Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Vans & Minivans Minivans - Domestic or Foreign
3643 messages, Last post on May 20, 2009 at 6:32 AM
You are in the Vans & Minivans Forum. Your Host is Karens
|
Good idea. Simple ideas are often the best. I guess the texture helps the owner familiar with the car, while the backlighting helps the unfamiliar driver.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: kmauss (Aug 15, 2008 8:00 am) The basics: The vans are all VERY WELL rated on safety, more fuel efficient than SUVs, and these days, will likely have better resale since they don't have the fuel-hog stigma of the SUV. Space efficiency is the key to the van, and they do it better than SUVs every time! All that being said, some major features/difference to note in the three main competitors do exist. Dodge Grand Caravan / Chrysler Town and Country These two are the same basic vehicle branded as two different things. The Dodge is styled as a little more sporty, the Chrysler more luxurious. This is the newest model that debuted on the market. Major Pros: It features a seating system you might find VERY useful, called Stow-n-Go. It allows all rear seating (middle buckets and third row) to be stowed underneath the floor, creating a flat load surface from tailgate to the front seats. Dodge and Chrysler also offer rebates and competitive pricing more often than the competition. Major Cons: The engine options are a little lacking unless you get the most loaded-out model (the best engine comes only on the most expensive model). The amount of power coming out of the engines in the lower and mid-level models are way down on what the competition offers. Also, interior quality isn't as good as that of Honda or Toyota. Honda Odyssey This van is the most "carlike" of the van options. It has tight steering, a firmer ride, and overall, drives similar to a Honda Accord. The engine makes more power (and is noticeably better) than the lower-end offerings from Dodge and Chrysler, but lacks power relative to the Toyota, which is just plain fast! Major Pros: The driving experience as a whole. The way the van drives will be the most comparable to a car, I believe, which could be a plus for you coming from a car. The rear bench is split, and folds flat into the floor like the Dodge's does. Major Cons: The Odyssey has the firmest/bumpiest ride, and has the most interior noise. The middle-row of seats must be manually removed if you want only the front seats in place, with the rest for cargo. These seats are heavy (my aunt calls me to move them). Toyota Sienna The Toyota Sienna is easily the most luxurious van of the three, with a very smooth isolated ride, a quiet but VERY powerful and fuel efficient engine. Major Pros: The ride is arguably the best of the three. The engine is the most powerful AND fuel efficient of the three. The rear bench split folds into the floor, like the Odyssey. The Sienna is available with some really high-tech options such as high-intensity headlamps and laser cruise control, which will slow down when you come up behind a car going slower than you, and speed back up once the slow car is out of the way. Major Cons: The driving experience pales in comparison to the Honda (to me). The steering is light, not too precise. Its responses are not quick or car-like. The middle seats must also be manually removed, as in the Honda. Toyota's option packages can be maddening to decipher; sometimes you can build the can you want online, but will never find it in real-life. If you are looking for lower-end models (you mentioned not wanting bells and whistles) this may not be an issue. I hope this gives a bit of an idea of the differences in these vans. If there are more questions, please just ask away! 
|
|
|
Replying to: kmauss (Aug 15, 2008 8:00 am) If you look at it from a practical perspective, purely based on merit, a van will win every time. You get more space for a lot less money, for starters. Nowadays you can get a good basic van for $22k, and for a little more you can get lots of extras. The minivan segment is fairly mature, and what that means is you have lots of good choices. High tech multi-valve engines are both powerful and fuel efficient. Seats fold and disappear. Space and comfort are abundant. Options galore. Let's look at the criteria that matter to you: Dependability: probably no different than the SUV segment. SUVs offer AWD, but you can get a Sienna with AWD, so even in snow you should be able to depend on that van to get around. Repair Costs: minor differences. Vans are perhaps a little bit simpler than large SUVs to work on, but I doubt it would break your bank. Vans cost a lot less to begin with, at least compared to most large crossovers/SUVs. Stow-away seats: big plus for vans. Dodge and Toyota even offer you power folding options, though some SUVs do as well (Expedition for instance). Primarily the vans win in that all the seats are actually comfortable and inhabitable. Even large crossovers often have tiny 3rd row seats. Insurance costs: probably lower for vans. I actually got insurance quotes for our Sienna and for a Subaru Tribeca 7 passenger model, and the van was $87 less every 6 months. Not a lot, but still cheaper. We liked the Tribeca but ultimately decided it was too small (we did buy a Subaru Forester for my wife). Safety: check IIHS but I think you'll find most of these tend to score very well, just make sure you get things like side curtain air bags and stability control. Nowadays most vehicles in this class have both standard, but make sure. To haul stuff you want SPACE! My Sienna offers 148 cubic feet worth. You can lay a 4'x8' sheet of plywood on the cargo floor, and still close the hatch! That's EIGHT FEET of length. The width is actually 52", so I would have 4 inches to spare. A Chevy Tahoe, for comparison, which is 1" longer than my van, only holds 109 cubic feet, and you can forget putting the plywood inside. An Expedition is longer and holds even less. Some crossovers come close - the Saturn Outlook is about the same length, but it still only carries 117 cubic feet of stuff. It costs a bunch more than a van, however. From a rational, practical point of view, a van will give you a lot more space for a lot less money. They are more car-like and easier to drive, too. They also use a lot less fuel. SUVs can typically tow more and have off road capabilities, but you didn't mention either of those in your post. |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: ateixeira (Aug 15, 2008 8:07 am) I guess the texture helps the owner familiar with the car, while the backlighting helps the unfamiliar driver. Exactly. I thought it was pretty ingenious, myself. It's those kind of ideas you wonder "why didn't someone else think of that sooner?"  
|
|
|
Replying to: thegraduate (Aug 15, 2008 8:21 am) I have no experience with the Honda or the Toyota vans, but my brother and family are on their third or fourth Dodge/Chrysler minivan, having piled almost 200,000 miles each (lots of cross country driving) on each of the previous ones with no major mechanical issues before they've bitten the dust. Actually, the last one was totalled on a Washington Beltway, but Lynne walked off with barely a scratch. So, reliability-wise and safety-wise I can't really have anything bad to say about Dodge/Chrysler. And the fold down seats would be a HUGE plus. I personally want no parts of taking seats in and out of a vehicle. My sister has a bad back, and therefore I know I'd have to do it myself, and there's no way I'd get into that situation. On the other hand, my other sibling had two Ford Windstars that were awful. I mean, when they worked, they were wonderful to ride in, but both of them had major mechanical issues that no one could locate. But since I don't think Ford even makes a mini-van anymore, it's a moot point. (The mystery in my mind is why after one Windstar was a total  , did they replace with another Windstar.... things that make you say huh?) They now will buy nothing but Toyotas, so I'm sure they'd counsel me to buy a Sienna! I will do some more research, and when I can, I'll just go out and test drive a few and come back with my impressions. In the meantime, I'd welcome any more input from anyone else who doesn't mind educating me. Thank you both again!  Karen
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: kmauss (Aug 15, 2008 2:46 pm) They think Vans are uncool looking and want to go with a SUV. I am a realtor and sometimes I do have to use my vehicle, I don't mind the van. I cannot afford the Odyssey this time. I am looking at a Quest 3.5 S but this is a serious downgrade from my leather, dvd, 2 auto doors. The price is good though close to $18000 out the door. What else should I be looking at with a 3rd row of seats for $18000 out the door new??? Any suggestions? I do not like the 08 Pilot and it also is still too expensive. |
|
|
Replying to: imariquinn (Aug 15, 2008 6:17 pm) The Chryslers also will give you a lot of value for the money. |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: imariquinn (Aug 15, 2008 6:17 pm) That is a GREAT price (to me, anyway). If you'd go with a year-old Dodge or Chrysler you could get a lot more van for the money, I'm sure, since someone else would have taken the resale hit for you. Another question: how much would it be to purchase your Odyssey?
|
|
|
Replying to: kmauss (Aug 15, 2008 2:46 pm) The other thing I drove that I never laid eyes on before is the brand new Dodge Journey. I was also quite favorably impressed with that vehicle, but that would be a 'replace current car with' and that is waaaayyyy off on the horizon, so I didn't look very seriously at it, at least not yet.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: kmauss (Aug 16, 2008 1:01 pm)   
|
|
You are here:
Forums
Vans & Minivans Minivans - Domestic or Foreign
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
2011 Toyota Sienna
2007 Dodge Caravan
2005 Chevrolet Venture
2006 Mazda MPV
2009 Kia Sedona
2010 Honda Odyssey
2008 Chevrolet Uplander
2009 Nissan Quest
2008 Hyundai Entourage
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
