Motul 510 2T - Semi Synthetic 2 Stroke Oil

[Syd]

Has anyone tried using Motul 510 2T - Semi Synthetic 2 Stroke Oil in a early Kawasaki H2 750? I would be interested to have any feedback on how this goes

[Walms]

I've run Motul 710 before... It seemed to be fine, very little deposits and had a good smell that got better the hotter the bike ran.
Given the age old Dino vs. synthetic debate maybe semi gives the best of both worlds???
Motul is a good name... I'd use it if it were easily available, that's my biggest criteria going forward.

[shiloh]

+1

[Curtis]

Not to get into a debate over dino vs syn, but I have always ran dino in any double stroke ( ) engine I have had. Its the availablity that also kills the sale on the semi syn and the price (at least here)

I would be curious to try a semi syn for a season on a bike or sled, compare dyno numbers and engine wear.

[Walms]

The benefit I could see with synthetic is less smoking and better protection at elevated temps... Whether that is worth the extra coin is up to the purchaser.

Dino produces a varnish on the engine components that is supposed to be better for corrosion protection over the winter months.

Semi synthetic is either giving both benefits or neither.

[lc]

To reduce the smoke and throwing spooge: Fix the oil line check valves (Walms!!!!).

With properly serviced check valves the oil is more efficiently used, as the engine does not waste oil when shut down or at idle.. Oil consumption will drop to better than 1000kms /L. Better range without worry on long rides and less $$$ are other advantages.

The final step towards the least smoke is an optimal mixture setting (not rich) so the oil is better burned up in the in the combustion chamber.

J

[Walms]

All I was saying is given the same amount of oil consumed, synthetic will smoke less than Dino.
Servicing the check valves makes sense if you are getting excessive oiling on startup after sitting a while but the bigger culprit for smoke while riding is the excessive volume the pump puts out at WFO not to mention a longer throw for bigger diameter carbs means you reach that max volume output of the pump at a smaller throttle opening.

[lc]

Seeping oil accumulation caused by leaking check valves in the crankcase will take far longer to clear than just start up. Depending on the  valve seep severity the bike will often smoke excessively (and possibly stumble) for miles and will continue to do so until run WFO to redline through the gears to remove the residual oil (the proverbial triple clean out). 

With bigger carbs during cruising or moderate acceleration there is less pull on the oil pump cable (oil pump lever input is less than stock carbs) as it takes less throttle movement/slide opening for given speed/power output. 

With big carbs at WOT you'll find the oil pump input lever actually goes well beyond where the oil pump's internal eccentric gives the piston it's longest output stroke.

Agreed, any oil used will smoke at max pump ouput.

J

[Walms]

We will have to agree to disagree I guess?
The only time I've been able to close down the 34's on my bike would be at constraint cruise speed while on the pipe... Which equates to about 5% of the time. I would say the average throttle position would be closer to 1/2 and at that point the larger carb would have the pump open more than a standard carb.
In the end, someone who has less oil consumption simply is on the throttle less.

[H2 Dude]

Going to switch up to Yamalube in the H1B this year . My 77 Suzuki GT 750 will get Shell Advanced Ultra sled oil. Guys who run it in the 750 really seem to like it.

[lc]

Odd, using antique VM34 rounds cruising the back roads at a typical 95kms/hr I'm at about 3/16-1/4- throttle. On the QEW/403 throttle is at about 1/4-5/16 @ 110 kph. I'm betting these throttle openings are smaller than when using stock VM28s. In both scenarios I'm off the pipes.

Oil range before check valve rebuild was around 800kms/L. After valve service it jumped to 1100-1200kms/L. I now have 11,000kms+ on these lines/bottom end.

Do your oil lines drain down if you hang them up? I'll bet they do.

Not having the additional factor of over oiling (and pooling oil in the crankcase) makes for better/easier tune ability.

For someone who likes to be "thrifty" it is false economy pouring excessive oil through an engine to save $50 in a line servicing fee...

J

[Walms]

You've just done more highway miles after the rebuild. I would have been lucky to get thru 600 km per tank full of oil so I took 4 litres with me on the Huron tour, I might have used 2 litres on that trip and 1/2 of it was during the RB ride.
Try cruising on the pipe and you will see that you could even close it more,

[lc]

Riding style (hwy miles) remained identicle before and after valve/line rebuild.

It seems you do not believe proper line servicing makes for more efficient oil use and directly reduces oil consumption. Tom V will confirm this fact with dozens of reports from his customers.

J

[Walms]

Nope, I never said that... If I had an issue with my bike fogging out the neighbours after sitting a few days, I'd be more concerned.
All I'm saying is the style of riding has more to do with oil consumption than a single drip of oil every 1/2 hour.

[lc]

Riding style definitely changes the rate of oil consumption.

However with increased check valve cracking pressure from the typical tired 2.2 lbs to the updated 4.6 and properly sealed valves the oil consumption will drop substantially, regardless of riding style.

Over the years 'tuner referred to this fact many times. I have witnessed it myself. Darth and Tom V will concur.

Do you want to save $$ in the long run and have a cleaner running bike?