How To: Reduction Gear Oil Change

My Nissan Leaf Forum

Help Support My Nissan Leaf Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
estomax said:
i hope the car is charging while you do this so you can do another 3 hour drive and get us efficiency results shortly :D

Ok, this is only 1 day of data so far and I only had two trips to compare vs. previous, but two routes that I do, one is 7 miles long, the other is 25 miles long. Both involve speeds of 55 MPH and lower, they are useful because they are roads with no stop signs, traffic lights, same speed limit, etc. As long as I don't run into any obstacles to slow me down or make me have to detour, I can run them over and over with the same cruise control settings and get pretty consistent numbers on efficiency.

So, normally, my 7 mile route gets me 4.5 m/kWh, today I got 5.0, which surprised me, but it could be a fluke of the temperature or weather. That is the kind of numbers I got on my old 2013, so that looked promising.

Now, the 25 mile route, usually get a lot less because of the rolling hills and such, so I've been getting about 4.2 m/kWh. That day, I got a 4.8 m/kWh, so again, this could be weather related or maybe I just had some really good tail wind, but I can say that so far, it seems to be working in positive direction, but I am not going to get excited by the results until I get a lot more numbers on, especially repeats on those routes to see if that was just a fluke driving that day.
 
Just curious if anyone had a gearbox oil change recommended by a dealer service department?
Mine was in last week for an annual battery check when they mentioned a 50K mile oil change.
This is the first I heard a dealer mention a mileage-based service interval at all with a LEAF.
 
rogersleaf said:
Just curious if anyone had a gearbox oil change recommended by a dealer service department?
Mine was in last week for an annual battery check when they mentioned a 50K mile oil change.
This is the first I heard a dealer mention a mileage-based service interval at all with a LEAF.
Others have reported dealerships trying to upsell them on this. It's not a bad idea to change it, and Nissan Matic S stuff at the dealership is of course just fine, actually thinner (lower visc) by a tad compared to the Amsoil Signature Series all-PAO stuff I put in myself. The thinner a fluild is, the better range boost you get. Not too thin though, as we've discussed above, there is a limit somewhere as to how thin you can go. Unknown as to where that line is.

It's certainly not sleazy for a dealership to recommend changing it at 50k even though Nissan says "never change it". I just hope the dealerships inform the customer that this is an optional service they think will help gearbox longevity.

If you're a DIY-er, this is an easy job, assuming you're good with jack stands, torque wrench, etc., have very basic mechanic skills.
 
voltamps said:
rogersleaf said:
Just curious if anyone had a gearbox oil change recommended by a dealer service department?
Mine was in last week for an annual battery check when they mentioned a 50K mile oil change.
This is the first I heard a dealer mention a mileage-based service interval at all with a LEAF.
Others have reported dealerships trying to upsell them on this. It's not a bad idea to change it, and Nissan Matic S stuff at the dealership is of course just fine, actually thinner (lower visc) by a tad compared to the Amsoil Signature Series all-PAO stuff I put in myself. The thinner a fluild is, the better range boost you get. Not too thin though, as we've discussed above, there is a limit somewhere as to how thin you can go. Unknown as to where that line is.

It's certainly not sleazy for a dealership to recommend changing it at 50k even though Nissan says "never change it". I just hope the dealerships inform the customer that this is an optional service they think will help gearbox longevity.

If you're a DIY-er, this is an easy job, assuming you're good with jack stands, torque wrench, etc., have very basic mechanic skills.
Fortunately I'm not quite to 50K miles yet so didn't get pushed on the matter. I'm not much into creeper work anymore but thinking this oil change might become a DIY event because I want to drop the plastic panels to take a closer looks at what I bought. I didn't take the time to ask what they charge for this service but judging by the $60 cabin air filter can likely guesstimate. Think they were more concerned about the 41K mile original Michelins at 3/32 tread depth. More than likely the dealer won't see me for another year/20K+ miles unless something breaks under warranty because the next service will likely be at a tire dealer.
 
Just finished this on my 2018 SL, with 60 000 kms. I was happy to see clean plugs with no visible metal bits on them. This is for sure the first fluid change on this car, new to me in November.
 
denwood said:
Just finished this on my 2018 SL, with 60 000 kms. I was happy to see clean plugs with no visible metal bits on them. This is for sure the first fluid change on this car, new to me in November.
Incredible. Clean? 37k miles & we typically see the break-in iron. I changed my '20 Leaf SV at 1.4k, almost new, and there was iron fuzz (pictures earlier in this thread).

Were the plugs magnetized? I'd test that on a piece of iron or steel.

Every set of plugs, no matter when it's changed have had plenty of iron junk on them.

Or, maybe the Nissan dealer changed the oil (did it look red or brown?) on a recent service visit before you bought it, or a DIY-er got hold of it, & it escaped your attention. DIY-ers can get pretty sneaky. :p

Even if the factory polished the gear faces down to a very low Ra, some fuzz will get free.
 
voltamps said:
Or, maybe the Nissan dealer changed the oil (did it look red or brown?) on a recent service visit before you bought it, or a DIY-er got hold of it, & it escaped your attention they did it. DIY-ers can get pretty sneaky. :p

Even if the factory polished the gear faces down to a very low Ra, some fuzz will get free.

I was about to say the same because I changed mine at 12K and the pictures shows how much metal was on mine, I can't see how it would be completely clean if no one has changed it before. On a side note, it was changed in the past and did come out clean, it's encouraging for us that one change is pretty good to clean out the gear break-in. :)
 
I love how this thread keeps going. It demonstrates the "Maytag repairman" aspect of LEAF maintenance. ;) I'm seriously tempted to upgrade to a larger pack at some point if the car stays as mechanically sound as it has been.
 
voltamps said:
denwood said:
Just finished this on my 2018 SL, with 60 000 kms. I was happy to see clean plugs with no visible metal bits on them. This is for sure the first fluid change on this car, new to me in November.
Incredible. Clean? 37k miles & we typically see the break-in iron. I changed my '20 Leaf SV at 1.4k, almost new, and there was iron fuzz (pictures earlier in this thread).

Were the plugs magnetized? I'd test that on a piece of iron or steel.

Every set of plugs, no matter when it's changed have had plenty of iron junk on them.

The car was bought new by a local driving school (I know the owner), so I'm about 100% sure the fluid was never touched. The fluid came out brown, and yes the plugs are magnetic. I was expecting a lot more metal evidence based on this thread, but the plugs were clean. The two plugs had the typical "snap" of a plug in an aluminium case that has never been removed. The car likely had very little highway mileage given its previous life. Given i have the car chassis pulled apart, this was the easy job on my list.
 
denwood said:
The car was bought new by a local driving school (I know the owner), so I'm about 100% sure the fluid was never touched. The fluid came out brown, and yes the plugs are magnetic. I was expecting a lot more metal evidence based on this thread, but the plugs were clean. The two plugs had the typical "snap" of a plug in an aluminium case that has never been removed. The car likely had very little highway mileage given its previous life. Given i have the car chassis pulled apart, this was the easy job on my list.
That's the clue. Driving school. No hard accelerations to stress out the gear teeth. Driving students treat it gingerly to pass (although if I was the teacher, I'd give extra points for snappy launches). All that low-RPM torque may be responsible for wearing down the gears, makes sense.

Start a thread on why in the Wide World of Sports would you have the chassis apart on an '18 Leaf? ???
Edit: OK, I think I saw some threads on why.
 
alright to add to the data I dropped my Redline D6 after running that 40k miles and put in the Valvoline ULV ATF.

This is what the drain plug looks like after 40k miles of Redline D6 (put it in at 40k miles, now at 80k miles). Both the fill and drain plug magnets had an even amount of (very little) debris on it, so I might pull the fill plug after 10k miles and see if the ULV is causing any extra wear or not.
AbtBtIF.jpg


Doing the job for the second time is much faster than first time around, taking the belly pan on and off might be the most time consuming part of this whole thing.
pEH4C0H.jpg

Still had the original hose that i used to fill it with redline d6 in the drawer.
NrKyaUa.jpg


Here is the redline d6 fluid that came out, looks a lot more milky than I expected to be honest.
XLdTLs2.jpg


Marko
 
estomax said:
This is what the drain plug looks like after 40k miles of Redline D6 (put it in at 40k miles, now at 80k miles). Both the fill and drain plug magnets had an even amount of (very little) debris on it,
So, you run a Driving School, apparently? :lol:

Very low wear. You just proved Redline D6 is awesome high-performance fluid. Assuming you hit the accel pedal some.

Your pictures also show it's still red, which means oxidation didn't affect it much either. I'd credit the expensive base oils in the Redline D6 for that. If the all-PAO Amsoil SS 6.3 cSt fluid in mine is as good as the Redline D6 (probably(?)), I'd be happy.

estomax said:
so I might pull the fill plug after 10k miles and see if the ULV is causing any extra wear or not.
I'm a little hesitant to go below Nissan's 5.2 cSt minimum kv100 spec. In reality, it will likely be not a problem to dip down a bit. For example, Ravenol ULV, all PAO+Ester, is at kv100 3.3, if you're feeling brave !! Any lower, and you've got water.
 
voltamps said:
I'm a little hesitant to go below Nissan's 5.2 cSt minimum kv100 spec. In reality, it will likely be not a problem to dip down a bit. For example, Ravenol ULV, all PAO+Ester, is at kv100 3.3, if you're feeling brave !! Any lower, and you've got water.

I was too, but it doesn't seem to get hot enough to approach it's max viscosity, so it should be fine during the summer, but I suspect, will perform very well during the winter. I'm still gathering efficiency numbers from my change and so far, they look damn good, almost too good, I'm at a point where I can't contribute everything to a massive tail-wind anymore. :lol:
 
Just some recent numbers, sorry about the rough format, trying to copy/paste from the Nissan website and put into a spreadsheet isn't that easy and then trying to paste it here in a readable format without requiring an external link. The lbs are CO2, just was easier to leave it in than trying to edit it all out. :mrgreen:

April 2021 (basically, the same driving route during the month, weather has been fairly consistent here, no AC/Heat needed)
These below never have any speeds greater than 55 MPH, but is the same distance driving to and from the same start and end place, even the times are consistent day to day.

Route 1
7.5 miles 4.7 miles/kWh 4 lbs
7.5 miles 4.7 miles/kWh 4 lbs
7.5 miles 4.7 miles/kWh 4 lbs
7.5 miles 5.1 miles/kWh 4 lbs <- Gear Oil Change

Route 2
6.6 miles 4.4 miles/kWh 4 lbs
6.6 miles 4.4 miles/kWh 4 lbs
6.6 miles 5.0 miles/kWh 4 lbs <- Gear Oil Change -- What?!?

Route 3
5.3 miles 5.1 miles/kWh 4 lbs
5.3 miles 5.1 miles/kWh 4 lbs
5.3 miles 5.5 miles/kWh 4 lbs <- Gear Oil Change

Route 4
4.6 miles 3.9 miles/kWh 2 lbs
4.6 miles 3.9 miles/kWh 2 lbs
4.6 miles 3.9 miles/kWh 2 lbs
4.6 miles 4.3 miles/kWh 2 lbs <- Gear Oil Change
4.6 miles 4.3 miles/kWh 2 lbs <- Gear Oil Change
4.6 miles 4.3 miles/kWh 2 lbs <- Gear Oil Change

Route 5
3.7 miles 4.1 miles/kWh 2 lbs
3.7 miles 4.1 miles/kWh 2 lbs
3.7 miles 4.1 miles/kWh 2 lbs
3.7 miles 4.1 miles/kWh 2 lbs
3.7 miles 5.0 miles/kWh 2 lbs <- Gear Oil Change -- How?!?!? :lol:
 
voltamps said:
For example, Ravenol ULV, all PAO+Ester, is at kv100 3.3, if you're feeling brave !! Any lower, and you've got water.

Ravenol is 3.3 eh? Stop finding us more things to buy and try! :) i think that stuff is not available in the states anyway?

Otherwise my average miles per kwh has been in the 3.3-3.7 range since the pandemic started, no traffic so 70+ on freeway and liberal accelerator use since i am not going for efficiency numbers anymore with the lesser amount of driving ive been doing..

knight - those seem like some amazing efficiency bumps. i will be curious to see what mine are, will be harder to measure since i dont have a regular commute these days though.
 
estomax said:
knight - those seem like some amazing efficiency bumps. i will be curious to see what mine are, will be harder to measure since i dont have a regular commute these days though.
I've been looking over past weather forecast, the common thing I noticed is a cold, overnight temperature. Basically, running those routes with a cold (probably sub 50F gear box) even though the weather is pleasant during the day. When temperatures warm up more, I bet either my numbers will stay the same (still better at least) or some insane boost in efficiency when the ULV part really kicks in. Time will tell, can't wait! Hoping for the best!
 
Wow, surprising how big the efficiency gains appear to be. I do find it suspicious that all the current EVs out there (Tesla, Bolt, Leaf, Kona, i3, Niro, Soul, etc.) ALL use ATF or GL4 fluid of around 5.2 to 6.x cSt. If the gains are really that good, wouldn't they jump on thinner Ultra Low Viscosity (ULV) ATF? Helps the advertised all-important EPA Range numbers, after all.

What do all those engineers know that we don't?
Could be they spec thicker-than-needed fluid for 2 reasons:
1. Hot climates like AZ. and
2. Shearing the VII chemicals (polymer plastic type chemicals break with mechanical stress) over the first 30k miles reduces viscosity naturally, until some point when oxidation counters that viscosity drop as the fluid ages, causing visc to ramp up gradually.

On an engineering test bench, not in customer's Leafs, I'd like to see the effect of using a very thin ATF fluid with a good dose of gear moly (Liqui Moly 2019 MoS2 Anti-Friction Gear Lubricant):
31ijmc0nmSL._AC_.jpg


estomax said:
Ravenol is 3.3 eh? Stop finding us more things to buy and try! :) i think that stuff is not available in the states anyway?
I think you're right, not available in N. America. I hadn't noticed that.

In the past, I've looked at Ravenol products on their home Germany website, and it is typically only available here in the U.S. if blauparts.com, ravenolamerica.com, or amazon.com imports it. Some of their stuff just doesn't get shipped here in bulk stock. .....

Ravenol is interesting since they use expensive base oils excessively, while other more "profit-responsible" companies make sure most of their products use cheaper GroupIII full-syn oils. Kind of cool for somebody looking for the best materials though. ...... That's not to say big oil companies like Mobil, Castrol, Valvoline, etc. don't make good oil, as they are always dependable.
 
voltamps said:
Wow, surprising how big the efficiency gains appear to be. I do find it suspicious that all the current EVs out there (Tesla, Bolt, Leaf, Kona, i3, Niro, Soul, etc.) ALL use ATF or GL4 fluid of around 5.2 to 6.x cSt. If the gains are really that good, wouldn't they jump on thinner Ultra Low Viscosity (ULV) ATF? Helps the advertised all-important EPA Range numbers, after all.

What do all those engineers know that we don't?
Could be they spec thicker-than-needed fluid for 2 reasons:
1. Hot climates like AZ. and
2. Shearing the VII chemicals (polymer plastic type chemicals break with mechanical stress) over the first 30k miles reduces viscosity naturally, until some point when oxidation counters that viscosity drop as the fluid ages, causing visc to ramp up gradually.
I think it might sit between "good enough" and "we don't make stuff like that". Looking at the chart you posted, a lot of those brands start to converge once the temperature starts to get high, so I think even in AZ climate, it doesn't seem to be an issue with viscosity if the outdoor temperatures are high while the user runs AC (thus blowing more heat on the gear box). As you mentioned though, maybe there is a minimum viscosity needed to protect the gears so they can continue to sling the lubricate around freely and properly along with the chemical changes over time from the gears crushing the oil.

I suspect that the good numbers I'm seeing are only because I am driving under 55 MPH up and down hills. There might something that is making regen more efficient for example or some other effect that stacks and increases the efficiency for those short trips.

I don't have any routes to test 70 MPH for like 15 miles yet... I have plenty of data for those in the past but have not had the opportunity to drive them with the new oil. That is where I am really curious to see if there is a difference. I suspect I won't see a difference in efficiency because of the high speed and air resistance that might cancel out the benefit of the ULV.

Now, at least two of us here are running the ULV, I'm sure we will be the first to complain if something goes wrong. :lol:
 
For most people reading this, don't use a thinner fluid than the Nissan Matic S, unless you accept the extra-wear risk.
Anything thinner & we're just guessing as to how it affects long-term wear.
 
Back
Top