View Single Post
Old 02-25-2009, 03:36 PM   #19
rocknrollcali87
 
rocknrollcali87's Avatar
 
Drives: 1969 Chevrolet Camaro
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 223
Quote:
Originally Posted by radz282003 View Post
I remember reading about a small controversy between those that liked flushing and those that didn't. The ones that didn't thought that if you had a vehicle with higher mileage that the varnish and build-up in the tranny would hold it together, so-to-speak; even with changing the fluid and filter, the left-overs were still in there. So, the theory was that by removing all the fluid from the tranny and 'verter, you were removing what was sealing the tranny up and holding it together, and there were those that claimed they had failures not long after the flushes. Personally, I think that if a simple fluid change from swapping filters has worked this long, leave it alone unless there's a problem. I'm no tranny guy though.

I think he means because the ECM controls the tranny that there's a chance the ECM could be causing the problem. I remember reading people over-oiling air filters were causing tranny failures because the oil would get on the MAF sensor wires and cause the ECM to interperate the data wrong, control the tranny wrong, and burn the tranny up. I don't know if you have a oil-impregnated air filter or not, or if that's even the case here, but I though I'd just add this senario since I've read about it before.
Well I have drop in K&N not heavily oiled, throttle body cleaned out every oil change with throttle body cleaner. Could my filter have such a big influence on the trans?!


Quote:
Originally Posted by radz282003 View Post
Yeah - they'd put an '80 in a 2500 Suburban or 2500 and 3500 truck, but I don't recall GM putting those on engines smaller than 6.0Ls. I know even then, there were LS2 running around with '65s, not '80. Those things weigh more than 200 lbs. and suck a good deal of power. The gear ratios are also less aggressive than '60s, so I imagine one of those behind a 5.3L would bog it down pretty good (I mean bad). Maybe the did put an '80 in there though. I think if you look at the RPO code tag in the door, and look at the "MXX" codes, you'll see like M30 in there. You should be able to decode those on-line and determine what was supposed to go in the Tahoe and what it should have.
I'm going to check this out, thanks! the only reason I see being such a big transmission is because of those high gears and the towing package it has setup. It's an LS 5.3 and this sucker has always had plenty of power.
__________________


It's 4 fat guys in a Geo up a hill, we can't go any faster!!
rocknrollcali87 is offline   Reply With Quote