This is a touchy subject because while a manufacturer cannot deny a warranty claim for using a third-party part or fluid that meets specifications, if the third party part caused the fault, they can deny the warranty, but it would be on Subaru to "prove" that the third party part was the cause of the failure. In this case, "prove" means in a court of law, but this is civil court, not criminal court. The customer would have the burden of hiring a lawyer to sue Subaru for denying a warranty claim without basis.

Subaru can deny your warranty if you used the wrong fluid in the car - as to what is the "wrong fluid" there are degrees or wrongness. Using gear lube in your radiator is the wrong fluid. Using a conventional SAE straight-30w in the engine is the wrong fluid. Using Castrol or Amsoil universal CVT fluid that claims to be compatible with 12 different brands of transmission? That's where there's a gray area. If the cvt belt started slipping after changing to aftermarket CVT fluid, could Subaru deny a warranty claim? Yes - it's reasonable to conclude that the aftermarket CVT fluid had something to do with it. On the other hand using a third party CVT fluid can't void the warranty for your air conditioner or your cooling system. Subaru has different CVT fluids for different transmissions, and they can change from year to year. The Ascent and 2020 Outback 2.4 use a new Clear/Amber LV CVT fluid in the TR690 transmission but earlier year vehicles with the TR690 use the old Orange HT CVT fluid. Similarly, for the models equipped with the TR580 transmission, the fluid changed from green CVTF-II, to blue CVTF-III. Unless the CVT fluid you used specifically stated that it was compatible with those model-specific fluids, there's a good chance you'd lose in court, since you did not use a compatible fluid.

If you pay an authorized Subaru dealership to change your CVT fluid, I can't imagine that Subaru would deny a warranty claim. If the dealer used the wrong Subaru CVT fluid (there are several) then I would presume that Subaru or the independently owned and operated dealer would take care of the issue. Anecdotally at least one Subaru Ascent owner caught a Subaru tech holding the wrong CVT fluid in his hand.

 

This is a touchy subject because while a manufacturer cannot deny a warranty claim for using a third-party part or fluid that meets specifications, if the third party part caused the fault, they can deny the warranty, but it would be on Subaru to "prove" that the third party part was the cause of the failure. In this case, "prove" means in a court of law, but this is civil court, not criminal court. The customer would have the burden of hiring a lawyer to sue Subaru for denying a warranty claim without basis.

Subaru can deny your warranty if you used the wrong fluid in the car - as to what is the "wrong fluid" there are degrees or wrongness. Using gear lube in your radiator is the wrong fluid. Using a conventional SAE straight-30w in the engine is the wrong fluid. Using Castrol or Amsoil universal CVT fluid that claims to be compatible with 12 different brands of transmission? That's where there's a gray area. If the cvt belt started slipping after changing to aftermarket CVT fluid, could Subaru deny a warranty claim? Yes - it's reasonable to conclude that the aftermarket CVT fluid had something to do with it. On the other hand using a third party CVT fluid can't void the warranty for your air conditioner or your cooling system. Subaru has different CVT fluids for different transmissions, and they can change from year to year. The Ascent and 2020 Outback 2.4 use a new Clear/Amber LV CVT fluid in the TR690 transmission but earlier year vehicles with the TR690 use the old Orange HT CVT fluid. Similarly, for the models equipped with the TR580 transmission, the fluid changed from green CVTF-II, to blue CVTF-III. Unless the CVT fluid you used specifically stated that it was compatible with those model-specific fluids, there's a good chance you'd lose in court, since you did not use a compatible fluid.

If you pay an authorized Subaru dealership to change your CVT fluid, I can't imagine that Subaru would deny a warranty claim. If the dealer used the wrong Subaru CVT fluid (there are several) then I would presume that Subaru or the independently owned and operated dealer would take care of the issue. Anecdotally at least one Subaru Ascent owner caught a Subaru tech holding the wrong CVT fluid in his hand.

View attachment 494729

Just want to note, Subaru CVTs do not use a belt, they use a chain.

 

Thank you very much for you comment and chart. I did use Subaru CVTF-II from a dealer, which is the correct fluid.

I've heard Amsoil CVT doesn't have problems in this CVT. But the Amsoil is pretty expensive. But that's interesting to note losing in court based on Amsoil CVT. That is also a question I have.

But I was more concerned about the case when using the OEM correct fluid and that SOA supposedly saying if you touch the CVT you will be denied the warranty. Which seems to be pretty clearly against the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act.

But I do understand your point of having to hiring a lawyer and deal with a big company in court.

 

I am not sure where people are getting the information that the warranty will be void if the CVT fluid is changed (maybe some un-informed dealers are advising this)

One of the forum members actually contacted Subaru of America (SOA) about changing the CVT fluid and whether this voided the warranty. SOA advised (in writing if I remember correctly) that the CVT warranty would not be voided if the fluid was changed by either a Subaru dealer or someone else.

Many forum members have (probably wisely) decided that if they were to have the CVT fluid changed, they would have a Subaru dealer do the change so they would not jeopardise the extended “goodwill” warranty Subaru has given in the US which extends the CVT warranty to 100,000 miles.

Seagrass

 

Thanks for that clarification Seagrass. Yes I heard that on the MrSubaru video linked above. I personally don't give Subaru the "best regard" in regards to the "goodwill" warranty of 100k miles, even though that is a very good thing.

The reason is, customers are the test dummies here. In that same MrSubaru video he talks about how Subaru does not want customers or dealers to touch the CVT because they are basically using customers as a "testing" group where if the CVT fails before 100k miles SOA wants the dealer to ships the CVT back to Subaru to do testing to figure out why it failed. If the CVT is still "experimental" in this sense... then after 100k miles a $6-8k transmission replacement is a huge deal. How many CVTs need to be replaced after 100k and before 250k? It seems they might not be expecting them to last a lot longer than 100k, and to make them be seen in a better light they offer a "goodwill" extended warranty of 100k miles instead of a recall. Why did they offer a goodwill 100k extended warranty in the first place? What was going on in their failure data statistics that they made that decision?

 

Why did they offer a goodwill 100k extended warranty in the first place? What was going on in their failure data statistics that they made that decision?

No one here knows, beyond whatever was in the letter/TSBs that were issued. Some speculation in these long threads:

CVT Warranty Extension 2010-15

So, I got a letter today for Subaru informing me that they are extending the power train warranty for my CVT (I have a 2015 Outback). Does this mean that there have been issues with this transmission, I mean they don't extend warranties for no reason?

www.subaruoutback.org

CVT warranty extended for 2016, 2017, and 2018 !!

Has the CVT warranty been extended for the 2016 and 2017 OB? There is some discussion on other forums that letters are going out to the owners of 2016-17 Outback and Legacies that the warranty has been extended to 10 years or 100,000 miles. I have not received anything yet. Mod edit: It also...

www.subaruoutback.org

 

Just for context, other transmissions also have problems. Even conventional automatic transmissions aren't the ultra-reliable beasts that the CVT-worried seem to think.

https://www.google.com/search?q="automatic+transmission+recall"&tbm=nws

 

As others said, this is a gray area. As already stated the automaker and dealer do not have to prove squat until you file a breach of warranty lawsuit.

The one big caveat with Magnuson-Moss is the customer hast to prove they abided by the terms and limitations of the automaker's warranty. A great many customers find that a hard requirement to meet.

 

The 10R80 10-speed automatic transmission in my 2018 F150 has been terrible from 5,000 miles on. Though the dealer has had the truck in the shop for a total of approximately three weeks, and replaced a badly scored valve body, Ford hasn’t fixed it and my problems continue unresolved. It is a dangerous vehicle.

In that respect, I would welcome a good faith action from the manufacturer like an extended warranty to 100k miles! Just because Ford’s quality sucks does’t mean the bar should be lowered for all manufacturers but at least Subaru is trying.

Also, I bet that there are fewer complaints on Subaru CVTs vs. Ford’s 10R80. Go read through some F150 forums and even the diehard fanboys admit they have issues with their 10R80.

 

I thought there is revised guidance on routinely replacing the CVT fluid that came out around the same time as the warranty extension.
I read it on the internet so it must be true.

 

I spent more than forty years owning new car dealerships...not Subaru. In all of that time, I never saw a successful lawsuit based on Magnusen-Moss. Generally, it is far too expensive to go after the manufacturer on that basis and try to prove they are not right once they say something done to the vehicle caused the failure. A cheap lawyer and Bud down at the corner garage do not fair well against corporate legal staff and engineering experts in the field. All of that plus it will take years and deep pockets to even get the case into court.

I really think this is being over thought. The manufacturer has the right to stipulate when the fluids should be changed and the specs of the fluid that should be used. Good luck convincing the court you know better than those who designed and built the car and have a better understanding of Magnusson-Moss than their legal staff.

 

A different approach might be "Right to Repair" such as this; Automakers agree to 'right to repair' deal and is on the ballot in MA to add telematics as well.

 

But, if you look carefully at the W&M booklet (not cars101, which is incorrect), you'll see that the definition of "severe service" as it applies to the CVT is only when the vehicle is used for frequent towing.

 

Cars101 is incorrect?

I'm going to write a letter to the editor!

 

Yet in 2020 they changed the CVT fluid formula for both transmissions. Would this fluid make the transmission more reliable, or less? Only time will tell. At least for us XT/TR690 owners we're using the same fluid that the Ascent with 5000 pound tow rating uses.