I'm really loving the Dodge Ram I bought a few months ago. I didn't have much of a budget, and found this '98 B2500 12-passenger on Craigslist for $1000. Has really high miles (217,000), but it runs like a dream aside from a sensor that I had to replace. It was owned by some company that distributes bottled water around the area. The guy selling it claims most of the miles on it are from driving back and forth to Indianapolis, Cincinnati, etc., AKA highway miles. He also showed me documentation of a new radiator, water pump, rotors and brake pads that were recently installed. I don't expect it to last too long, but for now I'm meticulously maintaining it and I'd drive it anywhere.

sleepkid wrote:Fantastic album cover right there.

217,000 isn't shit for '98. I don't love Dodge but any vehicle that is 17 years old is going to have a new radiator, water pump, etc.

enframed wrote:If you can find one in your price range, that's the one you want.That's a Town-Ace. Good vehicle. But there is a step up from it...If you lived in Japan, or Australia, or the UK you could get yourself a Hi-Ace. I don't know why the Hi-Ace has never been marketed in the US - or if it has what name it was marketed under. Remember when Top Gear killed a Hi-Lux?This is the Van version of that:They are badass, comfortably carry many people and gear, can be adapted for towing, and basically run forever. Even the used ones here still carry a new car price because they are such solid and useful cars. They are the reason that Japanese construction workers don't drive pick-up trucks. Why have your shit get all wet when you can keep it safe and dry in your badass van? I love my microvan. But if I ever step up, I want one of these.

Bumping this thread for advice. My band and another band are looking to buy a van together. I have no idea or experience in this. We've been debating between passenger vans and cargo vans (which we would put a bench seat in after we get it. Cargo vans would be more secure at the expense of comfort, passenger vans could be effective but it might be weird to park it in a city near a venue wear it might be vulnerable to smash and grabs and such. Any thoughts on this?

bishopdante wrote:What could be a nuttier german-platform engine-swap than an AMG engine in a sprinter?I always wished that Volkswagen and Porsche had gotten together and created a really bad-ass and well-powered Vanagon with a boxer-6 in the hind-end back in the 1980's.Volkswagen seriously underestimated the potential of their U.S. marketed rear-engined vans then. They manufactured them with poor engines and powertrains and not so great accommodations. So did Toyota with their original Van, but the Van was a better vehicle than the Vanagon.I wish both Volkswagen and Toyota would manufacture updated and innovated versions of these respective vehicles. The Previa was a great successor to the Toyota Van...it was very original, innovative, efficient and groundbreaking in almost every respect while still staying true to the Van, but then Toyota just gave up on the whole concept and gave into Siennas .Anyway...I digress. A properly tuned Porsche (or Subaru) motor in a Volkswagen Van would be the bomb.

Ben Abraham wrote:Bumping this thread for advice. My band and another band are looking to buy a van together. I have no idea or experience in this. We've been debating between passenger vans and cargo vans (which we would put a bench seat in after we get it. Cargo vans would be more secure at the expense of comfort, passenger vans could be effective but it might be weird to park it in a city near a venue wear it might be vulnerable to smash and grabs and such. Any thoughts on this?To clarify, a Sprinter van is not an option. We're budgeting around $4000 so probably an older American van is what we're looking for.

matthew wrote:bishopdante wrote:What could be a nuttier german-platform engine-swap than an AMG engine in a sprinter?I always wished that Volkswagen and Porsche had gotten together and created a really bad-ass and well-powered Vanagon with a boxer-6 in the hind-end back in the 1980's.Volkswagen seriously underestimated the potential of their U.S. marketed rear-engined vans then. They manufactured them with poor engines and powertrains and not so great accommodations. So did Toyota with their original Van, but the Van was a better vehicle than the Vanagon.I wish both Volkswagen and Toyota would manufacture updated and innovated versions of these respective vehicles. The Previa was a great successor to the Toyota Van...it was very original, innovative, efficient and groundbreaking in almost every respect while still staying true to the Van, but then Toyota just gave up on the whole concept and gave into Siennas .Anyway...I digress. A properly tuned Porsche (or Subaru) motor in a Volkswagen Van would be the bomb.VW really underestimated. People routinely pay $10K these days for a used water-cooled Vanagon in decent condition. Nearly every time I'm in SF with my van someone yells out the window offering to buy it. I was very lucky and got mine in 2006 for $1800. You're right. The 1986-1990 Vanagons are really fantastic vehicles, so much space and they handle really well for being so narrow and tall. They are the best looking van every produced, IMO. The accommodations are fine. The turning radius is insanely tight, 3-point turns are rarely necessary. I have a 1992 2.2L Subaru Legacy engine in my 1987 Weekender (bed and table only--no pop-top, no water hookups, no wood inside = less weight). This Subaru conversion is the only legal one in CA, but people use 6-cyl 3.3L Subaru SVX engines as well. There were people converting to diesel in Sacramento, and others using South African VW engines. Vanagons were made in South Africa into the late 90s using 5-cyl Audi engines, IIRC. The stock diesel Vanagons ( and Tri-Star) are really super dope, very powerful turbocharged engines in some of those.

enframed wrote:matthew wrote:bishopdante wrote:What could be a nuttier german-platform engine-swap than an AMG engine in a sprinter?I always wished that Volkswagen and Porsche had gotten together and created a really bad-ass and well-powered Vanagon with a boxer-6 in the hind-end back in the 1980's.Volkswagen seriously underestimated the potential of their U.S. marketed rear-engined vans then. They manufactured them with poor engines and powertrains and not so great accommodations. So did Toyota with their original Van, but the Van was a better vehicle than the Vanagon.I wish both Volkswagen and Toyota would manufacture updated and innovated versions of these respective vehicles. The Previa was a great successor to the Toyota Van...it was very original, innovative, efficient and groundbreaking in almost every respect while still staying true to the Van, but then Toyota just gave up on the whole concept and gave into Siennas .Anyway...I digress. A properly tuned Porsche (or Subaru) motor in a Volkswagen Van would be the bomb.VW really underestimated. People routinely pay $10K these days for a used water-cooled Vanagon in decent condition. Nearly every time I'm in SF with my van someone yells out the window offering to buy it. I was very lucky and got mine in 2006 for $1800. You're right. The 1986-1990 Vanagons are really fantastic vehicles, so much space and they handle really well for being so narrow and tall. They are the best looking van every produced, IMO. The accommodations are fine. The turning radius is insanely tight, 3-point turns are rarely necessary. I have a 1992 2.2L Subaru Legacy engine in my 1987 Weekender (bed and table only--no pop-top, no water hookups, no wood inside = less weight). This Subaru conversion is the only legal one in CA, but people use 6-cyl 3.3L Subaru SVX engines as well. There were people converting to diesel in Sacramento, and others using South African VW engines. Vanagons were made in South Africa into the late 90s using 5-cyl Audi engines, IIRC. The stock diesel Vanagons ( and Tri-Star) are really super dope, very powerful turbocharged engines in some of those.I miss my old Vanagon, was a cool van but it was an early aircooled one and was rusting slowly away, yours is a much better model. Swapped it for a 1968 vw mirocbus but would have definitely stuck with it if I'd had a later watercooled model that didn't rust so much.