#4069910 - 07/06/20 03:00 PM
Re: 2005 grand Marquis question
[Re: BigMerc96]
|
Member
Registered: 04/02/18
Posts: 410
Loc: Pa
|
Just for reference, the "U-Haul" pan does not have increased fluid capacity...it's identical the the stock pan with the addition of the drain plug. I was going to say that but I wasn't 100% sure. From what I remember, the reason the u-haul pan exists is because u-haul wanted to be able to easily service their vans. They have enough pull with Ford (and GM) thru their fleet accounts and large numbers of vehicles ordered that Ford complied with that request by simply modifying the standard pan and adding a drain plug. Probably costs Ford very little to do that and if it keeps a large national fleet company happy, it only makes sense for them to do so. Should have been standard on all transmissions but they saved millions by deleting a drain plug. So many cars and trucks with 4r70w's ended up in the scrap yard due to early transmission falure that could have been prevented by having a drain plug to easily service the transmission fluid.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#4069942 - 07/06/20 08:57 PM
Re: 2005 grand Marquis question
[Re: Lance01]
|
Over the Hill
Registered: 11/19/11
Posts: 3100
Loc: Canada
|
Just for reference, the "U-Haul" pan does not have increased fluid capacity...it's identical the the stock pan with the addition of the drain plug. I was going to say that but I wasn't 100% sure. From what I remember, the reason the u-haul pan exists is because u-haul wanted to be able to easily service their vans. They have enough pull with Ford (and GM) thru their fleet accounts and large numbers of vehicles ordered that Ford complied with that request by simply modifying the standard pan and adding a drain plug. Probably costs Ford very little to do that and if it keeps a large national fleet company happy, it only makes sense for them to do so. Should have been standard on all transmissions but they saved millions by deleting a drain plug. So many cars and trucks with 4r70w's ended up in the scrap yard due to early transmission falure that could have been prevented by having a drain plug to easily service the transmission fluid. The same people who don't bother changing the fluid still wouldn't bother changing the filter so they wouldn't be that far ahead. It's all made even worse now when most new vehicles don't even come with a transmission dipstick anymore.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#4070664 - 07/14/20 02:22 AM
Re: 2005 grand Marquis question
[Re: gDMJoe]
|
n00b
Registered: 05/21/20
Posts: 15
Loc: Hawaii
|
Thanks.....
Definitely what I will order
_________________________
I came... I saw.... was not impressed
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#4070676 - 07/14/20 11:40 AM
Re: 2005 grand Marquis question
[Re: 2007CrownVic]
|
Poobah
Registered: 06/03/03
Posts: 7708
Loc: Timbuk3, MI
|
2007CrownVic ... It's all made even worse now when most new vehicles don't even come with a transmission dipstick anymore. Can't speak-for other brands or -all- Fords, but they do have a dipstick, it's just not convenient. Example ...
*In case the image is a no-show ... <PIC>
*6R80 transmission
And even then ... The aftermarket makers provide convenient, traditional alternatives. .
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#4071210 - 07/19/20 09:10 PM
Re: 2005 grand Marquis question
[Re: Dragonrider01826]
|
n00b
Registered: 10/16/14
Posts: 12
Loc: Ma
|
Well all sense my last post I've done the following to my grandma
1 80maf
2 Moe tune for 87 and 89
3 dual exhaust
4 18 mustang rims
Well now that I have new rims and I replace 90% of the front end and rear the car sits way to high, so looking at coilsprings.com but not sure what a good drop for these cars and if I do drop it do I want to change "Ride/Rate being changed" and if so what should it be.
_________________________
05 grand marquis ultimate edition LS Birch silver 157,295
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 07/01/11
Posts: 3926
|
|
|
Previous Topic
Index
