Like others at CC, I’m fascinated by platform longevity. Not so only in terms of mechanical genealogy as demonstrated by, say, the ’90s Caprice sharing bits with the ’70s A-body colonnades, but also as it relates to external similarities as exemplified by cars like the long-lived Volvo 240 and, as seen here, the Dodge B-series vans.
The origins of the B-series van have been covered before, so there really isn’t much need to go into the backstory. When Mopar ceased building the B-series in 2003, it wasn’t exactly the same as it was in 1971, but it was close enough that, when viewed with squinted eyes and from the right angle, you might be thinking it were 1979 all over again.
To pick up where the previous CC left off, 1998 was a pivotal year for the venerable vehicle. By that year, Ford was six years into the next generation Econoline, and GM was two years into the fourth generation of its heavy haulers. What was Mopar to do? Put old wine in a new bottle, of course.
A reskinned front nose was the most obvious change from the ’97 van, but there were numerous changes inside as well. According to Allpar, these included more power from the top-tier 360 engine, improvements to the brakes and unibody construction, a new dashboard and most importantly, the relocation of the engine a few inches forward to better cater to those pesky humans who wanted to sit up front.
Allpar also notes that in addition to the slight stretch forward for the engine bay, Dodge also moved the front seats and dashboard backwards to give the illusion of more room, when it fact all they succeeded in doing was making egress all that much harder, since the door openings where in the same location as they had been from the start.
In the end, much like many other Mopar products, there just wasn’t enough money to redevelop a new van, and the market was more than amply covered by the Econoline. The replacement van, the Sprinter, is a story until itself, but today we celebrate one of the longest lived platforms–thirty-two years in production for the Dodge B-series van!
This short wheelbase van was spotted hauling seafood awhile back, still plugging away as was intended. A little worse for wear, this van is probably sporting a 318 (5.2L) engine, but with no markings other than a RAM 1500, it’s impossible to tell. A 3.9 Magnum V6 was also available.
As a parting view, this B-series van shows us one of the last vestiges of its true year of origin–all other big vans had long abandoned the massive one sided door, and yet like the van itself, this option hung on long past its prime.
Related reading: 1990 Dodge Ram Radio Flyer: The Big Red Wagon & 1979 Dodge B100 Van: Is It The Real Thing?
I’ve always loved these Dodge and Plymouth full-sized vans. I was disappointed when they were replaced with the Dodge (Mercedes-Benz) Sprinter. I believe what would’ve made a good van even better would’ve been the option of a Cummins Diesel engine. Possibly a 4BT 3.9 litre 4 cylinder diesel.
With the right gearing, the Cummins 4BT in the Dodge van probably would’ve provided performance similar to the non-turbo 6.2L diesel that was in my 1984 GMC van. Similar weight, lower horsepower but higher torque from the Cummins. My van was capable but certainly not exceptional, except for fuel economy.
One big problem would have been that the 4BT was derived from the Cummins 12-valve 6BT. Dodge had to switch to the 24-valve Cummins part-way through MY1998 because of tougher emissions requirements. I don’t believe that the 4BT was ever updated to a 24-valve version. Would sales of have been high enough to warrant the R&D? I’m guessing not.
Minor correction-350 cu. in. is approximately 5.7 liters. The Mopar 318 is approximately 5.2 liters. Interesting read, thank you!
Right. Being so used to seeing 5.7/350, it got past us.
An underground culture of enthusiasts has recently formed in Japan who race and customize these 90s-early 00s “dajibans”
It’s worth noting that the Tradesman cab also saw overseas service in the 80s on the Dodge 50 Series, Renault 50 Series and Reynolds-Boughton RB44 at the heavier end of the UK/European light truck market.
Interesting, I had never seen such an animal.
It’s alive!!!
I supplied quite a few parts for that particular RB44
Lovely bit of kit, still working in Scotland, 4×4 with perkins 4 litre turbo engine, a real hybrid being Renault Dodge on top, Reynolds Boughton 4×4 and built to the UK MOD specifications provided (some were really bad ones too), the front brakes were the same as a Dodge 100 8000kgs vehicles drum brakes while the rear were same as a 3500kgs Dodge 50 series drum brakes for example.
USN window stretch version was the worst handling truck Ive ever driven, but it was the only way off base
I have always had a soft spot for these, and seriously considered buying one a couple of different times. Most recently was 1995. A local ChryPlyDodge dealer had a new one (2500 Ram Wagon) on the lot and let me drive it home for a test-fit into my garage. As much as I liked it, it was simply ancient inside and out. The biggest problem for me was that Dodge steadfastly refused to fit 3 point belts to any of the rear seating positions other than the two closest to the driver’s side windows. This made it a non-starter for me as a family hauler. I went so far as to write a letter to Chrysler begging them to modernize the passenger version. You all know how that came out.
Beyond the seatbelts, the thing was like a time machine back to the 70s. No captains chairs in back, no cupholders, and even the rear heat required you to throw a lever back behind the drivers seat. There were simply zero modern amenities for the passengers. In contrast, the Chateau Club Wagon that I ended up buying had all kinds of goodies like headphone jacks for rear passengers, cupholders galore and a rear seat that folded into a bed. Once the Mrs. saw the Ford, the Dodge would have been out of the running even if it had six shoulder belts.
Dodge was the last to offer that short wheelbase version of a big van. The 1500 version only came as a shortie. To get the standard length, you had to get the 2500.
I personally would not want to sit in Captain’s Chairs in this vehicle or any other vehicle unless I am the driver. Having ridden between Denver and the Gulf Coast as well as up and down the I-5 Corridor several times in an Econoline and Expresses the bench seats are a blessing. Being able to sprawl out sure is nice instead of being confined to a chair, but to each their own.
“Dodge was the last to offer that short wheelbase version of a big van.”
As I was reading the article, I was wondering how long the short wheelbase versions remained available. Any idea when GM and Ford did away with them?
“The [Dodge] 1500 version only came as a shortie. To get the standard length, you had to get the 2500.”
I’m assuming that wasn’t always the case?
This shortie business is confusing. GMC and Ford still offer an 8 or 12 passenger version of their vans.
Those are the length of what had been the middle length vans. Before minivans came on the scene all of them offered a van that only had about 8′ of load space behind the front seats but once the minivans got extended length versions the shorty full size was sort of redundant.
Here is a Chevy version, note the lack of space between the sliding door and the rear wheel well.
Thank you for the information and clarification.
Here is the traditional version that can be ordered with seating for 12, note the space between the slider and the rear wheel well and greater distance between the rear wheel well and the back of the van.
This gives an idea of how the extended length minivans sort of made the shorty full size vans obsolete.
(1992 figures) Extended Caravan C/V 109.6 WB Van 127.6 WB Van
Length: rear door to driver’s
seat back (in rearmost position) 97.1 92.9 110.9
Exterior length 192.8 180.7 198.7
Cargo volume 159.7 206.6 246.7
Other than the dangerous seatbelts, that sounds charming to me.
I remember these and the 1971-1996 GM vans were interesting automotive archeology to pick through and identify the parts on them that had been in production forever, I remember the GM vans still had chrome window and door cranks with the “spiral” style centers and real chrome door lock plungers just like a 1969 car.
One of the first things I noticed on these when this update was done was the door handles straight off the XJ Cherokee. Did anyone besides Dodge offer the single rear door?
What you hardly ever or never saw these as was as a cutaway, I know they made RV cutaways of these in the 70’s and maybe early 80’s, but after that? Did they stop making these for the “cube-van” U-Haul/Ryder style moving vans, I remember Ford and GMC’s being on most U-Haul lots, but never any Dodges.
My understanding is there was a point (one of the recessions, undoubtedly) where Chrysler totally got out of the RV/cutaway business. After that it was just Ford and Chevy.
Folks at U-Haul and RV Dealers have told me that Dodges were built to fall apart (sometimes even before the warranty expired) so that is why their entire fleet is now nothing but FoMoCo and General Motors. Though I hear the Cummins Diesel was good.
All I know is that Expresses are nicer on the driver, but pre-6 speed Tranny Expresses are slow to gain speed and Econolines are noisy and a bit crude in general.
The dealership I currently work at had Dodge vans for a time, and they were absolute crap. The front ends ate components, and they were about impossible to keep aligned. Switched to Econolines years ago and never looked back.
Back in the 70s, the Dodge engines and Torqueflite were highly regarded. I have a ’77 Dodge Chinook with the 360/A727, and it has been tough as nails. Bought it for $1200 back in 2005, and it’s taken us to Mexico twice and all over the West. Still going strong. But it is noisy, and the co-pilot seat has crappy accommodations.
Figured it had to be something like that, I remember seeing camper versions of these, but after a certain year, they were gone. After a certain year the only ones of these I remember seeing were all white with “Metro-Dade” on the door, I can’t remember any personal use passenger ones, except for the occasional custom van.
“After a certain year…I can’t remember any personal use passenger ones, except for the occasional custom van.”
That seemed to happen to all of the traditional full-size vans over time. In the ’60s, ’70s and even the ’80s, a significant percentage of full-size van production was private passenger vehicles, and you would have expected (as a hypothetical example) a guide to new cars and light trucks for consumers to cover full-size vans, at least the lighter-duty versions, just as you would expect such a guide to cover minivans, pickups and SUVs. But at some point, maybe in the early 1990s, the percentage of private passenger sales dropped far enough that these came to be considered pretty much strictly commercial vehicles, no longer worth mentioning in a guide to consumer passenger vehicles. I guess sales gravitated towards minivans and SUVs, especially as minivans and “compact” SUVs grew larger over time.
A local Dodge dealer, Elmhurst Dodge, specialized in selling conversion B vans, and up until 2001 or so, was #1 in van sales. But then buyers moved on to SUV’s and the B van was killed off. So, this Dodge dealer had to merge with the Chrysler-Jeep store down the street.
The Dodge place had a huge lot full of conversion vans for years, but sold it to a Semi Tractor dealer to park their trucks. The stand alone store went to Hyundai, and they are bursting at seems now.
Interesting in the shake up a local Chrylser (formerly Plymouth) dealer bit the dust, the Dodge dealer across the street picked up the Chrysler franchise and the Chrysler lot was turned into a MD/HD truck dealer.
A friend of mine had a ’96 that was covered in black astroturf and had the prism from Pink Floyd’s “Dark Side of The Moon” airbrushed on it. I cannot disclose as to how he equipped the interior, but given the context of Pink Floyd one can use their imagination…
Second note, these were real easy to work on. I recall working on a model that my tech school as part of my automotive training. We called them ‘doghouse vans’ as the access panel to the engine resembles a doghouse. If I recall correctly, the Aerostar, the Astro and the Dodge all had a similar access panel.
So do all Econolines and the Gen 2 & 3 GM twins.
The Aerostar and to a lesser extent the Astro had more of a access panel and less of a doghouse intruding on the passenger space. The Econolines from 1975 and up also put the engine more under the hood and less in the passenger compartment. So yeah for engine access the Chryslers were the best.
Those sure are some odd dents.
These Vans pretty much are a joke and I would have thought by the 1990s Chrysler would have come up with something better since they did invent the modern Minivan. The interior is horribly outdated and the pre-1997 face lift interior is worse. These Vans have the unstable rear overhang and the seam on the sides of the 15 passenger version just scream cheap to me. I have never ridden in a pre-2008 Express, but I do know that pre-2008 Econolines have no shoulder belts for the middle passengers which is foolish. Actually got a 2nd degree burn from one of these Dodges because the plastic headliner was missing in places and the Van was parked in the hot Texas sun. So when I climbed in the back and over the rear seat I brushed the ceiling and scorched my arm. Despite these flaws you can buy these in du-color schemes and Forest Service Green so sometimes I debate buying one as a future work vehicle.
Back in 2009 I got a ride from Boulder to Denver International in an 02 15 Passenger. The guy said the Dodge is the best of the Detroit Three in terms of holding together both inside and out especially the engine with over 400k. He said he had to relocate to the Boulder Super Shuttle area because 02s were too old according to the Denver Super Shuttle rules.
Here in the Rust Belt the Dodge vans were a VERY distant third in reliability/durability. Our roads just beat the living crap out of their rather fragile front ends among other issues.
Super Shuttle did like their Dodge vans for some reason. I’m suspecting it was because they could buy them for next to nothing. The Econoline is the king of full size vans, holding more than 50% market share for much of its life, because of its durability.
Drove these alot in the mid to late 1980’s. The versions with the square headlights and egg crate grill. They were all spec’d with the inline-6 and automatic with vinyl floors and deep tinted windows… with no seats other than the driver and passenger.
The back was reserved for up to two unlucky passengers and the gurneys.
My uncle owned a funeral service and had a fleet of these to transport the deceased to/from the client funeral homes and to pick up bodies from the morgue/hospital, take them to be embalmed and then off to the client funeral home. From a 16 year old’s point of view, it was a great job since you got to drive around all day on someone else’s dime and the passengers never complained about how loud you had the radio.
The vans were slow as hell and you had to put your foot in them to get any sort of acceleration. We had one older 8 cylinder van, but the front suspension and steering were damaged, so you were constantly sawing at the wheel to keep it on course.
The single hinge back door was heavy and was a pain in tight quarters, but being able to open it wide was really really handy when you needed the help of several big hulking orderlies to get the overloaded gurney in the back…
The main reason for that single-piece rear door (which neither Ford nor Chevy ever offered) was that it eliminated the split rear window that really messed with the view through the rear view mirror. You would be amazed what a PITA that gap between the rear windows is when trying to see what’s going on behind you.
Amen on the split window. Three times in my life have I backed into something; each time I was driving a ’95 or newer Econoline with the barn doors.
You can call me an anachronism and I won’t argue. My mind sees a 318 (or slant six) short van with stick that’s older than this. Wanted one but it never really fit my needs. Don’t think I would sell what I have to buy one but there is an empty spot.
What would have fit was one of the phone company vans with windows on the right side only. Could have run service in one of them but already had a stretch ford 300/six. Most of them were slant six with stick, in Texas anyway.
One of those 71’s on a short wheelbase with a slightly lowered stance and Mopar rallye’s would be excellent! The lowering would greatly improve stability because my experience with these in stock form is that they rock like a boat. I love the all-metal grille on these early ones!
I spent a good chunk of the 80s and 90’s working with passenger vans for summer camp transportation. We owned 12 Dodge 15 passenger vans 1986-88 models, and rented about 20 E-Line Club Wagons every summer. Here are my impressions:
Our youthful passengers liked the rear row of seats of the Dodges best–the wrap around rear windows offered far better visability than the “blind-back” body extensions Ford was using at the time.
Our owned Dodge 360’s/727s were dependable. I don’t remember any significant drivetrain failures over the years. Our snafus had mostly to do with A/C leaks. I remember a few Ford catalytic converters getting clogged on the 5.8L units. Never any problems with the mighty 460 V8 equipped Fords. For serviceability, the crown goes to Dodge. Once the “doghouse” engine cover was removed inside, there was great access to the engine. The Fords were much harder to work on.
Long Tee-Pee poles could be carried inside the Dodges diagonally—the Ford interiors were not as long.
We enjoyed good service from both Dodge and Ford vans.
Just adding to some of the comments about the consumer versions of traditional U.S. vans, I can recall seeing a few conversion vans at the auto show through the ’90s. The quietly disappeared, and I really didn’t notice.
About a year ago I found a few travel type magazines in a dark corner in our basement. They were from about 2001, and GM had ads for passenger versions of both the Chevy and GMC touting them as fantastic family vacation vehicles. I was pretty shocked that such versions existed, and that tiny ad campaign clearly didn’t have much impact.
To the extent that a box on wheels can look good, I always thought Dodge did a pretty good job with updating the exteriors on these in 1988. I did see a pretty nice one as a conversion van a few years ago. It had some very traditionally designed and attractive Dodge wheels on it that I didn’t recall seeing before.
Ford made a final retail pitch for the E150 Traveler around 2001. I recall seeing print ads in the scouting magazine I got when my boys were in scouts. Unfortunately, the Suburban had a lock on the plus sized family market.
Funny though that everyone who was used to Suburbans used to marvel at how much more accommodating my Chateau Club Wagon was when they got a ride in it. I still think it was the unbeatable family vehicle.
“One of those 71′s..”
These vans are so old, a ’71 model actually appeared in an episode of “Beverly Hillbillies” final season, 1970-71. Was painted as a ‘hippie van’.
The front end re-do that went with the unibody job was pretty low-budget, since the sheetmetal appears not to have changed at all. The fenders and hood are the same, and along with the bumper only the grille, headlamps and filler panels below the lights were changed to fit the longer front overhang. This leaves the front end looking rather awkward and lumpy compared to the BOF 1994-97 vans.
No Chrysler van was ever BOF, even the cutaways for high cube and RV conversion are unibody.
Thanks for the correction – I thought the changes for 1998 were a bit more than a front end re-do.
You’ll never, ever, have a problem finding a replacement windshield.
I wonder how many molds wore out.
I think that back door is the one to have for any work van. It meets the criteria for the standard sedan delivery. They always opened to the curb. Thats also like the door for my Nissan Cube which I am told opens in the opposite direction in Japan. I happen to like the back door of my cube better than any SUV I have driven lately. Don’t think I know how the scion opens.
Owned an E150 and found the rear to provide a good work station and never really thought about visibility. Just convenient.
I have a soft spot for ancient platforms, but I had occasion for work to drive a late model Dodge 15 passenger in the early 2000’s and came away unimpressed. I’d spent a lot of time driving Fords and there wasn’t anything that compared favorably. They probably hung on so long by virtue of their cheap cost, solid drivetrain and possibly their servicability. Those are some attractive factors for fleet buyers.
I drove one of those later models a few times in the shipyard, and found it difficult to squeeze my 6′ 2″ frame through the too-narrow door. It drove okay though.
dodge50.co.uk has loads of info on the UK made dodge 50 series, only the cab was used from the US Dodge and then they had to make roofs as there was no chassis cab US cab version, only vans.