Ask the Car People.SM


Honda Odyssey vs Dodge/Chrysler minivans - READ ONLY

7485 messages,  Last post on Mar 23, 2008 at 8:43 AM

You are in the Honda Odyssey Forum.

What is this discussion about? Dodge Caravan, Honda Odyssey, Chrysler Town and Country, Chrysler Voyager, Plymouth Voyager, Van

Messages Page 85 of 749

#837 of 7485 dmathews by 4aodge

Dec 28, 2001 (6:35 pm)

I don't care how long it took Chrysler to fix the 41TE 4-speed automatic transmission. It could have taken them 50 years to fix the darn thing as far as I am concerned. The bottom line is, it's fixed. If you go out today and buy a 2002 DC minivan, your chances of having a transmission falure are smaller than they have ever been since the 1980s. Period. End of story.
 
Also, no one here said that Chrysler has a better reliability history than Honda. However, I have tried to point out that, indeed, not all is happy in Odyssey land and the vehicle does have it's fair share of problems. Especially when you consider that it is a Honda, a company respected for it's high quality.
 
If you are going to say 10 years from now that you aren't going to buy a Chrysler minivan because it took them at least 10 years to fix their transmissions, even though they are currently "rock solid", than I would say you are foolish. What kind of reason is that not to buy any car?
 
Once again, the bottom line is Chrysler has and is continuing to improve reliability. Don't believe me? Just look at Consumer Report ratings over the years, news articles, and even happy owners of DC minivans such as Carl and myself. Chrysler reliability has improved, whether you believe it or not.
 
-Adam
2000 Town & Country LX

#838 of 7485 Consumer Report distortions are once more shown in posting by caviller by carleton1

Dec 28, 2001 (6:36 pm)

How else can you explain the BTA for the 1998 Odyssey? (Here are the numbers taking directly from your posting):
Odyssey:
Overall / Transmission
 
1998: BTA / 5 to 9.3%
 
WHILE the 1997 GC/TC in the EXACTLY identical category is rated WTA?
 
GC/T&C: Overall / Transmission
 
1997: WTA / 5 to 9.3%
 
.......Careful reading of Consumer Reports indicate CR is "NOT Recommended for purchase" due to unreliability, distortions, and flagrant bias.

#839 of 7485 4aodge by dmathews3

Dec 28, 2001 (7:12 pm)

I don't care if DC fixes or don't fix any of their problems, my point is as long as you and a couple of other DC people continue to stir the pot about the Odyssey, I will continue to slam you right back. If you don't want to hear me rant than don't stir the pot, as I have a BIG SPOON!

#840 of 7485 Careful reading, Carleton1? by arbarnhart

Dec 28, 2001 (7:38 pm)

OK, I lied - I came back.
 
Carleton1 asks why the overall score of the Ody was BTA one year while the overall score of the GC/T&C was WTA in a year when both rated the same amount of trouble with trannies. Carleton1 suggests it is because CR is biased. I would like to suugest that possibly it is because the overall score takes into account more than just the tranny rating. Duh!

#841 of 7485 Consumer Reports is "NOT Recommended" for purchase by carleton1

Dec 28, 2001 (7:54 pm)

Since their material is biased, distorted, and unreliable. End of discussion.

#842 of 7485 Confused... by dave210

Dec 28, 2001 (8:31 pm)

Why is it said that Carleton and 4adodge are "stirring the pot" when all they really say is that Chrysler has more creature comforts than the Honda, have gained an improved reliability rating compared to years past, and also state that like all things, the Odyssey have problems, too?
 
All are true statements. The Chrysler offers you much more bang for your buck, and is getting better and better in their reliability and quality. And the Odyssey, while a GREAT van (and I'm not being sarcastic) does have problems also (like anything).
 
If you intend on trading in your car every two to three years, financially the Honda is probably better since, yes, it does hold it's value quite well.
 
Yet, it should be noted that my friend, who just traded in their 2000 T&C LTD on a left over 2001 T&C LTD, only lost $8,900 on the whole thing. He originally bought the 2000 (with a $34,800 sticker) for $29,450. He got $19,400 trade on the 2000 and got the 2001 T&C for $28,300 (with a $36,460 sticker) Not too bad when you take into account the real prices they paid. If you look at the depreciation from MSRP, yes the vans do VERY crummy in the resale department, but the key into not getting screwed on a Chrysler is waiting for the right deal. Still, the Odyssey does fair better from MSRP and is a better value overall if you don't care for the luxuries on the Chrysler.

#843 of 7485 Carleton1, please read before you speak. by caviller

Dec 28, 2001 (9:17 pm)

Carleton1 uttered:
 
"How else can you explain the BTA for the 1998 Odyssey? (Here are the numbers taking directly from your posting):
Odyssey:
Overall / Transmission
 
1998: BTA / 5 to 9.3%
 
WHILE the 1997 GC/TC in the EXACTLY identical category is rated WTA?
 
GC/T&C: Overall / Transmission
 
1997: WTA / 5 to 9.3%
 
.......Careful reading of Consumer Reports indicate CR is "NOT Recommended for purchase" due to unreliability, distortions, and flagrant bias."
 
Arbarnhart is exactly right. Quite simply, transmissions are not the only category. Many other categories contribute to the overall rating. I only included the transmission category since that is what was being discussed.
 
In the past, you have also posted reliability figures from CR's breakdowns, so I know you have seen them. Though you later deleted those posts, I assume you are still somewhat familiar with their ratings system. It seemed good enough when you used it to tout the DC vans' performance in some sub-categories some months ago, yet now it is, "biased, distorted and unreliable." Interesting.
 
Consumer Reports certainly has its flaws, but none as serious as the many flaws with your preferred method of using anecdotes from friends and online forums for reliability comparisons.

#844 of 7485 Cosumer Report Data by dchopp

Dec 29, 2001 (5:41 am)

Keep in mind that Consumer Reports obtains there data from Surveys sent out to their subscribers. They take no advertising either. One of my vehicles is a Pontiac Grand Am and it is a piece of junk and I informed them of it through the survey.

#845 of 7485 Apologists for "NOT Recommended for Purchase" by carleton1

Dec 29, 2001 (8:40 am)

Please explain how ANY vehicle with a transmission problem rate of 5 to 9.3% could be rated as BTA.
   Only a non-thinking Honda lover will ignore atrocious transmissions. Transmission work is considered "routine maintenance" for a Honda.

#846 of 7485 by eneth

Dec 29, 2001 (9:59 am)

I'm not so sure about Honda, but replacing the transmission every 30-50,000 miles cetainly was part of the DaimlerChrysler van maintenance schedule from 1989-1999 or so.

Messages Page 85 of 749

Advertisement

Browse by Category

Browse by Vehicle
   View All Vehicles

Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
View All Topics

Edmunds Community

Advertisement