Other another oil post

This past weekend I noticed my ski had a really hard time making any power after attempting any tricks or landing with the ski dipping in the water. I found a bunch of thick oil foam in the carbs causing this. I usually run quicksilver synthetic but grabbed some kawi tcw3 oil while at the shop. Obviously water intrusion is the main issue but its not nearly as noticeable with the better oil. Heres a pic of my super scientific test suggested in last weeks oil thread.

CAM01153_zpsede29b7e.jpg

Poured together
CAM01154_zps214a533b.jpg

Shaken and let to stand about 30 seconds
CAM01155_zps75c3efa7.jpg

Quicksilver
CAM01157_zps0e09942a.jpg

Shook and let stand for maybe 10 seconds, i will never buy cheap oil again.
 

Christian_83

Xscream
Location
Denmark
OKai, i might be a fool here. But please bend it in neon for me - what you guys mean at superior for the 2 stroke oil.
2 mix with the water or to be totally seperated from the water?
 

Christian_83

Xscream
Location
Denmark
okai, i missed the pics.
So you mean the best oil should seperate the oil complety from any water?

Because the guy from our Danish jetski shop told me that TC-W3 oil SHOULD mix with water, that way it would extract any water intrusion with the gas/oil and not leave the water seperated in the engine (crankcase ect)
So no one is buying that story? :)
 

Matt_E

steals hub caps from cars
Site Supporter
Location
at peace
I am not quite getting this. The water is still there with both oils, but one makes it more visible. What's the difference?
 
it would almost seem that the oil mixing with water would be better for lubrication. water with no oil wont lube anything. water with oil will at least have some oil in it to lube a little. at 40:1 gas n oil, whats that going to make the ratio of oil to water? 1368:1
 

Vumad

Super Hero, with a cape!
Location
St. Pete, FL
I am not quite getting this. The water is still there with both oils, but one makes it more visible. What's the difference?

This came from a post I made in the other oil thread. I was running generic oil. My ski would get water in the motor during normal surf riding and would take a very long time to clear. My engine and plugs had a blue froth on them. A friend switched to Quicksilver and he had less water ingestion issues in the surf, all other things kept the same. I didn't believe it. I created this test. I then switched oils. I had significantly fewer water ingestion issues after switching.

The oil mixes with the water, froths, then starts fouling the plugs and whatnot. With the generic, the water mixes with the oil, turns into a sludge and stays in the motor. With the quick silver, the water on the oil stay separate, the water moves through the engine easier.

Whether the oil that mixes with the water lubricates better is irrelevant if the engine will not run. My theories may be wrong and my test may not be perfect, but that doesn't change the fact that myself and a number of others have had less issues after switching.
 
Last edited:

Vumad

Super Hero, with a cape!
Location
St. Pete, FL
This past weekend I noticed my ski had a really hard time making any power after attempting any tricks or landing with the ski dipping in the water. I found a bunch of thick oil foam in the carbs causing this. I usually run quicksilver synthetic but grabbed some kawi tcw3 oil while at the shop. Obviously water intrusion is the main issue but its not nearly as noticeable with the better oil. Heres a pic of my super scientific test suggested in last weeks oil thread.

Did you happen to take a picture of this? I used to get a frothy paste like residue on my plugs, carbs, everything. Was thick. Like the test, I didn't take any pics though. Have any?
 

naticen

Site Supporter
Location
wilmington, nc
This isn't water separator talk. It's about water straight into the carbs. Personally I don't have issues with sucking in water or it fouling my motor. Therefore I don't know how applicable this test is either.

I run whatever oil is cheapest wherever I am at the time.
 
Last edited:

air blair

you are the reason
It must be filters then. Pre filters or stock filters help and keeping water off spinning couplers with cover. My advice would be keep water out of oil and gas. Interesting dilution though. Hmm waste some oil in water for a test? Figure out how to stop it from getting there....... Hmmm

Sent from my SPH-D710 using Tapatalk 2
 

OCD Solutions

Original, Clean and Dependable Solutions
Location
Rentz, GA
I need something to kill another nightshift so I'm digging into this topic tonight.

Here's an article from a boating site on TCW-3 Oils that pretty much says all the same things we are. It mentions the testing requirements but doesn't list them specifically.
http://www.saltwatersportsman.com/techniques/understanding-two-stroke-engine-oil

Jeff Hsu sees the more expensive oils, with the additional additives, as a kind of insurance policy. "As a consumer, I tell myself, 'I just paid $13,000 for that outboard, and I'm going to buy the oil with the most additives to protect it!' But as a bargain shopper, I could argue that the industry does certify that basic TC-W3 oils meet all of their requirements, and by law engine manufacturers can't require you to use only their oil. In America, we tend to think more is better, but it isn't always so."

As always, it comes down to a choice on your part. Go with the up-front savings and buy a less-expensive oil, hoping that it will provide adequate protection, or ante up for a pricier oil with all its additives, hoping that those additives really do provide additional protection. All of the oils that carry the TC-W3 credentials are good; you just have to decide if some are better than others.

Another good read on modern 2 stroke oils; Understanding modern 2 cycle lubricants.
http://www.exhaustgas.com/PDF/1778.pdf
 
Last edited:
okai, i missed the pics.
So you mean the best oil should seperate the oil complety from any water?

Because the guy from our Danish jetski shop told me that TC-W3 oil SHOULD mix with water, that way it would extract any water intrusion with the gas/oil and not leave the water seperated in the engine (crankcase ect)
So no one is buying that story? :)

the idea of the system is to burn the oil off... if it's mixed with water it won't burn the oil, leaving a lard like whitish sludge behind... water itself will find it's way through the chamber and out the exhaust... really has nothing to do with water mixed with oil to lube, because when oil is mixed with water it wouldn't be doing it's job anyway.. the water breaks the oil down to the point it doesn't work...

to say that water mixing with oil would only happen in the tank is a joke.. even if the water comes through the carb , it still encounters the oil(in the carb)..
 

OCD Solutions

Original, Clean and Dependable Solutions
Location
Rentz, GA
Perhaps it might benefit the argument to mix some facts in with all this opinion. Anyone wonder what the label TC-W3 actually means, from the people who actually define and operate the certification program?

TC-W3 Two-Stroke Oil Certification Program as published by NMMA (National Marine Manufactures Association)

http://www.nmma.org/certification/certification/oil/tc-w3.aspx

Due to the nature of two-stroke marine engines, two-stroke oil lubricates the engine parts as it passes through the engine and is then burned along with the fuel. Two-stroke oil is either physically mixed with the fuel or, in the case of direct fuel injection, is combined with the fuel in the combustion chamber. This is in contrast to four-stroke engines which have oil sumps circulate the oil by pumping it throughout the engines.

The long term objectives of the two-stroke engine industry have been to reduce emissions which contain burned and unburned oil that have passed through the engine, and to develop a quality of oil that reduces the mixture ratio to fuel while extending the life of the engine. That means significantly reduced emissions to satisfy EPA requirements, less warranty problems, and increased customer satisfaction due to engines lasting longer with less maintenance and overhauls.

TC-W3® lubricant, an NMMA-owned trademark, has evolved over the years through much testing and research, and has proven to be the level of quality needed to satisfy the above objectives. And, going a step further, now that two-stroke engines have moved towards higher cylinder temperatures and compressions, this type of lubricant also helps to meet the EPA emissions reductions.

TC-W3® has demonstrated the necessary lubrication performance quality needed for these more demanding cylinder/engine conditions.

The TC-W3® standard is a performance-based qualification program. The requirements include various bench tests for fluidity, miscibility, rust, compatibility, etc., as well as engine tests to evaluate the prevention of ring sticking and carbon buildup on pistons and other engine parts. The engine tests include one Johnson 40 hp, one Johnson 70 hp, and two consecutive Mercury 15 hp tests, all of which are run under severe conditions for 100 hours each. Two additional engine tests are also conducted to ensure a high level of lubricity performance. The testing process is comprehensive and expensive, but worth the outcome for consumers and manufacturers.

Once lubricants have demonstrated the necessary lubrication performance qualities needed for TC-W3® certification testing by NMMA-approved laboratories, NMMA licenses those two-stroke lubricants to be marketed to the public. TC-W3® oils are licensed around the world and are recommended for use by two-stroke engine manufacturers.

Resource links;

TC-W3 Rating Manual [PDF - 808.28Kb]
TC-W3 Product Approval System [PDF - 127.86Kb]
TC-W3 Certification Test Manual [PDF - 401.85Kb]
2012 TC-W3 Registered Two-stroke-cycle Marine Oils [PDF - 985.59Kb]
 
Last edited:

OCD Solutions

Original, Clean and Dependable Solutions
Location
Rentz, GA
Lots of interesting information in the Certification manual.

Section 7.8 of the TC-W3 Certification manual outlines the Filterability test similar to the test conducted above. It places a mixture of water and oil into a glass bottle and is measured for flow.

http://www.nmma.org/assets/cabinets/Cabinet456/TC-W3-CertTestManual-4-08.pdf

Here is the pass/fail target for the test;

5.8 NMMA TC-W3® Filterability Test
The decrease in the flow rate of the candidate oil shall not be greater than 20 percent.

And here is the procedure to perform the test;

7.8 NMMA TC-W3® Filterability Test
7.8.1 Scope
This test is designed to determine the tendency of an oil to form a gel, or precipitate,
which can plug oil filter screens in Two-Stroke-Cycle engine Oil Injection Systems. It simulates a
problem which can be encountered in oil injection systems where ashless NMMA Certified Two-
Stroke-Cycle Engine Oils are contaminated with calcium containing low ash Two-Stroke-Cycle Engine
Oils in presence of small amounts of water (i.e., water of condensation). If the candidate oil is not
dyed, .05% of the Automate Blue 8 shall be added before testing. This is to aid the tester in
detecting contaminates in the neat oil.
7.8.2 Apparatus
7.8.2.1 4 oz. or 8 oz. Small glass or clear plastic bottles
7.8.2.2 25 ml burette (See Note 1)
7.8.2.3 Filter holder (Millipore xx300 01200 effective filter area » 0.6 cm2)
(See Note 2)
7.8.2.4 Outboard Marine Corporation Filter Screen 150 Micron Mesh Size
7.8.2.5 Stopwatch capable of timing sequential events (a Heathkit Model GE-
1201E or equivalent can be used)
NOTE 1: To insure that there are no restrictions to the oil flow in the burette, a Teflon
stopcock with a minimum opening of 1.8 mm must be used. Likewise the tip of the burette must
have an opening of 1.8 mm or greater.
NOTE 2: Since Standard Reference Oils with accurate flow rates are not used in this test
procedure, calculate the effective filter screen area using the inner diameter of the filter ”O” ring.
7.8.3 Reagents and Materials
7.8.3.1 Calcium containing low ash Two-Stroke-Cycle Engine Oil (CITGO
935111).
7.8.3.2 93738 NMMA Reference
7.8.3.3 Water: For the purposes of this test use distilled water
7.8.3.4 Candidate NMMA Two-Stroke-Cycle Engine Oil
7.8.4 Sample Preparation
9
7.8.4.1 Volumetrically and at room temperature thoroughly mix 100 ml of
Candidate Oil with 100 ml of CITGO 935111 Two-Stroke-Cycle Engine Oil.
7.8.4.2 Separate the mixed oil into an 80 ml portion and a 120 ml portion.
7.8.4.3 Place the 80 ml portion of mixed oil in sealable bottle and set sample
aside undisturbed for use as a control sample. Each Candidate Oil will have its own control sample.
7.8.4.4 Place the 120 ml portion of mixed oil in a sealable container. Add
0.25 Volume Percent distilled water and vigorously shake by hand.
7.8.4.5 Separate the 120 ml water containing mixed oil into 2-60 ml portions,
place in sealable bottles, and set aside undisturbed for 48 hours at room temperature.
NOTE: A 60 ml sample amount was selected in order to put all of the sample through
the filter mechanism, 50 ml for actual test timing and 10 ml for filling and leveling of burette. This
should help in introducing into the burette any heavy matter, which may have migrated to the bottom
of the sample bottle.
7.8.5 Filterability at room temperature
7.8.5.1 Set up the 25 ml burette equipped with a filter holder with discs of
OMC Filter Screen material cut to fit the holder.
7.8.5.2 The control oil flow rate is determined by placing a sample of the
control oil in the burette and passing enough of the control oil though the filter holder to remove air
bubbles. The burette is then filled with control oil to a level 1-2 cm above the “O” mark; the stopcock
is opened all the way; and the flow time of each successive 5 ml of oil is measured between the “O”
and 25 ml graduations.
The flow rate of each 5 ml portion of oil is calculated using Equation (1).
Equation (1) Flow rate = (A)/(B)/(C)
Where A = Volume of oil (ml)
B = Flow Time (sec)
C = Area of Filter (cm2)
7.8.5.3 To determine the test oil flow rate, the flow times of the control oil
are first determined as outlined in step 7.8.5.2 using the same filter screen and filter holder the
control oil level in the burette is reduced to the lowers level which allows no air bubbles below the
stopcock. The burette is filled with the test oil to level 1-2 cm above “O” mark. Open the stopcock all
the way and the flow time for each successive ml of oil is measured between the “O” and 25 ml
graduation.
The flow rate for each 5 ml portion of test oil is calculated using Equation (1).
10
7.8.5.4 The percent decrease in flow rate of the test oil relative to the new oil
is calculated from the final oil flow rates (between 10 and 25 ml measured with the same filter disc.)
using Equation 2.
Equation (2) Percent decrease in flow rate = [(b – a) x 100]/a
Where a = Final new oil flow rate
b = Final test oil flow rate
7.8.6 Test results
7.8.6.1 Tests on candidate engine oils must be run in duplicate and the
candidate oil test report is to contain the following information:
(1) Candidate oil identification
(2) New oil flow rate at 5, 10, 15, 20, 25 ml
(3) Test oil flow rate at 5, 10, 15, 20, 25 ml
(4) Percent change in flow rate for each test
7.8.7 Requirements
7.8.7.1 Results from candidate oils must have a decrease in test oil flow rate
of less than 20 percent in comparison to the new oil flow rate.
7.8.8 Sample Calculations
7.8.8.1 MEASUREMENTS OF FLOW TIMES. The flow shown in the example in
Table 2, is for the 5 ml portion of oil ending at the indicated volume. Flow times were measured with
a digital stopwatch capable of timing sequential events (i.e., the time for the new oil to flow from the
5 ml mark to the 10 ml mark was 6.75 s).
7.8.8.2 CALCULATIONS OF FLOW RATE. The flow rate is calculated from
Equation (1). Thus for the first 5 ml of new oil, the flow rate is:
Flow rate = (A)/(B)/(C)
= (5ml)/(5.61 s)/(0.636 cm2)
= 140 ml per sec per cm2
Where A = Volume of oil (ml)
B = Flow time (sec)
C = Area of filter (cm2)
TABLE 2 – FLOW TIMES AT INDICATED VOLUMES
Volume Reference Oil Test Sample Oil
sec sec ml
5 5.61 7.61
10 6.75 11.24
15 6.77 16.00
20 6.81 22.01
25 7.61 30.99
11
The calculated flow rates obtained using Equation (1) for the rest of the sample are shown in Table
3.
7.8.8.3 Calculation of percent decrease in flow rate
The percent decrease in flow rate is:
Percent Decrease = (b - a)/a
= (0.25 – 1.1)/1.10
= -77.3 percent
Where a = Final new oil flow rate
Where b = Final test oil flow rate
 
Last edited:

OCD Solutions

Original, Clean and Dependable Solutions
Location
Rentz, GA
I was looking for the published test results of each oil from the TC-W3 certification program when I stumbled across this post in a bike forum. I think I will conclude my research with this wise conclusion;

http://www.allthingsmoto.com/forums/f-114/tc-w3-oil-24931/

The one thing I did find out is that you cannot really base your decision on what oil to use by testing results. What is the test, how does it compare to what I expose the motor too, what my jetting is set to and what fuel I run.

I have used oil in the past some people say sucked and never had an issue. Actually from the low dollar stuff to the high dollar stuff I have never noticed a difference in performance, engine life, carbon build up and so forth. The only thing I have noticed is the price for 5 gallons of pre-mix can vary greatly depending on the oil I used.
 

OCD Solutions

Original, Clean and Dependable Solutions
Location
Rentz, GA
If I knew my engine was under similar load as that test then it might have some validity. However, that test is likely far more stress than any of our engines will ever see and therefore irrelevant to us.

I would equate that article to someone testing the flame resistance of a mattress by throwing it in an active volcano.
 
Top Bottom