Year 2000: Best and Worst SUV, Van, and Truck Buys -

BEST AND WORST OF...


 

Year 2000: Best and Worst Car and Minivan Buys

The list has been compiled after reviewing owner complaints, secret warranty programs, automaker internal service bulletins and memos, government complaint data, court judgments, and out-of-court settlements.

Ratings may contradict Consumer Reports or auto club ratings due to the weight given owner complaints and internal service bulletins.

For monthly updates, secret warranties, troubleshooting shortcuts, using upgraded parts and kits, and service bulletin proof that a problem is factory-related and should be fixed, free of charge, pick up the latest Lemon-Aid Guide and check this web-site frequently.

Why the Ford downgrade?

Taurus, Sable and Windstar owners may be angry that their vehicles have been downgraded to Not Recommend in this year's used car guides, while some of Chrysler's models, faced with similar on-going transmission failures, are given an Average rating.

Bad Buys

  • Cadillac: Allante, Catera, Cimarron, and all other front-drives
  • Chrysler: Horizon, minivans (up to 1997), Neon, Omni (engine, brake, and automatic transmission failures; paint delamination)
  • Chrysler: Cirrus and Stratus (engine, automatic transmission, and AC failures)
  • Daewoo: all models and years (just coming out of bankruptcy; may be acquired by GM)
  • Ford: Taurus, Tempo, Topaz, Sable, Windstar (electrical glitches, 3.8L engine, transmission, and brake failures)
  • Chrysler: Concorde, Intrepid, LHS, New Yorker, Vision (automatic transmission, brakes and AC failures; body leaks)
  • GM Saturn: all models and years (engine, failures, electrical glitches, and poor body fit and finish)
  • Hyundai: Excel, Pony, early Sonatas, Stellar (biodegradable bodies, serious engine, transmission, electrical, brake and fuel system failures)
  • Jaguar: all models and years (lots of cash for pseudo-cachet from Ford; mediocre quality and problematic servicing)
  • Kia: Sportage (a poorly performing sport-utility with an uncertain future)
  • Lada: all models and years; sold only in Canada, EH! (primitive and not easily serviced; going, going, going, almost gone)
  • Lincoln: Continental front-drive (engine, transmission, AC and brake failures)
  • Mazda: MPV (mediocre quality; latest version is a gutless runt)
  • Saab: (electrical failures and quirky; one of Lucien Bouchard's favourite cars.
  • VW: Rabbit and EuroVan (mediocre quality control and problematic servicing; Camper is ideal for waiting for a tow from Hans or Helmut)

Good Buys

  • Audi: A4 and A6 (no more sudden acceleration unless you're talking about sales)
  • Chrysler: Colt, Summit, Stealth (three of the best cars Chrysler never built)
  • Ford: Escort, Mustang, Crown Victoria, Grand Marquis (a Mazda spinoff and rear drive reliability)
  • GM: Caprice, Camaro, Cavalier, Firebird, Roadmaster, Sunbird, Sunfire (dependable rear drives and well-equipped, inexpensive front-drive small cars)
  • Honda: Accord, Civic, Odyssey after '98 (reliable and slow to depreciate)
  • Infiniti: all models and years (a better-performing Maxima)
  • Lexus: all models and years (your father's rear-drive Oldsmobile, if he were Japanese)
  • Lincoln: Continental and Town Car (best American luxury cars)
  • Mazda: 626, 929, Miata, Protege (reasonably-priced and almost as reliable as the Honda, Toyota competition)
  • Mercedes: 300 series (expensive, but you get your money back at trade-in time)
  • Nissan: Axxess, Maxima, Sentra (reliable and reasonably priced)
  • Subaru: Legacy and Forester (4X4 is what makes them special; reliability is in the Mazda, Nissan, class, almost as good as Toyota and Honda)
  • Toyota: Avalon, Camry, Solara, Sienna (Camry redux)
  • Volvo: all models and years (reliable and handles well; the quintessential NDP car-think of McGovern Democrats gone North-except for its modern styling)
  • VW: Passat (reliable, performs well, and holds its value)

BACK TO TOP

Sport-Utilities

Note that there are two types of used 4X4s you're likely to encounter: part-time and full-time four-wheel drive. Part-time four-wheel drive should be engaged when road conditions are wet and muddy or if roads are snow covered. The four wheels are locked together to turn at the same rate of speed. On dry pavement, driving in 4X4 mode will strain the drive-train and damage the drive-line components.

Full-time four-wheel drive (also called all-wheel drive) is a more sophisticated system that permits driving on any surface. A center differential lets all four wheels turn at different speeds. Also, keep in mind that safe off-roading requires suspension, engine, and drive-train packages and other components, such as off-road tires and a skid plate, that may not have come with your vehicle. Check your equipment before attempting any risky driving.

Recommended
  • Explorer, Mountaineer (1995–98)
  • Infiniti QX4 (1997–98)
  • Lexus LX 450, LX 470 (1997–98)
  • Ford/Lincoln Expedition, Navigator (1997–98)
  • Toyota 4Runner (1996–98)

Above Average

  • Chrysler/Jeep CJ, Wrangler, TJ Wrangler (1997–98)
  • Mercedes ML 320 (1998)
  • Subaru Forester, Outback (1995–98)
  • Ford Explorer (1993–94)
  • Honda CR-V (1997–98)
  • Honda Passport/Acura SLX/
  • Isuzu Rodeo, Trooper (1998)
  • Toyota 4Runner (1988–95)
  • Toyota RAV4 (1997–98)

Average
  • Chrysler Durango (1998)
  • GM Blazer, Tahoe, Yukon (1995–98)
  • Chrysler Ramcharger (1990–93)
  • Chrysler/Jeep Cherokee (1995–98)
  • GM Chevrolet Tracker, Suzuki Sidekick (1994–98)
  • Chrysler/Jeep Grand Cherokee (1995–98)
  • Isuzu Rodeo, Trooper (1993–97)
  • Chrysler/Jeep CJ, Wrangler,
  • Wrangler (1987–96)
  • YJ Nissan Pathfinder (1987–98)
  • Suzuki Samurai (1992–94)
  • Ford Bronco (1994–96)
  • Toyota Land Cruiser, Toyota RAV4 (1996)
  • GM Blazer, Bravada, Envoy, Jimmy (1995–98)

Below Average

  • Chrysler Ramcharger (1985–89)
  • Ford Bronco (1988–93)
  • GM Chevrolet Tracker, (1990-94)
  • GM Blazer, Jimmy, Tahoe, Yukon GM Suburban (1995–98)
  • Suzuki Sidekick (1989–93)
  • Honda Passport/Isuzu Rodeo, Trooper (1986–92)

Not Recommended

  • AM General Hummer (1996–98)
  • Chrysler/Jeep Cherokee (1985–94)
  • GM Blazer, Jimmy (compacts) (1985–89)
  • GM Blazer, Jimmy (full-sized) (1993–94)
  • GM Escalade (1998)
  • Chrysler/Jeep Grand Cherokee (1983–94)
  • Chrysler/Jeep Wagoneer, Grand Wagoneer (1985–93)
  • Ford Bronco (1979–87)
  • Ford Bronco II (1983–90)
  • Ford Excursion, Ford Explorer (1991–92)
  • GM Suburban (1985–94)
  • Lada Cossack, Niva
  • Land Rover Discovery (1994–98)
  • Suzuki X-90 (1997–98)
  • Suzuki Samurai (1986–91)

BACK TO TOP

Minivans

Minivan ownership costs are quite reasonable, according to the American management consulting firm Runzheimer International, which has concluded that it costs less to operate a minivan than it does many compact cars. Still, most minivans are overpriced, and motorists needing a vehicle with large cargo- and passenger-carrying capacity should consider a cheaper GM Vandura or Chevy Van, even if it means sacrificing some fuel economy and convenience features (they can be added by most conversion shops at competitive prices). You just can't beat the excellent forward vision and easy-to-customize interiors that these large vans provide.

Recommended

  • Ford Mercury Villager,
  • Nissan Quest (1997–98)
  • Honda Odyssey (1999)
  • Toyota Sienna (1999)

Above Average

  • Ford Mercury Villager, Nissan
  • Quest (1995–96)
  • Nissan Axxess (1993–95)
  • GM Silhouette, Trans Sport,
  • Venture (1997–98)
  • Honda Odyssey (1995–98)
  • Toyota Previa (1991–97)
  • Toyota Sienna (1998)

Average

  • GM Astro, Safari (1996–98)
  • GM Lumina, Silhouette,
  • Trans Sport (1995–96)
  • Mazda MPV (1996–98)
  • Nissan Axxess (1991–92)
  • Ford Aerostar (1995–97)

Below Average
  • Chrysler Caravan, Ram Van,
  • Town & Country,
  • Voyager (1997–98)
  • Ford Windstar (1996–98)
  • Mazda MPV (1988–95)

Not Recommended
  • Chrysler Caravan, Ram Van, GM Astro, Safari (1985–95)
  • Town & Country, Voyager (1984–86)
  • GM Lumina, Lumina APV, (1990–94)
  • Silhouette, Trans Sport (1984–96)
  • Ford Aerostar (1986–94)
  • Ford Mercury Villager,
  • Nissan Axxess (1987–90)
  • Quest (1993–94)
  • Ford Windstar (1995)
  • Toyota LE (1984–90)
  • Volkswagen Camper, EuroVan (1985–98)

BACK TO TOP

Full-Sized Vans

From a reliability perspective, GM full-sized vans come out on top, again, with Ford and Chrysler tied for second place. Apparently, Chrysler's last redesign has led to an overall improvement in component quality, while Ford's quality control has slipped as of late. Some of the more common problems shared by all three auto-makers: engine problems, drive-train breakdowns, ABS brake failures and premature brake and suspension wear-out, AC failures, and electrical/computer module glitches.

Recommended

  • GM Chevy Van, Express, Savana (1996–98)

Above Average
  • Chrysler Ram Wagon (1995–98)
  • GM Chevy Van, Vandura (1980–95)
  • Ford Club Wagon, Econoline (1997–98)

Average

  • Chrysler Ram Wagon (1985–94)
  • Ford Club Wagon, Econoline (1991–96)

Not Recommended

  • Chrysler Ram Wagon (1980–84)
  • Ford Club Wagon, Econoline (1980–90)

BACK TO TOP

Pickups

In choosing a pickup, decide first what characteristics best correspond to your driving needs. Chevrolet's full-sized C/K models (C1500, GMC Sierra, etc.) aren't impressive, due to their poor quality control and sub-par performance. Still, I'd place them slightly ahead of Ford and Chrysler for dependable power-train performance. The 1998 models had a limited production run and are now eclipsed by the better performing, more fully equipped 1999 Silverado and redesigned Sierra. The older C/Ks do have lots of power, a quiet interior, and a third door, but you also buy into a less comfortable ride, ponderous handling, and sub-par braking.

The post-1996 F-150's advantage is its pleasant ride on bad roads, well-thought-out ergonomics, attractivestyling, and good—though not exceptional—fit and finish. On the downside, the transmission shifts roughly and handling is vague. As well, reliability has fallen to average, mainly due to an increasing number of engine, fuel system, and automatic transmission complaints on low-mileage trucks.

Dodge full-sized pickups rate a third-place designation due to their emphasis on style over substance. Although they are aggressively styled, come with a fourth door, and are usually more reasonably priced than the competition, they aren't as well equipped, use outdated mechanical components, and have quality-control deficiencies that are almost as extensive and expensive to correct as those found on GM's C/K pickups.

Finally, can someone tell me this: What is the difference between GMC and Chevrolet full-sized trucks? I say, zilch. Apart from cannibalizing Chevrolet sales, the GMC nameplate only increases administrative costs and customer confusion.

For more information

buy New Car Buying Guide by Consumer Reports

buy Consumer Reports Used Car Buying Guide by Consumer Reports

BACK TO TOP