Universal atf vs transmission specific

[gallydif]

I hear maxlife univeral atf is popular on bitog. But aren't universal atf's such as maxlife not as good? Why use a blend that can be used in other tranny's as well. Dex is dex and merc is merc. There has to be some sort of sacrifice on both ends to be able to use them in either GM or Ford transmissions. As of now, I would think that Supertech dex vi would be 'better' for the specific tranny than Castrol or maxlife universal. Transmissions are very sensitive and can handle less of a 'change' than the engine. What are your opinions on this topic?

 

[kschachn]

Well, I've used M1 ATF for nearly all the life of my Sienna's transmission, and Maxlife here recently. I don't think I've appreciably shortened the life of the unit.

 

[jkhawaii]

I do not believe in universal ATF. It's one fluid trying to find a middle ground of property's.

 

[440Magnum]

DexronIII / Mercon V were an acceptable pairing. IIRC the MercV spec included everything about DexIII spec plus a couple of other requirements. Don't think it works that way for DexVI. And has been pointed out many times, the Dex III spec is so old that its very possible to meet its intent while violating it in a literal sense. The spec was written anticipating a lot of shear-down that modern fluids don't exhibit, so a modern fluid can easily start out thinner than what the spec calls for and still be as thick in service as the real engineering need behind Dex III. So I'd say its a case-by-case basis. I wouldn't use anything but ATF+4 in a vehicle that calls for it, but in a vehicle that calls for Dex III there are a lot of options that meet and exceed (without detrimental effects) the Dex III spec.

 

[Bottom_Feeder]

More simply, universal ATF is perfectly fine in older cars that do not require any modern specs, as long as the specs the fluid DOES meet are compatible. Easy.

 

[TTK]

I don't think companies like Castrol and Valvoline would list multiple specs on their TF and risk their reputation if the fluids were not perfectly fine for those they list. After all, Dex VI can be used in applications that call for Dex III, according to GM. Many people use Valvoline and Castrol multi fluids with excellent results for TI-V and ATF Z-1 and Dw-1. For Dexron VI, I would probably use genuine.

 

[meborder]

If the specs for two or three fluids have overlap, what's wrong with producing and using a fluid in the range for which the specifications overlap? In my world, base course and gravel surfacing have a very wide band of overlap. If one is smart, they can make good gravel that meets both specs and have one stockpile (e.g. Dex IV and Merc LV). Or, if one is looking to save money, they can just make base course and not blend in any binder and not plan on meeting the gravel surfacing spec (e.g. Merc LV only) I see nothing wrong with either, do you? Now if one is trying to pass off base course as gravel surfacing when it has no P.I., then thats a different deal... We would call that "failing" and it would need to be addressed (e.g. Saying it meets LV specs when is mercon V) Knowing which specs overlap can be a bit of a challenge, however.

 

[MolaKule]

Originally Posted By: 440Magnum

DexronIII / Mercon V were an acceptable pairing. IIRC the MercV spec included everything about DexIII spec plus a couple of other requirements. Don't think it works that way for DexVI. And has been pointed out many times, the Dex III spec is so old that its very possible to meet its intent while violating it in a literal sense. The spec was written anticipating a lot of shear-down that modern fluids don't exhibit, so a modern fluid can easily start out thinner than what the spec calls for and still be as thick in service as the real engineering need behind Dex III. So I'd say its a case-by-case basis. I wouldn't use anything but ATF+4 in a vehicle that calls for it, but in a vehicle that calls for Dex III there are a lot of options that meet and exceed (without detrimental effects) the Dex III spec.

I have mentioned on other threads that the dynamic friction coefficient is one of the important characteristics in an ATF. When it comes to most Dexron and Dexron-type LV fluids, the friction coefficients in the various transmissions are very close. As 901 mentioned, the exception is Chrysler ATF+4 which is considered a "highly modified" ATF, so the Multi-vehicle fluid MAY or may NOT offer shift performance comparable to the ATF+4. The research that the additive companies executed to develop Multi-vehicle fluids was very extensive. I am not trying to convince to use a Multi-vehicle ATF. If you are not comfortable with Multi-vehicle ATF's then you DO have choices, but I can tell you that many of the OEM branded fluids, such as NissanMatic J, S, is not as robust a some of the aftermarket fluids.

 

[Donald]

Amsoil has a few, so its not one fits all. It's one fits several specs. I have faith in Amsoil to use it in a vehicle if Amsoil lists it as recommended.

 

[K20FA5]

I'm comfortable using MaxLife ATF in our Nissan and Hondas. They don't seem to mind it at all. I do a drain and fill at least every 25,000 miles (usually more often that that though). Like to keep the fluid and additives fresh.

 

[blupupher]

Do research, as some have said, there are applications where the multi-vehicle formulas are as good if not better than the OEM spec fluid. Others, OEM spec is best. After reading around, I decided on Maxlife ATF for my Scion (Toyota WS spec) and also use it in my F150 (Mercon V spec). One fluid that does do what it is supposed to in 2 totally different manufacturers. Saves me time and money only having to buy 1 fluid for both. Funny thing is, I had bought some Valvoline Import Multi-Vehicle fluid for the Scion, but found out after that fluid does not meet the WS spec. I mean the Maxlife ATF works but the import multi vehicle does not? Weird.

 

[nthach]

I have a feeling Lubrizol and Afton who make a majority of the ATF add packs on the market did their homework and tested their proposed formulae in fleets - and those are usually mixed OEM. However, if you look at a taxi/rental fleet it's well-represented by the Detroit 3, Toyota and Hyundai. FWIW, I have MaxLife in a tranny that calls for T-IV and it shifts just fine. But I will stick to OEM in more esoteric applications.

 

[CharlieBauer]

A few years ago, I tried the Pennzoil Multi Vehicle ATF in a Mercon V application. It claimed compatibility with Mercon V. I didn't like it at all. Much prefer Mercon V, specifically Valvoline's unapproved version.

 

[jaj]

Castrol low viscosity ATF is represented on the bottle as certified by GM for Dexron VI and Ford Mercon LV. Note, that's BOTH and it's "certified", not just "recommended". How does that work?

 

[DWC28]

Originally Posted By: 440Magnum

The spec was written anticipating a lot of shear-down that modern fluids don't exhibit, so a modern fluid can easily start out thinner than what the spec calls for and still be as thick in service as the real engineering need behind Dex III.

There is a lot of advertising spin in this statement from a company promoting their universal fluid as having more stable VM than other fluids without any documentation. Shear stability was a specification in the early Ford type F spec; shear viscosity after Ford BJ 12-4 was ran. This was also included in Type M2C164A and M2C166H. M2C202B had a fuel injector shear test. The first DEXRON 6032-M had viscosity after GM test K,L and M. Most majors have used shear stable VM in ATF for decades. I think all current specs have some form of shear viscosity testing requirements. I am not saying Universal fluids cannot work, but the justification for the claims are weak.

 

[nthach]

Originally Posted By: jaj

Castrol low viscosity ATF is represented on the bottle as certified by GM for Dexron VI and Ford Mercon LV. Note, that's BOTH and it's "certified", not just "recommended". How does that work?

Ford and GM jointly developed their current 6-speed FWD AT. Afton developed the add pack, but the funny part is that most Dexron VI or Mercon LV isn't speced for both.

 

[MolaKule]

Originally Posted By: nthach

I have a feeling Lubrizol and Afton who make a majority of the ATF add packs on the market did their homework...

That they did. There are only about 5 wet clutch material Manf. in the world and they did extensive tests and analysis with those materials before submitting the final formulation.

 

[Nyogtha]

Originally Posted By: jaj

Castrol low viscosity ATF is represented on the bottle as certified by GM for Dexron VI and Ford Mercon LV. Note, that's BOTH and it's "certified", not just "recommended". How does that work?

It's one of several now Link to prior thread