The lesser of 3 evils? Please help with car choice!!! (Car arrived, photos post #72!)

[Smallhorses]

Ok, so my company car is up for renewal.

It's a 2004 Dodge Intrepid SE, which has 57000 miles on in 4 years.
All in all not been a bad car, but has started to have little niggles over the past 12 months, which is ironic since it should really have been replaced at 3 years old.

Anyway.....

I was looking forward to swapping it for a 2008 Dodge Charger, which is nicer looking, would have the 3.5L V6 instead of the Intrepid's puny 2.7L V6.
However, though I work in California, I work for a Massachussetts based company, and have just heard that the Charger, being RWD is "dangerous because people have accidents in the snow."
Snow? In the Bay Area? Last time it snowed here Brontasauri(?), Brontasauruses(?), well, you get the picture, were grazing here!!!
I own an FR Mazda Miata, and an RR Porsche 911, as personal cars, and I'm pretty adept at handling them.

So, the long and short of it, is that the Charger got yanked from the list.
What I'm left with is the following options:-

2008 Chrysler Pacifica FWD (Yes! Not even the 4WD in the interests of snow safety, since the 4WD version is more expensive! How safe is a 2.5 tonne SUV with FWD in the snow?)

2008 Chrysler Sebring FWD (Specs unknown, but may only be 4cyl! I'm still waiting to hear.)

2008 Dodge Grand Caravan SE (Has most available options, but I'm not allowed it in this funky orange colour! )

So there you have it, it has to be one of these, has to be an automatic. What should I go for?
I hate the looks of the new Chryslers. That straking down the front looks as though they've come off second best in a fight with Freddy Kreuger!

The Sebring is just a bit too, well, you know, meh. Nondescript, and if it's the 4cyl, forget it, a 4cyl automatic to my mind is fundamentally unsafe.

Less power, and you get no choice in gear selection when you anticipate needing to pull out to pass, or change up / down in uphill / downhill turns.
However, in the absence of a full size sedan made by Dodge/Chrysler that isn't "unsafe" & RWD we've been downgraded to the FWD Sebring. Humph. We're also restricted to 3 purchasable options on this model, Handsfree phone connection kit for $300 (big deal, I have a bluetooth headset already!) Smoker's package (I don't smoke) and heated engine block (for those chilly Bay Area mornings!!! )

The Pacifica, well, it's an SUV isn't it? Even in FWD it still looks, and handles like a lollopy, roly-poly, tank. With a 3.8L V6 it'll understeer like mad. I've always been opposed to roadgoing, soccer-Mommy SUV types, and this is no exception, a gas guzzling behemoth.

And then the Caravan. It's a minivan. I'm in my early thirties, married, but have no kids. What the heck do I want a minivan for? Granted, it's a lot less ugly than the hideous Chrysler twins, but it's a minivan!!! ( ^ See above!)
Ok, I can get a DVD screen for the back seats, but there's no-one to watch it!!!

So there it is, on the one hand I can't argue, a free car is a free car right?
On the other hand I have to pick one of these!
Please help me decide! I'd like to hear your wisdom & opinions on what I should do!

 

[Philly]

If it were me, I'd pick the Sebring in an instant. It isn't that great of a car, but at least it's a car, not a minivan or SUV which I hate. I hope you are a decent driver, though. At around 170 hp, this is a bit of an unsafe car in my book. Just don't cut anybody off.

 

[ferrari_chris]

Personally, I'd go with the SUV.

You've got two fun cars to play with when the mood takes you, but you've go no load space in either of those.

If you ever need to haul something bulky (a pushbike, a lounge chair or a new TV) you'll be dead grateful for the extra room in the SUV.

And when you want a nice car to drive, you've got the Mazda or the Porsche.

I say make this choice based on practicality.

 

[gibson]

minivan. go tailgating with it, they come with fold down tailgate seating standard

 

[1X83Z]

Haven driven all three (though I have not driven the latest incarnation of the Caravan - but I have driven many 2007s), my choice would be the Pacifica.

I work for a rental company and we rent cars in about the same spec you would be buying. Pacifica, even in its cheapest spec, is NOT a very cheap vehicle. It's big and will get the worst fuel economy of the three, but with its most basic engine, that's not so bad. They look decent and they're not bad to drive. Whenever someone returns a Pacifica they always beg us to have it again the next time we rent (however we have very few - I've only driven a Pacifica twice - though once was for some time and included a jaunt on the highway). They're genuinely good vehicles and you can tell Chrysler tried with them. The Sebring isn't that bad, despite what people on here will inevitably tell you. I have driven LOTS of new Sebrings and the cabin is better-appointed than you might think, the four-cylinder is quicker than you'd think, and it handles better than you'd think. In all this would be my second choice. I love minivans but there's no point without kids - I'd skip the van.

There's an opinion from someone with experience with these vehicles.

 

[Duke]

At around 170 hp, this is a bit of an unsafe car in my book.

How quickly you youngsters forget what you never knew in the first place. There was a time not so long ago that 170hp was considered a relatively powerful car...

 

[Smallhorses]

Interesting.

So far it's 2 : 1 : 1 in favour of the Pacifica.
However, it's still an SUV.
It's still uglier than things I've passed out of my butt, and some of my colleagues that have them already say the blindspots on them are big enough to park a jumbo jet in!
I think itgirlxx & I will be having a trip to the local Dogdy/Crippler dealer to see and drive these things in the flesh.

Oddly the 2.4L 4Cyl Sebring at 173HP is only 16HP & 25lb/ft of torque behind the 2.7L V6!!! There's engineering efficiency for you!!

Keep the opinions coming.

 

[JCE]

All three are rubbish, quit your job.

Unless you can convince them for a Magnum (and I don't care if it is a V6) you're pretty much screwed from choosing junk in my opinion.

 

[Philly]

How quickly you youngsters forget what you never knew in the first place. There was a time not so long ago that 170hp was considered a relatively powerful car...

I am comparing those 170 horses to what you can get in many new cars. I guess weight is a big issue too. My experiences tell me you can't do as much in a 180 hp, 4400 lb. Volvo as in a 200 hp, 3300 lb. GTI.

 

[Smallhorses]

All three are rubbish, quit your job.

Interesting thought!!!

Sadly I'd be chucking away 10 years service, and my 4 weeks of vacation if I did that!!! Not to mention I'd struggle to pay the mortgage & Porsche payments too!!!

I'd've settled for a Dodge Avenger rather than the Chrysler Sebring, and ironically it's possible to get an "exteremely safe" 4WD 3.5L V6 Avenger R/T for the same price as the base Pacifica!

 

[YSSMAN]

So the Dodge Avenger isn't an option at all? I would figure the company would be happy to save a few dollars and go with the arguably better Dodge, by comparison to the Chrysler (Sebring).

I have yet to see, touch, feel, etc one of the new Dodge Caravans, but keep in mind that they were co-developed with Volkswagen. That may actually translate to a chassis that could offer up a few surprises, and actually feel solid for a change. I assume it will have many of the same engine/transmission options as the Pacifica, so IMO, its not that big of a difference between the two.

...On the Pacifica for a moment: You may want to ask Joey how he feels about it. I seem to recall his mother driving one and having issues with it, but I'm not completely certain. He would obviously have more deets than I...

I guess that if I was in the same "gun-to-head" position as you are in right now I'd probably be picking the Sebring. Given that you aren't paying for it, and given that I'd never pay that much money for it, I'd call it a deal. They aren't horrible cars, they just aren't that good by comparison to say, a Saturn Aura or Honda Accord. But, they're good at being "normal" cars, so it isn't that bad.

So, yes, I'd go Sebring here (unless they make the Avenger an option, then I'd take that in a heartbeat. It seems like an altogether better car...)

 

[Joey D]

My mom owns a Pacifica, it's the worst vehicle we've ever owned. There are less then 30,000 miles on it and it has rusted, had the tractions control go out (which messed the brakes up), had the electrical system go out, something happened with the exhaust system, and now that I'm back home I discovered it has a rod knock in the engine. Now my mom baby's her cars so I can't imagine she really caused any of this.

 

[Smallhorses]

Rusting really isn't a consideration in CA. the air is very dry out here, and even in the snowy areas we visit at Tahoe in winter, the roads are not salted as it is feared the lake and surrounding area will become irretrievably contaminated when the snow melts.

I have a '95 Miata and '81 Porsche both of which are California cars, and neither has any rust.

I shall take heed of what you said about the electrics and stuff though, the engine in my current Dodge has been a pain over the last year, the engine tensioner pulley has been replaced twice, and the cam position sensor kept cutting out causing the rev-limiter to set itself down to 2500RPM (which is a bugger when you're doing 70mph on the San Mateo Bridge!!! )

 

[YSSMAN]

The good news on the Sebring is that it isn't all Chrysler stuff anymore. The chassis came from Mitsubishi, and the four-pot came from a Hyundai/Mitsubishi joint venture. That would likely, hopefully, minimize the future issues that may happen with the car. That being said, its Chysler, so you never know.

The good news is, Chrysler now has the lifetime warranty on the drivetrain, and the other warranty (if I recall) is rated just a few touches higher than average (I may be mistaken). So, in theory, you're covered if anything goes wrong.

I'm sure your local Chrysler dealer would be happy to let you take one for a drive before you order it. If they make a positive influence, I assume they hope you get your car serviced there...

 

[Joey D]

Rusting really isn't a consideration in CA. the air is very dry out here, and even in the snowy areas we visit at Tahoe in winter, the roads are not salted as it is feared the lake and surrounding area will become irretrievably contaminated when the snow melts.

I have a '95 Miata and '81 Porsche both of which are California cars, and neither has any rust.

I shall take heed of what you said about the electrics and stuff though, the engine in my current Dodge has been a pain over the last year, the engine tensioner pulley has been replaced twice, and the cam position sensor kept cutting out causing the rev-limiter to set itself down to 2500RPM (which is a bugger when you're doing 70mph on the San Mateo Bridge!!! )

Rusting shouldn't really be an issue on any vehicle that's only 3 years old and washed on average every week. My mom will wash it twice a week during the winter to keep the salt off of it.

 

[toyomatt84]

Caravan. Most cabin space with more comfort than other alternatives.

 

[1X83Z]

How quickly you youngsters forget what you never knew in the first place. There was a time not so long ago that 170hp was considered a relatively powerful car...

Of course, when this argument is brought up it is often not mentioned that in this "time not so long ago," cars didn't weigh 3300+ pounds, as the Sebring does.

 

[YSSMAN]

Very true. They were also a helluva lot more fun to drive, in some cases better looking, and all the more important actually "talked" back to the driver instead of funneling everything through a computer.

...Progress is progress I suppose, and while in some cases many of these cars became much better, I can think of quite a few that have become worse...

The four-pot Sebring seems like more of an option of necessity versus that of an actual choice (that being for a "higher-performance" model). I personally would be more forgiving of slower acceleration, the sloppy chassis, and the overall "why so fast?" attitude with that model, simply because it isn't meant to be this "go-fast" model that others tend to offer. That being said, that isn't an excuse however to write the idea off completely... Thats were Dodge comes in, with the mildly interesting Avenger.

...But that being said, if I'm shopping four-pot sedans, I'm far more likely to go for the local Ford or Saturn dealer. The Fusion at the very least looks and feels good, and the Mazda parts give it a hint of soul... Much the same for the Opel-derived Aura that gets a 174 BHP I4 this year as well. Hell, even Chevy gives you a reason to go with the four-pot on the '08 Malibu LTZ, adding the six-speed automatic into the fold.

 

[Kent]

"Small,"
I'd go with the Sebring. 👍
I learned to drive as a youngster on a caddy, I moved to a Jimmy when I got my license, after the Jimmy, I'll always go with the car first.
I'd buy a station wagon before I'd buy a minivan.
Probably the reason I enjoy my Corolla (although I hear they aren't exactly racecars).

Looking at the three choices, the Sebring would be my choice.
Good luck with you pick.
I suppose the products are limited to dodge/chrysler?
Edit:
I just pulled up the Dodge and Chrysler websites... Very easy to browse. 👍
Looking at their pages I thought the Avenger could be a nice FWD'er and when looking at prices I see that maybe the Sebring is an upscale Avenger?
If so that would be all the more reason to pick the Sebring.

After reading even more I noticed the mention by Smallhorses of a 4wd Avenger R/T... If that's possible I say do it do it do it! Just do it!

 

[Duke]

See if you can get them to spring the same money for a Caliber R/T or SRT.

 

[Tornado]

I'd go with the Pacifica, honestly. They are nice, well put together cars; and the main knock everyone ever had against them was that they were expensive in any spec. There is a reason for that, though.

 

[Joey D]

I'd go with the Pacifica, honestly. They are nice, well put together cars; and the main knock everyone ever had against them was that they were expensive in any spec. There is a reason for that, though.

There is no way "well put together" and Pacifica go together.

 

[Smallhorses]

Well I just got back from the Dodgy dealers, and have driven a Pacifica.
Let's just say I'm not impressed.

It feels solid enough, and is very capacious, however, a heavy 3.8 V6 slung over the front wheels of a vehicle that tips the scales only a little short of a Sherman tank didn't fill me with much confidence in its ability to stop quickly or corner safely. Couldn't really fling it into bends to test this theory with a sales guy in the car though!
Secondly the blind spots on the thing are enormous! It comes standard with rear tinted (almost blacked out glass) which makes shoulder checking a nightmare, assuming you can see past the massively obtrusive B-pillar!
Reverse parking / Parallel parking one of these would also be an adventure since you could hide an area the size of Wales in the blindspots behind the unnecessarily large C-pillars.

I have now found out that the 28Z Customer Options Package we're being offered on the Sebring is a "Lease-Only" package offered to the major leasing companies that provide companies like the one I work for with their employee leased vehicles. I wasn't allowed to look at the specs in the dealer guide book for legal reasons apparently, but got the basics from the guy there. It'll be a base model Sebring, but with the 2.7L V6 which is not offered for general sale. Hmmmmm. Having seen them in the flesh, and next to an Avenger, I can safely say it's the ugly duckling of the pair, and the Avenger is much meaner looking! On the plus side it does have a 40/60 split rear seat, so concerns about reduced car size not being able to fit our skis / snowboard in are reduced. However, the rear legroom for passengers is much, much smaller than the Intepid (missed the R deliberately! )
I wasn't able to drive a Sebring, since they didn't have a 2.7L sedan available, only the 2.4 4-banger, and a 3.5L version.
My biggest complaint about this is that I get a seniority allowance to add some options to my car of choice, but as I've mentioned previously the options list for this is exceedingly poor!

Since the only thing I've got against the minivan is the fact that it is a minivan, I'll have to reserve judgement until I've seen / driven one, but they won't have any 2008 models available to see / drive for another 2 months.
I can't take the chance of ordering one sight-unseen, so it looks I'll have to put off my decision for a while. Seriously, if they're going to remove cars from the list that they've never driven themselves in the interests of safety, we can't be reasonably expected to order a vehicle that we've never driven to establish it's handling and performance, and thus safety, in the interests of satisfying an order quota!

 

[YSSMAN]

On the minivan note, I came across this last night before bed:

Car and Driver's initial test of the new Chrysler/Dodge minivans.

This feature is awesome:

Swivel and Go Seating

...Although the dash looks a little plain...

---

I have to say that they're a decent choice, but if it is left between the Sebring and a Caravan, I think I'd take the Sebring.

 

[TopHat]

Go for the Caravan IMO, its good looking, and the interior is pretty nice too.

 

[Smallhorses]

I kind of like that feature too, and the fact that it's not a column shift (I know it's pretty close, but there's something about an automatic column shift that screams "Grandad Car" at me!!!!)
Do all new Caravans come with that seating configuration as standard, or only the higher spec models?

 

[TopHat]

Its an option unfortunately.

 

[YSSMAN]

I believe your choice is either "Stow and Go" or "Swivel and Go," but not both. Stripper models, I believe, can be had with a flat load floor with a removable bench, but those are only for cheap-asses. Chrysler's line of thinking is that most people will go with "Stow and Go," which makes sense, but I personally think that "Swivel and Go" is a far better choice. It actually makes the back a nice place to be... Although I don't know how well I would like sitting facing the rear doing 80 MPH on the highway (I get car sick when I'm not driving).

There is a really cool satellite TV package you can get though. If I understood it correctly, its part of the Sirius service, and gives you Nickelodeon, Disney, and Cartoon Network while in the car.

...Granted, I love cartoons, but if they offered CNN and ESPN, I'd be sold right there...

 

[1X83Z]

My issue with Sto'n'Go is the lack of room for headrests. Hey Chrysler - I can't stow the headrests? Die. You try to find a place for five minivan headrests with silver things protruding from them.

 

[YSSMAN]

Nissan gave you a little baggie to put them in in the Quest... One of the dumbest ideas I've ever seen in a new vehicle. When my Step Mom was looking at them, even the guys at the Nissan dealer were pissed about the bag.