A Cars forum. AutoBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AutoBanter forum » Auto makers » Chrysler
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

A604-41TE Amsoil synthetic versus ATF+3 Mpoar 7176 ??



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #71  
Old June 9th 05, 07:32 PM
David
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

You still here? Slow day selling Scamsoil! And what temp does your tranny
run? at ambient temp of 100 degrees, around town?
> wrote in message
oups.com...
> Hi Matt,
>
> I respect your caution about upgrading to a full synthetic ATF. God
> knows these trannys are very sensitive to fluid requirements, and
> everyone who has ever put Dexron Mercon in by mistake, or believed some
> idiot at a trans repair shop who said it was OK to put it in, "as long
> as a friction modifier like Lube-guard is added", immediately had TC
> shudder and slippage. Such would require an immediate full system
> flush, a new MOPAR filter (not a close but no cigar knockoff), and a
> complete refill with MOPAR ATF +3. All true.
>
> I know how you feel. The data. The data. Think about this though. How
> long were DCX's own TSB's on fluid (Trans OIL) for the A604 confusing
> and open to interpretation? I think their data is too often just profit
> driven bunkum.
>
> All I can tell you is this. I have had great results with full
> synthetic ATF in my A604. I knew right off I had done the right thing
> because it performs far better.
>
> It shifts way faster and firmer on WOT, like a properly installed shift
> kit would afford, and it shifts down perfectly too. Yet when driving
> "normal" with smooth light even acceleration, you can NOT feel it shift
> at all. I mean way waaaaay smoother than it did even when brand new. If
> the friction characteristics were not up to snuff, it wouldn't be able
> to do that, and you know it.
>
> It runs much cooler now too, both in stop and go traffic in hot
> weather, and when taking a beating on the highway. If the friction
> characteristics were off, it would heat up, even if I really was too
> stupid to sense if was slipping, or the shift timing was off.
>
> You know how these 4 speeds were designed to hang onto one gear while
> grabbing another, so they would have that "grocery getter smoothness",
> and how this means friction heat buildup. As you may know already. This
> is why a good shift kit can extend the life of these babies, IF DONE
> RIGHT. Yeah yeah yeah. I know. Most people can't install a shift kit
> right. Or they chose the wrong one and just wind up creating problems.
> But you know the idea behind getting one. Well now my A604 performs
> just as I told you above.
>
> I believe that this full synthetic enables the A604 to actually perform
> as it was intended to by the designers. In other words. I think they
> are a great design, and really the old ATF +3 was just not up to the
> job. Not really. You had to baby them to get a decent life span out of
> them, by avoiding WOT and driving conservatively.
>
> But for far too many people, over many years, [there is plenty of data
> on that!] driving conservatively and using only Mopar 7176 +3, Mopar
> filters and following their fluid & filter change schedule, did not get
> them the lifespan of the 3 speeds, and other car manufacturers
> transmissions.
>
> Thousands of complaints over the years by A604 owners has given it bad
> reputation. But it wasn't the design. It was the ATF. The fact that DCX
> is pushing their new semi synthetic +4, only proves they knew it too.
> The A604/41Te4 design is a marvel! It was ahead of it's time, IF you
> used Mopar 7176 +3, but not if you were using one of the full
> synthetics.
>
> Honestly Matt. Full synthetics like Redline C+ and Amsoil ATF have been
> around a lot longer than Mopar +4. Those who for years have been using
> these full synthetics in their's, with great results, have all along
> been denounced as liars trying to peddle snake oil though. It is a
> MYTH that only Mopar ATF should be used.
>
> True, Mopar +4 is better than their old +3, but it is only a semi
> synthetic. It is a far less robust than a 100% full synthetic. I use it
> in my A604, for the same reasons that I use Mobil 1 in my engine.
>
> I swear to you I don't sell the stuff Matt. In fact if I were you, I
> would go with the Redline C+, because they have a better reputation,
> and lots of race teams wont use anything else. I only have experience
> with Amsoil ATF though, and I do know from experience that it is great
> stuff. So personally I would buy Amsoil again.
>
> I trust Valvoline pretty much. I mean they do have a reputation to
> uphold, and there are liability issues, but they say they have a +4. I
> don't know if it is just a copy of Mopar's semi synthetic +4 or not
> though. I suggest you try one of the full synthetics.
>
> Or you can believe the myths. Like if you disconnect the air box on a
> Chrysler/MMC 3.0 and use a CAI instead, then your computer will burn
> up! People believed that myth for years. But experience, seat of the
> pants data not driven by profit, my own included, proves that to be
> untrue. It's the same with this ATF issue Matt.
>
>
>
> Steviepoo,
>
> Some of us still call the 41Te4 (not "41Te" as you said by the way)
> A604's out of habit, because we have been Chrysler owners a little
> longer.
>
> One more thing Stevie. You really can be a nasty bitchy little whiner.
> So I don't know if you are really a *man* or not. Balls *or* no balls.
>



Ads
  #72  
Old June 9th 05, 10:58 PM
Bill Putney
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Can anyone read this last post and tell me that could possibly be a girl
as claimed? No female expresses herself like this. Try reading the
post as a woman speaking to you - it's impossible - the voice keeps
switching to a man. The poster is a guy an "im-poster".

Bill Putney
(To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
adddress with the letter 'x')


wrote:
> Hi Matt,
>
> I respect your caution about upgrading to a full synthetic ATF. God
> knows these trannys are very sensitive to fluid requirements, and
> everyone who has ever put Dexron Mercon in by mistake, or believed some
> idiot at a trans repair shop who said it was OK to put it in, "as long
> as a friction modifier like Lube-guard is added", immediately had TC
> shudder and slippage. Such would require an immediate full system
> flush, a new MOPAR filter (not a close but no cigar knockoff), and a
> complete refill with MOPAR ATF +3. All true.
>
> I know how you feel. The data. The data. Think about this though. How
> long were DCX's own TSB's on fluid (Trans OIL) for the A604 confusing
> and open to interpretation? I think their data is too often just profit
> driven bunkum.
>
> All I can tell you is this. I have had great results with full
> synthetic ATF in my A604. I knew right off I had done the right thing
> because it performs far better.
>
> It shifts way faster and firmer on WOT, like a properly installed shift
> kit would afford, and it shifts down perfectly too. Yet when driving
> "normal" with smooth light even acceleration, you can NOT feel it shift
> at all. I mean way waaaaay smoother than it did even when brand new. If
> the friction characteristics were not up to snuff, it wouldn't be able
> to do that, and you know it.
>
> It runs much cooler now too, both in stop and go traffic in hot
> weather, and when taking a beating on the highway. If the friction
> characteristics were off, it would heat up, even if I really was too
> stupid to sense if was slipping, or the shift timing was off.
>
> You know how these 4 speeds were designed to hang onto one gear while
> grabbing another, so they would have that "grocery getter smoothness",
> and how this means friction heat buildup. As you may know already. This
> is why a good shift kit can extend the life of these babies, IF DONE
> RIGHT. Yeah yeah yeah. I know. Most people can't install a shift kit
> right. Or they chose the wrong one and just wind up creating problems.
> But you know the idea behind getting one. Well now my A604 performs
> just as I told you above.
>
> I believe that this full synthetic enables the A604 to actually perform
> as it was intended to by the designers. In other words. I think they
> are a great design, and really the old ATF +3 was just not up to the
> job. Not really. You had to baby them to get a decent life span out of
> them, by avoiding WOT and driving conservatively.
>
> But for far too many people, over many years, [there is plenty of data
> on that!] driving conservatively and using only Mopar 7176 +3, Mopar
> filters and following their fluid & filter change schedule, did not get
> them the lifespan of the 3 speeds, and other car manufacturers
> transmissions.
>
> Thousands of complaints over the years by A604 owners has given it bad
> reputation. But it wasn't the design. It was the ATF. The fact that DCX
> is pushing their new semi synthetic +4, only proves they knew it too.
> The A604/41Te4 design is a marvel! It was ahead of it's time, IF you
> used Mopar 7176 +3, but not if you were using one of the full
> synthetics.
>
> Honestly Matt. Full synthetics like Redline C+ and Amsoil ATF have been
> around a lot longer than Mopar +4. Those who for years have been using
> these full synthetics in their's, with great results, have all along
> been denounced as liars trying to peddle snake oil though. It is a
> MYTH that only Mopar ATF should be used.
>
> True, Mopar +4 is better than their old +3, but it is only a semi
> synthetic. It is a far less robust than a 100% full synthetic. I use it
> in my A604, for the same reasons that I use Mobil 1 in my engine.
>
> I swear to you I don't sell the stuff Matt. In fact if I were you, I
> would go with the Redline C+, because they have a better reputation,
> and lots of race teams wont use anything else. I only have experience
> with Amsoil ATF though, and I do know from experience that it is great
> stuff. So personally I would buy Amsoil again.
>
> I trust Valvoline pretty much. I mean they do have a reputation to
> uphold, and there are liability issues, but they say they have a +4. I
> don't know if it is just a copy of Mopar's semi synthetic +4 or not
> though. I suggest you try one of the full synthetics.
>
> Or you can believe the myths. Like if you disconnect the air box on a
> Chrysler/MMC 3.0 and use a CAI instead, then your computer will burn
> up! People believed that myth for years. But experience, seat of the
> pants data not driven by profit, my own included, proves that to be
> untrue. It's the same with this ATF issue Matt.

  #73  
Old June 10th 05, 02:30 AM
Matt Whiting
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

wrote:

> Hi Matt,
>
> I know how you feel. The data. The data. Think about this though. How
> long were DCX's own TSB's on fluid (Trans OIL) for the A604 confusing
> and open to interpretation? I think their data is too often just profit
> driven bunkum.


Thinking it is doesn't make it so.


> All I can tell you is this. I have had great results with full
> synthetic ATF in my A604. I knew right off I had done the right thing
> because it performs far better.


It performs differently, but that may not be better.


> It shifts way faster and firmer on WOT, like a properly installed shift
> kit would afford, and it shifts down perfectly too. Yet when driving
> "normal" with smooth light even acceleration, you can NOT feel it shift
> at all. I mean way waaaaay smoother than it did even when brand new. If
> the friction characteristics were not up to snuff, it wouldn't be able
> to do that, and you know it.


That isn't consistent. The same clutches are shifting at low throttle
and WOT. If the fluid is slipperier allowing smoother (i.e., more
clutch slippage during shifting) shifts are low throttle, it will also
allow smoother shifts at WOT. Think about it...


> It runs much cooler now too, both in stop and go traffic in hot
> weather, and when taking a beating on the highway. If the friction
> characteristics were off, it would heat up, even if I really was too
> stupid to sense if was slipping, or the shift timing was off.


How do you know? I haven't seen a production car with a transmission
temp gauge in eons.


> You know how these 4 speeds were designed to hang onto one gear while
> grabbing another, so they would have that "grocery getter smoothness",
> and how this means friction heat buildup. As you may know already. This
> is why a good shift kit can extend the life of these babies, IF DONE
> RIGHT. Yeah yeah yeah. I know. Most people can't install a shift kit
> right. Or they chose the wrong one and just wind up creating problems.
> But you know the idea behind getting one. Well now my A604 performs
> just as I told you above.


A shift kit and a fluid change aren't comparable at all. A fluid change
won't give the benefits of a shift kit.


> I believe that this full synthetic enables the A604 to actually perform
> as it was intended to by the designers. In other words. I think they
> are a great design, and really the old ATF +3 was just not up to the
> job. Not really. You had to baby them to get a decent life span out of
> them, by avoiding WOT and driving conservatively.


You believe a lot, but know very little. How do you know what the
designers intended? Do you know any of them?


> But for far too many people, over many years, [there is plenty of data
> on that!] driving conservatively and using only Mopar 7176 +3, Mopar
> filters and following their fluid & filter change schedule, did not get
> them the lifespan of the 3 speeds, and other car manufacturers
> transmissions.


Three speeds, yes, other car manufacturers modern four+ speeds, no.
Ford has had trouble with the Windstar, Honda with the Odyssey, even
Toyota vans have had an inordinate amount of trouble with their new
automatics early on. Most have been sorted out reasonably well by now,
but they are simply packing more stuff into a fixed space then with the
old three speeds and reliability has suffered, no argument there.
However, most of the newer trannies are doing rather well. My 1996
Grand Voyager just turned 167,000 miles and is on the original 3.3L
engine and four speed transmission.


> Thousands of complaints over the years by A604 owners has given it bad
> reputation. But it wasn't the design. It was the ATF. The fact that DCX
> is pushing their new semi synthetic +4, only proves they knew it too.
> The A604/41Te4 design is a marvel! It was ahead of it's time, IF you
> used Mopar 7176 +3, but not if you were using one of the full
> synthetics.


Actually, it had some design/component materials problems that have
since largely been addressed.


> Honestly Matt. Full synthetics like Redline C+ and Amsoil ATF have been
> around a lot longer than Mopar +4. Those who for years have been using
> these full synthetics in their's, with great results, have all along
> been denounced as liars trying to peddle snake oil though. It is a
> MYTH that only Mopar ATF should be used.


True. Do you not think that Chrysler engineers weren't aware of the
available fluids when they designed the transmission? If they could
have accomplished their design goals using a full synthetic do you not
think they would have done so?


> True, Mopar +4 is better than their old +3, but it is only a semi
> synthetic. It is a far less robust than a 100% full synthetic. I use it
> in my A604, for the same reasons that I use Mobil 1 in my engine.


Not necessarily better, just appropriate for the transmission design in
use today. I use Mobil 1 also, but engines and transmissions are
totally different beasts. I can't think right off-hand of any part in
an engine that doesn't benefit from less friction (once break-in has
been accomplished). However, wet clutches are designed for a PARTICULAR
amount of friction. Either more or LESS is bad. This isn't the case in
an engine.


> I swear to you I don't sell the stuff Matt. In fact if I were you, I
> would go with the Redline C+, because they have a better reputation,
> and lots of race teams wont use anything else. I only have experience
> with Amsoil ATF though, and I do know from experience that it is great
> stuff. So personally I would buy Amsoil again.


No, you think it is great stuff, you don't know that it is.


> I trust Valvoline pretty much. I mean they do have a reputation to
> uphold, and there are liability issues, but they say they have a +4. I
> don't know if it is just a copy of Mopar's semi synthetic +4 or not
> though. I suggest you try one of the full synthetics.


Why? I have 167,000 miles on +3 and my transmission still shifts just
tine. I'd be nuts to change.


> Or you can believe the myths. Like if you disconnect the air box on a
> Chrysler/MMC 3.0 and use a CAI instead, then your computer will burn
> up! People believed that myth for years. But experience, seat of the
> pants data not driven by profit, my own included, proves that to be
> untrue. It's the same with this ATF issue Matt.


Not even close to being the same. You just believe a different myth.


Matt
  #74  
Old June 10th 05, 07:14 AM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default



Bill Putney wrote:
> Can anyone read this last post and tell me that could possibly be a girl
> as claimed? No female expresses herself like this. Try reading the
> post as a woman speaking to you - it's impossible - the voice keeps
> switching to a man. The poster is a guy an "im-poster".
>
>



Get help.

It is obvious you need to find a good shrink
and sort your sexuality issues out.

Talk about insecurity. You take the cake. I
am sure this isn't the first time someone has
suggested this to you either.

  #75  
Old June 10th 05, 08:07 AM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


Matt,

I guess I was pretty silly to think you actually
wanted to discus this.

Obviously I was wrong though.

Have a good life.

  #78  
Old June 10th 05, 04:03 PM
David
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Somehow, I don't think you are gone!
> wrote in message
ups.com...
>
> Matt,
>
> I guess I was pretty silly to think you actually
> wanted to discus this.
>
> Obviously I was wrong though.
>
> Have a good life.
>



  #79  
Old June 10th 05, 07:38 PM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


Bill Putney wrote:
> Bill Putney wrote:
> > wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Get help.
> >>
> >> It is obvious you need to find a good shrink
> >> and sort your sexuality issues out.
> >>
> >> Talk about insecurity. You take the cake. I
> >> am sure this isn't the first time someone has
> >> suggested this to you either.
> >>

> >
> > Oh no! I'm so mortally wounded. I don't think I can ever get over it.
> >
> > Bill Putney
> > (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
> > adddress with the letter 'x')

>
> Besides, I'm not the one coming onto the internet as a cross-dresser.
>
> (I know - don't feed the trolls!)
>
> Bill Putney
> (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
> adddress with the letter 'x')
>
>
>


Are you one of those idiots from the FWD MOPAR Yahoo
group started by Jeremy Leis? He is the asshole who
started that rumor about me.

Now tell me that somebone who makes such an assumption
about me, because I am tall for a woman, doesn't have
some serious sexual issues.

For the record ASSHOLE. I am not a man. I have never
had a dick. I am not a sex change, and I am certainly
not a "cross dresser". Which is a word I had to look
up in the dictionary. By the way. Now how come you
know that obscure reference? It sure seems to be
insider terminology from what I can gather.

Either you 'are' Jeremy Leis or you are one of his
immensely homophobic buddies. I think you are Jeremy
Leis, and here is the proof that you DO have some
serious sexual issues.


http://www.dekalbsheriff.com/sexoffenders.asp


Just scroll down the SEX OFFENDERS LIST until you
find the name Jeremy W. Leis. Hit on the link, and
you will his picture, along with his address. Oh,
by the way Leis. Your address had better be current
and correct. Or you have violated your PAROLE!

Intolerant homophobic gossips always have one thing
in common. They are OVER compensating, and they are
hiding something.

**** YOU. YOU CHILD MOLESTER!

  #80  
Old June 10th 05, 07:43 PM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

What the hell is going on?

Right from the start I have been amazed at the
level of animosity expressed here, toward anyone
who points out, there are alternatives to Mopar
ATF.

I mean it is really over the top! I have been
accused of everything, from selling a particular
brand of full synthetic ATF, to being a cross
dresser!

What the hell is going on here? I just came here
to give the Mopar guys a heads up.

I kept expecting someone who isn't crazy, to
speak up and actually say something that made
some sort of sense, but no way. In fact it just
gets worse.

I just did a web search and looked around a bit.

I see someone even tried to start a Usenet group
about Amsoil. It has been completely silenced by
spam though. I also noticed that anyone who
speaks positively about non Mopar ATF, in other
forums, is treated the same damned way.

The very few posts which are not ludicrous rants,
filled with ridiculous personal invective, are
nothing more than doublespeak usually reserved
for political propaganda.

The tactics of propaganda remain consistent.
Anyone who says there are alternatives to Mopar
ATF, is smeared by any means necessary. I am
surprised I haven't been accused of being anti
American also.

The man who developed Amsoil, pioneered both the
development and production of, the very first
synthetic automotive lubricants. That was long
before Mobil 1, or any of the other synthetic
oils available today. I really can't imagine why
anyone would call snake oil. It doesn't make any
sense at all.

Consider this. The entire concept of synthetic
oil was denounced as snake oil, until BIG OIL
got on board with it. So is there a connection
between BIG OIL, and all the irrational hate
and misinformation involved in this war against
Amsoil? I don't know. It is enough to really
make me wonder though.

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
warman i am surprised you mix oil [email protected] Ford Mustang 5 May 8th 05 04:04 AM
Just used Fweembucks to get some Amsoil synthetic for the gearbox Anthony VW air cooled 1 December 7th 04 08:51 PM
Just used Fweembucks to get some Amsoil synthetic for the gearbox Anthony VW air cooled 0 December 7th 04 07:15 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:09 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AutoBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.