Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!

2008 Minivans

13567…25

Comments

  • bobw3bobw3 Member Posts: 2,989
    The Mazda9, Outlook, Acadia, Freestyle, Veracruz, etc...are all considered CUVs, because they're a cross between a SUV and minivan/car.

    By definition, a minivan is a small van, with a flat floor, sliding doors...basically a box on wheels. None of the CUVs listed above meet that criteria. Just because a vehicle holds 8 doesn't make it a minivan.
  • tsu670tsu670 Member Posts: 293
    There are some 2008 T&Cs arriving here and they look really nice. The problem is the ones with leather all have gray interiors. Looking at the Chrysler website (build your own), it appears you can get tan trim by ordering the Touring with 24k option pkg, but that would be in their so-called "YES Essentials" material, which I think is their fancy word for cloth seats. If you change the YES Essentials to leather, there is no additional charge, but the color automatically reverts to gray. Could it be that the only way to get tan leather seats in the new T&C is by moving up to the Limited model?
  • toronado455toronado455 Member Posts: 83
    Could it be that the only way to get tan leather seats in the new T&C is by moving up to the Limited model?

    It could be. Or it could just be that the web site isn't functioning properly.
  • marine2marine2 Member Posts: 1,155
    I don't know, but I saw a Dodge SXT with Swivel n Go seats with tan leather seats the other day at a dealership. It sure was nice.
  • artgpoartgpo Member Posts: 483
    Before buying a 2008 Chrysler built minivan you might consider reading the Edmunds Insider head to head review of the 2008 Grand Caravan and the Odyssey. As the title of my post suggests, nice try Chrysler, close but no cigar. Factor in the miserable depreciation (caused by tens of thousands dumped from rental/taxi fleets)and it becomes clear that the right choice would be an Odyssey.
  • tsu670tsu670 Member Posts: 293
    Yes, actually the Rice cake is at the top of our list, but we wanted to see what the new Mopars were like first. Somewhat under whelmed.
  • dennisctcdennisctc Member Posts: 1,168
    Actually all the Big 3 are jumping out of the rental/taxi fleets. Nowadays, you can rent Toyotas and Hyundais instead. You'd think someone would come out with a company just to make generic cars/minivan and focus solely on that niche? DCX also now has the best warranty in the industry.

    The "miserable depreciation" is quite dishonest because of the only way it can be factored i.e.. using MSRP, not actual transaction price. I bet if you could factor in people of paid dealer markup to get a certain model vs. someone who got a discount, it wouldn't be nearly "miserable".

    So if you factor in no rentals, the best warranty, features and honest depreciation, the right choice could be a Chrysler vehicle.
  • artgpoartgpo Member Posts: 483
    I have not posted on these boards in about 18 months or more and I know why. The mantra of the same people touting what cannot, in fact, be touted continues.

    I'm outta here, again.
  • artgpoartgpo Member Posts: 483
    I specifically remember GM saying they would not be putting the "new" Malibu into rental fleets to help maintain resale when the car was introduced about four years ago. Guess what? GM has made almost the exact same statement concerning its impending "newer" Malibu. GM says it would "limit" the number in rental fleets. I guess this will be the plan until sales do not meet quotas?

    BTW: According to Edmunds the Kia Sedona has the worst depreciation at 40%. Yes is for the newest body style. Chrysler is close behind.
  • dennisctcdennisctc Member Posts: 1,168
    I thought you were "outta here"?

    Guess it's easier to just spout off a figure but not respond to how depreciation is actually calculated. Edmunds says blah blah blah, but how did they arrive at blah blah blah doesn't matter?

    Lets see, I spent $20,000 for my 2005, it has 21,000 miles, never a problem, in great shape and according to NADA worth about $16,000 - $17,500, it's retained about 80% of it's original selling price using the $16k figure? Not too miserable by my calculations.
  • autowriteautowrite Member Posts: 226
    Let's see!
    My 2002 Odyssey that I bought for 34,700 canadian dollars, new is now worth (in 2007) 18,000 to 19,000 and has 175,000 kilometers (108,700 miles). A big-three (GM,CHRYSLER, FORD)
    looses halves {or halfs} it's value in 2 years. It I had bought a T&C in 2002 for 34,700 it would be worth 17.350 in 2004.

    It would be smart to buy a new Honda/Toyota OR a used BIG-THREE (3+ years old). Why loose all that money on depreciation!

    [Oh, I did not include Nissan as they are owned by Renault in France] :D
  • artgpoartgpo Member Posts: 483
    I just searched our local dealers for 2005 T & Cs. The price is anywhere from $10,000 to $13,500 RETAIL meaning trade-in is about $9,000 to $11,000 for the 50+ listed. The average RETAIL price for a 2005 Odyssey on the same site (9 listed) is $23,175 meaning dealer trade-in was around $21,000.

    44% retained value for the T&C
    75% retained value for the Odyssey

    I guess those hefty T&C rebates and other incentives must sure be worth it.
  • colloquorcolloquor Member Posts: 482
    I would concur on Chrysler minivan's depreciation having owned a 1994 Grand Caravan ES - new $27K, sold it for $2,400 in January 2007. On the other hand, in over 12 years and 164K of driving, here's what was replaced/repaired: starter, 3 sets of tires, brakes (2 or 3 times, including front rotors once), plus the normal routine preventive maintenance items. Nothing else . . . It was on its original stainless steel exhaust system, catalytic converter, etc. No problems with the engine (3.3L V6), nor the 4-speed automatic. 5W-30 Mobil 1 every 3K or 3 months, and changed ATF every 24K miles.

    The same can't be said for my brother's 2001 Ody. His first automatic transmission lasted 45K, and he's had several major electrical problems. Great resale value, but overall, poor reliability.
  • dennisctcdennisctc Member Posts: 1,168
    Artgo, you come on here bashing DCX Minivan with you're "Not Quite as Good" posting, spout off "miserable depreciation" comments, then try to silence posters with your "touting what cannot". Sorry for trying to explain to you how depreciation is calculated incorrectly, now if you want to correct me, feel free but don't try the high and mighty routine after initiating "Not Quite as Good".

    Have you driven a 2008 DCX Minivan? Somehow I doubt you ever will.
  • dennisctcdennisctc Member Posts: 1,168
    I just searched our local dealers for 2005 T & Cs. The price is anywhere from $10,000 to $13,500 RETAIL meaning trade-in is about $9,000 to $11,000 for the 50+ listed. The average RETAIL price for a 2005 Odyssey on the same site (9 listed) is $23,175 meaning dealer trade-in was around $21,000.

    44% retained value for the T&C
    75% retained value for the Odyssey

    I guess those hefty T&C rebates and other incentives must sure be worth it

    Since you don't know what the T&C buyers paid years ago, your analysis is flawed. What's the saying figures don't lie but liars figure?
  • marine2marine2 Member Posts: 1,155
    If your planning to spend $25,000 plus on a minivan and keep it only two or three years, yes, go ahead and by a Honda. But if your like me and keep one at least five years, the new Chrysler is a great buy. It has all the safety features Honda and Toyota has, plus a six speed tranny, television, DVDs, Nav, etc.,etc.etc. There is nothing the other two have that the Chrysler minivans don't. But there is stuff on the Chrysler vans the other two don't have and it has a life time warranty on engine and drive train as long as you keep it. It's pretty hard to beat that. Plus, it's now American owned and most of the profit from that van will stay here in America and create more American jobs. So yes, if your planning on dumping it in a couple of years, buy a Honda or Toyota. My next new one will be a Chrysler product with all those goodies you can't get on yours. Like you use to complain that Chrysler didn't have what the other two did. And when that light turns green and that 4.1 leaves your's in the dust, don't say you didn't have the chance to buy one.
  • autowriteautowrite Member Posts: 226
    I don't know where you got keeping a Honda Odyssey 2 years, but I have had mine 5 years and I plan to have it about 15 years, if possible (currently 175,000 kilometers). A new 2008 Chrysler T&C with 6 speed automatic lists at CAN$42,895.00 and does NOT have a life-time warranty, just 3year/60 kms. The life-time warranty is offered only in the USA.
    It was always American owned but Windsor, Ontario, Canada (across the river from Detroit, Michigan) has a Chrysler minvan plant where alot of these minivans are produced.

    My the way a Honda Odyssey Touring model will cost you can$50,000+ in Canada and we cannot get all the colours {Canadian spelling} in Canada although it's only build in Lincoln, Alabama (since late 2003}. They add the daytime runninglight module to them. In Canada daytime runninglights are manatory since 1971.

    Mostly Ford, GM, Chrysler, Honda, Toyota, etc give extra standard accessories to Canada, like heated mirrors & a few other items.
  • tncarmantncarman Member Posts: 82
    Well, my Chrysler isn't a minivan, it's actually a 2000 Sebring Convertible, but my depreciation was not miserable. I got the jxi for about $26k, and now days my car is worth about 7 thousand. But so would a Toyota Solara at the same price in 2000. Over time, american and foreign car prices start evening out for comparable cars. Its just the first two or three years where the differences are. And most people have cars for 5 anyways, when the depreciation has nearly or started to cathc up to one another.

    Besides would you rather buy a car you hate because it doesn;t really lose its value, or a car you love that isnt going to be worth so much? Id buy the car I love/ works best for me.
  • hansiennahansienna Member Posts: 2,312
    Some of us want the luxury of separately controlled temperature for the driver and front passenger that Chrysler offers on almost every minivan BUT Honda and Toyota offer it only on minivans costing $ 29,000 or more. :sick:

    For you the Odyssey may be the right choice but not for more people that buy Chrysler/Dodge than Honda/Toyota combined. :shades:
  • hansiennahansienna Member Posts: 2,312
    For a comparison of used 2005's, you need to state the model of each and the ACTUAL SELLING price when new. The posting # 127 is NOT RECOMMENDED because it is lacking in facts. :sick:
  • marine2marine2 Member Posts: 1,155
    It seems some people can't find anything Chrysler minivans don't have now, so they hit on the depreciation. But how many put $23,000.-$40,000 in their minivan and get rid of them in 2-3 years? I sure don't. I have a 7/70 bumper to bumper warranty on this one and I sure won't get rid of it until at least five years at the earliest. After that long, depreciation won't be much of a factor between any of them. After that, it's Swivel N Go.
  • dennisctcdennisctc Member Posts: 1,168
    Funny how things change, and will continue to. A year ago, people were writing how much better the Honda Ody was....faster, 5 spd auto, stability control. Now Chrysler has taken a clear lead in many of these areas, raised the bar on features others still don't have available, and like you said, depreciation is all that's left.

    I remember how important Honda's 1.4 sec lead to 60 mph was, it was key to being safer. But now Honda is 1 sec slower? OMG!! They should ban Odys from all highways then!!!!
  • artgpoartgpo Member Posts: 483
    My original posting directed people posting on Edmunds' boards to read the Edmunds head to head comparison of the 2007 Odyssey VS the 2008 Dodge GC. Their words in the review, not mine.

    I did not come back here to bash or tout anything. All I origially did was direct my fellow posters to read the review.

    Yes I owned Chrysler products in the past including a GC and say "never again".
  • dennisctcdennisctc Member Posts: 1,168
    Here's how to direct people properly:

    Comparison Test 2008 Dodge vs. 2007 Honda

    No need to tell people what to think with "Not Quite as Good" (not in article), "miserabe depreciation" (not in article) etc...those were your words.

    I happen to disagree with the article's conclusions though, as I happen to think it'll be others having to catch up to Chrysler. Other's don't offer 6 speed autos, or stow n go, or the ability to custom order features like DCX. Others don't offer tne dealer network, support and warranty either.

    If you want a driver's car....buy a bimmer. If you want more practical features buy a Chrysler.
  • bobw3bobw3 Member Posts: 2,989
    I wonder why then does the Odyssey & Sienna consistently beat the T&C in just about every car magazine, article, or quality survey out there? It's good that some folks have good long-term luck with their Chrysler product, but if that were the case with a majority of buyers, then you'd think that the T&C quality ratings would exceed those of the Odyssey & Sienna for the past decade.

    But it's true that if you can't find an Odyssey or Sienna in your price range with the options you want, then the T&C may be what you want to get.

    And please don't respond with any conspiracy theories.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Lots to talk about here.

    I agree that numbers stated at a % of the MSRP are pretty much useless, unless you paid MSRP. :D

    So steep discounts and 0% financing can help offset some (not all) of the steeper depreciation. In another thread I offered up some no-haggle pricing, new vs. used, same dealerships, and Honda and Toyota still had the edge, even factoring in the steep discounts.

    Still, there is the opportunity cost to figure. Depends on what you would do the money.

    Also, the 2008 Dodges may do better, now that they're new and improved.

    Note the lifetime powertrain warranty will not help resale, as it is *not* transferable. That might actually erode residuals because it encourages people to buy instead of used.

    Edmunds 0-60 for that Ody is unusually slow, their last one was quicker. The champ in acceleration will still be the Sienna, though, with 266hp. Edmunds has not tested one with the new 3.5l engine, so it's hard to understand why they excluded it from this test.

    I'll check out a Dodge when I get a chance, though I bought my van back in May so it's too late for me this time around.
  • marine2marine2 Member Posts: 1,155
    I think it's because for years Honda and Toyota made nice looking and fairly reliable minivans and cars that had the things Americans wanted on their vehicles. But while they still do. I think Chrysler has more than caught up. Now Honda and Toyota might still have some small advantages over the new 2008 Dodge/Chrysler minivans, I think Chrysler has them beat in offering the American consummer anything he could want in a minivan, no matter what your looking for, except seating for eight. I think Chrysler's minivan not only measures up, they have a lot more than the competition.

    Besides having all the safety features Honda has, it has a lot they don't. Things like power saver, that turns off your lights after about 20 min. in case you left them on. Only van with self leveling shocks, two DVD's, that can play two different movies at the same time, or video on one and games on the other. It can also be fed up to the front dash monitor, when the van is stopped. Television, A 20 gig hard drive for storing music or pictures. Only van to offer a intergrated child boster seat. A 506 watt 7.1 surround system, with a minivan first, subwoofer. Only van to offer a six speed transmission. A intergrated drop down survellance mirror to see what the kids are doing in the back. Only van to offer stow-n-go or Swivel And Go seats and table. Only van to offer automatic rear seat, with one touch stowing. You can get a firmer ride with the Dodge, or a softer ride in the Chrysler. That doesn't even include all the other stuff it has. There is a model for what every family needs or wants. Plus only company to offer a life time warranty on engine and drive train. I think it more than measures up.
  • rv65rv65 Member Posts: 1,076
    Odyssey has a subwoofer in the touring.
  • davethewave1davethewave1 Member Posts: 26
    As already mentioned Ody has the sub. Honda and Toyota have the integrated conversation mirror. Toyota has the power rear fold down seat.

    I've had a hard time convincing my wife to take a look at the new T&C. I might have to go by my self and check it out, we are very close to buying.
  • marine2marine2 Member Posts: 1,155
    If your going to buy one, you'd be crazy not to check them all out. I think you'll find out, Chrysler vans have a heck of a lot to offer minivan buyers. That halo lighting is really cool looking at night. The only real advantage Honda and Toyota now have on Chrysler is resale value. That is mostly because there are so many more Chrysler minivans sold and their bland interior. If your planning on keeping your van more than 2-3 years, resale value won't make much difference. Although with their new interior, I don't think that will be as much a factor as it was on the old ones. People are not going to look inside and automatically disregard this minivan because of it's bland gray interior, as many did on the older vans. As a matter of fact,, I hear Chrysler not only has the front seats heated, but also the middle seats.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    You make several good points, but I made a similar point in the Sedona/Entourage threads and I'll make it again here.

    You're focusing on the toppings. More of them, specifically.

    Honda and Toyota sell better ice cream.

    Dodge offers jimmies, syrup, whipped cream, jelly beans, gummy bears, granola, and all sort of chopped up candy bars on top of their vanilla ice cream. That's fine if you like toppings.

    But then they still use pushrod engines and hard plastics straight from the low-buck Caliber on the dash. They get the options right but miss on some of the basics.

    In the ice cream analogy, they use generic ice cream underneath all those toppings.

    Honda and Toyota use Breyer's vanilla.

    The lesson to be learned here? I'm hungry for lunch! :D

    Any how, $39,305 and it's still a pushrod engine.
  • davethewave1davethewave1 Member Posts: 26
    Nice
  • dennisctcdennisctc Member Posts: 1,168
    Talk to automotive engineers, and there are many benefits to a pushrod engine besides lower mfg cost, they also provide more torque at lower RPMs, similar MPG and easier to repair. Just look at the "pushrod" Corvette and Z06 engines, hardly Cosco bucket icecream!
  • bobw3bobw3 Member Posts: 2,989
    I agree with you. I'm more interested in the engine, handling, proven quality, reliability, etc than with a lot of toppings!
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Pushrods don't really make more torque, they just use more displacement. 4.0 liters instead of 3.5l. Makes less power than Toyota and gives up MPG as well.

    It's all about cost, because Chrysler has multivalve engines.

    The Corvette is a completely different animal.

    It's a shame the Edmunds comparo didn't measure mileage, I wonder why?

    Any how, my Sienna makes more power and gets better mileage. I'm not sure I'd be willing to give up either, much less both.

    I'll have a large sundae please. Make sure the ice cream is the best stuff you have: Breyer's Vanilla Bean. :shades:
  • marine2marine2 Member Posts: 1,155
    I'm not sure the new 4.0 engine is a push rod or not. But the 3.8 is and it's a good proven engine that is pretty darn reliable. Unlike the Toyota engine that built up sludge and had to be replaced. Let's not forget those Honda transmissions that people were replacing 2 or 3 times. At least most of Chrysler's problem with transmissions were mostly people using the wrong fluid.

    So they use hard looking plastic on their dash and doors. Last I looked, Honda's and Toyota's were plastic too. They only have a more rounded, softer look to them. It doesn't mean they'll last any longer and now you are talking about their toppings.

    It's all not just topping either. They have a six speed tranny, only van with self adjusting shocks, power saver, it's quieter, two kinds of rides, all row standard air bags, electronic stability control, along with traction control.(Not sure Honda even offers both) coil springs and a larger front stabilizer bar for improved control over the older models. There are plenty of improvements in this van over the older ones and they are not just toppings.
  • bobw3bobw3 Member Posts: 2,989
    I think the problem is that while you may be right about this years T&C, it's hard to overcome a decade of experience. For me, I'll wait until I see 5 years of consistent quality and reliability coming out of Chrysler. When I'm constantly reading about how Chrysler quality and reliability matches Honda and Toyota, then I'll consider them. But now I'm only reading about how they're getting better and are much improved and for me, that's not enough. It's the same reason why I won't buy Kia or Hyundia.
  • marine2marine2 Member Posts: 1,155
    Chrysler has made over 30 improvements over just last year's model. I also think Honda's quality has been over blown lately. They have had plenty of problems with trannys, sliding doors, squeeks and rattles. Air conditioning, windshields, etc. So far my 2005 has been problem free. Only recall was a possible pinched hose which I had checked with an oil change.
  • bobw3bobw3 Member Posts: 2,989
    I guess for some, a few stories and a couple of good years is enough, but not for me. It's sort of like buying a stock. You don't just look at a year or two of good returns, but the long history of a company. Plus, just because a solid company had a few bad years you don't dump them. I look at Honda/Toyota as the solid company, and while Chrysler may have a good year now and in the past couple of years, again that's not enough for me.

    Plus I think some of the features on the T&C are gimmicky to me. Most minivan owners have carseats attached to the seats in the 2nd row, so they're never going to use the stow-n-go feature on the road like they do in the TV commercials.

    And with the turning seats...I really don't think that kids (let alone adults) are going to be sitting facing each other knocking knees while driving down the highway.

    Maybe these things look good on TV commercials, but in reality, the minivan crowd doesn't look like the folks on TV. They're really interested in hauling a few kids around in car seats and booster seats and with a bunch of stuff behind the 3rd row on family vacations.

    Or with the autofolding 3rd row...give me a break. It's faster just to flip down the spit 3rd row of a Sienna or Odyssey then to wait for the autofold feature to work. But then I feel the same way with the auto-sliding doors, but then they have at least some practical benefit.
  • marine2marine2 Member Posts: 1,155
    One thing I have also noticed. Our other car is a 2004 Honda Civic. My insurance is cheaper than hers. Routine maintenance is cheaper. Every few months Chrysler sends me coupons on specials. I have one here now for a $16.95 oil change. Engine tune up for $83.95. Brakes, front disc or shoe replacement, $89.95. Metallic shoes extra. I have yet to pay over $20.00 for an oil change. Got one last year for $16.95 which also included free wiper blades, which they put on. The wife's Honda, usually is around $27.95. I paid over $8.00 just for her wiper blades at the dealer a few months ago. Her 15,0000 mile checkup was over $400.00. Mine was around $295.00 We keep all our reciepts and it will be interesting to see which was cheaper after five years.

    Take that back, it was a 30,000 mile check up, not 15,000.
  • marine2marine2 Member Posts: 1,155
    Plus I think some of the features on the T&C are gimmicky to me. Most minivan owners have carseats attached to the seats in the 2nd row, so they're never going to use the stow-n-go feature on the road like they do in the TV commercials.


    Right and for the little ones, Chrysler is the only minivan to offer intergrated child booster seats built right into one of their models. Like I said, they offer everything to everybody except eight passinger seating.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Unlike the Toyota engine that built up sludge

    Very outdated info. That engine was the 3.0l that was replaced. Even that engine's successor was replaced. You're complaining about an engine from two generations ago!

    That's just it, though, you see Toyota coming out with new engines, each more powerful and more efficient than the last.

    Let's not forget those Honda transmissions that people were replacing 2 or 3 times

    Got me there, but my neighbor had the same issue with 3 Dodge vans. If it was the wrong fluid then Dodge dealers have to be re-trained. For the 4th time.

    We have to wait and see about the longevity of this 6 speed.

    Blaming Dodge owners for using the wrong ATF type yet giving Toyota owners a pass for not changing their oil shows a blatant double-standard, IMO.

    Plus Toyota vans now have a maintenance minder oil change light on the dash, so it's unlikely to happen again.

    What has Dodge done that actively prevents owners from using the wrong type of ATF again?

    I'd like to see measured road noise to see if the new Caravan is quieter than the Sienna, but to be honest I doubt it.

    The air bags you mention has been standard on the Sienna for a while now, Honda too. Toyota made VSC standard for 08, though most models had it before. Honda made VSA standard years ago, and yes VSA incorporates both stability and traction control.

    Coil springs? Am I supposed to be impressed by that? You must be kidding.

    You drank the kool aid. The rear suspension is not fully independent. Honda wins there, period. No argument there. Toyota still uses a torsion beam as well, so both are well behind Honda in this regard.

    How can you even try to spin the suspension as an advantage over the Honda? Give us a break.

    Sure, the 08 Dodge van is an improvement over the very outdated 07 vans (the 2nd row windows didn't even open). But we're not comparing those.
  • marine2marine2 Member Posts: 1,155
    It's been hard for Chrysler to compete with the advantage the foreign makers have in profit. They can't put as much in R/D into their vehicles. Foreign makers here are not paying the health care for retirees. Have thousands fewer retirees to pay for. Not paying as much in health care, because their employees are younger. Got many of their new plants at big tax discounts to bring them into these states. Pay lower wages.

    I didn't say Chrysler had a better rear suspension than Toyota. But it's much better than they had, and the front suspension has the only adjustable shocks on a minivan.

    The second row windows roll down now and have built in screens that lower into the body. This minivan is hands over heals over what they had. And on a wole, as good or better than the competition.

    Got to go pick up my grand daughter from school.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Chrysler had not had a complete redesign since 1997. So major upgrades were to be expected. The '08 is indeed a big improvement.

    I'm not convinced it's the best, though. That requires a no-excuses effort. The price on the Edmunds tester of more than $39k is also in the no-excuses level.

    I would have liked to see them offer a multi-valve engine (which was considered during the last refresh, but shelved) at that price. If they did, maybe they wouldn't have to offer rebates once the newness fades.

    I'm sure they have contracts with current engine suppliers to keep certain plants operating, and that's why the 3.3l and 3.8l engines carry on, but c'mon, it's not 1997 any more, Chrysler. Time for a clean sheet.
  • marine2marine2 Member Posts: 1,155
    "I'm sure they have contracts with current engine suppliers to keep certain plants operating, and that's why the 3.3l and 3.8l engines carry on, but c'mon, it's not 1997 any more, Chrysler. Time for a clean sheet."

    Let me repeat what I said before, because it's obvious, you didn't understand me.

    "It's been hard for Chrysler and Ameerican automotive manufactures to compete with the advantages the foreign makers have in profit. They can't put as much in R/D into their vehicles. Foreign makers here are not paying the health care for retirees. Have thousands fewer retirees to pay for. Not paying as much in health care, because their employees are younger. Got many of their new plants at big tax discounts to bring them into these states. Pay lower wages."

    Japanese widen profit gap over U.S. automakers
    Associated Press
    August 8, 2007
    Article tools
    E-mail Share
    Digg Del.icio.us Facebook Furl Google Newsvine Reddit Spurl Yahoo Print Single page view Reprints Reader feedback Text size: TRAVERSE CITY, Mich. - Japanese automakers widened their profit-making gap over the Big Three domestic automakers last year by 31 percent, according to a study released Tuesday.

    The profit gap, which already was significant in 2005 at $2,899 per vehicle sold in North America, widened by $915, to $3,814, according to a study of industry costs and profits by Laurie Harbour-Felax, managing director of Stout Risius Ross, a Chicago-based financial and operational advisory firm.

    The study, made public at an automotive industry conference, found that while General Motors Corp. had improved its efficiency and cut production costs, the nation's largest automaker and its Detroit counterparts, Ford Motor Co. and Chrysler LLC, still have a long way to go to match the profits of Toyota Motor Corp., Honda Motor Co. and Nissan Motor Co.

    GM cut its loss per vehicle in North America to $146 in 2006 from $1,271 in 2005, largely because of cost cuts that included the departure of more than 34,000 hourly workers to buyout and early retirement offers. It also is saving money on efforts to design cars and trucks globally, by increasing the number of parts common to all of its vehicles and by purchasing parts on a global basis, Harbour-Felax said.

    "GM has done the most from this as you look at their whole product lineup," she said.

    Still, GM made $2,123 less per vehicle than Toyota in 2006, according to the report. Toyota, the most profitable of all automakers on a per-vehicle basis, increased its profit per vehicle from $1,175 in 2005 to $1,977 in 2006, the report said. The numbers for individual manufacturers are at times lower than the overall gap because they do not include special write-offs, Harbour-Felax said.

    Ford, while it has made progress on cost cuts, common parts and globalization, still had a $3,939 profit gap in 2006 when compared with Toyota, Harbour-Felax said.

    Chrysler's profit gap with Toyota averaged $3,088 per vehicle for 2006 mainly because it was "force feeding" the market by selling vehicles with heavy incentives, she said.

    The labor cost difference between the Big Three and the Japanese automakers amounts to $1,200 to $1,500 per vehicle, Harbour-Felax said. Although the domestic automakers likely are to seek parity with the Japanese in ongoing contract talks with the United Auto Workers, that won't solve all of their problems because labor costs make up only about 10 percent of the cost of a vehicle, she said.

    The average price of a vehicle in the U.S. last year was $28,451, according to the National Automobile Dealers Association.
  • marine2marine2 Member Posts: 1,155
    You may think Chrysler has no excuses not to come out with every new innovation that Honda and Toyota has but they do. I am surprised they can put as much in this new 2008 as they have and keep the price down as much as they have.

    Now the 3.8 might be an old design, but it's been dependable and there isn't that much difference in acceleration than Honda's new engine and five speed tranny. Less than two sec. with Chrysler's four speed tranny in the quarter mile. That could be even less with Chrysler's new six speed tranny. I hear Chrysler's new 4.0 is at least a second faster than the Honda. As if it makes much of a difference either way. Of course the Honda people made it a big difference about it before. I am sure they will think it irrelevant now that the 4.0 is faster. I don't know, Chrysler's new 4.0 may not be the old push rod engine. But if it's as dependable aas the 3.8, I wouldn't complain.

    I don't think all of Toyota's problem was just oil. Wasn't it determined the passageways were to small in that engine, not allowing the oil to flow freely, there by gathering up into sludge?
  • dennisctcdennisctc Member Posts: 1,168
    That's the good thing with competition!! Just like when DCX came out with dual sliding doors or power hatches etc... it's win win for all of us
  • allezallez Member Posts: 21
    I agree that competition helps - it spawns innovation and improvement. I am on my fourth minivan; my first three were DCX - a 1995 GC, 1998 T&C, and 2002 T&C. My '95 was horrible - went through 3 transmissions and got rid of it; I had an extended warranty on the tranmissions but I could not deal with the possibility of my wife and kids being stranded somewhere. The '98 overall worked well - no major problems up until some idiot crossed over the yellow line and totaled it. My '02 is doing well - it has approx 75k miles, with a few relative minor things (transmission solenoid replaced, etc).

    Now I also have an '07 Sienna. I'm very happy with. It cost a bit more, but for me it was worth it. At the time I got it (July), the new T&C's were not out. If they were I would have looked at them, although my suspicion is that I would have still ended up with the Sienna. It seems a lot of new ideas come from DCX, and many are copied by others. The innovations in the new T&C's are interesting, but I do have a couple of concerns about the Swivel 'n Go. First, for me riding backwards in a vehicle makes me incredibly nauseous; many years ago I had to ride a school bus with backwards-facing seats for a couple of years :sick: Second, I'd be a little leery of having a hard table in front of the 3rd seat in the event of an accident; perhaps the seatbelt would keep my kids from hitting the table, but it would still make me nervous. I think with crash testing they don't seem to check what happens to the back seat passengers; I would want some reassurance that the table would not be a problem.
  • carcom2carcom2 Member Posts: 212
    I finally got to see and drive a Limited with leather, dual dvd's,sunroof, NAV and every option except power rear seat. Priced around $41,700. It looks real nice in black w/ the silver accents.

    Facing rearward, Swivel N Go will only be good for shorter people or kids. My legs couldn't fit under the table unless stretched out and then there would be little legroom for person across. This would be good for kids perhaps but not much room for adults especially because you have to move forward the front seats to make room for the 2nd row to swivel and to also open up the storage bin where the table is stowed. The seats are comfortable though. But now I'm curious on how the Stow N Go seats will feel in comparison. And perhaps the 3rd row power seats have for/aft adjustments. The manual 3rd row does not, but it can recline as well as the Swivel N G can recline, but not all the way back to the 3rd row.

    The Limited looks much much better than the 2008 Grand Caravan SXT. A definite step up in looks. I drove the GC SXT with the 4.0 and fabric seats without tow package. I wasn't too impressed with the steering - felt numb or acceleration. The upgraded trim on the Limited and the clock make the T&C look a lot nicer inside vs the GC. The T&C with the tow package includes the self leveling rear suspension and I thought it drove much better and the steering feedback was much better than the GC. T&C - Acceleration was really good with a quiet ride. Overall much nicer interior and better ride than the GC.

    I do wish they had some softer rubberized plastics. At least the fold down armrests are padded. Plenty of storage area.

    The power sliding doors & liftgate work perfectly smooth even when used manually.

    Only thing missing is a telescoping steering wheel. I'm sure I'll want to check it out further. It's staying on my list for now.

    But it makes me wonder what if any enhancements will be made to the VW version of this minivan.

    Will they add softer materials inside, what will the diesel engine specs be,etc. When will the VW come out in the US?

    Wondering why not much mention of the Nissan Quest? - huge amount of legroom in all rows.
  • marine2marine2 Member Posts: 1,155
    I had read the ride in the Chrysler was softer than in the Dodge. I guess they give you a choice. Not sure you set in the swivel seats backwards when traveling. Something to ask the salesman about. Were the seats comfortable?
This discussion has been closed.

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles