Quaker State Multi-Vehicle ATF in 1994 Camry V6LE

[cangreylegend]

I just did a drain and fill with the QS Multi-Vehicle ATF. I was torn between using the standard Dexron III or this stuff. Though it was twice the cost I decided to try it anyways.
The transmission was never rough but relatively smooth. The shifts are now like butter. Sometimes you can't tell. Wow!
Next year's drain and fill will use the same stuff and I'm sure with the higher % of the QS stuff, it'll get better.

 

[Bluestream]

Is that ATF the one that is Mercon V approved? They make one ATF that is Dexron III/Mercon and also Mercon V. I don't know how one fluid can cover all of these specs. If so, any Mercon V could be used in any Dexron III aplication.

 

[cangreylegend]

I did not notice it. But it is the one that says "especially recommended for transmissions built after 1983" and listed a list of makes which were primarily imports. Having had the good experience of Honda ATFZ1, I was intrigued.

I suspect this stuff can actually replace Toyota T-IV.

Anyways, it was no BS this time. Their standard Dexron was 1/2 the price and their synthetic ATF was 25% more that this multi-vehicle stuff.

 

[TooSlick]

Bluestream,

The specifications for frictional properties are the same for the Mercon and Mercon V fluids. Mercon V does require significantly better high/low temp properties, so these fluids are synthetic blends or full synthetics. Making a Mercon V fluid that also passes Mercon should actually be pretty easy ....

TS

 

[Bluestream]

TooSlick, I understand what you are saying, but if this is so a Mercon V should be able to replace any Dexron III. Am I correct?

 

[TooSlick]

Only if they have also tested it to meet the Dexron III specifications ...it's not a given. There are some minor differences in Dexron/Mercon fluids, so you have to satisfy both sets of requirements.

TS

 

[Whimsey]

Don't know about Toyota's and the use of multi-spec ATF in their transmission that requires a Mercon/Dexron. But with Ford trannies that require Mercon, a multi-spec fluid that includes Mercon V specs can not be used. However, if you need Mercon V then you can use a multi-spec ATF that includes Mercon V and Mercon/Dexron fluid.

Whimsey

 

[unDummy]

MerconV is superior to Mercon in every way.
The only problem is with very old and tired transmissions. Too smooth of a shift could cause excessive slippage and wear. If the transmission isn't worn out, MerconV can be used in place of Mercon.

The frictional characteristics are slightly different. MerconV was designed to be used in newer transmissions that have controlled slippage. In the old days, TCs/clutches were either unlocked or locked. Now, they are unlocked, slipping(smooth shift), and locked. This is why frictioned modified fluids are important in new transmissions. The TCU can actually 'time' the shift. If the fluid is grippy(old Merc/Dex), then it will release pressure to allow more slippage. You will end up with reduced power holding capacity, more heat, more wear, and a shorter life to the clutches/lockup TC/transmission.

Most quality MerconV ATFs are backwards compatible with Mercon/Dexron. If yours isn't, try another brand.

Additives can be added to Dex/Merc to simulate other fluids. Problem is, that these additives can no way improve the cold/hot performance of a mineral ATF when compared to the newer synth blends. All they do is adjust slip/shift quality. This isn't a problem if your transmission is in good condition and you don't purposely overheat it(tow/race) or drive it to the north pole.

 

[Bluestream]

What I don't understand about the whole backward compatibility issue is this: How can say a Dexron III for example, be approved for a vehicle (my 1991 BMW 735 for example) that originally came with Dexron II? From what I have read in the above posts, Dexron III is much slipperier. It should make the Vehicle behave in a different way that it was originally desiged, and possible add stress to the components. And further on the same issue, the QS Multi-Vehicle ATF is also Mercon V approved. How will this stuff work in a 1991 vehicle that should have Dexron II? And should it even be used in that application?

 

[Ray H]

Just because QS has "approved" their Multi-Vehicle ATF as a substitute for Mercon V doesn't mean Ford has done likewise. Always keep in mind who actually provides the transmission warranty. (More "stupid Shell tricks" AFAIC...)

 

[unDummy]

The real question is, who has proven that any fluid is more/less slipperier?

 

[Slade]

Hey there,

I picked up some Pennzoil Multi-vehicle ATF
fluid. I picked it up since it was a synthetic
blend. This is of course on a 93 Tempo Manual
transmission (Mercon recommended).
Seeing as how Quaker-State and Pennzoil are made
by the same company then;
are you all saying this will NOT provide the
needed protection ?

Slade