My new Electraglide only has 400 miles on it, but I deciding what oil to use at the 1000 mile service. I want to stick with one oil for the life of the bike. My top choises are Amsoil mc 20w50 or Harley dino. I dont like Harley's syn3 oil. Any other oils? Is the new amsoil approved for use by harley? Will it void the warrenty?
New Harley oil?
- Thread starter Bagger_Matt
- Start date
- Status
Just for shts n grns, how's the owners manual worded? I'd bet it implies only HD, while wearing HD clothes, using HD tools turned by a HD tatoo'd hand.
Some FWIW's for ya. Guys I know doing UOA's on their HD's think royal purple and mobile1 15/50 (before the V twin MC oil )put up the best numbers.
Another bud who actually rides the darn things as opposed to paddling his feet from tavern to tavern. He puts around 50k on em in a year or two! trades off for new ones every year or two. He's always run amsoil and swears by it (and he's not a dealer). I did a cam bearing on one of them and the internals looked really nice compared to some of the other stuff I've seen. was it the oil?
Some FWIW's for ya. Guys I know doing UOA's on their HD's think royal purple and mobile1 15/50 (before the V twin MC oil )put up the best numbers.
Another bud who actually rides the darn things as opposed to paddling his feet from tavern to tavern. He puts around 50k on em in a year or two! trades off for new ones every year or two. He's always run amsoil and swears by it (and he's not a dealer). I did a cam bearing on one of them and the internals looked really nice compared to some of the other stuff I've seen. was it the oil?
I live in south Texas and prefer Mobil 1 15W-50 because it runs cooler and is easy to find. Redline is also popular here. Harley oil is at the bottom of my list.
Terry has always seemed to push Redline for HD engines. I run Redline, but have never had a UOA done.
"Just for shts n grns, how's the owners manual worded? I'd bet it implies only HD, while wearing HD clothes, using HD tools turned by a HD tatoo'd hand."
"...another bud who actually rides the darn things as opposed to paddling his feet from tavern to tavern."
Wiley you're killing me! ROLMAO~!
Here's a piece I put together while anguishing over the oil issue a while back. It's got some good links and such to back up my ideas. All FWIW, of course.
I talked to a Kendall rep the other day (supposed to have been a tech but she sounded like she'd have been more at home behind the jewelry counter at Walmart than where I found her).
Nonetheless...
She said that Kendall GT-1, being an SL rated 20W50, was not compatible with Harley Davidson's recommended oils. She said that Harley specified that a particular friction modifier present in SL rated oils was not compatible with their engines.
"Moly?" I asked.
"No, not moly. There are more friction modifiers than moly out there."
"Zinc? Phosphorous?"
"Zinc and phosphorous aren't friction modifiers," she informed me.
"So what is the FM that Harley doesn't want?" I asked.
She got silent for a few seconds, seeming perturbed at my persistent questioning. "Harley Davidson doesn't mention what the FM actually is," she finally said.
"So it could be moly then, right?" I persisted.
She didn't answer, and seemed to be getting ticked. I moved the conversation in another direction.
"Is Kendall GT-1 a group I or a group II oil?"
"That's propreitary," she said.
"That means group I," I told her. "If it was group II you'd want to brag about that." I laughed. She didn't.
I thanked her for her efforts (I called it trouble) and hung up the phone.
I still can't imagine what Harley Davidson would consider to be wrong with an SL rated 20w50. It's possible they're talking down moly for the instances where the oil was going to be put in the primary, or used in a Sportster type set-up. I do think it's probably moly that Harley is cautioning against; I just think the Kendall gal didn't know for sure, and in the process of not trying to sound stupid, well, sounded stupid.
I wondered if Harley is just trying to thin down the herd of options for us so that we'll end up having to purchase their WAY over-priced "360" used to be Sunoco but Citgo got the lowest bid now oil?
Looks like what I suspected was correct.
http://mysite.wanadoo-members.co.uk/H.H._M_bulletins/M1065_oildesg.pdf
In this service bulletin, HD seems to be recommending against the use of SJ oils. According to the Kendall gal I spoke to, HD is now saying that SJ oils are okay, but SL oils are not.
If the Kendall gal is correct, and HD is recommending SJ but not SL, something has changed since the linked tech bulletin shown above.
Here is a page with three links near the bottom, where you can read an article which appeared a few years ago in American Iron magazine: http://www.pecuniary.com/newsletters/americaniron.html The third part of the article is Harley Davidson's response to Donny Peterson's assertion that HD motor oils were 1 part science and 9 parts marketing (my words there, but that's essentially what Peterson said).
Is Harley Davidson merely taking advantage of the newer oil rating changes in order to (as the bulletin suggests) convert more customers back to their house brand of oil?
Or is there really something "inferior" about, say, Havoline SL rated 20W50 oil? Or Pennzoil SL rated 20W50? Both of these oils report acceptable viscosities and seemingly more than adequate addtive packages. (For those who don't know, the SL rating is the newest standard in automotive motor oils; it replaces SJ).
For our big twin engines, I think we need not worry at all about moly additives. Further, I'll bet you my bike against a flea market tricycle that the newer classes of 20W50 motor oil will continue to be better--not worse--for your HD's engine--and mine.
I'll be oiling with Havoline 20W50 this year. It's got credentials that make (based on virgin oil and used oil analyses) Harley 360 look like bacon drippings. And you can get at least two quarts of it for what one jug of HD 360 will set you back. Got a case for 13 bucks after rebate at Advance Auto, on sale this month. Further, Havoline isn't embarrassed to tell you what their oil's specs really are:
http://www.havoline.com/products/na/motoroil_mo_tech.html (Click the link, then scroll down the left side of the screen and click "Product data..." and the Adobe page will load).
I should mention that the HD 360 dino oil, while being sort of "antiquated," is quite adequate if changed in short intervals (say, 2000 to 2500 miles).
There's a guy who lives not too far from where I do. High Point, NC, name's Dave Willet. He rode an '87 Tour Glide (evo motor) over 400,000 miles with no major engine work (that bike is in the Harley Davidson museum in Milwaukee now, and the MOCO gave Dave a new motorcycle for it). He did it all on 2500 mile oil changes, and Harley Davidson's own 360 oil. So when I mention that the SL rated Havoline 20W50 makes this 360 HD stuff look like bacon fat I don't mean that the HD oil is inadequate. I just mean that the newer oils are certainly more refined, and will oil longer, clean better, and burn off less (much higher flash points) than the older formulas will. Since Harley Davidson has always refused to release any specific info about their oil, one must assume it's either pretty pedestrian, or even "sub pedestrian."
Their silence on the matter of chemistry leads one to inevitiably conclude that they can't be too proud of the formula; it apparently wouldn't stand up to the scrutiny afforded by modern oil comparisons.
And this is funny:
In the linked American Iron article--here's the direct link-- http://www.pecuniary.com/pdf/AmerIronPt3.pdf the Harley Davidson rep mentions that Sunoco had been (at the time of the article) producing Harley Davidson oils for "over twenty years." The HD rep offers this information as a rebuttal to Donny Peterson's assertion that Harley allowed its oil business to be "bid out." Very importantly, the Harley Davidson rep sees this "long relationship with Sunoco" as a good thing--he says: "Bidding out this kind of business would actually place a rider at a disadvantage, as this accumulated knowledge and understanding would be lost. A new company would have to start from ground zero to build its own knowledge base."
So... "A new company would have to start from ground zero to build its own knowledge base??" (open mouth insert both feet HD rep dude!)
Wonder how Citgo feels, being at "ground zero" and all? (For those of you who don't know, Citgo is now making all of HD's oils--the Sunoco relationship no longer exists).
Guess we better keep a close eye on that "Genuine" 360 oil while Citgo works on its "own knowledge base."
One final note. Changing your oil out at about 2000 miles is probably the best preventive maintenance you can do. Run it to 2500 MAX. If you try to go for a 5000 mile OCI to justify the cost of a synthetic you may finish 2000 or more of those miles with a fuel diluted (and thereby compromised) oil. A good dino oil is more than adequate for a 2000 to 2500 mile OCI. Too, there is a school of thought emerging that holds that some synthetic bases don't allow the zinc/phos barrier additives to adhere well to internals. The HD v-twin engine is quite dependent--especially on the top end--on the ZDDP layer. These things run pretty low oil pressure, so at idle there may not always be a good hydrodynamic film everywhere. Could be just a myth about the syns crowding out the ZDDP, but I saw it somewhere at this forum. I do know that I used to get an annoying little 'squeak' at idle with my '94 Evo. It seemed to be coming from the top of the engine. At that time, the oil was Mobil 1 15W50 "redcap." After switching to Havoline dino 20W50 I haven't heard that squeak a single time. Coincidence? Maybe. But... maybe not.
Dan
"...another bud who actually rides the darn things as opposed to paddling his feet from tavern to tavern."
Wiley you're killing me! ROLMAO~!
Here's a piece I put together while anguishing over the oil issue a while back. It's got some good links and such to back up my ideas. All FWIW, of course.
I talked to a Kendall rep the other day (supposed to have been a tech but she sounded like she'd have been more at home behind the jewelry counter at Walmart than where I found her).
Nonetheless...
She said that Kendall GT-1, being an SL rated 20W50, was not compatible with Harley Davidson's recommended oils. She said that Harley specified that a particular friction modifier present in SL rated oils was not compatible with their engines.
"Moly?" I asked.
"No, not moly. There are more friction modifiers than moly out there."
"Zinc? Phosphorous?"
"Zinc and phosphorous aren't friction modifiers," she informed me.
"So what is the FM that Harley doesn't want?" I asked.
She got silent for a few seconds, seeming perturbed at my persistent questioning. "Harley Davidson doesn't mention what the FM actually is," she finally said.
"So it could be moly then, right?" I persisted.
She didn't answer, and seemed to be getting ticked. I moved the conversation in another direction.
"Is Kendall GT-1 a group I or a group II oil?"
"That's propreitary," she said.
"That means group I," I told her. "If it was group II you'd want to brag about that." I laughed. She didn't.
I thanked her for her efforts (I called it trouble) and hung up the phone.
I still can't imagine what Harley Davidson would consider to be wrong with an SL rated 20w50. It's possible they're talking down moly for the instances where the oil was going to be put in the primary, or used in a Sportster type set-up. I do think it's probably moly that Harley is cautioning against; I just think the Kendall gal didn't know for sure, and in the process of not trying to sound stupid, well, sounded stupid.
I wondered if Harley is just trying to thin down the herd of options for us so that we'll end up having to purchase their WAY over-priced "360" used to be Sunoco but Citgo got the lowest bid now oil?
Looks like what I suspected was correct.
http://mysite.wanadoo-members.co.uk/H.H._M_bulletins/M1065_oildesg.pdf
In this service bulletin, HD seems to be recommending against the use of SJ oils. According to the Kendall gal I spoke to, HD is now saying that SJ oils are okay, but SL oils are not.
If the Kendall gal is correct, and HD is recommending SJ but not SL, something has changed since the linked tech bulletin shown above.
Here is a page with three links near the bottom, where you can read an article which appeared a few years ago in American Iron magazine: http://www.pecuniary.com/newsletters/americaniron.html The third part of the article is Harley Davidson's response to Donny Peterson's assertion that HD motor oils were 1 part science and 9 parts marketing (my words there, but that's essentially what Peterson said).
Is Harley Davidson merely taking advantage of the newer oil rating changes in order to (as the bulletin suggests) convert more customers back to their house brand of oil?
Or is there really something "inferior" about, say, Havoline SL rated 20W50 oil? Or Pennzoil SL rated 20W50? Both of these oils report acceptable viscosities and seemingly more than adequate addtive packages. (For those who don't know, the SL rating is the newest standard in automotive motor oils; it replaces SJ).
For our big twin engines, I think we need not worry at all about moly additives. Further, I'll bet you my bike against a flea market tricycle that the newer classes of 20W50 motor oil will continue to be better--not worse--for your HD's engine--and mine.
I'll be oiling with Havoline 20W50 this year. It's got credentials that make (based on virgin oil and used oil analyses) Harley 360 look like bacon drippings. And you can get at least two quarts of it for what one jug of HD 360 will set you back. Got a case for 13 bucks after rebate at Advance Auto, on sale this month. Further, Havoline isn't embarrassed to tell you what their oil's specs really are:
http://www.havoline.com/products/na/motoroil_mo_tech.html (Click the link, then scroll down the left side of the screen and click "Product data..." and the Adobe page will load).
I should mention that the HD 360 dino oil, while being sort of "antiquated," is quite adequate if changed in short intervals (say, 2000 to 2500 miles).
There's a guy who lives not too far from where I do. High Point, NC, name's Dave Willet. He rode an '87 Tour Glide (evo motor) over 400,000 miles with no major engine work (that bike is in the Harley Davidson museum in Milwaukee now, and the MOCO gave Dave a new motorcycle for it). He did it all on 2500 mile oil changes, and Harley Davidson's own 360 oil. So when I mention that the SL rated Havoline 20W50 makes this 360 HD stuff look like bacon fat I don't mean that the HD oil is inadequate. I just mean that the newer oils are certainly more refined, and will oil longer, clean better, and burn off less (much higher flash points) than the older formulas will. Since Harley Davidson has always refused to release any specific info about their oil, one must assume it's either pretty pedestrian, or even "sub pedestrian."
And this is funny:
In the linked American Iron article--here's the direct link-- http://www.pecuniary.com/pdf/AmerIronPt3.pdf the Harley Davidson rep mentions that Sunoco had been (at the time of the article) producing Harley Davidson oils for "over twenty years." The HD rep offers this information as a rebuttal to Donny Peterson's assertion that Harley allowed its oil business to be "bid out." Very importantly, the Harley Davidson rep sees this "long relationship with Sunoco" as a good thing--he says: "Bidding out this kind of business would actually place a rider at a disadvantage, as this accumulated knowledge and understanding would be lost. A new company would have to start from ground zero to build its own knowledge base."
So... "A new company would have to start from ground zero to build its own knowledge base??" (open mouth insert both feet HD rep dude!)
Wonder how Citgo feels, being at "ground zero" and all? (For those of you who don't know, Citgo is now making all of HD's oils--the Sunoco relationship no longer exists).
Guess we better keep a close eye on that "Genuine" 360 oil while Citgo works on its "own knowledge base."
One final note. Changing your oil out at about 2000 miles is probably the best preventive maintenance you can do. Run it to 2500 MAX. If you try to go for a 5000 mile OCI to justify the cost of a synthetic you may finish 2000 or more of those miles with a fuel diluted (and thereby compromised) oil. A good dino oil is more than adequate for a 2000 to 2500 mile OCI. Too, there is a school of thought emerging that holds that some synthetic bases don't allow the zinc/phos barrier additives to adhere well to internals. The HD v-twin engine is quite dependent--especially on the top end--on the ZDDP layer. These things run pretty low oil pressure, so at idle there may not always be a good hydrodynamic film everywhere. Could be just a myth about the syns crowding out the ZDDP, but I saw it somewhere at this forum. I do know that I used to get an annoying little 'squeak' at idle with my '94 Evo. It seemed to be coming from the top of the engine. At that time, the oil was Mobil 1 15W50 "redcap." After switching to Havoline dino 20W50 I haven't heard that squeak a single time. Coincidence? Maybe. But... maybe not.
Dan
And while on the subject of lubing... may as well talk about the primary and tranny.
Citgo is now making the HD oils. It did used to be Sunoco, but Citgo has the contract now. The MSDS (Material Safety Data Sheets) on the HD oils are required by law to name the manufacturer, and Citgo is named as such.
I agree that Mobil 1 15W50 is light for the tranny--but only because it is a "light" 50 weight to begin with--and it's got a wide multi-weight range. More on that in a minute...
Engine oils and transmission oils are rated by different viscosity tests. Not really sure why, but that's how it is. Here's a chart: http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/visc.html You can see that according to the SAE numbers, a 90 weight gear oil has the same working viscosity as a 50 weight engine oil. And even some 40 weight engine oils would be considererd 90 weight gear oils!
And this is why HD and Amsoil and Mobil and perhaps others can do the "3 in 1" thing. The 50 weight engine oil is essentially as thick as a 90 weight tranny oil--when both are "warmed up" and running.
But the engine oils can shear down and become much thinner. The wider the "winter" spread (20W50 has a 30 point spread), the more prone to shearing the oil will be. Synthetics can resist shearing more than dino oils, but all multi-viscosity oils will shear. And a transmission can shear an oil down much faster than the engine--due to the extreme pressure of the gear teeth gnashing together. A straight weight oil is actually best, so long as it's not too thick for the temperatures you'll be starting up in. This is probably why straight 50's and 60's are recommended for the shovels--since they can be pretty hard on an oil, these straight weights resist shearing.
Virtually every manufacturer who makes multi-weight synthetic engine oils also makes straight weight synthetic engine oils. Why? Again, due to the straight weight oil's ability to resist shearing and thinning. Someone said synthetics don't shear?
They can can do. Read the UOA's at www.bobistheoilguy.com Some multi-weight syns shear a LOT.
So stick with a 75W90 or an 80W90 dedicated tranny oil (only a 10-15 point spread there, so you get high resistance to shearing). I like Mobil 1 75W90 because it's only about 8 bucks a quart, and you can change the tranny oil with one quart, of course, and have 8 ounces left over.
For your primary, just stick with a good 40 weight engine oil. It won't matter if it's detergent or not--but you will not want to use an oil which has the "energy conserving" moniker in the bottom half of the API circle on the back of the bottle. Most 40 weight oils won't be energy conserving. It is believed that energy conserving oils contain larger amounts of molybdenum, which some say can cause clutch slippage. This all said, Mobil's dedicated motorcycle oils contain moly, and I'm sure that Mobil researched it well. So the moly thing is probably a myth, soon to die along side of the "bearing skate" myth that the MoCo had us all believing about synthetic oil for years (until they began selling it
).
Don't overthink this. I've been there, done that. I've gone back to dino oil in my engine because I think it best to change the oil sooner rather than later, due to the potential for getting the oil fuel diluted or otherwise spoiled with impurities--change it at 2000 to 2500 miles regardless of what oil you're using--my opinioin.
I do, as mentioned, use synthetic in the tranny because that's really the most abused lubricant in the entire machine--I would think.
But in the primary--good old Shell Rotella T truck oil, 15W40 and you'll never want for a better primary oil. About a buck fifty a quart. (I get it for less than 7 bucks a gallon at Wally's) Harley even recommends 15W40 heavy truck oils when you can't find their stuff, so you know it's safe to use it--even in all three holes, yes. But I wouldn't run it in the tranny for long--it'll shear!
So... for the primary, Rotella T 15W40... the tranny, Mobil 1 75W90 (or Shell Spirax, or even a good dino 80W90 gear oil is better here than any engine oil due to the potential for shearing and thinning) ...and whatever your flavor of 50 weight in the engine (been having great luck with buck thirty a quart at Advance auto Havoline 20W50 dino oil). And you're all set.
Dan
Citgo is now making the HD oils. It did used to be Sunoco, but Citgo has the contract now. The MSDS (Material Safety Data Sheets) on the HD oils are required by law to name the manufacturer, and Citgo is named as such.
I agree that Mobil 1 15W50 is light for the tranny--but only because it is a "light" 50 weight to begin with--and it's got a wide multi-weight range. More on that in a minute...
Engine oils and transmission oils are rated by different viscosity tests. Not really sure why, but that's how it is. Here's a chart: http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/visc.html You can see that according to the SAE numbers, a 90 weight gear oil has the same working viscosity as a 50 weight engine oil. And even some 40 weight engine oils would be considererd 90 weight gear oils!
And this is why HD and Amsoil and Mobil and perhaps others can do the "3 in 1" thing. The 50 weight engine oil is essentially as thick as a 90 weight tranny oil--when both are "warmed up" and running.
But the engine oils can shear down and become much thinner. The wider the "winter" spread (20W50 has a 30 point spread), the more prone to shearing the oil will be. Synthetics can resist shearing more than dino oils, but all multi-viscosity oils will shear. And a transmission can shear an oil down much faster than the engine--due to the extreme pressure of the gear teeth gnashing together. A straight weight oil is actually best, so long as it's not too thick for the temperatures you'll be starting up in. This is probably why straight 50's and 60's are recommended for the shovels--since they can be pretty hard on an oil, these straight weights resist shearing.
Virtually every manufacturer who makes multi-weight synthetic engine oils also makes straight weight synthetic engine oils. Why? Again, due to the straight weight oil's ability to resist shearing and thinning. Someone said synthetics don't shear?
So stick with a 75W90 or an 80W90 dedicated tranny oil (only a 10-15 point spread there, so you get high resistance to shearing). I like Mobil 1 75W90 because it's only about 8 bucks a quart, and you can change the tranny oil with one quart, of course, and have 8 ounces left over.
For your primary, just stick with a good 40 weight engine oil. It won't matter if it's detergent or not--but you will not want to use an oil which has the "energy conserving" moniker in the bottom half of the API circle on the back of the bottle. Most 40 weight oils won't be energy conserving. It is believed that energy conserving oils contain larger amounts of molybdenum, which some say can cause clutch slippage. This all said, Mobil's dedicated motorcycle oils contain moly, and I'm sure that Mobil researched it well. So the moly thing is probably a myth, soon to die along side of the "bearing skate" myth that the MoCo had us all believing about synthetic oil for years (until they began selling it
Don't overthink this. I've been there, done that. I've gone back to dino oil in my engine because I think it best to change the oil sooner rather than later, due to the potential for getting the oil fuel diluted or otherwise spoiled with impurities--change it at 2000 to 2500 miles regardless of what oil you're using--my opinioin.
I do, as mentioned, use synthetic in the tranny because that's really the most abused lubricant in the entire machine--I would think.
But in the primary--good old Shell Rotella T truck oil, 15W40 and you'll never want for a better primary oil. About a buck fifty a quart. (I get it for less than 7 bucks a gallon at Wally's) Harley even recommends 15W40 heavy truck oils when you can't find their stuff, so you know it's safe to use it--even in all three holes, yes. But I wouldn't run it in the tranny for long--it'll shear!
So... for the primary, Rotella T 15W40... the tranny, Mobil 1 75W90 (or Shell Spirax, or even a good dino 80W90 gear oil is better here than any engine oil due to the potential for shearing and thinning) ...and whatever your flavor of 50 weight in the engine (been having great luck with buck thirty a quart at Advance auto Havoline 20W50 dino oil). And you're all set.
Dan
Dan'
Great overview....i wasnt sure what to run in my primary and cuz i wasnt sure i stuck with the harley (no capitalization intended) primary lube.
Going to try the Rotella T 15W-40 on next change...i am running red cap M1, 15W-50, in the engine, M1 75W-90 in the tranny....
darrell
sin city
Great overview....i wasnt sure what to run in my primary and cuz i wasnt sure i stuck with the harley (no capitalization intended) primary lube.
Going to try the Rotella T 15W-40 on next change...i am running red cap M1, 15W-50, in the engine, M1 75W-90 in the tranny....
darrell
sin city
Yes Amsoil is approved for use in the harley. I believe the manual spec's for a sj/ch oil, in the viscosity of 20w50. Amsoil meets all of that and more.
You will also notice better performance in the tranmission with the Amsoil product compared to the harley syn3 product.
MSPARKS, Is the amsoil 134c oil filter for my bike rated at 10 micron or should I stick with the harley filter speced for the new twin cam?
Well sir, I just don't believe that ANY oil filter is specs at 10 micron. I just don't think it's possible.
The new Donaldson Endurance filters use NANO technology and are 98% effecient at 15 microns and 50% effecient at 7 microns. This is the best of the best.
Anyhow after that speil, the Amsoil filters will be at least as good as spec. They would not approve of a filter otherwise.
MSPARKS this is word for word out of my 2005 Harley Davidson touring bike manual. "Use of the premium 10 micron synthetic media oil filter is highly recommended." part #63798-99
Wonder if the media starts out 10, but opens up when its folded into pleats? Look through any pleated filter and see more light in the corners.
So they may have more of range like 10-90, much like coventional filters? Just a guess. The scotts are a straight even 35, which is supposedly about the small limit and still have good flow. That's why I question the 10 number.
So they may have more of range like 10-90, much like coventional filters? Just a guess. The scotts are a straight even 35, which is supposedly about the small limit and still have good flow. That's why I question the 10 number.
fyi
Q. What is the difference between a "micron rating" and a "beta ratio test" when referring to filters?
A. Micron Ratings are arbitrary values assigned to filters or media. Although a "micron" is a length (1 millionth of a meter), a "micron rating" is not actually a measured value. The micron rating for a filter quotes a particle size without establishing the filter's efficiency at removing that size of particles. A window screen will remove some 1 micron particles, but it will not be very efficient. Since a micron rating cannot be verified, filter manufacturers are safe in assigning any number that they want. AMSOIL does not recommend comparing filters based on micron ratings.
To compare filters, the filter industry has established standardized tests for measuring performance. These tests include Life and Efficiency Tests (SAE J726, J806, and J905) and Beta Ratio Tests (SAE J1858). These SAE standardized test methods, along with the meticulous recording of test conditions, ensure that filter comparisons are "apples to apples."
Life and Efficiency Tests measure the filter's ability to remove a standardized contaminant from a standardized fluid that is flowing at a constant rate and a constant temperature. The test continues until the contamination trapped in the media raises the differential pressure drop across the filter to a specific, predetermined level. Life and Efficiency Test results will include a Time Weighted Efficiency (%) and a Capacity (grams).
Beta Ratio Tests are by far the most accurate and objective way to compare the performance of filters. A Beta Ratio Test measures a filter's ability to remove particles of given sizes. In other words, the test measures the filter's efficiencies at specific particle sizes. The beta ratio test equipment actually counts the particles in the fluid before the filter and after the filter.
A. Micron Ratings are arbitrary values assigned to filters or media. Although a "micron" is a length (1 millionth of a meter), a "micron rating" is not actually a measured value. The micron rating for a filter quotes a particle size without establishing the filter's efficiency at removing that size of particles. A window screen will remove some 1 micron particles, but it will not be very efficient. Since a micron rating cannot be verified, filter manufacturers are safe in assigning any number that they want. AMSOIL does not recommend comparing filters based on micron ratings.
To compare filters, the filter industry has established standardized tests for measuring performance. These tests include Life and Efficiency Tests (SAE J726, J806, and J905) and Beta Ratio Tests (SAE J1858). These SAE standardized test methods, along with the meticulous recording of test conditions, ensure that filter comparisons are "apples to apples."
Life and Efficiency Tests measure the filter's ability to remove a standardized contaminant from a standardized fluid that is flowing at a constant rate and a constant temperature. The test continues until the contamination trapped in the media raises the differential pressure drop across the filter to a specific, predetermined level. Life and Efficiency Test results will include a Time Weighted Efficiency (%) and a Capacity (grams).
Beta Ratio Tests are by far the most accurate and objective way to compare the performance of filters. A Beta Ratio Test measures a filter's ability to remove particles of given sizes. In other words, the test measures the filter's efficiencies at specific particle sizes. The beta ratio test equipment actually counts the particles in the fluid before the filter and after the filter.
Thanks Mike and MSPARKS for all the info, and to all others for their input. I have decided to join the amsoil club as a full member and use their filters too.
Honestly, I would stick with the Harley SuperPremium filter. The price is cheaper than Amsoil's filters and it is a GREAT filter. It has a silicon ADBV and a threaded end bypass valve. The media is synthetic/glass. You really can't beat this filter for the price (It is one thing that HD sells that is not overpriced).
If you want, do a search. I cut one open a while back.
If you want, do a search. I cut one open a while back.
Too, if you go with a filter that is too restrictive, oil pressure may be impeded, and/or by-pass will occur too often, defeating the purpose entirely.
Not saying that the Amsoil filter would be a problem, but this is something to consider.
Filters tend to clog up to some degree as they age, so a relatively new filter may show good flow initially, but be noteably "plugged" after a couple thousand miles.
Something to think about.
Keep in mind, guys, that the two most shining examples of longevity in HD engines both went well over 400,000 miles--on 2500 mile OCI's of HD 360 dino oil and HD filters. Until a synthetic matches or surpasses those numbers it cannot be said that it will protect your engine better. In fact, the bar has been placed; short OCI's on a good dino oil seem to be the way to go.
Dan
Not saying that the Amsoil filter would be a problem, but this is something to consider.
Filters tend to clog up to some degree as they age, so a relatively new filter may show good flow initially, but be noteably "plugged" after a couple thousand miles.
Something to think about.
Keep in mind, guys, that the two most shining examples of longevity in HD engines both went well over 400,000 miles--on 2500 mile OCI's of HD 360 dino oil and HD filters. Until a synthetic matches or surpasses those numbers it cannot be said that it will protect your engine better. In fact, the bar has been placed; short OCI's on a good dino oil seem to be the way to go.
Dan
Hey Dan..have you run the UOA on that Havoline yet ?? I've been using the M1 T& SUV 5-40 in my Evo primary and really love it..no morning lurch when you put it in gear..smooth clutch action even in 90* weather..
Skunky, I'm about ready to send the oil in. I've got 2350 miles on it now. After tomorrow it'll be past 2500 miles, which is where I wanted to check it.
I should get the oil in the mail on Tuesday (Monday being the 4th).
Dan
I should get the oil in the mail on Tuesday (Monday being the 4th).
Dan
- Status
Similar threads
