Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Most popular vehicles
Popular New Cars
- New Acura MDX
- New Acura RDX
- New Audi Q5
- New BMW 3 Series
- New BMW X3
- New Buick Enclave
- New Cadillac Escalade
- New Chevrolet Equinox
- New Chrysler 300
- New Dodge Challenger
- New Ford Edge
- New Ford Escape
- New Ford Expedition
- New Ford Explorer
- New Ford F-150
- New Ford Focus
- New Ford Mustang
- New Honda Accord
- New Honda Civic
- New Honda CR-V
- New Honda Fit
- New Honda Odyssey
- New Honda Pilot
- New Hyundai Elantra
- New Hyundai Santa Fe
- New Hyundai Sonata
- New Hyundai Tucson
- New Jeep Compass
- New Jeep Grand Cherokee
- New Jeep Wrangler
- New Mazda 3
- New Mazda 6
- New Mazda CX-5
- New Nissan Altima
- New Nissan Maxima
- New Nissan Rogue
- New Porsche Cayenne
- New Ram 1500
- New Subaru Crosstrek
- New Subaru Forester
- New Subaru Impreza
- New Subaru Outback
- New Tesla Model S
- New Tesla Model X
- New Toyota 4Runner
- New Toyota Camry
- New Toyota Corolla
- New Toyota Highlander
- New Toyota Prius
- New Toyota RAV4
- New Toyota Sienna
- New Toyota Tacoma
- New Volkswagen Jetta
- New Volvo XC60
- New Volvo XC90
Popular Used Sedans
- Used BMW 5 Series
- Used Chevrolet Impala
- Used Chevrolet Malibu
- Used Chrysler 200
- Used Dodge Charger
- Used Ford Fusion
- Used Ford Taurus
- Used Honda Accord
- Used Honda Civic
- Used Hyundai Elantra
- Used Hyundai Sonata
- Used Tesla Model S
- Used Toyota Camry
- Used Toyota Corolla
- Used Volkswagen Jetta
Popular Used SUVs
- Used Acura MDX
- Used Acura RDX
- Used Ford Edge
- Used Ford Explorer
- Used Honda CR-V
- Used Honda Pilot
- Used Hyundai Santa Fe
- Used Jeep Compass
- Used Lincoln Navigator
- Used Mazda CX-5
- Used Nissan Rogue
- Used Subaru Crosstrek
- Used Subaru Forester
- Used Tesla Model X
- Used Volvo XC90
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
As far as insurance coverage goes, I did not buy this van so I could increase my insurance rates, heh. Bought it becuase the last van we had was hitting 200,000 miles and I didn't want to be left stranded somewhere.
Got to dealership that did job and they have service manager test drive. He says "your front swaybar links are bad". I say "on a 2005?" He says yea, costs about $400. I do the job myself, and guess what, no change!
Update, last week independant shop says front swaybar was left loosely attached when trans job was done and is ruined as well as new swaybar links I just installed! Total repair for new swaybar and links and front brake pads- $500.
Really like the ride and comfort of the T&C as well as the stow and go seats. Hope this is the last problem for awhile.
I bought one of my two '97 Plymouth Grand Voyager SE's from Rockenbach Chevrolet in Illinois. Several years later, when needing a brake job, I took it there. I was told I needed new pads/shoes front and back, new rotors, calipers and drums. I was told everything was well warn and sticking. I paid nearly $600 for everything. About 7 months and about 6,000 miles later the brake pedal was mushy. The diagnosis was a defective, (by contamination), master cylinder. I was told that the people doing my oil change topped off my brake fluid and contaminated it. Rockenbach wanted another $600 to replace the part.
I went back to lube pros and discovered I missed my 3,000 mile oil change and that Rockenbach was the last service place to touch my vehicle. I mentioned this to the service manager at Rockenbach, and he said, "no, we are sure you took it somewhere else, we would never cause a problem, we are experts". I took the vehicle to Gurnee dodge. They diagnosed the same problem but only charged me $370 for the repair. I since evaluated things and discovered that it was Rockenbach that damaged the vehicle. It is now clear that it was a continuing ploy of theirs to bring in business. Of course though, I have no proof.
Now that I had been going to Gurnee Dodge, and was treated nicely, I thought I was being treated fairly. That is, until our AC quit working on both vans on the same day.
I realized that unusual seasonal changes, with both vans outside on that strange day, caused the seals to expand and contract, leaking out AC fluid. I bought the cheap repair kit from Wal-Mart and fixed my van's AC in 1/2 an hour. I tried to fix my wifes, but couldn't. I much later learned that this was because her van has a dual evaporator system and it almost always requires a professional recharge.
Pep Boys wanted more money than the dealer to do an AC recharge. The Gurnee Dodge dealer charged a $133 fee. If the unit could not be fixed, however, the $133 would be applied to the repair if they performed the repair. Otherwise the money was not refunded.
Since I was positive both vans suffered the same problem, but figured I just could not recharge the system for some reason, it was worth the $133. The dealer said they would put dye in the system with the recharge and determine if there were any existing leaks.
10 minutes after bringing in the car, the service manager came to see me in the waiting room. He told me the evaporator was defective. He said that even though they fully recharged my AC, the evaporator was defective and would not work until it was replaced for $1,300. I asked if there were any system leaks and he said, "no, there are no leaks, just a defective evaporator". I chose to pass on the $1,300 fee, (for a van with 82,000 miles). When I got the receipt, it stated that the evaporator was defective because it leaked coolant. This seemed strange so I decided to see a private mechanic.
Immediately after visiting the dealer, through a referral, I contacted a nearby private shop. Matt, the owner, mentioned that sometimes a dealer will replace the whole part when it can easily be repaired. Matt said that sometimes a valve sticks. He can look at the van free and tell me if it is fixable, (for under $100), or if it needs an evaporator. I could not pass up a free diagnosis. Matt looked at my wifes van 2 hours after leaving Gurnee Dodge. Matt immediately told me the evaporator did not have a stuck valve. He would charge the system to test it free, just to see. There was no evidence that 2 hours earlier any dye was ever used to test the vehicle's AC system. Since he could recover the coolant, it would only cost him 20 minutes of labor and he was not too busy.
With me observing everything, the AC worked immediately and cooled the inside of the car by 40 degrees more than the outside. Matt decided to empty the system, add dye,(showing me evidence that it was in the system), and fully recharging the system. Everything worked fine and there was absolutely no evidence of any leak. I paid Matt $166 and received a free inspection a week later. The AC still showed no evidence of any leaks. 3 months later there were still no leaks. Matt guessed that since the dealer had few customers, they tried to cheat me to increase their revenue to cover the cost of maintaining their service team. I am now sure he was correct.
I complained to a VP at the dealer who revered me to a service director. They gave me $133 credit, (to shut me up), however they still insisted there was a small leak their experts detected. I still felt cheated. I wrote to the Better Business Bureau and filed a complaint. They claimed that there was a leak or the system would still have had coolant in it. I told about speaking with an expert, and that seasonal changes can temporarily affect the seals and that the system had held a charge for 3 months after the visit to Matts without an incident. I stated that I would not be satisfied until Gurnee Dodge paid me back the $133 plus the difference in the cost I had to pay to Matt, totaling around $166.
The Dodge dealer gave me a check for the $166, however they stated that this in no way acknowledges they did anything wrong! From now on I will buy cars from Carmax or a private party and I will never again use a dealer for servicing my vehicles.
I called the local constabulary, they called a local towing outfit and $125 later I was in the lot of a dealership near my main client (and also strategically near an Enterprise Car Rental outfit). The folks at the dealership insist that they'll take a look at it first to determine if it is fixable, however, given the nastiness I heard and felt when it went, I'm pretty sure that it's a goner. Just to be on the safe side they've already ordered a new (remanufactured) tranny ($2,900 installed, 3 year/36,000 mile warranty). I'll most likely have it back next Wednesday.
I've said it before and I'll say it again, I don't think this van owes me anything, and even if the typical litany of things like the starter, alternator, water pump, radiator, master cylinder, et. all fail in the next year or two, it will still have been a damn cheap and reliable ride.
Am I bummed that the transmission failed? Yup. That having been said, I've sort of been expecting this and given that all I was counting on was 100K out of the factory unit, I figure that I'm exactly 9,000 miles ahead on the next tranny. ;-)
Best Regards,
Shipo
Agreed.
The dealership called today and confirmed my worst case expectation, the transmission case was full of junk metal. Gee, no surprise there. The good news (sort of) is that they said, "We've sharpened our pencil a bit and are going to do the job for $2,600." I thanked him and figured to myself, "Hey, $300 is still $300, I'll take it."
What was the van worth? Well, That's a relative term. The Edmunds TMV shows it at $2,420 (trade), $3,284 (private sale), $4,422 (dealer retail), which means that the van wasn't even worth the price of the transmission before the transmission failed.
That having been said, it is currently my main ride to and from my current client and as such I had two choices, 1) pay someone to take it off of my hands and then buy a new car, or 2) pay $3,000 (tow, rental car and new tranny) and get my car back by Wednesday. To me at least, it was a no brainer, the three grand required to put this one back on the road makes it the cheapest car going.
The van has been a model of reliability and prior to this event it had cost me a total of $240 in unscheduled maintenance. The engine is good as it has been run on full synthetic oil since about 20,000 miles, and everything else works. It has new tires, newish brakes, it's already had its 100K service, and as I see it, the only things that are really likely to fail over the next year are the starter, the alternator, the water pump, and maybe the A/C, all of which are relatively cheap to fix.
My business partner and I went through the decision matrix last night and as much as I would like to make the argument for a new A3, I just cannot do, yet. ;-)
Best Regards,
Shipo
Really? :confuse:
For some reason, I've been thinking that my 1998 DGC 3.8 originally came from from the factory with ATF+3, however, per the referenced post by 97expresso ATF+4 is both the better fluid and backward compatible. Do any of y'all have any reference DC documentation that suggests that ATF+4 should be used in a 1998 transmission?
Best Regards,
Shipo
If, as the dealer says (although not my normal service advisor, he has Mondays off), "You're getting a newly rebuilt 1998 transmission, built to 1998 specs and you are to follow the service guidelines exactly as stated in your manual, including the type of ATF", then according to two separate TSBs that I found (TSB# 21-006-01 and TSB# 21-004-04) the following rules would apply:
NOTE: This bulletin applies to all transmissions manufactured by Chrysler except for 1999 and earlier minivans with the 41TE/AE transmission. This Service Bulletin DOES NOT apply to all AW-4 transmissions, Sprinter transmissions, Crossfire transmissions and WG bodies equipped with a W5J400 or NAG1 transmission (sales code DGJ).
Discussion:
A new transmission fluid (ATF+4 - Type 9602) has been developed and is being used as factory fill for all vehicles with Chrysler automatic transmissions. It is recommended that all vehicles with Chrysler automatic transmissions EXCEPT FOR THOSE LISTED ABOVE be serviced with ATF+4.
Furthermore, the older of the two (TSB# 21-006-01) builds upon the preceding by saying:
ATF+3 should continue to be used for 1999 and earlier minivans because of the potential for torque converter shudder during break in.
To say that I have a problem with the language in that last little bit is an understatement. So, which is it? When a statement says, "ATF+3 should continue to be used..." the implication here is that you have an operational unit that is not new, and yet the older fluid should still be used. With that in mind, it then says, "...because of the potential for torque converter shudder during break in.", which to me at least means that once the Torque Converter is broken in, ATF+4 would be acceptable if not preferable.
I then ask myself, "Why would DC continue to remanufacture the 1998 vintage transmission to 1998 standards when that unit has undergone some substantial redesign for later model years?" Or, said another way, since the newer unit is essentially a plug in replacement (mechanically at least), why wouldn't DC simplify their inventory and manufacturing complexity by bringing all factory remanufactured units up to the latest standards?
Then you chime in and say, "If you go with the Mopar rebuilt, you will be getting the same transmission as if you had a transmission failure in a new 2006 model." That supports my thoughts on the subject as well. I cannot tell you how much I hope you are correct. ;-)
I'll call my regular service advisor tomorrow and ask him to give me a rundown of Whats, Hows and Whys and I'll report back.
Best Regards,
Shipo
Said another way, my new transmission will not be a functional equivalent to either the unit in our 2003 DGC, or a new 2006 model. So, what they've done is simplify their inventory within transmission generation meaning that all replacements rollup to the latest engineering build of whatever generational model came in the vehicle from the factory.
While I would have preferred the latest and greatest transmission available, I'm thinking that a 2000 vintage unit that is able to take advantage of the ATF+4 will certainly be good enough. ;-)
Best Regards,
Shipo
For the $2,600 I'm spending I'm getting a factory remanufactured unit with factory parts that is brought up to the latest specs (Model Year 2000 in this case), AND a three year 36,000 mile warranty. Given that I have long since decided that I don't ever want to do another FWD transmission, regardless of whether it's swapping out an Automatic or a clutch replacement on a stick, a DIY job was out of the question. All in all, I think I got a pretty good deal. ;-)
Best Regards,
Shipo
Actually, ATF+4 is compatible with 1999 and older 42LEs IF the transmission had been rebuilt after the year 2000. The prohibition for ATF+4 in older 42LEs (mini-van only) was really because of a compatibility issue with some of the seal materials, although I have had transmission technicians tell me they have used it with no problems.
The Chrysler rebuilts are top notch, probably much better than the average rebuild in the field.
Chrysler is about to phase out their supply of ATF+3 as the next generation ...ATF+5...will be introduced in the near future.
Regards,
Dusty
Do you have any understanding why the TSB# 21-006-01 stated that ATF+4 wasn't to be used in 1999 and earlier minivans due to torque converter "shudder"?
Hmmm, ATF+5 huh? I don't suppose that would be for the next generation of automatics? Any idea if it's backwards compatible with ATF+4?
Sorry for all of the questions, inquiring minds want to know. ;-)
Best Regards,
Shipo
Hmmm, the 30K service on our 1998 was performed in late 2000, and the 60K service was performed in late 2003. I assume in both cases ATF+3 was used when the filter was changed. I had a combined 90K and 100K service performed last October, after which I did notice an abruptness in the transmission that I'd never noticed before. Said abruptness was most noticeable when the transmission would kick down a gear under light throttle, such as when cruising along at say 50 mph and then adding a little throttle to maintain speed while climbing a hill.
As it was a fairly subtle change from how it operated pre-service, I didn't really think too much about it and only posted one brief comment about it last December. That having been said, it has been hovering in the back of my mind for some time now, and as such, when the transmission failed last Thursday, I wasn't really all that surprised.
I don't suppose the potential of seal incompatibility could have been at least indirectly the cause of it finally self destructing? Any thoughts?
Best Regards,
Shipo
I welcome any comments as to where to start looking for a transmission. I live in Decatur, GA a surburb of Atlanta.
Erma
Thanks
shipo, "Chrysler minivans transmission problems" #1052, 16 Mar 2006 9:06 pm
Our 1998 DGC with the 3.8 engine (probably the same engine that you have in your LXi) is now about 1,100 miles into its new transmission, and so far, so good. When the transmission first failed, I called around a bit and found that I could have a "Rebuilt" unit put in for about $2,100, including a 6 month and 6,000 mile warranty. Not terribly impressive. The other option was to get a factory remanufactured unit (from your local dealer) for $2,900 (subsequently lowered to $2,600), which included a 3 year 36,000 mile warranty. I chose the latter.
With the factory reman, not only do you get the superior warranty, you also get factory parts and a transmission that is built to the latest engineering build (model year 2000 in the case of both of our vans) for the generation of the transmission in your van. I felt that getting this later build was important if for no other reason than it is certified to run with the newer ATF+4 fluid. Given that ATF+3 is either in short supply or already extinct, and given that according to two different TSBs our vans should not use ATF+4, I think that the upgraded unit is pretty damn important.
Best Regards,
Shipo
Transmission problems: See your dealer!
I did a rebuild on my previous one ('96) with an independant, it never worked well, I was always crossing my fingers that it would last.., and it did until someone fortunately flew thru a stopsign and totalled my van not to long after that rebuild! I think the main worry is that they use the wrong fluid.
Bring it to your Chrysler dealer and at least they won't screw up that part. Good luck!
Willem
We need this van to last awhile so I need some advice on what we need to do to make that happen. I see ton's of maintenance schedules in my log book..is it really necessary to follow each one exact? Does all the work need to be done by the dealership?
Any specifics for the trans since it seems if they are not taken care of they seem to fail?
Thanks for any advice you can pass on
I guess for me, I am so use to doing regular maintenance on our vechicles, that it would be very hard to trust an independent shop to do the service. I'd rather pay the extra money for it to be done right the first time. (Although there may be a time when it won't be fixed right the first time by either.)
We follow the dealers schedule for the most part. As it has been said, follow the maintenance schedule in your owners manual. Right now, you will not have a lot of stuff to do out side of oil changes every 3K. Changing the air and cabin filter at least once a year. Checking your tire pressure once a month. Oil and lub the rollers for the sliding doors, all key holes and door latch mechanism. Vacuum inside the sliding door wells where the tracks are for the sliding doors every time you clean the inside of the vechicle or at least every few months. Every 30K miles, have your trans. serviced. (Do it now if it has not been done and make sure it's by a Daimlerchrysler dealer. Get a trans flush every other trans. maintenance schedule.) This will make sure that all the old trans. fluid it out and replaced. Trans. holds about 14 qts. and only 2 to 4 qts are taken out when doing a filter replacement. When doing a complete trans. flush, all 14 qts. are taken out and the trans. and lines are flushed, but the filter is not changed. Both services should be under $150. Make sure to top off all fluids every oil change: trans. fluid, coolant, brake fluid, power steering fluid, washer fluid. I believe the life of the coolant is for 5 yrs or 150K. Change the wipers every year. (We use Bosch and it cost us about $60 to replace all three.) Make sure to inspect all the hoses and spark plug wires every year. (Ideally, they should not need to be changed before 100K). The drive built should be replaced at 100K or there after. I hope this helps.
Another cost effective preventive maintenance is to drain and refill the radiator (only) every 2 years. I disconnect the lower radiator hose after having a drain valve leak that was hard to stop. This requires about a half gallon of antifreeze mixed 50:50 to refill the radiator.
I have had few repair issues: battery at 59K, front brake pads (lifetime warranty) at 59K replaced at 92K for free. Water pump failed at 70K. AC has lost its charge each of the last 4 winters- refills about $85 ea. One axle CV boot failed at 108K and the starter failed at 110K.
This week I'm having the failed and pealing factory paint removed and repainted. The later is my only case of poor build quality. Roy
I will never again buy a new car from a dealer or get service from a dealer, thanks to Gurnee Dodge, (in Northern Illinois). I must also thank Rockenbach Chevrolet in Grayslake Illinois for their part in my decision.
I have bought both new and used vehicles. I almost always feel cheated when buying a new vehicle for various reasons, but for the sake of keeping it short, most people would agree with me that dealers like to use slight of hand and are not usually helping the customer. Only one dealer was less evil and actually seemed somewhat helpful, Motorwerks of Barrington (Illinois). Their policies are different and they only carry Honda plus several very high end cars. Their service was good, (under warranty).
I will start with Rockenbach:
I purchased my Plymouth Grand Voyager from them in 1998 with 28,000 miles and 1 year old. They lied about it having been in an accident which I discovered 3 years later. They also cheated me on the actual price paid for a 3 year extended maintenance contract by several thousand dollars. My wife bought an identical vehicle from a private party. We had all our service done at Rockenbach. I realized the dealer contaminated my brake fluid then tried to charge me to replace the master cylinder, (around $700). They figured that since it had been just under 6,000 miles since my last service that the people that changed my oil could be blamed for contaminating the brake fluid. Lubpros informed me that I hadn't been in for an oil change in 6,000 miles, (I actually missed my appointment). It turns out that Rockenbach serviced my brakes less than 6,000 miles prior and they were the last service personnel to touch my vehicle.
I brought my vehicle to Gurnee Dodge, where they confirmed the contamination, however only charged me $375 for the same part replacement.
Now on to Gurnee Dodge:
Gurnee Dodge had been servicing my mini-van for some time. They got it right, usually but charged a lot. I brought both vans in for a recall on the key switch, as my wife's van had problems related to the recall. Her van was fixed and mine, (that was working fine) now failed. I had to rent a car at my cost while they repaired my vehicle again.
Last summer my both my wifes and my air conditioning went out at the same time. It had to do with the change in seasons, swelling and shrinking of O-rings and the leakage of coolant. I was familiar with this phenomenon and figured I would recharge both vehicles.
My van recharged fine and still works fine almost a year later. My wifes van did not work after the recharge and I much later learned that it was because she had a front and rear system with 2 evaporators. This required a more professional recharge to even work right. Not knowing this, dressed in a suit (after interviewing), I brought her van into the Gurnee Dodge dealer. I figured that for $133 it would be done right the first time and it was less expensive than Pep-Boys for the recharge. They told me at the dealer that the $133 would be the charge even if they could not fix it, but it would count toward the labor if I had any problems fixed. Knowing that it was just a seasonal leak, I decided to continue with the recharge. The service manager said for $133, they would recharge my system with dye and perform a thorough inspection for leaks. 10 minutes after being seated in the waiting area, they drove my wifes van into the service area. After another 10 minutes only, the manager came to me and stated that my van had a defective evaporator which needed replacing for $1,300. I asked if there were any leaks in the system and the manager said there were no leaks at all, just an evaporator that would not work at all. Since the van was over 87,000 miles, I decided to hold off on the repair, loosing the $133. After refusing service, I realized the dealer stated on the receipt that the evaporator needed replacing because it leaked which is not what he had told me. When I got home, I called a mechanic and asked about the cost of replacing the evaporator. He told me that sometimes a valve on the evaporator sticks and the dealer will not easily repair it, but replace the whole unit. Matt took me immediately and inspected my evaporator for free. He told me the valve was not stuck. He then looked at the place where coolant is added and questioned me about the tests at the dealer. Matt found absolutely no evidence that dye was used to test my system and thought the story of the dealer was a little strange. Matt said he thought there was nothing wrong with the system and would recharge it. If it did not work he would eat the cost, however if it worked, I would pay $166. Matt charged the system and it worked very well the first time. To prove his theory about the dye and check for leaks, he evacuated the system and recharged it again with dye. I then saw new evidence of the dye and we found no leaks. I brought the vehicle back to Matts a week later and there were still no leaks. This same mini-vans air conditioning still works well a year later.
I contacted a Vice President at the dealer and he had me speak with a Director of Service. The director brushed me off and offered me a $133 credit at their shop to make me feel better. I was upset in that I felt the dealer was trying to cheat me. After speaking with others, I figured out why they tried to cheat me. They saw me in a suit, their shop was empty and they had to pay several service people to work. Simply charge the unsuspecting for expensive service, only recharging the airconditioning and stay in business. Apparently this practice regularly occurs at dealers.
I contacted the better business bureau and filed a complaint. The dealer tried to explain the situation and state that there were and still are leaks in the evaporator because it leaked out. After explaining my seasonal expanding/shrinking o-ring theory, the dealer president stated I did not know what I was talking about. I offered proof of my theory and the dealer backed down. The president offered me a $166 refund, the amount I paid them and the difference in cost in going to the private shop. But they said they admit no wrongdoing in the whole matter.
Restating the obvious, a dealer is not sacred because they stand behind the Diamler Chrysler logo, nor does the manufacturer stand behind their dealers. A dealer is simply a franchise that sells and repairs merchandise under their own policy. Do yourself a favor and find a reputable private
(I can't run out to the car to check the right fluid requirements, since it is at the shop). Any idea what the right fluid is, and what could I expect from putting the wrong fluid in? Thanks for the heads up... :sick:
Your transmission is designed to use Mopar ATF+3. Period, full stop, the end. Anything else WILL destroy your transmission in short order! FWIW, Mercon transmission fluid is for Ford cars.
FWIW (take 2) if your transmission is ruined, I'd consider action against the mechanic that put the Mercon in there. Using ATF+3 in late 1990s Chrysler transmissions is a long and well known bit if information, and the very fact that your mechanic didn't know that makes him very suspect in my mind.
As a point of reference, here are a few links to various manufacturers who still provide ATF+3:
http://www.shell-lubricants.com/products/pdf/FormulaShellATF3.pdf#search='atf3%2- - - 0transmission%20fluid'
http://www.pennzoil.com/TechData/pdsheet/DomesticMarketing/Gear&Transmission/pdf- - - /atf3.pdf#search='atf3%20transmission%20fluid'
http://www.havoline.com/products/na/trans_atf3.html
http://www.mobil.com/USA-English/Lubes/PDS/GLXXENPVLMOMobil_ATF+3.asp?Print=yes
http://www.chevron.com/products/prodserv/nafl/auto/content/atf.shtm
Best Regards,
Shipo
I think this is hogwash but didn't tell him so. Anybody verify if this is truly a Chrysler directive?
Got filter & fluid replaced with ATF+4 according to receipt.
Now, whenever the transmission downshifts from 3rd to 2nd (I think), I feel a jerk on the car similar to if someone pops a clutch on a manual tranny. Otherwise, the transmission works fine.
Is this the beginning of the end from my transmission? Any help would be appreciated.
Let me get this straight... You bought a used eight year old DC minivan with an unknown service history, with no warranty and with mileage north of 120,000 miles on the clock. The van then suffers from a transmission failure and you are using that as a blanket reason to condemn its design and build quality and that of all other DC products as well. Is that correct?
What if it were a Honda or a Toyota or a van from any other manufacturer? The truth of the matter is that ANY vehicle from ANY manufacturer with similar age/maintenance/mileage properties might could well suffer the same fate. Said another way, when buying a vehicle with that kind of mileage on it, it's an absolute crap shoot as to its future reliability.
In my case, I trust our 1998 DGC (that we bought new) enough to use it to commute to and from work (plus the odd trip to Chicago or New York), a commute that is roughly 100 miles per day. Said van has 112,000 miles on the clock and has no significant issues. Were it to get totaled in an accident tomorrow, would I replace it with another DGC of identical age and mileage? Not a chance. Would I replace it with another van from another manufacturer with identical age and mileage? Not a chance of that happening either. Why? Unknown history.
Best Regards,
Shipo
I tend to ignore those who post and do not even make half an attempt at writing coherent sentences with proper punctuation.
That having been said, I do feel it is necessary to point out the obvious irrelevancies in some posts so as to allow the casual lurker to get a balanced viewpoint. ;-)
Best Regards,
Shipo
NOW ITS YOUR TURN TOGET A LEMON
I trust this is the end of this exchange?
Shifty the Host
Best Regards,
Shipo