Traded in our 2008 Odyssey LX for a 2013 Caravan..
- Thread starter JTK
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted By: Vikas
don't you think a newer car would cost more to insure than a older one?
I've purchased new vehicles in years past (replacing older ones) and had my premium go down. It's all dependent on the make/model vehicle.
Good old Odysseys just happen to be a bargain to insure.
Prolly 'cause the transmissions explode when thieves try to thieve them.
don't you think a newer car would cost more to insure than a older one?
I've purchased new vehicles in years past (replacing older ones) and had my premium go down. It's all dependent on the make/model vehicle.
Good old Odysseys just happen to be a bargain to insure.
Prolly 'cause the transmissions explode when thieves try to thieve them.
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: jimbrewer
I wonder why the difference in insurance costs? I once read an article analyzing IIHS crash ratings and comparing it to actual insurance data. A lot of things were just inexplicable. For example, Jeep Cherokees (not the Grand Cherokees) were less prone to roll over than almost any other SUV. Why? No one knew. There was no obvious physical reason.
Lincolns were much safer than Cadillacs in IIHS crash tests, but much worse in the real world. I can see the reason for that one--Lincolns in those days tended to attract Lloyd Bentsen type old people who liked to drive their age. But a lot of this stuff is just weird.
When I first got my Jeep Cherokee (and it was not lifted), I had it sideways at 55 trying to stop for a deer.
I didn't realize that the rear brakes were prone to locking up after a rainy night.
Hit the brakes at 55 and it went sideways (on dry pavement). I thought I was going over, but it stayed right flat on the ground!
I wonder why the difference in insurance costs? I once read an article analyzing IIHS crash ratings and comparing it to actual insurance data. A lot of things were just inexplicable. For example, Jeep Cherokees (not the Grand Cherokees) were less prone to roll over than almost any other SUV. Why? No one knew. There was no obvious physical reason.
Lincolns were much safer than Cadillacs in IIHS crash tests, but much worse in the real world. I can see the reason for that one--Lincolns in those days tended to attract Lloyd Bentsen type old people who liked to drive their age. But a lot of this stuff is just weird.
When I first got my Jeep Cherokee (and it was not lifted), I had it sideways at 55 trying to stop for a deer.
I didn't realize that the rear brakes were prone to locking up after a rainy night.
Hit the brakes at 55 and it went sideways (on dry pavement). I thought I was going over, but it stayed right flat on the ground!
Originally Posted By: Miller88
Originally Posted By: jimbrewer
I wonder why the difference in insurance costs? I once read an article analyzing IIHS crash ratings and comparing it to actual insurance data. A lot of things were just inexplicable. For example, Jeep Cherokees (not the Grand Cherokees) were less prone to roll over than almost any other SUV. Why? No one knew. There was no obvious physical reason.
Lincolns were much safer than Cadillacs in IIHS crash tests, but much worse in the real world. I can see the reason for that one--Lincolns in those days tended to attract Lloyd Bentsen type old people who liked to drive their age. But a lot of this stuff is just weird.
When I first got my Jeep Cherokee (and it was not lifted), I had it sideways at 55 trying to stop for a deer.
I didn't realize that the rear brakes were prone to locking up after a rainy night.
Hit the brakes at 55 and it went sideways (on dry pavement). I thought I was going over, but it stayed right flat on the ground!
Stock Cherokee XJs have pretty good handling for an SUV. Add some thicker Addco anti-sway bars front and rear and you've got an SUV that can corner like no other. The Grand Cherokees have a higher center of gravity and weigh more than the Cherokee, which makes them more prone to rolling over.
Originally Posted By: jimbrewer
I wonder why the difference in insurance costs? I once read an article analyzing IIHS crash ratings and comparing it to actual insurance data. A lot of things were just inexplicable. For example, Jeep Cherokees (not the Grand Cherokees) were less prone to roll over than almost any other SUV. Why? No one knew. There was no obvious physical reason.
Lincolns were much safer than Cadillacs in IIHS crash tests, but much worse in the real world. I can see the reason for that one--Lincolns in those days tended to attract Lloyd Bentsen type old people who liked to drive their age. But a lot of this stuff is just weird.
When I first got my Jeep Cherokee (and it was not lifted), I had it sideways at 55 trying to stop for a deer.
I didn't realize that the rear brakes were prone to locking up after a rainy night.
Hit the brakes at 55 and it went sideways (on dry pavement). I thought I was going over, but it stayed right flat on the ground!
Stock Cherokee XJs have pretty good handling for an SUV. Add some thicker Addco anti-sway bars front and rear and you've got an SUV that can corner like no other. The Grand Cherokees have a higher center of gravity and weigh more than the Cherokee, which makes them more prone to rolling over.
Originally Posted By: Miller88
When I first got my Jeep Cherokee (and it was not lifted), I had it sideways at 55 trying to stop for a deer.
I didn't realize that the rear brakes were prone to locking up after a rainy night.
Hit the brakes at 55 and it went sideways (on dry pavement). I thought I was going over, but it stayed right flat on the ground!
I hear that. I owned a 1994 Cherokee 4.0L, 5spd, 2wd back in the late 1990s. It could be absolutely frightening under slick conditions.
When I first got my Jeep Cherokee (and it was not lifted), I had it sideways at 55 trying to stop for a deer.
I didn't realize that the rear brakes were prone to locking up after a rainy night.
Hit the brakes at 55 and it went sideways (on dry pavement). I thought I was going over, but it stayed right flat on the ground!
I hear that. I owned a 1994 Cherokee 4.0L, 5spd, 2wd back in the late 1990s. It could be absolutely frightening under slick conditions.
webfors, what the heck are they doing to your new GC that you can't pick it up 'till next week? Giving it the super colossal Canadian once-over?
I wasn't even ready for mine. Basically got it the same day.
Another mildly unpleasant thing you'll notice about the Pentastar is it looks like the intake manifold has to come off for coil and plug access. Ugh..
Oh.. and wait 'till you lift off the plastic engine cover. It's packed SO full of foam and sound deadening material, it could suffice as a wicked seat cushion or personal floatation device.
I wasn't even ready for mine. Basically got it the same day.
Another mildly unpleasant thing you'll notice about the Pentastar is it looks like the intake manifold has to come off for coil and plug access. Ugh..
Oh.. and wait 'till you lift off the plastic engine cover. It's packed SO full of foam and sound deadening material, it could suffice as a wicked seat cushion or personal floatation device.
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: JTK
webfors, what the heck are they doing to your new GC that you can't pick it up 'till next week? Giving it the super colossal Canadian once-over?
I wasn't even ready for mine. Basically got it the same day.
Another mildly unpleasant thing you'll notice about the Pentastar is it looks like the intake manifold has to come off for coil and plug access. Ugh..
Oh.. and wait 'till you lift off the plastic engine cover. It's packed SO full of foam and sound deadening material, it could suffice as a wicked seat cushion or personal floatation device.
LOL, good advice.
As for the delivery, I think they just sold too many units... they can't keep up, and with the long weekend that steals a day or two.
webfors, what the heck are they doing to your new GC that you can't pick it up 'till next week? Giving it the super colossal Canadian once-over?
I wasn't even ready for mine. Basically got it the same day.
Another mildly unpleasant thing you'll notice about the Pentastar is it looks like the intake manifold has to come off for coil and plug access. Ugh..
Oh.. and wait 'till you lift off the plastic engine cover. It's packed SO full of foam and sound deadening material, it could suffice as a wicked seat cushion or personal floatation device.
LOL, good advice.
As for the delivery, I think they just sold too many units... they can't keep up, and with the long weekend that steals a day or two.
Originally Posted By: webfors
As for the delivery, I think they just sold too many units... they can't keep up, and with the long weekend that steals a day or two.
Good points.
Two weeks ago, mine was the quickest delivery I ever experienced. It kind of showed. Looked like Stevie Wonder did the detailing.
Never once a push for an extended warranty or maintenance package. Never a mention of fabric or paint protection, glass etching. Those are firsts for me.
If fact, 2-weeks down the road, no new owner/dealer experience survey, no phone calls.
I kind of dig it!!
As for the delivery, I think they just sold too many units... they can't keep up, and with the long weekend that steals a day or two.
Good points.
Two weeks ago, mine was the quickest delivery I ever experienced. It kind of showed. Looked like Stevie Wonder did the detailing.
Never once a push for an extended warranty or maintenance package. Never a mention of fabric or paint protection, glass etching. Those are firsts for me.
If fact, 2-weeks down the road, no new owner/dealer experience survey, no phone calls.
I kind of dig it!!
I think the new Grand Caravan's are a good buy, the powertrain is great. We own a 2005, my wife likes it most of the time, but it has been the most unreliable car our family has ever owned. We've owned the van since 2006 and I've done all the maintenance, however we have a "book" sized stack of various repairs that have been needed (114,000 miles currently). The AC has been worked on 5 times (just for an example). I can only imagine that the new ones are way better than ours, but based on our experience my family would probably kill me if I brought another one home. Good luck.
Originally Posted By: Buick92
I think the new Grand Caravan's are a good buy, the powertrain is great. We own a 2005, my wife likes it most of the time, but it has been the most unreliable car our family has ever owned. We've owned the van since 2006 and I've done all the maintenance, however we have a "book" sized stack of various repairs that have been needed (114,000 miles currently). The AC has been worked on 5 times (just for an example). I can only imagine that the new ones are way better than ours, but based on our experience my family would probably kill me if I brought another one home. Good luck.
I sure hope we don't go through that. If so it'll be the first and last Dodge product in our family.
I think the new Grand Caravan's are a good buy, the powertrain is great. We own a 2005, my wife likes it most of the time, but it has been the most unreliable car our family has ever owned. We've owned the van since 2006 and I've done all the maintenance, however we have a "book" sized stack of various repairs that have been needed (114,000 miles currently). The AC has been worked on 5 times (just for an example). I can only imagine that the new ones are way better than ours, but based on our experience my family would probably kill me if I brought another one home. Good luck.
I sure hope we don't go through that. If so it'll be the first and last Dodge product in our family.
Originally Posted By: webfors
Originally Posted By: Buick92
I think the new Grand Caravan's are a good buy, the powertrain is great. We own a 2005, my wife likes it most of the time, but it has been the most unreliable car our family has ever owned. We've owned the van since 2006 and I've done all the maintenance, however we have a "book" sized stack of various repairs that have been needed (114,000 miles currently). The AC has been worked on 5 times (just for an example). I can only imagine that the new ones are way better than ours, but based on our experience my family would probably kill me if I brought another one home. Good luck.
I sure hope we don't go through that. If so it'll be the first and last Dodge product in our family.
I'm sure that the quality must be better by now, maybe we got a lemon I don't know. The most expensive repairs that I can think of were a rack and pinion (at only 50,000 miles) and a cracked flex plate at 100,000 miles (more common than you might think). It's kind of weird because you get to the point to where you expect something to happen every few months and if nothing happens you are suprised.
Originally Posted By: Buick92
I think the new Grand Caravan's are a good buy, the powertrain is great. We own a 2005, my wife likes it most of the time, but it has been the most unreliable car our family has ever owned. We've owned the van since 2006 and I've done all the maintenance, however we have a "book" sized stack of various repairs that have been needed (114,000 miles currently). The AC has been worked on 5 times (just for an example). I can only imagine that the new ones are way better than ours, but based on our experience my family would probably kill me if I brought another one home. Good luck.
I sure hope we don't go through that. If so it'll be the first and last Dodge product in our family.
I'm sure that the quality must be better by now, maybe we got a lemon I don't know. The most expensive repairs that I can think of were a rack and pinion (at only 50,000 miles) and a cracked flex plate at 100,000 miles (more common than you might think). It's kind of weird because you get to the point to where you expect something to happen every few months and if nothing happens you are suprised.
Last edited:
I hear you Buick92. That is a bummer. To be fair though, rack and pinion problems are not all that uncommon on any make/model minivan. Our 2008 Odyssey had issues with intermittent binding (extremely stiff wheel) the entire ~6yrs we owned it. Had it in for the P.S pump TSB and a time or two after that. It still did it. A/C issues are also common across the board given the miles of refrigerant lines and what have you. A/C stopped working on our Ody @ ~62K miles. An evac and recharge mysteriously fixed that.
My sister had 2000 for 10 years, not much wrong with that one other than rust (wasn't rustproofed), and they purchased a used 2009 fleet GC a couple years ago and have over 80k miles on it now, including two problem free cross country trips with a family of 7. Few issues with either, although my brother in law did mention they both went through brakes often.
In my opinion, Daimler ran Chrysler into the ground starting around 2004 or so.
Not that I put much faith in Wikipedia, but even they agree with me
:
"In the middle of the past decade, the merger began to take a turn for the worse. Due to Daimler's reluctance to allow Chrysler to continue development and use quality materials[dubious – discuss], Chrysler vehicles suffered lower fit and finish quality as well as sub-standard parts being supplied and used in spite of concerns[citation needed]. Although the resulting vehicles produced were still adequate, they were generally not on par with the competition."
Not that I put much faith in Wikipedia, but even they agree with me
"In the middle of the past decade, the merger began to take a turn for the worse. Due to Daimler's reluctance to allow Chrysler to continue development and use quality materials[dubious – discuss], Chrysler vehicles suffered lower fit and finish quality as well as sub-standard parts being supplied and used in spite of concerns[citation needed]. Although the resulting vehicles produced were still adequate, they were generally not on par with the competition."
Originally Posted By: JTK
Originally Posted By: Miller88
When I first got my Jeep Cherokee (and it was not lifted), I had it sideways at 55 trying to stop for a deer.
I didn't realize that the rear brakes were prone to locking up after a rainy night.
Hit the brakes at 55 and it went sideways (on dry pavement). I thought I was going over, but it stayed right flat on the ground!
I hear that. I owned a 1994 Cherokee 4.0L, 5spd, 2wd back in the late 1990s. It could be absolutely frightening under slick conditions.
Never could figure out why they lock like that on the first touch of the brakes. I replaced all rear hardware and it still happens ... just with the 31'' tires it won't lock up any more.
They are EXTREMELY front heavy. Last winter, with a bad diferential in the front, mine was limited to 2WD. It was absolutely horrid in the snow. Least bit of snow, it would just spin the right rear. I had good tires and piled tools and wheels in the back and even than it was bad.
Originally Posted By: Miller88
When I first got my Jeep Cherokee (and it was not lifted), I had it sideways at 55 trying to stop for a deer.
I didn't realize that the rear brakes were prone to locking up after a rainy night.
Hit the brakes at 55 and it went sideways (on dry pavement). I thought I was going over, but it stayed right flat on the ground!
I hear that. I owned a 1994 Cherokee 4.0L, 5spd, 2wd back in the late 1990s. It could be absolutely frightening under slick conditions.
Never could figure out why they lock like that on the first touch of the brakes. I replaced all rear hardware and it still happens ... just with the 31'' tires it won't lock up any more.
They are EXTREMELY front heavy. Last winter, with a bad diferential in the front, mine was limited to 2WD. It was absolutely horrid in the snow. Least bit of snow, it would just spin the right rear. I had good tires and piled tools and wheels in the back and even than it was bad.
Last edited:
Last year our 2007 Odyssey was totalled and we received a rental GC. We had it for a few weeks and it was a good mv. It was quieter than the Ody, although it was noticeably smaller inside (and out). With a family to haul around, interior space and comfort was definitely at a premium. We thought about it during our extended stay with the GC, but it just wasn't going to work for our family; the size just wasn't quite enough.
Big plus to the powertrain, though. You've mentioned it quite a bit, but it's eager and I got it to chirp the tires without really trying. I felt like the Ody was a bit better of a cruiser on the highway, ride wise even if it was a little louder. Very smooth. Other complaints about the GC were that the transmission would hang sometimes, often when coming out of a turn or when getting on/off the accelerator. I'm not sure if that was a sign of a bad transmission (the car had about 12k) or what, but it was a little unnerving when the car just wouldn't go when the pedal was down.
Our Odyssey was decent reliability wise; the power steering went out twice, once replaced by Honda (via reimbursement) and the second by our family mechanic. We babied the heck out of the transmission wrt to maintenance. Always had the oil changed with synthetic, good intervals, kept up with other maintenance...went through a lot of brakes and tires for some reason. We had a lot of miles when it was totalled (just had the wheel bearings and all four tires replaced as well) and insurance paid us out nicely. We were planning on keeping it to 300k+ as it was well "lived in" by our family, and I literally mailed out our final payment before we left on our ill-fated trip when it was totalled. Was pretty tight the whole time we owned it though there were a few qc issues that the dealer never rectified (parts fitting). We racked up a lot of miles on it, and if you didn't look at the odometer, you couldn't guess how many miles it had.
If we had fewer kids or the GC was just a wee bit larger, we might've purchased one. Great value in a mv, with a surprising powertrain.
Big plus to the powertrain, though. You've mentioned it quite a bit, but it's eager and I got it to chirp the tires without really trying. I felt like the Ody was a bit better of a cruiser on the highway, ride wise even if it was a little louder. Very smooth. Other complaints about the GC were that the transmission would hang sometimes, often when coming out of a turn or when getting on/off the accelerator. I'm not sure if that was a sign of a bad transmission (the car had about 12k) or what, but it was a little unnerving when the car just wouldn't go when the pedal was down.
Our Odyssey was decent reliability wise; the power steering went out twice, once replaced by Honda (via reimbursement) and the second by our family mechanic. We babied the heck out of the transmission wrt to maintenance. Always had the oil changed with synthetic, good intervals, kept up with other maintenance...went through a lot of brakes and tires for some reason. We had a lot of miles when it was totalled (just had the wheel bearings and all four tires replaced as well) and insurance paid us out nicely. We were planning on keeping it to 300k+ as it was well "lived in" by our family, and I literally mailed out our final payment before we left on our ill-fated trip when it was totalled. Was pretty tight the whole time we owned it though there were a few qc issues that the dealer never rectified (parts fitting). We racked up a lot of miles on it, and if you didn't look at the odometer, you couldn't guess how many miles it had.
If we had fewer kids or the GC was just a wee bit larger, we might've purchased one. Great value in a mv, with a surprising powertrain.
Originally Posted By: Miller88
Originally Posted By: JTK
Originally Posted By: Miller88
When I first got my Jeep Cherokee (and it was not lifted), I had it sideways at 55 trying to stop for a deer.
I didn't realize that the rear brakes were prone to locking up after a rainy night.
Hit the brakes at 55 and it went sideways (on dry pavement). I thought I was going over, but it stayed right flat on the ground!
I hear that. I owned a 1994 Cherokee 4.0L, 5spd, 2wd back in the late 1990s. It could be absolutely frightening under slick conditions.
Never could figure out why they lock like that on the first touch of the brakes. I replaced all rear hardware and it still happens ... just with the 31'' tires it won't lock up any more.
They are EXTREMELY front heavy. Last winter, with a bad diferential in the front, mine was limited to 2WD. It was absolutely horrid in the snow. Least bit of snow, it would just spin the right rear. I had good tires and piled tools and wheels in the back and even than it was bad.
I had an 89 dodge ram with a 318 that was like that. 1 wheel drive and horrible in even a dusting of snow.
I had knobby rear tires and a bed full of tools and that truck still had nothing for traction.
And it was maybe the second year for anti-lock brakes on dodge trucks. Pulsating brake pedal. Front tires lock up ad the rear was still pushing.
But that engine was absolutely the most gutless,but durable engine I ever saw. It had over 500k on it,with extremely questionable maintenance and it got sold off for parts because everything else was falling apart. The engine still started first turn.
Originally Posted By: JTK
Originally Posted By: Miller88
When I first got my Jeep Cherokee (and it was not lifted), I had it sideways at 55 trying to stop for a deer.
I didn't realize that the rear brakes were prone to locking up after a rainy night.
Hit the brakes at 55 and it went sideways (on dry pavement). I thought I was going over, but it stayed right flat on the ground!
I hear that. I owned a 1994 Cherokee 4.0L, 5spd, 2wd back in the late 1990s. It could be absolutely frightening under slick conditions.
Never could figure out why they lock like that on the first touch of the brakes. I replaced all rear hardware and it still happens ... just with the 31'' tires it won't lock up any more.
They are EXTREMELY front heavy. Last winter, with a bad diferential in the front, mine was limited to 2WD. It was absolutely horrid in the snow. Least bit of snow, it would just spin the right rear. I had good tires and piled tools and wheels in the back and even than it was bad.
I had an 89 dodge ram with a 318 that was like that. 1 wheel drive and horrible in even a dusting of snow.
I had knobby rear tires and a bed full of tools and that truck still had nothing for traction.
And it was maybe the second year for anti-lock brakes on dodge trucks. Pulsating brake pedal. Front tires lock up ad the rear was still pushing.
But that engine was absolutely the most gutless,but durable engine I ever saw. It had over 500k on it,with extremely questionable maintenance and it got sold off for parts because everything else was falling apart. The engine still started first turn.
Originally Posted By: dohnuts
We thought about it during our extended stay with the GC, but it just wasn't going to work for our family; the size just wasn't quite enough.
I haven't compared interior volume #'s between the 2007+ Odyssey and 5th gen Grand Caravan, but our GC doesn't at all feel smaller to me than our 2008 Odyssey and I've had 7 people in it several times at this point. Rear storage seems like it's larger on the GC, given the spare tire is underneath as opposed to rear left corner (on the Ody).
My wife noted visibility is better with the GC. The seats aren't as substantial and comfortable as the Ody seats were though. The switchgear feels a little more Harbor Freightish on the GC compared to the Ody as well.
So far we're getting better average fuel economy with the GC compared to the Ody. For day to day mixed driving, the first two tanks of fuel averaged 21.5mpg on the GC. Best we'd get day/day with the Ody was 20 or less. Long, steady highway could be as high as 25mpg with it. No long steady hyway on the GC yet.
Oh.. the 21.5mpg is with NOT using the "ECON" button. Haven't really messed with it too much, but it's supposed to yield you another mpg or so.
We thought about it during our extended stay with the GC, but it just wasn't going to work for our family; the size just wasn't quite enough.
I haven't compared interior volume #'s between the 2007+ Odyssey and 5th gen Grand Caravan, but our GC doesn't at all feel smaller to me than our 2008 Odyssey and I've had 7 people in it several times at this point. Rear storage seems like it's larger on the GC, given the spare tire is underneath as opposed to rear left corner (on the Ody).
My wife noted visibility is better with the GC. The seats aren't as substantial and comfortable as the Ody seats were though. The switchgear feels a little more Harbor Freightish on the GC compared to the Ody as well.
So far we're getting better average fuel economy with the GC compared to the Ody. For day to day mixed driving, the first two tanks of fuel averaged 21.5mpg on the GC. Best we'd get day/day with the Ody was 20 or less. Long, steady highway could be as high as 25mpg with it. No long steady hyway on the GC yet.
Oh.. the 21.5mpg is with NOT using the "ECON" button. Haven't really messed with it too much, but it's supposed to yield you another mpg or so.
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Clevy
Originally Posted By: Miller88
Originally Posted By: JTK
Originally Posted By: Miller88
When I first got my Jeep Cherokee (and it was not lifted), I had it sideways at 55 trying to stop for a deer.
I didn't realize that the rear brakes were prone to locking up after a rainy night.
Hit the brakes at 55 and it went sideways (on dry pavement). I thought I was going over, but it stayed right flat on the ground!
I hear that. I owned a 1994 Cherokee 4.0L, 5spd, 2wd back in the late 1990s. It could be absolutely frightening under slick conditions.
Never could figure out why they lock like that on the first touch of the brakes. I replaced all rear hardware and it still happens ... just with the 31'' tires it won't lock up any more.
They are EXTREMELY front heavy. Last winter, with a bad diferential in the front, mine was limited to 2WD. It was absolutely horrid in the snow. Least bit of snow, it would just spin the right rear. I had good tires and piled tools and wheels in the back and even than it was bad.
I had an 89 dodge ram with a 318 that was like that. 1 wheel drive and horrible in even a dusting of snow.
I had knobby rear tires and a bed full of tools and that truck still had nothing for traction.
And it was maybe the second year for anti-lock brakes on dodge trucks. Pulsating brake pedal. Front tires lock up ad the rear was still pushing.
But that engine was absolutely the most gutless,but durable engine I ever saw. It had over 500k on it,with extremely questionable maintenance and it got sold off for parts because everything else was falling apart. The engine still started first turn.
It's weird how bad front heavy vehicles are ... that are not front wheel drive!
The first two winters I had it, it had working 4x4. And, in 4x4, it was unstoppable.
This winter will be much different. Working 4x4 *and* snow tires.
And I still won't drive it so it doesn't rust! haha
Originally Posted By: Miller88
Originally Posted By: JTK
Originally Posted By: Miller88
When I first got my Jeep Cherokee (and it was not lifted), I had it sideways at 55 trying to stop for a deer.
I didn't realize that the rear brakes were prone to locking up after a rainy night.
Hit the brakes at 55 and it went sideways (on dry pavement). I thought I was going over, but it stayed right flat on the ground!
I hear that. I owned a 1994 Cherokee 4.0L, 5spd, 2wd back in the late 1990s. It could be absolutely frightening under slick conditions.
Never could figure out why they lock like that on the first touch of the brakes. I replaced all rear hardware and it still happens ... just with the 31'' tires it won't lock up any more.
They are EXTREMELY front heavy. Last winter, with a bad diferential in the front, mine was limited to 2WD. It was absolutely horrid in the snow. Least bit of snow, it would just spin the right rear. I had good tires and piled tools and wheels in the back and even than it was bad.
I had an 89 dodge ram with a 318 that was like that. 1 wheel drive and horrible in even a dusting of snow.
I had knobby rear tires and a bed full of tools and that truck still had nothing for traction.
And it was maybe the second year for anti-lock brakes on dodge trucks. Pulsating brake pedal. Front tires lock up ad the rear was still pushing.
But that engine was absolutely the most gutless,but durable engine I ever saw. It had over 500k on it,with extremely questionable maintenance and it got sold off for parts because everything else was falling apart. The engine still started first turn.
It's weird how bad front heavy vehicles are ... that are not front wheel drive!
The first two winters I had it, it had working 4x4. And, in 4x4, it was unstoppable.
This winter will be much different. Working 4x4 *and* snow tires.
And I still won't drive it so it doesn't rust! haha
- Status
