I was looking through the owners manual on my daughters 2012 Mazda 6 and discovered there is no scheduled replacement of the transmission fluid. I find it hard to believe that the FF is good for life. Has anybody ever changed the the fluid on this vehicle?
2012 Mazda 6 Transmission Fluid
- Thread starter greasegunn
- Start date
- Status
My corolla says the same thing, says its lifetime fluid..i had it emptied and filled at 65k miles and will likely do it every 65k miles.
Cant answer your question tho..
Cant answer your question tho..
A lot of new cars have "lifetime fill" trans fluid. The fluid might not be good for life, but changing it might not be good for the lifetime of the transmission. I wouldn't change it.
Mazda does not have a recommended interval. If you have the four cylinder model it takes Mazda M5 fluid, not Mercon V. If you have the six cylinder it takes 3309/T-IV fluid.
Originally Posted By: J. A. Rizzo
A lot of new cars have "lifetime fill" trans fluid. The fluid might not be good for life, but changing it might not be good for the lifetime of the transmission. I wouldn't change it.
I don't disagree with your thinking, just wondering if you could be more specific on your reasoning?
Thx
A lot of new cars have "lifetime fill" trans fluid. The fluid might not be good for life, but changing it might not be good for the lifetime of the transmission. I wouldn't change it.
I don't disagree with your thinking, just wondering if you could be more specific on your reasoning?
Thx
It'll last for the lifetime of the warranty!
Definitely change it - if an automatic I would do so at 1 year/15k miles then every 2 year/30k miles afterwards. Manuals are typically good for 30 - 50k mile changes.
Definitely change it - if an automatic I would do so at 1 year/15k miles then every 2 year/30k miles afterwards. Manuals are typically good for 30 - 50k mile changes.
I have read unconfirmed that the major components (engine, transmission, differential etc) have an expected lifetime of 150,000 miles. If that is true, then Mazda thinks statically that their AT is good for that mileage using the factory fill. Using the incorrect ATF other than Mazda Blue may cause more damage than not changing it. My dealer said bring a CX5 in ~ 100K miles if I'm concerned and they will change it. Ed
Originally Posted By: scurvy
It'll last for the lifetime of the warranty!
Definitely change it - if an automatic I would do so at 1 year/15k miles then every 2 year/30k miles afterwards. Manuals are typically good for 30 - 50k mile changes.
Yes - if doing this makes your imagination tickle or if you just have money to burn for no apparent reason, then do it. However, if you just want to keep more money in your wallet and have your car last an equal amount of time, just leave it alone. Changing the fluid introduces a fresh batch of additives that can wash loose crud that has been hiding harmlessly in nooks and crannies for many miles. Once it's free, who knows what it'll do? How many transmissions fail because of failure to change fluid versus how many fail shortly after the fluid was changed?
It'll last for the lifetime of the warranty!
Definitely change it - if an automatic I would do so at 1 year/15k miles then every 2 year/30k miles afterwards. Manuals are typically good for 30 - 50k mile changes.
Yes - if doing this makes your imagination tickle or if you just have money to burn for no apparent reason, then do it. However, if you just want to keep more money in your wallet and have your car last an equal amount of time, just leave it alone. Changing the fluid introduces a fresh batch of additives that can wash loose crud that has been hiding harmlessly in nooks and crannies for many miles. Once it's free, who knows what it'll do? How many transmissions fail because of failure to change fluid versus how many fail shortly after the fluid was changed?
Originally Posted By: Eddie
I have read unconfirmed that the major components (engine, transmission, differential etc) have an expected lifetime of 150,000 miles. If that is true, then Mazda thinks statically that their AT is good for that mileage using the factory fill. Using the incorrect ATF other than Mazda Blue may cause more damage than not changing it. My dealer said bring a CX5 in ~ 100K miles if I'm concerned and they will change it. Ed
The blue is for a skyactiv transmission. I don't think the 2012 has a skyactiv option.
I have read unconfirmed that the major components (engine, transmission, differential etc) have an expected lifetime of 150,000 miles. If that is true, then Mazda thinks statically that their AT is good for that mileage using the factory fill. Using the incorrect ATF other than Mazda Blue may cause more damage than not changing it. My dealer said bring a CX5 in ~ 100K miles if I'm concerned and they will change it. Ed
The blue is for a skyactiv transmission. I don't think the 2012 has a skyactiv option.
Originally Posted By: J. A. Rizzo
Originally Posted By: scurvy
It'll last for the lifetime of the warranty!
Definitely change it - if an automatic I would do so at 1 year/15k miles then every 2 year/30k miles afterwards. Manuals are typically good for 30 - 50k mile changes.
Yes - if doing this makes your imagination tickle or if you just have money to burn for no apparent reason, then do it. However, if you just want to keep more money in your wallet and have your car last an equal amount of time, just leave it alone. Changing the fluid introduces a fresh batch of additives that can wash loose crud that has been hiding harmlessly in nooks and crannies for many miles. Once it's free, who knows what it'll do? How many transmissions fail because of failure to change fluid versus how many fail shortly after the fluid was changed?
That's the whole point of changing it, to keep crud from building up.
Originally Posted By: scurvy
It'll last for the lifetime of the warranty!
Definitely change it - if an automatic I would do so at 1 year/15k miles then every 2 year/30k miles afterwards. Manuals are typically good for 30 - 50k mile changes.
Yes - if doing this makes your imagination tickle or if you just have money to burn for no apparent reason, then do it. However, if you just want to keep more money in your wallet and have your car last an equal amount of time, just leave it alone. Changing the fluid introduces a fresh batch of additives that can wash loose crud that has been hiding harmlessly in nooks and crannies for many miles. Once it's free, who knows what it'll do? How many transmissions fail because of failure to change fluid versus how many fail shortly after the fluid was changed?
That's the whole point of changing it, to keep crud from building up.
Originally Posted By: 3311
At 50k miles my wife's Mazda 3 tranny fluid was rancid. I've been giving it flushes with VML dex/merc and a magnefine every 35k since.
What year/engine is your Mazda3?
Are you having good success with the MaxLife?
How does the tranny shift?(4spd or 5spd)?
I'd like to try VML in my daughters '06 Mazda3 w/2.0L & 4 spd auto. I am currently using Castrol IMV and still have 2 more D&F worth of the IMV in my stash for her car/tranny.
At 50k miles my wife's Mazda 3 tranny fluid was rancid. I've been giving it flushes with VML dex/merc and a magnefine every 35k since.
What year/engine is your Mazda3?
Are you having good success with the MaxLife?
How does the tranny shift?(4spd or 5spd)?
I'd like to try VML in my daughters '06 Mazda3 w/2.0L & 4 spd auto. I am currently using Castrol IMV and still have 2 more D&F worth of the IMV in my stash for her car/tranny.
Originally Posted By: Char Baby
Originally Posted By: 3311
At 50k miles my wife's Mazda 3 tranny fluid was rancid. I've been giving it flushes with VML dex/merc and a magnefine every 35k since.
What year/engine is your Mazda3?
Are you having good success with the MaxLife?
How does the tranny shift?(4spd or 5spd)?
I'd like to try VML in my daughters '06 Mazda3 w/2.0L & 4 spd auto. I am currently using Castrol IMV and still have 2 more D&F worth of the IMV in my stash for her car/tranny.
I sent a PM. Thanks for the responce!
Originally Posted By: 3311
At 50k miles my wife's Mazda 3 tranny fluid was rancid. I've been giving it flushes with VML dex/merc and a magnefine every 35k since.
What year/engine is your Mazda3?
Are you having good success with the MaxLife?
How does the tranny shift?(4spd or 5spd)?
I'd like to try VML in my daughters '06 Mazda3 w/2.0L & 4 spd auto. I am currently using Castrol IMV and still have 2 more D&F worth of the IMV in my stash for her car/tranny.
I sent a PM. Thanks for the responce!
The crud is going to build up regardless of how often you change the fluid. Wear happens no matter what we do. So why upset the balance by stirring it up with multiple changes and letting that stuff get circulated around to get ground into the gears and stuck in the hydraulics? Just leave it where it is and don't worry about it. If there's no problem to solve, why invent one?
Originally Posted By: J. A. Rizzo
The crud is going to build up regardless of how often you change the fluid. Wear happens no matter what we do. So why upset the balance by stirring it up with multiple changes and letting that stuff get circulated around to get ground into the gears and stuck in the hydraulics? Just leave it where it is and don't worry about it. If there's no problem to solve, why invent one?
And you think leaving micro-particles inside as an abrasive would be better?
The crud is going to build up regardless of how often you change the fluid. Wear happens no matter what we do. So why upset the balance by stirring it up with multiple changes and letting that stuff get circulated around to get ground into the gears and stuck in the hydraulics? Just leave it where it is and don't worry about it. If there's no problem to solve, why invent one?
And you think leaving micro-particles inside as an abrasive would be better?
Originally Posted By: asiancivicmaniac
Originally Posted By: J. A. Rizzo
The crud is going to build up regardless of how often you change the fluid. Wear happens no matter what we do. So why upset the balance by stirring it up with multiple changes and letting that stuff get circulated around to get ground into the gears and stuck in the hydraulics? Just leave it where it is and don't worry about it. If there's no problem to solve, why invent one?
And you think leaving micro-particles inside as an abrasive would be better?
No, I'm saying you're speculating and creating Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt where none should exist. I postulate that nobody's transmission grenaded prematurely because they didn't change the fluid when the manufacturer said they didn't need to. My point is to expose you as just another "some anonymous person on the Internet" who has no idea what he or she is talking about but talks anyway despite the fact that engineers have worked for countless hours on the design of the powertrain and its lubrication schedule. Don't those "micro-particles" you imagine abrade the mechanism during the warranty period? Why would the manufacturer let this happen?
Provide some evidence of the problem or it doesn't exist. Show us that changing the fluid despite the manufacturer's recommendation results in a cost savings or transmission lifetime improvement. Count all the particles you want - I don't disagree they're present - speculate all you want about problems they cause. Just because they exist doesn't mean the transmission lifetime is affected, and if you clean them out with white gloves, there's no evidence it makes anything last longer. There's no evidence of a problem except in your imagination, so stop trying to solve one. It's a waste of time, needless money in some petroleum executive's bonus fund, and someone else's hard-earned money.
Originally Posted By: J. A. Rizzo
The crud is going to build up regardless of how often you change the fluid. Wear happens no matter what we do. So why upset the balance by stirring it up with multiple changes and letting that stuff get circulated around to get ground into the gears and stuck in the hydraulics? Just leave it where it is and don't worry about it. If there's no problem to solve, why invent one?
And you think leaving micro-particles inside as an abrasive would be better?
No, I'm saying you're speculating and creating Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt where none should exist. I postulate that nobody's transmission grenaded prematurely because they didn't change the fluid when the manufacturer said they didn't need to. My point is to expose you as just another "some anonymous person on the Internet" who has no idea what he or she is talking about but talks anyway despite the fact that engineers have worked for countless hours on the design of the powertrain and its lubrication schedule. Don't those "micro-particles" you imagine abrade the mechanism during the warranty period? Why would the manufacturer let this happen?
Provide some evidence of the problem or it doesn't exist. Show us that changing the fluid despite the manufacturer's recommendation results in a cost savings or transmission lifetime improvement. Count all the particles you want - I don't disagree they're present - speculate all you want about problems they cause. Just because they exist doesn't mean the transmission lifetime is affected, and if you clean them out with white gloves, there's no evidence it makes anything last longer. There's no evidence of a problem except in your imagination, so stop trying to solve one. It's a waste of time, needless money in some petroleum executive's bonus fund, and someone else's hard-earned money.
^^^Someone obviously never heard of planned obsolescence!
Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
^^^Someone obviously never heard of planned obsolescence!
No, I get it. I just don't believe asiancivicmaniac has any idea what s/he is talking about, like many posters here that spread FUD for totally imaginary reasons. Where's the evidence of that phenomenon in action?
^^^Someone obviously never heard of planned obsolescence!
No, I get it. I just don't believe asiancivicmaniac has any idea what s/he is talking about, like many posters here that spread FUD for totally imaginary reasons. Where's the evidence of that phenomenon in action?
Originally Posted By: J. A. Rizzo
No, I'm saying you're speculating and creating Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt where none should exist.
Mr. Pot, A Mr. Kettle on the phone for you!
Do you have any actual evidence that changing the transmission fluid has been proven to harm a new transmission? That is what greasegunn was asking in the first post. When transmissions have been serviced regularly there is no "crud that has been hiding harmlessly in nooks and crannies for many miles" to get washed loose.
No, I'm saying you're speculating and creating Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt where none should exist.
Mr. Pot, A Mr. Kettle on the phone for you!
Do you have any actual evidence that changing the transmission fluid has been proven to harm a new transmission? That is what greasegunn was asking in the first post. When transmissions have been serviced regularly there is no "crud that has been hiding harmlessly in nooks and crannies for many miles" to get washed loose.
- Status
Similar threads
