DEXRON®-VI or MOBIL 1 Synthetic / GM 4L60E

[Glades101]

I have an 03 V6 Silverado that does a fair amount of towing 1500#, on a regular basis.

Which of the above fluids should I use?

Thanks.

 

[unDummy]

Mobil1

 

[MaximaGuy]

Why Mobil1?

Are their oils way ahead of this new standard?

 

[G-MAN]

Either one would be fine in your application. Pick the one that is the least expensive.

 

[unDummy]

Mobil1 vs PetroCan Dex6
Draw your own conclusion:

Flashpoint
236 vs 206

CST@40
34 vs 30

CST@100
7.6 vs 6.0

Brookfield cP@-40
5200 vs 12000

ViscosityIndex
200 vs 150

Pourpoint
-54 vs -54

 

[unDummy]

And compare to Multivehicle Mobil Blend:

cst@40
35

cst@100
7.1

cP@-40
12000

VI
171

flashpoint
180

 

[MaximaGuy]

This is what I got from the PetroCanada and Mobil websites.

Their regular DexronIII(H) meats Mobil1 in all areas except for Flashpoint -- why pay more for Mobil1.

http://www.petro-canada.ca/eng/prodserv/lubesgreases/pdf/im7804e0308.pdf

http://www.mobil.com/USA-English/Lubes/PDS/GLXXENPVLMOMobil_1_Synthetic_ATF.asp


Mobil1 vs PetroCan DexronIII(H)

Flashpoint
236 vs 185

CST@40
34 vs 34

CST@100
7.6 vs 7.7

Brookfield cP@-40 (most of us are not living in the artic)
5200 vs 12000

ViscosityIndex
200 vs 210

Pourpoint
-54 vs -51

 

[unDummy]

http://www.petro-canada.ca/eng/prodserv/lubesgreases/pdf/IM_8017_E_v14.pdf

 

[Glades101]

Any other replies/opinions?

Thanks!

 

[Christian_89LSC_96XJR]

The ATRA transmission bulletin (also incorporated into Ford's TSBs) #9002006 (February 1990) states actually that the Brookfield viscosity cP@-40 is an excellent indicator of the quality of the fluid (lower is better: Dexron II (old) specs 50,000 max; "good fluids" are 35,000; hydrocracked 20,000; synthetics are 10,000 or less with some (Mobil 1 - my note) around 5,000)

 

[Mickey_M]

It's probably worth pointing out that the friction characteristics of the Mobil 1 and the Dexron VI are different.

Mobil 1 meets the Dexron III and Ford Mercon requirements, but not the Chrysler 7176 or later Dexron and Mercon requirements.

Their Mobil Mercon V Synthetic Blend satisfies Ford's Mercon V, General Motors’ Dexron-III and Dexron II, and is recommended for Chrysler ATF+3 and ATF+4.

I've asked them why the Mobil 1 hasn't been upgraded and haven't gotten a really clear answer.

The reason I mention this is that I had an application a couple of years ago where the Mobil 1 did not provide a satisfactory shift quality - the shifts were harsh. It gave me the low temperature results I needed and I was sure the base stock could handle whatever I threw at it, but the quality of the shifts left a lot to be desired.

The boys on Gallows Road suggested I move to their Mercon V semi-synthetic. What I finally did was add Lubegard to the Mobil 1, and that seemed to do the trick.


.

 

[Glades101]

Dexron VI it is...Happy Thanksgiving..

 

[caprice_2nv]

Faster (harsher) shifts mean less clutch slippage and longer trans life. I would gladly deal with that tradeoff with the amount of miles I put on my 20 year old car. Thats also the reason why I adjusted the tv cable for slightly more line pressure, causing quicker shifts. I think I'll go and try the Mobil 1 now that you've comfirmed I may get "harsher" shifts.

 

[Ray H]

If harsher shifts are what you mistakenly believe result in longer transmission life, drain and refill with a "Type F" fluid. The shifts'll shake your teeth out.

 

[caprice_2nv]

I would like your opinion on why quicker shifts do not increase longevity? A shift kit properly installed will nearly always increase the life of a transmission, only downside is neck snapping shifts even at part throttle. I have a friend who owns a very successful local auto trans repair shop. I've gotten a bit of info off him and from our trans expert at the Ford dealership I worked at the past year. I have been told type f fluid is not compatible with my transmission and may cause problems.

I got my Cutlass Supreme with 114k on it and at around 140k I had the fluid completely flushed and a big trans cooler installed, used Mercon 2 fluid we had in stock. Adjusted the tv cable a bit, got the tires to squeal on 1-2 shifts, and raced about once a month during the last 2 summers at the local 1/4 mile track. Trans was still shifting perfect at 200k when the car was put down cause of extreme rust underneath.

 

[brianl703]

Recent (~10 years or so) GM vehicles adjust the line pressure so that the shifts complete in the specified amount of time. The computer actually measures how long the shifts take to complete.

 

[MolaKule]

quote:

---

Faster (harsher) shifts mean less clutch slippage and longer trans life.

---

I can't agree with that statement.

Hard shifts mean greater shock loads, a mechanical "impulse" that places a lot of force on components in a shorter period of time. I have never seen any proof that shock or impulse loads increase mechanical component life; in fact, just the opposite.

What you need for racing are quick shifts and high holding presssures on the actuators to prevent slippage. This is why manually activated and highly modified PowerGlides are so often used in dragstrip and circle track racing, especially NCRA modifieds. In these transmissions, you need a Type "F" fluid with no friction modification.

For daily drivers you need smooth but firm shifts with a slight delay for comfort and for longevity of the other driveline components. And especially for Continuous Slip Torque Convertor Clutches (CSTCC) you need a specific friction modified fluid.

Oxidized and worn-out fluid due to thermal (overheating) and mechanical stresses, and blocked filters are the main causes of premature AT failures.

Change fluid at less than 30,000 mile OCI's and you will have increased tranny life.

http://theoildrop.server101.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=4;t=000315#000000

 

[racer12306]

when did dex-VI come out. i thought that dex-VI wasnt going to be used until the 06 or 07 model year.

 

[Gary Allan]

quote:

---

If harsher shifts are what you mistakenly believe result in longer transmission life, drain and refill with a "Type F" fluid. The shifts'll shake your teeth out.

---

There you're just adding friction material. I found it funny when TrickShift came out and all the street racers flocked in to buy it. About 10-15k later they were pulling their pans to see the metal shedding. Loads of friction material.

I imagine that our contemporary automatics (I really loath them and curse the engineers that designed them with a passion) are probably better at timing shifts without excessive "co-application" adding to inherent wear.

I would offer this to support the "firm shift" belief. If you drove a typical American automatic ..you got smooth and almost undetectable shift (sound only)...if you drove an older Audi 100ls ..very abrupt shifts. It was totally normal by Euro standards. They just didn't pamper the driver for the sake of automatic shifting. That is, I think the traditional shifting experience was more for "driver pleasure" then trans longevity. I would also assert that the smooth shift was factored into the wear equation by the designers.

I think that the "shock" factor would do more for damage to universals and whatnot. The diesel ambulances that I've ridden in shift in an abrupt manner. No easy shifting there. You didn't feel it ..you only heard the engine slow since I doubt a 4-5 ton body is going to jump (probably the converter buffers this somewhat) OTOH, they're probably rebuilding them on a two year basis anyway

 

[Mickey_M]

"Faster (harsher) shifts mean less clutch slippage and longer trans life."

Sometimes harsher shifts simply mean harsher shifts, abrupt shocks to the driveline and transmission parts, reduced transmission life, and an unpleasant driving experience.


.