Trans Fluid

John,
Why? Stick with the regular Dexron/Mercon and don't be "thinking with your dipstick" A marine trans has very little in common with a automotive automatic. It's simply a hydraulic pump that applies pressure to wet clutches. You put a synthetic with friction modifiers in it and you'll be sending your trans off to Eric for a rebuild. Of course he is a little on the slow side so put the synthetic in there!!

Seriously, why are you considering it????

Pete,
So you are saying that with the friction modifier you will just slip the clutches? I have several quarts of Amsoil TorqueDrive in the basement from my last trans service on my SuperDuty truck that I was considering using in the boat. I don't know if there is a friction modifier in that fluid or not. I know in some of they put some in their gear lube, but unsure of ATF.

I would like to hear some real experiences from people with trans failures due to full synthetic ATF.

I will gladly buy 2 quarts of the cheap dino ATF, but if this expensive stuff will work in the boat, why not. Sure has done wonders in my 4R100 transmission that is genuine FORD JUNK!!

Just throwing out the question why I shouldn't put it in there.

Going back to a earlier statement, you need to understand that the marine trans has very little in common with the automatic car/truck trans. Fancy ATF is made for them and not the marine trans with wet clutches. There isn't a wet clutch in a automatic trans and it's got a torque converter!

Another example of wet clutch problems with fancy oils is with the older marine manual trans which shared engine oil. I was over at a friends the other day who rebuilds old marines with manual trans's. This spring he had two come in from clients who were "thinking with their dipsticks" and believing the TV commercials. Both had put synthetics in their engines and the wet clutches slipped to the point of warpage. The friction modifiers in these oils did the damage. New clutch plates and back to a high ZDDP oil.

horkn wrote: Fwiw, there are wet clutches in most motorcycles. Running synthetic in almost all of these wet clutch bikes won't present an issue. The issue is more related to the kind of materials and the construction of the transmission, rather than the clutch simply being wet.

more unrelated BS as always.

horkn wrote: Fwiw, there are wet clutches in most motorcycles. Running synthetic in almost all of these wet clutch bikes won't present an issue. The issue is more related to the kind of materials and the construction of the transmission, rather than the clutch simply being wet.

Really? That's not what a very close friend of mine that happened to be my best man says. He happens to be half owner of Schamburg Honda Suzuki and a certified mechanic for both. We've talked about it often!!!

See, now THAT is not even close to the truth.

Tom how is this solving the OP issue talking about the latest ford tranmission copy of someone else's invention?

IT's not, damn idiot,

The same way if I was to talk about the CV transmision using gears and no clutch or pulleys, that we designed and used in a hybrid bus application as nothing to do with fixing this members issue. Yea it's a f n transmisson and that's all they have in common.

So why do you constantly have to waist time posting damn dumb ass information that is unrelated to the issue of the thread.

horkn wrote: 8122pbrainard wrote: horkn wrote: See, now THAT is not even close to the truth. Which statement? Marine trans's not similar to automotives, my stating you're potentially confusing some or the synthetics in motorcycle wet clutches? The motorcycle wet clutch mis information.

Tom,
I think I'll stick with what a certified bike mechanic has to say and certainly not your opinion.

Friction modifiers in motorbike wet clutch's is a definite NO.

Most of the new low friction synthetic oils will cause problems.

Normally, not being a techy type, I would stay way out of this, but I did have to chuckle at using a Wikipedia reference as back up. Teachers forbid students from using Wikipedia for any research at all because there is so much garbage on it. Wiki is populated by any knothead who happpens to decide he wants to write about something, no references, no peer review, no nothing. Stay away from it.

75 Tique wrote: Normally, not being a techy type, I would stay way out of this, but I did have to chuckle at using a Wikipedia reference as back up. Teachers forbid students from using Wikipedia for any research at all because there is so much garbage on it. Wiki is populated by any knothead who happpens to decide he wants to write about something, no references, no peer review, no nothing. Stay away from it.

Interesting topic as I've wondered about this as well. Actually, that article seems well written with a bunch of sources and references as are MOST wikipedia articles. Don't get me wrong, wikipedia is not perfect but it's by far the best information source on the net. Just check the sources. There was actually a study a few years back that found Wikipedia is about as accurate as Britannica.

fwiw, I never mentioned anything about the friction modifiers in wet motorcycle clutches. We were talking about synthetics in bike wet clutches. I simply mentioned that synthetic and wet clutches in bikes are quite common with no issues- provided you use the proper synthetic.

Obviously running an oil with the "energy conserving" label on it is a big no no. A bike specific wet clutch synthetic is the way to go.