MolaKule
Staff member
ATF+4 Recommendations? ('99 Dodge Durango 5.9l 4x4)
- Thread starter Scott_dup1
- Start date
- Status
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2002
- Messages
- 39,793
How about a rally at the DC engineering offices! We can all grab the clown that had to "reinvent the wheel" and make these autotrans so sophisticated (and weak) that they require an exclusive fluid.
OD autos have been around since the 60's (proabably earlier) ..why they evolved to this level of problematic status is beyond me.
I think a sharp grab of the necktie or necklace (as applicable) and a forced mating with a solid heavy surface woud be appropriate.
OD autos have been around since the 60's (proabably earlier) ..why they evolved to this level of problematic status is beyond me.
I think a sharp grab of the necktie or necklace (as applicable) and a forced mating with a solid heavy surface woud be appropriate.
Certain 1999 model year Chryslers (like my 99 300M) came with 9602 spec ATF (AFT+4). The problem with all these companies claiming their universal fluids meet this spec is that Chrysler specifies not only the performance parameters for ATF+4, but also the exact chemical composition, right down to the base oil blend and additives. This "recipe," as well as the performance specs, are proprietary and have not been released to oil companies for use in making "service fill" aftermarket fluids. There are two companies that make ATF+4 for Chrysler: Equilon (or whatever it's called now by Shell) and PetroCanada.
Here's the bottom line: These universal fluids (like Amsoil's) may "approximate" the characteristics of genuine ATF+4, but it is impossible for them to BE ATF+4 or meet the ATF+4 specs, because the companies that make these fluids DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT THOSE SPECS ARE.
The word compatable usually means for top-up only and not a replacement.
Amsoil reverse engineering the ATF+4 fluid the same way they recently did with the Castrol Syntrans fluid for Allison HD transmissions. It' really not that difficult to get a sample of genuine ATF+4 fluid and back out the physical and chemical properties, including those for friction retention.
Mitch,
I was going by memory, so maybe it only was four years ago. However, prior to the ATF+4 spec being released this fluid was also being recommended for ATF+2 and ATF+3 applications. So Amsoil has had a version of this universal ATF for some time ....
Tooslick
Dixie Synthetics
Mitch,
I was going by memory, so maybe it only was four years ago. However, prior to the ATF+4 spec being released this fluid was also being recommended for ATF+2 and ATF+3 applications. So Amsoil has had a version of this universal ATF for some time ....
Tooslick
Dixie Synthetics
[Excuse me while I put on my "skeptic's hat"...
]
Come on guys, let's get real for a second. We ARE talking about OIL here, not the secret for nuclear fusion. The idea that ONLY Chrysler can make a fluid that will work well in their transmissions is patently rediculous... especially with their apparent engineering skills.
OF COURSE Chrysler will specify the chemical composition for their ATF+4 fluid. They HAVE to or they will not know what it is they are getting from their supplier.
[End of skeptic's hat and on to our regularly scheduled programming...]
I'm sure that Chrysler picked their current formula because it met the OPERATING CHARACTERISTICS they designed into their transmission. This means that ANY fluid that also meets those operating characteristics (something that should be relatively easy for a competent lubrication chemist to figure out) should also be OK.
As for the QUALITY of ATF+4, that is up to debate. In my '99 Durango, the manual says the fluid should be changed every 30K miles for light duty service (Schedule A) or every 15K miles for heavy duty service (Schedule B). 30K miles for a high quality fluid? I don't think so.
I think many in this thread have misunderstood why I'm looking for a different fluid. It isn't because I'm trying to save money... on the fluid. It is because I am trying to save money on the transmission. These transmissions are known to last less than 100K miles. IMO, this is because of the OEM ATF.
From what I can see, the only company that claims to have an ATF+4 compliant product is Amsoil. Schaeffer says they will have a compliant product by the end of the year (actually about August, but I'm just trying to be conservative).
If Schaeffer had their product ready now, I'd jump on it in a second. I have about 5K miles before I'm going to be DUE for my transmission flush (I actually did get one done at 30K miles). Because of this, I'm going to wait to see if Schaeffer does get their ready by the end of the year. If not, I'm going to go with the Amsoil product.
G-Man II, where did you get your ATF+4 information? I'm not challenging it, but rather read for myself so I can learn more. I'm especially curious because the allpar.com web site indicates that the performance specs for the Chrysler ATF+3 product are known. In addition, Amsoil's site also indicates that all specs are known for ATF+ through ATF+4.
Speaking of the allpar.com website, I have found the information to be a bit dated. Also, there was no discussion about specific brands. Just a warning against using Dexron/Mercon products.
BTW, I'm really enjoying this discussion. I look forward to further feedback. It would be interesting to see analyses of the various transmission products (including Chrysler's ATF+4) so we can compare the compositions and various characteristics.
Scott
Come on guys, let's get real for a second. We ARE talking about OIL here, not the secret for nuclear fusion. The idea that ONLY Chrysler can make a fluid that will work well in their transmissions is patently rediculous... especially with their apparent engineering skills.
OF COURSE Chrysler will specify the chemical composition for their ATF+4 fluid. They HAVE to or they will not know what it is they are getting from their supplier.
[End of skeptic's hat and on to our regularly scheduled programming...]
I'm sure that Chrysler picked their current formula because it met the OPERATING CHARACTERISTICS they designed into their transmission. This means that ANY fluid that also meets those operating characteristics (something that should be relatively easy for a competent lubrication chemist to figure out) should also be OK.
As for the QUALITY of ATF+4, that is up to debate. In my '99 Durango, the manual says the fluid should be changed every 30K miles for light duty service (Schedule A) or every 15K miles for heavy duty service (Schedule B). 30K miles for a high quality fluid? I don't think so.
I think many in this thread have misunderstood why I'm looking for a different fluid. It isn't because I'm trying to save money... on the fluid. It is because I am trying to save money on the transmission. These transmissions are known to last less than 100K miles. IMO, this is because of the OEM ATF.
From what I can see, the only company that claims to have an ATF+4 compliant product is Amsoil. Schaeffer says they will have a compliant product by the end of the year (actually about August, but I'm just trying to be conservative).
If Schaeffer had their product ready now, I'd jump on it in a second. I have about 5K miles before I'm going to be DUE for my transmission flush (I actually did get one done at 30K miles). Because of this, I'm going to wait to see if Schaeffer does get their ready by the end of the year. If not, I'm going to go with the Amsoil product.
G-Man II, where did you get your ATF+4 information? I'm not challenging it, but rather read for myself so I can learn more. I'm especially curious because the allpar.com web site indicates that the performance specs for the Chrysler ATF+3 product are known. In addition, Amsoil's site also indicates that all specs are known for ATF+ through ATF+4.
Speaking of the allpar.com website, I have found the information to be a bit dated. Also, there was no discussion about specific brands. Just a warning against using Dexron/Mercon products.
BTW, I'm really enjoying this discussion. I look forward to further feedback. It would be interesting to see analyses of the various transmission products (including Chrysler's ATF+4) so we can compare the compositions and various characteristics.
Scott
Is Chrysler ATF+4 really synthetic?
Although I like Amsoil products and have had no problems with them, I will still use ATF+4 in my Chrysler transmission because the cost is about the same as Amsoil and there's no question whatsoever that ATF+4 will work.
Do a search. This topic has been discussed numerous time before, and I've posted links to where I got all my info, namely: the online catalog for PetroCanada, the online MSDS database for Equilon, and two or three lube industry trade articles.
Scott,
We go through this silly debate every few months....
You find folks saying that a universal fluid isn't possible, since the frictional properties of the ATF+4 fluid are SO much different from Dexron III and Mercon. Yet when you do some checking, you'll find that the frictional properties of the Chrysler ATF+4 fluid are not publically available. Which leads you to wonder about the whole basis of their argument? I have seen some so called friction curves from a company that makes additives for transmission fluids, but I'd question the accuracy of those.
Furthermore, the friction disk materials used in DC transmissions aren't necessarily the same as those used in Ford/GM products. So you couldn't directly compare the Cf's, even if you had the data and knew what the heck to do with it. Results in industry standard "Friction Retention" tests are a function of both the fluid and the types of organic clutch pack materials used. I've never found any actual data that would indicate the properties of ATF+4 and Dexron/Mercon fluids are mutually exclusive. The same goes for Mercon and Mercon V, which actually use the same friction retention tests.
The final thing you invariably find is that the individuals claiming this universal fluid can't possibly work have never even used the stuff. Those folks who recommend it are either using it or selling it or both. If you go to the turbodieselregister.com website for Dodge Cummins trucks, you can find numerous people who have been using the Amsoil fluid for years. I suggest e-mailing ANY of them and ask how it is performing in an actual application.
TS
We go through this silly debate every few months....
You find folks saying that a universal fluid isn't possible, since the frictional properties of the ATF+4 fluid are SO much different from Dexron III and Mercon. Yet when you do some checking, you'll find that the frictional properties of the Chrysler ATF+4 fluid are not publically available. Which leads you to wonder about the whole basis of their argument? I have seen some so called friction curves from a company that makes additives for transmission fluids, but I'd question the accuracy of those.
Furthermore, the friction disk materials used in DC transmissions aren't necessarily the same as those used in Ford/GM products. So you couldn't directly compare the Cf's, even if you had the data and knew what the heck to do with it. Results in industry standard "Friction Retention" tests are a function of both the fluid and the types of organic clutch pack materials used. I've never found any actual data that would indicate the properties of ATF+4 and Dexron/Mercon fluids are mutually exclusive. The same goes for Mercon and Mercon V, which actually use the same friction retention tests.
The final thing you invariably find is that the individuals claiming this universal fluid can't possibly work have never even used the stuff. Those folks who recommend it are either using it or selling it or both. If you go to the turbodieselregister.com website for Dodge Cummins trucks, you can find numerous people who have been using the Amsoil fluid for years. I suggest e-mailing ANY of them and ask how it is performing in an actual application.
TS
MolaKule
Staff member
The SAE#2 and JASO-M349-95 tests on various wet clutches show wide variation in dynamic frictional characteristics. Also see SAE J1646.
Borg Warner, supplier of most frictional materials, has done extensive testing on various surfaces with different fluids and the mu test results vary greatly.
Here is question to ask yourself:
How does frictional plate material know which friction modifier to pull from or select, from the many FM's in a universal ATF?
[ May 24, 2004, 02:13 PM: Message edited by: MolaKule ]
Borg Warner, supplier of most frictional materials, has done extensive testing on various surfaces with different fluids and the mu test results vary greatly.
Here is question to ask yourself:
How does frictional plate material know which friction modifier to pull from or select, from the many FM's in a universal ATF?
[ May 24, 2004, 02:13 PM: Message edited by: MolaKule ]
My brother-in-law drives a 2003 300M, currently at 11,000 miles. He called his dealer's service department and asked what they thought of using the Amsoil universal fluid. They enthusiastically endorsed the idea. Then added that doing so would all but guarantee they'd be seeing him at between 65,000 and 80,000 miles for a trannie rebuild on his nickel. Brand loyalty skewing? Of course it was. But, so is a site sponsor Amsoil rep claiming that Amsoil's "universal" product is compatible with DaimlerChrysler's unpublished, proprietary specs. As far as I'm concerned, current generation automatics are not in the same category as panty hose where "one size fits all".
Just FYI:
Chrysler's 5-speed manual transmissions uses ATF+4, but yet when filled with Amsoil's synthetic ATF, the transmission became hard shifting and had to be towed to the dealer. After the dealers service dept found out the owner changed the fluid, they called Amsoil, and after some discussion, Amsoil recommended using GLS[2]Series 2000 Synthetic Chaincase Oil (TCC)instead (which worked). The dealer could have easily reported the wrong fluid was used and effectively voided the person's warranty and charged full price for any repairs/labor/etc. IF any damage was found. I would post the link to the topic, but I forgot which Chrysler forum it was posted at. My question is that if Amsoil's ATF won't work correctly or causes problems in a Chrysler Manual transmission, how can it possibly be used in a Chrysler Automatic transmission? Plus the Chrysler power steering also calls for ATF+4 too but "Not Available Through Amsoil". What's up with that?
Chrysler's 5-speed manual transmissions uses ATF+4, but yet when filled with Amsoil's synthetic ATF, the transmission became hard shifting and had to be towed to the dealer. After the dealers service dept found out the owner changed the fluid, they called Amsoil, and after some discussion, Amsoil recommended using GLS[2]Series 2000 Synthetic Chaincase Oil (TCC)instead (which worked). The dealer could have easily reported the wrong fluid was used and effectively voided the person's warranty and charged full price for any repairs/labor/etc. IF any damage was found. I would post the link to the topic, but I forgot which Chrysler forum it was posted at. My question is that if Amsoil's ATF won't work correctly or causes problems in a Chrysler Manual transmission, how can it possibly be used in a Chrysler Automatic transmission? Plus the Chrysler power steering also calls for ATF+4 too but "Not Available Through Amsoil". What's up with that?
MolaKule
Staff member
Two different topics here and two different beasts with third party info.
Did Amsoil originally recommend the Universal ATF for the manual transmission or did the owner put it in on his own without any advice or recommendations? Let's try to find out before we attribute some unknown failure to one specific fluid.
With so many different clutch materials and new ones coming into the market, I don't see a Universal ATF doing a good job for ALL transmissions. I mean, one would have to retune the formula every 3 months just to keep up with friction plate changes alone.
http://theoildrop.server101.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=4;t=000147#000000
http://theoildrop.server101.com/cgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=4;t=000241
http://theoildrop.server101.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=4;t=000315#000000
http://theoildrop.server101.com/cgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=4;t=000128
http://theoildrop.server101.com/cgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=4;t=000131
[ May 25, 2004, 11:28 AM: Message edited by: MolaKule ]
If I remember correctly, the owner contacted Amsoil through their website for an answer to the ATF+4 compatibility question about their ATF and noted the year/model/transmission of his car, then purchased the Amsoil ATF based on the response. Believe the material used to coat the syncros needs ATF+4 or its equivalent for the transmission to shift smoothly and not lock up or bind. Why Amsoil Chaincase Oil works and is now recommended by Amsoil for use in Chrysler manual transmissions is a mystery to me, esp if the OEM ATF+4 works without any problems. In any case the owner is happy with the resolution, but not so happy his Amsoil ATF was drained away/wasted and had to purchase/try the new recommendation from Amsoil, Chaincase OIL.
BTW, I was searching the net for definitive answers to changing my manual transmission to a synthetic ATF+4 when I came across the topic. For now, I have since decided to stay with the OEM ATF+4 in my manual transmission and power steering fill.
BTW, I was searching the net for definitive answers to changing my manual transmission to a synthetic ATF+4 when I came across the topic. For now, I have since decided to stay with the OEM ATF+4 in my manual transmission and power steering fill.
MolaKule
Staff member
Sci-Fi,
I think you have taken the safer route.
How does the specific friction modifier know which clutch plate material to selectively "burrow" into and wet?
I have not seen a satisfactory Tribo-Chemical answer as yet.
[ May 26, 2004, 01:26 PM: Message edited by: MolaKule ]
I think you have taken the safer route.
Just to clarify, ask the question from another persepctive.
How does the specific friction modifier know which clutch plate material to selectively "burrow" into and wet?
I have not seen a satisfactory Tribo-Chemical answer as yet.
[ May 26, 2004, 01:26 PM: Message edited by: MolaKule ]
Mola asked; "How does frictional plate material know which friction modifier to pull from or select, from the many FM's in a universal ATF?"
I want to know the answer to this too.
Amsoil or any Universal ATF's tech departments care to answer this ?
For local interest and my trending I wish I could get you guys to pull more ATF samples for me to see and we could pin down the wear generation issues long term.
I want to know the answer to this too.
Amsoil or any Universal ATF's tech departments care to answer this ?
For local interest and my trending I wish I could get you guys to pull more ATF samples for me to see and we could pin down the wear generation issues long term.
I can't pretend to know the answer, because of course, it's a bit of a trick question.
MY guess (guess is a key word here - I haven't spoken to the alleged tech weenies at Amsoil) is that they use a few synthetic compounds that span the range....not a tribochemical answer. FM's don't have to be metallic or even organometallic compounds.
I do agree with Terry - with all the AT's out there more used oil analysis on ATF would be great!!!
MY guess (guess is a key word here - I haven't spoken to the alleged tech weenies at Amsoil) is that they use a few synthetic compounds that span the range....not a tribochemical answer. FM's don't have to be metallic or even organometallic compounds.
I do agree with Terry - with all the AT's out there more used oil analysis on ATF would be great!!!
- Status
Similar threads
