Real world "Rekluse owners and oil brand opinions"


31 replies to this topic
  • 642MX

Posted February 19, 2009 - 08:13 AM

#21

My guess is they're blowing smoke up your chute to get you to use an oil they know will work because they don't know why the clutch misbehaves with some other oils.


So whats your theory of why some oils don't agree with the Rekluse?

  • grayracer513

Posted February 19, 2009 - 08:35 AM

#22

Since I've never seen that happen, I can't really offer you one. But I have seen oils make conventional clutches act up (say YamaLube slowly), and jerky clutch grab/release behavior and chatter is a common issue in limited slip differentials. Interestingly, the fix in differentials is to add a friction modifier to make the oil actually slipperier. That smooths the operation during the times when the plates have to slip under a load without getting to the point where they won't hold the load they're supposed to.

Usually, it ends up being nothing more than a bad match up of the friction characteristics of the particular friction material on the particular plain plate with a particular oil on it. Changing any element will change the behavior.

If you take most any 1-2 pound object and drag it slowly along a table top with a rubber band, you'll get the same sort of release/grab kind of behavior. Changing anything about the setup will change how it acts; adding or subtracting weight, wetting the table, changing the material facing against the table, doubling up the rubber band, etc.

If an auto clutch were not smooth, I would run an oil that encouraged it to be smoother. If that made the clutch engage late, or slip, I'd adjust the engagement pressure upward to compensate. Either way, I wouldn't use an inferior oil in my engine to make my clutch happy; I'd fix the clutch.

  • 642MX

Posted February 19, 2009 - 09:28 AM

#23

If an auto clutch were not smooth, I would run an oil that encouraged it to be smoother. If that made the clutch engage late, or slip, I'd adjust the engagement pressure upward to compensate. Either way, I wouldn't use an inferior oil in my engine to make my clutch happy; I'd fix the clutch.


Thats the problem... you only have so much adjustment on the Rekluse.

On the older style you could adjust the installed gap tighter to make the clutch have more clamping pressure, but then it wouldn't idle in gear and it will stall everytime you touch the rear brake.

On the newer style, they are just 'drop in and go' the clamping force is determined by the metal plates they give you. They give you an extra thick metal to use if your clutch is worn, but if you use it and don't need it the result will be the same as the older clutch.

Based on their theory, one could run a synthetic (in the Pro version) and if it slipped, a few more tungsten balls might be the fix. The tungsten is heavier and locks the clutch up much faster possibly eliminating the slip.

Anyways, its much easier for me to just use the recommended oil from Rekluse and not worry about it. If Rotella wasn't a decent oil, this forum would be flooded with engine troubles and surely we would have tracked the failures down to the oil used.

  • grayracer513

Posted February 19, 2009 - 10:45 AM

#24

Based on their theory, one could run a synthetic (in the Pro version) and if it slipped, a few more tungsten balls might be the fix. The tungsten is heavier and locks the clutch up much faster possibly eliminating the slip.

That's the approach I would take. Sounds like the older design wasn't very sophisticated.

As to Rotella, it's tendency to loose viscosity due to degradation of its viscosity index improvers is well documented. There's no argument that as an engine lubricant it starts out as equal to some of the best available. As a transmission lubricant, it turns from a 40wt to a 30 (even a 20wt) in a remarkably short time. I know you do already, but anyone planning to use it should change it very frequently.

  • 642MX

Posted February 19, 2009 - 11:20 AM

#25

That's the approach I would take. Sounds like the older design wasn't very sophisticated.



Yeah, the older z-start was a POS compared to the Pro version. I guess they still sell it because its cheaper.... but its certainly not better.

As to Rotella, it's tendency to loose viscosity due to degradation of its viscosity index improvers is well documented. There's no argument that as an engine lubricant it starts out as equal to some of the best available. As a transmission lubricant, it turns from a 40wt to a 30 (even a 20wt) in a remarkably short time. I know you do already, but anyone planning to use it should change it very frequently.


Your right, the Rotella breaks down fast and should be changed often.

  • ztangoKLX

Posted February 19, 2009 - 03:17 PM

#26

You will find any number of synthetic oils labeled JASO MA (or MA1, MA2 now), indicating they conform to industry standards for wet clutches of every kind....



Hey Gray,

I have seen you post about JASO MA many times and you have some very convincing points, so the (semi-synthetic) oil I currently use in my YZ (Bel-Ray EXP....gasp)conforms to that standard. However, it is also rated as "API SG". When I compare this to Castrol GTX, I see that the GTX oil it is rated as "API SM". Does the "SM" rating mean that the Castrol is as good as the Bel-Ray with the "SG" rating?

Visit the ThumperTalk Store for the lowest prices on motorcycle / ATV parts and accessories - Guaranteed
  • grayracer513

Posted February 19, 2009 - 03:52 PM

#27

...the (semi-synthetic) oil I currently use in my YZ (Bel-Ray EXP....gasp)conforms to that standard. However, it is also rated as "API SG". When I compare this to Castrol GTX, I see that the GTX oil it is rated as "API SM". Does the "SM" rating mean that the Castrol is as good as the Bel-Ray with the "SG" rating?

It depends on who you talk to. And the API grades don't tell the whole story.

SG and SH oils had a lot of Zinc/Phosphorus based anti-wear additives. These are really know as boundary lubricants from a more technical standpoint. What they do, in simple terms is embed themselves in the surfaces of the wear parts and act as a last line of defense when the oil film fails to keep the parts separated for whatever reason. These additives were very highly desired by the builders of engines, but the EPA complained that they weren't good for catalytic converters, so they had to be removed. Oil blenders responded by substituting Moly (molybdenum) based compounds, but in some of the earliest SJ and SL oils, these were found to, or at least thought to, interfere with the operation of wet clutches, and as anti-wear additives, the first moly compounds just weren't as good.

At this point, Yamaha and others initiated the JASO MA/MB standards. Both were required to have anti-wear properties at least equal to API SG/SH, and MA was to be certified compatible with wet clutches. Furthermore, both were supposed to be shear-stable enough to perform in transmission applications, but this attribute was not given as high a priority, and several MA oils still tend to fall a bit short there.

As to the current API SM grade, it's anti-wear performance is said to be much improved (and the newest moly boundary lubricants are a lot better). Frankly, I don't know whether they are a full equivalent of SG or not in terms of boundary lubrication, but they could be. Some oils may carry both SM and JASO MA compliance tags; the two aren't mutually exclusive. If, however, an oil is labeled Energy Conserving Group II (API ECII), that is a possible red flag. ECII oils are friction modified, and can potentially cause clutch trouble.

None of this really tells you whether one oil is "better" than another, however. That involves questions not addressed in the gradings. Gradings are only intended to help select an oil that is more suitable, based on certain standards.

For me, the killer is the shear stability question. Will the oil stay the same grade it was when new for a reasonable length of time or not? And, of course, it has to keep the engine lubed well under pressure, but a lot more oils can do that than can stay in grade very well.

I have seen lab tests on a few Castrol synthetics, and frankly, they weren't that good.

  • xrjack

Posted February 19, 2009 - 03:58 PM

#28

Valvoline Dura Blend 10W-40 API Services SM/SL,CF ACEA A3 Performance.

Synthetic Blend non friction modified.

I have used this in my 2004 CRF250X since new......5 riding seasons.
Rekluse installed for 3 riding seasons.

Performance is excellent. Price reasonable.

  • grayracer513

Posted February 19, 2009 - 04:38 PM

#29

Again, this comes from a Honda rider with separate oil supplies. Which side do you use this oil in, the engine, or trans? What is the viscosity of a used sample from the transmission after 4 hours use?

How is this applicable to a YZF?

  • jeffboyd47m

Posted February 19, 2009 - 06:08 PM

#30

I am on my 3rd season running a Rekluse Pro in my YZ's. I have run Maxima 100% synthetic oil exclusively the whole time averageing 110-120 hrs a year on my bike. I have had zero clutch issues and change my oil every 6hrs of use. Lately I have been running the Maxima 530MX and have been very pleased. I ride expert level in both desert and motocross.
Jeff Boyd

  • xrjack

Posted February 20, 2009 - 10:19 AM

#31

Again, this comes from a Honda rider with separate oil supplies. Which side do you use this oil in, the engine, or trans? What is the viscosity of a used sample from the transmission after 4 hours use?

How is this applicable to a YZF?


Sorry to enter your thread, Grayracer, I wrongly assumed you were looking for oil performance w/ a Rekluse clutch. When I keep an open mind, I usually learn something new.

FYI, I use this oil in the trans. I do not have a viscosity measurement after use.

I use friction modified Valvoline Dura Blend in the engine.

  • grayracer513

Posted February 20, 2009 - 11:22 AM

#32

Sorry to enter your thread, Grayracer, I wrongly assumed you were looking for oil performance w/ a Rekluse clutch. When I keep an open mind, I usually learn something new.

FYI, I use this oil in the trans. I do not have a viscosity measurement after use.

I use friction modified Valvoline Dura Blend in the engine.

You do have the luxury of separate oil supplies, and given that option, we would have a great many more choices available. In a world of my own design, that's how I would have it. However, our oil must serve two masters. The specialized gear oils available can't be used because they are unsuitable for engines. Friction modified engine oils can't be used because of harm to clutches, so ours is a much more complex issue.

Your remark about keeping an open mind is a bit like a diesel owner offering a fuel recommendation in a discussion of gasolines, then becoming upset at being dismissed. Other than being thinly disparaging, it serves nothing.





Related Content

 
x

Join Our Community!

Even if you don't want to post, registered members get access to tools that make finding & following the good stuff easier.

If you enjoyed reading about "" here in the ThumperTalk archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join ThumperTalk today!

The views and opinions expressed on this page are strictly those of the author, and have not been reviewed or approved by ThumperTalk.