Re: Minivan Comaprison

Yes, but American minivans sells for much less when they are new. Dealers sell them 2K to 5K$ less than their MRSP.

With Honda or Toyota, it's hard to buy a new car 2K$ less than the MRSP.

Bottomline, american cars and vans MRSP are too high according to their value.

OK. That is a valid point. I guess anyone who buys an American car at or close to MSRP is getting screwed. I know that the 04 Sienna's are selling at or close to MSRP (some have the gall to charge a premium!). Law of supply and demand I guess. The Odysseys were like that too when they were first introduced, although there is a little more wiggle room now (especially after the 04 Sienna was introduced earlier this year). I hear there is some wiggle room on the 04 Quest's MSRP too - but they were never as popular as the other manufacturers to begin with...

"No computer components were harmed during the creation of this post, however several billion electrons were abused to ensure its safe delivery."

My 1996 Grand Voyager is smooth, quiet and solid ... and it has 140,000 miles as of 10 minutes ago. Kind of fun to watch all the zeroes light up!

Worst car I ever had was a Honda Accord. Best car was a Plymouth Acclaim that replaced the Accord. My Chevy truck has been nearly bulletproof since I bought it new 10 years ago.

Last time I checked, Consumer guide rated the 2003 Grand Caravan slightly higher than the 2003 Odyssey. I don't think the 2004 Sienna had been tested yet. And, having subscribed to Consumer Reports for nearly 20 years now, I do believe they are biased against American brands. I don't think it is a conspiracy, but I think there is definite bias there.

Yes, the resale values are low, but that is a result of supply and demand as much as anything. There are simply LOTS of Chrysler vans that come back each year from fleets. I just bought one this evening to add to my stable...

Matt

Have you looked closely at the new Quest? What an abomination of a minivan. The dash is not only butt ugly, but nonfunctional. I'll lose a lot of faith in the American public, and there isn't all that much left to lose, if this thing sells well at all. The multiple sun roofs are kind of neat to ease the claustrophobia, but that dash is horrendous.

Matt

Well said. It is true that there is SO MUCH Chrysler minivans that come back from fleets or location companies.

But I have to give the credit to the new 04 Sienna though, go take a look and you'll understand my point.

And it is true that Nissan's Quest designer have gone a little too far on their pulsion. It is YOU LIKE or YOU DON'T LIKE with their cars.

CR just reviewed the minivans including 2004 Sienna.

here. I

(although

looked

decided on

solid.

Sienna

definite

Apparently, from published tests, it rides and handles nicely, being built on the Altima/Maxima platform and all. And at least it isn't a box on wheels like some minivans. I agree about the instrument cluster, but the controls on the center raised console are handy (and why don't more minivans come with a shifter like this and the Sienna's, much easier to shift, than on the steering column?).

And apparently Motor Trend has a comparion of the Sienna, Quest, and Odyssey coming out (they featured it on "Motor Trend TV" this past weekend).

If you want to see a truly ugly dash take a look at a 2003/4 Ford Escape XLT. I just had the dis-pleasure of having one of these as a rental from Hertz whilst I was away on business. The gearshift lever when in park is about at a 60 degree angle and is sticking way up over the dash. The ignition switch is way down low on the steering column and every time I go to put the key in I usually miss and try and put it in the rubber covered gear selector hole. The dash is silver with orange and puke green numbers and lines on the gauges (with the lights on). The wiper control is confusing and the wash/wipe a couple of time function always seems to wipe but you have to hold the switch too long to get it to wash first. The keyless works, but only from about 15 feet from the SUV. Add to that the beast got 11mpg in hiway/suburban driving and it adds up to a big piece of garbage.

Once a Camry in disguise.... STILL a Camry in disguise.

Yes, I read that issue, but I believe that CR is fairly biased after 20 years of subscribing to their magazine. Still useful, but biased. I've found Consumer Guide to be a little more balanced along with the car magazines.

Matt

We did - didn't impress us a bit, so instead of trading the '96 T&C LXi, we kept it and bought a Pacifica AWD.

Take a look at the review of the 2003 Grand Cherokee in their auto guide. Black rating for reliability.

Then look at the ratings in the back for reliability.

Note how since 2001, every single category is good, very good, or excellent. NOT ONE below average mark.

Than look at the bottom rating for overall reliability. 100% black. I emailed them about it and their response was a bunch of double-talk.

GO take a look - then wonder what in the world is going on. They hate GM and Chrysler and are biased - that's the only logical conclusion you can draw from their blatantly overriding their own feedback.

Which means based on one of the best cars out there.

How? They accept no advertising, no corporate contributions, and no free samples of merchandise to test.

They accept advertising and get their test cars free from the auto companies. How can that be unbiased?

You don't understand how CR does this. The overall reliability rating is by comparison to the average vehicle of that model year. If you look at other vehicles, they are better.

The individual categories are based on what % of owners reported a problem in that area. No comparison. Those circles do not represent average, worse, or better, but what % reported a problem.

CR tells you this if you'd bothered to read the magazine before shooting your mouth off.

No, the obvious conclusion is you cannot read.

But solid, reliable, quiet, roomy, good-riding, etc.

Why not? The original Chrysler minivans were based on the K-cars. Honda's Odyssey, widely regarded as the best minivan, is based on the Accord. Nissan's new Quest on the Altima/Maxima. Mazda's MPV on the 626.

I first noticed similar things back in about 1985. I specifically remember reading their ratings of the Dodge Diplomat and Ford Crown Victoria. Big black marks in the overall rating and inane comments about them being "carbureted dinosaurs with rear-wheel drive." And yet there were NO specific reliability issues in any of the categorized areas, and at the time the Police and Taxi fleets were FILLED with indestructable Diplomats and Gran Furies and Crown Vics. Go ahead and rip them for bland styling, and I'd believe it. Rip them for mediocre handling (except the police packages) and I'd believe it.Talk about the less-than-ideal bench seats and instrument layout, and I'll agree. But you don't rip those particular cars on *reliability* and come away with any credibility intact.

Just compare CR's drivel to the story time has told. Do you see more '85 Gran Furies or '85 Toyota Cressidas on the road today in 2003? Do you see more 85 Crown Victorias or '85 Nissan Stanzas still on the road today?

CR is best used as toilet paper, and its not very good at that job either.

A) Camry is Japanese for "crap that stupid Americans will buy", and

B) A car platform is not a suitable base for a minivan.