Re: RE: syn atf

From: ffastje (ffastje@cox.net)
Date: Mon Jul 13 2009 - 09:43:00 EDT

Next message: Bernd D. Ratsch: "RE: RE: syn atf"
Previous message: Bernd D. Ratsch: "RE: RE: Brake Booster"
In reply to: Bernd D. Ratsch: "RE: syn atf"
Next in thread: Bernd D. Ratsch: "RE: RE: syn atf"
Reply: Bernd D. Ratsch: "RE: RE: syn atf"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

Bernd D. Ratsch wrote:
> No, but why? ATF+4 is a synthetic.
>
> - Bernd
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ffastje [mailto:ffastje@cox.net]
> Sent: Monday, July 13, 2009 7:15 AM
> To: DML
> Subject: DML: syn atf
>
>
> Is there any issues with going from conventional atf to synthetic?
>
> --
> ffastje@cox.net
> ffastje@gmail.com
> 1999 dakota cc 3.9L 4X4
> 57,332 miles
>
>
>
>
>
Thanks Bernd I did not know that is atf+4 the correct atf now?

-- 
ffastje@cox.net
ffastje@gmail.com
1999 dakota cc 3.9L 4X4 
57,332 miles

Next message: Bernd D. Ratsch: "RE: RE: syn atf"
Previous message: Bernd D. Ratsch: "RE: RE: Brake Booster"
In reply to: Bernd D. Ratsch: "RE: syn atf"
Next in thread: Bernd D. Ratsch: "RE: RE: syn atf"
Reply: Bernd D. Ratsch: "RE: RE: syn atf"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Aug 01 2009 - 00:31:46 EDT