Can Dexron VI replace Dexron III in a manual trans
- Thread starter Maritime Storm
- Start date
- Status
For the S-series Saturn Transaxle fluid P/N: 21005856, supposedly a modified form of either Dexron IIE or III, is still available and is still the preferred fluid.
Mobil 1 ATF works great however and is not much more $ anymore than Saturn fluid IIRC. A "Dex III compatible" regular fluid should be fine too though.
GM manual trans. and transfer case fluid did replace the Dex III spec. for the Getrag manuals (VUEs, non-S/C IONs) however.
Mobil 1 ATF works great however and is not much more $ anymore than Saturn fluid IIRC. A "Dex III compatible" regular fluid should be fine too though.
GM manual trans. and transfer case fluid did replace the Dex III spec. for the Getrag manuals (VUEs, non-S/C IONs) however.
Last edited:
Moklock My question arises from having 2 Saturns(1999 SL1 & 2003 ION) both manual. As of late the transaxle in the ION is getting sticky especially when cold. I used Mobil 1 in both at one time, but as a recently switched both to Irving's Transflo. On the SL1 it did wonders for the shift quality(better than the Mobil 1) but no chnage noted in the ION(still sticky when cold). I was wondering if switching to Dexron VI would help. What is the Part# for GM manual trans. and transfer case fluid?
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Whitewolf
Pablo,
I have no wish to fall out with you over this but I do respect results from outside labs more than those from inside labs that could be accused of being commercially influenced. I'm sure that you understand.
I understand where you are coming from. But Amsoil has been in business since 1972 and has not left a trail of khrapped transmissions behind them. Putting trust in GM is more of a stretch, IMHO. Also, please request independent lab tests from Redline, RP, Castrol, Mobil, Schaefer's, Pennzoil, Amalie.......etc....Oh yes I understand.
Pablo,
I have no wish to fall out with you over this but I do respect results from outside labs more than those from inside labs that could be accused of being commercially influenced. I'm sure that you understand.
I understand where you are coming from. But Amsoil has been in business since 1972 and has not left a trail of khrapped transmissions behind them. Putting trust in GM is more of a stretch, IMHO. Also, please request independent lab tests from Redline, RP, Castrol, Mobil, Schaefer's, Pennzoil, Amalie.......etc....Oh yes I understand.
So something like Valvoline's DEX/MERC that is still to Dex III spec would be better than a Dex VI?
Originally Posted By: Pablo
I understand where you are coming from. But Amsoil has been in business since 1972 and has not left a trail of khrapped transmissions behind them. Putting trust in GM is more of a stretch, IMHO. Also, please request independent lab tests from Redline, RP, Castrol, Mobil, Schaefer's, Pennzoil, Amalie.......etc....Oh yes I understand.
You know, this reminds me of something I realized recently that I think is interesting. I have heard of manufacturers specifically recommending against certain other brands of lubricants, but never Amsoil.
I also have also never heard one single horror story about Amsoil's products. Most other lubricant manufacturers have had one or two bad anecdotes said about them, true or false; the worst I have seen about Amsoil is that some of their sales people aren't well liked (present company excluded of course). I never see their products put on the chopping block by someone who has actually used them.
Maybe I've been living under a rock, but I think that says something.
I understand where you are coming from. But Amsoil has been in business since 1972 and has not left a trail of khrapped transmissions behind them. Putting trust in GM is more of a stretch, IMHO. Also, please request independent lab tests from Redline, RP, Castrol, Mobil, Schaefer's, Pennzoil, Amalie.......etc....Oh yes I understand.
You know, this reminds me of something I realized recently that I think is interesting. I have heard of manufacturers specifically recommending against certain other brands of lubricants, but never Amsoil.
I also have also never heard one single horror story about Amsoil's products. Most other lubricant manufacturers have had one or two bad anecdotes said about them, true or false; the worst I have seen about Amsoil is that some of their sales people aren't well liked (present company excluded of course). I never see their products put on the chopping block by someone who has actually used them.
Maybe I've been living under a rock, but I think that says something.
Originally Posted By: Pablo
Originally Posted By: Whitewolf
Pablo,
I have no wish to fall out with you over this but I do respect results from outside labs more than those from inside labs that could be accused of being commercially influenced. I'm sure that you understand.
I understand where you are coming from. But Amsoil has been in business since 1972 and has not left a trail of khrapped transmissions behind them. Putting trust in GM is more of a stretch, IMHO. Also, please request independent lab tests from Redline, RP, Castrol, Mobil, Schaefer's, Pennzoil, Amalie.......etc....Oh yes I understand.
Pablo, I fully agree. You know what I'm like by now. I just think that claims (whatever the product) should be substantiated and if that cannot be accomplished it should, in my world, be classified as false advertising. I know that it won't happen but just so you know my stance. I'm not picking on Amsoil it's anyone making any claim about any product. I don't really care WHAT it is, it could be a potato peeler!!! But if it cannot be shown and proved to do what's advertised, then it's wrong ... IMHO.
Originally Posted By: Whitewolf
Pablo,
I have no wish to fall out with you over this but I do respect results from outside labs more than those from inside labs that could be accused of being commercially influenced. I'm sure that you understand.
I understand where you are coming from. But Amsoil has been in business since 1972 and has not left a trail of khrapped transmissions behind them. Putting trust in GM is more of a stretch, IMHO. Also, please request independent lab tests from Redline, RP, Castrol, Mobil, Schaefer's, Pennzoil, Amalie.......etc....Oh yes I understand.
Pablo, I fully agree. You know what I'm like by now. I just think that claims (whatever the product) should be substantiated and if that cannot be accomplished it should, in my world, be classified as false advertising. I know that it won't happen but just so you know my stance. I'm not picking on Amsoil it's anyone making any claim about any product. I don't really care WHAT it is, it could be a potato peeler!!! But if it cannot be shown and proved to do what's advertised, then it's wrong ... IMHO.
Last edited:
Whitewolf, you are saying that Amsoil's claims are insufficiently substantiated in your opinion. That is an understandable and respectable position. However, it is quite different from saying Amsoil's claims are "false advertising", which means that they are demonstrably false. They are not.
Moreover, when you charge them with false advertising, the only difference between your posts and outright defamation is when you qualify them with "in my opinion". That's a hefty responsibility you are narrowly ducking, and it also fully admits that you have even less basis for your claims than Amsoil does of its own (expressly unqualified opinion vs. verifiable stated facts). Think about that.
Moreover, when you charge them with false advertising, the only difference between your posts and outright defamation is when you qualify them with "in my opinion". That's a hefty responsibility you are narrowly ducking, and it also fully admits that you have even less basis for your claims than Amsoil does of its own (expressly unqualified opinion vs. verifiable stated facts). Think about that.
Originally Posted By: d00df00d
Whitewolf, you are saying that Amsoil's claims are insufficiently substantiated in your opinion. That is an understandable and respectable position. However, it is quite different from saying Amsoil's claims are "false advertising", which means that they are demonstrably false. They are not. No one has ever proven Amsoil's claims wrong.
Moreover, when you charge them with false advertising, the only difference between your posts and outright defamation is when you qualify them with "in my opinion". That's a hefty responsibility you are narrowly ducking, and it also fully admits that you have even less basis for your claims than Amsoil does of its own (opinion vs. stated facts). Think about that.
I think that I made it very clear that I was not specifically targeting Amsoil or anyone else for that matter. I just happen to think that manufacturers (of anything) should, in the ideal world, be required to demonstrate that claims are legitimate.
Whitewolf, you are saying that Amsoil's claims are insufficiently substantiated in your opinion. That is an understandable and respectable position. However, it is quite different from saying Amsoil's claims are "false advertising", which means that they are demonstrably false. They are not. No one has ever proven Amsoil's claims wrong.
Moreover, when you charge them with false advertising, the only difference between your posts and outright defamation is when you qualify them with "in my opinion". That's a hefty responsibility you are narrowly ducking, and it also fully admits that you have even less basis for your claims than Amsoil does of its own (opinion vs. stated facts). Think about that.
I think that I made it very clear that I was not specifically targeting Amsoil or anyone else for that matter. I just happen to think that manufacturers (of anything) should, in the ideal world, be required to demonstrate that claims are legitimate.
Well then, if you're not actually saying anything about anyone, why are you still posing?
Amsoil's claims are verifiable using test equipment available to all of their competitors. No one has even challenged them. That is sufficient for them to continue making their claims.
If you are skeptical, that's fine. State it once for what it's worth, and move on. If you continue to hammer the point, you have a lot of explaining to do about your motives...
Amsoil's claims are verifiable using test equipment available to all of their competitors. No one has even challenged them. That is sufficient for them to continue making their claims.
If you are skeptical, that's fine. State it once for what it's worth, and move on. If you continue to hammer the point, you have a lot of explaining to do about your motives...
Originally Posted By: d00df00d
Well then, if you're not actually saying anything about anyone, why are you still posing?
Amsoil's claims are verifiable using test equipment available to all of their competitors. No one has even challenged them. That is sufficient for them to continue making their claims.
If you are skeptical, that's fine. State it once for what it's worth, and move on. If you continue to hammer the point, you have a lot of explaining to do about your motives...
That's strange. I thought that we were all free to express opinions on here. Is that not so?
Well then, if you're not actually saying anything about anyone, why are you still posing?
Amsoil's claims are verifiable using test equipment available to all of their competitors. No one has even challenged them. That is sufficient for them to continue making their claims.
If you are skeptical, that's fine. State it once for what it's worth, and move on. If you continue to hammer the point, you have a lot of explaining to do about your motives...
That's strange. I thought that we were all free to express opinions on here. Is that not so?
MolaKule
Staff member
IMHO, the DexronIII, or MerconV, or ATF+4 fluids would be better in an MT since their viscosities would be a bit higher at approx. 7.5 cSt verses the maximum viscosity of DexronVI at 6.0 cSt.
Again, and as was stated in other threads, ATF is a compromise in MT's, and I suggest trying Pennzoil or GM Synchromesh fluids at 9.3 cSt. They have about 4 times the AW and EP additives of ATF.
Again, and as was stated in other threads, ATF is a compromise in MT's, and I suggest trying Pennzoil or GM Synchromesh fluids at 9.3 cSt. They have about 4 times the AW and EP additives of ATF.
Last edited:
MolaKule
Staff member
I wouldn't use Dex VI based on what it says on the back of this GM Vehicle Care gallon jug.
Originally Posted By: Whitewolf
That's what I said, in most cases it has not been validated by the transmission manufacturer.
So how do you find out what has?
That's what I said, in most cases it has not been validated by the transmission manufacturer.
So how do you find out what has?
- Status