Saw the new '07 Sebring Thursday

Then, howcome I have a 1985 Corolla GTS in the yard with 258,000 miles that still starts on the first turn of the key, and just gave away an '85 Celica in excellent running condition that still starts on the first turn of the key, but my '92 Grand Voyager sounds like it's going to BLOW UP any minute now, and it only has 127,000 miles on it?

Because:

Somebody had done a survey of potential customers and decided that the customer was too dumb to know what was under the hood anyway, so the "cost effective" approach was taken. Ford's Taurus engines and GM's 3.8 used pushrods, so why not us?

We were paying a high premium for Mitsubishi's 3.0L V6, and Trenton Engine had room for another assembly line, so it was a no brainer as far as the necessity and where it would be built. We had some problems early on with valve stem finish which was quickly fixed, a bigger problem was thrust bearing failure. We were getting some engines coming in to tear down with incredible end play, you didn't need a dial micrometer to know which ones were bad. Our manager grabbed me and 3 other mechanics and we spent the next

I had a real battle with an eng Another problem is oil leaks. Anytime you bolt aluminum to iron, the gasket in between is compromised, due to the expansion differences between the two metals. This is particularly evident in the chain case module gasket. The gasket moves over time and creates a gap just above the oil pan rail, and boy does it make a mess. Lower intake gaskets leak in the corners. An upgraded gasket was designed with longer, tapered rubber ends that was supposed to end the use of RTV, but RTV will always be a necessity on that application.

Other notes Jim Gathmann wrote: The early years of the 3.3 did have problems with the rockers and the oiling system. I did not know when it was corrected... Apparently they fixed this by the second year of production.

"91redbaron" wrote: The 3.5 had a rather interesting intake setup. There were two separate intake manifolds for the left and right side cylinders with their own throttle-bodies (interesting throttle linkage and cabling there). So in a way it was like two in-line 3-cylinders that were joined at the crank.

Dan Rose wrote: "I am a Dodge Dynasty owner who has one of the first 3.3 engines ever to come off the line. The pulleys on the (at least the early)

Yup, American cars are the BEST, ok...

On Thu, 23 Nov 2006 06:36:24 -0500, Bill Putney graced this newsgroup with:

Bill,

All excellent points. I think the strongest comment you made was about the influence unions have on the American automobile.

(I'll preface this by saying that everything I say is IMHO and should be taken as such).

Unions have outlived their usefulness. There was a time when unions not only protected the factory worker but ensured that the auto manufacturer played fair. Over the course of time, again IMHO, the unions have moved away from "the big picture" and instead focused on higher and higher benefits and salaries for their members.

In the end, the cost has to be passed on to the consumer. The more expensive the car, the higher quality that's expected. I submit that a large quantity of the American cars sitting in dealer lots should be

That way, the cost vs quality and level of expectation would be in alignment.

And, as in everything, there's always exceptions to the rule

For example, I DO believe that Ford makes a great truck. I've owned two (new) Explorers (a 91 Sport and an 03 XLT) and both trucks were flawless..both in build quality, ride and reliability. The V8 in the XLT was smooth, powerful and economical. The fit and finish were excellent and if I were to buy another SUV someday, I wouldn't hesitate for a second in buying another Explorer.

I think you need to call the "waaaaambulance"

On Fri, 24 Nov 2006 03:22:21 -0600, "BoycottAI" graced this newsgroup with:

..besides, anyone who is actually seriously looking at a Chrysler, let alone a Sebring with it's horrible repair history and then thinks it's comparable to a Japanese car like a Camry is stump stupid.

I, personally, will never, ever own a Chrysler product ever again.

Not if they're condemned to driving a Camry every day. Talk about cause for heavy medication....

On Fri, 24 Nov 2006 09:20:00 -0600, Steve graced this newsgroup with:

the new Camry's come in several different engine configurations. Personally, it's not my kind of car either.

Good, because I don't believe you. Admittedly, an 80s Camaro is about the WORST American car you can pick for build quality, but it would still be better than the 79 Mazda POS that put me off Japanese cars forever.

Congratulations... it still has half the miles my '73 Plymouth Satellite has. Let me know how IT looks when its 33 years old and has 460,000 miles (as if it will ever come CLOSE to either!).

Because real engines do make a little more noise than wound-up rubber bands :-p

On Fri, 24 Nov 2006 09:25:41 -0600, Steve graced this newsgroup with:

..I'm not here to convince you of anything. Nor do I or anyone else have to. Personally, I think MY recollection of the problems I had with American cars is a hell of a lot more plausible than your claim of their longevity and looks.

But hey, it's the Internet, you can say or be anything you want. Somebody out there might actually believe you so knock yourself out. ;-)

That hasn't been our experience, with many Chryslers since '79, except for the Chrysler NEW stick shift 4 Speed in an '81 Horizon., however Chrysler replaced that transmission after 2 yrs with complete success.

In fact the reliability and performance of our Chryslers has been very good, the problem I have is the type of cars they are now building don't interest us. Currently have a '95 Concord and '01 Sebring that run perfectly and have had low maintenance costs.

On Fri, 24 Nov 2006 20:13:48 GMT, Some O graced this newsgroup with:

Unfortunately, my experience with Chrysler products wasn't as bright.

I *do* think they have the best body styles. Their Charger's, 300's and others are very nice looking cars. Then again, they have the PT Cruiser..ugh.

wow... that averages out to a whopping 14k miles a year! i guess that IS good for an american car!

heh... 1979 diplomat. within 6 years it needed...

new gas tank new exhaust system new brake system new steering gearbox new tranny

the only thing GOOD about the car was the 225 slant 6.

Oh my, if you've been put off to Toyotas forever, you are missing out on the best cars available. Try using your noodle.

Don't let the 79 Mazda experience deprive you of the best cars you can buy.

=====

Oops, Steve (NOT SoCalMike) wrote that about being put off to Toyotas forever because of the Mazda. Steve, use your noodle! [chuckle

When I was a kid, myself and a cousin were running thru my grnadmother's house when she stopped us and told us we'd better stop running in the house or we might fall and break our noodles. I was shocked, and yet a little amused, that my otherwise prim and proper grandmother would use such a crude expression. It was years later that I realized that "noodle" meant "head".

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

Why? What makes your claims "plausible," other than the fact that you said them? Nothing.

And you do...

On Sat, 25 Nov 2006 08:45:18 -0600, Steve graced this newsgroup with:

..the fact that you claim to have American cars that have hundreds of thousands of miles on them and look and run like new. THAT isn't plausible. Can happen? Sure, but don't come off trying to make the claim that ALL American cars do this. Because they don't. If you want to ignore every single consumer review by just about every reputable car review source on the planet. Go for it. It's doesn't make your credibility any more plausible.

Actually, I'm just confusing you with facts. MY experience with American cars not only goes back to '79, but spans several vehicles as recent as 2003.

YOUR experience, by your own admission, is isolated to '79, Which, again by your own admission is dated by 27 years. If your entire argument hinges on information that's nearly 30 years old..well, I think your credibility pretty much speaks for itself.

I'm not the one that's implausible here junior.

snipped-for-privacy@home.com wrote:

Sorry to disappoint you, but everything I said is a fact.

I think we can all agree on that.

So just don't YOU come off trying to make it sound like all Japanese cars are better than American cars, because we all know THAT isn't true either. The fact of the matter is that today, there's virtually no difference in reliability or longevity between ANY car brands. Any broad-based quality advantage that the Japanese had only existed between maybe 1978 and 1990. Some brands and models are more amenable to long life because they're easier to service (German cars, non-GM American cars). Some have a bit fewer "nuiscance" failures with non-drivetrain components (Toyota). Some have high rates of very specific failures (early 2000s Chevrolet V6 intake manifolds, a couple of sludge-prone Toyota oiling systems, the early Chrysler 2.7L v6 oiling system). But major differences? Forget it. Cars have evolved to be mostly transportation appliances. And that is my beef with most of the Japanese brands. I'd rather have chronic diahrrhea than be subjected to the boredom of driving a Camry or Altima every day. Yes, the same can be said of a Taurus, but at least SOME American and German cars are interesting. About the only Japanese car that I'd give a second look right now is the RX-8. In contrast, there are more American and German models that I find interesting every day. The new Mustang, the Charger, the Magnum, the forthcoming Challenger and next generation Camaro, Viper, Corvette C6, the BMW 5-series, etc. etc. etc.