2008 FLRHC Valvoline VR1 dino, 1.9k

[GRIMland]

This is my 2nd UOA from this bike. First oil change shown is M1 V-TWIN MC oil (on right). This analysis was Valvoline VR1 conventional 20w-50 (left). I put in Amsoil V-TWIN 20w-50 this fall and will analyze that next year, then M1 15w-50 after that.

Not sure what's going on with the titanium. Also, all the virgin and used oil analyses I've seen on VR1 show little to no moly and boron, so not sure if I get some carry over from previous oil on those elements.

Looks like the oil did shear down a bit to the upper end of 40 weight, whereas the M1 V-TWIN didn't shear down at all. I didn't really notice any difference on top end noise, maybe a little less than M1 V-TWIN.

 

[Propflux01]

Why you changing it so soon? 1900 miles is nothing. Any oil should perform good in that short an interval. I run it in my hogs at least 3K before I change oil.

 

[DuckRyder]

I'm guessing he's on the year interval based on the dates on the report...

I guess I don't see anything wrong with he report, but given the amount of oil that an average Harley retains during a change I wonder about he value of UOA's when the oil used is varied.

 

[loneryder]

I would not use Mobil 1 15-50 now that it's SN rated. They took a lot of the good stuff that a Harley needs out of it for SN rating.

 

[Propflux01]

I didn't notice the time interval. I find if I change my oil immediately after a long ride, I.E. more than say, 60 miles, I can get pretty much all the oil out of it. If its not up to temp, then it seems to 'hide' about a half quart.

 

[FCD]

M1 V-TWIN is well known for thickening during service to the point of becoming an effective 20W-60.

 

[GRIMland]

I've seen a few others test multiple oils back to back but I agree that ideally testing would be done after 2 or 3 cycles of the same brand. I guess it was my way of testing both engine metals in oil and how well the potential oils I plan on using hold up in a riding season - mostly curious how much the oils shear and if any particular ones add more metals that others. Since I only ride from ~May to October then change oil and store the bike, oil like Amsoil seems overkill.

 

[DuckRyder]

When I scavenge my bike It takes about a quart for it to be pumping fresh oil, but I think we are talking about a touring bike here so I don't know if it is possible to scavenge it, or if it holds as much in the oiling system. I don't believe it has an oil tank and lines like a softail.

I'm not trying to discourage testing the oil, but certainly it adds complexity to the data, it does the same on cars and trucks, but they typically retain a smaller amount during the change at least form a percentage basis.

I realize you didn't ask, but I feel like a quality oil should be able to do 2 years at this sort of mileage and I'm so sure it'll be fine - I just did exactly that and the UOA should be back next week, so I guess we will see.

You might consider a UOA on the Amsoil without changing it next year and see if the TBN and TAN supports letting it go 2 years (I also realize there was just a lengthy discussion about this, but I'm just putting it out there...)

 

[Bonz]

Originally Posted by loneryder
I would not use Mobil 1 15-50 now that it's SN rated. They took a lot of the good stuff that a Harley needs out of it for SN rating.



What "lot of good stuff" do you know that Mobil took out of M1 15W50 oil that a Harley needs? Am interested what 1300 ppm zinc and 1200 ppm phosphorus are not providing that a Harley needs?

 

[Propflux01]

Originally Posted by DuckRyder
When I scavenge my bike It takes about a quart for it to be pumping fresh oil, but I think we are talking about a touring bike here so I don't know if it is possible to scavenge it, or if it holds as much in the oiling system. I don't believe it has an oil tank and lines like a softail.

I'm not trying to discourage testing the oil, but certainly it adds complexity to the data, it does the same on cars and trucks, but they typically retain a smaller amount during the change at least form a percentage basis.

I realize you didn't ask, but I feel like a quality oil should be able to do 2 years at this sort of mileage and I'm so sure it'll be fine - I just did exactly that and the UOA should be back next week, so I guess we will see.

You might consider a UOA on the Amsoil without changing it next year and see if the TBN and TAN supports letting it go 2 years (I also realize there was just a lengthy discussion about this, but I'm just putting it out there...)


You can scavenge either bike. I used to use the "scavenger" system, until I changed my oil right after a 150 miles summer day run. I let it drain and put in 4 quarts. After run it was right at the top of the dipstick, and the oil was completely clear.. I have done it this way ever since.

Please post your UOA results, I think it could go two years as well. Where I am at it is ride-able for about 10 months out of the year. Jan and Feb are the two bad months. So I usually can get well over 5000 miles before the year is out..

 

[alarmguy]

Thanks for the report, everything looks good.

As far as your comment wondering if one compound or another is supposed to be present, in this case moly or boron, well that is impossible to know and never will know if you only do one run on the same oil, it takes a good 2 or 3 runs on any one oil to flush out the the remains from a different brand.

As far as "shearing" to a 40 weight, dont even give it a thought on a non shared sump bike like yours. Complete non issue not worth mentioning.

I dont agree, I would never run oil for 2 years on a light mileage vechicle of any type, only because oil change is such a cheap part of maintenance but to each his own and most likely doesnt matter, maybe more so because so little mileage the bike will never have a lot of miles and wear on it anyway. ) I think your doing the right thing, following the maintenance schedule.

Im due to for an oil change, and HOPING to give the bike a good run today, get the oil hot before taking a sample, will see, its been a weird fall, havent started the bike in a month.
Plan on sending in a sample as I do in the fall, just so late in the year this year but curious as I think this is the longest run on the oil I use ever.

The oil ran a full "torture" test this year and commonly ran into the 250 to 260 temperature range, normally I change once in the middle of the summer but didnt this year because of weather and work.
So I have runs into the mountains of NC and TN including tail of the Dragon and many runs to the beaches of SC, typically on 90+ degree days, A LOT interstate, which oils temps are their hottest and always run 250+ but this year hit the 260s more then a few times.

 

[DuckRyder]

Originally Posted by Propflux01


You can scavenge either bike. I used to use the "scavenger" system, until I changed my oil right after a 150 miles summer day run. I let it drain and put in 4 quarts. After run it was right at the top of the dipstick, and the oil was completely clear.. I have done it this way ever since..


Good to know, I'll have to study up on the Touring bike system again.

Oil was 244 degrees will I pulled the drain plug out of the oil tank this time around.

Originally Posted by Propflux01
Please post your UOA results, I think it could go two years as well. Where I am at it is ride-able for about 10 months out of the year. Jan and Feb are the two bad months. So I usually can get well over 5000 miles before the year is out..


I almost always do post the UOA's, I'll post this one. I already have one here with well over a year and TBN + TAN.

Back to the UOA at hand, I'm curious about the loss of viscosity as there shouldn't be a lot of shearing going on in a Harley engine, as mentioned several oils (M1 V-Twin included) have a reputation for thickening in Harley engines. So whats going on with this one? Do we have a VOA of it?

 

[GRIMland]

These are the two VOAs I have in my files from online somewhere, probably this site:

 

[DuckRyder]

So someone refresh my memory about how the multi viscosity is obtained in Synthetic vs Conventional oils.

I went looking for where I read it and could not find it, but do I recall that a multi grade Conventional oil starts at the lower and uses VI to obtain the higher, whereas Synthetic is just the opposite?

 

[alarmguy]

I thought th si was
Originally Posted by DuckRyder
So someone refresh my memory about how the multi viscosity is obtained in Synthetic vs Conventional oils.

I went looking for where I read it and could not find it, but do I recall that a multi grade Conventional oil starts at the lower and uses VI to obtain the higher, whereas Synthetic is just the opposite?


I thought this was a trick question at first as I always believed and still believe both oils behave the same, synthetic and conventional. Whether or not for the same reason I no longer know but did pull up a quick link as to what you are saying and I am rushing to get to work. WIth that said, its just one link and many ways to skin a cat I assume because shared sump bikes always seem to shear any oil faster if the oil starts out at a 5/40, 15/50 vs 15/40 and 20/50.

I thought the viscosity agents/improvers were the same, starts low, then thickens up as it warms up.

The lower the starting number ex. 5 vs 20, the more improver is needed to bring it to act like a 40 or 50 when hot and why the famous synthetic 5/40 Rotella T6 was ALWAYS a shear monster in shared sumps bikes vs even the most cheap conventional 15/40 oil which would hold viscosity much better because less viscosity agents in the oil to shear down.

However I see your point in this link

Im not saying this link is not true but I am saying for sure the more spread between any oil, synthetic or conventional the faster the oil will always shear, the reason it shears maybe different (if synthetics are produced in the way of the link) but they do shear and why I question statements that syn and conv are different. Maybe many years ago when synthetics were made from stuff other then oil decades ago, I dont know...

Interesting thoughts though.

 

[jeff78]

Originally Posted by DuckRyder
I went looking for where I read it and could not find it, but do I recall that a multi grade Conventional oil starts at the lower and uses VI to obtain the higher, whereas Synthetic is just the opposite?


It was in the old incorrect Motor Oil University articles here. It's since been corrected. Both conventional and synthetic oils use thinner base stocks and then add VII's (viscosity index improvers) to keep the oil from thinning out as much when heated, to end up with the operating temperature viscosity grade, for a multigrade oil.

So for example, if you wanted to make a 10W-40, you'd start out with base stocks that would be thinner than a straight SAE 40, then add VII's such that the viscosity of the finished oil at 100C would fall into the same range as the SAE 40 at 100C. The VII's prevent the oil from thinning out as much as the temperature rises.

This goes for both dino and synthetics, the advantage synthetics have is they generally start with higher natural viscosity indexes than dinos so synths may not need as much (or possibly any) VII's added in to achieve the same viscosity grade.

There's a lot more to a motor oil of course, but that's the basic gist of it.

A motor oil that is labelled as a monograde (SAE 30, SAE 40, etc.) must not have any VII's in it. If an oil has any VII in it, then it must be labelled appropriately as a multigrade. However, an oil that is labelled as a multigrade may or may not have VII in it. For example, you formulate an oil with synthetic base stocks and no VII that at 100C ends up in the 30 range. You can label this as an SAE 30. But then you decide to run it through the 'W' tests and find that it passes them for 5W. So this means that you can label this oil SAE 30 or 5W-30.

 

[alarmguy]

Originally Posted by jeff78
Originally Posted by DuckRyder
I went looking for where I read it and could not find it, but do I recall that a multi grade Conventional oil starts at the lower and uses VI to obtain the higher, whereas Synthetic is just the opposite?


It was in the old incorrect Motor Oil University articles here. It's since been corrected. Both conventional and synthetic oils use thinner base stocks and then add VII's (viscosity index improvers) to keep the oil from thinning out as much when heated, to end up with the operating temperature viscosity grade, for a multigrade oil.

So for example, if you wanted to make a 10W-40, you'd start out with base stocks that would be thinner than a straight SAE 40, then add VII's such that the viscosity of the finished oil at 100C would fall into the same range as the SAE 40 at 100C. The VII's prevent the oil from thinning out as much as the temperature rises.

This goes for both dino and synthetics, the advantage synthetics have is they generally start with higher natural viscosity indexes than dinos so synths may not need as much (or possibly any) VII's added in to achieve the same viscosity grade.

There's a lot more to a motor oil of course, but that's the basic gist of it.

A motor oil that is labelled as a monograde (SAE 30, SAE 40, etc.) must not have any VII's in it. If an oil has any VII in it, then it must be labelled appropriately as a multigrade. However, an oil that is labelled as a multigrade may or may not have VII in it. For example, you formulate an oil with synthetic base stocks and no VII that at 100C ends up in the 30 range. You can label this as an SAE 30. But then you decide to run it through the 'W' tests and find that it passes them for 5W. So this means that you can label this oil SAE 30 or 5W-30.



Jeff -

Well said, perfect, my thoughts exactly. Though with large spreads all oils need VII's except maybe specialized 25/40 oils such as marine oils, maybe better said all oils in these forums will have VII's. Most notable is the Synthetic Rotella 5/40 which shears down in shared sumps almost instantly, then stabilizes around 5/30 to as bad as the upper 20s.

 

[jeff78]

Originally Posted by GRIMland
Not sure what's going on with the titanium. Also, all the virgin and used oil analyses I've seen on VR1 show little to no moly and boron, so not sure if I get some carry over from previous oil on those elements.


It's not unusual for additives packages to change from time to time for oils - i.e. the 'recipe' changes. A sample of VR1 20W-50 bottled a couple of years back would likely have higher sodium and calcium levels as well.

But as alarmguy mentioned a couple of posts up, if the bike doesn't run any or feel any different throughout the oil change interval, the shearing probably isn't worth losing sleep over. It might be a concern if you wanted to extend the oil change interval (spring for the TBN test if you want to do this).

 

[DuckRyder]

Thanks Jeff, good conversation.