Maybe there will be some mention in the TAN Report on Monday.

Looking forward to it.

Anyhow according to the comments in this Analysis Report and analyzing all the elements in parts per million this transmission fluid could have easily went another 100,000 miles.

The comments section speaks for itself. He says all the levels are not a problem whatsoever.

Glad to see Lexus knows what they are talking about .

 

Jim - Excellent info - thanks for taking the time to post the report and sharing it with the forum

 

Amazing how two people can look at the same report and read the same comments by Blackstone and come to two different conclusions. I couldn't disagree with your comments more. For one thing, Blackstone isn't suggesting that the fluid shouldn't be changed (which they would do if it was still in good shape). Second, the levels of wear metals are HIGH compared to other analysis I've seen. Third, the viscosity is low and out of spec for this fluid. My conclusion is that 100k miles is too far and that Blackstone test further supports that point of view. Sorry elite7 but I think you are terribly wrong with regard to your conclusions.

Andrew

 

very interesting

 

Yep...raw numbers are certainly subject to different perspectives for interpretation. Still comes as a little bit of a shock to me to realize that everyone's reality can be quite different..but all relatively valid.

Reminds me of one of my favorite maxims (partially stolen from TS Elliot) - Don't confuse data with information...don't confuse information with knowledge...don't confuse knowledge with wisdom.

 

Some inappropriate posts have been removed from this thread.

Elite7, please check your PM and I ask you to exit this conversation.

 

I've posed a couple questions to Blackstone via email about the report, hopefully they'll respond (how much can you expect for $35!)... Here's the email I sent them...

"I received the attached transmission oil analysis from you last Friday and I'm hoping you can answer a couple of questions for me...

The levels of iron, copper, lead and tin are all elevated in the report. Would it have done any harm to continue running this oil in my transmission? I don't know how many PPM the levels would need to be at to consider them harmful to the transmission if I were to continue to run it. Do these elements act as an abrasive when they're suspended in the oil at certain PPM?

For the universal averages, how are those established? What is the point of reference / baseline you're referencing for those numbers?

Thanks, Jim"

 

I very much look forward to hearing what blackstone has to say about te realworld usability of the fluid. It is threads like these that make me happy that there are forums like this one.

 

The TAN or "Total Acid Number" came back this afternoon at 1.9mg. The comment made in the report was: "The TAN read 1.9, showing the oil was a little acidic"...

A lower number is better.

So, I did a Google search for TAN information and the only thing I found so far that was of any help was an article on Amsoil's website that compared Mercon V fluid TAN levels. I know the WS is different than a Mercon V, but the statement by Blackstone above, becomes confusing when compared to the Amsoil statement below, that states a TAN of 2.7 is wonderful... Does anyone have any knowledge of TAN numbers?

Total Acid Number (TAN) Test

MERCON V requirements do not allow a total acid number exceeding 3.5 mg following 300 hours of testing. Measured at 0.4 mg following 300 hours of testing, AMSOIL Synthetic ATF easily passed this portion of the test. Even after 1,106 hours of extended testing, AMSOIL Synthetic ATF easily passed MERCON V requirements for 300 hours. In fact, its TAN of 2.7 mg after 1,106 hours was lower than the 3.2 mg TAN of Texaco Havoline ATF after 300 hours. Although Texaco Havoline ATF passed 300-hour test requirements, it again showed its inability to provide protection over extended intervals, climbing to a TAN of 7.50 mg after 1,012 hours of testing.

BTW, they haven't responded to my questions in post #37...

 

Not a lot of definitive TAN info out there, but I did find this on a BMW site. It was in reference to a BMW X5 that had a Blackstone report done on the tranny fluid after a first fluid change at 83k miles... The TAN on the BMW's fluid referenced in the post below was 3.6 The person responding below appeared quite knowledgeable throughout the thread. I'm starting to think that a TAN of 1.9 isn't all that bad...

"The TAN indicator varies by transmission manufacturer, but some published numbers I have seen are that TAN cannot increase by 3.0 or 3.25 over initial baseline numbers, whatever that baseline number is. I don't know what the initial TAN number is for your (BMW) fluid, but there are other oils out there on the market in the 1.5 range. By that calculation, your fluid was about halfway to the change limit. All of this is an estimate, but I wouldn't say that your fluid was dangerously high. It was trending towards a replacement point, absolutely."

 

so whats the point of paying for an analysis when the quantitaive results given do not lead to any clear conclusion about anything ?

This is the answer I thought was amusing ... "By that calculation, your fluid was about halfway to the change limit. All of this is an estimate, but I wouldn't say that your fluid was dangerously high. It was trending towards a replacement point, absolutely."

Still ... it points to there being a limit, which is something Lexus says does not exist.

 

Oh and BTW, for the BMW X5 referenced above, BMW states the fluid is lifetime and doesn't require replacement. In reading the thread, apparently this X5 transmission is actually a GM transmission and the SAME transmission, when used in GM vehicles, has a maintenance schedule that calls for a fluid change at 100k miles...

 

I would be extremely surprised, shocked is a better word, if BMW buys transmissions for the X5 or any other vehicle from General Motors.

 

Prepare to be shocked Stu...

I know this must be true because I believe everything posted on the Internet!

http://www.xoutpost.com/bmw-sav-foru...ed-bmw-gm.html

Do a Google search for "GM A5S390R" or "GM A5S360R" and you'll see a bunch of search results for BMW's with GM transmissions in them.

 

I am shocked ...

I found this interesting.

"A soft, slow, shift that slips the clutche plates more results in faster wear of the clutch plate material and disks, and much more heat (which breaks down the fluid much more quickly. "

"Oil samples are in and of themselves interesting, but they don't give us much guidance as to how to maintain our vehicles, without trend lines and correlations to failures."

"my point is that it doesn't have to last forever. It just has to exceed the useful life of the rest of the vehicle, whatever that may be deemed to be."

LOL
In the 2001-2003 models the ZF tranny used is a weak point with tranny life of 100-150k. Unless BMW has reinvented the tranny and not told anyone; the lifetime oil bit is a marketing ruse. I guess BMW wagers that 4-5K repair once every 125k miles or so is not enough to cause owners to riot.


Deja Vu ?
" By that calculation, your fluid was about halfway to the change limit. All of this is an estimate, but I wouldn't say that your fluid was dangerously high. It was trending towards a replacement point, absolutely."


Lexus seals the tranny unit saying tranny fluid will last for life, they should warranty it for life !