Also, if a person has a copy of SDD, they can monitor fluid temp directly from the Bosch Mechatronic in the Transmission Diagnostic section, under adaptive learn.

 

A lot of people are posting warnings about the "risk" of not using ZF's fluid. What's the risk? I have a 2004 XJ8 with over 190,000 miles on it. A year ago I changed the fluid and used Ford Mercon SP. It's working fine. We're not talking about a pristine XK120 or a #1 condition Series 1 E-Type here, In my case were talking about a pristine, meticulously maintained 11 year old car with almost 200,000 miles on it. It has no value except to me as long as it runs so I'm willing to take the "risk" and experiment with fluid that isn't recommended by Jaguar. When it was new the dealer told me that synthetic Mobil 1 wasn't recommended but that's what I've been using in it since day one and I've never had any issues with the engine, except a water pump and mass airflow sensor which had nothing to do with the lubrication system. And I'm not blaming dealers for charging huge prices for service. That's where they make their money.

 

Well, I think it would be more accurate to say that a lot of people are quoting or paraphrasing the stern warnings published by ZF and repeated by Jaguar. Depending on which publication you read, ZF warns that the potential consequences of using any transmission fluid other than LG6 are “improper performance,” “internal transmission damage,” or "transmission failure."


You can't really equate using a different engine oil with using a different transmission oil. Engine oil’s primary jobs are to lubricate and cool the internal engine components. But since an automatic transmission is a hydraulic-mechanical device, the fluid not only lubricates and cools other components, it is one of the actual functioning components of the system. In fact, it is responsible for the very transfer of power from the engine to the gears via the torque converter. Other internal components also rely on the characteristics of the fluid, including clutches, brakes, valves, pressure regulators, sensors, etc.

According to ZF's literature, the 6-speed transmissions were designed with “minimum tolerances” (minimum clearances between parts), with the stated goals of reducing package size, weight and parts count, and increasing the fuel economy while reducing CO2 emissions. Given those objectives, it should be no surprise that the specified fluid has very low viscosity.

I’m not a hydraulics engineer, but if you read the principles of operation of the 6HP26 in documents like the ones at the links below, it isn’t difficult to understand that the characteristics of the oil could have a significant impact on the performance of the transmission. Yet, because of the electronic control and automatic adaptation abilities of the Mechatronik electro-hydraulic control unit, it seems possible that the system could adapt to a fluid with different parameters in subtle ways the driver might not notice, while the performance suffered in areas such as thermal cooling, torque converter clutch modulation and line pressure management (both directly related to shift quality), shift energy management (reducing or increasing engine output torque during shifting), gearslip, engine braking, etc. It also seems possible that the use of an incorrect fluid could lead to an increased rate of wear of the friction linings and elevated internal temperatures, possibly even a greater risk of triggering Hot Mode (leading to the use of a sub-optimal shift map) or Limp Home Mode:

http://www.europeantransmissions.com.../6hp_trans.pdf
http://www.all-trans.by/assets/site/...f/6hp19-26.pdf


We’re all still learning about these cars, and those who are willing to try alternative transmission fluids may eventually prove or disprove ZF’s warnings. In the meantime, I don’t personally know enough to confidently second-guess the engineers who designed these very complex and, at the time they were introduced, highly-innovative gearboxes.

Cheers,

Don

 

Agreed Don.

The auto industry is under continuing pressure to reduce emissions and improve mileage. I'll take that 30 MPG on my Super V8 any day thank you.

Among the many things car manufacturers have done is to pass along the pressure on their suppliers to improve performance and mileage as well. So in the case of ZF (among others), I'm of the belief that the fluid they design is a very specific formula whose composition is incorporated into the software of the TCM. I think they are specifically created to work together.

Will something similar work? Certainly, many use Mercon among others and I haven't personally read any "nightmare stories" about burned up ZF's whose owners used Mercon. The data sheets for many of these fluids are similar but not the same.

So if you had a rough running tranny and you decide your car isn't worth $250 or the whole bit is a marketing ploy, you put in Mercon. Does the tranny run better? Most assuredly. It was running poorly and you replaced the fluid with something similar. Does it run to intended spec? Need an engineer to weigh in.

It's better, maybe good enough for the owner, the owner is happy and that's what matters.

I knew what I was getting into when I bought my Jag. They are expensive to maintain. Mine cost $92k new 10 years ago. I'll buy the ZF fluid myself.

I have no experience in chemical or hydraulic engineering and would love to hear feedback from one or two engineers.

I love the opinions and input on this forum (less the insults). I offer mine. Feel free to chuckle at my expense. Hell, my wife does each and every day.

 

Then I whole heartedly invite you to purchase your 400% markup over cost at your local Jag dealer to keep them in business. As for me, cost plus 20% is the market rate I'm willing to provide. That's how supply and demand works.

 

Note the Mercon SP is used in the ZF 6 spd in Ford products, so it will work in any ZF 6 spd. Ford has surely tested it well, and if the viscositiy is a bit higher than ZF, that does not mean it is worse, but may be possibly be because the transmission fluid runs a bit hotter in a Ford product due to higher typical HP due to a heavier vehicle. The transmission will adapt automatically over time also. You also have the Jag, Audi and other OEM versions of the fluid that may or may not be the same as ZF. One could argue that the OEM fluid should be used in the car because it is adjusted for that particular application. But ZF says their fluid will work in any application, so it must be compatible with the OEM fluids. So I don't think there could be any problem using Mercon SP in any ZF6, or any other OEM fluid for the ZF6. As for Valvoline, all they need to do is run it in one ZF6 vehicle, not all applications. So if they run it in a Ford product with good results, it will work in all of them. They can also determine the compatibility in the lab, which they've surely done.


Anyway I am leaning to Ford SP as probably a better oil. From the spreadsheet provided by Pat/Don, the viscosity is 5.7 instead of 5.6 for ZF at 100C. (Valvoline is 5.9, Redline 6.4). Flash point is 218 for SP vs 210 for ZF, so SP probably has a bit more synthetic in it, which has higher flash point than Petro based. Redline flash point not given but they say pour point is -60 vs -51 for ZF and -45 for Mercon and -48 for Valvoline. This may be more a property of the type of synthetic used along with viscosity modifiers. Anyway they all are very similar with the redline being the thickest and affecting performance the most. It may however be better for HD operation at higher temps. I'd be inclined to go with the Ford SP given all the experience they have with transmissions and vehicles.


Now the same discussions occur on Ford websites. Apparently the Mercon LV has replaced SP, and Valvoline Maxlife still works for them all according to Valvoline.... here is a copy of a letter from Valvoline Maxlife ATF - Ford Truck Enthusiasts Forums


Entered on 02/22/2015 at 16:04:06 EST (GMT-0500) by feedback@valvoline.com:

First Name: Josh
Last Name:
Address:
City:
State: CO
Zip:
Country: United States
Email: ----------------------
feedback type: I have a question/comment about a product

Comments:

Hello,

I have known sometime that Maxlife ATF is compatible with Mercon LV and SP. In Ford SP/LV applications, specifically the Super Duty Torqshift transmission, the use of Mercon V will destroy the solenoids within a short time.

How is Maxlife ATF able to be both Mercon V and SP/LV compatible?

In the Powerstroke community a diligent effort is made to only use SP or LV and avoid Mercon V.

It's tempting to use Maxlife ATF in that application for it's availability and price versus the scarcity of or elevated price of LV.

Thanks

Josh



Good afternoon Josh, thank you for contacting Valvoline Product Support.



When evaluating specifications for our Valvoline MaxLife ATF, heavy testing takes place against the manufacturer standards. With some of these tests/trials taking up to 2 years to process, we ensure our products will not only meet the manufacturer specification but exceed it on the testing parameters.



Mercon LV replaced the Mercon SP, which replaced the Mercon V. Mercon V is an older standard by Ford which cannot meet the new SP/LV specifications. Each time Ford has released a new ATF standard, we put our product back into testing before we update the labels with newer specifications. The Valvoline MaxLife ATF will cover all iterations of Mercon: Mercon, Mercon V, Mercon SP, and Mercon LV.



If you have any further questions, please feel free to contact us via phone at 800 TEAM VAL or by email at valsupport@ashland.com for assistance.



Thank you and have a great day.

Erik

Valvoline Product Support



So I think it is worth a call to Valvoline wrt ZF fluid compatibility.

 

What is interesting is that if you visit the Ford website and look at the product data sheets for Mercon SP and Mercon LV,the product data sheets specifically state that they are not interchangeable,ie Mercon SP should not be used for LV applications and LV should not be used in SP applications.


This I found out when my local Ford dealer said that Mercon LV has replaced Mercon SP.When I took the data sheets back to the dealership they apologised for foisting the Mercon LV on me and GAVE me Mercon SP at no charge.

 

As I posted earlier, we don't yet know if the Ford 6SHP26 is really the same as the 6HP26 used in Jaguars. We can assume that it is, but since Ford uses different part numbers than either Jaguar or ZF, and ZF made several different versions of the ZF Mechatronik valve body/electronic control module for various applications, we don't yet know that the Ford transmissions are the same as those in Jags. I'll be more comfortable using Mercon SP when I can confirm that there are no substantive differences between the Ford and Jaguar versions of the transmissions. We still have to wonder why Ford specifies Lifeguard 6 for its Australian Falcon and Territory models, and ZF specifies Lifeguard 6 for European Ford vehicles with 6-speed ZF boxes.

As to Ford trucks having higher typical HP due to a heavier vehicle, it's true that a Lincoln Navigator weighs more than a Jaguar X350 (5,555 lbs. vs. 3726 lbs. in 2006, according to Edmunds). But the Navigator's 5.4L engine produces the same 300 HP as the Jaguar's 4.2L (and the supercharged Jags are even more powerful at 390 hp or more).


According to ZF, the only approved fluid for use in its 6-speed gearboxes is Lifeguard 6, regardless of whether it's in a Jaguar, BMW, Audi, Land Rover or Bentley. The only exceptions are certain Audi 6-speed versions which require Lifeguard 8 (Why? All these 6HP26s the same, aren't they?). As far as any of us has been able to determine, the OEM fluids are Shell M1375.4/Lifeguard 6, regardless of the auto maker's branding on the bottle, so mixing LG6 with the OEM fluid is just mixing it with itself.


The spreadsheet gives us a way to compare the published specifications of the various oils, but it doesn't tell us anything about the actual chemical compositions of the base oils, friction characteristics, anti-oxidants, dispersants, corrosion inhibitors, seal swell agents, viscosity improvers, pour point depressants, foam inhibitors, elastomer compatibility, anti-wear and anti-shudder characteristics, and other specifications that are not commonly published. Based only on the data sheet numbers, I don't know how anyone could judge whether one of the oils is "better" than another. What matters is, which oil is best for a specific application. The highest authority for that determination is the manufacturer of the transmission in which the oil is to be used.

By the way, ZF states that Lifeguard 6 is a semi-synthetic oil. I assume that if ZF considered a "fully-synthetic" oil to be superior, they would have specified a "fully-synthetic" oil. There must be a reason they preferred a semi-synthetic, but I have not yet uncovered their rationale. Are there any petro-chemical engineers among us?


Based on that line of thinking, the more obvious choice would be Dexron VI, since General Motors has sold more vehicles and transmissions than any other company. Even quite a few Jaguars have GM gearboxes....

Cheers,

Don

 

I have to say, when I was 10 years old, I thought I would be a professional baseball player. That was my passion.

Who'd have thunk any of us would be passionate about our transmission fluids?

In any event, my wife has respectfully requested that I cease and desist any and all Jaguar forum related discussion at the dinner table.

 

There is a general misconception in the public, as a whole, concerning full-synthetic lubricants, as if a they are not derived from common oil base stocks. This however, is simply is a misconception, with the few exceptions, like Pennzoil (A Shell subsidiary) who is now making some stock from natural gas. Semi-synthetics are simply a mixture of non-modified base stocks with some chemically modified stock. The addition of esters for example, in it's various forms, has been done since well before WW2 to produce a chemically "synthetic" stock for lubricants to overcome some of the shortcomings of oil base stock in it's refined state.

 

While I agree that it's usually good to follow manufacturers recommendations, I also have found that these recommendations may not be the correct procedures for vehicles with very high mileage. As far as the ZF transmissions go it has been mentioned that the transmissions have very close tolerances and that the ZF fluid is low viscosity. In my mind it's reasonable to assume that my car with more than 190,000 miles has sustained some wear and that the close tolerances are no longer what they were when I bought the car. Perhaps a slightly higher viscosity full synthetic fluid would be OK. In a past life, I was a mechanic and car restorer and I've rebuilt more than my share of GM turbohydramatics and I'm not convinced that frictions materials in the clutch packs and other moving parts in a ZF transmission are made from unobtanium. ZF claims that they have not tested other fluids in their transmissions. That doesn't mean they won't work in a high mileage tranny.

 

Latest version of the data file with various manufacturers' versions of Dexron VI added.

 

Ditto, with Maxlife ATF added

 

Well I am screwed because I refuse to have Microsoft Office on my computer.

 

Six Rotors, you can set up a bogus gmail account and forward them to that account. From gmail, you can open with google docs

 

This is it as a PDF file. Note that there are two pages.

 

Don B yes there are a lot of factors in the fluid other than viscosity and pour point. And "synthetic" oil is not the same as it was when Mobil 1 first came on the scene. They used esters and di-esters etc. and it was quite expensive, 5x the petro oil. What happened? I talked to an oils guy who said now synthetic can mean re-refined petro oil that simulates behavior of true synthetic. And there were problems with full synthetic holding the additives. So now we really have blends even if it says 100% synthetic, which is why the cost is lower compared to petro. Even Amsoil would not admit to full true synthetic he said. So who knows what we are really getting. But the flash point is one indicator because true synthetic is much higher if I remember correctly. And the oils guy is big on using OEM fluids.
I was thinking Ford SP would be good since they use it with their ZF 6 trannies, but you are saying they recommend ZF fluid in some. But they replaced SP with Mercon LV. So they keep improving hopefully. But a company like Ford has the resources to get the best additive packages and do the testing needed. And the weight difference on the Navigator means you will be on average using more power to haul that thing around than with the lighter Jag- unless you hot rod the Jag, then you are a "sport" user and need to change fluid more often. It's like a boat- you only run it at full power twice- when you buy it and when you sell it.
Anyway I got a response from Valvoline-
*****************
Bob, thank you for contacting Valvoline for your automatic transmission fluid application.
For your 2004 jaguar XJ8 application, we recommend the use of our Valvoline MaxLife Dex/Merc ATF product to meet the ZF 6 speed specifications recommended by your manufacturer. This product is 100% compatible for mixture or replacement in your vehicle and will not void any new car warranties.
We have done the appropriate testing with the ZF specification and cover it 100% with our fluid. The MaxLife ATF is a 100% synthetic transmission product. Unfortunately, we are unaware why there are multiple ZF fluids. Jaguar may have more information on the use of these fluids and if they are updates. We recommend speaking with a local dealer with this question.
If you have any further questions, please feel free to contact us via email or by phone at 800 TEAM VAL. Thank you once again for contacting Valvoline Product Support and have a great day.
Erik
Valvoline Product Support
************************************
So there you have it for what it's worth. I suspect there are a lot of Navigators using it- they talk about it a lot on the Ford site, and one Ford dealer recommends it instead. There are only so many things you can do with the fluid and there are only so many types of rubber etc to use so I do think Valvoline probably has it covered. I use it in everything else I have and it really has served my Volvo 850s and Toyota but these are older technology trannies. I'm sure Valvoline will give me my money back if there is a problem.... Like the trash truck that says "Satisfaction Guaranteed or twice your trash back" :-). Seriously though I do think it is an excellent product and I will probably give it a try and change more frequently. Would be nice to have an easier way to add fluid though.

 

It seems to me that the differences between 6HP26 transmissions will be in the mechatronic unit, which will be specific to the vehicle model and engine. The basic mechatronic mechanism is common to many ZF transmissions, not just the 6HP; it uses (amongst other things) fluid pressures acting on plungers; what varies between applications is plunger diameter and spring strength. In fact the plunger/spring technology is common to all epicyclic auto transmissions so it would be most surprising if that part of the 6HP26 was particularly sensitive to the type of fluid used.

The gear-train itself however is quite advanced and it is the brakes and clutches that require a fluid with very particular frictional properties to avoid judder and slippage - hence Shell M1375.4

But the gear-train of the 6HP26 will be common to all 6HP26s; if ZF changed that between vehicle models they'd have to tool up for a different box, and they'd give it a different number (as they do: 6HP19, 6HP28, 8HPxx etc)

So in the 6HP26s used in Ford vehicles the (relatively) fluid insensitive control units may be different from those Jaguar 6HP26s but the fluid sensitive gear-train won't be ... so if Mercon SP is okay in Ford 6HP26s it should be in a Jaguar 6HP26 ?

And ... Ford are quite specific that Mercon SP is only for the 6HP26, and their home produced versions, 6R60 and 6R75 (see attached pdf, dated 2014)

 

I recently bought a new riding lawn mower. The engine oil filter is only identified by a Briggs & Stratton or Husqvarna "house brand" number. The idea is to channel the customer into buying a painted over high priced Purolator filter from your dealer at oil change time.


Marketing departments come up with these schemes in all industries. A few are fooled but not many. Nevertheless they keep on keeping on.


Do you not think ZF plays that game too? Mind you, you must be careful in selecting a replacement component for "house branded" items.

 

Were I a betting man then I would certainly hazard a small sum that Mercon SP is really Shell M-1375.4, possibly with dye in it to make it look a bit different.

For other manufacturers' fluids, especially those which claim that a particular fluid conforms to, say, SP and LV and, maybe, V ... of those I would be extremely wary.

It's a bit academic on this side of the Pond 'though as Mercon SP seems not to be generally available here (no Fords over here with 6HP26Ss I guess ?) and those places that do sell it do so for not much less than the best price I've seen for Lifeguard 6.