Chrysler electronics on the first gen LH cars are MUCH more sophisticated than anything Ford, GM, or most other manufacturers had back then. The a/c control on those cars has many more "options" than most others, too. As in if you have it on "AUTO", then manually adjust the fan speed, it kicks out of full "AUTO". Just one click on the rotary fan switch is all it takes.
When on "AUTO", the fan speed WILL respond to additional light input from the sun coming out from behind the clouds, keying on the additional ambient light to adjust the a/c fan speed up for the anticipated heat load . . . and vice versa. That sensor is part of the center item in the middle of the instrument panel, near the front middle, which also has the flashing light for the factory security system.
I generally worried more about the temperature and air duct selection than fan speed. The first gen LHS was my "rent car of choice" when they were new . . . from Dollar. Then, when the Y2K New Year's Eve was about to happen, I ended up with a 300M rental from Dollar, even bought LDW (just in case), so I'd have the keys to a neat new Chrysler in my pocket should anything happen at that (allegedly) fateful hour. Our Mopar Club was doing New Year's Eve parties rather than Christmas parties at that time, so I was also in good company.
You can probably still get the factory Chrysler service manual for those cars. I bought one when my parents bought their '95 LH New Yorker. Knowing how GM did things back then, the electronic sophistication of the Chryslers makes GM products look like . . . well . . . "not fully bloomed, but less expensive to build", might be a nice way to put it.
Their '95 LH NY has about 105K on it now. Worst nagging thing is the noisy door checks, which "click" when you open the door. Trying to lube things so they work smoother only makes it worse. I think a bushing or something on the hold-down screw went away or something?
It's been serviced by the small town dealer they bought it from. When they got it in the later part of the model year, it was the dealer's wife's demo. My mother did not want an LHS (due to the "stick shift", as she's from the generation where stick/floor shifts were only on lower-level, less expensive cars), so the column shift NY works great for her.
At the 6 yr mark, although the mileage did not recommend a timing belt replacement, the dealer did. She approved that repair, so that was done then. Later, word came out about BFG not warrantying tires over 6 yrs old, due to deterioration of the rubber/cord in the tires, due to age . . even if they had never been mounted. So, that deal was gotten out of the way back then.
It had to have a pair of tie rod ends, which caused a noise similar to loose shocks in the front end. Got the steering a little tighter, too.
My mother drives the car daily, so every time she gets in, the power locks are worked. Several months ago, the rh rr lock actuator stopped working. Dealer replaced that during a normal oil change service.
Then the power antenna hung mid-travel. Got that fixed, too.
The orig Eagle GAs were replaced at about 35000 miles. I don't recall why, as it looked like they'd easily go 60K at that time, but she ended up with a set of Michelin Symmetrys on it. I don't think they might make it through the winter, though, but we'll have to see how that goes. Never has had an alignment, that I know of, yet all of the tires are wearing flat and even, with no real need to rotate to even out the wear.
At about 3 yrs, the factory battery failed. The dealer put in an Interstate battery at that time, using a different cable end on the positive cable (as flaky as that might have been). When she took it it two oil changes ago, the service man came in and asked if it'd been hard to start, or slow to start. My mother said that it did sometimes. She asked "Why?" He said that they noticed it turned over a little slower than normal, so they put the computerized checker on it and it came back "REPLACE". So she got a new battery like the old one that had lasted about 8 years.
Now, after the battery replacement, she noticed that the overhead console display was working normally again. I think she noticed it being a little dim AND the temperature display was not accurate--before the battery replacement. She had asked me about it being a little off and I replied that sometimes they were not completely accurate . . . so much for that.
Seems like there was a deal with the a/c belt tensioner or something similar?
Several years ago, I mentioned that she might ask them about doing a trans fluid/filter change, but I don't think it ever got done.
At one time, it had the torque converter shudder under certain light throttle settings going up a slight grade. I told her, when that happened, to back out of the throttle, let the speed drop a little, and then use more throttle to get up to speed (before the signal to lock-up the converter was given). It didn't matter how long you let it shudder, unless either the speed or throttle setting was increased, it would keep doing it. The dealer had a "fix kit" for that, which I suspect was from Chrysler, which helped it. Don't know if the fluid ever got changed or not. I know there's a toggle switch modification for that situation in the FAQs.
At some time in the future, it's also going to need struts. They are still good for smooth roads, but a few undulations can put a little too much float into things.
As for the factory service manual, I think it's probably about $50+ USD now, but welll worth it. There should be an order blank in the back of the owner's manual. You can probably go online to order one from the printer.
To me, the first gen and second gen LH cars are some of the best Chryslers ever built and designed--period. Even if they are front wheel drive. They have an athletic feel in the chassis that is "light on their feet" rather than the ponderous soft feel of similar GM cars, similar to how prior rear wheel drive Chryslers felt, in that respect (steering response and flat cornering).
In an AutoWeek commentary on the then-new LHS, they had previously driven a last-gen Buick Park Avenue (96?) when it was new. They'd taken the PA up into the hills (somewhere) to a fancy steak house. Those PAs handled pretty decently, they observed, on those roads. Then, a week or so later, they took an LHS to the same place. They commented that they just THOUGHT the Buick PA handled well . . . when they noticed they were driving the same roads about 10mph faster AND not noticing they were driving faster at all in the LHS. It was THAT easy to do.
By observation, if you run the tire pressures at 32 frt/30 rr, it'll make the steering response even better at it better matches the tire pressure to the weight distribution of the car. A little tighter steering response AND less understeer (understeer which is way less than any other fwd car of that type!).
When the last gen Park Avenue came out, I went to a ride-drive event for it. They had three versions of PAs there. The base car, the base car with upgraded GranTouring suspension, and the PA Ultra (supercharged V-8 and upgraded suspension). They also had a bench seat LHS there, plus a fwd Continental and something else of that nature.
In the handling section of the driving course, it was a 20mph slalom. The product specialist that was riding along with me told me to just drive through the cones and not worry about the speed, which he'd monitor.
In the base PA, by the 3rd cone, I was mowing down cones. Understeer and Goodyear Conquest tires were the culprits. Even at just over 20mph.
In the Ultra, I was mowing down cones again, at 22mph, but due to the MagnaSteer power steering rack's magnets not switching fast enough.
Then in the Lincoln, it had super easy steering and the cones were a "goner" again. This time due to massive understeer.
Final was in the LHS. I drove through the cones at about 26mph and didn't hit one! It steered clean and easy and accurately. No real tire noise either. I suspect that my many rental car experiences (many miles of "seat time") did not hurt, but with cars all of the same general wheelbase and size, it was a decent test.
As you might can tell, I like those LH cars a lot. And, as my mother's NY can prove, it's been a very trouble-free car too. Averages about
22mpg in the way she drives.
In the weekend trips I'd take in them, when new, they usually did 26mpg on the highway (65-70mph cruise conditions). A similar Concorde, with smoother over-the-car aerodynamics and a little smaller front end "profile" would do 27.5mpg in similar conditions, both with the same spec 3.5L V-6.
When I drove their '95 NY on the highway a while back, I noticed that it would "Instant MPG" at about 30mpg at 60mph, which closely matches what a 300M will do with the 2nd gen 3.5L V-6 in it (when new, which also matches the percentage increase in mpg which Chrysler quoted for the newer engine versus the earlier one).
My rental car experiences with the 300M resulted in highway "Instant MPG" of 30mpg at 60mph, which dropped to 27mpg at 90mph, with only
700rpm difference in engine speed. I think this proves how good that engine design is, with respect to fuel economy AND the aerodynamics of that chopped-off rear end 300M body.
For comparison . . . a '07 Impala LT with the VVT 3.9L pushrod V-6, 240+ horsepower, will get 30mpg at 70mph, in 3cyl mode. All the Chrysler V-6 has is OHC and a dual-path intake manifold setup, by comparison. And, of course, the 3.6L VVT DOHC GM V-6 in the Cadillac CTS, STS, and Buick LaCrosse, with similar 240 horsepower will get about 30mpg on a smooother road at a 60-65mph cruise, but when the speed goes above about
70mph and the roads have ups and downs, that mileage goes "south" quickly. So when you compare how much "tech" it takes for a GM engine to return similar power and fuel economy as a less-tech, but well-designed, Chrysler engine fo the same size . . . somebody's spending a LOT of money for not much advantage.
I HAVE rented a few of the LY chassis cars. They are nice, for sure, and the HEMI power is neat, but they feel big and more ponderous than the prior LH cars. The suspension tuning on the R/T is more "consumer" than "higher performance", from my own observations. I also feel they gave up too much fuel economy for that "blocky" look, a look I like, though. Be that as it may. And fuel economy took a hit, as did performance, with the extra weight of that body, too.
Interesting thing is that for the same EPA fuel economy . . . you can drive a new Mustang V-6 coupe . . . or a Charger R/T HEMI. Tough choice???? Not really! HEMI RULES!
So . . . for y'all with the flaky temp readings, you might do a load test on your batteries and see how they stack up. That might be the whole situation, as it was on my mother's '95 LH NY.
Enjoy!
C-BODY