Tegger wrote:
> Dave Kelsen <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote in
> news:49eb16af$0$27964$9a6e19ea@unlimited.newshosti ng.com:
>
>> On 4/18/2009 6:51 PM Tegger spake these words of knowledge:
>>
>>> "Woody" <TheDuck@pond.net> wrote in
>>> news:2TsGl.27451$YU2.2689@nlpi066.nbdc.sbc.com:
>>>
>>>> He is probably going to put it on a machine that pumps fluid through
>>>> the transmission. I wouldn't let them do it. Honda came out with a
>>>> service tip that said doing it could damage the screens in the
>>>> transmission.
>>>
>>> They did? What Honda Service News article would that be? I have them
>>> all and see nothing like this.
>>>
>>> Honda does prohibit "FLUSHES" (HSN: Feb/06), which are totally
>>> different from fluid changes.
>>
>> Tegger, I would say that what Woody is describing above is a flush,
>> but maybe I don't understand.
>
>
>
> Honda defines a "flush" as a service that involves the use of solvents as a
> cleaner prior to the installation of the new ATF.
>
> If the service involves a fluid change ONLY without the introduction of any
> unauthorized substances, that's OK by Honda regardless of the method used.
>
>
>
>> I don't have a maintenance minder (03 Accord 4 cyl), and my manual
>> doesn't call for transmission fluid change until 105K or 120K miles
>> (whichever it was, I did it then, for the first time.) I have seen
>> many people say that doing it every 30K miles is a good preventative
>> idea and can't hurt, like the folks who insist on changing oil every
>> 3K miles. Not necessary, but no harm done.
>
>
>
> Both are excellent ideas. I have been told by two oil engineers that, from
> a purely technical standpoint, you can never change lubricants too often.
>
>

that's odd - i know one of the lubricant folks at exxon-mobil, and he
says the opposite. and it's not like he makes more money selling less
of it.