(first posted 6/23/2013) Back in 1994, my Dad decided we needed a minivan and we test-drove a Windstar. We ordered a GL in this very shade (“Tuscan Bronze”), not knowing what it would look like. Once we saw it, we were in shock, promptly said “NO”, and instead ordered an LX model in a much more attractive shade called Champagne. It took us six months to get it. Was it worth the wait?
We left two weeks later for a five week trip from Florida to Tennessee and then to Michigan and back. Other than an issue with the brakes that turned out to be very minor, the van gave us no problems for the year and a half we had it. The only reason Dad got rid of it was because Mom didn’t like to drive it, and so it was swapped out for a new Explorer. Given what a bad reputation these vans have acquired due to blown 3.8 L head gaskets, grenaded transmissions and premature structural rusting (mostly 1998-2003 models), that was probably a good call by Mom. A woman’s intuition?
Granted Ford had the FWD Mercury Villager and RWD Aerostar to go head to head with GM and Chrysler, but they realized that they could possibly one-up the competition by doing a large front-drive van. The Taurus platform provided the basis, and from there the Windstar was born! It came out in January 1994 as an early 1995 model. At first it was only offered with the 3.8 V6 and four speed auto transmission straight from the Taurus/Sable/Continental. For such a large van it proved to be surprisingly quick off the line. It had a longer wheelbase than the competition so it had a very smooth ride.
The Windstar offered an attractive interior that featured a curved dashboard. When these debuted, the buff books promptly declared that the Windstar was the new King of the Minivans. Unfortunately for Ford, that title only lasted for one year, as the 1996 Chrysler Minivans outclassed all the others overnight.
The biggest advantage the Chryslers offered was the driver side sliding door. Ford claimed that they tossed around the idea in the consumer clinics, but the idea didn’t spark enough interest to make it worth doing.
By 1996 Ford found themselves with a bit of a turd on their hands, if for no other reason than the lack of that fourth door. As a stop-gap, they came up with the extended length drivers door, and included it on the early 1998 Windstars. This would have to do until the redesigned 1999 models with a proper driver’s side rear door would debut.
The Windstar sold reasonably well, averaging around 200k annual sales through 2000; then sales started a long decline. The renamed “Freestar” that appeared in 2003 did nothing to stem that terminal decline; if anything, sales dropped even faster. All 0f 2,390 Freestars were sold as 2007s before the plug was pulled. Ford had joined GM in being unable to make a successful mini-van, leaving the market to Chrysler and the Japanese (unless one counts the Flex as a mini-van).
I really wanted these to be “good” vans: they certainly were nice-looking, especially the instrument panel and interior. It baffles me why the lack of a LH sliding door was even a consideration. Sure it would be expensive but why would anyone NOT want one on that side?
Because, except for a few poorly-selling early models, vans had only curbside doors behind the front row.
I can see Ford’s thinking here. First, ChryCo Gen1 minis didn’t have a left-side sliding door…there didn’t appear to be a demand for one. The room and seating arrangements were such that it wasn’t a big issue – at the time. Moreover, a lot of minivan customers were young mothers – who wouldn’t want their charges getting out on the left side on busy streets and such.
I know: I know; it worked out differently. The minivan customer was a little different in requirements than the Ace Maintenance buyers of full-size vans. And once Mum discovered the convenience of the left rear slider…she’d want it.
But Ford was feeling its way here – they had no inspiration or feel for the product. When it was their guys presenting it as a concept, their management gave it thumbs-down. And when Lido opened it up as a new market segment, all they knew was to play “Me, Too!”
Oops, JPT…looks like I was echoing your comments at the same time that yours was posted.
Ford rejected a driver’s side rear sliding door after simply asking the consumer clinic participants if they wanted one. Only problem was, no consumer had never seen such a feature (nor were they shown one in the clinics), so the participants couldn’t grasp the benefit of a fourth door.
Forgive me for sounding a bit “soap boxy” for a moment, but it reminds me of something that used to irritate me on TTAC: When commenters would reject any new feature as “lazy” or “useless.” Unless and until you’ve actually used a feature, it’s sometimes impossible to figure out how it can make your life easier; sort of like how I made fun of cell phones and keyless remote entry in the early 1990s.
Ah, the benefit of my advancing age…
Also, it’s easy for people who don’t have kids to shlep to underestimate just how convenient certain “trivial” conveniences can be.
It’s also strikingly different from Ford’s approach with the Gen. 1 Taurus, where they aimed not to find out specifically what the customer wanted but what the consumer didn’t want yet—the purpose of the consumer clinics there was to find things that would spark Ford to innovate, not to fill out a checklist of possible features.
Yeah…getting old sucks, don’t it?
I swore I’d never have a car with an automatic transmission. I said, loudly, that cars with power windows were for idiots with more money than sense. I proclaimed I’d MUCH rather have a HOME air conditioner, than waste money on one on a CAR.
And, keyless entry gizmos? I could see my Aunt Sabrina struggling with one on her Cadillac…that’s who those things were for. To impress “legacy buyers” who owned a luxury brand because they always owned that brand.
Well, guess what? My 2010 Yaris has:
–Power windows
–Air conditioning
–Keyless entry
I’m replacing it with a new one, because I want: an AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSION!!
Ford should have remembered what Henry Ford I said about letting customers dictate what you do:
“If I’d asked people what they wanted when I started, they’d have told me a faster horse.”
Consumer Reports used to do this quite frequently until the 1990s. Back before most things we consider standard were optional, they would list various pros and cons of these things, often coming up with cons that had dubious value. Sometimes I wondered if CR really wanted us to drive Soviet style cars or Checker cabs that were simple old fashioned but had no life.
Some features have become very useful and practical like keyless entry and automatic locks but some are overplayed. When I bought my Camaro I got a basic version because in the end, you really only had to decide three things: V6 or V8 manual or automatic and what color you wanted. The rest of the few options are so minor the don’t alter the basics of the car.
Sliding doors both sides is a japanese van feature popular with couriers why ford couldnt do one is beyond me everyone else can
Back in the day, when most loading and unloading of passenger vehicles took place at an actual curbside, it made sense from a safety standpoint to have the rear passenger exit on a van be curbside only. Especially when the doors in question were still swinging doors that would open into traffic. The Corvair Greenbrier could be ordered with rear doors on both sides but it got very few takers.
Somehow, it took Chrysler and Ford a few years to recognize that the very customers who were driving off in minivans as fast as they were being built were no longer constrained by the curbside. In a suburban environment, minivans were being entered and exited in driveways, school parking lots, mall parking lots and so on, where it was helpful, and not a safety issue, to be able to use either side.
The original Falcon Van/Econolines were available in 8 door versions too, but there were very few takers and quickly disappeared from the options list. They also offered a 4dr w/o any rear side doors which had even fewer takers and lasted and was dropped even quicker.
Here is a COAL of the Windstar with LH sliding door: https://www.curbsideclassic.com/cars-of-a-lifetime/coal-2003-ford-windstar-sel-a-hint-of-luxury/
What. A. Disaster. The 90s seemed to wildly gyrate between “good Ford” and “bad Ford”. This was “bad Ford”.
These had just came out when I was seriously looking for a van. The Chryslers were in their last year of a cycle, and these were brand new. They looked to be the first real competition for Chrysler. We ended up buying a 1 year old Club Wagon instead, so we dodged a bullet too.
I knew several people with early Windstars. Disasters, every one of them. Multiple transmission failures, usually 2 or 3. We knew at least two families who got onto their 3rd transmission (in maybe 4 or 5 years) and immediately dumped the things for a Toyota and a Honda, respectively.
What amazes me is that I still see some early ones out on the roads here, usually driven by Mexican immigrants. There is probably no less expensive used vehicle out there than an old Windstar, so this is probably the reason.
Three families we knew from our kid’s school all bought identical new Windstars when they first came out. All of them had multiple headgasket and transmission failures. All of them bought Japanese cars next time.
That seems to be the story of the US car industry in general Paul, the customers bought something elsewhere that didnt break, Surely after all this time a powertrain can be designed to suit the purpose..
The contemporary Honda Odyssey did fare much better in regards to transmission failure.
You probably meant, “did NOT” fare much better.
That is funny that you should mention switching to Toyota and Honda minivans. When my kids were going to a Montessori school there were a few of us with Windstars. One family went to the Toyota, last time I saw it they were picking it up from the repair shop for what I don’t know. Another went with a Honda and it made sure that they will never buy another Honda again, it was replaced with a Ford car. I still talk to the dad on occasion and he told me how much worst the Honda was than their Windstar. Both needed transmissions but instead of $2500 for the Windstar the Honda trans cost them $4000 then they also had a $1000 plus bill for the power sliding door repair big bucks for engine mount replacement, AC that quit, and a $1500 60K service. So their Windstar was much better to them than the Honda.
The only person I know who is happy with their Honda minivan is the same guy who bought another Accord because the last one “was so good to him”. He kept the old Accord for his son and when it died and I helped him figure out the problem he then remembered that it had left him stranded several times before from an imploding distributor, failed ign control module and the main relay failing twice before the one that failed that time. Despite telling him to get an aftermarket one he insisted in getting yet another from Honda. I think one of the reasons he is still happy with the Honda is that it is his wife’s and it only sees about 8K per year of use.
Ours was replaced with a Mountaineer that is still in the driveway, we had rented a 02 Explorer and overnight my wife decided she hated having a minivan and had to have a SUV.
I’m with you, Eric, them ferrin cars are just a flash in the pan and all those rating agencies are just a conspiracy.
Buyers are more impressionable when they are younger, hence why foreign makes did well in 70s and 80s when Boomers were young and conditions in the country were rapidly changing. Brand loyalty in cars still exhibits somewhat of a solidifying (although less than years ago) effect as owners age. That explains why the Japanese imports have grown larger over time and brought out upmarket models.
The old Sloan model at work just operating at the intra-brand level and not inter-brand. A 1985 Corolla owner probably doesn’t want to drive a Corolla in 2013 especially if they can afford otherwise. So for the 1985 Corolla owner who is now 60 the Avalon looks good.
Once buyers find a “home” they often stay there as they age. The gentrifying is happening with the Japanese makes today just like it did with GM with the WWII generation. As a consequence, loyalists will tend to be more kind to their preferred brands and over look problems and quirks.
Back when the domestics were rapidly losing market share, no surprise that there was almost a linear relationship between age and incidence of buying a foreign make (in this case Japanese – German brands were a different story).
As I said above, as buyers age their loyalty increases and their factor of brand switching goes down unless there is a major life event.
Now that the domestics have slimmed their product lines, reliability and performance factors have narrowed and cars increasingly looking the same, other factors are now being employed to capture the Gen Ys who are today’s impressionable demographic.
So unnecessary to make a remark on “mexican inmigrants”.
I am mexican, and back then we could actually afford one in like this one (and even opt on the GL Plus since the GL didn’t have rear AC), brand new, we didn’t keep it long enough to experience any problem with it.
I’m a Ford guy but even I can’t defend these things – I remember opening the hood on one, and was amazed at how cheap and ill fitting the engine compartment was – could only think how cheap and slapped together the rest of the car would be……..
A few months ago, I wrote a little article on another website about my experience with our 2004 Ford Freestar. The long and short of it is that the transmission blew out and it cost me over $4K to get a new unit installed. Fortuantely the these vans are cheap to buy and I paid next to nothing for it. Even with the expensive repair I felt like we came out ahead.
Now that the repair has been made, the van drives out well and I really like it. It’s stable, rides nicely and the insides are very kid friendly. It’s a nice van and I think it stacks up well against the Chrysler vans I have driven in the past.
Since my job takes us overseas a lot, my goal when I bought this van was to use it for about 3 years and then sell it when we get an onward assignment. So, in my mind, it is a diposable vehicle. It’s a shame that these vans have such poor reliability, they could have been winners.
As mentioned on that other site you paid Honda minivan transmission money and shouldn’t have paid more than $2500 for a Wind/Freestar transmission.
In 2008 I priced out an AX4N transmission for my 1996 Sable wagon which had a 4th gear solenoid failure after 220k miles. Was going to be $2,200 installed, by a Ford dealer. Sold the car and haven’t owned an automatic since.
I’ve always kind of rooted for Ford. Maybe it’s because my dad is such a dedicated Ford man. So when the Windstar debuted, I really, really, really wanted to like it. It looked almost right — finally, someone was trying to actually compete with Chrysler using the right idiom. But these Windstars were still just wrong somehow. I never drove a 1st-gen so I can’t comment on it specifically, but even looking at them it was plain that Ford had learned the language but still spoke with a thick accent.
My dad had a 2nd-gen Windstar for a while. I did drive that one. I also once pushed it out of an underground parking garage when it broke down again. I pushed it out of the parking space with my legs and hands and then the rest of the way out of the garage with my Toyota Sienna, which was a dreadfully boring drive but was supremely reliable. Dad constantly dumped money into that execrable van.
My neighbors have a second generation one. Transmission problems, rusted out coolant tube, electrical problems, you name it, they have had to repair it. Yet for some extrange reason they still have it. I dont know if they can afford another car or not, but I do know that they have lost thousands of dollars on it. They even spent money to retouch the paint. They do have another car at least.
I’m curious, if anyone knows, what specifically it is about the transmissions on minivans, as people were mentioning this as common problem with other makes as well. Too lightly built for the loads carried by these vans? Specific to Windstars, was this drivetrain shared with other Ford products and did they tend to fail in those applications as well?
On the Fords, the Windstar engine and tranny were basically shared with the Taurus. The transmission was none too robust in the Taurus, and gets worse when you add a bunch more weight. I have more experience with the Chryslers. After the early Ultradrive fiasco (the first electronically controlled transmission) these things by the late 90s had become decent. Problem was that these things weighed as much as a 70s New Yorker. My 99 T&C weighed 4500 pounds (empty). Throw in 6 adults and some luggage, and these things are really, really heavy. Also, it you could fit an auxiliary cooler and change the fluid fairly frequently, you could get decent life out of the Chrysler unit. Still, they were none too overbuilt. The tranny in my T&C failed at 207K, and my mechanic said it had every appearance of the original transmission in the car. Most folks, however, just load up, drive and forget the transmission, and they do not last nearly as long that way.
The first Windstars did share the 140 HP 3.8, but later models got a 200HP 3.8 that the Taurus never got.
Say what you want about Iacocca, but he got the minivan absolutely correct, and Chrysler kept on getting it right until Honda showed up with the ‘magic’ disappearing rear seat on the 1999 Odyssey. Chrysler, instead, went with the power rear gate which was much less desirable, but made up for it later with the Stow-n-Go fold-into-the-floor second row seats (which no one else has yet copied).
The thing is, neither GM nor Ford seemed able or willing to copy what Chrysler was doing, and by the time they got around to a decent version, Chrysler was already ahead of the game. Buying a new GM or Ford minivan was akin to buying the last model Chrysler. In fact, GM never really had a fold-into-the-floor rear seat in a minivan. On their final Uplander, the rear seat would fold down alright, just not into the floor.
Of course, the market had long ago shifted to SUVs, too…
Ford and GM didnt have Misubishi heavy industries doing the brainwork like Lido did they had to start from scratch
Sorry but Mitsubishi had nothing to do with the first Chrysler minivans it was all K and 2.2. When Mitsu got involved it was surprising that it didn’t kill them right then and there between the problematic valve train and carb on the coarse 2.6 4 and the qt a week oil burning of the 3.0 V6.
That also applied to every other make besides Chrysler not just GM and Ford. All the makes began to copy Chrysler by late 90s and early 00s and did better but as you said SUVs and eventually CUVs started to absorb the customers especially when Gen X and Gen Y started buying and wanted their “own” type of vehicle. So you had the WWII Gen had station wagons, Boomers had minivans, and now we have ICVs (Image Conscious Vehicles) for today’s baby makers.
I’m going to be a dissenting voice (to an extent). We had a ’98 Windstar with the dreaded 3.8, but took good care and got 168,000 miles out of ‘er before the typical head gasket problems. No transmission problems. Other than that, lots of brake pads because of the hilly terrain of upstate NY, inner tie rods at 136,000 miles, and regular maintenance.
As mentioned, the acceleration was quite decent for a minivan of the time, and one reason we bought it over the Dodge. We had driven a borrowed Windstar through the mountains of NM and it never even blinked at the steep grades. The ride was also better, and even at 168,000 miles we never experienced a single squeak or rattle beyond the annoying plastic center hubs of the alloy wheels (easily fixed, but clearly a bean-counter’s work).
It was a surprisingly solid-built body, and the interior, which took the abuse of our two kids, years of foster children and church youth groups, still looked quite good when I sold her off.
We were never left stranded, and when we had to make middle-of-night, non-stop, emergency trips to TX from NY, we never hesitated. It was a great under-the-radar vehicle in that regard. How I don’t have enough tickets to wallpaper the house, I don’t know.
Was it perfect? Nope. Was it better than most realized? At least ours was. Maybe we lucked out. All I know is that from our experience, it was a great family hauler for us, and deserved better than it often gets.
Interesting to read your different experience Hank. Did you purchase your Windstar new? Also, did you regularly change transmission fluid? Over several decades I have found that changing transmission fluid every 30,000 miles or so preludes transmission problems. When I haven’t done that I usually ended up with blown transmissions at around 100,000 miles even in a couple of Toyotas. Our best example was a 1993 Maxima purchased new and driven more than 250,000 miles without a transmission issue. Traded only because of a moldy smell.
On a Maxima thats incredible those things have a rep of digesting transmissions
Perhaps incredible, but true. That was 250,000 miles over a period of 10 years also. The engine was never worked on except for tuneups and preventive maintenance and the car was just as smooth and fast at 250,000 miles as it was when new. Too bad the seats and ride were not up to the mechanical standards. It was not the most comfortable car.
We bought it gently used, and did regular maintenance, the fluid was changed, but not quite that often. Regular radiator flushes, too, since it was used in both the extremes of Texas heat and Northeastern winters.
Not beating the bark of a vehicle certainly makes it last a lot longer….
The split port 200hp 3.8 that was unique to the Windstar was the hot rod minivan when it came out. That was the reason I bought one and also the reason it had to have traction control. I had rented one on a trip and when I left a strip of rubber a block long pulling out onto a busy street I was sold. The only problem I had was the transmission which went around 90K. Otherwise it was a great van and with the air suspension it never lost it’s composure no matter how loaded it was or wasn’t.
I had a 1995 Windstar for about 7-8 years, also in upstate NY, and had similar experience. It was a very good kid hauler and general family vehicle. We got it from an in-law who had purchased (luckily!) the extended service plan. In its first 100k the car went through three sets of headgaskets, all covered by the plan. After that I used Bar’s Leaks or something similar and that kept that problem away. I am also a firm believer in changing the ATF and did that every 30-40k for the 160k that we owned it and never had any tranny problems. Traded it in after that and felt like it had been a good deal for us.
I remember seeing these everywhere when they came out, but by the mid ’00s they had all but disappeared from the streets. I can’t remember the last time I’ve seen one actually on the road. I run pass 2 in driveways on one of my routes: one in the same “Tuscan Bronze” and a 2-tone red one with beige lower color.
I did always think the dash design was really cool. The early ones came in some pretty wild colors like the mint green above, turquoise, and amethyst. The 1st gen ones like this were pretty good looking, although the cleaner-styled ’96 Chryslers made them look a little cartoonish in my opinion. The 2nd-gen Windstars didn’t do it for me. Too generic. Interesting fact, on leather-equipped models, only the 1st two rows had leather seat facing, the 3rd row bench was all-vinyl.
One of my friends’ mothers had a Windstar, but I never set foot in it—for birthday parties and other kid-hauling activities I recall his parents preferring to use their old H-body Delta 88 instead (make of that what you will).
Friends of ours had a ’96 Windstar they bought second hand from her parents. Her dad was a mechanic, and it was always well maintained. They kept it until last year, and by then they had been nursing it along for a while. It finally reached the point where it had one problem after another and it didn’t make sense to put any more money into it. They pulled the plates and scrapped it…but it survived 16 years of long drives throughout Ontario in all kinds of weather. I’d say they got their money’s worth out of it.
Ever go to a foreign country, shop at a local market, and see a version of a familiar product? Instead of a box of Cheerios, you see a Cheerios box, but the brand is instead named Happios? It looks just like Cheerios and has a similar name, so you decide to buy it. What do you really get?
You get a Windstar instead of a Voyager.
Instead of the dull competence of a Voyager, you got the dull incompetence of a Windstar. The Ford offered nothing the original minivan didn’t already offer, yet expected buyers of the Windstar to deal with non-Voyager quality issues. Ford’s box of Happios had a whole lot of those hard, dark brown overbaked oat loops in it, that if you didn’t mind spooning out of every bowl you poured, had the same dull flavor of the original.
The Windstar did not take the minivan segment of the family vehicle into a new direction. It did not offer anything special once Chrysler unveiled a newer, better version of the original family box van. By the time Ford figured out how to assemble a Windstar without errors, the minivan target moved and left Ford without a way of hitting it without completely spending a fortune redesigning their generic minivan. It is difficult to justify coughing up another half a billion dollars to redesign an uninspiring vehicle like the Windstar. Additionally, Ford had found a goldmine with families buying Explorers, so the urge to spend a wad of loot for a boring minivan wasn’t very strong.
The Ford minivans were as inspired as you could have imagined a company selling a million SUVs a year would be. Ford did not have their heart into it, and it showed.
I’m sorry by the first Chrysler minivans were not competent at all. Way underpowered with the 2.2l, strap a turbo on it to give it some power and be sure to pop the headgasket. Then there was the Mitsu 2.6 with it’s carb and timing chain issues and 3.0 with valve guides that were shot at 60K leading to qt a week oil consumption. Transmissions that grenaded at 60K like clockwork. Latches for the hatch that popped open with the slightest impact. Plastic plumber tape window regulators that failed.
The Ford 3.8 had enough power and once they did the split port version more power than any minivan at the time. The Vulcan 3.0 added later is legendary in it’s reliability. Yes the transmissions were fragile but they would last to 80K or more. All around better handling and ride.
Yes when the 2nd gen was introduced with Chrysler V6 power some of those issues were fixed. Though by that time it was obvious that the SUV was the family hauler of choice so Ford pretty much abandoned any significant updates to the Windstar.
In fairness, by the time the Chrysler-built 3.3 went into the minivans (1990 or 91, IIRC) all engine durability problems had been solved. The Chrysler 3.8 was just as good and available by 94. So, by the time the Windstar came out, all of Chrysler’s minivan engine problems were in the past. Those engines were slant-6-like in their anvil-ish durability. If they were not the most durable engines during their production life, they would be in the top 3.
I drove a 2nd generation Windstar (an 01 or 02) a couple of times while I owned my 99 T&C – simply hated the thing. It was noisier, harder riding, and with a floppier structure. Plus, the Nasser cost-cuts had taken anything of interest out of the inside. The Windstar may have been competitive in 1995-96 when they had decent interiors, but by the time the 4 door models finally came out, everything else had been cheapened. Also, here in salt country, Windys were horrible for corrosion. The Chryslers were much better there too.
BTW, I agree with your earlier comments about the Honda. I never liked the 2nd Gen Odyssey. They had a lot of creature comforts and did well against corrosion, but that was about it. It is interesting that the minivan is almost every maker’s vehicle with the highest number of problems today. My Kia Sedona came out better in Consumer Reports surveys than Odysseys or the Chryslers did, at least for certain years (going by memory from a couple of years ago). For the difference in cost, the Kia was a no-brainer and I kept the level of extra options to zero. No. Power. Doors.
Yes the Chrysler V6s put in the minivans were very good engines, of course they could now handle an OD so the transmissions became the weak, very weak point.
I agree that the 99 and up Windstar was a disappointment. For the most part it wasn’t a step back as much as the Chrysler had seriously stepped up their game, cheapening of the interior materials aside.
I’ve known a couple of people with Kia minivans who have had good luck with them from the original 7/8 scale Windstar to mid 00’s models.
Chrysler vans were dull and basic but minivans existed to haul people around, usually families with younger children. There really wasn’t much else to it. Chryslers hit the mark because they were really the Toyota Corolla of minivans. No one is going to claim a Corolla is anything more than a cheap boring basic car that does basic transportation well.
Astros were a bit too truck/van like for some civilian duties but were very useful for buyers looking for something more hardy than what was available in that size including all the commercial operators. The Aerostar wasn’t as crude as the Astro but still more hardy and capable than the Chryslers for a while offering RWD and V6s. What is astonishing is that from 1984-1990 at least Chrysler basically owned the market had no real competitors and nothing competed really head on. GM had FWDs in 1990 but they were a radical shape. Toyota came out with the egg van Previa to replace the hunchback van in 1991 but it was mostly popular with existing Toyota buyers. The Windstar was the first conventional FWD product on the market that matched the Chrysler design. By then, Chrysler had had 12 models years on it’s own by then many buyers were on their second go round. Toyota finally got into the game in 1998 with the Sienna that followed the formula and was more successful. Eventually Honda offered an Odyssey van with a V6 by then Chrysler had been offering 3.8s for years.
So no wonder Chrysler has led the parade from the start. This is one of those rare times in recent times where a domestic made the market and kept it. The imports tried every which way to play but eventually they all had to retreat call a spade a spade and started offering what Chrysler has been offering for 30 model years now.
When you call the Chrysler minivan a dull box, I am betting that you never lived with one. The reason Chrysler owned that market for so long was that they consistently provided dozens of little touches that you never knew you wanted until you lived with one. And every generation upped the ante.
Power rear flipper windows. Overhead console with storage for garage door opener. Rear ac vents in ceiling and low mounted in the doors. Cupholders everywhere. Defroster wires under the parked wipers. In my 25 years of living with family’s GM cars I never saw the kind of constant innovation I saw in Chryco minivans. In fairness, I never saw that kind of product leadership out of any US company before the Chryco minivan era.
Well of course I never owned one long term, but unlike the stereotypical
GM hierarchy, those of us in the trenches in design and engineering drove everything in the market quite frequently. Many vacations were taken renting competition vehicles or taking them about on trips from the underground fleet. And of course when son #1 opened his shop in 2005 we began to see everything on the road.
My point more had to do with general design and principles than the individual features you mention, which I agree with you on that point. Chrysler vans were the gold standard in design that all others were judged on and based around. Specifically while Chrysler stuck to a basic product and refined and updated it over the years, the competition, foreign and domestic, flailed around trying every which way to no avail.
In the 70s and 80s the Japanese, mainly Honda and Toyota were the gold standard of small sedans. Ironically the situation was reversed. Chrysler vans were as imperfect as any car was at the time but even despite the woes of the Ultradrive their vans still dominate.
I’ve owned, over time, four Chrysler minivans…three passenger vans and a Mini-Ram Van.
The 1988 and 1989 (my father’s Plymouth van and my panel truck) were two of the DULLEST-driving vehicles I’ve ever owned. The ergonomics of the things were as close to being bad as possible, without being actually painful. The throttle would numb up the foot; the upright seat didn’t have enough support. The steering was dead.
Okay…later I returned to the brand to buy a beater 1996 Plymouth. It was like night and day; sat comfortable; good visibility. Everything within reach. I liked it so much, I bought one of the last of the last of the teardrop minivans; a 2007 T&C still on the lot in April 2008. I haven’t a clue why; because it was at once, powerful, economical, a fine driver’s car. And even stylish!…in a conservative sort of way. The interior had lost some of the touches, under Daimler’s knife…but it was still better than adequate.
I say this, because I think you are talking about two different series of vans; which are so different, they are like two entirely different makes of cars.
I agree that the difference between the early models like the 88/89 and the newer ones like the 96 are like night and day. That is part of what caught Ford and the Windstar off guard. They leapfrogged the Chrysler with the first Windstar in virtually every measure but Chrysler soon leaped past the Windstar and didn’t look back.
Many of those inovations you cite on the Chrysler minivans actually appeared first on the Windstar or they had it too. In addition to the compartment to hold and operate your garage door opener you could just program a button and leave the opener at home. A mirror to see your kids and a place for sunglasses was also in the Windstar’s overhead console. Power rear windows rear climate control with overhead vents for AC and floor vents for heat were also available on Windstars. How about a rear wiper that turned itself on when you were in reverse if the front wipers were on, Windstar yes others?
Of course after the first few years Ford stopped the innovation and updates, but who can blame them since the Explorer was the best selling “car” in the nation. Chrysler had no choice but to spend money on their minivans since it was the only non Jeep that was selling and also was profitable. Had they lost their minivan market dominance Chrysler would have quickly withered and died.
The Chrysler Van is still the best of them indeed. I have always enjoyed my time in them. Most complete feeling van interior. We have rented several over the years and I owned one for a month. I had the 3.0 V6 in a 1999 Caravan. Low mileage but I later discovered it had some kind of gremlins with the cooling system and electrical system. I sold it at a loss. I really wanted to get it going but I wasn’t in a position to put a lot more money into it. I ended up fixing up my 1992 Camry with 196k to get me through the rest of college. The van was very likeable though, too bad about the mystery problems though.
I remember this pinkish champagne color from Ford back in the 90’s, it was on a bunch of cars too, from Tauruses to Town Cars. I think these did have a digital dash option on the fancy models didn’t they?
The featured photo car looks to be very clean, which is really odd for one of these, since their steep drop in value has made them bottom rung used cars, the only one I see of these belongs to someone tha visits my neighbors across the street, and its sounds like its not heathly, I haven’t seen it in a week or so, maybe it has finally bit the dust.
It interesting that Ford covered its minivan bets with 2 different vans in the 90’s and nether one really stuck, the Windstar on the Ford end and the Nissan Quest/Mercury Villager.
The Quest/Villager was a JV with Nissan (as I know you know), and for a number of reasons, the decided to part company. Mechanically, the Q/V is a Nissan, and has an excellent reliability rep, as far as I know. But it was more compact, and considered a dead end, size wise. I think Ford didn’t want to spend any more money on a second minivan, because to make it competitive size-wise with the market, it would have ended up the size of the Windstar. So they just slapped some Monterey badges on the Freestar…
Is the Quest/Villager all Nissan? I remeber the components on them seemed very “Fordy” (Fordesque?), but I havent really been around one in years, all I rememeber was that the Mercury version had a Nautica edition that could almost make a 70’s MarkV Bill Blass blush.
They were a true joint venture with Nissan supplying the engine and trans and Ford doing the suspension and brakes. Not sure who penned the body. The rear brakes are exactly the same as the Windstar. Ford also did much of the electronics and that is where Nissan got the keyless entry that they also used on the Maxima and Ford learned about those god awful string and pulley window regulators that earned such a bad rep in the aero Panthers.
The window regulators were crap in the quest/villager too. My family had both a 93 Villager and a 2000 Quest. The 93’s drivers regulator failed under warranty in the first year (it was actually owned by my grandparents at the time) but the 2000 ate them like lunch. Grand total of three failed regulators in 6 years, all of them out of warranty. Driver side failed twice and the passenger side failed once. When the regulator failed the second time on the driver side my Mom was at a expressway toll booth in the dead of winter on a very snowy day. Window was all the way down in the door and since she was going to work it remained parked like that for several hours. To this day my Mom is very gun shy about using power windows in any car after the Quest and she NEVER rolls them all the way down now.
Mechanically speaking they’re pretty reliable though. The Both the Villager and the Quest survived many annual road trips to Colorado and Florida without any hassle. Both were sold with around 150k on the clock and though the 93 started gushing coolant around the intake towards the end, it was probably an easy enough fix to keep going. The Quest went through two sets of CV shafts though. My Mom finally had enough of that POS and got her Focus in lieu of getting further nickel and dimed by the Quest.
They are just crap everywhere but the mechanicals for us. The pop out windows never sealed well and the latches were very brittle, the seats weighed a ton and rode on tracks that would jam with the slightest microbe of dirt, which made shuffling them around for easier cargo storage an exhaustive and essentially counterproductive exercise. The folding side mirrors would fold by themselves at highway speeds, the centercaps on the Quest all fell off, the heat took 20-30 minutes to even slightly warm the cabin, A/C only varied between Antarctic and Sahara up front and was somehow only stuck on the former in back(even with the rear controls all the way down), which made our Florida road trips uncomfortable for all. As a Taxi? They’re probably just fine. As a family van though? Junk.
Paul- I have to disagree with you- the Villager was not very reliable at all. I don’t exactly know the reasons for it, but when I was a parts delivery guy for a Lincoln/Mercury dealer in 1997, three morning a week I drove the parts truck from mid-Aurora, Colorado to the engine depot in Montbello for two or three black tub o’ engine for the Villager, then black boxes with cores back a couple of days later. I think those were the only ones I got- it was still too early for the 3.8’s to grenade themselves, and even the Mistake engines were ok. Maybe a AOD every fortnight, but by far it was always Villager engines or gearboxes going back and forth. It must have been some well known design fault, as I think most of these were warranty work! I can’t imagine the cost to Ford of replacing so many of those very complex engines.
Windstars were also terrible- but I think they generally outlasted the warranty period better. They served the purpose for which Ford intended, which was to grenade themselves upon the last payment in the book, when the service writer could then helpfully walk you over to the showroom to repeat the viscous circle.
“Could you help these folks out and show them a new……”
I always made sure all the service writers were my friends……
I may be wrong; I don’t really have much knowledge on them, except for the fact that there’s a disproportionate number still on the streets here, and some anecdotal comments I’ve heard. I’ve also never heard anything negative about them, but that’s hardly an objective survey.
The “cockroach of the road” here in the Northeast has gotta be the Quest/Villager. I can’t attest to any specifics on the reliability, but I see plenty of old ones on the road all the time.
So it’s not just me…that’s the case here too. And they seem to age quite well.
Few people detest Nissan more than I but the Quests and Villagers I see in the scrapyard are almost always over 200K. The last one I saw a few weeks ago was involved in a severe frontal collision (fatal). It was a taxi and the odometer read 253K I think. Who knows how long it would have lasted had it not been wrecked.
In contrast, there were three or four Windstars at the yard this morning: none with collision damage. The yard only had around 50-60 vehicles in it if that gives you an idea.
The Villager motor I repaired at the Lakewood Lincoln/Mercury shop had a bad crank snout- It snapped behind the camshaft drive cog, and the crank no longer drove the camshaft.
I put a new crank in the motor under warranty, and a week later it was back with another dead engine. As it happened, it return the day i left to start a new job, so i don’t know what happened to it after that.
One of the recalls on Village Idiots was for that issue… simply remove and replace the complete engine. I used to work with a tech that could do 2 complete R&Rs a day, flat rate. He raked in the $$$ when that recall was going strong.
The Villager was definitely the “sportier” driving van.
When I worked for Mr. Sesi during the summer of 1996 I saw a lot of Villagers come in to have the engines replaced. It really surprised me.
As for parts sharing, I am pretty sure that Nissan did the basic styling and drivetrain, and Ford supplied various electronics and body hardware. For also built them in their Ohio plant, and supplied the colors (the color names in the Quest and Villager brochures all had the same names).
I don’t thing a digital dash was ever available I know they weren’t in 98 or earlier. The Windstar I had was the Limited which gave you every “option” standard but the VCR and it did not have a digital dash.
I amost could swear I had seen one, I wasn’t even sure they made a cargo version of these, but I found one for sale, even with radio delete and no air!!
Enjoy
http://www.billsautosalesuniontown.com/auto35.html
Heres and article about someone installing a digital dash from a Windstar in another Ford car
http://frederic.woodbridgedata.com/index.php?p=f350-windstar-cluster
They did have a digital dash, first year only, I remember it being odd since by the time these were coming out, digital dashes were on their downward swing in popularity, also I remember the dash because it we took in a fairly new Windstar in on trade with 13K on it and someone pushed the METRIC conversion button on the car turning into a 24K mile car, causing the used car manager to freak out on Monday, until I found the little button and turned it back to MPH.
The digital dash was indeed an option in the top-line LX model from the get go, but was discontinued after 1998.
I swear these were designed to fall apart in exactly five years.
I had a 2002 Windstar. I parked it in the driveway for awhile in 2007 with about 80K miles.When I went to move it again the transmission gave up and started leaking fluid. There is your 5 years.
Oh great, you wrote a Deathstar CC. I was planning on doing one also (albeit as a FoMoCo DS).
Deathstar, hmm, the facelifted grille of the first generation always reminded me of Darth Vader’s mask (“Luke, I am your father…’s car.”)
These vans were bad. Like ’70s bad. Like made my Grand Am look like a Corolla bad.
The engine and transmission get all the press(the transmissions were hiliarious though. I remember them radiating heat through the floor just going down the road) , but I remember leaking A/C systems, sticking speedometers, rusting wheelwells and rockers (in Central FL!), plastic wheel covers just falling off, and interior plastic surrounding the sliding door shattering.
Air conditioning was very cold though.
I had forgotten all about that extended driver’s door. A clever stop-gap, as I’m sure re-engineering the structure for dual doors was no small feat.
It’s easy to criticize their decisions in hindsight, but you have to remember there were no other vans in the US with driver’s sliding doors at the time. People don’t always know what they want. When I bought our van, I specifically wanted one without power doors as I viewed them as a point of failure. A few years with kids changed my mind on that. But my mind changed again after recently spending time in a van that does have them. I found them far more annoying than useful.
This van was the best out there when it came out. Even if it was only for one year, that was quite a feat to accomplish at the time after so many years of Chrysler dominance. The early tries from Honda and Toyota were much worse (even if they were more reliable). Today’s vans seem to be regressing, oversized porkers with little ground clearance, independant rear suspensions that can’t properly handle heavy loads, poor visibility, and uncomfortable folding seats.
100% with you on the power doors. The only problem with the manual doors is that every passenger who rides in any other minivan regularly just walks away without closing the door! Grrrrr. 🙂 Besides, I am not patient enough to wait on the miserably slow things to open or close. It is very hard to find a van without them these days.
I will go with you on your Windstar opinion – to a point. Ford at least made a credible try, which is more than GM ever did. However, Ford botched the mechanical quality part so badly. Imagine if the Windstar could have come with the mechanical durability of the Dustbusters. Ford and GM could both build half of a decent minivan, but never put it together in the right combination. Had the Windstar been merely as good mechanically as the Chryslers, these would be popular used vehicles instead of the pariahs they have become.
I have to disagree that Ford botched the mechanical reliability of the Windstar so badly. Fact is the Chysler transmission expired almost always at almost exactly 60K while the Windstar it was 80K almost exactly almost all of the time. Meanwhile the Hondas lost their as early as 30K but never made it past 60K. The head gasket issue with the 3.8 has been over exaggerated no one I knew with a Windstar ever had a head gasket problem and in my experience as a mechanic I only did 1 head gasket job on a 3.8 and we had 1 other in the shop I worked at in the mid 90’s on. Some of the base models did get the legendary Vulcan. Still I agree it could have, and should have, been much better.
no one I knew with a Windstar ever had a head gasket problem You’re right; the 3.8 head gasket issue was just a conspiracy story planted by Ford haters. And they seem to have been very successful in spreading this myth very broadly.
I didn’t say that there weren’t problems with 3.8 head gaskets, but it seems to have been blown out of proportion on the internet.
There is also never any distinction made between the “lo-po” 3.8 that used conventional gaskets, that were prone to failure, and the split port 3.8 found in later Windstars that used a MLS gasket which very rarely fails.
Meanwhile you never hear ranting about the various Honda Civic and Accord engines that regularly blew head gaskets. I’ve personally replaced lots of them or just put in a “low mile from Japan” engine since it cost about the same out the door.
But then again everyone knows that Hondas never break and Fords always do.
I made a lot of money off that little conspiracy… LOL
Well the 1997 GM vans were there, 2 wheel bases, dual doors from the get go, probably the most credible GM FWD minivan that was.
“probably the most credible GM FWD minivan that was.”
Sort of like the Monza was the most credible Chevy subcompact of the 70s? 🙂
My parents had a 1990 Lumina dustbuster, I suppose you could call the drivetrain mechanically durable but in electricals, paint, interior, and general build quality it was a complete POS. Chryslers weren’t exactly reliable at the time either. And let’s not forget Honda has yet to prove an ability to build a good van transmission.
I made this point in another post but it seems like every manufacturer who wanted to break into the minivan market tried something very unusual compared to the utterly conventional Chryslers. I mean its a freakin’ minivan. Toyota perfected nothingness basic small cars and has done well with them yet went all crazy with their minivans. It seems like everyone learned their lesson that a minivan is a basic people hauler like a taxi that’s it. That’s why Crown Vics and the Checker were perfect taxis. There just wasn’t much to the basic winning formula. Like people are tempted to put too much spices in the spaghetti sauce…
In the late summer of 1990, parents were looking for a minivan. They were in their 30s with 3 small kids ranging from 13 to 6. It was time to upgrade from the Pontiac 6000 wagon that ran well but look like s*it from years of abuse. Dad liked the classic lines of the original generation Carvan so he had the dealer find a leftover one when the 91s came out. It was nice attractive two tone blue LE with attractive velour interior. The transmission kicked it like 7 years later at like 140K we kept the van until 2000 when the last of the kids got their license and there was no more need to haul people around. Everyone seemed to have the Chrysler vans. Some had Astros and big GM vans people with boats and trailers but import brand minis were much more rare than their sedans.
The base Vulcan 3.0L v6 powered Windstars seemed to last longer. Sister and family had a 1996 stripper base trim [not even a GL] van for 9 years. No power windows! But, no trans problems or head gasket fails.
I’ve never seen one without power windows. Where would the crank go?
As a Ford parts guy I made a lot of money off Windbags… ah, the good old days when warranty paid the bills…
One thing you have to remember is that minivans generally received harsh treatment in it’s ownership life like fleet vehicles and trucks. Minivans, unlike commercial vehicles, are bought by consumers who often reflect on the problems despite the abuse. Fleets and trucks standardize their servicing so that problems can be dealt with quickly and easily. Plus, in the case of cab cars like Crown Vics, the designs remained the same for so long. So it’s no surprising that we hear about a lot of problems in vans. The Ultradrive Chrysler transmission is widely thought of as problematic but it seems that most of the problems were in minivans. Same with engine issues in Windstars, I hear much more about blown head gaskets from the vans than the cars proportionally.
I’ve been employed in Ford dealerships for the last 20 years, and I can tell you that the 3.8s in T-Bird/Cougar, Taurus/Sable, Mustang, etc had just as many 3.8L head gasket failures as Windbags. The east side Cleveland Ford dealer I once worked at did probably several hundred head gasket repairs when the recall was in full steam. The T-Bird Super Coupes were by far the worst to work on…
My mother got one of these, and despite the ministrations of a young, aggressive driver beating the ever living hell out of the engine, she got 150,000+ out of the grenade without any indication of its imminent demise. I stomped the hell out of that thing. I tried really, really hard to kill it. No problems, other than the odd shift points that it learned from me that gave me away to mom when she drove it. I also never noticed the lack of driver-side sliding door, mainly because it was a new feature and it never occurred to me to miss it.
She succumbed to the headgasket recall and took the huge rebate on a new Freestar. Now THAT thing wasn’t any good. The resale on it was destroyed after two years when the odometer failed, which meant that she took a bath on it when she traded it for a Buick (!) SUV, which she still has. Extremely nice, and ostentatiously stupid. Good thing she makes some serious coin, because my kid would starve to death in deference to the gas tank if I owned it. But I digress.
Anyway, I’ve always had a positive opinion of the Windstar. I suppose that puts me at odds with the general public, but what else is new?
Has everybody forgotten about the overpriced, under powered, engine under the floor Toyota Previa? Toyota’s fast fix was to put a turbocharger on it and boost the price around $6,000.00
No it’s been covered here before since it is the vehicle of choice for a big taxi company/co-op in Paul’s home town Eugene, OR.
Supercharger I think, not turbo…..
Wow, I had sent this in to Paul to see if he wanted to use any of it for a piece of his own, didn’t expect this! I’m glad I decided to log in tonight!
The early Windstars really felt premium in their day. My dad let a friend of his drive ours and he proclaimed that it was a smooth as a Lincoln.
I think that part of the problem for my mom was that they traded in a 1992 Honda Civic for the Windstar, talk about a difference! When we left two weeks later for our summer trip, it was mom’s first time driving the thing. We were in South Carolina. Dad was napping in the front passenger seat, and I was laying down in the middle seat. The interchange at I-95 and I-26 consists of a steep curve that requires you to slow down considerably. Well, Mom was used to zipping around corners in her little Civic. I was quickly awakened when I was almost thrown into the floor as the poor Windstar was trying to come up off it’s wheels on one side, Mom didn’t think about slowing down!
She didn’t drive it much after that.
It was still a nice van.
Well I’ll be a dissenting pro-Ford voice here, because I drove a 1996 Windstar for 10 years and it was a very good vehicle for us.
The key to success seems to be that ours was a base model with the 3.0 engine. No head gasket issues, and smaller motor was presumably easier on the transmission, so no issues there.
I had it Krown rustproofed, so it never rusted and looked great up until the day we traded it in. Early Windstars had high quality interiors compared to later models, and particularly compared to the Freestar, which is why we went Caravan after the Windstar.
The lack of a 2nd sliding door never bothered us, and was actually fun when we hauled around other kids who would stand at the drivers side waiting for the door to automatically open:
“Kid, there’s no door on this side”
So the kid would go around to the other side and stand there:
“Kid, you actually have to open and close the door yourself”
By 2011 we still liked driving it, but were getting into irritating random failures (gas tank filler rusted out, injector wiring, alternator, brake line rust) which particularly would happen on vacations and incur spousal anger. Also the front end was completely sacked out and needed a rebuild to continue driving regularly on the interstate.
So we traded in on the 2007 Caravan. A dealership employee bought the Windstar for $500, and it’s still on the road in a more local short trip type of service.
Too bad Ford couldn’t have made them all with the 3.0, they might have had a lot less grief.
We rented a Windstar for a vacation in Pennsylvania (nice state BTW). We found it had a horrible turning radius, which created embarrassment for us making a U-turn at a two-lane road intersection. Our Sienna is much better here. Also, the Windstar had lower-grade interior plastics (as noted above), worse economy, & less power.
What a miserable van! We bought one new, Forest Green, nice van for a starting family. Then the problems started one year in. Lost the heater core valve first, then the water pump. Then an axle. Next was the VeggieTales CD that would never eject, imagine VeggieTales EVERY time you get in the car, if it wasn’t playing, it was attempting to eject… Whirrrr, click. whirrrr, click, whirrr, click….
Up next for our delight was the interior lights that wouldn’t shut off, or the doors that would think they were open while driving down the interstate, BING! BING! BING! BING!!!
Finallly the transmission started lurching, and the Check Engine Light topped it off like a star on a christmas tree.
Ended up trading it for a Dodge 1500 extended cab, and of course, rolling the loan on top of the Dodge too. I paid for that van many times over.
Quest/Villagers are like cockroaches, can’t be killed. So many still kicking in working class areas, 10 years after the last ones, with multiple colored panels.
And, the most common 90’s Mopar ‘survivors’ are Iacocca’s vans. Many purple ’99 ish Voyagers still clinging to life, carrying men to work sites or families to McD’s.
Windstars are ‘endangered species’, most seen are post ’99, with the ugly headlights that look like Martian eyes.
IMO, Ford had “Not Invented Here” syndrome for minivans. Poorly built, and expected buyers to trade into ‘real trucks’ when Windstars died.
I hate these. They were awful. Bad transmissions and head gasKets. Bad slide doors and manifold flaps. Junk. But which is worse this or a Pontiac Montana??/
Hi to everyone!
My experience with one of the last Windstars made (2003 SEL model, with the new Freestars on the lot when we bought it) has been a good one.
Bought the Windstar rather than the Freestar because: 1) there was a huge discount on the Windstar, and 2) the 03 Windstar had a nicer interior than the 04 Freestar.
It currently has 306K miles. No major engine or transmission work, still runs just fine.
I change the oil & filter every 3K miles (Castrol 5w20 and Fram PH3600).
The split-port 3.8 engine started using a bit of coolant at about 250K or so, I added some stop-leak to the coolant and the usage stopped.
I have replaced the usual stuff on a car with so many miles…. alternator (at about 150K) water pump (at about 290K), idler pulleys.
We live right on the water on the Gulf Coast, it is very humid and the AC runs almost all the time, either cooling or dehumidifying the car. For us AC compressors last about 100K miles.
I have not touched the drive axles or boots. I did replace the inner & outer tie-rod ends, and one front sway-bar link at about 280K. I have replaced the front brake pads once or twice, the original rear brake shoes still look fine!
On the body, the RH power door developed a glitch after many years and about a jillion open/close cycles from hauling several kids to school, dance class, girl scouts, cub scouts, karate, etc. This turned out to be the ‘plunger’ contacts in the door face.
Other than that, the interior & body has held up very well. No salt on the roads here, and not a speck of rust on the body.
It even has the original exhaust system.
Gas mileage varies from about 19 MPG (around town stop & go) to 21-22 MPG (75 MPH cruise with AC on) to 25-26 MPG (65 MPH with AC off). I wore out the original tires, then 2 sets of Michelin Hydroedge tires (100K miles per set) and have started on a set of Michelin Defenders.
Overall we are very happy with the car.
That is so awesome. I’m amassed. I’m so happy for you
Bought a 96 Windstar GL in 1998…spent more time at Paul Cerame Ford in the service department than in my possession…3 transmissions, including one “off the line with 1998 improvements” that lasted exactly a week. The dealership caught it on fire once, and had to replace the wire harness. The doors would allegedly lock, but would unlock on their own for no known reason. Once we went to pick it up, and waited, and waited…they handed us the keys to the loaner we had just dropped off and told us it wouldn’t start. The 1998 loaner started having problems…we had it for 75 days once and the tailgate latch wouldn’t latch, among other things. Traded it for a 1996 Mercury Villager Nautica, blue and white with two tone grey leather…great little van, but SMALL. We got a recall notice after we sold the Ford, that the hood skin can delaminate and fly off, leaving just the hood understructure in place…great.
We bought a used 2005 Freestar in ’06. It had been a rental car and had 21k miles, if I remember correctly. I’d heard horror stories about the Windstar, but the salesman told me that with the Freestar, Ford had fixed all the Windstar’s problems. (He did give me specifics; I don’t remember them, though.) We put a hitch on it and towed our 15′ boat for years; never had a problem. I even had the smaller engine (3.8? ) I wished I had the larger one with the official tow package, but as I said, never a problem. And my wife drove that thing like a sports car. I have to say, it handled really well, especially for a minivan.
Alas, 5 years later I bought a larger boat. (18′) Still under the maximum tow weight, but I thought I should consider a transmission oil cooler. My mechanic, however, told me that that particular tranny would NOT hold up while towing in summer heat, oil cooler or not. As there were no other minvan tow options, I would have to buy an SUV. I did, and sold the Freestar a week later.
A week after that, I received a call from an insurance company. Seems the new owner had filed a claim – the Freestar had burned to the ground!
My old job had a fleet of windstars and quite liked them. They went about 200,000 miles before they got rid of them. The Focus was the real trooper though; 425,000 miles before the tranny let go.
A friend of the family had one of these early Windstars. Super early 1994 production model for 1995 Model year. Transmission grenaded before 25k. Really a shame and a waste of resources. Nice bodies and interiors from the era before Ford’s all became cheapened out penalty boxes, but pointless with the dismal reliability. Between all the issues the 1st Gen models are known for, plus the axle issues of Gen 2, the Windstar is probably one of the worst vehicles Ford ever created. A rolling turkey if I have ever seen one.
Ford is good at creating a lot of hype and high expectations for its own vehicles and somehow not living up to those expectations. I still firmly believe they would have benefitted from Cancelling the Tempo/Topaz, skipping the entire ill-fated Contour/Mystique project and taking that money and investing in a more robust powertrain for the Taurus and this Windstar. They didn’t need to waste money on intermediates in the 90’s. They needed to beef up the engine and transmissions for the models that were actually selling.
Why is this article dated 2021 but 99% of comments are from 2013 ??
Odd.
Anyway I popped in to say that when a Champagne Windstar is “much more attractive” than, well……. ANYTHING, that other thing musta been pretty terrible indeed.
I had a Freestar for a while, bought only because it was in perfect condition and cheap, while I was in between Suburbans. They had the 3.9L V6 from the base Mustang. Yes 3.9 as opposed to 3.8, oh man the powahh!! LOL
Anyway it drove pretty well, comfy and quiet, toted the kids around just fine. I got lucky and had no HG or trans issues during my ownership. I drove one with the upgrade 4.2L and it would do a decent peelout, hehe.
In case you missed it, the very first line is “(first posted 6/23/2013) “.
Always look at the first paragraph of every post here. This one begins with (first posted 6/23/2013) — that’s your clue that this is a rerun.
I did miss that, but oh well- I still had stuff to say about it LOL
Whatever happened to Richard Bennett?
Can’t say I’ve seen any of his posts on here in quite awhile.
He founded a FB user group “Because Cars”.
Many years ago, when I was on the Edmunds forums (quaintly called “Town Hall” at first), one of the moderators dubbed this van the Windstall. Very appropriate.