2017 Chrysler Pacifica to Start $29,590*

Sounds very competative. I would love to better understand why they dumped their original names and went to use this crossover name plate?

Honda, Toyota and Hyundia have not done this.

I really hope the Hybrid is as good as it should be and ends up being the darling in sales.

Sounds very competative. I would love to better understand why they dumped their original names and went to use this crossover name plate?

 

Honda, Toyota and Hyundia have not done this.

 

I really hope the Hybrid is as good as it should be and ends up being the darling in sales.

I think you mean Kia and not Hyundai. 

Hyundai dropped their minivan (Entourage) in the late 2000s.

 

Sounds very competative. I would love to better understand why they dumped their original names and went to use this crossover name plate?

 

Honda, Toyota and Hyundia have not done this.

 

I really hope the Hybrid is as good as it should be and ends up being the darling in sales.

 

I think you mean Kia and not Hyundai. 

Hyundai dropped their minivan (Entourage) in the late 2000s.

 

Yes, thank you for the clarity there, it is Kia who still has a minivan.

Still wonder why the name change, would love to see if this was focus group driven or some other marketing or just Sergio wanting to screw everything up before he goes.

Seems pricy at first, but most 3 row crossovers cost more than this.  

Because Town and Country seemed too old sounding.

The trim level pricing and content is almost exact to when we got our 15 T&C.  Our equates to the Touring L plus, but the blind spot etc was an option, i see they make it standard in the Touring L.  Our MSRP was 38,8 or something.  So about the same.  Point is I don't think they jacked up the sticker.

The Caravan had lower priced trim levels, but those didn't have things like tinted rear glass, or a console in the front, or even a height adjustable drivers seat.

I like that the LX has a power seat standard, that to me means it will be a base level vehicle that at least has that feature in a class where the vehicle may see drivers trading seats a lot.  Value buyers don't always like the power doors.  I think the Touring will be probably sell the most because of the power doors.

I'm actually kind of excited to check this out when it hits the showroom.  With GM they introduce a car and it comes out 15 months later.  This got introduced at Christmas and it should be out soon.

I'm actually kind of excited to check this out when it hits the showroom.  With GM they introduce a car and it comes out 15 months later.  This got introduced at Christmas and it should be out soon.

The Acadia was shown at the same show as the Pacifica, at Detroit in January,  and will hit dealers by May.  How much longer till the Giulia comes out?

The truth is, they're all all-over the map on release timelines.  The only company I can think of who is good at consistently releasing at a show to showing up at dealers 4 months later is Honda.

Seems pricy at first, but most 3 row crossovers cost more than this.  

That was what I thought as well. Once you break it down, starting right at 30k for the room and cargo space you get is great. An Explorer starts at 31k Traverse also 31k, Durango starts at 30.5k. Yes those are all larger and more powerful but as far as spacious and roomy go, there's still probably more in the Pacifica. 

 

Seems pricy at first, but most 3 row crossovers cost more than this.  

That was what I thought as well. Once you break it down, starting right at 30k for the room and cargo space you get is great. An Explorer starts at 31k Traverse also 31k, Durango starts at 30.5k. Yes those are all larger and more powerful but as far as spacious and roomy go, there's still probably more in the Pacifica. 

 

The V6 in the Pacifica would be the same one in the Durango, and pretty much equal in output to the Ford and GM naturally aspirated V6es.  Yes the Dodge and Ford have optional engines that are more powerful, but they're such a small percentage of sales that the optional engines don't really matter that much in the grand scheme of things. 

The primary difference is in the fashion the second row doors open and the greater spaciousness of the van. 

I love the paint job on the hybrid.

I really like this. And the platform does have the ability to have AWD added to it. My guess? Expect a Chrysler CUV based on this too. 

 

I'm actually kind of excited to check this out when it hits the showroom.  With GM they introduce a car and it comes out 15 months later.  This got introduced at Christmas and it should be out soon.

 

The Acadia was shown at the same show as the Pacifica, at Detroit in January,  and will hit dealers by May.  How much longer till the Giulia comes out?

 

The truth is, they're all all-over the map on release timelines.  The only company I can think of who is good at consistently releasing at a show to showing up at dealers 4 months later is Honda.

 

16 Cruze (it's really just vaporware at this point), the 14 Impala, tons of GM product takes forever to hit the showroom

Hawt model let me into her van at the auto show this weekend, Chrysler had at least a half a dozen of these things on display, but just the one was open on the platform.  They let a few into it in the AM and then not after that.

Inside and out, looks in person as well as it does in pictures.  I didn't have anything i took issue with on it at all.  100 percent execution.  Looks great, the interior feels so much more airy, and the current brick of a van which i drive looks like 15 years old already, when parked close by.  It's that refreshing.

I think with the pricing staying put, the good mpg, the name change, and winner styling inside and out, should pump some life into the van segment and charge it up a bit for a few years to come.  Change nothing that was good, and improve everything else.

Model said the chassis was engineered for AWD but presently won't get it .....maybe in a couple years.....they will have to redesign the stow n go for AWD application is what was said.

The v6 here is newly revised, enough to be a new engine.  The output is more or less the same as before.

The v6 here is newly revised, enough to be a new engine.  The output is more or less the same as before.

I'm curious about that part.  I haven't seen any info on what the revisions are. 

Edit:  Found 'em - "For 2016, FCA released an updated version of the 3.6 L engine for the Jeep Grand Cherokee. This engine now featured two-stage variable valve lift (VVL), a cooled EGR, a new intake manifold, new fuel injectors, and new coil packs. It also features upgrades to the variable valve timing (VVT) system, an increased compression ratio (11.3:1), lower internal friction and lower weight. These improvements help to increase power as well as efficiency."

 

The v6 here is newly revised, enough to be a new engine.  The output is more or less the same as before.

 

I'm curious about that part.  I haven't seen any info on what the revisions are. 

 

Edit:  Found 'em - "For 2016, FCA released an updated version of the 3.6 L engine for the Jeep Grand Cherokee. This engine now featured two-stage variable valve lift (VVL), a cooled EGR, a new intake manifold, new fuel injectors, and new coil packs. It also features upgrades to the variable valve timing (VVT) system, an increased compression ratio (11.3:1), lower internal friction and lower weight. These improvements help to increase power as well as efficiency."

 

Very cool to see these engineering improvements, but how does that relate to MPG? As everyone seems to be stating same HP / Torque or is that also wrong?

Just wondering what the end point is for the updated motor, 

MPG = 

HP = 

Torque = 

The HP is an improvement over the outgoing van, now 295 verse 283.  Torque remains the same at 260 lb-ft.  The pentastar has been available in 295hp and 305hp tunes before, but not with these changes integrated.

It sounds like these were mostly efficiency related improvements that also happen to improve power a bit.

The best minivan out there, shows Chrysler's experience in this genre runs deeper than anyone.  I would get a Touring model.  So you're saying second and third rows fold flat into the floor?  The hybrid is of course a money loser, forced on Chrysler as a compliance appliance.

yup both rear rows fold flat.  you could get a couch or a twin bed in there.

EPA ratings are 18/28/22 combined. This is for FWD.  A FWD 2016 v6 Equinox is rated at 17/25/20.

Whether the engine is really 'new' would be interesting to find out.  As in, does it have the same block, etc.

But the hybrid has the exclusive paint tho.

And it looks like a bullet train, and for a people mover, I think that's an excellent styling idea.

Pacifica sort of looks a little like something Renault or Peuguot might sell in Europe too.

I spent a lot of time in the new Pacifica at the local auto show this weekend.  Breath of fresh air.  Nice interior, simple controls, great design.

Car and Driver has a first drive review.

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2017-chrysler-pacifica-first-drive-review

so does Motor Trend.

not much meat in the articles but it sells ads.

http://www.motortrend.com/news/2017-chrysler-pacifica-first-drive-review/

It is starting to grow on me....