Rusty Bowtie
General Category => General Discussion - Intros => Topic started by: FATnLOW on July 23, 2017, 08:42:14 PM
-
Got trans back from the shop.I failed to ask their recommendation on trans fluid for the 700r ..for those running the 700r what are you using... Googled this and getting conflicting comments. Thanks
-
I have a 700R4 and use this.
-
Whatever brand you use I'm sure you know to drop some in the torque converter before installing it. I normally buy the least expensive brand name ::)
-
It does get confusing and EDNY has a point. There are a lot more brands than manufactures and the top brand names cost more. Ask the parts guy who makes the store brand. Tom's choice of Castrol is among the brands that can be relied on.
-
Why not just use what the people who designed and built the transmission recommend?? That's the only fluid that GM dealers are
allowed to use when doing any kind of a warranty repair..That should tell you something.
(https://static.summitracing.com/global/images/prod/xlarge/ado-10-9395_xl.jpg?rep=False)
Backward compatible with previous DEXRON automatic transmission fluids and can be used as a much-improved replacement for older vehicles/transmissions originally using previous DEXRON fluids.- Improved performance over previous DEXRON fluids in friction durability, viscosity stability, aeration and foam control and oxidation resistance.
- Potential to enable improved fuel economy and longer transmission life.
- Provides for extended drain intervals.
- 32 oz. Part No. 10-9029 88861037
-
Moose ...not to be a smart a** but didn't GM also recommend Dex-Cool before the lawsuits?
-
Well Ed...GM still recommends Dex-Cool. It was my experiance that most of the problems we encountered with cooling system component failures back then were caused by owners not following the recommended maintenance routines. Most problems were caused by mixing Dex-Cool with standard coolant products causing all sorts of issues. The lawsuit was settled a long time ago with GM making the following statement shown below. If you do a search on the best antifreeze. You'll find that Dex-Cool is consistently on the top of the list. And yes, I still recommend Dexron vi for the 700R4 for a number if different reasons ..Just ask Jef Lynch
GM denies any wrongdoing but has agreed to a class action settlement of the lawsuits. The company argued that Dex-Cool protected engines for a longer period than traditional coolants, caused less wear on certain engine parts than traditional coolants, and provided environmental benefits. GM further argued that alleged problems with the vehicles' engines or cooling systems were caused by owners not following the maintenance instructions for their vehicles or other factors
(https://i5.walmartimages.com/asr/f3b1c740-3588-4f9d-8370-acdd54d72490_1.71c49f64f4fed0a299ff6746c16b4b0d.jpeg)
-
Moose, I remember all that. Wasn't it really an incompatability issue with the plastic/gasket material or by adding other coolant to Dex Cool? My old buddy John (professional machinist and mechanic- late 50s thru his death) ran into that problem with a low mile (30k 3.4 v6) second hand Buick he bought from the Buick dealership.
He always drained and refilled all fuilds/filters upon purchase. Always went by Gm recomendations for such. At 60k(1999) he was losing coolant, tested and found internal. Replaced gaskets(Gm), still losing water. Puzzled...he started investigating. Buick garage mechanic/shop manager said impropper instalation of new gaskets. He called BS! Argued a while with no satisfaction.
Went to his former job at Chevy garage and found a mechanic he knew to discuss. He told John he could not discus, but there was a problem and Gm knew about it. He stated it usually occured just after the waranty was up. He had seen the internal bulletin, but it was on the hush. He said to inspect plastic intake closely at water passages. Yep, it had wore thru coolant passage close to gasket area. He gave him a new part number for gasket.
He went back to Buick, said he knew there was a problem, but they still denied. He made some phone calls and managed to get another set of gaskets and a new intake at Buicks discount cost. No problems after that but he was unhappy about the run around.
-
sammons...The problem as we knew it was a problem with the gaskets and some of the plastic components that were being used breaking down and allowing coolant to leak and the majority of strictly coolant related problems were caused by owners mixing coolant types. GM apparently changed the composition of the plastic materials they were using for various engine components and also changed the gasket design and materials but the coolant is what got blamed for the failures and leaks. If you notice in GM's answer to the law suit they stated " that alleged problems with the vehicles' engines or cooling systems were caused by owners not following the maintenance instructions for their vehicles or other factors" with the emphasis being on "Other Factors"
-
Need advise Moose. :D First, auto trans fluid. When I get back to my coupe, I have a TH350 very low mile on rebuild and Transgo shift kit. I pulled it from my buddy's 32 when we put in the 5speed WC. If it still works from setting I am going to change fluid/filter. Do you recomend Dexron Vl or something else?
Second, 'ol John recomended Dex cool for coolant (old 301c.i.d., also less than 500 miles) due to the new aluminum radiator. What do you recomend?
-
Keep in mind that Dex-Cool needs to be maintained i.e. topped off continuously if not it loses it's integrity from what I was told. This last weekend I installed the alternator in my Chevy Traverse which requires removing the upper radiator hose and I lost Dex-Cool. My problem was I couldn't find any replacement Dex-Cool within 20 miles of my place on a Sunday. The traditional green anti-freeze is at just about any grocery and hardware stores. Starting to see "any color" antifreeze which has a neutral color and it states that it can be used with "any color anti-freeze application"...doesn't say it can't be mixed with Dex-Cool just with any color?
-
sammons ...GM states that DexRon VI is backward compatible with all GM transmissions. If it were my transmission I would have no problem using the latest DexRon fluid. When I installed my 700R4 I actually called GM tech and talk to an engineer about the fluids and he stated that one of the goals that GM has in place is to make sure that the updated fluids will meet or exceed all of the previous products specifications. I found the following that gives a pretty concise breakdown of the new fluid vs previous versions
Dexron-VI
The fluid specification for Dexron-VI was introduced in 2005, and was first used as the GM factory-fill automatic transmission fluid for model year 2006. All Dexron-III licenses expired permanently at the end of 2006, and GM now supports only Dexron-VI fluids for use in their automatic transmissions, although fluids asserted by their manufacturers to meet Dexron-III standards continue to be sold under names such as Dex/Merc. These fluids are not regulated or endorsed by GM.
Dexron VI is of a slightly lower viscosity when new compared to the prior Dexron fluids (a maximum of 6.4 cSt at 100°C for Dexron VI and 7.5 cSt for Dexron III), but the allowed viscosity loss from shearing of the ATF during use is lower for Dexron VI, resulting in the same lowest allowed final viscosity for both Dexron III and VI (5.5 cSt). The lower viscosity is intended to gain improvements in fuel economy by lessening parasitic drag in the transmission. Since Dexron VI is not allowed to thin out (lower its viscosity) as much as Dexron III during use, it requires the use of higher-quality, more shear-stable (less prone to thinning while in use) base oils. The current GM specification that defines the fluid is GMW16444, which superseded the original specification, GMN10060.
-
Good stuff
I remember years ago folks were converting to Type F (Ford) trans fluid in their GM THM350 rebuilds - not sure why but supposedly it had better properties than the available GM stuff at that time. I suspect that DexRon has sine corrected any deficiencies?
Here's an interesting coolant additive "which reduces coolant temperatures by as much as 30ºF"?
http://www.jegs.com/p/Red-Line-Oil/Red-Line-Water-Wetter-Supercoolant/752191/10002/-1?utm_source=email&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=20170726email&ref=EmailCampaign
Compatible with all antifreezes, including the latest long-life variations
-
I don't know about transmission fluid, but I have used water-wetter. Most recently I used the Royal Purple equivalent into my coupe. I can't say 100% if it made a difference because I added it the same time I added a small fan shroud. Before I added the shroud and additive my car hit 200, no problem. Now it has not gone over 180 degrees.
-
I was aware of but never used Water-Wetter and it was my understanding that the way it works is that it has a very low "surface tension" which allows it to come in closer contact with it's surroundings thus allowing for better heat transfer. After seeing Ed's post I decided to see if I could find out if the stuff really works and came upon a number of studies and all seem to render about the same results. Here is a quote from one of the studies....
Inexpensive products that promise significant improvements to your car’s performance are almost always fool’s gold. This is especially true for engine additives (*cough* STP *cough*). However, there’s one company with a sterling reputation for delivering on its promises: Redline Synthetic. Since 1979, the Benicia, California company has been selling coolants, fuel additives and lubricants to the automotive, motorcycle, marine and industrial markets. As part of their range, Redline offer a product called WaterWetter®. They claim their potion can reduce car coolant temperatures by as much as 30ºF. That’s hot! I mean, not. I reckoned it’d be a doddle to test the bottle. I’d simply run my car sans Redline’s additive and check the coolant temperature. Then, following the instructions on the bottle with my usual precision, I’d give my mount the magic potion, drive the same test loop and measure the temp again.
For the mechanically challenged, installation of WaterWetter® could not be easier. Assuming you can open your hood, open your hood (when it is cold, otherwise prepare for a scalding). Locate the radiator fluid intake point (RTFM if necessary). If you have too much fluid in the overflow tank (above the line labeled max), simply siphon off 12 ounces before installing, as overfilling is a really bad idea. Open the radiator cap (or on most modern cars, the overflow tank) and pour in the full bottle of WaterWetter®, funnel optional.
Before I reveal the results of my test, let’s look at Redline's claims for WaterWetter®'s effects on your cooling system:
• Doubles the wetting ability of water
• Improves heat transfer
• Reduces cylinder head temperatures
• May allow more spark advance for increased torque
• Reduces rust, corrosion and electrolysis of all metals
• Provides long term corrosion protection
• Cleans and lubricates water pump seals
• Prevents foaming
• Reduces cavitation corrosion
• Complexes with hard water to reduce scale
According to Redline, WaterWetter®’s greatest benefits accrue to those cars running straight water in their cooling system– which doesn't include anyone living in snow country. Translation: WaterWetter® offers all the normal protection benefits of regular coolant to people who don't use regular coolant. Oh, at a lower temperature. Well, theoretically…
Strangely, Redline’s own test results don’t square with their ad copy. Their technical literature only shows an eight degree Fahrenheit drop in a car with a 50/50 mix of water and coolant, and an eighteen degree Fahrenheit drop for a car running 100 percent water.
I used a VagCom system (reads sensor data directly from the ECU) for my tests. The pre-WaterWetter® installation delivered temperatures between 96 and 98 degrees centigrade (or 205 to 208 degrees Fahrenheit for the Americans). The post-installation temperature stayed steady at 96 degrees centigrade. Clearly, not the results advertised.
Other websites have tested WaterWetter® and also concluded that the overall decrease in coolant temperature is marginal. So WaterWetter®’s benefits either lie elsewhere (or nowhere). That assessment requires a certain level of trust with Redline products. In my experience, based on their oil products, they deserve this trust.
In reviewing the technical literature on Redline’s website, WaterWetter® claims to reduce hot spots in a car’s cylinder head. In theory at least, this reduces the possibility of localized overheating, improving engine longevity. Supposedly, WaterWetter® also protects aluminum products in the cooling system from excessive heat and cavitation caused by vapor bubbles forming inside the cylinder head and water pump.
In addition, for cars running straight water, WaterWetter® provides some additional protection. This includes traditional coolant roles of reducing corrosion and lubrication of water pump seals. For cars caned on the track or driven in the summer only, a water-only engine and cooling system solution will lead to problems. However, for cars with a tradition 50/50 mix of water and trad coolant, these benefits are already present without WaterWetter®.
WaterWetter® is available at auto parts stores and online for less than $10 a bottle. One bottle is good for an entire cooling system, and lasts as long as you properly keep fluid in your system (assuming you follow the recommended practice of flushing your cooling system every two years or 30,000 miles).
Since WaterWetter® has no readily measurable benefit, should you consider putting this in your car? That depends on your personality and your relationship with your car.
If you’re like me, you like buying stuff for your car in the HOPES of improving power, performance, mileage or longevity (I put Chevron Techron in my tank every 1000 miles). It’s true: I’m a sucker for products that have the POTENTIAL to improve the car, even without any possibility of measuring the results. This is doubly true if the cost isn’t prohibitive and there isn’t any risk of a downside.
In other words, fool’s gold is as good as gold to a fool.
-
Thanks for the info Moose/Ed! I still get parts ect at cost from my buddies parts store(an AC/Delco/GM inventory), so the extra price of the good stuff is affordable ;D
There used to be a similar old product (water wetter)from Siloo that 1/2 the dirt track cars in the 60s-70s at Dodge City ran it. With small cubic inch limits over boreing, high rpms and small radiators...they were after any advantage. I asked my nieghbor about it, he had a '55 stock car and his parts house carried it. Yep he said it lowered the "service tension". He said with straight water it was usually good for around a 15° temp drop. With anti freeze it was only about 5/10° drop.
Dad ran it in their super modifieds (usually run 301 ci)until his buddy came up with the dry ice trick. He would go pick up a 30 gal drum of it on saturday morning. I don't remember if he was putting any in the top tank, but he built a trough that the lower radiator tank would bolt down thru and pack the dry ice around the bottom. Worked better than water wetter anyway ;)
-
Hmmmm....looks like a maximum net gain of -2 degrees. I guess something is better than nothing? ::)
-
Snake Oil ;)
-
Thanks for the recommendations.... A lot of info.... Cleaning the crud off the tranny
-
May have mentioned it before but I have a bunch of misc 700R4 and 4L60E parts in a bin - if anyone ever needs something give me a shout...may have it.