Big transmission dilemma

On Tue, 14 Jul 2009 21:50:31 -0500, Ray O wrote:

> Toyota is pretty
> knowledgeable about their products, probably more so than the posters who
> bad mouth Toyota products.

I, sir, take exception to that!

On Tue, 14 Jul 2009 20:29:33 -0700, john wrote:

> Well they're probably interchangeable to a certain extent. For
> example, the new Dexron VI (there are blends and fully synthetic
> versions) can be used in place of the dino Dexron III except certain
> applications per GM TSB. The Dexron VI has better shear
> characteristics and other properties required for the new generation
> of Hydramatics, such as the 6T/6L series.
>
> Similar to engine oils, Toyota specified 0W-20 engine oil in place of
> older specs of 5W-30. Again in a TSB listing applicability.

This was after issuing the STB...

Thank you for contacting Scion.
We appreciate the opportunity to address your inquiry.

No, 5w30 is the recommended oil weight for your 2006 Scion xB as specified
in your owners manual. Use of any other weight can void your warranty.


Interesting. They come out with a TSB recommending a different oil weight,
and then tell us, "Use what it says in the manual..."


>
> Toyota T-IV ATF is just relabeled dino fluid called Mobil-3309,
> however, WS seems proprietary. The only place for true WS so far is
> the dealer. (Aftermarkets do not meet cold viscosity requirements). WS
> is supposedly synthetic and/or blend, but has low viscosity when cold
> for better MPG.
>
> As you included, WS is also thicker at high temperatures to "ensures
> the durability of this unit". So I would probably not go WS if the
> transmission originally spec'ed T-IV. I'd just use a fully-synthetic T-
> IV compatible fluid like the new formulation of Mobil-1 ATF.
>
> I can believe if Toyota says WS can be used in certain T-IV
> applications, just like GM synthetic/blend Dexron VI can be used in
> certain Dexron III applications, but not the other way around (can't
> use Dexron III in a Dexron VI transmission, even if you change it out
> 15-30K miles).
>
>
>
> On Jul 14, 6:39Â*pm, Built_Well > wrote:
>
>> For the U250E transmission, how can Toyota recommend two very different
>> ATF fluids that are not suppose to be interchangeable?
>> ========

Two or 3 weeks ago, I drained my transmission pan's T-IV ATF and
refilled it with Mobil 1 Synthetic ATF, making the ATF fluid in my
Camry a 50/50 mix of Toyota T-IV and Mobil 1 ATF.

My goodness, you're not going to believe this. Toyota recommends T-IV
fluid *AND* ATF WS fluid for the exact same automatic transmission,
depending upon Camry model year.

The 4-cylinder 2005 and 2006 Camrys have the Aisin U250E transmission,
whereas the V6 Camrys have the U151E.

One year later for 2007, the newly styled "next generation" Camry with
4 cylinders (same 2AZ-FE engine as the 2006) also uses the U250E
transmission, but instead of T-IV, Toyota specifies ATF WS for the '07
model year!

So here we have the two exact same transmissions, the U250E, but Toyota
specs T-IV in the 2006 model year, and specs WS in the 2007 model year.
The two fluids are not suppose to be interchangeable.

Here's a quote from GearsMagazine that I found online:

"One very important thing to remember is that the U250E requires
ATF WS:

"ATF WS is used to reduce the resistance of the ATF and improve the fuel
economy by reducing its viscosity at normal operating temperatures. At
higher fluid temperatures, the viscosity is the same as that of ATF Type
T-IV, which ensures the durability of this unit.

"ATF WS and other types of ATF (ATF Type T-IV, D-II) aren't
interchangeable. So with ATF WS you get improved fuel economy and
durability and that's not only smart... it's street smart!"[End quote]

Here's the link to the article in GearsMagazine.com :
http://74.125.45.132/search?q=cache:...&ct=clnk&gl=us

And here's a link to TransTec which verifies that the U250E is used in
both the '06 and '07 Camrys.

http://transtec.com/selector_guide/Toyota.htm

Finally, if you find it difficult to believe that the U250E transmission
in the '06 Camry and the '07 Camry is the EXACT same transmission, check
out this really convincing PDF document that shows the gear ratios, fluid
capacity, and weight of the transmissions in both the '06 and '07 Camry:

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sourc...J53uSZ 77sa_Q

My '06 owner's manual specifies using T-IV, but I also happen to have a
manual for the next gen. Camry (in this case the '08), and it specifies WS.

By the way, the next gen. 2007 V6 Camry uses that new U660E transmission ;-)

A couple weeks ago, I replaced half of my car's T-IV with Mobil 1
Synthetic ATF, but maybe a WS fluid would work just as well? Whaddya
think? Should I buy a WS or a T-IV replacement for my next fluid change
later this week? If a WS, I'll do an ATF oil cooler line complete flush,
instead of just a drain-and-fill. Either way, I'll DIY it (Do It Yourself,
of course).

For the U250E transmission, how can Toyota recommend two very different
ATF fluids that are not suppose to be interchangeable?
========

"Built_Well" > wrote in message
anews.com...
> Two or 3 weeks ago, I drained my transmission pan's T-IV ATF and
> refilled it with Mobil 1 Synthetic ATF, making the ATF fluid in my
> Camry a 50/50 mix of Toyota T-IV and Mobil 1 ATF.
>
> My goodness, you're not going to believe this. Toyota recommends T-IV
> fluid *AND* ATF WS fluid for the exact same automatic transmission,
> depending upon Camry model year.
>
> The 4-cylinder 2005 and 2006 Camrys have the Aisin U250E transmission,
> whereas the V6 Camrys have the U151E.
>
> One year later for 2007, the newly styled "next generation" Camry with
> 4 cylinders (same 2AZ-FE engine as the 2006) also uses the U250E
> transmission, but instead of T-IV, Toyota specifies ATF WS for the '07
> model year!
>
> So here we have the two exact same transmissions, the U250E, but Toyota
> specs T-IV in the 2006 model year, and specs WS in the 2007 model year.
> The two fluids are not suppose to be interchangeable.
>
> Here's a quote from GearsMagazine that I found online:
>
> "One very important thing to remember is that the U250E requires
> ATF WS:
>
> "ATF WS is used to reduce the resistance of the ATF and improve the fuel
> economy by reducing its viscosity at normal operating temperatures. At
> higher fluid temperatures, the viscosity is the same as that of ATF Type
> T-IV, which ensures the durability of this unit.
>
> "ATF WS and other types of ATF (ATF Type T-IV, D-II) aren't
> interchangeable. So with ATF WS you get improved fuel economy and
> durability and that's not only smart... it's street smart!"[End quote]
>
> Here's the link to the article in GearsMagazine.com :
> http://74.125.45.132/search?q=cache:...&ct=clnk&gl=us
>
> And here's a link to TransTec which verifies that the U250E is used in
> both the '06 and '07 Camrys.
>
> http://transtec.com/selector_guide/Toyota.htm
>
> Finally, if you find it difficult to believe that the U250E transmission
> in the '06 Camry and the '07 Camry is the EXACT same transmission, check
> out this really convincing PDF document that shows the gear ratios, fluid
> capacity, and weight of the transmissions in both the '06 and '07 Camry:
>
> http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sourc...J53uSZ 77sa_Q
>
> My '06 owner's manual specifies using T-IV, but I also happen to have a
> manual for the next gen. Camry (in this case the '08), and it specifies
> WS.
>
> By the way, the next gen. 2007 V6 Camry uses that new U660E transmission
> ;-)
>
> A couple weeks ago, I replaced half of my car's T-IV with Mobil 1
> Synthetic ATF, but maybe a WS fluid would work just as well? Whaddya
> think? Should I buy a WS or a T-IV replacement for my next fluid change
> later this week? If a WS, I'll do an ATF oil cooler line complete flush,
> instead of just a drain-and-fill. Either way, I'll DIY it (Do It
> Yourself,
> of course).
>
> For the U250E transmission, how can Toyota recommend two very different
> ATF fluids that are not suppose to be interchangeable?
> ========
>

I recommend that you invest in $10 to access www.techinfo.toyota.com to
access the TSB and PANT bulletins for your car. Toyota is pretty
knowledgeable about their products, probably more so than the posters who
bad mouth Toyota products. Follow Toyota's advice.
--

Ray O
(correct punctuation to reply)

Well they're probably interchangeable to a certain extent. For
example, the new Dexron VI (there are blends and fully synthetic
versions) can be used in place of the dino Dexron III except certain
applications per GM TSB. The Dexron VI has better shear
characteristics and other properties required for the new generation
of Hydramatics, such as the 6T/6L series.

Similar to engine oils, Toyota specified 0W-20 engine oil in place of
older specs of 5W-30. Again in a TSB listing applicability.

Toyota T-IV ATF is just relabeled dino fluid called Mobil-3309,
however, WS seems proprietary. The only place for true WS so far is
the dealer. (Aftermarkets do not meet cold viscosity requirements). WS
is supposedly synthetic and/or blend, but has low viscosity when cold
for better MPG.

As you included, WS is also thicker at high temperatures to "ensures
the durability of this unit". So I would probably not go WS if the
transmission originally spec'ed T-IV. I'd just use a fully-synthetic T-
IV compatible fluid like the new formulation of Mobil-1 ATF.

I can believe if Toyota says WS can be used in certain T-IV
applications, just like GM synthetic/blend Dexron VI can be used in
certain Dexron III applications, but not the other way around (can't
use Dexron III in a Dexron VI transmission, even if you change it out
15-30K miles).



On Jul 14, 6:39*pm, Built_Well > wrote:

> For the U250E transmission, how can Toyota recommend two very different
> ATF fluids that are not suppose to be interchangeable?
> ========

LOL. Toyota's left hand isn't telling it's right hand I guess.

In fact, I'd prefer the thickest approved oil instead of a light
weight oil for engine longevity. MPG gained per car is going to so
slight the owner won't see a difference, but corporate MPG is what
Toyota is going after.


On Jul 14, 4:49 pm, Hachiroku $B%O%A%m%/(B > wrote:
> Thank you for contacting Scion.
> We appreciate the opportunity to address your inquiry.
>
> No, 5w30 is the recommended oil weight for your 2006 Scion xB as specified
> in your owners manual. Use of any other weight can void your warranty.
>
> Interesting. They come out with a TSB recommending a different oil weight,
> and then tell us, "Use what it says in the manual..."

john wrote:
> LOL. Toyota's left hand isn't telling it's right hand I guess.
>
> In fact, I'd prefer the thickest approved oil instead of a light
> weight oil for engine longevity. MPG gained per car is going to so
> slight the owner won't see a difference, but corporate MPG is what
> Toyota is going after.
>
>
> On Jul 14, 4:49 pm, Hachiroku $B%O%A%m%/(B > wrote:
>
>> Thank you for contacting Scion.
>> We appreciate the opportunity to address your inquiry.
>>
>> No, 5w30 is the recommended oil weight for your 2006 Scion xB as specified
>> in your owners manual. Use of any other weight can void your warranty.
>>
>> Interesting. They come out with a TSB recommending a different oil weight,
>> and then tell us, "Use what it says in the manual..."
>>

Toyota did not come out with a TSB recommending a different weight oil
for vehicles originally requiring 5W30. The 2006 1NZ-FE still requires
5W30, just like the oil cap, service info, and oil related TSBs state.

The 5W20 / 0W20 TSB and revisions state which "new" models/engines
require said oil weights, and also state "DO NOT use these oils in
engines other than those listed above".

--
Toyota MDT in MO

Built_Well wrote:
> Two or 3 weeks ago, I drained my transmission pan's T-IV ATF and
> refilled it with Mobil 1 Synthetic ATF, making the ATF fluid in my
> Camry a 50/50 mix of Toyota T-IV and Mobil 1 ATF.
>
>

I'm still reeling from that adventure.

> My goodness, you're not going to believe this. Toyota recommends T-IV
> fluid *AND* ATF WS fluid for the exact same automatic transmission,
> depending upon Camry model year.
>
>

Unbelievable.

> The 4-cylinder 2005 and 2006 Camrys have the Aisin U250E transmission,
> whereas the V6 Camrys have the U151E.
>
> One year later for 2007, the newly styled "next generation" Camry with
> 4 cylinders (same 2AZ-FE engine as the 2006) also uses the U250E
> transmission, but instead of T-IV, Toyota specifies ATF WS for the '07
> model year!
>
> So here we have the two exact same transmissions, the U250E, but Toyota
> specs T-IV in the 2006 model year, and specs WS in the 2007 model year.
> The two fluids are not suppose to be interchangeable.
>
>

Are they the same, or is shift control programming very different
between the two years? What about friction materials and internal
clutch pack clearances? U250E isn't a part number, it's a basic model
designation that lets the casual observer know the number of forward
speeds, the relative power handling, the fact that it is an underdrive
trans design, and the fact that it is electronically shifted.

> Here's a quote from GearsMagazine that I found online:
>
> "One very important thing to remember is that the U250E requires
> ATF WS:
>
>

That article is not accurate. It should have specified 2007-up models
as requiring WS.

> "ATF WS is used to reduce the resistance of the ATF and improve the fuel
> economy by reducing its viscosity at normal operating temperatures. At
> higher fluid temperatures, the viscosity is the same as that of ATF Type
> T-IV, which ensures the durability of this unit.
>
> "ATF WS and other types of ATF (ATF Type T-IV, D-II) aren't
> interchangeable. So with ATF WS you get improved fuel economy and
> durability and that's not only smart... it's street smart!"[End quote]
>
> Here's the link to the article in GearsMagazine.com :
> http://74.125.45.132/search?q=cache:...&ct=clnk&gl=us
>
> And here's a link to TransTec which verifies that the U250E is used in
> both the '06 and '07 Camrys.
>
> http://transtec.com/selector_guide/Toyota.htm
>
> Finally, if you find it difficult to believe that the U250E transmission
> in the '06 Camry and the '07 Camry is the EXACT same transmission, check
> out this really convincing PDF document that shows the gear ratios, fluid
> capacity, and weight of the transmissions in both the '06 and '07 Camry:
>
> http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sourc...J53uSZ 77sa_Q
>
>

Yup. See above.

> My '06 owner's manual specifies using T-IV, but I also happen to have a
> manual for the next gen. Camry (in this case the '08), and it specifies WS.
>
> By the way, the next gen. 2007 V6 Camry uses that new U660E transmission ;-)
>
> A couple weeks ago, I replaced half of my car's T-IV with Mobil 1
> Synthetic ATF, but maybe a WS fluid would work just as well? Whaddya
> think? Should I buy a WS or a T-IV replacement for my next fluid change
> later this week? If a WS, I'll do an ATF oil cooler line complete flush,
> instead of just a drain-and-fill. Either way, I'll DIY it (Do It Yourself,
> of course).
>
>

Please try not to break the internet when doing so.

> For the U250E transmission, how can Toyota recommend two very different
> ATF fluids that are not suppose to be interchangeable?
> ========
>
>

Shift programming goes hand in hand with fluid characteristics. Both
are designed/speced by the engineers to work together.

--
Toyota MDT in MO

Toyota MDT in MO > wrote in
:

> Built_Well wrote:
>> Two or 3 weeks ago, I drained my transmission pan's T-IV ATF and
>> refilled it with Mobil 1 Synthetic ATF, making the ATF fluid in my
>> Camry a 50/50 mix of Toyota T-IV and Mobil 1 ATF.
>>
>>
>
> I'm still reeling from that adventure.
>
>> My goodness, you're not going to believe this. Toyota recommends T-IV
>> fluid *AND* ATF WS fluid for the exact same automatic transmission,
>> depending upon Camry model year.
>>
>>
>
> Unbelievable.




What I find unbelievable is the number of people who, knowing next to
nothing about how their cars were designed, ignore the automaker's
specifications, requirements and recommendations, and decide to "self-
medicate", so to speak.

They spend however many tens of thousands of dollars on a highly-engineered
piece of hideously-complex precision machinery, and they want to decide for
themselves how to repair and maintain it. And especially they want to save
a few relatively trivial bucks while potentially putting hugely expensive
assemblies at risk.

My mechanic has told me most people don't even check their oil, much less
change it. He also says most people make their own problems, simply through
lack of maintenance, or through badly-performed repairs/maintenance with
poor-quality materials. He said he gets much of his business through that.
In short, even if he wanted to, he wouldn't ever have to rip anybody off;
people already do a good job of that all on their own.




--
Tegger

On Wed, 15 Jul 2009 10:42:00 +0000 (UTC), Tegger >
wrote:

>Toyota MDT in MO > wrote in
:
>
>> Built_Well wrote:
>>> Two or 3 weeks ago, I drained my transmission pan's T-IV ATF and
>>> refilled it with Mobil 1 Synthetic ATF, making the ATF fluid in my
>>> Camry a 50/50 mix of Toyota T-IV and Mobil 1 ATF.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> I'm still reeling from that adventure.
>>
>>> My goodness, you're not going to believe this. Toyota recommends T-IV
>>> fluid *AND* ATF WS fluid for the exact same automatic transmission,
>>> depending upon Camry model year.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Unbelievable.
>
>
>
>
>What I find unbelievable is the number of people who, knowing next to
>nothing about how their cars were designed, ignore the automaker's
>specifications, requirements and recommendations, and decide to "self-
>medicate", so to speak.
>
>They spend however many tens of thousands of dollars on a highly-engineered
>piece of hideously-complex precision machinery, and they want to decide for
>themselves how to repair and maintain it. And especially they want to save
>a few relatively trivial bucks while potentially putting hugely expensive
>assemblies at risk.
>
>My mechanic has told me most people don't even check their oil, much less
>change it. He also says most people make their own problems, simply through
>lack of maintenance, or through badly-performed repairs/maintenance with
>poor-quality materials. He said he gets much of his business through that.
>In short, even if he wanted to, he wouldn't ever have to rip anybody off;
>people already do a good job of that all on their own.

Most people in my neighborhood drive *new* cars every 3 years because
they trash them through neglect and want the latest ride. So if they
know they're going to get a new car in 3 years, why bother with
maintenance?

Maybe air in the tires is as far as I see ANYONE around my
neighborhood going. And only when it is running near Flat.

My car is $300 short of being Paid in Full, has 40K-miles on the
odometer, and I plan to keep it for as long as it can withstand the
insults of salt here in the rust belt.

Nick