Chrysler Power Steering - Mobil 1 ATF?

[DWC28]

overall

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: DWC28
overall


See my last edit, I added a question

 

[DWC28]

From an 2005 ASTM round robin on ATF D2983 with: number of valid results 30; robust mean 10668.8; robust std deviation 499.1; repro ASTM 634.5; repro these test data 1382.5. 3 sigma on that data would be 9,000 to 12,000 cP.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: DWC28
From an 2005 ASTM round robin on ATF D2983 with: number of valid results 30; robust mean 10668.8; robust std deviation 499.1; repro ASTM 634.5; repro these test data 1382.5. 3 sigma on that data would be 9,000 to 12,000 cP.


Thank you, so then the true outlier is indeed the CAM2 (as we've both noted) with its MRV that is well outside the margin of error. Any thoughts on that? Is it due to what I mentioned earlier, base oil interchangeability as part of the spec?

 

[doitmyself]

Very late to this thread, but the Center for Quality Assurance does NOT show that CAM2 has a licensed ATF+4 product. http://www.centerforqa.com/chrysler-brands/ The product in this thread must be something else? They do have an unlicensed "ATF 4" product.

Also, reading between the lines of their base oil FAQ, they obviously left some wiggle room regarding the possibility of slightly different base oil use. When I called them some years ago, they confirmed that there could be slight differences due to base oil, but they all have to fall within a specific range of qualifications.

 

[Nyogtha]

Hmmm . . .

http://www.cam2.com/products/Automatic-Transmission-Fluid/CAM2-ATF-4.html

http://www.cam2.com/images/product_files/7392.pdf

It's missing the "+", and uses the words "compatible" and "recommended for use" with no license number mentioned.

 

[OVERKILL]

Good catch doitmyself, definitely seems to explain the huge difference between it and the others, which are all so similar.

Given the relatively poor cold temp performance it would appear cost is the primary driver IMHO....