2005 Grand Caravan SXT-any feedback, please?

With gas prices going up I would definitely consider the Sienna though I am no Toyota fan. It happens to get superior mileage and even though it will cost more up front, Toyota keeps great resale value for reasons I do not comprehend. Expect 10 percent better mileage than the Caravan.

Well, I'm one of those that comes from the position that if you don't have the money saved up to buy a new car you shouldn't be buying it.

Anyway, as far as the home equity vs Chrysler Financial, what is the interest rate your paying on your home now, and how much equity do you have in it? Rather than a home equity loan you might just consider a regular car loan, then once you get the car refinance your home and roll the car loan into that, if it will get you a better interest rate on your home, that is.

Don't listen to the idiot about the Toyota, if you are seriously considering that then post in the Toyota Usenet forum, and get some honest responses, rather than a single response from a crank who isn't even in the right newsgroup.

Ted

Sorry Ted to hurt your Chrysler loving feelings but I own a 300M so I have a perfect right to be in this group. Just so happens I have a Toyota Avalon too which I don't particularly like but that is besides the point. The original poster requested any comments. Fact is that Chrysler minivans get relatively poor mileage. With gas prices likely to go thru the roof and this guy obviously concerned about money, alteratives should be considered. The Sienna gets remarkably decent mileage for a minivan.

considered.

From the Toyota website, the Sienna XLE with a curb weight of 4165 and a

3.3L engine developing 230hp @ 5600 rpm, and 242 lb-ft @ 3600 rpm, is rated 19/26 city/highway MPG.

From the Dodge website the Caravan SXT with a curb weight of 4252 and a

3.8L engine developing 215hp @ 5000 rpm, and 245 lb-ft @ 4000 rpm, is rated 18/25 city/highway MPG.

So I think your assertion that the Caravan gets poor mileage compared to the Toyota is a big pile of poop. Unless that is you consider ONE mpg to be "relatively poor". And the Caravan engine is a more powerful one than the Toyota, which might mean the difference between a successful pass on a

2 lane country road or being stuck behind some crackerbox for 100 miles.

In any case, gas mileage is more a factor of the driver than anything else. A poofball on the Caravan will get better gas mileage than a leadfoot on the Toyota no matter how much you argue that the Toyota is so much better. (which it ain't)

If the OP was really concerned about money, he wouldn't be shopping for a new car. He has the money (or thinks he has) he just wants to make sure he's won't feel like he spent too much money after he's bought it.

Ted

'05 SXT is number 5 Chrysler minivan since 1988. Now have 6500 miles on this vehicle: Good points. Disk brakes all around. Fold down seating. The folks on the commercial are well practiced, but the fold down seats are a billion skillion times better than physically moving the old style seats. Bad points. Dash board gauges. In bright sunlight with sunglasses, and if the gauges are in shadow, I cannot read them. Power lift gate, power side doors. The extra weight pushes the

3.8 just a little bit to far. It's almost under powered. Other wise, a routine Chrysler van. If you take care of it, it will take care of you. Regds

In Consumer Reports real world tests, overall mileage for the chrysler vans were 17 mgp. The Sienna and the smaller Honda Odessey did 19 mpg. There were a couple of models that got 16. I believe Kia was one.