Did you recently take on (or consider) a loan of 84 months or longer on a car purchase?
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
Options
Full Sized Vans
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Just got a 2000 Express 2500 with a 5.7 and love it so far. No strange noises, except a hard shift between first and second at times.
The '94 High top models are;
SS = whsle 2320. retail 2990.
SLX = whsle 2810. retail 3640.
Limited + whsle 3860. retail 4960.
Add these to cargo values found on Edmund's.
Jerry
Got in touch with them and will probably do some business with them. Peace GREENBIRD
Edmund's pricing on a 1990 E 150 Club Wagon, allowing for optional equipment and mileage adjustments, indicates a wholesale value of 4,000. and retail value of 5,000. It would appear that the asking price is commensurate with your description of the van.
On the question of fuel economy, I drive a '97 E 150 low top conversion with the 4.6L V8 and I average about 15 mpg (warm weather) and 14 mpg (winter). The 5.8 likely will be a bit lower than that. Probably 14 and 13 respectivly, but that is just my best guess.
I would expect most mini's range 17 to 22 mpg.
The difference between 14 mpg and 18 mpg on 15000 miles per year is about 240 gallons, or 20 gallons per month.
Jerry
P.S. My 97 has 50,000 miles on it and it has been a gem.
By the way, I am experiencing the same lack of interest in Passenger vans by all the dealers that all you others are encountering. I haven't taken on the problem of how I can actually purchase what I want even after I've decided the make, configuration, and options. Any help here too would be appreciated. Thanks for any guidance you can provide.
Jack
I believe the lack of interest is due to lack of buying demand.
Jerry
No first hand knowledge, but I used to be a paramedic. Almost ambulance I've seen in the last 15 years was a Ford. The mechanics told me that Chevy's just don't last. Even though Chevy's are available and cheaper, the people that know seem to stick with those Fords even though the Chevy's are cheaper, look better, are rated to have more horsepower and get better MPG.
Ever noticed how many Chevy conversion vans are on the used car lots despite the fact that Ford sells a lot more?
I'm too lazy to check myself, but if it hasn't been done someone with a Ford van should start a reliability topic for those vehicles. It would be interesting to see what type of common issues, if any, arise.
It's hard to say any full size van looks good, but I do prefer the appearance over the Fords. The ride/handling is still spectacular given the size, and I have never regretted getting a full size van over a mini van once. My friends with mini vans complain that they are too small.
My '97 Ford has 50,000 trouble free miles on it.
The Coachmen conversion has been trouble free as well. It is still as tight as when new.
The reliability issues posted on the Chevy - GMC vans is rather disconcerting. I'm now searching the local market for a new van. Given my personal experience with the Ford and the volume of problems posted on the GM vans, I find myself tending to shy away from the GM vans.
This might be viewed as overreacting but I really don't want to buy into transmission failures, etc.
Bought the Ford because I heard both the Dodge and the GM were unreliable, plus the Ford looks the best, IMHO.
I drove Ford ambulances with lotsa brutal miles on them. No AT problems because we religiously turned the OD off in town. Not real happy with fit and finish, especially vis-a-vis Toyota or Honda products, but compared the Chevy's we had, there was no comparison. It seemed like we had to rotate starters, alternators, and rotors on those Chevy's more often than the tires.
No real experience with Dodge, but Chrysler's reliability record speaks for itself. The van is a little long in the touth, though. One would think they might have the bugs worked out.
It has been reliable and since the price of diesel has usually been lower than regular gasoline, a bit more economical to run. With a 35 gallon fuel tank, I can go 500-600 miles before fillup. It has power!
Since it is an E-350, it rides a bit rougher than most, but it is still better than my Mustang
If I didn't drive so many miles (solo) on a daily
basis, I'd keep this vehicle. It has 77,000 miles
in under 3 years time and never refused to start.
Altho I ordered the block heater to provide for the Michigan winters, it has never needed to be
plugged in.
The engine is a bit noisier than gasoline engines,
but I don't notice it anymore. The torque coming from this drivetrain is incredible. I ordered the trailer towing package (Class II/III/IV) and it has the 3.55 axle.
This is one of the best vehicles I have ever owned and I am going to truly miss it. I have done the regular maintenance on it and replaced the tires at around 60,000 miles. No repairs have been required.
If anyone has further questions, email me at kent0242@aol.com
Here is the big question! Where do I get info on conversion companies. I want a superior conversion that does not compromise the integrity of the vehical. Which company provides the best value? I've looked at several Regency vans and was quite impressed. Any recommendations, concerning conversion companies, and methods to investigate their materials and workmanship.
Thanks,
Brad
None of this says nothing about any alleged weak transmissions or aluminum gears. Still waiting (with an open mind) for proof on these points.
Captain Nemo
has 61000 miles and it has a lot of luxury inside.
Leader seats, 2 tv/vcr, vc, etc. I'm really crazy about this that I can't sleep. This will be my personal car to go to my job every day (14 miles)
My wife said that I'm crazy. We don't have kids yet we are young (40/27) and we don't travel alot. It has a 5.7L V8 TBI/TPI/FI (what is all that?)engine,normal aspiration, 12miles/Galon. I drove it and it feels great, heavier that the Savana 97 I drove few days ago. It's hard to break. It's a real truck!This is my point guys: What are the pros and cons with this heavy conversion? What I should check the most before I buy it? Am I going to make a lot of damage driving in town 90% of the time? what aplease, I need this info as soon as posible!!! thank you so much guys.
Ed. edgardo_bianchi@yahoo.com
Much thanks here to Joe Young, of and his own site for his quick and complete responses to each and every question I put to him, so here goes.
Basically, we're talking about two trannies here. One is the 4R70W, which is standard with the 4.2L and 4.6L engines and SOMETIMES.., even found mated to the 5.4L V-8. This is the lighter-duty box and not designed for heavier duty loads or towing applications to be sure. The second is the 4R100, which is the heavier duty box and is the current version of the old C-6 3spd. auto., which was a staple for years. It was the strongest box Ford had since the old cast-iron FMX, which was discontinued in '79. When the Feds got into the act and initiated the CAFE (Corporate Average Fuel Economy) ratings the handwriting was on the wall and much design went to aluminum for strength-to-weight ratio considerations and quietness. There are NO aluminum gears...only gearset cages of aluminum, which is not a problem. The problem with the 2001 4R100s, produced under the realm of Jac"The Knife" Nasser, was that to save $4. per vehicle, they opted to change the low one-way clutch from a roller-type to a dogbone-type, which CANNOT handle the stress/strain of heavy-duty applications. Most of the 80,000 produced, AGAINST THE ADVICE of Ford engineers, couldn't even be driven out of the plant. These involved 'F' and 'E' series vehicles and all were corrected at a cost of $2,000. PER UNIT !! Any Ford stockholders should address their congrats to the aforementioned Mr. Nasser. What a loser !
Bottom line is that for any type of heavy-duty application the REDESIGNED 4R100 is a fine box; however, it is the standard tranny available ONLY with the 6.8L 10cyl. and the 7.3 D.I.T. Diesel. For other engine options it may or may not be available, as an 'option', but if your buying from dealer on-site inventories you likely will be getting the 4R70W, which will, most likely, be okay ONLY IF you don't tow, carry any substantial payload and don't lean on it through the low end of the gearbox ...especially. A WORD TO THE WISE.........Once again, many thanks to Joe Young.
http://flatratetech.com
for any additional information.
http://www.egroups.com/group/4x4van
I'll bet everyone has forgotten we are here.
Drew
Host
Vans and Aftermarket & Accessories message boards
my dogs and gear to dog shows. With 8 dogs it must be large, at least the 12 passenger. I would remove all the rear seats. At the moment I have 3 vehicles to choose among, similar
miles ( apprx 70 ,000 ). Two are Econline Club Vans, a 96 with a 7.3 liter engine, extended and a 98 with a 5.4l Triton. The other is a 95 GMC conversion van with a 350 engine. After test driving I prefer the Fords. The best price is the 96 but I wonder about the huge engine - what gas mileage can I expect? The vehicle would only be used for highway driving....
Any comments?
Your probably going to average 12-15 mpg on any of these engines. A diesel might get up to 20mpg, but they had problems with pitting of the cylinders, caused by failing to replace and use proper coolant, that leads to engine failure. This could be very expensive to repair. (Of course, a well maintained diesel could be a reliable and economical.) See
http://www.ford-diesels.com
If you really need lotsa cargo space, an extended van full-size van would be the only way to go.
The package comes with 2 flip down TV screens from the ceiling, VCR, 4.6 V-8, tow package, 4 leather captains chairs with a leather bench in the back, privacy glass and other goodies. The package only includes one color, Charcoal metallic green with gray bottom. I'm told it may take 2 to 3 months for delivery.
Question ??? Has anybody seen this van on the road or dealers lot since Ford announced its coming?
Didn't drive it, but I don't know why it is would drive differently than any other Chateau.
Where do you live?
I actually went looking to buy another mini van since my 89 Ply. Grand Voyager now has 108000 miles on it and has cost me over $2,000.00 in repairs in the last 6 months. (transmission, fuel pump, axle, etc. etc.)
When I saw the prices of the new mini vans from Chry, Ford, Honda and Dodge I went the other way and looked at the full size and liked what I saw. The full sized vans cost the same as the mini van and in alot of cases they are actually cheaper. I kinda of feel that I'm getting more bang for the buck with the Traveler E-150. I also like the idea of having a tow capacity of 6100 lbs compared to 3500 lbs. with a mini van.
In fact, this one Traveller is the only new Econoline wagon (seats in the back) that I've seen for a while.
If you want me to look at anything, let me know. A friend just got a digital camera that I could borrow if necessary.
I think the standard Chateau is a real steal. I had one quoted to me for $24k last summer. About the same as a stripped minivan w/ bench seats, got about the same gas mileage, and had lots more space.
Just been hashing this stuff out in the "4 kids need a van" topic. Most of the poeple won't consider a fullsize out of the mistaken belief that a mini is safer or smaller. The govt crash tests don't support that belief, and the fullsizes are TALLER, but not significantly longer or wider than a minivan. But persist the naysayers do.
Also lots of posts on this in the fullsize vs. minivan thread.
who are looking for a used van. Prospective buyers should remember that
from about 1986 to 1992 many vans were
subject to the notorius "peeling paint
problem". Paint on these vehicles peeled
off and the problem is basically unrepairable because there is no primer
and any repaint job will continue to
peel off from below. On vans this problem
was partcularly bad because of the large
flat roofs were really affected. Cosmetically it looks horrible. I sold
an otherwise good (except for worn clutch) 1988 Dodge B150 because of this
problem. As far as I can tell most
"after factory" conversions had better
paint jobs and weren't subject to this
problem. Vans that do have this problem
will probably be visible to a buyer by noe.
I walked over to the Chevy display and looked at the Express van. All in all, I prefer the Ford. I'm expecting delivery within the next 8 weeks.
As for tranny problems with GMC/Chevy lets make one thing clear. The problems have always been with the lighter duty tranny in the GMC 1500 series, and by going to a 2500/3500 passenger van you automatically get a "HEAVY DUTY " tranny (4L80E)that comes with vehicles with a GVWR of 8600lbs or above. This tranny was improved for 2001 with a "new" torque converter to offer smoother shifting. Worth noting is that this tranny is the same one used in the GMC/Chevy commercial cutaway box vans with GVWR of 12,000lbs (with wheelbase of 177 inches) and duallys. I think this speaks for itself, and is more then enough durability for most people carrying much less weight everyday. I got a heavy duty tranny in a 2500 series without going to a 3500/350 series (that Ford requires).
Guess to each his own, make up your own mind, but don't complain later about leg room when your on your nest 400 miles holiday trip. I guess if your a commercial owner it doesn't matter when someone else does the driving, reliability and price are the key. But if your buying for personal use, I can't see having soo much space in the back (12 foot) and still be cramped up front for space.
Good luck whichever vehicle you buy.
If your wanting a 2500 series passenger vehicle, GMC/CHEVY automaticaly offer you a heavy duty tranny, heavy duty axles (8 bolt).....you have to go all the way to a 350 Ford to get that.
Notice I hardly mentioned Dodge. Give me a break with that vehicle. How stupid do they think people are, I just the other day looked at the Roadtrack camper vans using this frame....tiny front doors, tiny side windows (driver/passenger), no legroom, I don't care if they are reliable or not.....I can't see anyone spending $60K for something like this, yet the only reason seems to be that people just do not notice the lack of front space when they buy. Too many of us think of reliability and perhaps looks in there purchase decision. I consider ride, front space (especially leg room), quiet ride, low air noise, good handling more important. The GMC/Chevy offers all these benefits.
The GMC/Chevy "PASSENGER" vans are a different story.The heavy duty tranny and heavy duty axle (8 bolt) are standard equipment on 2500 and 3500 passenger models models.
Therefore in reliability discussions regarding trannys, remember that not all GMC/CHevy 2500 series models have the same trannys. Make sure you go for the heavy option....with that comes heavy duty tranny/axles/drums and heavier duty brake booster. Check out the Chevy COMMERCIAL VAN literature.....it is much more comprehensive compared to the regular litarature you receive.