2003 Taurus - low ATF

My son recently purchased a 2003 Taurus (185,000 miles) and we do not know the history related to transmission maintenance.

When making left hand turns, he was experiencing a transmission issue (as well as when he went up and down a slight incline over a railroad track.)

The transmission fluid was below the hatch marks on the dipstick, so my husband added ATF. However, he used whatever he normally uses in the other family vehicles he services (1999 Tahoe, 1999 Malibu, 2001 Alero).

When you don't know for sure exactly what was already in there, is it safe to add additional fluid instead of replacing it all? I know that the owner's manual says Mercon V, but I don't know what he has been using in the other vehicles that he placed in this one.

Do I need to be concerned ... or should I leave him alone about it?

You want to find out what he put in and how much he put in. Did it seem to help the issue your son was complaining about? I'd be surprised if it did. You might get some ideas on other things to consider for his complaints if you don't mind sharing a bit more specifics about what his complaints are. Based on the one sentence description I'd be more inclined to think there might be a worn engine or transaxle mount issue.

-Rod

You want to find out what he put in and how much he put in. Did it seem to help the issue your son was complaining about? I'd be surprised if it did. You might get some ideas on other things to consider for his complaints if you don't mind sharing a bit more specifics about what his complaints are. Based on the one sentence description I'd be more inclined to think there might be a worn engine or transaxle mount issue.

-Rod

I believe he added about 1/2 pint and it raised the level on the dipstick to the top of the hash marks (after the car had been driven about 20 miles and was idling.)

I haven't yet looked for my husband's bottle of ATF fluid. I'm trying to avoid asking him since he got irritated with me when I questioned him about the specification in the owners' manual for MerconV. He told me that it was simply different brands and implied that they should both be compatible. I guess I really won't know until I find the bottle and read it for myself.

According to my son, the problem he was experiencing with left turns seems to have gone away.

Previously, there would be a lag as he turned a corner before the car would pick up and go. He had said that the only way that would not happen (previously) was if he actually slowly accelerated through the turn vs having let off the gas initially and then try to speed back up.

I'll have to get more feedback from him over the next few days.

<sigh>

I found the bottle of "SuperTech" ATF fluid (for use in vehicles previously serviceable by Dexron III/Mercon Brands)

It specifically says on the back "Do not use this product in transmissions that specify Ford Type F, Mercon V fluids or GM Dexron VI fluid.

So ... what now? This is clearly the wrong stuff and has now been mixed with what was surely a Mercon V compatible product.

My gut feeling is that if it was only 1/2 pint you won't have an issue. I seriously doubt though that 1/2 pint would make a difference in the operation of the transmission, not would 1/2 pint low cause a noticeably low reading on the dipstick. I wonder if he had added a quart plus 1/2 pint.... If that's the case, you might consider having the transmission fluid and filter changed. I don't think I'd worry about flushing the system yet.

-Rod

I watched as he added the fluid, repeatedly, from a 100 ml measuring cup and he only did it five times. My recollection was that he only filled the cup to between 70 and 90 ml ... so it seems that he probably added something a little short of a pint instead of a half-pint.

As far as whether the problem was really resolved, I'm sure I will hear more about it in the next few days. As it was, my son could previously adjust his driving habits and prevent the issue, or create it ... at will. I'll have to question him again and see if he can intentionally create it.

Perhaps it is just coincidental that he didn't observe it yesterday. It would be too good to be true, that a vehicle with 185,000 miles (for which we don't have the service history) wouldn't have anything more to be concerned about.