Legit innovation in motorcycle engine oils?

[NORTY]

6 hours ago, Mike@MaximaUSA said:

I'm glad to have spurred more discussion and thanks all for the kind words! Glad to he here and partaking in discussions on behalf of Maxima.

Thanks for the feedback and warm welcome! I question your analysis though. Specifically, the term "pumping losses" usually refers to losses from the engine "pumping" air in through the intake and out the exhaust. The oil has little effect on this except through reduction of overall friction as you stated, whether through chemistry at low engine speed or viscosity at mid to high speed. The losses due to the oil pump itself are typically less than 0.5% of total parasitic loss, whereas the industry standard for overall friction is considered to be around 10% for the typical ICE, so a much more significant number and a more ideal parameter to target for improvement of power and/or efficiency. 

Thanks again!

 

Mike, when I mentioned "pumping losses" I was referring to the oil pump itself. You see, the oil pump consumes a fair amount of engine torque. I'm not going to get into specifics here, as this is a motorcyclist forum, not an oil forum. (Altho, I have been known to visit a few of those, over the years.) 

BTW, I had heard of Lubrizol in the past, but it was prior to 1990-1995 or so. (I was a marketer/jobber for a major from 1968 to 1999.) 

Member ASLE

Tribologist

OAN~ I can't BELIEVE what the crude futures market is doing right now...

[Sacrifice]

8 hours ago, Mike@MaximaUSA said:

I'm glad to have spurred more discussion and thanks all for the kind words! Glad to he here and partaking in discussions on behalf of Maxima.

Thanks for the feedback and warm welcome! I question your analysis though. Specifically, the term "pumping losses" usually refers to losses from the engine "pumping" air in through the intake and out the exhaust. The oil has little effect on this except through reduction of overall friction as you stated, whether through chemistry at low engine speed or viscosity at mid to high speed. The losses due to the oil pump itself are typically less than 0.5% of total parasitic loss, whereas the industry standard for overall friction is considered to be around 10% for the typical ICE, so a much more significant number and a more ideal parameter to target for improvement of power and/or efficiency. 

That's pretty surprising not hearing about Lubrizol at your former employer! I get it though. Many companies have their preferred additive supplier and some don't have much contact with the others. Nonetheless, I'd be very surprised if anyone at a major who worked directly with component suppliers or on the technology side didn't have at least some relationship with Lubrizol for one end use or another. Of the 4 big additive companies (the others being Afton, Infineum and Oronite), Lubrizol was the largest (at least when I was there) and provided additives or components for every major that I'm aware of. 

Thanks again!

You're welcome @Twowheeladdiction!! And thank you as well! 

I think that is a completely fair question. I'd like to preface my answer by clarifying that the core PEAC additive system is now included in all of our North American 4-stroke engine oils. We include additional chemistry on top of the core additive for higher performing oils like Pro Plus and our Extra Series while of course changing the base oils and viscosity modifier systems for each. 

Having said that, you'd still be getting the benefits of PEAC if you used our mineral-based Premium series, for example. Where you'd lose out is the additional longevity and cleanliness due to the synthetic base oils and esters, which can help improve the durability of your machine. Staying with the durability topic, you'd also be giving up some shear stability (viscosity stability) because Pro Plus and Extra feature more shear stable viscosity modifiers than Premium. You'd also lose out on some of the efficiency/power gains from the synthetic base oils and esters.

On the other hand, while Pro Plus meets JASO MA2 and technology has come along way since the days of "synthetics are bad for clutch", mineral oils like Premium still have a slight edge in minimizing clutch slip. Also, the shear stability of Premium is still pretty great and will certainly maintain sufficient oil film thickness sufficient to ensure adequate engine and transmission protection. 

So, if you're not racing competitively and you don't care about a bit of extra power or a bit of saved fuel, a mineral-based oil like Premium will be more than sufficient. You won't get the aforementioned extra benefits of Pro Plus, but we wouldn't sell Premium if we didn't think it was capable of delivering exceptional performance. 

BUT, if your manual recommends synthetic, please stick with that recommendation. That's my PSA for the day. Please don't go against the recommendation of your manual! It's illegal for the OEM to mandate which brand of oil you use, but they do (and should) specify the quality level and viscosity grade, so it'll usually say something like "Use 'Insert OEM Name Here' Genuine 10W-40 or a high-quality 'mineral/semi-syn/full-syn' 10W-40 meeting JASO MA." Please ensure you follow those recommendations, provided it's a Maxima oil ?!! Just kidding, I'd rather you use the correct competitor oil than the wrong Maxima oil and trash your bike. Too much design, development and even some artistry goes into these machines to mess them up with bad maintenance practices.

Thanks again for the kind welcome!

Just put maxima premium in my 690. 70 miles on the change and it shifts smoother than it ever did on motorex. Look forward to seeing how it works out over time.

[Mike@MaximaUSA]

On 4/21/2020 at 10:34 PM, Sacrifice said:

Just put maxima premium in my 690. 70 miles on the change and it shifts smoother than it ever did on motorex. Look forward to seeing how it works out over time.

Thanks for the great feedback @Sacrifice! Please let us know how it performs for you over the drain and thank you for the business! We really appreciate it!

On 4/21/2020 at 8:03 PM, NORTY said:

Mike, when I mentioned "pumping losses" I was referring to the oil pump itself. You see, the oil pump consumes a fair amount of engine torque. I'm not going to get into specifics here, as this is a motorcyclist forum, not an oil forum. (Altho, I have been known to visit a few of those, over the years.) 

BTW, I had heard of Lubrizol in the past, but it was prior to 1990-1995 or so. (I was a marketer/jobber for a major from 1968 to 1999.) 

Member ASLE

Tribologist

OAN~ I can't BELIEVE what the crude futures market is doing right now...

@NORTY it's definitely a crazy time for oil and the world in general. Hopefully we can get it turned around soon.

I don't think too much delving will be required, as you and I were talking about the exact same thing! Parasitic losses are essentially anything that consumes engine output and prevents the engine from achieving its ultimate goal of transferring usable power to the wheels. The oil pump is of course part of these losses and in modern hardware typically only constitutes 0.5% or less of total lost output (or torque). Compared to the 10% or more lost to friction, this is a negligible value, hence why decreasing frictional losses is how the most benefit to power and efficiency can be realized from the oil. Further, if we wanted to improve the small losses to the oil pump through the engine oil, we'd have to significantly decrease the viscosity of the oil to see any improvement, but this then brings it's own potential problem with loss of durability and we can't very well go as far as to drop the viscosity grade, since that is determined by the OEM or engine builder. 

But, for the sake of argument, let's say our 2.5% gain in power is repeatable, which we believe it is based on other dyno testing and also through separate engine friction testing using electrically driven motors, which is a nice, repeatable method because it eliminates any variability introduced through combustion. Using the aforementioned 10% as the industry-recognized value for frictional losses (doesn't hurt that it's a nice round number either), this is essentially a 25% improvement in what losses we can influence with the oil. If we were to take that same 25% improvement value and apply it to the oil pump losses, which to achieve would again require drastic viscosity reductions, we'd still only recognize a 0.125% improvement, negligible in the grand scheme and certainly not worth sacrificing the durability afforded by a more viscous oil. 

Thanks again for the feedback and interesting discussions! 

[FORMA MOTO]

It gets dirty, so you change it.

It wears out so you change it.

The first one nearly always trumps the second one, unless it's crap like Rotella.

 

Edited April 24, 2020 by KRAYNIAL

[EarthCruzn]

Oil to me is like anything else.....................

I have used a conventional GN4 for all the bikes..........race , road fun and camping.

It has never failed me by burning or any loss not expected.

Seals and rings wear well and compression stays in spec.

It would take a lot for me to purchase a "new and improved" product of any kind............................

Like your favorite beverage................. it became your favorite for a reason.

 

Edited April 23, 2020 by EarthCruzn

[NORTY]

4 hours ago, KRAYNIAL said:

It gets dirt, so you change it.

It wears out so you change it.

The first one nearly always trumps the second one, unless it's crap like Rotella.

 

Oil doesn't "wear" out. Sure, it's additive package may become consumed, but it doesn't wear out. 

 

[FORMA MOTO]

2 minutes ago, NORTY said:

Oil doesn't "wear" out. Sure, it's additive package may become consumed, but it doesn't wear out. 

 

Oh my........when the additives are depleted, the oil oxidizes. Then it is no longer protecting the motor..........because it is WORN OUT. 

https://www.machinerylubrication.com/Read/475/oil-breakdown

[NORTY]

9 minutes ago, KRAYNIAL said:

Oh my........when the additives are depleted, the oil *oxidizes*. Then it is no longer protecting the motor..........because it is WORN OUT. 

https://www.machinerylubrication.com/Read/475/oil-breakdown

Sorry. Wrongo.

 Again, oil does NOT wear out. 

Maybe I'm over simplifying it too much for you. (That's twice now.) 

Think "additive pack." 

Oils are made up of many components. (Base stocks and additive packs.)  

Oils themselves DO NOT wear out. It is the additive packs that get consumed...

 *Lubricants that have detergents/dispersants, usually have "anti-oxidizers" built into the additive pack. Along with many other constituents. 

Let's get back to motorcycles, shall we?

[FORMA MOTO]

10 minutes ago, NORTY said:

Sorry. Wrongo.

 Again, oil does NOT wear out. 

Maybe I'm over simplifying it too much for you. (That's twice now.) 

Think "additive pack." 

Oils are made up of many components. (Base stocks and additive packs.)  

Oils themselves DO NOT wear out. It is the additive packs that get consumed...

 *Lubricants that have detergents/dispersants, usually have "anti-oxidizers" built into the additive pack. Along with many other constituents. 

Let's get back to motorcycles, shall we?

So arrogant !  Complain, insult, accuse, but no proof.  So typical.

Read my link. Oil, all oils, have a life span. 

[NORTY]

Wait a minute! "life span" is totally different than "worn out."

I'll agree with you re: life span. Finished lubricants can have a finite life span. 

Dunno about "crude" oil having life spans. They could, but it would be a looonng time!

So much for "all oils have a life span..."

Damn it, this turned into another oil thread.  

[turbo dan]

43 minutes ago, KRAYNIAL said:

What ignorance, what arrogance.

What irony.

I've had two samples of rotella analyzed at Blackstone and it held up great.  Not just good but great.  Surely you have something even better than that to back up your somehow completely opposite opinion?

[EarthCruzn]

I really do not think there is the "perfect" oil for all engine's.

Each engine design in performance and RPM, designed torque loads and speeds will be best served with a oil that fits the task.

You would not use one type of fuel in every engine...……………… same applies to oils.

The words "manufactures recommendations" might be better than the commercial or the magazine article that just came out.

[ossagp1]

16 hours ago, turbo dan said:

What irony.

I've had two samples of rotella analyzed at Blackstone and it held up great.  Not just good but great.  Surely you have something even better than that to back up your somehow completely opposite opinion?

I am curious as to tests other than Rotella. Were there others?

Edited April 24, 2020 by ossagp1

[ossagp1]

5 hours ago, EarthCruzn said:

I really do not think there is the "perfect" oil for all engine's.

Each engine design in performance and RPM, designed torque loads and speeds will be best served with a oil that fits the task.

You would not use one type of fuel in every engine...……………… same applies to oils.

The words "manufactures recommendations" might be better than the commercial or the magazine article that just came out.

It's always a good place to start. I think making a change without having some kind of a target is time wasted. Looking at some of my manuals from the factory and seeing something like  SAE10-30 se rated, you may look at that and say, just like suggested octane it is the minimum requirement. Expectations of an oil to make up for mistakes is pretty much another unicorn hunt.

Edited April 24, 2020 by ossagp1

[EarthCruzn]

One thing is for sure,

You can put bad oil in a good engine and destroy it.

BUT you cannot put good oil in a bad engine and save it................... BUT they keep try'in to sell you magic in a bottle.

I have never used any synthetics in my engines................... it is almost impossible to find "pure" conventional oil on shelves today.

The market has gone magic

[NoFiddyPilot]

1 hour ago, EarthCruzn said:

 

I have never used any synthetics in my engines................... it is almost impossible to find "pure" conventional oil on shelves today.

The market has gone magic

I don't see it as "magic". I'm pretty sure the performance benefits of synthetics is well established and documented. I do think there is some is snake oil out there, but there are definitely legit companies with smart people who are trying to incrementally improve their products. Especially for racing applications, it's all about incremental improvements because the sum total of all of them add up. But, that's not important to everyone for sure. I started this topic b/c I do find the chemistry behind Maxima's PEAC additive package interesting (material affinity) and I appreciate the inside line that @Mike@MaximaUSA provided as well as the perspectives of those with real knowledge on the subject. The discussion arms buyers with more info and that helps cut through "magic" marketing messages. I think we all want quality products that also have a good value. I agree that running any product that you simply don't realize a benefit from is a waste of money in a sport that is fairly expensive already.

[EarthCruzn]

I know a few crews that use Maxima, they feel good about it as well. It is a good product.

I am glad to see the support all put in to our sport and lifestyle. It is appreciated for sure!

 

Not companies many do get involved................ most just think of the end bottom line.

[NoFiddyPilot]

12 minutes ago, EarthCruzn said:

Not companies many do get involved................ most just think of the end bottom line.

Especially in notorious forum oil topics! Brave! ? At least in the powersports segment, many work in it for the lifestyle, not just the money. Plenty of soul sucking ways to make a lot of money, but hard to do for long.

[beezer]

I don't know the first thing about oil and I don't want to know.

I have used Maxima since they started because Ron Lechien actually abused drugs and alcohol more than me.

And we're both still alive (sorta).

And my bikes always shifted noticeably  better when I used Maxima.

I use Rotella in my lawn mower.

 

[Arctic Pride]

this is calling Project Farm on YT