Thinking of getting rid of my Monte Carlo

[2010 SSRS]

My mom had a 2001 Sebring Convertible Limited, it was an awesome car.

[DevilsReject97]

Originally Posted by Stew

Um, I wouldn't suggest a GTP for reliability, great engine, but the rest of the car is junk and will basically fall apart around it.....

Op, just watch what you get, do the carfax thing, and make sure it was never a rental. As liong as it was maintained it should be fine. As for the sludge thing, as long as oil changes were done regularly and ontime, you will be fine. Most of these people have probably never owned a Chrysler and just buy into the hype......

Considering I'm coming from a Grand Prix background, they're pretty solid compared to a lot of other cars on the road. Granted, it's GM, but I had fewer issues with my Grand Prix than many other cars I've owned...

The sludge is a real deal, and while the on time and regular oil changes help, it doesn't prevent the issue, it just can prolong it from happening. I would have more knowledge of it than some, considering I owned one....

The 2.7L V6 is junk, period...and I wouldn't recommend it at all...

You might give thought to the turbo PT Cruiser...as it comes in a convertible, somewhat decent mpg, and it's of course a turbo

[King Sun]

Originally Posted by DevilsReject97

Considering I'm coming from a Grand Prix background, they're pretty solid compared to a lot of other cars on the road. Granted, it's GM, but I had fewer issues with my Grand Prix than many other cars I've owned...

The sludge is a real deal, and while the on time and regular oil changes help, it doesn't prevent the issue, it just can prolong it from happening. I would have more knowledge of it than some, considering I owned one....

The 2.7L V6 is junk, period...and I wouldn't recommend it at all...

You might give thought to the turbo PT Cruiser...as it comes in a convertible, somewhat decent mpg, and it's of course a turbo

04 grand prix and up>>>>>>>>>

[upflying]

Originally Posted by 2010 SSRS

My mom had a 2001 Sebring Convertible Limited, it was an awesome car.

Good point, only people I see driving a Sebring CV are females.

[SleepWarz]

Originally Posted by swagled

Aside from an occasionally interesting vehicle, I don't think the flies have ever stopped circling Chrysler since the Iacocca bailout. Have always been leery of them cutting corners, and going under.

I don't see LeBarons still on the road... Or New Yorkers, Dodge Dynasties, etc. People do not love Chryslers enough to keep them maintained. They are disposable cars.

I actually turn my head to see a K car that still runs. They were as common as crows in the 1990s.

My 91 newyorker is going strong.... 195000 on the odo. Engine is a tank, tranny is the weakpoint.

[Stew]

Originally Posted by DevilsReject97

Considering I'm coming from a Grand Prix background, they're pretty solid compared to a lot of other cars on the road. Granted, it's GM, but I had fewer issues with my Grand Prix than many other cars I've owned...

The sludge is a real deal, and while the on time and regular oil changes help, it doesn't prevent the issue, it just can prolong it from happening. I would have more knowledge of it than some, considering I owned one....

The 2.7L V6 is junk, period...and I wouldn't recommend it at all...

You might give thought to the turbo PT Cruiser...as it comes in a convertible, somewhat decent mpg, and it's of course a turbo

My GTP was a 2000. Where to start. We'll start with little stuff. Door pnels etc just falling apart, cv joints(common), bushings, sway bar, AC died (common problem, expensive fix), transmission self destucted (this is VERY common and a VERY expensive fix), my parents 2000 Regal LS has had similar issues. This is one reason that, while I am looking a new compact with good gas mileage, and really like the way Cruze drives I am very leary. My Chrysler products onnthe other hand, 01 Dakota 200k miles, 07 Patriot, 70k miles, no real issues, Jeep Cherokee was over 200k miles, 01 Grand Cherokee currently around 160k, 99 Dakota R/T around 140k, 97 LHS, had until 95k miles, never needed the first thing, not even a battery. Given, i'll admit I never had a 2.7 and wouldn't get one simply because of the MPG/power deficit, but IMHO the sludge issue is blown a bit out of proportion on this site do to it being a GM site.

[Stew]

Originally Posted by swagled

Aside from an occasionally interesting vehicle, I don't think the flies have ever stopped circling Chrysler since the Iacocca bailout. Have always been leery of them cutting corners, and going under.

I don't see LeBarons still on the road... Or New Yorkers, Dodge Dynasties, etc. People do not love Chryslers enough to keep them maintained. They are disposable cars.

I actually turn my head to see a K car that still runs. They were as common as crows in the 1990s.

yeah, because you see so many 80s Cavaliers, late 80s/early 90s Luminas, etc and 80s Ford Escorts, Tauruses, etc still running around......

[DevilsReject97]

Originally Posted by Stew

My GTP was a 2000. Where to start. We'll start with little stuff. Door pnels etc just falling apart, cv joints(common), bushings, sway bar, AC died (common problem, expensive fix), transmission self destucted (this is VERY common and a VERY expensive fix), my parents 2000 Regal LS has had similar issues. This is one reason that, while I am looking a new compact with good gas mileage, and really like the way Cruze drives I am very leary. My Chrysler products onnthe other hand, 01 Dakota 200k miles, 07 Patriot, 70k miles, no real issues, Jeep Cherokee was over 200k miles, 01 Grand Cherokee currently around 160k, 99 Dakota R/T around 140k, 97 LHS, had until 95k miles, never needed the first thing, not even a battery. Given, i'll admit I never had a 2.7 and wouldn't get one simply because of the MPG/power deficit, but IMHO the sludge issue is blown a bit out of proportion on this site do to it being a GM site.

Look, we've all had vehicles that were junk....but I can just as easily trash Chrysler as I can GM.

The sludge deal is no joke, and I'd warn anyone even thinking of buying a 2.7L V6 powered Chrysler to say away....period.

[Stew]

Originally Posted by DevilsReject97

Look, we've all had vehicles that were junk....but I can just as easily trash Chrysler as I can GM.

The sludge deal is no joke, and I'd warn anyone even thinking of buying a 2.7L V6 powered Chrysler to say away....period.

The point I was trying to make is that Chrysler is not junk, just as GM isn't, I loved my B and D bodies, but our W-bodies, 3 of which we have had, are seriously lacking in the quality department (96 Lumina, 00 GTP (both lost transmissions), 00 Regal, transmission on it way out, (among many issues). You are giving him advice to stay away from the 2.7, from my experience I am suggesting to stay away from W-bodies (at least gens 1.5-2.0).

[swagled]

Originally Posted by Stew

yeah, because you see so many 80s Cavaliers, late 80s/early 90s Luminas, etc and 80s Ford Escorts, Tauruses, etc still running around......

It's be interesting to find out statistically what percentage of 1980s Chryslers are still registered versus other makes. I do think I see more Tauruses, Chevy Caprices, etc than I do Dodge Dynasties and Lebarons.

I don't "know" it, but I "sense" it, from what I see around me on the road. People don't seem to value keeping K-era Chryslers maintained. I'm tempted to say the same of the LH cars. They started shedding paint in the mid/late 1990s in big chunks, and that visually telegraphed to people that these were cheaply made and not worth keeping up.

I say all this as someone that drove a Plymouth Valiant until 1992. Motor and transmission were still solid, but needed front end restoration after 250,000 miles. Chrysler used to make durable cars but they stumbled around the Aspen/Volare era and have been struggling ever since.

[fielderLS3]

Originally Posted by Stew

yeah, because you see so many 80s Cavaliers, late 80s/early 90s Luminas, etc and 80s Ford Escorts, Tauruses, etc still running around......

Originally Posted by DevilsReject97

Look, we've all had vehicles that were junk....but I can just as easily trash Chrysler as I can GM.

The sludge deal is no joke, and I'd warn anyone even thinking of buying a 2.7L V6 powered Chrysler to say away....period.

Over the decades, every car company has built some cars that were excellent, and some that were junk. Late model Sebrings as a specific model fall into the junk category.

The 2.7L sludge problem is about as bad as it gets. I can't tell you how many times I've been behind a 5-6 year old Chrysler product that was blowing out clouds of blue smoke. Everytime, I know exactly what's under the hood.

[Stew]

Originally Posted by fielderLS3

Over the decades, every car company has built some cars that were excellent, and some that were junk. Late model Sebrings as a specific model fall into the junk category.

The 2.7L sludge problem is about as bad as it gets. I can't tell you how many times I've been behind a 5-6 year old Chrysler product that was blowing out clouds of blue smoke. Everytime, I know exactly what's under the hood.

This is true, but had some great motors too. the Magnum engines, the 4.7 is a great motor, the world engines seem to be extrememely reliable (70k miles so far in my 2.4 Patriot and no problems), the Jeep inline 6 (yeah, i believe it was an AMC design, but still LOL), the 3.3 and 3.8 pushrod 6s seem to be extremely durable.

It's be interesting to find out statistically what percentage of 1980s Chryslers are still registered versus other makes. I do think I see more Tauruses, Chevy Caprices, etc than I do Dodge Dynasties and Lebarons.

I don't "know" it, but I "sense" it, from what I see around me on the road. People don't seem to value keeping K-era Chryslers maintained. I'm tempted to say the same of the LH cars. They started shedding paint in the mid/late 1990s in big chunks, and that visually telegraphed to people that these were cheaply made and not worth keeping up.

I say all this as someone that drove a Plymouth Valiant until 1992. Motor and transmission were still solid, but needed front end restoration after 250,000 miles. Chrysler used to make durable cars but they stumbled around the Aspen/Volare era and have been struggling ever since.

With the exception of the Caprice and Crown Vics from the mid 90s, every domestic manufacturer basically made junk in the 80s so you can't just point your finger at one brand. I see LOTS of LH cars still on the road and lots of luminas. And we can point out one bad engine from Chysler, but you do the same with GM and Ford. Such as the Ford 3.8 headgasket blower, the gm 3.4 OHC engine and 3.1 OHV engines).

[fielderLS3]

Originally Posted by Stew

This is true, but had some great motors too. the Magnum engines, the 4.7 is a great motor, the world engines seem to be extrememely reliable (70k miles so far in my 2.4 Patriot and no problems), the Jeep inline 6 (yeah, i believe it was an AMC design, but still LOL), the 3.3 and 3.8 pushrod 6s seem to be extremely durable.

You've brought back many memories. I was raised in Caravans with the 3.3L until my parents moved up to a Grand Cherokee. They don't make 'em like that I-6 anymore. Nothing today makes low-end torque like that.

[Silverado]

If you're looking for a vert, look into a G6....I don't know anything about them, but they were hardtop verts......go back a few years and see what you can find....FWD, convertible, (hard top helps with the noise, security, etc), decent engines, etc.

Or, find an older Jeep Wrangler.....maybe a Tracker....okay, maybe not.

Good luck.