Advise: '96 Plymouth Voyager with 4 cyl. and 3 spped auto

I realize I've been all over the map on looking for my next or second car, but I think I have found a decent candidate that comes close to "doing it all".

For occasional hauling of bulky items as well as folks, in a somewhat compact package with almost reasonable fuel numbers, the latest find is a '96 SWB Plymouth Voyager with the 2.4 (150 horsepower) 4 cylinder and the 3 speed automatic. Van has low for the year miles (85K) and while it's fully loaded, it also has a low price for the physical condition...$2,900.

I know Chrysler's automatics, at least their automatic transaxles are not very long lived and looking at Edmund's tell me that these vans are either hard to kill or THE biggest lemons on the lot.

(Van will be driven in Florida (flat as a bowling alley) and loads while bulky won't be heavy.)

Should I take a longer look...at something else? Or are the 3 speed automatics more "robust" than the 4 speeds used in these vans?

Those 3-speeds should be the same family as the earlier A413 used in the 2.2 turbo cars. They are pretty tough. Vigo would have the full scoop.

Buy it, drive it to death, replace anything that breaks, repeat until you can't.

Junkyards are full of parts that fit.

My biggest "fear" is buying it and a week later the transmission "dies" and after investing in another transmission...that one dies, too. That's what I read on Edmunds, but no real details on which engine and transmission was not able to last more than 60K miles.

I know this topic has been covered before, but finding the comments that will tell me "yes, great transmission" or "RUN, that transmission is made of wet paper tissues" can't be located.

Might also be interested in what can be done to this engine...realizing the transmission is going to limit the effects of more horsepower.

I thought pretty much the same thing, but someone on here(might have been Vigo) corrected me, it's not a problem with the trannies so much as it is the asshats who drive the crap out of them and treat them poorly.

I'll just leave this here....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=78InPT4iqlw

^Also that.

Dude. The 3-speed is not the 4-speed.

The 3-speed is damned strong and stupidly simple to maintain. It sucks for mileage as it is either geared for around town or highway. The lockup versions are a bit better on the highway.

Lots of hop-up parts available for the transaxle and the engine.

The 4-speed is problematic (for idiot owners who use the wrong fluid, refuse to pay attention to things, etc)

offset to the poor gas mileage is that the 3 spd will at least do its damndest to make the car feel peppy.

turboswede wrote: Dude. The 3-speed is not the 4-speed. The 3-speed is damned strong and stupidly simple to maintain. It sucks for mileage as it is either geared for around town or highway. The lockup versions are a bit better on the highway. Lots of hop-up parts available for the transaxle and the engine. The 4-speed is problematic (for idiot owners who use the wrong fluid, refuse to pay attention to things, etc)

wasn't that about the time that the Chrysler minivans with the 4 speed trans had a problem with some sort of a pin or retainer in the differential breaking and taking out the trans case- with the fix being a $5 kit that you get from the Dodge Garage?

Heresay but here it is.

The fellow who does my auto trans work for me claimed that the FWD Chrysler automatics kept him in business for quite a while.

He didn't mention the model of transmission except to indicate that it was the one in my wife's 84 Voyager with the mitsu 2.4.

His words were: "That transmission is overworked, sitting in your driveway with the engine off"

That being said, my father had a later one (91-ish) as a work van full of fire prevention equipment and tools for about 5-6 years and it never had a problem with the transmission.

Shawn

Didn't mitsu use the same trans in the stuff they had that motor in as well? Don't recall hearing about trans issues on the expos and the like.

novaderrik wrote:

turboswede wrote: Dude. The 3-speed is not the 4-speed. The 3-speed is damned strong and stupidly simple to maintain. It sucks for mileage as it is either geared for around town or highway. The lockup versions are a bit better on the highway. Lots of hop-up parts available for the transaxle and the engine. The 4-speed is problematic (for idiot owners who use the wrong fluid, refuse to pay attention to things, etc)

wasn't that about the time that the Chrysler minivans with the 4 speed trans had a problem with some sort of a pin or retainer in the differential breaking and taking out the trans case- with the fix being a $5 kit that you get from the Dodge Garage?

Most of the FWD transaxles with open diffs have this issue if they are allowed to do one-wheel burnouts. Like say when stuck in snow/ice or when someone is being a hoon. Look at the VW 020 diff fix, or Neons, etc. I know it's very easy to spin one wheel in our FWD Highlander, so it's likely possible to grenade that as well if I don't pay attention.

The 4-speed AWD versions had a slightly different issue because the rear was driven off the passenger side of the differential and that added extra load,plus it was still an open differential.

Yes, the diff pin in the old Chrysler FWD autos LOVED to work it's way out and take out the case. The solution was a thin piece of steel and drilling and tapping a bolt hole to prevent it.

The biggest reason these units fail is either they are early models that fail because the factory failed at making them live or lack of maintenance.

The Mitsu's I know of used their own trans when bred into one of the DCX's nameplates. There was a F4A51 that kicked my ass for 4 days before giving up on it. berkeleying pieces of E36 M3.