Mercon V and Amsoil Universal ATF

[MNgopher]

I'll back up most of what metroplex has said. The one notable exception to Mercon backwards compatibility is the 4R100 transmission used behind the lightning F150, in Superduty trucks, etc... This is a Mercon only transmission. Mercon V (Fords fluids anyways) caused too high of wear rates in the 4R100.

Personally, I wouldn't feel comfortable using a fluid that is not rated Mercon V in a transmission that calls for it, such as Mobil 1. A fluid that meets both Mercon and Mercon V should be fine though. I personally use Valvoline Durablend ATF that meets both specs and thus is more "universal" for my applications.

I have the AW4 in my 88 Cherokee. You'd think Jeep dealers would know better what fluid goes into their vehicles, but if they're combined with a Chrysler dealer of some sort, they are generally clueless. The AW4 is a Japanese transmission that used Dexron/Mercon from start to finish in the Cherokee. Yet dealers insist it uses ATF+3, unless you show them the manuals....

 

[Bio-T]

Ford recommends the following transmission fluids for the following transmissions.

1. E4OD------Mercon
2. 4R100-----Mercon
3. 5R110W----Mercon SP

In the E40D and the 4R100 the use of dual rated fluid Mercon is not permitted. Mobil I is not dual rated, and if a synthetic is desired then this fluid is correct to use. In the new 2003 5 speed automatic, 5R110W, only the Mercon SP transmission fluid may be used.

Never heard of Mercon SP? Don't feel left out as this a new fluid and so far no info is available on backward compatibility. What does the SP stand for? No one seems to know at this point as I have seen nothing in writing. I thought it may indicate Synthetic, but after more consideration I think it stands for Special.

If you want a good transmission fluid for you Ford go this site www.brianstruckshop.com He is one of the premier transmission builders for Ford transmissions. His site lists on the front page what fluid he uses except in the new 5R110W.

[ January 16, 2003, 11:31 AM: Message edited by: 59 Vetteman ]

 

[Pablo]

OK Here is a REAL answer from Amsoil. I like it and the response I got!!

quote:

---

The AMSOIL ATF is far superior to a group II base oil blended with hydro treated naphthenic oil. Secondly it uses a premium additive chemistry that meets the static and dynamic coefficient of friction parameters to meet ATF+4 requirements. It also meets the coefficients of friction parameters for MERCON, MERCON V, DEXRON III, and Diamond SPIII. Although the additive chemistry may be slightly different the exclusive MOPAR fluid from the factory, it still follows suit with the parameters set forth by Daimler Chrysler. Therefore it is not going to cause a mechanical problem. All AMSOIL lubricants are designed to improve performance and increase protection to engine and transmission components.

Further more, Chrysler developed the +4 spec to "fix" an inherent chattering problem with the Chrysler transmissions. That is the sole reason why Chrysler recommends +4 fluid and this is why nobody offers a +4 fluid. On the other hand there are fluids that are far superior to Chryslers +4 specs, including ours!

We didn’t just one day decide to make this claim just for the heck of it. This was very carefully researched and we have been developing superior fluids for over 30 years. We certainly would not recommend fluids we knew were going to cause damage. Why would anyone who wants to stay in business??

---

 

[Spector]

My Experience with the Amsoil ATF is that I have and do use it in GM products and Ford products with no issues to date. Been in my 92 Camry since 25,000 miles, Isuzu, Buick, Mercury Mystique, Chev. The only one I have not tried it in is a Chrysler product. That is because in 1985 I swore I would never ever again own one of these vehicles and never have again.

Last change in my Camry I did try the Lubeguard, no difference although I may have seen some slight change in the Mystique when I put the lubeguard in, maybe just perception too.,

The Amsoil ATF does work great but again, never tried it in a Chrysler product

 

[msparks]

I was speaking with Alan a while ago, and from what I understand the chemisty is very complex that is used on the ATF. I would imagine that it is also very expensive, which would be prohibitive to most other ATF makers, since why would someone pay $6 a quart when you can buy the stuff on the shelf for $1.50?

I believe this is also the same reason you don't have much competition to the Amsoil Series 2000/3000 line, the additives used are super expensive and other lube manufacters would not be able to sell it!

I mean who will really pay $8+ a quart for oil?? No one in their right mind that is for sure

 

[Spector]

I just re read the original post at the top and noted the claim about the Amsoil warranty. Although I use the products IMO the warranty isn't worth the paper it is printed on. they will always claim the failure was due to a mechanically issue never the fluid or the oil. To the best of my knowledge the warrany has never ever paid a claim for an Amosil product so although excellent products do not use them believing they will pay off. If you use it during warranty period you will win eventually ( if dealer denies only on the basis of using Amsoil) but take years of battling the dealer and courts in winning. Unfortunately, that is life today. The fluid will never fail it is always a design or manufacturer problem according to Amsoil

 

[Mike_dup1]

There is always the chance they are correct!

It a fact that some of the failre claims against any product can often be attributed to the user. Have you ever seen someone abuse some product then slam the manf.? Happens a lot, I can think of several instances of people doing this. How about the fella that buys a basic 1/2 2x4 350 V8 pickup truck and pulls a 22 ft trailer trailer from Michigan all the way to Flordia, then blames GM for building a bad transmission that failed somewhere in the hills of Kentucky and Tennesee. The dealer who fixed the truck told him he was grossly overloaded and that the repair was not be covered under warranty. 10 yrs later, this fella will not buy a GM product and slams Chevy all the time. An and guess what he pulls the trailer with now, a SD F250 2X4 but the Chevy was junk.

 

[G-MAN]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Pablo:
G-man II, please elaborate. What's false?

---

Pablo, please don't take my comments personally. Even though you are an Amsoil retailer, I know this stuff you are posting isn't coming from you, that you are getting it from someone at Amsoil.

As to his statement about ATF+4, the burden is on him to prove that the supposed "chatter" problem is the only reason Chrysler introduced ATF+4.

 

[Ray H]

Interesting discussion. Does anyone know what, if anything, if compatible with "Diamond SP III"?

-Ray Haeffele

 

[Pablo]

Ray - Amsoil Universal ATF meets Diamond SP III.

 

[Ray H]

Thanks for the tip, Pablo, but I was thinking in terms of something cheaper than a synthetic fluid. Extended drain intervals are a non-starter since my 10 yr./100,000 mile powertrain warranty is contingent on establishing through receipts that I can account for the required maintenance at the specified intervals (30,000 miles on the Hyundai transmission in severe service).

-Ray Haeffele

 

[G-MAN]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Pablo:
Further more, Chrysler developed the +4 spec to "fix" an inherent chattering problem with the Chrysler transmissions. That is the sole reason why Chrysler recommends +4 fluid and this is why nobody offers a +4 fluid. On the other hand there are fluids that are far superior to Chryslers +4 specs, including ours!

---

More "misinformation" from Amsoil.

 

[Pablo]

G-man II, please elaborate. What's false?

 

[blano]

FWIW a tribologist I spoke to claims that its impossible for one fluid to meet all the specs that Amsoil universal claims it does. He said something about the frictional charachteristics are unique for certain fluids.

 

[Johnny]

Now I'm not sticking up for Amsoil, but it can be done. We have a whole truckload of chemist and tribologist that came up with our Multi Vehicle ATF's. And ours are certified by the manufactures. We have paid the license fees.

 

[blano]

Johnny,Does it meet both dexron, mercon, and atf4?

 

[Ferb]

I don't worry any more about ATF meeting the combo of Dexron III, Mercon, and M-V, but what bothers me is the ATF+3 and +4.

From what Widman has on his page, the ATF+3 friction ramp is much different than Dexron III. Now if it's true that +4 is to minimize chatter, the slope will be even more relaxed compared to DexIII.

I don't doubt that Amsoil has done their homework, but i'm kinda curious if it's "flirting the lines" and getting close enough to all the standards to pass.

ferb!

 

[Johnny]

blano: Yes it does. DEXRON III/MERCON/MERCON V/ATF+3/ATF+4.

 

[blano]

How can one fluid pass specs like mercon and atf3-4 that have differant frictional charachteristice? BTW atf4was brought out to help with the torque convertor shudder some dodge AT have.

 

[Johnny]

I don't know, I'm not a chemist. But our chemist say it does, and Ford, GM, and Chrysler have tested it, and they say it does. That's all I know. It is certified by each of the mfg.