manual transmission lube
02-18-2017, 01:17 PM
#1
Race Director
Thread Starter
Member Since: Jun 2006
Location: Inverness FL
Posts: 17,891
Received 727 Likes
on
621 Posts
St. Jude Donor '07
manual transmission lube
a generic question, not specific to a particular brand or type of transmission:
modern manual transmissions tend to use a lightweight lube such as ATF or something similar.
what, other than efficiency derived from moving/churning a thinner fluid, is the benefit of using the lighter lube?
AND, what would be the positives and negatives of using 'standard' weight lubes (other than efficiency) in a modern transmission.
Bill
modern manual transmissions tend to use a lightweight lube such as ATF or something similar.
what, other than efficiency derived from moving/churning a thinner fluid, is the benefit of using the lighter lube?
AND, what would be the positives and negatives of using 'standard' weight lubes (other than efficiency) in a modern transmission.
Bill
02-18-2017, 04:22 PM
#2
Race Director
Member Since: Apr 2015
Location: Fresno California
Posts: 17,505
Received 3,443 Likes
on
2,113 Posts
Bill, as a non-petroleum and non-mechanical engineer, I can only guess. My guess would be tolerances, and bearing and gear design and alloys. Main reason for the thin lubes is fuel economy.Period. Installing the old thick stuff in a new tech trans would be a no-no. And vise-versa. It would be much better to discuss this over a cocktail or three while throwing scraps to the alligators off your back deck. Unfortunately, I am in California, with all the whackos, so I am limited to keyboard input. Cheers!
Jeff
Jeff
02-18-2017, 04:28 PM
#3
Le Mans Master
I can only speak for t5s but the early ones used a brown papery liner on the blockerd that some petroleums attacked, ATF does not. The new blockerd are improved carbon fiber but still like Dexron 3 ATF. Supposedly Dex 6 is too slipery.
02-18-2017, 05:09 PM
#4
Race Director
Thread Starter
Member Since: Jun 2006
Location: Inverness FL
Posts: 17,891
Received 727 Likes
on
621 Posts
St. Jude Donor '07
Once upon a time, I lived in Fresno for 19 months and was involved in building a small agricultural waste-to-energy plant in Firebaugh...Bill
Last edited by wmf62; 02-18-2017 at 05:11 PM.
02-18-2017, 05:38 PM
#6
Burning Brakes
Member Since: Sep 2004
Location: Cincinnati OH
Posts: 1,067
Likes: 0
Received 223 Likes
on
150 Posts
Yes, you are correct in that modern manuals from about the late 80's on used regular ATF or 30 wt motor oil. Sometimes synthetic sometimes not.
Probably build tolerances like GTOguy said, but also the old thicker 90wt. gear lube was just too thick for winter, cold driving. In below freezing temps the 90w would be just too thick and too many people complained of hard shifting and unable to get the trans in gear.
Was better after it warmed up but people don't wanna wait, they wanna go. I still run the old 90wt in my 65 Muncie but I don't do much cold weather driving either.
Probably build tolerances like GTOguy said, but also the old thicker 90wt. gear lube was just too thick for winter, cold driving. In below freezing temps the 90w would be just too thick and too many people complained of hard shifting and unable to get the trans in gear.
Was better after it warmed up but people don't wanna wait, they wanna go. I still run the old 90wt in my 65 Muncie but I don't do much cold weather driving either.
02-18-2017, 06:04 PM
#9
Race Director
Thread Starter
Member Since: Jun 2006
Location: Inverness FL
Posts: 17,891
Received 727 Likes
on
621 Posts
St. Jude Donor '07
Yes, you are correct in that modern manuals from about the late 80's on used regular ATF or 30 wt motor oil. Sometimes synthetic sometimes not.
Probably build tolerances like GTOguy said, but also the old thicker 90wt. gear lube was just too thick for winter, cold driving. In below freezing temps the 90w would be just too thick and too many people complained of hard shifting and unable to get the trans in gear.
Was better after it warmed up but people don't wanna wait, they wanna go. I still run the old 90wt in my 65 Muncie but I don't do much cold weather driving either.
Probably build tolerances like GTOguy said, but also the old thicker 90wt. gear lube was just too thick for winter, cold driving. In below freezing temps the 90w would be just too thick and too many people complained of hard shifting and unable to get the trans in gear.
Was better after it warmed up but people don't wanna wait, they wanna go. I still run the old 90wt in my 65 Muncie but I don't do much cold weather driving either.
Bill
02-18-2017, 07:04 PM
#10
Team Owner
Member Since: Mar 2003
Location: Greenville, Indiana
Posts: 26,118
Received 1,843 Likes
on
1,398 Posts
I bought an '84 Ford Tempo, brand new. Never mind that 200 miles out of warranty and out in the middle of nowhere at 2:00 AM with three small kids in the car, it decided to spring a transaxle leak and the transmission started squeaking, squawking and grinding. It sounded horrible. I limped the 30 more miles home and parked it.
Next morning, (I'm still in the boonies) I start it up to drive it to the garage a couple miles down the road to put some grease in it. When I started it and let the clutch out, it killed the engine. The transmission had gotten so hot it welded itself together.
Next move was to restart the engine and goose up the throttle and pop the clutch. With a loud bang and a jerk, it broke free and away I went.
The transaxle was completely dry. The gasket had failed between the two transaxle halves. Anyway, he pumped it full of 90 wt and away I went, quiet as a mouse. Later, I learned that tramsaxle was supposed to have ATF, not 90 W.
I cleaned the leak area off with solvent, applied JB weld over the leak area. I had the car another 25-30K miles (about 45-50 total) and that transmission never made another sound or caused any problem with shifting with the 90 W in it.
To answer the question, I suspect the thin oil was spec'd for fuel economy reasons and the transmission was designed accordingly. I'm not sure but I believe that transmission design came from Japan.
Next morning, (I'm still in the boonies) I start it up to drive it to the garage a couple miles down the road to put some grease in it. When I started it and let the clutch out, it killed the engine. The transmission had gotten so hot it welded itself together.
Next move was to restart the engine and goose up the throttle and pop the clutch. With a loud bang and a jerk, it broke free and away I went.
The transaxle was completely dry. The gasket had failed between the two transaxle halves. Anyway, he pumped it full of 90 wt and away I went, quiet as a mouse. Later, I learned that tramsaxle was supposed to have ATF, not 90 W.
I cleaned the leak area off with solvent, applied JB weld over the leak area. I had the car another 25-30K miles (about 45-50 total) and that transmission never made another sound or caused any problem with shifting with the 90 W in it.
To answer the question, I suspect the thin oil was spec'd for fuel economy reasons and the transmission was designed accordingly. I'm not sure but I believe that transmission design came from Japan.
Last edited by MikeM; 02-18-2017 at 07:06 PM.
02-19-2017, 12:08 AM
#11
Race Director
Thread Starter
Member Since: Jun 2006
Location: Inverness FL
Posts: 17,891
Received 727 Likes
on
621 Posts
St. Jude Donor '07
anyone know why 'blocker rings' are supposedly Kevlar or carbon fiber or some other god forsaken material rather than the brass we are familiar with?
Bill
Bill
02-19-2017, 02:56 PM
#14
Race Director
Member Since: Apr 2015
Location: Fresno California
Posts: 17,505
Received 3,443 Likes
on
2,113 Posts
I'll throw in another wild card: all the Japanese transmissions and transaxles in the 1980's and 1990's that specified motor oil (and there were a ton of them) relied on the ZDDP in the oil to provide anti shear and anti-scuff protection on the gears and other moving parts under high load. Modern oils without the high ZDDP levels in these transmissions would not be a good thing.....just like they aren't with our old flat-tapped camshaft engines. For all the same reasons. If I had a 25 year old Honda, I'd run diesel spec oil in the transaxle or a ZDDP boosted motor oil. Not off the shelf stuff. And in CA where I am, there are a TON of 25 year old Hondas, etc. still on the road.
02-19-2017, 03:04 PM
#15
Race Director
Thread Starter
Member Since: Jun 2006
Location: Inverness FL
Posts: 17,891
Received 727 Likes
on
621 Posts
St. Jude Donor '07
I'll throw in another wild card: all the Japanese transmissions and transaxles in the 1980's and 1990's that specified motor oil (and there were a ton of them) relied on the ZDDP in the oil to provide anti shear and anti-scuff protection on the gears and other moving parts under high load. Modern oils without the high ZDDP levels in these transmissions would not be a good thing.....just like they aren't with our old flat-tapped camshaft engines. For all the same reasons. If I had a 25 year old Honda, I'd run diesel spec oil in the transaxle or a ZDDP boosted motor oil. Not off the shelf stuff. And in CA where I am, there are a TON of 25 year old Hondas, etc. still on the road.
basically. my question is; IF a lube is not detrimental to the blocker ring or it's liner, is/are there lubes that are 'grabbier' (a technical term...) than others...
Bill
02-19-2017, 03:45 PM
#16
Race Director
Member Since: Nov 2000
Location: Beverly Hills (Pine Ridge) Florida
Posts: 10,152
Received 525 Likes
on
374 Posts
Even within the ATF fluid types, there are those that are "grabbier". We use to run "Type F" in our GM Turbo 400 trans because of that characteristic.
And I think you might be asking the wrong crowd here. Go search the C5 or C6 forums for the correct fluid in manual trans. I remember seeing several when I was a regular follower on the C5 forums (Tech and General).
John
Last edited by Plasticman; 02-19-2017 at 03:49 PM.
02-19-2017, 04:57 PM
#17
Race Director
Thread Starter
Member Since: Jun 2006
Location: Inverness FL
Posts: 17,891
Received 727 Likes
on
621 Posts
St. Jude Donor '07
Bill,
Even within the ATF fluid types, there are those that are "grabbier". We use to run "Type F" in our GM Turbo 400 trans because of that characteristic.
And I think you might be asking the wrong crowd here. Go search the C5 or C6 forums for the correct fluid in manual trans. I remember seeing several when I was a regular follower on the C5 forums (Tech and General).
John
Even within the ATF fluid types, there are those that are "grabbier". We use to run "Type F" in our GM Turbo 400 trans because of that characteristic.
And I think you might be asking the wrong crowd here. Go search the C5 or C6 forums for the correct fluid in manual trans. I remember seeing several when I was a regular follower on the C5 forums (Tech and General).
John
going to the C5/6 forums would be, for me, like going to a foreign country; I wouldn't even know what they are talking about.....
Bill
02-19-2017, 05:47 PM
#18
Race Director
Member Since: Nov 2000
Location: Beverly Hills (Pine Ridge) Florida
Posts: 10,152
Received 525 Likes
on
374 Posts
Bill,
Here are some recommendations from the C5 manual trans camp. 01 and up manual trans have triple/double compressed carbon blocking rings and synchros.
Originally Posted by Bill Curlee View Post (Bill C. is one of the foremost experts on the C5 forum):
The T-56 was designed to use ATF. Plain and simple. If you run a thick gear lube oil, your SYNCHROS and BLOCKER RINGS would most likely not function properly.
I've found the best fluid (IMHO) is the AMSOIL Products. They have something called TORQUE DRIVE and it is compatible with ALL C5 T-56 gear boxes.
http://www.amsoil.com/shop/by-produc...mission-fluid/
If your trans has paper blockers (like the earlier C5 manual trans (again from Bill C.):
Your 97 has paper Synchro blocker rings and synthetic ATF can damage them. NOT RECOMMENDED to use synthetic ATF in your trans.
Use an OEM Compatible ATF! They don't make DEXTRON III any more but there are compatible dino stock ATF fluids..
John
Here are some recommendations from the C5 manual trans camp. 01 and up manual trans have triple/double compressed carbon blocking rings and synchros.
Originally Posted by Bill Curlee View Post (Bill C. is one of the foremost experts on the C5 forum):
The T-56 was designed to use ATF. Plain and simple. If you run a thick gear lube oil, your SYNCHROS and BLOCKER RINGS would most likely not function properly.
I've found the best fluid (IMHO) is the AMSOIL Products. They have something called TORQUE DRIVE and it is compatible with ALL C5 T-56 gear boxes.
http://www.amsoil.com/shop/by-produc...mission-fluid/
If your trans has paper blockers (like the earlier C5 manual trans (again from Bill C.):
Your 97 has paper Synchro blocker rings and synthetic ATF can damage them. NOT RECOMMENDED to use synthetic ATF in your trans.
Use an OEM Compatible ATF! They don't make DEXTRON III any more but there are compatible dino stock ATF fluids..
John
Last edited by Plasticman; 02-19-2017 at 10:38 PM.
02-19-2017, 05:58 PM
#19
Race Director
Member Since: Apr 2015
Location: Fresno California
Posts: 17,505
Received 3,443 Likes
on
2,113 Posts
Yes. One reason synthetic gear oil is not recommended in some transmissions is due to the fact the syncro cones won't grab well enough t o allow shifting without clash. They slip. When I bought my new-to-me Tundra 4x4 last year, the previous owner had had the rear limited slip differential serviced with full synthetic lube. The clutches chattered like crazy. A change over to the factory specified dino gear lube with added positraction friction modifier completely fixed the problem. Synthetic oil is more 'slippery' than conventional dino based oils.