Originally posted by fastcougar:
As for this question of "why one forumulation spec than then another ... the first was spec at some time and should be good enough". We are supposed to learn from our mistakes aren't we? Engineers do the same thing ... at the time, the engineers thought that the spec was good enough. xxxxx service warranties later, they have rec-spec'd the fluid to avoid known issues. It's a simple by product of testing ... except that WE where the guinee pigs



But that's the real question isn't it. Maybe they know something they haven't told us. From the information posted here over the years, there was no proponderance of failed transmissions using ATF.

To add to that, Ford Honey doesn't have many of the qualities of most manual transmission fluids. The two biggest things going for it is that it is synthetic (probably group III, not the highest grade of synthetic at that) and that it has a high resistance to sludge (high TBN or total base number that resistists oxidation).

It seems to boil down to a choice of using a very expensive fluid that is good for two qualities or using ATF that is better matched in other areas but not as high in the ability to handle temperature extremes or oxidation.

Better still would be to use a synthetic fluid specifically blended for manual trans use. It should be an even better match. Two such fluids would be Torco and Specialty Formulations. Royal Purple may even be in that catagory. Red Line MTL should have been but has proven at least at times is not.

Different opinions is what makes a horse race. Hopefull we can learn to respect different opinions, especially when it is presented in such a way as to help others to make better informed decisions.

Just saying it is what Ford specs isn't a good enough answer for me.

Jim Johnson 98 SVT 03 Escape Limited