Model Year | 2006 | 2015 | |
Model | Chrysler Town & Country | ||
Engine | |||
Transmission | |||
Drivetrain | |||
Body | |||
Difference | |||
Total Legroom | 0 in (over 1 rows) | 0 in (over 1 rows) | 0 in |
2006 Chrysler Town & Country Seat Room and Comfort: Pros | ||
Year | Body/Powertrain | Comment |
2007 | 4dr Minivan 180-horsepower 3.3L V6 4-speed automatic FWD |
Very good support. Just the right height. Tilt steering column adds to comfort. Armrest also provides added comfort. see full Chrysler Town & Country review |
2007 | 4dr Minivan 180-horsepower 3.3L V6 4-speed automatic FWD |
The 2nd and 3rd row seats are acceptable for even long trips. This is not the Stow-&-Go version where the seats seem to be thinner, less comfortable. see full Chrysler Town & Country review |
2007 | 4dr Minivan, ext. 200-horsepower 3.8L V6 4-speed automatic FWD |
see full Chrysler Town & Country review |
2006 | 4dr Minivan, ext. 207-horsepower 3.8L V6 4-speed automatic FWD |
Very comfy for long rides, adjustable. Ditto the middle and rear seats. Supportive but not overly firm. see full Chrysler Town & Country review |
2006 | 4dr Minivan, ext. 207-horsepower 3.8L V6 4-speed automatic FWD |
Stow & Go see full Chrysler Town & Country review |
2005 | 4dr Minivan, ext. 207-horsepower 3.8L V6 4-speed automatic FWD |
Really like the roominess of the center and rear seats as compared to other vehicles. Also really like the flexibilty and use of use of the Stow-And-Go seating. see full Chrysler Town & Country review |
2005 | 4dr Minivan, ext. 207-horsepower 3.8L V6 4-speed automatic FWD |
The seat and driving positions are very comfortable. I have driven the T&C more than 500 miles in one day and the same drive the following day. see full Chrysler Town & Country review |
2005 | 4dr Minivan, ext. 207-horsepower 3.8L V6 4-speed automatic FWD |
More legroom than previous Chrysler minivans see full Chrysler Town & Country review |
2006 Chrysler Town & Country Seat Room and Comfort: Cons | ||
Year | Body/Powertrain | Comment |
2007 | 4dr Minivan, ext. 200-horsepower 3.8L V6 4-speed automatic FWD |
the drivers seat in relation to the steering wheel is off too the left a bit see full Chrysler Town & Country review |
2007 | 4dr Minivan, ext. 200-horsepower 3.8L V6 4-speed automatic FWD |
inadequate thigh support, difficulty adjusting power seat into good position, seat bottom too flat and "lumpy" with leather/heated seats see full Chrysler Town & Country review |
2015 Seat Room and Comfort: Pros | ||
Year | Comment | |
2016 | The CX-3's driving position is very good, more car-like even than the HR-V's. The view forward is open. The view rearward, not so much, as the racy styling yields rear windows that are quite a bit smaller than the front ones. To help compensate, the outside mirrors are large plus blind sport warning is standard on the Touring and Grand Touring. The CX-3's driver seat is very comfortable and provides good lateral support in turns. The cloth center pocket is cushy without being mushy. Unlike in the HR-V and some others, the headrest does not jut uncomfortably far forward. But the lumbar bulge is not adjustable. As is, it fit my back well, but many people will wish for more of a bulge. The HR-V's also non-adjustable lumbar bulge was too pronounced for my taste. The JUKE's seats are comfortable, but for effective side bolsters (and then some) you must step up to the NISMO. Worth noting for those of you who get your coffee to go: the cup holders are located beneath the armrest (optional on the Sport, standard on the others). If you want to use them, then you can't use the armrest. see full review |
2015 Seat Room and Comfort: Cons | ||
Year | Comment | |
For people who have no interest in a manual transmission (the great majority), the Mazda CX-3's largest shortcoming is a rear seat that is tight even by small car standards. Sitting behind my 5-9 self, my knees pressed lightly against the front seat backs. I wasn't uncomfortable, but felt a little closed-in. A shame, as rear headroom is relatively plentiful and the rear seat is otherwise very comfortable. The HR-V provides about four inches more rear legroom, a big difference. According to their specs, the JUKE has three inches less rear legroom than the Mazda. In reality, though, I had perhaps an inch more rear knee room, but less rear headroom. The Nissan's rear seat might be slightly more adult-friendly than the Mazda's, but neither is a good choice if people taller than me will be sitting in both rows. see full review |
None of our members have yet commented on the seat room and comfort of the 2015 .