Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Ok, Here's the deal. I have a 2005 Buick LeSabre with 95,000 miles. I'm not the original owner, but my guess is that this car is like most, very little maint. done, other than oil changes.
So the recommended transmission fluid change is 100,000 miles. (It only recommends one at 50,000 if you regularly commute in heavy traffic, have a lot of stop and go traffic or commute in hot weather with heavy traffic, or tow a trailer.) I live in west Tx, so its the easiest driving you could have, no traffic jams in town, no hills, and lots of highway miles. So I start calling around, and I've had two transmission shops refuse to touch it because they say I should have changed it more often.
So should I find another shop to change it without the flush or just drive it?? It used to slip once in a while if I didn't drive it very much, but now it doesn't slip or leak. I think I will stop by the GM dealer and see what they say. I checked the fluid and it looks brownish red, so I'm sure its dirty to a certain degree.
They wont take your $ for a good reason... If you don't do regular trans fluid changes and expect to do the first one at 100k miles, they know you are asking for trouble.. Do it yourself by draining the trans and refill with new fluid and then in a few weeks do that same thing. This will change 90% of the fluid
Might be the best to just drain and fill and do it every 2 weeks until it's sastifory. Maybe 2 or 3 times then you should be ok. It's lot cheaper than having them do it which will cost lot more.
Location: East of Seattle since 1992, 615' Elevation, Zone 8b - originally from SF Bay Area
44,551 posts, read 81,085,957 times
Reputation: 57739
Regardless of the original manufacturer recommendation I'd have suggested every 60,000. The recommendation is only that, the real reason to change it is the actual condition. If you have it serviced regularly the shop should look at it and even test it and tell you when it needs changing, which could be as early as 30,000. With rebuilds at $3,000 and a service around $100, it's cheap insurance against premature failure. Sometimes waiting this long will mean leakage if you do change it now. Seals and gaskets after many years can be dry or cracked but filled with microscopic debris that gets flushed out
when you change it, but that's less risky on this one at 7 years old than keeping brown fluid. You should also check the power steering system and perhaps change that fluid, this model has been known for problems with it.
I think you're all right on. But what still bugs me, is why would GM, in their great wisdom, not recommend a fluid change until 100K? I would still love an answer to that one. Of course, I love mysteries. And if that's true, what other bogus maint. advice are the manufacturers giving us? Surely that's not the only bad advice out there??!!
I think you're all right on. But what still bugs me, is why would GM, in their great wisdom, not recommend a fluid change until 100K? I would still love an answer to that one. Of course, I love mysteries. And if that's true, what other bogus maint. advice are the manufacturers giving us? Surely that's not the only bad advice out there??!!
Car manufacturers are in a race to see who can claim the lowest cost of ownership/maintenance, as naive buyers will tend to gravitate to cars that seem to be "cheaper to own" over the long term.
A perfect example is the ridiculously long trans fluid change interval for that Buick. GM (just like all other mfrs) knows that the fluid should be changed every 3 yrs/30k miles, but they also know that trans failure is not likely to take place during the warranty period, so--GM will not be the party that has to pay for a trans rebuild! The hapless car owner who was naive enough to listen to GM's advice is the one to pay the big bucks for this omission.
Another example of failure to list required maintenance is Honda's elimination of valve lash adjustment from the maintenance schedule. Or--in the case of Toyota, stating that the valve lash only needs to be adjusted if the valves are noisy. Hogwash!
Another example of failure to list required maintenance is Honda's elimination of valve lash adjustment from the maintenance schedule. Or--in the case of Toyota, stating that the valve lash only needs to be adjusted if the valves are noisy. Hogwash!
I agree with that one. I was wondering where the valve adjustment maintenance went in the newer car models. I know for sure valves still need to be adjusted time to time.
The recommended date to change my Civic's transmission fluids is something like every 3 years. I didn't change my until 6 years. Do you guys think some damage has been done already?
I think you're all right on. But what still bugs me, is why would GM, in their great wisdom, not recommend a fluid change until 100K? I would still love an answer to that one. Of course, I love mysteries. And if that's true, what other bogus maint. advice are the manufacturers giving us? Surely that's not the only bad advice out there??!!
because 'low maintenance' sells cars. Its that simple. They figure with an average driver and no fluid changes in the trans, it will last 150k miles tops. At that point they could care less about who owns that car and what they think of the car.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
