LIFETIME POWERTRAIN WARRANTY on new Chrysler and Dodge!

A-ha! So it's the American worker, not the big 3's operating processes that are the problem! Well I'm no UAW lover. Of course, those transplants aren't unionized, so I can't blame it on them. Balls! As I mentioned above, I'll be sure to get right on finding those international surveys of North American vehicles and their quality. pfffft

 

Im buying one... And I will drive the Crap out of it....

 

Resale value is one thing quality is another. Right now I have 2 BMWs that have spent more time in the shop with problems then the 3 domestic vehicles I have which covers all of the big three. A Chevy, Jeep, and Ford. Build quality on domestics have improved quite a bit. If you are looking for heavy duty trucks like I would be then Domestic is really the only choice IMO. Nissan Titan is ok but I wouldn't have a Tundra on a bet. Dodge trucks used to have a transmission problem but they have got that cleared up. I don't think they use cheaper materials then their European counterparts either. I can tell you also the interior of my Ford F150 Lariat is as nice as my BMW 525. Don't get me wrong I love my BMW's and will always have one in the garage. Outside that garage is a vehicle that actually pays for itself many times over on the farm and once I step inside of my Ford I am as comfortable as any car I have ever drove from Baveria.

I believe Chrysler is on the right track. Long ago there was a guy named Lee Iacocca that offered an unheard of warranty 7/70,000 on a group of ugly K cars and sold a ton of them and turned Chrysler around. If Iacocca could sell those butt ugly K cars with a large warranty think how many are going to be sold when the cars are better looking.

 

I am thinking about doing the same thing.

 

That's fine. Just pray they're still around when you try to collect on the warranty.

 

Apparently, you haven't owned a late model Ferrari. I've owned two. Gas and oil.

 

Better looking? And, when might that be?

 

You make a very good point. What is my time worth? I don't care how much free service you give me. If my down time exceeds my comfort level, The cost is unacceptable. Free can be expensive!

 

I'm curious... how many miles?

Because I honestly don't know what kind of reliability people see out of the new Ferraris. My 308 can go hundreds of miles gas & oil only!

Nonetheless, it is humorous. Goes to that whole point I was making above about "we don't make that model anymore"!

P.S.- why isn't this in the Cars off topic section?

 

Have you seen a K car just about anything looks better than those cars. Chrysler products IMO as far as domestics go are not bad looking cars. I really like their trucks which is what I would be buying. There is not a foreign truck that I feel could pull a 26' gooseneck trailer full of horses safely but a Dodge 3500 can pull that without a sweat. If diesels are included in the warranty I will probably own a Dodge next. If not I will stick with The Chevrolet I already have. Again if you look at the interior and it's comfort it is on par with most cars that come out of Europe and what is funny is these are trucks not luxury cars.

 

Chrysler has weathered worse problems. When Iacocca took over they were in much worse shape than they are now. Them being there would be the least of my concerns. if they did go under what exactly would I have lost $10,000 maybe $20,000? I would believe this is going to boost their sales. It will give a lot of people a good feeling with such a warranty. People like trading for a latest greatest model to take full advantage of the warranty though so in the long run it is not going to cost Chrysler a great deal to offer it. But it will get people in the show rooms. I have talked to several farmers that are already talking about it too. Farmers, Contractors, Blue collar workers are the group this will appeal to and they will buy them.

 

A Pontiac G6 is a great car... for $9,000 Canadian brand new. It is not worth the what? $25,000ish price.

I will continue to BASH the North American car makers until they use quality materials and have their brand new cars on the road for more than 5 years! They make turds look sturdy.

Them sending out papers to news papers and internet news companies does NOTHING to make the cars more reliable. What would you expect them to do? Say, yeah we have the same old **** wrapped in brighter paper?

Again, who is in charge of these studies? Are they in the car industry? Do they have something to lose if the North American car industry falls flat on it's face? Who do they get their money from? Who employs them, who owns these companies you speak of?

Also how can we comment on the new warranties today when the cars of today aren't even covered by these fake warranties? We can only go on the last 20 years of experience with these companies and the track record sucks.

Tell me what new and improved materials these manufacturers are now using that will allow these cars to last for 15 years without an engine rebuild, transmission replacement, interiors being torn to shreds in less than 5 years, paint that looks 50 years old after 5 -7 years?

What are they doing other than spouting more BS on the potential car buyers?

With this new warranty crap, they will draw people in without changing anything. It's called a gimmick. When it fails in a few years, they'll come out with more.

Have you heard about the "EMPLOYEE PRICING"? What BS is that!? In other words we have to drop a couple of thousand off each car or it will rot in our parking lot.

I buy and sell cars for part of my living. I am positive I know more about the **** that North American car manufacturers crap out than 95% of the consumers out there. I get cars all the time and about 40% of them are North American. I have 3 right now for Christ's sake and they all suck! Squeaks, rattles, engines that sound like they're dying, interior door handles that lose all of their colour after a year of opening the doors, the same with the radio buttons and all the other cheap, cheap plastic interior parts.


Why do we see 12 year old Honda's, Toyota's. VW's, BMW's, Volvo's, Audi's etc. out there and no North American cars? Because none of them last that long.

 

Resale value is directly related to quality. Why would cheap cars hold value? Why would quality cars hold value? Because the cars build with strong reliable parts will drive further and last longer than if it was made with cheap materials. I don't see how anyone could say quality isn't a factor in resale value.

I am not talking about pick up trucks. Ford and GM build good work trucks and poor poor cars. They build the trucks better because they are bought by individuals who use them to make a living. If the trucks were as crappy as the cars, none would sell and the companies would go under. So why can't they use the same idea and materials in the cars? Because if you have to buy a new car every 4 years instead of 12, the manufacturers will make 3 times the money.

I'm not saying the warranty is a bad idea, I'm saying it won't make the cars any better and won't keep them on the road any longer. A gimmick will continue to work on the weak as it has always worked. People fooling themselves, ready for a Ford econobox to last for the next 15 years is laughable.

 

Im with you on this fully!! I use my trucks for work. If they break its not what it cost to fix it that bothers me, it ho wmuch Im loosing not working.
I dont care that its free, I dont want it to break PERIOD!!

down time= -$ > cost to fix

 

True, the American truck does have a great interior when you get right model, but then again, I would expect some fine as hell interior when the price of the truck is enough to rival a BMW or Mercedes.

The one thing I hope will come from this Warranty is that it'll force or cause other companies to up their's.

 

Well it's not like I'm going to get anywhere with you (you know what they say about winning an arguement on the internets, it's like winning in the special olympics...), but to answer a few of your questions:
On April 1, 2005, J.D. Power and Associates became a business unit of the McGraw-Hill Companies.
We all know that Consumers' Union doesn't accept money from the companies they review.
They've both had positive things to say about domestic quality recently. Perhaps one of these companies has those 100mpg fish carbueretors stashed away, too! All of these studies said domestic quality sucked for years, so do you expect that GM is now finally paying into McGraw-Hill to bias the JD Power research?

As for the 2nd part of your concerns... there's that perception gap. I tell you what. If you insist on judging 2007 vehicles based on experiences of 1987 cars... just don't buy one. Consider this: are you smarter than you were 20 years ago?

As for what's different, once again, it that continuous improvement process. Every time there's a screwup, part of the process used to fix it is to figure out and implement steps to prevent reoccurrence. I can tell you that durability standards get tougher, not easier, new requirements are put in place. Where I work at we're constantly adding more tests and checkoffs on designs and durability vehicles and, contrary to what you wish to believe, the data shows improving quality as a result.

I can fully understand the layman's skepticism when looking at 3 Months In Service quality data, but have you ever considered that automakers know more about making cars than you and must have figured out over the years that 3MIS data has to have some value? Just a crazy thought I had...

OVER & OUT, rant away!

 

Why do you keep saying I'm basing my judgments on 20 year old cars? Where did I say that? You can be biased all day but adding your words to mine isn't going to stick.

I'm commenting on experience on these cars over the last 20 years including today. So the cars aren't 1987 built cars driving around today, they're 2001 models that are total junk heaps in wrecking yards today. How is that not relevant?

20 years ago I was 4.

Hell yeah auto makers now how to build and sell cars, they even mastered selling cars with a shelf live of about 7 years.

I'm sure Ford and GM could make a car last 20 years if they wanted to but now since the screwed up for sooo long, if they make a car that lasts 20 years, they'll be out of business. They would have to sell a car like that for 3 or 4 times the price of their current entry level cars and that just isn't going to happen.

 

A bit of trivia. There is no such thing as "over and out." There is either over (your turn to talk) or out (I'm hanging up). If you really want to get technical, the person initiating the call is the one to end it. Sorry. I couldn't resist.

 

That, sir, is an excellent point. Even though my Toyota is way, way out of warranty, I still have had zero down time.

 

It depends on the age of the cars.

All vehicles have their best years and all makes have a few issues from time to time but in the last 4-ish years all makes have gone down hill and they're either staying there or sinking further.


As I posted above, the work trucks can't go through this or the owners would go on a rampage due to lose of work time.

So why is it, they make the trucks solid and not the cars?


Because they want you to buy a new car every 4 years.


It's not rocket science.

 

It is sad but the trucks are pretty much their bread and butter. They know what makes them money and they put more effert there. That said when it comes to powertrains Chrysler offers Hemis in both cars and trucks so the fact that this is a powertrain warranty wouldn't bother me. If they build it to last in the trucks then it will in the cars too. Actually the powertrain will not be stressed in the cars as much as it would in trucks.

I still don't think it will be a bad move for Chrysler
1. It will get people in the showrooms and will sell cars. Which will make other Companies have to up their warranties to compete.
2. Most are still not going to hang on to the cars for more than 4 or 5 years at the most so they aren't going to have much more expense in warranty repairs then they do now.

What was said earlier in here though looks to be true. Diesels are excluded from the warranty. I don't understand their reasoning there. The engines that are built to last hundreds of thousands of miles are excluded form the warranty go figure. I guess I won't trade the Ford off anytime soon.

 

That's what I said above. Even if they don't change a single thing, they will sell cars because of this warranty exposure. When something goes wrong and you have to fight tooth and nail to even get your car looked at for free, some **** will hit the fan. Also when you sell the car, some buyers will assume the warranty is transfered to them.

Either way, it's a scam. It may not be illegal but I view it as underhanded.

 

Few warranties out there, for anything, trasfer to second or third owners......there's nothing underhanded about that. Most all of the 'car flippers' who buy new vehicles every 3-6 years do so not because there's a 'problem' with the vehicle. They do so strictly because they want a NEW one - new smell, new interior, new bells/whistles, etc. Buying a new car, while your old car still has a decent trade-in value AND interest rates are low, has made economic sense for many Americans these past 4-5 years. This doesn't mean the quality of the cars are suspect. I have known several domstic car owners (myself being one) who have racked up hundreds' of thousands of miles on Ford/Saturn/Chevy/Chrysler products. Solid and consistent vehicle maintenance is key to this, of course, but I have over 200,000 miles (and counting) on my Ford Ranger 4-cylinder engine and have not spent ANY 'down time' having anything associated with the drivetrain overhauled or repaired. Sounds to me like we have a bunch of 24-year-olds who don't know sh!!!t about American cars shooting their mouth off in here.....