| Author | Message | ||
     Danny |
That threw me for a loop the first time I read it, too. It's a "nine-five" model station wagon, not a 1995 production year station wagon. EDIT: wrong use of threw/through (Message edited by Danny on July 04, 2005) | ||
| Blake |
Tramp, Where do you come by information that conventional oil is more tenacious than synthetic. I believe the technical parameters for what you are describing would be shear strength and viscosity index? In both, synthetic oil is superior. The synthetic based oils also exhibit an ionic affinity for metals thus after shut-down synthetic oil will maintain a more substantial film on cylinder walls and bearing surfaces compared to conventional oil, which tends to drain from such surfaces more completely. The idea that Buell engines are somehow antiquated and are thus better served by old style conventional oil is just another in a long line of myths. Did you know that conventional base stocks require copious amounts of additives in order to achieve decent multi-viscosity performance? Did you know that those additives are very much prone to break-down and in so-doing contribute to the formation of damaging compounds in the oil? Good synthetics require no such additives and thus do not suffer near the harmful effects of combustion byproducts and decomposed additives. Come to the light my wise friend. I do agree. If one is prepared to change engine oil every 3K or less, the discussion is made virtually moot. Being in Texas and taking the bike to the track on hot Summer days, I cannot imagine running anything but a good synthetic. Conventional oil would be cooking in the heads. | ||
| Sportyeric |
Ah. Every time I try to be a smartass, I end up looking the 2nd part alone. | ||
| Tramp |
Blake- If it's a fact that (and I'm sure it is) that synth oils create fewer skianky byproducts over time than organic oils (and that sure sounds reasonable), then my argument for more frequent changing is lessened. I would like to learn more about the tenacity of synth lubes, being that the very thing for which they were designed (superior elimination of friction) seems to be antitheical to 'stickiness'. stickiness is the friend of those big ol' gaps in the bearings, and that's waht i've based my argument (for better or worse) on. like I say, The organic stuff has worked really well for my buell, but i always keep an open mind, 'specially to things moto -thanks for the points, as always -jay | ||
| Ceejay |
My take on it, if I can jump in, is that my bike's oil runs at about 165 after riding at idle with synth, 180 with dino at the same conditions, top end seems noisier, but I'll spend the extra ten bucks and still change it every 4,000 because heat to me is what causes problems, I know I feel like crap today!!  | ||
| Blake |
That is another common myth. Except at low temperatures, synthetic oil is really no more "slippery" than conventional oil. Two engine oils having identical viscosities will provide the same efficiency (slipperiness) in any regime where hydrodynamic lubrication (involving a film of oil between two surfaces) is the governing mechanism of lubrication (virtually all of engine lubrication scenarios, yes even for roller bearings, even for ball bearings.) In my experience, the tenacity of a lubricant is associated with scenarios where grease is used such as in wheel bearings and screw jacks and such. | ||
| Loki |
wouldn't the big difference between synth and super refined crude be the stability and size of the molecular structures. Both require a blend of additives to do their job properly. One has a given amount of unwanted hitchhikers in its hydrocarbon base. The more one refines it the fewer the hitchhikers and the more you will pay. The other is made with specific hydrocarbons and has no hitchhikers. To me. The reality of synth is its standardized molecular structure and stability that comes with it. Thus you can build a lubricant for a specific purpose. Just a thought here. I would bet that Brand X synthetic automotive oil and Brand X synthetic motorcycle oil and Brand X v-twin motorcycle oil differences go beyond the additive package and step into the molecular structure. As in the size(length) of the chains put together. One might also make the assumption that HD had SYN3 built just for the the archaic power plant. My supposition is that short chain synthetics are good for those close tolerance solid bearings. While a longer chain synthetic can be built for those big 'ol rollers and needles. Just my thoughts. If I have strayed and become lost..... | ||
| Rocketman |
Just bought and sold a 1975 Saab 96. Was a lovely little thing only done 66000 miles from new! Didn't want to part with her really but needs must when the punters stood there waving pound notes at yer. Then as if by sheer coincidence coz they dodn't come around often no more, just had another Saab 96 offered yesterday. This one's a 1972 model. Decisions decisions......... So gents and ladies, are we down to micrometers at the molecules stage??? LOL So here's my anal oil fetish for the recently rebuilt S1W. Running in first 500 miles. Long Dyna filter of choice and HD 20\50 for initial break in period. Sunday saw 610 miles clocked after returning from long ride into the Yorkshire Dales so fresh oil and filter required. Same type Dyna long filter again and upgraded oil to RevTech SAE20W50. If you ask me coz I'm a suspicious miserly old git, at twice the price I'd say the RevTech oil is the same as the HD oil but my balls (pun intended of course) aren't big enough to want to take a chance so I paid the extra anyway  . Could be it's just in a different labeled bottle though. But what do I know. Well my theory is I'm working my way slowly towards synthetic oil. I might run the S1W in to 1500 miles then switch to Mobil 1. We'll see. Rocket | ||
| Road_thing |
So, Rocket, any pics yet? | ||
| Jerry_haughton |
Rocket: COOL!  Ferris ps: what Road Thing said. | ||
| Knotrider |
i use h-d different grades for different seasons. i change it every 1000 to 1500 miles. at every change i put 20% lucas treatment in. i think about synthetic but heard that if you don't remove "all" of the fossil lube before installing synthetic your oil will turn to mud. sounds hard to believe,but,i figure that my mill is going to need a complete rebuild sooner than any motor should. aside from that how else would you completely remove all fossil oil. | ||
| Reepicheep |
Knot... no problem mixing synth and dino oil, provided the dino oil and synth oil were produced in the last 20 years. | ||
| Tramp |
There's little risk in switching over to synth. If you're worrried about 'mud' do a 'quick change with some synth after running with crankcase of synth for a few minutes. that's kind of a myth, though. changing BACK to organic, from synth, is where problems, albe'em few, actually occur. remmeber that most synths are blends anyway, so that residual organic's no big deal. | ||
| Ftd |
"That is another common myth. Except at low temperatures, synthetic oil is really no more "slippery" than conventional oil. " The term in the oil biz for this is tractive coefficient. It is essentially the same for synthetic and mineral oils. The reasons for using synthtics are that they are more resistant to oxidative and thermal breakdown which is great news for us in warmer climates and those of you who employ longer change intervals. Frank | ||
| Ray_maines |
Fill the crank case with Diesel fuel and run the engine for 45 seconds or until it starts to make ugly noises, drain and refill with full synthetic. | ||
| Blake |
That would be bad bad bad Ray. Ray be bad bad bad for suggesting it. Bad Ray! Bad. | ||
| Iamike |
Knot- Where do you ride, Death Valley? Changing it every 1k-1.5kmi. seems to be an awful waste to me. And at those exhorbitant prices HD charges for their common oil too. I have had guys tell me that they run their auto's oil 7-8kmi. between changes (dino) and have over 150kmi. on them, and they still don't have to add oil. | ||
| Tramp |
"The reasons for using synthtics are that they are more resistant to oxidative and thermal breakdown" Actually, the primary reason I use synth in BMW bikes, and recommend it to BMW customers, is that the molecular chains in synthetic will expand and contract with heat, unlike organics, who's relatively random molecular clusters are static throughout thermal range. So, using a synth 5w50, ALL of your oil is @ a nice, thin 5 wt, for stratup, allowing it to prelube every nook and cranny upon startup, then, as it heats up, ALL of the oil gains viscosity* (*resistance to flow), so that ALL of the oil is a nice, thick, protective and thermal sinking 50 wt. Brilliant stuff, when utilized in the correct applications... | ||
| Fullpower |
Tramp the oil does not actually gain viscosity. the number preceding the "W" (in your example of 5W-50) is the "winter" (W) specification which is measured at 0 degrees fahrenheit. the number AFTER the hyphen (-50) in your example is taken at 210 degrees fahrenheit. two completely different specifications, using different units at different temperatures. the scales used at the two respective temperatures are not even close. it is quite true as you have implied that the synthetic base stocks are much more stable over temperature extremes, and as Blake has mentioned,a much lessser quantity of fragile viscosity index improvers are required with the synthetic oil compounds. this makes a more "durable " oil, as less of its volume is used on various chemical compromises. Synthetic lubricants are better, but they are NOT magic. | ||
| Blake |
I think Jay (Tramp) knows was he is meaning to say, that in laymen's terms... a 5wt oil is still more viscous at freezing temperatures than is a 50 wt oil at boiling point of water (212oF) or... a 20W50 multi-viscosity oil will have the viscosity of a 20 weight oil at freezing cold temperatures and the viscosity of a 50 weight oil at boiling hot temperatures. Thus the multi-vis oils, both dino and synthetic, retain the ability to flow in cold temperatures without sacrificing adequate viscosity at high temperatures. And that what gives the synthetic base stock the ability to achieve such amazing multi-vis performance are its purpose built/engineered long chain molecules; no viscosity improvers are required. Not so with conventional oil with its hodge podge of different hydrocarbon molecules. Now, about that automatic transmission fluid (ATF). Some folks run that in their Buell tranny??? | ||
| Whodom |
Is this the first time a joke thread at BadWeb ever got hijacked for serious discourse?  Blake, on the subject of transmission lubricants- the interesting thing to me (especially as an engineer) is how we all tend to believe manufacturer's claims about the superiority of synthetic lubricants (which is pretty well documented). OTOH, we'll ask Mobil which lubricant they recommend for a specific application (such as Buell primaries) and then say "Ahh, what do they know? I'm running XXX instead." In our defense, I'm sure there's a certain amount of company politics/marketing in what they recommend for a given application (i.e.- Mobil-1 V-twin 20W-50 over Mobil-1 15W-50), but it does kind of make our lubricant choices seem completely arbitrary. It may well be that gear oil is complete overkill for Buell transmissions. I remember one of my professors saying that the main reason for modern gear oil formulations is the hypoid gears in the rear axles of autos. These gears have a large amount of sliding contact and really gave the lubricant engineers fits in the late 40's/early 50's when cars started getting lower. Lower cars necessitated lower driveshafts, which necessitated the development of hypoid gears to allow the pinion on the rear end to be mounted below the axle centerlines. This lead to excessive gear wear until suitable lubricants were developed. It will be interesting to see if any other ATF users come forward. | ||
| Brucelee |
There are many car manufacturers who specify ATF in their manual trans, ie BMW. Never heard of any bike makers doing this but it does give one pause. | ||
| Tramp |
The sacry thing here is that there are several different bases which comprise different ATFs, so it's a dangerously broad idea. Incide4ntally, I learned about the actual lengthening and shortening of synth molecular chains in BMW (m/c) tech II school, this was cited as the primary difference between BMW synth (Spectro Gold) and organic oil. The viscosity of the *entire* mass of oil varied according to tempo, according to our technical services instructors. I am NO engineers, and my knowledge of this is strictly second/third hand... | ||
| Road_thing |
WHo--you're right, this is 180 degrees out from our normal progression! Say, didja hear the one about the rabbi, the priest and the Buell tech? rt | ||
| Jlnance |
is how we all tend to believe manufacturer's claims about the superiority of synthetic lubricants... OTOH ... I always find it interesting that so many people have oil change intervals they are adamant about that bare no relation to the interval recomended by Buell (or whomever makes the bike.) | ||
| Ftd |
"actual lengthening and shortening of synth molecular chains " The molecules that comprise the viscosity modifers do not change length per se but do change shape. At lower temps they attempt to become spherical (thus low viscosity/high fluidity) and at higher temps they attempt to become rod-like or linear (thus high viscosity). Mineral oils require more of these additives as well as others as they are not engineered like the synthetic oils. These additves break dwon due to time, temp, oxidation and then the oil is not as good as when new. Plus, not only are the broken down additives not doing their intended jobs but many contribute to the deposits formed in an engine. So, the fact that synthetics have less additives than the equivalent mineral oils makes them less prone to thermal and oxidative breakdown. Frank | ||
| Rocketman |
ATF in the tranny? - I've posted some info on the XB board.............. In Europe and in (oil) trouble My question then would be, do Rivera or Bandit Machine Works have a gain to make from recommending ATF? Rocket | ||
| Tramp |
What exactly, is HD sport trans comprised of? Doesn't seem to be a hypoid, or IS it? | ||
| Blake |
Rocket, Which ATG do they recommend? Tramp, Great question! I've tried to find that information for a long time. I mean HD won't even tell you the viscosity grade of the stuff. That was really, REALLY annoying when I first got into riding a Buell back in '98. | ||
| Blake |
You got me wondering about your hypoid oil question... hypoid adj 1. A type of bevel gear in which the axes of the driving and driven shafts are at right angles but not in the same plane. So I guess that hypoid oil is specially formulated to handle the peculiar rigors of lubricating a hypoid gear assembly. No hypoid gears in our tranny, so *probably* no "hypoid" oil in the lube? |
