2.4l Engine

General Discussion

  1. shooter65

    shooter65 Senior Member

    My Photo Garage
    Messages:
    1,221
    Likes Received:
    627
    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2013
    Location:
    PA
    Hello Everyone,

    My search for a dependable vehicle to commute into the city, (Pittsburgh) and park in garages or lots has turned up quite a few vehicles with 2.4L engines. I believe the 2.7 was problematic but don't know much about the 2.4l. Does anyone have any suggestions or warnings regarding the 2.4l?

    Thanks!
     
  2. march

    march Member

    Messages:
    164
    Likes Received:
    71
    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2014
    Location:
    Syracuse
    We bought my wife's 2011 Jeep Patriot 4x4 new and it now has 90k miles. No issues whatsoever with the engine even though it runs hard, attached to 3.23 gears due to the optional off-road package called Freedom Drive II. Due to those gears the engine is around 3500 RPM at 30 miles per hour. The CVT that it's attached to is not recommended, as it was replaced last year under a Chrysler service contract. It was on it's way out for a while, but the engine is great.
     
    • Thanks! Thanks! x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
  3. Carmine

    Carmine Senior Member FCBO Gold Member

    Messages:
    3,732
    Likes Received:
    2,766
    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2015
    Location:
    Detroit 'burbs
    It would help to know what years/models you're considering. There were two "2.4L", one in-house design, another that came out under Daimler and was shared with Hyundibishi. They were used in concurrent years, but different models.

    I seldom recommend Allpar for anything but examples of inaccuracies-quoted-as-fact, but in this case they're correct:

    The 2.4 liter four-cylinder Chrysler-Dodge engine

    This is the "World" engine page, and as you'll see, there are two generations:

    Chrysler Tiger Shark and World Gas Engines: 1.8, 2.0, 2.4
     
    • Thanks! Thanks! x 1
  4. Carmine

    Carmine Senior Member FCBO Gold Member

    Messages:
    3,732
    Likes Received:
    2,766
    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2015
    Location:
    Detroit 'burbs
    Agree. The CVT trans isn't much fun, (almost no one likes CVTs, rightly so). So again it's important to know what models you're considering.
     
    • Thanks! Thanks! x 1
  5. traintech55

    traintech55 Senior Member FCBO Gold Member

    Messages:
    2,764
    Likes Received:
    1,178
    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2015
    Location:
    Hammond, IN.
    Well I get to chime in good or bad. My 2005 dodge caravan has a 2.4 and has 192,000 miles on it now. It does have a noisey valve train when cold, (most overhead cam engines do with high miles), it does use 1 quart of oil per 500 miles, (again this is not uncommon), but will give me 20 + mpg all day long.
     
    • Thanks! Thanks! x 1
  6. Wildaugust

    Wildaugust Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,244
    Likes Received:
    554
    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2011
    Location:
    Politically Correct Hell
    Yes, there were at least two different 2.4L engines and in 2005, my year, there were 3 engine code possibilities on the VIN, all were 2.4L I4 engines. I can only speak about the "x"code 2.4 DOHC engine, which is the one I have. I don't drive the crap out of it and I do give it time to warm up before driving. It gets an oil change every 3,000 miles, just like my V8s. The car is my year round driver and now has 360,000 km on the odometer. I bought the car used, but have no reason to believe that this is not the original engine. I've owned it since 2011 and in that time have not had to do anything to the engine except replace the timing belt and two camshaft sensors. The camshaft sensor is a 10 minute job in this car. Yes, the valvetrain is a bit noisy when cold and I'm adding 1 to 2 bottles of oil between changes. Overall, I'm happy with the 2.4, at least this version of it.
     
    • Thanks! Thanks! x 1
  7. Snotty

    Snotty Senior Member FCBO Gold Member

    Messages:
    2,171
    Likes Received:
    586
    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2015
    Location:
    Chico, California
    I've had 2 cars with the 2.4 motor.

    A '96 Stratus; had it for 17 years and 206,000 miles. Outside of tune-ups, oil changes, and one new electronic module, I never touched the motor. No smoke and no oil consumption. Excellent motor with good power and MPG.

    My wife's '09 Sebring, only in this case it's the PZEV motor. 152,000 current miles. No problems with the motor, outside of a smog control issue. Never had any power, but delivers 31 MPG on the highway.

    Now, compare that to my daughter's '11 200 S, with the 3.6 V6 and 6 speed transmission. Excellent power and 31 MPG mas well! If I were buying the same today, and had the same choices, I'd go with the V6 in a heartbeat! It's a kick-ass motor!
     
    • Thanks! Thanks! x 1
  8. shooter65

    shooter65 Senior Member

    My Photo Garage
    Messages:
    1,221
    Likes Received:
    627
    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2013
    Location:
    PA
    Sorry, this is in a 2007 Sebring Touring with 92k miles. Thanks everyone. Good info.
     
  9. Two 67's

    Two 67's Member FCBO Gold Member

    Messages:
    60
    Likes Received:
    19
    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2015
    Location:
    Pittsburgh
    Stick with a 2.4 i rarely have to work on them except for normal maint. 2.7 are grenades
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Thanks! Thanks! x 1
  10. Snotty

    Snotty Senior Member FCBO Gold Member

    Messages:
    2,171
    Likes Received:
    586
    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2015
    Location:
    Chico, California
    2.7 motors run well, but repairs are a nightmare!!! When we bought the Sebring the salesman tried to get me to look at a 300 with one in it. When he asked me why I wouldn't, I made this suggestion: "Tomorrow, when your Service Department opens, ask a Tech what the charge is to change the water pump on a 2.7. You will then know why I'm not interested."

    Labor rate for such a job is 10 hours!!!
     
  11. Carmine

    Carmine Senior Member FCBO Gold Member

    Messages:
    3,732
    Likes Received:
    2,766
    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2015
    Location:
    Detroit 'burbs
    The bad rep for 2.7 comes from the PCV system being inadequate and allowing combustion by-product moisture into the oil, (vs burning it away) creating sludge. Just like the Toyota 3.0 V6.

    The proof of this is that the 2.7 is based from the 3.5, which has a very good rep... and a different PCV system. The 2.7 also has smaller oil passages, which certainly don't help.