Honda Car Forum

"Elmo P. Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote in message news:elmop-2C297C.17034707102007@nntp1.usenetserver.com...
> In article <fea995.hlk.0@poczta.onet.pl>,
> "Pszemol" <Pszemol@PolBox.com> wrote:
>
>> > drain and fill simply empties the old fluid, and does /not/ contaminate
>> > with anything foreign. it works by dilution, and that is sufficient.
>> > again, i speak from personal experience.
>>
>> We are talking about doing "flush" at the dealership.
>> In my case, we were talking about my old toyota camry.
>> The most likely scenario will be that the machine was
>> used on toyotas only for years. No other fluids than toyota.
>> So the argument is mute.
>
> Firstly, it's not a "mute" point. The phrase is "moot point".
>
> http://wsu.edu/~brians/errors/mute.html

Yes, thank you.

> Secondly, it doesn't matter if the dealership has and tries to sell the
> services of such a machine. The only real question is, is it good for
> the car? The dealership doesn't really care; they care about selling
> services that people want, whether those services are useful or not,
> whether those services are beneficial or not, whether those services are
> harmful or not.

Does the manufacturer tolerate services sold under the logo of
TOYOTA or HONDA which are not only not recomended but HARMFULL?
Dont you think that manufacturer would forbid selling such services?

> Does the manufacturer specify the procedure? If so, show me the
> specification.

Do not know such specification. do not have access to service manuals.

> Chances are, the manufacturer does NOT specify the procedure. The fact
> that the dealership offers services not recommended by the manufacturer
> is simply a fact of life. They want to make money any way they can.
>
> Honda specifies a repeated drain/fill/drive procedure to exchange the
> fluid, and recommends against using a flush machine. There's a reason
> for that, and it doesn't have anything to do with foreign or
> contaminated fluids.

Can you show me such recomendation of honda AGAINST flushing with machine?

"Elmo P. Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote in message news:elmop-F49643.17054107102007@nntp1.usenetserver.com...
>> > "motsco_" <motsco_@interbaun.com> wrote in message
>> > news:13ggpbl2t3c1m6f@corp.supernews.com...
>> >> MURPHY'S LAW DICTATES THAT the goofs at Monkey Lube have an 80% chance
>> >> of hooking up the FLUSHING machine BACKWARDS, which evenly distributes
>> >> the contents of your HONDA internal filter throughout your tranny.
>> >
>> > We were talking about doing transmission flush at the dealer.
>>
>> given that the honda factory maintenance specs specifically say to /not/
>> flush, i think you're not understanding what you're being told. or
>> you're not talking with the right people.
>
> No, he desperately wants the world to be different than it is. Toward
> his goal, then, he sticks his head in the sand and ignores reality.

What are you talking about?
I am a confused car USER (not a mechanic) who is facing
opposite mechanic recommendation coming from the dealership.
I am expected to make a decision based on two opposite
recomendation as a lay man, not knowing pros/cons.

Can you quote Honda's or Toyota's recomendation against
flushing with machine INCLUDING the reasoning given?

> It's like the people who want an oil change interval listed in the
> owner's manual, and refuse to listen to the maintenance minder--even
> though the maintenance minder IS the keeper of the manufacturer
> specified oil change interval. So, instead, they simply make up an
> interval out of thin air, and claim it to be superior to what the Honda
> engineers say.

What is has to do with the discussed subject?

"Elmo P. Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote in message news:elmop-748068.17100107102007@nntp1.usenetserver.com...
> In article <fea999.hlk.0@poczta.onet.pl>,
> "Pszemol" <Pszemol@PolBox.com> wrote:
>
>> > Not to mention, Honda's own engineers say that a "flush" (as most people
>> > use the term) isn't recommended. They specify a repetitive
>> > drain/fill/drive procedure as a way to clear things out.
>>
>> Do they care to say WHY it is not recommended?
>
> Because it's not.
>
> Does it matter WHY they say it's not recommended?

Do you think I would care to ask this question
if it did not matter to me?

> They are the engineers. I'm the consumer.
> I don't need to know the engineering details.
> I need to know what maintenance to perform
> and when to perform it.
>
> The hairy details aren't nearly so important.

I will give you a reason why they could be important.
If the manufacturer recomended use of a machine than
the routine would be not universal and hard to
make in not well equiped garage...
If a simple method not requiring expensive machine
is good enough than this method will be recomended.

There is a big difference between "not recomendin"
and "recomending against" - at least for me...

So does honda recomend against using such machines?
If so, what is the reasoning behind such recomendation?

"Elmo P. Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote in message news:elmop-B5A54C.17111207102007@nntp1.usenetserver.com...
> In article <feaets.hl8.0@poczta.onet.pl>,
> "Pszemol" <Pszemol@PolBox.com> wrote:
>
>> >> Do they care to say WHY it is not recommended?
>> >
>> > i just told you...
>>
>> What you said does not make any sense.
>> Flush is going to exchange almost 100% of fluid with a new one.
>
> It will also do other things that the people who designed and built
> the transmission don't want to happen.

What exactly are these "things"? Do you know or you simply guess?

> Honda does specify a method to exchange almost 100% of the fluid with
> fresh. Use that method. Hint: it does NOT involve the use of a
> machine. A torque wrench, a drain pan, and some fresh fluid--and
> time--are all that's needed.

If you replace 2/3 of the fluid twice you will have still
more than 11% of old gunk diluted in the transmission...

In article <feb0pv.hho.0@poczta.onet.pl>,
"Pszemol" <Pszemol@PolBox.com> wrote:

> >> given that the honda factory maintenance specs specifically say to /not/
> >> flush, i think you're not understanding what you're being told. or
> >> you're not talking with the right people.
> >
> > No, he desperately wants the world to be different than it is. Toward
> > his goal, then, he sticks his head in the sand and ignores reality.
>
> What are you talking about?
> I am a confused car USER (not a mechanic) who is facing
> opposite mechanic recommendation coming from the dealership.

If you're the car USER, as in OWNER, then you have an owner's guide to
maintenance.

Does this guide specify any transmission fluid replacement at all?

If you really want to know, you can buy the manufacturer's service
manual.

But don't blindly listen to the dealership. Their job is to make
money--as in, take it from your pocket and put it into theirs. If they
can make that happen by your being ignorant, they will capitalize on
that fact.



> Can you quote Honda's or Toyota's recomendation against
> flushing with machine INCLUDING the reasoning given?

Do they have to give a reason? Do they give a reason why they recommend
changing the oil?

2002 Honda Odyssey owner's manual, p. 295:

To thoroughly flush the
transmission, the technician
should drain and refill it with
Honda ATF-Z1 (Automatic
Transmission Fluid), then drive
the vehicle a short distance. Do
this three times. Then drain and
refill the transmission a final time.

Now, what about that specified procedure is ambiguous? Why do you want
NOT to follow the specified procedure?

In article <feb0jc.b2s.0@poczta.onet.pl>,
"Pszemol" <Pszemol@PolBox.com> wrote:

> > Secondly, it doesn't matter if the dealership has and tries to sell the
> > services of such a machine. The only real question is, is it good for
> > the car? The dealership doesn't really care; they care about selling
> > services that people want, whether those services are useful or not,
> > whether those services are beneficial or not, whether those services are
> > harmful or not.
>
> Does the manufacturer tolerate services sold under the logo of
> TOYOTA or HONDA which are not only not recomended but HARMFULL?
> Dont you think that manufacturer would forbid selling such services?

Nope. Happens all the time.

Now, if the manufacturer's area representative gets wind of too much
crap going on (not bloody likely in the case of GM and Ford and
Chrysler), if the customers bother to complain directly to the
manufacturer in such a way that it gets their attention, the dealership
might have to answer to the manufacturer in some way or another.

But the dealership is an independent businessman, and there are strong
laws regarding his right to do business and his relationship with the
manufacturer.

In the end, most dealerships just do what they think they can get away
with. Their goal is to MAKE MONEY. Period.



> > Does the manufacturer specify the procedure? If so, show me the
> > specification.
>
> Do not know such specification. do not have access to service manuals.

If they don't specify it, and/or you don't know if they specify it, then
why assume they DO specify it?

Absent a specific recommendation to do so, don't you think it's better
to assume NOT to do it and instead do what it is they actually specify?

"Elmo P. Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote in message news:elmop-5E82D6.17090907102007@nntp1.usenetserver.com...
> In article <feaj2l.gro.0@poczta.onet.pl>,
> "Pszemol" <Pszemol@PolBox.com> wrote:
>
>> > given that the honda factory maintenance specs specifically say to /not/
>> > flush, i think you're not understanding what you're being told. or
>> > you're not talking with the right people.
>>
>> The dealership is not right people? Who is then?
>
> No, the dealership service department has its own agenda for making
> money--and that is frequently at odds with what the manufacturer says.
>
> The "right people" are the manufacturers. They create the service
> manuals. Get the service manual and follow its direction.

If something is not in the service manual it does not automaticaly
mean manufacturer is recomending against the procedure...

> Meanwhile, the dealership will do whatever it takes to make money. If
> that means lying to you to try to convince you to spend money for a
> procedure that the manufacturer VERY SPECIFICALLY recommends AGAINST,
> they will. They end up with the money, and you end up with the repair
> bill a few months afterward.

I still wait to see such recomendation against using machine.
Could you show it to me, please?

>> If you go back couple of posts in this thread you will notice
>> I was refering to an experience with TOYOTA not honda dealer.
>
> It doesn't matter WHAT dealership you're talking about. They all do
> business the same.
>
> The trick is to find one that is capable and understands the
> manufacturer's product and recommendations, and is willing to do the
> work that the manufacturer specifies in an honest manner. Those
> dealerships exist, but you as an owner have to ask the right questions.

As a consumer, a car user, I need to know what exactly is wrong in using
the machine to flush the transmission fluid and paying cheaper ($99)
than paying for two drain&fill services (2x$69). The method using a machine
is cheaper and seems to do the job better than two drain&fill routines.

I have already know, Elmo, that you do not know the details on why
machine is "wrong" and what bad "things" does it do to your tranny.
If anybody on this newsgroup knows details and wants to share them
with me than I would be happy to read about it. But please do not
tell me that flush done at "Monkey Lube" place will infest my honda's
transmission with some gm or ford transmission fluid living bugs :-)
We are talking about flush done at the honda/toyota dealership,
who deal with the one brand of the cars.

BTW - anybody knows a link to some good description of how such
machine works and showing where is the risk of hooking it up
in reverse or adding some old fluids to your transmission ?

"Elmo P. Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote in message news:elmop-43B169.18064307102007@nntp1.usenetserver.com...
> In article <feb0jc.b2s.0@poczta.onet.pl>,
> "Pszemol" <Pszemol@PolBox.com> wrote:
>
>> > Secondly, it doesn't matter if the dealership has and tries to sell the
>> > services of such a machine. The only real question is, is it good for
>> > the car? The dealership doesn't really care; they care about selling
>> > services that people want, whether those services are useful or not,
>> > whether those services are beneficial or not, whether those services are
>> > harmful or not.
>>
>> Does the manufacturer tolerate services sold under the logo of
>> TOYOTA or HONDA which are not only not recomended but HARMFULL?
>> Dont you think that manufacturer would forbid selling such services?
>
> Nope. Happens all the time.
>
> Now, if the manufacturer's area representative gets wind of too much
> crap going on (not bloody likely in the case of GM and Ford and
> Chrysler), if the customers bother to complain directly to the
> manufacturer in such a way that it gets their attention, the dealership
> might have to answer to the manufacturer in some way or another.
>
> But the dealership is an independent businessman, and there are strong
> laws regarding his right to do business and his relationship with the
> manufacturer.
>
> In the end, most dealerships just do what they think they can get away
> with. Their goal is to MAKE MONEY. Period.

Not very convincing argument...
If in fact a strong manufacturer recomendation AGAINST using
such machines existed if would be easy to get on the dealers back
for doing something to the cars which manufacturer recomended against.

>> > Does the manufacturer specify the procedure? If so, show me the
>> > specification.
>>
>> Do not know such specification. do not have access to service manuals.
>
> If they don't specify it, and/or you don't know if they specify it, then
> why assume they DO specify it?
>
> Absent a specific recommendation to do so, don't you think it's better
> to assume NOT to do it and instead do what it is they actually specify?

I do not assume it.

You seem to cut the last, important part of my message.

<you:>
> Honda specifies a repeated drain/fill/drive procedure to exchange the
> fluid, and recommends against using a flush machine. There's a reason
> for that, and it doesn't have anything to do with foreign or
> contaminated fluids.

<me:>
Can you show me such recomendation of honda AGAINST flushing with machine?

Well, can you?

"Elmo P. Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote in message news:elmop-65367E.18014407102007@nntp1.usenetserver.com...
> If you're the car USER, as in OWNER, then you have an owner's guide to
> maintenance.
>
> Does this guide specify any transmission fluid replacement at all?

Yes, it does. Where are you going with such question?
Are you trying to say AT fluid replacement is not needed at all? :-)

>> Can you quote Honda's or Toyota's recomendation against
>> flushing with machine INCLUDING the reasoning given?
>
> Do they have to give a reason? Do they give a reason why they recommend
> changing the oil?
>
> 2002 Honda Odyssey owner's manual, p. 295:
>
> To thoroughly flush the
> transmission, the technician
> should drain and refill it with
> Honda ATF-Z1 (Automatic
> Transmission Fluid), then drive
> the vehicle a short distance. Do
> this three times. Then drain and
> refill the transmission a final time.
>
> Now, what about that specified procedure is ambiguous? Why do you want
> NOT to follow the specified procedure?

And where do you have here "the manufacturer VERY SPECIFICALLY recommends
AGAINST" flushing with machine ? Do not make stuff up, please...

One more thing - I do not have service manual for my honda
but I have one for my old 95 camry. They specify to replace
the fluid if it smells burnt or is black. They state tranny
total volume to be 5.9 liters. Drain and fill only 2.5 liters.
So one drain and fill replaces only 42% of old fluid with new,
not even half. Doing this twice will replace only 42% of the
remaining mixture, so you will be left with almost 25% of old
gunk in the transmission. Compare this with 100% machine flush...

In article <feb3pq.gio.0@poczta.onet.pl>,
"Pszemol" <Pszemol@PolBox.com> wrote:

> Do you think I would care to ask this question
> if it did not matter to me?
>
> > They are the engineers. I'm the consumer.
> > I don't need to know the engineering details.
> > I need to know what maintenance to perform
> > and when to perform it.
> >
> > The hairy details aren't nearly so important.
>
> I will give you a reason why they could be important.
> If the manufacturer recomended use of a machine than
> the routine would be not universal and hard to
> make in not well equiped garage...

If the engineers recommended a machine, the machine in question would be
specified and Honda would require its dealerships to own one.