Mobil 1 racing 4T oil in the Spyder!!!!

[Sarge707]

The use of SM or GF-4 rated oils was prohibited by BRP due to the friction modifiers some manufacturers used to achieve those ratings. Some of these were "too slippery", causing clutch slippage. Since the Spyder came out, the situation has become more confusing. First the Rotella-T, and now the Mobil1 4T, have changed their rating to SM. At the same time, though, they carry the JASO MA rating, which has been contrary to the SM rating in the past. My guess is that they are achieving the standards through a different formulation, that now allows the oil to meet several accepted standards.

The successful use of these oils is the key. If you have been using the newer products with no clutch slippage, you are probably OK...provided you do not have a lubrication related failure that needs warranty repairs. Use is still prohibited by BRP. I know some owners have had problems with the new-label Rotella-T, but they may have used 10W-40, which is a different formulation. I think our best bet is for owners currently using the rerated oils to report on their success or failure, and the specific brand, weight, and rating of oil they used, as well as how many oil changes they have used it, so we all know what is working in the real world.

Scotty I Pasted this from my former li nk-

A premium quality motorcycle engine oil can be stated to meet the requirements of API Service Classification SJ, SH, SG, SF, CH-4, CG-4, CF-2, CF and CD. Note that SH, SF, SG and CD are now obsolete. Motorcycles specifying an oil meeting any of the obsolete applications can use an oil with the newer classification oil because it includes, and supersedes, the requirements of the obsolete service classification. For example, if you have an old motorcycle that specifies SE service classification you do not have to go out and look for an oil with that service classification (and if you did you would most likely not be able to find any in stores as SE was outdated in 1979). The newer classifications include the outdated ones and are perfectly suitable for use. There are some motorcycle oil manufacturers that will include an older service classification on the bottle to so that consumers can specifically see that the oil not only meets all the older specifications but the newer ones as well.​

​

Mobil Superceded the old SG, SH with the new SM rating. BRP has NOT!

Read more: http://www.smartsynthetics.com/articles/motorcycle_oil_technical_facts.htm#ixzz18CnyPNeW​

 

[NancysToy]

Scotty I Pasted this from my former li nk-

A premium quality motorcycle engine oil can be stated to meet the requirements of API Service Classification SJ, SH, SG, SF, CH-4, CG-4, CF-2, CF and CD. Note that SH, SF, SG and CD are now obsolete. Motorcycles specifying an oil meeting any of the obsolete applications can use an oil with the newer classification oil because it includes, and supersedes, the requirements of the obsolete service classification. For example, if you have an old motorcycle that specifies SE service classification you do not have to go out and look for an oil with that service classification (and if you did you would most likely not be able to find any in stores as SE was outdated in 1979). The newer classifications include the outdated ones and are perfectly suitable for use. There are some motorcycle oil manufacturers that will include an older service classification on the bottle to so that consumers can specifically see that the oil not only meets all the older specifications but the newer ones as well.​

Mobil Superceded the old SG, SH with the new SM rating. BRP has NOT!

Read more: http://www.smartsynthetics.com/articles/motorcycle_oil_technical_facts.htm#ixzz18CnyPNeW​

I'm not sure of the source of their information, but it is not strictly accurate. As an example, BMWs that specified an SG oil experienced failures with some of the later grades, due to the new friction modifiers eating the brionze bushings in the transmissions. BMW sold its own oil for a while, with the old rating. Some oils of the newer ratings have been proven to be acceptable...mostly the motorcycle formulations, but you still have to watch which oil you put into a BMW...especially an early one. That is why BMW and some other motorcycle manufacturers continued to specify API SF/SG oil. I have not looked at any labels recently, but some motorcycle specific oils still carried that obsolete rating just a year or so ago, even though it did not exist for any other application.

You are correct in that those API ratings are now obsolete, and have been superceded. There is more than SM, though. Current ratings include SL, SM, SN, and SJ for gasoline engines. All other ratings are obsolete. BRP initially specified an oil rated SL. Those oils seem to be disappearing, which is the topic of this thread (the oils previously labeled as SL are now labeled SM), but the SL rating is still a valid one. I will stick to an SL rated oil until I have experience with an SM formulation, or there is enough testimony that I am comfortable with it. If you put it in your Spyder and burn up the clutch, it will be expensive...and BRP will not pay for the damage!

 

[Dudley]

I love oil discussions. In the end, the BEST oil is the one you trust. I am sold on RP, some others on Amsoil, etc. You can throw labels, specs, typings on the label, but in the end, it's all how you feel about what YOU put in your Spyder. It's like trying to determine what is "true pink"!

 

[Raptor]

I love oil discussions. In the end, the BEST oil is the one you trust. I am sold on RP, some others on Amsoil, etc. You can throw labels, specs, typings on the label, but in the end, it's all how you feel about what YOU put in your Spyder. It's like trying to determine what is "true pink"!

:agree: I know there is a bunch of science and things to give us guide lines, but at the end of the day Dudley is right. He found RP, the stuff is working for him, and that is what he's usin! For me, I was fortunate to find Amsoil, and that is what is working well for me. It really is about what you trust. So there ya go!

 

[NancysToy]

I love oil discussions. In the end, the BEST oil is the one you trust. I am sold on RP, some others on Amsoil, etc. You can throw labels, specs, typings on the label, but in the end, it's all how you feel about what YOU put in your Spyder. It's like trying to determine what is "true pink"!

:agree::agree::agree:

 

[Sarge707]

I love oil discussions. In the end, the BEST oil is the one you trust. I am sold on RP, some others on Amsoil, etc. You can throw labels, specs, typings on the label, but in the end, it's all how you feel about what YOU put in your Spyder. It's like trying to determine what is "true pink"!

:agree: I have run 4T in my supercharged (High Reving) jet ski Rotax engines since 2003 with Great results! Since I just changed my oil for the winter season and have found 4 quarts of the SG, SH yesterday I,m good till NEXT fall!

 

[IWN2RYD]

I love oil discussions. In the end, the BEST oil is the one you trust. I am sold on RP, some others on Amsoil, etc. You can throw labels, specs, typings on the label, but in the end, it's all how you feel about what YOU put in your Spyder. It's like trying to determine what is "true pink"!

Very good point.

But I have another. Just because someone decided on an oil does not mean it is the one they should be using. I come to this forum to learn. :thumbup: My question is still just as valid regardless of who chooses to use what.

Maybe I need to re-word it. ***Clears throat*** If a bottle of oil matching our personal preferred grade has the "Approved" specified code, but then also has one not on the preferred list (Like the SM in this case) do we stay away from this oil or what? :helpsmilie:

And because body language and tone is hard to see in a white background and black letters of text. I am simply trying to learn, not challenge. We always read up on forums like this and find the most knowledgeable of a particular product (Like the Spyders in this case) to be there and not in a store selling us an oil.

We are more than happy to get rid of our current oil supply (Three changes worth) and go buy the correct one. :thumbup:

 

[Bob Denman]

:shocked: Wow... my headache is really getting ugly... :shocked:

 

[IWN2RYD]

:shocked: Wow... my headache is really getting ugly... :shocked:

Wow what an awesome value add. lol :roflblack:

 

[Sarge707]

:shocked: Wow... my headache is really getting ugly... :shocked:

Here is the Mobil1 Tech line 1-800-662-4525.

I called and explaining a lot of people are concerned with the new rating.
Basically its as was stated before that the SM Supercedes the SG, SH and has ALL the same qualities we expect from the older rating BUT has been assigned a New Letter. The Formula is Completely the same he assured me. In another year or sooner this Letter will be superceded by the letter "N". "It is Specifically made for High Reving Motorcycle 4 Sroke engines with transmissions and wet clutch primaries."
It will be an individual choice?:dontknow:

 

[NancysToy]

Very good point.

But I have another. Just because someone decided on an oil does not mean it is the one they should be using. I come to this forum to learn. :thumbup: My question is still just as valid regardless of who chooses to use what.

Maybe I need to re-word it. ***Clears throat*** If a bottle of oil matching our personal preferred grade has the "Approved" specified code, but then also has one not on the preferred list (Like the SM in this case) do we stay away from this oil or what? :helpsmilie:

And because body language and tone is hard to see in a white background and black letters of text. I am simply trying to learn, not challenge. We always read up on forums like this and find the most knowledgeable of a particular product (Like the Spyders in this case) to be there and not in a store selling us an oil.

We are more than happy to get rid of our current oil supply (Three changes worth) and go buy the correct one. :thumbup:

That, I'm afraid, is still strictly up to you. To me, the main reason not to use an otherwise acceptable SM rated oil would be to prevent voiding the warranty, in case of oil-related damage. BRP is unlikely to pay to repair a clutch...or even a transmission bearing, if you use a specifically prohibited oil. Until they issue an alternate oil recommendation, we are stuck with their rules.

From a standpoint of continuing to use an oil which is now labeled SM, I would be comfortable experimenting close to home, being prepared to dump the oil and start over if the clutch slipped in the least. That is my point of view as a mechanic...but my point of view as a cheap Dutchman says I payed for the extended warranty, and I wouldn't want to throw that money away. Take a deep breath, flip the coin, then proceed as directed.

 

[clueless]

That, I'm afraid, is still strictly up to you. To me, the main reason not to use an otherwise acceptable SM rated oil would be to prevent voiding the warranty, in case of oil-related damage. BRP is unlikely to pay to repair a clutch...or even a transmission bearing, if you use a specifically prohibited oil. Until they issue an alternate oil recommendation, we are stuck with their rules.

this is exactly where I am coming from :thumbup:... I am using a full synth 5W40 oil that does not have the SM rating. enough said .. others can do what they want but I have the extended warranty and dont want to risk it. keeping receipt for the oil I bought thru dealer Motul 300V 4t.

for the $$ I put into the Spyder and the ext warranty just KISS ... meet their recommended oil and be done. cost me like $1 more per qt... not a big deal.

 

[IWN2RYD]

**cries a little**

This does nothing to answer the question of the labeling meeting the requirements and one of those "Not wanted" ratings from BRP is also present.

I looked at Amsoil and it looked like this same dilemma is there as well. They qualify for numerous ratings.

Of course I know I can make my own choice, and of course the wrong oil can void the warranty. That is WHY I am trying to clarify to begin with. :2thumbs:

I could also just run the factory oil that also does not meet their very own rating requirements (If old info is still valid). Is BRP going to run Oil Test samples on every bike to determine what oil is being used in order to deny warranty repair or not? Granted I do understand a few of the oils are easy to tell. But not all.

Come folks. I am trying to learn factual info and not personal options. I remember very similar type conversations when synthetic first started rolling out.

I mean this with the up most respect, we may not yet be able to answer this question on the forums and may require direct communication with the oil companies and BRP for a final answer we can all hang our hats on. pps::chat:

For now I will just run whatever BRP sells until we know for sure. I highly doubt that will take long for the factual answer to come to light, and it most certainly is the safe call to make running BRP's stuff for a few oil changes till then...

To this day I have not seen a motorcycle synthetic oil meet one rating. They all seem to meet multiple ratings. So if one of those ratings is not one to use, do we skip over that oil all together even though it does meet another rating that is allowed? :sour:

 

[Dudley]

IWN2RYD, I can understand your concern for oil. I don't know if you can get the answer you want on this forum. I, for one, will not tell someone what oil to use. I decided on Royal Purple after reading numerous on-line sites on different oils, etc. It seems to me that when any oil company posts results of tests, their oil will meet or be superior to others contested. I call that marketing. Not to say that the other oils are not good. I called the RP tech and talked for quite a while and he answered all my questions. The one thing that swung my trust was his stating that the wear reducing additives in the oil DID NOT would NOT damage a wet clutch. He told me the only difference between the RP automotive and the RP motorcycle oils was that the MC oil was formulated for air cooled engines. I use the 10W40 weight because where I live the coldest it will ever be when I start the Spyder will be in the 40s. Again, I used this oil in the 2008 SE5 for over 35,000 miles with no issues and I am now using it in the 2010 RT. Am i concerned about warranty to the engine? Absolutely not. For over 40 years I have ridden over 500,000 miles and never had an engine issue, not matter what oil I used. Am I lucky? Yes I am. Am I worried now? No I am not. In the end, its is my choice, as it will be yours. Happy Trails. Ride in Faith.

 

[IWN2RYD]

IWN2RYD, I can understand your concern for oil. I don't know if you can get the answer you want on this forum. I, for one, will not tell someone what oil to use. I decided on Royal Purple after reading numerous on-line sites on different oils, etc. It seems to me that when any oil company posts results of tests, their oil will meet or be superior to others contested. I call that marketing. Not to say that the other oils are not good.

Could not agree more. I certainly mean well and am just trying to learn, not challenge ones likes or dislikes in Oils/Brands/Etc...

The reason for me not letting the question slide is quite simple. This has been spoken on a few times, I read those and participated in a few. It seems every time one is looking for information no answers other than opinions or like and so on ever develop.

It is 100% my fault for not asking this way in the past, before I purchased the oil I did. But a forum like this is very valuable to folks like me who are experts in a few things and not in countless others.

We rely on information offered by others on forums that have proven valuable in the past and are chalked full of folks far more knowledgeable than most. Yeah just like anything in life we trust to much or read into things one way or another.

I am not an expert in almost anything discussed here. But more than one person has responded with opinions and present them like facts.

My first hopes in coming into this thread was learning more on Mobil 1 and potentially running that in our new 2011 RT-S SE5. This is why I chimed in hoping we all could learn more as this subject is a few months down the road from last time. pps:

 

[NancysToy]

IWN2RYD, I'm not sure why you are letting this drive you so nuts. The bottom line is that you may no longer be able to find an oil other than the BRP oil that will meet their specifications. (Does anyone sense a plan here?) Virtually all oils carry multiple ratings. While for most applications, a higher rating in addition to the one specified, carries no risk...that is not the case with wet clutch motorcycle engines. All Spyder owners are in this bind. The 2008 Spyders specified a full synthetic oil, meeting certain specifications. Then BRP came out with their Summer Blend, which did not meet those specifications, yet that oil was specified for all the later Spyders, along with any full synthetic or synthetic blend designed for motorcycle use...without the API-SM rating. At that time they did not issue a service bulletin or any other announcement that would let the 2008 owners off the hook for a full synthetic meeting the API-SL rating. Now manufacturers have apparently found a way to meet the API-SM rating without the friction modifiers that cause clutch slippage. (I can't imagine Mobil1 motorcycle oil would be marketed if it was bad for motorcycles.) Unfortunately, BRP's specification once again remains the same. We are hung out on a limb again!

No, your dealer won't test your oil in case of failure. What he might do, however, in case of a problem in instances where the owner changed his own oil, would be to insist on your maintenance records. The oil you used would be revealed then. If your records were insufficient to prove you used the proper oil, your claim could be legally denied. Clutch trouble would be the most common trigger for this type of action on the dealer's part. If a tech does not find a mechanical failure (or a turbo, eh Doc) that caused a clutch to burn up, he would immediately suspect the wrong oil was used.

Note that most oils carry multiple ratings. The rule of thumb is to use any oil whose label carries the rating specified in your owner's manual...provided it does not list any rating which is specifically prohibited. In this situation, the ball would be in BRP's court to make any necessary adjustments to their specification. Since they did not do so in 2009, I sure wouldn't expect it now. They have put the burden of proof on us...in effect forcing us to buy their oil (which doesn't meet their own spec, but is specifically listed as OK for all but 2008 Spyders.) Your frustration is best addressed with them, I'm afraid. Best of luck climbing that mountain!

 

[BajaRon]

:agree: with Scotty.

Don't read this if you are susceptible to migraines! :yikes:

Oil can be as simple, or as complicated as you want to make it. It doesn't have to give you a headache, but it can.

The oil we get in a can isn't what the Arab's send us in barrels. First, Chemical engineers play all kinds of games with it.

Then the marketing people get involved.

Clueless said in a previous post; "after the oil heats up you either 5W40 or 10W40 is the SAME weight running at SAE40 weight at operating temp so again no difference. So its a WIN WIN to use 5W40 over 10W40. all things being equal."

And, in a perfect world, and all things being equal, this would be a correct statement. But, unfortunatly, it isn't a perfect world, and all things are certainly not equal. If you dig deeper into oil testing you'll find viscosities can be all over the map and nowhere near what the label on the bottle states even after only a few hundred miles.

That article from Clueless is a good one, but the part about 40 weight being 40 weight is more intended theory than reality (as you'll see if you read further down).

It would be nice if it were that easy. And honestly, it should be. But honesty is part of the problem. You have to understand, the job of the oil manufactures is not to make oil, it is to SELL oil, and in doing so, make a profit. Bigger profit is better.

If you read down a little further in the excellent article posted by Clueless, you'll find that synthetic is not necessarily synthetic. In fact, the United States is the only country in the world that allows Group III based oils to be marketed as 'Full Synthetic' (which they are not).

Amsoil and Mobil 1 are the only Group IV based oils (True Synthetic) that I know of (thought it's been sometime since I checked this).

Group IV is a more expensive base than Group III. And if you can sell the cheaper Group III as Synthetic (and make more money) then....

Group III based oils must have the same modifiers to get multiple viscosities as do so called Dyno oils. The greater the spread between numbers, the more modifiers are needed. These modifiers tend to break down, especially when you add a transmission to the equation.

As they break down, so does your effective viscosity and protection.

Group IV based oils do not need these modifiers so they maintain original specs much longer.

That is why, in my opinion, it is a shame to pass over a great product like Amsoil, or Mobil 1 for that matter, because of a 5w/10w difference. But, of course, this is just my opinion and it's always worth what it costs.

I am not saying that everyone should rush out and get Amsoil or Mobil 1. Or that other oils used by Spyder owners aren't going a great job. But knowing as much as you can will always lead you to the best choice for what you are trying to accomplish.

 

[BajaRon]

There must be something wrong with me because I love oil discussions! I guess it only confirms what Lamont has been saying about me for years!

Anyway, with all the concern about wet clutch application, this is some interesting information.

Now, of course, this is from Amsoil and they are marketing their product. So you have to take that into consideration. I would have liked to see more oils tested. Makes me wonder if other oils might out perform Amsoil in this area.

Go to Page 22 of this document where they give wet clutch friction information.

http://www.amsoil.com/lit/g2156.pdf

 

[clueless]

Here is an oil that is Truly Synthetic rating in multiple countries. Made in France.

Motul 300V 4T

http://www.motul.co.jp/eg/product_line_up/4stroke/4stroke09.html

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]SAE/DOT Standard[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]5W40[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Specification[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]API SL & JASO MA[/FONT]

Weight meets BRP Requirements = CHECK

Specs meets BRP Requirements = CHECK

:clap:


(disclaimer) I do not work for an oil company, marketing company, nor a supplier for any brand of oil. I am not a FanBoy of one brand or another ... LOL

I do like Mobile 1 V-TWIN oil for my Harley and I run Mobile 1 Gear Oil in the Transmission of my Harley Fatboy.

Just they do not make 5W40 and now their rating has changed.

 

[clueless]

Go to Page 22 of this document where they give wet clutch friction information.

http://www.amsoil.com/lit/g2156.pdf

from Page 22 = "Motul and Royal Purple meet the JASO MA specification"

Meets BajaRon requirement = CHECK :doorag:


the rest of most of the oil websites including the one I posted if from is AMSOL marketing cr$p. like BajaRon said they (in this case AMSOL) can spin it to make their best features (i.e. what they test) as listed in their report and bury what they suck at by not showing that graph or chart.