ATF for a 96 Chrysler T&C ?

[LargeCarMan]

Quote from Gary Allan:

I can't, pal!! ..but you won't begrudge me a rant every now and then, will you?

Not from me Gary, it relieves stress...

One thing I am worried about(here I go again) is folks stating that you flush the transmission by disconecting the cooler line back to the transmission and run out the old fluid in drive until it's clean or bright red. Any issues here? what happens to the fluid that is returning to the transmission...what does it do? or does it just drain to the pan?

Wondering and Ranting in Idaho

 

[brianl703]

Unless you have a drain pan under there, the fluid that would be returning to the transmission but now isn't because that hose is disconnected will be making a mess of your driveway. (You should be adding fluid at the same time as the old fluid is being pumped out).

 

[LargeCarMan]

What I am saying Brian, Sorry, my wife say's I am a poor commuicator

Is folks are saying..drain your pan, replace your filter, put the pan back on,put 4 quarts in the pan, disconect the return cooler line to the transmission, place the line into a milk jug and place the transmission in drive. Run the atf out as you are adding more in the dipstick. My issue is with what happens to the ATF that should be returning to the transmission, but now is going in a milkjug. I am having an issue (ranting) with what is the fluid doing,or not doing that should be returning to the return nipple on the transmission?Does this make since or did I fail again? Does the fluid that would have normally returned to the transmission do anything? is there a purpose for the Atf that is returning to the transmission or does it just drain to the pan? Fail or Pass?

 

[Gary Allan]

LCM ..no ..crystal clear. Your concern is sound from a reasoning stand point. You fear that the fluid is being interupted from performing some critical task inside the transmission. This appears to be the case. My schematics of my simple 30rh (aka 904 in 4 banger jeep clothing) shows that indeed it goes to the "lubrication" circuit ...and NOT to the "pump suction" circuit (filter/pickup/pan).

All that I can offer is that no one has reported apparent issues with doing this. Nothing is compelled to turn except the pump via the converter housing (although, at times, some older automatics would transmit some motion through to the tail shaft if the wheels were off the ground). The event isn't that long.

Oh ..neutral should enable the cooling circuit in most transimission ..but PARK disables it in some.

 

[G-MAN]

quote:

---

Dexron wasn't the cause of failure for most of these failed transmissions. From what I remember from friends that worked at the dealership, most initial failures were repaired at the dealership under warranty while running OEM or dealer installed OEM fluids.

---

Just to clarify, Dexron was a LARGE part of the problem up until Chrysler eliminated it as an "optional" service fill when they released ATF+3. Dealers that had always serviced Chrysler TorqueFlite transmissions with Dexron just continued to use it in UltraDrive transaxles because Chrysler didn't say DON'T USE IT right from the start. That's the real puzzle: Why Chrysler ever allowed the "option" of Dexron when they knew their own fluid spec (ATF+) was needed for the proper function of these transmissions. The ATF+ spec was developed concurrently with the UltraDrive and early testing showed the Dexron add pack was not correct for the clutch material and would rapidly degrade and cause problems. It wasn't until the release of ATF+3 that Chrysler finally removed Dexron from the owner's manuals and service manuals as an optional replacement fluid. By then, roughly EIGHT YEARS after the introduction of the UltraDrive concept, the damage had been done. Even after Chrysler said "ATF+3 ONLY" some shops continued to use Dexron. In large part, Chrysler's proprietary ATF+4 was introduced to finally put a stop to this problem (which Chrysler itself had caused by not specifying only their proprietary fluid from the beginning). To ensure that Chrysler fluid and ONLY Chrysler fluid would be used, they didn't license the formula for ATF+4 except to their OEM lubricant manufacturers. Perhaps they felt the "Dexron is interchangeable with ATF+/ATF+2/ATF+3" mentality was so ingrained that the only way out was to specify a new fluid and be the sole provider of it. Now, some six years after the introduction of ATF+4, Chrysler is finally going to license ATF+4, maybe because they finally feel the "problem" with using Dexron in these transmissions has passed.

 

[Gary Allan]

G-Man, I don't quite get you here. You totally assert that +3 and +4 are totally transparent in function ..and only base oil properties are different. Now you could say that the "+3" evolution included refinements ..but 7176 fluid (aka- pre +3 designation..+3) was nothing more then Dexron with friction modifiers added to it. Mopar had a part # for the it at one time.

So when you say "Dexron was a LARGE part of the problem" ..you're either referring to the "in a pinch" use being interpretted as "just fine anytime" ..or you're saying that Dexron fluid wasn't properly additized by the installer to MAKE IT 7176 fluid.

Before the Chrysler debacle ..no one routinely serviced their transmission. That is, the OEM fluid was in most of the Chrysler transmissions that failed. They were the aftermarket trade's best friend with the lamest devolution in an otherwise "never needs service" device. Sure transmission took a crap from time to time ..but under 6 hours of book labor and, usually, under $100 worth of parts fixed them. I wonder how a normal band or clutch get applied ..yet an od needs to have the cc's of fluid measured by a computer to assure a smooth application and to compensate for wear

Come the revolution ...the Chrysler engineers will be the first to face the tribunal and the guillotine for their crimes against the people!!

 

[G-MAN]

Gary Allan: Since what you wrote and claim to be a paraphrase of my position bears absolutely no resemblence to anything I've said about ATF+3 or +4, I don't know how to respond.

 

[Gary Allan]

I've just gone through a number of your posts, G-man ..and again and again you've stated that the evolution to +4 was for longevity. Aren't you doing an infamous +3 in place of +4 experiment? Aren't you saying that there is no difference in operation?

If this is true ..and the evolution of +3 is a later development of 7176 ...and 7176 was a modification of DEXRON ......

Does that string together for you easily enough??

 

[Gary Allan]

But while I got your attention, G-man

Your thoughts:

mopar antifoam

I can't find the images on the net ..but this stuff was clearly designed (MOPAR #) for dealers to use for the conversion of Dex to 7176. Now if you can tell me the difference between 7176 and +3 ..and if you're still asserting in your experiment that +3 works just fine in +4 spec'd vehicles only IF swapped out soon enough (no longer lifetime fill) ...then what don't you integrate between your post saying "all kinds of problems with Dexron ..when in fact 7176 was merely additized Dexron and my later post

 

[G-MAN]

quote:

---

If this is true ..and the evolution of +3 is a later development of 7176 ...and 7176 was a modification of DEXRON ......

---

I never said Type 7176 was a modification of Dexron. It wasn't. ATF+3 was itself Type 7176E, the last iteration of Type 7176 fluid. ATF+4 had a new material spec, Type 9602.

 

[G-MAN]

quote:

---

I can't find the images on the net ..but this stuff was clearly designed (MOPAR #) for dealers to use for the conversion of Dex to 7176.

---

The Mopar Anti-Foam additive was designed as a stop-gap measure that addressed issues with 7176D fluid, which was corrected with Type 7176E (ATF+3). It was made specifically to be added to Type 7176D (ATF+2) fluid, and not to "convert" Dexron to 7176.

 

[Gary Allan]

Okay ...for some reason I'm having to pry this out of you here. Now I know you're not obligated to educate me ..but I'd be much obliged

What happened to the 7176a-c? The one that Lubeguard meets at least one of the specs when added to DEX? Were those evolutions still required because DEX was used instead of 7176a-c? That is, there was nothing wrong with the transmissions or the fluids ..but they changed the fluid anyway

..and are you or are you not using +3 in a +4 spec application? Otherwise I don't see the point of a 50 mile "and so far everything is fine" report in one of your other posts

Have I gotten anything else terribly wrong here

 

[Gary Allan]

Dexron was NEVER factory fill in any of the UltraDrive type transmissions, including the first ones sold all the way back in 1989.

I don't see where I said it was

I merely said that there were additives that did make it fit one of the older specs. Since Dex was the primary reason, in your opinion (major may be a better term) for a great many UltraDrive failures ..then there would appear to be little reason for 6 evolutions in fluid that otherwise had very few changes in decades otherwise (talking ATF in general)

And finally, I still don't see why my using ATF+3 in my Chrysler has anything to do with this particular discussion.

Does it have to? ..but... Okay ..you're using +3 in a +4 application. To you they are functionally (at least you silently in this post anyway) identical. Since +3 is an evolution of the 7176 ...and, according to you, ALL 7176 fluids were perfectly OKAY to use in the UltraDrive transmissions ...AND I can get an additive, when added to DEXRON that meets ONE of the 7176 specs (a-c)...

One should be able to conclude that you can take DEXRON ..add an additive that meet ANY 7176 spec .. and use it in ANY UltraDrive trans.

You're setting the precedence yourself.

..but seeing as you don't seem to get where I'm going (this is just discussion here, G-man) ..just let it go.


I'll thank you kindly for going to the trouble. Have a nice day

 

[G-MAN]

quote:

---

One should be able to conclude that you can take DEXRON ..add an additive that meet ANY 7176 spec .. and use it in ANY UltraDrive trans.

---

In their study that was published, Chevron completely debunked the idea that you could turn Dexron into a fluid that would meet the requirements of 7176 using these various friction modification additives. Thus, I would never recommend anyone use Dexron doctored up with any of these snake-oil FM additives in their Chrysler transmsission.

As for the rest of what you wrote, I'm still not following most of what you're getting at, so I agree we need to drop it.

 

[G-MAN]

Type 7176a-c were just earlier iterations of Chrysler's ATF+ proprietary spec fluid. I believe these were all sold under either the "Type 7176" or "ATF+" labels. With 7176D Chrysler renamed the fluid "ATF+2."

And for the life of me, I don't see why you keep interjecting Dexron into this discussion. Dexron was NEVER factory fill in any of the UltraDrive type transmissions, including the first ones sold all the way back in 1989. Type 7176 fluid was developed in conjunction with the UltraDrive. Dexron was never listed as an equivalent alternative to ATF+ in the owners manuals or service manuals. It was, however, listed as an optional service fill IF the appropriate 7176 fluid was not available. (As I've pointed out, that was a BIG mistake, and one that Chrysler finally corrected when they released ATF+3 in 1997 and completely removed any mention of Dexron in the owners manuals and service manuals.)

And finally, I still don't see why my using ATF+3 in my Chrysler has anything to do with this particular discussion.

 

[acewiza]

So, just to summarize: All the people, including the clueless techs at the trans shops that put Dex in the ultradrives made the same assumption Gary did.

Sorry, couldn't resist

 

[LargeCarMan]

I am telling you it's true...Salesfolks are selling the fix all Dextron to your specs transmission oil....Just Lubegard it they say...

Sorry to revive this post G-man II and Gary Allen , but you guys are great minds and these oils or fix all additives scareme

 

[bmwtechguy]

Has anyone ever tried Redline or Amzoil's Universal ATF in these transmissions that call for ATF+3 or 4?

 

[Gary Allan]

Well, you gotta take a quote out of my 99 jeep FSM. (paraphrased): Don't use Dexron II or you'll experience converter clutch shudder. It too spec's 7176. So it's obvious that "destroying clutch material" isn't DC wide ..even though the spec was.

There's still far more assumptions and unauthoritative speculation (even though the speculation and assumptions are made by higher qualified assumers and authorities) then there is fact about these fluids. Most of it is in the form of conclusions assembled outside of bona-fide documented fact.

 

[wiswind]

1. Use the manufacturer specified fluid....check for any TSB's that may have updated the specification....If you can get a synthetic that meets the specification....I would do that.
In other words....using the fluid that meets the correct specifications is more important than if it is synthetic or not. A synthetic that meets the correct specifications is best. (in my un-authorized opinion).
I am NOT qualified to get into the fluid specification discussion above....and I don't have the same car you do. I have researched and made my choice for my car.

2. If you have had a transmission(s) replaced....double check to make sure that the old transmission did not clog the cooler. There is a TSB for my windstar that tells the shop to flow test the cooler to make sure that it is not clogged with crud from the old transmission... If the cooler is clogged, the new transmission will overheat and fail.
I would think that it would be worth checking on other vehicles...as the principle is the same.

3. Install a auxilary cooler. Install the cooler in the line that goes from the factory cooler to the transmission...to further cool the fluid after it has gone through the factory cooler.

4. Magnefine makes a great in-line filter that you would install in the transmission cooler line. The filter contains a magnet, a paper filter element, and a pressure bypass that will open and let the fluid flow if the filter element should become clogged. Change the filter with each oil change.

5. Change the fluid at least as often as the manufacturer specifies. Do this EVEN with the extra filter, and with synthetic fluid.