RE: Redlinin'

[DeWitt Harrison <de@aztek-eng.com>]

At 02:16 AM 12/9/99 -0800, Todd Phenneger wrote:
>Everyone seems to keep forgetting about Redline MTL.  MT-90 is great if
>you live in a warm climate but in cold climates that have cold winters the
>MTL works much better.  Its the same type of stuff as the MT-90  (has the
>friction stuff for snchros designating the MT before it for Manual
>Transaxle) but is a lighter weight.  75-80 weight where the MT-90 is a
>75-90.  yea, bthey are both 75-weight rated but the MTL works better at
>low temps.  thats why its there. [ ... ]

Kinda maybe. AFAIK, MTL is not marketed as a low temp version of
MT-90. MTL is designed for synchromesh manual transmissions and
does that job very well. And even though it is generally perfect for
transmissions it's not really up to high pressure differential service,
especially for tweaked cars. At GL-4,  MTL is also a tick shy of
Audi's own GL requirement for the transaxle.

I used MTL in my first transaxle. It has very nice shifting characteristics,
I'll agree, but the tranny eventually started making ugly bearing noises.
The MT-90 in the current rebuilt unit makes the shifting a bit less
silky because there is a little less friction available to operate the synchro
cones. However, the box is holding up very well under fairly hard use.

IF you had the discipline to change your gear oil seasonally, perhaps
MTL in the coldest part of the winter would be a reasonable choice.
That's an expensive proposition with Redline gear lube though.
On the other hand, I have not experienced any increase in shifting
effort with MT-90 during the winter months in Colorado. In fact it
seems to me that MT-90 should shift even better cold. Any viscosity
increase should start to operate the synchromesh more effectively.
Waddaya think?

>>(I had written about a 89 tqw:) MT-90 front and 75W90 rear is the
>>correct setup for your car.
>>
>>DeWitt Harrison
>>Boulder, CO
>>88 5kcstq