Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
-- Mark
If you didn't venture to the back seat you will notice a big loss in toe room (can't tuck them under the second row seat). Maybe not a big deal if you don't have anyone of size sitting in the back row. I have to admit the extra space that the seats duck into in the second row is nice, but I think having to slide the seats forward to access them all the time will make them quickly unused except for long trips with lots of people where you may be more desperate for the space. More likely a convenient dumping ground for emergency stuff (ropes, jumper cables, first aid kits, tools, etc). Even if this is the only use they get - its better than the rest for this functionality.
Any new 2005 owners actually using those storage bins for anything other than longer term strorage? The big well behind the 3rd row seems to have added so much interior space by itself that it would not seem that the second row bins would get much use with the accessibility issues noted above. Loss of storage space vs old Windstar is my wife's only grumble on 2004 Odyssey so far.
Also, if it hits a low ceiling, what happens? Does it have some mechanism that causes it to stop, reverse, and close? Is there any way to get it to stay mainly open, without reversing? I could put some foam on my ceiling so it's nice and soft - would that help?
Thanks!
Mike
For what it's worth, our 1996 Caravan with manual rear gate opens fully in our garage, and it is a low garage, probably in the 6'10"-7' range, however if you are not in the garage far enough, it will touch the formed metal reinforcing "bar" on the inside of the lower garage door panel when open, which hangs down low as the last panel does not travel up to a flat position when full open. I padded it with foam rubber and duct tape so it doesn't scratch the paint. If the van is in the garage far enough, then this does not happen.
Anyway, the rear liftgate will open manually, so if I just open it manually, and rest it on some foam or something on the ceiling, it'll be fine, even if the ceiling is a little short. (If you use the power liftgate, if it's a couple inches short, it'll hit the roof and then reverse and close.)
But someone else posted that they measured it at 6'9". When I was there, and measuring it with my hand (I forgot a tape measure), I think 6'9" is probably close to accurate.
Mike
The liftgate can open fully in my garage - barely. It's hard to measure, but the highest point of the liftgate seems to be around 7'. This is *not* the end, but somewhere more in the middle. At the end of the liftgate, it's about 6'9". In my garage, the closest point is actually the metal handle to my garage. It's at a height of 6'11", and it's pretty close to the maximum part of the liftgate - but not quite there. There's less than an inch of clearance. I just put some foam on the handle, so even if it hits, it's no big deal.
As far as the seats go. We looked at the Odyssey and Sienna also. My high-level impression is that the Odyssey and Sienna have cushier seats - but they're bigger. So the interior feels a lot more cramped. The T&C has a very spacious feeling interior - because the 2nd row seats are a little smaller, they're not full Captain's chairs. Because we have kids and carseats for the 2nd row, we obviously much prefer the smaller seats. I would call the typical Captain's seat as "luxurious", and these seats as "fine". I could certainly imagine there are others (more pampered than me :-) ) that might think of Captains' seats as "acceptable" and anything worse, like the fold-and-stow seats, as "unacceptable".
They adjust fore and aft, and they can recline. The pitch of the base is a little bit steep, so I think normally you'd want the back to be reclined a bit.
Mike
I was also comparing a similarly equipped 2004, but I would have added AWD. The price was pretty similar. So for similar money, I decided I'd rather have 2005 + Stow and Go, instead of 2004 + AWD. Mainly because of resale value...
Mike
Now that I look at the numbers more closely, I see that the '05 would have been a much better value for us. At the time, they had a few '05's stored on the back of the lot, but none with the options we wanted. I too, have access to 1% under invoice thru the Affiliate Rewards program. I also would have had the $1000 rebate and $1000 trade in rebate. Didn't realize that these would be in play for the '05's so early.
So, I could have given up the moonroof and full size spare (neither a big deal to me). And gotten an '05 with luxury, leather, NAV, DVD & airbags.
For roughly $2500 more, I would have added these features that I do not currently have:
Stow & Go
Overhead rails
Heated Seats
Side Curtain airbags
Power Passenger seat
Vehicle Info Center
Automatic Climate Control
Infinity speaker upgrade
Automatic Headlights
Parking Assist
Cetrainly, well worth the extra $$. Plus better resale.
I made the deal on the '04 because of HUGE incentives, and I still think it was a good deal. Just not as good as this one, in hindsight. I guess the key is still being able to get 1% below invoice on an '05, when most people probably wouldn't - yet.
Oh well, nothing I can do about it now, unless I want to get slaughtered in a trade in.
Just something to chalk up to experience, I guess...
Just something to chalk up to experience, I guess."
Remember that there is always someone out there that got a better deal than you. Rather than letting it spoil the way you feel about your new van. don't worry about it. Chrysler packaged the deal in such a way that you had no choice but to jump on the 2004. These guys are pros.
After all, we have a '96 short wheel base Caravan Sport that is still an enjoyable vehicle and we bought it as a new leftover in March 1997. Except for the Infinity sound system, it has none of the features on that list either and has served us well for seven year and continues to do so and it still looks nearly like new as well.
I always seem to do this when buying a car. I need help.
When I start saying "I wonder is we should have done something else..." my wife says:
"It's done, I don't want to hear it. We like the van we have, and that's that"
Good advice.
Enjoy your new van and keep your wife too!
Since you mentioned 2005 SXT, I thought I would share the price advertised in our local paper, unsure of what is MSRP but options listed include stow'n go seating, 3.8 V-6, auto dual power doors, alloy wheels, power lift gate, 7 pass, dual a/c & heat, tilt, cruise and more with an ad price of $23,879 or a 39 month lease with 39,000 miles and $2500 down for a lease payment of $299/month.
Same ad also offers a 2004 GC SE with a MSRP of $28,010 for $20,819
Seems that the price on the 2004 is nothing great but that the 2005 looks interesting
good luck
The rear seats are not bad, but really low angled. Quite easy to use the stow-n-go feature.
There was one low-end model (LX) sitting there, with a "no-haggle" lease price for $329/month, after $2995 down. Expensive, in my eyes.
Overall, even though they advertised (on the van) that T&C is the most luxury minivan, I still think they missed many things they used to offer, and could be a deal-breaker for me. I'm still undecided which minivan to take next (my current Windstar's lease expires in about 8 months).
The power controls for the door locks and windows are still NOT illuminated, something they did for years but stopped to save a few pennies, and so is the ignition key ring. The glove box is not illuminated, but the new 'mini' center console between the 2 front seats is lighted - a nice thing. The windshield wipers de-icer which Chrysler invented on their minivans is already copied by Toyota and Kia minivans, but Chrysler stopped to offer it. TOO BAD.
Another thing bothers me, the optional packaging. I hate leather, and don't want a car with leather. If I take the Touring edition, I would like to add the luxury group, which adds many good things, as fog lamps, auto dimming mirror (in & out), better stereo system, rear sonar sensor, adjustable pedals, nicer gauges, etc. but if you take this package, you MUST first take the leather package for $2100!! That's just crazy! (Sounds like Toyota - the only thing they copied! :-)
I believe the rear seats are angled downward (in the rear--upward at the front) more severely to add in crash survivability--less likely to fly out of the seat. The angle also brings up the knees a bit for a more comfortable seating position.
The new van made its maiden NH-NYC trip with an average of nearly 20 MPG and is now able to return an average of between 23 and 24.5. I suspect that when it is a little more broken in that 25 will be easily achievable.
Best Regards,
Shipo
Thanks in advance
Oh, and this post may be of interest:
tomtomtom "Honda Odyssey vs Dodge/Chrysler minivans" May 6, 2004 4:58pm
Steve, Host
Edmunds Vans Newsletter
Steve, Host
The Ford marketing people seem to be getting really aggressive in their Freestar ads. I think they need to. In my opinion, while an improvement over the last generation, the Freestar is the most underwhelming of any van on the market today.
I'm sure you've seen the Freestar versus Odyssey commercial where the now no longer independent "automotive authority" is asked by a couple on what they should do with the Honda head rests.
("Why'd I buy a Honda...Why'd I but a Honda..")
Best regards,
Dusty
I'm sure someone could link me to a net version of the commercial, but I'll just take your word for it. :-)
Steve, Host
When the performance is lacking they will say something like the interior will make you forget the little lack of performance...if the luxury that's lacking they will say company "H" is good at the basic stuff that people "really" want.
Best Regards,
Shipo
Best Regards,
Shipo
They've been an exceptional car the last few years.
Regards,
Dusty
If Chryslers have been exceptional for the past few years, it should indeed show *consistently* on most long term surveys, but it doesn't. My guess is that, they're good during the first two or so years, then slowly start to go downhill.
Having said that, I wouldn't mind buying a T&C even now with their extended warranty, great deals etc. if I were to like their overall package. Right now the Toyota is better packaged, if one is not crazy about "stow & go" second row. IMO of course.
Best Regards,
Shipo
I have not seen C&D's comments; but, I did see where the June 2004 issue of Road and Track placed the 530i 6th in a 7-way comparo of 6 cylinder sedans. (the CTS won)
Back on topic...
If you're prone to rely on Consumer Reports for "reliability" data, better look at the Plymouth Breeze for years '96-'99 again. They actually haven't been that bad, and better than average (Bonneville, Quest, Windstar, Explorer, for example).
Also, if you look at their data, the Chrysler mini-vans (with the exception of '00) have been "average" or better from '97 up.
Dusty
If you're prone to rely on Consumer Reports for "reliability" data, better look at the Plymouth Breeze for years '96-'99 again. They actually haven't been that bad, and better than average (Bonneville, Quest, Windstar, Explorer, for example).
Also, if you look at their data, the Chrysler mini-vans (with the exception of '00) have been "average" or better from '97 up.
Dusty
Corresponding year Camry also has 5/5 but 4/5 mid term whereas Accord is 3/5 in IQS, but with 5/5 in the mid term.
I tend to put more trust in JDPower than in CR, but to me if a vehicle is consistently reliable, it will have to show up in all of the surveys to be above average. If not there is something wrong somewhere.
Steve, Host