Minivans: Less Uncool Again?

[LoveTaurus]

It may not be the fastest vehicle on the road or offer the latest in high-tech design but the humble family hauler is becoming cool again.

Scorned as the suburban "mom mobile," the minivan is making a modest comeback after being eclipsed last decade by sportier SUVs.

 

http://online.wsj.co...2672144056.html

[silvrsvt]

I wouldn't call it much of a come-back....its only about 55K units extra, which would mean that out of the 5-7 minivans out there, the increases are only 5-7K per name plate

[theoldwizard]

There will always be a need for a family bus/delivery van.

 

After the Windstar and Freestar disasters (that still don't want to go away) Ford has given up on that market space. The problem is, with the new Transit and Transit Connect, families will be buying them for that exact purpose.

Edited August 11, 2012 by theoldwizard

[ANTAUS]

Marketplace will always want a minivan, for years we've heard "excuses" of how the numbers have dropped, its losing customers, blah blah...same thing for the FWD small/Mid Coupe argument, YET OTHER manufacturer's seem to make a business case out of it. While 10 years ago we were discussing the market beinh fragmented, and having MORE choices of vehicles, but with less than steller 400K+ unit sales we experienced in the 90s.

[NickF1011]

Marketplace will always want a minivan, for years we've heard "excuses" of how the numbers have dropped, its losing customers, blah blah...same thing for the FWD small/Mid Coupe argument, YET OTHER manufacturer's seem to make a business case out of it. While 10 years ago we were discussing the market beinh fragmented, and having MORE choices of vehicles, but with less than steller 400K+ unit sales we experienced in the 90s.

 

A small handful of automakers make a business case out of it. Just like a few automakers make a business case for producing pony cars. However, the fact of the matter is there are fewer choices on the market today for minivans than there were 10 years ago. Soon there will be even fewer with the upcoming end of the Caravan. It's a viable segment to some, but, just like pony cars, it's not one that everybody is going to be able to compete in.

[goinbroke2]

There will always be a need for a family bus/delivery van.

 

After the Windstar and Freestar disasters (that still don't want to go away) Ford has given up on that market space. The problem is, with the new Transit and Transit Connect, families will be buying them that exact purpose.

 

WTF??? Why all the hate for the windstar/freestar? I've known DOZENS of them and while I've heard the "horror" stories on here, I've seen two...TWO with headgasket problems and one with a tranny problem. All three were 3.8L's. The wife had a 98 3.0L which we sold at 330,000km's, it had a new alternator and brakes/shocks. Original exh, engine, tranny, etc. Her 07 freestar now has 235,000 on it and I replaced the coil pack....I mean really WTF?? Many friends use them as people haulers or when they are old (and cheap to buy) use them to haul gravel/dirtbikes/everything. Buckets up front and everything else pulled out they are excellent at hauling crap and are reliable.

 

As far as the transit connect (and transit) of course people will use them as people haulers...WHY NOT??? It's a utility box to haul crap.

Not sure of the reason for hating.

[theoldwizard]

WTF??? Why all the hate for the windstar/freestar? I've known DOZENS of them and while I've heard the "horror" stories on here, I've seen two...TWO with headgasket problems and one with a tranny problem. All three were 3.8L's.

First, we will never know what percentage of Windstars/Freestars had engine/transmission/rear axle/front sub-frame failures because Ford does not track any failures outside of the warranty period (approx. 5 years/60,000 mile).

 

The 3.8L engine and AX4S (and to a lesser degree the AX4N) were a "deadly" combination in any vehicle ! I know Ford mechanics that did head gaskets on Taurus/Windstars 3 to 5 days a week for years. Same with the transmission. Besides the infamous head gasket issues, the 3.8L also was know to have (i.e. TSB was issued) with the intake manifold gaskets.

 

Add in the rear axle and front sub failures (both probably more common in the "rust belt") and Windstar/Freestar minivans had many more non-typical repairs than similar vehicles. Many customers had more than one of these failures outside of the warranty period and paid for them out-of-pocket.

 

The Freestar was such a poor "freshening" that sales continued to plummet.

 

I do expect a FWD/AWD low roof Transit passenger van (ie. Tourneo) to eventually show up in the US. Hopefully they can shoe horn the 3.7L and 6F transmission in it. It would make a fantastic replacement for the Club Wagon.

[akirby]

There is a huge difference between keeping a minivan that already has a competitive modern platform and a loyal customer base versus trying to develop one from scratch and add it to the manufacturing mix and take away buyers from other established brands. There is also a difference between a manufacturer like Honda who only has a few vehicles versus Ford who has many many vehicles that all require capital investment.

 

Ford could easily go after the minivan market but it would have to give up something else to do it.

[papilgee4evaeva]

There is a huge difference between keeping a minivan that already has a competitive modern platform and a loyal customer base versus trying to develop one from scratch and add it to the manufacturing mix and take away buyers from other established brands. There is also a difference between a manufacturer like Honda who only has a few vehicles versus Ford who has many many vehicles that all require capital investment.

 

Ford could easily go after the minivan market but it would have to give up something else to do it.

 

Flex?

 

I like the vehicle, but Ford can spare it.

[akirby]

Flex?

 

I like the vehicle, but Ford can spare it.

 

Sure, they could spare it but it would take more than that to pay for a new minivan. Flex is just a tophat on a shared platform. And that platform isn't suitable for a world class minivan.

[papilgee4evaeva]

Sure, they could spare it but it would take more than that to pay for a new minivan. Flex is just a tophat on a shared platform. And that platform isn't suitable for a world class minivan.

 

True, but I think the GC/T&C/(Routan) is the only minivan sold here that rides on its own platform. Odyssey shares with Accord (more or less), Sienna shares with Camry,, Quest shares with Altima/Maxima, and, as I just found out, Sedona shares with Optima. We could start to go back and forth about all the modifications that would need to be made, but I think that's been done ad nauseam here.

 

But it's also kinda hard to stipulate a "world-class" minivan when that segment, like the full-size pickup, is almost exclusive to North America.

[sullynd]

How does something like the new Tourneo concept compare with the plus-sized NA "mini" vans? Is the SWB version that much bigger?

[akirby]

True, but I think the GC/T&C/(Routan) is the only minivan sold here that rides on its own platform. Odyssey shares with Accord (more or less), Sienna shares with Camry,, Quest shares with Altima/Maxima, and, as I just found out, Sedona shares with Optima. We could start to go back and forth about all the modifications that would need to be made, but I think that's been done ad nauseam here.

 

But it's also kinda hard to stipulate a "world-class" minivan when that segment, like the full-size pickup, is almost exclusive to North America.

 

Minivans are so unique they may as well be unique platforms. The features are certainly unique. It's not that it can't be done - just that it would take a big effort and a lot of resources to do it.

 

The F150 is only sold in North America but I don't think anyone would argue that it's world class.

[sullynd]

How does something like the new Tourneo concept compare with the plus-sized NA "mini" vans? Is the SWB version that much bigger?

 

Can anybody find dimensions on the Tourneo Custom? Looks like the SWB is about 5" longer than a Sienna. I wouldn't see the Tourneo as viable in our market, but wonder if it could be the basis for a NA Minivan... I know, One Ford, etc, etc.

[silvrsvt]

Can anybody find dimensions on the Tourneo Custom? Looks like the SWB is about 5" longer than a Sienna. I wouldn't see the Tourneo as viable in our market, but wonder if it could be the basis for a NA Minivan... I know, One Ford, etc, etc.

 

Do keep in mind that Ford already has a minivan in form of the Galaxie in Europe on the current Mondeo platform. With the Fusion and Edge moving to the CD4 platform (evolution of the current Mondeo/S-Max/Galaxie), it makes having a Minivan in NA market more likely...if the MKT and Flex go away, you even have room in the same plant as the Edge.

[sullynd]

Do keep in mind that Ford already has a minivan in form of the Galaxie in Europe on the current Mondeo platform.

 

The Galaxy is smaller than the minivans from Honda or Toyota that Ford would need to target,

 

 

Galaxy

Length

4820 (189.76)

 

Width

1884 (74.17)

 

Toyota

Length

5085 (200.2)

 

Width

1985 (78.2)

 

Honda

 

Length

5152 (202.83)

 

Width

2011 (79.17)

[jpd80]

Ford has already shown us with Ranger that having a product elsewhere is no guarantee that Ford will sell it in North America.

Obviously, the accountants look very closely at business plans and the expected ROI, sure there may be significant sales in a

segment but is the effort worth the expense and also, can the money be used to better effect elsewhere in another segment?

[theoldwizard]

Flex?

 

I like the vehicle, but Ford can spare it.

Sure, they could spare it but it would take more than that to pay for a new minivan. Flex is just a tophat on a shared platform. And that platform isn't suitable for a world class minivan.

The word "minivan" has been banned from use anywhere in the Dearborn Prduct Development Center !

[theoldwizard]

Do keep in mind that Ford already has a minivan in form of the Galaxie in Europe on the current Mondeo platform.

The Grand C-Max was canceled from US because it was too much like a minivan.

 

Right or wrong, the NA Product Planners have a long memory regarding the Windstar/Freestar debacle. Baking the return of a minivan in the US is a career shortening move !

[RichardJensen]

Oh come on! Ford didn't approve the Grand C-Max and then cancel it because they suddenly discovered it had sliding doors!!

 

I'm guessing it's closer to the truth to say that the volume projections in the US just weren't there, and with no power sliding doors, no room for grade-schoolers in the 3rd row, and iffy fuel economy, well, it was going to be a marginal player anyway. At least in EU it's a competitor in a segment with many other entries of similar size. Here it would've been, "Oh hey, didn't Mazda used to make one of those?"

Edited August 14, 2012 by RichardJensen

[jpd80]

Oh come on! Ford didn't approve the Grand C-Max and then cancel it because they suddenly discovered it had sliding doors!!

 

I'm guessing it's closer to the truth to say that the volume projections in the US just weren't there, and with no power sliding doors, no room for grade-schoolers in the 3rd row, and iffy fuel economy, well, it was going to be a marginal player anyway. At least in EU it's a competitor in a segment with many other entries of similar size. Here it would've been, "Oh hey, didn't Mazda used to make one of those?"

Maybe the real problem was that grand C-Max is Focus based and wasn't wide enough

to accommodate true three across seating required in North American minivans.

[BlackHorse]

Anyone who is driving around in a two wheel drive SUV and doesn't realize that it's really just a tall station wagon is living in denial. The SUV craze is proof that people in this country do not use common sense and logic when buying cars. An SUV is just about the worst choice for a "family" vehicle. Most of them don't seat any more passengers than a standard station wagon does and they don't have any more rear area cargo room than your typical station wagon would. What they do have is a greater propensity to roll over due to the taller ride height and decidely less than stellar gas mileage. The average household size in America is 2.6 which means that most couples have 1 child on average and 2 isn't altogether uncommon. Either way, there's no reason a family of 4 can't fit into your average station wagon. But God forbid you drive a station wagon like dear old Mom and Dad did. Guess what, your SUV is just a station wagon. Congratulations, you have in fact turned out to be just like your parents. Minivans for larger families make a lot more sense then any SUV. They are easier to get into and out of. They still have plenty of cargo space and they are far less prone to rolling over due to the lower ride height.

Edited August 15, 2012 by BlackHorse

[Anthony]

We went from a large CUV to a minivan and will never look back. The difference in daily usability (especially with kids) is night and day.

Edited August 15, 2012 by Intrepidatious

[akirby]

Anyone who is driving around in a two wheel drive SUV and doesn't realize that it's really just a tall station wagon is living in denial. The SUV craze is proof that people in this country do not use common sense and logic when buying cars. An SUV is just about the worst choice for a "family" vehicle. Most of them don't seat any more passengers than a standard station wagon does and they don't have any more rear area cargo room than your typical station wagon would. What they do have is a greater propensity to roll over due to the taller ride height and decidely less than stellar gas mileage. The average household size in America is 2.6 which means that most couples have 1 child on average and 2 isn't altogether uncommon. Either way, there's no reason a family of 4 can't fit into your average station wagon. But God forbid you drive a station wagon like dear old Mom and Dad did. Guess what, your SUV is just a station wagon. Congratulations, you have in fact turned out to be just like your parents. Minivans for larger families make a lot more sense then any SUV. They are easier to get into and out of. They still have plenty of cargo space and they are far less prone to rolling over due to the lower ride height.

 

Everybody understands that minivans have more utility than crossovers or suvs and station wagons ride and handle better.

 

People buy crossovers and suvs because they prefer the styling and/or the taller seating position. Some people simply do not like the look of minivans and station wagons. It's that simple.

 

And who are you to tell people what vehicle they should be driving? You don't know their motives and even if you did it's none of your business.

 

Why aren't you driving a Prius instead of a Corolla? It gets way better gas mileage and it's a hatchback. You're obviously driving the wrong vehicle.

[NickF1011]

Anyone who is driving around in a two wheel drive SUV and doesn't realize that it's really just a tall station wagon is living in denial. The SUV craze is proof that people in this country do not use common sense and logic when buying cars. An SUV is just about the worst choice for a "family" vehicle. Most of them don't seat any more passengers than a standard station wagon does and they don't have any more rear area cargo room than your typical station wagon would. What they do have is a greater propensity to roll over due to the taller ride height and decidely less than stellar gas mileage. The average household size in America is 2.6 which means that most couples have 1 child on average and 2 isn't altogether uncommon. Either way, there's no reason a family of 4 can't fit into your average station wagon. But God forbid you drive a station wagon like dear old Mom and Dad did. Guess what, your SUV is just a station wagon. Congratulations, you have in fact turned out to be just like your parents. Minivans for larger families make a lot more sense then any SUV. They are easier to get into and out of. They still have plenty of cargo space and they are far less prone to rolling over due to the lower ride height.

 

99% of vehicle purchases are illogical on one level or another. If vehicle purchases were dictated by necessity there would be one car company on the planet building 3 models: a car, a truck, and a van. And they would all look dull as dishwater and be the same color. But gosh darnit, they would all meet the Blackhorse Practicality Criteria.

 

Both of my current cars would surely fail the test.

 

Who needs a 500+ horsepower Mustang? Completely impractical!

 

And I'm single with no kids. And it hardly ever snows here. Why on earth did I buy an AWD CUV?

 

I should be ashamed.

Edited August 15, 2012 by NickF1011