LV in a 10R80

[Performance nut]

Has anyone used LV vs ULV with their 10R80? Chevy uses LV with their 10L80 vehicles so I'm wondering if anyone made the change since the transmissions are identical. I see some benefits to doing this

Sponsored

 

[Cobra Jet]

Has anyone used LV vs ULV with their 10R80? Chevy uses LV with their 10L80 vehicles so I'm wondering if anyone made the change since the transmissions are identical. I see some benefits to doing this

Good questions, but not sure if changing trans fluid to LV will cause any detrimental effects to the internals.


Per Ford:
Use only Motorcraft MERCON® ULV Automatic Transmission Fluid XT-12-QULV (WSS-M2C949-A) or equivalent when servicing a 10R80 automatic transmission.

Maybe compare each type side by side as far as what is contained in the actual fluid?

 

[Performance nut]

Good questions, but not sure if changing trans fluid to LV will cause any detrimental effects to the internals.


Per Ford:
Use only Motorcraft MERCON® ULV Automatic Transmission Fluid XT-12-QULV (WSS-M2C949-A) or equivalent when servicing a 10R80 automatic transmission.

Maybe compare each type side by side as far as what is contained in the actual fluid?

An F150 guy did an extensive post on it and found it less than desirable but he admitted he is a tame driver and it is an F150 (I'm sure shift strategies are different). In the long post, they did a comparison of the actual oils (down to cSt).

Reason I post is because it is time to change the fluid (no longer red) and my mechanic switched to Amsoil LV on his 10R80 and actually enjoys it better. Never heard of someone doing this and was curious. Right now I'm researching Mercon vs Valvoline ULV (Valvoline is a full synthetic whereas Mercon is not).

These transmissions get heck hot when you race them. The ULV doesn't seem to be suited for this sort of duty.

 

[EFI]

since the transmissions are identical.

Technically they aren't 100%, they were co-developed together and the architecture is obviously the same, but internally there could be differences especially in clutch material and clearances. I would not base much of anything on the 10L80 when it comes to the 10R80.

IMO, the 10R80 and it's architecture is much more sensitive to fluid viscosity. It's one thing in an engine or differential running between hard parts, it's another when it's trying to fit in between very specific set of clutches. I would run thicker oil in the engine and diff or a manual trans, I would not in the 10R. Myself and others who track theirs have not had an issue with the ULV.

 

[Performance nut]

Technically they aren't 100%, they were co-developed together and the architecture is obviously the same, but internally there could be differences especially in clutch material and clearances. I would not base much of anything on the 10L80 when it comes to the 10R80.

IMO, the 10R80 and it's architecture is much more sensitive to fluid viscosity. It's one thing in an engine or differential running between hard parts, it's another when it's trying to fit in between very specific set of clutches. I would run thicker oil in the engine and diff or a manual trans, I would not in the 10R. Myself and others who track theirs have not had an issue with the ULV.

There is truth to this. For example, the filters are completely different. The Ford solution is viscosity sensitive meaning low temp fluid goes one way and high temp fluid goes another. I'm not sure where Ford made the change but apparently there use to be a flapper that was connected to a temperature sensitive plate that would force the hotter fluid through the fine filter. Supposedly this flapper is no longer installed since the fluid is capable of self directing as viscosity changes. By going in and changing viscosity, you upset this balance if you don't have that flapper installed.

As for track guys having issues, I would probably say they aren't voicing it loud because the car is not meant to be tracked therefore more frequent changes are expected. Though I know the track guys temps get hot on the 10R80's, all of us get it. With this thin of an oil, I'm wondering if there is more breakdown at hotter temperatures versus LV. Also why I'm also researching full synthetic.

 

[EFI]

With this thin of an oil, I'm wondering if there is more breakdown at hotter temperatures versus LV. Also why I'm also researching full synthetic.

I would say moving to a more robust synthetic fluid would be a better first step than changing viscosities. And secondly as you mentioned, more frequent changes if driven hard and getting it hot.

Kind of like for the engine oil, a tracked car experiencing hot fluids should change the oil more often. And a 5w20 high quality fully synthetic oil is going to protect better than a gas station special 5w30 even though it's thinner.

 

[skateflip107]

Has anyone used LV vs ULV with their 10R80? Chevy uses LV with their 10L80 vehicles so I'm wondering if anyone made the change since the transmissions are identical. I see some benefits to doing this

quite an old thread by now but I just found this in the recall data for the 10R80. It’s the same trans for the trucks and cars. So going LV vs ULV should be an upgrade in my eyes if ford is calling for it on the 4wd models of the trucks. To me this is fords admission of guilt that ULV is inferior.

 

[PSI]

Yes it’s an old thread from the dead, and I don’t have a 10R80 car, but it is interesting anyway that they are speccing LV in that particular application.
I’ve been fond of straying from manufacturer specified fluids quite a bit over the years and nothing has blown up on me yet. I’ve ran Valvoline Maxlife ATF in a Mercedes 722.6, a ZF6HP, a GA6L45R, a ZF8, two 6R80s, a 4L80E, and a 6R140. All of them shifted great on it, despite assurances that the German special snowflake transmissions would certainly shit the bed if they didn’t have the proper insanely expensive mouse milk. The multi vehicle fluid has only one viscosity, but the fluids it replaces cover quite a variety of different viscosities, yet it seems to work well.

Sponsored