Find it must respond as soon as possible, the Chrysler minivan was introduced in March 2005 of STIs. The 2005S long wheelbase make the competition is better: not only the third row stowed under the floor, but also the second row.
A prototype of my 2005 Detroit Auto Show When examined in the new standard is recommended highly innovative seating systems, but could be the comfort of their seats and quality problems. Is it still a problem to organize the production of the van? The year 2005 has what it takes to make Chrysler Again on the segment and return loss Innovative Company stock? To find out my 2005 review of series production at the dealership.
Chrysler Town and Country reliability
want more information about reliability? Want to know what really sets you would if you purchased the Chrysler Town and Country instead of something else? This comes in the form of "times in the shop" and "Days in the shop" stats. To access the information you have two options: sign up to help provide the data now or pay $ 24.95 later.
Town and Country Styling
In my eyes Chrysler minivan is still the most interesting set. This is a conventional line, but clean and elegant, especially in metallic black paint available. In comparison, the style is flat and square Honda and Toyota style is rare. Nissan offers a refreshingly unconventional style, sports.
For 2005, Chrysler redesigned front Receive, but minimal changes. I can not decide if I want the front end of 2004 or 2005 is better. Whether it's a little too rounded and shapeless.
Chrysler design in the least adequate with advanced graphics adds a touch of class of instrument. In top trim lines are still a few seats grain leather or heavy (Town and Country Touring), or a combination of leather and suede this (Town and Country limited). Both are interesting. I especially like the skin on the Touring. Both the interior finish that Chrysler is the minivan class more each. For the year 2005 in the dashboard and door trim has been revised in the light, higher quality and feel even more exclusive. Fashion bits forged metal in the atmosphere increases waiter. I personally prefer the Touring, which is not convincing enough without fake wood Limited.
Some minor control on the instrument panel continues to look and feel slightly below par, but somehow it bothers me less than in previous years. On the cover of 2001-to 2004 are for the storage of waste in the third line (not visible from the right place at Van) Special feels cheap. For 2005 the back of the wall panel has been redesigned, and this limit is lost. They are well in place outdoors. It may be more functional, and possibly allows Chrysler to spend a few cents elsewhere.
The new Toyota only offers the interior certainly more pleasant (EVEN GM claims to have greatly improved within ITS 2005 minivans renewed for this fall). Superior interior as Honda, but simple in appearance. The same could be said of the Ford Freestar, but at a lower rate in two respects. Nissan Quest has a much larger deviations in material quality than Chrysler.
Town and Country Accommodation
the front seats are very comfortable in Chrysler. Surprisingly, they offer a generous amount of lateral support, something that often wanted in a car brand (the next 300 Hemi power included). The driving position is excellent. Excellent under. Hood and waist (on the basis of the window) to make a very good visibility in all directions, and advanced, especially Minivans tend to do well in this area, but Chrysler was the best by a significant margin.
Wondering if I was eleven Pacifica, Chrysler Town and Country feels the same way given its size. Not at all. Pacifica was in much stricter and much less comprehensive. So if the atmosphere of the cabin is spacious, City & State requires consideration.
Considering the small instrument panel, helps controls Chrysler oriented towards the driver. Very thoughtful. They are easy to reach and operate, for a refreshing contrast. Strange, difficult to reach and operate the controls on the Nissan Quest
Accommodations are not as good in the back. Although the seats are much more stable feeling in the production of the van largely allay my concerns based on the prototype, some questions remain. The second row of seats Chrysler has always been a bit small and too close to the ground, both common problems with the minivan. The 2005 is even lower, so that fold into the storage compartments under the floor.
If the headrest in its lowest position an adult jab in the shoulder blades are. For decent comfort and security that is necessary to increase significantly. The same applies to the third row of heads of Chrysler and the headrests of the third row of the Ford and Toyota. The three obviates the need for the headrests before folding the seat-a claim with the Honda and Nissan to eliminate an unusually low support. The difference is that Chrysler was in the second row as well. At least the headrests are easy to adjust. In order to bring it down, press a button and gravity does the rest.
Seat Chrysler Credit, once the headrests are raised in the bucket of the second row going very well because of its size (high-tech Chrysler foam type), but a full-size seat would be even better. A common problem with the second line of Chrysler, there is little room for feet under the driver's seat, the legroom compromises. The second row seats can slide backwards to increase legroom, but it takes away legroom in the third row.
Aesthetically, if seats are upholstered in leather, at least a more beautiful and more attractive than ugly units thin and flat in most minivans.
The third row seat is nice and wide, unlike the Ford, but as in previous years is not very comfortable, and when the second series is not fully forward (or, better still, folded under the floor) space for adult legs limited. The seat is too low to the ground, but a sharp increase in the inclination to backup slightly improved thigh support until 2004.
It seems that Honda minivan is the champion of space and comfort in all three rows of seats, with the second and third Toyota Nissan. (Although there are similar problems in the legroom of Siena). Chrysler is in the ballpark, but clearly not the market leader in this area. The Ford is a third line, the marginal costs of adults, putting in the last among those shown here.
For 2005, in a navigation system and rear seat video system available.
The Chrysler 2004 offered a number of class-leading cargo space when you are ready, remove and store heavy and bulky seats. But of course, you're not, right? The 2005 offers almost as much cargo volume over 165 cubic meters, only a few less than in 2004 and almost 20 more than the import of three and adds class-leading versatility.
Each of the second rows of seats folds into an underground tank. Nissan offers a superior fold-flat second row, but the solution of Chrysler in at least two respects. First, there is a completely flat floor, without nooks and crannies for small parts open in the fall. Secondly, if the containers are not in use, each have a good number of things (which are 33 centimeters long, 25 centimeters in width and depth of approximately four inches).
The third line also leads the segment in terms of versatility. First, as a Toyota, but none of the other is split 60/40. Second, apart from the fact that under the floor stow able these sections can be folded 90 degrees tailgating (such as one-piece seats in the Ford and Mazda). Unlike Nissan said fastening is designed so that there is no risk of damaging the hand. Especially for the folding of the Chrysler-Nissan located under the floor in comparison is much easier, both by an intelligent mechanism and the lower weight of each section, compared with a seat in one piece.
The third row of seats can also be used for the storage compartment when the seat upright. Together, the three compartments of 12 cubic feet of hidden storage, almost as much as an average sedan.
The console can not removable refined in the second row is placed; it is not compatible with the new seating system. A modular storage system above is a new option. Power sliding doors and power lift gate is still available. There are at least six outlets, the indoor propagation.
A strange omission: unlike the Sienna and a growing number of other vehicles, the passenger seat does not fold forward, so that in particular long articles. I suspect this feature will be added within a year or two. If your mission is to create more versatile inside, why the hardest part, getting the second set in the ground, no?
Overall, Chrysler 2005, with a substantial margin, the segment leader in cargo volume and versatility. While others were looking for incremental improvements, Chrysler has managed to reinvent the minivan inside. Unless Honda has the same for his own in 2005, due to happen this fall, which should be in a good position for the coming years.
Town and Country On the road
Performance with little or no change for the year 2005 when there were no significant changes in the power train or suspension (with one exception). The van reviewed about 150 pounds heavier, but this is not a substantial percentage change.
The power of the Japanese carriers from their large, sophisticated four-valve per cylinder engines from 3.3 to 3.5 liters. The Chrysler 3.8-liter OHV V6 is outdated in comparison, and on the paper below in power. Their power peaks in 215 horsepower, while the production of engines import between 225 and 240. Well, that excellence is not everything. Up to 4000 rpm as high as most engine minivan away company time Chrysler engine produces less power as well as the Japanese engines. As a result, it feels much more powerful in normal driving. In the acceleration to full speed, especially at high speeds, the Honda and Toyota have an advantage.
More of a problem as the engine is the gearbox. Chrysler four-speed unit is below a ratio compared with those of the Honda, Toyota and Nissan top line. A fifth ratio would help to measure performance and fuel economy. Hopefully you are on the way.
The only big change for 2005 is that all-wheel drive is no longer an option. Creating storage wells removed seat space for a driveshaft. If you have a seat stowage and all-wheel drive, head to your local Toyota dealer wants. Toyota is conducted to the drive shaft by removing the spare wheel in its four wheel drive vans. Chrysler was apparently not willing to take that step. If a third row that folds into the floor is acceptable, GM also offers vans with this combination of features. (The GM vans were also revised in 2005. The main changes are ugly inside and outside of superior quality.)
Guess Chrysler dealer is recommended that people who want all-wheel drive, the Pacifica for sale. The Pacifica is stylish and six seats, but as a mid-size SUV has only half as much cargo volume. As I mentioned before, is very different from the Town & Country, it will be good or bad depending on your personal preferences.
The Chrysler handles well for a minivan, although it lacks an independent rear suspension by some competitors. The steering wheel has a natural feel to it, with a gradual gain in cost as it is on. Your opinion is decent, especially for this class. Best of all was that Chrysler was agile feel to it is absent in most minivans. Along with the excellent forward visibility, found it easier to get out of a small car. The Honda is the second best in this area, the Ford the worst.
Chrysler moves smoothly and quietly, and even more in 2005 than last year (Chrysler ensures a 16 percent reduction in noise). The Toyota is probably the best in this area, and Ford is doing well, until it reaches a serious slump, where the chassis tuning takes its revenge too flexible. Others complain about the noise of the street from the Honda, but I think it's more than acceptable. The Nissan, however, feels and sounds less smooth and firm as the others.
Town and Country Safety
In order to compete in Security (Chrysler expects five stars everywhere), the characteristics of 2005 an armed front and the structure corresponding to the available head curtain airbags for all three rows. (This last removal of the roof support grips and are not connected to the roof, however.) The stability control, where Toyota and Nissan, is not yet an option. If you are regularly in smooth, winding roads, one of these minivans is probably better.
Town and Country Price
why else pricing of vehicles? Well. They were too slow and require too much effort, especially when it comes to comparing prices. So I taught some programming and created a website where necessary, through option packages, prerequisites, and the like one by one to dig - the truth Delta algorithm in these numbers for quick passage .
For example, True Delta, the Town and Country and Odyssey leather, curtain airbags, CD changer, and compare the results in a benefit of $ 500 for the Chrysler, but only after a refund of $ 1,500. You are so close.
My analysis of the original price, concluded: Overall, Chrysler is very cheap. He and Honda have done much better, while the other. The Honda is faster, more comfortable rear seats, and (like Toyota), is slowly losing value, while Chrysler is smarter and has a versatile interior. One or the other is the best option, depending on their priorities. In particular, given their lower price, adjusted for the team, I'd probably go with the Chrysler. I think Honda has revised a minivan coming this fall, however, and could shake things up again.
Final words
In 2005 Chrysler jumped the competition for the third time. In 1984, the first point. No one else had a similar vehicle for at least six years. In 1996, revolutionized the segment with a large van that had a second sliding door. This time they have revolutionized the minivan seating and cargo versatility. Nothing comes close. I do not know if I've ever been a more thoughtful view inside a vehicle. Little else has changed, but Chrysler has already made and handled better than the average minivan. It is the performance champion, but that's not what's in this segment about.
Add to surprisingly competitive prices, and Chrysler is my top pick among minivans, the Honda in second place. Unless you rarely save the second row, the Honda has my approval. Toyota, but hot at the moment, it only makes sense for me to visit for those who have a high value to Toyota, anything is possible on four wheels, or want the most features. Everyone is a loser.
Update: Now have carried the Odyssey 2005. It consists of the 2004 major shortcomings, but is innovative in any way. The second row store is not flat, and I found the seat uncomfortable, but otherwise it is better than Chrysler. If you do not have a problem with the driver's seat and do not expect to save the second row is often the best option.
No comments:
Post a Comment