Mercon LV and SP
#31
Josh
#32
#33
They would have to come from the same base stock, add packs and even batch, to be identical (fluids), but there are many ways to meet the same spec... And that is what you said anyway, so not sure why I'm here...
Sounds like plenty of folks running MaxLife, SP, LV and blends of the 3. I'm sure they all will work just fine...
#34
#35
That would be the specs that are identical, I highly doubt the fluids themselves are in fact identical. But this will just take us down that path of: "does it even matter?" Which it doesn't...
They would have to come from the same base stock, add packs and even batch, to be identical (fluids), but there are many ways to meet the same spec... And that is what you said anyway, so not sure why I'm here...
Sounds like plenty of folks running MaxLife, SP, LV and blends of the 3. I'm sure they all will work just fine...
They would have to come from the same base stock, add packs and even batch, to be identical (fluids), but there are many ways to meet the same spec... And that is what you said anyway, so not sure why I'm here...
Sounds like plenty of folks running MaxLife, SP, LV and blends of the 3. I'm sure they all will work just fine...
Amsoil ATF VOA of Amsoil ATL Low-Viscosity ATF | Gear & Transmission Used/Virgin Oil Analysis | Bob Is The Oil Guy
UOA of Motorcraft LV http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums...UOA:_Mercon_LV
Josh
#36
Looks like a few differences based on these two information sources:
Max Life
Petroleum Quality Institute of America
LV
https://www.fcsdchemicalsandlubrican...ERCON%20LV.pdf
flash pt LV : 421
flash pt Max Life: 383
Viscosity Index LV: 155
Viscosity Index Max Life: 182
Viscosity 100*C cST LV: 6
Viscosity 100*C cST Max Life: 7.2
Granted, the LV brochure is a specification chart, and the Max Life article states that they averaged 10 samples.
The BITOG analysis does look close - wish it was a virgin sample.
Max Life
Petroleum Quality Institute of America
LV
https://www.fcsdchemicalsandlubrican...ERCON%20LV.pdf
flash pt LV : 421
flash pt Max Life: 383
Viscosity Index LV: 155
Viscosity Index Max Life: 182
Viscosity 100*C cST LV: 6
Viscosity 100*C cST Max Life: 7.2
Granted, the LV brochure is a specification chart, and the Max Life article states that they averaged 10 samples.
The BITOG analysis does look close - wish it was a virgin sample.
#37
Looks like a few differences based on these two information sources:
Max Life
Petroleum Quality Institute of America
LV
https://www.fcsdchemicalsandlubrican...ERCON%20LV.pdf
flash pt LV : 421
flash pt Max Life: 383
Viscosity Index LV: 155
Viscosity Index Max Life: 182
Viscosity 100*C cST LV: 6
Viscosity 100*C cST Max Life: 7.2
Granted, the LV brochure is a specification chart, and the Max Life article states that they averaged 10 samples.
The BITOG analysis does look close - wish it was a virgin sample.
Max Life
Petroleum Quality Institute of America
LV
https://www.fcsdchemicalsandlubrican...ERCON%20LV.pdf
flash pt LV : 421
flash pt Max Life: 383
Viscosity Index LV: 155
Viscosity Index Max Life: 182
Viscosity 100*C cST LV: 6
Viscosity 100*C cST Max Life: 7.2
Granted, the LV brochure is a specification chart, and the Max Life article states that they averaged 10 samples.
The BITOG analysis does look close - wish it was a virgin sample.
1st column is universal average for Mercon V, second column is Maxlife ATF
Josh
#38
I see what you are saying.
In the link:
Petroleum Quality Institute of America
They make the footnote "a" look like it applies to Max Life (ie the "average-a" column).
In the link:
Petroleum Quality Institute of America
They make the footnote "a" look like it applies to Max Life (ie the "average-a" column).
#39
I see what you are saying.
In the link:
Petroleum Quality Institute of America
They make the footnote "a" look like it applies to Max Life (ie the "average-a" column.
In the link:
Petroleum Quality Institute of America
They make the footnote "a" look like it applies to Max Life (ie the "average-a" column.
Josh
#40
LV replaced SP.
The comparison above was made that Ford Gold coolant was the catch-all coolant, regardless of gas or diesel and for intents and purposes Ford Gold is NOT a preferable coolant for a 6.0 diesel.
With that reference, the comparison is that LV has started replacing many other ATFs, when in fact it has really only superseded SP.
Mercon V, is the ATF that superceded Mercon and is really the catch-all ATF. Do not use Mercon V in a Torqshft.
As for availability of SP, you have to special order SP from the parts counter at my local Ford dealers and the oil distributor for Northern Colorado hasn't carried Mercon SP since 2012.
I wonder what the deal is with the 6HP26 and 6R60/6R75 transmissions not being able to handle LV, yet the CR80 is approved.
Josh
The comparison above was made that Ford Gold coolant was the catch-all coolant, regardless of gas or diesel and for intents and purposes Ford Gold is NOT a preferable coolant for a 6.0 diesel.
With that reference, the comparison is that LV has started replacing many other ATFs, when in fact it has really only superseded SP.
Mercon V, is the ATF that superceded Mercon and is really the catch-all ATF. Do not use Mercon V in a Torqshft.
As for availability of SP, you have to special order SP from the parts counter at my local Ford dealers and the oil distributor for Northern Colorado hasn't carried Mercon SP since 2012.
I wonder what the deal is with the 6HP26 and 6R60/6R75 transmissions not being able to handle LV, yet the CR80 is approved.
Josh
#41
Mercon LP vs. SP
I went to ford.com parts and in the literature under mercon LV it states to not use it where SP is in use, and likewise the SP states not to use it where LV is in use. I've read a lot of posts on this subject that state LV is a direct replacement for SP and on and on. I just replaced 10 quarts of SP in my 2008 f450 6peed torq shift with 10 of the LV during a tranny filter change and within a week of doing so the tranny shifts out of gear and engine revs up so I let off of the throttle and it slowly goes back in gear. This has happened three times now and I think I just need to locate 15 quarts of mercon SP and pay to have it flushed and refilled with the SP. I hope that gets rid of it. Anyone have any thoughts on this, or similar experiences.
#42
I went to ford.com parts and in the literature under mercon LV it states to not use it where SP is in use, and likewise the SP states not to use it where LV is in use. I've read a lot of posts on this subject that state LV is a direct replacement for SP and on and on. I just replaced 10 quarts of SP in my 2008 f450 6peed torq shift with 10 of the LV during a tranny filter change and within a week of doing so the tranny shifts out of gear and engine revs up so I let off of the throttle and it slowly goes back in gear. This has happened three times now and I think I just need to locate 15 quarts of mercon SP and pay to have it flushed and refilled with the SP. I hope that gets rid of it. Anyone have any thoughts on this, or similar experiences.
#43
I went to ford.com parts and in the literature under mercon LV it states to not use it where SP is in use, and likewise the SP states not to use it where LV is in use. I've read a lot of posts on this subject that state LV is a direct replacement for SP and on and on. I just replaced 10 quarts of SP in my 2008 f450 6peed torq shift with 10 of the LV during a tranny filter change and within a week of doing so the tranny shifts out of gear and engine revs up so I let off of the throttle and it slowly goes back in gear. This has happened three times now and I think I just need to locate 15 quarts of mercon SP and pay to have it flushed and refilled with the SP. I hope that gets rid of it. Anyone have any thoughts on this, or similar experiences.
#44
#45
The thing with Ford Gold is it isn't very robust, requires frequent flushes. EC-1 is one n done.
Josh