Those Having Trouble with 6sp

AintQik · 11-28-05, 04:26 PM

I had GM put Syncormesh in my gear box and there is quite an improvement. It even goes into 1st easier when stopped. Lots of folks complaining about this. I can't answer any questions about warranty I can only speak to before and after. If anybody is wondering, a tuner here in Jersey recommended it when I told him 3rd is tough to engage over 6k rpms. He said this stuff was the ticket. Too cold to shift into 3rd over 6k now (gets way too loose in the cold and track is closed), but so far everything feels purty dang good. Its 60 today so maybe I'll get a chance to go beat on her if it stays dry. Also, at 10K miles there was lots of material in my ATF when we drained it. It was really brown which I can't begin to guess what it is. Composite syncros? Maybe just break in stuff. Anyways, I'm pretty happy with the swap. Its around $13 a quart, you need 3 or 4, and its something you can do on your own. It was in the 40s and the guys at GM were bored that's why I let them do it. If you hate your 6sp... try it.
rj

c4c5specialist · 12-12-05, 04:09 PM

Hi there,
That is a very bad move, and will VOID your warranty on your transmission, due to incorrect fluid inside the unit.
Tolerancing of bearings and the composition of the syncronizer frictional surfaces are critical and this will create problems with the lubrication of critical components.
Allthebest, c4c5

DRTH VTR · 12-12-05, 04:24 PM

c4c5-
Nice to see you here!
Jim

AintQik · 12-13-05, 01:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by c4c5specialist

Hi there,
That is a very bad move, and will VOID your warranty on your transmission, due to incorrect fluid inside the unit.
Tolerancing of bearings and the composition of the syncronizer frictional surfaces are critical and this will create problems with the lubrication of critical components.
Allthebest, c4c5

I completely believe you. This tip was given to me by a tuner who runs syncromesh in his cars. I have since come to realize that this tuner is a moron. My big problem is the stinking tranny works so much better that I am having a hard time taking this stuff out. It feels like the composite syncros are actually doing better with this stuff. But, I think I'll take the stuff out to be sure. But man it shifts fast.

1stiff84 · 12-13-05, 03:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DRTH VTR

c4c5-
Nice to see you here!
Jim

Amen!

c4c5specialist · 12-13-05, 04:44 PM

Hi there,
The best option for this transmission is Redline D4 ATF.
This is a synthetic lubricant with a substantially different friction modifier package, to aid in syncronizer function.
Because it is classified as Dexron 3, you can use this without voiding your warranty, and still obtain the benefits for the shifting problems.
Allthebest, c4c5

bossvette · 12-13-05, 05:27 PM

I really like the Redline Synthetic in mine, never thought about warrenty; but at 90,000+ miles I don't think it matters

Gorgon · 12-13-05, 10:09 PM

I had a similar experience putting synchromesh in my C5 tranny. After C4C5 cautioning as he did here I swapped it for the Redline ATF. It didn't seem to be as good as the Synchromesh when shifting but was an improvement over the standard fluid. There's definitely an improvment shifting into first gear which was the main reason for the switch to begin with.

Leon

c4c5specialist · 12-14-05, 07:37 AM

As a sidebar, the reason that Syncromesh seems to make the syncronizers work better?????????
Its a thicker oil, so it slows down the spinning of the syncronizer hubs to gear.
But, the oil doesnt flow as well into the bearings or into the frictional surfaces.
The Redline does this, with a friction modifier package, NOT JUST THICKER FLUID.
Allthebest, c4c5

AintQik · 12-14-05, 08:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by c4c5specialist

As a sidebar, the reason that Syncromesh seems to make the syncronizers work better?????????
Its a thicker oil, so it slows down the spinning of the syncronizer hubs to gear.
But, the oil doesnt flow as well into the bearings or into the frictional surfaces.
The Redline does this, with a friction modifier package, NOT JUST THICKER FLUID.
Allthebest, c4c5

Yeah, its kind of like saying dumping molasses in the thing is a good idea cause it "feels" great. Nevermind the thing will self destruct. I'm really kinda mad that a reputable Vette shop would tell me to do something like this. Ah well live and learn.

Byron · 01-13-06, 04:57 PM

There is a TSB that states that Dextron VI ATF can now be used in place of Dextron III. It has some pretty interesting characteristics that might help those with balky shifters.

QUESTION: Can this also be used in the M6, or does that still require Dexron III ATF?

Byron · 01-13-06, 05:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Byron

There is a TSB that states that Dextron VI ATF can now be used in place of Dextron III. It has some pretty interesting characteristics that might help those with balky shifters.

QUESTION: Can this also be used in the M6, or does that still require Dexron III ATF?

The link is here ....

http://corvetteactioncenter.com/kb/q....php?qstId=563

c4c5specialist · 01-14-06, 08:39 AM

HI there,
You can use Dexron 6 in ALL TRANSMISSIONS, that classify a Dexron 3.
However, I am NOT sure about the changes in the friction modifier package, so I do NOT know if there will be a benefit to shifting characteristics.
Allthebest, c4c5

Byron · 01-15-06, 05:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by c4c5specialist

HI there,
You can use Dexron 6 in ALL TRANSMISSIONS, that classify a Dexron 3.
However, I am NOT sure about the changes in the friction modifier package, so I do NOT know if there will be a benefit to shifting characteristics.
Allthebest, c4c5

Thanks. Mine is shifting fine, so I don't feel a need to change. Here are the things that got my attention from the TSB. (I realize they are talking about the auto tran here).

Clutch Friction Stability
Improved 100%

Clutch Durability Due To Fluid
Improved 120%

Oil Film Thickness
Increased 20%

c4c5specialist · 01-16-06, 05:53 AM

Understood.
The first and second point can relate to the T56 also, because the syncronizers frictional surface cones in the early T56 were paper, just like clutches in the automatics. So it may assist in syncronizer function. It was only later on in production of the T56, that the carbon composition friction surfaces in the syncronizer cones were introduced.
3rd point, I do not know what type of benefit that would have on the T56.
Allthebest, c4c5