Elder abuse.

[OVERKILL]

The crossover ones.

OK, well that vehicle was never made in PHEV form, that was an abortion developed under the Chrysler/Mercedes partnership and they were a nightmare. The OP said "a few years ago" and referenced the hybrid, which would be the same one my client owns. They are the replacement minivan in the Chrysler fleet and have absolutely nothing in common with the old one.

 

[AutoMechanic]

OK, well that vehicle was never made in PHEV form, that was an abortion developed under the Chrysler/Mercedes partnership and they were a nightmare. The OP said "a few years ago" and referenced the hybrid, which would be the same one my client owns. They are the replacement minivan in the Chrysler fleet and have absolutely nothing in common with the old one.

I know that. I know someone that owns one. I think it will still have the Chrysler electrical problems. My aunt bought one and quickly returned it to the dealership and got her money back luckily her mechanic told her to run and my dad and me did too.

 

[Chris142]

Heck, I ski more than 20 days a year and skipped 4x4 on my truck.

It’s too big to really go off-road. I get along fine with a newish set of Blizzaks.
There are certain fairly specialized applications where 4x4 is useful, such as a farm truck that operates on muddy roads.

Buying 4x4 because you don’t want to bother changing to snow tires in winter is bad. On the other hand, you pretty much recapture the value at trade-in time if you trade in every few years which is more than you can say about most options.

I can't get to my house in heavy rain or snow with a 2wd. Also hauling toys out into the desert requires 4x4.

 

[OVERKILL]

I know that. I know someone that owns one. I think it will still have the Chrysler electrical problems. My aunt bought one and quickly returned it to the dealership and got her money back luckily her mechanic told her to run and my dad and me did too.

Well, respectfully, what you think and what's borne to fruition may not be the same thing. Saying in response to the OP that it would be a financial disaster with no experience with the product in question having actually played out in that way is perpetuating rumours, heresy and liberal hyperbole that may be entirely irrelevant to the product actually being discussed.

Your dad uses Lucas and my impression is you are extremely young. Forgive me if I'm being a bit crass, but generally I don't give much weight to opinion presented by those whose position is one of absolutism even in the face of evidence that clearly debases it. You mentioned your dad's adherence to the virtues of Lucas even after you told him as to what was discussed here, so, in the face of facts he defers to completely unqualified "experience" as proof-positive of performance. If I judge the merit of his advice on the basis of that metric I'm left with a value that approaches zero and it sounds like on much of this you are simply parroting his position/opinion, which is unfortunate.

I think you'll find that if you give yourself the opportunity to step outside that echo chamber that things are far more nuanced and far less black and white than you've been led to believe and regurgitating here. Knowledge is a powerful tool, understanding that there will always be more to learn and that things are always changing yields wisdom and wise people typically don't broad-brush because their knowledge has taught them that it usually isn't appropriate.

 

[AutoMechanic]

Well, respectfully, what you think and what's borne to fruition may not be the same thing. Saying in response to the OP that it would be a financial disaster with no experience with the product in question having actually played out in that way is perpetuating rumours, heresy and liberal hyperbole that may be entirely irrelevant to the product actually being discussed.

Your dad uses Lucas and my impression is you are extremely young. Forgive me if I'm being a bit crass, but generally I don't give much weight to opinion presented by those whose position is one of absolutism even in the face of evidence that clearly debases it. You mentioned your dad's adherence to the virtues of Lucas even after you told him as to what was discussed here, so, in the face of facts he defers to completely unqualified "experience" as proof-positive of performance. If I judge the merit of his advice on the basis of that metric I'm left with a value that approaches zero and it sounds like on much of this you are simply parroting his position/opinion, which is unfortunate.

I think you'll find that if you give yourself the opportunity to step outside that echo chamber that things are far more nuanced and far less black and white than you've been led to believe and regurgitating here. Knowledge is a powerful tool, understanding that there will always be more to learn and that things are always changing yields wisdom and wise people typically don't broad-brush because their knowledge has taught them that it usually isn't appropriate.

Some things me and him disagree on so not always agree with him on things. I am just speaking based on my experience with Chrysler stuff. I don’t take criticism from what you wrote because I do disagree on some things. I have worked on many different brands so I have knowledge on some things too as I’m sure you do as well probably much more than me. I am younger but not too young of course. I explained to some other people that I know that use Lucas products as well and they laughed some of which are also professionals in this industry so they have probably been taught the same things I was and my dad was about their products. I don’t feel what I wrote was irrelevant but that’s just my opinion.

 

[OVERKILL]

Some things me and him disagree on so not always agree with him on things. I am just speaking based on my experience with Chrysler stuff. I don’t take criticism from what you wrote because I do disagree on some things. I have worked on many different brands so I have knowledge on some things too as I’m sure you do as well probably much more than me. I am younger but not too young of course. I explained to some other people that I know that use Lucas products as well and they laughed some of which are also professionals in this industry so they have probably been taught the same things I was and my dad was about their products. I don’t feel what I wrote was irrelevant but that’s just my opinion.

I don't mind you disagreeing, in fact I encourage it if it is backed up with facts. I'm not always right and never claim to be, but my positions are always evidence-based, which is why LOS is generally maligned on here, as the evidence clearly shows what the product is.

The problem, which you've well-highlighted in the last part of your post, is that people get invested in a mindset and then will just "laugh" when presented with information that clearly contradicts it. They'd rather laugh it off then do the work reconciling their belief with reality and that's dangerous and that's often what happens when people slag a specific car company as a whole, rather than delving into the nuance of the topic and how they've had some specific models/engines/transmissions...etc that were problematic.

Take the latest Honda thread that The Critic posted where the camshaft ate itself. Honda benefits from a reputation for being indestructible, but it's become reasonably clear in that thread that this isn't an isolated incident. Should we all swear off Honda now because this engine seems particularly more prone to camshaft issues? Of course not, the same reason people shouldn't avoid the HEMI because the odd one has a lifter failure or Toyota because they had engines sludge solid.

Yes, absolutely avoid problematic products if you are not inclined to deal with those issues when they come about; if the cost outweighs the experience. If you are looking for an engaging car and it having the absolutely lowest TCO isn't important, sure, buy that BMW, pay to play! If you want a car with the lowest possible TCO and it having the personality of a toaster doesn't bother you, then sure, get that Camry or Corolla.

Chrysler's minivans have typically had a very good reputation for being cheap to buy and maintain. Yes, the new Pacifica does not have that reputation, and hey, it may not get it, but we'll see, it's too early to tell yet, and that's the point I was trying to get you to see. You can't condemn the current Pacifica based on the model bearing the same name produced ages ago that has nothing in common with it.

You can't make a claim that something would have been a financial nightmare and back it up with the fact you dislike Chrysler, that's not how evidence works. There's not enough viagra in the world to keep that argument up.

 

[AutoMechanic]

I don't mind you disagreeing, in fact I encourage it if it is backed up with facts. I'm not always right and never claim to be, but my positions are always evidence-based, which is why LOS is generally maligned on here, as the evidence clearly shows what the product is.

The problem, which you've well-highlighted in the last part of your post, is that people get invested in a mindset and then will just "laugh" when presented with information that clearly contradicts it. They'd rather laugh it off then do the work reconciling their belief with reality and that's dangerous and that's often what happens when people slag a specific car company as a whole, rather than delving into the nuance of the topic and how they've had some specific models/engines/transmissions...etc that were problematic.

Take the latest Honda thread that The Critic posted where the camshaft ate itself. Honda benefits from a reputation for being indestructible, but it's become reasonably clear in that thread that this isn't an isolated incident. Should we all swear off Honda now because this engine seems particularly more prone to camshaft issues? Of course not, the same reason people shouldn't avoid the HEMI because the odd one has a lifter failure or Toyota because they had engines sludge solid.

Yes, absolutely avoid problematic products if you are not inclined to deal with those issues when they come about; if the cost outweighs the experience. If you are looking for an engaging car and it having the absolutely lowest TCO isn't important, sure, buy that BMW, pay to play! If you want a car with the lowest possible TCO and it having the personality of a toaster doesn't bother you, then sure, get that Camry or Corolla.

Chrysler's minivans have typically had a very good reputation for being cheap to buy and maintain. Yes, the new Pacifica does not have that reputation, and hey, it may not get it, but we'll see, it's too early to tell yet, and that's the point I was trying to get you to see. You can't condemn the current Pacifica based on the model bearing the same name produced ages ago that has nothing in common with it.

You can't make a claim that something would have been a financial nightmare and back it up with the fact you dislike Chrysler, that's not how evidence works. There's not enough viagra in the world to keep that argument up.

LOL (to the last part about viagra). Yeah I mean some of those other Chrysler vans were pretty decent for the most part. My English teacher that I had in middle school who is one of my distant neighbors had a 2009 model Town and Country she never had an issue with it until it developed a short in the electrical system earlier this year so she traded it in and got a new Honda Odyssey just because they didn’t want to spend a whole lot on that older one. For what it was they gave her a decent trade for the mileage and short problem.

 

[OVERKILL]

LOL (to the last part about viagra). Yeah I mean some of those other Chrysler vans were pretty decent for the most part. My English teacher that I had in middle school who is one of my distant neighbors had a 2009 model Town and Country she never had an issue with it until it developed a short in the electrical system earlier this year so she traded it in and got a new Honda Odyssey just because they didn’t want to spend a whole lot on that older one. For what it was they gave her a decent trade for the mileage and short problem.

Yep, member @StevieC has racked up an obscene amount of miles on Chrysler vans over the years, they are generally well-regarded. So, the current Pacifica, which is a van, is supposed to replace the old Chrysler van. Will it be as reliable? I don't think there's enough evidence to know that yet. The original Chrysler van had some interesting issues early on too (transmission problems) but those were eventually solved. It's one of the staple vehicles of their lineup, so making it reliable is likely priority, unlike with the 200/Dart, which is at the other end of the spectrum. The trucks have been good too, same with the LX cars (Charger, Challenger, 300), WK2 vehicles (Durango, Grand Cherokee) and even the current gen Fiat-based Cherokee appears to be well sorted now too.

I'm not an FCA fanboi, I grew up in a Ford family and most of my vehicles have been Ford products. I started buying FCA offerings when I became friends with the owner at our local dealership. Here at work we've had really good service from the trucks, and they've been no less reliable than the Fords. Like with any other company, they have products you are best to avoid and some that are excellent. Trying to avoid getting jaded when you are forced to work on the bad ones is the hard part

 

[AutoMechanic]

Yep, member @StevieC has racked up an obscene amount of miles on Chrysler vans over the years, they are generally well-regarded. So, the current Pacifica, which is a van, is supposed to replace the old Chrysler van. Will it be as reliable? I don't think there's enough evidence to know that yet. The original Chrysler van had some interesting issues early on too (transmission problems) but those were eventually solved. It's one of the staple vehicles of their lineup, so making it reliable is likely priority, unlike with the 200/Dart, which is at the other end of the spectrum. The trucks have been good too, same with the LX cars (Charger, Challenger, 300), WK2 vehicles (Durango, Grand Cherokee) and even the current gen Fiat-based Cherokee appears to be well sorted now too.

I'm not an FCA fanboi, I grew up in a Ford family and most of my vehicles have been Ford products. I started buying FCA offerings when I became friends with the owner at our local dealership. Here at work we've had really good service from the trucks, and they've been no less reliable than the Fords. Like with any other company, they have products you are best to avoid and some that are excellent. Trying to avoid getting jaded when you are forced to work on the bad ones is the hard part

I’ve seen his before.

 

[sloinker]

I should have called the post Taking advantage of an old timer versus elder abuse. That particular dealer was well within its rights to not take back the vehicle they sold the old man. There is a back story of being kept waiting for this and that approval and in essence, wringing out every last penny they could from the transaction over a period approaching 9 hours. He paid a premium over MSRP and bought everything else they offered too. I suspect he probably bought Simonizing and Scotchgard if they were clever enough.The old guy has become fairly easily manipulated and the dealership took advantage of that. Could have been any dealership. He trusts too much for this day and age. I suggested he test drive a bunch of vehicles and buy what he wanted online. He didn't take my advice and did what he wanted. He can well afford the money spent and he won't be around much longer so he should spend it while he can It still doesn't excuse the predators at the Toyota dealership.

As far as AutoMechanic- most folks on this board have forgotten more than you could ever hope to learn. Advertising your ignorance is a surefire way to get some hate. I'm not as kind as many posters on this site. Overkill is Canadian and inherently more polite than many. I myself have made a few absolute statement's and have been handed my azzz over it. I try to learn from my mistakes and use that learning in the future. I've never met your dad but if he likes Lucas Oil Stabilizer he is as smart as you appear to be.

 

[mobilnissan1991]

Buying a 4wd is smart because you just never know if you will be in a situation where you might need it. You may say you never will need it, but that one time you do youll be glad you had it. My next truck and any truck I buy from here on out will be 4wd.

 

[joekingcorvette]

Sometimes these old people just like to act abused and they sit back and watch the show. Sounds as if he must have a sound mind to be able to ride a bicycle and drive a vehicle at that age. Old people love to stir the soup and let the siblings sit back and squabble over such small menial matters. On a worst case scenario he would probably lose a couple thousand bucks by having to resell the vehicle that didn't suit his wants and needs. IMO these are very trivial matters compared to other ways elders can get totally ripped off.

 

[sloinker]

Buying a 4wd is smart because you just never know if you will be in a situation where you might need it. You may say you never will need it, but that one time you do youll be glad you had it. My next truck and any truck I buy from here on out will be 4wd.

He has a 4WD pickup already, he also has a couple tractors if the snow gets past a few feet. The purchase was to allow the hauling of his recumbent bicycle as easily as possible. Low lift height and not having to partially disassemble it to transport. The RAV4 offers a lower lift height than his truck but requires disassembly to haul it. I feel a minivan with the seats folded down or removed would have suited his needs best. Too late now unless he wants to sell the RAV and move on.