Archives >> 7.3L Power Stroke Engine and Drivetrain (11/01-7/03)

Pages: 1
CPSS
Member
Member # 17597
Reged: 11/15/01
Posts: 631
Loc: Clifton Park, NY
MERCON vs MERCON 5 again
#1056591 - 02/07/03 09:02 AM

I recently had a remanfactured tranny installed by the dealer. After we got it back I noticed they never installed the extrenal filter as required by TSB, when I picked it up the second time, I asked if they used the correct fluid and was told its all the same now. I tried to correct them and the mechanic said MERCON 5 was better. I told him he was wrong and to check his TSB's. Later service mgr. called me back and said he checked and they did use MERCON. I don't believe him. Is there any way to test the fluid? I was just going to replace it with Mobil 1, but am concerned that damage could have been done. Put about 7K miles on it already. Mark K, what do ya think?

DB
Member
Member # 152
Reged: 04/02/99
Posts: 891
Loc: Carson City
Re: MERCON vs MERCON 5 again new
#1056638 - 02/07/03 09:40 AM

Did they assertaing why the tranny gave out?? Did they replace the cooler. I did not see anything in the TSBs about an external filter.

haul_n_horses2
Member
Member # 21227
Reged: 04/22/02
Posts: 1994
Loc: Ann Arbor, MI
Re: MERCON vs MERCON 5 again new
#1056660 - 02/07/03 09:56 AM

STOP per the TSB is to place a Magnefine filter post cooler to catch the debris that the exploding tranny showered into the cooler. It cannot be flushed out and if not caught by the filter will kill the new tranny in short order. You can install these on a new tranny pre cooler to prevent the trash from collecting in it. I put mine on pre cooler at 500 miles. You can by them for $20 from Emerging Enterprises, a site sponsor.

hank53
Member
Member # 12975
Reged: 04/17/01
Posts: 350
Loc: Charleston, SC
Re: MERCON vs MERCON 5 again new
#1056661 - 02/07/03 09:56 AM

My dealer did the same to me, but I caught it on the service bill and took it back the next morning. Mine only ran 60 miles but I swear, it started shifting into OD different after that. Problem is, they want let you watch them, so you don't know what fluid they put in. Since they think V is just a upgrade, they may not even stock Mercon any longer? Who knows. The mechanic who did the change was livid when I brought it back.

Mark Kovalsky
Member
Member # 1191
Reged: 05/07/99
Posts: 3481
Loc: Livonia, MI USA
Re: MERCON vs MERCON 5 again new
#1057070 - 02/07/03 02:14 PM

If it is MERCON V and you change it you'll be fine. MERCON V won't cause the transmission to immediately fail, it takes a long time.

guss
Member
Member # 26685
Reged: 11/20/02
Posts: 408
Loc: frankfort ohio
Re: MERCON vs MERCON 5 again new
#1057295 - 02/07/03 07:40 PM

my understanding a trans shop told me that mercron is the old type f that they used in the c6.and in them trans you better use that type or it will fail

Mark Kovalsky
Member
Member # 1191
Reged: 05/07/99
Posts: 3481
Loc: Livonia, MI USA
Re: MERCON vs MERCON 5 again new
#1057428 - 02/07/03 09:07 PM

MERCON and Type F are VERY different fluids. And the C6 used MERCON after 1976, just like the e4OD and 4R100 use MERCON. Don't run MERCON V or Type F in them!

scottginfla
Member
Member # 23050
Reged: 07/16/02
Posts: 562
Loc: sorrento,fla
Re: MERCON vs MERCON 5 again new
#1057541 - 02/07/03 10:09 PM

mark, is dextronIII/ mercron the same as mercon? thats all i can find locally. my new 02 says to use mercon so i have been using dextron III/ mercron. thanks,. scott

kckeith
Member
Member # 20440
Reged: 03/16/02
Posts: 251
Loc: Highlands Ranch, Co.
Re: MERCON vs MERCON 5 again new
#1057562 - 02/07/03 10:15 PM

DexronIII/Mercon is all you will find in the shelf. It is Mercon. DexronIII and Mercon are the same fluid. Mercon V is a totally different fluid. It is suprising though that a lot of Ford mechanics do not know this. For that reason, I would not trust any of them to change my fluid or service my tranny.

scottginfla
Member
Member # 23050
Reged: 07/16/02
Posts: 562
Loc: sorrento,fla
Re: MERCON vs MERCON 5 again new
#1057576 - 02/07/03 10:19 PM

thanks, thats what i thought. just wanted to make sure, kind of got confused when my buddy came by today with his new f150 and the dipstick said mercron v.

Bob Riley
Sponsor
Member # 4125
Reged: 12/03/99
Posts: 7400
Loc: Sebring, Florida
Re: MERCON vs MERCON 5 again new
#1057617 - 02/07/03 10:42 PM

Mark, did you ever find out anything? Or are they (Ford) still going by a reccomondation of a gentleman that no longer works there and left no paper trail as to his reason? I'm sorry I'm a little sarcastic about this, but it's been at least a year that NO ONE has any data showing WHY it can't be used.

Remember, many, if not all, the oil companies that have a Mercon V say it is an upgraded fluid.

And remember guys, here's the rediculous part. Most Ford dealers use nothing but Mercon V and if you can't test after the fact to what fluid is in there, how in the heck will your warrantee be denied?

Bob

Larry MModerator
Moderator
Member # 14468
Reged: 06/19/01
Posts: 5146
Loc: Northern Va
Re: MERCON vs MERCON 5 again new
#1057994 - 02/08/03 06:41 AM

Quote:

And the C6 used MERCON after 1976




Mark,

You're the last person (well one of them anyway ) that I would want to disagree with on facts concerning Ford trannies, but can you double check that date on the use of MERCON in the C6 just for sake of discussion. I would have made a small wager that my C6 in my 1978 E250 Van specified Type F and not MERCON.

Larry

CPSS
Member
Member # 17597
Reged: 11/15/01
Posts: 631
Loc: Clifton Park, NY
Re: MERCON vs MERCON 5 again new
#1058374 - 02/08/03 01:00 PM

They did finally install the magnafine filter, post cooler, said the technician must have "forgotten". I guess i'll just replace the fluid with Mobil 1 to be on the safe side.

Mark Kovalsky
Member
Member # 1191
Reged: 05/07/99
Posts: 3481
Loc: Livonia, MI USA
Re: MERCON vs MERCON 5 again new
#1058434 - 02/08/03 01:48 PM

Bob,

There will never be any data shared outside Ford that tells you why you can't use MERCON V in a 4R100. Get over it.

Either you believe the manufacturer's recommendation or you don't. Obviously you don't believe it. That's fine. Run what you like.

For those that are still in warranty and want to keep it that way I recommend following the manufacturer's recommendation. That means don't run MERCON V or a fluid that says MERCON/MERCON V.

Bob Riley
Sponsor
Member # 4125
Reged: 12/03/99
Posts: 7400
Loc: Sebring, Florida
Re: MERCON vs MERCON 5 again new
#1058473 - 02/08/03 02:20 PM

Mark,

I'll never get over it when I truly beleive what you know I believe as to their reason. When they have a real reason, they usually explain in detail. Heck, they wrote several TSBs or memos about exhaust brakes, coolants, etc, but this Mercon V issue is still a big hush/hush.

And what about all those guys wanting to keep it in warrantee, so they take it to a dealer, who doesn't even stock Mercon fluid? And you know as well as I do, no one, including Ford has any idea what fluid is in there.

I'm not saying I'm right, I'm saying I'd like to see some data showing that Ford is right and all the oil companies are wrong. They make the fluid, they test the fluid, they know fluids.
For all wondering why I'm pushing this issue, I'll give you a little background;

The gentleman who made this statement at Ford no longer works here. No one knows why he made that statement. Mark, that came from you on this site.
So, I did a little digging. Come to find out about middle of 2002, there was no longer any Mercon in a barrell from Ford to buy. The dealers must buy from Ford. Since most had to start buying in quarts, they refused and started buying in Mercon V in barrels. Quarts costed them over 1.00 a quart more. They get the same money for warrantee or service either way, so it was a loss. Ford buys their oil in huge quantities. They don't want to get stuck with it any more than the you would. All their new vehicles required this new Mercon V fluid, so ...what to do? What is the vehicle with the highest consumption of ATF and CAN use Mercon? The E4OD. SO, make it a requirement that you must use this fluid. They had to know since the fluids were so close that oil companies were going to make a dual useage fluid. So, lets cover ourselves that way too. They also knew by the time they had the new truck out with a new transmission, they'd be out of trans fluid, and most would be out of their 36k mile warrantee and would be told "this is all we have, it's ok now, we tested it". You make my word, it will happen that way. The oil companies are fighting this as they don't want to make two fluids, when they know it can be done with one. This is my opinion based on speaking with several dealerships

Also, I'll give you another example. Forget even Amsoil for a moment. Many of you like Red-Line. No one ever questioned it's quality or marketing. But, as soon as they came out last year and said the same thing and theirs is now a dual useage fluid, people were returning it because they didn't beleive Red-Line. The only reason I mentioned Amsoil in the beginning, was they were the first to step out and face it in the market with a dual useage fluid. To me, it was a bit brave, but here's the scoop on that. It's the same fluid as when it was Mercon. Ford made a new rating, Amsoil tested, it passed. So now, it causes damamge?? Red Line did the same. A full sysnthetic oil did not have to even reformulate to meet the Mercon V rating. IT does not mean it has to be synthetic to be Mercon V, but I have yet to see one not at least a syn blend.

Mobil.......here's one that I have gone out on a limb on, but still stand by it. Mobilone has made a decision to not have any of the Mercon V market to keep their Mercon market(it's still larger). Smart move, I think. I also beleive that if they test (and I beleive they have), it will also pass Mercon V without reformulation. And then what? ALl you guys with it will also have damaged transmissions.

Sorry, Mark, I definately need more than "we told you, so that's it" There is way too much stacked against their statement of not to use it.

Bob



Popperboy1
Member
Member # 18267
Reged: 12/13/01
Posts: 1450
Loc: Homer Glen, IL
Re: MERCON vs MERCON 5 again new
#1058680 - 02/08/03 05:26 PM

Bob, I don't doubt what you said in the above post is 100% true.

Mark, I also believe what you said in your post is also 100% true.

The only thing that I can add is this: Ford owns the warantee ball, so if they want to take it and go home, the ball game is over.

There have been too many 4R100's with factory fills of MERCON failing, too many Ford dealers putting in MERCON V and not knowing it is not allowed in the sevice manual, owner's manual and a TSB that says DON'T DO IT, and too many guys running MERCON V or a MERCON/MERCON V dual rated oil and not having a failure after 100,000's of miles to have a definative answer.

Bob Riley
Sponsor
Member # 4125
Reged: 12/03/99
Posts: 7400
Loc: Sebring, Florida
Re: MERCON vs MERCON 5 again new
#1058745 - 02/08/03 06:14 PM

Terry, gotta admit, that's a heck of a way to put it.

Bob

Birken Vogt
Member
Member # 2535
Reged: 08/16/99
Posts: 1794
Loc: Penn Valley, Ca
Re: MERCON vs MERCON 5 again new
#1061113 - 02/10/03 12:45 AM

Mark,

I have been wanting to vent this for some time and I will do so now. I am pretty disgusted at Ford for coming up with a new fluid for this transmission. The way I see it, there had to be a way to make a new transmission that used the same old ATF that we have always been using. After all, GM did it.

The last thing I want is to have to stock another kind of fluid, and explain to employees who may be less than mechanically inclined what kind of fluid goes in which hole on which vehicle. I had definitely had my sights set on a new F250 diesel for our next vehicle purchase. But now I am not so sure. Ford sure stacked the deck against themselves on this one. So I have to stock a new tranny fluid, and also I have to deal with a fuel filter mounted sideways in a canister and a pot type oil filter too? Come on this is not the 1950s. Spin on filters worked great all these years. I am disgusted with this move back to pot type filters on all vehicles. ISBs are doing it too and of course the old PSD had one.

OK enough rambling. Summary of my point of view though: filters should be spin-on and fluids should be standard. Is that too much to ask?

Birken

zocalo
Member
Member # 16431
Reged: 09/18/01
Posts: 310
Loc: Thousand Oaks, CA
Re: MERCON vs MERCON 5 again new
#1061155 - 02/10/03 01:27 AM

Guys, you're a LITTLE rough on Mark. The guy works for Ford. He can't tell you everything that he knows on the inside, or he'd be on the outside faster than you can get to the finish line (yes Thunder, even you). Face it, we wouldn't respect him as much if he did. In my limited, but somewhat intimate dealings with Ford on varied issues at the plant level, I have found that there is a basis for a lot of the silly-ass things we take for granted. Not all, just a lot.

If Mark knows anything at all about the sensitive issues that MAY be involved behind the scenes here, chances are he's not going to tell you any more than he feels is appropriate. Ford management is simply too unstable for him to risk it. I would like to think that he would not have even involved himself in the discussion if there was no basis for the difference between fluids. But he has. I don't think its based on the MASSIVE amount of stock that he owns in Mercon, but I could be wrong.

That said, I have talked with 2 techs in CA that SEEM to THINK they know the difference in the 2 fluids, simply by SMELL and FEEL. Maybe they've been sniffing a little too much during working hours.


Bob Riley
Sponsor
Member # 4125
Reged: 12/03/99
Posts: 7400
Loc: Sebring, Florida
Re: MERCON vs MERCON 5 again new
#1061184 - 02/10/03 02:05 AM

Zocalo, I have great respect for Mark in his knowledge of transmissions, but this one issue I will debate till it's resolved. Mark does not work in the E4OD/R4100 department, and no one, including him knows why we "shouldn't" use the Mercon.
Now, I know Mark is trying to be helpfull, but my issue with this one is his persistance to go out of his way, as if paid to do so, to make sure everyone knows Ford says don't do it, even if not asked for such info.
If Ford had a reliable transmission and there was a rash of failures as soon as these Mercon V fluids became available, then I'd see the point. But, it isn't happening.
Ask any oil co. tech you can get ahold of.....their answer is Ford has some political or financial reason for this, and none of them are happy about it.

My main issue is not with Mark, but with Ford, but if your going to come out and defend Ford on this issue, I do expect some data. This one has just been too "grey" to ignore any longer.

Beleive it or not, my anger at this one started when I saw a post by a gentleman on this site that was upset at Red-Line. He had used it for years and loved it. He received his new bottle and to his surprise, there was a Mercon/MerconV rating on it. But, it wasn't on the site. Red-Line told him they hadn't updated the site yet, but it was the same fluid he had used for years. The gentleman returned the ATF at the demands of several posters. It was fine last week, but now that they tested the same fluid for a new rating, and it passed, it'll damamge the trans and void the warrantee? Folks, it's still red ATF. It's gotten silly. No One can tell what you have in there.


And here's the most important part of the fluid warrantee equation that most do not know.....

If you use anything but Motorcraft fluid, and that fluid failed causing damage, the fluid is at fault and Ford will not cover it, reguardless of miles or ratings. Ford is only required to cover the warrantee if you either...use Motorcraft fluid and change it at their reccomended intervals, or.....if the fluid you used is not Motorcraft, but did not fail, and it met the Ford rating, and damamge occured that was not the fault of the fluid.

So, basically, if you use Napa Mercon ATF and it fails causing damage, you pay for it anyway, or the oil company's warrantee kicks in.

Remember the MM act says if the aftermarket part you used caused the damage, it is up to Ford to proove it caused the damage, or they must pay. If they do proove it was caused for the fluid, they do not have to pay.

So, to end this liitle point, if the oil company says it's right, they are the ones sticking their necks out more than we are.

Bob

dmftoy1
Member
Member # 21742
Reged: 05/19/02
Posts: 3275
Loc: Lexington, IL
Re: MERCON vs MERCON 5 again new
#1061310 - 02/10/03 07:57 AM

Bob, I"m not saying that I disagree with you, but I've yet to see a documented case where an oil company has paid for a transmission rebuild. Do you have any examples, or people who could post here that they've had a transmission rebuilt/replaced by an oil company? I get a little nervous when I see people quoting MM as I think it's something you could win in court with enough money, but most of us don't want to pay a lawyer the $$ to actually challenge the dealer.

I think Mark is primarily trying to make sure that people know what Ford has stated as the limitations to the fluids you use in the 4R100. It does state clearly that you should not use a dual rated fluid, it also states that you shouldn't mix Mercon and Mercon V. I'm only guessing, but I would bet money that they discovered during their testing, that Mercon V was deterimental to seals, or something along that line. I know in the documentation for our products the dox writer has to get sign-off from the responsible engineer for anything that's in the dox. I would think that engineer, whomever he was, had a reason for putting that in there. (It would be nice to know what it was)

Now is is possible that Amsoil or Redline or whomever have a fluid that passes both tests? Yes, I believe that's possible. On the other hand, I'm not going to bash anyone who's trying to do everything "by the book" to try and extend the life of the 4R100 either. (or possibly get something covered under warranty if it fails). I believe in reality, that most dealer's wouldn't even test the fluid as long as it was red and slippery, but who knows.

Just my .02

Have a good one,
Dave

scaesare
Member
Member # 17619
Reged: 11/16/01
Posts: 354
Loc: Ashburn, VA
Re: MERCON vs MERCON 5 again new
#1061313 - 02/10/03 08:01 AM

Quote:

MERCON V won't cause the transmission to immediately fail, it takes a long time.




Mark-

While I know you can't speak in absolutes, would you care to venture a ball park estimate as to what a "long time" may be?

I had MERCON V in my rig for 10,000 miles before I caught the service department mistake.

Thanks.

-Steve

scaesare
Member
Member # 17619
Reged: 11/16/01
Posts: 354
Loc: Ashburn, VA
Re: MERCON vs MERCON 5 again new
#1061319 - 02/10/03 08:14 AM

Quote:

There have been too many 4R100's with factory fills of MERCON failing, too many Ford dealers putting in MERCON V and not knowing it is not allowed in the sevice manual, owner's manual and a TSB that says DON'T DO IT, and too many guys running MERCON V or a MERCON/MERCON V dual rated oil and not having a failure after 100,000's of miles to have a definative answer.




Or...

Could the wildy varying experiences in transmission longevity that have been experienced and reported here perhaps be due to incorrect fluid usage by dealer service departments?

We have people towing 20,000 pounds that have 4R100's that last well over 100,000 miles. And we have people running around unloaded (and un-chipped) w/ tranny's that puke far earlier.

My (ex-) dealer put MERCON V in w/ 800 miles on the clock. Didn;t know the difference between MERCON and MERCON V. Had never seen the TSB('s). And apparently never read the owners manual. How many 100's (1000's? 10,000's??) of trucks are running around w/ "wrong fluid" in them? Are tranny failures post-mortem'ed at the dealer? I doubt it...

-Steve

Mark Kovalsky
Member
Member # 1191
Reged: 05/07/99
Posts: 3481
Loc: Livonia, MI USA
Re: MERCON vs MERCON 5 again new
#1061426 - 02/10/03 09:49 AM

Quote:


While I know you can't speak in absolutes, would you care to venture a ball park estimate as to what a "long time" may be?




It's more than 10,000 miles.

Mark Kovalsky
Member
Member # 1191
Reged: 05/07/99
Posts: 3481
Loc: Livonia, MI USA
Re: MERCON vs MERCON 5 again new
#1061432 - 02/10/03 09:54 AM

Quote:

If you use anything but Motorcraft fluid, and that fluid failed causing damage, the fluid is at fault and Ford will not cover it, reguardless of miles or ratings. Ford is only required to cover the warrantee if you either...use Motorcraft fluid and change it at their reccomended intervals, or.....if the fluid you used is not Motorcraft, but did not fail, and it met the Ford rating, and damamge occured that was not the fault of the fluid.




That isn't true.

The M-M act does apply here. The act states that a manufacturer has to honor the warranty if parts/fluids are used that meet the manufacturer's requirements. All fluids that have a MERCON, but not MERCON V rating meet Ford's requirements for this transmission and will not affect the warranty.

And Bob, you can debate all you want. I'm not debating. I'm simply stating what Ford requires for warranty coverage. You can get that info if you read the owner's manual.

You've stated several things above that you have distorted from what I've told you.

We do know what will happen to a 4R100 with MERCON V fluid. You don't want that to happen to your transmission. I'm also not going to share the data with you. I need this job.


Bob Riley
Sponsor
Member # 4125
Reged: 12/03/99
Posts: 7400
Loc: Sebring, Florida
Re: MERCON vs MERCON 5 again new
#1061461 - 02/10/03 10:11 AM

"That isn't true."

Mark, that came straight from Ford.
Quote:

The act states that a manufacturer has to honor the warranty if parts/fluids are used that meet the manufacturer's requirements.



Contrair, the act says they cannot void the warrantee simply by using it. The act was created to prevent OEMs to require the use of only OEM fluids, air filters, etc. IF the aftermarket part oil fails, the act says they must proove it was at fault. Your telling me that Ford will cover fluid failures by a manufacturer that is not theirs? Please think about what I'm saying here.

Guys, I was not spouting the mm act as it has been used in the past. I'm saying this time that if you truley want no warrantte issues and NOT have to fight the mm act, the only fluid choice you have is Motorcraft.

I can't give you examples of many fluid companies paying for trans, but, that is not the point. The point is they (the oil company) are responsible. If, and only if, the oil you used is not Motorcraft and it did not cause the damage, is your warrantee truly not in question.

And dealers checking it. Like I said, there is absolutely no way any dealer or Ford could tell.

Mark, I understand your position if your told to keep it a secret. My issue is what on earth could be a secret about what damamge could be caused? That is the silliest thing I ever heard.
And with all the auditing going on at dealerships for parts inventory, why are more dealerships not getting written up or loosing their ability to service warrrantee items when they service R4100 trannies, but stock no Mercon fluid? I mean, if it causes damage, they'll just eat another transmission.
Bob

CPSS
Member
Member # 17597
Reged: 11/15/01
Posts: 631
Loc: Clifton Park, NY
Re: MERCON vs MERCON 5 again new
#1062030 - 02/10/03 04:22 PM

Guys this has been lots of fun, but my question is "is there any test or any way to tell which is which". If even the dealer doesnt know, how can we find out?

444turbodiesel
Member
Member # 29388
Reged: 02/07/03
Posts: 1052
Loc: The RV capital of the universe.
Re: MERCON vs MERCON 5 again new
#1062253 - 02/10/03 06:42 PM

Quote:

The act states that a manufacturer has to honor the warranty if parts/fluids are used that meet the manufacturer's requirements.




Try telling that to Cat. if you use anything but yellow on one of their engines. (including filters)

That's why I'm now a Cummins man. (sure wish Ford would offer one)

Edited by 444turbodiesel (02/10/03 06:43 PM)

Bob Riley
Sponsor
Member # 4125
Reged: 12/03/99
Posts: 7400
Loc: Sebring, Florida
Re: MERCON vs MERCON 5 again new
#1062548 - 02/10/03 08:46 PM

Quote:

how can we find out?




You can't. It would cost you more than your tranny is worth for the test data to show that. Unless you watch the tech take it from the bottle, and place it in your truck, you will never know.
Bob

DixieDiesel
Member
Member # 16184
Reged: 09/05/01
Posts: 1217
Loc: Stone Mountain, Ga.
Re: MERCON vs MERCON 5 again new
#1063776 - 02/11/03 12:43 PM

So let me get this right. Fluid rated Mercon/MerconV does not meet Mercon specs?

The discussion about someone using Red Line for years, and now won't use THE SAME STUFF because it received an upgraded rating sure makes me wonder.

Mark, you are our authority on this and I will do what you say. But I sure wish you could get the OK to tell us WHY.

So my choices are limited to Dino, Mobil 1, and Royal Purple.

4cstr
member
Member # 18643
Reged: 12/30/01
Posts: 983
Loc: South Dakota
Re: MERCON vs MERCON 5 again new
#1064356 - 02/11/03 07:07 PM

Had a discussion on this subject matter with the local service manager today while getting some work done on my truck. He said, and I quote "Absolutely not, you can not put Mercon V or Mercon/Mercon V fluid into the 4r100 tranny". He also makes sure that his diesel techs know this as well. He then went on to say that he also doesn't understand why ford has gone to so many differing types of fluids.

Dave

Popperboy1
Member
Member # 18267
Reged: 12/13/01
Posts: 1450
Loc: Homer Glen, IL
Re: MERCON vs MERCON 5 again new
#1064491 - 02/11/03 07:59 PM

Quote:

We do know what will happen to a 4R100 with MERCON V fluid. You don't want that to happen to your transmission.



Good enough for me, Mark.

DieselRay
member
Member # 18455
Reged: 12/23/01
Posts: 319
Loc: New Hampshire Seacoast
Re: MERCON vs MERCON 5 again new
#1064982 - 02/11/03 11:19 PM

Found something you may find interesting for what its worth.
Amsoils take on it

Edited by DieselRay (02/11/03 11:23 PM)

Bob Riley
Sponsor
Member # 4125
Reged: 12/03/99
Posts: 7400
Loc: Sebring, Florida
Re: MERCON vs MERCON 5 again new
#1065023 - 02/11/03 11:37 PM

Ray, I've posted that many times. Folks want the aftermarket companies to put their money where their mouth is and Amsoil did and it still didn't matter much.

I'll tell you this. Factory fill on my truck, no mods, 11k miles I lose the first trans. 22k miles, still Ford filled reman trans, lose a torque convertor. Ford dealer repairs trans and replaces convertor.
Took straight to pump machine, filled with Amsoil Mercon/Mercon V. At 55K, I change the pan fluid with Amsoil Powershift trans fluid. At 75k miles, I replace the TC with Suncoast because with all the power mods, the TC felt sloppy. At that time, the trans got a whole new batch of Amsoil Powershift fluid. Tonight, I hit 99K miles. Still same reman Ford put in at 11K. I have an issue with right now with a possible sticking/leaking cooler bypass valve, but the trans has held up under numerous truck pulls, drag races, lots of miles towing, etc.
Basically, I gave Ford's "reccomended" two chances and it failed. They lost my confidence in having any clue in what might happen. I couldn't even get out of warrantee with the original transmission, for peats sake. So yea, I was ticked off that I had to have a reman trans when I bought a NEW one not 11k miles before that.
To me, that's like getting a used truck, after you buy a new one just cause they don't want to fix it right.
I will always be sore about that one.

Bob

DieselRay
member
Member # 18455
Reged: 12/23/01
Posts: 319
Loc: New Hampshire Seacoast
Re: MERCON vs MERCON 5 again new
#1065075 - 02/11/03 11:57 PM

Thanks Bob,
Good post. I wouldn't knock AMSOIL. I honestly don't know either way. I thought I'd just post it since I didn't see it in this thread. I did come accross something else though http://www.txchange.com/merconv.htm I found the torque converter clatter comment very interesting. Lots of people have had that.

Ray

Edited by DieselRay (02/12/03 12:23 AM)

Bob Riley
Sponsor
Member # 4125
Reged: 12/03/99
Posts: 7400
Loc: Sebring, Florida
Re: MERCON vs MERCON 5 again new
#1065116 - 02/12/03 12:16 AM

Ray, your link doesn't work.

Bob

DieselRay
member
Member # 18455
Reged: 12/23/01
Posts: 319
Loc: New Hampshire Seacoast
Re: MERCON vs MERCON 5 again new
#1065141 - 02/12/03 12:25 AM

Hmmm. It works for me. I always test them. I changed it the other way. Try again.

SmokeyWrenModerator
Administrator
Member # 957
Reged: 04/26/99
Posts: 16386
Loc: Midland County,TX, USA
Re: MERCON vs MERCON 5 again new
#1065501 - 02/12/03 09:26 AM

If AMSOIL is so sure of their case, then it should be a simple matter for the AMSOIL engineers to go to their counterpart at Ford and have Ford clarify what they meant by not allowing dual-rated or multi-rated ATF to be used in the 4R100 tranny.

In the meantime, I'll follow Ford's recommendation. Mobil 1 MERCON.

msnunes
Member
Member # 10177
Reged: 12/26/00
Posts: 602
Loc: Walnut Creek, CA
Re: MERCON vs MERCON 5 again new
#1065701 - 02/12/03 11:47 AM

It is conceivable that this is another one of those situations where "information is lacking" or "management made a broad decision for the sake of liability."

As was alluded to in the Amsoil link, there may very well be only "one" (or few) oil company that makes a Mercon V (or dual rated fluid) that will not cut the mustard in a straight Mercon application. During Ford's testing of the 4R100, they discovered this and had to make the "safest" decision/recommendation:

Maybe only one or a few out of many dual-rated fluids will fail in that trans -- but they can't publish "You can use any dual-rated fluid except Brand X". But since all Mercon fluids work, that's all they can recommend officially in writing.

Doesn't necessarily mean that other brands (like Amsoil) won't work... On the other hand, I also don't see Ford changing their recommendation to officially say "Don't use any dual-rated fluid except Amsoil's". It's much easier to make a blanket statement and make everyone do the same thing, even if it means keeping a lot of the reasons to themselves.


Bob Riley
Sponsor
Member # 4125
Reged: 12/03/99
Posts: 7400
Loc: Sebring, Florida
Re: MERCON vs MERCON 5 again new
#1065734 - 02/12/03 12:06 PM

Smokey, they are and have tried. They can't get anyone to answer any questions either. In their defense of their position, Ford made a rating and Amsoil met it. It's not their fault that it met multiple ratings.
Smokey, I don't blame you for wanting to stick with the Ford reccomondations. Remember, my issue is not with customers, it's with Ford on this one.
Bob

SmokeyWrenModerator
Administrator
Member # 957
Reged: 04/26/99
Posts: 16386
Loc: Midland County,TX, USA
Re: MERCON vs MERCON 5 again new
#1065928 - 02/12/03 02:07 PM

If I were an AMSOIL executive, and if my Pet E's and Chem E's swore up and down to me that the AMSOIL ATF was as safe as anyone else's MERCON ATF in a Ford tranny, then I'd order another product to be packaged. Put the AMSOIL ATF in a new pkg that says it's MERCON and only MERCON. Omit the fact that it might also meet other specs other than DEXTRON III. Then raise Bob Riley's salary and have him market the heck out of the Ford-packaged AMSOIL MERCON.

Not enough Ford PSDs on the road to warrant a separate pkg? Nonsense. There are over 2 million PSDs on the road today. That's plenty market for a separate pkg.

Surely there is at least one MBA running AMSOIL that learned this stuff the way I did over 30 years ago. If the Ford buracracy is hard to overcome, then go around them. But this arguing that the Ford spec is all wrong is senseless and non-productive.

The fact that AMSOIL hasn't taken this very obvious step adds even more suspicion that the Ford guys are right and that the AMSOIL multi-rated ATF is not as good to use in our 4R100s as plain ole MERCON.

Bob Riley
Sponsor
Member # 4125
Reged: 12/03/99
Posts: 7400
Loc: Sebring, Florida
Re: MERCON vs MERCON 5 again new
#1066250 - 02/12/03 05:16 PM

Smokey, I suggested that very same obvious solution as well. They beleived this "political" situation at Ford would be over soon. Guess they were wrong. I actually didn't suggest it, I begged of it.
Bob

msnunes
Member
Member # 10177
Reged: 12/26/00
Posts: 602
Loc: Walnut Creek, CA
Re: MERCON vs MERCON 5 again new
#1067587 - 02/13/03 10:02 AM

It's a war of wills -- Ford won't back down from their political position, and Amsoil won't back down from their philosophical position. And both would compromise their integrity by doing so... It's all clear to me now -- I'm sticking with Amsoil.

Bob Riley
Sponsor
Member # 4125
Reged: 12/03/99
Posts: 7400
Loc: Sebring, Florida
Re: MERCON vs MERCON 5 again new
#1067829 - 02/13/03 12:20 PM

You know that is soo true now. I was talking to my wife last night about it and wondered if Amsoil could/would still consider this. She made a god point. If they changed now, people would say "see Amsoil was wrong" and "bob was full of crap al those months"
Folks, it's as simple as this. I beleive with all my heart it is the absolute best ATF on the market. I can't make anyone use it. If your that worries about warrantee and beleive they could even know what you have in there, don't use it. If your out of warrantee, you have your choice.
Bob

JustinTyme
Member
Member # 29374
Reged: 02/07/03
Posts: 8
Loc: Brighton, Michigan
Re: MERCON vs MERCON 5 again new
#1069398 - 02/14/03 08:34 AM

Gentlemen,

This is a very interesting subject. I'm changing my fluid over to Mobil 1; not because of this debate, but because I have used this product line since it's inception in all of my vehicles.

I work for the Big Blue Oval myself and don't fully understand why the Company would be hesitant to explain the reasoning for any TSBs/recommendations regarding their products. They must have facts to prove why a Mercon/Mercon V rated fluid would have a harmful effect on any particular transmission. And this group should have the resources, with the number of members to either prove or disprove the recommendations.

Anyway, I happened to come across this group a few weeks ago and have learned alot about my 99.5 PSD.



Pages: 1



Contact Us TheDieselStop.Com

*
UBB.threads™ 6.3


All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective companies.
All else is Copyright 1997-2003 TheDieselStop.Com.
All Rights Reserved

TheDieselStop.Com Privacy Statement
Advertising on TheDieselStop.Com

This site is in no way affiliated with Ford Motor Company or International Truck and Engine Corporation.