The Belief a Fluid Killed Something

[DoubleWasp]

I'm sure we've all heard that story:

"_________ product is the worst! I put it in my car and it killed my ________."

"Tried __________ and immediately had problems."

My recent experience? ST ATF+4.

My automatic Ram had unknown service history, so I decided to do a filters change and complete fluid flush. I did a cooler line exchange of the whole thing, including doing a Ford-style extra 8 quarts of flushing beyond the point where clean and clear fluid came out of the cooler line. After my last purge, I dropped the nearly empty pan and replaced both filters. Put the whole thing back together, did proper fill and top-off of the trans and proceeded to enjoy.

110 miles later, I had a transmission throwing a line-pressure code, Solenoid A code, and refusing to shift in limp-home mode.

This would normally be the time to rag on the quality of ST fluids, and assign blame to the fluid for causing some harm to the transmission. Difference here is that I know the 68RFE transmission well enough to know that a solenoid pack failure is a "not if but when" situation. I also known that ATF+4 spec is tightly controlled, and the ST ATF has the proper approval.

I drained the pan, dropped the pan, dropped the VB, dropped the solenoid pack, slapped a new one in, topped-off the trans and went back to the daily routine. 6000 miles later, still running ST ATF+4, I'm still going strong.

So did ST ATF harm my solenoid pack? Of course not. The pack clearly failed for the same reason as every other bad RFE solenoid pack out there. Just a bad design and age. Coincidence it happened right after ST ATF entered the picture? Yes.

Could the new ATF have caused an ailing but functioning part to slip over the edge? Distinct possibility.

Would I do anything differently? Not really, except just pre-emptively replacing a known trouble-part while I had the pan down, instead of waiting for its demise and doing the same thing twice.

It does go to show how wacky conclusions can be drawn by timing.

 

[dlundblad]

I know the general rule is that all ATF+4 is the same, but this thread came up last month proving this otherwise. They are all close to the same, but not identical. It could have very well been timing, but it is very coincidental your issues happened right after the fluid change.

http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/4053143/1
7th post down.

Has anyone found a ST+4 data sheet?

 

[JC1]

Thanks for the post. I have a 2015 grand caravan and your post provides some confidence that fluid changes for Dodge/Chrysler products shouldn't worry you.

 

[Popsy]

Well writen, sir.

 

[Nyogtha]

Originally Posted By: dlundblad
I know the general rule is that all ATF+4 is the same, but this thread came up last month proving this otherwise. They are all close to the same, but not identical. It could have very well been timing, but it is very coincidental your issues happened right after the fluid change.

http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/4053143/1
7th post down.


Look on the 3rd page of that thread and you'll see all those test values are within the test reproducibility limits, except the CAM2 which is an outlier.

However, it should be noted Mobil, Pennzoil, & Quaker State ATF+4 PDS show those brands are synthetic blend (GpII+/GpIII) while most other ATF+4 brands specify fully synthetic formulation.


Originally Posted By: dlundblad

Has anyone found a ST+4 data sheet?


Yes I asked them to email one to me a while back. Numerical values for ST ATF+4 are identical to Mag 1 ATF+4.

 

[doitmyself]

I just added a post to that other thread showing that the CAM2 "ATF 4" is NOT licensed by the Center for Quality Assurance. Maybe that is why they left the "+" out of their product name?

http://www.centerforqa.com/chrysler-nonlicensed-brands/

Also, see their FAQ page regarding the use of the term "synthetic". Obviously they left some wiggle room regarding base oil.

 

[Bottom_Feeder]

Well said. This is the same reason why I wasn't all up in arms when my Impreza spun a rod bearing the first time I used Rotella T6 in it.

 

[cptbarkey]

Draining your fluid probably killed the solenoid pack.

 

[Panzerman]

Well, I just serviced my Dodge RAM. I bought it new so I know it's service history. Every 30,000 miles on the Transmission. Both filters, just a pan drop. No flushing. I used ST ATF +4. I think the flushing did the damage. Never a good idea. You change your fluids when you should, that should be sufficient. I think it was neglect and flushing that did the damage.

 

[AirgunSavant]

Often people change fluids because something is amiss or performance is off as a part is nearing the failure point.
When it does go, the first thing you blame is what fluid went into it last. Forget it was abused, bad engineering to start with or had a zillion miles on it

 

[4wheeldog]

I believe that solenoid packs often fail because they get loaded up with magnetic particles. It wasn't the fluids fault, but the flushing got those particles disturbed and moving. Enough of them collected on the electromagnets in the solenoid pack to kill it.

Would it have happened anyway? Eventually. Could you have prevented it? Not as the second owner. If early and often fluid and filter changes had been done, maybe.

 

[UltrafanUK]

[color:#FF0000]
Originally Posted By: doitmyself
I just added a post to that other thread showing that the CAM2 "ATF 4" is NOT licensed by the Center for Quality Assurance. Maybe that is why they left the "+" out of their product name?

http://www.centerforqa.com/chrysler-nonlicensed-brands/

Also, see their FAQ page regarding the use of the term "synthetic". Obviously they left some wiggle room regarding base oil.


YEP, you found the smoking gun of ATF fluids, [censored] (Back Speccin).
It combines with a lack of oversight, even if the Pet boys do try their best. Net result forked bearings or seals.

http://www.pqiamerica.com/samplesummarytransmission.htm

General Motors and Ford Motor Company has set forth a number of laboratory and rig tests required to meet the former Dexron III and Mercon performance specifications. Although laboratory tests alone cannot be used to establish if an ATF meets these specifications, they can be used to determine if it doesn't.

 

[DoubleWasp]

Originally Posted By: Panzerman
Well, I just serviced my Dodge RAM. I bought it new so I know it's service history. Every 30,000 miles on the Transmission. Both filters, just a pan drop. No flushing. I used ST ATF +4. I think the flushing did the damage. Never a good idea. You change your fluids when you should, that should be sufficient. I think it was neglect and flushing that did the damage.


The solenoid pack was just old with very hard seals.

I cannot imagine that flushing itself did any damage. It's just running new fluid through the transmission, using its own pump.

 

[DoubleWasp]

Originally Posted By: AirgunSavant
Often people change fluids because something is amiss or performance is off as a part is nearing the failure point.
When it does go, the first thing you blame is what fluid went into it last. Forget it was abused, bad engineering to start with or had a zillion miles on it

Pretty much. Since changing the fluid, it's been solid as a rock, even hauling 10 tons.

Quote:
I believe that solenoid packs often fail because they get loaded up with magnetic particles. It wasn't the fluids fault, but the flushing got those particles disturbed and moving. Enough of them collected on the electromagnets in the solenoid pack to kill it.

Would it have happened anyway? Eventually. Could you have prevented it? Not as the second owner. If early and often fluid and filter changes had been done, maybe.


Was just seals hard as a rock in my case. No accumulation of ferrous particles.

 

[KrisZ]

Blaming the fluid is very similar to blaming the person that last touched the vehicle. Both show ignorance.