Ford Unveils Mercon LV

[XS650]

Originally Posted By: Pablo
The bottom line there is: Frictionally just how different is Dex VI from Dex III? GM says Dex VI backward compatible.


For the sake of picking a nit....Not for all applications. Per GM it's not backwards compatible for manual transmission application.

 

[Doug Hillary]

Hi,
this is a very complex issue. The Manufacturer's standards are just that - standards that they believe a product needs to meet to equal or better the intended/deign performance characteristics. And they will officially endorse the supplier who proves that it does!

I have no doubt that the increasing move by Manufacturers to officially endorse proven conforming products is not new. It started with CAT and engine lubricants in the 1930s and carried on then by MIL-L-2104 and the API's DG-DM-DS standards. CATs standards are a way of life today!!

This will mean that Oil Blenders will become increasing isolated if they chose NOT to have their products endorsed/licensed or whatever. They of course must be prepared to "wear" the product of NOT doing so!

ATFs and Euro transmissions are a particular case in point - the Manufacturer (ZF, Getrag, MB, Voith and etc) endorsed lubricants do perform better than those of "unknown" performance that say they "meet" or "exceed" the requirements

Regardless of the Brand!

I remember voicing this "compliance" matter regarding engine lubricants on here many years ago - many people including some well known contributors did not even know that ACEA existed for instance. I was "howled down" in antagonistic protest - perhaps we have come a long way since

I hope so

 

[onion]

Originally Posted By: XS650

For the sake of picking a nit....Not for all applications. Per GM it's not backwards compatible for manual transmission application.


Another nit to pick: Allison has come out with a service bulletin saying not to use Dex VI in their older transmissions that came out with Dex III. They say that there are potential problems with seal compatibility. They still specify DexIII, even though it's no longer a licensed product.

But they use Dex VI in some of their new transmissions.

 

[Pablo]

Originally Posted By: XS650
Originally Posted By: Pablo
The bottom line there is: Frictionally just how different is Dex VI from Dex III? GM says Dex VI backward compatible.


For the sake of picking a nit....Not for all applications. Per GM it's not backwards compatible for manual transmission application.


This is true. I should have said in AT applications. Perhaps this is mainly a function of viscosity, and the reason I recommend ATD as a minimum vis fluid for Dex III MT's.

 

[Donald]

I am sure this will be a business decision for Amsoil. They can see if there is a way for the universal ATF to meet the spec, if not they would have to come out with a unique ATF. Whats the market, since Fords says the stuff goes 150K, which for many cars is lifetime. And there is no hurry, since few 2008 cars will need any ATF for awhile and if they did, it would sure to be a warranty issue and let the dealer fix it for free.

So it always come down to what is the business case.

I understand the issues with licensing, it somewhat protects the consumer, and also provides revenue to Ford. If Amsoil comes out with an ATF they claim that will meet the Mercon LV spec, then I would have faith that it does, they have too much to loose by claiming something they did not test. Same would be true for most other major oil companies. Now Mercon LV ATF at the dollar store would be a different story, licensed or not.

 

[MolaKule]

Quote:
Anyway back on this topic, why the struggle with the fact that the base fluid really does effect functionality of a fluid? It's easy to know it does in temperature/viscosity behavior as well as oxidation resistance - so why not the frictional properties as well?


Let's get back to the focus of the total formulation.

The quality of the base oil provides the film strength characteristics, shear characteristics, varnish appearance, and oxidation. The better the base oil, the lower the varnish, lower oxidation, lower friction, higher film strength, and better shear resistance.

It is the additive package, and specifically the friction modification compounds (usually specialized complex amines) that determine the dynamic frictional characteristics of the fluid such as shift quality and anti-shudder for the frictional materials in the automatic transmission.

Now some of the other additives, such as oxidation inhibitors, help keep the oil more oxidation stable over the life of the oil; which is required for the more complex transmissions which tend to run hotter. Improved viscosity improvers in Group III oils also will help the oil maintain viscosity over the life of the oil as well. Pure synthetic ATF's will use little or no viscosity index improvers since their inherent viscosity characteristics are more stable.

 

[MolaKule]

The improved chemistries of viscosity index improvers are also much more stable than previous formulations and are of a different type than used in PCMO's.

 

[wiswind]

Thank you very much for the informative post.
This is the kind of "stuff" that I like to read.

I also really like to see input from Molakule, as well as others.

I have learned a lot from this site.

I am sure that Amsoil, like any other oil company will look at the Mercon LV specification and evaluate the potential market for a product for this.
If it is a TRUE fill for life/150K mile product, to be used ONLY in the newer transmissions, then the only demand for this product will be for repair (and for FORD's sake that better be minimal) and 100K-150K mile service.
That may not be a big demand in the aftermarket.
My '96 FORD calls for 30K mile "normal" service and 21K "severe" service.
So going to 100K-150K is a big drop in demand for a product.

As far as confidence in a product, we are going on faith that what is in the bottle will do as the label says.
I am not concerned about warranty on a 12 year old vehicle, but I pay very close attention to what the manufacterer specifies for my vehicle.

If Amsoil puts Mercon LV specification on the bottle, I am sure that a lot of thought and investigation will have gone into it.
I have not used Amsoil (yet), but I do believe what they list on their product.
However, it comes down to what each person has confidence in....after doing their own homework.
For folks like me......it is reading what other people say......and having confidence in what they say......or not having confidence in what they say.

 

[LubeMan]

Well good luck to you - its pretty sad that you want to believe a marketer and not OEMs who test and release products for customers.

One question which keeps coming up is if Ansoil products are so good why don't they get a license for these WS, LV and Dex-VI products ? Is it against their reputation to do so ? Once they get a bill from these OEMs that will change their policy.

 

[badtlc]

Kudos to Ford.

 

[Donald]

Amsoil does not pay for any of the licensing (SAE either). But they do state on the bottle what spec(s) it meet. Amsoil has a small percentage of the market (but maybe a much larger percentage of the BITOG market). They do however spend money on doing testing to make sure their oil meets the various specs and performs well in many tests. The question would be how much more revenue would Amsoil get if they paid for licensing for all their oils and could put the SAE (or other) sticker on their bottle? My guess is few people who might buy Amsoil are scared away because it does not have an official SAE sticker on the bottle.

 

[Pablo]

Originally Posted By: LubeMan
Well good luck to you - its pretty sad that you want to believe a marketer and not OEMs who test and release products for customers.

One question which keeps coming up is if Ansoil products are so good why don't they get a license for these WS, LV and Dex-VI products ? Is it against their reputation to do so ? Once they get a bill from these OEMs that will change their policy.


To imply Amsoil doesn't test their products is not correct.
Amsoil is not claiming compliance with WS or LV.
Not against "their reputation", more like Amsoil does not want to be constrained.
Not sure what you mean by "a bill from these OEMs"? Please explain.

 

[onion]

Originally Posted By: Pablo

Not sure what you mean by "a bill from these OEMs"? Please explain.


He probably means a lawsuit for false adversizing or something along those lines. But I don't think that's too likely, considering Amsoil's penchant for creative wording.

Redline D6, on the other hand, seems like (legally) risky labeling to me.

 

[Audi Junkie]

I'd guess that a thicker fluid, like AMSoil ATF is, would do better in the LV-spec unit than vice-versa.

Anyway, for what it's worth, I was as nit-picking of an AMSoil skeptic as anyone, but look at what I have in my new Honda trans, AMSoil ATF.

The thread has gone off-course.

 

[The Critic]

Originally Posted By: Audi Junkie
I'd guess that a thicker fluid, like AMSoil ATF is, would do better in the LV-spec unit than vice-versa.

Anyway, for what it's worth, I was as nit-picking of an AMSoil skeptic as anyone, but look at what I have in my new Honda trans, AMSoil ATF.

The thread has gone off-course.

What good is a thicker fluid if the newer one is thinner, but more shear stable?

Also remember that the thinner fluids can have a higher film strength than older "thicker" fluids. This is something that a lot of people don't think about.

 

[bmwtechguy]

I saw Mercon V bottle at WM today, SuperTech, and it had the LV,SP, and about every other spec like ATF+4 listed on it as well, all for 2.97 a bottle. Sounds like a poor man's Amsoil, and then some! One shoe fits all..

 

[Whitewolf]

"What good is a thicker fluid if the newer one is thinner, but more shear stable?

Also remember that the thinner fluids can have a higher film strength than older "thicker" fluids. This is something that a lot of people don't think about".
The Critic.

The problem is that the majority of people just can't get their head around that.

 

[psudaytona]

Thats because many dont want to learn anything beyond the idle chatter they pick up here and there. Its the same idea that keeps people to the, "if you dont change the oil every 3000, you WILL kill that engine" nonsense. I try as many of you do to educate those I come into contact with but its a slow dying tradition.

Most folks arent like those of us at this site. My personal reason for wanting to learn the science behind this probably has alot to due with how I approach life in general. I want to understand everything around me.....Probably also why I am pursuing a Phd eventually.....

 

[Donald]

No one knows (ok a few at Amsoil do) how Amsoil will try and meet this new spec (or not). So all speculation. My point was its a business decision (not technical) as to what to do. If they can meet it by modifying a current ATF, much less of a big deal, if they have to come out with a new unique fluid, with who knows what the volume would be, a much bigger deal.

 

[Tempest]

Quote:
Also remember that the thinner fluids can have a higher film strength than older "thicker" fluids. This is something that a lot of people don't think about".
The Critic.

The problem is that the majority of people just can't get their head around that.

Can we have a tutorial as this is something that has not been brought up around here much but is most interesting.