Mobile Delvac/Synchromesh VS. Amsoil MTG 75/90 for G56

[zeng]

Originally Posted by 2009ram2500
All of the information your telling me to get in in the 1st post.

Originally Posted by MolaKule
The Delvac's application is primarily for HD OTR transmissions, is speced for 17.5 cSt@100C, and I don't see any approvals for your transmission listed.

"Mercedes benz specs Mobile Delvac synthetic trans fluid SAE 50 for this transmission" The tranny maker specs this oil for this trans.


It makes perfect sense for trans manufacturer recommending Delvac trans fluid SAE50 , ignoring FE, in particular in the face of potential problems arising out of the use of thinner fluids with lower KV40C, from the fields. IDK


Quote
Originally Posted by MolaKule
The Amsoil MTF has a viscosity at 100C of ~ 9.4 cST and contains the required friction modifiers for synchro assemblies.


I'm not running a mix right now I'm running the MTG. Also Synchromesh & ATF is too thin for gear protection pulling heavy loads like I do. The only reason Chrysler did not spec Delvac 50 for the G56 is they didn't want to spend millions of dollars re-rigging their production lines so they threw ATF+4 in it as they use it for just about everything else on these trucks BUT ATF+4 is NOT what the actual tranny maker specs.


I agree with your assertion that Synchromesh and ATF of lower KV40C is too thin for your application.

Synchroniser-related Friction Modifiers , its quality standards and quantity or its lack of, play no roles in OP's problems in so far as oil operating temperatures is concerned .Period.

It's efficacy is unpredictable, in applications .


Quote
The MTG's heating issue is NOT the viscosity as again I've ran 2 different oils in this trans the 3/5 synchromesh/Delvac 50 mix and the Amsoil MTG with almost the exact same viscosity and the 3/5 Synchromesh/Delvac mix took longer to get to max temp of 180 to 190F where the MTG gets hot in shorter distances and maxes out at a higher temp 220F.. .


Drag heat generated by oil viscosity is insignificant and miniscule, if any, in relation to quantum of heat generated by boundary lubrication sliding frictional heat within the transmission.


Quote
Originally Posted by MolaKule
I recommend you use the Amsoil MTF ALONE and thoroughly drain your tranny of the current mix.

This does not answer the questions I posed, it's just an opinion with out all of the information and I'm looking for real answers so I can make an informed decision what I want to run. The heating differences between the two is NOT viscosity since both oils where the same, it's gotta be additives and/or physical make up?.

3/5 Synchromesh/Delvac Blend: 88.76CsT at 40c / 14CsT at 100c

Amsoil MTG: 87.6CsT at 40c/ 13.9CsT at 40c


Yes, viscosity-related drag heat is miniscule.

And it is additives related, but nothing to do with synchroniser-related Friction Modifier , though.


Originally Posted by 2009ram2500


Originally Posted by MolaKule
The Delvac's application is primarily for HD OTR transmissions, is speced for 17.5 cSt@100C, and I don't see any approvals for your transmission listed.

"Mercedes benz specs Mobile Delvac synthetic trans fluid SAE 50 for this transmission" The tranny maker specs this oil for this trans.


...... Rightly.


Quote
Originally Posted by MolaKule
I recommend you use the Amsoil MTF ALONE and thoroughly drain your tranny of the current mix.

This does not answer the questions I posed, it's just an opinion with out all of the information and I'm looking for real answers so I can make an informed decision what I want to run. The heating differences between the two is NOT viscosity since both oils where the same, it's gotta be additives and/or physical make up?.

3/5 Synchromesh/Delvac Blend: 88.76CsT at 40c / 14CsT at 100c

Amsoil MTG: 87.6CsT at 40c/ 13.9CsT at 40c


Agree that the difference in heat and/or oil operating temperatures is related to friction-reducing part of additive package (Read:Molybdenum and/or Titanium and/or Boron ), and it has nothing to do with synchronizer-related Friction Modifiers , as claimed.

Edit:Bold

 

[2009ram2500]

Originally Posted by MolaKule
I have no idea what you're running and what the mixes are because you have not clearly stated anything.

If would be nice if you stated all of the mixes you made and showed the tested viscosities and monitored temperatures, not what you think those viscosities might be, Where are the full Blackstone reports from each mix?


Let me spell it out for the 3rd time:
1) I ran a 5 quarts (5/8 or 62.5%) Mobile 1 Synthetic Transmission Fluid 50 SAE (the one in the picture) which has a manf tested viscosity of 132CsT at 40c / 17.5CsT at 100c BLENDED with 3 quarts (3/8 or 37.5%) Amsoil Manual Synchromesh Transmission Fluid (the one in the picture) which has a manf tested viscosity of 87.6CsT at 40c/ 13.9CsT at 40. This blends weighted average viscosity is 88.76CsT at 40c / 14CsT at 100c. I ran this blend for 25,000 miles in my 2009 G56. This blend would max out at 180F to 190F in about 200 miles at 100F ambient temps.
Here's my pan results after 25K on this blend
https://www.cumminsforum.com/forum/...elvac-50-amsoil-synchromesh-results.html

2) at 50K I switched out the trans fluid to the Amsoil Manual Transmission and Transaxle Gear Lube 75W-90 (MTG 75W-90) (the one in the picture and the one I referenced in my "other" thread on here which has a manf tested viscosity of 87.6CsT at 40c/ 13.9CsT at 40c. I've ran this for 5,000 to -8,000 miles and running this MTG I tracked the results making the same trip under the same load conditions and similar ambient temps

Here are my temp/ miles results with the MTG 75/90:
30 miles to get to 140*
100 miles to get to 160*
140 miles to get to 180*
180 miles to get to 200*
200 miles to get to 220* ambient started at 63F and got to a max of 92F around mile 200

3) Additionally I ran the MTG on a different trip pulling a different trailer and got these results (which differ from the results above):
Now on my last winter trip with the MTG 75/90 it was 63F outside and I did 240 miles and trans never got above 200F. On the way back ambient temps where 82F and temp remained 180F until I pulled the white water grade outside Palm springs CA headed west (about 3 miles) at about 65-70mph with the 7k box trailer. As soon as I started the grade temps started climbing and didn't stop until about 220F which is where they level off and seem to peak out with the MTG 75/90 On a side note; if I shut off the truck, the trans cools down from 220F to 160F in about 12 minutes.

Conclusions:
1) Both the MTG and the 3/5 blend have the same viscosity so the differences in temperature and shifting characteristics can only be from differences in additive packages not viscosity.

2) The MTG acts different in different ambient temperatures and shear loads. EG: It stays cool (180F) under 80F ambient but heats up very fast when over 90F ambient and under high shear loads.

3) The Blackstone anayslsis of both the Delvac 50 SAE & the Amsoil Synchromesh 5W-30 are posted in this thread but I do not know how to calculate the actual additive content based on the weighted averages of my blend to get at least a close ballpark of what was in the 3/5 (37.5%/62.5%) blend I ran and tested for 25K miles.



Given these results, here are my questions

1) why does the MTG get hot so much faster than the Delvac mix despite having the same viscosity?

2) what causing the MTG fluid temps to rise under load VS. running flat and why does a 20 degree increase in ambient temps raise the MTG fluid temp so much?

3) Why can I not get it in to gear above 210/220F with the MTG 75/90 even though it's thinner when hotter ( aka it's not the viscosity)?

4) Is it better to run the manual trans at 180/190F with the Delvac/Synchromesh mix OR 220F with the MTG as there are no clutches ( like in an auto trans), since it's all gears and brass synchros?

 

[02SE]

Originally Posted by 2009ram2500
Originally Posted by 02SE
No answer to my question as to why you're overfilling your transmission. Extra oil being unnecessarily churned in the transmission, will add heat to the oil. Also potentially causing aeration of the oil, which won't lubricate or cool as well.


Read this
https://www.cumminsforum.com/forum/...ory-fill-not-atf-4-a-30.html#post5357132

Front bearings gets cooked on long up hill pulls under load.


Read that single post, or the entire 66 page thread? There's no way I'm reading 66 pages.

What kind of load? within the trucks rated capacity, or well above it's rated capacity as I know some truck owners do? Often with an engine making a lot more power than stock.

What kind of up hill grade, standard maximum allowable Interstate highway grade, or something much steeper?

Not enough info presented to diagnose anything.

I will say that overfilling presents it's own issues, as already stated.

 

[2009ram2500]

Originally Posted by MolaKule
Remember, this is your second thread on the same topic so whats with that?


I guess it's not obvious so let me explain this one to you also;

I was seeking real information based on what I was proposing to do but nobody ever gave me any real information on anything. I just got a bunch of opinions and no facts or data to back them up so I was forced to make my best educated guess, hang my balls & my wallet out there and do some testing of my own which I did and now I'm back with the results asking the same/similar questions BUT again I'm getting nothing but a bunch of crap and no facts or real information.

That's why I'm back but I guess your right, I should be to blame for doing the same thing twice and expecting a different result? This is the best oil forum I know of and I thought I might get some more educated information once I'd actually done some testing and had real world data not MSDS or manufacturer specs (which I already read) on some proposed blend.


Originally Posted by MolaKule
I can tell you how each additive component works, but you have to act as if you have an open mind. Otherwise I have to assume you are simply here to argue because of boredom, lost girlfriend, or whatever.


I'm not the one making the jabs here but this seems to say a lot about you doesn't it?

Evidence suggests either your ego can't take the possibility you might not know everything there is know or that what you think you know could be different from what others have experienced and your ego can't handle it (or you really just don't know anything and you're just getting defensive).

I'm on many forums and there's always one engineer that alpha dogs everyone else and thinks the forum is their own personal [censored] ground to brow beat those less fortunate souls that don't have the superior intellect they possess (expensive receipt on the wall for a degree) therefore everybody else needs to bow down to their train of thought without questioning them and what anybody else has to say to is worthless (and if that does not work they usually resort to name calling and making merit-less accusatory statements).

As I've already admitted many times I don't know and I'm here to be educated on the reasons why I achieved the results I did based on the facts I have gathered and the testing I have done BUT I'm not here to blindly take recommendations, be brow beaten or ridiculed in to submission.

The choice is yours Molacule what kind of guy are you when it comes down to it?

 

[2009ram2500]

Originally Posted by 02SE
Originally Posted by 2009ram2500
Originally Posted by 02SE
No answer to my question as to why you're overfilling your transmission. Extra oil being unnecessarily churned in the transmission, will add heat to the oil. Also potentially causing aeration of the oil, which won't lubricate or cool as well.


Read this
https://www.cumminsforum.com/forum/...ory-fill-not-atf-4-a-30.html#post5357132

Front bearings gets cooked on long up hill pulls under load.


Not enough info presented to diagnose anything.

I will say that overfilling presents it's own issues, as already stated.



I never asked about overfilling the trans, it has nothing to do with what I'm asking and it does not cause a problem with these transmissions.

There has been at least one user on Cumins Forum who burnt front input bearings running OEM fill capacity with pictures of his rebuild showing burnt bearings. If you want to know more about this read up on Cumins forum yourself but please quit interjecting in this thread about fill level unless you know something about how the additive packages of these oils referenced affect the results I achieved in my testing.

Proof overfill could only possibly be one single concern is I over filled both oils I tested to the same levels and one ran cooler than the other so unless the MTG is aerating under load and temp then this has nothing to do with my results. And even if the Mtg is aerating the Delvac/Synchromesh wasn't because it stayed cool under load and temp and therefore it again comes down to additive package differences, which is what I'm looking for information on.

Also I can test this if necessary by dropping a quart of the MTG that's in it right now and making the same trip and monitoring the results BUT I'm inclined to think this is not the issue plus I want to know what the different additive packages/ Oil content is doing to my brass synchros as I think I had a lot of brass fines in the pan results I posted above and shifting in to 2nd from a stop was getting harder after 25K miles running the 3/5 blend but not as hard or as crunchy as it is now after 8K on the MTG 75W-90.


Thank you.

 

[2009ram2500]

Zeng THANK YOU!

You seem to have some good information.

Now that we know what is in the 3/5 Delvac synchromesh mix I'd like to get an analysis of the Amsoil MTG 75W-90 to look at the composition of the two and see how the additive composition correlates to the results I got.


Can anybody get there hands on an analysis (Blackstone or otherwise) of the Amsoil MTG 75W-90 pictured on the fist page?


Thanks

 

[zeng]

Originally Posted by 2009ram2500
Does anybody have a Blackstone Volatile Organic Analysis (VOA) on the Amsoil Manual Synchromesh Transmission Fluid 5W-30 AND the Amsoil Manual Transmission and Transaxle 75W-90 they could email, post up, or have a link to?


I'd be real interested to see what the chemical make up of these are compared to the Delvac Transmission 50.


Thanks

Having seen your upload of VOA Amsoil Manual Synchromesh Transmission Fluid 5W-30 (MTF) of 4 ppm Boron, of effectively zero level of solid lubricants vis-a-vis
Delvac Transmission Fluid SAE 50 of 267 ppm Boron ...... that helps sliding friction reduction .

Below is a VOA for Amsoil Manual Transmission and Transaxle Gear Lube 75W-90 GL4 (MTG) of 6 ppm Boron, effectively free of solid lubricants in relation to Delvac/MTF mix.

 

[zeng]

I hope this is clearer ...........
and any wonder why your Delvac/MTF mix demonstrates 'perceptible' temperature difference.

 

[zeng]

Originally Posted by 2009ram2500
Zeng THANK YOU!

...... but I possess neither a PhD nor a Masters, mind you.

 

[zeng]

Originally Posted by MolaKule
Originally Posted by 2009ram2500


And on the heat issue, since there seems to be no real data on the Amsoil MTG I'll just have to assume there is some chemical make up that makes it generate heat under load or when exposed to ambient heat.


None of the fluids are exothermic.

Anytime you put in say a thicker 75W90ish fluid in a machines speced for a lower viscosity fluid, horsepower is converted to heat because you have to move the more viscous fluid and churn the fluid with more input power.


That's totally invalid in explaining OP's 'problems' .

 

[zeng]

Originally Posted by OVERKILL
Originally Posted by 2009ram2500
Originally Posted by 4WD
Ok … this is getting a bit "human" when you are actually very pragmatic … How does the Delvac 1 "40" look if the "50" is too viscous … ? Thinking something available in larger containers would be worth pricing out …


I appreciate that 4wd, it looks interesting but again I don't know if the mobile synthetic Delvac transmission fluid has the best additive package for this transmission that's the entire reason why I even posted this, was to learn
about additive packages and how they work anf effect the oil and metals involved based on my tested real world results.

The viscosity is right on but I'm thinking I need to get educated and find the best additive Packages every if it's a blend " I formulated"

OK, but if you are mixing two different lubes with two different additive packages, both of which have been vetted for specific performance characteristics as standalone products, the characteristics of the blend are not going to be predictable. So the logic of going with a fully formulated fluid that's more in-line with the viscosity characteristics you seek is sound.


I know where you are coming from, but to subtly link the 'negatives' (or is it 'positives' ) of mixing 2 different oils of differing formulations as performed by OP hence probably leading to 'unpredictability' in viscometrics like viscosity (?), at high temperature operating regimes, in 'helping' or 'not helping' in lowering operating oil temperatures is akin to standing on soft sand, IMHO.

 

[zeng]

Delete.

 

[zeng]

Originally Posted by 2009ram2500
Originally Posted by MolaKule
Remember, this is your second thread on the same topic so whats with that?


I'm not the one making the jabs here but this seems to say a lot about you doesn't it?

Evidence suggests either your ego can't take the possibility you might not know everything there is know or that what you think you know could be different from what others have experienced and your ego can't handle it (or you really just don't know anything and you're just getting defensive).

I'm on many forums and there's always one engineer that alpha dogs everyone else and thinks the forum is their own personal [censored] ground to brow beat those less fortunate souls that don't have the superior intellect they possess (expensive receipt on the wall for a degree) therefore everybody else needs to bow down to their train of thought without questioning them and what anybody else has to say to is worthless (and if that does not work they usually resort to name calling and making merit-less accusatory statements).

As I've already admitted many times I don't know and I'm here to be educated on the reasons why I achieved the results I did based on the facts I have gathered and the testing I have done BUT I'm not here to blindly take recommendations, be brow beaten or ridiculed in to submission.

The choice is yours Molacule what kind of guy are you when it comes down to it?


Stay cool ......., OP.

 

[02SE]

Originally Posted by 2009ram2500
Originally Posted by 02SE
Originally Posted by 2009ram2500
Originally Posted by 02SE
No answer to my question as to why you're overfilling your transmission. Extra oil being unnecessarily churned in the transmission, will add heat to the oil. Also potentially causing aeration of the oil, which won't lubricate or cool as well.


Read this
https://www.cumminsforum.com/forum/...ory-fill-not-atf-4-a-30.html#post5357132

Front bearings gets cooked on long up hill pulls under load.


Not enough info presented to diagnose anything.

I will say that overfilling presents it's own issues, as already stated.



I never asked about overfilling the trans, it has nothing to do with what I'm asking and it does not cause a problem with these transmissions.

There has been at least one user on Cumins Forum who burnt front input bearings running OEM fill capacity with pictures of his rebuild showing burnt bearings. If you want to know more about this read up on Cumins forum yourself but please quit interjecting in this thread about fill level unless you know something about how the additive packages of these oils referenced affect the results I achieved in my testing.

Proof overfill could only possibly be one single concern is I over filled both oils I tested to the same levels and one ran cooler than the other so unless the MTG is aerating under load and temp then this has nothing to do with my results. And even if the Mtg is aerating the Delvac/Synchromesh wasn't because it stayed cool under load and temp and therefore it again comes down to additive package differences, which is what I'm looking for information on.

Also I can test this if necessary by dropping a quart of the MTG that's in it right now and making the same trip and monitoring the results BUT I'm inclined to think this is not the issue plus I want to know what the different additive packages/ Oil content is doing to my brass synchros as I think I had a lot of brass fines in the pan results I posted above and shifting in to 2nd from a stop was getting harder after 25K miles running the 3/5 blend but not as hard or as crunchy as it is now after 8K on the MTG 75W-90.


Thank you.




Based on some of the basic questions you're asking, you don't know what can cause a problem with this or any other transmission.

You edited out the specific questions I asked about how the trucks (yours or others you're referring to) are used. Fill level is but one variable that can effect the temps you seem to be worried about.

I've built and modified more than a few transmissions over the years. I could've been of some assistance in this matter.

But you can dismiss me if you want, it saves me some typing.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted by zeng
I know where you are coming from, but to subtly link the 'negatives' (or is it 'positives' ) of mixing 2 different oils of differing formulations as performed by OP hence probably leading to 'unpredictability' in viscometrics like viscosity (?), at high temperature operating regimes, in 'helping' or 'not helping' in lowering operating oil temperatures is akin to standing on soft sand, IMHO.


I was thinking more along the lines of unpredictability in the impact on FM, AW...etc. Viscosity is relatively easily calculated (which he's already done). My comments were really meant to be more elementary: The Delvac product is tested and recommended by Mercedes. If his main concern with this product, and the reason he originally diluted it is the viscosity, running the 40 version from the same lineup makes more sense than blending two products from two different manufacturers in my mind where there are a number of unknowns.

 

[2009ram2500]

Not to beat a dead horse but molakule recommends the Mobile SHC-DC and the Delvac SAE 50 for the G56 here..

So again contradictory recommendations post number #4061713

Comparison of oils for dodge diesel manual trans

 

[kschachn]

When people take the time to spell correctly it does help to take them more seriously.

 

[MolaKule]

Originally Posted by 2009ram2500
Here is the Blackstone Analysis o the Amsoil Manual Synchromesh Transmission Fluid



You said you were using a mix of MTG and the Delvac, this is a single report on Amsoil MTF. Where is your analysis on the mix?

My request was:

Quote
If would be nice if you stated all of the mixes you made and showed the tested viscosities and monitored temperatures, not what you think those viscosities might be, Where are the full Blackstone reports from each mix?


Baiting and switching doesn't clarify anything.

 

[MolaKule]

Originally Posted by zeng
Originally Posted by MolaKule
Originally Posted by 2009ram2500


And on the heat issue, since there seems to be no real data on the Amsoil MTG I'll just have to assume there is some chemical make up that makes it generate heat under load or when exposed to ambient heat.


None of the fluids are exothermic.

Anytime you put in say a thicker 75W90ish fluid in a machines speced for a lower viscosity fluid, horsepower is converted to heat because you have to move the more viscous fluid and churn the fluid with more input power.


That's totally invalid in explaining OP's 'problems' .


It is perfectly valid and a scientific response clarifying what is happening with reference to Chemical Thermodynamics.

No oil "generates" heat. To generate heat, a mixture has to be exothermic, which means "energy from within the system to its surroundings, usually in the form of heat." Take a carboxylic acid and an alcohol and mix them to form an ester with byproducts. Once mixed, the internal reaction generates heat.

An oil may rise in temperature due to mechanical energy being transferred to it, but it does NOT generate it's own heat.

Many times science trumps archaic thinking and old wives tales.

 

[MolaKule]

Originally Posted by MolaKule


...I can tell you how each additive component works, but you have to act as if you have an open mind...

Remember, this is your second thread on the same topic so whats with that?



I will ask again: What or which components in the MTF's additive package would you like to know more about so I can help you with your understanding of MTF chemistry?