By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
No, but they tell you a lot. Like, if you're loading the suspension quickly (like you would in an emergency lane change) the stability control equipped models have higher speeds. Higher speeds through a controlled lane change = safer vehicle when an emergency arises.
I find that comment a little suspect as well. Every time I've been to a BMW event at one of our local tracks, EVERYBODY turns off their skid control systems so that they can improve the handling of their cars.
Well, they're turning it off so they can drift through the turns, which can increase lap times. Not quite the same as technically making the car handle better, you're just exceeding the grip of the tires in lieu of using brake/throttle. The fact that you can't drift the car with stability turned on should tell you a lot.
That said, when driving in slippery conditions with either of my "i" model BMWs I made damn sure the DSC was engaged (no surprise there). The counterpoint to those two cars is the minivan, a benign sled like handling FWD vehicle, complete with inherent understeer. Go into a corner too fast on one of these things, Odyssey, Caravan, Sienna, it makes no difference, stability control is only going to be able to do so much.
Oh sure there's a limit, but stability does pickup on steering inputs vs speed/yaw/etc. and if you're asking for more than the vehicle can physically provide it's going to do everything possible (beyond what even an experienced driver) could do in a split second to correct. Maybe a complete knucklehead move can't be fixed by stability control, but can't make the outcome any worse.
Sorry, not buying that argument, especially when we're discussing understeer prone FWD minivans. Please point me to a few back to back tests of a FWD vehicle (preferably a minivan) that was able to post better slalom times with a skid control system enabled.
"Oh sure there's a limit, but stability does pickup on steering inputs vs speed/yaw/etc. and if you're asking for more than the vehicle can physically provide it's going to do everything possible (beyond what even an experienced driver) could do in a split second to correct. Maybe a complete knucklehead move can't be fixed by stability control, but can't make the outcome any worse."
That's my point. Once you are into understeer on this type of vehicle there really isn't all that much that can be done from the perspective of a stability control system. If anything you are actually bolstering my argument.
Best Regards,
Shipo
Shipo, the air susension is only availible with the $600 towing prep package on DCX vans, as you discovered.
Understeer, oversteer, doesn't really matter. It's going to detect a steering motion that's not compatible with the direction/speed of the vehicle and brake accordingly. If the vehicle detects understeer, it applies the rear inside brakes which will assist the vehicle turn in the correct direction. Oversteer brakes the outside front wheel. That's pretty simple driver dynamics stuff there, except YOU can't control the brakes on one wheel. Of course as you mentioned, if you're plowing into a turn well beyond reason you're not going to recover. But that's pure stupidity which nothing can help
I can't find the article/story on the slalom test. I believe they were late-model Grand Prix's they were testing and the most obvious difference was when they wet the track. Either way, it's pretty simple that with stability control you can run beyond the capabilities of a normal vehicle so there's no reason you couldn't go quicker through a slalom/emergency maneuver. The non-stability controlled vehicle will spin-out more easily which ends the test. If you're racing on a track, you want the car to work completely differently and disabling stability makes sense.
Is this your rationalization of what you think is going on or do you really know for a fact that braking the inside rear wheel (the wheel that will have the least amount of absolute traction in this scenario) will correct for oversteer? If this is scientific fact, please refer me to your source. Until then I maintain that stability control on a FWD sled like a minivan is a highly questionable option.
Best Regards,
Shipo
Funny how styling affects us. I DON'T like the Civic design where the windshield is longer than the hood nor do I like the Chrysler 300 where the roof looks like an elephant sat on it and made the side windows too short.
IF I had to sit in any seat other than the driver's seat for any great distance, the Odyssey would be the BEST vehicle for me. Since I do most of the driving, the compass/outside temperature and trip computer information is very important (but probably a distraction) and the driver's seat of our 2006 Sienna LE is as comfortable as any driver's seat.
I got a back ache while riding in the 2nd row seat of the Sienna for a couple of hours last August while our daughter drove. The 2002 T&C LX 2nd row seats never caused the bach ache for a longer period of time.
Test drives are never long enough to find the dislikes of any vehicle. I do NOT like the shiny circles around the speedometer, tachometer, etc. in the Sienna instrument cluster and I HATE the shiny surfaces in the middle of the Sienna dash. On the other hand, I never did like the white faced instruments of the 02 T&C LX.
You can google stability control and get as much information and technical specs as you want. The way I explained it is how (in a very basic situation such as understeer/oversteer) stability will correct actions. Keep in mind stability works BEFORE you go clear into full-blown understeer, so it's a HUGE advantage for a FWD sled like a minivan. Now if you want to throw in an emergency lane change with two wheels ending up in loose gravel on the berm....then it's a little more challenging. Even with my experience driving race cars, I won't buy a truck/suv/minivan without stability these days. I won't say that about a car, but if it's an option I'll take it.
Well, considering he drives about 30-35k miles a year (he bought his current 05 Accord Dec of 2004 and has 68,000 miles on it now) , 6 MPG over 2 years will add up to be as important as the drop in car payment (going down about $50 a month).
The Civic sedan isn't my favorite style, but I do love the coupe's look.
If dad drives 3,000 miles a month, and gets approx. the city estimate (as he does now in the Accord - 24 MPG) he will use 100 gallons of gas, vs. 125 gallons in the Accord. With summer prices around $2.90 and prices in winter hovering at $2.15 here, we'll say $2.50 a gallon for average. 25 gallons a month at $2.50 a gallon is $62.50 a month. (Say $60 for numbers' sake). $60 a month is $720 a year; or you could say the gas savings is going to pay our cell-phone bill from now on. With the $50 payment drop, and the $60 gas drop, he's going to be shelling out over $100 less per month on driving.
The real question is now how his insurance rates will change.
This is off topic, but we can carry on in the Civic forum if ya want. Sorry to everyone else who can care less about the Civic. I'm through
My brother just got an Entourage Limited with the Entertainment package (13 speaker Infinity). Best in-car sound I've personally heard without going aftermarket.
I like the van a lot, waiting to see if they have some better incentives coming - was there Saturday and it's not worth it for me to make the switch yet
link title
hopefully, not old news. :P
When I checked my Volkswagen MANY years ago, the odometer read 4 % more miles driven than the actual miles. The speedometer was also overly optimistic.
These built in errors caused me to think the Volkswagen was getting better gas mileage than it actually did and made me wonder why people were passing me all the time.
My son's Odyssey showed 2.6 % more distance than my 2002 T&C LX when driven on the same course.
I regret NOT driving the 01 Ody, 02 T&C, and 06 Sienna on the same course instead of comparing Ody with T&C and then later comparing Sienna with the Ody.
Interestingly, the T&C Trip Computer was closer to actual mileage when computing by dividing long trip miles driven by gasoline consumed than is the Sienna. T&C was about 1 % overly optimistic while the Sienna is just over 3 % higher than actual gas mileage.
Yes.
Is there any ground we HAVEN'T already covered on these two vans? I'd love to know what it is. Otherwise, I'm going back to sleep......
I would buy an Odyssey IF the dealers were not overly arrogant AND the Odyssey LX were offered with separately controlled temperature for driver and front passenger AND a complete overhead console with compass/outside temp/trip computer.
I do NOT want to pay extra to get power sliding doors on each side and cast wheels.
I would like to see DC make a less CHEAP interior, offer the most powerful engine on all models, and have the complete overhead console optional on ALL models.
I think Honda is wise to NOT offer Factory Discounts/Rebates/Incentives like DC and Toyota offer. It is easier to know I did not pay too much when a company is consistent in their marketing schemes.
Honda & Toyota have become complacent since their former reliability ratings are carrying sales.
http://www.autoblog.com/photos/2008-dodge-caravan-1/123329/
I would never ever buy another chrysler product nor could I ever recommend it to anyone. My van still runs, mostly because all it's parts are now new....rofl
But it is now used by my husband to get to work. We could not continue to use it as a family car. Too unreliable, thus unsafe. We went on ahead and bought a honda crv for the family, rather than all sitting in a roomy, packed with features caravan. What does that tell you? At least now, family and I drive on in peace!
When we can save up some money, caravan goes and husband can by a reliable small car for himsefl.
My girlfriend swore her van was awesome, had to be only mine, well guess who was picking her up off the highway cause her transmission blew? Yep, me in my clunker caravan.
Now mine leaks power steering fluid. Or rather, my husbands van.
So I am glad that you are enjoying your van. No need to get snippy on me. You lucked out, many have not. Funny how we got the caravan because it was top rated in Consumer Reports and then within another year or two, alot of their reviews on the caravan were lousy.
Meanwhile, enjoy your MUCH smaller CR-V.
I bet they are. And the extra 5 MPG that comes with it!
I bet they are. And the extra 5 MPG that comes with it!
lol....did I miss something here! I thought this board was dead!
Thanx I am super loving my much smaller CRV with way more cargo room and one less kid in the car to shuttle around...woohooo, teen driver, right
BTW, dh is driving around that caravan. Let's see last year was the a/c finally got fixed after the third year of repairs, last year was the brake work repair and now this year is the power steering. But I told dh he is not allowed another repair. So hopefully we'll be able to afford a used car.
And teen driver will be driving the 93 dodge shadow! How's that for keeping a car around???
The only thing that would worry me about that would be lack of safety features. I'd at least want a car with dual airbags for a new driver.
Have verbally negotiated a good deal on a new Honda Odyssey, however have just recently been offered a family van (the Chrysler) for $10,000 less. Seems like a no-brainer to go the cheaper route - the Chrysler only has 27k miles on it. But I'm still a little leary about the Chrysler product's reliability over the long haul. If you were in a similar situation, would you go the new van route or save the cash and go with the 3yr old model?
I'm just now trying to do analysis on cost of ownership on this used car to determine whether the current savings would dwindle next to zero over the next 5 years. Resale value after 5 years could make up a huge difference in the numbers, but I'm not sure if it would be that significant.
Combined the above repairs total to about thirty-four hundred dollars (and change), which given the mileage is awfully darned inexpensive. ;-)
Best Regards,
Shipo
The lack of Stow N Go in the 04 is a big negative for me, and the fold flat third row comes in handy more times than you think...
The only thing that would worry me about that would be lack of safety features. I'd at least want a car with dual airbags for a new driver.
I think with just the one airbag, this is a good starter car. It will be a long while before he's driving anyone around, particularly other teens.
It is certainly a whole lot safer and better than any car I started out with.
That said, I am prone to the paranoid and now you have started up my paranoid zone.
Thank God for the school buses, that he will use daily for school! That limits car time to work and home only....
Have verbally negotiated a good deal on a new Honda Odyssey, however have just recently been offered a family van (the Chrysler) for $10,000 less. Seems like a no-brainer to go the cheaper route - the Chrysler only has 27k miles on it. But I'm still a little leary about the Chrysler product's reliability over the long haul. If you were in a similar situation, would you go the new van route or save the cash and go with the 3yr old model?
I'd say do your homework. There are a few around here who swear by their dodge products and have themselves experienced good things with them, along with friends.
We've had the whole other spectrum with dodge. had a terrific car with them so we went with the caravan when van shopping. CR had them rated top of the line and we thought, why not. Well, the next year, the reliability rating in CR plummeted. We had awful experiences from the first year of owning it.
So check the newer issues of CR, check online reviews here for that model caravan that you are looking for. See if it is acceptable to you. Sometimes price is not the first consideration in car buying. You may end up with the more expensive deal when trying to save a few dollars.
Good luck and most of all, make it a fun car buying experience
I started in a 1996 Accord. Dual Airbags are all it has (I still drive it regularly!). No ABS has been something that's scared me only a handful of times though, and I'm turning 20 next month (got the car 50,000 miles ago in August of 2002). I'm now at 174k miles, and haven't been injured in either of my two wrecks in that car (wrecks that combined cost over $4,000 to repair - NOT MY FAULT, but still!).
Don't be paranoid. In a Shadow, and in the city, he won't be going too fast to do anyone too much harm, much less himself since he has an airbag.
Honda's are nice(I own one), but the Chrysler products are decent as well. Parts will be a lot cheaper to come buy than the import products and you'll be able to afford to stick some money into it with the savings you're looking at.
It's that sort of stuff that will nickel and dime a customer right into the arms of another make of car. Sure, I'm sure any manufacturer has its share of the same, but your vehicle seems particularly full of little issues to have so few miles.
Yep, he does have the airbag. I have never had ABS up until now. It was never a big thing because being a NYC driver, I really pump brakes. I have beeen making an effort with my new car NOT to do that, but darn if it ain't hard
thanx for the kind words. I do worry about him. People here drive awful...I have seen worse driving habits than any big city up north in this little town!
In our case, our 2003 developed the infamous "clunk" somewhere in the thirty to forty thousand mile range and we simply ignored it until about the 85,000 mile mark when it finally got annoying enough to do something about. I am an analyst by trade and as such am a fan of changing one thing at a time instead of throwing a whole bunch of parts at a problem hoping to solve it via brute force. So, ignoring the dire warnings of many experienced folks, I simply changed the bushings (I used the NAPA "Blue" bushings that cost about $11.00) and NOT the links.
When I admitted what I had done I was told that I'd need to go back in and replace the links as well and that I was a fool for not doing them all at the same time. Well, I'm here to say that nearly 10,000 miles later and our 2003 is still as quiet as it was the day it rolled out of the showroom. ;-)
In defence of the "You must change the links" folks, I've heard anecdotal reports that suggest that Chrysler used two different end link types, one primarily plastic and one primarily metal. If that is the case, then I can certainly understand why some folks are convinced that the links are needing replacement at the same time as the bushings.
Best Regards,
Shipo