Generation Gap: The Original Mopar Minivans Edition

"Amoore100" (amoore100) 09/21/2016 at 21:58 • Filed to: Generation Gap, Mopar, Minivan, Dodge Grand Caravan, Chrysler Town & Country

0

38

Welcome to Generation Gap where we ask you about your favorite generation of a certain multi-generational car nameplate. Then, explain why your choice is right to the rest of us uneducated folks.

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

The Americans have long been credited with inventing the minivan in the ‘30s with the Stout Scarab and reinventing it again in the ‘80s with the Mopar vans. With the venerable Grand Caravan/Town & Country nameplate going by the wayside, which of the original Mopar minivans did you like the best?

The options:

First Generation [1984 - 1990] S

Dodge Grand Caravan

Plymouth Grand Voyager

Chrysler Town & Country

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

Second Generation [1991 - 1995] AS

Dodge Grand Caravan

Plymouth Grand Voyager

Chrysler Town & Country

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

Third Generation [1996 - 2000] NS and facelift (T&C)

Dodge Grand Caravan

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

Plymouth Voyager

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

Chrysler Town & Country

Chrysler Town & Country

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

Fourth Generation [2001 - 2007] RS and facelift (T&C)

Dodge Grand Caravan

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

Chrysler Town & Country

Chrysler Town & Country

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

Fifth Generation [2008 - 2016] RT and facelift

Dodge Grand Caravan

Dodge Grand Caravan

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

Chrysler Town & Country

Chrysler Town & Country

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

Urambo Tauro > Amoore100 09/21/2016 at 22:11

1

I totally forgot that 3rd-gens were ever available with only the one sliding door. All I remember is the big commotion surrounding the introduction of the second sliding door, which was such a big improvement over just having the one on the curb-side.

RallyDarkstrike - Fan of 2-cyl FIATs, Eastern Bloc & Kei cars > Amoore100 09/21/2016 at 22:12

6

SECOND GEN! We had a ‘93 Caravan SE when I was growing up and my parents divorced - mom got “the van” (as it was affectionately known as to us) and trying to raise twin brothers on a single parent salary meant that poor Dodge never got any but the most basic of maintenance. It never let us down ONCE, and the only time it did was with a dying fuel pump. Even then, the pump soldiered on until we were 100ft from the dealer and let us coast into the dealer parking lot.

First vehicle I ever drove. White with a burgundy interior and red pinstripes down either side - short wheelbase. We went on long trips in it, we went camping in it....lots of memories. Only thing that ever stopped working ‘quality-wise’ was the A/C, which we rarely used anyway to save gas.

This is the only picture I have of her:

Rest In Peace ‘The Van’ - wherever you are...

Nibby > Amoore100 09/21/2016 at 22:12

1

87'd

C62030 > Amoore100 09/21/2016 at 22:15

1

90% of my childhood was spent in a ‘94 Grand Voyager SE with broken speakers and four gloveboxes. Gotta be second-gen for me.

interstate366, now In The Industry > Amoore100 09/21/2016 at 22:18

1

Every now and then I see a 1st gen that says Ram Van instead of Caravan.

Invinciblejets > Amoore100 09/21/2016 at 22:22

1

1st gen. Everything.

Phyrxes once again has a wagon! > Amoore100 09/21/2016 at 22:24

1

My parents had a 93 Voyager when I was growing up, I still remember learning how to parallel park it.

Frenchlicker > Amoore100 09/21/2016 at 22:42

1

My mom had a second gen caravan when I was growing up. I would rock the hell out of that thing now. I do love the most recent generation though.

Frenchlicker > RallyDarkstrike - Fan of 2-cyl FIATs, Eastern Bloc & Kei cars 09/21/2016 at 22:42

1

Sadly it's safe to assume it ended up where a majority of them did

Spridget > Amoore100 09/21/2016 at 22:48

1

I have an unhealthy obsession with K-Cars, so the first gen takes it for me.

Birddog > Amoore100 09/21/2016 at 22:56

3

First Gen because Turbo and 5 speed.

fhrblig > Amoore100 09/21/2016 at 23:03

1

I had a fourth generation one (SWB Caravan), and I think I like the looks of that generation best. Only the Dodge version, though.

RallyWrench > Amoore100 09/21/2016 at 23:04

1

Hard to choose between 1st and 2nd gen, but before I got my license I often got a ride to high school in my friend’s mom’s loaded first gen T&C and thought it was cool. Burgundy with the fake wood, burgundy velour seats, I liked it so first gets the nod.

DipodomysDeserti > RallyDarkstrike - Fan of 2-cyl FIATs, Eastern Bloc & Kei cars 09/21/2016 at 23:10

1

My story is almost identical to yours. I get the chills thinking about the one my parents had as it reminds me of them getting divorced.

Land_Yacht_225 > Amoore100 09/21/2016 at 23:52

1

The day I fell in love with the minivan was the day in elementary school that my best friend’s mom showed up in their new-used 2000 Chrysler T&C Limited. It was a half day and we were all going to hang out at their house. That van was a palace on wheels. I remember the shock when the doors opened “by themselves.” It had leather, it had Infinity speakers, it had a VHS player, it was tinted out, black, and had those sweet chrome rims! It was basically a limo as far as any of us kids were concerned. I remember telling my mom I thought we should get one, only for her to get mad and explain to me exactly why she was too cool for a minivan and how her new pseudo-Suburban TrailBlazer EXT suited her just fine.

It’s a solid gen-three vote from me.

bhtooefr > Amoore100 09/22/2016 at 00:02

2

Not counting the new Pacifica?

In any case, I think I’ll go with the 1st-gen, simply because it was the generation that threw damn near everything at the wall to see if it stuck.

Two wheelbases? Check.

Four seating configurations (5, 6, 7, and 8 passenger)? Check. (Not all at the same time, and I think the 5-seat config was only available on SWB vans (and gave more legroom to the second row than the three row configs), but still.)

Camper version based on the 5-seat model? Check.

Woodgrain? Check.

Cargo van? Check.

Six engine options (not all at the same time)? Check. (2.2, 2.6, 2.5, 3.0, 2.5T, 3.3)

Two of them outsourced? Check. (2.6, 3.0)

One of them turbocharged , when that was still new technology to the consumer? Check. (2.5T)

Four transmission options (almost certainly not on the same engine)? Check. (4-speed manual, 5-speed manual, 3-speed auto (three different ones depending on engine), 4-speed auto)

Dr. Zoidberg - RIP Oppo > Amoore100 09/22/2016 at 00:05

1

This post belongs in ridiculous rebadges as well.

Amoore100 > RallyWrench 09/22/2016 at 01:16

1

American van a la ‘70s Cadillac. Sounds awesome!

Amoore100 > fhrblig 09/22/2016 at 01:17

0

Yeah, that generation T&C always looked a bit like it was sticking out its lower lip and pouting, although you can’t deny the slight Airflow design cues...

Amoore100 > Birddog 09/22/2016 at 01:18

0

With that color combo and those wheels? Yep.

Amoore100 > Spridget 09/22/2016 at 01:20

0

Hey, K-cars are great!

One for any and every time and occasion!

Amoore100 > Frenchlicker 09/22/2016 at 01:21

0

Most recent as in fifth gen, or the new Pacifica?

Amoore100 > Dr. Zoidberg - RIP Oppo 09/22/2016 at 01:26

1

Meh, tis not that ridiculous. Just American carmakers doing their thing. Besides, we already did the Lancia Voyager so I’d say it exempts these Mopar vans.

Amoore100 > bhtooefr 09/22/2016 at 01:34

0

Pacifica is on a new platform/nameplate, the list was getting kinda long, and I figured it might skew the results towards those choosing the newest and best (all lame excuses, I know...mainly just because I didn’t want to! ;)

Haha, I love the summary! The first-gen Caravans/T&Cs were parts bin specials indeed, cobbled together from the best that Chrysler could manage out of some old K-cars and Mitsubishis. Granted, they were probably correct in pursuing such a diverse market range since as this was the first widely marketed minivan it was hard to determine what would be the volume seller. Was it to become a sportier alternative to the wagon, thus the turbo+manual? Should it be a comfier cruiser with a big engine and ‘luxurious’ features? Should it be a bare-bones people hauler with just enough horsepower and a practical 5-speed? Turns out we wanted the luxurious option, just look at MPVs today. 3.5L V6s, effortless six-speeds, cushy leather, and panoramic roofs.

Amoore100 > Land_Yacht_225 09/22/2016 at 03:49

0

Haha, as a kid I had a similar experience when we first got our Odyssey EX-L brand new in 2005. Leather, electric sunroof, 6 CD player, folding seats, automatic doors, it had everything! Honestly, anyone who wants a CUV over a minivan is just fooling themselves badly. Minivans offer just about as good of a ‘sitting over the road’ position and handle much better with a lower center of gravity without all the pseudo-ground clearance and useless rear diffs robbing interior room.

Amoore100 > Phyrxes once again has a wagon! 09/22/2016 at 03:49

0

Hey, welcome to the ‘parallel parking a minivan’ club! I learned in our Odyssey. Really teaches you how to manage something so big and unwieldy, even as maneuverable as the Honda is for its size.

Amoore100 > Nibby 09/22/2016 at 03:51

0

oh no, not again

Amoore100 > interstate366, now In The Industry 09/22/2016 at 03:52

0

You mean the Dodge Caravan Ram C/V’s?

Amoore100 > Urambo Tauro 09/22/2016 at 03:54

1

Indeed, a van without two sliding doors seems surprisingly useless.

RT > Amoore100 09/22/2016 at 06:25

1

Gens 3-5 are out of the question, because by then you had plenty of other better minivans out there. Gens 1-2 were pretty cool though, very innovative for the US market. Going for 1st, since it started the whole minivan craze in America, so it had that going for it.

Frenchlicker > Amoore100 09/22/2016 at 07:05

1

I meant fifth, however we’ll go with both.

RallyDarkstrike - Fan of 2-cyl FIATs, Eastern Bloc & Kei cars > Frenchlicker 09/22/2016 at 07:49

0

Unfortunately....there was a time it was a bit muddy in our back yard and as mom was backing up to turn it around to leave to go to town, the van actually slid into the house. House was fine and the van was fine, except for a broken taillight lense. I kept a piece of the lense - still have it somewhere. It’s the only thing I have left from it. :)

CaptDale - is secretly British > Amoore100 09/22/2016 at 14:14

0

I’d rather hang myself

Amoore100 > RT 09/22/2016 at 21:42

1

Indeed, by 2006 (for example) here in the United States your minivan options were:

The Nissan Quest

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

The Kia Sedona

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

The Hyundai Entourage

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

The Mazda MPV

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

The Ford Freestar

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

The Mercury Monterey

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

The Chevrolet Uplander

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

The Buick Terraza

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

The Saturn Relay

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

The Pontiac Montana SV6

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

The Toyota Sienna

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

The Honda Odyssey

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

Of course, besides the last two they were pretty much all 100% rubbish which is probably why the Japanese vans lead the market today. Before 2000 though, Honda only had the way-too-small Shuttle/Odyssey and Toyota’s Sienna was considerably more compact than the GC also. Chevrolet’s Venture was even more rubbish than the Uplander (you guys got it as the awful Sintra) and Mazda’s MPV was this weird SUV-like monster. The Windstar was sleep-inducing as was the Quest, and so if you wanted an actually decent family hauler it truly was Mopar-or-no-car back at the turn of the millennium.

RT > Amoore100 09/23/2016 at 16:39

1

Question is though, why was the original Odyssey and Sienna too small? They could seat seven, allowing them to do their job just fine.

Even this can seat seven, making the Mopar look a tad excessive.

So, why do you want a bigger vehicle if it would be harder to park, worse to drive and potentially less fuel efficient?

The only reason I can think of is safety, since if you were to seat someone in the back of a compact minivan, their head would become the rear crumplezone. This would in theory make the Mopar the best bet…

http://www.theaa.com/allaboutcars/ncap/ncap_car_results.jsp?make=Chrysler&model=Voyager&year=1999&publicationDate=1999-06-01

…But it was the only car to score zero in a frontal impact test, oops.

Still, back then your best bet was probably something which was just as big, and featured even less crumplezone.

Mid-engined, supercharged, 4x4 goodness. Sign me up.

Amoore100 > RT 09/23/2016 at 18:53

0

Haha, that’s a truly European point of view!

First off, the original Ody had regular car doors and a NA I4 which made it hard to get 7 people into it and then hard to pull them along once they were inside. As for the Sienna, it was only slightly narrower and shorter than the GC but the interior packaging was far worse so both second and third row passengers were subjected to little elbow and leg room.

Anyways, here in American suburbia parking and gas mileage is a non-issue, but carpooling and cargo hauling is. Take a look at this picture of the back of our 2005 Honda Odyssey:

That’s with all 8 seats up, and, when the string quartet decides to practice after school, there’s enough room for all our backpacks in addition to two violins, a viola, and a cello. Not to mention that the thing is great for Home Depot and Ikea runs, simply pull the second row out, flatten the third row, and you’ve got a simply cavernous space:

(My dad once fit an entire apartment’s worth of things in here with the passenger seat removed.)

Anyways, safety was also one of the main reasons my parents got the Odyssey over the contemporary Sienna or GC. Honda had just introduced their new ACE body shell which crashed like this rather than like this .

Now, I love the Previa as much as anyone else here, but let’s just say it was never the safest thing out on the roads...

Long_Voyager, Now With More Caravanny Goodness > Frenchlicker 10/25/2018 at 12:26

0

In my driveway?

Long_Voyager, Now With More Caravanny Goodness > Amoore100 10/25/2018 at 12:31

1

Generations in order:

2nd

1st

4th

3rd

5th

Reasoning, 2nd gens had a slightly tighter chassis but retained the lightness of the 1st gen, while offering more powerful engines. Both the 1st and 2nd gen can be easily modded by swapping parts from other mopars of the era, so they can easily be turned into great driving vehicles.

The 3rd gen started getting fat and lost the parts swappability of the 1st/2nd gens, while gaining almost no power.

The 4th gen did not gain much weight over the 3rd gen, at least the non SNG models didn’t, so the updated suspension geometry and more powerful engines made them more enjoyable to drive.

The 5th gen is far too overweight to even be considered. It’s fat, it’s rolly, and it doesn’t try to hide it.