By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
IF Toyota or Honda had offered a Lifetime Powertrain Warranty, the same people who mock Chrysler would be writing praises of Toyota or Honda.
My daughter's 1999 GC SE has over 101,000 miles and has NEVER needed a repair. My sister had zero problems with a 1986 Caravan that had 170,000 miles before it was sold to their friend.
I mean, I UNDERSTAND why Chrysler is doing this, I just don't think it's going to do them any good---or should I say, not enough good to justify the expense or the embarrassment of having to withdraw the offer later on.
I could see Lexus possibly extending warranty since the competition on the very high luxury end is pretty vicious.
RE: not needing repairs: Could be sis is the luckiest woman alive, right? I mean, people fall off buildings and land on a mattress truck--that doesn't make it normal
If you haven't noticed, Toyota's image, in terms of quality and reliability, isn't flying quite so high these days.(link)
All I'm saying is that I think whatever Toyota's reputation, Chrysler's is worse in the public eye at the moment. Having a wart or two isn't the same as internal injuries.
http://www.financialweek.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070820/REG/70817026/10- 36
could make that lifetime warranty kind of risky for chrysler.
Thats when the decline starts. I have said this before here. Toyota is heading down the same road Ford went. On top of the world thinking you are 10 foot tall and bullet proof and then you wake up one morning and your market share has dropped 15%.
All the signs are there, so far this year they have recalled more then sold and have very quietly gone through a sludge problem.
I am not knocking Toyota, just saying that what it takes to be #1 can be the down fall of your product
Wasn't it GM who was #1 for many years?
Toyota is having problems because recent Toyota buyers who owned another brand have learned by personal experience that Toyota vehicles are NOT better than other brands. I will NOT be a repeat Toyota buyer even though I like the dealership and the salesman who sold me the Sienna. I think the Odyssey is a better product than the Sienna.
Not #1 in Truck in the past few decades, it is for the past few decades.
But that was not the point. The point is if Toyota is not careful they will continue down the same road the domestics went.
I'm not referring to "initial quality" surveys, which are pretty meaningless if the car falls apart in 2 years.
And how do we explain the substantial resale value of a Toyota vis a vis an older Chevy Ford or Chrysler?
Now in the case of Mercedes, people were saying some years ago "they aren't the car they used to be" and the data backed that up. But it's not backing up any claims about Toyota.
And least not yet....
Maybe in the past but now with a simple google search you see they are really no better off then any of there competitors.
From 04-06 there recall #'s doubled and through the second quarter they had recalled more then what they sold.
My point being is not to bash Toyota, they make a fine car. But when you start running with the big dogs there will be more problems and quality will suffer.
What's interesting though in those stories about Toyota's quality control problems is that "these reports have alarmed Toyota executives AND ANGERED THE JAPANESE GOVERNMENT" (my caps inserted).
Now honestly, can you imagine the US government getting mad at Chrysler or Ford or Chevy for bad marks on consumer surveys and Big Three executives making a slight bow to the president and offering an apology?
My point, or opinion I mean, is that Japan, and Toyota, still has the corporate culture to CHANGE and improve, but American automakers apparently don't....given that they've had 40 years to try already.
So yes, every company has the potential to slip but no, not every company has the resources at hand to change.
I learned that Toyota retained value is NOT very high when I tried to trade off my 2006 Sienna and was told by the Toyota used car manager it was worth only $19,000 when it had less than 3,000 miles on it and was still in mint condition. :sick:
I've had a different experience. I'm going to sell my 2006 Scion xA for $11,500 with 30K on it, and I paid $12,500 in Nov. 2005. I think that's outstanding...of course my out the door price with T&L was higher, but still.....and the buyer of my car sold their 1995 Corolla for $4,600!!
I hope you didn't trade that Sienna in
Back to the topic, I think the warranty will help Chrysler. They have had some problems in the past, but it looks like things are getting better for them, and this will certainly help people who may have had doubts about buying one.
No, but they have a more formidable force to contend with - the shareholders.
tidester, host
SUVs and Smart Shopper
Re: The Sienna tell me what trim level you got, the color, etc and I will tell you what it is really worth.
If I can't someone at RWTIV can
Anyway, I think the consumer is already doing what you suggest the stockholder do...but voting with their checkbooks, not on a proxy ballot.
There is only one way to get any major corporation to do the right thing, be it foreign or domestic, be it cars or blenders or your TV set. Hit them in their wallets, hard fast and often.
This can be expressed effectively in the new car showroom.
I'm looking at a 2003 Mini Cooper S, black on black, 15,000 miles, custom wheels, premium package. Pedal to the metal. Fear no man!
You wanna talk RESALE VALUE? Geez, Minis are strong, strong, strong!
I have an '06 Mustang GT that was built in 5/06 after Ford issued a TSB on their fuel pumps.
The problem was that the cars would hesitate after sustained highway driving. Mine was built after the problem surfaced and a TSB was issued.
Did Ford put a revised fuel in my car? Nope - it was built with a known problem as I found out one day after exiting the freeway and trying to pull out into heavy traffic when the car bogged and I came close to being broadsided.
IMHO, this is a safety issue for which a TSB is insufficient. But it's one less recall for Ford.
In a few years I would like to find a 2005 MINI Cooper S with the factory LSD and no sunroof to make into a rally car.
That might be impossible to do for a reasonable amount of money so if I can't find one I will get a 2003 or 2004 without a sunroof and then have a quaife LSD put in.
And this WITHOUT a warranty.
Of course, MINI is a specialty car and can't be compared to bread and butter cars from the Big Three.
Why don't you compare the cost of buying a 4 yr 75K mile bumper to bumper (bad terminology but I don't know what Chrysler calls there best warranty) warranty. No reason to pay for time you know your not going to use and you may be able to get complete coverage for the same cost for the time you will actually have the truck.
I'm the guy who has to deal with Chrysler trade-ins. I'm the person who has to explain to customers that they are NOT sought after as used cars by ANYONE.
For that reason, they can be a lot of car for the money if you can find a good USED one!
I haven't mocked the warranty. I just think it's desperate act and I don't think it'll stick around long. We shall see, I suppose?
The Chrysler had more complete controls for both HVAC and stereo AND separately controlled temperature for the driver and front passenger. I was happy to see Honda add the better HVAC to all Odysseys but the LX in 2005 and I have always written that the Odyssey has THE most comfortable seats of all minivans.
Sadly, I was lied to by the Honda dealership when I asked for the salesman who sold my nephew the 2005 Ody EX when I was told he was no longer at the dealership. He later told my nephew that he has heard from more than one person that customers have been told he no longer works there. I would probably be driving a 2006 Ody EX instead of my 06 Sienna LE if I had originally met the Honda salesman who sold my nephew the 05 Ody and 07 Accord. :shades:
WHY would salesmen LIE to customers when they ask for a specific salesman? :confuse:
Or maybe it's one of those places that has so much turnover the sales staff doesn't get a chance to know each other.
I'm serious.
Agree with you about the seats. My preference was a Sienna but the damned seat cushion simply wasn't long enough so I ended up with an Odyssey.
With Chryslers, people expected transmission problems. Hondas are expected to be perfect and when Honda stumbles people are up in arms.
You had good luck with your Chrysler as a lot of other people do.
I don't understand the big deal over a timing belt. Timing chains wear out too. So you replace the T-belt every 105,000 miles?
That said, Honda stepped up to the plate and covered the problem when the vehicle was out of warranty.
And earned at least one customer's loyalty.
IMHO, the one critical thing that American car manufacturers fail to understand is that they must exceed customer expectations. Instead, they seem content to only lower them.
Two in 71K? This makes me wonder. As a 16 year old, I managed to tear the transmission out of my parent's Buick!
Why's that? You think ccccompson was hot rodding in his Odyssey?
I came close to buying the Odyssey in 04'. Didn't care much for the exterior or interior styling. The ride and handling didn't seem to match up with the stellar reputation either. I decided to go for more power, performance and style in the Mazda MPV. :shades:
That said, I think the 05' and up models are much nicer. Honda seems to have corrected the transmission problems.(chiming out)
The second failure happened right when it was being traded on an '04 Pilot and the dealer just billed Honda for the repair. The salesman said the damned thing just wasn't beefy enough to pull the weight of the Odyssey.
90% of the miles on that '99 were driven by my wife. While not known for a light foot, she didn't hot-rod it!
Of the 60 plus cars I've owned the only other transmission failures were a pair of '70s GM products with lots of miles on them.
Could it be because (a)they can be expensive to replace and (b) their failure can be VERY costly?
tidester, host
SUVs and Smart Shopper
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
That has GOT to be good on a transmission!
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
Not a powertrain problem, but this VERY COSTLY to repair MAJOR defect with the Sienna power sliding door does not exist on any Chrysler minivan. :shades:
How can a part breaking at 100K be a "defect"? I'm sorry but I gotta slap my head when I hear this kind of thing.
You know, we have to look at the idea of "lifetime warranty" with a bit of sobriety.
It's like the _______ Muffler Company's "lifetime guarantee".
Yeah, so? What it says is: "If you buy our lousy cheap muffler and it rusts through or falls off, just come in and we will give you another lousy, cheap muffler until you get tired of coming in or sell the car".
I am NOT implying that Chryslers are per se lousy or cheap---what I'm saying is this:
Putting a lifetime warranty on a product does not improve it one little bit. It's still what it is when you buy it.
Me? I don't want a lifetime warranty first and a good car second. I want a GOOD car first.
Try to collect on it when the vehicle has 170k on it. I am sure there is a clause which states the monetary expense cannot exceed the value of the car. Which for a Chrysler product can be 5 years Thereafter they won't cover a new engine,
In other words, the car limps in with 170,000 miles and the engine is just worn out. Nothing "broke" but the rings are shot, it needs a rebuild etc.
Is THAT covered?
I agree that Toyota has had a better reputation for reliability than Chrysler. However, Chrysler does not have a monopoly on iffy reliability. My nephew's wife had automatic transmission failure on a Honda Accord when it was a few years old. She had purchased the Accord NEW.
Even SERIOUS known defects don't seem to hurt a car's reputation, because again they might be isolated to a small fractional percentag, and then soon enough corrected the next year. I'm thinking of things like Porsche 996 rear main seal leaks.
Where defects DO hurt a company's reputation is when the defect is running rampant for one thing, and is NOT corrected in a reasonable amount of time.
GM V-6 intake manifolds corroding, comes to mind. The notorious VW ignition coil fiasco is another.
So you see the difference? A jammng door isn't going to bring a company down but a decade of frequent and varied defects will. That's why Toyota is #1 and Chrysler and VW aren't IMO.
VW is #1 in Europe. Chrysler is not #1 in anything!
Think of the warranty costs if customers purchased the lowest cost Caliber and kept them for a "lifetime".
It is almost tempting to buy a Caliber to drive my commute except eventually I'd get so irritated at the non-powertrain failures I'd get rid of the darn thing anyway.