Jump to content
Sampath Gunasekera

My New Ride : Mistubishi Lancer CS1 GLX (A/T) YOM 2007

Recommended Posts

iRage    733
27 minutes ago, Davy said:

Exactly. Manufacturers sometimes are known to severely under estimate certain service requirements. One thing I have first hand experience is the TC-SST transmission currently on my car. The service schedule says the first oil change needs to be done at 90,000 km! Experts all over the world strongly suggest changing oil and filter every 40,000 km (some even suggest shorter intervals like 20,000 km for track cars) due to the design of the unit. This is actually one of the reasons the earlier TC-SST units gave trouble. People ran with old oil close to 100,000 km, and naturally the transmissions failed. Not saying this will happen to every car, but this is one instance where "manufacturer specification" was just too infrequent. 

The thing with agents and dealers is that they do everything by the book. So they don't even open up the transmission and clean the pan (not their fault - its not in the service schedule). For a country like Sri Lanka where we constantly strain our gearboxes driving abruptly and crawling in traffic half the time, it doesn't take 15 years for these filters to get clogged. So taking the car to a separate garage every 40,000 km or so and doing an ATF change where the pan is removed, cleaned, filter is changed and gasket is replaced is actually a good idea IMO. The bottom line is that the agent follows a reactive approach whereas consumers prefer the option of carrying out preventive maintenance. 

On the topic of transmission maintenance, sealed transmissions are becoming more common now. What that is basically a car with a maintenance free transmission. I believe some manufacturers including Mitsubishi and Hyundai have already stepped into this scene. In fact the TC-SST transmission is supposed to be "sealed". You break it, you replace it! However, many workshops now carry out successful overhauling of these transmissions.

Interestingly when I took the Mark X to the agents...they said the ATF filter should be changed with the oil and because they didn't have the specific filter in stock that I should come back after 6 - 8 weeks ! My car had only 60000kms at the time. So yeah....agents....they are an enigma. Even in Japan they follow it by the book..but considering that 90% of the cars are used pretty much according to what the manufacturer has presumed I guess it all works out.

Well..the A30 series RAV4's CVT is supposed to be a sealed, no maintenance transmission. It is only to be inspected at 100,000kms and provide necessary maintenance. Same with most of the K series CVTs. However, we all know how that is working out :)

Basically, what the manufacturers provide is the basic minimum requirements (both schedule wise and consumables) for the car to operate under normal conditions. After all going to a more rigorous schedule and consumables with a higher threshold would result in a significant increase in cost of ownership which would be a burden on the owner.  

Edited by iRage

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I rechecked with a senior technician at UM and he said for Lancer CS series, this transmission filter comes in lifetime basis and they replace it only if  any repair needed with transmission unit/open the chamber ,as this filter is mounted inside the transmission chamber. My car is 9.5 years old and  96,500km at the clock. ATF change done for the second time in two weeks ago.  Still no issue found and transmission works smoothly.  I am worry, without any issue, opening this transmission chamber and  if anything done/goes wrongly there, this would be a "Illan kema". :D . So decided to leave it as it is (as happen with other CS units here). I hope to keep this vehicle may be for next 3 years and if anything goes wrong under my ownership with that is my "karume" ;)

Edited by Sampath Gunasekera
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
iRage    733

What do you mean inside the chamber ? In pretty much all the AT gearboxes I have seen the filter sits above the base cover/pan. So inside as in its in the bottom. Typically the filter sucks in the oil from the pan where the oil goes through the oil filter and back in to the mechanism. So getting to the filter is not a matter of dismantling the gearbox but removing the bottom pan. Its nothing complicated. Remember I mentioned a Volvo 740 GLE ? It belonged to a friend of mine and he and I did it at our dorm parking lot during thanksgiving weekend (i.e. long weekend and it is cold outside). It was messy...but really not complicated.

Again, I think this is mostly a case of "following the book" and agents/manufacturers under estimating service requirements. Because statistically it works. Not to mention not wanting to do it the messy way :)

Started looking in to the technical reasoning as to why the filter is not replaced anymore and it seems to be a matter inferences and convenience.

Apparently in the past it was done every time because the only way to remove the oil was through the pan below. So it was a case of "since you have it removed..you might as well change it". Since now most people use fluid exchange machines the extra burden of removing the pan is not worth it just for a filter change. (Seems like even now if using the machine is not an option and the change is done through the pan then you should change it).

The "not needing to change"  is justified though the fact that since the gearbox is a closed unit the internal mechanism has no interaction with any foreign elements. Thus, the only possible debris in the filter would be metal shavings from the transmission and when a transmission reaches that stage it requires far more than a fluid and filter change so why bother :). The oil needs replacing apparently not because of contaminants but the breakdown of the oils (so I suppose the non-serviceable gearboxes have some super duper synthetic oil that doesn't break down ?). 

But then the above seems to be based on the fact that the car would be used under which can be classified as "normal" conditions and not "severe". So then again the whole thing is thrown in to limbo because what happens when the usage is severe ? 

As before, I think this is one of those things where you have to decide based on necessities stemming from your own use of the car :) Davy's TC-SST is a prime example. I guess we have to trust that the local agents factor in local conditions when they "go by the book".  Still, I too am with Davy....there is no harm in getting the thing replaced at a reputable garage after a decent interval. I don't know about SL but in Japan the agent will do such pre-empive repairs if the owner insists. The Mark X's filter in Japan was just 3000yen (no idea how much it is at TLC). So if it helps to prolong the life of the car..why not ? So...I am sure your gearbox is not going to give issues for the next three years or more because of the filter...but if the filter was changed would that car run for 25 years as opposed to 15 or 20 ?

Going off topic...maybe the above highlights an un-thought of reason that contribute towards old cars lasting longer....there were no easy ways to get things done and that resulted in us in inadvertently being pre-emptive about a lot of things (no fluid exchange machines = rip the bottom off and replace everything :)) . 

 

Edited by iRage

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, iRage said:

What do you mean inside the chamber ? In pretty much all the AT gearboxes I have seen the filter sits above the base cover/pan. So inside as in its in the bottom. Typically the filter sucks in the oil from the pan where the oil goes through the oil filter and back in to the mechanism. So getting to the filter is not a matter of dismantling the gearbox but removing the bottom pan. Its nothing complicated. Remember I mentioned a Volvo 740 GLE ? It belonged to a friend of mine and he and I did it at our dorm parking lot during thanksgiving weekend (i.e. long weekend and it is cold outside). It was messy...but really not complicated.

Again, I think this is mostly a case of "following the book" and agents/manufacturers under estimating service requirements. Because statistically it works. Not to mention not wanting to do it the messy way :)

Started looking in to the technical reasoning as to why the filter is not replaced anymore and it seems to be a matter inferences and convenience.

Apparently in the past it was done every time because the only way to remove the oil was through the pan below. So it was a case of "since you have it removed..you might as well change it". Since now most people use fluid exchange machines the extra burden of removing the pan is not worth it just for a filter change. (Seems like even now if using the machine is not an option and the change is done through the pan then you should change it).

The "not needing to change"  is justified though the fact that since the gearbox is a closed unit the internal mechanism has no interaction with any foreign elements. Thus, the only possible debris in the filter would be metal shavings from the transmission and when a transmission reaches that stage it requires far more than a fluid and filter change so why bother :). The oil needs replacing apparently not because of contaminants but the breakdown of the oils (so I suppose the non-serviceable gearboxes have some super duper synthetic oil that doesn't break down ?). 

But then the above seems to be based on the fact that the car would be used under which can be classified as "normal" conditions and not "severe". So then again the whole thing is thrown in to limbo because what happens when the usage is severe ? 

As before, I think this is one of those things where you have to decide based on necessities stemming from your own use of the car :) Davy's TC-SST is a prime example. I guess we have to trust that the local agents factor in local conditions when they "go by the book".  Still, I too am with Davy....there is no harm in getting the thing replaced at a reputable garage after a decent interval. I don't know about SL but in Japan the agent will do such pre-empive repairs if the owner insists. The Mark X's filter in Japan was just 3000yen (no idea how much it is at TLC). So if it helps to prolong the life of the car..why not ? So...I am sure your gearbox is not going to give issues for the next three years or more because of the filter...but if the filter was changed would that car run for 25 years as opposed to 15 or 20 ?

Going off topic...maybe the above highlights an un-thought of reason that contribute towards old cars lasting longer....there were no easy ways to get things done and that resulted in us in inadvertently being pre-emptive about a lot of things (no fluid exchange machines = rip the bottom off and replace everything :)) . 

 

iRage, I too understand the importance of the changing transmission filter and will check with UM at my next visit and keep you updated with more details. Usually I drive 20,000km per year and hope next ATF change will come soon. :)  . Anyway I have some priorities in the list like , replacing rear two tires, engine tune up, replacing two engine mounts (two engine mounts found broken when inspect at last service), replacing fuel filter. I do one by one according to my cash flow. I wish if I had an Uncle Aloysius  who come and settle my all car maintenance bills secretly, I could have done all pending maintenance work at once :P   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jor-el    220
17 hours ago, iRage said:

 

Started looking in to the technical reasoning as to why the filter is not replaced anymore and it seems to be a matter inferences and convenience.

1

Customers often ask if they should change the filter as well as the fluid.

In the past, automatic transmission fluid was changed by removing the pan, changing the filter and gasket and refilling with 1/3 the capacity of the transmission. This was the only method known to change the fluid so it was the acceptable method.

When transmission flushing equipment was introduced to the market, people started to ask, “what about the filter?” “we used to change it, why don’t we have to change it now?” The answer to this is, it was changed before because we already had the pan off so “we might as well” plus the filter company’s packaged the gaskets with filters and encouraged this practice.

An automatic transmission is a closed hydraulic device with no foreign matter being introduced. Therefore, if the filter on a transmission should ever become plugged, it is plugged with transmission parts! This means the transmission is past the point of needing a fluid change. An engine, on the other hand, is constantly exposed to foreign matter (air and fuel) which brings in contaminants as well as the combustion that creates many other byproducts. The engine oil filter is designed to filter these products out.

Many transmission manufacturers use only a screen on the fluid pickup to filter out any casting flaws or debris that could be poured down the dipstick. Some manufacturers do not recommend changing the filter.

The fluid will break down and needs to be changed, the filters do not plug up on a healthy transmission.

http://www.fluidservicetech.com/resources/change-filter.html

 

Not sure if this article is accurate though

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
iRage    733

Again..this can be argued back and forth. It seems to be a matter of judgement. Perhaps you might not need to change the filter every time you change the ATF but perhaps after a certain amount of usage and depending on the conditions the car is being used in. So perhaps when the next ATF change is done were I suppose the car would be about 12 years old and has about 150,000km (you did say you drive about 20,000km per year) perhaps you should look in to changing the filter as it does seem about match up with things like what manufacturers would have considered as its lifetime (15-20 years thus 150,000 - 200,000kms).  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jor-el    220
On 8/7/2017 at 10:38 PM, Sampath Gunasekera said:

 

Three months passed under my ownership.

Some maintenance work done at agents.

 

1

What about the air filter and cabin air filter? :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Jor-el said:

What about the air filter and cabin air filter? :)

They are in good condition at the moment and can use for a while.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Register for a new account in our community. It's easy and FREE!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now




×