2 year mark - 2007 Town and Country Touring-L

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Dec 8, 2006
Messages
10,389
Location
Illinois
It has been 2 years with the 2007 Town and Country Touring with Leather. This unit was purchased used at Tyson Chrysler-Dodge-Jeep-Ram in Joliet, IL (Good people to deal with, by the way).

It was a one-owner unit that had been sold there new, serviced there, and traded in there on a brand new Town and Country. It was 5 years old and had just 33,536 miles on it when we purchased it. Since it was dealer serviced, I was provided a list of all of the repairs that the dealership had performed on the van.

Fast forward to now, two years later. It now has 62,676 miles on it... just a few miles short of 15,000 miles per year.

Here's the list of repairs that is has needed in the past two years.

6/2012 - 41000 miles - Check engine light turns on, retrieved stored code, replaced EGR valve. $66.

8/2102 - 45100 miles - Set of Goodyear Assurance ComforTred tires (with WHITEWALLS!!!). $304 (installed).

5/2013 - 58300 miles - Replaced factory front rotors and brake pads. $89.

That's it.

I've changed the oil six times. I started out by changing it every 3000 miles (with Pennzoil yellow bottle), but have slowed down and now change it every 5000 miles using Pennzoil Semi-synthetic oil (the Dexos-approved 5w-30 flavor) and a Purolator Classic filter.

The factory Bridgestone Turanza tires weren't worn out... but the original owner had the tread on them siped, and they were incredibly noisy because of it. Just got tired of them.

Just took a short road trip in it last Monday. It ran down the interstate with the cruise set at 80mph flawlessly, with the front and rear A/C on, and rode every bit as good as the Buick Park Avenue that it replaced. Temperature in Indianapolis was in the mid-90's and humid.

Average mpg's over the past 2 years is coming in at 20.2 mpg per the on-board computer (rated 16/23). Not impressive, but I'm far from being disappointed, considering the 3.8 liter pushrod engine under the hood, and a 4 speed transmission (a drivetrain that Chrysler probably designed in the late 1980's).

062112183233.jpg
 
What the ratio of city/highway. Your about the middle which isn't bad. The engine isn't a child of the 80's. it was implemented in the early part of this century.
I read so much about poor Chrysler quality but in my own personal experience I just don't see it.
Nice van. I was considering that vintage once my girls van dies but that windstar just won't give up.
Thanks for posting.
 
Real Sharp! I have always like that gen of Chrysler T&C especially from 1996 onward. Though I have never owned one, I have rented many in the South West while on vacation and have driven them from NM, AZ, NV & CA. Love'em!
 
My buddy has a 95 Chrysler Mini Van (old body style) with the V6 and it's pushing 290k on the clock. He finally had to replace the original starter and one axle. He likes to go 15-18000 miles (mostly highway) between OCI running SuperTech synthetic - he does add a couple of quarts during the run. The engine is so quiet you can barely hear it. Chrysler makes good vans.
 
Actually,the 3.3/3.8 was under development since the mid 1980s.The 3.0 Mitsu was a stopgap (for 1987) until it was ready.There have been many changes to the 3.3/3.8,the most for 2001 when HP took a major jump.So,in reality,its a product of the 1980s..they even used 2.2 liter headbolts!
But thats no downer,the 2.8 GM became a 3.1 then a 3.4 and lived until the 21st century.The 3.8 Ford became a 4.2 and lived in pickups until 2004.The AMC Typhoon 6 started in the 60s and lived until the 4.0 took over in Wranglers (itself somewhat based on the Typhoon).
 
Looks new! Plus you've got the latest and greatest of the 4th gen. All the bugs worked out.

Have you done an ATF change or two?
 
Originally Posted By: silverrat
Have you changed the cabin filter?


It may not have one. Only the ones with the electronic HVAC had the cabin filter.

These can be super vans. We loved the heck out of our 2007. I wish ours held together like yours has. Great looking ride.
 
Originally Posted By: Clevy
What the ratio of city/highway. Your about the middle which isn't bad. The engine isn't a child of the 80's. it was implemented in the early part of this century.
I read so much about poor Chrysler quality but in my own personal experience I just don't see it.
Nice van. I was considering that vintage once my girls van dies but that windstar just won't give up.
Thanks for posting.


It sees more miles while under 45mph. than it does over 45mph.

And yes, it is an engine that was originally designed in the late 80's. It was designed and put into production during Lee Iaccoca's time at Chrysler. It was originally offered as a 3.3 liter unit in 1990, and then it was punched out and also offered as the 3.8 liter unit in 1991. It was used in the minivan shortly thereafter.

Regarding the perception of Chrysler quality (or lack thereof), there are only two Chrysler products that I'd be brave enough to own from 2007. One is a Chrysler/Dodge minivan, the other is the Ram pickup. I don't think I'd take a chance with any other 2007 Chrysler model.
 
Originally Posted By: silverrat
Have you changed the cabin filter?


Yes, it was something like $8 from Rock Auto. Changed it along with the first oil change.
 
Originally Posted By: JTK
Looks new! Plus you've got the latest and greatest of the 4th gen. All the bugs worked out.

Have you done an ATF change or two?


The transmission has never been touched, and it will stay that way until it dies. I'm not one to change ATF. My Dad never has... and my neighbor, who is a heavy equipment mechanic, doesn't change ATF in his vehicles either.

So, I guess it is an experiment in progress....
 
Originally Posted By: Hokiefyd
Originally Posted By: silverrat
Have you changed the cabin filter?


It may not have one. Only the ones with the electronic HVAC had the cabin filter.

These can be super vans. We loved the heck out of our 2007. I wish ours held together like yours has. Great looking ride.


Hokie has been a fantastic source of info for me, even since *before* I bought this one.

Thanks again, man!
 
One note... The whitewall Goodyear Assurance ComforTred tires are actually a size P225/60R-16 (think Buick Park Avenue and Mercury Grand Marquis).

The stock size for this van was a P215/65R-16, and I didn't think that the selection in that size really was all that great.

Since I'd been very pleased with the ComforTreds on the Park Avenue that this van replaced, I really wanted the same set on this van.

Since the dimensions between the two sizes were quite close, I put the P225/60's on, and am glad that I did. I like the slightly wider tire.
 
The guy that grooms my dog has a 2001 Grand Caravan with 305,000 miles on it, that he still uses as a daily driver.

He told me that there are weeks that he can put nearly 1000 miles on a vehicle between commuting five days a week, and going to a weekend dog show... so he can rack the miles up fairly quickly.

Just this year, he purchased a 2008 T&C Touring-L to take on the long trips to dog shows. It *only* has 100,000 miles on it, and to him, that's just "broken in".
 
Originally Posted By: mrsilv04
One note... The whitewall Goodyear Assurance ComforTred tires are actually a size P225/60R-16 (think Buick Park Avenue and Mercury Grand Marquis).

The stock size for this van was a P215/65R-16, and I didn't think that the selection in that size really was all that great.

Since I'd been very pleased with the ComforTreds on the Park Avenue that this van replaced, I really wanted the same set on this van.

Since the dimensions between the two sizes were quite close, I put the P225/60's on, and am glad that I did. I like the slightly wider tire.


You can go even larger than that. Personally, I think Chrysler under-sized the tires on these vans. The size on the van was actually a 215/65R16 (without the preceding P), with a 98 load index. The ones with 15" wheels came with 215/70R15 (without the preceding P), also with a 98 load index. One hint that the tires are marginal: Chrysler specifies the inflation pressure that gives the maximum weight-carrying capacity on an E-metric tire (36 psi).

Our Honda CR-V (which is at least 750 pounds lighter and likely with a lower center of gravity as well) comes with 225/65R17 tires with a 102 load index. That's an increase in load rating of 221 pounds per tire, or almost 1,000 pounds for the whole vehicle. Now, obviously you're not going to carry that much in a CR-V, but the tires are much more conservatively-sized on this vehicle. And I think it shows in the recommended inflation pressure: instead of setting them at 36 psi to achieve the maximum weight-carrying capacity, they're set at a more reasonable 30 psi.

Chrysler went to the P225/65R16 size in 2008, with an optional P225/65R17 (both with a 100 load index). The 3.3L and 3.8L are certainly capable of hauling the van around on slightly taller tires, and I think they would add some engineering margin on a 4th generation van. I think a 225/65R16 would ride better and handle better than the stock-sized tires, despite being taller.
 
Originally Posted By: mrsilv04
Originally Posted By: JTK
Looks new! Plus you've got the latest and greatest of the 4th gen. All the bugs worked out.

Have you done an ATF change or two?


The transmission has never been touched, and it will stay that way until it dies. I'm not one to change ATF. My Dad never has... and my neighbor, who is a heavy equipment mechanic, doesn't change ATF in his vehicles either.

So, I guess it is an experiment in progress....


Well that makes completely no sense. What do those engineers know about the recommended change intervals anyway!!??
crazy2.gif


I own 5 of these Chrysler minivans in a family business and I change the ATF once a year with the recommended fluid. While I believe the transmission is durable, it's one where you want to keep the fluid clean. Good luck with your experiment.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top