On Jun 15, 6:01 pm, "Scott Koprowski" <skoprow...@earthlink.net>
wrote:

I was wondering about this. The new Avenger comes with the "2.4 world"
engine for the base model. How does it compare to the 2.4 that it
replaces. They got most of the problems worked out of the old 2.4, so
I couldn't understand why they would want to use something new and
unknown.

-KM

Although the new 2.4L engine is mentioned for it's cold roughness,
most of the article is on aspects of the the Sebring and Nitro which
customers don't like, such as  "both knocked for their interiors".

I looked at the Sebring  when it first came out and since I was mainly  
interested in the V6 this wouldn't have been a problem for me.
However I rejected the Sebring in 5 minutes because:
-Can't store a full size spare.  (a critical need for me)
-Impractical hood channels in a snowy climate.
-Poor interior.

Note that the poor interior is third on my list of concerns, no mention
of the first two which are more important to me, in fact the first (full
sized spare) is a firm need for my outside of urban driving.
I have no idea how it drives, because it doesn't interest me.
I certainly wouldn't trade our 2001 V6 Sebring on it!

Oh yes the Nitro. It was there to and the salesman insisted I sit in it.
Sitting in it turned me off even more than looking at it. The only thing
I could see attractive about the Nitro is the low price.
IMO it's just a large Honda Element; two boxes on wheels.

The only thing I saw is complaints about NVH when cold. That doesn't
sound like much of an issue, but I'm glad to see them "re-thinking" the
Sebring and Nitro. How about "re thinking" them right out of production
and get a midsize sedan of a build quality to match the Magnum and Charger?

As for the "world engine," yes I was highly suspicious the moment I
found out that Mitsubishi was involved in the design. Now there's a
company that can't build a decent engine no matter how hard they try....

The fixes they are talking about - improving quality while cutting costs
- will *only* work if it is managed with extreme ethics - very hard to
do in today's business world.  I saw the failures of that when working
for a supplier to Ford and Delphi (GM) in the 90's - I've posted some
war stories about that here.

If the combination of cutting costs and upping quality is done like it
usually is in U.S. automotive, it will amount to making bricks without
straw, the mandated quality documentation will get faked (much as in
communist countries with their unachievable but required goals) in spite
of "documentation" requirements, and will utterly fail.  BTDT.

Maybe they will succeed at it.

Bill Putney
(To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with the letter 'x')

As a public service announcement, I am posting the full article below.
Incidentally, the Caliber has a bump below the steering column that
interferes with the driver's knee room when the seat is forward.  There is
no telescoping steering wheel which would solve that problem.

I didn't drive the car, but the salesman assured me the gas pedal is touchy
and the steering too sensitive.  He said the overhead cam is driven by a
belt and if it skips or breaks, the engine will need to be overhauled when
the piston heads collide with valves.

I heard enough and left to buy a pre-owned car from a Used Car Lot.  I
figure when I pay 1/5 the cost of a new one, I can live with all the
deficiencies in a used model, the same ones found in virtually all the new
models.

We might ask ourselves, why all the problems in 2007 cars?  After all, cars
have been around more than 110 years and don't seem to have been perfected
yet.  I think I know the answer, but Chrysler wouldn't listen to anything I
said, so let them rot and blow away in the wind.  They could have been a
contender.