Transmission Flush

[deerefan]

That's where a lot of misconception/misinterpretation comes from, and that's my whole point. The last couple of posts, (for example), have included information on the differences between flushing methods....as if a curious and unfamiliar vehicle owner didn't already have enough mumbo-jumbo to process from this, (and other), transmission flushing threads on the 'net. Here's the thing: It isn't recommended, no matter how you want to parse the "flushing" term to suit the argument you support.



Me neither.



Here we go again. So a manufacturer realizes it's "better" or "the way to go about it", and yet they still don't recommend it. Why? Not only that, but you can visit any forum you like and find posts from "a guy that worked in a lab". Read enough of 'em and you'll soon discover how much hooey they contain. Real, tested, proven documentation from testing labs isn't hard to find. Relying on what "some guy" said that was subsequently posted on a forum is an amazingly unreliable way to gather information.



This keeps getting repeated, and once again the manufacturers are not unaware of it.



I don't care how other people maintain their vehicles either. But when folks post up about how somebody else should maintain their vehicle, the information ought to be accurate. And saying vehicle manufacturers recommend the procedure is inaccurate. Implying manufacturers are unaware of the volume of fluid changed with *this* procedure versus *that* procedure is inaccurate. Implying that the manufacturer means "flush" when they say "change" is inaccurate.

See where I'm coming from?

We're some 5 pages deep into this now, and nobody has provided a scan or a link or anything supporting their point. (And don't try and say there hasn't been some searching going on.)

I'd say that's a pretty good indicator of how widely-recognized and manufacturer-supported this *obviously-better* procedure is. So there you go.....all you curious and inquisitive vehicle owners, another multi-page internet forum thread chock-full of "useful" information for you to try to digest.

Good luck with that.

:thumbsup:

Man, you ok? Have a drink and calm down. Way bigger things to worry about than how someone services their tranny. Do what works for you and the heck with everyone else.

 

[Diamondpilot]

Well...Can't say I've had that happen...just the 1st yr 700R4 in an '82 or '83 Blazer (don't remember) it was a design flaw. It did let go around 125K though.

Anyway...We're off to Disney for a few days...Have a good rest of the week.

Enjoy that warm weather. You driving the new truck or flying?

Either way have a safe trip.

Chris

 

[Bird]

I've read most, but not all, of this thread. And I just got back from picking up our 2002 Ford Crown Victoria that I left with the dealer yesterday. It was due for a state safety inspection sticker and 60k mile service, so I just had them do it all. And they do machine flush the transmissions now. Of course, they also flushed the coolant system, changed oil & filter, changed air & fuel filters, cleaned fuel system, rotated tries, etc., etc. I may spend a little more than a lot of people but I'd rather spend a little more on preventive service than repairs.

 

[Mace Canute]

Well, when I have my tranny serviced, my mechanic simply pulls off a return line from the rad cooler and lets the tranny pump push the old oil out into a bucket. That changes as much of the oil as possible without "heroic efforts".

Life is good.

 

[Diamondpilot]

Well, when I have my tranny serviced, my mechanic simply pulls off a return line from the rad cooler and lets the tranny pump push the old oil out into a bucket. That changes as much of the oil as possible without "heroic efforts".

Life is good.

That is what I have done myself for years. Like mentioned before from a study done they averaged 97% fluid changed doing it this way.

Chris

 

[Highbeam]

I agree with the vast majority of posters to this thread that changing trans fluid is the same thing as flushing the tranny fluid. Any challenge to that has been weak at best and should be abandoned. You are sinking with the ship.

The only way to change a high percentage of fluid in one shot is to either use a flushing machine or to drain everything possible and then use the trans pump to push old fluid out with new. I prefer the second method since the speed of fluid draining out as well as the direction and pressure are provided by the trans pump which should not exceed normal limits. I would hate to reverse flush, high speed flush, or chemical flush a trans.

 

[brokenot]

I agree with the vast majority of posters to this thread that changing trans fluid is the same thing as flushing the tranny fluid. Any challenge to that has been weak at best and should be abandoned. You are sinking with the ship.

Really? "Changing" is the same as "flushing"?

Then please tell me what manufacturers are recommending owners do, because....well, read on:

The only way to change a high percentage of fluid in one shot is to either use a flushing machine or to drain everything possible and then use the trans pump to push old fluid out with new. I prefer the second method since the speed of fluid draining out as well as the direction and pressure are provided by the trans pump which should not exceed normal limits. I would hate to reverse flush, high speed flush, or chemical flush a trans.

I would also hate to do something that isn't proper, so if we decide to use the "flush" and "change" terms interchangeably, then the next question a curious person reading threads like this needs to ask themselves is:

-bucket flush?

-reverse flush?

-high speed flush?

-chemical flush?

What we "like to do" or "prefer to do" to our own vehicles is all well and good. But seriously people, put yourselves in the position of someone who came to this thread looking for an answer. Now we've divided the flushing thing up into several different types, and yet we still cannot show that a manufacturer recommends any of them. Why?

Like mentioned before from a study done they averaged 97% fluid changed doing it this way.

It's amazing what we can make ourselves believe, if it's something we're *sort of* inclined to go along with anyway. Here's the thing: The "study" mentioned before wasn't linked to. We weren't given any details or shown any data. The statement went a little something like this:

"I remember reading a post from some guy, (I think it was on an RV forum somewhere), about a lab study that Ford did years ago. And it said...."

Let's set the transmission topic aside for a sec. Ask yourselves if *information* from a *study* like that would convince you of anything you were trying to make a decision about? You didn't read the study yourself. You didn't get to look at how it was done, nor how the data was collected and conclusions were arrived at.

You simply read a forum post on the 'net about the study that was allegedly done. That's all the information you really have. There wasn't anything more.

So basically what's going on is that you're sooooo ready to cite that bit of internet gossip, because it happens to jive with what you already believe yourself. Now, let's apply it to another situation:

"I read on the internet, (I don't remember where though, so I can't post a link or anything), that a guy in a lab ran some tests and determined that Dodge is better than Ford. So that should really put that whole debate to bed."

We kind of need to be careful about what we cite just because it happens to be something we agree with...don't we?

Still waiting for a link/scan/anything from a manufacturer that shows the flush procedure is recommended. Until then, I'm gonna have to say it isn't my ship that's sinking....because I see a whole lot of other people patching holes and bailing to stay afloat.

I really must apologize to anyone reading this thread looking for real, concrete answers to their questions. But I invite them to stick it out and see where this ends up. It might take us a while to get there though, because I guess we've now got to break the various "flush" types into "good" and "bad" categories.

Try to keep up and not get confused or discouraged, just keep in mind that manufacturers do recommend fluid changes. Some folks think that when they say "change" they mean "flush". Some folks prefer *this* flush type over *that* flush type, because, well....the wrong *flush* type is obviously not what you want to do.

:confused2:

 

[Bird]

I've owned a lot of cars, both high and low mileage vehicles. And I've had automatic transmission "trouble" (I guess you'd say) exactly twice. In 1960, I bought a 1955 Cadillac Coupe DeVille with a bad transmission and had the transmission replaced. Then I bought a new 1968 Plymouth Roadrunner and in 1973 it got very sluggish backing out of the garage when cold. Really worried me initially, but the dealer said it only needed a fluid and filter change.

Now it is truethat I find nothing from Ford Motor Company recommending "flushing" the transmission, but I've also found nothing from them recommending that flushing not be done. Now I did not go back in the shop and personally see what my dealer did, but this is a dealer I trust (don't know of many I could say that about), especially the service writer I deal with. So he described for me the filters they used to change vs. the current filter design, told me a lot of things I already knew about fluid that would be left if you just drained it, etc. And he described the machine chemical flush they currently use.

Now I'm not a mechanic or engineer, so maybe the transmission in this Crown Vic will disintegrate next week, but this same dealer flushed the transmission on my Ranger pickup 2 years and a month ago and it's still going strong.

 

[brokenot]

Now it is truethat I find nothing from Ford Motor Company recommending "flushing" the transmission, but I've also found nothing from them recommending that flushing not be done.

This is the point I've been trying to get across. They also don't say to "not do" a lot of things. So....do we do what they recommend, or do we do what they don't specifically either omit recommending or "don't not" recommend?

he described the machine chemical flush they currently use.

Whoops! From a few of the other "pro-flushing" posts, it seems that that "type" of flush isn't the preferred method.

Just sayin'.

Now I'm not a mechanic

I am.

 

[Illini22]

Brockenot, sounds like your in favor of dropping pan, changing filter and the fluid that is in the pan. If the manual says to change the fluid ( not some of the fluid), how do you do it?