|
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Ft. Myers Beach, FL, USA
Posts: 531
|
Hope this doesn't crash the server, but it's the best & most Info on motor oil, anyone should ever care to know!
Well, looks like I can only post half of it!
The definitive conversation on lubricants, filters and everything Motor Oil, by the late Viscosity Scientist, Dr. George Morrison, STLE CLS
Noted you mention using Mobil 1 V-Twin. Highly recommend you consider Mobil 1 MX4T 10W-40. Mobil 1 V-Twin is fine for slower turning engines such as most V-Twins. In our higher RPM engines, the use of a 40W full synthetic is much a much more optimum viscosity oil.
Yes, 50W is fine for John Deere Tractors, but not so fine for our engines... But that is from a lube engineer's perspective......... We want to optimize viscosity for the RPM's the engine will be seeing.. Remember, our engines are NOT V-twins as defined by Harley Davidson but much higher revving, higher performance in every respect, with very different lubrication needs.
Re: 50W.. No, we are never talking single grades anymore, just lazy typing on my part. Should have been more exacting in saying a 15W-50 ot 20W-50 but both oils ARE true 50 weight oils at engine operating temperatures. Slipped into engineering talk of operational viscosities...
My reference that our Ducati engines are not V-twins (L-Twin) was tongue in cheek, moreover with the intent of differentiation that our engines are NOT of the HD, Yamaha cruiser, etc. ilk.. Our engines are high speed engines optimized for XXW-40 visosities, vs the slower turning HD V-twin (and of course John Deere Tractors of old) need the XXW-50 viscosity..
As a lube engineering concept, the faster the component, the lower the viscosity required to achieve optimum fluid dynamics. The slower the component (HD), the thicker the viscosity needed to achieve optimum interelationship with bearing surfaces.
The viscosity issue is one of the ongoing battles I have to deal lwith as the mentality of "if two asperins are good, four must be better" applied to "if 10W40 is good then 15W-50 must be better" In most cases it is not... The thicker oil robs horsepower, creates unwanted heat (especially in an air cooled engine), and can/will cause accelerated bearing interface wear as the oil simply cannot keep up with the bearing face speeds.
In API engine oil viscosity designation, the "W" is the "winter" rating for the oil. This system was originally designed for mineral based oils, when "multi-viscosity" came into being. Mineral oils are very sensitive to temperature changes: when cooled they thicken, when heated they thin. The old single grade oils were lilke molasis at 0 degrees F. Magic of chemistry came along. Multi vis. How we make a 20W-50 mineral based oil is to start out with 20,000 gallons of 20W oil, then throw in viscosity improvers which are essentially plastic coil springs (plastomers) which expand with temperature, shink with cold. Thus when we heat this 20W oil up to operating temperature, the plastic coil springs expand, giving the 20W oil the apparent viscosity of a 50W oil. When the oil cools down, the coil springs shrink and we are back to our 20W oil we started with.. Which flows like a 20W oil at 0 degrees F. Because it IS a 20W oil..
Now to full synthetics. All the above does NOT apply. To make a 20W-50 API rated oil, we start out with a 50W base stock (essentially) and do nothing. When full synthetics are cooled, they do not thicken as mineral base oils do. Same when heated; they retain their viscosity and do not thin. Which is one of the major positives for synthetic based lubes: they provide the film thickness at higher temps yet allow easy start-up. No VI improvers needed with this oil, although in the real world VI improvers are used minimally to allow large scale production and insurance of exceeding API requirements.. But even in full synthetics, when the range gets to a 0W-50 or so, there is a slug of VI improvers in that mix.. The downside of VI improvers are that they shear, are subject to load shock, etc. NOT as good as a full synthetic molecule...
So, the old wives tail about synthetic oil being thinner is completely innacurate. Full synthetic engine oils are thicker both in base stocks and operationally..
Hope I have clarified. If not, keep the questions coming.
No, for those with a 20W-50 designation by Ducati, by all means run Mfg recommendation.. Mine says 10W-40 and for those whose manual says 10W-40....... (however, methinks this 20W-50 recent recommendation changge is related to Shell's Ducati racing sponsorship and Shell's not making a 10W-40 full synthetic motorcycle oil... Woops, lets change that manual to read 20W-50 don't want to be recommending an oil our sponsor doesn't make!)
Like with Ford and Honda discovering the glitch in CAFE fuel mileage that enabled huge paper gains in corporate cafe by merely switching from a 5W-30 to a 5W-20 engine oil. Millions of dollars of engineering could not equal what the stroke of a pen achieved...
Regarding "it doesn't seem to make sense". As a correlation of the viscosity stability of synthetic lubricants, look to water. Water does not change its viscosity until it reaches boiling point and of course freezing point where all manner of chemistry goes to heck as it not only solidifies, it expands! Irrespective, in its liquid state, water maintains its viscosity right on. Very similarly, a full synthetic base stock is very, very stable. Not to say that it does not slightly increase vis at very, very low temps, as it does, it is that the rate of viscosity change is almost straightline vs. mineral base oils which temperature graph looks like a safe dropped out a 4 story window with cold/heat.. Again, the temperature stability of synthetic base stocks is one of its many virtues in providing optimal viscosity and film thickness throughout the operational range of an engine. (and transmission, etc.)
Re: 10W-40 for water cooled and 50W for air cooled. My air cooled 1000DS manual calls for a 10W40. An XXW-50W is potentially going to create *more* heat and the air cooled relies on the oil for roughly 40% of its heat dissapation.. i.e. the water cooled can much better deal with heat as it has air, coolant and oil to carry heat away... Thus from an objective lube perspective, the air cooled would be more optimally lubed and cooled with a full synthetic XXW-40. Another important point is that a full synthetic engine oil dissapates heat at roughly twice the rate of a mineral based equivalent. Enabling a signifcantly cooler running engine, transmission...
I realize all this viscosity business is confusing but I will answer questions till the cows come home so you can have a good understanding of this very important point. Yes, you are correct in that we could call Mobil 1 MX4T a straight grade 40W, like the old mineral base straight grades. EXCEPT that we no longer can speak of mineral base chemistry.. Full synthetics, especially Group IV and V oils have an extremely stable natural viscosity characteristic. This actually is quantifiable in its measurement of Viscosity Index. (NOT viscosity, a different term here) A high quality mineral based oil will have a natural Viscosity Index (referred here on as VI) of say 96. 100 is the highest and the bestest best suite crude enables this level. We can now enhance the natural VI by adding our VI improvers from our previous discussionw. Now the enhanced VI for this same oil can be measured at 145 to 150. The higher the VI the more temperature stable the oil is. Now, untreated synthetic group IV or group V will have a natural VI as high as 190, revealing its incredible temperature stable viscosity over a broad temperature range.
Thus, with Mobil 1 MXT, it is made with a 40W base stock yet meets the API testing requirement for cold flow of a 10W. (actually almost a 0W but could you imagine how many folks would buy a 0W-40 motorcycle oill? None.. TOO Thin!!)
This all requires a paradigm shift in thinking in translating Group IV or Group V chemistry from mineral base. The whole API XXW-40 rating program was geared to multi-viscosity mineral based oils..
With synthetics it is a whole different program. Another example of the disparity. A 10W-40 mineral
based oil will be a sollid at around 20 degrees below zero F. Yet the Mobil 1 MX4T still flows freely at 40 below zero F!
Hope I am cleariing the air, if not keep the questions coming..
And yes, for the person who has run a 15W-50 in his/her engine.. No problem. I am just a nit picking lube engineer sharing information. As with Ducati, oil/lubrication is a personal issue. My quest is sharing sound lubrication principles so all can make an informed choice.
No, I do not work for Mobil. I am very much biased towards Mobil from 25+ years of working with lubricants of all manufacture; through the years I have developed about 6 inches of scar tissue where I care not to discuss from using various lubricants in severe applications. i.e. as a lube engineer you make lubricant recommendations; then they fail, it is my fault, not the lubricant. Thus one develops a group of lubricants one can recommend and *know* they will work. Thus my Mobil Bias... I do work for a company that sells Mobil and many other lubricants. But it is not my intent to sell Mobil products on this site, only using them as reference for examples of Group IV synthetics, and I am totally familiar with their performance, formulation, and can speak with authority. There are many wonderful Group IV & Group V motorcycle oils on the market, I just do not have technical background with them.
And regarding the advisability of using a Group IV or Group V synthetic motorcycle oil, as we have discussed, the plastomer VI improvers are subject to shear, even in an automotive engine. Those same VI improvers used in mineral oil based are *really* sheared when they are used in gearbox applications, such as ours. With synthetics using little or none of these, the lubricating qualities of the oil are consistent and of course far superior to mineral based oils in terms of film strength, thermal stability, resistance to oxidation, ease of shifting, rust prevention, etc. etc.
Ducpainter, your question deserved an answer, as I discussed an awful lot of "Mobil" and not other excellent brands. A deserved question as you have no doubt seen oil pedlers selling their wares online. My presence, my commitment is a major segment of my STLE CLS certification; i.e. to share lubricant knowledge. I was answering your excellent, very relevant question..
Klotz makes excellent products but I do not have first hand knowledge/experience with them.
And the term "clingability" is indeed a trait that we very much need in engines that may be idle for extended periods.* i.e. winter for us in the midwest..* Metal attraction is a natural, inherent aspect of Group IV and Group V synthetics.* They will cling to metal surfaces for a much longer period of time vs. mineral based oils, especially after engine shut down.* Mineral based oils are vaporized quickly in the hot sections of the engine; cylinder bores, etc.* The areas where we need lubrication immediately on start-up.* Synthetics, with their higher flash points, remain on those surfaces and provide a lubrication boundary layer on start-up.* Excellent corrosion protection is also provided during this period.* This is true for most all Group IV and Group V engine oils...
Re: 100W aviation engine oil.* Very simply, NO!, Nada, absolutely no way!! to put it mildly.* That oil is a for real straight grade mineral base 50W oil.* Not multi-vis.* Aviation piston engine oils contain little or none of the extreme pressure additive we need big time.* Zinc diothiophospate (our anti-wear, extreme pressure, anti-oxidant additive) creates havoc in engines that run for long periods of time at the same RPM's (aircraft piston engines) and can lead to catastrophic pre-ignition/detonation which can destory an engine and ruin one's whole day as a pilot.. Our engines vary RPM's continually thus ZDP is very much needed in large amounts for our engines. Aircraft engine oil, NO ZDP, motorcycle engine oil, a boatload of ZDP. Plus multi-viscosity characteristics, most important for our application. A 100W aircraft engine oil is a solid at +10F.
So, no, do not be tempted..* In simplistic terms it is a very basic, poorly additized oil for our Ducati application and should not be used under any circumstances.* One would think that since it is for aircraft it would follow that it is "better".* It IS better for Lycoming and Continental aircraft engines but* an early demise our engines..
Mobil V-Twin can certainly be used in our engines. However, with such a heavy operational viscosity, horsepower loss and heat will be the two by-products. I know this sounds strange but in racing applications we really do not stress an optimal viscosity engine oil. 99% of the lubrication in our engines is hydrodynamic lubrication. Hydrodynamic lubrication is where the person is water skiing on a very thin water film being pulled by a vehicle equipped with Goodyear Aquatread tires. In areas where one would think would not be hydrodynamic such as camshafts, valves, it is still metal floating on an oil film; hydrodynamic lubrication. So, even in racing applications, as long as we have the oil viscosity in the engine that it was designed for, we will then achieve maximum horsepower, best engine cooling and performance using the lowest optimal viscosity engine oil. On a dyno, one can see as much as 1 to 3 horsepower gain from just engine oil viscosity change. Which is why 99% of all NASCAR engines are running a 0W-30 engine oil. Same with Formula 1, Grand am, etc. are all reducing operational viscosities. Two years ago all the Grand Am racers were having heating issues at Daytona 24 as it was unusually warm. Except one. All of the Toyota engined cars were running Mobil 1 15W-50 except one which was running Mobil 1R 0W-30. It finished 3rd and the others were waay back, laps down. . For these same reasons we have been discussing they are changing from their previous 50W and 60W mineral oils to lower viscosity full synthetic engine oils.
Driving short distances, stop and go, will stress engine oil far more than racing applications.
An excellent question, regarding viscosity spreads. With a mineral based oil, the further the spread, the more susceptible the oil will be to viscosity improver shear, shock, etc. VI improver shock is a very real, temporary condition, an almost smashing of the VI improver. With a large amount of VI improver this can lead to spalling, high wear rates, especially in engine/gearbox combinations such as ours. With a full synthetic, depending on the sophistication of the base stock, minimal VI improver use provides for a very shear-resistant lubricant. Even in a 10W-40 spread, it is possible to achieve this performance through base stock choice alone. However, as I said previously, in large scale production small amounts of very high quality VI improvers may be used to provide a greater margin of assurance that the end products will far surpass API classification. The "expensivie" VI improvers are extremely shear resistant and when combined with a high quality synthetic base stock are synergistic in their bottom line performance. Additionally there are new base stocks which are blended with normal group IV and V which provide the same physical action as VI improvers but are completely impervious to shear and provide chemistry enhancement to the base stocks in terms of film strength, oxidation resistance and overall performance.
Excellent question..... Re: "how long can we now go with these super base stocks and additive packages?" As our discussion has evolved, we have shear resistant base stocks, high performance additive packages, oxidative resistant lubricants but the oils are still subject to contamination from the power cycle and gear box wear. You have heard for years about doubling, tripling ODI's with synthetic oils vs. a mineral based engine oil in autos. The most significant need for changing oils IS contamination. Synthetic lubricants have the capabilities to last *much* longer than a mineral based oil but are still subject to the same contamination issues that confront mineral based oils. However, one of the prime sources of contamination is blow-by. Even in a very new, tight engine we will get some level of blow-by occuring; exhaust by-product gasses are going to get into the engine oil. Exhaust gasses will bring all manner of contaminates ranging from acids, soot, water, and even raw gasoline. With a full Group IV or V synthetic base stock, we do have significantly lower levels of combustion by-product contamination. Piston rings require an oil film for their sealing action. At & near top dead center the cylinder walls are at constant elevated temperatures. Mineral based oils continually burn off, leaving the top 1/4 to 1/2 inch of cylinder wall essentially dry, with no oil film. If you have ever overhauled a gasoline engine with many miles on it you can many times actually see this area of high wear. Correspondingly, with no oil film, blow-by occurs until the rings encounter the oil film on their trip down the cylinder wall. With the oil film, sealing then occurs. Synthetic base stocks will live at higher temps and provide an oil film nearly to TDC, thus providing an oil film for the rings to seal. Thus when ignition occurs, the rings have an oil film, seal, and very little blow-by occurs. Additionally, this is where the measurable power increase at the rear wheel occurs with synthetic engine oils. One can actually *feel* the difference in performance with the right hand! We are now deriving all of the power from combustion. And our engine oil is staying much cleaner as blow-by is greatly reduced, easily enabling doubling, and even longer ODI's on automotive/truck applications.
That said, unfortunately we have a gearbox to contend with and some Ducati have wet clutches. Both of these components add a large amount contaminants to our oil, which will create wear. Especially the gearbox as the steel wear metals will be a super abrasive for any yellow metal in our engines.. Sooo, bottom line. Yes, we could theoretically significantly extend our ODI's with the oil's capaibilities but are very much limited with the high level of contaminants the oil gets from the gearbox and clutch (if wet). So regular ODI's are in order. Hey, it's only 3 or 4 quarts.. :-)
A method to *know* what is taking place in an engine is to run an engine oil analysis to determine contaminant levels. Oil analysis is the method we use for cars, trucks and off highway equipment to determine optimum ODI intervals. In some cases we have over the road trucks going 100,000 miles between changes (filter at 50,000), with oil analysis being the driver. Then one *knows* exactly what is going on in the engine. Oil analysis kits are relatively inexpensive ($15 or so) and invaluable in determining engine status. Like taking a walk inside your engine.
Yes, there are filters and then there are filters... Filters range from near worthless to pretty good. Unfortunately there are not "Superb" engine oil filters currently available from anyone at this point. It becomes a cost vs. practicality issue in that a state of the art full microglass (sometimes referred to as synthetic) element is a very sophisticated design utilizing stainless screens front and back of the glass medium (it will not support itself as paper does) which leads to extremely high cost of manufacture. Which makes them cost prohibitive when we change them with frequency. But boy do they ever filter! 1 micron beta 1000 (absolute, absolute) With paper we are lucky to get a 30 micron Beta 50... (70% +/- filtration of 30 microns and larger)
Paper elements, on the other hand, are very cost effective but little else. Generally 50% of a paper element will not allow fluids to even pass through it while the other half stops 30 microns and larger pretty well but not much in the way of smaller particles. Combination glass/paper blends are coming into the market with much better flow capacities (maybe 80 to 90% will actually flow fluids) and filtration yet can be reasonably priced in that they use paper as its support; but it is a blend and not anywhere near the performance level of a full microglass element. One still has to be careful about brands as some adverrtise all levels of performance yet still use lower quality internal construction and charge large dollars for their products. Do I hear Profit Center?
Some new filters are coming on market as I type this (literally) which we will soon have to do di-sections and compare with standards. I hate to say, "stay tuned" but in the next weeks we will hopefully have some new very high quality spin on filters to discuss..... Hopefully with applications for our Ducati...
At this point, Genuine Duc is as good as the rest... The filter can be raised to a higher level of filtration by attaching a high quality neodymium magnet to the outer case; the neo can serve two causes. Operate light change sensors at intersections and provide some level of additional oil filtration in that a strong magnet (which neo is) will filter from 1 angstrom on up through chunks and clunks. With the majority of our wear metals being ferrous, the addition of a neo magnet as additional filtration reduces the loading on the paper element enabling the filter to do its job better. Attaching the Neo anywhere on the outside of the element will work as the oil travels from the outside in. Thus you will be capturing wear metals before they go through the filter medium.
Re: Fairly linear.. Linear relative to mineral based oils... To emphasize my point of the vast differences in rate of viscosity change for synthetics vs. mineral based oils . Yes, synthetics do change viscosity relative to temperature but not nearly, not in the same world, as mineral based oils....
As example, we can have a straight grade 40W full synthetic oil which will pour down to 60 below zero yet a mineral based 14W-40 engine oil will a solid at -15 degrees F... That is a *huge* difference; which was my point. Relative linearity. Obviously I did not do a good job of clearing that, explaining..
Thank you for the excellent question.....
Regarding the 20W50 vs. the 15W-50 Mobil 1. Again the W is in relation to its winter rating only and that is a measure of how it *flows* at cold temperatures. Operationally you have a rock solid 50W in both cases. Both oils are operational 50W oils. i.e. the 15W50 Mobil 1 is not thinner than the 20W-50 Mobil 1. In fact both oils may well be identical with the manufacturer wanting an oil for a specific application and utilizing an API rating/label for a certain manufacturer's recommendation, etc. As we discussed before, some synthetic engine oils could surpass a 0W rating but no one would purchase a 0W-40 motorcycle oil as it is "too thin". But as we now know, it would not be thin ........ So, marketing comes into play, even with some specification sheets being incredibly conservative as a manufacturer may not want to reveal what the oil's ultimate capabilities really are... There is a cloaked secrecy among oil manufacturers, pride of invention, chemistries, etc..
Re the use of 20W-50 for the heat of summer. If the manual calls for a 10W-40 for your model, by all means, Mobil 1 MX4T. As we have discussed, the use of Mobil 1 V-Twin 20W-50 will actually create more heat as more energy is being expended in just churning the heavy 50W oil. As a very dramatic demonstration in clinics, I have folks churn a 10W-40 with a manual beater, then churn a 20W-50 and watch the looks on their faces.. The difference in "churn factor" is huge.. The same with our engines.. We are not going to be sacrificing film strength with the full synthetic.
You will most likely be lecturing your shop folks about the attributes of synthetic oils as you now have a much greater knowledge base than they!
As example of the relevence of viscosity and synthetic oil, every jet/turbine engine flying is using a full synthetic (most likely Mobil Jet II) 5W engine oil... Yet the engines are turning in the 27,000 to 35,000 rpm region. Centrafugal bearing loading is incredibly high. Yet the 5W full synthetic oil provides superb lubrication for those bearings; not just bearings, but also the gearboxes which drive generators, hydraulic pumps, and various other mechanical attachments. The relatively thin synthetic oils go through literally thousands of heat cycles yet the oils are not changed until 20,000 and 30,000 hour intervals, depending on the airline.. As example of just what synthetic base stocks can do.
Cetme, Regarding your excellent question and the Amsoil/Valvoline comparison and the similarities of the pour points along with viscosities.. Unfortunately I do not have personal knowledge of the composition of the Amsoil 20W-50 but would like to also add the same numbers for Mobil 1 V-Twin 20W-50. Beginning with pour points. Valvoline 20W-50 at -27C, Amsoil at -39C, while Mobil 1 V-Twin has a pour of -51C (60 below zero F!). The Mobil 1 reflects a *significantly* lower pour point than both the Valvoline and Amsoil. The Vis at 40 is Valvoline 165, Amsoil 151 while V-Twin is 130. Vis at 100C for Valvoline is 18.5, Amsoil 20.1 and V-Twin at 17.7. Again the V-Twin reflects a more linear nature in its viscosity plot vs. the Valvoline & Amsoil. Amsoil may be using some level of Group 1 or II in its formulation; I am not familiar with Amsoil formulations but am with Mobil and as can be seen, the V-Twin is indeed formulated with 100% synthetic base stock.
Moreover, the point of our previous discussions is that, yes, a mineral base oil could be additized to approximate the viscosity temperature performance, on paper, of a full synthetic. The shortcoming is as the saying goes "one cannot make a silk purse out of a cow's ear". i.e the additives used to bolster the mineral base stocks are just unable to provide the overall performance level of the synthetic base stocks in a real working engine/transmission. The VI improvers, as we have discussed, are subject to shear, shock and even filtration loss. In high load areas such as high speed engine camshafts, VI improvers can just collapse under high film strength loading; what we are left is the base oil we started with in the formulation, in this case a 20W mineral based oil.
Regarding the comment of Jet Engine oils long drain intervals. Yes, jet/turbine oils are not exposed to the by-products of combustion as is the oil in reciprocating engines. The bearings are contained in positive pressure housings, insulated from contaminants but not the heat cycles and temperature extremes. It is still a very hostile enviornment. But yes, the secret to synthetic engine oil life is that the oil remains crystal clear clean even after 20,000+ hours of use.
Regarding synthetics vs. "motorcycle oils"..* A full synthetic oil whether it be PAO or Ester, provides a much higher level of film strength vs. a mineral base oil primarily from the fact that the base oil is "manufactured".* The process produces molecules which are all identical and thus bonding is near perfect.* Mineral base oils are plethora of chemistries, everything from dinosaur bones (chemically) to leaves and branches (chemically).* Thus the composition of mineral base oils is a mish-mash and the resulting chemical bonding is marginal, at best.* The result is that full synthetics have a film strength many times that of even the highest quality mineral based oils and require much less addization.* In the previously discussed Turbine Oil example, the film strength actually increases with use.* The turbine oil provides better extreme pressure wear protection over time than when new, which is completely contrary to mineral base oils.
Back to motorcycle specific oils.* From the above, it is obvious that a motorcycle specific full synthetic base stock oil will provide superior performance in every perspective with minimal additization.* From the lubrication of the engine to the transmission, the motorcycle specific full synthetic is going to provide the highest level of lubrication, resistance to shear, oxidation resistance,horsepower generation and cooling.* By motorcycle specific full synthetic I am referring to formulations that do not contain automotive lubricity enhancements and associated automotive EP additive minimizations.* This is what most companies are providing with their "Motorcycle specific" formulations.* Some companies are going one step further and using even higher performance synthetic base stocks and additives in their motorcycle oiles which in turn cost more to produce and are priced higher on the shelves.
With our demanding requirements of engine, transmission and in some cases clutches, it is very difficult to formulate a mineral based oil that would equal the performance of a motorcycle specific full synthetic oil.* Similar to the foundation of a house, when the* base stock is a full synthetic we have an extraordinary foundation to build the formulation.. The full synthetic base stock does everything to the 9's naturally, unaddized.*
Some manufacturers of mineral & mineral/synthetic blend based *motorcycle specific* oils are using higher cost, shear resistant VI improvers, higher quality base stocks,* but these oils still do not match the performance of a full synthetic base stock in extreme conditions, from my experience.* Back to that "foundation" discussion. Sometimes those conditions cannot be anticipated.. However, these motorcycle specific oils are superior to regular automotive oils for our applications.
And then we have those manufacturers who shall remain nameless who are just re-labeling automotive oils with "Motorcyel Use Labels", getting on the motorcycle specific bandwagon through the magic of marketing and label making....* *These oils are not motorcycle specific in their formulation and are not providing increased performance in any way.
In the case of the Mobil 1 motorcycle vs. automotive oils. Mobil 1 Mx4T and V-Twin oils are formulated with a higher quality (higher cost) base stock which provides an even higher level of base stock performance then the Mobil 1 automotive. Additive differentiation between auto and bike is that (1) automotive engine oils are restricted in the amounts and types of additives that can be used due to catalytic converter and EPA state/local restrictions. Those additives are the "good ones" we need for our combined engine transmission; ZDP (Zinc dithiophosphate) for one, which provides extreme pressure, anti-wear, and oxidation stabilization. And other additives of lesser nature but still valuable in supplementing base stocks. (2) energy conservation additives. These are used in automotive oils to assist manufacturers in fuel conservation and simply make the oil 'slipprier'. These energy additives can cause clutch slippage in certain applications depending on clutch face material, stress, heat, etc..
So, in a motorcycle specific such as Mobil 1 MX4T and V-Twin, Mobil is starting out with a higher quality synthetic base stock, higher treat levels of premium additives specific to motorcycle requirements and a more limited production, all of which contribute to a higher end user cost... It's only 3 quarts.... :-)
Excellent question: What to do for break in? Mineral or synthetic.. All Corvette, Porsche, Mercedes AMG are shipped from the factory with Mobil 1 synthetic oil. The old wive's tail of "synthetics are so slippery you don't get seating proper seating" is just simply not true...
However, during break in we generate large amounts of wear metals in the seating process, and we need to flush the system. It is expensive to use synthetics for this process and of little or no added value. Several short oil change intervals early on with high quality mineral based oils would be ideal, then switch to the full synthetic..
If Ducati specificies only the20W-50, I would suggest the 20W-5050; if the owner's manual gives a viscosity range recommendation (which generally is done to compensate for mineral base oils, ambient temps around the world) then proceed with that option..
Regarding changing brands. In this case each oil was a very high quality oil so there should be no issues. But an excellent question especially as it relates to Motorcycle oils. Manufacturers do have different philosphies of addization, base stocks, etc. so it is adviseable to minimize oil brand changes if it all possible. With some base stocks, conflicts can occur creating acid by-products, while certain additives can negate a particular additive function. This issue is not so relevant with automotive oils manufacturers have been rorced to compatability due to SAE/API requirements; however, in motorcycle oils we have some pretty esoteric products being made which do not have to meet any particular standards of compatability..
So, yes, minimize brand switching if at all possible.. It would be an extremely rare situation where conflicts would occur But.........
Regarding Delvac 1.* It is a full synthetic engine oil formulated for extended drains for diesel engines. And yes, formulating for a diesel means fortifying with high levels of additive to include detergency, anti-wear, anti-oxidation, soot dispersion and acid neutralization.* Yes, it could be a good Ducati or other motorcycle engine oil.* Delvac 1 does not contain any lubricity enhancers ala Cafe, so no clutch issues.* Delvac 1 would not be as optimally formulated as Mobil 1 MX4T for our needs but would far, far surpass any automotive type oils in terms of performance.* It is a rock solid 40W yet flows to -40F and easily withstands 3,000 degree F turbocharger temps..* Delvac 1 is an extraordinary oil.
I would choose Mobil 1 MX4T over Delvac 1 for my Ducati.* I would not say Delvac 1 is a compromise as it certainly is not as the oil is gangbusters in every paramter, but from a lube engineer's perspective, optimization, Mobil 1 MX4T. And by the way, that was a very sophisticated question......
Regarding winter/cold weather operation.* It is most important to get the oil up to a 170 to 180F level for 15 to 20 minutes to allow moisture to release completely.* If one operates below that temperature continuously, water will build in the oil.* Engine oil that has a milky appearance, has entrained water.* It can easily be confirmed by doing the "scrambled egg test".* *Extract some of the oil and put it on a hot plate.* If you hear the sound of eggs frying, it is water.* The by-products of water are corrosion and in limited amounts, additive depletion.* Reducing engine oil cooling a bit, riding longer, harder, getting up to 180F will release the moisture.* If not possible, simply change the oil more frequently.* It is very important that during storage or minimal riding that the oil be kept fresh and free of entrained moisture.* Even if you just change the oil without changing the filter, you will have fresh additive, minimal moisture and excellent corrosion protection.* The situation is exacerbated with synthetic engine oil in that we create less heat with synthetic oil, disappate the heat faster, making it *really* difficult to hit that 180 degree F mark!
Re: Neodymium Magnet.* Try to obtain the highest quality neo you can source.* With Neo, a high number rating, even tho quite small, will radiate through the steel casing and present an excellent magnetic field inside.* So, size is not as important with Neo as the base quality. Something rated in the 30 region or higher would be excellent.* A high rating neo from erasure size through quarter-size would be excellent and more than one strategically placed around the permiter would be excellent..
Any neo or any size/quality is better than none at all.
Neo is one super, super strong magnet and will stay in place. Some use some designer duct tape for security but should not be necessary..
I am sorry my bike is in the shop right now so unable to show photos but will try and get some posted of samples neo sizes tomorrow.. They are available in just about any configuration imaginable, just need to be selective in power rating. Again, 30 or higher is desired. They are relativelly inexpensive. Regular steel magnets do not have the field strength to penetrate the case. Magnetic fields dissapate very quickly going through metal; additionally iron magnets temporarily loose their field at elevated temperature, rending them near useless as a filter agent, especially after having gone through the steel case of the filter.
Regarding Neo placement. Anywhere the magnet size you use will have a secure flat surface to adhere to. A neo half the size of a pencil erasure can have tremendous magnetic strength... Your hard drive is run by a miniscule neo magnet and yes I have seen those magnets attached to oil filters; they work just fine. It would be good to have a zinc coated magnet as neo is quite friable, fragile: do NOT play with neo once you get it. The magnet is so strong that it has the capability of destroying itself.. It IS tempting for all men to play with magnets.. Neo's are NOT to be played with. Get it, put it on the filter, forget it.. Some neo is strong enough to not only destroy itself but smash fingers on their way to steel..
One point I did not get answered relative to the Neo. With each filter change you just remove the Neo magnet, change the filter, then re-install the magnet on the new filter.. If you have a filter cutter you will find some amount of powder/paste ferrous on the inside wall where the magnet was located. In some cases I have seen fairly significant amounts of powder/paste/chunks after the initial install, then settling down to just a small amount of powder/paste.
We are removing one of the most abrasive components (steel) in our engine oil and with our combination gearbox/engine, the gearbox is continually generating steel wear particles ranging from angstrom size up through chunks and clunks. Our oil filters are filtering down to around 30 microns, leaving particles from 30 microns and smaller essentially unfiltered. The Neo, as I mentioned before, will provide filtration for that missing segment of wear particles. And reduce the loading on the filter element to do its job better.
Terry: Regarding synthetic oil viscosity stability relative to temperature change. My primary thrust was to hammer home the principals of viscosity change for synthetics vs. mineral based oils. Full synthetic oils do change viscosity with temperature change but on a side by side charting, the differerences in those rate of changes are significant. The engine oil you are using is labeled as a "unique fully synthetic lubricant" but is very likely a Group III mineral based oil. In Europe Castrol won the case that Group III Mineral based oils could be termed "synthetic". Later Castrol achieved the same here in the U.S. As example, the pour point indicated on the Product Data Sheet for Shell Advance Ultra 4 10W-40 is -30C (-22F).
Mobil 1 MX4T 10W-40 has a pour point of -54C (-65F).
As you can see, the cold weather performance for a Group IV full, or shall we say 'real', synthetic engine oil is *significantly* lower than a Group III mineral base stock oil. The difference in pour points reflect the viscosity stability of a Group IV or Group V full synthetic... The same correlation applies for high temperature viscosity performance.
Re: Scotts filter. I am sorry but I have no direct knowledge with this particular filter but am familiar with similar filter arrangements. If the filter is of high quality construction, yes, they work well. One disadvantage is that on many screen arrangements they do not have the particulate capacity of a comparably sized paper/cellulose element thus can fill relatively quickly. Some have 1/5 the amount of effective surface area of comparable traditional filters. Of the stainless mesh screens I have worked with they have installed a pressure differential alert to advise when cleaning needs to be done. That would be my only strong suggestion, which it appears you are already going to adhere to: clean the screen frequently and well. With all of paper/cellulous disadvantages, they are forgiving and do hold a significant amount of contaminants.. So, just keep a close eye on screen fill to ensure good filter flow, throughput, and filtration.
Terry, again, very good investigative work on your part in your noting the cold flow/viscosity increase of your Shell Advance Ultra 4. At even +7C/44F your oil is beginning to thicken noticeably.
Unfortunately, no, there is no official list of what is and what is not a true synthetic (group IV & Group V) any more. With the European and U.S. rulings that group III's can be called synthetic oils, one must dig through product data sheets for the information as to the oil's makeup.
It is discouraging, as everything we have been discussing in this thread has been relative to Group IV and Group V synthetic oils. Your question, comment and real world findings were at an excellent time in this discussion. Thank you,
Terry, as we have discussed, Group IV and Group V synthetics create less heat and then dissapate that heat at a faster rate than do mineral based oils.* Thus your experienced 150C* (300F) with your current oil in extremely high ambient temperatures may not have occurred with a group IV or group V base stock oil.* I have seen many cases where the use of Mobil group IV or group V synthetics have lowered operational temps as much as 25 degrees F / 14 degrees C.* It may be a moot point.
Terry, I would suggest you should not look to the oil to provide your heat for your engine. Some other method of increasing heat would be a more logical solution. You *need* the lubrication a group IV or group V will provide on start-up, cold running; look to some other means to create the heat, whether it is blanking off a portion of the oil cooler, cowling, etc. In aircraft operations with air cooled engines, this is exactly what we do in winter: install winter baffles..
And if you do experience condensation simply change the oil more frequently. The issue with entrained moisture is not so much a lubrication function, as engine oils are designed to hold water in suspension, but one of internal corrosion.
The 300F / 150C your saw in the Mobil discussion was as an example. Mobil 1 MX4T will function well at higher temperatures, but is a function of how long the oil operates at those extreme temperatures.
Regarding the belief that you were running a true synthetic engine oil. You are not the only one Terry. If you polled the people at Ducati Central, each and every one would be of the understanding that the oil is a full synthetic oil. That is what the Product Data Sheet says exactly: "Advance Ultra 4 is a unique, fully synthetic lubricant for ultimate engine protection and performance". But the next sentence is the giveaway: "Founded on Shells XHVI synthetic base fluid technology" The key word is: "XHVI is Shellspeak for Exta High Viscoscity Index Group III base stock oil. As opposed to the average Group III which may not have a natural Viscosity Index as high as the extra high VI base stock. But even in an XHVI refinement, these base stocks do not provide the performance levels of a Group IV or Group V base stock.
I have Mobil 1 MX4T in mine and at -12C/10F my oil flowed freely in the oil window... :-) I froze my tail off riding to the shop for updates 3 weeks ago, however!
I think you will be very pleased, especially in the feel of the engine, ease of shifting; you will notice a difference after a few days of riding. it takes a bit of time for the MX4T to get to all the nooks and crannies of the engine and transmission..
It is indeed my pleasure.. This has been a wonderful forum for me as well... The questions, comments and physical discoveries have been superb. The dynamics of the discussions have been the result of excellent work on the part of all participants.. Everyone has had an open mind, no gnashing of teeth, no flaming.. It does not get better than this for a discussion, especially one as volatile as lubrication can be.
One quality group of people.
And thank you for assigning the thread atop.. This has certainly expanded participation in the discussion...
Synthetic ATF is a win/win.* With the constant pressure to decrease automobile weight, our automatic transmissions have been the target for weight loss.* Automatic transmission used to hold huge amounts of ATF which enabled a very important process: cooling..* Current automatic transmissions have half or less the volume ATF and size compared with just a few years ago.* Heat is the #1 cause of demise as we just do not have sufficient cooling volume.* *Mineral based ATF fluid's constant exposure to elevated temperatures results in high rates of oil oxidation.* The by-produdts of oxidation are a whole host of acids which in turn attack clutch facings, yellow metals, and bearing housings.
Back to rule #1 with synthetic Group IV and Group V basestocks: they create less heat and then disappate that heat at a much higher rate than mineral based oils. Also, synthetic ATF is very resistant to oxidation.* Thus Synthetic ATF will run cooler, enable even better clutch interface as the clutch facings are running cooler and damaging acids will not be produced; the result is a much smoother shifting, longer lasting (big time) transmission..*
Regarding semi-synehtic engine oil vs. your regular full synthetic. There should be no operational problems. However, in oils, as in chains, the weakest link determines the total strength of the chain/oil and with the mineral oil component, we have a weak link. Mineral based oils, as previously discussed, do not have a natural viscosity index, oxidation resistance, film strength and purity of a synthetic base stock. Thus, a synthetic blend contains a component of lower performance capability.
The other issue is that there is no qualification or accepted standard of exactly what constitutes a "synthetic blend". ie a synthetic blend could contain as little as .0001% synthetic base oil (and that could be a group III) and can legally be referred to as a "synthetic blend".
As we have seen, a synthetic based engine oil may not be a "real" synthetic at all; with a synthetic blend, it is anybody's guess as to what its components are.
However, there should be no conflicts of chemistries with the oils. Just performance levels.
Regarding higher viscosity oils and shock loading. Yes, this is correct and there *is* an engine application where a higher viscosity engine oil is applicable. In a gasoline engine when ignition occurs, it is a burn process. In a diesel engine, the combustion process is just that; a very violent "explosion" vs. the burn process of a gasoline powered engine. Thus diesel engines require a higher viscosity engine oil which will provide "cushioning" for the connecting rod and main bearings. This is why diesel engines use a XXW-40 viscosity engine oil. The use of multi-viscosity engine oils which allowed the application of higher viscosities in engine operating temperatures was one of the single most important advancements in enabling the extension of diesel engine life.
Regarding the temperature range of Neo magnets for use on our oil filters. Some of the higher quality Neo has a significantly higher temperature operating range, so keep an eye open for those magnets. As with engine oils, there are Neo's and then there are Neo's.
The magnetic field will reduce with elevated temps but the field is always there to some degree. Additionally, the metal surface of the oil filter can where the Neo is attached to will become magnetized by the Neo creating an excellent force field area. Once particles begin to collect in the area, they too become magnetized, enlarging the field area. With elevated temps the "reach" of the magnet decreases but does not turn off like a light switch. And as the oil is cooled, the magnet force field returns back to original levels. I have examined hundreds of oil filters that had Neo on their surfaces and in every case there is ferrous residue ranging from a small amount of paste to paste/chunks/clunks. i.e. there is always "something" there and that "something" is iron and steel. Any abrasives, especially ferrous, we can capture from the system is a win/win for our engine and transmission.
Regarding the cloudiness you see after your rides. It is somewhat surprising in that generally 10 to 15 minutes of 180+ F riding should well release any entrained moisture. As previously discussed, the major concern is corrosion. Engine oils are formulated to be able to contain levels of moisture without creating any lubrication issues. Short change faux oil changes (no filter, just the oil) is an easy, 3 quart excellent rust preventive.
Regarding the 4T designation. I do not have an answer..... For years I surmised it was the European manufacturer simple designation for 2 (2T) cycle or 4 (4T) cycle motorcycle engine/transmission designation. I will do some research and get back on this.
If we get the oil to the 180F+ level, the entrained moisture is released and vents through the crankcase breather. If we do not reach the 180F+ level for enough duration, then the moisture is not released and is contained in loose emulsion. When coolinig, the water already in the oil pulls even more into the oil as water is incredibly reactive. If not released from the engine oil, simply change the oil. Fresh oil will be much better able to deal with any condensation that does take place with its full charge of additives and inherint higher stability. New oil does wonders, especially for corrosion prevention.
A multi-grade 50 weight oil, especially a group IV or Group V synthetic, will certainly provide a much higher level of lubrication, especially on startup. As per our previous discussions, a 15W-50 full synthetic such as Mobil 1 V-Twin is essentially a 50W oil that just happens to flow to 40F below zero... Thus this type of oil is capable of immediate flow, pumpability, and optimal lubrication immediately, irrespective of ambient temperatures. Additionally the Group IV or Group V synthetic will provide higher viscosity, superior lubrication at elevated operating temperatures.
Courtesy modern day chemistry, there are no engine applications in which a true straight grade 50W mineral based oil would be recommended. A 50W full synthetic Group IV/V oil is a total operational win/win and multi-viscosity mineral based XXW-50 weights would provide far superior performance characteristics vs a mineral based straight grade 50W. There are simply no applications I am familiar with that a straight 50W mineral based oil would be recommended.
Yes, it is correct that Mobil 1 15W-50 Extended Performance does not contain lubricity enhancements for fuel mileage maximization.* However, as with our previous discussions, the 15W-50 viscosity is not optimal for most Ducati engines, creating unwanted heat and horsepower loss.*
Compared to other available 15W-50 oils, the Mobil 1 EP 15W-50 is an exceptional oil for those engines requiring a 50W oil.* *Both the Mobil 1 MX4T 10W-40 and Mobil 1 V-Twin 20W-50 contain even higher levels of anti-wear and detergency addization than the Extended Performance, along with motorcycle specific base stock (higher performance).
As we have been discussing at length, the 10W-40, Mobil 1 MX4T is the recommended viscosity for Ducati by Ducati.* A 50W will rob horsepower, create heat.* You indicate that your 15W-50 Mobil 1 'sheared' to a 40W in relatively low mileage.* I have reviewed Mobil 1 15W50 engine oil analysis results after a 500 mile NASCAR race (they don't use 15W-50 anymore, changed to 0W-30 two years ago) indicating a right on the money 50W viscosity, no shear whatsoever.* Ducati engines can be fuel diluters, big time.* *I would strongly suggest that your 40W viscosity was due to fuel dilution vs. shear...* Some labs do not take the time to run fuel dilutions, just the viscosities.*
I have reviewed many Ducati oil analysis with viscosities lower than what went in the engine and in group IV and Group V full synthetic oils, it was fuel dilution every time..* I have reviewed many, many Mobil 1 MX4T 10W-40 Ducati engine oil analysis and in every case, right on viscosity; except those cases where significant fuel dilution was present.
So, yes, I strongly recommend Mobil 1 MX4T or other Group IV or Group V synthetic engine oil.* Shear is not an issue from my experience.* *Quite the contrary... Mobil 1 MX4T and Mobil 1 V-Twin are very shear stable....*
Dan, thank you so much for posting that excellent link.* Superbly written and loaded with good information.* And in Dan's reference link, Terry, the few full, real Group IV and Group V oils were delineated. There are not many.....* One of the immediate clues of the base stock used is pour point.* As we comparatively examined the pour points of Mobil 1 MX4T 10W-40 vs. Shell Ultra 10W-40, it was most evident that the Shell was not a group IV or Group V.* And then our good friend from Greece noted in a most scientific way that when he swayed his Ducati from side to side, the oil on the window moved reeeaall slow...* Which is what initiated our whole Shell discussion on the subject "there are synthetics and then there are *real* synthetics".
Lubrication is not a simple subject, especially when the water (oil) has been clouded with the quasi synthetic group III now legally labeled "synthetic".
I really do not want to get to the point of "recommending" a product.* I will share information of products I know, such as Mobil 1 MX4T in that I have knowledge of its formulation, base stocks, and formulator along with extensive oil analysis database.* My purpose is to share in depth technical information so you can be a more informed buyer, user,* enabling you to better decide which lubricants will provide optimal performance for your bike's engine and gearbox in your environment and application.
Terry, you are right on target; when a lubricant manufacturer walks into a race team with a rather large check, it many times (let's say always) follows that the motorcycle or automobile manufacturer will follow suit and recommend the company's lubricants. The problem in this case is this situation with Group III oils and an appearance of mis-information with respect to use of the word "synthetic" and corresponding words such as "Ultra"; as this is not only a "synthetic oil" it is an "Ultra synthetic"
super duper, worth the high cost, you're gonna love it because we know it is best. When in fact you (and everyone on this site) very likely now know more about Shell Ultra and Group II+, Group III oils than the good folks at Ducati. I would venture to say there will be some raised eyebrows at Ducati at some point when they find out the oil is not what they thought it was.
First, may I thank you for the kind words.... The excellence of this thread is the result of everyone who has inputed and participated; extraordinary people reside on this site.
The oil indicates that it is ester based and thus a very high level performing engine oil. The only drawback of an ester based engine oil is its natural affinity for moisture, which can lead to corrosion. If you live in a cold climate where you will not be riding you bike for an extended period, you should consider changing the oil prior to spring. Ester based oils love water.
The oil has the potential to be equal to or superior to Mobil 1 Mx4T in every respect except the corrosion issue.
You are most welcome, thank you.* You know the site is getting esoteric when the discussion raises to the level of enhancing oil filter performance!* Such a simple, relatively inexpensive device yet Neo's filtration capabilities are superb.* Especially in our high ferrous wear metal producing gearboxes.* When I previously mentioned filtering to the angstrom level, this also provides significant benefits to the engine oil.* Ultra fine metal particles are oxidation catalysts and by removing/minimizing these ultra fine particles we can significantly increase engine oils properties.* Ferrous metals, whether it be a gear face or free floating are all fighting for the same anti-wear additives; minimize the free floating ferrous particles and the additive stays in suspension to deposit on gear surfaces, where it is needed instead of depleting.* Oil oxidation rates can be significantly reduced.* Oxidation by-products are many, including acids.* Acids in engine oil accelerate wear rates, especially for yellow metals.* Minimize oxidation, minimize acid by-products, oil performance levels are then maintained at a much higher level for a longer period.* All the result of that little magnet on the oil filter...
As further discussion for the relevance of the use of Neodymium magnets as an iron/steel filter mechanism, my recent Ducati 1000DS engine oil analysis reflected the following.
Iron, 18 ppm, chrome 1, lead 1, copper 4, tin 0, aluminum 4, nickel 1, sililcon (dirt) 6. As can be seen, the highest single wear metal component was iron/steel, related to our sharing sumps with the transmission. The elevated iron significantly accerates all of the other components wear rates, especially yellow metal. Anything we can do to reduce the level of iron/steel in the engine oil will have a direct relationship on the engine, gearbox and especially bearing wear rates and overall longevity. And Neo will address this component very, very well. Along with increasing the performance of the engine/gear oil.
I apologize, I obviously missed your shelf life question.. 3 years is a conservative safe life for sealed Group IV or Group V stored in reasonably stable temperatures (to minimize condensation). Group III synthetics (?) are variable in their makeup, base stocks, but should be safe for comparable periods.
Yes, in answer to your question, the specifications indicate that the Amsoil is a group IV/V base stock oil. Regarding the Amsoil comparisons, it is difficult for me to comment on as I very much want to keep my position in the forum as neutral as possible. All of the top rated motorcycle specific oils in their comparisons are superb engine/transmission lubricants. One can split hairs on a particular laboratory test result but all of these oils are going to provide a level of performance and protection advantage that is huge compared with Group III and non-motorcycle specific engine oils.
A company may publish a particular segment of laboratory tests that skew results towards one's products. An example may be stating Zinc additive treat levels, with an obvioius high treat level, indicating that as an advantage. However, another company may use other anti-wear additives which provide additional anti wear and oxidation benefits that zinc alone cannot provide. The comparison shows brand X to be deficient to brand A in Zinc content; however, the overall anti-wear additization package of Brand X is at a much higher level than brand A, thus providing significant performance benefits. If one graphs Zinc content alone, brand A is indeed the winner but the result is meaningless as it relates to overall engine oil extreme pressure performance.
So, back to point one, all of those Group IV and V motorcycle specific oils are superb products... One cannot go wrong with any of the choices.
Yes, Amsoil's white paper did concur in the fine print that Zinc alone is not an indicator of performance; however, the half page graphs showed nothing but Zinc levels so a person reading the notation "Zinc quantiy content alone does not indicate its performance" would ask "why publish the graph in the first place!?" Which is exactly my point..
The graph shows Brand A with higher levels of Zinc than all other oils.. Which would lead a person who had *not* read the complete text to come away with a "obviously Brand A is better" take... For me, the "white paper" becomes a little gray with this methodology..... Why publish a graph that has little or no meaning?? There are EP additives which can far surpass the performance of Zinc alone; some of the other oils indicated on the chart contain these additives. These "other additives" can cost much more than Zinc and will provide synergistic results when combined with a certain level of zinc.
Thus my issues with these "white papers" and my previous comments about "thin slicing" tests, publishing data and graphs which are mis-leading, especially to a person who may not read the complete study, the fine print, or just likes graphs...
It is reeeallly difficult to correlate laboratory test performance to real world. Yes, lab testing does perform a very important function in developing products but I cannot tell you the number of times, the layers/inches of scar tissue I have from developing the world greatest lubricant only to have it fail miserably in field applications. I have received plaques honoring some of my stupendous failures, yet each performed superbly in the lab! I speak from experience....
As per the previous insightful post ("did you read the whole thread?!!!!"), please take a moment (well, maybe a whole day) and read the previous posts and you will find there IS clear concensus on one aspect and that is to NOT use an XW-50 weight oil in your Ducati engine... PLEASE go back and read...... (Unless a good synthetic 10W-40 is not available in your country)
Ducpainter is right on target. Engine oil lubricant should be changed at a mileage or annually. As he indicated, acids, moisture, wear metals and combusiton by-products accumulate in the oil and simply need to be drained, at least annually. Preferably at the end of the riding season so that a fresh charge of oil is in the crankcase/transmission. The acids and other harmful deposits are then removed for winter storage. Acids in the used oil can quietly work away all winter if left in the engine.
Regarding a "straight" 50W for use in older Ducati engines with bottom end issues. As we have discussed on this site, a full Group IV/V synthetic base stock engine oil IS a straight grade 50W oil. A 50W synthetic base stock will just happen to meet the 15W or 20W specifications but is essentially a full, for real, 50W oil very much the same as a mineral based 50W, except that our fully synthetic base stock will pour to 50 below zero, where the mineral based 50W is approaching a solid at 0 degrees F. Additionally, at 230F, our 50W synthetic is a rock solid 50W where the mineral based 50W is beginning to thin, as all mineral based oils do when exposed to elevated operating temperature. Thus our synthetic XXW-50 full synthetic oil is going to provide a "thicker" oil at engine operating temperatures than the supposed thick 50W mineral based oil.
From a lube engineer's perspective, using a high quality group IV/V full synthetic XXW-50 will provide nothing but advantages in operation, life, for any engine designed for a 50W, irrespective of bearings, especially for a "weak" situation. There are simply no lubrication advantages in a mineral based oil vs. a full group IV/V synthetic. None........
As long as we provide the viscosity required by the manufacture in its initial design phase, a full synthetic is going to provide superior lujbrication in every respect. The film strength of a full synthetic alone, vs. a mineral based oil is a win/win. Then add cold weather flow, high temperature stability, etc.. You are correct in your assumptions...
You are correct that Shell Rotella 5W-40 does not contain friction modifiers, however, as with Shell Advance, Rotella is a Group III mineral based oil and not a full Group IV/V synthetic in the true sense of the word.
Certainly an excellent mineral based oil but does not have the lubrication capabilities of a true Group IV/V synthetic engine oil.
Steve in Denmark.
As a discussion poinit, do you have any full synthetic diesel rated engine oils available? They generally come in the 5W or 15W-40 viscosity rating and perform very well in older engines and do not contain energy saving additization. As a group they are high in detergent so an increase of oil drains would be anticipated. But the bottom line would be a positive one for you and your engine if you have any such readily available.
Many older Ducati are running Mobil Delvac 1 5W-40 and other full synthetic diesel engine oils with great success.
The Mobil Synt S is a European VW TDI diesel specific formulation. The PDS for Synt S oil does not indicate energy conservation additization, however I have no way to confirm that as Synt S is a European only product and not produced here in the U.S. I would suggest trying to find a non TDI specific synthetic diesel oil. VW may have specified the formulation to be energy conserving which would then include lubricity enhancement but unofortunately I have no way of confirming that...
With a full synthetic, we are not concened about the W rating as much as the operational viscosity. Most of our Ducati are optimized for a 40W operational viscosity. So, with a full synthetic there is no issue on cold weather rating (the XXW rating) as most full, real Group IV or V 40W synthetics flow to 60F below zero. And yes, Mobil 1 automotive contains friction enhancement and should not be used in a wet clutch application. Mobil 1 motorcycle specific synthetic oils do NOT contain friction enhancement and are optimized for motorcycle use.
So, no, a 10W-30 was never mentioned in our previous pages of discussion and should not be used in our Ducati engines/transmissions.
Yes, I have read the MCN oil test and they did a yeoman job. But, yes, laboratory testing is one aspect but it is just impossible to duplicate real world. Lab tests are used to develop a baseline oil then it is off to the real engine/transmission for the rest of the formulation process. Irrespective, MCN's work was superbly done and written. Experientially I can share that Mobil 1 MX4T uses a significantly higher quality base stock than the automotive formulation yet there are no lab tests that will reflect the real world advantage of the difference, as one example... There are more..
As we have discussed, laboratory tests are excellent tools used to develop formulations but then it is off to the real world to tweake and fine tune the formulation, sometimes HUGE tune a lubricant. And then a lubricant may have an EP additive which does not show up as the normal Zinc or Phosphorous EP additive. Thus this lubricant would not compare well with an Amsoil (example)l which may have high treat levels of Phos/Zinc but none of the unreported state of the art anti-wear/EP additive.
Suffice it to say that all group IV and V motorcycle oils are superb lubricants that are going to provide extraordinary real world performance. Any direct laboratory performance comparison gets into splitting hairs, big time.
As another previously discussed example, Mobil 1 MX4T uses a higher performance proprietary base oil very different from Mobil 1 auotmotive oils yet test-wise, the higher performance base oil would not reflect in any significant laboratory test number result improvement..
Oil does have a shelf life but if kept in normal temperatures, out of sunlight, 2 to 3 years is generally accepted. The settle out that you see IS a common current problem with Group II mineral based oils. Group II is quite stable as a base stock and does not hold additives in suspension as well as good 'ol Group 1 base stock oils. No big deal, just shake the bottle well and pour... No operational issues.
The 50W is no BIG issue, it just robs some horsepower, creates extra heat, etc. vs. a 40W. Operationally works just fine except for the aforementioned. It does not to anything "better" than a comparable group IV/V synthetic based engine oil and does some things not quite as well..
Ideally we would like "optimum" viscosity but if not available, do next best. Not "perfect" but no problems, no issues......
Re: Mobil 1 auto vs. Motorcycle MX4T for dry clutch Ducati, is auto better? In a word, No.. The original chief chemist for Mobil had 17 motorcycles, 5 of them Ducati and was given carte blanche on formulation. Thus Mobil 1 MX4T not only has an optimized additive package for motorcycle engines but also a much higher quality base stock than regular automotive Mobil 1. It is like when one builds a house, the foundation is the most important component; same with base stocks. Which comes to play in our requirement as gear oil lubricant with our common sump. Every component of Mobil 1 MX4T is totally optimized for high performance air and liquid cooled motorcycle application. (along with other Group IV/V motorcycle specific engine oils)
I have reviewed literally hundres of MX4T 10W-40 used engine oil analysis (including those from my own 1000DS) and the oil has always on vis, very much the same as it went in; in the 15Cst region, a rock solid 40W. The oil is very shear resistant, especially in that it was formulated for use in gearbox application, with a minimal use of shear resistant VI improver. Thus your concern of Mobil 1 MX4T and possible shearing should hopefully be allayed.....
Regarding esters and their hygroscopic nature, I have no knowledge of a chemistry differentiation in those esters used as automotive blends. An ester is an ester.. Esters are very agressive, excellent natural detergency, excellent film strength, enable good additive dispersancy and of course seal swell. In that agressive nature comes a natural tendency to adhere to anything, including water.. The potential for corrosion has always been an issue with any ester blend. Which is one reason why Mobil and others have reduced ester content to minimal or none in their engine/gearbox oil formulations. Mobil 1 auto used to contain 10% ester, 0% in current formulation..
Mobil's published viscosities are one thing, real world quite another... Both MX4T and V-Twin are mid grade products in real world oil analysis results. Thus V-Twin 20W-50 is not a "light" 50W, from what I have been seeing but a mid-grade 17/18 cst viscosity. Mobil and other manufacturer's published specs are "representative" and all are caveated with "these may not represent exact performance numbers" or some such legaleze...
If you do a searc on this thread there are many excellent Neo sites available. Just a few pages back several were mentioned. I obtain my Neo directly from China for specific appllications and do not sell nor do I have a relationship with anyone selling Neo. Sorry. And no, it MUST be a good high qualityh Neodymium. Neo is what made this whole filter thing possible. Even going through the thin metal surround of an oil filter *greatly* reduces normal magnets to virtually no effective field whatsoever. Neo's with their incredible power, will not only penetrate the oil filter housing and provide very effective filtration for ferrous metals from 1 angstrom on up through chunks and clunks (virtually supercharges an oil filter's performance; from a shaky 30 micron and larger to 1 ansgtrom and larger...A Bit of an increase....) A regular magnet, even samarian cobalt, not worth the time/money..
And no, there is no affect on electronics with its location way down below the engine; however, it may also assist in tripping stop light activators..
Yes, it sounds like your oil is over-filled. Just loosen the drain plug and drain a bit out to achieve the proper level.
At this point it looks like July and some very high quality filters should be available for our Ducati!
I am most excited, finally, to see high quality filtration medium being used in our Class 6 filter.
I have no affiliation with the company manufacturing the filters.
One of the The manufacturers is Amsoil.....
The new filter is NOT yet available; the current Amsoil cycle filters are of the same quality as the Ducati OEM filter so no current advantage. The new style filter is in a whole new level of filtration.
And no, I am NOT an Amsoil distributor, never have been one and never thought I would be sharing Amsoil information but as they say, if someone has a better mousetrap; it looks like Amsoil is soon going to have just that.
Regarding the 30W viscosity for MX4T 10W-40; the question that I had asked previously: was there any fuel dilution detected in the analysis result? I *have* seen Mobil 1 MX4T viscosity in the 30W, even 20W viscosity range, but in each ease there was a significant level of fuel dilution causing the reduction in viscosity.. As I shared previously, I have a file full of MX4T's that are right on vis, thus my question on fuel dilution......
Not to belabor, but I review between 200 and 300 analysis results a day and oxidation level is one of the key components for certain operations as certain staff like to do "Parker Pen" oil changes and oxidation level is an immediate giveaway. And yes, oxidation levels are right on the money for the Mobil 1 MX4T analysis results I have reviewed, within a point or so of virgin. I daily review Mobil Delvac 1 diesel oil analysis results with 100,000+ miles and oxidation has never been an issue except in cases of severe overheating, oil cooler blockage, etc..
And certainly a fuel dilution of less than .5 would not alter viscosity a grade, I agree.. No answers on my end... You have analysis reflecting out of grade, I have analysis reflecting in grade..
I have run my 1000DS Ducati on the dyno with both Mobil 1 MX4T and 20W-50, with MX4T indicating a 1 to 2 horsepower gain It is simple viscometrics. Churning a 50W simply requires more energy, robs horsepower and creates heat. With synthetic oil's natural film strength, we simply do not need to be churning a 50W when a 40W full synthetic will provide more than ample film strength. 99.9% of our Ducati lubrication is hydrodynamic. Most Ducati engines are optimized for a 10W-40 viscosity oil, as indicated in the owner's/maintenance manual. Thus we have "documentation" that Ducati's recommended viscosity for most of their engines is 10W-40.
With a mineral based oil, the need for a heavier viscosity may well be true, but with a Group IV/V synthetic, we have viscosity temperature stability providing the required oil film. As a lubrication engineer I live with "thicker oil must be better" thought process each and every day. In my 30+ years experience in lubrication, viscosity optimization (especially so with synthetics as we can generally utilize lower viscosity lubes and still achieve optimimum film thickness at operational temperatures) is key for maximum component, lubricant life and the highest level of efficiency. Which, on a Ducati, spells fun........
Jethro, excellent question regarding a mineral based oil getting "thicker" when cold to provide better rocker lubrication on startup. However, "viscosity" as defined is its ability to be pumped. Thus, on cold start-up, we need the ability for fresh oil to be pumped to the extremities of the engine, including the rockers.. Thus we need the most temperature consistent oil, viscosity-wise, so that on startup we have oil flow immediately taking place.. Additionally, a "thick" oil at the rockers is not going to be able to "keep up" with the velocity of the rockers.. It would seem to make sense to have thick oil there, but in reality, no.
Regarding the Group IV/V stating on the bottle... Excellent question, very common sense: however, no one is putting it on the bottles at this point. All Castrol "synthetics" are NOT Group IV/V but group III. The reason the Castrol was so much less is that it was not a Group IV.. At this point the only Group IV/V oils are Mobil 1, Amsoil, Red Line and other lesser known motorcycle specific oils. One must examine the MSDS and PDS for each oil to decipher exactly what the base stock used in each oil is.. Hopefully this will change with time and true synthetic oil manufacturers will advance to specific delineation of the base stock used in making the finished oil.
Again, Excellent questions.......
I had not heard the name Bardahl for years! I did not know the company was still in business. Bardahl manufactured engine/transmission additives for years. Their spokesperson was Brocerick Crawford (waaay before your time!), the star of a highway patrol police show. This big old Buick would side up in front of the camera, Broderick would get out and say "I use Bardahl engine oil additive, so should you"... Classic stuff...
I went to the Bardahl site and was not able to download the PDS or MSDS for the product so I do not know if the oil is indeed Group IV/V or Group III.. The site says 100% synthetic but we know what that means: nothing...
So, unfortunately, no information on my part on your Bardahl oil.......
No, if gasoline is present it will not "settle out" or give any indication other than odor. There will be no "visible" indicator. You could have the engine oil analyized at a lab and the results will indicate positively if gasoline is or is not present in the oil. Cost of analysis is generally around $20; the oil analysis results will also provide levels of wear metals, additive treat levels, viscosity, etc.
And yes, if one does have an injector weeping badly, it will end up in the oil indicated as increased volume. The problem is that the excess gasoline washes down the cylinder wall, greatly increasing ring, piston and cylinder wall wear rates.
Once the fuel gets into chemical solution with engine oil, it is difficult to release from the oil.* It would be extremely rare to have any level of engine oil increase related to fuel dilution without the engine exhibiting some sort of corresponding symptom...* *As in big time roughness, inability ro idle, etc..* It would definitely not be a smooth running Ducati engine...* Small amounts of fuel dilution are normal; however, oil level changes would be undetectable..
The new Amsoil filter is the one I was aluding to, however the one listed on the web site is not it.. On paper (actually SAE papers presented on the medium, which is what caught my attention) the filter looks superb. I am going to run oil analysis on my 1000DS with OEM, then Pure, then the new Amsoil and will publish the results. When and if the Amsoil Ea comes available.
Hopefully all are aware that I have *no* affiliation with Amsoil. However, this filter's medium performance has the potential to far exceed that of the OEM paper element and now gives us a premium, ultra fine filter available where we had none just a few months ago. If someone is manufacturing a superior oil filter for our Ducati, I will be first in line, irrespective of manufacture..
At this point Kudos to Amsoil for manufacturing what looks like a very exciting (for a lube engineer), completely new concept in filtration mediium. If/when it is available...
Yes, you are correct; it is the new Ea medium that has me excited. The new filter was *supposed* to be available July 1 for our Ducati engines... The old Amsoil medium is the same old same old cellulose with no advantages vs. the OEM filter. The Ea series is quite another filter medium, however.
Which is why I did not mention a brand/product until now as I have experienced vaporware before..
As of today, 7/11/06 the new Ea filter medium is NOT available for our Ducati engines... I just got off the phone with Amsoil technical support and they have no idea when or if the Ea filter would be available for our application.. Amsoil only has the cellulose/Wix filter available at this point.
Scoobydoo; excellent thought!
Again, I am NOT an Amsoil distributor, have no association whatsoever with Amsoil, never have; however, with this new oil filter they have me, a card carrying non-Amsoil type, anxious to install this new filter on my Ducati, run analysis and confirm its performance compared to our OEM filters...
I have already made several phone calls to Amsoil but got pretty much a nothing response, rather like "we have no control over what filters are made using the new Ae filter medium".. As in like, who DOES make those decisions?? And no response......
This filter medium has had several papers written regarding its exceptional performance but the proof is still in the rubber meeting the road; i.e. its real world perfomance on our Ducati engine/tranny combos... Our engines/transmission create a *load* of wear metals, primarily from the trarnsmission and we desperately have needed a high quality filter medium to help minimize the level of those contaminants; i.e. the neodumium magnet supplement.
Oldy, regarding your question "How good is MIL-PRF-7808L?" It is an excellent Group V synthetic oil. However, it is formulated specifically for turbine engine requirements. 7808 can only be used in a turbine engine, however. It is an extremely light base stock (5W) optimized for 38,000 rpm bearings and high speed gearboxes. Superb product for its specific application but little or no application elsewhere.
The CAT SOS oil analysis program is good but with some signicant shortcomings. For one, SOS does not use accepted ASTM procedures for viscosity determination but uses a rather a quick and dirty run at room temperature, from my experiences with CAT labs in Ohio. So please take this into account. And yes, there may well be some fuel dilution viscosity reduction taking place, as I have seen this in many Ducati analysis, including my own. But, in grade..
As discussed several times in this thread, the Shell Ultra is not really a true synthetic. Shell Ultra Synthetic is actually a group III MINERAL based oil. A judge here in the U.S. enabled the oil (along with Castrol Syntec, etc.) to be labeled "synthetic" when in fact they are not Group IV or Group V synthetic oils. Buried in this thread are several real world discussions regarding the Ultra and its operational shortcomings vs. true Group IV and V synthetics.....
Thumper, regarding your original question:" My Ducati has a dry clutch and does not require the same oil that regular sports bikes use. But can I still use that oil even if it's not required?" Yes, Thumper, you can use the same oil required by sport bikes which have wet clutches. Real, solid answer........
"I'm kind of stuck in the middle. We can't use regular motorcycle oil because of the dry clutch, and we can't use HD oil because we don't have V-Twins. So what the freak oil do we use?HuhHuh"
You are not stuck in the middle Thumper. You *can* use regular synthetic motorcycle oil. It is as simple as that... I hope this is clear and concise enough for you........
Regarding viscosity for 4 valvers.. The optimum viscosity for those engines is dictated by what the manual recommends for your ambient temperature/ climate.
Gosh is it ever great to be back! Tomorrow will be 3 weeks since my neurosurgery; I just returned from neurosurgeon visit and all looks super, glad to report! I took a nasty, nasty fall at MidOhiotrack day July 31st and did not realize how hard my head hit the asphalt; it took two weeks for the hematoma to evidence itself in the form of severe night time headaches. I thought I had twisted my neck and was making an appointment with the chiropractor! He suggested I go to ER and get a very exacting X-ray of my neck, which I did 3 weeks ago Tuesday. I felt just fine sitting in ER, frankly rather guilty as there were folks bleeding everywhere waiting in line.... Almost left.. Glad I didn't as the scan revealed a severe subdural hematoma; I was immediately transported to the *real* hospital where they did the craneotomy; I lost a quart and a half of blood during the process so am a bit down on stamina.
But I am back 100% spirit-wise with no loss of any motor function, etc. and if it weren't for the stamina, Yule Brenner haircut, incredible scar, it is as though nothing has happened... :-)
I missed you all and very much appreciated your kind words and prayers in my absence... Obviously the stuff does work...........
I have a very, very small database to share information (two oil analysis/particle counts) however, the results are consistent with what I have seen with other stainless filters. There was absolutely no discernable difference beteen the metal screen and OEM paper. The actual particle counts for the Scott with 1500 miles on the used oil were >4 microns: 76,9252 particles. >6 microns 30,786 particles, >14 microns 1,206 particles. >25 microns 233 particles, >50 microns, 43 microns, >100 microns 6 particles... Which again, are almost identical to my particle count results with a Ducati OEM filter.......
Bottom Line: save your money and continue to use OEM oil filters. There ARE (promised in July: no filters as of today) some new filters coming out that will significantly increase filter perfomance without caveats, reasonably priced. When/If these new filters come available I will publish their particle count results so we can emperically evaluate their pafrticle count performance vs. OEM..
Sorry to be so tardy in my response, still recovering a bit.......
We are splitting hairs in the discussion of a full, real Group IV/V synthetic 40W vs 50W discussions. We have been discussing "optimal" viscosities.. The use of a heavier viscosity Group IV or V will not create issues, , will provide superb lubrication but as for increasing connecting rod bearing life, tough call. Rod and main bearing life is particularly affected by a too heavy viscosity in that we can experience the inability of the fluid to "keep up" with the surface speed differential that could exist during high revolution operations. We can experience fluid "shear" where the thicker oil actually loses its coherency, losing its viscosity for just a moment, allowing metal to metal to occur. As we previously discussed, 99% of our lubrication is hydrodynamic, i.e. the guy wake-boarding behind the Goodyear Aqua Tred car on 1/4 inch of water..
So, we try to use the "optimum" viscosity to achieve the best hydrodynamic fluid balance, the highest fluid strength and a viscosity which will in turn protect against speed differential shearing.
Alll diesel engines use an XXW-40W oil. These are relatively low speed engines, turning a maximum 2,100 rpms in most applications. However, the difference in fuel burn is huge. In a gasoline engine, fuel is ignited by the spark plug and results in the fuel air mixture "burn" process. A relatively "soft" energy dispersion. In a diesel engine the ignition is a result of heat and pressure, resulting in a literal "explosion". This produces a violent initial thrust that can literally crush a connecting rod bearing where a low viscosity oil may be present (fuel dilution). Note that most every diesel engine manufactrured, the optimum viscosity recommendation is an xxW-40W. The 40W handles a 1,000+ horsepower diesel engine violent combustion process just fine. Connecting rod bearings can live to 1,000,000+ miles...
My case is that our 40W is one very robust viscosity, certainly capable of handfling the stress of a relatively "soft" burn process, for those engines that designate an xxW-40 as recommended oil. I have seen far more connecting rod bearings showing signs of stress from using too high a viscosity vs. too low a viscosity. Most engine failure that I do tear-down failure analysis are of course mechanical but in those few that really are purely lubricant related (not from fuel dilution, anti-freeze or other) are a result of the bearing speeds exceeeding the oil viscosity and its aility to "keep up" with the bearing speed differentials.. Synthetic oil has some incredible level of film strength, demonstrated in its ability to protect turbine bearings and gearboxes that normally run in the 38,000 rpm level, with 5 weight viscosity. For tens of thousands of hours. For an engine that is required an XXW-50W, then that is the oil to use.
And a re-remind that there are synthetics and there are those quasi-synthetics.......
Duc Huntin: Excellent question and I hope you are sitting down.. The lubrication of both plain and roller/ball bearings is hydrdynamic and essentially the same. (tje guy on the wake-board with a 1/4 inch of water supporting him) The EHL calculation (engineering calculation for optimum viscosity) for each is very slightly different but both are based on bearing size, speed, and operating temperarures... Each bearing design has its pros an cons but plain bearings are able to withstand much higher loading than a roller/ball designs. i.e. plain bearings are used on large CAT equipment for loaders, bulldozers where high impact loading occurs. A roller/ball type bearing would be crushed in those applications. Roller/balls have their applications, certainly anywhere high speed, low loading occurs. But not exclusively, as example turbo-charger bearings: they are plain bearings which see 20,000 to 30,000 rpm, incredibly high heat, yet live long lives...
The bottom line is that in each case if one uses the optimum viscosity high quality oil in each, both bearing styles should provide long service life with little or no wear differential in that the plain bearing is continually riding on that wonderful film of oil, thus little or no wear differential. Improper viscosity oil for a plain bearing and we have a totally different discussion...
From a lube engineer's perspective the first thing we do in either a plain or non-friction bearing application is perform an EHL calculation for proper/optimum viscosity determination.. It is simply viscosity, viscosity and viscosity...
Regarding wear differenced between Group IV an Group V oils. Honestly, we would be examining the differendes in the measurement of split hairs. All of these oils provide a level of lubrication that is so clearly superior that this 'creme de la cremed' group of oils is just that..
Of course Amsoil has their "white papers" indicating advantages in tests which have little or no correlation to real world application but, again, all of the mentioned Group IV/V oils are simply superb...
The helmet I was wearing was a Z1R. The helmet did not crack in the fall and only shows the asphalt scrape of the asphalt. Honestly I do not think my problem was with the helmet; I do not think any helmet would have dealt with the severity of my head hitting the pavement any better or worse than the Z1R. With the rear wheel total lock-up at 70+ mph in the high speed turn, I was thrown to the pavement quite violently.. It literally tore my brain lose from the side of my cranium, which caused the hematoma.. On my way down I was saying to myself "this is gonna hurt!"
An excellent question for which I do not have the ultimate answer tho as I am not going to "test" another helmet brand with the same fall... :-)
Regarding oil warm up, etc. You are correct in that with our wonderful Group IV/V full synthetic oils, there is no need to "warm up" the oil. The viscosity is going to be essentially the same on start up as it is at operating temperatures. However, your difficulty with accepting starting up and immediately running/riding is well founded. We need to now allow the internal metals time to warm. Bearings, rings, cylinder walls, all need a few minutes of heat soaking, to perform and provide proper clearances, etc. So, a few minuetes of idle, followed by a bit of "taking it easy" would be highly recommended to allow for progressive heat soak to occur. But all the while, all internals are going to be immediately well lubricated.....
Excellent Question, and thank you.....
That *is* the problem. There is no one *book* on lubrication that coves everything we have covered in this thread. And this thread has covered so many good areas as a result of the thread's natural meandering... Tough, no, impossible to summarize which is why no one has written *the* lubrication book..
Frankly, this thread is the closest thing to *the* book on Ducati lubrication needs, in existence....
One more point not to forget in the condensed version... The installation of the high quality Neodymium magnet on the oil filter... (just had to get that in).. :-)
I would agree with Ducpainter that the 'visibles' are either transmission or clutch (or both) break in wear metals. Do not be concerned with the darkness in color as we aren't dealing with just an engine oil as in your car, but a combined system of engine, transmission and in your case, wet clutch. The high detergency level in the oil will do its job cleaning, especially for new/break-in. I would not be concerned at this point; just keep an eye on follow-on drains. Cut open the oil filter each oil change and examine the pleats closely with a Neo magnet.. Monitor for trending.. And of course document and keep dealer advised... Again, build dirt and break-in most likely cause.....
Overall, as the analysis result comments indicate, a good oil analysis. The only concern is the silicon level (which is not gasket material, but dirt: silicon is the elemental word for dirt). Elevated silicon (dirt) is an abrasive which causes accelerated wear of components. If you are running a performance air filter such as a DP or K&N, this is the by-product. Just change oil a little more often..
All in all, a good analysis and if you have any particular questions, by all means...I review between 100 to 300 analysis a day as part of what I do....
You have a constant abrasive contaminant (silicon) entering the oil continuously. To minimize the abrasive concentration, more frequent oil changes would minimize the level of abrasives in the oil. As you will note, K&N advertises their filters HP (dubious, however) capabilities but no longer tanks about the filter's ability to "filter"... Any air filter which you can see through is not going to stop a dirt particle moving at 100+ mph; there is simply no tackifier that will reach out and grab that particle.. It is going straight through to the engine/transmission... Resulting in just what your oil analysis indicated... No immediate harm, just a much higher rate of wear is taking place, especially on softer yellow metals (bearings) and aluminum..
Thus you now have the knowledge from your oil analysis results and options that will minimize the affects, should you continue with the K&N or go to back to paper, etc. etc.. Irrespective, as long as we minimize the abrasives and resultant wear, your engine and transmission life and performance will be maximized.
Yes, the incoming abrasives that can find their way in through the induction system can do some pretty destrictive work. I have seen $100,000+ V-12 engines destroyed in less than a week due to a leaking induction system which allowed high levels of abrasives into the engine.. i.e. the pistons were literally rattling in the liners! My primary concern is to enable the knowledge that if minimal induciton restriction/maximum performance is the primary, then one should take steps to minimize the amount of abrasives in the oil by more frequent oil changes..
As a lube engineer, the number 1 cause of premature engine/component failure I see is induction system leakage, faulty air filter, or improper air filter seating. By a huge margin dirt is #1....
Regarding your excellent questions:
1. "For viscosity, if 10-40 is better than 20-50, would 10-30 be even better?"
No, we want the viscosity that our engines/gearboxes have been built for, to provide optimize the film thickness all of the time, in all rev ranges. In an engine designed for a XXW-40, it could be possible to exceed the EHL (hydrodynamic) range of an XXW-30 weight oil. Which could result in accelerated engine wear, best case, possible film failure with attendant scoring/gouging/failure... In those Ducati engines where an XXW-50 is Ducati recommended in the manual, then XXW-50 it is. Optimization of viscosity is the name of the game.
2. "I've heard of problems with Mobil full synthetic 15-50 causing slippage in wet clutches. Would a synthetic blend or even the dino variety be better for wet clutches? If so, would an automotive type be ok? eg. Valvoline?"
It is not the synthetic oil which would cause slippage issues but the use of an automotive friction modified oil (fuel consumption reduction additives). These friction reducing additives can indeed cause clutch slippage issues. However, the use of motorcycle specific synthetic oils will enable wet clutches to in fact work better than a comparable mineral based oil as synthetic base stocks disappate heat at a much higher rate than mineral based oils. Thus clutch action is more consistent and with the lower heats generated, clutch facing materials life can be greatly extended.
As previously discussed, most high performance automatic transmissions use full synthetic ATF's for these same reasons..
|
Aloha Alex
Linear Mode
