Power Flush?

i say what i use and explain why

i say what i use and explain why

MindyMark said:
You may have had good luck with Mercon III in your car as others, but the recommended fluid for our transmissions is Mercon V. This is the first time I've ever heard someone thinking Mercon III is better then Mercon V.

Maybe in some cases it is, maybe others it isn't. However I'll always stick with what Ford says is best for the car. I've got 218k on my transmission running Mercon V since around 30k miles and I can't complain.
Click to expand...

this seems a difficult concept for many to grasp. i will tell what i would not do and that is to put v in a car designed for iii. ford addressed the corrosive properties in service bulletins and by redesigning the seals on the affected transmissions. mine had the early seals which lasted less than 100k. the new seals for these transmissions are formulated for this fluid and the old ones are not meaning it is not a question of if these seals will fail under the mercon v but rather when they will fail.

i, like many fleet owners use iii because it is a reliable lubericant for transmissions and when serviced in proper intervals works the way transmission fluid is designed to work. we are spending our nickles to maintain cars that fmc has all but forgotten about unless there is a potential for a substantial revenue stream.

an examples can be found with the headlight bulb. sylvania manufactured these assemblies and bulbs since 95 until they were discontinued by fmc in
06. according to sylvania executives, the company asked fmc for a licensing agreement to manufacture the bulbs and or assemblies for the aftermarket. fmc denied this request and demanded the return of the tooling. the tooling now is in some dark dungeon serving a death sentence while being replaced by a new assembly and halogen bulbs for $750 a set plus installation and tax.

how does fmc look now? still your friend and advisor? need more, google: ford motor company tort awards, it should be an eye opener. fmc will put life at risk for a three dollor per copy savings.

happy motoring
 
Geez guys!

Ok. I thought we all knew WHY they switched to Mercon V. The ONLY reason I have EVER been told was because of the friction material on the TC would break down under high heat. On top of that it was specific to certain year range I thought, like 95 and up.

So if you drive like a regular Joe, you may never have a problem with Merc III.
If you have an early model Mark VIII, you may never have a problem with Merc III.
If you live in the colder climates, you may never have a problem with Merc III.

The point is Merc III is not a death with to the 4r70w transmission. The TSP to make the switch was to prevent the issues as well as to standardize on a singular fluid for all applications. Like the switch to 5w-20.

So Merc III is "ok" but since an official Ford TSB came out, Merc V is whats recommended.
 
MERCON®V ATF is a premium quality fluid that
meets the latest requirements for use in automatic
transmissions in Ford passenger cars and light trucks
(except those requiring a Type F fluid). It also meets
DEXRON®-III requirements for use in automatic
transmissions in General Motors vehicles. It provides
improved antiwear and anti-shudder performance
compared with previous generation products, as well
as better low temperature fluidity. It is recommended
for service fill in all automatic transmissions where
MERCON®V, MERCON®, or DEXRON®-III fluids are
specified. It also meets the performance requirements
of Allison C-4, Caterpillar TO-2, and Mercedes-Benz
ATF, as well as Sundstrand hydrostatic, Voith, and ZF
transmissions. This product has excellent antiwear
properties and may be used in hydraulic systems where
good performance over a wide temperature range is
desired. It is also suitable for use in many passenger
car power steering systems.
 
icladius said:
this seems a difficult concept for many to grasp. i will tell what i would not do and that is to put v in a car designed for iii. ford addressed the corrosive properties in service bulletins and by redesigning the seals on the affected transmissions. mine had the early seals which lasted less than 100k. the new seals for these transmissions are formulated for this fluid and the old ones are not meaning it is not a question of if these seals will fail under the mercon v but rather when they will fail.

i, like many fleet owners use iii because it is a reliable lubericant for transmissions and when serviced in proper intervals works the way transmission fluid is designed to work. we are spending our nickles to maintain cars that fmc has all but forgotten about unless there is a potential for a substantial revenue stream.

an examples can be found with the headlight bulb. sylvania manufactured these assemblies and bulbs since 95 until they were discontinued by fmc in
06. according to sylvania executives, the company asked fmc for a licensing agreement to manufacture the bulbs and or assemblies for the aftermarket. fmc denied this request and demanded the return of the tooling. the tooling now is in some dark dungeon serving a death sentence while being replaced by a new assembly and halogen bulbs for $750 a set plus installation and tax.

how does fmc look now? still your friend and advisor? need more, google: ford motor company tort awards, it should be an eye opener. fmc will put life at risk for a three dollor per copy savings.

happy motoring
Click to expand...

"Frankie X" is a certified Ford mechanic and "Mad1stGen" was a Ford engine designer in the 90's. They both recommend Mercon V. There is no higher authority.

Maybe one of them will chime in.
 
If you want the best ATF for your 4R70W I recommend Amsoil ATF or Mobil 1 ATF. They can be changed at 30-50k intervals no problem while providing better protection than regular Mercon 5 at 20-30k intervals.
 
icladius said:
ford addressed the corrosive properties in service bulletins and by redesigning the seals on the affected transmissions.
Click to expand...

I would be interested in seeing some of those service bulletins.

Speaking of this fluid though, when was the offical switch over? Meaning what year did cars start coming came with Mercon V from the factory?
 
I wonder if the guy who rebuilt my tranny used Dextron III instead of Mercon, thereby screwing up my tranny in less than 3 years.
 
It was this guy in Winemmucca, NV. He is suppose to be pretty good from what people there said. His specialty is 4X4's. But mine hasn't worked quite right since he rebuilt it. It has some of the symptoms it had prior to it going out last time. He just replaced some parts. It is a small shop, no fancy diagnostic equipment. Like I said before, I wanted him to put a Jasper re-manufactured tranny that has a 75,000 mile warranty. I was out of the country and my dad doesn't remember if he gave the guy those instructions but by the time I called to see how it was going, he had already taken it apart and ordered the parts. Now I'm pissed but have no recourse. His 1 year warranty is up!
 
Not you Wayne.

Just to get some of the record straight on when Mercon IS NOT recommended (Mercon SP or TYPE F)
 

Attachments

  • Mercon V-1.jpg
    Mercon V-1.jpg
    62.3 KB · Views: 0
Last edited:
logres said:
No problem...I was just curious as to what info out there was under question.
Click to expand...

I think he was referring to the TSB that was was mentioned by icladius that Ford put out about the corrosive properties of Mercon V.

I've personally never heard of it and I was interested in seeing what the TSBs said.
 
Last edited:
I never heard for Merc III being more or less corrosive than V. Spec says that V exceeds the standards as III. I think someone just "thinks" V is more corrosive even though everything else says its less. Those people also think WD-40 is a "lubricant". :)
 
this thread lives on

this thread lives on

MindyMark said:
I think he was referring to the TSB that was was mentioned by icladius that Ford put out about the corrosive properties of Mercon V.

I've personally never heard of it and I was interested in seeing what the TSBs said.
Click to expand...

i no longer have access to the tsb's but there were two that caught my eye as manufactures are always in my sight. the first cited the seal issue and the second warned service personal to avoid direct contact with mercon v. i understand there are other formulations that meet this spec from other manufactures that might not be offensive, regardless i am not going to feed the revenue stream of fmc or any other manufacturer unless i have the ample authoritative evidence to overcome both my personal experience and anecdotal evidence.

as a final thought:
each to his own taste
said the cat
as he licked his own _________

you are all good sports...tom
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top