Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Dodge Avenger
... Dodge today has what? Stratus coupes? Yawn... they look nice, but Dodge can do better.
Tagged:
0
Comments
The 2.5L 6cyl was not used in any mitsubishi that I can think of and the 2.0L 4cyl was the same motor as in the dodge neon which was also chrysler built.
In a nutshell, this is not a car I would personally want to take a chance on owning.
I have heard numerous horror stories.
This is definitely a hit or miss automobile.
If the price is right however, it may be worth a shot. Otherwise, I personally would not pay anywhere near book value for this car.
'95 Avenger ES was offered with the Mitsu 2.5L six and was only available with the Chrysler 41TE four-speed automatic.
The V6 is a reliable engine, by most all accounts, though it's output, for its displacement, is not impressive. It is smooth enough, not prone to leaks, and has a fairly pleasing growl above 4,000rpms.
The 41TE tranny was problematic for Chrysler, until about '98. Be wary of leaks, which usually begin to manifest themselves at or around 70K miles. Main suspect the forward oil pump seal. Reapir of that item will cost between $1700 and $2200. If you don't mind a red spot on the garage floor, many people have logged substantial miles with a leaking seal, with no loss of performance, though the fluid level must then be watched.
The only way to get a 5-speed was to opt for the 2.0L four. If there are no signs of oil leaks, you should be fine, but make sure to ask if the head-gasket was ever replaced.
Avengers were notorious for warping front rotors as well. This can be said of many makes and models, but the factory rotors, if still on, should be replaced with upgrades at the first brake job. No serious cornering can be accomplished with the OEM rotors.
Undeniably some of the best sheetmetal any coupe ever wore, the Avenger is a hot-looking car, even now. It is a modest performer, but has the disticnt advantage of being comfortable for four, and capable of multi-tasking, due to a sedan's worth of space.
The '95 is not a car to take chances on. If you want it, have it inspected top to bottom by a great mechanic. The '98 model year is a much better gamble, regardless of powertrain choice.
What level are you looking at, and how many miles are on it? Can't price without that info...
While the price is not out of line, the miles are too high, and the 4-cylinder mated to the automatic is the worst combo for the car. It takes the performance from acceptable to downright depressing. Mind you, the engine is certainly capable of more miles, but other components will start to fail by this point. Also, a '95 41TE with 130K miles is not a bet to take under any circumstances.
Anecdotal advice is meaningless from someone who knows little about the car, as is the case with some of the above posts.
A '98 or later Avenger, as I said, would be a much better bet. QC at Mitsu and Chryler started to improve dramatically in '97, just as design did in '95.
Good hunting!
Your are welcome to your opinion that all Chryslers are crap, provided you label it as opinion or provide supporting evidence. And since, IIRC, the very rag you tout recommends more than one of the Chrysler family, you obviously can't do the latter.
This poster asked for specific information about a specific car with which I have experience, and I posted specific valid concerns which will hopefully help in the decision-making process, not some BS about all Chryslers and Mitsus are crap because you loathe your Neon.
I will reiterate: due to the miles, the drivetrain combo, and the history of the 41TE prior to '98, I would pass on this car. Specifically.
Don't be a dipwad.
BTW, I'm very seriously considering the Sportcross. I'm gonna ditch the coupe in about 22 months, and the IS looks like the best candidate. Did you drive it yet? You like the 17" wheels with summer tires or the all-season 16"s?
Although I will give you credit for telling him to PASS on the car, you should refrain from labeling others' opinions (which are meant only to help) as BS. And you should certainly not call other people names (how old are you?). A-hole.
Now that we got that out, yes, I did test drive an IS300 5 sp. The 17" wheels are an absolute must, in both a functional and aesthetic sense. They look a million times better than the 16 inchers. If you get the 16", it ruins the performance of the car totally (acceleration, handling, braking, etc). See Car & Driver's road test from a couple months ago for more on IS tire selection if that isn't enough.
I've seen CR. On numerous occasions. Perhaps you should consider revisting it yourself.
Oh, and you're right about the name-calling. Sorry. That was at least as juvenile as lumping all Chryslers and Mitsus ever made together and calling them crap. Kind of like calling all VWs crap, or all GMs crap, or all Nissans crap. Your opinion is valid to you, and should be set forth as opinion and not fact, which it frankly is not.
You give ME credit for voting to pass? Thanks so very much. Considering I gave specific mechanical reasons to avoid that particular car, rather than ignominious rantings aimed at an entire company of which you have owned one example, that's the least you could do.
Now that WE got THAT out, I drove the Sportcross with the 17"s, but had no opportunity to drive with the all-seasons. You can barely find ONE Sportcross on a lot around here (SF Bay) let alone a few for comparison's sake. Yeah, I read the blurb in C&D too, but reading and doing (especially with C&D) are far too often two vastly different things. I was hoping perhaps you'd sampled both. My preference leans quite naturally toward the 17"s, just curious about other impressions.
It's a winner in my book. The only other one I like right now is the 325. Well, that and the Audi.
Last thought: Leather/Escaine? I prefer the Escaine myself, thought I wonder about wear...
Also, after about 100K miles, the motor mounts may be pretty well shot (true of most cars really). This is more prevelant in manual-equipped ones, and depends somewhat on driving habits. It won't affect performance much, but it will make for a rougher idle, and shifts will be much more noticeable.
If you were a tuner, or a tuner wannabe, this could be a fun engine. With stock rods, pistons, crank, head and cams, the SOHC version has been played up to over 300hp at the crank. Not sure about how far the DOHC can be taken, but I'm impressed!
Again though, I wouldn't take this particular car (or ANY used car,for that matter) on without a whole lot of service and maintenance documentation and a thorough inspection. Even then, that tranny would make me skittish!
I don't need to revisit CR; I remember what I read.
Lumping all Chryslers and Mitus together into a category known as crap is not juvenile; it's fact. Again, argue all you want. You are the only one with juvenile postings here. I actually couldn't care any less about a Dodge Avenger of any model year. (And I wouldn't call all Nissans crap - but I would call all GM cars crap - you can add that to my "juvenile" lumping of auto makes that are crap. Don't get me wrong, my uncle's '98 6 spd Corvette is a great car, but, much as he loves it, he will be glad to tell you about the many problems it has had, including three serious ones.) Despite what you may think in your little mind - and you know nothing about me - I don't give out advice on cars unless I have adequate knowledge of them. Why don't you worry about your own opinions/advice and not critique others'. 12 year olds like yourself shouldn't be giving out car advice anyway.
IS: I had no interest in driving the 16" wheels. They look horrible and I knew the performance would be significantly diminished. I like the Ecsaine best (holds your butt in place better than full leather), but we will be going with cloth - we will be hauling two kids with us by then.
Clearly, from your posts, you know nothing whatsoever about the Avenger, and alarmingly little about your own Neon.
"I actually couldn't care any less about a Dodge Avenger of any model year..."
And yet you feel not only compelled but qualified to give an earnest enquirer advice on one. Now there's a mature attitude.
"Despite what you may think in your little mind..."
A utter paragon of comportment.
"I don't give out advice on cars unless I have adequate knowledge of them..."
Well, that certainly shows from all your detailed, fact-filled pointers on the '95 Avenger in question. Truly, I am humbled by your intense knowledge of all things automotive.
"12 year olds like yourself shouldn't be giving out car advice anyway..."
As most 12 year-olds have a firmer grasp of the distinction between useful fact and agitated hyperbole than you appear to, I absolutely relish the compliment.
Based on this sampling of the supreme quality of advice given, I shall get me to a Lexus lot and try out the 16"s.
Some advice for you, since I have some other experience you have yet to garner: it's one hell of a lot easier to get formula, spit-up, vomit, juice, string cheese and Pokemon fruit snacks off full leather than it is out of cloth.
Resale's generally better on a "lux/sport" with leather, too. Generally. But then, I'm sure you already knew all that, after all, it's in CR...
2. I don't feel it is necessary to go into specific mechanical issues (which I never claimed to have) of a car that is LIKELY to not be of average or better reliability. Besides, you already wowed us all with your in-depth, mechanical knowledge of a car that was a total market failure.
3. The fact that I don't care about Avengers has nothing to do with whether I would proffer advice on whether or not to buy one.
4. Not impressed with your efforts to impress/sound intelligent by using "big college words".
5. You are the one who does not know what a useful fact is: on giving advice to someone who does not own an Avenger but is thinking about buying one, pointing out the mechancial stuff as you did isn't much benefit. Experiences from owners and friends of owners of the same and similar cars is more beneficial at this point - that is, the consideration stage of buying. Your advice would be better served at the shopping stage, after one has decided to look for a certain model.
6. If, when you are old enough to get your license, you test drive a Lexus with the 16" wheels, you will come to find that their performance is less than that of the 17" tires. If you know anything about tires, you could tell this just by looking at the tire designation.
7. You don't know anything about me; you don't know what I do or don't know. I DO know that leather is easier to clean than cloth. That is not the reason for choosing cloth. My wife and I want cloth because leather gets hot and we don't want to burn our kids' butts when they are old enough to be out of child seats. And we plan on keeping the car for a very long time, which is also why I am not concerned about the higher resale value of leather (another fact that I DID know) that we will be passing on.
8. You, sir, are a jackass.
You, having a remarkable opportunity, since the is a thread about (get this) AVENGERS, consistently show, with escalating vitriol, that you know nothing whatsoever about them, aside from the fact that they're virtually identical to Sebrings of the same years. Since you admittedly have no interest in the cars, why would you bother posting in the first place?
"I don't feel it is necessary to go into specific mechanical issues (which I never claimed to have) of a car that is LIKELY to not be of average or better reliability..."
Let's just see what the poster asked for: "If anyone could tell me if it is easy or if they have any mechanical problems with them or otherwise, it would be a big help..."
So you really don't care what the poster wanted, you just want to rant for fun. Your choice.
"The fact that I don't care about Avengers has nothing to do with whether I would proffer advice on whether or not to buy one."
And nobody said you had to! If you at least know what you're talking about, you can reamin as detatched as you please, and no man objecting!
"Not impressed with your efforts to impress/sound intelligent by using 'big college words'..."
Oh, I haven't even touched the college bag. Why would I? You seem to find sophomore high school vocabulary daunting enough.
"You are the one who does not know what a useful fact is: on giving advice to someone who does not own an Avenger but is thinking about buying one, pointing out the mechancial stuff as you did isn't much benefit. Experiences from owners and friends of owners of the same and similar cars is more beneficial at this point - that is, the consideration stage of buying. Your advice would be better served at the shopping stage, after one has decided to look for a certain model..."
I can't say what's more amusing: the fact that you actually wrote that, or the thought that you might actually believe any of it! The poster HAS decided to look at a certain model, and asked for issues related to it. How exactly is pointing out specific mechanical issues that should be foremost in mind when assessing the viability of a candidate not of benefit. I'm to assume that a blanket (and erronious) opinion of "all Chryslers are crap" is somehow more helpful?
Apparently, you know just as much about tires as you do about Avengers. I have never questioned whether the 17" package would offer greater performance over the 16" package as offered. I merely asked if you'd driven it equipped as such. That's all.
"You don't know anything about me; you don't know what I do or don't know. I DO know that leather is easier to clean than cloth. That is not the reason for choosing cloth. My wife and I want cloth because leather gets hot and we don't want to burn our kids' butts when they are old enough to be out of child seats. And we plan on keeping the car for a very long time, which is also why I am not concerned about the higher resale value of leather (another fact that I DID know) that we will be passing on..."
I've schlepped two young'uns around on (gray) leather for six years now. It's routinely in the hundreds out here in the summer, and nobody's ever burned a butt. However, not wanting to burn baby butts is commendable.
Your kids, once you finally have them, are going to be in child seats for about five years, maybe longer, the way new laws are proliferating. A Corolla-based sedan will be less than comfortable when the first is about two years old. Unless you aren't planning on this as your primary family car, I'll bet dollars to doughnuts you'll be shopping again a lot sooner than you think.
Then again, it IS silly for me to try to give you any advice, especially unwanted! You seem to know so very much already!
I do really care what the poster wanted; I did not post in order to "rant for fun" (that is what you have been doing). (In fact, I find arguing with you is not fun - but you started it; instead of just offering your own advice, you feel you must compensate for your own feelings of inadequacy by belittling others.) Once again, you demonstrate that you are an ignorant a-hole by making assumptions about people you don't know. Insulting my vocabulary with no basis - another sign of you being an ignorant prick.
The poster is asking about a specific car because he is considering it; he didn't say he was set on getting an Avenger. When I shop for a car, I don't care to know all the specific details in the beginning. I just want to know whether it is reliable in general. Or general areas where such a model could be prone to problems.
Apparently, you are too stupid to even remember what you asked because you didn't just ask if I had driven the IS with 16" wheels; you asked if I LIKED the 17" or 16". And I politely answered you. I actually know a lot about tires (and, no, I don't claim to be an expert on everything like you) but I guess I better not get into that with you, or anything else. Apparently, you think you are an expert on everything in life, from vocabulary to Avengers to tires to kids. Too bad you aren't an expert on human relations. I think you post just because you like to argue, insult, and be a jackass. In those areas, you have succeeded. I didn't come here to argue. Whether you like it or not, I just came by to offer a solicited opinion on a vehicle. You don't get to be the judge of whether or not others are "worthy" to post an opinion.
As for the IS, my wife prefers cloth, and that is fine with me. I don't insist on leather. And you are right on one thing: I don't want - or need - your advice.
So we finally get to the point that you have no facts to post, but only your opinions, to which you are duly entitled, as I said from the start, so long as they are framed as what they so obviously are: opinions. I have never sat in judgement on your right or ability to offer an opinion.
"I do really care what the poster wanted..."
Claptrap. He asked for mechanical issues on a '95 Avenger. Even after 23 total posts on the thread, you still haven't offered the least bit of factual info on a Dodge Avenger, other than it had a stablemate from Chrysler and you couldn't care less about it. Very useful.
"I don't claim to be an expert on everything like you..." I don't claim to be an "expert" on anything germane to automotive topics, but I certainly have relevant facts at my disposal on this particular topic, don't I? That's something you haven't offered in the least.
Rather than return with any factual information on the subject matter general, specific or otherwise, you choose to resort to name calling and other third-grade-level taunts.
I've never posted in the Miata topic. Know why? I've never owned one, worked on one or even read extensively about them. I have nothing to offer in an in-depth discussion on Miatas other than they look good and have power going to the correct wheels. That's why I don't post in the Miata thread. You keep saying I don't know what you know. Well, you're in a thread about Avengers; why don't you just show us all what you do know!
Thought not...
Sorry it didn't work out, but this wasn't exactly a golden opportunity.
A '98 or later would be, as I said, a much better bet, and if you prefer not to have a manual (I prefer the manual in this car), try to get an ES with the 2.5L six. By '98, the 4-speed automatic is pretty darn bug-free. Also, the timing belts on the six are good to 105K miles.
Again, Good Hunting!
Good luck to you, the Avenger-seeker. I honestly hope you get one that is trouble-free. For your sake, I hope Chrysler quality has improved, even if the hard data isn't showing that to be the case.
PS - you want facts? See the 4/00 issue of Consumer Reports (2000 was the last model year they made the Avenger). You don't have to trust my opinions or stated facts. Trust all the people who reply to CR's annual auto survey - all the owners of Avengers who report on them. I'll save you the flipping time - it's on page 42. The Avenger's reliability gets a black dot - the worst rating (it means "much worse than average"). It also got a black dot for [owner] satisfaction. These are the OWNERS making these ratings. I quote, "Reliability has been poor. This is the last year for the Avenger/Sebring pair."
From the 2000 CR Buying Guide, page 277, "Used Cars to Avoid": 95-97 Dodge Avenger (they sold so few of them in '98 that CR had insufficient data for the 98 model year & at the time of publication, the survey for '99 models was not complete. Also note '95 was the debut year, so for all years they had sufficient data, it was a used car to avoid.) On page 286, you can see a breakdown of its reliability data. Most troublesome areas: electrical & [body] integrity, then hardware, then brakes, then ignition, and then paint/trim. All of these areas received below average marks. All but the last two areas received the dreaded black dots. Again, these are owners' statistics. Strangely, these are the same problem areas our neon has had so much trouble with. But I guess you would call that coincidence. Whatever.
And you had to go digging to find a two-friggin'-year-old copy of your beloved CR to do it, because you don't actually know ANYTHING! It comes to the same conclusion I offered numerous posts back: Pass. Imagine that! Seems a '95-'97 is a risky proposition: well, whaddaya knowbout dat?
Conveniently, your bathroom reading search contains nothing on the years I suggest looking at. Now THERE'S a coincidence. Your Neon shares an engine block with the Avenger/Sebring, and that's about it, BTW, so call it whatever YOU want.
You could try Allpar, and go to the owner's web ring, so you can find some real info on the cars from real owners who actually know something about their cars. It's much more illuminating than CR, where broken stereo knobs and blown fuses get listed as "electical issues". Better yet, try dirtying your tiny nail-bitten fingers on a car once in a while. But you don't care, do you? Nope.
Why? Well to put it in terms you'd use yourself and therefore understand, because you're a know-it-all dickless loser whose entire pathetic life is lived in the pages of old issues of magazines. The IS should be a perfect long-term car for you. See, to have children (your own at least), you'd actually have to have a set of reproductive organs, as well as the brains to actually use them. So it pretty much looks like you won't ever have to worry about growing out of a Corolla, unless you adopt.
Shifty Joe: after you delete all the BS posts from this thread, feel free to e-mail me my notice. It's been ages since we've talked.
I figured after [you] having to admit that it was relevant data (as I spoke of all along - just now getting page numbers to satisfy you), you would then: A. attempt to attack the credibility of CR (and fail miserably), and then: B. having bombed at that, you would then launch a vicious, immature, verbal assault on me personally. I don't take it personally because you don't know me and because you have just shown yourself to be the jerk I said you were all along (with your name-calling, arguing, assumptions, etc). I think most people would say the engine block is a very significant shared part, if not the most important. After all, that IS what makes the car move (its sole purpose in life) - at least, from my limited automotive knowledge , I think it is the engine that makes the car move.
CR readers, some of which are undoubtedly mechanics, don't have to be the "under the hood" types to be able to point out obvious problems when they occur. You lose any credibility when you refer to CR data as not real. Like anyone is going to believe some website over a respected publication. We all believe everything we read on the web . BTW, I don't bite my nails, if you really want to know.
I'm not going to respond to your silly name-calling. I will just say that I have been happily married to a 5'1" 103lb beauty for six years. We have a beautiful 2 year old daughter and our second child is due in January. I never planned on buying an IS, thinking it was too small, until my wife test drove a midsize Accord and was not comfortable piloting something that large. Since, after having a kid for two years, we have never had a problem fitting her stuff in the trunk of the neon, I figure we are safe with a similar size trunk in the IS (I have a truck, too, anyway). Plus, she loved the car and all its standard safety features.
To the host: if you feel any or all of my posts are irrelevant and/or inappropriate, please feel free to delete them as well. Thanks.
A) After all your silly generalizing, you actually scurried off to find some hard data to support what I'd already suggested to Avenger: PASS! I never once said he should take the car. If you'd had the brains to "find the page numbers" in the first place, and post the relevant data on the car in question, there would be nothing to discuss. I don't dispute the CR statistics, nor their recommendation. The fact that they lump their data into broad categories is irrefutable, though obviously necessary for reporting purposes.
Try something like: "According to the most recent JD Power IQ survey, Chrysler, at 141, as a manufacturer, has more complaints per vehicle than the industry average, which is 133."
See, now THAT'S a fact, as opposed to hyperbole! Can't really argue with that. It certainly does not imply that everything they make is a piece of crap, though. GM, BTW, is above the average, yet Nissan is topped not only by DCX, but Ford and Mitsu, and Mazda appears nowhere in the top fifteen (#15 is Kia, at 212).
Keep trying though. I give your full marks for tenacity. Like a puppy with a wet slipper.
I told you in the beginning that my statement of the unreliability of Chrysler products (Mitsus too) was based on, in part, hard data gleaned from CR. I didn't just read that data for the first time. I got page numbers of data I had already read (years ago) because you were in denial of the facts as I stated them. Most people, unlike you, don't ask for page numbers. I gave you the name of the printed source in the beginning. Normally, that is enough. But you are not normal.
Since "crap" is general negative term, I will rephrase my statement to say that Chrysler and Mitsu cars are generally unreliable. This is backed up by CR (see issues already mentioned). Since we are talking about a Dodge here, you can look at the poor reliability ratings of the other Dodge models on and around the same pages as I gave for the Avenger model. Flip a few pages forward and note the ratings for Honda models and then Toyota models. Note how Honda and Toyota models received a lot of full red and half red dots (better than average - excellent reliability). Then note how Chrysler/Dodge and Mitsu models received many full black and half black dots (below average - much worse than average reliability). From this data, even your feeble mind can safely conclude that reliability tends to be very consistent between the models of a particular make of vehicle. From the facts of years of reliability data, I confidently state that Chrysler products in general are unreliable. As I stated in the beginning. But you mistook it for ranting.
Nissan's ratings have indeed declined. I believe I read something about the JD Power study in the news that said Mazda was included in Ford's ratings, which is why it didn't appear on the list. But you are talking about an Initial Quality study, which is not the same thing as Long Term Reliability.
Your own first post on the subject. Yeah, I mistook that for ranting. How silly of me.
"Since 'crap' is general negative term, I will rephrase my statement to say that Chrysler and Mitsu cars are generally unreliable." "I confidently state that Chrysler products in general are unreliable..."
Nice back-pedal. Toned down and getting closer to a true statement. I never mentioned Honda or Toyota. That they are the current industry leaders in quality and reliablility is not now, nor has it been a point of contention. Did I tell him not to look at a Honda or Toyota if he so pleased? NO! He asked about a Dodge Avenger, and I gave him viable, useful information on a Dodge Avenger. He didn't ask about shopping for other cars, he asked if there were any issues he needed to know about with this car. What is it you don't get?
"From this data, even your feeble mind can safely conclude that reliability tends to be very consistent between the models of a particular make of vehicle..."
Which duly explains why the Escort is a CR Good Bet, but the Windstar is a Reliability Risk? Of course it does.
Again, what don't you get? An intelligent statement, such as "in general, Chrysler offerings are less reliable than Toyota and Honda", is factual, with statistical information available to back it. Only a twit would try to refute that statement, and the rest of us can enjoy the show. Somebody at least interested in offering constructive advice would have perhaps said: "You might want consider a '95 Camry coupe. They book at about the same price, though there will be a few less amenities, but the performance will be very close, and reliability should be much better." Again, hard to refute under any circumstances. But you didn't because you not only don't know, but don't care, and would rather take the opportunity to rant about all Chryslers being "junk".
Just so that there is something relevant to leave in archive, Consumer Reports rates the Avenger very poorly, among the worst reliability records possible.
So I trust the original poster will take that data for whatever it is worth and let's move on.
thank you
MrShiftright
Host
The parts are getting scarce and expensive; it's had a few minor problems; but overall, it has been the best car I've ever owned.
I've been disappointed in the design of the headlights (no parts available, just the whole module), the clearance of the front airdam, and the size of the delicate alloy wheels. 17" tires are a lot more money (with no apparent improvement in handling).
So, although there is plenty of room for improvement, and parts are overpriced, it is still a joy to drive while listening to the Infinity sound system (with added XM satellite).
My ES model has leather, a sun roof, electric mirrors, air, a V-6 with automatic front wheel drive, and anything else a comparable BMW has for about half the cost!
Actually, before I could replace the headlights recently, it turned on me. The tranny went and it needed EGR valve, belts and a tune-up. With a $3000. bill looking at me, and the prospect of another brutal desert summer upon us, I figured I better give it up. It was generally a reliable car though. I can't complain. If I had the money, they'd have never gotten the car away from me! I just couldn't afford to keep the car fixed up for the long haul. :-( Mechanics say casually, "oh, that'll be $900. to fix". Like it's NOTHING! I would have loved to have kept the car till it was a "antique". Oh well. Of course I had to see a very sharp black one in town this weekend, to make me feel worse!
For anyone's info.(flavenger) I found new after-market headlamp assemblys for it for $140.+ $10 shipping each at BB Auto parts, out of the Bronx, NY
Eric Rogers
i have both cars but im in texas and my cars are in new york so any for will help
Say what you want in terms of critism, you like it or you don't. I expect that anyone is the same, you have the makes of cars you like and don't like. If you are looking to buy a car, ask questions like; What do I need in a vehicle, this helps determine just you should put money towards.
You may also want to ask if comfort or power are the prime targets, you sacrafice one for the other, lets face it, Vets are not the most comfortable cars but they go. Avengers..... damn they look good just sitting there, I don't need to go fast!!
This car has not given us a lot of trouble. Some, but not a lot. 6 months after we bought it, it had lifter noise -- turned out it had to have the rear main seal replaced. No major problems since. We have had on and off annoyances that irritate me alot: the air conditioning belt whines, and the darn alarm goes off in the slightest breeze (a TSB said to have a shim installed; that only solved the problem for about a year, so now I leave the car unlocked). We are still on our original break pads and rotors, so so much for the break issue thing that so many other Avenger owners have been plauged with. (Of course, I drive my vehicles nicely: I don't go rushing up to stop signs at light speed like every other idiot in a cool looking car seems to love to do!)
The other thing I am sorry about is it's low, low, low resale value. Oh, well. At least when our son turns sixteen next year, he'll be driving a pretty darn cool looking car with airbags, and a 4-banger that won't let him get too out of control.
I like the car, and unless the cost of a repair is more than the thing is worth, I don't think we'll ever sell it.
side of 96 avenger? Sounds like a big loose nut and bolt or something like that. Also, I need a headlight assembly on the passenger side, got one for sale?
Is there realy any diffrence in design 95 to 2000???
I saw a picture of the headlamps and I can not see the diffrence.
PLS I need answer fast!!! Greetings and THANKS
I have put a short ram air filter and a racing muffler on it, and it sounds great but wont go faster than 105mph! Which i am sorry isnt fast enough. the speedo goes up to 150, the car should to I think!
My low beams point right into the ground. I have to use my high beams in order to drive at night. My headlights have always been really cloudy. Two years ago the car was in a wreck and I had the headlights replaced. There were still many problems with them. The dealer said that the headlights were just too low and so they couldn't be fixed. Then, they attempted to fix them by "adjusting" them. NOw it looks like i have a spotlight hitting the ground around 5 feet before me. NO better at all. Now they are telling me that I have to take the chances of getting them replaced AGAIN, but this still may not fix the problem. I'm really really really really sick of this.
what can i do, where else can i go, i do not have a fortune to try and fix this problem again.