nv3550 questions
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: nv3550 questions
"Matt Macchiarolo" <matt@nospamplease.com> wrote in message
news:m5KdnWF_6JC0STrZnZ2dnUVZ_v-dnZ2d@comcast.com...
>
> "Coasty" <uscg_ret at comcast dot net> wrote in message
> news:dv2dnZozmva0PTrZnZ2dnUVZ_oidnZ2d@comcast.com. ..
>> How the auto companies get away with it is to say a product must meet
>> (blank) specifications. They are not saying a particular product is the
>> only authorized fluid or you will void your warranty, that would be the
>> Magnusson Moss act.
>>
> But for th e NV3550, that's exactly what the FSM and the owner's manual
> said. "Do not use anything but Mopar pert number XXXXXXX."
Matt,
Go to the Pennzoil web site and read the specs it says "SUITABLE for use in
Chrysler transaxles and transmissions requiring Part No. 4874464 it does not
say MEETS Chrysler transaxles and transmissions requiring Part No. 4874464.
Suitable does not mean it meets OEM specs.
The Magnusson Moss Warranty Act does not prevent an auto company from
specifically specifying a particular OEM fluid such as Part No. 4874464 for
the manual transmission they just are not telling you what is a substitute
and they do not have to. However what ever if you use any thing else it
must say on the container MEETS Chrysler specifications Part No. 4874464.
Saying SUITABLE is not the same and could void any warranty.
(OT but relevant) For over 20 years Harley Davidson said any other oil but
theirs would ruin the engine and GOD forbid if you used synthetic your
engine would just blow up. Today HD sells their own brand of synthetic oil
however that cannot say it is exclusive and the only oil you can use in the
engines. HD was one of the reasons for the Magnusson Moss Warranty Act.
Meets means that it is equal any other wording such as suitable, can be used
instead, and my all time favorite can be used with special additive just
does not cut it.
Coasty
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: nv3550 questions
"Matt Macchiarolo" <matt@nospamplease.com> wrote in message
news:m5KdnWF_6JC0STrZnZ2dnUVZ_v-dnZ2d@comcast.com...
>
> "Coasty" <uscg_ret at comcast dot net> wrote in message
> news:dv2dnZozmva0PTrZnZ2dnUVZ_oidnZ2d@comcast.com. ..
>> How the auto companies get away with it is to say a product must meet
>> (blank) specifications. They are not saying a particular product is the
>> only authorized fluid or you will void your warranty, that would be the
>> Magnusson Moss act.
>>
> But for th e NV3550, that's exactly what the FSM and the owner's manual
> said. "Do not use anything but Mopar pert number XXXXXXX."
Matt,
Go to the Pennzoil web site and read the specs it says "SUITABLE for use in
Chrysler transaxles and transmissions requiring Part No. 4874464 it does not
say MEETS Chrysler transaxles and transmissions requiring Part No. 4874464.
Suitable does not mean it meets OEM specs.
The Magnusson Moss Warranty Act does not prevent an auto company from
specifically specifying a particular OEM fluid such as Part No. 4874464 for
the manual transmission they just are not telling you what is a substitute
and they do not have to. However what ever if you use any thing else it
must say on the container MEETS Chrysler specifications Part No. 4874464.
Saying SUITABLE is not the same and could void any warranty.
(OT but relevant) For over 20 years Harley Davidson said any other oil but
theirs would ruin the engine and GOD forbid if you used synthetic your
engine would just blow up. Today HD sells their own brand of synthetic oil
however that cannot say it is exclusive and the only oil you can use in the
engines. HD was one of the reasons for the Magnusson Moss Warranty Act.
Meets means that it is equal any other wording such as suitable, can be used
instead, and my all time favorite can be used with special additive just
does not cut it.
Coasty
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: nv3550 questions
So the pennzoil synchromesh is "good enough" but isn't synthetic like the
oem stuff, which means I will have to keep changing it instead of leaving it
in there for the lifetime of the vehicle? Doesn't seem to bad as I'm in
Florida and will probably sink the jeep again... Maybe if I trash the
nv3550 I could find an ax15 to slap in there and just use the simpler stuff
in it.
Troy
"Coasty" <uscg_ret at comcast dot net> wrote in message
news:dv2dnZozmva0PTrZnZ2dnUVZ_oidnZ2d@comcast.com. ..
> How the auto companies get away with it is to say a product must meet
> (blank) specifications. They are not saying a particular product is the
> only authorized fluid or you will void your warranty, that would be the
> Magnusson Moss act.
>
> It is just like ATF+4, DC has said the transmission fluid must meet ATF+4
> to be used and the only place you could get ATF+4 was at the Dealer.
> However it is now sold at every parts place as ATF+4 under the Valvoline
> label.
>
> Pennzoil® says their Synchromesh fluid is suitable for use in Chrysler
> transaxles and transmissions requiring Part No. 4874464. However the key
> word is missing in which is (Meets OEM) Chrysler Part No. 4874464. Just
> like the Mercron ATF which said it was suitable for use in DC
> transmissions and when you used it your transmission failed. People were
> either too cheap or did not understand the difference between suitable and
> meets OEM requirements their is a big difference their and they ended up
> paying for it with failed transmissions.
>
> The difference is the Chrysler Part No. 4874464 is a full synthetic
> designed to last the life of the transmission unless it requires
> rebuilding or goes under water and Pennzoil® Synchromesh is not synthetic
> it is a paraffin based lubricant that must be change.
>
> What I have said was confirmed by a writer for Motor Week Pat Goss who I
> talked to on his weekly radio show and he is the most knowledgably auto
> mechanic there is.
>
> The old adage Pay ME Now or Pay Me later came to mind.
>
> Coasty
>
>
> "Matt Macchiarolo" <matt@nospamplease.com> wrote in message
> news:X4OdnTWdWq1ejTrZnZ2dnUVZ_tWdnZ2d@comcast.com. ..
>> Thing is, I do remember reading somwhere (not on the net) that for
>> maintenince issues like oil and fluids, the manufacturer (not dealer) is
>> not supposed to charge for it if the manufacturer specifies only their
>> own fluid and no other, which was the case for the NV3550 when it was
>> intro'd. I was googling for a pertinent link about this issue and the
>> Magnusson Moss act but can't find it yet.
>>
>> "Greg Johnson" <Islander2000@webtv.net> wrote in message
>> news:13962-44A6EE86-177@storefull-3317.bay.webtv.net...
>>> "if there is no aftermarket equivalent they are supposed to provide it
>>> for free."
>>>
>>> Why in the world would you say something like that? Don't beleve
>>> everything you read on the internet.
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
oem stuff, which means I will have to keep changing it instead of leaving it
in there for the lifetime of the vehicle? Doesn't seem to bad as I'm in
Florida and will probably sink the jeep again... Maybe if I trash the
nv3550 I could find an ax15 to slap in there and just use the simpler stuff
in it.
Troy
"Coasty" <uscg_ret at comcast dot net> wrote in message
news:dv2dnZozmva0PTrZnZ2dnUVZ_oidnZ2d@comcast.com. ..
> How the auto companies get away with it is to say a product must meet
> (blank) specifications. They are not saying a particular product is the
> only authorized fluid or you will void your warranty, that would be the
> Magnusson Moss act.
>
> It is just like ATF+4, DC has said the transmission fluid must meet ATF+4
> to be used and the only place you could get ATF+4 was at the Dealer.
> However it is now sold at every parts place as ATF+4 under the Valvoline
> label.
>
> Pennzoil® says their Synchromesh fluid is suitable for use in Chrysler
> transaxles and transmissions requiring Part No. 4874464. However the key
> word is missing in which is (Meets OEM) Chrysler Part No. 4874464. Just
> like the Mercron ATF which said it was suitable for use in DC
> transmissions and when you used it your transmission failed. People were
> either too cheap or did not understand the difference between suitable and
> meets OEM requirements their is a big difference their and they ended up
> paying for it with failed transmissions.
>
> The difference is the Chrysler Part No. 4874464 is a full synthetic
> designed to last the life of the transmission unless it requires
> rebuilding or goes under water and Pennzoil® Synchromesh is not synthetic
> it is a paraffin based lubricant that must be change.
>
> What I have said was confirmed by a writer for Motor Week Pat Goss who I
> talked to on his weekly radio show and he is the most knowledgably auto
> mechanic there is.
>
> The old adage Pay ME Now or Pay Me later came to mind.
>
> Coasty
>
>
> "Matt Macchiarolo" <matt@nospamplease.com> wrote in message
> news:X4OdnTWdWq1ejTrZnZ2dnUVZ_tWdnZ2d@comcast.com. ..
>> Thing is, I do remember reading somwhere (not on the net) that for
>> maintenince issues like oil and fluids, the manufacturer (not dealer) is
>> not supposed to charge for it if the manufacturer specifies only their
>> own fluid and no other, which was the case for the NV3550 when it was
>> intro'd. I was googling for a pertinent link about this issue and the
>> Magnusson Moss act but can't find it yet.
>>
>> "Greg Johnson" <Islander2000@webtv.net> wrote in message
>> news:13962-44A6EE86-177@storefull-3317.bay.webtv.net...
>>> "if there is no aftermarket equivalent they are supposed to provide it
>>> for free."
>>>
>>> Why in the world would you say something like that? Don't beleve
>>> everything you read on the internet.
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: nv3550 questions
So the pennzoil synchromesh is "good enough" but isn't synthetic like the
oem stuff, which means I will have to keep changing it instead of leaving it
in there for the lifetime of the vehicle? Doesn't seem to bad as I'm in
Florida and will probably sink the jeep again... Maybe if I trash the
nv3550 I could find an ax15 to slap in there and just use the simpler stuff
in it.
Troy
"Coasty" <uscg_ret at comcast dot net> wrote in message
news:dv2dnZozmva0PTrZnZ2dnUVZ_oidnZ2d@comcast.com. ..
> How the auto companies get away with it is to say a product must meet
> (blank) specifications. They are not saying a particular product is the
> only authorized fluid or you will void your warranty, that would be the
> Magnusson Moss act.
>
> It is just like ATF+4, DC has said the transmission fluid must meet ATF+4
> to be used and the only place you could get ATF+4 was at the Dealer.
> However it is now sold at every parts place as ATF+4 under the Valvoline
> label.
>
> Pennzoil® says their Synchromesh fluid is suitable for use in Chrysler
> transaxles and transmissions requiring Part No. 4874464. However the key
> word is missing in which is (Meets OEM) Chrysler Part No. 4874464. Just
> like the Mercron ATF which said it was suitable for use in DC
> transmissions and when you used it your transmission failed. People were
> either too cheap or did not understand the difference between suitable and
> meets OEM requirements their is a big difference their and they ended up
> paying for it with failed transmissions.
>
> The difference is the Chrysler Part No. 4874464 is a full synthetic
> designed to last the life of the transmission unless it requires
> rebuilding or goes under water and Pennzoil® Synchromesh is not synthetic
> it is a paraffin based lubricant that must be change.
>
> What I have said was confirmed by a writer for Motor Week Pat Goss who I
> talked to on his weekly radio show and he is the most knowledgably auto
> mechanic there is.
>
> The old adage Pay ME Now or Pay Me later came to mind.
>
> Coasty
>
>
> "Matt Macchiarolo" <matt@nospamplease.com> wrote in message
> news:X4OdnTWdWq1ejTrZnZ2dnUVZ_tWdnZ2d@comcast.com. ..
>> Thing is, I do remember reading somwhere (not on the net) that for
>> maintenince issues like oil and fluids, the manufacturer (not dealer) is
>> not supposed to charge for it if the manufacturer specifies only their
>> own fluid and no other, which was the case for the NV3550 when it was
>> intro'd. I was googling for a pertinent link about this issue and the
>> Magnusson Moss act but can't find it yet.
>>
>> "Greg Johnson" <Islander2000@webtv.net> wrote in message
>> news:13962-44A6EE86-177@storefull-3317.bay.webtv.net...
>>> "if there is no aftermarket equivalent they are supposed to provide it
>>> for free."
>>>
>>> Why in the world would you say something like that? Don't beleve
>>> everything you read on the internet.
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
oem stuff, which means I will have to keep changing it instead of leaving it
in there for the lifetime of the vehicle? Doesn't seem to bad as I'm in
Florida and will probably sink the jeep again... Maybe if I trash the
nv3550 I could find an ax15 to slap in there and just use the simpler stuff
in it.
Troy
"Coasty" <uscg_ret at comcast dot net> wrote in message
news:dv2dnZozmva0PTrZnZ2dnUVZ_oidnZ2d@comcast.com. ..
> How the auto companies get away with it is to say a product must meet
> (blank) specifications. They are not saying a particular product is the
> only authorized fluid or you will void your warranty, that would be the
> Magnusson Moss act.
>
> It is just like ATF+4, DC has said the transmission fluid must meet ATF+4
> to be used and the only place you could get ATF+4 was at the Dealer.
> However it is now sold at every parts place as ATF+4 under the Valvoline
> label.
>
> Pennzoil® says their Synchromesh fluid is suitable for use in Chrysler
> transaxles and transmissions requiring Part No. 4874464. However the key
> word is missing in which is (Meets OEM) Chrysler Part No. 4874464. Just
> like the Mercron ATF which said it was suitable for use in DC
> transmissions and when you used it your transmission failed. People were
> either too cheap or did not understand the difference between suitable and
> meets OEM requirements their is a big difference their and they ended up
> paying for it with failed transmissions.
>
> The difference is the Chrysler Part No. 4874464 is a full synthetic
> designed to last the life of the transmission unless it requires
> rebuilding or goes under water and Pennzoil® Synchromesh is not synthetic
> it is a paraffin based lubricant that must be change.
>
> What I have said was confirmed by a writer for Motor Week Pat Goss who I
> talked to on his weekly radio show and he is the most knowledgably auto
> mechanic there is.
>
> The old adage Pay ME Now or Pay Me later came to mind.
>
> Coasty
>
>
> "Matt Macchiarolo" <matt@nospamplease.com> wrote in message
> news:X4OdnTWdWq1ejTrZnZ2dnUVZ_tWdnZ2d@comcast.com. ..
>> Thing is, I do remember reading somwhere (not on the net) that for
>> maintenince issues like oil and fluids, the manufacturer (not dealer) is
>> not supposed to charge for it if the manufacturer specifies only their
>> own fluid and no other, which was the case for the NV3550 when it was
>> intro'd. I was googling for a pertinent link about this issue and the
>> Magnusson Moss act but can't find it yet.
>>
>> "Greg Johnson" <Islander2000@webtv.net> wrote in message
>> news:13962-44A6EE86-177@storefull-3317.bay.webtv.net...
>>> "if there is no aftermarket equivalent they are supposed to provide it
>>> for free."
>>>
>>> Why in the world would you say something like that? Don't beleve
>>> everything you read on the internet.
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: nv3550 questions
So the pennzoil synchromesh is "good enough" but isn't synthetic like the
oem stuff, which means I will have to keep changing it instead of leaving it
in there for the lifetime of the vehicle? Doesn't seem to bad as I'm in
Florida and will probably sink the jeep again... Maybe if I trash the
nv3550 I could find an ax15 to slap in there and just use the simpler stuff
in it.
Troy
"Coasty" <uscg_ret at comcast dot net> wrote in message
news:dv2dnZozmva0PTrZnZ2dnUVZ_oidnZ2d@comcast.com. ..
> How the auto companies get away with it is to say a product must meet
> (blank) specifications. They are not saying a particular product is the
> only authorized fluid or you will void your warranty, that would be the
> Magnusson Moss act.
>
> It is just like ATF+4, DC has said the transmission fluid must meet ATF+4
> to be used and the only place you could get ATF+4 was at the Dealer.
> However it is now sold at every parts place as ATF+4 under the Valvoline
> label.
>
> Pennzoil® says their Synchromesh fluid is suitable for use in Chrysler
> transaxles and transmissions requiring Part No. 4874464. However the key
> word is missing in which is (Meets OEM) Chrysler Part No. 4874464. Just
> like the Mercron ATF which said it was suitable for use in DC
> transmissions and when you used it your transmission failed. People were
> either too cheap or did not understand the difference between suitable and
> meets OEM requirements their is a big difference their and they ended up
> paying for it with failed transmissions.
>
> The difference is the Chrysler Part No. 4874464 is a full synthetic
> designed to last the life of the transmission unless it requires
> rebuilding or goes under water and Pennzoil® Synchromesh is not synthetic
> it is a paraffin based lubricant that must be change.
>
> What I have said was confirmed by a writer for Motor Week Pat Goss who I
> talked to on his weekly radio show and he is the most knowledgably auto
> mechanic there is.
>
> The old adage Pay ME Now or Pay Me later came to mind.
>
> Coasty
>
>
> "Matt Macchiarolo" <matt@nospamplease.com> wrote in message
> news:X4OdnTWdWq1ejTrZnZ2dnUVZ_tWdnZ2d@comcast.com. ..
>> Thing is, I do remember reading somwhere (not on the net) that for
>> maintenince issues like oil and fluids, the manufacturer (not dealer) is
>> not supposed to charge for it if the manufacturer specifies only their
>> own fluid and no other, which was the case for the NV3550 when it was
>> intro'd. I was googling for a pertinent link about this issue and the
>> Magnusson Moss act but can't find it yet.
>>
>> "Greg Johnson" <Islander2000@webtv.net> wrote in message
>> news:13962-44A6EE86-177@storefull-3317.bay.webtv.net...
>>> "if there is no aftermarket equivalent they are supposed to provide it
>>> for free."
>>>
>>> Why in the world would you say something like that? Don't beleve
>>> everything you read on the internet.
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
oem stuff, which means I will have to keep changing it instead of leaving it
in there for the lifetime of the vehicle? Doesn't seem to bad as I'm in
Florida and will probably sink the jeep again... Maybe if I trash the
nv3550 I could find an ax15 to slap in there and just use the simpler stuff
in it.
Troy
"Coasty" <uscg_ret at comcast dot net> wrote in message
news:dv2dnZozmva0PTrZnZ2dnUVZ_oidnZ2d@comcast.com. ..
> How the auto companies get away with it is to say a product must meet
> (blank) specifications. They are not saying a particular product is the
> only authorized fluid or you will void your warranty, that would be the
> Magnusson Moss act.
>
> It is just like ATF+4, DC has said the transmission fluid must meet ATF+4
> to be used and the only place you could get ATF+4 was at the Dealer.
> However it is now sold at every parts place as ATF+4 under the Valvoline
> label.
>
> Pennzoil® says their Synchromesh fluid is suitable for use in Chrysler
> transaxles and transmissions requiring Part No. 4874464. However the key
> word is missing in which is (Meets OEM) Chrysler Part No. 4874464. Just
> like the Mercron ATF which said it was suitable for use in DC
> transmissions and when you used it your transmission failed. People were
> either too cheap or did not understand the difference between suitable and
> meets OEM requirements their is a big difference their and they ended up
> paying for it with failed transmissions.
>
> The difference is the Chrysler Part No. 4874464 is a full synthetic
> designed to last the life of the transmission unless it requires
> rebuilding or goes under water and Pennzoil® Synchromesh is not synthetic
> it is a paraffin based lubricant that must be change.
>
> What I have said was confirmed by a writer for Motor Week Pat Goss who I
> talked to on his weekly radio show and he is the most knowledgably auto
> mechanic there is.
>
> The old adage Pay ME Now or Pay Me later came to mind.
>
> Coasty
>
>
> "Matt Macchiarolo" <matt@nospamplease.com> wrote in message
> news:X4OdnTWdWq1ejTrZnZ2dnUVZ_tWdnZ2d@comcast.com. ..
>> Thing is, I do remember reading somwhere (not on the net) that for
>> maintenince issues like oil and fluids, the manufacturer (not dealer) is
>> not supposed to charge for it if the manufacturer specifies only their
>> own fluid and no other, which was the case for the NV3550 when it was
>> intro'd. I was googling for a pertinent link about this issue and the
>> Magnusson Moss act but can't find it yet.
>>
>> "Greg Johnson" <Islander2000@webtv.net> wrote in message
>> news:13962-44A6EE86-177@storefull-3317.bay.webtv.net...
>>> "if there is no aftermarket equivalent they are supposed to provide it
>>> for free."
>>>
>>> Why in the world would you say something like that? Don't beleve
>>> everything you read on the internet.
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: nv3550 questions
What is going on in the nv3550 that makes it require that specific mopar
lubricant? I think I remember reading on the pennzoil syncromesh bottle
that it is safe for "yellow" metals like brass, copper, etc. Being a metal
finisher I would guess that some other lubricants would be mildly acidic or
base and eat up the copper/brass that may be in the nv3550? I dont know if
there is any in there, just guessing. The parts guy ( i know, parts counter
guys, sheesh) says he didn't really sell much of the stuff, and there must
be something out there people are using instead of it.
Troy
"Coasty" <uscg_ret at comcast dot net> wrote in message
news:xYKdnbzGcfy0dDrZnZ2dnUVZ_q2dnZ2d@comcast.com. ..
>
> "Matt Macchiarolo" <matt@nospamplease.com> wrote in message
> news:m5KdnWF_6JC0STrZnZ2dnUVZ_v-dnZ2d@comcast.com...
>>
>> "Coasty" <uscg_ret at comcast dot net> wrote in message
>> news:dv2dnZozmva0PTrZnZ2dnUVZ_oidnZ2d@comcast.com. ..
>>> How the auto companies get away with it is to say a product must meet
>>> (blank) specifications. They are not saying a particular product is the
>>> only authorized fluid or you will void your warranty, that would be the
>>> Magnusson Moss act.
>>>
>> But for th e NV3550, that's exactly what the FSM and the owner's manual
>> said. "Do not use anything but Mopar pert number XXXXXXX."
>
> Matt,
>
> Go to the Pennzoil web site and read the specs it says "SUITABLE for use
> in Chrysler transaxles and transmissions requiring Part No. 4874464 it
> does not say MEETS Chrysler transaxles and transmissions requiring Part
> No. 4874464. Suitable does not mean it meets OEM specs.
>
> The Magnusson Moss Warranty Act does not prevent an auto company from
> specifically specifying a particular OEM fluid such as Part No. 4874464
> for the manual transmission they just are not telling you what is a
> substitute and they do not have to. However what ever if you use any
> thing else it must say on the container MEETS Chrysler specifications Part
> No. 4874464. Saying SUITABLE is not the same and could void any warranty.
>
> (OT but relevant) For over 20 years Harley Davidson said any other oil but
> theirs would ruin the engine and GOD forbid if you used synthetic your
> engine would just blow up. Today HD sells their own brand of synthetic
> oil however that cannot say it is exclusive and the only oil you can use
> in the engines. HD was one of the reasons for the Magnusson Moss Warranty
> Act.
>
> Meets means that it is equal any other wording such as suitable, can be
> used instead, and my all time favorite can be used with special additive
> just does not cut it.
>
> Coasty
>
lubricant? I think I remember reading on the pennzoil syncromesh bottle
that it is safe for "yellow" metals like brass, copper, etc. Being a metal
finisher I would guess that some other lubricants would be mildly acidic or
base and eat up the copper/brass that may be in the nv3550? I dont know if
there is any in there, just guessing. The parts guy ( i know, parts counter
guys, sheesh) says he didn't really sell much of the stuff, and there must
be something out there people are using instead of it.
Troy
"Coasty" <uscg_ret at comcast dot net> wrote in message
news:xYKdnbzGcfy0dDrZnZ2dnUVZ_q2dnZ2d@comcast.com. ..
>
> "Matt Macchiarolo" <matt@nospamplease.com> wrote in message
> news:m5KdnWF_6JC0STrZnZ2dnUVZ_v-dnZ2d@comcast.com...
>>
>> "Coasty" <uscg_ret at comcast dot net> wrote in message
>> news:dv2dnZozmva0PTrZnZ2dnUVZ_oidnZ2d@comcast.com. ..
>>> How the auto companies get away with it is to say a product must meet
>>> (blank) specifications. They are not saying a particular product is the
>>> only authorized fluid or you will void your warranty, that would be the
>>> Magnusson Moss act.
>>>
>> But for th e NV3550, that's exactly what the FSM and the owner's manual
>> said. "Do not use anything but Mopar pert number XXXXXXX."
>
> Matt,
>
> Go to the Pennzoil web site and read the specs it says "SUITABLE for use
> in Chrysler transaxles and transmissions requiring Part No. 4874464 it
> does not say MEETS Chrysler transaxles and transmissions requiring Part
> No. 4874464. Suitable does not mean it meets OEM specs.
>
> The Magnusson Moss Warranty Act does not prevent an auto company from
> specifically specifying a particular OEM fluid such as Part No. 4874464
> for the manual transmission they just are not telling you what is a
> substitute and they do not have to. However what ever if you use any
> thing else it must say on the container MEETS Chrysler specifications Part
> No. 4874464. Saying SUITABLE is not the same and could void any warranty.
>
> (OT but relevant) For over 20 years Harley Davidson said any other oil but
> theirs would ruin the engine and GOD forbid if you used synthetic your
> engine would just blow up. Today HD sells their own brand of synthetic
> oil however that cannot say it is exclusive and the only oil you can use
> in the engines. HD was one of the reasons for the Magnusson Moss Warranty
> Act.
>
> Meets means that it is equal any other wording such as suitable, can be
> used instead, and my all time favorite can be used with special additive
> just does not cut it.
>
> Coasty
>
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: nv3550 questions
What is going on in the nv3550 that makes it require that specific mopar
lubricant? I think I remember reading on the pennzoil syncromesh bottle
that it is safe for "yellow" metals like brass, copper, etc. Being a metal
finisher I would guess that some other lubricants would be mildly acidic or
base and eat up the copper/brass that may be in the nv3550? I dont know if
there is any in there, just guessing. The parts guy ( i know, parts counter
guys, sheesh) says he didn't really sell much of the stuff, and there must
be something out there people are using instead of it.
Troy
"Coasty" <uscg_ret at comcast dot net> wrote in message
news:xYKdnbzGcfy0dDrZnZ2dnUVZ_q2dnZ2d@comcast.com. ..
>
> "Matt Macchiarolo" <matt@nospamplease.com> wrote in message
> news:m5KdnWF_6JC0STrZnZ2dnUVZ_v-dnZ2d@comcast.com...
>>
>> "Coasty" <uscg_ret at comcast dot net> wrote in message
>> news:dv2dnZozmva0PTrZnZ2dnUVZ_oidnZ2d@comcast.com. ..
>>> How the auto companies get away with it is to say a product must meet
>>> (blank) specifications. They are not saying a particular product is the
>>> only authorized fluid or you will void your warranty, that would be the
>>> Magnusson Moss act.
>>>
>> But for th e NV3550, that's exactly what the FSM and the owner's manual
>> said. "Do not use anything but Mopar pert number XXXXXXX."
>
> Matt,
>
> Go to the Pennzoil web site and read the specs it says "SUITABLE for use
> in Chrysler transaxles and transmissions requiring Part No. 4874464 it
> does not say MEETS Chrysler transaxles and transmissions requiring Part
> No. 4874464. Suitable does not mean it meets OEM specs.
>
> The Magnusson Moss Warranty Act does not prevent an auto company from
> specifically specifying a particular OEM fluid such as Part No. 4874464
> for the manual transmission they just are not telling you what is a
> substitute and they do not have to. However what ever if you use any
> thing else it must say on the container MEETS Chrysler specifications Part
> No. 4874464. Saying SUITABLE is not the same and could void any warranty.
>
> (OT but relevant) For over 20 years Harley Davidson said any other oil but
> theirs would ruin the engine and GOD forbid if you used synthetic your
> engine would just blow up. Today HD sells their own brand of synthetic
> oil however that cannot say it is exclusive and the only oil you can use
> in the engines. HD was one of the reasons for the Magnusson Moss Warranty
> Act.
>
> Meets means that it is equal any other wording such as suitable, can be
> used instead, and my all time favorite can be used with special additive
> just does not cut it.
>
> Coasty
>
lubricant? I think I remember reading on the pennzoil syncromesh bottle
that it is safe for "yellow" metals like brass, copper, etc. Being a metal
finisher I would guess that some other lubricants would be mildly acidic or
base and eat up the copper/brass that may be in the nv3550? I dont know if
there is any in there, just guessing. The parts guy ( i know, parts counter
guys, sheesh) says he didn't really sell much of the stuff, and there must
be something out there people are using instead of it.
Troy
"Coasty" <uscg_ret at comcast dot net> wrote in message
news:xYKdnbzGcfy0dDrZnZ2dnUVZ_q2dnZ2d@comcast.com. ..
>
> "Matt Macchiarolo" <matt@nospamplease.com> wrote in message
> news:m5KdnWF_6JC0STrZnZ2dnUVZ_v-dnZ2d@comcast.com...
>>
>> "Coasty" <uscg_ret at comcast dot net> wrote in message
>> news:dv2dnZozmva0PTrZnZ2dnUVZ_oidnZ2d@comcast.com. ..
>>> How the auto companies get away with it is to say a product must meet
>>> (blank) specifications. They are not saying a particular product is the
>>> only authorized fluid or you will void your warranty, that would be the
>>> Magnusson Moss act.
>>>
>> But for th e NV3550, that's exactly what the FSM and the owner's manual
>> said. "Do not use anything but Mopar pert number XXXXXXX."
>
> Matt,
>
> Go to the Pennzoil web site and read the specs it says "SUITABLE for use
> in Chrysler transaxles and transmissions requiring Part No. 4874464 it
> does not say MEETS Chrysler transaxles and transmissions requiring Part
> No. 4874464. Suitable does not mean it meets OEM specs.
>
> The Magnusson Moss Warranty Act does not prevent an auto company from
> specifically specifying a particular OEM fluid such as Part No. 4874464
> for the manual transmission they just are not telling you what is a
> substitute and they do not have to. However what ever if you use any
> thing else it must say on the container MEETS Chrysler specifications Part
> No. 4874464. Saying SUITABLE is not the same and could void any warranty.
>
> (OT but relevant) For over 20 years Harley Davidson said any other oil but
> theirs would ruin the engine and GOD forbid if you used synthetic your
> engine would just blow up. Today HD sells their own brand of synthetic
> oil however that cannot say it is exclusive and the only oil you can use
> in the engines. HD was one of the reasons for the Magnusson Moss Warranty
> Act.
>
> Meets means that it is equal any other wording such as suitable, can be
> used instead, and my all time favorite can be used with special additive
> just does not cut it.
>
> Coasty
>
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: nv3550 questions
What is going on in the nv3550 that makes it require that specific mopar
lubricant? I think I remember reading on the pennzoil syncromesh bottle
that it is safe for "yellow" metals like brass, copper, etc. Being a metal
finisher I would guess that some other lubricants would be mildly acidic or
base and eat up the copper/brass that may be in the nv3550? I dont know if
there is any in there, just guessing. The parts guy ( i know, parts counter
guys, sheesh) says he didn't really sell much of the stuff, and there must
be something out there people are using instead of it.
Troy
"Coasty" <uscg_ret at comcast dot net> wrote in message
news:xYKdnbzGcfy0dDrZnZ2dnUVZ_q2dnZ2d@comcast.com. ..
>
> "Matt Macchiarolo" <matt@nospamplease.com> wrote in message
> news:m5KdnWF_6JC0STrZnZ2dnUVZ_v-dnZ2d@comcast.com...
>>
>> "Coasty" <uscg_ret at comcast dot net> wrote in message
>> news:dv2dnZozmva0PTrZnZ2dnUVZ_oidnZ2d@comcast.com. ..
>>> How the auto companies get away with it is to say a product must meet
>>> (blank) specifications. They are not saying a particular product is the
>>> only authorized fluid or you will void your warranty, that would be the
>>> Magnusson Moss act.
>>>
>> But for th e NV3550, that's exactly what the FSM and the owner's manual
>> said. "Do not use anything but Mopar pert number XXXXXXX."
>
> Matt,
>
> Go to the Pennzoil web site and read the specs it says "SUITABLE for use
> in Chrysler transaxles and transmissions requiring Part No. 4874464 it
> does not say MEETS Chrysler transaxles and transmissions requiring Part
> No. 4874464. Suitable does not mean it meets OEM specs.
>
> The Magnusson Moss Warranty Act does not prevent an auto company from
> specifically specifying a particular OEM fluid such as Part No. 4874464
> for the manual transmission they just are not telling you what is a
> substitute and they do not have to. However what ever if you use any
> thing else it must say on the container MEETS Chrysler specifications Part
> No. 4874464. Saying SUITABLE is not the same and could void any warranty.
>
> (OT but relevant) For over 20 years Harley Davidson said any other oil but
> theirs would ruin the engine and GOD forbid if you used synthetic your
> engine would just blow up. Today HD sells their own brand of synthetic
> oil however that cannot say it is exclusive and the only oil you can use
> in the engines. HD was one of the reasons for the Magnusson Moss Warranty
> Act.
>
> Meets means that it is equal any other wording such as suitable, can be
> used instead, and my all time favorite can be used with special additive
> just does not cut it.
>
> Coasty
>
lubricant? I think I remember reading on the pennzoil syncromesh bottle
that it is safe for "yellow" metals like brass, copper, etc. Being a metal
finisher I would guess that some other lubricants would be mildly acidic or
base and eat up the copper/brass that may be in the nv3550? I dont know if
there is any in there, just guessing. The parts guy ( i know, parts counter
guys, sheesh) says he didn't really sell much of the stuff, and there must
be something out there people are using instead of it.
Troy
"Coasty" <uscg_ret at comcast dot net> wrote in message
news:xYKdnbzGcfy0dDrZnZ2dnUVZ_q2dnZ2d@comcast.com. ..
>
> "Matt Macchiarolo" <matt@nospamplease.com> wrote in message
> news:m5KdnWF_6JC0STrZnZ2dnUVZ_v-dnZ2d@comcast.com...
>>
>> "Coasty" <uscg_ret at comcast dot net> wrote in message
>> news:dv2dnZozmva0PTrZnZ2dnUVZ_oidnZ2d@comcast.com. ..
>>> How the auto companies get away with it is to say a product must meet
>>> (blank) specifications. They are not saying a particular product is the
>>> only authorized fluid or you will void your warranty, that would be the
>>> Magnusson Moss act.
>>>
>> But for th e NV3550, that's exactly what the FSM and the owner's manual
>> said. "Do not use anything but Mopar pert number XXXXXXX."
>
> Matt,
>
> Go to the Pennzoil web site and read the specs it says "SUITABLE for use
> in Chrysler transaxles and transmissions requiring Part No. 4874464 it
> does not say MEETS Chrysler transaxles and transmissions requiring Part
> No. 4874464. Suitable does not mean it meets OEM specs.
>
> The Magnusson Moss Warranty Act does not prevent an auto company from
> specifically specifying a particular OEM fluid such as Part No. 4874464
> for the manual transmission they just are not telling you what is a
> substitute and they do not have to. However what ever if you use any
> thing else it must say on the container MEETS Chrysler specifications Part
> No. 4874464. Saying SUITABLE is not the same and could void any warranty.
>
> (OT but relevant) For over 20 years Harley Davidson said any other oil but
> theirs would ruin the engine and GOD forbid if you used synthetic your
> engine would just blow up. Today HD sells their own brand of synthetic
> oil however that cannot say it is exclusive and the only oil you can use
> in the engines. HD was one of the reasons for the Magnusson Moss Warranty
> Act.
>
> Meets means that it is equal any other wording such as suitable, can be
> used instead, and my all time favorite can be used with special additive
> just does not cut it.
>
> Coasty
>
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: nv3550 questions
> Matt,
>
> Go to the Pennzoil web site and read the specs it says "SUITABLE for use
> in Chrysler transaxles and transmissions requiring Part No. 4874464 it
> does not say MEETS Chrysler transaxles and transmissions requiring Part
> No. 4874464. Suitable does not mean it meets OEM specs.
>
I did see that, I was just quoting what it says on the bottle.
> The Magnusson Moss Warranty Act does not prevent an auto company from
> specifically specifying a particular OEM fluid such as Part No. 4874464
> for the manual transmission they just are not telling you what is a
> substitute and they do not have to.
Do they not have to say "Or Equivalent," or provide a published
specification?
However what ever if you use any thing else it
> must say on the container MEETS Chrysler specifications Part No. 4874464.
> Saying SUITABLE is not the same and could void any warranty.
I do not know what Chrysler spec MS9224 is, do you? Could it be the spec for
the NV transmissions?
From FSM: "Required lubricant for the NV3550 is Mopar Manual Transmission
Lubricant P/N 4761526. This is the only lubricant to be used in NV3550
transmissions. No other lubricants are acceptable, or recommended." Can't
explain why the part numbers are different.
They are not stating "or equivalent," they are saying "don't use anything
but our oil." Does that mean if I use the GM part for the same transmissions
(as NVG also supplied trannys for GM) I would void the warranty?
As it is, it's all moot since my TJ is out of warranty. :-)
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: nv3550 questions
> Matt,
>
> Go to the Pennzoil web site and read the specs it says "SUITABLE for use
> in Chrysler transaxles and transmissions requiring Part No. 4874464 it
> does not say MEETS Chrysler transaxles and transmissions requiring Part
> No. 4874464. Suitable does not mean it meets OEM specs.
>
I did see that, I was just quoting what it says on the bottle.
> The Magnusson Moss Warranty Act does not prevent an auto company from
> specifically specifying a particular OEM fluid such as Part No. 4874464
> for the manual transmission they just are not telling you what is a
> substitute and they do not have to.
Do they not have to say "Or Equivalent," or provide a published
specification?
However what ever if you use any thing else it
> must say on the container MEETS Chrysler specifications Part No. 4874464.
> Saying SUITABLE is not the same and could void any warranty.
I do not know what Chrysler spec MS9224 is, do you? Could it be the spec for
the NV transmissions?
From FSM: "Required lubricant for the NV3550 is Mopar Manual Transmission
Lubricant P/N 4761526. This is the only lubricant to be used in NV3550
transmissions. No other lubricants are acceptable, or recommended." Can't
explain why the part numbers are different.
They are not stating "or equivalent," they are saying "don't use anything
but our oil." Does that mean if I use the GM part for the same transmissions
(as NVG also supplied trannys for GM) I would void the warranty?
As it is, it's all moot since my TJ is out of warranty. :-)
