Honestly, between design and build quality I'd only consider the Honda and the Toyota. Between my experience and my in-laws, I would run from Chrysler like the plague. Nissan and Kia are only a little better. Toyota is better built and can be awd but the Honda is a more pleasant drive. I have known over 30 Chrysler owners, they've all sucked, and that's polite.
I have personally owned over 30 Chryslers and i agree with you. 
Not really. There are a lot of segments you can say Chrysler doesn't have a competitive entry in, but the minivan class isn't one of them.
The only huge knock i have on the most recent body style (before new Pacifica) is that i hated the way the trans acted around 4th gear which was right in the middle of the 'im about to use my 280hp minivan to go unreasonably fast' speed range and it totally killed my want to drive them.
The new Pacifica is right back on top, though. I don't think anyone can argue it's not top3 in class regardless of your preference, and its probably a lot of people's #1.
Has anyone looked at the little vans that Mercedes Benz makes? They were advertising them alot a while back but I have never seen one in person.
The new Pacifica looks really nice. It looks alot like the Merc wagon thing that my wife's friend had for a while.
How many people are you planning on hauling? I ask because if you don't actually need more than 4 seats you might want to take some of the new baby delivery type vans for a drive. I had the Chevy version of the baby Nissan for a weekend and walked away really impressed, and while I haven't driven the newest Transit Connect the old one wasn't a bad place to be passing the miles.
Can't we talk sucking chest wounds Instead? Pleeeeze?
My good friend just bought a transit connect this year. I've only been a passenger in it. It's pretty comfy for a 2 hour drive. It would probably be more comfortable if the baby seat behind me was moved elsewhere.
LuxInterior wrote: Can't we talk sucking chest wounds Instead? Pleeeeze?
Go ahead start a thread about them.
clutchsmoke wrote: My good friend just bought a transit connect this year. I've only been a passenger in it. It's pretty comfy for a 2 hour drive. It would probably be more comfortable if the baby seat behind me was moved elsewhere.
The local dealer has one of these on the lot that I really like. Since one of the big uses for this vehical will be business related either halling people and or equipment the transit connect is a good option as it seems to convey a more work oriented impression on clients while at the same time maintaining a professional immage. I think I am going to have to look at these a bit more closely.
oldopelguy wrote: How many people are you planning on hauling? I ask because if you don't actually need more than 4 seats you might want to take some of the new baby delivery type vans for a drive. I had the Chevy version of the baby Nissan for a weekend and walked away really impressed, and while I haven't driven the newest Transit Connect the old one wasn't a bad place to be passing the miles.
No more that 4 people plus gear would be the typical hall. Every now and then I could have 5 or 6 but that would be very rare.
The new Pacifica looks really nice. It looks alot like the Merc wagon thing that my wife's friend had for a while.
Mercedes R-Class. The one Mazdeuce just bought a 500hp version of. When i saw it in person one of the first things i said was 'this is laid out a lot like an old Chrysler Pacifica'. I think he might be one of the few 500hp euro car owners that wouldn't take that the wrong way.
My wife's friend had terrible luck with there Mercedes R. It was in the shop every other month and it seemed like the bill was never less than 3k. They traded it in as soon as it was paid off. I got a chance to drive it and it was nice. They had the 500 and it was quick. It was also a really big vehical. Not in a bad way. You had that King of the road feeling in it.
Robbie wrote:Klayfish wrote:also disagree that they are horribly underbuilt. More like all cars are horribly underrated. Here is a good (although old) article on the matter, and a table of cars and their weight limits. http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/money/autos/2007-09-13-overloaded-cars_N.htm 2006 M.Y. Vehicles (model/seating capacity/payload capacity in LBS): Acura TSX 5 850 Acura MDX 7 1158 Dodge Grand Caravan 7 1150 Dodge Magnum 5 865 Dodge Caliber 5 865 Ford Mustang 4 720 Ford Fusion 5 875 Honda Civic 5 850 Honda Accord 5 850 Honda S2000 2 400 Lincoln Navigator 8 1452 Lincoln MKX 5 909 Mazda Speed6 5 850 Mazda 3 5 850 Mazda CX-7 5 850 Mazda MX-5 2 340 Nissan Versa 5 860 Scion xB 5 850 Scion tC 5 850 Toyota Highlander 7 1200 Toyota Tundra Double Cab 6 1340rslifkin wrote: The problem with minivans being like big cars is that they're horribly underbuilt. Sienna? It's a Camry platform with Camry-sized trans, suspension, etc. Weight carrying capacity kinda sucks too on most of them. By the time you fill all the seats with average size people, you're already pushing the max rated payload. Think how often you see a minivan loaded up with a family and some stuff that's clearly riding on the rear bumpstops... Because of the whole FWD and low weight capacity thing, IMO, they're useless for towing too. I cringe every time I see one with a trailer of any kind on the back (especially considering they're almost always bottomed out in the rear from the tongue weight). Personally, outside of a few like the R-class, the old Previa and others that weren't just an inflated car in their design, I hate the things. I'd much rather have a vehicle that's actually capable than one that just pretends to be.Couldn't disagree more. Minivans are designed to be the family workhorses. They're designed to haul 6 or 7 people around, along with some of their gear. How often do I see a minivan loaded riding on the rear bump stops? A whole lot less often than I see it in a family sedan, a station wagon or a small pick up. And usually when I see it, it's on a van that's clearly lived a very hard life. Also remember that the minivan is designed to deliver a comfortable ride, so there has to be some compliance in the suspension. They're not supposed to compete with cargo hauling capacity of a Dodge Ram. Minivans are the kings of hauling people and their gear. As for towing, sure, you're not going to tow a full size car on an open deck trailer. They're not designed for that. But a landscape trailer, small boat, snowmobiles...all day long. As I said, I towed many a race car on a dolly with my Sedona. Never once felt unsafe or overloaded. It has a tow rating of 3500lbs and it towed that with ease.
It appears that each vehicle is designed to carry it's rated passengers ,nothing more. No luggage, nothing in the trunk. Assuming that each passenger weighs 175 lbs.
I've rented tons of GC's and T&C's from Hertz. All 3.6 VVT. I've come to believe that some have different final drive ratios than others. I've had a few that were astonishingly quick and others quite a bit less so. The slower ones seemed to be in fine working order just not nearly as eager.
On the other hand, a Nissan Quest ('15) with the CVT will smoke any of the Fiat/Chryco minivans. That thing is a beast. And I used to think all CVT's were worthless.
Well, Nissan has had the most and longest experience with CVTs. My main knocks on CVT are start-clutch behaviour and that they don't have a low enough gear reduction on the bottom of the range to make a small engine feel good from a stop. Nissan's VQs make enough torque to bypass that complaint. Their current engines don't make a bunch more power than a Dodge v6, but CVTs manage to average a lot more power to the wheels over time by staying very near the engine's power peak at all times.
In the vein of the Transit Connect, and what about the Ram Promaster City? I know someone on here has one, and was really impressed other than a lengthy windshield replacement.
Went and looked at a Connect today at the local ford dealer. I really like it. It looked to be an xlt optioned one. I may get back there this week and see about a test drive.
markwemple wrote: Honestly, between design and build quality I'd only consider the Honda and the Toyota. Between my experience and my in-laws, I would run from Chrysler like the plague. Nissan and Kia are only a little better. Toyota is better built and can be awd but the Honda is a more pleasant drive. I have known over 30 Chrysler owners, they've all sucked, and that's polite.
How so on the Kia being only a "little better" on build quality? The very first generation, I think it was '02-'05, had known issues with some engine failure. But that was corrected when the second generation came out in '06 and those things are bullet proof. I'd put their reliability right up there with Toyota and Honda. They're a bit more of the bargain variety in that they use some cheap plastics inside and such, but they're built like brick E36 M3 houses. Can get them for a steal now too.
I'd stay away from the new Metris. Very cool looking van, but I have grave concerns about reliability, and resale value.
As a tech who works on it all, Sienna or Odyssey all the way. Ody engine mounts can be pricey, and they wear out the door roller hinges but not a big deal to DIY. Great interior.
Chrysler if you must buy brand new. They're OK overall, but tons of dumb issues with newer ones like 2nd stage oil pumps failing and the entertainment/HVAC system crashing or failing.
Quests(at least up to 2010ish) are awful. Everything is terrible to work on. Not necessarily unreliable but more issues than the other Japanese vans.
dean1484 wrote: Has anyone looked at the little vans that Mercedes Benz makes? They were advertising them alot a while back but I have never seen one in person.
The Metris. Recently bought one for 98% family and 2% car towing duty combining a big ford e350 and the family wagon into one. So far very happy, ~21mpg in town 27-28mpg highway. I have not towed yet but it seems more than capable. It will be 40k by the time it gets optioned up but that's comparable to other vans and it's far more cargo capable. Downsides: Merc really doesn't have a clue since the passenger version is nicer than commercial but certainly not luxury, the seats are heavy and don't come out all that easy, cruise control is only packaged with the nav (which is fast but the UI is junk). Pros: can get a nice wheel and high quality vinyl, side doors are very easy to operate w/o being powered (rear hatch a little heavy), the 2.0L is capable and the visibility is quite good.
Hints: the wheel upgrade is a standalone option, order the divider, hitch and psm as they can not be added after the fact.
flatlander937 wrote: As a tech who works on it all, Sienna or Odyssey all the way. Ody engine mounts can be pricey, and they wear out the door roller hinges but not a big deal to DIY. Great interior. Chrysler if you must buy brand new. They're OK overall, but tons of dumb issues with newer ones like 2nd stage oil pumps failing and the entertainment/HVAC system crashing or failing. Quests(at least up to 2010ish) are awful. Everything is terrible to work on. Not necessarily unreliable but more issues than the Japanese vans.
I actually just had to change the driver side axle on my 2005 ody with 190k miles. 8 fasteners to remove (5 of which were lug nuts), and 1.5 hours was plenty to do the job taking lots of care and cleaning a bit. The axle even popped right out of the hub bearing, no fuss. I planned a whole afternoon, and was pleasantly surprised.
I crawled over the Metris a good bit last November. It's a very European van, which means it is derived from hardcore business-vehicle pragmatism and the passenger version is truly an afterthought. I didn't think that was all bad, though. It just doesn't have the same sort of little life-easing functionality built all over it that a regular minivan does. It's still perfectly capable of moving people in reasonable comfort, but you wouldn't buy it over a mainstream minivan unless you value any of the things that make it different. I think of it sort of like a Sprinter that's sized for family work and actually looks good. It's the mini-ish van you want if you want a full-size van but can't stand the fact that older American full size vans are aesthetically/ergonomically terrible dinosaurs and the new ones are too damn big anyway (Promaster, Transit).
The only way I'd consider a Metris over a GC/T&C would be if a conversion company does a Westy-like camper. Otherwise, it just isn't special enough to justify the price difference over a used Chrysler van. Plus, the past 10+ years of dealing with German cars has me with far more faith in something made by Dodge. And that's pretty sad.
For some odd reason the Euro styled vans now remind me of when Ford introduced the old Aerostar van. How many Aerostars have you seen on the road in the last 5-10 years?
I may be one of the few that actually liked driving the old full size vans, especially conversion vans. The most comfortable driver seat of any vehicle I've ever driven was in an '87 Chev conversion van. Now working on those vans was a toss up. Dog house access allowed for decent access in some makes. I never had to do major work but I don't think engine swaps would be any fun.
Ive seen way too many pretty new Sprinter vans with rust to have any faith that Germans can rust proof their van products any better than the Americans can.
You'll need to log in to post.
