Omega Owners Forum

Chat Area => General Car Chat => Topic started by: Webby the Bear on 24 February 2013, 10:01:33

Title: An explanation about why changing ATF MAY be a bad idea if never been done...
Post by: Webby the Bear on 24 February 2013, 10:01:33
Hi guys,

I posted in the Gen. Help section a litle while ago (sorry can't remember who for) but it was about if you haven't changed your ATF in a long time why it may POTENTIALLY cause a breakdown of the gearbox...

Well I came across this video from ETCG which kind of explains what was meant....6mins 30s....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Qf6O0oAs7U

Ps, before I get shouted at this is not me saying ''dont change your oil''. you should.

but its just an explanation as to if you change your ATF after a lot of miles and then it breaks this is probably why :)

ps, part 1 here....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JGbsgpp2YJQ&feature=youtu.be
Title: Re: An explanation about why changing ATF MAY be a bad idea if never been done...
Post by: TheBoy on 24 February 2013, 10:11:32
I left my silver bullet until around 160k (I've owned since 88k, and nothing in history that it had been done)  :-[

Apart from a catasphoric leak, as seen at Newent, and a failed thrust washer (noticed whilst sorting said leak at Newent), its still the smoothest autobox of any Omega I have driven
Title: Re: An explanation about why changing ATF MAY be a bad idea if never been done...
Post by: Webby the Bear on 24 February 2013, 10:14:22
I left my silver bullet until around 160k (I've owned since 88k, and nothing in history that it had been done)  :-[

Apart from a catasphoric leak, as seen at Newent, and a failed thrust washer (noticed whilst sorting said leak at Newent), its still the smoothest autobox of any Omega I have driven

Was the leak the fluid change at all, TB? Known cause for it happening?

Obviously not saying it will happen but if it does it could be this  :y
Title: Re: An explanation about why changing ATF MAY be a bad idea if never been done...
Post by: omega3000 on 24 February 2013, 10:18:08
Never changed any gearbox oil in all 3 omega's and never had any problem , thats why they dont have a drain plug , sealed for life  :P ;D
Title: Re: An explanation about why changing ATF MAY be a bad idea if never been done...
Post by: TheBoy on 24 February 2013, 10:37:19
I left my silver bullet until around 160k (I've owned since 88k, and nothing in history that it had been done)  :-[

Apart from a catasphoric leak, as seen at Newent, and a failed thrust washer (noticed whilst sorting said leak at Newent), its still the smoothest autobox of any Omega I have driven

Was the leak the fluid change at all, TB? Known cause for it happening?

Obviously not saying it will happen but if it does it could be this  :y
The gasket failed.
Title: Re: An explanation about why changing ATF MAY be a bad idea if never been done...
Post by: Marks DTM Calib on 24 February 2013, 11:42:56
Yep, he's talking crap as usual  ;D

So what he's saying is that the tiny metal particles suspended in the oil is good because it makes the oil thicker.

Hence this goosed oil where the lube properties due to sheer have been destroyed and which contains tiny abrasive metal particles is better than fresh oil on an old box.

Unbeleavable.
Title: Re: An explanation about why changing ATF MAY be a bad idea if never been done...
Post by: 2boxerdogs on 24 February 2013, 15:10:16
Queried this at my local dealer when I bought the 2.2 auto, never change the oil unless you have any problems with the auto box was their advice , according to all the service history that came with the car it has never been changed, now on 87,000 miles and as smooth as silk.
Title: Re: An explanation about why changing ATF MAY be a bad idea if never been done...
Post by: TheBoy on 24 February 2013, 15:19:42
Queried this at my local dealer when I bought the 2.2 auto, never change the oil unless you have any problems with the auto box was their advice , according to all the service history that came with the car it has never been changed, now on 87,000 miles and as smooth as silk.
I bet the same dealer said change the engine oil every 20k.

Ignore dealers, they are full of bovine waste.
Title: Re: An explanation about why changing ATF MAY be a bad idea if never been done...
Post by: feeutfo on 24 February 2013, 16:10:02
Love the video, good stuff. :y

But he did say, the cause of a failure after a long period without an oil change was the gear box being worn.
So if you follow that theory, with new fluid, the fluid is to spec. It's the gear box that its out of spec/worn.

I don't claim to be a gear box expert in any way, but I don't buy the theory at all. A normal corse of events might be, that fluid goes unchanged or the box just reaches the end of its life. Possibly the life ends early due to no fluid change but either way the box is wearing out. The driver senses a problem, first port of call, change the fluid. Might fix it if parts are sticking due to old fluid, might be a slight improvement followed by a complete failure because....the box is worn out.

Even to his own theory, its the wear that's the problem, not the new fluid. :y


That's a front wheel drive box, btw. Much less reliable due the lack of space and the need to offset the drive line due to fit it all between the front wheels.

Motorbike clutches look almost exactly the same as the ones shown, and suffer the same faults. Burnt out or warn plates, but also pitted marks/grooves on the clutch drum where the splines are under pressure. The plates dig in to the grooves and stick, holding the clutch plates apart slightly, then the clutch slips under load and that accelerates the wear rate. :(
Title: Re: An explanation about why changing ATF MAY be a bad idea if never been done...
Post by: 2boxerdogs on 24 February 2013, 16:40:59
Exactly , the technician I spoke with re my auto box is also a resident down my road, engine oil is a different matter altogether & we all know regular changes prolong /protect the engine.I would sooner take his advice as he has had several autos since I have known him & as he says weekend "tinkerers" create more problems for themselves .I  have probably had 8 autos over the years & never changed gearbox oil & never had problems .
Title: Re: An explanation about why changing ATF MAY be a bad idea if never been done...
Post by: feeutfo on 24 February 2013, 16:56:08
Exactly , the technician I spoke with re my auto box is also a resident down my road, engine oil is a different matter altogether & we all know regular changes prolong /protect the engine.I would sooner take his advice as he has had several autos since I have known him & as he says weekend "tinkerers" create more problems for themselves .I  have probably had 8 autos over the years & never changed gearbox oil & never had problems .
Consider yourself lucky then. All of my cars have benefitted from an ATF change, and noticeably so. Shift quality improves, especially when engaging drive in forward and reverse. My 2.5cdx was thumping badly when engaging gears. ATF change revived it perfectly. It's like the ATF had gone sticky.
Title: Re: An explanation about why changing ATF MAY be a bad idea if never been done...
Post by: TheBoy on 24 February 2013, 17:03:29
The autobox fluid, as well as degrading like any oil, also picks up the metalic filings and debris that the box generates.

Anyone who has changed the fluid on a seal autobox will know quite how much of this actually exists in the box after a few 10s of thousands of miles.

Now I'm just the stupid kid from the local comprehensive, but I'd bet my left gonad that a seriously degraded oil, laden with metal filings, is doing the box no favours whatsoever.

As for the "technician" saying, in not so many words, leave it to the professionals, that smacks of one of 2 possibilities; protecting his own business, or lack of knowledge/ability.


But happily, on OOF, we know better :y
Title: Re: An explanation about why changing ATF MAY be a bad idea if never been done...
Post by: 2boxerdogs on 24 February 2013, 17:08:48
Perhaps I have been lucky with the cars I have had, only ever buy new or 1 owner cars just my way rightly or wrongly in the hope that they will provide good regular service, any problems that do arise I get sorted out asap. In the late seventies & up until 1989 I was in the London ambulance service, we had Bedford cf autos & believe me they were really abused ,never had any problems with gearboxes wheel bearings were another story though!
Title: Re: An explanation about why changing ATF MAY be a bad idea if never been done...
Post by: ffcgary1 on 24 February 2013, 17:12:32
Dont VX recommend a fluid change every 70,000 miles, i seem to remember seeing this somewhere. :-\
Title: Re: An explanation about why changing ATF MAY be a bad idea if never been done...
Post by: TheBoy on 24 February 2013, 17:19:42
Dont VX recommend a fluid change every 70,000 miles, i seem to remember seeing this somewhere. :-\
Its wishy washy.

Remember, the service intervals are to please fleet managers, so GM like to say the car needs no servicing.

So GM actually leave it open, along the lines of "70k miles on cars that have had a hard life"

Going on GM's engine oil lasts 20k 'dangle berries', I take it to mean the ATF should be changed at 70k. Its not a hard job. Its messy. Very messy. But not hard. And if you feel the difference, you clearly have left it too long ;)
Title: Re: An explanation about why changing ATF MAY be a bad idea if never been done...
Post by: feeutfo on 24 February 2013, 17:20:24
Dont VX recommend a fluid change every 70,000 miles, i seem to remember seeing this somewhere. :-\
It is in the OOF recommended service intervals 60k iirc. Vauxhall say the box is sealed for life, bless them.
Title: Re: An explanation about why changing ATF MAY be a bad idea if never been done...
Post by: feeutfo on 24 February 2013, 17:23:25
In 'ere. :)

http://www.omegaowners.com/forum/index.php?topic=90441.0


...and I remember wrongly.  :-[
Title: Re: An explanation about why changing ATF MAY be a bad idea if never been done...
Post by: tigers_gonads on 25 February 2013, 14:32:46
Ok question time before I go and spend 50 squid on 2 gallon on ATF and a can of brake cleaner.

My new shed has been neglected for the last 2 years.
Engine oil was like tar but now sorted.
Gearbox is very reluctant to change up when the oil is cold.
Also it had a p1700 code which seems to have disapeared over the last 300 miles of my use.
Ode meter says 125 K

Do I drop the gearbox sump and do a total oil change and clean the filters out while i'm in there OR do I just top it up with fresh ATF and see how it runs ?

Never had a auto box before so this is a bit of a learning curve.

Also do I need a gaskit for the sump plate or is it a case of silicon ?
Title: Re: An explanation about why changing ATF MAY be a bad idea if never been done...
Post by: Entwood on 25 February 2013, 14:41:27
You can't change "all" the ATF by just dropping the sumps/filters, only about 1/2 gets removed as the torque convertor and cooling pipes are still full. actually emptying the system takes a quite a bit of faffing I believe !!

I did the "sump drop change" on mine at 85000, as its use for towing a lot .. and I'm very pleased with the result... changes were smoother, quieter and seemed to be earlier as well .. but that might be wishful thinking !!
Title: Re: An explanation about why changing ATF MAY be a bad idea if never been done...
Post by: albitz on 25 February 2013, 14:55:52
A favoured method of changing the ATF on Merecedes forum iirc is to disconnect the outlet pipe from the transcooler and put the end into a suitable container.Then,start the engine and pump new ATF into the transmission.Job is complete when new ATF starts appearing in the container,rather like bleeding brake fluid.
I wonder if thres any reason this cant be done with the Omega autobox ?  :-\

TG,if the car has been a tad neglected and the box is a bit grumpy I would change the ATF personally.
Iirc there is a gasket,but its fine to use sealant when replacing the sumps.
Title: Re: An explanation about why changing ATF MAY be a bad idea if never been done...
Post by: Elite Pete on 25 February 2013, 16:09:29
Ok question time before I go and spend 50 squid on 2 gallon on ATF and a can of brake cleaner.

My new shed has been neglected for the last 2 years.
Engine oil was like tar but now sorted.
Gearbox is very reluctant to change up when the oil is cold.
Also it had a p1700 code which seems to have disapeared over the last 300 miles of my use.
Ode meter says 125 K

Do I drop the gearbox sump and do a total oil change and clean the filters out while i'm in there OR do I just top it up with fresh ATF and see how it runs ?

Never had a auto box before so this is a bit of a learning curve.

Also do I need a gaskit for the sump plate or is it a case of silicon ?

New gaskets and filter are about £35 from here http://www.jpat.co.uk/
Title: Re: An explanation about why changing ATF MAY be a bad idea if never been done...
Post by: feeutfo on 25 February 2013, 16:53:14
Ok question time before I go and spend 50 squid on 2 gallon on ATF and a can of brake cleaner.

My new shed has been neglected for the last 2 years.
Engine oil was like tar but now sorted.
Gearbox is very reluctant to change up when the oil is cold.
Also it had a p1700 code which seems to have disapeared over the last 300 miles of my use.
Ode meter says 125 K

Do I drop the gearbox sump and do a total oil change and clean the filters out while i'm in there OR do I just top it up with fresh ATF and see how it runs ?

Never had a auto box before so this is a bit of a learning curve.

Also do I need a gaskit for the sump plate or is it a case of silicon ?
Change it. That's twice the recommended mileage.
I prefer gaskets myself, but an instant gasket goo will do fine.

I know you don't mean silicon btw, but just to be sure, silicon is a no no.
Sealing the scuttle up maybe, but other than that, no. Just no ;)
Title: Re: An explanation about why changing ATF MAY be a bad idea if never been done...
Post by: Elite Pete on 25 February 2013, 16:54:28
Ok question time before I go and spend 50 squid on 2 gallon on ATF and a can of brake cleaner.

My new shed has been neglected for the last 2 years.
Engine oil was like tar but now sorted.
Gearbox is very reluctant to change up when the oil is cold.
Also it had a p1700 code which seems to have disapeared over the last 300 miles of my use.
Ode meter says 125 K

Do I drop the gearbox sump and do a total oil change and clean the filters out while i'm in there OR do I just top it up with fresh ATF and see how it runs ?

Never had a auto box before so this is a bit of a learning curve.

Also do I need a gaskit for the sump plate or is it a case of silicon ?
Change it. That's twice the recommended mileage.
I prefer gaskets myself, but an instant gasket goo will do fine.

I know you don't mean silicon btw, but just to be sure, silicon is a no no.
Sealing the scuttle up maybe, but other than that, no. Just no ;)
What about around the bath :P
Title: Re: An explanation about why changing ATF MAY be a bad idea if never been done...
Post by: feeutfo on 25 February 2013, 17:05:04
Ok question time before I go and spend 50 squid on 2 gallon on ATF and a can of brake cleaner.

My new shed has been neglected for the last 2 years.
Engine oil was like tar but now sorted.
Gearbox is very reluctant to change up when the oil is cold.
Also it had a p1700 code which seems to have disapeared over the last 300 miles of my use.
Ode meter says 125 K

Do I drop the gearbox sump and do a total oil change and clean the filters out while i'm in there OR do I just top it up with fresh ATF and see how it runs ?

Never had a auto box before so this is a bit of a learning curve.

Also do I need a gaskit for the sump plate or is it a case of silicon ?
Change it. That's twice the recommended mileage.
I prefer gaskets myself, but an instant gasket goo will do fine.

I know you don't mean silicon btw, but just to be sure, silicon is a no no.
Sealing the scuttle up maybe, but other than that, no. Just no ;)
What about around the bath :P
Indeed. Scuttle drain. Exactly that. ;) ;D
Title: Re: An explanation about why changing ATF MAY be a bad idea if never been done...
Post by: TheBoy on 25 February 2013, 17:53:52
I'd chnage it.

Note, the TCM holds 1st gear longer when cold, to heat the cats up faster. ECO crap for the tree hugging hippies who really are a waste of valuable oxygen.
Title: Re: An explanation about why changing ATF MAY be a bad idea if never been done...
Post by: tigers_gonads on 26 February 2013, 23:05:58
Message recieved  :y

Thanks lads  :)
Title: Re: An explanation about why changing ATF MAY be a bad idea if never been done...
Post by: sassanach on 26 February 2013, 23:11:23
A favoured method of changing the ATF on Merecedes forum iirc is to disconnect the outlet pipe from the transcooler and put the end into a suitable container.Then,start the engine and pump new ATF into the transmission.Job is complete when new ATF starts appearing in the container,rather like bleeding brake fluid.
I wonder if thres any reason this cant be done with the Omega autobox ?  :-\

TG,if the car has been a tad neglected and the box is a bit grumpy I would change the ATF personally.
Iirc there is a gasket,but its fine to use sealant when replacing the sumps.
thats the method i use,works very well but uses a fair bit of atf
Title: Re: An explanation about why changing ATF MAY be a bad idea if never been done...
Post by: Vamps on 27 February 2013, 00:22:54
I had a full oil and filter change on the Jeep, Merc Autobox, and noticed an improvement in gear change time and smoothness...... :y :y
Title: Re: An explanation about why changing ATF MAY be a bad idea if never been done...
Post by: TheBoy on 27 February 2013, 18:55:46
A favoured method of changing the ATF on Merecedes forum iirc is to disconnect the outlet pipe from the transcooler and put the end into a suitable container.Then,start the engine and pump new ATF into the transmission.Job is complete when new ATF starts appearing in the container,rather like bleeding brake fluid.
I wonder if thres any reason this cant be done with the Omega autobox ?  :-\

TG,if the car has been a tad neglected and the box is a bit grumpy I would change the ATF personally.
Iirc there is a gasket,but its fine to use sealant when replacing the sumps.
If its unknown, I think I'd like to have the sump off anyway, check and clean the magnet, and search for bits of thrust washer....
Title: Re: An explanation about why changing ATF MAY be a bad idea if never been done...
Post by: feeutfo on 27 February 2013, 19:20:14
Yes I'd like the sumps off, but I'd also like to get ALL the atf out too :)
Title: Re: An explanation about why changing ATF MAY be a bad idea if never been done...
Post by: TheBoy on 27 February 2013, 19:28:39
Yes I'd like the sumps off, but I'd also like to get ALL the atf out too :)
I guess the Merc method, followed by sump removal. Would use bucketloads of ATF though, probably easier to just do a couple of changes at 5k intervals...
Title: Re: An explanation about why changing ATF MAY be a bad idea if never been done...
Post by: feeutfo on 27 February 2013, 20:30:52
Yes I'd like the sumps off, but I'd also like to get ALL the atf out too :)
I guess the Merc method, followed by sump removal. Would use bucketloads of ATF though, probably easier to just do a couple of changes at 5k intervals...
...I am a...  now what was it again? Oh yeah....  a cake and eat it type if guy. :)
Title: Re: An explanation about why changing ATF MAY be a bad idea if never been done...
Post by: albitz on 27 February 2013, 20:41:28
Yes I'd like the sumps off, but I'd also like to get ALL the atf out too :)
I guess the Merc method, followed by sump removal. Would use bucketloads of ATF though, probably easier to just do a couple of changes at 5k intervals...

Other way round would be best I would have thought. ???
Title: Re: An explanation about why changing ATF MAY be a bad idea if never been done...
Post by: TheBoy on 27 February 2013, 20:53:09
Yes I'd like the sumps off, but I'd also like to get ALL the atf out too :)
I guess the Merc method, followed by sump removal. Would use bucketloads of ATF though, probably easier to just do a couple of changes at 5k intervals...

Other way round would be best I would have thought. ???
Probably makes little difference in reality.