When Chrysler Group first announced that it would be spinning off its Ram truck brand in order to allow the Dodge brand to “come out of the shadow of the trucks,” there was at least some logic to be found in the decision. After all, there used to be more to Dodge than truck-inspired styling and marketing, and concentrating “Ram-ness” into the trucks made a certain amount of sense. But then, Chrysler Group announced that Ram would be moving into the commercial vehicle business with a pair of European-style deliver vans, raising the question of how these distinctly un-Ram-like vans would fit in with the brand’s bro-magnon image. But now the Ram brand has a new problem: before it even challenges its fans with front-drive Euro-vans, it’s dropping a windowless Ram Cargo Van based on the Dodge Caravan. Because what separates a spun-off brand from its previous brand like shared product? Whatever Kool Aid they’re drinking over at the Ram Brand, my tank is just about full of it.
Brings back memories of the distant past. During the mid-eighties a friend of mine owned a Dodge Minivan Delivery panel van for his computer business. It had a 4-banger with a stick shift on the floor, it got terrible gas mileage, always smelled like the oxygen sensor was not working, and had more mechanical and electrical things wrong with it and things falling off it than should be allowed by law. But it was cheap, not only in price but in everything else as well. If that Dodge minivan delivery van was the granddaddy of this new version, God help us all. It would make any Sprinter look like a Rolls-Royce!
IIRC, it was called the Ram Van. Or was it the Caravan C/V? That rig had a lot of different names.
The last iteration was “Caravan CV”. We have a few of them in our fleet. They’re pretty good vehicles, actually.
Sajeev, I can’t recall what it was called. One day I went with him to attend a SBDC meeting in El Pao, TX,
The answer is usually one click away: https://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2010/03/chrysler-minivan-thursday-outtake-2-1985-dodge-ram-van/
I knew a fellow from Michiana who’d shoehorned a 360 and A-727 into an unassuming dark-grey example, converting it to rear-drive (no joke!)… It was certainly quick enough.
It has an auto-open sliding door, making it easy to get those kids into your panel van without letting them go.
Too far? Did no one else see this as the new child-molestor vehicle of choice?
BlueEr03 wrote:
It has an auto-open sliding door, making it easy to get those kids into your panel van without letting them go.
Too far? Did no one else see this as the new child-molester vehicle of choice?
All it needs is the right paint job.
http://verydemotivational.memebase.com/2010/04/21/demotivational-posters-ominous-vans/
They just brought out the work version of the basic truck, and this thing, with the stripped interior, oil and tranny coolers, and self-leveling rear suspension, is a legitimate contender for work vehicles.
Probably better to bundle all the work models under one brand, especially once they get into the interior configs like Ford does with the Transit, rather than having that stuff under both the Ram and the Dodge banners. The pickup truck starts the contractor lines, so the vans go there, too.
That’s the one thing to take away from this. The Dodge Caravan C/V is now the Ram C/V. If the Dodge and Ram vans co-existed, I’d agree it was a complete screw-up in the recent vein of Chrysler screw-ups.
I don’t know what the gratuitous swipe at the (admittedly ridiculous) Dodge/Ram marketing schtick was about. Yes, it’s still convoluted, but as mentioned, it does belong in the Ram brand. Now, if we wanna re-open the debate on the merits of establishing a Ram brand at all, that’s another discussion.
Now, that all said. This is where the action is going to be, at some point. If I were Dodge/Ram/whatever, I’d be making a van out of the Ram 1/2, 3/4 and 1 tons. The full-size van market is wide open for the taking.
I don’t know, the full sized van market is pretty limited and dominated by Ford, whose R&D and tooling costs were recovered decades ago. Sales are mostly to fleets and businesses, who want minimal purchase and maintenance costs. Chrysler would be crazy to try cracking that nut.
Hi Russycle:
Normally, I’d be right there agreeing with you, but if you posit that Dodge would be nuts to try and crack the Econoline hegemony, why is Nissan coming out with a designed-for-N.-America CV of their own? (follow link in my first post).
Nissan has had mixed success in the broader N. American market, but they seem to be pretty astute in the commercial vehicle (outside N. America) segment, so it leads me to believe there’s something there.
86er, I did check that link out before I posted. I know Nissan claims their new van was developed for North America, but they have a worldwide distribution system, they can sell them almost anywhere. Not true for Chrysler, although the Fiat connection may help with that. And of course, there’s the question of whether the Nissan van will succeed, especially with gas prices moving up again.
Obviously Nissan knows something about selling cars and they agree with you, it will be interesting to see how this plays out.
So putting some blinds on a Caravan turns it into a panel, or should I say ‘cargo’ van? Really? They were even thoughtful enough to leave the original cupholders in the new ‘cargo’ area.
From the PR: ” A commercial-tuned ride and heavy-duty load-leveling suspension offer maximum hauling capability. A heavy-duty radiator and heavy-duty transmission oil cooler help meet heavier powertrain demands. Ram C/V is also engineered with unique hydraulic power-assist rack-and-pinion steering, front anti-sway bar and rear twist-beam axle with coil springs. Ram C/V has a maximum Gross Combined Weight Rating (GCWR) of 8,750 lbs. ”
“The Ram Cargo Van also receives a structural aluminum rear load floor. Two flooring options will be available, including one with a flat, uninterrupted, high-capacity surface. A second, optional floor provides through-the-floor access to three exclusive storage bins and load floor tie-downs. “
Point taken.
People consider the new “Ram” products as Dodges anyway. I don’t see what difference it makes to anyone if the vehicle says Ram or Dodge on the front.
That said, Chrysler’s intent with Ram is to give the products under it a more professional/work image similar to GMC while strengthening Dodge’s mainstream vehicle and performance image.
The fleet version of the Caravan fits Ram’s image in that context.
I hope it fares better than Opel’s version of the GM minivans sold in the late 90s. Of course that one was still equipped as a people-mover, not a cargo van. I think this will be too space inefficient and not durable enough for such Euro duty.
Oh yes, you mean the Opel Sintras with the steering wheels that break off..
Those aren’t cupholders. They are “man-pockets”. They are used for things like loose bolts, screws, and empty beer bottles.
Also, shotgun shells.
I don’t think it’s too much to ask for an actual design that at least give the impression of thought and planning in the effective use of materials and space.
The cup holders are on top of the wheel well, so it’s not like there’s much that they could do with that space anyway. Making a new cup holder-free molding for a low-volume vehicle is going to cost, so why bother?
I agree this is kind of a half-assed conversion, but until they know what kind of market there is for it I think Chryler is smart to do it on the cheap, at least on the cosmetic side.
Chrysler has always offered a version of their minivan as the Caravan C/V. And it’s always been the passenger van with the interior stripped out (essentially). These are the same ones your Xerox rep has been driving forever.
Don’t knock the leftover cup holders. An acquaintance of mine installs DISH TV systems, he uses an old ‘dustbuster’ GM van for his work vehicle. He loves the myriad of cupholders in the backs of the seats; he keeps all kinds of frequently used connectors and fasteners in them. The ‘man pocket’ is real and incredibly convenient.
Time to end the RAM-brand era. Already. In the months since its inception, it’s already obsolete.
Recent history recap:
Daimler-Chrysler: merger of equals leaves a gutted Mopar corpse at the side of the road.
Cerberus: smartest guys in the room look to make a bajillion dollars with a quick turnaround of car company — how hard can it be?
Carpocolypse: gas prices double, Wall Street crashes, unemployment skyrockets, national economies collapse, people stop buying cars.
TTAC Death Watches Come True: Cerberus looks to unload all or part of Chrysler while Congress rejects Detroit cries for help. Begins to cut apart the company for spin offs…will GM buy Jeep brand? Will Nissan buy Dodge Trucks? Will Ford buy the minivan business? We speculate on TTAC commentor board wildly.
Bailout: Administration (both Bush’s and Obama’s) cannot risk the collapse of the entire US automotive industry if GM and Chrysler tank. Cerburus, meet Fiat. Chrysler, meet your new boss.
Today: We have a Ram brand out there on its own which no longer makes sense, now that the need to spin off Chrysler divisions is a moot point.
While I am still not sure about the logic behind separating Ram from Dodge, one thing is clear to me. If they are going to pull it off, they need to separate work/cargo vehicles from passenger vehicles. In this context making the CV a Ram makes sense. This is not “shared product” Ed, it is confirmation of the unique missions laid out for Dodge and Ram.
“Unique missions” is merely the justification for a Ram spinoff after the true reason for said spinoff is no longer necessary. See my post above — Ram as a separate entity was created when Cerberus was desperately trying to get something – anything – for its damaged car manufacturer (as a whole, or in parts).
Today, the Ram brand is still separate, but the true reason for its existance as such — a spinoff firesale — is no longer necessary. Now, the marketers are trying to save face by trying to make it work.
Dodge needs a Ram brand designation for its commercial business about as much as Chevrolet and Ford need separate brand designations for theirs.
In other words, not at all.
@Domestic Hearse: You do realize that it was New Chrysler, post-reorganization and Fiat managed, that spun off the Ram brand don’t you? It was September of 09. Cerberus was indeed shopping the entire company (even trying to force a merger with GM at one point) but it was current management that made the decision to spin Ram off from Dodge.
https://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2009/09/chrysler-to-spin-off-ram-as-separate-brand/
“it’s dropping a windowless Ram Cargo Van based on the Dodge Caravan.”
I’m confused, did “dropping” suddenly become synonymous with “adding”, or did I totally miss the point of this article?
It’s slang deriving from the world of hip-hop. As in “my album is dropping on April Fools day.” I can see how it might be confusing in this context…
No “swagger wagons” here…
Thanks for clarifying Ed, have to confess that I’m not hip to the jive lingo the kids are using these days. Yesterday I had to google what a G6 was(nope, not a Pontiac).
I had to look that one up also lol
When I was still farming, I used a minivan instead of a pickup, because 90% of the time the minivan was better than a pickup. The other 10% of the time I used a real pickup, a one-ton, long-frame dually with a 12 foot contractor’s bed, grain box, and hoist. I would drive my minivans right out into a plowed field. They had great traction.
I overloaded that little 1984 Caravan with the 2.2 and 5-speed so many times that finally, at 300,000 miles, I bent the rear axle and then promptly got another one. They averaged 28 mpg over the hundreds of thousands of miles I drove them. My last 5-speed minivan, a 1993, averaged nearly 30 mpg overall. No pickup will match that.
What Chrysler should do with this cargo van is to put a high roof on it, like the Transit Connect. It would have over 200 cubic feet of cargo space and also be able to hold full sheets of 4×8 sheet goods inside with the hatch closed, something the Transit can’t do.
When i drove rural routes (“chasers” we called them) for Fedex Ground, I would have loved to have had a high-cube front wheel drive minivan to get in and out of farm driveways in the winter, instead of the standard front engine rear wheel drive vans that drove like pigs and bounced the packages off the shelves on washboard gravel roads.
I can’t believe I’m posting on this stupid van again but….
Is there really 8 feet between the seat backs and the back door? Doesn’t look that long in the photo.
According to the press release, it will handle 4×8 sheets.
I’ll believe it when I read Baruth’s review about whipping this thing around Willow Springs at triple digits carrying the construction materials for the new guitar display case/wet bar he’s building.
I can verify that it will take a 4×8. We have an ’08 Town & Country with Stow and Go and have brought back plywood sheets from Lowes’ with the seats stowed.
Does it have a Hemi in it?
It’s about time someone makes a serious competitor for the Transit Connect. Chevy HHR panel version isn’t even remotely serious. Are you actually going to knock the marketing decision of a vehicle that will barely even be advertised?
Whatever they call it, I hardly think it matters. It’s a panel van, for small businesses and delivery services. They’ll buy ’em in multiples, they’ll get ’em in white, and they won’t give a damn what it’s called as long as the price is right, the features are right, and the maintenance is cheap and easy.
I have 64 of these things in our fleet, all aquired since the demise of the Astro. They serve their purpose alright, and are cheap.
You just have to keep a close eye on everything that wears-out abnormally on a normal Dodge C/V van: brakes, transmission and driver patience. Set the depreciation rate on the lease as high as it will go and make damn sure to replace every single one of these before the magical mystery tour to the closest friendly Chrysler repair shop starts to be sponsored by your bank account instead of the U.S. tax payer.
And when it comes time to replace… it’s not like there are dozens of other options around so…
What’s their Total Cost of Ownership like compared to those old Astros?
Might be just what I need when it’s time to replace the Silverado.
A van would be optimal for me as an alternate live-in-mobile.
Sounds like a terribly spartan place to be…
Inside, Ram Cargo Van gets air conditioning with dual-zone temperature control, an instrument cluster with 120 mph speedometer and tachometer, outside temperature display, an overhead console, A-pillar passenger assist handle, 120-volt auxiliary power outlet, 12-volt front and rear DC power outlets, air filtering, audio jack input for mobile devices, AutoStick automatic transmission, cloth low-back bucket seats, “Ram” interior accents, door courtesy lamps, driver and passenger sun visors with mirrors, rearview auto-dim mirror, dual glove boxes, front courtesy / map lamps, headlamp shut-off delay, cargo compartment observation mirror, a liftgate floodlamp, lower instrument panel storage bin, dual sliding doors with alert warning, power locks, power front windows, rear dome lamp, speed control, steering wheel mounted audio controls, tilting and telescoping steering wheel, tip start and variable intermittent windshield wipers.
It actually sounds totally comfortable, and with a modicum of toughness not offered by the Dodge, Chrysler or VW vans. I would drive the $hit out of a 300hp 25mpg cargo box on wheels.
EDIT
It also has a nice non-chromed grill. For those who wish for a less blinged-out trim– this is it. I’d like to see one in black, with some optional black chrome wheels. Yes.