automatic transmission failure question

I have an '88 Supra w/+220,000 on it. I have no idea, since for one it's
in Kilometers (Canadian model) and the speedo cable broke (SURPRISE!)
before I got it. Nice looking, bad trans, good engine, Sport Roof and JUST
starting to rust. Classy beater.

1989 Subaru GL coupe. Try to find parts! I double dog dare ya! Looks good,
rust just more than er, 'noticable', electronic AWD, nice driving car. Two
steps below the Supra.

1988 Mazda 626, as low a model as you can get, 5-speed, 183,000 miles.
From Florida. Oiled every year I've owned it. Wouldn't really be a beater
if there were still paint on the roof...(A guy I know has the EXACT same
car....his doesn't have paint on the roof, either...)

1997 Subaru Legacy L wagon. 335,000 miles, and a blown head gasket to
boot. I'll let you know if I fix it...

My favorite: 1985 Corolla GT-S 'hachiroku'. 10,000 when I bought it in
1986, 260,000 'retired' in my back yard. Slowly returning to the elements
(faster when I close a door...) A modern classic. One day I'll fix the
body...

2005 Scion tC. Never seen snow. FASSSSSSSSSSST!!!
(Most uncomfortable seats I ever sat in. Know anyone with a wrecked
Celica?)

 

jeepers, you guys /really/ don't get it do you? with a honda, it's not
whether the thing can be rebuilt 50 times like in cuba, it's whether the
thing runs perfectly for the first 500k miles or not. no rebuilds.

i love it when clowns stand in line to bleat about how "reliable" their
ford turnip truck is. but it's amazing how quickly they vaporize again
when the specifics of broken half-shafts, stub axles, springs, kingpins,
transmissions and engines that piece of crap has needed. yeehaw! mah
truck is /that/ reliable folks!

 

Like I said, every time I had to take it back in (3X) I was at the end of a
LONG LINE of other owners and NONE of us had anything kind to say about
those dogs. The piece of shit was constantly shifting. If you were in a 30
MPH zone it would shift thousands of times in a 10 mile stretch. Stop and go
traffic - that piece of SHIT would shift more times than the car I traded in
did in 10 years of driving. GM never DID figure out how to make that work.

 

The earlier models with the OLD 4 speed worked fairly well. The later
ones in the later 90's worked. Just that period with the one transmission
with was at least the VERY WORST transmission ever made in America. Even the
old DYNASLUSH was better. It wated 99.(% of the engine's horsepower - BUT it
always worked. Eben tghe old Chrysler fluid drive was better. You could not
keep those things working. (Some of anything work, but by and large they
were shit.)

I drive an SUV now. A Honda CR-V. Great car!'

 

Don't let me break this to you. NAPA doesn't have a BIG operation in
Havana. There is no Auto Zone stores with ring sets. You don't seem to GET
that whatever they had in parts in 1959 were the LAST parts Cuba saw. If you
think they are constantly rebuilding the cars you are nuts. Sure they fix
things. Know what they use for brake fluid? A combination of shampoo and
cooking oil. Don't even ASK how they make brake shoes.

Guy there were many extremely reliable old cars. I know people with old
Kaisers with that old Continental Read Seal 6 that are well on their way for
the second 500K with the original rings etc. Some folks with the old BIG 6
Nashes report the same longevity. It was later in the 60's that SELF
DESTRUCT (planned obsolescence) reared its ugly head on American cars. By
the 70's the cars were DNF.

Did I start in on Ford's? I had some really nice Chryslers. A 66 Dodge
Coronet with a 318 and torqeflight. GREAT CAR. I also had a 68 AMX with a
390 + 4 speed. PHENOMENAL CAR!
From there it was downhill. I did have a 85 Dodge Caravan that I had 250K
on. Loved it. I was a 4 banger. WAY underpowered but ran forever. You
measured zero to 60 times with a calendar.

 

A supra is *not* an Accord or Civic or Camry or Escort or Neon or other
generic front-drive transportation appliance. Its not exactly a '69
Charger either, but its a very overbuilt and relatively simple
rear-drive vehicle that can be maintained pretty much indefinitely, and
is interesting enough to be WORTH maintaining indefinitely. Front-drive
Hondas are not.

 

Have a hydraulic parts supplier make you any hose you want. It usually
runs less than $30. Some A/C shops are set up to assemble new hoses and
fittings for you also. If you're gonna play the keep-it-forever game,
gotta learn the tricks of the trade ;-)

I think that just as the AW-4 has a cousin that Toyota used in automatic
applications, the AX-15 has a cousin that they used in MT applications.
In fact it might just be no more than finding a 7M-GE bellhousing and
clutch that works. AX-15s are common as dirt, people are looking for
NV3550s more these days but the problem is that Jeep only used the
NV3550 starting in 2000, and the percentage of MTs in Jeeps was lower
after 2000 than before (demand shifted to 2wd/automatic in competition
with the flood of "SUVs" never intended to go offroad from other
manufacturers).

 

I'm certainly no fan of GM from the late 80s... but I find that hard to
believe of a TH-400. That transmission was a rock just like the Chrysler
727 and Ford C6. I didn't remember GM using a 3-speed like the TH400
quite that late, except in extreme HD applications maybe. Are you sure
it wasn't a 700R4? Those were utter crap in the early years (well into
the 90s, actually) but today's 4L80E is basically the same thing, just
updated and electronically controlled.

 

krp wrote:
Eben tghe old Chrysler fluid

Now you're talking out your ear. The Fluid Drive was just a manual
transmission with a clutch and a fluid clutch in series. This allowed
you to NOT use the clutch from a dead stop. Press clutch, put in gear,
hold brake, release clutch. Wait for light to turn green, release the
brake, step on the gas and go. Then shift normally. You could also just
put it in 2nd or 3rd and leave it there all the time if you didn't mind
s-l-o-w acceleration from a standstill. It never broke, at least no any
more than any other manual transmission.

There was also a dual-range semi-automatic from that era that was a
little more complicated, but generally worked OK.

The first Chrysler true automatic was the Powerflite 2-speed circa 1951,
then the Torquefite 727 in '56. They never had a problem transmission
again until the 41TE in 1989.

 

That's a 700R4 alright. The TH400 was a simple, big, heavy-duty 3-speed.

 

Here's an article on the 700R4 evolution. Doesn't look out of bounds
for GM RWD V-8's, but then I'm not sure. Maybe my '76 Impala had one.
That one died but it had a lot of miles. The rebuild failed too but I
got the second rebuild adjusted down. Still cost me though.
Had a '78 Beauville van (G20) too that might have had it, but that one
never peeped, and I put a lot of miles on it. Both those were 350's.
Went to an 88 Celebrity and it's been FWD from there.
I don't argue with anybody who lost money on junk. Once burned, twice
shy is something I go by too.

http://www.hotrod.com/techarticles/113_0704_700_r4_transmission/index.html

--Vic

 

The trans in the late 80's Blazer and Jimmy was a 4 speed. The 4th speed
being slightly overdriven. The thing was constantly shifting in city
driving. I don't recall the exact designation. It probably was the 700R4.
It was still called in the manual a TH 400. It was a 4 speed. It would shift
itself to death.

 

Despite tremendopus energy loss, the Fluid drive WORKED reliably as did
Dynaslush. They didn't break all the time.

Everyone had transmission problems in the late 80's, even the venerable
Ford "C" transmissions were a bit shakey. The front drive Chrysler minivans
either worked or didn't. Lots of people had loads of grief, others like me
had NONE. Hit and miss. Even though there has not been significant problems
since the mid-90's in the Chrysler minivans the rumor persists of trans
problems. It is very rare today.

I am very happy with my CR-V. Although Honda is on mu shit list because
they messed with my wife on her 2007 Civic. The back tires wore like mad.
The dealer sold her 2 new tires, didn't check WHY the tires were bad at only
10K miles, and the new tires started showing wear, so they did a rotation
and the car chewed up the other two tires before Honda did a recall on the
rear control arms. They fixed the car but left her with 4 BAD tires. Honda's
solution? Is she buys 3 new tires they will magnanimously give her the 4th
tire free! I told off the service manager, by stating, I could go to ANY
tire store in the country and get a 4th tire for free. Pick the brand. Good
Year, Bridgestone, Michelin, Cooper ANYTHING! I didn't expect a "SCREW -YOU"
attitude from Honda of all companies. She never took it anywhere else but
the dealers for service, meticulously kept the records. We have 3 late model
Hondas. Her 2007, by step-son's 2008 SI, and my CR-V. I don't think I'll get
another Honda.

 

I guess the 700R4 was the one they stuffed a 4th gear overdrive in. What a
piece of SHIT!
GM ate the car. I got out of the car and bought another Dodge minivan.

 

OK, I get your point. If I can split hairs, the fluid drive's hydraulic
clutch was less lossy than a Dynaflow.

Very true. Up through the 80s, everyone said "Chrysler transmissions
never break" even if they hated Chrysler products. After the 41TE
fiasco, the rumor is "Chrysler transmissions always break." People even
said that about the truck transmissions that were still the same old
design that "never broke" from before.

 

Both the GM 700R4 and the Chrysler 41TE (minivan transmission of the
90s) are case studies in what happens when accountants "go over"
engineers' work and find ways to "save money." I'm sure you can find a
similar story at all manufacturers. In both cases, the basic designs are
fine- as witnessed by the fact that the 700R4 (and its electronic
version, the 4L60E) as well as the 41TE are now reliable... once all the
"cost cuts" were undone.... Hot rodders and muscle car guys even build
up 700R4s with updated parts and put them behind HUGE engines and they
don't break. The 41TE is still in use by Chrysler, and you never hear
problems about it anymore. In the case of the 41TE, it was also a bit
ahead of its time. The first fluids for it didn't work well, and also
since its small and light it really benefits from putting the throttle
under computer control (most current cars are "throttle by wire") so
that the computer can throttle back during shifts, saving the abuse of
dumping engine power into the clutch packs while they're slipping during
a shift. That change alone has HUGELY improved transmission reliability
all across the automotive industry.

 

Both were lopusy transmissions. But neither had service problems.

The Torquflite was a GREAT transmission., "WAS." You forget in the 70's
came "PLANNED OBSOLESCENCE" and the rise of the BEAN COUNTERS running the
big 3. Of the 3 CEO's only Lee Iacocca knew ANYTHING about cars and he
didn't know much. The focus on building cars at all 3 companies was to make
them as CHEAPLY as possible, if they came off the line all fukkked up, have
the dealers fix them. Look at 1975. Can you find a car that even qualifies
as a "BAD" car from that year? When you made a terrible car, BAD was a step
UP. Again it was the age of the BEAN COUNTERS - MBA's designing cars. One
asshole ENDED the Fisher body Craftsman's guild. He didn't want to hear from
Engineers who he found "ANNOYING." That's when in the board room they
decided it was cheaper to pay off lawsuits than FIX their shitty cars. It
was more than just a time of greed. It was arrogance in their belief that
the American public would accept ANY shit they dished out. What were they
going to do, after all, buy a Volkswagen or a Rice Burner???? SCREW EM!

 

Harvard MBA's to be exact. If it were up to me? I'd have a big meeting
at a outdoor pavilian in the middle of the Nevada desert and get EVERY MBA
in the country there for a seminar. Then I'd detonate a 50 megaton nuke and
get rid of them. I would pass a law imposing the death penalty for any MBA
we missed.

Look at electronics. RCA was offered the exclusine on flat panel
displays. Said it was "SHIT" and that nobody would ever want one. They were
HAPPY with their CRT TV's and minotors. Same with every other American
company. BTW - how is RCA doing today with making stuff in the U.S.?
Zenith? Maganox? Sylvania? ANYONE? The last of the computers. Dell. Where
are Dell's made today?

Did you hear the story (I am told it is TRUE) of a GM CEO that at one
meeting asked; "why the hell do we need 5 bolts on a wheel, won't ONE work?"
The problem with American industry is that we have had too many IDIOTS
running companies who have ZERO knowledge of their industry. They are
shocked when they hire a guy who was in wholesale food business and he comes
to an auto company and immediately puts it in the shitter! Same kind of goof
balls went to airlines. Delta's CEO was trying to get things done his way
and the pilots TRIED to tell the asshole, "Planes won't FLY that way!" "WHY
NOT?" No company can work well when the guy at the top is 100% clueless
about the business.

 

I've had a Caravan and 2 Grand Voyager LEs, one w/AWD.
GREAT vehicles, as long as yuou feed the tranny the correct sauce!

 

Gee, I liked my Accord! It was a decent car. Um, I also bought it NEW, not
17 years old...