Road Rage

Many people have asked about alternative fluids to Honda's MTF for the 6MT. This is an analysis I just did for the guys at s2ki.com, many of whom swear by GMS FM, but wanted to be sure it would not harm the S2000's tranny - it won't - nor the 6MT in the TL. Enough intro, here the skinny:

Well, I got my 6-qt case from GMPARTSDIRECT,COM. Not sure it is the best deal, as they added a $14 "handling" charge and $5 of shipping for cryin' out loud!

The good news is that all the ingredients are listed:

1) "Severely solvent refined, solvent de-waxed, heavy parafinnic petroleum distillates"
RR: This is the "semi-synthetic" base oil. It is likely a GIII hydrocracked mineral oil - I love the use of the word 'severely'. Shows some poetic creativity on some engineer's part. This is a better base oil than Honda's MTF, but not as good as Red Line's. That does not mean it is not a better tranny lube, however.

2) "Benzene, C10-16 alkyl derivatives"
RR: Also known as Benzenesulfonic acid, this is used in, of all things, Clorox bleach! It is a surfactant, here used I would imagine to keep parts clean; it may also act as a carrier for the other ingredients.

3) "Methacrylic acid, copolymer of 'methyl' and 'lauryl' esters"
RR: Here is used as an ester oil. This is the synthetic part of the formulation, and is chemically representative of esters in general; highest resistance to heat degeneration, high detergency. Good stuff. In other forms it is often used to make contact lenses.

4) "Sulfonic acids, petroleum, magnesium salts"
RR: These are the friction modifiers - they may also play a part in friction reduction.

5) "Hydrotreated heavy parafinnic petroleum disitillates"
RR Similar to #1, but not as purified - less 'severe'; could be somewhere between a GII and GIII.

6) "Zinc alkyl dithiophosphate"
RR: The is the famous ZDP you have seen me mention frequently - these compounds represent the best anti-wear tyechnology yet developed - the SL engine oils have reduced amounts to save the mfr's having to pay for catalytic converter damage. The oil industry supposedly added other chemistry to make up for the reduced ZDP. Let's hope that they used a lot here, as they do not have to pander to the car mfr's.

I would say this is an excellent formulation - better than Honda's MTF, and very competitive with Red Line. It should have a bit less service life, but if it offers better gear action than RL MTL or MT-90, I think gearheads would gladly give up longevity for shift feel.

Nice job, GM.

SlntSam

Interesting. A question. I've noticed that at redline my first to second gear changes ressult in a "crunch". Do you think changing to GM synchromesh might fix that?

Road Rage

If it doesn't, I don't know what will. But are you sure you shift technique is perfected? Full clutch depression? Not letting up on the clutch until the shift is completed (getting ahead of yourself)? Some trannies cannot be speed-shifted - I do not know about the TL's. The S2000 can be a bit balky when cold, but my 2004 has carbon-faced synchronizers, and they seem perfect. I have used Red Line MTL with good luck, but am going to switch to GMSFM, in part because it is the same color as the stock fluid, and has been getting raves from drivers I know and respect on the S2000 forum.

I will say that the Red Line MTL did reduce the notchiness of the S2000 when cold, and that the analysis we did of Honda MTF was not at all impressive. They claim it can last 30k miles, but by 15k its additive pack was so depleted that it was scary. It is not the best choice for any tranny in my opinion.

I would go with the GMSFM, and see how it works for you.

92NSX

I just changed the Honda MTF fluid in my NSX this past weekend but haven't driven it since to be able to report results. Several other owners on the Prime have already done it and are extremely happy with what it has done.

SlntSam

I used to have a Prelude and Prelude owners that I've spoken to also rave about GM Synchromesh. I tried a few redline shifts and if I slow down the shifting it'll go in without problem.

I'll give the syncromesh a try regardless. The TL is notchy when cold (in the winter especially) and produces vibration up to the stick when shifting from first to second. Up until it warms up, then it's fine.

Road Rage

U changed to GMS FM or what?


Also, let's be very precise: There are 2 types of GMS - the plain stuff and friction modified. All the raves I have seen from S2000 and NSX owners have been for the GMS Friction Modified. Words mean things - I would hate for someone to go to the time and expense of putting in regular GMS (which is no better than Honda MTF overall) and not GMS FM.

92NSX

I used the GMFM and SyncroMesh in my change.

Road Rage

I think we would all be interested in your findings. I had a 1995 NSX-T for a year, throughly enjoyed it, but the S2000 is more fun, and the pure sports car. The NSX is an amazing car - I used to love to study its construction details. Only 713 were made in 1995 as I recall.

BTW, my understanding is they have always lost money on this car - but as a halo of Honda achievement, it has apparently been worth it.

92NSX

I will post my findings.
As for the S2K being more fun and the pure sports car....well everyone has their opinion.
I don't know about them losing money on them though. You very well could be right.

ITL

very interesting to see S2000 on a higher pedastal than NSX.....why, RR? I am curious, give me details.....I have never come close to driving either (but I still love my TL)

Road Rage

It is quite simple. The NSX is something everyone lusts after, and it is a thing of wonder to behold, but I did not find the driving experience as engaging as the S2000. First of all, nothing, and I repeat nothing, compares to alfresco driving. Targa roofs do not come close.

Then there is the issue of balance - a mid-engine has its own feel, and you can feel it doing squirelly things in mid-corner. Fine when you get used to it. It is also an old design now - the S2000 was a clean slate 10 years after the NSX was designed, and has a stiffer platform by far, even stiffer with my special X-brace.

Then there is the issue of size and weight. The S2000 in my configuration is about 300 pounds lighter, and has a more favorable stance in terms of wheelbase and track - plus true front to rear 50/50 balance and front engine/rear drive habits, which the bulk of my racing career in Lotus 7's makes oversteer and skid control 2nd nature.

Finally, the NSX attracts a lot of attention, the kind I do not want. Plus, when street driving, the stakes are very high if you go off-roading - much less so in the S2000. The NSX you treat like a queen - the S2000 is that cute girlfriend from college - you know, that one.

92NSX

I just took the car on a 750 mile round trip to Atl and can't say I notice a huge difference in the quality. I can tell a little difference but not like others have said.
Wonder how it would work in my other Acuras????

ITL

Thanks, RR.....I get ya

1fsthatch

i actually drove all em all the s2000 is downright brutal on the highway the poweplant it packs and the size is just incredible weaving in n out of traffic like nothing the nsx is much faster but knda long IMO my fav car of all time tho is the current car i own which is a NBP TLS 6SPD i rather have the TL its more classy

TLAdvanced

iTrader: (4)

Resurrected!! Welcome back thread!