Why I like Opti-2 two stroke oil

Joined
Jul 14, 2014
Messages
871
Location
Wisconsin
If it costs more than $20/gallon, I dont use it. I go through gallons of 2T oil per year. Never had an oil related failure.
 
Joined
Jun 2, 2002
Messages
3,668
Location
Georgia/Retired
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.
 
Joined
Jul 15, 2003
Messages
3,281
Location
MN
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.
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.
 
Joined
Jun 2, 2002
Messages
3,668
Location
Georgia/Retired
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.
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.
 
Joined
Sep 10, 2018
Messages
131
Location
Northern va
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
 
Joined
Oct 15, 2006
Messages
1,515
Location
Southern Ontario
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
Out of curiosity why were you running Saber so rich?
 
Joined
May 30, 2010
Messages
15,625
Location
North Carolina
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.
 
Joined
Oct 15, 2006
Messages
1,515
Location
Southern Ontario
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.
 
Joined
Sep 10, 2018
Messages
131
Location
Northern va
Out of curiosity why were you running Saber so rich?
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.

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.

When I bought my 22261 it has a scored piston. I swapped in a good used short block. I pulled the piston and split the case to install new crank seals and they definitely have needle bearings. I didn’t see bushings anywhere. From What I’ve seen and read, the older brick tops that recommended 16:1 had the bushings.
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.

Every 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.
 
Joined
Jul 15, 2003
Messages
3,281
Location
MN
Every 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.
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 24:1
 
Joined
Oct 15, 2006
Messages
1,515
Location
Southern Ontario
Oh I was looking at the rtek portion of the manual it turns out. Oops. 32:1 for the duraforce. But I’m convinced it can safely run at 50:1 especially with modern oils.
 
Joined
Sep 10, 2018
Messages
131
Location
Northern va
Just thought I’d share these pictures. I was digging through my shed and found a box of parts with a bad duraforce engine. Here are some pics confirming they do have needle bearings
3B6058AF-D7EF-4669-B376-BCD221159820.jpeg
7790DAE5-076D-42EB-A359-0F4CF5ACAAB3.jpeg
 
Joined
Apr 20, 2015
Messages
536
Location
T-County, Ohio
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.

L8R,
Matt
 
Joined
Sep 10, 2018
Messages
131
Location
Northern va
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.

L8R,
Matt

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
 
Joined
Apr 20, 2015
Messages
536
Location
T-County, Ohio
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
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.

L8R,
Matt
 
Top