Pumpkin Lube
1970 Corvette Registry - Searchable AIM index now online!
http://www.1970corvetteregistry.org/
....or.... http://www.corvetteforum.net/c3/1970registry
[Modified by silvervetteman, 6:22 AM 6/2/2002]
Last fall I had the rear out to paint and change the fluid. I suspended it with a rope attached to the side yokes. (attached to the ceiling of garage).
This allowed for tipping the unit on it's nose to remove the cover and also add the fluids.
I used genuine GM fluid and one bottle of additive. I slightly under filled with fluid until the cover was installed and the rear was positioned level again, then filled to the hole. (Drove a few hundred Mi. this year, no chatter)
I used teflon tape on the fill plug as it always tended to seep a bit.
keep the rear level until it is installed and it will not leak out the vent.
I used a floor jack to raise the unit in place. A simple "one person" job.
Hope this helps.
Barry
The Best of Corvette for Corvette Enthusiasts
I now only use the GM axle oil and additive, because I know it works. I don't think 75W-140 is a good idea. The spec is 80W-90 GL-5 (Mil-L-2105). As far as I'm concerned, using anything else is an R and D project! Typical synthetics are 75W at low temp because of their superior viscosity index, but a 140 will be more viscous at high temperatures and just create more heat; 140s are typically used in HD trucks that have slower turning but higher loaded hypoid gearsets. You don't need or want 140 in a typical car axle.
Occassional drag racing with a base engine/automatic is not going to stess your axle. It's the 5000 rev clutch drops and power shifts in manuals that kill it.
Duke
[Modified by SWCDuke, 9:22 AM 6/2/2002]
The lubricant originally installed by GM allowed our cars to go hundreds of thousands of miles without significant wear. I know that the inner ends of the yokes wear, but do not believe that ANY lubricant would prevent this. What additional benefit could an unproven substitute provide, making it worth the risk?
I work for one the 'big three' aircraft engine manufacturers. We typically deny several million dollars worth of warranty claims per year based on the owner's use of non-approved lubricants or other shade tree modifications. We couldn't do such a thing without undeniable proof that these substitute materials and methods were the primary cause of the failure.
As a result, people expect the recommended lubricants to be the minimum standard so they seek higher quality products in hopes of extending life expectancy and improving performance. The 'snake oil' vendors will always find a market for their brand of products.
Needless to say, aircraft engine manufacturers want a peerless reputation so they insist on the best compatible lubricants and maintenance to qualify for warranty claims. Plus the dollars and cents (sense?) of aircraft maintenance are completely different, for good reason.
Gary














