What's hot? Cars that last

25 hours is CONSERVATIVE. You've gotta have a few under your belt to make flat rate on them - and most dealer techs don't want to do them because it takes MORE than they get paid for flat rate.
Reply to
clare
Loading thread data ...

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.

Reply to
clare

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.

Reply to
Joe Pfeiffer

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." 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.

Reply to
Steve

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

Reply to
Derek Gee

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

Reply to
Derek Gee

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)

Reply to
clare

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...

Reply to
Joe Pfeiffer

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.

Reply to
Steve

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!!!!

Reply to
clare

All '07 and I believe the last of the 06 production are 2.4 "world engine" - AKA Hyundai/Kia/ ? /? /?

Reply to
clare

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.

Reply to
Steve

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.

Reply to
Mike Hunter

Nope.

No PT Cruiser had the world engine.

Reply to
bllsht

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.

Reply to
Joe Pfeiffer

You are wrong. 2007 and up have the world engine.

Reply to
clare

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.

Reply to
clare

Afraid not.

Ever seen one? Can you tell the difference?

09 PT Cruiser 2.4L SMPI & 2.4L turbo:
formatting link
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":

formatting link
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.

Reply to
bllsht

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...

Reply to
Joe Pfeiffer

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

Reply to
clare

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.