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
Watch closely for the contaminant known as "Rail Dust". As the name implies, it comes from transporting your vehicle by rail. It consists of tiny metal fibers that bond with your paint.
Left unattended, the metal begins to rust, which could eventually hurt your finish.
Ford has a three phase chemical wash procedure that is supposed to solve the problem, if it is applied soon enough. However, on vehicles contaminated over 120 days, the solution is not as simple.
The color of your vehicle will either make it really easy to detect (long term) or hide it until it is late in the destructive process. Since my van is white, I can spot the early signs of contamination pretty easily.
Another technique is to take a clear cigarette wrapper and hold it over the finish, feeling for little lumps. Keep in mind, rail dust can even stick to the coatings on glass, so check it as well.
The best place to check on the body of a car is in the window "sills" or roof (any horizontal surface).
I have found evidence of "Rail Dust" on my van and am now researching the best solution. Most of the service managers immediately suggest buffing, but if you don't solve the problem with chemicals first, buffing is no different than pulling a "tick" off your body, but leaving the head buried in your skin. The Metal would continue to rust under the surface of the paint.
It might serve you well to check with your dealership and ask them directly, before delivery of your new vehicle, just how they deal with the "Rail Dust" problem.
I'm not pushing anyone to buy anything. Frankly, I think we all ought to keep our cars/vans longer and save some money!
Now here you are coming up with a very complex subject that is a challenge to any researcher. There are many variables, and although it is possible to include all the variables, the summary data can easily become innaccurate simply due to the variables the reasearcher has chosen in his study. The problem is selecting which variables will determine the final result we all have to trust. I do not believe much of the information because the different statistics we have read are not even CONSISTANT. Data is reliable and valid only if it reproduces the SAME RESULT every single time the study is done. We have gross inconsistancies here (eg- State Farm states one thing, and NHTSA says something different...too me they publish something to save their jobs). In the studies I find many variables not mentioned that to me are important. No mention is made of height as a safety factor, or low hood designs that will throw a deer threw my window while a traveller. This is an example only, but there are so many variables that even I don't have a clue what to trust. So how can I trust a number, where did it come from to allow me to make the decision, if they listed ALL THE VARIABLES it would be fine (they don't). Missing one crucial variable also changes the summary statistics. It is not an easy subject, and that is why we get different studies with different solutions.
Why don't you list all the variables right here and now for us on the net, let us decide if those variables even match what others think are important. You will be up all night, and still not get the right answer. Untill the EXACT variables are listed, the summary statistics (mean, standard deviations, correlation anaylsis and multiple correlations, T-test, F-tests, etc) all mean nothing. It's just a star rating or a number on paper. It is garbage in and garbage out. I need to know how the study was done, what variables were used, and then I will decide if the research is valid and reliable.
I said before, I know I am not driving the safest vehicle, nor am I driving the most dangerous on the road. I figure the average vehicle is a medium sized car and I am "much larger" and higher from the ground and out of harms way. I think this is more reliable in judging how safe I feel on the road. Sit in a Civic and your gut feel will tell you if you feel safe if you drove up slowly to the front bumper of a parked 4x4 truck, now imagine 30 mph! I personally feel let your own common sense prevail regarding safety. Of course if were talking about comparing 10 different medium sized cars I would look to NHTSA, we have nothing better to rely on since they all look the same on the lot. However, when you see a large vehicle your common sense should prevail a bit too.
I think part of the problem is that your assuming a full size vehicle is ALWAYS FILLED to capacity (15 passenger models you read about). Well, I will agree with you in that people should know that this is a lot of people and the vehicle should be something larger before they climb in, even for comfort! Too many commerical operators are thinking money only, and how to get them to the airport on time (limousine services using 15 passenger models). However, I think most of us here are still thinking about use of these vans for 1-5 people (a family), small home builders, small delivery use with PAYLOADS a lot lower...and this is where our conflicts reside. It is obvious 15 passengers and over 3000 lbs of payload with a high center of gravity is not wise, I don't even need to have NHTSA tell me that....again it is common sense (and something should be done about that)and not even full size vans or mini vans are safe when at peek payload. Since most of us here are arguing mini vs full size vans, we all assume the vans will be for PERSONAL USE. That is the distinction we have to make if were going to keep this discussion going. I believe for personal use nothing beats a large SUV, full size truck or van...and I'm sticking to it!
I would like to see how people feel about low sloping hood desings on mini vans and cars. This is as unsafe as when they place the rear seats 4 inches from the rear hatch. I think this should raise peoples eyebrows even more then roll over, perhaps your driving one yourself??
The bottom line is your worried about the 20% of the time you might be in a roll over, whereas I worry about the 80% of the time I will be in a collision with someone (which I cannot always control). You can always slow down to avoid roll over, which is likely the main reason why you hear about 15 passenger van roll overs (one 2 months ago occured in Quebec, the driver was 17 doing 80mph will a full 15 load). One other thing, the statistics does not even mention how many vans drive down the road that DID NOT ROLL over. This is critical in deciding safety, it may be a very small number frightening us all>>>>yet the cause of worry is by this minority group (airport shuttles). Like a plane crash, we all hear about it, but it is the safest way to travel they say (if that is true?).
Try this link to their bulletin board:
http://www.vannin.com/ubb/
Yup, any metal particle sitting on a painted metal surface will rust if given enough time. I can see where after 3 months the problem is now deeply embedded (and yours has sat for a while). I think it won't hurt to start with Fords 3 step chemical wash. Next, talk to a few auto paint stores if the problem persists, they may have rust cleaners. Some are stronger and used for preparing metal for painting by converting any rust to "black rust" (an inert substance). However, they may have a weaker cleaner since many cars do with aging get light rust stains off trim, etc. If it has happened, someone must have invented a solution some where. I would stick to the warranty, and push them first.
If you cannot still solve your problem, try oil spraying with hydrualic oil. It works great (has rust inhibitors used for heavy equipment hydraulic components). I spray twice a year at home, and I overspray the body. People ask what kind of wax I use becuase it sure beads up the water into huge 1 inch clumps! Paint is oil based, and as it drys out it goes chalky, so it seems my oil treatment restores things and the lustre. One note, keep oil off rubber around windows, sometimes it reacts by swelling (on some cars). Just don't oversoak. It's the easiest way to wax and your saving your doors and lower panels from rusting out. I pull rust proofing plugs out, and really soak the inner door panels,etc. For application use a lawn pesticide sprayer, and mix if needed with some WD40. The best approach is buy a compressor and cheap paint sprayer, but watch out for your friends wanting a rust fix too. Paying $500 or less is cheaper then body work and can be used for other things around the house (nail gun, impact gun, air ratchet, etc).
I hope you solve that rail dust problem. I can't see buffing really removing it since it will be embedded in the paint, besides some areas will be surface rust, and others already deeper set. Buffing won't remove all of them.
Good luck!
How about "clay"? Lots of folks swear by it for removing stuff on car paint.
Now back to your regularily scheduled topic:-)
Steve
Host
Vans, SUVs, and Aftermarket & Accessories message boards
I started this morning on a step-ladder with a washing pad fastened to the end of an extension pole (the only way to clean the top), and finished waxing by 5:00p.m.
Rather than having MPG ratings on the window stickers, perhaps the consumer would be better served by having washing and waxing times listed.
I don't want to talk anyone out of buying a full size van....god knows I love mine....but be prepared to spend a little more time taking care of the outside, particularly if your a "do it by hand" fanatic like me.
My arm is sore from waxing all that sheet metal !!!
I know mine won't, and since I am only renovating this house so I can turn it into rental property, my van will sit outside until we move next year (which is why I am spending so much time waxing the darn thing...see my previous post on washing and waxing).
You can see that van from I40 as you pass Performance. It is light brown or tan and is in the front row closest to the Interstate.
The interior was plush, seating for 7 and the back bench folded down to a bed (operated by a motor). The van also had curtains and a TV.
My kids loved it, but it was a little plush for a family of small kids. I doubt the curtains would have lasted a week.
I settled for the E-150 that also had an extra set of Captains Chairs (total seating 7). The factory seats were a little firmer and the material was a little more durable.
As for pricing...all I know is they told me Performance Ford was getting out of the Conversion Van selling business. I think they would be real happy to sell you that last one.
Good Luck !
The one I am working on is free standing, so I extended the back a bit for an extended 2500 van. I also had to remove my standard garage doors (not quite high enough). Remember you need safely at least 6 inches clearance above the roof line. When half your vehicle is in the garage, the other half is still outside....so any irrigularities in the ground (snow buildup, gravel not even) could cause one tire or two to sit higher and cause you to hit the ceiling. So I raised everything up inside and increased the height of the doors (now their barn door style).
Width won't be a problem, just anything above watch out for. Most standard garages lack in length, measure and decide from there. I get frequent hail, so it is worth it to me. I also wanted room in there to do repairs out of the rain when the warranty is over. I also have a mean cat around the neighbourhood that DOESN'T like me. He has scratched my car hood when he jumped on it, peed on my house windows and doors.....he is my worst enemy....LOL, and in BIG TROUBLE if he does it again!
I don't know if Consumer Reports references the NHTSA report, but I bet it does.
Thus, this handling issue is getting press and I think this adds support to my earlier arguments.
I do not think you will change anyones mind, people are aware of the center of gravity problem with vans, transport trucks, and even falling off a ladder! Do you think you will suddenly change peoples minds because of roll over. Most people know that it has a higher center of gravity (like transport trucks, buses, etc) and they know to slow down, that they are not driving a sports car.
Do you think anything will change, really! People still need them for RV'ng, small business, shipping, etc........and there is no substitute for cargo space.
If you want to save the world, try solving the low hood problem on smaller cars, try outlawing tiny little sports cars that are much more dangerous in collisions, and what about bus drivers who have to sit with there feet right against the front face of the bus and in harms way. A bus driver only has one thing in his favour.....he sits up higher then the standard automobile (an advantage pickups and vans share). There are many other markets that you should be concerned with too if you want to save us all. DO me a favour, stop reading too many Ralp Nader articles and saving the world....leave it to the champ!
I have said enough, and have said it before...buy what you want! You want to do us all a favour, outlaw bicycles perhaps so only seniors are allowed to drive them......I feel sorry for a bicyclist who is in a collision with a van/car/bus/ etc. Remember, that bicycle also has a very high center of gravity and is "very" unstable on the road or side-walk (and is driven by minors too). This is a bigger issue in safety compared to van roll over.
As adults we need to exercise COMMON SENSE first, you want to drive fast/drink/look at girls/use cell phone....then yu might pay the price. Were all risk takers to a point in life.
And remember, nothing is 100% safe, we all would want to drive transport trucks from a safety point of view (even if this also is prone to roll over due to high center of gravity). However, it's difficult to park, fuel costs are high, won't fit my garage (LOL), poor handling, rough ride, high insurance costs...BUT IT IS SAFE, so mass does make a difference, and it is over 4000 lbs!!!!
For practical reasons we take a bit away here and there and by design we get something a little smaller and less safe.....it's called COMPROMISING>>>>A VAN/pickup!
Other then roll over Dplachta, you have never discussed a single other aspect of full size trucks/vans (payload, towing trailers, cargo space), how come? These are important issues that demand a differently styled vehicle. I think your too biased, or you do not know enough about the people who drive these vehicles and their needs. Your mind is locked into the car lifestyle. Full size trucks and vans are different and built for different reasons, and that means compromises again (usually only in ride quality, passenger capacity, fuel economy, and rarely in safety).
The handling (roll over) issue is only "one aspect" of safety (and if you read Consumer reports carefully, that is what they said specifically regarding safety). That is only 20%, don't forget the other 80% of the time when yu wished you had been sitting a lot higher in the vehicle and surrounded by A LOT more mass and space around you to protect you from being crushed (or even getting whiplashed from the sudden push from the rear).
Why are you stuck on handling, start looking at all the other safety disadvantages of driving a lot of these mini vans (low mass, low steeply sloping hoods, no heavy frame , etc). Although the mini van may with respect to safety win on the handling issue, look at all the disadvantages.....primarily>>>>>>>it's a Civic size car<<<<<< Don't forget what it really is!
Please start writing about some other pros/cons to driving full size versus mini vans/trucks. It is getting very boring hearing about handling all the time (roll over).
Most large minivans like Windstar, Odyssey or T&C are all over 4000 lbs, and rather large compared even to typical midsized cars. Not quite Civic sized. Please check the links I provided above, showing that additional weight over 4000 lbs. is not a major factor for reducing injuries in accidents.
""Please start writing about some other pros/cons to driving full size versus mini vans/trucks""
There's always braking distance. In most cases, acceleration, too. Throw in gas mileage and tailpipe emissions. The ladder frame in the full size van is great for killing passengers in Civics, but when you hit a wall, a large SUV, large Pickup, or another full size van you'll find that the energy is transmitted to the passengers since it is not absorbed by the frame as well as it would be in a minivan. The IIHS links I provided will detail the statisitics on this also. For this reason, you may not want all those small cars outlawed. When everyone drives a large, ladder frame vehicle, your odds of survival in an accident would be even worse.
Take similarly priced and equipped Windstar LX and Econoline E-150 XLT again. Windstar clocks in at 9.9s in the 0-60 according to Consumer Reports, with a quarter mile of 17.7s and 0-60 braking of 138 ft. Fuel econ is 18/25, with 9.5 tons of emissions (2% worse than average vehicle). I doubt the XLT comes close to those figures. I know it doesnt for fuel economy (14/19) or emissions (11.9 tons, or 28% worse than average). I will note that Motor trend clocked the pricier 6.8L V-10 at 9.8s, and the braking was 167 ft back in 1997.
Windstar not only gets all 5-star ratings and a top Offset crash result, it also has a host of extra safety features. Features the NHTSA guide lists as standard or optional on Windstar and not available on Econoline include adjustable upper rear seat-belts, seatbelt force limiters, advanced airbag feature (reduced force or dual force), side airbags, Child seat LATCH system, Head injury protection, Rear seat head restraints, traction control and auto-dimming rear view mirrors. I also know Windstar has an optional self-sealing tire system and a reverse sensing system. I didn't see those options listed for Econoline, at least on E-150 XLT trim...
I'd choose a full sized van for most of the reasons you mentioned. On the other hand, if driving in suburbia or commuting to work is what it will be used for, I'd pick the large minivan and be just as safe. Full size vans have many advantages over minivans, but safety isn't necessarily one of them. Reliability sure might be, though. Minivans have not been stellar for reliability as a group, and Windstar tends to be on the low end of the group...
when it is raining outside, you can jump inside the back with your kids, close the side door behind you, buckle them up, then step forward to the drivers seat.....when you want to go bike riding with your kids, you can put your whole families bikes in the back storage area behind the third row seat....when you want to take your 4 dogs for their annual shots, it's easy as pie to load them up in the back and still have all that seating room left for your 3 kids....When your camping and the rain simply won't quit, you and your kids can move your sleeping bags onto the floor of the full size van and sleep like logs.....etc, etc, etc,.....
Funny you should do the comparison on the Windstar. My State Farm agent commented on how much cheaper it was to insure my Econoline than his own Windstar. He was surprised the difference was as great as it was.
"Long Live Full Size Vans"
The bigger vehicles so far have not needed to require crush zones like the smaller vehicles to obtain reasonable safety (eg- transport trucks). One day we will have both!
Your statement of better braking in a lighter mini vans is true, anything that can help you stop faster helps. But what do you do when you lack the time to stop, which is what this is all about>>>COLLISSION. Where would you rather be? Smaller vehicles have seen greater advancement in technology with crush zones added to the body only because they needed a way to make vehicles more safe against larger vehicles on the road, which really do not need them. If it were a problem, I am sure manufacturers would be concerned for the SUV and larger market. Perhaps you never saw the program where there is a large increase in SUV's and other vehicles climbing up unto peoples windshields due to low front hood design (which many mini vans including Windstar suffer from)...seems the concern isn't with SUV safety, but rather smaller vehicle safety.
I am not blind, I am correct in saying many mini vans are the size of civic/ sunfire sized cars (look around). What I am not correct about is that I generalized that statement a bit. I had assumed from previous articles that we were discussing the smaller mini vans, not the larger ones (Windstar, Astro, Safari are some of the largest). I do not really have a problem with those since they do have the characteristics of weight, some seating height , etc. It is the smaller ones, just look around. My Corolla is the same size in length and mass as some of these tiny vans.
One thing you are very right on, many times the energy is directly absorbed by the passenger, especially when hitting a wall. Every race car driver knows that! Were back to how many times do we hit walls, and how many times do we roll over. If you no longer can avoid the collision, which vehicle would you rather be in? That is what I have been arguing (not gas mileage, acceleration, emissions,rear traction control, auto dimming rear view mirrors)....and by the way, the larger vans do have 2nd generationg air bags, and child restraint features (at least the Savana does). It even has child protection rear door locks, door guard beams, heated side mirrors,seat belt limiter, etc. The advancements are not unique to mini vans either. One thing a large van has....much wider and longer interiors....so you have much more room during impact from being crushed (and your above the "impact zone" in those high seats....now that is a safety feature few vehicles have).
You said it yourself, the ladder frame design is great for killing people in Civics. Well, I don't want to do that, but you said it yourself, who is the one getting hurt?
"When everyone drives a large ladder frame vehicles we would allwill be worse off"
This point is true, but the reality is we do not all drive larger vehicles.....so I feel safer and am willing to pay the extra gas(and in turn get cargo space, payload, high tow capacity). Also, if everyone starts driving larger vehicles, then perhaps I may be the few to drive a transport truck, or the next best thing. That is also the time you rely on crush zones and any other edge in technology to stay alive if the unthinkable ever happened when were all equal on the road. For now, a large mini van (safari, windstar) or full size truck or van I still consider the safest on the road. However, even a Windstar is no help against deer on the road. That is another reason I chose a vehicle that is much higher. I travel extensively,and anyone else that travels through national parks, etc knows that your worse enemy at night is not a another driver, but a deer bolting out unto the road. States like New Hampshire, New York,Wyoming, etc., and many others are way over populated with deer....this has become a real fear for many (far more then roll over).
It still boils down to there is no perfect vehicle, everyone buys for different needs. As I said before, I am not driving the most dangerous or the safest vehicle perhaps in a collision. I also know who would be better off in a deer collision when you compare a Winstar to a Savana 2500/3500 van. I am sitting about 4 1/2 feet off the ground, and the windshield is still much higher.
It seems to me we are spending too much time on this safety thing, soon this will need to be called the Safety Forum. Perhaps we should all stop and change topics and get to other more interesting things regarding vans.
It's been an interesting discussion. Yup Vguard, I can see you know the finer points of owning a LARGE VAN! Enjoy it towing your comfy large 24 foot trailer with 3 dogs along and family.I have 12'3" of rear space behind the front seats of the van I ordered. The ride is very impressive, and the view is unsurpassed up high. One other thing....Vguard and I will be able to see 10 car lengths ahead for signs of an approaching accident, whereas most other vehicles find themselves blinded by the first vehicle in front of them. I will have my brakes on LONG BEFORE EVERYONE ELSE! Now that is braking!
I hope we all enjoy what were driving and that they are reliable and reasonably safe. Good luck!
Probably, but the facts should not be ignored in favor of misleading generalizations.
"then you go ahead and sit in a Tercel about to hit a 10,000-50,000 lb vehicle"
I never compared such vehicles. I compared a Windstar and an E-150 XLT, both in the categories we are discussing, and both fairly similar in price and features. The IIHS link has all the statistics to back up my comparisons. Believe them or not, they're the same statistics insurance companies like State Farm use.
"But what do you do when you lack the time to stop"
You dismissed the importance of rollovers in a similar way. Accident avoidance features (emergency handling, braking, acceleration) help avoid accidents altogether. Sure, if you're always a perfectly safe driver and are never distracted, you will minimize these situations, but you can never minimize the little kid walking out from parked cars, the animal in the road you swerve to avoid, or the drunk who comes across the centerline. I'd rather avoid them then test my vehicles structural integrity.
"I am not blind, I am correct in saying many mini vans are the size of civic/ sunfire sized cars"
The extended DC vans (Grand Caravan, T&C), Windstar, Odyssey and extended GM twins are all large vans (~4000 lbs) and compromise most minivan sales. Vans like Sienna, MPV and the regular length Caravan are smaller, but no where near Civic sized. Check their weights, I suspect you'll find all are over 3500 lbs. FYI, Corolla weighs in around 2500 lbs, Camry just over 3000. Vans like Windstar are around 200" long, though E-150 is about 210". Both much longer than a corolla or civic near 175". They ride much higher than compact and midsize cars also. Really, minivans are not small. You can hop in them and move around row to row as well. Not as big as an Econoline, but nowhere near as low or small as a Civic.
"When everyone drives a large ladder frame vehicles we would allwill be worse off"
Incidentally, you suggested this idea, even if it was tongue-in-cheek.
"My State Farm agent commented on how much cheaper it was to insure my Econoline than his own Windstar."
I also provided some information on claims and rates data, and how they are related to more than safety.
Cheers.
Enjoy your van and let these guys enjoy their reading. You will never be able to convince them of the merits or advantages, which are based on common sense, as long as you are debating the consumer safety industry publications these guys spend their days reading.
You might as well be debating the gun control groups, who are convinced it's the gun and not the person holding the gun, that is responsible for gun violence.
My key to road survival....be a considerate and defensive driver at all times and always wear your seat belt. What ever you do, never replace good driving habits with the false sense of security driving a "statistically safe" car can provide. Remember, all cars are unsafe, particularly when driven by a bad driver.
"GOD BLESS GOOD DRIVERS"
Vguard, wasn't it you who added the light reading about the insurance claims data from State Farm, implying they indicated which vehicles were safest?
I think everyone, including me, has established that full size vans have many merits and advantages over minivans. Safety just isn't one of them unless you're inclined to dismiss every available statistic and test and just go on a "hunch". They're both safe vehicle classes.
"Remember, all cars are unsafe, particularly when driven by a bad driver."
Until everyone is a good driver, why not accept that some people consider that good handling, acceleration, braking, crash tests and advanced safety features just might be reason enough to make vehicles like Windstar or Odyssey a safe vehicle, especially when these vehicles weigh in over 4000 lbs?
I have no issues about full-size vans. I drive them almost daily at work. There are many good reasons to purchase a full sized van. I also don't see the need to continue these unsupported generalizations that minivans (Especially ones like Windstar and Odyssey) are small, lightweight, unsafe vehicles when all the published data indicates otherwise. Is it that much of a bother to do some reading and learn that your perceptions may not be correct, rather than to simply dismiss any data that doesn't support your 'common sense' beliefs?
If the topic is beaten to death, I'll happily drop it. I only added since Xfiles asked for some additional pros/cons for minivans and full size vans. Instead of making unsupported attacks on minivan safety, why not emphasize areas where full size vans may be superior? Large passenger and cargo space and towing are obvious. I also mentioned reliability as a possibility. Despite their popularity, NY Taxi fleets are considering dropping minivans because of their poor repair history. Apparently, body on frame vehicles like Crown Vic do much better in the long run in taxi cab service...
I have tried to point out both pro's and con's of owning a full size van....see my post about washing and waxing (negative).....see my post about garage size (negative)......see my post about all the wonderful things a full size van allows you to do (Positive).....see my post about State Farms opinion of full size vans (Positive)...
I'd like to think I have been both objective and well rounded in expressing my opinions, both pro and con.
As I stated early on, safety was one of several considerations I had when I made my decision to purchase a full size van. By depending on the "36 best rated vehicles" State Farm puts out, I feel as though I addressed the Safety issue (particularly since I insure with State Farm and will be receiving the substantial discounts they give for purchasing a full size van).
Whether the honda or toyota or whatever alternative to my Ford full size van is "better" or "higher rated", is of no consequence to me since I had additional criteria for selecting my vehicle (load capacity, towing ability, roominess, view while driving, etc).
I also make no secret about the fact I consider responsible driving habits a much more important issue than which car/van/truck you may or may not be driving. I base this opinion on the fact I don't consider "any" car/van/truck to be particularly safe.
However, if given a choice, I would prefer a large/heavy/tall van, over most any other car on the road.
"GOD BLESS OBJECTIVITY"
I am in Marketing Management, I have had plenty of marketing research courses, statistics, and done quite a few marketing research studies. I will tell you this, a great majority of studies end up in the waste basket because of innaccurate procedures used in the tests. Further, a single number to me means nothing until they tell me HOW THEY did the study, what level of significance (ever hear the term 95% confidence levels), sample size, etc. I really don't want to get into it. The data you guys read was as I remember from a MATHEMATICAL MODEL. Well, that is garbage in and garbage out. It may even be somewhat useful, but only if they would provide the raw data (or at least tabulated data)for us to judge for oursleves as to reliability. The most accurate data is when it's gathered on a single variable (eg- age of the average Mercedes driver). Age is the single variable, then you can play with it, determine the standard deviation, mean, median, and play as long as you want...depeding on what is important to you. In collisions, were dealing with multivariate analysis. In essence, you can crash a vehicle at 1 degree intervals ito a test wall, record the result, then hit the same wall at 2 degrees, then at 3 and all the way up to 360 degrees. Each time you will get a different result. This is still representing an analysis in one variable (one plane). There are many other variables to consider. By the time you are done, I would likley consider linear programming to solve this complex problem. Finally, how did they measure the damage on the vehicle, and how do you measure the damage on people (it gets complex). There are a lot of assumptions made.The easiest way in my book is to use common sense. I said before, I may not have the safest vehicle, but I also will not have the most dangerous....it is good enough for most of us who need the advantages of a full size van or truck. You drive what you want, Vguard and I will drive what we want. I know enough that a tercel won't do if safety is the issue, a minivan is better, a full size pickup truck or van is better yet (or at least good enough for what I need). Large pickup trucks, vans, and SUV's are well known for holding up reasonably well in a collision. This is old knowledge. I still believe that State Farms insurance data is more reliable, provided they knew how to tabulate the data. I see too many studies where the percentages total 113% (LOL). What could be simpler, yet still it is done improperly. Yup, you got it, I don't trust everyone or everything! I especially get a laugh out of ratings using the "5 star" approach. One guy rates ride a 2 and another a 4 or 5. Well, if this study was reliable, everyone would have arrived at the same exact rating, and the study would be repeatable giving the same exact answer no matter who performed it. There are reasons why the differences occur, I don't want to get into that. Bottom line, who do you trust? Many times you want to trust one bit of data, because it is what YOU want to hear, because that is the one your interesting in buying perhaps.
I have seen enough small vans, and even an Arrowstar to me is tiny compared to what I bought (by the way Vguard, I got my phone call from the dealer, and I pick it up on Monday). Say what you want, you go ahead and worry about the 20%, I will worry about the 80%. I am happy, I also plan in the near future on buying a Class-A motorhome (a bus).....I do extensive travelling. This thing also has a high center of gravity, and don't go telling me I need to worry aout roll over.
My needs are a vehicle for deer protection as well (something you guys must realize is one other variable in survival on the road). If you travelled a lot, you would know how bad it is out there in scenic land. Roll over is the least of my problems at dusk! Hwy 93 in NH is so bad, they post a sign for moose (hundreds killed, slow down!). This is the biggest problem they have on that hiway, my buddy is paramedic on call for that road constantly, and not due to auto accidents. Hit a deer, or a small car, I am up high and out of harms way sitting 4 1/2 feet from the ground......something they never seem to mention in the stats (another issue misplaced).
Good luck with whatever you drive. I hope none of us have a problem.
GREAT !!
If it was me I would have already made a trip to the dealer and "sneaked a peek" at the new toy !
Remember to ask the service department how they handle the "rail dust" issue. You can go to this link and see what the Ford solution is (you may need to "cut and paste" this link in order to reach it):
http://www.autoint.com/Ford%20Bulletin%2099-12-10.htm
Just remember this, if your new van was transported by rail, it was contaminated.
If I remember correctly, Chevy vans come with floor mats (wish Ford did). If not, get some right away. I can't tell you how much dirt my new Husky liners have kept from my carpet.
Let us know how you like your new Van !
Have a nice day! Enjoy your van, I will.
Let me know how you make out on the rail dust thing. Thanks for the link, will check out for sure. Yu got me worried too!
They've been delivering vehicles on rails for a very long time. Makes you wonder if it is unique to the paint each manufacturer uses. Paints are supposed to be better then 40 years ago and we never complained of rail dust then.
I think you will be okay after the treatment. That acidic wash sounds like rust eater when you prepare a car body for painting.
Remember though, one day your going to have bigger holes to worry about along the lower panels.....oil spray 2x per year. That will protect the insides and the body paint as well from all the overspray (use hydraulic oil only....has rust inhibitors). I have a 83 Tercel with over 400,000 miles(not kms) and the body is still great......I had more dings then problems with rust when I repainted myself. Doors never even began to rust. Only the rear lower window corner had some rust because the oil was unable to get under the rubber seal around the window. Water dripped down (salty during winters) and attacked the metal under the rubber lip. It all helps if you should decide one day to sell.
Never said you weren't. I was just pointing out the fact that in one post you're attacking all the 'reading' you don't like to do, yet you still added some of your own when it suited you.
"I am in Marketing Management"
That's great. Then you should have been interested enough to read the text in the link I provided which discusses how claims data relates to safety.
"Many times you want to trust one bit of data, because it is what YOU want to hear, because that is the one your interesting in buying perhaps."
Ironically, I posted many bits of data (Usually to contradict posted generalizations about weight or safety), and didn't solely rely on claims data from one insurance company to judge overall safety. Apparently, the data compiled by the IIHS didn't impress you, either. Also ironically, they are the organization that does all these 'census' tabulations on real-world collisions for their member insurance companies like State Farm.
It's no secret that every test and study has it's flaws, and you point out some of the typical flaws in controlled crash tests. That's why it's useful to look at all the results, and not just zero in on the one you like. Just like you said.
"I know enough that a tercel won't do if safety is the issue, a minivan is better, a full size pickup truck or van is better yet"
That's exactly the 'common sense' that can be very misleading. Mass is not the end-all of safety, especially when you're above 4000 lbs. Though it's hard for some to accept, emergency handling, braking, acceleration and rollover resistance can help avoid accidents. Proper design of crush zones and advanced safety features (adjustable belts, seat belt pre-tensioners, force limiters, dual stage smart airbags, side airbags, traction control, run flat tires, LATCH child seat anchors) can make a smaller vehicle protect its occupants very well, especially when it turns out that that smaller vehicle is really over 4000 lbs and 200" long.
I'm not sure why everyone is so defensive on this. The data is there. You can choose to dismiss it, and that's fine; it's a free country. No one is trying to take away your vehicles. Xfiles asked for some additional pros/cons. If the evidence showing that minivans are not lightweight, unsafe vehicles is offensive, I apologize for adding them to the discussion.
Incidentally, there are vehicles that have body-on-frame designs which do have many advanced safety features, combined with excellent handling/acceleration/braking and crash test results. Some are also well over 4500 lbs and can do a respectable job towing. The BMW X5 is a good example which shows that auto companies can design their large vehicles to be even safer if they so desire. Though I don't own one, I can still acknowledge that it is a very safe vehicle. Here's some more reading on how BMW one-upped all the other makers of large trucks and SUVs:
http://www-cs-students.stanford.edu/~kpfleger/auto/
Cheers.
As a common courtesy, it would be nice if you would identify who you are quoting and from what post you are pulling the quote from. Otherwise your narrative is a little hard to follow.
Having said that, I must tell you that I consider your position on the matter well documented (complete with links) and frankly was hoping for some "other" first hand experience you have with full size vans.
Not that safety is not important, but since for most people it is one of many considerations when buying an automobile/van/truck, it would be nice if you could contribute with the same intensity on other aspects of full size van ownership.
After all, this forum is called "Full Sized Vans"
And you're right, it is a Full Size Van forum. It also seems the original poster (dplachta) may have lost interest, so perhaps the discussion is over.
Thanks for indulging another point of view.
• Is an extended van much different to drive than a 3/4 ton? (It seems they are easier to find)
• Is the limited slip differential an option you would recommend for driving on snow and ice? Is it a must have?
• What motor and differential do you recommend?
• What is the best gas mileage can I expect ?
I'm not following you here. A 350 wagon can be regular or extended length. I think they are all 12 passenger (3 rows of benches) except that the extended can be a 15 passenger (4 rows of benches). The E250 is not available as a factory wagon, but is available in cargo van and could have been converted. The E250 could be regular or extended length.
Extended length means two extra feet of cargo bed. Unlike the newer GM's, the extended body on a Ford (and Dodge) do not have longer wheelbases. Obviously, there is more weight in the back with one of these.
Regarding your question, handling will be trucklike whether your a comparing an extended Ford van or either E350 or E250 chassis. I'm not sure what you mean to compare it to when you say a 3/4 ton. Your old Chevy van? A 3/4 truck? A regular length 3/4 E350? Bottom line is you need to drive the van. If it's well used, wear on the chassis and the condition of the shocks (original or replaced with some of the super heavy duties available) will have a great impact on your ride quality.
>>Is the limited slip differential an option you would recommend for driving on snow and ice?
Many would disagree, but I would say no. If you have lots of snow, you should consider adding a locking differential. I live in the snow belt and get by with a rear wheel drive minivan with all seasons and an open diff. Put weight in their when it's snowing and carry chains and a recovery strap.
>>What motor and differential do you recommend
The smallest available unless you are towing, then you need the largest available. You really haven't given enough information of your driving needs and habits, where you live, etc.
>>What is the best gas mileage can I expect ?
Obviously, this will depend the engine. I would expect 10/13 on the old 460 (7.5) and v10, as good as 14/18 with smaller v8's and v6's.
Your mileage may vary. Additional conditions apply. Contact your doctor if symptoms persist. Yada yada yada.
Here's an interesting article on diff locks of various sorts.
http://www.pps.net.au/4wdencounter/articles/difflocks.html
It has a 4wd off-road perspective, but the info and opinions would be somewhat applicable to those of us trying to drive on snowy roads.
I once owned a 2wd Ford F-150 and remember getting stuck on a flat wet field up in Kentucky. I had to wait for the field to dry out before I could "fetch" my truck.
Because of that experience, when I was making my decision between the last two remaining year2000 Ford Econoline's on the dealers lot, I chose the one with the Limited Slip Option.
Might have been a waste of money, but the comedy of being stuck on a flat field has never left my mind.
"God bless sand bags"
(he really wanted a Ford, but you did not hear that from me).
"vguard"
Bottom line: Full sized vans require careful driving. They do not handle anywhere near as well as minivans. They roll over much more easily. This is so obvious, you don't need government data to back it up. Yet, now there is data and you still disagree. Again, this doesn't mean that full-sized vans aren't worthwhile, it just means what it means.
An "unreasonable" posting is one that claims minivan are the size of Civics. I own a Camry, which is bigger than a Civic, and I know for a fact that our minivan is much, much bigger.
An "unreasonable" posting is one that claims the rear glass is 4 inches behind the rear seat.
In our minivan, this distance is 2 feet.
Dplatcha's Toyota Previa is far safer than any fullsize van. It's much bigger than a Civic. It's not built like an economy car. It rides on a full frame. And there's many yards of space behind the rear seats to protect her children if she is rear-ended.
Oh yeah, and it handles like a Ferrari.
Feel better about yourself now?
1. Yes, the Mercury Villager is about the size of
a Civic (except for roof height), and your
Camry is about the size of a Windstar or
Safari...or pretty close.
2. I never compared Civics with 15000 lb vehicle.
Improve your comprehension please.
3. Check your own facts. Where were you when the
issues of placing rear seats against the back
window were aired? Just because YOU have a
vehicle with seats 2 feet away does not mean
they are all like yours (Some are 4 inches).
By the way, it was Vguard that originally
mentioned this. Are you telling us were both
blind, I've seen many....don't go telling me
different. Look before you speak!
4. I said specifically>>>>if handling, and braking
fails, and you WILL COLLIDE<<<<what would you
rather be in? Doesn't a low sloping hood scare
you a little in a front end collision. Doesn't
a low seat placement fighten you too. You guys
constantly ignore this. What about deer
collisions (a major problem in some areas).
Just another variable the testers forgot.
5. Wake up, I said over and over about roll over
is common knowledge on anything with a high
center of gravity. But I would rather be in a
truck, or on a ladder 8 feet up to avoid
direct impact? That clear enough!
6. Don't go stating I ignore gov't facts when you
yourself ignore Sate Farms claims data. Why?
You have conveniently left out issues such as low front hood issues, and the advantages of high seat placement on full size trucks and vans. Obviously you don't want to hear about that, even though I mentioned it MANY TIMES. I repeatedly told you it is not the safest, but also not the worst for safety, those design advantages give you a big edge in safety (just my opinion).
If you want to have a serious discussion and make some decisions....you need to define the problem, set paramters regarding what your going to discuss, establish criteria, list alternative solutions based on those criteria, then make some decision in the problem solving process. We're not doing anything here other then wasting time. There is no systematic process going on here, it is about winning an argument it seems. You guys go ahead an argue between yourselves. In the future I am staying out of it.
I don't think there is anything wrong with fixing my garage. I know how to do it, anything wrong with someone enjoying woodworking and having a reason. I always thought that is why people have garages (so we can store vehicles or tools). Your acting like a child with such a comment. Your comment just degrades your image when you resort to such behaviour. By the way, another person had posted here enquiring about garages. Is he a problem for you guys too? Shees>!
As for my denigrating posted info from government testing, that proves to me you read and believe everything. First of all the 4000 lb figure they said was based on a mathematical model. In particular, it was created likely using linear programming or simulation, or worse was a simple opinion. You can get any answer you want choosing the wrong parameters. I also have this to say....go ahead and believe it, I know from fact that if I had an extra ton or more I would not have been pushed nearly as far forward and therefore would not have had a light case of whiplash (Mass absorbs energy). This is another issue you ALWAYS ignored (rear end collisions and advantages of mass). There is a huge advantage to having 6500 lbs of mass, the difference is equivalent to a small vehicle when compared to 4000 lbs. As for other safety tests performed you are clueless about the process. A subject as complicated as this would have perhaps 100 variables per equation, and probably 100 equations would be required in describing the problem mathematically. I do not expect you guys to understand advanced math....simply put, this is a complex model in multi dimensions (not two dimensional math). A more simpler approach is to take straight forward claims data. It is readily available, has a large sample size (compared to a few crash tests on each type of vehicle...they can't afford large sample sizes ....LOL) allowing for 95% confidence limits in there studies, and because it is actual real data it avoids using mathematical modeling, as well it is truly random (non biased due to human error or type of tests chosen). There are more issues at stake here in doing studies. That is why I have always stated I believe in claims data (so does Vguard). Why do you ignore the fact that they rate vans in the top 35 for safety? You site other data to try to dispute it, only so you can win your argument. Using data for your own convenience is what you blame me for, what about you? I backed my reasoning with an explanation, your reasons boil down that you read and believe everything. You have no knowledge on data handling, don't know the definition of valid and reliable data, so you question nothing. I would consider all types of data, but actual case data is always the best because it is simple data gathering, no simulations, no mathematical modelling, just data you gather, tabulate, then put into table form, etc. They never even stated how significant the correlation is between mass and certain types of collisions....trust us is what they say! Yup, try telling a person to trust NHTSA when they never considered that the rear seats being placed so close to the rear hatch could be dangerous. Trust them with the low sloping hood (which they actually acknowledged many years later). Seems NHTSA had never noticed that SUV's were climbing right up on to peoples windshields). This data was likely already in the claims data bank, but then again, we do not always gather the right information. It took years to notice, and how many lost there lives (so don't make roll over a big deal....I worry about the 80% of the cases, not the 20%). Handling will also not always save your neck, nor will braking....we all know that too (in fact most people just freeze and slam on the brakes when in shock).
Well, there will be no end to this. I am not ignoring all the data, I just QUESTION the sources, and it is MY CHOICE to decide which data I will accept (not your choice). I will use common sense. If the government posts actual case data, I will accept that a lot more then modelled data. Being actual case data, it is likely going to have the same outcome as claims data from insurance companies. Whats the big deal here?
Yup, your pretty close, I didn't camp out at the dealer, but I might camp out in the van in my garage (kidding). LOL. I did sneak a peak too! That Savana made the mini van next to it look REAL SMALL...hehehehe. Can't remember what brand it was. Seeing is believing they say.
I phoned today, have to go in and give them the particulars it seems, and they need to get them plates. I won't see it till Wed, and if it snows like they say it will I will leave it there another day. I don't want a collision the first day to prove who is right in these discussions on safety we have been having for the last week. LOL.
Mrnimmo is right, I give up on this safety discussion too. Good posting Mrnimmo.... LOL.
My van is spending a few nights away from home. It is over at the body shop having it's "rail dust" chemically removed (I hope).
After they do the "chemical thing", I may authorize some "claying", but I think I will draw the line at "buffing". I just can't bring myself to allow some guy go crazy on my van with a buffer.
However it turns out after the chemical bath and some non-abrasive claying is what I will live with. What I may do is buy some of the chemical wash from Ford and perform it myself once or twice a year, if I see evidence of the rail dust returning.
The one thing that has me so upset now is the fact I will need to re-wax the darn van this week. Trust me, I was not looking forward to that job again this soon, but those chemicals will take all the existing wax off.
Speaking of garages, I wish I could use mine, wax jobs last a lot longer when a vehicle is kept inside. Hell, the entire finish of a car/truck/van lasts longer if kept inside. In fact, I would go as far to say your vans value will be increased by keeping it in a garage.
Guess some people just can't see the big (van) picture !!
p.s. I don't think we will need professional help with the "feelings of love" we have for our full size vans, unless of course we start giving them "pet names".
My Previa is no tank, but last year I avoided an idiot in the fog and mountains on I-77 *going the wrong way, in my lane, head on, at a high rate of speed* in the middle of the night and our family lives. Our Previa was loaded to the gills, 5 people, bikes, luggage for our week vacation. I pushed the envelop of handling with that incident and our van handled great. I don't believe we would have had the same success with a full sized van.
Yes, I am ignoring some of your arguments-- the ones that make sense. I do that because I don't dispute them, arguments like mass, sloping hoods, or seat elevation. Obviously, there are other factors to be included in judging overall safety. Repeat these over and over if you like-- I won't argue.
My only points of issue are roll over and handling, which are serious deficiencies of full-sized vans that have led to people dying. Facts that caused an investigation by NHTSA. Facts that you cannot accept.
http://www.hwysafety.org/srpdfs/sr3301.pdf
http://www.crashtest.com/explanations/weight/ie.htm
http://www.iihs.org/sr_ddr/sr3507_t1.htm (compare real fatality data for station wagons/minivans between 4000-4499 lbs to SUVs pickups over 4500 lbs. Note full-size vans are not included in either category)
If you no longer think real world fatalities are direct indicators of safety because minivans and wagons do so well in accidents, you may be right. The NHTSA also has this to say about similar insurance claims data: "In setting insurance premiums, insurance companies mainly rely on factors that are not directly related to the vehicle itself (except for its value). Rather, they mainly consider driver characteristics (such as age, gender, marital status, and driving record), the geographic area in which the vehicle is driven, how many miles are traveled, and how the vehicle is used... ...Insurance companies do not generally adjust their premiums on the basis of data reflecting the crashworthiness of different vehicles."
And some other links on safety comparisons:
http://www.seatbelt.com/safest_cars.html
http://www.crashtest.com
http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/cars/testing/NCAP/SaferCar2001/contents.html
In your post #498, you quote the NHTSA as follows:
"In setting insurance premiums, insurance companies mainly rely on factors that are not directly related to the vehicle itself (except for its value). Rather, they mainly consider driver characteristics (such as age, gender, marital status, and driving record), the geographic area in which the vehicle is driven, how many miles are traveled, and how the vehicle is used... ...Insurance companies do not generally adjust their premiums on the basis of data reflecting the crashworthiness of different vehicles."
In reality, State Farm gives the following discounts to buyers of their 36 best rated vehicles, regardless of the criteria you have quoted from NHTSA (the list itself can be viewed in post #426):
"Drivers of these models — which include four-door sedans, trucks, luxury cars and sports utility vehicles — will see a 40 percent vehicle safety discount which covers medical payment and personal injury protection. Customers will also pay less for standard collision and comprehensive premiums as calculated by the physical damage index".
"The new plan will cut rates for drivers of some larger models, including sport utility vehicles and pickup trucks, because they generate the fewest injury claims. Big autos, such as some Acuras, BMW’s, Mercedes-Benzes and Jaguars, also fall under that category".
"Cars that produce the fewest injuries is the type of car you shouldn’t pay as much to insure," State Farm spokesman Dick Luedke said Monday.
source: ABC News
It appears NHTSA has not been telling you the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help you God !
I really believe that the opposition you have received on this forum is not so much for the concept of how much auto makers have improved the safety of the mini-van, but the fact you "eat", "sleep" and "something else" every word these organizations spew out.
It has been my experience that those who have a natural bias against full size vehicles (trucks/vans/SUV's, tend to latch on to these statements (or in your case web sites), as gospel.
I think what you perceive as "bruised ego's" on the part of others involved in this discussion, is in fact signs of "frustration" with your habit of seeing how many different ways you can say the same thing.
With regard to your "giving up" comment, once again I think what your actually seeing is a desire from everyone to simply "move on" to the next subject.
As I mentioned earlier, your position on safety is well documented and, speaking for myself, fully appreciated. However I think everyone would also be interested in hearing your opinion on other area's of full size van ownership, that you have personal experience with.
I switched from State Farm a few years ago. I'd pay the 40% more they were charging me, but somehow I don't believe that my car will be magically safer if I insure with them. In fact, I'd go so far to guess that no one's cars will be safer if they switch to an insurer that happens to have their car on their list of vehicles getting lower premiums based on their claims data. Check the Erie Insurance link I provided earlier. Plenty of minivans on its safe cars list, also. Check the IIHS data on injuries and deaths again, and notice how well minivans do overall. Check Allstate's interactive finder ( http://www.allstate.com/tools/makemodel/ ). Pick one like Econoline (Average) or Express (Average) and then compare by body style. Note that vans like Windstar, Odyssey, Sienna and Villager are all Better than Average. So, will your Express or Econoline be less safe if you switch to Allstate, or might the NHTSA be right that there are other factors involved than vehicle crashworthiness?
I don't eat, drink, or sleep data from any source. Particularly a single insurance company's claims data. Claims data are a useful component of a safety evaluation, but there are many others, too. Indeed, I also considered claims data from other companies, real-world death and injury data compiled by the IIHS, offset crash tests from the IIHS, frontal/side tests by the NHTSA, rollover probabilities from the NHTSA and the Kimmel Index, handling, braking, weight, acceleration and also the independent safety evaluations from a variety of websites (Wall Street Journal/Seatbelt.com, money.com, smartmotorist.com) and magazines (Consumer Reports, Jack Gillis' Ultimate Car Book, Kiplinger's Auto Issue). So in that, I guess you're right. That's a lot of ways of saying the same thing. Minivans like Osyssey and Windstar are very safe vehicles.
Today's experience with our department full size vans (Ram and Econoline) is that both were at vehicle repair and unavailable (don't know why, though, may have been routine maintenance). Unusual both were gone on the same day, though. Too bad, I ended up having to use a pickup to haul the cargo I had since the minivans weren't big enough unless I removed the rear seats.
Please, let this rest.
One thing though, were all a bit stubborn....LOL. Won't say if that is good, won't say if that is bad, just will say... maybe!