Supertech ATF+4
- Thread starter beadvised
- Start date
- Status
Its licensed and made by Warren last I knew. It's good stuff
Originally Posted By: beadvised
Is Castrol or Valvoline any better than Supertech ATF+4?
Because of Chrysler's (superior) licensing requirements, all ATF+4 fluids, no matter who the manufacturer, are chemically identical. That can't be said for any other ATF. Buy the Supertech and save some money.
Is Castrol or Valvoline any better than Supertech ATF+4?
Because of Chrysler's (superior) licensing requirements, all ATF+4 fluids, no matter who the manufacturer, are chemically identical. That can't be said for any other ATF. Buy the Supertech and save some money.
Originally Posted By: G-MAN
Originally Posted By: beadvised
Is Castrol or Valvoline any better than Supertech ATF+4?
Because of Chrysler's (superior) licensing requirements, all ATF+4 fluids, no matter who the manufacturer, are chemically identical. That can't be said for any other ATF. Buy the Supertech and save some money.
If they license it. But companies like Amsoil just say meets or recommended. So they can be superior.
Originally Posted By: beadvised
Is Castrol or Valvoline any better than Supertech ATF+4?
Because of Chrysler's (superior) licensing requirements, all ATF+4 fluids, no matter who the manufacturer, are chemically identical. That can't be said for any other ATF. Buy the Supertech and save some money.
If they license it. But companies like Amsoil just say meets or recommended. So they can be superior.
Originally Posted By: Donald
Originally Posted By: G-MAN
Originally Posted By: beadvised
Is Castrol or Valvoline any better than Supertech ATF+4?
Because of Chrysler's (superior) licensing requirements, all ATF+4 fluids, no matter who the manufacturer, are chemically identical. That can't be said for any other ATF. Buy the Supertech and save some money.
If they license it. But companies like Amsoil just say meets or recommended. So they can be superior.
I was referring to licensed ATF+4 fluids, since that is what the OP asked about.
Originally Posted By: G-MAN
Originally Posted By: beadvised
Is Castrol or Valvoline any better than Supertech ATF+4?
Because of Chrysler's (superior) licensing requirements, all ATF+4 fluids, no matter who the manufacturer, are chemically identical. That can't be said for any other ATF. Buy the Supertech and save some money.
If they license it. But companies like Amsoil just say meets or recommended. So they can be superior.
I was referring to licensed ATF+4 fluids, since that is what the OP asked about.
Remember we're talking about old-tech here (1998). The ATF+4 requirements are not very difficult to meet compared to Dexron VI, Toyota WS, Mercon SP, etc.
dnewton3
Staff member
Originally Posted By: G-MAN
Originally Posted By: beadvised
Is Castrol or Valvoline any better than Supertech ATF+4?
Because of Chrysler's (superior) licensing requirements, all ATF+4 fluids, no matter who the manufacturer, are chemically identical. That can't be said for any other ATF. Buy the Supertech and save some money.
I believe that the license for the Dexron VI (GM's current fluid) is also a spec based upon a licensed chemistry package. So, techinically, you are incorrect in stating "that can't be said for any other ATF." Walmart pays for the GM license rights for the DEX VI; it's probably every bit the fluid it is required to be.
Originally Posted By: beadvised
Is Castrol or Valvoline any better than Supertech ATF+4?
Because of Chrysler's (superior) licensing requirements, all ATF+4 fluids, no matter who the manufacturer, are chemically identical. That can't be said for any other ATF. Buy the Supertech and save some money.
I believe that the license for the Dexron VI (GM's current fluid) is also a spec based upon a licensed chemistry package. So, techinically, you are incorrect in stating "that can't be said for any other ATF." Walmart pays for the GM license rights for the DEX VI; it's probably every bit the fluid it is required to be.
Originally Posted By: dnewton3
Originally Posted By: G-MAN
Originally Posted By: beadvised
Is Castrol or Valvoline any better than Supertech ATF+4?
Because of Chrysler's (superior) licensing requirements, all ATF+4 fluids, no matter who the manufacturer, are chemically identical. That can't be said for any other ATF. Buy the Supertech and save some money.
I believe that the license for the Dexron VI (GM's current fluid) is also a spec based upon a licensed chemistry package. So, techinically, you are incorrect in stating "that can't be said for any other ATF." Walmart pays for the GM license rights for the DEX VI; it's probably every bit the fluid it is required to be.
The Dex VI license is still performance based, not formula based. GM leaves it up to the additive makers to develop a formula that meets the performance spec, then the formula is licensed. The additive makers then sell the formula to blenders and a sub-license is issued for the finished ATF product. Nowhere in this licensing scheme does GM specify the formula, which Chrysler does for license ATF+4. Right now there are ten different licensed Dex VI formulas used by the various blenders to make finished Dex VI ATF. Thus, unlike with ATF+4, only the brands of Dex VI that use the same licensed formula are chemically identical. With ATF+4 there is only one formula (based on a Lubrizol additive package), thus no matter what the brand, all ATF+4 is chemically identical.
Originally Posted By: G-MAN
Originally Posted By: beadvised
Is Castrol or Valvoline any better than Supertech ATF+4?
Because of Chrysler's (superior) licensing requirements, all ATF+4 fluids, no matter who the manufacturer, are chemically identical. That can't be said for any other ATF. Buy the Supertech and save some money.
I believe that the license for the Dexron VI (GM's current fluid) is also a spec based upon a licensed chemistry package. So, techinically, you are incorrect in stating "that can't be said for any other ATF." Walmart pays for the GM license rights for the DEX VI; it's probably every bit the fluid it is required to be.
The Dex VI license is still performance based, not formula based. GM leaves it up to the additive makers to develop a formula that meets the performance spec, then the formula is licensed. The additive makers then sell the formula to blenders and a sub-license is issued for the finished ATF product. Nowhere in this licensing scheme does GM specify the formula, which Chrysler does for license ATF+4. Right now there are ten different licensed Dex VI formulas used by the various blenders to make finished Dex VI ATF. Thus, unlike with ATF+4, only the brands of Dex VI that use the same licensed formula are chemically identical. With ATF+4 there is only one formula (based on a Lubrizol additive package), thus no matter what the brand, all ATF+4 is chemically identical.
Originally Posted By: dwcopple
Originally Posted By: dnewton3
Walmart pays for the GM license rights for the DEX VI;
walmart is not a lubricant mfg.
Wal-Mart is a licensed rebrander. Their Dex VI license number is J-60340. Their license is not issued by GM but the blender who supplies their product. It's probably Warren.
Originally Posted By: dnewton3
Walmart pays for the GM license rights for the DEX VI;
walmart is not a lubricant mfg.
Wal-Mart is a licensed rebrander. Their Dex VI license number is J-60340. Their license is not issued by GM but the blender who supplies their product. It's probably Warren.
dnewton3
Staff member
Originally Posted By: G-MAN
Originally Posted By: dnewton3
Originally Posted By: G-MAN
Originally Posted By: beadvised
Is Castrol or Valvoline any better than Supertech ATF+4?
Because of Chrysler's (superior) licensing requirements, all ATF+4 fluids, no matter who the manufacturer, are chemically identical. That can't be said for any other ATF. Buy the Supertech and save some money.
I believe that the license for the Dexron VI (GM's current fluid) is also a spec based upon a licensed chemistry package. So, techinically, you are incorrect in stating "that can't be said for any other ATF." Walmart pays for the GM license rights for the DEX VI; it's probably every bit the fluid it is required to be.
The Dex VI license is still performance based, not formula based. GM leaves it up to the additive makers to develop a formula that meets the performance spec, then the formula is licensed. The additive makers then sell the formula to blenders and a sub-license is issued for the finished ATF product. Nowhere in this licensing scheme does GM specify the formula, which Chrysler does for license ATF+4. Right now there are ten different licensed Dex VI formulas used by the various blenders to make finished Dex VI ATF. Thus, unlike with ATF+4, only the brands of Dex VI that use the same licensed formula are chemically identical. With ATF+4 there is only one formula (based on a Lubrizol additive package), thus no matter what the brand, all ATF+4 is chemically identical.
I disagree, at least in part ....
Here are a few links and quotes:
http://www.imakenews.com/lng/e_article000384801.cfm
... GM will license chemistries that meet the specification's requirements, leaving it to additive companies to issue sub-licenses for approved finished fluids.
Here is a list (from 2009) showing all the official licensed products. I'm sure it's probably larger now:
http://www.imakenews.com/lubritec/e_article001628035.cfm?x=b11,0,w
DEX VI is chemistry based. For a short time after introduction, as I recall, only Afton had the license. Many have jumped on the bandwagon as you can see. GM licenses the chem packages, then the sub-makers license out the fluid.
No GM chem license = no sub-market products.
Walmart is just as valid in DEX VI as is AAP, AZ, Napa, Mobil, Pennzoil, Castrol, etc. They all carry a unique license. That license is based upon the sub-market final product, but the chem packages are essentially the same. It is the lube maker that can choose the base stocks, but they are under contract (as I understand it) to use one of the chem packages as licensed.
If you see it differently, I'd like to know how ...
Originally Posted By: dnewton3
Originally Posted By: G-MAN
Originally Posted By: beadvised
Is Castrol or Valvoline any better than Supertech ATF+4?
Because of Chrysler's (superior) licensing requirements, all ATF+4 fluids, no matter who the manufacturer, are chemically identical. That can't be said for any other ATF. Buy the Supertech and save some money.
I believe that the license for the Dexron VI (GM's current fluid) is also a spec based upon a licensed chemistry package. So, techinically, you are incorrect in stating "that can't be said for any other ATF." Walmart pays for the GM license rights for the DEX VI; it's probably every bit the fluid it is required to be.
The Dex VI license is still performance based, not formula based. GM leaves it up to the additive makers to develop a formula that meets the performance spec, then the formula is licensed. The additive makers then sell the formula to blenders and a sub-license is issued for the finished ATF product. Nowhere in this licensing scheme does GM specify the formula, which Chrysler does for license ATF+4. Right now there are ten different licensed Dex VI formulas used by the various blenders to make finished Dex VI ATF. Thus, unlike with ATF+4, only the brands of Dex VI that use the same licensed formula are chemically identical. With ATF+4 there is only one formula (based on a Lubrizol additive package), thus no matter what the brand, all ATF+4 is chemically identical.
I disagree, at least in part ....
Here are a few links and quotes:
http://www.imakenews.com/lng/e_article000384801.cfm
... GM will license chemistries that meet the specification's requirements, leaving it to additive companies to issue sub-licenses for approved finished fluids.
Here is a list (from 2009) showing all the official licensed products. I'm sure it's probably larger now:
http://www.imakenews.com/lubritec/e_article001628035.cfm?x=b11,0,w
DEX VI is chemistry based. For a short time after introduction, as I recall, only Afton had the license. Many have jumped on the bandwagon as you can see. GM licenses the chem packages, then the sub-makers license out the fluid.
No GM chem license = no sub-market products.
Walmart is just as valid in DEX VI as is AAP, AZ, Napa, Mobil, Pennzoil, Castrol, etc. They all carry a unique license. That license is based upon the sub-market final product, but the chem packages are essentially the same. It is the lube maker that can choose the base stocks, but they are under contract (as I understand it) to use one of the chem packages as licensed.
If you see it differently, I'd like to know how ...
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: G-MAN
For ATF+4, there is only ONE chemistry, the one specified by Chrysler in the license.
And that there is the source of the problem. It's about money, not about performance.
For ATF+4, there is only ONE chemistry, the one specified by Chrysler in the license.
And that there is the source of the problem. It's about money, not about performance.
Originally Posted By: G-MAN
Just because you keep posting this doesn't make it so.
It's absolutely true that ATF+4 is the latest in 1998 transmission fluid technology. There are many semi-synth fluids on the market (non-licensed) that meet the performance requirements. Same cannot be said of the other current-gen specs.
Also I believe that GM is no longer going charge $$$ to license the DEXRON specs.
Just because you keep posting this doesn't make it so.
It's absolutely true that ATF+4 is the latest in 1998 transmission fluid technology. There are many semi-synth fluids on the market (non-licensed) that meet the performance requirements. Same cannot be said of the other current-gen specs.
Also I believe that GM is no longer going charge $$$ to license the DEXRON specs.
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: martinq
Originally Posted By: G-MAN
For ATF+4, there is only ONE chemistry, the one specified by Chrysler in the license.
And that there is the source of the problem. It's about money, not about performance.
Prove it.
Originally Posted By: martinq
It's absolutely true that ATF+4 is the latest in 1998 transmission fluid technology. There are many semi-synth fluids on the market (non-licensed) that meet the performance requirements.
Yeah, whatever. Believe what you want. I'm done.
Originally Posted By: G-MAN
For ATF+4, there is only ONE chemistry, the one specified by Chrysler in the license.
And that there is the source of the problem. It's about money, not about performance.
Prove it.
Originally Posted By: martinq
It's absolutely true that ATF+4 is the latest in 1998 transmission fluid technology. There are many semi-synth fluids on the market (non-licensed) that meet the performance requirements.
Yeah, whatever. Believe what you want. I'm done.
FWIW, I have had excellent results with Supertech ATF+4. Our '96 Grand Cherokee is at 213K miles and counting. The 42RE transmission is original and has been running on Supertech fluid since 133K miles. I would use it with confidence.
Andrew S.
Andrew S.
MolaKule
Staff member
Chrysler's ATF+4 required a specific GroupIII base oil, Texaco's XVHI with an additive package from Lubrizol with an elemental analysis of approx 460 ppm of Phosphorus (AW), Calcium of approx. 690 ppm (dispersant/AW) and Boron (AW) of 130ppm.
Lubrizol also developed a special methacrylate polymer for improved Viscosity Index retention, the proprietary friction modifiers for the TCC's anti-shudder performance, and improved anti-oxidants.
IMO, the DexronVI spec allows for different base oils (full synthetics) with improved anti-oxidant and reduced shearing properties as compared to the GroupIII base oil specified for the ATF+4.
Chrysler chose the GroupIII for one other reason: It required less seal swell additive than a pure synthetic base oil such as PAO but of course, one can add di-esters to compensate.
Summary: GM chose a performance spec that allowed the use of full synthetic base oils, while Chrysler chose a specific chemistry-based specification that limited the selection of base oils for blending.
Both ATF's, AT+4 and DexronVI, certainly represented a significant improvement in viscosity retention, shear stability, and oxidation resistance.
Lubrizol also developed a special methacrylate polymer for improved Viscosity Index retention, the proprietary friction modifiers for the TCC's anti-shudder performance, and improved anti-oxidants.
IMO, the DexronVI spec allows for different base oils (full synthetics) with improved anti-oxidant and reduced shearing properties as compared to the GroupIII base oil specified for the ATF+4.
Chrysler chose the GroupIII for one other reason: It required less seal swell additive than a pure synthetic base oil such as PAO but of course, one can add di-esters to compensate.
Summary: GM chose a performance spec that allowed the use of full synthetic base oils, while Chrysler chose a specific chemistry-based specification that limited the selection of base oils for blending.
Both ATF's, AT+4 and DexronVI, certainly represented a significant improvement in viscosity retention, shear stability, and oxidation resistance.
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: G-MAN
Believe what you want.
I don't believe it, I've seen it.
Believe what you want.
I don't believe it, I've seen it.
- Status
