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

1155156158160161224

Comments

  • 1846618466 Posts: 46
    I have a degree in Mechanical Engineering and I am amazed at what people are worried about. Surface rust on engine parts that will never amount to anything in the life of the vehicle.

    Maybe we should worry about aluminum because it is typically 1/3 the strength of comparable thickness steel, but it looks better when it oxidizes.

    Chrysler and Honda both make good autos and it amazes me at what length the cheerleaders on either side will go to prove that the car they drive is the best choice for everyone and everything else is inferior.

    Also I wouldn't advise using a chemical cleaner on modern engines with a large amount of electronics, they don't mix well.
  • socalawdsocalawd Posts: 542
    I have a degree in Mechanical Engineering and I am amazed at what people are worried about. Surface rust on engine parts that will never amount to anything in the life of the vehicle.


    It sure is wierd. This guy just dosen't like the way it looks I've put like 250K(3 different cars) on the 3.3L with no issues.

    Maybe we should worry about aluminum because it is typically 1/3 the strength of comparable thickness steel, but it looks better when it oxidizes.


    Actually it is lighter and there are many different strength cast iron based on (impurities/carbon) and aluminum grade. If we knew all that then the tensile and fatigue strenght would be easier to find out! So I'm not sure which is better! Typicially cast iron is stronger, but more brittle due to the impurities.

    Chrysler and Honda both make good autos and it amazes me at what length the cheerleaders on either side will go to prove that the car they drive is the best choice for everyone and everything else is inferior.

    I think it all comes down to what meets your needs. Both in the wallet and the application.

    Also I wouldn't advise using a chemical cleaner on modern engines with a large amount of electronics, they don't mix well

    I actually wipe all the stuff off the out side of my engine without chemicials every time I wax it. People think it's wierd how clean it is in there! I also vac out all the debris that get in the engine compartment.
  • 1846618466 Posts: 46
    In our family we have owned 4 Chrysler minivans (3.8 liter) and two Hondas (Pilot and CRV). All have been good vehicles and have their specific problems.

    As far as the strength of aluminum vs cast iron, overall (many many alloys) the 1/3 strength of the aluminum seems to be the average comparison but also 1/3 the weight and it has better heat transfer. There are some very strong aluminum alloys but overall this holds true. Which one is better for a engine block is anybodys guess. Had an old Jeep Cherokee go over 180,000 miles with few problems (all cast iron). CRV has over 83000 miles and still going strong (all aluminum).

    Looks like you take great care of your car.

    Have a great day!
  • dennisctcdennisctc Posts: 1,168
    Over time, the rust spreads, and rust IS NOT GOOD to have on an engine.

    OMG I just checked out my one year old DCX GC SXT for rust!!!! There's rust on part of the exhaust manifold (some manufacturers use plastic exhaust manifold, I think DCX was first with 95 Neon), and some parts of the tranny assembly!!! I'm certain this is due to the horrific DCX quality, not just a function of metallurgy. I bet I could find rust on any Honda too!!! And since our expert has alerted us to the dangers of rust spreading...all rust is dangerous I could assume!

    It's great to have experts, sharing their wealth of knowledge with us! Info such as DCX's "plastic chain" (althought they wouldn't rust now would they?) that are actually wiring guides. Their expertise in IP design and safety. Unsupported knowledge of DCX's horrific quality. Finally people with backgrounds in Metallurgy is indispensible!!!!
  • dennisctcdennisctc Posts: 1,168
    I have a degree in Mechanical Engineering and I am amazed at what people are worried about. Surface rust on engine parts that will never amount to anything in the life of the vehicle.

    What amazes me are people who know nothing about what they're talking about, just making inflamatory statements with nothing to back em up!!!

    I too am a Mechanical Engineer from PENN STATE :) and have worked in the automotive field for 15 years, first in engineering of electrical components like connectors, clocksprings and PDCs (power distribution center/fuse box). I'm now in sales (the dark side) selling to Visteon which now produces radios/climate control modules/clusters/NAVs/RSEs for Ford, Honda, Nissan, BMW, DCX, Hyundai and GM.

    I think some people just want to flame, and aren't really as worried as they claim.
  • hansiennahansienna Posts: 2,312
    True story. There was a Sergeant Major stationed at the University of Wyoming who would wipe down and clean out the engine compartment of his new 1972 Oldsmobile Toronado on a weekly basis.
    When he got snow tires for the Toronado, he had them placed on the rear of the FWD Toronado...and did NOT have snow tires put on the drive wheels of the front. He was pleased with how much better the Toronado drove in the snow on a round trip to Denver from Laramie with the snow tires on the rear. ;)
    Do all people who wipe down and clean the engine compartment of their vehicles think alike? :shades:
  • fljoslinfljoslin Posts: 237
    I had a 1992 Grand Caravan with more or less the same engine that DC is still using. It was a good engine, but is prehistoric by today's standards. I recently purchased a 2006 Odyssey EX-L and get very close to the EPA rated gas mileage city and highway. I get this mileage because of the way that I drive which is to get good mileage. The Odyssey handles so well and has so much power that it is very easy to drive it in a more performance oriented way and your mileage will drop. At least I and the other Odyssey owners have that option. I can drive like an "old man" (no offense intended) or I can get out of a sticky situation through velocity or avoidance. I have it all. BTW, the VCM in the Odyssey is claimed to get ca. 1 mpg better city and 10% better highway where it is used more.
  • hansiennahansienna Posts: 2,312
    What is prehistoric about the DC 3.3 L V6 that has an EPA rating of 19/26? (which is a better rating than the Odd EX with cloth or LX engine).
    My 2002 T&C LX 3.3L has given me 28.2 MPG on a 1409 mile round trip and has an OVERALL average of 22.5 MPG. How many owners of the Odd have comparable gas mileage?? :confuse:
  • socalawdsocalawd Posts: 542
    When he got snow tires for the Toronado, he had them placed on the rear of the FWD Toronado...and did NOT have snow tires put on the drive wheels of the front. He was pleased with how much better the Toronado drove in the snow on a round trip to Denver from Laramie with the snow tires on the rear.

    That is what your supposed to do if you only have 2. I grew up in NY/NJ and was always told that. It keeps the back end from spinning out. Here's a link to a site Snowtire information
    that says that. link title

    It is regardless of wheather you have AWD(my personial favorite) FWD and RWD. I know you were trying to make fun of me but looks like it backfired! :P

    Do all people who wipe down and clean the engine compartment of their vehicles think alike?

    No!! But some people wish it was that way! I do think it's funny that a guy from Southern Ca has to tell a guy from Utah which place your snow tires go if you only have 2!! ;)
  • socalawdsocalawd Posts: 542
    What is prehistoric about the DC 3.3 L V6 that has an EPA rating of 19/26? (which is a better rating than the Odd EX with cloth or LX engine).

    Compared to the 19/25 for the odyssey which has 64 more horsepower and 30 ft lbs more torque. Also the Odyssey is 300lbs heavier and bigger in almost all places behind third row storage, leg room and head room. Altough overall cargo capacity is a bit smaller.
    The 3.3L is a older design but is less expensive and has fewer parts due to the pushrod design. All and all a fine engine for most applications.

    My 2002 T&C LX 3.3L has given me 28.2 MPG on a 1409 mile round trip and has an OVERALL average of 22.5 MPG. How many owners of the Odd have comparable gas mileage??

    I got less than 20mpg in my stripped SWB caravan. You must be very lucky. :shades:
  • dennisctcdennisctc Posts: 1,168
    Keep in mind you can get a 3.3 in a SWB Caravan for thousand$ less than any Ody available, still get decent gas mileage, warrantly and peace of mind driving a new warranted vehicle. OR go out and buy a used Ody with 60k miles, questionable history and possibly a warranty.
  • fljoslinfljoslin Posts: 237
    The following is a quote from the Allpar page (Mopars only http://www.allpar.com/mopar/33.html) about the 3.3 L engine:

    Introduced in 1990, the 3.3L was the first Mopar designed and built V6 engine to see duty in front wheel drive Chrysler vehicles.
    To start with, we motor room mechanics were a little disappointed when [the engineer] came down with the first prototype parts for the 3.3. We were expecting an overhead cam-high tech-high performance engine, and were shocked when we pulled out a bag containing push rods!

    Somebody had done a survey of potential customers and decided that the customer was too dumb to know what was under the hood anyway, so the "cost effective" approach was taken. Ford's Taurus engines and GM's 3.8 used pushrods, so why not us?


    This was in 1990, 15 years ago. I stand by the term "prehistoric" in 2005.
    You get good mileage and I commend you. I get similar mileage in my Odyssey EX-L. The difference is performance.
    The Odyssey significantly outperforms the 3.8 L DC vans in acceleration, handling and stopping and will be even better than the equivalent DC 3.3 L vans and the Odyssey weighs more. It is not just about mileage.
  • socalawdsocalawd Posts: 542
    Keep in mind you can get a 3.3 in a SWB Caravan for thousand$ less than any Ody available, still get decent gas mileage, warrantly and peace of mind driving a new warranted vehicle.

    Yes the warranty as far as I can tell for 2006 models the powertrain warranty is 5years/60K(all 2006 hondas) for the Odyssey and 3/36K for the DCX van. The bumper tp bumper is 3/36 for both. As for the SWB unless your really short on cash it has alot of shortcomings. No leg room, No storage room and no Stow and Go. I've been seeing alot of 2006 LX for sale at just over 23K. Now for the money THATS a SWEET deal. Or you could pay 20K for a DCX GC SE without all the great safety features! Really all up to what you want! Price isn't my main deciding factor. Driving something I want to keep 10 years was!
  • dennisctcdennisctc Posts: 1,168
    The following is a quote from the Allpar page (Mopars only http://www.allpar.com/mopar/33.html) about the 3.3 L engine:

    Your quote comes from [Name of writer withheld] ??????

    One would also think that maybe there's been ongoing improvements made to these "prehistoric" engines? You think.

    There are other comments in same website:

    With ample torque available early in the rpm range, the 3.3/3.8L series was well suited to its primary application as a source of power for Chrysler's award winning minivans.

    And how far back does Honda's 3.5/3.2 go back? 1995 or earlier? And GM's Corvette engine? 50 years?

    Seems to me the Ody's advantages, like a 1.4 second faster 0-60 time, or 4 foot shorter braking distance are minor, or someone's personal opinion of "handling" etc... Most minivan buyer are looking for price, quality and features. More minivan buyers are opting for DCX still after 20 years.
  • dennisctcdennisctc Posts: 1,168
    unless your really short on cash it has alot of shortcomings.

    Seeing SWB Caravan in Detroit for $17k...3.3l etc... $6k - $8k difference could go to setting up college funds for their children or many other things. Some people don't want large "minivans", don't need the space or really are short on cash. DCX gives them the most options for a minivan.
  • socalawdsocalawd Posts: 542
    Seeing SWB Caravan in Detroit for $17k...3.3l etc... $6k - $8k

    I'd buy a MPV! About the same price and more stuff.

    setting up college funds for their children

    Let em pay for it themselves. They appriciate it more! If my boy doesn't get a academic scholarship it's community college/then I'll help out on the next two years! Oh and I've been saving, but if they say they don't wanna go to school I'll be partying.

    Some people don't want large "Kminivanc", don't need the space or really are short on cash. DCX gives them the most options for a minivan.

    Actually I think it's the mazda MPV or the Mazda 5. That 5 is cool for the money! ;) Side airbags, ABS,driver lumbar, 21/26 mpg good handling, ZOOM ZOOM!!!
  • Prehistoric! Today's vehicles are all prehistoric in some ways. In 1961, AMC had an Aluminium Engine, 1920's Cord was using FWD and other early vehicles had 4 valves per cylinder, headlights that turned with the steering wheel to help see around corners. Other then the electronics that control the systems in todays vehicles, not much is new.

    Chrysler gives more people better choices to fit different budgets. I don't think that most scoccer moms care what the engine is made of. My wife would never dream of looking under the hood to look at the engine! What's under the hood of todays minivan isn't worth looking at anyways! Only a people hauler, not much more!
  • socalawdsocalawd Posts: 542
    Prehistoric! Today's vehicles are all prehistoric in some ways. In 1961, AMC had an Aluminium Engine, 1920's Cord was using FWD and other early vehicles had 4 valves per cylinder, headlights that turned with the steering wheel to help see around corners. Other then the electronics that control the systems in todays vehicles, not much is new.

    I think the first OHC was a 1912 Fiat. Thats a long time ago!

    Only a people hauler, not much more!

    I love my Odyssey it's like a luxury sedan and a 8 passenger vehicle in one. Some people just want a people hauler I wanted a little MORE!!!
  • I am glad that you think of your van as a "luxury" vehicle, I only see utility with leather. I like having more choices, engines, SWB and price. Chrysler is only giving the people what they ask for. Honda will someday find out what people are saying.....Give us more choices.

    Glad you are happy with your van. Thats what makes the world go round. Enjoy!
  • fljoslinfljoslin Posts: 237
    There have been improvements made to the 3.3L engine. It came out at 150 HP, increased to 158 HP and is now at 180 HP, I believe. I have a 1999 Intrepid with the 3.2 L engine. In 1999 it was close to the top of the food chain with 225 HP/ 225 ft/lbs torque. The competition have all increased their HP ratings, but my 1999 Intrepid is still in the running. My wife has a 2005 Pacifica with the 3.5 L engine. Again, this engine is competitive with other crossover SUVs. These engines were available six years ago and if Chrysler had made them optional in their premier minivans, they would have been leading the competition as they had done previously. However, DC chose to sit back, take the easy road and rely on customer loyalty. I do not simply believe that the more HP the better. However, up to a certain point, more is better and you need to be competitive. When I purchased my Intrepid, I also drove the Intrepid with the 2.7 L engine. I could not believe the improvement in driveability with the larger engine. I learned a valuable lesson.
    When comparing prices, the Honda that I purchased would have been very close to the cost of a comparably equipped Chrysler (leather, heated seats, full airbags, moon roof, power doors, etc.) but the Chrysler does not compete in the drivetrain for HP, Torque, 5 speed trans, VCM, nor in the mileage for the 3.8L. These things are important to me.
    Rumor has it the DC will be putting larger engines in their minivans soon. That is great, a little late, but they still need to get good mileage which is where the hard work comes.
  • socalawdsocalawd Posts: 542
    I like having more choices, engines, SWB and price. Chrysler is only giving the people what they ask for. Honda will someday find out what people are saying.....Give us more choices.

    They seem to be doing fine with the packaging they have now. 20 years ago DCX had a greater than 70% market share in minivans now the market share is 38%. And a large number of them are taxi, rental cars, and company lease vehicles. Seems that price is the big deal here. DCX is just giving people what they have on hand! If they want to make better profit margins they should make a car people want without having to give 5K off the top!
  • dennisctcdennisctc Posts: 1,168
    20 years ago DCX had a greater than 70% market share in minivans now the market share is 38%.

    True but look at the competition back then - VW Bus? truck based minivans from GM & Ford, and eventually weird looking vans from Japan. It took Honda till 1999 to really figure what what was wanted by consumers, and Toyota even longer!

    I remember an article about Honda 1999 version and how the Japanese couldn't figure out why Americans wanted something so large. Their head of Marketing spent months in US then, watching Americans at Home Depot, Walmart etc...actually using their Minivan. Then is sunk in!

    If they want to make better profit margins they should make a car people want without having to give 5K off the top! Kinda like the 300s and Chargers?

    I believe DCX is fine margins on their vans! Vans whose basic design is 10 years old (with updates), tooling mostly paid for, and CONSTANT $$$$ givebacks from suppliers like me!

    Keep in mind too, that these vans were initially designed by the old Chrysler Corp!!! No german influence/components at all. The 2007-2008 should be a banner year with diesels, 6 sp trannies, improvemed Stow N Go etc.. The Chrysler version is going to be vastly different from the Dodge, not just badge engineering again! And....cutting edge styling via Ralph Giles (Viper, PT Cruiser interior, 300c and Charger fame! plus acquaintance).
  • sebring95sebring95 Posts: 3,231
    Keep in mind too, that these vans were initially designed by the old Chrysler Corp!!! No german influence/components at all. The 2007-2008 should be a banner year with diesels, 6 sp trannies, improvemed Stow N Go etc.. The Chrysler version is going to be vastly different from the Dodge, not just badge engineering again! And....cutting edge styling via Ralph Giles (Viper, PT Cruiser interior, 300c and Charger fame! plus acquaintance).

    Great! We all have something to look forward to!! In the mean time, my 2005 Ody delivers the engine, performance, and excellent driving feel that I desire. If DC can throw out an '07 T&C with a super quiet and buttery 250hp (maybe more???!!) engine, 5,6,7 speed automatic, crisp handling, proper steering feel, a well laid-out interior, top-notch DVD/Navigation, and stability control maybe the Ody will have a real competitor on its hands. If they can keep the price well below the Ody, it might be a blow-out for all but the hard-core Hondaphiles (which I'm not, I just buy what I like the best at the moment...). I'll be ready for a new one in '08 so bring it.
  • aaron_taaron_t Posts: 301
    I'm seeing T&C base models for <$14k. SWB + 3.3L. Touring <$20k. LX model does not look like a good value to me vs. the Touring/GC SXT. Lots more equipment for $2200 more.

    The 3.8L DCX pushrod has about the same amount of torque <4k rpm as the Honda 3.5L In all but WOT applications, the acceleration is much closer than the car rags show.
  • hansiennahansienna Posts: 2,312
    DC minivans still lead the competition while Sienna also provides the Odyssey all the competition Honda can handle. ;)
  • socalawdsocalawd Posts: 542
    . LX model does not look like a good value to me vs. the Touring/GC SXT. Lots more equipment for $2200 more.

    It's not bad for a lot more standard safety equipment. Matters what your priorities are!

    The 3.8L DCX pushrod has about the same amount of torque

    I'm not so sure about that! But I think the passing time is much quicker for the Odyssey. Also I think the braking is better than CR says. MT has the Ody at 60-0 in 123 ft and Dodge GC SXT at 136 ft. Also has a more than 10% better gas mileage everywhere I look. 2006 Odyssey now has a better warranty!
  • sebring95sebring95 Posts: 3,231
    Sienna and T&C are much closer for those that like the disassociated steering/road feel. The Ody drives much closer to a euro machine and I would imagine a little german influence in the T&C should help things greatly. I doubt Toyota will ever try the sporty route. The only way I can stomach driving my wifes GX470 is to twist the suspension all the way to extreme sport, lower the suspension, and pop a couple dramimine. Driving feel is not a Toyota quality, nor anything DC made prior to the 300. Maybe they'll have an SRT T&C :surprise:
  • socalawdsocalawd Posts: 542
    DC minivans still lead the competition while Sienna also provides the Odyssey all the competition Honda can handle

    Not alot of substance in this post! But Sienna lost sales last year about -1% and Ody was up 15+%. But lets not let the facts get in the way.
  • hansiennahansienna Posts: 2,312
    IF so, the DC minivans have the best quality. If you imply the Odd is better than the Sienna because Odd sales were up 15+ % while Sienna sales were down 1 %, then DC minivans have the BEST quality based on sales numbers. ;)
  • aaron_taaron_t Posts: 301
    $2200 more for the Touring gets:

    3.8L vs. 3.3L
    16" Aluminum wheels vs. 15" steel/hubcaps
    2 more speakers
    Tape player
    Power driver's seat
    3-zone manual HVAC w. rear AC vs. one
    Power driver's side sliding door
    Leather wrapped steering wheel w/ audio controls
    map/reading lights
    overhead console/trip computer/Homelink
    power liftgate
    tire pressure monitor
    traction control
    roof rack

    Or all the above except the power liftgate in the GC SXT for $1500 more.

    I haven't found actual dyno plots for either, but peak torque of 240lb-ft for the 3.8L at 4000rpm vs. 240 @ 5000rpm for the 3.5L. That's peak implying that at any other engine speed it has less than peak torque. So, at 4000rpm, the DCX 3.8L has more torque (and horsepower) than the Honda 3.5L. I'm sure both have both have 90% of torque >1500rpm and torque differences at any specific engine speed between 1500 and 4500rpm is negligible.

    Honda has an extra gear, but more weight.

    Car rag passing times = WOT to redline. I'm not surprised the Ody is quicker. As for braking, I've seen conflicting results, one mag with the Ody. shorter, another with the DCX shorter.

    Mileage: non-vcm is very close to the 3.8L with the VCM 3.5L about 10% better.
This discussion has been closed.