Oils that don't shear out of grade, shared sump

[BusyLittleShop]

Originally Posted By: Robenstein

I trust the good people over there in Hinkley England to tell me the thinnest oil I can safely run at all temperatures.


The thinnest oil you can safely run is 10w40 for 6,000 mile interval... trusting the good
people over there in Hinkley England means that during that interval a 40 will naturally
shear 3 cSt and begin flowing like a 30... this known shearing is not going to cause the
low oil pressure light to STAY ON... if a momentary flickering low oil pressure light is
cause for alarm then you'll most likely see Triumph shorten the oil change interval...

Quote Triumph Speedmaster manual

"Triumph high performance engines are
designed to use semi or fully synthetic
10W/40 or 15W/50 motorcycle engine oil
which meets specification API SH or higher
(i.e. SJ, SK or SL) AND JASO MA."


"If the engine oil pressure is too low, the low
oil pressure warning light will illuminate. If
this warning light stays on when the
engine is running, stop the engine
immediately and investigate the cause.
Running the engine with low oil pressure
will cause engine damage."

 

[Shannow]

Originally Posted By: BusyLittleShop
Originally Posted By: Robenstein


If it was all about flow we would be all using even thinner oils that we do today.

It is all about flow because our oil was graded only by cSt flow
tester and that flow is not a measurement of thick and thin... so we
are debating oil in terms of cSt which means a quantity of oil was
heated to a standard temp and the rate of flow was recorded by a stop
watch... this flow-rate is governed by resistance of the oil flowing
under gravity through the capillary tube, this test actually measures
an oil’s kinematic viscosity. The viscosity is typically reported in
centistokes (cSt), and is calculated from the time it takes oil to
flow from the starting point to the stopping point using a calibration
constant supplied for each tube... so a drop of one grade which is
only a 3 cSt difference in flow is nothing to fear...


Ummm....hogwash...cst is all about thick and thin...particularly HTHS, which in a multigrade has nothing to do with your 10cst, and certainly nothing to do with capilaries.

Originally Posted By: BusyLittleShop
Originally Posted By: sunruh

7) think about who pays the bills on what is spinning between your ankles. ie is it you and that crank is spinning 13,000 rpm?



If your crank is spinning 13,00rpms then a 30w flows more oil at higher rpms which flows
more oil between the critical bearings which carries away more heat and you're not
wasting HP just pumping oil through the blow off valve...

0w30 psi
1000 10
2000 20
3000 30
4000 40
5000 50
6000 60
7000 70
8000 80
9000 90
10000 99
11000 99 blow off by the pressure relief valve... perfect

0w40
1000 12
2000 24
3000 36
4000 48
5000 72
6000 84
7000 96
8000 99 blow off by the pressure relief valve... too early
9000 99
10000 99
11000 99

15W50 psi
1000 15
2000 30
3000 45
4000 60
5000 75
6000 90
7000 99 blow off by the pressure relief valve... way to early
8000 99
9000 99
10000 99
11000 99



In your scenarios, which is "flowing" more at 6,999 RPM to lubricate and "carry away heat" ?

 

[alarmguy]

As a general rule oils with the highest "low" number will shear less then the ones with the low numbers.
5/40 will shear faster then 10/40, 10/40 will shear faster then 15/40, 15/40 will shear faster then 20/40 and 20/50 oils.
Its all really simple, for the most part, the low number oils use thinner base oil and more polymer viscosity agents to make the oil act like the higher number when hot.
Its all in the UOAs right in these forums be careful when reading them that you are comparing them against the same make bike.

Ps, I dont subscribe to the theory that thin oils and oil flow is better, not on a motorcycle that gets rode above temps of 50 degrees or so, race engines get rebuilt, not made to last over a 1000 (or maybe a 100) miles, never mind over a 100,000 we would like to get.
The thinner the oil film, the more wear. Just go and compare oils in Amsoils own "White Papers" look at the 10/40 oils in the 4 ball test and look at the 20/50 of the same exact oils, you will notice slightly more wear in those tests. Does it really matter? na maybe not most of us will never have a oil realted failure if that is all we are concerned with.
Anyway .. Im getting off the subject .. ha ha

 

[BusyLittleShop]

Originally Posted By: Shannow


Ummm....hogwash...cst is all about thick and thin...particularly HTHS, which in a multigrade has nothing to do with your 10cst, and certainly nothing to do with capilaries.



In case the OP wonders what Shannow is concerned about its an oils HTHS value which
stands for High Temp / High Strength and if we compare the actual HTHS numbers between
the grades there's only a difference of about 1 cSt... thats not 1 cSt thicker or
thinner... 1 cSt is still a measurement of an oils gravity flow timed by a stop watch
at an prescribe temperature... This difference is measurable but no cause for alarm...

A sample of HTHS numbers in cSt (gravity feed numbers) between the grades at 302F (150ºC)...

20, 2.7 cSt
30, 3.1 cSt
40, 3.7 cSt
50, 4.6 cSt

 

[Shannow]

"only" 1cst, or 3cst being 30 % of the HTHS/KV100 repsectively...

It has a difference...and it IS thicker/thinner, claiming otherwise is inane. It flows more/less in your capilarry precisely because it IS thicker/thinner.

And HTHS is not measured by flow/gravity...no planet would provide the gravity sufficient to induce shear rates of 10^6.

And you need to answer which oil flows more at 6,999 RPM.

Note also, that flow <> lubrication.

 

[BusyLittleShop]

Originally Posted By: alarmguy
As a general rule oils with the highest "low" number will shear less then the ones with the low numbers.
5/40 will shear faster then 10/40, 10/40 will shear faster then 15/40, 15/40 will shear faster then 20/40 and 20/50 oils.
Its all really simple, for the most part, the low number oils use thinner base oil and more polymer viscosity agents to make the oil act like the higher number when hot.
Its all in the UOAs right in these forums be careful when reading them that you are comparing them against the same make bike




Technical speaking the first number (the "5" in 5w40) is only a
relative number which basically indicates how easily it will allow an
engine to "turn over" at low temperatures. It is NOT a viscosity
reference. In other words, a 5w40 is NOT a 5 weight oil in cold
temperatures and a 40 weight oil in warm temperatures... rather a 5W40 actual viscosity
is 76 cSt at 104F (40C) and 13.8 cSt at 212F
(100C) that means the oil was heated to 100 degrees C and it flowed
within a certain kinematic viscosity which is then classified with in
a certain SAE grade like the "40" in 5w40).

API ranks the first number 5 and the letter W from the slowest to the
fastest on its ability to lube your engine during critical start up

20w

15W

10W

5W

0W

If you wish to employ the latest in oil technology then you want an one with an API
rank of 0W...

 

[Shannow]

Originally Posted By: BusyLittleShop
Originally Posted By: alarmguy
As a general rule oils with the highest "low" number will shear less then the ones with the low numbers.
5/40 will shear faster then 10/40, 10/40 will shear faster then 15/40, 15/40 will shear faster then 20/40 and 20/50 oils.
Its all really simple, for the most part, the low number oils use thinner base oil and more polymer viscosity agents to make the oil act like the higher number when hot.
Its all in the UOAs right in these forums be careful when reading them that you are comparing them against the same make bike




Technical speaking the first number (the "5" in 5w40) is only a
relative number which basically indicates how easily it will allow an
engine to "turn over" at low temperatures. It is NOT a viscosity
reference. In other words, a 5w40 is NOT a 5 weight oil in cold
temperatures and a 40 weight oil in warm temperatures... rather a 5W40 actual viscosity
is 76 cSt at 104F (40C) and 13.8 cSt at 212F
(100C) that means the oil was heated to 100 degrees C and it flowed
within a certain kinematic viscosity which is then classified with in
a certain SAE grade like the "40" in 5w40).

API ranks the first number 5 and the letter W from the slowest to the
fastest on its ability to lube your engine during critical start up

20w

15W

10W

5W

0W

If you wish to employ the latest in oil technology then you want an one with an API
rank of 0W...


'cept the 0W30 will be a markedly thinner basestock than an equivalent 5W30, and more VII.

The 0W30 base oil viscosity is probably 5-5.5cst, with 7-8% Viscosity Modifier to prop it up.

the 5W3- base oil viscosity is probably 6.5 (20% thicker), with 2-5-3% Viscosity Modifier.

In a high shear application, I'll take less VII to shear, and a stronger base oil to shear down to any day over "latest"....particularly if your bike isn't called on to start at -40C/F

 

[BusyLittleShop]

What Shannow brings up is base stocks and VI (Viscosity Improver)... but since the oil
companies consider both the real cSt base numbers and the real percentile of VI
proprietary we don't really know for sure... so one has to state their best learned
conjecture with a probably...

One thing is for certain... whether you choose an 5w30 or 0w30 oil both will meet and exceed
your mileage expectations...

 

[Clevy]

Originally Posted By: BusyLittleShop
Originally Posted By: Robenstein


If it was all about flow we would be all using even thinner oils that we do today.

It is all about flow because our oil was graded only by cSt flow
tester and that flow is not a measurement of thick and thin... so we
are debating oil in terms of cSt which means a quantity of oil was
heated to a standard temp and the rate of flow was recorded by a stop
watch... this flow-rate is governed by resistance of the oil flowing
under gravity through the capillary tube, this test actually measures
an oil’s kinematic viscosity. The viscosity is typically reported in
centistokes (cSt), and is calculated from the time it takes oil to
flow from the starting point to the stopping point using a calibration
constant supplied for each tube... so a drop of one grade which is
only a 3 cSt difference in flow is nothing to fear...

Visible Flow comparison among the Oil grades... you want the freest flowing Oil
recommended in your owners manual...

MOre dumb pictures like they actually mean anything.
I cannot believe you put any stock in this stuff nor can I believe the stuff you post which borders on absurdity.
Save it for the idiots who actually believe your nonsense,because we aren't buing it.
You are a disservice to any customer you have and I pity them if they listen to you.

 

[Shannow]

Originally Posted By: Spur
Correct, but we are finding that thinner oils can be used and we have been moving that direction for a while now. Certainly film strength and additives are part of the balance. But, hydrodynamic lubrication relies largely on flow.


No, not at all.

The only flow that's needed in hydrodynamics is that which makes up for bearing side leakage.

That's why a 40 has higher oil pressure than a 30, there is less side leakage, and the bearings take less make-up from the galleries...bearings needing less oil means that it "backs up" in the galleries, increasing pressure...until some of it relieves.

 

[Spur]

Originally Posted By: Shannow
Originally Posted By: Spur
Correct, but we are finding that thinner oils can be used and we have been moving that direction for a while now. Certainly film strength and additives are part of the balance. But, hydrodynamic lubrication relies largely on flow.


No, not at all.

The only flow that's needed in hydrodynamics is that which makes up for bearing side leakage.

That's why a 40 has higher oil pressure than a 30, there is less side leakage, and the bearings take less make-up from the galleries...bearings needing less oil means that it "backs up" in the galleries, increasing pressure...until some of it relieves.


I certainly agree with this,but here is a question. Assuming the film strength of the thinner oil is sufficient. Would the thinner oil not provide more cooling flow because the leakage and makeup flow would be greater.

A thinner oil would also have less parasitic drag allowing for better fuel economy, is this true.

Just trying to understand the balance between, too thick, too thin and just right. Kind of like porridge.

 

[BusyLittleShop]

Originally Posted By: Clevy


MOre dumb pictures like they actually mean anything.
I cannot believe you put any stock in this stuff nor can I believe the stuff you post which borders on absurdity.
Save it for the idiots who actually believe your nonsense,because we aren't buing it.
You are a disservice to any customer you have and I pity them if they listen to you.


I do and I do for you kids and this is the thanks I get???

 

[Shannow]

Originally Posted By: Spur
Originally Posted By: Shannow
Originally Posted By: Spur
Correct, but we are finding that thinner oils can be used and we have been moving that direction for a while now. Certainly film strength and additives are part of the balance. But, hydrodynamic lubrication relies largely on flow.


No, not at all.

The only flow that's needed in hydrodynamics is that which makes up for bearing side leakage.

That's why a 40 has higher oil pressure than a 30, there is less side leakage, and the bearings take less make-up from the galleries...bearings needing less oil means that it "backs up" in the galleries, increasing pressure...until some of it relieves.


I certainly agree with this,but here is a question. Assuming the film strength of the thinner oil is sufficient. Would the thinner oil not provide more cooling flow because the leakage and makeup flow would be greater.

A thinner oil would also have less parasitic drag allowing for better fuel economy, is this true.

Just trying to understand the balance between, too thick, too thin and just right. Kind of like porridge.


First I'd like BusyLittleShop to explain what's going on with them all at 6,999 RPM...he keeps missing that point.

In all three cases, the oil pump is not in relief, so the same volume of oil is being pumped to the engine. The bearings are using less, so things like squirters and oilers are operating at a higher pressure...and therefore flowing more (they have characteristic that is density, area of nozzle and pressure...more pressure, more squirter flow)...maybe those squirters are positioned to carry away exhaust valve/piston heat ???

As to your question, there's two "films"

There's the hydrodynamic oil film, that keeps parts separated.

There's the "film" that the one armed bandit, 504Rat, 4 ball etc. "test", which is the tenacity of an oil film after there's no hydrodynamics...held up by that proposing it as an indicator of wear.

The idea is to keep hydrodynamic if you want your gear to last.

More viscosity = more film thickness = greater parts separation, but you are perfectly correct, more parasitic drag from the lubricant.

Starting too low a viscosity, in a shear prone oil will push you closer to the point that the additives are doing the protection, which is great for getting the last 10ths out on the track, not for longevity.

I posted this link in the interesting articles last night
http://www1.eere.energy.gov/vehiclesandfuels/pdfs/hvso_2006/07_fenske.pdf

Page 9 has a table that I've not seen presented that way before, which shows the frictional MEP (essentially power) losses due to (piston) viscous drag for a variety of test viscosities, versus the MEP for asperite contact (metal to metal), and the benefits of friction modifiers...can see that an unadditised 20 would have more total friction than an unadditised 50, and how increasing additive performance gives the typical thinner/less friction loss trend that we see in practice.

(note that lowest friction is not lowest wear).

It's normally shown on a Stribeck curve, this was a way of giving the information that I think works.

I'd still like BLS to comment on what his engine is doing at 6,999RPM.

 

[Spur]

Originally Posted By: Shannow
Originally Posted By: Spur
Originally Posted By: Shannow
Originally Posted By: Spur
Correct, but we are finding that thinner oils can be used and we have been moving that direction for a while now. Certainly film strength and additives are part of the balance. But, hydrodynamic lubrication relies largely on flow.


No, not at all.

The only flow that's needed in hydrodynamics is that which makes up for bearing side leakage.

That's why a 40 has higher oil pressure than a 30, there is less side leakage, and the bearings take less make-up from the galleries...bearings needing less oil means that it "backs up" in the galleries, increasing pressure...until some of it relieves.


I certainly agree with this,but here is a question. Assuming the film strength of the thinner oil is sufficient. Would the thinner oil not provide more cooling flow because the leakage and makeup flow would be greater.

A thinner oil would also have less parasitic drag allowing for better fuel economy, is this true.

Just trying to understand the balance between, too thick, too thin and just right. Kind of like porridge.


First I'd like BusyLittleShop to explain what's going on with them all at 6,999 RPM...he keeps missing that point.

In all three cases, the oil pump is not in relief, so the same volume of oil is being pumped to the engine. The bearings are using less, so things like squirters and oilers are operating at a higher pressure...and therefore flowing more (they have characteristic that is density, area of nozzle and pressure...more pressure, more squirter flow)...maybe those squirters are positioned to carry away exhaust valve/piston heat ???

As to your question, there's two "films"

There's the hydrodynamic oil film, that keeps parts separated.

There's the "film" that the one armed bandit, 504Rat, 4 ball etc. "test", which is the tenacity of an oil film after there's no hydrodynamics...held up by that proposing it as an indicator of wear.

The idea is to keep hydrodynamic if you want your gear to last.

More viscosity = more film thickness = greater parts separation, but you are perfectly correct, more parasitic drag from the lubricant.

Starting too low a viscosity, in a shear prone oil will push you closer to the point that the additives are doing the protection, which is great for getting the last 10ths out on the track, not for longevity.

I posted this link in the interesting articles last night
http://www1.eere.energy.gov/vehiclesandfuels/pdfs/hvso_2006/07_fenske.pdf

Page 9 has a table that I've not seen presented that way before, which shows the frictional MEP (essentially power) losses due to (piston) viscous drag for a variety of test viscosities, versus the MEP for asperite contact (metal to metal), and the benefits of friction modifiers...can see that an unadditised 20 would have more total friction than an unadditised 50, and how increasing additive performance gives the typical thinner/less friction loss trend that we see in practice.

(note that lowest friction is not lowest wear).

It's normally shown on a Stribeck curve, this was a way of giving the information that I think works.

I'd still like BLS to comment on what his engine is doing at 6,999RPM.


Thanks. I will make no judgements regarding BLS

 

[Spur]

Shannow,

Thanks for the link, very interesting

Your thoughts

An air cooled shared sump v-twin is speced for a 20W-40 semi-synthetic in all conditions. I understand the reasoning behind the use of less VII to reduce shearing. Would you see any problem with running a 10w-40 synthetic or a 15w-40 HDEO.

Thanks for response

 

[BusyLittleShop]

Originally Posted By: Shannow


I'd still like BLS to comment on what his engine is doing at 6,999RPM.


Whats going on with Mr.RC45's engine at 6,999RPM??? its music to the seat of my pants... you
ought get out of your cage and start riding yourself because we are having too much fun....

 

[Shannow]

Originally Posted By: Spur
Shannow,

Thanks for the link, very interesting

Your thoughts

An air cooled shared sump v-twin is speced for a 20W-40 semi-synthetic in all conditions. I understand the reasoning behind the use of less VII to reduce shearing. Would you see any problem with running a 10w-40 synthetic or a 15w-40 HDEO.

Thanks for response


Since the 2013 SAE J300 (viscosity table) update, the 0W, 5W, and 10W 40s have to have a High Temperature High Shear of 3.5 min (used to be 2.9), versus the 15W, 20W, and 25W 40s with an HTHS of 3.8, I wouldn't have run a 5W in a high shear application (unless Delvac 1 or something with a published higher figure).

If your ambient is correct for a 10W or a 15W, I'd take either a 10W40 bike specific, or a 15W40 HDMO.

 

[alarmguy]

Originally Posted By: BusyLittleShop
Originally Posted By: alarmguy
As a general rule oils with the highest "low" number will shear less then the ones with the low numbers.
5/40 will shear faster then 10/40, 10/40 will shear faster then 15/40, 15/40 will shear faster then 20/40 and 20/50 oils.
Its all really simple, for the most part, the low number oils use thinner base oil and more polymer viscosity agents to make the oil act like the higher number when hot.
Its all in the UOAs right in these forums be careful when reading them that you are comparing them against the same make bike


However if you look at the motorcycle UOAs you will see a clear corallation that the lower 5/40 oils shear faster then 10/40 to 15/40, 20/40 to 20/50. 20/50 being the best. The reason for my answer to the OP.

Technical speaking the first number (the "5" in 5w40) is only a
relative number which basically indicates how easily it will allow an
engine to "turn over" at low temperatures. It is NOT a viscosity
reference. In other words, a 5w40 is NOT a 5 weight oil in cold
temperatures and a 40 weight oil in warm temperatures... rather a 5W40 actual viscosity
is 76 cSt at 104F (40C) and 13.8 cSt at 212F
(100C) that means the oil was heated to 100 degrees C and it flowed
within a certain kinematic viscosity which is then classified with in
a certain SAE grade like the "40" in 5w40).

API ranks the first number 5 and the letter W from the slowest to the
fastest on its ability to lube your engine during critical start up

20w

15W

10W

5W

0W

If you wish to employ the latest in oil technology then you want an one with an API
rank of 0W...

 

[alarmguy]

Originally Posted By: Shannow
Originally Posted By: BusyLittleShop
Originally Posted By: alarmguy
As a general rule oils with the highest "low" number will shear less then the ones with the low numbers.
5/40 will shear faster then 10/40, 10/40 will shear faster then 15/40, 15/40 will shear faster then 20/40 and 20/50 oils.
Its all really simple, for the most part, the low number oils use thinner base oil and more polymer viscosity agents to make the oil act like the higher number when hot.
Its all in the UOAs right in these forums be careful when reading them that you are comparing them against the same make bike




Technical speaking the first number (the "5" in 5w40) is only a
relative number which basically indicates how easily it will allow an
engine to "turn over" at low temperatures. It is NOT a viscosity
reference. In other words, a 5w40 is NOT a 5 weight oil in cold
temperatures and a 40 weight oil in warm temperatures... rather a 5W40 actual viscosity
is 76 cSt at 104F (40C) and 13.8 cSt at 212F
(100C) that means the oil was heated to 100 degrees C and it flowed
within a certain kinematic viscosity which is then classified with in
a certain SAE grade like the "40" in 5w40).

API ranks the first number 5 and the letter W from the slowest to the
fastest on its ability to lube your engine during critical start up

20w

15W

10W

5W

0W

If you wish to employ the latest in oil technology then you want an one with an API
rank of 0W...


'cept the 0W30 will be a markedly thinner basestock than an equivalent 5W30, and more VII.

The 0W30 base oil viscosity is probably 5-5.5cst, with 7-8% Viscosity Modifier to prop it up.

the 5W3- base oil viscosity is probably 6.5 (20% thicker), with 2-5-3% Viscosity Modifier.

In a high shear application, I'll take less VII to shear, and a stronger base oil to shear down to any day over "latest"....particularly if your bike isn't called on to start at -40C/F


Agree, never mind how much less shear when you get to the 15/40, 20/40 to 20/50s as the UOAs show, way more so in shared sumps.

 

[sunruh]

Originally Posted By: Shannow

I posted this link in the interesting articles last night
http://www1.eere.energy.gov/vehiclesandfuels/pdfs/hvso_2006/07_fenske.pdf

Page 9 has a table that I've not seen presented that way before, which shows the frictional MEP (essentially power) losses due to (piston) viscous drag for a variety of test viscosities, versus the MEP for asperite contact (metal to metal), and the benefits of friction modifiers...can see that an unadditised 20 would have more total friction than an unadditised 50, and how increasing additive performance gives the typical thinner/less friction loss trend that we see in practice.


and if you read all 3 bullets of page 10...let's just say you must have more than 3 brain cells to understand the ramifications of thin oil (whether from starting vis or sheared)