I don't buy into this theory. I do understand that companies recommend these service intervals to somewhat "prevent" the shade-tree mechanic from causing havoc, and that they are in the business of "return business." However, I hope to turn this Toyota into a 250,000-350,000 mile car many years from now, so YES TOYOTA, I WANT TO CHANGE MY ATF. This comes from speaking with the parts desk. Let's review the transcript: "Good morning, yes sir, I'd like the price of the Toyota WS Automatic Transmission Fluid." Parts guy, "What vehicle?" Me, "2011 Toyota Corolla." Parts guy, "That car doesn't require the ATF to be changed." Me, "I know." Parts genius, "Then why do you want to change the ATF." Me, "Because I do." Parts fella, "Hold-on." Fumbles phone while mumbling to someone, "$8.99/qt." Me, "Thank you sir." It could have been worse. The 10,000 mile scheduled maintenance will be performed this week and I wish to change the ATF next weekend. This would be a pan drop, magnetic/screen cleaning, and fluid flush via the fluid cooler line. The reason for doing this at 10,000, TO REMOVE BREAK-IN METALS TOYOTA. A few thoughts/questions: Would a simple plug removal and fill do what I want to occur? That is removing the metal and chemicals associated with break-in procedures. This would be cheaper as I would not have to purchase a transmission pan gasket. I’m not convinced it will and I'm not into dropping half the sump and replacing with new, just to do it again in 10,000 miles. On to ATF’s. This car is still under the 3-year/36,000 mile warranty. As I don’t expected any issues associated with this ATF exchange, how liable am I if I perhaps selected the Amsoil Synthetic Fuel Efficient Automatic Transmission Fluid at $8.90 plus shipping, which is rated for the Toyota WS specification. Amsoil over the original Toyota WS ATF for $8.99 (dealership quote per quart). I guess my true question is, with some ATF manufacturers listing meeting factory spec’s such as the Toyota WS and later finding out that they drop this specification for whatever reason, how stringent and trustworthy can I be in say Amsoil’s current spec as meeting the Toyota WS standard? An example of this, Mobil1’s ATF specification for the T-IV only to be dropped or the Redline D6 ATF spec’d for low viscosity equivalency only to begin recommending D4. I can see you post now, “If you’re that worried about it, stick with Toyota WS.” Being as anal retentive as we are here on BITOG, I simply want the best product to serve in equipment that I want to serve me for years to come. How does the Magnusson-Moss Act play into a situation where the non-OEM manufacturer drops the “spec’d” standard? Does that become a liability of the AFT manufacturer because I highly doubt anything would come of that. Simply put, how reliable are the standard meeting spec’s quoted by manufacturers?