1. Home
  2. Chrysler Cars
  3. ATF+4 in '95 Voyager?

ATF+4 in '95 Voyager?

NOTE: This bulletin applies to all transmissions manufactured by

> Chrysler except for 1999 and earlier minivans with the 41TE/AE > transmission, This Service Bulletin DOES NOT apply to all AW-4 > transmissions, Sprinter transmissions, Crossfire transmissions and WG > bodies equipped with a W5J400 or NAG1 transmission (sales code DGJ). > > Discussion: > A new transmission fluid (ATF+4 - Type 9602) has been developed and is > being used as factory fill for all vehicles with Chrysler automatic > transmissions.It is recommended that all vehicles with Chrysler > automatic transmissions EXCEPT FOR THOSE LISTED ABOVE be serviced with > ATF+4.

What does the "EXCEPT FOR THOSE LISTED ABOVE" refer to? The "except for

1999 and earlier minivans with the 41TE/AE transmission", or the lengthy list before that????

I've also seen the earlier TSB 21-006-01, which states:

A new transmission fluid (ATF+4(R) - Type 9602) has been developed and > is being used as factory fill for all vehicles with Chrysler automatic > transmissions. Until now, vehicles originally filled with ATF+2 or > ATF+3 were to be serviced with ATF+3. Effective immediately, it is > recommended that all vehicles with Chrysler automatic transmissions > except for 1999 and earlier minivans be serviced with ATF+4(R). ATF+3 > should continue to be used for 1999 and earlier minivans because of the > potential for torque converter shudder during break in. For all other > applications the ATF+4(R) fluid offers significant benefits as outlined > below.

This seems to indicate that the only problem might be with breaking in a new torque convertor, which surely won't be a problem with our van with 112,000 miles. Are there other problems that we might encounter? I've seen some comments about leaking seals.

Please remove the "nospam" from my address if responding via email.

-- Jeff Wieland

95 Voyager SE 3.0L (still running strong -- hopefully!) 98 Neon R/T(RIP) 01 Neon R/T
formatting link
Reply to
Jeff Wieland
Loading thread data ...

Reply to
jdoe

I agree with the confusion and think you have read the TSB properly. The dealer used the ATF+4 on our 1999 T&C Minivan when the fluid was power flushed at about 30K miles. I also used the ATF+4 when I dropped the pan and replaced the fluid and filter at 60K miles. Vehicle now has about 65K miles and is performing just fine. We never experienced any shudder or torque converter lock up problems. YMMV. I am using ATF+4 in 3 of 4 of my Chrysler transmissions (1996, 1999, 2001), but still use ATF+3 in my 1991 Mitsubishi which uses the Chrysler transmission.

Bob

Reply to
Bob Shuman

It is not just breaking in a new torque converter that is of concern. If the transmission's computer has to reprogram itself it goes through a cycle that could result in clutch chatter if +4 is being used instead of +3. Are you confused yet? Except for that one little issue +4 is superior in every way. Really look out if they put in +4, plus an additive.

Richard.

Reply to
Richard

They didn't put in any additives. I've been thinking about running the tranmission through the retraining procedure on

formatting link
once the roads clear up aroundhere. It is driving and shifting fine. I'm also thinking about putting a tranmission cooler on it. True, it might have been better to have done it 10 years ago, but since we're trying to squeeze a few more years out of it, it seems like a good idea.

-- Jeff Wieland

Reply to
Jeff Wieland

Reply to
jdoe

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.