I'm going to clarify...in about 75% of the Chrysler transmissions I have seen, its due to people not putting in ATF3/4 but instead putting in Dextron. Dextron just doesn't play well the seals and what not in a Chrsyler transmission. The other 25% is just from abuse or the usual lemon. And yes, everyone has their anecdotes.

And I've rebuilt a few A670 transmissions believe or not...including the tranny on my old Caravan.

The most current problem transmission in Chrysler is the A604 Ultradrive, which was the first computer controlled transmission. The problem was not so much the computer but rather the engineers underestimated the strength of several parts in that transmission and well, there was failures within the infamous 75,000 mile warranty pretty quick. But guess what? Mopar engineers corrected the problem with stronger parts that did the trick. So when service was done, the new parts were put in and the problem went away. The transmissions never went into limp mode for a long time. HOWEVER, there is a bunch of a transmission rebuilder who are not savvy about this issue and instead get the cheap parts which are even worse.

And Samurai, my comment was a joke about something you said about an angry rant when Bandi worked at that GM dealer about all the silly repairs he made one day a long time ago.

Love ya Skelly, but Chrysler trannys are shit.

I have seen GM trans behind damn near every motor, Chrysler Hemi included, with the use of adapters. Never saw someone stuff the auto trans out of a Dodge Ram into a Mustang Drag cae

Posted by Agent Skelly I'm going to clarify...in about 75% of the Chrysler transmissions I have seen, its due to people not putting in ATF3/4 but instead putting in Dextron.

the transmissions are shit.
period.
junk. crap. garbage. fluid-spewing refuse!

Sorry, Skelly, but they just suck regardless of what fluid you put in them.

Look at it this way, Ford's AOD was a piece of shit. GM's 700R4 was a piece of shit.
i know it gets your panties in a wad, but there are too many of us here that just know what fails on these things, regardless of what fluid you put in them.

Off-topic, what was the autospastic transmission Ford used in the 98 Explorer (4.0L 4x4)?
That motherfucker must weigh 500+lbs!!!

Lets just leave this as we disagree like the many other topics we have beaten to death

Posted by velcrozeppelin Dad's Dakota would hold gears far too long and then THUNKSLAMBANG into the next gear... The wife's van just revs and revs but never really seems to get anywhere.

Sounds like what the Ram is currently doing and what the Neon did. (THUNKSLAMMED reverse when cold. Shattered an axle the first time it pulled this stunt. Fucking car.


And Dave, our Voyager did about that. No warning, no leaks, well-cared for. Way out in the sticks of Ohio, the car suddenly went into limp mode.

I love my MOPARs, but I realize that they are far from the best bet, especially those with autotragics.

Posted by jellybeans95 Sounds like what the Ram is currently doing and what the Neon did. (THUNKSLAMMED reverse when cold. Shattered an axle the first time it pulled this stunt. Fucking car. And Dave, our Voyager did about that. No warning, no leaks, well-cared for. Way out in the sticks of Ohio, the car suddenly went into limp mode. I love my MOPARs, but I realize that they are far from the best bet, especially those with autotragics.

Now, it sounds like the Voyageur you have the A604 with the weak parts. Like I said, with a rebuild, your back in business and will last another 100,000.

Posted by Agent Skelly your back in business and will last another 100,000.

A mere 100k out of a transmission is sad.

Posted by DelbertGrady A mere 100k out of a transmission is sad.

I think thats fair to be honest. Most cars are designed to go that far...after that, its just extra innings and yes, there is cars that do go on forever it seems like. Maybe thats just my thinking

Posted by DelbertGrady A mere 100k out of a transmission is sad.

my friend Stacy got 279,000 miles out of the autotragic in his 82 BMW 318 (or was it 325?...) When it broke, he called around to replace and got a lesson in how expensive Beemer parts were. As far as i know, the car is still sitting in his dad's backyard.

when the autospastic in my dad's 94 Explorer went, he called around all the salvage yards looking for a used replacement. He got laughed at! there was no such thing as a 'good' used Ford Explorer transmission. Eventually, he went to the dealer and bought a reman'd one for $1300 that had a $300 core. Ford wanted the old one.
it was quite honestly the worst fucking transmission I have ever had the misfortune of changing!

Posted by Agent Skelly Now, it sounds like the Voyageur you have the A604 with the weak parts. Like I said, with a rebuild, your back in business and will last another 100,000.

It's lonnnnnnnnnng gone. We got the van about 94 or 95, had it til about 2000-01. It was a 90, and yes, it did have that dogshit A604. It got 3 rebuilds, first one, the guy was some toothless hick who did an awful job on it, so the trans died a mere 12k later. (First time it went out at ~75k mark). Went to another shop, another $1300 plunked into it, trans shat itself again somewhere around the 88k mark. Rebuilt it again somewhere between 120 and 125k. When it went for the last time around 160k, we said "f it." By that time, the van had been relegated to "spare vehicle/storage". (I was wrong on the 130k comment the other day. Mentioned it to my parents and they said it gave up at 160k.

Posted by Agent Skelly I think thats fair to be honest. Most cars are designed to go that far...after that, its just extra innings and yes, there is cars that do go on forever it seems like. Maybe thats just my thinking

I've done 590,000 km on a BMW 325e (and sold the car, it didn't stop working), Julie's Jetta has 350,000 on the tranny (and VW doesn't make a fantastic automatic), 500,000 on a Toyota Tercel, 450,000 on a Corolla, 300,000 on a Cherokee... and none of these had tranny problems before I got rid of them (and Julie is still driving her Jetta).

Posted by bandi I've done 590,000 km on a BMW 325e (and sold the car, it didn't stop working), Julie's Jetta has 350,000 on the tranny (and VW doesn't make a fantastic automatic), 500,000 on a Toyota Tercel, 450,000 on a Corolla, 300,000 on a Cherokee... and none of these had tranny problems before I got rid of them (and Julie is still driving her Jetta).

if i remember right, one vintage of the Jetta had a horrible 5-speed that ate reverse? My friend Bickels' 98 Jetta GT lunched reverse.

Aw hell, look at my Luminas, the couple of Cavaliers with the autos and my damn Beretta... In fact, the 98 Luminator I had a few years ago just flipped 300,000 miles, still on the same engine and transmission.

i mean, this isn't about a brand loyalty pissing contest, this is a discussion over the fact that Chrysler needs to overhaul certain components of their powertrains... their automatics are awful.

I think every manufacturer has had their spells of shitty automatics.

Million Mile Joe got over a million out of his though-
http://www.youtube...atch?v=svsUfBdvDGk