"Transmission Flush": Required ?

Hello:

Have a '97 Buick Le Sabre with 60,000 miles on it.

Brought it back to the dealership today for an oil change, and they recommended (strongly) that I also have a "transmission flush" due to having

60K on it.

Didn't have it done.

Should I have ? Is this a good idea after only 60K ?

Guess in a way I was a bit concerned about lousing up the trans any, as it works fine.

Thoughts on ?

Thanks, Bob

Reply to
Robert11
Loading thread data ...

While I'm not a fan of flushing the transmission (I much prefer dropping the pan and changing the filter and gasket), regular maintenance is essential. I've heard of too many problems after a power flush, especially in vehicles like yours that have gone an extensive number of miles without proper service, so that's why I don't like it. You should probably go no further than 30,000 miles before having the fluid and filter changed - or less under severe driving conditions. 60,000 miles in 8 years doesn't sound too severe, however. You can look in your owner's manual for the recommended sevice intervals.

If you've not had any tranny service done in 60,000 miles then you're living on borrowed time. Tranny fluid does break down over time and can get contaminated. The internal filter will plug up over time which only hurts your tranny, causing loss of performance and overheating.

Cheers - Jonathan

Reply to
Jonathan

I always wonder how the myth got started with the old timers that transmission fluid should never be changed. The dealer was acting in your best interest in suggesting a flush. If you can't trust him to work on your car that's another matter.

Reply to
Al Bundy

Before GM started going on their "extended" maintenance interval kicks.....the standard transmission "service" was done at about

40K klms. You are at about twice that mileage, so a transmission service or "fluid exchange" would certainly not hurt. In your case, I'd be wanting to drop the pan and change the filter at the very least.

Ian

Reply to
shiden_kai

The pan should be dropped so that the filter can be changed and accumulated sludge cleaned out of the bottom of the pan. Shops all love the power flush machines because they are quick and very profitable to run. However, the machine does not replace the filter or clean the pan properly. I also do not trust the solvent many of those machine proceedures run through the transmission.

That said, a power flush is far better than doing nothing at 60,000 miles. GM (and almost every other company) puts far too long of a recommended usefull life on the factory fill ATF IMO.

John

Reply to
John Horner

There is a lot of hype over flushing. I feel it is over rated and it causes more problem than it cures though it helps the bank accounts of those pushing it. The only time that I can think of warranting a flush is if you overheated tranny badly and cooked the oil and were trying to salvage/save it. You did right and do not give it another thought.

Reply to
SnoMan

No myth, the only time you need to do it is if it has been cooked and in the old days for us "old timers" they used to put drain plugs in torque converters so you could drain about everything out and they had plug on tranny pans too. Then they started to say that was because it really does not nedd changing and now they say they need flushing I have seen flushing cause problems and it is best not done as the only one that really benifits form flushing every time is the dealer and his bank account.

Reply to
SnoMan

We service thousands of high mileage fleet vehicles every month in our fleet service business. We have been using tranny flushing machines, as a prevent maintenance tool, quite successfully for around five years.

Seems to me there is an awful lot of misinformation being posted on how a tranny flushing machine does its work and the advantages of flushing over simply draining the fluid and taking down the pan.

I would suggest one do a search before posting anymore of that misinformation

mike hunt

SnoMan wrote:

formatting link
Visit Topic URL to contact author (reg. req'd). Report abuse:
formatting link

Reply to
BigJohnson

You could shift those 1951 Fords into reverse with the vehicle moving

30mph. As long as you were careful not to touch the gas it wouldn't kill the trans either. Lots of them would go 100,000 miles and people did not change fluids. That's not good enough today. Maintenance is never a bad thing when done properly.
Reply to
Al Bundy

Wow, I totally agree with you Mike! It's not often I do, but in this case, you are right. We've been using "flushing" (fluid exchange) machines for years and they work fine and do not damage anything. Why folks like "Snoman" have to muddy the waters with their "old wives tales" is beyond me.

Ian

Reply to
shiden_kai

due

case,

You miss the point here, the main reason they push the power flush is $$$ in their pocket and you are nieve to think otherwise. Suddenly it is a good idea after all of these years. Detriot wants more excause to do more expensive maintaince on your vehical because with greatly reduced margins on new car sales they are looking more to service for additional revenues. A filter and fluid refill every 30 to 40K is just fine (you want to do that about every 15 to 20K in HD and towing use though) If doen improperly (which is possible as long a human is in the loop) it is possible to do more harm than good and best not done unless once again you have burnt fluid in it.

Reply to
SnoMan

As usual, you have no clue what you are talking about. I happen to work at a dealership and am quite familiar with why we recommend trans services or flushes. All fluid maintenance procedures are money in our pockets and you are "naive to think otherwise". So what? That's what we are in business for, to make money. The fact of the matter is that both procedures, a transmission service, and completely exchanging the fluid, are both acceptable ways of maintaining your transmission. The reason we use a machine is for productivity reasons, just like we use hoists to lift cars now, along with a whole host of other special tools that have been developed so that we can do more work in less time. Novel idea, eh?

It's only idiots like you that are still living in the 70's that caution people not to have this type of maintenance done.

Again, you show your complete lack of knowledge about what forces are driving things like fluid maintenance. Typical!

Anything that is done improperly can do more harm then good. What's your point, Einstein!

Ian

Reply to
shiden_kai

In my experience, the dirt from a transmission is fine powder, I'm in favor of dropping pan, and scrubbing away dirt, + new filter. If you want to be a real shark, change again a couple thousand miles later. A motor lets you drain almost all oil out, not so with trans, which only allows removal of a couple quarts, approx 2 gallons stays in the internal passages. I recommend Mobil 1 synthetic trans fluid for hot climate, severe duty, takes a few change outs to be * almost * all synthetic. Conventional or synthetic, fluid should be changed when dirty.

Reply to
451CTDS

At 60,000 miles he is due for a fluid change, IMHO the dealer was trying to suggest a useful service. If the OP doesn't want to pay for it he can drop the pan and change the fluid and filter himself, but I would do something.

nate

Reply to
Nate Nagel

Nate, the complete myth involves more than the cost. That's just his reason dejure. The myth says that it's a sealed system and nothing can enter unless someone opens the tranny up and then all hell can break lose. They qualify it by agreeing that if the fluid turns coal black then something could stand to be done. They overlook the fact that debris develops from within the system and does not show on the stick, if the car has one. And they assume that all the additives are working if the fluid is red. No amount of reasoning can change this belief.

Reply to
Al Bundy

Well... IMHO that is backwards. By the time the fluid is burnt looking there's likely enough varnish in there that doing a flush or fluid change *could* be harmful. Better to do preventative maintenance IMHO.

nate

Reply to
Nate Nagel

Gee I have seen tranny goo twenty and 30 years without flushing. The real "new" old wifes tale is that you need to do it. Agian the ONLY time you need to do it is if fluid is cooked or maybe fouled with water. If fluid is "normal" , anything more the a filter change and fluid refill is wasted man hours and money. The best thing you can do with a fleet of trucks or car is to make sure that the trannies have enough cooling in HD service because that will extend their life far more than any power flushing.

Reply to
SnoMan

Mobil One tranny fluid is not the cure for hot climates because even if the oil can take more heat you do not want it to because the seals in tranny do not like heat either and sustained temps above 220 or so can shorten their life a lot. The real answer for a tranny in hot climates is proper cooling of engine and tranny because high engine temps tend to put more heat in tranny to from airstream and heat conduction. If you have enough cores in your radiator with proper fans and a proper aux cooler and correct gearing for load, it is quite possible to tow in 110 degree heat with normal engine temps while maintaining tranny temps of 200 or below with regular ATF fliud. If it heats up it is because your cooling system is not cutting it, not because of the ATF fluid you are using.

Reply to
SnoMan

Every system has to have some kind of breather opening to the atmosphere to allow for expansion and contraction pressure equalization. Even RWD differentials have a vent which opens to the outside air.

These are not "sealed" systems as all.

Also, transmission fluids are subject to oxidation just like any lubricant.

The one thing I agree with is that keeping transmission temperatures down is a big benefit both to transmission life and to fluid life.

It also makes plenty of sense to periodically change out the ATF by one means or another. Automatic transmission failures seem to be far more common on modern vehicles than are major engine failures, yet most people pay far more attention to engine oil chanes and other engine related preventative maintenance than they do to the transmission.

A similar situation exists with brake systems. Many of the European makers schedule a brake fluid flush once ever 2 years, yet most US and Japanese makers have no scheduled brake fluid flush. In this case the Europeans have it right. Brake fluid accumulates contaminants and looses the effectiveness of anti-corrosion additives which are in the fluid. Changing it periodically addresses these issues. There would be significantly fewer failed master cylinders and calipers if this basic fluid maintenance were carried out on all vehicles once every two years.

I really liked the old Shell advertising series back when the gas station was also a service station: "You can pay me now, or you can pay me later." The point was that the relatively minor cost of routine preventative maintenance is much less than the long term cost of more major repairs.

Now if only we could have greasable suspension joints installed routinely on modern cars!

John

Reply to
John Horner

(snippage of_finally_an intelligent post on the trans. flush issue.)

And if they'd put drain plugs back in torque converters, there'd be little need for a trans. flush. Wonder how much they saved per vehicle when they screwed the consumer out of that transmission access?

Garrett Fulton

Reply to
gfulton

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.