Chrysler finally admits the new "World Engines" have issues

http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll...=2007706080377


I have been saying this since the engine debuted in the Caliber- maybe this
is a nice step in a good direction for the "new" Chrysler.

On Jun 15, 6:01 pm, "Scott Koprowski" >
wrote:
> http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll...=2007706080377
>
> I have been saying this since the engine debuted in the Caliber- maybe this
> is a nice step in a good direction for the "new" Chrysler.

I was wondering about this. The new Avenger comes with the "2.4 world"
engine for the base model. How does it compare to the 2.4 that it
replaces. They got most of the problems worked out of the old 2.4, so
I couldn't understand why they would want to use something new and
unknown.

-KM

In article . net>,
"Scott Koprowski" > wrote:

> http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll...=2007706080377
>
>
> I have been saying this since the engine debuted in the Caliber- maybe this
> is a nice step in a good direction for the "new" Chrysler.
Although the new 2.4L engine is mentioned for it's cold roughness,
most of the article is on aspects of the the Sebring and Nitro which
customers don't like, such as "both knocked for their interiors".

I looked at the Sebring when it first came out and since I was mainly
interested in the V6 this wouldn't have been a problem for me.
However I rejected the Sebring in 5 minutes because:
-Can't store a full size spare. (a critical need for me)
-Impractical hood channels in a snowy climate.
-Poor interior.

Note that the poor interior is third on my list of concerns, no mention
of the first two which are more important to me, in fact the first (full
sized spare) is a firm need for my outside of urban driving.
I have no idea how it drives, because it doesn't interest me.
I certainly wouldn't trade our 2001 V6 Sebring on it!

Oh yes the Nitro. It was there to and the salesman insisted I sit in it.
Sitting in it turned me off even more than looking at it. The only thing
I could see attractive about the Nitro is the low price.
IMO it's just a large Honda Element; two boxes on wheels.

Scott Koprowski wrote:

> http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll...=2007706080377
>
>
> I have been saying this since the engine debuted in the Caliber- maybe this
> is a nice step in a good direction for the "new" Chrysler.
>
>

The only thing I saw is complaints about NVH when cold. That doesn't
sound like much of an issue, but I'm glad to see them "re-thinking" the
Sebring and Nitro. How about "re thinking" them right out of production
and get a midsize sedan of a build quality to match the Magnum and Charger?

As for the "world engine," yes I was highly suspicious the moment I
found out that Mitsubishi was involved in the design. Now there's a
company that can't build a decent engine no matter how hard they try....

Scott Koprowski wrote:
> http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll...=2007706080377
>
>
> I have been saying this since the engine debuted in the Caliber- maybe this
> is a nice step in a good direction for the "new" Chrysler.

The fixes they are talking about - improving quality while cutting costs
- will *only* work if it is managed with extreme ethics - very hard to
do in today's business world. I saw the failures of that when working
for a supplier to Ford and Delphi (GM) in the 90's - I've posted some
war stories about that here.

If the combination of cutting costs and upping quality is done like it
usually is in U.S. automotive, it will amount to making bricks without
straw, the mandated quality documentation will get faked (much as in
communist countries with their unachievable but required goals) in spite
of "documentation" requirements, and will utterly fail. BTDT.

Maybe they will succeed at it.

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

"Bill Putney" > wrote in message
...
> Scott Koprowski wrote:
> > http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll...=2007706080377
> >
> >
> > I have been saying this since the engine debuted in the Caliber- maybe
this
> > is a nice step in a good direction for the "new" Chrysler.
>
> The fixes they are talking about - improving quality while cutting costs
> - will *only* work if it is managed with extreme ethics

You simply cannot improve quality and cut costs on a car engine design
unless it is an established design, with history behind it. If it is a new
design, your going to have teething pains and those are going to cost
money and reduce perceived quality. Remember an engine is complex
with a lot of parts - and you can have 99.9% of the parts of a superior
quality and better design, but all it takes is 1 substandard part to tank
the entire thing.

We saw Ford do this when they went to plastic intake manifolds. A
mistake in the selection of the type of plastic produced manifolds that
grew brittle and cracked, and this was an established engine design.

Ted

Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
> "Bill Putney" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>Scott Koprowski wrote:
>>
>>>http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll...=2007706080377
>>>
>>>
>>>I have been saying this since the engine debuted in the Caliber- maybe
>
> this
>
>>>is a nice step in a good direction for the "new" Chrysler.
>>
>>The fixes they are talking about - improving quality while cutting costs
>>- will *only* work if it is managed with extreme ethics
>
>
> You simply cannot improve quality and cut costs on a car engine design
> unless it is an established design, with history behind it. If it is a new
> design, your going to have teething pains and those are going to cost
> money and reduce perceived quality. Remember an engine is complex
> with a lot of parts - and you can have 99.9% of the parts of a superior
> quality and better design, but all it takes is 1 substandard part to tank
> the entire thing.
>
> We saw Ford do this when they went to plastic intake manifolds. A
> mistake in the selection of the type of plastic produced manifolds that
> grew brittle and cracked, and this was an established engine design.
>
> Ted

Though this thread was titled for the engine itself, the article had
very lttle to do with the engine problem(s), and more to do with overall
automitve design philosophy and quality in general. My comment was
about the more general context.

But if I read correctly, the only complaint on the engine is its cold
running properties. As you indicate, that may be due to one component
or at least one aspect of the controls algorithm, and the solution may
or may not be easy to retrofit - probably not too difficult to
incorporate into new builds. But the damage to the reputation of the
engine may be irreparable even if the engine itself is fixed.

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