Originally Posted By: onion
Let's not get crazy here. There's absolutely nothing wrong with a good brand of Dexron III/Mercon. Yes, DexIII no longer exists on paper... but I doubt blenders started pouring sand in the bottle the moment the license expired.
If it still meets the mercon spec, then it's quite safe to assume that it's still essentially Dexron III. If it also meets the Allison C-4 spec, then you're definitely good to go.
That said, I've got Dexron VI in both of my GM transmissions. Works great so far.
While they may not be bottling sand, they could be blending fluids that do not meet the requirements of the older Dexron-III(H) spec, and unfortunately consumers will never know until a long time down the road. It's a question of whether or not you trust the blender to build a good fluid.
These are the same blenders who build multi-vehicle fluids and claim that they are recommended for a particular spec (example: T-IV, Z1, SP-III, etc), yet they don't even know what the spec entails. Sure, the fluid might work, but who knows if the fluid will cause long-term damage? Perhaps they figure that by the time the transmission fails, it would be a toss-up as to whether it failed due to the fluid or due to old age, so they are unlikely to be held accountable. Perhaps I'm being a bit cynical here, but keep in mind what the motives of a fluid blender are-- to sell more fluid and to cover as many applications as possible.
Originally Posted By: Scimmia
I ask, though, do you really believe a major player like Castrol or Penzoil would advertise that they meet the Dexron III spec if they didn't? Back when DexIII was licensed, people argued that the name brands were better because they didn't just barely meet the spec, they made a good, solid fluid. Do you really believe they would then dumb down the oil (which didn't have to do anything above meeting the spec in the first place) and then falsely advertise that they're within spec?
The difference now is that the spec no longer exists, as no one audits them on a regular basis to ensure that the product is meeting a particular set of performance requirements. Before, they couldn't cheat as they are likely to get caught. Now they can.
Let's not get crazy here. There's absolutely nothing wrong with a good brand of Dexron III/Mercon. Yes, DexIII no longer exists on paper... but I doubt blenders started pouring sand in the bottle the moment the license expired.
If it still meets the mercon spec, then it's quite safe to assume that it's still essentially Dexron III. If it also meets the Allison C-4 spec, then you're definitely good to go.
That said, I've got Dexron VI in both of my GM transmissions. Works great so far.
While they may not be bottling sand, they could be blending fluids that do not meet the requirements of the older Dexron-III(H) spec, and unfortunately consumers will never know until a long time down the road. It's a question of whether or not you trust the blender to build a good fluid.
These are the same blenders who build multi-vehicle fluids and claim that they are recommended for a particular spec (example: T-IV, Z1, SP-III, etc), yet they don't even know what the spec entails. Sure, the fluid might work, but who knows if the fluid will cause long-term damage? Perhaps they figure that by the time the transmission fails, it would be a toss-up as to whether it failed due to the fluid or due to old age, so they are unlikely to be held accountable. Perhaps I'm being a bit cynical here, but keep in mind what the motives of a fluid blender are-- to sell more fluid and to cover as many applications as possible.
Originally Posted By: Scimmia
I ask, though, do you really believe a major player like Castrol or Penzoil would advertise that they meet the Dexron III spec if they didn't? Back when DexIII was licensed, people argued that the name brands were better because they didn't just barely meet the spec, they made a good, solid fluid. Do you really believe they would then dumb down the oil (which didn't have to do anything above meeting the spec in the first place) and then falsely advertise that they're within spec?
The difference now is that the spec no longer exists, as no one audits them on a regular basis to ensure that the product is meeting a particular set of performance requirements. Before, they couldn't cheat as they are likely to get caught. Now they can.
