Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





Honda Odyssey vs Dodge/Chrysler minivans

1111112114116117224

Comments

  • hansiennahansienna Posts: 2,312
    Do NOT do it in a minivan with your family. :blush:
    Volkwagen introduced the minivan concept with the original VW bus with an anemic little air cooled 4 cylinder engine.
    Chrysler added creature comfort items in the original FWD minivan that was also powered by a 4 cylinder engine.
    Most adults with children do not want to jeopardize the safety of their children by driving a minivan like a legitimate racing vehicle.
  • macakavamacakava Posts: 775
    There must be obvious reasons why Cadillac, Lincoln have followed the lead of BMW, MB, Audi, Honda/Acura, Toyota/Lexus, Nissan/Infinity, etc in using OHC engines in their high-end cars. Some of these reasons include eliminating the thrashy sounds for high refinement levels. OHV is more suitable for trucks where thrashy sounds are more tolerable. Even then, more folks are becoming more selective - the Nissan Titan and Toyota Tundra sport OHC cam engines and they more refined vehicles than the domestics according to many testing agencies. This is the next segment where the Japanese will dominate. It is just a matter of time.

    If you think your wiser than them combined to use OHV engines, that sounds interesting. VERY INTERESTING!
  • macakavamacakava Posts: 775
    Hans,

    It is not racing, but spirited, energetic driving that some of us enjoy in any vehicle we drive. Minivans like the Ody/Sienna/Quest are based on great handing car platforms and they respond to spirited driving.

    Again, it depends where you are in the driving spectrum that I have described in the past.
  • dustykdustyk Posts: 2,926
    And which one of us thinks they're wiser?

    Both European and Asian manufacturers have had to deal with much higher fuel (gasoline) prices than North Americans since World War Two. The price of fuel has dictated that European and Asian car companies produce much smaller displacement engines to keep fuel consumption low. So for better than five decades they have become very good at getting more power out of smaller displacement engines. Hence, these companies usually have a small displacement philosophy and comensurately smaller displacement engine families.

    Having smaller displacement engines has led to the development of overhead, multi-valve engines. It had nothing to do with noise. In fact, placing a drive belt outside of the head and having cam bearings close to the top of the engine is guaranteed to produce more noise. The so-called "refinement" you assume is the simple result of OHC is really in noise reduction techniques, like covering the belt drive components, and bringing thick cylinder partitions up higher, using roller tappets and very thick valve covers to quiet the noise. If these "refinements" hadn't been done then this discussion would be about why OHC engines are so darn noisy.

    "OHV is more suitable for trucks where thrashy sounds are more tolerable."

    That's funny, because some of these same testers have proclaimed the new Dodge Hemi engine, which uses a cam in the block and push rods to be as quiet or quieter than the competition. In fact, the 5.7 Hemi is 1 db quieter than the smaller 4.7, which is overhead cam.

    I was looking at the Chrysler 3.8 and Honda 3.5 engine specs and noticed something curious. The Chrysler 3.8 is undersquared engine at 96 x 89mm, while the Honda 3.5 is oversquared at 89 x 93mm. The Chrysler 3.8 is rated at 205 Hp @ 5200 RPM with 240 lb/ft of torque @ 4,000.

    Honda really has two 3.5 engines. Both are mechanically the same, but are tuned differently:

    For LX & EX - 255 HP @ 5750 RPM with 250 lb/ft of torque at 5000 RPM

    or

    For EX with leather (huh?) or Touring, 255 HP @ 5750 with 250 lb/ft of torque @ 4500 RPM.

    The LX & EX versions have an EPA rating of 19/25, while the EX with leather or Touring gets 20/28 EPA. Even Honda knows that increasing lower RPM torque is beneficial to fuel consumption. But why do you think Honda provides two different versions of the same engine?

    For long-term reliability, I'd take the slower turning Chrysler.

    Dusty
  • hansiennahansienna Posts: 2,312
    The Japanese have a BIG cost advantage: They do not have to pay the high cost of providing expensive health benefits to former workers who are now retired. :sick:
    However, the Japanese automakers must now very carefully look over their shoulder and be concerned about the Korean automakers providing them REAL competition based on lower production costs.
    How long before the Chinese competition scares both the Koreans and Japanese? :blush:
    DC wisely produces half of its minivans in Canada to help lower the cost of production.
  • mrblonde49mrblonde49 Posts: 626
    Honda really has two 3.5 engines. Both are mechanically the same, but are tuned differently:

    For LX & EX - 255 HP 5750 RPM with 250 lb/ft of torque at 5000 RPM

    or

    For EX with leather (huh?) or Touring, 255 HP 5750 with 250 lb/ft of torque 4500 RPM.

    The LX & EX versions have an EPA rating of 19/25, while the EX with leather or Touring gets 20/28 EPA. Even Honda knows that increasing lower RPM torque is beneficial to fuel consumption. But why do you think Honda provides two different versions of the same engine? "

    The difference is VCM. That's why you have better mileage estimates. Only on EX-L & Touring
  • macakavamacakava Posts: 775
    "The LX & EX versions have an EPA rating of 19/25, while the EX with leather or Touring gets 20/28 EPA. Even Honda knows that increasing lower RPM torque is beneficial to fuel consumption. But why do you think Honda provides two different versions of the same engine?

    For long-term reliability, I'd take the slower turning Chrysler. "

    C & D minivan June 2004 comparo: The 3.8L engine is gutless and won't cut it with the others(Honda, Toyota and Quest) in this class.
  • macakavamacakava Posts: 775
    Your smart, Mon!
  • macakavamacakava Posts: 775
    "How long before the Chinese competition scares both the Koreans and Japanese?"

    The Chinese are where the Koreans were 20+ year ago. Their concept of quality is far different from ours. It is one thing to make clothing and other less high-tech stuff, but vehicles for western consumption is a very different thing. They would likely start at where Yugo was when it existed, and have to work VERY HARD to prove themselves to the masses. Of course there will always be a market for CHEAP cars that compromises quality.

    The affluent Chinese do not drive Chinese-made cars because of the substandard quality issues. Instead, they drive Japanese and European luxury models.

    The cheaper lower grade Chinese cars are ideal for those who want to upgrade from bicycles and mule carts!
  • dustykdustyk Posts: 2,926
    "The difference is VCM. That's why you have better mileage estimates. Only on EX-L & Touring"

    Well, that makes sense on the surface, but cutting off cylinders doesn't explain the difference in the torque rating. The two different torque specifications is more likely the result of camshaft timing difference.

    Dusty
  • dustykdustyk Posts: 2,926
    "C & D minivan June 2004 comparo: The 3.8L engine is gutless and won't cut it with the others(Honda, Toyota and Quest) in this class."

    Did C&D use the term "gutless," or are those your words?
  • fish8fish8 Posts: 2,282
    If I remember correctly, those were the exact words from C&D.
  • macakavamacakava Posts: 775
    Yes and more. Glad you asked.

    Here it goes...

    Lows:"Gutless engine, flacid suspension, iffy steering, slack back driver's seat"

    Verdict: "A great idea(i.e referring to StoGo) sabotaged by tofu mechanicals"

    I agree having rented 60 - 70 minivans in the past 2 yrs, mostly DGC with a few loaded new T &Cs at times.
  • hansiennahansienna Posts: 2,312
    WHY don't you rent an Odyssey ? :cry:

    When people think that the Odyssey, Sienna, and Quest are superior, WHY do they rent the inferior DCG? :blush:
  • macakavamacakava Posts: 775
    Cannot find one, or a Sienna, or Quest!

    Maybe they are too good/unaffordable to rent??

    DGCs go for $37.99 daily at Dollar and Thrifty and are affordable. Similar prices at Alamo, Budget. I need the space to take my team to clients. The safety of a mnivan is also a plus.
  • dustykdustyk Posts: 2,926
    Well, the last T&C I drove was a 2003, I believe. If that 3.8 was "gutless" then I think Car & Driver's perspective is highly skewed, especially if the T&C is only one second slower than the Honda. I guess a magazine like Car & Driver would put an emphasis on speed.

    Dusty
  • fish8fish8 Posts: 2,282
    If you drive by any rental lot (Enterprise, Budget, etc...) you will notice mostly domestics makes. It's all about economics. Domestic manufacturers sell their cars for deep discounts (fleet sales) to rental companies. Japanese car companies don't need to discount their products to sell them. Therefore, rental companies don't buy them.

    Selling to rental companies helps sell units and for many years it allowed Ford to brag about the Taurus being the top seller in the family sedan category. I know this Ford comment is completely off topic, but I just wanted to make my point.

    But, I still love our T&C..... ;)
  • isellhondasisellhondas Issaquah WashingtonPosts: 17,623
    I also agree, there is nothing wrong with a pushrod engine. GM's 3800 engine is a great example. It's a lot smoother and more refined than Chrysler's.

    Still, having a pushrod engine doesn't make for a bad car.
  • isellhondasisellhondas Issaquah WashingtonPosts: 17,623
    It must be remembered that in many parts of our country, driving a "foreign" car is taboo. That, in itself has a lot to do with this.
  • marine2marine2 Posts: 1,155
    Lows:"Gutless engine, flacid suspension, iffy steering, slack back driver's seat"

    Funny, Edmonds says,

    "Excellent ride and handling characteristics, good low-end pull from 3.8-liter V6, roomy cabin, nifty fold-flat second- and third-row seats."

    New Car test drive . com says,

    "On the road, the Dodge Grand Caravan and Caravan offer a smooth ride and responsive handling. These are family-friendly vehicles that offer the features and flexibility most buyers want and there's a model for every budget. Most models come with a powerful V6 engine that delivers strong acceleration for merging onto hectic freeways. Anti-lock brakes and side-impact airbags are available.

    Automotive.com says,
    " The 3.8-liter V6 available for the Grand Caravan delivers strong power. This big V6 is responsive when merging into fast freeway traffic, accelerating from "intersections, or passing on two-lane roads.

    Canadan Online Auto Review says,

    "On the road, the Grand Caravan offers a smooth ride and predictable handling. The test Grand Caravan SXT had the 3.8-litre V6 and its power off-the-line or when merging into freeway traffic was impressive."

    All of which is the opposite of gutless engine and iffy handling, don't you think?
  • macakavamacakava Posts: 775
    C & D is more oriented to testing the dynamics, handling, acceleration, cornering, etc to the likes of energetic, highly spirited drivers. C & D does actual measurements (with actual g's) for acceleration, cornering, slalom with more lead feet than others who try to do similar measurements. So you get the extreme capabilities/limits of the tested vehicles.

    Most other testing sources just do their testing with driving impressions and state just generalities and subjective (not objective) comments like you described. This may be adequate for a broad group of people. But for the car enthusiasts in us, irregardless of vehicle types, that is not sufficient.
  • marine2marine2 Posts: 1,155
    Most other testing sources just do their testing with driving impressions and state just generalities and subjective (not objective) comments like you described. This may be adequate for a broad group of people. But for the car enthusiasts in us, irregardless of vehicle types, that is not sufficient.


    CR, test of Dodge, verses Honda, on the quarter mile. Honda 16.9 sec. Dodge,17.7 sec. Less than one sec. difference Mac. While I'd admit that the Honda is faster and does a better job passing at higher speeds, you still can not call the Dodge gutless.
  • macakavamacakava Posts: 775
    CR does NOT use lead feet like C & D does and their times are always slower for all the same cars tested by both agencies.
  • hayneldanhayneldan Posts: 657
    Macakava please re-read the post 3748. If you were to put all the so called experts in one small room, they would not be crowded. If you believe the ratings without doing your own comparasons perhaps they could choose a wife or girlfriend for you too,
  • marine2marine2 Posts: 1,155
    CR does NOT use lead feet like C & D does and their times are always slower for all the same cars tested by both agencies.


    That is why I could care less what C&D says. We are driving family minivans Mac, not sport cars. Most of us want a van with an engine that will be powerful enough to get us up a mountain without straining, enter a freeway and be able to melt in with the moving traffic. Pass cars that are not keeping up with the flow of traffic. We could care less if it can't out race the car or van next to us. Maybe that means something to you and a few other lead foots, but not to most of us. We are carrying family and friends in our vans and we just want to get them from point A, to point B, safe. I could care less if you beat me there by 30 sec. less. You seem to have a hard time understanding that.
  • minivanguyminivanguy Posts: 85
    I think 1 second means alot, because that would mean that the odyssey is only 2.3 seconds slower than the hemi powered charger. ;) "2005 models of coarse"
  • macakavamacakava Posts: 775
    "That is why I could care less what C&D says. "

    As I said in the past, it depends on where you are in the driving spectrum from the "Floridian retiree types" on one end to the "Mario Andretti types" on the other end. It is obvious and I fully understand where each one of us belong. :)

    It does not matter what vehicle type we drive, the energetic spirited drivers prefer the vehicle to have great dynamics/handling and swift acceleration.
  • macakavamacakava Posts: 775
    One second is lot to those who understand and appreciate what it means in performance.
  • macakavamacakava Posts: 775
    Been married for 31+ years. No divorce in on my side or my dear wife's side, unlike so much of the typical American family. I guess there is that good DNA in both of us!

    I have lots of girlfriends and they happen to be those of my many friends who are females.

    Maybe you are secretly crying from within for some female company through others? :)

    CR uses statistical data based on their sampling to predict/project their results with a certain level(say 90%+) of confidence. Those who do not understand statistics will certainly be doubters.
  • hayneldanhayneldan Posts: 657
    "CR uses statistical data based on their sampling to predict/project their results with a certain level(say 90%+) of confidence. Those who do not understand statistics will certainly be doubters." Please provide "any" detail on CR statistical data on what their sampling is. The only FACT that CR reveals is they only send questionaires to subscribers, and no numbers on the number of returns are given. I do understand statistics, having studied it in College.
This discussion has been closed.