Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
HomeAnnouncements
Discussion Groups
By Brand
BMWChevroletDodgeFordGMHondaLexusMercedes-BenzNissanPeugeotToyotaVolkswagenOther Brands
By Topic
4x4 CarsRVsDrivingMaintenance & RepairCar AudioCollectible Cars
Country Specific
Australian ForumsUK Forums
ArticlesAuto InsuranceBuyingCars & TechnologyMaintenanceMiscellaneousSafety
DMV Resources
Related Topics
MotorcyclesBoatsMore Topics ...

Car Forum / Chrysler Cars / March 2005

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

trans. dipstick says use dexron III in 89 chrysler lebaron

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
marks89lebaron - 26 Mar 2005 03:43 GMT
Just about everyone on the net claims using dexron II ATF is hazardous to a
chrysler auto. transmission.  Yet right from the get-go chrysler
manufacturers claim that Dexron II is the preferred ATF type for (at least
this one) the 1989 chrysler lebaron.  So its no wonder the transmission
shudders and shakes like its going to fall from the car and onto the
pavement.  My question is, how much old dexron fluid is allowed to stay in
the transmission?  An ounce or two?  Or is there a way to get every last
drop of old fluid out?
Daniel J. Stern - 26 Mar 2005 05:47 GMT
> Just about everyone on the net claims using dexron II ATF is hazardous to a
> chrysler auto. transmission.  Yet right from the get-go chrysler
> manufacturers claim that Dexron II is the preferred ATF type for (at least
> this one) the 1989 chrysler lebaron.

For the 3-speed auto in '89, yes, it's fine, though the current Dexron
fluid is no longer Dexron-II.  If you have the 4-speed auto, you MUST use
ATF+, and *NOT* Dexron, regardless of what is stamped on the dipstick
(which could easily have been replaced with a non-original item sometime
in the last 16 years.)
HarryS - 26 Mar 2005 10:59 GMT
http://dodgeram.info/tsb/2004/21-004-04.htm

http://www.allpar.com/fix/trans.html
Signature

HarryS My 2?

| Just about everyone on the net claims using dexron II ATF is hazardous to a
| chrysler auto. transmission.  Yet right from the get-go chrysler
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
| the transmission?  An ounce or two?  Or is there a way to get every last
| drop of old fluid out?
Bill Putney - 26 Mar 2005 15:01 GMT
> http://dodgeram.info/tsb/2004/21-004-04.htm
>
> http://www.allpar.com/fix/trans.html

That TSB says not to use ATF+4 in the OP's car, right?

Bill Putney
(To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
adddress with the letter 'x')
Bill Putney - 26 Mar 2005 15:13 GMT
>> http://dodgeram.info/tsb/2004/21-004-04.htm
>>
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
> (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
> adddress with the letter 'x')

Oops - is my face red.  The TSB is written ambiguously - the vehicles
listed in the *table* are *supposed* to have ATF+4 as refill.  The
exceptions are given in a sentence - the way it is written, one could
think they meant that all vehicles in the table are *not* to use ATF+4,
but I see vehciles in that list (like LH vehicles) that definitely are
supposed to use it.  Who writes those things!?

Bill Putney
(To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
adddress with the letter 'x')
alec_b - 27 Mar 2005 07:37 GMT
>  >> http://dodgeram.info/tsb/2004/21-004-04.htm
>  >>
[quoted text clipped - 23 lines]
> in my
> adddress with the letter 'x')

I?ve used dexron III for the past 3k miles in my 97 T&C 3.8 with no
negative effects. No shudder, no shift problems, no slips, no TCC
problems.
Daniel J. Stern - 27 Mar 2005 18:06 GMT
> Ive used dexron III for the past 3k miles in my 97 T&C 3.8 with no
> negative effects. No shudder, no shift problems, no slips, no TCC
> problems.

Wow, three *whole* thousand miles, with no negative effects that you're
aware of yet. That doesn't show that it's OK to use the wrong fluid, but
it does clearly demonstrate that you're excessively rich, excessively
stingy, or (probably) both.

DS
Steve - 28 Mar 2005 19:16 GMT
> Just about everyone on the net claims using dexron II ATF is hazardous to a
> chrysler auto. transmission.

That is simply not correct.  People say that Dexron is hazardous to the
Chrysler ELECTRONIC 4-SPEED transmissions with computer-modulated lockup
torque convertors. Those didn't even appear until 1989, and then ONLY in
conjunction with the 3.3L v6 engine in selected car lines.

>  Yet right from the get-go chrysler
> manufacturers claim that Dexron II is the preferred ATF type for (at least
> this one) the 1989 chrysler lebaron.

Dexron IS just fine for an 89 Chrysler 3-speed automatic.

>  So its no wonder the transmission
> shudders and shakes like its going to fall from the car and onto the
> pavement.

You've changed everything but the CV joints, and everyone here has
pointed out that inner CV joints are the #1 candidate for the symptoms
you've described. Why don't you change them before blaming the transmission?
Daniel J. Stern - 28 Mar 2005 20:40 GMT
> People say that Dexron is hazardous to the Chrysler ELECTRONIC 4-SPEED
> transmissions with computer-modulated lockup torque convertors. Those
> didn't even appear until 1989, and then ONLY in conjunction with the
> 3.3L v6 engine in selected car lines.

Actually, Steve, the A604 electronic 4-speed was available with the 3.0
*and* 3.3 in '89, in *most* Chrysler Corp. vehicles with those engines.
Including minivans. Including Spirits and Acclaims. Including Dynasties
and New Yorkers.

> Dexron IS just fine for an 89 Chrysler 3-speed automatic.

True.

> You've changed everything but the CV joints, and everyone here has
> pointed out that inner CV joints are the #1 candidate for the symptoms
> you've described. Why don't you change them before blaming the
> transmission?

Because he obviously didn't post here for an answer to his question. He
posted here to try and garner support for his own ignorant undiagnosis.
Steve - 28 Mar 2005 21:39 GMT
>>People say that Dexron is hazardous to the Chrysler ELECTRONIC 4-SPEED
>>transmissions with computer-modulated lockup torque convertors. Those
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
> Including minivans. Including Spirits and Acclaims. Including Dynasties
> and New Yorkers.

My bad, then. I thought the 604 was 3.3 only, and Dynasty/NYer/Imperial
and minivan only for 89.

>>You've changed everything but the CV joints, and everyone here has
>>pointed out that inner CV joints are the #1 candidate for the symptoms
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> Because he obviously didn't post here for an answer to his question. He
> posted here to try and garner support for his own ignorant undiagnosis.

Or maybe because the engine is now toast (as indicated by another
thread...) ???

:-p
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2008 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.