Chrysler is dead

[Joshua]

Let's not look back in history with rose colored glasses either.

Chrysler had SEVERE rusting problems in the late 50s.  Growing up with musclecars, Mopars were always regarded as tinny but with great engines.

So before we go on about how "I would never buy anything besides my first and second generation Dodge!" let's count up how many of us have had rusted floor pans, trunk pans, frame rails! and areas of rust that you just don't see with anywhere near the frequency in same year Mustangs and Camaros for example.

I love 'em, but they're tinny, they've always been tinny.  The difference is that the cars are so loved now that we FIX all these issues and garage them.  Let's not compare our weekend toys to new drivers.

As for new cars, Chrysler could take some quality lessons from Buick if they want to get their ratings higher.

Truth.....
I love Mopars over the other brands, just alot of cooler options, wild engine packages, bright colors, etc, plus, just like the "underdog" I guess,....anyway,.... the fact is, during the musclecar era (well, most of the 50's as well) Mopars had CRAPPY build quality, when compared with the others, in particular GM....
For the most part, cars have been in a constant state of poor build quality and "cheapness" since WWII.....
Hell, new Ferrari's just don't have the fit and finish of Ferraris of the 60's...

[Mike DC]

     

Mopars are great designs on paper that are executed like crap. 

GMs are crappy designs on paper that are executed very well. 

Fords are all over the place.  Some good, some bad. 



Toyotas & Hondas are decent designs on paper that are executed very well. 

(But the problem is they're life-threateningly boring.  And they're not American.)

[resq302]

Well, I for one will not be buying any new Chrysler or Dodge anytime soon unless their quailty goes up significantly.  I had a 2005 Hemi Ram quad cab 1500 4x4 that I can no longer discuss due to a gag order as part of them buying it back "voluntarily" so as not to deem it a lemon.  But let me just say, I did not have even 6000 miles on the truck and it was a basket case.  Stuff that you would never think to go wrong did, even more than once.  And then when they replaced the part, they had an "option" of putting a remanufactured unit in place of a new on on a new truck.  C'mon people!  The truck is still new, why put a "used but new" part a new car.  As far as the sheet metal, I was washing the truck within the first month of getting and and leaned on the fender with my palm to reach the center of the hood and I put a damn crease in my fender and I weigh only 180 lbs.   

So much for kwalety being job wun.  (spelled intentionally)

[Magnumcharger]

Let's not look back in history with rose colored glasses either.

Chrysler had SEVERE rusting problems in the late 50s. 

Here's the reason:
The 1957s started to rust within several months of being built. They leaked water on both sides of the windshield posts on all models. Torsion bars broke leaving cars looking like fallen over Towers of Pisa. Upholstery split, seams tore, seat springs popped through, paint flaked off in huge chunks, hubcaps wouldn't stay on, rear view mirrors vibrated, door handles broke with ease, locks froze easily, and interior appliances fell off. However, in all fairness to Chrysler, they were NO worse than Ford or Chevrolet in that era. Ford quality was just as bad, if not worse.

"Just a few weeks into the 1957 production, of course, the rushed assembly began to come home in the form of quality problems gone out of control. To Chrysler's credit, the engineers charged right in and began to get on the line fixes to areas that truly needed help. By the time the 1958 models came out, a lot of the areas were fixed. The windshield leaks had been rigged with plugs, nipples and small rubber hoses in a kit. Likewise, the rear window had been rigged. No, the actual leaks had not been stopped, but at least the water, for the most part, ran out into the wheel wells instead of on your feet or your luggage in the trunk. Extra braces were fitted in the structure. The body metal was assembled using larger rivets. A heavier gauge of sheet metal was employed. Longer posts were tried for the rear view mirrors. (The vibration never truly went away on any of the models fitted with the dash mirror). Extra sound deadening was liberally applied, especially in the floor pans and rear trunk. Seat springs and materials were completely changed. The small $2 rubber boot that had been taken away by the "bean counters" to cover the end of the Torsion Bars was quickly reintroduced. It prevented dirt from entering the rear of the bar seat area and causing it to bind and break. The 1959 models were discernibly better, except for rust.

Some 20 years later, in the 1970s, it was alleged that, to aid the economy of Japan in the mid 1950s, steel was melted down for shipment to the United States. Under a subsidy, this steel was sold to the automotive industry; purportedly this steel was from the Atom Bombed buildings left in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Remelted iron and steel returns to normal, without radiation, but it contained high levels of iron, a notorious oxidizer; and adding nickel or chromium into the molten steel to resist oxidation was prevented due to cost. The use of that poor quality steel, along with the lack of rust resistance methods on the line, garnered Chrysler a poor reputation that still lingers today. Yet, given what we know now about the steel from Japan, it is unfair to lay all the rust problems at Chrysler's door step. They were doing their patriotic duty for the country, as they had when refusing profits from World War I. They were never repaid for that.

http://www.allpar.com/history/chrysler-years/1957.html

[MoParJW]

Brian, are you telling me Mopars didn't have a serious rust issue over other cars because of poor undercoating and design areas like the....... Unprotected fender well area's?  Come on?   Even Most Mopar lovers will tell you of the serious Mopar rust issues.  And I do not agree they are all the same.  There are and were good and bad auto manufactures throughout the years. 

Considering their age, I think 60's & 70's mopars (and chevy's & Fords also) are doing pretty well
There's a lot of old american iron still on the road over here, still being driven daily, still in good shape
All the european cars from that era have rusted away years ago 

[Mike DC]

 

1960s automobile market studies indicated that the average new-car buyer kept the car for 3 years.  The cheapskates kept them for five years.


So a 1969 Charger was never really intended to last much beyond about 1971-73. 

[Orange_Crush]

I have owned Chrysler vehicles almost exclusively since I could drive.  SO what are the wors vehicles I've ever owned?  Two fords and a Volvo.  The Mustang grenaded its rear end 30,000 miles in.  The Crown Vic lost a tranny at 98000 miles and went through two sets of idler and pittman arms before I finally bought Moogs.  The Volvo had WAY too many problems to list, but emptying the entire contents of its crankcase on my driveway the day I got it home was just the beginning ('98 S70 BTW).

I have also had a '91 Accord and an '84 Mercedes which were pretty good cars.

The best, most reliable cars that I have ever owned have been Chryslers.  I had an '84 Omni that went 150,000 miles before I finally wrecked it.  All I ever had to buy for it was an A/C hose.  I have a 2002 Grand Caravan that ate its tranny at 160,000 miles because I NEVER changed the tranny fluid.  That car has been rode hard and put up wet every day of its life (idling in 100 degree heat for 2 and three hours at a time) and yet, other than the tranny, has given me 180,000 trouble-free miles.  About the chrysler I ever owned that was even close to being what I would consider a "bad" car was a '95 Cirrus that the window trim kept popping off of.

My brother has a '90 Grand Cherokee with 285,000 miles on it.  Its his daily driver.  Not ONE problem.

I, for one, am a proud member of the Mopar or no car crowd.

[moparstuart]

I have owned Chrysler vehicles almost exclusively since I could drive.  SO what are the wors vehicles I've ever owned?  Two fords and a Volvo.  The Mustang grenaded its rear end 30,000 miles in.  The Crown Vic lost a tranny at 98000 miles and went through two sets of idler and pittman arms before I finally bought Moogs.  The Volvo had WAY too many problems to list, but emptying the entire contents of its crankcase on my driveway the day I got it home was just the beginning ('98 S70 BTW).

I have also had a '91 Accord and an '84 Mercedes which were pretty good cars.

The best, most reliable cars that I have ever owned have been Chryslers.  I had an '84 Omni that went 150,000 miles before I finally wrecked it.  All I ever had to buy for it was an A/C hose.  I have a 2002 Grand Caravan that ate its tranny at 160,000 miles because I NEVER changed the tranny fluid.  That car has been rode hard and put up wet every day of its life (idling in 100 degree heat for 2 and three hours at a time) and yet, other than the tranny, has given me 180,000 trouble-free miles.  About the chrysler I ever owned that was even close to being what I would consider a "bad" car was a '95 Cirrus that the window trim kept popping off of.

My brother has a '90 Grand Cherokee with 285,000 miles on it.  Its his daily driver.  Not ONE problem.

I, for one, am a proud member of the Mopar or no car crowd.

[69_500]

Proud to be of the MOPAR OR NO CAR minority it seems. However I for one do believe in brand loyalty. That stretches far past just being loyal to car brands. When I find a brand of just about anything that is very well done, then I stick to it. Same holds true with sports teams and the such. Seems that the car hobby isn't void of "FAIR WEATHER FANS" either though. To each their own. Every car company makes good cars, and every company has cars that are their bottom of the line cars with the cheapest sticker prices, and least amount of options that anyone can afford. And call it crazy but the striped down models are typically the ones that last the longest, even though they often see the roughest lives.

[Mike DC]

I just don't excuse the problems anymore.


We can map the human genome, or land a craft on Mars, or make a gigantic airliner run almost trouble-free for a million miles. 

We should be able to commute in a 100,000 mile car without having to keep a standby fund of $2000 on hand for unscheduled failures. 

[resq302]

It seems like after 1997, or so, that is when the quality started really going down hill.  My dad bought a new 1997 Ram 1500 extended cab short bed 4x4 and the factory never put the center stripe on.  Chysler basically told him that if he didnt like it to order another truck after he already sold his since he was tracking when it came in.  The thing was that the factory even had that he paid $258 for the center stripe on the window sticker saying this vehicle made especially for: and his name.  It ended up costing Chrysler over $3000 for them to paint the center stripe on and replace all the emblems and decals to make it right for him.  I bought that truck from him and the only issue we had was the bottoms of the door panels starting to rust which they warranteed and then the wheel lips started rusting.  It also had the inherent plenum pan gasket that would fail under the intake.  That was the only real problem with that as it had the 5.2 magnum and I sold it with 100,000 miles to my dads best friend and it is still going strong.   Its in need of a paint job but that is largly the fault of the present owner as he does not really take care of his vehicles.

[Tigger]

Here's my bullshit take on all this. You can't please everybody, so some people will swear by Chrysler, and others won't buy one. I work for Chrysler turning wrenches, I have a 06 diesel, and my wife just bought a 08 Wrangler. I already know I'm going top have to replace the injection pump and fix the injectors for high return. And the dana's under the jeep are going to get rebuilt. I knew this before i bought them. SO WHAT, there are no vehicles on the road that don't have some sort of issues. YES, Chrysler does have more of them now, but being bought and sold twice in the past 10 years really hurts a company, especially the way funds are directed for research and development. Management change hurts because of new directions taken with the company. CHRYSLER will downsize to about half its size, as dealers and car lines are axed. I own a Toyota Camry also, and it has its issues, timing belt slap, front strut bearing plates. Imports are not immune to quality control problems, though they appear to address them quicker. The big three had there day in the sun, now the imports are having theres, but for how long, Toyota's quality has had a small ripple, trying to pump out quantity vs quality. This is nothing more than a cycle. In a day of instant news, instant texting, instant this and that, it still takes 2 YEARS MINIMUM to put a vehicle form concept to showroom. Once Chrysler is at a manageable size and the next line of vehicles come out, they will be OK. Downsized. This is my opinion, but opinions are like assholes everybody has one.

[pettyfan43]

The fact is that cars are simply mechanical devices, they are designed and built by human beings, the robots used to do some assembly are programmed by humans.  There will be problems. it happens.

As far as Chrysler being worse than anybody else , that isn't MY experience and that is why I am on my SIXTH Dodge truck. I have also owned other vehicles like I said before.

As far as imports, I worked at a dealershit that had Dodge, Lexus and Infiniti vehicles. The much vaunted Lexus LS430 had terrible problems with sludge and normally let you know it by puking its guts out the bottom.

The new Tundra that you see those great commercials for has a habit of swallowing the camshafts, which requires engine replacement, and if you own one, don't load your riding mower or 4 Wheeler bu driving it along the tailgate unless you want the tailgate ripped off the truck.

[Mike DC]

As time goes by, I just wanna put together my own cars & trucks more than ever.  It's not worth $20-35K just to get a brand new car or truck. 



I could get more metal in the body doing an older vehicle (even AFTER putting the asian repop skins everywhere). 

I could get longer-lasting paint finishes doing it myself. 

I could get much simpler & better quality electrical systems from the aftermarket resto/street rod companies.

 
So what are we really paying for with a newer car? 
If we could get reconditioned older vehicles mass-produced to bring down the expenses, the value would eat the OEM cars & trucks for lunch. 

 

[Joshua]

So what are we really paying for with a newer car? 

The ability to make easy, cheap? monthy payments..... hahahaha!!!! It's not a 35K dollar car.....it's a $450 a month car.
99% of the population probably has a hard enough time checking their oil, let alone the ability to upkeep an older car.

[resq302]

So what are we really paying for with a newer car? 

99% of the population probably has a hard enough time checking their oil, let alone the ability to upkeep an older car.

Hence the reason why they are probably putting tie rods, ball joints, and other parts in now without grease fittings.  Either that or it is planned obsolesence.

[Mike DC]

 
I'm not sure they're so wrong about that one. 

A lot of those sealed non-greasable joints tend to last a LONG time.  I doubt they would last any longer if they were the open/greasable type. 

[1969chargerrtse]

 
I'm not sure they're so wrong about that one. 

A lot of those sealed non-greasable joints tend to last a LONG time.  I doubt they would last any longer if they were the open/greasable type. 

[Plumcrazy]

I've worked in Chrysler service departments since 1982 so I've seen it all. But not all of the blame is Chryslers.
There are some owners out there that could F*** up an anvil with a rubber mallet.

[nh_mopar_fan]

 

[moparstuart]

[69bronzeT5]

When I saw the title "Chrysler is dead", I actually thought it was haha.

[Challenger340]

I've got a 1991 1/2 ton, 4X4, 318 auto, that I've kept around as a beater. Very basic truck, power nothing.
Grab engine cores, somebody needs a truck, parts run, whatever, it's there and available to my guys.

Just can't seem to kill this thing.
435,000 Kilometers showing on the Odometer, we did the heads & timing chain years ago, Tires, Trans was done @ 330,000 km as was getting "slow" but was still working, but regular Oil changes, brakes, belts, whatever it needs it gets.
NOT saying we haven't maintained it properly, 'cause WE HAVE, just that other, than what I'd classify as "regular maintenance" over what translates to 275,000 MILES, the "woopy wagoon" has been fantastic ! Still is ! Runs and drives FINE though it starting to look like Hell !
Gonna change the name to "war wagon".

Had a '95 NEON, wife drove it 2 yrs, gave it to a Daughter.
Same deal, all my cars get "regular maintenance", T/chain & head gasket every 160,000 kms, Brakes were poor, every 60,000 ? or so, Front struts once, Tires, but other than that, the damn thing kept going until 2004, at 410,000 kms or 260,000 MILES, until it got rear-ended and totalled !
That NEON, for what I think I remember paying about 12K for "new", even if I add in the "maintenance", on a per MILE basis, was one of the best transportation costed vehicles, I ever owned. Very COMPETITIVE.
I don't care who thinks they were SHIT, that one was indestructable, great for the kids to abuse !

I've tried later multiple PT Cruisers, various 2.0SX 's, yadda, yadda, since that time, as various transporters for the wife and Kids.
Was NOT impressed !
Plethora of annoyances, minor problems, glitchs, all had terrible TIRES from factory ?
What's up with that ?
Does Goodyear or whoever, make a point of supplying the worst "Balonies" to Chrysler ??
or, does Chrysler just buy the cheapest crap made to put on their cars ?

Dunno if I'd buy another Chrysler ?
If I did,
I suspect I'd buy, what I think they can do well at, that being, a "cheap transportation" car, a "bottom end" beater if they ever produce such a thing again ?
No money in producing those though.

[nh_mopar_fan]

Picking this up on Saturday....

I cannot believe the depreciation hit on a car with only 2000 miles on it. Someone took a real bath.

[Rolling_Thunder]

I've caught so much flack on this forum for saying the same thing...       I personally drive a Toyota Tacoma daily...    before that was my old Toyota pickup...    never any problems...        But I do own a 68 charger, 69 Road Runner, and a 66 Satellite - So I guess that makes up for it.

My friend just bought a 2007 Ram Long Horn edition...     it has 16K miles on it and it has had the following problems: Clunking in front suspension - needed three trips to the dealership to get fixed (the even fixed the wrong side)...      Blower motor fan broke and the air conditioning no longer works....       front shocks needed replacing...      Power steering hose began to leak...       

He also has a 2006 R/T Charger...    has just as many problems....

He is never buying another American made car...     which he has owned nothing but for the last 35 years...       

American auto companies are killing themselves...       Asian auto companies deserve it more - they put BILLIONS of dollars into R&D when american companies were saying "well...    I guess this will be good enough for now"  ---