NV5600 & Spec MS-9224

[NIsaacs]

Now we are picking little black specks out of pepper. They are the same, however drivers are not.



As far as sheer testing, at what oil temp is this performed at?





"NICK"

 

[amsoilman]

Now we are picking little black specks out of pepper. They are the same, however drivers are not.



As far as sheer testing, at what oil temp is this performed at?





"NICK"

High Temperature/High Shear Viscosity

(ASTM D-4683 @ 150°C, 1. 0 X 106 s. -1, cP



This is a test used on MOTOR OIL, not Transmissions.





Wayne

 

[steved]

High Temperature/High Shear Viscosity

(ASTM D-4683 @ 150°C, 1. 0 X 106 s. -1, cP



This is a test used on MOTOR OIL, not Transmissions.





Wayne

Can you elaborate on this a little more Wayne??



steved

 

[Gary - K7GLD]

I don't think a mass produced NV5600 transmission is unique in itself, with different operating characteristics, based on which lube it is using.



However, I do think it might have unique operating differences based on it's owner/driver.



"NICK"

I tend to disagree - based upon the MANY reports of other owners, plus my own direct experience!



Specifically, I suspect the NV-5600's greatest weakness lies upon a poor synchronizer design that doesn't provide either the right material, or else insufficient surface area to properly engage sync action and properly slow gear rotation for smooth shifting between gears.



That "weakness", or design flaw makes these trannies unusually sensitive to the lubes that will work best in them for smoothest shifting. Sure, guys who try drag racing or otherwise "rush" shifting will see problems far sooner and more frequently than those who are slower and more careful - and they are also far more likely to prematurely wear out the syncros in the process. But they are only increasing the symptom and effect of that existing design weakness, not CAUSING it!



I suppose another way of expressing this weakness, is that the poor syncro function of these trannies creates a very narrow "window" of proper and acceptable shifting characteristic, and one that is quickly and easily tilted out of range by rapid shifts that prevent the weak suncros to properly adjust gear speeds, OR, lubes and internal variations in manufacturing tolerances that in their own way also prevent the needed syncro action in these specific transmissions - but nevertheless, the real problem is FAR more likely a syncro design issue than a lube issue!



In my own case, my 5600 has always displayed the SLIGHT tendency when cold, to "catch" a gear between 2nd and 3rd - and on rare occasion from 3rd to 4th - but this can ALWAYS be reduced or eliminated by slower shifts - and goes away on it's own after a couple of blocks driving, or in warmer seasons.



BUT, on the 2 occasions I have experimented with "superior" lubes, in a vain effort to eliminate even the MINOR issues I had, it only made shifting FAR worse - and I suspect it was BECAUSE those lubes WERE superior, and rendered the already weak syncro action worse by eliminating the friction they needed to properly slow gear rotation for best shifting action.



AND, I have read enough here from other owners, guys who were very specific in stating that THEY TOO were shifting slowly and carefully - but still experienced grinding at shifts with whatever "better" lube they were using as a trial substitute.



So, that's my own theory, and while it doesn't provide all the answers or cover all the bases, in my own opinion, it is EXACTLY the variation in manufacturing tolerances of these trannies, combined WITH the weak syncro design, that causes rather wide variations in shifting smoothness from one brand/type lube to another...

 

[amsoilman]

Can you elaborate on this a little more Wayne??



steved

As you know, Engine oils run hotter than transmission oil, like used in the

NV-5600 transmissions, so the High temp/High shear testing is used on engine oils.



Here is how the ASTM explains the testing:



This test method covers the laboratory determination of the viscosity of engine oils at 150C and

1X106 s-1 shear rate using a tapered bearing simulator-viscometer (TBS Viscometer) equipped with a refined thermoregulator system. Older TBS units not so equipped must use Test Method D 4683-87.



1. 2 The Newtonian calibration oils used to establish this test method cover the range from approximately 1. 5 to 5. 6 cP (mPas) at 150°C.



1. 3 The non-Newtonian reference oil used to establish this test method has a viscosity of approximately 3. 5 cP (mPas) at 150C and a shear rate of 1 x 106 s 1.



1. 4 Applicability to petroleum products other than engine oils has not been determined in preparing this test method.



1. 5 This test method uses the centipoise (cP) as the unit of viscosity. For information on the equivalent SI unit, the millipascal second (mPas) is shown in parentheses.



What all this means is oils that have a higher HT/HS rating, (measured in cP)

the greater the level of protection.



Wayne

 

[NIsaacs]

Will the NV5600 react differently to different oils as far as syncro action? Yes, however they will all act the same (if they are new) with the same driver. If they are used, then they will act or react based on the wear of that particular transmission and driver.



It does not stand to reason that there are enough tolerance difference between "new" syncros. They all come from the same mold and install/operate the same. There is no "adjustment or install procedure" that would vary between new assembly.



Are the syncro's in the NV5600 flawed or weak? Maybe, but ya don't want an aggressive syncro with the weight/rotating mass of a transmission of this size. It would just destroy them prematurely.



With a transmission of this size, you want to use the engine rpm to assist, with the syncro as the final tiny bit of mismatch. When the engine/transmission is cold, this rpm drop is quick, so shift quick but gentle. With a warm combo the reverse is necessary. Shift slow and gentle.



So... ..... I still say the main difference between trannys is the driver. I am not implying they are bad, just different





"NICK"

 

[steved]

... however they will all act the same (if they are new) with the same driver. If they are used, then they will act or react based on the wear of that particular transmission and driver.





"NICK"

I disagree... I drove five different NV5600 trucks before buying mine (#6) and not one shifted identical to the other... each had its own quirk whether it was difficulty between two gears, speed needed to shift correctly, etc... and that was a single driver in six trucks.



steved

 

[Vaughn MacKenzie]

I've owned two NV5600 trucks and the shifting characteristics between the two were VERY different. The first was an '01 and the other an '03. As I understand it there were some minor changes to the NV5600 in '03 so that could be part of it. The trans in my '01 was notchier and not as smooth going into gear, the '03 shifted great with no complaints other than sometimes I'd have a hard time catching 3rd gear if I was taking off like a jackrabbit.

 

[Gary - K7GLD]

Nick sez:

Will the NV5600 react differently to different oils as far as syncro action? Yes, however they will all act the same (if they are new) with the same driver. If they are used, then they will act or react based on the wear of that particular transmission and driver.

HOOOKAYyyyyy, then perhaps you can explain WHY on my own transmission, why I could switch to Amsoil, drive a mile or so EXACTLY the same way I always have, and within a mile, begin experiencing severe grinding between gears. THEN, after a week or so, change BACK to the OEM 9224 DC stuff - and WITHIN A MILE, obtain a return to the shifting quality as I had previous to the Amsoil.



That exact scenario was repeated later with Redline MTL - abundant grinding with the MTL - complete return of shift quality with the return to the 9224 - SAME truck, SAME transmission, SAME driver - and driven EXACTLY the same way - but 2 entirely DIFFERENT shifting characteristics between the aftermarket lubes and the OEM stuff!



I'm interested in hearing your explanation, if NOT what I earlier suggested... :-laf:-laf

 

[JHardwick]

Can you elaborate on this a little more Wayne??



steved

Please don't :-laf

 

[JHardwick]

It does not stand to reason that there are enough tolerance difference between "new" syncros. They all come from the same mold and install/operate the same. There is no "adjustment or install procedure" that would vary between new assembly.

As a machinist, process engineer and shop owner for over 20 years, ALL parts have a tolerance and ALL assemblies have a stacked, or accumulated tolerance.



The closest you'll ever come to having 2 identical assemblies is by using geometric tolerancing, and I'm betting NV does not use geometric tolerancing.

 

[NIsaacs]

Geeze, what can ya learn about a brand new truck, with a five minute test drive? Ya gotta break it in and get comfy with it. When I jump out of my 01 and get in my 91, I can't drive it worth a darn





"NICK"

 

[NIsaacs]

As a machinist, process engineer and shop owner for over 20 years, ALL parts have a tolerance and ALL assemblies have a stacked, or accumulated tolerance.



The closest you'll ever come to having 2 identical assemblies is by using geometric tolerancing, and I'm betting NV does not use geometric tolerancing.

You are comparing apples to oranges. There is no machine work necessary in the assembly of a simple standard truck transmission. You can mix and match transmission parts from several trannys and make one.





"NICK"

 

[amsoilman]

Please don't :-laf

To bad... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ..... I already did!



Wayne

 

[Gary - K7GLD]

You are comparing apples to oranges. There is no machine work necessary in the assembly of a simple standard truck transmission. You can mix and match transmission parts from several trannys and make one.





"NICK"

UMmmmm - are you claiming here, and in public, that there is NO machining involved in the gears, shafts, bushings, retainers, clips, syncros and the transmission case itself?



And NO possibility of manufacturing tolerance differences between those individual parts and assemblies?



We're not talking ASSEMBLY here - but actual MANUFACTURING of individual components and assemblies!



Is it your claim and theory that all those parts are CAST into perfectly fitting finished form, with NO machine work or tolerance variations involved?



My journeyman machinist son will get a BIG laugh outta all this - tolerance control, measuring and verification is always a MAJOR issue in the machining process - some outfits do it better and to closer values than others - but it's ALWAYS a big issue! :-laf:-laf:-laf



Give it up Nick, yer just digging yourself in deeper and deeper... :-laf

 

[NIsaacs]

I said assembly of the transmission, that the parts will interchange between trannys of the same model, that the machine work of a simple syncro is not a tolerance fit. Dont put words in my mouth that are not said. Of course there is machine work in manufacturing trannys, just not to the point of the syncros, they "are" just molded.





"NICK'

 

[Gary - K7GLD]

Hey Nick, when are ya gonna reply to THIS earlier post:

HOOOKAYyyyyy, then perhaps you can explain WHY on my own transmission, why I could switch to Amsoil, drive a mile or so EXACTLY the same way I always have, and within a mile, begin experiencing severe grinding between gears. THEN, after a week or so, change BACK to the OEM 9224 DC stuff - and WITHIN A MILE, obtain a return to the shifting quality as I had previous to the Amsoil.



That exact scenario was repeated later with Redline MTL - abundant grinding with the MTL - complete return of shift quality with the return to the 9224 - SAME truck, SAME transmission, SAME driver - and driven EXACTLY the same way - but 2 entirely DIFFERENT shifting characteristics between the aftermarket lubes and the OEM stuff!



I'm interested in hearing your explanation, if NOT what I earlier suggested... :-laf:-laf

And as to THIS:

I said assembly of the transmission, that the parts will interchange between trannys of the same model, that the machine work of a simple syncro is not a tolerance fit. Dont put words in my mouth that are not said. Of course there is machine work in manufacturing trannys, just not to the point of the syncros, they "are" just molded.

You convieniently overlooked THIS sentence in my statement:

We're not talking ASSEMBLY here - but actual MANUFACTURING of individual components and assemblies!

Which was clearly directed to the stated assertion that variations in NV-5600 shifting characteristics might well be the direct result of variations in manufacturing tolerances (machining!).



And as to the syncros themselves, not sure about the ones in my NV-5600, but virtually ALL the previous manual transmission syncros *I* have worked on, were machined brass...

 

[NIsaacs]

And yes Gary, I will give up, I might have known you would get to the ridicule stage... ... ... .





"NICK"

 

[Gary - K7GLD]

And yes Gary, I will give up, I might have known you would get to the ridicule stage... ... ... .





"NICK"

Nick, I might tease you and give you a spirited debate, but I would never ridicule you, we go back a ways together on this board.



But sure, I certainly WILL challenge what appears to be flawed fact, logic or reasoning from you, just as I would expect and accept from YOU if/when I put my foot in my mouth - and I have had to eat my own share of Crow on theses boards in the past!



SO, if you have additional facts to provide to support your apparent position that there's little/no likelihood of manufacturing tolerance variations in the NV-5600 sufficient to affect sensitivity to lubricants or to adversely affect general shifting quality, fire away!



Otherwise, blaming ME or my posts for your silence is a cop-out I wouldn't expect from you.

 

[NIsaacs]

Gary, what I am and have been trying to say, is that standard transmissions are simple, syncros are simple and that all parts are machined simple, they will all mix and match and make one. They are not individually machined to only fit one application as in the usual term of machine fit.



That the major player is in the driver not the machining or assembly of the trannys. Who knows, I "might" could drive "your' truck with the so called "bad" lube that you found unacceptable.





"NICK"