| We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Chrysler Pacifica Crossover | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Apr 29 2017, 06:54 AM (142 Views) | |
| Project2017 | Apr 29 2017, 06:54 AM Post #1 |
|
Nickel
|
Back in 2003, Chrysler tried their hand in a very strange vehicle-the Pacifica. It was a crossover vehicle, on the platform of the ever-growing minivan. It was to have the capacity of a minivan, the ruggedness of an SUV, and the handling of a sedan. Despite Mercedes-Benz having a hand in vehicle production and trying to rival the Lexus RX, Buick Rendezvous, Acura MDX, and BMW X5, the vehicle flopped in the end. Why did the vehicle flop? 1. It sold poorly-it was around from 2004 to 2008. Even with Celine Dion briefly having a role in advertising, she alone could not save the vehicle from a sales drop. 2. It was underpowered and had terrible gas mileage-given the size of the vehicle, Chrysler only gave the buyer three engines to choose from-all were a V6. Pairing it to a 4-speed automatic didn't help anything-a 6-speed did come through, but the vehicle was already done for by then. Chrysler might've made more money if they opted to put their famous Hemi or SRT motors in as options. 3. The third-row seat was cramped. This is true with all full-size crossover vehicles-their third row seats are small enough to fit children and short adults. The minivan had a better third-row seat. I'm 5 foot 11, so I don't sound ideal for it. 4. It was too expensive and unreliable. When the vehicle first came out, not only did it have reliability issues, but it was equipped enough to be too expensive. Even CR slammed the vehicle, giving it a below-average rating due to the poor build quality, paired to the powertrain being prone to failure. When people couldn't afford the car, Chrysler offered variants that didn't have as much options (and that meant the deletion of the third row seat). Because Mercedes worked on the vehicle with Chrysler, the offerings Mercedes had were more reliable. That, and Chrysler took an eternity to fix the issues-the vehicle was rushed in production. The unreliable thing is to prove all Chrysler cares about is their money. So those are my two cents on this car. Not even a decade later, the name was revived to be used on the replacement for the Chrysler Town & Country. Have any two cents on the crossover? Comment below (the later 7/8-seat crossovers still had small third row seats, but at least their reliability improved). |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| « Previous Topic · Chit Chat · Next Topic » |





7:33 PM Jul 10