Recent Topics
Impala 2008 recall
by Durango
04/20/14 10:50 AM
Issues with simple mp3/wma player.
by mrsilv04
04/20/14 09:26 AM
Finally installed Lifeliner GLS on the Focus
by Miller88
04/20/14 08:42 AM
My PYB expierence
by Georgiaboy2109
04/20/14 08:24 AM
Any GM L-76 (LS-X variant) V8 owners out there?
by SuperEd73
04/20/14 07:52 AM
THE BATHTUB TEST
by Charlie1935
04/20/14 07:15 AM
My First OC in my 2006 Volvo XC90
by Toros
04/20/14 07:05 AM
Lubegard in p/s pump
by Bob_E
04/20/14 05:56 AM
How do you say it?
by GreeCguy
04/20/14 04:24 AM
Oil recommendation
by TIUSER
04/20/14 04:18 AM
A Slew Of Choices
by Red91
04/20/14 01:48 AM
Two Shops, One Septic Tank
by Red91
04/20/14 12:20 AM
Newest Members
loneryder, MNbiker, Amercanzer0, BobCos, rdm101
49632 Registered Users
Who's Online
78 registered (147_Grain, AandPDan, beast3300, Bandito440, bigblumer, 77GrandPrix, 5 invisible), 1828 Guests and 160 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Forum Stats
49632 Members
64 Forums
212146 Topics
3325263 Posts

Max Online: 2605 @ 04/19/14 12:41 PM
Donate to BITOG

Page 12 of 15 < 1 2 ... 10 11 12 13 14 15 >
Topic Options
#3221640 - 12/19/13 12:53 PM Re: IF WS2 = ultimate lubricant [Re: alternety]
MolaKule Offline


Registered: 06/05/02
Posts: 13639
Loc: Midwest
Quote:
Not sure I understand. That is what I'm hoping to get (well, not the 85, but (80+90)/2.....).


Manual Transmission Fluids here in North America range in viscosity from 6.0 cSt to 15 cSt.

So, 80+90 doesn't make any sense.

Does anyone understand that the SAE weight system doesn't describe the Kinematic viscosity of a fluid?



Edited by MolaKule (12/19/13 12:57 PM)
_________________________
Everyone needs a friend who is all ears. There's no such thing as too much candy. Keep your paws off of other people's jelly beans.

Top
#3221674 - 12/19/13 01:28 PM Re: IF WS2 = ultimate lubricant [Re: MolaKule]
67King Offline


Registered: 10/19/12
Posts: 83
Loc: Knoxville, TN
Originally Posted By: MolaKule
Quote:
Not sure I understand. That is what I'm hoping to get (well, not the 85, but (80+90)/2.....).


Manual Transmission Fluids here in North America range in viscosity from 6.0 cSt to 15 cSt.

So, 80+90 doesn't make any sense.

Does anyone understand that the SAE weight system doesn't describe the Kinematic viscosity of a fluid?



Hmmm......I usually don't have comprehension problems like this. Either reading or writing.

Transmission fluids here in America do not end at 15cSt. Many call for a 75w90. Max allowable KV is 24.5 for those specifying a 75w90. Porsche probably has a higher take rate on manuals than any other OEM. They spec a 75w90. And yes I know it is a transaxle, but so are all of the Hondas that spec a 75w80. Olyslager actually lists a 75w90 as the spec transmission oil for Vipers.......

Second of all, an 85W oil can be from 11-13.5. So taking the allowable midpoint (since it is a theoretical oil) of an 80, which is 9, using the 50/50 (which is what (80+90)/2 is doing) lever rule with the Millers 75w90 (17.3) puts you at 13.15. A 60/40 puts you at 12.3. Which is within the 85W range. Maybe neither ideal nor perfect, but not inherently wrong, either.

So again, not sure what there is to be confused about.
_________________________
944T - SP3 race car, 944TS "hot rod", 968 driver, 67GTO, 66 Bronco, 10 535i M-Sport, 6.7L Cummins Ram, 07 R320CDI - all with Millers

Top
#3221716 - 12/19/13 02:07 PM Re: IF WS2 = ultimate lubricant [Re: 67King]
MolaKule Offline


Registered: 06/05/02
Posts: 13639
Loc: Midwest
Originally Posted By: 67King
Originally Posted By: martinq
Originally Posted By: 67King
I am really hoping I can get some in a 75w80-like viscosity, which is very close to ATF.

What about a 70w80 or 70w85 instead?


Not sure I understand. That is what I'm hoping to get (well, not the 85, but (80+90)/2.....).


The above in bolded type is what I said was confusing.



Quote:
Choosing a Manual Transmission fluid can be confusing.

Many times there is simply a specification referenced and no information about the viscosity of a fluid at 100C, where the oil viscosity is documented at the higher testing temperature.

What I recommend you do when looking for a replacement fluid is to determine the viscosity of the fluid at 100C either from the manufacturer's Product Data Sheet or from a New oil Analysis or VOA.

After knowing the viscosity at 100C (212F), one can then attempt to match up the fluid to one or more of those below:

A. The four MTL fluids closest to a Kinematic Viscosity of 6.1 (About the same viscosity as a DexronVI) or so are:

1. Castrol Syntrans FE 75W,

2. BMW (Pentosin) MTF-LT-3,

3. Honda MTII or MTF 2.

4. Ford FML-XT-11-QDC


B. The next higher viscosity MTL would be the 7.5 cSt versions (About the same viscosity as a DexronIII)

1. Royal Purple's Synchromax

2. Ravenol MTF-2

3. Honda MTF

4. VW part number G052512A2

5. GM Manual Transmission and Transfer Case Fluid

6. BMW (Pentosin MTF 2) MTF-LT-1, 2


C. The next higher viscosity MTL would be Castrol Syntrans V FE 75W-80 8.0cSt

D. The next higher viscosity MTL would be BG Synchroshift II 8.2 cSt

E. The next higher viscosity is Mopar Type MS-9417 MTL 9.0cSt

F. The next higher viscosity MTL would be Pennzoil Synchromesh 9.3 cSt


G. The next group of MTL’s are in the 10.x cSt range are:

1. Redline MTL 75W80

2. Amsoil MTL (9.7 cSt)

3. GM Synchromesh’s

4. Volvo MTF 645

5. Ford Motor Craft XT-M5-QS

6. Fuchs TITAN SINTOFLUID SAE 75W-80 synthetic MTF


H. The next higher viscosity MTL would be:

1. Redline MT-85 – 12.0 cSt


I. The next higher viscosity MTLs would be:

1. Amsoil MTG 13.9 cSt

2. Redline MT-90 15.6 cSt

3. Castrol Syntrans Multivehicle 75W-90

4. Castrol Syntrans Transaxle 75w-90


Manual Transmisson Design and Fluid Technology


Edited by MolaKule (12/19/13 02:08 PM)
_________________________
Everyone needs a friend who is all ears. There's no such thing as too much candy. Keep your paws off of other people's jelly beans.

Top
#3221723 - 12/19/13 02:15 PM Re: IF WS2 = ultimate lubricant [Re: alternety]
MolaKule Offline


Registered: 06/05/02
Posts: 13639
Loc: Midwest
In other words I could care less about the SAE viscosity range rating as it tells me nothing about the actual Kinematic Viscosity of the MTF at working temperatures.

Manual Transmissions can be very sensitive to viscosity differences of 1 or 2 cSt KINEMATIC viscosity at 100C. Many times, one has to experiment with different application specific (dedicated) Manual Transmission Fluids (not differential gear lubes) to determine which ones provide the best shifting performance wrt wear.



Edited by MolaKule (12/19/13 02:19 PM)
_________________________
Everyone needs a friend who is all ears. There's no such thing as too much candy. Keep your paws off of other people's jelly beans.

Top
#3222265 - 12/20/13 03:58 AM Re: IF WS2 = ultimate lubricant [Re: MolaKule]
martinq Offline


Registered: 07/22/05
Posts: 1023
Loc: ON, Canada
Originally Posted By: MolaKule
Manual Transmissions can be very sensitive to viscosity differences of 1 or 2 cSt KINEMATIC viscosity at 100C.

This must be amplified at lower temperatures.

It's very difficult to get any substantial heat into the tranny during winter unless you're hot-lapping. What about transmission performance at 0C, -10C or -20C?

Top
#3222519 - 12/20/13 09:56 AM Re: IF WS2 = ultimate lubricant [Re: alternety]
67King Offline


Registered: 10/19/12
Posts: 83
Loc: Knoxville, TN
My real world experiences differ greatly from some theories put forth here, from four levels. 1. Owner/track driver/mechanic, 2. Vendor, 3. Engineer at the OEM level, and 4. Instructor and technical resource for PCA track events. I can list tons of vehicles that have used gear oil with a higher KV@100 than their factory fill, and successfully. In some cases, it is DRASTICALLY higher, such as guys who run 75w90 in their BMW's. This guy is one: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QZaH1hxnBDs and his comments about the change were "completely transformed the shift feel of the transmission."

I cannot, however, find a single spec that calls out KV. SAE Viscosity and API GL-#? All day long. But not KV.

The Millers is a GL4/GL5 fluid. It meets GL4 specs (as well as GL5). It is a transmission fluid. As is their street version, which is labeled specifically as a transmission fluid....in a 75w90. And its KV@100 is even higher, at 17.85. Millers is not unique. Every one of Motul's 75w90 oils are GL4 and GL5. Royal Purple's 75w90 is a GL4 and GL5. Amsoil has an MT-1 and GL5.

Again, I cannot find an OEM who specifies a gear oil by KV. Furthermore, having been in the OEM product development world (used to do engine development for Ford), I can absolutely guarantee you that they are designed to accommodate the full range of the specification, and then some. You absolutely MUST design in robustness that the real world introduces. Case in point, albeit engine oil. I was involved in the early work that became the new 5.0L Coyote. The VCT system requires both oil temp data, and a positive feedback. Yes engine oils have many more variables, but there is still noise that must considered. When working with previously referenced race team, I had to get in touch with a former colleague who had D&R responsibility for the VCT system, since we don't offer a 5w50 (but do a 10w50). Sent him some data, and he verified for the team and me that the system is robust to the viscosity difference. And using oil as a working hydraulic fluid is certainly doing to put more demands on precise viscosity than a gearbox.

There are PLENTY of transmissions, NOT transaxles, that spec a 75w90, here are a few more that are higher volume ones:
- Mazda Miata, gen 1 (80w90)
- Mazda Miata, gen 2
- Mazda MX5 (current gen)
- Subaru BRZ/Scion FR-S

Which is, again, why you can go to any parts store, and find GL4 spec 75w90 sitting on a shelf, but you can't find the thinner stuff.

Some 75w90's that meet GL4 specs that have a higher than 15cP that may have been missed:
Motul Gear 300 - 15.2
Motul Gearbox 80w90 - 21.2
Motylgear - 16.7
Royal Purple 17.5
Red Line (GL4 only) 15.6
Mobil 1 Delvac - 15.9
Fuchs Titan Sintopoid - 15.2
Amsoil 80w90 (MT-1) - 16.0
Schaeffer 741 (MT-1) - 16.6
Torco SGO - 16.2
Torco RGO (80w90) - 20.2
Swepco 201 (MT-1 80w90) - 15.7

I stopped looking after that. And that doesn't even include the transaxles, which would be the majority of manual transmissions at this point in time.

Furthermore, about 30% of our customers have street/track cars. You'd struggle to get a gearbox to reach 200 degrees on the street. They'll hit 275 pretty easily on the track. If transmissions were sensitive to 1-2cP differences, then it would be impossible to run the same oil on the street and on the track (well, unless they were like damper oil w/ 350-ish VI's). But they do it. With virtually every oil. And as an nationally certified instructor with PCA, I get to interface with tons of folks who track their street driven cars. NEVER met anyone who had to change their fluid for driving on the track. The owner of the BMW listed above is one - his daily driver, he drag races it, and he also tracks it at Road Atlanta and Atlanta Motorsports Park.

Some other types of cars: tons of Porsches: 944's, 968's, Boxsters, 996, 997 (incl GT3). One of the 968's was mine. Caterham, VW, I forget others.

Probably 65% of our customers have dedicated track/race cars. Excepting a few BMW guys who run THICKER oil in their race cars due to heat, they all run the OEM spec viscosity. Which again due to heat will be notably different than 1-2cP from where the street driven spec originates.

That said, I can definitively say that it does NOT work well with Honda transaxles!!!! We had a customer with a Grand Am team running Civis, and the change to our 75w90 was disasterous. Hoped the higher temps would thin out the oil enough for use, but it didn't.

BTW, I should be able to make public a change that will be taking place for factory fills for one rather upscale vehicle starting in January. Currently has a service requirement of 40,000 miles. Will change to a single lifetime fill. The factory fill will be decidedly higher than 15cP.

As it is, I need to be productive the rest of the day. I don't mean to be argumentative, but like I said, the theories put forth do not align with my experiences, dating back to before I even knew squat about oil. We've already seen some confusion about the Millers in this thread, I just want to avoid more, since this one reads like a list of reasons to not use it.


Edited by 67King (12/20/13 10:00 AM)
_________________________
944T - SP3 race car, 944TS "hot rod", 968 driver, 67GTO, 66 Bronco, 10 535i M-Sport, 6.7L Cummins Ram, 07 R320CDI - all with Millers

Top
#3222751 - 12/20/13 02:31 PM Re: IF WS2 = ultimate lubricant [Re: alternety]
MolaKule Offline


Registered: 06/05/02
Posts: 13639
Loc: Midwest
Quote:
My real world experiences differ greatly from some theories put forth here, from four levels. 1. Owner/track driver/mechanic, 2. Vendor, 3. Engineer at the OEM level, and 4. Instructor and technical resource for PCA track events. I can list tons of vehicles that have used gear oil with a higher KV@100 than their factory fill, and successfully. In some cases, it is DRASTICALLY higher, such as guys who run 75w90 in their BMW's. This guy is one: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QZaH1hxnBDs and his comments about the change were "completely transformed the shift feel of the transmission."

I cannot, however, find a single spec that calls out KV. SAE Viscosity and API GL-#? All day long. But not KV.


Then I seriously doubt you really do lubricant development.

So you're saying that 75W90 or 14-18 Kinematic Viscosity lubricants are the only viscosities available for MTL's?

I don't know where you practice lubricant development but I develop formulations for domestic and foreign entities and every contract has a number of developmental specificatons including 100C, 40C, and Brookfield viscosities, for fluids ranging from 5 cSt to 50 cSt@100C.


Edited by MolaKule (12/20/13 02:36 PM)
_________________________
Everyone needs a friend who is all ears. There's no such thing as too much candy. Keep your paws off of other people's jelly beans.

Top
#3222868 - 12/20/13 04:28 PM Re: IF WS2 = ultimate lubricant [Re: alternety]
MolaKule Offline


Registered: 06/05/02
Posts: 13639
Loc: Midwest
Quote:
Furthermore, about 30% of our customers have street/track cars. You'd struggle to get a gearbox to reach 200 degrees on the street. They'll hit 275 pretty easily on the track. If transmissions were sensitive to 1-2cP differences, then it would be impossible to run the same oil on the street and on the track (well, unless they were like damper oil w/ 350-ish VI's).


What the heck is damper oil?

We're talking mainly here about street cars for daily drivers. There is a separate forum on here for Racing Topics.

Various series of Manual transmissions in Nissans and Toyotas were VERY sensitive to viscosity differences.


Some the lowest viscosity transmission fluids (both ATF and MTL) I ever developed (4-6 cSt@100C) were for strip and oval racing because they want the least amount of viscous drag available so the that extra HP goes to the wheels, and not in churning thick horsepower robbing fluids.

Yep, there are a lot of myths out there! cry


Edited by MolaKule (12/20/13 04:31 PM)
_________________________
Everyone needs a friend who is all ears. There's no such thing as too much candy. Keep your paws off of other people's jelly beans.

Top
#3222954 - 12/20/13 05:54 PM Re: IF WS2 = ultimate lubricant [Re: alternety]
alternety Offline


Registered: 01/15/09
Posts: 119
Loc: Pacific NW
Sort of an out of sequence post. I was back reading earlier posts in this thread and a thought occurred to me. I think I may have actually mentioned it somewhere in the thread, but it is about bonding IF WS2 to the engine parts. Intuitively (to me) it would seem that the best way to actually treat an engine is to flush it out to remove all oil and then introduce IF WS2 in a suspension (perhaps ethyl or isopropal alcohol - that is what I am using) into the engine. Then, take the sparkplugs out and use an electric motor or something (possibly intermittently use the starter motor) to rotate the crankshaft. It would have to be fast enough for the fluid to be circulated to all the necessary parts. Then drain and fill with oil. Run the engine for a bit to get out any residual water.

This would provide the best access to the metal surface for the IF WS2 material. It avoids the issue of the oil keeping the surfaces from interfacing and letting the WS2 do bonding. Of course the best approach would be for the engine manufacturer to simply spray the engine parts (at an appropriate pressure) with the WS2 during manufacture.

It is possible (even probable) that this is an excessive effort. But I would think it would provide a faster, and possibly a more even coating on the appropriate surfaces.

There is also the cylinder head. If that could be coated, it should resist carbon formation. WS2 melts at 1250C, so it might survive on the cylinder walls. And if it can get to all the valves, that would be an excellent place to avoid material build-up. If it could be delivered in the fuel, and survive the combustion cycle, it could get to the exhaust valves. In direct inject it would not help the intake valves. All good things. I have no clue about the effect on the catalytic converter. And there is also the consideration/potential of particles getting into the atmosphere. The material is not listed as hazardous material, but nano -**** is not well studied for ecological or biological impact (sort of the same thing).

Just some thoughts.

Top
#3222974 - 12/20/13 06:11 PM Re: IF WS2 = ultimate lubricant [Re: martinq]
dailydriver Offline


Registered: 03/14/06
Posts: 6525
Loc: Bucks County, Pa.
Originally Posted By: martinq
Originally Posted By: MolaKule
Manual Transmissions can be very sensitive to viscosity differences of 1 or 2 cSt KINEMATIC viscosity at 100C.

This must be amplified at lower temperatures.

It's very difficult to get any substantial heat into the tranny during winter unless you're hot-lapping. What about transmission performance at 0C, -10C or -20C?


Kind of why I wish the oil companies (big AND small) would give HTHSVs and MRVs for their gear oils/manual gearbox oils. wink
_________________________
2000 Z28 1SC 6 speed 165K HARD miles!
Sustina 0W-20, M1 0W-40 (60/40 mix), Amsoil EaO 64 filter
Millers CRX 75-140 NT/4oz. XL-3, RL MTL, 11S

Top
#3222995 - 12/20/13 06:22 PM Re: IF WS2 = ultimate lubricant [Re: MolaKule]
dailydriver Offline


Registered: 03/14/06
Posts: 6525
Loc: Bucks County, Pa.
Originally Posted By: MolaKule
What the heck is damper oil?


I believe that Harry is referencing the elastomer/gel-like fluid as used in Fluidampr harmonic balancers/dampers for the crank pullies of high performance engines (I did not know that it had a sky-high VI though, but I guess that it would HAVE TO)? shrug
_________________________
2000 Z28 1SC 6 speed 165K HARD miles!
Sustina 0W-20, M1 0W-40 (60/40 mix), Amsoil EaO 64 filter
Millers CRX 75-140 NT/4oz. XL-3, RL MTL, 11S

Top
#3223036 - 12/20/13 07:01 PM Re: IF WS2 = ultimate lubricant [Re: dailydriver]
67King Offline


Registered: 10/19/12
Posts: 83
Loc: Knoxville, TN
Originally Posted By: dailydriver
Originally Posted By: MolaKule
What the heck is damper oil?


I believe that Harry is referencing the elastomer/gel-like fluid as used in Fluidampr harmonic balancers/dampers for the crank pullies of high performance engines (I did not know that it had a sky-high VI though, but I guess that it would HAVE TO)? shrug


No, dampers, as in "shocks." Here is part of a note that Herta sent us regarding their experience in developing the damper (shock) oil for their IndyCar:
"Dampers on our Indycar need to operate anywhere from ambient temperature to almost 100 deg C. As such, one of the biggest challenges for a racing damper fluid is to be conssiten over a large range of temperature. Damping force variation from temperature change will make the car inconsistent in its behavior, which is very disruptive to the driver." If anyone wants me to link the PDF of the letter, let me know and I'll share.

Damper is a bit more common term in racing (obviously) and amongst their manufacturers, as the true nature of a "shock" is damp the oscillating tendencies that would otherwise be imparted on the system from a spring. Sorry I tend to forget I'm not talking about "racing" or industry stuff, but rather generalities. Side trivia note - engine oil is also used as an inherent damping fluid for valvesprings. If you ever see a cutaway of an engine at high RPM, the valvesprings behave very differently with a lot of oil versus none/little.

Note that every damper (aka shock/strut) uses oil to control motion. Some are "gas charged" and some are not. There are two types of "gas charged" shocks. Without getting into too much detail, the big take away is that a valve controls oil flow, which is how the damper damps oscillations.

I'll get to the question about when to introduce NT into an engine later.
_________________________
944T - SP3 race car, 944TS "hot rod", 968 driver, 67GTO, 66 Bronco, 10 535i M-Sport, 6.7L Cummins Ram, 07 R320CDI - all with Millers

Top
#3223212 - 12/20/13 10:17 PM Re: IF WS2 = ultimate lubricant [Re: alternety]
MolaKule Offline


Registered: 06/05/02
Posts: 13639
Loc: Midwest
Quote:
Damper is a bit more common term in racing (obviously) and amongst their manufacturers, as the true nature of a "shock" is damp the oscillating tendencies that would otherwise be imparted on the system from a spring.


No, the common term in use is "struts" and "shocks" for a device that dampens mechanical oscillations on vehicle suspension systems.

The fluid in harmonic balancers is usually a special silicon polymer.

Getting back to the topic of WS2, a TLT article of Aug. 2012 showed that WS2 is extremely difficult to place in suspension and the process to do so was very complex.

However, the company Nanomaterials, Ltd. of Yavne, Israel, claims to have developed the dispersion process to do so for both mineral oil and synthetic oils, and is able to disperse it in high and low viscosity base oils.



Edited by MolaKule (12/20/13 10:19 PM)
_________________________
Everyone needs a friend who is all ears. There's no such thing as too much candy. Keep your paws off of other people's jelly beans.

Top
#3223229 - 12/20/13 10:49 PM Re: IF WS2 = ultimate lubricant [Re: MolaKule]
67King Offline


Registered: 10/19/12
Posts: 83
Loc: Knoxville, TN
Originally Posted By: MolaKule
Quote:
Damper is a bit more common term in racing (obviously) and amongst their manufacturers, as the true nature of a "shock" is damp the oscillating tendencies that would otherwise be imparted on the system from a spring.


No, the common term in use is "struts" and "shocks" for a device that dampens mechanical oscillations on vehicle suspension systems.



I'm not sure why you think that your ignorance is my problem, but I assure you that you are quite mistaken. Nanotechnology may be a new technology unfamiliar to most, but the function of a damper oil isn't. And there is not a shock or strut in the world that dampens, or get things wet. Like I said, I've been at this since before being involved in oils. The proper term is damper. Because that is what it does.

FWIW, here's a letter from an Indy 500 winning engineer.

_________________________
944T - SP3 race car, 944TS "hot rod", 968 driver, 67GTO, 66 Bronco, 10 535i M-Sport, 6.7L Cummins Ram, 07 R320CDI - all with Millers

Top
#3223285 - 12/21/13 12:40 AM Re: IF WS2 = ultimate lubricant [Re: alternety]
MolaKule Offline


Registered: 06/05/02
Posts: 13639
Loc: Midwest
Quote:
I'm not sure why you think that your ignorance is my problem, but I assure you that you are quite mistaken.


And your ignorance of basic mechanics, lubricants, and the English language is your problem.

The word "Damp," when used in the verb tense, means to reduce the amplitude of oscillations.

To Dampen (verb) means to deaden, depress, reduce or lessen mechanical oscillations.

You were thinking of the word, dampness," which mean to, "wet."

"Damping" is the effect of reducing the Amplitude of mechanical oscillations over time.

In a shock absorber or "shock," (common term) the damper (noun) is the assembly of the fluid, valve, cylinder, and piston that dampens or reduces mechanical oscillations. But in everyday terms, this device, with mounting posts is called a "shock absorber." If you are purchasing a device that contains a shock and spring assembly with mounting posts, you order a "strut."
_________________________
Everyone needs a friend who is all ears. There's no such thing as too much candy. Keep your paws off of other people's jelly beans.

Top
Page 12 of 15 < 1 2 ... 10 11 12 13 14 15 >