Not really... They just state the oil had better be up to the challenge of more heat. Maybe theirs is? I have never ran the 100:1 Saber, but have used a lot of Interceptor and Dominator at the specified ratios. I just run Dominator at 50:1 in my OPE.I love Opti-2 and Amsoil Saber but once again Amsoil has contradicted themselves with their product offerings. We all know that Opti-2 and Saber are 100:1 mixes with Opti-2 being recommended for all 2-cycle engines and Amsoil Saber is recommended only for OPE. But if you reference the Amsoil publication "The Inside Track" dated 23 Dec 2021, there is an article about Interceptor and Dominator oils and their usage. In this article Amsoil specifically makes this statement: quote "
Less Oil = More Heat (and Potential for Wear)While burning less oil helps curb emissions, it also creates excess engine heat.
If you know anything about engines, you know that high heat is detrimental. It robs the engine of efficiency – meaning you can’t ride as hard – and can cause piston expansion, which leads to wear.
This means owners of high-performance sleds are asking less oil to do more work. The oil had better be up to the challenge lest you grenade your $18,000 sled." unquote.
So this is Amsoil's stance on their Interceptor oil but not on their Saber oil. I wish they'd make up their minds.
They state it right there in their article - less oil creates excess engine heat. I suppose this is why they stopped recommending their Saber 100:1 for motorcycles, snowmobiles and other high performance power sports equipment. It seems to work fine with a leaf blower and string trimmer so I guess they were wise to withdraw their former recommendation for use in power sports equipment.Not really... They just state the oil had better be up to the challenge of more heat. Maybe theirs is? I have never ran the 100:1 Saber, but have used a lot of Interceptor and Dominator at the specified ratios. I just run Dominator at 50:1 in my OPE.
Out of curiosity why were you running Saber so rich?I wanted to try something new and bought a few 1 gallon packs of the opti 2 from my local hardware store after running out of the amsoil saber. I was mixing the saber at 32:1 for my 2 lawnboy duraforces.
So far I’ve noticed…
MUCH less smoke on startup on the opti 71:1 vs amsoil 32:1
The mower tends to “ warm up” faster and run overall smoother. It’s hard to explain but I notice it
Much less smell.
Mower picked up a few rpms too. It now runs around 3260-3300 without me touching the carb. I had it adjusted at 3200 using the 32:1 and didn’t touch it after changing the ratio.
I’ve mowed my grass 4 times now with my 22261 and burned through a whole tank (1 gallon) with it mixed at 71:1 with e0 89 octane gas. I have no complaints so far.
I’m no way bashing amsoil, I would probably have the same results using it at 70-80:1 ratios.
I’m too chicken to try 100:1
I’ve pulled apart a couple duraforces and I seem to remember needle bearings. The lawnboy manual even suggests toro tcw3 at 50:1 for the duraforce.Some of the 2 cycle lawnboy engines use bushings on the connecting rod. that need the oil. Going with less oil will kill it. Duraforce engines had bushings, i don't know about the brick tops.
I talked to an older gentleman who had worked on lawnboys for decades, he told me to run them at 32:1 or even 24:1 with a synthetic oil. I guess the guy was just set in his ways.Out of curiosity why were you running Saber so rich?
Some of the 2 cycle lawnboy engines use bushings on the connecting rod. that need the oil. Going with less oil will kill it. Duraforce engines had bushings, i don't know about the brick tops.
I’ve pulled apart a couple duraforces and I seem to remember needle bearings. The lawnboy manual even suggests toro tcw3 at 50:1 for the duraforce.
I think it was for pollution reasons and maybe they found that much oil was not needed with better oils available? Strikemaster Ice Augers used to spec a 24:1 ratio and later switched to 40:1 without changing the Tecumseh engine or carb. They stated that all engines can run the 40:1 even if they had stickers on them that said to run 24:1. They used to spit goo out of the mufflers at 24:1Every manual I’ve seen still recommends 32:1 for the duraforce, and a 3200 max rpm spec. The same engine in the toro snow blowers (r-tek) revs to a maximum rpm of 4100 rpms but is piston ported vs the reed valve in the mower, but toro recommends 50:1 in that engine. I have no idea why, I’ve read that lawnboy didn’t want to change the spec from 32:1 which they have used for decades but I really have no definitive proof that’s the case.
The connecting rod bearings aren’t the issue. Some of the older engines like the D-433 that’s on my 5024 Bricktop only has upper crank bearings. They use a bronze bushing for the lower crank support.
You are totally correct. Even in late 60s, Len-Boys used needle bearings on the connecting rod. I think it was around 1971 or so when Lawn-Boy went from requiring 16:1 to 32:1 ratio. But that was for the new models being released. The older machines still needed the 16:1.I’ve never had a brick top engine apart but I believe all the ones that has bushings on the connecting rod called for 16:1, correct?
I’ve seen a few people post that duraforces have bushings on the connecting rod instead of bearings and that just isn’t the case. Never found any pics, so I took those just to clear up any confusion