It’s heartbreaking. To see a major company that literally carried a healthy portion of America’s heartland go up in Euro-flames. I remember the beauty of it. The 1990’s minivans that completely obliterated their competition. LH sedans that were state of the art for their time. Cloud cars that had more power and road feel than their American brethren. Neons that were so good that even Toyota was jealous. Believe it or not, I still think the talent base of Chrysler is there. But to get it out…
You need a reality check. Chrysler has been lead by idiots for 10 years now. The few successes of modern times have been so limited, that not even the word Limited means anything at Chrysler anymore. Limited. As in a last gasp of breath before the good night. We all have discussed what’s worth saving (Jeep, Ram, and the Vans). But how about the memories? What cars will be the halo for Chrysler’s journey to the automotive afterlife?
I’ll give you the minivans, but the LH cars (that looked ultramodern) were corner cutting specials (requiring premium fuel for a non-premium car) that didn’t hold up over the long run. The neon should have been the next beetle, but underneath the sheet metal was an ancient engine and a three speed transmission, that probably made the japanese shake thier heads (kindof like saturn).
As far as late-model/semi late-model cars go:
– The Chrysler 300C. The most awarded car in history.
– The 1993 Ram 1500. It made Dodge a “real” player in the light truck market. Before that the were not even real competition to GM and Ford.
Don’t cout Chrysler/Fiat completely out yet. I honestly think they have a better chance than GM. Watch them 10 years from now.
Powerful cloud cars?
Lutz in the 1990s was all about great packaging and styling, and then cutting corners like crazy beneath the skin.
If Chrysler couldn’t make a solid go of it with Daimler’s engineering prowess behind them how will they ever make it with Fiat’s (engineering?) technology?
Most believe that Daimler pillaged Chrysler from the get-go and that was their intention all along. I think Chrysler was more of a Trojan Horse having cost Daimler about $36 BB before it was all said & done. Cerberus too, only they really, really deserved it. Who’s to say Fiat’s intentions aren’t the same?
I don’t think Chrysler ever had a disadvantage in engineering or motivation (prior to 1998) to be and build the best. They just never had the $$$ to really do it right. Their choice of financial partners has been their apparent Waterloo.
If Chrysler couldn’t make a solid go of it with Daimler’s engineering prowess behind them how will they ever make it with Fiat’s (engineering?) technology?
Who knows, this time Chrysler might actually get some of their new owner’s engineering technology.
P.S. autojunkie, you mean ’94 Ram. Sorry to nitpick.
Their muscle cars: Duster, RoadRunner, Super Bee, Challenger, ‘Cuda, Charger… Even the current Challenger will qualify.
The HEMI, of course. Independent of the iteration.
I’d put the Neon, because I like it. But I think in 10 years nobody will remember it.
The Minivans
The aforementioned 1993 Ram 1500. It changed the game. Also, used a lot of the previous truck’s parts. FTW.
Believe it or not, I still think the talent base of Chrysler is there
Me too, but the remainders will be sweep by Fiat. Count on it. Check allpar news today ;)
Chrysler’s done, a zombie car company. There’s nothing left to save, other than a few still-sterling brand names. And even those are badly tarnished.
Someone needs to just put a bullet in its head and put it out of its misery. Enough already.
Michael said…
“Lutz in the 1990s was all about great packaging and styling, and then cutting corners like crazy beneath the skin.”
I think that pretty much describes all mainstream American cars, not just Chrysler.
My first car was a Plymouth Volare that rusted out within two years and literally died at 11 and Jefferson after seven years. Chryler passenger car product is shit and always has been shit. Hopefully the europeans can revive what has never been a proud brand.
“Who knows, this time Chrysler might actually get some of their new owner’s engineering technology.”
86er – The Daimler link-up wasn’t completely for naught. Let’s not forget that the 300/Charger/Magnum/Challenger wouldn’t have existed without the “E” series rear suspension/differential that Chrysler got from Daimler. There was some technology transfer.
Chrysler’s greatest strengths, at least in the last couple decades, have been their design studio and their willingness to greenlight fairly risky concept vehicles for production.
The Caravan turned the automotive world on its head, and created an entirely new class of vehicles. The Prowler, even with it’s lack of true power, still looks great on the road when I see one, you wouldn’t know the design is well over ten years old. The PT Cruiser lit the world on fire, as did the Neon, the 300C, and the big rig styled Ram trucks.
Chrysler’s biggest problems have been poor mechanical reliability and performance and letting vehicles wither on the vine for too long. If the PT Cruiser had been kept modern, if the Ram trucks didn’t have transmissions made of tin foil and duct tape, if the 300C (which had a pretty damn nice interior by comparison to the competition when it debuted) had been upgraded over time to match not only the Germans but what GM and Ford were starting to put out – there are just too many ifs.
To me, it’s much more sad to see Chrysler fail than GM. GMs problem is they just didn’t care, accountants and the UAW ran the company, they knew the were putting out mediocre products without vision, but they didn’t bother to try to do anything about it. Chrysler gave us one of the first large crossovers with the Pacifica, some great import-style sports cars with the DSM Eagle Talons and the Dodge Stealth, a great fullsize wagon with a big honking V8 with the Magnum, and one of the first luxury SUVs with the Grand Cherokee. They started the whole trend of cab forward design with the LH cars, and even had great idea for trimming brands by axing Plymouth and Eagle, and then starting an initiative to combine all Jeep/Chrysler/Dodge stores under one roof before Ford or GM got on that ball.
The Mercedes ‘merger’ was likely failed from the start, but I do have a lot more hope for Chrysler’s future with Fiat. Unlike Mercedes, Fiat doesn’t have an American presence, so they have actual motivation to make the deal succeed. Fiat has a history of beautifully designed cars with Alfa and Lancia, which should go well with Chrysler’s historical strength in that area. The Fiat 500 is by all reports actually a damn good little car, and one that could win over a lot of people here if it is priced right when it comes over.
As much as Chrylser is in a branding tailspin right now, the solution to me is fairly simple – play to the history of style and innovation. The Chrysler Building in NYC is one of the worlds best looking and iconic skyscrapers – get some cash together, rent or buy some floors, and move the headquarters back to NYC, which brings an aura of style and sophistication that crumbling Detroit lacks. Play up the European connection, and target the metropolitan and style oriented crowd, GM and Ford have the good old boy and mainstream American market locked up at this point, so instead of being a third string player in the country, move to the city and focus there, Fiat’s lineup is stronger there anyway.
Coming out of World War II, Chrysler was the No. 2 Automaker; behind GM but ahead of Ford. They built some great cars during this time! The Chrysler, Desoto, Dodge and Plymouths were hard to beat!
“Neons that were so good that even Toyota was jealous.”
As the kids say, lol. Your glasses are seriously rose-colored. The cars have always been second-rate, and the minivans were ruined by the ticking timebomb that was the A604 transmission.
The Neon and LH cars had horrible reliability over the long haul. A chevy cavalier was less problematic than a neon. Chrysler’s 90s cars were were less reliable than their 80s K-car predecessors, at least they were simple and easy to fix. And how many chrysler minivan drivers did you know in the 90s who got burned by bogus trannies…..
Sell Jeep. Please. Before an American icon is completely devalued as a brand.
Remove the rest from life support and let it go to the light…..
Anyone with any talent left a while ago. Any one left with any sense split shortly after.
Thanks for the memories of the Mopars…the Chargers, the Dusters, the Newports, the 300s….
Now, just go.
For over 35 years of potential car purchases I’ve never even remotely considered Chrysler. Consistent mediocrity while the entire world got better.
Coming out of World War II, Chrysler was the No. 2
Automaker behind GM, but ahead of Ford in sales.
They built some great Chrysler, Desoto, Dodge and Plymouth cars!
My first car was a Plymouth Reliant with the Mitsubish 2.6. I picked it up in 2000 after it had been sitting in an open field for 10 years unsheltered from Massachusetts winters, got it running and it gave me 3 reliable years (until the dreaded plastic Mitsu timing chain guides began to fail like they did on all those 2.6 engines) For a college kid having the ultimate beater was something to be proud of.
Would I consider a chrysler product today? I see their reliability has remained flat (or gone down) since the 80s,,, probably not. When you look at cars like the Avenger,,,,, talk about the rebirth of the Pontiac Grand Am…. no thanks. With such a mediocre lineup I don’t see how they can possibly survive for 1 year, let alone 2.
rpol35:
You’ll do well to remember the original LH chassis was designed to be used in FWD, RWD and AWD applications, and that the LX cars were an outgrowth of this flexibility.
It wasn’t Chrysler that wanted to use Daimler bits in the car. In fact, the next-generation version of these crucial, unengineerable by the peons in Chrysler “pieces borrowed from the E-Class” that you’re speaking of have been re-adopted by Father Benz for their E-Class.
I’m still amazed that noone mentions the Daimler 3.5 V6’s appearance after the merge. Suppose it’s cool to kiss your cousin so long as you never admit to it, eh?
Brabski :
Everyone loves to pick on the Volare’ & Aspen. Show me one AMERICAN car of the same vintage (mid-late 1970’s) that didn’t rust out in a couple of years.
I’ve owned cars by all three american car companies over the last 10 years (Olds, Lincoln, Dodge, Chrysler, Eagle, GMC, Mercury to name just a few) With GM: I had mechanical issues, Fords: ELECTRICAL ISSUES NON STOP!, Chrysler: A/C mostly. I drive in excess of 35K a year, but I maintain them. ALL cars have issues, they are not perfect.
The one thing that Chrysler has shown, is that they have a plan. Didn’t say it was a perfect or even 100% obtainable plan. But it’s a plan.
Maybe someone should compare the plans of all three companies and how they stack up. Providing there would be no bias, I bet the Chrysler plan is, at least, more thought out and complete then GM’s.
A few others:
1. Chrysler Airflow. Beautiful but ahead of its time.
2. 1957 Chrysler products. Lousy build quality, but still gorgeous.
3. The slant six. Bulletproof.
4. K-cars with the 2.2 engine. Between me (the original owner) and two of my wife’s cousins, we got 250,000 miles out of an ’87 Sundance.
5. The 1996-2000 minivans. Good looking and practical. We traded in our ’99 Grand Voyager with 160,000 miles on the original transmission.
Yes, there once was a time when Chrysler built reliable, durable, desirable cars.
I have a 2007 Magnum. Except for regular manitanence, it’s been practically bulletproof. Chrysler still makes good cars, but Daimer (and I prefer a different spelling “DAM*er) really did Chrysler in. If/when Chrysler comes back, I would love to Daimer pay for their “sins”.
The problems Chrysler is in right now is 1000% the fault of the German Overloads. They dictated the designs and suppliers. They cheapened the interiors. They forced their wishes onto Chrysler. Chrysler was their dumping ground.
Yes, Chrysler did get some good things (300, etc) but what they did get was too costly for them to use and required alot of work to get it to work.
Today the minivan market is only a fraction of its peak in the late 1990’s, yet with all of its troubles, Chrysler still controls around 30% of this market.
iNeon:
I’m not sure that I am following you but the fact of the matter is that there was a technology transfer between the two and that is my point in reference to 86er’s post. I guess the 3.5 engine that you reference is again, more evidence, that there has been a technology transfer.
I sincerely believe that the only future for the Chrysler brand is to fire every single white-collar worker they have, scrap 90% of their products, and start over. They should come up with a new name (one that doesn’t have the horrible stigma of the current one), and lastly, *drum roll* make desirable products that are well engineered.
Everyone loves to pick on the Volare’ & Aspen. Show me one AMERICAN car of the same vintage (mid-late 1970’s) that didn’t rust out in a couple of years.
I can show you one – My all original ’79 Lincoln Continental. Not one bit of rust anywhere. 84,000 miles. bought 2 years ago with 74,000 miles and replaced the original radiator and original hoses and rebuilt the carburetor and thats it. Ice Cold A/C, runs perfectly, no rust.
Painting with a pretty wide brush there.
In the 90’s, Chrysler’s design was the best of any mass manufacturer worldwide. The 90’s minivans world’s ahead. The Neon, upon release, was a revelation (it wasn’t until later on that people realized it was cheap). The PT Cruiser, when first introduced, was a huge hit and something incredibly fresh–the original “retro” styled car before retro got old. The Jeep Grand Cherokee was considered one of the best American cars made during that period of time; and still looks good on the road. LH Cars had futuristic styling. C/D rated the Cirrus as better than the Honda Accord upon it’s release.
Since then, they’ve really gone off a cliff. I guess if they had built any of the above with quality components so that they’d last, then Chrysler could have built upon that momentum.
npbheights :
Ok,
you have a 30 year old car that had 2800 miles A YEAR put on it. (84K / 30 years). I can find cars in museums that are rust free too ! How about a Chysler Turbine car ? They are around 100K miles and are from 1964.
Here’s a Apen with 127K that isn’t rusted out either: http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/Dodge-ASPEN-RT-1977-DODGE-ASPEN-2-DR-RT-MODEL-SHARP-LOOKING-T-TOP_W0QQitemZ140357624281QQcmdZViewItemQQptZUS_Cars_Trucks?hash=item20adf761d9
I can show you MY 1975 Dodge Coronet Crestwood Wagon with 197K miles on it that looks great too. I’m not talking about the one-offs that survived. I’m talking in general terms. My late father’s 1979 Grand Marquis Trunk lid was a rusted mess in just a few years. My late mother’s ’82 and ’88 Mercury Colony Park Wagon’s tailgate was decomposing on the dealer’s lot. Ford designed the tailgate with no drainage and a flat bottom. Gee, that was smart…. NOT !
My point is that most, if not all of the cars in the late ’70s and ’80’s were not the greatest.
“Chrysler still controls around 30% of this market.”
Nobody controls any market share, at least not in the automotive world. Once upon a time, Chrysler had over 80% market share in minivans. If they had indeed “controlled” 80% of the market, then they would still have it.
” …. fire every single white-collar worker they have … ”
I’m not privy to what has gone on inside Chrsyler, but typically the problem in such situations isn’t the majority of the white-collar workers; but rather a handful of key executives, the decisions they make and the culture they create.
As many others have said, the main thing I will miss when Chrysler goes away is their unique designs. Their cars may be bottom of the barrel in terms of reliability, but I can see Chrysler group cars being carefully restored as antiques in the future. Chrysler cars are better as art than as appliances. I strongly recommend visiting the Walter P. Chrysler museum to appreciate their design contribution.
http://www.chryslerheritage.com/homepage.do
rpol35 is absolutely right: if it did not work with Daimler then why should Fiat be succesful? And although Sergio is a great guy and very respected in the business so is Dieter Zetsche.
No hope for Chrysler. Not to mention that the whole thing might put at risk the relatively sound financial situation of the Italians.
@ iNeon:
The 3.5L is an all Chrysler engine. It’s a derivative of the 2.7L and 3.2L engines used since the inception of the LH cars.
The Crossfire used a 3.2L V6, but that was all Mercedes. No relation what-so-ever to any Chrysler V6.
I’ll always remember the viper.
Dieter Zetsche is more of a putz than Lutz!
Toyota was jealous about the Neon (and worried). The “ancient engine” someone described above was actually a brand new modern engine (2.0) developed with export in mind. It was praised in the buff mags like Automobile when they tested it. That same engine also became the basis for the first engine in the MINI (with a smaller displacement).
Yes all cars in the mid to late 70’s were prone to rust. I had such a car (1975) and the bumper bolts rusted and the whole back bumper fell off one night. It was not a Chrysler product but from a company that today is very well respected.
Chrysler reliability: Chrysler has been mid pack in reliability for years. Jeeps have historically been more problematic due in part to their 4WD systems. When Mercedes “merged” with Chrysler, they had worse reliability than Chrysler according to JD Powers, due in part to electrical issues. Go look it up. In the most recent Powers survey, Chrsyler brands rated better than VW, Suzuki, Mitsubishi, Land Rover, among others, and were not that much worse than Nissan and Mazda.
Chrysler = always unreliable is as untrue as Toyota = always reliable. The B&B surely know the latter is untrue. The former is as well. I’ve owned 6 Chrysler products (4 new, 2 used) and have only had major issues with one, and that was a used vehicle with over 100,000 miles on it when I bought it. If you ever see a really old car on the road (50’s – 70’s) it will often be a Chrysler product. That has been my experience. I do know that at one time Chrysler did things like used forged cranks in all their engines, not just the hi-po ones. Ford and GM used cast cranks instead. I’ve heard of motors sitting in junkyards for years that started up right away after being prepped (squirt of oil in the cylanders, etc.). I had a electonic interior component from a junkyard that I needed as a replacement worked as soon as I plugged it in – after it had been sitting in a covertible with no top on it and open to the elements for years.
Chyrsler reliability is not the issue, it’s quality is. They look and feel cheap. This is being remedied, the new Ram, the redone Patriot, the soon to be introduced Grand Cherokee, even the Challenger, are light years ahead of the Caliber and Sebring (all Daimler, not Cerberus cars). The plan is to redo most of the interiors/exteriors in the next two years.
Cloud cars – the top line trim used a V6 with 168 hp. For mid 90’s that was more than enough power for a compact/mid-size that weighed 3200 lbs. How much power do you really need? In Mexico they had a 2.4 turbo available that put out 180 hp.
Neon – it was Bob Eaton, formerly of GM, who upon becoming CEO of Chrysler ordered the use of cheaper headgaskets which was the bane of the 1s gen Neon. This was done against the advice of the engineers. Despite this the car has quite a few fans, who have been screaming at Mopar to make another car with the same attributes. It was Eatons cost cutting that prompted Iacocca with Kerkorian to attempt a hostile takeover in the middle 90’s. Chevy Cavalier could only hope to be as relaible as a Neon. Maybe they were ok by the late 90’s but the late 80’s thru mid 90’s were atrocious.
The only LH cars that required premium fuel were the top of the line models with the hi-po engine. Everything else ran on regular.
“Someone needs to just put a bullet in its head and put it out of its misery. Enough already.”
That’s the job of the market. Thankfully, Obama has not made you the Car Czar.
Airflow, 331 hemis cars from the 50’s, Imperial until ’68, the original Max Wedge/Hemi cars, the 68-71 muscle cars, the K Car, The original minivans, the Viper, and the new Challenger.
“NN :
November 6th, 2009 at 1:09 pm
In the 90’s, Chrysler’s design was the best of any mass manufacturer worldwide. The 90’s minivans world’s ahead. The Neon, upon release, was a revelation (it wasn’t until later on that people realized it was cheap). The PT Cruiser, when first introduced, was a huge hit and something incredibly fresh–the original “retro” styled car before retro got old. The Jeep Grand Cherokee was considered one of the best American cars made during that period of time; and still looks good on the road. LH Cars had futuristic styling. C/D rated the Cirrus as better than the Honda Accord upon it’s release.
Since then, they’ve really gone off a cliff. I guess if they had built any of the above with quality components so that they’d last, then Chrysler could have built upon that momentum.”
NN gets the TTAC COTW award for this week.
Chrysler at one time in the 1990’s had more marketshare than GM has right now. They were the most profitable manufacturer on the planet and had cash savings that made it arguably the most healthy company of the Big 3.
Their entire product line and war chest were raided by Daimler. Product lines that were supposed to be given ample funding were cut to the bone (one example was the Dakota refresh which was cut from $750 million to $250 million) and countless other models had their launches pushed back for years on end.
If you ever wanted to know why Sebrings, PT Cruisers, and even their minivan cash cows were stretched to years on end, the answer is Daimler-Benz.
To me the epitome of Chrysler was the 4-year-old 1969 New Yorker four-door hardtop (with vinyl roof, of course) that belonged to the parents of a college friend in Bensonhurst, Brooklyn NY. What an enormous interior! And an enormous exterior, too – but unapologetically so.
The slogan of Chrysler at that time was “Extra Care in Engineering” and at least at that time, it seemed to be true. Also they made a decent utility car at the time that I was familiar with: the 1971 Plymouth Satellite wagon. Chrysler cars during this design era were (it seemed) self-evidently more modern than the competing GM and Ford products.
Steven Lang:
one example was the Dakota refresh which was cut from $750 million to $250 million
Oh, that explains that, then.
Chrysler has made very few vehicles newer than 1971 that I’d want to own, except for those that wear a Cummins badge. Most people I know that were Mopar buyers switched to GM in the 70’s.
“Nobody controls any market share, at least not in the automotive world. Once upon a time, Chrysler had over 80% market share in minivans. If they had indeed “controlled” 80% of the market, then they would still have it.”
Semantics aside, Chrysler has always been the dominant player in the minivan market.
I’ve had two cars that I often site as reasons to never again buy an American car, one was a Fiero, the other was a Neon.
Both were examples of thoughtless engineering and flagrant cost cutting. Granted, both were old by the time I owned them but neither was as old as my current ’84 Civic which runs like a top.
The Neon should have been a great car, instead it was cheap (albiet powerfull) and crappy.
Press Release: Chrysler/Fiat Announces 2010 New Spirit
In a radical departure from the auto industry’s dependence on the showroom appeal of all-new models, and following the sensational public reception of the New Spirit concept car at automotive shows around the world, Chrysler/Fiat CEO Getur Nucar today announced resumption of production of the Dodge Spirit. Produced from 1989 to 1995 for the US and Canada and several years longer in Mexico, it never received the acclaim it deserved, said Nucar.
Rather than completely tool up for an all-new “retro” look along the lines of the Prowler and PT Cruiser, the 2005 New Spirit not just looks like the previous model, but most of the parts will be interchangable with it. Using so much of the old design will keep costs lower than any all-new model, giving the New Spirit a strong value edge.
The New Spirit’s main difference from the original will be the standard 5-speed automatic transmission – each one hand-built by automotive parts supplier Magna International’s lead mechanic Belinda Stronach. Other upgrades include the engine, suspension, and minor tweaks such as improved HNV performance and a quality “feel” to the controls. “The more we looked at it, the more we realized there wasn’t a whole lot we needed to do to it.” said Nucar, “We’ve taken care to ensure it retains the original’s ease of repair, furthering leadership in total cost of ownership.”
Exterior differences will be limited to a small badge on the deck lid, and it will be available in a range of models from a stripped-down value leader to luxury model with all the latest gadgets. The only other clue to identify the new version will be the rear seat headrests. The quaint squarish dashboard and even the original paint colors are specified. The popular folding back seat returns also. The New Spirit, unlike the original, will be available with an optional diesel engine, a 5-spd manual transmission with either engine and AWD. A high performance short-wheelbase coupe version and a New Spirit station wagon will follow within a year.
Other automakers have taken notice, and GM and Ford are expected to launch concept versions of the Tempest and Tempo, respectively.
Anybody see the picture in the article as a phallic symbol?
Michael Karesh :
“Powerful cloud cars?
Lutz in the 1990s was all about great packaging and styling, and then cutting corners like crazy beneath the skin.”
It wasn’t Lutz, it was Bob Eaton who did the rampant beancounting on Chrysler’s products. It fit, since he came from GM.
nothin’ worse than a kick to the old plymouths.
Wow, a lot of folks liked the cloud cars. I had a ’95 Cirrus I bought new for commuting. After 5 years and 90,000 miles it was all used up.
The car ate body control modules every 15,000 miles. The A/C stopped working at 50,000 miles, and the Chrysler techs basically told me it couldn’t be repaired. When it hit 90,000 miles I was having engine management issues (stalling at 60mph on I-93 coming out of Boston at commute time is a bad thing!)
I wanted Chrysler to succeed because I grew up with and loved the old Mopar stuff, but I pretty much swore Chrysler cars off after the Cirrus.
(OK I do own a WJ Grand Cherokee, but I think of it as a Jeep, not a Chrysler. Semantics… I know.)
Chrysler lost it when they abandoned their ‘Extra Care in Engineering’ mantra and tried to compete directly with Ford and GM on styling alone. It’s understandable (it was mainly Iacocca’s doing) because of the dire financial situation at the time, but it still doesn’t help today’s situation any.
As Henry Ford had stubbornly found out a half century before, Iacocca knew that styling and marketing was what really sold cars in big volumes, not superior engineering. The Hemi (the real ones from the fifties and sixties, not the lame current version), slant-six, TorqueFlite automatic transmission, alternator, were all examples of Chrysler’s superior engineering prowess but that didn’t move the metal like Ford and GM.
And now they get Fiat ‘engineering’. Yeah, that’ll bring back Chrysler’s reputation.
Chrysler has been known as the engineer’s company, many times in the past to the detriment of styling. Recently, the LH cars were spacious and forward looking, compared to a Taurus or Lumina.
The Germans really messed up the company. They wanted the cash reserves that Chrysler had built up with the Ram and LH, etc. which they took back to Germany and sent precious little back. Yes, the E class powertrain, so what? Chrysler had spent a bundle on a new gen of FWD transmissions that the Germans tossed in the dumpster because they didn’t design it. It was a cash grab, pure and simple. Eaton and company (yes those guys) took the money and ran. That reserve was supposed to develop new products, which Chrysler could sure use now.
Last I heard, Eaton was down in a Florida compound somewhere, counting his piles of money. That was the beginning of Chrysler’s current situation. They have been on the brink before, can they come back? Time will tell.
brandloyalty, I loved the New Spirit “press release.” Those cars got no respect, but they were cheap to buy, run and fix, comfortable, trimmed well, and had good-sized trunks. Good appliances for folks who just need appliances.
Another chuckle for the New Spirit PR. Note the Spirit was discontinued in Mexico in ’95, same as in the US and Canada.
My ’91 Spirit R/T, with most of the factory European BUX equipment installed, was quite a car.
Those ’90’s minivans would be the ones with that obliterated the competition with exploding transmissions? … I’m just saying…
cpu
It was said the vans should have come with a spare transmission rather than a spare tire, since you were more likely to need the spare tranny.
But a lot of the transmission issues, like the A604, were due to a major fiasco regarding the fluid as opposed to the design of the transmission.
A few years ago I posted the New Spirit nonsense on allpar. A number of people genuinely believed it, and were unhappy to learn it was a hoax.
We have a ’90 Spirit with lots of upgrades and the various quirks corrected, from the V6’s valve guide job to backflow valves in the windshield washer lines. It’s a perfectly good car. It (and the sister Acclaim) was an excellent design that somehow was mostly ignored. Had it been just a bit higher quality, it would easily have equalled the Camry and Accord of the day.
Features such as steering wheel mounted cruise control and split folding back seats were ahead of their time at that price level. It’s amazingly rust-free and can get 42mpg (Imperial) on the highway. The ’93’s to ’95’s were cheapened somewhat. There was also a dual-fuel version for masochists.
The R/T was quite the car and I gather it provided much fun to the few who owned them.
There was a European version of the Spirit, called the Saratoga. The LeBaron and LeBaron convertible of the time were shortened Spirits, and those LeBarons still on the road look up-to-date.
Questions:
Why does Chrysler engines start to smoke so badly later in their lives? Because they smoke so badly after a red light I’d guess valve guide seals?
Is the shift from 2nd to 1st in the Chrysler FWD auto trannies normal when they make that clicking, ratcheting sound? Just curious…
Did American cars get the same “rust protection” if you want to call it that as my Fiats and VWs – i.e. a heavy coat of paint and no galvanized panels??? My VWs stayed rust free as long as there were zero rock chips in this paint. Once that happened though and not corrected the car would simply rust away.
I don’t have much experience with Chryslers as I have watched friends’ troubles enough. That said my sister had an 80s non-turbo Dodge 400 (K-Car) convertible that served her reliably enough. I drove it a few times. Was very comfortable and had enough power for cruising. Everything was VERY dampened. Felt like there was a big torsion spring between the engine and tranny. Very smooth and gut-less. LOL. Had the standard wire hubcaps of the era. Didn’t like the look but I liked putting the top down. Another friend bought a new Neon back in ’95 (?). I was HUGELY impressed with that car. Don’t know if it lasted but he flogged it constantly. I think he wanted a new engine before the warranty ran out. VBG! Had that car gained the reputation the Honda products have for durability I would have owned one. The Neon was one of those domestic products that gave me hope that Detroit was going to make something import-like that I would want to buy. I had just returned from three years in Italy and really not impressed with anything made by Detroit having enjoyed driving Fiats, Lancias, Alfas, BMWs, Opels, Renaults, Peugeot’s, etc. Cars that were fun to drive and somehow stayed together despite the rough southern Italian roads. Cars that were small but still boasted good utility and surprisingly good interior space.
I may look like an idiot, but presumably someone will correct me on this explanation of the smoking Chrysler products…
The Mitsubishi 3.0L V6 and larger versions of it were used in a lot of Chrysler cars and minvans from the mid-80’s to who knows when.
The valve guides were not properly secured, and came loose over time. This wore out the seals. At, say, 50,000miles the valves could wobble enough that oil could find its way directly to the exhaust manifold without going through the combustion chamber. This did not have much effect on the engine’s performance and durability, though it probably didn’t do the catalytic converter much good.
High vacuum such as at idle exaggerated the problem, so with the high throttle needed to get up to speed after sitting idling for a while, a cloud of smoke would be produced so bad it could have been of interest to the military. Situations included stop lights, ferry lineups, and lineups for emissions testing. Enough that people such as yourself who don’t know about the problem, have noticed it.
The fix was to replace the damaged parts and install some sort of rings that better secured the valve guides. If caught early enough, this could be done without removing the heads.
One time I got kicked out of the lineup for emissions testing, because the Spirit was chugging out blue smoke. Since I knew about this matter, I drove to another testing station. On the way there, the smoke cleared up. By keeping the rpm’s above idling while waiting, the Spirit passed the test with no problem. Which proved that while operating normally, the engines are relatively clean.
However, since we planned to keep it for years, it made sense to get it fixed. This was done by a Chrysler dealer for almost $1800, and included rebuilt heads with a valve job. Although the tailpipe still is not as clean as I’m used to on other cars, it now passes emissions testing with flying colors and no messing around.
Another common issue with these cars and minivans is transmissions failing into limp mode. That’s why you see so many of them crawling along highway shoulders with the 4-way flashers going.