Frame Rust problems of the 2005 Chrysler Pacifica - part 2

Unusual rusting of the frame and underbody of the car.

Went for routine state inspection and was notified that the subframe has significant rust on the passenger side (engine cradle). This vehicle only has 125,000 miles on it and the subframe should not be rusted out. Have called Chrysler and although they issued an extended warranty in 2010 which included my vehicle they have since refined this to vehicles made in a 6 week window in 2004. My vehicle was made in June 2004 just a few weeks outside their window. It is obviously a bigger problem as there are tons of similar complaints - rust on the subframe on the passenger side (see full list of complaints at NHTSA and all over the web). This needs to be addressed ASAP by Chrysler. It has left me and my family in a very difficult situation - never mind the safety problem I have exposed my family to over the past year.

I have maintained this vehicle extremely well. No visible rust on body, vehicle appears to be in excellent condition. I took vehicle in for routine maintenance and the technician stated that the engine cradle and passenger side sub frame is nearly rusted in half. I was shocked because it is not my primary winter vehicle, and salt exposure is minimal. The technician explained that it is not safe to drive the vehicle because of the risk of drive train falling out when the engine cradle fails to support the engine and transmission. Also, the car could break in half if the sub frame fails. How can a vehicle that has been well maintained, looks and drives like new, be unsafe because it isn't structurally sound. The vehicle is driven only about 10000 miles per year. An online search revealed that this is a known issue on this make/model. I cannot understand how this vehicle is not recalled. I have been driving this vehicle, thinking it would keep my family and I safe. This is very dangerous, and millions of people are undoubtedly driving Chrysler Pacificas that are not structurally safe. I hope that the NHTSA will investigate this.

Went to get my 2005 Chrysler Pacifica inspected and was told the front sub-frame was rusted through.

The contact owns a 2005 Chrysler Pacifica. The contact was driving approximately 55 mph, the front passenger side tire began to wobble without warning. An independent mechanic stated that the frame was rusted and the engine cradle needed to be replaced. The vehicle was not repaired and the manufacturer was not notified. The approximate failure mileage was 150,000.

The 2004-05 Chrysler Pacifica subframes are defective, they rust and corrode to the point of being unsafe to drive. This has been an issue that been reported to the NHTSA before. A twenty year old car's subframe should not rust and corrode to the point that the engine could fall out, much less a nine year old car like mine and many others who have reported this. Found out Chrysler first offered an extended warranty of 10yrs 150,000 for people who live in high salt usage states, such as minnesota where I live. My car qualified so I called Chrysler and the guy said take it to the dealership and they will take care of it under warranty. Took it to mckays family Dodge in st. Cloud and glen ertl lifted it up, took pictures for Chrysler to see, and then told me my car wasn't under warranty. In the process of lifting my car up mckays somehow broke my motor mount which I was told later by my regular mechanic and it now made a clunking sound when I accelerate and feels very unsafe to drive. Glen told us to "prove it" that he had broke it, very good business practices. Called Chrysler back and they told us it was a new employee who told me it covered under warranty but it actually wasn't even though I was holding a letter from Chrysler saying all 2004-05 Pacifica's under the criteria I mentioned above were qualified for the repair under warranty. This is a dangerous problem that many others have reported and it needs to be addressed. Thank you for any help you can offer.

Vehicle brought in for state safety inspection. During visual inspection of vehicle, obvious hole in frame found due to rust/corrosion. Vehicle is not covered under 6 week window Chrysler corporation currently covers. Vehicle is unsafe, fails state safety inspection and at this time owner will bear cost.

The contact owns a 2005 Chrysler Pacifica. The contact stated that during a routine maintenance, the dealer found that the sub frame was rusted and there was potential for the engine to fall out. The vehicle has not been repaired. The manufacturer was notified of the failure. The approximate failure mileage was 162,000.

The contact owns a 2005 Chrysler Pacifica. The contact stated that upon inspection, it was found that the frame was rusted. The vehicle was not diagnosed or repaired. The manufacturer was contacted about the failure. The failure mileage and VIN was not available.

The contact owns a 2005 Chrysler Pacifica. The contact stated that while driving at speeds over 50 mph, a vibration was present. The vehicle was taken to an independent mechanic who discovered that the engine cradle and the sub frame had rusted. The vehicle was repaired. The manufacturer was notified of the failure. The failure mileage was 113,000.

The contact owns a 2005 Chrysler Pacifica. The contact stated that the frame was rusted. The vehicle was taken to the dealer where the failure was confirmed. The vehicle was repaired. The manufacturer was contacted about the failure. The failure mileage was 126,422.

Our 2005 Chrysler Pacifica touring model did not pass a state vehicle safety inspection because of extensive corrosion holes and frame rust. The engine cradle support has rust holes and is severely weakened, and the areas below the rocker panels underneath the car have rusted through. The vehicle was purchased new by my father, and has always been garaged and well maintained. The car has only 77,100 miles on it, and yet now is considered structurally unsafe to drive. Researching online, I found that Chrysler knew of the unusual corrosion problems with this vehicle. They acknowledged the rust problem by quietly issuing an extraordinary "extended 10 year / 150,000 mile warranty" for Pacifica model years 2004-2005. They subsequently amended this warranty to limit their responsibility to the front engine cradle only (reference: x26, warranty bulletin dated March 16, 2012), and further reduced their exposure by only providing this warranty coverage to vehicles manufactured between February 23, 2004, to March 31, 2004 - an implausibly short time frame given their acknowledged corrosion problem. The Chrysler customer assistance center told me they would not provide any assistance, since the manufacture date for this car was June, 2005. It is inexcusable that a well-maintained 2005 vehicle with only 77,000 miles could be rendered structurally unsafe due to corrosion. It is absurd to suggest that their corrosion problem only affected one part manufactured only within a 36 day window. Having spoken with several mechanics and insurance adjusters, extensive underbody panel rust and frame corrosion are extremely common with this model year. Structural corrosion is a known defect with this car. It's a huge financial loss for us. It also a dangerous safety "time bomb". They know it is. Chrysler should assist in fixing these vehicles quickly, or be forced to recall them.

The contact owns a 2005 Chrysler Pacifica. The contact stated that while having the tires changed, the mechanic noticed excessive rust on the sub frame. The contact called the manufacturer regarding the rust and was advised that the vehicle was not under warranty so there was nothing they could do to assist. The contact did not have any repairs performed to the sub frame. The failure mileage was 86,000.

Tl- the contact owns a 2005 Chrysler Pacifica. The contact stated that while the vehicle was being inspected, it was noticed that the sub frame was perforated due to rust. The vehicle was taken to the dealer where it was confirmed that the sub frame was severely rusted. The contact was also informed that the vehicle was not included in the manufacturer's recall. The manufacturer was contacted about the failure. The failure mileage was 150,000. Mh.

The contact owns a 2005 Chrysler Pacifica. The contact stated that while having the vehicle inspected, the technician stated that the front of the sub frame was rusted and corroded and needed to be replaced. The manufacturer was made aware of the failure. The vehicle was not repaired. The approximate failure and current mileage was 110,000.

The contact owns a 2005 Chrysler Pacifica. The contact stated that the vehicle was taken to an independent repair shop for an inspection. The inspector stated that the entire frame was rusted. The vehicle was not taken to an authorized dealer. The manufacturer was notified of the failure and stated that the VIN was not included in any recall. The failure mileage was 148,000 and the current mileage was 149,000.

Brought the car in for oil change and mechanic noticed the rust thru the frame. We contacted a local dealer and they would not cover the defect. I did hear that Chrysler knows of the issue and has extened vehicle warranties to 150,000 miles and repaired the frame damage. How do I get this repaired? this should be recalled for safety issue.

The contact owns a 2005 Chrysler Pacifica. The contact stated the vehicle was taken for a routine inspection when he was informed that the front sub frame had become rusted and corroded. The dealer was notified who advised that there were no recalls for the vehicle or the failure and offered no further assistance. The manufacturer was notified who confirmed that there were no recalls and offered no assistance. The vehicle was not repaired. The failure mileage was 150,000.

Had my SUV service at the dealer and they told me that the subframe is rusted and has to be replace they are charging me $4,300 I call Chrysler and ask about any recall and they told me that my SUV was not made on the recall year a car should not rust that bad in 8 years.