41TE Transmission Rebuild

[lexus114]

Where are you guy`s getting this information from? Chrysler is big on doing this cut the engine torque to the transmission [censored] because their built so cheap. I dont know any other ones doing this right now. If their are,then I stand corrected.are you getting torque management confused with this? : When Traction is turned off the torque management feature should be disabled. It's just a software function of the traction control system.That`s for traction control though,not normal shifts. If you have other information re; this,I would be glad to read about it.

 

[440Magnum]

Originally Posted By: lexus114
Where are you guy`s getting this information from? Chrysler is big on doing this cut the engine torque to the transmission [censored] because their built so cheap. I dont know any other ones doing this right now. If their are,then I stand corrected.are you getting torque management confused with this? : When Traction is turned off the torque management feature should be disabled. It's just a software function of the traction control system.That`s for traction control though,not normal shifts. If you have other information re; this,I would be glad to read about it.


The function we're talking about has NOTHING to do with traction control at all. If you haven't even heard of it and don't understand what it is, then how can you say "Chrysler is big on" doing it?

EVERY automagic-equipped car in the computer era momentarily reduces engine torque during shifts to some degree or another. More recent cars (2000 and later in general, ones with throttle-by wire in particular) actually do deliberate RPM matching while modulating the engine torque during shifts so that the clutches barely slip at all. Anyone with half an ear for engine sounds can *HEAR* it happening- the exhaust note changes subtly during the shift as the engine output drops- it sounds almost like someone very rapidly and skillfully shiffting a manual transmission. I've noticed it on GM, Ford, Chrysler, Hyundai, Honda, and Toyota rental cars I've had for the past 8-9 years. The only ones I DON'T notice it on are the CVT-equipped ones (Nissan, primarily). I've read descriptions of the logic in trade magazines. I've read about it in factory service manuals. The very first vehicles with a computer-controlled automatic (Chrysler A-604 from 1989) limited the engine torque on the wide-open-throttle 1st-to-2nd upshift by cutting fuel injection pulses, but subsequently it was discovered that limiting torque on all upshifts not only increased transmission longevity, reduced fuel consumption, and reduced heat dissipated in the transmission, but drastically reduced NVH by making the shifts glassy-smooth without the downside of slipping the clutches excessively.

 

[lexus114]

hey settle down magnum! You may not want to hear it,but Chrysler transmissions are cheap junk. And what proof do you have of all of this stuff your talking about? And to answer your question,I have a friend that owns a 2000 Ram 1500,and they had a tsb on doing the torque cutting stuff because the transmissions were comming apart! Yeah,I know you will have something to say about my reply,but remember Chrysler isnt going under(a second time) because they build quality.

 

[lexus114]

And as far as the A sicko-4`s I have experience with them and never got more than 90,000 miles out of them. Even with trans. coolers! A lot of their problem is their poor quality electronics.

 

[rszappa1]

As a owner of many chryslers in the past i have to agree with you post..... MOPAR is a once proud word.....

 

[lexus114]

I just get a little tired of guy`s like that coming back with snide remark`s all the time. about having half an ear and all that junk. I try and keep it civil,but I guess their are just too many [censored] out their.

 

[L_Sludger]

Originally Posted By: lexus114
wow,cutting the engine torque to save the transmission? talk about an easy way out of a problem.
toyota/lexus has been doing that for two decades now, first starting with their higher end cars and now with all of them.

 

[Gary Allan]

Well, it's a natural evolution. Every consumer DEMANDED velvety smooth shifts. There they were, future prospective new car buyers ..picketing and protesting right in front of every corporate head quarters. They screamed for "velvety smooth shifts".

That's what some say, anyway

 

[lexus114]

This is all here say,What proof do you all have of this stuff? I could tell you all that I`m the new proud owner of the Brooklyn Bridge too.Remember,some of us only have a half an ear to be able to say for sure

 

[L_Sludger]

Originally Posted By: lexus114
This is all here say,What proof do you all have of this stuff? I could tell you all that I`m the new proud owner of the Brooklyn Bridge too.Remember,some of us only have a half an ear to be able to say for sure

you're presenting the power-down for upshifts as if it's a bad thing
i can't find the technical information for it right now, but i know that the '89-92 Cressida (A340E), and then by proxy every LS400 starting in '90 (A340E) had the upshift ignition timing retardation. It was a feature, not a drawback.

 

[lexus114]

I never said it was a bad thing,but obviously it started out as a quick/cheap fix some where.And just happened to turn out for the better.

 

[440Magnum]

Originally Posted By: lexus114
I never said it was a bad thing,but obviously it started out as a quick/cheap fix some where.And just happened to turn out for the better.


No, it really didn't go that way at all.

Its a logical and elegant way to optimize a problem that had been solved by brute force for decades before the technology to do it the right way was available. I'm sure the engineers who designed the very first HydraMatic would have *loved* to be able to match input/output RPM during upshifts so that they didn't have to slip clutches and then carry away the heat in order to get acceptably smooth shifts, but the technology to do it in a cost-effective reliable way didn't exist in 1949.

Obviously you've been burned by a bad transmission design, and I sympathize- rally, I do. I agree many transmissions weren't what they could be in recent days, not the least of which is the Chrysler 41TE. But speaking as an engineer, lowering stress on a component (clutches, planetary gears) through a control mechanism (software) is JUST as viable a solution as is building something unnecessarily strong. In fact, its a more optimum solution because it also increases efficiency.

I agree with whomever it was earlier in the thread that said transmissions in 2010 are in many ways BETTER than they've ever been, inclusive of things like torque management. With the exception of Honda, I read *very* few stories of repeated and consistent failures of most automatic transmissions currently on the market. Even the 41TE has become very reliable, as exemplified by the topic of this thread: almost 200k miles on a 97 model. And newer models are better still. Where are any complaints about inherent problems with a 545RFE? Or the W5A580? There just aren't any, and guys are out there re-tuning their 6.1s for >500 rear-wheel horsepower through W5A580s, and they *still* don't grenade (its the rear half-shafts that go first, FWIW).

 

[440Magnum]

Originally Posted By: lexus114
I just get a little tired of guy`s like that coming back with snide remark`s all the time. about having half an ear and all that junk. I try and keep it civil,but I guess their are just too many [censored] out their.


Oh, please be reasonable here. All I've done is state facts in a clear and concise manner, I've certainly never called you an "a__hole" (yes, anyone can see what the word was before the censor cut it whenever they do a quote to reply). I didn't even mean the "half an ear" comment to be derogatory, just realistic. Some people can't hear what I'm talking about, just like I can't see a lot of things other people can.

 

[SteveSRT8]

Anyone who says auto trans are generally worse than in the "good ole daze" is not running anything hard on the street or strip. Both autos and manuals are WAYYYY better than ever, even with factory TMM.


As a WA580/NAG1 owner (mine came with a made in Germany tag) I can definitely say that they are tough.

And note that the halfshafts are just fine on street tires of reasonable size. Its those drag radials that break things. And Chrysler upgraded everything for 09 solving all those issues for good.

I have edited out almost all TM on my car, and have a TON of passes on it with no issues whatsoever. There are few auto trans that measure up to this one.

 

[tomcat27]

Can I interrupt the debate for some techie questions?
dont they use the 41TE in the minivan also? I would suspect its really stressed in that duty.

anyway, thanks for the pix. where'd you learn how to do tranny builds? is it practical for an average car nut to try one? I've rebuilt small engines, replaced many clutches in cars/trucks, an trained in OBD 1 & 2 FI systems - and I am curious about autos - although the closest I have gotten in replacing the solenoid pack and valve body in my LH. can I learn on a 604? special tools required? expensive? is it worth it? and how to learn?

 

[lexus114]

Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
Anyone who says auto trans are generally worse than in the "good ole daze" is not running anything hard on the street or strip. Both autos and manuals are WAYYYY better than ever, even with factory TMM.


As a WA580/NAG1 owner (mine came with a made in Germany tag) I can definitely say that they are tough.

And note that the halfshafts are just fine on street tires of reasonable size. Its those drag radials that break things. And Chrysler upgraded everything for 09 solving all those issues for good.

I have edited out almost all TM on my car, and have a TON of passes on it with no issues whatsoever. There are few auto trans that measure up to this one.


Your dreamin,you know how many times I heard that? I looked at a Plymouth mini-van back in 2000,and the salesman told me the same thing back then already. And we all know they hadnt solved anything as of that point.

 

[440Magnum]

Originally Posted By: lexus114
Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
Anyone who says auto trans are generally worse than in the "good ole daze" is not running anything hard on the street or strip. Both autos and manuals are WAYYYY better than ever, even with factory TMM.


As a WA580/NAG1 owner (mine came with a made in Germany tag) I can definitely say that they are tough.

And note that the halfshafts are just fine on street tires of reasonable size. Its those drag radials that break things. And Chrysler upgraded everything for 09 solving all those issues for good.

I have edited out almost all TM on my car, and have a TON of passes on it with no issues whatsoever. There are few auto trans that measure up to this one.


Your dreamin,you know how many times I heard that? I looked at a Plymouth mini-van back in 2000,and the salesman told me the same thing back then already. And we all know they hadnt solved anything as of that point.


You're really just making stuff up, now. You hate Chrysler- fine. But this is a technical forum, so lets keep it factual.

For one thing, the minivan transmission WAS pretty well squared away by 2000. Its a minivan- every single minivan manufacturer has some degree of transmission problems. The Sienna isn't immune, and the Odyssey has a worse rap than the Caravan. A minivan is just about the limit of mass you can move with a FWD driveline and have any reliability at all- one reason I'll never own a minivan.

For another thing, the quote you red-lined above has nothing at all to do with the transmission. He's talking REAR-drive LX platform here, and the problem was the half-shafts external to the rear differential. Fixed. Actually, never even a problem on stock tires and stock horsepower, but 6.1 SRTs were made to be beat on and tuned to obscene horsepower. Thats the only time the problem showed up, as SteveSRT8 said.

 

[lexus114]

I`m not making up anything,its reality.And for the record;I dont hate Chrysler,but I do put blame where blame is do.(in spite of what you may want to hear)And that salesman most certainly did tell me that about their transmissions,probably to make a sale.I dont drive one of these any more,so it`s really not affecting me.I just have to laugh how some people will come up with anything to defend their opinion.Neither one of you have a leg to stand on here,as I mentioned before;where is all the proof to what you are saying? I`m sure their are others here that agree,but would rather remain silent.Which is fine,but I have been around the automotive field a long time as well so your not debating with a greenhorn. Also as I mentioned,if you have any reading material re;the torque cut upon shift`s,I would like to read it.I agree that some manufacturer`s may do this,but I hardly believe ALL of them do it as speculated here.

 

[lexus114]

I did some research myself,and found what is called; "shift shock reduction" However it doesnt state if all manufacture`s do it or not.I understand what your referring to here,but I can not tell if all the companies do this or not.I have not experienced this in my vehicle as of now.I am not a wide open throttle driver,unless i`m driving a manual transmission.

 

[SteveSRT8]

we don't have to do anything to destroy your credibility, you seem to take care of that yourself.

I am a moderator on a forum with THOUSANDS of LX/LC platform owners since 2005. The data I provide is not applicable to the "wrong wheel drive" platforms you claim familiarity with by reason of salesman's quotes!

We all know that a salesman is the very best information provider.

Chryslers issues with transmissions are very deserved, but blanket statements are only made by the people ignorant of the facts. Torque management is an integral part of the software used to control the driveline in almost any car on the road with an automatic trans. Trucks, too. We use tuners to reprogram the PCM's in our cars, removing most TM. The difference is dramatic.

And it is a simple, easily verifiable fact that Chrysler now makes all the hi po LX/LC platform cars with a Getrag 226 mm ring gear 3rd member with clutch type LSD and larger halfshafts with additional splines, replacing the 215mm rear.

To date, based on THOUSANDS of actual LX/LC owners inputs, I know of three cars that have had issues with halfshafts breaking on street tires. All have been repaired under warranty. Mine have about 36 full tilt drag passes on them as well as 50k of "spirited" driving at track events all over the country. Never a peep.

I know of a few more that have broken under a full tilt drag pass on drag radials. This will happen to many cars with any real HP, as it's often traction that kills parts. Spinning is safety at the strip.

And you may wish to note that the exact same trans as in my car was standard equipment on the last generation E55 with mechanical supercharging. Also used in their twin turbo SL65 monster! It is a fantastic unit that can tolerate well over 500 RWHP in our stock form, and needs only simple valve body modifications to go to extreme HP levels.

An excellent ex-Mercedes driveline engineer for you to contact runs Paramount Performance Products. We call him Builder Bill. He can give you FACTUAL information on these cars.