Amsoil Multi-Vehicle ATF? ATF+4? Debate settled?!

johnmyster said:
Where are the horror stories of using dish soap?
Click to expand...
Your false equivalency in using dish soap as an analogy versus a product that claims ATF+4 compatibility is quite telling 🤡 last time I checked dish soap doesn't claim ATF+4 compatibility, so not sure why one would use it in the first place 🧐
 
johnmyster said:
Funny. Amsoil won't talk about it.

View attachment 264585

View attachment 264590

I guess we could look at the SDS. Oh, <1% alpha-olefins.

View attachment 264586

So we have Amsoil, a company that centers there marketing around telling us how much better the "real" slim shady (4/5) is than the "fake" one (3/3+). But then they won't commit to their "100% syns" being 100% grp 4/5. If their stuff was really 100% grp 4/5, I can guarantee they'd use it as a marketing point and be willing to discuss it.

I'm not saying they don't make good stuff. I'm saying you've bought the hype, and want to justify using a product that doesn't meet the spec in your mopar, which we know has caused problems in many a fragile mopar transmission.

Rats. Seems I've ruined any chance of future amsoil sponsorship. It was rude of me to make you doubt the fluid you've already purchased.
Click to expand...
You definitely are not interpreting the SDS correctly. Maybe best just to slow down and take a more rational approach.
 
Pablo said:
You definitely are not interpreting the SDS correctly. Maybe best just to slow down and take a more rational approach.
Click to expand...
Didn't claim I had. SDS doesn't tell us what we want to know.

Was the chat with Amsoil not rational?

1a) Is Signature ATF 100% Grp IV/V? (OPs claim)
1b) Does this make it superior to other ATF+4? (OPs claim)
2a) Does it meet the requirements of ATF+4 simultaneously with the requirements of other fluids listed? (Amsoil's claim)
2b) Is ATF+4 lacking in the intended application in a way that merits the Amsoil? (OPs claim)

We started at 2b and added others along the way. ATF+4 is the specified fluid. I would anticipate good service from the Amsoil in other applications. Not for ATF+4. The FM content of ATF+4 does not lend itself to a universal.
 
Last edited:
BouncinBrandon said:
Your false equivalency in using dish soap as an analogy versus a product that claims ATF+4 compatibility is quite telling 🤡 last time I checked dish soap doesn't claim ATF+4 compatibility, so not sure why one would use it in the first place 🧐
Click to expand...
I'm not so dumb that I fail to recognize my own comparison as proposterous. The point is, the lack of evidence for your hypothesis (amsoil is a bad atf+4) does not serve to confirm the alternate hypothesis (amsoil is a superior atf+4). I lack evidence that dish soap is a bad atf. Doesn't make it a good one.

Likewise, not sure why one would use it in the first place. Fact, we know mopar transmissions can have trouble staying together. Fact, we know fluid substitutions can cause this. (Mopar ATFs have been unique for 30+ years.) Fact, the correct fluid does exist. You can get it easily at local stores.

Do we suspect mopar transmissions fail because the "base stock" lubricant is inferior and breaks down? What about AT mechanicals causes this? I'm personally less concerned about seals, shafts, and bearings. More concerned about frictions.

Multiple folks chimed in likewise, cautioning against substitution. Are we all fearmongers, or is that just me? Read my first post. Read your assertions about full synthetic group 4/5 content. Read the amsoil chat. You came here to confirm that the product you purchased is superior to actual ATF+4. Looks like the Amsoil salesman is the only one willing to offer that perspective.
 
Last edited:
BouncinBrandon said:
So the question from here is where are the horror stories of using the Multi-Vehicle ATF in ATF+4 applications?
Click to expand...

You won't find any, at least not in my experience.

We used a MV ATF at my old shop to service 95% of all vehicles, only ordering specific fluid for applications such as Honda DW-1, CVT's, ZF boxes, and maybe a couple other outliers. I can say for sure that every single Mopar vehicle (minus those with a ZF box), from a 41TE equipped Caravan to a 68RFE Ram all got MV.

In the 13 years I worked at that shop, we never once got a complaint or had any fluid-related issues. This was an indy shop that serviced many, MANY Mopar vehicles.

If someone has an issue after swapping for MV, the transmission likely had issues prior to the fluid change.
 
Pablo said:
Well yes you did. "I guess we could look at the SDS. Oh, <1% alpha-olefins."

Which = zero sense.

Carry on. OP can use Amsoil ATF in his friend's AT with confidence.
Click to expand...
He's about to reply to you with a dish soap analogy, I can feel it lol
 
Pablo said:
Well yes you did. "I guess we could look at the SDS. Oh, <1% alpha-olefins."

Which = zero sense.

Carry on. OP can use Amsoil ATF in his friend's AT with confidence.
Click to expand...
The only things we are confident in...

1) The amsoil full synthetic is no more full synthetic than any actual ATF+4 available...despite OPs claims.
2) The universalish friction modifier package is not the one specified for ATF+4.
3) His friend will enjoy the cool amsoil sticker.
4) Amsoil sales rep will confirm amsoil sales reccomendation.

None of this is new information. Well, maybe item #3.
 
Last edited:
D60 said:
I was poking around just for giggles and ATP makes a universal fluid AT216 which they claim is good for +4 as well as Dex VI/Merc LV

I'm not arguing for or against, just looking around:
https://atpautomotive.com/at216
Click to expand...
I just don't think the FM in ATF+4 is some magical sauce, or so different, that doesn't play well with others. People can say this, but no proof.
 
Pablo said:
I just don't think the FM in ATF+4 is some magical sauce, or so different, that doesn't play well with others. People can say this, but no proof.
Click to expand...
I really don't know but very few are willing to state specifically their multi-vehicle will work with +4.

I'm not sure if that's just a licensing/legality issue?

I had some old Royal Purple ATF which listed +4 but it appears their most recent ‐‐ or at least their website-- no longer includes it in the list. I always wonder what causes a manufacturer to rescind an application.
 
D60 said:
I really don't know but very few are willing to state specifically their multi-vehicle will work with +4.

I'm not sure if that's just a licensing/legality issue?

I had some old Royal Purple ATF which listed +4 but it appears their most recent ‐‐ or at least their website-- no longer includes it in the list. I always wonder what causes a manufacturer to rescind an application.
Click to expand...
Amsoil updated their Fuel-Efficient ATF specs and removed Mercon ULV and Dexron ULV after they released their own ULV ATF. While the Fuel Efficient can still technically be used, I believe the viscosity was different enough to justify making a separate fluid. Wonder if something similar happened with RP.
 
johnmyster said:
The only things we are confident in...

1) The amsoil full synthetic is no more full synthetic than any actual ATF+4 available...despite OPs claims.
2) The universalish friction modifier package is not the one specified for ATF+4.
3) His friend will enjoy the cool amsoil sticker.
4) Amsoil sales rep will confirm amsoil sales reccomendation.

None of this is new information. Well, maybe item #3.
Click to expand...
5) john meisterburger will carry on with his hate of toys and Amsoil.

44B445AC-1A72-4B91-A3C6-ED410249BA75.webp
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

FTTSHO
Valvoline Maxlife ATF, the best for all applications?
2 3
Replies
51
Views
2K
rondhol
A
20 year old Amsoil ATF
Replies
3
Views
409
D60
Number_35
Which Lubegard additive to use with ATF+4?
2 3
Replies
46
Views
2K
johnmyster
91camarosRS
another question regarding PSF vs ATF. multi compatible fluids and etc.
Replies
6
Views
893
nthach
S
AMSOIL Signature Series MV 100 % synthetic. red cap vs blue (fuel efficient)
2
Replies
26
Views
3K
Pablo
Back
Top Bottom