Chrysler Pacifica

oedipus1608

I read the article in Motortrend. They printed an estimated 0-60 time of a little over nine seconds. On the contrary, I believe that the people over at Motortrend made a mistake. Given the Pacifica's 250hp, low drag coefficient and moderate weight, the Pacifica should be able to make 60mph in about plus or minus 8 seconds. The Chrysler Town and Country Limited, which only has a 215hp engine and is heavier than the Pacifica, can reach 60mph in 9.7 seconds. Motortrend never mentioned anything about the car being sluggish. In fact, they praised the engine noting that it has no problem moving the Pacifica quickly. I would wait until another Auto Magazine publishes a first drive article before coming to conclusions. The 300hp hemi will also be available in the Pacifica for people that need a little more thurst. Chrysler took great effort to make the public know that the Pacifica is not a station wagon. Notice that in station wagon the word station or stationary, means not moving. Chrysler made sure that the Pacifica is called a sport tourer.
P.S. I read in another post asking why the Pacifica did not have the transmission from the E-Class. I think tht Chrysler is putting the E-Class transmission in the V-8 hemi 300hp hemi version of the Pacifica. The Pacifica that Motortrend was allowed to dive was the Pacifica with the 250hp engine.

russklass

"Given the Pacifica's 250hp, low drag coefficient and moderate weight..."
MODERATE WEIGHT????
Are you kidding? That "moderate" weight is 4672 lbs!
Also, forget the Hemi for the Pacifica. For some reason Chryslet opted for an "east-west" engine placement for the Pacifica, rather than a longititudinal arrangement.
The Hemi engine/transmission would need to be completely redesigned for Pacifica application.

fast929

adp3, I too have looked at the AWD T&C. We can get one cheap due to having a family member who works at Chrysler. With the employee discount, $4250 in cash, $1670 leather credit of the LXI, I can get a $39k T&C for $28.4K. What a bargain, huh? Funny thing is I'm challenged to go back to a minivan...even with that kind of deal.

The 2004 Sienna has a number of features that the T&C doesn't: 230hp, power rr windows (nice for the kids to get some air), fold flat seats vs. taking them out, 17" wheels. I haven't seen too many pictures of it yet but it is supposed to be at dealers in two weeks. It won't come close to the deal I can get with the T&C. It's still a minivan though.

Your thought on the carrier on top is the only consolation to going with the Pacifica...if it drives well and accelerates better then what we are all talking about.

RE the Yukon XL. They are taking it back. I might just go with another one, relunctantly.

carlbyrd

First Cruiser's and now the Pacifica. When will Chrysler take note of all the foreign jobs that come day one with dual exhausts. The prelim photos you'll recall had duals set into the rear - and now they're gone. What's up! Such a beautiful, well conceived car and while trying to compete with the overseas jobs, knowing that know Americans like thing in sets, and they go brain dead. Even the 300m special now has duals! Guess it'll be a 2005 sport option.

oedipus1608

The Pacifica is moderate in weight. It only weighs about 20lbs heavier in AWD than a Honda pilot, which has 240hp and a 0-60 time of 8.2 seconds. Please wait until some one else prints their first drive with the Pacifica before coming to a conclusion about the car. I'm 99% sure that Motor trend made a mistake, they always do. I sent an email to Chrysler about the E-class transmission, and the hemi engine which should and will be in the Pacifica. (Unless any of you are Chrysler engineers and or developed the Pacifica, I doubt that you have any knowledge whether or not the Pacifica would have to completely redesigned for the hemi engine.) I'll post Chrysler's response. Untill then, hold the comments.

regfootball

4700 pounds is hardly moderate.

i dunno what an a6 quattro wagon weighs but a pacifica is basically that with a taller roof. shouldn't be more than 4100 pounds or so.....

edmunds lists an audi wagon at 3924.....how bout an e class awd wagon.....4043 pounds.......

pacifica=fat.

ruski

it is *estimated*

which means that they have not tested it, they just are making a guess.

deerlake7

Got a copy of a salesperson's Pacifica comparison form. It compares the Pacifica to the MDX, RX300, XC90, X5 and the Rendeveux. It states a 9.9 second 0 to 60 time for the Pacifica. MDX was around 8.8, with the X5/3.0 at 8.1. Everything looks like it's worth replacing my Highlander with this, but the drivetrain may kill it for me.

nedzel

Oedipus: As russklass mentioned, the Pacifica uses a transverse engine. There's no way that Chryco can fit a V8 in there with a transverse engine. With a transverse engine, you need to fit the transmission beneath/beside the engine. Not gonna happen because it just won't fit. You don't need to by a Chryco engineer to figure that out.

The Magnum wagon that they showed with a supercharged Hemi is a different platform -- one that has a longitudinal engine configuration.

oedipus1608

I may be wrong. However something is a miss.

rcf8000

What is amiss is that DC decided to save money on the development of the Pacifica by using an inadequate, existing engine and transmission.

ruski

the engine is actually pretty good.

regfootball

lets just hope those 0-60 times of 9.6 are not true then.

rcf8000

An interesting evaluation of Pacifica is available on consumerguide.com.

rcf8000

The April issue of Car and Driver has a two page "preview" article about the Pacifica. They estimate 0-60 as 8.6-9.5 seconds. The lower figure presumably is for the FWD model, but that seems like a lot more difference between the models than one would expect. (Lexus claims .1 second difference between FWD and AWD RX330s) The review for the most part is very positive, considerably moreso than consumerguide.com's.

russklass

My dealer called today to say he can order a Pacifica the way I want it.
Decided to get everything but the rear seat entertainment system (we have a portable DVD player), and chrome wheels (I like the painted wheels with the silver body color).
No word yet on estimated production date.
The dealership president promised to make the price right for me.
The wait begins!

jb_shin

I remember vaguely from a few years ago that when most car magazines test 0-60, they rev the engine anywhere from 2-3000rpm to redline and drop the clutch or into drive (auto). So those numbers will never be realized in real world driving situations for average person. For one thing it would eat through your diff. and burn the clutch like there is no tomorrow. One exception was the Consumer Report or the Consumer Guide (are they the same?), which started and drove to 60 like any average Joe would.

All that aside, I think 9.5 is about what I would expect from a car that weighs 4300 lbs. I am not sure what the power-to-weight ratio is, but I can't imagine it being too good. Gear ratio also would play a role, as in BMW X5 which uses the same 3.0 engine as the 330, but still manages a respectable figure due to the aggressive gear ratio.

svevar

TheCarConnection.com has tested the Pacifica. To sum up their review, they said "We expect this vehicle to be a solid hit when it rolls into showrooms this spring, and will unquestionably place it on our own list of recommended vehicles."

Sounds pretty good. Here's the link for the full article:

http://thecarconnection.com/index.asp?article=5810&sid=181&am- p;n=157

rcf8000

The April issue of Automobile has a 4 page article on the Pacifica. They especially like the handling and the ride quality. But they call the acceleration "lackluster" and the steering "numb". They quote Chrysler as claiming 9.6 seconds 0-60 time. The seats are "very fine".

bargamon

I am happy the quality control is there. This being the first new offering since the benz merger.

What is perplexing is the lack of stability control, 5 speed transmission and apparent lack of power and refinement in the engine.

I guess they are not yet ready to commit to using the benz 3.5 litre yet.

Correct those, and you'd have a world class car.

Reminds me of GM in that the car is just not all it can be. This thing was to make a statement, and fell short. I realize they need to make a profit. The pricing is reasonable, but a car wanting for torque is just not that enjoyable.

It is still on my list, I'll wait and drive for myself.

fijikm

Yesterday I finally got a chance to grab my stopwatch and do some 0-60's. Approx 1800 on the odo and temp @ 30F. Results: 2 @8.9 and 1 @9.0; I can live with that especially when taken in the context of the whole package. I expect it will improve within 60 days.

russklass

That's encouraging, but what does it FEEL like?
Does the car feel perky or sluggish?
Very few people will put a stopwatch on the car, but will judge it by feel alone.
Since you are our lone driver so far, how do you rate the acceleration feel?

rcf8000

How does the off-the-line acceleration feel? How about the engine noise?

b4z

Back in the early eighties if a car could do 0-60 in 8.9 seconds it was a performance car.

All FWD Chrysler products are handicapped by their extremely inefficient transmissions.
Several years ago Chrysler put a ZF transmission in the 300M and 0-60 times dropped by more than .5 second.

To give you an example a Olds Intrigue that weighs 3450 lbs with the 215 hp DOHC motor posts the identical 0-60 time that a 3660 lb 300M with 253 hp does.
That is some serious hp lost to driveline inefficiency.

ruski

Chrysler's 3.5L engine is a very good engine. It's the tranny that should be blamed for slow acceleration.

toledo19

C'mon! High 30's to low 40's for the Pacifica?! Look at the competition! You can buy the new RX 330, Benz M class, etc. for that as well as many others. Hell, just wait a year and buy a year old model for half the cost.

bargamon

Only going by what I read. I'll drive myself.

Thanks.

bargamon

Nicely equiped Pacifica with out the chrome wheels, power lift, DVD, nav, lists for under 35k and includes moon roof and upgrade stereo.

Rx 330 and ML would top 40k. ML with three rows about 44k. Thats apples to apples. Load any of them up and the price soars. If compared to ML, its a different catagory. The ml is a much better vehicle, but is 27% more in cost. Best comparison is with a fully loaded HIghlander (only seats 5 in two rows). Same for the Rx330. Rx330 is more refined, but also gets pricy.

Honda pilot might be a good comparison. ITs base is also lower, but so is the interior appointments. A fully loaded Pilot still gets into the mid 30's.

The pacifica right now really is a cross over in price and utility.

ruski

I never read anywhere that 300M's engine was bad. (except for some heavily anti-Chrysler forums)

ja45

Current "MotorWeek" reports that the engine is a bit weak (the AWD weighs over 4600 lbs) and that the transmission's downshifts are slow. Has the tranny been upgraded yet? I really like everything about the vehicle except as reported elsewhere, that it's underpowered for the weight and unless thoroughly upgraded, uses what I regard as an inferior tranny. My 1998 TC auto trans (4spd) with 67,000 miles has always had the bump stop down-shift problem and from early on, sometimes does not engage without a restart. DC had a great opportunity to be ahead of the curve with the Pacifica but missed the boat with the powertrain. Kinda reminds me of how the PT Cruiser began it's career. Wonderful concepts that could have easily been class leaders.

russklass

I have over 125,000 miles experience in two 300Ms with NO engine or transmission problems.
Assuming the Pacifica transmission is ths same, just moved east-west, I forsee no problems.
The standard Autostick adds some flexibility, and should help in hilly and passing situations.
Chrysler has been making this engine since 1998, and I can't believe they haven't found a way in 5 years to extract another 25-50 ponies fron it.
Too bad the engine was'nt initially designed as a DOHC which could easily gain some additional power from variable valve timing.

bargamon

I realize you ordered yours and have that emotional buy in. Glad you have a positive experience with the 300's.

I do expect DC to really step things up going forward. The design of the pacifica and Crossfire are brilliant. I just hope the execution is as good. The specs and intitial reports are just not as glowing for the drive train as the rest of the vehicle. Car and Driver was very postitive. O-60 over 9.5 is a little tough to swallow.

russklass

"Car and Driver was very postitive. O-60 over 9.5 is a little tough to swallow"
Especially after almost 5 yeard in 300Ms!

ruski

http://www.cars.com/news/stories/030703_storyb_cc.jhtml?aff=natio- nal

jchan2

The Pacifica sounds impressive. I may replace my Odyssey minivan in a couple of years with a Pacifica.

ruski

http://www.autoweek.com/cat_content.mv?port_code=autoweek&cat- _code=reviews&loc_code=index&content_code=00943554

indydriver

DC has a company-wide mission to refine and focus a unique message for each of its brands. "Chrysler" vehicles will be increasingly defined by luxury (not necessarily performance). The "Town & Country" minivan is the epitome of the Chrysler brand message. Given this brand theme, the Pacifica is right on message. If you want high performance in a similar package, DC is clearly steering you to the Dodge division and the Magnum. If the 5-door concept flies this time, DC will have two distinct segments of the market covered. Plus, and this is important, both sets of dealers are pacified. Smart marketing.

rcf8000

The cars.com review is pretty favorable. It has the now common complaint about not enough power. With FWD this is less of a problem than with AWD, it was said. With that in mind, I do not comprehend why Chrysler expects 70% of Pacificas to be sold with AWD. My understanding is that a small fraction of Town and Countries are sold with AWD. Why would Pacifica be any different, especially since current minivan owners are considered the prime market for the Pacifica.

bargamon

I guess I have not clarified myself, I love the idea, the talk of very good fit and finish, stability, good ride, steering, first class seating for 4, etc, all excellent reviews!

Then you get to the drive train, and the pacifica falls short. The 0-60 is about a second slower than the new awd sienna! IT needs a 5speed and not a bigger engine, but a better one.

This thing is so close to being a real great vehicle no matter what you label it!

Ok, Im a refinement snob. If I wanted crude drive train I'd get an explorer!

regfootball

the pacifica is nice and all, but why are the radio and climate control buttons the same ugly cheap ones in all the other mopars from the last 5 years....which look no better than the buttons on a hand held game you buy for ten bucks at the store?

its a serious deficiency ona 35k vehicle IMHO

and the steering wheel is about as ugly as the Ion's too.

russklass

I beg to differ. Having lived with the same controls for almost 5 years and 125,000 miles on 2 300Ms, I find them excellent in both design & function.
The Pacifica avoids integrating the HVAC and audio controls with the nav system as so many manufacturers do. In some cars you need to go thru 3 steps just to adjust the radio volume!

bargamon

A 35k car is a tweener. You get some goodies and others you must share.

I was reading my car and driver last nite and Chevey has a 5800lb awd 11 passenger van with a vortec v8. zero to sixty= 8.5 seconds. Pacifica estimated at 9.5 seconds! Im gonna get smoked by a church van? I don't think so. If I got people and some gear, and want to pass uphill? This thing is going to wheeze.

Its not the engine, 250hp should do the trick, its the dam transmission!. Volvo also put in a 4 and needed a turbo the fix it.

My wife and I love the design and concept of this vehicle. Kudos to DC to build it. I will still reserve judgement until I drive it. I would hate to get one and next year they fix it and Im stuck with the Wheezy version.

Russ, I know your getting one and commited to it, but have you driven one yet?

fijikm

I'm somewhat puzzled by the statement that a car's perceived performance is more important than its measured performance. The car feels faster than our last T&C Limited (in every respect) and faster off the line than my current Concorde Limited (no tire spinning during initial launch). Handling is definitely better than the T&C or Concorde; you can really feel the benefit of the wide stance and AWD on sweeping freeway entry and exit ramps. As far as engine acceleration noise is concerned, I find that using the auto-stick mode is much more satisfying than letting full-auto mode kickdown or accelerate from standstill and/or moderate speeds.

regfootball

If Mercedes is gonna call this thing a 'sports' tourer than it should have acceleration more akin to a sports sedan rather than a run of the mill minivan or SUV.

SPORTS tourer.

indydriver

there's nothing wrong with the 3.5L and trans from the 300M that a 1,000 lb diet won't cure in the Pacifier. Is there any vehicle out there that wouldn't benefit from 50-100 more hp? BTW, while ogling the new brochure on the '04 300M, I couldn't help but notice the Pacifica parked next to a T&C in the lineup of Chrysler offerings. It is huge! Much larger than the minivan. No wonder it can't get out of its own way. Don't worry, don't worry, only one year 'til the Magnum....

acrafton

In looking at the photos on the Chrysler site it appears that the third row seats have no headrests? Is that the case? If so, that surprises me and is not good in the event of an accident, etc., as well as comfort.

Adam

hayneldan

Unless your Taurus is a V8, This quote applies "But that extra pair of cylinders doesn't keep the Vulcan V6 from being an uninspiring propulsion device, noisier than a good many of its competitors and, at 145 horsepower, tepid in the power department". And if its a wagon, its slower than a Pacifica!

regfootball

what the hell does this have to do with a Taurus?

and BTW, I do have a v8.

The Taurus does not advertise itself in any way as a SPORTS tourer and certainly does not have a 35 grand large price tag.

Your attempt to try to relate this in any way to a price oriented mid size station wagon is so ludicrous, how do you tie your own shoes?

There's no excuse whatsoever for the Pacifica to not come to market with a mid seven 0-60 if they are trying to pass it off as a SPORTS tourer.

b4z

To make a 4400 lb plus vehicle get to the mid 7's you would need about 320 hp.
Not going to happen in a vehicle like this.
Maybe in the Magnum but not in the Pacifier.

There is nothing wrong with the 300Ms engine but there is everything wrong with the tranny.
it is simply one of the most inefficient boxes out there and is probably sapping an additional 15 hp over what a GM slushbox does.

bargamon

You do have a Pacifica currently? I recall someone here worked for DC and had one a month ago. Can you share with us your opinion if you can be objecive?