Do U agree with my theory, if not what do U think?

Status
Not open for further replies.
D

daz

Joined
Jul 15, 2009
Messages
164
Location
so cal
So i was using Torco 20/50 in mt bike since the dealer uses it and swears by it and he supplies me with it free. Money however is no object when it comes to my bike. That being a triumph 1700 cruiser called the thunderbird. The bike makes around 115 Lbs of torque at 2500 RPM as a stock 1700, but i'm running pipes and a custom map that makes quite a bit of difference. So id guess maybe 120-125 Lbs. However, they rate at the crank so actual rear wheel is probably more like 110@2500. So we're talking a lot of torque all the aw from 2500 or in other words throughout the powerband. It also weighs a lot at 740 wet.

I mentioned the specs because it will have a bearing on my theory. I tried M1 20/50 V-twin recently and noted a few changes which led me to this theory....

worse average MPG by about 3 MPG

very noticeable increase in power...accelerates quicker and pulls harder

runs hotter, IE: fan goes on much more

So i thought about it and it didn't make sense that the power increase would go along with the rest of it. If it's making more power that could only be due to oil that allowed for less friction. Yet if there's less friction then the MPG should have gone up and it should not be running hotter. So this is where this theory came in....the torco oil has a lot of moly. Even tho it's spec'd for JMSO the moly count is insane. It's something like 700 PPM (i think PPM is the measurement, right?)vs other oils which are all about 95% less.

So my theory is this...the torco allows for less friction and therfore cooler running and better MPG than the M1, and the reason for the better power with M1 is that with the Torco the moly caused the clutch to constantly slip to a slight degree making the bike accelerate slower and feel like less power. With the bike's weight and torque i could see that being more likely than with much lighter bikes with much less torque. I don't know how else to account for the fact M1 runs so much stronger yet also shows 2 changes that should not coexist with the power increase. I welcome any thoughts/theories because i'm trying to figure out what to do as far as oil. I always felt M1 was great, but when the bike runs hotter and gets worse MPG i gotta think the clutch is the reason due to the moly in torco. And if thats the case i want to find an oil that lets the bike run as strong as it does now but with the same MPG and temps that torco got me.
 
Last edited:
If you're serious about establishing the performance of the oil (or any other changes for that matter), you'll have to be a bit more scientific in your approach.

You'll have to measure and document the variables with both types of oil separately. I.e. actual engine temperature as well as ambient temperature. Acceleration measurements, accurate fuel measurement etc.


Seat of the pants guesstimations nor opinions won't get you the results you'd like.
 
Sounds like you are giving it more gas, using more fuel, creating more heat and getting less MPG. Environmental factors and fuel could also play a part.

I don't think your theory is sustainable, but you could do more accurate testing and documentation and come up with enough data to point you in the right direction.
 
Originally Posted By: boraticus
If you're serious about establishing the performance of the oil (or any other changes for that matter), you'll have to be a bit more scientific in your approach.

You'll have to measure and document the variables with both types of oil separately. I.e. actual engine temperature as well as ambient temperature. Acceleration measurements, accurate fuel measurement etc.

Amen! With out actual data points as a reference, all of your observations to this point are anecdotal at best.



Seat of the pants guesstimations nor opinions won't get you the results you'd like.
 
Well the Torco oil failed to even meet JASO MA, let alone the more stringent JASO MA2 in the Amsoil tests.

Those Thunderbirds are a nice bike. I dont know if your Triumph manual allows but you can run 10w40 in my 2011 865cc Speedmaster. I am going to run some Bran Penn 10w40 in mine next instead of the Castrol RS 10w50 since it makes no determination on climate for oil viscosity.

So maybe try a 40 weight oil next time. Rotella T6 perhaps.
 
If the clutch slipped while using the Torco then it should not have given you better MPG due to power loss. I wouldn't use the Torco if it slips and cause wear and power loss. Clutch slipping is best to avoid. Have you used the the M1 long enough yet? If liquid cooled use the 4T instead.
 
Yeah, i have also thought of trying the 10w40 M1, and yes it's water cooled. The manual suggests either 20w50 or 10w40, tho the 10W when cold is a little worrisome since it's start up where they say 90% of engine wear occurs. But i suppose i'll probably try it. I imagine that should certainly get me better MPG, but i would think it would run hotter still.
 
I just figured that it would also drain down quicker leaving the top drier than with 20W during initial start up, especially after sitting a week or 3. No?
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: daz
I just figured that it would also drain down quicker leaving the top drier than with 20W during initial start up, especially after sitting a week or 3. No?


So, the engine will only last for a 999 years rather than 1000....

So much angst over such insignificance.
 
What?! Where do you get "so much angst"? Actually that was a rhetorical question because i know the answer....i see it all the time on forums. You simply WANT me to be full of angst so you have something complain about. Trust me, i'm simply discussing something that i'm curious about and angst is the last thing it will cause me. And 999 years instead of 1000...you sir are the master of exaggeration. Assuming it's true that 99% of wear happens at startup, (and that is a widely held belief) then common sense would suggest if anything thats the one thing worth considering because that WOULD lead to notable premature wear. I think the angst problem is with you ! You may need to get out more instead of complaining about people talking about and learning about oil.
 
It wont leave the top end dry. Lots of car engines are running 5w20 weight oil and last 200k miles. Just cause oil is thinner does not make it not coat the metal. Especially with the high zddp content of a motorcycle or HDEO, your cam is going to have that sacrificial anit wear additive.

A 10w40 will actually get oil up to the top faster than a 20w.

Try it once and see. Triumph makes no temperature guide for using 10w40 over 20w50 in my air cooled Speedmaster manual.
 
Originally Posted By: daz
...you sir are the master of exaggeration...


+1000!!! Wait until you hear some of the "camp" stories.
 
Unfortunately, there is no successful treatment for "oil angst" and other OCD's.

Slick back your hair with Amsoil or other boutique oil of preference and pray to the god of your choice that your oil is good enough to handle the demands that your engine alone will throw at it.
grin.gif
 
Originally Posted By: Maximus1966
Originally Posted By: daz
...you sir are the master of exaggeration...


+1000!!! Wait until you hear some of the "camp" stories.


Would you care to provide some examples of exaggeration?
 
Hi Daz,

I was thinking about your first post and it seems you are concerned that your engine might be hard on oil due to the torque.

Not so. Any normally aspirated engine will produce a maximum BMEP (brake mean effective pressure) in the range 8.5 to 10.5 bar (850 to 1050 kPa; 125 to 150 lbf/in2), at the engine speed where maximum torque is obtained.

This, however, is a comparatively mild load when contrasted to high RPM operation. Where the inertia of the connecting rod and piston can place many time more force on the bearings than the combustion event.

Without calculating the forces and knowing all the details, I would simply guess that your engine is like every other engine produced and can achieve substantial inertial loads.

The heavier viscosity probably seals the piston rings better, thereby producing more torque. Those are big pistons to seal.

Aircraft engines use heavy viscosity oils for the very same reason. Thin oil is consumed quickly.
 
Originally Posted By: Cujet
Hi Daz,

I was thinking about your first post and it seems you are concerned that your engine might be hard on oil due to the torque.



No, thats not what i meant. What i was suggesting is that because the engine has so much torque, that that combined with the extremely high amount of moly in the torco oil may have caused the clutch to continually slip under acceleration which may be why the M1 20w50 gave the bike what seemed like a very noticeable increase in acceleration compared to the torco. The theory was all I could come up with as to why I got that increase in power with M1 yet the engine ran hotter and got less MPG with it. If the engine runs hotter and gets less MPG with M1, wouldn't you find it odd that it would also run STRONGER? Thats why i thought maybe the clutch was slipping with the torco due to all that moly. Thats would seem to make sense since it runs cooler and gets better MPG than M1. Wouldn't you think it should also run stronger than with it? Someone also said torco failed the wet clutch test somewhere. That would speak to what i'm saying i would think.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: boraticus
How could a slipping clutch improve mileage?


Unless it slipped only during a hard acceleration and not when under a softer load cruising around.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

J
Theoretical Justification to Use Traveller 15w-40 in my Wet Clutch MC's
Replies
19
Views
2K
Jim Rogers
T
Amsoil metric oil
Replies
14
Views
2K
alarmguy
Jay Freddy
Long Lasting Motorcycle Tires?
2
Replies
21
Views
3K
LongTime_Lurker
J
Fork oil differences besides viscosity?
2
Replies
34
Views
1K
ChristianReske
Braapdaddy
4 stroke titanium valves with copper beryllium seats
2
Replies
31
Views
2K
sunruh
Back
Top