Hi folks, Is the transmission problem that has haunted dodge caravan for the past 10 years or so due to the front wheeldrive transmission being to light to pull the weight of the van? Also is there a transmission out there anywhere that would n0t have the same type problem, that would / could crossover to my 2000 and 1994 models.
151RUM
05-17-2007, 01:40 PM
I have the same question and courious to see any answers...LOL your not alone
mrbizness1
05-17-2007, 10:06 PM
Hi folks, Is the transmission problem that has haunted dodge caravan for the past 10 years or so due to the front wheeldrive transmission being to light to pull the weight of the van?
That same 4 speed trans is also in a few other Chrysler cars that have similar weight to the caravans. It could be that van owners use their vans like trucks and overload and abuse them. I see many of them on the road that are used like commercial vehicles for plumbers, and construction crews.
I work for a printing company and several customers use caravans to deliver printed flyers. They leave our place with the bumpers a few inches from the ground.
RickMN
05-18-2007, 01:00 AM
The early 90's models were really poorly designed. I think just about every one of them failed regardless of load. The later models have updates that make them more reliable. However, the two vans that I hear the most transmission complaints are Chrysler and Ford. Personally, I think the Ford tranny is a nightmare--just opinion. The Chrysler failures I think are fairly in line with industry averages when you consider that it's the best selling van out there and that the engines are fairly bullet-proof. My two cents.
mrbizness1
05-18-2007, 03:48 PM
The early 90's models were really poorly designed. I think just about every one of them failed regardless of load. The later models have updates that make them more reliable. However, the two vans that I hear the most transmission complaints are Chrysler and Ford. Personally, I think the Ford tranny is a nightmare--just opinion. The Chrysler failures I think are fairly in line with industry averages when you consider that it's the best selling van out there and that the engines are fairly bullet-proof. My two cents.
Many of the complaints on early 90's transmissions were because they were late in downshifting. Some even downshifted after the vehicle came to a complete stop which caused a bump feeling. After a while Chrysler programmed them to downshift sooner.
shelbydodgeimp
05-28-2007, 01:48 PM
The a604 was nice on paper, but in terms of everything else it was a nightmarish failure.
There is nothing else that bolts to the 3.3/3.8 transverse engines. The 2.7 5spd swap potential myth has been proven baseless. It doesn't matter what model has this trans, it WILL fail eventually- the question is how, when and why.
Most of the hard part failure problems were fixed, but it took Chrysler a good 10 yrs to remove all the design errors in these transmissions (such as "forgetting" to use differential pin stoppers, the rear carrier that liked to split in half- those shorts of things).
I will say that limp home mode is part of the reason why this trans has a bad rep, once people have an older beater van and it starts staying in 2nd- chances are they're gonna get rid of the van and have no idea its just a safeguard that means its time to do some diagnostic... it would not surprise me if most the 3.3/3.8 vehicles that end up in yards, do so because of limp mode and not necessarily an actual hard part failure.
Add to this all the shops that are clueless on what they're doing with a604s- shops that use dexron, shops that don't use all the updated parts in rebuilds, shops with rebuilds designed to just barely finish the warrenty period and die ( :cough cough : amco : cough :), etc. The people running around with 5, 6 trans rebuilds are fueled by misdiagnoses (assuming limp always = rebuild time), bad rebuilders, and from there- driver error (exaggerates any existing design problems).
IF you have the $$, you can make an a604 fairly reliable.
