SAE Paper on Universal ATFs
- Thread starter The Critic
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted By: Whitewolf
Well the results are in the paper.
If you purchase it, I'll pay the postage for you to send me a photo copy via USPS. But the link Critic posted only states the paragraphs he quoted, along with links to purchase the SAE paper.
Well the results are in the paper.
If you purchase it, I'll pay the postage for you to send me a photo copy via USPS. But the link Critic posted only states the paragraphs he quoted, along with links to purchase the SAE paper.
In addition, the results show that a customer should not deviate from the automatic transmission fluid specified in the vehicle's owners manual.
I agree with this. That said...there should be a better standardized system of lubricant specifications for ATF that are generated and published by the OEM's so the consumer can easily judge what fluid will meet spec's and what won't.
I agree with this. That said...there should be a better standardized system of lubricant specifications for ATF that are generated and published by the OEM's so the consumer can easily judge what fluid will meet spec's and what won't.
Yes, a common standardized set of specs would be helpful. Would like to discuss but teenager duty calls.
The SAE can say what they want about universal ATF, it isn't going to change how well Amsoil works for me in Toyota T-IV applications.
Originally Posted By: artificialist
The SAE can say what they want about universal ATF, it isn't going to change how well Amsoil works for me in Toyota T-IV applications.
The real proof of T-IV for me is my wifes Lexus which has had regular T-IV changes for 132,000 miles and still shifts like new. With this performance..why would I ever consider changing. Same goes for the daughters CRV nearing 80k and still shifting well with Z-1. Do I enjoy buying lubricants from the dealer? Certainly not unless they are competitively priced. And if you price shop dealers you will find that the marginal cost of factory spec ATF's is very very small. Not worth the risk of making a mistake and having to replace a transmission early IMO.
The SAE can say what they want about universal ATF, it isn't going to change how well Amsoil works for me in Toyota T-IV applications.
The real proof of T-IV for me is my wifes Lexus which has had regular T-IV changes for 132,000 miles and still shifts like new. With this performance..why would I ever consider changing. Same goes for the daughters CRV nearing 80k and still shifting well with Z-1. Do I enjoy buying lubricants from the dealer? Certainly not unless they are competitively priced. And if you price shop dealers you will find that the marginal cost of factory spec ATF's is very very small. Not worth the risk of making a mistake and having to replace a transmission early IMO.
It's not about saving $1/q and letting the trans die early for it, it's about making the trans last LONGER and work BETTER. Better than Z-1? How about MaxLife, Castrol Import MV, AMSoil and even ATF+4 has the potential to be better. Someone has to man-up and try them.
Kestas
Staff member
I am curious about the tests that were run... what fluid parameters were they testing, and how close were some of these fluids to each other? Though not $11 curious.
Originally Posted By: Audi Junkie
It's not about saving $1/q and letting the trans die early for it, it's about making the trans last LONGER and work BETTER. Better than Z-1? How about MaxLife, Castrol Import MV, AMSoil and even ATF+4 has the potential to be better. Someone has to man-up and try them.
That sounds nice but the fluids speced by the OEM's are formulated to give their transmissions the ability to meet their service life "bogie" so to speak. Too bad we don't know that either but I think it would be around 150,000 miles on most transmissions. The inside of an automatic transmission is a hot dirty nasty place. I have found that regular fluid/filter changes with the factory specified fluid is the best thing a consumer can do to hit or pass the design "bogie". Statistically, there are those who fall outside both ends of the bell curve for this service "bogie". But fluid is only 1 (albeit a large one)of the parameters in a huge permutation of moving dynamic parts that contact each other. ATF has multiple roles in a transmission application including hydraulic operation, friction reduction by lubrication of contact surfaces,dissipation of heat and cleaning away normal debris and operational byproducts. So the chemistry developed by the manufacturer is critical to all those functions in order for them to assure complete service life.
Substituting fluids in an unknown chemical/materials environment is merely hit or miss to me. I'm not saying that it is not possible...I just won't substitute a lubricant unless I am completely certain that it is better in ALL categories. But that is just me.
It's not about saving $1/q and letting the trans die early for it, it's about making the trans last LONGER and work BETTER. Better than Z-1? How about MaxLife, Castrol Import MV, AMSoil and even ATF+4 has the potential to be better. Someone has to man-up and try them.
That sounds nice but the fluids speced by the OEM's are formulated to give their transmissions the ability to meet their service life "bogie" so to speak. Too bad we don't know that either but I think it would be around 150,000 miles on most transmissions. The inside of an automatic transmission is a hot dirty nasty place. I have found that regular fluid/filter changes with the factory specified fluid is the best thing a consumer can do to hit or pass the design "bogie". Statistically, there are those who fall outside both ends of the bell curve for this service "bogie". But fluid is only 1 (albeit a large one)of the parameters in a huge permutation of moving dynamic parts that contact each other. ATF has multiple roles in a transmission application including hydraulic operation, friction reduction by lubrication of contact surfaces,dissipation of heat and cleaning away normal debris and operational byproducts. So the chemistry developed by the manufacturer is critical to all those functions in order for them to assure complete service life.
Substituting fluids in an unknown chemical/materials environment is merely hit or miss to me. I'm not saying that it is not possible...I just won't substitute a lubricant unless I am completely certain that it is better in ALL categories. But that is just me.
I guess I'm one of the dumb ones for trying something different in a $40K car but I'm pretty sure it can't do worse than Z1. Getting ready to turn 60K on a fluid that even Amsoil doesn't recommend. The magnefine shows no debris and even the factory magnet has almost nothing on it.
I say Honda's Z1 is a load of [censored]. First off Honda can't make a decent transmission anyway so what makes me think they can make a good fluid? I switched to Amsoil in my Accord and haven't had a worry since. I also did a quick drain in my 98 Odyssey and put in MaxLife and already I can notice smoother shifting. I will be putting some Auto-RX in it now, and then when that is done I am adding Amsoil to that as well.
If you think you have to use Z1, go to your Saturn dealer and get the "ACDelco Z-1, part 22717466 " for their VUE, it is the same thing as the Honda stuff only cheaper. Carquest also sells Z1 under a different name, ask the guy at the front desk and he will show it to you.
If you think you have to use Z1, go to your Saturn dealer and get the "ACDelco Z-1, part 22717466 " for their VUE, it is the same thing as the Honda stuff only cheaper. Carquest also sells Z1 under a different name, ask the guy at the front desk and he will show it to you.
How much cheaper is GM Z1?
I'm going to place a vote for premium ATF fluids over OE. My 2000 Tundra transmission never really worked quite right using Toyota fluids. It has been working flawlessly (knock on wood) using Schaeffers #204SAT for the last 10K miles. This has been a big relief for me.
Originally Posted By: INDYMAC
I'm going to place a vote for premium ATF fluids over OE. My 2000 Tundra transmission never really worked quite right using Toyota fluids. It has been working flawlessly (knock on wood) using Schaeffers #204SAT for the last 10K miles. This has been a big relief for me.
Same here. I have never seen an OE fluid that performas as well as Royal Purple or Redline ATF's in any vehicle I have ever owned. The performance from the transmission is night and day difference. I have also never had a transmission failure due to using the non OE or non certified fluid.
I'm going to place a vote for premium ATF fluids over OE. My 2000 Tundra transmission never really worked quite right using Toyota fluids. It has been working flawlessly (knock on wood) using Schaeffers #204SAT for the last 10K miles. This has been a big relief for me.
Same here. I have never seen an OE fluid that performas as well as Royal Purple or Redline ATF's in any vehicle I have ever owned. The performance from the transmission is night and day difference. I have also never had a transmission failure due to using the non OE or non certified fluid.
Now with 238,000 miles on my 93 Civic, 118,000 using Amsoil ATF, I can say that the ATF is superior to the Z1 fluid.
Last edited:
The oems have their fluids bid out to meet the minimum spec.
It stands to reason that boutiques, such as Schaeffers, build theirs with better base stocks and add packages designed to outperform.
As an example. Joey Chumlo's convenient store 5-30 meets the sae spec, but don't think for one second that it will outperform a quality name brand.
It stands to reason that boutiques, such as Schaeffers, build theirs with better base stocks and add packages designed to outperform.
As an example. Joey Chumlo's convenient store 5-30 meets the sae spec, but don't think for one second that it will outperform a quality name brand.
Originally Posted By: salesrep
The oems have their fluids bid out to meet the minimum spec.
It stands to reason that boutiques, such as Schaeffers, build theirs with better base stocks and add packages designed to outperform.
As an example. Joey Chumlo's convenient store 5-30 meets the sae spec, but don't think for one second that it will outperform a quality name brand.
The newest OEM fluids have very, very strict controls over the additive package and basestock selection. The performance differences between brands has pretty much been eliminated.
The oems have their fluids bid out to meet the minimum spec.
It stands to reason that boutiques, such as Schaeffers, build theirs with better base stocks and add packages designed to outperform.
As an example. Joey Chumlo's convenient store 5-30 meets the sae spec, but don't think for one second that it will outperform a quality name brand.
The newest OEM fluids have very, very strict controls over the additive package and basestock selection. The performance differences between brands has pretty much been eliminated.
Originally Posted By: salesrep
The oems have their fluids bid out to meet the minimum spec.
It stands to reason that boutiques, such as Schaeffers, build theirs with better base stocks and add packages designed to outperform.
As an example. Joey Chumlo's convenient store 5-30 meets the sae spec, but don't think for one second that it will outperform a quality name brand.
I'd rather know an oil actually MEETS the current API SM spec than not. GM, Honda and others frequently test and require a specific quality level of oil in many of their vehicles.
Boutique brands have for years made the API out to be a minimum standard, which in many cases it could be. However, if there were no standards, the quality of motor oil would vary significantly IMO. When using non api certified oils, you run the risk of not knowing what you are getting IMO. This doesn't mean I wouldn't use a non api approved oil, but while under warranty and in certain cars, i would prefer too.
After that, use whatever you want.
The oems have their fluids bid out to meet the minimum spec.
It stands to reason that boutiques, such as Schaeffers, build theirs with better base stocks and add packages designed to outperform.
As an example. Joey Chumlo's convenient store 5-30 meets the sae spec, but don't think for one second that it will outperform a quality name brand.
I'd rather know an oil actually MEETS the current API SM spec than not. GM, Honda and others frequently test and require a specific quality level of oil in many of their vehicles.
Boutique brands have for years made the API out to be a minimum standard, which in many cases it could be. However, if there were no standards, the quality of motor oil would vary significantly IMO. When using non api certified oils, you run the risk of not knowing what you are getting IMO. This doesn't mean I wouldn't use a non api approved oil, but while under warranty and in certain cars, i would prefer too.
After that, use whatever you want.
- Status
