[lhwalker22]

Looking to purchase my first Astro van, and have located one fairly close. It is an AWD with ~130,000mi.
My plan is to lift it with larger tires. It will be an occasional family mover, not an exploration vehicle. I understand AWD is not needed for my application.
I have heard the AWD vans have more issues - this makes sense as there are more components.
If this is true, are the issues usually big deals or small things? This specific van is a ‘99 model. I like the idea of having AWD because it opens up options if I ever do get adventurous. Small chance, but we also have the occasional brutal ice storm in my area. Again, small chance. Just sharing ideas that I like the sound of an AWD, but would like to hear if this is hundreds more per year to maintain, or usually just smaller items.

 

[augidog]

I have a 95 AWD with 106K. I bought it with 101K, and even though everything looked and operated fine, I immediately went for rear & front differential inspection/refill (no signs of any problems) and transfer case drain and refill (also no signs of metal or burning.) With that done, I just stopped worrying about it. From what I know, there aren't any aftermarket options for the transfer case, so that's kinda important.

Yes, you have an extra driveshaft, CV-axles, and different front bearings. Aftermarket seems to have a pretty good handle on those parts. I believe there are differences between my Gen1 and your Gen 2 transfer case and tranny, but someone with more experience will have to explain.

130K is relatively nothing for a well-cared-for Astro. Pics would be helpful in getting informed opinions here.

Now for my opinion as an OE kind of guy. If you're looking for a daily driver, skip the taller tires, the clearance with stock config is already pretty impressive, and your drivetrain will surely last longer as designed.

 

[Rod's Trucks]

IMHO,
Yes, the AWD does have more overall maintenence expenses; but I think there may be more variabilty with the actual vehicle you wind up with, as a result of overall maintenance, or lack thereof.
Front wheel drive components, transfer case and suspension on the AWD vans are a bit more complicsted and a bit more expensive, so previous maintenance can play a big role in determining the likely added expenses for the first couple of years.
Fuel economy also suffers a bit with the AWD mods, but I do not think it should be a big factor unless the van will be a daily driver and expecting to put a lot of miles on it.
This is just one opinion and YMM !
Rod J
Issaquah, WA

 

[Mmusicman]

I have heard the AWD vans have more issues - this makes sense as there are more components.

Yes... this is true. They often DO have more issues.
AWD "can" be expensive to repair, but the systems don't always need repair.
Many have had good luck with them.. including myself.

But as mentioned, you have double the parts

• Front differential
• Front drive-shaft
• Front cv-axles
• AWD transfer-case
• Pre-loaded clutch packs
• Encoder motor (common failure)
• Controllers
• Specialty Autotrac II fluid (common failure)
• Sensors, wiring, connectors, etc, etc

This list applies to the electronic version 99-up

All these things have the potential for failure, and sometimes can get expensive, depending on who is doing the work. Personally, I have since converted to manual 4x4 eliminating some of this.

None the less, I say if you don't "need" it then maybe best to avoid it.
But if you can get a nice enough deal (on a clean van), then go for it anyway.
I guess it really just depends.

Around here the AWD is considered the ultimate van.
They do get slightly less fuel economy, but only by very little.
I've also owned plenty of RWD vans, and never missed having AWD at the time.

But if you mostly travel the highways with the family, then AWD really won't matter.
If you drive in snow.. then that is where the AWD really shines best.

Good luck

 

[lhwalker22]

Thank you for the replies. The guy just sold the van out from under me. Bummer. Guess it was not meant to be.

With these replies, maybe I will stop avoiding the RWD. I just want to lift the van and run 31-32” tires, and it is hard to find the 3.73 rear diff.

Does anyone run a lesser gear differential with larger tires in a RWD? Is there sufficient torque and cruising characteristics? What about in hills?

 

[Huckleberry]

Thank you for the replies. The guy just sold the van out from under me. Bummer. Guess it was not meant to be.

With these replies, maybe I will stop avoiding the RWD. I just want to lift the van and run 31-32” tires, and it is hard to find the 3.73 rear diff.

Does anyone run a lesser gear differential with larger tires in a RWD? Is there sufficient torque and cruising characteristics? What about in hills?

Concerning Astros, I've owned four and RWD is all I would buy.
For me an Astro is only desirable because it gets better mileage than a G-Series van.
If I'm gonna sacrifice mileage and have more things that can go wrong, I ain't doing it with an Astro.
I'd recommend a Tahoe or a Suburban.

 

[Mmusicman]

Does anyone run a lesser gear differential with larger tires in a RWD? Is there sufficient torque and cruising characteristics? What about in hills?

AWD or RWD doesn't make any difference about gearing.. same issues applies to either.

Yes my 2000 runs 31" tires with stock GU6 3.42 gear... and it's an under-powered DOG!
Not only hurting power, but hurts fuel economy too.
With headwind, A/C, and light towing (or slightest incline).. I often can't maintain top highway speeds in 4th OD. Sometimes it's really an issue, other times not. With over-sized tires on a lifted AWD van, my fuel economy can range from 13mpg-17mpg highway.. depending on wind direction.

32" tires don't really fit well at all..
I had 31 with a lot of lift and I still didn't like it..
I dropped to 30" tires (just down 1 inch) and it was a BIG improvement both power and fuel economy.
30" was/is ideal for me.

Yes the GT4 3.73 is the desirable gear (G80 for posi-traction).
But don't let that be the deciding factor for finding a van.
If body and paint is clean and straight, little rust, interior nice, runs good with good trans.. then you've found your van. If it's high mileage (as many are by now).. you need to consider it may need engine and trans some time in near future. Depending on who would do the work, and what you can get the van for, is also a big deciding factor.

Regardless.. vans are the BEST!
Happy hunting.. have fun.. good luck

 

[snobird60]

I have owned EIGHT AWD Astro/Safari vans and ONE 2WD, ranging from 1996 to 2005. I shared my experiences here and posted my opinions on
" pre_purchase inspection"
AND
"What mods to do for overlanding".

AWD on the Astro/ Safari vans is a very worthwhile feature ...
especially if you have an outdoors oriented lifestyle, enjoy camping, or OVERLANDING.

I find the gas mileage difference between 2WD and AWD to be unimportant, and the added versatility of AWD to be very important to my personal life style. YES, I actually do genuine overlanding in these rigs.
I am a SNOBIRD, and spend Winters in Mexico or Arizona, Summers in Canada, with bi-annual cross continent trips, and exploring rough country at both ends.

The initial purchase price difference between AWD and 2WD is often neglible, and given that any A/S van will be at least 17 years old, condition is more important than almost everything else. The most common and often most expensive AWD only repairs can include;

• front wheel bearings
• transfer case
• front axles/CV joints.

But honestly, most of the repairs I have done on my vans are common between the 2WD and the AWD.

One owner, well maintained, un-modified vans are getting rare, so if you find one, jump on it ASAP.
THE PRICES ARE ALWAYS GOING UP.

I just bought a clean 2001 AWD Astro last week. I may keep this one stock ... At least for a while.
(;-{)