Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 19 of 19
  1. #11
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Northeast
    Posts
    516

    Default

    If Tanner_M's problem is valve body wear, then a lower viscosity ATF is probably gonna exacerbate his poor shifting. DEFINITELY first make sure you've got the proper level on the dipstick. If your car shifts fine the first 10 min. of driving, but then things start going to hell once the fluid warms up (thins out), this could be a very good sign of solenoids/valve body wear based on my own experience. Also, before I replaced my VB, I was getting the P0740 code.
    2007 XC70, 206,000 miles
    2002 V70XC, 130,000 miles, parts car

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Western Head, Nova Scotia
    Posts
    3,089

    Default

    Astro:

    Great info! Thanks!

    Edit: Interestingly I just pulled up the spec sheet for Mobil 3309 (https://www.mobil.com/english-us/pas...mobil-atf-3309) and noticed that it no longer specifies that it matches to any Volvo or MB specs. In fact, the OEM matches are only for a Ford and VW spec and Mobil further notes matches for Audi, Saturn, and Type-IV. As I recall the list use to be more inclusive. I have an old bottle out in the shop and I should take a look to see what is on there versus the current spec sheet.

    You have to wonder if Ashland reduced viscosity for mileage reasons, etc. what did the rest of the ATF manufacturers, including Mobil, do with their respective products? Is Mobil 3309 the same product it was 5 years ago or so when the last time I used it? These days it seems it is rare for one manufacturer of anything to make a fundamental product change without it being a reaction to its competitors or causing a reaction from those same competitors. Have you seen any similar data from Mobil and if so, could you post it here. I'd be interested in seeing if I should reconsider. Unfortunately, both MaxLife and 3309 are not the easiest to find around here for some reason. That's one of the reasons I tried Eneos and Asin even though those are also not at every corner shop either.

    Thanks again,

    Bill
    Last edited by billr99; 10-27-2018 at 05:00 AM. Reason: additionnal comment
    Western Head, NS CDN

    '08 BMW 750i (Black Sapphire)-204K kms to-date
    '05 XC70 (Lava Sand)-296K kms to-date
    '02 V70XC-gone @393K kms
    '05 V70R (Magic Blue)-120K mi to-date - gone
    '96 854R (Red)-real CDN-spec 5-speed R - gone @270k kms
    And other Volvos and misc. Euro stuff

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Virginia Beach
    Posts
    3,853

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Xfingers View Post
    If Tanner_M's problem is valve body wear, then a lower viscosity ATF is probably gonna exacerbate his poor shifting. DEFINITELY first make sure you've got the proper level on the dipstick. If your car shifts fine the first 10 min. of driving, but then things start going to hell once the fluid warms up (thins out), this could be a very good sign of solenoids/valve body wear based on my own experience. Also, before I replaced my VB, I was getting the P0740 code.
    I think Tanner_M's problem is likely Valve Body wear - sure sounds like it.

    However, since the fluid level on this can be a bit tricky to get correct, I would encourage him to eliminate that as a possibility first. Always check the basics before diving into a diagnosis...
    Current Fleet:
    2016 Tundra Crewmax 4WD 1794
    2005 MB S600 (100K, Michelin AS3+, M1 0W40)
    2002 V70-XC (238K, Castrol Edge 0W40)
    2002 V70-T5 (195K, IPD bars, Bilsteins)
    2001 V70-T5 (76K)
    1932 Packard Sedan (straight 8, dual sidemounts, original paint and interior, Shell Rotella 15W40)

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Virginia Beach
    Posts
    3,853

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by billr99 View Post
    Astro:

    Great info! Thanks!

    Edit: Interestingly I just pulled up the spec sheet for Mobil 3309 (https://www.mobil.com/english-us/pas...mobil-atf-3309) and noticed that it no longer specifies that it matches to any Volvo or MB specs. In fact, the OEM matches are only for a Ford and VW spec and Mobil further notes matches for Audi, Saturn, and Type-IV. As I recall the list use to be more inclusive. I have an old bottle out in the shop and I should take a look to see what is on there versus the current spec sheet.

    You have to wonder if Ashland reduced viscosity for mileage reasons, etc. what did the rest of the ATF manufacturers, including Mobil, do with their respective products? Is Mobil 3309 the same product it was 5 years ago or so when the last time I used it? These days it seems it is rare for one manufacturer of anything to make a fundamental product change without it being a reaction to its competitors or causing a reaction from those same competitors. Have you seen any similar data from Mobil and if so, could you post it here. I'd be interested in seeing if I should reconsider. Unfortunately, both MaxLife and 3309 are not the easiest to find around here for some reason. That's one of the reasons I tried Eneos and Asin even though those are also not at every corner shop either.

    Thanks again,

    Bill
    Bill - I hadn't noticed the change in recommendations on Mobil's website. Interesting.

    I think that the OEMs are specifying lower viscosity transmission fluid just as they are lower viscosity engine oil in an attempt to improve fuel economy. The California note in Max Life's product data sheet bears that out a bit.

    Another example: my Tundra specifies a very low viscosity fluid in the transfer case, a new thing since 2015. It's a 75W. Not 75W90, just 75W. Available from my dealer for the price of $72/quart. That's not a typo... Looked all over for that, and finally, I found some Ravenol 75W on Amazon for $16/quart that meets the Toyota specification. This is a case of the aftermarket (like Ashland/Valvoline) being slow to catch up to the new OEM specifications.

    I think that's what is going on in the broader market - newer vehicles specify the lower viscosity ATF. So, if you're a big label, you formulate your product to meet the requirements of the majority of the market.

    Toyota moved from the T-IV specification in new transmissions to the WS specification in about the 2003 model year. So, the Low Viscosity ATF trend has been with us for quite a while. After 15 years of LV transmissions being sold, it's no surprise to me that the big "one size fits all" ATFs are now LV. The vast majority of the cars on the road specify an LV ATF. And most older cars run fine on LV ATF, so, sure, one size fits all. Just like Toyota's built in 2008, and specified to run on 5W30, are now filled up with 0W20 at Toyota dealers throughout North America...

    So, where does that leave us? The owner of the newest P2 XC has an 11 year old car. My P2s are 16 years old.

    Well, the easiest fluid to get that meets JWS-3309, and by that I mean, actually meets it, not "recommended for use in" is Toyota's own T-IV. It's still out there, as Toyota sold lots of cars that still required T-IV after the introduction of WS. Not as convenient as going down to Canadian Tire or whatever, but there's a Toyota dealer pretty close to everyone. The Idemitsu that's been talked about is available here, don't know about up there.

    I'm of the opinion, by the way, that regular fluid changes are far more important than base stock formulation. Everybody wants "synthetic" and I get that, but meeting JWS-3309 specification, and then regular ATF changes to keep it fresh, are what's important for long, trouble-free life in the AW-55.

    The advantage of synthetic ATF is stability in cold weather. That's about it. But the car was built Sweden. And in road testing it in Sweden with the mineral oil base Volvo ATF didn't reveal any issues. Nor have my trips to Vermont with similarly cold weather.

    Now synthetic motor oil is often formulated for long drain intervals through higher detergent additive levels. And it resists viscosity breakdown a bit better than conventional. Those advantages really don't apply to the clean environment inside a transmission. Even with an external filter, like the one that I've got set up, I think you should change your fluid (complete cooler line exchange a la Gibbons) every 30,000 - 50,000 miles. I err on the conservative side of that, at 30,000, and the fluid comes out pretty clean. The removal of wear particles and the maintenance of specified viscosity and additive levels (which also break down over time) is what makes the transmission happy. The guys doing a drain and fill (which gets just under half of the ATF replaced) are accomplishing roughly the same thing.
    Current Fleet:
    2016 Tundra Crewmax 4WD 1794
    2005 MB S600 (100K, Michelin AS3+, M1 0W40)
    2002 V70-XC (238K, Castrol Edge 0W40)
    2002 V70-T5 (195K, IPD bars, Bilsteins)
    2001 V70-T5 (76K)
    1932 Packard Sedan (straight 8, dual sidemounts, original paint and interior, Shell Rotella 15W40)

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Posts
    10

    Default

    Thanks to everyone!

    So what it comes down to fluid wise is either the Toyota T-IV or the Maxlife Multi vehicle ATF as better choices than what I have in there.

    After I'd been out driving the one day I took it out, and noticed some minor slips and delays going into gear, we did check it. in retrospect, we didn't have it on the most level of surfaces. The level looked OK, but slightly low, so we added a bit more fluid. The next time I drove it was when the slipping really happened.

    I have a few questions:

    Am I likely to do more damage in the process of heating it up to recheck transmission fluid?

    Is it possible that I've overfilled the fluid levels and that is causing problems?

    If it is overfilled, can I just drain out a few ounces from the bottom and see how it responds?

    Or should I drain it all out and change to a better fluid?

    If it is a valve body, how critical is the specialized engine lift I've seen in the instruction files? Are there more cost effective solutions?

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Virginia Beach
    Posts
    3,853

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tanner_M View Post
    Thanks to everyone!

    So what it comes down to fluid wise is either the Toyota T-IV or the Maxlife Multi vehicle ATF as better choices than what I have in there.

    After I'd been out driving the one day I took it out, and noticed some minor slips and delays going into gear, we did check it. in retrospect, we didn't have it on the most level of surfaces. The level looked OK, but slightly low, so we added a bit more fluid. The next time I drove it was when the slipping really happened.

    I have a few questions:

    Am I likely to do more damage in the process of heating it up to recheck transmission fluid?

    Is it possible that I've overfilled the fluid levels and that is causing problems?

    If it is overfilled, can I just drain out a few ounces from the bottom and see how it responds?

    Or should I drain it all out and change to a better fluid?

    If it is a valve body, how critical is the specialized engine lift I've seen in the instruction files? Are there more cost effective solutions?
    So, fluid level question first.

    It won't hurt the car to start up cold and do a cold level (bottom set of markings on the dipstick) check. Not as accurate as the hot level check, but close enough to be in the ballpark. Just be certain that it's parked on dead level ground, idling, and in park when you pull/wipe/check the dipstick.

    If the level is way off - then I would simply do a drain and fill. Easier than withdrawing fluid, or adding fluid, when you need to add or remove a lot.

    Put the car up on ramps/jacks - open the drain plug on the transmission, let it drain. Reinstall the drain plug (same crush washer as the oil drain plug, and yeah, I would use a new one). Then add 3.5 qts of your favorite fluid. You might be a hair low after that, but you'll be close. You can then check hot, and add in 100ml increments, if necessary.

    If you choose Max Life for that, well, OK, but I think the Valvoline Import Multi Vehicle ATF is a better choice. It more closely approximates the JWS-3309 viscosity.

    Yes, the fluid level being significantly off can have the effect that you're describing. That's why you need to check that first before moving on in troubleshooting.

    If the fluid level is good, well, then yeah, it's likely the valve body. But if you've got a lot of miles on this car and/or the transmission has been slamming into gear for a while, then it will probably be better to replace the whole thing.

    As far as the engine hoist - use what you have on had that will SAFELY lift the engine about 2". If that's a cherry picker, OK. The transverse engine brace is much easier, there are no legs to get in the way under the car. You could jack up the engine/transmission from below with a bottle jack, I suppose, but be certain that it's well placed and won't slip. IF that engine drops while your hands are in there, well... Be very, very careful lifting an engine and then working around it...
    Current Fleet:
    2016 Tundra Crewmax 4WD 1794
    2005 MB S600 (100K, Michelin AS3+, M1 0W40)
    2002 V70-XC (238K, Castrol Edge 0W40)
    2002 V70-T5 (195K, IPD bars, Bilsteins)
    2001 V70-T5 (76K)
    1932 Packard Sedan (straight 8, dual sidemounts, original paint and interior, Shell Rotella 15W40)

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Cumbria, UK. Maine USA.
    Posts
    486

    Default

    "If it is a valve body, how critical is the specialized engine lift I've seen in the instruction files? Are there more cost effective solutions?"

    The engine support is a Harbor Frieght cheapie, get it before the tariffs push the price up.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Western Head, Nova Scotia
    Posts
    3,089

    Default

    One additional thing I might add to Astro's comments is that regardless of your choice of fluid, proper filtration and cooling are a huge help in maintaining these gearboxes. Astro has put up on an older thread his external filter and cooler setup. I haven't needed a cooler as I don't pull anything or honk hard on the gearbox, but I have installed his external PH-16 filter mod on all three of the P2s I've had. Its a relatively cheap mod that seems to work quite well. On my first P2 I did dump-and-fills every other oil change (every 20K kms) or once a year. Now I've extended that to every 45K kms ob both my XC and VR which ends up being about every 3 years or a bit less. Keep in mind that in Asin's infinite wisdom and Volvo's implementation of their box, neither seems to have thought of putting in a replaceable filter like, say ZF boxes for one. So adding a filter is a great idea and a highly recommended Stage 0 mod. Here is the link to Astro's post http://www.volvoxc.com/forums/showth...sh-From-Bottom.

    Cheers,

    Bill
    Western Head, NS CDN

    '08 BMW 750i (Black Sapphire)-204K kms to-date
    '05 XC70 (Lava Sand)-296K kms to-date
    '02 V70XC-gone @393K kms
    '05 V70R (Magic Blue)-120K mi to-date - gone
    '96 854R (Red)-real CDN-spec 5-speed R - gone @270k kms
    And other Volvos and misc. Euro stuff

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Posts
    10

    Default Vehicle Fluid Check

    So, I finally had time to go check the fluid level. I wasn't able to put the vehicle into the garage, because it no longer goes into reverse.

    Yay.

    I checked where the car is sitting, and it wasn't completely level, but it was quite close, so I took a reading with the engine running.

    The fluid is at or over the high end of the cold marks. So, based on what I understand, that means it is overfilled?

    That being said, do I have any hope if I drain out the excess? Or is this thing just toast?

    I would upload a photo, but it is failing for some reason.

    Thanks everyone!

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •