Oil grade

So what is being said here guys is that Mono grades are better in a Commando that Multi grades?
I am doing bits and pieces to my bike which I bought a couple of months ago and hope to be ready in a few weeks, (heard that one before), obivously the oil will be changed, I was just going to go for my usual Castrol GTX which I had always used in my 3 previous Commandos, would it be better to use a mono grade?
Come to think of it , away back when I had my first, (Commando), at 19 I don't think I ever changed the oil!!!!! and it went like a train...... the innocence of youth!

Gino is probably right oil regular changes are vital on these old aircooled engines. However I'll also continue to use Amsoil 20/50 full synthetic. It's expensive but after nearly 20k on a rebuild even the Andover cam from 6 years ago is hardly worn (removed barrels this winter to repaint), just some light marking on the lobes as you'd expect. Tappets never need adjustment so unless my valve seats wear at the same rate as the cam and tappets wear is hardly measurable. No metal fur on the mag drain plug either. It costs me £35 for an oil change at 3000 miles a year (with filter). Previously used 40, 50 and Duckhams 20/50 and there was always a good furry buildup on the drain plug every 1000 miles. Oil consumption is about 1/4 pint per 1000 (hard run in on rings with straight 40) with lots of 75-80mph use. Obviously not conclusive but if you've spent a lot of hard earned on a rebuild and it makes you feel better £30 extra a year is not a lot.

rbt11548 asked,

So what is being said here guys is that Mono grades are better in a Commando that Multi grades?

Click to expand...

I don't think there is a definitive answer on this, but personaly I would be wary of running multi-grades for too long, and I would agree with Gino that regular milage/time intervals are probably more important than oil type.

Read up on several view points and make your choice :?:

I still think an oil with an acceptable level of zinc (ZDDP) should be used. It was considered important when just about everything had plain bearings and pushrod valvetrain with flat tappets.

The main reason the new API standards (SL, SM) have drastically cut the amount of ZDDP in motor oil is most modern engines use roller tappets and new alloys that can survive without the zinc additive. Lower zinc levels in the oil are supposed to be beneficial to the environment, too.

I equate this to the old days when gasoline had tetraethyl lead used as an octane booster. The added benefit of the lead was it deposited on valve seats and cushioned the impact of the valve on the seat. New valve seats had to be designed for use with unleaded fuel, and engines generally built before 1968 needed either an additive to the gas, or have the new valve seats installed.

Well said Bill, I was told to make sure the oil has an SG rating. I think that is the zinc, +1 on Amsoil 20/50 Heard it's great oil. The Castrol GTX no longer contains zinc as it once did. And there is no way I am going to check the temp with my meat by sticking it in the tank even if I do have a rubber on it. :roll: :roll: :roll:

"And there is no way I am going to check the temp with my meat by sticking it in the tank even if I do have a rubber on it. "

Chuck,

That is damn funny! I sure did get a real belly laugh out of that one.

Well that's all I was trying to do is be funny, After I left the post I was worried some might find it stupid. For those that think it is I am sorry. It's nice on this forum that we can talk about oil and not argue about it, On the Buell forum it seems there is no better way to start an argument than to talk about oil or tires. But I do think that changing your oil often is good insurance. Take care guys and ride safe, Chuck.

I use Millers 10/60 fully sythnetic, the consistancy stays the same regardless from startup to shut down. Only downside is expense also UK only.

I use Valvoline VR-1 Racing oil. It's comparable to Castrol or Quaker State conventional oil pricewise, but still has the higher zinc content, plus I can find it at my local auto parts store in 40, 50 or 60 weight.

I have run 50 weight since I put the bike together, and it seems to like it. We don't have to worry about cold weather down here - it was 59 at dawn this morning (16 C), but that's because we had a cold front come through yesterday

Straight 50wt VR-1 here as well. It still has, as noted earlier, fairly high levels of ZDDP. I have a filter and change the oil at 1,000-1,500 miles.

I'm using the Valvoline PN VV851 in the just completed R90S while breaking it in . It was recommended by Leo Goff who did the work and it supposedly has high levels of ZDDP . Once the break-in is complete I plan to switch to the AMSOIL 20-50 . That's what I run in the recently acquired 850 Commando and have been using it in my air cooled Ducatis for several years .

My street 944 SS Ducati has an oil temp gauge it is not unusual to see 130 C when riding in the mountains in the summer on it . My other Duc is a 750 SS race bike that has mid 80's rwhp . It has been held wide open on the banking at Daytona and on the long straighaways at Road America . The race engine has been apart a couple of times to replace holed pistons due to bad gas . Cams , rockers , bearings and transmission gears all look fine . If the AMSOIL can withstand that heat along with the shearing action of the transmission gears and whatever shearing may occur due to the roller bearing crank and transmission shafts , I'm prettty confident it can take whatever abuse a 40 hp Norton is able to throw at it .

Interestingly , the Valvoline has no API service classification on the bottle . The AMSOIL has the older SG rating . As someone stated earlier , that's what I look for . Another interesting thing is that in some of their testing , AMSOIL found that some of the oils with the highest levels of Zinc , didn't do so well . www.amsoil.com/lit/g2156.pdf

I'm NOT an AMSOIL dealer and I hate their business model , but my experience is that the stuff works . They also have a 75W-90 GL-4 gear lube that is advertised as being non-corrosive to yellow metals , unlike the GL-5 rated lubes . That's what I put in the transmissions and final drive on the Beemer and plan to put it in the transmission of the Commando .

rond944 said:

Interestingly , the Valvoline has no API service classification on the bottle .

Click to expand...

That product doesn't have the API label because it is not street legal - for racing or off-road applications only.

I broke in my engine with Aeroshell non-detergent oil

I just went onto the Valvoline site to see what they said about the zinc issue, on a 2 page spread this was one of the statements;

"Many hands-on car enthusiasts and engine experts believe the lower levels of zinc in “SM” engine oil is causing excessive wear in older style push-rod and flat tappet engines. This is despite the fact that all new engine oil classifications are intended to be backward compatible. This has resulted in the widely accepted belief that modern engine oil is not adequate to protect older engines".

Make of it what you will, the way I read it was that it was making a number of statements and covering all sides of the debate.
Firstly they say that enthusiasts and experts "believe" ... not have proof that it is causes engine wear.
Secondly they say that ALL new engine oils are "intended" to be compatible with older engines, not necessarily that they are!
Lastly the "wildly accepted belief" that modern oil is not adequate to protect older engines... again they don't come out and say it does not protect older engines.
The way I read the paragraph, and it is only my opinion, as I am way down the food chain when it comes to the make up of oils, is that there is a big definite, maybe, might or might not proctect the older engines.
They have managed to cover all sides of the argument in a paragraph, and the answer is...... decide for yourselves and put in what you think will do the job.

I think we Norton owners, myself included, get a little carried away about our choices of oil. After all, were are not talking about accumulating high mileage with our Nortons. Most change the oil and filter at least three times more frequently than our four wheel mounts. Although I do have a preference, I don't think it's that critical. If there is one area of lubrication I'm concerned about, it would be oil temperature. You can fill the oil tank with $100/ quart 5-100W Unobtainium, but if it gets too hot it's lost most of it's lubricity.

IMO, three things all Nortons need are: an oil filter, an oil cooler, an oil pressure gauge.

rbt11548 said:

I just went onto the Valvoline site to see what they said about the zinc issue, on a 2 page spread this was one of the statements;

"Many hands-on car enthusiasts and engine experts believe the lower levels of zinc in “SM” engine oil is causing excessive wear in older style push-rod and flat tappet engines. This is despite the fact that all new engine oil classifications are intended to be backward compatible. This has resulted in the widely accepted belief that modern engine oil is not adequate to protect older engines".

Make of it what you will, the way I read it was that it was making a number of statements and covering all sides of the debate.
Firstly they say that enthusiasts and experts "believe" ... not have proof that it is causes engine wear.
Secondly they say that ALL new engine oils are "intended" to be compatible with older engines, not necessarily that they are!
Lastly the "wildly accepted belief" that modern oil is not adequate to protect older engines... again they don't come out and say it does not protect older engines.
The way I read the paragraph, and it is only my opinion, as I am way down the food chain when it comes to the make up of oils, is that there is a big definite, maybe, might or might not proctect the older engines.
They have managed to cover all sides of the argument in a paragraph, and the answer is...... decide for yourselves and put in what you think will do the job.

Click to expand...

I don't think one has to spend a mint for oil, but I am firmly in the camp of 'zinc is important for flat tappet, plain bearing engines'. Some may complain of 'soft cams' in certain older engines that have their lobes wear prematurely, and this is precisely what zinc is intended to mitigate.

Since a very small percentage of vehicles on today's roads would be adversely affected by low zinc levels (maybe 1%) oil companies would be correct in stating that new standards are intended to be backward compatible.

Bill , thanks for the education regarding the API service classification . I didn't know that it was only applicable to oils intended for street use . I agree with you that some higher level of zinc than what is found in most new oils is necessary to keep our flat tappet cams and lifters happy .

Ron

Strongly recommend Redline oils for their zinc content and general quality. I've posted elsewhere and won't wax rhapsodic lest anyone think I own Redline stock or something, but I swear by their products. MT-90 for the gearbox, MTL for the primary, and you've got the Redline trilogy working for you. Has done right by me.

I think this is an interesting article:

http://www.realclassic.co.uk/techfiles/oil030319.html

And here's another one that is even more interesting:
"Motorcycle Oil vs. Automotive Oils"

http://www.nightrider.com/biketech/oiltest1.htm

It is a very long test report (quite old though). If you don't want to read all of it, scroll down to the end of it: the table "Relative Viscosity Retention"
It shows the difference of viscosity retention between synthetic and mineral oil. It convinced me to use full synthetic oil (Mobil 1) in both my Ducati MHR Mille and my Buell S1 and I'm also going to use it in the Norton that I bought this week.

addition: the aim of this article was to find out if there's a difference between motorcycle oil and automotive oil. As mentioned above, the article is quite old and partially superseded. IMO, the chapter about viscosity retention though is still useful information.

Paul said:

And here's another one that is even more interesting:
"Motorcycle Oil vs. Automotive Oils"

http://www.nightrider.com/biketech/oiltest1.htm

It is a very long test report (quite old though). If you don't want to read all of it, scroll down to the end of it: the table "Relative Viscosity Retention"
It shows the difference of viscosity retention between synthetic and mineral oil. It convinced me to use full synthetic oil (Mobil 1) in both my Ducati MHR Mille and my Buell S1 and I'm also going to use it in the Norton that I bought this week.

Click to expand...

Viscosity retention is why synthetic oils can go up to 25,000 miles (40,000KM) in some applications. For 3000 miles or less between oil changes, the difference is negligible. In an older engines with flat tappets, zinc level in the oil is the most important consideration. Newer oils have reduced the amount of zinc, and can actually be harmful to old engines unless a zinc additive is combined with the oil. I believe 1000-1300ppm is the ideal range for zinc.

For most motorcycle applications, maintaining proper oil level is much more important than whether you've got $4/quart oil or $20/quart. I have an acquaintance who ruined a 2007 engine because he hadn't checked the oil level in over 2000 miles. He figured, "why bother? It's got Motorex 4T and the oil changes are every 6000 miles." When the oil level dropped to about a quart, he spun a bearing.