FIRST LOOK: DCX Minivans

[Flybrian]

**UPDATED**

First post now contains full press release and additional photography.

[Intrepidation]

I just realized something...DCX actually has a segment first for the number of transmission gears! Astounding...

It's also impressive that you can get the 6-speed on the mid-grade engine...DCX should do this with the Sebring and Avenger...hell they should stick one in the Caliber too.

That leather in the T&C looks very nice too.

Looking at the specs and features it really seems like they thought of every possibly thing! These will be hard for teh competitors to match that's for sure.

Edited January 6, 2007 by Dodgefan

[haypops]

2003 Volkswagen EuroVan MV

[Intrepidation]

2003 Volkswagen EuroVan MV

That's not technically a minivan though...is it? Anyway it's a cool feature but I think DCX handled it better.

[haypops]

That's not technically a minivan though...is it? Anyway it's a cool feature but I think DCX handled it better.

That is a fair question. Who knows. Let's not forget that the PT cruiser is a truck.

[Intrepidation]

That is a fair question. Who knows. Let's not forget that the PT cruiser is a truck.

And the Magnum

[NOS2006]

Um, do those things literally have a table in them? :rotflmao:

[VenSeattle]

Chrysler has been here before. All these vans are missing are integrated window curtains and you have a reinterpretation of the original full-size van.

My parents had a Dodge Ram conversion van back in the 1980s, which had mid-row captain chairs that swiveled, and a table that could be installed/removed at will. The table looks almost interchangeable with the one we had. You unlatched the top from the base and then removed the pole from the floor. Easy to store when not in use. Let's see if engineering has improved after 20+ years. (gaud... I feel old at only 30 )

I do have to say... overall, I like them. After seeing both interior & exterior shots, they're a dramatic improvement over the current generation and once again the best on the market.

edit: I didn't see DetroitNut90's post before posting... Kind of funny that we had a similar experience and association.

[Intrepidation]

Um, do those things literally have a table in them? :rotflmao:

Yeah...why is that funny?

[sciguy_0504]

The fronts of both look good. The Dodge is a lot softer than I expected it to be. The sides and back end look like they were ripped off from Kia/Hyundai. I know there is little room for different designs in the minivan world but come on, Nissan can do it.

The interiors look average at best. The design is definately below average though DCX is trying to make up for it by offering great features like the Swivel 'N Go (GREAT idea) and lighting (everyone should look at that picture, one of the links a fellow member posted).

Overall, I'm impressed with the features. Not so much with the design. I'd still take the Quest, Down Syndrome and all.

[MyerShift]

I do like the front end of the Dodge - but it looks like the Dodge will have cheaper headlights without the fancy HID projector lamps of the Chrysler TC. I guess that was part of their plan to make them more unique. I prefer the clean look of the Chrysler dash - the Dodge has too much black plastic for my taste. And I wonder why they left the void where the clock goes in the TC? It looks unfinished.

I, for one, am shocked that the Caravan is as handsome and subtle as it is. Thank the Lord!

Yes, it does look a bit unfinished with that gaping hole in the Caravan's dash, but the only thing I really don't care for is the placement of the gear selector lever.

[haypops]

Um, do those things literally have a table in them? :rotflmao:

Like the present/new DC vans it was part of a seating package. The weekender package had the captains turned around back wards and the table. The standard vehicle had a middle row bench seat.

[Intrepidation]

That is just awesome!

[96impalass]

That is one ugly somebitch, the model its replacing looks better IMHO. The lock/unlock button on the Dodge pic isnt fasened down properly, maybe the production models will be better. I guess Toyota and Honda can breath easier now. Im getting a GMC ACADIA anyway, GM is gonna kickass with their new cross overs, who needs a minivan when you have the ACADIA, OUTLOOK and ENCLAVE to choose from!

[Intrepidation]

That is one ugly somebitch, the model its replacing looks better IMHO. The lock/unlock button on the Dodge pic isnt fasened down properly, maybe the production models will be better. I guess Toyota and Honda can breath easier now. Im getting a GMC ACADIA anyway, GM is gonna kickass with their new cross overs, who needs a minivan when you have the ACADIA, OUTLOOK and ENCLAVE to choose from!

People who want maximum space efficiency that nothing else can match.

[Robert Hall]

I like how they moved the shifter onto the dash..very international.

[red]

What struck me is that the overall design displays much improved execution and cohesiveness relative to recent introductions from Mopar. However, the overall design is disappointingly bland.

The interior, especially the dash, suffers from similar gaffes of recent DCX introductions: tupperware quality, bad gaps, no style. This dash is so poorly thrown together, it's almost a step back in build quality.

The engine lineup continues to be a weakness, as Chrysler is in desperate need of a new V6 - and the 4L ain't cuttin it.

Overall, I give this a passing grade of a C.

[Intrepidation]

What struck me is that the overall design displays much improved execution and cohesiveness relative to recent introductions from Mopar. However, the overall design is disappointingly bland.

The interior, especially the dash, suffers from similar gaffes of recent DCX introductions: tupperware quality, bad gaps, no style. This dash is so poorly thrown together, it's almost a step back in build quality.

The engine lineup continues to be a weakness, as Chrysler is in desperate need of a new V6 - and the 4L ain't cuttin it.

Overall, I give this a passing grade of a C.

How do you know about the quality without seeing or touching it in person? Do yu have a magical power or have you been invited by DCX to fondle the dash before the public does? I think not. The gaps don't look bad from the pics I've seen and they are preproduction. As for interior and exterior styling...what do you expect? They're minivans! The last out-of-the-box minvivan we got was the droopy and ugly Quest...and we see how ell they sell. As for the V6...it may not be the most powerful but it's certainly not underpowered...plus it has an extra cog to make up for that. I won't argue that they need a new V6 though.

Edited January 6, 2007 by Dodgefan

[dufus22]

I do like the table thing, that why if you need to feed the kids on a long trip you can with out messing up the inside. If i had a big Family i would lokk into these things.

[boblutzfan]

That is just awesome!

Like a private jet. Very nice.

[boblutzfan]

That is one ugly somebitch, the model its replacing looks better IMHO. The lock/unlock button on the Dodge pic isnt fasened down properly, maybe the production models will be better. I guess Toyota and Honda can breath easier now. Im getting a GMC ACADIA anyway, GM is gonna kickass with their new cross overs, who needs a minivan when you have the ACADIA, OUTLOOK and ENCLAVE to choose from!

Who needs a minivan? Well lets see:

- Those that don't want an oversized door that the kids will open and bang into the car next to them in the parking lot - sliding doors are the answer here.

- Folks that want seats that really fold into the floor - not onto the floor like in every crossover on the market. The interior height of a minivan is unparalled.

- Those that want superior gas mileage for a people hauler - my mothers 2004 Chrysler Town & Country Limited gets 26 MPG with five people and their luggage crusing 70-75 MPH on the highway - try that in any crossover.

- For those that want lots of leg room in all three rows - a minivan is again unparalled.

I agree that the new Lambda CUVs are excellent and probably the best full size CUV on the market - but they are not better at being a minivan than a minivan is.

Chrysler is surely going to gain market share and keep their crown with these new vans. I doubt even with three brands (Acadia, Outlook and Enclave) that GM will sell nearly as many Lambda's as DCX will these two vans.

[haypops]

Those that want superior gas mileage for a people hauler - my mothers 2004 Chrysler Town & Country Limited gets 26 MPG with five people and their luggage crusing 70-75 MPH on the highway - try that in any crossover.

Could you explain why a crossover wouldn't have superior fuel mileage to the minivan? The crossover (not SUV) should have better aerodynamics than the minivan. Isn't that really how the minivan gains all those excellent characteristics that you detailed?

[Satty]

An '07 Pacifica weighs in ad 4500lbs, the '07 T&C weighs just under 4000lbs. I bet you'll find most other minivans weigh less than crossovers like the Highlander, Edge, Acadia, etc.

[Intrepidation]

Could you explain why a crossover wouldn't have superior fuel mileage to the minivan? The crossover (not SUV) should have better aerodynamics than the minivan. Isn't that really how the minivan gains all those excellent characteristics that you detailed?

The current minivans are jellybean shaped...that's pretty aerodynamic.

[haypops]

An '07 Pacifica weighs in ad 4500lbs, the '07 T&C weighs just under 4000lbs. I bet you'll find most other minivans weigh less than crossovers like the Highlander, Edge, Acadia, etc.

According to the honda web site, the minivan seems to weigh 200 pounds more than the pilot which makes sense with the sliding door mechanism and addional glass. Who knows.

[pow]

According to the honda web site, the minivan seems to weigh 200 pounds more than the pilot which makes sense with the sliding door mechanism and addional glass. Who knows.

The current Odyssey is a generation newer than the lame-duck Pilot. You'll find the 2003 Pilot heavier than the 2003 Odyssey.

[haypops]

The current Odyssey is a generation newer than the lame-duck Pilot. You'll find the 2003 Pilot heavier than the 2003 Odyssey.

good point.

[ToniCipriani]

Actually looking it again, it sort of reminds me of the Buick GL8 Firstland in China.

[regfootball]

An '07 Pacifica weighs in ad 4500lbs, the '07 T&C weighs just under 4000lbs. I bet you'll find most other minivans weigh less than crossovers like the Highlander, Edge, Acadia, etc.

quest (largest cargo area) comes in around 4200 pounds in S trim I think.

[regfootball]

Who needs a minivan? Well lets see:

- Those that don't want an oversized door that the kids will open and bang into the car next to them in the parking lot - sliding doors are the answer here.

- Folks that want seats that really fold into the floor - not onto the floor like in every crossover on the market. The interior height of a minivan is unparalled.

- Those that want superior gas mileage for a people hauler - my mothers 2004 Chrysler Town & Country Limited gets 26 MPG with five people and their luggage crusing 70-75 MPH on the highway - try that in any crossover.

- For those that want lots of leg room in all three rows - a minivan is again unparalled.

I agree that the new Lambda CUVs are excellent and probably the best full size CUV on the market - but they are not better at being a minivan than a minivan is.

Chrysler is surely going to gain market share and keep their crown with these new vans. I doubt even with three brands (Acadia, Outlook and Enclave) that GM will sell nearly as many Lambda's as DCX will these two vans.

you excel in reiterating the obvious. KUDOS. some don't get it though......

Edited January 7, 2007 by regfootball

[regfootball]

What struck me is that the overall design displays much improved execution and cohesiveness relative to recent introductions from Mopar. However, the overall design is disappointingly bland.

The interior, especially the dash, suffers from similar gaffes of recent DCX introductions: tupperware quality, bad gaps, no style. This dash is so poorly thrown together, it's almost a step back in build quality.

The engine lineup continues to be a weakness, as Chrysler is in desperate need of a new V6 - and the 4L ain't cuttin it.

Overall, I give this a passing grade of a C.

i drove the new 4.0 and 6 speed combo in the pacifica and it actually moved out quite nicely. drive one first and judge for yourself.

[pow]

i drove the new 4.0 and 6 speed combo in the pacifica and it actually moved out quite nicely. drive one first and judge for yourself.

The availability of the 3.3 (170 hp?!) and 3.8 is odd. Most minivans only have one V6, making 240-270 hp. Unless base level DCX vans become considerably cheaper, I don't see the point.

[sciguy_0504]

The availability of the 3.3 (170 hp?!) and 3.8 is odd. Most minivans only have one V6, making 240-270 hp. Unless base level DCX vans become considerably cheaper, I don't see the point.

Perhaps it's because DCX must keep the factories humming? I would think the two extra and unneccesary engines would add more expense then they'd make up for.

[enzl]

Perhaps it's because DCX must keep the factories humming? I would think the two extra and unneccesary engines would add more expense then they'd make up for.

Most will end up in Fleet units and price leaders....DCX has o expect at least 20% of production will go fleet.

[boblutzfan]

The availability of the 3.3 (170 hp?!) and 3.8 is odd. Most minivans only have one V6, making 240-270 hp. Unless base level DCX vans become considerably cheaper, I don't see the point.

It gives them a lower entry point - without suffering from the stigma of a four cylinder engine. Note that the smaller V6 would be mated to the four speed automatic - thus lowering the powertrain cost. I predict that the 3.8L with the six speed auto will become the volume model. Most consumers will benefit from the six speed automatic and what has already been proven to be a bullet proof 3.8L V6 engine.

For those that prefer more power - the 4.0L V6 will provide more HP and torque. This new powertrain has gotten positive reviews in the Pacifica. I predict the same for the T&C and GC.

Remember - these are minivans - not sports sedans. Chrysler has maintained the sales lead with very low tech powertrains in the face of much higher tech powertrains from Honda and Toyota. Adding a six speed auto to the 3.8L only enhances its performance and fuel economy and will be more than most consumers will ever need.

[WIBoomer1]

First Time Poster, Long Time Reader, Love the Topic, Love the show...

Hey! Is it just me, or does the interior look scarily like the old 1980's Omni and Sundance/Shadow? I mean, the big huge plastic pieces give me nightmares...and maybe I'm in the minority here, but I hate the slot machine shifter...The old reliable column shifter works just fine in my 2004 SXT Caravan. I like the sliding glass, but this is the wrong way to go Dodge...more towards the future, and stay away from the past. I do agree with other posters that this will sell, but only because it's going to be the only discounted choice they'll have...everything else will remain at premium pricing.

[Intrepidation]

Actually looking it again, it sort of reminds me of the Buick GL8 Firstland in China.

Looks like an Uplander with a previous gen Lexus LS front end to me.

First Time Poster, Long Time Reader, Love the Topic, Love the show...

Hey! Is it just me, or does the interior look scarily like the old 1980's Omni and Sundance/Shadow? I mean, the big huge plastic pieces give me nightmares...and maybe I'm in the minority here, but I hate the slot machine shifter...The old reliable column shifter works just fine in my 2004 SXT Caravan. I like the sliding glass, but this is the wrong way to go Dodge...more towards the future, and stay away from the past. I do agree with other posters that this will sell, but only because it's going to be the only discounted choice they'll have...everything else will remain at premium pricing.

I have a Shadow...and no it doesn't look like that interior, and I've been in an Omni...and again, No. As for the shifter, eh I don't care as long as it's within easy reach...minivans are all about convenience. These will sell because of all the class exclusive features, not because they'll be discounted. This is certainly the right way to go for DCX, they're in line with the current style without being ugly like the Sebring, and they give the customer choices and features no other competitor can match.

The more I look at them, the more I like them. Good Job Chrysler Group.

[caddycruiser]

Not sure if this was already brought up (sorry if it was--I didn't read through all the posts), but WHY are they claiming they have the first minivan exclusive power-fold 3rd row? That is a newer minivan feature, compared to some SUV's, but Toyota was the first to have it in their top model Sienna well over a year ago. Did they just forget about that, or thought they'd try and slip a quick one?

Otherwise, I still like these vans, as I've always liked Chrysler vans. I actually think the current gen models look much more svelte and luxurious inside and out (especially a current T&C Limited, which is really richer looking in a lot of small ways than the new model), but with a new gen, you do have to change something. They're still attractive, and well done, and passed the "dad test" (i.e., I just sent him the pics and got a good response, which is usually a good sign for someone who's so critical of every new design he sees). He even thought the table and spinning seats was a nice idea "for things like traveling when you stop and pick up food quick or something", after I mentioned I thought it was a bit of a weird feature. Still do, but some people definitely will like it.

I guess the main things that bug me about this new one are some drab details and proportions on the outside that just don't look as good as the current ones, and the less well done interior from the obvious current DCX hard & shiny store. BUT, they've always had a strong following, and after the LX cars, even things like the less than spectacular Caliber and new Sebring are going like gangbusters in some places (like here, which actually still suprised me recently), so these vans should have no trouble at all. Once Stow n' Go came out, their sales really shot up and people love them. On that note, it's too bad they couldn't come up with better shaped rear seats and retained the feature, but oh well--for the typical kid rear rider, they don't notice much anyway.

[JWilly48519]

My observation of the first seven pages of this thread is that people who seem to be personally favorably inclined toward minivans in general, and thus might be a potential customer, generally like the DCX products. People who don't like minivans, and therefore almost certainly wouldn't be a potential customer, naturally don't like these specific products.

It should be obvious that DCX isn't trying to appeal to folks who don't like minivans anyway.

If they can hold their share or gain ground among minivan buyers, and the segment maintains its size, they'll have been pretty successful.

If the segments grows (contrary to Mr. Lutz's public expectations), it'll be interesting to see the correlation-studies as to whether the new buyers were attracted by the DCX products. I wouldn't be at all surprised.

Of course, I'm pro-minivan.

[GM4ever]

I'm not a minivan person but it looks like a winner except the stupid shifter location.

[Regalguy01]

Not that I am a huge minivan fan...but I really can see why people buy these things!

I just don't understand why Gm is giving up on this segment. They now have finally a great platform for this type of vehicle (lambdas) 6 speed trans 3.6 HF.....I just don't get it.

It seems like they have everything there that they would need for a good if not great minivan, and they just give up!

If I understand their corporate speak(and who among us can) GM acknowledges that it has to cut away the duds in order to be its most efficient and restore profitability. To the duds end, minivans have never been a GM standout and finally, afters decades of attempts, GM realizes that. GM shines in the pickup truck and mid to full size SUV department, but with fuel prices so volaitile that simply is not a growing market right now. Similarly, the minivan market hasn't been hot for years. The crossover-utility market(CUV, as they have been dubbed), is with out a doubt the hottest and fastest growing market. GM would like to own a very significant, if not dominant, share of that segment hence the reason that it has spent so much money and effort on the LAMBDA's as well the reason they will introduce a Chevy Lambda next year.

That being said, I think its a smart move for GM to leave this market. DCX was the long-time stonghold and Honda and Toyota seemed to have caught or passed them in this shrinking market. GM, in its current state, needs to utilize every dollar possible to ensure the success of more profitable ventures. The minivan market, if still around in 8 to 10 years, will suffer little from GM's lack of presence. GM on the other hand may come out all the better.

[BrewSwillis]

Not sure if this was already brought up (sorry if it was--I didn't read through all the posts), but WHY are they claiming they have the first minivan exclusive power-fold 3rd row? That is a newer minivan feature, compared to some SUV's, but Toyota was the first to have it in their top model Sienna well over a year ago. Did they just forget about that, or thought they'd try and slip a quick one?

Chrysler's 3rd row is a "one touch" power folding 3rd row. They said that other minivans had a power 3rd row before, but it required you to hold the button the whole time. They are the first with a "one touch" power folding 3rd row.

[AM6_Cutlass]

back to boxy, I see. Looks like two steps back, though they are using different tail light designs for each division for the first time.

Nobody caught my brain fart... 1991-1995 Caravan had a different tail light than the Voyager/T&C. The interior is HORRIBLE, F--. I could have designed a better interior when I was five.

[MyerShift]

The interiors vaguely remind me of that from the Mitsubishi Galant:

[Intrepidation]

Nobody caught my brain fart... 1991-1995 Caravan had a different tail light than the Voyager/T&C. The interior is HORRIBLE, F--. I could have designed a better interior when I was five.

So let's see a sketch of a superior minivan interior. Don't forget to include how Stow `n Go and Swivel `n Go work.

Put up or shut up.

Edited January 9, 2007 by Dodgefan

[boblutzfan]

Nobody caught my brain fart... 1991-1995 Caravan had a different tail light than the Voyager/T&C. The interior is HORRIBLE, F--. I could have designed a better interior when I was five.

With comments like that... One could only wonder what is in your brain that is giving you farts...

Please - even if you don't like the interior - saying you could have done better when you were five (last year?) is ridiculous.

[sciguy_0504]

Nobody caught my brain fart... 1991-1995 Caravan had a different tail light than the Voyager/T&C. The interior is HORRIBLE, F--. I could have designed a better interior when I was five.

I thought it was a funny comment.

[gm4life]

Attractive, although its not stomping out any new grounds. I think it actually reminds me more of the early 90's vans than the originals.

They look darn nice, better than the Toyota Sienna still like the Odessey more. (Sorry I HATE THE UPLANDER, Terrza is okay!)

But uh the shifter has to be the most ignorant thing I have ever seen, look at wrong spot it should just be a colum shift of a decent rally shift like Vibe, or Torrent has!

[loki]

the shifter is kinda in an interesting spot, possibly shift w/o taking you're hand off the wheel... unlike the lambdas.

[Robert Hall]

the shifter is kinda in an interesting spot, possibly shift w/o taking you're hand off the wheel... unlike the lambdas.

I like the shifter spot..that's the typical spot for the shifter in European and some Japanese minivans..