Oil Marketing Bunk

Re: oils, by Robin Chung 

=============================================================================

From           [email protected] (Robin Chung)
Organization   Slip.Net
Date           23 May 1997 01:42:15 -0700
Newsgroups     ba.motorcycles
Message-ID     <[email protected]>;
References     1

=============================================================================

Here we go again with the MC-oil claim...
This is mostly marketing BUNK!

Motorcycle Consumer News ran an article comparing bike oils and regular
synthetic oils.  They disspelled all the rumors about MC-=specific oils,
both empirically and theoretically.  In the end, even an MC-specific
synthetic oil won't run any better than a good full synthetic like Mobil1.

According to an article in MCN 2/94 (motorcycle consumer news), the
bike-specific oil versus regular "car" oil argument is bunk.  The "car"
oils are actually as good as any semi-synthetic/dinosaur juice bike-oil.
For the same money, you are better off buying Mobil 1 Synthetic in your
bike for the same price as bike-specific semi-synthetic stuff.  If you're
going to buy $9/quart MC-synthetic, you're paying double for the same
protection a regular synthetic could give you.

The synthetic (full) oils run fine in motorcycles as reported by the
Cal-State Physicist who ran the tests.  In both real world and test bench
conditions, the Mobil1 synthetic outperformed all the bike-oils (Mobil1,
Castrol Syntec, Castrol GTX, Honda HP4[MC/syn], Spectro 4).  In fact, the
Spectro4 was the poorest performing oil in the lot.  The tests charted
"Relative Viscosity Retention" which is a measure of oil lubrication (VI)
breakdown over time/mileage.  (VI retention is the index that MC-specific
oil marketers always try and trumpet over other non-MC oils.)  The
conclusions were basically:

        1. The Viscosity of synthetic based oils generally drops more
slowly than that of petroleum-based oils in the same application.
        2. Comparing figures for Viscosity retention for the same oils
when used in an automobile would indicate that motorcycles are indeed
harder on oils than cars.  (MC's share transmission and engine oil.)
        3. The viscosity of petroleum based oils, whether car or
bike-specific, drop at the same rate when used in a motorcycle.
        4. There is no evidence that motorcycle-specific oils outperform
their autmotive counterparts in viscsity retention when used in a
motorcycle.
        5. The greatest drop in Viscosity Retention occurred at 800 mi.

(Edited for brevity.)

The claims made for MC-specific oils destroying car catalytic converters
due to the zinc/phosphorous additives (Zinc dialkyldithiophosphate - ZDDP)
is also bunk. There is a federally mandated limit for the zinc additivies,
and it is the same for cars and bikes.  BMW's run MC-oil as well in their
fuel-injected catalytic converted bikes.  A corollary claim, that
MC-specific oils contain 'more' of ZDDP additives to protect against
extreme wear, is misleading.  As stated above, ZDDP is limited by federal
regulations for all oils, and ZDDP is necessary only in extreme wear
conditions like metal-to-metal contact.  This should only happen
in the event of complete lubrication failure.

When asked for responses from the MC-oil companies, MCN got no
conclusive scientific reply.  All the MC-oil spokespersons stated the
usual marketspeak about (sheer stable polymers, extreme pressure
additives, etc.) but these are included in the non-bike oils as well.
Surely, MCN does not doubt that a bike-specific full-synthetic would not
perform better, but probably no better than full-synthetic Mobil 1.

And Mobil 1 costs about the same as bike-specific semi-synth. oil.
Folks, it's marketing.  plain and simple.

(MCN, Feb 94