Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
regfootball

new Chrysler van interiors

133 posts in this topic

over lunch i popped into the chrysler dealer.

peeked in and out at a new minivan just off the truck

TERRIBLE!

thing looks like humpty dumpty on the outside, but worse....

horrible interior! in just about every way.

build quality sucks

plastics quality sucks

color scheme sucks

control layout sucks

design sucks

ugh!

chrysler really shot themselves in the foot. they killed their iconic model and took no care to replace it with an effort that would cement their standing as top dog.

meh.

Edited by regfootball
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Chrysler is really in a downward spiral, but I think the vans will do okay. They're innovative and have to be nicer than the current ones. However, with Chrysler recently announcing that it will take 10 years to turn their product around, one has to wonder if we'll ever seen good interiors out of a Chrysler brand until then.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interior platstics I can see the gripe about, same with color (although I like the tan ones). Build quality I dunno...but control layout?> I don't buy it. Controls are logically places and easy to reach. If there's one thing Chrysler interiors are good at besides versatility it's ergonomics.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've driven many Chrysler minivans over the years, and the 1996 and up are actually very nice to drive, much better than the other domestics, which is why GM and Ford probably got out of the market. They truly did NOT compete IMO, those who have driven both know what I mean....

As far as materials go, I haven't seen the new interiors- the 2008 minivans, but I'm not really sure what you are looking for..? Connelly leather and burled walnut? It's a MINIVAN! Kids, pets, cargo, you name it.

I think they are pretty nice for the application.

Sure are alot of "wow terrible" threads in here that could be used in ANY new car scenario. Lots of plastic inside and out on all sorts of vehicles nowadays.

I'll have to look at a new minivan to see if I think this thread is ANOTHER sour grapes thread, or if it has any merit....

*shrugs*

What's so cheap looking?

Is this the interior you were looking at?

Posted Image

Edited by CMG
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've driven many Chrysler minivans over the years, and the 1996 and up are actually very nice to drive, much better than the other domestics, which is why GM and Ford probably got out of the market. They truly did NOT compete IMO, those who have driven both know what I mean....

As far as materials go, I haven't seen the new interiors- the 2008 minivans, but I'm not really sure what you are looking for..? Connelly leather and burled walnut? It's a MINIVAN! Kids, pets, cargo, you name it.

I think they are pretty nice for the application.

Sure are alot of "wow terrible" threads in here that could be used in ANY new car scenario. Lots of plastic inside and out on all sorts of vehicles nowadays.

I'll have to look at a new minivan to see if I think this thread is ANOTHER sour grapes thread, or if it has any merit....

*shrugs*

What's so cheap looking?

Is this the interior you were looking at?

Posted Image

:blink: Sure, one would expect a $45k Town & Country wagon to have a nice interior, but what about the 'bread and butter' vans? You know, the $19k van interior?

I don't think Chrysler's vans are all that bad, but Chrysler has surely gone downhill in the past few years. I remember a few years ago when a customer showed me their new 2000 Sebring convertible with the cream leather interior: my jaw dropped - it was gorgeous. Back in those days, Chrysler was leading the pack with some of the 'horniest' looking interiors out there, but in the past few years they have very obviously been cutting corners - at the very worst possible time, IMO.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:blink: Sure, one would expect a $45k Town & Country wagon to have a nice interior, but what about the 'bread and butter' vans? You know, the $19k van interior?

I don't think Chrysler's vans are all that bad, but Chrysler has surely gone downhill in the past few years. I remember a few years ago when a customer showed me their new 2000 Sebring convertible with the cream leather interior: my jaw dropped - it was gorgeous. Back in those days, Chrysler was leading the pack with some of the 'horniest' looking interiors out there, but in the past few years they have very obviously been cutting corners - at the very worst possible time, IMO.

You liked the 2000 Sebring interior? I can't stand it...it is so god-awful cheap and ugly in design it's not even funny. The new one may not be class leading but it's light years ahead of the car it replaces in the interior department.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While I haven't had time to sit in one, I have looked at a Town and Country. They look better on the outside in person than in pictures. There were still some aspects of the design I found laughable, but considering there's only one other minivan I find attractive (Quest), it should bare well. The interior, I could only view looking through the windows, so I can't say much about it, other than the center stack is horrible. It took Cadillac's design and magnified it 5 times. Ugh. :P

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted Image

That is a very odd location for the shifter. It seems like you have be careful when turning. Why not use button if you are going to put it there?

I guess it just takes some getting use to it.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The thing about always being the 'also-ran' company is that Chrysler has traditionally not been afraid to take risks. They have pushed a lot of weird and innovative ideas over the years: push button trannies, oval steering wheels, the plexiglass 'dome' that housed the instruments in the early '60s - a lot of great stuff. There are lots of people out there who will buy something because it is 'different' or unusual.

If Detroit is going to stand out in a sea of boring beige Toyotas, they are going to have to start with a clean sheet. I agree with the remarks about the Quest. It was actually a beautiful design - for a minivan. Just because people who drive minivans have families and are on a budget, does not necessarily mean they don't want to at least pretend to be cool.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The thing about always being the 'also-ran' company is that Chrysler has traditionally not been afraid to take risks. They have pushed a lot of weird and innovative ideas over the years: push button trannies, oval steering wheels, the plexiglass 'dome' that housed the instruments in the early '60s - a lot of great stuff. There are lots of people out there who will buy something because it is 'different' or unusual.

If Detroit is going to stand out in a sea of boring beige Toyotas, they are going to have to start with a clean sheet. I agree with the remarks about the Quest. It was actually a beautiful design - for a minivan. Just because people who drive minivans have families and are on a budget, does not necessarily mean they don't want to at least pretend to be cool.

Yeah, Chrysler is an "also ran" in the minivan segment. :rolleyes::rolleyes:

After all, the Dodge Caravan remains the No. 1 bestselling minivan, as it has for 23 years.

http://www.mercurynews.com/education/ci_6767603

And yeah....the Quest is a beauty queen :puke:

Posted Image

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm gonna check out the new vans today, too... in addition to the Accord and leatherette CTS. Half the time I drive an '02 Odyssey, so I'll let you guys know how it is as a minivan.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the Quest is rather homely, mind you, I think the 2000 Chrysler minivans were better looking than the 2007 OR 2008 minivans. I think they took a step back in styling.

The shifter is in a weird position, but it reminds me of the A100 vans and pickups. Minivans are usually put into drive and left in drive. If it was a sports car I would be shaking my head, but it's not a sports car.

Chrysler as an "also ran" in the minivan segment must make even the diehard GM fans here laugh? Pretty funny stuff....

I think the interiors look pretty nice for a minivan. Almost TOO nice in the case of the Town and Country stuff, it's more suited to moving adults than kids and pets. The interior looks pretty innovative to me, with the seats that can all face a central table while traveling.

In order to judge it I think those should look at it as if it was THEIR BRAND OF PREFERENCE, and then truly evaluate the vehicle. The "SOUR GRAPES" routine in alot of threads is getting kinda old?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it looks red-xy

LOL!

Sorta....

OK!!!!!!!!! I changed it to a link!!!!!!!!!!!

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

lol

Dude...stop comparing everything to a GM car.

I have no issues with these vans from seeing pictures as well as seeing them on the lots. However, it is a fact that Chrysler/Dodge occupies the lower-end of the minivan market. That's the 'bad' news. The good news is that they absolutely own the cheap van world to the point where their domination of a stangnant segment effectively forced GM and Ford out of it.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Screw the quality issues... my problem with Chrysler Minivans is that for every

minivan they have sold over the years they sell three or four remanufactured

transmissions to bolt up to where a blown up trans used to be.

I swear Mopar sucks at transmmissions worse than anyone domestic. It just

boggles my mind how someone cen replace three or four transmissions in their

FWD Chrysler product only to buy ANOTHER one! WTF?

I've owned a ton of GM cars, FWD & RWD, that have had 100K + and still had

their original trans.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm gonna check out the new vans today, too... in addition to the Accord and leatherette CTS. Half the time I drive an '02 Odyssey, so I'll let you guys know how it is as a minivan.

I'll be interested to get your take. Bring a barf bag, just in case.

to the others. the thing looks like a beached whale in person. It looks like a squatter and wider GMC safari, and the interior plastic and aura is not even on par with a Safari. This thing is the automotive equivalent of a nasty BBW. except its not a BBW, it's a BUW. BBW's are nice to look at. this is NOT.

Chrysler better hope the market for cargo vans is big right now, because I don't see trendy moms touching this f@#ker with a ten foot pole.

Rush out to get your 07 now while you can!!!!!!!!!!!!

The quest is an assload nicer inside than this thing. Sienna/Ody trounces this thing.

WHERE IS GM HERE!?!?!?!?!?!

ok, i will give this thing a second chance and try to find one with leather this weekend.

Edited by regfootball
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Screw the quality issues... my problem with Chrysler Minivans is that for every

minivan they have sold over the years they sell three or four remanufactured

transmissions to bolt up to where a blown up trans used to be.

I swear Mopar sucks at transmmissions worse than anyone domestic. It just

boggles my mind how someone cen replace three or four transmissions in their

FWD Chrysler product only to buy ANOTHER one! WTF?

I've owned a ton of GM cars, FWD & RWD, that have had 100K + and still had

their original trans.

My wife just sold her Caravan- 1997 3.3 auto. It had 220,000+K on it, never had any tranny issues of any kind, she towed a 19 foot boat with it quite a few times on very hilly highways for hours and hours.

The OLDER Chrysler minivans had tranny issues galore, but that was late 80s early 90s.

My Chevy Express gets a new tranny in a week or so when I can schedule it in, it has 38,000K on it, I'm not gonna abandon it because it needs a tranny.

LOL

Edited by CMG
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bring a barf bag, just in case.

We all bring "barf bags" into your threads.

:wink:

We need them. For your UNBIASED opinions.

:wink:

LOL

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Screw the quality issues... my problem with Chrysler Minivans is that for every

minivan they have sold over the years they sell three or four remanufactured

transmissions to bolt up to where a blown up trans used to be.

I swear Mopar sucks at transmmissions worse than anyone domestic. It just

boggles my mind how someone cen replace three or four transmissions in their

FWD Chrysler product only to buy ANOTHER one! WTF?

I've owned a ton of GM cars, FWD & RWD, that have had 100K + and still had

their original trans.

You have no proof or numbers to back any of that up. You just bring up the same old tired lies about Chrysler and other non-GM brands.

The proof I have is that out of about 15 Chrysler vehicles that my immediate or extended family have had.......exactly one vehicle had transmission problems. It was my sister's Dodge Stealth......which, you guessed it, is not really a Chrysler vehicle at all, except for the name. The Mitsubishi transmission went bad at about 120K miles. My dad even had a 1986 Dodge Daytona Turbo that he pulled a 16 foot boat with. That car was handed down to me, and I put a bunch of hard miles on it with a Mopar performance computer that raised the boost. No problems but a busted timing belt that was overdue to be changed at 65K miles.

Maybe people keep buying Chryslers because they don't actually go through 4 transmissions per vehicle? :scratchchin:

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You have no proof or numbers to back any of that up. You just bring up the same old tired lies about Chrysler and other non-GM brands.

Maybe people keep buying Chryslers because they don't actually go through 4 transmissions per vehicle? :scratchchin:

The only Dodge work van I had was a 5.9 auto and it had 400,000K before it was put out to pasture.

Never had any tranny problems whatsoever, but MORE surprising was the spark plugs were changed once.

In the lifetime of the vehicle when I had it. LOL

I like the MoPar powertrains for the most part, I have had a few Chevys but I probably prefer the MoPars if reliability was an issue.

I know that "can't be REAL" around here.... so.... I hate them.

hahaha

I'll see how my Express does a year down the road....

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0



  • Who's Online (See full list)

    There are no registered users currently online

  • Who's Chatting

    There are no users currently in the chat room