Howdy, Stranger!

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





Howdy, Stranger!

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

Minivans - Domestic or Foreign

I'm new to the group and would like to thank all contributors for advice and input given to date.
I have been looking at the 2002 DC Grand Caravan Sport 2_K with added side air bags and touring group, the Honda Odyssey EX, and the Toyota Sienna XLE. All three are around the $35-36K in Canadian dollars, but DC currently has rebates on which would drop it down to $30K. Alternatively I could get a Chrysler Town and Country LXi for the same as the Odyssey and Sienna (after rebate). Any thoughts, suggestions would be appreciated. Also, Iv'e noticed a number of tools for coming up with prices for cars bought in the US (Edmunds, Consumer Report, Car Point, etc.) but hav'nt found anything to give me a starting price for Canadian cars. Any ideas?
«13456773

Comments

  • steverstever Posts: 52,457
    Welcome to Town Hall. Be sure to read the model specific boards for the vans you are interested in, and check out the comparison topics too.

    Getting Canadian prices for free is tough - there is a business that sells Canadian car price information whose name escapes me at the moment. I'll try to dig it up; meantime maybe someone else will jump in with the name.

    Steve
    Host
    SUVs, Vans and Aftermarket & Accessories Message Boards
  • Roland,
    Being a thrifty Canadian myself, let me save you a lot of time. The Dodge Grand Caravan is without a doubt the best in it's class. My wife and I spent weeks driving and comparing all the offerings (By the way, stay away from G.M.). We even rented two samples before buying. The Dodge is the best ride without question. No other minivan handles, rides, or is as solid as the Dodge. If you can, I highly recommend renting one for a weekend to see how it performs, you won't be disappointed. We took delivery of a 2002 G.C. Sport in Garnet Red last November with quite a few convenient options ($34,500 sticker; $32,200 plus tax). After 4,000 km including one trip to Nashville, we are convinced we made the right choice.
  • Try "www.daimlerchrysler.ca".
    You can calculate accurate sticker prices on this web page. It also offers some good explainations of option packages. All in Canadian dollars.
  • yzfyzf Posts: 65
    Gee, I would have said the opposite. Get a GM and stay away from DC vans!! DC vans tend to have major powertrain problems in a very short time (60/70K miles) whereas GM's will run forever. I've got the Olds Silhouette and love it. My wife appreciates the car-like ride and all the amenities keep us happy. Guess you really need to shop around and try the different minivans for yourself to determine which is best for you.
  • I have rented a 2002 DC Grand Caravan for a week, and was happy with the ride and comfort, but am a bit concerned with the long term reliability. I've probably read to many articles and discussion groups because you will find dissatisfied Odyssey, Sienna, GM etc. owners too. Any thought on the 3.8 vs. 3.3 on the Grand Caravan? I'm interested in comparing fuel economy of these to the Odyssey and the Sienna, but would like to see actual road results and not the laboratory results which do not include wind resistance. Thanks again!
  • excelent3excelent3 Posts: 197
    Another great option. Read the reviews on E-Opinions or Edmunds. Forget the Kia past as far as reliablity. Hyundai is behind them now and the Sedona is well concieved and designed...but not perfect. Im' a former Toyota Previa owner, so I expect alot. I am very pleased with this van, great power, 25mpg hwy, excellent stereo. Fully loaded every conceivable option I paid $22995. 10 year 100K warranty is hard to beat. Drive one and see for yourself.
    Heres just one of many reviews.

    http://www.canadiandriver.com/testdrives/02sedona2.htm"

    Heres another:

    http://www.newcartestdrive.com/02/minivans/02sedona.cfm

    Excelent3
  • yzf,
    Did not drive the Olds but tried the Chevy and Pontiac minivans. Both were rattle traps that wandered all over the road at highway speeds, road noise over rough surfaces turned both into rolling drums, you can't even hear the radio. I did discover why these vans are less expensive than most; they are not as well appointed or as well finished as the rest.
    As far as D.C. tranny troubles, I know 6 people with the D.C. vans that have not had powertrain trouble well past 150,000 km. The only negative was one owner who frequently tows a 21 ft. boat. That repair was limited to seal replacement due to overheating. D.C. has addressed the question beginning in 2001 with a new design and an expanded warranty. This tranny is so smoothly you have to watch the tach. to know when it shifts.
  • regarding DC transaxles. In my office three of us had DC vans. One guy had two. We are all in the maintenance biz ourselves, so we stick to factory service recommendations, or even better.

    All of the vans but one needed a tranny rebuild. Mine didn't, but then I traded before the warranty expired after seeing what my co-workers experienced.

    I know, a very small sample space out of the millions of vans, but after seeing people who properly maintain their vehicles lose their trannys was unnerving for me.

    To be fair, my 1987 Buick LeSabre also required a tranny rebuild at 90K last October. Fluid and filter was changed every 30K. I was getting ready to change again when the car just wouldn't go when warmed up. So $1500 for a tranny rebuild. It too is very smooth now and should be good for at least another 90K.

    A final thought, the DC 4speed auto transaxles are very smooth as was previously stated.

    FWIW,

    TB
  • yzfyzf Posts: 65
    Lucierjim:

    Can't argue with your experience in testing the Pontiac Montana or Chevy Venture. All I can say is that my Olds Silhouette is very smooth and quiet inside. No problems hearing the radio. To each his own.
  • 4aodge4aodge Posts: 288
    My family and I have a 2000 Chrysler Town & Country LX 3.3L van. The whole family loves this vehicle after 34k miles of trouble-free service. Our Town & Country still runs just like it did the day we drove it off the lot and I would highly reccommend a 2002 model to anyone shopping for a minivan. If you want the ultimate mininvan in terms of comfort, luxury, and convienience, you cannot beat a Chrysler Town & Country Limited. Just sit inside a 2001 or 2002 Town & Countr y Limited and you will understand.

    As for GM vans, we rented a 1999 Oldsmobile Shilouette (spelling?) when on a family trip in Hawaii and were very dissapointed in the interior quality of the car. Keep in mind, we had a rather base 1998 Dodge Grand Caravan SE at the time, which was still alot better than the Oldsmobile in terms of quality and refinement. The interior cloth and trim was very cheap and there were plenty of rattles in the doors. In my opinion, Chrysler, Honda, and Toyota do a much better job of making a minivan than GM.

    As for Chrysler reliability, it has improved greatly over the years. I have many friends with DC minivans and they all are very satisfied with their vans. One neighbor that just moved to Chicago actually had two 1999 Dodge Caravan SE models and they did not have a problem with either. Another neighbor down the street has a 1997 Town & Country LXi with 70k miles and no-problems. Lastly, our 1998 Dodge Grand Caravan SE was traded in for our new Town & Country with 70k trouble-free miles of service.

    I hope this helps!

    -Adam
  • jasdmwjasdmw Posts: 118
    Am now the very happy owner of a Sienna XLE. Had owned 2 Chrysler vans for a total of 8.5 years prior to. Was fed up with the problems and lack of quality. Was able to build a nice personal relationship with a Service Manager, though. That's about all the good I can say about my Chrysler experience. Should you buy one, get a pre-owned one. There a many, many around, even current models (2001/02). The depreciation is also atrocious, again because there are so many around. That should help you get into one for a very good deal, if that's a big factor. Keep in mind, though, you get what you pay for. As the old addage goes, if it's got to be Big 3, buy used, if it's Japanese/German, buy new.
  • excelent3excelent3 Posts: 197
    Kia (Now owned by Hyundai)needed to address reliability issues in a big way. They had to make a targeted move which would begin the trail of redemption concerning reliabilty. They made a tactical, gutsy move. Duke it out in the highly competive, brutal, minivan sector. And why not. Minivan buyers are ultra picky and uncompromising. They had to make a heck of a statement. They did their homework and did it well, and the end result is the Sedona. This Sedona is a winner, hands down. "Charter" buyers are reaping the rewards of a well conceieved vehicle, incredible value, warranty!
  • donselldonsell Posts: 27
    Unfortunately, this thread will probably degrade into people flaming the mini vans they didn't buy. Spend some time in the all of the discussions, especially the discussions about the problems that vans have. I think you'll see all vans have had their share of problems and alot of owners of all vans say they've had no problems.

    I'd pretty much ignore people who subjectively flame one manufacturer like has happened to GM already. I think it is interesting that no one has had to start a GM Van Problem forum but they seem to get beat on regularly by those who chose a different van.
  • I bought a minivan last year and here are my thought as objective as I can make them:

    Dodge/Chrysler minivans have great features for the price and most people agree they have the best styling of all the minivans out there. Reliability was a concern but everything I've read indicates most of the transmission problems have improved starting with the 2000 model year.

    Honda makes a very reliable minivan with a powerful engine. Features were a lot fewer on Odyssey than GC but it still has everything you need. At the time I was shopping, dealers were still selling them above MSRP but I don't think that's the case any longer.

    I did not even drive a GM minivan because of horrible crash test ratings.

    The Mazda MPV is a great little van but the V6 at the time wasn't very powerful. I've read that it has a larger V6 for 2002 so maybe that's no longer a concern. I viewed the MPV as a 7/8 scale Honda Odyssey with the added benefit of roll down windows for the middle row.

    I've never been a Toyota or Ford fan so I can't give you any input on the Sienna or Windstar.

    In the end, I ended up buying a used 2000 Grand Caravan with 14,000 miles. The price was more than $10,000 less than the sticker on a new GC and I have not had any problems yet.
  • kkollwitzkkollwitz Posts: 274
    "I did not even drive a GM minivan because of horrible crash test ratings."

    ...and I bought a GM minivan in part because of the superior real world accident data available at http://www.highwaysafety.org/vehicle_ratings/ictl/ictl_wagon.htm which puts the Montana and the Silhouette in first & second place.
  • catamcatam Posts: 331
    I just did. It sure gives an interesting perspective on minivan safety. In a nutshell you are safer in any minivan regardless of IIHS crash test scores, than the vast majority of other vehicles. Goes back to the duh philosophy, the bigger one wins. My $0.02 is that you should look at the whole package when buying any vehicle, just going off one stat is equivalent to a totally uninformed decision.
  • cavillercaviller Posts: 331
    Crash tests are a direct measure of crashworthiness for specific types of crashes.


    Real world statistics may also have an element of crashworthiness in them, but they also have a very large element of driver profile. Thus the discrepancy between vehicles like Venture and Montana, Quest and Villager or Town & Country and Grand Caravan. These pairs of vehicles are all essentially identical twins, yet have markedly diferent injury scores in some cases. Death statistics are similar in variations among twin vehicles.


    It's easy to be a booster or detractor of any particular model by clinging to one statistic. On the other hand, if you are looking for an overall evaluation of minivan safety, you should look at all the crash tests and other relevant safety information. Also see:


    http://www.car-safety.org/minivan.html

    Personally, I'd tend to avoid vehicles that have significantly worse than average results in any of the crash tests or real world death/injury data. There are plenty of choices in most classes of vehicles that do average or better in all these comparisons.

  • catamcatam Posts: 331
    You state, "Real world statistics may also have an element of crashworthiness in them, but they also have a very large element of driver profile." Exactly what is the difference in driver profile between the driver of a Ford Winstar Vs. a Toyota Sienna or any other minivan for that matter. I would think the driver profile for these drivers would be as similar as it can get, "young to middle aged adult parent of more than one child, probably married and working full time" All minivans are targeted by the auto makers to the same audience.
    How exactly do you buy a vehicle if you eliminate those Significantly worse performers. The Quest was the worst performer listed as far as injuries, yet it was the best performer in death rates. By using the criteria you have purported you could easily eliminate any and all minivans and have evidence to support they are unsafe.
    In the end, like I said earlier, a new Minivan of any make, is probably one of the safest vehicles on the road, and to discount any soley on any one safety test is stupid. Look at the whole package, and buy what best fits your needs, budget and taste.
  • jpc47jpc47 Posts: 62
    A horrific crash is likley to kill anyone in any vehicle. Picture a head-on with a truck! Point is, you can get a Ford Windstar with great crash protection but horrible reliablity, or a Honda Oddessy with both reliability and crash protection. We have the Venture, which to be sure is not good in the frontal offset crash tests. It has been reliable and comforable, and I think it's safe.
  • cavillercaviller Posts: 331
    "I would think the driver profile for these drivers would be as similar as it can get"

    Similar, yes. Identical, not by a long shot. Again, compare the twin vehicles I mentioned. T&C and GC, Quest vs. Villager, etc. Identical vehicles, identical crashworthiness, yet different injury/death statistics. I'd be happy to hear any other explanations for these variances. Precision is one, but that would then mean all the results are poor. For death rates, notice that they publish a margin of error. With margins like that, the statistics don't appear to have great precision anyway, even if you ignore the fact that driver profile is a big part of the variances among identical vehicles.

    "How exactly do you buy a vehicle if you eliminate those Significantly worse performers"

    I said worse than average. Personally, I'm very skeptical of any vehicle design that earns 3-stars or less in any NHTSA test, or a "Marginal" or "Poor" in the IIHS test. These tests are well established, and the parameters are well known to manufacturers. If they can't design a vehicle to do well in these tests, why should I be confident they have made a good safety cage or restraint system that will be effective in other types of crashes that may vary from the tests? As for injury and death rates, even excluding driver profile, most minivans are better than the overall average.

    Overall, Winstar, Sienna and Odyssey pass all the crash tests and rollover ratings with flying colors, and have lower than average injury and death rates. Odyssey and Windstar both appear to be average or lower than average in injury and death rates, even just within the minivan category. Everyone will use their own criteria, obviously, I simply suggest thay buyers consider all the available data, and not just one piece that makes one particular vehicle look good or bad. That seems to be pretty much your conclusion, also.

    Mass and length are also important safety factors in crashes between different vehicles. Most minivans have a big advantage there, too.
  • cavillercaviller Posts: 331
    you can get a Ford Windstar with great crash protection but horrible reliablity

    How do you define horrible? If you are using those misleading red and black bars in Consumer Reports, keep in mind that their average problem rate for 2001 is 0.2 problems per vehicle over the last 12 months. At that rate, even a Windstar (about 50% below average predicted reliability) would take years to have even ONE more serious problem than a Sienna (about 30% above average).
  • carleton1carleton1 Posts: 560
    For my sister, a new 2001 Odyssey EX was the best. For my wife and I, a new 1999 Grand Caravan in March 1999. Inky now drives a 2002 Odyssey after having 2 Siennas and a 1999 Odyssey. Swampcollie is now driving a 1999 Grand Caravan Sport after complete satisfaction with 2 other DC minivans. My friend Kurt got a 2000 Grand Caravan LE after satisfaction with 2 previous DC.
    Some people do not like Astro and Safari. We had excellent experience with our 91 Astro CL and actually prefer the panel doors to the liftgates that are on most minivans.
    Jim W. hates his Windstar (he got used) but there are many friends who love their Windstars. Bill T. traded a Toyota 4Runner on a Windstar a few years ago and now has another Windstar. My good friend Terry A. loves his 98 Sienna LE.
  • We are in the market for a new minivan for the first time in nearly 10 years. We now own a 93 mercury villager and have loved it for the ease of re-configuation of the seating, car-like driveability and minimal repair (several major this past year, but none prior).

    There are lots of great alternatives out there and I'm getting overwhelmed with options and compromises.

    The one feature I had hoped to get is a numeric keypad entry (frequently lock keys in car). I have only found this option on the Windstar. Do any other models still have this feature. It was available on Villager in '93 but no one seems to offer it now.

    Also like the Odyssey for the flip and fold seat but it is missing several small features like conversation mirror (for spying on kids in the back).

    Sienna is ok but after having the "instant cargo room" capability on the Villager, we don't relly want to have to remove seats for cargo room.

    So, I'm back to the Villager or the Quest. Am I crazy to be considering a discontinued model? Do these vehicles still have the Maxima engine in them (I thought I read that they now have a "bullet-proof" truck engine)?

    Any thoughts out there?
  • steverstever Posts: 52,457
    I don't think you'd be crazy to buy an orphan, assuming you get a great deal on a Quest or Villager. If you traded cars every 3 or 4 years, I'd say no way - the depreciation hit would be too great.

    If we were looking to replace our '99 Quest, we'd look hard at the Sedona and MPV initially since our preference is for the smaller vans.

    Keypads are "passé" now that everyone has gone with fobs. I like the fobs (no scratches around the door lock), but I do keep a spare key hidden under the bumper. Fobs are pricy to replace. I doubt that you'll find any keypads available, but other little touches, like the conversation mirror, are probably available as an aftermarket item to upgrade an Odyssey (or whatever) to your liking. And the Odyssey and MPV have "magic" seats that are convenient for instant cargo room without removing seats.

    Steve
    Host
    SUVs, Vans and Aftermarket & Accessories Message Boards
  • yzfyzf Posts: 65
    Steve's right - not too many keypad equipped vehicles out there any more. Key fobs seemed to have done away with the key pads. Have you looked at the GM's? We have an Olds Silo Premiere and are really happy with it. Rear set folds down easily for expanded storage. It has onstar so if you lock your keys in the car, you can call onstar from any phone, give your account and code number and they will unlock the car remotely. Pretty nifty! Other nice features include a car-like ride, rear parking aid, dual power sliding doors, LOTS of cargo space (we got the extended version), leather, heated seats, tow package, rear VCP/Video, triple zone climate control, etc. etc. and a 6/60 bumper to bumper warranty since Olds is on the way out.

    Since you seem to keep cars like my family (forever), don't worry about going with a Quest if that's what you want. Keep in mind, however, that the Quest does not have a fold flat or hidaway rear seat. Instead, you take out the second row captain's chairs and slide the third row seat on a track all the way to the front. But for that feature, the Quest would have been a very strong contender for us. No keypad either. As for the conversation mirror, we picked up one aftermarket at our local Auto Parts store. It attaches to the windshield with a suction cup and sits right above the rear view mirror. There are also ones that actually attach to the rear view mirror or clip to the visor. I wouldn't base a minivan purchase decision on that feature alone. Good luck!
  • Had a keyfob on my Villager that broke within the first year, but i'm sure they are much sturdier now.

    I wouldn't base my decision on the reaview conversation mirror but I do get tempted by the keypad on thw Windstar. My significant other says "no way" to the WS as their rear seat does nothing. We love the sliding track rear seat on the Villager and Quest and may go with it again.

    Have been looking at the MPV online and reading the town hall notice. Might have to go visit that one in person. Thanks for your quick response.
  • steverstever Posts: 52,457
    That's a great plug for OnStar too, yzf. I have a friend who's always locking his keys in his truck - he could sure use it.

    Steve
    Host
    SUVs, Vans and Aftermarket & Accessories Message Boards
  • pluto5pluto5 Posts: 618
    I drove the GC sport also with the H package and was impressed with the ride. However the mechanicals don't appear any different than my '94 GC/SE which has had premature failures in A/C evaporator coil, paint and transmission which the manufacturer paid only part.
  • Hi posted this earlier and was asked to use this site.
    I'm looking at 3 minivans. Need your opinions on which you feel would be the better deal for my $$.

    98 Villager...43,000 miles.....asking $14,9
    99 Grand Caravan...33,500...$15,995
    99 Sihouette.....37,200...16,995

    checked CarFax all are clean....Have service records on all, but they don't say much.
    I just need a good reliable vehicle. Have heard good things about Villager.

    Also any tips on how to haggle price would be appreciated.
    Thanx!
  • rob133rob133 Posts: 24
    Be aware that the 1997-2001 Toyotas have been having problems with engines crapping out becuase of some design change to make the cars pass smog tests, the engines are made to run hotter I guess. So far at least 3000 engines have died and customers are up in arms. It is unclear if the problem was fixed for 2002.


    here is the article that describes the engine problem better than I can.


    http://www.autonews.com/article.cms?articleId=38302

  • tccmn1tccmn1 Posts: 278
    I have been looking at the Mazda MPV; now, with the new 200HP V6 in 2002. It is much improved on power and has a nice dashboard layout as well as the "Honda" type fold under rear seat. You can get into one of these fairly loaded for the mid $20's in the Twin City area. Includes heated mirrors, fog lights, pwr. everything (seat too), ac, alloy 16" wheels, 6 CD changer w/cassett too!
    Not a bad rig for it's size and features.
    I currently drive a 95 3.3 DC which I bought new and has 152K miles on it. I change my oil every 3K miles and DID have the infamous tranny replaced by Chrysler at 98K miles UNDER WARRANTY.
    I've towed a 2000lb sailboat with it and have the towing package. The MPV/with towing, can do 3Klbs.
  • hawk27hawk27 Posts: 5
    My family is ecstatic with our 2001 Silhouette. We've owned it for more than a year (15k miles/24k KM) and have taken it on several long trips. But this is mostly an around-town kid hauler, and it has survived the abuse with flying colors. I've owned Hondas and Toyotas before, so I was skeptical about GM. But we tested everything and liked the Silhouette the best. Fit and finish was comparable, handling excellent and there's plenty of power. Brother-in-law bought an Odyssey at the same time, and we were down to the wire with the decision. His Honda is wider, but is noisier inside. Also, it's been in the shop twice with problems, including the sliding door. I would highly recommend the GM vans, and take a real-world view of the crash test results.
  • goatmealgoatmeal Posts: 11
    A good way for your friend not to lock himself out of his truck is to carry a spare door key in his wallet. I have done this for many years and occaisionaly it has paid off.
  • steverstever Posts: 52,457
    My buddy has been known to toss his wallet on the dash and then lock himself out too! I have a "hide a key" thingy under the bumper myself :-)

    Steve
    Host
    SUVs, Vans and Aftermarket & Accessories Message Boards
  • hoyahenryhoyahenry Posts: 399
    Consumers purchase the Sedona because they drive it, evaluate it, compare and contrast it, perform a cost/benefit analysis, and come to the conclusion that it's everything they need. If they also conclude that an Odyssey meets their needs and wants criteria following the same process, then they have to evaluate the fact that the Sedona costs 20-30% less than the Odyssey. One consumer put the price delta at $15K!

    Nobody "buys it because of the cheap price." - NO ONE. Price is just one of the decision factors - and yes, it's quite an overwhelming one. (I doubt if an endorsement from a young golf pro could mitigate this issue.) Price and other Sedona differentiators, like a better cockpit design or the ability to tow without voiding the warranty, provide ample opportunity for the consumer to weigh certain priorities and preference factors.
  • javadocjavadoc Posts: 1,167
    You are incorrect Ody1... get your facts straight. The Odyssey does not have the most space. The Chrysler T&C has more, 186cft vs the Ody's 146cft. Hmmmmm, interesting isn't it? The Ody also has less front and rear shoulder room than the DC van, less rear hip room, is narrower, shorter and has a shorter wheelbase. It also has a lower towing capacity, which is important to some consumers. Consumers are who buy these vehicles, not automotive editors. It has the most power, but not until 5500rpm, and the redline of the engine is 6000rpm. Hardly a useable amount of power.

    I keep hearing the same words and nothing new, can you say something different please? If you would take your blinders off for just one second Ody1, you'd notice that the CONSUMERS rate the Odyssey as a 9.0. The MPV is CONSUMER RATED a 9.7 and the VW Eurovan is rated a 9.9. So, you must think that the consumers are ignorant since they rate the Ody lower?

    Also, get your facts straight regarding TMV... According to edmunds: "The Edmunds.com True Market Value® (TMV®) price is our estimate of the current average national selling price for this vehicle. It is what you need to know to negotiate a fair price."
  • hoyahenryhoyahenry Posts: 399
    Ody01 posts are designed to fit in the discussion space available located on the consumer opinion page of the vehicle description, which lists the first three lines of the two most recent posts....
  • steverstever Posts: 52,457
    Interesting theory, but I haven't seen an example yet. Can you point me to a specific model where it's happening? Thanks!

    Steve
    Host
    SUVs, Vans and Aftermarket & Accessories Message Boards
  • javadocjavadoc Posts: 1,167
    I do believe you're onto something there hoya!

    /j
  • Well, I can't beleive somebody didn't nail you on your semantic games earlier, but here goes:

    The Chrylser Town and Country only has 168 cu.ft. of cargo capaciy . Not "186cft". The Odyssey only have 146 cu. ft. of cargo capacity because the folding seat cannot be removed, so its volume is subtracted. Your selective and biased post is just dishonerable. Its also a prime example of selective journalism. You fail to even mention ANY of the other statistics supporting Ody01's claims. The luggage capacity on the Ody is 38.1cft, and only 17.8 on the T&C. That's over twice as much. Passenger volume on the Ody is 170.7 cft. and only 164.9 on the T&C. The T&C only has 9% more towing capacity.
    Your attempts to grasp for positive interior dimentions are quite comical, as you have left out ALL the instances in which the Odyssey beats the town and country on interior dimentions and there are quite a few. Also, the instances in which the T&C beat the Ody were by fractions of an inch and there are several instances where the Ody beats the T&C quite handily. Let me list all of the instances that you left out (which would be every single other dimension that edmunds gives):
    Front Head Room: 41.2 in.
    Front Hip Room: 57.8 in
    Rear Head Room: 40 in.
    Front Leg Room: 41 in
    Rear Leg Room: 40 in.
    Now, subtracting the differences between the dimensions of the T&C and the Ody, that makes the Ody the winner by several inches.
    As for consumer ratings, although I'm not quite sure where you got your numbers from(you should cite your sources),theres an element of self justification in all ratings given by consumers and therefore I would be highly skeptical of consumer surveys, especially non-scientific ones.
    (All information was taken from Carpoint of Edmunds)
  • javadocjavadoc Posts: 1,167
    First, I valued your well thought out post in response to me, thanks. Semantic games though and my post dishonerable? That hurts, lol. ;-)


    Regarding the DC's total cubes, my bad, I transposed the number on accident. It was not intentional, so I stand corrected, thank you. To be sure that you don't think I just conjured the figures up, the numbers were pulled from http:/www.autotrader.com. If you would like the exact url, just say so and I'll happily provide it for you. The rear cargo room in a T&C is rated at 20.0cubes according to the source I cited, although I've seen the figure you cited as well.


    As for consumer ratings in TownHall, I got them right here on edmunds. You are correct, there is a level of cognitive reasurance displayed when folks post a review. OTOH, don't fool yourself into thinking that automotive press is objective either. Gosh, who is? I know I am not.


    I wouldn't be skeptical of consumer surveys, personally. Where do you think companies get their information for what to produce? They don't sit in a dimly-lit, smokey, cherry panelled room and decide that Joe Consumer will want to buy whatever they come up with (yes, I'm dramatizing). Okay, maybe Pontiac does this, but companies use consumer surveys to figure out what the consumer wants and doing away with what the consumer doesn't want.


    However, you missed the point of my post entirely I am afraid. I was writing exactly what Ody01 writes, only posting the facts that were advantageous to my goal. I was also pointing out his error, just as you kindly did for me.


    Now, read Ody01's post... "Other minivans may be good if owner never takes long trips, has no family or never wants to haul large, bulky items. " What?!? I have a family, carried them over 3,000 miles in 4 days over roads you don't even want to know about in a Non-Odyssey, and we all thought it was a wonderful vehicle to take on a long trip. I did not say that the Odyssey (or any other vehicle) would not have been a good vehicle for this.

  • Ok, your absolutely right. I did miss the entire point of your post if it was supposed to be a sarcastic rebuttal to Ody01's tactics and previous posts. As for the dishonerable and semantic games comments, the exact same thing can be said about Ody01 so I won't hold you responsible if the post was intended as you say.
    Edmunds ratings are probably the least scientific as there is no accountability for the posters. I would seriously doubt the results of anything posted on the Edmunds consumer ratings. I noticed glowing reviews from people selected 5 stars because they either didn't know how to select a rating or didn't know they had to. Personally, I have no trust whatsoever for unscientific polls because the base of people is so narrow. As an example, up until recently most online large scale political polls ended up with the republican issue winning because there was a vastly larger amount of republicans who could afford computers vs the democrats who could afford computers. Basically, the edmunds consumer rating holds no water to me and I don't think it should serve as anything more than anecdotal evidence.

    I'm also new this discussion so excuse me if I misinterpret the direction of certain statements.

    Then again, the Sedona only got 8.4 to the Ody's 9.0 :)
  • steverstever Posts: 52,457
    I only took one long trip in my "little" Quest minivan. Ten months, 32,000 miles.

    Did you guys hear about me hauling my side-by-side frig inside it with the hatch closed? And then there were those three sheets of 4x12' drywall. Couldn't quite shut the hatch that time :-)

    No family though, unless you count spouse and cats. ynmv (your needs may vary).

    Steve
    Host
    SUVs, Vans and Aftermarket & Accessories Message Boards
  • javadocjavadoc Posts: 1,167
    csv, no worries... it's all good! But my post was satirical in nature. Oh, I have to share a bumper sticker I saw today that fits this line of thought... "Save time, see it my way." ;-)

    And my under-achiever will be hauling 800lbs of laminate flooring home when the stuff comes in. Thx to my wife for needing a "special order" woodgrain, huh? Good thing it will hold the miter saw and air tools I'm buying too, heheheh.

    /javadoc
  • mendez1mendez1 Posts: 4
    69000 miles and must say I like the car. From the exception of a right hub, ignition switch and an air bag signal (warrantied repairs), all I have had to pay is for maintanence repairs (brakes, antifreeze change, belts etc.) I Like the ride and comfort. Took the van on several long trips (from New York to Florida, TWICE) and it perfomed great. My wife and I are considering to trade this one in for the newer model. Hope this helps with your final decision and good luck.
  • pat84pat84 Posts: 817
    I owned a 96 Grand Caravan, drive a 99 Odyssey, and have rented several Standard length DC's and 1 Windstar. The Windstar had 7 miles on it when I drove it off the rental lot. Each van has its own advantages and disadvantages. If you want the maximum in creature comforts and good tight handling more like a sports car, buy a DC product. If you want the most room for a tall driver get the Windstar. Unfortunately it has the sloppiest handling of the three. If you want handling and a ride that is more like a smooth riding car, get the Odyssey. Compared to the DC vans the Odyssey is a little boring. I have had no problems with my Odyssey in 55 K miles.
    I have never driven the MPV, or Quest, Sienna or Sedona.
    Anyone interested in buying a minivan should first decide on the
    size. If one can live with the shorter versions, there are more selections. I would recommend that potential buyer test drive any vans that seem to meet the requirements. Do not expect to find an Odyssey to test drive.
    One last piece of advice. If you only looked at the problems sections at Edmund's you would never drive anything. There are dissatisfied customers for every van out there.
  • pluto5pluto5 Posts: 618
    I agree; after driving several vans I decided I don't want another; large four door sedan is more practical, safer, and more reliable. Also costs less! When your kids get older they don't want to drive minivans, anyway.
  • hoyahenryhoyahenry Posts: 399
    If you want handling and a ride that is more like a smooth riding car, get the Odyssey.

    I agree with many of your points, or appreciate that that is your honest opinion and experience. I've driven the various DC vans on and off for the last 15 years, and took the 2002 Ody for a test drive. Then, I drove a Sedona. I found that the Sedona delivered a much more car like feel and ride. Among other things, it offers the 5-speed transmission like the 2002 Ody at an exceptional price and a nice long warranty. When contemplating a new van, I think the Sedona is more than worthy of due consideration.
  • cavillercaviller Posts: 331
    Minivans aren't trendy. People don't buy them solely for commuting. In many cases, they're full of kids, or hauling many passengers. That's why people buy them in the first place. As for fuel economy, even the Sedona does better than SUVs of similar weight.

    If you're sincerely concerned about gas mileage and oil consumption, why don't you move over to the SUV forums? I see plenty of monster SUVs with 12/16 mpg ratings carrying only a driver on a commute each day. More than half don't have towing gear. I'm sure they'd love to hear your opinions. Your comments on Sedona's gas mileage are very tiring, much as Carleton1's were.

    Cheers.
Sign In or Register to comment.