Howdy, Stranger!

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





Minivans - Domestic or Foreign

1116117119121122182

Comments

  • thegraduatethegraduate Posts: 9,731
    Just read it...really slaughtered the DCX for showing its age...I don't know what I was expecting considering it came in 4th vs. the old Odyssey(1st last time and this time) and Quest(3rd both times). Kudos to Sedona for 2nd place!
  • bobw3bobw3 Posts: 2,997
    If you're looking for 3 in the 3rd row, then the Freestyle is out, although you can put 3 in the 3rd row, and just leave the 1/3 part of the split 2nd row bench flipped and folded forward to allow easy access to the 3rd row. Or if you can live with a 6 seater, then you can go for the 2 captain chairs in the 2nd row.

    When the Saturn Outlook comes out, then you'll have exactly the configuration you want.
  • jrock65jrock65 Posts: 1,371
    Hyundai/Kia execs should break out the champagne, lol. This is the first time in history that a Hyundai/Kia vehicle is the fastest in its class.
  • badgerfanbadgerfan Posts: 1,564
    I really find it amusing that 0-60 times would rank very high on anyone's criteria for purchasing a minivan. Does anyone really buy a minivan to race from 0-60 in the minimum time?

    MOST (not all) minivan buyer's criteria is to be able to haul families and stuff with the utmost flexibility at a family affordable price, and that is exactly where the DC minivans shine. Yes they are not state of the art in all aspects, however their flexibility as a people/stuff hauler with the Stow and Go seating is much more important.

    One item no one mentions is that the 3.3L V-6 in the Caravan and SE Grand Caravan is I believe the only minivan on the market today that can burn E-85 fuel, which could become much more important in a few years, if the trends accelerate toward E-85. You will see increasing amounts of flex fuel vehicles in the near future, DC introduced that in 2002 for Caravan/Town & Country, though they have not marketed it much at all.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Posts: 9,731
    I don't think the 0-60 is nearly as important as the passing-acceleration test. The Grand Caravan took a second and a half longer to go from 45-65 MPH. While it's not dangerously slow, it is not confidence inspiring or up to the standard set by vehicles today. Doesn't speak well for the engine and transmission, since the DCX was lightest in the comparo by as much as 155 pounds to the much quicker Odyssey and Sedona. The Quest ran a third place 8.5 sec, right on the Odyssey's tail.
  • badgerfanbadgerfan Posts: 1,564
    I just don't know how we lived through it when we drove for 12 years our 1985 Caravan with the 2.6L Mitsubishi four cylnder engine. This was the "more powerful" optional engine at the time!
  • dennisctcdennisctc Posts: 1,168
    I don't think the 0-60 is nearly as important as the passing-acceleration test. The Grand Caravan took a second and a half longer to go from 45-65 MPH. While it's not dangerously slow, it is not confidence inspiring or up to the standard set by vehicles today.

    My Porche 911 Turbo has a much lower 45-60 MPH passing time, so I guess that doesn't speak well for other vehicles engines, trannys or safety.

    Point is, you should know your vehicles capabilities and drive accordingly. I doubt very few minivan owners run around passing vehicles with their families in tow. 1.5 seconds difference is not that critical unless you're driving unsafely to begin with...i.e..passing when there's oncoming traffic.

    BTW - I don't own a Porche 911 :)
  • dennisctcdennisctc Posts: 1,168
    I just don't know how we lived through it when we drove for 12 years our 1985 Caravan with the 2.6L Mitsubishi four cylnder engine. This was the "more powerful" optional engine at the time!

    And what about all the poor souls driving any car that doesn't have an 8 second 45-60 passing time. They should just kill themselves now inside of being killed on a highway trying to merge or pass!!!
  • dennisctcdennisctc Posts: 1,168
    One item no one mentions is that the 3.3L V-6 in the Caravan and SE Grand Caravan is I believe the only minivan on the market today that can burn E-85 fuel, which could become much more important in a few years, if the trends accelerate toward E-85. You will see increasing amounts of flex fuel vehicles in the near future, DC introduced that in 2002 for Caravan/Town & Country, though they have not marketed it much at all.

    If you go to the Dodge Caravan website, they tout it there but you're right, they're not marketing it much. Wonder way?
  • sebring95sebring95 Posts: 3,225
    Performance was important to me. I live in a very hilly area with very short on-ramps. The difference between my mothers 3.8L GC and my Ody is quite substantial. 0-60 times themselves don't matter much, but it is a sign of potential performance in all areas. How the transmission shifts is also very important and likely the real problem for the Caravan. Her van tends to upshift easily and loves to stay in the higher gears even when pulling a hill. The Ody will NOT upshift while climbing a hill, even with light acceleration. Which means you don't have to wait for a 2-3 gear downshift to get back on the hammer if there's traffic barreling down.

    Same difference between my Tundra and my prior Chevy pickup. On paper they have similar perfomance numbers, but on the hills the Toyota is much quicker/responsive.

    My prior Tahoe would run on E-85. Personally, I don't see the market really opening up. Poor performance, poor fuel economy, cold-starting issues (per the manual, I never tried it in the cold). Yeah, it's the fuel of the future :confuse:
  • jipsterjipster Posts: 5,345
    I read that article today, curious as to why they didn't include the Toyota Sienna.

    MT also made note of the second row Stow n Go seating in the DGC ,"Dodge obviously prioritized the fit-in-the-floorwell parameteers of Stow n Go over actual human comfort" OUCH!

    Quite surprising they spoke so highly of the Sedona though.
    Maybe it was because the Sedona scorched the Ody in the 0-60 time? ;)
  • badgerfanbadgerfan Posts: 1,564
    I currently in the process of purchasing a Grand Caravan with Stow and Go, and the second row seats seem quite comfortable to me, not all that different from the fixed captains chairs in our present Caravan. They are not like living room couches to be sure, but are very comfortable. The "lack of comfort" issue has been greatly overblown, mostly by those defending the competition who do not have second row Stow and Go at the present.
  • cpsdarrencpsdarren Posts: 265
    On carsdirect.com you can get the base model for just over 21k now, probably less if you haggle at a dealer. I've never seen the new Sedona in person, but it looks nice and also has decent performance, great crash test results and important safety features standard. Seems like a great bargain with a great warranty. If only they had an 8-seater and released it a few months earlier when I was shopping...

    It will be interesting to see the Consumer Reports review, supposedly an extra in the September issue. Sounds like the latest Motor Trend is worth a trip and a few bucks to buy it. Does jrock's ranking indicate they liked the Odyssey best overall? Incidentally, here is the last comparo: http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/van/112_0505_2005_mininvan_comparison/specs_- price.html
  • cpsdarrencpsdarren Posts: 265
    I agree, at least for how I drive. I never even get above 3k RPMs from a stop. I doubt I've even pushed 0-60 in 10 seconds, even on freeway merges. On the other hand, I have had a few instances where pedal-to-the-floor passing power came in handy. The Consumer Reports and Motor Trend passing tests are much more useful than the 0-xxx or quarter mile times in my opinion, at least for a minivan. How much of a difference is important is another question. A couple tenths of a second is probably meaningless and within the margin of error anyway, but a half or full second might be significant if you are in a jam.
  • dennisctcdennisctc Posts: 1,168
    I haven't seen this issue of MT yet, hopefully it'll be in mail soon so I can take on vacation.

    It's always good to be the new kid on the block though. DCX's design/engine date back to 2001 and needs updating....we'll see the next gen at the North American Auto Show in 6 months....260hp/275 ft/lb of torque, 6 speed with overdrive, power stow n go seats, cup holders with heaters and coolers and a diaper changing table.....
  • rorrrorr Posts: 3,630
    "...they're not marketing it much. Wonder way?"

    Maybe because:

    a) E85 if extremely hard to find in most markets;
    b) In most markets that DO have E85, it is more expensive than 'regular' gasoline;
    c) Your gas mileage will be much worse.

    According to this data:

    http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/byfueltype.htm

    The EPA ratings on Caravan with the 3.3l V6 is 19/26. On E85 fuel, those ratings drop to 13/17.

    Wonder no more.
  • badgerfanbadgerfan Posts: 1,564
    Yes, but having the ability to use E85, should conventional gas prices keep going up, could be an advantage a few years down the road.

    Ethanol plants are sprouting like dandelions here in the Midwest. It is only a matter of time before E85 supplies become abundant, possibly nationwide. Current demand is mostly being driven for 10% replacement Ethanol in gas as a replacment for MBTE.

    As long as conventional gas prices stays at current prices or goes up more, even with lower efficiency, E-85 ethanol.

    And if E85 does not come to pass, the 3.3 DC V-6 will still drink regular gas fairly efficiently.
  • sebring95sebring95 Posts: 3,225
    There's really not much special about getting an engine to run on E85. In fact, most would do it regardless. There are some issues with o-rings and other rubber parts (that Ethanol will destroy) but I'm not sure there's really a problem on todays fuel systems. So it really comes down to the engine computer being able to compensate for the way Ethanol detonates. The vehicles approved for E-85 have programming that can adjust when the system detects Ethanol fuel.

    My guess why other manufacturers aren't jumping on the wagon (or other engine configurations for DC) is because of the cost of certifying another engine for emissions/fuel economy. Costs a lot and they don't get a dime more for the E85 engines.
  • rorrrorr Posts: 3,630
    "Current demand is mostly being driven for 10% replacement Ethanol in gas as a replacment for MBTE. "

    As well as future demand as far as I can tell. The U.S. currently consumes around 140 Billion gallons of gas per year. We currently produce 4.4 Billion gallons of ethanol per year. To get JUST TO THE MANDATED 10% level for E10, we need to produce about 14 Billion gallons of ethanol (roughly 3x what we currently produce).

    I think ethanol demand will outstrip supply for quite some time, just to meet the E10 requirements. Which tells me that it will be a LONG time before E85 (domestically produced E85 anyway) is economically viable as a replacement for gasoline.

    Or we could just eliminate the high tariffs on sugar-cane based ethanol from Brazil in which case E85 would be economically viable much sooner.... ;)
  • badgerfanbadgerfan Posts: 1,564
    I think you may be underestimating the rate at which ethanol production is ramping up in the US, however with the 3.3L V-6 in the new Grand Caravan I am purchasing, I will be covered either way.
Sign In or Register to comment.