When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Last week end we rented a 2001 Windstar XL for 3 days when we flew back east. We had 5 adults & 1 infant. The 93 AWD Aerostar XL ext of mine beats out the Winstar. All of our luggage would fit behind the rear seat in the Aerostar but not Windstar. Their seemed to be less passenger room. The Windstar had an ouside key lock only on the rear hatch & drivers door which made it difficult at times. The left rear passenger door did not seem to add anything but take up more space. The Aerostar sits up a little higher and the bottom front airdam does not hit the parking stops like the Windstar. The Windstar with the smaller engine did not have the performance like the Aero with 4.0. The only advantage seemd be a little more access to the engine compartment and less of a blind spot on the left behind the driver. Gas mileage was the same.The finish on my 93 is just as good as the Windstar after 8 years. I plan to keep my Aerostar at lot longer & would buy anothe AWD Aerostar if I find a 97 in mint shape better than mine. Thought you Aerostar people would be interested in this info.
thanks for the in-put. you can't beat the aerstar for ground clearance or inside space. my wife has a dodge, and i hate to drive it. my 91 aerostar has a ton more space and power. thats why i hope to keep it running .....so far 150 thou miles
Hold up now, the line for a mint '97 forms here. Kidding aside, you've pinpointed the reason why the Aerostar remains popular. The Aerostar was built on the Ranger truck platform while the Windstar uses the Taurus platform. The automotive press just kept heaping accolades and praise on the Voyager/Caravan due to its 'car-like' ride and cutesy interior gimmicks. Ford/Chevy eventually threw in the towel and joined them, despite having a better product to begin with. (Ford did, can't speak for the other product.)
I wouldn't say that Chevy threw in the towel. After all, they still make the Astro AWD and the GMC Safari with AWD. I had an 89 Astro and it was one of my favorite trucks so far. One thing that I liked better about the Chevy over the Ford is that the Astro is mounted on a frame as opposed to the unibody design of the Aerostar. In fact the next "new" car will probably be a Chevy Astro/GM Safari AWD. (If they're still made by then) I still have alot of miles left in my 95 Aerostar AWD. Having owned both I can say that Ford made a big mistake by cancelling the Aerostar. I hope that Chevy and GM dont make that same mistake. The front wheel drive car design just isn't as durable as a rear wheel drive design. Sure Chrysler has their AWD model but I remember it only being able to tow 2800 lbs. I do alot of towing (boat,motorcycles,4-wheelers,camping trailer) The Aerostar and Astro are made for this!!
[font size="1" color="#FF0000"]LAST EDITED ON 03-Nov-01 AT 12:28 PM (EST)[/font][p]If your going to buy a new Chevy Astro or GMC Safari you'd better do it fairly soon, as GM has announced that the 2002 model year is the last year they will be produced. Ditto for the full size Dodge Ram Van's.
Personnally I cannot believe that ANYONE would want an Astro over an Aerostar. Aside from the Astro still being made and maybe a bit more towing capacity(when you're up that high, get a full size anyway), it's an absolute pain to drive. There is NO place for your left foot! We had one at our company, I hated driving the damn thing....Aerostar any day!