I'm pretty sure that Ram just got a Dodge caravan and took out the rear seats and windows to be a cargo can (Ram and Dodge are both owned my Fca) Similarly with the mini clubvan just being a rear seat and rear window delete car but the same body. I think a lot of companies did this to make a sort of small ish van that isn't a passenger minivan but the size of one. One more example is The chevy ssr cargo van is just like the other ones too.

Yeah that Dodge van is just a "passenger" van with the side windows blanked out and no seats.

Also I think you Chevrolet HHR Panel Van the SSR was a truck wannabe that was either a failed product or a limited run vehicle

Yeah that Dodge van is just a "passenger" van with the side windows blanked out and no seats.

Also I think you Chevrolet HHR Panel Van the SSR was a truck wannabe that was either a failed product or a limited run vehicle

sorry about that mixed them up as they are very similar in name, style and era.

sorry about that mixed them up as they are very similar in name, style and era.

Yeah,
no problem we are all here to help out each other.

I immediately thought of the HHR because my stepfather has a red 2010 model one (LT the one with windows AKA not the panel van)

anyway here is what the SSR looks like

I might aswell respond to this post as I'm starting to use this site once again. I drive a 2001 chevy malibu ls, and a 1996 ford F150. Both are pretty modified, the malibu is 3400 swapped with a 65mm TB, hid headlights, tuned, B&M line pressure controller for the trans, monsoon audio system and 2 12s on a 500w amp, and plastidipped a chameleon color. The truck has GT40P heads, headers, and a 3 inch exhaust all the way back, plus 2 12 inch subs on a sony xplod 430w amp.  I couldn't let either car be slow.

yup been looking for a metro (the old 3 cyl ones) for quite some time.  hard to find one that isn't rusted out here in Michigan.  ive put over 10,000mi on the aveo and all it has needed was the routine timing belt change.  the '95 Chevy 1500 in the background is mine also but I couldn't afford the 10mpg I was getting with it.  I should probably sell it while it still runs good.

My brother LOVES geo metro!

@Xelareverse, I'm typically not into Malibu's, but that Malibu you've got sounds interesting. Sounds like it's got
some "get up and go" to it as well. Certainly faster than my Pontiac G6

My Subaru Legacy has a 6 speed CVT transmission with manual paddle shifters on the steering wheel. The CVT is pleasant and the constantly changing gear ratios keep the RPM’s at a fairly relaxed level while cruising at a constant speed. I wish there was a true manual overdrive mode to get the Subaru WRX/STI experience. There’s some road noise from the 18 inch premium wheels, but I just turn up the radio a little louder 

Bullet proof reliability so far after two years including a drive all the way to Canada and back. At 87,000 miles we’re still going strong. That 3.6 liter “boxer” engine is a fine machine. I replace the oil (5W-30 synthetic) every 5000 miles. I restored and resealed the headlight lenses and replaced all the stock incandescent lamps.

... 6 speed CVT transmission...

Terms like "6 speed CVT" is a marketing BS and technical nonsense, it does not exist.
CVT has either one (only some Toyotas have two gears - a fixed ratio "launch gear" and the the variator) or infinite gears, depends how you look at it (the number of power path arrangements vs number of attainable gearing ratios - a variator is a single power path, but with infinite ratios within their range).

The existence of the emulated fixed gears in the variator controllers many makers use are a sales pitch, but at the same time a proof marketers are complete morons even in what is supposed to be their field of expertise (convincing customers to buy the products) - not being able to sell the clear technical superiority and forcing engineering to artificially making it perform inferior, yet still having ghe biggest inherent drawback of CVTs there (the belt wear and so the need for rather complex and expensive replacement job after some time).

Using these emuoated gears is a big no-no. You cause the belt to wear off dents in the pulleys (at the positions corresponding to the "gears") and then the transmission will become jerky when the belt passes thaose worn positions when used normally. Often leading to premature belt or bearing failures.
With normal use the wear is distributed along the whole surface, so it remains smooth.

Terms like "6 speed CVT" is a marketing BS and technical nonsense, it does not exist.
CVT has either one (only some Toyotas have two gears - a fixed ratio "launch gear" and the the variator) or infinite gears, depends how you look at it (the number of power path arrangements vs number of attainable gearing ratios - a variator is a single power path, but with infinite ratios within their range).

The existence of the emulated fixed gears in the variator controllers many makers use are a sales pitch, but at the same time a proof marketers are complete morons even in what is supposed to be their field of expertise (convincing customers to buy the products) - not being able to sell the clear technical superiority and forcing engineering to artificially making it perform inferior, yet still having ghe biggest inherent drawback of CVTs there (the belt wear and so the need for rather complex and expensive replacement job after some time).

Using these emuoated gears is a big no-no. You cause the belt to wear off dents in the pulleys (at the positions corresponding to the "gears") and then the transmission will become jerky when the belt passes thaose worn positions when used normally. Often leading to premature belt or bearing failures.
With normal use the wear is distributed along the whole surface, so it remains smooth.

Reminds me of my MTD lawn tractor. Claims it's a 6 speed but it's got a manually adjustable CVT through a lever with 6 ratios. I just use the clutch to variate it.

@Xelareverse, I'm typically not into Malibu's, but that Malibu you've got sounds interesting. Sounds like it's got
some "get up and go" to it as well. Certainly faster than my Pontiac G6

the only g6 this cant keep up with is the 3.6 powered ones.  It has pretty much the same engine as the 3.5 minus a few manifold differences and the 0.1 liter in displacement, aswell as a different crank trigger count.  With this being tuned and other things I think it would beat a 3.5 powered G6 without any questions asked.  If it's an EcoTec we all know the answer. But that'd be an interesting thing to look into. I wanna take it to a strip some day, maybe I can race a G6.

Funny that you guys mention Malibu. Today as I was driving from Montana to Washington, I had a guy repeatedly try to race me with a Malibu. I pretty much ignored him, I must be getting old! I don't know what he was thinking? Probably just having fun. I have no idea what engine that car had, but he was really giving it the beans!

As for CVTs. I begrudgingly bought a CVT car for my wife, but it is the new Toyota 2 stage CVT with a real 1st gear, it's "2nd gear" is the CVT. This type of CVT helps a lot, for the wife it's good and I don't complain too much about it. I hope it is "Toyota reliable" because I convinced her to buy her first Toyota after owning only Subarus prior, If this new CVT fails, she's gonna let me have it!

As for CVTs. I begrudgingly bought a CVT car for my wife, but it is the new Toyota 2 stage CVT with a real 1st gear, it's "2nd gear" is the CVT. This type of CVT helps a lot, for the wife it's good and I don't complain too much about it. I hope it is "Toyota reliable" because I convinced her to buy her first Toyota after owning only Subarus prior, If this new CVT fails, she's gonna let me have it!

Inherently this "launch gear" concept should last way longer, unless Toyota screwed it up with its implementation.
The thing is, for launch, the engine torque is multiplied by the torque converter (except small vehicles using just a centrifugal clutch), so very high loading for a friction system with the classic CVT. Here this extra torque is to be handled just by the launch gear, being a meshed gear it is not that difficult to handle the torque. The CVT stage then engages only when the torque converter is already bypassed (or at least operates in a low multiplication factor mode), so it is only the bare engine torque (without any multiplication) the CVT stage has to handle.
It is nothing small: Multiplication factors use to be 2..2.5, so it is quite a big difference if the CVT belt system gets just half of the load, even when made a bit smaller, it still means lower material loading without mass and losses penalty...

Inherently this "launch gear" concept should last way longer, unless Toyota screwed it up with its implementation.
The thing is, for launch, the engine torque is multiplied by the torque converter (except small vehicles using just a centrifugal clutch), so very high loading for a friction system with the classic CVT. Here this extra torque is to be handled just by the launch gear, being a meshed gear it is not that difficult to handle the torque. The CVT stage then engages only when the torque converter is already bypassed (or at least operates in a low multiplication factor mode), so it is only the bare engine torque (without any multiplication) the CVT stage has to handle.
It is nothing small: Multiplication factors use to be 2..2.5, so it is quite a big difference if the CVT belt system gets just half of the load, even when made a bit smaller, it still means lower material loading without mass and losses penalty...

I've been around all generations of Nissan's VQ motor, and have owned, rented, driven nearly every version of them. I have owned VQ30, VQ35 and currently own a VQ37. I have driven the 4AT, 5AT, 7AT, MT and CVT versions of these drivetrains.
Uniquely, the VQ motor, like a Chevy "small block" has a certain character, my modern VQ37 feels a lot like my 1997 VQ30, in character and sound.
All versions of VQ, with either a traditional auto or a standard trans, shared this certain character.
However, the VQ's with a CVT, sucked. The first VQ35 CVT I drove was a rental Altima 3.5.
Having such a long history with a certain engine type made it very clear to me that CVT is not for me.
Even the Toyota 2-stage CVT in my wife's car, albeit "decent" still....eck... nevermind, don't want to think about it!

I don't have a car as of yet but I am saving up, I have tried to not waste it on lights . I am looking at a 1988 Toyota AE82 Corolla, 4A-LC Carby, 5 Speed. I will settle with any Australian or Japanese 80 - pre 2000s or just a ute for work like an old Hilux, Ford Courier, Holden Rodeo, Mazda Bravo.

I’m getting the urge to save up for a second car as my “weekend car.” I’d want something cheap but reliable and fun to drive. My top two choices are a pre 2004 Honda S2000 or a second generation (1998-2004) Mazda Miata.

The pre 2004 S2000’s don’t have a rev limiter and offer a more intense driving experience. The Miatas are extremely popular cars and show up at my driving club and local car shows.