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

1140141143145146335

Comments

  • badgerfanbadgerfan Posts: 1,564
    Caravan 81,696 vs 2004 80,020 a 2% increase
    Town and Country 61,156 vs 2004 38,333 over a 59% increase.
    Odyssey 55,566 vs 2004 45,169 a 23% increase
    Sienna 47,914 vs 2004 56,348 a 15% decrease

    Odyssey gaining ground which understandable with a new model replacing one that had been around since 1999.

    Sienna losing ground-- reasons?????

    Chrysler version of the DaimlerChrysler twins is really zooming in sales with Dodge slightly increased. Stow and Go seems to be gaining traction.

    Likely overall minivan sales have increased due to people switching out of their SUV's to get better mileage, so not all the gained ground by the hot sellers is at the expense of the others, though why the Sienna sales rates are slowing is a bit puzzling.
  • hansiennahansienna Posts: 2,312
    Part of the Town & Country increase is because the former Chrysler Voyager is now called a Town & Country. Sienna sales decrease is because the Sienna is overpriced :cry: .
    As an owner of a 2002 T&C LX, I prefer the 2nd row buckets with 50/50 split fold and tumble 3rd row seating to the 2005 Stow and Go. The 2nd and 3rd row seats of my 2002 T&C LX are more comfortable than the 2nd and 3rd row Stow and Go. The 2002 has more space for the feet of the passengers in the 2nd and 3rd row than does the 2005 Stow and Go.
    The Odyssey has the most comfortable seats for me in all seats. I also prefer the location of the Odyssey spare tire to the DC minivans spare tire in the Stow and Go minivans. However, the Odyssey still lacks the nice complete overhead console of DC minivans with compass/outside temperature and trip computer even though the Odyssey finally offers separately controlled temperature for the driver and front passenger. One has to pay over $31,000 MSRP to get the separately controlled temperature for driver and front passenger in a Sienna. :confuse:
  • badgerfanbadgerfan Posts: 1,564
    Ok Voyager had 6,534 in 2004, so Chrysler sales went to 61,156 in 2005 from 44,867 for T&C+Voyager in 2004. Still over a 36% increase, which is still sizeable considering the upgraded competition.

    I really could care less about where the spare is mounted, but DaimlerChrysler, please stay away from expensive run flat or those high tech and overpriced Michelins run flats that Honda is putting on their top of the line models. At most all I would like to see implemented is a full size spare rather than the space saver spare.

    Flat tires are so rare these days that it is more important to be able to get an inexpensive replacement tire if one fails, rather than pay for an expensive run flat that may not even be available in an emergency.

    Seating comfort? Well the marketplace seems to be giving Chrysler the nod on Stow and Go, willing to compromise perhaps a small bit of comfort (perceived or real) for the flexibility and ease of use of Stow and Go.
  • robr2robr2 BostonPosts: 7,740
    Is stow and go standard on every Chrysler van? If not, perhaps you are giving the feature too much credit.
  • masterpaul1masterpaul1 Posts: 421
    All but the SWB version. I'm not sure if it is standard or an option on all LWB versions. :surprise:
  • masterpaul1masterpaul1 Posts: 421
    I had a flat in our van last year on the expressway in the winter time. It was about 30 degrees outside and my two younger children were with me. I was doing about 70 MPH when I noticed a difference in the steering wheel, but I never lost control of the van nor did I feel like I was losing control. I pulled over to the shoulder and got out to check what was going on and saw that I had a flat tire on the front driver side tire. (To which was the side that I pulled onto the shoulder). It was kinda of scary at times, because all of the cars were speeding by at or above 60 MPH and the van kept shaking as some cars went by. I really didn't have a problem changing the tire, but I couldn't help but to think If this had happened to my Wife. How would she have felt and what she would have done. This is about my third time in over 15 years of driving that I have had a flat like that on the expressway. I can see why some like the run flat tires, even though they are costly to replace and don't last as long as your standard tires. Even still, I prefer the standard tires over the run flat tires any day. When I took the tire in for repair, they told me that it had two holes, one in the tread and one on the side wall. A new tire cost us total with road hazard insurance about $165.00. (This was the price for a lose tire). Our spare tire is in the back under our van where the cargo area is. It is so easy to get to and crank down. I can even check the tire pressure easily with it under the van. I even like the van jack and handle. Not as flimsy or hard to use like some of the other jacks in todays cars. Our jack handle has a swiveling head which makes it easier to turn the bolts and when using the jack or crank pulley. I had a chance to see the spare on the 2005 models and didn't like it at all. For one, there is a cover over the tire to protect it and can only be removed from under the van. (From what I was told). You have to literally get under the van to get to it. Second, the space were the bolt is to crank down the spare, is right in front of the dash board. So you don't have a lot of room to use whatever tool is needed to crank the tire down. :shades:
  • badgerfanbadgerfan Posts: 1,564
    Stow and Go is not in the short wheel base versions, but they account for I believe less than 10% of sales. Also the long wheel base "base" Grand Caravan, and I assume the "base" Town and Country also are available without Stow and Go. I would suspect, however that Stow and Go is in 70-80% of all of DaimlerChrysler's minivans, though this is just a guess.
  • hansiennahansienna Posts: 2,312
    No, but 3rd row 60/40 Stow and Go is now standard on every GC SE with 2nd row bench standard.
    As badgerfan stated, no SWB Caravan and NO SWB T&C have Stow and Go available.
    Stow and Go may be increasing T&C sales but at present, the Stow and Go will cause me to get an Odyssey for my next minivan even though I am well satisfied with my 2002 T&C LX with 2nd row buckets and 50/50 split fold and tumble 3rd row.
    I do NOT like the spare tire location on Stow and Go vans. The 2nd and 3rd row seating of Stow and Go is not as comfortable as the seating in my 2002 T&C although the seating in the Odyssey is more comfortable than my 2002 T&C.
  • marine2marine2 Posts: 1,155
    Stow and Go may be increasing T&C sales but at present, the Stow and Go will cause me to get an Odyssey for my next minivan even though I am well satisfied with my 2002 T&C LX with 2nd row buckets and 50/50 split fold and tumble 3rd row.
    I do NOT like the spare tire location on Stow and Go vans. The 2nd and 3rd row seating of Stow and Go is not as comfortable as the seating in my 2002 T&C although the seating in the Odyssey is more comfortable than my 2002 T&C.


    I have the 2005 with Stow and Go. Although the middle seats are a little more firm, they are not uncomfortable at all.

    While I don't like where the spare tire is on my van,(under & between the two front seats) it really isn't any worse than changing a tire on a pickup truck.

    I love the stow and go feature of those seats. I usually only carry three kids home from school and that allows me to stow one of those seats. I could stow them both, but I don't. That one bin holds a furniture pad, tools, flash light, umbrella and battery cables. Nothing sits out to mess up my van. The one stowed seat gives me plenty of room getting the kids in and out and gives the dog some place to lay down or to carry stuff like I did last week, when I took my air compressor over to my brothers house.

    I never worry if I go to Lowes or some place else and buy something big, that I have to go home first and take the seats out to carry it. I'm always ready no matter what it is. Stowing those seats was the only reason I sold my 2001 Dodge Dakota truck. I didn't need it anymore and I have a heck of a lot more room.
  • hayneldanhayneldan Posts: 657
    Lets remember that Honda stored their mini spare behind the front seats in the floor in front of the second row until the 2005 models. That space has become the "lazy susan storage space" for 2005. The mini spare if you haven't ordered the PAX tires is located on the drivers side rear big hump behind and alongside the third seat. This is why they eliminated the electric rear (last) windows opening function. The DC stow and go spare is located under the car and is winched down from the front seats. They still have the rear opening third windows. :P
  • hansiennahansienna Posts: 2,312
    I prefer having the spare tired stored inside the left rear of the minivan as in the 2005 Odyssey over the difficult to access location of the 2005 DC minivans with Stow and Go.
    The extra cargo space at the rear with "fold-into-the-floor" 3rd row seating is NOT worth the inconvenience of placing the spare underneath the van where it is now located with Stow and Go.
    Four adults and 2 children can travel in our 2002 T&C and take ALL the luggage, clothes, and snacks that are needed for long trips. Additionally, all 7 seating positions in my 2002 T&C LX are comfortable for adults.
    I think Honda was stupid to put the antenna in the rear side window where the reception is compromised.
  • denver5357denver5357 Posts: 319
    After reading this Edmunds thread and others since December, I realized today that I could tell who posted sometimes simply by what was posted - without looking at the names. I picked up marine2 and Hans' posts right away. :D
  • SylviaSylvia Posts: 1,636
    You are now a fully annointed Forums junkie! Welcome to the club!! ;)
  • marine2marine2 Posts: 1,155
    You buy your van for the things your going to use it for. If your buying a van only to carrry people, it makes little difference what you buy. If that were the case, I would probably by a Honda if the price was right. I know I 'll use mine for more than hauling people, so there is only one choice for me, Stow and Go.
  • badgerfanbadgerfan Posts: 1,564
    Toyota Sienna first. The Chrysler/Dodge twins tied for second. Odyssey not one of the top ones. Not listed in the summary press release.
  • isellhondasisellhondas Issaquah WashingtonPosts: 17,593
    Except the first 90 days is hardly an indicator of long term reliability.
  • jipsterjipster Posts: 5,345
    I disagree. It may not be a tell all indicator. But, initial quality is more a factor of long term reliability than any other indicator...at least on an individual vehicle case.
    It seems most people who have reported :lemon: have problems within that first 90 day period.
  • hansiennahansienna Posts: 2,312
    Jipster is correct. Almost all my bad vehicles had problems very soon after they were purchased. Same with my best friend's vehicles.
    Very few vehicles that have no problems in first 90 days ever turn out to be lemons. :lemon:
  • marine2marine2 Posts: 1,155
    As on its passenger cars, Honda tuned that suspension tightly. The vocal engine, decent tire grip, and busy ride quality make it feel connected to the road, and the turning radius is nearly as tight as a sedan's. Like the Accord it's based on, the Odyssey gives the feeling that it can be tossed around corners a bit. Taking it up on the offer ruins the illusion, however, mostly because the capsizing feeling that comes with any aggressive turn reminds you of how high you're perched. That, plus too-slow steering, plus the Odyssey's not-so-mini measurements, make mountain runs a nervous affair. It's probably best to be content with the Odyssey's feel in the city, and best to keep it there.
  • isellhondasisellhondas Issaquah WashingtonPosts: 17,593
    Is grossly overused in these forums. A new car with a rattle, as an example, is hardly a lemon.
This discussion has been closed.