|
SuzukiSavage.com
/cgi-bin/YaBB.pl General Category >> Rubber Side Down! >> Oil temps and usage comparison /cgi-bin/YaBB.pl?num=1283117891 Message started by verslagen1 on 08/29/10 at 14:38:11 |
|
Title: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by verslagen1 on 08/29/10 at 14:38:11 Last summer I became very concerned with the amount of oil I was pouring into my bike. By the end of summer, I'm pouring in a qt. a week. No need to change oil at these rates. I tried Mobil1 vtwin 20w50 with no change. Then winter appeared and the oil usage stopped. I'd have to equate this boil off with the flash point of the oil. So this year I'm logging my oil use and temps with some highly touted oils. My daily commute consists of a 25 mile run on the superslab. Just enough time on the street to warm it up before I hit full speed. Typically 50 to 75% at 65-70 mph. The rest at 30 to 45 mph. I keep the oil filled up to the bottom line in the oil window as I get up to the top line it tends to blow out the breather. Data from the 1st run of Rotella Synthetic T6 Started with a fresh oil change and a new filter. http://www.savageriders.com/verslagen/Oil War/RotSynT6-1.jpg klotz MX-4 15w50 with a new filter. http://www.savageriders.com/verslagen/Oil War/Klotz-1.jpg The yellow bar shows the average for the data collected. The data from the previous RotSyn run is repeated below And the next line is RotSyn subtracted from Klotz. Interesting thing to note is that the head temp is 9° hotter. This could be vary condemning, if the Klotz isn't taking the heat out of the head, it can't be good for it. Next week promises to be cooler, so we'll see the impact of cooler ambient on Klotz. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by ralfyguy on 08/29/10 at 14:58:15 Looks like it's better not to run Klotz. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by Charon on 08/29/10 at 14:58:17 Actually, I am not surprised that a 15W-50 oil would run a little hotter than a 5W-40 oil. The heavier oil would cause a little more viscous drag than the thinner oil, thus more frictional loss. That's the reason car makers are calling for thinner oils, such as 5W-20 for year-round use (Honda and Ford). Those thinner oils very slighty increase fuel mileage by lowering engine friction. Keep those measurements coming. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by jsarsfield on 08/29/10 at 15:41:49 21323F352A34262A530 wrote:
I can't wait for Bill's response ;D |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by verslagen1 on 08/29/10 at 16:32:00 According to klotz... Flash Point: 480°F (same for all mx4's) But according to an independant test... Flash Point: 385°F (mx4 10w40) and after 12 hours in a raptor 700... Flash Point: 305°F (mx4 10w40, more than likely due to 3.5% fuel contamination) And from Shell's Rotella MSDS... Flash Point: 435°F (RotSynT6) [edit]Clearer? here's the link to the raptor data http://www.moddedraptor.com/community/raptor-700-maintenance/8766-more-oil-analysis-bel-ray-thumper-klotz-mx4.html [/edit] |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by justin_o_guy2 on 08/29/10 at 17:19:55 312235342B2620222976470 wrote:
B4 or after the 12 hr run? |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by verslagen1 on 08/29/10 at 18:11:25 342B2D2A3730013101392B276C5E0 wrote:
Quote:
|
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by Serowbot on 08/29/10 at 19:54:55 Comparing identical air temps,... the Rotella seems to win hands down... Would variations in humidity have any effect on cooling?... |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by verslagen1 on 08/29/10 at 20:45:50 3F293E233B2E23384C0 wrote:
it has a variation in my cooling, so the more humid it gets, the faster I go. Which increases air flow to the bike. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by verslagen1 on 08/29/10 at 22:06:26 Ok, so I covered the temp's... now for the usage... RotSyn, 4 qts over 2 months and 2k miles. Klotz, 3 qts over 1 month and 1k miles. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by justin_o_guy2 on 08/29/10 at 23:49:02 Yea, but ya GOTTA use more Klotz, cuz thats the price ya pay for ZERO WEAR oil.. Pfffft Everbody done been knowin That fer Yeeerz, mang! |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by Oldfeller on 08/30/10 at 11:17:38 Yo !!! Bill .... Weeeeee..weeeeee..weeeeee..oooo !! Weeeee..weeeeee..oooo !! Where ya running off to, city boy? little 'ol Brittany ain't gonna hurt ya none ... [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QXskL1MG8fg&feature=related[/media] ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D (you didn't really think I was gonna mount you like an ugly hillbilly, now did ya? Brittany, now that's a possibility cause she squeals right nice and she's all purty and she's smart .... and you ain't.) ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D .... and now for the final cost analysis for a projected two months of oil usage jest to bring home the financial point that needs to be made .... 2 months for 2 quarts (half gallon) blue jug of RotSyn costs you $9.99 (at the current buy it at Walmart on yer next planned trip price) 2 months for 2 quarts of Klotz would cost you $25.98 plus the $10 internet shipping costs .... so, Bill -- you only paid $25.99 plus extra dollars to date that ugly hillbilly boy and ta get yer horizons so rudely expanded. ..... ain't cha jest proud of yerself? Me, I'll stick with Brittany. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by verslagen1 on 08/30/10 at 11:49:49 2k mile oil change OF 2qts to change, 2 qts to make up leakage and evaporative cooling. same for both. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by Oldfeller on 08/30/10 at 11:59:28 Go back up and clarify your original useage post to just state the adder usage, ignoring the oil change amounts which is assumed to be same -- same for each type of oil. So you didn't use more Klotz per month? Looking at the post below it seems to be pretty much SAME-SAME on the oil consumption side of things. Jest fix the amounts and I'll go back up and fix the math fer Bill --- he's still dating the ugly hillbilly but he's paying a wee bit less for his expanded horizons (bet it still hurts a lot though ...) |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by verslagen1 on 08/30/10 at 13:18:57 To clarify: Test period, 2 months and 2k miles. at start of test, 2qts bring level up to midway with filter change. record make up oil. RotSyn, 2 qts. change + 2 qts over 2 months and 2k miles (test complete) Klotz, 2 qts. change + 1 qt over 1 month and 1k miles (test incomplete) |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by Oldfeller on 08/30/10 at 17:19:27 Jest how many quarts of Klotz did you buy? I assume you are gonna use it all up so you will be reporting total useage over the entire time span. Hey, at the rate you bleed oil you really don't need to be making any oil changes, just an occasional purge at oil filter change time. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by verslagen1 on 08/30/10 at 21:13:49 It don't bleed, it vaporates. bought a case I tell ya, my uphill speed has been hovering around 85 since I got this motor. 1st week I had it... wasn't meaning to... but hit 90. while true, I am replacing the whole volume over 2 months... how do I flush out the bad sh!t? old rotellas and such. ;D So who's going to give me a deal on amsoil? |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by Charon on 08/31/10 at 05:13:47 From your description, you are using about a quart of oil every thousand miles. You are also reporting oil temperatures generally under 200 F; and head temperatures not a lot higher. With the oil flash point reported as being well over 300 F, I doubt the oil is evaporating or boiling off. I think the engine is burning it. Depending on your fuel mileage, that's about a quart for twenty to twenty-five gallons of gas, or call it 100:1 mixture. If a two-stroke burns a 100:1 mix, you have to watch closely to see any smoke. I've been wrong before, but that's my guess. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by verslagen1 on 08/31/10 at 07:44:25 It doesn't use any oil durring the winter. cept for leaking, but that's hardly any. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by Oldfeller on 08/31/10 at 09:18:58 Cylinder wall losses, rings and valve seals, air borne particles exiting the crankcase pressure bypass system up in the head. While it is true all our bikes do lose less oil in wintertime and more in the summer, it still has to take one of these exit pathways. Hummmmm ..... for the shits and giggles of it how about replacing the metal screening in the head bypass area with a much finer mesh something (like a rolled up fabric or a felt for example) just to see if it makes any difference? Might make it a lot worse if pressure could build up inside the crankcase -- mebbe this could be a very bad idea. Other than that, fresh valve seals and new piston rings and a hone job on the cylinder wall? I bet you got very little remaining cross hatch and your rings are well worn by 25,000 miles. "Excuse for high compression 97mm piston have you" sez old Yoda. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by verslagen1 on 08/31/10 at 09:54:50 yes, I have new viton seals and a high compression 95mm piston waiting, cams that need regrinding and cylinders that need reboring. All watching, waiting... sometimes the wispering is too... too... but I digress. Way ahead of ya OF, keep meaning to stop and pick up a breather puke pot. I do find oil in my airbox. And if it had a cool place to condense, it may settle out and return to the case. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by ralfyguy on 08/31/10 at 10:49:06 617265647B7670727926170 wrote:
How much oil do you find in your airbox? Whenever I drain the airbox, about once a month, I get about 3-4 drops diluted in water. Also about oil consumption: I usually use about a shot glass full every 1,000 miles in summer. That's with 20W-50 oil. Recently I did a few trips with my wife at 80-90 miles an hour most of the time in 95 degree heat, and that's when it used more like 2-3 shot glasses full. But imagine how hard that motor had to work doing that. I do not ride like this most of the time. I change oil every 1,500 miles. I don't care about the cost, it makes me feel better, because of the heat that motor produces, especially in Oklahoma summers. It won't financially ruin me, but a blown motor would. Whether it's isn't necessary, doesn't matter. When I drain it after 1,500 miles it's quit dark and looks like it needs to get out. That is the same no matter what brand I used. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by verslagen1 on 08/31/10 at 11:23:12 2D3E333926382A265F0 wrote:
I checked a week or 2 after the oil change, which I'm sure I drained at that time and got a couple of teaspoons of red stuff. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by ralfyguy on 08/31/10 at 15:21:50 I don't exactly know what's considered normal, but that sounds like quiet a bit for 2 weeks. I don't mean to sound offensive, but it looks like that motor could be a tad worn out. Does it still pull strong though? |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by verslagen1 on 08/31/10 at 16:06:15 No problem, say what you will, I'm looking truth, after all, the engine has 30k miles on it. But, don't worry about pull. I have an uphill on my way home that has developed into my performance monitor, tweak this or that and how fast do I go up it. It's always done about 85 at full throttle. and I got the engine with about 10k on it. Believe it or not, same stock plug, same stock air filter. With the same oil, it's still doing 85 up the hill. ;D And same as the '96 I had before it. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by ralfyguy on 08/31/10 at 18:19:28 Hehehehe I have the same kind of "Test Track". It is US69 going north with real nice smooth concrete with concrete barrier on the median with those green vertical slates or whatever you call it on top. And lake most of the way on the right side. 20 miles like that. Other than from the air, almost impossible for cops to catch you. Even if they come from the opposite direction and they could manage to radar or laser you, they couldn't even turn around. Anyways, it's got a long 5 mile stretch that is completely flat, and a hill like yours where she barely makes it to 85, if you whip her ass real bad. Now the only problem is the wind, because here it usually does around 15-25mph from the south most days. That is where it gets really interesting. Going north with that wind in the back I once had to back off around 97mph, turning about 6,700rpm. It kept going, but I quit there, because i was afraid to blow the motor. That was on the flat stretch. Turned around and she struggled to make it to 90mph. Indicated about 88mph, and the wind pressure in the face was just nuts! Like I said, the wind is the problem. Every now and then I catch a calm day and she will do about 93mph either way, except the hill will not allow more than 85mph. That is about 20 miles one way, and after some of those test runs with the high wind at full throttle the whole time I manged to blow almost 3/4 of the tank! :o :o :o :D And the funny thing is, that she actually feels pretty stable doing speeds like that. I can do 55+ miles a gallon if I ride relaxed and at speeds 20-30mph below that, but IF I get on it hard then she starts drinking like a horse! ;D ;D ;D |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by Charon on 09/03/10 at 06:30:20 I'm not completely sure whether you are running the standard crankcase breather into the standard airbox, but from your description of finding a little oil in the airbox it seems you are. In that case any oil that boils off or evaporates finds its way back into the combustion chamber and burns. Now that you have data for Rotella 5W-40 synthetic, and at least some data for Klotz MX-4 15W-50, it might be interesting (and less expensive) to try Rotella 15W-40 conventional oil and see what happens. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by verslagen1 on 09/03/10 at 17:36:06 the bikes all stock except for the muffler and the main jet. started our with the rotdino, not looking back. especially not during the summer. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by Oldfeller on 09/03/10 at 17:51:08 Justin uses white jug Rotella T dino, he has the same oil consumption issues too. I think we will all use some more oil as the mileage racks up on our Savages. Is any dino oil significantly "better" than other dino oils? In a Savage, kinda doubtful at this stage of things. Do I have to use synthetic oil? Me, yes -- but it is a personal quirk because dino oil failed me once in a car engine and scrapped out the vehicle. Pissed me off large it did. Synthetic oil can stand more heat and more abuse than dino oils can and simply keep on going, this is proven by lots of testing and long distance racing and 18 wheeler high mileage experience. Synthetic oils can also support much longer drain intervals (if you have filtration enough to do it). I've been running the same crank case full of RotSyn since before the first Dragon run. I've added some, yes, because I too use oil. But I won't change it until Christmas or thereabouts. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by Charon on 09/03/10 at 21:50:58 Somehow, I suspect that oil consumption will not be greatly affected by the type of oil, conventional or synthetic, unless there is a major difference in oil evaporation at normal engine temperatures. My suggestion of trying Rotella conventional 15W-40 was more from curiosity about temperatures than consumption. It seems from Verslagen's posted data that consumption of 5W-40 and 15W-50 is about the same, but temperatures differ. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by verslagen1 on 09/03/10 at 22:49:29 rightly so, but I suspect it's temperature related. so why use something that isn't as capable? And load up the engine with sludge? if i used rotella it wouldn't be in there for long. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by Oldfeller on 09/04/10 at 05:26:14 And that is the real reason I like Rotella Synthetic T-6 .... It allows me to have all the high temp synthetic benefits, long use intervals, no sludge build up problems ever (self cleaning), runs about 8-10 degrees lower running temperatures than some other oils, starts easy in the winter time and makes my tranny shift easier to boot. And it costs half as much as the high price spread and I can get it at my local WalMart or Advance Auto store. Fully JASO approved too. ..... so what's not to like? |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by verslagen1 on 09/05/10 at 11:05:12 OK, so the cool days have come and gone... http://www.savageriders.com/verslagen/Oil War/Klotz-cool_days.jpg What I did was delete any days that were over 90° Now we can directly compare the Klotz with RotSyn. And what we find is the same results, klotz runs hotter then RotSyn. I think we all have to wonder what that means. Is it a good or bad thing. There are a lot of places in the engine that run hotter than 250°. Is klotz absorbing that heat better? The head temp is confusing me a bit. I'm measuring the temp at the coolest part of the head to keep within the capabilities of my IR gage. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by justin_o_guy2 on 09/05/10 at 11:19:30 Is klotz absorbing that heat better? Interesting question right there.. I spose if I was running a lab on it & wanted to see if one oil had the ability to take heat on quicker than another, Id have to expose them both to the same heat for the same time & see if one got hotter quicker. IF one does get hotter quicker, could we assume it would be able to cool more quickly? IF they have the same heat grabbin qualities, would the temp differences inside the engine lead me to believe one was allowing more friction than the other? Wouldnt a dyno test show that? |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by verslagen1 on 09/05/10 at 11:30:33 Quote:
That's what I would think, and the test could be run on stove top when the wife ain't looking. time to temp in a pan under full heat. then time to cool afterward. looks like i'm saving the old klotz and looking for a trash pan. Quote:
I don't think so, unless the oil was reaching a temp that viscosity broke down. Quote:
Running an engine to oil breakdown would be insane. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by justin_o_guy2 on 09/05/10 at 12:12:33 IF they have the same heat grabbin qualities, would the temp differences inside the engine lead me to believe one was allowing more friction than the other? Wouldnt a dyno test show that? Back to top IF the one that gets hotter IS hotter because of more internal friction, Then wouldnt it follow that the HP would be less with that oil? |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by verslagen1 on 09/05/10 at 13:02:47 4A555354494E7F4F7F47555912200 wrote:
My dino says they are the same. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by Lupo on 09/05/10 at 21:39:54 Most motor oils have friction reducers but I know the Rotella diesel doesn't. I use that in my wet clutch bikes. I don't know about the synthetic stuff so I can't say but (oil threads are dangerious) motorcycle wet clutches shouldn't use oils with friction reducers because the clutch friction plates slip which could cause excessive heat. In my Guzzi's I run Mobil 1 because they have dry clutches like a car. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by verslagen1 on 09/05/10 at 22:00:07 Rotella both dino and syn both have the jaso ma rating, good for wet clutches. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by Lupo on 09/05/10 at 22:03:13 That is good to know, thanks. Now if you can't get enough oil threads, have you seen this? http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/cms/ |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by verslagen1 on 09/05/10 at 22:34:08 yep bob is well known here. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by Lupo on 09/05/10 at 23:51:33 I'm humbled in sorrow. : ) |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by Oldfeller on 09/06/10 at 05:02:25 Lupo, don't be sorry any at all -- Bob and company was news to a lot of folks back in the early oil war days back when Rotella wasn't JASO approved right on the jug. Back then there were motorcycle oil camps and diesel oil camps and we were a lot more ignorant of how oil needed to work in our particular semi-antique motorsickle. Bob and the boys certainly helped educate us, as the Savage engine is relatively primitive, uses flat tappets (tough to find these days on anything) and has a slightly overstressed cam chain drive that wears quicker than one would like. We got to the resolution point on these issues, then began grinding on our high mileage issue of oil consumption -- there was hope that one particularly expensive synthetic might result in less oil loss. No such luck, and it didn't even do as good as the low cost spread for temperature control. Plus, let's be honest -- we oil war now over the least excuse because it is something to do while saving coins for the next mod and waiting for the next group mountain run. ------------------------------------------- If you follow Bobistheoilguy, is there a decent replacement for ZDDP that has been found yet? This is still a key need for us that really only has a stopgap solution identified so far. http://www.pegasusautoracing.com/Images/L/1678.JPG |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by Lupo on 09/06/10 at 08:47:29 The articulation of your wisdom is refreshing. I feel better now, think I'll go for a ride. Happy Labor Day all. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by bill67 on 09/06/10 at 09:59:45 495A4D4C535E585A510E3F0 wrote:
Vers keeps the oil to the bottom line because it blows out the breather if he fills it higher |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by bill67 on 09/06/10 at 10:05:54 776473726D6066646F30010 wrote:
Now Vergs put it midway so he gets its it blown out,He said they used the same amount of oil,So Klotz wins the oil consumption,Because he put it midway. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by bill67 on 09/06/10 at 10:12:28 2F3C2B2A35383E3C3768590 wrote:
The head is hotter because Klotz has better Ring to wall seal which cause higher compression Which makes more power and heat,Even thought the engine is 10 degrees warmer the oil is 2 degrees warmer,cooler running oil compared to engine temperature. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by bill67 on 09/06/10 at 10:15:36 Klotz wins Less oil consumption,More horsepower with the better seal,Cooler running oil compared to the engine temperature. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by bill67 on 09/06/10 at 10:23:37 I was suprised how well the rotella did in the Raptor 700. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by bill67 on 09/06/10 at 10:26:15 I started using Klotz 39 years ago and I see now reason to stop. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by bill67 on 09/06/10 at 10:31:31 OF get down on your knees. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by Oldfeller on 09/06/10 at 10:32:44 Wheeeeee !! It's an OIL WAR !! (light hand carry weapons and flame throwers only -- no field artillery, bombers nor tactical nukes allowed) ;D ;D ;D Since your questions were to Verslagen, how 'bout we let him answer them questions before getting anybody's pants knees all dirty? Once your statements get verified as facts and the ramifications of them understood then we will let the kangaroo court decide who bends over for whom. ;) .... been having nightmares about that ugly hillbilly, haven't you? If somebody were gonna rudely expand my horizons I'd be making me up some imaginative rebuttal stuff up too .... |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by verslagen1 on 09/06/10 at 10:44:11 404B4E4E1415220 wrote:
Now Vergs put it midway so he gets its it blown out,He said they used the same amount of oil,So Klotz wins the oil consumption,Because he put it midway. [/quote] To further clarify, started midway, because that's where 2 qt's puts it, replenish to lower line if it falls below lower line, same with both oils. And oil noted in airbox drain tube. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by verslagen1 on 09/06/10 at 10:45:58 373C39396362550 wrote:
if the head is hotter by 10° why isn't the oil hotter by 10°? |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by verslagen1 on 09/06/10 at 10:50:40 3B3035356F6E590 wrote:
same oil consumption so far, 1 qt a month/1000 miles. same horse power, same 85 on the dino track. klotz clearly runs hotter in the same average ambient temperatures. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by verslagen1 on 09/06/10 at 10:53:18 2D26232379784F0 wrote:
Whose telling you to stop? clearly it's a fine lube for those that can cross stream and not raise a cloud of steam. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by Charon on 09/06/10 at 10:53:48 Bill67, we are all still waiting for your documentation of your tests. At the very least, Verslagen IS running a test, and IS posting his results. So far, all we have from you is a series of unfounded statements. That you have been using Klotz for 39 years merely shows us you aren't willing to experiment for yourself. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by bill67 on 09/06/10 at 10:53:55 Because Klotz has less friction,Crank, valves, and transmission are running cooler. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by bill67 on 09/06/10 at 10:55:51 0C272E3D20214F0 wrote:
Charon the test has been run by a very bias person and Klotz won. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by verslagen1 on 09/06/10 at 10:56:52 5C4F5859464B4D4F441B2A0 wrote:
Have rethought this, will get some test tubes. And I think the heat source should be small, a candle. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by Charon on 09/06/10 at 10:58:10 You of course are referring to Verslagen's test. Where are the results from YOUR tests? Or haven't you run any? |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by bill67 on 09/06/10 at 11:04:09 I tried to explain to you guys the results of the test,I guess some of you guys just don't want to get it. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by verslagen1 on 09/06/10 at 12:02:10 505B5E5E0405320 wrote:
so far you've only managed to quote the klotz website. Even the so-called 'biased' people can find independent results. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by bill67 on 09/06/10 at 12:09:15 Vergs tell me about the Raptor 700 and the rotella results |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by verslagen1 on 09/06/10 at 12:53:00 797277772D2C1B0 wrote:
That's so lame quoting results I found. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by Oldfeller on 09/06/10 at 13:00:56 Bill, how many years of your stated 39 years of Klotz use were done using Klotz in two stroke engines (snowmobiles and the like)? These two stroke years really don't apply to Savage motorcycles as Klotz didn't even make a 4 stroke oil until the last few years. Verslagen's tests are the first evaluations done by anyone other than Klotz that you even know about, aren't they? ================ If you ever had some other source of real testing to quote, you'd have quoted them by now. PS every time you accuse Verslagen falsely and then go shoot some bullshit of your own in the very next line it really decreases your credibility should you EVER find any form of real corroborative evidence about Klotz. Even Babyhog has chided on you for slamming folks statements as "falsified" when they are not. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by verslagen1 on 09/06/10 at 13:12:41 7E5D5557545D5D5443310 wrote:
What credibility? |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by Charon on 09/06/10 at 13:30:28 2D26232379784F0 wrote:
Let's look at this. The valves are in the head, and Verslagen says the head temperatures are higher with Klotz. I have some trouble believing the valves would be cooler if the head in which they are installed is hotter. The crank and the transmission are bathed in the oil, and it would be quite difficult for them to be cooler than the oil in which they run. Besides, the crank and the transmission generate heat themselves, and are cooled by the oil. Verslagen's test shows the oil temperature is higher with Klotz. Care to explain, bill67? |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by verslagen1 on 09/06/10 at 13:33:16 475443425D5056545F00310 wrote:
Have rethought this, will get some test tubes. And I think the heat source should be small, a candle.[/quote] more thought... a light bulb instead of a candle. won't be dependent on airflow for the flame, test to run during identical ambient conditions. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by Oldfeller on 09/06/10 at 14:16:29 Having Bill to accept and digest real data is jest about like watching girls putting a fresh worm on a hook .... [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4UPDEJdMxGI&feature=player_embedded#![/media] ;D ;D ;D ;D it's fun to watch though, that there worm ain't the only wigglin' & jigglin' going on .... Now, this here is a custom Bill rig all set up and ready to go implant some fresh real data into good 'ol wiggly Bill ..... http://www.blueoceantackle.com/Shark_Hook_004.jpg ..... that nasty sharp cold data hook point, can you feel it a splittin' through yer drawers yet Bill?? Must be, we can see ya hollering, wiggling & squirming to beat the band fer shure now .... |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by verslagen1 on 09/06/10 at 14:44:00 Now old fellow, if your gonna go bill baitin' ya gotta have a license for that there pole and billy hook or you're gonna have to put it away. we must have decorum, please follow the marques de queenberry rules. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by Oldfeller on 09/06/10 at 14:53:32 OK, I'll behave. We can shoot his nonsense full of holes or torch it with a flame thrower, but the big fishhook is against the Geneva Convention. Got it .... |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by bill67 on 09/06/10 at 14:56:20 53585D5D0706310 wrote:
I'm waiting guys |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by bill67 on 09/06/10 at 15:09:36 0A151314090E3F0F3F07151952600 wrote:
B4 or after the 12 hr run? [/quote] here it is guys tell me about rotella in the blue bottle on the 12 hr run |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by Oldfeller on 09/06/10 at 15:32:32 Tell you what, Bill? If you got some T6 dirt you want to share with us, jest plop her on out on the table so we can all see it .... fair is fair. Lots of folks in bikedom use the stuff, so if any dirt is out there -- go get it. Jest have a reputable source that you can provide us the actual source location for so we can go read it ourselves. Other than that, you is jest makin' noise, jest a screeching, wigglin' and hollerin' like a Palestinian child molester a doing the pole dance immediately after a real short Palestinian Muslim type trial .... PS don't go a lookin', I found that video on line when I was a looking for the big hook that ain't kosher fer us to be talking about, much less the nasty long pole ... |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by bill67 on 09/06/10 at 15:37:58 2B2025257F7E490 wrote:
B4 or after the 12 hr run? [/quote] here it is guys tell me about rotella in the blue bottle on the 12 hr run[/quote] |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by Oldfeller on 09/06/10 at 16:27:38 Google search was Rotella T6 Raptor 700 About 3,790 results (0.38 seconds) Search Results 1. Another Rotella-T oil Question. - Page 2 - Modded Yamaha Raptor Forums 10 posts - 6 authors - Last post: Mar 28 Let's talk facts... Yamaha calls for API service SE, SF, SG type or higher to be used in the Raptor 700. Rotella T6 is not only SM rated, ... www.moddedraptor.com/.../raptor-700.../11169-another-rotella-t-oil-question-2.html - Cached Get more discussion results 2. Welcome to the Shell Rotella Forum: Rotella 5W-40 Synthetic is ... 5 posts - 5 authors - Last post: Jul 16 FJR1300, R1, XR200, CBR929, VFR800, Rino700, Mule.... -Timm ... Now that Rotella T6 is JASO certified there are no doubts. Ride Safe! ... Posts: 1, I have a yamaha raptor 350 ATV for some reason my manual states. ... www.shellusserver.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php?ubb...1 - Cached Get more discussion results 3. alternative to yamalube - Bob Is The Oil Guy 15 posts - 11 authors - Last post: Mar 5 I run Rotella-T 15W40 in my Raptor 700, Wolverine 350 and Rhino. ... Thanks again I am going to try the t6 but was wondering why yamaha ... www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat... - Cached Get more discussion results 4. Rotella ?'s - Page 2 - Suzuki LT-R450 Forum :: LTR450HQ.com 10 posts - 4 authors - Last post: Jun 28 I'm running Rotella T6 5W40 Full syn in my Gixxer. I'm gonna run it in my LTR now ... I'm running it in both LTRs and my dads Raptor 700. ... www.ltr450hq.com/forums/general.../14107-rotella-s-2.html - Cached Get more discussion results 5. Synthetic oil back to conventional and Clutch question [Archive ... 35 posts - 10 authors - Last post: Mar 15 I have to run conventional in my 700 for a few more months and figured ... If it's a pure cost issue for you, Rotella T6 Synthetic is rated ... www.raptorforum.com/forums/archive/index.php/t-66345.html - Cached Get more discussion results 6. Rotella Oil? - Yamaha Rhino Forums - Yamaha UTV Forum Sep 2, 2010 ... Ok, so i know some of you guys were/are using Rotella t-6 for your ... 08 700 SE XMF LT HID's. Livewire whip and some quads and a KTM ... www.rhinotalk.net/forums/yamaha-rhino.../7842-rotella-oil.html - Cached 7. Amazon.com: Yamaha Raptor 700 Spiral Core Slip-on Exhaust: Automotive Amazon.com: Yamaha Raptor 700 Spiral Core Slip-on Exhaust: Automotive. ... All aluminum T6 muffler with welded brackets; CNC machined billet aluminum end cap with turn down ... 20w 40 rotella oil vs 10w 30 oem spec, 4, 3 hours ago ... www.amazon.com ... Parts Exhaust Mufflers - Cached - Similar 8. Brand of Oil - Polaris RZR Forum - RZR Forums.net Apr 28, 2010 ... 2008 Attitude TH 06 raptor 734 09 Raptor 700 08 RZR 860 MCX Turbo ... rotella t6 5-40 with mobil 1 filter ... www.rzrforums.net/rzr-s-specific-discussion/28627-brand-oil.html - Cached 9. help on picking the right oil - Honda ATV Forum Jul 9, 2010 ... My trail ride is a 07 GRIZZLY 700 ! 69quadracer is online now ... in synthetic . the rotella t6 full synthetic 5w40 is the same grade but in ... www.hondaatvforums.net/forums/.../4818-help-picking-right-oil.html - Cached 10. Rotella T [Archive] - 600RR.net 100+ posts - 75 authors - Last post: Feb 26 you think oil that's 700 miles old doesn't break down much? ...... hey guys I just bought rotella, and its the rotella T6 blue container?.. ... www.600rr.net/vb/archive/index.php/t-100329.html - Cached Well Bill, ..... there's only 3,770 remaining threads to look through to try to find you some dirt on Rotella T-6. It IS a commonly used motorcycle and ATV oil, so you have lots & lots of turf to cover in your hunt. Good luck there buddy .... ..... watch out for them big fish hooks and them nasty sharpened stakes a laying on the ground as you go squealin' wiggling & squirming along. Be real careful not to go sticking yourself on any new data while you are out there in web land. ;D ;D ;D |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by bill67 on 09/06/10 at 16:52:08 I don't go around trying to fine some dirt on something,How come vergs says he testing to difference oils and and writes some dirt as you call it on one of the oils,Did you ever think when he started that anything else would be the winner to him other than Roteela ::) |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by Oldfeller on 09/06/10 at 17:50:09 Yup, I wuz plumb anxious when the data first started coming in .... I figured the red stuff had to have some serious mojo going for it as Klotz two stroke DID have some really good properties that I was very well aware of. But, as it turned out red stuff for 4 strokes apparently doesn't carry over the crown of excellence that Klotz had won as a two stroke oil, not in a Savage engine anyway. It performs about SAME - SAME in the Savage engine (and I ain't a sweating me a few degrees of head temperature neither way). Same-same, it just costs a lot more and is a good bit more trouble to get a hold of. Now, me teasing you with hillbillies and big fishhooks, now that's almost fair game in an oil war -- it motivates you to go find whatever you can to support your position. So, what do you have for us? Or has this oil war done peetered out due to lack of evidence on the opposing side? =========================== Stroke your crystal ball and peer into it for a moment ---- two 6" Pyrex test tubes plumb full of freezer cold oil (one 15w50 Klotz and one 5w40 Rotella T6) with temperature thermocouples supported up in the last 1/2" of oil up in the top of each test tube, thermocouples that are hooked up to a three channel data recorder. Everything starts out below zero degrees F ..... There is a third thermocouple recording the ambient freezer temperature, just for the giggles of it. The two parallel Pyrex test tubes are dipped 1/2" deep into a pan of hot cooking oil that the third thermocouple is put down into to record the "ambient" hot oil bath temperature. The oil is 350 degrees F. Data is sampled 4 times a second, generating a temperature response curve for each oil type, both raw temperature change and factored against the bath ambient temperature. What would it show? The lower first number oil would respond quicker when very cold, and the lower second number oil would respond quicker when the temperature went up past room temperature. Take the parallel test tubes out of the hot oil bath and put them back into the freezer (along with the ambient bath lead of course) with all 3 leads going out the freezer door to the data recorder to cut the curves for the cool down part of the test. When still very hot, the lower second number oil would respond quicker on the cool down phase. Once it drops below room temperature, the lower first number oil would respond quicker on the cool down phase. What would this test likely prove? That 5w40 Rotella T6 can suck heat out faster and dump it somewhere else quicker than 15w50 Klotz can? But what news would this really be? That's the exact same SAE testing that put the silly weight numbers to the two different types of oil in the first place, just done slightly differently. Then to add insult to injury, we would pour out the two oils when really really cold to see which one poured better .... Hummmm .... Rotella T6 wins every test, doesn't it? ============================== Bill, what can you figure out for a test that would show your 15w50 Klotz to have some sort of advantage? Logically, it wastes more engine power due to its thicker viscosity, it transfers heat less effectively (same reason) and it costs a bunch more to buy it and ship it to your house. What's that red stuff good for again? You gotta figure out SOMETHING it is good at. (or I think you done lost this oil war too) ;) ========================== JOG, I think that explains your question about why the Klotz head temperatures run hotter yet the Klotz in the sump runs about the same temperature (give or take a degree or three) -- it simply doesn't pick up head heat as quickly nor does it dump what heat it does pick up very effectively nor very quickly either. Remember the ratio of the amount of oil in the sump to the amount of oil circulating through the head is about 50 to 1 volume-wise so the sump being 3 degrees hotter is the result of the small volume of 10-13 degree hotter oil coming back down from head into the 50 times more massive constantly churning sump mass and then slowly losing that heat to the outer cases. Slowly is the key term here, on both ends of the heat exchange situation. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by bill67 on 09/06/10 at 18:14:19 Of I just want to know one thing whats the flash point of rotella when run 12 hours in a raptor. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by Oldfeller on 09/06/10 at 18:24:28 It's out there Bill, go get it. Or go find something else to support your position. Something that Klotz 15w50 is good at. Anything ..... and if you can't find it, Bill, that means you are pretty durn slack as we have all easily found it in a very logical place and have studied it and are including its data in our posts. .... or you can jest sit there and make lots of noise and squirm and wiggle until you get that hook so firmly embedded in your fundament that you'll never get it out. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by verslagen1 on 09/06/10 at 18:25:22 what the hell is going on here? I go ride a harley for a half hour and OF fires a broadside of data at Ol' Bill the dataless. And what a resounding reply... I think it was a handful of dirt? Dirt? hey, OF, when you clean the dirt off your boots can you sift thru all that... hmmm... dirt? and find some independent lab reports? |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by Oldfeller on 09/06/10 at 18:31:49 Nope, I ain't doing Bill's job for him. There is nothing "for" Klotz anyway that is factual and not "I think" kinda stuff, I've looked lots of times. And if Bill was looking, he'd go to a technical site like Bob's or the Shell Rotella T6 spec site as the shear rates and viscosity/time tables for Rotella are well known. (can't say that for Klotz -- its a secret like everything else about it) Curious, what wuz you riding a Hurley for? |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by bill67 on 09/06/10 at 19:06:00 6E6560603A3B0C0 wrote:
here it is again I guess you forgot who won the oil test. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by verslagen1 on 09/06/10 at 19:17:13 01222A282B22222B3C4E0 wrote:
Cause it pulled up in my driveway. I was all hunkered down balancing my new tire and up rolls a custom harley. Real bad handling problem. It wanted to make U turn every turn, you fought it all the way thru, no rear brakes, tire from the dark side, 205/60. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by verslagen1 on 09/06/10 at 19:20:51 3A3134346E6F580 wrote:
here it is again I guess you forgot who won the oil test.[/quote] You actually going to say that? F the engine, oils fine? |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by justin_o_guy2 on 09/06/10 at 19:39:15 Cool lab tests. Excellent work. Thanks for the answers. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by Oldfeller on 09/06/10 at 19:41:01 Lemme go look at that data again .... hmmmm http://verslagen.savageriders.com/Oil%20War/Klotz-cool_days.jpg Bill, once again you are permitting blatant untruths to issue forth from your fingers. How do you justify this combined statement of yours? Oil consumption was Same-Same Klotz didn't make any extra power Klotz couldn't remove heat from the head as effectively (14 deg. higher) and what little it did remove tended to remain in the sump rather than exit out freely through the cases (3 deg. higher). Klotz 15w50 has thermal transfer issues compared to Rotella T6. The choices are: 1) Bill can't read a spreadsheet 2) Bill doesn't care about truth or honesty 3) Bill is delusional -- he just sees what he wants to see that there evil Klotz potion has him in a fairy glamour 4) Bill believes in the BIG LIE -- repeat it endlessly like a crooked politician does and some sucker is born every minute that will believe your repeated lies. 5) Bill has just felt the cold sharp kiss of the big hook going thru his underwear -- he is in a terror filled trembling panic. 6) We are all so stupid we can't see it (my hindsight is 20-20 you know) |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by Charon on 09/06/10 at 19:45:56 I don't recall seeing any link to any test involving Rotella and a Raptor. There was a link to oil analysis on Bel-Ray Thumper 20w-50 and Klotz MX-4 10w-40. The flash point on the Klotz had dropped, and that change was attributed to fuel contamination. Pour fuel in any lube oil, used or new, and the flash point will drop because of the volatility of the fuel. The line about "cooler running oil in relation to the engine" is pure foolishness. Both the oil and the engine ran hotter, with the only change being the oil. The part about "More horsepower with the better seal" appears to be pure speculation. Come on, bill67. You have made a lot of allegations about the superiority of Klotz. You have referred to Klotz as "zero wear oil" but have shown us no measurements and no details of the tests run. You have offered no proof whatsoever for any of your claims. Let's see some actual links, or the results of YOUR testing. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by bill67 on 09/06/10 at 19:56:33 I explained it to you guys if you don't understand I can't help it. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by Oldfeller on 09/06/10 at 20:09:46 6) We are all so stupid we can't see it. Wow, gee I'm so stupid I forgot to list that one. I can fix that though .... ;D ========================== With that fine thought as a conclusion, let's throw it to the Kangaroo Court for a decision. Has Klotz 15w50 been shown to be superior to Rotella 5w40? Those who wish to vote simply post a yes or a no |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by justin_o_guy2 on 09/06/10 at 20:10:52 Based on the data that has been provided, I am gonna have to say, Ummm, No.. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by verslagen1 on 09/06/10 at 21:00:34 716E686F72754474447C6E62291B0 wrote:
+1 |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by ralfyguy on 09/07/10 at 10:21:05 I didn't see it either. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by justin_o_guy2 on 09/07/10 at 15:43:33 Okay, well, if Im stupid, at least Im in good company. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by bill67 on 09/07/10 at 15:48:04 Stupids hang together and make good company for each other. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by Oldfeller on 09/07/10 at 19:58:39 Let's see, a normal jury takes 12 people to call the shot - so how many voters does an informal kangaroo court require? I dunno ..... but while we "grouped stupids" are sitting around waiting for enough votes to come in we can discuss what we should do to Bill for his sentence. Now, let's forget about "hooking" him or giving him over to the hillbillies, that was just to motivate Bill to try harder to find some sort of supporting data (and we can all see how well that worked, can't we?) He's got him a new nickname now "Bill the Data-less", alias Bullshooter Bill for how well he handles reality vs his wishful non-technical non-data, so that has to be some part of his sentence --- .... like mebbe Bill would be forever forbidden to offer his non-technical wishful mismash up to newbies who don't know any better AS FACT as he has done in the past? What do you think? |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by verslagen1 on 09/07/10 at 20:05:16 Betcha can't just vote once. I will delete the poll after awhile, maybe. ;D |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by bill67 on 09/07/10 at 20:07:15 OF the data on Iraq was they had WMD,So much for DATAs ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by Oldfeller on 09/07/10 at 20:38:50 Sadam Insane liked for everybody to think he had WMD under development, he bragged on it often to his neighbors. There were pieces purchased here and there that would go into a refining complex that were tracked to Iran. So says the CIA. Current thought is that once the US began seriously moving towards invasion all the stuff was quickly moved to Iran along with the jets and other mobile stuff in an attempt to "save it for Islam". Now that is all bullshooting conjecture according to oil war rules -- the facts are no complex was ever found. Facts is facts. Go find us some facts about Klotz 15w50 being good stuff for the Savage engine. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by verslagen1 on 09/07/10 at 22:01:49 3 votes, did bill vote rotsyn? or did the florida voting program work? |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by Oldfeller on 09/08/10 at 02:36:41 ;D No, you can see that he voted. ;D Also Verslagen you can now more accurately judge if you should spend any more money or time on these sorts of investigative things since nobody apparently is reading it or following along. ;) t'warn't worth the cost of the erl you used fer the few that cared |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by Charon on 09/08/10 at 05:21:26 I'd have to say, based on the presented data, Shell Rotella Synthetic 5w-40 looks better. I guess that is a NO vote for Klotz. I noticed while looking at Klotz's tech sheet for their MX-4 15w-50 oil that is is said to meet or exceed API and JASO MA requirements. Does the container actually have the JASO or API labels? Verslagen, were you planning to test any other oils? I thought I saw a reference to Amsoil in there somewhere. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by bill67 on 09/08/10 at 05:54:19 545F5A5A0001360 wrote:
|
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by bill67 on 09/08/10 at 05:57:57 537871627F7E100 wrote:
On the container of Klotz it says for Diesel motors only ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by dinsdale on 09/08/10 at 06:51:25 Bill seems to be a fan of the straw man argument style. Throw me down for a No for Klotz vote. Not worth the extra $$$ for sure when Rotsysn works slightly better and is substantially cheaper. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by verslagen1 on 09/08/10 at 07:21:38 6D464F5C41402E0 wrote:
yes a case of amsoil is on the way. I got slightly better than their website price, but the Klotz was slightly cheaper. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by prechermike on 09/08/10 at 07:40:17 2D0E0604070E0E0710620 wrote:
OF. I have not commented here, but I appreciate Versy for taking the time, effort, expense of doing the test. I use the dino rotella. There seems agreement it is good for us laid back types. I would be interested in comparison to that. So thanks versy! |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by verslagen1 on 09/08/10 at 22:47:29 The 1st poll is closed. Is Klotz 15w50 the winner? 2 (18.1%) Is RotSynT6 the winner? 7 (63.6%) Undecided. 2 (18.1%) |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by Oldfeller on 09/09/10 at 01:46:22 Preachermike, White jug Rotella T dino 15w40 was the "oil of preference" for both the crotch rocket boys and the Goldwing guys for a lot of years until the blue jug stuff became available. They still debate whether blue jug Rotsyn is really needed in their engines or not, so it is likely about the same situation that we have. White jug Rotella T dino 15w40 is plenty good enough for a normal stock Savage engine and the use of synthetic oils is an optional preference for those who think they need it. Does Verslagen or I truly really need to pay more to use a full synthetic oil in our Savages? No, the Savage doesn't REQUIRE it -- but I have a personal quirk about only using synthetic oil in all my vehicles since I cooked me a crankcase of dino oil in a car and wound up scrapping the car because of the oil failure -- it ain't gonna happen to me again. Side bar to that same thought flow -- there is a big issue going around inside Toyota car land about dino oils sludging up their engines -- Toyota has been sued saying this is a issue with their engines running hot and Toyota has a program to replace engines that sludge to failure within 150,000 miles or some such as a warranty issue. In my opinion, Toyota should simply require the use of synthetic oils in their cars. Corvette does require it, as do several other very high performance engine car makers. If you know that is a requirement going in when you buy the car it would be a non-issue from that point forward. the thought of pouring dino oil into a Lexus to build sludge up inside that precision engine just seems wrong to me ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D PS if that was the final vote and Bill has done lost this here oil war then it is time for his sentencing. As the plaintiff, I request from the court that Bill be forced to GO CHECK HIS VALVES and then be forced TO TELL US TRUTHFULLY how far out of spec they were found to be before he adjusted them. At 5,000 plus miles, it is time his valves got some preventive maintenance done to them. And the telling the truth part about the current clatter gaps will hurt Bill plenty enough, believe me. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by bill67 on 09/09/10 at 05:21:15 With Klotz Zero wear oil valves will still be OK at 50000 miles,look how many people that have check their valve and they were OK,All your going to get when you start taking things apart is oil leaks. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by Oldfeller on 09/09/10 at 05:36:32 Dream on Bill, dream on .... may reality never touch you with its clammy cold hands. Flat tappet screw & nut valve adjustment engines require periodic adjustment no matter what sort of oil you use. If nothing else, the tulip heads pound their way into the valve seats over time, an impact type action which has nothing really to do with oil, period. Of course at your present rate of mileage build up use it will take you a long time to ignore it to the eventual point where you sell off the bike "because it is acting odd" which is what you freely admit that you do with motorcycles. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D OK, we fall back to the second punishment. UNTIL YOU HAVE CHECKED YOUR VALVES AND REPORTED THE TRUTH ABOUT THE CURRENT LASH AMOUNTS FOUND BEFORE YOU ADJUSTED THEM, UNTIL THEN YOU ARE FORBIDDEN TO TOUT KLOTZ TO NEWBIES BY STATING UNSUBSTANTIATED OPINIONS AS FACT. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by bill67 on 09/09/10 at 05:48:02 Of I sell my bikes when I decide I want a difference bike,Not because of odd noises you talk about I have never heard odd noises from any bike I have had,But I don't believe in using cheap oil any any engine I have, even if its a $100 lawn mower. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by jsarsfield on 09/09/10 at 06:59:08 Bill forgot to mention that Klotz contains a percentage of Adamantium That when used in his Savage provides a indestructible coating over all metal parts thus negating ANY and ALL regular scheduled maintenance. With Klotz all regular properties of metal and physics are null and void. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by verslagen1 on 09/09/10 at 07:16:35 BTW, we're into the 5th qt of Klotz. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by bill67 on 09/09/10 at 08:13:02 I've never had a bike that used over a cup of oil in 5000 miles,and yes one had over 28000 mile,But I use motorcycle oil not cheap oil.No valves adjusted either.In the long run its best to use the best oil you can afford or you'll have a beater like Vergs. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by Oldfeller on 09/09/10 at 10:21:59 http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=1367272 Bob is the Oil Guy debate --- great debate over T6 being same base oil as Ferrari's top secret race car engine oil and being in fact good for use inside high performance car engines. Then the resulting "warranty arguments" over them GM cars are revealing as well as they hint how ZDDP was negotiated out of existing American car oils because GM wanted it done for their own reasons .... (got to follow all the thread references to get all the information they are referring to) Lots of research, arguments, cross-referenced threads and good tech talk for those who can follow through all the convoluted cross references. http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=1367272 I see 'ol Bill is still a squealing and a squirming and a wiggling, even after we done put up the big hook once the final verdict was turned in .... ::) BTW, did Bill just admit right above that he has NEVER adjusted the valves in any motorcycle he has ever owned ???? wow :-/ right sad |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by bill67 on 09/09/10 at 10:39:03 I adjusted them on my V50 Moto Guzzi at 12000 miles Never had to on a Jap bike. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by bill67 on 09/09/10 at 10:40:54 415245445B5650525906370 wrote:
What kind of oil was you using in your bike to get the engine in such bad shape,It couldn't have been diesel oil could it. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D Rotella NO! |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by Oldfeller on 09/09/10 at 11:18:52 Let's see, V50 Guzzi's were made between 1977 and 1985 -- for the sake of argument let's go with the most modern one, 1985 vintage. You only put 2,000 miles a year on a bike up where you live and you tend to buy new bikes and then you tend to run them until they act funny, so .... You owned it for like over six years and only adjusted the valves ONCE during the whole time you owned it? And the only time you adjusted a valve, ever, was at least, what ??? 19-20 years ago? I guessed wrong, it was 29 years ago :D Now Bill, he's a testing out your claims of Klotz's magic healing powers -- after 6 full quarts we'll have to disallow all of your claims for the magic properties part too ..... |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by bill67 on 09/09/10 at 11:28:30 1980 moto guzzi, back when by wife road we put on 8000 per year,I worked 6 days a week,Never rode bike to work ,all riding nights and sundays.29 years ago I did the valves ,I guess.Adjusted valves in my 1949 chevy conv about 55 years ago.I owned it for 2 1/2 years the V50,You and Vergy do a lot of wrong guessing. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by Charon on 09/09/10 at 11:30:12 Wonder if bill67 ever even checked the valves on his Japanese bikes? Because if he didn't check them, he had no way to know he didn't need to adjust them. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by bill67 on 09/09/10 at 11:35:43 6F444D5E43422C0 wrote:
I go by sound on the valves, So your right I never check the valves but I'm sure they were there.Any motorcycle mechanic can tell by sound if the valves need adjusting have you notice on here how many miles some have gone and checked their valves and they were OK,Good oil makes the difference. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by Oldfeller on 09/09/10 at 11:37:15 Yup, we can be wrong when we are guessing -- but you note that we always say bluntly when we are guessing so it is always clear. (no confusion on what is real and what is not real from me or Verslagen -- plus we correct our goofs and are quick to 'fess up when we make one) |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by Charon on 09/09/10 at 11:38:44 I'm not going to argue with you, bill67, because I don't need any more personal attacks. But I don't think I'd ever buy a vehicle from you, either. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by bill67 on 09/09/10 at 11:38:48 So Charon when you do your valves record the sound and keep that in your Data Files. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by bill67 on 09/09/10 at 11:40:54 70535B595A53535A4D3F0 wrote:
1st Vergy say he was use twice as much klotz,Then he said he was using the same,No guessing there. ::) ::) ::) ::) |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by bill67 on 09/09/10 at 11:47:06 4D666F7C61600E0 wrote:
Personal attacks you have to be kidding,I geared my GR650 1000 rpm lower than stock,I like 100 per cent gasoline,I use and have very good results with Sea Foam and Klotz engine oil and fork oil,And you say there all wrong :o :o :o :o :o How old are you Charon. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by verslagen1 on 09/09/10 at 11:51:20 Added more use data for RotSynT6 According to klotz... Flash Point: 480°F (same for all mx4's) But according to an independant test... Flash Point: 385°F (mx4 10w40) and after 12 hours in a raptor 700... Flash Point: 305°F (mx4 10w40, 3.5% fuel contamination) And from Shell's Rotella MSDS... Flash Point: 435°F (RotSynT6) After 5500 miles in a Honda GW... Flash Point: 375°F (RotSynT6) I think this would explain the reduced oil consumption for the RotSynT6 as the flash point (boiling poing) of 5500 mile oil is almost as good as the brand new Klotz. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by Oldfeller on 09/09/10 at 12:04:53 Bill, he clarified the change amounts and the adder amounts to make it clearer to the reader -- it was me and Justin that got the numbers wrong from our original first reading on how he wrote it out. I 'fessed my interpretation mistake and went back and corrected all my posts -- as of right now all conclusions are Same-Same. However .... Let me guess the future -- Verslagen, in your last post are you us getting ready to tell us you used relatively more Klotz per mile than Same - Same with RotSyn T6? (he'd just about have to since he had six quarts-- two to change out and remaining 4 quarts are getting used up inside of 3 months) ;D |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by verslagen1 on 09/09/10 at 12:21:07 I'll have to review when I get home. Believe I did... 8wks/2000 miles with RotSynT6, 4qts total. 6wks/1500 miles with Klotz, 4qts total. 2 qts intially with the remainder as makeup. I had a discussion with my Nascar owner friend... put the oil cooler on. Having just purchased amsoil, I will continue as is, but I think I will be putting it on in a month. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by Oldfeller on 09/09/10 at 12:23:50 Fair warning to all NEWBIES ---- listening to Bullshooter Bill is DANGEROUS TO YOUR BIKE. Bill <I go by sound on the valves, So your right I never check the valves but I'm sure they were there.Any motorcycle mechanic can tell by sound if the valves need adjusting> Bill Bill's statement that "Any motorcycle mechanic can tell by sound if the valves need adjusting" is just plain false. Any mechanic would tell you -- you can only spot an enlarged adjustment gap because of the extra clatter it makes. Loose valves make extra noise, they but they don't kill engines. It's tight valves that kill engines, and they make no tell tale audible signs that they are happening .... Plus, it is not uncommon for intake valves to go one way and exhaust valves to go the other way, with the noise from one covering the relative lack of noise from the other. Yup, tight valves make no tell-tale noise to tell you the gap has gone under the recommended clearance amount and your valves are in danger of hanging open, overheating and eroding and burning seats, etc. when everything gets nice and hot when you are running at full interstate speeds. A real mechanic takes the valve covers off when the engine is bone stone cold, sets the bike to top dead center on the compression stroke and uses feeler gauges to decide if valves are set correctly or not. ;D |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by bill67 on 09/09/10 at 12:39:11 OF I think you should check your valves either tonight or tomorrow you never know you might have tight valve that you screwed up last week when you did the valves. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by bill67 on 09/09/10 at 12:43:17 273423223D3036343F60510 wrote:
Now the oil use went from twice as much to the same,Now its 25% more for the Klotz oil,Do you really think any one here believes you and that you were going to let your old faithful diesel oil lose,Yes the oil that already screw up your motor. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by bill67 on 09/09/10 at 12:45:29 0320282A292020293E4C0 wrote:
OF do you have any more Tall Tales you want to tell us. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by Charon on 09/09/10 at 12:48:09 Sure feels good to know I'm not the only one who gets attacked. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by Oldfeller on 09/09/10 at 12:50:54 I checked them right before the last mountain run, tuned them down nicely and adjusted my carburetor too. Took me all of two hours to do it, and my bike ran great the entire trip as it has since then. You know, the same mountain trip you said you were gonna show up on so you could kick Lancer's butt? Remember? ;D Of course, I do ride my bike a lot more than you do yours, in more aggressive twisty fast mountain areas in front of multiple other list members who can attest factually to how my bike runs. The last list member who saw my bike run was Lancer, we wuz on the way back to the truck after eating breakfast with MMRanch at Hardees -- wanna ask him how it was doing? or you could ask them two teenagers in the Camero, they got to watch me at speed after I passed them, and even longer as they struggled to keep up afterwards. :D Same as before Bill -- you are invited to come down to the NC mountains show all of us what you got. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by bill67 on 09/09/10 at 13:10:14 4B584F4E515C5A58530C3D0 wrote:
What the flash point after 12 hours in raptor for Rotella? Apples for apples |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by Oldfeller on 09/09/10 at 13:12:36 "Where's Bill?" "I dunno, he was hanging back in the back of the pack when we started out" "Anybody seen Bill since the last gas stop?" "No, he was having some problems with his bike, it was sputtering something fierce, he could barely break 60 on the straight-aways." "Wanna backtrack to find out where he is now?" "No, we warned him and warned him about those valves, but he never listened ..... I guess he's done run himself plumb outta his red magic and his bike is toast now." "Yeah, we all told him to have it fully tuned and in tip top shape before bringing to the Dragon -- he sure was warned plenty of times by everybody". ;D ;D ;D You STILL ain't found that information yet Bill? Geez you are slow -- Verslagen posted the link in the original post right after you first bitched about it --- that was DAYS & DAYS AGO and you still ain't found it? You is pitiful, bud -- plumb pitiful. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by bill67 on 09/09/10 at 13:19:49 Wheres Bill, he did the dragon, hes waiting for you guy,He figure you must have run out of oil or stop to check your valves |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by bill67 on 09/09/10 at 13:23:53 Also when I drain my air box the oil that comes out isn't red its yellow like plain oil,And Klotz has bend in there the last 4500 miles. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by Oldfeller on 09/09/10 at 13:25:47 That's OK Bill, we were supposed to meet here, remember? The meeting spot. Jump directly off I-40 on to 23 south to Waynesville, then 276 south to Cruso. Can't get no easier ..... http://www.blueridgemotorcyclecamp.com/images/Cruso-Map.jpg Better luck next year, try taking a copy of the map with you so you go to the right meeting spot. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D yellow huh? Hmmmmm, that sounds about like the appropriate color fer you, Bill |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by bill67 on 09/09/10 at 13:37:35 How many miles would Stinger have gotten using diesel oil may 7 or 8 thousand then tear down time. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by Oldfeller on 09/09/10 at 13:58:51 Gee Bill, I've got over twice that many miles and I'm a lot more abusive to my bike than Stinger ever was to his .... ;) And I think that Verslagen bought his newer bike with more previous owner miles on it than that ..... but he can speak to that, not me. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by bill67 on 09/09/10 at 14:25:51 So OF you got 90000 miles on now. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by verslagen1 on 09/09/10 at 14:28:05 696267673D3C0B0 wrote:
So you're telling us the food coloring don't boil out? I think you're using too much seafoam or are just full of it, you fill up the airbox too? |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by verslagen1 on 09/09/10 at 14:32:08 7F7471712B2A1D0 wrote:
What the flash point after 12 hours in raptor for Rotella? Apples for apples [/quote] Apples to Apples? It'll be another 10 years before your Klotz pony gets up to the mileage I started with. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by bill67 on 09/09/10 at 14:36:22 I guess a raptor want run 12 hours with Rotella oil,must seize up.What was the flash point before it seized then maybe you can tell me that. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by Oldfeller on 09/09/10 at 14:37:49 Ever notice how Bill tends to misunderstand things -- on purpose? He mentions 7 to 8 thousand miles, you tell him you got twice that and he wants to go take Stinger's mileage and double it. What is the correct technical term for his illness? a) Non-functional dyslexic passive aggressive syndrome? b) Alzheimer's I forget what the shite I am talking about syndrome? c) Advanced cranial-anal inversion syndrome? I dunno -- you guys tell please me what it is that is ailing him. I really can't figure it out .... :D |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by bill67 on 09/09/10 at 14:45:55 I guess I will have to stick with my oil girl from the auto department at Wal-Mart,she makes more sense and doesn't say one thing one day and then change it the next day,She says theres a lot of good hi performance motorcycle oils,but wal mart doesn't sell it so don't buy their oil. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by jsarsfield on 09/09/10 at 15:13:37 6F4C4446454C4C4552200 wrote:
Or you could just say got his head up his ass ;D I really find it funny though guys that the supposed oil war with Bill continues even when he has less mechanical knowledge than my girlfriend. Bill admit it your a caricature of yourself and your battle in this oil war thus far has been and always will be nothing more than satire at best ..... Thanks for the entertainment. ;) But those of you that have actually put forth data and real input and not just delusional meanderings, Go pick on someone your own size :D |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by Oldfeller on 09/09/10 at 15:36:05 OK, here is a pic of Bill's trusted female information source from WalMart. She gives him all his information on adjusting his valves, general bike maintenance advice and of course she tells him the correct oil brand and weight for him to use. She also gives him current fashion advice on clothes and other critical purchases. http://cdn.holytaco.com/www/sites/default/files/images/2009/67.jpg And here is a pic of Bill after his last Walmart clothing shopping spree .... http://cdn.holytaco.com/www/sites/default/files/images/2009/walmart%5B1%5D_0.jpg I'll quit just as soon as Bill does --- |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by justin_o_guy2 on 09/09/10 at 15:40:51 Now, NOW! You guys may be correct about Bill in a way, BUT, do notfail to see the benefit he enjoys. You see, he wont be suffering the indignity of gettin his old butt scoped by a doctor, ever. Its not necessary to have someone else look "up there" since he keeps it under 24 hour surveillance. Sorry Bill, Its just a joke, dude. You believe whatya will about the oils. Its your bizniss & without differing opinions, oil wars wouldntbe fun. That it seems youve chosen to stand on an opinion not supported by facts is kinda funny, but, hey, still your choice, hoss.. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by Oldfeller on 09/09/10 at 15:55:04 Now, all joking aside -- Bill's bike will live a happy life using his chosen oil and it will still do everything Bill might ever or would ever ask of it. So for Bill, it is the perfect Zero Maintenance oil. He can blame every success on it, whenever he has one. After all, he pays a lot for it, so it MUST be good stuff, right? :D |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by verslagen1 on 09/09/10 at 15:59:36 Let's see, 5500 miles on a goldwing, what's that in raptor hours? 5500 miles / 70 mph = 78.6 hours Oh dam, I got watermelons to apples. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by Oldfeller on 09/09/10 at 16:04:15 Yeah, you done overstated the inexplicable multiplicative in Billish. He'd want you to go divide that by 6 to get equivalent cylinder hours. ;D ;D ;D ;D OOPS, that's still too many? Sorry :-? |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by bill67 on 09/09/10 at 16:10:59 213225243B3630323966570 wrote:
The only thing you put up a senseless thing about one oil,It was pretty senseless and means nothing,compare is compare,think how stupid you were to even put something like that up about one oil. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by bill67 on 09/09/10 at 16:13:58 5B7870727178787166140 wrote:
You came close she is a 22 year old black girl that rides a V-ROD but is about 5 4 tall and say maybe 115 And what a butt! |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by Oldfeller on 09/09/10 at 16:20:34 Too much information being volunteered there, Bill -- we really don't want to know anything about your prescription for Viagra nor her age nor especially anything about her butt ever 115, wow that's less than 4 times as many years old as the last time you adjusted a valve Remember, when speaking to Bill you gotta speak to him in Billish or he won't understand you .... |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by bill67 on 09/09/10 at 16:23:39 253C2E3D3C29262A232B4F0 wrote:
Or you could just say got his head up his ass ;D I really find it funny though guys that the supposed oil war with Bill continues even when he has less mechanical knowledge than my girlfriend. Bill admit it your a caricature of yourself and your battle in this oil war thus far has been and always will be nothing more than satire at best ..... Thanks for the entertainment. ;) But those of you that have actually put forth data and real input and not just delusional meanderings, Go pick on someone your own size :D [/quote] Jarhead you don't even know were you are when you jump. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by Oldfeller on 09/09/10 at 16:28:28 Where are you when you jump? I dunno. Up? Then down, I guess. sometimes Billish doesn't translate very well |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by verslagen1 on 09/09/10 at 16:34:58 BTW, I doubt will ever see bill do a dragon, but anyone ever see bill on a bike? |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by Oldfeller on 09/09/10 at 16:50:43 Bike? What does that mean in Billish? What is that correct multilingual translational Billish equivalent again? keyboard |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by verslagen1 on 10/24/10 at 21:07:43 With summer over, and the Cali indian summer just about over... I think this just about concludes the test for this year. So here are the Amsoil data... http://verslagen.savageriders.com/Oil War/Amsoil-1.jpg I have about a half qt. left, so that would give at least another week to equal klotz in usage for the same number of days. So to compare the results... http://verslagen.savageriders.com/Oil War/Delta's.jpg I'd have to say the klotz numbers are slightly better than Amsoil. And the higher head and oil temp for both would have to be due to the higher viscosity. Yielding less oil flow to the head. So while the higher viscosity supposedly giving more protection from metal to metal contact, reduces the cooling effect of the oil. I would say, regardless of the temperature that 40 wt. oil at operating temps is better for engine cooling. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by Lupo on 10/25/10 at 01:37:24 If the engine is running hot your not going fast enough. Air cooling. If your burning too much oil your not going fast enough. Piston compression ring is relaxing and allowing oil to leak into the combustion chamber. If your sitting there reading this bull$hit and thinking, hmm,.. he might be right, you most definitely are slow. GO FASTER, but please be safe (within reason). |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by Oldfeller on 10/25/10 at 05:55:59 Lupo, all readings are taken over the same route at the same speed. Same stop point, same instrument, same sensing locations. All readings are stated as DELTA temperatures, as in head temp minus ambient air temp so the daily temp variations are all accounted for in the collection method. Actually, you are coming in at the very tail end of a year long event accomplished over about 3 oil war sessions -- any easy "error causes" such as you are referring to got factored out long ago and in some cases the data had to be retaken to the improved system. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by Oldfeller on 10/25/10 at 05:57:59 Bill, you can brag that Klotz is better than Amisol in the Savage engine. Verslagen, oil usage amounts -- what is the final comparison between the oils? Logic would try to say there should be some difference somehow, but what was it? You know the length of your trip and the period of time each test took in days, so a useage per mile (or miles per quart) might be possible to generate. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by bill67 on 10/25/10 at 06:05:00 5C7F7775767F7F7661130 wrote:
Data had to be retaken if it didn't work out the way Vergy wanted it to work ;D ;D ;D |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by Oldfeller on 10/25/10 at 06:07:09 Charon was the only one who asked for any redo Bill, and he had a good technical reason to suggest it. He wasn't in the dogfight like you were. PS pass the salt shaker please, here comes the oil usage data ..... ;D |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by cornfuzed on 10/25/10 at 06:42:35 Hey theres no oil comparison done with Schaeffers ?? ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ps... its a joke son dontchya gettit? Umm DONT use Schaeffers in wet sumps ...fyi... |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by verslagen1 on 10/25/10 at 08:05:53 Data was collected until 1 gal. of oil was used. Each round trip is 50 miles, half of which was in brutal summer heat, and did I slow down? Not cause it was hot. Last ~10 miles was 30 to 40 mph due to traffic. 30 days would be 6 weeks to consume 2 quarts at 50 miles per day. 750 miles per qt. durring the summer. And nearly none during the winter with the same daily mileage weather permitting. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by Oldfeller on 10/25/10 at 08:26:34 Any differential between oil brands? I know that consumption was what drove you to trying the different oils, looking for one that ran longer before exiting out the well worn engine. =========================== I know you don't like dino oil. I don't like it either. Seems a dumb bet not to have the hi-temp proof advantage of a synthetic oil. But .... next hot season you could run a test on dino RotT 15w40 as you actually replace a quart so fast it would never even get broken in good before it was replaced by the next quart. You know you have no issues with overheating (you've been tracking your bike's temps for over a year now). I have me a burning curiosity itch as to the delta in performance between a known good dino and same brand synthetic (keeping the exact same brand on both) to see if syn really does perform better, or is it all bullshit hype that gets us into the $11 a quart oils? Curious minds want to know :D |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by ralfyguy on 10/25/10 at 09:42:22 I put in T6 5W-40 in to try it, I could swear the valve train is a tad quiter. I will observe if the consumption is higher than with the Lucas 20W-50. If it's not, then I might even try to run it in 105 degree summers instead of the 20W-50. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by Oldfeller on 10/25/10 at 09:48:54 ;D Bill, do you suppose standard old dino 15W40 Rotella T might actually OUTPERFORM your magical red Klotz stuff in a Savage engine? ...... just think about it for the next 6-8 months or so 'till hot season comes around again ...... ...... by then we may actually KNOW !!! ;) |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by bill67 on 10/25/10 at 09:56:43 No Klotz is my oil,It runs cooler,you get more horsepower,better gas mileage and zero wear, I don't use or burn any oil with Klotz,Thats good enough for me,Its worth the extra money. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by Oldfeller on 10/25/10 at 10:12:31 http://verslagen.savageriders.com/Oil%20War/Amsoil-1.jpg http://verslagen.savageriders.com/Oil%20War/Delta%27s.jpg Now now Bill, you wouldn't want to confuse the casual readers -- Klotz runs cooler than AMISOL, yes, but it does not run cooler than RotSyn. Rotella Syn beats the stuffing out of both of these expensive oils. ;D ====================== Now the nasty salty painful question for next summer's test run is "Does standard old low cost dino Rotella T smack the crap out of Klotz?" I don't know if it will or not --- but you can roll the thought around in your mouth this winter for a while and judge what it might jest taste like when the bird poop hits the pallette late next spring to early summer ..... After all, you can buy a whole gallon of Rotella T for what one quart of Klotz costs. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by bill67 on 10/25/10 at 10:59:43 Did anyone on here believe when Verg started this that he would have any other oil win but his favorite,I believe his test were done at the keyboard. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by Oldfeller on 10/25/10 at 11:01:48 I have to agree, none were at the keyboard :D (Bill fixed his little typo) The excessive keyboard stuff is the forte of yet another list member, one that you may see fairly frequently in your travels around near where you live .... ;D |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by bill67 on 10/25/10 at 11:03:04 I would use Amsoil before I would use Rotella,Theirs no doubt in my mine that its better. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by Oldfeller on 10/25/10 at 11:09:00 Why Bill, of course Amisol has to be better !!! It costs 5 times as much, right? Got to be better !! They do roller scar size testing on it (an appropriate test for greases and heavy gearbox oils) to prove it is better, just like Klotz does. Good stuff, but your Klotz beat it in an impartial test done on a Savage engine !!! Stick with a weiner, don't change because of any factual information to the contrary !! |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by Charon on 10/25/10 at 11:18:28 2B2025257F7E490 wrote:
Ya know, I believe ol' bill67 done called Verslagen a liar. Of course, I suppose I could possibly be misintepreting what he said. I also note bill67 has never posted any of the results of his own tests, either, probably because he has never run any. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by Oldfeller on 10/25/10 at 11:32:21 Puts Verslagen in good company doesn't it? Bill has called both me and you a liar in past oil wars too, if memory serves correctly. Me, I think good ol' Bullshooter Bill is a lot better moniker for our buddy Bill -- a liar is both malicious and he knows that he is lying, something that you cannot convince me is true about Bill. ;) He believes what he says when he says it |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by Oldfeller on 10/25/10 at 11:36:52 Hey Charon, You are currently running Rotella T dino aren't you? How could we test the stuff in some authenticate-able fashion against its full synthetic brother? |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by Charon on 10/25/10 at 12:06:32 I have Rotella 15W-40 conventional oil in my S40, and Rotella 5W-40 synthetic in my 250 Ninja. To be truthful, I cannot tell the difference, if any, from the 10W-40 Havoline I had in them before. I just did the 7500 mile service on the S40, and all the valves were spot on. Unfortunately, I had not written down their clearances when I did them before, so cannot say whether they changed. I have been thinking about a repeatable test for some time. I have a Craftsman 2500 watt generator with a Briggs 5 hp engine in it. I thought about loading it with 2500 watts of electric heaters, putting a small tank (I have a 1-quart tank from an old Snow Pup) on it, and plugging an electric clock into it. My idea is to put in whatever oil I wanted to test, fill the tank, start the engine and apply the load, then note the total run time as taken from the electric clock (which would stop when the engine ran out of fuel). The idea is that, if there are any frictional differences, the engine will run for more or less time. I also want to figure out a way to measure temperatures, since I don't have an IR temp gun. One thought is to drill a thermometer-stem-sized hole in the plastic fill cap and stick a thermometer through the hole directly into the oil. I am still pondering logistics, including the Briggs instruction saying not to use 10W-40 oils. The obvious criticism is that the engine isn't a motorcycle engine, so the test isn't even applicable. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by verslagen1 on 10/25/10 at 12:19:30 4C676E7D60610F0 wrote:
Ya know, I believe ol' bill67 done called Verslagen a liar. Of course, I suppose I could possibly be misintepreting what he said. I also note bill67 has never posted any of the results of his own tests, either, probably because he has never run any.[/quote] The mileage I put on my bike in a month is more than ol' Billshutter does in a year. He said he does 5 miles a day (probably to get the mail) times 6 days times 4 weeks times 6 months. That's 720 miles a year. That's if he even has a savage. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by bill67 on 10/25/10 at 13:47:45 Your close 710 miles a year.I have a Boulevard S40. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by Oldfeller on 10/25/10 at 13:56:13 I've got a dual channel recording thermocouple device I could stick on my Savage so I could take a data paired hit of air temp against a hit of head temp or sump temp taken at the exact same instant. But only one paired item could be taken at a time as I only have 2 channels. Which would be the better or more useful data? Head or sump temp? I'd excel subtract the paired data against each other to generate a delta temperature value, which should take out air temp as a variable completely, just yielding a performance temperature plot of the geographic/speed variable contained by the trip. This would only be short term duration data (although it would last for a fast single distance run of say 3-5 minutes which is my longest local "haul ass full speed" distance between two stop signs). Which would be better data, accelerating around the same turns or an interstate run of a single steady fixed speed? Free riding, even on the same course would put operator influence into play (conscious or unconscious, you take your pick). The fixed speed interstate run would be more even handed and could "stretch out" the 8,000 paired data points by increasing the time interval in between readings to cover a much longer run time. Say, the run from Fayetteville to Raleigh, which is about 40 minutes at full interstate speeds. Thoughts? |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by bill67 on 10/25/10 at 14:03:28 I would say oil temperature because with a better oil (Klotz) you will have higher head temperature because of better piston ring seal. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by Oldfeller on 10/25/10 at 14:09:00 Bill, at 710 miles per year, how many years do you go between oil changes? ===================== Another mix might be take sump temp and head temp and get the matched pair delta between oil and head as Verslagen's data indicates that this delta shows a more "regular" variation between oil brands than any other combination. As such, it is more "sensitive" as an indicator. Plus we get the raw data for both the head and the sump and I can spot check the ambient air temp at the beginning and end of each run and use the average of the two to give me the generalized air ambient temp to apply where needed. Then we could generate head over air, another delta data set that showed brand differences clearly. Still, we would only get relatively short term data -- Verslagen collected month long data spans and averaged them to get some significant accuracy over time. One of the things that would get shaken out by doing Rotella T against RotSyn would be to test two oils that are 40w when hot -- I think we have a lot of oil weight differences showing up in what we have now rather than simple brand determine data. Thoughts? |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by verslagen1 on 10/25/10 at 14:13:45 4F4441411B1A2D0 wrote:
So with your measurement of what's better... Amsoil wins, hotter is better. ;D |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by bill67 on 10/25/10 at 14:23:39 The only true test of oil would be to put the the oil in same engines run for and hour and then drain the oil,start up again and see which engine runs the longest before it quits.Maybe Charon will do this for us. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by Oldfeller on 10/25/10 at 14:29:36 Bill, that's kinda silly -- how are you going to do the second run of testing in the same engine after you just scrapped it out in the first test? Either you didn't think it through, or you are just being obstinate and silly. Besides, nobody runs an engine w/out oil in it on purpose. Especially our Savage engine with plain aluminum cam bearings in it (instant stupid death to run w/out oil pressure). :-? |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by bill67 on 10/25/10 at 14:38:38 3 different engines |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by Charon on 10/25/10 at 16:42:20 I'd have to say the idea that the best oil is the one which protects an engine for the longest after the oil has been drained is pretty silly - even stupid. After all the oil is designed to protect the engine while still in place. That also tells me there is no point in running any further tests to convince bill(My mind is made up - don't confuse me with facts)67. But I'd be happy to run that test if bill67 will supply the engines. As a matter of interest, Briggs & Stratton did run a similar test years ago. I don't remember what the additive was, but B&S took two sequential engines off their production line. They ran one with their recommended oil; the other with their oil plus the additive for some period of time (24 hours comes to mind). They then drained the oil from both engines and ran them (to failure? I'm not sure). The engine with the additive showed more damage than the one without. I am sure some research on the Web will find the details. I was also interested to note bill67's comments that Klotz runs cooler and gives more horsepower, along with his comment that because the Klotz provides a better piston ring seal the head temperature will be higher. There seems to be a contradiction, somewhere. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by bill67 on 10/25/10 at 16:54:03 What I said was pretty silly, It was about as silly as Briggs & Stratton doing the same thing,Most wear on and engine is on start up so the test would show which oil that would have less wear on start up.Head temperature and oil temperature are 2 different things,oil shows how hot the over all engine is,And thats were the wear comes in ,Its not in the head.Because the head is hotter doesn't mean the engine is. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by verslagen1 on 10/25/10 at 16:56:02 507B72617C7D130 wrote:
Facts? not with billshut around. His statement clearly says Amsoil is better by 2° but don't let the facts get in your way. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by Oldfeller on 10/25/10 at 17:43:56 Well, this oil war has about run its course -- I have to agree with that. I can live me a fine full life without knowing for sure if Rotella T dino 15w40 really can whup up on Klotz 15w50 synthetic on the temperature tests (although I suspect it would being a 15W40 oil and having better thermal conductivity on the high end accordingly). We have learned that 15w50 oils of two respected brands can't conduct away heat nearly as well as a 5w40 oil can, and that was interesting thing to learn (and certainly unexpected). Two very expensive brand names of "glitz" performance oils have come down a notch or two, in my mind anyway. Certainly I question their performance vs their high high price even more than previously. And Bill collected him a new nickname, one that reflects his "openess of mind" to any new ideas. Billshut continues as he has before, undaunted by facts or data or anything else. He never even connected on to the oil weight thing and never asked for or insisted on a retest using a lighter weight of Klotz oil (if they make such a thing). Ah, such is life ..... .... as the song sez so well "Hey Bungalow Bill ..... what did you kill? Bungalow Bill .... ;D he's the all-American bullet-headed saxon mother's son |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by bill67 on 10/25/10 at 18:44:10 OF he claims he use Klotz 15w50w And Klotz makes all the weight oils,0w 50w for snowmobiles,They make racing synthetic oils,Not run of the mill Wal-Mart oils. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by verslagen1 on 10/25/10 at 18:57:03 He went out tiger hunting with his elephant and gun In case of accidents he always took his mom |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by bill67 on 10/25/10 at 19:00:24 63686D6D3736010 wrote:
Bump |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by Lupo on 10/25/10 at 19:15:22 http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc4/hs435.snc4/47845_147877621913655_100000742536056_267202_5119380_n.jpg |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by Oldfeller on 10/25/10 at 19:37:07 Was that a short horned bull that you shooted wid your widdle elephant gun, as he sped by on by on the back of that 4 stroke racing snowmobile? Moooooo !!! Mooooooooooo !!! <BAM!!> Now that would be a contest -- 15w50 Klotz racing 4 stroke snow mobile oil vs lowly "common as dirt" old dino 15w40 Rotella T --- there wouldn't be a lot of weight difference to futz things up. You go first (and at 710 miles per year it may take you a decade or two to get any substantive results). Bill, I ride more than 710 miles (counting both ways) just to get to a Dragon Run. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by Charon on 10/25/10 at 19:48:28 On further thought, my generator with its Briggs & Stratton engine does have a major difference from the S40. It is an old flat-head side-valve engine, so there is no oil circulation in its head. Thus the head temperature would probably bear little relationship to the oil temperature. It is also a splash-lubricated engine with no pressurized oil system. I could still assume differences in run time, pulling the same load, could reflect different oil friction in the engine. The engine is governed, so if oil friction increased, throttle opening would increase; fuel consumption would increase, and heat (temperature) would increase. Cooling air flow would remain roughly constant, since it is determined by governed engine speed. If I filled the little one-quart tank from a five-gallon can, I would eliminate most possible differences from fuel. I may yet do a little experimenting. Sure hate the idea of spending megabucks on exotic oils, though. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by Oldfeller on 10/25/10 at 20:13:18 Briggs engine would also show the oil weight (last number) differences as a "major effect" as the crank cap paddle splashes thru the stuff once per rev. Liked that Briggs emblem on the tank, I actually thought about the Webley Vickers emblem, that one was kinda cool looking (and feasible for the casual onlooker as what the heck was Vickers but an obscure Brit bike builder and the Webley part was an awkward British semi-automatic revolver. Saw a Horton emblem a while back, too. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by Lupo on 10/25/10 at 21:20:44 Webley still makes some fine air guns http://www.webley.co.uk/ The Briggs on the tank gets some amusing reactions. Most buy into it. ;) |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by Oldfeller on 10/25/10 at 22:00:10 [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AipD9vkj4Sk&feature=related[/media] Bill's rendition of the Beatles Classic "Bungalow Bill" All the ritualized tree knothole abuse shown in this film was Bill's idea -- we just posted the film "as taken" It is obvious that Bill is still thinkin' about them ugly hillbillies -- he's been a practicing his rebuttal Hey, Bungalow Bill what did you kill Bungalow Bill? Hey, Bungalow Bill what did you kill Bungalow Bill? He went out hunting with his elephant and gun in case of accidents he always took his mom he's the all-American bullet-headed saxon mother's son All the children sing Hey, Bungalow Bill what did you kill Bungalow Bill? Hey, Bungalow Bill what did you kill Bungalow Bill? Deep in the jungle where the mightly tiger lies Bill and his elephants were taken by surpirse so Captain Marvel zapped him right between the eyes All the children sing Hey, Bungalow Bill what did you kill Bungalow Bill? Hey, Bungalow Bill what did you kill Bungalow Bill? The children asked him if to kill was not a sin "Not when he looked so fierce", his mommy butted in "If looks could kill, it would have been us instead of him". All the children sing Hey, Bungalow Bill what did you kill Bungalow Bill? Hey, Bungalow Bill what did you kill Bungalow Bill? Hey, Bungalow Bill what did you kill Bungalow Bill? Hey, Bungalow Bill what did you kill Bungalow Bill? Hey, Bungalow Bill what did you kill Bungalow Bill? 1968 Northern Songs, Ltd. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by Charon on 10/27/10 at 15:23:53 The whole "oil test" idea has been nagging at me, so today I went out and ran a "proof-of-concept" preliminary test, using my generator. I must stand corrected, though - I said it was a 2500 watt unit, but it is only 2400 watts. I mounted the little one-quart tank using cable ties, and ran a clear fuel line to the carburetor (this engine has a carburetor separate from the fuel tank, with a needle and float in it). I made a wire pointer and attached it to the throttle on the carburetor, then stuck a piece of tape to a convenient spot so I could see how far open the throttle actually is. I filled the tank, started the engine, and plugged a voltmeter into the outlet. 133 volts, unloaded. I marked the throttle position on the tape, then plugged in a 1000 watt heater. Voltage dropped to 125 volts; throttle opened up some, and I marked its new spot. I unplugged the 1000 watt heater and plugged in a different one, unmarked for power. Voltage dropped to 123 volts; throttle opened slightly more than with 1000 watts. I marked that spot, too. Then I added the 1000 watt. Voltage dropped to 110 volts; throttle opened some more (but not quite to the wide-open mark I had previously made). I marked the spot. Somewhere in there I remembered to start a stop watch, but wasn't too worried about exact timing for the trial run. I walked away for about five minutes (noisy darn thing), and when I came back noticed the throttle had closed a little. Voltage was still 110 volts. My guess is that the engine and its oil warmed up during that time. Under the full load the engine ran for right at 30 minutes. I had calculated it ought to run for somewhere in the 30 - 35 minute range, so was glad to see my calculations verified. I have not yet installed any temperature measuring stuff, but I am still strongly thinking about drilling the oil-fill plug and sticking a meat thermometer through it into the oil. I am also going to refine the throttle position indicator, and find a way to measure current. The engine presently has 10W-30 oil in it, but I didn't write down what brand when I changed it last. I'll make my refinements, and run another test or two to see if things are reasonably repeatable. I have on hand both Rotella 15W-40 conventional and Rotella 5W-40 synthetic oils, so they will probably be the first ones tested. I also have some 5W-30, so it will likely be tried too. I am thinking about the cross-contamination issue. When I drain one oil, some will stay in the engine to contaminate the next oil. I think I may keep the 10W-30. Then when I drain a test oil, I'll put the 10W-30 back in, run the engine for a few minutes, and drain. That way at least the cross-contamination will be more or less the same. Anyone have any suggestions (that don't cost a lot of money, since I am retired and there was no COLA either last year or this)? |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by Lupo on 10/27/10 at 15:28:48 5D767F6C71701E0 wrote:
Go fishing :) |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by bill67 on 10/27/10 at 15:43:27 I have never heard of bungalow bill in my life. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by Oldfeller on 10/27/10 at 16:35:05 Bill, He's YOU, old bud, tight little tree knot-holes and all he's the "all-American bullet-headed saxon mother's son". ============================================== Charon, Let's play make believe -- you have finished your tests and the heavier oils ran slightly shorter times and had slightly higher temperatures (some logic behind that) and lighter weight oils ran slightly longer times and had slightly lower temperatures (once again, in line with what we learned from Verslagen's tests and the SAE rating system's functional requirements) What conclusions should we draw, other than to pay attention to the oil weight numbers (second # is important for full temp run rates, first # is important for cold starts). Ditto if I actually rigged up my 2 channel to my bike and ran RotSyn against Rotella T dino. I'd find the synthetic 5w40 gave marginally lower temps than the 15w40 dino oil did, simply because it sucked heat from the head better and dumped it more effectively into the sump to be radiated out into the ambient air through the aluminum main case halves and side covers. What would really change for us? Unless of course, the COMPLETELY UNEXPECTED actually showed up again ..... ;D |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by Charon on 10/27/10 at 16:58:56 OF, that's pretty much what I expect to find. I expect the heavier (more viscous) oils to result in slightly shorter run times and slightly higher temperatures. I rather expect the two Rotella oils to be just about the same, too, because they are both 40 at running temperatures. A variable exists with ambient temperature, which has turned chilly here in Nebraska. The engine may not warm its oil up to 100 C, the temperature at which oils are rated, particularly with lighter oils. I can make a reasonable measurement of the temperature rise above ambient, but the oil viscosity is a function of actual temperature. "When you explore the unknown, by definition you don't know what you will find." I am rather expecting to find all all the oils with the same second number to group together, and oils with different second numbers to differ. I can only hope the differences are pronounced enough to show without precision measuring equipment. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by Charon on 10/29/10 at 18:41:52 Well, gents, I have made a couple more trial runs, and found some interesting things. Yesterday, 10/28/2010, I visited a local repair shop to get another oil filler cap, so I can destroy one and still have a cap in case I need the generator. While there I chatted with the proprietor (an old acquaintance), who told me of measuring oil temps on his old BMW 1000 boxer. He said there was available an oil thermometer which replaced the OEM dipstick, and on which he observed oil temperatures approaching 300 F. He mentioned Klotz, saying it got just as hot, but seemed to give him perhaps one or two mpg improvement. He also said Klotz was the only oil he ever used which made his BMW leak, and when he went back to petroleum oil the leak went away. Based on Verslagen's IR temps for oil, I bought a meat thermometer with a high number of 220 F. I drilled the oil filler plug to a press-fit for the stem of the thermometer, and put the whole works on with the thermometer stem down in the engine oil. I also placed a piece of tape on the generator housing and made a pointer which I attached to the throttle butterfly. I marked throttle wide-open as 100%; throttle closed (to the idle stop) as 0%, and roughly divided the rest of the tape in 10% increments. Bear in mind this is a governed engine with no user throttle control, which is designed to produce somewhere near 60 Hz power, 3600 rpm. My idea was to start the engine, and as soon as it came up to speed plug both my electric heaters into it and start the stopwatch. When I plugged in the heaters, the throttle solidly pinned against 100% and the engine bogged a little. I didn't like that much, so removed one heater for a moment. Then I figured to see what would happen, since the generator has an overload breaker. I started the stopwatch and plugged the heater back in. At start, the 10W-30 oil temp was 64. When the oil temperature reached 120, in about three minutes, the throttle began to drop. At five minutes the oil was 198 and the throttle had dropped to about 75%. I walked away for a few minutes. When I returned at twelve minutes, the oil temperature was off-scale, at an estimated 240, and the throttle had dropped to about 70%. At 17 minutes the oil was at an estimated 270 and the throttle was about the same. When the engine ran out of fuel at 29 min 25 sec the oil was perhaps 280. Temps above 220 are estimates, since the pointer was off-scale. Conjectures so far. The oil viscosity decreases as the engine warms, and this is quite significant in terms of throttle position with a fixed load. In fact, it is a heck of a lot more significant under my test conditions than I would ever have guessed. Without casting doubt on Verslagen's measurements, either his Savage engine is cooled a heck of a lot better than the forced-air cooling on my Briggs, or the Briggs is working a lot harder than the Savage. Be it noted the Savage holds about 2.4 quarts while the Briggs holds 20 ounces. I did some more experimenting today, but I am still digesting results. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by verslagen1 on 10/29/10 at 19:10:58 Remember, I'm not taking a direct reading on the oil temp, it's thru the oil filter cover, so some cooling does occur. 300° does seem to be the max running temp when directly read. And while your generator may be rated for that load, I'd hate to run it at that for any length of time. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by bill67 on 10/29/10 at 19:20:30 A motorcycle going down the road isn't under a constant load like your generator is,Unless you were going up a 10 mile hill or pulling a heavy trailer. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by Oldfeller on 10/30/10 at 09:11:30 Still, it is interesting stuff. "Lower viscosity" seems to have an improving performance effect. I guess that isn't news -- cars have been swinging to thinner and thinner oils of late for economy and performance. As oils get better & better, you can get away with that. When I was a kid, oil weight (thickness) was protection - period. Manufacturing tolerances (clearances) with iron pistons were a lot greater than they are now too. Now days it is beginning to smell like excess weight (thickness) is wasteful of energy, gasoline and leads to higher running temperatures. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by Charon on 10/30/10 at 17:41:04 My experiments yesterday, 10/29/2010, revealed some interesting data, although I didn't run the full tank of fuel. First, I determined my original voltage measurements were in error by about five volts. I had used an old analog meter; this time I used a digital and recalibrated the analog. The virtue of the analog meter is its AC plug, making connection easier. I started by measuring the actual loads of my electric heaters. The one marked 1000 watts is actually closer to 750, depending of course on input voltage. The other was about 1050, but its rating label long since fell off. I did this by measuring current and voltage, then multiplying. For resistive loads this is OK with AC, although strictly speaking I should have called the result VA instead of watts. On initial engine start, the 10W-30 oil was 70 F; the throttle settled at 38% with no load. Of course, the engine always has the load of its cooling fan and whatever windage load exists in the generator. Output was 129 volts. I plugged in the larger heater; throttle went to 67%; voltage 116; current 9.4 A; wattage 1090. I unplugged the big heater and plugged in the smaller one. Throttle 45%; voltage 120; current 6.8; wattage 816. I plugged both in; throttle 95%; voltage 105; current 15.1; wattage 1586. This didn't last long, because the power strip into which I plugged the heaters has a circuit breaker that didn't like that much load. I spent some time fooling around with the different heaters and the power strip. By the time eight minutes had passed the oil temp was over 200 F. A few minutes later, when the oil had reached 225 (est) I did some more checking. With no heaters, throttle was 20%.Small heater, throttle 38%. Large heater, throttle 45%. Both heaters, throttle 70%. Note particularly the differences in throttle position between cold and warm oil. No load cold, 38%; warm 20%. Full load cold, 95%; warm 70%. I unloaded the generator at about 15 minutes, just to see whether the oil temperature would drop. It did, but quite slowly. I then shut off the unit and called it a day. At this point I conclude I need to get a thermometer with a higher range to get better numbers. I also conclude the varying viscosity of the oil as it warms causes far more change in the engine loading than I would have imagined. You folks who noticed the idle speed changing as your motorcycles warmed up are not imagining it. Frankly, I am not sure whether my experiment as originally formulated will produce anything worthwhile, but I plan to keep playing with it. I have already discovered information I find interesting. |
|
Title: Re: Oil temps and usage comparison Post by Oldfeller on 10/31/10 at 04:57:30 What you are getting ready to do is bust up the 20w50 fantasy that Hurley people have been promoting for 100 years or more. No modern bike (including modern Hurleys) really requires a 20w50 oil any more. Clearance running tolerances on all parts are controlled statistically at the plant of manufacture. There are no more "big gaps" on a modern bike to fill up on purpose with a really really thick oil. Oil has gotten significantly better in the last 15 years -- modern synthetics can protect better and at much higher temperatures than old style dino oils could ever dream about. A modern 5w-40 synthetic will outperform an old style dino 20w50 for metal protection and it will have a greater film strength and higher retained viscosity at higher than normal operating temperatures than the old dino stuff could provide at the same elevated temperatures -- with this modern synthetic advantage going right on up & up to very very high temperatures that would have turned the old dino stuff into stinking smoking black jello. Now, suppose you got you a fancy new synthetic 20w50 oil that didn't thin out like crazy like the old dino 20w50 oils did when they got really hot? Guess what, you just put some expensive "instant slow down" into your engine that will resist free motion at full tilt usage in every bearing location and gear mesh point that you got because IT WON'T THIN DOWN AS MUCH LIKE THE DINO OIL DID AT THOSE ELEVATED TEMPERATURES. That Hurley was designed for the oil to be "dino oil thin" at higher operating temperatures, now you have plugged in some modern synthetic stuff that retains much more of the 20w50 viscosity and completely resists extra thinning as temps go up & up -- ya just put some performance molasses in yer works that is gonna cause power loss and oil and head temperatures to rise unnecessarily when you get into heavy use scenarios. (and where do you think the wasted power goes? -- into yet more oil heat of course) Add to it Verslagen's findings about how heavier oils don't transfer heat from the head down to the cases as effectively as thinner oils do and you got a double whammy causing heavy oils to make your bike have to run harder and hotter & hotter to get the same performance level as you go down the road at the same speed. ;D weeeeeeeee .... and the fun continues |
|
SuzukiSavage.com » Powered by YaBB 2.2! YaBB © 2000-2007. All Rights Reserved. |