Contour Enthusiasts Group Archives Forums General Common Interests Ford vs. Chrysler, a comparison

Originally posted by Sandman333:
People buy the Windstar because it has the best safety rating.

Originally posted by javaContour:
As an owner of an MPV we compared it to the Windstall and Caravan. The DC is a very refined van, as DC has had time to work out the creature comforts. Of course, they've also had part of two decades now to work out the Automatic 4 speed automatic, but yet it seems to still grenade itself at 60-75K intervals.

Ford has been building the Windstar since 1995. If that is not enough time to refine a vehicle, I don't think they will ever get it right.

The Windstall seemed like driving a tractor compared to the DC vans, and the reliability history of Ford's engines and transmissions for this platform may rival DC for the cellar. The DC engines seem reasonably reliable.

Actually, my Windstar suspension is slighty stiffer than the DC, but it also handles the curves much better. A lot less body roll. Further, nearly every high mileage Chrysler minivan I've seen has sent profuse clouds of burnt oil out the tailpipe. This is probably due to Mitsubishi engines (most high mileage Mitsus do this too.) I trust Chrysler products a lot less than I do Ford.

The MPV is the dog when drag racing. However, 90% of the time, our MPV has two or three people in it, and very little gear. It handles better than the other two (as well as the Odyssey we test drove and were underwealmed by) and is fine around town as well as highway driving.

I think those who simply compared 0-60 times in minivans were really missing the mark for who and how they are used. We've had ours for 2 years and about 21K miles, without drama. The only recall we've had was a sticker for the door and the owners manual correcting errors about the tire load range required.

Passing power on the highway in the Windstar is stellar for a minivan. I think Ford has the fastest factory minivan out there, which is a good thing. Still, a little more power wouldn't hurt (Chrysler's top engine choice edges out the Ford in hp/trq, but I don't think it is as fast on the street). Hauling 6 passengers + driver, or using the front and rear air, there is a noticeable decrease in acceleration; more so than should be present.

I wouldn't tow a trailer with this, but then if I were buying a van to tow with frequently, it would be a full sized RWD van with a V8.

The 2002 MPV with the 3L Duratec and Jatco 5speed ATX is a great minivan choice for those who only need a 7/8ths sized "minivan"

Perhaps Ford should consider using that tranny. The WS only has a 4 speed automatic, and still shifts kind of quirky sometimes.

Finally, if it proves reliable, the new Kia minivan may be the value leader, at about 23K fully loaded, you get a lot of van for the money. The question is will the company behind the 10year/100K warranty still be in business before you get done making all of your payments.

FWIW,

TB

Originally posted by Sandman333:
The 3.8L isn't OHC, it's your standard 12 valve pushrod engine, although it does incorporate a balance shaft over the camshaft.

I'm sure the cam profiles could be adapted to get the low end torque out of the 3.0L Duratech that my heavy Windstar (near 5000 lbs!) needs to get moving. If they can make a 2.5L SVT run 200 hp/170 ft lbs, I see no reason why a 3.0L can't hit 200 hp/212 ft lbs. Hell, they could probably make 220 hp/245 ft lbs easy, with a rather flat torque curve. The engine would be a hell of a lot smoother too.

Originally posted by Sandman333:

Perhaps Ford should consider using that tranny. The WS only has a 4 speed automatic, and still shifts kind of quirky sometimes.