I have a XC with an AW50/51 AWD transmission. I've been using Toyota T-IV since 97000 km. It has now 188k km and the transmission is fine.

I also used to have a V40 and a S80 which also used a similar transmission calling for the same JW3309. Both cars after buying I used Toyota T-IV. The S80 from 80k to 135k km. The V40 from 98k to 198k km. The V40 was sold with the transmission running fine of which the buyer was pretty impressed compared the other V40 he has tested/

I do adhere to a regular ATF change which probably contributes a fair bit to a trouble free transmissions. Whether using Toyota T-IV in the long run would cause damage, I can't say for 100%. But it has worked for me till now.

First time I've heard of Aisin AFW, interesting reading it up and seeing that it's synthetic. Could potentially lengthen the ATF life.

Mannol jws3309 in my 2006 TF80SC for over a year, no problems created just gearbox improvements and harsh engagement of reverse gone.
It's real cheap on German eBay such that I have another 25l in the shed for next year already!
:thumbs_up:

After knowing that Aisin sells their own ATF I did some searching and from Aisin website, this is the recommended ATF for XC90 with an Aisin.

https://i.imgur.com/pQaQFeol.png

The label on volvo genuine ATF 1161540 specifies use for AW 5 or 6 speed up to year 2010. According to various sources in the internet, this is the same as JWS 3309 or Type T-IV.

For > 2010, my volvo dealer said to use volvo 31256774 fluid. Further cross check 31256774 = WS fluid = Aisin AFW+. According to: http://www.exedy.com.au/assets/file/..._Datasheet.pdf, it is indeed synthetic.

I believe that Aisin only produces two types of fluids for conventional transmission (other than the CVT), namely T-IV & WS (US market) or AFW & AFW+ (asian and russian market). They may have a different branding in Europe. I've asked Aisin to confirm whether they are the same but it seems that they are beating around the bush not directly answering my question. Maybe for legal & marketing reasons for different parts of the world.

I also have been researching the Aisin AFW+ and after a while snooping around, i finally saw on the side of the can as indicated in the picture that its suitable for Volvo using part no 1161540-8 and also Toyota T-IV/WS was listed as well but Volvo wasn'y list in spec sheet obtained from the website.

I dug into this in detail here:
https://forums.swedespeed.com/showth...AW-1-(JWS-3324)

The fluid change over goes by vin break (as explained in a TJ). 2013+ XC90s use AW-1 / Type WS / JWS 3324 fluid.
Other Volvo models using the TF-80SC Gen II switched to AW-1 fluid earlier.

Hi maxiz1

Are you still using the Aisin ATF? Any updates on how's your transmission going after 3 years? :teeth_smile:

My XC90 is now at 230k kms and the AW50/51 is fine. Recently after many years using Toyota T-IV the fluid was partially changed to Volvo ATF. The volvo was at a shop for something else and was due for a ATF refresh. The shop was aware of some volvo owners using T-IV and he doesn't recommend it. They said the quality is inferior to Volvo.

Anyhow, after the Volvo ATF the transmission surprisingly felt much better compared to previous drain refill with T-IV.

Now I'm wondering whether I should change to something else. I found the regional Aisin Singapore website has an application chart for their Aisin AFW+. Under Volvo it lists a few part numbers. At first I thought it was the transmission part no but after searching a bit in VIDA - the part no given by Aisin are actually the Volvo ATF part no which matches with the XC90.

With AFW+ being synthetic, I'm tempted to give it a try.

I have used Mobil1 ATF before in the V40 with no ill effects. But this was when the bottle specified compatible with T-IV/ JWS3309. After the new packaging omitted these specs, I stopped using.

If your old fluid was due for a refresh as you put it, chances are any new fluid would have felt better. In other words if you'd changed it yourself with the same T-IV as before, you would have had an improvement.

Also on higher mileage cars, using the "flushing/Gibbon" change method isn't a great idea. Much better to do a few part-changes aka "sump-dumps" over the course of 3-4 months spaced a month apart. Reduces the risk of the new fluid (in bulk) blowing old seals that have partially dried out due to the old fluid. Also removes more dirt and sediment from the box keeping it cleaner which means it runs cooler. Lots of other benefits too!

Sorry for jumping in here. :) Does that mean, that at some point I should switch from "sump-dumps" to the Gibbons method? Let's say after five or six dumps the transmission is ready enough?

After many readings I did/do only the sump-dumps, but do I stay with that or do I better change?

TIA

Stick with sump-dumps, it's much gentler on the box (especially higher mileage boxes) - as i stated " Also on higher mileage cars, using the "flushing/Gibbon" change method isn't a great idea. "

Just to reiterate, it isn't a great idea to use the flushing/Gibbon method! :nah:

After 5-6 part-changes (sump-dumps) revert to one part-change a year to maintain it.