Chrysler engines

How did their aluminum six hold up? I know the Rambler aluminum mill was prone to all kinds of problems, and many were replaced with cast-iron jobs while still under warranty.

If we're talking musclecar-era engines, I agree with your assessment. AMC and Studebaker also put out engines that were far superior to Chevy and Ford, IMHO. Some of the "upmarket" GM engines (Olds, Cadillac) were pretty good too.

nate

Im not sure about that one, Roger. Chrysler had some cars that were relabels of Mitsubishi too, and I don't really know if they used some of these engines in their domestic cars. Will try to check it, for sure.

I found reference to 1961-1964 aluminum sixes used in Ramblers, with a reputation for unreliability. Some say the reputation was unwarranted, but I think it should stick.

Chrysler didn't buy AMC until considerably later.

I obought a 1975 AMC Sportabout Wagon after the birth of my son, and this little car was pretty durable. The 258 CID cast iron L6 burned a little oil from the very beginning and never stopped, and mileage was pretty poor for this type of car, but I never really regretted buying it.

I don't think they count as Chrysler engines. They are Mitsubishi engines. There was one in my '82 Dodge Colt. They had a reputation for needing rings at 100k km (60k miles). Mine did. White smoke.

--

------------------------------------------------------------------------------ William R Watt National Capital FreeNet Ottawa's free community network homepage:

The aluminum 225 slant-6 has no systematic problems at all -- except for knowitall owners used something other than glycol-based antifreeze in the cooling systems. The design of the engine is extremely robust (integrally-cast iron cylinder liners, deep-skirt die-cast aluminum block, beefy factory align-bored cast iron upper and lower main bearing caps, etc). Proper procedure must be followed when installing the head gasket, but that's true with everything. I have owned five of these engines -- still own two -- and they're not much less robust than the iron version of the same engine. Certainly Chrysler never had to engage in warranty heroics as AMC and (later, with the Vega) GM did with their more halfassed efforts.

Chrysler was dumb enough to buy the Bitsushitti Astron 2.6 litre "Silent Shaft" engine and install it in a lot of K-cars and minivans from '81 through '86.

Apparently having failed to learn the lesson, Chrysler paid Bitsushitti to pull prolonged "No, really, we've fixed it this year, this time for sure" shenanigans on them between 1987 and 1994 with the 3.0 litre V6. Post-'94 3.0s aren't bad engines.

That Vega engine has to be one of the worst GM ever made. The metallurgy sounded very high tech, and the promise was there, but they were just no good.

I was not able to get that much milage from my old slant six, though it was still a great, reliable engine. I had one rocker arm fail in one, had to replace distrib. cap on the same one also.

Did have carb problems in a couple of others. Mopar made carb float out of plastic- a plastic that would eventually absorb too much gasoline and no longer float :-)

I have a Neon now. A great little R/T. Did have to have head gasket replaced, though under warranty. Thing that gripes me about it, however, is that apparently they new the gasket was defective design, and had revision already when car was built, but didn't want to just throw out their stock of the old ones. I can't believe what they saved on using old gaskets was cheaper than all the warranty work they had to do.

We are on our third minivan. Had clutch problems on first, due to defective design again, but other than that they have been super reliable. First two were the four cyl. New one is V6- hope it is as good as the fours.

Good on ya...I assume the first one had a manual tranny? There are getting to be fewer and fewer vehicles available with manuals.

If only that was true. My SO's Caravan is inflicted with the Mitsubishi junk. The rest of the van has been relatively trouble free. The engine even at it best is a weak noisy piece of crap. The last time there was a problem, the dealer's solution was to try to sell her a new engine. Fortunately an independent mechanic was able to repair it by replacing a burned valve. However, even after repairing it, he suggested dumping it immediately. He had nothing good to say about the engine. Apparently my SO has one of the better ones....

Personally there is no way I'll ever be seduced into buying another Chrysler product. As soon as our last Dodge truck goes to the happy hunting ground I'll swear off from Chrysler products forever. Long ago my Father warned me not to buy Chryslers (as his Father warned him when he was young). I was too stupid to believe him and suffered for not trusting his experience. I think one Chrysler product per generation is enough (and I've had two). Chrysler may not have learned their lesson, but I have learned mine.

Ed

Our new one has an auto :-( We'd have preferred the manual, but we knew the last van we had, a '94 model, was one of the very last ones with manual. None in 95 and beyond. My Neon is still manual, but we had to forego manual on van. I don't think there are ANY minivans now with manual.

Actually, 1995 was the last year in which handshift minivans were available in North America from Chrysler Corp, and then only with the

There are lots of them...outside North America. Everywhere else in the world, you can have your Chrysler Voyager with a very nice turbodiesel engine and a 5-speed.

Whose turbo-diesel are they using?

Ed

I dont know the answer, but Mercedes (Daimler) has long technology in diesels and turbo diesels.

Outside the USA there is a rather wide availability of decent technology. My son in Norway bought a Ford station wagon at auction for about $5000. (I was surprised to find it was in great shape) New cars there usually cost from $30,000 upward. (My bosses GS430 would have cost $200,000 in taxes)

This little Ford has plenty of power, runs well, gets great economy, and is a 4 cylinder diesel. Darn sure doesnt run like what I would expect from a 4 cyl diesel.

Steyr-Daimler-Puch

Thanks.

Is this the same engine they are using in the Jeep Liberty? Are the vans assembled in the US and shipped to Europe?

Ed

Here's what GM have done. Take the old four cylinder engine from the Chevy II/Nova and put it in the Vega. That engine was very reliable (I still use one for an every day driver in a '69 Nova) and easily had enough power. Take all the money that they spent on the Vega engine warranty program that was used on all the engines that they replaced free of charge on the ones that failed before 50K miles and use that money to perfect the Vega aluminum engine before they put it on the market without testing it. If you can drop a small block Chevy in the Vega and it will hold up, you could have easily used the old Chevy II four cylinder engine without any problems. Oh, wait. I forgot that this was GM.

Yep... I'm one of the people who call the Iron Duke engine bad names. For me, it was a POS. The one in our 84 Fiero cracked early on, and GM denied there was any problem. Finally, when it could limp no further, I pulled it out and surely enough there was the characteristic crack. Several trips to the boneyard yielded many more engines of the same year with the same cracked blocks. Finally, I found one that was worn out but no crack, had it bored, and rebuilt it.

GM has made shitteaux engines which include some of the 3800's (although many are quite reliable, not all series are), the DOHC affront to humanity, and a few others.

By the way, I just bought the CR annual review, and although I openly do not trust CR very much, it is helpful in finding a body style I like, and picking out the engine/transmission options I can get. It looks like, if I am to buy new or slightly used, it is probably going to be a Honda or a Toyota, but CR's ratings had little or nothing to do with it.