Traveller Universal Tractor/Hydraulic Fluid

[ray66v]

People mix hydraulic fluids everyday. For example, the automatic transmission fluid in 98% of cars today, is a version of hydraulic transmission oil. The first time you change it, you mix different brands.

There are no warnings against it, on either the machines, the manuals I have seen, or the oil. And, no horror stories on TBN, that I have seen as a result of doing so.

You can not change to a different fluid on a tractor either, without mixing them. That's because, it's impossible to get all of the old fluid out. For that reason, they have to be compatible.

I am not for using cheap fluid. You simply can't save enough money, using cheap fluid in a GC, for it to make any sense.

But again, adding a quart of Travlers, or even two, to 4 gallons of Permatran, isn't going to make any difference. Neither is just letting it go for a few days, until you can get to the store to buy the good stuff.

 

[Threepoint]

Pretty sure the TSC private-label Travelers Premium Hydraulic Fluid is made by Warren. I don't have any hesitation using it in my tractors, including my 2014 NX4510HST cab, but to each his own.

 

[DarkBlack]

After ripping off my hydro filter-loosing all my oem oil, I refilled with tsc oil. I always thought the gear noise was more. Still do.

 

[JWR]

Why does it give you an uneasy feeling? Permatran 3 is the proper rating. Rotella makes one that is spec'd for multiple brands... Warren oil does, Mobil 424, etc. Remember, most hydraulic components are not manufacturer specific, they are sourced from component suppliers. AGCO doesn't make your pump, they buy it. More accurately, Iseki buys and installs it. Some companies install Bosch fuel systems, some install Delphi.

Point is, practically all of the modern component parts are industry based, not Mfg based. Therefore, oil Mfgs would design their products to meet industry needs. Then... Individual companies would buy the oil and label it as their own, claiming how amazing it is and how it is specifically formulated for their product... All while up-charging you for their "presto-chango" label switch.

I agree 100% and your explanation is an excellent one. If the container says it is compatible you will absolutely never know the difference (and probably wouldn't even if it was NOT listed as compatible.) Especially just topping it off neither you nor the machine should care.

 

[JerryK]

I use TSC Premium Hyd/Trans fluid in my Mahindra, and use their fluids in my John Deere and misc other hyd equipment. Never had a problem or noticed any noise change. As for topping off with a different fluid.. it is no different than emptying all the old stuff and adding a new brand. There is still an amount of the old fluid in various areas in your hyd system that will mix with the new stuff when you operate the unit after the fluid change. So, while it's good to stick with a certain brand in general, you still mix the stuff every time you change brands... Would not loose any sleep over it...

 

[AxleHub]

Sometimes I'm just surprised at posters listening skills. I was reading this thread and numerous opinions were expressed regarding mixing hydraulic fluid brands.

But the OP in a followup post had written


"The more I think about it the more I get an uneasy feeling about it. Maybe it is because of being an aircraft mechanic in the USAF to long. I know I never liked the term suitable sub in the military, and that is what it sounds like."


And the thing that surprised me was how nobody seemed to recognize something really simple. Humility in motion.

So lets see . . . how many longtime aircraft mechanics do we have "in the room" ???? How many have the certifications or hours on job working on engines that made the difference of life and death to battle pilots and troops ????

My point is . . the OP is qualified to "teach the class" and yet he was willing to be "the student". Yet he was too polite to defend his reasoning.

He had several good concerns if he chose to express them. I'm familiar with at least 3 reasons why I wouldn't voluntarily mix fluids and I sure don't have the OP's experience or credentialed skills.

 

[ray66v]

Sometimes I'm just surprised at posters listening skills. I was reading this thread and numerous opinions were expressed regarding mixing hydraulic fluid brands.

But the OP in a followup post had written


"The more I think about it the more I get an uneasy feeling about it. Maybe it is because of being an aircraft mechanic in the USAF to long. I know I never liked the term suitable sub in the military, and that is what it sounds like."


And the thing that surprised me was how nobody seemed to recognize something really simple. Humility in motion.

So lets see . . . how many longtime aircraft mechanics do we have "in the room" ???? How many have the certifications or hours on job working on engines that made the difference of life and death to battle pilots and troops ????

My point is . . the OP is qualified to "teach the class" and yet he was willing to be "the student". Yet he was too polite to defend his reasoning.

He had several good concerns if he chose to express them. I'm familiar with at least 3 reasons why I wouldn't voluntarily mix fluids and I sure don't have the OP's experience or credentialed skills.

Perhaps then, you did not see where the OP posted:

Does anyone know if Traveller Universal Tractor/Hydraulic Fluid is compatible with AGCO Permatran 821XL?

The OP asked for the responses he received. If it was clearly a bad idea, why did he ask?

Many people here, also have levels high of knowledge, and lots of experience. As well as, relationships with people who are experts their fields, to draw from.

Oil is one subject however, it never seems to pay to debate. No one seems to ever want to change their mind.

 

[AxleHub]

Perhaps then, you did not see where the OP posted:

The OP asked for the responses he received. If it was clearly a bad idea, why did he ask?

Many people here, also have levels high of knowledge, and lots of experience. As well as, relationships with people who are experts their fields, to draw from.

Oil is one subject however, it never seems to pay to debate. No one seems to ever want to change their mind.

Greetings ray66v,

I absolutely saw his question . . every word of it. And I absolutely agree there are many smart men and women involved in TBN or I wouldn't be here.

But my point is . . when readers see a poster is asking a question AND they see he already has a considerable experience in that subject area . . . then doesn't it justify having good, and specific reasons to justify their opinions? Or to show a respect to probe for other thoughts? Or heaven forbid . . that they may not have the awareness to properly answer?

An example from my experience of 30 years ago: a buck toothed farmer in dirty clothes and a big smile tells me he's going out to evaluate his neighbor's fields for him. All he had with him was a cheap polaroid camera. He told me the neighbor had experts in and they were testing soils etc. etc. But hadn't licked the neighbors problem. I asked this farmer what he would contribute and he said he was going to take a couple Polaroid pictures of the field. I had enough humility to not make light of his effort but instead to ask "why". Or at least to offer a better camera.

And that dirty old buck toothed farmer said: "because I'm going to have the pictures prismatically analyzed. . and all these big opinionated "experts" have not even heard of that yet". AND Polaroid film captures the uv spectrum that film cameta don't. In 3 days he had a complete analysis that he gave his neighbor for amendments to correct.

My point on this thread is . . Nobody seemed willing to point out the differences between the words "comparable to" and "compatible with" . . and that is the crux of the OP's concern.

Every oil type and fluid type is produced with virgin oils based on oils location and mineralization and then additives are amended to it as well by each manufacturer. They get certified/tested spec definitions. So they meet manufacturers' engineered recommendations. But being spec'ed to a cettification makes the product "comparable" but doesn't mean it is "compatible with another product".

Think of it real basically. Synthetic oil and conventional oil carry many of the same certification specs . . but you sure don't mix them now do you?

When a long time aircraft mechanic questions something . . I listen before I open my mouth. I don't rush to the idea he's over evaluating or fussy.l or nit picking.

Or he might not have the money others do and he can't afford to make a mistake.

 

[TSO]

Greetings ray66v,

I absolutely saw his question. And I absolutely agree there are many smart men and women involved in TBN or I wouldn't be here.

But my point is . . When readers see a poster is adking a question AND they see he already has a considerable experience in that subject area . . . then doesn't it justify having good, and specific reasons to justify their opinions? Or to show a respect to probe for other thoughts?

An example from my experience of 30 years ago: a buck toothed farmer in dirty clothes and a big smile tells me he's going out to evaluate his neighbor's fields for him. All he had with him was a cheap polaroid camera. He told me the neighbor had expetts in and they were testing soils etc. etc. But hadn't licked the neighbors problem. I asked this farmer what he would contribute and he said he was going to take a couple polaroud pictures of the field. I had enough humility to not make light of his effort but instead to ask "why".

And that dirty old buck toothed farmer said: "because I'm going to have the pictures prismatically analyzed. . and all these big opinionated "experts" have even heard of that yet". In 3 days he had a complete analysis that he gave his neighbor for amendments to correct.

My point on this thread is . . Nobody seemed willing to point out the differences between the words "comparable to" and "compatible with" . . and that is the crux of the OP's concern.

Evety oil type and fluid type is produced with virgin oils and the additives are amended to it. They get certified/tested spec definitions. So they meet manufacturers' engineered recommendations. But bring spec'ed to a cettification makes the product "comparable" but doesn't mean it is "compatible with another product".

Think of it real basically. Synthetic oil and conventional oil carry many of the same certification specs . . but you sure don't mix them now do you?

When a long time aircraft mechanic questions something . . I listen before I open my mouth. I don't rush to the idea he's over evaluating or fussy.

Or he might not have the money others do and he can't afford to make a mistake.

Axle... I think some people may be over thinking this.

Massey recommends their "Permatran III" hydraulic oil for practically all of their machines, and it is backwards compatible with their old machines too. Yet, their machines are made in different factories by different manufacturers. Iseki makes our machines (compacts, 2700e utility, 4600 series utility, etc), TAFE makes the 2600 utility machines, the 5600's are made in Europe I believe... Completely different components.

Yet, they all are spec'd to use Permatran III. Massey doesn't make the oil. In fact, Massey doesn't really exist anymore (just a trade name for AGCO in reality). They buy it and slap their own product label on it.

Conoco-Phillips makes the "Ford MotorCraft" 10w30 PSD oil for my PowerStroke, yet Ford slaps their own label and claims it's "specially formulated" ... Only research revealed the origin.

My Hustler commercial ZTR recommends 10w30 for the hydraulic system. Doesn't give a specific brand though, and I don't believe that Hustler even re-brands their own oil. Hustler doesn't make their own hydraulic system tho... Mine runs a Parker pump with HydroGear TransAxles.

Industry based......

No secret formulas here.....

Keep in mind, most hydraulic oil appears to be 10w30 also.

Don't swallow the kool-aid...

 

[AxleHub]

Duplicated