"The Chrysler that invented the segment in 1984 would have done that,
but the Chrysler of 2001 wasn't really the same company"
See now that's what I don't understand. How bad is the
beaurocracy/management in these companies (Ford, GM, Chrysler) that they
can't even fire people after a bad product (design, marketing ... whatever the
 issue). You say minivan was invented by Chrysler
and we know that Ford invented the car (production) in the first place.
How come all these companies are going at losses and closing plants
while newer companies like Honda and Toyota are making a killing?
Is there something in the auto industry that is different from the rest
that they can't hold on to their own advantages? As far as I know
in other industries if the employee doesn't do a good job he gets fired
 ... I guess it doesn't work like that in the Auto industry.
  
 You say that Chrysler lost the edge because it didn't come up with a
 split folding rear seat then shouldn't the entire team that ignored or
 missed that idea be fired? Were they? My guess is a no. Did they learn
 from that mistake? Sure (stow n' go, swivel n' go). But they still should
 be fired because money was lost and money runs companies.
  
 Bottom line is I think that Ford, GM and Chrysler are currently limping
 because of their own mistakes ... in every segment.

yeah it's a shame the engineers weren't on the ball in 2001... Dodge/Chrysler has always had the budget minivan market cornered (short wheelbase strippo models) but their top of the line offerings in 2001 should have come out swinging with the corporate 3.5L v6, a 5spd auto, and the too late stow n' go seats. I think it would have been a totally different ball game! Now they are playing catch up in a couple of wierd looking mini-vans. The 1996-2000 minivan's were actually quite nice and upped the bar with the roller out seats and dual sliding doors and even if you hop in one that's in nice shape they don't necessarrily seem out of date. 2001 the van got even quieter and a little nicer interior, but I agree that they totally jumped the shark by not offering anything new and continuing on with the same powertrains they had in 96...

Maybe being a single guy in my twenties I don't quite understand what the appeal of the whole swivel and go is?
 
From what I can tell the seats swivel to face each other and you can have a card game with other people in the back of the van, while it's not moving. Is this really a feature people were clamoring for?

"For 2008 Chrysler's minivans have fought their way back from obsolescense with a host of unique features (stow n' go, swivel n' go, rear-seat TV). We'll eventually add one to the long-term fleet to confirm its real-world functionality. Who knows, maybe it's even jumped back?"
 
Ummm...Karl, don't you guys have a bright red on running around in your long-term fleet?

Tiruvan - Honda, Toyota and other leading/successful auto companies are where they are and their products are what they are because they are truly "in it to win it". It's an ultracompetitive business and they don't shy away from it at all......instead they are fully committed (top to bottom) to being the best.
 
If I was in the market for a minivan, the Honda would easily be my choice - I have thought for a while now that their van sets the mark. Nice to see Chrysler sticking with it and doing a heavy redesign, problem is they've spotted T and H too much of a lead. It will be a while (if ever) before their van equals or surpasses the Sienna or Odyssey (IMO).

Karl,
  
Spot on. As a minivan owner/driver for 16 years, I can say the typical minivan is spacious, fairly fuel efficient and easy to park. I hated being seen driving the thing (alpha male and all that) but from a packaging and practicality standpoint, IMHO minivans are a far better option for most families than full size SUVs.
  
The 1999 Honda completely blew away anything on the market at that time. Its combination of size, features and "Honda aura" easily trumped anything from all the domestics, not just Dodge.
  
Remember also that Dodge seemed to have major transmission problems around the time Honda introduced their van and also, Dodge paint jobs did not seem to last. The Dodge interior was terrible. The plastic inside looked like, well, plastic, cheap plastic at that.
  
Dodge's argument why a lay flat rear seat was not offered reminds me of the mid 1990's Ford Windstar without the driver's side sliding door. It was a "safety issue" and instead, Ford put a "big" door on that side with a flip forward seat. Idiots.
  
Karl, if Dodge cannot sell minivans and Ram trucks, how do the dealers eat?

No, the Chrysler vans did not jump the shark in '01, they were just the automotive equivalent of putting on the waterskis, checking the wind, drinking a few beers, and saying, "Hey y'all, watch this!"
 
It is the new '08s that jumped the shark. The styling is atrocious and offputting to owners of older models. I personally know about 5 people who have older ones that will not even consider the new model because of the styling. Stow and go is okay in theory, but you have to slide the front seats all the way forward to open the hatches in back. The second row seats are also very thinly padded and extremely uncomfortable on long trips. The third row seats are a little more comfortable, but are not sized for adults.
 
Swivel and go is a bad joke. There is about 8 inches of room between the seats for the feet of the occupants of both rows. I had to turn my feet completely sideways to sit there, and I only have size 10s. The seats are not supposed to be rear facing while driving, so no good conversations without neck twisting and no Texas Hold 'Em while crossing Texas.
 
Stow and Go works great on paper, but in real life is only appropriate for people who need a cargo van that will occasionally carry people and Swivel and Go needs much more foot room before it will work in real life.
 
The final nail in the coffin (so to speak) for these monstrosities is that I have now seen a couple of '08 Town and Countries fitted as hearses, complete with black vinyl tops covering all the rear windows and giant silver landau bars on the sides. Perfect! Carry the casket out to the graveyard, then pop the seats up and give the gravediggers a ride back into town!

My '99 Town & Country Limited was the nicest family car I have ever owned. It drove smoothly although a bit underpowered, had a very nice interior with comfortable seats, lots of room for the kids and their stuff, and was the best looking minivan of it's time IMHO. It was also unreliable - the transmission died at only 5k miles in the middle of that endless stretch of Hwy 5 between Southern and Northern CA on a Sunday night.
 
Each subsequent redesign seemed to have less styling, and the '08's look like a loaf of bread with wheels. I used to think Chrysler had excellent design and engineering but poor reliability. Now I think their vehicles are poorly designed and falling behind in engineering, especially powertrains.

Disclosure alert - I own a 2006 Toyota Sienna.
 
It seems to me that Chrysler got the nod for novelty with the 1984 minivan models. However, novelty doesn't have a lot of legs (cue "Funkytown" by Lipps Inc.) Once other car companies seized on and improved the formula, any credit Chrysler had for being first to the party started to fade away. With the Honda Odyssey redesign in 1999 and the Toyota Sienna redesign in 2004 both on the market, Chrysler just couldn't compete. The Honda had better driving characteristics, the Toyota had better comfort, and they both had better utility (thanks largely to the folding rear seat). They also had generally higher build quality, particularly in the drivetrain, a weak spot for Chrysler (especially the trannys). I remember renting a Chrysler T&C in 2004 while I was on vacation, and couldn't believe the discomfort of the rear seats, due to poorly placed LATCH anchors that poked my hips.
 
At this point, Chrysler needs to be doing it better, more reliably, and more affordably than the other guy. Otherwise, they're going to continue losing market share to their competition.

What Chrysler should have been doing is developing the Pacifica into a proper crossover minivan replacement instead of letting it die on the vine.
 
Let's give Ford some props for trying to bend the mold with the Flex....we'll see how it compares to the Odyssey/Sienna etc.

doesnt Chrysler still sell more minivans than anyone else? Kind of hard to understand how they are making the worst in class vans when that is the case. I dont think we really want to attempt to tally minivan innovations between Chrysler, Toyota and Honda. I'm pretty sure Chrysler has the advantage there by a large margin and they one upped the Japanese again in terms of features with the 2008 models.

1487:
 
Chrysler sells more minivans than anyone else? Really? I don't know the exact figures but I'd still say that if they were leading it is because of two minivans (Caravan and T&C) in their lineup. If it boils to down to 2 versus one (Sienna/Odyssey) comparison then that is pathetic.
 
You think Chrysler innovates more and better than Honda/Toyota? Maybe you also believe in Santa Claus then.

I don't think the Caravan ever jumped the shark, so to speak, the competition just caught up. Look at the various roadsters that were sold in the 80's in America. Those products didn't get worse, but when the Miata showed up, they all but disappeared.
 
If one's idea of jumping the shark is a lackadaisical approach to reinvention of a model, then every vehicle has jumped the shark at some point. No company can afford to keep a model at the top of its class every single year.

I find that Chrysler vans are the perfect vehicle, when painted appropriately, for travelling round the country with ones closest friends and a large brown dog, wearing groovy clothing, solving mysteries and saying "Zoinks" or "Jinkies" when taken my suprise by monsters and ghosts.
 
Having said that, globally thinking, I've never really been impressed by Chrysler's claim to inventing this segment, the T+C and Caravan were launched only a few months ahead of the Renault Espace. But they were just first to market and have been dining out on the claim ever since, big deal. Guess that it doesn't matter anyway as most of America has never seen an Espace.

"Ummm...Karl, don't you guys have a bright red on running around in your long-term fleet?"
 
Yup, sorry. We've actually "had it" for weeks, but it was in Detroit until last week so I sort of forgot about it (though Dan's logbook entries were NOT easy to forget -- I just had brain fade).

My parents live near Windsor, ON where a lot of these things are made. My dad has owned 5 of Caravans of various trim levels. <anecdotal evidence> Before getting his current (2007) van he talked to some of his clients, who work(ed) on the line @ Chrysler. They told him that the early 2000's (ie pre-stow n go) models were the worst products they've ever worked on. They said that once stow 'n' go came along the product was much better (both to assemble and to drive). When my dad test drove the 07 he noticed the difference right away. </anecdotal evidence>
 
That being said the back rows of seats are still rubbish, it still drives like a uhaul truck, and some of the plastics are still quite poor.
 
Overall, I agree with Estreka - I think this is more of a case of the competition catching up and overtaking the old master.

I also think the new model has jumped the shark. The styling is just too outrageous......and I don't see a practical used of swivel-and-go (although I give them props for trying something different). I think the 2005/2006 prev-gen models are better than the new models.

"Remember also that Dodge seemed to have major transmission problems around the time Honda introduced their van and also"
 
Honda has had tranny issues as well. 99-03ish V6 Accords, TLs, Odysseys. Luckily they have nipped it in the bud and upgraded and revamped the 5AT to a much stronger durable 4 shaft unit. Even taking that into consideration, I still think the Honda is a much better built piece.
 
As a 2005 Odyssey Tourring owner, I have to say that this van has really impressed me. It deals with 5 kids 9 (all under 10) on a daily basis as well as my wifes heavy foot. I never thought Id say this about a minivan but I actually like driving it. Its comfortable, spacious, has good performance (minivan standards), great features, quality, good materials, and decent fuel efficiency. Weve already decided to get another one after we get rid of this one.
 
We drove the Sienna, Caravan (looked at) and drove the Quest. All had their good and bad qualities but none of them beat the Odyssey when taking the package as a whole into consideration. Im happy with our purchase.

The more I see the current (2008) model Chrysler vans, the uglier I think they are! They look like the "missing link" between the 1995 and 1996 models.

Here are a couple of pics of hearse Town and Countries, in black and silver:
 
http://www.4hearse.com/08402-flags2.jpg
 
http://www.4hearse.com/08416-31.jpg
 
This isn't quite the same as the ones I have seen, they had vinyl roofs covering the windows on the sliding doors as well.
 
These are, at least in my opinion, the ultimate iteration of these vehicles.

Seems like people are overthinking this a lot. The reason that people like Honda minvans is because they are much better looking and appear to be much better put together than the marshmellow Dodge vans. The Hondas are, shall we say, "sporty" looking. As Hondas, and to a lesser extent Toyotas, progressed and became more refined, the Chrysler/Dodges turned into the low class choice that you could get at a sharp discount. Then there's the typically poor interiors and quality that you expect in Chrysler products. Just look at a four year old Chrysler van next to a comparable Odyssey. There are simply better choices now.

Who says swivel and go is not usable while driving? The second row belts are attached to the seats, a la convertibles, so you can swivel while you go, without taking off your seatbelt! And for '09, the third row dvd player will also be able to 180 and face the second row in living room config. In terms of drivetrain perf. and refinement, the new 4.0L and 6AT is now waay ahead of the japs. If I were to drive a minivan, it would be the one that can do 0-60 in 8 sec.

>>>Who says swivel and go is not usable while driving?
 
Uhm, Chrysler, on the window sticker and in the owners manual and in all the advertisements in the small print. The front seats have to be pretty far forward as well for the second row to swivel. Like I said before, great in theory, very poorly executed.

Ok, Chrysler definitly has an ad video on its site that shows 'swivel and go' in use, while the vehicle is in motion. Nowhere does it state otherwise. Dont make claims unless you are willing to back them up.

I took a look at one of Chrysler minivan-model at an autoshow a awhile ago they do have the table in the back which is good if a family has kids and they need to eat in the back. I agree the exterior syling could have been better but its not that bad. The interior plastics could have been better too.
 
I agree 100% with Karl that the 2001 was just a referesh of the 95-00 model. Man, when Chrysler merged with Mercedes the 2001 Srbring/Stratus came out as disasters and the 2001 mini-vans were just a refresh. Something happened to Chrysler when they merged with Benz in 1998 in that their 2001 release of brand new products were either average(mini-vans) and was way behind the competition at the time(Sebring/Stratus.)