Rotella T6 causing clutch drag and hard shifting?

[LAF]

ZDDP is more for protecting high pressure interfaces like the gears themselves and the cam lobes rather than for any frictional properties.
But whatever works for ya', just keep on doing that!!

Everything I have read about oil is that the Zinc is very important for cling and pressure properties of oil. Also that Zinc is going and has gone the wayside in most oils. The cling and pressure properties is exactly what clutch plates and steels need in the FJR. Since the oil bath of the clutch is not as good as other bikes, what you get there, you want to stay there, hence ZDDP.

Maybe not right to you, but I will keep doing that as you suggested.

I'd like to clarify something: It's the residual build-up of oil additives on clutch plates the leads to slippage and eventual failure.A clutch is in an oil bath for cooling, not lubrication.

"Friction Modifiers" fill in the low spots on clutch plates reducing their effectiveness.

ZDDP is effective in high-pressure metal-against-metal situations such as transmission gear teeth or cams on followers, etc.

Well we all have different opinions on this. First Zinc is very important to preserving oil from breaking down which is why it helps in pressure on gears. Second if it was build up then why are they stuck together? And after calling Barnett for clutch pack soaking they said 20 minuets, not the 24 hours advocated on this forum? I believe a clutch manufacturer. My plates were dry on a 0 mile bike. So a build up of anything is not believable to me. Since the Barnett clutch and adding Risoline I have never experienced any clutch issues, period.

Use what you want your bike. But I don't have any worries or lurching of my bike, the engagement is butter and the gray area of the clutch is very nice to use in traffic and when it is called for. I respect your opinions but live research and results show me that I am fine where I am with additives. Zinc is more to oil then pressure or shear protection. You can quote whoever and DickPedia is not a source I respect just look a bit further and see what other things Zinc brings to oil and you will see it is just not pressure protection, just a by product of Zinc and how it prolongs oils longevity from breakdown. And if the fjr put more on the clutch basket it would be better off.

 

[Fred W]

You guys are saying the same things, but from different angles.

SLK50 is talking about a clutch failure, which is when it slips. LAF is talking about a sticky clutch that will not release fully. So yeah, if you want it to slip more you need to add some lubricity, if you want it to grab more you want to delete some.

Zinc (ZDDP) has been been severely reduced from modern API Service Class SN motor oils due to it being blamed for fouling catalytic convertors. But our FJR engines have flat tappet cam actuation which is very hard for oil to maintain lubrication of. Then consider what happens when you leave the engine overnight (not to mention sitting longer) where the oil will get squeezed out of the high pressure between cam and tappet, you will have metal to metal contact during start-up at least. We are also using our crankcase oil to lubricate the gearbox, which also has some pretty high pressure interfaces.

The zinc and phosphorous in ZDDP electrochemically binds to the surfaces of exposed metal part, theoretically providing a microscopic layer of mechanical insulation from wear. Would this also help lubricate the clutch plates on an FJR to reduce grabbiness and sticking? Sure seems plausible to me. (I use STP oil treatment by the way)

So adding some form of ZDDP to your oil charge is probably good for your engine's longevity, may help with grabby clutches, but is potentially bad for the cats. I prefer dogs myself, anyway...

 

[Fred W]

OK, and just because I can't leave well enough alone, here's a pretty strong argument against adding ZDDP from a highly credible source:

The Starburst Oil Myth -- The latest myth promoted by the antique and collector car press says that new Starburst/ API SM engine oils (called Starburst for the shape of the symbol on the container) are bad for older engines because the amount of anti-wear additive in them has been reduced. The anti-wear additive being discussed is zinc dithiophosphate (ZDP).

Before debunking this myth, we need to look at the history of ZDP usage. For over 60 years, ZDP has been used as an additive in engine oils to provide wear protection and oxidation stability.

ZDP was first added to engine oil to control copper/lead bearing corrosion. Oils with a phosphorus level in the 0.03% range passed a corrosion test introduced in 1942.

In the mid-1950s, when the use of high-lift camshafts increased the potential for scuffing and wear, the phosphorus level contributed by ZDP was increased to the 0.08% range.

In addition, the industry developed a battery of oil tests (called sequences), two of which were valve-train scuffing and wear tests.

A higher level of ZDP was good for flat-tappet valve-train scuffing and wear, but it turned out that more was not better. Although break-in scuffing was reduced by using more phosphorus, longer-term wear increased when phosphorus rose above 0.14%. And, at about 0.20% phosphorus, the ZDP started attacking the grain boundaries in the iron, resulting in camshaft spalling.

By the 1970s, increased antioxidancy was needed to protect the oil in high-load engines, which otherwise could thicken to a point where the engine could no longer pump it. Because ZDP was an inexpensive and effective antioxidant, it was used to place the phosphorus level in the 0.10% range.

However, phosphorus is a poison for exhaust catalysts. So, ZDP levels have been reduced over the last 10-15 years. It's now down to a maximum of 0.08% for Starburst oils. This was supported by the introduction of modern ashless antioxidants that contain no phosphorus.

Enough history. Let's get back to the myth that Starburst oils are no good for older engines. The argument put forth is that while these oils work perfectly well in modern, gasoline engines equipped with roller camshafts, they will cause catastrophic wear in older engines equipped with flat-tappet camshafts.

The facts say otherwise.

Backward compatability was of great importance when the Starburst oil standards were developed by a group of experts from the OEMs, oil companies, and oil additive companies. In addition, multiple oil and additive companies ran no-harm tests on older engines with the new oils; and no problems were uncovered.

The new Starburst specification contains two valve-train wear tests. All Starburst oil formulations must pass these two tests.

- Sequence IVA tests for camshaft scuffing and wear using a single overhead camshaft engine with slider finger (not roller) followers.

- Sequence IIIG evaluates cam and lifter wear using a V6 engine with a flat-tappet system, similar to those used in the 1980s.

Those who hold onto the myth are ignoring the fact that the new Starburst oils contain about the same percentage of ZDP as the oils that solved the camshaft scuffing and wear issues back in the 1950s. (True, they do contain less ZDP than the oils that solved the oil thickening issues in the 1960s, but that's because they now contain high levels of ashless antioxidants not commercially available in the 1960s.)
Despite the pains taken in developing special flat-tappet camshaft wear tests that these new oils must pass and the fact that the ZDP level of these new oils is comparable to the level found necessary to protect flat-tappet camshafts in the past, there will still be those who want to believe the myth that new oils will wear out older engines.
Like other myths before it, history teaches us that it will probably take 60 or 70 years for this one to die also.

Special thanks to GM's Techlink
- Thanks to Bob Olree – GM Powertrain Fuels and Lubricants Group

And now we know why all oil threads are NEPRT. There are no correct answers anywhere.

 

[bwv]

And now we know why all oil threads are NEPRT. There are no correct answers anywhere.

I was just typin almost that same sentence...

But... there are correct answers, for sure....it's just real hard to peel them from the rest of the witch doctor stuff.

Just use oil that meets the specs Yamaha set for the bike, be dillegent with maintenance schedules, and you will have many trouble free miles... they spent MILLIONS engineering these fine machines...why argue with that?

Or.. be real careful selecting the finest oils made from unicorn tears and unobtanium, and then add 35$ worth of platinum/gold blend XYZ to it.. spend 150$ an oil change...and get what is likly to be the same exact result.... but you will feel better, 'cause that wallet wont be pullin unevenly on your spine anymore...

 

[Fred W]

THe part that is a little scary in that GM quote, and I've seen it elsewhere also, is that by adding too much ZDDP too high a level may actually end up eroding some of the very components you are trying to protect.

Sheesh...

 

[bwv]

You simply can't re-engineer or rebuild an engine with a can of supergoop...

I have seen automotive and tractor engines with odd colored buildup on main and rod bearings that I assumed were from people using engine oil additives...I dont remeber what additive, or how many miles, etc... and while this is great, as the additives are super slippery and may help on a plain layered bearing in a car engine with some extra clearance from 100000 miles... I shudder to think what these might do to a clutch pack...or even to oil seals on a bike engine that may not be chemically designed to be soaked in that gunk.

Back on the OP's topic for a second....

T+180 miles in on the regular Rotella, and no bad side effects at all... nothin... clutch works fine...shifts exactly the same... I keep waiting for crappy clutching or notchier shifting, but alas.. nope, it's still awesome... I'll keep lettin you know til maybe 1500 miles or so...

(Well... Kinda back on the OP topic... I know the OP was base on Rotella T6, but by post 12, regular Rotella T was made out as horrific as well...so I offered to share my observations with my brand new bike and plain old T, (whether you wanted them or not....) at post 27, as thats what I'm using based on my personal beleifs. (It doesnt hurt my feelings to know that SkooterG, when asked, said he used it in his 226,000 mile bike....)

 

[LAF]

OK, and just because I can't leave well enough alone, here's a pretty strong argument against adding ZDDP from a highly credible source:

The Starburst Oil Myth -- The latest myth promoted by the antique and collector car press says that new Starburst/ API SM engine oils (called Starburst for the shape of the symbol on the container) are bad for older engines because the amount of anti-wear additive in them has been reduced. The anti-wear additive being discussed is zinc dithiophosphate (ZDP).
Before debunking this myth, we need to look at the history of ZDP usage. For over 60 years, ZDP has been used as an additive in engine oils to provide wear protection and oxidation stability.

ZDP was first added to engine oil to control copper/lead bearing corrosion. Oils with a phosphorus level in the 0.03% range passed a corrosion test introduced in 1942.

In the mid-1950s, when the use of high-lift camshafts increased the potential for scuffing and wear, the phosphorus level contributed by ZDP was increased to the 0.08% range.

In addition, the industry developed a battery of oil tests (called sequences), two of which were valve-train scuffing and wear tests.

A higher level of ZDP was good for flat-tappet valve-train scuffing and wear, but it turned out that more was not better. Although break-in scuffing was reduced by using more phosphorus, longer-term wear increased when phosphorus rose above 0.14%. And, at about 0.20% phosphorus, the ZDP started attacking the grain boundaries in the iron, resulting in camshaft spalling.

By the 1970s, increased antioxidancy was needed to protect the oil in high-load engines, which otherwise could thicken to a point where the engine could no longer pump it. Because ZDP was an inexpensive and effective antioxidant, it was used to place the phosphorus level in the 0.10% range.

However, phosphorus is a poison for exhaust catalysts. So, ZDP levels have been reduced over the last 10-15 years. It's now down to a maximum of 0.08% for Starburst oils. This was supported by the introduction of modern ashless antioxidants that contain no phosphorus.

Enough history. Let's get back to the myth that Starburst oils are no good for older engines. The argument put forth is that while these oils work perfectly well in modern, gasoline engines equipped with roller camshafts, they will cause catastrophic wear in older engines equipped with flat-tappet camshafts.

The facts say otherwise.

Backward compatability was of great importance when the Starburst oil standards were developed by a group of experts from the OEMs, oil companies, and oil additive companies. In addition, multiple oil and additive companies ran no-harm tests on older engines with the new oils; and no problems were uncovered.

The new Starburst specification contains two valve-train wear tests. All Starburst oil formulations must pass these two tests.

- Sequence IVA tests for camshaft scuffing and wear using a single overhead camshaft engine with slider finger (not roller) followers.

- Sequence IIIG evaluates cam and lifter wear using a V6 engine with a flat-tappet system, similar to those used in the 1980s.

Those who hold onto the myth are ignoring the fact that the new Starburst oils contain about the same percentage of ZDP as the oils that solved the camshaft scuffing and wear issues back in the 1950s. (True, they do contain less ZDP than the oils that solved the oil thickening issues in the 1960s, but that's because they now contain high levels of ashless antioxidants not commercially available in the 1960s.)

Despite the pains taken in developing special flat-tappet camshaft wear tests that these new oils must pass and the fact that the ZDP level of these new oils is comparable to the level found necessary to protect flat-tappet camshafts in the past, there will still be those who want to believe the myth that new oils will wear out older engines.

Like other myths before it, history teaches us that it will probably take 60 or 70 years for this one to die also.

Special thanks to GM's Techlink

- Thanks to Bob Olree – GM Powertrain Fuels and Lubricants Group

And now we know why all oil threads are NEPRT. There are no correct answers anywhere.

I agree, no correct answer. The thing I understand is ZDDP is not only good for pressure, but anti oxidation and a cleaner. It is also STP in another bottle. So what I read is all good including the anti oxidation and cleaning ability and how that would play into a better clutch engagement.

Again with so little oil hitting the clutch, what does hit it I would like to know is doing some good.

It must work or help as even though I have a Barnett clutch pack in it has not in three years lurched or carried on like it did new. And they were dry as a bone when I pulled them with 0 miles. The bike sat more this winter then others past and first time start up no sticking.

Again the STP guys and Risoline guy me, are using the same thing in a different form, and they and I agree it helps.

Again your bike run what you want or not. I also use Moly in my FD, MoS2, which is just for gears but can not be used in a wet clutch. So I do believe in better living through chemicals.

Also of note is in all the reading it seems Diesel oils have the highest concentrations of ZDDP which I find interesting. And along with the Rotella guys being passionate about using it. Must be onto something running Diesel oil with high Zinc levels some reported at 1800PPM. Zinc prolongs engine oil from breakdown so it can not be a bad thing in my mind. And about 4.00 a oil change I can take the heat.

 

[Fred W]

Also of note is in all the reading it seems Diesel oils have the highest concentrations of ZDDP which I find interesting. And along with the Rotella guys being passionate about using it. Must be onto something running Diesel oil with high Zinc levels some reported at 1800PPM. Zinc prolongs engine oil from breakdown so it can not be a bad thing in my mind. And about 4.00 a oil change I can take the heat.

I believe that was old info. Current Rotella T is rated API Service Class SM, which means that can only have up to .08% ZDDP.

 

[LAF]

Also of note is in all the reading it seems Diesel oils have the highest concentrations of ZDDP which I find interesting. And along with the Rotella guys being passionate about using it. Must be onto something running Diesel oil with high Zinc levels some reported at 1800PPM. Zinc prolongs engine oil from breakdown so it can not be a bad thing in my mind. And about 4.00 a oil change I can take the heat.

I believe that was old info. Current Rotella T is rated API Service Class SM, which means that can only have up to .08% ZDDP.

It may be Fred. Delvac is what I think was being said to hold the highest PPM of Zinc.

At any case putting ZDDP in sure beats sacrificing a chicken and spitting good rum all over the place.

I am wondering if 13's have a dry clutch issue? It seems to me that with all the clutch plate soaks that have been done by dealers, Yamaha would cut a new oil hole in a better place for the clutch bath to really happen?

Who knows? I enjoy the information and thoughts these threads produce. I do know I am glad I cut the dose to 10% instead of the recommended 20%. Something in me will not allow me to replace 20% or 1 quart of my oil to a additive. However the 10% seems to be working and I will stay with it.

And the Moly in the FD uses one tablespoon to the FD oil so no worries there. Again the Moly was about 60.00 for a quart and was bought and used in my K 1200 LT FD to stave off the dreaded FD blow out. In 26,000 miles it never did but was set up by a friend in New England who had the jigs to set the spacer distance to spec. It was way off from factory spec and after it was set I never gave it a second thought. Moly will heal and polish gears like no other substance on earth short of pulling them and having at it. While I have no reason to suspect Yamaha on FD issues better living through chemicals is still something I do.

 

[bwv]

When you say Moly, are you using dry Molybdenum disulfide, or a liquid additive?

(Thanks)

 

[LAF]

When you say Moly, are you using dry Molybdenum disulfide, or a liquid additive?(Thanks)

I use Molykote M Gear Oil from Dow Corning. You can search for it and read all the stuff it has to say about it.

 

[bwv]

A change in feel for sure. It crept up...has gradually worsened, is not terrible yet, but is definetly noticeable.

Disclaimer: I am not claiming it is the oil. You are all adults, make your own inferences, I will report what I am witnessing with my bike.

925 miles on it now (I'll look back.. i think it was 707 miles that i changed it at)

Some downshifts now require a slight (but not too much) increase in engine rpm to go smoothly.

After riding for, lets say a mile between gear shifts, I notice that, when pulling in the clutch and "bliping" the throttle for a downshift, there is a definite clunk in the drive train, and/or, you can feel the bike.. move, surge, bump forward (i dunno the right word to use here...) It's like the clutch has stuck engaged a bit, and then frees once the force of then engine speed, changed by the "blip" effort, increase is enough to break it free.

It does not do this when there is a multiple downshift... For example, I ride 4.4 miles to work today (I always warm the bike to 2 bars before I roll)...The last 3 miles are highway and generally, I am in 5th that whole time... when I approach work, and drop it into 4th (maybe 100 feet before I turn in) it does the "clunk and lurch forward" when I blip (unless i am carefull and match the RPMS perfectly) and downshift into 4th, but then the 3>2>1 after that, do not.. they go relatively smoothly.

I did try, going 60 in 5th gear for at least a mile before pulling in the clutch and revving, but not shifting... and can confirm this "stiction" exists on first "blip" but not sucessive ones..

Moving the bike, off, cold, and in gear, in my garage, which used to require pulling in the clutch and maybe one rock, now requires several very firm "rocks" (5?) back and forth to get the clutch free.

It has become more challenging to get it into first from a cold start. (I know.. "start it in gear".. but I'm not gonna beat my starter like that, it lunges forward unless you rock it free first..this tiuny starter shouldnt be asked to move a bike this heavy)

Not the result I expected.

I am not going to change this right away... so if any of you would like me to perform some test you have, or want me to try something.. let me know.

Good chance to experiment i guess...

If it does get any worse though... i will dump it and go yamalube... I will promise at least another 500 miles before I dump it (unless it becomes dangerous to myself or the machine)

My opinion... new bike.. tight tolereances... I bet if it had 10,000 or more on it...this would not happen... Rotella worked fine in my KLR (better than Valvoline 4 stroke MC oil on the cold roll in gear thing)

 

[LAF]

Seems to me you have the classic symptom of dry clutch plates. It is not a big deal to check and you loose no oil in the process. Pull the clutch basket and look. I will bet your first plate will be a little wet and all the rest dry. If you follow the forum soak for 24 hours. If you want to believe Barnett they say 20 minuets will do it. I know after soaking the Barnett for a half hour as a put it in. I used a goose neck oil can and wet every plate and steel as I put them back in. I also started to use Risoline from that point forward. Is it my Barnett Clutch pac that fixed it? Don't know. Was it the Risoline? Don't know. I do know my clutch does not stick and has not in 22,000 miles.

I still believe the clutch does not receive enough oil from the oil bath.

I refuse to pay for a Manufactures oil when it is some flavor of oil from a major oil manufacturer that puts a Yamaha label on. Car oil and Motorcycle oils are a joke. The motor does not know the difference. The clutch may if there is to much anti friction additive but there are so many oils used with good results it makes on wonder what the hell is actually going on with these clutches.

 

[petey]

I've been using Rotella T6 for years. On my '08 the clutch started sticking with less than 3K miles on the odo. I had the dealer (under warranty) soak the plates and continued using T6 and never had the clutch sticking again. Sold the bike with 42K miles on odo.

 

[RossKean]

+1

Your clutch is sticky - likely dry. Blipping the throttle for downshifts??? Shouldn't be necessary, ever! The lurch starting in first with the clutch pulled is also abnormal. If my bike has been idle for a couple of days, I might get a minor surge starting in first but hardly noticable; certainly not to the point where I would be concerned about taxing the starter motor (or running into the back wall of the garage. I suppose it is also possible that your clutch needs a bleed...

I doubt it is your Rotella but you could experiment - change the oil without doing anything else and see if there is a dramatic improvement.

 

[SouthernCruizer]

>snip>
I doubt it is your Rotella but you could experiment - change the oil without doing anything else and see if there is a dramatic improvement.

I did just that. Changed from Rotella T to Honda oil...smooth shifting within a few miles. Now, over 1500 miles later, the bike is shifting smoother than my ultra smooth '08 was. I didnt soak the clutch, didnt sacrifice a chicken, just simply changed oil. YMMV.

 

[bwv]

The blips i mention, arent like Vroom Vroom (no squidly racetrack stuff)... but more like a brief and slight opening of the throttle to match up the engine RPMs to what they will be in the next lower gear as i downshift. I wont say it has "needed" this since new... but i will say it made downshifting a lot smoother action, so I just did it, but as time is passing, it seems to be "needed" for 5>4 downshifts after periods of not actuating the clutch.

Coming from the KLR650, I just thought this is a bigger biker, with more rotating mass in the tranny and crank... so it was probably normal to do this for smoother shifts.. I like things to mesh and shift smoothly, so i have no issue with that little extra task... I'd rather not have to.. but its ok either way.

It doesnt feel in any way like the clutch needs to be bled.I do not think that air would cause an occasional issue(not after 975 miles), and, the clutch does release completely and work very consistently once its not "stuck".

I'll buy into sticky plates and maybe needing to be soaked...

I don't think its the Rotella either...but it sure is odd timing

It is kinda like the worst of both worlds... if it was a dry clucth, this wouldnt happen (but it wouldnt last long with this much torque) if it was a wetter than it is clutch, I bet it wouldnt get sticky with fresh oil all the while... but being its a "kinda damp clutch".. maybe the heat and pressure, on oil that doesnt get exchanged from the friction surfaces a lot is maybe makin some sticky spots...

What if i just lay it on its right side every time I park it for like a week? There's no kickstand in the way on that side... and that should get some oil into the clutch basket right?

(kidding)

I'm gonna run it a while and see if its just me actin like a bitch, or if it's a confirmable behaviour by the machine.

If it irritates me enough, I'll change early and try a different lube in it... but I'm cheap (and curious).. so not yet... It isnt hurtin things, and i only really need the clutch to stop and start anyway

Or... I might want to see what that big ol' clutch looks like in person, and just take it apart, see if the discs are dry, and then soak it just for shits and giggles... I'll take pictures if i do...

 

[900gc]

>snip>
I doubt it is your Rotella but you could experiment - change the oil without doing anything else and see if there is a dramatic improvement.

I did just that. Changed from Rotella T to Honda oil...smooth shifting within a few miles. Now, over 1500 miles later, the bike is shifting smoother than my ultra smooth '08 was. I didnt soak the clutch, didnt sacrifice a chicken, just simply changed oil. YMMV.

I'm glad no chickens were harmed, except maybe the one you had for dinner.

Looking back through this thread I couldn't find if you mentioned that the Honda oil was the Synth. or the dino 10w/40 Pro.

 

[fredkerr]

After reading this series of posts, I drained the Rotella from my bike, put in Yamalube, and put the Rotella in my diesel truck. Bike now shifts smoothly, and no hangups on downshifts. However, I think it's probably a fig newton of my imagination.

 

[rfulcher]

BWV the symptoms you describe are the same I had with dry clutch plates on my 07. I let it go for 12,000 miles before I got it fixed. It took that long for the symptoms to get bad enough for the service tech to admit I had a problem. At first I thought it would get better with time or I would develop better shifting technique, nope it just got worse with time. I needed new clutch plate soaked overnight to fix the problems. This has been the only problem with this bike in 60,000 miles.