With the spring creeping slowly closer, I'm thinking of changing the transmission fluid and filter on my 99 Buick LeSabre with 34k miles on it. Would the Schaeffer's All-Trans ( #204 ) be a good match with the transmission? I'd be dropping the pan, draining out the 5-6 quarts in there, then refilling and repeating the operation in a couple months.
Schaeffer's All-Trans in GM 4T60?
- Thread starter sciphi
- Start date
- Status
I don't have experience with that fluid but a 4T60 will often require 7-8 qts with a pan drop and filter changer. Make sure you buy enough. I always make sure I have 8 qts on hand but I don't always have to open the 8th one.
Dexron-VI would be a better choice.
Looking at their site, doesn't that not come in quarts or gallons?
#204SAT can be purchased by the case (12 qts.). It will cost you $75-80/case. I now use it in my 2000 Tundra (DEXII/III) and I can unequivically state it is a perfect match for my transmission.
Originally Posted By: salesrep
I do not think dex VI is a better choice.
Why?
I do not think dex VI is a better choice.
Why?
DEXRON-VI, since that upgrade. GMs statement was basically that DEXRON-VI is back serviceable and that they do not support any earlier spec fluids or fluids that lay claim to those earlier specs. In fact they went so far as to say that people should not use those fluids in GM Hydramatic transmissions.
Originally Posted By: salesrep
I'd like to see this report.
"All DEXRON®-III licenses expire at the end of 2006 and will not be renewed. Beyond that date GM will only support the use of DEXRON®-VI fluids for use in Hydra-Matic transmissions. Fluids sold in the market after that date bearing claims such as “suitable for use in DEXRON®-III applications” or similar wording should be avoided. DEXRON®-VI licensed fluids are fully backward compatible and can be used in all applications covered by earlier GM ATF specifications.
The use of unlicensed fluids and/or non GM approved aftermarket additives may prove detrimental to transmission performance and void warranty coverage."
From: http://www.gm.com/explore/technology/gmp...ease_30NO07.doc
I'd like to see this report.
"All DEXRON®-III licenses expire at the end of 2006 and will not be renewed. Beyond that date GM will only support the use of DEXRON®-VI fluids for use in Hydra-Matic transmissions. Fluids sold in the market after that date bearing claims such as “suitable for use in DEXRON®-III applications” or similar wording should be avoided. DEXRON®-VI licensed fluids are fully backward compatible and can be used in all applications covered by earlier GM ATF specifications.
The use of unlicensed fluids and/or non GM approved aftermarket additives may prove detrimental to transmission performance and void warranty coverage."
From: http://www.gm.com/explore/technology/gmp...ease_30NO07.doc
Exactly.
vi is backward compatable. III is not forward compatable.
This does not mean that a III fluid is not better for a transmission that specified a III fluid.
In this case I stand by my claim that our 204s will outperform VI or gmIII for that matter.
FYI Our 205 is gm VI licensed as well.
vi is backward compatable. III is not forward compatable.
This does not mean that a III fluid is not better for a transmission that specified a III fluid.
In this case I stand by my claim that our 204s will outperform VI or gmIII for that matter.
FYI Our 205 is gm VI licensed as well.
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: salesrep
Exactly.
vi is backward compatable. III is not forward compatable.
This does not mean that a III fluid is not better for a transmission that specified a III fluid.
In this case I stand by my claim that our 204s will outperform VI or gmIII for that matter.
Then why would your company bother to formulate VI if they feel that their III will do just as well?
Exactly.
vi is backward compatable. III is not forward compatable.
This does not mean that a III fluid is not better for a transmission that specified a III fluid.
In this case I stand by my claim that our 204s will outperform VI or gmIII for that matter.
Then why would your company bother to formulate VI if they feel that their III will do just as well?
Originally Posted By: salesrep
Fuel economy. More complicated transmissions. The newer transmissions demanded it. III was not going to be able to handle the newer apps.
Clearly, VI is superior to III. Otherwise, GM would have formulated VI for the newer autos only and stuck with IIIH for the older units.
For instance, Ford used Mercon SP for the Torqshift automatic and stayed with Mercon-V for everything else.
Fuel economy. More complicated transmissions. The newer transmissions demanded it. III was not going to be able to handle the newer apps.
Clearly, VI is superior to III. Otherwise, GM would have formulated VI for the newer autos only and stuck with IIIH for the older units.
For instance, Ford used Mercon SP for the Torqshift automatic and stayed with Mercon-V for everything else.
Clearly, VI is superior to III. For the newer transmissions, yes.
I also think what GM is saying about licsening is this. They will not license any other than VI, meaning that if a formulators claims to meet III specs you must trust that said company has indeed formulated to those specs (GM did not approve). Buyer beware.
I also think what GM is saying about licsening is this. They will not license any other than VI, meaning that if a formulators claims to meet III specs you must trust that said company has indeed formulated to those specs (GM did not approve). Buyer beware.
1/ For 2005 onwards yes but even for older transmissions there is improved durability, particularly in severe operation.
2/ You are exactly correct. Without licensing and policing there is nothing but trust! No offence but it's a bit like asking the Fox to guard the chickens.
2/ You are exactly correct. Without licensing and policing there is nothing but trust! No offence but it's a bit like asking the Fox to guard the chickens.
- Status
Similar threads
