Silkolene updates formula to "XP", jacks price up

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: bmwtechguy
Vote with your wallet. How much better is it than other quality synthetics?


Yep
wink.gif
Mobil 1 15W-50 is $23 for 5qt. at Walmart, there is no oil worth 3 times the amount over Mobil 1 for street bike use.
 
True, I could run M1 15W50 only 2500 miles and change it out and still be less $$ than running the $68 Silkolene for 5000......
 
Originally Posted By: LoneRanger
True, I could run M1 15W50 only 2500 miles and change it out and still be less $$ than running the $68 Silkolene for 5000......



Mobile 1 15w50 has a wear protection ranking of 111 out of 156 oils tested whereas Mobil
1 5w30 ranks 10 and you'll enjoy a 6hp gain and still meet and exceed your mileage expectations...

111
15W50 Mobil 1, API SN synthetic = 70,235 psi
zinc = 1,133 ppm
phos = 1,168 ppm
moly = 83 ppm

10. 5W30 Mobil 1, API SN synthetic = 105,875 psi
zinc = 801 ppm
phosphorus = 842 ppm
moly = 112 ppm
 
Larry,

Will you provide a warranty for his Ducati Mutistrada if he has an engine or powertrain related problem while using an xW30 oil?
 
Originally Posted By: CentAmDL650
Larry,

Will you provide a warranty for his Ducati Mutistrada if he has an engine or powertrain related problem while using an xW30 oil?


If I built the engine I'd stand behind it... Ducati built it so they will stand behind it...
in accordance with the official Ducati manual an owner may choose a 30 or 40 or 50 weight
oil depending on temp... they don't suggest problems running a 30 and neither should we...
 
Last edited:
update as in sn api rating...less phosphorus for catalyst equipped bikes..a number of mc specific bike oils have the sn rating..motul,kendall gt-1 to name a few..formula trickery to charge more for less..additive
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: moontan
update as in sn api rating...less phosphorus for catalyst equipped bikes.


Less phosphorus doesn't mean more wear... the more phos means it takes longer to be depleted so it only affects OCI not wear...

Quote 540 Rat

. If you’ve read Section 1 – Motor Oil “Wear Protection” Ranking List,
of this Blog, you know that the amount of zinc/phos, does NOT
determine an oil’s wear protection capability. Because it is
physically impossible for more zinc/phos to provide more wear
protection. Zinc/phos does NOT work that way. More zinc/phos simply
takes longer to become depleted, since there was more to begin with.
It is much like the way more gas in your tank will take longer to run
out, but more gas in your tank will NOT make more power.

But, many people incorrectly believe you need high levels of zinc/phos
for adequate wear protection in High Performance engines, simply
because they have always been told that, read that or heard that.
Amazingly, they’ve blindly accepted that notion with NO PROOF what so
ever. And unfortunately for them, that line of thinking is nothing
more than an old wives’ tale MYTH that took on a life of its own,
because it kept being repeated over and over for years and years. But,
repeating wrong folklore over and over, does NOT make it magically
become true. Engineering tests have BUSTED that old high zinc/phos myth.

Phosphorus limit set in 1993 and revised in 1996...

SH - Introduced 1993 has same engine tests as SG, but includes
phosphorus limit 0.12%, together with control of foam, volatility and
shear stability.

SJ - Introduced 1996 has the same engine tests as SG/SH, but
phosphorus limit 0.10% together with variation on volatility limits

SL - Introduced 2001, all new engine tests reflective of modern engine
designs meeting current emissions standards

SM - Introduced November 2004, improved oxidation resistance, deposit
protection and wear protection, also better low temperature
performance over the life of the oil compared to previous categories.

SN - Introduced in October 2010 for 2011 and older vehicles, designed to
provide improved high temperature deposit protection for pistons, more
stringent sludge control, and seal compatibility. API SN with Resource
Conserving matches ILSAC GF-5 by combining API SN performance with
improved fuel economy, turbocharger protection, emission control
system compatibility, and protection of engines operating on
ethanol-containing fuels up to E85.
 
I'm not going to run 5W30. I was running Mobil 1 Racing 4T 10W40 a couple yrs ago but in the summer the valve train would be pretty noisy. The bike runs really strong and quiet on the Silkolene 15W50 ester stuff, I just wish they hadn't jacked the cost.

I want to stay with a 15W50, I'll just have to find a different one.
 
my point was not wear..phosphorus is poisonous to a catalyst and most motorcycles these days have such emissions equipment..sn:emission control system compatibility
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: moontan
my point was not wear..phosphorus is poisonous to a catalyst and most motorcycles these days have such emissions equipment..sn:emission control system compatibility


Yes, but someone else made the point. And of course I will always chose to protect my engine and transmission over my catalytic converters. And really the ZDDP only kills the catalytic converter if you have an oil burning problem. For instance my 29 year old car when 25 years before its catalytic converter died and it saw high ZDDP oil for 13 years of my ownership. Only when the valve seals utterly failed did I have to put a new one on. I was burning something like a quart every 400 to 500 miles.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Robenstein
ZDDP does equate to wear protection. not just to length of protection. D


True but double the ZDDP does not double the protection... it just doubles the length of protection... a moot point since we routinely shorten the recommended OCI...

Quote Brad Penn Oil Company:

"There is such a thing as too much ZDDP. ZDDP is surface aggressive, and too much can be a
detriment. ZDDP fights for the surface, blocking other additive performance. Acids
generated due to excessive ZDDP contact will “tie-up” detergents thus encouraging
corrosive wear. ZDDP effectiveness plateaus, more does NOT translate into more protection.
Only so much is utilized. We don’t need to saturate our oil with ZDDP."

Quote 540 Rat

"And ZDDP DOES NOT build up on parts like some sort of plating
process. ZDDP simply DOES NOT work that way. ZDDP that is present in
the oil, is activated by heat and pressure, which is precisely what
the oil is subjected to during my oil testing procedure. My testing
DOES NOT discount ZDDP levels either. ZDDP is part of the additive
package, and the additive package is what contains the extreme
pressure anti-wear components. You cannot test oil film strength
without also automatically testing the ZDDP included in that oil at
the same time. Since ZDDP is an integral part of an oil’s additive
package, and the additive package is primarily what creates an oil’s
film strength, the ZDDP that is present, will be working as well as
its chemical composition allows, during any film strength testing."

In fact, incorrect choices of poor performing high zinc/phos motor
oils, is the primary reason why flat tappet wiped lobes are still a
problem, whether during break-in or after. But, choosing a high
performing motor oil from my Motor Oil Wear Protection “Ranking List”,
which is based on oil film strength load carrying capability, rather
than on the amount of zinc/phos, can make wiped lobes and complicated
break-in procedures a thing of the past.

. In addition to that, not only are high levels of zinc/phos no
guarantee of providing sufficient wear protection, but too much
zinc/phos can actually DAMAGE your engine. Oil industry testing has
found that motor oils with more than 1,400 ppm ZDDP, INCREASED
long-term wear. And it was also found that motor oils with more than
2,000 ppm ZDDP started attacking the grain boundaries in the iron,
resulting in camshaft spalling. The ZDDP value is the average of the
zinc and phosphorus values, rounded to the next lowest 100 ppm
increment.
 
Everything is bad in too much quantity. And I can assure you that the 2,000ppm threshold for damage is not correct. Look at the VOA of the Pennzoil GT racing oil and you will see they have it around 2,500ppm and those high stressed engines I have ran see about zilch for wear on it in regards to solid mechanical lifers and cam, bottom end, and even the cylinder bores. One rebore in 20 seasons, never a blow up, and only one cam change (that was due to a cylinder head upgrade needing more cam). Crank is still standard.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Robenstein
And I can assure you that the 2,000ppm threshold for damage is not correct.


You need to assure the author 540 Rat not me... he is the Mechanical Engineer

U.S. Patent Holder (Mechanical device designed for Military Jet Aircraft)

Member SAE (Society of Automotive Engineers)

Member ASME (American Society of Mechanical Engineers)

Lifelong Gear Head, Mechanic, Hotrodder, Drag Racer, and Engine Builder

https://540ratblog.wordpress.com/2013/06/20/motor-oil-wear-test-ranking/
 
Last edited:
Nice deflection.

I am sure the people formulating and blending over at SOPUS have similar professional credentials. I am just saying there are VOA's of that oil that show anywear between 2,000 and 2,500 ppm of ZDDP(Blackstone, which tends to have a bit of variation at times) and no one is blowing engines or experiencing premature wear because of it.

The guy that builds my engines with me and turned me onto the oil was a two time drag racing AHRA record holder, he knows a bit about engines too.
wink.gif
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Robenstein
no one is blowing engines or experiencing premature wear because of it.


No one is blowing engines or experiencing premature wear on their prized motorcycles running
the recommended 30 weight with the lower ZDDP levels of 1993 and 1996 either...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top