AH64ID

That's the funny thing about the G56, it's spec'd ATF by DC but not by MB. MB Specs a GL-4. GL is a gear lube, which is why there are lots of manual transmissions that don't run it.

Not sure. I found a spec sheet from 2014 that is identical to the current one. There is something going on. The one engineer I asked said the formula for it hasn't changed at all. That's a lot of miles for 14 months. I've read about it in the G56 but results are mixed. Shifting seems to be an issue for some, but not for others. It's not even close to the proper spec for a NV5600, as it doesn't use a GL-4 or MT-1. Synchromesh is its own category altogether and not an API rating as far as I know. The NV5600 is known to have premature synchro and bearing issues when it gets a GL-4.

While I didn't give them the product number we were talking about the same product. They only have 1 product with that name. It's rather odd the level of confusion at Mobil. Before any of them looked at their engineering sheet they said the same thing about a label,but then looked at the data and said that it wasn't a GL-4 and they weren't sure why it said GL-4 on the jug. It's rather odd, and not very confidence building. Really hoping it's a good long term fluid for you.

I look forward to seeing the email. Odd that we are getting different information from the Mobil engineering department. The 3 engineers I spoke to said it wasn't GL-4 based on their data.

Bingo!

So I've made some more phone calls and gotten some more information, which changes a few things but not the overall standings of the lubes in discussion. From what I gather the term "rating" is a bit ambiguous. API sets standards for each fluid. Current service designations are GL-4, GL-5, and MT-1. Each fluid has different applications and requirements to meet the fluid specifications. If a fluid has the requirements the manufacturer can claim to meet those service designations. Here is where it gets gray, or confusing/misleading. We are all aware of what the PDS for the Mobil Delvac states, as well as what Michael's bucket states. They are different in terms of GL-4 applicability. The PDS only has the fluid meeting or exceeding MT-1 and not GL-4. That is why I called Mobil earlier. I had an additional question so I called Mobil back and the 2nd engineer was rather confused as to why the jug has GL-4 on it so he transferred me to a 3rd engineer. He was also surprised that GL-4 was on the jug and went on to talk about the differences in MT-1 and GL-4 and how the EP properties of the MT-1 aren't necessarily good for synchros. Bottom line is that it's a MT-1 fluid primarily and will work in GL-4 but the PDS and data the engineers have doesn't list it as meeting or exceeding GL-4, even thou the jug does. The last engineer didn't find testing results or meet/exceed data for the fluid and GL-4. Rather confusing! Here is what API states about MT-1 and GL-4 differences. "API GL-4 oils may be used in selected manual transmission and transaxle applications where API MT-1 lubricants are unsuitable." "API MT-1 does not address the performance requirements of synchronized transmissions and transaxles in passenger cars and heavy-duty applications." I did find some references to where MT-1 and GL-1 were on the same jug and that's because MT-1 is the upgraded fluid spec that helped make GL-1 obsolete and no longer in use. Amsoil MTG specifically lists GL-4 and Chrysler MS-9020 as exceeded specifications. I did notice that the term "rated" isn't in any of the documentation; however, it's the term all of the engineers I spoke with today used. None of them would classify the Mobil Delvac as "rated" GL-4, Amsoil did stated "rated" for GL-4. This contributed to the "rated" confusion. So here is where I am at.... Michael is correct in his feelings towards it being a GL-4 based on the jug; however, there is far more information from Mobil that it does not meet or exceed the GL-4 service designation. That leaves it as a MT-1 fluid that can be used as a GL-4, but it's still just a MT-1 fluid. SWEPCO has a similar SAE 50 fluid and its PDS states "SWEPCO 711 meets or exceeds the requirements of the API, MT-1 EP gear oil classification and can be used in transmissions and gear cases requiring API Service GL-1 through GL-4". That's a much easier reading statement than Mobil's. It can be used but doesn't meet or exceed those requirements. Clear as mud?!

Lol... semantics at this point. We all agree that it's probably a good fluid choice for the NV4500, and most of us agree that it's technically not the specified fluid for the NV4500. The Mobil Delvac Synthetic Transmission Fluid 50 is a MT-1 rated fluid that is "recommended" in GL-4 applications. Per Mobil( Product Data Sheets and a phone call to them) it does not carry the GL-4 rating, only MT-1. It has the properties that it could potentially be a GL-4 fluid, but it's not. Michael keeps telling people it carries the GL-4 rating. It's false information and despite all the data and facts from Mobil he refuses to accept it. It's been over a year. This is where words mean things. Say what it is, and don't make it something it isn't. The 5 gallon jug that Michael has says that it meets or exceeds GL-4, but it still doesn't carry the GL-4 rating. This was the point of my phone call to Mobil today. The Mobil engineer pointed out that it doesn't state that it carries the rating, only that Mobil feels it meets or exceeds the requirements.. but he also said he was unsure that it would get the GL-4 designation if they applied to API for it.

That Mobil Delvac is slightly different than the standard Delvac used. Remove the 1 from the part name and it's the proper fluid. They are two different fluids with very similar names.

Yes. The Amsoil MTG is a GL-4 fluid.

If the information from Mobil isn't good enough for you then there isn't anything left....

I don't see "rated" ANYWHERE... and neither does Mobil. Words mean things... You're not going to find the words rated GL-4 anywhere because it simply isn't rated for it. That's a fact and it's time to stop ignoring facts to make your opinions... I realize you have backed too far down your hole to admit the facts, so just do us all a favor and stop. Stop arguing the facts and stop claiming Mobil Delvac Synthetic Transmission Fluid 50 is a GL-4 rated fluid. There is too much misinformation out there already. Nobody is arguing that it won't work well for you in the NV4500. It's simply not rated for it, but Mobil does recommend it and it should work well. That's a fact.

meets or exceeds DOES NOT mean rated, not only in plain English but also in what the manufacturer states. NOWHERE on the label does it say GL-4 rated, NOWHERE period (except your false statements) does it list this fluid as being rated GL-4. This is a lost cause. The facts are here in black and white, but we cannot make you understand them if you're unwilling to.

There is the misleading part. Mobil very clearly stated that the phrase on the label DOES NOT indicate that it carries the rating. Not sure how else to explain it when you don't want to listen to the manufacturer. Que the dead horse... Mobil Delvac Synthetic Transmission Fluid 50 ONLY carries the API MT-1 rating, period... end of story. It is recommended and suitable for GL-4 applications, but it does NOT carry the rating. Words mean things....

That's because I base my opinion on fact. So I just got off the phone with Mobil. The product is not mislabeled, nor is it GL-4 rated. Here's the deal. Just like the website, the bucket does not state that it is actually API GL-4 rated. Mobil also backs this statement up, it is ONLY API rated to meet the MT-1 specification. The engineer stated that while it is not a GL-4 rated fluid it works very well in GL-4 applications, as you have found in your NV4500. He said that it could possibly pass GL-4 testing/certification with API and become rated, but he wasn't 100% sure on that either. The fluid has not gone under any revisions, so what is in your bucket is the same as it is on the current published PDS and what is currently on the shelf. I did specifically ask if it was a mislabel and he said no and stated that "meets or exceeds" is not a API rating and just a manufacturer claim. So not mislabeled, but since we are having this discussion I will say that it is misleading. Bottom line is that it's not a Gl-4 rated fluid, as we have been discussing for over a year, but it should work well for you. Words mean things and that has been my point since last May.

Very interesting label Michael. I do know that 14 months ago when you first posted about this fluid the website was the same it is now and it did NOT meet GL-4 specs. I also found the 2014 PDS and it also only shows MT-1. So I have to ask, how old is your fluid? http://petroleumservicecompany.com/content/pdfs/MOBIL_DELVAC_SYNTHETIC_TRANSMISSION_FLUID_50_PDS.pdf I'll go out on a limb and say that the label is mislabeled, but that's just a hunch. I've seen more mislabeled products than I have seen wrong product data sheets. It seems it takes more QA on a printed label. Since it talks about a GL-4 recommendation on the PDS I can see where the monkey making the labels could easily mislabel it.

Impressive...... Yes, the specs are muddying the water.... not the guy posting misinformation.

That's not even the fluid you use!!! Second, open the product page and look under specifications. Guess what, GL-4 is MIA. Third, you should post the whole sentence.... "Mobil Delvac 1 Transmission Fluid 50 meets or exceeds the requirements of the API service MT-1 classification and is recommended by ExxonMobil for use in transmissions and gear cases where API Service GL-1 through GL-4 (non-EP) gear protection is required." As I have said for over a year to you now, just because it says it's recommended doesn't mean it meets those specs. It also says non-EP which is extreme pressure. I am not putting a non-EP gear oil in my trans..... The fluid you bought doesn't have the non-EP blurb luckily. Lastly... here is the page for the fluid you bought 5 gallons of. https://www.mobil.com/en/industrial/lubricants/products/mobil-delvac-synthetic-transmission-fluid-50 Yes it's splitting hairs, but it doesn't meet the specs you claim it does. It may provide you with a great service life out of your NV4500 but that doesn't change the fact that it's a fluid that doesn't carry the API GL-4 spec that the NV4500 calls for.

NO it's not!! Re-read the specs, as we have been telling you for a LONG time now. It says it is suitable for GL-1 thru GL-4 applications, but it does not MEET those specs. Suitable does not mean it meets them. I'm glad it's working well for you, but you should really post accurate information about the specs. It looks like crap when the site owner can't even put out accurate information and is unwilling to educate himself. As you can see in the photo below GL-4 isn't listed under specifications and approvals. MT 90 is another great GL-4 fluid. Synchromesh is NOT a GL-4 fluid and is spec'd for the NV5600. Using synchromesh in a NV4500 will damage the synchros, just like using a GL-4 in a NV5600.

Wow, I'm surprised it's been a year already.

I have a NV5600 and I overfill by about a qt, but I am not sure what's recommended on the NV4500.

It appears that the Valvoline 75w-90 is a GL-5. I have personal experience running "GL-4 compatible" GL-5 oils and wouldn't advise it. No, Mobil SAE 50 is not a GL-4 fluid. It's a MT-1 fluid. MT-1 is a HD non-synchronized fluid specification. Mobil does state it can be used for GL-1 thru GL-4 but it doesn't meet those specs close enough to carry the designation. Who cares if the big trucks use it... they run different transmissions with different synchro's, bearings, and gears. The other fluid that Michael listed, Valvoline Drive Train 50, is also not a GL-4. It's a TO-4 which is an offroad drivetrain fluid that doesn't appear to even belong in a thread about truck transmissions. Michael is openly anti Amsoil, thou I've never heard a good reason, and would rather run a fluid not spec'd for his transmission than run Amsoil. I highly recommend the Amsoil MTG 75w-90 GL-4 synthetic trans fluid. IIRC it's cheaper than the Mobil SAE 50 and the proper specification for the transmission. It meets/exceeds GL-4 and Chrysler MS-9070 specs. If you want a quote on it then shoot me a PM.

Hopefully the traffic isn't too bad. I expect the Weiser/Ontario area to be as bad as anywhere in the state due to the easy access to the path of totality. I'm already dreading the drive back from where I will be.

I have a feeling nothing will be quiet on the 21st :-)

Sounds like labor intensive airbags.... :-)

So far everyone I know that has installed Timbren's has pulled them off and installed airbags. I hope they work better for you, but I know where W&F is coming from.