Mercedes-Benz Forum banner

1 - 20 of 23 Posts

·
Registered
2004 e320 svr/blk 136k
Joined
·
355 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Hey all, not trying to beat a dead horse but is anyone actually using the shell 134 ATF. Any problems? I have to do a change very soon and may go that route. Is this the "backwards compatible" stuff that I have heard complaints about?
 

·
Registered
2001 E320 wagon
Joined
·
733 Posts
Iv'e done about 15K miles on it now, the first 100miles it felt different - not bad - just different. Since then its been just great, no problems at all. I used the most of a whole case and did a flush at the same time.
I did it a little different to most as I wanted to clear the whole system so I drained the pan, replaced the filter and replaced the pan, put in 6 liters, undid the cooler hose and hooked up to a 5 liter can and started the engine, idle only and pumped out +/-5 liters, stopped the engine and then connected everything up and filled it back to normal using the dipstick to the cold position then took it for a run up to temp - and rechecked the level.
I'm very happy with the 134 worked just fine for me.
cheers
Barri
 

·
Registered
E320/E250 Bluetec Ford F350 6.7l
Joined
·
36,706 Posts
It is always endless dispute about comparable fluids.
For me it is easy - I have no way to test or read reliable test results by others, so I am not taking chances with $6000 transmission for $20 or even $50 savings. Those savings too often are delusional. Just had a dispute in W124 with members who use Zerex coolant and have issues with engine running hot, while I use MB coolant and drive 2 diesels with engine fans removed in hot California.
So you might save few buck initially but lower performance alone is going to cost you pretty penny in extra fuel.
Fact that I am getting MB fluids at local indy warehouse for low prices helps as well.
 

·
Registered
93 190E 2.3, 94 E320 (sold), 01 E320, 99 S320, 18 Durango
Joined
·
4,983 Posts
So Kajtek1 can you still get the right ATF fluid for the 722.6 transmission from the dealer?
I remember I read on the forum that the original fluid is not available any more and the dealer sells a newer version instead.
I have 68k miles on my car and the original owner never replaced the transmission fluid/filter before. When should I replace them and what ATF should I get.
Also is there a difference between the conductor plate and the transmission conncetor plug? which should be replaced while doing ATF replacement?
 

·
Registered
E320/E250 Bluetec Ford F350 6.7l
Joined
·
36,706 Posts
Can't tell you about the older MB ATF availability, but the plug ADAPTER was judged consumable in last years and having it available at Chrysler for about $4 why not get it?
 

·
Registered
93 190E 2.3, 94 E320 (sold), 01 E320, 99 S320, 18 Durango
Joined
·
4,983 Posts
Any recommendation for when to replace ATF and filter? currently the car has 68k.
 

·
Registered
E320/E250 Bluetec Ford F350 6.7l
Joined
·
36,706 Posts
Any recommendation for when to replace ATF and filter? currently the car has 68k.
Lifetime? ;)
I replaced ATF on 2 W210 at about 200k mark each. From the looks of it one was still on original fluid and had no issues. Sure new fluid made softer gear changes as old fluid gets thicker.
The filters are actually strainers. They don't filter the small particles, just hold bigger chunks so they could last forever, but several years old gasket should be replaced and filter comes with it as a set.
You will find lot of opinions, but I am pretty sure you can run the ATF for 100k pretty safe. Another issue is that newer converters don't have plug, so you can do only partial refreshing, or do the power flushing.
Age of ATF should be considered as well. In the years W210 was on the drawing board average life expectancy for cars was below 10 years. How old is your car now?
Per my observation most of the dirt from ATF settles on the bottom of the pan and on the top of valve plate. So wiping the pan clean is crucial part of service IMHO. Dropping the valve plate adds about 1/2 -1 hr for advanced DIY, so might be worth the time as well.
 

·
Registered
2001 E320 wagon
Joined
·
733 Posts
kajtek
the atf 134 is the recommended replacement atf. its the new 236.14 thats recommended by MB to be backward compatible with 236.10. I held out on it as well but it certainly seems to work well.
cheers
Barri
 

·
Registered
1999 E55, 2001 E320, 1990 560 SEC, 2004 ML350, 2001 ML55, 1995 S500, 1998 SL500, 2010 E550 Sport zoo
Joined
·
7,035 Posts
Hama - at 68K replace now - then if it was me I would replace again after another 40K.
 

·
Registered
1998 E300TD
Joined
·
82 Posts
I used the Shell ATF 134 when I drained the trans and torque converter at 102k miles, also dropped the valve body to drill out that little 7mm connector bolt I OVERTIGHTENED AND BROKE OFF and checked around the speed sensor for cracks. Used a good 8 qts of the ATF 134 in the process. At 107k miles the transmission appears to function as designed, so I will use it again if and when the ATF is changed again. FWIW I used Zerex G05 when I drained and refilled the cooling system.
 

·
Registered
2006 S350;2016 GLC 300
Joined
·
758 Posts
I bought my MB 6 months ago with 139k miles on it. The previous owner had a rebuilt transmission installed at 105k miles. In June, with 144k miles on car, the transmission was making loud clunk noises and going in to limp mode. Using Shell ATF 134, I replaced the transmission filter, gasket, fluid, and flushed the ATF using yumling's ATF flush technique: http://www.benzworld.org/forums/w210-e-class/1371714-flushed-my-tranny.html. While I was at it, I replaced the plug adapter which only had trace amounts of fluid on it. Afterwards, the transmission was smooth. No more clunks and no more hard shifting.
 

·
Registered
2006 E320 CDI
Joined
·
386 Posts
It is always endless dispute about comparable fluids.
For me it is easy - I have no way to test or read reliable test results by others, so I am not taking chances with $6000 transmission for $20 or even $50 savings. Those savings too often are delusional. Just had a dispute in W124 with members who use Zerex coolant and have issues with engine running hot, while I use MB coolant and drive 2 diesels with engine fans removed in hot California.
So you might save few buck initially but lower performance alone is going to cost you pretty penny in extra fuel.
Fact that I am getting MB fluids at local indy warehouse for low prices helps as well.
Just one question. Would Mercedes Benz approve a product if it were not satisfactory for use in their intended application? Shell ATF134 is a MB Spec. 236.14 approved fluid and will perform the same as the stuff that you pay the dealer $15-20 per liter.
 

·
Registered
2006 E320 CDI
Joined
·
386 Posts
I used the Shell ATF 134 when I drained the trans and torque converter at 102k miles, also dropped the valve body to drill out that little 7mm connector bolt I OVERTIGHTENED AND BROKE OFF and checked around the speed sensor for cracks. Used a good 8 qts of the ATF 134 in the process. At 107k miles the transmission appears to function as designed, so I will use it again if and when the ATF is changed again. FWIW I used Zerex G05 when I drained and refilled the cooling system.
Zerex G05 is MB Spec 325 approved antifreeze and is the same as the MB brand that you pay twice the price for at the dealer.
 

·
Registered
99 E430, 01 E430 Sport, 00 SL500
Joined
·
3,266 Posts
It is always endless dispute about comparable fluids.
For me it is easy - I have no way to test or read reliable test results by others, so I am not taking chances with $6000 transmission for $20 or even $50 savings. Those savings too often are delusional. Just had a dispute in W124 with members who use Zerex coolant and have issues with engine running hot, while I use MB coolant and drive 2 diesels with engine fans removed in hot California.
So you might save few buck initially but lower performance alone is going to cost you pretty penny in extra fuel.
Fact that I am getting MB fluids at local indy warehouse for low prices helps as well.
The saving is more like $70. However, in 40K miles at 12Kmiles/year driving, it only costs a nickel more per day.
 

·
Registered
2006 E320 CDI
Joined
·
386 Posts
You are confusing "approved" with "the same quality".
Per my experience those are 2 different things.
Not really confused, MB approves fluids that are tested to meet their standards and that is good enough quality for me. The fact that I pay $5.38 a quart for Shell ATF134 does not make it an inferior product.

Who do you think makes the MB branded fluids? It is not MB but is some company like Fuchs, Shell or heavens knows and it is made to the same spec that the other is made to.
 

·
Registered
1997 E320 Elegance- 140,000 miles, Black with Interior 204 (Leather, Saffron/Java)
Joined
·
448 Posts
Not using the shell stuff...but I, along with many others, am using Valvoline MaxLife ATF with zero issues...about to change it and use it again.
 

·
Registered
99 E430, 01 E430 Sport, 00 SL500
Joined
·
3,266 Posts
I don't know much about the transmission design but my guess is going from 5-speed to 7, the fluid may have to be thinner for more finer gear teeth, generally speaking. Your W210's 5-speed transmission is already worn out over the years. How much life is left? Thicker fluid/oil is preferable for older engine. If the ATF 134 is a little thinner, it may not be good for your W210's tranmission. It may wear the gears faster over the remaining life of the transmission. Its life will be shortened. You just don't see the effect right away.
That's just my guess. Five cents a day more when using the older fluid gives me some peace of mind.
 

·
Premium Member
2001 E320 - Brilliant Silver/Ash: 107,000+
Joined
·
17,193 Posts
mbvis is correct. The 236.14 ATF is indeed thinner than the 236.10 but it seems that the 236.10 is no longer available. If I were you, I would stick with the newer MB fluid. 236.12 if you can still find that. Plus it looks like Fuchs is out there and equivalent to the MB OEM.
 
1 - 20 of 23 Posts
Top