Speaking of transmission-challenged mini-vans in taxi duty, here’s another example. Well, maybe by the time this one was built, the infamous A604 was improved some. Our 1992 Caravan’s fourth transmission finally seemed to be able to go some distance; it had some 80k miles on it when I finally donated it. Is that a record?
The transmissions were revised in 2001 and since then they have been solid I think.
I liked these SWB vans.
I agree on both your points.
It isn’t so bad to live in a world where the vast majority of engines and transmissions are good for the life of a vehicle. What a shame that Chrysler, of all companies, suffered woeful failure rates for transmissions in the 80s and 90s. After all, the company was built on the rock solid engineering tradition of the Dodge Bros. and produced the legendary TorqueFlite, amongst many other long-lasting drivetrain components. The Slant Six, 318, and 9 3/4 rearend come to mind.
When was the last time you heard of anyone replacing an engine or trans in a car built after 2000? Plenty of 300k+ vehicles out there with original equipment.
Amazing.
As to the shorty van—I think all Chrysler vans look best in SWB. It just works proportion-wise.
I think you meant 8 3/4 rear end.
The transmission in my 1994 Dodge RAM2500 is basically a Torqueflite 727 with overdrive gear and lockup torque converter added. It is considered a weak transmission, but the weak parts are the overdrive gear and lockup.
Most Mopar axles are good, the 7.25″ less likes but mostly found in A cars with sixes and V8s with economy gearing.
8.75″ was older V8 cars before 1972. Easy to spot had no cover.
8.25″ most popular after 1972 on just about everything V8 except for the big blocks.
9.25″ big block cars after 1972.
9.75″ mostly big blocks Hemi’s etc with 4 speed on floor. Pretty rare.
Mopar axles are pretty good all around 7.25″ wasn’t unreliable just a bit small for anything but a leisurely Slant Six car.
They’re still a hit-or-miss proposition. The Ultradrive in my parents’ 1998 Caravan was solid throughout five years and 130,000 miles, but the transmission in their replacement 2002 failed at 110K.
Their current 2007 T&C has 83,000 miles on the odometer, and I’m starting to get nervous. All three were/are SWB models, maintained regularly, and carry at most three people and a schnauzer at a time.
Make sure your “regular maintenance” doesn’t include transmission flushes, which can do more harm than good. Also ensure your shop uses the correct fluid, I believe yours requires ATF+4.
It does, and the fluid was replaced (no flush) at around 60,000 miles on the dealer’s recommendation. The tech said everything looked fine, so here’s hoping.
Ironically, as I type out my family’s history with Ultradrive, my 2012 Escape is sitting at my dealer waiting for a valve body repair kit to arrive. I took it in yesterday for a routine LOF and for a TSB-suggested transmission reflash to alleviate an occasional harsh shifting issue. The advisor came back an hour later with the news that the technician said the transmission’s internals were “nearly cooked.” It has less than 18,000 light-duty miles on it!
Same thing happened to parents of a good friend; the transmission in their 2005 Escape went out (but just after the warranty expired). They were lifetime American car buyers up to that point, and now drive a CR-V and a Corolla.
Very timely post. My mother-in-law’s ’05 Caravan just chucked a transmission @ 75,000 miles.
That’s about exactly when they chuck a tranny: 120,000 km is the average.
Interesting. I had one of the last 2007 SWB T&C minivans…I guess it was the Ultradrive. A March 2008 fire-sale closeout; marked down $4000. And with Chrysler’s Infinity Drivetrain warranty…I figured there was a chance MoPar’s days were numbered shorter than my van’s; but when it hit; and when various legitimate claimants were being beaten up, I figured it was time to get out while the getting-out was good.
The van by then had 60,000 miles on it – many quite abusive. Towing a heavy trailer 300 miles; flat-towing my Jeep about a thousand miles; towing a light motorcycle trailer another couple thousand miles. Oh, and a crazy chase that led offroad and onto a fire trail…no, I wasn’t dodging the cops; I was trying to link up with a work-crew on the move and took a wrong turn. In a National Forest. In a snowstorm. In a panic. Bad combo; bad ride. Amazingly, no lasting effects.
But, with a bad moon on the horizon, I traded for a Toy Yoda. I took it in the shorts, but I was philosophical about it – and by hindsight it was the right choice. What I lost in trading, I made up in gas saved.
We had a 97 Voyager for 12 yrs and 110k Sport SWB Never touched the trans or engine except for fluid changes. My wife is still mad we sold it. Mini vans aren’t mini anymore.
So true! I loved the size of my 93 Grand Voyager, replacement 06 Sienna was okay size too. Last year I looked at a new Sienna and couldn’t believe the bulk of it. Nice van, but way bigger than I wanted.
It doesn’t help that the new vans are so ugly. Nissan and Honda particularly so.
At one point I found a small shop that did trans rebuilds- they would always use heavy duty parts when applicable on the FWD Chrysler trans. They seemed to have a very good long term success rate. The problem is, you have to find those shops by word of mouth.
When it comes to auto trans, and the way the vast majority maintains them I would say 150,000 trouble free miles is pretty good. Anything over that is bonus.
Speaking of auto trans, I still like the good old 4 speed models. Some 5 speed ones feel okay, but it’s kind of getting ridiculous with the number of gears in newer models.
I agree completely with the gears. I drove a 6 speed Explorer in the mountains a few years ago, dang thing was constantly shifting. Very annoying.
Agreed. As someone who used to work at one of the shops who got fairly good at rebuilding these. The major problem was that the welds holding the pinions on the planetary gears would fail causing the entire geartrain to self destruct. This was largely an issue of quality from the factory. The pinions were secured by a strait line weld running diagonally across the pinion shaft and you could see with the naked eye where most of the welds, despite being automated, didn’t achieve good penetration, or missed the center of the pinion — thereby reducing the holding strength.
We used to TIG the planets by hand around the entire radius of the pinion shaft and it increased their service life significantly. The taxi units would usually last around 200,000+ kms or so before breaking down again. Though the solenoid blocks usually needed to be replaced several times in this same period.
4-speed automatics are antiquated and archaic. The only upside they have is possibly smooth shifts, but that and the low number of gears combine to make awful fuel economy. That, and they’re just plain slow. A Crown Vic cop car with a V8 and a 4-speed auto can’t outrun anything. I was just in a brand new Audi Q5 with an 8-speed auto, and the gearshifting is very inconspicuous. Manual cars used to be faster and more fuel-efficient than automatics only because the auto transmissions were so bad at that time. The new transmissions, with 50-100% more gears than the old 4-speeds, now surpass manuals in both performance and fuel economy.
I have no experience with Audi, but I am here to tell you that I’d take a 4 speed over a 6 speed in a GM or a Ford any day. The auto magazines may love them, but I don’t. Always shifting, often picking too high of a gear, then refusing to downshift is the best way to describe the six speed in our Malibu (and the two previous GMs that we owned). It’s like driving a 6 speed manual, with a blind and deaf person controlling the shifter for you.
I could not imagine the hell that an 8 speed auto in a Malibu would be. The experience has so traumatized me that I went to a CVT in a Nissan. At least it’s always in the right gear and pays attention to your throttle input. For me anyhow, 4 speeds is about the limit of what I want in an auto. once you get beyond that, I’d rather have the CVT and avoid the nonsense.
You have a unique experience, CVTs are sloppy as hell transmissions especially under load and going up hills. Most people go the other way. For a low duty/low performance car, there is no need to have such a sophisticated transmission like what is in the Audi Q5. That 8 speed transmission is a Tiptronic and way too complicated and expensive for urban duties.
Pray the CVT in the Altima stays well, better yet, buy a protection plan for the transmission. The long term reliability of CVTs have not been pleasant, ask a Mini owner. We talked about this extensively in the post a month or so ago with the Ford 500. The Nissan Murano had extensive problems with the CVT when it came out about 8 years ago.
Just sayin…
I have to throw out there that I don’t mind the CVT in my Subaru. After getting the feel for how to throttle it, well, it performs just fine. It performed better than expected while towing a trailer. I guess it’s fair to say overall I don’t like it any less than a 6 speed conventional automatic. I would certainly take it over a 8 or 9 speed auto.
4 speed autos might be old news, but I managed 31 mpg in my 3.9L Impala. That’s hardly awful fuel economy.
Drive an Altima, then drive a Malibu, and your opinion will be changed. Not all CVT’s are the same and lots of upgrades have happened since the CVTs first came out. I am not one to make a leap like this normally, as I would have preferred a 4 speed auto, but Nissan’s CVTs are the best CVT in the business in my opinion. Much quicker than the previous automatics, terrific fuel economy, and no slop at all.
On the other hand, I’ve owned 3 GM 6 speeds and they are the worst programmed transmission I have ever experienced and one failed in less than 20,000 miles. If you search the Malibu forums or the Acadia forum, you’ll see plenty of complaints there too, especially the trans programming.
As for the longevity; we’ll see. I put a lot of miles on a car and I’ll make a judgement call when the 60,000 mile power train warranty is close to up. But so far, I have no complaints with this car, other than the cheap interior and rock hard seat. The more likely scenario is that my butt will be tired from driving the Altima, before I need to worry about it’s drive train.
I won’t be suckered into extended warranties though. I’d rather save my money and spend it if it needs a trans, than spend it all upfront and not use it.
By the way, I’m not really trying to come off bashing GM, (as I know that’s close to home for you), I’m calling it the way it is from my experience, and I’m not alone. I like to reward good experiences and call out bad ones. No brand loyalty is considered. For example; I’m a Ford guy, but I’m not going for a Fusion. Same transmission…
I appreciate your consideration and I wasn’t making my point to smear Nissan by any means. I know that Nissan had a lot of trouble with the CVT in the Murano so perhaps things have worked out for the Altima. Here is a link you might be interested in:
http://www.autoblog.com/2009/11/17/psa-nissan-doubles-warranty-on-cvts-to-10-years-120-000-miles/
My view on this is from a service standpoint, not particularly brand specific but TCOA and Maintenance and Repairs. I am not anti technology by any means but I tend to follow the philosophy of KISS (Keep It Simple Stupid) and don’t fix it if it isn’t broke etc. People ask me almost every day why I keep my little Buick going mainly because the costs involved in keeping it going is extremely minimal, service is a breeze, and the tradeoff in old luxury versus new luxury is minimal for me as the primary driver. My point is is that cars are growing exponentially more complicated at the expense of styling and personality with only incremental marginal increases in performance.
It’s all good. I’m not married to Nissan either. For example, I would advise against buying a new model of any Nissan. They seem to have teething problems with new technology. As demonstrated by the extended warranty campaign you referenced. Unfortunately, my 2012 isn’t covered by that. Hopefully it’s because of the improvements made in the CVT since it’s introduction and not that Nissan is trying to limit the bleeding 🙂
I hear you and agree on the KISS principal. The problem I have though is that if I need a relatively comfortable car, that is as fuel efficient as it can be, and I’m buying new, it’s going to be a trade-off no matter what I buy. It’s just getting harder to follow the KISS principal and it’s kind of irrelevant which transmission it has, as I’m not going to rebuild it myself regardless.
And even with my bad experience with the Malibu, I still have my GM world card racking up unlimited points towards another GM. So I’ll have that big incentive to consider when I’m ready for another car.
The 6 speed in my Kia Sedona is quite pleasant. Shifts are very unobtrusive, and there is a notable lack of hunting for the right gear. In fact, it takes quite a bit of effort to detect shifts, and whether they are actually shifts or the torque converter locking. I have been quite happy with the unit from a driveability standpoint.
Does the Ultradrive in this use ATF-4 like the LH cars or not?
This body style 2001+ probably had the ATF+4. It supposedly retained proper shift characteristics up to 100k miles. I think on these 50k trans service is a better idea.
Thanks for the answer.
We’re on our forth C/GC/T&C, and never had a transmission problem with any of them.
The ’98 Caravan went 95K before being totaled. It was replaced with a ’98 GC with 98K – it had probably already had a transmission replacement, as there was silicone goop oozing out around the pan. Son Number Two still drives that van, which now has 265K (so the transmission has at least 170K on it with no problems – never did a flush or filter replacement, either).
Our 2006 GC was totaled by a lightning strike with only 20K or so (no problems with the transmission). The 2005 T&C we replaced it with had about 55K when we bought it, now at 137K, again, no transmission problems.
YMMV, of course.
Totalled by a lightning strike?!?
Do tell more!
Son Number Two had just gotten his permit and was driving with Wife and Son No. One from a nephew’s wedding Georgia to the Chicago area. Took a direct lightning hit in a heavy rain storm, but thought it was the semi next to them having a blowout at first (couldn’t figure out why all the sparks across the windshield).
Needless to say, the engine died and they coasted to a stop on the side of the road. Killed most of the electronics and blew out two tires – family was safe and sound, though (google Farraday Cage).
Insurance company thought they could repair it, but every time they turned the switch on to check something, another electronic system would fail, so they ended up totaling it out.
Google “minivan lightning strike” for a live action shot of another person’s van (not ours) getting hit in a similar fashion.
There has to be a joke in here somewhere about the chances of having multiple Chrysler vans without transmission problems vs. the chances of getting struck by lightning…
+1
I remember reading that one of the biggest killers of Ultradrives was that the torque converter lockup clutch didn’t engage fully, causing it to slip and burn out, and that someone had created a simple electronic circuit that would solve the problem. I just found it again:
http://www.allpar.com/fix/torque-converter.html
There was a linked page of fixes for common Ultradrive problems that would probably be of interest to people here:
http://www.allpar.com/fix/trans.html
I’ve never had a vehicle with the Ultradrive, but twice I’ve had shifting problems into 4th gear and lockup in my 1994 Dodge pickup. (Those are the only shifts controlled electronically in the 46RH transmission.) Both problems wound-up being electrical issues related to the throttle position sensor, which I ultimately diagnosed and repaired myself.
For one elusive problem I sought the advice of a transmission shop that was supposedly knowledgeable about Mopar transmissions. Their answer was “your trans probably needs to be rebuilt”. Overhauling the transmission seems to be the default answer to problems at a transmission shop. I bet lots of 46RH transmissions got overhauled because of a bad TPS.
They had some solenoid issues that usually set a check engine light and could be repaired quite easily, in fact we did a ton of those. There are many times when a trans problem is improperly diagnosed, when an electrical issue is to blame. Examples are shift solenoids, speed sensors, throttle position and mass air flow sensors. Fortunately, I worked in some excellent facilities where we got time to properly diagnose, and not just hose the customer for a rebuilt trans.
Bravo for yr honesty and acumen, Aristo!
’02 SWB SE Caravan here, 3.3 v6: 198k miles and just changed the filter, NO flush.
Where is that solenoid located, Aristo? Drop the pan? tks
They’re on the outside of the trans, they bolt onto the case. Often it’s dirty trans fluid that clogs up the solenoid and causes the problems. It’s a good idea to use dielectric grease on the connector to keep corrosion away.
Another point I should bring up is over the years the “ultradrive” problems have been addressed and built with better parts. Add to that some software reprogramming and in later years, it’s not as awful. It’s hard to shake a bad reputation though!
Sometimes our customers would request a rebuilt unit when the trans acted up because of the vehicle mileage or because they wanted a longer warranty, etc. For that we would just get a trans from a rebuild factory for the economics of it.
graci
If you can get thru 3 trans in normal use what is the point in using something so poorly designed as a taxi downtime is money,
Torque converter related issues are the #1 source of problems in most automatics historically. Even the THM200C most of it’s ills were directly or indirectly attributed to the torque converter.
Chrysler specs ATF+4 for all automatics from 727 on now regardless of age. When I serviced my 81 Imperial several years ago I refilled it with +4 probably not really necessary but the extra friction modifiers won’t hurt. ATP a supplier of transmission parts offers a specific Chrysler additive you can buy off the net for about $10-12 that works well. Originally the old 727 904 took Dex/Merc but with the introduction of the Ultradrive 7176 was introduced specific to that transmission. Some people topped off and refilled Ultradrives with old fluid causing problems. +4 came out around 2000 and superseded everything.
My 99 Eclipse had the Chrysler 4speed (you could tell shifting from P to R) but gave no trouble for 76k and one service. It seems you hear more trouble out of the minivans than the rest of the line.
There was a TSB on a work around for electrical issues splicing wires that set the TCM into a default mode that solved a lot of problems. Also many transmissions had ground strap problems.
I think you hear more trouble from the minivans due to being able to weigh them down so much with people and gear. Think about summer vacation- Mom, Dad, four kids with van loaded to the hilt, pulling the pop up camper in 90 degree heat. Repeat for many thousands of miles and that trans is being worked pretty hard. It’s just a theory, but I’ve seen plenty of that on the road.
Plus, the lwb versions weighed in at close to 5,000 pounds – close to what my 64 Imperial weighed. Lodda car to haul around, and that’s even before it gets loaded up with a family of 5 or 6 people.
What exactly was the cause of that distinctive sound when shifting from P to R? It’s like a buzz or a rattle. My parents’ ’90 Town & Country made this sound, and the ’00 300M they replaced it with made the exact same sound.
It is the shift valves opening and closing. It actually makes the noise anytime you upshift downshift or move from park or reverse, but you usually only hear it at idle because there are no road or engine noises.
It was the first transmission to shift gears without bands or springs using the solenoid pack and TCM to “sample” the driving habits and make periodic adjustments to adapt the transmission shifting characteristics to your most recent driving.
One thing I forgot to mention in my previous comment is that the TCM reset MUST be done whenever the fluid is drained from the transmission, even simply F&F service.
The easy way to reset the TCM, and everything else for that matter, is to disconnect both battery cables, tie the cables together, turn the key to ON (but not start), push the brake down 3/4 of the way for at least 5 minutes, turn key OFF, reattach the cables to the battery and go on at least a 20 miles drive with mixed conditions.
80K mile :O. OMG. I firmly believe it is a record. This is why we were always told “Old is Gold”. Old vehicles used to last longer than latest cars we have today and also they provided better service.