In a Slowing U.S. Auto Market, Minivan Sales Are Falling 7 Times Faster Than the Overall Market

Timothy Cain
by Timothy Cain

The minivan as we know it is not dead. Credit for the minivan segment’s still-beating heart belongs in large part to the disappearance of most contenders – so few competitors remain that a handful of remaining minivan nameplates may well still sell in six figures in the United States in 2019.

Most automakers determined years ago that sticking their forks into this pie isn’t worth it; the pie was just too small. The absence of GM, Ford, Hyundai, and Volkswagen, along with the steady rise of the family-oriented crossover, caused the pie’s shrinkage to continue. Nissan and Mazda left, too, and the pie kept shrinking.

In fact, the rate at which the minivan pie is shrinking has picked up speed. Auto sales are slowing, to be fair, but U.S. minivan sales volume in 2019 is slowing nearly seven times faster. And no, for FCA and Toyota and Honda and Kia, the whole “bigger slice of a smaller pie” argument just isn’t holding water these days.

According to Automotive News, auto sales fell 2.4 percent in 2019’s first half. Minivan volume, however, was down 15.8 percent, a loss of nearly 7,000 sales per month. Each of America’s three leading pickup truck nameplates – F-Series, Ram, Silverado – now easily outsell the entire minivan segment. America’s top-selling utility vehicle, the Toyota RAV4, is closing in on the minivan sector’s overall tally, as well.

With only 218,635 sales in the first half of the year, minivans owned just 2.6 percent of the industry’s overall volume. It’s not an insignificant share of the market, but it’s down nearly half a percentage point over the span of just one year, nearly a full percentage point in half a decade, and down from 4.3 percent during the depths of the recession.

Perhaps it’s that final comparison, that Americans acquired more minivans in 2009 – when auto sales had slowed to a crawl, when there were roughly 40 percent fewer new vehicles sold than there are now, when 540,000 fewer vehicles were sold on a monthly basis than are being sold now – that most clarifies the degree to which minivans have fallen out of favor.

Put it this way: there were more Americans who wanted minivans when barely anyone could afford to buy a new car than there are now.

Granted, it’s not as though 2009 was a minivan heyday. Minivan volume had peaked nearly a decade earlier. 1.37 million minivans were sold in 2000, Automotive News says, and the segment’s market share nudged 8 percent.

2000 was not, however, the high-water mark for America’s remaining minivans. Honda Odyssey sales are roughly one-fifth lower now than they were in 2000, but they’re down around 44 percent compared with the Odyssey’s 2006 peak. Toyota Sienna sales likewise peaked in 2006 but have since been cut in half. The Kia Sedona wasn’t even around in 2000, when minivans were at their strongest, but sales this year appear to be off 2004’s best-ever Sedona pace by – you should be sitting down for this – 78 percent.

What about the Detroit stalwarts? Dodge was selling 24,000 minivans in 2000. That’s per month, and that’s actually down from what the Caravan/Grand Caravan was accomplishing in the four previous years. The Chrysler brand added another 16,000+. Again, that’s per month. The Dodge Grand Caravan and Chrysler Pacifica now produce 20,000 monthly sales between them, or about half the circa-2000 monthly average.

America’s minivan pie is now so small that, even when cut into five portions instead of 16 or more, all of 2019’s slices are slivers compared with the slabs of fluffy lemon meringue Grandma used to serve.

Minivans nevertheless continue to command high prices. Kelley Blue Book says July’s average minivan transaction price was $35,375. The Toyota Sienna and Dodge Grand Caravan have forged ahead without major redesigns in 8 and 11 years, respectively, which is the sort of product stagnation that lends itself to high profit margins. Honda, meanwhile, benefits from a minivan that shares an architecture and an assembly plant with multiple other Hondas.

Circumstances like these justify the minivan’s existence in the here and now. But what happens if sales fall as fast next year as they are this year?

Timothy Cain is a contributing analyst at The Truth About Cars and Driving.ca and the founder and former editor of GoodCarBadCar.net. Follow on Twitter @timcaincars and Instagram.

Timothy Cain
Timothy Cain

More by Timothy Cain

Comments
Join the conversation
3 of 99 comments
  • 3800FAN 3800FAN on Aug 20, 2019

    So with the market shrinking who bites the dust first? Sedona probably...fca is gonna kill the GC with a rebadged pacifica. Soon itll be just voyager/pacifica odyssey and sienna...and really theyre just different manufacturers take on a standard template that the market has evolved to. makes me wish for the variary of the 80s when it was chrysler vans vs astro vs aerostar vs toyota van. That was variaty.

  • APaGttH APaGttH on Aug 21, 2019

    Chrysler. Dead brand walking the green mile.

  • Bkojote Allright, actual person who knows trucks here, the article gets it a bit wrong.First off, the Maverick is not at all comparable to a Tacoma just because they're both Hybrids. Or lemme be blunt, the butch-est non-hybrid Maverick Tremor is suitable for 2/10 difficulty trails, a Trailhunter is for about 5/10 or maybe 6/10, just about the upper end of any stock vehicle you're buying from the factory. Aside from a Sasquatch Bronco or Rubicon Jeep Wrangler you're looking at something you're towing back if you want more capability (or perhaps something you /wish/ you were towing back.)Now, where the real world difference should play out is on the trail, where a lot of low speed crawling usually saps efficiency, especially when loaded to the gills. Real world MPG from a 4Runner is about 12-13mpg, So if this loaded-with-overlander-catalog Trailhunter is still pulling in the 20's - or even 18-19, that's a massive improvement.
  • Lou_BC "That’s expensive for a midsize pickup" All of the "offroad" midsize trucks fall in that 65k USD range. The ZR2 is probably the cheapest ( without Bison option).
  • Lou_BC There are a few in my town. They come out on sunny days. I'd rather spend $29k on a square body Chevy
  • Lou_BC I had a 2010 Ford F150 and 2010 Toyota Sienna. The F150 went through 3 sets of brakes and Sienna 2 sets. Similar mileage and 10 year span.4 sets tires on F150. Truck needed a set of rear shocks and front axle seals. The solenoid in the T-case was replaced under warranty. I replaced a "blend door motor" on heater. Sienna needed a water pump and heater blower both on warranty. One TSB then recall on spare tire cable. Has a limp mode due to an engine sensor failure. At 11 years old I had to replace clutch pack in rear diff F150. My ZR2 diesel at 55,000 km. Needs new tires. Duratrac's worn and chewed up. Needed front end alignment (1st time ever on any truck I've owned).Rear brakes worn out. Left pads were to metal. Chevy rear brakes don't like offroad. Weird "inside out" dents in a few spots rear fenders. Typically GM can't really build an offroad truck issue. They won't warranty. Has fender-well liners. Tore off one rear shock protector. Was cheaper to order from GM warehouse through parts supplier than through Chevy dealer. Lots of squeaks and rattles. Infotainment has crashed a few times. Seat heater modual was on recall. One of those post sale retrofit.Local dealer is horrific. If my son can't service or repair it, I'll drive 120 km to the next town. 1st and last Chevy. Love the drivetrain and suspension. Fit and finish mediocre. Dealer sucks.
  • MaintenanceCosts You expect everything on Amazon and eBay to be fake, but it's a shame to see fake stuff on Summit Racing. Glad they pulled it.
Next