What is the correct premium to pay for a Toyota vs a Chrysler?

[notmyhand]

I'm looking at purchasing a new Chrysler Pacifica or a Toyota Sienna. They both are listed for similar prices with similar features. The Chrysler guys seem to be coming down in price more than the Toyota dealerships. Plus the Sienna is a hybrid and the Chrysler AWD is not. If you plan on driving the car into the ground, so resale value doesn't matter much, how much more would you be willing to pay for a Hybrid Toyota over a Chrysler?

And different question, has anyone shopped between the two and chosen one - which one did you go with and why?

Edited to add that the Toyota is a Hybrid AWD. I need an AWD.

[sully45]

I've shopped between the Dodge Grand Caravan and the Sienna.

Ultimately I didn't want to buy new, so I chose the dodge. As much as a premium toyota commands for new models, its even higher for used. That's a bit of an apples and oranges comparison since the dodge is an older platform.

One other data point, try out Rock Auto's repair index for the models you are considering. It can basically tell you what parts cost for two models.

[finfire]

I've been looking at both, used. Many, many recent-year used pacificas available versus used Siennas..

Makes me wonder why are there so many recent year used Pacificas available?

I have noticed the used pacificas are much cheaper than the used siennas....I'm guessing the reason is that buying a chrysler means more visits to the shop??

[megabad]

What is the intrinsic value of the vehicles? To me it is a functional object so the two are exactly equal. As such, I would expect slightly less than double the life with a sienna vs a Pacifica so I would expect the Pacifica to cost 50-60% of the sienna new. This is simply based on reliability surveys and anecdotal evidence that the major mechanical components last far longer on average. I am not sure I have ever seen a Chrysler with an original engine and transmission at 200k miles and greater than 10 year age.

[Jack FFR1846]

Are you comparing equal vehicles? I don't think so. Hybrid is a major thing. AWD is a major thing. Perhaps compare 2 FWD non-hybrids to get a fair comparison of similar vehicles.

[jhsu802701]

I'd pick the Toyota over the Chrysler - no contest!

In the frequency of repair surveys in Consumer Reports, Toyotas usually fare among the best while Chryslers usually fare among the worst. Being acquired by Fiat has only further degraded the quality of Chrysler products. If you REALLY want to drive a Chrysler, just rent one. It will be fairly new and thus unlikely to have problems. If your rental Chrysler does have problems, it's the rental car company's responsibility to find a replacement and/or get it fixed, not yours.

[runner3081]

I've been looking at both, used. Many, many recent-year used pacificas available versus used Siennas..

Makes me wonder why are there so many recent year used Pacificas available?

I have noticed the used pacificas are much cheaper than the used siennas....I'm guessing the reason is that buying a chrysler means more visits to the shop??

I would guess more have been used as rentals = more on the market.

[sully45]

I've been looking at both, used. Many, many recent-year used pacificas available versus used Siennas..

Makes me wonder why are there so many recent year used Pacificas available?

I have noticed the used pacificas are much cheaper than the used siennas....I'm guessing the reason is that buying a chrysler means more visits to the shop??

My assessment is that the dodge/chrysler minivans tend to be purchased for rental fleets. That was the case during my search. Thus many, many more 1-3 year old models to choose from. Because most families don't sell a minivan after only a couple years.

Everyone has heard the toyota reliability bit, and no doubt there is truth to it. But how much is that reliability really worth compared to up front cost?

Just trying to play both sides here. I don't think you can really go wrong either way.

[skp]

What is the intrinsic value of the vehicles? To me it is a functional object so the two are exactly equal. As such, I would expect slightly less than double the life with a sienna vs a Pacifica so I would expect the Pacifica to cost 50-60% of the sienna new. This is simply based on reliability surveys and anecdotal evidence that the major mechanical components last far longer on average. I am not sure I have ever seen a Chrysler with an original engine and transmission at 200k miles and greater than 10 year age.

I'm sure Siennas are reliable and at least they don't rust out. But twice the life??? Do people really drive Sienna's 20 years? I can only compare a Dodge Caravan to the Toyota Sienna. I drove both of ours for 10 years. I would have kept it but my husband pushed me to get a new car. We aren't handy and it was rusting (my biggest complaint with the car) and it started needed more repairs. So we gave it to my daughter in laws dad who is a car mechanic. He is STILL driving that caravan 4 years later- so it is now 15 years old. So 50-60% is IMO not an accurate assumption.
We looked at the Sienna because of the reliability- and ended up replacing our caravan for a Pacifica. We got a cheaper, just as nice ride IMO and the stow and go seats were the deal breaker for us. As for the reliability- so far so good and it isn't rusting.

[Helo80]

I'd pick the Toyota over the Chrysler - no contest!

In the frequency of repair surveys in Consumer Reports, Toyotas usually fare among the best while Chryslers usually fare among the worst. Being acquired by Fiat has only further degraded the quality of Chrysler products. If you REALLY want to drive a Chrysler, just rent one. It will be fairly new and thus unlikely to have problems. If your rental Chrysler does have problems, it's the rental car company's responsibility to find a replacement and/or get it fixed, not yours.

Keep in mind, your dollar goes farther both in the new and used markets on a FCA product versus Toyota/Honda. Numbers wise, you could make an argument that FCA is the superior vehicle especially if you're a BH that pays all cash and you invest the difference in an index fund.

[eye.surgeon]

I rented a Pacifica for a week and was thoroughly impressed. I buy Japanese cars but that Pacifica was really well done.

[zag00]

We are in the market for the minivan and these alongside the Honda Odyssey have topped the list. Currently in a Jeep GC with the V6 - same motor as the Pacifica - and have had 0 problems out of the 100k miles driven. Pacifica is the most powerful minivan on the market if that matters to you - upwards of 300hp. We are more interested in the creature comforts of each model, stow n go, rear entertainment, sliding/reclining seats. Its really going to be the wife's choice as she will be doing the majority of the driving.
Personally have always been leery of the hybrid options but 36mpg is nothing to scoff at especially when making 900mi round trips multiple times a yr. We will be test driving both pacifica and sienna in the upcoming weeks and likely make a decision in the upcoming months.
What is the warranty periods on both? Havent even looked at this aspect but would be something to consider.

Sister loves her 2017 Pacifica and as do i as its similar to what we have now as far as infotainment and drivetrain.

[59Gibson]

Pacifica- you need to go used. The depreciation hit is bloody murder, unless you truly Know you'll keep it for 10+years. I don't think the reliability diff. will be quite as stark as others believe, but Chrysler def. bombs out the rental fleets with their vehicles so that's one reason for ton of them hanging around the lots.

[Inframan4712]

I rented a Pacifica for a week and was thoroughly impressed. I buy Japanese cars but that Pacifica was really well done.

We love ours. We bought it used. Great vehicle. Just drove it 900 miles round trip. We haven’t done that in years.

The StowNGo seats have no equal in the other minivans. We put a 3 cushion sofa back there once.

[alfaspider]

Toyota if you are looking for something you can keep for 15 years.

Chrysler if you just need something for a few years till the kids are out of car seats. Buy lightly used as the depreciation will be brutal.

[megabad]

I would expect slightly less than double the life with a sienna vs a Pacifica so I would expect the Pacifica to cost 50-60% of the sienna new. This is simply based on reliability surveys and anecdotal evidence that the major mechanical components last far longer on average.

50-60% is IMO not an accurate assumption.

I admit my opinion is based primarily on anecdotal evidence and reliability surveys. It sounds like you have anecdotal evidence to the contrary. I also admit that I think mechanical reliability has improved for modern cars across the spectrum and this might have caused a narrowing of the reliability “premium” over the short run (ie 10 years). But OPs question was “until the wheels fall off”. US automakers were so far behind in total life in my opinion that they are still nowhere close despite improvements. This coupled with the “buy American” popular attitude that inflates prices definitely slants way in favor of Toyota in my opinion for the long term. Since most people don’t keep cars very long, this opinion wouldn’t apply to them but it might in OPs situation.

PS. I own both “American” and “Japanese” vehicles by the way. But I don’t own any of the American vehicles for reliability reasons.

[mmmodem]

I think the market has already determined the correct price premium for a Toyota. It's really up to you whether you can suffer the difference in reliability. I believe the difference in cost is inflated by not only the repair costs but for the hassle factor of a breakdown as well.

For my sister, no question, she is buying the Honda or Toyota. For me, it's a small nuisance. I take good care of my vehicles. A $2000 transmission repair doesn't phase me if I paid $5000 less than a comparable Rav4. We own a Mitsubishi and a Ford. We are considering a Dodge Caravan or Chrysler Pacifica for our next vehicle. The price premium for a Sienna or Odyssey is too much for me.

[THY4373]

Toyota if you are looking for something you can keep for 15 years.

I find this amusing I have owned several US made domestic sedans since 1997 all of them so far have gone 15 or more years without major issue:

1993 Crown Vic (bought used in 1997 for $8.5k) went 18 years and I only got rid of it then because the clearcoat paint failure made it look awful. It was running fine.
2000 Ford Taurus wagon (bought used in 2003 for $5k and ex-rental to boot). Got rid of it at 15.5 years just because I was bored honestly.
2010 Lincoln MKZ (bought used in 2015 for $11.5k it retailed for $40k new) and still going strong though admittedly only 11 years at this point.

Each of these vehicles was chosen because it had a steep depreciation curve (works when buying used) and were rated at least average reliability by Consumer Reports.

None of the above cars had major issues and I got them for far less than a comparable Japanese used vehicle. To me personally used Japanese vehicles are not worth the premium in my experience so far but each of us is going to place a premium on different things.

Oh and my ex is driving a 2010 Ford Fusion Hybrid we bought new in 2010. That has gone 150k with just fluid changes, (12v) battery, a few bulb replacements and tire replacements. Because of the regenerative braking her hydraulic braking system is still on the original pads and rotors that came from the factory (the fluid has been changed a couple of times).

[sk2101]

Makes me wonder why are there so many recent year used Pacificas available?

Rental cars. Toyota sells very little to fleet customers vs. other manufacturers.

[jlawrence01]

I have had many Chrysler minivans in my corporate fleet over the years. If you said that you were going to switch vehicles frequently, maybe the Chrysler product would be OK. However, once you hit about 70k miles, you will start having electrical problems. Maybe the window motor goes out or the transmission starts to shift a little funny. They are NOT well built.

We did a lot better off when we started buying Toyota and Lexus vehicles instead. Driver satisfaction was a lot higher and downtime was nonexistent.

[jlawrence01]

2000 Ford Taurus wagon (bought used in 2003 for $5k and ex-rental to boot). Got rid of it at 15.5 years just because I was bored honestly.

You got the 2000 Taurus for so cheap because their 1995-97 models had disposable transmissions. I know a guy in Cleveland with a transmission shop who would buy every one of those cars with a blown transmission at auction and sell them back to dealerships. He made millions. He would always say "If I saw Bill Ford on Public Square in Cleveland, I would run up to him and kiss him on the lips. He had made me a rich man."

In 2002 and 2003, one dealer offered to see me NEW Ford Taurus sedans for $12-13k as he could not get rid of them. By that time, they fixed the problem but their reputation was so bad that the majority of the sales were to fleets.

[forkhorn]

I don't know the answer. But, we bought a new minivan in 2013 and went with the Sienna. I don't really care that it cost more- the annoyance with having to fix stuff or get it fixed is as significant as the money to fix it as far as I'm concerned. Especially with little kids. So far no regrets; 80-something k miles and nothing but routine maintenance, which I do. DW even wrecked it pretty bad in the first year. Other than those two weeks in the shop getting the front end replaced, which I can't blame the van for, it's been perfect. Good luck.

[SimonJester]

I'm sure Siennas are reliable and at least they don't rust out. But twice the life??? Do people really drive Sienna's 20 years?

I have 17 years on my 2004 Sienna, I am just now hitting the first repair, leaking radiator (known issue Toyota fixed in subsequent models). It was paid off in 5 years, and we plan to keep it another 3 years or so. Its been a rock solid vehicle serving our needs as our family grew from young kids now hauling kids stuff to their college dorms.

I would pay 5K - 8K or so premium for Toyota over a Dodge perhaps even more...

[bottlecap]

The car market is efficient. Look at the average sale price for each. There's your premium.

The car market could be wrong because nobody knows the future. But price differences are based on all the information we collectively have and it determines the "correct" premium.

Good luck,

JT

[finite_difference]

I rented a Pacifica for a week and was thoroughly impressed. I buy Japanese cars but that Pacifica was really well done.

We love ours. We bought it used. Great vehicle. Just drove it 900 miles round trip. We haven’t done that in years.

The StowNGo seats have no equal in the other minivans. We put a 3 cushion sofa back there once.

The Pacifica also has a hybrid version, which is industry-leading.

I hope Chrysler will also be the first to make a fully electric minivan.

[eric321]

Way too much love on this board for boring Japanese cars.

In the minivan space - the Chrysler Pacifica is much nicer than the Sienna. Way back when the Chrysler Town & Country and the Dodge Grand Caravan shared a platform.

More recently, the Pacifica is the premium model the Grand Caravan the value model. The Grand Caravan no longer meets emission standards so they decontented a Pacifica and named it a Voyager.

Japanese cars were much better in the 1990s, the gap is narrower now..

I think the premium is zero... I'd take the Pacifica over the Sienna if i were to buy a van

[DarthSage]

We bought a Sienna in 2018. I was a Chrysler girl, all my adult life, but they chased me away. My previous van (2008 Chrysler) began to just...stop, as I was driving down the road. It didn't do this all the time, and it started right back up again, once I put it in neutral and re-turned the key. It's a pretty scary experience, driving down the road and having your car stop like that. Since it was random, the mechanic couldn't help me. 2018 was also the first year of the Pacifica--between the thought of "new design shakeout", plus random stopping in traffic--no, thank you.

That said, I do miss the stow-and-go seats. But, I love my Sienna.

[Sandtrap]

I'm looking at purchasing a new Chrysler Pacifica or a Toyota Sienna. They both are listed for similar prices with similar features. The Chrysler guys seem to be coming down in price more than the Toyota dealerships. Plus the Sienna is a hybrid and the Chrysler AWD is not. If you plan on driving the car into the ground, so resale value doesn't matter much, how much more would you be willing to pay for a Hybrid Toyota over a Chrysler?

And different question, has anyone shopped between the two and chosen one - which one did you go with and why?

There is an up front premium to pay when buying a car vs another.
. . . . . ..
And, a premium to keep paying and paying when owning a car to keep it running for a long time over another.

j

[stoptothink]

Way too much love on this board for boring Japanese cars.

In the minivan space - the Chrysler Pacifica is much nicer than the Sienna. Way back when the Chrysler Town & Country and the Dodge Grand Caravan shared a platform.

More recently, the Pacifica is the premium model the Grand Caravan the value model. The Grand Caravan no longer meets emission standards so they decontented a Pacifica and named it a Voyager.

Japanese cars were much better in the 1990s, the gap is narrower now..

I think the premium is zero... I'd take the Pacifica over the Sienna if i were to buy a van

Interestingly enough, my sister-in-law just traded in their lemon Sienna for a Pacifica. Like most here, I am generally a Toyota person, but (by far) the least reliable car I ever owned was a corolla (and I currently drive a 5+ year old VW). The hyperbole in this thread by some about the differences in reliability is interesting to read.

[Mindbender]

Do people really drive Sienna's 20 years?

We bought our '04 Honda Odyssey 10 years ago and still going strong. No major repairs. Just tires, oil and the serpentine belt.

I know some in this thread have had good experiences with domestic manufacturers. I have not and will probably never go back. My Chrysler and Ford were in the shop waaaaay too much. To me the premium I pay for Toyota or Honda (used) is well worth not having the headache of unscheduled repairs.

[Inframan4712]

I rented a Pacifica for a week and was thoroughly impressed. I buy Japanese cars but that Pacifica was really well done.

We love ours. We bought it used. Great vehicle. Just drove it 900 miles round trip. We haven’t done that in years.

The StowNGo seats have no equal in the other minivans. We put a 3 cushion sofa back there once.

The Pacifica also has a hybrid version, which is industry-leading.

I hope Chrysler will also be the first to make a fully electric minivan.

The hybrid is a great car by many accounts. But you lose the StowNGo seats in the hybrid. That was a deal breaker for us.

[finfire]

I've been looking at both, used. Many, many recent-year used pacificas available versus used Siennas..

Makes me wonder why are there so many recent year used Pacificas available?

I have noticed the used pacificas are much cheaper than the used siennas....I'm guessing the reason is that buying a chrysler means more visits to the shop??

My assessment is that the dodge/chrysler minivans tend to be purchased for rental fleets. That was the case during my search. Thus many, many more 1-3 year old models to choose from. Because most families don't sell a minivan after only a couple years.

Everyone has heard the toyota reliability bit, and no doubt there is truth to it. But how much is that reliability really worth compared to up front cost?

Just trying to play both sides here. I don't think you can really go wrong either way.

Good point. I get paid by the hour, so every hour wasted in a shop has many $$$ associated with it. Also the inconvenience factor..I'll pay 5K or more to lessen shop visits over the lifetime of a car (for me usually 10 years).

[onourway]

I think it doesn't matter that much if you intend to keep the car until it's worn out. You should decide on the relative features you prefer in each - as mentioned hybrid vs. awd is a big difference and alone would be the deciding factor for many people.

The Toyota is almost certain to be more reliable. The Chrysler is likely to be acceptably reliable, with a major issue or two along the way if owned long term. My father has been buying them as work vehicles for 35 years - since the original model in what, about 1984? This has been pretty much his experience with every one (although they have sure gotten a lot nicer over the years!)

[hnd]

i think the chrysler pacifica product looks amazing. That said, all those amazing things begin to have issues once you hit 100k miles. I used to work for a dealership that sold caravans and town and countries. no other vehicles were in the shop for repairs than these minivans. most of the time it was cosmetic interior issues, like things not working. everything on the are complicated fixes. you should see how the windows roll down.

I have a friend who works in a mechanic shop and they advise against them.

stow and go is a genius design though...we rode to a baseball game last year in a 80k mile tricked out pacifica last year and everything sounded like it was going to rattle off the walls. but i could hardly hear any outside noise which is good.

my odyssey EXL sounds like you have a window open all the time.

all that said, its possible you buy a pacifica and drive it til the wheels fall off. But i'm not making that bet.

[megabad]

The car market is efficient. Look at the average sale price for each. There's your premium.

The car market could be wrong because nobody knows the future. But price differences are based on all the information we collectively have and it determines the "correct" premium.

As long as you value the same things as the market does, than I agree. Remember the vehicle price is only one part of the equation. In my experience, the market values initial price, style, color, and 5 year performance. This is why the new car msrp's are approximately the same (and have been for many years). If you instead value only longevity, than the market's assessment is no longer efficient by your measure. In contrast, an efficient market is one where buyers/sellers use the same or similar metrics to assess value. This would be like someone investing in the stock market with the valuation metric "I like blue logos". The market would not be efficient to them because the market does not assess value that way.

[finite_difference]

i think the chrysler pacifica product looks amazing. That said, all those amazing things begin to have issues once you hit 100k miles. I used to work for a dealership that sold caravans and town and countries. no other vehicles were in the shop for repairs than these minivans. most of the time it was cosmetic interior issues, like things not working. everything on the are complicated fixes. you should see how the windows roll down.

I have a friend who works in a mechanic shop and they advise against them.

stow and go is a genius design though...we rode to a baseball game last year in a 80k mile tricked out pacifica last year and everything sounded like it was going to rattle off the walls. but i could hardly hear any outside noise which is good.

my odyssey EXL sounds like you have a window open all the time.

all that said, its possible you buy a pacifica and drive it til the wheels fall off. But i'm not making that bet.

Yeah but you can probably get a cheap manufacturer warranty to take the Pacifica to 120k miles or so? It also should cost much less than an Odyssey to begin with.

You could probably get an EV Pacifica after 120k miles, depending on how much you drive, since that could be in 8-10 years.

[chrisjul]

I'd pick the Toyota over the Chrysler - no contest!

In the frequency of repair surveys in Consumer Reports, Toyotas usually fare among the best while Chryslers usually fare among the worst. Being acquired by Fiat has only further degraded the quality of Chrysler products. If you REALLY want to drive a Chrysler, just rent one. It will be fairly new and thus unlikely to have problems. If your rental Chrysler does have problems, it's the rental car company's responsibility to find a replacement and/or get it fixed, not yours.

Agree!

[eye.surgeon]

I'd pick the Toyota over the Chrysler - no contest!

In the frequency of repair surveys in Consumer Reports, Toyotas usually fare among the best while Chryslers usually fare among the worst. Being acquired by Fiat has only further degraded the quality of Chrysler products. If you REALLY want to drive a Chrysler, just rent one. It will be fairly new and thus unlikely to have problems. If your rental Chrysler does have problems, it's the rental car company's responsibility to find a replacement and/or get it fixed, not yours.

I'm a fan of Japanese cars, but one of the ways Toyota games reliability testing is not embracing new tech. Toyota infotainment systems are always a generation behind the competition. They generally suck. Even Lexus infotainment systems are outdated and terrible. Many of the dings against their competitors from Consumer Reports and JD Power are complaints about tech issues. It's hard to complain about your wireless Apple Carplay disconnecting when you drive a Toyota because they apparently have never heard of it and don't offer it. Have you seen the infotainment in a 2020 Toyota 4runner? It looks like it's from 1985. But it's reliable.

[Helo80]

I'm a fan of Japanese cars, but one of the ways Toyota games reliability testing is not embracing new tech. Toyota infotainment systems are always a generation behind the competition. They generally suck. Even Lexus infotainment systems are outdated and terrible. Many of the dings against their competitors from Consumer Reports and JD Power are complaints about tech issues. It's hard to complain about your wireless Apple Carplay disconnecting when you drive a Toyota because they apparently have never heard of it and don't offer it. Have you seen the infotainment in a 2020 Toyota 4runner? It looks like it's from 1985. But it's reliable.

Same sentiment. One of my favorite comments on cars from this forum was with the 2019 to 2020 Toyota Highlander.... Toyota's bread and butter mid-size SUV. Somebody was saying a reason to go with the 2019 was that the 2020 was being built on the "new" TNGA platform and that BHs like proven technologies (previous one was like 20 years old). You can't fix some of the people on here.

"They don't make cars like they used!"'

Yes! Thank God they don't make cars like they used to!!

[hnd]

i think the chrysler pacifica product looks amazing. That said, all those amazing things begin to have issues once you hit 100k miles. I used to work for a dealership that sold caravans and town and countries. no other vehicles were in the shop for repairs than these minivans. most of the time it was cosmetic interior issues, like things not working. everything on the are complicated fixes. you should see how the windows roll down.

I have a friend who works in a mechanic shop and they advise against them.

stow and go is a genius design though...we rode to a baseball game last year in a 80k mile tricked out pacifica last year and everything sounded like it was going to rattle off the walls. but i could hardly hear any outside noise which is good.

my odyssey EXL sounds like you have a window open all the time.

all that said, its possible you buy a pacifica and drive it til the wheels fall off. But i'm not making that bet.

Yeah but you can probably get a cheap manufacturer warranty to take the Pacifica to 120k miles or so? It also should cost much less than an Odyssey to begin with.

You could probably get an EV Pacifica after 120k miles, depending on how much you drive, since that could be in 8-10 years.

we went ot a chrysler dealership in Chicago to look at an odyssey they took in as trade. Well they screwed the pooch on the listing and the sales guy tried to keep us interested by showing us used pacifica's. we were looking at an elite model odyssey and the higher end used pacifica's were priced equally although they were definitely more willing to knock the price down than the dealership we eventually bought the odyssey at was willing to knock down.

[iamlucky13]

What is the intrinsic value of the vehicles? To me it is a functional object so the two are exactly equal. As such, I would expect slightly less than double the life with a sienna vs a Pacifica so I would expect the Pacifica to cost 50-60% of the sienna new. This is simply based on reliability surveys and anecdotal evidence that the major mechanical components last far longer on average. I am not sure I have ever seen a Chrysler with an original engine and transmission at 200k miles and greater than 10 year age.

I view the question with similar logic, but would not rate the difference as that large, and a quick check on Auto Trader shows no shortage of 10+ year old Chrysler/Dodge minivans.

Keep in mind reliability surveys are generally for new car reliability; JD Power only surveys for 3 years; Consumer Reports surveys for 5 years, if I remember right. These catch early life issues, typically within the warranty period, but don't capture the full lifetime experience. The average age of cars registered in the US is 11 years, so calendar life expectancy is on the order of twice that. I recommend doing a quick search for the terms "reliability bathtub curve" to get a sense why I consider it relevant to discriminate between these 3-5 year surveys and the ~20 year life expectancies, considering the normal trend of rates of problems over the life of a product.

Since the early life issues tend to occur within the warranty period, I view them as primarily inconvenient rather than costly.

Based on the wealth of anecdotal comments available, certainly I expect more early problems, and a shorter life before onset of late in life problems from Chrysler than Toyota, but it is very difficult to pin down from anecdotes the real rates and durations for each phase.

I've settled on examining total cost of ownership for all vehicles I'm considering based on a 150,000 mile life expectancy. I also separately calculate TCO based on 200,000 miles for brands I have extra confidence in. Basically, my intention is to start with the same comparison for consistency, but give myself the chance to consider the likelihood of an alternative TCO for brands I have more trust in. I also include fuel cost based on EPA rating, but have not yet decided on a way to include expected maintenance cost.

I recently added another calculation to my spreadsheet recently to try to be a little more market-aware about this: TCO based on residual value. I'm probably going to focus on this method going forward.

For this, I look up the most comparable vehicle from the same manufacturer 12 years ago to get MSRP and Kelly Blue book value based on 150,000 miles. I assume the KBB/MSRP ratio for the older model can be applied to the car I am currently considering, so I multiply the purchase price or MSRP by that ratio to estimate remaining value over my comparison period for a refined Total Cost of Ownership.

The underlying assumptions, of course, are (1) that the market has efficiently used available information about brand reliability and (2) that brand reliability is generally consistent over time.

[iamlucky13]

I'm a fan of Japanese cars, but one of the ways Toyota games reliability testing is not embracing new tech. Toyota infotainment systems are always a generation behind the competition. They generally suck. Even Lexus infotainment systems are outdated and terrible. Many of the dings against their competitors from Consumer Reports and JD Power are complaints about tech issues. It's hard to complain about your wireless Apple Carplay disconnecting when you drive a Toyota because they apparently have never heard of it and don't offer it. Have you seen the infotainment in a 2020 Toyota 4runner? It looks like it's from 1985. But it's reliable.

I guess that comes down to how much your buying decision is based on entertainment features, and how much is based on the transportation utility.

Regardless, is a system with the latest features but a lot of bugs really better than and older system that isn't as slick to use but is reliable? Is aftermarket an option? To be clear, I'm looking at this as a person who still keeps CD wallets in my car, because I've gotten excellent value out of an older car, and haven't cared enough to shop for a newer aftermarket system.

Lastly, I was curious about what you said and did a check. Toyota does have Carplay compatibility, and even though the 2020 4Runner might not be as fancy as in less utilitarian vehicles, it is nothing like 1985, when a cassette players weren't even standard.

2020 Highlander
1985 Highlander

[eye.surgeon]

Lastly, I was curious about what you said and did a check. Toyota does have Carplay compatibility, and even though the 2020 4Runner might not be as fancy as in less utilitarian vehicles, it is nothing like 1985, when a cassette players weren't even standard.

But not wireless carplay, which is what I said. Even Lexus doesn't have wireless carplay. Many cars do including my Honda.

[SlowInvestor]

You should also consider what the service of your local dealers are like. It's great to have a warranty, but you'd still have to deal with the service department if something breaks. And consider the time it would take if something is fixed even under warranty. You have to go to the dealer, arrange for transport, etc. Just a PIA. Time is money and I'd say if it were within 5k, I'd take the Toyota.

Also check out websites like car complaints to see what the biggest issues affecting these models are.

I did your search about two years ago comparing the Odyssey, Pacifica, Sienna and the Sedona. I didn't like how the Sedona drove and was weary about Chrysler build quality. I ended up with a Odyssey only because it had android auto and it had sliding middle seats.

[random_walker_77]

i think the chrysler pacifica product looks amazing. That said, all those amazing things begin to have issues once you hit 100k miles. I used to work for a dealership that sold caravans and town and countries. no other vehicles were in the shop for repairs than these minivans. most of the time it was cosmetic interior issues, like things not working. everything on the are complicated fixes. you should see how the windows roll down.

I have a friend who works in a mechanic shop and they advise against them.

stow and go is a genius design though...we rode to a baseball game last year in a 80k mile tricked out pacifica last year and everything sounded like it was going to rattle off the walls. but i could hardly hear any outside noise which is good.

my odyssey EXL sounds like you have a window open all the time.

all that said, its possible you buy a pacifica and drive it til the wheels fall off. But i'm not making that bet.

Many people value reliability and are willing to pay a substantial price premium for reliability. Especially minivan-owners who don't want to be stranded on the side of the road with a car load of kids.

Consumer Reports says that the Pacifica still isn't so good for reliability, but if you plan to trade it in before 100K miles, and are tolerant of the risk of an issue or two, you'll probably be better off financially. (Personally, I went for the Sienna)

https://www.motorbiscuit.com/the-2020-c ... -category/

[protagonist]

It all depends on whether you like the Toyota more than the Chrysler, and if so, how much more. Factor in such things as your emotional tolerance for mechanical issues.

Especially if you will be driving it for the next 5 or 10 years or more. That's a lot of your life to be stuck behind the wheel...the difference in what you might get in resale , by comparison with your decade of experience, may be trivial .

[DarthSage]

I mentioned up-thread about my Chrysler minivan randomly stalling out, which was my final deal-breaker on going to the Sienna. In addition, my Chrysler minivan kept chewing through tires. I couldn't figure out why I was replacing them every 20k miles. Finally, my mechanic told me, the company recommended tires weren't the right size for my vehicle, that's why they kept wearing out so fast.

I also had the transmission go at ~75k. The van was 9 years old at the time--I don't typically drive long distances in it. As others have said, the review places, such as Consumer Reports, only go out 5 years. So, they would have picked up where my power sliding door shorted out, leaving me with a dead battery (fixed under warranty), but not the dead transmission, and certainly not the stalling problem.

[rixer]

I've owned two Chryslers. They make great looking cars and they're not low end vehicles. However, both of them were very unreliable and it was always something. I would never buy another one but that's just my experience.

[JackoC]

I'm looking at purchasing a new Chrysler Pacifica or a Toyota Sienna. They both are listed for similar prices with similar features. The Chrysler guys seem to be coming down in price more than the Toyota dealerships. Plus the Sienna is a hybrid and the Chrysler AWD is not

Reliability records of recent model years per Consumer Reports, 1-5 scale
2017 Pacifica 1 Sienna 2
2018 P 1 S 3
2019 P 2 S 2
2020 P 5 S 3
2021 (predicted) P 2 S 4

So not the drastic difference you might expect from general brand reputation, or even CR's overall brand reliability ranking*. Also it demonstrates the year to year noise you sometimes see in CR reliability scores for the same model (even without a generation change), and the algorithm for 'predicted' is clearly not just the recent average for that particular model. On average 2017-20 numbers were 2.25 for Pacifica and 2.5 for Sienna.

As others noted, if one is a hybrid and other AWD non-hybrid then you really can't compare price directly. And anyway would I pay 'more' for an equivalent Toyota? Above data notwithstanding yeah I probably would, though that doesn't answer how much, and both these particular vehicles are below my cut off on CR reliability history unless another really good reason to get it (and I probably can't totally filter out that I'd never get a minivan ).

*in Nov 2020 the Toyota brand of TMC was 2nd (behind Mazda) among 26 brands, Lexus 3rd. Among FCA brands, Ram was 7th, Dodge 10th, Jeep 19th, no entry for the Chrysler brand.

[whodidntante]

If the money is not a factor for you, buy the one you prefer. But it seems the money is a factor because you indicate price sensitivity in your post. With the exception of my current car, I have bought used cars that depreciated rapidly and this has added considerably to my wealth. I've never had a car outright fail on me to the point where I didn't repair it. But I did drive one vehicle to 300k and another to 230k. Both were working fine when I sold them.