94 Civic: coolant drain/flush and thermostat

Elle wrote:
> "Abeness" > wrote
>>All engine oils are created
>>equal, if they bear that grade stamp I forget the name of just now. For
>>the tranny, on the other hand, there was some discussion here about more
>>or less slippage adversely affecting the synchromesh gear system; hence
>>my caution.
>
>
> I'll have to look this up. I've been using Pennzoil 10W-30 (or 40 in the
> climate where I now live) in my 91 Civic's tranny. The owner's manual
> doesn't say Honda oil is necessary.
>
> I thought it was newer Hondas that had stricter specs on the manual
> transmission fluid.

My manuals (owner's and Helm) specify ordinary 10w-30 as well; it was
only after following a discussion of the synchromesh stuff here that I
got the idea that Honda manual tranny fluid might be better. I suppose
the way to find out would be to try both and see if I'm able to detect
any difference in feel or response.

Abeness > wrote in :

> TeGGeR® wrote:
>> jim beam > wrote in
>> :
>>
>>
>>>Abeness wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>Mine too; I was referring to tranny oil. All engine oils are created
>>>>equal, if they bear that grade stamp
>>>
>>>not true abe. sorry. massively different additive packages.
>>>different base stocks. all the grade stamp does is spec /minima/.
>>
>>
>>
>> There are several grade stamps. API, MB, ACEA, and ILSAC among them.
>>
>> Not all oils carry all stamps, so there is considerable difference
>> between oils as far as compliance with engine makers' standards.
>
> I'm talking about comparing apples with apples, however, not apples
> with oranges. Is it not the case that oils bearing the same API grade
> stamp (sans additives)



The additives ARE the standard. Base stocks between brands within
categories are similar or identical.



> provide at minimum the same engine protection
> regardless of whether you buy the brand that's USD $2.50/qt. or the
> one that's USD $1.00/qt.?


As far as I know, yes, you're correct.


> Obviously, if you're buying an oil that
> bears additional stamps that indicate adherence to higher standards or
> that contains additives that increase protection, we'd be talking
> about a different beast altogether.
>
> Anyway, I suppose that is what Jim indicated: different additive
> packages lead to different levels of protection. I'm not too worried
> about it, however: Honda spec'd a minimum grade that you can't even
> buy anymore the last I looked.
>


Standards are upgraded over time. I think they're up to API standard SM at
this point. All the standards are backwards-compatible, so you can use an
SM in a 1970 car made for SD oil.



--
TeGGeR®

The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ
www.tegger.com/hondafaq/

Abeness wrote:
> Elle wrote:
>
>> "Abeness" > wrote
>>
>>> All engine oils are created
>>> equal, if they bear that grade stamp I forget the name of just now. For
>>> the tranny, on the other hand, there was some discussion here about more
>>> or less slippage adversely affecting the synchromesh gear system; hence
>>> my caution.
>>
>>
>>
>> I'll have to look this up. I've been using Pennzoil 10W-30 (or 40 in the
>> climate where I now live) in my 91 Civic's tranny. The owner's manual
>> doesn't say Honda oil is necessary.
>>
>> I thought it was newer Hondas that had stricter specs on the manual
>> transmission fluid.
>
>
> My manuals (owner's and Helm) specify ordinary 10w-30 as well; it was
> only after following a discussion of the synchromesh stuff here that I
> got the idea that Honda manual tranny fluid might be better. I suppose
> the way to find out would be to try both and see if I'm able to detect
> any difference in feel or response.

there was a whole long thread about this only a few months ago. there
was an additive present in the old engine oils [molybdenum?] that is now
absent for environmental reasons. this means you now need to use honda
mtf for your transmission becuase it contains that additive and it helps
your synchros last better.

Abeness wrote:
> jim beam wrote:
>
>>> Mine too; I was referring to tranny oil. All engine oils are created
>>> equal, if they bear that grade stamp
>>
>>
>>
>> not true abe. sorry. massively different additive packages.
>> different base stocks. all the grade stamp does is spec /minima/.
>
>
> Really? I've read differently on several occasions, though I can't
> recall where now. Could you point me to a good discussion of differences
> between grades (excluding synthetics)?

abe, there's more about motor oils on the net than you could ever
reasonably shake a stick at. provided you google /excluding/ the word
"amsoil" you may even find useful info...

basically, oils are base + additives. bases are differing qualities,
compositions and purities. both bases & additives vary from company to
company - look for oil analysis results to see this for yourself. some
bases &/or additives are better than others. proportions vary greatly.
saying that an oil conforms to an api standard is like saying that
some beverage is qualified as "beer". sure, it may be qualified as
"beer" by the fda, and two beers may even have a very similar
composition, but that doesn't mean pbr is the same as a sam adams.

jim beam wrote:
> Abeness wrote:
>
>> Elle wrote:
>>
>>> "Abeness" > wrote
>>>
>>>> All engine oils are created
>>>> equal, if they bear that grade stamp I forget the name of just now. For
>>>> the tranny, on the other hand, there was some discussion here about
>>>> more
>>>> or less slippage adversely affecting the synchromesh gear system; hence
>>>> my caution.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I'll have to look this up. I've been using Pennzoil 10W-30 (or 40 in the
>>> climate where I now live) in my 91 Civic's tranny. The owner's manual
>>> doesn't say Honda oil is necessary.
>>>
>>> I thought it was newer Hondas that had stricter specs on the manual
>>> transmission fluid.
>>
>>
>>
>> My manuals (owner's and Helm) specify ordinary 10w-30 as well; it was
>> only after following a discussion of the synchromesh stuff here that I
>> got the idea that Honda manual tranny fluid might be better. I suppose
>> the way to find out would be to try both and see if I'm able to detect
>> any difference in feel or response.
>
>
> there was a whole long thread about this only a few months ago. there
> was an additive present in the old engine oils [molybdenum?] that is now
> absent for environmental reasons. this means you now need to use honda
> mtf for your transmission becuase it contains that additive and it helps
> your synchros last better.
>

in that case, a "cheap" fleet oil like shell rotella T might fit the
bill. its formulated for diesels, but safe for cars. doesnt have the EC
"starburst" label. 15w40 is the regular grade, and they make a 5w40
synthetic. might be worth doing some research on.

"Abeness" > wrote in message
news
> Elle wrote:
> > "Abeness" > wrote
> >>All engine oils are created
> >>equal, if they bear that grade stamp I forget the name of just now. For
> >>the tranny, on the other hand, there was some discussion here about more
> >>or less slippage adversely affecting the synchromesh gear system; hence
> >>my caution.
> >
> >
> > I'll have to look this up. I've been using Pennzoil 10W-30 (or 40 in the
> > climate where I now live) in my 91 Civic's tranny. The owner's manual
> > doesn't say Honda oil is necessary.
> >
> > I thought it was newer Hondas that had stricter specs on the manual
> > transmission fluid.
>
> My manuals (owner's and Helm) specify ordinary 10w-30 as well; it was
> only after following a discussion of the synchromesh stuff here that I
> got the idea that Honda manual tranny fluid might be better. I suppose
> the way to find out would be to try both and see if I'm able to detect
> any difference in feel or response.

Yes, I'm thinking about it... Unfortunately I just changed my manual tranny
fluid a month ago, and it likely won't be due again for two more years.

jim beam wrote:
> saying that an oil conforms to an api standard is like saying that some
> beverage is qualified as "beer". sure, it may be qualified as "beer" by
> the fda, and two beers may even have a very similar composition, but
> that doesn't mean pbr is the same as a sam adams.

Point taken. Thanks. When I find some time to wade through the results
of that Google search... the problem is that most of the pages I'm
finding are from the oil manufacturers, which usually assert that the
API standards are stringent and that their oil is just great for your
engine, matches engine manufacturer standards, etc. etc.

Abeness wrote:
> jim beam wrote:
>
>> saying that an oil conforms to an api standard is like saying that
>> some beverage is qualified as "beer". sure, it may be qualified as
>> "beer" by the fda, and two beers may even have a very similar
>> composition, but that doesn't mean pbr is the same as a sam adams.
>
>
> Point taken. Thanks. When I find some time to wade through the results
> of that Google search... the problem is that most of the pages I'm
> finding are from the oil manufacturers,

which is why i say reject the word "amsoil"!

> which usually assert that the
> API standards are stringent and that their oil is just great for your
> engine, matches engine manufacturer standards, etc. etc.

true. people like chevron publish some limited tech info, but i admit
you have to dig deep. there was this article posted a while back:

http://physicsweb.org/articles/world/15/2/7

from a thread on this group.

"jim beam" > wrote
Abeness wrote
> > My manuals (owner's and Helm) specify ordinary 10w-30 as well; it was
> > only after following a discussion of the synchromesh stuff here that I
> > got the idea that Honda manual tranny fluid might be better. I suppose
> > the way to find out would be to try both and see if I'm able to detect
> > any difference in feel or response.
>
> there was a whole long thread about this only a few months ago. there
> was an additive present in the old engine oils [molybdenum?] that is now
> absent for environmental reasons. this means you now need to use honda
> mtf for your transmission becuase it contains that additive and it helps
> your synchros last better.

I see a thread begun by Tegger on April 26 on this. The only authoritative
citation on the subject appears to be from George M., who wrote that "the
Honda Australia site started to push Honda lubricants fairly recently and
now recommend Honda MTF for manual gearboxes; prior to that they used to
recommend a SAE 75W-80 API GL4 lubricant."

The only thing I found at the Australia site so far is at
http://www.honda.com.au/buying+a+honda/parts/ , which says: "Honda MTF Plus
Manual Transmission Fluid has been specifically formulated for use in all
Honda manual transmissions. MTF Plus is designed to provide smoother
shifting operation at all temperatures over the life of the fluid."

Googling yields comments like that at
http://www.inlinefour.com/honmantranfl.html . I am finding nothing
dispositive on the subject, so far.

Does anyone have a better citation (on the subject of using Honda's own
manual transmission fluid vs. the originally specified 10W-30)?

jim beam wrote:
> Abeness wrote:
>> Point taken. Thanks. When I find some time to wade through the results
>> of that Google search... the problem is that most of the pages I'm
>> finding are from the oil manufacturers,
>
>
> which is why i say reject the word "amsoil"!

Uhhhhh.... I did, jim. Generally speaking, I try hard to catch what
people write. ;-)

>> which usually assert that the API standards are stringent and that
>> their oil is just great for your engine, matches engine manufacturer
>> standards, etc. etc.
>
>
> true. people like chevron publish some limited tech info, but i admit
> you have to dig deep. there was this article posted a while back:
>
> http://physicsweb.org/articles/world/15/2/7

Thanks, I'll check this out when I get back. Gotta run now.