synthetic $20 a quart no alternative WHAT?
1 - 20 of 26 Posts
Joined
·
1,625 Posts
Joined
·
6,625 Posts
Sounds about right. The nice thing is you don't need to change it to often.
Joined
·
1,445 Posts
the Ford Honey (as it is known) is well worth it. Royal purple is about the same price, mights well go with what Ford recommends. There are lots of threads arguing the fact, but I love the Ford stuff
Joined
·
1,625 Posts
Stop spreading dis-info you have no clue what you are talking about this has been argued to death. the OEM ford honey is rated a 75w90 on FORDs own website go read for yourself, please stop spouting BS, Thanks!
here https://www.fcsdchemicalsandlubrica... Full Synthetic Manual Transmission Fluid.pdf
here https://www.fcsdchemicalsandlubrica...ransmission Fluid&category=Transmission Fluid
The only reason Royal purple sometimes recommends their 10w40 motor oil for the trans is because of extreme cold weather but at operating temp the 75w90 and the 10w40 motor oil are the same on a viscosity scale. Down here in TX we really dont have a problem with extreme cold weather so 75w90 FTW
Max Gear is recommended for use in truck and automotive front or rear differentials, manual transmissions and lower gear units of marine engines that specify use of an API GL-5 or GL-4 fluid. It is non-corrosive to soft yellow metals (brass, bronze, copper, etc.) and synchronizer safe. Specially designed to extend gear and bearing life, Max Gear provides superior corrosion protection over competing conventional and synthetic gear oils.
We engineered this ultra-tough, high performance automotive hypoid gear oil to provide maximum protection to heavily loaded gears while maximizing power throughout the drive train. Max Gear outperforms ordinary gear oils by combining the highest quality synthetic oils with Royal Purple’s proprietary Synerlec® additive technology.
Max Gear makes gears run smoother, quieter, cooler and longer without overhauls. A direct reduction of drag in the drive train has huge advantage for trucks and other 4-wheel drive vehicles: better gas mileage. Max Gear is formulated with a friction modifier additive – no additional additives are necessary.
Max Gear is available in the following viscosities: 75W-90, 75W-140, 80W-90, 85W-140 and SAE 90
Max Gear High Performance Gear Oil Advantages
Maximizes horsepower
Extends gear and bearing life
Reduces operating temperature
Severe service performance
Lower coefficient of friction
Superior corrosion protection
Separates rapidly from water
Meets warranty requirements
Environmentally responsible
Formulated for limited-slip differential use
http://www.royalpurpleconsumer.com/products/max-gear/
From EXPERIENCE of using Redline MTL, Amsoil 75w90, RP Maxx Gear and Ford Honey
RP wins less notchy and much smoother shifts
Amsoil was closeto RP but RP overall felt better
Ford honey was Ok but notchy
Redline was worse than OEM ford Honey and red line now recommends their ATF fluid for the MTX.....
Joined
·
1,445 Posts
Should only need two. They adjusted the capacity to 2.0 quarts so you wouldn't need that extra .1
Joined
·
93 Posts
Thank, heading out to the stealership soon
Joined
·
44,595 Posts
This is still correct, the particular RP fluid mentioned is a special case in covering GL-5 standards with a GL-4 compatible fluid.
What we want to avoid is anyone thinking that ANY Gear Oil is OK, needs to be a Synthetic GL-4 that will work for manual transmissions - toss in a Dino GL-5 75-90 and you/the trans won't be happy.
Joined
·
8,950 Posts
You can actually find other non-ford sites talk about the ford stuff too, seems well received. OP, on the plus side, its a fluid that you will not be replacing again anytime soon. So think of it that way, its going to last and its known to be good.
I am sorry, I am not familiar with this specific oil, however, if you can't understand my apprehension with using a gl-5 spec gear oil in a syncromesh transmission I don't know what to tell you. Although GL-5 gear oil is spec'ed for MT1(non-syncro) manual transmissions, common in heavy equipment, it is well documented that it has caused increased wear on syncros and other yellow metals. I only specified that I would exercise caution using a GL-5 oil for an MTX75. Oil weight is one thing, the additive package is an entirely different matter.
Use of GL-5 spec gear oil isn't recommended in your manual transmission except for certain conditions. The EP (Extreme Pressure) additives found in GL-5 may reduce the effectiveness of your synchronizers making the transmission shift poorly and tarnish them over time. However, it should also be noted that if you are wanting an oil that does provide higher film strength and added protection against gear & bearing wear, you may consider using a GL-5 spec gear oil. Just remember that it will not shift as good at the high rpms and that it will oxidize the synchros over time.
http://www.widman.biz/uploads/Transaxle_oil.pdf
There is much more information available. Thank you for the immediate biased response/opinion that everything I have to say is utter rubbish
The idea that 75-90 and 10-40 are the same viscosity is pretty goofy too. Simply and totally 100% incorrect.
The idea of some MTX using lightweight oils all the way down to ATF fluid has to do with improved gas mileage, the thicker 75-90 has lower mileage because of.........................increased viscosity.
The idea of some MTX using lightweight oils all the way down to ATF fluid has to do with improved gas mileage, the thicker 75-90 has lower mileage because of.........................increased viscosity.
Joined
·
1,625 Posts
Your problem is exactly that in bold, did you even bother to read RP's spec sheet? Or how about ford own oil as a 75w90 gear oil?
all im saying is dont post dis-info if you dont know for sure. yes I know the difference between GL4 and GL5 oils i dont need your lecture. but RP maxx gear is syncro safe doesn't eat yellow metals. I was simply pointing out to the OP and you that you are wrong and don't know what you speak which here you clearly stated yourself.
as a matter of fact people that used RP's syncromesh oil which is a little thinner oil had problems within their transmissions down the road.
Ford Honey = a 75w90 gear oil PERIOD! Use what you want , Ive had experience using 4 quaility gear oils and RP maxx gear is the clear winner.
OK its not "exactly" the same amc but they are very close but you also must remember that gear oils and motor oils are rated on a viscosity scale differently.
I called RP directly because their recommendation for the MTX75 + Getrag in the ford focus now is their 10w40 Motor oil, I asked about the 75w90 maxx gear they said if you dont notice any ill effect then the maxx gear is fine and CONTINUE to use it but some people complain because its hard to shift in cold weather and when the vehicle is cold.
Actually, it's not. Gear oil an motor oil conform to different scales. A 75W90 gear oil and a 10W40 motor oil are going to be roughly the same in terms of viscosity (obviously that doesn't mean they're interchangeable as the additive packs are completely different).
As far as the Ford Synthetic transmission fluid, it's worth the money and the trip to the dealer in my opinion.
'A 75W90 gear oil and a 10W40 motor oil are going to be roughly the same in terms of viscosity'
Nope and not even, I've done viscosity testing and ultimately it is based on how fast a fluid flows by weight and temp through a calibrated hole regardless of all the rubbish surrounding the subject. 40 weight oil will drain off an object faster to let the object corrode in storage from humidity, 90 NEVER will, so thick it stays on pretty much forever. They do NOT flow nearly the same at ALL. I've based storage of high quality expensive bare metal parts on that for 40 years.
As well I've run mechanical equipment using varied viscosities that overlapped the two, the higher number is ALWAYS thicker in the exact same oil with same additives. Gear oils are thicker to slow down throwoff of gears, it lowers wear. Used generally when there is no oil pump and splash only. Try pumping a 75-90 in an engine oil pump and see how long it lasts, it would be on bypass 100% of the time, maybe five minutes until it sheared the drive or tore up the pump. The engine would also self destruct from lack of oil, it is too thick to get quickly down the oil galleries. You'd fail connecting rods in minutes.
AND, that logic flies in the face of the OEMs using lighter weight oils in MTX all the way down to ATF (roughly 10 weight) in efforts to increase mileage. The extra viscosity is brought up countless times as in 'it doesn't shift as easy as before' with the heavier oils.
Some people need to pick up a book every once in a while......................it's all there.
Nope and not even, I've done viscosity testing and ultimately it is based on how fast a fluid flows by weight and temp through a calibrated hole regardless of all the rubbish surrounding the subject. 40 weight oil will drain off an object faster to let the object corrode in storage from humidity, 90 NEVER will, so thick it stays on pretty much forever. They do NOT flow nearly the same at ALL. I've based storage of high quality expensive bare metal parts on that for 40 years.
As well I've run mechanical equipment using varied viscosities that overlapped the two, the higher number is ALWAYS thicker in the exact same oil with same additives. Gear oils are thicker to slow down throwoff of gears, it lowers wear. Used generally when there is no oil pump and splash only. Try pumping a 75-90 in an engine oil pump and see how long it lasts, it would be on bypass 100% of the time, maybe five minutes until it sheared the drive or tore up the pump. The engine would also self destruct from lack of oil, it is too thick to get quickly down the oil galleries. You'd fail connecting rods in minutes.
AND, that logic flies in the face of the OEMs using lighter weight oils in MTX all the way down to ATF (roughly 10 weight) in efforts to increase mileage. The extra viscosity is brought up countless times as in 'it doesn't shift as easy as before' with the heavier oils.
Some people need to pick up a book every once in a while......................it's all there.
Irony--it never goes out of style....
No offense, but you see to have no understanding of how viscosity is actually measured. Again, gear oil and motor oil DO NOT USE THE SAME SCALE. It's like saying 100F is hotter than 80C, since the number if higher...
Gear oil is rated by the API according to the AGMA/SAE gear oil scale; motor oil is rated according to the SAE crank case scale. There's some variance within the range, but it's entirely possible for a 75W90 gear oil to be THINNER than a 10W40 motor oil (and the Ford MTF actually is one such oil, it's kinematic viscosity is on the thin site for a 90W gear oil).
This chart may help explain it to you:
http://www.doolittleoil.com/sites/default/files/visc_0.jpg
Joined
·
44,595 Posts
Gotta note on that chart some of the variations noted, particularly different measuring specs. for different types.
Also viscosity measured at 100* C, except for "W" ratings.
The largest change I've seen is the newer Synthetic oils meeting standards for a classification while having a wildly different viscosity than classic "Dino" oil meeting the same standards.
Just compare the "honey" regular gear oil flows like at room temps. vs. motor oil at the same temperature - then see the differences with a synthetic that meets the same protection requirements for a gear oil rating - flows just like Motor Oil.
Hot oil is like water compared to the same at room temp., and once you get below freezing the differences are magnified. Current design transmissions for cars tend to need something much thinner than traditional "Gear Oils" to work OK when cold, having oils that otherwise meet Gear Oil standards yet are thin enough is a bonus for the application. (Hence the ability to spec. a "Gear Oil" in full synthetic where otherwise it wouldn't work)
Also viscosity measured at 100* C, except for "W" ratings.
The largest change I've seen is the newer Synthetic oils meeting standards for a classification while having a wildly different viscosity than classic "Dino" oil meeting the same standards.
Just compare the "honey" regular gear oil flows like at room temps. vs. motor oil at the same temperature - then see the differences with a synthetic that meets the same protection requirements for a gear oil rating - flows just like Motor Oil.
Hot oil is like water compared to the same at room temp., and once you get below freezing the differences are magnified. Current design transmissions for cars tend to need something much thinner than traditional "Gear Oils" to work OK when cold, having oils that otherwise meet Gear Oil standards yet are thin enough is a bonus for the application. (Hence the ability to spec. a "Gear Oil" in full synthetic where otherwise it wouldn't work)
Yes, whether or not synthetic can change the qualities of the oil.
Nowhere in there did I ever mention the oils use the same scale, but SAE designed them both and the idea pretty much the same.
I measured the viscosity of water with various chemicals in it for five years using a viscometer. Printing where the viscosity affected print quality and machine longevity. Water variances are much smaller than oil ones.
Speaking of irony............
'It's like saying 100F is hotter than 80C...'
Isn't that about the same as saying viscosity is the same or close with a temp rating difference of 60C? Or, the chart premise there. Goofy.
The oil chart is clearly condensed to get it all on one page and the two columns on the left (ISO, AGMA) do not relate directly to the other two on right because of the temp rating difference, 100C vs. 40C. Somebody tell me how a chart can be accurate if one of the biggest variables of viscosity is not nearly the same or the temperature. The oils are not as close to each other as they look; the chart even states that by saying ONLY horizontal comparisons are valid, anything tilted away from that is not. I even question the slight tilt given in the example on the chart. An above or below there yet chart says you can't do that. Hunh. The importance of the dead straight horizontal dashed lines becomes very obvious there. 10w-40 oil is actually a 10 weight with viscosity improvers, so how can a 90 be even close given the chart rules? And a 75 that is under a 10 would also be under a 75 as well according to the chart, one doesn't see anything wrong with that? An oxymoron if you ask me. The viscosity/temperature numbers at far right are clearly stated to be for mono grade oils ONLY and that means if you assume the 40 or 90 is for 10W-40's or 75w-90's upper end a mistake too. The higher numbers are not accurate, they are from viscosity improvers and not being a straight weight oil. or, the caveat about mono grade oils. Somebody making up the chart is talking out of both sides of his mouth at the same time. Why am I not surprised.
All you have to do is read........................and I DARE you to put 75W-90 non-syn in an engine, the different additives be damned. The engine will cease to run long before the wrong additive package brings it down.
Nowhere in there did I ever mention the oils use the same scale, but SAE designed them both and the idea pretty much the same.
I measured the viscosity of water with various chemicals in it for five years using a viscometer. Printing where the viscosity affected print quality and machine longevity. Water variances are much smaller than oil ones.
Speaking of irony............
'It's like saying 100F is hotter than 80C...'
Isn't that about the same as saying viscosity is the same or close with a temp rating difference of 60C? Or, the chart premise there. Goofy.
The oil chart is clearly condensed to get it all on one page and the two columns on the left (ISO, AGMA) do not relate directly to the other two on right because of the temp rating difference, 100C vs. 40C. Somebody tell me how a chart can be accurate if one of the biggest variables of viscosity is not nearly the same or the temperature. The oils are not as close to each other as they look; the chart even states that by saying ONLY horizontal comparisons are valid, anything tilted away from that is not. I even question the slight tilt given in the example on the chart. An above or below there yet chart says you can't do that. Hunh. The importance of the dead straight horizontal dashed lines becomes very obvious there. 10w-40 oil is actually a 10 weight with viscosity improvers, so how can a 90 be even close given the chart rules? And a 75 that is under a 10 would also be under a 75 as well according to the chart, one doesn't see anything wrong with that? An oxymoron if you ask me. The viscosity/temperature numbers at far right are clearly stated to be for mono grade oils ONLY and that means if you assume the 40 or 90 is for 10W-40's or 75w-90's upper end a mistake too. The higher numbers are not accurate, they are from viscosity improvers and not being a straight weight oil. or, the caveat about mono grade oils. Somebody making up the chart is talking out of both sides of his mouth at the same time. Why am I not surprised.
All you have to do is read........................and I DARE you to put 75W-90 non-syn in an engine, the different additives be damned. The engine will cease to run long before the wrong additive package brings it down.
Um..you're the one telling me to "go read a book", and yet you're completely ignoring the grading system of gear and motor oils. It's not "their chart", it's simply a depiction of the gear oil and motor oil grade scales.. There are plenty others out there, or you can just go to the published SAE papers. The first number refers to viscosity at 40C, the second number at 100C, both in gear oil and motor oil.
This is, or course, completely false. Viscosity improvers impact how little an oil thins as it heats up. The base oil determines the actual weight of the oil (the second number).
Again, you don't seem to understand the concept of scale. The chart is actually quite clear--I suggest you give it another look: Kinematic Viscosity is at the left, at both 40C and 100C. At those various temperatures, you can see where an oil fits in its relative scale. For instance, a motor oil that is a 40W oil is between 12.5 to 16.3 cSt @ 100C; and a gear oil that is a 90W gear oil is between roughly 13 to 18.5 cSt at 100C. I'm not sure how the chart could be any more clear? Here's another may help:
http://www.viscopedia.com/viscosity-tables/substances/sae-viscosity-grades/
Unless, of course, I made that up as well...
That's funny.
Why would I do that? Again, the additive pack would likely damage the engine. Sure, some gear oils may also cause cavitation due to excessive foaming--but that's probably pretty unlikely. 20W50 is thicker than any 75W90 gear oil, but it' not going to cause damage to an engine (not saying it's optimal). Again, I wouldn't put 75W90 gear oil in a crankcase, but viscosity has absolutely zero to do with it.
I was hesitant to engage in this discussion any more as I was reminded of the Backfire Effect: http://youarenotsosmart.com/2011/06/10/the-backfire-effect/
So, I'm pretty sure everything I just posted will just further convince you that you're "right". However, as fellow wagon owner, I figure it's my duty to try and put some of your misconceptions to right.
Lastly, putting the charts aside, let's look at the ACTUAL kinematic viscosity of Motorcraft's gear oil and a typical 10W40 motor oil:
https://www.fcsdchemicalsandlubrica... Full Synthetic Manual Transmission Fluid.pdf
http://www.epc.shell.com/Docs/GPCDOC_X_cbe_24855_key_140003385867_200912032246.pdf
Motorcraft 75W90 40C 76 cSt 100C 15.4 cSt
Pennzoil 10W40 40C 96.9 100C 14 cSt
So, at room temperature, the Motorcraft is actually quite a bit thinner (about 20% thinner!) than the incredibly thick gear oil that's too thick to pump though an engine... In operation (100C), it's about 10% thicker. That said, they're *roughly* the same weight.
Anyway, the information is out there. What you do with it is up to you.
1 - 20 of 26 Posts
Join the discussion
Join now to ask and comment!