Watch out for that Redline MTL!!!!
It looks like my differential went becuase the lube was too thick. I just thought I'd throw that out there, I guess I'm not the only one that has encountered this issue (pastey residue).
I recently put redline MTL into my trans and the diff blew 4 months later...
Has to be a coincidence.
Originally posted by BlackBirdRacing:
I recently put redline MTL into my trans and the diff blew 4 months later...
Has to be a coincidence.
I doubt its a coincidence, mine went 4 or 5 months after I put the MTL in as well... Coincidence... I doubt it! 
Oh Mr. Demon and warmonger.
i ran mtl for the better part of a year in my 99 csvt before the accident and the diff was just fine. iirc the mtl is not as think as what ford recommends. is it safe to assume that your tranny is the one terry was recently speaking of?
Terry seems to think it's bad stuff.
I try to trust the general masses, but sometimes they can be wrong....
So general masses... What do you suggest for my torsen LSD?
redline mtl...
I just ordered 6 quarts of Royal Purple syncromax.
Originally posted by RawDirte':
I just ordered 6 quarts of Royal Purple syncromax.
I take it Terry recommended this? I might have to try it out. I have some regular Valvoline ATF in it now.
Originally posted by todras:
Originally posted by RawDirte':
I just ordered 6 quarts of Royal Purple syncromax.
I take it Terry recommended this? I might have to try it out. I have some regular Valvoline ATF in it now.
Upon asking Terry what alternate route to take from Redline he suggested Ford 'honey' or the RoyalP...
Originally posted by GetLucky151:
redline mtl...
Hey why not it's in the how to...
Those scare me, now
Originally posted by todras:
Originally posted by RawDirte':
I just ordered 6 quarts of Royal Purple syncromax.
I take it Terry recommended this? I might have to try it out. I have some regular Valvoline ATF in it now.
Huh. He had recommended MTL as second to Ford Honey back before I put MTL in mine.
OK, I take that back...HE didn't recommend it, but it sure was getting lots of positive feedback, and I like it in mine. I wonder if these bad transmissions he's getting have any other commonalities?
I probably should just bite the bill and change over to Ford Honey anyway. 
Cheaper than a new diff.
Originally posted by RawDirte':
Watch out for that Redline MTL!!!! It looks like my differential went becuase the lube was too thick. I just thought I'd throw that out there, I guess I'm not the only one that has encountered this issue (pastey residue).
You are so entirely FULL OF SH~T!!! 
Redline MTL is actually a bit lower in viscosity the Ford's "new" recommended fluid. It rates just above straight Mercon ATF. About the ATF+3/4, 80W, or 30-35W engine oil range.
Ford's honey fluid is a 90W (40W engine oil) at operating temps.
How's that for tearing your assinine statement to pieces. 
Then to top is off you are now gong to try even a THICKER fluid because the MTL was to thick.
RP's Syncromax is their copy of GM's Syncromesh. (hmm I wonder who recommends using that ) That's an equivalent of roughly 85W gear oil.
Then the HEAVIER Ford Honey (90W) is also recommended.
Get your head out of your ass! The diff broke because it's a POS inside a poorly designed MTX. Glass diff, terrible syncros, poor oiling, et cetera. 
Originally posted by DemonSVT:
Originally posted by RawDirte':
Watch out for that Redline MTL!!!! It looks like my differential went becuase the lube was too thick. I just thought I'd throw that out there, I guess I'm not the only one that has encountered this issue (pastey residue).
You are so entirely FULL OF SH~T!!!
Redline MTL is actually a bit lower in viscosity the Ford's "new" recommended fluid. It rates just above straight Mercon ATF. About the ATF+3/4 or 30-35W engine oil range.
Ford's honey fluid is a 90W (40W engine oil) at operating temps.
How's that for tearing your assinine statement to pieces.
I'm not the only one who this has happened to. Honestly, I could care less what you use. All I did was state what happened to me and others. Hence my title 'Watch out' letting others know to just be careful. No reason to rip into me like that...
Greg-O needs a hug....
Turn that frown upside down!
Originally posted by RawDirte':
I'm not the only one who this has happened to. Honestly, I could care less what you use. All I did was state what happened to me and others. Hence my title 'Watch out' letting others know to just be careful. No reason to rip into me like that...
Yes there is because your statement is complete and utter sensationalism.
You should be in a the media. You would be perfect for making up bullsh~t and trying to place the blame anywhere but where it belongs. ON YOU & ON THE PEOPLE WHO DESIGNED THE MTX-75.
Originally posted by DemonSVT:
Originally posted by RawDirte':
I'm not the only one who this has happened to. Honestly, I could care less what you use. All I did was state what happened to me and others. Hence my title 'Watch out' letting others know to just be careful. No reason to rip into me like that...
Yes there is because your statement is complete and utter sensationalism.
You should be in a the media. You would be perfect for making up bullsh~t and trying to place the blame anywhere but where it belongs. ON YOU & ON THE PEOPLE WHO DESIGNED THE MTX-75.
Good lord, you are obviously missing the point. If you would like to discuss it further then PM me. But there is no reason to clutter up this thread with your attacks. 
Hmm...TH has been post-morting these two boxes that he got in, both of which were using the MTL, and the damage isn't typical MTX-75 fragging. I'm bewildered by the whole thing but he's positive that it's failure of the lubricant that's causing the boxes to shred themselves.
I doubt the fluid is causing diff. issues but I'm guessing it's not good in regards to the break down of the metals inside. Anything causing a gooey mess is not something I would use.
Originally posted by RawDirte':
But there is no reason to clutter up this thread with your attacks.
I see all the reason in the world for Demon to "clutter" this post with FACTS. He might not be the most tactful person on the boards but he surely makes up for it in sheer knowledge and willingness to help.
Ill stop there before my nose gets stuck up demon azz. 
you guys are scaring me. is this stuff ok? i just ordered some to put in my tranny since break in is over. i can't afford another break down like i had before? will i be ok?
I'm using Ford's Mercon ATF with a 1/2 bottle of friction modifier. Have been running it since the 3L swap and tranny build(Quaife LSD) in April of 2003. I've put 32k miles on the transmission in those 2-1/2 years with no ill effects.
Mark
Originally posted by RawDirte':
Originally posted by DemonSVT:
Originally posted by RawDirte':
I'm not the only one who this has happened to. Honestly, I could care less what you use. All I did was state what happened to me and others. Hence my title 'Watch out' letting others know to just be careful. No reason to rip into me like that...
Yes there is because your statement is complete and utter sensationalism.
You should be in a the media. You would be perfect for making up bullsh~t and trying to place the blame anywhere but where it belongs. ON YOU & ON THE PEOPLE WHO DESIGNED THE MTX-75.
Good lord, you are obviously missing the point. If you would like to discuss it further then PM me. But there is no reason to clutter up this thread with your attacks.
I will agree that Demons comments were out of hand, in both of his responses, but you did the right thing and invited any other discussion over his disagreemnet with you should be done through PMs only. And I will second that.
Back on topic...
I think before we start jumping to conclusions here, we need to find out some facts about the trannys in question. Like...
1) What fluid did they have in the tranny before?
2) How long had the old fluid been in the tranny before the change-over to MTL?
3) How long had the MTL been in the tranny, before the failure?
4) Did the person change the fluid on a regular basis and/or what intervals had the fluid been changed?
5) When the dif's broke, were there any differences in the breaks and in what ways were they different?
Those are just a few of the questions that I would ask myself if this had happened to me. Granted, Terry has probably answered these questions in his forum, but I am just wondering for myself. Because before we go off and denote a product line as a bad thing for our trannys, which almost everyone here has had good results with until now, we should have some proof first.
This is in no way an attempt to dis any of Terrys opinions, but I feel that before a post is made saying that a product has caused a failure, then there needs to be some proof to back up the claims.
Originally posted by unisys12:
1) What fluid did they have in the tranny before?
2) How long had the old fluid been in the tranny before the change-over to MTL?
3) How long had the MTL been in the tranny, before the failure?
4) Did the person change the fluid on a regular basis and/or what intervals had the fluid been changed?
5) When the dif's broke, were there any differences in the breaks and in what ways were they different?
How about what kind of driving has this tranny seen? Not just with you but with the previous owners? Have you ever dragged, launched hard, etc.?
That diff is weak enough that mild abuse will break it. If mine goes, I sure wont be blaming the MTL. I dont abuse it often at all, but any can be too much for that sucker!
Heck, there is a thread in this forum right now about a brand new stock diff failing!!! I mean come on?! Fluid? How about its just a piece? 
Originally posted by unisys12:
Back on topic...
I think before we start jumping to conclusions here, we need to find out some facts about the trannys in question. Like...
1) What fluid did they have in the tranny before?
2) How long had the old fluid been in the tranny before the change-over to MTL?
3) How long had the MTL been in the tranny, before the failure?
4) Did the person change the fluid on a regular basis and/or what intervals had the fluid been changed?
5) When the dif's broke, were there any differences in the breaks and in what ways were they different?
Those are just a few of the questions that I would ask myself if this had happened to me. Granted, Terry has probably answered these questions in his forum, but I am just wondering for myself. Because before we go off and denote a product line as a bad thing for our trannys, which almost everyone here has had good results with until now, we should have some proof first.
This is in no way an attempt to dis any of Terrys opinions, but I feel that before a post is made saying that a product has caused a failure, then there needs to be some proof to back up the claims.
1. As far as I know it had stock fluid, whatever that may be. I am unsure.
2. I have no records of previous changing. Thats why I did it.
3. The MTL was in for probably 4 to 5 months.
4. That was the first time I (myself) changed it. Like I said I dont know about anything that happened before.
5. From what I heard, they are breaking the same way. The MTL is gunking up into a paste mixed around with metallic flakes and blocking oil from the diff.
Terry has a some very useful info on FCO. Unless you guys want to start opening up your pocket books, I'd suggest at least checking it out before you completely look past the idea.
Originally posted by KingpinSVT:
How about what kind of driving has this tranny seen? Not just with you but with the previous owners? Have you ever dragged, launched hard, etc.?
That diff is weak enough that mild abuse will break it. If mine goes, I sure wont be blaming the MTL. I dont abuse it often at all, but any can be too much for that sucker!
Heck, there is a thread in this forum right now about a brand new stock diff failing!!! I mean come on?! Fluid? How about its just a piece?
My diff has seen some abuse by me. But nothing to bad, I mean just some spirited driving every now and then. Yes it had 103K on it and it was probably time to go... But I'm not thinking that the MTL helped too much... I mean a couple months after I put it in... Come'on... others experiencing the same. I am just trying to look out for you guys. LOOK INTO IT!
100k+ miles on the orignal fluid.
Then changed to a fully
synthetic manual trans lube for only 4-5 months. (read the FAQs anyone)
Transmission fails and it's 100% because of the fluid in it the last 4-5 months.
Your story reeks of a completely more logical answer. That being neglect from running non-protecting ATF for 6-7 years & 100k+ miles in it.
'nuff said
EXACTLY! people break the stock diff with all different types of fluids in them! i bet you could find a person with every single type of fluid in their tranny that has shattered their diff.! ALOT of them with the stock fluid! So do you mean to tell me that the stock fluid can cause the diff to break?.....
99.9% of the time it is because of the driver! If these cars were driven like they were "supposed" to be driven...not "racing" them...they would all be fine. But some of us like to abuse our cars that's why many of us have a LSD...like ME!
I think that if a guy with Terry's experience cracking MTX-75s has two essentially identical failure cases that ran MTL (first MTXs to use it that he'd seen, he said) and were lousy with metal goop, I can stand to listen to his analysis and spend the money on changing over to the Ford recommended spec. That's what it comes to for me.
Originally posted by 99cougar:
EXACTLY! people break the stock diff with all different types of fluids in them! i bet you could find a person with every single type of fluid in their tranny that has shattered their diff.! ALOT of them with the stock fluid!
It's not just that it died, it's HOW. Pasty residue & unusual wear patterns.
Originally posted by demonsvt:
Your story reeks of a completely more logical answer. That being neglect from running non-protecting ATF for 6-7 years & 100k+ miles in it.
not that my opinion matters but i comletely agree. if mtl were to blamethen why only two and why only now?
Originally posted by RawDirte':
1. As far as I know it had stock fluid, whatever that may be. I am unsure.
2. I have no records of previous changing. Thats why I did it.
3. The MTL was in for probably 4 to 5 months.
4. That was the first time I (myself) changed it. Like I said I dont know about anything that happened before.
5. From what I heard, they are breaking the same way. The MTL is gunking up into a paste mixed around with metallic flakes and blocking oil from the diff.
My diff has seen some abuse by me. But nothing to bad, I mean just some spirited driving every now and then. Yes it had 103K on it and it was probably time to go... But I'm not thinking that the MTL helped too much... I mean a couple months after I put it in... Come'on... others experiencing the same. I am just trying to look out for you guys. LOOK INTO IT!
so as far as you know the fluid may never have been changed even once in about 100k miles and then we are going to suddenly blame redline? there has to be more to the story. my question is, if redline mtl is too think being a 70w-80 gear oil then why is ford recommending an 80w gear oil?
specs on fords honey, note three under the manual transmission fluid chart
redline mtl product info
terry's thread on this subject
Originally posted by RawDirte':
blocking oil from the diff.
Im no Terry h. but i have pulled and split my own tranny on my kitchen table, and im curious how you can block fluid from getting to the diff?
Originally posted by DemonSVT:
100k+ miles on the orignal fluid.
Then changed to a fully synthetic manual trans lube for only 4-5 months. (read the FAQs anyone)
Transmission fails and it's 100% because of the fluid in it the last 4-5 months.
Your story reeks of a completely more logical answer. That being neglect from running non-protecting ATF for 6-7 years & 100k+ miles in it.
'nuff said
I HAVE ONLY HAD MY CAR FOR ABOUT A YEAR. I CHANGED IT BECAUSE I DID NOT KNOW OF ANY PREVIOUS MAINTENENCE RECORDS! Maybe the larger text will help you to understand that, becuase it seems that you are trying to pick any and every little thing out of my posts! LIke I said, if you have an issue with me PM ME!!!!!!!!! I am not taking any sides here! For the last time, I made this post so you guys at least look into it... You people need to get a hold of yourselves!!!
Originally posted by dubkatz:
Originally posted by RawDirte':
blocking oil from the diff.
Im no Terry h. but i have pulled and split my own tranny on my kitchen table, and im curious how you can block fluid from getting to the diff?
LUBE IS SUSPENDING DEBRIS AND THIS 'PASTE' IS BLOCKING OFF THE 'OIL FEED" FLATS TO THE BEARING AREAS
Seems to me like a preventable potential failure route. Like, it may never happen to you but leaving the Redline in means it could. You measure your own risk threshold.
I'd like to see demon and terry discuss this for the benefit of everyone. Obviously we want to make sure terry's observations are justifiably based on the lube alone, and not some other facter. It would be sad to use a great oil as a scapegoat.
Demon, do you have an account on FCO to post in that thread?
Originally posted by rkneeshaw3.0:
I'd like to see demon and terry discuss this for the benefit of everyone. Obviously we want to make sure terry's observations are justifiably based on the lube alone, and not some other facter. It would be sad to use a great oil as a scapegoat.
Demon, do you have an account on FCO to post in that thread?
It would be nice but hi, if I want to see two rams butting heads, I'll watch Wild America. 
Besides, it seems to me like they're already debating, since Terry's last post seemed to almost directly address Demon's viscosity comments.
I just read the thread from FCO and I believe Terry is suggesting that you/me/all stay away from Redline MTL in this application.
From Terry's last post -
"...don't get hung up on the viscosity of the lubes here...the MTL appears to have the same additives as a hypoid gear oil that is designed for extreme pressure,which the MTX75 does NOT need.The fact that the MTL carries debris all round the trans appears to be the issue.Just smell MTL and smell a hypoid gear oil...same,then take a smell of Ford XT-M5-QS....the Ford lube does not come close to the others in smell.This is an additive issue....and again an MTX75 does not need ANY 'EP' additives as the MTX75 has none of it's gears with a hypoid gear 'cut'.Also woth noting is that an 'EP' lube with a Quaife or Torsen will REDUCE the effectiveness of the ATB diff.An ATB diff balances torque to each side by the friction 'end load' of the spiral cut diff pinions pressing on the diff carrier case.Using an 'EP" lube will reduce the end thrust friction of these pinions on the case and affetct the torque bias...not good. "
Originally posted by rkneeshaw3.0:
I'd like to see demon and terry discuss this for the benefit of everyone.
I'm guessing the sun will blow up before they have a public discussion for the benefit of everyone.
I read Terry's thread and it's very interesting. Not to discredit Demon but Terry has alot more experience with the MTX-75 and especially with broken ones. 
What we really need is some sort of list/database of people who have opened up their transmissions, what parts were broken, what fluids were run and for how long, driving style, mileage, etc. I'm curious if Demon or others with the MTL fluid have opened up their boxes since running it. What is the condition of the Vs peope running ATF and friction modifier or Ford fluids.
Also people on this site have said not to run MTL if you have damaged transmission components, so that could be a factor too (perhaps componetnts were damaged but driveability symptoms wern't noticeable yet)
I'd be curious in the final answer... but it sounds like the original fluid had coagilated (sp?) before the MTL was put in (maybe the MTL loosened up the original gunk).
I got my car with 17.7k miles. I put MTL in at 20k, changed it at 30k, and just changed it at 40k. I run it HARD anytime i'm on the road, and also do monthly (sometimes bi-monthly) autocrosses.
So, I'm concerned, but doubtful.
Anybody that doesn't know their own vehicle's maintenance history, shouldn't have much of a say in this.
I'm thinking it's just coincidence that the diff blew in your tranny Robert. It's like buying a used car w/ 100k miles on it, immediately changing the oil, and the engine blowing up. Do you blame the Valvoline oil that you put in it? No, as you don't know what was put in it before. Until there is some significant data, showing that Redline MTL is the reason for your diff shattering, I don't think people should be so quick to jump to conclusions.
Mark
Originally posted by Y2KSVT:
Anybody that doesn't know their own vehicle's maintenance history, shouldn't have much of a say in this.
I'm thinking it's just coincidence that the diff blew in your tranny Robert. It's like buying a used car w/ 100k miles on it, immediately changing the oil, and the engine blowing up. Do you blame the Valvoline oil that you put in it? No, as you don't know what was put in it before. Until there is some significant data, showing that Redline MTL is the reason for your diff shattering, I don't think people should be so quick to jump to conclusions.
Mark
I have put almost 30k miles on it. And that is true, I do not know the previous maintenence records. That is completely out of my control. Thats why I kind of went crazy with it. No where did I say that the MTL is the reason why my diff went on me, and if I did say it... Let me take it back because I did not mean it.
I still think you guys are missing the point here. All you guys are hearing is what you want to hear... "If you use Redline MTL, then you will ruin your diff." NO, that is not what I said!!! When I switched to the MTL, i noticed metal shavings in the fluid when draining it. It was not much, but enough to show that there was wear. The mix of the MTL, and metallic flakes creating a paste DID NOT help my diff and a prolonged life. Upon cracking open my trans, that was found, significant and strange wear. Also found on other MTL users transmissions. These are not my grounds to stand up and preach about it. Go to FCO and read about it!
I'm also running MTL. I have a 99+ cougar trans with a torsen. I want this discussion to continue because it is very intriquing to me, I don't want to ruin my new torsen. My trans supposedly had roughly 10k on it. I've put 5k on it with the MTL. So far so good tho. Also I took my trans apart myself and i dont see how the diff could get blocked from getting fluid.
A few more facts just to throw them out there.
When i took my trans apart (the one with 128K and shot 3rd synchro) the diff looked perfect. I put new ATF fluid in it when i bough the car. (98k) and then i put ATF+3 (112K-128K)
Originally posted by Stylin55_oh:
I'm also running MTL. I have a 99+ cougar trans with a torsen. I want this discussion to continue because it is very intriquing to me, I don't want to ruin my new torsen. My trans supposedly had roughly 10k on it. I've put 5k on it with the MTL. So far so good tho. Also I took my trans apart myself and i dont see how the diff could get blocked from getting fluid.
Originally posted by RawDirte':
Originally posted by dubkatz:
Originally posted by RawDirte':
blocking oil from the diff.
Im no Terry h. but i have pulled and split my own tranny on my kitchen table, and im curious how you can block fluid from getting to the diff?
LUBE IS SUSPENDING DEBRIS AND THIS 'PASTE' IS BLOCKING OFF THE 'OIL FEED" FLATS TO THE BEARING AREAS
Sure there is not enough factual information to give Redline a bad name. But when the man TH is saying that it is probably not a good idea to go with this MTL. I'm going to listen to him. Whats the big deal about spending 30 extra dollars. Compared to some other giant amount for a tranny repair. I could care less what you people decide to go with. I got my trans rebuilt by the guy and I am going to take his advice.
Quote:
Sure there is not enough factual information to give Redline a bad name. But when the man TH is saying that it is probably not a good idea to go with this MTL. I'm going to listen to him. Whats the big deal about spending 30 extra dollars. Compared to some other giant amount for a tranny repair. I could care less what you people decide to go with. I got my trans rebuilt by the guy and I am going to take his advice.
Seems you are the one getting a little defensive here. No one is trying to persuade you to keep with MTL. We appreciate the heads up and I agree 100% with spending another $30 on some other trans fluid. And i understand TH knows his Shiznit. I just think it's best to research a little instead of just saying, oh someone said this.. dont use it (i understand TH really knows his stuff, I've talked with him before)
Originally posted by Stylin55_oh:
Seems you are the one getting a little defensive here. No one is trying to persuade you to keep with MTL. We appreciate the heads up
Thank you... Sorry I was getting a little defensive. I just wanted this thread to be something to keep in mind. Thats it.
I received this e-mail from HMS -
"...what I am saying is stay away from gear lubes that
have the spec/additives of an 'EP' lube,this is not
specific to MTL/Redline/'Acme Gear Oil Inc" or any
specific brand...It's the type and composition of the
lube that is causing the issue here......."
Originally posted by RawDirte':
Originally posted by BlackBirdRacing:
I recently put redline MTL into my trans and the diff blew 4 months later...
Has to be a coincidence.
I doubt its a coincidence, mine went 4 or 5 months after I put the MTL in as well... Coincidence... I doubt it!
Yeah. Whatever.
I pumped over 300 ft-lbs of torque into my trans with redline, atf and others. I can only tell you that you are mistaken.
Redline has nothing to do with your trans failure unless you failed to put in enough.
ANY normal lubricant won't cause your diff/trans to go out for no reason. It had to be another issue.
Anyway, if you examine the damaged parts you can easily deduce what caused them to fail whether it be stres, lubrication, etc. Please be sure to post a picture so we can see if there is any merrit to your insinuation that Redline lubricants blew your transmission. I won't say it is impossible and I'll give your argument a fair consideration. Besides, if there is an issue then you may be doing us a service.
guys, what is this "EP" lube terry is talking about?
Originally posted by Jeb Hoge:
I think that if a guy with Terry's experience cracking MTX-75s has two essentially identical failure cases that ran MTL (first MTXs to use it that he'd seen, he said) and were lousy with metal goop, I can stand to listen to his analysis and spend the money on changing over to the Ford recommended spec. That's what it comes to for me.
Come on now. Terry is good at what he does but that doesn't mean he knows about redline or even cares to experiment with non ford products. His recommendation on products is fine if that is what you want to run. However, just to see a gunked up transmission and blame the fluid isn't a death warrant. I'm sure Terry has some 'qualifier' such as "from the two transmissions he's seen", or something similar that INDICATES he isn't saying it as an ABSOLUTE FACT about that fluid.
I'm fairly certain the metal paste and gunk had been in there a long time. I know that I ran Redline for over a year and I had less metal flake in it than when I ran fresh ATF. I also had no gunking, AND I have pictures to back my points up. What about these other claims I seen no pictures from them?
Besides, I'm a one-owner on this 99 Ford and I didn't change my ATF out until about 38K miles. I saw what it was when it came out and I've changed fluid no less than 5 times since then with different types. I lived with MTL the longest and there is nothing negative about that fluid. I am now going to MT90 but that is besides the point.
Originally posted by RawDirte':
Originally posted by dubkatz:
Originally posted by RawDirte':
blocking oil from the diff.
Im no Terry h. but i have pulled and split my own tranny on my kitchen table, and im curious how you can block fluid from getting to the diff?
LUBE IS SUSPENDING DEBRIS AND THIS 'PASTE' IS BLOCKING OFF THE 'OIL FEED" FLATS TO THE BEARING AREAS
Ummm You don't know what you are talking about do you?. There is an oil drain or feed hole but the bearings spin. The bearings are not sealed off by themselves, they are pressed onto the diff and it is in full contact with the fluid, at LEAST 50% of the way up the diff. High enough in fact that if you go and pull an axle right now, fluid will run out of the transmission. How is that NOT able to get to at least the bottom end of the bearings. Did the paste turn itself into a lip seal and seal off the bearing area entirely...despite the fact that it moves?
If the bearing is full of metal paste then it didn't happen overnight and it didn't happen in four of five months.
It happened over 4 or 5 years!
Lack of maintenance damaged your transmission.
I think the diff as a 'part' sucks but the transmission and its design as a whole are pretty darn good. The fluid recommeded in it are what really suck! Ford should have sprung a few extra bucks for some good fluid from day one so that this trans didn't have as many issues. Dino ATF in this trans sucks.
Originally posted by akrump47:
Originally posted by rkneeshaw3.0:
I'd like to see demon and terry discuss this for the benefit of everyone.
I'm guessing the sun will blow up before they have a public discussion for the benefit of everyone.
I read Terry's thread and it's very interesting. Not to discredit Demon but Terry has alot more experience with the MTX-75 and especially with broken ones.
What we really need is some sort of list/database of people who have opened up their transmissions, what parts were broken, what fluids were run and for how long, driving style, mileage, etc. I'm curious if Demon or others with the MTL fluid have opened up their boxes since running it. What is the condition of the Vs peope running ATF and friction modifier or Ford fluids.
Also people on this site have said not to run MTL if you have damaged transmission components, so that could be a factor too (perhaps componetnts were damaged but driveability symptoms wern't noticeable yet)
Hello!!!!!!
Is this the first post you've read in this forum? I've just had my trans open again and the MTL did not cause a problem. How many times have I posted my reviews AND shown pictures???
There is still plenty of friction in the diff with MTL to allow the ATB to work the way it was intended. I had enough conversations with Torsen engineers that I can safely say that lack of friction was NOT an issue!
I'm guessing years of poor maintenance was the issue. Running a batch of fluid to flush the transmission out is always a good idea on an unknown transmission like that. After all the worn material is flushed out then the new fluid can have a FAIR EVAKUATION.
Originally posted by RawDirte':
Originally posted by Y2KSVT:
Anybody that doesn't know their own vehicle's maintenance history, shouldn't have much of a say in this.
I'm thinking it's just coincidence that the diff blew in your tranny Robert. It's like buying a used car w/ 100k miles on it, immediately changing the oil, and the engine blowing up. Do you blame the Valvoline oil that you put in it? No, as you don't know what was put in it before. Until there is some significant data, showing that Redline MTL is the reason for your diff shattering, I don't think people should be so quick to jump to conclusions.
Mark
I have put almost 30k miles on it. And that is true, I do not know the previous maintenence records. That is completely out of my control. Thats why I kind of went crazy with it. No where did I say that the MTL is the reason why my diff went on me, and if I did say it... Let me take it back because I did not mean it.
I still think you guys are missing the point here. All you guys are hearing is what you want to hear... "If you use Redline MTL, then you will ruin your diff." NO, that is not what I said!!! When I switched to the MTL, i noticed metal shavings in the fluid when draining it. It was not much, but enough to show that there was wear. The mix of the MTL, and metallic flakes creating a paste DID NOT help my diff and a prolonged life. Upon cracking open my trans, that was found, significant and strange wear. Also found on other MTL users transmissions. These are not my grounds to stand up and preach about it. Go to FCO and read about it!
How about the fact that you never flushed the goopy fluid out the first time, changed fluid, then when the metal came out with the thinner/cleaner fluid you ended up blaming the new fluid for the fault of the old fluid and lack of maintenance????
Is this even remotely possible in any way in your mind??
Is it even remotely possible that your diff still would have blown if you had used ATF? Or that fresh clean ATF would have started to break up the sludge and flushed it out when you changed it???
Has this ever occured to you? C'mon, you posted the other stuff like it was fact....what about these questions???
Originally posted by JB1:
guys, what is this "EP" lube terry is talking about?
He is talking about extreme pressure additives (EP).
In a stock transmission there is no need for EP additives according to his explanation.
With a Torsen I have posteed that EP fluids will quiet the noise down that these diffs make. He's bascially saying I'm all wrong because the friction is what makes the diff work.
From a simple perspective, and it is not that simple, this might be true. That part that IS an issue is the Torque loads the transmission sees and the design range of the differential. The T2 was designed for a friggin Ford Focus, NOT a V6 contour!
This is directly from Torsen by the way.
This part is NOT from Torsen:
Simply put, friction is a product of the coefficients of static and dynamic friction multiplied by the Force applied, whether it be gravity or something else; along with a few other factors.
Simple math indicates that if the Force applied is 3 times HIGHER than that which the part was designed for would mean that the coefficient of friction doesn't have to be as high for the differential to operate the same way.
In fact you could say that it could be three times less and the product would still be within the design limits that would allow the diff to work.
In the meantime the high pressure additives will protect the gears from the excessive loads. I qualified this by saying "With High torque loads AND an ATB, use something with pressure additives" if you want to reduce the noise.
This won't hurt the differential at all and as long as the transmission shifts correctly, it shouldn't hurt anything else in the transmission either. It is the friction that allows the synchros to work and if the friction is still good enough that it shifts fine....Then how can pressure additives hurt when they will protect the gears BETTER from wear??
(assuming these are additives that specifically don't harm yellow metals)
Tom your starting to be like Greg, just plain ol' blunt...I like it. :-)
Redline MTL blew up my diff, I know this because I was thinking about putting it in when I started out hard and had excessive wheel hop.
I should call up Redline and ask then to pay me for my repair costs.
If the tranny fluid was what caused your problems the effected area would be dry, no fluid. I do not see how there could be a bearing in this tranny that is sealed enough to keep the fluid out. Can you post some pictures of the broken parts.
I think that I will have to agree with Tom and Demon on this. If you do not know the condition of the tranny before you put the fluid in - you can not say that it contributed to the failure. When I say know the condition I mean you actually took the tranny apart - inspected everything - then put it back together correctly. Otherwise it was just wear and tear that killed it. The fluid change was just a coincidence.
I just rebuilt my tranny w/ torsen and put MTL in it. If it blows up again and there is pastey residue on everything I will post pics and there might be a case. Otherwise I just did a bad job rebuilding it. Knock on wood.
Just my little joke and thoughts on the matter.
This post with responses from the experts is making my head spin and my blood boil. Last I checked Terry wasn't getting any endorsement fees trying to sell everyone on Ford honey or Mobil 1. You guys can say what you want about him but he knows his sh!t. Who on here has torn down and rebuilt 100's of tranny's? That's right. NO ONE! He is telling everyone what his findings are. He benefits from none of it in these lube type matters. Hell if I were him I'd tell ppl to use MTL so their tranny will degrade quicker so he can make more $.
Robert is letting everyone know Terry's findings so lay off! The reason the MTL is not a lube I would use is shown in the following pictures.
This is what a stock diff. for those that don't know.
This diff/tranny above was run on MTL for 1 year. Notice the extreme spider gear wear?!! He's lucky the pin didn't go. Doesn't really matter since it's toast either way.
This is what Roberts parts looked like
Notice the normal diff. pin for comparison. Those 2 planet gears ride on the diff pin. Notice the 2 machined notches in the pin? That's where the planet gears sit. Those 2 notches are there for a reason. FOR LUBE FOR THE PLANET GEARS. NO LUBE THE GEARS WILL EAT THE PIN as shown here. The MTL is pasting up and not allowing for the lube to flow under the planet gears. Yes Roberts trans had 100k before he switched. Even with the stock fluid in there for so long it would not have caused this jind of damage. The Ford Honey was engineered my a German outfit specifically for the MTX-75. You think that Ford would just throw any off the shelf lube if they could? Sure would save them a boat load of $. The MTL has high EP. EP is found in axle lubes and smells just like rotten pu$$y. The same smell that is found in MTX-75's that run this. Demon & warmonger you really know your stuff in some aspects but in this repect I'm not agreeing one bit. I've never been so fired up over anything on this board before but I'm putting my foot down.
BOTTOM LINE. GO AHEAD AND USE MTL BUT DON'T COME BITCHING WHEN THINGS GO SOUTH. TERRY RECOMMENDS FORD HONEY OR MOBIL 1 WITH FRICTION MODIFIER. THE DIFF PIN IN THE PIC THAT IS STILL SOLID WAS OUT OF A TRANNY WITH MOBIL 1. WHATS A FEW EXTRA $ FOR FORD HONEY IN A $1000 TRANNY? ROBERTS TRANNY SAT IN THE DUNK TANK FOR 2.5 HRS TO GET THE RESIDUE OUT. A NORMAL TRANS. TAKES 1 HOUR!
i'm sure as hell switchin' fluids.
Originally posted by warmonger:
Come on now. Terry is good at what he does but that doesn't mean he knows about redline or even cares to experiment with non ford products.
And why would he need to "experiment." A high dollar transmission is not something most ppl experiment with. Terry also recommends Mobil 1 if you hadn't heard. He recommends the honey first though. The reason is as stated in my previous post. This fluid is spec'd for the MTX-75. Their is a reason for that. You think Ford would go out and spend needless amounts of $ if it didn't need to? Engineers at Ford are probably there for a reason. Nah I'll just go out and buy my lube from a small company like Redline. Maybe use a lube that wasn't specifically designed for a Ford transmission. Sounds great!
Originally posted by G�¨t�£uck�¥151:
i'm sure as hell switchin' fluids.
Is that what you ask for at Ford. Just tell them you want 3 qts. of Ford Honey and a bottle of XL-7? Definitely changing mine asap. I noticed my trans was hard to get into 1st from a dead stop. So I tried the MTL, and it actually got worse. I thought it was just my syncros going. Now I hear this. 
-tropictour
todd
I'm sorry but those look just like previous blown or degraded stock diffs when used with stock fluid and some agressive driving. Nothing new about those pics at all to me.
I haven't done hundreds but I've been into a few and I HAVE been into hundreds of transmissions when I was a mechanic...as well as engines from all different types of manufacturers. That is how I made my living for 8-10 years!
This is just turning into sensationalism now.
I am going to agree to dissagree and bow out of this argument now. I'll look again if some proof were offered in the future.
Tom
I for one think that the truth lies somewhere in the middle. I'm leaning toward the "stock lube breakdown over 100+K miles" theory. Then when he did change fluids, did so with a quality fluid, which dislodged years of "gunk", which led to fluid passage blocking and ultimately to his problems. I am however planning on running Mobil 1 + XL-7 FM ... did that in my last Cougar and loved it. It's tried and true and all said and one, I will have about $3,000 tied up in my transmission ... not something I want to experiement with.
If terry wants to have some fun...I have used Redline MTL in my HMS trans which is currently out of my car and not going back in for some time.
Just a thought.
Originally posted by fastcougar:
I for one think that the truth lies somewhere in the middle. I'm leaning toward the "stock lube breakdown over 100+K miles" theory.
Stock lube is not going to gum up not matter how old. It will break down and lose most of it's good lubricating properties but it's not going to block the slots in the diff. pine that urgently need lube in order for the planet gears to rotate.
I've got my MTX opened up and sitting on my workbench right now. I changed out the stock ATF at around 40K miles and started using the Mobil-1 cocktail, draining and refilling about every 25K miles. The transmission, now at 112K, looks absolutely spotless inside and there were only a couple TINY metal flakes on the collection magnet. Looking over the internal components, it's hard to see any indications of wear.
Even at 112K on an almost 10-year old transmission, it still shifts great (i.e. no syncro problems).
I've got 3 bottles of Redline MTL ready to dump in after my Torsen/Fork install, but after reading this dialogue, I'm inclined to continue using the Mobil-1 cocktail until the 'MTX Heavyweights' duke out the MTL issue some more. In the meantime, I'll hold onto my bottles of MTL.
I agree that it's hard to blame 2 transmission failures on MTL, considering that the fluid change history was unknown. If you don't keep the fluid fresh, it's gonna come back to bite you, no matter what fluid you're using.
Like I said, the truth probably lies in the middle ... perhaps the MTL caused the gumming due to the EP additives combined with broken down stock fluid???
Originally posted by MapOfTaziFoSho:
If terry wants to have some fun...I have used Redline MTL in my HMS trans which is currently out of my car and not going back in for some time.
Just a thought.
How many miles do you have on it since the rebuild? If more than 20k I say do eeet! The findings would be very interesting.
I've had MTL in mine from the day it was rebuilt (whoever it was that rebuilt it). About 35k on it now.
I am going to order some Ford Honey though just because its' not worth the risk IMO until this is all settled, and its probably due for a change (its been 25k miles)
Originally posted by rkneeshaw3.0:
Originally posted by MapOfTaziFoSho:
If terry wants to have some fun...I have used Redline MTL in my HMS trans which is currently out of my car and not going back in for some time.
Just a thought.
How many miles do you have on it since the rebuild? If more than 20k I say do eeet! The findings would be very interesting.
I've had MTL in mine from the day it was rebuilt (whoever it was that rebuilt it). About 30k on it now.
[censored] if Todd wants to pick it up while he is down there...just for research... I don't care. I'm gonna email Terry. Cracking it just to take a look shouldn't be too terribly difficult.
Originally posted by RawDirte':
Originally posted by BlackBirdRacing:
I recently put redline MTL into my trans and the diff blew 4 months later...
Has to be a coincidence.
I doubt its a coincidence, mine went 4 or 5 months after I put the MTL in as well... Coincidence... I doubt it!
I though it was in for 12 months?
Quote:
Quoted from TH on FCO....
Redline,stoc diff blew,lube was in for 12 months at correct level(as per customer info)
So we have Rawburts and others trans which were full of 'pastey residue' per Terrys description running the MTL, and we have warmonger and others who have run MTL for some time and seen no internal issues. Could their be a 3rd factor that we don't know about yet? Something has got to give.
Originally posted by akrump47:
So we have Rawburts and others trans which were full of 'pastey residue' per Terrys description running the MTL, and we have warmonger and others who have run MTL for some time and seen no internal issues. Could their be a 3rd factor that we don't know about yet? Something has got to give.
warmonger and others have a LSD
the ones that shown problems didn't
not sure if that makes a difference, but there is another variable
Originally posted by terry haines:
...hows this,we set a day & time,you bring your
trans,a digi camera and a vid camera ,I crack open
your trans to check for any 'paste' ,grey debris etc
etc and then seal it back up...no charge...so you and
the masses can see it,first hand!
Pete call me seriously. Meet me at Stazi's Sat early AM and I'll pick the trans up. I'll drop off back to you next weekend when I'm in town again for the wedding. Terry told me he'd gladly crack it open free of charge for inspection.
Originally posted by MapOfTaziFoSho:
Originally posted by terry haines:
...hows this,we set a day & time,you bring your
trans,a digi camera and a vid camera ,I crack open
your trans to check for any 'paste' ,grey debris etc
etc and then seal it back up...no charge...so you and
the masses can see it,first hand!
I'd do it. Whether it's consistent with the others or not, it's a data point toward figuring out what's going on.
Originally posted by 96_98_SE:
I've got my MTX opened up and sitting on my workbench right now. I changed out the stock ATF at around 40K miles and started using the Mobil-1 cocktail, draining and refilling about every 25K miles. The transmission, now at 112K, looks absolutely spotless inside and there were only a couple TINY metal flakes on the collection magnet. Looking over the internal components, it's hard to see any indications of wear. Even at 112K on an almost 10-year old transmission, it still shifts great (i.e. no syncro problems).
So why change?! You know what works. I used Mobil 1 for quite some time. Put it in at 40-50k. Trans was cracked at 130k. Everything was still in excellent condition. Sure as hell didn't look like those 2 transmissions.
My dad is gonna bring it up to EL sat early am. You wanna pick it up from here? See my dad is already making a trip up here for me.
Sure. Give me an addy and time and I'll swing through.
Pete, aren't you running a Quaife already? Do we think that the gunking up might be more prone on stock diff trannies? What's the consensus IF Pete's tranny comes back fine, after using MTL?
This thread is making me
Mark
I'm no expert, but if the lube was the problem causing the build up, I think it woudl be seen in more places than JUST that diff pin.
I have a quaife already. For ref my stock diff is perfect and chillin in my garage as a showpiece. I ran Syn Mobil 1 atf for 2 years on the stock diff. What broke in my trans was basically everything else. More interesting is the 'gunk' that terry is speaking of from the MTL...I'm no engineer and an amateur mechanic at best. I'm reserving ANY judgement til more data is out there. All that being said, I have great faith in Terry's judgement as well as Demon and War.
The whole bit of Terry trying to sell certain products is laughable at best.
Okay I'm going out of my way and picking up Pete's trans this w/e. Terry is going to open this trans Mon. after shop hours for me to take pics. I might shoot video of his actually seperating it to show this isn't set up. He can crack it in 15 minutes. We will be doing the white glove test to show the residue inside. If it's clean as a whistle well my name is Mud.
No matter what is found, this is a win/win situation. We, who have been running MTL, can be relieved nothing bad is going on down there, or we all learned to switch our fluids before it's too late. This is like CSI stuff.. LOL
I'm taking my car to the strip in three weeks, with an upgraded pole120 rear mount. I've had MTL in for just over a year now; if my MTX bites the big one it will be going to Terry immediately for inspection.
Originally posted by hetfield:
with an upgraded pole120 rear mount. I've had MTL
Yikes that was my combo... 
Originally posted by RawDirte':
Originally posted by hetfield:
with an upgraded pole120 rear mount. I've had MTL
Yikes that was my combo...
Mine too... (not pole120's I made my own.)
KABOOM, through the top of the case!!
Originally posted by BlackBirdRacing:
Originally posted by RawDirte':
Originally posted by hetfield:
with an upgraded pole120 rear mount. I've had MTL
Yikes that was my combo...
Mine too... (not pole120's I made my own.)
KABOOM, through the top of the case!!
Nothing went through my perrrrrrrty case
Well if my diff fails from MTL, it will give me an excuse to get the LSD Ive wanted oh so badly. I dont really have the cash to do it if its not broken. Im looking at this as opportunity!
Originally posted by KingpinSVT:
Well if my diff fails from MTL, it will give me an excuse to get the LSD Ive wanted oh so badly. I dont really have the cash to do it if its not broken. Im looking at this as opportunity!
Quite the optimist aren't you Chris! The glass is always half full with you! lol
Mark
Originally posted by todras:
Okay I'm going out of my way and picking up Pete's trans this w/e. Terry is going to open this trans Mon. after shop hours for me to take pics. I might shoot video of his actually seperating it to show this isn't set up.
Todd, you are The Man. 
This thread has taken a life of it's own.
I wonder if it will become the longest thread on the CEG forums.
Originally posted by KingpinSVT:
Well if my diff fails from MTL, it will give me an excuse to get the LSD Ive wanted oh so badly. I dont really have the cash to do it if its not broken. Im looking at this as opportunity!
Me too. I've been putting off the MTX upgrades pretty much since I bought the car over two years ago. Part of me is almost hoping the diff goes so I can justify the repair.
Originally posted by Big Jim:
This thread has taken a life of it's own.
I wonder if it will become the longest thread on the CEG forums.
Not by a long shot. The Group Buy thread for the ELGlow gauges lasted exactly two years with 826 posts. Were there any threads larger than that one?
i ran redline for 2yrs and it was ok.
Originally posted by rkneeshaw3.0:
I'm no expert, but if the lube was the problem causing the build up, I think it woudl be seen in more places than JUST that diff pin.
Someone using their brain I see. Yes it would. The syncros would all be completely shot because without lubrication they would fail first. The oil (or lack there of) is not going to subjectively starve just one spot
Those pictures todras posted show damage from broken spider gears. TYPICAL MTX DIFF FAILURE. Hello sheep. Wake the hell up!
What happens when METAL PIECES constantly grind into the bearings and spindles for a prolonged time??? Oh yeah. Extreme wear happens like in the pictures.
Yes I am being overly sarcastic but the majority of the damn sheep on this board need their head beat in order to get any sense in it.
I ran MTL in my MTX-75 for well over a year (from Jan 01 to Sep 03)
When I tore my MTX apart there was absolutely ZERO FLUID BREAK DOWN & Negligable wear!!!
My bet for this over blown media style sensationalism going completely assinine is that someone added a "transmission fix" type additive or an high pressure LSD additive to the transmission at some point. Those types of additives cause exactly the type of build up that was described.
BTW (sorry Terry) - if Terry states that EP additive is bad for the MTX then why is he still recommending the cocktail as an option??? That's what the XM-7 is. It is an Extreme Pressure anti-chatter additive used for REAR WHEEL DRIVE differentials.
Another BTW - I've been against the cocktail (LSD additive) for years myself. ATF does a poor enough job protecting harsh gear engagement without being broken down by it. Feel free to search too if you want, it's there.
Man some times this site just tires me out. Too many f'n lemmings following each other off the cliff at the drop of a hat.
It's a very good thing a few people on here (and not on here anymore) actually don't listen to what can't be done or is not possible.
You know, I really need a break from this crap.
Originally posted by hetfield:
Originally posted by Big Jim:
This thread has taken a life of it's own.
I wonder if it will become the longest thread on the CEG forums.
Not by a long shot. The Group Buy thread for the ELGlow gauges lasted exactly two years with 826 posts. Were there any threads larger than that one?
The South Central Ultimate Topic ran for 1350 posts and was still heavy rolling before it was locked as a joke (supposed to be unlocked but the mod went on vacation for 2 months...)
Ray
Norcal's CF hood GB lasted 1145 posts, about 22.75K views and is still going! I was a lucky few that actually got a freakin hood.
Originally posted by MapOfTaziFoSho:
Originally posted by terry haines:
...hows this,we set a day & time,you bring your
trans,a digi camera and a vid camera ,I crack open
your trans to check for any 'paste' ,grey debris etc
etc and then seal it back up...no charge...so you and
the masses can see it,first hand!
This would be good if we know the details of the prior fluids used, length of time MTL has been used on top of it. As I said, I'm not close minded to the possibilities but I want something a little more controlled before I start to buy into this.
Originally posted by todras:
Okay I'm going out of my way and picking up Pete's trans this w/e. Terry is going to open this trans Mon. after shop hours for me to take pics. I might shoot video of his actually seperating it to show this isn't set up. He can crack it in 15 minutes. We will be doing the white glove test to show the residue inside. If it's clean as a whistle well my name is Mud.
What do you mean "clean as a whistle"?
I don't think I've ever seen any transmission that doesn't have some sort of metallic gray film. Now before anyone jumps up and down I'll give a more common example. You go to service an automatic transmission that has seen nothing but ATF. When you change out the fluid you wipe out the pan and you find a gray dust-like film over the whole pan and bottom of the trans. This material is from metal and clutch wear but the particle size is so small it doesn't hurt in small amounts and is one reason to service the transmission.
Now the same thing happens with a manual without clutch wear particles as gears will wear a little over time. If the manual trans hasn't been serviced in a long time there will also normally be a lot more of the metal dust and a little bit of brass speckles in it but that doesn't mean it is bad.
On a transmission that was completely cleaned and run with clean fluid in a year I'd expect very little metal particles but a very light gray residue wouldn't be unexpected.
Here is a good link from a guy kind enough to post pictures and do his homework/research on products: Stealth AWD transaxle lubricant info.
THat may explain it, someone adding more modifiers to the mtl to the fluid in the trans in question I mean.
From the smell that Terry described it sounded like standard gear oil. MTL doesn't smell like that, mostly GL-5 oils seem to smell like that!
The MTL fresh from the bottle that I remember was very mild in smell. Do you recall what yours smelled like?
Does anyone with a fresh bottle who also knows what a hypoid gear oil smells like, think it smells like that?
When I used ATF + friction modifier I had the most intensive wear in my transmission! It was for about 3 weeks to a month and of course the Torsen was breaking in, but it was significant in the metal particles. When I dumped the fluid it totally REEKED of the type of smell that Terry described! I changed it out because of poor performance and switched to MTL. My transmission never worked better than when I had MTL in it. I ran it for over a year and then switched to Royal Purple. Not satisfied with that I'm now turning to MT90 and I found that even MT90 doesn't stink like what is described!
I also ran Torco synthetic a long time back and that may be what protected my stock diff from blowing up as that is the last fluid I ran before putting in the LSD. I ran that for about 1.5 years. No wear from it either. Of course the shift forks were binding like hell from the previous factory lube but I got all that fixed up and its been shifting smooth as silk for over two years.
I think MTL has a very slight hypoid smell... but wouldn't think about it unless I was trying to smell it. I was comparing the smell to Redline 75W90 gear oil (for my wife's Intrepids differential). That gear oil reaks... MTL does not.
Originally posted by warmonger:
Originally posted by MapOfTaziFoSho:
Originally posted by terry haines:
...hows this,we set a day & time,you bring your
trans,a digi camera and a vid camera ,I crack open
your trans to check for any 'paste' ,grey debris etc
etc and then seal it back up...no charge...so you and
the masses can see it,first hand!
This would be good if we know the details of the prior fluids used, length of time MTL has been used on top of it. As I said, I'm not close minded to the possibilities but I want something a little more controlled before I start to buy into this.
This transmission was done by terry in may of 04. I ran MTL in it from DAY 1. Prior to the build up I ran Mobil 1 syn ATF with XL3 friction modifier. (could've been XL7...)
That was run from sept 02 til the shift tower went bye bye in march early april of 04.
The MTL in the trans prob had 14k miles on it.
We'll be tearing her down today.
EXcellent
Can't wait to see this. It's about time to change my tranny fluid just to get all the new stuff out.
Looks like I'll be doing the Mobile 1 and Ford FM, but I'm still curious as heck to see this....
Originally posted by todras:
We'll be tearing her down today.
Hey Todd, just be sure to post everything in this thread. That way we can keep it all in one place.
Terry will also be getting my trans soon.
we'll see what he finds...
I doubt it's the MTL but we will see.
Here's Pete's trans.
Has 14k on it. Was done by Terry a year ago. It was totally spotless when Terry shipped it off as with any build he does. The only thing he uses is assembly lube. Does not put anything in it. It would spill out the axle ports anyway.
Notice the nice build up on the shift tower! Slightly blurry but you can see the black residue was wiped off!
Notice the tempured splines. Nice rainbow effect. It's not supposed to look like that! Due to high heat/friction.
Mmm nice sludge on the magnet. Bet that is great for lubrication.
These are the pins I think that are for the shift forks. The top one is how both of Pete's looked. The bottom one was wiped off!
These are the insides of 3 seperate transmissions. This is Pete's. Oh nice black coating you have there Pete!
AND NO AN MTX IS NOT SUPPOSED TO HAVE METAL FLAKING ON THE INSIDE AS WARMONGER STATED!!!!!
This transmission ran Ford Honey.
This transmission ran straight up ATF.
Notice the huge differences?!!! Pete's is at the top!
Look at the nice oxidation on Pete's Quaife! This is caused by the sulfer content in the MTL! Just another added benefit of MTL on top of the sludge.
Also on the teeth!
So there you have it. Any more questions? Can't wait to hear the arguments now. If you have MTL Terry recommends running plain ATF for a couple weeks and then draining it and then run Honey or Mobil 1.
Terry has also sent samples off of each of the lubes to the labs so even more evidence can be shown about the great additives MTL has in it.
Nice Job Todras...but I have a question...Why in this picture
Do some of the transmissions look like they are different from each other. For example... the bottom trans has one big hole and the others have 2....what gives?
This is good information, and I'm looking forward to the discussion that will follow. Thanks Terry, Tod.
Holy Cow!! I'm speechless, but still looking forward to what others have to say. There is alot for me to learn here, so... my ears on the monitor.
Todd, thanks for the good effort.
Now, we can all make informed decisions.
Originally posted by todras:
Terry has also sent samples off of each of the lubes to the labs so even more evidence can be shown about the great additives MTL has in it.
OK, it's kinda obvious now who is right and who is wrong. I say this thread should be locked down at least until we get the lab stuff back...
I'm really upset seeing this. I was there and when we pulled it open I was disgusted. I spent a pretty penny on this and it looks worse than the flippin oil pan I pulled off my 2.5
Pictures are worth 1000 words.
PS todd...terry said to run straight ATF for a couple of days. Drain it hot and let it drain overnight...then run the Ford honey or Mobil 1. Just so you guys know terry gets .000000000000000000000000001% of all sales from these products.
Starjamir the uper right is the bell housing side...the first upper left is the bell housing side zetec and the lower left is the gear set side of a rod shift.
Terry knows his [censored].
Rawburt was prob the not the best messenger for this information based on some of his CEG history. To be honest I thought it was hooey just because it came from him. No offense Raw...but well sorry.
I'm 100% with terry on this one guys. I know of a few other guys here in MI that will agree with me.
Sorry for a not so great write up...I'll be spending the rest of my night in the library and I don't have time to write novel.
wow! it is great having terry around. there is no replacement for his experience and knowledge.
Baaaa.
I didn't do quite as hardcore a flush procedure as Terry suggested, but I only had the MTL in for the summer. I think it'll be OK. Thanks for the research.
Originally posted by Jeb Hoge:
Baaaa.
I didn't do quite as hardcore a flush procedure as Terry suggested, but I only had the MTL in for the summer. I think it'll be OK. Thanks for the research.
Nothing is perm. damaged. Additionally...my trans did seem to shift better with the old 'cocktail' and before the rebuild. I never ran MTL b4 the rebuild.
Originally posted by 96_98_SE:
I've got my MTX opened up and sitting on my workbench right now. I changed out the stock ATF at around 40K miles and started using the Mobil-1 cocktail, draining and refilling about every 25K miles. The transmission, now at 112K, looks absolutely spotless inside and there were only a couple TINY metal flakes on the collection magnet. Looking over the internal components, it's hard to see any indications of wear. Even at 112K on an almost 10-year old transmission, it still shifts great (i.e. no syncro problems).
I've got 3 bottles of Redline MTL ready to dump in after my Torsen/Fork install, but after reading this dialogue, I'm inclined to continue using the Mobil-1 cocktail until the 'MTX Heavyweights' duke out the MTL issue some more. In the meantime, I'll hold onto my bottles of MTL.
I agree that it's hard to blame 2 transmission failures on MTL, considering that the fluid change history was unknown. If you don't keep the fluid fresh, it's gonna come back to bite you, no matter what fluid you're using.
This is very interesting too. Don't run the MTL. After seeing my BRAND NEW trans in this state. I'm so miffed right now.
Miffed at myself for not running what Terry told me to, but at the same time...I suppose it is good that I did because we now have pretty solid PROOF of what it does. Idk why Terry just doesn't endorse the MTL to increase his sales. 
that trans that ran the honey is real purtty. i now understand that this is not a viscosity thing but rather a lube content thing. thanks for the information. demon, warmonger, comments?
You know what Todd? You got an issue with something I say you should approach it in a fair reply to my post, i.e. the metal issue; not bury it amongst a bunch of pictures. Otherwise, I would use PMs as I did when I first tried to point out that there was a lack of objectivity here. Obviously you weren't going to be objective about this in the first place so I wasted my time in the pm and I'm probably wasting my time here now. I haven't ever had a problem with you before and I don't intend to start it now.
However I have some questions:
1.)If that one transmission used Ford Honey, WHY IS THE FLUID ON THE BEARING RACE FRIGGIN RED?
2.)Why on the one with the straight ATF are there wipe marks on the inside of the case?
3.)Also, rainbow coloration on the gear teeth? I'll have to see a much better photo than that one before I agree that it is there as we can't really see it; I'll also have to see a photo of it before it was rebuilt by Terry to insure that it wasn't preexisting, meaning caused by the usage and fluid formerly used before he worked on it. That coloration won't go away so it would have stayed there up to now even if it was preexisting.
You know I've opened up many transmissions and unless the transmission was recently cleaned...less than a year on the fluid, they all have that same slightly dark residue, many about as bad. My factory fill had the same crap with almost as much sludge but with a stock differential!
After 1.5 years of MTL I had minor build up on the magnet though I did flush my trans after break-in.
I'll admit that the sludge on his magnet is a bit excessive for a year!
However, I will also be the first to point out that it looks like that is the same fluid it was broken in with, meaning he never changed fluid after he broke in the new parts in the trans. Contrary to popular belief, NEW, friction based ATBs like Torsens and Quaifes are going to generate quite a bit of metal particles as those planetary gears start to wear down and smooth out.
He probably wouldn't get that kind of buildup on his transmission if it was properly flushed out after the break-in process. One reason it can get so bad is that all of the particles from the break in process will act as an abrasive over time, making more particles and increasing the wear.
If you OR Terry has an issue with me saying that the break in process will produce metal particulates AND that you will see the flake in the oil, then either you aren't quoting him correctly or you are both wrong. Don't forget that MY definition of metal flake and your/his definition of metal flake may not be equal. We aren't talking friggin nuggets here.
Now, all of that being said, I'm still open to seeing if the additives in Redline are problem causing. That is still apparently undecided as I can see two or three discrepancies just from the explanations and the photos.
I have nothing to gain by using or not using Redline. I just can't see what appears to be a great product by almost all accounts suddenly turned into a bad product by one opinion and no facts, or UNCONTROLLED conditions.
I'm going to invite one of the Redline engineers to view this topic and defend themselves.
What about the differential makers? Do they have an issue with redlines lubrication specs?
Crap, I wasted so much time addressing each and every possible source of error
Redline MTL tech information/lube specs Chew on this for a while. I won't post links of all the positive usage reports from the internet for Redline MTL on transmissions using the same alloys and technologies as our beloved mtx-75. You people can search google for that. I did have a hard time finding negatives though.
I did flush it after the first 500 miles. And Terry told me that quaife didn't rec this type of fluid. I see this getting ugly and being an ego based argument about who has the bigger d!ck.
I watched Terry make a couple of swipes on the other two cases and I wasn't terribly concerned about it.
I was just typing to my Volvo buddy and he uses MTL religously in his cars:
DanGTO: i can probably join, and throw some [censored]
DanGTO: i know i have some, i have 2 other trannies apart, i wonder if i cleaned the shifter plates off
DanGTO: but the cause of trans failure was a tweaked housing due to the torque.
DanGTO: But, i could not believe what i saw
DanGTO: funny thing is
DanGTO: the volvo drain on the trans
DanGTO: is magnetic
DanGTO: and i found only a ton of sludge built on it
DanGTO: so it is true, that the mtl shifts metal with it.
DanGTO: hell, the other trans in it has redline now
DanGTO: my overdrive unit, which uses the fluid and a solenoid to work [electronic 5th] was full of crap on the filter as well.
DanGTO: moore black crap.
DanGTO: yet, every volvo shop swears by it.
War...as for the discoloration it was THERE, YOU HAVE MY WORD. As much rainbow as the city of Ferndale.
War...when u say properly flush...you mean just an empty and a refill after break-in or is there a step I missed?
Quote:
1.)If that one transmission used Ford Honey, WHY IS THE FLUID ON THE BEARING RACE FRIGGIN RED?
2.)Why on the one with the straight ATF are there wipe marks on the inside of the case?
3.)Also, rainbow coloration on the gear teeth? I'll have to see a much better photo than that one before I agree that it is there as we can't really see it; I'll also have to see a photo of it before it was rebuilt by Terry to insure that it wasn't preexisting, meaning caused by the usage and fluid formerly used before he worked on it. That coloration won't go away so it would have stayed there up to now even if it was preexisting.
As an objective 3rd party,
1. the transmission using honey did not appear to have any red atf.
2. He stated that in all fiarness he had wiped them lightly, but I do believe it would have taken quite a bit of cleaning to match pete's car, and it REALLY did not appear that they were thoroughly cleaned. Keep in mind that these transmissions had quite a bit more mileage.
3. I would agree with the statement that the discoloration could have been caused before, but it was blatant in person.
I also have to add that my initial reaction at seeing these pictures was that they did not do the difference between the transmissions justice.
Originally posted by MapOfTaziFoSho:
I did flush it after the first 500 miles. And Terry told me that quaife didn't rec this type of fluid. I see this getting ugly and being an ego based argument about who has the bigger d!ck.
I watched Terry make a couple of swipes on the other two cases and I wasn't terribly concerned about it.
I was just typing to my Volvo buddy and he uses MTL religously in his cars:
DanGTO: i can probably join, and throw some [censored]
DanGTO: i know i have some, i have 2 other trannies apart, i wonder if i cleaned the shifter plates off
DanGTO: but the cause of trans failure was a tweaked housing due to the torque.
DanGTO: But, i could not believe what i saw
DanGTO: funny thing is
DanGTO: the volvo drain on the trans
DanGTO: is magnetic
DanGTO: and i found only a ton of sludge built on it
DanGTO: so it is true, that the mtl shifts metal with it.
DanGTO: hell, the other trans in it has redline now
DanGTO: my overdrive unit, which uses the fluid and a solenoid to work [electronic 5th] was full of crap on the filter as well.
DanGTO: moore black crap.
DanGTO: yet, every volvo shop swears by it.
War...as for the discoloration it was THERE, YOU HAVE MY WORD. As much rainbow as the city of Ferndale.
War...when u say properly flush...you mean just an empty and a refill after break-in or is there a step I missed?
Look, fair enough on the flush and on the opinion. A flush is a flush. The particles should have been mostly removed in the first flush and any left over that weren't picked up by the magnet should have been relatively harmless. I'm not interested in the bigger dick thing (also don't really care for the reference). I just don't like it when things are so one sided and there are so many uncontrolled variables. This isn't a slam on any person but on the methods used. It won't hurt me if Redline does turn out to be terrible but my god man, how come there haven't been reports on the way some of these transmission using ATF have looked? There is no rigorous start to finish tests and there have been far more people using it. Why did my transmission look so much better than that one after 1.5 years of use? There are too many variables here that don't add up. How much wear was on the trans to begin with. How well was the diff set. How much wear occurs on a quaife/torsen. Flushing the fluid won't clean the magnet, that stuff is magnetic and it will stay there from the break in procedure.
How about your fluid when it was pulled out. I doubt the transmission was transported with fluid it in. Can it be spread out in a clear class jar so we can see how dirty/particle filled it is?
I just think that we should all be sure before we trash a product and cause literally hundreds of users to stop using it. Sure there are other fluids out there but still...I'm more a scientist at heart and I hate bad science.
Hell, if it is a bad product then I don't want to use it either...lets just be sure. No offense to you or Todd or Terry on that point.
Again I really am not taking sides but I don't think either todd or pete quoted terry correctly. He stated that the high sulfur content of the redline reacts with the aluminum and brass to form corrosion that cuases the sludge. He really did not talk about flakes per se. He explained the content of redline was made to handles the stresses of either dog gears or differentials both of which do not have the sensitive metals of the mtx-75. I was also told that with a fully helical gear set, the forces do not surpass the limits of the ford honey or even standard atf.
I'm sorry if this has been discussed already, I havent followed this thread at all, I just want to make sure Terry's comments have been passed correctly. Don't shoot the messenger
It seemed to be one sided before tho...Rawburt was def a shot down messenger. I don't want to make it too one sided now either. I MAY have the old fluid in my garage and I will call my pops to check for me. Odds are he tossed it, but hopefully not. Sorry about the ref...just seems to be the norm with car guys. At least locally...
I know I am prob not quoting terry properly...he'll email myself or todd and we'll copy paste.
Originally posted by {Kontofosho}:
Quote:
1.)If that one transmission used Ford Honey, WHY IS THE FLUID ON THE BEARING RACE FRIGGIN RED?
2.)Why on the one with the straight ATF are there wipe marks on the inside of the case?
As an objective 3rd party,
1. the transmission using honey did not appear to have any red atf.
2. He stated that in all fiarness he had wiped them lightly, but I do believe it would have taken quite a bit of cleaning to match pete's car, and it REALLY did not appear that they were thoroughly cleaned. Keep in mind that these transmissions had quite a bit more mileage.
Here is the pic, that Todd posted, that was suppose to use the Ford Honey...
Not only can you see the red fluid in the cap, located in the center, but you can see someone wiping the case.
Not to say this was rigged, but War pointed some things out that I noticed as well and since it was questioned... Well, I just wanted to point out what we both saw in the pics.
Also, I'm not real sure why the MTX-75 would be the only tranny out there with these problems, using Redline MTL. I mean, yeah I could see it if you used one of their dif fluids, but not the MTL.
If we could find other cars with different trannys with the same issues, then I would start to think otherwise. But, the product has been around for so long, there would have to be others out there with these same issues if it was the fluid that was failing. Wouldn't it?
I will look forward to hearing what someone from Redline would have to say about this. This post will be locked, at least until we can put together a MTX-75 FAQ or this is resolved.
Originally posted by warmonger:
You know what Todd? You got an issue with something I say you should approach it in a fair reply to my post, i.e. the metal issue; not bury it amongst a bunch of pictures. Otherwise, I would use PMs as I did when I first tried to point out that there was a lack of objectivity here. Obviously you weren't going to be objective about this in the first place so I wasted my time in the pm and I'm probably wasting my time here now. I haven't ever had a problem with you before and I don't intend to start it now.
However I have some questions:
Whoa whoa whoa. Never said I had an issue at all. I respect you and your thoughts. They are just completely off kilter is all on this issue. j/m Didn't realize I was burrying it. Just things that were coming to mind as I was typing. Guess I didn't structure my post very well. I am objective on this issue. But when the eveidence is presented to me it's preety hard to dismiss. That little voice in the back of my head a few years ago said why are these guys searching for these lubes for the MTX-75 when Ford Honey and Mobil 1 are know to work well. You and Demon seem to want to reinvent the wheel. No need to go to PM's I want everyone reading everything so they can judge. I'm not keeping any secrets on this forum. This is a Contour we're talking about here. Not keeping NASA secrets from China. Maybe a couple captions were a little off on some of the pics but you get the point that the tranny's on the left didn't have MTL and Pete's did. The wipe marks are from a couple swipes Terry did with small rag. Did the same swipe on all of them. You don't see the residue on the others like you do on Pete's.
Wiping softly on those cases will make NO DIFFERENCE. You would need to SCRUB in order to make ANY difference to the cases especially mine. Yes there are some errors, but there are always holes...there are no absolutes.
Originally posted by warmonger:
Redline MTL tech information/lube specs
Chew on this for a while. I won't post links of all the positive usage reports from the internet for Redline MTL on transmissions using the same alloys and technologies as our beloved mtx-75. You people can search google for that. I did have a hard time finding negatives though.
Well explain this to me then. From the sheet.
� Satisfies manual transmissions and transaxles requiring
motor oils, or GL-1, GL-3, or GL-4 gear oils
Sounds like it has sulpher based additives to meet the requirements for other transmissions that may require GL type additives. Hypoid gear oil has sulphur based additives. These are a no no in alloy trans. cases. They cause major oxidation (sulphuric acid). ATF's DO NOT contain sulphur, MTL does. Which we will see how much when the lab tests come in.
Originally posted by warmonger:
3.)Also, rainbow coloration on the gear teeth? I'll have to see a much better photo than that one before I agree that it is there as we can't really see it;
Yea okay. I think you're the only one that can't see it. Even blurry it's plain as the nose on my face on my monitor. Get off the Tandy 1000.
Originally posted by todras:
Originally posted by warmonger:
3.)Also, rainbow coloration on the gear teeth? I'll have to see a much better photo than that one before I agree that it is there as we can't really see it;
Yea okay. I think you're the only one that can't see it. Even blurry it's plain as the nose on my face on my monitor. Get off the Tandy 1000.
Todd where is the photo of your car hitting mine because the e brake didn't work?
Originally posted by unisys12:
or this is resolved.
Seems pretty resolved to me. I don't see anyone questioning the virtues of Ford Honey or Mobil 1. Have they ever? Not to my knowledge. Present away if I'm wrong. Some of the guys with Torsen's "ahem Tom" are getting some gear noise. The reason he is running this stuff is to quiet it down by running MTL & MT-90. I've heard it and it's nothing someone can't deal with. It's a modified car, come on man. This is the most fun on CEG in a long time.
Originally posted by MapOfTaziFoSho:
Todd where is the photo of your car hitting mine because the e brake didn't work?
Needs more funny. Does work. Didn't have it on because I haven't replaced the front cable in the 3 sections it entails. I wouldn't call it hit but ok.
Originally posted by todras:
Originally posted by warmonger:
3.)Also, rainbow coloration on the gear teeth? I'll have to see a much better photo than that one before I agree that it is there as we can't really see it;
Yea okay. I think you're the only one that can't see it. Even blurry it's plain as the nose on my face on my monitor. Get off the Tandy 1000.
hey for the record i cant see it.... ....oh wait...maybe its because im color blind.....seriously i am....
Another pic of the the tempured gearing. Zoomed in from this pic.
Originally posted by warmonger:
You know I've opened up many transmissions and unless the transmission was recently cleaned...less than a year on the fluid, they all have that same slightly dark residue, many about as bad. My factory fill had the same crap with almost as much sludge but with a stock differential!
After 1.5 years of MTL I had minor build up on the magnet though I did flush my trans after break-in.
Many MTX-75's? Thought you only opened yours once you said. My MTX-75 didn't coated like that on the inside at 130k. Ask Blackbird racing what fluid he had in his MTX-75? He had a new stock diff. put in in what April/May of this year? He blew the 2nd diff. in like 5 months. Now we weren't in the car to see his driving habits but I'm guessing the MTL blocked the oil passages and wore it right down like Rawburt's to the point it snapped when he dropped the clutch. Again it's not a completely controlled theory. Sounds pretty strange to me though.
Originally posted by ToTalXS:
Originally posted by todras:
Originally posted by warmonger:
3.)Also, rainbow coloration on the gear teeth? I'll have to see a much better photo than that one before I agree that it is there as we can't really see it;
Yea okay. I think you're the only one that can't see it. Even blurry it's plain as the nose on my face on my monitor. Get off the Tandy 1000.
hey for the record i cant see it.... ....oh wait...maybe its because im color blind.....seriously i am....
+1...lol
DanGTO: oh, my trans is aluminum case and I run regular motor oil in the trans in it now. so we'll see. I never stated that the trans failed due to redline like this one guy likes to point out "one sided", just that there is sludge there, not present when the original volvo fluid was removed, and the magnet only had actual metal...no sludge with the original oil. Just for the record, since that guy thinks it is all one sided.
DanGTO: shifter tower under the cap on the main trans body was BLACK, with the MTL. The filter on the overdrive was coated in it as well, under the access cover
Hopefully he can get registered and be an active participant in this. Would be nice to see other opinions from other types of vehicles.
Originally posted by MapOfTaziFoSho:
just that there is sludge there, not present when the original volvo fluid was removed. Just for the record
Again.
MODS: Whoever has the power is it possible to change the name of this stickied thread to something that more closely resembles what information the thread contains?? It might make it easier for people who search and find it to get the information. Just a thought. Thanks.
Todd. My trans has beeen opened a total of 3 times.
First time by Ford under warranty but I got to see it and it was terrible. They replaced synchronizers because I complained of a 5th gear grind.
The trans was ok for a while till later I busted a shift cable. Eventually I pulled it to replace those and for a Torsen Diff. The day I put the Torsen in I had abnormal noise from other Torsens, I even posted about it and contacted Torsen. At that time I had been running Torco synthetic and it looked pretty good though the shift forks were screwed.
I ran MTL this last time and the longest. I put it in after the ATF+friction modifier I was running at first. All I can say is when I pulled it apart two months ago to do some refinements to my shift tower and check out my differntial it looked fine, no rainbow coloring on the gears but it did have some dark residue but much better than his. I sent it into Torsen for service on the noise and they were kind enough to maintenance it at no cost to me also because I specifically talked with them on recommended lubricants two years ago when I first put it in with the noise. It seems there were some burrs on one of the planet gears.
Anyway, diff sounds great right now, no noise at all.
I don't know what else to say and maybe he is right.
That last picture looks more convincing over every other picture that was presented.
Please tell Terry he has my appologies for casting a dim light on the other photos. Maybe I responded too quick to the original message, we'll see. I am going to wait for Redlines response and a response from Torsen before I pick one side or the other and when I get the information I will post them as an objective post, not sided. In the meantime I am going to try out Mobile One synthetic or the Ford Honey and see how the Diff performs after its service as well as the shifting.
Any thoughts on running royal purple synchromax?
Originally posted by RawDirte':
Any thoughts on running royal purple synchromax?
I'm running the hord honey...if terry said Royal Purple is cool ...use it, but I'm waiting til the results come back from the lab. Run some straight ATF for the break in maybe.
Originally posted by MapOfTaziFoSho:
Originally posted by RawDirte':
Any thoughts on running royal purple synchromax?
I'm running the hord honey...if terry said Royal Purple is cool ...use it, but I'm waiting til the results come back from the lab. Run some straight ATF for the break in maybe.
Hmmmmm... Well I already have the RoyalP and the car is going back together today. Any fast alternatives?
Take back the RP and buy ATX fluid
I haven't researched the Royal Purple...email terry. Run the Royal Purple tho...I'm sure it's fine. Just realize u need to drain it and re fill in about 500 miles.
Go to Advance/AutoZone and buy good ole Valvoline ATF. $9 for 3 qts. I'm sure the RP will be fine also.
I'll just use royal purple for now. Maybe come drain time, I'll refill it with the 'honey'
Anyone care to answer this dumb question: What is Ford Honey? Must you purchase it straight from Ford, or is it a Mercon product? How do you ask for it? Do you need any other addatives like the friction modifier?
Mark
Ask the Ford counter for the Manual Transaxle Lubricant for FWD's.
Originally posted by Y2KSVT:
Anyone care to answer this dumb question: What is Ford Honey? Must you purchase it straight from Ford, or is it a Mercon product? How do you ask for it? Do you need any other addatives like the friction modifier?
Mark
If you ask for the Ford Honey, chances are they're gonna look at you with a wtf'chyou'talkin'bout look on their face. Ask for the part number XT-M5-QS. It is a "synthetic manual transaxle" lube made by Ford, sold at ford dealerships. If they doubt you tell them there was a TSB for it back in 2000 ( link to TSB ) Add 2 oz of friction modifier, a ford product part number: XL-7
Originally posted by rkneeshaw3.0:
If you ask for the Ford Honey, chances are they're gonna look at you with a wtf'chyou'talkin'bout look on their face.
Exactly why I didn't want to ask for it by the CEG name of "Ford Honey"
Originally posted by rkneeshaw3.0:
Add 2 oz of friction modifier, a ford product part number: XL-7
Thanks Ryan! I think I'll do this over the winter.
Mark
Def one of the most worthwhile discussions I have read on here in a while. I'm glad this happened before my trans got redone. Anyone want 3 bottles of MTL?
Terry just sent me this. He's been discussing the issue with some colleagues that work as "lube" engineers.
....info so far from 'Karl'(Germany),'Mike' (UK) &
'Ryan' (USA).
The overall take is that 'GL' additives are all a
problem in a trans with a)ally case b)brass bronze
blockers etc.The majority of GL additives are sulphur
based.This varies in %'age but does have a corrosive
effect on the brass blockers,be it slow.All agree that
the 'grey'/black paste is a result of the additives on
the ally case causing oxide.
ATF fluids dare not have any sulphur additive due to
the paste (re valve bodies in autos)and a lot of autos
also use brass/bronze bushings.
It appears the guts of the problem is sulphur.
Points against ATF...it does not like high gear tooth
pressures and can break down in high tooth pressure
designs(Re straight cut,semi-helical & hypoid gear
cuts),the MTX 75 has helical gear cut(lower tooth
pressures),except in the 'stoc' open diff gears ,which
are straight cut.This may expalain why some owners
feel the HP lube may save the diff gears.Should add my
2 cents here that the pre 98 diffs were 'fully' cut
gears Vs the later moulded/sintered diff gears.I have
never seen the early 'cut' gears fail,a diff pinion
pin yes but not the gears and most of these have run
straight ATF all the time (it was factory fill).
Examples ,an MTX with stoc gears and a Quaife/Torsen
diff = ATF or current Ford spec honey.
An MTX with Quaife 'syncro' gear set(which have a
semi-helical gear cut) and a Quaife diff =75W90
G4....this shows that the gear tooth pressure on a
semi-helical cut needs EP additives plus you will get
some grey residue but the EP is for the main gears not
the Quaife/Torsen diff.
Last extreme would be a Quaife 'dog gear' set that has
straight cut gears,no brass blockers(uses steel dogs')
and a Quaife diff =75W90 GL4/5, a higher GL rating for
the even higher gear tooth pressures of a straight cut
gears over a semi-helical or helical cut.
We still have some more info from all three to
come....Just a point to note,the MTL spec sheet on
it's benefits list *Satisfies manual transmissions and
transaxles requiring motor oils(engine) or GL-1,GL-3
or GL-4 gear oils. The MTX75 has never been spec'd
with motor oils or any GL type gear lubes,the only two
lubes have been ATF then 'honey(as a retro fill back
to '95)...
Originally posted by akrump47:
Anyone want 3 bottles of MTL?
Ditto
I've been trying to figure out how to get rid of these all day :/ Probably not even worth it to ebay them.
Ebay's prob a good idea actually. There's surely other cars/transmissions who wouldnt have problems with MTL. This discussion isnt over yet though. Still no reply from "Mr Sheep and Sensationalism" either ...
Originally posted by todras:
I don't see anyone questioning the virtues of Ford Honey or Mobil 1. Have they ever? Not to my knowledge. Present away if I'm wrong.
I've stated for years that ATF is a piss poor fluid for protecting a manual transmission. It has no sheer viscosity strength (i.e. excessive wear) and is broken down very quickly. It was a "compromise" made by Ford so they did not have people complaining about shifting quality. A compromise that hurts the transmission in the long run. Running ATF when there are better more protecting fluids is definitely not the best idea. PERIOD.
If you want to use this flock of sheep's reasoning. How many failures does the MTX-75 have under it's belt with ATF in it? About 100 million percent more then all the other fluids combined. Gee I guess I did not need to give any empirical proof it's truly bad with a record like that.
Originally posted by todras:
Terry just sent me this. He's been discussing the issue with some colleagues that work as "lube" engineers.
Just a point to note,the MTL spec sheet on
it's benefits list *Satisfies manual transmissions and
transaxles requiring motor oils(engine) or GL-1,GL-3
or GL-4 gear oils. The MTX75 has never been spec'd
with motor oils or any GL type gear lubes,the only two
lubes have been ATF then 'honey(as a retro fill back
to '95)...
The specs on Ford's "honey" fluid indicate it is a GL-4 rated fluid. (From Big Jim's post almost 3 years ago)
First let me point out that this man took the time to actually review the thread, view the pictures and then respond to me in less than 24 hours. Here's the gist of what I submitted to Redline Oil:
Originally posted by warmonger:
....The thread follows at the bottom of this request.
I need an engineer to take a look a this thread in an online automotive forum and make an educated guess as to what is going on. I have used MTL and found it to work very good but I only used it for about a year and a half. The reports are saying that the EP's are causing oxidation of the metal on the Torsen T2 differential, the Quaife differential, the aluminum case, and not protecting the gear teeth. The purported oxidation and poor lubrication is supposed to be causing sludge buildup which further reduces lubrication to bearings.
So if this is true then I would want to discontinue use of the redline product....
Here is their reply:
Originally posted by Redline Oil:
James,
Thank you for contacting Red Line Oil, the MTL does not cause oxidation and or corrosion. I don't see the oxidation that is being referred to, a dark film that seems to wipe off, it doesn't appear to be a high temperature oxidation component. I see what likely is some rust on the edge of the gear and the inter bearing race, likely from the presence of moisture. The MTL offers good rust protection, so this likely occurred some time previous to it's introduction. As far as the sludge, the Quaife and Torsen type differentials do tend to darken the gear oil, this is just the nature of these units, the MTL doesn't cause the sludge it is just a byproduct. The MTL is a GL-4 gear lube offering good EP protection but is not corrosive to either internal components or the aluminum case.
I am not familiar with the XL-7, I don't know what it may contain other than a friction modifier. A friction modifier makes the fluid slipperier which is not typically desirable in a synchro type manual transmission/transaxle application, a Dexron/Mercon fluid already being fairly slippery.
I would be interested in seeing the test results.
Regards, Dave
Red Line Oil
Originally posted by todras:
Terry just sent me this. He's been discussing the issue with some colleagues that work as "lube" engineers.
....info so far from 'Karl'(Germany),'Mike' (UK) &
'Ryan' (USA).
The overall take is that 'GL' additives are all a
problem in a trans with a)ally case b)brass bronze
blockers etc.The majority of GL additives are sulphur
based.This varies in %'age but does have a corrosive
effect on the brass blockers,be it slow.All agree that
the 'grey'/black paste is a result of the additives on
the ally case causing oxide.
ATF fluids dare not have any sulphur additive due to
the paste (re valve bodies in autos)and a lot of autos
also use brass/bronze bushings.
It appears the guts of the problem is sulphur.
Points against ATF...it does not like high gear tooth
pressures and can break down in high tooth pressure
designs(Re straight cut,semi-helical & hypoid gear
cuts),the MTX 75 has helical gear cut(lower tooth
pressures),except in the 'stoc' open diff gears ,which
are straight cut.This may expalain why some owners
feel the HP lube may save the diff gears.Should add my
2 cents here that the pre 98 diffs were 'fully' cut
gears Vs the later moulded/sintered diff gears.I have
never seen the early 'cut' gears fail,a diff pinion
pin yes but not the gears and most of these have run
straight ATF all the time (it was factory fill).
Examples ,an MTX with stoc gears and a Quaife/Torsen
diff = ATF or current Ford spec honey.
An MTX with Quaife 'syncro' gear set(which have a
semi-helical gear cut) and a Quaife diff =75W90
G4....this shows that the gear tooth pressure on a
semi-helical cut needs EP additives plus you will get
some grey residue but the EP is for the main gears not
the Quaife/Torsen diff.
Last extreme would be a Quaife 'dog gear' set that has
straight cut gears,no brass blockers(uses steel dogs')
and a Quaife diff =75W90 GL4/5, a higher GL rating for
the even higher gear tooth pressures of a straight cut
gears over a semi-helical or helical cut.
We still have some more info from all three to
come....Just a point to note,the MTL spec sheet on
it's benefits list *Satisfies manual transmissions and
transaxles requiring motor oils(engine) or GL-1,GL-3
or GL-4 gear oils. The MTX75 has never been spec'd
with motor oils or any GL type gear lubes,the only two
lubes have been ATF then 'honey(as a retro fill back
to '95)...
I can tell you right now that the part about the grey paste not being caused by ATF is incorrect.
I started my transmission work working on automatic transmissions; ford, chrysler, and GM. There is a serious amount of grey paste that accumulates in any automatic with around 1.5 years or more on the fluid and/or 25K miles or more, in almost every case! Why do you think they filter an automatic trans and don't filter a manual even though they both can use ATF? The valve body as Terry pointed out can't have a buildup whereas it is no big deal with the manual.
The ATF and lack of corrosives plays no roll as it is from the metal wear and the clutch and band material being worn off through time that the paste is caused in an ATX. In an MTX it is also through metal wear.
I'm intrigued that there can be the same paste buildup in a Transmission that uses ATF, be it an mtx or atx and yet THAT isn't called corrosion. It looks the same and can be wiped free.
I suspect all we are seeing is abnormally high metallic wear from the Torsen and or from the weak stock diff.
Anyone on here see any gray film/paste on theirATX, or on their MTX when the took it apart to put in shift forks and/or an LSD after using ATF? Or can we assume that everyone using ATF experienced NO gray metallic paste??
Oh, by the way. When was the last time that non-helical cut gears were used in transmissions and rear ends outside of higher performance racing or specific applications? I"ll give you a hint, like 1940!!
The manufacturers figured out that helical cut transfered the contact from one tooth to another continuously and made a much quieter operation. Straight cut gears are actually stronger but the downside is the noise. THe noise was so bad that the designers came up with helical cut.
This means....ALL factory differentials come with helical cut gears even in heavy duty work equipment other than special applications like racing based solely on high frequency noise and the resultant hearing loss. THOSE differentials and gear boxes, the helical cut industrial ones, were wearing out too fast and GL additives were developed to protect them from the high loads. All heavy rear ends call for GL-5 after it came out but the corrosion to brass prevents it from being used in transmissions. Nothing is said about the aluminum.
Another point. THe aluminum is protected by a layer of aluminum oxide. All alumimun without annodizing and coatings is protected by this 'Alumina' to some degree as it forms naturally as oxygen in the air corrodes the aluminum. The process will continue over time if left to the air uncoated (look at an aluminum rim without paint). After a while the process slows down because the oxygen can't penetrate the layers of alumina that form on the aluminum. Aluminum Oxide is one of the most chemically resistive, or chemically inert compounds known! To be corroded by oil additives is a bit of a stretch.
Look it up! Now you are getting into my area of expertise as a Materials Engineer. Alumina or aluminum oxide is VERY resistant to all kinds of corrosives. IT isn't perfect but I'd bet it can handle oil/oil additives and I know it can handle moisture. You don't think the GL-4/5 would list aluminum on the corrosive list if it wasn't an issue? That leaves only the brass and I don't think the brass will leave that color and kind of residue.
I'll look into it though.
This is making my head spin.
Question on friction modifier: I've heard this in older threads I've searched and found bringing up this "friction modifier makes lube more slipery" thing. wtf is up with that? How does that help synchro's bite?
Also, I was checking to see if I had some friction modifier left from the old mobil 1 cocktail I ran way back in the day and found some XL-3. Upon searching, some older posts say to use XL-3 for the friction modifier. When did XL-7 become better and why?
I've always wondered why my 3rd gear synchros magicly went really bad only 2 months after putting in the mobil 1 w/ xl-3 friction modifier.... if it makes it more slippery maybe it accellerated the failure of my old synchros....
At this point I'm scared to put ANYTHING in that transmission. For now I just drained my MTL and loaded in some Valvoline ATF as a flushing measure before I put in the ford honey, but I'm definately holding off on putting any friction mod in there until I hear back.
Also to note, the ford TSB recommending Ford Honey doesnt' say a thing about friction modifier...
I see no way for mosture to have gotten into the case of my trans. I also fail to see how the quaife had the oxidation prior to the MTL being introduced to the trans. I'm prob just going to give up on this thread. Believe what you want...of course the guy isn't going to tell us that the stuff is fine...he works for the company. Regardless of what he actually may believe, he would prob give a positive answer to save face. I will never run MTL again and I will tell my friends to stay away from it if their trans is not too dissimilar from ours. I don't see much of a conclusion to this discussion...at any point...ever.
Originally posted by akrump47:
Def one of the most worthwhile discussions I have read on here in a while. I'm glad this happened before my trans got redone. Anyone want 3 bottles of MTL?
I'll take them. I'll pay about $10 for shipping to anyone who wants to give their 3+ bottles of MTL away.
Originally posted by MapOfTaziFoSho:
I see no way for mosture to have gotten into the case of my trans.
Well, by the tranny sitting around. As the temp changes inside the case and outside the case, it can cause moisture to build up inside. With normal use, the heat generated during use will burn the moisture off. But if left to sit for a period of time, there is no chance for the moisture to burn off.
Originally posted by MapOfTaziFoSho:
I see no way for mosture to have gotten into the case of my trans. I also fail to see how the quaife had the oxidation prior to the MTL being introduced to the trans. I'm prob just going to give up on this thread. Believe what you want...of course the guy isn't going to tell us that the stuff is fine...he works for the company. Regardless of what he actually may believe, he would prob give a positive answer to save face. I will never run MTL again and I will tell my friends to stay away from it if their trans is not too dissimilar from ours. I don't see much of a conclusion to this discussion...at any point...ever.
And some people aren't going to tell us a Non Ford recommended product is fine either; namely Ford reps, Pro Ford people and so on. What of it? That is why God gave us the ability to reason and think for ourselves.
BTW, there is a transmission vent on every transmission. It allows the air to come in and out as the heated fluid expands; otherwise the seals will blow out and leak. Plugged vents blowing seals has happened before. This is how the transmission will pull in moisture, from humid air every time it cools down. Also since it is cooling down the moisture just sits there until the next startup where it is boiled off. Ala rust.
I don't think the Redline Tech is saying that the diff was rusted. I read it as the higher wear of a friction based LSD is generating higher wear rates on the metal and generating a higher level of particles in the oil. His comment on rust is just a secondary observation. Don't forget that rusty metal is DARK when oiled, NOT red. Try penetrating oil on a rusted bolt and compare.
All I can say is that an LSD equiped transmission will need more frequent flushing due to the nature of the beast, at least once per year. Without a filter system what can you expect in any transmission? What would you expect in an ATX without a filter??? In fact that is indirect evidence to my statements on ATF filled ATX's also generating the same kind of paste, else why use a filter?
Metal parts in a metal on metal environment wear out. Hence cylinder walls and rings go out, gears wear down...it is natural. Frequent servicing to remove particulates helps. Anyone using an LSD in their contour is after performance and beats on it more than the normal driver...especially considering normal drivers won't fork out for the increased costs.
Originally posted by todras:
Terry just sent me this. He's been discussing the issue with some colleagues that work as "lube" engineers.
....info so far from 'Karl'(Germany),'Mike' (UK) &
'Ryan' (USA).
The overall take is that 'GL' additives are all a
problem in a trans with a)ally case b)brass bronze
blockers etc.The majority of GL additives are sulphur
based.This varies in %'age but does have a corrosive
effect on the brass blockers,be it slow.All agree that
the 'grey'/black paste is a result of the additives on
the ally case causing oxide.
ATF fluids dare not have any sulphur additive due to
the paste (re valve bodies in autos)and a lot of autos
also use brass/bronze bushings.
It appears the guts of the problem is sulphur.
Points against ATF...it does not like high gear tooth
pressures and can break down in high tooth pressure
designs(Re straight cut,semi-helical & hypoid gear
cuts),the MTX 75 has helical gear cut(lower tooth
pressures),except in the 'stoc' open diff gears ,which
are straight cut.This may expalain why some owners
feel the HP lube may save the diff gears.Should add my
2 cents here that the pre 98 diffs were 'fully' cut
gears Vs the later moulded/sintered diff gears.I have
never seen the early 'cut' gears fail,a diff pinion
pin yes but not the gears and most of these have run
straight ATF all the time (it was factory fill).
Examples ,an MTX with stoc gears and a Quaife/Torsen
diff = ATF or current Ford spec honey.
An MTX with Quaife 'syncro' gear set(which have a
semi-helical gear cut) and a Quaife diff =75W90
G4....this shows that the gear tooth pressure on a
semi-helical cut needs EP additives plus you will get
some grey residue but the EP is for the main gears not
the Quaife/Torsen diff.
Last extreme would be a Quaife 'dog gear' set that has
straight cut gears,no brass blockers(uses steel dogs')
and a Quaife diff =75W90 GL4/5, a higher GL rating for
the even higher gear tooth pressures of a straight cut
gears over a semi-helical or helical cut.
We still have some more info from all three to
come....Just a point to note,the MTL spec sheet on
it's benefits list *Satisfies manual transmissions and
transaxles requiring motor oils(engine) or GL-1,GL-3
or GL-4 gear oils. The MTX75 has never been spec'd
with motor oils or any GL type gear lubes,the only two
lubes have been ATF then 'honey(as a retro fill back
to '95)...
On further reading, another question?
If the GL-4 spec fluids are causing aluminum alloy case corrosion on our transmissions then why would it be ok to use them in an MTX-75 with the "dog gear" set? The dog gear set has no brass for one and this is another direct corroboration that the black paste is not from the case.
Originally posted by DemonSVT:
The specs on Ford's "honey" fluid indicate it is a GL-4 rated fluid. (From Big Jim's post almost 3 years ago)
Yea & there are many types of additives that make an oil EP and fall into the GL specs. 'Active' and 'non-active' additives? Active would be say sulphur, non-active would be barium. Sulphur would cause the situation you have discribed (as seen in the oxidation on Pete's Quaife), barium would not but would still be a GL/EP oil.....but barium is far more expensive.
Originally posted by warmonger:
And some people aren't going to tell us a Non Ford recommended product is fine either; namely Ford reps, Pro Ford people and so on. What of it? That is why God gave us the ability to reason and think for ourselves.
OMG! Here we go again and again.
Originally posted by rkneeshaw3.0:
This is making my head spin.
Question on friction modifier: I've heard this in older threads I've searched and found bringing up this "friction modifier makes lube more slipery" thing. wtf is up with that? How does that help synchro's bite?
Also, I was checking to see if I had some friction modifier left from the old mobil 1 cocktail I ran way back in the day and found some XL-3. Upon searching, some older posts say to use XL-3 for the friction modifier. When did XL-7 become better and why?
I've always wondered why my 3rd gear synchros magicly went really bad only 2 months after putting in the mobil 1 w/ xl-3 friction modifier.... if it makes it more slippery maybe it accellerated the failure of my old synchros....
At this point I'm scared to put ANYTHING in that transmission. For now I just drained my MTL and loaded in some Valvoline ATF as a flushing measure before I put in the ford honey, but I'm definately holding off on putting any friction mod in there until I hear back.
Also to note, the ford TSB recommending Ford Honey doesnt' say a thing about friction modifier...
Oh god the sky is falling. XL-7 is for use with synthetic lubes. Just use Ford or Mobil 1! Stop being retarded Ryan. Enough of this here.
Originally posted by DemonSVT:
How many failures does the MTX-75 have under it's belt with ATF in it? About 100 million percent more then all the other fluids combined.
And where did you deduce this information?
Originally posted by todras:
Originally posted by DemonSVT:
How many failures does the MTX-75 have under it's belt with ATF in it? About 100 million percent more then all the other fluids combined.
And where did you deduce this information?
True, but this is all hearsay. I didn't blow my diff and I was running ATF. How many ppl blew diffs with ATF w/o ever changing as opposed to those who ran ATF with regular change intervals. Too many variables and too much hearsay.
Originally posted by todras:
Originally posted by rkneeshaw3.0:
Question on friction modifier: I've heard this in older threads I've searched and found bringing up this "friction modifier makes lube more slipery" thing. wtf is up with that? How does that help synchro's bite?
When did XL-7 become better and why?
Also to note, the ford TSB recommending Ford Honey doesnt' say a thing about friction modifier...
Oh god the sky is falling. XL-7 is for use with synthetic lubes. Just use Ford or Mobil 1! Stop being retarded Ryan. Enough of this here.
My point is, the only reason I'm seeing people use friction modifier is because people on the CEG recommended it. I haven't seen or heard of it in any of Fords documentation or recommendations for this transmission. If it was so great, why hasn't FORD recommended it in a TSB, or any official documentation?
You see, I took the word of people on this site and used MTL. Now its up for debate whether MTL is actually harmful. Now I figure the safest bet is to go with what Ford says (ya know, back to the basics. After all, Ford built the thing, they should be the authoritive source to tell me what I should use). Ford doesn't say anything about using FM at all, but once again, people on this site are recommending it. I'm going to use my noodle here and wait to hear why FM is so great, and why Ford hasn't recommended it themselves. Are we just smarter than Ford engineers?
I don't want to be a lemming here and just follow the masses. I did that once and used MTL.
Forgive my excitement. I haven't eaten yet and its been a long day, I may be a little off-base.
Originally posted by todras:
Originally posted by warmonger:
And some people aren't going to tell us a Non Ford recommended product is fine either; namely Ford reps, Pro Ford people and so on. What of it? That is why God gave us the ability to reason and think for ourselves.
OMG! Here we go again and again.
Sometimes a man's gotta do what a mans gotta do.
What do you want me to say? Lay over and agree with something that I don't believe? What kind of person would I be. I only argue using facts and logical assumptions from facts. I'm not stupid and if I see questions that are unanswered then why not voice them?
If I saw the condition of the tranny I would say:
"Self, why is this tranny so dirty?"
Then I would list off the three or four possibilities and slowly see if I can eliminate them. It is a version of the scientific method.
So again, I ask for the proof in the pudding so to speak on how it is definitively the MTL and not something else?
I see NOTHING that says it is the MTL. I see pictures and I hear just one possible explanation. I've already offered an alternative solution to the amount of material in the transmission and that is excessive wear from the LSD.
Are you saying that is dead wrong? And that it is for sure the MTL that caused it? How? Show me a method and I"ll follow along. Lead me to water and I'll drink, not this tripe.
How do I know that it wasn't the ATF fluid he used for Break-in purposes that caused the excessive wear and most of it settled when he flushed it. Did he run consecutive flushes? That is exactly what happened on my own Torsen Diff. I broke it in with dyno ATF with XL-3 friction modifier. The stuff was putrid when I took it out after hardly a month,. terrible petroleum smell to it! There was all kind of blackish fluid that came out with it. I flushed it using two flushes, one quick one with ATF and then Redline MTL. Voila, noise quieted down and the severe wear dropped off. 1.5 years later the transmission was in pretty darn good shape.
From these real experiences I honestly believe the ATF is the worst thing for these differentials.
I don't think it matters much for the stock gearbox but with an LSD this is different.
Well, I can tell you this much. I have been using the Ford honey and 2oz friction modifier since TH rebuilt my trans way back when. I have changed the fluid every year and it comes out all shiny (teeny metal flakes to be expected as I have a Quaife) honey colored and clean. No black sludge on my fingers when I stick my pinky in the fill and drain holes.
Shifting is incredibly smooth. I love driving my SVT over my 135k Impreza (winter beater). The Impreza's shifting is somewhat notchy while the SVT's is smooth as silk. This is aside to all of the SVT fun stuff over the Impreza.
My dealer looks at me funny when I buy the fric mod, states its for a rear-end, but screw them. They are used to me and my freak Contique tendacies.
Originally posted by warmonger:
What do you want me to say? Lay over and agree with something that I don't believe? What kind of person would I be. I only argue using facts and logical assumptions from facts.
Well at one point in this thread you sounded as if you were being swayed. What happened to that? Would you like to explain the oxidation on the Quaife and the tempered splines?
Originally posted by warmonger:
Originally posted by todras:
Originally posted by warmonger:
And some people aren't going to tell us a Non Ford recommended product is fine either; namely Ford reps, Pro Ford people and so on. What of it? That is why God gave us the ability to reason and think for ourselves.
OMG! Here we go again and again.
Sometimes a man's gotta do what a mans gotta do.
What do you want me to say? Lay over and agree with something that I don't believe? What kind of person would I be. I only argue using facts and logical assumptions from facts. I'm not stupid and if I see questions that are unanswered then why not voice them?
If I saw the condition of the tranny I would say:
"Self, why is this tranny so dirty?"
Then I would list off the three or four possibilities and slowly see if I can eliminate them. It is a version of the scientific method.
So again, I ask for the proof in the pudding so to speak on how it is definitively the MTL and not something else?
I see NOTHING that says it is the MTL. I see pictures and I hear just one possible explanation. I've already offered an alternative solution to the amount of material in the transmission and that is excessive wear from the LSD.
Are you saying that is dead wrong? And that it is for sure the MTL that caused it? How? Show me a method and I"ll follow along. Lead me to water and I'll drink, not this tripe.
How do I know that it wasn't the ATF fluid he used for Break-in purposes that caused the excessive wear and most of it settled when he flushed it. Did he run consecutive flushes? That is exactly what happened on my own Torsen Diff. I broke it in with dyno ATF with XL-3 friction modifier. The stuff was putrid when I took it out after hardly a month,. terrible petroleum smell to it! There was all kind of blackish fluid that came out with it. I flushed it using two flushes, one quick one with ATF and then Redline MTL. Voila, noise quieted down and the severe wear dropped off. 1.5 years later the transmission was in pretty darn good shape.
From these real experiences I honestly believe the ATF is the worst thing for these differentials.
I don't think it matters much for the stock gearbox but with an LSD this is different.
I didn't use ATF for my break it. I used redline...then flushed it...then refilled. I also didn't use a frixn modifier.
I was looking back at some
old posts and found this one my Demon.
Personally I would go with a known Full synthetic ATF (Like Mobil 1) over the "unknown" synthetic mix of the Ford honey colored fluid.
Especially for 1/3 (or less) the cost!
& another from
here .
Nope. Ford's price is just stupid.
In other words. Typical Ford...
Mobil 1 ATF & 2oz Ford FM (half bottle)
I almost pissed myself. And on the price aspect. How much is a transmission worth to you?
& the
very best post by demon.
Originally posted by rkneeshaw3.0:
My point is, the only reason I'm seeing people use friction modifier is because people on the CEG recommended it. I haven't seen or heard of it in any of Fords documentation or recommendations for this transmission. If it was so great, why hasn't FORD recommended it in a TSB, or any official documentation?
Per Terry. Synth is good for helping 'cold shift' issues but does nothing to help the syncros which need friction to work, hence the friction mod additive.
From other posts from ppl that have cold shift problems in colder climates with it. That would be us in MI. I'm sticking with tried and true Mobil 1. Easy to find, low cost and haven't heard of any issues/ill effects with it.
I will be using ATF +3 for the break in, then switching to royal purple synchromax.
Originally posted by DemonSVT:
Originally posted by todras:
I don't see anyone questioning the virtues of Ford Honey or Mobil 1. Have they ever? Not to my knowledge. Present away if I'm wrong.
I've stated for years that ATF is a piss poor fluid for protecting a manual transmission. It has no sheer viscosity strength (i.e. excessive wear) and is broken down very quickly. It was a "compromise" made by Ford so they did not have people complaining about shifting quality. A compromise that hurts the transmission in the long run. Running ATF when there are better more protecting fluids is definitely not the best idea. PERIOD.
If you want to use this flock of sheep's reasoning. How many failures does the MTX-75 have under it's belt with ATF in it? About 100 million percent more then all the other fluids combined. Gee I guess I did not need to give any empirical proof it's truly bad with a record like that.
Ford changed the lube spec to honey from ATF and FWIW the issue was not gear wear(why they changed) because gear wear was never an issue with ATF as the gear are a helical cut
which work fine with ATF lube(open up an auto, the gear trains are helical!). The only component in question is the stoc open diff straight cut gears......maybe thats why they went to honey....but again the 'current official Ford spec' is honey not ATF and 'honey' is NOT MTL.
From TH
MTX75 kogboxes(from around 2004 on ) have a change to the diff, still use the same 'moulded'/sinter style gears but the diamater of the diff pinion pin has been increased from around 15 MM diameter (that size goes right back to '94) to around 18 MM diameter....that alone tells you that they know of an issue with the open diff assy. This I found on a trans I built for a Focus with a 2.3 4 cylinder Duratec (pure track trans/car).....and as I said the lube spec is now honey for the Focus. I think all the 'musical lube' issues are around the diff, which a lube will not save(stoc diff that is), any trans with a quaife or torsen will have no issue.....whatever.....
_____________
If MTL is going to cause issues on a stock trans I'm sure as hell not putting it in my modified trans.
Originally posted by todras:
Originally posted by rkneeshaw3.0:
My point is, the only reason I'm seeing people use friction modifier is because people on the CEG recommended it. I haven't seen or heard of it in any of Fords documentation or recommendations for this transmission. If it was so great, why hasn't FORD recommended it in a TSB, or any official documentation?
Per Terry. Synth is good for helping 'cold shift' issues but does nothing to help the syncros which need friction to work, hence the friction mod additive.
http://autorepair.about.com/library/glossary/bldef-219.htm
I'm not putting friction modifier in my transmission until the explanations add up. Is XL-7 a magical friction modifer that ADDs friction instead of REDUCING friction?
The definition of what friction modifier does goes against the reasons for adding it. Why?
Maybe the same reason its not part of the TSB ford released for its ford honey. Maybe its the reason my syncros went bad when I did the Mobil 1 + FM cocktail. Maybe not. But I'm sticking to what the TSB from ford says in the meantime, and that is straight up Ford Honey, no other additives. And if were asked, I would recommend others do the same.
We add the FFM in the Lightnings rear diff so that the clutch packs in the limited slip aren't hurt. So, I'm assuming the FFM in the MTX-75, some how helps the blocking rings...
Originally posted by rkneeshaw3.0:
Originally posted by todras:
Originally posted by rkneeshaw3.0:
My point is, the only reason I'm seeing people use friction modifier is because people on the CEG recommended it. I haven't seen or heard of it in any of Fords documentation or recommendations for this transmission. If it was so great, why hasn't FORD recommended it in a TSB, or any official documentation?
Per Terry. Synth is good for helping 'cold shift' issues but does nothing to help the syncros which need friction to work, hence the friction mod additive.
http://autorepair.about.com/library/glossary/bldef-219.htm
I'm not putting friction modifier in my transmission until the explanations add up. Is XL-7 a magical friction modifer that ADDs friction instead of REDUCING friction?
The definition of what friction modifier does goes against the reasons for adding it. Why?
Maybe the same reason its not part of the TSB ford released for its ford honey. Maybe its the reason my syncros went bad when I did the Mobil 1 + FM cocktail. Maybe not. But I'm sticking to what the TSB from ford says in the meantime, and that is straight up Ford Honey, no other additives. And if were asked, I would recommend others do the same.
Originally posted by TerryHaines(email):
..the FM deal goes waYYYYYYYYYY back.I'd stick with
straight up honey until I get lab results....but thats
just me
Originally posted by rkneeshaw3.0:
Maybe its the reason my syncros went bad when I did the Mobil 1 + FM cocktail. Maybe not. But I'm sticking to what the TSB from ford says in the meantime, and that is straight up Ford Honey, no other additives. And if were asked, I would recommend others do the same.
No. I ran M1 plus XL-3 for 80k. Tranny was still in great shape. Run M1 in the SHO and it was too slippery w/o the FM. 3rd gear would grind. Added a little FM and good to go.
Originally posted by RTStabler51:
Originally posted by rkneeshaw3.0:
Originally posted by todras:
Originally posted by rkneeshaw3.0:
My point is, the only reason I'm seeing people use friction modifier is because people on the CEG recommended it. I haven't seen or heard of it in any of Fords documentation or recommendations for this transmission. If it was so great, why hasn't FORD recommended it in a TSB, or any official documentation?
Per Terry. Synth is good for helping 'cold shift' issues but does nothing to help the syncros which need friction to work, hence the friction mod additive.
http://autorepair.about.com/library/glossary/bldef-219.htm
The definition of what friction modifier does goes against the reasons for adding it. Why?
We add the FFM in the Lightnings rear diff so that the clutch packs in the limited slip aren't hurt. So, I'm assuming the FFM in the MTX-75, some how helps the blocking rings...
helps them by reducing friction? Its also not the reason given for adding it to the MTX-75 in the first place. I'm no trasmission or lube expert (hell, I'm barely a noob), but this is straight up old-fashioned simple reason.
I don't think it reduces friction, I think it in fact does the opposite, so that the clutch packs (RWD, Limited Slip) and the Blocking rings in the MTX-75 can get that extra 'bite'...
Originally posted by rkneeshaw3.0:
Originally posted by RTStabler51:
Originally posted by rkneeshaw3.0:
Originally posted by todras:
Originally posted by rkneeshaw3.0:
My point is, the only reason I'm seeing people use friction modifier is because people on the CEG recommended it. I haven't seen or heard of it in any of Fords documentation or recommendations for this transmission. If it was so great, why hasn't FORD recommended it in a TSB, or any official documentation?
Per Terry. Synth is good for helping 'cold shift' issues but does nothing to help the syncros which need friction to work, hence the friction mod additive.
http://autorepair.about.com/library/glossary/bldef-219.htm
The definition of what friction modifier does goes against the reasons for adding it. Why?
We add the FFM in the Lightnings rear diff so that the clutch packs in the limited slip aren't hurt. So, I'm assuming the FFM in the MTX-75, some how helps the blocking rings...
helps them by reducing friction? Its also not the reason given for adding it to the MTX-75 in the first place. I'm no trasmission or lube expert (hell, I'm barely a noob), but this is straight up old-fashioned simple reason.
Originally posted by RTStabler51:
Originally posted by rkneeshaw3.0:
Originally posted by RTStabler51:
Originally posted by rkneeshaw3.0:
Originally posted by todras:
Originally posted by rkneeshaw3.0:
My point is, the only reason I'm seeing people use friction modifier is because people on the CEG recommended it. I haven't seen or heard of it in any of Fords documentation or recommendations for this transmission. If it was so great, why hasn't FORD recommended it in a TSB, or any official documentation?
Per Terry. Synth is good for helping 'cold shift' issues but does nothing to help the syncros which need friction to work, hence the friction mod additive.
http://autorepair.about.com/library/glossary/bldef-219.htm
The definition of what friction modifier does goes against the reasons for adding it. Why?
We add the FFM in the Lightnings rear diff so that the clutch packs in the limited slip aren't hurt. So, I'm assuming the FFM in the MTX-75, some how helps the blocking rings...
helps them by reducing friction? Its also not the reason given for adding it to the MTX-75 in the first place. I'm no trasmission or lube expert (hell, I'm barely a noob), but this is straight up old-fashioned simple reason.
I don't think it reduces friction, I think it in fact does the opposite, so that the clutch packs (RWD, Limited Slip) and the Blocking rings in the MTX-75 can get that extra 'bite'...
Can you back that up with any reference materials? I googled for awhile and could not find ANYTHING that says it ADDs friction. Everything said it reduces friction.
This thread has gone from most worthwhile to most inconclusive evar! All I would like to know is what fluid to run that will prevent my 3rd gear syncros from destroying themselves a 3RD time in the future!
P.S. - warmonger, I'll PM you if I still decide to get rid of my MTL.
akrump, in my opinion, I think it would be safe to use exactly what Ford reccomends for their product: The Ford Honey, without friction modifier.
It makes sense to me that if Ford went through the trouble of actually producing a replacement fluid specifically for this application that they would have either recommended FM if it was necessary, or included it in the fluid formulation already. Since the TSB only states to use the Ford Honey straight up, thats what I'm going to do and I'm confident it is safe to do so.
MTL may be a great product for the MTX-75. It may not. You can avoid the whole issue and just use what Ford has recmomended IMO.
No I can't 'cause I'm wrong Ryan. I searched the NLOC boards and it says that it helps reduce friction as well. I was confuseded
Originally posted by rkneeshaw3.0:
akrump, in my opinion, I think it would be safe to use exactly what Ford reccomends for their product: The Ford Honey, without friction modifier.
It makes sense to me that if Ford went through the trouble of actually producing a replacement fluid specifically for this application that they would have either recommended FM if it was necessary, or included it in the fluid formulation already. Since the TSB only states to use the Ford Honey straight up, thats what I'm going to do and I'm confident it is safe to do so.
MTL may be a great product for the MTX-75. It may not. You can avoid the whole issue and just use what Ford has recmomended IMO.
I'm with you
Terry specifically recommends either Ford Honey (you'll have to ask him about the FM, I don't remember him mentioning using it in conjunction) or Mobil 1 synth ATF WITH XL-7 FM. I'm running the latter.
I have a feeling for whatever car I own I am always end up going with what the manufacturer recommends. Reason being...look at DSMs. There are SOOO many diff types of lube out there. DSM guys argue about Mobil 1 syn being the best and the worst. There is no clear cut answer. I've tried to research other platforms and have just come up with more confusion than I had before this.
Originally posted by akrump47:
This thread has gone from most worthwhile to most inconclusive evar! All I would like to know is what fluid to run that will prevent my 3rd gear syncros from destroying themselves a 3RD time in the future!
P.S. - warmonger, I'll PM you if I still decide to get rid of my MTL.
Everything has been presented here. You have a brain right? Decide for yourself. You're a big boy.
http://www.fordcontour.org/index.php?showtopic=1497&hl=This is an interesting flashback...I remember it now, Terry was a little uncertain about Redline MTL but had communicated with them. He also said in a separate thread:
Quote:
I like Mobil 1 with FM or Ford honey with FM
And also that groups never can come to a consensus.
Originally posted by Jeb Hoge:
And also that groups never can come to a consensus.
I think 98% of us know what the consensus is.
Originally posted by Jeb Hoge:
Terry specifically recommends either Ford Honey (you'll have to ask him about the FM, I don't remember him mentioning using it in conjunction) or Mobil 1 synth ATF WITH XL-7 FM. I'm running the latter.
That may change... just be careful.
Originally posted by TerryHaines(email):
..the FM deal goes waYYYYYYYYYY back.I'd stick with
straight up honey until I get lab results....but thats
just me
There has been mention of syncromesh, either valvoline or Royal purple, but for some reason no positive or negative feedback on this fluid. Demon ,who i respect a ton, is running it. Rawburt is saying he is going with the RP version of it. Someone mentioned the DSM debate on trans fluid, well my friend who just had a race trans built by sheppard racing was told to go with Pennzoil Syncromesh and this is what he is running.(only 600mi since rebuild so not a lot of input from him) I was just wondering if this is a good idea or not. I haven't heard any good or bad input about it. I have MTL now, and honestly i don't plan on doing anything about it in the near future. I just know that often times OEM suggestions meet needs, but rarely surpass them. I have a feeling ford honey isn't the best fluid out there, and i dont feel like buying another trans, or paying for a TH rebuild. So any thoughts or suggestions on this fluid??
Originally posted by Stylin55_oh:
I have MTL now, and honestly i don't plan on doing anything about it in the near future.
So then why are you asking if you don't plan on changing it. Just keep running MTL. No one is forcing you to do anything. I thought you said you didn't want to pay Terry for a rebuild.
The SHO guys really like GM synchromesh. It's pretty pricey though. About as much as Honey from what I recall. Also funny Demon isn't running MTL any longer. I do recall seeing his post now abouy Penn. synchromesh. Sounds pretty scientific. Run it until it shows an issue and then go with something else.
Originally posted by Stylin55_oh:
There has been mention of syncromesh, either valvoline or Royal purple, but for some reason no positive or negative feedback on this fluid. Demon ,who i respect a ton, is running it. Rawburt is saying he is going with the RP version of it. Someone mentioned the DSM debate on trans fluid, well my friend who just had a race trans built by sheppard racing was told to go with Pennzoil Syncromesh and this is what he is running.(only 600mi since rebuild so not a lot of input from him) I was just wondering if this is a good idea or not. I haven't heard any good or bad input about it. I have MTL now, and honestly i don't plan on doing anything about it in the near future. I just know that often times OEM suggestions meet needs, but rarely surpass them. I have a feeling ford honey isn't the best fluid out there, and i dont feel like buying another trans, or paying for a TH rebuild. So any thoughts or suggestions on this fluid??
Look at the pics of MTL and decide. That is my trans on the chopping block. I am never gonna touch that stuff again.
Originally posted by akrump47:
This thread has gone from most worthwhile to most inconclusive evar! All I would like to know is what fluid to run that will prevent my 3rd gear syncros from destroying themselves a 3RD time in the future!
P.S. - warmonger, I'll PM you if I still decide to get rid of my MTL.
I was noticing in the past few weeks that the ocassionaly grinding into 3rd and the slightly sloppy 3rd gear shift has completely disappeard gradually since putting in Ford Honey with XL3.
This is hardly scientific, but an observation of my car only. I have about 40,000 miles on the fluid now, and it was still acting up a litte at 30,000 miles. I have some ATF+4 that I intended to use when this fluid hits 60,000 miles, but now I'm thinking I'll probably return to Ford Honey, but next time I'll use XL7 (it wasn't available when I last changed fluid).
The car has 210,000 miles with the original clutch and the trans has never been out of the car.
Originally posted by Big Jim:
I was noticing in the past few weeks that the ocassionaly grinding into 3rd and the slightly sloppy 3rd gear shift has completely disappeard gradually since putting in Ford Honey with XL3.
This is hardly scientific, but an observation of my car only. I have about 40,000 miles on the fluid now, and it was still acting up a litte at 30,000 miles. I have some ATF+4 that I intended to use when this fluid hits 60,000 miles, but now I'm thinking I'll probably return to Ford Honey, but next time I'll use XL7 (it wasn't available when I last changed fluid).
The car has 210,000 miles with the original clutch and the trans has never been out of the car.
Bah! Why would you run an ATF fluid in a car's tranny that's designed for it? And you actually have not pulled the trans due to wear?! Amazing.
Obviously you did not follow the posts a few years back when I introduced ATF+3 to this group. I studied it as well as I could, including asking the oil company reps that called on me to see if they could get some technical advice as to if there would likely be a problems with ATF+3 with it's higher level of friction modifier.
Although they would not come right out and endorse it, they did say that it would probably work fine. After all, it was used in Chrysler product manual transmissions. Much to my surprise, the shifting quality improved tremendously over using Mercon.
I continued using ATF+3 from about 45,000 miles until 150,000 miles when I installed the Ford Honey (I just checked my log, so it has been in 60,000 miles, not 40,000 as I posted a few minutes ago). Prior to using ATF+3, the fluid change using Mercon improved shifting somewhat, but the improvement was short lived.
The immediate impression of the Ford honey + XL3 was that there was a slight improvement over ATF+3, but not much. As time has gone on, the improvement has gradually continued to increase.
ATF+3 and ATF+4 are nearly the same, but ATF+4 has a higher synthetic blend and a greater temperature range. Both have the same level of friction modifier. Both are used on Chrysler product manual transmissions.
From what I have been able to learn, ATF+4 is very similar to Mercon V, but does have a somewhat higher level of friction modifier. Mercon V does have a higher level of friction modifier than Mercon.
Because Chrysler was slow in releasing a license for other companies to make ATF+4, Mobil, and some others, actually recommended that their Mercon V product be used in Chrysler products that called for ATF+4. This is likely to change because Chrysler recently announced that they will license others to sell ATF+4. It is interesting that Mobil is the vendor that supplies Chrysler with ATF+4.
The explanation about why friction modifier often works well in manual transmissions is that it helps the synchros clear off the oil in the mating surfaces of the synchros better, allowing better bite without being harsh. I don't know how accurate this is. There seems to be some concern that too much friction modifier may actually weaken the lubrication ability and lead to gear damage. It must be remembered though, that in it's primary role as an additive, it is used in differentials with limited slip clutch packs, where gear wear is even much more critical.
Originally posted by Big Jim:
Obviously you did not follow the posts a few years back when I introduced ATF+3 to this group.
I think someone missed the sarcasm in my post.
I repeat: DO NOT use friction modifier.
I just called a ford service technician and had him verify with his documenation a couple things:
1. Friction modifier was NEVER recommended in any ford documentation for the MTX-75.
2. The Ford Friction modifier XL-3 and XL-7 both REDUCE friction. It makes the lube MORE slippery! This is contrary to popular beleif on these boards! Friction modifier may make your shifts smoother, but it is NOT going to make your synchros bite better, or live longer if it makes everything more slippery.
Now for the kicker:
As of the last 48 hours, Ford sent notice to dealerships NOT to sell friction modifier at all, anymore. There is no replacement product, it is to be disposed of, "it is not neccary for anything anymore".
I gathered this data directly from a Ford service technician at a local dealership over the course of a 30 minute phone call.
I suggest the FAQ's be updated and the how-to's edited to reflect this data.
I'm guessing I can pick up some XL-7 today and also a year from now.
Originally posted by todras:
I'm guessing I can pick up some XL-7 today and also a year from now.
Good luck to you. But even if you can, why do you want to use it?
Originally posted by rkneeshaw3.0:
Originally posted by todras:
I'm guessing I can pick up some XL-7 today and also a year from now.
Good luck to you. But even if you can, why do you want to use it?
he's just making the point that ford will rpobobly continue to cary it.....
Originally posted by todras:
Originally posted by akrump47:
This thread has gone from most worthwhile to most inconclusive evar! All I would like to know is what fluid to run that will prevent my 3rd gear syncros from destroying themselves a 3RD time in the future!
P.S. - warmonger, I'll PM you if I still decide to get rid of my MTL.
Everything has been presented here. You have a brain right? Decide for yourself. You're a big boy.
Looks like there's still some open ends to be tied up. Lab results from the fluid in Pete's trans? More info on the Friction Modifier, which Demon states may cause buildup? And now Ryan's post from the dealer tech. This topic seems to get more and more interesting the more I read it. Sounds like the Ford "Honey" is the safest choice though.
Why would I use it?
Because friction modifiers are used to reduce and control friction in the equipment targeted for their application. In a transmission, friction modifiers are crucial for reducing drag in the gear train. It's also responsible for reducing wear in many locations throughout the transmission. ATF fluids have lower levels of reactive additives while performance and shudder problems would seem to require higher levels. Safe, stable, non-reactive, non-sludge forming friction modifiers are desperately needed. Synthetic is so slippery it doesn't allow the synchros to spin up fast enough to make the shift.
Call me a sheep if you want, but I'm going to go with Terry's lead from here on out. I think he's got the insight and connections to be the best judge.
Originally posted by todras:
Synthetic is so slippery it doesn't allow the synchros to spin up fast enough to make the shift.
And how is friction modifier going to help that if it makes lube MORE slippery? Do a search outside CEG. This isn't fabricated: friction modifier reduces friction.
If friction mod was so needed, why has Ford NEVER recommended it? Who HAD first recommended it you ask? Demon has, and Terry has (according to a search in the archives), but both of them with the idea that friction modifer ADDs friction. It seems that was a misconception.
Ryan you talked to a tech on the phone for 30 min and you want to take his word like the bible. C'mon ryan! I'm not saying it's bogus...listen to him...but take it with a grain of salt and read more. Research.
Originally posted by MapOfTaziFoSho:
Ryan you talked to a tech on the phone for 30 min and you want to take his word like the bible. C'mon ryan! I'm not saying listen...but take it with a grain of salt and read more.
It was 30 minutes becuase I had him double check the documentation he had for the MTX-75 and to verify that the XL-3 and the XL-7 both reduce friction. I was careful to have him double check his stuff. I'm not stupid enough to just take a random dealership tech's word for it.
If someone has a source at Ford that everyone will trust better I would be VERY interested to hear what they have to say too! Hell, call your local service departments please. I am not biased here, if this is all incorrect then awesome. But this is what I've got and I trust it.
Originally posted by rkneeshaw3.0:
Originally posted by todras:
Synthetic is so slippery it doesn't allow the synchros to spin up fast enough to make the shift.
And how is friction modifier going to help that if it makes lube MORE slippery? Do a search outside CEG. This isn't fabricated: friction modifier reduces friction.
If friction mod was so needed, why has Ford NEVER recommended it? Who HAD first recommended it you ask? Demon has, and Terry has (according to a search in the archives), but both of them with the idea that friction modifer ADDs friction. It seems that was a misconception.
Because it's a different additive and helps reduce drag so the synch's can spool up faster & engage.
Originally posted by todras:
Originally posted by rkneeshaw3.0:
Originally posted by todras:
Synthetic is so slippery it doesn't allow the synchros to spin up fast enough to make the shift.
And how is friction modifier going to help that if it makes lube MORE slippery? Do a search outside CEG. This isn't fabricated: friction modifier reduces friction.
If friction mod was so needed, why has Ford NEVER recommended it? Who HAD first recommended it you ask? Demon has, and Terry has (according to a search in the archives), but both of them with the idea that friction modifer ADDs friction. It seems that was a misconception.
Because it's a different additive and helps reduce drag so the synch's can spool up faster & engage.
You know I love you man but thats the opposite of everythign thats ever been posted on here about why friction modifier should be added. The reason given is that the synchros NEEd the friction to spin up.... This is the first I've heard of the synchros needign LESS friction...
Originally posted by rkneeshaw3.0:
Hell, call your local service departments please.
I did, they said they hadn't heard anything from Ford - about discontinuing it. Frannie did say she'd check before she left today just to be sure and let me know either way. She says it's up to the individual customer whether or not to use it. Some says it helps, some say it hinders, some say it does nothing at all.
Originally posted by Tisby:
Originally posted by rkneeshaw3.0:
Hell, call your local service departments please.
I did, they said they hadn't heard anything from Ford - about discontinuing it. Frannie did say she'd check before she left today just to be sure and let me know either way. She says it's up to the individual customer whether or not to use it. Some says it helps, some say it hinders, some say it does nothing at all.
Can you see if they can support anything else the tech I talked to stated? In perticular: (1) the Friction Modifier reduces friction vs increasing friction and (2) that it has NEVER been recommended by Ford for the MTX-75?
I asked Terry about it, and he made some calls. There's a TSB about discontinuing XL-7 use in F-series.
Quote:
Its a TSB on Ford F series,Explorers etc. re. rear end lube. Stock lube with XL-7 is repalced with new lube '75W90 QFEHP without XL-7. Other rear ends that use 75W140 still take XL-3 FM. On the F-series etc. with the new lube the clutch packs in the diff must also be changed and the Ring and pinions checked/replaced....Can still get XL-3 but no XL-7......
FWIW, the AllData database only calls for ATF3 in the MTX-75.
That makes sense. Thanks Jeb
Originally posted by todras:
I was looking back at some
{edit}
very best post by demon.
You can tell a LOT has been learned in 5 & a half years.
That was back when I "believed" what was being spouted and did not do my own research. I lot has changed since that time. I've found out most of the bullsh~t this site was spouting was just that. Someone's sorry limitations they could not see past.
Hell the stock rods didn't break at 200 TQ like someone predicted. (Terry)
The new style stock PCM & rev limiters was cracked even though someone said it could never be done. (Leo)
ATF was proven to be the worst thing to run in the MTX. Even Terry described horror stories or transmissions with the "cocktail" in it after that time. This was back when he started strongly recommending the "new" Ford honey. Check out those posts todras.
Forced induction on a 10.3CR SVT. It was called impossible and just plan stupid because the engine would break. 13psi and 330FWHP later the stock 2000 2.5L SVT engine shut all those blind folks up. 9psi and 330HP/TQ later on a bone stock bargain basement setup Tom shut everyone up again.
I guess it's a good thing some people stopped listening to the mindless drivel some folks kept clinging to because they OBVIOUSLY (hind sight is 20/20) were not even close to the truth.
BTW I noticed you completely skipped over my posts about 2 years later (3-3.5 years ago!) when I starting to go away from listening to the "norm" and actually did some REAL research myself on the subject.
I like how you picked the very old, early threads and skipped any thing that proved my point.
Those sound bites sound convincing but in reality it just proves your short sightedness and limited thinking. In other words it is exactly what I expected from you.
Should I post the more current & relevant threads???
Originally posted by todras:
The SHO guys really like GM synchromesh. It's pretty pricey though. About as much as Honey from what I recall.
Also funny Demon isn't running MTL any longer. I do recall seeing his post now abouy Penn. synchromesh. Sounds pretty scientific. Run it until it shows an issue and then go with something else.
Syncromesh is $5 per quart. Get your facts straight. (sorry forgot who I was asking )
I switched to Syncromesh when I did the 3L. Syncromesh was only $4 a qt and it was local. I had used Syncromesh on both Mitsu's (ConQuest & Eclipse) with great success so I went with it. 2 years later and it's doing great. It was replaced at the 1 year mark because I sheared an axle. (last fall at the track) It came out looking as fresh as the new stuff.
When I ran the cocktail the fluid came out black and had a horrid smell to it. I changed it every year. This is part of the reason why I stopped recommending ATF and say if you do run ATF you had better change it every year. It has ZERO longevity and below average protection!
Originally posted by Big Jim:
Obviously The immediate impression of the Ford honey + XL3 was that there was a slight improvement over ATF+3, but not much. As time has gone on, the improvement has gradually continued to increase.
Psst. Changing 60k mile old ATF may have been why the shifting got better.
In all seriousness.
Originally posted by DemonSVT:
Get your facts straight. (sorry forgot who I was asking )
Lets try to keep this thread informational okay. It wasnt stickied for you to throw your snotty little comments in here or there. Some people are trying to learn from this...
Originally posted by todras:
Originally posted by rkneeshaw3.0:
Originally posted by todras:
Synthetic is so slippery it doesn't allow the synchros to spin up fast enough to make the shift.
And how is friction modifier going to help that if it makes lube MORE slippery? Do a search outside CEG. This isn't fabricated: friction modifier reduces friction.
If friction mod was so needed, why has Ford NEVER recommended it? Who HAD first recommended it you ask? Demon has, and Terry has (according to a search in the archives), but both of them with the idea that friction modifer ADDs friction. It seems that was a misconception.
Because it's a different additive and helps reduce drag so the synch's can spool up faster & engage.
Worse then a broken record. Empirical proof from several sources against his position yet he spouts the same nonsense.
Why do you think I've been against the additive for years???
There is also the fact most LSD additive have highly concentrated corrosive high pressure additives in them. This is because a RWD differential does not have brass blocker rings and they use it to reduce wear.
Originally posted by DemonSVT:
Syncromesh is $5 per quart. Get your facts straight.
Actually GM synchromesh is about $10 a qt from a local dealer. Where are you getting it for $5 a quart? From what I've heard the Penn. is the same as GM w/o the name. Maybe that's what you're putting in? Pennzoil sync. I'm not a mind reader.
Originally posted by RawDirte':
Some people are trying to learn from this...
Unfortunately most people are not.
They are blind lap dogs that believe almost anything that is fed to them without actually having valid proof.
The rarity is the people that have not ignorantly believed what has been spoutted and have done the research, work, fabrication, and projects themselves. These are the people that every one should be listening to. They are the ones that are not stuck in the past and behind glass ceilings because they can't think outside the box and can't see other people's real world data proving things otherwise.
The problem is that your "some" people make up a Very small percentage. I do applaud those people with all my heart. The rest...
Correct todras.
Pennzoil makes SyncroMesh for any label that sells SyncroMesh. (GM, QS, etc)
RP's SyncroMAX is suppose to be a fully synthetic version of Syncromesh. It looks interesting.
Originally posted by DemonSVT:
There is also the fact most LSD additive have highly concentrated corrosive high pressure additives in them.
Does XL-7? So maybe MOST do. Pretty blanket statement. Not all additives are the same as previously posted i.e. active/nonactive.
Originally posted by todras:
Originally posted by DemonSVT:
There is also the fact most LSD additive have highly concentrated corrosive high pressure additives in them.
Does XL-7? So maybe MOST do. Pretty blanket statement. No all additives are the same as previously posted i.e. active/nonactive.
Since Ford does not release the specs but also does not make their own fluids...
Yes it is a blanket statement based on every single LSD additive I could find specs for. (i.e. they all had them)
That's not 100% proof but it's close.
It is infinitely more accurate then saying that the additive lets the syncros "bite" better because it reduces friction. (which has no logic to it of course)
Originally posted by DemonSVT:
Why do you think I've been against the additive for years???
Well since MTL has FM's in it already why aren't you against it?
Demon what would the Syncromesh fluid offer over the Ford Honey (or even the now maligned MTL)?
Any fluid named "Syncromesh" definitely seems interesting to me
Originally posted by DemonSVT:
That's not 100% proof but it's close.
It is infinitely more accurate then saying that the additive lets the syncros "bite" better because it reduces friction. (which has no logic to it of course)
From what I've read and posted earlier today it reduces drag in the ATF so it can bite. I previously thought it did cause the synch's to bite as was the main train of thought. There are so many things written about it it seems no one really has an answer.
Originally posted by akrump47:
Demon what would the Syncromesh fluid offer over the Ford Honey (or even the now maligned MTL)?
Price. $5 per vs $20 per.
Both SyncroMesh and Ford's honey are high quality fluids.
Both have a great track record.
SyncroMesh is a synth blend while the Honey is a full synth. Advantage Ford.
Syncromesh works perfectly as is while Ford's needs the LSD additive. Advantage Syncromesh.
I did a little digging on Royal Purple's (RPs) SyncroMAX. It is a fully synthetic fluid they set up to be like GM Syncromesh. It looks very promising. It's $8 per quart.
Originally posted by DemonSVT:
Originally posted by RawDirte':
Some people are trying to learn from this...
Unfortunately most people are not.
They are blind lap dogs that believe almost anything that is fed to them without actually having valid proof.
The rarity is the people that have not ignorantly believed what has been spoutted and have done the research, work, fabrication, and projects themselves. These are the people that every one should be listening to. They are the ones that are not stuck in the past and behind glass ceilings because they can't think outside the box and can't see other people's real world data proving things otherwise.
The problem is that your "some" people make up a Very small percentage. I do applaud those people with all my heart. The rest...
The rest don't have the time or facility to try to reinvent the wheel ever time their car needs servicing. Call me crazy, but I did the research into who has the most experience and credentials to make informed judgements on the platform and what should and shouldn't be put into it. Maybe you can ratchet down the disparaging comments?
This makes no sense...
What are we supposed to do for those with Limited Slip Rears?
We still NEED Friction Modifier.
So anyone know who first recommended the friction modifier? Seems it is a CEG urban myth that became fact/gospel. If we know who first recommended it maybe we can find out why?
More research suggests the FM bonds to organic materials (e.g. clutches in a LSD) that make clutch engagement smoother and less jerky, but might not have any effect on metals themselves.
Bottom line is I think it will take a chemical engineer to say what effect FM has on our trannies and whether its truly safe or not.
But I will repeat: Ford does not, and has not, ever, recommended FM in the MTX-75 no matter what ATF (dino or synthetic) you use. Ford has however, recommended the ford honey over dino ATF stright up, no friction modifier.
Originally posted by RoadRunner:
This makes no sense...
What are we supposed to do for those with Limited Slip Rears?
We still NEED Friction Modifier.
huh? Who drives a contour with a limited slip rear?
And please, why do you think we NEED friction modifier?
Originally posted by rkneeshaw3.0:
Originally posted by RoadRunner:
This makes no sense...
What are we supposed to do for those with Limited Slip Rears?
We still NEED Friction Modifier.
huh? Who drives a contour with a limited slip rear?
And please, why do you think we NEED friction modifier?
He has a marauder and he needs the XM 7...they aren't going to discontinue it.
Originally posted by DemonSVT:
while Ford's needs the LSD additive.
What are you talking about? Didnt you just say a few posts back that you do not support additives such as friction modifier? And why does ford's honey need an additive for the LSD? (assuming you mean quaife and torsen)
Originally posted by MapOfTaziFoSho:
Originally posted by rkneeshaw3.0:
Originally posted by RoadRunner:
This makes no sense...
What are we supposed to do for those with Limited Slip Rears?
We still NEED Friction Modifier.
huh? Who drives a contour with a limited slip rear?
And please, why do you think we NEED friction modifier?
He has a marauder and he needs the XM 7...they aren't going to discontinue it.
Oh sorry, thought he was talking about 'tours
If you look at more info on the TSB it says the XL-7 is being discontinued, and customers are told to use a different fluid which is listed in the TSB. They're not left in the dark, the FM just isn't needed if they use the correct fluid apparently.
Originally posted by rkneeshaw3.0:
Originally posted by RoadRunner:
This makes no sense...
What are we supposed to do for those with Limited Slip Rears?
We still NEED Friction Modifier.
huh? Who drives a contour with a limited slip rear?
And please, why do you think we NEED friction modifier?
It's printed in 99+ Cougar owner's manuals under fluid recommendations. Not sure about the Contour owner's manual.
...trying.........to............learn.......so........difficult..........
Link to Cougar Onwer's Manual ... look at page 232!
http://www.newcougar.org/download/files/owners_manual.pdf
Apparently, it references Ford Specification "ESD-MAC-186-A" ... anyone have access to OASIS?
Originally posted by fastcougar:
Link to Cougar Onwer's Manual ... look at page 232!
http://www.newcougar.org/download/files/owners_manual.pdf
Apparently, it references Ford Specification "ESD-MAC-186-A" ... anyone have access to OASIS?
now that's funny!
Sweet jesus, thank god! A documented reason to use friction modifier!
I swear I was gonna go crazy.
Looks like that was issued in 1999, so it should be accurate and applicable.
Lets verify some part #'s
EZL401 and ESDMac186A
No room for assumptions here IMO.
Originally posted by DemonSVT:
Originally posted by Big Jim:
Obviously The immediate impression of the Ford honey + XL3 was that there was a slight improvement over ATF+3, but not much. As time has gone on, the improvement has gradually continued to increase.
Psst. Changing 60k mile old ATF may have been why the shifting got better.
In all seriousness.
Perhaps I left out some detail. I never left any ATF, Mercon or ATF+3, in the trans for 60,000 miles.
When the ATF+3 was installed the first time at 45,000 miles, the Mercon had already been changed twice. For the next 105,000 miles, the ATF+3 had been changed 3 times. It is the Fod Honey that has been in 60,000 miles and is due for a change, but it is working so well I'm a little reluctant. I may run it another 10,000 miles or so.
On another note, friction modifier is one of the many types of additives that are used in blending different types of lubricants. Even Mercon has friction modifiers before any more is added. It just doesn't seem to have enough.
It may help to study this web site. Specialty Formulations is a boutique blender of exceptional fluids.
http://specialtyformulations.com/
Take a look at the write up for MTL-P, a 75W85 GL4 (and GL5) trans oil, and MTFGlide, a manual trans oil for manual transmissions that normally use ATF. You will note that both of them include friction modifier in their formulation. I took the liberty of cutting and pasting the details of both of those products below.
MTL-P, Synthetic Manual Transmission GL4/GL5 Gear Lube 75W85
1 Quart $9.95
1 Gal. $28.95
MTL-P replaces Honda MTL HG (part number 08798-9016), Nissan/Infiniti HQ Multi 75W85 (part number 999MP-MTF00P), BMW MTF-LT-2 (part number 23 00 7 533 514), and some Audi fluids.
A 75W85 weight oil recommended for manual transmissions and transaxles specifying a 75W85 lubricant. MTL-P is great for manual transmissions and transaxles that experience problems with low temperature shifting.
We start out with the industry�s latest and most advanced PAO Group IV and Group V base fluids and include a robust Extreme Additive (EP) and Anti-Wear (AW) package. For added fuel savings, we add our Pat-Pending friction modifier.
What this means is that MTL-P provides the ultimate in Anti-Wear (AW) and Extreme protection while lowering fuel bills over petroleum gear lubricants.
To prevent rust and corrosion, we use the most advanced rust inhibitors, metal deactivators, and antioxidants. MTL-P provides plenty of protection for copper-alloy metals such as a bronze and brass bearings and synchronizers. Sintered metal synchronizers are protected as well. Shifting is smooth and detent is crisp with MTL-P.
MTL-P is compatible with old and new transmission seals.
Instructions: No need to rinse transmission. Simply add and replace filler plugs.
Specifications (Average)
SAE 75W85
Color Lavender
Gravity API 28.1
K. Viscosity@100C 11.5 cSt
K. Viscosity@40 C 82
Pour Point -40 F
Specific Gravity 0.87
Viscosity Index 121
Specialty Formulations is not responsible for misuse of this product. Wash hands after use. Keep out of reach of children.
MTFGlide GL4/GL5
1 Qt. $9.95
1 Gal. $28.95
A low viscosity synthetic transmission fluid for manual transmissions that normally require an ATF. This fluid has the same viscosity as ATF fluid but 5 times the AW/EP additives, and has a GL4 EP additive package. MTFGlide gives your manual transmission superb shifting qualities while protecting the gearing, bearings, and shifter forks. Special friction modifiers guarantee synchronizer and blocker ring engagement are smooth as silk. MTFGlide uses the best synthetic fluids and additives to provide excellent cold weather shifting, positive detent, and protection for yellow metals and sintered synchronizers.
We start out with the industry�s latest and most advanced PAO Group IV and Group V base fluids and include a robust Extreme Additive (EP) and Anti-Wear (AW) package. For added fuel savings, we add our Pat-Pending friction modifier.
What this means is that MTFGlide provides the ultimate in Anti-Wear (AW) and Extreme Pressure (EP) protection while lowering fuel bills over petroleum gear lubricants.
To prevent rust and corrosion, we use the most advanced rust inhibitors, metal deactivators, and antioxidants. MTFGlide provides plenty of protection for copper-alloy metals such as a bronze and brass bearings and synchronizers. Sintered metal synchronizers are protected as well. Shifting is smooth and detent is crisp with MTFGlide.
MTFGlide is compatible with all transmission seals. May also be used in Transfer Cases that specify an ATF.
Remove drain plug and drain old oil. Replace drain plug and tighten. Refill according to manufacturer�s specified capacity.
Specifications (Average)
Color Blue
K. Viscosity@ 100 7.5 cSt
K. Viscosity@ 40 39
Pour Point -45 F
Viscosity Index 197
Flash Point 455 F
Specialty Formulations is not responsible for misuse of this product. Wash hands after use. Keep out of reach of children.
Well,
As promised I brought the issue to the attention of Redline and to Torsen. I posted Redlines reply and I am about to post an excerpt from the email from Torsen. I'm only posting the part about the lubricant questions as the other part is my business dealing with them.
Originally posted by warmonger:
***section omitted***
On a side note, what lubrication can I use to protect it well?
Specifically, I used ATF initially because it was what the manufacturer
called for but the noise was very high from day one so tried other
fluids. I had good luck with Redline MTL and I wanted to make sure that
this fluid was good for protecting the differential. It is recommended
by Redline for my type of transmission but I wanted to be sure as I read
a rumor that MTL would cause oxidation of the metal on the differential.
If you can confirm or deny that Redline MTL will help/harm the diff I
would appreciate it. If you aren't aware of the specs on MTL you can
review the specs from Redlines website at www.redlineoil.com under tech.
If there is any other lubricant that you feel is better then please let
me know.
Thanks,
Tom
Reply from the Manager of Quality and project engineering himself:
Originally posted by Torsen:
Hello Tom,
Glad to see everything is working well!
***section regarding personal information omitted***
The T-2 unit is designed to run in just about anything so the manufacturer's
suggested ATF is what I would have told you to run with as we do for all
requests regarding axle or transmission fluids for the Torsen. We do get
emails from vehicle owners saying that they run their Torsen units in a wide
variety of fluids and I have not heard anything back that has been negative,
especially with the Redline MTL. That does not mean however that oxidation
does not occur, just that we have not heard about it!
Unfortunately, because of legal issues we cannot suggest a lubricant for
your transmission since we don't have the technical background to make such
suggestions or claims. I realize that this does not help much but I hope
you can at least appreciate the difficulty we face in suggesting one brand
over another and the technical expertise required to do so!
Best regards,
Manager of Quality, Project Engineering, & IT/MIS
Toyoda-Koki Automotive Torsen North America, Inc.
Company Website: http://www.torsen.com
I want to highlight the fact that he specifically points out that he has had no negative reports, especially about Redline Oil.
If my diff were oxidizing and not getting lubrication because of a fluid I used I would report it to Torsen so that they would verify and have a warning to protect customers and themselves from future warranty issues.
Upon further contact with Redline, they have pointed out that there is just no way to know all the contributing factors in these situations so far posted here. They have NOT said that anyone's opinion is right or wrong. They have only taken the stand that their product will not cause the oxidation and sludge buildup reported and that it will provide superior shifting and protect the components.
I have a little insight about the "myth" of using friction modifier in the MTX75. It is incomplete because it was already a common practice before I joined CEG.
Shortly after buying my SVT, I found CEG and followed the postings on the Contour-L list before deciding to join. I emailed Lance about joining. In that email, I mentioned my background as a former Ford tech and then currently as a service manager. I also mentioned that I felt that using friction modifier in a manual trans was improper.
I found many that had tried adding the friction modifier and that the transmission behaved much better, especially when cold. There was one member back then, from Sweden, with a Mondeo, that complained to his dealer about the shift quality and the dealer added friction modifier and the problem was resolved.
Others mentioned that they felt that the 95 shop manual called for type F ATF with added friction modifier. I never confirmed that. I do know that Mercon does have a higher level of friction modifier than type F, so it seemed reasonable.
Since then I have made it a point to ask manual transmission technicians about their experience with friction modifier. Most knew nothing about it. A few, mostly old timers, were aware of it, and sometimes added friction modifier for special cases from time to time and some also always used it on their own transmissions.
I became a believer when I tried ATF+3 with great success.
There are other automotive applications where friction modifier became an unofficial cure. Many power steering technicians had been using a little friction modifier in power steering pumps to cut pump noise. During the worst of the trans torque converter shudder problems on the AODE transmission, a hot line engineer "unofficially" told me that many of them had been cured with the addition of some friction modifier, but that Ford no longer wanted it to be added so it could not be listed on the warranty claim. I have myself confirmed that indeed trans shudder could be reduced or eliminated with a 4 oz bottle of friction modifier. If that made a significant difference, I knew that the problem could be resolved with a complete trans fluid change. Ford eventually published that the entire problem was due to "tired fluid". That is part of why they developed Mercon V, although they have never officially sanctioned backfitting Mercon V into those older transmissions.
Originally posted by todras:
Originally posted by warmonger:
What do you want me to say? Lay over and agree with something that I don't believe? What kind of person would I be. I only argue using facts and logical assumptions from facts.
Well at one point in this thread you sounded as if you were being swayed. What happened to that? Would you like to explain the oxidation on the Quaife and the tempered splines?
Sorry to have put those vibes out man.
I only meant to point out that I pointed out some discrepancies I saw in the photos but that I was sorry if I cast a negative light on the reports.
I believe Terry is only reporting what he sees and I'm fine with that and I don't want to cast doubt on his observations.
That said, I don't think the conclusions drawn from the observations are correct and so far I stand by my own assumptions.
Originally posted by todras:
I was looking back at some old posts and found this one my Demon.
Personally I would go with a known Full synthetic ATF (Like Mobil 1) over the "unknown" synthetic mix of the Ford honey colored fluid.
Especially for 1/3 (or less) the cost!
& another from here .
Nope. Ford's price is just stupid.
In other words. Typical Ford...
Mobil 1 ATF & 2oz Ford FM (half bottle)
I almost pissed myself. And on the price aspect. How much is a transmission worth to you?
& the very best post by demon.
Nice!
And to think it's only been 3+ years and we have found out more information since then that may make that outdated advice. Given the circumstances I think those were the best options back then for out community because people hadn't begun to use the high quality products available in the sport industry. It was still a family car then and under warranty so to speak. Not so anymore.
I just noticed that I had a typo (I know, I have a lot of them). I typed Fod Honey instead of Ford Honey. The post was so big that the system did not allow me to edit it.
Like I said much earlier, this thread has taken on a life of it's own.
I really don't have more to say on my end. I think everything is laid out for others to judge. I'm just going to post this though.
Originally posted by akrump47:
This thread has gone from most worthwhile to most inconclusive evar! All I would like to know is what fluid to run that will prevent my 3rd gear syncros from destroying themselves a 3RD time in the future!
P.S. - warmonger, I'll PM you if I still decide to get rid of my MTL.
I hate to say it but the MTL gives the best shifting results of anything I have tried. It is so good for shifting that people with binding shift forks and previously ginding synchros reported that the problems went away with the MTL.
The oxidation of the case and the diff is a different matter and not related to shifting.
In fact, lets look at the actual facts:
The only issue is someone blew a stock diff on MTL ( go figure ) and then it looked like a lube problem.
Then we look at a TH built trans and see all kinds of dark metallic film over everything and sludge on the magnet. Now you have the same information we do, make your assumptions and make a decision!
Everything else is just opinion and opinions are like A-holes, everyone's got one and they all stink when something goes wrong.
war......
Originally posted by RawDirte':
Originally posted by DemonSVT:
Get your facts straight. (sorry forgot who I was asking )
Lets try to keep this thread informational okay. It wasnt stickied for you to throw your snotty little comments in here or there. Some people are trying to learn from this...
Umm, it isn't like he isn't defending himself... Maybe we shouldn't actually tell Todras not to be sarcastic, nor Demon to be snotty. That is between them and I think they've both been here longer than most.
Is that the same cougar manual that has all the misprints and errors in it?
Yes it is true, ever heard of a Cougar-S? They were going to use a bigger and better engine in it, maybe it was the SVT engine , no wait I think it was supposed to be the 3.0.
Whatever. Anyway the manual actually had all the stats printed up with that information and they never made ANY of it. It was a mistake.
I've never said anything about the friction modifier yet but I wouldn't trust ANYTHING in those cougar manuals as there were too many discrepancies.
Don't believe it? Ask around.
BTW, there are many different friction modifiers but MTL and certain ATF's are designed with them in mind.
That is a big difference then adding something meant for a Gear Oil in a rear end to an ATF based lube.
I'm not saying it is wrong...yet. I'm just pointing out that this wouldn't be a good leg to argue from.
for the record, both my 99 and my 2000 contour owners manual say the same thing.
Originally posted by JB1:
for the record, both my 99 and my 2000 contour owners manual say the same thing.
And by the same thing, you mean the cougar's manual?
That link won't work for me. Can someone cut and paste it here?
Having followed this thread since it's inception and reading all the information presented here, I felt like it was time to add to the discussion (hopefully something worthwhile). Fortunately for me I work with a 100 or so engineers who develop powertrain components (read transmissions) for earth moving equipment (Cat if you want to know). I talked to a very well respected individual who is something of an expert on fluids. I explained the premise behind this thread (the FM and EP additives) and learned this from him.
FM additives RARELY (and he emphasized rarely) are used to increase the coefficient of friction of an oil. The FM's are PRIMARILY used to decrease friction. The coefficient of friction of an oil is a function of the base stock - trying to increase the friction is difficult at best.
So why use FM's? Well, for an automatic transmission it depends on how you design your trans. John Deere, for instance, likes to run a slippery fluid; i.e. lots of FM. So how do they pass all the torque through the clutches? They oversize things; heavier springs, larger diameter clutch discs, etc. Their philosophy is that their trans. will work w/ any fluid. Cat is a little different. We tend to make things small to maximize power density. Therefore we typically do not put FM's in our transmission oils. In passenger car automatic transmissions, the manufacturer uses FM's to balance torque transmission and the smoothness of the shift. Since each manufacturer doesn't design their transmission the same way, it is highly likely and probable that different fluids (with different amounts/types of FM) are required to produce the coefficient of friction that works best in their particular transmissions. Too slick of an oil can cause premature wear due to excessive slippage; to sticky and shifting may be harsh. Based upon this information I read that the FM does NOT help the syncros bite better (yes, it was probably said some time ago, but I'm saying it again). If it does anything at all I could see some benefit of FM's with LSD's (depending upon the design). I don't believe based upon what I have been told that the FM is needed. Todras' post of the Cougar owners manual muddies the water on this one.
The EP additives work by essentially corroding the surface of contacting parts when the film pressures become high. Don't ask me why/how but the wearing of the surface due to corrosion helps reduce friction (if u want to know more PM me and I'll get more specific). So it would not be a surprise to see that if a transmission used a fluid with EP additives a build up of wear debris in the case were observed. Without a filter in the trans. to catch the debris, it is not surprising therefore to see the sludge/debris build up. If Redline MTL has EP additives then it is possible that we could see some corrosion effects. If Terry and/or Ford say we don't need the EP additives, then I would question why I should MTL.
I went to Redline's website and read the info on MTL, and NO WHERE does it state that they add a FM.
Redline web page They simply state they have a higher coefficient of friction than comparable fluids. Interestingly if I'm not mistaken, I saw some posts where it was stated that Redline did not recommend MTL for this (Contour) application. Anyone know why? I found another
web page where they recommend D4ATF plus 1.5 oz.s of Redline limited slip friction modifier. Are you as confused as I am now?
What am I gonna do? I don't know yet. I just put MTL in my trans. 5 months ago, but I'm questioning whether or not I should change. I'm leaning toward the Ford honey or maybe the RP syncromax. Maybe the Pennzoil synchromesh, too. More research for me now. If we seriously want some highly technical info, I will contact some friends at Lubrizol (add pack mfr). I'm rambling - I'll shut up.
Flame suit on
I decided to verify what my owners manual for my 96 SE says. For the 5speed manual transaxle it says simply "Mercon ATF". Thats it.
Is it possible the addition of friction modifer in later model contours and cougars was a mistake (or rather, something ford later found out wasn't right), and thus the reason for the TSB to use Ford Honey instead? Date of manuals recommending FM so far = 1999, 2000. Date of TSB = early 2000
More to think about. This is very intriguing.
The '99 owners man. says the same thing.
Originally posted by JB1:
for the record, both my 99 and my 2000 contour owners manual say the same thing.
Prove it then???
I have a 2000 owner's manual and it states:
MERCON ATF ~ XT-2-QDX
Want some proof. I have plenty to go around for everything I spout.
Originally posted by Tisby:
Originally posted by JB1:
for the record, both my 99 and my 2000 contour owners manual say the same thing.
And by the same thing, you mean the cougar's manual?
nevermind...please forgive me because i am stupid. i made a mistake. i read the manual wrong. it does not mention the fm.
edit-demon, isn't it refreshing to see someone (this schmuck, aka me) is willing to admit when he is wrong. not an accusation btw. too bad i didn't catch the mistake earlier.
This is fcuking funny! I'm going with Terry's advice. If I'm going to be a lemming at least I am follwing the one building my goddamn tranny.
I suppose I am a lemming for following Demon's advice on my 3L too.
Originally posted by MapOfTaziFoSho:
This is fcuking funny! I'm going with Terry's advice. If I'm going to be a lemming at least I am follwing the one building my goddamn tranny.
I suppose I am a lemming for following Demon's advice on my 3L too.
Fellas! FELLAS! Could everyone please watch the lanuage!? I mean... I should have locked this thing on the first few pages, but I let it go because this is a very important topic to alot of people. I knew that there were alot of strong opinions on this subject and there would be some fluid throwing. And I am willing to let alot of that slide as long it is in a constructive way (aka nonbashing). But the language has gotta change. You ain't sitting around some camp fire or in a garage. So I expect everyone to start acting like it or I will have to start banning folks. It's either that or we move this thread and someone can go through all this and rewrite the topic.
There's rules `round here, so lets try to follow them.
Hdbngr8
Please do! Get more technical information and post it.
I am pretty much convinced that when redline talks about FM in their oil they are talking about the blending of the base oils and NOT an additive like an external friction modifier.
They don't smell the same at ALL. The lube with FM added to it smells like fuel or something when it is pulled out! I can only guess that to reduce friction the FM actually breaks down the molecules in the oil to reduce slipperyness. I'm guessing they are long, straight chain molecules designed to slide on each other for a while in order to provide the lubrication protection and this FM breaks up a percentage of those molecules depending on how much is added. This to me would be very bad because of the excessive wear.
I'm also gonna reiterate the point I made a long time ago that as long as the diff is operating and the synchros are working correctly over the correct temperature range then there is no need for additional additives to adjust friction.
Now that you are bringing up how the FM corrodes the metal at the point of high pressure I beginning to wonder even more about the amount of wear that was caused by it before hand!
I used ATF+FM one time and the wear rate and fluid was sooo dark that it was horrible. The fluid stank as I already stated and it came out like water. I thought it was just the atf that was poor but I'm beginning to think it was the FM added to the ATF. I've been in contact with Torsen over this issue for a while but it is hard to pin down the exact cause of the excess noise/wear because I have such a high torque motor and that could easily contribute more wear.
Originally posted by MapOfTaziFoSho:
This is [bleep] funny! I'm going with Terry's advice. If I'm going to be a lemming at least I am follwing the one building my goddamn tranny.
I suppose I am a lemming for following Demon's advice on my 3L too.
Yep. What about that 3L, was Demon all wrong on that one too???? You know Terry
The point is Terry is a transmission expert, not a fluid expert. Read the letter from Torsen, they are powertrain experts and they don't claim to be fluid experts either but they know how to build the parts.
Terry's advice was to use FM and many knowledgeable people have warned about that over the years, not me I might add as I don't know. Still I wouldn't blame Terry in the least if it is wrong. I am not a fluids expert but I am pretty well educated in metallurgy and Materials science. I can tell you properties of steels and how it is made, heat treatments, etc. My point is it is up to us to find out for ourselves, not just blindly follow advice. If don't know and don't want to find out then put in the fluid that Ford recommends and leave it to curious people to find out.
So I suggest that until we find a real fluid expert then we hold off on the lemming attitudes and go by the fluid specifications recommended by the manufacturer.
Ford doesn't say you have to use their products as that is against the law. They publish the specifications for their products and it is up to you as the consumer to use what they tell you or match the lube specs. FM isn't one them by the way!
I think we really need some IR spectroscopy of Ford Honey versus Redline MTL. This is the easiest way I know of seeing if they are chemically similar. We must have something to compare the MTL with and if the Honey is the new fluid of choice then that is the one to compare it to.
Anyone in 1st or 2nd semester Organic Chemistry right now? When I was in O-Chem we took gasoline samples from around the city and compared. We could tell the major components of the fuels and which stations were lying on their premium grades and which weren't. An oil will be just as easy to examine.
If we combine that with the Lab Results Terry is getting done then I think we can get a good picture.
Originally posted by unisys12:
Fellas! FELLAS! Could everyone please watch the lanuage!? I mean... I should have locked this thing on the first few pages,
Yea lets just lock everything on THIS SITE. Lock it up so no one learns. We're adults having a discussion. Some have used some less than eloquent language but who cares. You think a couple 10 year olds are reading this tiny post in this vast internet. Some great information has come about in this thread because it flourished. And why BECAUSE IT WASN'T LOCKED! Why anyone would even think about locking it has issues. Thought this was a car site not romper room.
Well I will be switching to RP Synchromax when I get back form vacation. I plan on draining my tranny fluid into a clean white container to check for debris.
Terry had commented on my tranny when I took it to hm for a quaife and Zetec FD when I was doing my Turbo. It had previously been repaired by Ford for a toasted 3rd gear synchro, and after it was reassembled they had used the Ford "Honey" and it was clean as a whistle.
Soon after I broke in the trans with ATF, I switched to MTL and have about 20,000+ miles on it so it'll be interesting to see what has happened with the fluid and any wear particles therein, since then.
Originally posted by warmonger:
Originally posted by warmonger:
***section omitted***
On a side note, what lubrication can I use to protect it well?
Specifically, I used ATF initially because it was what the manufacturer
called for but the noise was very high from day one so tried other
fluids. I had good luck with Redline MTL and I wanted to make sure that
this fluid was good for protecting the differential. It is recommended
by Redline for my type of transmission but I wanted to be sure as I read
a rumor that MTL would cause oxidation of the metal on the differential.
If you can confirm or deny that Redline MTL will help/harm the diff I
would appreciate it. If you aren't aware of the specs on MTL you can
review the specs from Redlines website at www.redlineoil.com under tech.
If there is any other lubricant that you feel is better then please let
me know.
Thanks,
Tom
Reply from the Manager of Quality and project engineering himself:
Originally posted by Torsen:
Hello Tom,
Glad to see everything is working well!
***section regarding personal information omitted***
The T-2 unit is designed to run in just about anything so the manufacturer's
suggested ATF is what I would have told you to run with as we do for all
requests regarding axle or transmission fluids for the Torsen. We do get
emails from vehicle owners saying that they run their Torsen units in a wide
variety of fluids and I have not heard anything back that has been negative,
especially with the Redline MTL. That does not mean however that oxidation
does not occur, just that we have not heard about it!
Unfortunately, because of legal issues we cannot suggest a lubricant for
your transmission since we don't have the technical background to make such
suggestions or claims. I realize that this does not help much but I hope
you can at least appreciate the difficulty we face in suggesting one brand
over another and the technical expertise required to do so!
Best regards,
Manager of Quality, Project Engineering, & IT/MIS
Toyoda-Koki Automotive Torsen North America, Inc.
Company Website: http://www.torsen.com
I want to highlight the fact that he specifically points out that he has had no negative reports, especially about Redline Oil.
If my diff were oxidizing and not getting lubrication because of a fluid I used I would report it to Torsen so that they would verify and have a warning to protect customers and themselves from future warranty issues.
Upon further contact with Redline, they have pointed out that there is just no way to know all the contributing factors in these situations so far posted here. They have NOT said that anyone's opinion is right or wrong. They have only taken the stand that their product will not cause the oxidation and sludge buildup reported and that it will provide superior shifting and protect the components.
And I'm guessing they haven't had any reports on MTX-75's due to the fact there aren't but a handful of people running it. What do you think they are going to say. Yea our fluids do oxidize certain metals. He states to run what the manf. says. Very smart guy. I'd do the same... oh wait I do. Our spec is Honey now not ATF but you get the point. Run what the manf. states. Then you can argue but I have an LSD in it now. Yea what does Ford recommend for those in Europe the come from the factory with them. THE SAME THING!
Originally posted by Stazi:
Soon after I broke in the trans with ATF, I switched to MTL and have about 20,000+ miles on it so it'll be interesting to see what has happened with the fluid and any wear particles therein, since then.
I don't think their will be particles per say though. To really tell you're going to have to crack it open to see the tell tale signs. The sludge isn't going to come out with the fluid.
Originally posted by warmonger:
Is that the same cougar manual that has all the misprints and errors in it?
Wow, just wow. Ok.
Anywho when Terry gets Blackbirds trans I'll be taking pics of that too. Don't know why I even bother since I've posted a ton of pure evidence but no one can see the forest for the trees.
FWIW when I drained my MTL it smelled actually quite nice (lol). Seriously, it was not offensive at all, I thought to myself, hmm, not bad, I like it
No nasty smell in my MTL after 25k miles.
Originally posted by todras:
Originally posted by warmonger:
Is that the same cougar manual that has all the misprints and errors in it?
Wow, just wow. Ok.
Be a little open minded Todd, isn't that what we're asking everyone to do here? That doesn't sound so impossible... look at all the contour manuals that all say straight up ATF. Same tranny. Look at the facts: the only manual that says to add FM is this PDF we're referencing on the internet.... all the print manuals everyons's looking at say straight ATF.... What are you going to put your trust in, a single PDF on the internet or everyone's owners manuals?
Thats just a counter point. It would be interesting to hear from some cougar owners and see what their manuals say and to verify the accuracy of that PDF since we have a lot of different cases here.
Someone mentioned the Mondeo's in europe, anyone know what Ford has spec'd for those that come with a LSD from the factory? Straight up ford honey?
Originally posted by warmonger:
Now that you are bringing up how the FM corrodes the metal at the point of high pressure I beginning to wonder even more about the amount of wear that was caused by it before hand!
Correction - don't confuse the FM with the EP additives. The EP additives are what cause the corrosion.
I will contact friends at Lubrizol today and get their expert opinion and advice.
FWIW, Terry's getting different lubes analyzed and expects results in a few days.
Originally posted by rkneeshaw3.0:
Originally posted by todras:
Originally posted by warmonger:
Is that the same cougar manual that has all the misprints and errors in it?
Wow, just wow. Ok.
Be a little open minded Todd, isn't that what we're asking everyone to do here? That doesn't sound so impossible... look at all the contour manuals that all say straight up ATF. Same tranny. Look at the facts: the only manual that says to add FM is this PDF we're referencing on the internet.... all the print manuals everyons's looking at say straight ATF.... What are you going to put your trust in, a single PDF on the internet or everyone's owners manuals?
Thats just a counter point. It would be interesting to hear from some cougar owners and see what their manuals say and to verify the accuracy of that PDF since we have a lot of different cases here.
Someone mentioned the Mondeo's in europe, anyone know what Ford has spec'd for those that come with a LSD from the factory? Straight up ford honey?
I'm going to visit my brother this weekend and I'll open up his 01 Cougar manual and see what it says. This is just a pdf of a 99 manual. Yea I'm sure it was fabricated. How could you just mistakenly print that? Yes the Cougar S didn't make it to production but was extremely close. Big deal. So everything in the manual is a mistake because they had Cougar S info?
Also owner manuals can be DL'd from here www.fleet.ford.com
The 99 Cougar manual is the only one that states to add 2 oz of FM.
There's no need to be sarcastic.
My 96 manual also says only "Mercon ATF." It also says nothing about changing the fluid in the MTX.
With so much confusion, speculation, and technical mumbo-jumbo to sift through, all I want to know is, "What is the current Ford spec? and why?"
Someone show me where Ford has come out and said that I need to change my fluid in my 96 Contour, and that when I do, what I should use. TSB number? What does the "official" service manual say, and what is the most current version?
Then I want that information stickied in a separate post so that those less adventurous of us who just want the darn info can get it quickly and leave all you Einsteins and Edisons alone.
There's a lot of info in here but none of it is controlled.
Roger Ford made many internal changes to the manual transmissions in 2000 or 01. The changes changed the fluid capicity. Before the changes, the capicity was 2.7 quarts. After the changes the capacity was 2.2 quarts. Starting with the revised transmission, they started using a golden or honey colored synthetic fluid. I don't think we can get proof w/o calling a dealer. When the honey came out they stated that it should be used now on all 95 to current MTX-75's. You can just call and ask them.
Oh god no, Demon is anything but wrong on that. I am following his blueprint, but I was upset that he called us lemmings at one point back in the thread. Going thru a re-read I saw this and just took it a lil too personally.
Originally posted by todras:
Roger Ford made many internal changes to the manual transmissions in 2000 or 01. The changes changed the fluid capicity. Before the changes, the capicity was 2.7 quarts. After the changes the capacity was 2.2 quarts. Starting with the revised transmission, they started using a golden or honey colored synthetic fluid. I don't think we can get proof w/o calling a dealer. When the honey came out they stated that it should be used now on all 95 to current MTX-75's. You can just call and ask them.
In addition, there is an official Ford TSB #00-1-9. This TSB says to use the Ford Honey (XT-M5-QS), no mention of any friction modifier at all.
http://www.contour.org/FAQ/docs/New_Transaxle_Fluid_Service.pdf
There you go Roger. Thanks Ryan. And Pete wtf are you rambling about?!!
Originally posted by Stazi:
Well I will be switching to RP Synchromax when I get back form vacation. I plan on draining my tranny fluid into a clean white container to check for debris.
Terry had commented on my tranny when I took it to hm for a quaife and Zetec FD when I was doing my Turbo. It had previously been repaired by Ford for a toasted 3rd gear synchro, and after it was reassembled they had used the Ford "Honey" and it was clean as a whistle.
Soon after I broke in the trans with ATF, I switched to MTL and have about 20,000+ miles on it so it'll be interesting to see what has happened with the fluid and any wear particles therein, since then.
Take some pics.
Originally posted by rkneeshaw3.0:
Originally posted by todras:
Roger Ford made many internal changes to the manual transmissions in 2000 or 01. The changes changed the fluid capicity. Before the changes, the capicity was 2.7 quarts. After the changes the capacity was 2.2 quarts. Starting with the revised transmission, they started using a golden or honey colored synthetic fluid. I don't think we can get proof w/o calling a dealer. When the honey came out they stated that it should be used now on all 95 to current MTX-75's. You can just call and ask them.
In addition, there is an official Ford TSB #00-1-9. This TSB says to use the Ford Honey (XT-M5-QS), no mention of any friction modifier at all.
http://www.contour.org/FAQ/docs/New_Transaxle_Fluid_Service.pdf
Thanks, guys. That's what I needed.
Now, I know a lot of guys "recommend" servicing the MTX, but has Ford ever made mention of a service interval?
What happens when someone cracks their tranny open after using MTL, and it's clean?
Mark
Originally posted by Y2KSVT:
What happens when someone cracks their tranny open after using MTL, and it's clean?
Mark
Define clean? I guess if you like a black coating on everything. As you can see in Pete's 1 year old tranny it's never going to look clean/shiney like the ones that didn't use MTL. And if you can't see that but I'm sorry you're just an idiot. No helping that. I'd never use a fluid that covered everything with black residue.
Originally posted by todras:
Define clean? I guess if you like a black coating on everything. As you can see in Pete's 1 year old tranny it's never going to look clean/shiney like the ones that didn't use MTL. And if you can't see that but I'm sorry you're just an idiot. No helping that. I'd never use a fluid that covered everything with black residue.
Damn Todd...be nice. Rub yo ears and say wooosaaahhhh.
Originally posted by RogerB:
Now, I know a lot of guys "recommend" servicing the MTX, but has Ford ever made mention of a service interval?
This is what my 96 manual states.
Manual Transaxle Fluid
The lubricant level and quality should not deteriorate under
normal driving conditions. However, you should have the fluid level checked occasionally. If lubricant is required, see Lubricant Specifications in this chapter.
Normal driving conditions? Define normal? All of us drive in extreme conditions. It's like the platinum plugs lasting 100k. It goes with everything on the car, flush the coolant, trans, fluid, change fuel filters etc etc. How well do want your car to perform and last? I'd say change the trans. fluid every 40k minimum.
That black coating looks a lot like the black coating that you usually find all over everthing when you remove a diff cover to change the diff fluid. I'm sure that it is fluid related. On the diffs, it is not supposed to be harmful. Remember that usually diffs have stronger additives, especially ep (extreme pressure) additives to put up with the higher pressures from the hypoid cut gears. Some of these ep additives are what makes diff gear oil unsuitable for manual transmission use.
I wonder just what MTL has in it.
Hello! Just what Terry has been saying all along!!!!!! Apparently no one can grasp this for unknown reasons.
We dont know that for sure yet, the lab tests aren't back. At this point we dont know exactly WHAT is causing that. What if hte tests of the MTL come back and there are 0 EP additives? Its all speculation until we get the results back from the lab.
For now, I'm going with what Terry recommends: Straight up Ford Honey, no FM, as per Ford's official recommendation via TSB, until we know more from the tests.
I just sent an e-mail to one of my Lubrizol contacts, so hopefully I'll have more information to share soon.
Anyone want to put $ where their mouth is on this issue before the lab results come back?
all i know after reading as much of this as i could, is that my upcoming fluid change will involve 3 qts of Penzoil Syncromesh......
Originally posted by todras:
Originally posted by RogerB:
Now, I know a lot of guys "recommend" servicing the MTX, but has Ford ever made mention of a service interval?
This is what my 96 manual states.
Manual Transaxle Fluid
The lubricant level and quality should not deteriorate under
normal driving conditions. However, you should have the fluid level checked occasionally. If lubricant is required, see Lubricant Specifications in this chapter.
Normal driving conditions? Define normal? All of us drive in extreme conditions. It's like the platinum plugs lasting 100k. It goes with everything on the car, flush the coolant, trans, fluid, change fuel filters etc etc. How well do want your car to perform and last? I'd say change the trans. fluid every 40k minimum.
I missed that part of my 96 manual last night, but it's also out of date.
I'm frankly not interested in anybody's "recommendations" right now. (Well, I appreciate them, but I've already read them.) I'm looking for documentation.
Either way, I'll be changing my fluid as soon as I can, as it is nearing 75k on the original fluid. I would just like to see what the factory perceives as a valid reason to service.
[rant]As for "recommendations," I've been involved in these discussions before with Terry, and when I asked for clarification from Terry on whether or not to use the FM with the honey, I got nothing but silence. Maybe he felt he already answered that somewhere else, or he was sick of saying it, or he just didn't see it. Then, IIRC, I got some other yahoos chiming in, and there are still people "over there" recommending ZL-7 with everything. Meanwhile I've got the service tech at the local dealer telling me there's no reason to ever service the MTX. I've had it with the circle jerk. Lemmings, my arse. The 3 or 4 people I respect the most can't even agree on stuff around here, and half the time we get "Oops...that wasn't right" a couple years later. It pays to be slow to act, sometimes, and this thread is proof of that.
Sorry. Had to vent. [/rant]
Originally posted by todras:
Anyone want to put $ where their mouth is on this issue before the lab results come back?
Anyone want to swing from Terry's righty, to keep the balance from Todd holding onto his lefty?
No offense, but there are some people on here stating that they've been using the MTL with no ill effects. I'm not backing them up, as I've never used the product. I do like to be presented with all evidence before making a decision, so I'll keep my money in my wallet on this bet. I could care less if the lab tests come back proving that MTL will eat a hole in the tranny case and make every part inside dissinigrate, but to rule them out because of one or two instances is a little quick, IMHO.
Anyone on here that's owned their car since NEW, and knows their maintenance history that is running MTL?
Mark
My only problem with MTL was rough shifting.
I do, but I have only had MTL in the gear box for 5 months now (only about 2800 miles).
Originally posted by pole120:
all i know after reading as much of this as i could, is that my upcoming fluid change will involve 3 qts of Penzoil Syncromesh......
And why would that be? Because Demon is running it? Do your own research. He said he did his research on MTL. Must be great stuff since he is no longer running it. I think I'm going to make a witches brew and just mix a hald a qt of everything. I'll get the best of all worlds. Demon is just like the rest of us. Just a car nut. What makes him better than anyone else? I think I'm going to trust the guy as Pete said that builds my transmission. No only builds it but also worked for Ford developing the CDW-27. I'll hang from his left/right nut what have you thanks. He has the schooling and many years of experience that almost everyone on here lacks. I don't see anyone on her tearing down tranny's on a daily basis and noting what fluid was ran.
Originally posted by RogerB:
I missed that part of my 96 manual last night, but it's also out of date.
I'm frankly not interested in anybody's "recommendations" right now. (Well, I appreciate them, but I've already read them.) I'm looking for documentation.
Either way, I'll be changing my fluid as soon as I can, as it is nearing 75k on the original fluid. I would just like to see what the factory perceives as a valid reason to service.
[rant]As for "recommendations," I've been involved in these discussions before with Terry, and when I asked for clarification from Terry on whether or not to use the FM with the honey, I got nothing but silence. Maybe he felt he already answered that somewhere else, or he was sick of saying it, or he just didn't see it. Then, IIRC, I got some other yahoos chiming in, and there are still people "over there" recommending ZL-7 with everything. Meanwhile I've got the service tech at the local dealer telling me there's no reason to ever service the MTX. I've had it with the circle jerk. Lemmings, my arse. The 3 or 4 people I respect the most can't even agree on stuff around here, and half the time we get "Oops...that wasn't right" a couple years later. It pays to be slow to act, sometimes, and this thread is proof of that.
Sorry. Had to vent. [/rant]
What do you want documentation on? We already know what the manual states. I think even VW's say no service to trannys and coolant. I'm not keeping mine in my car forever. Things age and break down. Tranny fluid isn't miracle fluid. Just like oil should be changed every 3-5k. Roger you're a smart guy. When do you think it would be time to change out? In the 30-50k range. That's maybe 3 times in the vehicles average life. You don't need Ford to tell you what common sense tells you. And who said 'oops that wasn't right'? Not Terry. He's said the same thing for years.
Originally posted by rkneeshaw3.0:
Originally posted by Y2KSVT:
What happens when someone cracks their tranny open after using MTL, and it's clean?
Mark
You mean besides Tom & myself already having done that and proved that it's not the MTL fluid.
Oh that's right. We don't count because Terry said it's the MTL because he found it on 2 MTXs that ran MTL for a short period but had a neglected history. That's logical...
That's not even taking into consideration all the other data we've collected against this unsubstanciated theory. It is just a weak theory folks because there is absolutely "no proof" it's the MTL's fault. Yet there are countless reasons it's not the MTL and countless reasons why you shouldn't add FM to the fluid (expecially POS ATF) yet next to no one listens.
It gets to a point where, "what's the damn point! Nearly everyone is a closed minded lap dog!"
Originally posted by DemonSVT:
You mean besides Tom & myself already having done that and proved that it's not the MTL fluid.
Oh that's right. We don't count because Terry said it's the MTL because he found it on 2 MTXs that ran MTL for a short period but had a neglected history. That's logical...
Well as stated previously in this thread. How many ppl are running the crap? A very small percentage. How many go off to Terry to be repaired on top of that? An even smaller percentage. The only ones that he's torn down that run MTL have proof that they have oxidation, wear issues and sludge.
Originally posted by DemonSVT:
That's not even taking into consideration all the other data we've collected against this unsubstanciated theory.
And what data is that? I missed the pictures.
Originally posted by DemonSVT:
It gets to a point where, "what's the damn point! Nearly everyone is closed minded!"
Pot calling kettle black.
Originally posted by todras:
Originally posted by DemonSVT:
Why do you think I've been against the additive for years???
Well since MTL has FM's in it already why aren't you against it?
Still haven't heard this answered. I like how certain points are skipped over.
Originally posted by todras:
Originally posted by RogerB:
I missed that part of my 96 manual last night, but it's also out of date.
I'm frankly not interested in anybody's "recommendations" right now. (Well, I appreciate them, but I've already read them.) I'm looking for documentation.
Either way, I'll be changing my fluid as soon as I can, as it is nearing 75k on the original fluid. I would just like to see what the factory perceives as a valid reason to service.
[rant]As for "recommendations," I've been involved in these discussions before with Terry, and when I asked for clarification from Terry on whether or not to use the FM with the honey, I got nothing but silence. Maybe he felt he already answered that somewhere else, or he was sick of saying it, or he just didn't see it. Then, IIRC, I got some other yahoos chiming in, and there are still people "over there" recommending ZL-7 with everything. Meanwhile I've got the service tech at the local dealer telling me there's no reason to ever service the MTX. I've had it with the circle jerk. Lemmings, my arse. The 3 or 4 people I respect the most can't even agree on stuff around here, and half the time we get "Oops...that wasn't right" a couple years later. It pays to be slow to act, sometimes, and this thread is proof of that.
Sorry. Had to vent. [/rant]
What do you want documentation on? We already know what the manual states. I think even VW's say no service to trannys and coolant. I'm not keeping mine in my car forever. Things age and break down. Tranny fluid isn't miracle fluid. Just like oil should be changed every 3-5k. Roger you're a smart guy. When do you think it would be time to change out? In the 30-50k range. That's maybe 3 times in the vehicles average life. You don't need Ford to tell you what common sense tells you. And who said 'oops that wasn't right'? Not Terry. He's said the same thing for years.
The Ford service interval. The outdated manual says what it says. It's not the current standard for fluid, either.
Yeah, I'm a smart guy, but I have almost 75k on the original fluid, because my manual says it's OK. Because the local Ford service guy, who I know is always trying to sell unnecessary service, recommends against it. Lots of different cars out there with different service intervals and fluids. "Conventional wisdom" is often wrong. Nevertheless, knowing that the Ford spec is the honey by itself, I figure I can't go wrong with a drain and fill using the spec'd fluid. Yes, my previous cars had a 30k service interval on the tranny, but cars are coming from the factory now with full synthetic lubes and "sealed" cases. All my old cars used 30W motor oil in the tranny. Obviously a different ball game.
Terry learns just like the rest of us. Maybe his stance has been firm on the MTX fill, but he has made mistakes in the past on other things, or, at least admitted to discovering new knowledge that made his "old knowledge" obsolete. It happens to the best of us, and the best of us admit it and move on.
Of course, Ford has never come out (AFAIK) with a replacement interval for the waterpump, or a less-than-100k-mile tune-up recommendation, either, so I know this is probably a long shot.
Todd, I appreciate your position, but you obviously don't possess the documentation I'm looking for (if it even exists). All I'm asking is that if anyone has access to it, and knows it's current, please share.
Originally posted by todras:
Originally posted by pole120:
all i know after reading as much of this as i could, is that my upcoming fluid change will involve 3 qts of Penzoil Syncromesh......
And why would that be? Because Demon is running it? Do your own research. He said he did his research on MTL. Must be great stuff since he is no longer running it. I think I'm going to make a witches brew and just mix a hald a qt of everything. I'll get the best of all worlds. Demon is just like the rest of us. Just a car nut. What makes him better than anyone else? I think I'm going to trust the guy as Pete said that builds my transmission. No only builds it but also worked for Ford developing the CDW-27. I'll hang from his left/right nut what have you thanks. He has the schooling and many years of experience that almost everyone on here lacks. I don't see anyone on her tearing down tranny's on a daily basis and noting what fluid was ran.
Originally posted by todras:
I think everything is laid out for others to judge.
and my decision is to run the Syncromesh......i've made my own judgement\decision as you've suggested i do.
edit:
I just picked up a ford TSB that states
*portions omitted*
"the new fluid (XT-M5-QS(1 L/quart)) is fully compatable wit hearlier (1995-2000 model year) transaxles and fluid. It is recomended that this new synthetic fluid(XT-M5-QS(1 L/quart)) be used exclusively in all model year MTX-75 transaxles when filling a full drqained unit, or when toppin off fluid level."
one question, there is no mentiuon of a "friction modifier", and can't recall what i all read.
is it not needed as opposed to what was stated earlier??
Originally posted by DemonSVT:
Syncromesh works perfectly as is while Ford's needs the LSD additive. Advantage Syncromesh.
Originally posted by todras:
I like how certain points are skipped over.
It's nice isnt it. Did you miss this one:
Originally posted by DemonSVT:
Originally posted by Y2KSVT:
What happens when someone cracks their tranny open after using MTL, and it's clean?
Mark
[image]
You mean besides Tom & myself already having done that and proved that it's not the MTL fluid.
So two people with MTL & Buildup in the trans. Two People without. NO CHEMICAL RESULTS YET stating that the buildup IS IN FACT DRIECTLY CAUSED BY MTL. Wow that's highly conclusive isnt it.
Originally posted by Y2KSVT:
Anyone on here that's owned their car since NEW, and knows their maintenance history that is running MTL?
Mark
Mine has had the "Coctail" since almost new.. and just had it's 4th trans flush done at Ford. Fluid was a bit dark. More specifically, the fluid consisted of Mobil 1 ATF with Friction Modifier. When the trans was opened up do to a FAILED 3RD GEAR SYNCHRO three months ago, according to the Ford Service report, the trans had a lot of "black residue on the inside of the trans case, and required an additional hour or so in the parts tank to remove the residue". They were a bit stumped there, as they knew of the cars past and how many flushes it's had. Ford re-filled it with the recomended Ford fluid, not the cocktail... and the shifts are hard into first gear. 2 months later, I'm getting ready to drain this crap out and put whatever is decided in this dicussion back in. RP Syncromesh is sounding positive.
Originally posted by akrump47:
Originally posted by todras:
I like how certain points are skipped over.
It's nice isnt it. Did you miss this one:
Originally posted by DemonSVT:
Originally posted by Y2KSVT:
What happens when someone cracks their tranny open after using MTL, and it's clean?
Mark
[image]
You mean besides Tom & myself already having done that and proved that it's not the MTL fluid.
So two people with MTL & Buildup in the trans. Two People without. NO CHEMICAL RESULTS YET stating that the buildup IS IN FACT DRIECTLY CAUSED BY MTL. Wow that's highly conclusive isnt it.
Those aren't questions. Those are statements on observations. Do we have pics of what they said they've encountered? No. I don't know what they have seen or done. I've seen the transmissions that I've posted pics of and have been told what they run. I also know that Demon's car supposedly puts out so much power and has never shown a dyno sheet.
Found a pump? What would you need a pump for? Just need a funnel with a long tube attached to it for filling.
Anywho. I'd run Ford Honey or something that meets or exceeds it's specs. Oh wait there isn't anything out there that does that.
People don't start asking questions on what you should run. You're going to have to figure that out yourself. I think this is the 2nd post asking this. Either you're going to listen to Greg/Tom or Terry.
Originally posted by DemonSVT:
Originally posted by rkneeshaw3.0:
Originally posted by Y2KSVT:
What happens when someone cracks their tranny open after using MTL, and it's clean?
Mark
You mean besides Tom & myself already having done that and proved that it's not the MTL fluid.
Oh that's right. We don't count because Terry said it's the MTL because he found it on 2 MTXs that ran MTL for a short period but had a neglected history. That's logical...
That's not even taking into consideration all the other data we've collected against this unsubstanciated theory. It is just a weak theory folks because there is absolutely "no proof" it's the MTL's fault. Yet there are countless reasons it's not the MTL and countless reasons why you shouldn't add FM to the fluid (expecially POS ATF) yet next to no one listens.
It gets to a point where, "what's the damn point! Nearly everyone is a closed minded lap dog!"
And what, we are close minded lap dogs because we aren't YOUR lapdogs! Additionally, how does my transmission have a neglected history.
Demon when you cracked your trans open what was the very LAST fluid you had run in it? Better question why aren't you running MTL now?
Stryped...you have ZERO credibility. 
Originally posted by todras:
People don't start asking questions on what you should run. You're going to have to figure that out yourself.
Then don't make coments about our descision.
Originally posted by pole120:
Originally posted by todras:
People don't start asking questions on what you should run. You're going to have to figure that out yourself.
Then don't make coments about our descision.
Can i get a reply on this?? \/
Originally posted by pole120:
edit:
I just picked up a ford TSB that states
*portions omitted*
"the new fluid (XT-M5-QS(1 L/quart)) is fully compatable wit hearlier (1995-2000 model year) transaxles and fluid. It is recomended that this new synthetic fluid(XT-M5-QS(1 L/quart)) be used exclusively in all model year MTX-75 transaxles when filling a full drqained unit, or when toppin off fluid level."
one question, there is no mentiuon of a "friction modifier", and can't recall what i all read.
is it not needed as opposed to what was stated earlier??
Originally posted by DemonSVT:
Syncromesh works perfectly as is while Ford's needs the LSD additive. Advantage Syncromesh.
Originally posted by DemonSVT:
You mean besides Tom & myself already having done that and proved that it's not the MTL fluid.
Oh that's right. We don't count because Terry said it's the MTL because he found it on 2 MTXs that ran MTL for a short period but had a neglected history. That's logical...
This was sort of the point I was getting at. There aren't a lot of people on here that know their car's true maintenance history, which is why I asked for people who've owned their cars since new.
I do know that my transmission has been rebuilt twice for 3rd gear grind. The first rebuild was at ~34k miles, and the Ford recommended fluid was used. The second was at 52k miles, and I've had the Mercon ATF w/ FM for 32k miles, and it's held up a lot better than with the previous fluid. Not to mention this last build has seen it's most abuse with the 3L having been built at the same time as the tranny rebuild. I think I'm going to do a tranny flush and fill this winter, but the fluid I use is undecided.
Mark
In that case. I re-tract my comment. Still for some that have actual lives (unlike myself) they don't have the extra time to research.
Stryped still has no credibility.
Originally posted by MapOfTaziFoSho:
Stryped...you have ZERO credibility.
Originally posted by todras:
Do we have pics of what they said they've encountered? No. I don't know what they have seen or done. I've seen the transmissions that I've posted pics of and have been told what they run.
Then I don't think we should discredit any of the more respected members of this community, because they haven't shown pictures of their transmissions. I think Tom and Greg both would be the FIRST people to come on here and tell people of any negative findings, as they have both proven to be here to HELP fellow CEG'ers. Knowing that Greg switched from MTL to another brand of tranny fluid, I'm lead to believe that he had no buildup that the 2 cases you have apart did, or he'd probably be telling people to avoid MTL! Unless Greg works for Redline, he hasn't had a reason to NOT tell us to avoid it.
Mark
Answer me this then. If the MTX-75 at one time was spec'd to run ATF. Then why run MTL? States on the back of an MTL bottle..."For transmissions recommending an ATF, Red Line D4 ATF should be used." So why are people using MTL versus Redline D4 ATF?
Originally posted by todras:
Answer me this then. If the MTX-75 at one time was spec'd to run ATF. Then why run MTL? States on the back of an MTL bottle..."For transmissions recommending an ATF, Red Line D4 ATF should be used." So why are people using MTL
versus Redline D4 ATF?
Perhaps because Ford changed the spec from ATF to gear oil? That sounds to me like either one could be correct, but the gear oil would be preferred. After all, ATF was the spec for five model years.
About black residue when using Mercon. Has anyone paid attention to what NEW Mercon looks like? Pour a little in a manner that you can see light through the pour, and notice the BLACK that is in it. It gives Mercon a sort of a smokey color. That is part of the additive package and part of what makes Mercon (and Dexron) unique from other trans fluids. ATF+3 doesn't have that. It is optically clearer. Could part of the black residue you see left behind be that black additive?
Originally posted by todras:
Answer me this then. If the MTX-75 at one time was spec'd to run ATF. Then why run MTL? States on the back of an MTL bottle..."For transmissions recommending an ATF, Red Line D4 ATF should be used." So why are people using MTL versus Redline D4 ATF?
I couldn't tell you Todd. Like I said, I'm not using the MTL, or any Redline product for that matter. My only point was that there's an awful lot of finger pointing going on in this thread, with less than substantial evidence to backup ANYONE'S claims.
I think both sides have presented very valid points, and I'm not one to go jumping on any bandwagons. This will all work itself out, and I'll be interested to see what the test results conclude.
Mark
Originally posted by pole120:
Originally posted by pole120:
Originally posted by todras:
People don't start asking questions on what you should run. You're going to have to figure that out yourself.
Then don't make coments about our descision.
Can i get a reply on this?? \/
Originally posted by pole120:
edit:
I just picked up a ford TSB that states
*portions omitted*
"the new fluid (XT-M5-QS(1 L/quart)) is fully compatable wit hearlier (1995-2000 model year) transaxles and fluid. It is recomended that this new synthetic fluid(XT-M5-QS(1 L/quart)) be used exclusively in all model year MTX-75 transaxles when filling a full drqained unit, or when toppin off fluid level."
one question, there is no mentiuon of a "friction modifier", and can't recall what i all read.
is it not needed as opposed to what was stated earlier??
Originally posted by DemonSVT:
Syncromesh works perfectly as is while Ford's needs the LSD additive. Advantage Syncromesh.
Use some reason: Ford does NOT say to use FM with the honey. The TSB calls for Ford Honey straight up. Someone else is suggesting you might want to use FM.
You decide: follow Ford's official documenatation or a car enthusiasts advice.
As of this posting, there is no such thing as a product that says "meets or excedes specificates for Ford Honey". Which is the fluid Ford says should be used in this transmission. So I'm going to use Ford Honey and be cool with it.
Originally posted by Big Jim:
Perhaps because Ford changed the spec from ATF to gear oil?
What? Is Ford Honey a gear oil?
The only documentation produced has said ATF or Ford Honey, when/where has it been said to use a gear oil?
I just got off the phone with Steve at Tousley Ford. He said, and he isnt a fluid guru, but he told me I should be running Ford Honey. And for $14 Im gonna switch it out.
-tropictour
Ryan, I think the Ford Honey meets the specs of a GL-4 gear oil. I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong. But your right, there is nothing or no one who will not reccomend it.
Originally posted by Y2KSVT:
My only point was that there's an awful lot of finger pointing going on in this thread, with less than substantial evidence to backup ANYONE'S claims.
I think both sides have presented very valid points, and I'm not one to go jumping on any bandwagons. This will all work itself out, and I'll be interested to see what the test results conclude.
I 100% agree with you.
Originally posted by rkneeshaw3.0:
Originally posted by Big Jim:
Perhaps because Ford changed the spec from ATF to gear oil?
What? Is Ford Honey a gear oil?
The only documentation produced has said ATF or Ford Honey, when/where has it been said to use a gear oil?
Somewhere in the distant past of CEG I posted the spec sheet for Ford "honey". IIRC it said that it was a GL4 85W95 gear oil. I don't remember clearly what viscosity it is, but I do remember clearly that it was GL4. That would have probably been three or four years ago.
wow, $18 a quart for ford hiney at the dealer......thats just sad.
Originally posted by Big Jim:
Originally posted by rkneeshaw3.0:
Originally posted by Big Jim:
Perhaps because Ford changed the spec from ATF to gear oil?
What? Is Ford Honey a gear oil?
The only documentation produced has said ATF or Ford Honey, when/where has it been said to use a gear oil?
Somewhere in the distant past of CEG I posted the spec sheet for Ford "honey". IIRC it said that it was a GL4 85W95 gear oil. I don't remember clearly what viscosity it is, but I do remember clearly that it was GL4. That would have probably been three or four years ago.
Ford Honey is a fully synthetic GL4 85W90 GEAR OIL.
Like Big Jim said this information has only been posted for about 3 YEARS now! Before that you had to read the Ford reports to find it's specs.
12/99 was when Ford stated the TSB change to the "new Honey" fluid. That will be 6 YEARS this December.
There sure are a lot of people that think this is all new information.
The funniest part about this whole thing is my only issue was with the original poster ignorantly blaming the MTL for being "too thick" and causing his NEGLECT damage. Unfortunately the majority of the folks everywhere jumped on this band wagon without a freakin' clue in the world. Some of them even defend the original post still.
I'll gladly cut my loses as I have much more important things to do then to try and talk to an ignorant brick wall. I've wasted enough of my time.
'nuff said.
That is why I didn't do it....couldn't remember the reason. I'm doing it this time tho.
I found that old thread. Please note that I started off wrong saying that it is a GL5 fluid and later corrected myself to show that it is a GL4 fluid. Also note that the display of the spec sheet somehow isn't still available, but you can tell from how others responded that they had read it.
The main reason for looking it up is that it is actually 75W90 gear oil.
http://www.contour.org/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=tranny&Number=215043&page=&view=&sb=5&o=&fpart=1&vc=1
Originally posted by todras:
Originally posted by warmonger:
Originally posted by warmonger:
***section omitted***
On a side note, what lubrication can I use to protect it well?
Specifically, I used ATF initially because it was what the manufacturer
called for but the noise was very high from day one so tried other
fluids. I had good luck with Redline MTL and I wanted to make sure that
this fluid was good for protecting the differential. It is recommended
by Redline for my type of transmission but I wanted to be sure as I read
a rumor that MTL would cause oxidation of the metal on the differential.
If you can confirm or deny that Redline MTL will help/harm the diff I
would appreciate it. If you aren't aware of the specs on MTL you can
review the specs from Redlines website at www.redlineoil.com under tech.
If there is any other lubricant that you feel is better then please let
me know.
Thanks,
Tom
Reply from the Manager of Quality and project engineering himself:
Originally posted by Torsen:
Hello Tom,
Glad to see everything is working well!
***section regarding personal information omitted***
The T-2 unit is designed to run in just about anything so the manufacturer's
suggested ATF is what I would have told you to run with as we do for all
requests regarding axle or transmission fluids for the Torsen. We do get
emails from vehicle owners saying that they run their Torsen units in a wide
variety of fluids and I have not heard anything back that has been negative,
especially with the Redline MTL. That does not mean however that oxidation
does not occur, just that we have not heard about it!
Unfortunately, because of legal issues we cannot suggest a lubricant for
your transmission since we don't have the technical background to make such
suggestions or claims. I realize that this does not help much but I hope
you can at least appreciate the difficulty we face in suggesting one brand
over another and the technical expertise required to do so!
Best regards,
Manager of Quality, Project Engineering, & IT/MIS
Toyoda-Koki Automotive Torsen North America, Inc.
Company Website: http://www.torsen.com
I want to highlight the fact that he specifically points out that he has had no negative reports, especially about Redline Oil.
If my diff were oxidizing and not getting lubrication because of a fluid I used I would report it to Torsen so that they would verify and have a warning to protect customers and themselves from future warranty issues.
Upon further contact with Redline, they have pointed out that there is just no way to know all the contributing factors in these situations so far posted here. They have NOT said that anyone's opinion is right or wrong. They have only taken the stand that their product will not cause the oxidation and sludge buildup reported and that it will provide superior shifting and protect the components.
And I'm guessing they haven't had any reports on MTX-75's due to the fact there aren't but a handful of people running it. What do you think they are going to say. Yea our fluids do oxidize certain metals. He states to run what the manf. says. Very smart guy. I'd do the same... oh wait I do. Our spec is Honey now not ATF but you get the point. Run what the manf. states. Then you can argue but I have an LSD in it now. Yea what does Ford recommend for those in Europe the come from the factory with them. THE SAME THING!
Sorry Todd, but you have to READ what I wrote before posting a response. Look at what I highlighted in your response and tell me how that makes sense? This was from TORSEN, not Redline. They have nothing to gain by helping or hurting Redline Oil. They would likely report any case of any problem with Redline Oils used with their differentials for ANY transmission because of the questions that I asked.
Therefore they have indirectly supported that Redline Oils are not causing problems with their diffs. End of story.
Originally posted by todras:
Originally posted by Stazi:
Soon after I broke in the trans with ATF, I switched to MTL and have about 20,000+ miles on it so it'll be interesting to see what has happened with the fluid and any wear particles therein, since then.
I don't think their will be particles per say though. To really tell you're going to have to crack it open to see the tell tale signs. The sludge isn't going to come out with the fluid.
Funny, you are suddenly an expert yourself? I argue from experience that those 'so-called' telltale signs are not really signs of a problem at all! Go to any transmission place the does a decent around of turnaround with your photos. Ask them if this is normal in a High Use transmission with moderate oil changes. This would assume you don't prep them before hand with any information, but I think you'll find that it is quite common.
It all depends on too many factors such as time on the fluid, current usage, and previous situations the trans was in like fluids and usage before the rebuild.
Originally posted by todras:
Originally posted by warmonger:
Is that the same cougar manual that has all the misprints and errors in it?
Wow, just wow. Ok.
Anywho when Terry gets Blackbirds trans I'll be taking pics of that too. Don't know why I even bother since I've posted a ton of pure evidence but no one can see the forest for the trees.
How the heck is that evidence? You don't even know what I know about that cougar manual yet you spout it as truth? Who's actually being foolish now? I KNOW that the manual is in error because I have seen it with my own eyes and verified with the Mercury Dealer that there were ERRORS in the manual! You should be saying "'wow' I walked into that one".
I'm NOT kidding, check what I'm telling you about the contents of the manual and the so-called Cougar 'S' and whatnot. It was a load of bunk, a concept.
Hell, if I lied I would never be trusted again but if you see it in print it must be fact?
Originally posted by todras:
yea I'm sure it was fabricated. How could you just mistakenly print that? Yes the Cougar S didn't make it to production but was extremely close. Big deal. So everything in the manual is a mistake because they had Cougar S info?
The 99 Cougar manual is the only one that states to add 2 oz of FM.
You ask how can you mistakenly print something yet in the same paragraph you say the CougarS was extremely close but never made it into production. So what you are saying is someone went ahead and added stuff they weren't supposed to before the quality control guys could sort it all out....and they went to print on it and printed in error. Nothing unbelievable about that. It also means that other things could have been inadvertently printed. Therefore the manual is suspect and we throw that bit of evidence OUT....same as in court.
Next.
Just FYI, another response from Redline.
Originally posted by Redline Oil:
...
The MTL is not corrosive to brass or bronze and is non-corrosive at temperatures in excess of 375�°F. Sulphur does not oxidize aluminum. Aluminum oxide is white, not black.
Starting in 2000 Ford started recommending a different fluid, XT-M5_QS a synthetic manual transmission fluid in these all of transaxles and retrofitting it in earlier units. This is a GL-4 qualified fluid, it contains the GL-4 levels of sulphur and is very close in viscosity to the MTL.
If the black coloration is due to anything other than just normal wear, it may be just oxidation due to temperature. A sulphur containing fluid can darken with sufficient temperature, this doesn't change it's ability to perform or protect. An oxide coating on a gear actually is protective. I haven't seen an indication that MTL doesn't perform or protect well in the transaxles, certainly superior to an ATF. An ATF does use a different GL-4 chemistry so would tend to remain clearer/lighter in color.
In a dog ring racing transaxle we would recommend the ShockProof LightWeight though that is a completely different application.
A note regarding the MTL spec sheet quote, it is saying the MTL is a suitable replacement for a motor oil or a GL-1, GL-3 or GL-4 gear oil in a transmission/transaxle application. A 5W30 motor oil for example is the same viscosity as a 70W80 gear oil and a good motor oil will offer GL-4 protection levels. Ford has and currently does call for a GL-4 gear oil in the MTX-75 transaxle as noted above.
I am sorry if people are selling off their MTL based on misinformation.
Please feel free to contact me with any additional questions and/or comments.
Regards, Dave
Red Line Oil
Combine this with some of the Materials information I posted and You may start to wonder if your assumptions are correct. IN FACT, why haven't there been any comments on my observations that Aluminum Oxide isn't likely to be affected by additional corrosives?
Why hasn't someone addressed the issue that a friction based LSD is going to wear down material over time and that the material is going to go somewhere?
Originally posted by todras:
Define clean? I guess if you like a black coating on everything. As you can see in Pete's 1 year old tranny it's never going to look clean/shiney like the ones that didn't use MTL. And if you can't see that but I'm sorry you're just an idiot. No helping that. I'd never use a fluid that covered everything with black residue.
That is total bullcrap. You've used ATF haven't you? Ask Terry about the buildup in the original fluid fill of the transmissions and what color it was!!
Originally posted by Big Jim:
That black coating looks a lot like the black coating that you usually find all over everthing when you remove a diff cover to change the diff fluid. I'm sure that it is fluid related. On the diffs, it is not supposed to be harmful. Remember that usually diffs have stronger additives, especially ep (extreme pressure) additives to put up with the higher pressures from the hypoid cut gears. Some of these ep additives are what makes diff gear oil unsuitable for manual transmission use.
I wonder just what MTL has in it.
You're telling me with all your experience you've never cracked an MTX and seen that stuff? You've never cracked an ATX pan and had to clean it?
Originally posted by Y2KSVT:
Originally posted by todras:
Anyone want to put $ where their mouth is on this issue before the lab results come back?
Anyone want to swing from Terry's righty, to keep the balance from Todd holding onto his lefty?
No offense, but there are some people on here stating that they've been using the MTL with no ill effects. I'm not backing them up, as I've never used the product. I do like to be presented with all evidence before making a decision, so I'll keep my money in my wallet on this bet. I could care less if the lab tests come back proving that MTL will eat a hole in the tranny case and make every part inside dissinigrate, but to rule them out because of one or two instances is a little quick, IMHO.
Anyone on here that's owned their car since NEW, and knows their maintenance history that is running MTL?
Mark
Umm yes... ME! Other than warranty work I've done all maintenance, mods, and repairs.
Originally posted by Stry-ped:
Originally posted by Y2KSVT:
Anyone on here that's owned their car since NEW, and knows their maintenance history that is running MTL?
Mark
Mine has had the "Coctail" since almost new.. and just had it's 4th trans flush done at Ford. Fluid was a bit dark. More specifically, the fluid consisted of Mobil 1 ATF with Friction Modifier. When the trans was opened up do to a FAILED 3RD GEAR SYNCHRO three months ago, according to the Ford Service report, the trans had a lot of "black residue on the inside of the trans case, and required an additional hour or so in the parts tank to remove the residue". They were a bit stumped there, as they knew of the cars past and how many flushes it's had. Ford re-filled it with the recomended Ford fluid, not the cocktail... and the shifts are hard into first gear. 2 months later, I'm getting ready to drain this crap out and put whatever is decided in this dicussion back in. RP Syncromesh is sounding positive.
Oh Jesus, praise the Lord that someone can finally post that a residue will occur in transmissions without Redline!
I further put forth that the FM is causing more wear that would be seen without it (reduced friction ring a bell?) and that any car previuosly running a significant portion of FM is likely to see higher than normal levels of black residue.
The FM is really bad news for my own transmission. I ran it and had significant gunk in the oil at that time. Last time I am going to reiterate that point.
Originally posted by todras:
Originally posted by akrump47:
Originally posted by todras:
I like how certain points are skipped over.
It's nice isnt it. Did you miss this one:
Originally posted by DemonSVT:
Originally posted by Y2KSVT:
What happens when someone cracks their tranny open after using MTL, and it's clean?
Mark
[image]
You mean besides Tom & myself already having done that and proved that it's not the MTL fluid.
So two people with MTL & Buildup in the trans. Two People without. NO CHEMICAL RESULTS YET stating that the buildup IS IN FACT DRIECTLY CAUSED BY MTL. Wow that's highly conclusive isnt it.
Those aren't questions. Those are statements on observations. Do we have pics of what they said they've encountered? No. I don't know what they have seen or done. I've seen the transmissions that I've posted pics of and have been told what they run. I also know that Demon's car supposedly puts out so much power and has never shown a dyno sheet.
WTF are you talking about?
How many people on here can show pictures of MY transmission?? LOTS OF THEM> THey can see all the gears because when I started that darn thread about improving your MTX-75 with shift forks and other things, I was paving the way. I showed photos of everything. Then I posted more photos. Some people probably have a hard drive full of photo proof that I have posted. I am one of the most credible members on this board. I have religiously documented everything I've done since year 2001 and still keep a website showing all that information. Can you argue otherwise? OH, and I have posted more than a few dyno sheets.
Originally posted by Big Jim:
Originally posted by todras:
Answer me this then. If the MTX-75 at one time was spec'd to run ATF. Then why run MTL? States on the back of an MTL bottle..."For transmissions recommending an ATF, Red Line D4 ATF should be used." So why are people using MTL
versus Redline D4 ATF?
Perhaps because Ford changed the spec from ATF to gear oil? That sounds to me like either one could be correct, but the gear oil would be preferred. After all, ATF was the spec for five model years.
About black residue when using Mercon. Has anyone paid attention to what NEW Mercon looks like? Pour a little in a manner that you can see light through the pour, and notice the BLACK that is in it. It gives Mercon a sort of a smokey color. That is part of the additive package and part of what makes Mercon (and Dexron) unique from other trans fluids. ATF+3 doesn't have that. It is optically clearer. Could part of the black residue you see left behind be that black additive?
Very good point. Sorry about earlier when I used the rolleyes but I found it hard to believe you never saw any similar buildup in your past work.
So to summerize:
ATF = origional spec, but is now outdated
Ford Honey = GL-4 gear lube
MTL = GL-4 gear lube
both are very similar viscosity
Friction modifier is bad, and hasn't been recommended by Ford.
Current official recommended fluid from Ford: Ford Honey.
Still up for debate: whether MTL is an acceptable alternative
Are the lab tests comparing MTL to Ford Honey at all? Should they be?
Originally posted by warmonger:
Originally posted by todras:
yea I'm sure it was fabricated. How could you just mistakenly print that? Yes the Cougar S didn't make it to production but was extremely close. Big deal. So everything in the manual is a mistake because they had Cougar S info?
The 99 Cougar manual is the only one that states to add 2 oz of FM.
You ask how can you mistakenly print something yet in the same paragraph you say the CougarS was extremely close but never made it into production. So what you are saying is someone went ahead and added stuff they weren't supposed to before the quality control guys could sort it all out....and they went to print on it and printed in error. Nothing unbelievable about that. It also means that other things could have been inadvertently printed. Therefore the manual is suspect and we throw that bit of evidence OUT....same as in court.
Next.
It should be pointed out that on the Ford Fleet site, which has copies of owners manuals, does not have a single manual that recommends friction modifier:
https://www.fleet.ford.com/maintenance/owners_manuals/results.asp
Look at the 1999, 2000, 2001 and 2002 Cougar manuals. Neither of those manuals say to add friction modifier. The PDF of the cougar manual posted earlier has to be a misprint or some sort of freak.
Also of note, the 2001 and earlier cougar manuals still recommends plain old Mercon ATF, and the 2002 manual is finally updated to specify the Ford Honey fluid.
If we were to look at this as we would engine oil, what would we conclude? We all buy an API SM oil of the appropriate viscosity, be it Mobil 1, Castrol, Pennzoil, etc. In order to get that API certification any candidate oil has to successfully complete the same ASTM tests. Therefore ANY engine oil of the appropriate grade and API certification (as defined by the vehicle manufacturer) is acceptable for use - who makes it doesn't matter. Some may be better than others, but they all met a certain minimum level of acceptance. The choice of the brand (Mobil, Castrol) is left to the consumer - but you should feel confident that the oil will not harm your car.
The Ford honey is in fact an API GL-4 gear oil (I did not know this prior to Big Jim's post - apologies for not searching for this earlier; I assumed that since no one made a post previously to this effect that it was unknown what the Ford honey really was). If Redline MTL, RP Syncromax, and Pennzoil Synchromesh meet the API GL-4 guidelines, and Ford is recommending a GL-4 oil, then they ALL should be acceptable oils. PERIOD. Some may be better than others, but any one of them is acceptable. The only caveat I would throw out is that if Ford has done something drastically different than the competition in the design of the transmission that it requires a special formulation, then maybe the Ford honey is the only logical choice (I seriously doubt that they have). I, for one, now feel much better about MTL after learning the honey is a GL-4 oil. I think at this point I will leave it in and check after 5-6K miles.
I have all 4 owners manuals in PDF.
1999 Cougar = ATF + 2% FM
2000 Cougar = ATF only
2001 Cougar = ATF only
2002 Cougar = Ford Honey
I aquired these documents from Mercury's Onwers website 5 minutes ago ... up-to-date information from "the horse's mouth" so to say. Just thought that I would clear up exactly what Ford themselves recommends vs. differing years of the same car with the same transmission. Shows a few things, such as learned issues and more importantly, possible changes in internal components.
Good find.
What it really shows is Ford's lack of communication and organization.
This should give us all a better idea of the source of most of the confusion.
warmonger, thank you for your efforts. demon also. the last page or so has cleared up a few questions i have had throughout this thread. the responses from torsen and redline are especially helpful. now just out of curiousity i want to see the lab results, but what i have learned is:
-redline=ok
-ford honey=ok
-synchromesh=ok
-RR synchro(whatever)=ok
-fm=no
and most importantly i now have the specs to which i may compare any future fluid.
fastcougar is right, lol, the 1999 manual I loaded must've been a chached copy of one of the others or something. I just checked now and it does say 2% FM. But the fact that later manuals say simply ATF, then finally Ford Honey makes me think I still dont want to use FM.
Also received this from Terry:
Originally posted by TerryHaines(email):
...lube chart(attached) does NOT designate honey as a
GL 4 lube.The only current GL lube is part #
F32Z-19C547-MA, which is a 75W90 Gl-4,it is not used
inthe MTX75...take a look at the cart!
The attachment didnt' come through but once I get the chart I can post it here for everyone's review
So:
Ford Honey is NOT a GL-4 gear oil maybe?
Originally posted by rkneeshaw3.0:
Also received this from Terry:
Originally posted by TerryHaines(email):
...lube chart(attached) does NOT designate honey as a
GL 4 lube.The only current GL lube is part #
F32Z-19C547-MA, which is a 75W90 Gl-4,it is not used
inthe MTX75...take a look at the cart!
The attachment didnt' come through but once I get the chart I can post it here for everyone's review
So:
Ford Honey is NOT a GL-4 gear oil maybe?
It looks like there may be no current objective evidence that Ford Honey is GL4. When I found the product sheet back in 2003 I posted it here. Somehow that product sheet did not remain in the CEG archives, but many saw it and commented about it at the time. Last night and this morning I have spent considerable time searching Ford and Motorcraft sites looking for any detail there might be about XT-M5-QS and WSD-M2C200-C and cannot find that original product sheet, or for that matter anything but the briefest of descriptions of the product.
I know it was there, and others saw the post, but I cannot prove it today.
We are not the only ones experimenting with different gear lubes. Here is a used oil analysis from a Mopar comparing MTL results with ATF+4 that was posted at bobistheoilguy:
http://theoildrop.server101.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=50;t=000028
Look what Terry pointed out to me, this is very intersting!
http://www.amsoil.com/scripts/runisa.dll?amsoiloaf.:rightpanel:1681767005:conto,fd,g,124383
EDIT: cut and past that link I guess
See what Amsoil says is a lube for the MTX?
Also, here is a current ford lube chart
lube chart
A note regarding this chart, also brought up by Terry, is that there are different products: Ford Honey, and a GL-4 gear lube is also listed. Why would ford make two different products of the Ford Honey IS the same as GL-4 gear lube? Just something else to think about....
Originally posted by rkneeshaw3.0:
Look what Terry pointed out to me, this is very intersting!
http://www.amsoil.com/scripts/runisa.dll?amsoiloaf.:rightpanel:1681767005:conto,fd,g,124383
EDIT: cut and past that link I guess
See what Amsoil says is a lube for the MTX?
Also, here is a current ford lube chart lube chart
A note regarding this chart, also brought up by Terry, is that there are different products: Ford Honey, and a GL-4 gear lube is also listed. Why would ford make two different products of the Ford Honey IS the same as GL-4 gear lube? Just something else to think about....
I picked up a copy of the lube chart and a TSB reference chart yesterday at a local dealership. The IB5 transmission, next to the MTX-75 is the FSVT, and is the only other that uses honey.
On the TSB chart there are two TSB's for the honey. 00-1-9, which was already posted, and 01-15-7. I havent looked up the second number.
There is also a TSB for FEHP friction modifier, the XL-7 the number is 03-19-8.
The Amsoil link doesn't work. Something about the search being timed out.
So according to this chart...
Originally posted by rkneeshaw3.0:
lube chart
..... Synchromax is recommended from RP.
you can just hit amsoil and click the usage/application button. It said our mtx uses 5w40 synthetic motor oil + additive
I found the Amsoil listing. It still isn't very clear. Besides recommending 5W40 synthetic engine oil, there are footnotes. One says SLF is MT fluid meeting spec WSD-M2C200-C and the other says additive needed (could that be friction modifier?).
The same manual trans fluid showed up when I plugged in a 2002 Mercury Cougar.
1998 FORD CONTOUR 2.5L 6-cyl VIN Code G HO
BOSCH SPARK PLUGS
SVT
Wire......B09402
Plug......B4458
BOSCH WIPER BLADES
Driver side......B40922
Passenger side......B40920
FILTERS
Oil Filter......SDF11
Oil Filter Qualifier......HO
Oil Vapor Filter......N/R
Oil Vapor Filter Qualifier......HO
Air Filter......AF307
Air Filter Qualifier......HO
Fuel Filter......GF115
Fuel Filter Qualifier......HO
Fuel Vapor Filter......N/R
Fuel Vapor Filter Qualifier......HO
PCV Valve......HV193
PCV Valve Qualifier......HO
Cabin Filter......AF1002
Cabin Filter Qualifier......HO
LUBRICANTS & FLUIDS
Engine Oil
Grade 1......API*
Series 2000 Synthetic 0W-30 Motor Oil
SAE 5W-30 Synthetic Motor Oil
SAE 5W-30 XL-7500 Synthetic Motor Oil
Manual Transmission,.....SLF[1][2]
Synthetic 5W-40 European Engine Oil
Automatic Transmission.....MA
Synthetic Automatic Transmission Fluid
Fluids
Power Steering Fluid.....MA
Synthetic Automatic Transmission Fluid
Brake Fluid.....HBH
1. SLF is MT fluid meeting spec.
WSD-M2C200-C
2. When replacing fluid, add 1.8 oz. (52 ml) of additive .
specification No. EZL-401.
CHASSIS LUBRICATION
0 Fittings, 0 Plugs
CAPACITIES
Engine, with filter..........5.8 quarts[1]
Cooling System, Initial Fill..........9.0 quarts
Automatic Transmission, Initial Fill..........3.9 quarts[2]
Automatic Transmission, Total Fill..........10.0 quarts
Manual Transmission, ..........5.5 pints
1. After refill check oil level
2. With ENG automatic transmission operating temperature, shift through all
gears. Check fluid level in PARK and add fluid as needed.
TORQUES
Oil Drain Plug.....16-22 ft-lbs
Manual Transmission
Fill Plug.....29-43 ft-lbs
Drain Plug.....29-43 ft-lbs
CAUTIONS
ENGINE
Remove the engine oil dipstick when
refilling in order to avoid contamination
of the PCV system.
SERVICE INTERVAL
AMSOIL Product Change Interval Guide (g1490)
Originally posted by Swazo:
So according to this chart...Originally posted by rkneeshaw3.0:
lube chart
..... Synchromax is recommended from RP.
Looks like you're right!
Specific reference page here:
http://www.royalpurple.com/techa/tranxref.html
So far, looks like approved fluid list is:
Ford Honey (no additive required)
RP Synchromax (meets ford honey specs, no additive required)
Amsoil 5w40 (need clarification yet on additive?)
This also goes with the Royal Purple listing. It actually gives the Ford Part number and spec with it's reference to Synchromax.
http://search.freefind.com/find.html?id=35546555&pageid=r&mode=ALL&n=0&query=M2C200-CTo make sure that the above link does't disappear, here is a cut and paste.
Site Search Results
Search Results From The Royal Purple Website
Found 1 items, now showing 1 - 1 search tips Home Page
<< Prev | Next >>
NewRefine
1. Royal Purple Synthetic Oil Transmission Cross Reference Chart
04874464 Synchromax Ford Manual Transmissions XT-M5-QS spec WSD-M2C200-C Synchromax Transaxles F32Z 19C547-MA Max-Gear 75W90 All Models XT-2-QSM Synchromax All Models XT-5-QM
What doesn't transfer is the window where I plugged in M2C200-C
I was talking to the tranny guy at the local ford stealership today and he said that you should use straight ATF, no FM at all in the tranny. and i also put in redline mtl in my new tranny today, i want to reduce the noise from my torsen, and cause i ain't scared.
I'm going to break in my 'new' HMS trans with ATF+3 for 500 miles, and then switch to RP Synchromax.
That is extremely interesting. It is the 2002 version of the chart that was posted earlier today. The chart on the bottom of the page is for manual transmissions. One of the footnotes says: "XT-M5-QS" (what we know as Ford Honey) "Replaced SAE 80W manual trans fluid F2ZZ-19C547-A."
I think that F2ZZ-19C547-A is a multi viscosity GL-4 gear oil. I'll try to see if I can find anything about it.
I didn't find what I was after, but I did find something better. I found a Ford site with a full descrption of XT-M5-QS. Follow this link and then go to page 15.
http://www.fcsdchemicalsandlubricants.com/fad/pdf/catalog.pdf Ford says that "Ford Honey" is GL4, 75W90, just like I posted two years ago.
Just to muddy the waters a bit more
, my hardcopy '1996 Contour/Mystique' Service Manual (copyright 1995) shows the following fluid specifications:
My glovebox manual states to run 'Mercon ATF' (no mention of any Friction Modifier).
I just got my 96SE running again after installing Clutch/Forks/Torsen. The Torsen sure 'rattles,' but will hopefully quiet down when it has more than
2 miles on it! For the break-in, I'm running straight ATF. After that, I'm leaning towards using RP-Syncromax, as RP's specs reference Ford's Honey (even though I have 3 bottles of RedLine MTL sitting in my garage).
I ran the Mobil/FM Cocktail for
70K+ miles -- never had a shifting problem and the transmission was shiney/spotless when I opened it up last weekend. I'm of the opinion that the greatest factor in the protective abilities of an MTX fluid is the regularity of drains/fills and user driving habits. I feel comfortable with the 20K mile MTX fluid changes.
So Ray McNary was right. The older shop manuals did show that friction modifier should be added to Mercon. There is a lot of interesting stuff falling out from this thread.
Yeah. But that has obviously been long outdated, almost ten years.
Now we have new recommended specifications....and VERY FUNNY to me that they have the same specs as Redline MTL.
Oh Todd, what do you think of that?
Well this is the way I see it:
Ford Honey is what Ford specifies for this transmission.
The only aftermarket products that adhere to that specification are RP Synchromax and looks like this Amsoil product as well. (specification being WSD-M2C200-C)
So for me it will be either Ford Honey or Synchromax (probably synchromax since its a lot cheaper)
Originally posted by warmonger:
Now we have new recommended specifications....and VERY FUNNY to me that they have the same specs as Redline MTL.
Actually, MTL doesn't have the same specs at Ford Honey. Ford Honey, according to the spec sheet, is 75W90. MTL is lighter. Red Line's MT-90 is a closer match.
Here is the Red Line site. Check it out for yourself.
http://www.redlineoil.com/
Umm yeah, I know.
I was not being very precise but I meant that they were both GL-4 spec oils when I was saying they were the same. Thanks for correcting me though.
Yes I am aware that MT90 is the closest oil and you may have seen my other post from about 3 weeks ago where I put in MT90. Been pretty happy with it so far too as the shifting is nice and there is absolutely no noise from the differential. I'm waiting to reserve judgement for when cooler temperatures show up as far as the shifting goes, but so far so good.
Anyone on here want to unload their redline MTL really cheap? I'm in a buying mood right now, especially since the market is rather low on that stuff? C'mon, I want someone who said they were throwing it out to go ahead and do it, just throw it my way.
Originally posted by warmonger:
Yeah. But that has obviously been long outdated, almost ten years.
Now we have new recommended specifications....and VERY FUNNY to me that they have the same specs as Redline MTL.
Oh Todd, what do you think of that?
I reread this and it looks like it can be construed as being a smartass. I'm not trying to be. I honestly am asking your opinion or Terry if he wants to comment as to why Ford is recommending a fluid with essentially the sames specs as MTL and MT90 (with MT90 being the closest as Big Jim wrote).
Though this information is good it doesn't discredit any observations people have had. It may make us look for alternative reasons though.
If they are the same why do they smell SO different then? Just a minor observation.
Are you comparing new fluid to used or side by side new in the bottle?
I also wouldn't expect them to smell the same new since the formulations are different though. Like tires, not all treads and compounds are the same though they all meet the standards to be certified.
All I can say for certain is that MTL nor MT90 smelled strongly like an axle gear oil. They did not smell like an ATF though either.
The Royal purple maxgear did smell more like a gear oil than the MT series fluids did too. At this point I wouldn't recommend it. Their regular series of fluids will be fine.
Ford honey smelled downright nice. MTL didn't smell like ATF...but didn't smell like gear oil. MTL was a closer smell match to a 90w gear oil that I had nearby. Just an observation.
Originally posted by warmonger:
I reread this and it looks like it can be construed as being a smartass. I'm not trying to be. I honestly am asking your opinion or Terry if he wants to comment as to why Ford is recommending a fluid with essentially the sames specs as MTL and MT90 (with MT90 being the closest as Big Jim wrote).
Though this information is good it doesn't discredit any observations people have had. It may make us look for alternative reasons though.
Okay it's hard to respond now since I've been offline for a few days. How is it that that you are saying it has the same specs as the honey? I'm so lost now LOL!
Originally posted by Terry Haines:
The first phase of the lab results will be with me
later today.The second phase re sulphur and other
tests will be a couple more days as they a quite
extensive(and expensive,around $200,so we are not
having a run of the mill oil check done here)The lab
has pics,write up etc and all the info on hand from me
.As soon as I have the first phase of results I will advise.TH
I should add...
Originally posted by Terry Haines:
...that prior to the lab getting the samples I called
them and spoke to the chemist,discribed the
sludge,smell etc.Also of the smell of honey Vs 'our
lube'....His initial comment was'Tell me what you
think it is...to which I said 'sulphur'....his
response was ...'dead right Terry,sulphr in lube
causes the conditions you have discribed'...But we
shall see,I like reams of data on a case such as this.TH
Earlier messages that I missed...
Title of email was 'Ford Honey is...'
Originally posted by Terry Haines:
...NOT listed as a GL-4 lube on the current spec
sheet(attached),there is only one GL lube and it is
F32Z-19C547-MA...not for an MTX,so wher on the ford
spec sheet does it lis honey as a GL-4?
I sent this to Terry after he emailed me that Ford "Honey" wasn't GL rated. He responded that he wonders what the additive is that was used to make it GL-4.
Anyway, you can see for yourself that Ford says that it is GL-4.
Originally posted by Big Jim:
I didn't find what I was after, but I did find something better. I found a Ford site with a full descrption of XT-M5-QS. Follow this link and then go to page 15.
http://www.fcsdchemicalsandlubricants.com/fad/pdf/catalog.pdf
Ford says that "Ford Honey" is GL4, 75W90, just like I posted two years ago.
Nice. This thread has more suspense than an Indiana Jones movie!
Mark
heheh no sh!t. Been trying to wait for the lab results, but I'm pretty sure I'm going to order up some MT-90 today.
Originally posted by morbid:
heheh no sh!t. Been trying to wait for the lab results, but I'm pretty sure I'm going to order up some MT-90 today.
Do whatever you please.
Originally posted by MapOfTaziFoSho:
Originally posted by morbid:
heheh no sh!t. Been trying to wait for the lab results, but I'm pretty sure I'm going to order up some MT-90 today.
Do whatever you please.
He is, which is why he said it.
Mark
Originally posted by Big Jim:
I didn't find what I was after, but I did find something better. I found a Ford site with a full descrption of XT-M5-QS. Follow this link and then go to page 15.
http://www.fcsdchemicalsandlubricants.com/fad/pdf/catalog.pdf
Ford says that "Ford Honey" is GL4, 75W90, just like I posted two years ago.
Actually it DOES NOT say its a GL4 fluid, its says it is recommended for transmissions that require a GL3 or GL4 fluid.
This sounds like (atleast to me), that it has very similiar properties to a GL3/4 fluid but is not actually a GL3/4.
Terry should have my trans sometime today...
As soon as hell pulls it open we'll see what he tells me and I'll post it I had the same Blackish goo...
But again I can't garantee it wasn't there before.
We'll see. I also heard todras might take some pics...
Ford Honey
http://www.fototime.com/DF79FEECAB57E27/standard.jpg
MTL
http://www.fototime.com/9111AAA5BD1B1F5/standard.jpg
From Terry:
the FMC (honey) the baseline of what the content of
MTL should be(or any other 'aftermarket' lube for an
MTX75)...compare the numbers....not too close is
it!
--------------
Also with Terry's chat with the lab MTL = straight 30 weight
oil, Honey = 15W40, so honey is already a higher
viscosity than MTL! At 210 deg F a straight ATF is
42 to 45, MTL = 57.4, honey is 80.7. They also said that
the zinc and phosphorus is very high in MTL. Sulphr is
yet to arrive but again I have to say, thus far, MTL
does not 'match' honey in its make up.
Sulfer results to come.
I've gone over my bandwidth in my fototime account so it's resizing them automatically. Anyone want to host so ppl can read em?
I can host them, but I won't have access to my webserver until tonight. Email them to me if you can't find another source. hetfield at hetfield.net
todras you are so one sided you made me post in this thread again.
It was never in question that MTL was a lower viscosity. (it's rated around 80-85w) Matter of fact it has been mentioned 100's of times in a context like as follows.
"MLT is between the original Mercon ATF and the New Ford honey in viscosity. This will give better start up and colder weather shifting while still giving you the benefits of running a true gear oil instead of the lesser protecting ATF."
Also it was mentioned about as many times that MT-90 is more of a direct viscosity comparison to the specs of the Honey.
So that in itself is proving nothing against the fluid.
Also Zinc is used as an antiwear additive. It is found in many antiwear chemical compounds.
Originally posted by DemonSVT:
Also Zinc is used as an antiwear additive. It is found in many antiwear chemical compounds.
Blacksone said the common amout of zinc in a gear lube is around 1000 parts per million, honey has 1161 and MTL 3419!Way overkill and of little benefit. Per Terry
Originally posted by todras:
Originally posted by DemonSVT:
Also Zinc is used as an antiwear additive. It is found in many antiwear chemical compounds.
Blacksone said the common amout of zinc in a gear lube is around 1000 parts per million, honey has 1161 and MTL 3419!Way overkill and of little benefit. Per Terry
Then I think that point needs to be thrown out. I don't think we're concerned as much in this case with what is giving that EXTRA little bit of protection, as we are with what is sludging up trannies.
Mark
Originally posted by Y2KSVT:
Originally posted by todras:
Originally posted by DemonSVT:
Also Zinc is used as an antiwear additive. It is found in many antiwear chemical compounds.
Blacksone said the common amout of zinc in a gear lube is around 1000 parts per million, honey has 1161 and MTL 3419!Way overkill and of little benefit. Per Terry
Then I think that point needs to be thrown out. I don't think we're concerned as much in this case with what is giving that EXTRA little bit of protection, as we are with what is sludging up trannies.
Mark
Wow needs less Demon stroking. Thrown out!? Are you insane? I want to know what also is causing this? If you want to have an LSD in your tanny that looks like this then fine but I sure as hell don't. All the pieces add up.
Originally posted by DemonSVT:
todras you are so one sided you made me post in this thread again.
ME ONE SIDED! Look in the mirror much? You have all this evidence and still you're still not seeing it. Ooookkkaaay.
Just a side note, Marky and I changed out my MTL tranny fluid this past weekend. I have 90,000 miles on my car and this was my second 30,000 mile run of MTL, so about 60,000 miles total with MTL. Once again as the last time, the fluid came out amazingly clean. It looked practically the same as the new fluid I put in and had no distinct smell.
In comparison, I used the "cocktail" from 25,000mi to 30,000mi and was unhappy with the performance. Very notchy shifting and when I drained it, it was black and had metal particles in the fluid. Not to mention the ungodly smell of the friction modifier.
Just my experience and .02...
Zinc, phosphorous, magnesium and calcium are all part of typical additive packages. Zinc is one of the main anti-wear components of the add. pack. The amount of zinc varies based upon application and the oil/add. pack manufacturer. Our CAT hydraulic 10W test oil runs at about 700 ppm zinc. This is about the bottom end of whats commercially available worldwide - in our eyes the more zinc the better. Engine and gear oils run all over the place in terms of zinc, so I wouldn't say 3500 ppm of zinc is overkill.
Originally posted by todras:
Ford Honey
http://www.fototime.com/DF79FEECAB57E27/standard.jpg
MTL
http://www.fototime.com/9111AAA5BD1B1F5/standard.jpg
From Terry:
the FMC (honey) the baseline of what the content of
MTL should be(or any other 'aftermarket' lube for an
MTX75)...compare the numbers....not too close is
it!
--------------
Also with Terry's chat with the lab MTL = straight 30 weight
oil, Honey = 15W40, so honey is already a higher
viscosity than MTL! At 210 deg F a straight ATF is
42 to 45, MTL = 57.4, honey is 80.7. They also said that
the zinc and phosphorus is very high in MTL. Sulphr is
yet to arrive but again I have to say, thus far, MTL
does not 'match' honey in its make up.
Sulfer results to come.
I've gone over my bandwidth in my fototime account so it's resizing them automatically. Anyone want to host so ppl can read em?
Didn't Terry say it wasn't all about viscosity?
Another question. If that transmission was shipped with no oil; and the the waste oil was already thrown out then where are these samples coming from? Are these brand new oil samples straight out of the jug? i was under the impression it would be the oils as found in the transmission but that would have to have been drawn from the container from the old oil. If you take the leavings in the bottom it would be higher in solids (insolubles) and maybe even other materials from the breakdown of surface metals and oxides. Would have been nice to see the results from oil siphoned off of the bulk of the oil change.
Oh, and just FYI high zinc content is a very old way to make motor oils better at protecting the engine according to the old timer auto techs out there. Penzoil was a preferred racing oil back in the day because of high zinc content.
Is that a bad thing now? I'll check on it. I'm also going to have to get copies of these tests that I can actually read.
Thanks for the information though.
Wow. Did you save that oil from the last MTL change? I'd be interested in seeing what it looked like if you were to put it into a clear plastic container with light behind it. An oil test for comparison would also be nice but thats probably asking too much.
Still, you're results with the cocktail are very similar to mine and I ran mine only about 30 days or so. I ran the MTL a year and a half but had less miles on it than you did so maybe not as definitive a result.
Originally posted by warmonger:
Wow. Did you save that oil from the last MTL change? I'd be interested in seeing what it looked like if you were to put it into a clear plastic container with light behind it. An oil test for comparison would also be nice but thats probably asking too much.
Still, you're results with the cocktail are very similar to mine and I ran mine only about 30 days or so. I ran the MTL a year and a half but had less miles on it than you did so maybe not as definitive a result.
The oil is still sitting in a catch pan on my patio. I'll see if I can borrow my GF's digicam and try to snap a pic of the used MTL. I would try honey to have a comparison, but there's no way you will get me to pay $17 per quart. Especially not when MTL is $6.99 all over the net.
I ran the cocktail for 5k mi, which at the time was only 6 weeks or so. The first 30k mi with MTL was less than a year, so my car was definitely getting a work out. The last 30k mi was over about 20 months time.
Paul (Path914) I'll bet still has the fluid. I watched the fluid drain and it was a light amber, I'd say a bit darker than the fresh MTL he added. A problem with taking pics of this fluid is that the closed top drain pan we used had been used for oil changes. I would gladly send a sample to Blackstone but the sample would be contaminated.
Ive had my MTL in now for roughly 10,000 miles. The fluid was changed for the first time at 50,000. At least as far as I can tell. I have the full service history of my car and just went through it, but my eyes got a little blurry from looking at all those typed yellow copies. Too crowded! I never found anything that said it had been changed previously.
Anyway, I might change mine and funnel it into a clear plastic bottle. Im interested to see whats up.
Anyone got any extra fluid?
Originally posted by warmonger:
Another question. If that transmission was shipped with no oil; and the the waste oil was already thrown out then where are these samples coming from? Are these brand new oil samples straight out of the jug?
Samples were taken from new unused oil.
Terry's been talking about the MTL issues with a couple chemical engineers on the other side of the pond that know a hell of a lot more than the ppl on this board. Here is one recent email.
Dear Terry,
You're right about non-ferrous
(brass/bronze,aluminium) corrosive wear with EP
additives. Those based on sulfur/phosphorus are not
suited to European Ford transmissions due to increased
corrosive wear/glazing on these materials. The EP
additives used in the WSD-M2C200-C series are
developed from ATF packages (zinc/sulfur) and provide
good EP performance without causing this problem.
The viscometrics of WSD-M2C200-C are significantly
different from typical 75W90 lubes and have much
better low-temperature viscosity. Running a typical
75W90 material will certainly lead to baulking at low
temperature.
Unless the Redline fluid was specifically designed with
the above characteristics I would recommend you switch
back to the FCSD 200-C lube. Never use GL5 as you can
only achieve this level with sulfur/phosphorus EP
additives.
Originally posted by todras:
Originally posted by Y2KSVT:
Originally posted by todras:
Originally posted by DemonSVT:
Also Zinc is used as an antiwear additive. It is found in many antiwear chemical compounds.
Blacksone said the common amout of zinc in a gear lube is around 1000 parts per million, honey has 1161 and MTL 3419!Way overkill and of little benefit. Per Terry
Then I think that point needs to be thrown out. I don't think we're concerned as much in this case with what is giving that EXTRA little bit of protection, as we are with what is sludging up trannies.
Mark
Wow needs less Demon stroking. Thrown out!? Are you insane? I want to know what also is causing this?
Not stroking anyone ego, or anything else for that matter. The fact is, you didn't quote his whole post, and you only replied to the part about the Zinc, which you've went on to say that it's "overkill and of little benefit", meaning that it might not be a benefit, but it's not hurting the transmission. So why quote the most irrelevant part of his post and comment on it?
Mark
Originally posted by todras:
Terry's been talking about the MTL issues with a couple chemical engineers on the other side of the pond that know a hell of a lot more than the ppl on this board.
Needs less Terry stroking . Why do these people across the pond know so much more than people on this board, and what credentials do they have that make you say that? Do they know more because they agree with Terry? Doesn't sound to opinionated to me.
Mark
Originally posted by Y2KSVT:
Needs less Terry stroking . Why do these people across the pond know so much more than people on this board, and what credentials do they have that make you say that? Do they know more because they agree with Terry? Doesn't sound to opinionated to me.
Mark
These guys work for labs and auto mfg's. Two are tribology experts and one is a chemical engineer. They have far better creditials than ANYONE on CEG in their field. I suppose ppl will begin doubting that as well now. Terry doesn't get his info from 'shadetree' mechs/weekend
wrenches. He contacts people within the automotive engineering field with whom he has worked with or know from connections on various past projects. He has been in this 'core' industry over 30 years FYI. He asks them their take on what he has seen, what the lab results are etc etc. These guys aren't swayed by his opinion. If they think he's full of s**t you can be sure they will tell him.
Originally posted by todras:
..tribology..
Never heard of this until just now. Thanks Todd.
"Tribology is defined as the science of interacting surfaces in relative motion. The word tribology comes from the Greek tribos, meaning rubbing. In any machine there are lots of component parts that operate by rubbing together. Some examples are bearings, gears, cams and tappets, tyres, brakes, and piston rings. All of these components have two surfaces which come into contact, support a load, and move with respect to each other. Sometimes it is desireable to have low friction, to save energy, or high friction, as in the case of brakes. Usually we don't want the components to wear so they are lubricated.
The study of friction, wear, lubrication and contact mechanics are all important parts of tribology. Related aspects are surface engineering (the modification of a component's surface to improve its function, for example by applying a surface coating), surface roughness, and rolling contact fatigue (where repeated contacts causes fatigue to occur)."
Nah, I won't doubt them. I(like a lot of others on here) want to know the source of the information. I just hope everything gets sorted out and I can make a more informed decision this winter when I decide to change my tranny fluid.
Mark
Mark you should totally be able to make a decision already. I suppose I am biased because I held my quaife and tempured gears in my hands....
More info from accross the pond.
FYI Castrol in Germany are the manf. of Ford Honey....
The manufacturer was Burmah-Castrol but I
guess that's now BP, who own it. The original product
was "BOT 130 M GETRIEBEOEL" but may be sold under the
Castrol name there as "SMX-S" gear oil. I couldn't
find it on the Castrol USA Website, so you may be out
of luck. That's the only approved product so no chance
of going elsewhere.
From two users of the lube in UK:-
After contacting Castrol in Germany (our neighbours..)
They gave me the advise to use Castrol SMX-S fully
synthetic gear oil. This combined with an additive
called TSL made my gearbox change gears like never
before.
For gear box: Castrol SMX-S Manual Transmission fluid.
No definite info on GL specs or so. The text on the
bottle says: specially
developed for gear boxes which require API GL-3 or -4
or engine oil...
A word from a lube supplier in USA:-
Castrol�® manufactured a synthetic transmission fluid
called TranSynd�® in conjunction with Allison�® to be
used in heavy-duty Allison�® transmissions. With the
introduction of this oil, Allison�® established the
Technical Engineering Specification-295 (TES-295), and
only operators using TES-295 oils can extend drain
intervals according to Allison�® recommendations in
bulletin 10-TR-99 Rev. B, and only those operators are
eligible to purchase the Allison�¨ extended
transmission coverage (ETC) warranty. Although
Castrol�® has since made that product available to
other marketers, manufacturers outside that limited
sphere are handcuffed. To achieve TES-295 is virtually
impossible because Allison�¨ has not made the TES-295
test stand available and has not established the
necessary formalized field trial protocol. Therefore,
AMSOIL performed a reverse engineering process on
TranSynd�® to uncover its chemical make-up, and then
formulated a product based on the same type of
chemical technology.
More info from a chemical/lube engineer:-
Lubricating oils should be carefully selected for
specific applications and not haphazardly applied. The
dominant wear mechanism and environmental contaminants
and hazards that are expected or known to occur in a
piece of equipment should be known and countered by an
effectively designed lubricant formulation including
base oil type, viscosity and additive package.
Heavily loaded components should be protected first by
viscosity if possible, and antiwear or mild to heavy
extreme pressure properties as needed. These additive
packages all protect equipment from rapid mechanical
wear at the cost of inducing some amount of chemical
wear, relative to the aggressiveness (strength) of the
antiscuff package. In lighter load situations, an
over-aggressive lubricant can shorten equipment life
through corrosive attack without providing any useful
benefit.
Note that some synthetic basestocks (such as diesters)
have some limited natural antiwear properties without
causing surface degradation, and that some lubricity
agents found in compounded oils are nonchemically
reactive.
Adam Davis, Noria Corporation
Excellent information. I just want to point out that I read nothing in that information that states anything contrary to the information we have on MTL from any source at this time. The rest is basic lubrication information when selecting an oil.
I had become quite educated on engine oils from research and now it looks like I'll be getting even more from researching gear lubes in general.
I'll be interested to see what the MTL and Honey results from new oils come back as.
It could end up being a VERY good thing that comes out of this.
Originally posted by warmonger:
Excellent information. I just want to point out that I read nothing in that information that states anything contrary to the information we have on MTL from any source at this time. The rest is basic lubrication information when selecting an oil.
I had become quite educated on engine oils from research and now it looks like I'll be getting even more from researching gear lubes in general.
I'll be interested to see what the MTL and Honey results from new oils come back as.
It could end up being a VERY good thing that comes out of this.
You might want to read a little more carefully. The results ARE from new UNUSED samples. You say you haven't read anything contrary to MTL? Might I copy and paste a certain paragraph in the post above yours?
Lubricating oils should be carefully selected for
specific applications and not haphazardly applied. The
dominant wear mechanism and environmental contaminants
and hazards that are expected or known to occur in a
piece of equipment should be known and countered by an
effectively designed lubricant formulation including
base oil type, viscosity and additive package.
Heavily loaded components should be protected first by
viscosity if possible, and antiwear or mild to heavy
extreme pressure properties as needed. These additive
packages all protect equipment from rapid mechanical
wear at the cost of inducing some amount of chemical
wear, relative to the aggressiveness (strength) of the
antiscuff package. In lighter load situations, an
over-aggressive lubricant can shorten equipment life
through corrosive attack without providing any useful
benefit.
Note that some synthetic basestocks (such as diesters)
have some limited natural antiwear properties without
causing surface degradation, and that some lubricity
agents found in compounded oils are nonchemically
reactive.
Adam Davis, Noria Corporation
et al
In lighter load situations, an over-aggressive lubricant can shorten equipment life through corrosive attack without providing any useful benefit.
Originally posted by todras:
In lighter load situations, an over-aggressive lubricant can shorten equipment life through corrosive attack without providing any useful benefit.
I read that to mean that the high-EP gear oils (GL-5) are not a good idea for the MTX-75, a point that's already been made, and yet, says nothing about MTL since it is not of this variety. The "corrosive attack" is obviously a result of the chemical additives in a GL-5 that can be corrosive to the brass/bronze alloys typical in a synchronized manual transmission.
I'm with Warmonger.
Ok... I would guess that the darkness and smell of the MTL is ONLY from failing/failed tranny and/or differential. I've changed my MTL 2 times (about 10,000-12,000 miles apart) and each time it looked almost like new -- no smell, cherry red, and no metal flakes. I just changed out the MTL for a 3rd time about 2 weeks ago. My diff began failing yesterday and I drained it when I got home. It stank like hypoid, was dark brown/red... and was filled with metal flakes (looked like a ricer paint job). The drain plug was even gouged and scraped
I am definetly NOT blaming the MTL -- I do abuse my car. I AM saying that the nastyness that Terry has found in the trannys are most likely ONLY a result of a failed tranny/diff (probably due to extensive heat generated by the failing components -- my tranny. Why else would he be working on a tranny if it hadn't already failed?
Originally posted by morbid:
Ok... I would guess that the darkness and smell of the MTL is ONLY from failing/failed tranny and/or differential. I've changed my MTL 2 times (about 10,000-12,000 miles apart) and each time it looked almost like new -- no smell, cherry red, and no metal flakes. I just changed out the MTL for a 3rd time about 2 weeks ago. My diff began failing yesterday and I drained it when I got home. It stank like hypoid, was dark brown/red... and was filled with metal flakes (looked like a ricer paint job). The drain plug was even gouged and scraped
I am definetly NOT blaming the MTL -- I do abuse my car. I AM saying that the nastyness that Terry has found in the trannys are most likely ONLY a result of a failed tranny/diff (probably due to extensive heat generated by the failing components -- my tranny. Why else would he be working on a tranny if it hadn't already failed?
Very good point, but WHY did your diff fail is a better question! What kind of diff? Stock or LSD?
Originally posted by morbid:
I am definetly NOT blaming the MTL -- I do abuse my car. I AM saying that the nastyness that Terry has found in the trannys are most likely ONLY a result of a failed tranny/diff (probably due to extensive heat generated by the failing components -- my tranny. Why else would he be working on a tranny if it hadn't already failed?
Uuuuu you might to read this thread again then. "ONLY a result of a failed tranny." He volunteered to open it up free of charge to inspect it in case you missed the huge amount of posts on it! Pete's car is down and the tranny was pulled from the car. It most likely will get slick shift forks installed since it is out. PLEASE DON'T POST THEORIES IF YOU'RE NOT GOING TO FOLLOW ALONG AND YOU HAVE NO IDEA OF WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT.
Originally posted by morbid:
Ok... I would guess that the darkness and smell of the MTL is ONLY from failing/failed tranny and/or differential. I've changed my MTL 2 times (about 10,000-12,000 miles apart) and each time it looked almost like new -- no smell, cherry red, and no metal flakes. I just changed out the MTL for a 3rd time about 2 weeks ago. My diff began failing yesterday and I drained it when I got home. It stank like hypoid, was dark brown/red... and was filled with metal flakes (looked like a ricer paint job). The drain plug was even gouged and scraped
And another MTL user bites the dust. Anymore? Why are you changing it so often. Must have $ to throw around on $10 a qt gear lube. As stated a million times. Of course it will look good coming out. The sludge isn't going to pour out in it! This is getting so old hat it isn't funny. The only reason this thread is still going is because 2 respected members know everything. What about one "disrespected" member with the means/education to tell you what not to use? Guess that means nothing even though all the evidence backs his claims and more comes to light as this thread grows. He builds most of the performance tranny's on here. Haven't heard of any of them failing either. Why no one listens to him when he tells you what's going on with the ones running MTL is way beyond me. He shows documented pics, spends $200 on independent lab tests and communicates with experts/engineers in the chemical engineering field gathering their take on the issues. I missed where others are doing that.
todras, if you and Terry are right all the time then why hasn't my MTX-75 died since I've NEVER run Ford honey in it??? To boot I've run MTL for almost 2 years previously with out any issues or that "non-MTL caused" build up.
That's what this entire thread is stating like an oversensationalized media blitz. "Run Ford Honey ONLY or your MTX will be destroyed"
Seriously that is what half of the posts are truly saying.
Why is it that the majority of the people with MTX-75's are not running "honey" and are still going strong???
It's funny how real world data, experience, and accomplishments can throw a big monkey wrench in the book theories of others isn't it.
This thread still has not proven that MTL is a bad fluid or has problems. Was that not the entire purpose of this thread???
It certainly wasn't to say the Ford Honey was a good fluid option. That was already a given long before this thread started.
When is the PROOF coming that MTL is without question a "BAD" fluid??? I bet it never does. To be honest it would be hard to prove considering the POS choice to use ATF in the first place. You can't argue MTL, MT-90, or SyncroMesh is not better then any ATF. We won't even get into ATF with added LSD FM because that's been proven to be a horrible choice for longevity.
Also did you notice how those "European experts" stated that zinc/sulfur packages were used to safely improve gear oil's anti wear properties without hurting the MTX. Then they also agreed with our post from
nearly 3 years ago that GL-5 is never an option. They are not helping your case to prove MTL or our (this site's nobody CEGer's as you put it
) original thinking is bad.
holy [censored] has this thread grown!!
all i wanna know is what to run...
Originally posted by DemonSVT:
todras, if you and Terry are right all the time then why hasn't my MTX-75 died since I've NEVER run Ford honey in it??? To boot I've run MTL for almost 2 years previously with out any issues or that "non-MTL caused" build up.
Luck. I never said anyone was right all the time. You have an LSD. You don't have planet gears with oil galleys that can get clogged. Did it have a black residue when you opened it up after running MTL? Have you actually seen the inside of it?
Originally posted by DemonSVT:
That's what this entire thread is stating like an oversensationalized media blitz. "Run Ford Honey ONLY or your MTX will be destroyed"
No one has ever said that! Where are you getting this from. Terry suggested RP S.M. as well as Mobil 1!
Originally posted by DemonSVT:
Why is it that the majority of the people with MTX-75's are not running "honey" and are still going strong???
Because they are running ATF which terry said would be fine. Ford Honey is the best as stated a million times. THe MTX-75 will be fine with ATF which was the previous spec. Has since been changed to Honey as stated over and over.
Originally posted by DemonSVT:
It's funny how real world data, experience, and accomplishments can throw a big monkey wrench in the book theories of others isn't it.
Funny isn't it. What are you bringing to the table?
Originally posted by DemonSVT:
This thread still has not proven that MTL is a bad fluid or has problems. Was that not the entire purpose of this thread???
It certainly wasn't to say the Ford Honey was a good fluid option. That was already a given long before this thread started.
Oh really? It's been proven all along and also backed up with facts. Now if you fail to read everything I can't help that. I'm not cutting and pasting any more. It's all been laid out.
Originally posted by DemonSVT:
You can't argue MTL, MT-90, or SyncroMesh is not better then any ATF.
I thought that's what we were talking about in this thread.
Originally posted by DemonSVT:
We won't even get into ATF with added LSD FM because that's been proven to be a horrible choice for longevity.
And how has that been proven. Missed where ATF is leaving a black residue and sludge on the inside of MTX-75's.
Originally posted by DemonSVT:
Also did you notice how those "European experts" stated that zinc/sulfur packages were used to safely improve gear oil's anti wear properties without hurting the MTX.
I missed where it said that. Could you point that out?
Originally posted by morbid:
Ok... I would guess that the darkness and smell of the MTL is ONLY from failing/failed tranny and/or differential. I've changed my MTL 2 times (about 10,000-12,000 miles apart) and each time it looked almost like new -- no smell, cherry red, and no metal flakes. I just changed out the MTL for a 3rd time about 2 weeks ago. My diff began failing yesterday and I drained it when I got home. It stank like hypoid, was dark brown/red... and was filled with metal flakes (looked like a ricer paint job). The drain plug was even gouged and scraped
I am definetly NOT blaming the MTL -- I do abuse my car. I AM saying that the nastyness that Terry has found in the trannys are most likely ONLY a result of a failed tranny/diff (probably due to extensive heat generated by the failing components -- my tranny. Why else would he be working on a tranny if it hadn't already failed?
MTL is not cherry red, are you sure? Have you been using ATF?
We just did a fluid change on an SVT this weekend, no red color at all in the MTL we drained, and definately no red color in the fresh MTL we filled it with. No red color in the MTL I filled my SVT with in May.
Originally posted by G�¨t�£uck�¥151:
all i wanna know is what to run...
If you're leaning toward MTL this might even be better if you're stuck on running a Redline product.
15W40 diesel.
Originally posted by DemonSVT:
That's what this entire thread is stating like an oversensationalized media blitz. "Run Ford Honey ONLY or your MTX will be destroyed"
Let's make something clear to you and the rest. Terry has no axe to grind against MTL. Having seen the effects he started digging. This could have been Royal Purple, Amsoil etc. That is not his issue, the issue is what he's seen. Why do you guys keep thinking this is a specific dig at redline? So stupid and closed minded!
Originally posted by Marky:
MTL is not cherry red, are you sure? Have you been using ATF?
We just did a fluid change on an SVT this weekend, no red color at all in the MTL we drained, and definately no red color in the fresh MTL we filled it with. No red color in the MTL I filled my SVT with in May.
FYI MTL has a pinkish redish hue to it when new. When slightly used it turns into a brownish/black red.
Originally posted by todras:
Originally posted by G�¨t�£uck�¥151:
all i wanna know is what to run...
If you're leaning toward MTL this might even be better if you're stuck on running a Redline product.
15W40 diesel.
well all i wanna run is the stuff thats better from all the tests and whatnot that have been discussed...whether it be the Ford stuff, or whatever.
Originally posted by G�¨t�£uck�¥151:
well all i wanna run is the stuff thats better from all the tests and whatnot that have been discussed...whether it be the Ford stuff, or whatever.
Ford "Honey" is the best choice.
Originally posted by todras:
Originally posted by Marky:
MTL is not cherry red, are you sure? Have you been using ATF?
We just did a fluid change on an SVT this weekend, no red color at all in the MTL we drained, and definately no red color in the fresh MTL we filled it with. No red color in the MTL I filled my SVT with in May.
FYI MTL has a pinkish redish hue to it when new. When slightly used it turns into a brownish/black red.
I've never experienced that. The fluid that Marky and I changed last weekend came out a medium amber color, just a smidge darker than the new MTL we put back in.
Funny how Terry comments that a heavier fluid should be used ala Ford Honey, but you still recommend ATF which is the lightest fluid mentioned.
I'll stick with what I've seen and experienced in my own car. 60,000 mi of perfect use over 2.5 years with a stock diff using MTL compared to obvious wear and notchy shifting using Mobil 1 for a mere 5,000 mi.
Originally posted by path914:
Funny how Terry comments that a heavier fluid should be used ala Ford Honey, but you still recommend ATF which is the lightest fluid mentioned.
I'll stick with what I've seen and experienced in my own car. 60,000 mi of perfect use over 2.5 years with a stock diff using MTL compared to obvious wear and notchy shifting using Mobil 1 for a mere 5,000 mi.
I don't recommend anything per say. I thought the transmission shifted excellent with M1 and have nothing but success with it. I'd say use anything over MTL. Bang for the buck is Mobil 1. Terry recommends Ford Honey which is spec'd for the MTX-75. ATF was previously spec'd and that's what I used when it was so. Had great results with it so I'm sticking with it. Put in whatever your heart desires. It's your tranny.
From Terry Haines to the 'masses' 'I personally don't care what you put in your MTX75...I'm only sharing what I have seen and results of lab tests, pics etc etc.The choice is yours, all yours....
Originally posted by todras:
From Terry Haines to the 'masses' 'I personally don't care what you put in your MTX75...I'm only sharing what I have seen and results of lab tests, pics etc etc.The choice is yours, all yours....
And I think we all appreciate that. The more information available the better IMHO. I just have yet to see anything conclusively negative in regards to the MTL. Can't wait to see the final lab reports.
A big thanks to Terry for putting in all the effort and expense...
Originally posted by path914:
Originally posted by todras:
From Terry Haines to the 'masses' 'I personally don't care what you put in your MTX75...I'm only sharing what I have seen and results of lab tests, pics etc etc.The choice is yours, all yours....
And I think we all appreciate that. The more information available the better IMHO. I just have yet to see anything conclusively negative in regards to the MTL. Can't wait to see the final lab reports.
A big thanks to Terry for putting in all the effort and expense...
I saw something...the inside of my blackened transmission. If it does that then I just don't want it.
Originally posted by MapOfTaziFoSho:
Originally posted by path914:
Originally posted by todras:
From Terry Haines to the 'masses' 'I personally don't care what you put in your MTX75...I'm only sharing what I have seen and results of lab tests, pics etc etc.The choice is yours, all yours....
And I think we all appreciate that. The more information available the better IMHO. I just have yet to see anything conclusively negative in regards to the MTL. Can't wait to see the final lab reports.
A big thanks to Terry for putting in all the effort and expense...
I saw something...the inside of my blackened transmission. If it does that then I just don't want it.
He said conclusively(being such that what is specified proves a matter beyond all doubt) negative. Yours and Roberts transmissions are not "conclusive" evidence that the MTL is what caused your conditions.
What color was the MTL fluid when he cracked it open? Was it all a mucky black color?
Mark
Originally posted by todras:
Originally posted by morbid:
I am definetly NOT blaming the MTL -- I do abuse my car. I AM saying that the nastyness that Terry has found in the trannys are most likely ONLY a result of a failed tranny/diff (probably due to extensive heat generated by the failing components -- my tranny. Why else would he be working on a tranny if it hadn't already failed?
Uuuuu you might to read this thread again then. "ONLY a result of a failed tranny." He volunteered to open it up free of charge to inspect it in case you missed the huge amount of posts on it! Pete's car is down and the tranny was pulled from the car. It most likely will get slick shift forks installed since it is out. PLEASE DON'T POST THEORIES IF YOU'RE NOT GOING TO FOLLOW ALONG AND YOU HAVE NO IDEA OF WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT.
unfortunetly I have been reading this entire thread from the beginning, but thanks for the attack. I was mearly adding to the many theories currently posted here... what have you been posting?
btw, my car most likely had the original fluid when I purchased it at 17,000. I put MTL in at 20,000, around 30,000, and around 44,000. Oh, but I already posted that in this thread, you care to reread it?
My mtx has never been openned.. so it's the stock components that died at ~44,500 miles. I autocross and drag race... so did I miss something about the other mtx's failing that run ATF or honey?
MTL can be purchased for $7 / quart... and I put about 8,000 - 10,000 miles on per year. Should I be such a cheap ass that ~$10 / year will break me? Where is the proof that running fluid for 30,000+ miles will prolong the mtx's life?
oh... and before you respond with another attack, I do respect Terry, and am planning on sending him my transmission. Is the entire point of all of this just to blame MTL or to ensure honey or any other product won't result in a similarily failed component?
If I switch to honey and my tranny dies, will you pay for my replacement?
Terry has cracked open my tranny which was running MTL
I havn't asked him yet about the black sludge.
Perhaps I'll ask him, but again by posting here I probably just did.
Thanks again Terry for all the research you're putting into this.
This thread will most likely change CEG as we know it
i still have my fluid in my tranny i was running mtl, and my diff did blow recently if you guys would want a sample of that........
Originally posted by Y2KSVT:
Originally posted by MapOfTaziFoSho:
Originally posted by path914:
Originally posted by todras:
From Terry Haines to the 'masses' 'I personally don't care what you put in your MTX75...I'm only sharing what I have seen and results of lab tests, pics etc etc.The choice is yours, all yours....
And I think we all appreciate that. The more information available the better IMHO. I just have yet to see anything conclusively negative in regards to the MTL. Can't wait to see the final lab reports.
A big thanks to Terry for putting in all the effort and expense...
I saw something...the inside of my blackened transmission. If it does that then I just don't want it.
He said conclusively(being such that what is specified proves a matter beyond all doubt) negative. Yours and Roberts transmissions are not "conclusive" evidence that the MTL is what caused your conditions.
What color was the MTL fluid when he cracked it open? Was it all a mucky black color?
Mark
YES! Mark where have you been. We posted picutres. I ran MTL from the get go. It was rebuilt by him and he told me to run the ford HONEY. I was like F that it is way too much money. Stazi and Demon are running MTL so hey...should be fine right? I am kicking myself for this.
I don't see how it couldn't cause the conditions when terry sent me a non-blackened trans.
Originally posted by todras:
You might want to read a little more carefully. The results ARE from new UNUSED samples. You say you haven't read anything contrary to MTL? Might I copy and paste a certain paragraph in the post above yours?
Uh, I read ALL of it the first time. And that applies how???
It isn't overagressive, it is designed not to attack metals and this hasn't been proven otherwise (at all) despite your slanderous comments. AS I stated before you have a set of observations with a range of possiblities. When have you sat down and addressed all of the possibilities?
I'm not going to dog the analysis guys because they only know what they are being fed.
Also, IT SAID NOWHERE in the beginning that you used clean samples. IT said virgin on the scans of the reports but that wasn't readable until after the post, hence my questions.
Why attack these points? Haven't I argued based upon the information and not on the circumstantial?
Originally posted by todras:
Originally posted by morbid:
Ok... I would guess that the darkness and smell of the MTL is ONLY from failing/failed tranny and/or differential. I've changed my MTL 2 times (about 10,000-12,000 miles apart) and each time it looked almost like new -- no smell, cherry red, and no metal flakes. I just changed out the MTL for a 3rd time about 2 weeks ago. My diff began failing yesterday and I drained it when I got home. It stank like hypoid, was dark brown/red... and was filled with metal flakes (looked like a ricer paint job). The drain plug was even gouged and scraped
And another MTL user bites the dust. Anymore? Why are you changing it so often. Must have $ to throw around on $10 a qt gear lube. As stated a million times. Of course it will look good coming out. The sludge isn't going to pour out in it! This is getting so old hat it isn't funny. The only reason this thread is still going is because 2 respected members know everything. What about one "disrespected" member with the means/education to tell you what not to use? Guess that means nothing even though all the evidence backs his claims and more comes to light as this thread grows. He builds most of the performance tranny's on here. Haven't heard of any of them failing either. Why no one listens to him when he tells you what's going on with the ones running MTL is way beyond me. He shows documented pics, spends $200 on independent lab tests and communicates with experts/engineers in the chemical engineering field gathering their take on the issues. I missed where others are doing that.
This is pretty off base. Terry knows a lot but he is no lubrication expert nor a materials expert. In fact, when I was TA at the University of Arizona one of the classes was MSE 331, the materials classes our department taught to Mechanical Engineers! This complemented strength of materials classes but also showed me just how little the average ME and EE knows about materials. No slight to them but it isn't their field. They learn a lot over the years but still....
So you and Terry are dabbling in fields that you are not expert in and we are supposed to take it all like gospel?
I am not lubrication expert and not a ME. I'm a MSE! So that is why I feel like pointing out a bunch of the errors in these assumptions that are/were made about the materials.
The damn stock diff has case hardened material. This stuff degrades and wears down with stock ATF which you say is better than MTL. HOW DO YOU EXPLAIN THAT? If it will wear out with the ATF yet you don't blame the ATF, HOW DO YOU BLAME THE MTL?
I'll reiterate again what I told you in PMs:
This simply appears to be a case of bias against MTL and other NON Ford materials. If the recommended Ford ATF (mercon) was so darn good then why were there so many MTX failures with it? Why then is it NOT the fault of the ATF?
I think Terry pointed out that the stock diff was a very sorry part and he was very right on that one.
Until you guys start addressing all the issues before you cry wolf the no one is going to be able to take you seriously.
This is like giving someone a hot pepper and have them die of a heart attack, then blaming the pepper.
Originally posted by todras:
Of course it will look good coming out. The sludge isn't going to pour out in it!
I don't quite follow the logic here. If the MTL is suspending the particles to clog the passages to the diff, as stated earlier, why would it look clean when coming out of the transmission?
Anywho, I went ahead and switched from MTL to Mobil 1 this week as my personal assessment of the risk outweights the $20 for fresh ATF. The fluid was drained immediately after the car had been run for a while, so the fluid was hot. In fact, the temperature was about 153F (yes, I checked.) There was no debris in the oil, though it had only been in for less than 10k miles. The color was identical to unused MTL as well.
Does this information prove anything? No, it is just more information for those who are interested. I will heed Terry's advice for the time being as there is no contesting that he has outstanding experience with this transmission.
Originally posted by todras:
{edit}
The EP additives used in the WSD-M2C200-C series are
developed from ATF packages (zinc/sulfur) and provide
good EP performance without causing this problem.
{edit}
Never use GL5 as you can
only achieve this level with sulfur/phosphorus EP
additives.
~~~
Originally posted by todras:
Did it have a black residue when you opened it up after running MTL? Have you actually seen the inside of it?
Obvious you don't actually read any of my posts very well. I've stated several times that neither I nor Tom had any residue from the MTL.
My MTX-75 had MTL in it (over 1.5 years old) when I tore it apart during the 3L/LSD project. Again something I've stated a few times in this thread alone.
Should I bold face that for you this time? 
Now stop going off on a tangent by saying that Ford Honey is good so therefore MTL is bad. There is no logic there. There also is no proof that MTL is bad and significant proof it's better then any form of ATF.
If anything this should be a thread stating not to use ATF and especially ATF with LSD additive. (i.e "cocktail" ) Which btw is still being recommended???
Originally posted by xdouble:
Originally posted by todras:
Of course it will look good coming out. The sludge isn't going to pour out in it!
I don't quite follow the logic here. If the MTL is suspending the particles to clog the passages to the diff, as stated earlier, why would it look clean when coming out of the transmission?
Anywho, I went ahead and switched from MTL to Mobil 1 this week as my personal assessment of the risk outweights the $20 for fresh ATF. The fluid was drained immediately after the car had been run for a while, so the fluid was hot. In fact, the temperature was about 153F (yes, I checked.) There was no debris in the oil, though it had only been in for less than 10k miles. The color was identical to unused MTL as well.
Does this information prove anything? No, it is just more information for those who are interested. I will heed Terry's advice for the time being as there is no contesting that he has outstanding experience with this transmission.
I don't have an answer to that...you just have to look at the pictures. I drained it and the sh!t came out fine.
The testing would be even more meaningful if they would have sent a used sample from the failed trans. I understand that it is too late for that now, but it would have been very useful as it would have given a better idea about how and if it failed as well as given additional information about how the transmission failed. It would be really interesting to know just what that black residue is from.
Hey fellas Ive been reading along and I am awaiting a result as far as the FM is concerned. I am and have been using this along with Mobil 1 with FM for a long time. I think its time for me to get some input here maybe to light up some ideas or whatnot.
-First off, I dont feel that we should be bashing certain transmision fluid users for the choices that they make.
-Second off, we cant just look at what trannys have failed because of MTL. We need to find out how manny trannys have failed period amongst CEG. I learned this in science, my teacher told me in order to get more accurate results there needs to be more specimins or variables.
-Third off, Why cant we test the chemical/metal reaction between the stock differential and the oils. I remember when I switched from my stock diff to my Quaife I had alot of wear on some teeth and I could chip off metal shavings with my fingernail. I dont believe I changed the fluid since I bought the car but I know for sure it was regular ATF per previous owner.
-As far as the fluid changing color its bound to happen I mean the tranny heats up causing friction and heat, changing the way the fluid interacts with the inside and causing wear. You guys cant expect to put in a red liquid and get the same color liquid when you are ready to change the fluid. There would be no need to ever buy fluid again in those cases.
I understand why people stand behind their product MTL because its loyalty to what they are comfortable with or fits their needs. But we need to remember that MTL is an aftermarket product and may not always be intended for all makes and model vehicles. example. I cant buy a universal honda supercharger and put it on my contour its not made for it, but its universal for all honda applications you get my drift. 2nd reffering to the FM now. Ford is known to makes mistakes and keep them quiet in order not to get in trouble. Well maybe they realized that the FM was causing breakdown in the case and had "Ford Honey" produced to surpass the quality of the FM and slowly remove it from the shelves without many people noticing. It happens everywhere. I tried to buy some piaa superwhites for my fog lights and Piaa told me that they are discontinued and the new replacement is the starwhite light. Same bulb, improved color, whole new name.
Dont flame me for my comments and views I just dont want you guys getting out of control and leading the thread to be locked. This is a very informative thread since the very first few posts and its only getting better. Lets work together and see what we get.
Originally posted by MapOfTaziFoSho:
Stazi is running MTL so hey...should be fine right?
Not for long... R P S...
Originally posted by path914:
Originally posted by todras:
Originally posted by Marky:
MTL is not cherry red, are you sure? Have you been using ATF?
We just did a fluid change on an SVT this weekend, no red color at all in the MTL we drained, and definately no red color in the fresh MTL we filled it with. No red color in the MTL I filled my SVT with in May.
FYI MTL has a pinkish redish hue to it when new. When slightly used it turns into a brownish/black red.
I've never experienced that. The fluid that Marky and I changed last weekend came out a medium amber color, just a smidge darker than the new MTL we put back in.
The Redline MTL that was in my car was very much a dark cherry red, almost a claret. If I hadn't known it was transmission fluid, I might have suspected it to be quite tasty. Seriously, it looked like cherry cough syrup.
Originally posted by Jeb Hoge:
Originally posted by path914:
Originally posted by todras:
Originally posted by Marky:
MTL is not cherry red, are you sure? Have you been using ATF?
We just did a fluid change on an SVT this weekend, no red color at all in the MTL we drained, and definately no red color in the fresh MTL we filled it with. No red color in the MTL I filled my SVT with in May.
FYI MTL has a pinkish redish hue to it when new. When slightly used it turns into a brownish/black red.
I've never experienced that. The fluid that Marky and I changed last weekend came out a medium amber color, just a smidge darker than the new MTL we put back in.
The Redline MTL that was in my car was very much a dark cherry red, almost a claret. If I hadn't known it was transmission fluid, I might have suspected it to be quite tasty. Seriously, it looked like cherry cough syrup.
I'd like to add to this too: every bottle of MTL i've used and filled/drained has been a cherry red color. Looked like Faygo Rock and Rye... mmmm. It even smelled kinda nice (not like Faygo though).
Maybe someone thinking they used MTL were using something else? What color is MT-90?
Originally posted by Big Jim:
The testing would be even more meaningful if they would have sent a used sample from the failed trans. I understand that it is too late for that now, but it would have been very useful as it would have given a better idea about how and if it failed as well as given additional information about how the transmission failed. It would be really interesting to know just what that black residue is from.
I still have my used MTL for testing...
My diff went boom.
Morbid still has his I think...
IMHO I dont see any reason yet that says MTL is definately bad. And before the MTL-haters jump my case and say "look at the pics", I did, and yes, they look bad. But there are way too many other variables here. These are excellent observations, and I do think there is serious reason for concern and its excellent we're addressing this here. But as of yet, there isn't anything that should be accepted as gospel except that Ford Honey is so far the best fluid to run, and Royal Purple Synchromax is a perfectly fine alternative (that conforms to that ford specification).
It should also be noted that so far, the only trannies to excibit this sludge are trannies that have been running MTL, but not ALL trannies that have been running MTL show this. This is what warrents further investigation before saying "MTL is the problem, its bad dont use it".
So far, according to the lab results, it would seem ATF < MTL < Ford Honey.
We need more data relating to what is actually causing that sludge.
Originally posted by BlackBirdRacing:
Originally posted by Big Jim:
The testing would be even more meaningful if they would have sent a used sample from the failed trans. I understand that it is too late for that now, but it would have been very useful as it would have given a better idea about how and if it failed as well as given additional information about how the transmission failed. It would be really interesting to know just what that black residue is from.
I still have my used MTL for testing...
My diff went boom.
Morbid still has his I think...
Why don't you check with Blackstone (or another reputable lab) and see if they can analize your old fluid? It would be interesting to see how much different it is compared to the virgin sample that Terry sent in. You probably don't need the more expensive sulpher content testing, but maybe Blackstone could give you guidance.
If anything, I think this observation that some have made about their "MTL" not looking like what others have described kind of brings into question whether or not everyone's got or are talking about the same product. Factory mixup? Who knows?
I checked my MTL fresh out of the bottle yesterday and it DID look like a pinkish amber color. When draining it and pouring in the new stuff neither Marky or I noticed any red color though. Could have just been the light outside that absorbed some of the coloring. No big deal either way, most importantly, it appeared clean and without any gunk, sludge or metallic particles.
Originally posted by Jeb Hoge:
If I hadn't known it was transmission fluid, I might have suspected it to be quite tasty. Seriously, it looked like cherry cough syrup.
i always found cough syrup to be rather disgusting
Originally posted by rkneeshaw3.0:
. It even smelled kinda nice (not like Faygo though).
I've also always wanted to invent the "smell-o-tron 5000" that would digitize smells send them through the internet to your nostril for delight or disgust. This would help cure the smell discussion.
seriously tho, my MTL didn't smell bad and was pinkish amber colored as well. I could drain it for inspection but It's only got 4k on it. But if anyone wants to sent it to a lab, I'll drain it and ship it for scientific reasons.
How much does blackstone charge for analysis? I may send off mine too just for everyones sake if its not expensive. If its expensive, Ill probably leave it in for a while longer since its not that old.
It's probably around $25.00. That is what they charge for engine oil. That doesn't include the extra testing that Terry requested for Sulpher.
hmm... if it's only $25, then I"ll try to get a sample of mine to them.
Originally posted by morbid:
hmm... if it's only $25, then I"ll try to get a sample of mine to them.
+1
Checking garage tonight to see if it wasn't poured into my storage barrel
Who cares?! If the MTL blows it up...fix it and don't use MTL again. Live and learn. I really hope that I stop posting on this forum. I'm beg to hate it.
Originally posted by MapOfTaziFoSho:
If the MTL blows it up...fix it and don't use MTL again. Live and learn.
Thats enough for me...
Originally posted by MapOfTaziFoSho:
Who cares?! If the MTL blows it up...fix it and don't use MTL again. Live and learn. I really hope that I stop posting on this forum. I'm beg to hate it.
WTF???
Pete, I don't think I've read one post from you in this thread that's made any sense. YOU had what APPEARS to be a bad encounter with MTL fluid. Quite a few people on here that have ran the SAME fluid are stating that they've had ZERO problems. See where the dilemma lies? Can you prove beyond a reasonable doubt that MTL gunked up your trans?
Mark
Originally posted by Big Jim:
It's probably around $25.00. That is what they charge for engine oil. That doesn't include the extra testing that Terry requested for Sulpher.
Actually, their standard oil analysis runs $20.00
Here's a breakdown on their website.
Carl Fisher Water Test
$30.00
Chlorine
$30.50
Dielectric Constant
$35.00
Diesel Fuel
$36.00
Emulsified oil
$55.00
Gasoline
$40.00
Grease
$30.50
H2O (6 elements)
$110.00
On-Spec Waste Oil
$149.50
Particle Count
$19.50
PCB analysis (full)
$95.00
PCB screen
$25.00
Percentage Ash
$70.00
Solvent
$30.50
Specific Gravity
$18.50
Sugar Analysis
$55.00
Sulfur
$35.00
TAN
$10.00
TBN
$10.00
Total Halogens Screen
$35.00
Viscosity @ 100�°F
$30.50
Viscosity Index
$30.50
Mark
If this thread has left you wanting to better understand gear oil theory, I posted links to two white papers on the subject. It is in this forum under the topic "gear oil theory".
Originally posted by Y2KSVT:
Originally posted by MapOfTaziFoSho:
Who cares?! If the MTL blows it up...fix it and don't use MTL again. Live and learn. I really hope that I stop posting on this forum. I'm beg to hate it.
WTF???
Pete, I don't think I've read one post from you in this thread that's made any sense. YOU had what APPEARS to be a bad encounter with MTL fluid. Quite a few people on here that have ran the SAME fluid are stating that they've had ZERO problems. See where the dilemma lies? Can you prove beyond a reasonable doubt that MTL gunked up your trans?
Mark
Mark. How can you disprove it?! How?! There was NO other fluid run it. Not one post from you has made sense throughout this entire thread.
Originally posted by MapOfTaziFoSho:
Originally posted by Y2KSVT:
Originally posted by MapOfTaziFoSho:
Who cares?! If the MTL blows it up...fix it and don't use MTL again. Live and learn. I really hope that I stop posting on this forum. I'm beg to hate it.
WTF???
Pete, I don't think I've read one post from you in this thread that's made any sense. YOU had what APPEARS to be a bad encounter with MTL fluid. Quite a few people on here that have ran the SAME fluid are stating that they've had ZERO problems. See where the dilemma lies? Can you prove beyond a reasonable doubt that MTL gunked up your trans?
Mark
Mark. How can you disprove it?! How?! There was NO other fluid run it. Not one post from you has made sense throughout this entire thread.
You have this backwards, IMO. You're making a wild claim and saying "Prove me wrong."
All we know for sure is that TH opened a tranny and found crap inside. He's been honest about his findings.
We also know that neighborhoods with more telephone poles have a higher crime rate. Should we ban telephone poles? I say the poles are causing crime. You need to prove me wrong.
My point is we have, at best, a weak correlation between MTL and sludge, and between sludge and MTX failure. Correlation does not, in itself, imply causality. IOW, just because two things occur together, does not mean that one thing is the cause of the other.
This is retarded. The transmission was a rebuild. It was basically new. I ran MTL in it from the rebuild on til now. About 14k miles. There IS NOTHING else that could've caused the sludge. Prior to the rebuild the case was CLEAN. After the rebuild the case was CLEAN. How are you ppl not getting this!?
Originally posted by RogerB:
Originally posted by MapOfTaziFoSho:
Originally posted by Y2KSVT:
Originally posted by MapOfTaziFoSho:
Who cares?! If the MTL blows it up...fix it and don't use MTL again. Live and learn. I really hope that I stop posting on this forum. I'm beg to hate it.
WTF???
Pete, I don't think I've read one post from you in this thread that's made any sense. YOU had what APPEARS to be a bad encounter with MTL fluid. Quite a few people on here that have ran the SAME fluid are stating that they've had ZERO problems. See where the dilemma lies? Can you prove beyond a reasonable doubt that MTL gunked up your trans?
Mark
Mark. How can you disprove it?! How?! There was NO other fluid run it. Not one post from you has made sense throughout this entire thread.
Additionally, I was not experiencing any REAL problems. I brought my trans to terry for the sake of research. If it gunked it up like this after 14k miles I would've/could've had problems down the road.
You have this backwards, IMO. You're making a wild claim and saying "Prove me wrong."
All we know for sure is that TH opened a tranny and found crap inside. He's been honest about his findings.
We also know that neighborhoods with more telephone poles have a higher crime rate. Should we ban telephone poles? I say the poles are causing crime. You need to prove me wrong.
My point is we have, at best, a weak correlation between MTL and sludge, and between sludge and MTX failure. Correlation does not, in itself, imply causality. IOW, just because two things occur together, does not mean that one thing is the cause of the other.
Additionally, I was not experiencing any REAL problems. I brought my trans to terry for the sake of research. If it gunked it up like this after 14k miles I would've/could've had problems down the road.
Don't even bother Pete. Ppl are PMing me with conclusions about why your trans "went." It's obvious no one is reading everything posted. PETE'S WAS CRACKED TO PROVE A POINT! Build up on a fresh trans that ran straight MTL. My head hurts. If Demon would have started this post everyone would be crying about the sky falling and this thread would be 1 page long. Everyone would quit running MTL and everything would be hunkey dorey.
Some ppl are jumping to conclusions w/o reading a damn thing and are realling looking very dumb. My trans didn't break this time around...it was opened to prove a point.
Originally posted by MapOfTaziFoSho:
This is retarded. The transmission was a rebuild. It was basically new. I ran MTL in it from the rebuild on til now. About 14k miles. There IS NOTHING else that could've caused the sludge. Prior to the rebuild the case was CLEAN. After the rebuild the case was CLEAN. How are you ppl not getting this!?
Straight MTL or did you add anything to it?
Did you do a flush after the first 500-1000 miles?
If indeed Ford Honey is really repackaged Castrol SMX-S, I found a little about it. Please note that this web site is for Castrol Korea. I also found some UK posts about Castrol SMX-S, where it is highly regarded.
http://www.castrol.com/castrol/productdetailmin.do?categoryId=82914056&contentId=7000414
Originally posted by DemonSVT:
Originally posted by MapOfTaziFoSho:
This is retarded. The transmission was a rebuild. It was basically new. I ran MTL in it from the rebuild on til now. About 14k miles. There IS NOTHING else that could've caused the sludge. Prior to the rebuild the case was CLEAN. After the rebuild the case was CLEAN. How are you ppl not getting this!?
Straight MTL or did you add anything to it?
Did you do a flush after the first 500-1000 miles?
YES! No additives per Stazi's advice. I flushed it after the first 1000. Came out pretty and all...wasn't worried. Moreoever I fig'd when terry opened it...she'd be clean as a whistle. I was really shocked.
This site looks a little interesting too as it gives specs for several gear oils including Red Line MTL and Castrol SMX-S
http://members.shaw.ca/jbarge/MTF.htm
Here is another Virgin Oil Analysis of Red Line's Manual Transmission lubricants.
http://theoildrop.server101.com/cgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=50;t=000017
Originally posted by Terry Haines:
Two ways you can view this oil issue:-
View 1:- FMC have developed the correct spec's for the
lube to match the needs of the MTX75.They have
approved a supplier and that suppliers lube meets the
specs.
View 2:- Fords specs are incorrect for the MTX75 as is
the lube spec and a better lube supplier has proved
that their product is better(This implies that Ford
have made a major error on the honey lube specs)
I think the onus of proof is on the aftermarket
supplier to prove that their lube is better.I have yet
to see another suppliers test data that shows such
information,either by testing or chemical formulation.
Just a thought!
Originally posted by MapOfTaziFoSho:
Originally posted by Terry Haines:
Two ways you can view this oil issue:-
View 1:- FMC have developed the correct spec's for the
lube to match the needs of the MTX75.They have
approved a supplier and that suppliers lube meets the
specs.
View 2:- Fords specs are incorrect for the MTX75 as is
the lube spec and a better lube supplier has proved
that their product is better(This implies that Ford
have made a major error on the honey lube specs)
I think the onus of proof is on the aftermarket
supplier to prove that their lube is better.I have yet
to see another suppliers test data that shows such
information,either by testing or chemical formulation.
Just a thought!
Good points, Pete, and more info that I'm sure I read but either missed or forgot.
I did not nor do I now defend MTL, but I still think we have precious little to go on to condemn any fluid.
Still, if I were just looking at specs, and had never heard of CEG, I'd pick the MT-90 over the MTL based on it at least having the correct viscosity.
I checked with my local Ford dealer on the Honey, and it's $21.60/quart. I've emailed Bill J today (Friday), but I don't expect a response until next week. Where is anyone finding this stuff for $15?
I also appreciate Terry's position, but Ford and other OEMs will do things sometimes that are just a little shady. For instance, they will "spec" 5W-20 synthetic motor oil and then charge extra for it at the dealer. Truth is, any 5W20 synthetic would work in that application. Many people believe that in this case, any 75W90 Gear Oil would work just fine, but Ford creates some arcane "spec" that very few aftermarket suppliers will bother to cross-reference. Sure, it might be the "best" but that doesn't mean all other fluids will wreck your transmission.
Anyone have any real experience with the RP Synchromax? Or did I miss/forget that, too?
Check with Bill Tousley, 10% over cost. The Ford dealer I went to was charging $19.71/qt. I asked the parts guy (who I have come to know over the years) for a discount and he sold it to me for $16.75/qt. Never hurts to ask. Btw I think someone posted the Bill Jenkins price, it was $17.XX.
"COMIC BREAK"
You might be a car guy if you post on a thread that is 24 pages about transmission fluid.
I'm on page 5?
Originally posted by MapOfTaziFoSho:
This is retarded. The transmission was a rebuild. It was basically new. I ran MTL in it from the rebuild on til now. About 14k miles. There IS NOTHING else that could've caused the sludge. Prior to the rebuild the case was CLEAN. After the rebuild the case was CLEAN. How are you ppl not getting this!?
Don't you remember that the torsen and quaife both rely on friction from gears rubbing together? You didn't have a failure with the MTL as you pointed out and you didn't have a problem with your transmission since he looked at it for research.
Don't you think it is possible to have gotten a significant amount of black metal residue from any fluid while that diff was breaking in?
All of you people have Failed to even acknowledge the point I made that you will get the same stuff in an ATF equipped transmission with a torsen. You just jump on the MTL bandwagon but it is the worn down material from the gears. Damn, at least address this point instead of jumping to a different topic and avoiding it.
Are you saying positively that this wear and sludge would NOT have occured with ATF or Honey? Are you willing to put your money where your mouth is so to speak when the next transmission that is opened up and didn't have MTL looks like that? [ If there were anyone with a stock tranny that ran mobile1 and a torsen or honey and a torsen decides they want free labor to help THEM pull the trans for some reason, then I will...just to examine the inside of the transmission while I am at it. I have the garage and I have the tools.]
How many people who have put in these ATB's have had the things opened back up and examined? Not many because they are built so much better than the stock diff. This means that any number of ATBs out there could be showing the exact kind of sludge buildup with any kind of fluid and YOU WOULD NEVER KNOW because they are working fine, haven't failed and don't need to be opened up. Hell, the inside of the transmission is a rough aluminum surface, porous. It is going to hold on to any particles that settle on it and not allow them to be flushed out anyway when you drain the oil. So will the magnet. It's going to be there, count on it.
All you did with having your trans opened up (besides muddy the waters more) was prove that your transmission with an ATB has higher amounts of wear residue than a non ATB equiped transmission. IF the stock diff is failing, IT WILL ALSO have high amounts of material but because it was failing, not because it is designed to have gears rub together and wear like an ATB.
So your statement is a perfect example of oversimplification and not really addressing all the possibilities.
I would love to see your transmissin in 20K miles after the Ford Honey. Will it have residue? I'm almost positive your magnet will have a good coating but it will be less overall since your differential is now broke in and the rate of material wear will have dropped lower now.
And I'm not even positively saying the MTL is not the cause or a contributor of some other transmission failures...but I highly doubt it.
Originally posted by todras:
Don't even bother Pete. Ppl are PMing me with conclusions about why your trans "went." It's obvious no one is reading everything posted. PETE'S WAS CRACKED TO PROVE A POINT! Build up on a fresh trans that ran straight MTL. My head hurts. If Demon would have started this post everyone would be crying about the sky falling and this thread would be 1 page long. Everyone would quit running MTL and everything would be hunkey dorey.
So that is your goal? Everyone quit running MTL because you and Terry and mapoftazi say so?
Read my response above, you haven't proven anything by opening ONE ATB transmission that didn't have a failure or any issues.
Did you take freshman composition in college, or do any comparative analysis to determine the best of something? The only way to have an argumentative paper was to "Compare and Contrast" the opposing view points.
This would be to compare other ATB equiped transmissions with the same hardware, similar miles but different fluids. THAT would be some serious evidence there. But because you have made these statements without real investigative work, and because you jumped on an assumption without a wide range of data to fully illustrate either point, you have hurt your argument.
NOW you have pride at stake. How would we know that you would even report a failure on Ford Honey in the future? You didn't approach it open minded from the beginning, you went on a witch hunt from one incident; so we can't know that you won't do so from now on.
You still see some brass and you're calling it gold.
I'd have been willing to accept ONE possible explanation of MTL causing the failures if there were numerous cases and a couple of examples showing that other fluids didn't cause failures on equivalent transmissions were also presented for comparison purposes.
I thought some good might come out of this thread but I was wrong.
People say "leave this thread, it's important." No its NOT. All it is is National Enquirer type reporting. Might as well be saying, "OOH space aliens contaminated my fluid and broke my transmission"
Originally posted by MapOfTaziFoSho:
Originally posted by Terry Haines:
Two ways you can view this oil issue:-
View 1:- FMC have developed the correct spec's for the
lube to match the needs of the MTX75.They have
approved a supplier and that suppliers lube meets the
specs.
View 2:- Fords specs are incorrect for the MTX75 as is
the lube spec and a better lube supplier has proved
that their product is better(This implies that Ford
have made a major error on the honey lube specs)
I think the onus of proof is on the aftermarket
supplier to prove that their lube is better.I have yet
to see another suppliers test data that shows such
information,either by testing or chemical formulation.
Just a thought!
Now these are very valid points and I can agree with these.
Originally posted by Terry Haines:
...do NOT impart friction from the two gears rubbing together...the friction is on the END of the planet
gears,between the end of the gear and the diff carrier
case...NOT between the gears...
Originally posted by MapOfTaziFoSho:
Originally posted by Terry Haines:
...do NOT impart friction from the two gears rubbing together...the friction is on the END of the planet
gears,between the end of the gear and the diff carrier
case...NOT between the gears...
Well its a good thing Terry doesn't have a problem reading the posts, he just has a problem coming back to CEG and answering them himself.
Now, friction is friction. Something is rubbing somewhere or there wouldn't be friction. The details of the ends of the gears or the sides or whatever are not important in the point I'm trying to make so I'm not going to allow more clouding of the issue!
Friction causes wear. Wear will result in material deposits and break down. Simple as that. Brake pads and rotors come to mind as an example of controlled, designed friction. Rotors wear out, pads wear out, brake dust is the result which has metal and pad material. So get back on the issues.
Ok is it fair to assume with my trans that you think.....
1)The black/sludge is a non issue,is normal and I
shouldn't worry about it? Y/N
2)I should continue to use the lube as it won't
damage the trans? Y/N
Originally posted by MapOfTaziFoSho:
Ok is it fair to assume with my trans that you think.....
1)The black/sludge is a non issue,is normal and I
shouldn't worry about it? Y/N
2)I should continue to use the lube as it won't
damage the trans? Y/N
You forgot a choice for both questions:
1.) y/n/u
2.) y/n/u
I pick U for unknown at this time based on current information.
Limited amounts of sludge and wear are to be expected but I have not seen multiple MTXs with the torsens or quaifes removed for examination. I'm willing to bet money that during the break in process there will be higher levels of residue in the lube. I just don't know what is normal. Yours just looks higher than I would expect based upon what you have told us were the lubrication and flush histories of your transmission.
I had a significantly higher amount of wear on mine with ATF in my transmission during the break in. It isn't exactly the same as I changed my fluid like four times in the first six months before I chose Redline MTL and stuck with it for the next year and a half. I had a serious amount of residue and particle content in the ATF when I first drained it. After that the levels dropped down.
When I took it apart two months ago after a sustained amount of time on MTL I had some dark residue but very little as compared with what was in my trans when I first opened it up to install the new shift forks and the torsen.
I am going to say that you will NOT completely get rid of the wear and black residue.
I think that using an ATB will just require a more frequent change of lube to flush out the wear materials so that increased wear doesn't develop from an excessively high metal content floating in the oil.
This would be very high in the beginning during initial break in and the amount of use/abuse the diff sees and then it should taper off to lower levels. I'm guessing that break in fluid should be flushed after about 5K miles, then a second flush at 10K, and then a fresh change at the one year mark and then every year thereafter or a little higher depending upon racing/track use.
I make this recommendation after spending many hours researching this topic, looking at my own results, yours, and others. It appears to me that the rate of material buildup will accelerate IF FM is added to the ATF during the break in process. Best to use a quality ATF during break in for the two flushes as it will be the least likely of all the fluids to cause the sludge buildup.
Then on that third Fill up I'd put in the Ford Honey or the fluid of choice.
For now, my choice of fluid type and change interval will but thus:
1.) High Quality dino ATF for break in (Mobile 1 is probably too slippery) x2 flushes.
2.)Redline MT90 for summer use (or Royal Purple as I have used that too and I think it is Very good stuff, or Ford Honey)
3.)Redline MTL for winter. (Or: RoyalPurple Synchromax, Mobile1 ATF since the temps are lower)
---NO FM used at all (change fluid if shifting is an issue)---
*planned fluid change would be bi-annually, spring and fall.
Now, this doesn't mean that if better evidence is presented I won't change to accomodate it, EVEN if it is to discontinue use of MTL or Redline products. But not right now.
***The most conclusive thing I can find that IS consistent is the higher rate material wear ending up in the fluid from the ATB and the subsequent requirement for more frequent changes with high quality fluid used after break in.
To answer you other question, I would think that sludge levels like I saw in your transmissions pictures would eventually be harmfull but lower levels probably wouldn't hurt at all. I honestly think it is the type of fluid that you broke in your differntial with that caused the sludge.
ATF is thinner and more likely to flush out that sludgey metallic material that will be so much more prevalent during initial break in rather than a gear oil based lube. The gear oil would leave in material simply because of the viscous properties when it is warm, and when drained(like using a solvent instead of an oil to clean something, one cleans and one lubes).
Now, you can go about and ridicule my conclusions or not. Just remember the information is free and only one persons recommendations; only one opinion.
Great answer!
Originally posted by warmonger:
So that is your goal? Everyone quit running MTL because you and Terry and mapoftazi say so?
Yep that's exactly what I've been saying all along. You're so astute.
I have some left over Syncromax.....if you'ld like top send that out for testing as well.....
Drom Terry today
...today I opened up a V6 MTX from a customer in
Linden ,Mi,Todd M...99 Contour V6 ,over 100,000 on
it,supect diff(kicking back thru steering wheel,couple
of teeth starting to go on the diff gears),bad 3rd
gear syncro....
This trans was running red ATF....,about 1/3 of the muck on the magnet Vs Petes and the case was very clean,no black stain
Originally posted by RogerB:
I checked with my local Ford dealer on the Honey, and it's $21.60/quart. I've emailed Bill J today (Friday), but I don't expect a response until next week. Where is anyone finding this stuff for $15?
If you are really in a hurry to get it, Ford Parts Online has it for $12.97 unless I got the part number wrong. XTM5QS right?
Originally posted by xdouble:
Originally posted by RogerB:
I checked with my local Ford dealer on the Honey, and it's $21.60/quart. I've emailed Bill J today (Friday), but I don't expect a response until next week. Where is anyone finding this stuff for $15?
If you are really in a hurry to get it, Ford Parts Online has it for $12.97 unless I got the part number wrong. XTM5QS right?
ya but they make you buy a whole case.
My local ford dealership parts guy hooked me up with a score: $15/qrt. He looked at the price and was like "wtf, thats rediculous. How about $15/quart". me: SHWING!
Originally posted by rkneeshaw3.0:
He looked at the price and was like "wtf, thats rediculous. How about $15/quart". me: SHWING!
Not sure if anyone addressed this in a post already since I skipped to the end, but Redline MTL should not be used in Contour transaxles for the following reasons:
1.) Both manual & automatic transmission require Mercon ATF
2.) MTL is for standard manual transmissions and is not compatible with or to be used on transmission that require ATF
I have used Redline products for over 10 years and have never had a problem. As a matter of fact, MTL worked wonders in my 89 RX7 Turbo, made shifting smoother, easier and reduced gear noise.
Please note some additional factors about using synthetic oils (including trans fluids), not all products are true synthetics as I recently learned and can lead to serious problems if you try to extend fluid change intervals.
Synthetic products from Mobil (Mobil 1), Castrol (Syntec) and other major oil companies are typically made from Group III base stock (petroleum oil) rather than more expensive Group IV or V base stock (PAO or diesters).
Originally posted by FordMonkey:
Not sure if anyone addressed this in a post already since I skipped to the end, but Redline MTL should not be used in Contour transaxles for the following reasons:
1.) Both manual & automatic transmission require Mercon ATF
2.) MTL is for standard manual transmissions and is not compatible with or to be used on transmission that require ATF
[sarcasm]No this has never been mentioned. Thanks for helping out though.[/sarcasm]
Originally posted by todras:
[sarcasm]No this has never been mentioned. Thanks for helping out though.[/sarcasm]
Funny, this entire thread is turning into a joke too!
Mark
Originally posted by todras:
Originally posted by FordMonkey:
Not sure if anyone addressed this in a post already since I skipped to the end, but Redline MTL should not be used in Contour transaxles for the following reasons:
1.) Both manual & automatic transmission require Mercon ATF
2.) MTL is for standard manual transmissions and is not compatible with or to be used on transmission that require ATF
[sarcasm]No this has never been mentioned. Thanks for helping out though.[/sarcasm]
Don't be a tool, he just said he'd skipped to the end.
Originally posted by Jeb Hoge:
Don't be a tool, he just said he'd skipped to the end.
Hey you get what you ask for posting that ish. You don't read the post you're going to get lambasted. He's about 5 years out of date with the Ford lube specs for the MTX75 and IB5 trans.
Also per Terry:
Ford Spec (WSD-M2C200-C) for honey was activated/released on 2/24/98,revised on 5/22/01 and the last revision on 8/31/04.
Originally posted by Y2KSVT:
Funny, this entire thread is turning into a joke too!
Mark
How do you figure that? Maybe to you.
Originally posted by todras:
Originally posted by FordMonkey:
Not sure if anyone addressed this in a post already since I skipped to the end, but Redline MTL should not be used in Contour transaxles for the following reasons:
1.) Both manual & automatic transmission require Mercon ATF
2.) MTL is for standard manual transmissions and is not compatible with or to be used on transmission that require ATF
[sarcasm]No this has never been mentioned. Thanks for helping out though.[/sarcasm]
i find it odd that you are bashing people that are backing your side of the story.....
I agree this thread is a complete joke. When ppl start sending Terry emails about why my trans failed...
Originally posted by pole120:
i find it odd that you are bashing people that are backing your side of the story.....
Why? He's stating what has already been. We don't need umpteen more ppl jumping on here not reading the thread posting whatever.
Further more this is not true as I posted
1.) Both manual & automatic transmission require Mercon ATF
Honey is the spec.
Originally posted by FordMonkey:
Synthetic products from Mobil (Mobil 1), Castrol (Syntec) and other major oil companies are typically made from Group III base stock (petroleum oil) rather than more expensive Group IV or V base stock (PAO or diesters).
Mobil 1 is Group IV. Mobil sued Castrol about using Group III base stocks and calling it synthetic and lost. Since then, others have introduced "synthetic" oils that are Group III, but not Mobil.
Originally posted by Big Jim:
Mobil 1 is Group IV. Mobil sued Castrol about using Group III base stocks and calling it synthetic and lost. Since then, others have introduced "synthetic" oils that are Group III, but not Mobil.
Since loosing that lawsuit, Mobil has switched to Group III ... they have increased their profits as a result, which has more than paid for their lawsuit ... hypocrytes!
Originally posted by FordMonkey:
1.) Both manual & automatic transmission require Mercon ATF
When Ford introduced the synthetic "honey" for the MTX75 manual transmissions, they published a TSB (which has been already cited on this thread) that said that "honey" was factory till and required for all transmissions built after that date (early 2000) and that "honey" was recommended as both top off and refill for all prior MTX75 transmissios.
Well, after some more research, it appears that I have found much conflicting information concerning Mobil1 and their user of Group III vs. Group IV base stock. All the "official" reading states that they do indeed use a Group IV ... foot in mouth
Originally posted by todras:
Drom Terry today
...today I opened up a V6 MTX from a customer in
Linden ,Mi,Todd M...99 Contour V6 ,over 100,000 on
it,supect diff(kicking back thru steering wheel,couple
of teeth starting to go on the diff gears),bad 3rd
gear syncro....
This trans was running red ATF....,about 1/3 of the muck on the magnet Vs Petes and the case was very clean,no black stain
This is significant information.
Personally, I will not be using Red Line MTL until there is a better answer to what is going on with their fluid. I would say that it would be a way to err on the side of caution.
I'm sure that a lot of this would have never happened if there was not so much confusion about just what Ford "honey" really is. If Ford would have been more forthcoming about the composition of their fluid or at least about it's specs people would not have been casting about trying to find a reasonable alternative. Along with this is using a fluid that is priced at about $20.00 a quart for an entry level or near entry level car is unconscionable.
Just like engines, manual transmissions will work just fine with a range of viscosity. The fact that the MTX75 was marketed in the US for over 5 years using ATF pretty much means that it was suitable. Longer if you count the Mondeo. It was even considered "lifetime" fill. Then for Ford to replace it with a dedicated fluid with little information as to what it is just muddied the water.
Ford's own spec sheet for "honey" says it is suitable for manual transmissions requiring GL3/4 75W90 gear oil. Now during the course of this thread we learn that it may really be relabeled Castrol SMX-S which Castrol says can be used wherever a 75W85 GL3/4 gear oil is required. That's hardly anything that will pin down just what it is. Also Castrol does not market this product in the US.
Considering that the MTX75 started life using Mercon ATF and then later got moved to something that appears to be a manual trans gear oil in the 75W90 or 75W85 range pretty much indicates an improved manual trans oil that is either as thin as ATF or as thick as 75W90 should work fine.
So what happened to the Red Line?
We don't have a good answer. We don't have a used oil analysis from the trans that failed. We don't even have a used oil analysis of the trans that Terry opened that was rebuild 14,000 miles ago and had only used Red Line MTL.
Yes, we have two virgin oil analysis that show that Ford "honey" and Red Line MTL are not an exact match. But then, a virgin oil analysis of ATF would also not be a match and it worked OK for over 5 years before Ford changed the spec.
I have it from good authority that there is no reason that the best manual transmission fluids cannot be GL rated. What is more important is what was used to gain the GL rating. Some GL additives can be damaging to yellow metals, but not all. If the right additives are used to incresase GL ability, there is no reason that it cannot meet GL5 spec. Just as important is what friction modifiers were used so that on balance the transmission will live and shift properly.
It looks to me that the Red Line MTL in a MTX75 may be bad news. It looks like the anti oxidant additives were depleted and allowed the oil to start breaking down on the trans that Terry opened for inspection. Until I know more, I will not use it.
Does that mean the Ford "honey" is the only answer? I doubt it.
(FLAME SUIT ON)
Originally posted by fastcougar:
Well, after some more research, it appears that I have found much conflicting information concerning Mobil1 and their user of Group III vs. Group IV base stock. All the "official" reading states that they do indeed use a Group IV ... foot in mouth
Mobil is a huge producer of Group III base stocks. What are they using it on? It looks like they are using it for Mobil 5000. It also looks like Mobil 7500 is a blend of Group III and about 15% to 20% Group IV, making 7500 a true "synthetic blend" instead of a "pretend" blend because it has some Goupr II+ or Group III in it.
But engine oil is not really the topic of this thread.
Originally posted by Big Jim:
We don't even have a used oil analysis of the trans that Terry opened that was rebuild 14,000 miles ago and had only used Red Line MTL.
I still have some used Redline MTL from my last flush and I can send it in for analysis.
Life of trans;
1) Low mileage trans (less than 25k miles) bought from LKQ Auto Parts of Northern California
2) Sent to Terry for Upgrade/Quaife
3) Ran Ford "Honey" for first 500 miles, flushed
4) Ran Ford "Honey" for next 500 miles, flushed
5a) Ran MTL for rest of life, flushed every 15k miles (+/- 1k miles)
5b) Has been flushed/filled with MTL 4 times (approximately at 60K,75k,90k,105k)
6) Car is currently at 109k miles.
7) Only 5 passes down the 1/4 mile, never autocrossed, lots of spirited mountain driving.
Jim.
I don't have any problem with this summary of yours. I have no problem saying to err on the side of caution and not use Redline MTL. That's just saying there has been a question on the product but nothing conclusive.
Terry: I don't doubt your observations or your desire to use the best material. I'm guessing you may want to go ahead and build up a small file of pictures for comparison purposes on ATB equiped diffs and the fluid they run. Hopefully you will minimize the number of variables in the comparison. This will be more compelling when you post that information rather than hearing it 3rd hand from some guy whose credibility is unknown to us.
For myself, I won't bash the redline product only because I observed quite different results from using it. If I hadn't had personal experience from using it I would never have posted anything about it. I'm not going to push it as a product, but I will post that I had great shift feel and apparently good results. I don't know what fluid I will use next. Since I am apparently almost the only one now who has had good results with it and willing to talk about it then I will quit this fight and just leave it at that. I don't know where all the other people are now who used to 'love' it. I use my brain before I do something and if I screw up then it is my problem. No blind following from me, no blaming, and no sucking up.
That would be a good sample if you send the oil in for analysis
Originally posted by warmonger:
That would be a good sample if you send the oil in for analysis
agreed
Dang you drive a lot sleeper.
Originally posted by SleeperZ:
Originally posted by Big Jim:
We don't even have a used oil analysis of the trans that Terry opened that was rebuild 14,000 miles ago and had only used Red Line MTL.
I still have some used Redline MTL from my last flush and I can send it in for analysis.
Life of trans;
1) Low mileage trans (less than 25k miles) bought from LKQ Auto Parts of Northern California
2) Sent to Terry for Upgrade/Quaife
3) Ran Ford "Honey" for first 500 miles, flushed
4) Ran Ford "Honey" for next 500 miles, flushed
5a) Ran MTL for rest of life, flushed every 15k miles (+/- 1k miles)
5b) Has been flushed/filled with MTL 4 times (approximately at 60K,75k,90k,105k)
6) Car is currently at 109k miles.
7) Only 5 passes down the 1/4 mile, never autocrossed, lots of spirited mountain driving.
But you have had a Quiafe. A much different animal than the stock diff. The problems lie in build up under the planet gears. I'm sure a tranny using MTL with an LSD will hold up. Is it the healthiest though? Is it tempered on any of the splines, oxidation on the LSD?
I went back and took a hard look at the page in the Ford Chemical catalog that describes Ford Honey and found that it does indeed call it a 75W90 oil, not just that it can be used for a 75W90 gear oil.
It does not say that it is a GL4 oil though, just that it can be used wherever a 75W90 GL 3/4 gear oil is specified. So maybe it isn't quite GL4, or maybe it is GL4 but just not tested to validate it.
What is even more interesting is that it is clear that the Castrol SMX-S is published to be 75W85. It is interesting that in a Ford bottle it is a 75W90, but in a Castrol bottle it is a 75W85. Yes, I have verified that it is the same product, but my information source requires confidentiality.
I still have the opinion that any high quality manual transmission oil that is as thin as ATF or as heavy as 75W90 should work fine in this transmission. So why didn't Red Line's product hold up?
Originally posted by Big Jim:
I still have the opinion that any high quality manual transmission oil that is as thin as ATF or as heavy as 75W90 should work fine in this transmission. So why didn't Red Line's product hold up?
1 word. Additives.
Originally posted by warmonger:
I use my brain before I do something and if I screw up then it is my problem.
Why can't everyone in America have this attitude. I think Jim summed up this thread the best.
Originally posted by todras:
Originally posted by Big Jim:
I still have the opinion that any high quality manual transmission oil that is as thin as ATF or as heavy as 75W90 should work fine in this transmission. So why didn't Red Line's product hold up?
1 word. Additives.
Not that my opinion on this matters much, but I concur. Logically, think of the transmission fluid in aluminum cases as a PH "neutral" compound. The additives in that package can either tip the scale in one direction or another, OR keep the formulation neutral. I'm sure with anything else in this world, the engineers had to play a balancing game when selecting a fluid to their specs due to the nature of the aluminum case and brass and other metals found in the gearset and synchros/blockers. I'm no chemist ... hell, for all I know, aluminum cases might like a higher PH and be more prone to working "cleaner" in an acidic environment ... the example was merely to demostrate an example metaphorically.
Todays news...
I have some more results from the lab faxed to me this morning. I also called the lab to discuss the findings and try to establish their 'take' on the black/oxide/sludge etc. This is a potted version of the telecon and the results/comments from the lab:
MTL Sulphur content 0.5125%, FMC Sulphur content 0.3496%
Whats your take on the sulphur and additive contents?
The MTL sample appears, with the amounts of phosphorus and zinc + sulphur, to be more of an EP oil than the FMC.
Could this cause the black/oxide/paste we have seen?
It could if you match the proportions of the additives in the FMC against it.
What about the base oil type, 20W on the MTL Vs 15W/40
on the FMC?
That did catch our attention, it could be that the 20W oil has had more detergent additives used, that could explain why you have seen debris carried in suspension Vs 'dropping out' when FMC is used.
If this was your car what would you use and would you be concerned about the black etc?
OK, from what I have seen I'd agree that I would try to match the Ford lube as close as I could to any aftermarket lube before I would use it.
Could this be a 'batch' or mixing problem, some MTL batches are overdosed with additives and out of their own spec, say a QC issue??
Possible but as I said the MTL appears to be more of an EP lube than the FMC, as we don't know the ins and outs of how/who/where the MTL is blended and QC controls etc it's hard to say.
Thanks for all the info over the past weeks Ryan, I'll leave you in peace.
Originally posted by todras:
Originally posted by rkneeshaw3.0:
He looked at the price and was like "wtf, thats rediculous. How about $15/quart". me: SHWING!
$35/liter here in Canada...
Originally posted by todras:
Todays news...
MTL Sulphur content 0.5125%, FMC Sulphur content 0.3496%
Whats your take on the sulphur and additive contents?
The MTL sample appears, with the amounts of phosphorus and zinc + sulphur, to be more of an EP oil than the FMC.
Could this cause the black/oxide/paste we have seen?
It could if you match the proportions of the additives in the FMC against it.
What about the base oil type, 20W on the MTL Vs 15W/40
on the FMC?
That did catch our attention, it could be that the 20W oil has had more detergent additives used, that could explain why you have seen debris carried in suspension Vs 'dropping out' when FMC is used.
If this was your car what would you use and would you be concerned about the black etc?
OK, from what I have seen I'd agree that I would try to match the Ford lube as close as I could to any aftermarket lube before I would use it.
Could this be a 'batch' or mixing problem, some MTL batches are overdosed with additives and out of their own spec, say a QC issue??
Possible but as I said the MTL appears to be more of an EP lube than the FMC, as we don't know the ins and outs of how/who/where the MTL is blended and QC controls etc it's hard to say.
Thanks for all the info over the past weeks Ryan, I'll leave you in peace.
So... These results and converstion following, tend to support Terrys theory, as outlined in this thread which was originally posted over at FCO and copied over here...
"...don't get hung up on the viscosity of the lubes here...the MTL appears to have the same additives as a hypoid gear oil that is designed for extreme pressure,which the MTX75 does NOT need. The fact that the MTL carries debris all round the trans appears to be the issue. Just smell MTL and smell a hypoid gear oil...same,then take a smell of Ford XT-M5-QS.... the Ford lube does not come close to the others in smell. This is an additive issue.... and again an MTX75 does not need ANY 'EP' additives as the MTX75 has none of it's gears with a hypoid gear 'cut'. Also woth noting is that an 'EP' lube with a Quaife or Torsen will REDUCE the effectiveness of the ATB diff. An ATB diff balances torque to each side by the friction 'end load' of the spiral cut diff pinions pressing on the diff carrier case. Using an 'EP" lube will reduce the end thrust friction of these pinions on the case and affetct the torque bias...not good."
I would still like to see some lab results of MTL and Honey, taken from a freshly drained box. Just for the sake of knowing what actually is happening to the fluid and the metals inside the tranny during use of each. To some, this may seem like beating a dead horse, but I think it is really needed for this discussion.
I will add a hugh thanks to Terry for taking the time and initiative to actually run these tests and tear into those boxes, earlier in the thread.
I have them...but no where to host them.
Originally posted by Terry Haines:
Re Castrol SMX-S
I have been in contact with Castrol USA and Castrol UK
.
Castrol USA called this morning.They do not and will
not be selling the SMX-S in USA.I enquired about the
supply of it in Europe as the Ford lube in it's
'XT-M5-QS guise...no comment,in fact very tight lipped
about it.The info appeared to go away from trans lube
as the 'market was small in the USA'...Would they
consider importing?...Nope. So little or no chance of
getting the lube that is the Ford exact spec in
USA...unless you buy the Ford honey...I tried!!!
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!
Originally posted by warmonger:
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!
From TH
...I can't oblige on that one.I have the Ford specs
and myself and my contacts within the auto industry
have our own 'professional code' between each other
and a trust built up over many years.If a company ,say
Redline wish to be an 'authorised' supplier of lube
for the MTX75 I'd suggest they contact Transmission
Engineering in Germany who will advise them of
specs,test perameters etc...if they submit test data
then they have a good chance of being authorised...at
a price.As to other aftermarket suppliers who 'say'
that their lube meets Ford 'WSD-M2C200-C'...I'd be
intersted to see their proof of being 'authorised by
Ford'...or do we assume they have been certified and
passed all the Ford tests etc from a lube
submission...
Originally posted by warmonger:
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. ??
It seems a little scary that we (collectively, we at CEG) have raised a concern and Red Lines performance and they have no explanation. It would be appropraite for them to show some concern and perhaps step up to take a sample of used MTL from Pete's trans and investigate it more deeply. It sounds like they really don't care.
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!
To me, the scary thing here is that Red Line doesn't seem to show much concern. We (that is we collectively here at CEG) have raised a concern about their MTL based on more than one observation of the performance of their fluid. Their response is basically to say it should have worked. I would most certainly expect them to show a bit more concern. It would be a class act at this point for them to step up and ask Pete if they could run an analysis of their own on the sludge found in his transmission.
It is a common thing in industry, especially among ISO 9000 certified companies, to issue a Suppliers Corrective Action Form (SCAR) when a deficiency is found or suspected. I wonder if Red Line would respond to a SCAR from a consumer. In industry, failure to respond appropriately usually leads to the supplier being removed from the approved suppliers list and loosing future business.
Just a noob comment.I bought my 95 tour in 97 with 49000 km
and still have it today along with my 01 cougar and I find
it strange that my diff and tranny has lasted so long with
no problems.It now has 260000 kms on it and has been beaten
with no restraint since day one.the only maintenance I did
to it was change fluid every 3yrs or so with the cheapest
dex3 fluid.My contour isn't modded however.I've started
modding my cougar lightly (svt uim,tb and gmk's stuff)and
when I changed tranny fluid the first time shortly after
I bought it the fluid was brown and burt like I've never
seen on my tour(had a trailer hitch when I bought it,got a new engine under warranty though
)replaced that fluid
with castrol dex5 and has been great since 1 1\2 yrs
despite beeing driven the same way the tour's been.I just
don't like the notchy feel of it and double clutching to
get in 1st gear when moving sorta sucks too but as far as
it beeing reliable I can't complain.
Originally posted by todras:
From TH
...As to other aftermarket suppliers who 'say'
that their lube meets Ford 'WSD-M2C200-C'...I'd be
intersted to see their proof of being 'authorised by
Ford'...or do we assume they have been certified and
passed all the Ford tests etc from a lube
submission...
Here was my email to Royal Purple:
Originally posted by me:
I notice that you list Synchromax as compatible with Ford's
XT-M5-QS spec WSD-M2C200-C gear oil for the MTX-75 manual
transmission. You are, perhaps, the only aftermarket lube
company to do so. I have a 96 Ford Contour with the MTX-75, and I have 3 quarts of Synchromax in the trunk, waiting to go in the tranny. The Motorcraft lubricant is over $21/quart locally, so I was glad to find you. However, I do have a few questions before I go ahead with the drain and fill.
What sort of testing/documentation/certification have you done to ensure that the Ford spec has been met? Is there a
"seal of approval" that has to be obtained from Ford? I'm
curious why more companies (such as Redline, Amsoil, etc.)
don't make specific claims with regards to OEM specs. What
have you done that the others have not bothered to do?
Thanks for your time and attention,
Roger B
Wichita, KS
And here's the quick response:
Originally posted by Royal Purple:
Roger,
Thanks for your email regarding the Ford MTX57 5 Speed Front Wheel Drive transmission in your 1996 Ford Contour.
We have tested the Synchromax in this Ford World Car platform in Europe for several years through our Italian distributor. The Ford spec calls for a GL-3 rated gear oil in a synthetic 75W90 formulation. A GL-3 rated gear oil is not really a gear oil at all in that it does not contain any EP additives like you would find in a EP gear oil used in a differential. See the attached API description of GL ratings.
The Synchromax is a slightly lighter viscosity fluid than the Ford product but also contains our Synerlec additive package which gives the oil film 300% more film pressure to resist metal to metal than a GL-3 oil but still allows the synchronizers to function correctly and in this case, more efficiently making for smoother shift quality.
No, the Synchromax is not a Ford certified fluid meeting this particular specification - to do that - it would have to be pretty much an exact copy of it - so it would perform no better. But we are not claiming it is a warranty product, only that we recommend it for this particular application. If you want the OEM fluid in your 9+ year old car - then the Motorcraft fluid is right for you. I suspect that you've upgraded the tires, the shocks, the brakes, maybe the audio system, why not upgrade the fluids?
The reason the Ford Motorcraft product is so pricey - it's not a better product, it's just going through more levels of marketing. The lube blender sells it to Ford Europe (or North America) at a markup. Ford then distributes it to the Different divisions (at a markup) who then distribute it to the District level (at a markup) which then goes to the dealership (at a markup) who then sells it to you at 21 / quart. It started as a 3-4 / quart product with 5 people making 35-50% markup.
Attached is a press release of another Ford application using the Synchromax in a Tremec 5 speed with higher horsepower that I thought you might find interesting.
David
David Canitz
Tech Services Manager
Royal Purple Ltd
1 Royal Purple Lane
Porter, TX 77365
Wow they actually have experience testing it in an MTX-75! Nice. I'm putting some in a car I'm doing a clutch job on this week. I'll report back on shift quality. I don't know what's in it and I doubt he does either.
Originally posted by todras:
Wow they actually have experience testing it in an MTX-75! Nice. I'm putting some in a car I'm doing a clutch job on this week. I'll report back on shift quality. I don't know what's in it and I doubt he does either.
I LOVE the stuff.
Originally posted by todras:
Wow they actually have experience testing it in an MTX-75! Nice. I'm putting some in a car I'm doing a clutch job on this week. I'll report back on shift quality. I don't know what's in it and I doubt he does either.
What!!! An aftermarket fluid without the the Ford Rating or approval...and without any qualification other than Royal Purple recommends it? Awefully brave there aren't you? I mean, That isn't saying anything more than Redline said but now its good enough?
I'm not saying you are wrong to put it in, just pointing out the obvious questions that a shrewd person reading 400+ posts would have....
Originally posted by pole120:
Originally posted by todras:
Wow they actually have experience testing it in an MTX-75! Nice. I'm putting some in a car I'm doing a clutch job on this week. I'll report back on shift quality. I don't know what's in it and I doubt he does either.
I LOVE the stuff.
Funny.
People said that with:
1.)Fresh ATF
2.)The Cocktail
3.)Redline MTL
What will they be saying in six months to a year when the first trans blows using it?
Let me tell you...it will go something like the first 39 pages of this thread.
(something smells like....)
Wow I now have a headache after reading the first 30 pages of this post. So with that said can someone bring me up to date on this post? Has there been any conclusions on this, did those test results ever come back, were they posted?
I think I have come to a conclusion though... I'm not going to run any oil so there!
...
...
haha oh so funny
poop stinks!
Originally posted by Royal Purple:
Roger,
Thanks for your email regarding the Ford MTX57 5 Speed Front Wheel Drive transmission in your 1996 Ford Contour.
We have tested the Synchromax in this Ford World Car platform in Europe for several years through our Italian distributor. The Ford spec calls for a GL-3 rated gear oil in a synthetic 75W90 formulation. 1A GL-3 rated gear oil is not really a gear oil at all in that it does not contain any EP additives like you would find in a EP gear oil used in a differential. See the attached API description of GL ratings.
2The Synchromax is a slightly lighter viscosity fluid than the Ford product but also contains our Synerlec additive package which gives the oil film 300% more film pressure to resist metal to metal than a GL-3 oil but still allows the synchronizers to function correctly and in this case, more efficiently making for smoother shift quality.
David Canitz
Tech Services Manager
Royal Purple Ltd
1 Royal Purple Lane
Porter, TX 77365
I really hate to bring this back up, but didn't Terry point out that the EP additives is what he feels was partly to blame for causing all the goo?
Originally posted by TH from FCO post:
"...don't get hung up on the viscosity of the lubes here...the MTL appears to have the same additives as a hypoid gear oil that is designed for extreme pressure,which the MTX75 does NOT need. The fact that the MTL carries debris all round the trans appears to be the issue. Just smell MTL and smell a hypoid gear oil...same,then take a smell of Ford XT-M5-QS.... the Ford lube does not come close to the others in smell. This is an additive issue.... and again an MTX75 does not need ANY 'EP' additives as the MTX75 has none of it's gears with a hypoid gear 'cut'. Also woth noting is that an 'EP' lube with a Quaife or Torsen will REDUCE the effectiveness of the ATB diff. An ATB diff balances torque to each side by the friction 'end load' of the spiral cut diff pinions pressing on the diff carrier case. Using an 'EP" lube will reduce the end thrust friction of these pinions on the case and affetct the torque bias...not good."
Originally posted by warmonger:
What!!! An aftermarket fluid without the the Ford Rating or approval...and without any qualification other than Royal Purple recommends it? Awefully brave there aren't you? I mean, That isn't saying anything more than Redline said but now its good enough?
Because they've actually tested it on an MTX-75 and can back it up. On top of Terry recommending it. I listen to the guy building my transmission.
unisys, I'm not sure I see what you're getting at. RP isn't saying the SynchroMax contains EP additives....
EDIT: I see what you mean now ... "300% film pressure"... I dunno.
Originally posted by SHOTIME2669:
I think I have come to a conclusion though... I'm not going to run any oil so there! ... ...
Has anyone ever ran no oil?
Maybe this is the solution!!
Originally posted by todras:
Because they've actually tested it on an MTX-75 and can back it up. On top of Terry recommending it. I listen to the guy building my transmission.
Yes, "tested" on the MTX-75. They never advised the extent of their testing though. They could have tested it for shift feel only and drained it out within 100 miles.
Mark
Originally posted by todras:
Originally posted by warmonger:
What!!! An aftermarket fluid without the the Ford Rating or approval...and without any qualification other than Royal Purple recommends it? Awefully brave there aren't you? I mean, That isn't saying anything more than Redline said but now its good enough?
Because they've actually tested it on an MTX-75 and can back it up. On top of Terry recommending it. I listen to the guy building my transmission.
that doesn't say much toodles. Hopefully you don't listen to the guy who builds your motors! :-)
Originally posted by RTStabler51:
Originally posted by todras:
Originally posted by warmonger:
What!!! An aftermarket fluid without the the Ford Rating or approval...and without any qualification other than Royal Purple recommends it? Awefully brave there aren't you? I mean, That isn't saying anything more than Redline said but now its good enough?
Because they've actually tested it on an MTX-75 and can back it up. On top of Terry recommending it. I listen to the guy building my transmission.
that doesn't say much toodles. Hopefully you don't listen to the guy who builds your motors! :-)
LMAO
And look everybody, Ryan typed below the quote
Originally posted by RTStabler51:
Hopefully you don't listen to the guy who builds your motors! :-)
I don't.
Originally posted by todras:
Originally posted by warmonger:
What!!! An aftermarket fluid without the the Ford Rating or approval...and without any qualification other than Royal Purple recommends it? Awefully brave there aren't you? I mean, That isn't saying anything more than Redline said but now its good enough?
Because they've actually tested it on an MTX-75 and can back it up. On top of Terry recommending it. I listen to the guy building my transmission.
I will also listen to my transmission builder. Same way I would listen to my attorney.
Originally posted by SVTatGT:
Originally posted by RTStabler51:
Originally posted by todras:
Originally posted by warmonger:
What!!! An aftermarket fluid without the the Ford Rating or approval...and without any qualification other than Royal Purple recommends it? Awefully brave there aren't you? I mean, That isn't saying anything more than Redline said but now its good enough?
Because they've actually tested it on an MTX-75 and can back it up. On top of Terry recommending it. I listen to the guy building my transmission.
that doesn't say much toodles. Hopefully you don't listen to the guy who builds your motors! :-)
LMAO
And look everybody, Ryan typed below the quote
I never realized i was doing it bass ackwards until it was pointed out in my speeling thread... :-)
Originally posted by rkneeshaw3.0:
unisys, I'm not sure I see what you're getting at. RP isn't saying the SynchroMax contains EP additives....
EDIT: I see what you mean now ... "300% film pressure"... I dunno.
I think he's saying that the whole point (which is a pro for using RP) is that it does NOT contain EP. EP is what Terry was thinking was causing the problems. Both Terry and RP now have both said that they think EP does not belong in this tranny.
Thats my take at least.
My sources tell me that it is not so much of an issue about using EP additives in a manual transmission as it is an issue of using the RIGHT EP additives and that it be done in balance with whatever else is needed to ensure proper manual transmission operation.
The older and cheaper EP additives are bad news in a manual transmission. The newer and more costly ones are not.
Originally posted by todras:
Originally posted by warmonger:
What!!! An aftermarket fluid without the the Ford Rating or approval...and without any qualification other than Royal Purple recommends it? Awefully brave there aren't you? I mean, That isn't saying anything more than Redline said but now its good enough?
Because they've actually tested it on an MTX-75 and can back it up. On top of Terry recommending it. I listen to the guy building my transmission.
So. We are back to square one because He hasn't tested it either.
Funny, you will take the word of someone who's NEVER used it and RP's word that it is tested and improves shifting. On the other hand you won't take Redline's word who also claims MTL will improve shift feel, even though EVERYONE who's tested it in the last two years and ever posted a review of Redline posted how excellent the shifting was. Isn't that the exact same criterion for suitability you are using?
Isn't this exactly the way the "Hype" over redline MTL started two years ago?
There hasn't been a negative review of Redline MTL until Terry opened that transmission.
So I say again, it's all good now until someone blows a diff and blames the fluid for their crappy maintenance or treatment, or shoddy workmanship.
Better stick with Ford Honey as at least you have Fords Reputation to base your recommendation on. ( Fords tires on the explorer and recalls comes to mind)
I, on the other hand, have already used RP products and given a decent recommendation on one of their products though not the synchromax.
So I'm not saying RP is bad. I'm just saying the logic is hypocritical.
I may even try RP synchromax eventually because I can get good deals on RP products from a friend of mine who is a distributor and because they, like Redline have a good reputation with their products.
Originally posted by MapOfTaziFoSho:
Originally posted by todras:
Originally posted by warmonger:
What!!! An aftermarket fluid without the the Ford Rating or approval...and without any qualification other than Royal Purple recommends it? Awefully brave there aren't you? I mean, That isn't saying anything more than Redline said but now its good enough?
Because they've actually tested it on an MTX-75 and can back it up. On top of Terry recommending it. I listen to the guy building my transmission.
I will also listen to my transmission builder. Same way I would listen to my attorney.
So Ok, I get the whole Idol worship thang.... but I'm giving you no points for it. I was hoping you'd have some additional information or your own ideas on the subject.
Oh, and BTW I wouldn't go there on the Attorney thing either.
Originally posted by warmonger:
Originally posted by MapOfTaziFoSho:
Originally posted by todras:
Originally posted by warmonger:
What!!! An aftermarket fluid without the the Ford Rating or approval...and without any qualification other than Royal Purple recommends it? Awefully brave there aren't you? I mean, That isn't saying anything more than Redline said but now its good enough?
Because they've actually tested it on an MTX-75 and can back it up. On top of Terry recommending it. I listen to the guy building my transmission.
I will also listen to my transmission builder. Same way I would listen to my attorney.
So Ok, I get the whole Idol worship thang.... but I'm giving you no points for it. I was hoping you'd have some additional information or your own ideas on the subject.
Oh, and BTW I wouldn't go there on the Attorney thing either.
Nothing to do with idol worship. I mean christ almighty you are one to talk. WTF good are my own ideas going to do for this thread. No one will listen to me on this. It seems that you are missing the whole point of MTL being closer to an EP type gear oil. I am really sick of this thread...wtf are we trying to get at now!?! !?
Also I had sh!ttier shifting with the MTL....but that was just my experience.
And as for the attorney thing...I trust BOTH my parents with anything.
So lets do some math...you have cracked your tranny about 3 times. Terry has done countless. I love what you have done with your car, but I am not going to take your advice on this matter over his. I don't care to research this BS anymore. I have better things to do.
Originally posted by DemonSVT:
The shortest post from Demon ever.
Drained the fluid on the car I have been working the other day. Appears that it had MTL in it. Stuff looks awful after it's been used. Also smells terrible. Smells like axle grease. What does axle grease have in it? EP's. Car didn't shift all that great either. I also remember ppl reporting that MTL didn't improve cold weather shifting as opposed to M1. My trans with M1 shifts like butta. Ask Eurotour how he likes the M1 in his LSD equiped trans. So nice.
Originally posted by todras:
Drained the fluid on the car I have been working the other day. Appears that it had MTL in it. Stuff looks awful after it's been used. Also smells terrible. Smells like axle grease. What does axle grease have in it? EP's. Car didn't shift all that great either. I also remember ppl reporting that MTL didn't improve cold weather shifting as opposed to M1. My trans with M1 shifts like butta. Ask Eurotour how he likes the M1 in his LSD equiped trans. So nice.
Want to add some actual evidence to this? Or atleast a little detail? What kind of car? You never mentioned that anywhere! How sure are you that it ran MTL? "Appears that it had MTL in it" doesn't cut it. This is turning into too much of a who can get the last word in type of thread.
Mark
It's a Contour. What else would it be. I've seen MTL enough to know. It's had an LSD put in so I'm guessing the guy that had it before him which was a CEGer saw some posts and thought it was a good idea. I'm not looking to get a last word in. I'm just making observations. No other fluid looks and smells like this. It didn't look or smell like honey or ATF.
In the last 3 weeks we have drained/filled three different SVT's, all stock MTX's. One had ATF (SVT EDDIE 98.5, my old car,)and the fluid had been swapped out twice before. The fluid looked dark red, no odor. Filled with MTL.
The next was a '99 (path914) running MTL, fluid had an amber appearance, again no odor. I think the fluid was used for 20k miles. Filled with MTL.
Lastly my '99 with 42k, drained MTL which had been run for 4 months and 3k miles. Fluid looked like it was poured from the bottle light amber with a pinkish hue, again no odor. I filled it with ATF (to flush per TH) and will drain and fill with honey this weekend.
During all this we noticed color variances in the MTL. We poured some samples straight from the bottle onto a white paper plate. I had MTL left over from May, it looked more amber had a different label than the MTL purchased last week. The newer MTL had a more red/pink color. We also observed a small amount of black particles (like very fine soot) in the bottom of the MTL bottles. This was present in both batches of the MTL. No experts out here, no stake in the game, no opinion. Simply passing along what we observed.
I also plan on draining/filling a '03 2.3L Focus MTX this weekend, curious to find out what the factory fill is, should be honey. I plan on running RP Synromax in the Focus.
From what I'm gathering from this thread, it sounds like Quaife equipped cars with MTL = bad smell. Stock diff cars with MTL = not noticeable smell. Maybe MTL reacts with metals in the Quaife somehow?
Rawburt's car had a stock diff. in it so who knows. I think it the smell and look come from high use.
Originally posted by MapOfTaziFoSho:
Originally posted by warmonger:
Originally posted by MapOfTaziFoSho:
Originally posted by todras:
Originally posted by warmonger:
What!!! An aftermarket fluid without the the Ford Rating or approval...and without any qualification other than Royal Purple recommends it? Awefully brave there aren't you? I mean, That isn't saying anything more than Redline said but now its good enough?
Because they've actually tested it on an MTX-75 and can back it up. On top of Terry recommending it. I listen to the guy building my transmission.
I will also listen to my transmission builder. Same way I would listen to my attorney.
So Ok, I get the whole Idol worship thang.... but I'm giving you no points for it. I was hoping you'd have some additional information or your own ideas on the subject.
Oh, and BTW I wouldn't go there on the Attorney thing either.
Nothing to do with idol worship. I mean christ almighty you are one to talk. WTF good are my own ideas going to do for this thread. No one will listen to me on this. It seems that you are missing the whole point of MTL being closer to an EP type gear oil. I am really sick of this thread...wtf are we trying to get at now!?! !?
Also I had sh!ttier shifting with the MTL....but that was just my experience.
And as for the attorney thing...I trust BOTH my parents with anything.
So lets do some math...you have cracked your tranny about 3 times. Terry has done countless. I love what you have done with your car, but I am not going to take your advice on this matter over his. I don't care to research this BS anymore. I have better things to do.
I'm one to talk? I've supported most everything I've said with facts, questioned what I don't trust, and disagreed with things I know to be wrong. I may not be correct on all accounts but I'm waiting for the points to be proved/disproved.
Many more supporting pics besides whats on my website too.
You don't realize that I put over ten years actually servicing vehicles, with a significant part of it rebuilding ATX and MTX transmissions. Granted they were mostly GM RWD like the TH 200,350,400, 700 series, Chrysler FWD, Ford RWD like C4,6 series, Jeep MTXs, etc.
I Earned my way through college while I was in the Marine and Army Reserve before I went back to college to be an engineer and before I went back on Active Duty as an Officer. I am NOT just some young man. I've earned the right by experience to make the statements I've made.
Take it for what its worth. This isn't about Terry's qualifcations either. I know he was a Mech Eng. Thats all I know and that he now services the MTX 75. You don't 'know' any more than that either.
And by the way, you are right about not listening to you when you just parrot what someone else is saying. I mean think about it. ONLY NOW you point out you had crappy shifting with MTL? Why wait to post it? That would have been noteworthy. Sounds like you were going with the flow in those days so you kept your mouth shut; and sounds like you're going with the flow again now.
You just helped shoot your own credibility in the foot just a little bit more and now I'm going to have to discount even that little bit of information due to your lack of consistency. I didn't really want to flame anyone over this, just get to the bottom of the situation.
I mentioned way back in the beg of the thread that I had better shifting with the M1. AFAIC I will go with Terry's thoughts on the matter. I am not studying to be an engineer. So this does no good for my future career. My time is better spent researching things pertaining to my major. Nuff said.
I've got a haines built tranny with Quaife. Ran MTL since installing it about 2 years ago. Drained and filled with MTL during the engine swap in the spring of '04, didn't notice any funny oder. Just drained and filled with regular ATF before I put in Honey and noticed no bad smell. Actually, I thought it smelled pretty good. I've never noticed a nasty smell from the MTL during the last 2 years of using it, either during fill or drain of old fluid.
Now my power stearing fluid, that REAKS.
After reading this lengthy thread I have decided to swap out the MTL in my SVT. Mainly based on the episodic data. Also about the metal in the MTL. That may not be a direct result of the MTL but I don�t want to take any chances and have to take out the trans.
On my 95 that my son is driving I put in Mobil 1 in years ago. The car has 210k miles on it so the fluid has been in a long time, probably 150K miles. The car is pretty beat so only required maintenance to keep it running is performed, so the old Mobil 1 will stay in until the car blows up which may be soon.
On my SVT I am going to put in Royal Purple even though the Ford honey should be the primary choice. Big difference in price.
So in about 6 months when bad things come out about the Royal Purple I may have to go to the Ford honey.
When I pull out the MTL I�ll also give a report on the condition. It has only about 10k on it so I expect it to look and smell brand new.
Rich S
Originally posted by richs:
The car has 210k miles on it so the fluid has been in a long time, probably 150K miles. The car is pretty beat so only required maintenance to keep it running is performed, so the old Mobil 1 will stay in until the car blows up which may be soon.
Oh but M1 ATF is crap.
Originally posted by warmonger:
So I'm not saying RP is bad. I'm just saying the logic is hypocritical.
And why is that? Terry never said RP meets the Ford specs but from data I've seen it's a good alternative for the price. From reading info here it seems like a far better choice than MTL. Sure doesn't have the high sulfer content or some of the additives MTL does. I don't see anyone else here sending samples of lubes to the lab and posting the results. I think someone else should put up the $ to prove that RP isn't a good alternative.
Originally posted by todras:
I don't see anyone else here sending samples of lubes to the lab and posting the results. I think someone else should put up the $ to prove that RP isn't a good alternative.
And if I ask Terry, I'm sure he'll tell me that you and him don't share a friggin bank account. So just because you agree with Terry, doesn't say that YOU are the one doing all of this work/data/testing. If you are so gung-ho about the RP, why don't YOU send in a sample with YOUR money to prove that it IS a good alternative?
If it would make you happy, I'll personally deliver a sample of the fluid that I drain out of my tranny to Blackstone Labs. Then I can say that because I partook in this experiment, I must know more than the next person.
Mark
I'm never telling anyone what fluid I'm running my tranny. You guys are making this much more than it really is.
Originally posted by RTStabler51:
I'm never telling anyone what fluid I'm running my tranny. You guys are making this much more than it really is.
I am running 2 tubs of margarine with 1 bottle of xl-7 friction modifier, tranny shifts like butter
Originally posted by Y2KSVT:
Then I can say that because I partook in this experiment, I must know more than the next person.
Mark
Did anyone say they know more because they submitted a sample? They sent a sample to prove a point. A point that MTL has a higher sulfer content than FM. I can tell you RP isn't going to have EP's like MTL does. That's what makes it harmful. I'm not spending the $200 to prove it though. Maybe they'll email me some specs. Doubt it though.
Originally posted by SVTatGT:
Originally posted by RTStabler51:
I'm never telling anyone what fluid I'm running my tranny. You guys are making this much more than it really is.
I am running 2 tubs of margarine with 1 bottle of xl-7 friction modifier, tranny shifts like butter
I've heard that will leave a yellow residue on the internals of the transmission. You might want to send that in for a sample.
I'm not running any lube in my transmission. I've had all the parts coated with a teflon-like substance and it rawks!
Originally posted by Y2KSVT:
And if I ask Terry, I'm sure he'll tell me that you and him don't share a friggin bank account. So just because you agree with Terry, doesn't say that YOU are the one doing all of this work/data/testing. If you are so gung-ho about the RP, why don't YOU send in a sample with YOUR money to prove that it IS a good alternative?
If it would make you happy, I'll personally deliver a sample of the fluid that I drain out of my tranny to Blackstone Labs. Then I can say that because I partook in this experiment, I must know more than the next person.
Mark
I'm still trying to figure out your hard-on for all of this. You come and pipe in every now and then. Are you trying to get a rise out of people or something? Just asking.
Originally posted by RTStabler51:
Originally posted by SVTatGT:
Originally posted by RTStabler51:
I'm never telling anyone what fluid I'm running my tranny. You guys are making this much more than it really is.
I am running 2 tubs of margarine with 1 bottle of xl-7 friction modifier, tranny shifts like butter
I've heard that will leave a yellow residue on the internals of the transmission. You might want to send that in for a sample.
I'm not running any lube in my transmission. I've had all the parts coated with a teflon-like substance and it rawks!
Your right, I think I am going to start running straight honey instead. I can get a gallon for $29.99, is that a good deal.
Honey
Originally posted by todras:
Originally posted by Y2KSVT:
And if I ask Terry, I'm sure he'll tell me that you and him don't share a friggin bank account. So just because you agree with Terry, doesn't say that YOU are the one doing all of this work/data/testing. If you are so gung-ho about the RP, why don't YOU send in a sample with YOUR money to prove that it IS a good alternative?
If it would make you happy, I'll personally deliver a sample of the fluid that I drain out of my tranny to Blackstone Labs. Then I can say that because I partook in this experiment, I must know more than the next person.
Mark
I'm still trying to figure out your hard-on for all of this. You come and pipe in every now and then. Are you trying to get a rise out of people or something? Just asking.
You said 'hard-on' and 'rise' in one post teeeheeeeheee
Hey Todd... if you're interested, Terry cracked my tranny open today. Again... i'm sure it had the factory goo in it when I got it at 17k miles. I put MTL in at 20k, ~32k, ~46k... 2 weeks on the last fill.
I've put on too many miles heading over to shop getting other pictures. It's a mute point now. People are going to see what they want to see. Terry has provided photographic evidence, data and lab results. If ppl don't grasp it then they can do what they want. Run MTL all day long. I don't care and either does he.
Nope, that's definitely not it at all. I'm saying that you are sounding like a proprietor of HMS, when you haven't really provided anything other than your opinions, and quotes from Terry. You run M1, so you're just as much of an outsider as me. We can both talk about what we've seen from "other people's" tranny drains until our faces turn blue, but not knowing all the facts about that person's maintenance/driving history doesn't give much proof.
Mark
You guys are starting to sound like two old ladies. WTF cares? Run what you want, and [censored] at yourself if the fluid sucks and causes tranny failure. This is the same question as "Which oil is better?"
I think the usefulness of this once useful thread has now died.
Originally posted by RTStabler51:
You guys are starting to sound like two old ladies. WTF cares? Run what you want, and [censored] at yourself if the fluid sucks and causes tranny failure. This is the same question as "Which oil is better?"
I think the usefulness of this once useful thread has now died.
Agreed!
On another note Ryan, which oil IS better?
Mark
Originally posted by Y2KSVT:
Originally posted by RTStabler51:
You guys are starting to sound like two old ladies. WTF cares? Run what you want, and [censored] at yourself if the fluid sucks and causes tranny failure. This is the same question as "Which oil is better?"
I think the usefulness of this once useful thread has now died.
Agreed!
On another note Ryan, which oil IS better?
Mark
I just use baby oil. Makes your mom's skin soooo smuv!
Originally posted by Y2KSVT:
but not knowing all the facts about that person's maintenance/driving history doesn't give much proof.
Mark
He/we gave Pete's known history. Nothing but MTL was ran. I posted pictures. See all the proof?
Originally posted by todras:
Originally posted by Y2KSVT:
but not knowing all the facts about that person's maintenance/driving history doesn't give much proof.
Mark
He/we gave Pete's known history. Nothing but MTL was ran. I posted pictures. See all the proof?
Pete bought his car brand new and/or has ALL maintenance records to show what was used prior to this whole fiasco?
Mark
Originally posted by Y2KSVT:
Originally posted by todras:
Originally posted by Y2KSVT:
but not knowing all the facts about that person's maintenance/driving history doesn't give much proof.
Mark
He/we gave Pete's known history. Nothing but MTL was ran. I posted pictures. See all the proof?
Pete bought his car brand new and/or has ALL maintenance records to show what was used prior to this whole fiasco?
Mark
MARK! Pay attention! I have used the MTL since the trans was REBUILT BY TERRY HAINES. Prior to my ownership at 48k miles I have no idea, but this should be irrelivant because it was REBUILT.
When terry gave me the trans it DID NOT HAVE THE BLACK RESIDUE in it. When I gave it to him when I ran M1 with FM it had no black stuff in it.
Originally posted by Y2KSVT:
Pete bought his car brand new and/or has ALL maintenance records to show what was used prior to this whole fiasco?
Mark
Remind me to punch you in the head at SZ.
Originally posted by morbid:
Hey Todd... if you're interested, Terry cracked my tranny open today. Again... i'm sure it had the factory goo in it when I got it at 17k miles. I put MTL in at 20k, ~32k, ~46k... 2 weeks on the last fill.
And TH let me know last night that it was black inside with a stock blown diff.! Does this compute to anyone? Hello anyone....
Originally posted by todras:
Originally posted by morbid:
Hey Todd... if you're interested, Terry cracked my tranny open today. Again... i'm sure it had the factory goo in it when I got it at 17k miles. I put MTL in at 20k, ~32k, ~46k... 2 weeks on the last fill.
And TH let me know last night that it was black inside with a stock blown diff.! Does this compute to anyone? Hello anyone....
Todd...just let it go. I do have some good news tho....
I'm going to Steamboat for a week and staying at a 5 star hotel! 
Originally posted by MapOfTaziFoSho:
Todd...just let it go. I do have some good news tho....
I was expecting to read, "I just saved a ton of money on my car insurance by switching to Geico."
Me too.
Anyway, to contribute to this whole fiasco... I just drained and filled my tranny for the first time a few months ago, shortly after I bought it. I put in (what else?) Redline MTL because the people around here would swear by it. And now this... I want to kill you all.
And damn, I did notice a bit of difference for the better in the shifter feel, which I didn't expect. Now it's been about 4k miles or so, and I don't know what to do. I honestly can't afford to change it out right now, because I am the typical flat broke college student. My SVT already has 130k miles on it, so I am rather surprised that the synchros and the differential has survived this long.
When I get the chance, I'll probably drain out the MTL and put in RP, just to be on the safe side. I'm not really buying into this whole anti-Redline deal because there are too many other possibilities and explanations, but I don't want to take the risk, just in case. I'm planning on getting my transmission rebuilt, along with Spec clutch kit, flywheel, and the works... but not until it craps out on me, and I'd like it to last a little while yet.
When it does finally get rebuilt, I wouldn't be surprised if it was dirty as hell on the inside. I have no idea what the previous owners were running in it, and the fluid change, if I remember correctly, was the sole thing I couldn't find in all the maintanence records, so I'm not sure how often or when it was last changed before I got it. Because of that, I see no reason to blame the fluid(s) used if the tranny does come out looking ugly. If it's clean inside, though...
Originally posted by Rishodi:
Me too.
Anyway, to contribute to this whole fiasco... I just drained and filled my tranny for the first time a few months ago, shortly after I bought it. I put in (what else?) Redline MTL because the people around here would swear by it. And now this... I want to kill you all.
And damn, I did notice a bit of difference for the better in the shifter feel, which I didn't expect. Now it's been about 4k miles or so, and I don't know what to do. I honestly can't afford to change it out right now, because I am the typical flat broke college student. My SVT already has 130k miles on it, so I am rather surprised that the synchros and the differential has survived this long.
When I get the chance, I'll probably drain out the MTL and put in RP, just to be on the safe side. I'm not really buying into this whole anti-Redline deal because there are too many other possibilities and explanations, but I don't want to take the risk, just in case. I'm planning on getting my transmission rebuilt, along with Spec clutch kit, flywheel, and the works... but not until it craps out on me, and I'd like it to last a little while yet.
When it does finally get rebuilt, I wouldn't be surprised if it was dirty as hell on the inside. I have no idea what the previous owners were running in it, and the fluid change, if I remember correctly, was the sole thing I couldn't find in all the maintanence records, so I'm not sure how often or when it was last changed before I got it. Because of that, I see no reason to blame the fluid(s) used if the tranny does come out looking ugly. If it's clean inside, though...
It will not be clean inside. I promise you that much.
My car ran great on ATF+3 for a lot of miles before I got around to using Ford Honey.
If you drained the original fluid out of it, it would have been Mercon. ATF+3 is very similar except that it already has a higher level of friction modifier and needs no additional. Shift quality is greatly improved over Mercon (some have said better than MTL). You can get it for less than $3.00 a quart. It should serve you well until you can afford some Ford Honey, which is really probably the best answer.
Originally posted by MapOfTaziFoSho:
Originally posted by Rishodi:
Me too.
Anyway, to contribute to this whole fiasco... I just drained and filled my tranny for the first time a few months ago, shortly after I bought it. I put in (what else?) Redline MTL because the people around here would swear by it. And now this... I want to kill you all.
And damn, I did notice a bit of difference for the better in the shifter feel, which I didn't expect. Now it's been about 4k miles or so, and I don't know what to do. I honestly can't afford to change it out right now, because I am the typical flat broke college student. My SVT already has 130k miles on it, so I am rather surprised that the synchros and the differential has survived this long.
When I get the chance, I'll probably drain out the MTL and put in RP, just to be on the safe side. I'm not really buying into this whole anti-Redline deal because there are too many other possibilities and explanations, but I don't want to take the risk, just in case. I'm planning on getting my transmission rebuilt, along with Spec clutch kit, flywheel, and the works... but not until it craps out on me, and I'd like it to last a little while yet.
When it does finally get rebuilt, I wouldn't be surprised if it was dirty as hell on the inside. I have no idea what the previous owners were running in it, and the fluid change, if I remember correctly, was the sole thing I couldn't find in all the maintanence records, so I'm not sure how often or when it was last changed before I got it. Because of that, I see no reason to blame the fluid(s) used if the tranny does come out looking ugly. If it's clean inside, though...
It will not be clean inside. I promise you that much.
Don't just say that out of the blue....It has 130K miles on it! Only a few thousand with redline. Of Course it won't be clean.
Originally posted by rkneeshaw3.0:
Originally posted by xdouble:
If you are really in a hurry to get it, Ford Parts Online has it for $12.97 unless I got the part number wrong. XTM5QS right?
ya but they make you buy a whole case.
I run that part number and it says automatic transaxle fluid, is this correct? It's also showing that I can purchase it by the quart as opposed to by the case. If somebody can check it out and see if that's the right product, let me know please...
Originally posted by warmonger:
Originally posted by MapOfTaziFoSho:
Originally posted by Rishodi:
Me too.
Anyway, to contribute to this whole fiasco... I just drained and filled my tranny for the first time a few months ago, shortly after I bought it. I put in (what else?) Redline MTL because the people around here would swear by it. And now this... I want to kill you all.
And damn, I did notice a bit of difference for the better in the shifter feel, which I didn't expect. Now it's been about 4k miles or so, and I don't know what to do. I honestly can't afford to change it out right now, because I am the typical flat broke college student. My SVT already has 130k miles on it, so I am rather surprised that the synchros and the differential has survived this long.
When I get the chance, I'll probably drain out the MTL and put in RP, just to be on the safe side. I'm not really buying into this whole anti-Redline deal because there are too many other possibilities and explanations, but I don't want to take the risk, just in case. I'm planning on getting my transmission rebuilt, along with Spec clutch kit, flywheel, and the works... but not until it craps out on me, and I'd like it to last a little while yet.
When it does finally get rebuilt, I wouldn't be surprised if it was dirty as hell on the inside. I have no idea what the previous owners were running in it, and the fluid change, if I remember correctly, was the sole thing I couldn't find in all the maintanence records, so I'm not sure how often or when it was last changed before I got it. Because of that, I see no reason to blame the fluid(s) used if the tranny does come out looking ugly. If it's clean inside, though...
It will not be clean inside. I promise you that much.
Don't just say that out of the blue....It has 130K miles on it! Only a few thousand with redline. Of Course it won't be clean.
I can totally say that because it has 130k miles on it! No matter what that thing ain't gonna be clean!
Have had it in for a day and have driven the thing hard. this stuff shifts like butta!
Night and day compared to the MTL - which to me is surprising...or is it?
Thumbs up to RP!
That was the review I was waiting to hear. I'm putting that in this weekend.
True. I guess I expected because of the 'redline' thing.
What fluid did you run before? How long?
This is the royal purple synchromax right?
I love RP products and will be very pleased to switch if it proves superior to other fluids for shifting.
Okay, no way I'm reading this whole thread. Someone please tell me what the outcome is, since I have MTL in my transaxle now. Is Redline no good? How about Ford Honey? And Royal Purple? I'm due for new fluid anyway, so I'll buy whichever one of those provides the best protection.
Originally posted by Auto-X Fil:
Okay, no way I'm reading this whole thread.
wow...just wow.
Originally posted by pole120:
Originally posted by Auto-X Fil:
Okay, no way I'm reading this whole thread.
wow...just wow.
After reading the first post, and knowing that I had MTL in my transmission... I had to read the whole thing. Sure, it took me like 2 hours... but I think it was worth it.
Fine guys, I'll read it all. I saw a LOT of bickering and stupid non-informative stuff amongst the information, so I stopped after a coupe pages, but if no one who was involved in this wants to save me two hours (or 30 min or 15min, whatever) then I'll read it. I really didn't think it was an unreasonable request to ask for a summary of something like this.
Yea and ask Stazi how the MTL smelled?! Like arse! So you fools that said it didn't have a smell...well...smoke another bowl.
Originally posted by todras:
Yea and ask Stazi how the MTL smelled?! Like arse! So you fools that said it didn't have a smell...well...smoke another bowl.
Yes, he had some on his hand and it smelled terrible, but uhhhhh who knows where his hand had been Anyway, the RP Synchromax is fantastic! Couple days now and I'm loving it!
Originally posted by Auto-X Fil:
Fine guys, I'll read it all. I saw a LOT of bickering and stupid non-informative stuff amongst the information, so I stopped after a coupe pages, but if no one who was involved in this wants to save me two hours (or 30 min or 15min, whatever) then I'll read it. I really didn't think it was an unreasonable request to ask for a summary of something like this.
The final answer is, is that there is no answer, only opinions.
Shampoo is betta! Nooo, Conditioner is betta!
That about sums it up.
I am on week 3 with RP in the tranny and the difference is still quite noticeable. I have been through the gambit of fluids over the years, starting with stock, cocktail, MTL, ATF+3 and now Syncromax. Syncromax is by far the best for me in my transmission. Most of my fluid experimentation was done with the intention of finding something that shifted better in my colder climate. It's about this time of the year when the temp has fallen into the 50's (daytime) 30's (overnight) that the stiffer shifting becomes apparent, as of yet I haven't noticed a difference. It may be due to the fluid being relatively new but I don't think so. I will continue to report on this as it gets colder and the fluid gets older.
Originally posted by SVTCANUK:
I am on week 3 with RP in the tranny and the difference is still quite noticeable. I have been through the gambit of fluids over the years, starting with stock, cocktail, MTL, ATF+3 and now Syncromax. Syncromax is by far the best for me in my transmission. Most of my fluid experimentation was done with the intention of finding something that shifted better in my colder climate. It's about this time of the year when the temp has fallen into the 50's (daytime) 30's (overnight) that the stiffer shifting becomes apparent, as of yet I haven't noticed a difference. It may be due to the fluid being relatively new but I don't think so. I will continue to report on this as it gets colder and the fluid gets older.
And just think of the time and $ you could have saved by going with the spec'd Honey in the first place. Why would you randomly put different fluids in your trans?
Originally posted by todras:
Originally posted by SVTCANUK:
I am on week 3 with RP in the tranny and the difference is still quite noticeable. I have been through the gambit of fluids over the years, starting with stock, cocktail, MTL, ATF+3 and now Syncromax. Syncromax is by far the best for me in my transmission. Most of my fluid experimentation was done with the intention of finding something that shifted better in my colder climate. It's about this time of the year when the temp has fallen into the 50's (daytime) 30's (overnight) that the stiffer shifting becomes apparent, as of yet I haven't noticed a difference. It may be due to the fluid being relatively new but I don't think so. I will continue to report on this as it gets colder and the fluid gets older.
And just think of the time and $ you could have saved by going with the spec'd Honey in the first place. Why would you randomly put different fluids in your trans?
Hm, do we really have to go over this again? It's because it costs $20 a freaking quart! $8/quart for MTL or Synchromax is expensive enough to me, so there's no way I'm buying the friggin honey if I can find something nearly as good for less than half that ridiculous price.
*sits back and waits a few months for people to find something horribly wrong with RP*
Originally posted by Auto-X Fil:
Fine guys, I'll read it all. I saw a LOT of bickering and stupid non-informative stuff amongst the information, so I stopped after a coupe pages, but if no one who was involved in this wants to save me two hours (or 30 min or 15min, whatever) then I'll read it. I really didn't think it was an unreasonable request to ask for a summary of something like this.
It's really not that bad. When you read through it, it's easy to tell the posts that are bickering and the real informative posts to which you should pay attention. If you want summaries, there are several by several members within the last few pages. You'll want to go read Terry's take on it to which spouted this whole thing, and here's the link to that:
http://www.fordcontour.org/index.php?showtopic=5567
Originally posted by Rishodi:
Hm, do we really have to go over this again? It's because it costs $20 a freaking quart! $8/quart for MTL or Synchromax is expensive enough to me, so there's no way I'm buying the friggin honey if I can find something nearly as good for less than half that ridiculous price.
*sits back and waits a few months for people to find something horribly wrong with RP*
Umm think of how much $ he spent on all those fluids?! The Mobil 1 and FM are about $26 alone. I can't beleive you just responded with that! No logic. He would have saved $ going with Honey long ago. Anywho I just got a reply from an email I sent off to Royal Purple. A little too short IMO. Didn't really answer my questions.
-----Original Message-----
From: Todd R. [mailto:todras@yahoo.com]
Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2005 2:04 PM
To: rpautotech@royalpurple.com
Subject: Synchromax?
To whom it may concern,
I'm trying to find out if you can provide some sulfer
specs on RP synchromax? I'm trying to find out the
sulfer content in it. Also what is the weight of it?
I'm trying to find a lube that is as close to Ford's
XT-M5-QS spec WSD-M2C200-C gear oil for the MTX-75
manual transmission. Also another member of
contour.org sent and email to you and this was in the
reply...We have tested the Synchromax in this Ford
World Car platform in Europe for several years through
our Italian distributor. Can you tell me what kind of
tests are performed?
Thanks for all the help! -Todd Rasmussen
Response from Royal Purple:
Synchromax has the viscosity of an ATF. But with film strength that ATF does not have. Synchromax does not use a typical Gear oil EP ad pack. So it is non corossive.
Unlike some companies that just bench test oil Royal Purple test transmission fluids in transmissions that are in cars. We started testing Synchromax about 6 or 7 years ago in our race cars and about 5 years ago in our street cars. To date we have not had a lubricant related transmission failure with Synchromax.
Thanks
Patrick Burris
Technical Advisor
Royal Purple Ltd.
1-888-382-6300 ext 241
Direct 281-577-5041
cell 713-705-9201
Also if anyone hasn't looked on RP's website take a look here under the transmissions that the Honey/XT-M5-QS is spec'd for.
Originally posted by "todras":
Umm think of how much $ he spent on all those fluids?! The Mobil 1 and FM are about $26 alone. I can't beleive you just responded with that! No logic. He would have saved $ going with Honey long ago. Anywho I just got a reply from an email I sent off to Royal Purple. A little too short IMO. Didn't really answer my questions.
I'm not seeing your point here... yeah, M1 with FM is $26 for a fluid change, and the Honey is $60. Hmm... unless you're buying into that lifetime lube crap, which I don't.
I'm glad you're looking into Synchromax. I know damn well I'd like to get some more information because now I'm more cautious about jumping on that bandwagon.
Originally posted by Rishodi:
I'm not seeing your point here... yeah, M1 with FM is $26 for a fluid change, and the Honey is $60. Hmm... unless you're buying into that lifetime lube crap, which I don't.
$45!!!!! Not $60!!!!!!! About $15 a quart.
Also for those interested here is a Focus owners page about him switching from Redline D4 to the honey. No it's not MTL but it's a Redline product. Probably suited better than MTL since it's recommended for transmissions spec'd for ATF. True the MTX-75 is no longer spec'd for ATF due to the into to honey but I still.
http://focus.noegruts.com/trannyoil/trannyoil.htm
Originally posted by todras:
Originally posted by Rishodi:
I'm not seeing your point here... yeah, M1 with FM is $26 for a fluid change, and the Honey is $60. Hmm... unless you're buying into that lifetime lube crap, which I don't.
$45!!!!! Not $60!!!!!!! About $15 a quart.
That's if you're lucky. And it's still too damn expensive!!
Running honey now, much smoother feel. I ran MTL for four months dumped it, ran ATF for about 150 miles (to flush per TH) and put in the honey. Did Terry mention his recommendation re; how often the honey should be changed?
Originally posted by Marky:
Did Terry mention his recommendation re; how often the honey should be changed?
Nope. I'd go 50k though. I thought he put some in one of his personal Contours and has at least 80k on it off the top of my head.
Originally posted by Rishodi:
That's if you're lucky. And it's still too damn expensive!!
Pretty friggin' cheap compared to a new transmission with a blown stock diff. now isn't it?!!!!!!!!!!!! If you're that much of a tight ass put in regular Valvoline ATF in it! $3 a quart.
Originally posted by todras:
Originally posted by Rishodi:
That's if you're lucky. And it's still too damn expensive!!
Pretty friggin' cheap compared to a new transmission with a blown stock diff. now isn't it?!!!!!!!!!!!!
I concur!
ok my tranny blew about 4 months ago and i was running redline, now i took it apart yesterday after seeing this thread is still going and there was not a spec of black gunnk or any sign of anything , and i was runnign it for about a year. so what else could cause that???
From Terry...
...I've had mine in MY contour since 35,000...car now
has 128,000 on the clock...no changes.The Ford data
sheet for testing states the lube must stand up to a
min of 100,000 shifts without breakdown or wear to the
syncro blockers that would cause a crunch
shift...FWIW....
Originally posted by todras:
$45!!!!! Not $60!!!!!!! About $15 a quart.
Originally posted by Rishodi:
That's if you're lucky. And it's still too damn expensive!!
What do you mean if you're lucky? From fordpartsonline.com
Item Number MSRP Core Price Price
XT-M5-QS $17.29 $0.00 $12.97
$12.97 a qt plus shipping is $46.86
watching you two bickering is...
Hey he wanted to come in here and post. His fault for being illogical. Nice new glasses mang!
Originally posted by SvtEdwardo420:
ok my tranny blew about 4 months ago and i was running redline, now i took it apart yesterday after seeing this thread is still going and there was not a spec of black gunnk or any sign of anything , and i was runnign it for about a year. so what else could cause that???
-i think it was accidently missed at the bottom of the page as no reply was made.
Originally posted by todras:
Originally posted by Rishodi:
That's if you're lucky. And it's still too damn expensive!!
Pretty friggin' cheap compared to a new transmission with a blown stock diff. now isn't it?!!!!!!!!!!!! If you're that much of a tight ass put in regular Valvoline ATF in it! $3 a quart.
Nah, I'd rather not use ATF; that's why I was looking for a good mid-grade alternative between that and the honey. By the way, I'm getting tired of the "cheap compared to a new transmission argument". That's moot. I should be able to drain and fill my transmission with a good lube without spending too much. I'm used to $3-5/quart, and I'm not the only one that thinks the Honey is overpriced.
I don't doubt that you CAN keep Honey in the transmission for quite a long time, but I wouldn't do it. Hell, some people *cough* have kept the stock ATF in their Contour until after 100k miles and I wouldn't have done that either if I could help it. Ford's honey is no miracle fluid; it's still transmission fluid, it gets dirty, and it needs to be changed every so often.
However, I'm glad to hear that it's available for $13/quart plus shipping. That's cheaper than I've ever seen it and beginning to look like more of a reasonable choice.
Originally posted by SvtEdwardo420:
ok my tranny blew about 4 months ago and i was running redline, now i took it apart yesterday after seeing this thread is still going and there was not a spec of black gunnk or any sign of anything , and i was runnign it for about a year. so what else could cause that???
Uh oh, what's this? Someone else running MTL and found no signs of the sludge?
To answer your question though, quite simply these transmissions were not as well designed as they could be. After a few years of wear, the differential and the synchros are prone to give out. It's not at all an uncommon issue.
Originally posted by pole120:
-i think it was accidently missed at the bottom of the page as no reply was made.
Oh we saw it but I don't see him posting any pics of his transmission. He could be starting flamebait. Seeing his posts in the SE MI regional forum I don't trust most of his posts.
Originally posted by Rishodi:
Nah, I'd rather not use ATF; that's why I was looking for a good mid-grade alternative between that and the honey. By the way, I'm getting tired of the "cheap compared to a new transmission argument". That's moot. I should be able to drain and fill my transmission with a good lube without spending too much. I'm used to $3-5/quart, and I'm not the only one that thinks the Honey is overpriced.
Why are you tired of it? Because it's true? You buy a 23k SVT and can't part with $45 every 4 years for a fluid change. With an estimated average yearly mileage of 12k. What is that $11.50 a year that breaks down to? Do you use synthetic Mobil 1 in your SVT like most on here do? (Probably run the $1 a qt stuff from the corner store huh?) If you do it yourself it's about $25-30 an oil change every oil change every 5k? Makes the trans fluid sound like a bargain eh and your logic wack now doesn't it? Should have bought a Yugo.
Originally posted by Rishodi:
After a few years of wear, the differential and the synchros are prone to give out. It's not at all an uncommon issue.
Umm NO! I had 130k when my 2.5 spun a bearing. My stock MTX looked great when I had a Quaife installed!!!! Big Jim has 200+k on his SVT without any motor or tranny work. Proof that aggresive maintenance works. Nice try on that angle though.
Originally posted by todras:
Proof that aggresive maintenance works. Nice try on that angle though.
It doesn't matter how well you maintain the car. Failures happen and abusive driving will make components fail prematurely. And Todd speaking of cheap aren't you the one that skimped on rod bearings on your last failed 3L?
Originally posted by Thinkmoto:
And Todd speaking of cheap aren't you the one that skimped on rod bearings on your last failed 3L?
Is that the only thing you've ever posted as a response to my posts? Seems like it. Staz didn't do the rod bearings in Bk's car. Runs just fine. Didn't realize I had to spend $ on an engine with 10k on the clock. Nice try yourself. Yea by looking at my Contour you can see how cheap I am. Now go away again for a few more months and post the same thing to me again and hijack another thread.
Originally posted by Rishodi:
Uh oh, what's this? Someone else running MTL and found no signs of the sludge?
From TH
...on MTL:- *Differences in color between 'batches'
*New bottles with 'black stuff' in the bottom of the
bottle
*Some very dirty black transmissions, some people claim theirs are clean
*We have virgin oil test on ONE batch(time others sent some!)
*We have yet to see a pic of a clean trans that was opened up(dispite what some say I WANT PROOF!)...and maybe, just bloody maybe if they would read the WHOLE thread they may pick up where we mentioned that it could be a QC problem at Redline...as my own virgin sample had 'solids' in it!!!...which is a no no...Maybe R/Line has no 'sample inspection' QC standards.....READ THE WHOLE POST!
Originally posted by todras:
Originally posted by Thinkmoto:
And Todd speaking of cheap aren't you the one that skimped on rod bearings on your last failed 3L?
Is that the only thing you've ever posted as a response to my posts? Seems like it. Staz didn't do the rod bearings in Bk's car. Runs just fine. Didn't realize I had to spend $ on an engine with 10k on the clock. Nice try yourself. Yea by looking at my Contour you can see how cheap I am. Now go away again for a few more months and post the same thing to me again and hijack another thread.
Speaking of that, I owe you a congrats. I am assuming by now you've surpassed the 50 mile mark. congrats! :-)
Originally posted by RTStabler51:
Speaking of that, I owe you a congrats. I am assuming by now you've surpassed the 50 mile mark. congrats! :-)
I wouldn't be too sure about that.......
Originally posted by Stazi:
I wouldn't be too sure about that.......
I would. What is this? Asshat covention? What does me buying a used engine have to do with this thread?!
I'm just teasing, seeing as I've put on more miles walking, than you have driving, since you put your car back together.
Originally posted by todras:
Originally posted by Rishodi:
After a few years of wear, the differential and the synchros are prone to give out. It's not at all an uncommon issue.
Umm NO! I had 130k when my 2.5 spun a bearing. My stock MTX looked great when I had a Quaife installed!!!! Big Jim has 200+k on his SVT without any motor or tranny work. Proof that aggresive maintenance works. Nice try on that angle though.
I don't get why you're so adament about this. Aggressive maintenance helps but it's no guarantee; it never is. It's rare that a Contour gets high mileage without a transmission problem. Hell, I'm surprised that mine has gotten to 130k without any issues. And no, I don't abuse it and neither did the previous owner. It's a simple fact that our transmissions aren't the greastest and are prone to failure.
To answer your question, I use Castrol GTX in my engine, and I buy it by the gallon, which comes out to around $2.25 per quart. That and changing the oil filter every time makes it a little less than $20 for me to do it myself.
If you can't see my viewpoint, that's fine and it's no big deal to me. I can see yours and that's fine, though you're pushing it awfully hard. Basically, I just don't think that it's worth spending the money on the best/most expensive of everything as long as you can find a cheaper item of near quality, because at the same time it is worth spending enough to get a better product than the cheapest available. I think that's just being realistic and careful with your finances. You call me cheap? You should meet my roommate lol
Originally posted by Rishodi:
I don't get why you're so adament about this. Aggressive maintenance helps but it's no guarantee; it never is. It's rare that a Contour gets high mileage without a transmission problem.
Most likely because of abuse and improper shifting procedures. Yes later MTX's seem to have 3rd gear sync issues. I have a 99 SVT in my garage right now with 65k on it and no grind issues. I've also heard of some with 30k on them with a lot of sync issues. Logic tells me someone drove the hell out it at some point.
Originally posted by Rishodi:
Hell, I'm surprised that mine has gotten to 130k without any issues. And no, I don't abuse it and neither did the previous owner.
Theirs your answer. You didn't abuse it. All of them would last w/o issue like yours with a good lube, timely changes and good driving.
Originally posted by Rishodi:
Basically, I just don't think that it's worth spending the money on the best/most expensive of everything as long as you can find a cheaper item of near quality,
Then Synchromax is for you.
Yeah, I won't believe SVTedwardo til I see pics. He made my friend drive all the way home to show him a car and never showed nor called nor answered his phone.
I think I will be switching to RP as well. Looks like a good option for me personally. Im not joining the "down with MTL" group yet. Though there is some evidence for both sides, Im coming to this conclusion based on a few personal reasons.
1. Im not really pleased with MTL in the winter. It sucks until it gets warm. I will say I like it in the warmer months. Im just tired of doing the pre drive row to spread the oil around, and really the shifting doesnt improve for a couple of miles anyway. RP seems like a viable option, especailly for the price. I am wary of jumping from one boat to another, however, but it seems RP has some good data to back its claims.
2. I am curious to see what kind of condition the MTL is in, and to compare with others. I would be willing to send it in to Blackstone for the standard test. If anyone would like further tests, they are welcome to paypal me the $$$ for whatever test they would like run beyond the initial $20. I would like to change the fluid this weekend, b/c I have some free time. Would storing it in a clean old water jug or something work until the Blackstone bottles came or would that contaminate it? I could wait for the Blackstone kit if someone was interested. If not, Ill put it in clear bottles and take pics.
My car has about 63,000 miles. The original fluid was changed out for the first time, by me, between 50,000- 55,000 miles (remember I have kilometers, Im not quite sure what the mileage was), last spring sometime. Anyway, the original fluid saw pampering by the original owner, then 2 drag passes, 3 auto-x laps, and the very occasional hard launch by me. Havent done a ton on the MTL except for the occasional hard shift from 1-2 and 2-3. No launches (I know this because Ive had it as long as my poly rear trans mount, and I never have put it through its paces). So thats its history. If anyone wants some analysis done on some lower mileage MTL I would be happy to help for the good of the group. I personally just cant afford to do the full blown test like Terry.
Originally posted by todras:
Originally posted by Rishodi:
Basically, I just don't think that it's worth spending the money on the best/most expensive of everything as long as you can find a cheaper item of near quality,
Then Synchromax is for you.
That's what I've concluded as well. But as I posted previously, I want to find out more about it before I hop on that bandwagon like I did with MTL. And I'm going to end the bickering here because I'm tired of it and it was way off topic
Originally posted by SvtEdwardo420:
ok my tranny blew about 4 months ago and i was running redline, now i took it apart yesterday after seeing this thread is still going and there was not a spec of black gunnk or any sign of anything , and i was runnign it for about a year. so what else could cause that???
Got any pics?
BTW, some of the non supported evidence on this thread is just [censored] [censored]!
To top it off you already have people making the exact same kind of "it shifts great now" posts that they were making two years ago about redline and before/after that the cocktail.
You got wonderfull shifting...So what!? Who should we believe when that same stuff was said about every other hokey oil that's ever been sold!!!!
I'm sick of misplaced blame or illogical assumptions either way. Now if I respect your opinion or your work then I'll read and pay attention. For you newbees out there, read closely.
I hate to say this but if you don't have a solid reputation behind you that says the reader should listen to what you're writing...or unless you have some proof, then don't post anything as a fact. Post it as an observation or a question and if you can come to a logical assumption about it then post that too. Don't be offended if someone can poke holes in it like swiss cheese when you didn't think of everyting.
As far as the lube; at this junction, we have NO direct evidence against the redline product, only circumstantial evidence. We have NOTHING saying RP is any good at all yet. Yet some of you are going to jump on it.
Fine if you wish to experiment but don't come crying later that someone said it was good.
I have my own theories on this and I went straight to the source and posted them on FCO so that Terry could have a crack at them. I'm tired of posting them here. If you actually find something wrong with those theories of mine, then say so. Say so here if you don't want to post over there.
Oh yeah and People disagree on here. Sometimes I think they are jackasses too. I've been a jackass in the past (though not about this
) So Big deal, get over it. I'm not so wrapped up on a friggin thread here that I couldn't go out and have a beer at the end of the day with any of the guys on here that disagree or agree with me. This topic stays in this thread! I respect a person who stands up for their beliefs, so don't anyone take me the wrong way.
Originally posted by Rishodi:
I want to find out more about it before I hop on that bandwagon like I did with MTL.
You're not going to find any more info than whats been posted here already about it. Get a sample done. Doesn't have to be the thourough test like one Terry had done. If you notice he had 2 done. Get the basic and compare it against the other tests on MTL and Honey.
Originally posted by warmonger:
Oh yeah and People disagree on here. Sometimes I think they are jackasses too. I've been a jackass in the past (though not about this ) So Big deal, get over it. I'm not so wrapped up on a friggin thread here that I couldn't go out and have a beer at the end of the day with any of the guys on here that disagree or agree with me. This topic stays in this thread! I respect a person who stands up for their beliefs, so don't anyone take me the wrong way.
double-werd.
And martina mcbride is hot. Random yes, but one of her music videos just came on TV. I'd do her. That is all, thanks for listening.
I'm agreeing with everything you just said. It's almost funny to watch so many people hopping over to RP just because of this thread and claiming it works well - yet, that was exactly the positive reaction people used to have with MTL.
There is no irrefutable evidence against MTL so far. I've read the entire thread and I've seen what's going on, and I think we have a strong hypothesis that MTL is doing bad things, but it has yet to be proven. Until there is solid proof, I'm going to remain skeptical. I think we have more than enough reasons for the legal term "reasonable doubt" to apply in this situation.
Originally posted by warmonger:
BTW, some of the non supported evidence on this thread is just [censored] [censored]!
To top it off you already have people making the exact same kind of "it shifts great now" posts that they were making two years ago about redline and before/after that the cocktail.
You got wonderfull shifting...So what!? Who should we believe when that same stuff was said about every other hokey oil that's ever been sold!!!!
Tom, next your gonna tell us you can't feel the 1-2hp that certain mods may add! I mean, i know when I added my FRPP wires my car was flying!
Originally posted by todras:
Originally posted by SVTCANUK:
I am on week 3 with RP in the tranny and the difference is still quite noticeable. I have been through the gambit of fluids over the years, starting with stock, cocktail, MTL, ATF+3 and now Syncromax. Syncromax is by far the best for me in my transmission. Most of my fluid experimentation was done with the intention of finding something that shifted better in my colder climate. It's about this time of the year when the temp has fallen into the 50's (daytime) 30's (overnight) that the stiffer shifting becomes apparent, as of yet I haven't noticed a difference. It may be due to the fluid being relatively new but I don't think so. I will continue to report on this as it gets colder and the fluid gets older.
And just think of the time and $ you could have saved by going with the spec'd Honey in the first place. Why would you randomly put different fluids in your trans?
There was nothing random about it. The first change with Mobil1 was prior to the Honey being available, the second was when everyone was initially going on about how good MTL was and how much smoother the shifting was. The switch to ATF+3 was done as recommended by members here for problematic trannies. The RP Syncromax was next in line for me to test, this thread just happened to coincide with my change.
I have spoken with a few local members who have informed me that Ford Honey is brutal for shifting in cold weather. Why would I spend an outrageous amount of money on something that someone else has already proven not to work? The Honey may be fantastic for moderate to warm climates but when it's -30 outside it sucks. BTW if I were to add up the cost of all the fluid changes combined, together they might equal the cost of the Honey
Menutia aside - go for the RP. It's very close to the Ford specs AND shifts great - even when cold.
I drained the near fresh fluid out last night, looked clean, and put in the RP. As stazi said, it's like butter.
Huge improvement, shifting from 3rd, to neutral, and then to first is a piece of cake, no forcing it into gear at all.
I have three quarts of RP in my trunk, and I can't feel any difference at all in my shifting.
Seriously, though, I am not an experimenter when it comes to most aspects of this car. I let other people do that. So, the good thing is I've missed all the bandwagons: FM, cocktails, MTL, and so on.
From a pure specs comparison, it makes more sense to me to run MT-90 than MTL, but let's face it: Everything I know about MTX fluid I've learned in the last month. Like I said, I'm not one to experiment.
Anyway, I don't have much to go on, here. I posted a response from RP, and I read the responses from Redline, and they both say nearly the same thing. RP inspires a bit more confidence, because they 1) knew what an MTX 75 was, 2) claimed to have "tested" their product in this exact unit, and 3) have enough confidence themselves to cross-reference their product with the XT-M5-QS. The Redline response seems rooted more on what should "theoretically" be OK, unless I read it wrong. Redline doesn't make as bold or specific a claim as RP wrt suitability, either.
Still, there's a lot we don't know about the RP product, and both RP emails are selectively vague about test methodology. What is the test? "No Italians are complaining, so it must be good?"
As TH has said, there could be a quality control issue with the MTL. Based on specs, the MTL should be fine. The MT-90 perhaps "better." Fram oil filters meet specs, too, and thousands of people run them without ever noticing anything wrong. If the quality of the MTL is inconsistent, that could explain a lot. (Doesn't prove it's true, though.)
I'm not interested in "like butter" observations, either. I could put straight ATF in there tomorrow and it would probably shift "like butter" compared to now, (with almost 75k on the original fluid!). My fluid needs changed, and I'm tentatively convinced that the RP is a good product with reliable quality, and that it might even work better than the Ford fluid. But, like I said, I don't have a lot to go on.
Originally posted by RogerB:
I'm not interested in "like butter" observations, either. I could put straight ATF in there tomorrow and it would probably shift "like butter" compared to now,
I'd think Stazi would give a correct analogy compared to most on here. He changed more transaxles than most on here and driven quite a few. I'm close to him so I'd say if some of the more respected members on here says it shifts better I'd believe them. I remember hearing cold shift complains about MTL back in the day and that's what kept me away from it.
Originally posted by KingpinSVT:
.. Would storing it in a clean old water jug or something work until the Blackstone bottles came or would that contaminate it? ..
Wash glass bottles with distilled water (and triple rinse). Then air dry. Fill bottles with fluid all the way to brim to ensure no air bubbles and cover with tight lid.
Originally posted by RogerB:
As TH has said, there could be a quality control issue with the MTL. Based on specs, the MTL should be fine. The MT-90 perhaps "better."
Based on specs? The lab report does not match the lab report of Honey. How does that make it fine? Why would you run MT-90? What is your reasoning? What's going to happen when the weather turns colder with that heavier weight fluid in there? War lives in a warmer southern climate so that might be ok for him. I can't recall where you live. The reason War is running it is because of the noise his Torsen is producing. Maybe the diff. bearings weren't preloaded correctly when the diff. was installed? I don't know. Eurotour and I put M1 in his Torsen equiped trans Terry built. No noises from it. And why not run D4 since that is what's stated on the Redline label? "Suitable for transmissions that are specified to run ATF." Which again is not the spec for the MTX-75 anyway but at the beginning was spec'd as previously stated. If you've missed installing all these "mystery oils" then why not run the Ford spec'd honey? You've obviously saved a lot by sticking to ATF. MT-90 is not even close to something I'd use in an stock MTX-75. I thought you stated you weren't experimenting?
The MT-90 is of the correct weight at 75W90. (The same as the Ford "Honey.") As an average consumer, I might not dig any deeper than that. I'm not recommending MT-90. I'm just trying to make a point about "spec."
I run 5w-30 in my engine, and will probably never change. Some guys argue that a 0w-30 or 0w-20 would be better--others argue 20w50. Both cite some arcane technical analysis that I can understand but would never be curious enough to do on my own. Both sides make some believable points that contradict each other. I'll be sticking with the design spec, thank you. That's what I mean by "not experimenting."
Now, reading that you might think I'd never stray from the Honey. But, I think I know enough now to realize that this is not rocket science. Well, it shouldn't be, anyway. My engine wants 5w-30. It gets 5w-30. It doesn't matter who makes it. Sure, some oil works better than others, and I run Mobil 1. But technically, I should be able to run any "certified" 5w-30 oil and not worry about it ruining the engine.
The gearbox is slightly more complicated, I realize. I have to worry about GL-3/4 vs GL-5. I have to use something designed for a synchronized transmission. Given complete ignorance of this thread, I should be able to choose any synthetic manual transmission fluid of the correct weight and GL rating and not worry about it. Given that, I'd be deciding between Redline MT-90, RP Synchromax, and the Ford Honey (and maybe some others). If I didn't know Ford had updated the spec, I might have D4 ATF on the list, but that's a moot point, isn't it? And who the hell's idea was it to put FM in there? But we've already covered that.
If I could wait longer, I would, to get more "long term" data on RP. But 75k is enough, and my shifting needs improvement. I'm going to have to trust my gut on this, and rely on RP's confidence. But I don't see it as a big risk.
Originally posted by Stazi:
Menutia aside - go for the RP. It's very close to the Ford specs AND shifts great - even when cold.
I honestly think that is what I will do when I change out this fluid. I've always liked RP products and I'm eager to try this stuff out this winter as I know this MT90 is going to be too heavy come December.
Originally posted by todras:
War lives in a warmer southern climate so that might be ok for him. I can't recall where you live. The reason War is running it is because of the noise his Torsen is producing. Maybe the diff. bearings weren't preloaded correctly when the diff. was installed? I don't know. Eurotour and I put M1 in his Torsen equiped trans Terry built. No noises from it.
True on the climate and Torsen noises. I found out that it was because of the high torque loads my engine produces that my torsen makes more noise than other people's.
I routinely run 300+ ft-lbs of torque at the crank up to and including the uncorrected 330 ft-lbs I recorded at the wheels when I last dynod, that was what...350 ft-lbs at the crank?
Torsen said the T2 was only designed for the Focus and for its torque loads. I developed the noise on a powerful motor using only ATF+FM. I'll never use that stuff again. The rest of my trans has held together well on any of the fluids I've ran, including the stock diff. I still have the stock diff and not a mark on it with the fluids I ran. I even ran it with my turbo for about 3 months before installing the torsen and of course that was over 2 years before that on the 3L hybrid motor I built.
So yeah, MT90 is close in weight to the Ford Honey but I'd be carefull on it in a cold climate. Not that it will hurt anything but because it may not shift as well.
If it comes to it, I used Torco Synthetic from Jan 01 to May 03. That stuff worked well and did a great job of protecting my diff from damage. NOT an ounce of wear on my stock diff as I stated above, and the fluid I used for two years with the 3L and three months of the turbo was the Torco synthetic sold by BAT.
BAT actually recommends it for the MTX 75 as it has been used in racing in these tranmissions and it has been tested for well over 5 years. How come no one uses this stuff? I it has more race time than any of these other fluids we talk about...including Ford Honey. I endorse it for protection even in the less than ideal conditions of a high torque motor.
Originally posted by Stazi:
Originally posted by RTStabler51:
Speaking of that, I owe you a congrats. I am assuming by now you've surpassed the 50 mile mark. congrats! :-)
I wouldn't be too sure about that.......
Haahahahahahaha Wow Todd and how long has your car been apart? I go away for awhile and your still crying like a bay about your car. Don't worry Todd I'll go away now for awhile again because I know you love me soooooooooooo much
1995 transaxle, 147k miles, still shifts great with no synchro issues at all.
Just drained my MTL and squirted some RP (1/2 qt) through to flush a little. Then added the rest of the 3 qts and drove. It feels nice, but no better than the MTL when it was new, except it doesn't take any time for warm up. My MTL looked fine when I took it out, but looks obviously don't always mean anything.
I'm beg to wonder about a bad batch of MTL...mine looked like arse coming out.
I'm beginning to think you had some contaminants in the transmission from a previous use of friction modifier, or someone elses previous use.
No matter what, if you want to feel good about it then use a fluid that makes you feel like you are doing the right thing. Terry said use Honey. If it performs well then don't worry about the costs.
I just don't agree that the fluid by itself is the issue.
Originally posted by warmonger:
I'm beginning to think you had some contaminants in the transmission from a previous use of friction modifier, or someone elses previous use.
No matter what, if you want to feel good about it then use a fluid that makes you feel like you are doing the right thing. Terry said use Honey. If it performs well then don't worry about the costs.
I just don't agree that the fluid by itself is the issue.
Does the fact that terry gave me that trans case clean as a whistle prior to me using the MTL. Do we need another 100 pages...
I still think the darkening is from excessive heat -- failing components and/or LSD (good or failing). Each time I drained my MTL, it looked nearly new. Last time I drained it, my diff had locked and was wicked hot.... the fluid was very dark. This could also be combined with the bad batch theory.
MapOfTaziFoSho, Terry installed an LSD right? Has anyone seen dark MTL come out of a non-failing, stock diff mtx?
This is not to debate whether or not MTL is good/bad for our trannys... just trying to isolate the circumstances that generate the dark MTL.
Originally posted by todras:
Originally posted by Auto-X Fil:
http://store.summitracing.com/default.asp?target=egnsearch.asp&N=400484+309635&autoview=sku
This stuff?
Yes.
Man, I went to four different stores last night trying to find this stuff and no luck.
Just so you guys know, Summit has free shipping but there is a handling charge since it's considered a hazardous substance.
3 quarts from Summit were 23.85,Handling was 8.95.
The total was 32.80 shipped to my work, but I get a cool free catalouge.
I guess this weekend I'll be doing the first oil change and tranny fluid change on the 3 liter. Can't wait to see what this RP does or those hard to shift gears...1st and 3rd in my tranny.
If the two guys that put my car back together are using it, then so's me!!!! Thanks Terry and Stazi or all the info.
I guess I'll give a big thanks to Todd and Rawbutt so they don't get thier panties in a knot!
Originally posted by Bk4293L:
I guess I'll give a big thanks to Todd and Rawbutt so they don't get thier panties in a knot!
Panties have been knotted, PM SENT!
ive had a tranny faiulre my diff blew a gear out the case and when i drained the mtl from it, it looked very good. no darkness or anything , looked like used tranny fluid.
PS Summit will send you a free hat too!
Originally posted by SvtEdwardo420:
ive had a tranny faiulre my diff blew a gear out the case and when i drained the mtl from it, it looked very good. no darkness or anything , looked like used tranny fluid.
Did you open the case up or was that a fictional event!?
Pic?!
Originally posted by Stazi:
PS Summit will send you a free hat too!
Half of that hat is mine!
I'm willing to bet he will give it to you if you post pics of that gf of yours!
i dont have pictures of it right now im down in ohio but when i come back up this weekend ill post it, i dont have a pic of the fluid anymore unless theres still some in my tranny but ill post pics of the inside on friday or saturday
Originally posted by Stazi:
PS Summit will send you a free hat too!
It's my second or third hat. WTF do I need three Simmit hats for? And I got some deoderant. No wonder they charge so much for shipping. I got a hat in a package of effing speedbleeders. The hat weighs twice as much!
Originally posted by Bk4293L:
Just so you guys know, Summit has free shipping but there is a handling charge since it's considered a hazardous substance.
Actually summit sucks and charges a handling fee on EVERYTHING. Their "free shipping" is such a stupid gimmick.
Originally posted by Kremithefrog:
Originally posted by Bk4293L:
Just so you guys know, Summit has free shipping but there is a handling charge since it's considered a hazardous substance.
Actually summit sucks and charges a handling fee on EVERYTHING. Their "free shipping" is such a stupid gimmick.
I'll pay that "handling fee" any day if I know my parts are going to be on my doorstep the next morning. The fact is, Summit is extremely fast with shipping. People have to find something to complain about.
Mark
I'm with Mark on that one.
Handling cost or now, it's still cheaper than most stores.
Murray's sells the synchromax for 11.99/ quart.
Originally posted by Stryped:
Murray's sells the synchromax for 11.99/ quart.
Holy rip off!!!!!!! Even the only store in GR that caries it in stock is like $8 or $9.
Thats what I thought. I was able to order it through Pepeboy's for liek $9.80/quart.
Sorry got some things confused. This is what was meant to be posted. We have another player.
Found the info on their site.
http://www.amsoil.com/StoreFront/mtf.aspx
About 6.95 a qt.
Didn't we cover this already?
I don't think we did...did we?!
He's responding to something I had up and edited it. Brain fart.
It says it can be used as a replacement in AUTOMATIC FORD TRANSMISSION that require Mecron ATF. Anyone have any thoughts, I will run this past Terry, may be a good alternative.
Originally posted by todras:
He's responding to something I had up and edited it. Brain fart.
Yes. Nevermind my last.
Originally posted by Y2KSVT:
Originally posted by Kremithefrog:
Originally posted by Bk4293L:
Just so you guys know, Summit has free shipping but there is a handling charge since it's considered a hazardous substance.
Actually summit sucks and charges a handling fee on EVERYTHING. Their "free shipping" is such a stupid gimmick.
I'll pay that "handling fee" any day if I know my parts are going to be on my doorstep the next morning. The fact is, Summit is extremely fast with shipping. People have to find something to complain about.
Mark
You can say that again, its here already!!!
I was able to get my RP Synchromax for $10 per quart Canadian! Shop around guys you should be able to find it pretty cheap.
I found the Ford Honey (which dealers here want $40 per quart) to shift fine in summer but it was next to impossible to shift in winter. RP's Synchromax fixed that for me making it much easier to shift in cold weather while retaining smooth shifts.
Advocate ----
Where abouts? I'd like to throw some in the new 'tour once the initial "change everything under the sun" flush is done with.
Originally posted by pole120:
Originally posted by Auto-X Fil:
Okay, no way I'm reading this whole thread.
wow...just wow.
I've read 6 pages of this for the first time now and I think I have heard pretty much everything. Redline is good, redline is bad, MB1 is better, Ford Honey is best
I don't know anymore, I do know that I'm going to change my MTX fluid soon now and probably go with Ford if it will save my transmission. So is it straight fluid or is there a FM additive that needs to go in the Ford stuff?
This thread needs to DIE!!!
Can you just add the information with all observations to one post and add it to one of the FAQ's already stickied at the top? There is so much drama and BS shrouding the actual core information that we are going to have to do this to make it worthwhile. I know I wouldn't go back and read all these pages if I just now saw it. At least unsticky it when that is done so it will go away.
Originally posted by warmonger:
This thread needs to DIE!!!
Can you just add the information with all observations to one post and add it to one of the FAQ's already stickied at the top? There is so much drama and BS shrouding the actual core information that we are going to have to do this to make it worthwhile. I know I wouldn't go back and read all these pages if I just now saw it. At least unsticky it when that is done so it will go away.
No, not yet. It still has a long way to go to be the longest thread. This thread is better than a soap opera.
CEG... we know drama.
Originally posted by warmonger:
This thread needs to DIE!!!
Can you just add the information with all observations to one post and add it to one of the FAQ's already stickied at the top? There is so much drama and BS shrouding the actual core information that we are going to have to do this to make it worthwhile. I know I wouldn't go back and read all these pages if I just now saw it. At least unsticky it when that is done so it will go away.
I think I suggested this on page 2 or 3. Read the whole thread and you'd know that.
Originally posted by warmonger:
This thread needs to DIE!!!
Can you just add the information with all observations to one post and add it to one of the FAQ's already stickied at the top? There is so much drama and BS shrouding the actual core information that we are going to have to do this to make it worthwhile. I know I wouldn't go back and read all these pages if I just now saw it. At least unsticky it when that is done so it will go away.
I will tonight.
Originally posted by unisys12:
Originally posted by warmonger:
This thread needs to DIE!!!
Can you just add the information with all observations to one post and add it to one of the FAQ's already stickied at the top? There is so much drama and BS shrouding the actual core information that we are going to have to do this to make it worthwhile. I know I wouldn't go back and read all these pages if I just now saw it. At least unsticky it when that is done so it will go away.
I will tonight.
Ahhhh, this was my masterpiece. I thought I created a monster!
Originally posted by unisys12:
Originally posted by warmonger:
This thread needs to DIE!!!
Can you just add the information with all observations to one post and add it to one of the FAQ's already stickied at the top? There is so much drama and BS shrouding the actual core information that we are going to have to do this to make it worthwhile. I know I wouldn't go back and read all these pages if I just now saw it. At least unsticky it when that is done so it will go away.
I will tonight.
That is gonna be a farting pain in the butt
Doh!
Yea censorship! Can't wait to see how this turns out.
I hope it doesnt turn into censorship. There is a lot of bickering, I would personally remove that and any stupid comments and those with absolutely no factual backing.
Originally posted by todras:
Yea censorship! Can't wait to see how this turns out.
No more than a few paragraphs w/pics...
Originally posted by KingpinSVT:
I hope it doesnt turn into censorship. There is a lot of bickering, I would personally remove that and any stupid comments and those with absolutely no factual backing.
That would be what....two of my posts and 99% of Todras's?
j/k
There would likely be only about 1 page of text if you pull out the stuff without any proof or support.
You know what Im saying. Im talking about:
"I put _____ in my trans and its _____."
OR
"Well ______ is awesome so I dont care what you say!"
VS.
People making arguments based on what they have actually seen/had tested or at a min. decent logic or fluid specs.
Originally posted by warmonger:
That would be what....two of my posts and 99% of Todras's?
j/k
Takes a lot of wind to disprove misinformation.
Hahah. Touche
Maybe I should have tried a bit harder then.
I grabbed the 5 points against MTL and the rebuttals to each. I did not include any comments of my own nor did I give, add or alter any information. Most of the summary is copy and pasted, but some thoughts ran on through several posts, so those were reworded.
I am going to post the summary, lock it and sticky it. This thread is pointed to at the end of the summary. If anyone, in the future wants to argue this topic further can do so within this thread. But, it will no longer be stickied.
I will also add that people can feel free to PM me with suggestions about the summary, but remember... this is about MTL. Not FM, RP, Ford Honey, ATF, etc..
Originally posted by unisys12:
I will also add that people can feel free to PM me with suggestions about the summary, but remember... this is about MTL. Not FM, RP, Ford Honey, ATF, etc..
That information is important tho. Still would be great for a stickie!
Originally posted by MapOfTaziFoShoââ??¢:
Originally posted by unisys12:
I will also add that people can feel free to PM me with suggestions about the summary, but remember... this is about MTL. Not FM, RP, Ford Honey, ATF, etc..
That information is important tho. Still would be great for a stickie!
Yes, there is a ton of great information in this thread, but the title of the thread and topic overall is about MTL and how it is suppose to be bad.
Nice job on the summary!
I like that you gave adequate summary and hit the high points of various arguments.
Originally posted by unisys12:
Originally posted by MapOfTaziFoShoââ??¢:
Originally posted by unisys12:
I will also add that people can feel free to PM me with suggestions about the summary, but remember... this is about MTL. Not FM, RP, Ford Honey, ATF, etc..
That information is important tho. Still would be great for a stickie!
Yes, there is a ton of great information in this thread, but the title of the thread and topic overall is about MTL and how it is suppose to be bad.
Lets add another sticky about "Fluid" then Or why dont we just make one informative "fluid" thread and call it a day? There is some very good info in here about RP, Honey, and an updated view of FM that I think are important to keep stickied, or at least in a thread that makes more sense than "watch out"
Originally posted by rkneeshaw3.0:
Originally posted by unisys12:
Originally posted by MapOfTaziFoShoââ??¢:
Originally posted by unisys12:
I will also add that people can feel free to PM me with suggestions about the summary, but remember... this is about MTL. Not FM, RP, Ford Honey, ATF, etc..
That information is important tho. Still would be great for a stickie!
Yes, there is a ton of great information in this thread, but the title of the thread and topic overall is about MTL and how it is suppose to be bad.
Lets add another sticky about "Fluid" then Or why dont we just make one informative "fluid" thread and call it a day? There is some very good info in here about RP, Honey, and an updated view of FM that I think are important to keep stickied, or at least in a thread that makes more sense than "watch out"
You have a point and that got me to thinking.... You could actually take this one thread and cover just about 90% of the information needed for a MTX-75 FAQ. But, since we have a Wiki coming so...
Originally posted by warmonger:
Nice job on the summary!
I like that you gave adequate summary and hit the high points of various arguments.
Thanks.
Originally posted by Y2KSVT:
Originally posted by Kremithefrog:
Originally posted by Bk4293L:
Just so you guys know, Summit has free shipping but there is a handling charge since it's considered a hazardous substance.
Actually summit sucks and charges a handling fee on EVERYTHING. Their "free shipping" is such a stupid gimmick.
I'll pay that "handling fee" any day if I know my parts are going to be on my doorstep the next morning. The fact is, Summit is extremely fast with shipping. People have to find something to complain about.
Mark
Well, they're not that fast for me. Just average. But that's besides the point. Advertising free shipping yet charging for handling isn't cool. They should advertise super fast shipping instead, but I imagine that fast shipping stems from the fact that you only live a state away from their warehouse.
Good job on complaining about my complaining.
Originally posted by Kremithefrog:
Originally posted by Y2KSVT:
Originally posted by Kremithefrog:
Originally posted by Bk4293L:
Just so you guys know, Summit has free shipping but there is a handling charge since it's considered a hazardous substance.
Actually summit sucks and charges a handling fee on EVERYTHING. Their "free shipping" is such a stupid gimmick.
I'll pay that "handling fee" any day if I know my parts are going to be on my doorstep the next morning. The fact is, Summit is extremely fast with shipping. People have to find something to complain about.
Mark
Well, they're not that fast for me. Just average. But that's besides the point. Advertising free shipping yet charging for handling isn't cool. They should advertise super fast shipping instead, but I imagine that fast shipping stems from the fact that you only live a state away from their warehouse.
Good job on complaining about my complaining.
Thanks for complaining about something I said 2 weeks ago. Summit in Ohio isn't the only location by the way. Also, I know of several people that live much further away from them that have received the packages the next day, if not 2 days after. All I'm saying is, you'd really be bitching up a storm if you didn't get your parts in a decent amount of time, so that little handling fee they charge is worth it.
Mark
a firend of mine received some u-bends for our project car from them in 2 days.
and another friend of mine got his clutch for his '03 cobra in 2 days also...we line in Hilton Head, SC
Originally posted by Y2KSVT:
Thanks for complaining about something I said 2 weeks ago. Summit in Ohio isn't the only location by the way. Also, I know of several people that live much further away from them that have received the packages the next day, if not 2 days after. All I'm saying is, you'd really be bitching up a storm if you didn't get your parts in a decent amount of time, so that little handling fee they charge is worth it.
Mark
No problem. And I know that summit in ohio isn't the only location, but there aren't many other locations either, and I believe most products ship from there. The handling charge may be worth it. All I said is it is a stupid gimmick. That was it. You just wanted to have something to complain about. I didn't even say anything as to whether the handling fee was worth it or not. Just that's it's a gimmick.
Now ladies...quit your bickering....
Hey Kremit I heard stories awhile back when there was family problems involved. This was my first order from Summot and I must agree, they rock. I had my stuff in 2 days. Along with a free hat, a catalouge, and even a free stick of Degree Deoderant...they mustve heard about me somewhere..
??? What does what they give you or how fast it gets there have to do with what I said. Goooshhhh.
Originally posted by Kremithefrog:
??? What does what they give you or how fast it gets there have to do with what I said. Goooshhhh.
Originally posted by Kremithefrog:
Well, they're not that fast for me. Just average.
Paint That Yellow !!!
Paint what yellow? The header I got coming? If I can find good yellow ceramic paint, then sure thing.
By the way. Ordered 11/08 (in the pm) will be here 11/14, from Ohio. Average shipping time.
That's not too bad. You are ordering parts for an Escort. They don't stock 50 of every part. Your more common parts, and universal stuff like your battery relocation boxes and gauges(both of which I ordered from Summit) will generally ship out the day you order. I'm guessing a 1992 Escort header isn't something they keep in stock. Either that, or they just have to dig through the dust to find one.
Mark
No. It shipped out the next day (I ordered when they were closed). Like I said average shipping. I never complained about the shipping. It's average.
Just for follow up, it came today. It's all scratched up (not a big deal, gotta high temp coat it anyways), no free hat or deodarant.
Originally posted by Kremithefrog:
Just for follow up, it came today. It's all scratched up (not a big deal, gotta high temp coat it anyways), no free hat or deodarant.
Maybe they were trying to give me a hint....
Did my third trans axle service on my 96 SE with 97,000 miles today. With all the possible bad things with using MTL that can happen to the MTX, I decided to drain it and put in some ATF for the cold months to come, it was still shifting fine, besides the typical mediocre 1st to 2nd shift. The 17,000 miles old fluid came out very clean, not a speck of black sediment and odor free. It to me, smells better than the Napa brand Dexron III/ Mercon ATF, I used last week in servicing an auto trans. The same grade Quarker State ATF, I used in my car today had less of a odor to it, than the Napa brand.
I read people aren't recommending friction modifier anymore but since I had 2 ozs. sitting around and it shifts better with it, I used it.
Originally posted by eepals:
I read people aren't recommending friction modifier anymore but since I had 2 ozs. sitting around and it shifts better with it, I used it.
Qualitative data point:
Original owner of 1999 Contour SVT. Still has original tranny /diff. Drained factory fluid @ 59K miles, replaced w/ Redline MTL. Shift quality improved greatly, including cold temps. Drove the car for 13K miles (including one open-track day) and had the fluid drained and replaced yesterday. I asked the tech at the shop to note the color and smell of the MTL. He said "It looked like Kool-Aid, kind of a pinkish color." As to the smell, he said "it smelt (smelled??) fine, no strong odors." I refilled w/ RP Syncromax. From my short drive home, the RP feels good, maybe not quite as smooth as MTL, but more time/distance/temperature vairation is required for a real comparison.
I'm about ready to flush my trans and I put MTL in there when I upgraded it. I'll post and let you know how it comes out. I'm going to refill it with ATF w/friction modifier and run it for a month or two. I guess I've decided better safe then sorry since I've invested a little over $1k in this trans.
So has anyone had enough experiance with Ford Honey to say whether it's worth while yet.. besides TH of course. If the fluid that comes out looks and smells good I think after I flush it with the ATF I might just put MTL back in there. Unless someone who has used MTL and switched to Honey has something to say that would show that the Honey performs better.
Well heres the info as you all know from the how-to I did on the MTX-75 I just upgraded my trans and swapped out the forks and the diff. I filled it with Redline MTL and I just changed it out since I broke in my Torsen.
Well I don't know if it was because I was breaking in the Torsen or what but the MTL fluid came out brown and it had a weird smell to it, not a smell you would expect from a gear oil or ATF. It didn't smell brunt either so I don't know... either way I put ATF with the friction modifier in for the time being until someone can figure out what the hell is going on.
