Anyone tried motorbike engine oil for car?

[Thwwx]

Inferior properties in terms of protection? Definately not. Frankly, if you're debating on fuel efficieny, there is not a snowball's chance in hell that a high HTHS 40wt will win over a 20wt. Then again, if you're looking at protection in extreme conditions, the converse is also true.

 

I am pointing out that M/C oils are made to protect any engine better especially in extreme use, which is the truth without exceptions. They're often higher spec than your equal weight and 'quality' (as in syn versus syn) PCMO in terms of protection and durability. Performance oils (M/C oils as well as top end car oils) are meant to protect and last, their durability and higher film strength (HTHS) compromises their effectiveness in terms of energy conservation, FM or no FM. Still, the difference is minute, EC specs savings in the range of 1% or 2%, you won't see much savings unless you do long haul.

 

There is no argument that:

 

1. M/C oils won't corrode anything in the engine, regardless it car or bike

2. True M/C oils definately protect better, that is what engine oil core function is all about

Edited June 19, 2007 by Thwwx

[Thwwx]

That's where you're wrong, stock production normally aspirated bike engines are producing up to 0.2 bhp per CC, with 4 cylinders at a comp ratio of 12.8:1

 

If you scale this up to produce an 8 cylinder 2000cc car, it will pump out 400 bhp, promptly smoking anything on the road in the same capacity class. The engines are more highly stressed than any passenger car. The reason normal cars are not made like this is because it will be highly impractical. They will idle very high, have crap efficiency and generally be closer to F1 than anything on the road.

 

Many bikers put top of the line engine oil into their bikes as a matter of fact, and you'll see the top racing oils in far more % of bikeshops than there will be in car shops.

[Elfenstar]

There is no argument that:

 

1. M/C oils won't corrode anything in the engine, regardless it car or bike

2. True M/C oils definately protect better, that is what engine oil core function is all about

 

I beg to differ.

 

I did some double checking. The sulfur or chlorine compounds contained in them can react with water and combustion byproducts, forming acids that facilitate corrosion of the engine parts and bearings. These acids also "assist" in TBN depletion, sludge, varnish etc. Its been hinted that the only reason m/cycle oils contain EP additives is because the oil is shared with the g/box as it was explicitly said that anti-wear additives are more than sufficient for any IC engine and EP additives will not be doing anything better than them in an IC engine.

 

On a semi-related note, did you know that the same chemicals we call EP additives are used in cutting fluids for metal machining???

Edited June 20, 2007 by Elfenstar

[Thwwx]

There are not the same as those in gear oils, there are a whole range of such additives. Notice that gear oil have a distinctive smell but 4T does not have. And why will a 4 stroke motorcycle oil be formulated in such a way that will corrode the engine? This is radical, to the extent of ridiculous, extrapolation just because they have better antiwear levels. These are the same stuff in car oils, just more because they don't have to save the catalysers.

 

It is true that the regular car oil antiwear levels are 'sufficient' for cars as long as they're specced to use that particular API/ACEA/fancy factory conti spec. But then again, what's the point of choosing a particular brand/type of oil? Any that meets the spec is 'sufficient'. So why do you fuss about car oil with FM is that marginally 'better'. FM or no FM, it is more than 'sufficient'.

 

Do you put the cheapest oil that meet your car specs in your car or do you actually have an interest which product is better despite the same specs?

 

Other than AW/EP, there is higher shear resistance offered. These are the same reasons people who want performance shell out big bucks for auto race oils.

 

1st you generalise about FM, which was refuted. Now it is generalisation about corrosion linked to wear protection. What next? This is rather pointless discussion if you already made up your mind based on your generalised ideas of certain properties.

[Scaglietti]

Friction modifiers, that's another mythical difference between car and bike oils.

Myth? This is from the oil manufacturer themselves.

 

Here's a quote from Mobil website:

Mobil 1 Racing 4T 10W-40 is designed for sport bikes. Most of these bikes have multi-cylinder/multi-valve engines and use a common sump, which means the engine oil lubricates the engine, transmission and wet clutch. So unlike Mobil 1 for cars, Mobil 1 Racing 4T 10W-40 has no friction modifiers, which could lead to clutch slippage.

Look under "Okay. Let's start with Mobil 1 Racing 4T 10W-40. What does it offer that Mobil 1 for cars does not?"

http://www.mobiloil.com/USA-English/MotorO...FAQs.aspx#FAQs4

 

BC

Edited June 20, 2007 by Scaglietti

[Elfenstar]

The thing is i'm not an oil guru, and what you're saying and what "oil gurus" have said do not match.

 

For one an engine on its own needs hydrodynamic lubrication (i.e. for sliding) and when the film strength is not enough boundry lubrication. The latter is where FM's and AW additivies do all the work. Motorcycles on the other hand also need their oils to provide elastohydrodynamic (EHD) lubrication in the gearboxes. Ever heard of the phrase jack of all trades master at none?

 

No. two is that the properties of chemicals used are different. For one most EHD chemicals don't hold up well hydrodynamic lubrication and vice versa. So having higer levels of EHD chemicals means that something else is displaced (it could be anything from detergents to anti-wear).

 

Another thing is that PCEO manufacturers are substituting molybdenum for ZDDP, in addition to its exceptional boundary protection properties, it triples up as an anti-wear additive, friction modifier (when it become molybdenum disulfide-if they used a different moly based chem- for both AW and FM) and one of the few non-acid forming EP additives. Courtesy of the wet clutches, most m/cycles cannot have this additive, and unless motorcycle EP additives are made of a non-sulfur based polymer esters, its EP additives would form corrosive acids without sufficient counter additives. Btw, studies have shown that moly can reverse some minor wear. I've been looking through various UOA's for sulfation figures but can't seem to find any for bikes to disprove or confirm my acidity claim.

 

Considering that i'm selling my car at the end of the year i could pretty much use any oil but i would not switch to a lower quality oil simply because i believe its the right thing to do for the next owner. If you can prove that 4T is equal to at least german castrol, i'll be more than happy to give it a try.

[Elfenstar]

actually i think u got the question the wrong way around what we're trying to figure out is what do (if any) PCEO's have that m/cycle oils do not.

 

Besides FM's there are other factors like performance of silver based AW additives vs ZDDP vs moly (in top end PCEO's).

 

Then theres the EP additives (which is what gears need much much more thanks to higher shock and loads) in m/cycle oil that don't have the as much hydrodynamic lubrication (which is what pistons, bearings etc need) as PCEO's .

 

then theres what kind of EP additives are used as the sulfur based ones react with the water and other combustion chemicals and by-products to for a mild corrosive acid etc.

 

A few more things havent cropped up like whats the cleaning power of 4T vs high detergents engine oils etc.

Edited June 20, 2007 by Elfenstar

[Comfy]

I heard people got do before... does it work? Genie what are your thoughts on this?

 

Why would u wanna do that? Might as well use cooking oil, cheaper...

 

used cooking oil can be make into biodiesel la...

[Thwwx]

Mobil 1 also tells you that it is synthetic, which the following has raise some serious doubts about:

 

http://theoildrop.server101.com/forums/sho...=0&fpart=1&vc=1

 

Mobil 1 tells u alot of things so that they can sell you at premium price. In the states, bikes are lifestyle toys, bike oils sells for 2X as much as car oil easily. The bike guys have been dumping the car stuff into their bikes. Many work great even with the EC rated oils, those that slip either have a clutch that needs replacement anyway or need new/stiffer clutch springs.

 

The other main performance difference other than AW levels is that cars oils, with their typical weak shear resistance, get sheared out of grade in very little time.

 

Incidently, bike manuals have never stressed on using bike specific oil until in recent years. The emphasis was not so much on clutch slip, but on the protection level. BMW even issued a TSB that advised against later than API SL formulations for use in their bikes.

[Thwwx]

So how does 'EHD chemicals' interfere with hydrodynamic lubrication? The latter is in perfect state of lubrication when there is no physical contact between surfaces at all! It's effectiveness is factored directly to film strength and HTHS. This is a wild assumption of 'master of none'. If the car engine designers want it, they will spec an oil loaded with AW because it makes their design so much easier. Repeatedly mentioned that it is all about emissions, google it.

 

Mo does not substitute ZDDP, it complements. There are good reasons that Zn/Ph AW systems remains firmly in today's every single oil formulation. Moly disulphide is a solid precipitate and is not used in any modern engine oil! MoDTC is common, and you're wrong, it doesn't slip the clutch, AND, Mo is actually formulated in some bike specific oils, it is a matter of whether they want to.

 

This is from a well known independant test by Sportrider mag, showing clearly Mo content even in a bike spec oil.

 

The American public has been drilled that Moly is bad in bikes and auto oil is bad in bikes. Before Mobil launched their M/C series, they recommended their 'red cap' 15W50 for bikes. Then when their MX4T and V Twin 20W50 was launched, they did a 180deg turn. To this date, diehards still put M1 15W50 into their bikes, but the AW situation is evolving, this time weakening cars oils in AW protection.

 

The 'experts' like Engine Oil bible is actually a very shallow summary of 'internet knowledge' that won't stack up to slightly more serious research into the topic. Why don't you quote your sources of such 'gurus'?

Edited June 20, 2007 by Thwwx

[Thwwx]

So now it is about cleaning power? Do we really have to go through every single component aspect? Why is it that you seem to think that bikes deserve a lesser oil and should be questioned thoroughly in every function? Has it got to do with the status of bikes? There are 2 smokers that ah pek rides with 20yr OTR and there are modern high performance EFI bikes that are more 'race ready' out the box than the special edition WRX that Ah Seng is dying to test drive.

 

If u strip away all your biases, see that both car and bikes are basically 4 strokers, but one is tuned to churned out 0.2 bhp per CC at comp ratio unheard of in cars, capable of revving 14~15k rpm for extended periods, you will immediately see which oil needs to withstand the beating.

Edited June 20, 2007 by Thwwx

[Nemo6089]

Engine oil for motorcycle is so much more expensive,

why do you wants to waste your money?

[Trex101]

Inferior properties in terms of protection? Definately not. Frankly, if you're debating on fuel efficieny, there is not a snowball's chance in hell that a high HTHS 40wt will win over a 20wt. Then again, if you're looking at protection in extreme conditions, the converse is also true.

 

I am pointing out that M/C oils are made to protect any engine better especially in extreme use, which is the truth without exceptions. They're often higher spec than your equal weight and 'quality' (as in syn versus syn) PCMO in terms of protection and durability. Performance oils (M/C oils as well as top end car oils) are meant to protect and last, their durability and higher film strength (HTHS) compromises their effectiveness in terms of energy conservation, FM or no FM. Still, the difference is minute, EC specs savings in the range of 1% or 2%, you won't see much savings unless you do long haul.

 

There is no argument that:

 

1. M/C oils won't corrode anything in the engine, regardless it car or bike

2. True M/C oils definately protect better, that is what engine oil core function is all about

 

I got to chip in here, a reason why MC 4T oil is not suitable for automotive engine is the high ash content, this may cause increase valve temp & may cause burned valve in the long run.

 

Unless the engine is modify and harder valve installed.

[Thwwx]

Older gen cars have no issue with 1% or more ash, why are newer cars lower tech? Industrial diesels have no issues with ash. The main reason for low ash has been to protect the catalysers. Without a cat, an engine suddenly can use all kind of oils, not just low ash. As mentioned before, ash is hardly an issue unless the engine is buring copious amount of oil.

 

Do you have actual examples of high ash causing aforementioned damage in an otherwise healthy engine? Incidentally, newer bikes equipped with cats also states low ash in manual, but no such valve chipping reported.

Edited June 21, 2007 by Thwwx

[Elfenstar]

First things first. Enough about this presuming that i am biased BS. I'm willing to accept facts, yet there is nothing that you have proven shows that motorcycle oil is indeed better. Perhaps I might even suggest that you are the one biased towards 4T oils. And yes we do need to go through the different aspects as the whole is only the sum of its parts.

 

Another thing is read what i said properly. I never said that EP additives interfere with hydrodynamic lubrication (they just aren't good at it). But obviously in 1L of 2 near identical oil except one has more EP additives something else has to be displaced so it remains as 1L. Since I'm on EP, it is well documented that most EP additives (as most contain sulfur) do form a mildly corrosive acid (most noticeable effects are on yellow metals), I can't find any comparison of sulphation levels between UOA's in m/cycle and PCEO's and until proven otherwise i would rather err on the side of caution. higher MoDTC content also helps in this regard as when it forms MoS2 (thanks to the combustion process and petrochemicals that allows this reaction) it reduces the amount of sulfur available to form these acids. And just like ZDDP/ZDP MoS2 is a polar molecule that bonds to metals.

 

Also with regards to moly, elf's "molygraphite" does have MoS2 (as well as graphite) as solid state lubricants. As a solid state particle it is also a major component of modern aircraft engine oils (thats to its extremely low coefficent of friction). It is only complimentary to ZDDP as its bonds to zinc are stronger than its bonds to iron or aluminum.

 

MoS2 is also much more slippery than ZDDP. ZDDP has a coefficient of friction of 0.35, and MoS2 about 0.03. In a reaserch finding reported in the Tribology Letters scientific journal, the ZDDP-MoS2 combination had a friction coefficent of 0.12. I think I can safely infer than the higher levels of ZDDP in 4T allows for more friction than in PCEO's which is probably why some motorcycle clutches will not slip with Moly in 4T. (i.e. the same percentage of moly in PCEO has lower friction than in 4T as the higher level of ZDDP alows for greater friction). This inference is also backed up by another find reported in the Tribology Transactions journal in which it was stated that "the friction coefficient between the belt elements and the pulleys decreased as the amount of Zn was reduced" as well as from the Lubrication Science journal in which it was stated that "Therefore, an increase in friction due to the formation of the film derived from ZDDP and a decrease in friction due to the formation of the film derived from MoDTC were clearly suppressed in the case of the steel pins sliding on the DLC-coated disc." I'm also guessing that the clamp rate of the clutch and/or coefficient of friction of the disc may also be higher than previously to allow for this.

 

Oh although ZDDP has a higher sheer strength that MoS2 (as reported in one of the findings in the Tribology International journal), wear rates were lower with MoS2 than ZDDP but combined together they offered a better wear rate than either. Too bad i don't know in what sort of proportions (i.e. 4T vs PCEO proportions) they would offer the best protection.

 

With regards to detergency, although this is only my opinion, I suspect that all m/cycle oils are better in this regard, but if detergency is the main consideration, HDEO's would be a more cost effective option, or alternatively changing PCEO's on a more frequent schedule should see the same levels of "cleanliness".

 

As for ash content, Trex101's statement has been inversely replicated in tests by the reasearch department at the Uni of Nevada. Quote "A high ash content will tend to form more sludge and deposits in the engine. Low ash content also seems to promote long valve life." With regards to ZDDP/ZDP it was also stated that "More doesn't give you better protection, it gives you longer protection if the rate of metal to metal contact is abnormally high. High zinc content can lead to deposit formation and plug fouling." These statements speak for themselves. If you have any queries about these just email Ed Hackett at [email protected] as he's in a better position to explain them.

 

You know that stuff you keep saying about bikes working harder? Its not entirely true either. I'm not even going to try and guess which works harder as their hard work is different and i'm not one to compare apples to oranges. One is high revving the other has high loads. Why do you think that most cars have lower compression ratios? Taking pump fuel into consideration, if a car had m/cycle like comp ratios there would be a good recipe for early detonation thanks to these loads. Alternatively they could retard timing and this will raises the exhaust gas temperature. This raises the thermal stress on the pistons, spark plugs, valves, and exhaust system.

 

The last bit i need to mention is that a 1L engine putting out 0.2bhp per cc will not be able to put out the same power to displacement ratio if the engine is enlarged to 2L because power gains through displacement is not linear. The larger the displacement the lower the power to displacement ratio all other things being equal.

Edited June 22, 2007 by Elfenstar

[Elfenstar]

Don't fret too much on the defensive reply by Thwwx. In addition to what i've replied to him, scientific journals have documented the higher temperatures are obtained with higher ash content, so although nothing has explicitly been said that higher ash content will lead to increased valve temps, it can be inferred from everything that it is a distinct possibility that valves and seats are more likely to burn with a higher ash content given the right conditions esp in a modified car environment or with worn piston rings.

[Duk33d]

i have used mobil 1 5w30 motorbike engine oil in my honda city...

 

Why I used it? I din realised it was motorbike oil?

 

Second, comparing shell helix ultra 5w40 & the cheap Carrour oil 5w-40...

 

I think the motorbike kinda of like perform the best, for shell my engine starts noticeably noiser at 5k or 6k, where else for motorbike oil, 5k-6k is still like brand new engine oil noise level....

 

anyway, i change engine oil quite regularly,..b4 the 10k is up...

[Thwwx]

I appreciate a good discussion. My absence is due to other commitments, be assured I will give you some numbers to chew on if that's what you want. How about a 4.0 HTHS@150degC for a 12.5cst@100 oil? What does a oil that rates right up there with Redline car oils in HTHS tell u? Do we need to go through the whole list of performance figures, really? It is not cheap to build such oils and it is one great indicator of the intended function of the product. PC engine oil are mostly mid 3's at 14+ cst.

 

"I never said that EP additives interfere with hydrodynamic lubrication (they just aren't good at it). But obviously in 1L of 2 near identical oil except one has more EP additives something else has to be displaced so it remains as 1L."

 

Please kindly explain how will an additve interfere (as in 'have an effect on') with hydrodynamic lubrication? You do realise that all additives are measured in the order of PPM (part per MILLION), to say that volumetric variance from a stronger additive concentration is like saying a few hundred milligrams making an impact on 1 kg of base. Are you confident that this difference is even measurable?

 

"A high ash content will tend to form more sludge and deposits in the engine. Low ash content also seems to promote long valve life." With regards to ZDDP/ZDP it was also stated that "More doesn't give you better protection, it gives you longer protection if the rate of metal to metal contact is abnormally high. High zinc content can lead to deposit formation and plug fouling."

 

There is also alot of "will tend to" and "can lead to". A low viscosity oil "can lead to" accelerated wear, a 15WXX oil "can lead to" more startup wear. Drinking too much water "can lead to" death, get the drift? Does it really apply in our context and how significant? No well documented reports of such recurring 'problems' in practice strongly suggests it is a non issue. Can you explain why in the past 20++ yrs, cars have been running on a steady diet of what is considered 'high ash' oils today? Do you see that this 'high ash' thing only came about with the advent of catalysers? Will you stop using SH/SL oil just because SM now define those as 'high ash', even when your manual says it is OK? And there are people who put stuff like Delvac 1 into their cars, with great results. High ash stuff.

 

I repeat for the last time: If you're not burning copious amount of oil, this ash thing isn't an issue. If you are burning enough oil to make a few thousand PPM of metallic ash an issue, your plug probably would have been fouled from oil coating the plug.

 

"You know that stuff you keep saying about bikes working harder? Its not entirely true either. I'm not even going to try and guess which works harder as their hard work is different and i'm not one to compare apples to oranges. One is high revving the other has high loads. Why do you think that most cars have lower compression ratios? Taking pump fuel into consideration, if a car had m/cycle like comp ratios there would be a good recipe for early detonation thanks to these loads. Alternatively they could retard timing and this will raises the exhaust gas temperature. This raises the thermal stress on the pistons, spark plugs, valves, and exhaust system.

 

The last bit i need to mention is that a 1L engine putting out 0.2bhp per cc will not be able to put out the same power to displacement ratio if the engine is enlarged to 2L because power gains through displacement is not linear. The larger the displacement the lower the power to displacement ratio all other things being equal. "

 

Load is HP, it doesn't matter what rpm it is generated at. Gearing does the rest, bikes do not operate at 2k rpm like cars. I have explained that cars have lower comp ratios, and longer strokes because it is IMPRACTICAL to have an over squared bore/stroke. Such designs are for MAX HP and will drink petrol like water and you will find these in pure race engines, like F1.

 

Some cars do come closer to MC bore/stroke configurations. Do you dare say Ferraris engines are less stressed than your Toyota? Power gains thru displacement is not linear if you're talking about upping CC by changing bore/stroke. With the same bore/stroke but multiplying cylinders, it is virtually linear.

Edited June 27, 2007 by Thwwx