Chrysler engines
In order not to prolong the warranty thread, I made a broad statement the
other day that Chrysler had always made good dependable engines, to my knowledge. I can't remember one that had problems with cracked blocks, premature wear, etc. The old slant six was good for a couple hundred thou, frequently. And the V8 have been legendary for their toughness. Of the Big Three American manufacturers, GM has possibly put out some of the worst (and best) engines, with Ford not far behind. Have I missed some Chrysler clunkers, or given the other two too little credit? |
|
"Roger Blake" > wrote in message ... > In article >, > wrote: > > Have I missed some Chrysler clunkers, or given the other two too little > > credit? > > How did their aluminum six hold up? I know the Rambler aluminum mill > was prone to all kinds of problems, and many were replaced with cast-iron > jobs while still under warranty. > > -- > Roger Blake > (Subtract 10 for email.) Im not sure about that one, Roger. Chrysler had some cars that were relabels of Mitsubishi too, and I don't really know if they used some of these engines in their domestic cars. Will try to check it, for sure. |
I found reference to 1961-1964 aluminum sixes used in Ramblers,
with a reputation for unreliability. Some say the reputation was unwarranted, but I think it should stick. Chrysler didn't buy AMC until considerably later. I obought a 1975 AMC Sportabout Wagon after the birth of my son, and this little car was pretty durable. The 258 CID cast iron L6 burned a little oil from the very beginning and never stopped, and mileage was pretty poor for this type of car, but I never really regretted buying it. |
>.. Chrysler had some cars that were > relabels of Mitsubishi too, > and I don't really know if they used some of these engines in their domestic > cars. Will try to check it, > for sure. I don't think they count as Chrysler engines. They are Mitsubishi engines. There was one in my '82 Dodge Colt. They had a reputation for needing rings at 100k km (60k miles). Mine did. White smoke. -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ William R Watt National Capital FreeNet Ottawa's free community network homepage: www.ncf.ca/~ag384/top.htm warning: non-FreeNet email must have "notspam" in subject or it's returned |
On Wed, 20 Jul 2005, Roger Blake wrote:
> How did their aluminum six hold up? I know the Rambler aluminum mill was > prone to all kinds of problems, and many were replaced with cast-iron > jobs while still under warranty. The aluminum 225 slant-6 has no systematic problems at all -- except for knowitall owners used something other than glycol-based antifreeze in the cooling systems. The design of the engine is extremely robust (integrally-cast iron cylinder liners, deep-skirt die-cast aluminum block, beefy factory align-bored cast iron upper and lower main bearing caps, etc). Proper procedure must be followed when installing the head gasket, but that's true with everything. I have owned five of these engines -- still own two -- and they're not much less robust than the iron version of the same engine. Certainly Chrysler never had to engage in warranty heroics as AMC and (later, with the Vega) GM did with their more halfassed efforts. |
On Wed, 20 Jul 2005, William R. Watt wrote:
> I don't think they count as Chrysler engines. They are Mitsubishi engines. Chrysler was dumb enough to buy the Bitsu****ti Astron 2.6 litre "Silent Shaft" engine and install it in a lot of K-cars and minivans from '81 through '86. Apparently having failed to learn the lesson, Chrysler paid Bitsu****ti to pull prolonged "No, really, we've fixed it this year, this time for sure" shenanigans on them between 1987 and 1994 with the 3.0 litre V6. Post-'94 3.0s aren't bad engines. |
"Daniel J. Stern" > wrote in message .umich.edu... > On Wed, 20 Jul 2005, Roger Blake wrote: > That Vega engine has to be one of the worst GM ever made. The metallurgy sounded very high tech, and the promise was there, but they were just no good. |
|
"Don Stauffer" > wrote in message ... > We are on our third minivan. Had clutch problems on first, due to > defective design again, but other than that they have been super > reliable. First two were the four cyl. New one is V6- hope it is as > good as the fours. Good on ya...I assume the first one had a manual tranny? There are getting to be fewer and fewer vehicles available with manuals. |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:27 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
AutoBanter.com