Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I hate them. Beyond being boring, unstylish, lacking any personality, and all looking alike...?
reliability. Most models have scored very poorly in reliability surveys. That is probably one reason for their terrible resale value. They simply dont hold up as well and last as long. I also feel they could be a safety risk. They have comparitively small wheels and a tall body, which to me would hint at a higher risk of rolling over in an accident and I worry about side impact protection. They also often have stubby front ends so Id worry about driver safety in a frontal collision when those unreliable brakes go out.
Also, here in the midwest, the lower bodies are prone to severe rot-out, which quickly spreads and effects the structural strength of the vehicle.
It's weird you think there is some sort of cult... it's just a minivan. I just really want people to admit they don't like them because of the image, not because they aren't practical. I'll readily admit that I'd never own a minivan b/c of that... will you?
I've never argued they aren't practical. I've argued they aren't the MOST practical for EVERYONE the way some in the CD chapter of the cult seem to believe. I've said a couple times I don't blame anyone for liking what they like or for deterring one vehicle type is more practical for their purposes than another. I just bristle when people who don't even know me insist the vehicle that better suits their purposes will also better suit mine. All this "you could do this" or "you could do that" to convince me a minivan is better for me. Or I could just buy an SUV since it'll do everything I need with no further need for a trailer/truck rental from time to time, or 3rd vehicle sitting in the driveway for occasional use.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tiffer E38
No, Minivan owners say minivans are better for EVERYONE and that SUVs suck for ANYONE. Sorry. See my previous photo of what I use my SUV for. No minivan is doing that.
SUVs like mine and Nlambert's can do what minivans can do (carry people and stuff). Minivans can't do what SUVs like ours can (go offroad/deeper snow and tow big stuff). Again, sorry.
Very well said. The additional advantages in versatility, capacity, capability and long term value more than offset the additional cost.
No, Minivan owners say minivans are better for EVERYONE and that SUVs suck for ANYONE. Sorry. See my previous photo of what I use my SUV for. No minivan is doing that.
SUVs like mine and Nlambert's can do what minivans can do (carry people and stuff). Minivans can't do what SUVs like ours can (go offroad/deeper snow and tow big stuff). Again, sorry.
That is not saying the same thing as what I responded too. Is this some kind of trick? Try again.
I would prefer not to have to set my schedule around having to find a rental store with a trailer available, drive down to rent it, and drive back to drop it off. Not to mention the liability (or spend more $$ on insurance) of driving something that isn't mine.
I'm not stretching a business case. This is exactly what we have and how we came to the conclusion as to what fits our needs the best. There is nothing I've claimed to have that isn't true.
I don't really know what your specific life is like, but do you really need quick access to a trailer for an emergency midnight eviction or something? Is the nearest Home Depot 50 miles away? I know people who have trailers for taking stuff to the dump or whatever, but in reality that's a once a year thing. Some regular family with 2-3 kids and regular lifestyle will get by just fine with a minivan. Tricks that SUVs do like retractable steps and flipping seats are a bit of band aid to make up for their limitations. In your case an E-350 Econoline will theoretically suit you much better.
I'm willing to admit style is the majority of what goes into a purchasing decision. I'd do better with a minivan, but I'm not buying one. I like the overall feel and look of a midsize SUV. Buying a car is much more subjective than people would like to admit. Sure I could make up a bunch of stuff to convince somebody that I made the right decision, but I'm confident enough not to really care if somebody else thinks I made the right move or not.
I don't really know what your specific life is like, but do you really need quick access to a trailer for an emergency midnight eviction or something? Is the nearest Home Depot 50 miles away? I know people who have trailers for taking stuff to the dump or whatever, but in reality that's a once a year thing. Some regular family with 2-3 kids and regular lifestyle will get by just fine with a minivan. Tricks that SUVs do like retractable steps and flipping seats are a bit of band aid to make up for their limitations. In your case an E-350 Econoline will theoretically suit you much better.
I'm willing to admit style is the majority of what goes into a purchasing decision. I'd do better with a minivan, but I'm not buying one. I like the overall feel and look of a midsize SUV. Buying a car is much more subjective than people would like to admit. Sure I could make up a bunch of stuff to convince somebody that I made the right decision, but I'm confident enough not to really care if somebody else thinks I made the right move or not.
I need access to a trailer quite often.
1.) I have a woodshop and routinely find deals on larger stacks of lumber that are too long for my truck bed. My 14 ft trailer fits the bill. When I run across these deals I have to be able to move quickly. (Plus we have a Polaris RZR 4 seater that we often take on last minute rides)
2.) The nearest HD/Lowe's is almost 30 miles from me. I am remodeling my house right now, so it is nice to be able to quickly hook up and go when the need arises to pick something up (like cabinets).
3.) I have a lot of trees. If I need to haul a couple off, I can easily load up and go.
4.) I cut my in-laws grass for them. I have to load up my lawn equipment weekly and go to their house to take care of their yard.
Retractable steps and flip up seats are a nice added convenience, not a Band-Aid. Band-aids are temporary fixes to a problem. The Expedition does not present any problems for us, so none of those conveniences are band-aids. What limitations does it have? I have yet to find anything that it cannot do. If these are truly band-aids, then you could say Chryslers Stow-N-Go options are a band aid for a vehicle that doesn't have a bed. In the case of choosing an Econoline over an Expedition.. it might work for the most part. In that case it might be a styling feature that we like better. But a mini-van and a full size van are different animals altogether.
As I have re-iterated numerous times in this thread, different vehicles work for different people. There is no one solution that works for everyone. The problem I have is with people who automatically make the assumption that one vehicle will work for everyone just because it works for them and then go on to try and rationalize why they are right by providing false information about the vehicle (horrible turning radius, lack of storage, horrible mpg, poor crash test rating, etc...) when none of it is true.
When manufacturers start putting the same engines you can get in their SUVs in their minivans, then perhaps they can lay claim to being the most practical.
The most "practical" minivan ever built was by Mercedes, the R63. Had the utility of a minivan, the towing power and muscle of an SUV, and the outright speed of a sports sedan or sports car. Did everything. Only minivan I'd ever buy. We currently own a Town and Country (given to us by my father) and it can't take the place of an SUV, nor can it tow as much. It's primary use lies in being a people mover, and not much else.
What?
Take a look around. Pretty much every minivan has a V6 sourced from their midsize SUV lineup. Modern manufacturing dictates you use the same engine for as many models as possible. Explorers are using Taurus engines. 0-60 times are about the same for minivans and SUVs.
A modern Honda Odyssey is running low 15s. Back in the 60s that would have been considered a performance car.
I'm not sure where the minivan vs full size SUV comparison started but those are two radically different things to compare. That's like saying a Civic isn't as practical as Suburban. That may be true if you pull a 35 foot boat frequently, but not if you drive 8 miles to work everyday.
I hate them. Beyond being boring, unstylish, lacking any personality, and all looking alike...?
reliability. Most models have scored very poorly in reliability surveys. That is probably one reason for their terrible resale value. They simply dont hold up as well and last as long. I also feel they could be a safety risk. They have comparitively small wheels and a tall body, which to me would hint at a higher risk of rolling over in an accident and I worry about side impact protection. They also often have stubby front ends so Id worry about driver safety in a frontal collision when those unreliable brakes go out.
Also, here in the midwest, the lower bodies are prone to severe rot-out, which quickly spreads and effects the structural strength of the vehicle.
LOL.
You do realize the roof and air weighs nothing right? Do you assume an empty box truck rolls over on every cloverleaf? No because all the weight is in the engine. SUVs historically have been prone to rollover due to the higher ride height. The CG of the entire vehicle is raised for ground clearance meaning higher chance of rollover. A minivan's CG is based off a car, so all the weight is closer to the ground. These days its closer to a draw thanks to stability control. https://cars.usnews.com/cars-trucks/...-suvs-shootout
In this day and age, you'll have a hard time convincing me that SUVs don't start to look alike after awhile.
I'm not even going there with the rot out business. Its not 1970 anymore and even it was, show me a 1970s SUV without corrosion. No need to make up stuff.
This is probably the most uninformed minivan bashing post ever created in the history of the internet.
1.) I have a woodshop and routinely find deals on larger stacks of lumber that are too long for my truck bed. My 14 ft trailer fits the bill. When I run across these deals I have to be able to move quickly. (Plus we have a Polaris RZR 4 seater that we often take on last minute rides)
2.) The nearest HD/Lowe's is almost 30 miles from me. I am remodeling my house right now, so it is nice to be able to quickly hook up and go when the need arises to pick something up (like cabinets).
3.) I have a lot of trees. If I need to haul a couple off, I can easily load up and go.
4.) I cut my in-laws grass for them. I have to load up my lawn equipment weekly and go to their house to take care of their yard.
Retractable steps and flip up seats are a nice added convenience, not a Band-Aid. Band-aids are temporary fixes to a problem. The Expedition does not present any problems for us, so none of those conveniences are band-aids. What limitations does it have? I have yet to find anything that it cannot do. If these are truly band-aids, then you could say Chryslers Stow-N-Go options are a band aid for a vehicle that doesn't have a bed. In the case of choosing an Econoline over an Expedition.. it might work for the most part. In that case it might be a styling feature that we like better. But a mini-van and a full size van are different animals altogether.
As I have re-iterated numerous times in this thread, different vehicles work for different people. There is no one solution that works for everyone. The problem I have is with people who automatically make the assumption that one vehicle will work for everyone just because it works for them and then go on to try and rationalize why they are right by providing false information about the vehicle (horrible turning radius, lack of storage, horrible mpg, poor crash test rating, etc...) when none of it is true.
I never implied that they were best for everyone. That's an impossible statement to make on any vehicle.
The retractable steps thing is a bandaid for making up for the height of an SUV. Coincidently it sucks. Its another motor, electric do hicky hanging underneath the nastiest parts of a car collecting salt, sand, dirt, whatever just to mimick the geometry of a lower car. Just try taking every little baby step, then ducking down right at the end when you want to actually get in and notice how ridiculous it feels. Then just hop in a lifted Jeep like a man in one leap holding either the wheel or grab handle and notice the difference.
Might as well layout a red carpet when the freaking steps deploy.
As I have re-iterated numerous times in this thread, different vehicles work for different people. There is no one solution that works for everyone. The problem I have is with people who automatically make the assumption that one vehicle will work for everyone just because it works for them and then go on to try and rationalize why they are right by providing false information about the vehicle (horrible turning radius, lack of storage, horrible mpg, poor crash test rating, etc...) when none of it is true.
Yes you have, but remember this thread was started by a (self proclaimed at age 30) middle aged, unmarried and unattached, man looking to buy a practical vehicle for his hypothetical wife and 2.1 children.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
