Contour Enthusiasts Group Archives Forums Modifications Transaxle ATF+4

If they are serious at becoming a supplier for the
lube they should touch base with the Ford buyer who
covers lube.FWIW this will NOT tell them the chemistry
of the lube only the specs it has to meet Re wear
rates on blockers,number of shifts,test rig set
up,duty cycles of gears,bearings etc...The operational
and conditions that the lube must meet....not what
goes into it.THAT is up to the potential supplier to
formulate to meet or exceed the testing.(FWIW,I have
my own copies of the spec and background info,NOT for
public debate/release)My 'brother ' engineers and I
,on a worldwide basis,are very tight with our
info.Sorry,welcome to the 'darkside'.....have to be a
'member'!!!!

So then does this come down to the old concern about "Licensed by (fill in the automaker)" (such as in Mercon, Dexron, ATF+4), or "recommended for use where (Mercon, Dexron, ATF+4) is specified by (fill in the automaker), by (fill in the name of the lube supplier)?

For example, Chrysler did not until recently release the specs or make available the licenseing of ATF+4. Mobil specifies on their packaging that their Mercon V "is recommended by Mobil for use in Chrysler products where ATF+4 is specified" or words to that effect.

We had a similar thing with engine oil after the huricanes in the gulf coast where many oil refineries were temperarly shut down. Because of the shortage of critical ingredients the oil that some blenders supplied for a few weeks did not meet API or ISLAC specs and their labeling said something like "recommended for use where API SM is specified". Basically they used alternative blends that they did not have time to certify due to the emergency nature of the problem. Suposidly the alternative blends were "equilivant or better".

Even Ford with the Ford Honey somewhat did that on their literature saying that something like it was "appropriate for use where GL4 manual transmission fluid is specified".

When Ford decided to promote 5W20 engine oil, they proactively sought out Wal Mart to retail their 5W20 oil. As was explained on a national broadcast to dealer employees that it was done so that Ford could not be accused of requiring an oil that only they could supply.

Why have they not done something similar with Ford Honey? Did they feel that the likelyhood of a lawsuit or bad publicity was so small for this fluid for manual transmissions for Contour and Focus models only that no one would notice. Did they notice that Chrysler was getting away with the same thing on ATF+4 as well as Volvo, Toyota, and others that have hard to find transmission fluids?

It is outragous that Ford specifies an engine oil is a special labeled bottle for their transmission and commands $20.00 a quart for it.

I would wrlite more, but I have a plane to catch.

Luckily, there are blenders that are willing to provide a product that is "recommended" for our cars. Now we need to ferrett out which ones of the alternatives are the best. We know that Red Line MTL isn't one of them.

Big Jim-

I appreciate your candor and I think you are on the right track.

I have tried: factory fill, Ford Honey, Redline MTL, ATF+3 (on your suggestion) and Royal Purple Synchromax. See my thread just below this one "... observations" for full details, but in summary:

I feel the best fluid, regardless of price, is the Synchromax. Considering price, the ATF+3 was almost as good as the Synchromax till it broke down with use. I am curious how the ATF+4 will compare to the older ARF+3. If the Synchromax is robust and outlasts ATF+3 (as it should) then I'll stick to it. If shift feel drops substantially in a couple years I may go back.

Brian
99 SVT