If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
1995 Ply Voyager Xmission question
Hi, folks, , , I just bought a 1995 Plymouth Voyager, excellent condition, 120K miles. It shifts fine most of the time, but today, it shifted down at about 25~35 mph, and now doesn't want to shift out of lower gears, running at abt 45-50 at 4K rpm. after shutting down, it works for a while, but then the problem comes back again. I am wondering if this problem can be solved by replacing the solenoid package? If so, (or not) how much is this going to cost me? Thanx for your wisdom. Ron C. In the Calif. High Desert. |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
You'll need to have the unit scanned by a COMPETENT tech that knows morethan
just 2 words (replace transmission). NOt saying you don't need a rebuild or reman but many of them are rebuilt/replaced for no good reason. I'll bet more than 50%. Larry "Dr " > wrote in message ... > > Hi, folks, , , > > I just bought a 1995 Plymouth Voyager, excellent condition, 120K > miles. > It shifts fine most of the time, but today, it shifted down at about > 25~35 mph, and now doesn't want to shift out of lower gears, running > at abt 45-50 at 4K rpm. after shutting down, it works for a while, but > then the problem comes back again. > I am wondering if this problem can be solved by replacing the solenoid > package? If so, (or not) how much is this going to cost me? > > Thanx > for your wisdom. > > Ron C. > In the Calif. High Desert. > > > > |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
I'm not a competent tech but I am someone who just went through this
transmission business so might throw out a few gotchas. 1. Have someone scan the transmission codes. A very, very good independent or an excellent mechanic should be able to do this. I could not find either so did find an excellent and honest dealer by asking around. 2. I updated the TCM, the Transmission Control Module. Apparently the clutch is EECM, an electronically something-or-other clutch controlled by software. My TCM needed an upgrade to its firmware. Again, I went to the dealer. Cottman is a bit of a joke. I called them up and they did not even know what I was talking about, at least the fellow answering the phone. An independent tranny guy also did not seem to follow my request for a firmware update or pretended not to follow. 3. 1995 is when Chyrsler released the firmware upgrade to the TCM for the A604 or the 4-speed tranny, that is 3 speeds with Overdrive, making it four speed, a temperamental tranny that needs Chrysler's own fluid, ATF+3 is safest, not ATF+4, not anybody else's. There are equivalents, but if something is wrong with the tranny, get the original fluid meant for that particular tranny. Weird but that's the way it is. You might want to change fluid and filter if your car has not been serviced a lot. I would not be surprised if your had been serviced and someone put it in the wrong fluid. Very easy to happen since it was not known how fussy this tranny is for ATF+3 which is really only at the dealer's. Not Dexron. Not this or that but ATF+3. ATF+4 is synthetic and I would not trust that in a 1995. You might be right about the solenoids. The firmware made the tranny shift into faster gears more quickly, avoiding the self-destruction of the torque converter. I do not remember anything about it shifting downwards. But changing the fluid and filter, not a power flush which might destroy the tranny, the fellow can see if big chunks of metal are in the fluid, meaning something is really bad. And since this should be done on any used car that you just get, it's almost a no-brainer. And no wise jokes from anybody "jdoe" > wrote in message news:0epVd.84312$tl3.14878@attbi_s02... > You'll need to have the unit scanned by a COMPETENT tech that knows morethan > just 2 words (replace transmission). NOt saying you don't need a rebuild or > reman but many of them are rebuilt/replaced for no good reason. I'll bet > more than 50%. > Larry > "Dr " > wrote in message > ... > > > > Hi, folks, , , > > > > I just bought a 1995 Plymouth Voyager, excellent condition, 120K > > miles. > > It shifts fine most of the time, but today, it shifted down at about > > 25~35 mph, and now doesn't want to shift out of lower gears, running > > at abt 45-50 at 4K rpm. after shutting down, it works for a while, but > > then the problem comes back again. > > I am wondering if this problem can be solved by replacing the solenoid > > package? If so, (or not) how much is this going to cost me? > > > > Thanx > > for your wisdom. > > > > Ron C. > > In the Calif. High Desert. > > |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
+4 works just fine. Used it in my 93 and my dad's 91 no issues. Use it in my
99 also. They ARE touchy though if you put wrong fluid in but hey so is everything else. GM's use Dexron (don't put Mercon or type F in them, Fords like Mercon, the jap stuff is something else altogether in many cases. All units are engineered for certain characteristics and fluids. Larry "Treeline" > wrote in message ... > I'm not a competent tech but I am someone who just went through this > transmission business so might throw out a few gotchas. > > 1. Have someone scan the transmission codes. A very, very good > independent or an excellent mechanic should be able to do this. > I could not find either so did find an excellent and honest dealer > by asking around. > > 2. I updated the TCM, the Transmission Control Module. Apparently > the clutch is EECM, an electronically something-or-other clutch > controlled by software. My TCM needed an upgrade to its firmware. > Again, I went to the dealer. Cottman is a bit of a joke. I called them > up and they did not even know what I was talking about, at least > the fellow answering the phone. An independent tranny guy also > did not seem to follow my request for a firmware update or pretended > not to follow. > > 3. 1995 is when Chyrsler released the firmware upgrade to the TCM > for the A604 or the 4-speed tranny, that is 3 speeds with Overdrive, > making it four speed, a temperamental tranny that needs Chrysler's > own fluid, ATF+3 is safest, not ATF+4, not anybody else's. There > are equivalents, but if something is wrong with the tranny, get > the original fluid meant for that particular tranny. Weird but that's > the way it is. > > You might want to change fluid and filter if your car has not been > serviced a lot. I would not be surprised if your had been serviced > and someone put it in the wrong fluid. Very easy to happen > since it was not known how fussy this tranny is for ATF+3 which > is really only at the dealer's. Not Dexron. Not this or that but > ATF+3. ATF+4 is synthetic and I would not trust that in a 1995. > > You might be right about the solenoids. The firmware made the > tranny shift into faster gears more quickly, avoiding the > self-destruction of the torque converter. I do not remember > anything about it shifting downwards. > > But changing the fluid and filter, not a power flush which might > destroy the tranny, the fellow can see if big chunks of metal > are in the fluid, meaning something is really bad. And since this > should be done on any used car that you just get, it's almost a > no-brainer. And no wise jokes from anybody > > > > "jdoe" > wrote in message > news:0epVd.84312$tl3.14878@attbi_s02... >> You'll need to have the unit scanned by a COMPETENT tech that knows >> morethan >> just 2 words (replace transmission). NOt saying you don't need a rebuild >> or >> reman but many of them are rebuilt/replaced for no good reason. I'll bet >> more than 50%. >> Larry >> "Dr " > wrote in message >> ... >> > >> > Hi, folks, , , >> > >> > I just bought a 1995 Plymouth Voyager, excellent condition, 120K >> > miles. >> > It shifts fine most of the time, but today, it shifted down at about >> > 25~35 mph, and now doesn't want to shift out of lower gears, running >> > at abt 45-50 at 4K rpm. after shutting down, it works for a while, but >> > then the problem comes back again. >> > I am wondering if this problem can be solved by replacing the solenoid >> > package? If so, (or not) how much is this going to cost me? >> > >> > Thanx >> > for your wisdom. >> > >> > Ron C. >> > In the Calif. High Desert. >> > > |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
"Daniel J. Stern" > wrote in message n.umich.edu... > On Thu, 3 Mar 2005, jdoe wrote: > > > +4 works just fine. Used it in my 93 and my dad's 91 no issues. Use it in my > > 99 also. > > +4 is not only "just fine", but far superior to +3. There was a service > bulletin at one time that said not to use +4 in older minivans because of > the potential for objectionable torque converter clutch shudder under > certain circumstances, but this has been cancelled. What do you think though about the seals? Is that an urban legend or is it better to use a non-synthetic oil, like ATF +3 just in case there are some seals left-over or forgotten from a rebuild, a Cottman rebuild, that are rated for synthetics? Or does it not matter? The +4 being synthetic should be more slippery and that should help the tranny. Is this what you mean by being far superior, beside lasting longer than non-synthetic ATF +3? As an aside, I have been using an O-ring of the Buna-N type in a water filter housing. I have been lubing this with petroleum jelly. Ordinarily this would be a big no-no. But this particular seal is impervious to petroleum products. Now these are slightly more expensive than regular seals, but if these types of seals were used, relatively speaking, then yes, I would see your point. For almost 20 years, these Buna-N seals have neither leaked nor deteriorated, astonishingly well made. My point is that the gains might not outweigh the losses if the tranny starts leaking. So I ask your advice on this. Does it matter if the tranny takes 10 years and leaks a few drops, probably not. But if the leaks occur internally, could that affect matters? I just don't know and read contradictory comments so you seem to have a good handle on this... |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
On Thu, 3 Mar 2005, jdoe wrote:
> +4 works just fine. Used it in my 93 and my dad's 91 no issues. Use it in my > 99 also. +4 is not only "just fine", but far superior to +3. There was a service bulletin at one time that said not to use +4 in older minivans because of the potential for objectionable torque converter clutch shudder under certain circumstances, but this has been cancelled. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
SORRY. . . My 95 Van is a 3.3 engine and automatic tranny. Ron C. On Wed, 02 Mar 2005 11:25:29 -0800, "Dr " > wrote: > >Hi, folks, , , > >I just bought a 1995 Plymouth Voyager, excellent condition, 120K >miles. >It shifts fine most of the time, but today, it shifted down at about >25~35 mph, and now doesn't want to shift out of lower gears, running >at abt 45-50 at 4K rpm. after shutting down, it works for a while, but >then the problem comes back again. >I am wondering if this problem can be solved by replacing the solenoid >package? If so, (or not) how much is this going to cost me? > >Thanx >for your wisdom. > >Ron C. >In the Calif. High Desert. > > |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
On Thu, 3 Mar 2005, Treeline wrote:
> > +4 is not only "just fine", but far superior to +3. There was a > > service bulletin at one time that said not to use +4 in older minivans > > because of the potential for objectionable torque converter clutch > > shudder under certain circumstances, but this has been cancelled. > What do you think though about the seals? What about them? > Is that an urban legend or is it better to use a non-synthetic oil, like > ATF +3 just in case there are some seals left-over or forgotten from a > rebuild, a Cottman rebuild, that are rated for synthetics? ATF+3 and ATF+4 are both fully compatible with all seal materials found in any Chrysler transmission. Seal compatibility is not even on the radar screen as far as reasons to pick ATF+4 vs. ATF+3. ATF+4 has much greater thermal stability, much more consistent frictional characteristics across a much wider temperature range, a lower pour point for shift consistency at low temperatures, and greater resistance to shear-induced deterioration. Full details directly from the horse's mouth: http://www.sae.org/servlets/productD...PROD_CD=982674 DS (I use ATF+4 in *ALL* of my Chrysler products, ranging from 1962 models on up) |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
"Daniel J. Stern" > wrote in message n.umich.edu... > On Thu, 3 Mar 2005, Treeline wrote: > > > > +4 is not only "just fine", but far superior to +3. There was a > > > service bulletin at one time that said not to use +4 in older minivans > > > because of the potential for objectionable torque converter clutch > > > shudder under certain circumstances, but this has been cancelled. > > > What do you think though about the seals? > > What about them? > > > Is that an urban legend or is it better to use a non-synthetic oil, like > > ATF +3 just in case there are some seals left-over or forgotten from a > > rebuild, a Cottman rebuild, that are rated for synthetics? > > ATF+3 and ATF+4 are both fully compatible with all seal materials found in > any Chrysler transmission. Seal compatibility is not even on the radar > screen as far as reasons to pick ATF+4 vs. ATF+3. ATF+4 has much greater > thermal stability, much more consistent frictional characteristics across > a much wider temperature range, a lower pour point for shift consistency > at low temperatures, and greater resistance to shear-induced > deterioration. > > Full details directly from the horse's mouth: > http://www.sae.org/servlets/productD...PROD_CD=982674 > > DS (I use ATF+4 in *ALL* of my Chrysler products, ranging from 1962 models > on up) Now that's very helpful information. I had read on the allpar.com about someone from Chrysler, not knowing how high a tech or engineer, who expressed concern about ATF+4. If I had known it did not matter, then I would have prefer ATF+4 for all the reasons you stated about, especially about temperature stability and frictional characteristics. SAE Technical Papers Document Number: 982674 Title: Development and Introduction of ChryslerS New Automatic Transmission Fluid Meeting Where Presented: International Fall Fuels and Lubricants Meeting and Exposition, October 1998, San Francisco, CA, USA, Session: Automatic Transmission Fluids (ATF) (Part 1&2) The price is about $12 snail mail which is par for the course, but $30 for a fax. I gather then they had tested the fluid extensively before releasing it to the market. And they had tested on older cars and you are satisfied with your cars going back to the early 60's which is good to hear. This leads though to synthetics and engine oil. Now that is not the same as synthetic transmission oils? Is there any truth to synthetic engine oils hurting seals and the cars beginning to leak if used in older cars, such as mine, which is almost 200,000? What is your experience here? The same as with the synthetic transmission? I am now using Conoco semi-synthetic 5W-30 [really by default from the dealer's oil change] and it seems fantastic. Less oil consumption and the engine is awfully smooth, knock on wood, considering the very high mileage. So my fears are abated sometwhat since it uses less oil. And if the dealer goes to a full synthetic, then fine. I can change the oil myself but it gives the dealer something to do and keeps us on a cordial basis. I tried the local independents, but it turned out quite badly. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Question: Regarding wheel offset and WTB: 1995 Jetta III steel wheel | Timothy J. Richter | VW water cooled | 4 | March 10th 07 03:51 PM |
99 Voyager Electrical Question | blziggy | Chrysler | 4 | December 27th 04 04:35 AM |
1995 325is question 2 | RyMal | BMW | 9 | November 8th 04 11:15 AM |
Need Help with ABS Trouble Codes (1995 Plymouth Grand Voyager) | s61948f | Dodge | 1 | May 26th 04 07:30 PM |