90 Grand Voyager Transmission fluid

Discussion in 'Voyager' started by tedliu525, Apr 13, 2005.

  1. tedliu525

    tedliu525 Guest


    I know this is an old topic that has been discussed for a long
    time. But I still have a couple questions.

    I have a 1990 Grand Voyager SE (3.3L). The transmission was
    replaced in 2000 at 81K miles. The replacement is a Mopar
    reman transmission (part number R4741744-AA). Note: the
    transmission controller was not replaced. I do not know
    exactly what type of transmission fluid was used with
    the replacement tranny.

    The replacement transmission has been in operation for more
    than four years now, and I added another 40K miles on the
    vehicle. I believe it's about time to have the transmission

    1) should I have the transmission flushed, in addition to
    changing the fluid? should the filter be replaced?

    2) I read from this ng that ATF+3 or, preferably ATF+4, should
    be used. But this is a reman transmission. What kind of
    transmission should I use.

    Thanks for any helpful info.
    tedliu525, Apr 13, 2005
  2. tedliu525

    Richard Guest

    1. Don't Flush.
    2. Do change fluid and filter.
    3. Use ATF+3.

    Richard, Apr 13, 2005
  3. tedliu525

    kmatheson Guest

    I agree. The TSB about fluid says that 1999 and before minivans should
    not use ATF+4. I am curious as to why earlier minivans are excluded.

    -Kirk Matheson
    kmatheson, Apr 13, 2005
  4. tedliu525

    Treeline Guest

    The transmission controller module or TCM does not need to be replaced unless
    it is defective which is probably quite rare. However, you might want to make
    very, very sure that it has the latest software upgrade.

    Reman. Part No. Vehicle Application -
    Software ID
    Body Type

    R4686606AA 04686606 95 AJ,AS,A1,A3,A4,ES 3.0, 3.3 & 3.8L
    R5269726AA 05269726 95 FJ 2.0 & 2.5L
    R4797708AA 04797708 95 LH 3.3 & 3.5L
    R4686478AA 04686606 93-94 A,C,J,P,S,Y 3.0, 3.3 & 3.8L
    R4759066AA 04797708 93-94 LH 3.3 & 3.5L
    R4761848AA 04796123 92 A,C,G,J,S,Y 3.0L
    R4761849AA 04796124 92 C,S,Y 3.3L & 3.8L
    R4761847AA 04796122 90-91 C,S,Y 3.3 & 3.8L
    R4761846AA 04796121 89-91 A,C,G,J,S,Y 3.0L

    "I am using TSB 18-020-02 Flash Programming Failure Recovery, which supersedes
    TECHNICAL SERVICE BULLETIN 18-32-98, which in turn supersedes the original
    TSB-18-24-95, involving the TCM: "exhibit a pronounced shudder during EMCC
    operation, harsh up/down-shifts, and/or harsh torque converter clutch

    About the ATF+3 or ATF+4. There might be some problem that older trannies might
    not have all their seals able to handle synthetic fluids, like ATF+4. Some on
    this forum suggest that this is not the case any more. And some have used ATF+4
    in their older vehicles. I, myself, asked for ATF+3. It may not have the better
    slippery qualities of ATF+4 and I might have to change a tad more often because
    it does not have the robustness of a purely synthetic or mostly synthetic oil,
    but then I do know that my tranny was made with ATF+3 in mind and ATF+4 was not
    yet in existence.
    Treeline, Apr 14, 2005
  5. tedliu525

    jdoe Guest

    You may have the new style controller. If you know what it looks like see if
    it has fins. If not it would be adviseable to get the new style one
    regardless of whether the old one is ok. Re. flushing if done right it's
    fine you could use +4 with no issues. This has been beaten to death but +4
    is all many dealers even stock. Your trans will be fine with it. The thing
    will be if you only drop the pan than buying +4 is not going to get you
    anything. If you do flush you can have the tech drop the pan too and replace
    the filter and gasket along with the new controller and latest software with
    +4 and you're good to go.
    jdoe, Apr 14, 2005
  6. tedliu525

    Richard Guest

    About the ATF+3 or ATF+4. There might be some problem that older trannies
    Chrysler has informed us that the friction characteristics between the two
    are quite different. If a pre-1999 transmission has to go through a
    computer retraining cycle the use of +4 in such transmission can lead to
    clutch chatter which can injure the clutch. But for this little problem it
    appears that +4 is the superior product.

    Richard, Apr 14, 2005
  7. tedliu525

    Bob Shuman Guest

    Could you please explain your rationale for the comment below on "why this
    does not buy you anything?" Your other advice and comments seemed accurate,
    but I do not understand how replacing just over half the fluid with +4,
    replacing the filter, cleaning off the magnet, and getting all the sludge
    off the bottom of the pan could be doing "nothing". Thanks.

    Bob Shuman, Apr 14, 2005
  8. tedliu525

    tedliu525 Guest

    why not?
    I understand the argument for using ATF+3 on earlier (pre-1999)
    voyager models. But this is a reman transmission put on
    my voyager in Augest, 2000.

    Thanks again,
    tedliu525, Apr 14, 2005
  9. tedliu525

    hachiroku Guest


    I work for a Used Car Dealer. We flushed three trannies, and then replaced
    three trannies within 5 weeks after flushing! All we do now is a typical
    drain and fill. If the customer says the fluid looks bad, we drian and
    fill again. Haven't had a single tranny come back since.
    It was probably rebuilt to original spec and filled with +3. I have been
    told you CAN mix +3 and +4, but I'd just go with one or the other. Since
    the manual says +3, I'd stick with +3.
    hachiroku, Apr 14, 2005
  10. tedliu525

    jdoe Guest

    You won't get the benefits of switching to +4 unless you flush out
    everything that's in there now.
    jdoe, Apr 15, 2005
  11. tedliu525

    tedliu525 Guest

    Thanks all for the helpful info.
    I know exactly what to do now.
    One more question. Where is the transmission filter for my van (again
    it is a 1990 Grand Voyager SE (3.3L))? I couldn't locate it.
    tedliu525, Apr 18, 2005
  12. tedliu525

    aarcuda69062 Guest

    Once you remove the pan, you can't miss it.
    aarcuda69062, Apr 18, 2005
Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.