Ford 5000 oil question

dannyidp

Member
Hi guys,
I was wondering what oil you guys run in your 5,000 Ford rear differential? I have a 600 Ford then I have ran 80w 90 gear oil for 20 years and it has work flawless. But it does have a piston pump whereas the 5,000 has a Gear Drive pump. When I rebuilt it I put 68 Universal hydraulic oil in it. My pump is making a lot of noise I read somewhere that the wrong oil would cause that. Just want to know what you guys run.

Thanks
DAN
 
Hydraulics, wet brakes, and rear end are common sump. Use only good grade universal trans/hydraulic fluid. The ISO fluids do not have the additives for wet brakes and clutches. If the bucket does not say "transmission" in the description do not use it. Make sure it says it will work for Ford 134 fluid. My rule of thumb when telling customers that if where you're buying it has a $25 bucket and a $45 bucket but the $45 stuff. Oil is WAY cheaper than parts. When I was at the Ford/New Holland dealer we would get at least one machine a year where the person had put in the wrong oil and delaminated the brake discs and PTO clutch packs.
 
Only the last couple years of 5000 production used a common sump. But yes, an oil that meets NH 134D specs.
 
(quoted from post at 19:15:57 02/05/18) Only the last couple years of 5000 production used a common sump. But yes, an oil that meets NH 134D specs.

Thanks guys . But I'm wondering what oil you guys are using and where you get it? I get my oil and hydraulic fluid mostly from red drum sales. I also know you have a ring and pinion gear and pto bearings and gears ect ect that need lubrication. I know because it's all new lol. I read somewhere that if the pump was whining or making a noise it was possibly the wrong fluid

. Never heard of that my old 600 has about 3 gallons of hydraulic fluid with the rest being gear oil just to thin it a little for cold weather.
 
(quoted from post at 06:28:14 02/05/18) Make sure it says it will work for Ford 134 fluid.

[b:670a51106e]No! No! No! [/b:670a51106e] One of the first things we are taught as lubricant distributors is that "will work for" and anything other than "meets or exceeds" the named spec is a cheap lubricant's way of trying to sneak in the door. It may not necessarily meet or exceed the spec called for.
 
(quoted from post at 08:13:06 02/05/18) I'm wondering what oil you guys are using and where you get it?

I'm an Archer Lubricants distributor. Depending on where you're located, you may be have access to Archer Uni-Fluid XP (which is what I use in Ford Select-O-Speeds on up through Ford (NH) Genesis tractors. It does exceed the ford M2C-134D spec. Find an Archer distributor here "Archer Dealer Locator"
 
I misread the part about "common sump". A 5000 does indeed have the hydraulics, wet brakes and rear end as a common sump. I thought you were referring to the ones where the transmission was also included.
 
600-601 were/are originally three separate compartments. Gear lube in the trans and rear end, hydraulic in the center. Ford changed their recommendation to change all 3 compartments to 134D
to eliminate cross contamination. Good hydraulic transmission fluid will take the gear loads from a TW-30 or a TJ-530, your 600 isn't going to hurt it. Oils have come a LONG way since those
machines were designed. One of the years I was sent to tech school there was a half day session on oils. The guy explaining was head of CNH's oil supplier (since bought by FIAT also and
brought "in house"). They order base stock by the train car load, and then what is added to that makes it engine oil, hydraulic oil, or hyd-trans fluid, etc. and most high grade oil use
parafinic base stocks not napthinic. When you hear pricing for barrels of crude on the media they are usually using WTI (west texas intermediate) witch is not good enough to make lubricant
base stock, just fuels. I never though listening guy a guy talk for hours about oil would be that interesting.
 
(quoted from post at 08:40:58 02/05/18)
(quoted from post at 06:28:14 02/05/18) Make sure it says it will work for Ford 134 fluid.

[b:f8f0a62475]No! No! No! [/b:f8f0a62475] One of the first things we are taught as lubricant distributors is that "will work for" and anything other than "meets or exceeds" the named spec is a cheap lubricant's way of trying to sneak in the door. It may not necessarily meet or exceed the spec called for.

NO! NO! NO! A ford 5000 required m2c53a Fluid. PLEASE quit rewriting history. m2c134 fluid did not even exist. Yes you can use it. Yes it is a better fluid. BUT.... newer tractors with hydroshifts, shuttles. and MUCH HIGHER HYDRAULIC
 
(quoted from post at 08:40:58 02/05/18)
(quoted from post at 06:28:14 02/05/18) Make sure it says it will work for Ford 134 fluid.

[b:ad4b22870d]No! No! No! [/b:ad4b22870d] One of the first things we are taught as lubricant distributors is that "will work for" and anything other than "meets or exceeds" the named spec is a cheap lubricant's way of trying to sneak in the door. It may not necessarily meet or exceed the spec called for.

NO! NO! NO! A ford 5000 required m2c53a Fluid. PLEASE quit rewriting history. m2c134 fluid did not even exist. Yes you can use it. Yes it is a better fluid. BUT.... newer tractors with hydroshifts, shuttles. and MUCH HIGHER HYDRAULIC Presssures and higher flow rates had to have a better fluid. The ford 5000 is NOT one of those tractors. The "meets or exceeds" is also used in the automotive oils. Its means the oil uses the exact same additive package that equals or exceeds the standards for the original oil. Amsoil, who I despise, uses those spec and has survived all lawsuits as their oil "meets or exceeds" api tests and standards. They use the same additives but do not pay for the million dollar test regime for each new oil that goes out or do not pay to have the api "sunburst label" at the very high cost per quart..... Small oil producers cannot afford the cost, so they simply use an package that has already met the testing requirements. Today the additive packages once done by each producer, sadly have dropped down to a few specialist who now provide the package for everyone. Meaning that you add a known base oil, a known additive package, and its approved.


SO.... The 1965 ford 5000 REQUIRES a hydraulic oil that meets or exceeds... m2c53a. NOT m2c134a. The 1965 ford 5000 does not have to use/need the better oils required for post 1996 tractors. Can you use the better oil, you bet. But you can also use the oil called for by the manufacture, and expect to have no problems as well.
 
(quoted from post at 11:30:31 02/05/18)
NO! NO! NO! A ford 5000 required m2c53a Fluid. PLEASE quit rewriting history. m2c134 fluid did not even exist.

I think you're grasping at straws just to start a fight! I don't believe I've said anywhere that the spec for a 5000 was M2C-134D. you'd better read it again. A good apology would be in order here!
 
Since Ford then CNH corporate told us to use 134D in everything we did, about 8000 gallons a year through the shop. 134D does excede the old spec oil. As an addition to my comment below, what
Viscosity Oil (now Fiat Lubrificante) said was that the OEM grade (F200 & 134D) oil additive packages are designed to still meet the spec at drain interval, not just when you pour it in. Also since most people have more than one machine using one oil in all lowers the risk of putting the wrong stuff in. Times change, remember the injection pump for those machines were designed for 1500 ppm sulfur content fuel, try finding that spec now. Newer is not always better, but sometime it IS.
 
Hard to find a fluid on the market these days that would actually say on the label whether it meets that old M2C53A specification. When Ford stopped making it they officially superseded that spec with another one, and then another one, and so on, and the currently recommended spec that superseded all of the older ones is M2C134D.

To the original poster - I use "Travellers Premium Universal Tractor Trans/Hydraulic Fluid" (UTF) from Tractor Supply, which says on the label that it meets or exceeds the Ford M2C134D specification. Depending on the fluctuating price of oil, it can go for anywhere from $32.00 to $42.00 per 5 gallon bucket. I keep enough on hand so that I never need to buy it in a pinch and only buy it when the price is lower than $35.00. If your local Walmart actually carries UTF that says on the label that it meets the M2C134D spec, chances are that it is a couple of bucks less than the Travellers brand at TSC. Unfortunately my local Walmarts (2 within 10 miles of my house) do not carry any UTF at all.
 
Thanks sean and others for this info. sean this is the Info I was looking for I don't do Walmart for many reasons but we do have a tsc so I will check there. There was no way I was going to pay ford for there over priced oil. Now after reading all this info you guys have me concerned about my 410 backhoe because I have been using 32 hydraulic fluid in it for years it has wet clutches wet brakes basically the same setup as the 5000.


(quoted from post at 00:47:16 02/06/18) Hard to find a fluid on the market these days that would actually say on the label whether it meets that old M2C53A specification. When Ford stopped making it they officially superseded that spec with another one, and then another one, and so on, and the currently recommended spec that superseded all of the older ones is M2C134D.

To the original poster - I use "Travellers Premium Universal Tractor Trans/Hydraulic Fluid" (UTF) from Tractor Supply, which says on the label that it meets or exceeds the Ford M2C134D specification. Depending on the fluctuating price of oil, it can go for anywhere from $32.00 to $42.00 per 5 gallon bucket. I keep enough on hand so that I never need to buy it in a pinch and only buy it when the price is lower than $35.00. If your local Walmart actually carries UTF that says on the label that it meets the M2C134D spec, chances are that it is a couple of bucks less than the Travellers brand at TSC. Unfortunately my local Walmarts (2 within 10 miles of my house) do not carry any UTF at all.
:shock:
 
(quoted from post at 12:27:53 02/05/18)
(quoted from post at 11:30:31 02/05/18)
NO! NO! NO! A ford 5000 required m2c53a Fluid. PLEASE quit rewriting history. m2c134 fluid did not even exist.

I think you're grasping at straws just to start a fight! I don't believe I've said anywhere that the spec for a 5000 was M2C-134D. you'd better read it again. A good apology would be in order here!

NO! NO! NO! you will be waiting...

"Meets or exceeds" is just fine per the legal system. Go ask any amsoil fanatic.

Now if some lubrication shyster is faking it, then even the "api sunburst seal" doesnt stand for much.

The 5000 is just fine with "meets or exceeds" m2c53a. And 134d "meets or exceeds" m2c53a. And out of your mouth, you sell fluid that meets or exceeds.... or even tested, but is NOT m2c53a fluid. So when are you going to apologize for this post and one last week? Nothing wrong with "meets or exceed". Quit changing the ford spec or implying otherwise. These are 1965 tractors.

and again, NO! NO! NO!
 
sotxbill - This is what he was responding to:

Make sure it says it will work for Ford 134 fluid.

There is a big difference between "will work with" and "meets or exceeds". He was saying that it has to say "meets or exceeds", and that "will work with" is not acceptable wording regardless of which spec is being discussed.
 
(quoted from post at 11:07:36 02/06/18) Thanks, Sean!

Thanks guys much appreciated for your answers. I feel like a idiot which I'm not but honestly I never knew about trans fluid all I knew was hydraulic fluid, hydraulic oil , 80w 90 and 140 GL motor oil and trans fluid for a car. I truly never knew about trans hydraulic fluid. I make it a point to learn something new every day
 
(quoted from post at 20:37:32 02/05/18) sotxbill - This is what he was responding to:

Make sure it says it will work for Ford 134 fluid.

There is a big difference between "will work with" and "meets or exceeds". He was saying that it has to say "meets or exceeds", and that "will work with" is not acceptable wording regardless of which spec is being discussed.

yes.. . but STILL NOT m2c134D........ ITS m2c53d..... and there are a LOT of fluids that will [b:330b5eff08]"work in that application"[/b:330b5eff08].... as its a very old spec and very moderate by today's standards. JUST like the amsoil guys.. he needs to look up the m2c53 spec, define it, and then make correct statements based on fact. NOT fear mongering. I have a particular problem with oil salesmen who spout out their "facts". With the oil company mergers, most of the companies shut down their labs and now is down to a few specialist who make up the additive package, get it certified and then sale it to everyone else to add to their base oil. And due to cost of individual testing, we are moving more into a different world. "will work with"" is very common for superseded specs without paying for the tests to prove that. And yes, is common for some shysters to manipulate, both ways. And to make thinks even worse.. """""Do you know how to tell when an oil salesman is lying?"""""
 

We sell tractor parts! We have the parts you need to repair your tractor - the right parts. Our low prices and years of research make us your best choice when you need parts. Shop Online Today.

Back
Top