Lubegard has their own Full ATF now?

Status
Not open for further replies.
The minimum viscosity of Dexron III is higher than the maximum viscosity of Dexron VI. I call [censored] on it meeting all specs listed based on that it has both listed.

It's impossible to meet both specs with 1 fluid, so if they're going to lie about that, what else are they going to lie about?
 
Dexron-VI
The fluid specification for Dexron-VI was introduced in 2005, and was first used as the GM factory-fill automatic transmission fluid for model year 2006. All Dexron-III licenses expired permanently at the end of 2006, and GM now supports only Dexron-VI fluids for use in their automatic transmissions, although fluids asserted by their manufacturers to meet Dexron-III standards continue to be sold under names such as Dex/Merc. These fluids are not regulated or endorsed by GM.

Dexron VI is of a slightly lower viscosity when new compared to the prior Dexron fluids (a maximum of 6.4 cSt at 100°C for Dexron VI and 7.5 cSt for Dexron III), but the allowed viscosity loss from shearing of the ATF during use is lower for Dexron VI, resulting in the same lowest allowed final viscosity for both Dexron III and VI (5.5 cSt). The lower viscosity is intended to gain improvements in fuel economy by lessening parasitic drag in the transmission. Since Dexron VI is not allowed to thin out (lower its viscosity) as much as Dexron III during use, it requires the use of higher-quality, more shear-stable (less prone to thinning while in use) base oils.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: brandini
The minimum viscosity of Dexron III is higher than the maximum viscosity of Dexron VI. I call [censored] on it meeting all specs listed based on that it has both listed.

It's impossible to meet both specs with 1 fluid, so if they're going to lie about that, what else are they going to lie about?


Oh, they wouldn't do that.
laugh.gif
 
Originally Posted By: brandini
The minimum viscosity of Dexron III is higher than the maximum viscosity of Dexron VI. I call [censored] on it meeting all specs listed based on that it has both listed.

It's impossible to meet both specs with 1 fluid, so if they're going to lie about that, what else are they going to lie about?


This has been beaten to death before. Part of the Dex VI spec is that it have much better viscosity retention (less thinning) during use, so that after a period of use Dex VI will be the same thickness as Dex III after a similar use period. The simple fact that Dex VI is backward compatible with III should tell you that both specs can be met by one fluid- namely Dex VI itself.
 
Originally Posted By: ltslimjim
I ran across their product on Amazon browsing this morning and hadn't recalled them selling their own ATF before. Does anyone know much about it / tried it?

http://www.amazon.com/Lubegard-69032-Synthetic-Automatic-Transmission/dp/B00BZMQT66

http://www.lubegard.com/C-1036/COMPLETE+Full+Synthetic+ATF


It actually states "compatible" with the listed fluids, not approved. One would assume that in order to justify the "compatible" claim a full range of compatibility testing, including friction tests, has been carried out with every one of the fluids listed? In which case it is no problem for Lubeguard to support their claim by publishing the results!
 
Yeah the shear stable fluids that start around 6 cSt @100ºC are better than mineral based fluids that start at 7.5 cSt @100ºC but end up shearing almost half of their viscosity over the interval.while the shear stable fluids don't lose much viscosity at all. The letter from Valvoline pretty much says it all.
 
Originally Posted By: Whitewolf
Originally Posted By: ltslimjim
I ran across their product on Amazon browsing this morning and hadn't recalled them selling their own ATF before. Does anyone know much about it / tried it?

http://www.amazon.com/Lubegard-69032-Synthetic-Automatic-Transmission/dp/B00BZMQT66

http://www.lubegard.com/C-1036/COMPLETE+Full+Synthetic+ATF


It actually states "compatible" with the listed fluids, not approved. One would assume that in order to justify the "compatible" claim a full range of compatibility testing, including friction tests, has been carried out with every one of the fluids listed? In which case it is no problem for Lubeguard to support their claim by publishing the results!


The same could be said of PetroCanada, Pennzoil, Mobil, Valvoline, Renewable Lubricants, Smitty's, LE, Wolf's Head, ....etc.

Most likely ILI developed the list from the additive Manufacturer's list of tested transmissions.
 
It has already been documented and published that some of the listed fluids are very different in terms of for instance, friction characteristics. Information is shown in SAE paper #2007-01-3987.
 
Originally Posted By: Whitewolf
It has already been documented and published that some of the listed fluids are very different in terms of for instance, friction characteristics. Information is shown in SAE paper #2007-01-3987.


I encourage anyone to write up a BITOG White Paper regarding any SAE paper.

I have had a copy a copy of SAE 2007-01-2987 "Comparison of OEM Automatic Transmission Fluids in Industry Standard Tests" for many years, written in 2007, and it does not identify any of the fluids with respect to Manufacturer or brand name.

The paper lists seven (7) fluids, their general properties, and a series of tests.

I do agree that conversion fluids should not be used or added to ATFs and have stated that many times.

What is interesting is the same manufacturer (Afton) that produced the original Dexron VI additive group also produces universal additive packages, as does Lubrizol and Infineum.
 
Originally Posted By: 901Memphis
Yeah the shear stable fluids that start around 6 cSt @100ºC are better than mineral based fluids that start at 7.5 cSt @100ºC but end up shearing almost half of their viscosity over the interval.while the shear stable fluids don't lose much viscosity at all. The letter from Valvoline pretty much says it all.
Is the Lubeguard ATF Grp IV or Grp V oils based ?
 
Originally Posted By: fpracha
Originally Posted By: 901Memphis
Yeah the shear stable fluids that start around 6 cSt @100ºC are better than mineral based fluids that start at 7.5 cSt @100ºC but end up shearing almost half of their viscosity over the interval.while the shear stable fluids don't lose much viscosity at all. The letter from Valvoline pretty much says it all.
Is the Lubeguard ATF Grp IV or Grp V oils based ?


The base oils of most "synthetic" ATFs are composed of a mix of API Group III, Group IV, and Group V.
 
Last edited:
Me too. I have been called a purist when it comes to the definition of synthetic.

I was simplyly referring to the "colloquial" definition of synthetic:

1. characteristic of or appropriate to ordinary or familiar conversation rather than formal speech or writing; 2. informal. 3. informal refer to types of speech or to usages not on a formal level.
 
Last edited:
I've used Lubegard ATF and it works well. Just another option for those that don't want Castrol, Amsoil, Maxlife, Mag1, Peak, Eneos, Torco, Neo, Redline, Kendall, Citgo, Cam2, or other low visc ATF....
 
I've used universal fluids on several occasions without problems. Amsoil,maxlife, supertech mv. I've also used lubgaurd platinum to convert fluids no issues at all.

One thing I don't get(because lack of knowledge I suppose) is how LG platinum converts fluid yet can also be used as an oe fluid protecent?? My logic would tell me that it would make the oe fluid unfit for its oe intended application used as a protectent?? The lubguard application guide indicates that red or platinum can both be used for all oe ATF other than type f or cvt fluids. I have used it just as an oe protectent though and had no problems with that either.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: ronp
...One thing I don't get(because lack of knowledge I suppose) is how LG platinum converts fluid yet can also be used as an oe fluid protecent?? My logic would tell me that it would make the oe fluid unfit for its oe intended application used as a protectent?? The lubguard application guide indicates that red or platinum can both be used for all oe ATF other than type f or cvt fluids. I have used it just as an oe protectent though and had no problems with that either.


Well, the theory is, you take a a so-called protectant (LubeGard Red) and insert friction modifiers.

Back when ATF chemistry did not have the advanced anti-oxidants, Viscosity Modifiers, and friction modifiers as we do now, something like LubeGard Red probably helped prolong the inevitable.

With today's advanced ATF chemistry, I see no reason for ATF additives unless you have, say, a tranny that may have varnished valving and LubeGard may have some use.

Fluid changes are the best insurance, IMHO.

I was never convinced that conversion fluids actually "converted" anything,

Additional logic would say that lack of a problem does not necessarily convey a benefit.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

G
Motomaster Low Viscosity ATF - Dexron 3 Application?
Replies
4
Views
556
Snagglefoot
H
Valvoline multi vehicle max life full synthetic ATF 1 gallon $21.92 Walmart and Amazon
Replies
1
Views
397
Garen
P
valvoline import atf 17.98 jug from AMAZON
Replies
8
Views
966
Egg_Head
S
Need help with ATF0T4 (JWS 3309)
Replies
5
Views
3K
Trav
R
is mazda fz really a unique ATF or just rebranded toyota ws ?
2
Replies
30
Views
19K
toyotacarnage
Back
Top