- Joined
- Feb 5, 2023
- Messages
- 244
Okay, going to address the misinformation here.
1. The Chrysler 3.5 all in all is a solid engine.
It is loosely based on the 3.3 l V6 just as the problematic 2.7 was loosely based on the 3.5. the 2.7 has a timing chain driven water pump and a lower deck design with poor ventilation. The 3.5 has a traditional dry timing belt driven water pump and has better ventilation. My family has had 4 of these engines and they are gentle on oil and if maintained decently they have none of the problems the 2.7 are famous for. The second generation 3.5 is an interference engine.
2. The Journey and the Patriot are based on a Mitsubishi Lancer platform. Having said that the transmissions are different as the Patriot had a Jatco CVT initially with later models around 2014 having a Hyundai 6 speed optional. The Journey has the 2.4 world engine paired with the 4 speed 41TE(S) and the 3.5 version has the 6 speed 62TE which is based on the 41TE.
From here, I will share food for thought. Around 2011, FCA refreshed pretty much everything. The interior quality took a noticeable improvement from here. I don't have extensive experience with the Journey but I do have experience with the pre 2011 and post 2011 minivan. The pre 2011 had break issues and the developed a fuel smell on the interior. It's possible that this particular van was a random lemon but these issues have not been duplicated in the 13 and newer models my family owned (3 in total) none of these problems reappeared and the one we have at least twice the mileage on. Rental Chargers from that era varied. One had electrical issues with the cruise control while another one was fine. I tend to be reluctant towards 07-10 models Lancer based models because of the financial crisis and it's impact on Chrysler. I own a 13 200 with the 3.6, it has a few minor glitches but it is okay at 125k miles. I know a couple people who had the Pacifica crossover which was also one of the first models to use the 62TE starting with the 2007 models. One traded it in at 130 k miles because of wanting better fuel economy and not wanting to pay for the timing belt water pump change on the 4.0 (enlarged 3.5) another had about 118 k miles before they traded it in. From my recollection it was trouble free but she wanted something newer and more fuel efficient. So all I can say is I don't know any 200 k plus examples but I don't know if exhaustive list of failures either of the early versions of the 62te. I know one example of a 62TE transmission failure at 100k on a post '11 minivan but whether it's because their mechanic used the wrong fluid or they neglected it or bad luck I can't confirm. I have less anxiety over a 62TE than other transmissions from that era like the dry dual clutch used by Ford where consistently everyone has to have clutches replaced every 30k miles. As rough as they can shift it doesn't slip at a dead stop or shift flare like our 6F50 11 Taurus did but our 09 Taurus never did that even after 249 k miles or our 15 Taurus in its short life. You can get a good one or a bad one of anything. On the topic of Mazdas with the 3.7 be aware of the timing chain driven water pump very expensive to replace. They can either run forever like our 09 Taurus did with the same engine family or it could go prematurely.
Good luck.
1. The Chrysler 3.5 all in all is a solid engine.
It is loosely based on the 3.3 l V6 just as the problematic 2.7 was loosely based on the 3.5. the 2.7 has a timing chain driven water pump and a lower deck design with poor ventilation. The 3.5 has a traditional dry timing belt driven water pump and has better ventilation. My family has had 4 of these engines and they are gentle on oil and if maintained decently they have none of the problems the 2.7 are famous for. The second generation 3.5 is an interference engine.
2. The Journey and the Patriot are based on a Mitsubishi Lancer platform. Having said that the transmissions are different as the Patriot had a Jatco CVT initially with later models around 2014 having a Hyundai 6 speed optional. The Journey has the 2.4 world engine paired with the 4 speed 41TE(S) and the 3.5 version has the 6 speed 62TE which is based on the 41TE.
From here, I will share food for thought. Around 2011, FCA refreshed pretty much everything. The interior quality took a noticeable improvement from here. I don't have extensive experience with the Journey but I do have experience with the pre 2011 and post 2011 minivan. The pre 2011 had break issues and the developed a fuel smell on the interior. It's possible that this particular van was a random lemon but these issues have not been duplicated in the 13 and newer models my family owned (3 in total) none of these problems reappeared and the one we have at least twice the mileage on. Rental Chargers from that era varied. One had electrical issues with the cruise control while another one was fine. I tend to be reluctant towards 07-10 models Lancer based models because of the financial crisis and it's impact on Chrysler. I own a 13 200 with the 3.6, it has a few minor glitches but it is okay at 125k miles. I know a couple people who had the Pacifica crossover which was also one of the first models to use the 62TE starting with the 2007 models. One traded it in at 130 k miles because of wanting better fuel economy and not wanting to pay for the timing belt water pump change on the 4.0 (enlarged 3.5) another had about 118 k miles before they traded it in. From my recollection it was trouble free but she wanted something newer and more fuel efficient. So all I can say is I don't know any 200 k plus examples but I don't know if exhaustive list of failures either of the early versions of the 62te. I know one example of a 62TE transmission failure at 100k on a post '11 minivan but whether it's because their mechanic used the wrong fluid or they neglected it or bad luck I can't confirm. I have less anxiety over a 62TE than other transmissions from that era like the dry dual clutch used by Ford where consistently everyone has to have clutches replaced every 30k miles. As rough as they can shift it doesn't slip at a dead stop or shift flare like our 6F50 11 Taurus did but our 09 Taurus never did that even after 249 k miles or our 15 Taurus in its short life. You can get a good one or a bad one of anything. On the topic of Mazdas with the 3.7 be aware of the timing chain driven water pump very expensive to replace. They can either run forever like our 09 Taurus did with the same engine family or it could go prematurely.
Good luck.
