It's my understanding that all the Mobil 1 oil have been reformulated with an SL API rating as well as going to the SuperSynthetic formula. I understand the SuperSynthetic is much better. However, with the changes made concerning the new SL API rating, the Phosphorus and Zinc levels have supposedly been lowered in the 15W-50 making it less desirable for motorcycle use. I would really like to run this oil but am still concerned since my bike sees WOT nearly everytime I ride it. There is a lot of debate in the motorcycle forum I frequent about the use of this specific oil and weight. Most agree it is safe to use. Most also agree that it does not have moly in it. My concern that the recent changes negate their opinions which may now be outdated. Someone please clear this up for me.
M1 15W-50 formulation changes???
- Thread starter blsnelling
- Start date
- Status
I run this oil in my '99 Honda Magna, a 750cc quad cam V-4 with a wet clutch and shared housing for transmission & engine.
It is not an energy conserving oil, so it should be OK for the wet clutch. I'm not worried about the ZDDP levels. My understanding is that ZDDP is a last defense against metal-metal contact that won't be needed as long as the oil maintains its viscosity. Besides, in one oil analysis I read (which was before the supersyn formulation), the Mobil 1 oils were already in the 1000-1100 ppm range for ZDDP which is almost low enough for API SL, and there was little or no difference between Mobil 1's motorcycle blends and the "red cap". At that time it seemed their motorcycle oils were simply repackaged and repriced versions of the car oil. I'd be curious to see whether that is still true now. Perhaps with "red cap" going API SL, they have retained the old, higher ZDDP levels in their motorcycle oils.
I emailed Mobil about this a while ago. Their response was that the SL version of the car 15W50 has ingredients that could cause problems with wet clutches. However a retired petroleum engineer who posts on one of the VFR forums claims he has been assured by someone inside Mobil that the newest 15W50 is still OK.
As far as ZDDP, virgin oil analysis posted on this site indicate the levels are still high enough.
My personal opinion is that now that they have a motorcycle specific oil, Mobil is 'playing it safe' in their recommendations.
It is very unlikely that any permanent harm could occure from using it. If there is any indication of clutch slippage, changing to a different oil should return things to normal in a short while.
As far as ZDDP, virgin oil analysis posted on this site indicate the levels are still high enough.
My personal opinion is that now that they have a motorcycle specific oil, Mobil is 'playing it safe' in their recommendations.
It is very unlikely that any permanent harm could occure from using it. If there is any indication of clutch slippage, changing to a different oil should return things to normal in a short while.
The 15w-50 and 20w-50 grades aren't subject to API limits on phosphorus/zinc, so the 15w-50 supersyn may indeed have the higher levels it did previously. It does have about 80 ppm of moly, although I don't think that's a concern either ....
TooSlick
TooSlick
Energy conserving means it provides a certain (small) percentage MPG increase in a test engine over the same engine running a specific reference oil. 10w30 and up are required to have .8% average(of 2 tests) improvement over specific reference oil (I believe is a 15w40). 0w30 and 5w30, the improvement req is avg 1.5%. (These tests have no cold start regimin, for those that refuse to believe that 0w and 5w oils shear and the cold ops are where they make the mpg improvement claim.
)
So you can see why a xw50 will not be energy conserving no matter how many additives are in it, by virtue of hydraulic drag, unless it shears like crazy then I suppose they could make one that is EC. Witness M1 0w40.
So you can see why a xw50 will not be energy conserving no matter how many additives are in it, by virtue of hydraulic drag, unless it shears like crazy then I suppose they could make one that is EC. Witness M1 0w40.
Here is some info I dug up.
I tell you what Google is a man's best friend.
I tell you what Google is a man's best friend.
in my all my motorcycle that i have had. I use the Mobil1 10w30 and never had a clutch slip on me. these bikes were (1978-KZ650SR), (1996-HONDA 300EX) (1992-HONDA NH750) and recently with the use of AMSOIL High Performance 10w40 oil "not motorcycle oil" i have in my (2002-Kaw Vn800B) I drive these scooters pretty hard too. also I put this same oil in my g/f 2003 honda rebel 250cc. With the use of the amoil mentioned i put 3450 miles on so far. I guess i must be lucky or something?
It's not about being lucky. I don't think that it's a definate thing that these friction modifiers will harm your clutch, I'm guessing that the CAN, but not that it WILL
Also the Regular Amsoil 10w40 is the exact formulation as the motorcycle stuff. Just a different label. The Amsoil 10w40 has been friction modifier free for some time now.
I'm not taking any chances with my Triumph ST. If I were not using Amsoil I probably would choose the Mobil 1 Motorcycle stuff.
[ July 03, 2003, 03:01 PM: Message edited by: msparks ]
Actually,
The Honda 750CC Magna is a pretty high HP/torque bike. Thing makes over 85HP stock!
Tim
Also note that the wet clutch operation usually does not present a problem unless the bike has a huge power/torque ratio that would put a large strain on the clutch causing it to heat up. I would suspect that your magna is a pretty low power/torque bike. Whereas an 1800 would probably have over twice the Hp/torque of your bike, and it could present a problem using a automotive spec'd synthetic. [/QB][/QUOTE]
The Honda 750CC Magna is a pretty high HP/torque bike. Thing makes over 85HP stock!
Tim
Also note that the wet clutch operation usually does not present a problem unless the bike has a huge power/torque ratio that would put a large strain on the clutch causing it to heat up. I would suspect that your magna is a pretty low power/torque bike. Whereas an 1800 would probably have over twice the Hp/torque of your bike, and it could present a problem using a automotive spec'd synthetic. [/QB][/QUOTE]
Maybe I wasn't clear. I was referring to ZDDP as a completely independent issue from friction modifiers. For a motorcycle engine, ZDDP = good, friction modifiers = bad.
My question had nothing to do with ZDDP. I was wondering why Honda would disrecommend energy conserving oils, if there is no direct link between the "energy conserving" designation and any particular additive that might harm the bike.
Someone else posted the answer straight from Honda -- thanks!
So if the "energy conserving" designation has no direct relationship to additive packages, why would Honda specifically disrecommend the use of energy conserving oils?quote:
Originally posted by Jason Troxell:
Energy conserving means it provides a certain (small) percentage MPG increase in a test engine over the same engine running a specific reference oil. 10w30 and up are required to have .8% average(of 2 tests) improvement over specific reference oil (I believe is a 15w40). 0w30 and 5w30, the improvement req is avg 1.5%. (These tests have no cold start regimin, for those that refuse to believe that 0w and 5w oils shear and the cold ops are where they make the mpg improvement claim.)
So you can see why a xw50 will not be energy conserving no matter how many additives are in it, by virtue of hydraulic drag, unless it shears like crazy then I suppose they could make one that is EC. Witness M1 0w40.
I thought Honda disrecommended these oils because they reduce the life of the wet clutch. If so, that implies that the "energy conserving" designation implies the existence of additives that can make a wet clutch slip.
[ July 03, 2003, 12:05 PM: Message edited by: MRC01 ]
I don't know. It doesn't make sense to me. Most bikes recommend 10w40-20w50. These viscosities will never be EC certified no matter what additives are present. Most PCMO oils (in any vis)have FMs nowadays. And there is no spec for additives in the EC certification, so not sure why they say that. I guess they may say it because it is very hard to meet EC without them. But most/all EC oils are not in a viscosity recommended for a bike anyway, that's also why it seems pointless to me for them to even bother saying that.
And I think the discussion is moot with modern oils. Satterfi uses Red Line 10w40 in a Honda bike... (with great results) Red Line says it is ok for bikes. They have mucho FMs...
I guess I would just check with the oil mfr before I made a choice.
And I think the discussion is moot with modern oils. Satterfi uses Red Line 10w40 in a Honda bike... (with great results) Red Line says it is ok for bikes. They have mucho FMs...
I guess I would just check with the oil mfr before I made a choice.
Energy conserving has nothing to do with weather the oil contains a friction modifier that will harm the wet clutch of the bike. ZDDP is not the friction modifier that is the problem. Amsoil, Golden Spectro, and virtually all other MC specific lubes as well as diesel lubes have copious amounts of ZDDP.
The ZDDP reduction is for engines that are supposed to have catylic conveters, which when the ph is burn causes harm to the catylist.
Also note that the wet clutch operation usually does not present a problem unless the bike has a huge power/torque ratio that would put a large strain on the clutch causing it to heat up. I would suspect that your magna is a pretty low power/torque bike. Whereas an 1800 would probably have over twice the Hp/torque of your bike, and it could present a problem using a automotive spec'd synthetic.
- Status