Best mercon LV for cold weather

Joined
Apr 25, 2017
Messages
7,624
Location
Ohio
This stuff will last longer the Ford motorcraft Mercon LV .
What makes you think that ? Being "licensed", that means these fluids have to be almost 100% identical. Maybe, let me repeat maybe, the aftermarket fluids could be better in that they exceed some requirement or spec but consumers have no way to know this.
 
Joined
Aug 4, 2011
Messages
2,572
Yeah I seriously wonder if someone at Home Depot did not get that price right....

The Castrol transmax high mileage is Dexron III fluid and is "more" expensive. Rather peculiar.
It’s the priced the same on HD website
 

Attachments

  • CC4A240A-F311-41F4-90BE-5835980FBFFC.jpeg
    CC4A240A-F311-41F4-90BE-5835980FBFFC.jpeg
    89.1 KB · Views: 15
Joined
Jul 11, 2014
Messages
2,674
Location
Paradise of Florida
Being licensed doesn't mean the fluid is identical. It means that it meets the minimal requirements for the licensed spec. And, each blender can go about their way within the licensing requirements. And, the consumer can read datasheets, or contact the blender, to see what some specs are to see if they are met, or grossly exceeded. For example, cold flow OE spec might be 13000cst CP... with common fluids beating it at ~12000 while some better ones could in the 7-10k range while Redline is ~5000cP. As a consumer, some of us know. Can't stand the ostrich head in the sand or can't be improved upon mentality with some members here.

The Pennzoil Platinum ATFs are pretty good fluids that are overlooked and have 3 full synthetic options:
LV:

HM full viscosity:

Mopar:

Castrol also added more products to their ATF line, and some full synthetic:

And Valvolines list of 6 full synthetic options:

For this thread, I'd group the Dexron HP, Redline, and then follow with any full synthetic LV/VI ATF. From what I remember, LV has more stringent(better Ford requirements) than dexVI and dexHP trumps both.

The Platinum LV, Schaeffers, and Castrol brookfield at -40 is ~10000. Maxlife 9000. Amsoil 7700. Redline 4500. Mobil blend approved DexronVI is ~11500! Anyone think that the spec can't be improved upon anymore? The original PAO DexronHP was about 5000 and not sure if the newer GTL is that low.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Aug 4, 2011
Messages
2,572
That beats the lowest-cost, licensed fluid - Supertech LV - by almost $2 per quart. At least I don't know of any that's cheaper.
For anybody needing an LV fluid....especially with Ford and GM license
Hard to find a better deal
 
Joined
Aug 4, 2011
Messages
2,572
Being licensed doesn't mean the fluid is identical. It means that it meets the minimal requirements for the licensed spec. And, each blender can go about their way within the licensing requirements. And, the consumer can read datasheets, or contact the blender, to see what some specs are to see if they are met, or grossly exceeded. For example, cold flow OE spec might be 13000cst CP... with common fluids beating it at ~12000 while some better ones could in the 7-10k range while Redline is ~5000cP. As a consumer, some of us know. Can't stand the ostrich head in the sand or can't be improved upon mentality with some members here.

The Pennzoil Platinum ATFs are pretty good fluids that are overlooked and have 3 full synthetic options:
LV:

HM full viscosity:

Mopar:

Castrol also added more products to their ATF line, and some full synthetic:

And Valvolines list of 6 full synthetic options:

For this thread, I'd group the Dexron HP, Redline, and then follow with any full synthetic LV/VI ATF. From what I remember, LV has more stringent(better Ford requirements) than dexVI and dexHP trumps both.

The Platinum LV, Schaeffers, and Castrol brookfield at -40 is ~10000. Maxlife 9000. Amsoil 7700. Redline 4500. Mobil blend approved DexronVI is ~11500! Anyone think that the spec can't be improved upon anymore? The original PAO DexronHP was about 5000 and not sure if the newer GTL is that low.
I’ll admit I’m not well versed in Brookfield knowledge.

so is a lower number better I assume ??
 
Joined
Jun 6, 2015
Messages
488
Location
VA, US
It means that it meets the minimal requirements for the licensed spec.
That means it is approved by Ford (if they actually tested it), not licensed.
A license is a specific formulation that was analyzed by the licensing authority, not only testing.
I cannot find the exact Mercon terms, but this is from ATF+4:
Companies interested in becoming licensed Blenders must submit a request for qualification of proposed formulations to CQA. The ATF+4 specification requires a unique additive system added to base oils. FCA US LLC's ATF Committee reviews each Blender application and reviews test data. Required testing includes physical and chemical, wear, friction and elastomer testing. If the applicant's qualification sample is approved, the Blender then submits licensing documents, including copies of intended product labels for approval.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Apr 25, 2017
Messages
7,624
Location
Ohio
What makes you think that ? Being "licensed", that means these fluids have to be almost 100% identical. Maybe, let me repeat maybe, the aftermarket fluids could be better in that they exceed some requirement or spec but consumers have no way to know this.

Being licensed doesn't mean the fluid is identical. It means that it meets the minimal requirements for the licensed spec. And, each blender can go about their way within the licensing requirements.

That means it is approved by Ford (if they actually tested it), not licensed.
A license is a specific formulation that was analyzed by the licensing authority, not only testing.
I cannot find the exact Mercon terms, but this is from ATF+4:

The fluid and oil producers have accomplished exactly what they wanted to accomplish ! They use different wording and terms to confuse the consumer, i.e. "recommended for", "approved for", and so on. Approved by who ? Oh yeah, the producer (Valvoline, Castrol, etc).... Too many consumers only see "they say it's fine for my car" and run with it.

"License" or "licensed" is basically a legally binding term here and things are pretty black and white. The wording from the FCA program sounds pretty close to my comment above too - they are either identical or in some cases, better. This agreement refers to "a unique additive system" and that means using at least minimum amounts of various additives. Some might use more but why would they ? It just adds cost with likely minimal benefit.
 
Joined
Jun 6, 2015
Messages
488
Location
VA, US
If a company uses better stock oil than what the license formulation requires, they might not need that special additive to get the spec characteristics. Is that good? Is that bad? Just marketing?

That's why I don't put too much trust on "licensing". It's probably just a money making term.
 
Joined
Jul 11, 2014
Messages
2,674
Location
Paradise of Florida
Licensed spec or approved spec are all terminology. Quit nit picking. Lets just call it what it is.... no choice profit mongering spec by automaker's dictatorship. Not that the specs are bad, but many can be approved upon, and older specs/licensing/trademarks/labelling/requirements are not that special. At least the older specs had 'approvals' from most of the additive suppliers. Some of the newer ones or single supplier only. Doesn't mean the competitors can't make something equivalent or even better.

Lower brookfield means better cold flow test. See the thread title. So, the lowest brookfield is what someone wants if worried about cold weather.
 
Joined
Apr 25, 2017
Messages
7,624
Location
Ohio
Licensed spec or approved spec are all terminology. Quit nit picking.
It's not nit-picking. Let's stick to this Mercon LV example. Valvoline says they recommend MaxLife ATF for Mercon LV applications. Castrol, for example, has a Ford license # for Mercon LV fluids (applications). Are they the same ?
 
Joined
Jul 11, 2014
Messages
2,674
Location
Paradise of Florida
They are not the same. But the additive packages/baseoils/vm's meet the requirements. The only question you should be asking is, do you trust Valvoline? Or, is there something better than MerconLV? The answer to the second question is yes. The answer to the 1st question is for you to decide if its Valvoline or not.

And yes, its nit picking. I don't care for automaker license #s. Doesn't mean a thing. And, as I already posted, licensed fluids can vary drastically as long as they meet the minimal requirements.
 

MolaKule

Staff member
Joined
Jun 5, 2002
Messages
22,944
Location
Iowegia - USA
They are not the same. But the additive packages/baseoils/vm's meet the requirements. The only question you should be asking is, do you trust Valvoline? Or, is there something better than MerconLV? The answer to the second question is yes. The answer to the 1st question is for you to decide if its Valvoline or not.

And yes, its nit picking. I don't care for automaker license #s. Doesn't mean a thing. And, as I already posted, licensed fluids can vary drastically as long as they meet the minimal requirements.
I think the original reasons for the Licensing requirement were these:

1. Consistency of Formulation,
2. Consistency of Performance because of Consistency of Formulation, where performance was validated with a costly set of tests born by the formulator/blender,
3. Warranty support for approved products,
4, There were many "knock-off" ATF products at Discount Stores, roadside gas stations and convenience stores with sub-standard formulations and performance that would shorten the life of an AT,
5. When higher performance AT's with more gearing, and CAFE requirements came on the scene, new formulations had to be introduced to meet those new requirements.

My personal opinion is the licensing costs and the royalty payments required for a licensing number probably paid for the Research and Development costs of introducing new formulations.
 
Top