Synthetic engine oil

[R-1150-RS]

I have read that, in addition to the previously mentioned protection from high pressures on the cam lobes, ZDDP also protects the rings from scuffing due to the minimal oil available for the rings at the higher RPM's motorcycle engines typically run at.

 

However, it has been stated that one of the reasons why it has been taken out of the newer automotive rated oils is because it can contaminate the cat converter.

 

Our bikes have these. Would they not also be affected in the same way as those in autos?

 

Gary

[smiller]

If it states it meets SJ and SL, then it is not approved by BMW.

 

But Bob, that is a direct conflict with your earlier post where you list a number of 'HD' oils (again, there is no 'HD' oil, although sometimes people like to refer to any non-EC oil as 'HD') that you state meet BMW's requirement per the service bulletin, yet all of these are rated as SJ (or even SJ/SL.) But you also say that HD oils are acceptable ("The message here is that any of the above HD rated oils clearly meet the requirements stated by BMW"). Which is correct? And, if as you say SJ/SL oils are not recommended by BMW, and virtually all current automotive oils carry this rating, you must be saying that none of these automotive oils ('HD" or not) are acceptable (at least per a literal reading of the BMW bulletin.) That is precisely what I said and you criticized me for not reading the memo.

 

Sorry for the tone in my last post, but I really don't understand what you are recommending here. Could you clarify?

 

 

Our bikes have these. Would they not also be affected in the same way as those in autos?

 

A good point which I raised earlier. I believe that our bikes have two-way converters (no control of NOx) and most cars have three-way converters, but unless being a two-way converter somehow makes the unit immune to the zinc components then I would think that this would be a concern for BMW motorcycles if one wants to keep the cat healthy.

 

Heck, I find this all just as confusing as everyone else. But BMW's bulletin doesn't clarify anything, in fact it does exactly the opposite.

[Slartidbartfast]

As you say, 'read the service bulletin posted earlier.' I get that from the line in the service bulletin that states "The API specification SJ is not approved for use in any BMW motorcycle" (their emphasis.)

I have seen this issue thrashed out elsewhere and seem to recall that BMW later backed down, stating in a later bulletin to the effect that oils meeting API specification SJ were okay after all provided they also met API specification SH. We are now up to SM? and some oils still list all the older specifications they meet, including SH, whereas some do not. This also begs the question whether newer oil specifications are truly backwards compatible (as has been stated without supporting documentation.) If so, then BMW's later statement is nonsense because ALL newer oils must still meet SH spec. I must apologize because this is all hearsay and I can not produce any copies of documents in support.

 

Furthermore, I seem to recall that BMW NA also could not confirm where the information in the service bulletin came from. IIRC, nobody in their engineering department would own up. The conclusion was that someone with more zeal than technical knowledge initiated the original bulletin. Once again, I have to apologize because I did not save the link to where I found this information and have no "evidence" to offer.

 

Many of us WANT to believe that either buying premium (priced) oils is somehow giving our baby the very best and is worthwhile in the long run. Many others WANT to believe that $1 per quart generic oil is quite good enough. All the empirical data I have ever seen seems to point in both directions at once. Bench tests can show that (at least some) high dollar synthetic oils are superior in many ways, whereas real world testing seems to show that the differences are trivial or immeasurable in real world applications. If our chosen bikes were known for e.g. excessive cam follower wear or premature wrist pin failures, etc., then we should maybe care about possible means to minimize the risks. When most oilhead engines will run for hundreds of thousands of miles more than most owners will ever put on them, it probably doesn't matter. Use whatever argument you need to justify your own approach. I know I do

 

Incidentally, Rotella T synthetic 5W40 and non-synth 15W40 both meet SH specs according to the info at www.rotella.com (even though it does not say so on the containers). I have recently used both of these oils in my 95 GS but did not like the amount of camchain slap upon start-up and during hot idling with the 5W40.

[ShovelStrokeEd]

Since everything I own is out of warranty, I'll run whatever oil I choose and screw BMW and their picky little bulletin. In fact, the base circle on our cams and the shape and size of the lifters are not all that much different from an automotive application. The cams in the R259 have pretty mild profiles in both duration and valve lift so I doubt there is much cause for worry there.

[RFW]

[quoteA good point which I raised earlier. I believe that our bikes have two-way converters (no control of NOx) and most cars have three-way converters, but unless being a two-way converter somehow makes the unit immune to the zinc components then I would think that this would be a concern for BMW motorcycles if one wants to keep the cat healthy.

 

This is something that I find truly puzzling. The sole reason for reducing the ZDDP content in car oils (from around 0.15% in SG oils to as low as 0.05% in SL oils) was to reduce potential damage caused by phosphorous "poisoning" in the cat when oil was burned.

 

What bothers me (and apparently you and others) is that most or all BMWs have cats! I worked for a time with Europe's largest manufacturer of cats (in Germany), so I can state categorically that 2way cats are affected by phosphorous poisoning just like 3way cats are.

 

On a side issue, are you sure that BMW cats are 2 way only? The entire reason for an O2 sensor is to accurately hold the fuel-air mixture to stoichiometric in order for a 3way cat to oxydize CO and HC, and at the same time reduce the NOx. In order for these two chemically-opposite reactions to occur, the mixture has to be held within Lamda=0.995 to 1.005 (where Lamda=1.000 is a perfect stoichiometric mixture). If all that needs to be done is oxidize all the unburnt CO and HC, then the accuracy of an O2 sensor and feedback control is simply not needed; standard memory-mapped mixture control is good enough.

 

The other question is that the so-called HD oils mostly state that they meet SJ or SL specs, so how can they contain more ZDDP than ordinary car oils?

 

About 3 years ago, I had all this figured out (or so I thought), but I've forgotten some of the details since then since oil formulation is not usually a subject that comes up at the dinner table.

 

As I recall, the reasoning is that HD oils are not required to meet the reduced ZDDP spec when claiming SG/SH/SJ/SL compatibility. This is probably because they are intended to be used on engines that normally have no cat. What I do know, from talking to a Standard Oil chemist on this subject, is that their Delo400 has upwards of 0.1% ZDDP, which exceeds the maximum allowed in a normal SL oil (even though it states on the container it meets SL). Again, it appears that there is a loophole to allow it meets other qualifications for SL, but is exempt form the reduced ZDDP requirement.

 

Note that the higher ZDDP content is only a problem for the cat, if the bike is burning excessive amounts of oil.

 

In any event, regardless of what oil any of you choose, if your bike has a wet clutch, do NOT use any oil that has the energy conserving statement in the lower half of the "API Donut" on the label. This typically applies only to lower viscosity oils. For example, 5w30 oils are "energy conserving", but 20W50 oils are not.

 

The problem with "energy concerving" oils is that the organometallic molybdenum additives that reduce friction, also cause clutch slippage in we clutches.

 

Anyway, I'd have to agree that the whole thing is pretty fuzzy!

 

Bob.

[russell_bynum]

I have read that, in addition to the previously mentioned protection from high pressures on the cam lobes, ZDDP also protects the rings from scuffing due to the minimal oil available for the rings at the higher RPM's motorcycle engines typically run at.

 

However, it has been stated that one of the reasons why it has been taken out of the newer automotive rated oils is because it can contaminate the cat converter.

 

Our bikes have these. Would they not also be affected in the same way as those in autos?

 

Gary

 

Higher RPM's: Not our bikes. We don't rev much higher than a typical car.

 

Catalytic converters: Yep...seems like if it causes problems in cars, it would cause problems with us.

[Martyn]

This thread certainly has generated some interest - I turned the question around in that I contacted Castrol & asked them what they recommended for the vehicles in the family fleet; for the oil-heads they recommended GP or GP-S (synthetic)

see their blurb below:-

Castrol GPS is an advanced, semi-synthetic, 10W-40, 4-stroke engine oil which offers superior engine lubrication and protection. It maintains a tough layer of protection on the engine and transmission parts, which is important for motorcycles that are ridden hard for extended periods of time. Castrol GPS reacts to changes in engine temperature providing additional protection against thermal and mechanical breakdown.

Castrol GPS provides a thick protective oil film even at high temperature conditions. The product is formulated to provide high resistance to viscosity loss that can be caused by high oil temperatures or mechanical shear and thus provides protection to maximise the engine life.

Benefits

Extreme protection at high temperatures

Protection against thermal and mechanical breakdown

Superior high speed engine protection extending engine life

Excellent oil consumption control

Easy start from cold

Excellent gear shift quality

Excellent wet clutch performance

Protection of exhaust and catalyst systems

Applications

Castrol GPS is suitable for all makes of 4-stroke Japanese and European motorcycle engines, including all high performance, multi-cylinder, multi-valve, V-twin air or water cooled sports or race replica models.

Performance

SAE 10W40

API SG

JASO MA

I have a great deal of time for their products, & am happy with their recommendation. I'd say the same applies to the other major oil companies here in the UK & of course in North America

[smiller]

On a side issue, are you sure that BMW cats are 2 way only?

 

No, I'm not. I believed that I read that in the BMW service manual, but when I went back to check I could find no such mention. But the point is moot anyway if both types of cats are equally vulnerable to phosphorous poisoning.

 

The other question is that the so-called HD oils mostly state that they meet SJ or SL specs, so how can they contain more ZDDP than ordinary car oils?

 

About 3 years ago, I had all this figured out (or so I thought), but I've forgotten some of the details since then since oil formulation is not usually a subject that comes up at the dinner table.

 

As I recall, the reasoning is that HD oils are not required to meet the reduced ZDDP spec when claiming SG/SH/SJ/SL compatibility. This is probably because they are intended to be used on engines that normally have no cat. What I do know, from talking to a Standard Oil chemist on this subject, is that their Delo400 has upwards of 0.1% ZDDP, which exceeds the maximum allowed in a normal SL oil (even though it states on the container it meets SL). Again, it appears that there is a loophole to allow it meets other qualifications for SL, but is exempt form the reduced ZDDP requirement.

 

That is my understanding as well. Of course that does leave one with the question, what's to stop anyone from using these oils in their cat-equipped car? If lower ZDDP levels are important to the long-term health of cat converters, why are so many oils exempt from the requirement, or why do they at least not carry some sort of warning? And, as discussed, is there no danger to the cats in our bikes? Why would BMW specifically recommend oil with high levels of ZDDP?

 

In any event, regardless of what oil any of you choose, if your bike has a wet clutch, do NOT use any oil that has the energy conserving statement in the lower half of the "API Donut" on the label.

 

That is the usual advice, although I have to say that I've never seen anyone report problems with their wet clutch based on any particular oil usage but I've seen many who report that their oil choice doesn't seem to have any effect at all. Anyway, not an issue with (most) BMW bikes in any event. But I would still avoid the EC oils as they are the ones that seem to have the lower levels of ZDDP.

 

Anyway, FWIW my advice in the matter would be to toss BMW's memo as the specific recommendations just don't make any sense. Instead I'd look into the intent behind it and simply choose a non-EC oil of the correct viscosity and with one of the higher levels of ZDDP, regardless of whether it is 'motorcycle specific' and regardless of the API rating. I really don't see how you could go wrong that way, especially in a bike with a separate clutch and transmission.

[Marek]

I hope I'm not alone in this but I'm completely exhausted by this oil conversation and LOST.

I hope that some one can post a simpler answer to the question so the rest of us knows what to do.

 

Mark

[smiller]

I hope that some one can post a simpler answer to the question so the rest of us knows what to do.

Simple answer, most any oil without the EC (Energy Conserving) rating and of the proper viscosity requirement (as printed in your owner's manual) will probably be OK, and most of the oils that meet the BMW viscosity requirements are not EC oils so not much need to worry about even that. Popular oils among this group are 15W-50 Mobil 1 and the Shell Rotella and Mobil Delo 'diesel' oils. And of course any of the motorcycle-specific oils would also be excellent choices, albeit at a price premium.

 

There may be some additional concerns for motorcycles that share the engine oil with the transmission or have wet clutches, but none of that applies to the boxer models.

[Bob Palin]

I hope I'm not alone in this but I'm completely exhausted by this oil conversation and LOST.

I hope that some one can post a simpler answer to the question so the rest of us knows what to do.

 

Mark

The simplest answer is just to use the BMW brand oils, it may or may not be necessary but you won't go wrong and depending on your annual mileage the cost difference won't be significant.

[russell_bynum]

Martyn,

Castrol's answer is troubling, and indicates that they don't know how the oilheads are configured.

 

For example:

 

 

It maintains a tough layer of protection on the engine and transmission parts

Excellent gear shift quality

Excellent wet clutch performance

 

Since we don't have wet clutches, and we don't share oil between the engine and the transmission, those three statements don't make any sense. I suspect what you got, was a generic response to all "What oil should I put in my motorcycle?" questions.

 

Note: This doesn't mean that the information is incorrect...just that it is somewhat suspect.

[smiller]

Also, Castrol suggested a 10W-40 which is not the optimal viscosity range for most oilhead applications. I also think that you just got a generic response, not at all tailored to your particular bike. As Russell said, not necessarily wrong, but not necessarily the best choice either.

[RFW]

[That is the usual advice, although I have to say that I've never seen anyone report problems with their wet clutch based on any particular oil usage but I've seen many who report that their oil choice doesn't seem to have any effect at all.

 

Actually, a good friend and riding buddy of mine had this very problem with a previous bike (A Suzuki 750). He experienced annoying clutch slippage when hs used a normal "energy conserving" 5w30 cat oil, that disappeared as soon as he switched to a non enregy conseving 20w50 of the same brand.

 

Anyway, FWIW my advice in the matter would be to toss BMW's memo as the specific recommendations just don't make any sense. Instead I'd look into the intent behind it and simply choose a non-EC oil of the correct viscosity and with one of the higher levels of ZDDP, regardless of whether it is 'motorcycle specific' and regardless of the API rating. I really don't see how you could go wrong that way, especially in a bike with a separate clutch and transmission.

 

Agreed!

 

Bob.

[russell_bynum]

Actually, a good friend and riding buddy of mine had this very problem with a previous bike (A Suzuki 750). He experienced annoying clutch slippage when hs used a normal "energy conserving" 5w30 cat oil, that disappeared as soon as he switched to a non enregy conseving 20w50 of the same brand.

 

I've read several reports of this type of thing on the sportbike boards.

[smiller]

Actually, a good friend and riding buddy of mine had this very problem with a previous bike (A Suzuki 750). He experienced annoying clutch slippage when hs used a normal "energy conserving" 5w30 cat oil, that disappeared as soon as he switched to a non enregy conseving 20w50 of the same brand.

 

I've read several reports of this type of thing on the sportbike boards.

Well real-world experience is what counts I guess. But of course the difference could be more related to the change in oil viscosity from 5W30 to 20W50 than whether the oil is EC or not.

[Slartidbartfast]

The simplest answer is just to use the BMW brand oils, it may or may not be necessary but you won't go wrong and depending on your annual mileage the cost difference won't be significant.

The cost difference for two or three oil changes a year will add up to the price of a tire. That may not be significant to some ...

[Slartidbartfast]

Also, Castrol suggested a 10W-40 which is not the optimal viscosity range for most oilhead applications. I also think that you just got a generic response, not at all tailored to your particular bike. As Russell said, not necessarily wrong, but not necessarily the best choice either.

The response from Castrol was a marketing response, not a technical one.

 

Assume that an oil company has actually produced a motorcycle-specific oil that really has some technical advantage for motorcycles (i.e. it was developed by people wearing lab coats and/or overalls, not suits and ties.) If this hypothetical oil is designed for motorcycles with a wet clutch then it does none of the rest of us any good at all. If the oil is formulated for the supposed unique properties of an air-cooled engine, then surely it would be ideally suited for and marketed as lawnmower oil too. Why do Kohler or Briggs & Stratton not recommend $8/qt. synthetic motorcycle oil for their engines? Would it be wasted on water-cooled engines?

 

How about an oil specially for vehicles with an integrated transmission? Old British front-wheel drive cars (and others?) did not require special oil, nor have oil manufacturers ever tried to sell anything specific to that application.

 

The idea that there is some lubrication engineering requirement unique to V-twin engines is the most laughable of all. Even if it were true, that oil would do no good for boxer twins or in-line fours so why recommend it for those applications too?

 

Does motorcycle oil use a better quality base stock than auto oil or HD (diesel) oil? - Almost certainly not.

 

Does motorcycle oil contain an additive package that might provide unique benefits to a wet clutch, air cooled engine or integrated transmission? - Possibly! - How much benefit and at what trade-offs (if any) against other oil properties? - Who knows!

 

The oil producers certainly aren't telling anyone the answers to the above, even in response to numerous requests - I wonder why?

 

Motorcycle oil is a boutique product in the same way that every seller of shampoo claims some unique combination of properties but at the end of the day, they all clean your hair about the same, regardless of the price per bottle.

[ShovelStrokeEd]

Where are you buying your tires? Or for that matter, your oil?

 

Regular dino oil is around $2.00 per quart, 4 quarts, 3 changs/year $24.00.

Super slippry xtra fantastic stuff is about $8.00, same factors = $66.00.

 

My 3rd grad 'rithmatic tells me thats about a $42.00 difference. That's one cheap ass tire. Not to mention that with the super oils, you can extend your change interval by an easy 50% if you wish. So instead of 3 changes you only have to do 2.

 

I ride over 40K miles per year with 4K or more a month not an unusual usage. That's an oil change every 6 weeks or so if I run the BMW recommended intervals. I don't, I have extended to 9K mile service intervals and use Mobil 1 Extended Life products exclusively. BTW, in terms of wear, my 1100S has not required a valve adjustment since the last service at 24K. It now has 48K on it. I have checked the clearance but it has not needed and adjustment. Nor have the throttle bodies required anything like a synch. I did do a slight touch up on the idle at the 39K point but that's it.

 

So, either BMW has taken a page from this forum and decided to become all anal over a few percentage points of magic goop, or my bike is wearing out the cam lobes at the exact rate the valve seats are subsiding. Unlikely at best.

[russell_bynum]

BTW, in terms of wear, my 1100S has not required a valve adjustment since the last service at 24K. It now has 48K on it. I have checked the clearance but it has not needed and adjustment. Nor have the throttle bodies required anything like a synch. I did do a slight touch up on the idle at the 39K point but that's it.

 

My experience has been similar. I'm at 78K on my RT and have been using Mobil 1 15w50 synthetic since the 18K service, with changes every 6K. My valves haven't moved in ages. I think the 36K was the last time I had to touch them...but it might have been the 42K...I can't remember.

 

I haven't personally done an oil analysis, but you would certainly think that if this oil was not adequate and was causing excessive wear (particularly to the camshaft, as Mitch hypothesized) that my valves would need adjustment, but they never do.

[ShovelStrokeEd]

Oops, told you it was 3rd grade 'rithmatic.

 

4*8*3=96 not 66 so the difference is 72 bucks not 42. Still dirt cheap unless you are using Chen Sings or the like on an RT, in which case, oil change interval is the least of your worries.

[Marek]

OK - that's what I have been waiting for - I also have been using M1 15W50 Extended performance and change at about 6000 or less intervals and now my mind is at ease.

I'm not going to read this oil post anymore.

 

Mark

[BUSTED]

On my 96 RT I checked the valve clearances 12 times in 78,000 miles. I adjusted 1 intake valve that was a "thousandth off" in all that time. I haven't touched a valve other to check it in the last 40K on this RT. Both bikes switched to Mobil 1 at the first service.

[Slartidbartfast]

Okay, throw in a non-BMW filter and you're still not quite saving $80 - I will concede that is not quite enough for a tire - But it's still a decent chunk (depending on the depth of your pockets). Although I further concede that when you are running a BMW, $80 is chump change and cheap peace of mind, I still think it is probably an unecessary expenditure.

 

I want to believe (in the M/C oil fairy)... I really do... I just can't make myself do it.

[Bob Palin]

Okay, throw in a non-BMW filter and you're still not quite saving $80 - I will concede that is not quite enough for a tire - But it's still a decent chunk (depending on the depth of your pockets).

I don't disagree but he asked for a simple answer. I'm actually switching from BMW synthetic to Rotella T if I ever see my RT again.

[RFW]

Well real-world experience is what counts I guess. But of course the difference could be more related to the change in oil viscosity from 5W30 to 20W50 than whether the oil is EC or not.

 

But that works the wrong way! A thicker oil ought to stay in the clutch plates longer, and promote MORE slippage, not less!

 

Bob.

[ShovelStrokeEd]

Working on some more real world experience in regards clutch slip problems.

 

I used to run my Suzuki drag bike on 2 quarts of 5W20 Torco oil. Any more oil would be turned to mayonaise by the clutch basket during the stint in the water box. Now this is hardly a normal motor nor was the clutch very standard in that it was a centrifugal clutch called a slider in the slang. Its major merit was that it was dead consistant once properly set up. The bike would run, at the time, in the mid to low 8's at just under 160 mph on a fairly light load of nitrous oxide. Times for any given night would not vary within a few hundrethes of a second depending on track temperature and air density.

 

Being pretty anal, I used to change the oil about every other outing as this clutch would send a lot of debris into the oil. Well, one day I found myself out of oil and didn't feel like a 100 mile round trip to pick up some fresh so I stopped at the local auto parts and picked up some 5W20 from Mobil 1. That night, the track temps were ideal as was air density and the bike should have run easy 8.20's, instead we were mired somewhere in the 8.70's. Only a practice session so it wasn't a big deal. Pulled the clutch next day and found all the steels blue and a nasty smell to the oil.

 

Upshot was excessive clutch slip caused by the oil. One thing to consider is that this bike weighed a little under 400 lbs and made 225 HP or so. I doubt it would be a problem on all but the most powerful of the street bikes.

[Martyn]

Martyn,

Castrol's answer is troubling, and indicates that they don't know how the oilheads are configured.

 

For example:

 

 

It maintains a tough layer of protection on the engine and transmission parts

Excellent gear shift quality

Excellent wet clutch performance

 

Since we don't have wet clutches, and we don't share oil between the engine and the transmission, those three statements don't make any sense. I suspect what you got, was a generic response to all "What oil should I put in my motorcycle?" questions.

 

Note: This doesn't mean that the information is incorrect...just that it is somewhat suspect.

 

Not quite - the above was cut & paste from their website - my dealings with Castrol over last 30 years have always been professional & their rep. calls at our workshops at least every couple of months & is always delighted to talk new applications - sometimes too enthusiastic, if you know what I mean; we are both familiar with the layout of the BMW both K-Series & oil-heads

[Martyn]

Also, Castrol suggested a 10W-40 which is not the optimal viscosity range for most oilhead applications. I also think that you just got a generic response, not at all tailored to your particular bike. As Russell said, not necessarily wrong, but not necessarily the best choice either.

Here in the UK Castrol GP & GP-S is the recommended oil - if a BMW dealer services it, that's what you get

[RCS]

Provided for your reading enjoyment..

http://www.yft.org/tex_vfr/tech/oil.htm

 

regards