Huber Transmisions ?????
06-02-2009 | 01:52 PM
#41
PF Marine
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 1,787
Likes: 24
From: Dallas, TX
Just to Clarify this thread was started as a question as to what fluid everyone is running Valvoline??/ Ford type F ??? and about the foaming oil ??? Was NOT A SLAM AT EARL @ Huber by no means 
So whoever the Phuch called Earl and told him i"m slammin him on OSO u need to pick up the phone BIG Daddy and fill me in ,or explain it to me at the next boating event over a cocktail what you read that i did'nt ...Earl is doing the cruise to get me back together and i'm confident they will handle some power ...
ring ring im waiting 815-693-3031 Dont make me wait tooo long
So whoever the Phuch called Earl and told him i"m slammin him on OSO u need to pick up the phone BIG Daddy and fill me in ,or explain it to me at the next boating event over a cocktail what you read that i did'nt ...Earl is doing the cruise to get me back together and i'm confident they will handle some power ...ring ring im waiting 815-693-3031 Dont make me wait tooo long
06-03-2009 | 04:26 PM
#47
Thread Starter
Banned
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 12,849
Likes: 3
From: Frankfort,ill
just a matter of time you say
weighing our options BIG Daddy .... Just got off the phone with Earl Zimmer and was going thru the serial #s and seems all my torched trannys last year to present are all on the same side (port) starting to think maybe the cooler has been Phuched for a while 
06-03-2009 | 06:12 PM
#48
Offshoreonly Advertiser
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 2,517
Likes: 280
From: Pompano Beach FL, USA
Let me pitch in on the fluid question.
We recently did extensive testing of fluids and friction materials. The results surprised me. We always knew Type F was good, but did not have hard numbers.
I’m at home and the actual resulta are at work, and anyone that knows me can tell you my memory is shot, so don’t shoot me if I am off a few points. With the friction material commonly used to-date ( a graphitic paper) the order of preference
and performance is:
Type F or FA 100% (no difference between the Valvoline & Castrol in this test)
Amsoil Supershift 94%
Dexron 85%
All the other Mercon’s, Dexron 6, synthetics, etc were as bad or worse then the old fashioned Dexron.
Please remember the ONLY thing we are testing for (or care about for this application) is break away torque capacity. In the automotive world there are many more and relevant factors.
We are now using a new material in our dry sump models. Using the baseline above it is about 114% with the Type F. It also recovers better after a momentary slip. And the Amsoil is within 1-2% of the type F, so I think it will be OK with the new material.
We recently did extensive testing of fluids and friction materials. The results surprised me. We always knew Type F was good, but did not have hard numbers.
I’m at home and the actual resulta are at work, and anyone that knows me can tell you my memory is shot, so don’t shoot me if I am off a few points. With the friction material commonly used to-date ( a graphitic paper) the order of preference
and performance is:
Type F or FA 100% (no difference between the Valvoline & Castrol in this test)
Amsoil Supershift 94%
Dexron 85%
All the other Mercon’s, Dexron 6, synthetics, etc were as bad or worse then the old fashioned Dexron.
Please remember the ONLY thing we are testing for (or care about for this application) is break away torque capacity. In the automotive world there are many more and relevant factors.
We are now using a new material in our dry sump models. Using the baseline above it is about 114% with the Type F. It also recovers better after a momentary slip. And the Amsoil is within 1-2% of the type F, so I think it will be OK with the new material.
__________________
Marc
www.mercruiserparts.com
www.go-fast.com
www.bammarine.com
www.cyborgtransmissions.com
It's not alive -www.BoatStuffExpress.com - temporarily retired
Marc
www.mercruiserparts.com
www.go-fast.com
www.bammarine.com
www.cyborgtransmissions.com
It's not alive -www.BoatStuffExpress.com - temporarily retired
06-03-2009 | 06:27 PM
#49
Thread Starter
Banned
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 12,849
Likes: 3
From: Frankfort,ill
Let me pitch in on the fluid question.
We recently did extensive testing of fluids and friction materials. The results surprised me. We always knew Type F was good, but did not have hard numbers.
I’m at home and the actual resulta are at work, and anyone that knows me can tell you my memory is shot, so don’t shoot me if I am off a few points. With the friction material commonly used to-date ( a graphitic paper) the order of preference
and performance is:
Type F or FA 100% (no difference between the Valvoline & Castrol in this test)
Amsoil Supershift 94%
Dexron 85%
All the other Mercon’s, Dexron 6, synthetics, etc were as bad or worse then the old fashioned Dexron.
Please remember the ONLY thing we are testing for (or care about for this application) is break away torque capacity. In the automotive world there are many more and relevant factors.
We are now using a new material in our dry sump models. Using the baseline above it is about 114% with the Type F. It also recovers better after a momentary slip. And the Amsoil is within 1-2% of the type F, so I think it will be OK with the new material.
We recently did extensive testing of fluids and friction materials. The results surprised me. We always knew Type F was good, but did not have hard numbers.
I’m at home and the actual resulta are at work, and anyone that knows me can tell you my memory is shot, so don’t shoot me if I am off a few points. With the friction material commonly used to-date ( a graphitic paper) the order of preference
and performance is:
Type F or FA 100% (no difference between the Valvoline & Castrol in this test)
Amsoil Supershift 94%
Dexron 85%
All the other Mercon’s, Dexron 6, synthetics, etc were as bad or worse then the old fashioned Dexron.
Please remember the ONLY thing we are testing for (or care about for this application) is break away torque capacity. In the automotive world there are many more and relevant factors.
We are now using a new material in our dry sump models. Using the baseline above it is about 114% with the Type F. It also recovers better after a momentary slip. And the Amsoil is within 1-2% of the type F, so I think it will be OK with the new material.
and Jeez get that memory fixed 
06-03-2009 | 11:52 PM
#50
PF Marine
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 1,787
Likes: 24
From: Dallas, TX
Let me pitch in on the fluid question.
We recently did extensive testing of fluids and friction materials. The results surprised me. We always knew Type F was good, but did not have hard numbers.
I’m at home and the actual resulta are at work, and anyone that knows me can tell you my memory is shot, so don’t shoot me if I am off a few points. With the friction material commonly used to-date ( a graphitic paper) the order of preference
and performance is:
Type F or FA 100% (no difference between the Valvoline & Castrol in this test)
Amsoil Supershift 94%
Dexron 85%
All the other Mercon’s, Dexron 6, synthetics, etc were as bad or worse then the old fashioned Dexron.
Please remember the ONLY thing we are testing for (or care about for this application) is break away torque capacity. In the automotive world there are many more and relevant factors.
We are now using a new material in our dry sump models. Using the baseline above it is about 114% with the Type F. It also recovers better after a momentary slip. And the Amsoil is within 1-2% of the type F, so I think it will be OK with the new material.
We recently did extensive testing of fluids and friction materials. The results surprised me. We always knew Type F was good, but did not have hard numbers.
I’m at home and the actual resulta are at work, and anyone that knows me can tell you my memory is shot, so don’t shoot me if I am off a few points. With the friction material commonly used to-date ( a graphitic paper) the order of preference
and performance is:
Type F or FA 100% (no difference between the Valvoline & Castrol in this test)
Amsoil Supershift 94%
Dexron 85%
All the other Mercon’s, Dexron 6, synthetics, etc were as bad or worse then the old fashioned Dexron.
Please remember the ONLY thing we are testing for (or care about for this application) is break away torque capacity. In the automotive world there are many more and relevant factors.
We are now using a new material in our dry sump models. Using the baseline above it is about 114% with the Type F. It also recovers better after a momentary slip. And the Amsoil is within 1-2% of the type F, so I think it will be OK with the new material.
Hey Mark, thanks for the info. Have you done (or will be doing) any testing to see which stands up to the most heat?
