guido4475
Not a Member
Scott, I'm at the yard until 10 in the morning....If youre not here, I will leave the Dodge pamphlet in youre paperwork/bill of lading file in the file cabinet.
Dodge van?
- Thread starter Monty
- Start date
Scott, I'm at the yard until 10 in the morning....If youre not here, I will leave the Dodge pamphlet in youre paperwork/bill of lading file in the file cabinet.
Brisco
Expert Expediter
RLENT
Veteran Expediter
While I don't like to be saddled with shifting a manual, the use of an automated manual transmission is somewhat of a concern - from the standpoint of reliability/repairs (probably be more expensive than a straight manual) and possibly performance (on a hill as noted in the video)
The diesel powerplant seems to have plenty of power (more than a T1N Sprinter) and if the fuel economy is really in the neighborhood of 28 mpg that's an aspect that's far more desirable than some extra ponies.
The lower CG/profile offers some benefits (better handling, easier to step up into the rear, possibly lower wind resistance), as does the use of FWD.
Be interesting to see how they hold up.
The diesel powerplant seems to have plenty of power (more than a T1N Sprinter) and if the fuel economy is really in the neighborhood of 28 mpg that's an aspect that's far more desirable than some extra ponies.
The lower CG/profile offers some benefits (better handling, easier to step up into the rear, possibly lower wind resistance), as does the use of FWD.
Be interesting to see how they hold up.
How smooth is that? Is it as smooth as having an experienced driver running a standard manual transmission? Is it as smooth as automatic with a torque convertor? Is there a noticeable lag between shifts. [/QUOTE]
I don't have much experience with front wheel drive vehicles. Owned a Saturn during the 90's but didn't drive it much. I understand the benefits of having front wheel drive for traction on snow and ice with the engine weight over the drive wheels and pulling rather than pushing. What concerns me with front wheel drive on this van is the likelihood of the ***-end coming around during hard braking when empty. Our highways and byways are tattooed with sideways sliding skid marks that I assume are from front wheel drive vehicles, most likely minivans.
Also, I was under the impression that front wheel drive increased the turning radius compared to a rear wheel drive vehicle with the same wheelbase and that maintenance costs are higher due to the short life of CV joints and other related stuff.
True, but I think that is because it is new and somewhat radical. Once they become common place they won't seem so ugly. Like the first "new" Dodge pickups, the first T-600, the PT Cruiser and even the first Sprinters to come to this country. A radical look can seem ugly at first. The PT Cruiser is still an ugly vehicle though. Especially the convertible model.
Personally I don't mind a vehicle with a manual transmission although I haven't driven one in a long, long time. I think I would prefer either a true manual transmission or a conventional automatic over an automated manual.
I agree that maintenance cost and reliability will probably be an issue.
According to both videos Brisco posted, the EcoDiesel won't be available until December or January, is it available now? The Dodge webpage doesn't seem to note the inside dimensions, only the exterior length, interior volume and the fact that the extended is 14" longer.
guido4475
Not a Member
I don't have much experience with front wheel drive vehicles. Owned a Saturn during the 90's but didn't drive it much. I understand the benefits of having front wheel drive for traction on snow and ice with the engine weight over the drive wheels and pulling rather than pushing. What concerns me with front wheel drive on this van is the likelihood of the ***-end coming around during hard braking when empty. Our highways and byways are tattooed with sideways sliding skid marks that I assume are from front wheel drive vehicles, most likely minivans.
Also, I was under the impression that front wheel drive increased the turning radius compared to a rear wheel drive vehicle with the same wheelbase and that maintenance costs are higher due to the short life of CV joints and other related stuff.
True, but I think that is because it is new and somewhat radical. Once they become common place they won't seem so ugly. Like the first "new" Dodge pickups, the first T-600, the PT Cruiser and even the first Sprinters to come to this country. A radical look can seem ugly at first. The PT Cruiser is still an ugly vehicle though. Especially the convertible model.[/QUOTE]
The convertible pt cruiser resembles a bathtub on wheels..lol..seriously, though..all it is is a different body on a dodge neon frame and chassis.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I717 using EO Forums mobile app
guido4475
Not a Member
He did. But I think it was turtle that drove a diesel powered one? And someone said they were only making red and white ones right now, but yet someone posted a picture of a silver one? So who knows..I left the pamphlet with scott that had quite a bit of numerical information in it...so hit him up with the questions...lol..he's a quite talkative fellow...lol..
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I717 using EO Forums mobile app
In regards to new Vans. There is a add in this months Professional Remodeler magazine Shows a Nissan high top short wheel base "The biggest V8 Nissan makes and up to 3,925 pounds of pay load"
Lots more then I would prefer to put in a one ton van.
Lots more then I would prefer to put in a one ton van.
I asked Scott if he could scan and post the specs from that pamphlet. Let's hope he doesn't do the metric conversion thing.
It's as smooth as an experienced driver running a standard manual transmission. It's not as smooth as an automatic transmission. You can feel the hesitations between gears, same as you would with a manual shift transmission, but it's very smooth, like it would be with an experienced driver shifting the gears. I gotta figure the hydraulic servo gizmo widget controlling the clutch and shifting will extend the life of the clutch beyond that of even the most experienced driver, but I dunno. I still think I'd rather have either an automatic or a straight manual transmission.
All I know is, the turning radius of this van is ridiculously small, much smaller than that of the Sprinter. It will enable you to maneuver in some really tight places.
I don't know that front wheel drive means higher maintenance costs, but it does mean (more than likely) more frequent maintenance. Front wheel drive vehicles are susceptible to more frequent repairs because the wheels are connected to the transaxle via axles that have constant-velocity-type universal joints at each end. There is an inner and outer joint on the left and right axles. Generally, the outer joints fail first because they run with the highest angularity, meaning, when the wheel is turned, the joint has to redirect the torque from the engine around a corner. The more angle, the more strain. And it's usually the right side that goes first because we turn sharper around right hand corners than left hand ones (in England the left side goes first for the same reason). These high strain joints are also easily damaged when you hit a curb or the wrong pothole (so I'm leery of them in Detroit, frankly).
It used to be that when you had a failed joint you had to remove the axle and take out the failed CV, then replace it and the boot, lubricate the new and old joint with fresh grease, reinstall and go. But it was nevertheless time consuming and really, really messy. Now, you just replace the entire axle with a new or rebuilt one, which ends up being quicker and cheaper to do. But with an expedite vehicle, since most miles are highway miles, the front axles won't have to be replaced nearly as often as you might think. It'll be more along the lines of having to replace brake pads and rotors. If you can stay out of Detroit, that is.
I like the PT Cruiser, because it looks just like what it was designed to look like, a street rod or a gangster getaway car from the 1930s. The Sprinter, on the other hand, even after all these years and familiarity, is still butt ugly. But the Sprinter is exceedingly functional, and that's the important thing. Same with the ProMaster Dodge.
My first three cars, from 1974 to 1995, were manual transmission vehicles. My last three (two Caravans and a Sprinter) have been automatic. I'm fine with either, but would prefer the manual for the fuel mileage. Then again, since most miles are highway miles, it might not make much of a difference.
Outside of North America, something like 70 or 80 percent of the Sprinters on the road are manual transmissions, yet those aren't even available here. Weird.
I'm assuming they've got it figured out, but it seems like adding a bunch of stuff to a manual transmission to make it a fake automatic is courting disaster. Seems to me it would be much easier to just offer automatic or manual, or both. Maybe they're afraid Americans won't want a manual transmission? I dunno.
IIRC, the guy at the dealer said the diesels weren't available for delivery until December, despite them having two of them there, but they were taking orders for them now. The two diesels and the one gas model they had there weren't for sale yet, they were being used to test drive and in-house to shuttle people and parts around.
I looked at a ProMaster 2500 high top, short wheelbase today. The dealership had 5 of these and one shorty low top, all gassers. I didn't have time for a test drive and don't want to test drive anything other than the long and tall 3500.
The inside cargo area with its straight walls should make it easy to insulate and finish off. The inside of the cab isn't as tall as the cargo area. At 5'10 I could not stand up in the cab, like a Sprinter, but it was still easy to bend over slightly to access the cargo area. What you give up in cab headroom you gain with a storage area above the cab, accessible from the cargo area. I feature I like.
The driver's seat had only an inboard armrest and the left armrest was integrated into the door panel, similar to my Chevy. I found the indoor armrest to be too far away to use comfortably. I had to lean or stretch to reach it. Also the center console cup holders are only a few inches above the floor making for a long downward reach.
Someone earlier in this post commented on the ground clearance of the rear axle. It looked low to me also and I measured it at 7". My Chevy is 7" at the center of the differential housing and a few inches higher along the rest of the axle.
The first picture below shows the above cab storage compartment. The second pic is a closer view of that storage area. I stuffed a ProMaster brochure in it to show the height, which is about 10" and about 24" deep. A great place to store clothes and other light weight stuff.
The inside cargo area with its straight walls should make it easy to insulate and finish off. The inside of the cab isn't as tall as the cargo area. At 5'10 I could not stand up in the cab, like a Sprinter, but it was still easy to bend over slightly to access the cargo area. What you give up in cab headroom you gain with a storage area above the cab, accessible from the cargo area. I feature I like.
The driver's seat had only an inboard armrest and the left armrest was integrated into the door panel, similar to my Chevy. I found the indoor armrest to be too far away to use comfortably. I had to lean or stretch to reach it. Also the center console cup holders are only a few inches above the floor making for a long downward reach.
Someone earlier in this post commented on the ground clearance of the rear axle. It looked low to me also and I measured it at 7". My Chevy is 7" at the center of the differential housing and a few inches higher along the rest of the axle.
The first picture below shows the above cab storage compartment. The second pic is a closer view of that storage area. I stuffed a ProMaster brochure in it to show the height, which is about 10" and about 24" deep. A great place to store clothes and other light weight stuff.
