The recall merry-go-round spins again...

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: Miller88
Originally Posted By: itguy08
Originally Posted By: Clevy


That being said I've owned 3 dodge trucks. 2 of them went in excess of 450000kms on them,never having opened an engine. Went thru a few trannies and a rear end though.



Quote:
Now I've had many chev and ford trucks too. Fuel pumps got changed at 200000kms. Never had any other real issues.


What's wrong with this picture? Dodge = reliable if it spits a few transmissions and a few rear ends. Ford, Chev = reliable if it only needs fuel pumps. I'd call puking transmissions and rear ends unreliable....


Quote:
In fact if I had to call any if my previous vehicles junk it would be my 2000 mustang. And only because it spit out plugs costing me time and effort changing heads.


The engineer that approved that POS should be drawn and quartered.



Cost saving measure. "Lets only drill 3 threads!"


I think it was actually for installation purposes (which in a round-about way I guess ties into a cost savings of sorts in terms of reducing assembly time). The threads are at the very bottom of the hole and there is a taper above it. Basically, a machine could drop the plug down the hole and it would self-centre and would just need to be tightened. This is useful when your spark plugs are 6" down an angled tube.

Ultimately though could have put three more threads in the hole and possibly achieved the same effect but perhaps in testing this proved to give the best seating results whilst still (on paper) providing adequate thread engagement for the predicted stresses of the operating environment and required fastener torque.

 

[440Magnum]

Originally Posted By: Hokiefyd
Originally Posted By: jhs914
And both of my Dodge's were designed during the Daimler era, in fact many of the suspension components used a shared design with Mercedes products during that period.


To sort of echo your statement, I think the Chryslers that are more German underneath than those that are not have been the best ones sold. We had two minivans and neither were spectacular. The later one, an '07 model, was a pure nightmare. It seems that the vehicles with the tightest cross-walk between Daimler and Chrysler, the LX platform cars, are generally the most durable. Maybe it was because they were brand new platforms, and didn't suffer from engineering shortfalls that continued on through two or three generations of product.


Here's my honest take, trying to remove all bias:

The LX platform is great because it took some of the best of Mercedes (suspension, NAG-1 auto trans) and some of the best of Chrysler (less complicated and very reliable engines, nicer interiors starting in 2011, vastly simplified electronics compared to an S-class, styling) and came up with a great car that almost 10 years later is still a higher-caliber platform than its competitors. It has always been Mercedes-like performance with American initial cost and serviceability.

The Jeep/Truck group (other than the WK2- see below) just flat operated almost independent of Mercedes, and other than a few issues turned out a decent product that started getting much better circa 2011. With the current lineup breaking new market ground with the EcoDiesel, its no surprise they topped Silverado sales for a month earlier this year. Ram more or less solved its issues from within, replacing things like the 4xRE series transmissons with the very reliable (but still internal to Chrysler) 545RFE and 65RFE, upgrading the 4.7 engine and addressing its issues in '08, adopting the Hemi and updating it routinely, adopting the pairing of the 3.6 Pentastar and ZF8 transmission, bringing out the EcoDiesel/ZF8 pairing, etc. My Ram is an 08, which was probably produced right at about the worst point in recent Chrysler history- but its been 100% reliable. No recalls, no TSBs, no rattles, no trouble (now that I say that, it'll bite me tomorrow...).

The front-drive platforms up until the Fiat merger... well, sucked. And sucked badly after the LH platform was dropped. We owned a 2005 PT Cruiser which drove clumsily, was terribly underpowered, got lousy mileage, had a horribly mis-matched set of gear ratios in the transaxle. It had its good points: an amazingly clever and versatile interior, tight chassis build quality, and at least was reliable. Other than it I wouldn't (and didn't) touch anything Chrysler / front-drive from 1998 until 2013. If I need a front-drive, it would be a Ford.

The WK2 platform is interesting (2011-up JGC, Durango, and Mercedes M-class). Its truly collaboratively developed platform, new to both manufacturers, with the added wrinkle of hitting the market AFTER they parted ways. I'm still not quite sure how the ownership of the design is divided. I like our 2011 JGC, but it definitely "feels" less Chrysler and more Mercedes than either the 08 Ram or my 2012 SRT, and interestingly has more hold-over tech from the 2003-2007 era (like the problematic TIPM) than either the Ram or Challenger- though it is well publicized that the new gen Minivans also use the same TIPM. And its the one car in the family with all the recalls. All that could be because it was a first-year model (wouldn't normally do that, but we bought it used at a "can't say no" price), but I honestly think it had more to do with coming out BEFORE it was really clear that Chrysler was going to survive under Fiat and they were keeping costs as low as practical. In fact sales of the WK2 are part of what turned Chrysler around, and as often happens "early adopters" see more problems. It would have been really nice to buy a new 2014 WK2 instead of the 2011, but that just wasn't in the bank account.

I'm OK with being an early adopter given how little we got it for, so long as they continue to support it. The TIPM recall is my first opportunity to observe how they handle a real issue for me since I owned a 1993 LH car that had a fuel-rail recall.

 

[itguy08]

Originally Posted By: 440Magnum

Don't let the ignorant brand-haters bother you. The "I'd rather push a Ford than drive a Chevy" (or vice-versa) mentality will never die. All manufacturers have hiccups and glitches.


How is it ignorance when the data from the top companies that track long term reliability show that the vehicles are very sub-par? And others state things along the same lines.

I fail to see how that's ignorance? Unless one wants to throw their hard earned money rolling the dice that "maybe I'll get a good one". That's a hard sell when, for the majority of people, an automobile is their second largest expense.

 

[meep]

Chrysler is such a mixed bag.

We had an 08 WK (grand chero). There were things about that vehicle you had to love. It drove well, sounded great, was comfortable and generally *felt* very well put together. The air blew cold, and pre-lift could achieve 21-22 mpg driven right. It towed pretty well, had good brakes, had great seats, and was fun to drive. The devil in that car was in the details. Not everybody would have caught them.

1. developed a fuel leak on the rail, somewhere, for 3 days. car reeked. then after being parked for a week, was fine. Pressure test valve seemed to be the culprit. tightened it, it was already tight, didn't seem to make a difference.

2. would almost stall at idle, then SURGE back to life, causing the vehicle to lurch forward or backward when parking, easing forward in traffic. replaced a CPS and cleaned grounds and checked fuel pressure and... and... no codes... never figured it out. Wouldn't do it if the a/c was on.

3. A/C blend doors were never completely closed to full cold. didn't matter how many calibrations performed.

4. HVAC vent control was never quite right.... the knob was just a guideline

5. trans seem to bind... but only on a specific speed, incline, and only with the cruise on. It would do it 2-3x per month. 45, cruise on, very mild incline. you'd hear the car struggle to make speed and the throttle would open wide and the car would just drag down, engine GROWLING. Then like releasing a rubber band, the thing would (as much as one does in a high gear), spring forward and hit 55 prior to reigning it in. This is not a hill, or a slope, barely an incline. It felt like something in the trans was binding or dragging.

Considering it took 5 trips to the dealer to repair and door lock switch and a window switch, I didn't dare come in for this. There were no codes, the stalling/surging was erratic, the binding occurred on a road they couldn't test drive on, and even with my replacing the normal items, TPS, CPS, nothing showed up as at fault.

I traded it.

I miss it--- the characteristics of that vehicle were great and I liked owning it. But WK owners were starting to pop up on the 'net with similar issues, with dealer fixes including full ECU replacements, BCM replacements, and even trans replacements, but only after months of back-and-forth with the dealer and out-of-pocket costs. I wasn't willing to go through that.

Oh, and the frame flexed an awful lot. Doors were always creaking as road camber changed, and the WKs were known for really thin metal where the doors hinged-- a stiff breeze would bend the base of the A-pillar -- you could see it flex.

They almost got it right.... But the '93 I had, was just all around a better put-together vehicle.

 

[Clevy]

Lets get something straight here.
My tranny issues were 100% my fault. I got stuck and seriously overheated them which is why I wasn't complaining.
The rear end on my 89 went while towing about 8000 pounds,way over capacity and at that point the truck had over 300000kms on it.
So when I say the trucks were reliable it's because they were. The only time I had to replace something was due to my stupidity,not build quality.
And it's almost like clockwork those chev fuel pumps. Every 99-05 chev truck I've come into contact with blew a fuel pump by 200000kms(160000 miles)so again not a huge deal considering mileage.
I just wanted to clarify so if brand bashers are gonna bash they have the facts.

I drive vehicles until they die or are totalled. Very rarely do I sell any of them. For that reason I try to maintain my vehicles the best that I can.
And let's be serious here. -40 cold year after year is tough on a vehicle,yet I routinely get well over 300000 miles from a vehicle.
And I refuse to spend big bucks on them to fix things.
I can swap parts easy enough. And thanks to YouTube not a lot of fixes are beyond me now.

Little tip. On a 99-05 silverado it's easier to change the fuel pump by lifting off the box rather than drop the tank.
And the 3 thread nightmare 2v heads. When adding a threaded sleeve for the plug take the hood off if it's the rear cylinders that spit a plug.

I'm not bashing any manufacturer. They all have issues sometimes. It's been my experience that my dodge trucks have been reliable,longer,than my other brands again I attribute that to the owners maintenance more than brand.

 

[HangFire]

Originally Posted By: 440Magnum
Mitsubishi and Chrysler haven't shared anything whatsoever for many years now. The last Mitsubishi engine that Chrysler used was the 2.5 liter V6 in the Cirrus/Stratus/Sebring of the early 2000s. The Diamond-Star alliance is long gone (10+ years). The GEMA engine (Chrysler/Hyundai/Mitsubishi) was the very last remnant and it has been replaced by the Tigershark which though based on the same basic architecture, is very heavily updated.


Interesting, and good to know it's gone. My neighbor just rebuilt his 2.5L. He's no longer a Chrysler fan.

Originally Posted By: 440Magnum
Don't let the ignorant brand-haters bother you. The "I'd rather push a Ford than drive a Chevy" (or vice-versa) mentality will never die.

I'm long past having any brand loyalty, or paying any attention to it. When I said I did my research, I was talking about Edmunds, JD Powers, even Consumer Reports. Also I was searching for a good used car, so even if all the engines and platforms being reported on are all obsolete now, it was highly relevent to me.

I agree about ignorance. The problem is consumers need to educate themselves on platforms, models and model years, etc. etc. in order to make a non-ignorant choice. Your statement about not buying any Chrysler FWD cars across a 1998-2013 large span of years is telling. It's hard to be enthusiastic about a brand when you hear something like that.

Originally Posted By: 440Magnum
All manufacturers have hiccups and glitches. GM has their ignition switch fiasco. Honda has more recalls this year than Chrysler, despite a smaller market share. Even mighty Toyota got caught writing very poor powertrain control software and it bit them in the tush... and unfortunately caused a spate of accidents when the throttle hung open while the process rebooted (which it was found to do MULTIPLE times on an average drive, though usually too fast for the driver to notice.)


And someone died because they couldn't bother to switch the engine off or put it in Neutral... but they could call 911 and scream about it until they crashed.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=03m7fmnhO0I

911: "And you don't have the ability to turn the vehicle off or anything?"

 

[dishdude]

Although no one in the family owns any Chrysler products at the moment, we've probably had a dozen over the years - everything from K-cars to Grand Cherokees. All gave good service, no major failures and any problems we had were relatively minor. We got a bit turned off by the interiors and designs during the Daimler period, but the last couple years have us taking a second look as they are turning out some really nice products recently.

 

[Hokiefyd]

Originally Posted By: 440Magnum
The front-drive platforms up until the Fiat merger... well, sucked. And sucked badly after the LH platform was dropped. We owned a 2005 PT Cruiser which drove clumsily, was terribly underpowered, got lousy mileage, had a horribly mis-matched set of gear ratios in the transaxle. It had its good points: an amazingly clever and versatile interior, tight chassis build quality, and at least was reliable. Other than it I wouldn't (and didn't) touch anything Chrysler / front-drive from 1998 until 2013. If I need a front-drive, it would be a Ford.


The kicker was we really, really liked those minivans. I really enjoyed how they drove. I don't know what it was. The driving position just really suited me well. Even though the seat and the steering wheel weren't actually in-line (check it for yourself, 4th gen van owners!). It just had a very easy-going nature about it that I liked. We would absolutely still have that van (the '07) if it could have stayed out of the dealership.

There was also sort of a paradox of design, engineering, and materials. On the one had, the minivans had this MASSIVE aluminum subframe in the front, that must have cost a fortune to produce. I mean, HUGE. I was actually quite pretty to behold. But then they used these really cheesy one-bolt hinged sway bar bushing brackets that couldn't keep a consistent clamp on the bar. Stuff like that was frustrating to observe.

Our decision goes back to a point you made earlier: about the Chrysler dealers...at least the ones near us. I suppose if the van was reliable, we'd have never known whether they were good or bad, right? And I know every brand has poor dealers here and there, but we had to play the cards we were dealt, and our dealers (and to be fair, Chrysler Corporation as well) simply did not back us and really soured the experience. Stiffing me one day on a rental car after they failed to properly complete a warranty repair was sort of the last straw for us.

I guess you can choose one of two paths at that point. You can take the "we got unlucky, the next one will be better" path or you can take the "fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me" path. I'm more in the "we got unlucky" camp while my wife is more in the "I got fooled" camp.

I hope time heals her scars, because there are some right good-looking products at FiaRamDoChry dealers right now.

 

[440Magnum]

Originally Posted By: HangFire


And someone died because they couldn't bother to switch the engine off or put it in Neutral... but they could call 911 and scream about it until they crashed.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=03m7fmnhO0I

911: "And you don't have the ability to turn the vehicle off or anything?"



As with most things, things weren't cut-and-dried with the "unintended acceleration" thing. There was a high-profile example of someone deliberately staging an "incident." There were questionably (in)competent driver actions taken. But when the forensics guys dug into the code during some of the less publicized (and much later) civil cases, they found some really scary stuff. Like the watchdog timers that were supposed to safely re-boot "hung" PCM processes being coded in such a way that they TOO would sometimes hang along with the processes they were watching. Very, very bad practice, and in some cases it was shown that the car actually wouldn't respond to gear selector or ignition switch inputs when the processes were in a certain state (I'm paraphrasing the redacted findings I read some months ago- a lot of detail still hasn't been made public due to the proprietary nature of the software, which is another problem I see.) Here's a link to just one article.

And don't think for a moment I believe this is unique to Toyota- I'm sure there are similar bad software processes in some of my cars. The simple fact is that (as of right now) the software design process for cars isn't held to quite the same safety-of-life standards that, say, aircraft flight control systems are- despite the fact that more and more the automotive systems can intervene with the driver's wishes in dangerous ways. Its scope creep- in the early days of car software, maybe the entertainment system would quit or the engine would run rough if the software had a problem. But it gradually grew to the point where the ABS, throttle, air bags, and even the gear selector and ignition switch itself are dependent on the software working correctly. And that demands a higher standard of practice in writing software. And frankly, I'm a big fan of the ignition switch being an actual, no-software KILL switch, the gear lever being a hard link to the transmission (at least for Neutral), the brake pedal overriding everything else, and (definitely!) no such thing as "steer by wire." Not a fan of that gear selector knob in the new Ram, for example. But truth be told, the vast majority of shifter levers now work the exact same way.

 

[440Magnum]

Originally Posted By: Hokiefyd

Our decision goes back to a point you made earlier: about the Chrysler dealers...at least the ones near us. I suppose if the van was reliable, we'd have never known whether they were good or bad, right? And I know every brand has poor dealers here and there, but we had to play the cards we were dealt, and our dealers (and to be fair, Chrysler Corporation as well) simply did not back us and really soured the experience. Stiffing me one day on a rental car after they failed to properly complete a warranty repair was sort of the last straw for us.



They have a LOT of make-up work to do in that area, and to be quite honest that particular weakness of the Chrysler corp. (and GM to a degree as well) goes back to at least the 80s if not the 70s. I've always contended that the mythos of the ultra-reliable Japanese car of the 1990s had more to do with dealers making things right and soothing over problems than it did with the actual quality of the hardware in the first place. A co worker and I bought a 1993 Prelude (him) and a 1993 Vision TSi (my wife) at the same time, and we compared notes after 5 years. He had actually had several more issues that needed attention and more invasive ones at that (like an entire new steering rack and pump that would have been over $1000 if not under warranty), but his perception was that there was never a problem because the dealer responded so well and in such a timely way.

The other thing that I have to remind myself goes all the way back to the first post: how do people who AREN'T willing or able to find their own fixes deal with these things when the parts are unavailable or the manufacturer won't speed up the response? Most of the Chrysler issues I've experienced have, at their core, been pretty trivial. A bad relay. A leaky O-ring. A poorly-routed wire. If the dealer wasn't helpful, I just spent $2.50 and *fixed* the dang thing myself, heck I've got two engineering degrees and have rebuilt 3 60s vehicles from the bones up, so its not that big a deal... for ME. But it would be a show-stopper for my wife, if I weren't around.

 

[HangFire]

Originally Posted By: 440Magnum
Originally Posted By: Hokiefyd

Our decision goes back to a point you made earlier: about the Chrysler dealers...at least the ones near us. I suppose if the van was reliable, we'd have never known whether they were good or bad, right? And I know every brand has poor dealers here and there, but we had to play the cards we were dealt, and our dealers (and to be fair, Chrysler Corporation as well) simply did not back us and really soured the experience. Stiffing me one day on a rental car after they failed to properly complete a warranty repair was sort of the last straw for us.


They have a LOT of make-up work to do in that area, and to be quite honest that particular weakness of the Chrysler corp. (and GM to a degree as well) goes back to at least the 80s if not the 70s. I've always contended that the mythos of the ultra-reliable Japanese car of the 1990s had more to do with dealers making things right and soothing over problems than it did with the actual quality of the hardware in the first place.


Yes, great dealers can make a poor brand shine, and bad dealers make a great brand stink.

Chrysler had a great dealer house-cleaning concurrent with the bankruptcy. In my home town, 2 of 3 dealers were eliminated. One was a curious Jeep-only dealer (plus other unrelated brands) that I wasn't surprised went down.

Of the other two, one was a big new showy place that charged 120% for Mopar parts and never stopped piling on charges and unneeded work. They made a point of charging me for a tire rotation at the same time they had all 4 wheels off for a ball joint recall and a 4 brake check (and they charged for the brake check too). (I challenged this and the service writer said it was the correct labor time charge for a tire rotation according to the book; I said OK I authorized the work, I'll pay, but he should realize I'll never authorize any more work here ever again. He seemed OK with that.)

The other place was a Dodge dealer since there was a Dodge company, before they merged with Chrysler and bent over backwards to save the customer a buck. Guess which one got the axe?

It gets better. The survivor dropped Chrysler the next year and went Honda. Fortunately another huge area-wide dealer shuffled their Dodge/Chrysler dealership to their lot in our town, and they're pretty good guys.

I hope to never get rid of my old Dakota, but I only use Mopar parts when they are cheaper (rare), exclusive (happens), or markedly superior (occasionally).
Originally Posted By: 440Magnum
The other thing that I have to remind myself goes all the way back to the first post: how do people who AREN'T willing or able to find their own fixes deal with these things when the parts are unavailable or the manufacturer won't speed up the response? Most of the Chrysler issues I've experienced have, at their core, been pretty trivial. A bad relay. A leaky O-ring. A poorly-routed wire. If the dealer wasn't helpful, I just spent $2.50 and *fixed* the dang thing myself, heck I've got two engineering degrees and have rebuilt 3 60s vehicles from the bones up, so its not that big a deal... for ME. But it would be a show-stopper for my wife, if I weren't around.

As the go-to guy for car problems amongst my non-gearhead friends, I think about this too.

How do they deal with these things? Some raise a stink and get a rental. Some leverage lemon laws and get out of Chrysler products for good. Some suffer quietly and borrow rides and cars from friends and relatives. Some suffer loudly and borrow rides and cards from friends and relatives.

In the end it all makes Chrysler look bad... well, not just Chrysler, but every other manufacturer doing recalls right now, which seems to be "all of them." I can only point out that not every recall is debilitating.

 

[440Magnum]

Originally Posted By: HangFire

In the end it all makes Chrysler look bad... well, not just Chrysler, but every other manufacturer doing recalls right now, which seems to be "all of them." I can only point out that not every recall is debilitating.


Which brings me full circle to my original point: The environment of corporate fear is huge- fear of prosecution & lawsuits for the most trivial of malfunctions- things we would have called "annoyances" 10 or 20 years ago. All the trivial stuff that should N-E-V-E-R warrant an actual recall is clogging the system so the real problems are addressed more slowly than they should be, and its raising prices for all of us. Our culture's "protect me from myself" mentality is out of hand.

 

[HangFire]

Originally Posted By: 440Magnum
Which brings me full circle to my original point: The environment of corporate fear is huge- fear of prosecution & lawsuits for the most trivial of malfunctions- things we would have called "annoyances" 10 or 20 years ago. All the trivial stuff that should N-E-V-E-R warrant an actual recall is clogging the system so the real problems are addressed more slowly than they should be, and its raising prices for all of us. Our culture's "protect me from myself" mentality is out of hand.


I agree, but to some extent the industry has brought this on itself.

For one thing, not pointing at Chrysler, but Ford has been caught twice writing memo's that it is cheaper to pay off settlements than fix fatal problems, first with Pinto's and again with Explorer's. GM's bad ignition switches deactivate air bags at highway speeds, which resulted in deaths. The problems may have started out small, but allowing them to continue were real and inexcusable actions. If they had feared fines and prosecution back then, they may have acted more responsibly.

Second, the less knowledgable that we've been pitying is getting tired of being screwed. The current administration they elected into office is less business-friendly and more enforcement-oriented.

Third, the taxpayers had to bail them out, creating a they-owe-us mentality.

When I talk to people about recalls, their attitude is "I wish they'd recall my car, I just dropped $XXXX on something that never should have broken."