2004 Chrysler Pacifica Base FWD 3.5 gasoline from North America

Summary:

Middle class luxury van

Faults:

Coil spring broke, I drove too fast over a speed bump.

Heater stopped blowing, cabin filter was never replaced, very clogged.

Otherwise nothing, the car was maintained at all recommended service intervals since new.

General Comments:

Very nice drive, very stable, and smooth. Predictable handling. Enough power to drive on the highway all day long. Great A/C, rear vents and controls are a nice touch. Lots of storage cubbies all around the vehicle.

Lots of room for four adults and two children. But, with the third row up, there isn't a lot of space for much more than a couple of backpacks. With the third row down, there is enough space for just about any shopping trip. I have camped in the car with the second and third row seats folded down.

Fuel mileage is pretty low. The extra fuel cost is OK with me, as the vehicle is so reliable. Also, the five star safety rating is a plus.

It's kinda ugly though.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 6th February, 2018

2004 Chrysler Pacifica 3.5L V6 from North America

Summary:

Even though the vehicle has a few first model year infidelities, I love it

Faults:

Engine replacement at 102,000 miles, due to previous owner neglect (oil changes).

Threads in oil pan drain plug are worn; oil pan needs to be replaced.

General Comments:

The car is quite underpowered for its weight.

It handles much better than the average SUV, nonetheless.

It's got all the bells & whistles on it such as a NAV system, surround sound audio system, chrome wheels, etc.

Very stylish and handsome car when kept clean.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 26th September, 2012

2004 Chrysler Pacifica 3.5 from North America

Summary:

It's a pretty good SUV, but it does have some pros and cons

Faults:

Weird handling; sometimes the car rides smooth, and sometimes it rides like a bus.

Rear visibility sucks, making parallel parking difficult.

Not much room in the third row.

Kinda lacks acceleration power.

Cheap looking roof rack.

Whenever it rains heavy, water drips into the interior. I guess that's due to the age of the car.

General Comments:

The seats are very comfortable, although they're starting to wear.

It's very sporty looking.

Lots of leg room in the third row.

It idles very smooth and quietly.

Gas mileage is acceptable.

It now has 74,309 miles on it, and it's still holding up well.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Don't Know

Review Date: 29th July, 2012

11th Feb 2018, 02:05

The Pacifica is not an SUV.

In reply to 11th Feb 2018, 02:05

26th Apr 2023, 16:52

Earlier models are AWD with tons of room to spare, so it is considered an SUV although it is more like an AWD station wagon. The later models changed to minivans.

In reply to 26th Apr 2023, 16:52

22nd May 2026, 22:51

Interior space has nothing to do with a SUV classification.

The Pacifica was a unibody, transverse-engined, FWD-based, AWD (not 4WD), potato that lacked a low range transfer case. It was neither styled nor marketed to even pretend to be capable of venturing off-road.

2004 Chrysler Pacifica 6 cylinder from North America

Summary:

I should have looked into this car more when I bought it

Faults:

Transmission failed 3 times.

The interior isn't roomy.

Headlights fog up all the time.

There's this odd sound coming from underneath the front end.

There's hardly any leg room in the 3rd row.

It's too low to the ground.

The brakes constantly need service.

The transmission makes this awful grinding noise when I change gears.

Check engine light comes on and off once in a while.

The body scratches and dings very easily and visibly.

Turning radius is poor.

General Comments:

The only thing I like about this car is the handling.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Don't Know

Review Date: 15th March, 2012

21st Feb 2016, 05:07

Unfortunately, the Pacifica was not one of Chrysler's better vehicles ever built. It was one of those good ideas on paper, to take a Chrysler chassis and integrate Mercedes-Benz derived tech and features into it; however, in reality these vehicles turned out to be a disaster. They didn't sell nearly as good as planned and they wound up having some serious reliability and quality control issues. The problem was also that they used a dated series of underpowered V6 engines and a buggy transmission to go along with them. It was simply too much car for the light-duty mechanicals to handle.