Oil

[Fred W]

"Higher Quality" doesn't mean "slipperier" or dangerous to a wet clutch, assuming it meets JASO MA rating. I don't know where that idea is coming from. There are plenty of "low quality" oils on the market with friction modifiers and energy star ratings that cause them to be unsuitable for use in a motorcycle with a wet clutch.

 

[gapiob]

Maybe I have lost some translation and I apologize.
Usually, car's oil High quality have many additive in. but indeed in low quality oil you have also this kind of additives.
the worst for our clutch are anti friction additives. An oil without this kind of additive is not prejudicial for wet clutch.
Unfortunately I had this probleme on my first byke, a virago... I used the same oil than my diesel car, and I made my disk trimmed unusable... I wase obliged to change it.
The JASO norme is made to ensure that oil is good for an oil bath clutch or not by testing the frictional properties thereof. So if your clutch slips after draining or that it seems to be worn out too fast, the first thing to check is that the oil used to respond positively to the JASO standard

The latest revision of standards Jaso date of May 2011 and resumes revise JASO T903: 2006 and Jaso T904: 2006 to make only the JASO T903: 2011.

To be certified as an oil Jaso, it needs to obtain results within a certain range (eg, between 1 and 3) and in 3 tests.
At the beginning (JASO 2006) there were only 2 Jaso certifications;

- MB for oils that are not compatible with an oil bath clutch
- AD for oils that are compatible with an oil bath clutch


MA then the category has been subdivided into three categories: MA, MA1 and MA2 of which the following table:

For an oil is called MA1 and MA2 if and to what the 3 tests that the oil gets only the results of a single class (or MA1 and MA2) and if oil gets results "mixed" MA1 and MA2 of it is reclassified in the MA category.

for detail more category JASO MA, JASO MA Oil meets a red lead to a test of the MA2 category:

- The first case is an oil that got 2 results class MA1 and MA2 1 class
- The latter is an oil that has obtained 1 Income Class MA1 and MA2 2 class


in conclusion ;


If one is facing the JASO standard 2011:

Whatever happens, we can say that JASO MA oil is necessarily better than oil since MA1 responds to at least a test of the MA2 category but if you want the top, work toward a certified oil JASO MA2.


If one is facing the JASO standard 2006 (some oil is still sold under this standard)

that's the big lottery, a certified oil according to JASO MA 2006 is compared to the standard 2011 JASO be in the best of cases equivalent to an MA or MA2 but in the worst case, this might just be a simple MA1

you can have all information here :

https://www.jalos.or.jp/onfile/pdf/4T_EV1105.pdf

 

[Donal]

What ever happened to Fridays?...............

 

[pista]

Let me try to simplify this.

Any oil of a correct viscosity that is S* rated (we're currently at SJ4) is suitable for use in your FJR.

Except, and this is important, except if it is labeled energy conserving. That usually implies a zinc or boron additive.

Check your owners manual. If it happens to be C* rated in addition to S* then no harm no foul.

 

[rbentnail]

Let me try to simplify this FURTHER.

Clean oil good, dirty oil bad

.

 

[gapiob]

Nothing, for me it's 6.30 pm,I'm in we.

So indeed, I have take my manuel, and it's write sg or more in api spécification.

So I supposed it's ok. Without ans additives.

I don't know tests made fort api, but I know test made for jaso, they are spécifique for moto. After anybody make whant he want. And has you say, the worst is "energy saver"...

 

[Redfish Hunter]

Yamalube.

JSNS

 

[AdamK]

So we can let this thread die now for another 10 years?

 

[gapiob]

Whant is Jsns?

Sorry for m'y poor vocabulary

 

[mcatrophy]

Whant is Jsns?Sorry for m'y poor vocabulary

A saying made at the end of every post by member Beemerdons, who sadly departed this world, and much missed.
JSNS stands for "just saying, enough said", shortened to "Just Saying Nuff Said".

 

[gapiob]

Thanks for the explications, and to help the little french.

 

[Redfish Hunter]

Thanks for the explications, and to help the little french.

There is no need to apologize for your vocabulary. Most of us are supposed to know how to speak English and yet, we cannot seem to type it correctly. Your French is actually a welcome addition to this place.

And beemerdons was a longtime forum member, he was extremely popular here and he almost always ended his posts with that saying. Mcatrophy was (as usual) very precise and informative with his explanation.

Since this is in NEPRT and it is an oil thread I feel absolutely no guilt about getting off topic.

 

[gapiob]

Thanks for all this explications. I have often see on this forum reference of this member, but know I hunderstand this reference.

We have all some friends left too early.

Sad

 

[RaYzerman19]

The EPA et al are driving the changes in oil ratings. That does not mean higher quality, it just means the formulation was revised, most likely to effect energy conservation and emissions, mostly for cars and trucks. There is an article or two out there that says Rotella 15-40 was no longer recommended for bikes because the ratings were changed, the amount of zinc, etc., but if you're finding it labelled JASO-MA, I'd say you're good to go. If you use a motorcycle specific oil, you have no worries and don't have to guess about ratings. If you're worried about cost, buy the synthetic stuff and extend your change intervals.....

 

[N4HHE]

JASO T-903 and T-904 trivially specify oil properties, and suspiciously originally specified sulfated ash to be no more than 1.2 when "diesel motor oils" of the day were all 1.3. The only thing new JASO added was a wet plate clutch friction test using a test jig made of parts no motorcycle shared.

In 2006 the spec was updated to split MA into two ranges, MA1 and MA2 as apparently some wanted to claim theirs "had more better" and others believed they could tell a difference from one end of the spectrum to the other.

As for Rotella-T, is not officially tested or certified. But Shell has gone on record and printed on bottle statement that product meets JASO MA.

No respectable motor oil specification will say, "must have X zinc", or must be synthetic. If properties are desired which are possible with zinc then the properties will be listed with a condition limiting how much zinc can be used toward said goals. Just as viscosity improvers are limited in making 5 weight oil into 5W-40 because VI's are not as robust as base oil. So synthetic is not specified directly but is essentially required to make 5W-40.

 

[AdamK]

As for Rotella-T, is not officially tested or certified. But Shell has gone on record and printed on bottle statement that product meets JASO MA.

I read that today too. Found this document which lists the tested and approved JASO oils.

https://www.jalos.or.jp/onfile/pdf/4T_EV_LIST.pdf

 

[Mossyrocks13k]

For those who use Rotella or other Diesel Engine Oil

Industry Updates - Engine Oil Proposed Category 11 (PC-11)

Got a little time though "The first engine oils meeting PC-11 will be licensed under the new category name March 1, 2017."

 

[N4HHE]

For those who use Rotella or other Diesel Engine Oil
Industry Updates - Engine Oil Proposed Category 11 (PC-11)

Got a little time though "The first engine oils meeting PC-11 will be licensed under the new category name March 1, 2017."

Years ago BMW famously (or should be famous) declared "API SG is required for warranty, SH voids" when SH was announced. BMW was upset about reduced maximums of ZDDP (zinc) and molybdenum disulfide. Never mind BMW's own SG oils were under the new SH limits. My point here being it is most likely we already have PC-11 oils on the shelf... only that they are not yet licensed as PC-11.

PC-11 is promising to motorcyclists by including shear stability and resistance to aeration to the formal spec. Just the thing we need for oil in transmissions.

 

[Fred W]

Exactly. Just because an oil is not certified as XYZ doesn't mean that is doesn't meet that criteria. It only means that manufacturer hasn't bothered (and paid) to apply for the certification by the governing body.

It is like Snell foundation certification for helmets. They do not just test all available units and certify the ones that pass. The maker has to apply to the foundation, and pay for the testing (pass or fail) to receive the cert. Any manufacturer with any wherewithal would already know what the results were going to be before they asked for their testing.

If a particular oil is not destined to be directly marketed to a particular use, why go to the added expense of certification for that application. It may well pass, as is the situation with Rotella and JASO, but they feel no need to apply for the cert. Especially when they can (quite legally) make the claim that it meets all requirements without paying JASO for the cert. If JASO takes exception with their claim, they would have to prove that it doesn't meet the requirements, and there isn't any money in doing that, that isn't what JASO is around for.