Good morning! Since we did cars with really low mileage yesterday, I thought today we’d go the other way, and look at a couple of vehicles with a crap-ton of miles on them, well over 300,000 each. Even more astounding, they’re both one-owner vehicles.
I feel like I accomplished something important yesterday: I got you all to vote for a K car over a Cadillac. All it took was a busted TH440-T4 and a set of cheesy eBay LED headlights. I get the feeling you were right about the Caddy–someone’s grandson already got their hands on it, did a bunch of stupid things to it, and now is trying to make a quick buck off it. The Reliant is a lot more honest car.


Me, I actually like K cars, so this is an easy choice. Besides, I’ve already owned a FWD Cadillac, and as nice as it was to drive on the highway, it was an absolute nightmare to do any repairs on. I’ll never touch another transverse V8 unless it’s behind the seats of a Ferrari– which probably means I’ll never touch another transverse V8.
I’ve always admired people who can buy a new car, drive it for years and years, rack up a ton of miles, and take care of it. I set out to do it once, with a brand-new Mazda Protege, but after four years and 70,000 miles, circumstances changed, and I traded it in on something else. The original owners of these two made it quite a bit longer, and took good enough care of them that they both still run and drive fine. Let’s check them out.
2001 Toyota Tundra DX – $3,800

Engine/drivetrain: 3.4-liter dual overhead cam V6, four-speed automatic, RWD
Location: Burbank, CA
Odometer reading: 342,000 miles
Operational status: Runs and drives well
For decades, American automakers had one vehicle market all to themselves: full-size trucks. That all changed in the mid-1990s, when Toyota introduced the T100, which was basically a scaled-up version of its popular small truck. The T100 was successful, but hampered by the fact that it wasn’t quite as big as domestic offerings, it offered only a six-cylinder engine, and it was manufactured in Japan and therefore subject to the 25% “chicken tax” tariff on imported trucks. Toyota replaced the T100 in 1999 with the Tundra, which was larger, available with a V8 engine, and built in the US–which meant no tariff.

This Tundra doesn’t have the V8; it has the base engine, a 3.4 liter V6 that was also used in the contemporary 4Runner. It makes 190 horsepower, plenty for a work truck, and drives the rear wheels through a four-speed automatic transmission. It’s a good durable powertrain, as witnessed by this truck’s 342,000 miles. It runs and drives just fine, though it does leak some oil from the oil pan gasket.

It’s a single cab with a bench seat, like a good truck should be. All those miles are hard on interior parts, but apart from the driver’s end of the seat, this one actually looks pretty good. You’d have to sit in the seat to know how much padding is left in it, but it looks promising. It has air conditioning, and the seller says it works fine.

It’s honestly scruffy on the outside, with all the little dings and scrapes that a truck incurs naturally while earning its keep. It has a tonneau cover over the bed, which can either be a help or a hindrance, depending on the load you intend to haul. It’s easy enough to remove if you don’t need it. It has cheesy plastic hubcaps, but behind them are four new Yokohama tires, a nice bonus.
2015 Dodge Grand Caravan – $2,000

Engine/drivetrain: 3.6-liter dual overhead cam V6, six-speed automatic, FWD
Location: Niles, IL
Odometer reading: 370,000 miles
Operational status: Runs and drives, I think
Three hundred and forty thousand miles over the course of twenty-four years is impressive, but it’s just a natural result of a durable vehicle being used regularly for a long time. But here we have a vehicle that has racked up even more miles in less than half the time. Somebody spent a lot of time in the driver’s seat of this van over the past decade.

This is the Dodge Caravan in its final form, offered only in long-wheelbase size and with only one drivetrain: Chrysler’s 3.6-liter “Pentastar” V6 and a six-speed automatic transmission. This engine has a hit-or-miss reliability record, but it sounds like failures happen early on if they happen at all, and the ones that don’t fail run forever. 370,000 miles isn’t forever, but it is a hell of a life for an engine, and it sounds like this one isn’t done yet. It’s a little hard to ascertain its condition because the ad reads like a bad imitation of a William Carlos Williams poem, but they don’t say it doesn’t run, so I’m going to assume it does.

We only get this one photo of the inside, and it’s not much to go on. It looks worn, as you’d expect, but not abused. These vans have one design feature I always thought was cool: the gearshift lever comes out of the dash, to the right of the steering wheel, like the old A-series Dodge vans of the ’60s. It’s a little thing, but anything you can do to make a minivan more interesting helps.

These last few years of Caravans seem to have been available in any color you wanted as long as it was white. I’ve probably seen other colors, but if so, I sure don’t remember. It’s a little scruffy and banged-up here and there, but not too bad considering the mileage. It is an Illinois car, which means you should check underneath and make sure the road salt hasn’t done a number on it.
Both of these sellers got their money’s worth out of these vehicles, no doubt about that. But it also begs the question: why sell them now? Is it just a desire for a change, finally? Or is there some impending failure they’re avoiding by jumping ship before it happens? A careful inspection is always a good idea, but with cars with this many miles, it seems especially important. Providing they both check out, which one are you going for: the Toyota truck, or the Dodge van for about half the price?
I’ve had five Chrysler minivans, and only one has given me any drivetrain trouble beyond oil leaks. I’ve never had any transmission troubles, and I’ve used them for heavy hauling and towing far beyond their rated abilities.
A fourth generation 3.8 broke a valve spring, but only badly enough to idle poorly and get shitty gas mileage. It’s my understanding that the beehive-style springs could crack near the top and still work mostly OK, but I never took it apart to confirm. I would have fixed it, but it also needed a dashboard-out AC evaporator and heater core replacement, and it was too rusty to bother fixing those and other accumulated little issues. I sold it for scrap value to a needy friend who also never fixed it, and he daily drove it 20 miles or so a day for many months before selling it to the junkyard for what he paid.
Chrysler minivans have already given me over a million miles of reliable travel. It’s riskier, but I’d choose the Chrysler, even though I know the Toyota is the better value.
California instead of Illinois, multiple pictures instead of few, no information vs a leak at the oil pan, a repair even I can do, no questions it is The Toyota Yoda.
I honestly couldn’t care less about these two,but I like a good van,even a Dodge.
A Mopar with 370k miles on it should be about $370, not $2k.
I’d much rather take my chances with a Toyota with that mileage, even for some extra coin.
While I like the idea of a bench seat full sized bed truck, I think the minivan would be more useful, and considerably safer. And way cheaper.
Naturally it’s getting clobbered.
This was easy too…To”yoda” Tundra!
It’s still in decent shape for the miles and will keep going. That long bed is cool and useful. I could even stop by and show it to Jay Leno in Burbank, ha ha. There’s no way I was gonna pick a Dodge van w/ that high miles, and from IL. Much prefer the truck
I have more use for a van than a truck, so I’d go with that. I suspect that the Toyota has less issues and will ultimately be more durable, but it’s $1800 more. I also have more use for a people mover than any hauling or towing.
If the only thing wrong with the Toyota is the seat and a gasket (both of which should have readily available replacements) its probably going to be purchased by somebody well before the van.
I’ll take the Toyota. I’ve been down the Chrysler Town & Country / Dodge Caravan road before and I’d rather have my fingernails pulled out than go through that again. Honestly, I’d probably take a Huffy over the Caravan.
As an aside, because those Pep Boys wheel covers are horrendous and wheel covers in general should never be on a pickup, I really wish Toyota hadn’t moved away from the delightfully earnest silver painted steel wheels to the absolute homely garbage of wheel covers. This Tundra should be riding on a slightly scaled up version of the classic 80s Pickup Toyota silver painted steel wheel with the single black hub cap in the center, adorned ever so slightly with a little Toyota logo.
Give me the caravan. More impressive than the engine is the fact that it has an intact transmission!
For now. And it doesn’t really say that
Fair point!
Caravan for me. It’s cheaper and I have more use for a minivan than a single cab pickup.
I’ve probably seen that van at Walmart. Like that literal, exact van. Given how many of those van drivers drive around here (not as bad as Altima drivers, not as “good” as BMW drivers), I’d be leery of how hard those 300K miles were.
That Toyota was and likely will continue to be a reliable transport truck, and repairs and maintenance shouldn’t be too bad, as opposed to the Dodge, where everything is crammed into too-small of a space.
Hmmm, perhaps it’s not what I think it is but…..
is it possible that the radio display still has the factory plastic film on it after all these years???
I’ve found the plastic protective film still on many commercial leased vehicles, and being white with the mile accumulation perhaps ???? it’s so.
Toyota makes the best cars and trucks, and Chrysler minivans are known for having the worst transmission ever LOL
I’m surprised they made the T100 in Japan, given that they didn’t sell it there, and that Toyota made the Hilux in the US from 90-95, and the Tacoma after that (which was still almost identical to the Hilux of the time, other than the double cabs)
I voted for the van: superior utility, plus an essentially disposable price.
See user name for answer ^
A perfect truck for truck things. That van’s gonna wind up with an Xfinity installer in Morton Grove.
As a former owner of a >300,000 mile Tundra (with the 4.7L V8), which one of my sons now dailies, you don’t need a crystal ball to tell where my vote went. I didn’t even have to read the article, but I did just for good measure, after I voted.
Just watch out for any frame-rot and do regular maintenance and you’re good for another 300K.
Purely based on location, I’d expect to have little frame rot on that California Tundra. Can’t be shared with that salt-belt Caravan.
True enough – but you always gotta keep an eye out for Mr. Tin Worm, especially with those earlier Tundras.
We had a four-door V8 Tundra 2WD of that generation and it was wonderful. Especially with about 500 pounds of cargo in the bed. It rode like a Buick with a little weight back there. I didn’t get anywhere that many miles on it before we parted ways. Well, my then wife and I parted ways and what happened to it after that, I don’t know. Somebody probably got a good deal.