Gear Oil study

Status
Not open for further replies.
Some oils score well in certain areas, Amsoil scores well in all areas. There is a reason I am still using their FGR and not changed over to the newer Severe Gear.. It works awesome and its less expensive! Not the cheapest but a very good gear oil for MT1 of GL5 applications.
 
If you believe this was good data, heres your proof to all those who ask why we recommend Amsoil gear oils.

Not surprised to see Lucas failing where most others pass.
 
That paper is 6 years old; not new to most of us here.

SAE J2360 is an updated equivalent to the old Mil spec for gear lubes. This SAE spec not only addresses inputs that would be reflected in GL-5, but also speaks directly to performance factors while in-use like vis retention, channeling, insolubles, etc. See this video: http://drivelinenews.com/videos/sae-j2360/

You can find a long list of approved fluids here: http://www.pri-network.org/other-programs/automotive-qpl/lubricant/
follow the links on their page. Interestingly, there are many dino fluids that pass the same strict standards as many syns. This file is updated monthly, IIRC.


I will also make a few interesting notes here ...
Regarding Mobil products, their dino Mobilube 80w-90 is SAE J2360 approved, but their Mobil 1 75w-90 is not. The Delvac syn gear lube is approved, though. (see the PRI list)
Regarding Valvoline products, their 75w-90 Synpower is J2360 approved, but their 75w-140 is not. (see this statement direct from Valvoline: http://www.valvoline.com/faqs/system-fluids/synpower-chemicals/108)

My point? I cannot tell you WHY some of those products are not on the approved list, but those of you that subscribe to "synthetic" and "thick" lubes always being better than conventional and thinner lubes, perhaps should spend a little more time in researching facts, rather than subscribing to rhetoric. Now, you'll note that Amsoil is not on the list; that does not mean they could not pass the J2360 test, but it does mean they have not passed the test, probably because they choose not to submit to it. But like I showed, there are dinos that pass where popular syns are not listed, and thinner lubes that pass where thicker lubes are not listed. Just because something is syn or thick, is not an assurance of meeting the criteria.

Please do not construe that to mean I am against syns or thicker fluids; that is not true. What I am pointing out is that there is a very reliable, stringent and strict gear lube standard based upon actual performance criteria, and the SAE directs the PRI/LRI to validate the applicants and maintain that listing. Want a good gear lube? Find it on the list and you're assured excellent service.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top