Oil?

I was advised (Penrite oil), that detergent oil on an old engine starts to pick up the old stuck particles from ages past in the engine, to the detriment of the engine (unless you have a modern oil filter that can pick these particles up). non detergent oil probably best unless the engine is newly rebuilt and all internals sparkly as a new pin.

Non detergent SAE 50 is normally recommended for total loss veterans. Classic SAE 50 is normally lightly detergent and I would suggest more suitable. In fact, unless you are doing long, hard runs in ahot climate, SAE 40 may well be a better bet. More and more people are recommending synthetic 10W-60. Once I use up my stock of Morris's SAE 40 I may well go down that route. Velocette used 10W-40 on their 24hr 100mph Venom so you can use multigrade on roller big-ends quite happily.

Previously john_renvoize wrote:

I have recently aquired a W.D. 16h and I need to know what SAE50 oil you would recommend to use in the engine, would you use detergent or non detergent oil ?

Many thanks, John.

Well good old Morris or Milliers Castorl 20/50 SAE will do more good than any SAE50, why you may ask will for a start the oil in a 20 Sae state witch is good to get round all the small oilways, quickly, and do the job of lubricating the Ball and Roller Bearings then as the engine get hotter is transforms into a 50SAE oil all very clever Oil technology , thats been around for well over 50 years, Yours Anna J

I use 10/60 in my Commando, other than unerring ability to create new oil leaks it is a huge leap in combating metal to metal wear and surviving hot spots near the exhaust valve unchanged. Next oil change I will be going 20/60 and fitting dowty washers to the oil tank filter to cure the last remaining oil leak.

I use Rockoil TRM 20w60 synthetic oil in all my twins and single (except the Manx). It is expensive compaired to other oils, but after disasters with oils in the past, I want to have confidence in my oil.

http://www.rockoil.co.uk/cm/images/pdf/techdata/TRM.pdf

I personally wouldn't use a 20w50 in my 16H, a straight 40w or 50w would be best if you don't want the synthetic oils. When a 20w50 oil breaks down with pressure and high temperature, it reverts back to a 20w oil which is not suitable for a Norton. As sidevalves run very hot and with a roller bearing crank a 20w50 oil is more likely to beakdown.

I see even Andover Norton have added a page on there site about oil, saying 20w50 was only recommended for Commando's because it was widely available and not because it's the best oil for the bike. They now recommend 40w oil for them. This confirms what I have concluded and I won't use a normal 20w50 in any of my Nortons now.

http://www.andover-norton.co.uk/SI%20Oil.htm

It is a myth that modern multigrade oils will break down under the thermal and mechanical stresses of your engine. he specification requirements set a minimum viscosity of, typically, 3.5 cP at 150 deg. C and a shear rate of 106 sec.-1 it is also required that after a large number of cycles at high shear stresses, the oil must remain in grade.

Beware however not all 20W50 oils achieve the levels of performance set by the American Petroleum Institute (API) or ACEA, ( the European equivalent.

So what you're saying is some oils can break down if they don't achieve a certain level of performance.... therefore it's not a myth...? Andover Norton wouldn't be writing about it if it was a myth.

I was told Valvoline 20W50 was a good oil. I put it in a newly built Commando engine. After 2000 mile and several oil changes, I had to take the engine apart for another reason and was shocked to see everything was worn out, and I mean everything that could ware out, had. I showed it to an my engineer and he confirmed it was my oil. I rebuilt the engine and now use Rockoil TRM.

I use Rockoil TRM 20w60 synthetic oil in all my twins and single (except the Manx). It is expensive compaired to other oils, but after disasters with oils in the past, I want to have confidence in my oil.

http://www.rockoil.co.uk/cm/images/pdf/techdata/TRM.pdf

I personally wouldn't use a 20w50 in my 16H, a straight 40w or 50w would be best if you don't want the synthetic oils. When a 20w50 oil breaks down with pressure and high temperature, it reverts back to a 20w oil which is not suitable for a Norton. As sidevalves run very hot and with a roller bearing crank a 20w50 oil is more likely to beakdown.

I see even Andover Norton have added a page on there site about oil, saying 20w50 was only recommended for Commando's because it was widely available and not because it's the best oil for the bike. They now recommend 40w oil for them. This confirms what I have concluded and I won't use a normal 20w50 in any of my Nortons now.

http://www.andover-norton.co.uk/SI%20Oil.htm

Here its on Andover -norton web site is popie-cock, How can a formulated oil become a 20 SAE at high tempture when its formulated to be a 50sae and has additives to do just this, oil technology has come a long way since the 1980s and 90s and a singel cylinder machine crank shaft is not under perssure like a twins cylinders are , as there mains are roll bearings, and tin oil is better for these has the bearing will not skid as much has they would with a 40or 50sae, and a tin oil lubricates quicker and get round the engine quicker too, heavy oils cannot do this until there at tempeture, , Its like trying to get a pillow up a drain pipe, ho welll no one really reads what i put anyway, yours anna j

Previously dave_graham1 wrote:

So what you're saying is some oils can break down if they don't achieve a certain level of performance.... therefore it's not a myth...? Andover Norton wouldn't be writing about it if it was a myth.

I was told Valvoline 20W50 was a good oil. I put it in a newly built Commando engine. After 2000 mile and several oil changes, I had to take the engine apart for another reason and was shocked to see everything was worn out, and I mean everything that could ware out, had. I showed it to an my engineer and he confirmed it was my oil. I rebuilt the engine and now use Rockoil TRM.

What I am saying is that in order to satisfy the modern specifications of the API and ACEA the oil must pass stringent tests the severity of which exceeds greatly those encountered in even extreme service. The specifications and test methods are verified by widespread testing by the appropriate industry groups in a wide range of engines over mileage which exceed drain intervals and which use demanding driving /riding regimes.

So yes Andover Norton are wrong. I have a lifetime of experience in both the science of lubrication and in formulation of oils for all sorts of engines, so there is a chance that I know of what I am writing..

Anna, I totally agree with you that oils have come along way in the last 50 years, hence I use a 20w60 synthetic oil as stated above. This is probably more than is needed in a Norton single. I wouldn't use a mineral 20w50 oil from my experiences.

What you are saying about Norton singles doesn't make sense, you are saying the roller bearings run better with thin oil, but a 20w50 oil when at temperature is a 50w oil, so why not run it on straight 20w oil if what you say is correct?

A roller bearing bigend (crankpin) isn't pressurised, as you've said, so needs a viscous oil to coat the rollers, a thin oil wouldn't stay on the bearings and it would be unprotected. There are no thin oil ways and so a single weight oil like 40w or 50w is fine for these engines.

A bit puzzled regarding the Valvoline experience. I used it for many years with no ill effects. Was it really the oil that was at fault? Our bikes are relatively undemanding regarding oils. Straight oils provide perfectly adequate protection but I see no reason why one shouldn't use a multigrade either. For our engines, are fully synthetic oils worth the extra money? Discuss.

In the single cylinder Norton Engines the oil is pressure fed through the big-end restriction jet, along the timing side shaft, through the flywheels and sprays onto the roller bearing. The viscosity of the oil has to be high enough to ensure traction between rollers and crankpin and outer race. Experiments show that the traction generated by multigrade oils is sufficient to maintain rotation. What we term skidding is inevitable because the crankpin diameter is less than that of the outer race and hence there is a difference in the speed of the outer race and crankpin so the number of rotations of the roller per engine rotation is less for the crankpin contact than for the outer race contact.

A further point, although multigrade oils are designated as say 20W50 and have the low temperature characteristics of a 20 grade oil and the high temperature characteristics of a 50 grade oil,this is only true at low shear stresses. At high temperatures and high shear stresses the viscosity falls to, typically 0.6 of the low shear stress values. The viscosity recovers when the shear stress falls. It is for this reason that High Temperature High Shear rate viscosity is part of the oil lubricant approval tests and that the specification values are set high enough to ensure that there is no risk to engine bearings.

Hope that this helps.

Previously Gordon Johnston wrote:

A bit puzzled regarding the Valvoline experience. I used it for many years with no ill effects. Was it really the oil that was at fault? Our bikes are relatively undemanding regarding oils. Straight oils provide perfectly adequate protection but I see no reason why one shouldn't use a multigrade either. For our engines, are fully synthetic oils worth the extra money? Discuss.

I can't think of any other explanation to why everything in a new engine wore out in 2000 miles. The cam and followers, piston rings and rocker spindles all had to be replaced. There was no damage to the bores or crank but minor scoring on the shells probably from the particles in the engine and the main bearings were ok. The oil pump was dismantled and ok and went back in the rebuild engine. The damage to the cam lobs and followers would suggest the oil was to blame. If it was a faulty part how would that affect the rings and rocker spindles? Since I've been running the Commando with synthetic oil it's been ok (but I haven't taken it apart again to see). I no longer get a metalic sheen in my old oil on my Dommie or Commando.

You are probably right that a synthetic oil is not necessary in a 16H or ES2, but I can't see a problem with having an oil that's too good? It's also easier for me to have 1 oil in the garage than 2 or 3 different oils for different bikes. However I was pleased I had the synthetic oil in my 16H last year in Normandy when my magnito shellac melted and the engine was struggling to keep going. I had to limp the bike 2 up, 20 miles at 15mph, back to the campsite. I could see the exhaust changing colour and it was very hot. It stretched the mag chain, retarding the ignition and making the bike run hotter. When the bike cooled down, the shellac set hard and the engine wouldn't move. Luckily Rik Payne had a spare mag on site and the bike was up and running again.

I think the answer to John's original question of what oil to use in his 16H just depends on who you're asking, everyone seems to have a different opinion

At least you are running hot enough to keep your plug clean and avoid condensation!.

Previously David Cooper wrote:

Charles - thanks for the handy summary of oil requirements - but I'm not so sure about rollers needing to skid. If they did (just because the outer race had a different circumference from the inner) then the epicyclic gearbox would not be possible. There isn't any need for rollers to skid. Taper rollers don't skid either since the inner and outer tapers are on conical surfaces with a common top centre point.

David - Unlike main bearings, big end bearings do skid. See page 86 Tuning for Speed and 229 onwards, Motorcycle Engineering by Phil Irving. Phil Irving may not have been so well known as Tesla or Brunell, but I would say he knew more about motorcycle engineering than anyone else on this forum

Previously David Cooper wrote:

Charles - thanks for the handy summary of oil requirements - but I'm not so sure about rollers needing to skid. If they did (just because the outer race had a different circumference from the inner) then the epicyclic gearbox would not be possible. There isn't any need for rollers to skid. Taper rollers don't skid either since the inner and outer tapers are on conical surfaces with a common top centre point.

The circumference of the inner race (crankpin ) is less than that of the outer race ( con rod eye ). so the number of complete rotations of the rollers per engine revolution is different for the crankpin / conrod eye. So slippage occurs. This usually doesn't matter much, particularly if the bearing is caged and a good lubricant is used. If not, then pileup of rollers can occur causing premature failure.

With regard to synthetic lubes v mineral oil based ones, the advantage of the synthetics is that they allow the formulation of wider viscosity oils and they are easier to protect against oxidation. You would not use an expensive synthetic base stock to make, say, a 20W50 oil but you couldn't make, say, a 10W60 without synthetics.

For most of our members the mineral based oils are adequate. For those doing high speed, high milages, then synthetics are worth the extra cost.

Previously john_hawden wrote:

(unless you have a modern oil filter that can pick these particles up).

The way the dry sump system works you cannot filter the oil on the way to the engine, only on the way back to the tank when the damage has been done. The sludge trap, on the other hand, is a better solution. The solid contaminants only flow through the oil pump (which is bad enough) and stop at the sludge trap.

Anna, I totally agree with you that oils have come along way in the last 50 years, hence I use a 20w60 synthetic oil as stated above. This is probably more than is needed in a Norton single. I wouldn't use a mineral 20w50 oil from my experiences.

What you are saying about Norton singles doesn't make sense, you are saying the roller bearings run better with thin oil, but a 20w50 oil when at temperature is a 50w oil, so why not run it on straight 20w oil if what you say is correct?

A roller bearing bigend (crankpin) isn't pressurised, as you've said, so needs a viscous oil to coat the rollers, a thin oil wouldn't stay on the bearings and it would be unprotected. There are no thin oil ways and so a single weight oil like 40w or 50w is fine for these engines.

Hello Well a 2 stroke engines runs on a 30sae oil and I have raced Konig flat4s on 30 sae oil with no problems and rallyed 180bhp Wartburg 991 2 stroke cars as well on 30sae morris oils so a 20w/50w should have no problem is a big single thumber ES2 or 16h model 50 for normal road use,

Previously David Cooper wrote:

I don't dispute that roller bearings skid in some circumstances. All I am saying is that slip is not caused by the crank pin being smaller than the outer race but by the local physics at the surface including interactions between load,lubricant, and the inertia forces (centrifugal forces). But a roller between two races can roll on both without slipping on either. In a little 'thought experiment' we can see that if the roller and the races are both provided with teeth, we have the sun and planet wheels used in epicyclic gears. Rollers work the same geometrically whether they are being used to move stones for pyramids or Norton conrods on crank pins. One surface moves relative to the other, and the roller can happily move exactly half as quickly against both. Phil Irvine is pointing out that with high inertia forces at high revs the inner rollers lose load and move outwards but that's not a geometric effect which is why main bearings don't suffer the same. Mains have the same effective geometry since the inner race is smaller than the outer, but they don't tend to slip because they have no overall eccentric centrifugal forces acting on them.

The epicyclic gear system is not analogous to a roller race. The gears have no option but to mesh and turn where as the rollers have the option to roll or not.

The loads experienced particularly by big ends are so high that two things happen, 1/ the surfaces deform elastically so spreading the load over a larger area than that expected by line contact and 2/ vast increases in viscosity of the oil occur under the pressures of the inlet of the the roller race contacts. This form of Lubrication is called Elastohydrodynamic and understanding of it and its importance post-dates Phil Irvine's brilliant books. Tuning for speed was my favorite reading as a schoolboy in the 1950's.

The traction forces necessary to ensure roller rotation are due to the above increase in viscosity.

However for reasons previously stated, for a given engine speed, the outer race being of larger circumference, is traveling at a higher speed than is the inner race (crankpin). The rolling velocity is 1/2 (velocity of the outer race+ velocity of the inner), the sliding velocity is ( velocity of the outer race- velocity of the inner). The ratio of these, the slide / roll ratio, and viscosity at the elevated pressures determines the friction in the contact.

Good lubricant formulation protects by forming protective elastic films on the surfaces. These films shear at lower shear force levels than do the metals and hence protect. Incidentally similar behave explains the lubrication of cam and tappets.

Unfortunately, as any bevel-Ducati owner who tried synthetics twenty or more so years ago can confirm, there is something in the testing of these oils which fails to recognise that they caused consistent and recognisable damage...the roller mains simply destroyed themselves...The oil companies and their marketing departments appear to complacently believe that their testing is so far in advance of old engines that everything must be in order.

These oils are good. They cope with underlubricated turbos on modern diesel engines. The temperatures and speeds are colossal. The laws of physics apply equally to all engines...and yet, more problems seem to arise from owners dabbling with new oils than from sticking with the tried and tested types...Is it down to clearances that are too large, or too small ?

I don't know what John's intended use is and where he's located but if it's typical and not excessive, then a good quality monograde 40 such as Morris's Golden Film, changed every 1000 miles will probably 'see him out' and can be used in chaincase and gearbox as well.

Of course the other plus point for a monograde is that the drip rate onto the garage floor is considerably less than that of a multigrade. Similarly, the rate of wet sumping is reduced. If I remember, Silkolene produced a straight oil (SAE40 or 50?) specifically for the bevel-drivenDucatis to counter the problem of bottom-end lubrication failures.

The bevel cam drive Ducati is indeed an interesting case.Its fussy lubrication needs are a function of its orriginal design brief.It was never designed to run slowly.Set out as a endurance race motor in the fifties its low pressure system was carefully crafted to not oversupply the big end at max revs or to waste any power through bleeding off excess oil pressure. At low revs the oil flow is not enough to cope with average street use. Used for short runs the 40 oil needed to keep the big end happy is too thick to drain down from the head. The OHC needs a good supply but gets little on start up and when running slowly. The motor is happy to run hot fast and hard day in,day out for thousands of miles, and was famed for its ability to outrun big bikes in endurance races. In normal road use its a racehorse pulling a cart. All engines are not the same.But that's what makes our hobby so involving.

The Rockoil TRM synthetic 20/60 oil I use was designed for air cooled V twin engines with roller bearing cranks, it can also be used in the gearbox.

http://www.rockoil.co.uk/cm/images/pdf/techdata/TRM.pdf

After reading all of the views above on oil, I am now wondering if anyone has any informationregarding the fact that modern engine oils have less or nozinc additive which protected the flat tappet cam equiped engines of pre the 1990's. Modern vehicles now have roller rockers so there is no need for the zinc protection of the tappets and cam lobes.The EPA requires the removal because the zinc caused the catalytic converters to not function as required. Zinc additives (ZDDP) are available for use in the older engines to give this protection. Any thoughts?

Previously Paul Knapp wrote:

After reading all of the views above on oil, I am now wondering if anyone has any informationregarding the fact that modern engine oils have less or nozinc additive which protected the flat tappet cam equiped engines of pre the 1990's. Modern vehicles now have roller rockers so there is no need for the zinc protection of the tappets and cam lobes.The EPA requires the removal because the zinc caused the catalytic converters to not function as required. Zinc additives (ZDDP) are available for use in the older engines to give this protection. Any thoughts?

Paul,

Zinc Di alkyl Di thio Phosphates provide both anti-oxidant protection and Anti Wear protection, the AW protection depends greatly on the structures of the alkyl groups, upon other additives present in the oil and upon the concentration of ZDDP.

We use %P as a measure of the amount of ZDDP in the oil. Modern ACEA A class oil typically have about 0.12 % P. ACEA class C oils have much lower, typically 0.08% P.

Classic oil suppliers are somewhat coy in the information in their data sheets but typically 0.06 - 0.08 % P is used.

Modern ACEA oils have to pass the same cam and follower wear test and at the same performance level. The engine used is a PSA 1.4 l with OHC and finger followers. Conditions are severe.

Modern oils (ACEA C) are constrained by the impact of P and Sulphur on catalytic converter life. but will have been formulated with extra non P and S containing additives.

The low P levels+ no supplementary Anti Wear agent levels of the classic oils is a much greater worry.

Classic suppliers seem reluctant to include

Unfortunately, as any bevel-Ducati owner who tried synthetics twenty or more so years ago can confirm, there is something in the testing of these oils which fails to recognise that they caused consistent and recognisable damage...the roller mains simply destroyed themselves...The oil companies and their marketing departments appear to complacently believe that their testing is so far in advance of old engines that everything must be in order.

These oils are good. They cope with underlubricated turbos on modern diesel engines. The temperatures and speeds are colossal. The laws of physics apply equally to all engines...and yet, more problems seem to arise from owners dabbling with new oils than from sticking with the tried and tested types...Is it down to clearances that are too large, or too small ?

I don't know what John's intended use is and where he's located but if it's typical and not excessive, then a good quality monograde 40 such as Morris's Golden Film, changed every 1000 miles will probably 'see him out' and can be used in chaincase and gearbox as well.

Well some 30 years ago I bought a Wartburg 311 with 23,000 miles on the clock

the farmer I got it from siad he could not find the dip stick so he never put any oil in with the petrol ether , so how many Four stroke engine will run to 23,000 with no oil not many, its lucky that the engine in a Wartburg cars are Two Stoke three cylinder water cooled, and the crank is all ball bearings the normal oil two stroke is a Sae 30, at 40:1 mixture, I have seen there crankshafts do 150,000 before needing a rebuild, and I changed the Crankshaft in the farm yard only took me a hour , and drove the car home, from Sheerness to Howden 230 miles it was on a trade plate, and friend was behind me with a van load of spares ,, happy days

so it just show you how much roller or ball bearing can take, and THIN oil is best,

as you have small oilways in a Norton twins or Singles, and the oil pump as a hard time pumping thick oil around the engine, its like trying to push a bag of rags up a drain pipe, there met with lots of ressitance , so this time for Norton owners to think in a diffrent way, Thin oil is better thats a fact, all Diesel Engines run on thin oil, 10w-40w most modernd cars now run on a 5W-40W thin oil when cold a 40w when hot, so a 20/50 is the best for all Nortons, Yours Anna J

Not quite that simple Anna and certainly not a one size fits all.

I accept Charles knows a thing or three about oil but would challenge the notion that straight oil is not the best for singles, they have a well proven track record. Generally I use SAE 40 (No detergent and no external filter) in my singles but add a bit of 30 at the start and end of the riding season and when permitted, during the winter. No oil issues.

I used to run my Mk III commando on SAE 40 with light detergent and found wet sumping and kick starting (No electric boot) a big problem.

Last year I went back, after 20 odd years to 20/50 in my Commando and it was a joy to start and no wet sumping after perhaps 3 weeks.

To put it in the words of that scoundrel, Algore, I believe 'the science is settled,' with regard to straight oils in singles but the debate should really be with regard to twins, both with and without an external oil filter.

I'm listening...

PS: My old Perkins 2.0 Ltr Dieselran on 15/50 oil and I did 111,000 miles without any engine issues. Changed every 6,000 miles.

I understand the concern about the use of modern oils in roller bearing / ball bearing engines. I would point out that during the 1960's Honda produced their 800 cc sports car the S800 which produces about 80 BHP and ran at up to 8500 rpm and had roller mains and big ends. They used a 10W30 oil for temps less than 86F and a 20W40 above that.

So our low revving / low powered Singles should not pose problems to modern oils.