Mista Bone wrote:
'94 Civic Si 5 speed. Any particular reason you are adamant about not
using Redline MTL?

Randolph wrote:

I'm interested in this issue myself. The manual specifies ordinary
10w-30 or 10w-40. What's the need for Honda MTL? I recently bought
10w-30 (thinner for winter) for my 94 Civic EX and was planning to
change it soon, since I doubt the prev owner ever did it.

Lowest winter temps here are maybe 0 F. At about 30 last night and not
having driven it in a week, it was a tad difficult to get it into first.
116K miles. I'll probably give the regular oil a shot and see how it
goes. If the shit that's in there now is ancient, as I suspect after
seeing the brake fluid, I expect I'll see improvement.

Abeness wrote:
========================

The manual you're quoting is NINE years old . . .The petroleum industry
(and Honda) have come up with a lot of better ideas since then. They
wouldn't be recommending anything that would be a step backwards, I'm
sure.:-)


'Curly'

motsco_ _ wrote:
True enough. I suppose the question is, however, whether what the manual
recommends is sufficient. Obviously it was, at the time.

Abeness wrote:

i wonder if a regular mobil1 synth would work.
hopefully. i replaced the tranny fluid on an old MG midget w/ 4speed
manual and it made a pretty big difference. lost all its notchiness.

and that was just replacing with the recommended 75/80wt gear oil.

motsco_ _ wrote:

might some of the newer stuff actually be *too* good? as in too
slippery, etc?

SoCalMike wrote:

Using a synthetic motor oil in the transmission is a problem because it
is too slippery. The synthetic transmission fluids are formulated to
give appropriate friction for synchronizers etc.

SoCalMike wrote:
How could it be too slippery? Once the gears are engaged, they ain't
gonna slip away from each other. Seems like it could only be an improvement.

SoCalMike wrote:
We shall see.... <g>

Randolph wrote:
Hmmm, OK.