Last post on Mar 23, 2008 at 7:43 AM
You are in the Honda Odyssey
What is this discussion about?
Dodge Caravan, Honda Odyssey, Chrysler Town and Country, Chrysler Voyager, Plymouth Voyager, Van
#856 of 7485 Beauty of a DC Minivan
Dec 30, 2001 (1:35 am)
I just saw the movie "The Family Man" with Nicholas Cage that we rented on DVD the other night. I was pleased to see that he and his wife had choosen a bright silver 2000 Dodge Grand Caravan ES as their families mode of transportation. There were several scenes in the movie involving the Dodge.
The interesting thing is, it is a fine looking automobile. I can't even count the number of reviewers, including Edmunds, who have said the same thing about this car. What I can't get over is that it is a mininvan! A minivan described as a good looking vehicle? Only DC, the makers of the Viper, Prowler, and PT, could create such a thing.
I personaly feel the 1996-2000 model years were the best looking of the bunch. Although I still think the 2001 model DC minivans are still the best looking minivans on the market, right ahead of the 2002 Odyssey EX (I hate the LX as I think the abscence of the roof rack and the black trim is very ugly).
Anyway, you just can't beat a Chrysler minivan in terms of look and style (example: Chrysler hides the sliding door hinge on their vans while many others, including the Ody, have them clearly in sight). In my humble opinion, of course...
#857 of 7485 About the body color trim....
Dec 30, 2001 (8:31 am)
While the majority of the DC vans now have body color trim, and at most, a small black strip running along the side of the car, the 1996-2000 were the biggest culprit of unneeded black trim, which was there way to differentiate the $36,000 van from the $20,000 van.
I never understood why up until 1999, Chrysler was still putting on black bumpers, thick black side cladding, black door handles, and a black roof rack. The white colored 1996-1998 Dodges and Plymouths were not pretty in my opinion. And the only thing they did in the 1999-2000 vans was take away the black door handles, which while good, was probably just a cost cutting move.
On that note, the 1996 vans had many minor changes to them through out the 1996 model year. When they first came out, the Town & Country LX and LXi were given exclusive front doors with a good gripped handle to close the door and wood accents, versus the little hand pocket with vynil covering on the other models. The LXi was also exclusive to the map pockets on the front doors. Later on in the year and a half the '96 vans were out, the headrests were changed to half leather on the front, where before they were completely vinyl. The doors were also changed to the ones with a small hand pocket(I'm sure to simplify things)but kept the wood accent. The gold LXi pin stripe was also changed from one thick one, to two double thin stripes.
#858 of 7485 Beauty of a DC Minivan by 4aodge
Dec 30, 2001 (9:45 am)
Those vehicles were furnished by DC for FREE. That was the only reason they were used. Not just because you think they are beautiful. They would have used Studebakers if they had been free. Everyone here knows that you think they are the best, but some of us don't, so if you're going to stir the pot, use something useful. Even I'd brag up DC vans if they gave me one, but since they didn't and I had to buy, we chose the best, and safest, and most reliable bang for the buck.
#859 of 7485 dmathews3
Dec 30, 2001 (12:17 pm)
dmathews, I'm sorry if you can't take someone talking possitively about how another mininvan on the market other than the Honda Odyssey without getting defensive and aggitated. I know the vehicles were given by DC for free as I doubt the movie makers would have gone out and purchased a near 33k dolar minivan.
Yes, your right. I do think that DC minivans are the best on the market, at leat for us. And I don't get defensive and worked up when someone else says something positive about another car just because it isn't sitting in my garage.
You can call it "stirring the pot" or whatever you would like, but that won't stop others from expressing their positive opinions on vans that are not Honda Odysseys.
#860 of 7485 dmathews3 by 4aodge
Dec 30, 2001 (1:42 pm)
I have no problem with you talking about the DC vans, but you also seem to throw a number of snide remarks about the Odyssey, and as long as you continue.....................
#861 of 7485 Spoon Size!
Dec 30, 2001 (5:10 pm)
You may have a big spoon but it seems as though mine is even BIGGER!
#862 of 7485 Spoon Size! by 4aodge
Dec 30, 2001 (5:56 pm)
The only thing you have thats big is your ego. I have more time in the bathroom thinking about cars than you have been alive. I can't wait until you get old enough to buy your own car, and we'll see what you get. I doubt it will even be a minivan. Now the PT Cruiser that your folks have would be about the only thing DC has I would take a chance again on. But thats a cheap vehicle and if it turned out like other DC products I could get my money out of it.
#863 of 7485 my spoon is bigger than your spoon
Dec 30, 2001 (9:01 pm)
I am not sure what my first car will be. I really like minivans. I value their decent gas mileage (generally speaking when compared to SUVs), versatility, cargo room, and seating capability, among other things. But I don't know if I would want one for my first car, although I love driving our 2000 Town & Country, even when I'm by myself.
The PT Cruiser is an awesome car, as one would expect from a vehicle crowned "Car of the Year" by Motortrend magazine. Its good looking, fun to drive, versatile, and is a great bargan when it's bought at MSRP. The interior and exterior is very well put together and the fit and finish is very impressive, especially when you consider how "cheap" the car is. You should hear the solid slammmmm when the doors are shut!
As for my ego, it's not big at all. I think you would like me if we were to talk face to face. I'm just really amused by this whole spoon size thing you've started and so I'm going to play into that. Especially after you got all riled up after I said that I think DC builds the best looking minivan. I mean common, did that really get u THAT upset?
#864 of 7485 Motor Trend Car of the Year...
Dec 30, 2001 (10:33 pm)
While I do think the PT deserved it for its outright "look at me" appeal and it's great initial quality, Motor Trend kinda lost their credibility with me after rating the Chevy Vega MT Car of the Year two times in a row, only to have it rust out after two years and have the infamous backfire that almost killed my back seat passenger (a dog) when the whole rear caught on fire.
Oh and for this years SUV winner...the GMC Envoy? Yeah ok.....
Sorry, just a *little* bitter at GM, so I actually DO understand why some people dislike the Chrysler vans who HAVE OWNED troubled Chryslers. I owned a VERY troubled GM product that they never stood behind until law suit after law suit.
While the transmissions may not be great (don't know, never had problems), that cannot compare to the near death experiencing I had with GM....but since I'm already off-topic, I'll save that for another day.
#865 of 7485 Motor Trend Car of the Year
Dec 31, 2001 (12:17 am)
Dave, I can totally understand why you have lost credit in Motor Trend and it's "Car of the Year" award. While I still have more faith in their ability to judge what's best, I too am a little confused as to why they chose the Chevy Trailblazer as the SUV of the year. I haven't driven one, but I have sat in a Trailblazer that was on display at a local mall. It was ok. But good enough to label it the car of the year?
I don't know about that.
Also, one more interesting thing about Motor Trend. The Chrysler minivans have been the ONLY ones ever made to win Motor Trend's car of the year award. That was back in 1996 when they were first remodeled. I wasn't into cars back then but the 1996 Chrysler minivans must have really blown past the competition in that year. I don't know of any other minivan on the market then that could even compare to the Chrysler vans.
But of course, those days are gone. And as someone here pointed out, the increased competition in todays market will only make the products better and cheaper. Which, of course, is good for the consumer!