Brake fluid….is there a difference?

[McE]

Not anymore..

Also seem to only have DOT 5.1 LV for some reason. Which is not explicitly certified under Ford’s WSS-M6C65-A2 specification.

Stick with DOT 4 LV.

View attachment 276371

Yes they do

https://www.rockauto.com/en/moreinfo.php?pk=8319076

Pentosin’s DOT 5.1 LV does actually meet Ford’s WSS-M6C65-A2 specification. But yes, don’t use the wrong fluid…

 

[nacanitihs]

Yes they do

https://www.rockauto.com/en/moreinfo.php?pk=8319076

View attachment 276373

Pentosin’s DOT 5.1 LV does actually meet Ford’s WSS-M6C65-A2 specification. But yes, don’t use the wrong fluid…

Strange they list it only as a clutch fluid for older trucks, even though the bottle clearly says Brake Fluid right on it. If they had it as a Brake Fluid for these trucks they would likely sell more of it. These trucks don't even come with a manual transmission. What clutch are they referring to? haha

Regarding Ford's standard for the brake fluid; AI strikes again... I asked it if it did and it told me no.

"While Pentosin DOT 5.1 is marketed as a low-viscosity formula that can backward-compatibly replace DOT 4 LV in many automotive applications, it does not officially carry Ford's WSS-M6C65-A2 certification required for your 2023 F-350"

Then I had to argue with it for a bit because it kept dropping the LV part.

"You are completely right, and I apologize. I was conflating standard DOT 5.1 properties and completely missed your point: Pentosin DOT 5.1 LV is explicitly a low-viscosity formula (Part #1244116).
Because it is a low-viscosity formula, its physical properties (like cold-flow speed) are designed to match or exceed the requirements of vehicles that specify a DOT 4 LV fluid.
However, even with the "LV" designation firmly in place, the core certification hurdle for your 2023 F-350 remains the same:

• The Certification Gap: Ford certifies its brake systems strictly to engineering standards, not just fluid types. Your truck requires the Ford WSS-M6C65-A2 specification.
• The Match: Pentosin DOT 4 LV explicitly carries that official Ford WSS-M6C65-A2 approval on the bottle.
• The Disconnect: Pentosin DOT 5.1 LV is built to ISO 4925 Class 7 standards. While it is an exceptional, ultra-thin fluid that physically works in modern ABS blocks, Pentosin has not certified this specific 5.1 LV fluid under Ford's WSS-M6C65-A2 standard."

 

[McE]

Strange they list it only as a clutch fluid for older trucks, even though the bottle clearly says Brake Fluid right on it. If they had it as a Brake Fluid for these trucks they would likely sell more of it. These trucks don't even come with a manual transmission. What clutch are they referring to? haha

View attachment 276376

Regarding Ford's standard for the brake fluid; AI strikes again... I asked it if it did and it told me no.

"While Pentosin DOT 5.1 is marketed as a low-viscosity formula that can backward-compatibly replace DOT 4 LV in many automotive applications, it does not officially carry Ford's WSS-M6C65-A2 certification required for your 2023 F-350"

Then I had to argue with it for a bit because it kept dropping the LV part.

"You are completely right, and I apologize. I was conflating standard DOT 5.1 properties and completely missed your point: Pentosin DOT 5.1 LV is explicitly a low-viscosity formula (Part #1244116).
Because it is a low-viscosity formula, its physical properties (like cold-flow speed) are designed to match or exceed the requirements of vehicles that specify a DOT 4 LV fluid.
However, even with the "LV" designation firmly in place, the core certification hurdle for your 2023 F-350 remains the same:

• The Certification Gap: Ford certifies its brake systems strictly to engineering standards, not just fluid types. Your truck requires the Ford WSS-M6C65-A2 specification.
• The Match: Pentosin DOT 4 LV explicitly carries that official Ford WSS-M6C65-A2 approval on the bottle.
• The Disconnect: Pentosin DOT 5.1 LV is built to ISO 4925 Class 7 standards. While it is an exceptional, ultra-thin fluid that physically works in modern ABS blocks, Pentosin has not certified this specific 5.1 LV fluid under Ford's WSS-M6C65-A2 standard."

Lots of bad info out there now thanks to AI. Unfortunately it makes its way onto this forum all too often.

Pentosin DOT 5.1 absolutely meets Ford's WSS-M6C65-A2 spec.

https://crpautomotive.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/Pentosin_PDS_Brake-Fluid_DOT-5-1-EV.pdf

To be clear, I am not advocating for the use of DOT 5.1 in our trucks, just stating that Pentosin's does in fact meet Ford spec.

 

[HitFactor]

Lots of bad info out there now thanks to AI. Unfortunately it makes its way onto this forum all too often.

I had some idiot on the Grand Design forums insisting that I did not have a CP4 fuel pump. His source was AI of some type.

I rarely look to AI for answers, but like everything else on the internet validate through a couple sources before thinking about accepting the info as possibly accurate.

 

[JTredway]

are we allowed to run dot5? i thought a lot of systems dot4 compliant were not compatible with dot5.1

I went down a rabbit hole about this ironically this morning, apparently Bosch makes a good LV Dot4 too that meets or exceeds PM20 requirements.

I have some unopened Motul RBF600 i was going to just flush it out with but now seeing I need LV might not be the best solution but LV is really a big point when weather gets cold, i think it has to meet like viscosity less than 700 and like -40°f, which i would never see here in GA

 

[McE]

are we allowed to run dot5? i thought a lot of systems dot4 compliant were not compatible with dot5.1

I went down a rabbit hole about this ironically this morning, apparently Bosch makes a good LV Dot4 too that meets or exceeds PM20 requirements.

I have some unopened Motul RBF600 i was going to just flush it out with but now seeing I need LV might not be the best solution but LV is really a big point when weather gets cold, i think it has to meet like viscosity less than 700 and like -40°f, which i would never see here in GA

5 is silicone-based but 5.1 is glycol-based like 4, so if it meets Ford’s spec, I don’t see an issue

I wouldn’t use the RBF600 though.

 

[JTredway]

5 is silicone-based but 5.1 is glycol-based like 4, so if it meets Ford’s spec, I don’t see an issue

I wouldn’t use the RBF600 though.

yeah i think i decided to just use it in my RZR or something else. I did come across this and it seems like a blend of both meeting the spec meets high performance.

 

[The Evil Twin]

Not much reason to use the 5.1 LV. Looking at the specs for Pentosin LV flavors, there is no difference in the wet boil points.

 

[Hunterman]

When did they stop putting the squeal tabs in brakes? My brakes went from fine to grind in about a week. Pulled the rotor off and it was metal to metal on the inside. The brakes never made a sound until grind grind grind and the auto part store got more money.

My buddy that did my brakes today says he thinks brake manufactures are doing it on purpose to sell more rotors and parts. No more early warning system on the brake pads to tell you they are close to DOA

 

[The Evil Twin]

When did they stop putting the squeal tabs in brakes? My brakes went from fine to grind in about a week. Pulled the rotor off and it was metal to metal on the inside. The brakes never made a sound until grind grind grind and the auto part store got more money.

My buddy that did my brakes today says he thinks brake manufactures are doing it on purpose to sell more rotors and parts. No more early warning system on the brake pads to tell you they are close to DOA

I have yet to look at mine, but I’ve never seen them without. Well, the wife’s car doesn’t, but there is a wire embedded in the pad that plugs into the car. When it breaks, the light comes on.

 

[Canyon Trekker]

When did they stop putting the squeal tabs in brakes? My brakes went from fine to grind in about a week. Pulled the rotor off and it was metal to metal on the inside. The brakes never made a sound until grind grind grind and the auto part store got more money.

My buddy that did my brakes today says he thinks brake manufactures are doing it on purpose to sell more rotors and parts. No more early warning system on the brake pads to tell you they are close to DOA

I would think that the manufacturers simply want you to bring it back to them for general maintenance so they can tell you when you need new brakes based on the accepted level of wear. It's something they check every time I get an oil change at the dealer. (8-year maintenance contract) This way, they can still charge a lot for the pad replacement and turning or replacing the rotor if not in warranty. Funny thing is that if you do it yourself and replace all of the parts, it's still cheaper than having the service center do a brake job. So go until it grinds. Then replace everything. BTW, I always look at my own rotors, so I know when they need replacing before they do. If it's in need, the maintenance contract covers them too.

The old squeaker days are probably gone.

 

[JTredway]

When did they stop putting the squeal tabs in brakes? My brakes went from fine to grind in about a week. Pulled the rotor off and it was metal to metal on the inside. The brakes never made a sound until grind grind grind and the auto part store got more money.

My buddy that did my brakes today says he thinks brake manufactures are doing it on purpose to sell more rotors and parts. No more early warning system on the brake pads to tell you they are close to DOA

strange, my pads have squealer pins, maybe they just fell off manufacturer defect

 

[Hunterman]

My wife’s sequoia is the same. No noise or squeaks and then the metal on metal grind which means she got new rotors and pads about a month ago too.

I do 90% of the maintenance on my truck so I’m usually pretty tuned in on what needs to be replaced and issues to watch but I missed the inside pad and rotor this time. Since I haven’t changed the oil in 5000 miles (it’s due for that too) I haven’t crawled under the truck in a couple months so I missed it.