What happened to AWD?

While you may have had a good experience with your AWD, there are enough people out there who feel that AWD hasn't lived up to it's expectations that the popular feeling is that it's not worth having it on this kind of vehicle.

I happen to own a 1994 T&C with AWD and a 1995 T&C without. The '94 has about 140K on it, same as yours. (I bought it cheap, as a project vehicle) I can tell you from my experience so far working on the van, that AWD just means more stuff to have to take apart to fix anything, I can certainly see why people claim they have higher repair costs.

Cars today have enough complexity already, you have to ask yourself, what does AWD give me, and is it worth increasing the number of things in the vehicle that can break down? Certainly, to me it isn't worth it, and if my '94 wasn't as cheap as it was, I wouldn't have bought it.

Ted

I would speculate that along with the added complexity that AWD added, that the stow and go seating (or however Chrysler refers to it) probably made it more difficult to implement.

Plus, the limited sales of the option of AWD.

How's that coming along? Have you gotten the transmission out yet? Or are you still staring at it wondering why you decided to try to take the transmission out?

I was waiting until the title went through before spending any real money on it. It would have been highly uncomfortable to have the transmission out, have a lot of money sunk into it, then have the State send me a letter saying the vehicle is listed as stolen, or some such. I have cleaned it, though. (that was at least 8 hours, it's amazing how filthy some people make their vehicles get)

Fortunately I got the title last week but we had kid's b-day party on the weekend and I had to put in a rebuilt half-shaft on my '84 GM on Sunday. This coming weekend will be when I attempt to take the transmission out.

Ted

Stow-n-go. A great idea.

------------- Alex

We got a 94 voyager for my wife to drive, the entire inside of which was soaked with cola. The upholstery was originally gray, but most of the seat area was brown. We took the seats out and ran a hose on them, and the water looked just like soda pop. Yech! Makes you wonder what these people were thinking.

3 year old people don't really think about all that much. Barney mostly. Those are the people who ride in these nasty minivans.

Any parent that gives a 3 year old soda pop to drink meets the definition of white (or black) trash. Even fruit juice is better, and that's saying a lot considering that the American Academy of Pediatrics says giving fruit juice to kids is basically giving them sugar. They recommend a maximum of a martini glassful a day, if you give it at all.

Ted

Nevertheless, I have answered your question about what they were thinking.

It wasn't my question, it was Robbie & Laurie Reynolds's question. Me, I would rather not know, undoubtedly something rather nasty. Nasty people and their nasty pigsty vehicles. I've seen a lot more horrible than a Coke-soak sitting in the U-pull it yards, though. There's people out there who obviously don't see the difference between the inside of a car and a porta-pottie.

Ted

Hey, What does your reply have to do with AWD?

Quite highjacking my thread!!

Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:

-- blan

----------------------------------------------------------------------- blank's Profile:

this thread:

As David pointed out elsewhere, it's mostly due to few vans being ordered with AWD. I remember a quote from a Chrysler spokesman that less than 5% of the vans were ordered with AWD. But I imagine it also the real motivation was that it allowed them to implement the Stow-n-Go while conveniently eliminating some costs for Chrysler.