Any of ya saw pros/specialists have any input here for this from our climbing forumn at this site?
{http://www.arboristsite.com//showthread.php?s=&threadid=5357}
{http://www.arboristsite.com//showthread.php?s=&threadid=5357}
Using Amsoil etc. for 2 cycle
- Thread starter TheTreeSpyder
- Start date
Help Support Arborist Forum:
HUSKYMAN
Addicted to ArboristSite
Personally I think it is a waste. The OEM oils are very good. You have more important things to worry about in your business then this probably.
don
ArboristSite Guru
This has been discussed in debt on this forum
If you do a search ... synthetic ... oil ... you will find quite allot of information on the topic of 2 cycle oil
If you do a search ... synthetic ... oil ... you will find quite allot of information on the topic of 2 cycle oil
Any two stroke tuner worth a ???? will scoff at the use of amsoil 100:1. Amsoil as a rule uses shaddy sales and marketing practices, but there products tend to be ok. Nothing exceptional, but they wont chernobyl your motor either.
mix
I have only heard good words about Optimol, but I still don't see the reason for using it.
I have only heard good words about Optimol, but I still don't see the reason for using it.
Saw Man
ArboristSite Operative
In Europe many companies use 100:1 mix. Most is already synthetic blends.
Amsoil, and some other similar lubes actually do work. It's the sales & marketing people in competing companies who sometimes get into fights.
Opti-2 (patented)was invented/marketed by Optimol Oil Werke (Munchen/Munich, Germany) many years ago. The additive is used not only in two cycle, but also four cycle, greases, and other hi tech lubes.
Optimol was bought by Castrol about 6 years ago for the patent rights.
It's advantages are :
>Reduced surface wear,
>Longer life,
>Increased power,
>Less pollution (less smell too).
Happy & Safe Sawing!
Stuff really does work
Amsoil, and some other similar lubes actually do work. It's the sales & marketing people in competing companies who sometimes get into fights.
Opti-2 (patented)was invented/marketed by Optimol Oil Werke (Munchen/Munich, Germany) many years ago. The additive is used not only in two cycle, but also four cycle, greases, and other hi tech lubes.
Optimol was bought by Castrol about 6 years ago for the patent rights.
It's advantages are :
>Reduced surface wear,
>Longer life,
>Increased power,
>Less pollution (less smell too).
Happy & Safe Sawing!
Stuff really does work
Mazola might technicaly work. The question that needs to be asked is what is best for the engine. That is not a 100:1 ratio. I have a contact at Phillps 66 that works in formulation. Everytime I bring up this 100:1 nonsense he just laughs. I can provide you with a e mail address if you like.
I do not care what kind of patents they have. They make some rather large claims on there website that most petrochemical engineers would find pretty laughable. BTW there patent is for a moly amine salt. Nothing high tech there. All of the oil companies have something better or simular.They make no outlandish claims on there patent submission.
Last edited:
Saw Man
ArboristSite Operative
bwalker,
I'm lost trying to fit in where Mazzola fits as a proper lubricant.
The oil ratio is really determined by the lube engineer, and testing. Not the engine maker.
You can run 16:1 thru 100:1 in the correct application, in the same engine, where the only variable is the oil itself.
Most oil companies don't blend two cycle oils. They supply base stocks to blenders who actually make the two cycle oils.
I started selling synthetic lubricants over 20 years ago when they "didn't' work then and still don't today, according to some people.
Quaker State, Penzoil, Castrol, Mobil, Exxon, etc., would be surprised to learn their stuff doesn't work.
Especially don't tell Amsoil that they're FAA (Federal Aviation Administratio ) approved synthetic AV Oil for aircraft doesn't work.
I AGREE with you, that many companies make false claims. But that doesn't mean they all are bad.
I'm lost trying to fit in where Mazzola fits as a proper lubricant.
The oil ratio is really determined by the lube engineer, and testing. Not the engine maker.
You can run 16:1 thru 100:1 in the correct application, in the same engine, where the only variable is the oil itself.
Most oil companies don't blend two cycle oils. They supply base stocks to blenders who actually make the two cycle oils.
I started selling synthetic lubricants over 20 years ago when they "didn't' work then and still don't today, according to some people.
Quaker State, Penzoil, Castrol, Mobil, Exxon, etc., would be surprised to learn their stuff doesn't work.
Especially don't tell Amsoil that they're FAA (Federal Aviation Administratio ) approved synthetic AV Oil for aircraft doesn't work.
I AGREE with you, that many companies make false claims. But that doesn't mean they all are bad.
That sound like something right out of the amsoil sales pitch book. unfortunantly its not true. Do you sell amsoil?btw synthetics are great, just not at 100:1.
Saw Man
ArboristSite Operative
No, I don't sell Amsoil, I sold against it!
Believe it or not, there are engines & lubes that can run at 200:1.
There are so many things that are NOT new, it's just that today, companies want you more than ever to use only their brand. If you don't then many sales people put the fear of problems, and loss of warranty into dealers, and users heads.
That is wrong, retards progress, and keeps people from doing better.
Believe it or not, there are engines & lubes that can run at 200:1.
There are so many things that are NOT new, it's just that today, companies want you more than ever to use only their brand. If you don't then many sales people put the fear of problems, and loss of warranty into dealers, and users heads.
That is wrong, retards progress, and keeps people from doing better.
I think we will have to agree to disagree on this one.
Saw Man
ArboristSite Operative
I'll drink to that.
Will be easy, as we're taking a friend out for her birthday dinner.
All, b_ _ l s_ _ t aside; engines, coatings, oils, filters, etc have changed alot over the years. The education learning curve hasn't reached the user well enough.
So, the misnformation, and horror stories still float around.
Example, NikaSil is a cylinder coating that is twice (2X) as hard a chrome, likes oil (molecular affinity), isn't as heat sensitive as chrome flashing, and you can use less oil with the right oil.
It is an optional coating used by Kohler, and many two cycle companies. A famous big German saw company used it, and had problems with it years ago. But only they had problems, not the other German company, nor their Swedish competitors.
Yet they bad mouthed it, while quietly using it in theie cut off saws. They used the wrong rings on the chain saws!
Optimol, which I also used to sell against, used to have some problems. Upon research, it was found the packaging was not only off, but was had to measure. That screwed up the ratios.
When they added squeeze packets ( like ketchup) vs pour measure bottles, the problems disappeared overnight.
They have for 10+ years been sucessfully selling the oil packets at 72:1 ratio. I started using my competitors oil in my demo saws, service schools, and I didn't stink so much(so my wife said).
Time to go. Will toast our agreement to disagree. If you meet us I'll buy you one.
Will be easy, as we're taking a friend out for her birthday dinner.
All, b_ _ l s_ _ t aside; engines, coatings, oils, filters, etc have changed alot over the years. The education learning curve hasn't reached the user well enough.
So, the misnformation, and horror stories still float around.
Example, NikaSil is a cylinder coating that is twice (2X) as hard a chrome, likes oil (molecular affinity), isn't as heat sensitive as chrome flashing, and you can use less oil with the right oil.
It is an optional coating used by Kohler, and many two cycle companies. A famous big German saw company used it, and had problems with it years ago. But only they had problems, not the other German company, nor their Swedish competitors.
Yet they bad mouthed it, while quietly using it in theie cut off saws. They used the wrong rings on the chain saws!
Optimol, which I also used to sell against, used to have some problems. Upon research, it was found the packaging was not only off, but was had to measure. That screwed up the ratios.
When they added squeeze packets ( like ketchup) vs pour measure bottles, the problems disappeared overnight.
They have for 10+ years been sucessfully selling the oil packets at 72:1 ratio. I started using my competitors oil in my demo saws, service schools, and I didn't stink so much(so my wife said).
Time to go. Will toast our agreement to disagree. If you meet us I'll buy you one.
dbabcock
Hi Tech Redneck
For years I used Mercury High Performance synthetic 2 stroke oil at 32:1 in my Nikasil bored/ chrome Moly ringed, 2.5 liter race outboards with great success. No oil induced problems. One year, at the behest of a friend and Amsoil advocate, I tried running Amsoil at 50:1 as I refused to go to 100:1 just because it seemed too risky. About 10 hours after I switched, I ended up throwing a rod through the side of the block on one of the motors. Analysis pointed to marginal lubrication. Since these motors are pre-mix, I knew it wasn't oil injection failure, nor was it a leaning out of the fuel injection. Later, I pulled the other powerhead apart just to see if it was OK. It wasn't. Mostly rod big end bearing heating and main bearing wear. The hard face on the two upper main crank journals was starting to spall.
Now I'm not condemming Amsoil specifically as it might have been the 50:1 mixture, but those motors were torn down and inspected every spring and they were in excellent shape every year up until then. That 10 hours killed them.
Now I'm not condemming Amsoil specifically as it might have been the 50:1 mixture, but those motors were torn down and inspected every spring and they were in excellent shape every year up until then. That 10 hours killed them.
One last jab. Amsoil only reccomends the 100:1 mix for engines that oems spec that mix ratio. The catch is that there are none. The question needs to be asked why would you want to use less oil than is reccomended when many experts conclude that even that is too little. Yes, there have been advances in engine design. To bad saws are still useing 70's two stroke tech.
BTW If you want to talk two cyle lubrication call this guy. Dr. Dave Redzus at Precision Automotive Research 630-766-4402. This guy does things like develop race fuels and two cycle lubricants for Phillips 66 Raceing fuel and lubricant division. Be prepared the guy is very technical and a brainiac to boot.
BTW If you want to talk two cyle lubrication call this guy. Dr. Dave Redzus at Precision Automotive Research 630-766-4402. This guy does things like develop race fuels and two cycle lubricants for Phillips 66 Raceing fuel and lubricant division. Be prepared the guy is very technical and a brainiac to boot.
Saw Man
ArboristSite Operative
Years ago engine makers used to b#*l s^-t dealers, and users that they had to use their oil, filters, etc. to keep they warranty intact.
That was an out & out lie. A Federal law passed back in 1968 Moss Fergusson (spelling?) Warranty Act stated basically said that any manufacturer who requires the usage of their specifically name branded maintenance items (lube, filters, tires, etc.), MUST provide those at NO CHARGE to the customer for the warranty peroid.
Companies still try to do that. As little as 6-7 years ago a major two cycle company Echo had that written in such a way in the owners ops manuals, that dealers/users thought they must use only their stuff. They changed their manuals.
Here's the problems.
>Companies developed newer, better lubes that really work.
Sold to dealers, sold to customers.
Engine makers, and the sales people, and dealers don't like seeing other products going in their stuff. In reality they don't like losing sales. So, they deliberately create misinformation.
Worked with some of those people.
>People whether sales or service, factory or dealer,.........find out that some other product other than what they sell has been used.
They deny warranty, or just give grief to the dealer or user.
That creates problems, and uncertainy. Afterall what dealer wants to get hung out on the line if he sells you a product, and he has trouble getting support?
I worked with people, and sold against people who deliberatly did, and some still do it.
>Lack of technical education.
>Lack of honesty
>Selfishness. "If it's not mine then it's not good, or as good".
How did many companies get around the mis claims on oil ratios??
Simple, let the user mix the oil as per the engine makers instructions. So, if an oil could be ( not all can) mixed at 50:1, but the ops manual showed 32: 1, the mix it at 32:1. No problem.
Same with 100:1.
Did they get the best performance? No, but there should be no warranty problems.
Here's some food for thought....
Homelite, (no matter what we think of it) for years, and years sold & marketed a 16:1. a 32:1, AND a 50:1 oil. All covered under warranty, and could be used in any Homely-lite product.
The only difference was the oil formula, AND, yes, AND, they had contracts to fuflill. Those legal things that forced them to keep buying the 16:1 oil, PLUS the cans, till the contract was over.
I worked for a company that private labeled some of the best oil blended. A better formula, and new 'easier to use' packaging were both developed. Since they had over 50,000 of unsold cases,and empty cans, plus unfulled contracts, they couldn't introduce the better products.
Unfortunately both the formula, and the packaging got sold to other companies. Ever see the packets, and squeeze bottles????
I'm not trying to just be arguementative, but I'm trying to get credit to some of my old competitors products, because they can & do work.
I hope you'll keep that in mind, even though we might disagree.
Even though a fellow posted a problem, that doesn't mean it was a lube problem in and of itself. When was teaching some service schools, I saw alot of engine problems that were caused by the so called 'lack of lube'. 99.9 % of the time there was a related procedure, or mechanical event that caused the 'lack of lube.
Oil is there to solve problems, not create them. Humans do that.
That was an out & out lie. A Federal law passed back in 1968 Moss Fergusson (spelling?) Warranty Act stated basically said that any manufacturer who requires the usage of their specifically name branded maintenance items (lube, filters, tires, etc.), MUST provide those at NO CHARGE to the customer for the warranty peroid.
Companies still try to do that. As little as 6-7 years ago a major two cycle company Echo had that written in such a way in the owners ops manuals, that dealers/users thought they must use only their stuff. They changed their manuals.
Here's the problems.
>Companies developed newer, better lubes that really work.
Sold to dealers, sold to customers.
Engine makers, and the sales people, and dealers don't like seeing other products going in their stuff. In reality they don't like losing sales. So, they deliberately create misinformation.
Worked with some of those people.
>People whether sales or service, factory or dealer,.........find out that some other product other than what they sell has been used.
They deny warranty, or just give grief to the dealer or user.
That creates problems, and uncertainy. Afterall what dealer wants to get hung out on the line if he sells you a product, and he has trouble getting support?
I worked with people, and sold against people who deliberatly did, and some still do it.
>Lack of technical education.
>Lack of honesty
>Selfishness. "If it's not mine then it's not good, or as good".
How did many companies get around the mis claims on oil ratios??
Simple, let the user mix the oil as per the engine makers instructions. So, if an oil could be ( not all can) mixed at 50:1, but the ops manual showed 32: 1, the mix it at 32:1. No problem.
Same with 100:1.
Did they get the best performance? No, but there should be no warranty problems.
Here's some food for thought....
Homelite, (no matter what we think of it) for years, and years sold & marketed a 16:1. a 32:1, AND a 50:1 oil. All covered under warranty, and could be used in any Homely-lite product.
The only difference was the oil formula, AND, yes, AND, they had contracts to fuflill. Those legal things that forced them to keep buying the 16:1 oil, PLUS the cans, till the contract was over.
I worked for a company that private labeled some of the best oil blended. A better formula, and new 'easier to use' packaging were both developed. Since they had over 50,000 of unsold cases,and empty cans, plus unfulled contracts, they couldn't introduce the better products.
Unfortunately both the formula, and the packaging got sold to other companies. Ever see the packets, and squeeze bottles????
I'm not trying to just be arguementative, but I'm trying to get credit to some of my old competitors products, because they can & do work.
I hope you'll keep that in mind, even though we might disagree.
Even though a fellow posted a problem, that doesn't mean it was a lube problem in and of itself. When was teaching some service schools, I saw alot of engine problems that were caused by the so called 'lack of lube'. 99.9 % of the time there was a related procedure, or mechanical event that caused the 'lack of lube.
Oil is there to solve problems, not create them. Humans do that.
Sawman, you can not argue the fact that no OEM has ever speced a 100:1 ratio. At least not for a aircooled high stress app like a saw. I do not really see what advantage there is to useing less oil, anyway. Would you try to lower the sump capacity of your car to 2 quarts to save $3 at oil change time?
Saw Man
ArboristSite Operative
bwwalker,
When talking about two cycle mix ratios you switched over into four cycle volume which is totally different. I'm sure you know the difference by your level of knowledge, and what you mean, but, sorry don't follow your logic.
Yes, there are companies that used 100:1, and synthetics long ago. Solo, and Dolmar were just two German companies. Solo actually packaged a small plastic tube with their saw, mist blowers, lawn mowers, etc.
The North American is just a small part of the world.
Ich gehe nzu Deutschland, zu arbiten, spielen, und essen. (Yes, I do speak German, rusty now). I went to Germany to work, play, and eat, compliments of Solo. I have worked with German, Japanese, Swedish, and last but not least with American two cycle engine companies
When talking about two cycle mix ratios you switched over into four cycle volume which is totally different. I'm sure you know the difference by your level of knowledge, and what you mean, but, sorry don't follow your logic.
Yes, there are companies that used 100:1, and synthetics long ago. Solo, and Dolmar were just two German companies. Solo actually packaged a small plastic tube with their saw, mist blowers, lawn mowers, etc.
The North American is just a small part of the world.
Ich gehe nzu Deutschland, zu arbiten, spielen, und essen. (Yes, I do speak German, rusty now). I went to Germany to work, play, and eat, compliments of Solo. I have worked with German, Japanese, Swedish, and last but not least with American two cycle engine companies
They may have reccomended it in the past, but the sure do not now. I guess they learned there lesson as Amsoil did. BTW looking at the data on amsoil and opti I see no differance from a formualtion stand point that would allow them to run at 100:1. Opti has a little moly in it, but so what. That stuff has been around since the 70's and it cant be to great from a deposit standpoint. Amsoil 100:1 is just a high cst ester with a above normal additive treat(also bad from a deposit standpoint). BTW I brang up the car oil thing to prove a point. That is that people will try to run the least amount of oil through a two cycle as they possibly can, but they would never do the same witha four cycle.
Sawman, Answer me one question and we can put this thread to rest. What is the advantage to running the least amount of oil possible through a two stroke?
Sawman, Answer me one question and we can put this thread to rest. What is the advantage to running the least amount of oil possible through a two stroke?
Saw Man
ArboristSite Operative
Good ????
First, a light just went on regarding some replies. Someone is giving you some wrong info. I say this regarding the; 'Opti ratio', and the 'moly in Opti'. More specifically Opti 2 since we're talking about two cycles.
So, that could explain some posts. Wrong data, conclussion is off.
I hate that, I'm sure you do to.
Opti 2 is a 100:1 mix. It can be mixed at 50:1 if you want. In the packets (1gal or 2 1/2 gal) ratio is about 72:1. They did that to give it a cushion if people didn't squeeze it all out. You know what some users can be like.
Opti 2 doesn't have any moly. It uses a natural petroleum base stock, with additives. One being the 'secret' Patented additive
They do make many fluid, and solid lubes. Some do contain moly.
A company the makes the water tubes for fire ladder trucks will only use Optimol Longista grease. It is the only grease they provide to the fire companies. They were a good account.
Somewhere in my boxed up "files' I have some Optimol tech lit.
If you'd like I'll send some to you. Will take a while to find.
Straight gas has more advantages over mixed fuel. Lower emissions, more power, better control of flame propagation, espically with so many gas formulas, two cycle oils, and last of all but not the least mix ratios.
In a carefully controlled experiment, using the same gas, and two cycle oil, changing only the ratio, you would see the higher ratios when heated would flame/burn quicker, and produce less smoke.
You are right in that some applications it's not best to go experimenting. Ie., an engine (especially older), that has run on a steady diet of 16, 25, even 32:1 an d switch to 100:1. Ther often are tolerences that need the thicker layer oil oil ( boundry lubrication) to keep parts from being ruined.
Many a good oil has been blamed for lack of knowledge, over zealous selling, experience, etc.
First, a light just went on regarding some replies. Someone is giving you some wrong info. I say this regarding the; 'Opti ratio', and the 'moly in Opti'. More specifically Opti 2 since we're talking about two cycles.
So, that could explain some posts. Wrong data, conclussion is off.
I hate that, I'm sure you do to.
Opti 2 is a 100:1 mix. It can be mixed at 50:1 if you want. In the packets (1gal or 2 1/2 gal) ratio is about 72:1. They did that to give it a cushion if people didn't squeeze it all out. You know what some users can be like.
Opti 2 doesn't have any moly. It uses a natural petroleum base stock, with additives. One being the 'secret' Patented additive
They do make many fluid, and solid lubes. Some do contain moly.
A company the makes the water tubes for fire ladder trucks will only use Optimol Longista grease. It is the only grease they provide to the fire companies. They were a good account.
Somewhere in my boxed up "files' I have some Optimol tech lit.
If you'd like I'll send some to you. Will take a while to find.
Straight gas has more advantages over mixed fuel. Lower emissions, more power, better control of flame propagation, espically with so many gas formulas, two cycle oils, and last of all but not the least mix ratios.
In a carefully controlled experiment, using the same gas, and two cycle oil, changing only the ratio, you would see the higher ratios when heated would flame/burn quicker, and produce less smoke.
You are right in that some applications it's not best to go experimenting. Ie., an engine (especially older), that has run on a steady diet of 16, 25, even 32:1 an d switch to 100:1. Ther often are tolerences that need the thicker layer oil oil ( boundry lubrication) to keep parts from being ruined.
Many a good oil has been blamed for lack of knowledge, over zealous selling, experience, etc.
murphy4trees
Addicted to ArboristSite
chiming in from the climbing forum if I may....
I started the thread over there because I became accutely sensitive to saw and blower fumes a couple of years back.. I started using a respirator and switche to Amsoill 2 cycle.. We really don't run the saws that hard 'cause we don't do firewood and move logs with equipment these days.. and I have had no mechanical problems since switching..
From my point of view.. keeping fumes down is far more important than engine wear... I can always buy a new saw.. where can I get a new pair of lungs?
That said... I do appreciate the info shared by all.. I'll increase the oil a bit and see what happens.
God Bless All,
Daniel
I started the thread over there because I became accutely sensitive to saw and blower fumes a couple of years back.. I started using a respirator and switche to Amsoill 2 cycle.. We really don't run the saws that hard 'cause we don't do firewood and move logs with equipment these days.. and I have had no mechanical problems since switching..
From my point of view.. keeping fumes down is far more important than engine wear... I can always buy a new saw.. where can I get a new pair of lungs?
That said... I do appreciate the info shared by all.. I'll increase the oil a bit and see what happens.
God Bless All,
Daniel
