Changed Trans and Diff oil and WOW!

[Enzo]

Damn phone got me again

Autocorrect strikes again!

Sent from my SM-N920T using Tapatalk

Sponsored

 

[jasonstang]

Wonder why redline recommended 75w140 for the diff fluid on their website for the 2015 Mustang GT.

 

[Enzo]

Wonder why redline recommended 75w140 for the diff fluid on their website for the 2015 Mustang GT.

That seems kind of high. I went through American muscle

Sent from my SM-N920T using Tapatalk

 

[Joshg120]

There's so many schools of thought on which transmission fluid to use. Trying to get my head around which is the best compromise. Really want smoother shifting but more importantly want to avoid any extra NVH, which I've read is sometimes a symptom of the common trans oil swaps

 

[Enzo]

There's so many schools of thought on which transmission fluid to use. Trying to get my head around which is the best compromise. Really want smoother shifting but more importantly want to avoid any extra NVH, which I've read is sometimes a symptom of the common trans oil swaps

Yeah I was the same I just read a lot of good stuff about redline and amsoil but redline for me seems to be more readily available so I went with them and I'm glad I did. Trans is a lot quieter. It even says it on their bottle. Im excited to see what their engine oils offer.

Sent from my SM-N920T using Tapatalk

 

[Enzo]

Wonder why redline recommended 75w140 for the diff fluid on their website for the 2015 Mustang GT.

The differential itself I think says 75w80.

Sent from my SM-N920T using Tapatalk

 

[EXP Jawa]

The late S197 axles used 75W140, that's probably what Redline is basing it on. However, the S550 uses Ford's 75W85 Gen-3 lube from the factory.

 

[jhann76]

Anybody tried both this product and the Royal Purple Synchromax? Any thoughts on which is better?

 

[Enzo]

Anybody tried both this product and the Royal Purple Synchromax? Any thoughts on which is better?

I used to use Royal purple but I found out there not fully synthetic and it voids warranty on transmission.

Sent from my SM-N920T using Tapatalk

 

[jhann76]

Yikes. Good to know. So I'm assuming the Red Line does not void the warranty then?

 

[Enzo]

Yikes. Good to know. So I'm assuming the Red Line does not void the warranty then?

Accord to redline it's not in their recommendation anymore apparently the mt82 has different recommendations. Wether it voids warranty is up to Ford, regardless though if anything does happen in order for Ford to deny your claim on it they would have to prove that the fluid was the root cause of failure. Which I've never ever seen that happen.

Sent from my SM-N920T using Tapatalk

 

[EXP Jawa]

I think in practice (regardless of the spirit of the law), the dealer is likely to deny a warranty claim - which may or may not be the same as voiding the warranty - based on a modification or change of parts/lube. It then falls on the customer to prove that the modification didn't contribute to the failure, which would be hard to do without any test data - and the oil manufacturer openly acknowledging that they don't meet Ford spec. I don't think that is really how the Magnuson Moss Act is intended to work, but that's how it often seems to go down in the real world.

Basically, don't expect that the dealer would have to prove your change caused the failure. They'll make the assumption it did first thing if they can. You'll have to prove it didn't, assuming if it becomes an issue.

 

[Enzo]

I think in practice (regardless of the spirit of the law), the dealer is likely to deny a warranty claim - which may or may not be the same as voiding the warranty - based on a modification or change of parts/lube. It then falls on the customer to prove that the modification didn't contribute to the failure, which would be hard to do without any test data - and the oil manufacturer openly acknowledging that they don't meet Ford spec. I don't think that is really how the Magnuson Moss Act is intended to work, but that's how it often seems to go down in the real world.

Basically, don't expect that the dealer would have to prove your change caused the failure. They'll make the assumption it did first thing if they can. You'll have to prove it didn't, assuming if it becomes an issue.

They also have to prove though that it did though. They can't go off assumption. Because you can hire a transmission specialist and he can say the same thing. In court it's about proof. You can take it to a small claims court let them know that there's no actual proof that the oil damaged the transmission. Ford has to honor warranty if they want to deny the claim they have to prove that the oil caused the damage. It's about what you can prove in court and hopefully that still stands lol.

Sent from my SM-N920T using Tapatalk

 

[Enzo]

But regardless let's hope for the best lol.

Sent from my SM-N920T using Tapatalk

 

[EXP Jawa]

My point is simply that you have to be prepared to prove you're innocent, and that isn't going to be easy. Since it isn't a criminal case, innocent till proven guilty doesn't really apply. You can't assume Ford or the dealer will study it and determine cause, then address the warranty claim after. They're going to start with "no" if there's a reason to do so, and you'll have to fight them to get the warranty honored. If it did go to court, there's a lot more burden on you to prove that then there is on the dealer/Ford and they're high-priced legal team to say otherwise. Just bear that in mind...

Sponsored