What's hot? Cars that last

Discussion in 'General Motoring' started by rcpm, Mar 24, 2009.

  1. rcpm

    clare Guest


    My experience with Toyota over the years - and then owning Fords, GMs
    and Chyslers (and working on those owned by friends) the Toys are
    actually not all that bad. Even the Previa and Van LE were easier to
    work on than the 3800 TransSport or a 2.5 Liter Mystique.
     
    clare, Mar 26, 2009
    #21
  2. rcpm

    Joe Pfeiffer Guest

    My daughter's 1990 pickup (with 3.0 litre engine) has the most
    mind-numbingly stupid unmaintainable issues of any vehicle I've ever
    owned. Of course, every other vehicle has been a Chrysler, so perhaps
    I'm just spoiled.
     
    Joe Pfeiffer, Mar 26, 2009
    #22
  3. rcpm

    Steve Guest

    I've had a few Chrysler products that raised my ire too. Dad's 78
    Horizon was a service mess. The two 80s M-bodies that drifted through
    the family were annoying in that most things were typically Chrysler
    straightforward, and others were mind-numbingly annoying- like anything
    related to the accessory brackets seemed to have been needlessly
    goobered-up compared to 70s Mopars. And then the whole "isolated
    transverse suspension" concept that created a pretty-much impenetrable
    bucket of steel right below the engine and limited access from below
    severely.

    But I never quit being amazed at how nice it was to work on the '93 LH.
    Some things *looked* horrific- like the first glance at changing a
    timing belt. UNTIL you read the service manual and discovered that 4
    bolts would get the whole radiator upper cross-brace out of the way,
    then 4 more plus a wire and 4 clips would get the electric fans out and
    open up plenty of room in front of the engine. Same with access to the
    steering rack- it looked *buried* at the back of the engine compartment,
    but a few bolts to remove the windshield wiper motor and linkage "tray"
    as an assembly, then popping off the air intake "Y" pipe (this was a
    3.5) opened up plenty of room back there too. Someone had obviously put
    some time into deliberately grouping things into easily-removed modules
    to allow access to deeper bits and pieces. And that car lasted over 250k
    miles, too. No complaints there.


    Just skimming the FSM for wife's 05 PT revealed one thing that made my
    hair hurt.... to replace the right motor mount, the 4th or 5th step is
    "remove engine assembly." <sigh> I sure hope it lasts a *long* time. I
    can almost forgive it, the PT is something of a special case when it
    comes to packing components in. Its very obvious that a lot of the
    layout was dictated by the car's oddball styling.

    And to get back to Cadillacs- don't even get me started on the HT4100
    that drifted through the family. OK, too late, I'm started. Just one
    example: to change the water pump, you had to remove the PS pump. OK, I
    can buy that. To remove the PS pump, you have to get at a bolt that's
    blocked by the PS pulley. Been there before, no problem... IF they had
    used a spoked PS pulley like my '69 Coronet has so that you could remove
    the bolt through the gap between pulley spokes. But no- Cadillac used a
    solid disk pulley. Gotta squeeze a puller into the limited space and
    extract the pulley off the PS pump nose, all just to get at *one*
    stinking bolt.
     
    Steve, Mar 26, 2009
    #23
  4. rcpm

    Derek Gee Guest

    You've missed my point. What JD Power is saying is that the IQS numbers
    predict very well what the Vehicle Durability Study numbers three years down
    the road will look like. That is not worthless.

    Derek
     
    Derek Gee, Mar 27, 2009
    #24
  5. rcpm

    Derek Gee Guest

    True, JD Power aren't in it for charity, but I've been tracking their
    numbers against Consumer Reports and internal automaker data, and overall it
    does track pretty well against it. I only wish they would track the
    vehicles for longer than three years (like they used to). At that point,
    they are only just being nicely broken in... :)

    Derek
     
    Derek Gee, Mar 27, 2009
    #25
  6. rcpm

    clare Guest

    You've never owned a PT Cruiser!! Thankfully mine is NOT the Turbo -
    this one is tight enough (the early 2.4, not the "world engine)
     
    clare, Mar 27, 2009
    #26
  7. rcpm

    Joe Pfeiffer Guest

    True -- though that same daughter did have a '95 Neon for a while
    (similar though not the same, in spite of some who make the claim,
    platform) and it was the single easiest vehicle to work on I've ever
    owned, including my '66 Charger.

    Unfortunately, part of her disenchantment with it stemmed from the
    fact that it was as easy for stereo thieves to work on as it was for
    us...
     
    Joe Pfeiffer, Mar 27, 2009
    #27
  8. rcpm

    Steve Guest

    Did the PT ever get switched over to the World Engine? I've never been
    clear on that. If so, it must have been in the last 3 years, the 06 we
    looked at before buying the 05 still had the 2.4. Interesting, I just
    did some googling around and I can only find references to the TURBO
    motor being switched to the "world engine" platform in 07, but I have to
    assume that the NA version was also switched.
     
    Steve, Mar 27, 2009
    #28
  9. rcpm

    clare Guest

    My daughter had a '89 Neon - was broken into 3 times and stolen once -
    But working on it - even being a twin cam was a veritable CINCH
    compared to the PR. There isn't room for a flee to move under the
    confines of a PT hood - those big fenders, narrow grill, oldfashioned
    look really puts a damper on things. Would be easier with the engine
    in lengthwize!!!!
     
    clare, Mar 27, 2009
    #29
  10. rcpm

    clare Guest

    All '07 and I believe the last of the 06 production are 2.4 "world
    engine" - AKA Hyundai/Kia/ ? /? /?
     
    clare, Mar 27, 2009
    #30
  11. rcpm

    Steve Guest

    Chrysler/Hyundai/Mitsubishi. Hopefully the Chrysler participation
    prevented too much oil burning and head cracking from the Mitsu side of
    things :-/


    Hyundai and Kia are the same parent company now, I think.
     
    Steve, Mar 27, 2009
    #31
  12. rcpm

    Mike Hunter Guest

    The problem with ranking anything on a 'list' is, the fact that it is
    misleading. Any list of the finest of the finest, or even the worst of the
    worst, will have one on the top and another on the bottom, which means
    nothing. Those surveys should be presented as the statistical PERCENTAGE,
    which is what they are, that would be more meaningful.

    As a statistic list would show that ALL manufactured vehicle fall within the
    2% average failure rate for ALL manufactured products, with one being at an
    insignificant small percentage above the one below.

    Does it really matter if the failure rate is 1.8% or 1.9 or even 1.1% when
    the 3,000,000 copies of that vehicle were sold? Your chance that you
    bought one of the 98% that did NOT have a failure is far greater and even
    you did get one of the 2% the failure would have been covered by the
    warranty, that is why all manufacturers offer a warranty, even on a $500,000
    Rolls Royce

    Durability studies that are not quantified are meaningless to the average
    person as well, because unless one spends big buck to subscribe to the group
    providing the survey, there is not way to know how the person surveyed used
    or abused the product or if they provide the proper preventive maintenance
    or not.
     
    Mike Hunter, Mar 27, 2009
    #32
  13. rcpm

    bllsht Guest


    Nope.

    No PT Cruiser had the world engine.
     
    bllsht, Mar 28, 2009
    #33
  14. rcpm

    Joe Pfeiffer Guest

    Amen. The second generation is just as good, but, again, you *really*
    need the FSM to find that out.
    Ummm.... on Becca's Neon, replacing the timing belt required removing
    one of the motor mounts. My recollection is it was the right side...
    I sure hope I'm remembering wrong.
     
    Joe Pfeiffer, Mar 28, 2009
    #34
  15. rcpm

    clare Guest

    You are wrong. 2007 and up have the world engine.
     
    clare, Mar 28, 2009
    #35
  16. rcpm

    clare Guest

    Neon engine mount needs to come out to do the timing belt, but
    removing the neon engine mount is a relatively simple job - done with
    the engine in place with the help of a jack and a piece of wood.
     
    clare, Mar 28, 2009
    #36
  17. rcpm

    bllsht Guest


    Afraid not.

    Ever seen one? Can you tell the difference?

    09 PT Cruiser 2.4L SMPI & 2.4L turbo:
    http://www.chrysler.com/en/2009/pt_cruiser/performance/powertrain/

    Specs from Chrysler service information:
    Displacement 2.4 Liters 148 cu. in.
    Bore 87.5 mm 3.445 in.
    Stroke 101.0 mm 3.976 in.



    09 Sebring/Avenger/Caliber/Patriot/Compass/Journey 2.4L dVVT "World
    Engine":
    http://www.chrysler.com/en/2009/sebring/performance/powertrain/

    Specs from Chrysler service information:
    Displacement 2.4 Liters 146.5 cu. in.
    Bore 88 mm 3.465 in.
    Stroke 97 mm 3.819 in.
     
    bllsht, Mar 28, 2009
    #37
  18. rcpm

    Joe Pfeiffer Guest

    Right (I did it; unfortunately, after the belt had broken...
    compression check showed the valves were not damaged, but my oh my it
    went through oil after that) -- but does the PT also require removing
    the motor mount to do the timing belt? And given (per Steve's quote
    above) that replacing the motor mount requires removing the engine...
     
    Joe Pfeiffer, Mar 28, 2009
    #38
  19. rcpm

    clare Guest

    Mea Culpa.
    I was wrong. The PT Cruiser appears to be the one holdout for the old
    Neon 2.0 based 2.4

    I've been wrong before - and likely will be sometime again!!

    There was RUMOR that the PT was to get the World Engine, but
    apparently it did not happen.

    Mine is a 2002
     
    clare, Mar 29, 2009
    #39
  20. rcpm

    clare Guest


    The mount needs to come out but it is possible to do IN the car.
     
    clare, Mar 29, 2009
    #40
Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.