Minivans nowadays really aren’t mini; they’re all about 204-205″ long, which is hardly mini by any stretch of the imagination, or word. But the genre really did start out small; the original Dodge Caravan and Plymouth Voyager were a mere 175.9″ long, or three inches shorter than a Chevy Trax. And yet this Voyager was quite capable of seating seven passengers. Maybe not in the level of comfort that we take for granted now in a midivan, but they got the job done. And as such, they were a marvel of space efficiency, especially compared to the Family Trucksters of yore. Yes, a new generation of parents embraced these with a passion, putting Chrysler on sound financial footing at last and opening the floodgates of a whole new market segment.
And this Voyager even has a stick shift; how quaint!
Let’s start at the front. Given the stick shift in this one, we know it has the 2.5 L version of Chrysler’s SOHC four, which had replaced the 2.2 with the refresh in mid-1987 that also included a cleaner front end with flush-lens composite headlights. The 2.5 had a single-point fuel injection system and was rated at 100 hp. Given how light these were (just under 3,000 lbs), this drive train was perfectly adequate for the double-nickel times. Maybe a bit less so if fully loaded with eight adults, but that wasn’t exactly a common occurrence.
The interiors in these gen1 Voyagers and Caravans were a bit basic, but the upholstery wore well, except for the arm rests. Interesting to see the two small auxiliary gauges attached to the bottom of the dash. I didn’t notice them as I was shooting so I can’t tell what they’re for. It would seem that this owner is keeping this for the really long haul, and concerned about certain engine parameters.
The really rare version was the turbo with the 5-speed stick. Just the thing to have if you were a fast driver and your family didn’t get carsick.
I’ve long given up hope for finding an eight seat version, which included a front bench seat. Undoubtedly the stick was not available in that configuration. Actually, the 8-seater was only available in the first three years (1984-1986), and I suspect it was not a commonly chosen option. But if you really wanted it, there it was, in the brochure. And even a 6-passenger configuration was also available, with the front bench combined with one rear (wide) bench.
Yes, leg room was not exactly generous for both the second and third row, although it was so in the five passenger configuration, which mounted the wider bench seat further to the rear. I remember sitting in one of these in the rear; it was a bit snug for my long legs but perfectly fine for kids and shorter folks.
The third seat was a bit snugger yet, as the second row passengers could take advantage of the space between the front seats for their legs. A bit curious to see the least-used seat have a rip. Maybe it was a kid playing with their knife? Or did kids not have pocket knives by this time? We all did; I can still feel the shape and texture of my Boy Scout knife in my pocket. Don’t leave home without it.
Admittedly, there was not much space for cargo behind that third seat. That alone limited their usefulness as a genuine family hauler suitable for vacations and all.
That was the reason the swb Caravan was not even on our radar when it came time to buy a larger family hauler. The 1991 Grand Caravan we did buy got quite some workouts, but none so much as on this trip, which was an extended camping trip with my two sons and four teenaged boy visiting from Austria. The cooler and food and utensils went in the back and all the personal gear and tents and such went on the roof.
But this was not my personal best in terms of packing; that was in 1974 when I ferried two female student friends, their cat and all of their possessions including two bicycles from Iowa City to Bloomington, IN, to the university there. Had to make them take the clothes out of their bags and stuff it under the seats and every other nook and cranny. And the roof rack was piled high, with the bikes strapped on top. There was just enough room carved out in the back seat for one of them and the cat. But the 40 hp Beetle made it, although a bit slower than the usual top speed of 72.
Let’s move on a couple of generations, to this swb Caravan of the third generation. I have almost zero experience with these, but I know from comments left here that its owners felt that these were a significant upgrade from the gen1/gen2 versions. These were also surprisingly common in Europe, thanks to being built under contract at Magna-Steyr’s factory in Linz, Austria, often powered by the VM 2.5 L diesel. This was during a time when certain American cars were enjoying a bit of a renaissance in Europe, especially in market segments that they had not exploited much yet, like minivans and compact SUVs (Jeep Cherokee). That time seems rather hazy now, but so it once was. Well, the Tesla Model Y did have a big success for a few years and still sells fairly well, so we must give that credit too.
No stick shifts in the North American versions of these, but of course that would have been very common in European versions. Supposedly, the three-speed TorqueFlite automatic was available with the diesel, but I doubt many were built that way. The dash design certainly was a bit more up to date than the blocky one in the earlier generations.
I can’t help but wonder if this has the TorqueFlite or the 4-speed Ultradrive; given that it’s a swb version and the fact that it’s still on the road, my guess is the TF hooked up to the 2.4 L DOHC four, rated at 150 hp. Or was the Ultraproblematic starting to become a wee bit less suicidal by this time? We went through four of them in our ’91 GC, the last one being a keeper.
It appears that this is a seven seater too, with the third seat removed. Ah yes, that was a bit of a workout, to remove or install these seats solo. No wonder my back is still problematic.
This one is sporting a modest array of Eugene-approved bumper stickers.
Even these gen3 and gen4 versions have become rather scarce on the streets, so I couldn’t help but stop and shoot these two. I’m drawn to the simplicity (and the stick shift) of the older one, but to each their own.
Related CC reading:
Curbside Classic: 1985 Dodge Caravan – Chrysler Hits a Grand Slam Homer by me
Curbside Classic: 1989 Dodge Caravan Turbo – Desperate Measures by me
My 1996 Dodge Grand Caravan – Everyone Should Own A Minivan Once by THISWAS
A friend of mine leased a 1996 GC, and it served well except it had frisbees for front brake rotors, and needed front brakes twice a year. But, parts were cheap.
Yup, the brakes were too small for the size of the car. In the hilly country where we live you’d be lucky to get 20,000 km out of front brakes. The rotors were so thin they needed to be replaced every time. We did pads and rotors for $330 in 2004, all in.
Speaking of quaint, here’s a photo I took of an early Dodge Caravan “woody” while on a walk in my neighborhood last week. The faded dealer sticker on the liftgate confirmed that it was indeed an original Toronto car, rather miraculous that it survived our salty winters in such pristine condition. I, as well, was blown away by how tiny it was in today’s frame of reference. Modern mini vans aren’t so mini.
Original paint. Could you make out the dealer sticker? Peel Chrysler maybe?
Weird wheels on this one, certainly not original. Possibly aftermarket running boards too, one really didn’t need them to get in to these minivans.
Nice capture! Wow.
It was from Willowdale Chrysler.
Cool! Thanks
Cool, I grew up just around the corner from there – it’s a condo now.
I had a 2nd generation Voyager with a stick shift, about which I wrote a COAL entry. Mine was the 5-seater version, with a 3-place bench in the 2nd row. I don’t believe it had any options besides A/C. I could get 28mpg on the highway. I rather liked it, but I bought it very near EOL, and it didn’t make sense to keep putting money in it. I’d buy one again.
Yes, the “mini-van” is not so mini any more. I just find it silly how so many people think they need such big vehicles any more. It’s so common to see people with huge vehicles for a family of 3.
Something I have found over the years is how durable the interiors seem to be on these Chrysler Corp vans. Nearly indestructible.
Ive always been under the impression that these early minivans were kinda underbuilt. Like tiny brake rotors from a k-car, same transmissions, etc. These parts were undesized, under specced for the amount of weight these vans were carrying around, especially when loaded down. Chrysler wasnt the only one guilty of this, Hondas 2nd gen Odyssey used the powertrain lifted from the v6 Accord and burned up transmissions.
The usual thing, cost cutting. Use cheap, inadequate parts off your light weight economy car, charge a lot more, have the customer swear you off for life after 3 transmissions and 5 sets of front brakes at 100k miles.
I had a 1990 Grand Caravan for a while, just after we returned from Korea. We were setting up a new household from scratch and I needed a hauler for cheap. I found one with 275,000 km on it (high for any Mopar product) for $700. I drove it around for six months and sold it for, get this, $700. When I got rid of it, the Ultradrive was going into limp mode when it was hot. I disclosed this to the buyer, who didn’t care. He was going to install another engine and transmission.
We have have a ’91 Grand caravan, it had 376,++k miles. Original 3.3l and one A604.
Never been into the engine, except for oil leak repair, and a timing chain at 200k maintenance.
I’m a tech and proper maintenance and repairs are key!
There were several attempts to keep minivans “mini”; the Gen 1 Honda Odyssey, Gens 1 and 2 Mercury Villager/Nissan Quest, and the Mazda MPV/Mazda 5 come to mind. None of them got much traction.
A 2001 Nissan Quest SE was the runner-up in my 2001 new car quest. I ultimately bought the Trooper, but not gonna lie, I was swooning over the Quest’s built-in VHS player….
Dave M: Great point. Those just didn’t do well and maybe that is why.
I just don’t get this constant bloating of vehicles every time they re-do one. The “all new” Mazda CX5 (which is really kind of outdated already) is a great example. It’s bigger than the outgoing 2025 CX5, and why? Who is asking for this? If you want bigger, go CX50.
This same thing was always going on when I was with Honda too. From the time I started at that dealership in 1988 to when I left in 2011 (with a couple year break in that time), the Honda’s kept growing and growing. When I left, the Civic was the size of the Accord when I first started there. Then they felt like they had to introduce something smaller to fill the space where the Civic was. But now today, the trend has changed where they are no longer filling the smaller car/CUV spaces with another, but instead adding larger vehicles while the current line is still getting fatter. Just pure lunacy.
I had a ’98 Odyssey – a perfect sized car for a young family. Handled well and with the 2.3 VTEC, accelerated perfectly fine. Great fuel efficiency too. I replaced it with a 2010, which I just got rid of, and would contemplate another the size of the ’98 but none to be found.
Plenty of them around here in their days, all of them marketed as the Chrysler Voyager. But not quite ‘mini’ enough, which explains the success of the Renault Mégane Scénic, introduced in 1996, pictured below (and ‘success’ also applies to the current Renault Captur, first gen unveiled in 2013).
It seems unlikely anyone from Iowa would be going to school in Bloomington idaho, but there is a very small Bloomington up there, so maybe.
Still I think it’s more likely you drove the girls to Bloomington, Indiana, home of Indiana University.
True that. Typo is now fixed. Thanks.
If only a van the size of either of these were still available, it would be my next car.
Both vans are still pretty nice, save for the missing rear bumper on the 1st-gen model. I spotted a 2nd-gen Dodge Caravan in Saluda, SC 2 years ago and noted at the time how similar it and my 2016 Ford Transit Connect (visible in background) were in overall size. This particular example not only has woodgrain paneling, but also a different-colored sliding door, front-passenger door, right front fender, and hood compared to the rest of the body. Undoubtedly the original parts got replaced at some point (likely from damage) for this to have happened.
One thing I believe may have been another factor in the “shorty” vans disappearing was the emergence of compact & midsize crossovers. The Dodge Journey, for instance, has roughly the same wheelbase (113″) and overall length (around 190″) as the final “non-Grand” Caravan and was introduced around the same time the 5th-generation minivans came out (which were only offered in long-wheelbase form). And given what happened to nearly all of the other “small” vans available at the time, the majority of the market apparently agreed.
That being said, the “smaller” vans still have a place in today’s world if you don’t need seating for 7+ but still want the cargo capacity only a box on wheels can provide. It’s good to know there are still people out there–me included–who can appreciate the size of the originals. 🙂