COAL: 1999 Chrysler LHS – A Car That Renewed My Faith in the US Auto Industry…Almost
Jim Brophy
– April 25, 2020
A few posts back I wrote about some of the rolling wrecks I owned in the "deadly decade" of the 1980's; the "flammable" 1981 Buick Skylark and the "napkin-munching" 1986 Ford Escort GT. The experiences with those cars drove me to drive Toyotas for the next 10 years. It helped I was mostly overseas in Japan during that period, but even if I had been in the US, I would have avoided anything from the Big Three.
1982 JDM Toyota Cresta
1988 North American Cressida
From 1989 to 1999, I drove Toyota Crestas – first a 1982 model, then for seven years a 1988. Seven years was typically a long time for me to have one car but the '88 was so nice and drove so well, that I had no desire to part with it. Most CC readers will know that the North American Cressida was the top-line version of the JDM Cresta.
But in 1999 I headed back to Wright-Patterson AFB in Dayton and couldn't take the Cresta with me (though I would have liked to), so once again I needed wheels. Was I going to take a chance on a US model, or were the scars still too fresh?
1999 LHS from internet – exactly like mine other than I had brushed aluminum wheels, not chrome
I had done quite a bit of looking and research…obviously a Toyota was the first choice but the Cressida was out of production by then and I didn't care for the bland styling of the Avalon. I wanted something larger than a Camry, Altima or Accord and European sedans were out of my price range. Then I saw a picture and read a review of the then new 1999 Chrysler LH cars in Road and Track – specifically the LHS version.
1996 Chrysler LHX Concept
I have to say the styling of all the LH cars stunned me. I had been a fan of the cab-forward styling since Bob Lutz, Francois Castaing and Tom Gale pushed it by a soon to retire Lee Iacocca in the early '90's. I know these are polarizing designs, and that some folks can't stand them, but I thought the LHS was the closest thing to a road-going "concept" car that I had seen. It's hard to express how much that design struck me.
The silhouette was low and long – and nicely balanced. While it's typical now, this was one of the first cars to have a wheelbase long enough that the rear door didn't need a cutout for the rear wheel. That was really distinctive.
The rear was very clean without any added "jewelry" (an Iacocca favorite).
Some thought the front was a little bizarre but I found it unique and tasteful.
The engine was an all aluminum 3.5 litre SOHC 60 degree V6 with 4 valves per cylinder – engine code EGG. It made 253 hp and 255 ft lbs of torque. It was mounted longitudinally, not transverse, with the trans-axle underneath driving the front wheels.
Let's take a look at some of the "Good and the Bad"…
Styling – Again, I think this car is a stunner. It still looks good today – and I prefer it to the chunky, high-waisted look of the follow-on RWD LX 300C.
Performance – this was a swift car in its day – 0-60 in about 7.5 seconds. The big 3.5 V6 had plenty of low end torque and would wind out nicely.
Interior – not as attractive as the exterior but comfortable and roomy. Rear seat space was amazing – over 41.5 inches of legroom.
Reliability – surprisingly good – I heard from others that these had problems with cam sensors and electrical issues. In the four years I owned it, I never made an unscheduled trip to the dealer.
Overhangs – The car sat low and had fairly long front and rear overhangs – I'd scrape the front routinely over inclines and cement parking blocks.
"Plood" – the interior was nice with leather seats and classic white-faced gauges – but the plastic wood inlays were some of the cheapest and worst looking I've seen.
Maintenance – To get that low hood, Chrysler engineers really crammed everything together in the engine bay – I don't mean crammed as in haphazard, but everything was very tight. To change the battery, you had to unbolt and take out the engine air filter box, that would allow you to get to the cables. Then take off the passenger side front wheel which will allow you to pull the battery out of a small tray near the front. Thank goodness I never had to get anything under the hood worked on – just to change the alternator would have meant removing a whole bunch of components and costly man-hours.
Build Quality – Panel gaps, inside and out were OK – but if you looked in the wheel wells and other places underneath you'd see a lot of metal casting flash and jagged body seams.
Summary: As the title states, the LHS renewed my faith in US manufacturers – almost. After four years of ownership, I came away impressed, but with the feeling I had just been lucky. That impression has only grown stronger as I read sordid tales of GM faulty ignition switches and disintegrating Ford Powershift transmissions.
So would I consider buying a US Big Three vehicle today? Well, it would have to be something that really knocked my socks off like the LHS – with the focus now on CUVs and SUVs, that doesn't seem likely.
MrEdCT
Posted April 25, 2020 at 4:13 AM
A LHS was my father's last in a long line of Chryslers and Chrysler products. He loved the car and mostly it had minor issues.
The dashboard covering – a pseudo suede – started to decay and crack. My parents lived close to the water and the car was in the sun all the time, so I am sure that played a role in its breaking down. The other issue was my father kept on breaking the clips that held the interior door panel to the door. He would slam the door and break the clip. He got tired of replacing it. The car lasted for 10 years with just basic maintenance.
As Im primarily a Mopar fan, I really wanted to like these but I couldn't get it going for them, I even briefly considered buying a new 2002 Intrepid as an alternative to the Durango I bought (and still have) But there were 2 main reasons that kept me from the Gen 2 LH's:: I didnt like the styling on the Gen 2 LH's as much as the Gen 1 cars and the legacy problems of the the A604 transmissions.
Unlike the Gen 1 LH's though, I still see a lot of the Gen 2s on the road with well over 200k on them.
Doug Underwood
Posted April 25, 2020 at 11:51 AM
Did the 42LE transaxles have the same issues as the A604/41TE's?
The 42LEs addressed the shortcomings of the A604s with better clutch packs and reprogrammed shift points and was designed for use in the LH cars with N-S engines. The 42LEs turned out to be solid transmissions and they still use an updated version of it today as the base transmission in the current Dodge Journey, but given the catastrophic failures of the early 604s, I wasnt ready to gamble on a new FWD Mopar in 2002 when their longevity was still in question.
FWIW, my neighbor has a 2000-ish Caravan with over 300K on the original 3.3 V6/42TE so after they got the bugs worked out, they were solid drivetrains
My wife's parents had a 2003 Concorde, so pretty much a decontented version of the LHS. The styling of the front end was a struggle but the rest of the car was visually pleasant, and a nice departure from standard fare of the day.
The biggest problem for my in-laws was ingress/egress. He had broken his back in 1974 and getting in and out wasn't a smooth operation. She had double knee replacements and it posed somewhat more of a challenge. In late 2004 he found a 2003 Crown Victoria with only 800 miles (estate sale); they had a much easier time getting in and out of the Ford.
Mechanically the Chrysler was great. I drove it several times and thoroughly enjoyed it. The only issue was toward the end the rear main seal of the engine was dripping.
My mother-in-law was rear-ended when that Concorde had around 65,000 miles. She was not hurt but the car was toast. The upside is they didn't have to worry about replacing the rear main seal anymore.
I never had any firsthand experience with these second-gen versions. A sister in law had a first gen Intrepid that had crazy high miles on it. Lots of stuff had failed (a/c and the drivers seat was collapsing) but that 3.5 V6 continued to sing.
The 3.5 was a fabulous engine, and it will remain one of life's great mysteries how the 2.7 which was supposedly based upon the same design template was such a stinker.
And yes, almost every passenger car Chrysler built during this period was guaranteed to cause an owner fits whenever something needed fixed or replaced. This is probably one reason that much less "elegantly" packaged cars like Crown Vics and GM W bodies outlasted these on the roads.
The fatal flaw of the 2.7 was a timing chain tensioner it didn't have enough travel to take up any stretch in the chain. If you put a fresh chain and tensioner on them the tensioner was 90% extended. The quick and dirty fix I did on the cars that I managed to save was stick a nut in the bore behind the tensioner. I want to say I used a nut for a 5/16″ bolt. That allowed the oil to flow to the tensioner but pushed the outer body closer to the chain meaning that the inner part that tensioned the chain was only extended about 50% of the way, when it left the shop.
Sanityfactor@outlook.com
Oil ports were too small in the heads, would gunk up…
StudeDude
You forgot to mention the internal water pump driven by the timing chain. When that gave up, it was goodbye engine in most cases.
I thought that was the first truly new, modern design I'd seen in a long time when they came out, and I really liked them. In this condition, they still look good. But over time observing them, they seemed to wear down quickly, especially in the paint and clear coat. The time came when almost every one I saw appeared beat and half-clad in its clearcoat. Sad for such a cool design.
scottn59c
I wasn't a big fan of the look of these. It's interesting – my mother drove an Avalon (the car I learned to drive on) when our neighbor had one of these Chryslers.
I much preferred the look of the Avalon; it looked like the Lexus' sister – the one that was still pretty without all the makeup – to me.
This Chrysler to me looked like a bloated Camaro. Kind of like when you look at the mother of a pretty girl and wonder "how many more attractive years does she have left before she looks like that?"
Zipster
Whenever I would see one of these I would think of a Komodo dragon. Without question and interesting design.
RetroStang Rick
My Dad had a Gen 1 Concorde that looked exactly like the one pictured below. His was a 1994 if memory serves.
The cab forward design and long wheelbase did indeed make for a very comfortable car, even in the back seat on a long trip.
The 3.5L V6 was plenty powerful and felt like the V8 T-Birds I was driving at the time, from an acceleration standpoint.
This was only his second MOPAR product ever, the first being a '60 Dodge. From what I recall, he really liked the car. And although he never bought another Chrysler product, I don't think he was dissatisfied with the car.
Like you, Jim, he only kept it for 4 years, ultimately trading it on a '98 Regal GS in a nearly identical color scheme. I don't think he was having trouble with the car. It's more likely he was tiring of it. My Dad has a Jim-Klein-like attention span when it comes to cars….
Sorry Jim. 😉
That is my gen 1 Concorde down to the color.
Its 214 HP 3.5 was a revelation at the time, and lasted me 10 years and 100,000 miles, we sold it primarily because of a growing family, there were five of us, and only four shoulder belts.
I liked the gen 2 enough that I looked into trading up the the gen 2 in 1998, the bigger (huge) trunk would have been handy with all the kid stuff we had and I liked the styling. But, being on a parent's budget and with trading that soon not being in my DNA, it didn't happen.
When still just a family of four, we ended up with a rental 2000 LHS loaded with everything, including a sunroof. It was very nice and made me again pine for an upgrade to either the second gen Concorde or LHS as they shared the same body and that huge trunk.
derKommissar
Posted April 25, 2020 at 12:56 PM
My Mom has one just like yours. Followed it with a 300M. Good looking cars with many wonderful qualities but you could see/feel penny pinching.
That 5th picture is from a dealer near me! It is in an old 7-11. I actually bought a car from the lot behind the semi trailer, that shares its driveway with the State Farm office seen in the back ground.
Not a fan of the windshield forward cars, that architecture made for a very cramped engine compartment that is for sure. What fun it is to change a transmission or engine with that interface burred under that windshield.
The prior generation had a number of years where it was one of the most common cars to pop up on craigslist when you search "bad engine" or "needs engine".
Seventeen Chariots
My dad bought a new 99 Concorde which I have inherited. It has only 30k miles. It was Dad's first Chrysler, his last car and the only one dad described as being "expensive ".
As I recall the weak points were the steering wheel clock spring and the power window motors. To date the only trouble has been one window motor.
I love the style, the trunk and back seat are enormous. It's comfortable and drives nicely. The steering and brakes are remarkably communicative and the suspension is nicely balanced, an excellent compromise of comfort and firmness without the cost or complexity of any electronic control.
The appearance has aged very well, and to me, looks like what a futuristic car should be , low, sleek, smooth, a bit rounded and relatively free of ornamentation, much nicer than all the garish new cars on the road today…… except for current Maserati sedans, which look remarkably similar to our 21 year old Chrysler.
Patrick Lynch
My first 2nd gen LH car was a 1999 Concorde Lxi which was a fantastic car and I loved driving it almost as much as my 1968 Fury VIP, but in my second year of driving the Concorde, it got T-boned on my way to work. My current LH is a 2002 Concorde Lxi with the LHS styling which I've now owned for 8 years. Apparently to get all of the features of my 1999 car (excluding the engine) you had to get a Concorde Limited. Both of these cars I bought used. The first one well cared for, and the second one well abused as I quickly discovered. Bringing the 2002 car back to the level of the 1999 car needed an infusion of all at once cash I didn't have at the time and I learned quite a bit more than I planned on about these cars.
The first thing I learned is second gen LH cars have an extremely low tolerance for cheap chain auto store parts. Especially the thermostat which is located in a character developing location where you would never think to look for it if you are used to vintage cars. Also had to figure who the OEM maker/supplier of things like oxygen sensors and spark plugs were and when those things were replaced the 3.5 began running very nicely and the gas mileage went way up.
The second thing I learned is that you don't have to take the passenger front wheel off the car to get to the battery. Remove the air box and turn the wheel as far to the right as possible. Still have to remove that little panel in the fender well but with the air box out but the battery can slide back a bit and then lift straight up once freed of cables and the battery tray retainer.
The third thing I learned is that when the panel between the front struts is removed there is quite a bit of access to the area behind the engine which made it easy to replace inner tie rod bushings and to have access to a leaking quick connect fitting on the fuel line. Also learned the bolts that hold that panel on, are quite brittle and must be removed with care.
The fourth thing I learned is that when they get to a certain age or live in a salty winter climate like where I live the rear brake lines are almost notorious for rusting out. Scrolling through Facebook Marketplace listings and Craigslist I found otherwise very nice cars parked because of the rusted brake lines. Fortunately, I caught that before something bad happened. Also the nylon fuel lines with those vile "quick connects" will leak at the connections. I had to fix the fuel line both at the engine and at the tank. Barely avoided disaster when the one at the tank started leaking. Fixed that only to find the one by the engine doing the same thing to a lesser but looming disaster degree.
The most painful thing I learned was how to do the starter. My mistake was going by all of the forum posts and You Tube videos on how to do it. In my frustration I found an easier way, once the bolts and wiring are detached, pull the starter forward only a little and then drop it out the back instead of trying to fish the starter out from the front as instructed. There was no way I was going to remove the motor mount and lift that side of the engine. I never ever want to do that job again. I told my partner who now is the primary driver of the Concorde since I retired that her next car is very likely to be a 70's Valiant or Dart 4 door or a 89 Gran Fury or Diplomat.
All of that said, my 1999 car seemed to be better made overall than the 2002 car in terms of materials. All of the rubber has turned to crap on door seals, trunk seals and critically the engine cradle bushings which all need replacing. The 2002 seats feel like an old baseball glove compared to the 1999 car. The plastic in this car is soy based and crumbles and that's why interior door handles will need to be replaced sometime in its life. I've had to do both front doors.
The 3.5 V6 is great and is still powerful at 244,000 miles. It's not the high output version but it feels like it wouldn't have any trouble blowing the doors off of V8 powered family cars of yesteryear. The whole exhaust system needs replacing and the struts need replacing again and next time I'm going with KYB's instead of the infamous Monroe Quick Struts. It's also time to replace the original lower ball joints.
When these cars are good, it's like driving a modern C-body in some ways. You get the interior space and power of a Fury with the fuel economy of my '89 LeBaron Coupe with a 2.5 four cylinder. Huge usable trunk for its size and good for hauling the kiddo off to college. But when these cars are bad, they make me want to drive something much older if for no reason than relative ease of repair. To cover everything I had to do to the 2002 car would make this already too long post into an epic I'd rather not write.
Seen at the Toronto auto show circa 1990
yes300ed
I've owed 3 Dodge Intrepids. 2000 SE 2.7.
2003 SXT 3.5 HO (my 19 year old son owns it now with 211000 miles) and 2001 RT I bought used. I thought the battery was accessed in the right wheel well. All 3 were a delight to drive and we're extremely durable. Always wanted a 300M.
Savageatl
If you liked the lh, the current Lx is a revelation. Those cars are amazingly roomy, powerful, composed, handle well, and are super luxurious.
I hated the looks of the LH cars, both generations. I drove a later LH 300 a friend had quite often when I took him to his cancer treatments when his wife couldn't do it. It was his last car, the LX 300 was about to come out when he died. He was hoping to make it long enough to buy one, He had plenty of money, but not the time. He went about 3 months or so before the LX 300 showed up at dealers in the area. He would have loved the LX 300 and if he was alive today, I'm pretty positive he would be driving a Charger or Challenger Scat Pack in B5 blue.
I leased a new 2000 LHS. It was a fantastic car in a beautiful garnet red with black interior. There was nothing about this car I disliked. Even the imitation wood ("plood"…eye roll) was perfectly fine. The interior was incredibly room and the seats were just about perfect. Performance, styling (gorgeous still today), quality (so sick of this endless nonsense about Chrysler quality), luxury…everything about it was perfect to me. I miss that car. It replaced my equally beautiful and stunning 98 Concorde in gorgeous forest green. Chrysler really was on top of it's styling at that time.
Moparlee
I could easily have imagined myself in one of these, or more likely an Intrepid, but I was deep in minivan territory at the time. I did find the grilles on these visually small then, and even now, but I did like the overall look and style of these cars. Nicely balanced article.
principaldan
The President of Defiance College had one of these LHs (the short lived New Yorker version) in the 90s as his official vehicle. It was a 3 year lease with a screaming deal from an alumnus who happened to be a Chrysler dealer.
It was a portent of changes in the US auto market when it was replaced by a Mercury Mountaineer.