Puking trans fluid

'99 F350 7.3L SuperCrew 4X4 Dually.

120,000 on vehicle, 35,000 on trans replaced three years ago.

Backing anything (boat, car trailer) up my driveway, about a 50ft 10deg. grade, causes the trans to puke out fluid from the inspection cover.

One to two pints, and only in reverse. Fluid isn't even luke warm to the touch, so it's not a heat issue. Doesn't matter if it's a short trip or a 15 minute one.

I'm thinking bad pump seal, or front seal, or both.

Anyone with any experience with this?

Ideas?

Gonna check with the dealership Monday to see if they'd consider warranty fix---it's only 1 month out.

Spdloader

Reply to
Spdloader
Loading thread data ...

Actually it is a heat issue. The "puked" fliud may appear cold but when you are in a hard converter stall trying to back a heavy load up a hill the internal torque converter temps climb very fast and it is possible to "flash" some oil/fliud to boil and cause tranny to spit some out. The high low RPM torque of your 7.3 is not a assest on such a stall and can cook tranny is short order. (GM put a really deep reverse ratio in their Alison to help prevent this) How do you fix this? If you are running big tires and stock axle ratio's you are not helping yourself with this and you might consider using low range (if it is a 4x4) with front hubs unlocked to back a load up a incline any distance. This is not a rare problem.

----------------- TheSnoMan.com

Reply to
SnoMan

Unfortunately, have seen a few that do that. It seems to be a problem with cooling the reverse clutch pack. In my bread and butter business, we have had several that push it out the dipstick tube onto the right exhaust manifold and catch fire. AFIK, the only cure is a complete rebuild. I also understand there are some mods that should take care of the problem. There never seems to be any problem in the forward selections - just reverse. I have never been able to get hands on any documents but, I understand Ford is aware of the problem and there may by service info out on it. FWIW, I had one of them that caught fire this way after the 4th trans replacement with factory remans from Ford. Truck only had 31K miles total at time of fire. It was backing a trailered Bobcat up a muddy grade in 4WD at the time it puked.

Lugnut

Reply to
lugnut

This happens a lot with auto's when in reverse. Although my experience is with dodge and plowing snow with some towing, when backing up you can watch the temp climb right up the guage. What has dropped the temps some is a "double deep" pan. Don't know if that will solve the problem, but it should help lower the fluid temp. You might try low range when in reverse as well.

Reply to
Roy

This trans was replaced with a Ford Reman unit exactly three years ago. It has done it almost from the start, but it wasn't as bad as it is now. Spdloader

Reply to
Spdloader

What if the vehicle is "overnight cold", you start it, immediately back it up the driveway, and it pukes.

Is it still a heat issue?

Using low range doesn't affect it.

It has an auxiliary trans cooler on it for what it's worth also.

It never did it with the original transmission. The trans was replaced because the overdrive went out of the original one.

Spdloader

Reply to
Spdloader

On Sun, 25 Mar 2007 10:19:08 -0400, "Roy" wrote:

This is all relative to torque applied, cooling and overall gear ratio because the taller the effective ratio to drive the more torque that has to be applied to it and routed by tranny and automatics are there least efficent in the stall condition and when the engine is cranking out a lot of torque and vehcile speed is very slow in reverse and lot of the energy is being converted to heat. THis is generallu more of a problem with a diesel because they tend to have tall gears because of limited RPM range. Like I stated eariler, GM wisely used a 4.49 rev gear ratio in the ally so that there is no need to build up a lot of torque and heat to move a load in reverse plus deeper gears getts it off stall sooner so it runs cooler (this is not a anti ford statement but rather than why you never hear about ally's pukng in reverse). You can modifit rear clutch for more grip and that will help some but if you are fighting a heavy load and a tall effective ration that you are depending on 350 or 450 ft lbs of engine torque and more to overcome this load you are going to cook it sooner are latter on such a low speed backup. Most gas engine do not produce as much torque in stall so it takes longer to cook it. I am not sure of your setup but if you are running a 3.54 or 3.73 with larger than stock tires you are pushing the envelope. A bigger cooler will not help much in this kind of flash heating but deepr axle gear or small diameter tires would reduce the torque load on tranny. This problem is not only with diesels and automatics because more thyan one owner with a stick has roasted a clutch trying to start on load in a taller gear while trying to use the 500 or 600 ft lbs of torque they have.

----------------- TheSnoMan.com

Reply to
SnoMan

Huh? Immediately?

I wouldn't think so, not from if it is happening cold.

Low range should affect it.

Imho it is time to take it in. You aren't geting any codes are you?

Reply to
Roy

using low range should prevent it because a lot less torque is needed from engine and a lot less heat is generated in tranny. If it is worse with this tranny than original it is possible that you have a torque converter with a different stal speed and ratio that is making more heat than before. They do make after market low stall speed converters for diesels that run cooler that yoou might consider too.

----------------- TheSnoMan.com

Reply to
SnoMan

There isn't a heck of a load backing up with a mt truck. The temp will still climb even with 4:10 rears. As I said the double deep pan brought temps down to a acceptable level. A tight tc might raise temps a bunch after pulling a grade with a load but he is experiencing this on start up.

Reply to
Roy

Yep, it happens no matter how long it's been running. I'm not getting any codes. I'm taking it in tonight.

I'm done worrying about it.

Spdloader

Reply to
Spdloader

On Sun, 25 Mar 2007 10:58:58 -0400, "Spdloader" wrote:

The one I mentioned earlier had been sitting over 6 hours on a January day at a construction site. Vehicle was started and had been running including warmup idle under 3 minutes when "smoke" was observed from under front. It has actually been moving under one minute - just long enough to get the exhaust manifolds hot enough to ignite the fluid. The truck had all the guages and an alarm system that covered trans temp. There were no observeable indications there was a problem. On teardown, the reverse clutch pack had indications of high temperature. No other part of the trans was anything other than excellent condition looking "brand new". The fire damage was repaired and the trans rebuilt in the back corner of the dealership with "some modifications". The technician who built it seemd to think the problem was a cross leak in ght valve body causing the trans to have a forward selection partially engaged which would result in overloading the reverse pack. The engine, of course, has plenty of poer to overcome this minor nuisance condition. The valve bodies and cases on these transmissions are extremely sensitive to proper torque and torque procedure. The case is easily warped in the area above the valve body preventing them from sealing if not done "by the book". Many of the trans techs with a good record on building these transmission recommend torquing the VB to max end of range and letting it sit 1/2 hour or so. They then mark the capscrews, loosen and re-torque the VB to make sure it is fully seated and torqued with compressed gaskets. Again, I have not been able to get the Ford paperwork, if any, that may be out there to see exactly what they may know.

That truck has been back at it's job now for over 100k miles with no further trans problems. I still believe the transmissions are setup too "soft" to please drivers who want a truck that is just as smooth as the cars they drive which are also probably mushier than they should be for durability.

Lugnut

I do not believe this is a generalized overheat problem. See above.

I don't think so. It appears to be a localized internal problem.

I don't think the number of auxilliary coolers has anything to do with it.

Reply to
lugnut

The front pump seal and torque converter seals are both leaking. No other problems found with the transmission, but there are others, to which I will start another thread. See Hubs.

Spdloader

Reply to
Spdloader

I thought the front seal problem had been addressed several years back with a seal improvement and enlarging the drainback hole. The problem usually occured when there was a bit of wear on the pump bushing or the seal had been disturbed as the converter was inserted. The spring on the back side of the seal would tend to get displaced. This often happened if the converter slipped forward out of the pump while the trans was being installed. It is not often a pump seal - I assume your are talking about the pump housing oring - leaks if properly installed and the pump torqued into the case. If thesde are the leak points, you shopuld not even have to teardown the trans unless you just want to freshen the seals. It is not likely that anything else is wrong based on what you describe. Also, I would not expect these problems at 35K miles on a proper rebuild.

Lugnut

Reply to
lugnut

I am talking about the pump housing O-ring, and the seal around the torque converter shaft.

The trans was replaced with a "Ford Factory Reman" unit, 34,189 miles ago, and 3 years, and six weeks ago. The six weeks out is why they are telling me they won't help me with the repair. Although the leak started soon after replacement, but my local stealer wasn't able to find it. I have it at another dealer with a much better reputation now, but I'll be footing the bill, it appears. Spdloader

Reply to
Spdloader

On Wed, 28 Mar 2007 22:34:39 -0400, Spdloader rearranged some electrons to form:

Which stealer didn't help you? (you don't have to name them, just the first letter or two of their name). Just filing for future reference, since we're in the same neighborhood.

Reply to
David M

It was Crescent, Dave.

It's at Ciener now, at least they have tried to help out.

Spdloader

Reply to
Spdloader

On Thu, 29 Mar 2007 16:01:52 -0400, Spdloader rearranged some electrons to form:

Dang... that's where I bought mama's Explorer. So far, no issues with them, actually they have done well. Haven't dealt much with C/W, although they're not too much farther away, but people say they're fair.

Crecent had a GT sitting in their showroom last summer while we were buying the Explorer. They wouldn't let me drive it, (can't imagine why they wouldn't let me drive a $160,000 car) but we at least sat in it. A week later it was sold.

Reply to
David M

At the little hole in the wall dealer where we found the Excursion in Jan 06 (last one in Michigan with diesel and quad captain's chairs) there was room for exactly one car in the showroom...and it was a bright yellow GT. I asked the sales manager how they scored one, he said it just showed up one day, they drove it onto the floor and it was parked there ever since. I got to sit in it, that pretty much decided for me that I wasn't going to get one, it wasn't designed for 6'4" drivers. Damn door would have scalped me if I didn't put my head down. Well, that and the price...anything I pay that much for better have an attached garage.

Reply to
Matt Macchiarolo

We shopped there for my wife's Explorer in '04, but Thomasville really wanted to sell a truck, and Crescent didn't.......

They were a much better outfit when Mr. and Mrs. English ran it.

Spdloader

Reply to
Spdloader

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.