Transmission fluid drain or not? Dealer say its lifetime

[Sbjkmtce]

Originally Posted by Whitecat

I know,...thanks JCL to continue sharing all that knowledge

+1

[knucklebuster]

If I'm not mistaken dealer refers to as lifetime at 100k .Look in your owners manual in the back for routine fluid changes .

[RRPhil]

Just to add ZF’s view on the subject…….

In July this year, as well as a regular re-issue of their TE-ML11 lubrication list which stated (as usual) :

5-, 6- and 8-speed as well as 4HP20 automatic transmissions:

ZF 5-, 6- and 8-speed as well as the ZF 4HP20 automatic transmissions are filled maintenance-free with specially developed partially synthetic ATF oils. Maintenance-free fills are intended for normal operating conditions. Especially driving at very high operating temperatures can result in accelerated aging or increased wear of ATF oils. It is recommended, in the event of severe operating conditions, such as:
- frequent highway driving in top speed range,
- offensive, sporty driving style,
- frequent trailer operation,
being above average, oil purification (oil change) on automatic transmissions is recommended between 80,000 km and 120,000 km, or 8 years, depending on the load.
In each case, only released ATF oil may be used for oil changes. And oil changes must be performed in accordance with the relevant specifications.

ZF also introduced their new ‘oil change kits’ to the market :

http://www.zf.com/corporate/en/products/services/report/03_2013/oelwechselkits/oelwechselkits.html



So clearly ZF support, to some extent, fluid ‘purification’ changes for their transmissions (which replaces just over half of the fluid – the kits contain 7 litres) and advise that a fluid change may be necessary at between 50,000 and 75,000 miles (or 8 years) depending on the type of use.

For ‘normal operating conditions’ the official 5HP24 repair manual states :

“The transmission is filled with life-time oil. The oil does not have to be changed until it has been in use for ten years.”

and similarly in the 6HP26 repair manual :

“The transmission is filled for life with oil. An oil change is not necessary before 160 000 km or 10 years.”

Anyway, that’s the transmission manufacturer’s view.

Phil

[knucklebuster]

X5's w/ 6 speed have metal oil pans

[JCL]

Originally Posted by Hoser

This question can answered fairly easy-take a sample of your transmission fluid and have it analyzed. If you are one who believes a friction based mechanical device can go forever without service by changing the fluid, you should be playing poker.

OK, let's say I took a sample of my transmission fluid. What exactly would I get analyzed in an oil lab that would answer this question? Not lubricity, as it is not part of a standard oil sampling test. I touch on this only because you mention friction based devices. Viscosity? It matters, but recall that the ZF transmission automatically adjusts for changing fluid viscosity over time. If you want to throw out the fluid based on a viscosity reading you need to know the acceptable limits for that adaptation. Water in the fluid, sure, that would be a good thing to know. But you could see that without a sample. Large particle analysis? OK, but that indicates your transmission has already failed. Not a good predictor. All of the wear elements that people like to focus on as indicating wear rates? OK, but those aren't changing the quality of your oil, as they are measured in parts per million. Those numbers are used to trend transmission wear rates over multiple samples, not to qualify whether an oil is any good or not. IMO, here is the one that really matters: the effectiveness of the remaining friction modifier additives which affect clutch engagement. But how would you test for that? It is when those are used up that you can get flare ups on shifts. It is just that there isn't a test to say that a fluid still meets the original spec, unless you run it through the full ZF lifeguard certification process.

I understand fluid analysis. I even got a chance to work in an scheduled oil sampling lab at one point. I ran tests on fluids. I just don't know what a lab would do with a sample of used transmission fluid that would quantify how good it was, beyond the visual inspection that you can do without paying a lab (burnt smell, water in the fluid, etc)

[JCL]

Thanks for that Phil.

[Hoser]

Here is a sample of the comments section in reports from Blackstone Labs for instance. I think they are enlightening.
I have a 1998 Dodge 1500 v8 automatic.It has 94k on it now.At 40k I did a fluid exchange with AMSOIL ATF and added a trans cooler.At 60k did a filter change and top off with AMSOIL ATF.Now at 94k the fluid was a grape purple.I sent a sample to BLACKSTONE LABS.REPORT SAYS "Wear read high.Copper,lead and tin from clutch plates are most out of line.Aluminum(torque converter)is also high.Not all ATF's are compatible with all transmissions.Suggest switching over to whatever Dodge recommends and flushing the system.Check back in 20k. The switching over to Chrysler ATF+4 is a surprise.Blackstone surely knows its ATF+4 but doesn't 'SAY" it.They have had to have seen this before I would think. I thought I was USING a superior fliud using Amsoil full synthetic ATF. They evaluate the content of Aluminum, Chromium, Barium,Iron, Copper, Lead, Tin, Molybdenum, Nickel, Manganese, Silver, Titanium, Potassium, Boron, Silicon, Sodium, Calcium, Magnesium, Phosphorus, Zinc, Barium, and report on SUS Viscosity @ 210F, cSt Viscosity @ 100 C, Flashpoint in F, Fuel %, Antifreeze %, Water %, Insoluble %. I grant you some of the value of these numbers are more significant as a change rather than a one time reading, but not all. I for one would be interested in the typical anti-friction package. a higher than average copper-iron may suggest clutch plates are starting to unravel. The sample can also indicate if the fluid has been overheated-this may reflect anything from my style of driving to a need for a better transmission cooler. A grossly bad report would at minimum indicate an immediate need for some service/flush/fluid change, or if all were right with the world I could keep on keeping on toward my and the transmissions life span. Test is also valuable in before and after fluid change to evaluate whether the flush or dropping and changing fluid did the appropriate change in fluid quality-as has often been said on this forum the little one spends on doing things properly compared to the risk of a multi-thousand dollar transmission failure is only smart money.

[Hoser]

Here is a sample of the comments section in reports from Blackstone Labs for instance. I think they are enlightening.
I have a 1998 Dodge 1500 v8 automatic.It has 94k on it now.At 40k I did a fluid exchange with AMSOIL ATF and added a trans cooler.At 60k did a filter change and top off with AMSOIL ATF.Now at 94k the fluid was a grape purple.I sent a sample to BLACKSTONE LABS.REPORT SAYS "Wear read high.Copper,lead and tin from clutch plates are most out of line.Aluminum(torque converter)is also high.Not all ATF's are compatible with all transmissions.Suggest switching over to whatever Dodge recommends and flushing the system.Check back in 20k. The switching over to Chrysler ATF+4 is a surprise.Blackstone surely knows its ATF+4 but doesn't 'SAY" it.They have had to have seen this before I would think. I thought I was USING a superior fliud using Amsoil full synthetic ATF. They evaluate the content of Aluminum, Chromium, Barium,Iron, Copper, Lead, Tin, Molybdenum, Nickel, Manganese, Silver, Titanium, Potassium, Boron, Silicon, Sodium, Calcium, Magnesium, Phosphorus, Zinc, Barium, and report on SUS Viscosity @ 210F, cSt Viscosity @ 100 C, Flashpoint in F, Fuel %, Antifreeze %, Water %, Insoluble %. I grant you some of the value of these numbers are more significant as a change rather than a one time reading, but not all. I for one would be interested in the typical anti-friction package. a higher than average copper-iron may suggest clutch plates are starting to unravel. The sample can also indicate if the fluid has been overheated-this may reflect anything from my style of driving to a need for a better transmission cooler. A grossly bad report would at minimum indicate an immediate need for some service/flush/fluid change, or if all were right with the world I could keep on keeping on toward my and the transmissions life span. Test is also valuable in before and after fluid change to evaluate whether the flush or dropping and changing fluid did the appropriate change in fluid quality-as has often been said on this forum the little one spends on doing things properly compared to the risk of a multi-thousand dollar transmission failure is only smart money.

[bcredliner]

My position to change the fluid every 50,000 miles has nothing to do with the recommendations of BMW or the builder of the transmission.

Changing the fluid and filter every 50,000 with the original fluid is simply logical from a preventative standpoint.

It doesn't mean never changing the fluid is wrong. I do think it is not a proactive tender loving care approach to a very hard working and expensive transmission.

We accept engine, differential, transfer case, power steering and brake fluid should be periodically changed. I see no logic that transmission fluid defies the accepted replacement of other fluids.

[JCL]

Originally Posted by Hoser

Here is a sample of the comments section in reports from Blackstone Labs for instance. I think they are enlightening......

Well, we differ there, because I don't think they are enlightening, for a number of reasons.

1) Fluid colour isn't relevant, unless it indicates water.
2) The subjective opinion that the wear rate was high was likely based on a comparison between one sample, and a universal average. It isn't other transmissions of the same type, or other lubricants of the same type. It is point data, and therefor of limited value. It doesn't tell you to change your fluid, for example. (Edit: I don't want to slag the specific lab here. If they have no trend line available there is nothing else for them to compare the result to.) If you had five samples, and each time one reading went up by 100, and then on the fifth reading instead of reaching 500 it went to 2000, that would tell you something. You would test it again, at the same interval, and see if next time it was 2100, or 4000, or 10,000. And based on that result, it may be time to take action. If you changed to a different spec fluid (but still one that met the manufacturer's recommendations) and did five samples and the number went up by 10 each time, instead of 100, with the same use profile, then that would tell you something. But one number means nothing. We don't have the figures here, so my comments are based strictly on the lab's comments, not the actual results.
3) The benefit of oil sampling is that it can be used to try and catch things before they fail. Repair before failure is often cheaper than running to failure. Not always, but often. That is particularly true when the cost of downtime (especially unscheduled downtime) is factored in. But if a consumer had a high reading on a transmission after doing 10 or so samples and trending the result, would that consumer be likely to tear down the transmission based solely on the lab report, if it was still operating perfectly? The knowledge that it may fail could be helpful, but even commercial operations often decide not to follow recommendations of oil sampling programs when it comes time to open a component up. It depends on the likely amount of consequential damage, demands for the vehicle, and so on.
4) There isn't an antifriction additive package, there is a friction modifier additive package. It isn't to eliminate friction (because that wouldn't help your wet clutches to engage) but rather to modify the engagement characteristics, make them progressive, or whatever the designer has determined work best with the specific programming on rate of engagement. That is what different fluid specs are about. And when those additives are depleted, the fluid may no longer act as the transmission needs it to.
5) I remember seeing a high copper reading on a BMW transmission report. Just copper. There was worry expressed about wear. But if it was a thrust washer there would have been other elements, so a likely candidate was the cooler. Not a good reason to change a fluid or overhaul a transmission. But it got a good discussion going. My point is, interpretation of lab results is more important than the test itself.
6) Your clutch plates have to wear. If they didn't you would have very sudden shifts. They are designed to slip, and to last for the lifetime of the transmission. So wear in and of itself in not of value, but wear rate can be of great value, especially if it changes. That is when the fluid is breaking down.

I fully agree that if your fluid is burnt from overheating then it is no longer working to spec. That can indicate the need for additional cooling. But why run a lab report to see if it smells burnt?

If you change your fluid during this sampling regime, you learn very little. The goal of sampling is to trend wear over a number of samples, on the same fluid. Then, you may change the fluid, but to sample then change, sample then change, tells us very little.

Despite the above, I am a big fan of scheduled oil sampling. It is just that I think it has to be applied reasonably. And I don't think that doing a single fluid sample will easily tell you if your fluid needs changing, because sampling is designed to tell you about machinery wear rates more than about the quality of a fluid at a point in time.