Glyn M Ruck

I am well aware of Ashland's background. If they had a worthwhile product it would be in the Benz listing above.

When you can buy the Shell product at $5 a quart no point in being cheap. I'm not suggesting anybody be ripped off by a dealer - not all do though.

You may recommend as you wish & I shall point out the failings in that recommendation then people are free to choose whether they want to risk a transmission costing what a 722.6 or 722.9 does.

Have a great weekend.

Glyn M Ruck

You will be just fine mis3

mis3

Things are different in Toronto. I just went to a Shell gas station and checked their supply of auto fluids. Surprisingly, they have Pennzoil ATF but no Shell ATF !

Musikmann

The Shell stations here do not sell the Shell brand of just about everything, maybe their motor oil, but that's about it.

Glyn M Ruck

You won't find this product at a Service Station from any oil company.

JeffreyP

Mr. Ruck,

While I see you have very strong opinion about Maxlife in a 722.6, would you mind sharing your bad experience?

From what I collect, there are few questions that has been answered

1. Did anyone have problem with using 236.14 in 236.10 (722.6) spec transmission? The answer was quite a few.

2. Did anyone have problem using MB approved 236.10 (only) only in 722.6 tranny? The answer was none that I know of.

3. Did anyone have problem using tranny fluid claimed to meet 236.10 but not approved by Mercedes - including Valvoline, Shell, Royal Purple etc..? I haven't heard of any, with your experience maybe you can give your input?

To me, MB doesn't make their own Transmission Fluid but expect other companies to send them a big check for receiving MB testing and approval. Pretty sure companies like Valvoline and Royal Purple didn't want to do so. I also don't see why reputable companies would want to jeopardize their credibility to sell a few (well few thousands) more quarts of tranny oil when it doesn't meet 236.10 (NAG1) spec.

Just my opinion as I want to offer member with choices.
Sincerely,

Kevwood

My understanding is that Shell/Penzoil is now one of the same. Am I wrong? Big Kevin Harvick fan and the past 3 years prior to 2011 he was sponsored by Shell-Penzoil.

Glyn, question for you and your experience considering this is the first auto-trans car I've tracked.

I normally do a full trans fluid flush every 50,000km, being that I now have a supercharged engine in front of it making a tad bit more power/torque than stock and run the car hard on the track (road course), should I be changing the trans fluid (and rear diff, now equipped with a LSD, for that matter) every 25,000km or so? In stock form I never ran the CLK nor my C class the full 10,000km between MB recommended oil changes due to the 50*C summer temps in Dubai, I always try to change at 5-7,000km.

Cheers.

Glyn M Ruck

Yes - Shell owns Penzoil. Shell have not requested a 236.14 readover for any Penzoil ATF as yet so one presumes that the Penzoil branded product is not the 236.14 formulation. There is nothing stopping Shell from putting their 236.14 product in a Penzoil bottle & asking Benz for a readover. Benz would oblige as the formulation has already passed testing. Smaller companies than Shell could also buy-in an already approved product & put their label on it & request a listing. Most don't because they are more interested about margin & profit & don't care about Benz business.

Yes - a reduction in drain interval to half recommended would be wise/prudent if tracking the car. Do you have the 5 speed transmission or 7G. The 5 speed is tough as hell, the 7G I might change even more often. Rear axle would be fine at half recommended drain interval. It's multiple drag starts that score crownwheel & pinion. With an Auto you can't really hammer the rear axle the way you can but dropping the clutch on a manual at 4000RPM or whatever.

I presume this is fun racing rather than really competitive stuff where you would change fluids after ever race. How much power/torque are you producing? AMG level?

Kevwood

Thanks for the explanation on the Shell-Penzoil thing.

I've got the 7G. I don't drag race, absolutely no baggin on it from a standstill, it's all mid/top range rpm runs in 2nd-4th gear for the most part.

I run open and timed events. The open events are 3 20 minute sessions, timed are 2 5 lap sessions (about 10 minutes). The Kleemann package I have is a 500hp deal, I have other mods on top of it but 500 crank is probably a pretty fair number, 400ish WHP. Massive torque throughout the RPM range so more HP and TQ than the CLK55 AMG's by a long shot.

Glyn M Ruck

See comments in red

Glyn M Ruck

Next time you change the 7G keep an oil sample & get EPPCO or similar to analyse it for you. That will give us an idea of how it's doing with your powerful toy.

Kevwood

Kinda doubt I'll find someone to do that here unless MB Arabia wants to send the sample for me... How about I do it the good 'ol fashioned way? I'll smell it and if it don't smell burned well then yee-haw!

JeffreyP

And mine in blue
Mr. Ruck,

While I see you have very strong opinion about Maxlife in a 722.6, would you mind sharing your bad experience?
Maxlife has the wrong frictional properties for a Benz transmission which will effect clutch life. It does not pass the Benz spec at all. If it is correct for a Ford or GM transmission it is all wrong for Benz. Key points in ATF preformance are - frictional properties of the fluid to suite clutchpack material & desired controlled slip, maintenance of shift shock over fluid life, high temperature stability/oxidation stability, proper lubrication of gears & bearings - minor requirement, hydraulic performance & filterability

How do you know if it has the wrong frictional properties? These are your statement, but do you have note from Mercedes saying so? You said that “I’ve done the hard testing”, what do you mean by that? Did you tranny has failure when using Maxlife?
From what I collect, there are few questions that has been answered

1. Did anyone have problem with using 236.14 in 236.10 (722.6) spec transmission? The answer was quite a few.

Benz have had many transmission failures but not any more than other OEMS. They had plenty of failures on the 722.6 running older generation fluids. They have most certainly had less 722.6 failures on the 236.14 generation fluid & warranty claims show that. Remember until recently the 722.6 was still fitted to diesel models & 236.14 fluid was factory fill from 2008. Time moves on and Benz & the oil industry are working on further improvements right now.

Do you have any number, report saying so? I can only base on facts, from forums, friends and MB service managers who will not allow 236.14 fluid being used in 722.6 tranny.
2. Did anyone have problem using MB approved 236.10 (only) only in 722.6 tranny? The answer was none that I know of.

Many - ask the European Taxi industry.
Again, do you have any fact or documentation saying so?

3. Did anyone have problem using tranny fluid claimed to meet 236.10 but not approved by Mercedes - including Valvoline, Shell, Royal Purple etc..? I haven't heard of any, with your experience maybe you can give your input?

Many & Benz cancelled their warranty. Valvoline, Shell et al all have approved Benz engine oils. Some choose not to play in the Benz ATF market either because they don't have the technology or they make a commercial decision not to play in what is a small market for them. Companies like Royal Purple do not have the technology, research facilities or budget to play in this market. They have to buy it in from additive peddlars etc.

The 722.6 tranny has been in the market for 2 decades, I haven’t heard of failure using other fluid claiming to meet 236.10 fluid (at least in several MB forums). Matter of fact, the 722.6 tranny is on the Chrysler Crossfire, and guess what is in factory fill: Valvoline Maxlife

To me, MB doesn't make their own Transmission Fluid but expect other companies to send them a big check for receiving MB testing and approval. Pretty sure companies like Valvoline and Royal Purple didn't want to do so. I also don't see why reputable companies would want to jeopardize their credibility to sell a few (well few thousands) more quarts of tranny oil when it doesn't meet 236.10 (NAG1) spec.

Benz has spent millions on it's approvals program over the years to protect their product & their customers. And yes the 236.14 spec is difficult to meet. A number of the Super-Major oil companies have decided not to work with Benz on transmission fluids & have walked away from the segment. But then they don't try and sell products & BS that they meet the spec. They don't.

Why would a reputable company claim they meet NAG-1 spec (236.10) when they don’t? Don’t you think they can test own their own with a 722.6 tranny? Now I am not talking about 236.14 spec which Valvoline Maxlife clearly stated they don’t meet, but they claim to meet 236.10.
These are the same engineers MB spent million on who claim 722.6 tranny is sealed lifetime.

Just my opinion as I want to offer member with choices.

There are 9 choices on the latest approved listing I have posted earlier in this thread. That's enough for a transmission that only requires a fluid change every 60,000Km's. The cost of a proper rebuild on these transmissions can vary from $6000 to over $10,000 on a 722.9. That's more than half the US value of many of the cars on this forum.
We are talking about a 722.6 transmission and fluid. I’d never want to use anything that’s non-spec as Maxlife and others never claim to meet 236.14. However, many indicate that they meet NAG-1 which is 236.10.

Only the mentally insane would risk a non approved fluid.

The same could be said about anyone who just does what Mercedes tells them and not doing any research. (not what I want to say but there are two sides to things)

Sincerely,

Glyn M Ruck

I come from a very large oil company that has some of the largest research labs in the industry. You will have to take my word for it. We don't publish internal reports as Benz does not report warranty claim data on public forums. Chrysler Crossfire’s built by Karmann most certainly did not have Valvoline Maxlife as OE fill. What the Americans do with the transmission is their business - Benz does not have to carry the Warranty.

MBUSA are the idiots that said “filled for life” & it cost them. Stuttgart has never said this & ROW has always been on 60,000Km drain & filter. So don’t blame Benz engineers. They consider MBUSA to be a loose cannon.

Some companies are more reputable than others. All multipurpose ATF's are a compromise & do not meet any of the specs properly. Valvoline might consider that Chrysler is happy with their product. Benz is not. Valvoline do not say approved by Benz as it is not. Oil is not just oil. Today it is a design component of the vehicle. Same as a windscreen is no longer just a piece of glass. It is a stress component of the vehicle shell.

I have been in the oil industry for 39 years with the same company (see my profile). We do our research. I have worked with the MB approvals process on & off over that time & have been directly involved with ATF development to achieve Benz approval. I've been in & out of Benz test labs more often than you have had birthdays & Christmas.

I only give the best advice I possibly can on this forum to Benz owners. I do not just do what Benz says. I believe in the approvals program & have had plenty to do with it over many years.

You can do as you wish with your Benz transmission. Please don't give bad advice to others on this forum.

JeffreyP

With all due respect, but once again it's just your words with no real proof. At the same time you are also stating the obvious, use MB approved sheet which most of us already knew. As a reference, there is a 722.6 FAQ in W210 forum that's very informative.

Most of us as MB owners are quite successful and well educated - that's why we can afford to drive Benz's. Most of us use very sound judgement when given choices and should question why we only are given certain choices. If your advice/or whoever share your opinion is good to you - that doesn't means those of us who see things differently must be moron and mentally challenged. We tried to share our success but according to you it's bad advice. There are different point of views, but as adults, we need to make our own decision, not depend on anyone telling us it has to be that way or else.

Why don't you question this: what is so special about the 722.6 tranny that require such special fluid? What's its job? Shift/select gears, transfer power? My Celica shifts much better using cheap fluid, my Maxima tranny works nicely, heck even my Quest shifts smoother and doesn't require anything that cost $20 a bottle.

Another question is: in the MB approval/disapproval process, did MB test other ATF (say Valvoline Maxlife)and say it didn't meet the spec? OR MB didn't test it, and anything that they didn't test is not approved? I suggest everyone to think about it.

You sound very intelligent and I respect your opinion or what you may claim as fact and hope that you'd do the same. Some of us do have fact, we see that other ATF's work fine in the 722.6 tranny, some went 20,000, 30,000, 50,000 and more without problem.

Regards,

Glyn M Ruck

You have to respect the fact that I'm on this forum in my private capacity & can't post proprietary company information. I can only post information that is in the public domain. I'm more than satisfied that I've done my homework. I certainly agree that there is a HUGE amount of crap that is spoken on the internet. I'm pleased to say that my credibility on this forum is sound & you are welcome to search for my numerous posts on transmissions which contain a large amount of detail & on many other subjects.

Please understand that the 722.6 is a million kilometre transmission if run on the correct fluid & serviced every 60,000 Km's. Many Taxis in Asia have achieved this & we have an E240 in Cape Town at the office with 800,000Km on the clock that does airport service & has had no major repair. The only thing ever touched on the transmission was the electrohydraulic bushing O Rings leaking - common problem, US$8 buck part & external replacement. There is a TSB on the issue that I can post if you are interested.

In the modern Auto transmission the biggest single challenge for the fluid is to have the correct blend of very high quality friction modifiers that allow controlled slip & final lock up of the clutch packs & TC clutch in the transmission. Too little slip & you suffer shift shock. Too much slip & the clutches take too long to lock up with severe heat generation & resulting damage to the friction material used. All manufacturers use different friction materials & lock up pressures & thus require a fluid with the correct frictional characteristics to make the multi-wet-plate-clutches operate safely & correctly. In the days of pressure, vacuum, speed actuated transmissions if you put GM fluid in a Ford transmission it would fail in 5000 miles. Ford & GM have since unified their spec. The next challenge for the fluid is to provide controlled shift shock over the service life of the fluid.

You can never have a transmission changing more smoothly than it did new with the correct fluid. If you use a non approved fluid that suddenly makes the transmission change more smoothly than a new one with the correct fluid you are on your way to trouble & a failure sooner or later. Smoother change than design is a sign that the fluid is allowing too much clutch slip which leads to overheating & wear of the friction material. The whole thing is a balancing act.

Now you get some OEMs that design a transmission, like Honda, & then say to the oil industry now design us a fluid that will make this thing work & we want no shift shock. Yeah right! I'm sure some reading will inform you of all the trouble they had in the early 2000's. They have learned.

Benz has a different approach & works with the oil industry in the design stages to ensure that fluid and transmission are designed to work together from day one. Then they have a continuous improvement process with the industry as better synthetic base stocks & additive components become available - hence steady improvement & longer fluid life in service from 236.1 to 236.14 and beyond.

Benz does not publish fluids that fail testing. It sends the oil company back to do their homework. Valvoline has many products approved by Benz. It does not have a transmission fluid approved by them & that might be because they never submitted samples. One thing I can tell you, however, is that if Maxlife is suitable for Ford & GM transmissions, it is not suitable for Benz. The frictional requirements are quite different. Benz fluid similarly is no good for Ford & GM transmissions.

We have tested a whole range of these so called "multipurpose" ATF formulations in our research labs & they are all a horrible compromise & certainly don't pass the Benz specs & requirements.

Sound judgement tells one that you should use a product that is approved by Benz from whichever oil companies take the trouble to get it through the rigorous testing regime. Benz does not make money out of the approvals process. It costs them money.

Remember that the Shell fluid costs < $6 a quart. That is a damn good price for a fluid that is damn expensive to formulate. No one is suggesting you buy from a rip off dealer & BTW some US dealers sell at $7 a quart so they are not all robbers.

mis3

My MB dealership does not offer full flush service. Since they will perform only the partial flush, I was concerned about the impacts of mixing 236.10 and 236.14 fluids.

I called around and no MB dealerships and the local indies have this 236.10 ATF.

Glyn M Ruck

If you want a full flush then insist they do it. They will charge you more. As I've said before the new & old Benz fluids are miscible & fungible.

https://mbworld.org/forums/attachmen...0flush1-1-.pdf

https://mbworld.org/forums/attachmen...0flush2-1-.pdf

mis3

[QUOTE=Glyn M Ruck;5035938]If you want a full flush then insist they do it. They will charge you more. As I've said before the new & old Benz fluids are miscible & fungible.
QUOTE]

I asked and they said they did not offer this service. I did not ask why but I think they do not have the proper machine.

I will just do the partial change, for the peace of mind.

JeffreyP

Thank you Mr Ruck, that was a very informative post. As always I have the utmost regards for civilized and non-bias conversation. Now I know more about different situations and possible potential problems. As you indicated, I am not here to question your credibility as you have a solid reputation here.

Just a hypothetical thought though: say MB actually develope their own AF fluid and nothing else meet spec, so we have only one choice. However, its cost is $100 a bottle for a 14 quarts flush, will you still stick with what MB sheet or look for alternative?

That thought aside, thanks to the internet and deducing power, we are now can get MB parts at a fraction of the cost. At the same time, many owners are not afraid of tackling MB repairs. These two factors are at one point dealer exclusive.

Regards and have a great weekend.

JeffreyP

[QUOTE=mis3;5035950]To me, depend on the mileage: if your tranny has high mileage (say near 150k), I've heard that 236.14 mixing with 236.10 does NOT work best. Several members and shop owners had reported problem. With lower mileage, it seem to be fine. Also, partial change only dilute the sump with about 35-40% of new fluid. Don't do a machine flush as it may push out the debris in seals. MB has the WIS for using the cooler line for fluid exchange and it get about 85-90%.

Glyn M Ruck

That hypothetical will never happen. In the words of the late Max Gehring who started the approvals process at Benz all those years ago "We do not want to be in the petroleum business but we want the correct fuels, lubricants & other service products used in our vehicles to ensure their long & trouble free life for our customers"

Best translation from the German.

Glyn M Ruck

[QUOTE=JeffreyP;5035969]See WIS flush method above for 722.6 post 1999 that have no TC drain plug.

Regarding the other issue here is what I posted a long while back on the W203 forum when this issue was raised. So that no one here thinks I'm being rude to them.

"This bollocks about leaving old oxidised & contaminated fluid in the system being somehow better for the transmission than new fluid is absolute nonsense. A complete change will always be the best possible thing you can do."

As I have said above the fluids are miscible & fungible.

JeffreyP

[QUOTE=mis3;5035950][QUOTE=Glyn M Ruck;5035938]If you want a full flush then insist they do it. They will charge you more. As I've said before the new & old Benz fluids are miscible & fungible.
QUOTE]

I think you're missing the point, whether it's 20 times or 5 times more than regular price, it's still way overinflated. That's has been MB practices on parts and labors.

Glyn M Ruck

No. I do not miss the point. If you have a look at the W203 forum & to a lesser degree the W204 forum where I spend most of my time you will see that we strongly support parts outlets like RMeuropean etc. that don't rip one off & we strongly support Indy's that are competent. Most of the cars are getting up in the miles & are out of warranty. Benz cars are not sold with Mobilodrive (Motorplan) in the US as they are in places like SA where our major dealers are actually owned by Benz.

We are all sick & tired of US Benz dealer's inability to diagnose problems. They are in the main lost without a Star & nothing but parts changers. They endlessly try to take short cuts & ignore the WIS but charge full rate.

We always recommend good Indy's. Lots of the guys take their own oil & filters along if the Indy does not carry the genuine stuff but many of course do. We are careful to advise the use of genuine components in critical areas such as Mahle Knecht fuel filters that contain the pressure regulator for the fuel system & often find that these regulators fail in pirate filters, O2 sensors etc.

There is no need to be ripped off by crap dealers. There are some good ones, of course but they seem few & far apart.