Warning to those looking @ the new "Ram" Vans.

Two of my leasing clients have now done tests with the "Promaster" Pentastar vans.
A total of 65 vans were recently tried by four different companies. These were not first-year offerings either. These were all 2017/2018 AFAIK (vins all checked out.) I just uploaded the final records into my datamart this morning.
This test was supposed to go 150,000 miles or four/five years of ownership, whichever came first.
They were all pulled from service and sent to auction.

There's a reason trucks have a rear differential.
FWD is nice when the majority of weight is over the front wheels but not when you try putting heavy weight in the rear...making the front wheels "pull" the load instead of "push" the load. When your front wheels spin, you cannot steer the vehicle.
(Rear drive can lose traction and spin...but you don't lose your steering because of it.)
(An experienced driver can easily control a "drift" (power-slide) situation on a loaded RWD truck. FWD is not nearly as sure footed (WITH A HEAVY LOAD in the back.)

They actually had drivers transfer loads back over to their old vans because they refused to drive the "death trap" Promasters. According to the dispatchers, the FWD frightened them when fully loaded. (Ram was WELL aware of this problem. FWD is not for heavy loads. Period. Same reason they used to limit towing with a Toronado/Eldorado...even thought they had HUGE V8's capable of moving loaded 24' box trucks with relative ease.)

The transmissions failed in 9 of the 65 (and before they even reached 30,000 miles.)

NINE. That is not a good average. (Even the Ford automatics, which are one of the biggest reasons most Ford vans/pickups cost more than double to maintain over 200,000 miles compared to the GM units...almost always last 120,000 or so before spitting their cookies.)

A head gasket, multiple electronic issues and randomly occurring electrical gremlins required the battery to be disconnected once a month or so to "clear the computer" have plagued a number of the Promasters.
(All the drivers learned the trick and the fleet maintenance guys at one location actually installed battery switches the drivers could reset because of it.)

So many QC issues, I cannot count: Windshield leaks, heater box defects, bad radio speakers, flaky door switches, seats that wore out in the first year. (However, to be fair, most of these do not actually stop the vehicle...and the fleet scenario IS the very harshest environment on a vehicle.)

So...WHY am I so all-fired-certain that folks will end up getting the shaft long-term??? After all, the vans were auctioned at low mileage, right? 

Here's why:
The Focus was really a re-worked Escort.
The "totally redesigned Taurus" shared more than 65% of its exact guts with the previous years model.
Car companies have adapted platforms and turned past models components into "newly designed" vehicles for decades.

However, Ram "redesigned" old Fiat units to make the Promaster. (A vehicle actually designed by Fiat, Peugeot, Citroen...*gag*)
They took a vehicle with a load rating similar to a Grand Caravan and tweaked it till it was somehow certified for 5000+ pounds of payload. Only...they kept a "Grand-Caravan-like" drive line. (You can get away with doing that for a little while...but longevity suffers.)

ANY vehicle you "max out" will not last long. (Think about how many engines the old air cooled VW buses used to go through.) The Fiat was maxed out at a ton less GVW than Ram says their "newly designed van" can now handle.
I have personally been under several. You would not catch me dead with two and a half tons in the back of that thing. The running gear is just too...WIMPY. Those axle shafts look like they belong on a freaking Toyota Corolla.
The rear axle allows for almost zero ground clearance. (Looks JUST like a Voyager to me.)
Go compare the brakes on a 3500 Nissan van or a 3500 GM van...or any 350 series Ford van with the ones on the heaviest-rated Ram you can buy. Same with the wheel bearings and steering knuckles. (They too...look strangely like the ones on a Grand Caravan...hmm, a glorified K car hauling more than 5000 pounds of cargo...sound safe to you?)

Larger bearing surfaces make more friction and use more fuel. Larger engines do too...so do strong, beefy, "take any punishment" transmissions. They also last.



Even though the MPG figures are appealing, you do not save anything when your van needs a new engine 120,000 miles sooner than it's V8 RWD counterpart. (...and I venture to say...many will not even be able to do that.)
If you want a tall van, I suggest you look into a Nissan (even one of the new Fords...*turn your head and cough*) if buying a GM and having a high-top installed gets stuck in your craw.

For those that are unaware; I do fleet data for a living and have millions of light and heavy truck units in my databases/marts.

(The large leasing companies do not take spending money lightly, so I am hired to ensure we know how much each vehicle costs-per-mile to operate over its life.)

Both of the leasing companies involved in this particular test currently refuse to lease the Promaster. They will actually turn down the business if you request a lease on them. (That really should say a lot right there.)

My attempts at sharing data/knowledge has been plagued here in the past...by people who think their experience with one or two vehicles should outweigh the data from a thousand or more like-units with bean-counter-level records of expenses. I will not even reply to these "troll-worthy" statements.

If you own a Promaster...I hope it serves you trouble free for 300,000 miles and you shake your head, ten years from now...as you think about stupid JD and his bad advice. (...but all signs point to that not happening.  They went too far downsizing the Prostar. Too wimpy. Too light duty to carry 5000+ pounds on little more than a glorified Kcar.)

Best of luck, no matter what vehicle you choose to carry you.

Well, that is why I don't like front-wheel drive vehicles. Some vehicles are difficult to work on especially if you change the accessory belt, water pump, or anything on the front of the engine.

Some of them can't access the spark plugs or other components because no room to work on. Got to remove the engine mount and lift up the motor to have clearance.

It is ALL engineered by the manufacturer to prevent Do-it-Yourself repairs so the vehicle has to go to the dealership or certified auto mechanic repair shops with expensive equipment that is out of reached of Do-it-Yourselfers.

I forgot to mention that front-wheel drive vehicles, got to check the ball joints and CV joint axles.

Moderator Edit: Removed unnecessary quote from post.

JD, THANKS for the info !!  For me the next logical question is which 1/2 or 3/4 ton van performed the best over the long haul ?
    KinA

JD GUMBEE... what you have shared is nearly identical to what the fleet manager of the company I work for told me.  we have 120 vans now.  most all are chevy now.  we tried the Transits too and they were pretty good but not  as dependable as the chevy.  the fleet manager said hes never going with the promaster again after the experience we had with them breaking down so often.  electrical and transmission mostly.  

i have driven a chevy 2500 van for my company car for 6 years.  its never failed me.  i like it so much that i actually bought one for my van life!  i got the GMC savana 2500 but its the same thing with a few upgrades.  

would you kindly share a link to where i can read this data and draw my own conclusions. without access to the data this is just your opinion. and second hand at that

Moderator Edit: Removed unnecessary quote of the original post. Please refrain from quoting entire lengthy posts.

Seminole Wind - here's a part of that original post:


For those that are unaware; I do fleet data for a living and have millions of light and heavy truck units in my databases/marts.

(The large leasing companies do not take spending money lightly, so I am hired to ensure we know how much each vehicle costs-per-mile to operate over its life.)

Compiling data for large corporations is what he does for a living, posting either the database or sharing access to it is not going to happen.

^
that is not "the data" that is his opinion. i am not saying he has done a poor or unfair job. but there are thousands of people in similar positions around the world. constantly giving me their opinion without sharing the data. i just asked for the link to the data so i could make my own opinion.

The professional drivers on the Expediter Online forum largely drive (and live in for weeks at a time) cargo vans. In fact, they probably put on several times as many miles per year as the folks here, generally speaking.

https://www.expeditersonline.com/forums/

There's tons of good information there on reliability, modifications, accessories, etc. The last time I researched the matter on that site (about a year ago) there were plenty of happy Promaster owners, or at least the owners who had gasoline engines seemed mostly to be happy. Sure, there were some lemons and some Promaster-specific mechanical issues. (One involved headlights that failed much too frequently.) But mostly, the Promaster seemed to me to get at least as much love as any of the other major makes.

Matty Van Halen said:

JD GUMBEE... what you have shared is nearly identical to what the fleet manager of the company I work for told me.  we have 120 vans now.   

Click to expand...

and what company is it you work for?

I clearly mentioned NINE transmission failures.
It is not "my opinion" that 9 out of 65 units had failed transmissions before 30,000 miles.
That is an outrageous failure rate that warrants a heads-up to others.

I work for myself. There are not hundreds, let alone thousands...that do what I do.
More like about 40 of us in the USA. (At least the ones who deal with the volume I do.)

A person would be a moron to tell where they worked.
Too many with squirrelly mental status on this forum.
If you listen, great. If you do not...you were warned.


The Promasters that actually get used to haul weight are going to drop like flies. (They already are actually, it's just that they have yet to flood the secondary market, being such a recent model...so they are being repaired in-dealership or captive truck shops at present. When they enter the secondary market for service/repairs, the word will get out more.)

If you want to find evidence for yourself, I encourage you to call the recycle yards and ask for a used 4.8/5.3/6.0 GM V8. Here in VA, they can be had for under $500 dollars running perfectly. Then check on that Prostar motor and see how much it costs you.
Think supply and demand. Make your own assessment.

It isn't like GM is paying me...nor does it profit me a dime if you buy a 1947 Diamond-T, a Promaster...or if you want to get a teardrop and pull it with a Honda Goldwing.
Makes zero difference to my wallet or my life.

For the person on SSI who puts down their last 10,000 dollars and spends 3/4 of their monthly check on a payment for 7 long years...I want them to read this.
I want to see that person buy the van with the lowest cost per mile and fewest failures. It is very clear the Prostar is NOT going to be that vehicle.

JD, a very informed analysis. I used to deal with a small fleet too. Some tendencies become glaringly obvious when you have to manage a fleet. Thanks for the data...

jd, there may only be a handfull of people that do your job. but there are thousands of people world wide that share their opinion with out substantiating anything they claim. anywhere you want to look, medical, religion climate science. lots of claims out there professing to be "the truth" without sharing the raw data you used to make these conclusions means i have to take your word that yoyu are all knowing and i should trust you have not made a mistake.

for example you are comparing heavy duty heavy haul use that you say didnt work out so well to a retired van dweller, for which there is quite a bit of first hand reports of very satisfied owners out there. even if everything you claim is true in the heavy fleet service you claim. that does not mean it will carry over hand in hand to the average van dweller.

the way you word your attacks is very negative and condescending as if you had a grudge. if you levied the same attack against a person would you expect me to just take your word for it.

now if you came to me and said "here check out this report from X company, seams they have been having problems" then i could read the report and draw my own conclusions as to how that pertained to me. but with out it, it is just rumor and propaganda

I'll say it up front, I am biased against front wheel drive (FWD). My first (all) front wheel drive car(s) was a company car. The first rainstorm I drove it in, I bounced off a curb while trying to make a turn (wheel spin in a 1.2 liter) that would not have happened in a rear wheel drive car (bounce off curb). Had to have the boots replaced three times and a CV joint in the two years I drove it. Worked great in snow and got great gas mileage. I think the gas mileage savings got eaten up by the repairs though.

So I guess this begs the question(s), what other hauling vehicles have FWD? I'm not talking minivans.

Why are there not more if FWD is so great?

JD GUMBEE said:

For those that are unaware; I do fleet data for a living and have millions of light and heavy truck units in my databases/marts . . .
( . . . so I am hired to ensure we know how much each vehicle costs-per-mile to operate over its life.)

Click to expand...

Seminole Wind said:

 . . . without sharing the raw data you used to make these conclusions means i have to take your word that yoyu are all knowing and i should trust you  . . .

Click to expand...

There seems to be a disconnect here.  JD Gumbee has offered his opinion, based on his work.  Same as any other opinion you get here.  You put your own value on any opinion, report, or data you receive.  Demanding he gives you for free what he makes his living supplying is IMO out of bounds. 

I am sure if you PM'd M. Gumbee he would be glad to quote a price for the report you want.  He may even quote a price for the raw data.    Otherwise he has graciously offered, in subsequent posts, ways you can verify his opinion, but you have to do the leg work.

Several reviews on edmunds.com tend to echo the information presented by JD.

Of course, like most reviews on the internet, satisfied owners seldom sit down to write positive reviews, but many of those who have had problems will eagerly write bad reviews, even if only to vent their frustrations.

One obvious issue is that fleet vehicles tend to be driven by non-owners, and sometimes they are over-used (and sometimes abused) a bit by younger drivers in a hurry all the time to make their deliveries and go home.

I've done some of that me-own-self.... :dodgy:

Several well-liked youtube vanners and members here have the Promasters, so I hope they have a good experience with them....if not, the world will surely hear about it!


https://www.edmunds.com/ram/promaster-cargo-van/2017/consumer-reviews/?pagesize=50

Maybe an opportunity to buy a slightly used van.

also many who realize their purchase was a mistake will not admit it, no matter what.

FWD was pushed so hard by the manufacturers because of the economics of it. FWD cars are cheaper to manufacture making them cheaper to sell. people like cheap.

I view FWD as cheap disposable vehicles. use once and throw away. they get to expensive to repair and repairs cost more than the vehicle is worth.

I also view them as light duty.

granted these are my views and what do I know. after all I have been fixing vehicles since the late 60's before I even had a license to drive.

highdesertranger

I was kinda liking the idea of a FWD van, was thinking it would lend itself to a lower deck/floor height in the house and lower overall vehicle height. At the same time I was also somewhat suspect of the durability, especially since I've only seen the FWD in standard wheelbase 3/4 ton in my area.

Thanks JD! Appreciate your time in posting this.

JD, Thank you for your assessment. I totally appreciate it. The 200K mile comparison is eye opening, but in line with what i have been seeing of late WRT GM's, their transmissions seem to be better these days.

The Ford 5R55E was a pile of shite, but the newer ZF Derived 6R80 is exemplary.

The Allisons are tops, but only available in GM Diesels (and perhaps some Ram's now?)

Do you happen to have any data WRT smaller trucks like Explorer/Blazer/Durango, Ranger/S10/Dakota longevity?

I'm currently looking for a good small RWD SUV as a Toad for my Motorhome as I cannot pull my AWD Sport Trac or my wife's AWD NX2000. We bought BOTH before having the MoHo.

FWD makes packaging and assembly cheaper, but the customer pays in the long term. I'm not a fan of FWD architecture (even though my wife's overpriced Toyota is one too).