Psa do not use motul in your fiesta st

[FiSTerMr]

I agree. I replaced the OEM fluid before my first track day with Redline DCTF as specified. Today, ~19k later, I replaced it again with 2 qts of same, and after driving ~50 miles, my impression is that it feels better and is quieter. 2 quarts is the key.

On a side note, this was one of the easiest maintenance tasks I've done. 8mm hex bit and a long flexible funnel made it easy -- didn't even have to remove the airbox.

2 LITERS!, lol... But yes, even 2 quarts (1.89 liters), is better than the factory fill amount.

When I first got the car, I had a couple of grinds during quick downshifts (rev-matched, of course!). After doing a drain and fill with 2 liters, I havent had ONE single issue! Even if I tried, I couldn't get a grind. Trust me, I tried over and over and couldn't replicate it.

Mind you, I used oem fluid, not the ravenol. I plan to swap to it when it gets warmer. The viscosity is slightly higher than the oem stuff. Being that winter was coming, I wanted to wait before I go to the ravenol mtf-2.

My original intent was to first get the factory fill out of the gearbox, as I felt the metal bits from break-in was not exactly a good thing.... but more importantly, wanted to get her to 2 liters!

 

[koozy]

Technically it is 20mm below the fill hole regardless of quantity of fluid.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[FiSTerMr]

Technically it is 20mm below the fill hole regardless of quantity of fluid.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

THIS!

I actually did a physical measurement as well. The 1.67 liters was not close to the 20 mm that the FSM states. I made sure to level the trans before any measurements, front to back, left and right.

I wish they designed our trans to be as most every other manual on the planet! "keep filling till she starts coming out, then plug her up"

 

[koozy]

THIS!

I actually did a physical measurement as well. The 1.67 liters was not close to the 20 mm that the FSM states. I made sure to level the trans before any measurements, front to back, left and right.

I wish they designed our trans to be as most every other manual on the planet, "keep filling till she starts coming out, than plug her up!"

The majority of people do not check the actual amount they put into their crankcase for an oil change. Sure, what gets poured in is in the ball park, but when all is said and done everyone smart reads their dip stick.

For the gearbox, because it's a bit harder to read 20mm below the fill hole people are guesstimating based on several factory specs, user specs, etc. When in actuality everyone should ideally be measuring their own 20mm below the fill regardless of how much goes in. And those with leaky axle seals should occasionally check for 20mm below fill hole and top off if needed.

 

[FiSTerMr]

The majority of people do not check the actual amount they put into their crankcase for an oil change. Sure, what gets poured in is in the ball park, but when all is said and done everyone smart reads their dip stick.

For the gearbox, because it's a bit harder to read 20mm below the fill hole people are guesstimating based on several factory specs, user specs, etc. When in actuality everyone should ideally be measuring their own 20mm below the fill regardless of how much goes in.

Ironically, the only other manual trans that had a REMOTELY close fill procedure, was the T-5 in my '91 Mustang GT.

IIRC, the FSM mentioned "5 mm below fill hole". But that was just about the same as filling till she oozes out.... which is what everyone did.

 

[Dr Awkward]

I can’t make sense of people claiming that the oem fluid is low quality or the wrong type. To call it the wrong type is just bizarre. None of us know better than Ford. They are not going to specify a fluid that could contribute to premature transmission failure.
Some have posited that the apparent low viscosity of the oem fluid is a foolish attempt at improving fuel economy, but these claims seem like conjectural hand waving, without any evidence in support.
This isn’t to say that third party fluids (eg Ravenol, which meets the oem spec), aren’t reasonable alternatives, but you won’t likely go wrong running the Ford (Motorcraft) product.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[danbfree]

Except that I would still change it before 100K miles (I plan on every 25K miles or so), despite how great the Ravenol, or BG stuff may be, but maybe that is just me being maniacally OCD about maintenance.

There are these cocky jerks on the Facebook groups that mock those of us who feel the need to change the fluid at all. After seeing the owners manual says it's good for 120k I'm going to do mine again at 60k, about 50k from original change. We all make our peace where we decide and indeed it's pretty easy with a tube funnel anyway.

 

[KKaWing]

I've been off the forums for a while but I got gear whine from 30kph and up after an LSD install. I didn't want to chance it and took it to a transmission specialist chain store. It turns out 4th 5th and 6th showed signs of wear for some reason. When he called up Ford for parts, they told the trans place there were new part numbers for gears in the FiST. True or not I don't know... but my whine is fixed so who knows, something to think about I guess.

 

[XR650R]

One thing to remember on any manual transmission that doesn't share oil with the engine, is that the transmission takes longer to get to operating temperature than the engine does.

This is particularly true when you drive in cold environments.

You need to let the car get fully warm before you beat on it.

 

[danbfree]

I can’t make sense of people claiming that the oem fluid is low quality or the wrong type. To call it the wrong type is just bizarre. None of us know better than Ford. They are not going to specify a fluid that could contribute to premature transmission failure.
Some have posited that the apparent low viscosity of the oem fluid is a foolish attempt at improving fuel economy, but these claims seem like conjectural hand waving, without any evidence in support.
This isn’t to say that third party fluids (eg Ravenol, which meets the oem spec), aren’t reasonable alternatives, but you won’t likely go wrong running the Ford (Motorcraft) product.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Well, that's all this whole thing is conjecture and sharing of personal experiences. What I find so bizarre is that people don't understand that such sharing of experience and conjecture is to simply help describe the night and day difference in performance and also the very poor impression of the fluid that was drained. Take what you will from it, but don't hurt yourself to badly attempting to translate an extensive vocabulary for basic failure to see what is a simple sharing of personal experience and opinion for any attempt at claiming of true facts.

 

[JDG]

I've been off the forums for a while but I got gear whine from 30kph and up after an LSD install. I didn't want to chance it and took it to a transmission specialist chain store. It turns out 4th 5th and 6th showed signs of wear for some reason. When he called up Ford for parts, they told the trans place there were new part numbers for gears in the FiST. True or not I don't know... but my whine is fixed so who knows, something to think about I guess.

Was there any sort of indication as to when the new gear P/N's hit the shelves? Curious if it is better to get a transmission from say, a 2017/2018..

 

[KKaWing]

Was there any sort of indication as to when the new gear P/N's hit the shelves? Curious if it is better to get a transmission from say, a 2017/2018..

Sorry, I do not.

 

[jmrtsus]

You don't need to convince me, it's the other member, "jmrtsus", that was doubting it.
I am running 2 liters myself.


[emoji1303]

I am easy to convince, all I want to know is where the mysterious TSB is. I Keep reading about it but all we can find is "so and so said" or "absolutely is one" but we can't seem to find the TSB. I figured someone would actually have a copy or know where to get one. But up to now it still seems to be hiding. Everyone is free to do what they want with their car. Until I see something from Ford I'll stick with what I do know. What I know is I have not seen one, I will not buy a service subscription to attempt to locate a copy. I will not request copies of all TSB's for all years ST's, wait 6-8 weeks for them and pay copy costs/postage from NHTSA.
Our transmission is used in millions of cars according to Getrag, now Magna PT. It is packaged to fit many makes but the mechanicals are the same. The fill level is probably set by Magna PT as is the fluid specs since they designed it. If it was a safety or reliability issue NHTSA would have forced a recall as required by law. Obviously Ford is NOT telling people to bring their cars in to fix an incorrect fluid level. I have not received an addendum to my manual changing the fluid level. So that should tell people that Ford/NHTSA does not see it as an issue. Neither do I.

 

[FiSTerMr]

I am easy to convince, all I want to know is where the mysterious TSB is. I Keep reading about it but all we can find is "so and so said" or "absolutely is one" but we can't seem to find the TSB. I figured someone would actually have a copy or know where to get one. But up to now it still seems to be hiding. Everyone is free to do what they want with their car. Until I see something from Ford I'll stick with what I do know. What I know is I have not seen one, I will not buy a service subscription to attempt to locate a copy. I will not request copies of all TSB's for all years ST's, wait 6-8 weeks for them and pay copy costs/postage from NHTSA.
Our transmission is used in millions of cars according to Getrag, now Magna PT. It is packaged to fit many makes but the mechanicals are the same. The fill level is probably set by Magna PT as is the fluid specs since they designed it. If it was a safety or reliability issue NHTSA would have forced a recall as required by law. Obviously Ford is NOT telling people to bring their cars in to fix an incorrect fluid level. I have not received an addendum to my manual changing the fluid level. So that should tell people that Ford/NHTSA does not see it as an issue. Neither do I.

Gotcha [emoji1303]

 

[FiSTerMr]

....I lost my original trans running the OEM Ford DCTF at 6,000 miles due to output bearing shaft failure. 4,000 miles later on the new trans, I switched to Motul 300. I’m currently sitting at 70k miles with zero issues, and you know how much power I’m putting down, so I’d say you’re pretty safe with the Motul 300. I changed it for some fresh Motul at 50k, and noticed it had sheared down some.

Side note: When I drained to DCTF to put in the Motul 300, I actually drained 2.2L out of the trans. I called Ford and spoke to the master tech, who told me that when a FiST came in with a bad output bearing, they’re instructed by engineering to overfill the new trans. Apparently, the standard fill spec is a suspect in causing the bearing to fail. In any case, he told me to put at least 2L in, so that’s what I did. 2 full liters of Motul 300 went in, and again later when I put fresh fluid in. Like I said, zero issues all this time later, not even a leaky axle seal. Shifts smooth and quiet.

Found this

 

[Ford ST]

Found this

I believe I copied that from typhoon.

Sent from my LG-LS997 using Tapatalk

 

[FiSTerMr]

I believe I copied that from typhoon.

Sent from my LG-LS997 using Tapatalk

Haha, I thought it looked familiar.

 

[MisSTrouble]

Haha, I thought it looked familiar.

Actually, I’m the original poster of that. It was my trans that crapped the bed at 7k. As an update, yes, I’m still running Motul 300, and I’m now at 93k miles with zero issues.
On a side note; the reason that I know the 1.67L fill spec is wrong (besides Ford themselves telling me) is in the transmission fill procedure. It states to fil to 1” below the fill hole. If you were to follow that procedure and then immediately drain the transmission, you’d end up with roughly 2.2L, not 1.67.

 

[FiSTerMr]

Actually, I’m the original poster of that. It was my trans that crapped the bed at 7k. As an update, yes, I’m still running Motul 300, and I’m now at 93k miles with zero issues.
On a side note; the reason that I know the 1.67L fill spec is wrong (besides Ford themselves telling me) is in the transmission fill procedure. It states to fil to 1” below the fill hole. If you were to follow that procedure and then immediately drain the transmission, you’d end up with roughly 2.2L, not 1.67.

Totally!

I'm running a hair over 2L.
Changed out the FF at 7,500 miles.

A few things:

I had a hard time measuring that 1 inch below fill hole. Do you measure at a 90 degree angle or straight down???
Also, getting everything level was tricky.
In the end, I just put 2 liters in and walked away.

I went with the stock stuff, btw. I plan on doing the ravenol before summer.

 

[MisSTrouble]

Totally!

I'm running a hair over 2L.
Changed out the FF at 7,500 miles.

A few things:

I had a hard time measuring that 1 inch below fill hole. Do you measure at a 90 degree angle or straight down???
Also, getting everything level was tricky.
In the end, I just put 2 liters in and walked away.

I went with the stock stuff, btw. I plan on doing the ravenol before summer.

The procedure was meant to be used by a technician, with the car level on a lift. As for what you can use to check 1”, you could use almost anything. I believe one guy bent some weedeater line at a 90 angle and trimmed one end to 1”, then used it as a dipstick of sorts, filling and checking until it showed up on the end of the line. In the end, when you fill to 1” below the fill hole, you’ll get roughly 2.2L. As for me, I just pour in 2L and call it good, and I’ve had no issues.
My personal opinion is that it’s less important about what you use, whether it’s stock, Motul, Ravenol, etc; and more important to use the proper amount of it.

As an aside, if your trans has already started to whine, no amount of fluid or brand change will save you. The damage has already been done, and it’s just a matter of time.