Last post on Feb 27, 2008 at 7:47 AM
You are in the Vans & Minivans
What is this discussion about?
Toyota Sienna, Honda Odyssey, Chrysler Town and Country, Dodge Caravan, Hyundai Entourage, Mazda MAZDA5, Kia Sedona, Car Comparisons, Car Buying, Van
#685 of 1261 Re: flagrantly biased written portion...[bobw3]
Nov 17, 2007 (8:20 pm)
October 2007 CR has excellent example of CR bias.
The October 2007 CR Cover has headlines "MAKE YOUR CAR LAST 200,000 MILES" and has a photo of a Honda Civic on the cover (suggesting that Honda's are the cars that last).
On page 20, the 1994 Ford Ranger pickup is the vehicle that has 488,000 miles while the beloved 1995 Honda Civic on page 21 has only 227,000 miles (NOT even HALF the miles of the 1994 Ford Ranger).
On page 19 with NEW for 2008 there is a photo of the Honda Accord that is 4 times as large as the new Chrysler minivan (giving emphasis to their beloved Honda once more).
CR did not even get the Horsepower ratings of the 3 Chrysler engines correct where they state the 3 V6 engines offer 170 to 240 Horsepower when the correct numbers are 175 to 251. ( Is CR afraid to print the Chrysler 4.0L has MORE power than the 244 HP of the 08 Ody LX and EX or the 241 HP of the 08 Ody EX-L and Touring?)
The Chrysler 4.0L torque of 259 lb-ft 4,200 RPM is an even greater advantage over the 240 lb-ft 5,000 RPM of 08 Ody LX and EX or 242 lb-ft 4900 RPM of the 08 Ody EX-L and Touring while the Chrysler minivans have a 6 speed AT vs 5 speed Ody AT.
CR also writes that the new vans get rear coil springs instead of the trucklike leaf springs implying that the earlier Chrysler minivans are inferior to their beloved Odyssey and then go on to write that the new springs should improve ride comfort although an independent rear suspension would have been better.
The Grand Caravan and Town & Country have always been quieter with a smoother ride than the same year Odyssey. The Odyssey by contrast has superior handling for aggressive driving.
#687 of 1261 Re: 07 sienna 0-60 [hause7]
Nov 17, 2007 (11:16 pm)
The gauges look no different from yours, hause. I thought they changed with the 3.5L.
#688 of 1261 Re: 07 sienna 0-60 [thegraduate]
Nov 18, 2007 (12:05 am)
because he had a CE, you don't get the newer gauges unless you get the 07 or 08 LE,XLE, or Limited. i thought the same thing. But the redline is at 6,000RPM i think it was suppose to be 6,400. i don't know if thats an 07 for sure though.
#689 of 1261 Re: 07 sienna 0-60 [hause7]
Nov 18, 2007 (8:00 am)
For the 3.5L...
Size, liters/cu. in. 3.5 /211
Horsepower rpm. 266 6200
Torque (lb-ft) rpm. 245 4700
If the video has a redline at 6,000, he's a fraud.
#690 of 1261 Re: flagrantly biased written portion...[bobw3] [hansienna]
Nov 18, 2007 (8:53 am)
It seems to me that the only opinion biased here is yours, against CR.
Opinions are like rectums: everyone has one.
#691 of 1261 Re: 07 sienna 0-60 [hause7]
Nov 18, 2007 (9:08 am)
The "NEW" optitron gauges are standard equipment on the 2006 Sienna LE as well as the 2006 XLE and Limited. Ironically, the old type gauges of the CE are easier on the eyes since they do not reflect glare from sunlight.
Sad the video shows the fuel and temperature gauges in addition to the speedometer and NOT the tachometer.
#692 of 1261 Re: comparison reviews [bobw3]
Nov 18, 2007 (9:36 am)
PS..it's funny how some folks who consider themselves "experts" in the automotive field bash CR without even knowing their testing methods until I provided the into.
Ohhh so one needs to know CR's test methods before they can realize how bias CR is!! Makes complete sense.
#693 of 1261 Re: flagrantly biased written portion...[bobw3] [hansienna]
Nov 18, 2007 (9:45 am)
Thank you Hans!!!! There are SOOOO many countless examples of biase...every issue!!!! Subliminal images used!!!! Just recently they awarded the Tundra best tow capacity for a pickup truck....blatantly neglecting GM's top engine. One could go on for days on this!!!! CR's only value is for comparison of specs, test data etc....non subjective information.
What I don't understand though, if Chrysler's minivans are sooooo terrible, you'd think after 25 years of building crap, no one would be buying them at all and Chrysler would be belly up by now!!????? Yet I have friends who have had nothing but Chrysler minivans since 1994 - 5 time repeat buyers? I've abused them as company vehicles, and they took it all, so I bought my own personal one when my company switched to Ford Tauruses 3 years back.
#694 of 1261 Re: Ok.... [artgpo]
Nov 18, 2007 (10:14 am)
If Chrysler were such bad minivans as some would suggest, people wouldn't buy them and as you can see by my web sight, not only do I own one, but so does my brother and sister. Mine is the white one. We bought them because of the luck my brother has had with his older Plymouth.(Parked in the street.) His is a 2001, mine a 2005 and my sister's is a 2006.
She comes out every year (Arizona) with her family and our younger brother from Ohio. It's a 2,000 trip and none have them complained of the middle seats being uncomfortable.
Stow-N-Go is a great feature. As you can also see in my photos. I can get just about everything I want in my van and don't need to take out the seats. I will have mine three years next month. It has auto everything on it and I haven't had a thing go wrong with it. Brother has only replaced the brakes and a soft plug on his older Plymouth.
Notice I am able to get not only an electric wheel chair in it, but also an electric scooter and my brother too. Try doing that with another minivan as easily as that.
These vans can carry almost anything and do it well. And they are dependable. If not, we wouldn't have all bought them.
Click on the picture to make them bigger so you can get a good view of what they can do. I usually always keep the passenger's middle seat stowed as it make it very easy to carry things through the side door.