In much of the country, the car itself will rust through before the life of the transmission
Mercon ULV?
- Thread starter meborder
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted by MolaKule
Originally Posted by kstanf150
Let's see
The company I work for the owners 2017 Escalade Trans was replace last year at 65K
Owners daughters Yukon tranny was replaced at 75K
Co-worker Ram 1500 tranny was history at 35K
And now a buddy of mine 2018 F150 10
Speed is DOA
I'd call that pretty darn good understanding of technical data and discussion I'd say
And what is the context of these failures in this small sampling out of the millions of vehicles on the road without failures?
That is, has it been established that the ATF was the sole cause of these failures?
Has it been ruled out these transmissions did not have a design or production problem that caused these failures?
Has it been ruled out that insufficient or incorrect maintenance was not the cause of these failures?
Has it been ruled out that overloaded towing was not the cause of these failures?
I.e, what was the stated cause of these failures?
They were all maintained according to the lifetime factory schedule
None of em towed anything but grocery's and their butt up and down the road
So
Sir I respect your knowledge but you and I will have to agree to disagree on this topic
On my end I don't see transmissions being any better than they've ever been and thin life time fluid is not helping and only gona make the dealers a lot of money down the road
Originally Posted by kstanf150
Let's see
The company I work for the owners 2017 Escalade Trans was replace last year at 65K
Owners daughters Yukon tranny was replaced at 75K
Co-worker Ram 1500 tranny was history at 35K
And now a buddy of mine 2018 F150 10
Speed is DOA
I'd call that pretty darn good understanding of technical data and discussion I'd say
And what is the context of these failures in this small sampling out of the millions of vehicles on the road without failures?
That is, has it been established that the ATF was the sole cause of these failures?
Has it been ruled out these transmissions did not have a design or production problem that caused these failures?
Has it been ruled out that insufficient or incorrect maintenance was not the cause of these failures?
Has it been ruled out that overloaded towing was not the cause of these failures?
I.e, what was the stated cause of these failures?
They were all maintained according to the lifetime factory schedule
None of em towed anything but grocery's and their butt up and down the road
So
Sir I respect your knowledge but you and I will have to agree to disagree on this topic
On my end I don't see transmissions being any better than they've ever been and thin life time fluid is not helping and only gona make the dealers a lot of money down the road
MolaKule
Staff member
Originally Posted by kstanf150
...They were all maintained according to the lifetime factory schedule
None of em towed anything but grocery's and their butt up and down the road
So
Sir I respect your knowledge but you and I will have to agree to disagree on this topic
On my end I don't see transmissions being any better than they've ever been and thin life time fluid is not helping and only gona make the dealers a lot of money down the road
But you haven't proven that thinner ATF's were the cause, which was your original hypotheses.
I know for a fact that while ATF viscosities have been lowered, the additive packages, which contains improved AW chemistry's, are 10 times more stable and robust than previous fluids. I have not seen any SAE or rebuilder data that links lower viscosities with increased failure rates. Add to that better base oils and you have much improved fluids over the old Dex/Merc fluids.
I can relate one situation where certain GM transmissions in light vans and SUV's (I don't recall the exact GM designation) failed almost on target at 100k. But the transmission rebuilder I worked with, and which my daughter was the parts buyer, found it was the transmission's design, or lack thereof, that was the primary cause of failure, mostly due to undersized parts, poor metal treating of splined shafts, and poor shift timing.
The fluids of these failed of transmissions were analyzed and the fluids themselves were found to be in good shape, so it was not the fluid that caused the failure, but the internal design of this specific transmission.
...They were all maintained according to the lifetime factory schedule
None of em towed anything but grocery's and their butt up and down the road
So
Sir I respect your knowledge but you and I will have to agree to disagree on this topic
On my end I don't see transmissions being any better than they've ever been and thin life time fluid is not helping and only gona make the dealers a lot of money down the road
But you haven't proven that thinner ATF's were the cause, which was your original hypotheses.
I know for a fact that while ATF viscosities have been lowered, the additive packages, which contains improved AW chemistry's, are 10 times more stable and robust than previous fluids. I have not seen any SAE or rebuilder data that links lower viscosities with increased failure rates. Add to that better base oils and you have much improved fluids over the old Dex/Merc fluids.
I can relate one situation where certain GM transmissions in light vans and SUV's (I don't recall the exact GM designation) failed almost on target at 100k. But the transmission rebuilder I worked with, and which my daughter was the parts buyer, found it was the transmission's design, or lack thereof, that was the primary cause of failure, mostly due to undersized parts, poor metal treating of splined shafts, and poor shift timing.
The fluids of these failed of transmissions were analyzed and the fluids themselves were found to be in good shape, so it was not the fluid that caused the failure, but the internal design of this specific transmission.
Last edited:
Originally Posted by MolaKule
Originally Posted by kstanf150
...They were all maintained according to the lifetime factory schedule
None of em towed anything but grocery's and their butt up and down the road
So
Sir I respect your knowledge but you and I will have to agree to disagree on this topic
On my end I don't see transmissions being any better than they've ever been and thin life time fluid is not helping and only gona make the dealers a lot of money down the road
But you haven't proven that thinner ATF's were the cause, which was your original hypotheses.
I know for a fact that while ATF viscosities have been lowered, the additive packages, which contains improved AW chemistry's, are 10 times more stable and robust than previous fluids. I have not seen any SAE or rebuilder data that links lower viscosities with increased failure rates. Add to that better base oils and you have much improved fluids over the old Dex/Merc fluids.
I can relate one situation where certain GM transmissions in light vans and SUV's (I don't recall the exact GM designation) failed almost on target at 100k. But the transmission rebuilder I worked with, and which my daughter was the parts buyer, found it was the transmission's design, or lack thereof, that was the primary cause of failure, mostly due to undersized parts, poor metal treating of splined shafts, and poor shift timing.
The fluids of these failed of transmissions were analyzed and the fluids themselves were found to be in good shape, so it was not the fluid that caused the failure, but the internal design of this specific transmission.
Sir you are correct
I shouldn't have assumed that the transmission failures I've been associated with was failure due to fluid. So I apologize for assuming, as you've stated the failure Is most likely due to either design/part failure or just bad luck.
Originally Posted by kstanf150
...They were all maintained according to the lifetime factory schedule
None of em towed anything but grocery's and their butt up and down the road
So
Sir I respect your knowledge but you and I will have to agree to disagree on this topic
On my end I don't see transmissions being any better than they've ever been and thin life time fluid is not helping and only gona make the dealers a lot of money down the road
But you haven't proven that thinner ATF's were the cause, which was your original hypotheses.
I know for a fact that while ATF viscosities have been lowered, the additive packages, which contains improved AW chemistry's, are 10 times more stable and robust than previous fluids. I have not seen any SAE or rebuilder data that links lower viscosities with increased failure rates. Add to that better base oils and you have much improved fluids over the old Dex/Merc fluids.
I can relate one situation where certain GM transmissions in light vans and SUV's (I don't recall the exact GM designation) failed almost on target at 100k. But the transmission rebuilder I worked with, and which my daughter was the parts buyer, found it was the transmission's design, or lack thereof, that was the primary cause of failure, mostly due to undersized parts, poor metal treating of splined shafts, and poor shift timing.
The fluids of these failed of transmissions were analyzed and the fluids themselves were found to be in good shape, so it was not the fluid that caused the failure, but the internal design of this specific transmission.
Sir you are correct
I shouldn't have assumed that the transmission failures I've been associated with was failure due to fluid. So I apologize for assuming, as you've stated the failure Is most likely due to either design/part failure or just bad luck.
Awaiting the inevitability of someone putting maxlife in their 10r80. As to who will be the first I've no idea. (I understand it is not rated)
Last edited:
GM has been using Dexron HP for a few years on some transmissions, so they are actually ahead of Ford's ULV
The viscosities for Dex VI, Dex HP, and Mercon LV are similar (around 6 cSt). Mobil 1 ATF HP is 5.7 cSt at 100C.
For the 10 speeds, GM specs Dexron ULV, which I believe is equivalent to Motorcraft ULV.
Originally Posted by slacktide_bitog
GM has been using Dexron HP for a few years on some transmissions, so they are actually ahead of Ford's ULV
For the 10 speeds, GM specs Dexron ULV, which I believe is equivalent to Motorcraft ULV.
Originally Posted by slacktide_bitog
GM has been using Dexron HP for a few years on some transmissions, so they are actually ahead of Ford's ULV
Last edited:
MolaKule
Staff member
Originally Posted by meborder
just noticed that the new 10r80 uses an ultra low viscosity fluid, Mercon ULV
https://www.fcsdchemicalsandlubrica...+Fluid&category=Transmission%20Fluid
wondering if GM will follow suit for their version of the same transmission (10L80?) being that it was co-designed with ford. Or if they will use Dex VI.
Interesting.....
GM will most likely come out with an ULV or spec a modified Dexron HP, which currently has a 5.4cSt@100C spec.
Quote
From autoinfluence;
10. Speaking of Recalls
Yes, there was a small recall of (2017-18) F-150's and (2018) Expeditions, equipped with the 10-speed transmissions, earlier this year. The modest recall consisted of 142 units in full, and was based around the improper installation of a roll pin, which could potentially cause a loss of the ‘Park' function. That said, the recall went into effect earlier this year, with all owners notified and without further issue.
10R80 Article from AutoInfluence
just noticed that the new 10r80 uses an ultra low viscosity fluid, Mercon ULV
https://www.fcsdchemicalsandlubrica...+Fluid&category=Transmission%20Fluid
wondering if GM will follow suit for their version of the same transmission (10L80?) being that it was co-designed with ford. Or if they will use Dex VI.
Interesting.....
GM will most likely come out with an ULV or spec a modified Dexron HP, which currently has a 5.4cSt@100C spec.
Quote
From autoinfluence;
10. Speaking of Recalls
Yes, there was a small recall of (2017-18) F-150's and (2018) Expeditions, equipped with the 10-speed transmissions, earlier this year. The modest recall consisted of 142 units in full, and was based around the improper installation of a roll pin, which could potentially cause a loss of the ‘Park' function. That said, the recall went into effect earlier this year, with all owners notified and without further issue.
10R80 Article from AutoInfluence
Last edited:
dnewton3
Staff member
Is it just me, or is this FoMoCo statement an exercise in circular nonsense ? (see my underlined emphasis)
"Motorcraft® MERCON® ULV is an ultra-low viscosity fluid manufactured with high-viscosity index, ..."
"Motorcraft® MERCON® ULV is an ultra-low viscosity fluid manufactured with high-viscosity index, ..."
Last edited:
Originally Posted by dnewton3
Is it just me, or is this FoMoCo statement an exercise in circular nonsense ? (see my underlined emphasis)
"Motorcraft® MERCON® ULV is an ultra-low viscosity fluid manufactured with high-viscosity index, ..."
I don't understand, viscosity index and viscosity are not directly related. Viscosity index is the measure of change vs. temperature and has no units.
Is it just me, or is this FoMoCo statement an exercise in circular nonsense ? (see my underlined emphasis)
"Motorcraft® MERCON® ULV is an ultra-low viscosity fluid manufactured with high-viscosity index, ..."
I don't understand, viscosity index and viscosity are not directly related. Viscosity index is the measure of change vs. temperature and has no units.
- Status
Similar threads
