TheSamba.com Forums
 
  View original topic: GL 4 or GL 5 - "Official Gear Lube Topic" Page: Previous  1, 2, 3, 4 ... 60, 61, 62  Next
alikatcraig Mon Aug 11, 2008 10:04 pm

Thanks for the support Nikita. Just because it's the new kid on the block, and 'everybody' swears by it doesn't mean it is any better than GL-4 in our buses.

I attach a link to Conocophillips and their Philsyn MT-1 gear oil. You might want to read the application section "it may be used in NON SYNCHRONIZED manual trans in trucks, buses and heavy equipment (note, the MT is Manual Truck), where the manufacturer specifies API GL-5 or MT-1". NO mention of GL-4 compatibility that I can see.

http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:SZIZKCegFS8J:...&gl=us

If you check the patent for the MT-1 additive package, the variances on %/volume of each part are quite large. Remember, this was not put together with our trans in mind, but modern trans. Same thing with the engine oils we now see. Now, if I pulled the synchros, or raced the bus I might risk it, but otherwise, I'll endure your scorn and stick with what VW recommended, and is still available.



Al

alikatcraig Mon Aug 11, 2008 11:14 pm

Might also check out this from the API (the guys who gave you the specs in the first place):
http://www.api.org/certifications/engineoil/pubs/upload/1560.pdf

Pages 9 & 10 refer to the GL-4/GL-5/MT-1 specs, and state under GL-4 "The manufacturers specific quality recommendations should be followed". Also check out the MT-1 section.

There is plenty to read out there, and most of it points to the synthetic GL-5/MT-1 formula being intended initially for modern truck axles/trans where upto 1 million mile service intervals mean large cost savings. In cars it is primarily intended to increase manufacturers service intervals and combat extremes in temp and performance in modern set ups.

Al

Bruce Tue Aug 12, 2008 12:16 am

nikita wrote: .....The fact is that GL-4 is still an active API spec, not obsolete. Yellow metal syncros have been degraded by too much active sulfur in gear oil. What do you suppose causes that very common 3-2 downshift grinding in VW transaxles?

Post your pictures of synchros that have been degraded by GL-5.
Grinding gears is due to WEAR on the synchros, not corrosion.

mango.split Tue Aug 12, 2008 3:30 am

alikatcraig wrote: Thanks for the support Nikita. Just because it's the new kid on the block, and 'everybody' swears by it doesn't mean it is any better than GL-4 in our buses.

I attach a link to Conocophillips and their Philsyn MT-1 gear oil. You might want to read the application section "it may be used in NON SYNCHRONIZED manual trans in trucks, buses and heavy equipment (note, the MT is Manual Truck), where the manufacturer specifies API GL-5 or MT-1". NO mention of GL-4 compatibility that I can see.

http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:SZIZKCegFS8J:...&gl=us

If you check the patent for the MT-1 additive package, the variances on %/volume of each part are quite large. Remember, this was not put together with our trans in mind, but modern trans. Same thing with the engine oils we now see. Now, if I pulled the synchros, or raced the bus I might risk it, but otherwise, I'll endure your scorn and stick with what VW recommended, and is still available.



Al

The bottle of sta-lube GL5 I just bought says use anywhere GL4 is called for. All the auto parts stores I went to had GL5 and not GL4.

I guess all you people are using leaded gas too... :lol:

I have been using GL5 and many others here have. It works fine so anybody telling others not to use it are silly. If GL5 exceeds all the tolerances of GL4 why would you not use it.... unbelievable. :roll:

alikatcraig Tue Aug 12, 2008 7:31 am

Did you read the attachments? Obviously not! Sta Lube may well say that, and may be correct, but that is not what the American Petroleum Institute or Cococco Phillips say, and I can't be bothered to trawl any further for more cases. Guess you know more than them then!

Al

mango.split Wed Aug 13, 2008 7:37 pm

alikatcraig wrote: Did you read the attachments? Obviously not! Sta Lube may well say that, and may be correct, but that is not what the American Petroleum Institute or Cococco Phillips say, and I can't be bothered to trawl any further for more cases. Guess you know more than them then!

Al

Can you post a link were the API says NOT to use GL5 were GL4 is called for?

I would think the tolerance tests would be the deciding factor... :?

Glenn Thu Aug 14, 2008 4:34 am

I would guess that of the millions of air cooled VWs still on the road, 90% use whatever gear lube their mechanic uses. And i would bet that 90% of the mechanics use GL5.

So if GL5 WILL damage your tranny there would be tens of thousands of bad transmissions out there.

So... where are all of them?

Also my Berg 5 has had GL5 in it since 1999. Can someone tell me when the GL5 will damage it so I can be ready to fix it?

Reality speaks for itself.

miniman82 Thu Aug 14, 2008 6:28 pm

Know what I think? I think people put waaaaay too much thought into this whole oil debate. Do I know what kind of lube is in my trans? 90w gear oil. Do I know what grade? No. Do I care? No. It's not making any noises, and 90% of the world is using whatever's on the shelf, which is probably the same cheap 90w I'm using (Coastal). I mean really, it's just gear oil. :roll: Engines get a little more attention; I wouldn't throw Coastal in my engine (I use Valvoline), but a gearbox is just a gearbox. As long as it has something in it, it's not likely to fail.

udidwht Sun Aug 17, 2008 12:23 am

Quote Miniman82:

"As long as it has something in it, it's not likely to fail."



:-s wait...never mind. ](*,)


With regards to 90% of mechanics:

Since 90% of mechanics work on modern cars of today, I'll agree they use GL-5. But of all the strictly air-cooled shops I know they carry and use only GL-4 spec gear oil whether it be dino or synthetic. Most I know of use dino.

There used to be a time when there quite literally millions of ACVW's on the roads. Those days have come and gone.

Glenn Sun Aug 17, 2008 4:42 am

Can someone please show me a transmission that was damaged by using GL5.

Come on there must be at least one out there?

And don''t ask me to prove it doesn't... you can't prove a negative.

udidwht Sun Aug 17, 2008 8:12 am

Glenn wrote:

"And don''t ask me to prove it doesn't... you can't prove a negative."


Well...that's not entirely true. If GL-5 is bad it probably would take decades to rear it's ugly self. Which is why it probably hasn't/won't be proven anytime soon.

Glenn Sun Aug 17, 2008 9:56 am

I've been using GL5 for 15 years and so have millions of other VW owners.

So decades meaning 10-15 years were some people put 100,000 miles on when it fails.

Proof... we need proof.

miniman82 Sun Aug 17, 2008 2:27 pm

udidwht wrote: If GL-5 is bad it probably would take decades to rear it's ugly self. Which is why it probably hasn't/won't be proven anytime soon.


Let me get this straight- you would drive a transmission for 15 years, and then blame the lubricant when it fails? :roll: I would call any transmission that makes it 15 years a good trans, regardless of lubricant. Like I said, as long as there's something resembling oil in there, you won't see issues. Here's an example. My fiancée's Ranger had about 160K miles on it (trans fluid never changed, it was a '97), when it started grinding into 2nd, and just generally being stiff to get into gear. I went to the local lube express, where the diagnosis was that the fluid was way past gone. I watched them drain it, and I'm here to tell you that I didn't think tranny lube could be such an ugly color. It was a blackish brown, and looked like it had water in it as well. After the fulid flush and fill, the trans was back to working like normal- butter smooth shifts, and not stiff at all anymore.

If a trans can live with crap like that in it and still work like it's supposed to after having the fluid replaced, I have faith that no matter what you put in your gearbox (as long as it's gear oil), you won't have problems. This whole debate over types and grades is nothing but speculation until someone does a study. So use what you like; failures are not likely to be caused by lubricant type, just lack of lubricant.

udidwht Sun Aug 17, 2008 5:44 pm

Miniman wrote:

"Let me get this straight- you would drive a transmission for 15 years, and then blame the lubricant when it fails?"

That wasn't remotely close to what was said/suggested. But there must be a reason as to why VW called for the gear oil spec (as far as grade is concerned). But for GL-5 issues...who knows. Hell, all vehicles call for specific gear/trans oil spec. Who'd be willing to bet if you put something in your gear/trans box other (Newer vehicle) than the spec oil and then it fails you'd be covered under your warranty??? Dealer MUST not be misled as to what was put in trans/gear box. See what they tell you.


"The truth is out there."

Glenn Sun Aug 17, 2008 7:15 pm

So they you're suggesting taking a new transmission, filling it with GL5 and then letting it sit for 15 years?


VW listed GL4 because in 1972 GL5 wasn't available yet.


So... where do you get 91RON leaded gas these days?

udidwht Sun Aug 17, 2008 7:31 pm

Glenn wrote: So they you're suggesting taking a new transmission, filling it with GL5 and then letting it sit for 15 years?


VW listed GL4 because in 1972 GL5 wasn't available yet.


So... where do you get 91RON leaded gas these days?



I was thinking of one using a gear/trans oil quite the opposite of what is called for (spec wise) in 'whatever said vehicle'. Nothing mentioned about setting for any amount of time.

Leaded gas...here in the states :shock:


"The truth is out there...somewhere

66311 Sat Aug 30, 2008 7:45 pm

http://static.summitracing.com/global/images/instructions/red-synthetic%20gear%20oils.pdf
note: CORROSION PROTECTION
The extreme pressure chemistry used in many gear oils
can be corrosive to brass and bronze used in synchronizers
and bushings. Most gear oils are corrosive at
temperatures of 200°F. Red Line Gear Oils are non-corrosive
up to 300°F and the MTL® in excess of 375°F. A
corrosive gear oil can shorten synchronizer life by half
and can also contribute to rust problems.
I went with the 75W90 NS. Which is GL-5. I considered the extreme pressure formulas and MT-90. But I was put onto the NS by an article describing regular GL-5 as mostly for differentials and not working as well for gear synchronizers. The NS was recomended as working well in Porsche transaxles among others. I got tired of researching it all and put in the GL-5 NS. BTW I didn't get a full drain because of the axles so it's mixed with regular GL-5. The only difference I can tell is from when it had the old 90w dino oil and I replaced it with regular GL-5. It is much smoother when cold.
The MT90 is a GL-4 and is what I would use if I thought it had to be GL-4. But the only thing I've proved to myself is that synthetic beats dino.

Bruce Sat Aug 30, 2008 8:56 pm

Beware, you've changed TWO things at once. Either of them could be responsible for the improved shifting. You changed from regular oil to synthetic, and you have changed the viscosity of the oil. Which of those 2 factors caused the improvement in shifting?

Oh, and if anyone who read the fine print thinks their synchros will corrode away, your gear oil NEVER gets even remotely close to 200ºF.

66311 Sun Aug 31, 2008 6:01 am

Yeah the change to synthetic is secondary to weight most likely but then again because it's synthetic I can change weight.
Check out the Shockproof EPs for instance. And if you want GL-4 there is MT90.

AlteWagen Wed Mar 18, 2009 10:33 am

Just went thru this thread and have an interesting observation.

I have a 63 bus with rbg trans. upon taking ownership of the bus I changed all the fluids including rgb and center section. I always inspect the old oil for particulate and chunks of metal to get an idea of when it might let go. The bus had a dealer installed rebuilt trans right before it was parked by the po. at the first oil change the gear oil looked a bit darker than brand new oil but was still clear, and did not have any metal flakes in the oil. I put GL4 (gl5 not yet avail) and drove the bus daily. Even though not necessary, I would change all the fluids before a long trip just to be safe always checking for flakes or chunks.

Around 2002 I started using GL5 thinking it would help the trans with modern technology. The bus was no longer a daily driver so it would sit more than drive. Since then I have noticed an increase of brass particulate in the old oil. Recently I was getting ready for a camping trip and went to change the oil. This time I noticed a large amount of brass particulate in the old oil.

My question, since the trans does not grind or pop out of gear, is not tortured or overladen what would cause the change in wear characteristics in the trans causing more brass flakes in the oil? I have driven the trans around 60K since purchased and changed the oil at least once a year since I got it. Since 2000 I would say I have only put 10K miles on it with the GL5.

Is it just a coincidence? I never thought the oil would have had something to do with the increased particulate, I assumed regular wear and tear. After reading this thread it makes me wonder.



Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group