Some pretty wishy-washy words. Let's see ..."Changing the fluid on a high mileage transmission can sometimes lead to transmission problems..."
Of course, you could also say that NOT Changing the fluid on a high mileage transmission can sometimes lead to transmission problems.
I do understand where the author of that statement is coming from and agree to an extent, but there is not a lot of meat to it.
Granted, my statement above was pretty much void of content as well.
It would be hard to argue that bi-annual changes of transmission fluid and brake fluid are a bad thing.
I honestly believe that the reason manufacturers are recommending less comprehensive as well as longer maintenance intervals is to sell the car.
No, I don't mean that the car you buy will fall apart because of maintenance short cuts.
Rather, look at how many vehicles are marketed with such long tune-up intervals.
"The Belchfire X6000 doesn't need a tuneup in 100K miles." Some of you may have experienced this type of statement in an automobile ad.
So, a less comprehensive list of scheduled maintenance is used as a selling point of the vehicle.
Doesn't mean that's the best way to care for the vehicle.
It's just my opinion. I'm somewhat attached to it, but it won't break my heart if you choose to have your own, different opinion
TB
