Driving/maintaining a 1997 Chrysler LHS

Hello,
I purchased a '97 LHS with 66k miles on it. The car seems to be in pretty good shape
.. I got it from a dealership who didn't have any history of the
car or maintenance records. After running carfax on the VIN I found out that
it was initially leased by a rental car company and after that changed 2 owners.

I was thinking about changing transmission fluid, but was told by the dealer that
it might not be a good idea and that it could damage the transmission since we don't
knwo in what state it is (it does shift well). Is there any truth to this?
Since I don't know what kind of maintenance was done to this car before, could
someone suggest what should I tell the mechanic to inspect when I bring it there
(this is not the dealer mechanic as I managed to negotiate a really low price which
in turn cancelled any warranty on the car)?

 

No. For the mileage on the car, changing all the major fluids (trans, oil,
coolant) is good
preventative maintainence.

Ted

 

I agree with changing the fluids, even (especially) the tranny fluid.
The dealer is thinking of pressure flushing the tranny when they say it
could cause problems. The solution is to never pressure flush a tranny,
especially if it has some mileage on it and you don't know it's previous
flushing history. Flush it by disconnecting the cooler return line and
letting the tranny's built in pump pump the fluid out (as you replenish
from above) so it doesn't create any problems by disturbing residue that
can get caught in delicate spool valves, ports, and such.

Oh - and drop the pan and replace the filter. Use only the metal
replacement gasket *or* the Chrysler recommended tranny pan sealer (not
just generic silicone sealer) - metal gasket is less mess and risk, and
reuseable.

Bill Putney
(to reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with "x")

 

IF it had 150,000 miles on it and you didn't know the service done in
the past, that would be different, but at your mileage, CHANGE the
fluid & filter in the tranny and all the other fluids where
applicable.

 

Thanks, can you suggest what type of oil should I buy and bring to the
mechanic to change? I don't know if this engine is 'built for' synthetic or not and
what grade is recommended (I don't have the car manual). I still have a few
gallons of brand new Mobil1 10w-30 synthetic left that I used to sip in my
previous car.

Also what type of tranny fluid and engine coolant would you recommend?
This is my first automatic so I don't have any experiences with this.

Thanks.

 

I'll admit to no having had many automatics apart, only have done a
complete rebuild on one, but I've never seen one that had enough sludge
inside to cause a problem from a flush. Transmissions don't get the
build-ups that an engine gets from the combustion byproducts. And if
the tranny has enough sludge to cause a problem with a good flush, then
I'll suggest that it needs a complete rebuild anyway.


Matt

 

No engine is 'built' for synthetic - I've used both without problems.

10w30 is the recommended for my 3.5, but I have switched to a synthetic 5w30
in winter(I drive in cold weather alot and leave car outside).

I don't use long life coolant - I'd rather flush every 24 months.

As for tranny fluid, I use whatever my mechanic recommends.

James

 

Many people swear that synthetic oil is 1000 times superior and will stop
all
wear on your engine, allow you to run the oil for tens of thousands of miles
with
just filter changes, reduce pollution and save the planet, and get you
elected
Queen of the May.

If your in this boat then go ahead, if it gives you peace of mind it's
cheaper than
paying a counselor.

But the only really clear benefit that everyone agrees on is that synthetic
has
superior cold-start properties, particulary if your in the northern climes
where
the temp goes below zero many times during the winter.

I personally have had 2 vehicles I've own throw rods. (throwing a rod is
one of
the few engine failures that really points the finger to oiling problems)
and in both
cases, rebuilders I queried about it said that both of the engines had known
oiling
problems, ie: oil passages drilled too small at the factory. Neither
rebuilder put
any credence in synthetic oil, and in fact the one rebuilder I used to
rebuild the
engine in one of the vehicles, stated specifically that the warranty would
be voided
if an "extended oil change interval" scheme was followed. (such schemes are
typically propounded by synthetic oil adherants) He didn't care what kind
of
oil was used as long as it meet manufacturers recommendations. (he also
drilled
out the oil passages that were too small)

Some research that has been done and is available on the web on this topic
seems
to show that standard non-synthetic oil will last up to 12,000 miles before
breaking
down and needing to be changed, so I fail to see the justification for using
synthetic
oil just to obtain extended oil change intervals, since you could do it with
regular
oil just the same, if you believe in that sort of thing.

From a cost standpoint as synthetic oil costs about $5 a quart and regular
oil
costs about $1 a quart, there is tremendous pressure on synthetic oil
adherants
to claim extended drain intervals, in order to make the total cost of
synthetic on
par with regular oil. I frankly feel that this makes most extended drain
interval
claims for synthetic rather suspect.

Since you have the oil already, don't waste it. Use it.

Ted

 

Common knowledge in the industry suggests what I said - not that common
knowledge is always right ('cause 90% of the tranny shops will also tell
you that you can use Dexron™ in the LH trannies which I know isn't
right). Albeit anecdotal, I've seen too many posts about problems after
pressure flushing and not after flushing the "natural" way.

Bill Putney
(to reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with "x")

 

For tranny fluid: ATF+4 *only*.

Bill Putney
(to reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with "x")

 

AMSOIL make a synthetic ATF that is rated for Chrysler ATF+4.

For more info goto www.thebestsyntheticoil.com/atf.htm

 

How much did you have to pay Amsoil to link to your website?

Ted

 

x-no-archive: yes

For tranny fluid; ATF+4 *only*

 

Visen, I am going to put a link here that you should read:

http://www.imakenews.com/flashpoint/e_article000113903.cfm

and under Fair Use I am going to quote the entire article. In summary,
AMSOIL's claim
that their ATF is rated for ATF +4 is a lie, because Chrysler has only
approved
a single additive supplier to supply the additive that ATF +4 requires, and
that supplier is
not selling this additive to fluid manufacturers.

Please note that your LHS transmission will undoubtedly be fine with ATF +3
which is sold
by several oil companies, among them Chevron and Valvoline. That fluid is
probably specified
in your owners manual.

The situation is so bad that the Independent Lubricant Manufacturer's
Association, the ILMA
(http://www.ilma.org/) issued a complaint letter to Chrysler, and is
encouraging members to
contact the association's lawyer. (most likely to prepare a class action
lawsuit under antitrust)
That is what the article referenced above is all about.

Please also note that AMSOIL is a member company of ILMA, per the following:

http://www.ilma.org/about/membercompanies.cfm?printPage=1

"...ILMA Seeks Meeting with DaimlerChrysler on ATFs

ILMA this week has requested a meeting with DaimlerChrysler Corporation
(DCC) to discuss members' concerns with restrictions on their access to the
Chrysler ATF+4 (Type 9602) automatic transmission fluid. The Association has
received member complaints that they have been unsuccessful in purchasing
either the additive system approved for the ATF+4 (Type 9602) fluid or the
finished fluid itself. In its letter to DCC, ILMA said that independent
lubricant manufacturers who compete successfully with OEM-branded oil
programs are being competitively injured, in part, because a June 29, 2001
technical service bulletin issued by DCC recommends the use of this fluid in
all Chrysler vehicles with few exceptions.

ILMA members have told the Association that they have been unable to
purchase the additive system approved for the ATF+4 (Type 9602) fluid from
the additive company that has the sole approval from DCC for the additive
system. These ILMA members also have attempted to purchase the finished
ATF+4 (Type 9602) fluid from the major oil company that manufactures it for
DCC. This major oil company has told these ILMA members that DCC has not
approved the release of the fluid for resale.

Any ILMA members experiencing this problem are asked to contact ILMA Counsel
Jeff Leiter at 703-752-1080 or at ...."



Ted Mittelstaedt

 

He's probably a dealer as most Amsoil supporters on newsgroup turn out
to be.


Matt

 

Ted


Thanks for the article link. I did not know that.

That explains why it is hard to get ATF+4 fluid. I do not know what
additives AMSOIL uses or how it is formulated. It has been tested and
meets or exceeds the performance specifications of Chrysler ATF+4

Bruce Wappman
AMSOIL Dealer
www.thebestsyntheticoil.com

 

No seriously, he really does have a link on the Amsoil website. If you go
to the
Amsoil website and click around on it, some of the pages come up with a
graphic
that is a link to his business. I was a bit surprised to see this. I'd
imagine that he
had to pay upwards of a grand a month for that link, he must be selling a
lot of
the stuff. That's why I asked.

Ted

 

Bruce, your really on a slippery slope here.

Saying that Amsoil is tested to meet or exceed the performance
specifications
of Chrysler ATF +4 is in the realm of possibility. I do believe that it is
highly
improbable however, because Amsoil claims their transmission fluid also
substitutes for Dexron III, and Dexron III and Mopar ATF +4 have very
different frictional coefficients. A transmission fluid cannot have 1
frictional
coefficient in 1 transmission, and another frictional coefficient in
another. For
more information on this, please refer to the following link:

http://www.allpar.com/fix/trans.html

Granted, it's full of testimonials but Amsoil seems to like this, despite
the
fact that testimonials aren't worth a fig, but near the bottom of the page
is a somewhat dumbed-down explanation of why you cannot use Dexron
in a Chrysler tranny that calls for ATF +3 or ATF +4.

Of course it is possible for Amsoil to be made to match frictional
coefficients of ATF +4. In that case, however, it would be WRONG for
transmissions
that require Dexron III. That is why I say it's in the realm of
possibility. However,
I feel it is extremely improbable because the fluid additive for ATF +4 is
restricted (according to the article) however the fluid additive for Dexron
III
is not. (because many people make Dexron III) It is most probable that
Amsoil Transmission Fluid is just another Dexron III-compatible fluid.

However, the biggest problem isn't whether Amsoil has reverse-engineered
the ATF +4 additive and is making a compatible fluid. The biggest problem
is
that Amsoil dealers like you are claiming that Amsoil ATF is RATED for ATF
+4
and ATF +3.

Saying that Amsoil ATF is rated for ATF +4 implies that Chrysler has
certified
it for ATF +4, (as much as Chrysler will certify anything) and in the
absense of
that it implies that there's some kind of standards body that has applied a
rating
of ATF +4 on the fluid. This is pretty much fraud in my book. There is no
such
rating body for ATF +4 because ATF +4 fluid is custom-designed for Chrysler
who has signed an exclusivity deal with the sole supplier of the additive
system
designed for ATF +4, which prohibits that oil company from selling the ATF
+4
base.

Furthermore, ATF +3 and ATF +4 are both registered trademarks of Chrysler.
Amsoil doesen't even properly attribute this with a (R) on it's website, and
almost
certainly Amsoil hasn't sought approval from Chrysler for their fluids to be
marked ATF +3 or ATF +4. While you can get away with only an attribution on
sales literature, (since the courts have generally ruled that sales
literature is
considered a pack of lies) you cannot use someone's registered trademark on
a _PRODUCT_ without their permission. It makes me wonder what the actual
bottles of Amsoil ATF say. If they have the mark "ATF +3" or "ATF +4"
listed ANYWHERE on the bottle, even on the back in the fine print, Amsoil
must have permission from Chrysler for this, which quite obviously they do
not. And if ATF +3 or ATF +4 isn't on the bottle then legally the product
inside the bottle does not need to meet either ATF +3 or ATF +4 standards,
despite what lies may be on any accompanying sales literature.

Frankly, I think that there's some grounds for IMLA to boot Amsoil off it's
membership roles, it's amazing that someone hasn't complained yet. For
Amsoil to go to the general public and claim to be selling ATF +4 compatible
ATF, then privately though ILMA bitch to Chrysler that they can't buy
the additive system for ATF +4 is pretty two-faced.

Ted

 

I don't understand your logic above. Why would Amsoil charge one of its
owner dealers to link to their site to help sell more of their products?

Matt

 

Because every Amsoil dealer claims Amsoil is the leader in synthetics, so
there
must be a lot of Amsoil sold to make that claim, don't you think? Well if
Amsoil links to anyone who sells it for free, then they wouldn't have enough
space on their website to link to everyone, cause every one of those dealers
and retailers is going to demand a link.

Ted