To 03:56; I hope you have the luck with your Dodge I had with my last one (a 1990 Omni). I sold it in perfect running condition at 240,000 miles a few years back. The gentleman who bought it now has over 300,000 on it.
The Omni had a Mitsubishi engine in it. That's why it was so durable. Otherwise, most Chrysler products come in dead last for reliability.
The best and by far the most reliable engine used in the later Dodge Omnis was the American-made 2.2. A few early models had a Peugeot engine, but it was notoriously unreliable and under-powered. The Daytona 2.6 was a Mitsubishi, and it was not very reliable. Even at its worst Chrysler was nowhere NEAR as unreliable as Mitsubishi. Mitsubishi is even less reliable than the newer Toyotas.
Chrysler still comes in dead last for reliability. That's why they're a dead company. They need Fiat to breathe some life into them.
"Chrysler still comes in dead last for reliability. That's why they're a dead company"
Not any more. The reviews of the new Chrysler 200 (formerly the Sebring) were very complimentary. Every defect from the old Sebring has been fixed.
It is funny how people hang on to ideas from two or three decades ago. All domestic vehicles (including Chrysler) are now on a par with or better than Japanese or German cars. I have to laugh when I see people make reference to "Fords exploding". That myth is based on a tiny handful of Pintos that were built FORTY YEARS AGO!! Yes, a few Chrysler products from 30-40 years ago were prone to minor problems. And NO, Chrysler is hardly "dead". They are opening a new factory in Michigan to employ hundreds of Americans building American cars. Like Ford and GM, Chrysler is gaining rapidly in sales as Toyota drops and Honda barely hangs on.
I worked for a man in 1985 who had just bought a new Dodge truck. I ran into him last year. He was STILL driving that same Dodge truck. 24 years is not bad for ANY vehicle.
I owned a 1990 Dodge Omni with the bullet-proof American-made 2.2 engine. I sold the car at just under a quarter of a million miles. In that time, it had had two timing belts, one heater hose and two brake jobs. Even the original A/C worked like new, and had never even required freon.
I now drive 2 Fords and a GM, but I have no problems with Chrysler.
I stand by the comment I wrote about Chrysler coming in dead last for reliability and being a dead company. They are in deep financial trouble. They have been for years. They have lost billions, and have failed to introduce any new product for quite a while.
I don't hold preconceived notions. I do research about cars. Chrysler comes in below average for reliability, and customer satisfaction. I agree that Ford has greatly improved its products, and reliability. They are building cars that are just as good as anything on the market. GM is catching up too.
But Chrysler is not in the same position as Ford or GM. They are very far behind them. The 200 is just an updated Sebring. It's new, so how can anyone determine that it's free of all of Sebring's flaws? All they've managed to do is a re-freshening of all of their old products, which were seriously flawed to begin with. They didn't merge with Fiat. They had no choice but to be more or less be swallowed up by them.
Finally, the last time I read Consumer Reports, they stated that Honda and Toyota were back in first place for customer satisfaction and reliability. Check out a book called Lemon - Aid. The author is Phil Edmunston. He does his research, and he's not biased. He tells the truth about Chrysler. They're a dead company with poor products.
I can continually get around 30MPG, if not 32MPG, and have found my scan gauge to be incredibly accurate when calibrated properly. Usually speculating on things of which you have no familiarity with (Caliber) will almost never provide any valuable insight. Because you believe a car shouldn't be able to get 30 MPG, doesn't mean the guy is lying. If you had done any research yourself on the matter, you would have found many Caliber owners claiming 30 or near to it. Just my two cents.
I've personally never had any mechanical problems at all with the three Chrysler products we've owned (one of which was sold running flawlessly at nearly a quarter-million miles). I can't dispute that they generally are ranked far below other car companies in reliability and customer service. I can't knock the reliability, but have to say that the service was definitely horrible.
With that said, Chrysler appears to be making quite a comeback. Their monthly sales have increased more than any other car maker, and for the past few months their U.S. sales have been ahead of Toyota. The Ram and Jeep lines are experiencing fantastic sales.
The reviews I have read point out that the new Chrysler products are way ahead of those of a couple of years ago. The new 2012 Charger and 300 are coming out with the incredible 8-speed automatic. Testers rave about the acceleration, smoothness and fuel mileage. No other U.S. auto maker offers anything close yet.
With respect to the Caliber, I test drove 3 Caliber models in 2007 and was very pleased with the value for the money. They felt comfortable and performed well. I was not impressed with the CVT transmission, which was very slow off the line. I would opt for a manual transmission in the Caliber, but have no qualms about reliability whatsoever. No domestic (Ford, GM or Chrysler) that we have ever owned has ever had any repairs of any kind before 100,000 miles. In 240,000+ miles our last Chrysler product (a Dodge) had had nothing but two brake jobs, two timing belts and one heater hose. I'd call that pretty reliable.