Anybody out there that has used the dorman 42rle transmission pan? It has a drain plug bolt to drain the trans to make it less messy when i service the transmission. I also use the lube locker trans gasket. never had an issue with the stock pan leaking. thanks.
Dorman 42RLE transmission pan opinions
- Thread starter up on the mountain.
- Start date
LONGJP2
TJ Expert
You could have a bung installed on your current pan. Or 2, one for drain, and one for temp. sender.
No experience, but I've heard the Dorman pan holds an extra qt. of fluid.
No experience, but I've heard the Dorman pan holds an extra qt. of fluid.
MountaineerTom
LJ Enthusiast, Retired USAF Weapons Loader
Supporting Member
Ride of the Month Winner
I have had a Dorman pan on for a little over 2 years along with a Lubelocker gasket. I tried welding in a second bung myself for my trans temp gauge. I'm not a good welder and it was always seeping a little fluid around my weld. About 1-1/2 years ago I bought a second Dorman pan and had mrblaine silver braise a bung in for me. No leaks at all. With both pans I had no issues with fitment or leaks as well as no leaks with the Lubelocker. The only issue was seeping leaks where I tried to weld the bung.
In the Dorman pan reviews on amazon, several said the drain plug leaked when using the copper washer/gasket. I bought a different washer to use and had issues. You can get these at local autoparts stores. https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B000COBBZW/?tag=wranglerorg-20
More info on the pan can be seen here: https://wranglertjforum.com/threads...p-wrangler-unlimited.14995/page-2#post-672472
I had the same issue twice and switched to a Dorman nylon rib drain plug gasket. No more leaks!
We have used several. We don't have any issues with them leaking and if anyone compares them to stock, they are a bit heavier.
Thanks for the reply. would you happen to have the part # for the dorman plug gasket?
Thank you for the correction. I wonder why they are adding an extra quart? would that damage the transmission?
I also read that somewhere there was an increase in fluid capacity compared to the original pan. Idk I can't find any reference to it now.
I had a different style pan not sure if original or what, no drain plug on it. I expected to need 1 more quart but ended up filling the same amount I drained: 7 quarts because the pan was off for a few days.
I had a different style pan not sure if original or what, no drain plug on it. I expected to need 1 more quart but ended up filling the same amount I drained: 7 quarts because the pan was off for a few days.
There is a factory pan floating around that is higher capacity. The Dorman isn't.
I think this is the post that led to my confusion on the issue. It is a mopar pan apparently
Thread 'Mopar has a new pan for the 42RLE transmission' https://wranglertjforum.com/threads/mopar-has-a-new-pan-for-the-42rle-transmission.2590/
Yes you are right I know mopar has a larger pan. i was refering to the dorman pan. some on here where saying it hold 1 more qt.
So is the consensus that the Dorman pan does NOT require an extra quart? Dorman says its the same capacity as the OEM.