AGAIN http://www.aac-jasoinfo.com/jaso_web/index.htm



OH. So you want me to read the links you're posting. Well why didn't ya say so.

Musky

Your interpretation of a suggested substitute is interesting whether or not it came from Amsoil
You don't need motorcycle oil. Thousands and thousands of miles has proven that. Even Amsoil (A trusted name) has admitted that. After they bumped the price of their 20/50 motorcycle oil a couple bucks a quart and people started saying screw you they sent out a notice saying it was perfectly fine to use their plain old auto 20/50 synthetic in your motorcycle.


Since AMO and ARO are HI PERFORMANCE oil for motorhomes and older vehicles not their PLAIN OLD AUTO oil
You can use it in your motorcycle because it is Jaso MA for wet clutch
Their standard XL series auto oil is JASO VTW

Plain old auto oil is available from Amsoil only 5w-20,5w-30,10w-30,10w40
You dont get the heavier weight oils unless you get the hi performance AMO 10w40
or ARO 10w50 or Racing oil which is only JASO MB... NOT for wet clutch

Amsoil is discontinuing the AMF and AMV motorcycle oil and going with
MCF and MCV advanced formula motorcycle oil and suggesting the Hi performance AMO and ARO as substitutes if you dont want to pay the higher price for the MCF
or MCV
MCF 10w-40 or MCV 20w-50 would be the choice for me<br><br>Post edited by: Pop Rivet, at: 2006/10/16 12:38

My point (admittitedly poorly explained) was that it isn't motorcycle oil. But it has the needed stuff to use in motorcycles. Ergo - you don't HAVE to run motorcycle specific oil or pay higer prices for a label that says motorcycle.

From the amsoil website:
ARO - $7.75 / qt - 20/50 non motorcycle high perf
MCV - $9.10 / qt - 20/50 motorcycle high perf
$1.35 / qt difference for pretty much just marketing hype.

I'm still dancin

Musky
You are right ARO has the needed stuff for motorcycles its just that
MCV has MORE of the needed stuff
unless you think its the same stuff in a different bottle

Just like wider windshields ..MCV does a better job of doing what a motorcycle oil should do...for more money

Musky wrote:
My point (admittitedly poorly explained) was that it isn't motorcycle oil. But it has the needed stuff to use in motorcycles. Ergo - you don't HAVE to run motorcycle specific oil or pay higer prices for a label that says motorcycle.

From the amsoil website:
ARO - $7.75 / qt - 20/50 non motorcycle high perf
MCV - $9.10 / qt - 20/50 motorcycle high perf
$1.35 / qt difference for pretty much just marketing hype.

I'm still dancin

jaysus! i&acute;m selling bel-ray 20/50 motorcycle oil for 4 euros/litre (4.88 dollars more or less), AND still making 50% profit!

needless to say, my clients are VERY happy

I think if the ARO has enough of the good stuff then paying for more is just a waste of money.

Might of got me on the windshield comparison though. Ain't fair using my own words against me.

jaysus! i&acute;m selling bel-ray 20/50 motorcycle oil for 4 euros/litre (4.88 dollars more or less), AND still making 50% profit!



I don't doubt it. Alot of the oils are pure rip off.

As USAFRETIRED stated, the transmission and engine are separated. The two do not share the same oil and you certainly do not use automobile or motorcyle engine oil in your transmission

Hey Doc, thats not what I said. The transmission is located in the engine case and share the same oil. The transfer case as we know it, housing the chain which used the thicker hypoid oil. But is also is the oil reservoir for the engine.

USAFRETIRED wrote:
As USAFRETIRED stated, the transmission and engine are separated. The two do not share the same oil and you certainly do not use automobile or motorcyle engine oil in your transmission

Hey Doc, thats not what I said. The transmission is located in the engine case and share the same oil. The transfer case as we know it, housing the chain which used the thicker hypoid oil. But is also is the oil reservoir for the engine.

Yes, I realized that the error of my ways was pointed out to me and posted a correction. Having taken them apart I should have known better.

It was one of those days.

Besides, it gives the guys someone new to harp on.

Doc

Sorry. but the circlip itself was not defective

You may be correct that the circlip itself was not defective, but on the other hand, it does not state a gear was defective either, or gear wear. It only listed what was to be replaced, which was a collar, 4th gear, washer, circlip x 2.