Redline D6 ATF*

[LargeCarManX2]

Yow! 14 bucks a quart Dexron IV / Mercon. I do like specific application transmission ATF, but this is a killer...why would it be 4 bucks more a quart than the other Redline ATF's?

Any ideas?

 

[unDummy]

Why does quart of DexronVI cost $4 more then quart of DexronIII?

You get what you pay for.

 

[onion]

Redline is charging more than double the going DexVI price for their deceptively marketed unlicensed product. I'd look elsewhere.

 

[LargeCarManX2]

How much better can a product be than an already superior product?

4 dollars more a quart of what??? additive??? makes it worth the extra $$$'s?

DexronIII/Mercon D4 ATF is still 10 bucks and Redline told us Mercon V users it works just fine in that application.

What extra additives would make it a IV and cost that much?

OR maybe they purchased a licensing for the Dexron IV name?

 

[artificialist]

The thing that may make it more expensive is that it is new. That, and because they have to pay for extensive testing of the stuff in new transmissions, whereas the other stuff was tested long ago, and the cost was dispersed by the number of sales.

And it isn't dexron IV. It is Dexron VI. They skipped a few so people wouldn't confuse it with Toyota T-IV (Also in some GM cars) or with Mercon V.

Onion, Redline charges more for their oil because it contains a large amount of Polyol Ester, a more expensive oil than the Group 3 oil that composes most of regular Dex VI.

 

[onion]

Maybe so... but it isn't DexronVI.

They call it D6 so that people will THINK that it's DexronVI. But it doesn't meet the specification. That's deceptive marketing.

 

[unDummy]

Decepetive? yeah, the automakers are!

Meet the spec? Just because their formula doesn't match it , doesn't mean it can't meet or exceed the 'performance' specs.
I don't care for formula licenses. I do care about performance.
IMO, any automaker that licenses a formula, and not a performance requirement, needs to pull their engineering heads out of their arses. This is even worse then their recommended marketing maintenance intervals and disposal vehicles.

Quit being blind led by....... Let the oil blenders meet performance specs with whatever additive package(brands) and basestock groups they want. Let oil blenders even exceed it if they want to.
Or, stay blindfolded with arms tied behind your back limited to select basestocks, single non-competitive additive package brand(kickback?), and no room for improvement, until Dexron7,8,9 specs are released.
Why wait? why be a sheep? communists in charge of automaker?

I prefer my freedom of choice. If a boutique manufacture claims to meet or exceed the tested performance requirements of any OE fluid, without a silly license or inadequate OE forced formula, then that is an option for anyone who prefers that choice.

 

[onion]

Freedom of choice is a great thing. And Redline's product MAY be better than DexronVI (though I'd be interested in seeing anything akin to proof). I'm just pointing out deceptive marketing. Because it's named D6, LOTS of folks will buy it thinking that it's a version of DexronVI. [censored], that's exactly what started this thread.

 

[unDummy]

How is D6 deceptive? It IS Redline's version of DexronVI.
Am I missing something?

 

[onion]

They call it "D6".

It IS NOT Dexron VI.

It does not meet the specifications of Dexron VI

It uses a different base oil, likely a different additive package... is the viscosity even the same? We'll likely never know.

But they call it "D6" so that it sounds like "Dexron VI". That's deceptive marketing.