Topic: CD Article: Chrysler PT Cruiser, 2001-2007

[Autos_Editor]

Today's Used Vehicle Review:

"A handy and practical little carry-all that has the added bonus of not looking like a brick on wheels," the PT Cruiser has had some reliability issues, but low resale values tend to make up for that, says Contributing Editor, Chris Chase.
   
   More...


Read the article | View the photos | All The Used Vehicle Reviews

[Arthur Dent]

I'd love to get a turbo PT with a stick. Great fun and funky looks. Of course I already own one practical vehicle so no sense getting another one.

[initial_D]

I'd love to get a turbo PT with a stick. Great fun and funky looks. Of course I already own one practical vehicle so no sense getting another one.

The Lotus is definitely thee most practical car for fun. 

I actually do like the looks of the PT. As for owning one, well, if there is a SRT-4 model ...

[ovr50]

My sis-in-law has a 2001 model (first year) and it's woefully underpowered (before the turbo added in later MYs). I have driven it, and it would never be a car I wanted to own. In addition to anemic, it was a rattle-trap.

I understand that newer ones are better, but still not on my radar screen. Ever. In fact, I would buy the Chevy HHR over the PT, like the looks of the HHR better.

[odman]

I rented one around 2000 or 2001 and was also not that impressed. Fuel economy was poor, it was slugish, and despite its acclaimed utility/versatility, it was a struggle to get the baby stroller and a weekend's worth of luggage into the back. The curved hatch really cuts into vertical storage space. I wonder if the more upright HHR is better in that regard. We also found it to have a more narrow interior than the vehicle's footprint would suggest.

Still, it is one of Chrysler's better quality vehicles according to Consumer Reports (above average), despite the many problems listed here.

I wanted to like the PT more than I did. Instead, I like the similarly sized but more modern and effficient packaging of the Mazda5.

[chrischasescars]

Still, it is one of Chrysler's better quality vehicles according to Consumer Reports (above average), despite the many problems listed here.

Which is strange, considering CR gives it average at best for used vehicle reliability.

Personally, I like the PT. I've driven one and enjoyed it just fine and got decent fuel economy, too. Really don't trust the A604/41TE auto trans; it's the same heap that fails so frequently in Chrysler minivans.

[odman]

Oops, my mistake - the 2007 and 2006 auto issues show PT as average. Working from memory is dangerous! In an earlier iteration (maybe 2005 or earlier), I remember seeing PT above average and being surprised by it. I guess it has fallen since then.

I had an A604 in a Dodge Spirit. I was very careful about tranny flushes and had no trouble till the car got stolen and trashed. Then it was a $1,300 repair. Worst part was it didn't show up till 6mths later so the insurance company refused to cover it.

[jww]

I initially liked the looks of the PT when it first came out, and appreciated it even more when Chrysler fixed the obvious problems like those ugly black bumpers. Driving was a different thing, but if you don't mind spending some dough on it, it can be made to be a very capable vehicle. The GT is very nice, but does suffer from torque-steer - just like every other over-powered FWD car. Now - how about making it RWD or AWD? Could have been a contenda!

[johngenx]

I applaud the design.  Risk taking and innovative.  The problem that I had initially was the price seemed very high for the Neon mechanicals, but demand proved high, so they should max their profits.  The price was dropped by a great deal later, making the PT more appealing.

One lesson:  Buy no Chryco products with an AT.