 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Chrysler Cars / February 2006300M clunking is fixed
I haven't picked up my car yet but the Dodge dealer who accepted the challenge called me up and was all excited and declared the car fixed. Apparently, with the very warm weather today (70 degrees here in NC) the car did it consistently. 3 technicians (one in the car turning the wheel) worked it until they found a torn inner tie rod bushing. It was also not properly torqued. He says case is closed. My question is that in replacing the 2 front struts would the Chrysler dealer have touched that bushing? How about when changing the steering rack? How about when changing the bottom half of the steering column? I am asking those as separate questions to determine at what point, if at all, the Chyrsler dealer messed up. Thanks for everyone's help on my clunk. By the way, there were surely multiple clunks involved. Art, So glad it *finally* worked out for you. Any way to get something back from the first dealer as in terms of free maintenance or are you done with that dealership? Ken >I haven't picked up my car yet but the Dodge dealer who accepted the >challenge called me up and was all excited and declared the car fixed. [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > Thanks for everyone's help on my clunk. By the way, there were surely > multiple clunks involved. > Art, > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Ken I am shipping the car to my in-laws in Florida. We will be without a Chrysler product for the first time in 13 years. I am interested in finding out whether the first dealer messed up but all of this mess began with a pothole and some expensive repairs were done under warranty when it could have been denied. So my in-laws get a car with a new steering rack, new struts, new strut bearing plates, new bottom half of steering column and a few odds and ends. I spent $900 at the Chrysler dealer and I don't know what at the Dodge dealer. I'll post the amount when I find out. But the rack would have been $1400 installed I believe and some have failed way under the 100k mile mark so it could be worse. They will certainly drive the car more than 100k so hopefully they will escape the cost of the rack because of the clunk solution process. Perhaps Chrysler would be interested in your adventures? Ken >> Art, >> [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > drive the car more than 100k so hopefully they will escape the cost of the > rack because of the clunk solution process. I did a google search and came up with this interesting complaint regarding previous generation LH vehicles: http://www.daimlerchryslervehicleproblems.com/steering_lawsuit.htm >I haven't picked up my car yet but the Dodge dealer who accepted the >challenge called me up and was all excited and declared the car fixed. [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > Thanks for everyone's help on my clunk. By the way, there were surely > multiple clunks involved. Anyone read this page? It is hilarious. http://www.daimlerchryslervehicleproblems.com/ Might make a chrysler owner afraid to drive. Sounds bogus me. I've never had problems as described by this site. I have had three Chrysler products since 1991 to present. Hmmmm > Anyone read this page? It is hilarious. > > http://www.daimlerchryslervehicleproblems.com/ > > Might make a chrysler owner afraid to drive. I guess I should also state that just because it didn't happen to me doesn't make it impossible. > Sounds bogus me. I've never had problems as described by this site. I have > had three Chrysler products since 1991 to present. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >> >> Might make a chrysler owner afraid to drive. Actually most of the issues there are well known but dramatized and comparable issues probably exist for other makes. I remember when Honda first went to timing belts. When they started to fail prematurely they sent letters telling owners that the maintenence interval had been decreased and you better get your belt changed soon at your cost. >I guess I should also state that just because it didn't happen to me >doesn't make it impossible. [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >>> >>> Might make a chrysler owner afraid to drive. u think thats bad just wait untill the hyundi owners find the timing belts letting loose at 60 k and it not covered under the 100 k warranty they have, and that includes the bent valves because it's a interference motor i have done 3 in the last 4 months > Actually most of the issues there are well known but dramatized and > comparable issues probably exist for other makes. I remember when Honda [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > >>> > >>> Might make a chrysler owner afraid to drive. > u think thats bad just wait untill the hyundi owners find the timing belts > letting loose at 60 k and it not covered under the 100 k warranty they have, and > that includes the bent valves because it's > a interference motor > i have done 3 in the last 4 months True. Timing belts and inteference engine design both in the same low-end consumer vehicle: Engineering malpractice at its best. Bill Putney (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address with the letter 'x') Where can I find a list of cars equipped with interference engines? Does the 300M have one? Ken >u think thats bad just wait untill the hyundi owners find the timing belts > letting loose at 60 k and it not covered under the 100 k warranty they [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] >> >>> >> >>> Might make a chrysler owner afraid to drive. > Where can I find a list of cars equipped with interference engines? Does the > 300M have one? > > Ken http://www.gates.com/downloads/download_common.cfm?file=TBR05.pdf&folder=brochure (give it plenty of time to download (also can link it from here: http://www.gates.com/brochure.cfm?brochure=2256&location_id=3487) An asterisk next to an engine listing = interference. 300M 3.2 (not listed for the M?) and 3.5L engines '99-'04 are all shown as interference. I'm not sure everyone agrees that all listings are accurate in that regard, but I have no opinion. That guide contains only engines with timing *belts*. The 2.7L (used in other LH cars and in European 300M's) is chain driven, so does not show up - it is interference. Bill Putney (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address with the letter 'x') Bill, Many thanks!  Signature"Now Phoebe Snow direct can go from thirty-third to Buffalo. From Broadway bright the tubes run right Into the Road of Anthracite" Erie - Lackawanna >> Where can I find a list of cars equipped with interference engines? Does >> the 300M have one? [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address > with the letter 'x') > Bill, > > Many thanks! You're welcome! SignatureBill Putney (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address with the letter 'x') There was some early conflicting information about whether the 2nd generation LH 3.5 was interference or not but most people now believe that it is. But don't make your decision strickly on whether an engine is interference and uses a timing belt. The 2.7 has a chain but has major other problems. The 3.5 is known to be extremely reliable. One place to check engines is in timing belt catalogs. They often indicate whether the application engine is interference. > Where can I find a list of cars equipped with interference engines? Does > the 300M have one? [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] >>> >>> >>> >>> Might make a chrysler owner afraid to drive. Art, I had thought about it. My problem is that I'm too tall and not comfortable with this car. I have looked at many cars and have decided that I will sell my M and get into a new 300C. I really liked the looks of this car but since my wife no longer commutes to work, we really don't need the car. I'm still looking at reviews of the 300C. Interesting comment from Consumer Reports is the reliability of the vehicle. CR says the reliability of the six cylinder is average and the eight is below average (you saw this too) but what CR fails to report is WHY the hemi is below average. Specifically, they don't say so I'm at a loss here. Ken Signature"Now Phoebe Snow direct can go from thirty-third to Buffalo. From Broadway bright the tubes run right Into the Road of Anthracite" Erie - Lackawanna > There was some early conflicting information about whether the 2nd > generation LH 3.5 was interference or not but most people now believe that [quoted text clipped - 40 lines] >>>> >>> >>>> >>> Might make a chrysler owner afraid to drive. > ...The 2.7 has a chain but has major > other problems... I don't think they'd be using that in the new line if DC didn't at least think they had resolved those issues (primarily sludge) with some certainty. Bill Putney (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address with the letter 'x') to change a rack the inner tierods are taken off the rack and it would have been caused by the tech doing the rack change i would be looking at all my paperwork in the order the work was done after the rack and start thinking about some refund money if parts were replaced after the rack was put for the same klunk > Anyone read this page? It is hilarious. > > http://www.daimlerchryslervehicleproblems.com/ > > Might make a chrysler owner afraid to drive. > I haven't picked up my car yet but the Dodge dealer who accepted the > challenge called me up and was all excited and declared the car fixed. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > My question is that in replacing the 2 front struts would the Chrysler > dealer have touched that bushing? They could have, but shouldn't have. IOW - it's much easier to disconnect at the outer tie rod than the inner tie rod, and the outers have to be disconnected at some point in the process to remove the old struts (i.e., each outer tie rod attaches directly to an arm that is part of the its respective strut). A competent mechanic would not have touched the inners for that job - it would have been time wasted. > How about when changing the steering rack? Absolutely. The inner tie rod bushings are what attach the tie rods (two - left and right) directly to the rack. Each inner tie rod (there are two - left and right) has a hole in it. The hole has the annular ring bushing in it. A bolt goes thru that bushing and threads directly into the (side-to-side) moving element of the rack. > How about when changing the bottom half of the steering column? I'm not sure about that one - but if the rack did not have to be removed for that process, I'm thinking 'no' to that one. > I am asking those as separate questions to determine at what point, if at > all, the Chyrsler dealer messed up. > > Thanks for everyone's help on my clunk. By the way, there were surely > multiple clunks involved. With as common and known a wearout problem as the inner tie rod bushings on an LH car are, someone had to be pretty freaking dishonest or incompetent (or both) to have missed that until $1000 later in the troubleshooting process. I'd be pi$$ed, but sometimes you have to cut your losses and move on. Once again, I'm dreading the day when I can no longer work on my own cars for exactly this kind of crap! Bill Putney (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address with the letter 'x') One other detail on this, Art: When an alignment is done, if the technician locks the adjuster sleeve down with the tie rods leaning over fore or aft, the tie rod gets into a binding situation when the wheels are turned (as in turning left or right) - the result is an awful twisting stress on the tie rods that will wear the inner bushings out in no time flat. A good alignment technician knows that he has to manually rotate the tie rods to be pointing fairly close to straight up as he tightens the adjuster sleeve (some sideways leaning is OK, but not a lot). I'm not saying this is what caused your problem. Most likely some of the previous repair work that was done is to blame, or at least it should have been discoverd before now. The fact that one of the inner tie rod bolts was (apparently loose - reading between the lines of what you were told) is some indication that that is the likely explanation. On the other hand, the new dealer said the bushing was "torn" - that would point more to acute extreme physical stress as in the not-straight-up-pointing tie rod after an alignment (or re-assembly). Hard to say for sure. Like I said - sometimes you just cut your losses and walk away - not worth fighting with them over unless you find a real smoking gun. Bill Putney (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address with the letter 'x') I pretty much knew the answer regarding the steering rack/inner tie rods. I don't understand how the original Chrysler dealer could reassemble the front end after replacing the rack and screw it up then. The same dealership then would have done an alignment to finish the job. I figure that is where they screwed up. I will talk to the Chrysler dealer about this but will not get into a frenzy. I am thinking they should at least cover the Dodge dealer repair cost. Though I doubt they will. > One other detail on this, Art: When an alignment is done, if the > technician locks the adjuster sleeve down with the tie rods leaning over [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address > with the letter 'x') > I pretty much knew the answer regarding the steering rack/inner tie rods. I > don't understand how the original Chrysler dealer could reassemble the front [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > into a frenzy. I am thinking they should at least cover the Dodge dealer > repair cost. Though I doubt they will. Also, it should be a matter of course on the LH's to replace the inner tie rod bushings when replacing the rack ($20 for the bushings, 98% of the labor is already there for the rack job). But then again, even if they replaced them, if they got screwed up because of the subsequent alignment (the tie rod lean-over thing)... Bill Putney (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address with the letter 'x') So I called up the Chyrsler dealer today and told them about their screw up. I received nothing more than an apology and a promise that they would take it up with the mechanics who screwed up. Practically speaking, there is nothing much you can do these days to get satisfaction in a case like this. If you decided to sue them, you would need expert testimony to support your case which isn't worth the expense. Also, work orders are written in a manner such that the dealer could argue that they are being paid to do something, and whether it corrects a problem is irrelevant. Any way, as I explained to my wife, this is why I buy an extended warranties and usually get rid of the car a few months before the warranty is over. Having a warranty on a used car makes it easy to sell. In this case my wife wanted to keep the car, and then she decided to give it to her parents. Hopefully it will have no issues for a while. We replaced our 300M and Avalon with a Honda Odyssey and Accord Hybrid (yes, I know the hybrid feature is a complete waste of money but she wanted it). We bought zero deductible, 8 year 120k mile Honda service agreements for each of them for about $1200 each so I won't have any out of pocket repairs for a while. The minivan in particular, with all of the motorized doors, it is hard to believe that it won't eat up $1200 in repairs at some point. We are getting the 300M cleaned up and touched up and then shipping it to Florida. Another new experience. >> I pretty much knew the answer regarding the steering rack/inner tie rods. >> I don't understand how the original Chrysler dealer could reassemble the [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address > with the letter 'x') Is this a particular problem with with LH cars or is it a issue on other makes and models? > One other detail on this, Art: When an alignment is done, if the > technician locks the adjuster sleeve down with the tie rods leaning over [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > the tie rods to be pointing fairly close to straight up as he tightens the > adjuster sleeve (some sideways leaning is OK, but not a lot). > Is this a particular problem with with LH cars or is it a issue on other > makes and models? [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >>the tie rods to be pointing fairly close to straight up as he tightens the >>adjuster sleeve (some sideways leaning is OK, but not a lot). It definitely applies to the LH, possibly to some (but definitely not all) other cars. In contrast to the inner bushing that pivots perpindicular to the long axis of the tie rod on the LH car, rack & pinion steering cars I had in the past had axially oriented ball joints going into the rack from the tie rods - unlimited rotation at the rack joint, so no binding possible. With the LH design, those bushings fix the orientation of the tie rod on rack (inner bushing) end. The other end (outer end) has a limited rotation (around the tie rod length axis), so if the alignment guy biases it all the way over in one direction, you get the stress/binding that crushes and severely wears the bushing when the steering wheel is turned from lock to lock and the tie rod geometry changes (forcing some small but definite rotation of the tie rod about the length axis). HTH Bill Putney (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address with the letter 'x') > I haven't picked up my car yet but the Dodge dealer who accepted the > challenge called me up and was all excited and declared the car fixed. [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > Thanks for everyone's help on my clunk. By the way, there were surely > multiple clunks involved So, now this means you WON'T be giving your In-Laws a Clunker? :) SignatureA young girl I know told me I drive like an old man I told her, actually, I drive like Mario Andretti. It's just that too many other people on the road drive like Paul Tracy... Looks like the Dodge dealer fixed it. No sign of clunk. Too bad they didn't get steeing wheel back exactly straight. I'll leave that to my father in law. I will talk to the Chrysler dealer Monday and see what they say about their errors. >I haven't picked up my car yet but the Dodge dealer who accepted the >challenge called me up and was all excited and declared the car fixed. [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > Thanks for everyone's help on my clunk. By the way, there were surely > multiple clunks involved. I almost forgot. They charged $200 which I thought was a bargain considering. > Looks like the Dodge dealer fixed it. No sign of clunk. Too bad they > didn't get steeing wheel back exactly straight. I'll leave that to my [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] >> Thanks for everyone's help on my clunk. By the way, there were surely >> multiple clunks involved. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.