You are here: Forums Vans & Minivans Chrysler/Plymouth Voyager, Dodge Caravan Dodge Caravan/Chrysler Voyager

Dodge Caravan/Chrysler Voyager

2361 messages,  Last post on Nov 18, 2009 at 1:15 PM

You are in the Chrysler/Plymouth Voyager, Dodge Caravan Forum. Your Host is Karens

What is this discussion about? Chrysler Voyager, Dodge Caravan, Dodge Grand Caravan, Chrysler Grand Voyager, Van

Messages Page 2 of 237 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ... 237 Prev Next Last

Go To Msg # Search This Discussion

#10 of 2361 torque? by swampcollie Feb 17, 2000 (3:09 am)
what is the torque change? I really believe that is what is important. And if you look, the 3.8 had more torque than the odyssey the last 2 years. jpotoff: I drove a 3.3 for 7 years and was very happy with the reliability and power, what it lacked was torque. shifted down on hills. my 99 has the 3.8 and that problem is solved. the 3.3 is really a nice engine though. I never had a moments problem with it.
#11 of 2361 by targetgrn Apr 15, 2000 (4:49 pm)
We are trying to decide between the Silouhette and the Odyssey both 2000 models. There are things about each that we like but our main concern is the power doors on the Odyssey. When we test drove one the other day someone tried to manually open the door and we then had trouble getting the door to open under power. Even the salesman had trouble getting it to work. Has anyone had a problem with these doors?
#12 of 2361 3.3L Inadequate by indydriver Apr 23, 2000 (1:10 pm)
I will definitely opt for the 3.8 or 3.5 300M engine in my '01. My current 3.3 is OK around town but really struggles on Interstate drives through the mountains. It has been totally reliable after 130K though. I also own a '99 300M and absolutely love that engine. Besides the increase in power, it will definitely help reduce NVH levels in the minivan. TARGETGRN: Sure you meant to post in this topic?
#13 of 2361 Space Comparison With Windstar by maggie944 May 22, 2000 (12:22 am)
Can anyone help me with this ? How do the rear cargo and seating areas compare between the T & C and the Windstar? My current '95 T & C has had adequate room for the 3 or 4 hockey players and their bags I lug around all winter. How do you folks think the Windstar would compare ? Windstar is a lot cheaper. Would I be "penny wise and pound foolish ?"
#14 of 2361 Space Comparison by bordsource Jun 01, 2000 (12:39 am)
The Windstar is nowhere near as roomy as even the current Chryslers. Your '95, however, and the Windstar (past and present), are about the same size inside. The Windstar...well, there's no real advantage. The Windstar has no real price advantage (especially if it's a '00 that you're interested in), and it's significantly smaller inside than a similarly sized Chrysler (read: LWB). The rear seat of the Windstar is noticably more cramped than the rear of the Chrysler. Cargo space is similarly truncated. The Windstar has the more powerful engine, and the better crash test scores. Aside from those two things, I can't think of any reason to get a Windstar...get an Odyssey first. Yeah, we've got a Chrysler- '97 T&C- so there's probably some bias in this opinion. I wouldn't get a GM minivan unless someone had a gun to me (figuratively or literally). They've got ratty materials, poor build quality, and they're BORING! At least with the Honda, you're getting decent materials and build quality, even if it isn't quite up to Honda's usual levels. Either way, make sure that whatever you get (outside of a Honda) comes with a big discount! The minivan market has cooled considerably, so if the grille doesn't have an "H", then don't let them sell you anything at sticker!
#15 of 2361 windstar space by tsjs Jun 01, 2000 (1:15 am)
I agree with bordsource. I have a 90 GC and the windstar isn't as large at that, but close. I check headroom as well - I hit my head in the rear seat of the ford. You can hurt your metatarsal (?) (top of foot) on exposed bolts under the captains chairs in even the new windstar. Good luck.
#16 of 2361 maggie944 by thebrakeman Jun 01, 2000 (3:36 pm)
The T&C is the luxury van in the pack. If you are worried about the cost but still want the space, check out the Grand Caravan or Grand Voyager. If you need the big 3.8L engine, though, you must get the GC LE or ES, or the T&C LXi or Limited.
#17 of 2361 I doubt it......... by thebrakeman Jun 09, 2000 (8:01 pm)
Voyager is still slated to be the budget-minded van.
#18 of 2361 Carleton1-3.5L gas mileage by indydriver Jun 17, 2000 (1:55 pm)
Sorry for the long delay in responding, I had taken the 2001 sites off my routine since there wasn't much useful info available. Rereading my earlier comments here are funny because I'm in a totally different place now, working hard to find just the right 2000 GCS which has the 3.3!(see Vans #342 for the details). Anyway, to your question. I monitor my gas consumption very closely as I drive my 300M for business. I bought it in Dec. 98 and now have 42,000+ miles. I drive an eight state region in the Midwest so two-thirds of my miles are on flat highways. I usually drive long stretches at 75-80. In 1999, I averaged 22.3 mpg and YTD through May, I am averaging 22.5 mpg. I run on 87 octane even though it is recommended for 89 for max performance. It looks like the 2001 minivan 3.5 will have the powercurve tweaked for more torque at the expense of 23 HP (253 v. 230). But this is one sweet engine. It revs quickly and smoothly right into the red zone (6,500+ rpm) but you can short shift it at 2500-3000 for normal crusing. I know you've been heavily engaged in some of the "problem" topics and you'll notice there are NEVER any entries on Chrysler engine reliability. So, bottom line, 2001 engines should be a great upgrade all the way around. I did hear though, that the 3.5 availability would be very limited, perhaps only on T&C Ltd?
#19 of 2361 Carleton1 by indydriver Jun 22, 2000 (10:56 am)
I agree mileage would be lower in a van because unless you were using it for business, you would have a much higher percentage of city miles than highway miles. Obviously, the van is heavier with much greater frontal area (higher Cd) so it will burn more gas to push the vehicle at the same rate. BUT, I would choose it in a van in a heartbeat if I was checking off an options list. By the way, since I was shopping for a Dodge, I went to the 4adodge website to see what they had on the 2001's. They have the options matrix like you find in the back of the brochure. No 3.5 for Dodge available. Too bad DC doesn't see fit to put the high output engine in their performance division.

Messages Page 2 of 237 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ... 237 Prev Next Last

Go To Msg # Search This Discussion

You are here: Forums Vans & Minivans Chrysler/Plymouth Voyager, Dodge Caravan Dodge Caravan/Chrysler Voyager