OK I did transmission fluid flush on my 02 4.4i
 

Thanks for the info. So, how does the X feel? Is there a difference? Be honest, do you really feel a difference in shifting? Thanks for the brake down, I'm saving this as a bookmark.

Great write up!!

To be honest, I can't. But agian I have not have a longer trip as well.

I can say it less dramatic then when I changed my Audi transmission fluid. (this Audi of mine has 5 speed manual and I changed it at 90000 miles, BTW the ATF was alot cleaner than the X5's).
That last peace of info tells you if you want a longer lasting trans get manual with clutch. Unfortunately for me, the 4.4i only came with auto.

WELL DONE!
Very helpful info and great pics. Thank you.

good job but I wouldn't call it a flush since you didn't drain the convertor ;)

Thanks, you just convinced me to do mine myself.

:iagree:
I guess 75% flush will do for now:thumbup: . If I am bored I'll do it again around 60000 miles since I have 4 quart left, so all I need is filter, gasket and 2 more quart of Esso.

This is a good one for the Articles section.....

Nice write up!! Good pics too.

Very good write up:thumbup: It deserves to be posted as an article

Just curious....maybe you had some leftover strawberry cream cheese in that container of yours ;-)

Was your new fluid amber or straw colored....

I've done a drain/refill on mine 2X already and my Esso fluid has always been straw colored. I plan to do a pan drop at 60K...

Thanks for your excellent description and photos.Based on your post, I did my 01' 4.4 with 86K miles flush this morning. Everything went well but like you said, it was messy! Regards, Tom

Tomaz, how did the oil look like? Was it extremely dirty, or was there life still there? Thanks...

The fluid was as dirty as the pictures in Harv's photo's, including sediment on the magnets and bottom of the pan. Was there life in the dirty fluid? Probably, but there's more life in the clean fluid and filter.

The reason I ask is because I haven't changed mine yet. My mechanic told me he would do it once I hit 100k. So now I'm here at 100k, but he is not just going to flush it. He will do a complete tranny oil change. Which is a lot longer of a process and a little more expensive on my pocket. But I intend to keep the X for a very long time. My wife says that I have to drive it till it falls apart. :) If she only knew I'm in the process of picking up a 650 by Christmas. She is going to flip. Thanks again Tomas for your input. I'll let everyone know how it goes...

80k mileage 1/02 build 4.4i (no dealer or other warranty remaining). Seen minor signs of my gearbox sump/pan gasket weaping.Dealer quoted to Replace transmission oil filter inc fluid and gasket, (£193.79 UK Sterling).
Knowing cost of the ATF (in bmw bottles) I thought the price was good though I will be checking to make sure the ATF is correct. Getting mine done at dealer as I still have have full bmw history and know if I do a diy I will forfeit any possible goodwill claim in event of later failure. (I can easily diy swap some correct fluid in a year or so if I still have car - they wont know).


The ZF(not bmw) filter kit consists of Screw Plug M16x1.5 & O-Ring

Anyway the question is :

Do folks who have done this think there is a real need to replace the Screw Plug and O ring with new items ?

Comments on condition of old "o ring" & "plug" when you guys changed them appreciated........Dont want to ask for same if not needed as confusion will cause problems for them ! cost no issue

I seem to have answered my own question by happening to find this post by swissfrank at the end of a brilliant and mind boggling thread started by him.

More than convinced he knows more than me re transmission issues so will just make sure all bits replaced aare as the ZF filter kit albeit ordered as specific bmw parts which I have got the number of from from realoem

So, my 2000 4.4 has 104,000 on it (I've had it since 42,000). I have never done the ATF. Is it too late? Don't mess with it at this point? Or should I go ahead and do it. Shifts fine at this point. Lots and lots of highway mile behind me, and yet to come. I can see keeping it forever.

Personally I'd be tempted to do it if it were my car @ 104k miles though there is some debate re whether it can cause probs by dislodging old deposits.

2 links that may help you decide based on failures related to mileages

click here

and here

where can i buy this tranny oil ESSO ATF LT 71141, cannot find it in Montreal,qc

Thanks for the great write-up. It doesn't look as bad as I had heard. A couple of questions, the first of which is really dumb - what's the easiest way to find out what type of transmission you have, and exactly what type of fluid it needs (mine's an '03 4.4i)? And second, to drain the fluid out of the converter, is it just a matter of repeating the procedure a few times (minus the removal of the pan) to get most of it out? Thanks.

You may want to call bavauto.com to see which trans fluid goes with 03 4.4i (my guess will be the same as my 02 4.4i).
Also see if they can ship to Canada for oother poster.

You can't drain the TC and the full capacity is about 9 quart so after dropping the pan, you still have old 3.5 quart of old fluid in TC. My logic is that old fluid is more cleaner since the metal shaving is trapped in filter or magnet down in the pan. I plan on doing it again in a year when mine is @75Kmiles (it is at 64kmiles right now).

tell me how you drain the the T.C

You need to drop the entire trans, alot of effort and beyond my capability IMHO.
I you insist on it, contatc swissFrank or other real technicians on this forum (Weasel, Killcrap etc).

HI, Thanks for posting this. I have a 2001 3.0i sport and its done 102k now and i have this gut feeling that it's due a trans box oil change as i have noticed a slight dip in gear change, It's abit rough now but i am unsure wether it has life long oil in it or not..... What would you say ??

I have 2 other problems with my 2001 X5 and need some advice...

1st one being my handbrake has given up on me, The gears wheel in the handbrake has broken hence it wont engage in position, always down and dead, How can i fix this and what will i need to get this sorted. It's MOT is due soon and that is a failure.

2nd the famous door handle problem with my driver door and rear passenger door, The doors lock and unlock ok but the handles are coming off. Both handles have come apart from what seems like a clip or something so when i have to open the door, i need to use both hands, 1 to press the loose bit in and the other to pull the handle to open the door !!! What can be done to fix this problem as it's a matter of time before the handle(s) come off in my hand..

Any advice will be more than welcome.

Cheers

Great post. I have a 2002 4.4 with 96k that is up on ramps right now. I'm replacing the valley pan gasket, water pump, assorted hoses and expansion tank. I may as well do the trans filter change. Thanks again for the post, needs to be an article.

Thanks, but I'm not clear on why you plan to wait a year before doing another partial drain/refill. Why not just repeat the drain and refill procedure onceor twice to get most of the old fluid out in one go-around?

No scientific reason, just kinda follow Mike Miller suggestion long time ago at Roundel (BMWCCA magazine tech editor) to do flush every 30kmiles.

Writeups like this have been on www.e38.org for years. The 5HP18, 5HP24, 5HP30 between the 3, 5, 7 and X have pretty similar techniques. The most important is the filling precedure. I sold and just did a tranny swap in a customers 97 740iL yesterday...messy procedure to fill the fluid till it spills out, but the car is finally moving under it's own power now.

awesome illustration!

hi ... i did my tranny change the oil-filters, the jerky movement is almost gone, just once in a will, not as often as before.......

I've heard that VW/Audi part # G-052-162-A2 is the Esso LT71141 "Green Lable" stuff just repackaged. Although, I've yet to get 100% confirmation. It is very plausible. . .

Another refference for Esso Alternatives: Alternatives to the expensive Esso LT71141 automatic transmission oil

I will be using Red Line D4 ATF when I do my trans serivce. All my other cars take D4 ATF and I've been really happy with Red Line Products.

Red Line Synthetic Oil - Automatic Transmission Fluids - D4 ATF


k

Do all your other cars call for the Esso LT spec fluid?

My only issue with the D4 is that it is a generic fluid claimed to be suitable for all automatics (Dexron, Esso LT, Ford Mercon, Honda ATF, etc) and also used as a gear lube in transaxles. It isn't certified to any of those standards, that is just Red Line's marketing claim.

I think that the reason there are different specs is because different fluids are optimized for each different application. ZF, GM, and Ford even use different fluids in different designs of their own transmissions. Using one fluid in all of those applications (including using D4 as a gear lube) seems a pretty low-tech approach. Just my $0.02

If it wasn't a suitable functionable equivalent then I don't think Red Line would claim so for marketing purposes.

However, I was able to find Esso LT (VW/Audi version) from one vendor for a reasonable price.

I think these are the exact same fluids.... just different part numbers:

(VW/Audi Spec):dunno:
VW/Audi ATF ATF1: Semi-Synthetic, High Performance Fluid (1 Liter) G052162A2 - RM European Auto Parts

(BMW Spec):dunno:
BMW ATF Auto Transmission Fluid (1 Liter) Equivalent to: ESSO LT 71141 NOTE: Only for "Green Tag" transmission 83229407807 - RM European Auto Parts

Thoughts????

k

whats the deal with BMW calling it a life time fluid?

That is marketing B.S.! Plain and simple. Unless you only keep your cars till the end of the warranty period I would not follow that advice.

k

If it is on the internet it must be true?

Who is more likely to know what fluid is required for a transmission they designed, ZF or Redline? You are dismissing the published ZF requirement, and putting all your faith in a third party who has something to gain by selling fluid to you.

There are literally hundreds of posts on the topic, on this board alone. It comes down to the fluid being good for the life of the transmission (not your life, or the vehicle life) and there not being a correlation between changing the fluid and improving that transmission life.

You can change it if you like. There is a small but real risk of the change itself causing problems. Introducing a high-detergent fluid (ATF) into an older transmission can cause problems because the detergents loosen deposits and those deposits tend to cause problems when they move, primarily in the valve body. Those who change it tend to do so to try and extend the life of transmissions that generally haven't lasted as long as we all would like. The debate is simply whether changing it actually does anything to extend the life of the transmission, or not.

^^^Very good point, JCL.

FWIW, penzoil multi trans mission fluid meets the esso 17741 spec.

http://www.pennzoil.com/documents/Mu...icle%20ATF.pdf

you can buy for $4.xx per quart at pepboys. I've been swapping out the pan fluid since 40k miles. we are almost at 140k now.

I beg to differ. According to the link you provided, that fluid does not meet the Esso specification. Penzoil very carefully uses the phrase "suitable for applications that require..." as opposed to saying "certified to meet....".

Apart from the phrasing, which is common with many non-certified fluids, the give-away is that it is a multi-purpose fluid designed to be 'suitable' for transmissions requiring either Dexron III, Mercon, Allison C4, Toyota T, Honda ATFZ1, Mitsubishi SP, Nissan Matic D and J, as well as the LT specification. Those are all different specifications, with different specific requirements. The benefit of this type of fluid is for the vendor, because as Penzoil points out, inventory costs are reduced by only having to stock one fluid instead of the specific fluids called for by the manufacturers. That is also related to why it is inexpensive.

I am not saying that it won't work, and your experience has been positive. But for anyone contemplating changing the transmission fluid, I think it is worth noting the difference in between meeting a specification (as per the publisher of the specification) and claiming that it will be fine. ZF themselves say that only the Esso spec is acceptable, that there are no other appropriate fluids. The mechanical equivalent of these fluids is an adjustable crescent wrench; it can fit some bolts fine, and many times it works. Other times it just destroys the bolt because it doesn't fit as well as a proper wrench.

I put in the VW stuff. It was yellow. :dunno:
My tranny has been making a weird loud sound just before shifting when cold ever since (almost 2 yrs).
I'm thinking of flushing it for the red stuff but i don't know about mixing the two since you can't completly flush the tranny at once (or can you?)

I know this is an old post, but figured I add a new question:

In a previously published posting, I asked for help with regards to the slow leak coming from the Tranny oil pan. Today I purchased a bottle of Pentosin ATF1 and will topp it off before I take it to Spokane for warranty work. I am sure I could fix it myself, as it is probably the gasket that's leaking, but I also hit 60,000 miles and I will let them do the service. I usually change my oil, therefore I will request for the oil not to be changed.

The question none of the NAPA guys could answer was: Is the Pentosin ATF1 as good as the Esso LT 71141? Has anyone used it before? When I typed in BMW oil # 83220142516 listed on the bottom of the oil pan sticker, Pentosin ATF1 comes up...

Thanks for all who read this.

The Pentosin ATF1 apparently meets an older ZF spec, but does not meet the more current ZF spec. It is not the same as what BMW calls for. That may impact any future warranty claims you may have, in a theoretical world.

A separate question is whether it is much different, and whether using a small amount of top-off will have any detrimental effects. My gut tells me no.

Transtar sells the original ZF branded fluid in 1 liter bottles for $18 and change. Transtar has agents in many locations across the US and there should be one near you, look them up on the i-net.

Also, the dealer might give you a break on it if you bring your own container and ask nicely.... I paid $22 and change, hence not worth for me to go to Transtar but w/o the discount I would have driven the 15 miles to get to them.

Good luck

Thanks JCL, returned the Pentosin ATF1 after being told by Pentosin Customer Service that they will not guarantee compatibility!!! I got me a liter of Audi ATF instead which seems to be the same as the Shell M-1375.4

Thanks again !!!

Ok, I will kick myself in the nuts now... The 2005 X5 4.4i transmission oil filler is not on the side, it's on the bottom of the pan. Could have saved myself some serious time and headaches by looking at it first. I saw some instructions on how to deal with trannies, but I got no facility for that. Attaching a pic of the oil pan bottom showing the oil # warning and big plug at the end.

Thanks for all who contributed.


http://img692.imageshack.us/img692/4...annyoilpan.jpgGA6HP26Z

UPDATE!!!!

BMW roadside assistance will pick the vehicle up at my home and tow it 382 miles to Spokane and back at no charge. X5 is still under CPO warranty, and job will be covered under the CPO as well.

Car back in my garage. I had to hustle with Camp BMW to reunite the car with me, as they didn't want to pay for towing back to me. Made a few phone calls to BMWNA and Roadside Assist and they informed the dumbasses that the first 250 miles is the dealership's responsibility... so, I too the train where the 250 miles ended and brought it home :) Smart, heh???? Yeah I know, every penny counts these days. So, my leak is fixed, had them do some of the 60k miles service(break and coolant flushes) and I am a happy camper again!!! At least for now...

That great your very lucky

yeah, I consider myself lucky. The towing would have cost me $1,200.

Great write up!! Thanks.

Should the car be brought up to operating temp before the initial drain?

Probably couldnt hurt since warmer fluids flow better. I even cranked the engine (don't actually let it run) over a handful of times to get fluid pumped out of the lines.

Yes, but a warm transmission, the filling part will be a bitch. You need to fill it cold, then warm up. If the fill process starts out too warm, then you won't fill it up with the right amount.

Whereas it probably wouldn't hurt, transmission fluid is essentially a 10w oil, and so it flows pretty well anyway. I wouldn't warm it up myself, just to avoid working around hot components.

I did my 1st Transmission Fluid change 3days ago @123,538mile
 

I did my 1st Transmission Fluid change 3days ago @123,538miles on a 2001 BMW X5 4.4i. However, my transmission was smooth with no issue
But as you guys know, there are many discurtions in the forum outhere
about the word (Lifetime fluid). For me, I think this is too good 2 be true,
*Nothing could be Lifetime really, even bridges have to be rebuilt one day.
And I hate when people talking trash about (New Fluid will shock the Tranny).

I than decided to change my Transmission Fluid before things get worst
because the only issue I used to have is: when i selected reverse, if I don't
wait for 2 sec. to press the gas pedal, I feel a little jump or skipping back.
I just had some feeling that it might be related to transmission. Otherwise
everything was shifting smoothly.

To began, I had to gently try to loose all 22 transmission hex bolts to ensure that I could move forward with the job, because they were badly
injured and that was my mainly concern to not have to stop in the middle of it. 1st. I did not have my personal driveway to work and the only area I could found to do it is near my house which is only 95% level each-either. So I went and do it anyway with 4 Ramps holding 12000Lbs each.
Amazingly, I was able to get loose all 22 pan bolts first before began the
job. Overhaul, it was not bad at all guys, I was alone working all by my self as usual, and the job went well successfully. After filling 4 qrts of fluid inside, I than crawling inside the car for the switching gears. I wen't through all the gears but noticed while pausing to each gear, it won't stay
to 4 & 5. It just skip 4 & 5 and going back to 3rd gear,

I than crawling under the car again while engine it's running now to add 1qrt/ half more fluid, after doing so, fluid started dripping out of the filler
hole. I than tight everything up and go ahead for a test drive, Overhaul I can say the job has been well done, the car is smooth as usual with much more confidence now by knowing that my transmission pan is cleaned from debris since 11yrs now. (See pictures for details)

Lifetime means the transmission lifetime, not your lifetime. And most bridges last longer than transmissions; I don't understand the bridge analogy, since we don't usually change the fluid in bridges.

I wouldn't say the new fluid shocks the transmission since transmissions don't really care about what fluid is in them, as long as it meets the spec. What the new fluid and all the detergents it contains does do is clean out all the build up in the transmission and flush it out. Since there is nowhere for the residue to go it tends to settle in the valve body, where it blocks small but vital control passages and orfices. Then, you can get shifting problems, caused not so much by the new fluid, as by the detergents in the new fluid.

If you change it frequently enough you will tend to avoid that particular problem (no guarantees, though). Then the real debate becomes whether your investment in frequent fluid changes has any effect on the time to failure of the transmission, and thus whether it was a good investment, or simply money down the drain. Changing the fluid only makes sense if not changing it contributes to failures.

What I hate is when people talk trash about tribology.

Just a comment. I went through the dreaded tranny rebuild due to a cracked clutch housing several years ago. I developed a close relationship with the local authorized ZF tranny rebuilder as a result. My wife's '97 Jag XK8 uses the same tranny and was having some lurching issues. After consulting with a very experienced ZF mechanic, he confessed that these ZF trannies often exhibited more problems and potential slipping after fluid was changed. His recommendation was to just leave them alone and keep driving them and don't change fluid unless some serious problem comes up that requires disassembly. Her tranny problem turned out to be a faulty switch on the tranny Sport mode. No fluid change and now at 170K miles and running fine.

OK, as promised, I am posting my experience flushing my tanny.
The car is X5 4.4i 2001 with 123,535 miles on it and this
service has never been done in the past.
Lifeguard5 Fluid is for 5-speed ZF transmission E53 and may be used on other years/model as well.

The tools you need:
- T27 Torx bit
- 8mm Hex drive (for the filler and drain plugs)
- 10mm socket
- Torque wrench (lower range from arounf 6lbft to 50lbft)
- Oil manual pump to put the fresh ATF into the pan (see one of the pictures)
- Rubbermaid small step stool.
- Oil catch pan (I use 10 quart version)
- Plenty of rags or kitty liter, trust me you’ll have plenty Pentosin on your garage floor
- I use brake cleaner spray to clean the pans and hands

The parts
-Trans filter
- trans pan gasket+all 22 hex bolts have been replaced
- Lifeguard5=Esso LT71141 (I ordered 6 quarts) for $87.

Job has been successfully done! car still driving smooth as usual.

Don't know if anyone corrected the comment by the original poster (didn't want to go through all the posts) that the car was brought to operating temp when he did the second fluid add with the engine running, but the fluid in the trans and when I say trans I also mean the torque converter should be in a range of 30C to 50C. Since our engine operates at close to 195F which is pretty close to the temp at which water boil 100C bringing the car to operating temp, exceeds the 50C range that the fluid should be at according to the procedure for checking and filling the trans.

That's an important point, because if you get the transmission too hot, the fluid with expand, causing it to spill out of the fill hole before the transmission is truly full.

To add more fuel to the fire surrounding the controversy about whether changing the trans fluid makes sense, I'd offer this - the average American keeps his car around 10 years now. This means there are probably tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of cars driving around with well over 150,000 miles on them. Of these, I'd say less than 20% have ever had their transmission fluid changed. If it were really that critical to do this, the roadsides would be strewn with cars with dead transmissions. I'm not saying this is a terrible thing to do, I'm just not convinced it really makes much difference, plus it's not exactly an inexpensive bit of maintenance.

As one anecdotal data point, I drained and filled the trans fluid on my daughter's 04 E46 about a year and a half, and 18,000 miles, ago. The fluid that came out looked brand new - not even a trace of sediment in the pan. It even smelled new. We have the records of the car since new, and there's no record of the trans fluid ever having been changed. It ran fine before, and it ran fine after the drain & fill. But now, 18 months later, it's starting to slip when cold. So, my conclusion is that the drain and fill didn't cause the current problem, but I don't think it did anything to delay it, either. In other words, I don't think it had any effect one way or the other. I think I'm going to pass on the drain & fill on our other two BMWs, including the X5.

There was a commercial one time about a mechanic and his parting remarks was you can pay me now or pay me later.

The analogy is that the preventative maintenance cost will be less than the repair cost later.

The problem with applying that to automatic transmissions is that changing fluids doesn't qualify as preventative maintenance, since there isn't a correlation between changing the fluid and getting more life out of the transmission, at least on recent model BMWs.

As a mechanic and service manager, I didn't sell transmission fluid changes most of the time.

Since most of the containments in ATF is the semi-metallic material from the clutch packs I would say that replacing ATF is a preventative measure. The electro servos in the trans are nothing more than electromagnets which causes the valves to open or close. Having all that semi metallic material in the fluid will be attracted to those servos, that is why the manufacturers installs permanent magnets in the pan to attract those material and prevent them from circulating through the trans.

The manufacturers of the trans used in our X is either Zf or GM both recommends ATF fluid changes, only BMW in order to reduce their "Free Maintenance" cost to owners call the ATF Life time hoping that the trans will not crap out before the warranty.

I agree that eventually, the contaminants in the fluid will cause problems with the transmission. I'm just not convinced this will on average happen before other components not related to the fluid, such as the clutch packs, wear out.

I'm not saying it's a bad idea to replace the transmission fluid, and in some cases, it might increase the life of your transmission. But I'm with JCL that in most cases, it won't really do much, if anything. It definitely didn't in the case of my daughter's E46. Otherwise, as I said, there would be thousands of cars in this country with dead transmissions, when in fact, transmission failure really isn't that common of a problem.

And once that semi-metallic material goes into the pan it either sits on the magnet, or stays on the dirty side of the screen. In both cases, it does no harm there.

If the reason for not changing fluid was because of the prepaid maintenance offered in the US, then it would follow that all the rest of the world, with no prepaid maintenance, would have a different recommendation, namely to change the fluid. But they don't. And if BMW was concerned, then they wouldn't be holding the lease residuals on all those leased vehicles, without reducing their exposure.

What is different with BMW and those same transmissions in other vehicles? The transmission cooling system. The control software that reduces power during shifts. The torque converter lock-up strategy. The transmission monitoring algorithms. Etc, etc. That is probably why those two manufacturers endorsed BMW's maintenance strategy.

Do they really endorse BMW's maintenance strategy or do they just want to sell transmissions to BMW? After all when the trans crap out, do ZF or GM repair the trans or do BMW perform the repairs?

I'm on the fence with this. I've had very few automatics, but my e36 has 160K miles with no service records showing a tranny change. Unfortunately, its weeping a little bit, which means I may need to drop the pan and re-do the gasket. I'll probably do the filter at the same time and top it off, but I dont think I am going to do a full change.

I keep reading threads where people do the tranny service at high mileage and then 6 months later the tranny dies. I've read that the clean fluid does too good of a job cleaning the engine and the gunk it dislodges causes the passages to clog.

:iagree:That you tried to make a point on changing the transmission fluid
but at the same time, you plan on messing things up by doing basically
the same mistake a few people be doing outhere. By: topping-up and
not trying to add as much fresh fluid as you can, & not changing the filter.

By doing so, you risk to cause more damage because (the pan needs to be
dropped in order to be cleaned, including the 4 magnets inside).
If you knew how dirty they get over the time, you would be more excited
to clean them, because this is where all the wear metals seated.
The previous job upthere in this forum with the blue X5 4.4i was from me.
meaning: that may tell you something that I'm aware of because I've been there

I did mine for the 1st time at 125,000 miles, now I'm still driving strong
the same way with nearly 128,000 miles now. My suggestion is just that
Don't just top it up! Do it the right way, by removing as much dirty fluid
you can pull out. And Fill-up with the proper fluid, and replacing new filter.

There are not many companies around that know more about automatic transmissions than Allison. They had to come up with new oil formulations when GM dropped certification of Dexron. When that happened everyone was open to put burro pee in a can and call it dexron. The engineer who wrote the specs on Allison's replacement synthetic Syntec when retired, joined an RV forum about Allison. They were forced to re-adjust their thinking about lifespan of trans fluid-even with their new super juice. To those who "know" someone who changed their fluid/fliter in their automatic and ended up blowing up their trans- I think I would challenge them to name names. It only stands to reason that removing any of the dirt and byproducts of a piece of machinery with friction surfaces and replaceing the lubricant with fresh new lubricfant, can only do good for the same reason it does in an engine. I doubt that any machine manufacturer has their own oil well, oil research section, testing labs, health & safety standards approval section (this stuff is in human contact). I think it is safe to say BMW and others use rebadged cans of lubricants and chemicals. The fact that Ford uses the same ZF6HP26 tranny in a Lincoln Navigator and specs Motorcraft Mercon SP fluid at $8/liter should be a little enlightening to those who are receptive.

Good morning. The last time anyone posted on this thread was Dec. of last year. While your information is concise and well written, the topic has been beaten to death. There is a consensus from other members and former techs on this forum that support you don't touch the tranny if it has hit 100k and has never been cracked open before. Using the old adage of "if it ain't broke..." The exception would be if the tranny is experiencing problems, then change fluid. You may be looking at an overhaul of the tranny anyway, so as a last ditch effort to squeeze the last bit of life out, you could drop the pan and change the oil and filter, but end result normally is the same.

Just wanted to add this to the wikipedia.
For me, ZF5HP24.
3 Bolt Drains/Refill.
1 Pan Drop, NO Filter Change.
Fluid was cheap for me.
No issues up to this point.
Note, I have been experiencing the 2/1 downshift when I approached 98K miles, but this happened more/noticeable when I was on a incline and in stop and go traffic bumper 2 bumper rush hour traffic.

Full Pan Drop, filter, line flushed - I think I used about 11.25 qts .
The 2-1 downshift magically went away !
2500 miles later, G1 started slipping on me. 2 minor times with a hard bang into gear, then later in the day, straight slip until it hit 2nd gear with a hard bang and then limp mode, 1 stop sign away from home.

I did not hesitate going with the rebuild..
She's running strong. I'm still putting it through it's paces but sofar, sogood.

Yes after I posted I looked at the previous posting dates and realized I should go to bed. One technique for changing out tranny fluid owners of large RV developed was to, change out filter, then undo the return line from the tranny cooler and drain into a bucket while filling with new into the other return line section-with help from someone idling the car while this oil change circus is going on. It at least allowed the closest thing to 100% oil change. This involved transmissions with 18 to 25 liters capacity-but it is just as important for our cars. Anyone ever put forth this changeout technique?

Great write up, I did this last year. Still shifts like brand new at 185k. As far as the torque converter, since you changed the filter all you need to do is drain and refill after a few thousand miles. I changed mine, then went back and did a simple drain and refill.

If any of you are planning on keeping your car for the long haul, this is a MUST do thing that is worth its weight in gold.

For the earlier model X5's you can also drain and refill the transfer case without having to reset adaptive values, it also uses the same fluid as your transmission.
:thumbup::thumbup::thumbup:

How do you get the fluid out of the TC?

Depends on the model, some have a drain plug some you have to use a hand pump and pump it out.

03 4.4?

I havent been under one later than my own as far as looking at the T-Case. I think at that point it was still the 5HP24 5 speed so it should have a plug to drain down low and a plug to fill up top.

TwinTurbo made a good point, above, but I don't want to let your points go unchallenged.

I can point at specific transmissions whereby the fluid was changed, and the new fluid (or more specifically, the detergents in the new fluid) caused a failure in a transmission that was up to then, performing well. These were customer transmissions. They weren't BMWs (but then, BMWs don't have BMW auto transmissions). You can't have their names. You don't have to believe me if you don't want to, but these are not old wive's tales or urban myths. It certainly doesn't mean that changing the fluid at higher mileage will always cause a problem, it simply doesn't. But statistically, it does cause a problem often enough to make shops stop and think about whether they want to take the risk. Many won't, as they don't like being on the hook for a transmission rebuild after they specifically recommended not changing the fluid (same as the vehicle manufacturer), but did it at the customer's insistence. It is more profitable for them to pass on the revenue from the fluid change, and avoid the risk of the occasional rebuild on their dime.

I don't understand your Allison reference. Great company, no worries there. But they were owned by GM Powertrain from the 1920's to sometime in the early 2000's. So, Allison is GM. And GM endorsed BMW's maintenance strategy. So I don't think that their heavy truck experience, as applied to RV's, has any weight here.

The other issue with RVs is that they are famous for being heavier than they should be according to the GVW sticker, and having more aerodynamic drag. Both stress transmissions. I can understand changing the transmission fluid in a vehicle that is regularly overloaded, as many RVs are. It would make sense, as it would shift the risk/reward balance.

You mention dirt and byproducts in a transmission. Fair comment. But a transmission fluid has very low demands for lubrication. That is why it isn't called transmission oil. It is a hydraulic fluid, first and foremost. It is a heat conductor, very important. And it can't foam or oxidize. But the lubrication demands that it is subject to are so low that auto trans fluid is typically a straight 10w oil. It is running in a sealed system, with pressurized lubrication, with no external contaminants (things like byproducts of combustion, water, etc). So, it lasts a long time as long as it doesn't get burnt. Thermal management is very important (back to the RV issues....).

BMW doesn't design or build auto transmissions, or the fluid that goes in them. ZF and GM do a good job of both (and both have their fluids built to their own specs). What BMW does do is alter the control strategies, and the transmission cooling system. Those are BMW items, not ZF or GM (although they are done in cooperation). Items like the BMW cooling system, with the thermostat (keeps it cool, even towing 7700 lbs in Europe, and provides warm fluid sooner on startup to reduce cold wear), and the strategy of backing off the power via the ECM when shifting (reducing clutch wear, and heat, significantly) both extend the life of the transmission fluid. Even more important, the lock up torque converter strategy (much reduced heat when locked up) helps a lot. Not sure what the Lincoln has in this respect, but to say that it is the same transmission is incomplete.

I wouldn't use the Mercon fluid in a BMW, but that is simply because while it is similar, it isn't necessarily the same. ZF went to specific fluids due to their transmission design, primarily relating to clutch engagement characteristics. That is all that is different about the different fluids, at the end of the day. Unless ZF or GM want to publish their friction specs, it is a mugs game to say that the fluid is the same because some parts of the transmission are the same.

Your subsequent post asked about pumping out the transmission via the return line from the cooler. This can certainly be done. It gets more of the old fluid out. If I had a transmission with burnt fluid in an RV (common occurence, for reasons listed above) I would do this. But I wouldn't do it on a modern BMW, unless the fluid was burnt. Take a look at the BMW service procedure. If a tech has to drain the fluid to change a simple item like a temperature sensor, speed sensor, or whatever, inside the transmission, the approved service procedure says to catch the old fluid and put it back in. Think about that. It's a lot of trouble. It would be easier to put new in (and thus cheaper, when you are paying labour by the hour). But they want to keep the old fluid in, because it is better for the transmission than new fluid. There is a paradigm shifter for you.

Always happy to talk transmissions. And I even know where Stettler is (ex Edmonton, and Grande Prairie).

Cheers

Jeff

If you do a Google search you will find that Allison transmission warn their customers not to use Dexron VI in their trans. Even though the manufacturer of Dexron VI said that their fluid was backward compatible. Customers who changed to Dexron VI started having trans failure with the new fluid. It turn out that some of the rubbers seal used in the trans was not compatible with the new fluid.

Allison trans are not just used in trucks and RVs. Some Corvettes also uses Allison trans.

Interesting, I didn't know that. All my Allision experience was with heavy trucks and industrial equipment.

I looked up Allison and the lightest current transmission (model 1000) is rated for 6 ton and up vehicles. I thought the new Corvette was getting lighter? Was it an older Corvette?

Who is the real oe on the filters? I see several saying they are.

REALOEM from my vin says I have AUTOMATIC TRANSMISS. GA6HP26Z - 4-WHEEL

The vin decode says:
Production FROM : 1998/10/01 TO : 2003/09/30
Engine M62
Engine Oil 8.00 Liter
Transmission Automatic
Transmission Model A5S 440Z
Transmission Oil 9.70 Liter
Rear Axle Oil 1.00 Liter
Coolant(w/o Air Conditioner) 0.00 Liter
Coolant(with Air Conditioner) 12.50 Liter
Brake fluid 1.00 Liter
Remarks : 
Transfer box (0,46 l), final drive (front axel) (0,7 l)

Which freaking trans do I have?

Never mind. Somehow it jumped from 12/2002 to 12/2003. I knew I had the 5 speed.

Sorry & thanks

Consensus doesn't prove anything. I'm in the camp of changing the transmission fluid. I had it changed in my 2001 4.4i with 108K miles (right after I purchased the vehicle) and drove it to 129K miles before buying my current X5. Never had a hint of problem with it.

I had it serviced at an indy who specializes in German vehicles and the owner hsa over 25 years working as a mechanic and service manager for BMW / Mercedes before opening his own shop. It has been his experience changing the transmission fluid does not result in increased failure rates. To date I have seen no supporting facts showing an increase in faliure rates for transmissions where the fluid was changed after high mileage. Until such time I'm chalking this up to a wives tale.

I have been watching the outcomes of transmission fluid changes here since 06' and JCL is right on target. The post change failure rate is just high enough to make the process too risksy to be worth pursuing. Add to that, that the dealer won't do it to make a buck and I'm sold on it being a bad idea.

You've been watching it? How have you been watching it? What does "watching it" mean?

Consensus is always composed as a matter of opinion. Looking through threads, many on here have experiences problems after a fluid change, i.e. Trans fluid is a high detergent fluid, after a change, dislodges debris within the tranny. The debris could clog up passages for the fluid to circulate, starving the tranny of fluid in critical places. Is it 100%? No... it doesn't always happen and I am sure those who have changed their tranny fluid have experienced many miles of trouble free service and really don't voice the success. But those who have changed the fluid and experience failure, you can bet that they will always broadcast it.

While I agree fluid changes are necessary... I do not agree with having to spend a few hundred to change the fluid on a working transmission, then experiencing a failure and spending a few grand to fix it. Again, matter of opinion. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

Completely agree.

But I would respectfully point out that consensus implies a large sample, and you are holding your example out as proof to the contrary, in a case where n=1.

I would not expect you to have had a problem after changing your fluid, as more transmission will be fine post fluid change than will fail. But we are discussing the risk of failure, statistically, not whether they will all fail. And on the other side of the coin, you don't know that your transmission wouldn't still be running fine with the original fluid. You spent the money, got no return on that investment, and arguably increased your risk. Is that an investment decision you recommend all should make?

In theory the explanation makes sense. However there have been nothing but anecdotes to support such a thoery. We don't know all the details that go into each anecdote. For example it's not unlikely someone was experiencing a transmission issue and decided to try changing the fluid in an effort to correct it. Instead masking an underlying problem. Until there is support data it remains nothing more than theory.

No, I am holding the 25+ years of experience of my indy mechanic as evidence. As I said he worked for a local BMW dealer for 25+ years. In his experience he has not observed any correlation between changing the fluid and subsequent failure.

Likewise I have seen no supporting data anywhere to support this theory. If you've got some hard data I will be happy to take a look at it and reconsider. Until such time all we have are a number of anecdotes that form the "consensus". There could be any number of reasons for why a transmission failed after a fluid change. The most obvious being it was done incorrectly (which could be reason enoug to avoid doing it). It's not uncommon for work to be performed in an incorrect manner with problems as a result.

We've had this discussion many times before Sunny, and I am not out to change your mind. You have your mind made up. Fair enough. All of the posts that we provided to you documenting transmission failures post fluid change on past threads, you discounted as "probably a coincidence" and "anecdotal".

The outstanding question is, didn't you have to replace your own transmission valve body? You posted and described that in some detail back when it happened. I remember the references to your trusted independent mechanic, and a thread about your own transmission fluid change. I can't link to those discussions, because unfortunately the threads were subsequently edited. Perhaps they were leading to reader confusion about coincidences and anecdotes.

Any comment?

Why would I change my mind when the facts haven't changed? The facts are there is not supporting data for this theory. I've requested it numerous times and each time it has never been provided. Anecdotal stories, and that's what they are, posted on a forum is not supporting data. Not trying to be a jerk about this but I have a mechanic with over 25+ years experience working at a BMW dealership in various service capacities who tells me otherwise.

I'd appreciate it if you'd keep any implications editing of posts was done to deceive others. Typically I edit a post to correct spelling / grammar errors or to rephrase a thought after I've gone back and re-read it after posting.

With that said I owned two E53 X5's. The first, a 2000 with 85K miles required the valve body to be replaced. The second, a 2001 with 108K miles on it when I purchased it, had ALL the fluids replaced when I purchased it.

You can find the first mention of the 2000 issue here:

http://www.xoutpost.com/728325-post15.html

And the first mention of the 2001 transmission fluid replacement here:

http://www.xoutpost.com/756050-post3.html

And look...neither of them show as having been edited.

No one has asked for you to change your mind and no one is trying to convince you otherwise. Your opinion is your opinion and you are welcome to it. From what FORUM readers and FORUM techs have said, yes, doing a tranny fluid change on a worked out tranny heightens the risk of transmission damage. For your tech with 25+ years experience to tell you other wise is completely fine. But I will reverse your logic. You coming to the forum and telling us there is no substantial data to support the theory that a fluid change could possibly result in a failed tranny and that you have never seen supporting data is fine. Techs with years of experience have mentioned that this is possible and is a relevant concern. But... we haven't seen any data you have provided from your tech with 25+ years experience that proves the complete opposite. Supporting date could be an excel sheet listing all of the trannys he has done a fluid change on and how many have come back to thank him after another 50K, 75K, 100K miles of service and do another fluid change.

The point JCL and I were trying to make was, it IS possible to damage a transmission by doing a fluid exchange. We have seen it happen on the forum and I am sure JCL has seen it during his career personally. The statements you have made pertaining to your tech sound like absolute statements (Fluid changes do not cause transmission failures). And if your tech is saying that, then fine, we would actually love to hear that because it would stop the madness about doing and not doing a change of fluid and will give us a definitive answer. But until you can prove it, then its all relevant. There are forum members that have done a fluid change without any problems. Some have even used fluid that isn't even the spec it calls for and they are still fine. Bust some have had the service done at their shop or at the dealer and they have come back with a trashed tranny.

On another note, thats great your tech has had numerous roles, is a shop owner, and is 25+ years in. Thats really great and is probably a wealth of knowledge. But in my honest opinion... the power of the forum is better than any tech on his own. A forum is a collaboration of tried and true methods, fixes, and symptom hunting. I mean there have been countless times when members have come to the forum describing a symptom that their tech or dealer couldn't figure out, and 9 times out of 10 we've come up with the right solution. There is information on here that some dealerships haven't even heard of, "i.e. TSB numbers, tricks, tips, etc" Heck, members have even designed and manufactured their own parts that are better than original. So before regarding information on forums as mere heresay, you might want to add in your own "one hitter quitter" to back up your own claim. JCL and I have seen it many times on the forum here. We've witnessed heated arguments going back and forth between the advantages, disadvantages, turmoils, which fluid to use, etc. Information that you mentioned you have seen. Well, we haven't seen any of yours...

Again, not going meaning this to challenge you, or get into an argument, or the flame each other. But... just sayin...

I don't have to. The burden of proof for a theory rest solely on the shoulders of those making it.

Anything is possible. All I ask is for you to support your theory with data. Not anecdotes from forum members where the details of the situation are varied and largely unknown.

I don't have to prove anything. The burden of proof lies on those making the claim changing the fluid can lead to problems. I'm receptive to that theory and merely ask for supporting data, not anecdotes.

The fallacy being the transmission fluid change was the cause of the trashed tranny. Until data supporting the cause of the failure was related to changing the transmission fluid is provided it could merely be coincidence. Or, and this seems more plausible, the fluid change was done incorrectly.

My tech is now the owner of his own business. While he does work on vehicles from time to time he has other people doing the work for him. Where his 25 + years experience comes into play is having worked at a BMW dealership. He's seen more than his fair share of BMW vehicles prior to starting his own business.

Say what you will. My participation in this thread was not to argue the merits of changing the transmission fluid or not. It was to state that having a consensus doesn't really mean much without supporting data. After all at one time the consensus was the earth was flat.

Ok, seems like we are getting no where. You've made your own claims that a fluid change WILL NOT cause damage to a transmission. And again thats fine. But if you are asking us to prove it, then you will have to as well. Otherwise, again, all heresay. So what I am asking is for your proof. Again, this is supposed to be a discussion and so far, its one sided.

But you'll probably come back and say "I don't need to provide proof" Well, thats fine. Our proof is from members that have explained the situation in detail. Also from techs explaining it in great detail (BMW techs and indy's). So sounds like this thread is dead. You want to provide YOUR proof, we welcome it. If not, then I guess your information is heresay, much like ours.

The famous one that was edited down is here:

http://www.xoutpost.com/bmw-sav-foru...nsmission.html

This was the thread running at the same time, which had an example of a sudden failure after changing the fluid (I know, n=1, just like your example).

http://www.xoutpost.com/bmw-sav-foru...hange-diy.html

This next one was by far the most entertaining, though. It had everything. Yes, it was titled engine oil, but it was about transmission fluid, analysis, faith, and by the end, rainbows and cupcakes. It also included mention of the replaced valve body, albeit edited.

http://www.xoutpost.com/bmw-sav-foru...sing-help.html

This one was good as well, it had a couple of BMW technicians participating.

http://www.xoutpost.com/bmw-sav-foru...intenance.html

I had an 01 Acura CLS. They had known bad 5ATs. Acura tried to blame it on everything form the lunar cycle to bad/corrupt fluids. My car had 182k when it left me and it's transmission never had a hiccup.

Bottom line fluids wear out. They reach an end of life and stop offering the protection for which they were designed. It seems counter productive to not replace potentially end of life fluid because it might cause issues from following a reasonable maintenance cycle.

I have always upon purchase of a new to me vehicle performed complete maintenance. I have no idea if/when the fluids were replaced, I got no records. I plan to do it anyway.

I am making no such claim. I am claiming no such evidence to support such a theory has been provided. Consensus is not proof.

That's not proof. Those are anecdotes.

Edit down? What does that mean? If you've got an accusation I've been deceitful through editing my posts then say it and prove it.

Still not seeing any supporting data. Just a bunch of spin from you.

Seriously JCL...I expected much better from you.

I probably shouldn't have waded back in again :rofl:

I provided the links immediately above for the reading pleasure of newer members who might not have seen this particular debate before. It is all the same information as this time around.

I was also told last time around that the burden of proof was all on me with respect to the claim that properly done automatic transmission fluid changes on healthy transmissions can precipitate failures due to the detergent levels cleaning out the transmission, and shifting the resulting sediment into the valve body, causing shifting problems. My anecdotes, combined with the anecdotes of two forum members who were BMW technicians, and others in the business, didn't weigh up to the trusted independent that does Sunny's work. We couldn't help Sunny in this case, but there was a large offline discussion going on at the same time, just discussing that particular thread. It was, as my daughter would say, epic. It is the third one in my post above.

I also asked about a particular claim that Sunny made, namely that no fluid is lifetime and by inference, that old fluid was contributing to transmission failures. There was no proof provided for that claim. Using the same logic (one would think that would be logical, burden of proof and all....) I asked Sunny for his proof. He said it was a fact, he didn't need to prove it. That's in the third link as well, post #177. Oh well.

Haha, this is just becoming funny. I believe you said, and I quote, "I don't mean to be negative but it's my opinion there is a problem with the transmission that the fluid change has just covered. Ultimately the transmission will require repair and this will turn into another example of how changing the transmission fluid is a bad idea." (Sunny5280), and "Anyway this is rehashing a discussion I exited in the interest of keeping peace on the forum. I would request you refrain from engaging in posts which serve no propose other than to rehash the subject. (Sunny5280)"

Hmmm... so looks like this discussion happened before. Again you mentioned burden of proof, but still had none of your own?

It is probably safe to say we agree to disagree. You go ahead and change your fluids. That is fine. But for myself and a lot of other members, we will keep it where it is. Nothing for nothing, reading those posts... you kind of sound like you want to battle the tranny issue out. That's fine. But if anything, you are be irresponsible by saying a fluid change is good; as a fact, when you yourself have made no proof.

And reading those posts, there really wasn't any spin. JCL has made notes of other discussions from other members besides himself that are all in conjunction of what we've been saying. Again, you are entitled to your opinion. But I'm done with this thread. I've seen the previous posts mentioned and seeing you've had this discussion previously and you didn't come out looking so rosey then, yeah... I'm good.

Nice finds JCL. I liked the last one. Didn't read that one.

Deceitful is a very strong word. I never said deceitful. In the posts under discussion, you were editing posts as you wrote, and we couldn't keep up the responses because posts were coming and going. There are references to a couple of your claims that were made and then removed, in one of my links above.

Why would you come to a discussion board for data? It is for discussions.

Sorry if I am disappointing you.

Again: I don't have to provide the burden of proof to disprove someone else's theory.

For example if I were to say: Every morning you kill a kitten you don't have to provide proof that you do not. It would be my burden to provide proof to support such a statement. You don't have to do a thing in order to disprove it. Same applies here.

Please don't put words in my mouth. I am merely saying I have seen no supporting data to demonstrate changing the transmission fluid results in increased transmission failures. This is not the same thing as saying it is a good thing. Please learn the difference.

I looked just fine to people who understand logic and do not succumb to the "group think" (i.e. consensus) mentality. Do you still think the world is flat?

Apparently that's not the only thing you're not reading.

I didn't say you did. I said, and I quote:

"If you've got an accusation I've been deceitful through editing my posts then say it..."

Do you understand english? Is it not your native language?

What does this mean? Do you mean that I was deleting posts? Where are the references? Specifics please.

Because I expect people to support what they say when it goes contrary to common sense or other information I have. You've done everything BUT PROVIDE SUPPORTING DATA. You could easily clear this up by providing data. Instead you've opted to provide nothing but anecdotes and implications I have been dishonest through the editing / removal of my posts.

I'm not the only one you're disappointing.

I am interested in the argument against replacing old fluids that no longer provide protection.

Can someone please explain how it is better to leave it in than possibly dislodge unknown contaminants that may or may not be in the system.

Sure. Transmission fluid is designed to last a long time. It is in a sealed system, so it doesn't get contaminated by things like engine oil does. It has additives that fight oxidation, and foaming. There are also friction modifiers. Over time those additives become depleted. The fluid does wear out over a long enough period of time. It doesn't stop lubricating, but it does lose some specific properties. Recall that lubrication is the lowest requirement of a transmission fluid. It is a very undemanding lubrication requirement. That is why it is a straight 10w oil. It is primarily a hydraulic fluid. The question is, does it wear out before the transmission expires of other, unrelated causes? Most failures we are seeing are related to things not related to lubrication (wiring harnesses, sensors, etc). Those failures won't be impacted by a fluid change. So, there is a big question as to whether changing the fluid will have any effect on average transmission life.

Now, what happens when a transmission wears (naturally) over time? There are sediments created by clutch plate material, generally non-metallic, and they sit in the pan on the dirty side of the filter. Not the clean side. They look bad, but they don't hurt anything. They are also distributed throughout the transmission. There, again, they usually don't hurt anything. Now put in new fluid. Very high detergent levels, by design, that is what makes it last so long. Those detergents clean out the transmission. Same reason we use ATF in an engine to clean out combustion deposits. What happens when those deposits are loosened? They go through the transmission. They end up in the valve body. If they make it to the pan, no problem. If they get stuck in the valve body, in a sensor, in an actuator, etc, they can cause an early transmission failure. It happens. Not always, but often enough to show up in the statistics.

So the debate is, is the risk of damage (lets call it x) greater than y (the benefit of clean fluid, which is generally a good thing). If you believe that clean fluid is such a benefit that it overshadows the risk of failure through introducing new fluid, then change it. If you acknowledge the risk (small on a total population basis, but real) and don't see a history of failures due to aged fluid then you would not change it, save the money, and put it aside for an eventual transmission rebuilt not caused by a fluid issue.

There isn't a right answer. The only error, IMO, is not acknowledging that there is some risk, and that there is no demonstrated benefit. This isn't to say that all preventative maintenance is bad. It is usually good. But where there isn't a correlation between PM activities and extended component life, then it is better and cheaper to run it to failure. That is counterintuitive to some.

Hope that helps.

Thanks for taking the time to give me that info.

My transmission is fine currently. I guess I'll leave it alone for now and just do the rest of the fluids (already did the power steering).

Well and truly off topic, except for the last bit:
 

Fine. I didn't say it. You suggested I implied it. That better? For the record, I didn't imply it either. I simply noted that back when the previous discussion was going on, there was editing happening. It made it hard to follow the discussion at the time. The reason I remember is, there was at least one side conversation going on on private messages, with dicussion and comments about your approach. You were engaging in a debate with half a dozen or so forum regulars, some of whom had trouble following your logic. It just stuck in my mind.


Seriously? You want to insult every person who has English as a second language? Sí, Inglés es mi idioma principal. Sí, lo entiendo. Es la reparación de vehículos su primera profesión? No need to answer that.


Yes, it means you were deleting or modifying messages. Here is one specific example: See the thread http://www.xoutpost.com/bmw-sav-foru...nsmission.html. Your post #29. It was long. I wrote a detailed response. I had quoted you, so I had a copy of the long text. The flaw was that you used a circular argument in describing your burden of proof point. When I posted, I got a system error. It turned out that you had deleted the long text while I was typing, and left only a short response. Probably a good thing, because you had dug yourself a hole. My response in post #30 was my reminder. Is that all specific enough for you?


I have been thinking about something. Your reference for best practices on maintaining a BMW automatic transmission is an ex BMW dealer employee. Let's assume he knows all about BMWs. Now, how would he know anything about automatic transmissions built by ZF or GM? BMW doesn't train their dealer techs on those transmissions. They don't provide parts through their dealer system, so rebuilds are very unlikely at a dealer. Dealers are offered exchange transmissions in the event of transmission failures. And the BMW service instructions included in at least one case, instructions to drain the fluid and reinstall it, if a dealer tech had to go inside the pan. Yet an ex dealer employee is presented as an expert witness, so to speak. Doesn't seem like a logical conclusion.

Interesting, so the argument "don't flush trans fluid on hig mileage" argument really support "change the trann fluid more often, early" argument. Think about it...

I didn't suggest it. I said it:

"I'd appreciate it if you'd keep any implications editing of posts was done to deceive others."

That's an implication.

You're going to have to provide proof I ever did such a thing. It's easy to say something but you need to back it up. I won't hold my breath. Thus far you've failed miserably when asked to provide proof. All you've offered is "trust me because I said it".

How is what I wrote an insult? I asked you if you understood english and asked you if it was not your native language. I asked these questions because you appear to have a poor grasp on the language given you're having such a difficult time understand the simple concepts I've written. There's nothing insulting about that.


No, there's nothing there to support I had done any deleting / editing / modifying of my post to CYA. Again: Because I said so isn't proof. This seems to be a difficult concept for you.


I am not referring to it as a best practice. Please do not put words in my mouth.

The point being he has not observed a correlation between changing the transmission fluid and subsequent failures of those transmissions. This is not to say you should change it. Or that it's a best practices. Just merely if you do decide to do it there doesn't appear to be an increased risk of failure as a result. This is a very easy concept...why are you struggling with it?

With that said you can easily put this to rest by merely providing the requested information (i.e. reliable data supporting your point of view). I entered this discussion because TwinTurboGTR said:

"There is a consensus from other members and former techs on this forum that support you don't touch the tranny if it has hit 100k and has never been cracked open before."

It was not my intent to begin discussing this topic yet again. It was to merely say consensus doesn't prove anything. Ironically he also said:

"...the topic has been beaten to death."

Right before he said ...the consensus is... If it's been beaten to death there's obviously no consensus.

Same old story, another new person.

JCL, are you sure our transmissions are sealed? What about that vent tube that runs all the way to the engine bay.

Whatever.

I changed my fluid at 70K miles. Not flush, but drain and fill. I had crap stuck in my solenoids at 80k miles, so that put in about 10q of new oil.

My Lexus GS430 came with a card in the maintenance manual to drain and fill transmission every 30k miles. It is a very rare occurrence for the Lexus trans to fail, but the cases where it does fail, people were clueless about the regular oil refresh it required.

Will I keep changing the oil in my X5. Yes I will. Is it possible it will fail, yes it is. But, in my case, I am not afraid to try. I also use the proper oil, ZF6, and use a computer to monitor the fluid fill temperature.

Is my transmission acting better? Yes it is. But that could be since I "maintained" it with new solenoids, new fluid (times 3), new seals, and removed the crap that was blocking my solenoids since the beginning.

Came in here for knowledge, suddenly I found out I was in for some serious bizness:

http://images.starpulse.com/Photos/P...b-movie-03.jpg

By sealed I meant that it is unlike an engine, which has multiple sources of potential contamination of the oil. It isn't pressurized, so no it isn't completely sealed. One of the reasons to remove the fill tube going up to the engine bay (on other vehicles, not sure if BMW followed the same logic) was because leaving the dipstick out allowed contaminants to enter.

There is a possibility (not proof, just a likelihood) that the contaminants in your solenoids got there because the new fluid with the high detergent level loosened them and they travelled through the transmission, becoming lodged where they caused some problem. That is the standard complication that shows up following a fluid change. It doesn't always happen, and it doesn't always cause a problem. But that is the recognized failure mode, regardless. It is great if you got away with just the solenoids. And if you have gone any reasonable time from the fluid change, then it isn't likely to happen later, failures usually happened closer to the fluid change time. In my experience. Which isn't proof, as Sunny will want clarified.

Sunny:

The multi-quoting is getting difficult to follow. In one combined and relatively short post:

I never implied you were trying to deceive others. You are incorrect in that claim. I said it was difficult for me to follow it, because of the editing. The editing I witnessed myself. I provided you a time stamp if you have forgotten. I can't comment on whether others were deceived or confused. You would have to ask them. Some of them have posted their thoughts, but it is probably better if you ask them directly.

I don't have moderator privileges here, so I cannot undelete your messages or portions of messages and thus provide proof to you. Readers (other than you and I) are going to have to decide what to believe.

You wrote: "....you appear to have a poor grasp on the language given you're having such a difficult time understand the simple concepts I've written. There's nothing insulting about that." OK. Sounds insulting to me. Maybe the subtlety was lost in writing it.

The examples that I referred to in previous posts were from a shop I worked in, as you know. I previously explained to you that you can't have customer's and employee's names. I understand your request perfectly, I just won't play your game. You are anonymous here (at least to me, not sure about others), why would you expect real data? It isn't second hand info in my case, heard from a friend of a friend or read on a message board. It is from working on transmissions. It follows that since I was involved in working on those transmissions, that I know whether the transmission had pre-existing problems or not. I know if the correct fluid was used or not. And those examples, to the extent they exist, are not part of the data set under discussion. Your proof is a third hand reference to an anonymous mechanic who worked in a BMW dealership, where technicians typically aren't trained to fix transmissions. You say that I have to provide proof, but you don't (that is your particular strawman for this argument). Sorry. Again, readers are going to have to decide what to believe.

I disagree with you that a topic that has an apparent consensus cannot continue to be beaten to death. That is simply because consensus doesn't imply unanimity. I got that from my English language training, by the way. It only takes a few (or one persistent person) to continue to beat it.

Maybe we should go back to the famous "worst of the worst" thread and revisit whether the BMW driving experience is part of the feature set, and why can't BMWs be as reliable as Hondas for the same price? That was an entertaining one as well.

Have a nice day.

Jeff (Now less anonymous)

Thanks, is zf6 works for mine 4.4.i?

Then stop going to GAY bars. :bustingup :bustingup :bustingup

As I said I typically edit to correct spelling / grammar errors or make slight revisions to a thought in order to convey it better. None of this should have caused you any difficulty in following what I was saying.

With that said you stated I was deleting and modifying posts:

"Yes, it means you were deleting or modifying messages."

You were implying I had done so in an attempt to cover something up. That is being dishonest and I will not accept it when anyone accuses me of doing so, either implicitly or explicitly, without supporting facts. It's a shame because you do make very good points (I even think this theory is sound). But then you go and ruin your credibility with this kind of crap.

:popcorn:

It wasn't contaminants. It really, to be honest with you, looked like the gasket material around the filter neck in the trans. The first oil change I did was actually due to the massive lurch, and the same reverse issue. It didn't help much in either case. But when I put in new solenoids, it all became like it should once more.

Is your transmission the 6 speed, then I guess it is. Go to thectsc.com and check there. Lots of specs.

My alternator died and I went to the dealer for hoses. I asked to see the guy that invented the water cooled alternator, he was not there.

When I was there I asked about the transmission fluid. They claim BMW is a lifetime fluid. I guess it is made by elves or some mythical creature and imbued with magical properties.

It better be magical for the price they charge per L. I would be pissed if it was regular piss colored oil, and i bought so much of it.

Ah, there's your problem. You went to the dealer. You needed to go to Bosch, in Germany. ;)

I haven't actually worked on a water cooled alternator on any of my BMWs, since I like the 6 cylinder engines and they don't use the water cooled alternator. But I have seen them on emergency vehicles, ambulances and fire trucks (which have high alternator current loads due to all the ancillary equipment). I hadn't realized that the Bosch one was initially targetted at emergency vehicles. Anyway, here is a brochure on it. Some interesting info.

http://www.bosch.com.au/car_parts/en..._Alt_Broch.pdf

Hoses only from dealer. Alternator from eBay via shop in Van Nuys 309.xx before 49.99 core refund shipped with 1 year warranty.

Needed hoses now, paid price for immediate gratification.

Thanks for the brochure.

I read this and see the words but all I hear is bla bla marketing hype bla.

Liquid cooled alternators use coolant from the engine’s cooling system which
passes through a water jacket in the alternator casing, keeping the body and its
sensitive electronics operating at a stable heat range. By using liquid rather than
a fan, these alternators also offer the advantages of whisper quiet operation and
reduced load on the engine

Sunny:

I find your logical constructs confusing. I find your arguments about transmission fluid changes confusing. I find your insistence that others provide proof, whatever that is, while you sit back and insult others frustrating, but perhaps that is my problem. I have come across posts by you that were changed, while I was responding, and that added to my confusion. But to be fair, I was already struggling to follow your logic and the post editing didn't help. It did stick in my mind, but it wouldn't have been a factor without the initial confusion.

I apologize, I don't think your editing was malicious and I don't think you were trying to deceive.

Well, it is a marketing brochure, so that is pretty much expected. :rofl:

I object to the complication, ie when it fails, it will be more expensive and time consuming to fix.

But from a thermodynamics perspective, it is all very logical. Liquid coolant is far more effective at cooling than air is. If we use coolant on the engine block and head, why wouldn't we use it on other engine components and ancillaries that have high cooling requirements? Stable temperatures are better than temperature spikes, particularly for electrical components, and particularly for components that have a highly variable duty cycle. And the fact that the alternator helps warm up the passenger compartment upon cold start is a neat addition. Certainly more expensive to fix when it breaks, but then that is a common theme across many BMW engineering solutions.

Thank you so much... It is the same.....i'm going to change the transmission fluid/torque convertor fluid, transfer case fluid plus rear and front diff....but this will be perform at specialyzed transmission shop.... I learn so much in this thread that i was able to understand all (or most) of the process.

The shop told me that it was a no brainer to change fluid at 75miles on any transmission and BTW ZF transmission are taking a lot of the Market share on many automotive brand (not dedicated to BMW)....

Cheers

I hear you and all that is great but here in Phoenix too cool is an oxymoron.

It is 111 at 6:22pm and if we are lucky it will get down to a chilly 82 by 5am.

Searched ZF5HP24 found this:
ZF 5HP24 Fluid Change and Failures Poll - Jaguar Forums - Jaguar Enthusiasts Forum

If I decide to do this is there a real difference between these:

AMSOIL Signature Series Multi-Vehicle Synthetic Automatic Transmission Fluid


AMSOIL OE Multi-Vehicle Synthetic Automatic Transmission Fluid

Price difference is more or less 20 bucks. Seems a no brainer if there is a chance of more protection.

What about the filter? There are several companies claiming to be oe.

Which is?

don't try to do better than this guy on fluid.
The CTSC - ZF Parts

You can't drain what's on the TQ so why not stick with OEM fluid.
I bought my 6HP19 flush kit from them, quick response on email as well.

That is great for a 6 speed. I have a 5.

5 Speed oil change kit

His link for 5 speed kits (above) takes you here:

5 Speed

Home / Oil change kits / 5 Speed
http://www.thectsc.com/images/catalog/category60.gif No items found
Would you like to continue shopping or view our site map?

• Site Map
• Go to home page

Oh yeah, thectsc sells everything ZF, 5-sp or 6-sp and soon probbaly 7-sp.

My last comment just to show you I bought from them so I know they are good, even confirmed with me when I try to order a separate gasket for filter by saying no I didn't need one since the gasket is built into the filter.

All my ZF stuff came from Klaus. His name is really Klaus. Lol. So funny, but he is a cool dude.

And yes, our ZF trans, and lots of variants of it, are in a lot of cars. From Jags, to Bentleys, to all types of other cars. We aren't the only ones dealing with them.

Amsoil, hmm I have a lot to say about them. But I won't, because if you do your homework, you will find out the bullshit behind the entire pyramid scheme.

For your ZF trans, if you are going to drain and fill, at least put the stuff that was meant to be in there.

Care to elaborate?

I can't share any experience in using their products in a BMW but all my subarus and many of the guys in the local subaru community have been running Amsoil for quite some time with 100% satisfaction.

Amsoil is a whole lot of marketing hype for 10 bucks a quart if you ask me.


It's kinda like the Patron or Grey Goose of the automotive world. Are there better tasting, smoother, tequilas and vodkas out there for less money? Absolutely, but societal influence has you thinking that only the best and coolest people order Patron/Grey Goose, that's marketing dollars at work right there.

Hell, get me Stolichnaya, Russian Standard, Ketel One, etc any day over that overpriced French garbage Grey Goose. I actually did a blind taste test with Stoli and Grey Goose in my house with my in-laws, who used to SWEAR by Grey Goose as being the best vodka they've had. Put the blindfold on, and both picked Stoli as better tasting without hesitation.


My point? Amsoil may be big in the "community" but just how much advertising and sponsorship money has been spent to get that reputation?

From our local standpoint I couldn't give you an accurate number. I don't know of any sponsorships with the local guys except for one guy with an STI track car that took first place at the NASA event at Miller Motor Sports park last weekend. I know he uses their products but cannot say if he has an active sponsorship with them.

Other than that its been all word of mouth.


Although I just remembered something interesting on the Subaru side of the fence as well. Their 4EAT transmissions (4 speed AT) have 2 AT fluid filters. One resembles an oil filter and the other is an internal filter. Subaru advises AGAINST changing either filter. In fact the dealerships won't even touch unless the external filter becomes damaged or the customer demands it be done. They also recommend against 'flushing' but do advise a drain and fill at certain intervals but cannot remember the mileage of the top of my head.

The funny thing is, in the suby world their AT transmissions are the bulletproof trans while their 5MT trans have the nickname 'The Glass Transmission'

The funny thing to me is that every BMW transmission post isn't about a BMW automatic transmission at all. All of the same discussion, problems, solutions, opinions, fluid debates, etc, apply to the other automatic transmissions out there. Automakers don't make their own automatics most of the time, and you could take out the automaker's name and have the same conversations about any other automatic.

Yet it is suggested that all of this is a BMW issue. Strange.

Not suggesting this is a BMW only issue. Just sharing my experience :)

Sorry, wasn't picking on you. I was referring to the thousands of posts on this board. :)

My apologies for the misunderstanding on my part.

But I can also share my experience with changing trans fluid in a BMW, it was a 528i E39, and was slipping rather bad and leaking trans fluid. I bought a new gasket and filter from EAC, and about 8 quarts of I want to say Castrol ATF fluid but i can't recall accurately. Any way, dropped the pan and the bottom was covered with a grey/black sludge especially around the magnets, cleaned the inside out of the pan til there was not a single trace of gunk on it. The magnets looked new so i left them alone. put the car on jack stands, and using a hand pump, pumped the fluid in the highest 'fill port' I could find. Then started the car and put it in drive and let the wheels roll while my room mate pumped more fluid in. Re-installed the fill plug, got the car off jack stands and she was good to go. I had the car for about a year before selling it and had no issues whatsoever. However I may not have drove it enough for something to pop up either.

You guys talked me into CTSC. I went to buy the filter kit & oil but I need 10 quarts to approximate a drain but they want 17.00 per for loose quarts vs 14.50 in the 6 pack. No problem, I'll call and ask for 10for 145.00. Click contact and get a webform to email and there is no number.

I do not like to do business with companies that hide their number. I found several places that had the alternator but had no number so I kept looking.

Silly in this age to do that IMHO.

You guys talked me into CTSC. I went to buy the filter kit & oil but I need 10 quarts to approximate a drain but they want 17.00 per for loose quarts vs 14.50 in the 6 pack. No problem, I'll call and ask for 10 for 145.00. Click contact and get a webform to email and there is no number.

I do not like to do business with companies that hide their number. I found several places that had the alternator but had no number so I kept looking.

Silly in this age to do that IMHO.

dude Klaus is one guy. He gets like 300 calls a day, he used to have the number but asked to email because he couldn't keep up with demand.

I'm sorry if offended you by not having any knowledge of a company I never heard of prior to an hour (or so) ago lighten up dude.

Sometime that's the problem with text/post no one can really grasp fully what other try to say.

In any rate, if you drop the pan and refill, the kit is all you need. You can't drain the torque convertor w/o dropping the tranny or using some sort of extractor (machine to recirculate etc). So you don't need 10-quart.
Unless (again reading between the lines) maybe you are thinking about replacing the filter/pan and on later days do another drain and refill.

Yep, Klaus is the guy coresponding with me, at least that's the signature on the email.
Alot of auto-industry nowadays, prefer text/emails instead of phone as form of communications cause many of them operated by 1-2 front employee/sales sitting on top of a big warehouse. That's how they pass the saving to us, it's a competitive world this auto-parts online business.

Two things. The kit link takes you to nothing available. You have to get the filter and then add the oil. No biggie, just what it is.

Second You can drain and fill. run through the gears on stands or the road and then remove 4 quarts and replace them to get 90 +/-%

Let's say it holds 10 quarts. Let's assume you can replace 5. That gets you 50% new fluid.

Now run it, and the fluids mix.

Now drain 5 quarts (2.5 are old, 2.5 are new). Put in five new quarts. Now you are at 75% new fluid.

You would have to do it four times to achieve your 90%.

I disagree on the percentages but regardless if it is 60 or 90 it is better than leaving all that gunk in there and not changing the filter.
*Edit*

I said I want to replace the 6 that will come out by removing the pan. Not 5. Therefore there is whatever is in the torque converter and you can get some out with a pump.

Some good info here:
http://www.xoutpost.com/bmw-sav-foru...ures-poll.html

Got three gallons or 11.35623 L of
Castrol 03521 Transmax Import Multi-Vehicle Automatic Transmission Fluid - 1 Gallon, (Pack of 3) for 66.72 shipped from Amazon and the Filter Kit 5HP24 for $82.65 shipped from CTSC. Now I can run almost 12 litres through it and hopefully it lasts a goood long time.

Thanks for all teh input everyone.

Cabrio, all this talk about using propper fluid, and you go out and buy fluid made for Jap cars. "Multi Vehicle" is saying not meeting spec for ZF. You about to play Russian roulette with a $2500 transmission rebuild because you went with oil that is not meant for your car. Search for the dmackdown JCL hands out because people think all oil is the same.

From here:
http://www.xoutpost.com/bmw-sav-foru...es-poll-6.html

Castrol USA - Transmax Import Multi–Vehicle

Transmax Import Multi–Vehicle







CASTROL TRANSMAX IMPORT MULTIVEHICLE AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSION FLUID IS FOR USE IN MOST HONDA, TOYOTA, NISSAN AND OTHER IMPORTED VEHICLES.

• Recommended for use in vehicles that require:
  
  
  • Honda, Acura — ATF–Z1 (except in CVTs)
  • Toyota, Lexus — Type T, T–III, T–IV
  • Nissan, Infiniti — Matic–D, Matic–J
  • BMW — LA2634, LT71141
  • Mitsubishi — Diamond SP–II, SP–III
  • Hyundai — SP–II, SP–III
  • Volvo

http://www.castrol.com/liveassets/bp...V_10042011.jpg
http://www.castrol.com/liveassets/bp...ther/eicon.gif

• Also meets requirements of
  
  
  • ATF+3®, ATF+2®, ATF+®
  • Ford MERCON®, MERCON® V (Not for use where MERCON® SP is required).
  • General Motors DEXRON®–III H and prior (Not for use where DEXRON®–VI is required).
  • Allison C–4

TiAgX5 has real world experience & what he says is logical.

By using this I can do 2 full drains for less than the cost of one.

I have been using Castrol for 30 years and am very comfortable continuing to do so.








Slick, you were in that thread so I'd guess saw his posts.

I have a feeling you'll be fine.
if Castrol is light honey color and check the smell, it's probably is the same/similar/compatible trans fluid as ZF life-guard 5.

I dropped the pan once and drain refill another time using Esso @42k and @70k, my trans pull strong and still downshift agressively in sport mode (especially after I reset the adaptation), now @95k.

On the second drain, the fluid is not as dirty as the first one so I think if you want to fluh trans do it even before the 40k mile mark. Get rid of the metal shaving early for a safe of mind. I did on my 535i due to mechtronic sleeve leaks and yes that fluid is dirty as hell with all 4 circular magnets covered by metal shaving, even @38K.

Honestly, I have to evaluate my opnion on my first post on this thread, "BMW auto-trans may last longer than BMW clutch"; Well, BMW dual flywheel clutch with clutch-delay-valve in the hydraulic line is making my style of driving kinda hard on BMW clutch and my 335xi driveline (the ole single flywheel Audi clutch is more forgiving). with paddle shifter and DTC I will forgo the 3-pedal in the future, just a little rambling.

Same here. The Castrol name and LT71141 on the bottle was what it took for me to risk a non-ZF fluid in the trans.

I have been using Castrol at least that long as well, and am very comfortable with it. When I didn't use the BMW OE engine oil, I used Castrol Syntec.

The only comment was that their multi-purpose transmission fluid doesn't meet the ZF spec. It is a Dexron fluid that they say is OK to use anyway. Some have had no issues, others have reported issues.

ZF and ZF repair centres know about the problems of putting Dexron fluid in a ZF transmission and specifically warn against it. Yet Castrol imply they have overcome that problem, and also meet just about every other transmission fluid spec at the same time. Amazing accomplishment.

ZF don't make fluid. They just designed the transmission to work with a certain spec of fluid. They control that spec. Lots of companies make fluid to that spec. Castrol doesn't.

I don't think it is a bad fluid. I just think that there are enough variables already with these transmissions and that introducing a non-spec fluid is adding another layer of risk.

I wondered how many ATF recipes Castrol is currently selling.

Transmax MultiVehicle - certified to Dexron VI and Mercon LV
Transmax Dexron VI - certified to Dexron VI
Transmax Dexron/Mercon - not certified, suitable for the older Dex III standard
Transmax ATF+4 - certified for Chrysler specs
Transmax Type F - certified for Ford specs.
Transmax Import Multi Vehicle - certified for Mercon V. Recommended for Dexron III and transmissions in 17 other marques, as well as vehicles using Aisin transmissions, "and various European vehicles that call for Dexron III" No mention of BMW. Hmmm.

Product Data Sheet here:

http://"http://msdspds.castrol.com/b...20_03521_.pdf"

The product data sheet is two years old, and may be out of date. I am not clear whether the bottle label was more influenced by the marketing department at Castrol, or the engineering department.

I agree with this entirely.

Always trusted Castrol and the Bentley manual directed me to the Esso LT 71141 fluid spec for the 5HP24 trans, when I saw the LT 71141 on the Castrol MultiCar formula, I no doubt rolled the dice :yikes:. With 170k miles total (70k with the Castrol (double drain/refill with filter on 2nd drain/fill), and approx 10k of it towing in high temps I have nothing but :thumbup::thumbup: for the Castrol fluid.
I've seen posts on here where owners have drained/refilled with ZF/filter changed every 60k miles and haven't gotten 170k miles B4 trans issues, even without the towing stress added to the equation.

Now I am more confused. If the fluid meets the standard how is it a gamble? Is it some kind of voodoo that is not true but lets them claim to conform?

okay,so if some use Castrol oil ,why not use Valvoline MaxLife too? is still LT 71141...

So I ordered almost 24 hours ago. No conformation or communication. I check the order it says completed:

24XX 2013-08-14 14:41:53 $82.65 Completed

After completed it says click for details:
Order Content Product Name Price Quantity Total Filter Kit 5HP24 $64.93
(Not Taxable) 1 $64.93 Subtotal Amount : $64.93 Shipping : $17.72 Tax Amount : $0.00 Total Amount : $82.65

Nothing about shipping.

I'd say communication is pretty far down the to do list.

I just sent a message through the webform. We'll see what happens, I'd say this is verifying why I don't like dealing with companies that don't share phone info.

ZF stated the Castrol fluid was causing trans failure a few years ago and some on the forum question the ability of Castro to produce one oil that meets numerous fluid specs in a single formula. Had I known ZFs position on the use of Castrol I would have used ZF fluid (although this might be ZFs motivation all along, blame trans failures on Castrol, off the hook with customers, and increased ZF fluid sales.....WIN-WIN for ZF!!! :p:) Seeing as the bottom line for ZF is exactly that....the bottom line, there may be some truth to the statement.

As I stated prior, went with Castrol and have ZERO regrets, pocketed the $s in savings to boot.

Between you & threads like this I feel ok using it:

Castrol Import Multi-Vehicle ATF in ZF transmission?

This raises the question of whether changing the fluid extends the life of the transmission or not, apart from the issue of which fluid to use.

I don't have the data sheet on the Valvoline MaxLife. Does it say that it is certified to the spec by ZF? Or does it say that you should use it in applications that call for that spec? That is at the core of the confusion caused by the marketing departments of the oil companies.

I do see that Valvoline have some fluids that are certified to various specs (so they can certainly do it if they want to) and some others that aren't (but which are usually cheaper).

Edit: I looked up the list of suppliers to ZF for their Lifeguard 5 ATF. Valvoline isn't on the list. There are 23 suppliers listed. The document is from 2009. Interestingly, there is a Castrol approved fluid listed. It was Transmax Z (presumably for ZF). I only see references to it being available in Australia now, and there it no longer lists the ZF approval on line. It shows as a Dexron III fluid. Perhaps it was reformulated, I don't know.

I suggest that causing that confusion is exactly what some of these oil companies set out to do. You only have to see that they certify some fluids and don't certify others, but try and suggest that they are the same. Marketing. The job of the marketing department is to get your $$.

Remember that this is a proprietary standard, not a public one. It isn't like you can get it tested by a third party and claim compliance. So they don't claim to meet the standard. They just say that it is good to go. Trust them.

None of that means it is a bad fluid. The issue I have is that ZF says that their transmissions require different fluids for their different designs. It costs them money to move to a new fluid, they don't do it just for fun. They don't require you to buy the fluid off of them, just to buy a certified fluid. You can buy it from any one of the oil companies licensed to make it. But they do note that it isn't Dexron. ZF should know, they make a lot of transmissions that use Dexron III. Castrol was a supplier to them. Castrol says a Dexron fluid works fine in a ZF 5 speed automatic. OK. They can't certify it apparently. Just think how much money Castrol could make if they could come up with a single fluid that could get certified to all the ATF standards. They would clean up. I wonder why they haven't done that.

All that aside, TiAg had good luck with that fluid. If it is still the same fluid as when he bought it, then there is a good reference for you.

did, not find that data sheet on the net, but of course is not on the zf chart, i also got this:
Castrol 03521 Transmax Import Multi-Vehicle Automatic Transmission Fluid, to do a change ,as i have some slippage 1-2 when hot,as i described
in my other tread, i may change the "transmission thermostat thats attached to the radiator (here,nr#15),as one shop said ,if that does not work properly it will make the tranny run to hot and start slipping!.

Now, anyone knows how to test those "output speed sensor" from the inside tranny? with a multimeter ? to see
if is good or bad?, nr-6 here..

Thanks,

If BMW had put a proper 3 pedal trans behind the V8s in the E53, ATF would never have been a topic I would discuss. In over 30 yrs of driving, this is the first slushbox vehicle I have owned. 60s/70s muscle cars, Hondas, Audi Quattros, Jeeps, Vettes, Vipers, BMWs (except the E53), all manual trans.

I am coming from an 06 350Z nightmare. The only part of the car I didn't have a problem with was the 6MT.

I loved Z cars but will never buy another Nissan thanks to their horrible handling of the VQ35DE REVUP issue.

Hell I am just glad and lucky I have a 3 pedal 6 cylinder, if the E53 was a V8 only car I highly doubt that they would have even offered a manual trans on it. Sad, really, when you think about it.

It isn't for everybody, but for us the alternative was the E83. 3.0si, 260 hp, 6MT, better shifting than the E53 manual, better 0-100 km than the E53 4.4 (600 lbs less curb weight). More cargo space than the E53. Towing limited to 3500 lbs. And then there is the whole status thing.

IMO-With all the confusion about what is a proper fluid for what transmission, the cost of repair, the camps that say it is good to do so verses the horror stories that it wasn't, the usual mix of new and old fluid rather than changing the fluid in the torque convertor, I don't see any logic in using anything other than the exact fluid that was originally loaded in the transmission.

That is not to say others haven't made a good choice with excellent results. I haven't seen a long list of folks that endorse a particular fluid in a particular transmission to have enough verification that fluid is as good or better then the original fluid. This thread may help some but my interpretation is that the primary reason folks have gone to other fluids is that the original fluid is so costly (I agree). They are way to proud of it--but

I suppose you could run the vehicle on jackstands (very carefully....) and read the signal at the connector on the outside of the transmission. That would tell you if there is a signal from the output speed sensor. I think it is a sine wave, so it is either going to be there or not, you aren't going to have an inaccurate reading IMO.

But really, the message you are getting (as I recall it) had to do with a problem with the output speed sensor reading. The computer reads the input speed and the output speed, and compares them. If they are too different, it says there is an implausible reading. It doesn't mean that the sensor is faulty, just that the sensor isn't reporting what the controller expects it to. The most likely cause for that is that the transmission is slipping. And you know already that it is, both from the driving characteristics and from the burnt fluid. So I wouldn't think that the output speed sensor would be a cause, rather an early warning that slipping has started. But you already know that.

There are tests for the solenoids that activate various circuits. But you are only checking electrically. The transmission is a mechanical/hydraulic/electronic system. All the monitoring and faults are reported electronically. But that doesn't imply that the root cause is an electrical fault, as a mechanical or hydraulic problem will show up as an electrical fault (symptom vs cause).

Good luck.

Hi,

I have my pan down and oil drained , was going to do a change of oil/filter , to see if any different,also i have returned that castrol, and purchased petrosin atf-1,as per Zf chart or bmw chart.

The oil does not smell as burned and is not sooo,black!, maybe dealer lied...

Regarding that sensor , because the pan is down i have access directly to it, and i see 2 wires coming out,but dont know exactly how to test!, i found some chart :

excl. harness at 315 ohms

http://i40.tinypic.com/dbl99g.jpg

Now just put red and black tester wires (multi tester) and setting to ohms and test ,and i guess must be at 315?

Thank you,

When I began shopping for a used E53 I intended to get a manual trans unit, then I drove a V8 and felt the difference the additional 50% torque made. Could not pass up the added grunt of the 8.

In my opinion fluid properties such as dynamic/kinematic viscosity, pour point, flash point, foaming/aeration, copper corrosion, FZG gear scuffing resistance, etc. may be replicated by pattern/inventory-reduction fluids. However what is much more uncertain is whether or not the fluid matches the required friction characteristics.

These friction characteristics are critical. For example, the early ‘black-tag’ ZF 5HP30 transmissions fitted to the 540i, 740i/L & 840i (i.e. the 010, 011, 029 & 030 models) used only Shell LA-2634 fluid. The later ‘green tag’ versions of this same transmission (models 017, 026, 031, 032 & 040 – plus the Rolls-Royce, Bentley & Aston Martin models) - use only Mobil ATF LT71141 (like the 5HP24).

The difference between the two transmissions is the way the lock-up clutch in the torque converter is controlled. The friction characteristics of the two fluids are sufficiently different that getting the two fluids mixed up can, according to ZF, cause the transmission to fail.

The 5HP24 was designed without a torsional vibration damper in the torque converter to save weight and reduce length. It relies on a ‘continuous slip’ mode at lower engine speeds (around 3% slip between the impeller & turbine) to isolate the driveline vibration and, to achieve that, it needs a particular static-to-dynamic friction characteristic for the fluid.

http://i260.photobucket.com/albums/i...ficientLUC.jpg

If you use any other fluid than Mobil ATF LT71141 (aka ZF Lifeguard Fluid 5 or Pentosin ATF-1) in your 5HP24 there is no way of knowing if it contains the right friction modifier pack to achieve correct operation of the TC LUC. The torque converter costs a lot more than the difference in the fluid cost.

Phil

ZF video : Oil Change Intervals for the ZF 5HP Series of Transmissions - YouTube

Yes, that’s my chart. Just measure the resistance across the two pins :

http://i260.photobucket.com/albums/i...Resistance.jpg

Phil

If I understand torque converter operation correctly (it is a viscous coupling, right?) wouldn't the viscosity of the fluid at operating temp control % of slippage? The friction mod pack would be to control bearing/band/drum slippage and wear.

Paraphrase--use the same s##t as the old s##t.

Yes, it’s a hydrokinetic coupling when ‘open’

http://i260.photobucket.com/albums/i...Impeller-1.jpg
Impeller

http://i260.photobucket.com/albums/i...eteturbine.jpg
Turbine

but I’m referring to the lock-up clutch operation which locks the turbine to the impeller (or, at low engine speeds allows a small but controlled speed difference)

http://i260.photobucket.com/albums/i...LUCsection.jpg

It uses just a single, but large diameter, friction plate (shown in red above) :

http://i260.photobucket.com/albums/i...plateclose.jpg

Phil

That explains the friction mod pack controlling TC slip, thanks. If anyone could explain it clearly I knew it would be you.

Hi, Phil,

Yes ,that is your chart! :iagree:

Anyway,
i tested mine,out like you have in the picture and is at 0.341 k ohms.

Is this okay?

http://i41.tinypic.com/24c71ut.jpg

Thank you,

Are you sure this isn't an arial view of the Dallas Cowboys stadium with a google map drawing of where to park?

No input of any kind in the 2 business days since I placed the order and imho worse no response to the webform request for shipping info.

I guess my policy to do business with companies that provide a phone number isn't so hairbrained.

I'd never order from them again.

Did you check your spam?

I did.

whats the torque for the oil pan bolts? on the 5hp24?

i found out the the oil drain is 30nm (23ft.lb).

thanks,

7lbs if I recall

yes, you right, i found the info somewhere in the forum!

thank you friend.

Just did the tranny oil change on my '02 4.6is w/ 134k on it. Old oil didn't look too bad, and there was just a little bit of sludge on each of the 4 magnets.

I got the "kit" from bavauto that included a new gasket, drain/fill plugs, and 7 liters of ZF Lifeguard fluid.

I was able to add just over 3 liters initially, and then after starting the car and putting the transmission through all the gears and back in park with the engine still running, I was able to add all the remaining oil, and oil still did not start coming out the fill hole. Btw, the car was perfectly level on a lift, so it was not tilted to the driver's side or anything like that.

I was surprised that I ran out of oil before the tranny was full. From reading this and other threads, it seems that 6 quarts/liters is about all this 5 speed tranny will hold without draining the torque converter.

Does the 4.6is have a larger oil capacity tranny?

I guess I'll call bavauto and order some more, but hopefully I'm pretty close to full and won't hurt the tranny driving it around with "only" 7 liters of fresh oil in there.

The ‘034’ model of the 5HP24 for the 4.6is uses a 280mm torque converter (L51) whereas the 4.4i ‘029’ model is fitted with a smaller 260mm unit (F38). ZF state that the ex-works fluid capacity for the ‘034’ is 9.88 litres and for the ‘029’ it is 9.00 litres. Presumably the oil cooler and its feed and return pipes are additional to this. I’ll take a photo of the two torque converters side-by-side this evening and post it here – the difference between them is quite obvious.

Phil

Thanks Phil.

I went to bavauto's web site, and put in a 4.4 and looked at the tranny fluid capacity, and it stated 6.0 liters. When I changed to the 4.6, is showed 6.2 liters. Go figure.

Now I did leave the tranny pan off for over a week with a catch pan below it, and it dip continue to drip oil for days, but I'm pretty sure it didn't drip 0.8 liters worth! :rofl:

I would have thought the oil in the torque converter would be stuck there unless sucked out by force.

Drive it to work this morning, and everything appears fine. Never did have an issue before, but at 134k, I figured it was time (I only just purchased the car in the spring with 133k on it and have been fixing it up).

Actually the 20mm diameter difference between the two torque converters doesn’t particularly show up well in this photo

http://i260.photobucket.com/albums/i...ps8c1dd059.jpg

but you can certainly tell when you pick it up how much bigger the 4.6is converter is.

Phil