Did you actually read the Mike Miller quote I posted? Mike said he RECOMMENDS that the fluid be changed at least every 60,000 miles.

Mike also states:

"It is risky to drain a previously un-maintained automatic transmission with high mileage, even though if it were my car I would probably chance it."

I guess I don't understand why you are seemingly disagreeing with Mike Miller's advice.

Are you arguing that the AT fluid should not be changed?

If I knew him personally, I might go with his opinion. ;)

I read the link provided by BMWvoid. I assumed it was the same information.

I believe I've completely misunderstood your argument. Too used to seeing posts about Mr. Miller being used as support as to why the fluid should not be changed. I now realize you're using it in support of changing the fluid. My apologies.

When 50,000 miles rolls around, this is one task which I will most likely "bite the bullet" and have a BMW dealer do for me. Probably cost twice as much, but probably, in this case, worth it.

I think that's from 2002. :D

P.S. An interesting note... in comparing the 2002 document of Mike Miller with the 2009 version, it appears that, unlike your earlier contention that Mike "formed his opinion seven years ago," Mike has changed his position on changing ATF on a high-mileage AT transmission. In 2002 he said, "under no circumstances" would he do it, but in the latest document he says that while risky, he himself would choose to do it.

I think you owe Mike an apology more than me, as he clearly modifies his position over time when he feels it is appropriate.

Looks like FSETH and JCL lost a major piece of support for their argument.

Huh? I don't recall quoting Miller.

My apologies if I got you confused with someone else.

With that said, given Mr. Millers qualifications and recommendation are you willing to consider that your position may be wrong?

You should e-mail mike and ask for the latest version to get the whole story. He is not "black and white" on the ATF high-mileage change issue. Basically, he feels there is a risk to the high-mileage ATF change; however, believes the balance is in favor of changing it. But you really need to read his words to understand the "grayness" of the area. I'd offer to e-mail you my copy, but it appears even the 07/09 revision is now out of date, and he seems concerned about old versions circulating on the net.

I fully understand there is a risk in changing it. But I believe, as does JCL, the risk is slight.

The part where JCL and I disagree is if the benefit outweighs the risk. JCL believes it does not (because, as far as I can tell he doesn't believe it offers any benefit). I believe it does. Though recently it appears as if JCL believes there is some benefit based on the following statement he made:

"Valve bodies don't typically fail in normal use, unless they get clogged."

Very likely a fluid flush would avoid the valve body becoming clogged. I'm still waiting for his response to this.

And we can see why as someone was using an outdated copy to support this urban legend.