Talk:Motorcycle oil

??? some big porkies ???
There are some major porkies in this article. I'm trying to clean it up, so it would be good if others could double check my edits. -- Teutonic Tamer 18:56, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Porkies?--Dbratland (talk) 17:45, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Needs work.
The information on this page is largely a repetition of marketing literature and since the claims of motorcycle oil's unique qualities have been strongly contested in the one citation provided, I feel the majority of this article is unsupported and biased. Additionally, since we are discussing motorcycle oil specifically, the sections: engine, transmission, clutch and cooling should probably be within the main section because they represent what is supposedly unique among motorcycle oils. Cooling could possibly be eliminated, as all engines which use oil are effectively cooled by their oil. Again, due to the unsupported claims and contested nature of the subject I intend to edit all or most of this article. Please provide citations if you believe otherwise.

This is also my first edit so feel free to tell me if I'm going about it wrong. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stupid user (talk • contribs) 06:09, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

You neglected to use the 4 ~ at the end of your comment, that's all.DaveDodgy (talk) 18:39, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

1) The subject of viscosity modifiers is not adequately covered. Synthetic oils do not require viscosity modifiers, which wear out, why synthetics last longer. It is the aditives that wear out not the oil. 2) Needs to cover the difference in API ratings and how they stack up against JASO-MA as there is huge overlap here with some API ratings but not others --24.138.23.20 (talk) 19:04, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Mineral based, Synthetic or semi-synthetic
Other than contacting the manufacturer of your chosen oil, or the manufacturer of the motorbike, how do you decide which of the above 3 kinds of oil to use ?

I was told to use a semi-synthetic for mine, but why not use fully synthetic? Can someone in the know address this, in the article? ThanksDaveDodgy (talk) 18:44, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Decisive answers to this question are not available. The majority of discussion about the properties of different oils and their use in motorcycles, is anecdotal. While I am sure there are scientific studies that would fully explain the necessary qualities for motorcycle oils, to my knowledge, none have been offered that specifically address the consumer's interest and in layman's terms. Stupid user (talk) 14:38, 20 September 2009 (UTC)


 * In terms of more solid research, check this short paper from researchers in Maejo University in Thailand: Assessment of lubricating oil degradation in small motorcycle engine fueled with gasohol (check Table 3, results in wear patterns of different oil samples during simulations on wear machine (Timken method)). Obviously, their focus was on performance with petrol versus petrol/ethanol blend fuels so they did not necessarily tried to match oils specifically (mineral oil original viscosity seems to be too high, but synthetic did not deteriorate so much at 3000 km), but it gives you general idea. Besides, this is peer-reviewed article, and it lists some bibliography that could be very relevant to the topic.


 * Also, Motorcycle Consumer News had some articles in 1994 and 1997 (not sure if they had more recent ones), where they tried to test, and possibly debunk marketing for motorcycle versus general automotive oils (which perform similarly, but much cheaper). Not as scientific (although some PhD was performing tests over a year), but better matched oils. theUg (talk) 00:19, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Energy Conversing or Not
I can't find a single technical source that validates the claims repeated in this article that energy conserving oils are bad for wet clutch motorcycles. Anecdotally it makes sense, but where is the science? Anyone have a reference? Psyop1 (talk) 08:44, 23 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Here are some: "Motorcycology", "Why don't we want to use...", "...energy conserving friction modifiers...".  According to Chilton's Motorcycle Handbook, this is a hotly debated issue (the book literally warns you that bringing up the topic with motorcyclists will start a fight), and there is no definitive proof that the presence or absence of automotive or motorcycle friction-modifying additives is always harmful to motorcycles.  They cite a Motorcycle Consumer News survey where a few riders   did have clutch slippage due to synthetic oils, but that's not much to go on.The section has too much soapboxing and needs to be rewritten from a neutral point of view.  You can't ignore all the reliable sources that say wet clutches require motorcycle oil only, but there are also reliable sources that dispute, or at least qualify, this advice.  Giving out how-to advice on what oil to choose belongs more on Wikibooks than here anyway, so a lot of that stuff can just be moved over there where it belongs.  --Dbratland (talk) 23:11, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Proposed merger
This article should be merged with Motor oil because it's not notably different. -- T HE F OUNDERS I NTENT  PRAISE GOOD WORKS 17:49, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Support for the same reasons as the nominator. --Biker Biker (talk) 18:36, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Support Some (and only some) sources argue motorcycle oil is different, but that in of itself does not justifiy a separate article. And any arguments about what makes motorcycle oil different are best presented in the context of what non-motorcycle oil is. Is that one of Don Draper's whiskey glasses filled with motor oil in the lead image? --Dbratland (talk) 18:51, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Conditional support. It shouldn't be simply redirected (not that anyone was claiming so), but at least have a Motor oil section to explain wet clutches, friction modifiers, etc from a WP:RS or three. dbratland, didn't we have a discussion like this already? I mean, I'm willing to support if Motor oil says "here's what's different about some motorcycle oil." tedder (talk) 18:56, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I nominated if for deletion last year; result was keep. A few editors did suggest merging then. Also, a lot of the how to advice was moved over to Wikibooks in September 2009. --Dbratland (talk) 19:04, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Heh, this discussion definitely mirrors the AFD, and opinion is very similar to what it was then. Sounds like this is a good time to boldly merge it. tedder (talk) 19:07, 14 September 2010 (UTC)


 * I support having a motocycle section in motor oil, nothing at all wrong with that. Anyone here good at merging then? -- T HE F OUNDERS I NTENT  PRAISE GOOD WORKS 13:15, 29 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Motorcycle oils have very specific requirements that are not always met with all auto oils. This is because the oil also lubes the transmission and the issue with oil immersed clutch. As such if the two are merged it will require a large section on it's own. --24.138.23.20 (talk) 19:06, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Having two wheels vs four wheels doesn't have anything to do with engine lubrication. Some motorcycles share the engine and gear oil, some don't. Some have wet clutches, some have dry. Some have CVTs or other types of automatic or semi-automatic arrangements. The specific lubrication issues for some types of motorcycle transmissions may be mentioned in Motorcycle transmission and Clutch, and briefly covered in Motor oil. What we should not have is advice on what you should put in your bike, per WP:NOTHOWTO, WP:NOTMANUAL. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 21:05, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Support merger and have begun. The cited facts on clutch slippage and shear have been incorporated into Motor oil and Motor oil, respectively. Not sure what else here is worth saving. — Brianhe (talk) 16:15, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Any last calls? This will become a redirect to Motor oil soon. — Brianhe (talk) 00:43, 26 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Brian, appreciate your efforts. -- T HE F OUNDERS I NTENT  PRAISE 16:35, 26 March 2013 (UTC)