Yes, that fluid violates the spec. It simply doesn't meet it. It doesn't even claim to meet it. Use it if you like, but why would you? You changed to an unapproved fluid, and are having transmission issues. You decide to change the fluid again, and now you are saying you want to use another unapproved fluid? Why would you do that?

There is a reason why fluid makers come out with universal fluids. It is cheaper for them. Less types to make and to keep in stock means more profit. Can't blame them for trying, and in a non-critical application any old fluid will do. But why keep hunting these types of products out?

Just wondering, did you read my posts above on universal fluids that don't get tested to the Dexron spec, but just claim that they are good enough to use anyway?

It's the wrong stuff. But the maker of that fluid says it doesn't matter, you can use it in any vehicle that has an automatic transmission. Believe them if you like.

Not going by the maker of the fluid, going by the compatability chart in the E53 Bentley manual.

"Suitable for" does not equal meeting the spec. It means they don't care about the spec.

Since the fluid maker doesn't claim to meet any spec, including the Texaco one, how can it be the correct fluid? Have Bentley tested the oil and gotten it certified?

So what you are saying is when GM or ZF design a transmission for BMW they are also designing a fluid that has NEVER be produced by any fluid manufacturer EVER before? I find this extremely hard to believe. I am willing to bet my transmission that BMW is given an existing fluid spec by the trans manufacturer, contracts a fluid provider to produce the fluid to that existing spec, then puts a BMW specific part number on that product so it can be entered into their production parts ordering process and parts inventory system.
I did a triple dump and fill (90% new fluid) with the Bentley cross ref specified Esso LT 71141 (Castrol inport car formula, Meets LT 71141) on my "03 X5 4.4 at 100k miles, have put an additional 50k miles on the truck (over 2k miles with a combined trunck and trailer weight of over 12k lbs) and have seen no issues. At least in my instance, the Bentley cross ref fluid was right on the mark.

I did read all your posts and don't get that If a multi spec or Universal fluid says in their spec sheet that their fluid can be substituted for oe specs then what's the problem.
I come from a legal background. I would love to challenge a manufacturer in a consumer complaint, when the manufacturer is trying to get out of meeting a spec when it is plastered all over the spec sheet of their product. Their lawyers know that as well and you can be Darn sure that whatever is on the spec sheet is going to be used as evidence against the manufacturer... they just wouldn't say it if it weren't true.
Also, lots of oil companies don't certify the spec through the oem because they don't want to pay for the license. If they say it they are formulating to the spec.... they darn well better be!

Otherwise we would have been seeing consumer lawsuits about this by now.

My original post was intended to bring light to the fact that the maintenance specification Says, you MUST change the fluid at 100K miles. Yeah you can choose not to, I suppose , just like you can choose not to change your oil or coolant.

I did not mean to get into a pee-ing match over a discussion over the minute, semantic argument regarding spec, license, suggested, compatible choice of ATF.

Use whatever darn fluid that satisfies your desire as long as it is formulated to the dexron3 recipe.

Yes, and I still agree with you on changing fluid. I have always done it, and will continue to do so in my cars. No such thing as lifetime oil.

I agree 100%!

That ‘inventory optimiser’ fluid claims to be suitable for the ZF 6HP26 (Shell M1375.4/Ford Mercon SP), the GM 5L40-E (BMW ETL-7045E, ETL-8072B) and the ZF 5HP24 (BMW LT71141).

Having seen the (disastrous) consequences of filling a 5HP24 with Dexron on a number of occasions, the correct fluids clearly use different friction modifier packs.

I’m 100% with JCL on this one.

Phil