YEA, I KNOW, another oil thread.

[Walleye]

I am puzzled by your comment above. You own a Honda...but you don't trust Honda engineers. But...you'll trust someone who posts something on the Internet that you've never met. Why did you buy a Honda then?

I owned a Burgman scooter at one time. Almost all of those who seemed to be knowledgeable said they used Shell Rotella oil. T6, I believe. That was my first exposure to it. I later bought a Honda NT700V and now I had a bike with an engine that shared the oil with the clutch. I didn't want to screw it up, but I did want to use the best. And what I was using before, was Energy Conserving and therefore could screw up the clutch.

So I spent an afternoon reading through threads at "Bob is the Oil Guy". Some guys sounded like they knew what they were talking about. But in the end, they were probably no different than any of us. They just knew how to sound knowledgeable about oil. But they did say some things that made sense to me.

Shell Rotella is one of a couple diesel oil products. Diesel owners (not your pickup diesel owners, but the guys who's engines cost what 10 Tesla S's cost), tend to not be swayed by the marketing fluff and claims on the side of the bottles. Their engines cost a fortune to buy, and taking them down for maintenance is equally expensive. They want something that works...and when they find it, they stick with it; they don't go with the latest fads. Shell Rotella is one of their favorites.

Every motorcycle I bought, I intended to keep forever...or at least 100,000 miles. My current bike has more miles than any of the others at just shy of 50K. I don't plan to ever sell it...but I wouldn't be surprised if I find another bike that catches my fancy and I buy it. My point is that it makes no difference if this bike could make 150K with Shell Rotella T6 or 200K with XXX brand oil. Who cares? I'll never have it. And none of the people who bought my previous bikes have put on more than 10K on the bikes since they bought them. They'll never see the end of life for this motorcycle.

The ST's have remarkable longevity. That was engineered into them...by Honda engineers.

Chris

when I say I dont trust Honda is a generalization of I dont trust motorcycle manufacturers, auto manufacturers, lubes etc. . I really enjoy the ST, but I can think of many other bikes I would be perfectly happy with. I was not looking for an ST or honda when I bought my 1100, I was 2 days from closing a deal on a 1700 thunderbird when I was given a deal I couldnt refuse on the Honda ( I was well aware of what it was) and have never been sorry I did. RAT540 is not an inept jughead and has put together an admirable amount of testing that could only be disputed if you can prove him wrong. I stated previously what he's compiled is no way the bible of lubrication, but he has certainly exposed some misconceptions about the industry and the products and marketing. I have worked in the lubes production and test labs and have tried to stay on the ball with whats going on in the field and just enjoy general conversation on lubes and many other fields controlled by science, I try not to bury my head in the sand on anything.

 

[Pete in PA]

The JASO rating is just another way for them to try to force you to buy motorcycle oil only. Amazing how with all my bikes they never saw bike oil again when the original was drained out. some were used. Who knows what oil the previous owner used.

I've put 60-100k miles on these same bikes no clutch slippage ever. Some were 650 dual sports, air cooled, clutches abused off road in the woods, hill climbing here in PA, no slipping ever.

Amazing.

 

[Shawn K]

And the pioneer is the guy with the arrow in his chest. Knock yourself out John Moses.

Reminds me of something that one of my colleagues and I used to face at a former employer. The SOP was that you never wanted to be the *first* guy with a new idea for the company, because you'd be summarily shot on sight. Then, as someone was dragging you out of the conference room, the owners would turn back and ask, "Now... what were we talking about?"

Always better to be the *second* guy, if self-preservation is your priority.

 

[beemerphile]

Reminds me of something that one of my colleagues and I used to face at a former employer. The SOP was that you never wanted to be the *first* guy with a new idea for the company, because you'd be summarily shot on sight. Then, as someone was dragging you out of the conference room, the owners would turn back and ask, "Now... what were we talking about?"

Always better to be the *second* guy, if self-preservation is your priority.

2nd mouse gets the cheese. Self-preservation always struck me as a reasonable objective unless higher ideals are called into play.

 

[dwalby]

Reminds me of something that one of my colleagues and I used to face at a former employer. The SOP was that you never wanted to be the *first* guy with a new idea for the company, because you'd be summarily shot on sight. Then, as someone was dragging you out of the conference room, the owners would turn back and ask, "Now... what were we talking about?"

sounds like a great place to work, I bet you're glad to be able to call it a former employer.

 

[Shawn K]

sounds like a great place to work, I bet you're glad to be able to call it a former employer.

You have no idea...

 

[Larry Fine]

Reminds me of something that one of my colleagues and I used to face at a former employer. The SOP was that you never wanted to be the *first* guy with a new idea for the company, because you'd be summarily shot on sight. Then, as someone was dragging you out of the conference room, the owners would turn back and ask, "Now... what were we talking about?"

Always better to be the *second* guy, if self-preservation is your priority.

Reminds me of Dilbert.