Full synthetic mercon v

[DoubleWasp]

Originally Posted By: shiny

^^^ This ^^^

I've talked to a lot of Crown Vic guys who all told me the same thing: CVs aren't fussy about what oil you use, but their transmissions are fussy about what ATF you use.


You have it backwards. Those transmissions are fussy because they are bad transmissions with bad torque converters. Mercon V replaced Mercon III for no other purpose than torque converter shudder due to poor lockup clutch engineering. That's literally the only thing stopping a 4R70 from using Galoopi's "All Makes ATF". You could toss anything in there, and the only thing you're going to get is torque converter shudder. Any other problems you have with the trans will have happened anyway.

Use a good aftermarket converter, and you will never need to touch a bottle of MV ever again.

Quote:
Use only Mercon V, not something "suitable for Mercon V applications." Don't add any other products to the transmission fluid.


What's the difference exactly? MV is a semi-syn formulation of MIII. There's no rocket science in that bottle.

Quote:
Do a drain-and-fill (not a fluid exchange) every 30K.


Why should someone not do a fluid exchange?

 

[shiny]

Originally Posted By: DoubleWasp
Originally Posted By: shiny

^^^ This ^^^

I've talked to a lot of Crown Vic guys who all told me the same thing: CVs aren't fussy about what oil you use, but their transmissions are fussy about what ATF you use.


You have it backwards. Those transmissions are fussy because they are bad transmissions with bad torque converters. Mercon V replaced Mercon III for no other purpose than torque converter shudder due to poor lockup clutch engineering. That's literally the only thing stopping a 4R70 from using Galoopi's "All Makes ATF". You could toss anything in there, and the only thing you're going to get is torque converter shudder. Any other problems you have with the trans will have happened anyway.

Use a good aftermarket converter, and you will never need to touch a bottle of MV ever again.

Quote:
Use only Mercon V, not something "suitable for Mercon V applications." Don't add any other products to the transmission fluid.


What's the difference exactly? MV is a semi-syn formulation of MIII. There's no rocket science in that bottle.

Quote:
Do a drain-and-fill (not a fluid exchange) every 30K.


Why should someone not do a fluid exchange?

If tossing anything in there causes torque shudder, and Mercon V helps prevent that, then you kinda proved my point. Personally, if my option is to run a long time on Mercon V or replace the torque converter with an aftermarket one, I'll take the Mercon V.

Go talk to the guys over at crownvic.net if you don't believe me. They'll tell you that a lot of Panther transmissions fail after fluid exchanges, even ones that were well-maintained. They recommend doing a drain-and-fill several times if necessary to get all the fluid out, but no fluid exchange machine.

Both my mechanic and the independent transmission shop next door to him won't use a fluid exchange machine on these cars because they've seen too many transmissions fail shortly afterwards.

Since a drain-and-fill does the job and is cheap but a new transmission is not, why take the chance?

 

[DoubleWasp]

Originally Posted By: shiny

If tossing anything in there causes torque shudder, and Mercon V helps prevent that, then you kinda proved my point. Personally, if my option is to run a long time on Mercon V or replace the torque converter with an aftermarket one, I'll take the Mercon V.

Go talk to the guys over at crownvic.net if you don't believe me. They'll tell you that a lot of Panther transmissions fail after fluid exchanges, even ones that were well-maintained. They recommend doing a drain-and-fill several times if necessary to get all the fluid out, but no fluid exchange machine.

Both my mechanic and the independent transmission shop next door to him won't use a fluid exchange machine on these cars because they've seen too many transmissions fail shortly afterwards.

Since a drain-and-fill does the job and is cheap but a new transmission is not, why take the chance?


You're not getting the picture than while Mercon V addresses the TCC shudder, just about any quality universal ATF will do the exact same thing. The purpose of Mercon V is to stand up to the localized fluid overheating condition that causes the shudder.

The choice is not between using an aftermarket TC or using Mercon V. The choice is between using an aftermarket TC or using any premium ATF on the market, including licensed Mercon V.

Who said anything about machines? The procedure I was referring to was: http://www.crownvic.net/tech/transservice.htm

If a trans blows from doing that, it was going to go, no matter what was or was not done to it. I had 3 Lincoln Mark VIII's I did this to, and never lost one transmission.

 

[shiny]

I don't doubt your experience with your cars. Were they pre-2001 models? Because Ford stopped equipping most of the Panthers with torque convertor drain plugs sometime during 2001.

The conventional wisdom is that if changing the transmission fluid causes the transmission to fail, it was about to fail anyway. But numerous people who practiced regular drain-and-fills have had their transmissions go bad right after using a fluid exchange machine. I just know that several guys I respect who have replaced thousands of transmissions won't use a fluid exchange machine on the Panthers; that's all I was trying to say.

Without a torque convertor plug, a drain-and-fill will drain 5 qts of fluid. If you have a pan with a plug you can drain, fill, drive the car, and repeat the process two more times. It won't get all the old out but will get most of it without running the risk of shocking the transmission.

 

[buck91]

Fluid exchange and back flushing are two totally different things. The practice I employ, both on panthers I've owned as well as others, is the diy cooler line flush. Never had an issue.

 

[DoubleWasp]

I'm going to say this again: I am NOT talking about using any kind of machine. I have used both the torque converter drain method, and the cooler line exchange method (using the transmission's own pump to drain the trans) and never had an issue with any 4R70 I did it to.

The idea that these methods "shock" the transmission is incorrect. There is nothing shocking to a transmission about new clean fluid.

There is definitely evidence that contaminant levels rise after new fluid is introduced to a transmission, but this occurs in either pan drop or complete exchange.

Either way, a better filter than a rock catcher should be installed in the system (as Ford did for years) after any type of transmission service.

 

[meborder]

Originally Posted By: DoubleWasp

There is definitely evidence that contaminant levels rise after new fluid is introduced to a transmission, but this occurs in either pan drop or complete exchange.


Can someone explain this?

It seems counterintuitive and would lead one to think that, if true, a fluid exchange would be the worst thing you can do -- which we all (hopefully) know is not the case.

To the point at hand, I've done full fluid exchanges on 2 4r70's, one 4r75e, and one AOD with a combined mileage of about 235,000 miles or so and nary an issue, other than fixing the torque converter shudder for good. All of these were with synthetic fluids of various brands.

The panthers got the AOD/4r70 variants, and I fail to see how they could possibly be any different than the f150, explorers, expeditions, thunderbirds, E-series, ect.

 

[GiveMeAVowel]

Originally Posted By: DoubleWasp


There is definitely evidence that contaminant levels rise after new fluid is introduced to a transmission, but this occurs in either pan drop or complete exchange.



Site a legitimate source that confirms this?

The only possible way that could happen is that the detergent levels in the new fluid stir up contaminates that possibly had been adhering to various parts already, but the new fluid with agents that help to suspend such contaminates in suspension would counteract that anyway so it would be a wash when it comes down to the bottom line.

 

[DoubleWasp]

Originally Posted By: GiveMeAVowel
Originally Posted By: DoubleWasp


There is definitely evidence that contaminant levels rise after new fluid is introduced to a transmission, but this occurs in either pan drop or complete exchange.



Site a legitimate source that confirms this?

The only possible way that could happen is that the detergent levels in the new fluid stir up contaminates that possibly had been adhering to various parts already, but the new fluid with agents that help to suspend such contaminates in suspension would counteract that anyway so it would be a wash when it comes down to the bottom line.


You laughed, asked for a source, and then answered your own question.

But it's definitely not always OK to have those contaminants running around, if the amount in suspension goes too far.

I'm on my phone right now, but I'll post some excellent stuff and test results by Sonnax a little later.

 

[Y_K]

Originally Posted By: shiny
Without a torque convertor plug, a drain-and-fill will drain 5 qts of fluid.


4.5 in my experience, and 3.25 with a Mightyvac from the top

 

[shiny]

I just had it done on my car. It took the whole 5 quarts.

 

[Whitewolf]

The best, in my experience, and most tedious way, is to just drain and fill about three times, driving some miles between each. I don't like or trust flushing machines.

 

[DoubleWasp]

The rise in contaminants on a healthy transmission is not significant enough to cause the trans any problems, and is ultimately better than running old fluid that may be worn or getting close to being burnt.

In an unhealthy or poorly maintained transmission, a lot that's settled around can be picked up by the new fluid and go into circulation.

I'll quote Gregg Nader of Sonnax on this one:

Quote:
"When fresh oil is introduced during a service or repair, a fresh load of detergents will pick older settled/compacted particles up and circulate them throughout the system. I have tested and verified this effect in my shop. In a normal working transmission that has never seen a failure with 100K miles, The old/original oil tested relatively clean, the new oil tested clean, 90% of the old oil was changed via drain and fill without pulling the pan. Follow up tests after 10 miles, 80 miles, and 200 miles showed the particulate matter in the oil steadily rising confirming the old concern of servicing older transmissions. In this case the transmission is now running with a greater amount of particulate circulating with the new oil than it was with the old oil.

Gregg continues: "Based on my experiences here, my recommendations for servicing older transmissions that have not had regular maintenance is as follows. Assuming a ‘normal’ service interval of once a year for a vehicle that has never or rarely had a transmission service:
1. Change the fluid and/or filter by any method.
Add a drain plug
2. Relatively soon afterwards, drain the fluid and replace with new fluid. Leave the filter alone.
3. Thereafter, adopt an accelerated service interval by performing drain and fill of transmission fluid whenever changing engine oil (or every other depending on frequency).
4. After a few drain and fill services, return to the ‘normal’ service interval of once a year.

Gregg notes: "Obviously this is not practical for many customers and difficult to manage in the real world. The main point here is not the specific time, or intervals, rather if you truly want clean fluid you will need to also change out the “new” fluid added to older transmissions as it will quickly pick up the old grit that was laying around inside and the only way to get rid of this is to swap the fluid out."


So, the "flush fear" should be reserved for only neglected transmissions, the "pan drop only" should in fact be done alot more regularly for transmissions that do fall into the "pan drop only" category, and the simple addition of an external filter would save any transmission from getting to this point.

 

[A1O]

Wow lots of info which is great. Did some research on the 4R70 transmissions and the did have problems with the front pump going out and they also did a TCM reprogram to soften shift points.This transmission was serviced at 60k and 120k new fluid via exchange and the dropping the pan and changing the filter afterwards. Fluid right now is bright red and the car shifts fine very smooth. I have read on a lot of boards about the fragileness of this transmission and that's why I was asking about a full synthetic fluid for it. The next pan drop will be at 150k. At that time it will get the dorman pan added and will get the method described above

 

[DoubleWasp]

Cool.

My apologies if I came off as a bit of a butt. I just like to pass along good info when I get it.

Strongly consider adding the Ford/Magnefine transmission filter. Ford discontinued them when they introduced the current generation of transmission, but used to install them with every transmission they serviced. All Ford heavy duties used to come straight from the factory with an NTZ sub-micron bypass filter as well.

A lot of law enforcement agencies running CV's believe in them still.

The 4R70 had a lot of issues up until the 1998 model year, which is why I only bought 1998 Lincoln Mark VIII's.

I've used MaxLife Syn, Mobil Syn, and Amsoil syn in them, and they never cared which it was as compared to the FoMoCo MerconV. They are more than strong enough to hold up to that hot TCC.

 

[Pontual]

If you service the transmission, dropping the pan, changing filter and cleaning the mabgnet inside the pan, you wouldnt need magnefine, IMO.

 

[tig1]

I have always used Mobil 1 ATF in Ford trans for at least 20 years with never a trans failure.

 

[PandaBear]

Valvoline used to make it (group III), and Autozone was clearing it out for $1 last Xmas. I got 21 quarts and then my dad trade in his car...