DaimlerChrysler Suckage]

[Jesda]

http://www.daimlerchryslervehicleproblems.com/

[audtatious]

They got over the govt bailout and started building some good products. Now it looks like they are right back to the crappy stuff they used to have.

Shame on Chrysler!

[nismofly]

god they totally suck worse than i thought

my aunt had a brand new one have a timing failure and blow the engine with just under 300 miles on it...

[MinisterofDOOM]

You know, that's bad, BUT:

1. As Audtatious said, they've really pulled themselves out of that hole.

2. I can guaran-damn-tee that they are not the only company who has done the stuff they list on that page.

3. transmission issues...power steering problems...the first word that comes to my mind when I hear those words is FORD.

Diamler Chrysler is far from the only company that's pulled B.S. like that. And, unlike the aforementioned FoMoCo, Diamler Chrysler managed to sprinkle some redeeming cars upon their heaping pile of poo. And what company has recently recalled ALL of their $150k supercars due to serious faults in the steering/front suspension? Ford, that's who.

That site is yet another case of the one-sided argument. I'd have a lot more respect for it if it simply showed the whole D/C picture, and not just the bad side. They also fail to mention any other companies that have made these mistakes.

ME? I'd take a 300 Hemi C or SRT 8 over any euro-crap or even most Japanese stuff.

[nismofly]

2. I can guaran-damn-tee that they are not the only company who has done the stuff they list on that page.

mitsubishi!!

[Jesda]

Chrysler quality improved consistently during the 90s, while DaimlerBenz was taking a nosedive. After the merger, they all went downhill.

I dont see any impending mechanical issues with the Crossfire or 300, however. The Crossfire is based (almost entirely) on the SLK, which was designed and engineered during "old" MB, before the quality issues hit. The 300 appears to be absent of any scary German electronics.

[nismofly]

so if its absent of scary german electronics its like "old" chrysler than right?

oh by the way my aunts car had that problem when it still was "old" chrysler...what year exactly was the merger again?

[Jesda]

1998 was the merger.

The Chrysler 2.7 V6 was a nightmare (timing chain, sludge), but design updates have improved reliability dramatically. I still have a distrust for it though, after spending the last couple years at dodgeintrepid.net.The 2.7 was offered in 1998 in the second-gen Intrepid (and later, almost every car in the Chrysler lineup).

I blame Chrysler for this s*** engine. Fortunately, after 2 years passed they took care of things nicely (although they shafted their customers pretty good). The road is covered with 2.7L Intrepids nearing a sudden death.

Why the hell am I still awake? Didnt I log off AIM 2 hours ago?

[gabossie]

My friends 2nd gen intrepid just encountered "sudden death". Threw a rod.

[nismofly]

that might have been the engine in her car, what cars was it in besides the intrepid?

[Jesda]

98+ Dodge Intrepid98+ Chrysler Concorde

The cars are dropping like flies all over the place.

People are pissed.http://www.dontbuyone.org/

By 2002 a lot of the sludge and timing chain issues were taken care of. The engine is now used in the Sebring, 300, and Stratus.

I still wouldnt buy a Chrysler with the 2.7. Its a shame, because the 98+ Intrepid with the 3.2 and 3.5 is one heck of a nice, reliable car.

[nismofly]

hah, it was a late 90s concorde that blew on her, i bet it had this engine...

thats hilarious, at least some peoples are lasting a few years, hers lasted like 2 weeks!

[Jesda]

http://www.consumeraffairs.com....html

"Daimler Chrysler no longer makes Intrepids and Concrodes but the 2.7 liter engine is now being used in some new Chrysler 300 and Dodge Magnums. Daimler Chrysler says those vehicles are rear wheel unlike the front wheel drive Intrepids and Concordes."^^^LMAO! OOOH! When you change the drive wheels, the whole engine is different!!!

http://abclocal.go.com/wls/new....html

[nismofly]

^^^LMAO! OOOH! When you change the drive wheels, the whole engine is different!!!

id like to see them explain that one!

[Rex]

Two people I work with have suffered the Durango sludge death. And all they got from the dealer was "you should have taken better care, don the oil changes on time, blah, blah, blah", but wait the dealer did all the oil changes at or above (sooner) the dealers recomendation.

The 3rd guy, the first one I told, I like him more, traded his in a heart beat after the 2nd guys motor sludge-died at less than 80k. He got a smoking deal on a Armada .

[Mr1der]

going on some Chrysler mechanics...the new 2.7 is supposed to be way better...

I still wouldn't buy either of those cars without the hemi.

right now...as far as trucks go...I'd opt for a Nissan or Ford. Ford knows trucks, no contest. if I wanted a half ton, I'd probably get a Titan...anything bigger...nothing but the Super Duty.

Ford suffers with their fwd automatics...and the power steering...I have no idea...mine makes a hell of a racket...

[MinisterofDOOM]

I think even GT owners get that wonderful "squeeeeeeeeeeeaaah" noise when turning at low speeds. Just another built in Ford noise, much like rattley doors.

The really funny thing about the rattley doors is that the Ranger has far more substantial doors than any other small truck from it's era. I've driven Taco's and my grandpa's Frontier a few times, and always have been slightly put off at how thin and light the doors are. My Ford has good, thick, heavy doors...that's what I like. Of course, you still have to slam 'em, but they at least have some presence to them. And they still rattle more...

I don't know...I like the Ranger...good, bulletproof truck. But there are so many things about it that are not quite finished...not quite as good as they should have been. That's the way every Ford I've been in has been, from a Blackwood to a Tempo.

That's why I don't like Ford too much....even their would-be great cars always have something wierd about them that takes them a step down.

[metalsyth]

now I do like some of the vehicles Ford puts out but most Fords have way to many mystery noises for me though.

But I can not really knock on Ford because my old Ranger was the most dependable vehicle I have owned. But then again that might not be saying much.

I had a 1987 Suzuki Samarai, a 1996 Ford Ranger, 1991 Nissan Pickup, and 1995 Jeep Wrangler.

the Samarai started have major problem in the motor and in the drivetrain of it, the Nissan pickup was possessed with a destructive gremlin, once the orginal motor went out it went downhill after that and I could not get it running again so I got rid of it, And that leads me to the Jeep god what a nightmare but it does get me to point a to point b (most of the time) hopefully I can get it paid off here shortly and then I'll get something barely new for a DD and let the beast rest for so modifications to come. The only thing that had tore up on the Ranger was the transmission.

[driverdriver]

Daimler-Chryslers marketing formula is till to "heaviliy hype and sell". Basiically sizzle over substance, although I can't knock my Jeep. Sure it has many shortcomings, but its reliable.

[Bubba1]

I've had a total of 4 Chryslers: 3 LHS's and one 300M. All 3 year 20K mile leases. Trust me, they begin to self destruct between 50-60K miles.

Daimler-Chrysler makes well designed, comfortable, attractive , nice driving cars, but they are built like crap. My 300M was in for warranty repairs no less 8 times in 3 years. these were their top o' the line cars.

I kinda chuckle when I see all the hype about the new 300. Wait'll they start reaching 60K miles.

[Jesda]

I heard the main problem is that Chrysler low-balls for parts, always accepting the lowest bidder no matter what.

A friend of mine owns a 94 LHS with 150k. Still looks and drives like new. Build quality pales in comparison to his Lincoln or my Q, but of course the MSRP was much lower.

[Bubba1]

That's pretty much it. Of the 3LHS's I had (94,96,98) My 94 was the least trouble prone of the 3. They were wonderful cars for road trips. Very comfortable, plenty of leg room, huge trunk, nice ride. It's a shame Chrysler skimped when they built them.

[driverdriver]

Ford also lowballs for parts. Their is some steering component on the F150 and Navigator that suddenly gives without warning causing the driver to lose all steering. There have been something like 3000 accidents up here. Thankfully no one has been killed yet. The governnment has launched and investigation to force Ford in calling a recall (of course Ford says there is no problem). A couple of independent investigations have come to the conclusion the part is made cheaply, that's why it fails.

[Bubba1]

Ford also lowballs for parts. Their is some steering component on the F150 and Navigator that suddenly gives without warning causing the driver to lose all steering. There have been something like 3000 accidents up here. Thankfully no one has been killed yet. The governnment has launched and investigation to force Ford in calling a recall (of course Ford says there is no problem). A couple of independent investigations have come to the conclusion the part is made cheaply, that's why it fails.

You're so right. I had switched to Chryslers because of the last Ford product I had..A 92 Grand Marquis. leased new. Very comfortable car, but it spent a ton of time at the dealership. One of the problems spooked me. The fuel line was routed up the steering column, which was a horrible design. The virbrations eventually caused the fuel line to crack after about 10,000 miles. The fuel travelled down the outside of the fuel line and ended up dripping onto the catalytic converter! We were lucky the car didn't burn up. Ford initially told me it wasn't covered by warranty. When I threatened to consult my lawyer, they repaired it free. They just didn't officially label it a warranty repair on the work order. Kinda sleazy.

[elwesso]

Brian would love this thread!!!

I think what Jesda said "wait until they have 60k" will apply to a lot of cars... At least with chrysler you get a POS car but dont pay a lot for it, unlike the MB.. You do get what you pay for... If they can make the "hemi" as good as they say and its a decent motor.....

I still dont like that term, hemi is a very fanboy term..... Seeing how it has only very minor similarites to the original hemi...

I think in the end, GM is going to be the king of domestics..... Theyre building some STELLAR cars, and theyre using waht works... That damn 3800 isnt going to die, and theyve refined the northstar... The thing is with GM, they pick an engine, and just keep refining it until its perfect..... Just like the 305 in the old caprices... you CANT kill them.....

[Bubba1]

Well, I think it might be less "king of the domestics", and more the "lesser of 3 evils."

If GM developed the 305 until it was perfect then why did they stop using it? I totally agree with you that it was a great engine. I'm not going to bash GM, (well maybe a little) My 1st cars were 60's Chevies which I thought were great. My father mostly bought GM products (except for the sports cars, which were european). His last daily driver was a Suburban. From the 70's through entire 80's and for much of the 90's GM has produced more polished turds than anyone else. Might be a fun excercise to make a list of the bad GM cars. there are some doozies.

[elwesso]

I completely agree with you...

But also, every brand has their "things".. The japanese made some pretty good "turds" as well, but the import scene wasnt a real big deal until the 80s and 90s..... At least not like it is now... Also with domestics, who cares if it breaks.. Besides the inconvenience, you can keep those things going for nothing..... American cars are cheaply made, and the benefit to that is their parts are cheap as well!

They stopped using the 305 because they realized it cant accelerate cars.. It can move them, but so can a golf cart motor.....

The fact is every brand has their nitch..... There are flaws, if you made everything perfect the first time, youd have a lexus.. nothing to lookforeward to, just more boring perfection...... Unfortunately theyre flaw is uncureable, and that is lack of character.....

Ill live with my Q45 and problems that keep me up all night...

[Mr1der]

the 305 was never a good motor...sorry wes.

it was weak...not very reliable with any of my experiences...

the 3800 struggles to hit 200k...the lumina went through 2 transmissions and needed it's third while having a mystery miss problem and overheating...

I haven't heard any real horror stories about Ford motors...other then that whacky German 2.3...it's had both positive and negative though...

it's the rest of the cars that seem to give trouble...their 3.8 is way better then the GM in reliability...it just doesn't produce the power...

I don't think Ford makes a pushrod motor anymore though...well...there's the Powerstroke...mmm Powerstroke....

[Bubba1]

The ol 5.0 liter Ford V-8 Ford was never a bad motor. Not very refined, but reasonably dependable if they weren't beat on. I had two merc's with the 5.0 and one with the 4.6. The 4.6 was smoother and a tad quicker, but the 5.0 had fewer problems.

I don't think the 305 was GM's best motor, but I think it was very good. I think their best motors were their I-6's.

I don't think the GM 3.8 V-6 was a horrible engine. Wasn't great either. I think part of the problem was they stuffed them in such poorly built cars.

[Mr1der]

they make decent power with it...but it just doesn't last.

they don't wanna go much past 100k without needing something major...

GM's pinnacle motor was the 302 DZ...not sure about reliability...but I don't really care! mmmmm

the ZL-1 was also incredibly sweet.

anything other then their V8's...I don't much care for....

I can't really think of any I6's right now though...not GM anyway...they're bound to pale in comparison to the Japanese and European I'm sure however...

there's always the Chrysler Slant 6! It really hates the idea of dying...