Last post on Aug 02, 2012 at 3:11 PM
You are in the Chrysler Pacifica Maintenance & Repair
What is this discussion about?
Chrysler Pacifica, Oil
#124 of 211 Can anyone say, "Class action lawsuit"?
Jan 07, 2010 (3:18 pm)
I am Sooo glad I got rid of my 2005 Pacifica 3.5 as the engine oil consumption was 1 qt of Mobil 1 per 1000 miles, and this is completely unacceptable for a modern, well made engine. The net result would have been engine damages, exhaust system damage, and extraordinary costs... I sold off at 45K miles back to my dealer in place of a new 2008 T&C, he got stuck with a vehicle he couldn't sell for more than the trade value, and I got a decent engine and ride that so far has had small issues, not these large issues. I can't see buying another Chrysler product under the present company, that is sad...
#125 of 211 Re: Can anyone say, "Class action lawsuit"? [qpower]
Jan 07, 2010 (5:44 pm)
I am happy to have the 4.0 Liter, 6-speed combo in the 2008 Pacifica. These are still production products in Chrysler's present line. I am also happy to have the lifetime powertrain warranty. I would not own anything other than an '07 or '08 Pacifica with this powertrain combo and the lifetime warranty. Everyone else, good luck!
#126 of 211 final comment before changing cars
Jan 08, 2010 (5:47 am)
From the comments in this forum, I've concluded that the PAC pre-mature oil consumption problem seems to be with the 3.5 L, and not the 4.0 L. In fact, Chrysler advised me in December that I cannot replace my damaged short block (cylinders scorched) as Chrysler is no longer selling it anymore; I have to buy the long block instead (I think they are referring to the 4.0 L). Anyways, if you have a 3.5 L that is pre-maturally consuming oil, I suggest that you get rid of it ASAP as you are probably hedding for major trouble. Unfortunately, I don't have the time to lead a class action (although I firmly believe we have a strong case) so I will just have to sit on it and accept what has happended to me.
Signed, another lost Chrysler customer for life......
ps: trust me, I will also make sure that everyone I know will be well advised of how Chrsyler has handled this situation.
#127 of 211 difference between short and long block
Jan 08, 2010 (11:56 am)
These are terms within the car industry for the difference between selling you the engine block only with its built-in internal parts, stripped of all external components needed by an engine in chassis, like the accessories that hang off it, or a long block, which is essentially a complete engine ready to be dropped into place on motor mounts and driven away after set-up.
It is bull__it... that's why I got rid of the car, which was the best choice I ever made with a car!
Sorry for your loss, pacman2009 - whoever gets on the class-action bandwagon, please count me in!!
#128 of 211 Re: difference between short and long block [qpower]
Jan 12, 2010 (11:20 am)
Thanks for the clarification with respect to the short vs long block. I also decided to sell my PAC, just like you have done and just like many others in this forum will be doing. If anyone decides on organizing a class action, please count me in. Good luck to everyone in this forum discussion.
Cheers from Canada.
#129 of 211 2007 Chrysler Pacifica Touring
Jan 13, 2010 (5:52 am)
I too own a Pacifica. I can tell all of you the 2007 is no different. I also have had oil problems and just had a transmission replaced. I also have a noise in the front end that don't go away. They told me the oil consumption is normal. They also several times said they could find nothing wrong with the tranny before they had to replace it. They also had to fix my transfer case already. I was told the day I got my car back that another Chrysler Pacifica 2007 same as mine came in the day before with the same problem, and needed a tranny. One of the worse things they could have done was put a cap on the fluid holder so a comsumer cannot check their own fluid. Although my car had just been checked and low on fluid according to the dealer and refilled just 5 weeks prior to my transmission going. I really think chrysler messed up on these cars and should be held accountable.
#130 of 211 Re: 2007 Chrysler Pacifica Touring [cinkiss2000]
Jan 13, 2010 (9:37 am)
It appears these issues are more with the All-Wheel-Drive version of the Pacifica than the Front-Wheel-Drive. Please differentiate which version you have when posting. The AWD version seems to put more stress on the drive-train components. There seems to be a lot of Canadian posters here with problems related to their weather extremes. I have never had a problem with my '05 and '08 versions of the FWD Pacifica here in St. Louis where the weather isn't as extreme and mine is garage kept.
#131 of 211 Re: 2007 Chrysler Pacifica Touring [jtg61]
Jan 13, 2010 (10:38 am)
I live in Montreal (Canada) and I drive an AWD, however I doubt if it makes any difference with respect to pre-mature engine oil consumption - note that this section of the forum concerns oil consumption issues only. I do also have serious suspension problems with my PAC, probably related to my AWD, however I will post these comments in another section of this forum, so that others with similar suspension issues may follow. Cheers from the far north.
#132 of 211 Blown 3.5 engine
Jan 29, 2010 (5:20 am)
My 3.5 liter Pacifica spun a bearing. Low mileage with proper maintance. It does seem, now that I think about it, that I had to add oil on sever ocassions. Never got more than a qt low. The engine always seemed weak on the highway/passing situations.
I heard this particular engine is weak and that there have been many problems however I can not find data online to back it up, only word of mouth. Any one have facts and numbers on this problem?
#133 of 211 Re: oil problem [pacman2009]
Feb 11, 2010 (7:14 pm)
I am so glad I looked for others who have had the same issues we're currently having with our 2005 3.5L Pacifica. We were informed last week that our engine needs to be replaced completely because of damage due to "the engine being run void of oil". Chrysler has been completely uncooperative as have two Minneapolis Chrysler dealerships.
Has anyone pursued a class action lawsuit against Chysler related to the oil consumption problems discussed in these posts? Even the dealer mechanics agree that a 5 year old vehicle shouldn't need a complete engine replacement. If anyone has tried a class action lawsuit and failed, could you please tell me what the reasoning was?