Thanks for the link...yep has the information I was looking for. I should have known that CTSC would have the diagrams, but was not thinking....that is where I purchased the kit from.
And yes, always torque bolts in multiple passes. Going to print-out the diagrams so I have them with me.

THANKS!

 

Installing a pan isn't exactly a science, it's not like it involves any moving parts, it just has to "be there". I used to just go around the pan twice hitting every other bolt and snugging them starting in no particular point. Once they were all snugged I'd go around and tighten them by hand. Nowadays I do the same thing using my cordless drill with the torque set low then hit them either by hand or, in the case of the dinky bolts these ZF's use, a torque wrench. The pans aren't exactly fussy about any specific sequence like a valve body might be.

 

FWIW I did a little comparing of the steel pan to the plastic one the other day. Sorry I didn't take any pics but, well, we all know what a pan looks like anyway. I got to looking at them and, geez, they sure look about the same size, I just don't see how the steel pan can take a full liter less. So in the kitchen I go, right to the sink. I filled both pans using a 16 oz. measuring cup and, don'cha know, they're almost identical! They both take about 13 cups to fill to the brim and, if anything, the steel pan probably holds a couple (3 or 4) ounces more. Of course, you still have to allow for the separate filter but seeing as it has to be full of fluid too it shouldn't change the numbers much. That would make these pans pretty much an even swap - plus the benefit of having a fill port. On another note, I reinstalled my steel pan and filled it (through the bottom port) until fluid ran out. I put the plug in and then pulled the normal fill plug (the one in the side of the trans case we all hate), nothing came out so I started filling through there and it took maybe another 8 ounces. So that appears to be the difference between the steel and plastic pans and I hardly thing that 8 ounces is going to make any kind of dent when the whole system holds like 11 or 12 quarts (don't remember exactly offhand). I'm assuming the "1 liter less" is in reference to the OTHER steel pan, the silver one they use on the Land Rovers, but I'm not the expert, this is just my own observation.

One thing I did notice and if someone cares to chime in I'm interested to know since this would make more difference; we all know the trans has to be level when filled, but, what does ZF call "level"? When I originally filled my trans and had (allegedly) overfill problems I had put a bubble level on the machined surface of the trans case and had it dead on. Well, if you put the level on the bottom of the pan you'll get a completely different result, the bottom of the pan is NOT parallel with the (top) mating surface! When I had the machined surface level it forced a more nose down attitude of the car which would then result in taking more fluid in since the fill point is towards the rear. Being leveled by reference of the bottom of the pan changes that attitude and puts the front of the car higher which I can see can make a significant difference in the amount of fluid it will take - as also evidenced by my kitchen sink antics. So ... WHICH is the correct method; level on the machined surface of the trans or level by the bottom of the pan?? I haven't started the car yet to finish the fill, next warm day I'll do it, but I'm keeping my fingers crossed that my leakage days will be over.

 

Rick (joycesjag), Wayne (cjd777), and I have done a total of five ZF 6HP26 drain-and-fills combined on my previous 2005 S-Type 3.0 and my wife's current 2006 XK8. We always open the driver's door and set the level on the door plate (perhaps also called the door sill), then adjust the four jack stands accordingly. That has always worked well for us....