2004 Rav4 ATF factory fill 265,000 miles

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: Miller88
Originally Posted By: Leo99

The spirit of contrarianism runs very deep here. And the contrast between oil and ATF approaches is even more contrarian. The oil guys are pushing their OCI well past the recommendations of the manufacturer with good success. While the ATF guys are just the opposite and changing out their ATF well before the recommendations of the manufacturer.


Engines are a lot more durable than automatic transmissions. People don't realize that the transmissions are often a weak link on a vehicle.


Maybe in 5-10 years if these 20k changer people still have the same vehicles and are still posting here, we'll have some data. These posts that "I change my ATF every 20k miles and at 120k miles on the tranny it still shifts perfectly" don't really mean much to me. The tranny would still shift perfectly on the factory fill. Get it up to 400k miles without a hiccup and I'll agree it's beneficial. Of course, it would cost close to $800-$1000 for all that transmission fluid/filters.
 
Wow that's a lot of metals, I can't believe in still shift good. Thanks for the data but I would definitely drain some as that's highly abrasive and eventually could kill it before it's time.

I would like to see a transmission with over 200k miles after the FF and another drain and fill were done within the first 50k on both to remove the break in material and see how metals accumulate after that next 200k.
 
Guy I work with just told me that his monitor light came on in his Honda and the code said to drain/fill the ATF. Says he took it to a shop, but they told him that since it had over 100k miles, they wouldn't touch it.

I drained two quarts on my Corolla and it it stays working fine a few more months, I'll pull a couple quarts out of the Rav4 and put in some fresh T-IV.
 
Originally Posted By: CT8
Originally Posted By: Miller88
Originally Posted By: Leo99

The spirit of contrarianism runs very deep here. And the contrast between oil and ATF approaches is even more contrarian. The oil guys are pushing their OCI well past the recommendations of the manufacturer with good success. While the ATF guys are just the opposite and changing out their ATF well before the recommendations of the manufacturer.


Engines are a lot more durable than automatic transmissions. People don't realize that the transmissions are often a weak link on a vehicle.
that is because of low build quality.
Despite all the computer controls it's still
easy for Jonny the moron to "rev her up in neutral and drop her into drive". A little "rockin' it back and forth" to get out of a snowbank does wonders as well.
 
Last edited:
My friends DD Lexus sedan has 280k with the FF. If I remember correctly, he said if he had the dealer perform the recommended service at every 40k, he would have about as much in it by now as what a new transmission costs.. which at the end of the day, what is better? Assuming the transmission lasts that long, I think he came out ahead.

He still drives it about 60 miles daily, but plans to give it to his daughter as a first car and squeeze another 70k out of it.. He lives in Kentucky and the car is spotless cosmetically.

Might have missed it in the thread, but do you have any plans to service it?
 
Originally Posted By: dlundblad
My friends DD Lexus sedan has 280k with the FF. If I remember correctly, he said if he had the dealer perform the recommended service at every 40k, he would have about as much in it by now as what a new transmission costs.. which at the end of the day, what is better? Assuming the transmission lasts that long, I think he came out ahead.

He still drives it about 60 miles daily, but plans to give it to his daughter as a first car and squeeze another 70k out of it.. He lives in Kentucky and the car is spotless cosmetically.

Might have missed it in the thread, but do you have any plans to service it?


I'm still on the fence about servicing it. My wife is against it and she's the one that drives it. It does make some ugly growling noises in second gear that it's made them for the past 100k miles but they are sounding uglier and louder.
 
Leo99,

How much longer do you intend to keep the RAV4? At this point servicing the transmission is much less expensive than replacing it, but it may not do you any good. My mind is spinning while I imagine all the excess wear due to the metal suspended in the fluid. And that's water under the bridge. Those wear metals will never return to the clutch steels and other moving parts. While the clutches and seals may not be helped by a fluid change the solenoids and valves probably would be.

Hopefully the labor to remove and replace that automatic isn't as bad as for the manual when doing the clutch on a RAV4. A coworker just had a bad clutch in his RAV4 and gave the car to the mechanic rather than make the hefty investment.
 
My wife drives the Rav4 and now that the Rav has a slight transfer case leak my wife is getting a little leery about driving it past 300k miles. She's afraid something could break and strand her. As she drives 50 miles to work and 50 miles back and she's not resourceful, she's content to let the Rav go and buy another one when it's no longer dependable enough for her to trust.

Labor is huge to remove the tranny. Besides a starter and an O2 sensor that I could handle myself, the Rav has never needed a repair and my wife has a (unrealistic) limit of $400 for any future repair it might need. In other words, if something breaks and it will cost over $400 to repair, she's ready to buy a new Rav.

The repair to the transfer case lists 13.5 hours in the Toyota TSB.

As long as the oil leaks and transfer case leak don't get much worse, we'll keep driving it. Coincidentally, we had the "how much longer do you think it will be reliable enough for the wife to drive" talk today. We think 1 to 3 years (300k to 350k miles) will be the limit for my wife to drive. Depending on its condition, I might start to drive it after my wife kicks it to the curb.
 
leo99, thanks for doing and posting the UOA.
coming back to the whole concept of the lifetime fluid, i recently purchased a POS saturn ion, for my son to be his first (disposable) car. it actually has a made in japan aisin tranny that specifies T-IV.

I noticed GM is a bit more honest than toyota about tranny maintenance: 100,000 mile standard service or 50,000 severe service. I think this is a reasonable compromise.
 
Well, I broke down and did a little ATF replacement on the RAV4.

I know I wanted to wait until 300k miles to service it but I drove it and the tranny was making some hard downshifts and didn't sound so smooth. Vacuumed out 70 ounces of dirty ATF and replaced with 66 ounces of T-TV and 4 ounces of LubeGard Red.

I accidentally topped off the transfer case with 80W90 instead of 75W90 but the leak seems to have abated. After 3 weeks, the case stayed full.
 
Originally Posted By: Miller88
Wow!

Toyota does make good automatic transmissions! Does it still shift fine with >250K on factory fill?
Does Toyota make transmissions?
 
Originally Posted By: Leo99
Originally Posted By: Oro_O
Originally Posted By: philipp10
Trust me, Toyota did lots of testing before recommending lifetime fluid changes.


They sure did. But the judgment was not that it lengthened transmission life, but that it increased CAFE and reduced TCO - an accounting judgment, not an engineering one.

The goal was to get services outside warranty and increase CAFE compliance. There are SAE articles from 10 years ago+ from their engineers talking about this strategy. Stuff a good class action lawyer should be hunting for right now.

Toyota has seriously tarnished their brand the last decade. Hopefully they'll catch on soon and reverse it.


What damages have the class suffered due to Toyota's lifetime tranny fluid?

Higher chances of leaks and higher wear as the unit ages or accumulates mileage. How many people keep cars for very long?
 
Originally Posted By: CT8
Originally Posted By: Leo99
Originally Posted By: Oro_O
Originally Posted By: philipp10
Trust me, Toyota did lots of testing before recommending lifetime fluid changes.


They sure did. But the judgment was not that it lengthened transmission life, but that it increased CAFE and reduced TCO - an accounting judgment, not an engineering one.

The goal was to get services outside warranty and increase CAFE compliance. There are SAE articles from 10 years ago+ from their engineers talking about this strategy. Stuff a good class action lawyer should be hunting for right now.

Toyota has seriously tarnished their brand the last decade. Hopefully they'll catch on soon and reverse it.


What damages have the class suffered due to Toyota's lifetime tranny fluid?

Higher chances of leaks and higher wear as the unit ages or accumulates mileage. How many people keep cars for very long?


I tend to reject that argument. If the lifetime fluid lasts to near 300k miles, does it really make sense to do periodic fluid exchanges for the average person?
 
Originally Posted By: goodtimes
This is why I and many others use our own common sense with maintenance, NOT on the manual. Do you think they want to preserve your car so you never buy another? They want maint costs to look low so you buy the car in the first place.


thumbsup2.gif


The analysis says more about this specific transmission's ability to operate under adverse conditions and its tolerance to particulates than the fluid's formulation.

And another thing to consider is whether this example is an outlier and an exception, or will ALL Toyota transmissions tolerate this abuse?
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Leo99
Originally Posted By: jacky
i would have spent the money on changing the fluid instead of the test


It's my contribution to the body of knowledge regarding lifetime ATF.


I agree. Appreciate the report.

Originally Posted By: Leo99
Interesting. I find my local Toyota dealers to be incompetent. The fluid in my Rav is a dark dark red. It looks black if you put in a container but it has a reddish tinge on a paper towel. It doesn't smell burnt.


On my BMW, also lifetime fluid, it was grey after only 100k. A lot of people say they had dark brown fluid at 100k, but mine was grey. How you drive the car may also play a factor. I wish I did a UOA.

Originally Posted By: bigt61
The guys who like to change their ATF every 20,000 miles will ignore this. Good post.


crackmeup2.gif
In one thread someone was saying they do 15k.
 
Originally Posted By: Leo99
Well, I broke down and did a little ATF replacement on the RAV4.

Vacuumed out 70 ounces of dirty ATF and replaced with 66 ounces of T-TV and 4 ounces of LubeGard Red.


Has the shifting quality improved? Also why the lubeguard red? Why not just 100% Toyota T-IV?
 
Originally Posted By: Leo99
It's my wife's daily driver. Drives and shifts great. She's very gentle with it and accelerates very patiently. Drives it 100 miles per day, mostly highway miles. It has developed a loud droning sound that gets louder the faster it goes. So, she might be ready for a new Rav after this one hits 300k miles next summer.

Are you still experiencing that sound? Have you serviced the front diff? Thats where my drowning sound comes from.
 
Originally Posted By: Leo99
Well, I broke down and did a little ATF replacement on the RAV4.

I know I wanted to wait until 300k miles to service it but I drove it and the tranny was making some hard downshifts and didn't sound so smooth. Vacuumed out 70 ounces of dirty ATF and replaced with 66 ounces of T-TV and 4 ounces of LubeGard Red.

I accidentally topped off the transfer case with 80W90 instead of 75W90 but the leak seems to have abated. After 3 weeks, the case stayed full.



Did the new ATF and LG Red help with the downshifts? Inquiring BITOG minds want to know and all that.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top