"Recent" Minivan Transmission Performance? Opinions wanted --

Thread view:

Enable EMail Alerts

Start New Thread

Thread rating:

Jon - 06 Apr 2007 00:54 GMT

I've got a good friend who's looking at used minivans, particularly
those falling under the DC umbrella....since they are generally
thousands less in price compared to the premium Asian brands, and
still more affordable than other domestic brands. Realistically,
we're looking at machines around 100K or so in mileage...

Now, once upon a time, we used to make ourselves feel better about our
gambles by saying hell, if it did just find for 100K, it's got to have
some life left in it....and if you were wrong it was a $250 automatic
transmission rebuild or a few bills slipped to the parts yard.....but
now he's shopping for primary transportation for his wife and kids
that is far more sophisticated and expensive to repair if you have a
major breakdown. Historically, Chrysler has had some reliability
issues with its automatic transmissions used in the minivans...not to
mention other deficiencies. My question is: with specific regard to
the transmission, is there a model year that he needs to clear to
avoid the aformentioned transmission woes, or is it an ongoing
problem?

Many thanks to those who take the time to reply,

Jon

Reply to this Message

who - 06 Apr 2007 08:56 GMT

> I've got a good friend who's looking at used minivans, particularly
> those falling under the DC umbrella....since they are generally
[quoted text clipped - 18 lines]
>
> Jon

Since about '95 the Chrysler 4sp auto used in the Vans and also the 3.3L
LH cars has been OK up to at least 200K kms if serviced properly.
So IMO the key is getting a Van that has been properly serviced.

Reply to this Message

kmatheson@sisna.com - 06 Apr 2007 19:45 GMT

> In article <1175817273.601367.34...@q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>,
>
[quoted text clipped - 26 lines]
>
> - Show quoted text -

I believe that this is correct. I don't think there were any design
changes after 1995. These are the things that I have gleaned from over
the years:

1. Change the fluid regularly, and use the correct fluid. ATF+4 for
2000 and later models, and ATF+3 for 1999 and earlier. The bulletin
regarding ATF+4 excluded 1999 and earlier minivans, but no one seems
to understand why. Several have used ATF+4 in 1999 and earlier models
without a problem.

2. If you pull a trailer, follow the directions in the owner's manual,
and stick to the limits regarding weight. A transmission cooler is
also recommend.

3. If you do need service, Take it to a shop that uses the correct
fluid, has the correct scan tool(s), and other diagnostic equipment.
Don't settle for a "road test" only diagnosis.

My father took his low-mileage, great condition Dodge Dynasty to a
shop because the transmission wasn't shifting correctly. The guy took
it on a "road test" and told him that the transmission was "shot" and
would need a rebuild. He then offered to buy it on the spot, to which
my father agreed. I think that the guy figured that it was a probably
a solenoid pack, or some other easy repair, so he ended up getting a
great car for a low price.

Of course, I didn't find out until after the fact.

-KM

Reply to this Message

Steve - 09 Apr 2007 19:36 GMT

> I believe that this is correct. I don't think there were any design
> changes after 1995.

Some hardware changes- for example the 41TE has now been modified with
another planetary set to make it a 6-speed in certain applications, like
the 4-liter powered Pacifica. And there have been quite a few software
changes, too even for the 4-speed version. Since the engines are now
throttle-by-wire, one huge HUGE change that improves transmission
longevity is that the computer closes the throttle during shifts so that
the clutch packs no longer have to dissipate the power being produced by
the engine during the shift. It feels and sounds a little odd when you
first drive one of these newer drivetrains after driving an older one,
but the difference is significant. It almost sounds like a manual
transmission being "powershifted"- you hear the engine throttle back,
the transmission very very quickly moves to the next gear, and then the
throttle opens again. It should greatly reduce stress on the
transmission, and unlike a lot of implementations (coughGMchoke)
Chrysler's close-the-throttle-during-shifts actually improves
driveability. The shifts that result are extremely smooth- you hear
rather than feel them.

> These are the things that I have gleaned from over
> the years:
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> to understand why. Several have used ATF+4 in 1999 and earlier models
> without a problem.

ATF+3 may have been one of the bigggest problems all along. It has
poorer stability and oxidation resistance than Dexron or even old Type F
fluid. ATF +4 is THE way to go now- its a better fluid in EVERY way than
+3, and even has better basic stability than Dexron III and Mercon V

Reply to this Message

Jon - 10 Apr 2007 19:01 GMT

> kmathe...@sisna.com wrote:
>
[quoted text clipped - 36 lines]
>
> - Show quoted text -

Many thanks for your responses, if he's hell bent on buying Chrysler,
I'll steer him towards these generations and try to make sure he digs
up some service records.

Happy Trails,

Jon

Reply to this Message