This is a bit of a follow up to the Q I posted the other day.
I've looked and can't find a comparison between these specs on gear, bearing wear and spiral bevel gear wear (comparing between the CAT and API spec)
I realise that the CAT spec also addresses wet clutch/brake performance, but I'm not interested in that ATM, purely gear and diff (not hypoid) protection.
It's obviously possible to meet the GL-4 spec without using a sulphur based add package, ie. using a zinc based package more suited to hydraulic use as there are a few (limited) STOU's out there, but how compromised are they trying to meet an engine spec (usually CF or CF-4) as well as the gear/hydraulic requirements ?
How does an MT1 oil rank compared to the previously mentioned specs ?
The older tractor I'm trying to find a fluid for has a dry clutch and brakes and specifies an xW-40 fluid (CD engine oil) for the combined hydraulics/transmission/diff and I'm just trying to find the best compromise I can ATM.
thanks.
I've looked and can't find a comparison between these specs on gear, bearing wear and spiral bevel gear wear (comparing between the CAT and API spec)
I realise that the CAT spec also addresses wet clutch/brake performance, but I'm not interested in that ATM, purely gear and diff (not hypoid) protection.
It's obviously possible to meet the GL-4 spec without using a sulphur based add package, ie. using a zinc based package more suited to hydraulic use as there are a few (limited) STOU's out there, but how compromised are they trying to meet an engine spec (usually CF or CF-4) as well as the gear/hydraulic requirements ?
How does an MT1 oil rank compared to the previously mentioned specs ?
The older tractor I'm trying to find a fluid for has a dry clutch and brakes and specifies an xW-40 fluid (CD engine oil) for the combined hydraulics/transmission/diff and I'm just trying to find the best compromise I can ATM.
thanks.