Vague Transmission Oil Change Recs Vs Common Sense & Reality

[Woodguru]

I still remember what Infiniti came to the conclusion of in terms of statistics on recommended oil changes on their new Q45 platform. They started out with a 60k recommended first change, and the transmissions were lasting 150k. They bumped up the recommended 1st change and the transmissions started lasting 250k.

I do it at 20k, based on the fact that the oil looks nasty at 20k...all of the early break in and manufacturing roughness is in the oil, so then does it make sense to use oil that has this much crap in it, that looks this nasty?

My guess is that it makes sense to extend the lifetime of a seriously expensive replacement item if you intend to keep the car long term or put a lot of miles on it. I just talked to the service manager, he says they recommend 80k, and they don't have much problems with transmissions.

 

[cx5_2014]

I did mine at 120k because I bout it with that many miles and I don't think the previous owner had done it. I did it again at 150k miles. Right now I have 166k and trans is working like a clock. When I get a new car I plan on doing a 1x drain and fill every 30k

 

[cz5gt]

60-80k is ok on a Skyactiv. Yes you can do it earlier if you want but unless driving in extreme heat year round ... probably not necessary to do at 20-30k

 

[cx5_2014]

60-80k is ok on a Skyactiv. Yes you can do it earlier if you want but unless driving in extreme heat year round ... probably not necessary to do at 20-30k

I'm in Florida year round

 

[Lazy2.5]

I do it at 20k, based on the fact that the oil looks nasty at 20k...

Are you referring to the transmission fluid on the Skyactiv auto? What's your definition of nasty?

all of the early break in and manufacturing roughness is in the oil,

This is precisely why you want your first fluid change to be done early, I agree.

so then does it make sense to use oil that has this much crap in it, that looks this nasty?

You already know the answer to this. In short, no. But, you have to also consider:

1. What's the bottom of your pan look like? Is it dirty?
2. How about the magnet? Is it filled to capacity with metal shavings?
3. And the strainer sitting at the bottom of the pan? Is it still "straining" the fluid properly, to keep the contaminants separate?

After 100k miles, so long as these three factors are accounted for, your fluid will stay clean, and the transmission will last.

My guess is that it makes sense to extend the lifetime of a seriously expensive replacement item if you intend to keep the car long term or put a lot of miles on it.

It makes sense regardless of who drives it or for how long. It's an expensive components which requires appropriate maintenance.

I just talked to the service manager, he says they recommend 80k,

80K starts to get a little late, but if you are dropping the pan at this mileage, that's fine.

and they don't have much problems with transmissions.

It's true. I have 336,xxxKM on my Skyactiv auto; I was happy to see how smooth and precise the shifts were even when compared to the 2024 CX-5 loaner I had with only 36,000KM on it.

Driver claims that his transmission shifts "fine" at this mileage, even without ever servicing it. This is incredible for an automatic transmission.

Mazda 6 GJ ATX Transmission Pan & Filter Replacement!

Turns out these cars have a Metal transmission pan! For starters you got a little spot in the corner for your nice big pan magnet, which you can see at the top of the pan. Mileage was at around 103,000 miles when the service was done. I don't think the bottom of the pan looks too dirty for the...

www.mazda6club.com

Here's what the bottom of a Skyactiv transmission looks like after just over 100k Miles. (Drain and fill was done first at around 38k miles)

It's not bad, but that strainer and magnet needs to be clean, or else the transmission fluid won't be.

 

[eggsalad]

I just did mine at 50k, but only because it was 8 years old.

 

[cx5_2014]

I just did mine at 50k, but only because it was 8 years old.

Did you do a flush, drain and fill or do the filter too? What did you use for fluid?

 

[N7turbo]

I used to have issues with the "flush" method because of horror stories 30 years ago.

But watch this.

 

[TheMAN]

I got our 3's flushed out and ravenol ATF-FZ put in back in winter, at 50k miles... the old fluid wasn't bad, just normal dark gray (it wasn't black yet, but fluid color is also never fully indicative of its condition either)... about 1/3 of the miles on the car are road trip highway miles, so if it was only in town miles the whole time, I would've flushed it at 30k

shifts way better than when it was brand new...

the money spent on the 3+ gallons of fluid, plus cost of paying my dealer to use their BG machine to flush it out was worth it in time savings and guarantee that 100% of the original fluid is out compared to very costly 12 gallons of triple drain and fills and not really have 100% of the old fluid out

I don't recommend flushing with something way more miles than what I have or unknown history... but we had ours since new and understood what driving conditions it went through, so it's perfectly fine to flush

I'm about to buy a stock CX-50 cooler though... twice as big as the stock one, and is the same thing used in the mexican CX-5

 

[Lazy2.5]

The Skyactiv auto doesn't even have cooler lines for hooking up a flush machine.

There is some risk in flushing an AT, if the transmission already shows premature signs of failure. Makes no sense to flush or drain and fill a higher mileage AT without dropping the pan. It's like changing your engine oil, but not the filter. Drop the pan.

 

[TheMAN]

you never heard of an adapter?

 

[cx5_2014]

 

[cx5_2014]

http://bigo.nontirevendor.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/2015-ATF-Application-Guide.pdf