Hmm. Talked the test results over with the Redline representative and he finds that they are plausible enough to be MTL, including the sulpher percentages. So, No complaints from that department.
He goes on to say that the FMC lube appears to be a 40w base oil, like a motor oil, definitely FAR different than the type of lube results one finds when using ATF.
After reading the results of the FMC lube he raised an eyebrow that there could be any complaints over using MTL in comparison?? The gist of it is that IF the new specs called for FMC, then the MTL would definitely satisfy the lubrication requirements of our transmissions now more than they would when calling for ATF; when viewed by comparison.
He was more adamant now after seeing the results about recommending the MTL as a satisfactory lube and it reiterating that the MTL will NOT cause a failure than he was when we discussed ATF as the recommended lube because apparently MTL is more similar to the FMC honey than to the ATF. ??


Again, I'm not fighting this fight anymore so as was posted above, you people decide and if you have any questions buy the FMC lube (honey). I'm just presenting a little more information. Seeing the test results and having them stated plausible is a good step in the right direction. It doesn't help us determine that MTL is harmfull or that indeed it is anything other than a differently formulated lube.
What we need now is a more detailed spec sheet on the MTX-75 lube requirements that goes into detail on additive requirements and limits.
If ANYONE from FMC would be happy to oblige us that would be great! Then we can determine any and all fluids that are suitable.

Looks more and more like using straight synthetic motor oil would be just as good too!

Former owner of '99 CSVT - Silver #222/2760 356/334 wHP/TQ at 10psi on pump gas! See My Mods '05 Volvo S40 Turbo 5 AWD with 6spd, Passion Red '06 Mazda5 Touring, 5spd,MTX, Black