SodaLuvr

2003 Accord V6
BAYA/MAYA 5-spd remanufactured, updated automatic transmission (original unit failed @ 37K)

Miles on Unit: 22,200/12,266
Miles on Fluid: 9934/12,266

Fluid: Genuine Honda ATF-Z1/Genuine Honda ATF-Z1

Note: Transmission was drained and refilled three times with new Honda ATF-Z1 after the initial oil sample @ 12,266 miles. Shortly after the transmission service, 7 ounces of Lubegard ATF Protectant (Red Bottle) was added.
Lab: Blackstone

Fluid Condition:

Viscosity, 212F: 46.4SUS/47.2SUS
Viscosity, 100C: 6.2cst/6.4cst
TAN: 1.1/0.5
Insolubles: Trace/Trace
Flashpoint: 360F/350F

Elemental Values:

Al 54/24
Cr 1/1
Fe 44/44
Cu 7/9
Pb 2/1
Sn 0/0
Mo 0/1
Ni 0/0
Mn 1/1
Ag 0/0
Ti 0/0
K 7/13
B 195/194
Si 15/10
Na 9/10
Ca 159/276
Mg 52/126
P 538/139
Zn 86/202
Ba 1/3

My comments: Something is wrong here. Either the Lubegard is having a reaction with the transmission components (doubt it), or there's a torque converter wear problem here. Fluid condition is mediocre, given the high TAN in less than 10,000 miles. Additive pack of the fluid appears to have changed as well, but its probably due to a formulation change.

TunedTL

Lubegard may work for other transmission but seems it increase torque convertor wear on this AV6. I don't understand if one wants better flash point protection and resistant to ATF oxidiation, why not using Amsoil Synthetic ATF, which complies to Honda Z1 spec?

fla-tls

Why would lubeguard black increase TC wear on any tranny? It's a friction modifier - that's all.

Actually - torque converters really don't wear at all. Their lockup clutches, bearings, and sprags do, but not the fins (which are steel). The stators are aluminum, but when they start to go they go pretty quickly (and noisily) - and actually it's bearing that goes. That's why used ones are sent back for rebuild.

I impressed by the fact that Fe didn't go up at all. You must have negligible gear and clutch steel wear. Remember, all of your shafts are also held in place by the case (which is aluminum). Just keep watching it. This might be normal for your tranny.

TunedTL

He did not use lubeguard black, he used Lubegard ATF Protectant after sending off an ATF sample @ 12K. These are two separate products.

SodaLuvr

Not my tranny, thank goodness.

I double-checked with the owner about the transmission service, and I've updated the original post to reflect this. The unit was actually drained/filled three times with ATF-Z1, not power flushed. So, a triple drain/fill removes about 80% of the old fluid, which is close to what a cooler line flush would remove.

Lubegard Black and Lubegard Red are two different products. However, Lubegard Black is based off Lubegard Red. In other words, Lubegard Black is the same as the Red but with a blend of "selective" friction modifiers.

One would add Lubegard Black to Dex VI so the resulting mixture would be compatible for use in Honda, DC, Kia, and Toyota units requiring the specialty fluids. Lubegard Red is used if the correct fluid is already being used...such as adding it to the OEM ATF.

The wear rate for the Iron is about 3ppm/1,000 miles, which is normal for a newer Honda unit. The Aluminum, however, definitely isn't normal.

SodaLuvr

Here's another report from an identical BAYA/MAYA Honda 5-speed unit, from a 2003 Honda Accord V6. This one has the "old design," which required the oil jet:

Lab is Blackstone; this is the factory fill with 27,344 miles.

Al 48
Cr 2
Fe 116
Cu 9
Pb 2
Sn 0
Mo 0
Ni 0
Mn 0
Ag 0
Ti 0
K 3
Si 16
Na 10
Ca 360
Mg 230
P 8
Zn 336
Ba 9

Fluid Condition:

TAN: 0.6
Viscosity, @ 212F: 45.2
Viscosity, @ 100C: 5.8 (calculated)
Flashpoint, 370F
Insolubles, 0.0

As you can see, even with the factory fill in for nearly 30,000 miles on this identical Honda unit, the Aluminum reading is lower than the other unit, which had only 1/3 of the mileage on the same fluid.

TunedTL

I agree with Micheal here on Al. Driving 2300 miles less and getting more than 2x of Al is not normal.
Mobil1 Synthetic ATF is also highly friction modified but it is not for Toyota (actually Aisin Warner) transmissions. I know owners who put M1 ATF into their Lexus immediately experienced shift problems. My question is why adding Lubegard when Honda Z1 ATF is already perfectly friction modified for AV6 transmission? Seems what he adds here backfired big time.

SodaLuvr

Here:

Lubegard ATF Protectant (Red Bottle)= Protectant only, has no effect on friction modification. It is to be added to the correct ATF. (i.e. to Honda Z1, Toyota T-IV, etc)

Lubegard HFM Supplement (Black Bottle)= Protectant and friction modifier supplement, to be added to Dexron-VI so the fluid is now suitable for use in Honda Z1, Toyota T-IV, etc applications. Also has the benefits of the protectant.

M1 ATF contains some "selective" friction modifiers so the fluid may be compatible for use in Dexron-III(H), Mercon-V, and ATF+4 applications. Not all friction modifiers are alike, which is why one cannot use an ATF+4 only product in a Honda unit, for example. However, multi-vehicle fluids such as Amsoil and Pennzoil can be used in many applications, from Chryslers to Toyotas to Hondas, because the friction modifiers in that fluid are "selective," meaning they will respond differently depending on the materials used, hence the ability to cover a variety of transmissions.

Dexron-III(H) will work in Toyota AW units requiring T-IV. However, the shifts may be a bit firmer as the T-IV compatible fluids have a friction modifier that will respond correctly to the materials used, so the shifts will be much smoother.

TunedTL

Just my
I prefer to have better base stock e.g. synthetic ATF to combat heat, that is in addition to it having 1) Honda spec complying addivitive package 2) been proven in real world usage in Honda transmissions.
Lubegard may or may not be the problem, but is there scientific data and published spec on how it improves, or at least not hurting the chemical property of Honda Z1? Will lubeguard honor warranty claim if the tranny fails?

SodaLuvr

I personally don't use Lubegard. It isn't a bad product, but I don't believe that most OTC fluids on the market today need it, due to the upgraded baseoils that are in use now.

Lubegard does honor warranty claims if the problem can be traced back to their product, as with most additive manufacturers.

Saab did recommend Lubegard Red for use in its transmission under a TSB for shifting problems.

Btw, your Amsoil ATF doesn't have a Honda Z1 type additive package either, yet it works just fine as proven by Lubrizol's field/bench testing.

TunedTL

Micheal, you made a comment that Honda Z1's formulation appears changed. Some members on BITOG has noted Toyota uses Idemitsu to supply T-IV ATF in Asia; in the U.S. Toyota uses Mobil.
They both work well for AW transmissions, but I am not sure they share the same formulation. Honda may use the same approach, it could use one supplier for the factory fill and another supplier to sell maintenance parts. I guess as long as it work, everything is fine.

SodaLuvr

Sure, suppliers may be different.

However, keep in mind that there is only ONE approved formulation of Honda Z1, Toyota T-IV, and Toyota WS. Regardless of supplier, there is only one approved formula...

Same goes for Chrysler's ATF+4. Back when Chrysler didn't allow the aftermarket licensing of their +4 product, Pennzoil, Valvoline, ExxonMobil, etc were all approved suppliers of the product under the Mopar brand name. However, it was the exact same product they were all blending.

I may be wrong here about the formulation change. Its possible that the additive levels are much lower in the second sample (some of them), purely because the first sample contained some assembly lube from the transmission's assembly process, but all other reports that I've seen with ATF-Z1 has Calcium levels > 300 ppm.

TunedTL

Interesting, do you have any link or discussion?
I always thought an automaker (or their transmission supplier) has a specification, any oil company that can meet such specification, regardless of how they formulate ATF, would be OK.
One example I can think of is the engine oil, as long as it is SAE 5w20 and has a API Certification of >SJ, Honda will have no problem honor warranty. Each oil company has its own unique formulation, even though complying to same SAE/API standards.

SodaLuvr

There are many discussions on BITOG that explains the process, but I'll give you a brief overview of how the process works.

As we've seen already, and it will continue in the future, manufacturers will be moving toward individualized, exclusive, proprietary automatic transmission fluids for their units. These fluids will be of a low-viscosity, "fill-for-life," and will be "proprietary" products...meaning the automaker's brand is the only "approved" product.

In the past, and still, ATFs such as Dexron-VI and Mercon-V are avaliable for aftermarket licensing. Under such circumstances, the blender will purchase an "approved" additive package for that formulation from an additive supplier (i.e. Lubrizol, Infineum, Afton, etc), and blend the additive package with the recommended base oil mix. The final product is then submitted to the manufacturer (Ford or GM in this case) for final testing (Big bucks, often $100K or more). After its approved, a license is issued, and a royalty fee is charged for each gallon produced.

That process occurs only if the manufacturer allows aftermarket licensing of that particular ATF spec.

Now, Chrysler's ATF+4 is also avaliable for aftermarket production and licensing, but with a twist...

With Dexron-VI and Mercon-V, GM and Ford, respectively, could care less as to what base oils were used to blend the product, whose additive pack you used, as long as the final product passed their test. With Chrysler, they specify the exact type of baseoil (along with the supplier), and also require the usage of Lubrizol's additive pack for ATF+4, as well as the special VII.

They're doing this to ensure uniformity within all ATF+4 products...so regardless of which licensed ATF+4 product you purchase, it will be identical.

In other words, Chrysler has complete control over the exact ingredients used in their ATF+4 product. If Amsoil went out and built an ATF+4 product (which they do have, btw, in their UATF), and it meets/exceeds the required specs of ATF+4, they still would not even consider it for licensing solely because it does not have the required baseoil/additive pack. Amsoil's Universal ATF could be better, but Chrysler won't even consider it for licensing as it does not have the required ingredients.

Monopoly, isn't it?

Now, Honda, Toyota, and Kia are a whole different game. Instead, they do not allow licensing of their ATF at all. The manufacturer's supplier will be making the only "approved" automatic transmission fluid. Valvoline, Pennzoil, etc may have products out that will meet/exceed the specs, but they will not be approved products. In fact, licensing isn't even avaliable for these proprietary ATFs...as the automakers are not allowing it at this time.

In other words, if you're using Pennzoil, Amsoil, etc's ATF product for your Honda, it may or may not work, so be ware.

As for motor oils, there isn't really a licensing process, AFAIK. Additive packs are purchased from suppliers, baseoils are blended, and the final product is put on the shelves. Its an honor system, and products are randomly tested by the API to ensure that they meet spec.

That's all...

TunedTL

This is way OT.
About monopoly...it is against the federal law for any automaker to honor warranty on the condition of using OEM and OEM only part. Toyota avoids this by making the new WS ATF lifetime fluid.

If Honda, Toyota, and Kia indeed do not license their proprietary ATF and still require users to buy its own fluid in order to honor transmission warranty, they are liable for ligitation and more likely than not, lose the case.

http://www.semasan.com/main/main.aspx?id=61713
Federal Warranty Laws
1.The Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act (15 U.S.C. 2302(C))

This federal law regulates warranties for the protection of consumers. The essence of the law concerning aftermarket auto parts is that a vehicle manufacturer may not condition a written or implied warranty on the consumers using parts or services which are identified by brand, trade, or corporate name (such as the vehicle maker's brand) unless the parts or service are provided free of charge. The law means that the use of an aftermarket part alone is not cause for denying the warranty.

SodaLuvr

You are correct. Honda/Toyota/etc has never once said that usage of non-dealership parts will void the warranty. ATF is no exception.

However, should you decide to use an aftermarket part (i.e. Amsoil ATF in place of T-IV), and the aftermarket part causes damage to your vehicle, then you are responsible. If such an event were to occur, Amsoil would pick up the tab for the repair costs as they guarantee their product's compatibility.

There is, however, a notable exception that all should be aware of. The Magnuson-Moss Act does not apply to many, aftermarket 3rd party warranties, possibly some manufacturer extended warranties as well. Thus, if that applies to you, you may be bound by the agreement to use the recommended parts only. Be ware.

PS- Toyota recommends a pan drain (no filter change) @ 60,000 miles in transmissions using T-IV or WS if the vehicle is used for towing. Otherwise, it is considered to be a "fill-for-life" fluid. However, there have been complaints of notable loss of shift quality over time and/or shudder if the T-IV fluid isn't refreshed periodically.

smooth~silver_type_s

For all you 2nd gen honda owners out there, who will read this thread: GUYS FOR F**k'S SAKES, install a b&m transmission cooler in your car.

MikePA

Why? It doesn't prolong the life of the tranny.

smooth~silver_type_s

ignorance is bliss

MikePA

ignorance on your part.