Norton Oil Analysis

[ewgoforth]

Hello,

I got my used oil analysis back from Blackstone today on a Norton 850 Commando.

The other Norton oil analyses that I've seen were done by another Norton enthusiast and had a number referring to oxidation. This other enthusiast said that the oxidized oil had basically been "cooked" after 1 or 2 thousand miles.

I know that oxidized generally means that something has reacted with oxygen. Iron oxidizes (rusts), magnesium oxidizes (corrodes). I guess that if you set fire to a bottle of oil it could be said to have oxidized.

He recommended not going longer than 1000 mile intervals with conventional oils or 2000 with synthetics.

Another Norton rider who used to work for a company that made motor oil (Duckhams), thought that it was safe to go much longer: 3000 miles or so oil change intervals in a Norton.

I think that Norton recommended 2500 mile oil change intervals back in the early seventies, with the oils that were available then.

I didn't see anything on the test I got from Blackstone related to oxidation. From doing a little reading on the internet, it appears that TBN and TAN are related to oxidation.

Is there any way to tell if the oil has been damaged by excessive heat from the Blackstone test results?

How much affect would oxidation have on the ability to lubricate and cool an air-cooled engine?

I'd think that Harleys, with the rear cylinder hiding behind the front one, would be even harder on oil that my parallel twin Norton, and I see they routinely use much longer oil change intervals on bobistheoilguy.com

It looks like Polaris will do an oil analysis including oxidation. How do tests from one lab compare to another typically?

I ran Valvoline 20w50 motorcycle oil, which was on sale for $3 per quart. It typically runs $4 per quart. It has a nice zinc number. I've probably run Mobil 1 more than anything else in this engine. It has around 40,000 miles on it in this iteration, which is pretty high mileage for a Norton.

Here's my oil analysis:

 

[fuel tanker man]

This report would indicate that the Valvoline 20W50 motorcycle oil is higher in zinc, phos, and calcium than VR1 is, if these numbers are correct.

Thanks for sharing the report.

Dan

 

[hate2work]

Nice anti-wear package in that oil, it even has a little boron in it.

So why no TAN/TBN readings? Those numbers are critical in determining the longevity of the oil. Everything looks good to me, although it should given the low miles on the oil.

 

[sunruh]

very nice numbers.

in grade, nice flash, no fuel.

did you pull the bike behind a car with the engine off?

if this is an accurate analysis: copper more than aluminum?
with a blip worth of tin, lead and chrome?
or are we looking at background scatter?

run the next batch 2k-2.5k and retest.

 

[EagleFTE]

I can't speak first hand as I have never owned one but the Nortons do have a reputation of being hard on oil or vulnerable in hot environments like NC to the point of engine damage. Whether it is engine / oil system design, inadequate cooling fins or whatever, this is a widely held belief by old time Norton owners. Of course modern dinos are much better than they were in the 70s. I would still consider looking at a product that resists thermal breakdown better than most. Maybe a group IV or V. But on the other hand I see nothing wrong with these UOA results, actually pretty surprising even if on only 1.1k.

 

[BigCahuna]

I had a '69 Norton back in 1973. Can't say I remember having any motor issues using regular car oil back then. I broke a trans shaft and a boat load of clutch cables tho.,,

 

[ewgoforth]

I'm currently running VR-1 straight 50 weight. I'm thinking I'll run an analysis around the same mileage as before and see how it looks after 2000 miles if the 1000 mile oil looks okay. A lot of the Norton guys, especially in the UK, claim that monograde oils are better than multigrade, I've read claims that a multigrade would shear down to the base oil viscosity in less than 1000 miles in a Norton, but this certainly doesn't seem to be the case for me.

I figured if there's a good time to run monograde would be in the middle of the summer in a fairly hot climate. However, the viscosity on this multigrade looks about perfect, so I can't see much reason to use monograde at this point since multigrade protect much better at cold startups, although this time of year there are no cold startups. Here's what Blackstone had to say about oxidation:

Eric: Thanks for the e-mail. We don't run a separate test for oxidation. That's included with the insolubles test. Insolubles are actually solids in the oil itself due to heat, use and oxidation. If excess oxidation was a major issue with your engine, chances are good insolubles would have read a lot higher than they did here, as well as wear and the viscosity. They an oil gets oxidized to the problem level, the viscosity will tend to increase significantly as well. Given the fact that everything looks pretty good, we think a 2,000 mile oil run should be fine next time and chances are good that you can probably go even longer than that, depending on how the oil looks.

I'd originally planned to try Mobil 1 V-twin or another synthetic, but the store was out. One reason I wanted to use a synthetic was to get an oil with a higher flashpoint, but the flashpoint of this Valvoline appears to be as high or higher than any synthetics I've seen on this site, is that because of the short oil change interval? From the oil analysis that On the Fence posted it looks like the Mobil 1 V-twin was kind of cooked at 5000 miles, that is, the viscosity was higher than the recommend range Blackstone gives. It looks like the Amsoil in HD2002's oil changes was over what Blackstone recommends at 100C at 5000 miles too.

I've seen other UOAs on Harleys posted here that had the viscosity going the other way, getting thinner.

The Norton has plain big ends and roller mains with a couple gears and a chain driving the cam which operates with flat tappets. The primary and gearbox do NOT share the engine oil.

Do Harleys have roller or plain big ends?

-Eric

 

[sunruh]

Eric,

your flash of 440 is pretty darn good.
it does not beat my lists top 3, but nothing has come close to the VR-1 sae50 flash of 465 either! or the other test of the same oil at 445. or quakerstate high horsepower at 455.
but 440 is darn good! it ties my test of exxon superflo sae40. so a tie for my 4th place. pretty darn good!

what it says is that you honestly do *not* have any fuel in the sample.
any result over 400 is good. when you get over the 425 mark it is more telling of absolute zero fuel in the sample.

your results show you dont need a straight weight. please try a 2k run.

 

[cven]

Non-expert here but that looks like a very nice MC oil....and the price is hard to beat as well.

 

[ewgoforth]

Something seems to have happened to the picture. I've reattached it.