hi all,

i have a ralliart tj magna with 5 speed auto - down i downsift from 3rd to 2nd gear it was almost a thump throughout the car...i since changed the transmission oil with mitsubishi oil & it is now smooth as silk when i down change from 3rd to 2nd - highly recommend this oil!!!

regards

Transmission oils are designed for specific applications. Certainly Mits spec oil is required fro Mits products.

I had a Range Rover with a 3 speed Chrysler Torquelfite transmission. (Horrible it was). I changed the fluid often. The specs said Dexron II, but one time I couldn't get Dexron II, so I bought Dexron III - it is newer so it must be better... Wrong! Certainly the gear changes were a lot sharper, but when I was in reverse and the oil was cold, it would grab/slip/grab/slip and I would jerk my way out of the driveway. Once it warmed up it was OK. I phoned the oil supplier about this and he confirmed that Dexron III had different characteristics and I should really use Dexron II. So, yes - use the recommended oils and all should be fine.

Especially the case with Mitsubishi autos. We only ever use genuine Mitsubishi auto trans fluid in our Mitsys .
Anything else risks poor performance & reduced service life.

Mine thumps from 3rd to 2nd when the oil is low

Unless you have a fluid leak somewhere Wombatkarl, you shouldn't be using/losing transmission fluid.
How many Kms do you travel between fluid changes?

How many litres does the tranny take?
Reading that dipstick when checking hot level is ok, cold level on the other hand is messy...I think I remember reading 5ltrs?

Bit over 5 litres is enough for a transmission flush (regular scheduled service) however there is still some of the old transmission fluid (around 3 litres) that remains in the torque converter.
A power flush can be done also which pretty much replaces the old fluid with all new fluid but that takes nearly 9 litres of transmission fluid from memory. It would be best to go to an auto transmission specialist to do a power flush.

I dumped my oil by way of removing the sump plug and let it drain for about 20min. I then added 5ltrs of new oil so I'm good :)

I just do it the way in the manual and you can get it done with 2 x 5ltr bottles. system holds about 8.5 litres.

My TJ I think never had a flush at 130,000Km when I bought it, the 1-2 and 2-3 shifts were terrible - the fluid was the colour of old ENGINE oil on draining, 2 x 4L flushes and a final fill and it was really not as Red as the fluid can be, I'd say it would really have needed 12 to 16L of flush to get the gunk out as at 175,000km I am ready to flush it again as the shifts are not smooth any more.

Unless the ATF smells burned or looks black, the colour isn't indicative of its viability (colour is due to a red dye that fades with use).

Unless the ATF smells burned or looks black, the colour isn't indicative of its viability (colour is due to a red dye that fades with use).

So true. I took a sample for testing that looked really dark. Sent it to the lab and the results came back that the oil was fine. It had some oxidation but was still good to use.

How often should the transmission fluid be flushed in a car that does no towing and has an ATF cooler?

How often should the transmission fluid be flushed in a car that does no towing and has an ATF cooler?

The oil I had analised was at 50,000km and still considered to be in servicable condition. This is with a small cooler from a 2nd gen and a magnafine filter. I think it might get to 100,000km before it requires changing. I do about half highway kms and the other half suburban.

Does serviceable condition explicitly mean there is no benefit to changing it though?

I've read on this site that without a cooler the ATF should be changed every 20-25,000km, and that the manual states 45,000km intervals which may be ok only with a cooler installed.

I have a 14,400 BTU cooler installed in front of the primary fan (so that at traffic lights when the engine temp is rising, and/or the AC is on air flows over the cooler) + a magnefine filter an a bypass valve to bypass the cooler if the ATF is not hot, and was planning on 40,000km or so intervals.

Who did you send the oil to?
And how much was it?

EDIT:
I think we may have discussed this on BITOG

45,000km with a cooler sounds like a good idea, that is severe interval in the manual (normal is 90k). The test I got done was a generic test that wouldn't pick up on specific additives that are used in SP3. I know from experience that if I changed my ATF now it would be a bit smoother, that leads me to believe that there are additives in there which get depleted that the oil analysis does not pick up on.

AFAIK, ATF can be fine for up to 200,000 KM depending of course on your driving/towing habits.
Some cars have AT's that are claimed to be "sealed for life" (bit of marketing that doesn't tell the whole truth!).

With driving some clutch plate material sheds and that is kept suspended by additives, in turn that makes the ATF less slippery.
Take that to the extreme and the ATF turns blackish from clutch plate material.
Then you do a nice ATF power flush and your AT may stop working cause the ATF is to slippery for the old worn clutch plates.

So if you change ATF and it feels a bit smoother afterwards then it means you did get rid of some pollutants (ATF became a bit more slippery).

You can also change the properties of the ATF by over heating (it will smell burned).

No doubt there is a lot more to ATF's and how best to service your AT.
Interesting subject, but not sure anyone here on AMC has it down pat.

Also some very strong opinions on AMC about what is proper and what is not.

With driving some clutch plate material sheds and that is kept suspended by additives, in turn that makes the ATF less slippery.
Take that to the extreme and the ATF turns blackish from clutch plate material.
Then you do a nice ATF power flush and your AT may stop working cause the ATF is to slippery for the old worn clutch plates.

So if you change ATF and it feels a bit smoother afterwards then it means you did get rid of some pollutants (ATF became a bit more slippery).


What is the clutch material made of? Wonder if it has anything in it that would show up in the used oil analysis.

Toyota have been doing the sealed for life transmission for a while now and it seems to be working out for them.

I think as Aquar said, these sealed for life transmissions were just for marketing reasons, as I believe most manufacturers revised that once the model was nearing end of life (well, at least Mercedes did).

Aquar, on the basis that the ATF is less slippery due to suspected clutch plate material, this would also speed up wear and tear on the clutch pads too presumably?

I did a flush on my car at 170,000km (KJ2 5 speed). It is possible that this was the first transmission flush the car ever had, however the shift quality didn't seem to change, and at 209,000km now the transmission behaves wonderfully.
The car had no tow bar on it though, and I think towing must really cause wear and tear without a cooler installed.

I notice in both my KH and KL there is an accumulation of very fine grey particulate visible on the dip stick as a streaky looking material suspended in the ATF. Wiping on a cloth it looks like a very fine metallic colour. This prompted me to install the magnafine filter. I dont know if this is clutch material or metal, but appears to be normal given both cars have it.

TS370000 collected samples of his ATF at various stages / over a period of time, whilst doing a soft flush.
The idea was to do some rudimentary viscosity testing of these ATF samples.
I think TS370000 never got around to it, or maybe there was nothing to differentiate the samples.

Only way we will inch away at the truth is if we get opinions from specialists in AT fluid dynamics.

I believe that it cannot be a bad idea to replace some of the ATF on a regular basis, as tailored to driving habits.
That is simply a drain of the sump and refill with the same amount that came out.
An attractive proposition for the DIY car mechanic IMHO, but it may also be a tad ineffective (waste of $/ATF!).
I still don't know if pollutants are the only cause for degradation of ATF (over heating excepted).

A soft flush will do better in terms of ATF replacement and ditto for engine assisted flush, power flush, a full cleanout and filter replacement.
It kind of depends on variables like your budget, skill level, driving habit, prior servicing, additional gear to keep the ATF cool/clean etc.

Actually no, a dump and fill is 5.5l.

While this method is certainly better than nothing, unless your trans is serviced VERY often then this method is average at best. There will be still in the system around 3l of old fluid sitting in there

The best method by far is flush, usually around the 12l needed but have had up to nearly 20l on some very neglected transmissions.

The method of draining, filling, driving, draining and filling again is not much better than a dump and fill especially if you dont know what fluid was in there before AND you still end up with a blend of old and new

45,000km with a cooler sounds like a good idea, that is severe interval in the manual (normal is 90k).
The factory-recommended change interval for an AWD even without a cooler is 45,000km. For a 2WD auto, which uses mostly the same transmission components, it's 115,000km. Given that Mitsubishi has already increased the AWD's ATF change frequency almost 3-fold compared to the 2WD, Mitsubishi was clearly being quite conservative about this. I doubt anything more frequent would be justified - and that's before you start factoring in the benefits of auxiliary coolers... The only suggestions I've seen to the contrary have been what I'd regard as mischievous speculations with nothing whatsoever to back them up.

Is it impossible that the factory overstated the change intervals to make the cars seem more economical in the long term?
Also since it seems accepted that these cars need an ATF cooler, Mitsubishi may have not factored overheating ATF into the service intervals?

For example, 15,000km oil change intervals is fine with synthetic oil, but at the time Mitsubishi would have been using mineral grade motor oil.

Is it impossible that the factory overstated the change intervals to make the cars seem more economical in the long term?
No, it's not impossible, but no-one's produced a shred of evidence they've done so.

Also since it seems accepted that these cars need an ATF cooler, Mitsubishi may have not factored overheating ATF into the service intervals?
Your premise is false. The cars already come with a built-in cooler and there is no general acceptance they need one for ordinary driving. Except that I use mine for towing a 1.4tonne van, I wouldn't have bothered with one.

For example, 15,000km oil change intervals is fine with synthetic oil, but at the time Mitsubishi would have been using mineral grade motor oil.
Umm, we're discussing ATF in transmissions here, not engine oil. Spot the difference.

There is a general acceptance that these cars lack sufficient ATF cooling. Whether this is fundamentally true or not is of course a debatable matter. General acceptance extends beyond any one person's opinion, yours included.

Motor oil was used as an example for a proposed ideology that Mitsubishi may have followed, rather than directly comparing absolutes. The opening statement "for example" is more than enough to signify this. This really did not need to be explained more than once, however I hope you now understand.

There is a general acceptance that these cars lack sufficient ATF cooling. Whether this is fundamentally true or not is of course a debatable matter. General acceptance extends beyond any one person's opinion, yours included.
Given how many of these cars were sold and how few have ever had auxiliary coolers, the onus is on those claiming "a general acceptance that these cars lack sufficient ATF cooling" to produce at least a modicum of evidence to support the assertion, which you haven't. Indeed, so far as I am aware, you're the only person on any forum who has made such an assertion. Even the NSW police didn't find a need to have auxiliary coolers for theirs...

Motor oil was used as an example for a proposed ideology that Mitsubishi may have followed, rather than directly comparing absolutes. The opening statement "for example" is more than enough to signify this.
So how about staying on topic instead of throwing in irrelevant 'examples'...

Given how many of these cars were sold and how few have ever had auxiliary coolers, the onus is on those claiming "a general acceptance that these cars lack sufficient ATF cooling" to produce at least a modicum of evidence to support the assertion, which you haven't. Indeed, so far as I am aware, you're the only person on any forum who has made such an assertion. Even the NSW police didn't find a need to have auxiliary coolers for theirs...

Whereas you are voicing unsubstantiated claims and disputing any opinion that differs from yours, I am summarizing experiences I have read from members on this forum. Either from people saying that after fitting an ATF cooler the ATF would remain its original colour longer and not have a burned smell for longer, or from members testing the ATF temperatures during normal driving with and without a cooler.
Definitely not what one would consider a scientific basis, but more convincing than someone blindly refuting the possibility.



So how about staying on topic instead of throwing in irrelevant 'examples'...
The discussion being whether or not Mitsubishi may have overstated the service intervals for the ATF fluid? You need to reassess your internal definition of "irrelevant".
Even if you do find it irrelevant, this is a discussion board, and please do not forget that your authority does not extend to deciding what should or should not be discussed.


Please do not respond to my post as I am least interested in continuing this discussion with someone who sadly does not appear enjoy good mental health and has a tendency to repeatedly make what should be easy conversation something unpleasant altogether.

Please do not respond to my post as I am least interested in continuing this discussion with someone who sadly does not appear enjoy good mental health and has a tendency to repeatedly make what should be easy conversation something unpleasant altogether.

hehehe so true Spetz

The problem with this topic is that everyone is confusing anecdotal evidences as facts.
Making claims one way or the other without factual detail is a "blind" argument.

Seems to me that making changes to the transmission cooling system may, or may not, be useful at all,
as it really depends on how you work that AT.
Based on observations by various AMC members, I would punt on a cooler being a good modification when doing heavy duty towing. Wouldn't bother with it for shopping duty though.

The factory-recommended change interval for an AWD even without a cooler is 45,000km. For a 2WD auto, which uses mostly the same transmission components, it's 115,000km. Given that Mitsubishi has already increased the AWD's ATF change frequency almost 3-fold compared to the 2WD, Mitsubishi was clearly being quite conservative about this. I doubt anything more frequent would be justified - and that's before you start factoring in the benefits of auxiliary coolers... The only suggestions I've seen to the contrary have been what I'd regard as mischievous speculations with nothing whatsoever to back them up.

This is totally incorrect for starters, there are many reasons that there are strange service intervals with the transmission on these cars, Fleet was one of the main factors being able to show the general running cost for a least time to be far less than the other cars out there. This is partly why Mits used such long service interval on the 380 trans

The simple fact is that after even 45000km often the trans fluid has turned colour and is in need for a change, the amount of vehicles I get in here with approaching 100k on them with then having never had a trans fluid change is scary, ANY mechanic who does a service on ANY car should check ALL fluids and regardless of what the service book states should change any fluids which are not able to operate to peak performance INCLUDING transmission fluid.

I really dont know where all this trollop in saying that everyone is wrong and you are right has come from to be honest, you state no evidence, well you need to look simply at these cars and have a look at the fluid after say 65000km, hell I had a 380 in here not that long ago from Albury where the customer had been to Mits complaining about really bad shifting, they checked the fluid, was black, they told the customer they can not flush it as it has been allowed to go too long and get too dirty and he needed a new transmission. A good flush here in my shop and the car drove like new. He was lucky there was no damage as others were not so lucky.

The reason Mits removed the coolers was simply cost cutting. They did this in so many areas on these cars over the production years. They figure that the car will run ok for the warranty period without one so leave it off the car. They dont care what happens 5 years down the track. When there is an extended warranty all they do is factor in the issues known to date and calculate the risk there knowing there will be some failures.

Simple fact is if you want your transmission to last look after it. I am not saying drain the fluid every 10000km as that is simply retarded. In our shop we simply pull the stick look at the fluid colour and general condition of the fluid. IF the fluid is off colour we recommend a change and flush. IN all the years the amount of people who have commented either by calling us later or on next service on how much better the trans feels is amazing. The amount who have stated that it felt worse are 0

You ask for evidence on coolers, I can give you a good example, one of many I have done. 1 customer with a TF wagon a few years back towed a 4x4 camper trailer with his family of 5 around Australia, did 26000km all up in a car already approaching 200000km. Previously on some shorter trips he would come back, get a service and sure enough the trans fluid would be turning dark. On this trip upon his return checked the fluid and had only the slightest tinge of colour in the fluid.

Enough of this essay, if people want to run for 115km on original fluid then so be it, I am happy to sell a new transmission to them :)


Please do not respond to my post as I am least interested in continuing this discussion with someone who sadly does not appear enjoy good mental health and has a tendency to repeatedly make what should be easy conversation something unpleasant altogether.

hehehe so true Spetz

Not sure who this was directed to?

For example, 15,000km oil change intervals is fine with synthetic oil, but at the time Mitsubishi would have been using mineral grade motor oil.

Not sure why engine oil comes into this and on the basis you state again you are totally incorrect and this is a bad example

15000km on a modern motor which does not do constant short 5km trips is fine. Mits also have the 7500km interval for extreme conditions, these extreme conditions do not mean out in the dessert either. These are for conditions where the car is being used in a way that the car was not designed for ie short trip as well as hard driving. Issue is that most dealers will never take the time to explain to a customer how this all works or get an understanding from each individual customer how the car gets driven. One thing we do here is we get to know our customers and we ask then some questions ho how the car gets used and we base the service interval on this information AFTER having explained this to the customer with the reason why. A few minutes spent with the customer (most of whom have little knowledge about cars) goes a long way and the customer appreciates the understanding given.

Had a leaking hose from the trans cooler

I've had my TW since 2007 and 38 000k. At 45000k, I had the fluid changed by the dealer at my request. Interesting on the report, flushed trans and changed oil. total fluid charged 1 x 5L SP3 @ $34

I do remember them stating how black it was. This car had a factory T/bar and operating in constant heat given it was Darwin. With no knowledge of how this car was driven there was no way i was going past the 45000k. reading the description of what is severe conditions 45000k seems to be the safest interval.

I did end up doing a flush myself around the 75000k mark again and it was dirty which I suspect it was not really a flush at the 45000 unless they were feeling generous only charging for 5L.

I think on that one having never done this before i did go into a third bottle .

Not sure why engine oil comes into this and on the basis you state again you are totally incorrect and this is a bad example

15000km on a modern motor which does not do constant short 5km trips is fine. Mits also have the 7500km interval for extreme conditions, these extreme conditions do not mean out in the dessert either. These are for conditions where the car is being used in a way that the car was not designed for ie short trip as well as hard driving....

Going by a large sample group of used oil analysis (www.bobistheoilguy.com), 15,000km on high end fully synthetic oil is not a big ask.
The only used analysis reports that I've seen that had issues at lower km are ones where there were contaminants introduced (eg, leaking head gasket, or high metal particles from wear and tear).
Either way, the point was that 15,000km on mineral oil seemed overly ambitious, and the example was used to say that the ATF intervals Mitsubishi recommended may also have been ambitious.

... I did end up doing a flush myself around the 75000k mark again and it was dirty which I suspect it was not really a flush at the 45000 unless they were feeling generous only charging for 5L.

I think on that one having never done this before i did go into a third bottle .
Pfft, after having owned my KH for 16 years from new to this day and the KL for the past 3 I can tell you to never trust the dealers to properly flush the tranny. They state "flush" when having ether done a simple drain and fill or they dont use enough ATF when doing a manual flush.

As for a tranny cooler, wasnt necessary for me on my 4 speed 2WD, but I do think there could be a benefit on the 5 speed AWD and im considering it.

The factory-recommended change interval for an AWD even without a cooler is 45,000km. For a 2WD auto, which uses mostly the same transmission components, it's 115,000km. Given that Mitsubishi has already increased the AWD's ATF change frequency almost 3-fold compared to the 2WD, Mitsubishi was clearly being quite conservative about this. I doubt anything more frequent would be justified - and that's before you start factoring in the benefits of auxiliary coolers... The only suggestions I've seen to the contrary have been what I'd regard as mischievous speculations with nothing whatsoever to back them up.This is totally incorrect for starters
No, it's not 'totally incorrect' - at least not according to the Mistubishi Service and Warranty Book. Instead of 115000km for the 2WD auto I should have typed 105000km. Big deal. That still leaves the 4WD cars with a change frequency more than double that of the 2WD autos.

The simple fact is that after even 45000km often the trans fluid has turned colour and is in need for a change, the amount of vehicles I get in here with approaching 100k on them with then having never had a trans fluid change is scary, ANY mechanic who does a service on ANY car should check ALL fluids and regardless of what the service book states should change any fluids which are not able to operate to peak performance INCLUDING transmission fluid.
Which proves what, exactly, regarding how often the ATF should be replaced?

I really dont know where all this trollop in saying that everyone is wrong and you are right has come from to be honest, you state no evidence
The evidence I rely on is there in black & white - in the Mistubishi Service and Warranty Book. You can also look it up in the Boyce's Automotive Data - you should have a copy. Guess how often that says the AWD ATF should be changed? What is lacking is evidence that backs up Spetz's 'general consensus' claim. Neither Mistubishi nor, it seems, the industry at large has this view. Since Spetz is the one making the claim, it really is up to him to produce some evidence to back up his claims, not for me to disprove them, but all he produces is assertions.

If I were to claim something you thought contrary to information that's been published (e.g. front tyres on FWD Magnas are required to be replaced when the tread depth falls below 5mm), you'd be quite entitled to expect me to be able to produce evidence to support my claim and, in the absence of such evidence being forthcoming, you'd be justified in accusing me of making unsubstantiated claims. The onus would not be on you to disprove my claim - you're entitled to rely on what's been published. Here the shoe's on the other foot. Both Mistubishi and others in the industry have published information about Mistubishi ATF service intervals and Spetz is making claims of a 'general consensus' to the contrary. Where's his evidence?

Gee, Spetz even had a whole thread devoted to trouble-free transmissions (http://www.aussiemagna.com/forums/showthread.php?t=89610) and only 3 of the 71 posts to date in that thread mentioned changing the ATF more frequently than the factory recommendations. Hardly what I'd call a 'general consensus'...

So what you base your ENTIRE argument on is the service book. Well I take my hat of you you champ as you clearly know everything because you have a service book

IF you have an issue with one of these cars and it was still under warranty and you showed you did the services as per the book which are the manufactureres RECOMMENDATIONS then you would have a claim HOWEVER my evedence is simply experience, something you clearly lack in all ways. I service on average 7 - 10 Magna's, Verada and 380's per WEEK, I see the fluid is black on many of these well UNDER the 105k. Any real transmission expert will tell you the same.

You go ahead and change it how you want but dont come on here and have a go at people because you have a service book. The plain facts stand, if you want your transmission to last you need to change fluid more often, hell even the service book tells you to check fluids and part of checking these fluids is changing them if they need changing. Next you will tell me you can taste the fluid and tell if it is ok......

And maybe the truth is you just want to make more money by charging people for unnecessary services.

So now you are accusing me of ripping people off, that is very rich and you really want to be very careful of making any such accusations as they will not be tolerated. If you think I make heaps of money from a trans flush then you are more retarded than you seem in these posts.

You seem to have issues here mate, you need to really step back and think before you type.

Just do your own homework and think for a second, if trans fluid is black and burnt you say that it is fine to leave it until 105000 km even if that is still 50000km away just because the book states it is ok.

Without placing too fine a point on it, you're the one whose indulging in the ad hominem attacks. I've been accused of having no evidence to back up my claims of what the factory-recommended service intervals are and, when I provide specific references, what do you do - resort to ridicule and blatant misrepresentation. Ask yourself why a person with a vested interest in the matter might do that and see where it leads you.

Really, go back and read what not only I have stated

Yes, the service book states the interval recommended by the manufacturer, YOU have stated that no matter what leave it to 105 on a FWD, as stated above, many car makers extend intervals to make these cars appealing to fleet users as well as consumers where they can then state the average running costs of a car is $xx less than the other maker. They will factor in failures under warranty over extra profit in sales of these cars. There have been cases with 380's just as an example where dealerships have had to repair or replace transmissions under warranty due to failure where fluid has burnt and the transmission has failed, as the owner had the scheduled services done at the dealership there was no option for Mitsubishi.

I have no vested interest here, if this was the case I would leave these to that 105k and watch all these transmissions fail and make much more money out of replacing them.

If a part or the fluid has not lasted to the interval then it needs replacing. You use tyres as an example above, if Bridgestone state you will get 60000 from a set of tyres but at 40000 they are bald will you leave them to 60000, I think not. No difference with the fluid.

I can see several posts where you have been abrupt to members including members who have reported posts you have made here, you need to step back here as you have failed to show anything other than a book written 20 odd years ago.

In the case of coolers and external filters, many have had them fitted and noticed improvement in hot conditions, improvement in the life of the fluid and fluid being in better condition when drained when it is changed. This is not imaginary, it is the observation of many people and so many transmission shops recommend at least an external fine particle filter if not also a cooler. 5sp Auto's do run a lot hotter than the 4sp especially in the AWD thus the much shorter service cycle.

Either way, I am over trying to show you as clearly you are right here, I am trying to rip people off apparently so this will be the end of this discussion as I will now invoke my Nazi powers and close this rubbish off once and for all.