On 2-stroke oil...

[Turbo 162]

I was wondering about 2-stroke oils, and wandering online found this deep dive into that mysterious world: http://www.dragonfly75.com/moto/oil.html 

Some interesting take-aways:

The word "synthetic" is not particularly meaningful, as some oil companies apply it to oils that are petroleum based, but just super refined.  Apparently that's legal.

The reason ethanol is a no-no for us is that it often doesn't evaporate instantly upon hitting the opposite cylinder wall, diluting the oil film there!  (This, in addition to the fuel tank slowly dissolving!)

More oil than the 50:1 recommendation apparently will reduce ring-and-cylinder wear.

More oil than the 50:1 ratio apparently increases ring sealing, compression, and max power output!

Overall, it's a longish, but interesting read.

[Allen Sutphin 705]

A lot of 2 stroke oil articles are based on old information, not say all are, but newer syn/dino oil blends are the best out there. One could argue the oil debate for weeks and still not know anything definite.  What works for one doesn't mean its the greatest out there. Most all major 2 stroke oil brands are good, now days. I used Stilh chain saw oil for a few years and had success with it because it was a high performance air cooled oil. Then I went to AV-2 blended oil because it was cheaper. Both were good oil, no difference in carbon build up or storage protection.  Lucas semi synthetic is touted as being great oil for air cooled engines, but I have not used it. Pick an oil that works for you, can be bought locally, and stick with it till your engine tells you better. The oil is 2% of what we put thru our engine, but gets blamed for 99% of the problem. We never blame the other 98% which is fuel. A lot more crappy fuel out there than crappy oil!  Another hillbilly opinion!

Edited 27 Oct 2018 by Allen Sutphin

[Turbo 162]

One of the not-so-surprising takeaways I got was that oils branded with a manufacturer of lawn & garden equipment, like Stihl, Huskvarna, Echo, Poulan, and Deere, etc. Are almost always rated JASO-FD, which, at least by meeting that spec, makes them good choices for us.  The small amount of ash, 0.18% or less, is put there intentionally as a secondary layer of protection, and can be things like ZDDP, or other slippery solids.  This could prevent scuffing in an overheat situation, but leaves deposits.  Ashless oils lack this backup protection, but leave less stuff behind.

[nlappos 413]

[Turbo 162]

Nice, definitive statement, however oil technology and standards continue to evolve.  JASO (Japan Automotive Standards Organization) has developed a refinement over its FC standard (essentially equivalent to ISO-TC).  The New standard, JASO-FD, further limits the amount of ash allowable from 0.25% or less down to 0.18% or less.  Some ash is beneficial for hot-running small, high-revving engines, as the higher temps tend to burn off the excess, and as explaned above, that ash creates a second layer of protection in the event of the oil failing to lubricate at too-high temperatures.  Our liquid-cooled 582 engines don't go to those high temps, so the excess ash ends up building up on the combustion chambers' interiors.  The lower ash levels mandated by the JASO-FD standard would seem appropriate.  Any JASO-FD - rated oil also satisfies the ISO-TC standard.  FWIW - Turbo

[C5Engineer 1170]

[Allen Sutphin 705]

My oil is better than your oil !  Of course you'd have to tell what your oil is.  Bubba's ex-girlfriend's sister's ex-boyfriend used that oil and he said it wasn't any good. Haven't we all heard that before?

[Turbo 162]

Such a display of kindness.  Thanks, guys.  Apparently y'all didn't notice my focus on standards.  The oil companies all claim to produce the best oils, ergo my use of the word "mysterious" in my first post on this.  

[Guest]

This is one tough crowd! 

 

[Allen Sutphin 705]

We are a compassionate group!

[Turbo 162]

Should I now say that I know who to avoid if we ever have a fly-in?  These two gentlemen just violated the first rule of this site, and one is a moderator!  Hey, like so many of us, I'm just a little old guy trying to dig into what might be pertinent details to make sure my prop doesn't stop unexpectedly.  Like each of us I process information in my own, unique way.  These two offended me.  What did I do to evoke such unkind responses?  Any apologies tendered will be accepted, of course.  Was I delusional to think of you all as friends I have yet to meet face-to-face?   

Edited 31 Oct 2018 by Turbo

[1avidflyer 1983]

I should keep my nose out of it, but I don't think they meant to insult you.  It's just that oils get argued or debated over so often, and there is usually no real way to say that one was better than another.  I'm sure they meant no harm.  JImChuk

[Turbo 162]

Thanks, JimChuk,

That was precisely what I was avoiding.  The oil companies all promote their product with, well, propaganda!  However, there was a lot of info on oils of which I was ignorant, so I thought a share was appropriate.  But the real point had to do with oil testing against standards.  Hell, I have not yet found a JASO-FD rated oil that I like the price of!  But no way was I going down the classic rat-hole!  Too much superstition afoot.  Maybe I need a beer.

[Allen Sutphin 705]

No insult was intended at all!  The oil debate has been around since there was oil. And I doubt if there will ever be a final decision. All one has to do is go on any 2 stroke group and you will find an oil debate going on.  Ask 10 different people what oil is best and you will probably get 6 or 7 different oil types.

Edited 1 Nov 2018 by Allen Sutphin

[Turbo 162]

I believe it.  Got a bottle of the pride of Mazatlan (Pacifico) open and am feeling more sanguine already!

[NorthIdahoAvidflyer 374]

I spoke with two of the leading rebuilders about oil and they both said the engines that ran the Amzoil intruder produced the best results at rebuild time. One also recommended QuickSilver PWC 2 stroke which is also a synthetic oil. I can fly in some pretty harsh environments pulling a lot of RPM. I want to know I’m putting the best protection I can into my engine. 

I ran Penzoil aircooled for years and had good luck with it but did see a lot more ring build up during inspection.

This Amzoil has really impressed me so far. I had the exhaust manifold off last week and the pistons and skirts look like new and had a visible coating of oil on them. My favorite thing about it is it’s not dark colored and does not leave a mess on my aiplane like the others did. 

Like the others have said, 2 stroke oil has been a highly debated subject so many times I can’t count. I’m positive no insult was intended Turbo. Stick with an oil rated at or higher than the engine manufacturer recommends and go fly.  I appreciate your tenacity. 

 

[C5Engineer 1170]

In the spirit of not violating any rules that don’t exist I’ll say run Amsoil Intercepter it’s the only oil that’ll run in a 582.......

;)))))

 

Turbo the oil debate has been through the gamment soooooooo many times that it’s became comical to read the responses. You will never ever get any reasonable data from asking on forums what oil to run and why. Buy what’s easy for  you to get that meets Rotax specs and run it. I prefer Amsoil, others get theirs at Wally World. I’ve yet to hear of a motor failing strictly because of the oil unless they forgot to add any. 

If you want to judge me based on a single post of a meme vs. my other 3000+ posts,  10 years contributing, and countless hours of behind the scenes work to this forum be my guest but I hope we can press on. 

Edited 1 Nov 2018 by C5Engineer

[Allen Sutphin 705]

Think I'll disappear into the shadows.  Fly Safe!

[nlappos 413]

Strangely, I think the rotax folks know what we need, and tell us in their manuals. Radical? Nope.

[Turbo 162]

At this point, at least per my reckoning, the dead horse has been beaten well beyond horse-purgatory.

[Guest]

I love this debate and am always learning something new. I learned stuff from Turbo's references that I did not know, and have learned from references others have posted in the past too. I say keep it coming!

I used Chevron TCW3 for 1200 hours in my 582s. I could get it cheapest of anything because they had it in 5 gallon buckets at the local Chevron distributor. I asked for the specification sheet and they provided it. I thought that was cool. There was a lot of stuff I did not understand on the spec sheet, but it did say "designed to meet API TC standards"  but did not say tested to API specs (just like one of Turbo's referenced documents). At the time I took it at face value.

I figured (perhaps incorrectly) that Chevron is a big reputable company and probably had engineers that knew what they were doing. (also could be wrong in that they may be more driven by profit than producing a quality product.)

I ran oil injection and used a home made mixture control and always ran the engine as lean as I was comfortable with based upon plug color correlated to indicated EGT.

I never experienced a seizure. I performed all my own tear downs, cleanings, and overhauls. That was a lot of times taking the 582s apart.  Because I flew all over the place behind the 582 I took them apart, cleaned and inspected every 150 hours and overhauled at 600 because I was uncomfortable going beyond 2x the 300 hr TBO. I figured that the 300 hour overhaul was based upon some sort of Engineering. I felt comfortable based upon what I found tearing the engines down and figuring the engineering provided a reasonable design margin to go 2X their recommendation.

I always found a very clean engine on teardown with minimal to no deposits on piston tops depending upon the number of cross country trips taken that required me to fill up with Avgas. Avgas created deposits that car gas did not. On about 50% of the teardowns I would find the oil ring "stuck" under the dyke ring gap. By stuck, I mean it would still move but not as freely as everywhere else around the ring land. I have helped others with their teardowns and found the same occasional tight spot on the oil ring under the dyke ring gap regardless of the oil they used. Maybe it was a big deal but I don't think so. I suspect the second the engine started to warm up the tight spot would loosen or I would have experienced engine issues.

That's my story and I'm sticking to it :-)

Do I believe there are better and worse oils out there? Oh heck yes! Would I do things different If I were still flying behind the 582? I don't know. I feel like I keep learning and am becoming increasing convinced there is a difference in oils. But....I was flying a LOT and oil and gas are not cheap. And boutique oils can become a significant portion of the cost of a tank of gas. 

My teardowns never gave an indication that the oil I was using was inadequate.

 

 

 

Edited 1 Nov 2018 by Chris Bolkan

[1avidflyer 1983]

Think I'll disappear into the shadows.  Fly Safe!

Don't go away Allen.  We need all the comments on this site we can get!   JImChuk

[Turbo 162]

Thanks, Chris.  Here I can get an API-TCW3 oil that's also rated API-TC relatively cheaply.  Since it is devoid of solids, and apparently they are not needed since our engines are liquid cooled and don't seem to run that hot anyway, I think I will go that route.  Did you find it necessary to pull the pistons in order to clean out the ring grooves?  If so I'll eventually need to get the roller keeper tool.  I'm really contemplating getting the pistons ceramic coated on top first opportunity.  Has anyone used an ultrasonic cleaner for the pistons?