2000 Concorde Door Solenoids all failed.

If you visit

and the 300M ezBoard, you will see that it is a fairly common failure. However, having all four fail is probably unusual - aren't you the lucky person!! What are the chances. Maybe you should play the lottery with your Concorde's VIN. 8^)

It is possible that the problem is batch specific, in which case you would probably do fine getting them all from a salvage yard. Any 2nd gen LH car will do. Doesn't look like

lists the latch, but if you have any decent salvage yards around you, you should be able to find a good donor car for the latches.

FWIW, my '99 has had no lock failures (or at least not since I bought it at 58k miles).

You may already know this, but the solenoid/motor/actuator is built into the latch - so that's another name for it - but if you go around asking for it, "latch" is probably the best name to use for others to recognize what you're talking about.

You might also post to the Buy/Sell/Trade forums in DI.net and 300M ezBoard, although there's probably more people needing than selling them. I sold one on the 300M ezBoard a couple of months ago from a salvage door I installed on my Concorde due to an accident.

Bill Putney (to reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address with "x")

No problem on my 99 300M with the locks though it certain weather they sound a bit different.

FWIW, we lost three of our four door latches on my wife's 2000 Intrepid, and the trunk remote; the replacement door latches are all holding up fine. Haven't bothered to replace the trunk latch yet.

Have a look in this news group for postings with the subject "Chrysler

300M: Can't open rear passenger door" (Jan 31/04).

These door solenoids are failing probably because they get used

*needlessly* every time you get in your car and start to drive it because they are self-activating (auto-locking).

I hate this feature.

For example, in the morning I get in my 300 (which is parked in a garage over-night, and it's NOT LOCKED). I drive to work. In the parking lot I lock it. After work, I un-lock it, get in, drive home, and it remains unlocked.

So what do we have here. Ideally, the doors would not attempt an "auto-lock" once the car is started and driven a few hundred yards. So on a typical day I would perform 1 lock cycle (locking all doors upon arrival at work and unlocking passenger door when leaving work). No other locking activity would happen.

Instead, what really happens is

1) get in car in the morning. Start to drive to work. ALL doors are auto-locked (even the ones that ARE ALREADY locked).

2) at work, I lock the car.

3) at work, I unlock driver door.

4) driving away from work, all doors are auto-locked (even the ones that are ALREADY locked).

It must be the auto-locking "feature" that is killing these solenoids. Can it be turned off?

Why can't it work such that when a locking cycle is performed, that ONLY the doors that are unlocked have their solenoids activated, and vice-versa? That would eliminate needless solenoid activation and extend their life.

Yes, at least it can on my '96 T&C LXi by doing this:

1. Close all doors.
2. With key in ignition turn it between the OFF and ON position a total of four times ending in the OFF position (do not start the engine).
3. Press the driver's side power door lock button to lock the doors.
4. You will hear a single chime when programming is completed.

(Quoted from Page 17, "Things to Know Before Starting Your Vehicle", 1996 Chrysler Town & Country Owner's Manual.

I never thought about it, but this feature being the deafult could explain the relatively high number of failures.

It can be disabled on my '99 Concorde and every other LH vehicle - I assume later years as well - by a similar if not identical procedure. MoPar Man - look in your owner's manual for the procedure. It's in there. Bill Putney (to reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address with "x")

How? I lock my doors every time I get in the car; in my wife's car, the car takes care of it for me. what difference can it make to the life of the solenoid?

I would say that's not the norm either. But obviously they shouldn't fail even then. More cycling = earlier failure.

Bill Putney (to reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address with "x")