▲ 37 points
back
34 comments
The first minivan... The article missed it by 30 years. The first minivan was the Volkswagon type 2 in 1950.
As a bonus While checking my dates I learned something neat about the type2(bus). It has exactly the same wheelbase as the type1(bug). It literally started out as "What if we put a cab over van body on a volkswagon"
More than that even!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minivan#Predecessors
It's definitely true that it was the VW's breakout success in the US which - on top of inspiring the Chicken Tax - cued a full lineup of competition from all of the Big 3 (two from Chevy!).
Because Wikipedia overlooks it in that section, here's the Dodge offering from that period:
Wasn't the A100 a full-size van, replaced by the B-series (Ram Van)? I wouldn't consider the Ford E-series a minivan either.
you could update the wiki too!
The Nomad II appears to be a late 1990-vintage Volvo 940 station wagon with a missing door.
That’d be more impressive if the Nomad II came before the 1970’s Volvo 240 wagons, which were basically boxier 940s / Nomad II’s.
> The first minivan was the Volkswagon type 2 in 1950.
The British Morris J was a little earlier if I think
Sliding door was optional on the T2 from 1964 onwards. Not standard.
I suspect that the Nomad II would not have done as well as the first Dodge Caravan for the same reason that Minivans don't do well, now.
Stigma. It looked too much like a Station Wagon.
When I was a kid, the neighbors had a Caprice Classic Station Wagon with the third row backward facing seat. As a kid, I guess I loved the novelty of looking at the people behind us for some reason. My dad was buying a new car and I told him he should get one of those to which he replied "I'd never buy a station wagon."
To him, the station wagon was the "Soccer Mom" car; a car that -- driving it -- would have made him feel old, I guess[0]. I was surprised to hear the same sentiment about Minivans as I got older. Everyone saw them as a symbol of being tied in suburbia with a litter of kids. So they buy SUVs/crossovers, some of which are classified, ironically, as a Station Wagon.
Incidentally, I've owned a Grand Caravan. It was my favorite non-convertible car. It was like driving my living room, except that my couch doesn't have air conditioned or heated seats.
[0] I have all of zero enthusiasm about the car I drive. My first car was a convertible. Ever since ditching the convertible, I don't really care what I'm behind the wheel of.
This stigma is so weird. My first car was Plymouth Voyager and I loved that I can haul a bunch of friends on a hike or I could do a road trip and comfortably sleep in it. My friend had Mazda MPV which was 4x4 and even better.
Now being older I love my minivan because I can fit my family and a ton of stuff. Sliding doors are great in tight city. Drives perfectly fine, it's not a racecar but it actually handles better than many SUVs.
My dream car is Mitsubishi Delica. It's very popular in Georgia (the country) because of the tough mountainous land. I've seen it run circles around jeeps and SUVs.
I am sad this segment of cars is disappearing.
I chuckled when I saw the main protagonist in TV show Ozark being overly attached to his Honda Odyssey. That man knew the real deal.
It comes down to the kind of car person you are, I think.
You're either someone who prioritizes the car they buy based on how others will perceive you (and how you will perceive yourself when driving it) or you're someone who sees a car as a means to an end.
I realized I was the latter when I bought my first car. After telling the salesperson the model I wanted, his first question was "What color do you want?" I went into a car dealership knowing the exact model/options "level" I wanted (V6, Leather, Convertible, Keyless, etc), I knew what I wanted the dealer to add (Remote Start, mostly) ... and I knew exactly what I was willing to pay given the two purchase options available to me (cash with a large incentive or 0% financing). At no point had I thought about the color. After shaking off the momentary embarrassment, I sarcastically quipped: "The cheapest color".
We own a 2008 Honda Odyssey and I swear it is the greatest vehicle I've ever owned. Honda perfected the minivan as a utilitarian family vehicle. We see them all over the place too - amazing durability.
We had a 2003 model and what finally sold me was when I learned you could lay 4'x8' plywood sheets flat in the back of it. Which I did several times.
That generation was unfortunately plagued with a faulty transmission design and ours went out at 105K, just after the extended warranty ran out. Got no grace from Honda on the repair which soured me a bit on the company. That said, we did get 12 years and 230K out of it before I sold it used for $3K.
More recent minivans will still fit sheet goods in the back, but they have started rounding off the lift gate (and consequently the opening it fits into) for stylistic reasons and while the maximum width is still >48" along the bottom edge you only have 42" or something before the trim starts angling up.
> We had a 2003 model and what finally sold me was when I learned you could lay 4'x8' plywood sheets flat in the back of it. Which I did several times.
Somewhat reminiscent of Citroen’s old C15 (a small panel van), the cargo area was designed specifically so you could slide a europallet (an then a bunch of mad lads created an extended 6 wheeler version).
I bought an '03 for $3k probably six years ago (has around 230k on it now). I noticed the transmission was whining a bit immediately after I paid for it. Refuses to die, and it's so useful I can't get rid of it. I've put 4x8 sheets of drywall in back many times.
Yeah it is huge inside! We moved a full size refrigerator. Yesterday we brought out Christmas tree home inside it instead of tying it on top.
We are still under 130k.
And 2024 will be remembered as the time Tesla fumbled around with a poorly implemented pickup truck while missing the boat on building the first really good EV van or SUV.
As I understand it, automakers have decided EV's are luxury vehicles with high price tags and high margins. Minivans are markedly none of those things. The article mentions that GM axed their minivan because it would be too popular. We don't have EV minivans for the same reason. They would instantly become the top selling EV and would ruin all other EV sales.
While I generally agree with the sentiment, I would also like to introduce you to the 2024 Chrysler Pinnacle PHEV, MSRP $63k. I can't speak to the margins, but they've certainly got luxury and high price.
https://www.kbb.com/cars-for-sale/all/hybrid/chrysler/pacifi...
Not to mention, all these "van life" people often have converted vans worth up to $100k.
It’s okay — everyone else seems to be dropping the ball, too. And Tesla bought itself a great deal of time while literally every competitor in the US market fumbles the transition to NACS / SAE J3400. I’m cautiously optimistic that TELO’s offering will end up filling the need of people who want minivans. Or maybe Rivian will be inspired to make a smaller and more van-shaped R1S.
(Damn it, CEOs of competitors: don’t wait for the final SAE publication and for the UL to figure out whatever weird paperwork they want and for whatever else you’re waiting for. Tesla launched this thing (apparently mildly different on a protocol level but physically identical) over a decade ago. If you need to, sells cars with two entirely separate charge ports, and make the NACS port modular just in case you screw up and need to replace it. But stop pretending like waiting until 2025 for launch makes sense, and stop telling customers that it won’t be annoying to be stuck using an adapter to charge the car.)
My dad bought a '69 VW camper bus, with a sliding door.
We soon discovered that if one person was pumping gas, and another inside would open the door, it would bash into the fuel hose.
VW moved the gas inlet in the next iteration.
It had a top speed of 65, and would take miles to reach it. This made it quite a challenge to pass other cars on a 2 lane highway. You had to back off a ways behind the car in front, and floor it. When you eventually came up on its tail, it was decision time - swerve into the left and and go round, or decide it wasn't clear and slam on the brake, then repeat.
The wind was also a problem. While driving in a crosswind, you had to cant the steering wheel into the wind or you'd get blown into another lane. I quickly learned to anticipate cuts the highway went through, as the cut would block the wind and the bus would lurch one way, when coming out of the cut it would lurch the other way.
Fun, but not a car for weenies.
Decades later, he tried to give it to me, but I demurred. Despite the large volume, it could not carry much weight. The brakes were poor, acceleration nonexistent, the engine in the back meant the defroster never worked, if you turned the wheel too hard it would fall over on its side, but the killer was there was no protection at all from a front end crash.
So I helped him sell it.
Unfortunately cab-over designs are impossible in the US anymore. They are nice because they optimize the cargo space / vehicle size ratio, with one significant downside.
Jeep had a cab-over design in the 60's called the forward controller, a very nice design. Then a few years ago the jeep R@D department remade this as a concept car, they took a wrangler chassis and built a cab-over body for it. In all honesty it was one of the coolest cars I have ever seen. However when asked if jeep planned to make it into a production car, the designer layed it out, pointing to the seat. "You see this, this is the crumple zone, right through the knees, there is no way to get a design like this through current safety regulations."
As an aside it is slightly strange that the VW bus is a "cab-over", with the engine in the back the cab is not "over" any thing. But that's language for you it does not exactly have to make sense.
A lot of cars these days have the same behavior with tiny engines and great heights
What modern car has this to the extent that the original VW Bus did?
My impression is that there's been power inflation, where things considered "underpowered" today would have been better than average 60 years ago.
Lost to time was the short-lived Nissan Axxess which was basically a proto-minivan with the benefits of two sliding doors. It has a surprisingly interesting import history and was a great vehicle. (disclaimer, my family had one)
https://medium.com/@500dollarVan/why-the-nissan-axxess-was-t...
The GM Van Plant was in Loardstown Ohio.
The Union won some concessions, I don't recall what (I was young, my two Uncles worked there).
To send the Union a message the Van Plant was razed over a long 4th of July holiday. When Union members returned to their jobs after the holiday they found they had none, the Van Plant no longer existed.
GM corporation really needs to be razed itself once you look into such things.
Lordstown Assembly was never "torn down", and it would certainly take longer than a holiday weekend to do so. From the wiki:
"Conversion van production at Lordstown ended when production of the Chevrolet van's successor, the Chevrolet Express, moved to the Wentzville Assembly in 1994, leaving Lordstown to focus exclusively on compact cars."
The assembly plant is still there, although GM shut down all production as of March 6, 2019. The plant was sold to Lordstown Motors on November 7, 2019. Still intact, definitely not torn down.
I was specific, the Van Plant was razed. In the 1970s. My uncles lost their job because of it. I was present during some rather heated discussions when they came home. The Van Plant was a sperate building.
Clearly the rest of the Lordstown Assembly building is there for everyone to see driving on Interstate 80/Ohio Turnpike, which I do frequently.
I don't know what Wiki you are quoting but it is out of date. The plant structure was most recently part of Foxcon, clearly seen on the sign when driving by the building. The recent bankruptcy of Loardtowwn Motors and them suing Foxcon will lead to a sign change once again.
Loardstown Motors was frequently in the local news here mostly for not getting things done (to be polite).
I love my minivan - 4x8 sheets of plywood/drywall fit in it, you can put a double air mattress in it to camp in, etc.
I'd forgotten that the original Chrysler vans only had one sliding door that opened on the passenger side. The idea was that you didn't want young kids opening the driver side door and stepping out into traffic.
> The idea was that you didn't want young kids opening the driver side door and stepping out into traffic.
I always heard that was sort of a retroactive justification, and the real reason is that a driver's side sliding door would have interfered with the fuel filler. The second-generation Chrysler minivans solved that problem by introducing a mechanical interlock, so that you couldn't open the driver's side slider while the fuel door was opened.
Interesting! I just tried it on my 2013 van, and indeed, it only partially opens but doesn't slide back.