Howdy, Stranger!

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





2008 Minivans

1535456585962

Comments

  • hansiennahansienna Posts: 2,312
    How many miles do you now have on your 39 month old GC SXT? What is your fuel economy?

    (My 2006 Sienna LE gets slightly better gas mileage than my 2002 T&C LX 3.3L got.) :shades:
  • artgpoartgpo Posts: 483
    What do you believe in, little green men? I owned almost nothing but American cars and minivans (4 American minivans from 1993 - 2005). Only one was was a POC and that one was a Chrysler product. The other Chrysler products I owned were also junk as was the 2008 Sebring I just drove for three days.

    You don't believe CR and you bash owners such as myself without knowing me or the FACTS. Every American mini I have owned: GM x 2 and Ford excepting the Dodge were excellent. I owned many American cars as well so why do you say I "bash" American vehicles? I state unemotional facts to try and help people avoid buying a new Chrysler rolling piece of junk. You get SO emotional and personal.

    Back off dude and let the information freely flow without insults, racial slurs and innuendo so people can make their own mind up on 2008 minivans.
  • marine2marine2 Posts: 1,155
    How many miles do you now have on your 39 month old GC SXT? What is your fuel economy?

    (My 2006 Sienna LE gets slightly better gas mileage than my 2002 T&C LX 3.3L got.)


    I have 42,000 on my 2005 and using a calculator and not the overhead computer, I get around 17 MPG city and the highest I got on a trip to California, from Arizona was 23.9mpg. Never have been able to go on a full tank without crossing mountains so not sure what I could get on flat land.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    Looking at some of the details, dbt was on to something:

    For the Ody, CR gives them below average scores up until the 2003 model, any one want to guess what category?

    Transmissions.

    So not only does CR score these Japanese-brand vans poorly in those categories, they happen to be the ones you guys keep bringing up.

    Honestly, you should stop saying CR is biased, and jump on the CR bandwagon and complement them for accurately pointing out that these Japan-brand minivans are far from perfect! LOL
  • marine2marine2 Posts: 1,155
    What do you believe in, little green men? I owned almost nothing but American cars and minivans (4 American minivans from 1993 - 2005). Only one was was a POC and that one was a Chrysler product. The other Chrysler products I owned were also junk as was the 2008 Sebring I just drove for three days.

    I doubt anyone on this board has own more Chrysler products than I have. Going all the way back to a used 41 Plymouth and a 48 Chrysler New Yorker. My last two were a 2001Dodge Dakota PU I traded for the 2005 minivan. We had a 1993 Eagle Vision we traded for our 2004 Honda Civic. The Eagle was one of the best cars we ever owned. The only ones we had any real problems with was a 1975 Plymouth and a 1954 Chrysler. I have also owned a Duster, New Yorker, Neon and Charger.

    I have the 2008 CR Buyers guide. If you look at yours, see if they have any blacks spots on the 2004-2006 Tundra and the 2004 -2006-7 Sequoia. Toyota has had a lot of problems with those, especially with the suspension's lower ball joints. But they don't show that in their latest addition. They don't tell about all the recalls on Toyotas and the recalls Toyota should have made on many of their models and didn't. Why? They have had time to update their scores on them, but haven't. Here Toyota has recalled in one year, more carsand trucks than they built. But you'd never know it looking at CR
  • marine2marine2 Posts: 1,155
    As a matter of fact, in the 2008 CR Buyers Guide, they rate the 2008 Toyota Sequoia. as above average in dependability even though they have had troubles for at least six years with steering and ball joint problems. How do they know the 2008 will be any different than the 2002-2007's? Which they still do not recognize the problem. from 2004-2007
  • marine2marine2 Posts: 1,155
    Now again using the CR Buying Guide, (Rating the 2008 Models.) On page 149, they don't even list the Dodge/Chrysler minivans, under (Minivans) Why? Under (Wagons and Hatchbacks), on the same page, they list the Dodge Caliber, and say it is a new model under predicted reliability and new, under owner satisfaction. But they don't even list the best selling minivans on the market for 2008 under (Minivans)? And then say they aren't biased against American?

    I remember when I looked at CR after I bought my 2005. They had practly nothing good to say about it. Worse than average predictability. I haven't had it in the shop once in 38 months. Talked about how slow it was compared to Honda and Toyota although it was only about 1.8 seconds slower in the quarter mile than the Honda. They said the instrument panel was (busy) What the heck does that mean? There is nothing wrong with the instrument panel. Everything is laid out pretty easy to get at and simple. Not as nice looking as the Honda and Toyota, but (Busy)?
  • carcom2carcom2 Posts: 212
    For those that don't think your top load washer washes as well as a side loader, have you used the High Efficiency detergent recommended for the newer top loaders. Some manuf. are requiring it to not void out the warranty I've been told. The HE stuff works better for those HE machines. Our top loader cleans great.

    CR, wether sometimes biased or not, just like our opinions even when trying to be as objective as possible, doesn't always have info. matching our own experience. It's just another tool that you may or may not consider to make your decision. Use your brain. I've had much better experience with all 3 Dodge/Chrysler products we currently own compared to CR ratings. And like them better than the Ford/Mercury stuff of the past. When I've looked at CR "black dots" in some categories, they did not coincide with my actual experience at all. I have had no regrets at all buying these 3 - 2005 300C, 2002 Intrepid, 1997 Grand Caravan.

    Anyway, for all you complainer and also the optimists, seems like you should check out the Chrysler website accolades from Popular Mechanics, Popular Science and others:

    http://www.chrysler.com/en/2008/town_country/accolades/awards/
  • artgpoartgpo Posts: 483
    Once again personal experience/observation trumps CR. Just remember, opinion is like a rectum, everyone has one including CR and we posters to these boards.

    Having owned many minivans I qualify for having seven opinions (rectums?). Would I buy another VW or Chrysler? HECK NO! I am glad to see VW teaming up with Chrysler because the baby of that marriage will undoubtedly be the most black dotted model in CR's minivan history.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    As to that 2nd article, the issue is that public perception lags a few years behind reality.

    Many domestics have indeed improved, look at the CR ratings for the Fusion for instance. The public perception will catch up about 4-5 years from now.

    They still have the Taurus fresh in their memories.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    Whoa, whoa, wait a second...

    Mitsubishi was the one hiding defects (not recalls). Not Toyota.

    You're talking about 2 different companies.

    I'll also point out that Mitsubishi was basically being controlled by Chrysler at the time. Though the hidden recalls were due to corruption at their headquarters in Japan, certainly not anything Chrysler did.

    I don't see recalls as a bad thing per se. A recall is a manufacturer taking reponsibility for a problem, and a problem that they have found a solution for.

    The hidden defects scandal is very, very different. Mitsubishi knew about patterns of problems and hid that knowledge, in fact did *not* recall those vehicles. A recall would have been the solution - but no, they chose not to recall them.

    So we should not say "hidden recall" at all, really.

    And for the record I don't trust Mitsubishi, in fact I've argued this issue with some Outlander owners in the crossovers thread. They pitch "Made in Japan" as a defacto advantage, and I disagree.

    The Sienna is built in Indiana, the Ody in the US/Canada, FWIW.
  • marine2marine2 Posts: 1,155
    Once again personal experience/observation trumps CR. Just remember, opinion is like a rectum, everyone has one including CR and we posters to these boards.

    Having owned many minivans I qualify for having seven opinions (rectums?). Would I buy another VW or Chrysler? HECK NO! I am glad to see VW teaming up with Chrysler because the baby of that marriage will undoubtedly be the most black dotted model in CR's minivan history.


    Your right there. This may be my first minivan, also my sister's first and my brother's second. Between four of them, only a freeze plug had to be replaced. I think that's pretty good.

    Problem is, many Americans are still judging American quality to the stuff they were putting out in the 70's and early eighties. Things have changed. Chrysler had problems in the 1990's with trannies. Honda had problems with trannies in the early 2000's. Toyota had engine problems in the early 2000's. But all put out some pretty reliable stuff now. If they didn't we wouldn't buy them and brother wouldn't buy his second one, after owning the first for five years.
  • maryh3maryh3 Posts: 263
    Marine, I laugh on my way to the bank and don't let it phase me. I found 2 articles that sound like I could have written them.

    http://www.allpar.com/cr.html

    http://www.topspeed.com/cars/car-news/consumer-reports-never-to-be-truted-ar4156- 9.html

    But we have to stop all this CR discussion as the moderator doesn't want this forum to overlap with their CR/JD Powers board.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    The vans are not listed because they are new and had not yet been fully evaluated at that point.

    Also, the 4.0l V6 engine is new to the vans, though I believe it was used in the Pacifica. They may not have enough data, however.

    Plus the 6 speed transmission is new.

    They can't really forecast reliability for an entirely new powertrain, which seems fair.

    The vans are listed under the historical reliability ratings.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    CR should be used for hindsight - not foresight.

    Bingo, I think that statement pretty much nails it.

    Now, the exception to that rule, in my opinion, is when a certain powertrain combination has been in production for a while and has done historically well.

    For instance, Toyota's 5 speed automatic, code name U151E, has been used for years in many models and always scored well. I think it's fair to expect better than average reliability.

    Then look at Toyota's new 6 speed, code name U660E, which has been more problematic. It's used the V6 Camry, and indeed, the complaints we've heard in the real world are the reason CR dropped their recommended rating from the Camry V6 (V6 only, the 4 cyldiner and hybrid models still do well).

    Anyone care to guess which transmission is used in the 4 cylinder Camry? You guessed it, the older 5 speed. And yes, as you would expect, it's still reliable and still recommended by CR.

    Now, going back to the poing Mary made, hindsight tells us the U151E, which is still used in the Sienna to this day, has been and continues to be a reliable transmission. So this hindsight still tells you the Sienna's transmission is a good one.

    CR failed to predict reliability for the U660E, however. They recommended the Camry V6 without any historical data, and this bit them back. This is the "not foresight" part Mary mentioned.

    Even though Mary and I haven't agreed often in the past, I think she made the most valid point yet about CR.

    We should use CR's data wisely. Odds are, if the 4.0l V6 in the Pacifica proves to reliable, and the 6 speed automatic used in other vehicles prior to the Grand Caravan also score well, then the Grand Caravan will, too.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    This guy is on a mission, and I like that he runs the site on his own, accepts only data from actual owners after verifying the VIN numbers show that the vehicles are for real:

    http://truedelta.com/latest_results.php?session_code=

    This is a small operation so he doesn't have enough data to rate a lot of vehicles, but he's building up his database.

    By the way, that allpar.com article actually recommends True Delta for reliability history over CR.

    Also, it's a real grass-roots effort. He goes to different forums and asks members there to register and start giving him input.

    Note the Sienna still scores extremely well. There isn't a lot of data for Dodge but the Grand Caracan scores better than average.

    Any how, another source if anyone's looking.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    That's good, but those aren't exactly the leaders in automotive publications.

    I'd be more impressed if it were Edmunds, Car & Driver, Road & Track, Autoweek, Automobile, etc.
  • marine2marine2 Posts: 1,155
    I think these two make much more sense when talking of quality and perception.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:DeLarge/recall

    http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1753099/posts
  • bobw3bobw3 Posts: 2,997
    In general, it is hard to dispute somebodies experience and I think it is a mistake to do so with most issues in life

    Dangerous logic in my opinion. For example, if your neighbor is killed because there car flipped over and they could crawl out of the car because they were tangled in their seatbelt and died, but if they weren't wearing a seatbelt they might have been able to crawl out and survive, so by your logic you'd stop wearing a seat belt because you have a personal experience where a seatbelt actually cause a death. So you're ignoring research over a single personal experience.

    Or you need routine surgery to save your life, but there's a small chance that you could die under the anesthetic, but the studies and research say it's unlikely. However your cousin died uner anesthetic for a minor surgery, so based on this personal experience you'll never go into anesthetic.

    That sort of logic is nonsense.

    If you want to live your life ignoring all reasearch and study and just live based on your personal experience that's up to you, but I just hope you have a lot of personal friends that are a good statistic sample of the population ;)

    BTW...I have a bosch front loading washer that will make your whites so white you'll think they're brand new and that's without using bleach!

    To get on the car topic...there's more to having a quality car than not having something break down after 150,000 miles. I don't want to drive a vehicle with poor handling, braking, driving dynamics, interior cheapness, etc...just because it will go 150,000 with zero problems. Personally I'd rather drive a minivan that has the driving dynamics of a car, with great interior quality and features, comfortable seats, good MPG, etc...and if it's to spend a couple more days in the shop than the previous car then that's okay, because the overall driving experience after years of driving a vehicle are more important than a few extra days in the shop.
  • marine2marine2 Posts: 1,155
    As to that 2nd article, the issue is that public perception lags a few years behind reality.

    Many domestics have indeed improved, look at the CR ratings for the Fusion for instance. The public perception will catch up about 4-5 years from now.

    They still have the Taurus fresh in their memories.


    That could be true. But when a manufacture that is supposed to be known for putting out the best quality of vehicles on the planet, is caught hiding recalls and still has more recalls than vehicles made in one year, I think says something about how much you can trust them. Here you have two Japanese companies hiding recalls, while trying to pretend that their vehicles are much better than anything America makes. That belief is ingrained into millions of people's mind. To the point they won't even try an American vehicle again. That hurts this country, because billions of dollars are being taken out of our economy and helping theirs. It's also helped cause the devaluation of our dollar and hurt us in the balance of trade. Not even counting the good paying jobs lost.
This discussion has been closed.