600km on an F4i, and you live in Switzerland's beautiful surroundings?
That should be a day for you, not a year
That should be a day for you, not a year
JASO MA-2
- Thread starter Pako
- Start date
- Status
Yep. Luck of time
thanks for the link Quattro Pete, i had seen table 2.1 from Amsoil touting their top clutch friction performance. looking at the static friction i see a lower value for the MA scale vs MA2 but the upper value is the same + the word and in between rather than from to confuses me, are these two different specs or a minimum + max value. thank you as i continue to learn
Originally Posted By: Doog
Originally Posted By: Pako
I am seeing MA-2 on oil labels. I am familiar with MA, But just what is MA-2?
thank you
It is the sequel to Jaso MA
MA2
The Reckoning (Coming this Christmas to a theater near you)
Originally Posted By: Pako
I am seeing MA-2 on oil labels. I am familiar with MA, But just what is MA-2?
thank you
It is the sequel to Jaso MA
MA2
The Reckoning (Coming this Christmas to a theater near you)
MA2.... a reason for BMW owners to argue about oil selection. But, but, It can't have moly
Originally Posted By: vronline
You guys realize this is a six year old topic?
Too funny, thanks for making my day. MA2 standard actually established in 2006.
For the one or two who might actually want to find out: http://www.jalos.or.jp/onfile/pdf/4T_EV0604.pdf
You guys realize this is a six year old topic?
Too funny, thanks for making my day. MA2 standard actually established in 2006.
For the one or two who might actually want to find out: http://www.jalos.or.jp/onfile/pdf/4T_EV0604.pdf
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: JonfromCB
The meat of MA2 is providing the most efficient clutch friction during starting, accelerating and sustained clutch engagement, AND reduced emissions via less oil additive emissions and longer catalytic life.
Not sure whether clutch slippage was an issue with older MA1 or MA rated oil... I've never had a problem running MC-specific, HDEO or PCMO non-EC 40W and higher. I thought I read an article stating it was so oil manufacturers could make single oil meeting both the latest PCMO and JASO specs. Likely tied with the move to have emission control devices on more and more motorcycles.
The meat of MA2 is providing the most efficient clutch friction during starting, accelerating and sustained clutch engagement, AND reduced emissions via less oil additive emissions and longer catalytic life.
Not sure whether clutch slippage was an issue with older MA1 or MA rated oil... I've never had a problem running MC-specific, HDEO or PCMO non-EC 40W and higher. I thought I read an article stating it was so oil manufacturers could make single oil meeting both the latest PCMO and JASO specs. Likely tied with the move to have emission control devices on more and more motorcycles.
Originally Posted By: bmwpowere36m3
Originally Posted By: JonfromCB
The meat of MA2 is providing the most efficient clutch friction during starting, accelerating and sustained clutch engagement, AND reduced emissions via less oil additive emissions and longer catalytic life.
Not sure whether clutch slippage was an issue with older MA1 or MA rated oil... I've never had a problem running MC-specific, HDEO or PCMO non-EC 40W and higher. I thought I read an article stating it was so oil manufacturers could make single oil meeting both the latest PCMO and JASO specs. Likely tied with the move to have emission control devices on more and more motorcycles.
The reason as I have always understood it was that when there was just MA and MB, oil manufacturers and motorcycle OEMs wanted a way to further distinguish "high" friction vs "low" friction oils that were suitable for wet clutches.
The big push came from the motorcycle manufacturers though because they didn't want complaints from customers of slipping clutches so they require the use of the oils that provide the highest friction in the clutch. There are also OEMs that don't and were happy with the MA or MA1 designations. So some manufacturers wanted the oil to limit clutch slip and others wanted it to limit clutch grab. That has at least been my understanding of why the difference was introduced.
Originally Posted By: JonfromCB
The meat of MA2 is providing the most efficient clutch friction during starting, accelerating and sustained clutch engagement, AND reduced emissions via less oil additive emissions and longer catalytic life.
Not sure whether clutch slippage was an issue with older MA1 or MA rated oil... I've never had a problem running MC-specific, HDEO or PCMO non-EC 40W and higher. I thought I read an article stating it was so oil manufacturers could make single oil meeting both the latest PCMO and JASO specs. Likely tied with the move to have emission control devices on more and more motorcycles.
The reason as I have always understood it was that when there was just MA and MB, oil manufacturers and motorcycle OEMs wanted a way to further distinguish "high" friction vs "low" friction oils that were suitable for wet clutches.
The big push came from the motorcycle manufacturers though because they didn't want complaints from customers of slipping clutches so they require the use of the oils that provide the highest friction in the clutch. There are also OEMs that don't and were happy with the MA or MA1 designations. So some manufacturers wanted the oil to limit clutch slip and others wanted it to limit clutch grab. That has at least been my understanding of why the difference was introduced.
BMWPOWERE36M3,Exactly! At least one person gets it. It's not about clutch slippage of MA spec clutch machines and/or separate sump clutches, or formulating new or better oil for pre MA2 spec machines. Read the last sentence of your post and the last 11 words of mine. It's about Emissions and forthcoming fuel efficiency standards for motorcycles....Euro 3 fully implemented this year with 4 and 5 to follow....hence shared sumps, new lighter clutch materials and design, mechanical noise reductions, road/tire noise and exhaust noise reductions. Full On-board exhaust management computers by 2020 model year in EU.
MA2 goes hand-in-hand with the new emissions and mechanical developments occurring in order to those new requirements.
Look for increasing use of lower viscosity oils in new bikes over the next couple of years (Post 2013 BMW boxers spec' a 5w40 for the first time ever), as mechanical changes are made to increase power, lower emissions and increase mileage.
MA2 goes hand-in-hand with the new emissions and mechanical developments occurring in order to those new requirements.
Look for increasing use of lower viscosity oils in new bikes over the next couple of years (Post 2013 BMW boxers spec' a 5w40 for the first time ever), as mechanical changes are made to increase power, lower emissions and increase mileage.
Last edited:
MotoTribologist, If you understood the emissions and mileage laws enacted over a decade ago and what Japanese and European manufacturers have been doing to meet those requirements you would better understand MA2 was developed to meet the requirements of these new machines that started "hitting" the market in the past three years. Recommend reading the JASO implementation document linked in my previous post for starters.
Lol, once again, all this stuff is over ten years old.
Lol, once again, all this stuff is over ten years old.
Originally Posted By: JonfromCB
Lol, once again, all this stuff is over ten years old.
That's exactly why I don't get this argument that MA2 is emission related. The new T903:2016 spec still hasn't changed the phos limit or the volatility since it was first introduced in 2006. If constantly reducing emissions were their primary concern wouldn't more emmission related properties be addressed in each iteration?
In the same train of thought, they have changed the clutch friction specification with every update to the specification since JASO was introduced.
Perhaps I'm missing something though.
Lol, once again, all this stuff is over ten years old.
That's exactly why I don't get this argument that MA2 is emission related. The new T903:2016 spec still hasn't changed the phos limit or the volatility since it was first introduced in 2006. If constantly reducing emissions were their primary concern wouldn't more emmission related properties be addressed in each iteration?
In the same train of thought, they have changed the clutch friction specification with every update to the specification since JASO was introduced.
Perhaps I'm missing something though.
Emissions and MILEAGE standards...not just emissions. It's pretty clear the larger difference between MA and MA2 is optimal Euro 3 spec wet clutch friction during three distinct operational functions...or in plain language, increased fuel efficiency via increased clutch efficiency.
Not to be flippant, but which came first, the chicken or the egg?..My point was/is the oil requirements were established to meet the mechanical requirements....not the other way around. Think/learn about how Euro motorcycle standards 3,4 and 5 are "driving" huge mechanical changes for all manufacturers...including American manufacturers that are scrambling to keep some models in the European market and are having to drop some models from European sales for 2017. The mechanical changes were driven by emission and MILEAGE standards enacted over a decade ago. Not hard to understand knowing that (for example) the Euro motorcycle emission standards being fully implemented this year were established over a decade ago and being negotiated and worked out for quite some time before that. To a larger extent than most realize, those standards are not independently government established and imposed without lot's of negotiation and even to some extent manufacturers full consent and prior knowledge of how they are going to do it...including knowledge of how much more efficiency and less pollutants they need to get from "lubrication" to meet the standards. JASO translates those requirements into measurable standards for oil makers and consumers...and as you can see, MA2 requirements were established 8 or more years before anyone in our country even seemed to care what MA2 was. Hence my humor about this discussion being 10 years old. Sorry for being so parochial.
Not to be flippant, but which came first, the chicken or the egg?..My point was/is the oil requirements were established to meet the mechanical requirements....not the other way around. Think/learn about how Euro motorcycle standards 3,4 and 5 are "driving" huge mechanical changes for all manufacturers...including American manufacturers that are scrambling to keep some models in the European market and are having to drop some models from European sales for 2017. The mechanical changes were driven by emission and MILEAGE standards enacted over a decade ago. Not hard to understand knowing that (for example) the Euro motorcycle emission standards being fully implemented this year were established over a decade ago and being negotiated and worked out for quite some time before that. To a larger extent than most realize, those standards are not independently government established and imposed without lot's of negotiation and even to some extent manufacturers full consent and prior knowledge of how they are going to do it...including knowledge of how much more efficiency and less pollutants they need to get from "lubrication" to meet the standards. JASO translates those requirements into measurable standards for oil makers and consumers...and as you can see, MA2 requirements were established 8 or more years before anyone in our country even seemed to care what MA2 was. Hence my humor about this discussion being 10 years old. Sorry for being so parochial.
Last edited:
- Status
