|
Xoutpost server transfer and maintenance is occurring.... |
Xoutpost is currently undergoing a planned server migration.... stay tuned for new developments.... sincerely, the management |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Transmission Fluid Oil Analysis
|
Sponsored Links | |
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Thanks.....
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Pls confirm- 75k miles on that fill???
Looks like you changed the fluid at this point. What would you recommend to others? |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
So what does this mean?
__________________
2006 4.8is, Black on White. SOLD Sniff Sniff. 2017 F85 x5m, Black on Red. BEAST MODE "The older we grow the greater becomes our wonder at how much ignorance one can contain without bursting one's clothes." - Mark Twain Unlock OBC post 5 |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Ard, yes the fluid has 75k miles on it and it was the OEM fill. It has been changed.
As to what it means, it's of limited value at this point. Ideally one would have new fluid to analyze to determine baseline viscosity, TAN ( acidity/oxidation level) and of course additive levels. These all change with time and use and the best use of the analysis tool is to trend the data over time, i.e. take more samples of the same oil fill and view the rate of deterioration/wear to see if it is linear as opposed to sudden changes. One thing is certain, the fluid did not have the levels it now has of iron, aluminum, copper and tin when it was installed. As to whether the presence of these metals is detrimental to the transmission one can only say it would be better if they weren't there but thay may in fact be "normal" for this particular transmission. Since this is the original fluid, there are obviously initial wear in materials present in the fluid. It's quite possible that the fluid would not look markedly worse at 100k, I don't know. I do know that we always want to change "good" fluid as opposed to fluid that is severely oxidized, laden with contaminants and wear materials. This is especially true in the case of a transmission where there is always old fluid present in the system, which if severely oxidized, acts as a catalyst on the new fluid, greatly reducing its potential life. What I would recommend to others is to not worry about the fluid if your plan is to sell the vehicle within (in my opinion) the 100k range. If, however, your plan is to keep the vehicle for let's say 150k ( that's my plan); than I think a fluid change at the mid way point (60-75k) is money well spent for a couple of reasons. First, after reviewing the report, I am inclined to think that I am glad the fluid has been changed. The copper is generally non intrusive as a rule as it leaches into the oil from the heat exchanger. The iron and aluminum are of more concern to me and since the transmission is essentially a hydraulic device the presence of these in conjunction with the relatively high particle count ( lower left) again leads to longer life of the components if these numbers are reduced. Secondly, looking at it from a potential buyer's perspective, I'd much rather the owner tell me he changed the fluid at 60-75k than have him tell me it's never been changed especially when I'm looking at 150k on the odometer. So I think the buyer would definitely be more comfortable knowing that fact as opposed to the alternative- hence making the vehicle stand out a bit from the others on the market at that time. Incidentally, I had an Indie change the fluid ( which encompasses replacing the transmission pan as it includes the filter- a large part of the bill), as well as the transfer case and both differentials for a total of $850.00. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
^^+1
IMO, the loss of viscosity is the biggest killer for ATs. They go along fine, wear metals increase as expected, particulates build up...but then at a critical point, the fluid viscosity begins to drop- maybe the car gets run hard and hot, maybe some of the seals in the valve body begin to shrink...and you get a loss of hydraulic circuit pressure when the tranny goes to shift. Shifts get sloppy- not enough that you really notice, but they do- and wear accelerates. By the time you get a code/CEL about some shift value being incorrect, the cancer is established: some people will panic and change fluid/filters; some will trade; some pray. Many say "oh, not the E70". We'll see. Look at the E53 forums.... A |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
In my experience transmission fluids don't thin out,(except under temperature) rather they tend to get heavier through oxidization, as well as accumulating wear metals and particles.Thinning is generally caused by shearing, particularly of any VI polymers, which these full synthetic fluids generally do not have.
Here's where having the original fluid's viscosity would be beneficial. My fluid came back at 5.4cSt @ 100C. I cannot find an actual spec on the (supposed) Lifeguard fluid it was filled with or possibly Shell's M1375-4 which is the actual OEM recommended spec to my knowledge. Castrols' Import Multi Vehicle Trans Fluid, which they claim is acceptable in our transmissions and is an equivalent to the Shell product, has a viscosity of 8 cSt @ 100 C considerably higher than the product that came out. The only way to confirm any viscosity change is to get a baseline on the unused fluid and compare it to used fluid with substantial miles on it. |
#8
|
||||
|
||||
I wouldn't expect thinning of the fluid. It will oxidize over time. However, automatic transmissions are not particularly sensitive to fluid viscosity. Look at the viscosity differencs between Dexron III and Dexron VI, and those are both acceptable for many transmissions.
As expected, the fluid isn't wearing out at this point. There is no reason to change it based on the fluid report. On the other hand, if you want to change it at twice this mileage on the assumption that it may be worn out by then, it isn't a bad idea to change it now to clean out the deposits that have accumulated over time. What changes with auto trans fluid is the additives and friction modifiers, and traditional fluid analysis doesn't address those issues. Particle count matters, but it doesn't look high in this case. Wear metals aren't an indicator for the fluid condition, they are an indicator of the transmission wear. Thanks to the OP for posting this.
__________________
2007 X3 3.0si, 6 MT, Premium, White Retired: 2008 535i, 6 MT, M Sport, Premium, Space Grey 2003 X5 3.0 Steptronic, Premium, Titanium Silver 2002 325xi 5 MT, Steel Grey 2004 Z4 3.0 Premium, Sport, SMG, Maldives Blue |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
^^ what is the viscosity of this fluid when 'fresh'? Any idea?
(Im lazy, if the next flight has wifi I'll search... ) A |
#10
|
||||
|
||||
Not sure about the actual OE ZF fluid, but various sellers claiming compatibility with the LT71141 spec using terms such as 'suitable for' but not actually certified to the LT spec, report viscosity at 100C from 6.1 to 7.4 to 8.0.
__________________
2007 X3 3.0si, 6 MT, Premium, White Retired: 2008 535i, 6 MT, M Sport, Premium, Space Grey 2003 X5 3.0 Steptronic, Premium, Titanium Silver 2002 325xi 5 MT, Steel Grey 2004 Z4 3.0 Premium, Sport, SMG, Maldives Blue |
Bookmarks |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
|