(first posted 4/6/2016) The minivan may have reached its peak popularity in North America long ago, but the segment is still a lucrative one that’s continually innovating, as evidenced by products such as the latest Kia Sedona, and the upcoming Chrysler Pacifica. Though its current fourth generation is getting a bit long in the tooth, the Honda Odyssey largely remains the benchmark upon which minivans are judged by, and an upcoming redesign should help it regain its spot as the undisputed industry leader.
A quarter-century ago, this wasn’t the case. The minivan market was booming with no end in sight, and Chrysler was king, with well over 50% share of the market. Although the Japanese automakers had proved they could build class-leading sedans that Americans would embrace in large numbers, they’d yet to produce a minivan capable of posing a serious threat to Chrysler’s dominance.
Toyota’s Previa was too big and too funky. Nissan’s Quest was too small and too impractical. But with Honda’s arguably then-highest brand perception of the Japanese Big Three and loyal following, would its first minivan for North America be a just-right hit?
Had things gone according to original plans, an astounding “yes” would’ve been very likely. Initially conceived back in mid-1990, the Odyssey was to originally feature the Acura Legend’s 200-horsepower 3.2L V6 (albeit, likely transversely-mounted), introduce a number of interior refinements to the segment, be sized to compete directly against Chrysler’s extended-wheelbase “Grand” minivans, and be built at its own dedicated factory in the United States. Rather obstinately, it would even cost as much as 50% more than the average minivan did at the time, but Honda was confident that much like its cars, Americans were willing to pay top dollar for a minivan wearing the Honda badge and its perceived higher quality.
Unfortunately, the timing for Honda to develop a minivan couldn’t have been worse. With the burst of the Asset Price Bubble sending Japan’s economy into its largest recession since World War II, Japanese automakers were forced to drastically reduce costs in all areas of their operations, new vehicle development included.
(Image: Honda)
As a matter of fact, the Odyssey almost never even made it to the production stage, having been initially cancelled early in development, an effect of Honda tightening its belt. Top management considered the project far too costly, and didn’t believe an expensive minivan exclusively for the U.S./Canadian market would be profitable. With plans continuing largely in secrecy, it was only after major concessions were made, making the vehicle suitable for production and sale in Japan that the project was officially green-lighted again.
The vehicle that was ultimately sold as the 1995 Odyssey, Honda’s first minivan (if you’d even really call it that) sold in North America, was a clear reflection of these compromises, sharing a high percentage of components with other Hondas, and lacking many important features of the then-benchmark Chrysler vans.
Strict budgetary constraints dictated that the Odyssey be built on the Accord platform, and share as many parts with the Accord as possible. This was not only to minimize R&D costs, but also to allow the Odyssey to be manufactured upon the same assembly lines as the Accord at Honda’s Sayama Plant, limiting production complexities.
A direct result of this was that the production Odyssey was substantially smaller than the original plans dictated. Stretching the Accord’s wheelbase by 4.5 inches, for a length of 111.4, the Odyssey’s wheelbase was less than even the short-wheelbase Chrysler minivans. Overall length was 187.2 inches, about two inches longer than the Accord sedan and one inch shorter than the Accord wagon.
(The badge-engineered Isuzu Oasis, sold in North America from 1996-1999)
In comparison to the most popular minivans on the market at the time, the 1991-1995 Chryslers, the Odyssey was about nine inches longer than the SWB Caravans/Voyagers. Unfortunately, this didn’t translate to more space. The Odyssey was some two inches narrower, and total cargo capacity with the rear seats out of the way was a paltry 102.5 cubic feet, nearly 15 cubic feet less than the 1995 SWB Chryslers.
This disadvantageous gap was made even wider when the Chryslers were redesigned for 1996. The SWB versions were now roughly the same length as the Odyssey, five inches wider, and boasted over 40 cubic feet of additional cargo capacity, with over 70 for the LWB versions.
Adding to the Odyssey’s space deficit was that when equipped with the ever-popular second row bucket seats, seating capacity decreased from seven to six. The standard seating arrangement included a very wagon-like three-passenger second row bench. Sandwiched between the wheel wells and spare tire, the third row bench was only wide enough for two, ensuring the only third wheel back there was quite literally a wheel.
Unlike the Accord wagon, the second row bench was split 50/50, further decreasing practicality, as well as comfort for the dreaded middle position. Furthermore, due to its federal classification in the U.S. as a car instead of a truck, Honda legally could not sell Odysseys with the commonplace factory-tinted rear windows, to many buyers’ dismay and need for aftermarket tint jobs.
Under the hood, the Odyssey also utilized Accord engines, although to much detriment, only 4-cylinder power was available throughout its four-year run. Like the Accord, adding a V6 would have required enlarging the engine bay, and correspondingly redesigning the front fenders and hood to accommodate this. Honda simply was not willing to invest any more in the Odyssey than they already had, ruling out any possibility of a V6.
Initially, power came from the Accord’s 2.2L I4, producing 140 horsepower at 5,600 rmp and 145 pound-feet of torque at 4,500 rmp. For 1998, it was replaced by the new Accord’s larger 2.3L, making 150 horsepower and 152 pound-feet of torque. With acceleration from the I4 average at best, the lack of a V6 and its added torque greatly limited the Odyssey’s towing capacity and general responsiveness when loaded with passengers and cargo.
Probably the most unusual feature (or lack of one) about this minivan was that it eschewed the right-side-only rear sliding door, the defining feature of most North American minivans, for dual swing-open style doors, similar to what would be found on a sedan or wagon (like the Accord).
This wasn’t necessarily a bad thing, as two rear doors not only made rear access easier, but were a feature no other minivan sold in North America had at the time of the Odyssey’s introduction. However, lacking the sliding door(s) only strengthened the view that the Odyssey was merely a half-hearted, testing-the-waters attempt at a minivan, and not a serious contender to minivans from the Big Three.
The other major hurdle Honda’s Odyssey could not overcome was its price. With base prices for the LX and EX beginning at $23,215 and $25,225 in 1995, the Odyssey was priced anywhere from $3,000-$6,000 more than rivals from Chrysler, Ford, GM, and even Nissan with their equally small Quest. Even the rebadged Isuzu Oasis failed to offer any significant sticker savings, despite its lack of the Honda badge.
Of course, for those prices, even the cheapest LX model gave buyers power windows, dual front airbags, front and rear air conditioning, four-wheel disc anti-lock brakes, full-cloth seats and door panels, AM/FM stereo with cassette player, power locks and power mirrors as standard. Just about all of these features would cost one extra dough on any other minivan.
Another bragging point was an advanced four-wheel double-wishbone suspension, with upper and lower control arms, shock absorbers, coil springs, and front and rear anti-sway bars. With a curb weight of just over 3,500 pounds, the Odyssey was one of the lightest minivans on the market, and thus awarded buyers with some of the best handling and MPGs. In addition, the Odyssey’s power rack-and-pinion steering gave it one of the smallest turning radiuses in its class, at only 37.4 feet.
The Odyssey’s high rear seating position and low beltline offering a commanding view of the road, further enhanced by tiered “stadium” rear seats. Additionally, the Honda’s lower overall height than most minivans translated to an easier step-in height, shorter reach to the roof rails, and a lower center of gravity, further improving handling.
The front and rear swing-open doors also allowed greater storage space, with little cubbies, map pockets, and cupholders, and the dashboard incorporated two glove boxes. Second row seats were removable, and both rear rows could fully recline, similar to Chrysler’s Convert-a-Bed. Most notably, the Odyssey was the first minivan to feature a third row seat that folded flat into the floor, something taken for granted on every minivan and most CUVs today.
Unfortunately, the large majority of American minivan buyers didn’t seem to care much about the Odyssey’s advantages in handling, accessibility, interior materials, and fuel economy. Particularly as a family vehicle, this was more of a black-and-white issue. Quite simply, competitors offered more space, more power, and greater versatility for less money – the primary considerations for most minivan buyers.
Marketing the Odyssey to Chrysler minivan-loving Americans was like showing up to a backyard cookout (which to our non-American readers, typically consists of hot dogs and hamburgers) with sushi. Of course, some people, including your pollo-pescetarian author, happen to really like pricey raw fish. The large majority, however, aren’t big fans, and first generation Honda Odyssey sales in North America reflected this.
In the U.S., Honda sold 230 ’95 Odysseys in calendar year 1994, 25,911 in 1995, 27,025 in 1996, 20,333 in 1997, and 13,665 in 1998 (which excludes additional 7,154 examples of the Ontario-built second generation Odyssey that went on sale in fall ‘98). Canada added roughly 2,000-3,000 additional units per year. In total, Honda sold less than 100,000 first-generation Odysseys in the U.S. and Canada, a far cry from the nearly 100,000 per year sold in Japan. Isuzu Oasis sales were barely significant.
In its own right, the 1995-1998 Honda Odyssey was a very fine vehicle. Nonetheless, it just wasn’t what the large majority of American minivan buyers wanted. The first generation Odyssey was living proof to Honda execs that one minivan couldn’t suit both Japanese and American tastes. As a result, the North American Odyssey took a divergent path for the 1999 model year, finally growing to full-size, gaining standard V6 power, and adding dual sliding doors.
“Curbside” Odyssey and Oasis photos provided by Paul N.
Related Reading:
Very nice article. My own experience, subjective at best, was that price was the largest factor in this model’s less than stellar sales. The SWB Chrysler vans, the Windstar and the GM Dust Buster vans were all larger, and considerably less expensive. They were also significantly cruder.
These Honda’s had the brand’s typical high build quality – and here in Japan you still see them running around – usually as someone’s “beater”. There are more first generation Previa’s (Estima) though – those things just refuse to die……….
Wow! I did not know about the planned, original Odyssey! High list price aside, that could have made a much larger impact in the US. Maybe even established itself as the definitive premium minivan instead of the Town & Country/Silhouette.
Also, is it really true the first Odyssey sold that well in Japan? I knew they liked vans and wagons but I didn’t realize they loved the Odyssey so much!
These were very popular here in NZ as used imports from Japan – they used be everywhere. However the attrition rate has been very high due to transmission failures. You’ll never find a used transmission in the scrapyard and a recon unit generally costs more than the car is worth.
I’ve looked a couple of times at buying one, and always been impressed by driveability and practicality, but the transmission reputation has putt me off.
Are you talking the 94-98 version? Here in the US, these were the last Honda minivans without transmission issues until recently (maybe). It was not unusual for these to see 300k miles on the original engine and tranny.
There’s a 1996 EX in my driveway with a popped timing belt that has 546K on its original drivetrain. These 1st gen Odysseys are amazing vehicles to say the very least.
My mistake, I thought it was all Odysseys that had the fragile transmissions. I’ve learnt a new thing! The ones I looked at were later ones though, so I was right not to buy.
Yeah I was pretty sure that it was only the 2nd generation with the sliding doors that had transmission issues. The 4-speeds couldn’t handle the torque of the V6 and the later 5-speeds (which were also in the Accords and the Acura TL and MDX) were just problematic from the start.
Very interesting post. I had no idea that Honda had originally planned a bigger, more powerful minivan. Priced right, that could have been a game changer.
As for these Odysseys, the U.S. marketplace acceptance sums them up: they were underwhelming. My brother, who was a huge Hondaphile at the time, with 2 little kids, was the perfect target for these when they came out. He was very interested to see the Odyssey, I went with him for a test drive. Talk about disappointing! It was boring and underpowered–the beginning of Honda’s slide into conservatism.
I wonder if another reason the V6 was held back was that Honda knew how iffy their automatics were in V6 applications. They released it on the second generation, years before the transmission was up to the heavy duty use that is a minivan.
Brendan does a great job of pointing out the issues of this generation versus the mainstream players. But like the Colt Vista before it and the Mazda 5, Kia Rondo after it, there is a small group of buyers for a smaller more fun to drive three row platform.
Honda has a lineup of mimvans under the Oddity size for the JDM they come with the usual oddball names we have them here used ex JDM though US readers are unlikely to trip over any, all Japanese car makers have done this.
Well, Honda had been using the four-speed automatic with the C-series V-6 since 1985 on the Legend, which in a lot of Japanese variants wasn’t available with manual transmission at all. My understanding has always been that the issues were not with the earlier four-speed automatic (which was mechanically quite a bit different) or the less powerful 2.5/2.7-liter sixes, but with the later five-speed behind the significantly torquier 3.5-liter engine.
The extra weight of the second-generation Odyssey didn’t help matters – particularly if it regularly carried a full load of people.
I loved the one I had. Yes, it was slooowww, but everything about it operated so nicely and these would run forever – the last Honda minivan to do so.
These were really, really expensive when new. Gas prices were at historic lows, so the four cylinder power offered no advantage. The competition offered more room, power and luxury for the same money. Hell, my loaded 94 Club Wagon Chateau stickered evenly with an Ody EX.
But as a cheap used car several years later, these were unbeatable. After mine got wrecked, I tried to find another, but couldn’t find the right one. I would still buy one of these if the right one crossed my path.
Very interesting article on a car that’s often overlooked. Of the 20,000 or so Odyssey buyers over these years, I bet about 15,000 were die-hard Honda fans. The original Odyssey appealed to the large number of people who had previously owned Civics and Accords, and absolutely loved them.
You’ve covered the major reasons why the Odyssey didn’t appeal to more folks: price, power and size among the biggest. And I bet two of the features you mentioned rank pretty high as well: lack of sliding doors and lack of tinted windows. Sliding doors are a remarkably versatile feature for a minivan, and without tinted windows, these vans are like an oven in the summer, and a fishbowl at all other times.
Incidentally, do you happen to know the reason why the Odyssey was classified as a car and not a truck by the feds? Was it due to interior volume, lack of sliding doors, or some other feature? It’s something that’s seemingly very subjective, but I’m sure there’s a definition out there somewhere.
“Incidentally, do you happen to know the reason why the Odyssey was classified as a car and not a truck by the feds? Was it due to interior volume, lack of sliding doors, or some other feature? It’s something that’s seemingly very subjective, but I’m sure there’s a definition out there somewhere.”
I’d like to know, too. The Colt Vista wasn’t classified as a car, and I’m not sure I can point to a single significant difference between the Gen1 Odyssey and the Vista that would allow such a distinction. Ditto the Axxess.
I had a landlord who drove a well-used ’95 Odyssey. He loved it and refused to consider a sliding door example as a replacement because he felt that his ’95 was just the right size.
Interestingly, about the size of today’s larger CUVs.
So not too small for families, just too small as a minivan and overpriced.
One thing I have never liked on Odysseys is their rear suspension. When loaded down the wheels exhibit significant negative camber. That may be fine in an Accord which doesn’t normally haul much, but in a van I don’t find it to be acceptable.
As others here, I assumed the 1st generation Odyssey was Honda’s typically conservative response to a new market segment. And with Honda, for whatever reason, staying with the smallest engines of the Japanese “Big 3” (though usually resulting in the most economical entry in any segment), a 4 cylinder engine when most minivans were moving to standard V6 engines was no surprise.
Ironically, the Accord with a V6 and a few other Acura models with V6 and automatic transmissions would become Honda’s most troublesome vehicles. If Honda had produced the van outlined here, it’s possible it would have been another troublesome Honda…..or not. Then again, the Japanese Economic “Meltdown” and it’s be necessary belt-tightening at Honda may have been a big factor in the (V6 with) automatic transmission debacle.
Two of my co-workers owned these, they were both Honda diehards who considered nothing else, and loved their Odysseys, keeping them for quite a long time.
I’d love a Honda Odyssey too, but for me that name has always meant the four wheeler ATV that I longed for in my youth..
I’d forgotten about those but yeah they were fun I and some mates visited a hire park where you could hire and hoon Odysseys the van was a retread of that name.
I would have gotten the Isuzu version just for the pretty alloys
I had a ’98 Odyssey with the 2.3 litre VTEC – although on paper the power difference didn’t look significant over the ’95-97 2.2 litre, in real world driving it was very significant. I loved that it was very tight handling and got great fuel economy, and the reliability was stellar (apart from daytime running lights which stopped working until I learned to apply more solder to the circuit board). We had the 2-2-2 configuration (no sofabed!) and frequently removed the mid row for carrying cargo – it was very versatile.
In salt-encrusted Toronto, rust on the rear wheel arches was endemic to most of them. My kids also grew too big for the 3rd row, so we bought a 2010 Odyssey to replace, but to this day I’d love to get another ’98 again.
We had a ’98 as well and selected it because of the 2.3 AND the much smoother automatic. Sadly ours suffered from transmission flare up on the 1-2 shift and severely worn suspension (happens with Chicago’s terrible roads). We ended up selling it for $1500 which was not bad considering the miles (140k) and the condition.
In 1996 my family was used-minivan shopping, our contendors ended up being a 90k mile 1989 MPV (rwd, auto, rare 2.6L 4cyl) that some folks down the street were selling for $5000, and a 2nd gen Caravan for sale at the local Mopar dealer, for $8000. Driving both back to back, it wasn’t even close. The Mazda was so much more refined in terms of how it drove and how the interior was put together. We drove that Mazda on countless trips, the only time it left us stranded was when a worn alternator belt snapped and my dad didn’t have the tools to fix it, so we left it at a shop and got a rental car. The van is still cranking along with 230k+ miles , it’s my brother’s shop truck and mountain bike hauler. It’s needed some work, the most serious thing being a reman head after my brother overheated the engine badly 6 years ago or so.
Regarding these 1st gen odysseys, I really like them. In Siberia, it is not uncommon to see the JDM AWD variants of these, too bad we never got them! My cousin’s family in Moscow had a German-market LHD version, similar FWD/2.2L configuration we had in the states. They loved it for their weekend trips out to the dacha.
Needless to say, these are classic “Eugene-mobiles”, and folks who have them keep them forever, although the ranks are beginning to thin out a wee bit. They’re a very handy size, and highly robust.
Undersized and overpriced vehicle in its time but unless you were around in the late-80s/early-90s it’s hard to appreciate just how determined some people were to purchase anything with a Honda or Acura badge.
I always thought these were Honda’s best effort in minivans and when they didn’t sell Honda threw up their hands and said “You want a Chrysler minivan made by someone other than Chrysler? Fine. We’ll build that and *exactly* that, fixed second-row windows, glass-jawed transmission and all! Happy now?”
Where I am, there are hills, and the comment from Odyssey owners go something like, “Transmission, transmission, transmission.”
Of the Odyssey owners I know, they all bought the sliding door version, had transmission issues, and never bought a Honda again. Some went Chrysler, whose transmissions were average, which all-in-all means no problems for a long time, while Odysseys’ were failing; the rest SUVs. Maybe one Toyota.
And the transmission repairs are expensive.
So if anything, those Odysseys may be okay flatland cars.
The transmissions in these were the opposite of those V6 vans. These would go and go and go, just like in every 4 cylinder Accord of the same era.
Other than the inherent limitations in size and power, these 95-98 Odys were one of the few cars that had no major debilitating weakness as they aged. That all changed with the 1999 redesign.
Head gaskets blow and cylinder heads warp on early ones they only go as long as the maintenance happens when that stops so do Hondas.
I had transmission flare ups at 140k miles. I think the ’95-’97 transmissions were okay but our ’98 had transmission problems that were probably terminal. The pre-’98 Honda automatic transmission has very firm (rough) shifts compared to the ’98, and it seems that Honda sacrificed reliability with this change. Interestingly enough, my ’94 525ia transmission failed without warning at 140k and I replaced it (myself) with a junkyard transmission and the car is still going, the Honda van was not special enough to be worth it.
Now that you mention it, I recall discussions on the forums that the move from a 95-97 van to a 98 had some tradeoffs. Do I recall that the 98 went to electronic control on the tranny? Whatever it was, I recall that it was a bit more complex and therefore more risk for trouble. Mine was a 96.
The transmission failures plagued the 1999-2004 models. The 2005-07 models had a problem with the torque converter that could supposedly be cured with a software reflash.
I looked at an Isuzu version in late ’99 at a then-local small Chevy/Isuzu dealership. The interior and equipment level were impressive, the price was not. I had wrongly assumed since the dealership was always touting heavily discounted deals on their Isuzu line that I might get a decent deal on what was obviously a Honda product. No such luck. The size and power deficiency weren’t issues to me at the time, as I was shopping it against an entry level Voyager (4cyl, manual windows & locks, no rear tint, basically A/C and a stereo, 2nd and 3rd row benches…before “Stow and Go” was a thing). The Isuzu was out of the running based solely on price. I don’t remember the difference in dollars, but I recall suffering a fit of sticker shock. In the end an off-lease ’97 Nissan Quest fit the bill perfectly. Even considering the Quest’s crummy door and window hardware and not-so-comfy front seats, the entry “XE” was still well equipped with full power options, cruise, etc., and in the late 90’s it was hard to beat a Maxima Drivetrain. I think I paid only about $2500 less for the 40k mile Quest than I would have for the heavily discounted new Voyager. It was a tossup for a few days, as I liked the comfort factor of even the basic Voyager, but in the end the stellar experience I’d already been having with a ’96 Sentra as my commuter made the Nissan a no-brainer. (I’m not sure I’d choose to be a 2 Nissan family based on their current product line, but in the 90’s they were building some nearly indestructible drivetrains, even if the styling was a bit uninspired.)
Interesting story on the Odyssey development. I always thought that the first and second generation were so different in concept that I was surprised they retained the Odyssey name. It appears that internally at Honda these had continuity as minivans.
These were really more an early CUV in the tall wagon motif than a minivan.
I rode in one of these as a New York Taxi in early 1997. My wife and I had downsized over the previous several years from a ’72 Pontiac Grandville and an ’87 Mercury Grand Marquis to an ’89 Thunderbird and a ’95 Chrysler Concorde.
Both of our cars seemed cramped at times to my 6’1″ frame, especially the relatively low rooflines. The first Odyssey was a revelation in space utilization and the benefits of relatively tall upright seating.
Marketed as a pricey small minivan, it was a sales failure in the U.S. But, the concept, with a bit more butch sheet metal, has proven to be the future of mainstream vehicles in the U.S.
I forgot all about the first gen Oddesy until now. It’s funny, as a kid every van owning family I knew, including us, had everything except the original Oddesy. I went to school in our Villager, my best friend’s parents older Astro, as well as an Aerostar, and Previa other parents drove, and all my aunts/uncles were dedicated Chrysler van owners, first to fourth generation in fact. The Oddesy was virtually nonexistent in our area.
I do remember seeing them occasionally though, but I remember not really equating them to minivans either due to the lack of sliding door, but instead something in their own little niche, as I saw mentioned an early CUV really. I also had a hard time identifying them as a kid, despite my lone childhood talent of knowing every last make and model of every car on the road, these I always thought were Saturns…
Are you quite sure? Got a citation for that?
From Motor Trend’s Long-Term Wrap-up of the 1995 Odyssey LX, originally published 2/1/1997:
“Because the government classifies the Odyssey as a car, Honda can’t apply dark window treatment like that found on some truck-based minivans.”
Here’s the link; 13th paragraph down:
http://www.motortrend.com/news/1995-honda-odyssey/
Interesting. I wonder if that’s because of the lack of sliding doors?
I don’t think so, because the Chrysler PT Cruiser hatchback (not the convertible, though) was classed as a truck. In that case, it had something to do with the ability to create an uninterrupted load bed from the backs of the driver/front passenger seat and the rear deck.
Good point. A way around the Chicken Tax for Honda perhaps?
Chicken tax does not apply to passenger vehicles. The only way Honda would have incurred the tax is if they imported a cargo version with no rear seats.
Great car and article Brendan, thank you for posting!
A bit of CHMSL (Center High-Mounted Stop Lamp) trivia: did you know that this first-generation Odyssey is the ONLY Honda minivan that used LEDs for the CHMSL? Even the current generation uses an incandescent bulb for that. How’s THAT for progress?
Oh wow.
Nice write-up on a very neat vehicle. 🙂
I saw the Isuzu version a little while ago and wondered what the hell it was. Now I know.
I’m not a minivan fan, but if I did ever get one I’d want a Chrysler. Is it the best out there? Doubt it, but I drive a couple newer Mopar vans sometimes for work and they ride and shift smooth and I just like Mopar.
That said, I saw a Toyota (I think) with a wood steering wheel the other day and I rather like wood on my steering wheel so it might be in the highly hypothetical running if they still make them that way…
Ask a Mom with young children about the sliding second doors. So much more practical for easily strapping children into safety seats, as you can get right in there and strap them up without contortions. And with two sliding doors, you can do two small kids.
The second generation had this odd problem with the windshield whistling at speed when conditions were just right. Every so often you see the fix, which is to run blue painter’s tape around the perimeter of the windshield. Not to keep water out, but to stop the darn whistling!
The first generation has a following in Japan for the usual modifications of lowering the car and adding the wide wheels and racy wings and stuff.
We’ve found our Olds Silhouette to be great for getting Grandma around. She had a stroke several years back and the best way to get her to her appointments (when we drive) is to lift her out of her powerchair into the middle row of my van. Swinging doors would not facilitate that by any means.
When I was in South Central Los Angeles back in 2012 the Quest/Villager twins were quite common and Previas are rather common in Portland, OR. I smile a bit when I see a Preview from way out of state cruising around.
I think these Minivans are neat though I never knew so few were built and I have been tempted by these occasionally if I need a box on wheels though I usually seek out the Isuzu version. Speaking of which, the Oasis was used as a taxicab in New York City. I am surprised to read these are technically cars since tinted window laws vary between Minivans and cars in states such as New York
Let’s see, underpowered, expensive, no sliding doors, limited features from the factory… Yep, sounds like you’d have to really want a Honda to put up with that.
Sorry, as maligned as domestic vans are (I’m not arguing about the facts there), I can’t imagine spending 10 or 20% more for a new car that has less equipment for more money. And also having it be less spacious and convenient to use.
Even though I have a GM minivan (it really isn’t mini, to be honest), I still think the Chrysler minivans are the standard setter.
I can’t wait to see the Pacifica in person…
Well, all the points you mention are pretty much the conclusion buyers reached at the time, so this is obviously not a minority opinion.
Another interesting CC article about something I didn’t know much about.
Because of our wider streets and lots cheaper fuel, what minivan buyers here are looking for is a big box that can carry the kids and some bikes or camping stuff etc. and can also at other times fit a 4×8 sheet of plywood or sheet rock or furniture in there. Maybe they also had a compact for commuting to work or running around town. So something with a lot less cubic and square feet for around the same money didn’t sell. The difference in size is much more obvious in person than it looks or sounds like in the article.
But this general size of minivan is still popular in Europe despite like here the infatuation with SUVs and CUVs. Some with sliding doors, some not. In fact, the US size minivans are not sold there today and were only here and there in the past.
I wish Ford and GM would sell some of this size vehicle here, which since they already have them in Europe would not be difficult. In Europe for example there is a stretched sliding door non-hybrid C-Max that would be perfect (for me), and a larger (but smaller than US vans) Galaxy as well.
As far as I’m concerned, first generation Honda Odysseys are the best vehicle ever (even though I dislike minivans). Why the Odyssey? Comfort, visibility, fuel economy, regular rear doors, cargo capacity, and reliability. The four cylinder is fine for any reasonable driving. (Yes, I’m retired but don’t drive in the left lane.) We started with a 95, drove a 14 year old 97 coast to coast and back with no problem whatsoever, and recently located a one owner 98 (with 10 more horsepower and a tachometer!). Also appreciate the simple styling, which is a welcome change from current tortured designs. Best vehicle ever for practical troublefree driving!
Tortured really is the perfect descriptor for current design fashion. Also agree that the gen-1 Odyssey is the perfect little van.
Agreed on all counts. There are two in the driveway curently: one live LX with 230K and one recently expired EX with 546K. The ex-spouse’s ’96 LX is approaching 300K (purchased with 134K on it) and has never had a malfunction or unscheduled repair other than maintenance. This is the 230K one, purchased from a recycling yard a few years ago.
They may not have been a great value new, but now, you can’t find many better vehicles out there for the money. Decent ’95s – ’97s bring between $2000 and $2300 in these parts.
Exactly!
Plus
1) Grenading airbags were not yet in use.
2) Not a smartphone on wheels: electronics consist of a radio, cassette, and optional CD.
3) Include desirable features like cruise control, electric windows/locks, and rear AC
4) Seen any other 90s minivans lately?
I’m done.
Darn, didn’t know later model had a tachometer; I was going to comment that the lack of one would be a worthy “de-content” item (at least to me…even though I use one in my current car it’s a manual). I know you can use a tachometer when doing a tune up and other work, but I’d imagine the “temporary” clip-in tach would normally suffice for the limited times you’d need them. I don’t quite get why they’ve become standard equipment in cars that only offer an automatic. To me, it is almost as bad as the middle console trying to look sporty, such that nowdays no car even offers a bench seat….to what avail? Style, I guess, but lose the practicality of being able to get in on either side of the car if we get hemmed in on one side (or if the power locks go bad, which happened on my current car).
The other thing that drives me crazy is elimination of the trunk lock cylinder in my Mother’s Impala…it doesn’t have the fold down rear seat, so if the battery goes flat, I have the keep the battery booster box inside the passenger compartment rather than the trunk, since there’s no way to get in the trunk if the battery goes bad. To me…take away the tachometer, if you’re trying to make de-contenting tradeoffs….or at least give me an emergency unlock to the trunk that doesn’t involve the battery (string a cable to the passenger compartment?)…or better yet, just put the lock cylinder back in the trunk lid…I’m not even going to bring up spare tires (that’s been covered by others)……if my car fails in the middle of nowhere I don’t want to have to be dependent and waiting for the auto service to get me out of my situation (what happened to self-reliance?). You’d think the designers would be looking out for your back more.
Putting an access panel to the top of the fuel tank so it didn’t need to be dropped to get to the fuel pump/pressure sensor/etc. would also be nice, but that was also de-contented out (from her prior 2001 Impala that had that provision).
I really like this generation of Odyssey to me it harkens back to the mid-80’s Stanza and even the tall Corolla wagon…small but spacious vehicles…something I’d rather have than a CUV/SUV (but nobody offers such a vehicle anymore…I don’t want/need AWD and resent the tradeoff of a CUV versus a car platform.
That Oasis looks great with the CRV’s steel wheels.
Can’t believe that in an article about the Odyssey, the Mazda MPV has only been mentioned once. It was the other significant non-slider minivan, though it only had a door on the passenger side until ’96. Never as popular as the Ford/GM/Chrysler vans, but I feel like they were seen in greater numbers than the 1st-gen Odyssey ever was.
Also, there is a market for a smaller van, even in this country. I think the Mazda 5 sort of proved that (I say sort of since it was discontinued after only one generation). But it sold decently and seemed to garner very favorable reviews from its drivers. Then again, it was probably priced much more competitively than the Odyssey was…
“Can’t believe that in an article about the Odyssey, the Mazda MPV has only been mentioned once.”
Well you just said it there, this article is about the Odyssey 🙂
But seriously, I never saw many Mazda MPVs around, even in the 1990s. The MPV was also rear-wheel drive, and had a quite un-minivan-like high step in as a result. Due to the fact that it had a combination of RWD, tallness, SUV-shape, AND lacked sliding doors, not to mention that it was explicitly called a multi-purpose vehicle, I’ve never personally considered it a true minivan in the way that even consider the Odyssey and Previa.
The original MPV lacked any sort of legacy that the Odyssey possessed, and Mazda never went on to produce an American-sized minivan to compete with Chrysler as Honda, Toyota, and Nissan did; only the mini-minivan 2nd gen MPV and Mazda5 that were sold in other markets.
I saw one the other day on I480 in the Cleveland area. Whenever I see one, I think this is the exact size of vehicle that my wife and I need. And yes, the wife agrees too. We have a house, we both have compact 4 door hatches that have been great carrying larger household things. We could use something a bit larger, but not the size of a mini van. We are probably going to with a used 2014/15 Transit Connect short wheel base in a year.
I’m not into SUVs or crossovers. I grew up in vans – full size Dodge vans, a VW Bus and a Plymouth Voyager. I’m not of mentality, oh a van how uncool.
Those Transit Connects are an odd duck. They are a nice size and handle well and I thought a LWB one might work for us. But I wasn’t as impressed with them once I got in one…they are rather crude and street price was similar to Grand Caravans. Still, I can see why some people may like them.
I was amazed to see photos of our silver Isuzu Oasis on this blog! You should have said Hi, I would have loved to talk about the car,
We’ve never considered the ‘Suzu a mini-van; instead as it was intended, a maximum payload vs footprint 5-door wagon. Indeed Honda produced basically the same car until 2013, a worldwide best seller, except for the U.S. market. I’ve watched neighbors’ US-made 2nd Gen (and later) Odysseys grow old and age into worthless hulks, while our Japan made Oasis is still a shiny jewel, in spite of constant use and abuse.
A couple years ago we put the largest possible size 205x75x15 (instead of the stock 65 series) tire on the 1st Gen CRV wheels, and gained about an extra 1″ ground clearance, handy on camping trips.
Great blog!
Being the right vehicle doesn’t have to mean being a big seller. This was a good vehicle, but not a good value. Honda won with it, however. It was a completely different kind of vehicle for Honda and I kind of doubt that if the Odyssey ended up being as popular as the Chrysler minivans, that Honda could have handled the success at that time.
As soon as I saw one, I knew that eventually Honda would have a big success. It was a matter of time. What I didn’t plan on seeing was the years that the Honda Odyssey had expensive transmission problems during the next generations. I didn’t foresee that. Honda lovers bought Odysseys only to end up dropping $3500 transmissions into them repeatedly. That was bad. That dented resale for a while, didn’t it?
Today, the bloom might be off the rose regarding this kind of vehicle, but Honda is still selling a Odyssey minivans to retired Boomers who love them, and to new families willing to drop way too much on a minivan because it is a Honda.
A win for Honda. Well done.
The Mitsubishi Expo/Space Wagon indeed offered swing doors and third row seat folded flat into the floor prior to the Odissey. Of course, the Mitsu was much smaller than the Odissey and many times considered muóre as a big wagon than a minivan, but truth has to be said. follows a picture of my ’98 Space Wagon.
Yes, CC-in-scale has done one of these.
They seemed quite popular back in the day, but the Aussie market moved on to SUVs and crossovers, and people movers/minivans aren’t such a common sight now,
Nice to see this article. I wrote 6 years ago about our 2 first-gen Odysseys. They continue to roll on at 125 and 175k miles, although one recently lost its garage space to a RAV4 Prime. I should probably sell it, but am conflicted about losing such a fine vehicle.