2005 Dodge Grand Caravan Reviews - Page 4 of 7

2005 Dodge Grand Caravan from North America

Model year2005
Year of manufacture2004
First year of ownership2008
Most recent year of ownership2009
Engine and transmission Don't Know
Previous carFord Windstar

Faults:

We bought our Caravan used, it had 33,000 miles when purchased. We now have 78,000 miles on it. Everything was so wonderful with it until now.

We have replaced brakes, and rotors all the way around the vehicle.

We have this annoying squealing when we brake, and sometimes when we are driving down the road.

We are replacing the EGR valve now.

We have just put new tires on it because they are wearing, but only in spots.

Now after the new rotors and brakes, when we are driving at 50+ mph there is a humming and vibration coming from the front brake (seems to only be on the drivers side). We've had the tires balanced twice just in case they weren't done right, but that didn't fix our problem. Any suggestions on what this might be?

General Comments:

I honestly love my Caravan, I wish we could figure out all of our problems. We owned at Windstar before this and I wouldn't own another one.

I just want my car to drive like it did when we bought it.

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

Review Date: 15th June, 2009

16th Jun 2009, 05:06

Check the wheel bearings - that's a very possible cause of humming, especially if the noise comes just from one side.

2005 Dodge Grand Caravan from North America

Model year2005
Year of manufacture2005
First year of ownership2005
Most recent year of ownership2009
Engine and transmission Automatic
Distance when acquired7 miles
Most recent distance42525 miles
Previous carDodge Grand Caravan

Summary:

I will never purchase a Dodge ever again

Faults:

The battery went before the 2 year mark.

The tires needed to be replaced around the same time, despite the fact that we continually rotated them on schedule.

The brakes had to be replaced at 18K miles.

The air conditioning does not work now.

All of this and barely 5 years old.

The electronic door on the passenger side has had to be repaired.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? No

Review Date: 8th June, 2009

8th Jun 2009, 11:53

This review is hogwash. Compared to other Caravans on this site. This is one with the least amount of problems. No tranny failure, serpentine belt slipping. I really don't see why you would'nt buy another?

8th Jun 2009, 19:42

I side with the reviewer. With only 45k miles on his vehicle he should not be having ANY of the problems described in this review. And SO FAR hasn't had the serpentine belt, tranny probs, etc YET.. wait til there's more miles on the vehicle. And if there is so many other bad reviews on this model why WOULD he buy another one??

10th Jun 2009, 22:10

I'm pretty sure the OP didn't research this Caravan. Dodge as a whole is a very unreliable company. Sure the designs are nice, but the high cost of ownership just isn't worth the hassle. Caravans have been terrible since birth. Compared to other Caravans on this site, this one is reliable with the problems it has had. A little more research would have saved this buyer a few headaches. No one's fault but the buyers, but hey at least you didn't buy a Windstar.

6th Dec 2009, 11:16

While some of their designs have been innovative, nobody has time anymore (except maybe retirees) to sit in a dealership waiting for repairs. Chryslers have the highest incidence of Lemon Law cases from state to state. I think it's time for Chrysler to fold up and die. Imagine, Fiat has bought them - talk about a merger of equal losers!

2005 Dodge Grand Caravan SXT 3.8 from North America

Model year2005
Year of manufacture2005
First year of ownership2008
Most recent year of ownership2009
Engine and transmission 3.8 Automatic
Performance marks 7 / 10
Reliability marks 7 / 10
Comfort marks 9 / 10
Dealer Service marks 8 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 6 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
7.4 / 10
Distance when acquired43000 miles
Most recent distance54000 miles
Previous carDodge Caravan

Summary:

The car got better with the new design, but the interior materials look low-rent

Faults:

The cheap STOW-N-GO cup holders broke at 43,500 miles.

The check engine light came on at 51,500 miles.

General Comments:

When I purchased the car, my 4 year old daughter easily broke the "cheap" second seat cup holder. This is a very flimsy design.

I love the STOW-N-GO seats though. The driver's seat is very comfortable as well. At 51k the check engine light came on with a p0138 code. I replaced the O2 sensor and reset the light, but after a day or two it came back on. I will have to let dealer fix.

I've had the car for about a year now. That's the only major problem I've had with it yet. This is a good long distance cruiser.

Previously, I owned a 1997 Dodge Caravan. That car was a major money pit for "little" problems, sway bar bushings, links, starter, battery, radio stopped working, and tie rod ends. The transmission "died" at 145k, not bad. I put 189k on that one before the engine gave up the ghost. I guess that's why I bought another one.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? No

Review Date: 26th February, 2009

26th Feb 2009, 13:43

Just curious why you won't buy from Chrysler again. Your old one nickel-and-dimed you, but this new one hasn't... at least not yet. So what are you thinking about that you haven't written?

4th Mar 2009, 11:19

I've had Chrysler's cars since the 80's. I'm finally getting tired of the trivial problems with their products. I will probably go import, although that term is relative these days as most makes are assembled in the USA.

14th May 2009, 11:17

I've had the same problem with the check engine light but have come to a very simple fix/conclusion; when the light comes on, fill the tank with the highest octane fuel you can find (typically ultimate premium). The light has always gone off and stayed off for quite a while... when it comes back on, I refill with high-grade fuel and the problem takes care of itself. I don't think it is an issue of a faulty sensor, rather a 'sensitive sensor.'

Average review marks: 6.5 / 10, based on 28 reviews