Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2010 11:27:22 -0500
Reply-To: Dennis Haynes <d23haynes57@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From: Dennis Haynes <d23haynes57@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject: Re: Gear Oil: Opinion/subjective experience..long.
In-Reply-To: <03a701cb95be$bce0b900$36a22b00$@com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
The reality here is that these transmissions are at their thermal and stress
limits for the stock application. I have found that any change including
tires has severe consequences for these boxes. The problem is worsened by
the fact that the housings also become distorted under load and age and just
like the engine cases are often not good candidates for rebuilds.
Especially for the Syncro boxes.
For oil you really need GL-5 or GL-6 lubricants to protect the gears under
stress. For those with bi engines consider using a 85w-140 viscosity. Shifts
will be stiff in winter but after a few miles will be fine. The boxes will
also be quieter. There will also be slight fuel economy penalty but
longevity is the goal here.
Dennis
-----Original Message-----
From: Vanagon Mailing List [mailto:vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com] On Behalf Of
Daryl Christensen
Sent: Monday, December 06, 2010 10:28 PM
To: vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM
Subject: Re: Gear Oil: Opinion/subjective experience..long.
I have been trying to determine the real world reason for some transmission
failures lately that seem to be oil related.
I am starting to see some serious issues with transmissions rebuilt a year
or two ago that are worn way beyond normal. Granted none of these are WBX'er
motors, but Subie 2.5 & 3.0's, 3.3's and TDi's. In taking apart units for
gearing upgrades or odd failures, I have seen abnormal wear on ring &
pinions, pinion bearings and the mainshaft's 2nd gear teeth primarily.
Some were using Redline MT90 and some Lubrimoly among others. As the drivers
of these rigs are generally not hot rodder's and drive conservatively, even
off road (that's you Bob S.), I suspect it is an oiling issue. Two of these
even had oiling plates installed as well.
In rebuilds of Porsche 944 and 911 tranny's that are raced weekly and using
Swepco 201, I see broken R&P's from shock loading, but NO tooth wear even
after getting beaten hard and put away wet.
Now what says me to myself...Are only the non stock motors in heavy Syncro
Westies at risk?? Highway normal usage should not cause such wear with good
synthetic oils.
Swepco seems to be a better oil for most I am thinking. It is a mineral oil
and can cause some stiff shifting when cold and is $50/gallon.
Redline MT90 seems to be the best for notchy gear changes and good for a
stockish pass van, esp in colder climates.
Always thought Lubrimoly was a superb quality oil, but seen some with issues
that can't be explained away lately other than oiling problems.
Amsoil is said to be a good oil, as is Royal Purple, but I have no long term
evidence any of the above mentioned are better than another with the
exception of the Swepco. Cost of some oils such as the Lubrication Engineers
stuff at over $25/qt is generally prohibitive for most non racer "normal"
people and also not easily available.
What's the general consensus here group??? Open to suggestions.
Anyone do any research on oils or have any personal real world hard evidence
reasons to use one over the other?? Tell us your stories and maybe I wont
have to give so much bad news down the road...
Daryl of AA Transaxle
425-788-4070
"On the cutting edge of Old technology"
86 Syncro Westy with a Zetec in the trunk AND with a Turbo being installed
next week.
Subject: Gear Oil: Opinion/subjective experience
Manual transmission, 5sp hooked up to a 2.0liter ABA Jetta motor putting
out (guessing) maybe 140hp. In a low top van with a partial Westie interior
and 14" wheels.
I recently reworked the driveline of this van, building a more powerful
motor with a custom exhaust, replacing the clutch, doing the CV joints,
trans mount, etc. When I re-installed the tranny the second time around
(don't ask)...I went with Redline MT 40. I have used this before, but I had
been running Swepco 201 right up to the engine swap. I put about 1000
miles on the van(and the MT-90) so far, and after my exhaust system was
finished and the mountings finalized to make everything real nice and
smooth, I could really notice the difference in the gear noise. Using the
Redline, the shifting was a little less smooth, but the lever moves easier.
The Redline feels like what it is....much thinner than the Swepco, not so
"slick" feeling.
So I drained it again (into a nice clean pan, then put it back in the
bottles for later use somewhere) the Redline MT-90 and re-filled with Swepco
201. What with my quieter exhaust system (significantly quieter and
smoother than the one I had before the new motor) I can certainly feel and
hear the difference...It just feels 'happier' back there, less
'stressed'...less "busy". And while it has only been down to about 20f so
far, I have not felt the expected 'stiff-stick' with a cold gearbox. I also
don't feel the slight hesitation that I did as the syncros worked, like was
the case with that MT-90 .
I will be interested to see how my gas mileage is affected, there should
be some difference...I have been getting 23.5 with the MT-90 and the new
2.0/1.8l hybrid motor. I expect more from the Swepco, especially on
sustained high speed driving. It seems much 'slicker'...
We'll probably have some comments from the Peanut Gallery now,
saying...."Oh, you can't use Swepco..it will ______________ your
gearbox"...but I ran it all last year and the inside of the gearbox looked
immaculate when I had it apart recently...with no deterioration on the
bronze or any ill effects.
Just saying, as my subjective opinion....All those Porsche guys are onto
sumpthin, running that high dollar dino oil in the gearbox..
Don Hanson
