i was wondering if anyone on here has used Amsoil Series 2000 20W-50 Synthetic Racing Oil in their motorcycle instead of their 20w50 motorcycle oil. I see this racing oil is rated at JASO MOTORCYCLE MB. I was wondering if i should of ordered this instead of the amsoil M/c oil...
Series 2000 20W-50 Synthetic Racing Oil
- Thread starter arkainzeye
- Start date
- Status
Might want to look at the difference between jaso MA and jaso MB? In short MA is for wet clutch bikes, MB is friction modified and not suitable for wet clutches.
Now is MB going to make a wet clutch slip? Probably not in the short haul, and amsoil would probably say it's racing oil and not meant for the long haul?
With all the marketing data and bar charts and info amsoil makes available, you'd think there might be some room to explain what Jaso MA and MB means? Most riders just see JASO and motorcycle and assume it's the correct product.
Now is MB going to make a wet clutch slip? Probably not in the short haul, and amsoil would probably say it's racing oil and not meant for the long haul?
With all the marketing data and bar charts and info amsoil makes available, you'd think there might be some room to explain what Jaso MA and MB means? Most riders just see JASO and motorcycle and assume it's the correct product.
Which motorcycle? Wet clutch? Generally, go with the 10W40 MCF motorcycle oil for metric bikes and and the 20W50 MCV motorcycle oil for the European and American bikes. Racing and need an edge? Go with the 10W40 motorcycle oil in all. The 20W50 Series 2000 was designed for cars, not optimum for motorcycles.
The JASO T-904:2006 standards have broken the frictional charactoristics down into three differnt catagories now.
MA1, MA2, and MB.
I don't think anyone can find anything that would support the notion that MB rated fluids are not acceptable for wet clutch use. If so, just where can I find that paper or test standard that states that MB is not acceptable for wet clutch use?
In all three tests for frictional charactoristics, there is very little difference in the numbers, and more than likely the differences could never be realised by the rider.
In fact, the fluid could well be within the MA1 range on two of the three tests*, yet just fall into the MB range on one of them...and the fluid must then be rated MB.
The JASO standards are a guide, but a meager guide at best.
*( STI stop time index, DFI dynamic friction index, SFI static friction index)
A guy I know runs the parts dept of a large Honda dealership. He tried to run the "moly means death" speil on me once, and after a long conversation the guy finally admitted that he was actually clueless on these issues and was only parroting what he had been told to say.
He also admitted to me that he had confused the Honda oils up and had been using the MB rated Honda fluid for about a year in his XR650 w/wet clutch. He stated that when he realized he was using the wrong rated fluid, he was confused because the MB fluid was doing a great job and he never once noticed any sort of clutch degredation whatsoever.
Until the general public understands that "moly" is simply a generic term and is not indicative of what is actually in the fluid, there will always be confusion on this issue. Especially when self proclaimed experts keep trumpeting the dangers or using oils with "moly" in them...which of course means they are "friction modified" and are death to the wet clutch. (major eyeroll)
Of course we can always depend on the marketing speil we get from those with sales agendas....(another major eyeroll)
MA1, MA2, and MB.
I don't think anyone can find anything that would support the notion that MB rated fluids are not acceptable for wet clutch use. If so, just where can I find that paper or test standard that states that MB is not acceptable for wet clutch use?
In all three tests for frictional charactoristics, there is very little difference in the numbers, and more than likely the differences could never be realised by the rider.
In fact, the fluid could well be within the MA1 range on two of the three tests*, yet just fall into the MB range on one of them...and the fluid must then be rated MB.
The JASO standards are a guide, but a meager guide at best.
*( STI stop time index, DFI dynamic friction index, SFI static friction index)
A guy I know runs the parts dept of a large Honda dealership. He tried to run the "moly means death" speil on me once, and after a long conversation the guy finally admitted that he was actually clueless on these issues and was only parroting what he had been told to say.
He also admitted to me that he had confused the Honda oils up and had been using the MB rated Honda fluid for about a year in his XR650 w/wet clutch. He stated that when he realized he was using the wrong rated fluid, he was confused because the MB fluid was doing a great job and he never once noticed any sort of clutch degredation whatsoever.
Until the general public understands that "moly" is simply a generic term and is not indicative of what is actually in the fluid, there will always be confusion on this issue. Especially when self proclaimed experts keep trumpeting the dangers or using oils with "moly" in them...which of course means they are "friction modified" and are death to the wet clutch. (major eyeroll)
Of course we can always depend on the marketing speil we get from those with sales agendas....(another major eyeroll)
thanks for the info guys.. the bike i was talking about is a 2005 kawasaki vulcan 2000 (2053cc) V-twin with a shared sump. i currently use a 50%/50% mixture of amsoil 10w40 & 20w50. had two Uoa done on the mixtures and so far as 3500 miles its not even close to being lower than a 40 weight. i got the tech details if requested. i was just wondering if the racing oil was worth a look at or not.. i will stay with amsoil m/c oil
Good post jaybird and yes, they have created MA1 nad MA2 for those 'tweener oils that don't fall under the MA limits. I'm not really about moly or friction modification, but there are those that are, and some oil companys make a big deal about it. The only problem I see with the MB spec is that it could be any level of friction reduction. OIl that was formulated as starburst friction modified GF4 SM could be sold under jaso MB if they submitted. Right or wrong most guys with bikes would agree that's not what they want in thier wet clutch. Here's what I'm talking about:
Look at page 6, table 2 of the jaso standards, http://www.jalos.or.jp/onfile/pdf/4T_EV0412.pdf
Read the note at the bottom and notice the MB friction limits are all "less than". So even an oil that was super duper slimy slicky slippery could achieve MB friction rating, because it's "less than" with no lower limit. MA on the other hand does have a lower limit and is "greater than".
Is this a big concern? it's up to the guy pouring the oil I guess? but I do think it's misleading for the guy thats trying to avoid low friction oils.
Look at page 6, table 2 of the jaso standards, http://www.jalos.or.jp/onfile/pdf/4T_EV0412.pdf
Read the note at the bottom and notice the MB friction limits are all "less than". So even an oil that was super duper slimy slicky slippery could achieve MB friction rating, because it's "less than" with no lower limit. MA on the other hand does have a lower limit and is "greater than".
Is this a big concern? it's up to the guy pouring the oil I guess? but I do think it's misleading for the guy thats trying to avoid low friction oils.
true, the old test was "less than" infinite, the new test that has ma1 ma2 looks to put a value on MB lower level like you said. But it looks to me like it's as low as you could test. Think about it, a zero would be slipping, so .4 and .5 could be pretty low. Be nice to see what a true energy conserving rated oils tests at? I think jaso is building an empire so to speak, they'll have a rating for every oil that is $ent to them before it's all over. My quote on MB "not being suitable" came from a Rotax 912 service document, can't find it but will post if I do. cheers wE
I used ARCO Graphite oil in my old CB450. Had 30K on the bike with the same clutch with nary a problem. But, I probably won't do that now!!
Well, I don't understand then what does "moly" stand for? I always thought it was molybendum which is used to create a barrier between 2 metal surfaces and prevent metal to metal contact. I have always been told that this "moly" can build up on wet clutch plates and reduce the friction between the clutch plates causing them to slip so it was generally advisable to avoid using lubricants that contain "moly" in a wet clutch application. Where am I off base here? I have always made it a point to find lubricants that had no moly for my motorcycle wet clutches. Please explain.
Ok did that and didn't find anything about my question.
I do get it that there are several types of "moly" additives.So which "moly" would be harmful to a wet clutch?
From my (limited) understanding the 2 types of moly in question. 1 is more of a solid (like powder) that would be added to the oil and could more easily collect on the clutch plates. This type was probably the type used in oil that sparked the whole BEWARE OF THE EVIL MOLY, movement.
Not sure if eany blends this stuff in oil anymore?
The 2nd type, used in most oils of late, is a soluable form of moly, as in it stays in soultion and would be less likely to build on the clutch plates. This proabaly the stuff that people haven't had much trouble with. BUT, it is used as a friction reducer and the resulting oil as complete product have allow enough coefficient of friction as to slip a clutch in some cases. BUT, moly is only part of this recipe, the other part usually includes a low viscosity oil. They combine to make the oil "slippery". BUT, most bikers choose oil of a heavier viscosity (40-50w), so in these heavier grades the friction reducing additive is unlikely to make the finished oil too "slippery". So, soluble moly + thicker oil = most likely won't be a problem.
Not sure if eany blends this stuff in oil anymore?
The 2nd type, used in most oils of late, is a soluable form of moly, as in it stays in soultion and would be less likely to build on the clutch plates. This proabaly the stuff that people haven't had much trouble with. BUT, it is used as a friction reducer and the resulting oil as complete product have allow enough coefficient of friction as to slip a clutch in some cases. BUT, moly is only part of this recipe, the other part usually includes a low viscosity oil. They combine to make the oil "slippery". BUT, most bikers choose oil of a heavier viscosity (40-50w), so in these heavier grades the friction reducing additive is unlikely to make the finished oil too "slippery". So, soluble moly + thicker oil = most likely won't be a problem.
most manuals state what oils are allowed or in my case are NOT allowed to be used. my manual specifically states to NOT use Energy Conserving II oil. which i have never seen on a bottle.
In vogue for only a couple years, if I recall...
Last time I remember seeing "Energy Conserving II" on a bottle of oil was 5W-40 Havoline Synthetic SJ/SG/C? (in a black bottle from the mid-to-late '90's). They used to have a 10W-30 Semi-Synthetic ILSAC GF-2 oil available in (I think?) a grey bottle at about the same time, Energy Conserving (I) but also OK to use in certain high performance GM V8's.
Cheers!
Bought 56 or so quarts of that stuff for $0.41 per quart when they changed the packaging: all they had @ GI Joe's.
Cheers!
Last time I remember seeing "Energy Conserving II" on a bottle of oil was 5W-40 Havoline Synthetic SJ/SG/C? (in a black bottle from the mid-to-late '90's). They used to have a 10W-30 Semi-Synthetic ILSAC GF-2 oil available in (I think?) a grey bottle at about the same time, Energy Conserving (I) but also OK to use in certain high performance GM V8's.
Cheers!
Bought 56 or so quarts of that stuff for $0.41 per quart when they changed the packaging: all they had @ GI Joe's.
Cheers!
Well I have been told it is the Molybdenum Disulfide to watch out for which is the stuff that will eventually build up on clutch plates.....so since that is supposedly possible I use a non-moly oil in wet clutches only. There are lots of them out there so it's not a problem. I just figure why take the chance?
- Status