|
|
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 3,037
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 3,037 |
Pre-98 transmissions rock.
"Think of it, if you like, as a librarian with a G-string under the tweed." Clarkson on the Mondeo.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 6,106
Addicted CEG\'er
|
|
Addicted CEG\'er
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 6,106 |
Originally posted by Jeb Hoge:
Pre-98 transmissions rock.
 They are still subject to the same stuff as Post-98 transmissions. The rod shifter isn't going to do a whole lot for you in that matter. So you may have a better 3rd gear syncro, but again it's not much different.
Mark
2000 Black CSVT
3.0L Hybrid - 206fwhp & 195fwtq
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 3,037
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 3,037 |
Originally posted by Y2KSVT:
Originally posted by Jeb Hoge:
Pre-98 transmissions rock.
They are still subject to the same stuff as Post-98 transmissions. The rod shifter isn't going to do a whole lot for you in that matter. So you may have a better 3rd gear syncro, but again it's not much different.
Mark
Not according to Terry. Ask him how many pre-98 transmissions come in with failures versus 98+. 
Quote:
The rod box also has all the selectors in the bottom of the trans and has almost zero wear to the parts as they are always in oil......
Seriously, though, his MTX-75 FAQ at FCO is why I went shopping for a pre-98 SE rather than an SVT.
"Think of it, if you like, as a librarian with a G-string under the tweed." Clarkson on the Mondeo.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 6,760
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 6,760 |
Originally posted by Jeb Hoge:
Originally posted by Y2KSVT:
Originally posted by Jeb Hoge:
Pre-98 transmissions rock.
They are still subject to the same stuff as Post-98 transmissions. The rod shifter isn't going to do a whole lot for you in that matter. So you may have a better 3rd gear syncro, but again it's not much different.
Mark
Not according to Terry. Ask him how many pre-98 transmissions come in with failures versus 98+.
Quote:
The rod box also has all the selectors in the bottom of the trans and has almost zero wear to the parts as they are always in oil......
Seriously, though, his MTX-75 FAQ at FCO is why I went shopping for a pre-98 SE rather than an SVT.
that's because old men/grandma's drive the 98>
Ryan
Trollin!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 21,197
I have no life
|
|
OP
I have no life
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 21,197 |
Originally posted by Y2KSVT:
They are still subject to the same stuff as Post-98 transmissions. The rod shifter isn't going to do a whole lot for you in that matter. So you may have a better 3rd gear syncro, but again it's not much different.
Mark
You never heard about 3rd gear problems back on the mailing list. Seems like when the 98+'s came out you were hearing stuff all the time. Also the early diff's were stronger too. Still not tough but stronger. I like the feel on pre 98's too. Seems more precise. Seems I have trouble finding gears in later cars.
-'96 SE MTX 3L
-'98 SVT 1,173 of 6,535
-'05 Mazda 6s, loaded, g/f's ride
-Need a 96-00 manual on CD? PM or email me
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 821
Veteran CEG\'er
|
|
Veteran CEG\'er
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 821 |
Originally posted by todras:
I thought you were putting MT-90 in? 
No he had decided on RP
Originally posted by RogerB:
I have three quarts of RP in my trunk, and I can't feel any difference at all in my shifting.
Unless you were just being sarcastic, then... nevermind...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 3,867
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 3,867 |
Originally posted by White99SE:
Originally posted by todras:
I thought you were putting MT-90 in?
No he had decided on RP
Originally posted by RogerB:
I have three quarts of RP in my trunk, and I can't feel any difference at all in my shifting.
Unless you were just being sarcastic, then... nevermind...
I didn't mean I was really going to put MT-90 in, just that if everyone used it, the crime rate might go down.
I actually have RP in the trunk, but I haven't had time to do the swap. I'm waiting for the 75k oil/filter etc. service.
Function before fashion.
'96 Contour SE
"Toss the Contour into a corner, and it's as easy to catch as a softball thrown by a preschooler." -Edmunds, 1998
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 4,693
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 4,693 |
Originally posted by todras:
Check out the R.P. spec for the MTX-75 now...
www.royalpurple.com/techa/tranxref.html
Manual Transmissions with XT-M5-QS spec WSD-M2C200-C: SAE 10W40
http://www.royalpurple.com/prodsa/rpmoa.html
Amsoil also specs a European motor oil for the MTX-75 now.
http://www.amsoil.com/storefront/afl.aspx
Funny they would go from saying they have been testing it in Europe for years to now calling for a multigrade engine oil. 
And to add to the mystery even more, an "interested party" that has been following these threads had the Ford Honey analyzed. He said that he found it very similar to engine oil in terms of it's AW (anti-wear) elements. It does have some friction modifier, but not much. The viscosity is very close to 75W90 gear oil. I will need to do a little research to see what engine oil viscosity that relates to.
So maybe that is why Royal Purple and Amsoil are now specifying synthetic engine oil.
That truly makes me think there could be better manual trans oils available for this trans. My perception is that engine oil is a step backward from ATF, but then it least it's full synthetic. But that's just me.
Edit: I looked it up. It would be close to 10W40 engine oil.
It looks like we have found the Wizzard of Oz and found that he is just a regular guy. So much for the mystery of Ford Honey. I should stress though that it is full synthetic, is at least moderately modified for manual trans use, and has a decent TBN rating of 9.5 so the detergency should hold up well (as we have learned from it's good anti-sludge character).
Jim Johnson
98 SVT
03 Escape Limited
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 9,602
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 9,602 |
Originally posted by Big Jim:
We are not getting reports of failures using the Mercon factory fill. We are not getting reports of failure using ATF+3. We are not getting failure reports with either GM or Penzoil manual trans lubes. Only some that have use Red Line MTL.
That's just plain laughable.
The majority of the failures have been running Mercon, Mobil 1 ATF, or ATF+3 when they failed. The ratio is not even worth comparing.
I wouldn't expect you to stoop to poor sensationalism like stated in that one paragraph.
2000 SVT #674
13.47 @ 102 - All Motor!
It was not broke; Yet I fixed it anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 1,066
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 1,066 |
Originally posted by stadtsoldat:
Honestly, any professional opinions here? Should we change? I'm no mechanic, and I'm no engineer, just a kid with a Contour who wants to take care of it right!
No kidding, can somebody decipher in stupid terms ?
I changed recently with whatever was recommended otc from the ford dealership ... ford mtx fluid non-synth.
|
|
|
|
|
