Contour Enthusiasts Group Archives Forums Modifications Transaxle Manual Trans Fluid Poll

Originally posted by todras:

---

Originally posted by Roz 1999 SVT-C:

---

I'm sorry you had a bad experience with MTL....But point is...I have not....atleast not yet....and when i drain it, and send the sample in, ill have a better understanding...Till then....Bite Me.

Lupe

---

I've never used MTL so I don't know what you're talking about. The trans in my sig is not mine.

---

Originally posted by todras:

---

Nothing scientific about doing multiple drain and refils with 10 brands of lube!

---

So your saying that sending a sample in to BlackStone Labs for analisys, after a certian about of miles (30,000 in this case) is NOT scientific, and that the infomation that they wil provide on the qaulity of the lube, doesn't mean anything???


And your saying that real wrold applications have no basis in science??


Please...

Lupe

Originally posted by RTStabler51:

---

I dont' get this whole pissing match about this subject.....what works for some doesn't work for others, in many faucets of life. So why can't this subject just be dropped?

---

Originally posted by todras:

---

...my 10cents worth!
.........the logic behind testing a used trans oil
sample is not my way of thinking.My logic dictates
that if I wanted to try a 'Brand X' lube I would carry
out checks before I put it in the trans.The baseline
spec is the Ford WSD-M2C200-C for both
life,performance,component wear,shift speeds etc
already exists.I think we can take it as a given that
the Motorcraft lube(made by Castrol) has meet the test
specs.I'd be more inclined ,in the absence of a 'Brand
X' lube without the Ford spec/test results,to do a
chem/lab analysis and at least check if the 'numbers'
were even close...which I did.I can't subscribe to a
test proceedure that just puts a Brand X lube in the
trans then does the analysis on a failed trans
lube.Maybe you think it's backwards but with some
'known' info Re Ford test spec,lab tests why would you
put anything that doesn't match/come close to those
results in,it's the obvious 'start point',why ignore
it??

---

Originally posted by MapOfTaziFoShoââ??¢:

---

Originally posted by DemonSVT:

---

This "Honey" was called nothing more then glorified 40W engine oil. Plus it is made by Castrol which calls its synthetic products synthetic because of a loophole in the classification. It really does not make full synthetic products at all. (not conjecture but proven fact however that does not seem to matter who most ignorant people posting here) Also its "so-called" synthetics have a high ash content and are prone to turning acidic. (same facts)

Specialty Formulations has posted countless tests of its product (again FACT) by both themselves and had results posted by other members. (like Jim said bobistheoilguy is the bible of fluids!)

This is all fact and not some blind and baseless rantings of short sighted individuals.

If you wanted to use Terry's logic then why would you ever use anything but Mercon ATF in your transmission. It was the original spec and the Ford engineers that designed the tranny could NEVER be wrong about anything. It's not like the transmission needed to be changed over a dozen times because of glaring flaws in its engineering and design right??? Our syncros, blocker rings, differential, and such parts are all well designed and reliable right? So of course they spec'd the correct fluid. Get a clue folks. He is far from a genius and even further from infallible regardless of how badly his lap dogs keep kissing his ass. This is exactly the problem with this site. A handful of people keep proving these ignorantly set boundaries as wrong yet people can't even see the forest through the trees.

---

And again you call us ignorant etc...and want us to listen to YOUR opinion. Where'd you get the loophole classification information from!? Where are your credentials?! Post your degree and work experience here and maybe some of us will listen to you. Who has proven anything in this!? Have you...you are posting your opinion without links to information and are expecting us to listen. I defend TH because I know him off the boards. I know his work and I know his talents. While you have done a lot for the contour community...I don't know a damn thing about you besides the fact that you post information here. Show us a little more proof besides you ranting and maybe we'll listen...

---

Originally posted by Roz 1999 SVT-C:

---

Originally posted by RTStabler51:

---

I dont' get this whole pissing match about this subject.....what works for some doesn't work for others, in many faucets of life. So why can't this subject just be dropped?

---

Id be more than happy to drop it, if people would just read my previous posts to know what exactly im doing....On top of that, im doing it for Warmonger as a favor and out of respect because he asked if i could assist him.


I didn't ask the flamers to rehash the subject, i was just merly defending myself from them because some people cant leave well enough alone. warmonger asked me a question, i answered...there was no reason for the other involment, or rude comments.


Lupe

---

Hey, as you can see this is a sensitive topic. Probably just don't take it personal and let anything inflamatory drop so that we all can continue to get along.
Your real world results with the fluid will be very helpfull in determining if the fluid is hurting your transmission.

The logic behind this is simple:
**A lube that is good lasts a long time and the transmission operates as designed with a normal amount of wear.
**A lube that is bad doesn't last a long time or doesn't allow the transmission to operate as designed, or allows higher than normal wear.

BY DEFAULT:
**A lubricant that DOES NOT cause abnormal wear, does not wear out early and allows the transmission to operate normally should be considered a good lubricant.

Therefore, 30,000 miles using the same type of fluid ought to provide usefull information.
Also, you have a stock diff right?

We've seen the heavy black deposits in otherwise unhurt transmission ONLY from LSD equiped transmissions that were run on redline. We haven't seen any LSD equiped transmission pictures that have 5-10K miles on other fluids yet.
We've seen stock transmission run on redline for 3 times longer that show no black deposits.

So we are really looking at 3 separate issues here and all calling it one thing.
- We have failed stock transmission with high amounts of gound-up grayish metal deposits run on MTL; with high mileages on other fluids previously.
- We have the heavy black deposits from Torsen LSD equiped transmissions that showed no other symptoms of failure, but slight tint to the ring gear that has debateable origins...yet was still serviceable.
- We have transmissions that have performed fine on MTL.

This is all I really know and it isn't conclusive enough for me to agree at all that MTL is bad. Only thing I'm seeing as consistent is that it may not be suited for cold weather applications.

So Roz, we need this longer term test results to see if the wear metals are higher in percent than other fluids, or if they are abnormal wear metals.
And trust me. MANY people, including the unhappy ones will appreciate the information!