Chrysler Mini-Vans

Due to my 1994 Dodge Grand Caraven being written off, I recently purchased a 2002 Dodge Grand Caravan.

I do like it vey much. Lots more creature comforts, and it is also more stylish.

When purchasing, I was offered an extended warranty. There was some work to be done, and it would be covered by the warranty, so I purchased the warranty. And am I ever glad I did!

There have been lots of little stuff, and it is the kind of stuff that the previous owner let go, that kind of stuff that can 2-bit you to death.

The trick with my warranty (by GM I might add) is that there is a $100 deductable per INVOICE. So you wait, and then have everything fixed all at once! My dealer has been great. Every time I go in, I get a loaner VAN - not a sub-compact!

If the van yo wish to buy is 2 years old, then it should still have a warranty. But if I were you, I would still buy the extended warranty if you can. Mine covers pretty much EVERYTHING. All electrical stuff, modules, cable harnesses, engine, transmission, A/C....

I love my van dearly. And I will pass on to you some recommendations:

1) Get a more "deluxe" van. While I had rentals and loaners looking for my new van, I noticed that the more basic models had really uncomfortable seats! My current van has - for the driver - a power adjustable seat. This puppy can be adjusted for the most amazing driving comfort! I love it. The basic models were aweful!

2) Have a full independant mechanical inspection - just to be sure.

3) The most common engines in these vans are 3.0 litre, 3.3 litre, and 3.8 litre. The 3.0 litre is an overhead cam Mitsubishi Engine. The 3.3 and 3.8 are basically the same block, domestically designed and manufactured, and are overhead VALVE! What this means is NO TIMEING BELT! :)

It is my recommendation to stay the hell away from the 3.0 litre Mitsubishi engine. I had one in an old Accalim. It was a pain in the ass. Changing the timing belt was not that cheap. It never ran correctly when conditions were moist. It PUKED oil like there was no tomorrow. "Fill up the oil, check the gas" was the watch phrase.

By comparison, the 3.3 litre enigines I have had are workhorses! They NEVER let me down, and did not require a lot of maintenance. My old van had a 3.3, and my new van has a 3.3. And if I had to go out and get one tomorrow, it would have a 3.3 as well!

4) Make sure the dealer or seller takes the van into the DEALER and have teh Transmission Control Module (TCM) and Engine Control Module (ECM) checked to make sure they have the latest firmware in them.

My only beef with my current van is it gets HORRIBLE gas mileage. HOWEVER, it is currently at the dealer, and the dealer said that I am SEVEN versions of firmware out of date between teh TCM and ECM! I suspect THAT could have a little to do with the mileage problem! Time will tell.

5) If you can, depending upon the model year you actually manage to get, try to get a van with the "Stow and Go" seats! I was a couple of years shy of this. Buy my old boss purchased one, and she LOVES it. Her and her husband do a lot of travelling and camping, and they have no idea how they ever got along without this feature - and this feature is the one thing that I wish my van had!

Can't think of anything else at the moment.

Good luck!

Thanks for all of the information. Don't have my eye on anything yet but don't plan to look at anything older than 2 years. Most likely I will buy new but it doesn't hurt to look. Nothing special about 2 years; just the cut-off point I chose.

Gas mileage is a consideration. My Windstar gets 17 in town and 25 on the road.

after working on both i do much more work to the fords than whats needed in a chrysler van i have seen them go 250 k and a never seen a windstar do that. we have a 99 with

100k and a cracked head the customer decl> I drive a 99 Ford Windstar mini-van and am looking to purchase a new or up

I can't really speak on the newer Chryslers, but I have owned four Chrysler cars, three bought new, one used. One was a new minivan (1992 which I still have). I will never buy a Chrysler again...AND I used to consider myself a Chrysler guy. Evry car has had all kind of problems. The strong point of Chrysler is the motors..they are good and can go a long way. If you don't mind annoying constant problems, then maybe a Chrysler is for you. Every car had problems within the first few years...from leaking head gaskets on two at less than three years to serious (and widely reported) transmission problems on the van at about 8 years old. I am the type that always worried more about the motor than other small problems, but I came to realize over the years that these little problems are not nearly as prevalent on other manufacturers products. I have replaced two Neons with two Hyundai Elantra GT,s. These cars are superior in every way and of course are backed by a ten year warranty. Good luck.

Ford Driver wrote:

I've owned 14 Chrysler mini vans. 3 were bought from individuals who were finished with them, and the rest were bought at auction for cheap, so obviously I'm talking about vehicles that had been well-tested. They have ranged from 1984 to 1999. Two of them had the Chrysler 3.3 engines. Both of these ran very well and were very dependable, but they leaked a lot of oil. For daily use they seem indestructible. The 1999, which we are driving now, has the 2.4 liter four cylinder engine which gets better mileage than the six cylinder engines. I thought it was going to be a weak performer, but it gets the job done surprisingly well. When the van is loaded with adults it has a noticeable lack of get-up-and-go, but most folks drive empty vehicles most of the time anyway, right? I wouldn't drive it for delivery work, but for the wife and kids it's a nice van. Besides the crappy 1984 four cylinder we had a long time ago, the rest of the vans I've owned over the past ten years have had the much-maligned 3.0 V6 (1987 to 1996 models). I've read a lot of gripes about this engine on this group, but I have loved all 10 that I have owned. Mine have all had a history of starting immediately, running well, being reasonably fuel efficient, and hauling whatever you can fit in the van. I ran 1800 pounds of paper brochures from Kansas City to St. Louis several years ago, and I noticed only 2 or 3 mpg less gas mileage. Another thing about this engine is that although you should do routine maintenance, if your timing belt does happen to break it will not hurt the engine because it is a non-interference design, meaning that the pistons do not hit the valves. This has been an issue for me twice. The older 3.0 engines used to suck oil through the valve guides and produce smoke at idle, including all but a couple of mine, but I have heard that this issue has been addressed in the newer ones. Engine-wise, you can't go wrong with these vans, in my opinion.

Transmissions could be another story. The overdrive models have had more of a history of failure than the non-overdrive models, which is also reflected in my own experience. I tend to run vehicles from

150,000 miles to 250,000. The highest mileage vans I have had were all non-overdrive models, and they all just kept going. I have had a few overdrive transmissions that failed, as well as one non-overdrive. The statistics clearly favor the non-overdrive type. I had one of these that went to 275,000 on the odometer before I sold it.

As for the van itself, these are well-built vehicles. They have a very nice ride, and as another guy already mentioned, the seats are pretty comfortable. I have noticed that the little problematic quirks seem to be due to design defects that occur in different places from year to year. For instance, the pre-1991 vans had little issues with the sliding door rollers and mounts, as well as the back door latch and the stupid plastic window tracks. The 1991 to 1995 vehicles all lost their interior hood release handles sooner or later, as well as most of their paint, and the electric window cables sometimes had trouble if you ran them up and down enough times. Our 1996 and 1999 vans lost all of their cheap plastic hubcaps (you see these with naked wheels all over town), and the handgrips on the back of the front seats tend to come off. And for some reason the sun visors have problems. Obviously I have no opinions about the vans of the past 7 years, but I would guess that getting one would be a safe bet. I wouldn't be surprised to hear that there is some new bug in the interior furnishings somewhere, but all in all, they're great vehicles. They stack up very well against the competition.

Hi, I'm new here. I don't have a lot to contribute other than that I just traded my 96 Windstar with a blown intake manifold gasket for an 05 Town and Country.

I've only had it for a few weeks but I like it a lot. It's the basic model but has as many features as I want. All I really need is a machine to get me from here to there.

Comparing to the Windstar:

It's quite a bit smaller. You could get 7 grown-ups in the Windstar pretty comfortable. It would be a bit cramped in the T&C.

The 3.3 in the T&C is a bit weak compared to the 3.8 in the Ford, but it will get you on the freeway with no problem and gets better milage the couple times I have checked. About 25 for the T&C v.s about 22 for the Ford in similar mostly highway conditions.

I've found it doesn't have a lot if you are passing. It makes a lot of noise if you floor it and pull out to pass, but doesn't really get up and go. But hell, it's a mini van... Just plan your passes to take a bit longer.

Both cars have heaters and air aplenty. I have only used the heat in the T&C a few times, but it's a lot. Enough that you don't want it all the way up even though I like it warm. Like the Windstar, it warns up quickly and you get some heat within a mile or so of starting out, but like I said I just got it a few weeks ago and it hasn't been very cold out yet (Wisconsin).

Comfort-wise...I'd give the edge to the Windstar on a long trip, but I haven't got the T&C quite tweaked the way I want it yet. It is quite comfortable, but I liked the Windstar better. Or maybe I was just used to it.

Overall I like the T&C a lot so far. This is the only newsgroup I've found so far related to it and I don't see the kind of complaining here that I see on the Ford newsgroup. I'm taking that as a good sign. I should probably go look for Dodge and Plymouth newsgroups too. Anybody know of any I should join?

Tom

The key thing to keep your chrysler happy is using the correct auto tran fluid with no addiitves and changing it every 30k miles or so. Stay away from peanut butter lube shops who want to use their standard fluid.