2001 Caravan SE 41TE/41AE Tranny Reliability

I consider the computer electronic, not mechanical.

Then it likely hasn't had serious MECHANICAL problems.

Matt

 

I still don't see how the weight of the van changes the strength
requirement of the transmission. The engine is the source of the torque
applied to the transmission, not the weight of the van.

I agree with heat dissipation being much higher with a heavier van, but
that isn't the same as needing a stronger transmission.


Matt

 

I still don't see how the weight of the van changes the strength

More mass = more *inertia* = more torque needed to get the van moving ,
applied over a longer period of time = more wear on moving parts, especially
clutches, torque converter, etc. Remember, a change in direction is an
acceleration subject to inertia, so this added torque requirement is a
constant thing, not just when starting out from a stop. But there's
mechanical engineers out there who can explain that part better than I.

Yes, the *potential* output of the engine/transmission package is
*theoretically* the same, regardless of the weight of the vehicle. How
frequently it is actually called upon to produce something near its peak
torque is what changes with the added mass.

That's my stab at it, anyway.
--Geoff

 

Well, there have also been changes to the internals. Different snap
rings, different materials here and there, revised hard parts, revised
thrust washers, etc. etc.. Everything (as far as I know) is
backward-interchangeable, but that doesn't mean its not been changed.

 

But wear is proportional to torque and to the duration its applied, and
since the heavy van requires a higher AVERAGE torque.

Well, not necessarily stronger, but bigger clutches can take more heat
surge during a shift for example. The physical size of clutches is
extremely important to their total capacity, not just cooling oil flow.

 

I bought a used 1990 Dodge Spirit when they were offering the 7/70
mile warranty the first time around. It was transferable, but I had to
pay $50 to transfer it. I don't know if the new 7/70 warranty is
transferable, and if a feee is involved.

-Kirk

 

You are still missing my point. The transmission should be designed to
handle the maximum torque that the engine/torque convertor is capable of
producing. Assuming it is, and I don't know if this is true with the 41
family, then you should be able to put the nose of the van against a
tree and floor it and not MECHANICALLY damage the transmission. Heat is
another issue, but I'm talking from a mechanical strength perspective.

Yes, a heavier vehicle will require more torque to be applied for a
longer period, but this still should not mechanically overstress a
properly designed transmission. It might well thermally overstress it
though.


Matt

 

Do you know what the top 5 or so failure modes are for this transmission?

Matt

 

...

Obviously not material changes from 96 to 01 - they are still a POS.
Which puts me in the position of being a repeat buyer of something
that sucks. But other than the tranny I can find little wrong with
the new vans. Although I'd kill for HID lamps.

 

On Tue, 27 Jan 2004 23:08:44 GMT, "Matthew S. Whiting"

....

Ok - I'll bite. What are they?

 

At any one instant in time this is true. But a transmission has to
dissapate more energy per "trip" because the engine has to work harder to
achieve the same speeds and go the same distances as a smaller car. I think
this is the more correct way of looking at this problem. The amount of work
the transmission does is a function of the resistance transmitted back
through the drive train from the wheels to the engine and the length of time
it has to do it.

It reminds me of how one measures the amount of energy released during an
earthquake. I remember being in an earthquake that really packed a wallop,
but it only lasted 10-15 seconds. That quake was preceded by one that was
of a smaller magnitude, but lasted 30-45 seconds. Well, the quake with the
smaller magnitude but lasting longer had a larger yield on the richter
scale.

Those of you in southern Calif. remember the Landers quake (7.2 on the
richter) and the Big Bear quake (6.5). The Big Bear quake shook a lot more
than the Landers quake, but didn't last as long.

 

On what do you base this assertion?

Why'd you do something crazy like this if you believe your first statement?

Matt

 

I don't know either. It wasn't a rhetorical question, it was a real
question. I've never had a problem with either of my minivan
transmissions so I have no idea what the failure modes supposedly are.


Matt

 

We agree completely, but endurance/durability isn't the same as
strength. I suspect the issue is heat dissipation, but I've never seen
any statistics on the failure modes so I don't know. I'd be curious to
see the stats if anyone has them. I'm sure Chrysler doesn't publish
them, but a busy transmission shop should have a good idea.


Matt

 

On Thu, 29 Jan 2004 02:54:43 GMT, "Matthew S. Whiting"

....

Three vans - two trannies did not make one year. And I can relate
story after story after story about the transmissions. If I had a
buck for everyone with a dead transmission...

First of all there is NOTHING that comes even REMOTELY close in AWD
vans for style, functionality, creature comforts etc.. At least not
until this year (2004).. And repeat after me - EXTENDED WARRANTY.
Repeat once more.

 

On Thu, 29 Jan 2004 02:55:39 GMT, "Matthew S. Whiting"

....

When you find out - let me know. I've had mine serviced to the
severe duty schedule even though it does not get that kind of work.
I'm REALLY hoping that the 03/04 trannies are FINALLY better. You
know, Chryco did this with ABS brakes - took them a decade to sort
that out.

 

Maybe so but your statement that nothing was changed in these after
1996 is a crock.

From a 1998 Chrysler manual for this tranny:

page 615:

12.10 1997 Model Year Refinements

reaction plates were reduced from 4 to 3
tapered snap ring on either side of the UD/OD clutch was increased
parking sprag was upgraded
cover assembly was modified

12.11 1998 Model Year Refinements

rear annulus gear material revised
front carrier hub spline induction hardned
OD hub shaft revised
improved oil dam of underdrive hub
reaction shaft support assmbly hardened
speed sensors have material added tohex area
L/R clutch snap ring plate is thicker
changed of ATF fluid

I don't have a more current trans manual but I'm sure that
there's been plenty more tinkering. You can buy new trans
manuals from Chrysler very cheap. Maybe you might
do this instead of relying on hearsay.

Ted

 

The Honda seems pretty close as does the new Toyota. The
Windstar/Freestar isn't that much different. Obviously, the
transmission issue really isn't a significant issue or people wouldn't
keep buying the vans.


Matt

 

On Wed, 28 Jan 2004 23:10:06 -0800, "Ted Mittelstaedt"

....

Tinkering. Good word choice. Like *I* said - nothing MATERIAL. The
trannies that I've seen do not have a great track record. Hopefully
whatever is hidden in the 03/04s is FINALLY working. It sure as
heck has not been up to now.

 

On Thu, 29 Jan 2004 10:53:03 GMT, "Matthew S. Whiting"

....

Neither the Honda nor the Ford offer AWD.

I think it is a "cost of doing business" - for both Chrysler and the
consumer.