Don't question science even if some science is base upon closed minded ignorance and google searches but whatever the modality one should never question science.

 

Most of the better manufacturers test their oils for corrosion and shear resistance properties and publish the results

Go to "Oil Comparisons" and download the "Gear Oil" test....very interesting
http://www.amsoil.com/literature.aspx

P. 17 of this test lists the Copper Corrosion results....guess which one did the worst? Royal Purple! Most of the others were fine (slight tarnish)

 

"Swepco" ain't in the same league with Motul....sorry

 

I'm not closed minded, and I don't have a pet oil. I like Amsoil, but I've used many other brands such as Redline, Motul, Mobil, Valvoline, Shell, etc.

Present that facts, not marketing rhetoric, and I'll listen.

 

I'm getting ready to change the fluid in my FD trans. The transmission was professionally rebuilt about 3900 miles ago and shifts great. In the past I've always used Redline MT90 in the gearboxes, lost a few of them tho, but never really attributed it to the oil...

Do any of you have experience with Redline Shockproof? I've heard from some at track days it's a great trans oil. http://www.redlineoil.com/Products.aspx?pcid=8

Otherwise I am considering Mobil 1 EP, Amsoil GL-4, or Synromesh.

 

The companies do that to sell their oil and for no other reason so fools/scientist will feel comfortable giving them their hard earned money because after all they did google and dertermine which oil was best.

You do understand the test were done by the company itself. You have seen the BS on the front page of their website. No offense Rice but at this point I'm a little concerned about the inner chi in you Did the guys on the s2000 forum put some royal purple in the transmissions and give that a run? Hopefully they did and the results were as bad as amsoils test results but the inner child/0OPS I mean chi in me says NO.

 

Comments re RL Shockproof

http://www.teamrip.com/manual_transm...tion_info.html

 

Yes, and this is the most common argument leveled against Amsoil, but in all reality, who else is going to do it? The tests are expensive and time consuming. Sport Rider magazine is one of the few independent studies I've seen; they performed an exhaustive review motorcycle oils, including all the standard wear tests, and found Amsoil's published results 100% accurate. Think about it, if Amsoil is intentionally falsifying data, they have alot to lose - essentially their entire reputation

 

I'd just like to see amsoil play by the same rules or atleast up the integrity level. However apparently it's been working just fine for them and who am I to judge I'll just remain ignorant to their business practices and buy mobil one or something else that's written on the door of a race car and I'm comfortable knowing that according to amsoil that car is actually running on their oil.

 

You can stop wasting your time I can find an equal amount of info that say GL-5 is fine just like the mazda owners manual says.

 

That wasn't directed to you or in regard to the GL-5 issue, it was in regard to Shockproof (turbo8 comment).

Yellow metal corrosion analysis is summarized on the Amsoil Gear Lube test. In general, most of the gear oils tested well, resulting in very mild corrosion (category "1B"), but again, why does the average street user need the extreme pressure additives of a GL-5? I'll get a UOA of my Amsoil MTG GL-4 gear oil next time with 15k and post the results.

 

?

Amsoil are the only guys regularly performing these tests and publishing the results. Kudos to them. The other guys need to get their finger out and put their scientist hats on.

 

According to... you?

 

Isn't this what degeesaman mentioned regarding your insistance that we non-technical FD owner types should have our own oils tested? And why a single periodic test doesn't really tell you anything? And the needed series of tests that would produce significant information are cost prohibitive?

 

What's difficult to figure out is how the test were performed etc.....and until you understand exactly all the ins and outs of the science behind the test the results can't be taken seriously and neither can amsoil by mobil 1 or any other major oil company. All they do is spin any and everything in their favor and people eat it up, kudos to amsoil. The more I'm exposed to their rhetoric the more I start to think GEE maybe amsoil does make the best oil of all time, you see it works

Seriously think about the quality of science ( i'm loving that word these days ) that mobil 1 has at it's disposal and the size and depth of what each of these two individual companies are involved in and it's pretty hard for a thinking man to believe that amsoil make such a far superior oil. I don't remember their score on that test but it's really quite laughable compared to last place but absolutely rediculous compared to 2nd place. I mean they tested twice as good as the 2nd place oil WOW Amsoil ROCKS, it's just not easy being that good in a field of crap oil.

 

That's simple UOA analytical testing, I'm talking about ASTM bench testing - apples and oranges

 

They're standardized ASTM tests, so there's no great mystery.

I don't think it is far superior, at least not now. However, as an example, standard Mobil 1 motor oil had a bad rap on BITOG for years because of it's consistent lackluster track record in terms of wear wear metals in UOAs, as well as poor performance in standardized tests. As a direct result of getting spanked by the competition (although they will never admit this!) they began to improve their product line (e.g. "Extended Performance"). As always, competition improves the breed, and I credit Amsoil for bringing science into this debate instead of speculation, empty sales pitches with technical sounding jargon, and random case studies.

Read it again, results were pretty close for several metrics, the scoring system skews the results in their favor.

 

Mazda, like nearly all OEMs, is not in the business of making cars last forever and perform the best under extreme conditions. They are in the business of building cars for the new-car-buying market and keeping their dealerships happy.

As such, it is wise business practice to work on the KISS principle with their customers and dealer techs. I work for a gearbox OEM and yes we often simplify our recommendations to customers simply because it's not worth it to us to spend our time to get detailed.

Dave

 

I might add that increased scruntiny on the science of motor oil performance has resulted in the big manufacturers releasing products like Penzoil Platinum/Ultra, Valvoline Synpower, and Castrol Edge - outstanding products by all accounts. We, the consumers, directly benefit from this high level competition, because manufacturers know they can't put out a overpriced crap product anymore and not get called out!

 

I would not use Shockproof, it contains solids that break down relatively quickly and is not recommended for synchromesh gearboxes. Shockproof is ideal for axles and dogboxes. Check the label on the Mobil 1 EP; last I checked Mobil 1 automotive gear oils are also not recommended for synchromesh tranmissions.

I stay with the Amsoil GL-4 and Redline MT-90.

Dave

 

I'm interested in the UOA results.

I've torn down a few FD transmissions running various oils and all of them had visible (not ready for failure, but significant) wear on a few bearings. Whether more EP additives or less is needed is hard to say but clearly metal-metal wear is an issue. Given that I've seen spalling wear and not micropitting I'm leaning towards more EP performance. Higher EP performance also reduces friction under shock loading which increases the torque threshold where failure occurs. There is a tradeoff here between synchro performance/synchro wear vs. gear / bearing protection and friction and torque capacity.

I'm not convinced the ASTM yellow metal test is the best assessment for the synchros. D 130 basically does a visual inspection for discoloration of the copper alloy. It begs the question: given that there are all different types of additive chemicals in these oils, is color the true indication of the level of corrosive attack, or just the color of the corrosive layer? If Amsoil or another manufacturer is trying to claim their oil is yellow-metal friendly, that means their goal is to reduce the tarnishing of copper rather than the rate of loss of metal.

What I can say with some emphasis about all of this is I believe that our transmissions should not use the most extreme EP additives for lubrication, but the rear axles should. Our differential gearing can fail in shock loading and heavy use and more EP performance and reduced OCIs are beneficial here. As well, the diff is the highest friction component in the drivetrain and any reduction in friction is very valuable. It costs less than $30 to change the rear axle oil so I do it every 10k miles.

Dave

 

my stock 94 has 92K on the clock and its about done. some may make it to 100+ but thats rare... the motor in the FD is a wear item unfortunately. Also its not really fair to compare the 1.3l stated displacement to a 4 cyl etc cause you get twice as many combustion cycles per rev so its really more like a 6 cyl. It's funny how we all have a tendency to downplay the negatives of the rotary and mis-use information like the stated displacement etc. If we compare it to a 6cyl, the rotary really looks pretty bad as far as longevity, durability, heat, fuel consumption, and power output. Dont get me wrong its a great motor but lets not ignore the huge flaws with it, and pretend like babying a stock car will make the situation much better (it just doesnt make it worse).


As far as the trannies go... i don't know if its been mentioned yet but we gotta realize that most of the replacement trannies available (even from japan) have a good amount of wear already. I'm honestly not sure that if you took two brand spankin new trannies, filled one with dyno and one with redline, and changed the fluid at decent intervals (not 30K) that you would have one fail that much sooner than the other. Who knows... maybe there is some magical formula that will make em last forever, but do you guys honestly believe youre gonna see another 60k from the tranny thats running Oil A vs. Oil B? Could we just be splitting hairs over trying to squeeze that last bit of life out of our collective pool of 15 year old transmissions, when we really should be talking about rebuilding with NEW parts? food for thought

-Heath

 

You might find a copy of this test here:

http://www.davidgeesaman.com/rx7/ASTM%20D130%2004.pdf

The test is originated in checking crude oil for corrosiveness due to sulfur in the crude. It works because sulfur makes the copper turn black. Sulfur is one of many element used in EP additive packages.

In our application, (wear of brass synchros) I believe it's useful to eliminate lubricants that make the copper turn black. However, it would take a chemisty background to know if all of the other additives that increase synchro wear also turn copper black. I have yet to see a discussion of this point and therefore I assume the answer is no, we don't know whether color can tell us if all additives can be assessed for wear using this test.

I don't believe Amsoil is better or worse than the other guys. In UOAs they perform generally well. What's clear to me is Amsoil markets strongly through the results of scientific tests, and from personal experience many companies taking this approach will design for the best test results rather than the best real world results. The simplified world of tests does not always translate to real-world results. I don't know who to believe out there.

The cost of rebuilding an FD trans to like new condition is really crazy high. Synchros, shift sleeves, gears, countershaft, mainshaft, input shaft, all bearings, you're easily over $4k in parts even with the Mazdacomp pricing. Everything wears in this transmission except the housings.

David

 

Not working <- Fixed

This is an excellent point (one I've made on s2ki to some of the Amsoil pundits); however, I believe the test results have some correlation to real world, and, as you said, Amsoil consistently performs well in UOAs. Redline and M1 have been more erratic, at least in previous years (motor oil).

 

Thank you amsoil for inventing a great oil and keeping the other makers competitive.

Alright enough about mobil 1 and amsoil.

Dave that's some interesting info and I didn't know you worked for a trans company which is pretty cool.

Which gear oil do you use and why? I undertand you like 4 in the box and 5 in the diff which makes perfect sense to me and that's what I've always done unless someone else is putting their oil in. As mentioned the porsche shop I think just put in some GL-5 so would you advise draining it and putting in something else or just shift slow. I'm serious about my shift style I'm mad slow