The real story behind ATF+4 tranny fluid & Multi-Vehicule Ma

Brody · **Posted:** Thu Feb 26, 2015 6:27 pm

Hey guys,

So I had my transmission serviced by a mobile mechanic here in Austin. Bought Valvoline ATF+4 quarts myself but it required more than the mentioned 5 quarts. My mechanic went out and bought 3 more quarts of tranny fluid but he bought Valvoline MaxLife Multi-Vehicule ATF.

Now I did some looking up and found this thread where basically everyone is screaming murder and says to do a flush and to replace the fluid with ATF+4.

I asked a local transmission guy for a flush and they said they would actually put the same MaxLife Multi-Vehicule ATF product back in the Jeep. He says this Muti-Vehicule ATF works with Chrysler ATF+4's requirements. He tells me to call Valvoline if I want to be 100% sure.

I do call Valvoline. The guy not only tells me it's compatible with my Jeep 2006 but that MaxLife ATF actually surpasses the specifications for ATF+4. He said they are under contract with Chrysler not to list them on the bottle because Chrysler wants their own separate product, which they make for them. He also says mixing the two different products is not a problem.

What do you guys think?
It seems a lot of people "in the know" are saying MaxLife ATF is not a good product to use. But maybe we've been wrong about this?

flman · **Posted:** Thu Feb 26, 2015 7:09 pm

I think the majority of Chrysler transmissions will work with the Multi. But ours with the low idle RPMs at cold start becomes a problem. I never had any problems until I put in Amsoil multi ATF. I got one of my CRDS problem free with multiple changes back to ATF+4. The other one need more attention or changes to get it back to normal.

gmctd · **Posted:** Thu Feb 26, 2015 9:00 pm

The 545RFE is all clutches'n'gears, no bands, so needs different additives than the banded transmissions with some clutches - TCM reduces pressure via the dual front pump when conditions permit, promoting increased fuel economy, which cannot be done with banded transmissions - I'd stick with ATF+4, particularly so in combination with the xfer case chain and gearbox

dennyb · **Joined:** Wed Aug 13, 2014 4:27 pm **Posts:** 110

Note: their site doesn't specify synthetic base oil in the maxlife. Other versions of maxlife oils were listed at most synthetic blends.

Valvoline does make full synthetic ATF +4 so why say that maxlife is ok?
I stuck with OEM ATF+4 when I did my 100k service in Dec. I feel the shifts are smoother with the new oil. It also might have been slightly low with the know dipstick mark error. Overfilled slightly on stick per others on site.

They do specify synthetic base in spec sheet. http://www.valvoline.com/pdf/maxlife_atf.pdf
One difference is ATF +4 is thicker viscosity. And additives are not mentioned either. http://www.valvoline.com/pdf/atf_+4.pdf

tcoilburner · **Posted:** Thu Feb 26, 2015 11:03 pm

I have been told by a Mobil oil rep. that multi fluids are just a compromise between high and low V.I. aft fluids. That you can not make one fluid that is really good at both.
The reason that they don't list Chrysler on that bottle is it does not match there atf spec. I will have to check, but I am sure the Chrysler spec is on the Valvoline +4 bottle. That is what I used in mine.

gmctd · **Posted:** Fri Feb 27, 2015 10:37 am

tcoilburner wrote:

I have been told by a Mobil oil rep. that multi fluids are just a compromise between high and low V.I. aft fluids. That you can not make one fluid that is really good at both.
The reason that they don't list Chrysler on that bottle is it does not match there atf spec. I will have to check, but I am sure the Chrysler spec is on the Valvoline +4 bottle. That is what I used in mine.

Correct, because most ATF's are not also suitable for transfer case duty - which is one of DCJ specs for ATF+4
- if container does not list DCJ approval, do not use - simple as that
- again, one specific reason to stick with recommended fluid is the anti-chatter additive required by the all-clutched transmission, an additive not always available, or available in diluted formulation, in other ATF's
Even the big DODGE 3500 RAM 350hp CUMMINS 4wd Dooley with the GODZILLA 68RFE (super-HD 6-spd version of the 545RFE, with 13" TCC) specs the same ATF+4 for the transmission and NV241, 243, 244, 271, and 273 transfer cases
- if DCJ\equiv ATF+4 is suitable for that big muthah, yer dinky li'l KJ (and mine) should have no problems in running with it
- particularly so if changed at suggested intervals to replace deteriorated additives which are formulated to promote smooth shifts with minimal shudder in the clutches and TCC

68RFE

545RFE

68RFE

Brody · **Posted:** Mon Mar 02, 2015 8:50 pm

I very much appreciate your input guys!

So it seems MaxLife is a no go then? darn...
How frustrating is it that the guy at Valvoline told me it was fine... And this transmission shop putting MaxLife in Jeeps?! Yikes.

How about this? http://www.lubegard.com/C-177/LUBEGARD+ ... Supplement

Brody · **Posted:** Mon Mar 02, 2015 8:52 pm

And gmctd I notice you're in texas. Where in Texas are you? I'm in Austin now so maybe you're close?
Are you a transmission guy?

gmctd · **Posted:** Mon Mar 02, 2015 10:02 pm

Yes, I've dabbled some in auto-shifters, turbos, Diesels, direct-injection turbo-charged gasoline engines - nothing professional, but enuff to be not easily misled - I'm 90mi north of Houston

ATXKJ · **Posted:** Mon Mar 02, 2015 11:30 pm

FYI - note on the Maxlife - on that site - there's a link for the product info PDF
a couple of clicks over there's also a link for the +4 product info

they don't tell you about traction additives -
they only list about four viscosity numbers

and the numbers are different
now a viscosity of 5.9 vs 7.55 might not seem like much - but that's >20%
would it make a difference driving to the mall? - probably not
would it make a difference towing a trailer to Colorado? - probably

for my money - I'll pay the extra for +4
and I'd avoid a shop that says there's no difference.

Brody · **Posted:** Tue Mar 03, 2015 1:32 pm

Well here's the dilemma I'm in right now. He already put the wrong fluid in.
The thinking would be to do a complete flush right?

Well from what I understand flushes are really hard on the transmission because you suddenly remove all the older thicker fluid and replace it with a new thinner fluid and that might just be too big of a shock for the transmission. In fact doing a flush can wreck your transmission.

But then the status of Multi-Vehicule in our CRDs seems inconclusive. Shops like QuickLube that's what they put in our Jeeps if we go there for a service!

So I'm in a kind of dead end needing to sort of make a gamble in either way because of someone's incompetence. So frustrating.

What would you guys do? (besides suing that guy?

He's called Corbin Sherrell BTW. His business is called Rebel's Custom in Austin. DON'T do business with him. He's refused to deal with this situation leaving me stranded )

geordi · **Posted:** Tue Mar 03, 2015 2:18 pm

A flush WILL NOT HURT YOUR TRANSMISSION. That is an old wives tale.

Fresh (and proper) fluid will never be bad for your transmission. What you need is a full fluid change flush, that will be somewhere around 15-19 quarts of fluid. The torque converter holds a LOT of juice.

The other way to do it is to do three changes on your own, in rapid succession. Each change will dilute more of the bad juice with good, but it also uses a lot of fluids. Sucks either way. By any chance, did this mobile mechanic get paid with a credit card? If so... You have the best way to recover your money: Charge it back! You contracted with him for a repair job, and he DID NOT DO IT PROPERLY to Chrysler's spec, which has now incurred greater expense on your part and the potential of much more serious damage if the situation is not resolved promptly.

I am available if your credit card issuer needs an impartial expert witness - I've done it before for others. The beauty of charging it back is that it doesn't matter who issued your card, they ALL have the same basic rules for purchase protections, and it puts the burden of proof on the vendor. You are automatically assumed to be the injured party by your card issuer and the vendor has to prove to them that he didn't fail you. The receipts for further work from another vendor (and all the fluid) is prima facie evidence that the original vendor didn't do it properly.

You will get your money back whether he wants to cough it up or not. Visa will just take it right from his account.

tcoilburner · **Posted:** Tue Mar 03, 2015 2:33 pm

There are only a few transmissions that can be hurt by using a flush machine with a pump. Most newer machines use the transmission's oil pump to exchange the fluid now. That is how we did it here at the shop. We have a newer BG exchange machine.

ChesterCRD · **Posted:** Tue Mar 03, 2015 2:57 pm

Dry fill is supposed to be 14 qts. I always get 10 qts out when I change mine. I think the "service fill" is supposed to be 5 qts, so if that is supposed to be for a change, it's wrong.

Anyway, if you get 10 qts out with change (I let it drip overnight, then finish the next day) you've gotten ~70% of the fluid changed. If it were my money, I'd do a change with ATF+4 and change filters too. If after a couple weeks of driving it's going OK, I would run it until the next change interval. As long as you use ATF+4 going forward it should be fine.

If it's not shifting right after a week or two with the ATF+4, then I suggest taking it somewhere for a flush/change to ATF+4 where they can also reset the transmission to learning mode (dealer). This seems to help in situations where the wrong fluid was put in, or the fluid went a long time without changing (black/brown ATF). IIRC this reset to learning mode is also mentioned in a TSB for Amsoil multivehicle ATF use in our liberties.

flman · **Posted:** Tue Mar 03, 2015 4:46 pm

I installed plugs in my transmission pans, I can drain them real easy.

ChesterCRD · **Posted:** Tue Mar 03, 2015 4:59 pm

flman wrote:

I installed plugs in my transmission pans, I can drain them real easy.

That would make a lot of sense if the spin-on filter could be changed without removing the pan.

gmctd · **Posted:** Tue Mar 03, 2015 5:14 pm

The caveats for back-flushing an auto-trans system are several:
- manufacturers may authorize back-flushing depending on transmission configuration, filter configuration and vehicle mileage
- if allowed, the flush in first service interval retains original filter(s)
- 2nd interval must be drained to allow filter replacement
- 3rd interval can be back-flushed, no filter change
- 4th interval must be drained to allow filter replacement
- etc

Problem here is some flushing stations filter the ATF, then refill the trans with the filtered\used fluid
- this may be acceptable for banded transmissions with no transfer case
- filtration cannot restore any deteriorated additives (same for motor oils: filtration does not restore components added to meet mfr specs for engine type)
- this is not acceptable for transmissions consisting of multiple clutched planetaries with TC clutch which require anti-chatter additives
- flush\filtration cannot restore these critical additives

Which is why the FSM states 'drain and refill with new filters' for the 545RFE\NV241
- there is no mention of backflush acceptability
- commercial additives are not to be added to ATF+4

offroadohio · **Posted:** Tue Mar 03, 2015 5:21 pm

I run max life with no issues. Use the flush machine at work. Took a liberty slipping trans ran a flush with max life and 50k miles later it is still in my family and running fine.

sent on tapatalk

geordi · **Posted:** Tue Mar 03, 2015 6:05 pm

Ok, there is a big difference between a 'back flush' and a machine that continuously refills the fluid while extracting from the cooler output line. The machines I have seen used all connect where the cooler is, and uses the transmission's own pump to pump the transmission out (like it is running normally) and at the same time, put fresh fluid in through the cooler return tube. This way, the transmission never runs low on fluid and all the bad is rapidly removed from the casing and the torque converter.

Now, about the transfer case: Our transfer case IS NOT COMBINED WITH THE TRANSMISSION. They have separate drain and fill points, and while the fluid might be the same ATF+4, they are NOT co-mingled! So continuously mentioning in every post about the transfer case is pointless and distracts from the problem: The transmission has the wrong fluid. It doesn't matter if the transmission has planetaries (they all do) and clutches or bands (that is the same thing to my understanding - that is how the planetaries stop and start) or if the whole thing is powered by the actions of tiny elves in overalls! Wrong fluid is wrong fluid. Period.

flman · **Posted:** Tue Mar 03, 2015 7:07 pm

ChesterCRD wrote:

flman wrote:

I installed plugs in my transmission pans, I can drain them real easy.

That would make a lot of sense if the spin-on filter could be changed without removing the pan.

Who says you need to change the filter if you are draining at every oil change? The net would be cleaner fluid, plus it is a lot easier to drop a pan that is empty when you do change the filters. My Sprinters have a drain pan and torque converter plug, so that is the best.

The real story behind ATF+4 tranny fluid & Multi-Vehicule Ma

Who is online