VW Vortex - Volkswagen Forum banner

1st-gen Caravan / Voyager

23K views 63 replies 41 participants last post by  1985Jetta 
#1 · (Edited)
I know I've officially lost it when I am looking at 20+ year-old minivans :screwy:

But for some reason (maybe all those Cal Worthington commercials I watched as a child), I have a liking for the short wheelbase, original Dodge Caravan / Plymouth Voyager (1984-1990)
Sitting behind one in traffic reminds me that it truly is a minivan, and not an SUV-sized vehicle misnomered as such.

These can now be picked up for grocery money. Obviously a Turbo would not be easy to find nor affordable, but one of the carb'd 4-cylinders or 6-cyl Mitsubishi-powered Vans (per WikiPedia) might make a good runabout for me, as the 99 coupe is not very practical for CostCo / veterinary shuttling runs.

Apparently the Transmissions are a weak point. I am sure there are many in junkyards, so parts should be plentiful.

According to this TCL thread, they are the "forgotton sportscar" :laugh:

Thoughts?


 
See less See more
2
#23 ·
Oh my god. The want.

I love TCL. We go about hating on new, fast cars, for not having backseats and then salivate over 25 year old minivans.
Actually, you reminded me of when I had the rear two rows removed from our 1990 grand voyager 3.3L. It was a lot faster without the extra weight. those two benches must have weighed at least 150lbs together. I recall that was a smooth engine. But, that 4spd AT was a ticking time bomb. I think our family went through 3 of them, luckily all replaced under warranty except for the last one.
 
#6 ·
These can now be picked up for grocery money. Obviously a Turbo would not be easy to find nor affordable, but one of the carb'd 4-cylinders or 6-cyl Mitsubishi-powered Vans (per WikiPedia) might make a good runabout for me, as the 99 coupe is not very practical for CostCo / veterinary shuttling runs.
Unless you're buying from an enthusiast market, the turbo models don't carry a premium. More of them have suffered attrition by now though, and so they are indeed harder to find.

The 3-speed automatic transmissions in this gen aren't particularly weak. Manual transmissions are fine too (again if you can find one). It's the 4-speed autos in the next generation that failed constantly.

If you don't have your heart set on a turbo or stick, find the nicest 2.5 fuel injected automatic and buy that. Should give good service for a while.
 
#20 ·
Unless you're buying from an enthusiast market, the turbo models don't carry a premium.

The 3-speed automatic transmissions in this gen aren't particularly weak.

If you don't have your heart set on a turbo or stick, find the nicest 2.5 fuel injected automatic and buy that. Should give good service for a while.
This, this and this. The 3-spd trans is actually pretty stout (especially on the turbo models), so don't be afraid of it. And the 2.5L TBI engine, while only developing 100 peak HP, is actually fairly durable. If you're just looking for a runabout, it will serve you well for many years.

It had the Mitsubishi V6 ... at 50K miles it was burning enough oil for visible smoke. So, I wouldn't call that the greatest engine.
The Mitsu 3.0L V6 had one weakness: the valve guides. Once they went, the engine would blow lots of blue smoke out the tailpipe. The engine internals weren't actually a problem, but everybody sees the blue smoke and automatically assumes the rings are shot. Rebuild the heads with upgraded valve guides and you're golden for many many miles.

BTW: this was never an issue on the 2.2/2.5 engine.

Your best bet for reliability and serviceability is going to be a Chrysler 2.2/2.5L powered van.
Another thing: the 2.2/2.5 engine is outrageously easy to work on. As an added bonus, the minivan engine bay has lots of room for wrenching. The end result is these things are cake for doing your own maintenance.


Having said all that, go for a turbo if you can find one. Until you do, you have no idea how hysterical this can be:

 
#56 · (Edited)
That is pretty damn awesome.
I do not like the 2nd-gen styling as much, but there are definately many more still on the road (or at least on CL)

Per Wiki, 3 of the 4 engines were V6 (I only drive 4-cyls, tho the 6s might haul), but a manual was still available, as was AWD. Wonder how hard those are to locate.
 
#11 ·
My mom bought an '87 Voyager SE brand new. It had the Mitsubishi V6...I believe '87 was the first year for that. Constant problems with the EFI system, and at 50K miles it was burning enough oil for visible smoke. So, I wouldn't call that the greatest engine.

On the other hand, one of these vans holds my record for the highest mileage I've seen on an odometer in the junkyard. It was either 376K or 367K, I forget. That one was a 4-cylinder though.

-Andrew L
 
#13 ·
and at 50K miles it was burning enough oil for visible smoke.
Yeah, i was just going to say that anyone on the market for most '80s-'90s mitsu/chrysler products should have someone follow behind on the test drive to see not if it smokes, but how much. They do seem to keep on going forever if you keep feeding them oil though.
 
#14 ·
Your best bet for reliability and serviceability is going to be a Chrysler 2.2/2.5L powered van. Avoid the 2.6L Mitsubishi from the early vans as well.

That said, if it hasn't been apart in a long time, expect to do a headgasket. Once changed properly and everything is surfaced, it'll never need it again. (on an NA car).
 
#29 · (Edited)
Avoid the 2.6L Mitsubishi from the early vans as well.
well shoot, the one I was about to look at has the 2.6L 4-cyl. (SE, 1987, 3-speed automatic, 142K miles)
What specifically is bad about them, other than burning oil?

I love TCL. We go about hating on new, fast cars, for not having backseats and then salivate over 25 year old minivans.
:D :thumbup:

Never been a big fan of the Astro, perhaps because I drove a beater one at work once and had multiple friends who drove Astros we lovingly referred to as the "ghetto van."

The 2nd-Gen is OK, I prefer the styling and size of the original though. If I were going to get a newer Van it would be a Ram 1500, tint it out + throw some beefy tires on it :D
 
#16 ·
I grew up in an '84 Caravan and eventually that's what I learned to drive in. I don't know what kind of problems my parents had with it in the ~14 years that they owned it but it moved the family and our friends back and forth to soccer practice pretty well.
 
#26 ·
the 1st gen Caravans are neat ... but personally I like the older Chevy Astros. The 4.3 vortex was a decent motor, and if you needed more power, a smallblock swap was quite easy. That, and rear wheel drive made for something that could be modded to be a lot of fun

my 2 cents ;)
 
#27 ·
I had a couple of refreshed ones. The first was my favorite. A 1994 Chrysler T&C. It was white with the gold package and those sweet fluffy leather seats, a digital dash and a towing package. I bought it for $350 needing a master cylinder and I drove it all over the place. In town, it only got about 17 mpg, but on the highway I could nail down a regular 25. I sold it with 177k miles on it and found it about 2 years later on CL needing a transmission with 225k.

My second was a 95 Caravan sport with the 3.3 litre. That engine felt taxed and got worse fuel economy than the 3.8. It had 280k miles on it when I sold it, and the guy I sold it to (just over 3 years ago) is using it to haul lawn mowers for his summer business. It has well over 350k on it. I paid something like $200 for it, and I sold it for $650. Great vans. They look great, run great and have a ton of room in them for a relatively small footprint. Oh, and they are absolute animals in the snow.

Chris
 
#39 ·
An alternative if somebody wanted a six with more fun... You can dig up an A543 transaxle from a P or G body and easily build yourself a five-speed 3.0L van.

Really though, if you love to drive, you need to find or build a van with a stick. You can forgive a lack of horsepower when you can pick your own ratio.
 
#44 ·
Way back in the late 80's when I was in High School , I had a friend who drove her parent's white ChryCo minivan. We loved it because it carried a lot of people. It was white. We called it Moby.

That's all I've got.
 
#45 · (Edited)
I never understood why Chrysler Co. tachometers of that era never rested at zero when the engines were shut off. They always sat at about idle speed.

This thread has me confused as to whether I really like or really despise the Chrysler minivans. They were very honestly styled, unpretentious and classless vehicles but it got old eventually. I think part of the magic, though, was the ability to order them as stripped or as loaded as you damn well pleased. Each one was different: some were extremely luxurious (for the time) and some were very spartan.

As a child in the late '80s, I got a kick out of seeing who had a base, SE or LE version and whether or not they'd ordered it with captains chairs, privacy glass, power rear vent windows, power seat, full length overhead console, complete instrumentation etc etc etc. Some disappointed with 5 passenger seating, a speedo/gas gauge, no rear wiper/defroster and vinyl seats, sans headrests. Most were pretty plush, though, and I loved having my friends' parents cart me around in a car with so many buttons and cubbies, the hideous engine noises and general shoddiness notwithstanding. It was a lot more fun than fighting over the armrest in the back my parents' '86 Accord, at the time.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top