Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Options
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
However, since many of Edmund's editors are overwelmed by the "Magic Seat" of the Odyssey, many of them do not notice the VERY nice comfort of the separately controlled air temperature for the driver and front passenger. They also do not notice the very nice complete overhead console with Compass and Outside Temperature. (I think DC should have the Trip Computer feature optional on EVERY DC minivan...it is on our 99 GC SE).
I will be driving my sister's 2001 Ody EX today to take their houseguests to the airport. I will then drive it on the Interstate where speed limit is 75 MPH to see how it is at highway speed.
(I asked for and got permission to do the road test).
The 2001 DC minivan seats in the lowest price level are much improved over the 96-00 years and are now as comfortable as the better trim level seats were in those years and now also as comfortable as the Odyssey and Sienna seats.
If DC will put the complete overhead console option in all DC minivans, we might get a 2002 DC and sell our outstanding 99 GC SE to our oldest daughter and her husband. After owning a 1988 Voyager LE, my sister would love to once more have a DC minivan.
The GC in your long term test is, in street-price terms, comparable to the Odyssey EX. At least it is so in S. Cal, where Edmunds bought it.
Here's another link for you : Send a Letter to the Editors.
Steve
Host
Vans, SUVs and Aftermarket & Accessories Message Boards
Thanks anyway for the suggestion. Maybe you can ask why the letter didn't get published.
Steve
Host
Vans, SUVs and Aftermarket & Accessories Message Boards
Drew
Host
Vans, SUVs, and Aftermarket & Accessories message boards
Nevertheless, I believe reviewers should be aware of typical selling prices and include that information when making comments regarding cost. Accuracy counts.
My sister and brother in law recently bought a NEW Taffeta White Odyssey EX for $26,660 (MSRP $26,840 less $180). On the date they bought it, Edmunds had a TMV $28,120 for a NEW 2001 Odyssey EX in our zip code.
Although Edmunds is providing us with a great service in the Town Hall, it appears that Edmund's TMV is not reliable and very misleading.
2002 Caravan SE MSRP of $19,155 is $5 LESS than the 2001 Caravan SE.
I would not want a 2.4L 4 cyl in a minivan but there are many who want a 7 passenger minivan with air conditioning, automatic, PS, PB, etc. and have a limited budget. DaimlerChrysler has not forgotten these less affluent people.
Having said that, I would expect that rebates are going to increase for competing models. If you're thinking of buying a Chrysler minivan and you don't need one right now, I'd wait til late Fall. You may get a good deal.
Carlton1, I agree about the base SE models. I think it is great that Chrysler makes a basic version. $25k - $30k for a minivan is alot of money for many folks. Considering that the base SE if often discounted, you might be able to get one for $16k, about the price for a decent compact car.
Is this the mileage everyone out there is getting?
Chrysler corporate (of course) says there is nothing they can do.
I cant believe there is nothing wrong or if lots of folks are getting this same lousy mileage they also would not be raising a stink.
What say you...
We have always been able to exceed EPA estimates...exept with a used 1977 VW Bus (purchased January 1979) that got 11.1 MPG on a 220 mile round trip while driven 55 MPH. We had to refuel 3 times!
The VW dealership where we got it said there was nothing wrong and the 77 VW Bus would get only 11 MPG. To make a long story short, we contacted the VW Factory Rep who told us to have them replace the cylinder head temperature sensor.
We took it to a different VW dealer, gave him the advice, and after their service, our 77 VW Bus got 30.4 MPG on a test drive at 55 MPH.
Our 99 GC SE with 3.3L rated 18 city and 24 highway gets 27 MPG on 1400 mile round trips with cruise set at 65-66. Overall AVERAGE for 30,848 miles is 23.6 MPG. Your van needs to be checked by a competent dealership.
my dad complained to our dealership about the miledage on our new 2001 pt cruiser when we first got it. we were only getting about 18mpg on average between city and freway driving. however, now that we have over 3k miles on the car, the mileadge seems to be slowly improving. according to my dad, we now get about 21mpg on average.
anyway, just wait and see what happens. if you do not notice an improvement in the next few months or at least until the car breaks 3k miles, then i would have it checked out at another 5 star chrysler dealership to make sure everything in fact, is ok. hope this helps!
-Adam (16/M/CA)
00 town and country LX 3.3l
I was pleasantly surprised by the improvements in fit and finish. It was one of the best rental vehicles I've had in some time.
The service manager said that that is to be expected for the first 500 600 miles with a new transmission. Something about the clutch getting broken in.
Is that really normal?
Any input is appreciated.
The Powerglide would slip when put into reverse but not very long afterward, the reverse would not engage at all. The Drive (one speed) and Low (another lower speed) would both continue to work so I would park it where I could drive forward until I had time to get it rebuilt for $180 in the 1957 - 1963 time frame at which time I got a new 1963 Impala Sport Coupe with a 3 speed manual.
I got the 65 Olds Delta 88 used in 1973 when it had 89,000 miles. Years later, it started slipping in Drive. A few weeks later, it actually stopped forward motion. After it sat awhile, it could be driven again. It probably just needed a transmission service with a new filter.
We have owned numerous sedans, pickups, and minivans with automatic transmissions, and these 2 were the only ones where a slip was detected.
I am starting to have very serious doubts about DC reliability
Think they will send flowers to your families funerals? Buy one, you can trust em!!!!!!!
Incidentally, gatogonow - why don't you live up to your handle, and go, NOW.
To give your hard earned dollars to a company that makes decesions like Daimler Chrysler is not an intelligent choice. I was stupid, at least I can help others not make the same mistake! Isn't that what the forum is really for?
Chrysler may abandon you someday, how will you feel having done nothing when your family has burned to death!!!!!!!!!!
So continue to post ZZZZZZZZZZZ and other slams, maybe you do not care about your families either!!!!!!!!!!!
I drive a 2000 Chrysler Town & Country LX and love it. I know two friends who have gotten into accidents in their 96-00 DC minivans, both accidents were minor. Both friends said their vans held up admirably in the crash and they did not suffer from any back/neck injuries.
gatagonow, when was the last time you heard about a DC minivan exploding after a crash due to a fuel leak? I sure haven't heard any stories about that. Out of all of the 2001 DC minivans that are on the road some are bound to get into serious accidents, some even worse than the simulated crash test. None of these vans has suffered from a fatal or serious or even an uncomon gas leak after the crash.
-Adam
When Consumer Reports listed Accident Injury Claims Rates, the 5 Star rated Windstar had a HIGHER injury claim rate than did the lower rated DC minivans. I prefer to AVOID accidents with the superior driving and handling characteristics of DC minivans.
They are not deserving of your money, buy elsewhere, you will be much safer and happier!
Also, even the spokesman from the IIHS said that it is not their intention to say that this whille occur on EVERY DC minivan that is on the road. That makes so much sense judging by the fact the leak only occured in one of many tests performed by Chrysler and the IIHS.
In addition, for those of you who think Chrysler has carefully twisted around it's words in it's press release...wouldn't you think that somewhere along the line in designing a brand new vehicle, they would have tested it for fuel leaks during or after a simulated crash test? I think it would be very realistic that Chrysler would have checked for any leaks that might occur from it's new minivan's tank BEFORE they even started production. Also, when Chrysler tests it's own cars, they don't slam them into a wall at 40 mph but into other vehicles. This would most likely be the case in most accidents.
People like GATOGONOW seem to want to make this into something its not for some futile reason to further slander the name of Chrysler. The level of intensity and almost fear that emminates from his "don't spend your hard-earned money on a Chrysler deathtrap" postings really does suprise and bewilder me. Some Odyssey owners (odd1) would accuse me of not being reasonable and not looking at the facts. However, I think you should go talk to GOTAGONOW if you want to converse with someone who does just that.
BTW Steve, if there had not been a fuel leak we would be disscussing the 2002 model's "ACCEPTABLE" saftey rating, not a "MARGINAL" one.
It was me who wrote that and that's incorrect. The fuel leak issue does not affect the '02 models because of the update parts. The '01 model, if not for the fuel leak, would've received a "Marginal". The '02 gets an "Acceptable" only because it has side impact head protection airbags.
Drew
Host
Vans, SUVs, and Aftermarket & Accessories message boards
I'm sure that some testing did occur, but I'm not sure how extensive it was because Chrysler doesn't publish that. I do think it is possible that Chrysler did not detect this problem during their own testing. I'm sure they do not want to spend the tens of millions of dollars it will cost to retrofit those minivans. I'm also sure that they will do whatever they can legally to give the impression that the leak is not a problem, including implying the testing was more thorough than it was and implying the likelihood of occurance is less.
As to the leak itself, it appears the leak was on top of the tank, as suggested here. It was discovered by the IIHS when they turned the van on its side, something they do as part of routine crash test analysis. What this implies for real life is that a) the tank is open at the top, exposing vapors that may ignite. b) if the car turns or rolls during the crash, the fuel may leak out increasing the chance of ignition.
As to the comments that the offset frontal crash represents a rare occurance in real life: it is true that the exact conditions of the crash test are very rare ... but that is true with any standardized test you choose due to the fact that crashes are unique. However, the offset test is considered by safety engineers to be a good representative, and standardized, sample of how a car will perform in a variety of crash situations. More importantly, it is considered far more representative than the frontal crash.
So, for people to say that because the exact circumstances of this crash test are rare, the problem won't occur in other crashes is simply unsubstantiated. The reality is the car did something it should not do during such a crash, and DC should fix it. DC's stonewalling on this is reminiscent of Ford's stonewalling on the Pinto.
I'm curious to hear your opinion as to whether you think Honda should have recalled its CR-V when it rolled over unexpectedly during similar crash testing? After all, it "did something it should not do during such a crash". Personally, I don't think these types of lab vs. real world occurrences are so cut and dried.
In the CR-V rollover situation, two questions come to mind. First, how much additional danger does the rollover add to the occupants? Second, can the rollover potential be corrected without a complete vehicle redesign?
If you do a lot of snow travel AWD is a great option. I had AWD with my '94 minivan and it was great. However, because we rarely travel in snow anymore I chose to go with 2WD with our 01 minivan. Even with traction control I notice the 2WD minivan doesn't get as good traction on wet pavement as the AWD did.
One disadvantage of AWD is maintenance. Alignments are more difficult and usually more expensive, tires wear out faster, and any repairs in the drivetrain cost more.
I hope this helps!
Chrysler like many companies must consider their costs verses their liability when determining a recall. It is my experience that customer satisfaction plays a very small part in most safety recalls. Liability, publicity and government intervention seem to be the key factors.
I also believe that this will change over time. The manufacturers are having a harder and harder time hiding their mistakes. With the advent and increased use of the internet, more people are coming to sites like this to bring their case to bear and to solicit others opinions about products and companies.
If this message board continues to allow both sides of an issue to be aired, then the side of right will prevail. If they only allow a single sides opinions then the public will be directed to their point of view and not allow for an intelligent person to make their own determination.
My decision would be to never deal with a company that has treated their customers the way the Chrysler has.
Steve
Host
Vans, SUVs and Aftermarket & Accessories Message Boards