Joseph James
Senior Member
Thinking of getting one as a work car until I finish floor work in the Fury. Any opinions on these cars?
LH Platform opinions?
- Thread starter Joseph James
- Start date
Had a 96 Intrepid, 3.3L and have a 2002 300M 3.5L now. I loved/love them both. The LHs where second to none, the peak of Chrysler's post k-car resurgence. My only recommendation would be to avoid the 2.7L, I can't speak to the 3.2L but the 3.3 and 3.5 were great engines IMO.
The first years of production of the 3.3 had some issues with the valve train breaking the pedestals off the head. That was fixed and overall these are a very reliable engine. 3.5 is mostly a larger bore copy of the 3.3. These(3.3) are timing chain engines not belts(3.5 belt), so that is an added plus. Properly maintained, these engines should be good for about 200k, although the valve guides sometimes go before that.
Dave
Dave
Last edited:
Be sure to check the transmission fluid for discoloration or burnt smell. Transmission is the weak point on the Intrepid. The transmission was updated about 2004 and was much more reliable.
Dave
Dave
I really liked them when they were new. Very ground-breaking in many respects AND influenced a good many GM products which came out later. The Olds Intrigue, to be specific, in feel and general demeanor. Funny how the 2000 LeSabre's suspension became more "LH like" in "decreased bounce", by observation.
The LHS was my rent car of choice, from Dollar, for years. Then the later 300M. Plus an Intrepid or two, with a Concorde or two, also.
When the last-gen Buick Park Avenue came out, I went to a consumer ride/drive event. Of course, one of the competitors we would drive for comparison was a bench seat LHS. First car I drove was a base Park Avenue. When we got to the low speed slalom, the product guy riding with me said "Target speed is 20mph. Just drive through the cones and I'll watch your speed for you." So, when I got to 20mph, it understeered and I was mowing down cones. Next was the upgraded suspension/supercharged Ultra. Started a bit "hot" and was mowing down cones by the second one. At about 23mph. That's when I discovered the one issue with GM's MagnaSteer that NOBODY had ever mentioned. The magnets could not change fast enough to maintain a steady boost, resulting in the same result as "pump catch" where the steering boost would lapse during turning the steering wheel. Did the fwd Continental. Soft ride, easy steering, and worse understeer than the PA, which was expected. THEN came the bench seat LHS. Went through at 25mph, drive around ALL cones, no problem! I smiled, but didn't tell him how much seat time I'd had in those cars. LOL
One of the weekly, import-oriented magazine had tested a PA ULtra and was impressed with the nandling in the hills around Los Angeles. A month or so later, they tested an LHS. Thought it was equaling what the PA Ultra had done, UNTIL they looked at their speed and they were driving it just as easily, but over 10mph faster. No drama.
The LH cars are geared to they use a bit more rpm than similar GM cars do. But it all works fine and the 3.5L was happy everywhere. Cruising through residential areas or on the Interstate at 75mph (where it would usually average about 26mpg when new, more mpg with more miles. The aerodynamics on the Concorde are a bit better, which resulted in about 27.5 on Interstate runs (with the 3.5L).
I like the fact the engine sits in them "right", rather than sideways. The 3.5L will provide good performance, even with a bit less than 220 horsepower. The 300M (2nd gen 3.5L) has more.
The car is designed such that in order to install rear struts, you have to remove the rear seat assy to get to some of the nuts/bolts. I believe the 300M is not that way, with a different rear suspension cradle/mount?
The many LHSs I rented would usually get about 26mph on Interstate runs, average, but would get more like 30 with more miles on them. The 300Ms would do (on the trip computer) 29-30 at 60mph (on a specific freeway section with no wind and completely flat. BUT it only dropped to 27mph at 90mph. Great aerodynamics, I suspect, as engine rpm was not that much greater. Great, all-around cars, except . . .
My mother's '95 New Yorker (LHS with a split bench and specific interior pattern, similar to a '69 New Yorker pattern) started to have a slight issue with the BCM. First I noticed a slight delay in the wipers reacting to input on the "delay" function. Later, the factory alarm would re-energize by itself. Made the horn honk for a split second longer than just a chirp. I would re-set it and it might happen again, later. But sometimes it would turn the light on and the battery run-down protection would kick in. Which I'd notice when I started it the next day. Sometimes, it'd kill the battery. Which is when I discovered the Interstate battery the dealer put in was over 7 years old. A new one didn't alter anything.
Eventually, things stopped working, one by one, until the cluster didn't work, nor did the a/c system. About that time, she stopped driving. I'd just remove a certain fuse to keep the battery "up" overnight. Finally just unhooked the battery altogether. That was at about 95K miles. It has sat every since.
As to the 2.7L, it is a good "drive-around" engine, from my experiences. It will seem "low power" at lower rpms, BUT if you hit WOT at the right road speed to get a downshift into 2nd, you'd better have it aimed where you want to go. Otherwise, "adequate" with no real mpg advantage, except in the EPA ratings.
On her's the outside mode door actuator started to click and not change from outside to inside air. Have to take the instrument panel loose to get to it. Needed a power lock actuator on one of the rear doors. Power antenna needed a new mast (an easy fix). The small town dealer (whose wife had it for her demo) advocated for a new timing belt at about 60K miles, which was about 6 years at that time, so it was done. Another time, it needed a new relay for the engine cooling fan, and somehow they did something that put the trans into limp-in mode. Just as with other computers, it was fixed when the car was re-started. BUT in the process, I had a local trans shop (whom I've know for many years AND likes Chrysler stuff) to a check on the trans. That's when I found that clutch friction material wear is determined by how long it takes for the circuit to "apply". Even at 90+K miles, it was still at the bottom of the spec.
As with many later-model rack and pinion steering cars, the outer tie-rod ends have rubber isolation in them. With use, the steering can get sloppy, making an noise like a loose shock absorber up front used to. GM uses something like that, too, as do many Fords. Moog has a replacement that's better.
There is a Chrysler 300M Enthusiasts Club, with an extensive website. Not to forget www.dodgeintrepid.net, which covers first and second gen LH cars.
Similar GM cars might ride and drive a bit smoother, but the LACK the "athletic, light-on-its-feet" feel all of the LH cars have. Plus a firm, but comfortable, ride.
Get a FSM to really appreciate all of the design and electronics that went into those cars.
Shop well!
CBODY67
The LHS was my rent car of choice, from Dollar, for years. Then the later 300M. Plus an Intrepid or two, with a Concorde or two, also.
When the last-gen Buick Park Avenue came out, I went to a consumer ride/drive event. Of course, one of the competitors we would drive for comparison was a bench seat LHS. First car I drove was a base Park Avenue. When we got to the low speed slalom, the product guy riding with me said "Target speed is 20mph. Just drive through the cones and I'll watch your speed for you." So, when I got to 20mph, it understeered and I was mowing down cones. Next was the upgraded suspension/supercharged Ultra. Started a bit "hot" and was mowing down cones by the second one. At about 23mph. That's when I discovered the one issue with GM's MagnaSteer that NOBODY had ever mentioned. The magnets could not change fast enough to maintain a steady boost, resulting in the same result as "pump catch" where the steering boost would lapse during turning the steering wheel. Did the fwd Continental. Soft ride, easy steering, and worse understeer than the PA, which was expected. THEN came the bench seat LHS. Went through at 25mph, drive around ALL cones, no problem! I smiled, but didn't tell him how much seat time I'd had in those cars. LOL
One of the weekly, import-oriented magazine had tested a PA ULtra and was impressed with the nandling in the hills around Los Angeles. A month or so later, they tested an LHS. Thought it was equaling what the PA Ultra had done, UNTIL they looked at their speed and they were driving it just as easily, but over 10mph faster. No drama.
The LH cars are geared to they use a bit more rpm than similar GM cars do. But it all works fine and the 3.5L was happy everywhere. Cruising through residential areas or on the Interstate at 75mph (where it would usually average about 26mpg when new, more mpg with more miles. The aerodynamics on the Concorde are a bit better, which resulted in about 27.5 on Interstate runs (with the 3.5L).
I like the fact the engine sits in them "right", rather than sideways. The 3.5L will provide good performance, even with a bit less than 220 horsepower. The 300M (2nd gen 3.5L) has more.
The car is designed such that in order to install rear struts, you have to remove the rear seat assy to get to some of the nuts/bolts. I believe the 300M is not that way, with a different rear suspension cradle/mount?
The many LHSs I rented would usually get about 26mph on Interstate runs, average, but would get more like 30 with more miles on them. The 300Ms would do (on the trip computer) 29-30 at 60mph (on a specific freeway section with no wind and completely flat. BUT it only dropped to 27mph at 90mph. Great aerodynamics, I suspect, as engine rpm was not that much greater. Great, all-around cars, except . . .
My mother's '95 New Yorker (LHS with a split bench and specific interior pattern, similar to a '69 New Yorker pattern) started to have a slight issue with the BCM. First I noticed a slight delay in the wipers reacting to input on the "delay" function. Later, the factory alarm would re-energize by itself. Made the horn honk for a split second longer than just a chirp. I would re-set it and it might happen again, later. But sometimes it would turn the light on and the battery run-down protection would kick in. Which I'd notice when I started it the next day. Sometimes, it'd kill the battery. Which is when I discovered the Interstate battery the dealer put in was over 7 years old. A new one didn't alter anything.
Eventually, things stopped working, one by one, until the cluster didn't work, nor did the a/c system. About that time, she stopped driving. I'd just remove a certain fuse to keep the battery "up" overnight. Finally just unhooked the battery altogether. That was at about 95K miles. It has sat every since.
As to the 2.7L, it is a good "drive-around" engine, from my experiences. It will seem "low power" at lower rpms, BUT if you hit WOT at the right road speed to get a downshift into 2nd, you'd better have it aimed where you want to go. Otherwise, "adequate" with no real mpg advantage, except in the EPA ratings.
On her's the outside mode door actuator started to click and not change from outside to inside air. Have to take the instrument panel loose to get to it. Needed a power lock actuator on one of the rear doors. Power antenna needed a new mast (an easy fix). The small town dealer (whose wife had it for her demo) advocated for a new timing belt at about 60K miles, which was about 6 years at that time, so it was done. Another time, it needed a new relay for the engine cooling fan, and somehow they did something that put the trans into limp-in mode. Just as with other computers, it was fixed when the car was re-started. BUT in the process, I had a local trans shop (whom I've know for many years AND likes Chrysler stuff) to a check on the trans. That's when I found that clutch friction material wear is determined by how long it takes for the circuit to "apply". Even at 90+K miles, it was still at the bottom of the spec.
As with many later-model rack and pinion steering cars, the outer tie-rod ends have rubber isolation in them. With use, the steering can get sloppy, making an noise like a loose shock absorber up front used to. GM uses something like that, too, as do many Fords. Moog has a replacement that's better.
There is a Chrysler 300M Enthusiasts Club, with an extensive website. Not to forget www.dodgeintrepid.net, which covers first and second gen LH cars.
Similar GM cars might ride and drive a bit smoother, but the LACK the "athletic, light-on-its-feet" feel all of the LH cars have. Plus a firm, but comfortable, ride.
Get a FSM to really appreciate all of the design and electronics that went into those cars.
Shop well!
CBODY67
Trans fluid . . initially, the fluid spec was "Dexron III + a Chrysler-specific additive". Later came the Chrysler ATF+ fluids formulated specifically for the LH transaxle. Now that the ATF+ fluids are readily-available, it should not be that big of a deal to get it.
There are two speed sensors on the trans, which report on any internal issues. Their speed readings should match, just as on other brands' OBD-compliant units. If one goes bad or has a wiring issue, strange things can happen in how it acts. The old BBS Chrysler mail list on Usenet had a thread on how a lady allegedly needed a new transmission when all that was really wrong was a failed exhaust manifold-to-pipe seal. So, knowing the cars was very important to not spending lots of money on repairs, back then.
As usual, Chryslers still had some quirks that people didn't understand or know how to fix without replacing major assemblies.
CBODY67
There are two speed sensors on the trans, which report on any internal issues. Their speed readings should match, just as on other brands' OBD-compliant units. If one goes bad or has a wiring issue, strange things can happen in how it acts. The old BBS Chrysler mail list on Usenet had a thread on how a lady allegedly needed a new transmission when all that was really wrong was a failed exhaust manifold-to-pipe seal. So, knowing the cars was very important to not spending lots of money on repairs, back then.
As usual, Chryslers still had some quirks that people didn't understand or know how to fix without replacing major assemblies.
CBODY67
I own two of these cars and bought them both brand new because I was so impressed with them - really impressive cars from every aspect. I don't have enough miles on them at this point to determine how reliable they are over the long term, but one of mine has 35K miles on it now, and I have never been back to the dealer since I bought it nor have I had anything done to it but a timing belt only because of age and a set of new tires for the same reason.
But in terms of handling, it is the best car I have ever owned by an extremely wide margin and the ride is amazing, smooth, quiet and supple and the handling is just incredible for a passenger sedan. Perfect in a word. The engine response is good and the transmission couldn't shift better and I get an average of 23 mpg overall including city and highway with the 3.5L engine. I love the style and comfort and the a/c is so strong it would likely cool my whole house just fine on hot days too. Incredible cars IMO. I like my 97 model (last of the first versions) much more than the later ones. The later ones were just too big, didn't ride too well compared to the first versions and lacked the excellent visibility of the early ones and didn't ride as quietly. While the 300M was pretty good, the rest of them were a big turn off to me compared to the early ones. I felt whoever took over the second generation just messed them up big time.
If you are buying a used early LH model, I would aim for a 97 because they got all the upgrades that made them the best choice in terms of avoiding any long term issues, and I would get the lowest mileage, best maintained one you can find. They are still out there and worth spending more to get than higher mileage ones. The 96 and 97 models also received an upgraded sound insulation package that made a big difference in the road noise department - it made the cars very quiet.
I don't have any desire at all to own another new car. My Concordes are just perfect to me - best designed cars I have even owned -even though they are 23 years old now. The one below is my low mileage garage queen (about 5K miles on it now). The other one is just as nice now and it is my daily driver when I don't use my 1989 Dodge Dakota with almost 200K miles on it and just can't kill it and it is still incredibly reliable, tight and runs great still. That truck is the most durable vehicle I have ever owned and my dad bought it brand new.
But in terms of handling, it is the best car I have ever owned by an extremely wide margin and the ride is amazing, smooth, quiet and supple and the handling is just incredible for a passenger sedan. Perfect in a word. The engine response is good and the transmission couldn't shift better and I get an average of 23 mpg overall including city and highway with the 3.5L engine. I love the style and comfort and the a/c is so strong it would likely cool my whole house just fine on hot days too. Incredible cars IMO. I like my 97 model (last of the first versions) much more than the later ones. The later ones were just too big, didn't ride too well compared to the first versions and lacked the excellent visibility of the early ones and didn't ride as quietly. While the 300M was pretty good, the rest of them were a big turn off to me compared to the early ones. I felt whoever took over the second generation just messed them up big time.
If you are buying a used early LH model, I would aim for a 97 because they got all the upgrades that made them the best choice in terms of avoiding any long term issues, and I would get the lowest mileage, best maintained one you can find. They are still out there and worth spending more to get than higher mileage ones. The 96 and 97 models also received an upgraded sound insulation package that made a big difference in the road noise department - it made the cars very quiet.
I don't have any desire at all to own another new car. My Concordes are just perfect to me - best designed cars I have even owned -even though they are 23 years old now. The one below is my low mileage garage queen (about 5K miles on it now). The other one is just as nice now and it is my daily driver when I don't use my 1989 Dodge Dakota with almost 200K miles on it and just can't kill it and it is still incredibly reliable, tight and runs great still. That truck is the most durable vehicle I have ever owned and my dad bought it brand new.
Last edited:
Here is a tech article on the 3.5. Reliable engine but more needy in terms of maintenance intervals.
Keeping the 3.5 Alive – Service Notes for Chrysler’s V6 Engine.
Many of the service concerns noted in this article were on high mileage engines. Note though that frequent oil changes are a must for this engine.
Dave
Keeping the 3.5 Alive – Service Notes for Chrysler’s V6 Engine.
Many of the service concerns noted in this article were on high mileage engines. Note though that frequent oil changes are a must for this engine.
Dave
Joseph James
Senior Member
Thanks for the responses! I really like the looks of these.
I watched a few videos on these and it seemed oil changes and water pump changes are extremely important.
Going to look at some low mileage models.
I watched a few videos on these and it seemed oil changes and water pump changes are extremely important.
Going to look at some low mileage models.
FYI, I sold my 96 Intrepid, 3.3L with 160k miles in 2012 when buying my 2012 Ram, I wish I would have kept it. No problems at all with engine or transmission. The only issue I had with the intrepid was an idiot ran into my wife and we had to replace the steering rack from the force of the hit but post rack and body work in 2000, we never had another issue with the car. The only thing that I didn't like about it, was the washer fluid was mounted low in front of the left front tire so in North East PA, that would freeze up if you didn't use anti-freeze windshield washer fluid. Here are four pics of the car when I sold it in 2012, this missing paint on the front bumper was that my wife hit a deer lightly, but enough to flex the plastic and she didn't want to spend the money on getting it repainted because we put a LeBra on the car most of the time anyway.
Here is the 2002 Chrysler 300M I bought a couple years ago as a daily driver. I've had to change tie rod ends, struts and fix an engine oil leak but it runs and rides great. These pics are from the CL ad that I bought it from. I bought my 300M with 128K, I've got about 140K on it now.
Here is the 2002 Chrysler 300M I bought a couple years ago as a daily driver. I've had to change tie rod ends, struts and fix an engine oil leak but it runs and rides great. These pics are from the CL ad that I bought it from. I bought my 300M with 128K, I've got about 140K on it now.
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2010
- Messages
- 28,155
- Reaction score
- 27,319
I want your ‘02 please.
We bought a 2000 Intrepid ES with the 3.2 engine and loved that car. We put over 120k on that car and it ran great. Very few problems with it. We sold it to a friend who still has it and uses it as his winter car. Check for rust damage, especially on the brake lines. The one important thing with the 3.2 & 3.5 engines of this era is to change out the water pump, timing belt and the idler pulley for the timing belt as these are interference engines and if the water pump, idler or timing belt fails you just wasted your engine.
MoPar Maniac
Well-Known Member
Renault/AMC designed a pretty nice car, didn't they?
My son drove one every day for about a year for work.
He said it was a nice car except for the transmission.
His boss, an Admiral liked it, too.
My son drove one every day for about a year for work.
He said it was a nice car except for the transmission.
His boss, an Admiral liked it, too.
Joseph James
Senior Member
So far, I am only finding high mileage models. Most are 170-200k miles.
I had a couple good friends that were Driver Mechanics at the Chrysler Proving Grounds(both retired now and still good friends. Both told me the late '90s early 2000s were the best LH cars Mother ever produced. One of those friends did a CDI deal on an '02 300M Special before the Nazi's ended the program. Got it in December of '02 W/ 11K on the clock off their lease lot. Gifted it to our Grand Daughter for her 16th BD in 2012 W/138K on it and here we are in 2020 and she's in her last under grad. year at UNC Greensboro and I think the last time I ask her over this Holiday season she told me it was right at 195K and still going strong. Thinking about investing a couple K in a long block for her graduation this fall before she starts Vet. School. Those leather seats are barley showing any serious cracks and the Bun Warmers still work. BTW, it got a new timing chain and I had the water pump swapped out while they had it opened up at 120K, before we transferred the title, Jer
Last edited:
I sold them drove them owned them traded them in and to this day feel they were some of the best cars to come out of the 90’s early 2000’s. However stay away from the 2.7/3.2 engines as sludging and reliability were big issues. Like Steve said find a nice 97 Intrepid or my preference a LHS with a 3.5.
https://www.cars.com/vehicledetail/...oTempest&utm_medium=TRP&utm_campaign=atempest
This is close enough to me that I could get eyes on it for you but not until they let them start selling cars in PA May 8th.
Similar threads
