2 stroke oil in a 4 stroke motorcycle

I’ve been running 2 stroke oil for a few years in my 4 stroke bike now,

And here are my findings:

  • It reduces friction in the upper cylinder, which is the main source of engine wear and heat.
  • Reduces engine braking by a minimal amount,
    The engine runs cooler.

With the right dose, you can notice:

  • an engine hp increase, from bottom to top revs, and in most cases, higher top speed.
  • MPG goes up.
  • Engine revs smoother, with less vibrations.
  • It restores a bit of compression loss on the piston rings and valves, thus higher torque.
  • Gasoline doesn’t get bad as fast
  • An easy way to increase octane levels of fuel by 1 or 2 (eg: 87 to 89), resulting in a lower chance of pinging

Cons:

  • It makes gasoline a bit more expensive
  • Too¬†much oil causes performance loss (as oil doesn’t combust as well as gasoline),
  • Minor plug fouling (usually below 50:1 ratios)
  • Minor carbon buildup (usually below 50:1 ratios)
  • And possibly harder cold starts when valves have buildup.

I’ve ran many different doses, and found the sweet spot for 4 strokes to be between 100:1 (smooth, easy riding), to 160:1 (performance increase still noticeable but less).

At 50:1, the fuel/oil mix is meant to lubricate both the top, as the back of a 2 stroke engine’s piston; since 2stroke engines don’t have an engine oil reservoir.

At 50:1, there is sufficient oil to form a buildup, and pass by the piston rings, lubricating the crankshaft and other mechanics inside the motor, as well as the valves, without really fouling the plugs.
For this reason, most 2stroke motors today, recommend to start with a mix of 32:1 for the first tank (white or blu-ish exhaust smoke visible), and switch to 50:1 for consequent tanks.

On a 4 stroke, only valves and the top of the piston need lubricating, not the engine’s internals.
Because of that, less oil is needed, and a lower dose can be chosen.
I’ve done tests ranging from 75:1 to 300:1, and found that:

  • 75:1 had a performance loss and low plug fouling
  • 100:1 gives nice lubrication, and recommendable for older engines with lots of miles.
  • 125:1 Sweet spot on performance and lubrication
  • 160:1 still good performance and low lubrication
  • 200:1 it is hard to distinguish between an engine without or with the mixture by ‘feel’.
  • 300:1 No noticeable improvement, engine acts like regular fuel.

Mobil is known for adding a small amount of oil into their fuels, while BP is known to add a proprietary chemical in their premium blends, that increases performance, many believed to be nitrogen based. Shell also uses a similar ‘performance enhancement’ blend, but in a less aggressive measure.

At 128:1, quite an easy number for us Americans, you’d have to pour 1oz in a 1 gal tank, or 3oz in a CBR300’s tank. This would be very close to the optimum dose, I’d say.
A small bottle of 6oz would last you 2 tanks and costs anywhere from $2.5 to $5.
A 5 quart 2stroke oil jar would cost you $25 to $30, resulting in $1 per 5-6oz, or, an additional of $0.5 per tank on oil.

  • At $2 per gallon, the overhead cost would be 1/12th, or 8%.
  • At $3 per gallon, the overhead cost would be 1/18th, or 5%.

The money really gets won back in MPG, as on average, the bike would have a 5% to 8% better fuel economy, OR, a ~5-8% better performance, depending on how you use it.
(Top speed can go up by 1 to 5%, depending from bike to bike, and fuel/oil mixture).

Most of all, piston rings and cylinder walls last longer, due to a cooler running engine, that’s more lubricated.

This video, is of an engine using a cleaning agent to, aside from cleaning, explains on upper cylinder lubrication..
Unfortunately the cleaning agent costs a good 4x more than 2 stroke oil, but 2 stroke oil doesn’t have the same engine cleaning capabilities.
[url]https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=kbo3nZm88Q4[/url]

 

EDIT: After tests, I have found that adding 2 stroke works on any engine, but is not recommended for Fuel injection bikes.
Bikes that rely on the O2 sensor to give data back to the ECU, will experience O2 sensor fouling; plus misreads due to a different chemical exhaust gas composition.

Another con is that whatever oil is inserted, robs the bike from the fuel it needs.
125:1 on oil in the gas, means 0.8% of fuel missing from the mixture, and a lean burn.
A carburetor is more flexible to this, but a fuel injection system is less. Especially when the bike already is running lean!

Re-gearing the Honda Rebel

My input on the Rebel 250 is always the same,

The bike is hopelessly undergeared!
With a stock 14/33t sprockets, it is jerky in first gear, you don’t even go half of an intersection before needing to shift into second gear, and fifth gear cruises nicely at 25-30mph. (so what about the other 50mph?)

The gears are so close together, because it’s made to shift incorrectly, here’s what I mean with that:
Because the rebel is a 360 degree ptwin, the whole engine/transmission system vibrates quite a lot; as one piston fires at exactly the opposite time as the other, having them fire evenly timed every other rotation of the crankshaft.
It vibrates, except in ‘resonant vibrations’, where the engine is canceling out its own vibrations, by rotating in a specific RPM range.
The Rebel has 3 such ranges.
1- somewhere between 2500 and 3666rpm (around 3k centered)
2- between 6k and 6666rpm,
3- between 7750 and 8500rpm range.

Also, it has odd vibrations, where the engine would vibrate and ‘add’ to the chassis vibrations.
These ranges would be:
1- around 4200 to 5200 rpm
2- 7-7.2k rpm
3-8.5+ k rpm.

Because of that, you will want to run the engine at around either 3, 6, or 8k rpm, where handlebar and chassis vibrations lessen.
These ranges on stock gears are not very nice riding ranges for Florida, where the minimum speed is generally 35mph, to 55mph.
Makingbthe stock gearing larger, from 14/33t where it cruises fine at 25-30mph, to 15/25t raises that ‘vibration free zone’ to 35-45mph, which is much closer to the speeds I usually ride at here in FL.

The rebel’s gears are tuned to run in that 8k range, where the gear spacing makes sense, not at 3-6k rpm, where double or triple shifting happens quite a lot, and city riding is bugged with more shifting than riding.
At this 8k range the bike is quite peppy, and has good engine brake-ability, but also wears out a lot faster. MPG is also a lot lower there, than in the lower rpm range.
The engine also surpassed it’s hp band (at 6.6k rpm to 7.5k rpm), and though a lower gear will give you higher torque to the rear wheel at those rpms, the lower engine hp and torque will make the rebel not accelerate faster than when trying to ride it at below 7k rpm in higher gear.

Same acceleration at 6k rpm, as in lower gear at 8k rpm, really makes no sense to even go beyond 7.5k rpm!

For those reasons, the rebel needs a sprocket change from the stock 14/33t.

I’ve ran quite a few sprocket combinations on it, and my advise is highly subjective, so you might feel different about it than I do.

Changing from 14/33 to 15/33 (or 14/30, about the same gearing), does little, but is a step in the right direction.
Running a 15/30t, I found the Rebel had quite a neutral gearing, quite perfect for normal riding on it.
The gears weren’t long, neither short. I found the bike’s response quite bland with this.
Further lowering the rear to 28t, I found the sprocket setup most suited for fast acceleration, and the gears to be quite tall. Big bike feel for under $75, without the torque nor danger!
At this setup 4th gear equals stock 5th gear, which means that in 3 gearshifts from first, you’ll be going just as fast as 4 gearshifts with the stock gearing, essentially saving you the time for one gear to shift.
I also found at this gearing you could rev it up to the end of the hp band (around 7k rpm), and when upshifting, the next gear would be in the befinning of the hp band, meaning I’d be shifting that bike in the rpm ranges where the engine makes most power, all the way from second to fifth gear!
I also found that the bike reaches highest top speed in this gear!
Instead of reaching 83mph at 9k rpm, now it does 87mph at about 8.5k rpm, much closer to its horsepower peak.
First gear also rides much smoother, and i can shift into second gear, well after I reached the other side of the intersection.
There are 3 more benefits from upgearing the bike:
1- For some reason, every upgear, made the bike vibrate less, to the point of at 15/25t it vibrates at 4k rpm, but not too bad.
2- Every upgear to 15/28t, and under conditions upto 15/25, would increase MPG on the bike. With a 15/25t it would lug below 2.5k rpm (30mph), and above 70 mph with a headwind. But on my 15/25t, I honestly never had a tank below 66mpg US. Most of the time I get between 72mpg (100% interstate riding, with about 25-50% of WOT) to 115mpg us at a continuous 30-40mph.
3- the engine runs cooler, wears less, and there’s a theory stating concerning opening the throttle a bit more under a heavier load, that the already lean running Honda bike, runs much closer at the ‘perfect’ 14.5:1 air/fuel ratio. Worse for pollution, but much better for performance.

The only gearing higher than a 15/28 I’ve tried, is a 15/25t gearing. This is about 50% higher geared than stock.
This type of gearing is harder on the clutch from a standstill, especially uphill with 2, but any novice knowing how to use a clutch properly, could start it.
It has another disadvantage, that the top speed lowers considerably in 5th gear, and 4th.
In 4th gear, the revs are still a bit too high, and it would rev at 8k rpm to do 75mph. Far above the hp band.
In 5th, it would reach 6k rpm at 80mph, but won’t have enough torque to maintain this speed unless someone is pulling the wind in front of you, or you have a backwind.
4th gear does get it up to about 85mph, wind still, no hills, but barely.
I’ve reached 90mph with some backwind on a few occasions.
Bit most benefit of the 15/25t lies in higher mpg at low speeds (80-110mpg US, which is what you usually get from a fuel injected 250, or 150cc scooter not going over 40mph).
And the lower vibrations.
15/28t feel like long gears, much like the Chevrolet Spark has, long gears, slow acceleration, a more big bike feel if you keep it around the 3k rpm range.
At 6k rpm it still outaccelerates most economy cars from a stoplight riding rather peppy!

After all said and done, I like my 15/25t much much better than stock gears, but if I ever where to do it over again, would have equipped an old rebel (before 2008) with a 15/28t, and a new one of the past year or two, with a 15/27 or 15/26t.

So how does the stock 300 do compared to the Rebel on the interstate?

Led projectors

For a LED projector, you can best look at the bulb wattage, to get an idea of lumen.

Most of the time, if the wattage is about 50Watt, ANSI Lumen are about 280-300 lumen, and peak lumen are about 1000-1500. Good enough for an 80″ display in a pitch black room, or 50-60″ indoors.

Unless you live out in the sticks where there’s no light pollution, it’s not a recommended projector for outside events, or perhaps with¬†a smaller than 60″ screen diameter.

For projectors smaller than 50Watt, usually the 25 Watts are good for 50 lumen, and 1-8 watt projectors for upto 10 lumen (good for about the size of a pc monitor), I have very little experience with.

At 100Watt, it’ll usually have 500 ANSI Lumen, and 2000 PEAK Lumen. Bright enough for the 80-100″ bedroom screen, with some night lights on, but not a fully illuminated room. This projector might be just a tad too bright at 80″ for a pitch dark room, and is suited for 100-120″ in these conditions. It also works well with a 60-80″ screen in a normal lit room.

At 150Watt, it’ll usually have ~700 ANSI Lumen, with a peak of about 2800 to 3000 Lumen. Great for a 100″ screen outside, with minor light pollution. Too bright for a bedroom screen of under 100″, in a pitch black bedroom.

At 200Watt you’ll reach about the upper end of the (Chinese) LED projectors fabricated today. Some manufacturers like Casio make higher powered projectors by combining them with lasers; but at 200Watt, you’ll be looking at roughly 800ANSI lumen, and 4000 peak. Great for the outdoors after sunset, for screens of upto 120″, or in the bedroom upto 200″. Screens of this size are harder to get.

Some concert projectors have 3000 ANSI Lumen, so LED projectors are still a far cry from this. But for personal home entertainment, they provide quite a nice experience, and oftentimes of this writing (12/2015) $400+ projectors can easily replace HD tvs, in both energy efficiency, and overall experience, if you can live with the lower resolutions (of ~720p).

FULL HD (1080p resolution) projectors, at the time of this writing, are still too expensive to cover the cost.

Most 3D Ready projectors are not 3D capable out of the box, and only work with personal computers.
If you want to have a 3D experience on a projector, with 3D glasses, straight from blu-ray, there used to be $600 devices from Optoma and some other brand, but for some reason they stopped manufacturing them. I guess either the standard hasn’t been set yet as to which glasses and system to use to transfer the 3d content.

There is a $400 alternative, but works only with optoma DLP projecors. All others will have to go with a $2k Sony or JVC converter; which is way too expensive.

At the time of this writing, the first Chinese converter boxes are being manufactured, to work with active shutter glasses, either through RF, bluetooth, or IR, at an affordable price of $80.

At the time of this writing, it is not yet recommended to invest in a 3D home entertainment system, for at least another year or two, until finally a¬†standard will be fully adopted by most manufacturers. The standard issue might make you buy technology today that will be outdated tomorrow (like how Blu-ray was chosen over HD DVD; and people with a HD DVD player (as well as a laserdisc) spent hundreds of dollars into a device that really got nowhere, and where there’s not a lot of content available for, and that which is, is oftentimes hard to get.

3D glasses come in several forms.
The easiest ones are the ones in the movies, passive glasses. These need a special screen, or projector with a special lens (polarized).
At the time of this writing, it is more common to see active glasses with projectors.

Of these active 3d glasses, there are those working on infra red signal emitted from the converter box, a bluetooth signal (these glasses need recharging), and an RF signal, which imho, is just radio (or microwave) waves going through your body that you want to avoid.

Let’s see what standards the¬†future will determine will remain!

At this current moment, there are nice sub-$100 projectors available for kidsrooms, sub $400 projectors for the bedroom, or outside activity.
Casio $1k-$2k projectors are also great for outside movies, but are for those who have more $$$ to spend.

Most of these projectors can not convert the full 5.1 surround sound, but convert it to 2.0 stereo sound, which you can play back from a Tripath amp (search amazon or ebay for them), and a set of desktop speakers.
For outdoors, you can easily buy 2x 8″ 100W stage monitors, from Samson, Hartke, or Behringer. They all sound great for the money!
If you are aiming for a party of more than 10 people (eg: 50 people movie night outside), a lot of brands sell 12 to 15″, 300W stage monitors as well, or, you can use 4x 8″ 100W stage monitors,
2 speakers on the front for L and R channel, and 2 on the rear, for the coupling effect (louder sound in the seating area).

Better immersion in 4k vs 1080p vs 720p

Though now entering the world of 1080p and ‘4k’, I have to say that 1080p definitely made a difference in the living room!
4k as pictures makes a difference in the living room, and I think I have 18 or 19/20 vision!
Though I can’t see individual pixels from a distance of 3ft or beyond, on a 60+” screen, i do notice the increased (true) sharpness, not an emulated one.

A famous tv presenter from back in the 50’s once said that 80% of a tv program sticks with you from hearing, 20 from seeing.
That was in the day of sub 20″ crt tvs, often black and white, with ~ 240p screens.

That also was in the days, when tv shows where educational, not only for entertainment.

Today there’s more emphasis on the presentation of a program, than on the content. More on the special effects, than on the story line of a movie.
A time where one tries to immerse the person by mega pixels, rather than ingenuity and imagination, because it doesn’t require as much effort, and costs less.

When I look back at some of the movies of old, like the story of Ghandi, the older James Bond movies, or the Sound of Music, I can get immersed in the story even on a 20″ old crt screen.
If you are asking about more immersion, and complain that pixels aren’t going to do, I would say “neither does color improvement”.
Nothing immerses more than better content!
Movie makers should focus on that!

Correct calibration of an LCD monitor

Quite often we hear people say that they can’t read for long behind a computer monitor, because they get headaches, or annoyed eyes from reading on these devices.

I once got a read out of a $200 science book I was given, where they explained the science behind correct monitor calibration, and I’ve thanked the writer of that book¬†ever since!

To make a long story short, there are 2 main different ways to calibrate your monitor’s brightness,

The first one is for watching movies or films;
During a movie or film, most part of the screen is colored or dark, unlike reading a text.
You will want to set your monitor so, that you can differentiate the darkest colors on a completely black background in a movie, so upping the brightness might be necessary.

However, whatever is comfortable for movie watching, isn’t comfortable for regular reading (black text on a white background, like websites, text or word documents, PDF’s, emails, and company programs).

The correct way to calibrate your monitor, is to completely tone down the brightness and contrast, so the screen will look very dark to your surrounding. Then focus your eyes on an object beside, or behind the monitor (look at the scenery, or wall behind the monitor), and from peripheral vision, try to dial in the monitor’s brightness until it becomes just as bright as the background.
Not darker, nor lighter.

Once you’ve set the monitor to be about even in brightness as the background (on many monitors that would mean brightness at 0%, contrast between 0 and 50%), then dial up the brightness¬†by a¬†notch (click) or two; just to bring it a bit more to the foreground.

(Quite often you’ll need to play with contrast, as on lower quality monitors, changing contrast from stock, could cause discoloration or lousy reflection of colors).

If the monitor is equal in brightness from the background, or lower, background images will draw attention to your brain, and you’ll be more distracted.
If the monitor is set too dark, you’ll probably feel annoyance in the eyes, or can’t read the text very clearly.

If the monitor is set too bright, your eyes and mind will tire faster.

If the monitor is calibrated just right, you should be able to read with much more comfort, suffer much less of headaches, and are saving your eyes from harm.

I have 18/20 to 19/20 vision, and been behind a monitor since an early age (now for almost 30 years).

Traveling to other planets?

Quite often I’m surprised at bold statements of people “with a vision” that claim in 50 years we will be living on other planets.

First, I would like my personal and religious convictions¬†to shine through, in that the bible said that “Earth was made for men to rule over”.
Genesis 1:26-29 says the following:
26Then God said, ‚ÄúLet us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals,a and over all the creatures that move along the ground.‚ÄĚ
27So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them.
28God blessed them and said to them, ‚ÄúBe fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky and over every living creature that moves on the ground.‚ÄĚ
29Then God said, ‚ÄúI give you every seed-bearing plant on the face of the whole earth and every tree that has fruit with seed in it. They will be yours for food. 30And to all the beasts of the earth and all the birds in the sky and all the creatures that move along the ground‚ÄĒeverything that has the breath of life in it‚ÄĒI give every green plant for food.‚ÄĚ And it was so.
It doesn’t say anywhere we will be ruling over any other planet. It does say that we (as men) are given authority to rule over the animals, plants and trees on this earth. We are also commanded to “fill and subdue” this earth, meaning to live all over on it, and control it, to make it function well; to create order, and good functionality on it.

So, Biblically, there is no reference on living on other planets.

From a science point of view, living long term on other planets will also not work out.
From the harsh environments, not allowing mankind to go outside, lacking sunshine (vitamin D deficiency),
Overwhelming radiation, that can cause long term DNA issues (cancers, miscarriages),
To the fact that every planet we could possibly live on, does not have all the nutrients we as humans need to survive!

A lot of science is spent in researching how spacecrafts can overcome gravity,
How more stuff can be shipped out of orbit, for a lower cost, and less and less fuel is used.
Research is done on making life on another planet bearable. Living in steel tubes on the surface of Mars, for 6 months, is one of them.

Mars still gets regular impacts of smaller comets, smaller astroids, and space debris (rocks, …). if one of them would fall on a science center, it could cause catastrophic results.
But research is done to lower chances of this happening.

From a technological point of view, everything ‘seems’ to be in order…
But I think they’re forgetting how many diseases we already have on earth, most of them resulting from malnutrition.

It could be as simple as having a diet lacking copper, zinc, iron, or chromium. A lot of trace minerals are needed for the body to survive, that are ONLY found on earth!

So even if we would find a planet, that would be in a reachable distance from our planet, that would preferably have some kind of atmosphere where we could survive for a while, and possibly even have water,
Where we are shielded from cosmic debris, and radiation, and are probably living underneath the surface, due to the extreme temperatures;
my estimation is, that we would never be able to live in other planets for a very long time.
Like the moon, it was nice to go there; but we never went back.
Not only because financially, but because… yes.. there’s nothing to do there!

A hostile place, without any resources we can use to multiply, and live a prosperous life like on earth.

As a child I had hoped we would find a second earth soon, in my lifetime!
It would be an adventure of a lifetime!
Elon Musk, a guy with a lot of money, may want to give this a shot, but my predicament is, no matter how much money he will throw into this project, it’s not going to work.
And though it might be possible to survive on some planet for a while; survival is far from living.

His analogy of “backing up your data on another harddrive”, referring to backing up humans on another planet, in case something would happen to earth; is more like backing up SSD or harddrive data on an old 3.5″ floppy drive, which has data corruption over the course of a few months to years!
The data on the harddrive is more safe than on the floppy.

And humans aren’t ‘copied’, or ‘backed up’ to another planet. They are moved. That means every string of DNA going to another planet, is removed from this planet, with possibility of it going corrupt, or lost.

The fires of Hell…

Mt 5:22 : “¬†But I tell you that anyone who is angry with a brother or sister,¬†will be subject to judgment. Again, anyone who says to a brother or sister, ‚ÄėRaca,‚Äô is answerable to the court. And anyone who says, ‚ÄėYou fool!‚Äô will be in danger of the fire of hell.”

Mt 5:22 talks about the fires of hell,
Not the fires that we think of, in the afterlife,
But fires that are here today, with us.

It talks about emotions.
Fires are untamable, and hard to control.

The fires of hell are the emotions raging within us, that cause catastrophe; that drive people to do crazy things…
It starts with a thought, it becomes a habit, and sometimes an obsession.

Sometimes it expresses itself outwardly, as outbursts of anger, the silence treatment, fights, and can go on and on to a mass shooting, murder, suicide, acts of terrorism.

Sometimes it’s expressed inwardly. On the outward, nothing unusual is noted, but inside, the person is eaten by guilt, shame, depression, frustration, emotional pain,….
And it can lead to physical illnesses, and even suicide!

The bible clearly talks about the Kingdom of God.
It’s the one thing Jesus was preaching when He was here on earth with us.

Bible scholars have found, that the Kingdom of God, exists in at least 2 places:
1- In the afterlife, heaven,
and,
2- Here, with us right now.

So it is for fires of hell. They are here right now among us, and will be with us in the afterlife as well.
Jesus taught about the kingdom of heaven, because we all fall short of His glory, but through His grace, we can practice the kingdom of God right now, here on this planet.
To walk in the benefits of it’s fruit.

The Kingdom of God, brings forth the fruits of the Spirit. “Love, joy (note: Not happiness, but true joy), peace,¬†forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control.”¬†Gal 5:22

And as an after effect, will also bring forth many earthly blessings, like prosperity and wealth, and technological advancements.

If our people would only spend more time and effort in helpful things, and waste less time in destroying theirs, and their neighbor’s lives, giving into the emotions that enrage their hearts¬†(the fires of hell),¬†our planet would change so rapidly.

Mt 5:22 says that just saying “you fool”, endangers you from the fires of hell (in this case it would be anger).

speaking with a forked tongue

Today I met a woman whom I would call “speaks with a forked tongue”.

In one breath,¬†she both cursed her husband, calling him names I would not dare saying in front of kids,¬†yet in the same she said to me: “God bless you”.

It brought me to think about how people are so easy swayed by emotions, including myself.
The bible, an ancient book that is not only full of history, but also full of life lessons of generations past, has something to say about this, in Revelation 3:15:

“I know your deeds, that you are neither cold nor hot. I wish you were either one or the other!”

God wants us to be either cold or hot. Either liar, or a truth speaker. Either one that honors Him, or one that defiles Him.
This would be the only way you’re going somewhere. Either up, or down.

 

It’s funny how John 3:16 is quoted as the most loved verse of the bible.
“For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.”

Yet in that same Bible, Revelation 3:16 brings quite a revelation to the surface:
“So, because you are lukewarm‚ÄĒneither hot nor cold‚ÄĒI am about to spit you out of my mouth.”

The meaning of this verse to me, means that God wants nothing to do with a double tongued person. And I don’t mean this physically.

The aim and effort is to ALWAYS let your words glorify God. Though this is impossible for humans, it is possible with God, if you let Him cleanse your¬†heart, because “the heart“, the emotions, the core of a human behavior, “is the source of all wickedness”.

The fires of hell, the bible mentions in MT 5:22, is not talking about a lake of fire you go to when you die.
It is talking about an untamable fire, that once ignited, will devour one’s heart. It could be through hatred, jealousy, anger, egoism, or anything else… But that’s for another topic.