Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Vans & Minivans Chrysler Town & Country/Dodge Grand Caravan Chrysler Town & Country and Dodge Grand Caravan 2005+
1422 messages, Last post on Sep 25, 2009 at 8:55 AM
You are in the Chrysler Town & Country/Dodge Grand Caravan Forum. Your Host is Karens
|
|
|---|---|
|
Replying to: shipo (Jan 31, 2006 2:17 pm) |
|
|
Replying to: frogger123 (Jan 31, 2006 7:50 pm) As for "thinner" oils, it depends upon what is causing your consumption issues (albeit issues that many a VW and Cadillac owner wishes they had). If it is simply oil making it past the valve guides, then the thinner the oil when hot (the second number in the oil spec), the more you're likely to use. That having been said, if the problem is your oil rings, my suspicion is that the thinner oil may actually be better able to work its way in there and clean that gunk out. If you do decide to convert to a fully synthetic oil, switch back and forth between 5W-30 and 0W-40 for a few oil changes and see if you notice any difference. A quick note about Quaker State oil: Back in the mid to late 1970s, I used to be the "go to guy" at my college for my fellow students who were driving old beaters that needed a new engine. Dumb though it was, I would overhaul any I6 engine from the Big 3 for $100 plus parts, and any V8 for $175 (Chevy Vegas and them furrin thangs was extra), and as such, I made a fair amount of money and saw the insides of lots of engines. The engines that I hated tearing down the most were those that had been run on a steady diet of "Pennsylvania Grade Crude", meaning Quaker State, Pennzoil, Wolf's Head and a few others that escape me for the moment. Why? Two reasons, 1) because of how much gooey crap was inside the engine, and 2) because of how said gooey crap smelled. Yuk, barf! Is Quaker State et. all still "Pennsylvania Grade Crude"? Don't know, don't care, I simply won't use it. As for what type of driving uses the most oil, our older van (a 1998 GC Sport 3.8) spent the first half of its life as a bus-station hack and maybe only got out on the highway every other week or so. Once we moved up here to New Hampshire (from the NYC metro area), it started spending easily three quarters of its time on the highway. With all of that said, I haven't really seen any correlation between average speed and oil consumption. In fact, last summer I drove it from just north of Boston to Chicago to Manhattan and then back to the Boston area. I drove nearly three thousand miles at an average speed of 72 mph (per the trip computer), which meant that I spent lots of time north of 80 mph, and my oil consumption didn't seem to change at all. Best Regards, Shipo |
|
|
We are a family with two cars. Until recently, the two cars were a 2005 Ford Focus ZX3 hatchback with a stickshift, and a 2005 Honda CR-V with a 5 speed automatic transmission and a 2.4 liter 4 cylinder engine. In November of 2005, we traded in the hatchback on a bigger hatchback – a 2006 Dodge Caravan SE, with no options and thus the 4 cylinder 2.4 liter engine. Although the lack of power windows and power door locks, and manual side mirrors, is a little spartan these days, I grew up on cars like these and find the presence of air conditioning, good upholstery, and carpeting plenty of frosting on the cake. The rest, as my dad used to say, is for Cadillac owners and not practical people (he never met an accessory that didn’t eventually break down). The big question gnawing at me when I switched to the Caravan, was whether a 4 cylinder – the lone surviving 4 cylinder in a minivan – would be strong enough to propel it. To keep up with traffic, including freeway merges. And to haul a reasonably sized cargo – not 7 adults and their overseas luggage (unrealistic, get the 6 cylinder!), but at least four “old fashioned” (not fat!) adults and light luggage. The answer afater 4,500 miles of driving it in all conditions, including mountain and snow, is – yes. It isn’t fast, but it’s adequate. It used to be that the CR-V felt considerably slower than the Focus ZX3. Now the CR-V is top dog, it is considerably faster than the Caravan! But other than the subjective difference in pick-up, the Caravan keeps up with traffic just fine, and it is extremely quiet at high speeds. The only negative the typical driver will notice, is that there is a fair amount of engine roar if you have to get on the throttle in a short freeway merge situation (in other words, run it up to 50 mph in second). For city driving, the 4 cylinder is definitely more than adequate, since the gearing and throttle tip-in are set up for good off the line performance up to 35 mph. I am getting 23.8 mpg based on a 35 mile (each way) commute to work via a fast flowing freeway, with only some slow and go for a couple of miles on the trip home. On roadtrips (gas up, get on the freeway, get off to gas up, drive some more on the freeway, gas up again etc. with no significant) I have hit as high as 25 mpg. So this is one of those rare new cars that comes close to its freeway rating (even those “highway” on the EPA cycle is more “rural” than the modern 75 mph or faster interstate trips). While the SE can be had with a power package, or a V-6, for years Dodge has been using this entry level van as an advertising tool to get shoppers onto their lot. They list less than $100 over $19,000, but often go on sale in dealer ads for less than $15,000, or even less than $14,000. The lowest I have ever seen them is for $13,500, and when I saw that, I had to buy one. At least in California, what they advertise, they have to sell, and the dealer had 7 to choose from. Although this base model has the grey polyurethane bumpers (the same plastic used on the Honda Element), I was able to choose a darker color van which hides, very well, the fact that this model has unpainted bumpers. I’m not zipping around other cars anymore, and I’m not getting 31 mpg anymore, but the automatic is very convenient, the Caravan is incredibly quiet, and when I load up family and friends for a long drive, I am probably getting one of the best “miles per passenger” ratings out there. I highly recommend the 4 cylinder Caravan (at least 2006 and later, since they cleaned up emissions to match passenger car standards in 2006).
|
|
|
Replying to: frogger123 (Jan 31, 2006 7:50 pm) "Does this Forum think that Castrol is one of the best Dino oils?" Who knows? Once upon a time, Castrol, as a European oil, was one of the few oils whose cans indicated it passed obscure European and Japanese test requirements that were more severe (due to overhead cam designs and higher rpm) than those for American cars (due to cam-in-block ohv designs and lower rpm). At that time I ran Castrol exclusively. Since then, small, high revving, overhead cam engine designs have become common from American manufacturers, and oils from major refiners have become much better. In particular, some large refineries, like Chevron/Texaco and Conoco Philips (although C-P still had conventional motor oils), have implemented some pretty advanced refining techniques (hydrocracking - see here: http://baseoil.conocophillips.com/products/grp2_base_oils/index.htm ). Chevron invented and licenses hydrocracking and "isodewaxing" and calls its resulting base stock (the basic oil to which additives are blended) Isosyn and has this to say about it: "ISOSYN™ base stocks, ... rival synthetics in critical engine tests." Chevron explains Group I, II, II+, III, and III+ here: http://www.chevron.com/products/prodserv/BaseOils/gf4_faq.shtml What is very interesting to note, is that Syntec, Castrol's line of "fully synthetic" motor oil, is a Group III oil sold at $5.00 or so a bottle, but in actuality it only exceeds the performance of Type II+ oil (Chevron Supreme) by a tiny margin (the intrinsic viscocity index of III oils is slightly better than II+ oils). Yet Chevron Supreme is only 1.50 a bottle, or even less at Costco. General consensus on other user groups is that Castrol GTX no longer rules the roost, but has incredible marketplace momentum since it started out as one of the best oils. Castrol is now owned by BP, British Petroleum, which produces some of the most advanced Group V base stocks in the world; thus the rave reviews on German Castrol. One other factor to consider is the obscure Chrysler MS6395L specification for the oils to be used in its cars. This is in addition to the grade requirement and any SAE or ILSAC starburst requirement in your manual (in my manual, I could find the MS6395L requirment, but the SAE and ILSAC requirements were missing! maybe the Chrysler requirement includes them). The following oils that I know of satisfy the Chrysler specification: Mobil 1 5-30 (not the Extended Performance version); Chevron Supreme 5-30; Havoline 5-30; Castrol GTX 5-30; Castrol GTX 5-30 Start Up. FWIW, in the manual for my 2006 Caravan, Chrysler has shifted radically away from encouraging longer oil change intervals. I owned a 1999 Dodge Neon, 2002 Neon, 2004 PT Cruiser, and finally this minivan. Oil change intervals used to be 7,500 miles, except severe service, which was NARROWLY defined. Now, the maximum is 6,000 miles, and severe service (3,000 mile changes) is BROADLY defined, to the point where Chrysler adds a note that "most drivers fall into one of the severe categories." Thus the reason I use Mobil 1 - it has the most stable (Group IV) base stock, and the best additive package, and Exxon Mobil's FAQ guarantees its perfomance up to the car maker's maximum oil change interval, unless the car is driven according to Exxon Mobil's definition of severe service - which really is severe service, not the whimpy DC version. I don't want to live in the dealer's waiting room, since I drive a lot, but do want to protect my vehicles, and Mobil 1 seems like the best bet for full protection with the convenience of 6,000 mile oil change intervals. |
|
|
This is my last post on oil, since this isn't an oil forum. However, the original post by frogger123 was based on consuming a quart of oil every 3,000 miles in his 6 cylinder Caravan, and what impact (if any) that might have on his catalytic converter. Here is what Chevron says: "What are the drivers behind GF-4? "The simple answers are tougher Emissions and Fuel Economy standards mandated by the U. S. Government. Automotive OEM's need better fuel economy to meet Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFÉ) limits. They also need their catalytic converters to provide reduced emissions for 120,000 miles. Higher quality base oils are an important part of the solution to GF-4." and "Why do emission regulations impact lubricants? "There is no engine test that measures emission system stability, but the OEM's have data showing that sulfur and phosphorus are poisons for catalytic converters and must be limited. Thus, in GF-4 oils sulfur is limited to 0.5%, maximum, in 0W- and 5W- engine oils and 0.7%, maximum in 10W- engine oils. Phosphorus is limited to 0.08%. This restricts the amount of zinc dialkyldithiophosphate, the workhorse anti-oxidant and anti-wear agent, which can be used in engine oils, which in turn, may restrict the amount of Group I oil in GF-4 blends." Obviously, using a quart of oil in 3,000 miles is going to expose the catalytic converter, over a long period of time, to more contaminants than with an engine that uses less oil. Also obvious is that the new SM grade oils will contain fewer contaminants than a non-SM oil (there are a few non SM, non GF4 oils available for passenger car use - Mobil 1 Extended Performance, because it NEEDS those extra antiwear additives to go the extra distance, and Shell Rotell T Synthetic, because as a dual purpose oil, diesel and passenger car, it needs extra antiwear additives to protect in the punishing diesel environment). Does it matter when replacement aftermarket converters are now only a couple of hundred dollars? Is 120,000 of service (formerly 70,000 miles) from a converter reasonable to expect? Have converters been failing in large numbers so far? I guess when it comes down to it, as an individual, I don't want to chase the last fractional mile per gallon at the expense of engine wear and tear, nor do I need an absurdly long catalytic converter life at the expense of engine wear and tear. That is probably one of the reasons, in addition to being able to tout an extended drain interval oil, that Mobil 1 has taken the amazing step of selling an oil (Extended Performance) that doesn't satisfy either the SM or GF4 requirements...let's see if they can survive in a market place that demands conformity. Meanwhile, on Aisle 3, consumers everywear are buying 10-40 oil (the most popular in parts shops etc.) and dealers are installing 10-30 instead of 5-30....which is why I carry in my own oil, no matter what vehicle I own. More and more owners are doing the same. |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: micweb (Feb 01, 2006 11:09 am) |
|
|
Replying to: frogger123 (Feb 01, 2006 2:33 pm) As to seating the rings, my understanding is that this is done, or not done, in the first 600 miles of driving - there are, as I recall, some crosshatching on the factory cylinder walls to help them scuff in. Even if your 24,000 miles is a typo (did you mean 2,400?) the rings are probably no longer an issue; but "driving hard once in a while" and varying speeds during the first critical 600-1,000 miles are definitely a good idea. I personally try to avoid full throttle until I hit 3,000 miles, but will use up to 3/4 throttle to hit high rpm, once the car is FULLY warmed up. I have also noticed engines continuing to break in over the first 10,000 miles, so something is definitely going on even after the first 600-1,000 miles, and long term car tests in the magazines often show performance increasing (not decreasing) as their test vehicles approach 15,000- 30,000 miles. I guess the total break-in process is a lot longer than we think, but at least our ability - as drivers - to harm the vehicles is a lot less after the first 600-1,000 miles.
|
|
|
Replying to: micweb (Feb 01, 2006 4:46 pm) Curious as to anyones thoughts on reliability with Caravans(or any van)that have been rentals and are usually sold to the public at around 20,000 miles. Much is said about proper "break in", yet usually people(myself  ) who rent autos are pretty hard on them from the get go(i.e frequent and heavy throttle, usually long trips at a constant high speed)...or as some say "they get ragged out" Keeping this in mind, it seems to be a bit risky in buying a rental.
|
|
|
Replying to: frogger123 (Feb 01, 2006 2:33 pm) Regarding your rings, my bet is that the compression rings are fully seated and there is nothing more that you can do with them shy of pulling the motor and rebuilding it (not that I'm suggesting that, it sounds like they're doing just fine). When I was mentioning your rings earlier it was in reference to your oil rings, and they don't "seat" in the conventional sense. They are however very suceptible to getting cruded up, and that means that they aren't scavenging the oil off the cylinder wall as effectively as they should. Given the relatively frequent oil changes that your van has had I'd be a little surprised if you had an oil ring problem, in spite of the Quaker State oil that has been used. Then again, maybe that stuff really is that bad. To bring this discussion full circle, I simply don't think you have anything to worry about with regards to your oil consumption. My bet is that if you keep your van properly maintained, you'll see well beyond the north side of 100,000 miles as still won't see your oil consumption drop to the point of concern (i.e. 1 quart per 1,000 miles). Best Regards, Shipo
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: shipo (Feb 01, 2006 6:37 pm) |
|
You are here:
Forums
Vans & Minivans Chrysler Town & Country/Dodge Grand Caravan Chrysler Town & Country and Dodge Grand Caravan 2005+
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
2010 Chrysler Town and Country
2010 Dodge Grand Caravan
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
