PT Cruiser Forum  

Go Back   PT Cruiser Forum > General Forums > General PT Cruiser Discussions

PT Cruiser Forum

Rear Stabilizer Bar petition now on line

Closed Thread
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11 (permalink)  
Old 19 Jun 2003, 02:19 pm
Fresh Cruiser
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Houston, TX, USA.
Posts: 34
Send a message via AIM to teves09

I can tell you two things are certain, the folks at Chrysler read the forums and the squeaky wheel will always get the grease first. If you don’t try you will never know if you can succeed. I know vendors who have made derogatory remarks about where Chrysler is taking the Cruiser, both publicly and on forums and their “contacts” at Chrysler were quick to call them up and give them the what for. So squeak on!, Lets see if you can get some satisfaction. [xx(]
Big Ern-
The Loan PT
  #12 (permalink)  
Old 20 Jun 2003, 12:54 am
Cool Cruiser
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Hammonton, New Jersey, USA.
Posts: 352


At least you have some idea what you are up against. I'll tell you why they deleted it in the first place. The rear bar is so wimpy that if you remove it and get two people to hold the ends of the bar it can be twisted back and forth. In other words it does nothing to control the body roll of a 3300 lb car. The so called redesign is a crock of s%$#. Even if the put a rear bar on it would make very little difference in the handling of the car. Aftermarket bars now you are talking about a whole different ball game.I have Progress sway bars on my Cruiser maybe that is why I don't understand why such a big deal is being made about this item
  #13 (permalink)  
Old 01 Jul 2003, 01:03 pm
Regular Cruiser
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Dallas, TX, USA.
Posts: 119

It is very likely that Chrysler has enough engineering data to trounce this case in court and will be able to clearly to demonstrate that the changes they have made for 2003 provide the same level of handling as prior models. When I purchased my '03 in December, the window sticker did not mention a stabilizer bar. This was brought to my attention through PTE and now this forum.

As far as quoting press releases, I'm certain that Chrysler will always have a disclaimer somewhere that will provide for certain changes, modifications and upgrades in engineering provided the ride and handling are not materially diminished. And the fact that DC would release a letter indicating such is a huge step toward quashing this suit:

"As an engineering change for the 2003 model year, DaimlerChrysler and our suppliers have developed technology to allow the internal rear stabilizer bar (which is integrated into the rear axle) to be up-sized to provide a level of roll control that equals the performance of the previous combination of internal and external bars. "

2003 Classic Edition, 5-speed with 7-ball shift knob, badges removed, dark tint, Borla split exit exhaust, short billett antenna, Nu-Image white-faced blue flamed gauges and 15\" American Racing Aero Wheels.
  #14 (permalink)  
Old 04 Jul 2003, 08:18 pm
Fresh Cruiser
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: wheeling, il, USA.
Posts: 18

Wish you luck. I have been on a class action suit against Chrylser for 2 yrs now on a "Inferior Head gasket" on my 1995 Neon. It cost me over 2500.00 to get the engine running again.I haven't heard recently a thing for the class action laywer. Last thing I heard was they wanted the hearing in Detroit and the laywers said "NO".
Good luck, but don't expect anything to happen over night or over the next year or two or three.
  #15 (permalink)  
Old 04 Jul 2003, 09:26 pm
Cool Cruiser
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: San Francisco, California, USA.
Posts: 401

Well I to signed the petition, fight the goog fight!!!
03 Black PT GT: BTG Strut Tower Brace, BTG Rear Anti Sway Bar, Psi-Fi Control Arm Bushings, H&R Wheel Spacers, Mopar Stage 2 Coilovers, Yokohama AVS ES100, Stage 1, Uppper Charge Pipe, Mopar Plastc Manifold.
Mods On The Way: AGP Wastegate Actuator
  #16 (permalink)  
Old 12 Jul 2003, 10:50 am
Senior Cruiser
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Alvaton, GA, USA.
Posts: 1,162

Allow me to offer a ray of hope:

I bought a new 1998 Dakota R/T back in June of '98, and one of the things that was advertised was that it could tow 6400 pounds. a few months later, I received a letter in the mail asking me to put the enclosed Manual Addendum in the owner's manual which stated that the truck could only tow 2000 pounds, and that it was a misprint originally.
Gee, now my very versatile truck was not that versatile. I was a member of the National Dakota R/T CLub and people were livid over this.Eventually, some people were complaining to Chrysler and 'deals' were given to them to make them happy.What Chrysler did to screw up was that they gave different people different deals.Joe Blow was given a $250 certificate good for accessories, and Bob was given one for $500.Ted got Chrysler to buy his truck back, but he had to pay for the mileage on the vehicle.This was all played out in our web group.This enraged people more.Some time after that, 4 members filed a class-action suit against DC. DC Immediately laid down a blanket deal for everyone.The choices were a big certificate (like $1000 I think), a complete buy-back, without having to pay for mileage, and something else (I forget what). I had leased my truck, and had driven it for a year and a half.I decided to sell mine back to DC. Not only did they pay about $25k to pay off the lease, but ON TOP OF THAT, they paid me back for every payment I had made, plus they reimbursed me for all accessories and parts I had added to the truck.This meant that on top of paying the truck off and taking it back without penalty, I got a check for $11,000 and change. DaimlerChrysler ended up paying about $37000 to get my truck back and close just my issue! The only thing I was out over the year and a half that I had it was gas and insurance and oil changes!
I am telling you this not to show DC as a bad company, butto show you that yes, even big companies with big legal departments make mistakes, and they can, and *do*, pay for them if the burden of proof is too much for them to overcome.
As a side not, DC actually resorted to infiltrating the web group.Many members received strange calls on the phone masked as 'surveys' asking if we owned a Dakota R/T and if we were a member of any online was all very shady for a while.
What was the reason for the towing capacity change? DC never said officially, but I had an inside contact with an explanation that made sense: The R/T was lowered 1" compared to other Dakotas.This, combined with the larger 9.25" rear axle meant the travel between the rear bump-stops and the axle went from like 6.5" to about 5" (not sure if those numbers are correct, but you get the idea). The concern was that if they didn't make anofficial capacity change, that repeated heavy load towing could cause the axle to bottom out on the frame and possibly lead to a catastrophic frame failure due to cracking.This was never made public or official, but was the best explanation I had heard amonth those that were floated.
Oh, and just so you know, DC could have corrected the issue by installing air bags, or other things, but by doing that, they would be admitting fault and opening themselves up to *way* more liability, so I wouldn't look for a fix.I think the best you can hope for is some kind of 'deal' such as a discount on something else, or perhaps even a buyback.


\"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.\"
Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759

  #17 (permalink)  
Old 27 Aug 2003, 05:01 pm
Senior Cruiser
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Barrie, Canada.
Posts: 1,171

just looked at my window sticker and their is NO stabilizer bar mentioned.

  #18 (permalink)  
Old 12 Sep 2003, 03:15 pm
Fanatic Cruiser
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: new york, ny.
Posts: 581

The Dakota towing capacity issue was a major reduction in the usefulness of the truck, the re-engineering of the rear suspension before production is not a significant reduction in the useablility of the PT.

Retrofitting a 'get them to shut up' sway bar could degrade handling, and reduce ride quality.

Has anyone done any handling tests between 02 and 03 models? Remember to make sure engines and tires are identical.
I just tell anyone who asks that "PT" stands for "Plymouth's Tombstone"
Defend Our Hobby!
Join the SEMA Action Network
Closed Thread

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
rear Anti sway bar gonzomania Tech & Performance Forum 19 07 Nov 2004 12:28 am
2005 PT Convertible Rear Stabilizer Bar MichaelDay Turbo Wheels/Suspension/Handling 19 15 Feb 2004 12:12 pm
FS: Schmidt Space Line 18x8,5 (Silver or Chrom) tunershop Vendors & Buyers Forum 0 10 Oct 2003 10:24 pm
Petition now online - Stabilizer Bar deletion Dalite General Turbo Discussions 26 27 Jul 2003 04:25 pm
Rear anti-sway bar install on GT JohnM General PT Cruiser Discussions 11 24 Jul 2003 07:38 pm

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:22 pm.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
LinkBacks Enabled by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2 © 2011, Crawlability, Inc.