Saw the new '07 Sebring Thursday

In article >,
wrote:

> Also, the car arrived *out of the factory* with a dead battery.

Interesting stories, but I'm sure the dead battery was the result of
something electrical being left on during shipping or storage.

Twice I've rejected batteries on new cars I was buying.
In each case I noticed the battery was dead on my inspection before
signing the contract. I made a pen mark on the battery label, requested
a new battery only to find the car delivered with the same battery
charged up. I just add another (secret) mark and insist on a NEW one.

My pre signing inspection also caught a car with the wrong engine. Seems
the car docs listed the engine I wanted, but that wasn't the engine in
the car. To this day I wonder where I would have stood if I didn't
catch that before signing and taking delivery! <

I've got a '96 Mercury Mystique that Ford used the wrong insulation on
all the engine wiring harnesses - after a few years, the insulation
literally turns to dust, and the harness is bare wires all over the
place. They came out with a campaign that went to 100k miles to replace
the harnesses, but they didn't notify the owners (it wasn't a true
recall so they didn't *have* to). Mine's over 100k, and they won't
budge on the limit.

I think we as a society have painted ourselves into a corner with our
demands on car manufacturers. We want light weight, air conditioners
that last over the expected life of the vehicle without requiring a
$1000 repair, good fuel mileage, all kinds of so-called safety features
(some are actually useful, some not) that work over the life of the
vehicle without requiring astronomically costed repairs (ABS brakes,
a.c. evaporators, etc.), 0-60 in 6 seconds or less, low pollution (tons
of delicate technical gadgest all over the vehilce), able to accommodate
every home appliance and gadget you can think of, everything extremely
tightly integrated yet easy to work on, low initial cost, low
maintenance cost over a 200k mile span, plastics that last longer than
plastics can last, and with nothing that breaks after 6 years that costs
more than half the value or the car at that point (a.c. evaps and ABS
brakes). Plus the union agreements won't allow making existing
production more efficient if it eliminates a worker from the line
(specifically GM).

I submit that it would be impossible to meet all but 3 or 4 of those
requirements in any given car. Between our own personal expectaions and
government requirements, we've quaranteed ourselves that we will be
unhappy with our cars and the manufacturers - too many compromises have
to be made to mee them all - something has to give - and we pay for it.

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

"Mr.X" > wrote in message
...
> On Mon, 23 Oct 2006 09:00:58 -0500, Steve > wrote:
>
>>Hachiroku wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, 22 Oct 2006 02:18:54 +0000, Dave wrote:
>>>
>>>
wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On Sat, 21 Oct 2006 18:16:40 GMT, Some O > graced this
>>>>>newsgroup with:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>In article >,
wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>On Sat, 21 Oct 2006 02:09:02 GMT, Some O > graced this
>>>>>>>newsgroup with:
>>>>>>>and this has to do with Nissans because.....?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>The new Sebring doesn't quite meet my requirements;
>>>>>>obvious from my two negatives.
>>>>>>Of those other cars I mentioned (Altima is a Nissan isn't it?) a few
>>>>>>do
>>>>>>appear meet my requirements and I'll look closer at them.
>>>>>>Since I keep a car for up to 10 years, I evaluate them closely.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>well..why you would even think of a domestic car if you're looking at
>>>>>something to last 10 years is beyond me.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Well my mom's 1987 Chrysler 5th avenue is going on 20 years and has
>>>>135,000 miles. Really not alot of miles in the past few years but get
>>>>this, it even has the original exhaust.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Every once in a while they screw up and make one RIGHT!
>>
>>True Believers in Japanese cars are harder to reprogram than
>>Scientologists, and just as well-grounded in fact. :-/
>>
>
>
> TRUE,
> long with my "new" 05 sebring convertable I still keep my 89 olds
> ciera 210k miles for the weekday work trip, I junked the 86 aries in
> 05 and got the sebring in it's place
>
> American Cars are the BEST

Then, howcome I have a 1985 Corolla GTS in the yard with 258,000 miles that
still starts on the first turn of the key, and just gave away an '85 Celica
in excellent running condition that still starts on the first turn of the
key, but my '92 Grand Voyager sounds like it's going to BLOW UP any minute
now, and it only has 127,000 miles on it?

Because:

http://www.allpar.com/mopar/33.html

To start with, we motor room mechanics were a little disappointed when [the
engineer] came down with the first prototype parts for the 3.3. We were
expecting an overhead cam-high tech-high performance engine, and were
shocked when we pulled out a bag containing push rods!

Somebody had done a survey of potential customers and decided that the
customer was too dumb to know what was under the hood anyway, so the "cost
effective" approach was taken. Ford's Taurus engines and GM's 3.8 used
pushrods, so why not us?

We were paying a high premium for Mitsubishi's 3.0L V6, and Trenton Engine
had room for another assembly line, so it was a no brainer as far as the
necessity and where it would be built. We had some problems early on with
valve stem finish which was quickly fixed, a bigger problem was thrust
bearing failure. We were getting some engines coming in to tear down with
incredible end play, you didn't need a dial micrometer to know which ones
were bad. Our manager grabbed me and 3 other mechanics and we spent the next
2 days at Detroit Metro Airport checking crank end play on Snappy rental
cars with the 3.3 engine. Most were okay, but an occasional one would
produce not 3 or 4 or 5 thousandths end play, but 100+ ! The blame was aimed
at the transmission, but we immediately went to a wider thrust face. Has not
been a problem since. [Note that the 3.3 was produced for many years, and
these early problems affected only a relatively small number of engines.]

I had a real battle with an engineer in regards to the head bolt washers and
the ensuing CYI approach he took to, well, cover his behind. The 2.2 and 3.3
used the same head bolts and washers; a decision was made to widen the head
bolt washer to increase the clamping area. Only problem with this was that
on the 3.3, the wider washer could hit the valve spring that is next to the
oil feed cam tower. And they did.

[One engineer] told me that noisy tappet replacement was our fifth biggest
warranty item on the 3.3, but when they got the suspect parts back to
engineering, they weren't noisy. I fought to get a service bulletin written
on this, to check for interference before doing a costly cam/tappet
replacement, but another engineer [tried to cover up with] the claim that it
"helped attenuate" engine noise. On a visit to Trenton Engine, I found the
line worker who assembled the heads and asked him why he didn't notify
engineering about this. "I did, but was told not to worry about it," he
replied...

Another problem is oil leaks. Anytime you bolt aluminum to iron, the gasket
in between is compromised, due to the expansion differences between the two
metals. This is particularly evident in the chain case module gasket. The
gasket moves over time and creates a gap just above the oil pan rail, and
boy does it make a mess. Lower intake gaskets leak in the corners. An
upgraded gasket was designed with longer, tapered rubber ends that was
supposed to end the use of RTV, but RTV will always be a necessity on that
application.

Other notes
Jim Gathmann wrote: The early years of the 3.3 did have problems with the
rockers and the oiling system. I did not know when it was corrected...
Apparently they fixed this by the second year of production.

"91redbaron" wrote: The 3.5 had a rather interesting intake setup. There
were two separate intake manifolds for the left and right side cylinders
with their own throttle-bodies (interesting throttle linkage and cabling
there). So in a way it was like two in-line 3-cylinders that were joined at
the crank.

Dan Rose wrote: "I am a Dodge Dynasty owner who has one of the first 3.3
engines ever to come off the line. The pulleys on the (at least the early)
3.3 are made out of plastic, they break easily. The power steering pulley I
have replaced 4 times in the past 4 years."



Yup, American cars are the BEST, ok...

On Thu, 23 Nov 2006 06:36:24 -0500, Bill Putney >
graced this newsgroup with:

>
<snip great commentary>



Bill,

All excellent points. I think the strongest comment you made
was about the influence unions have on the American automobile.

(I'll preface this by saying that everything I say is IMHO and should
be taken as such).

Unions have outlived their usefulness. There was a time when unions
not only protected the factory worker but ensured that the auto
manufacturer played fair. Over the course of time, again IMHO, the
unions have moved away from "the big picture" and instead focused
on higher and higher benefits and salaries for their members.

In the end, the cost has to be passed on to the consumer. The more
expensive the car, the higher quality that's expected. I submit that
a large quantity of the American cars sitting in dealer lots should be
*at least* 25% less than what's being charged.

That way, the cost vs quality and level of expectation would be in
alignment.

And, as in everything, there's always exceptions to the rule

For example, I DO believe that Ford makes a great truck. I've owned
two (new) Explorers (a 91 Sport and an 03 XLT) and both trucks were
flawless..both in build quality, ride and reliability. The V8 in the
XLT was smooth, powerful and economical. The fit and finish were
excellent and if I were to buy another SUV someday, I wouldn't
hesitate for a second in buying another Explorer.

I think you need to call the "waaaaambulance"


"Some O" > wrote in message
...
> Just a bit of difference from the previous Sebring, but mostly positive
> IMO. Chrysler can actually still do a tasteful styling job! <
> The limited foot room for a long leg big foot front seat passenger has
> been corrected. It's OK for me now. Still the same small glove
> compartment.
> The large Sebring trunk may even be a bit larger with tis new model.
> I find the trunk space of the small SUVs too small for my use. Generally
> they are too narrow for my golf clubs to go across the back, with our
> cases towards the front.
> The Caliber trunk is far too small for me and the truck like Nitro I
> looked at is also deficient in trunk capacity, although I consider it
> too large for me.
>
> The desirable 2.7L engine is the same, no variable valve timing yet.
> About C$27 for the 2.7L car, which has a very good level of equipment.
>
> Unfortunately two negatives for my use have been introduced.
>
> 1. Several finger size deep channels in the hood. Bad for cleaning off
> dirt and will be ugly for snow and ice. Obviously designed in California
> and not audited by someone still left in Detroit, where the winter snow
> will it tell all.
> I can just see the snow and ice from those deep channels blowing up on
> the windshield.
> You can just see the channels in the hood picture he
> http://www.chrysler.com/en/sebring/gallery/
>
> 2. A full sized spare isn't an option, so I assume it won't fit the well.
> The sales manager got into my discussion with the sales person over this.
> When I said assuming one dares a long trip on our "service free"
> highways without a matching spare, "where does one put the flat". His
> response: "put it in the trunk". Obviously not a very deep thinker.
> The sales person said just keep my '95 Concord then. He meant it
> because he already proudly pointed out the oldie Saab of his parked out
> front. I'm surprised they allowed that!
> ---
> Other possibilities in the Sebring category I will look at are Camry,
> Altima and Fusion.

On Fri, 24 Nov 2006 03:22:21 -0600, "BoycottAI"
> graced this newsgroup with:

>I think you need to call the "waaaaambulance"


...besides, anyone who is actually seriously looking at a Chrysler, let
alone a Sebring with it's horrible repair history and then thinks it's
comparable to a Japanese car like a Camry is stump stupid.

I, personally, will never, ever own a Chrysler product ever again.

wrote:

>>American Cars are the BEST
>
>
>
> uh..yeah..sure. That's why the Motor Trend Car of the Year was...you
> guess it...a Japanese car yet again... (Toyota Camry).
>
> Now...back AWAY from the crack pipe. Trust me, people function
> just fine without drugs....really.


Not if they're condemned to driving a Camry every day. Talk about cause
for heavy medication....

On Fri, 24 Nov 2006 09:20:00 -0600, Steve > graced this
newsgroup with:

wrote:
>
>>>American Cars are the BEST
>>
>>
>>
>> uh..yeah..sure. That's why the Motor Trend Car of the Year was...you
>> guess it...a Japanese car yet again... (Toyota Camry).
>>
>> Now...back AWAY from the crack pipe. Trust me, people function
>> just fine without drugs....really.
>
>
>Not if they're condemned to driving a Camry every day. Talk about cause
>for heavy medication....
>

the new Camry's come in several different engine configurations.
Personally, it's not my kind of car either.

> don't *even* get me started on the American cars I've owned (all new
>
> Unbelievable.

Good, because I don't believe you. Admittedly, an 80s Camaro is about
the WORST American car you can pick for build quality, but it would
still be better than the 79 Mazda POS that put me off Japanese cars forever.

>
>
> After that, we lost complete and utter faith in any American (big
> three) cars and went to Japanese cars. We have three Lexuses and
> a Sentra. ALL of them have been absolutely bulletproof and drive and
> look like new. The GS300 has 225,000 miles on it

Congratulations... it still has half the miles my '73 Plymouth Satellite
has. Let me know how IT looks when its 33 years old and has 460,000
miles (as if it will ever come CLOSE to either!).

>> American Cars are the BEST
>
>
> Then, howcome I have a 1985 Corolla GTS in the yard with 258,000 miles
> that still starts on the first turn of the key, and just gave away an
> '85 Celica in excellent running condition that still starts on the first
> turn of the key, but my '92 Grand Voyager sounds like it's going to BLOW
> UP any minute now, and it only has 127,000 miles on it?

Because real engines do make a little more noise than wound-up rubber
bands :-p