Did you recently rush to buy a new vehicle before tariff-related price hikes? A reporter is looking to speak with shoppers who felt pressure to act quickly due to expected cost increases; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com for more details by 4/24.
2008 Dodge Grand Caravan
Tagged:
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
(Items such as engine size, 4, 5, or 6 speed Automatic Transmission, etc.)
What attracted me to the SE is the fact that it is one of the shorter (than the Grand) minivans out there, and is available with a 4 cylinder engine. Since I do a LOT of freeway driving in my commute, with little stop or slow and go, the 4 cylinder is great, and you simply can't get a 4 cylinder any more these days on any other minivan (unless you count the Mazda5, which I consider a micro-, not mini-, van). I've been getting an average of 25 mpg with 1800 miles of driving so far.
I had been tempted to wait until the next generation of vans came out, or at least until '07, to see if the next generation of 4 cylinder engines from DC make it into the mix - the variable valve timing "world engine" that will start in the Caliber and gradually replace the existing DOHC 2.4 used in the Carvan SE, the PT Cruiser, and the "cloud cars." But in '06, they finally cleaned up the emissions on the 4 cylinder and I decided to give it a try.
While by '08 the "posh" minivans will undoubtedly have inflatable hot tubs in them to go with DVD players, and the "tech" minivans will all have side curtain/torso airbags with stability control etc., my wish list is simpler:
1. The 2.4 "world" engine with vvt, and/or the 2.7 small block DOHC engine used in the Magnum;
2. A 5 speed or 6 speed automatic transmission. The Benz based 5 speed might be an interesting choice; Ford and Chevy apparently have a great new 6 speed coming out soon.
(This last is optional and doesn't affect me too much, since I buy basic vehicles without a lot of electronic subsystems, but 3. An upgraded intravehicle network protocol to handle all the microprocessor controlled subsystems without glitches.)
In short, I'd like to see DC go a little "retro" and put the "mini" back into minivan - some of the current minivans are getting way too big, and they all strike me as a little heavy.
Chrysler needs to aim at the Odyssey and Sienna, hit a home run and create a new benchmark in the class.
Frankly I already think the Caravan is better than the Odyssey and Sienna in terms of driving - it's more fun to drive and with Stow and Go nicer to live with. But coming up are new engines, new transmissions (which I'm told are more reliable than the existing ones, which in turn are said to be more reliable than the Hondas!), and new features like a diaper changing station.
As far as gas mileage goes, there's EPA and there's reality. Also, the Chrysler V6 seems to take a LONG time to break in and get its full mileage and power.
The big question for me is whether they can get to Toyota quality levels, but they are supposed to be reorganizing their plants, so I suspect the answer is yes...after the first year! (At least I think they can beat Honda, which has not done so well on quality lately as they had in the past.)">link title
With Ralph Gilles in charge of the design, you can bet a million it's a MAJOR REDO!!
I met Ralph and his wife a few times. First time was him passing me on i75 northbound at 3 am. He was doing probably 100+ mph in a tricked out VW Corrado VR6! Luckily he got off at my exit and stopped for gas and I stopped and chatted him up. The VW had over 300hp!!! He's a total car freak!
When he got promoted at DCX to Director of Design, he had to dump the VW and get a DCX product. His wife was pregnant at the time and demanded a Minivan. He took a 2001 DGC, put in a tricked out 3.5 V6 from 300M, Viper brakes and made himself a racer for weekends at the track!!!!
I have total faith in what Ralph will do!!!
As far as gas mileage goes, there's EPA and there's reality. Also, the Chrysler V6 seems to take a LONG time to break in and get its full mileage and power.
yes! EPA numbers are a joke!!!! What do you consider a LONG time to break in? I have about 10k on mine.....on my christmas trip home to PA, I was getting 27mpg at 75 mph on the Ohio turnpike (flat). In the mountains of PA "only" 23 mpg
I've owned both a 2005 Sienna and a 2006 Grand Caravan SXT. I get several mpg better mileage on the Grand Caravan although its rated 18/25 vs the Sienna rated 19/26. In mostly city some highway mix I got 19 on the Sienna, 21 in the GC. Highest ever in the Sienna was 23mpg vs 27.5mpg in the Grand Caravan. I don't see how you can ever approach the rated Sienna highway mileage. Best we did at 55mph for hours with just a few short stop lights was 23mpg.
I think Toyota has tuned the car to optimize it for the EPA test. The 5th gear makes the engine turn such low RPM that it has such little torque that even a minor hill or any attempt to accelerate will cause it to pop out of torque lock. Accelerating from a stop at a decent speed requires a heavy foot which kills the gas mileage.
The Grand Caravan feels like it has much more torque. You can do mild hills and even accelerate without getting out of torque lock (only 4 gears). And modest acceleration from a stop doesn't feel like you're ragging on it.
Not sure we want the added bulk/length of the Grand Caravan, as we are now driving a 1996 Caravan (short wheel base) and find it's cargo capacity more than adequate for our needs, though the Stow and Go features available now only in the Grand are definitely a plus.
Basically we am trying to decide whether to buy now while we know the SWB's are available or wait till fall? 2007 for the redesign knowing that the SWB may not be an option at that time.
Best Regards,
Shipo
Oh well, we could probably wait and pick up a leftover 2006 SWB when the new ones are introduced!
DrFill
A high efficiency Diesel? Yeah, now that's the ticket. :shades:
Best Regards,
Shipo
Demand? Probably not. Yet.
Advantage? Hmmm, when I dropped my new 530i off at E.H. Harms in Munich to be shipped back to the States, the taxi that picked me up was a ~1998 Chrysler Caravan with a diesel in it and a 5-Speed transmission. The owner/driver told me that he had somewhere north of 550,000 km on the clock (i.e. greater than 340,000 miles), and the engine still hadn’t been opened up. That and he was getting something like 30+ mpg in the Munich urban area. Is that enough of an advantage? I'd buy one.
Best Regards,
Shipo
Dan
Horse glasses..that's what it is in the US. No offense! :confuse:
Best Regards,
Shipo
http://www.allpar.com/model/m/2008-minivans.html
Nice glimpse of the interior. Instrument panel looks great. Not sure about the center stack though.
The Caravan's unlikely to go hybrid until they go rear drive which is also somewhat unlikely. However diesel might not be far behind the intro. They already sell diesel caravans in Europe.
NOW ALL IT NEEDS ARE METAL BUMPERS.
I'm really curious what makes some vehicles become reliability nightmares, and others great transportation, besides maintenance and driving habits ?
The link above mentions, new Chrysler endurance standards, thats welcome.
The current DCX vans are still based on old platform dating back to '96 I think, when they were the only real player in minivan games. Since there are so many superior minivans out there today, and Chrysler still wants to be the king of the minivans, I assume that they're working really hard to compete.
I hope they will have a modern engine with at least 265hp, 6-speed tranny, smooth & quiet ride, and all bells and whistles other vans offer - and not ask to much for them.
Of course reliability needs to be stronger than ever! it's not well rated in Consumer Reports!
Really? Could'a fooled me, I've rather been under the impression that the 1998s were fairly well ironed out. Our 1998 DGC 3.8 is running very stong at well over 120,000 miles and isn't even using a full quart of oil between 7,500 mile oil changes. Yes, we did have to put a tranny in it this spring (at 109,000 miles), however, I suspect the new ATF+4 (added last fall during normal maintenance) as the prime cause of that failure. Other than that I've had to put in two batteries, two headlights (only one failed and I just "did" the other at the same time), a vacuum battery tray and a door switch. Hmmm, not too bad for 123,000 miles and over eight years. ;-)
As for the 2008s, it is my understanding that the top of the line engine will be the new 4.0 liter V6 that is being used in the 2007 Pacifica. Assuming that information is correct, it is reported to put out 255 HP and 265 lb-ft of torque and transmit that power to the wheels via a new 6-Speed transmission.
Best Regards,
Shipo
As for the 2008s, it is my understanding that the top of the line engine will be the new 4.0 liter V6 that is being used in the 2007 Pacifica. Assuming that information is correct, it is reported to put out 255 HP and 265 lb-ft of torque and transmit that power to the wheels via a new 6-Speed transmission.
I can't wait for the North American Autoshow in Detroit this year to see these new Minivans!! If they hold the line on price and meet or exceed the imports - they'll have a homerun on their hands! I'm hearing about cool in ceiling track LED lighting, cooled and heated cup holders and seats! Power Stow N Go seating on Chryslers! Independent Rear Suspensions.... I'm tired of listening to Import buyers "ohh you only have a 4 spd auto" or "you don't have stability control".
You are being fooled by the general exterior styling, which is not terribly radically different from 1996.
We just bought a 2006 GC SE, which has the "same" engine as our 1996 Caravan did, but looking under the hood, it is amazing how many things have been redesigned and relocated, and that is just what you can see externally.
In addition, to accomodate Stow and Go, essentially most of the "platform" was extensively redesigned, along with a complete redesign of the rear suspension.
Carrying over some basic design features is not all that unusual. Just look at the undercarriage of Toyota Camry, which carried the low hanging exhaust routing through for about 4 generations, finally losing it for 2007.
DGC refinement for improved reliability and for reduced manufacturing cost allowed us to buy a long wheel base Grand Caravan with overall more features for about $2,000 less than we paid for our 1996 short wheel base Caravan TEN years later. The 1996 Caravan wasn't all that unreliable anyways, except for its A-C system, which caused us two fairly expensive repair bills, but it never left us stranded, aside from a couple battery failures, which cannot be blamed on Chrysler.
I am sure the 2008 new redesign will be very significant, as the competition is relentless. We decided not to hold off for the redesign, as what we bought will serve us well, and we don't have to have the latest bells and whistles.
Now paint is another matter. The hood and roof lost sheets of paint base coat and clear coat only 5 to 6 years after purchase. I know the reason, but there is no excuse for this. Really poor . . . and, the interior bits and pieces fall off on a regular basis. And, I've had nothing but problems with the A/C, especially the rear evaporator.
But, it's been reliable, so I still like the van. Heck, it still has the original exhaust system which I find amazing after 12 years!
The new DCX minvan looks an awful lot like the Honda from the disguised profile. Boxy, and slab sides . . . At least, DCX is targeting a winner.
I personally don't mind carrying over platforms if it is well executed; Problem is that the critics do mind, big time.
Just look at so many publications and magazines ripping off the (usually American) car companies who re-use older platforms. One example is the GM (crossover) minivans. While I agree they need to improve in reliability and flexibility with a rear fold-down seat, the ride and handling of this van is not worse that DCX vans. It's smooth, quiet, and fairly nimble. But the platforms dates back to 1997, when they redesigned the minivan from the older "long nose" design. Now look how bad they are bashed all over the media, and Consumer Reports pointed this out many times, that this van is built on an old dated platform, even though this platform has been improved in most every way possible over the years, and is more reliable now than ever.
And since the DC vans sits on a dated platform from 1996, they have to do something about it, because if not, it could go the same way as Ford and GM...
The 3.3l family of engines is well sorted out,why retire it?
Well, Car mags don't buy and live with their vehicles. Basically they do 0-60 times, and say gee whiz, the Honda is faster.
So, all Car Co's have to keep up with the latest mid 250HP numbers and 6sp. tranny crowd.
The new body reminds me of the boxy GM Safari/ Astro pair, ie. truckish looking vans. Not bad.
Then again, Side by side I prefer the Aero look of the MDX over the Pilot.
So, I too, may sit the '07 Caravan and '08 side by side when available, and choose the discounted Aero '06.
Compared to my '98 Caravan, I thought the handling of current design to be sloppier. Suspension issues, cheap factory tires, maybe ?, and the plastic trim looked very unfinished. Both SE's. Not much improvement for DCX minivans in 10 years in my opinion.
Now, For sure I will wait for the new '08 to arrive. The quality of materials and chasis dynamics have to be better.
Only thing is, for city travel, the new van in (ONLY) the size of the grand caravan, will be too big for whipping around parking spaces. Decent handling in a manageable package is very important.
maybe you should consider something like ford freestyle. It holds 6/7 comfortably and hasabout 100 cu. ft. cargo space. and 4 in. shorter than current DGC, 3in. shorter than yours. for alittle more power but same dimensions try new suzuki XL7. For even more room and much smller dimensions try rendezvous which is more than a foot shorter.