$80/liter transfer case oil

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.


RAVENOL Torsen Differential Gear Oil AWD-TOR $65/L

Not to beat a dead horse, but I noticed a different transfer case fluid for Audi/VW with torsen transfer cases.
The GX470 and 4th gen V8 4Runner have a Torsen center diff with GL-5 75W90 OEM spec'd for it. I would say there is no evidence that the Torsen center diff itself precludes GL-5 usage or requires specialized fluid.
 
Last edited:

RAVENOL Torsen Differential Gear Oil AWD-TOR $65/L

Not to beat a dead horse, but I noticed a different transfer case fluid for Audi/VW with torsen transfer cases.

The description notes a friction modifier included in the fluid.

Google AI comes back with a note that the fluid is neither GL-4 or GL-5 rated and that it is a special fluid that cannot be selected based on standard technical parameters like viscosity or API ratings.

Not saying that I am recommending using this fluid, but it would be interesting to compare to Toyota fluid (especially given the fact Toyota fluid also does not have an API rating).
I chuckled at this review heading..

1773689334535.webp



"original VAG fluid"

ok back to the discussion.
 
The GX470 and 4th gen V8 4Runner have a Torsen center diff with GL-5 75W90 OEM spec'd for it. I would say there is no evidence that the Torsen center diff itself precludes GL-5 usage or requires specialized fluid.
Interesting older full-time Toyotas spec'd 75W-90. If the spec is based on the Torsen unit alone, it appears this would be the ideal fluid based on what I have read on the internet regarding torsen units.

I am not an expert on the specifics of the Torsen unit and potential differences between Toyota LC TC and Audi/VW AWD Torsen systems, my understanding at a high level is that they are both T-3 (Type C) Torsen units. But I thought it is interesting that Ravenol makes a Torsen-specific TC fluid for Audi/VW. And it makes me curious how close that fluid is to the Toyota-specific 75W LV spec'd fluid. Reading more, it seems the extra friction modifier in the Ravenol Audi fluid is to reduce harshness of engagement / reduce noise during tight turns.

Comparing viscosity at 100*C, Ravenol AWD-TOR is 16.7 cSt, Redline MT LV is 6.5 cSt

From my reading, higher viscosity oils will result in reduced locking effect for Torsen units.

I will likely keep traveling down the rabbit hole, this stuff is interesting to me.
 
Interesting older full-time Toyotas spec'd 75W-90. If the spec is based on the Torsen unit alone, it appears this would be the ideal fluid based on what I have read on the internet regarding torsen units.

I am not an expert on the specifics of the Torsen unit and potential differences between Toyota LC TC and Audi/VW AWD Torsen systems, my understanding at a high level is that they are both T-3 (Type C) Torsen units. But I thought it is interesting that Ravenol makes a Torsen-specific TC fluid for Audi/VW. And it makes me curious how close that fluid is to the Toyota-specific 75W LV spec'd fluid. Reading more, it seems the extra friction modifier in the Ravenol Audi fluid is to reduce harshness of engagement / reduce noise during tight turns.

Comparing viscosity at 100*C, Ravenol AWD-TOR is 16.7 cSt, Redline MT LV is 6.5 cSt

From my reading, higher viscosity oils will result in reduced locking effect for Torsen units.

I will likely keep traveling down the rabbit hole, this stuff is interesting to me.
I can only comment on my older rig, but it turns very smooth even at full lock when the CDL is unlocked. It's never had any harshness and it is as smooth as my old Subaru Forester with a 5-speed manual and a vicious coupling center differential was. I'm not sure one would notice the vehicle is AWD in normal use, outside of having great traction on wet/loose surfaces.

I've also found the T-case to be very "easy" on fluid, it's usually still golden-colored when I drain the TC even after a couple of years of use. The fluid in my diffs is usually much darker and more contaminated.
 
I can only comment on my older rig, but it turns very smooth even at full lock when the CDL is unlocked. It's never had any harshness and it is as smooth as my old Subaru Forester with a 5-speed manual and a vicious coupling center differential was. I'm not sure one would notice the vehicle is AWD in normal use, outside of having great traction on wet/loose surfaces.

I've also found the T-case to be very "easy" on fluid, it's usually still golden-colored when I drain the TC even after a couple of years of use. The fluid in my diffs is usually much darker and more contaminated.
My TC fluid was filthy dark after 13000 miles (previous shop used the 80w90 from Oreily's). Let's see how this new Ravenol fluid I put in is after 15,000.
Green container is TC.
Jug is front diff.

IMG_6132.webp


IMG_6150.webp
 
As noted in the first post of this thread, the old unicorn tear stuff was very dark straight out of the bottle.

My diff oils pretty much always come out looking nearly perfect. Not that appearance says much, especially without controlling for variables like container color/size/lighting/etc.
 
Those are some very dark fluids. My diffs usually look like that, but the TC does not. It could be due to conventional oil blackening much quicker than synthetic.

IMO if they are coming out that dark I'd be changing them more often. The fluids may also be getting quite hot.
 
Interesting older full-time Toyotas spec'd 75W-90. If the spec is based on the Torsen unit alone, it appears this would be the ideal fluid based on what I have read on the internet regarding torsen units.

I am not an expert on the specifics of the Torsen unit and potential differences between Toyota LC TC and Audi/VW AWD Torsen systems, my understanding at a high level is that they are both T-3 (Type C) Torsen units. But I thought it is interesting that Ravenol makes a Torsen-specific TC fluid for Audi/VW. And it makes me curious how close that fluid is to the Toyota-specific 75W LV spec'd fluid. Reading more, it seems the extra friction modifier in the Ravenol Audi fluid is to reduce harshness of engagement / reduce noise during tight turns.

Comparing viscosity at 100*C, Ravenol AWD-TOR is 16.7 cSt, Redline MT LV is 6.5 cSt

From my reading, higher viscosity oils will result in reduced locking effect for Torsen units.

I will likely keep traveling down the rabbit hole, this stuff is interesting to me.
has the toyota part numbers..
The heart of this system is the Toyota VF4B transfer case, which features two primary technologies: Torsen® Type-C Limited-Slip Center Differential

special transmission oil for transfer cases of four-wheel drive systems from Torsen type of VW and AUDI

confusion.
 
has the toyota part numbers..
The heart of this system is the Toyota VF4B transfer case, which features two primary technologies: Torsen® Type-C Limited-Slip Center Differential

special transmission oil for transfer cases of four-wheel drive systems from Torsen type of VW and AUDI

confusion.

I ordered a liter of the new Toyota 75W fluid and I will send in a sample to get oil analysis.

Something interesting I read was that the auto manufacturers don't always go with the Torsen-recommended fluid type or grade, since auto manufacturers need to look at their overall competing priorities (whether it is other components within the TC / axles, or standardization with other company fluids, or fuel efficiency targets, or some other bean counting priority) and decide what is most important. This is evident from auto manufacturers with 10,000 mile oil change intervals, or "sealed transmission" not needing fluid replacement, etc - at the end of the day these are for-profit companies that are trying to maximize profit and longevity is not their most overarching goal.

Again, this is probably going way down a rabbit hole that isn't needed, but I find it interesting.
 
Auto manufacturers are not going to 10k oil changes and "sealed transmissions" (by the way Toyota does not use that term and do recommend ttransoil changes if used for towing, dusty conditions or off-road) to maximize profits, in fact it hurts their bottom line as they make from service and parts than from initial sale. These pushes come from tighter CAFE standards, pressure on companies to reduce overall environmental waste (think used waste oil) etc.
 
Last edited:
Just received an order from McGRATH ELMHURST TOYOTA at decent pricing of 00279-DGOLF-01 LF 75W; 00279-DGOLT-01 LT GL-5 75W-85 and 00289-ATFWS World Standard ATF
 
Auto manufacturers are not going to 10k oil changes and "sealed transmissions" (by the way Toyota does not use that term and do recommend ttransoil changes if used for towing, dusty conditions or off-road) to maximize profits, in fact it hurts their bottom line as they make from service and parts than from initial sale. These pushes come from tighter CAFE standards, pressure on companies to reduce overall environmental waste (think used waste oil) etc.
There are estimated costs of ownership that manufacturers need to list. This is the "why" that they do it. As long as it gets the vehicle past the auto manufacturers warranty, they will be happy to lower the "cost of ownership" and use it to sell more cars. What makes more money in service? Oil changes...or replacing transmissions and engines? Not to mention the fact that if the customer chooses not to fix the problem, they are now in the market for a new vehicle.
 
There are estimated costs of ownership that manufacturers need to list. This is the "why" that they do it. As long as it gets the vehicle past the auto manufacturers warranty, they will be happy to lower the "cost of ownership" and use it to sell more cars. What makes more money in service? Oil changes...or replacing transmissions and engines? Not to mention the fact that if the customer chooses not to fix the problem, they are now in the market for a new vehicle.
@Julian73 👆🏻 overall “cost of ownership” is what the OEM’s are chasing here. I don’t know which company or publication pushes this trash, but it’s definitely a coveted #1 to tout. Clearly driven by arbitrary metrics and soon to be additional cars needing tranny rebuilds at 120k due to slipping, etc having never had their fluid serviced despite needing it.

There’s a ton of anecdotes on here with 200 owners having to basically insist for their service managers to write up whatever services owners are wanting to have done (ahc, transmission service comes to mind) due to their ignorance. Or toeing the company line by the service dept.

These are among the reasons I have trust issues with published service intervals overall. I’d want to talk to the engineering team, not the accountants for recommended durations of service to consider. My $0.02
 
@Julian73 👆🏻 overall “cost of ownership” is what the OEM’s are chasing here. I don’t know which company or publication pushes this trash, but it’s definitely a coveted #1 to tout. Clearly driven by arbitrary metrics and soon to be additional cars needing tranny rebuilds at 120k due to slipping, etc having never had their fluid serviced despite needing it.

There’s a ton of anecdotes on here with 200 owners having to basically insist for their service managers to write up whatever services owners are wanting to have done (ahc, transmission service comes to mind) due to their ignorance. Or toeing the company line by the service dept.

These are among the reasons I have trust issues with published service intervals overall. I’d want to talk to the engineering team, not the accountants for recommended durations of service to consider. My $0.02

This platform seems like the poster child for being skeptical of manufacturer service intervals. Changing the coolant much more frequently than recommended is a good example.
 
This platform seems like the poster child for being skeptical of manufacturer service intervals. Changing the coolant much more frequently than recommended is a good example.
Agreed. And I do that too. Though I am more and more of the thought the HG isn’t as robust as it should be and regardless of coolant changes you’re at the mercy of tolerances lining up just right to not have the potentially catastrophic leak/failure. Given known service history of our rigs and our overzealous fluid changing, we will see if our original HG’s last any longer than the guy just following the book.
 
Agreed. And I do that too. Though I am more and more of the thought the HG isn’t as robust as it should be and regardless of coolant changes you’re at the mercy of tolerances lining up just right to not have the potentially catastrophic leak/failure. Given known service history of our rigs and our overzealous fluid changing, we will see if our original HG’s last any longer than the guy just following the book.

You guys probably know I’m currently on a head gasket “adventure”. My gut is saying this was an unfortunate design error by Toyota. Something about the polymer used in some years of these things isn’t playing nicely with the coolant over time. I’m not sure changing it more frequently would help.. having a rig outside the date range and absolutely avoiding overheat, to me, are the only concrete things. But changing it early probably won’t hurt.

I don’t disagree we’ll get more data over time.. but that’s my interpretation so far. Which puts it in a bit of a different category than doing transmission, transfer case, brake, etc fluids more often than recommended.
 
You guys probably know I’m currently on a head gasket “adventure”. My gut is saying this was an unfortunate design error by Toyota. Something about the polymer used in some years of these things isn’t playing nicely with the coolant over time. I’m not sure changing it more frequently would help.. having a rig outside the date range and absolutely avoiding overheat, to me, are the only concrete things. But changing it early probably won’t hurt.

I don’t disagree we’ll get more data over time.. but that’s my interpretation so far. Which puts it in a bit of a different category than doing transmission, transfer case, brake, etc fluids more often than recommended.

This is probably correct based on the analysis that folks have done to date.

Unfortunate is an understatement...
 
I ordered a liter of the new Toyota 75W fluid and I will send in a sample to get oil analysis.

Something interesting I read was that the auto manufacturers don't always go with the Torsen-recommended fluid type or grade, since auto manufacturers need to look at their overall competing priorities (whether it is other components within the TC / axles, or standardization with other company fluids, or fuel efficiency targets, or some other bean counting priority) and decide what is most important. This is evident from auto manufacturers with 10,000 mile oil change intervals, or "sealed transmission" not needing fluid replacement, etc - at the end of the day these are for-profit companies that are trying to maximize profit and longevity is not their most overarching goal.

Again, this is probably going way down a rabbit hole that isn't needed, but I find it interesting.
Did you ever get the results from that oil analysis sample?

I’m shopping now and see that 00279-DGOLF-01 is half the cost of the metal can version I’ve been getting (08885-01806) but wanna make sure it’s what I actually want to switch to when it’s time.
 
Did you ever get the results from that oil analysis sample?

I’m shopping now and see that 00279-DGOLF-01 is half the cost of the metal can version I’ve been getting (08885-01806) but wanna make sure it’s what I actually want to switch to when it’s time.
I sent the sample in a couple weeks ago, should have results any day.

I will post it when I get the email from Blackstone.

I know, I've been waiting to change the fluid until the results come back, trying to figure out which product I will order.
 
I sent the sample in a couple weeks ago, should have results any day.

I will post it when I get the email from Blackstone.

I know, I've been waiting to change the fluid until the results come back, trying to figure out which product I will order.
It would be sweet if you get results before this 25% off sale is over.
 
Back
Top Bottom