Kia Sedona (2005 and Earlier)

jondot · November 2004

Well, I spent 4 or 5 hours researching the Tire Rack site and ended up selecting the Goodyear Assurance TripleTred. According to the specs comparison, this tire is the best of 41 in the Sedona size and the user reviews were predominately positive. My total price with tax, title and license :-) was $439 at Discount Tires and I will be getting a $50 rebate from Goodyear reducing total cost to $389. The price includes life time balance and rotation and road hazard warranty. That price compares with the TireRack price of $349 including the rebate but not including shipping and mounting costs so I probably saved a little. Also, I didn't have to wait and then deal with an unknown tire shop. The price also beat Wal-mart and Sam's Club but primarily because they could not offer the $50 rebate and they had to special order the tires too.

I can't say much about the tires performance yet-- just drove them home from the Discount Tire store, a distance of about 4 miles. I'll give a full report later.

Thanks again for everyone input.

John

navyair · November 2004

The Nokian WR's are all season but qualify as snowtires for extreme weather, winning the snowflake rating for a snow tire, so might make a good replacement tire for your next set. They are rated for 50K miles on all surfaces, not just snow/ice. Selling point to me was wet/slushy handling. The real dedicated snow tires Nokian makes with nobby treads, etc aren't listed for the Sedona, according to my tire guy, and wear out faster.

In actuality, I'd probably NOT buy a separate set, if my alloys hadn't been marked up a bit by salt when I lived in VA. It took me a couple of hours to polish the marks off them with metal polish and elbow grease. My commuter car (owned by my father in law previously) has alloys that spent time in the salt, and they aren't a pretty sight.

Easier to just get a second set of good tires and put them on steel during the winter. I'm told we get a fair amount of snow and salted roads here in the Twin Cities.

I have to go off and teach a class right now. Will write a bit more later about the speed rating and what I know. Like you, I'm just a consumer these days. Plenty of other folks who probably also have opinions on this, too. I'm not sure there is a 100% correct answer.

bluedevils · November 2004

Sounds like a really good price on what sounds like good tires. When I was shopping, the Assurance marketing blitz was just starting to hit the airwaves and I knew little about these tires.

navyair · November 2004

Blue Devils, et al,

It took me awhile to get back. This is a long post, so you may just want to skim the supporting stuff below, and look at the websites when you get a chance.

I'd recommend we take the discussion over to "Tires" if we want to go further with it, but I'm pretty well spent on the subject.

I'm not a tire fanatic...I think if I were, I'd go with nitrogen fill like some of the tire stores do. However, as evidenced below, speed rating is about 2 things, handling, and heat dissipation.

When you reduce speed rating, you lower the emergency handling of the vehicle, and the designed safety margin. Lots of external causes can nibble into that margin...underinflation, external heat (hot day), fast driving. Now, add a lower speed rated tire, and you may be setting yourself up for a tire failure (Ford Explorer, anyone?), a tire that rolls off the rim on an emergency maneuver (bead pops off), or something else bad.

I actually had this happen to my Porsche several years ago when I was a young and foolish aviator who drove too fast all the time. (As opposed to an old former aviator who drives too fast occasionally now, and hasn't taken the Porsche off blocks in years). I actually threw tread off all 4 tires on a cross country high speed run. That is when I learned about heat build up and tire speed.

As I understand it, tire load rating factor is pretty much a static item, as in how much weight is the tire designed to carry. The speed rating factor is the dynamic factor, how fast, under what conditions that load is carried.

Bottom line to me:

You are pretty much guarenteed that under virtually any condition you drive in (even with a little underinflation and potholes) if you have tires with at least the OEM specs, you will be OK for normal and emergency handling. Below that load rating and speed rating, you don't know exactly what will happen. You do know, however, that you have somewhat less capability in emergency handling heat build up, and speed with a T rated tire than an H rated tire, and less safety margin. (IE Always check the tire pressure before you load the van up, or head out on hot days...good advice in any event, but not always one my family adheres to)

My wife loads up the Sedona with kids, animals, and "stuff" and may not check the tires once a month. I try to check them weekly, but with the hours I work, sometimes I don't get around to it.

To me, the H rated tire is worth the slightly higher price. The clips below pretty much all say don't go below OEM speed rating...it isn't all about the speed.

From the tire rack: http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tiretech/general/speed.jsp
"Using a P195/60R15 87S tire size as our example, the 87S at the end of the size represents the tire's service description. A service description identifies the tire's load index and speed rating. Service Descriptions are required on all speed rated (except for Z-speed rated) tires manufactured since 1991.

The first two digits (87S) represent the tire's load index and are followed by a single letter (87S) identifying the tire's speed rating.

Load Index

P195/60R15 87S - The load index (87) is the tire size's assigned numerical value used to compare relative load carrying capabilities. In the case of our example the 87 identifies the tires ability to carry approximately 1,201 pounds.

The higher the tire's load index number, the greater its load carrying capacity.

89 = 1,279 pounds
88 = 1,235 pounds
87 = 1,201 pounds
86 = 1,168 pounds
85 = 1,135 pounds

A tire with a higher load index than that of the Original Equipment tire indicates an increase in load capacity. A tire with a load index equal to that of the Original Equipment tire indicates an equivalent load capacity. A tire with a lower load index than the Original Equipment tire indicates the tire does not equal the load capacity of the original.

Typically, the load indexes of the tires used on passenger cars and light trucks range from 70 to 110.

Load Index Pounds Kilograms
Load Index Pounds Kilograms
71 761 345 91 1356 615
72 783 355 92 1389 630
73 805 365 93 1433 650
74 827 375 94 1477 670
75 853 387 95 1521 690
76 882 400 96 1565 710
77 908 412 97 1609 730
78 937 425 98 1653 750
79 963 437 99 1709 775
80 992 450 100 1764 800
81 1019 462 101 1819 825
82 1047 475 102 1874 850
83 1074 487 103 1929 875
84 1102 500 104 1984 900
85 1135 515 105 2039 925
86 1168 530 106 2094 950
87 1201 545 107 2149 975
88 1235 560 108 2205 1000
89 1279 580 109 2271 1030
90 1323 600 110 2337 1060

Speed Rating

In Europe, where selected highways do not have speed limits and high speed driving is permitted, speed ratings were established to match the speed capability of tires with the top speed capability of the vehicles to which they are applied...Despite the tire manufacturer's ability to manufacturer tires capable of high speeds, none of them recommend the use of their products in excess of legal speed limits.

Speed ratings are based on laboratory tests where the tire is pressed against a large diameter metal drum to reflect its appropriate load, and run at ever increasing speeds (in 6.2 mph steps in 10 minute increments) until the tire's required speed has been met.

It is important to note that speed ratings only apply to tires that have not been damaged, altered, under-inflated or overloaded. Additionally, most tire manufacturers maintain that a tire that has been cut or punctured no longer retains the tire manufacturer's original speed rating, even after being repaired because the tire manufacturer can't control the quality of the repair.

...Beginning in 1991, the speed symbol denoting a fixed maximum speed capability of new tires must be shown only in the speed rating portion of the tire's service description, such as 225/50R16 89S. The most common tire speed rating symbols, maximum speeds and typical applications are shown below:

N 87 mph 140 km/h Temporary Spare Tires
P 93 mph 150 km/h
Q 99 mph 160 km/h Studless & Studdable Winter Tires
R 106 mph 170 km/h H.D. Light Truck Tires
S 112 mph 180 km/h Family Sedans & Vans
T 118 mph 190 km/h Family Sedans & Vans
U 124 mph 200 km/h
H 130 mph 210 km/h Sport Sedans & Coupes
V 149 mph 240 km/h Sport Sedans, Coupes & Sports Cars

...As vehicles have increased their top speeds into Autobahn-only ranges, the tire speed ratings have evolved to better identify the tires capability, allowing drivers to match the speed of their tires with the top speed of their vehicle.
While driving at the edge of a tire's ability in wet conditions is challenging, the car with the properly inflated tires provide handling that was predictable. Driving the car with the underinflated rear tires proved to be much more difficult to drive and forced the driver to slow down to retain control, producing lap times that were several seconds slower than the properl

navyair · November 2004

http://www.rowleys.com/faqs.htm#DownSRat

Can I downgrade the speed rating of a tire? Top

We do not recommend using a tire with a speed rating lower than that which the vehicle manufacturer recommends for the car. By downgrading the speed rating of the tires, you will reduce the vehicle's handling and control in emergency situations. The industry accepted exception to this rule is that you may downgrade one speed rating level when switching over to snow tires.

http://www.rma.org/tire_safety/tire_maintenance_and_safety/tire_s- afety_brochure/tire_care_and_safety.cfm

"Speed Ratings

Many of today's tires are marked, as part of the service description, with letters to indicate their speed rating, based on laboratory tests which relate to performance on the road. Tires may be marked with one of these speed symbols, M, N, P, Q, R, S, T, U, H, V, W and Y to identify the particular tire's speed rating. Additionally, the letter Z may appear in the size designation (see chart below).

When replacement of tires is required, consult the vehicle manual or tire placard for proper size and speed rating (if required).

If the vehicle manual placard specifies speed-rated tires, the replacement tires must have the same or higher speed rating to maintain vehicle speed capability.

If tires with different speed ratings are mounted on the same vehicle, the tire or tires with the lowest rating will limit the tire-related vehicle speed.

Tire speed ratings do not imply that vehicles can be safely driven at the maximum speed for which the tire is rated, particularly under adverse road and weather conditions, or if the vehicle has unusual characteristics. Never operate a vehicle in an unsafe or unlawful manner."

http://www.adtsea.iup.edu/adtsea/TheChronicle/winter_00/Tech%20Ta- lk,%20Techniques,%20Technology,%20and%20Training.htm

craigmri · November 2004

Navyair,

Very informative post! You basically said in much more elequent words what I feel and that is this......For whatever the reasoning, Kia determined they should put "H" rated tires on the Sedona. Did some engineer pull that speed rating out of his butt? I dont think so. They had a good reason for it. Installing a "T" rated tire will in most cases be fine but as you mentioned, the safety margin has been compromised. If Kia wanted an "H" rated tire on there, why try and out think their engineers??

Craig
'04 Sedona EX

bluedevils · November 2004

navyair, I didn't read your post. I copied it into MS Word and it's 3 pages - in small font! I thought I was the king of long Town Hall posts.

So you guys still think the vehicle's top speed and lack of speed governor - which results in a top speed (122mph) in excess of S and T speed ratings and thereby requiring at least an H speed rating - had nothing to do with Kia's decision to use H rated tires?

jondot · November 2004

navyair, that was an excellent and very informative post. Thanks for for taking the time and effort to dig up that encyclopedia of data. Nothing is simple any more.
The tires I bought are "T" speed rated not the "H" which came as original equipment. But no where in the Kia owner manual or in the placard at the driver's door is a required speed rating specified. One tire dealer who could have sold me H tires said there was no good reason for having H tires on the Sedona and the manufacturer of the van just got a good deal with a Korean tire maker and they happened to be "H" rated. If I remember right, both the TireRack and the Rowley links said something like " ..if the owner's manual or the tire placards specify a speed rating ...." THEN you should follow the recommendation and consider H as required.
I don't think a reputable tire dealer would allow inappropriate tires to leave his shop and I happened to have dealt with the Discount Tires store manager when I bought my Goodyears.

Anyway, I sure do like the way my Sedona handles with the new rubber. Even brand new it seems I was always correcting to keep going straight even on a staight and level road with the original Kumhos. Now, it stays straight until I want to change the direction. Another thing is even when the Kumhos were new, I had to concentrate to NOT spin the wheels when starting especially on a slight "up" incline or turning after a stop. So far so good noise wise and comfort wise so I am happy with my purchase.
Thanks again to all for your input.

John

navyair · November 2004

Good to hear they handle so well. Sounds like you got a decent deal.

I heard the Kuhomos handle differently than the Hankooks we got on the EX. Have been very impressed with the wear and handling in all weather of the Hankooks thus far (33k).

Good discussion, all. Appreciate the feedback. Have a great WE.

bluedevils · November 2004

I'm not sure how Kia split up the Kumho / Hankook tires on Sedona, but I don't think it was as simple as Sedona LX got Kumho and EX got Hankook. Our 2002 EX had the Hankooks, but our parents' 2003 EX had the Kumhos.

saabturboid · November 2004

bluedevils asked:

"Question for you: other factors being equal, does a tire with an "H" stamped on the side provide you with a wider safety margin than the same tire with an "S" stamped on the side? What exactly is different about a higher speed-rated tire? Are there certain characteristics of higher-speed rated tires that are inherent and not necessarily published or quantified?"

The answer to your questions are Yes, Yes and Yes. If you take an S (or T) rated and an H rated tire with all of the other specifications being equal, including load range, the H rated tire is safer. Why? Because in order to get a speed rating there is an industry standard test where a tire is rolled at its maximum weight range against a steel drum at a high temperature. All tires go through this test which is designed to simulate severe usage conditions and determine when a tire will fail. If a tire is rated S, that means it failed sooner (at a slower speed) than an H rated tire.

If you have noticed, almost all 215/70/15 tires (the Sedonas stock size) have the same load rating, approximately 1,600lbs. The load rating has a lot more to do with the volume of air available in the tire than the construction of the tire itself. This is why smaller tires generally have lower load ratings than larger tires, and most tires of the same size have the same load rating.

What the speed rating test really determines is how well any given tire handles heat. Heat is what causes tires to fail. Speed is one cause of excessive heat, which is why they call it a speed rating, however there are other causes of heat and subsequent failure. Low tire pressure, even at low speeds, will generate a lot of heat. For example: If your S rated tire has a small leak and you don't notice it, it might blow while driving down the road at 45mph due to excessive heat build up. An H rated tire might not under the same circumstances. This is the extra margin that an H rated tire will give you. Simply put, the construction of an H rated tire is more robust than that of an S rated tire.

You may have noticed that most other minivans come with S rated tires. Kia will never admit this, but in my opinion the Sedona was made overly heavy with excessive steel reinforcements in structural areas in order to get good marks on government crash tests, while other manufacturers such as Honda use better engineering to achieve the same results. Since the Sedona weighs about 1,000 lbs more than an Odyssey (which accounts for the lower fuel economy), I believe Kia found an S rated tire for the Sedona as marginal because the extra heft causes more heat, especially when you factor in that most people don't check their tire pressures regularly. In order to avoid a Ford Explorer situation they specified an H rated tire. I choose to heed that recommendation and only put an H rated tire on my Sedona. If you choose to run an S (or T) rated tire you will likely be fine as long as your air pressure is always fine.

I also give a nod to the Nokian WR. It can't be beat for winter traction, and it is the only winter oriented tire I know of for the Sedona that runs 50,000 miles, can be used year around, and is H rated.

- Chad

bluedevils · November 2004

I appreciate the comments from saabturboid and navyair. Multiple folks seem to be saying the speed rating has much to do with how well the tire handles heat. Question, then: what exactly does the Temperature rating of a tire mean? I guess I would think the 'speed rating' would have a little more to do with 'speed' than with 'resistance to heat' (granted, the 2 are related) since tires also all carry a separate Temperature rating too. All this talk about speed rating and resistance to heat seems to imply the Temperature rating is irrelevant.

It seems many tires, across different speed ratings, are rated B for temperature. There are plenty rated A, but these generally seem to be sportier sizes/types than 215/70/15 tires. Indeed, the OEM Hankook and Kumho tires carry the same temperature rating - B - as many of the S and T rated tires available in the 215/70/15 size.

I appreciate what folks are saying about the wider safety margin provided by higher speed-rated tires. In some ways, I wish I had replaced our OEM tires with H rated tires, just to have 'played it safe.' saabturboid has gotten into some specifics I was hoping to see someone get into. While I do concede that the H rated tires provide a greater safety margin, I feel - based on no particular book knowledge, just logic which may in fact be flawed - that a T-rated tire provides more than enough safety margin for all but the most severe (e.g. major underinflation, major vehicle overload, etc.) typical/real-world conditions. E.g. at 75mph, an H-rated (130mph) tire may provide extra safety margin against failure due to heat buildup, but a T-rated (118mph?) tire provides more than enough safety margin. I mean, if my tires are underinflated by, say, 3-4 psi, I just can't believe that a tire with a 118mph speed rating presents any significant danger. So even if the H rated tire provides double the safety margin, I feel like the T rated tire is plenty safe because it already has plenty of safety margin there. Maybe I'm being overly optimistic, but I have a hard time with it.

Surely, Kia figured Sedona's crash test ratings would benefit from added weight - although I think the difference between Sedona & Ody is more like 700, not 1000, pounds. I think this also was a cost issue - it would have cost Kia more money to engineer the vehicle to be lighter, and the fuel economy penalty was a tradeoff they decided to make. This extra weight may be a reason, possibly the only reason, why Kia specified an H rated tire, although I still think it's no coincidence that Sedona can do 122mph which is a faster top speed than a T rated tire would cover. I guess I should do a little comparison of other vehicles' top speeds and OEM tire speed ratings, to see if there's any merit to this theory.

If the extra heft was a factor in Kia going with H rated tires on Sedona, shouldn't this also apply to SUVs - many of which are heavier than Sedona? The OEM tires on my 4500-pound Isuzu Trooper, a vehicle within a linebacker of Sedona, are S rated. The OEM tires on the 2004 Chevy Suburban 1500 all are S rated, so says tirerack.

And what to make of most winter tires, whose Q speed ratings is specified at a measly 99mph? Does this mean I was taking my life into my hands when driving 75-80mph in my old Ford Contour with the Blizzaks on it, possibly underinflated by a few psi if I haven't checked them in a week or 2?

craigmri · November 2004

Blue,

I dont think anyone is suggesting your now driving an unsafe vehicle. I have no doubt that properly inflated, and running below 110 MPH on a regular basis :-) that you will most likely be as safe as those using H rated tires. In todays litigous society and in light of the Explorer/Firestone debackle, Kia is covering their butts to some degree and adding in a little extra margin probably to protect themselves from stupid owners who dont keep an eye on thier tire pressure.

I have no doubt everyone on this forum takes good care of their car but its easy to overlook that thousands of Sedona owners around the world will not. For instance let me imagine a hypothetical.....Sedona owner in Pheonix Arizona decides to drive to Tuscon in the summer(its like 110 degrees) and he's running one of his tires at 20 psi out of neglect. Out across the desert in some area's the speed limit is "Safe and prudent" so he blazes across at 100 MPH for an hour.

If you were the maker of the car and were concerned about being sued would you engineer in a little extra margin? I would.

Craig
'04 Sedona EX

bluedevils · November 2004

Sure, I can see running 10psi below recommended, at 100mph-- with T tires rated 118 and H rated 130, it would seem the additional safety margin from H tires is a USEFUL amount.

But something like running 5 psi too low @ 75mph with 70 deg air temp -- I don't think a T, or even S, tire is in any real danger.

The question in my mind still is, Why did Kia decide to put H rated tires on Sedona? Sure, Sedona is heavier than other minivans. But there are plenty of 4000+ pound minivans, and plenty of SUVs heavier than Sedona, out there. Why don't those vehicles come with H rated tires too? Is the H rating more necessary because Sedona has only 15" rubber while most other minivans are using 16" or in some cases 17", or is that irrelevant?

I still think the H rated tires has some basis in the vehicle's ungoverned top speed of 122mph.

navyair · November 2004

BD, Saabtuboid said it more eloquently than I did, thanks. (Also had my amplifying post removed and I got spanked for giving the Kia customer service name and e-mail address I got from this board previously).

Snow tires are somewhat of a different beast with the same problems, as you usually operate them in the cold, and don't drive as fast because of the snow/ice, which is why they say you can go one down on the speed rating. However, yes, if you were underinflated, had your car loaded down and drove fast on dry pavement, you could conceivably have a heat related blow out on the Blizzaks. My understanding is, though that they are excellent tires, and only problem is premature wear out from the soft compound.

As Saab mentioned, most folks don't drive their cars the way the book says they should. Example he used on the Explorer is what I mentioned. Most vans and cars are rated xxxx for cargo inside the vehicle, and yyyy for towing. The cargo includes the passengers. Most folks couldn't tell you what xxxx or yyyy is (3500 for towing for Sedona...something like 650-750# including passengers for xxxx, but I forget exactly)

Although I don't own an SUV, I frequently see one full of people, loaded to the gills with packages and presents, and luggage rack overflowing on top, and sometimes towing a trailer...all traveling somewhat north of 75mph...like 80-85 on the Intersate. People are ignorant of being overloaded by several hundred pounds of cargo, driving a "little" fast, low tires due to initial temperature and neglect, and are surprised when the tire lets go when they hit a pothole, or it sheds some tread.

I was going to look up the exact cargo capacity of the Sedona, but it appears that Kia has decided to start charging for access to its owners manual and service information on the web. Too good to last, I suppose. At least Craig got his wiring diagrams before they started charging!

bluedevils · November 2004

jcrider2, did you have the spark plugs replaced by the dealer or someone else? What was the cost?

My local dealer quoted me $249 for the spark plug change. I forgot to ask which plugs they use.

craigmri · November 2004

Navy,

Dissapointed to hear Kia is now charging a fee for this net based documentation. I suppose now that many early sold Kia's are off warranty or soon to be off warranty that Kia doesnt want to help any independents fix Kia's. Rather, they'd prefer to see these same cars be repaired at Kia dealers for non-warranty repairs. Cha-Ching for the dealerships.

I cant think of any other reason they would do this as I'm sure they're not going to make much money selling this technical information. Personally I found it a big "warm and fuzzy" having that great kia ownership benefit of factory technical support. As they say all good things come to an end.

Craig
'04 Sedona EX

kams1 · November 2004

2003 Sedona EX...14K miles...
A few days bask the emission control system warning light started showing on dashboard...

Any immediate tips from the board members is truly appreciated...

craigmri · November 2004

Kams,

Only guess I can think of and i hope you dont take offense to this but are you sure the gas cap is tight? My buddy who is the service manager at a Ford dealer claims he gets several of those a week.

Is the Van running with any other symptoms?

Craig
'04 Sedona EX

jcrider2 · November 2004

Bluedevils Yes the KIA dealer replaced the sparkplugs at 45000 miles when the engine check light stayed on. The cost was $300.00 dollars and included new intake manafold gaskets since that has to be removed to get to the rear plugs. The plugs are Bosch 60,000 mile plugs.I have found a couple of online sites for the fuel filter and it runs $35.00 to $40.00 dollars. Haven't checked with the dealer for a price on it or cost to have it installed. Its an in tank unit, located under a panel in the floor behind the drivers seat.

bluedevils · November 2004

Thanks.

bluedevils · November 2004

One dealer quoted me $249 for the spark plugs. Not sure if that includes new intake manifold gaskets. Same dealer quoted $106 for fuel filter.

Second dealer estimated $200 for spark plugs and $50-75 for fuel filter. The lady on phone was nice but she didn't feel like looking it up, so I did not get a firm price.

bluedevils · November 2004

I'm not surprised Kia is now charging for this stuff. I was quite surprised that it was free until recently. Could not understand why Kia was providing this info free to customers when I have never seen similar info provided by other auto manufacturers. I was too lazy to ever take advantage of any of the information, unfortunately.

casabiaf · November 2004

Hi Jend! We live in Palm Bay and are considering the purchase of a Kia Sedona. Where did you get yours? I am short and handicapped but I think I can get into the Sedona (I get into my husband's Toyota truck). Bob Dance just opened a Kia dealership in Merritt Island, do you have any other suggestions? Thanks for all the messages about the Sedona and your help with this.

navyair · November 2004

It made a lot of sense for them to provide it when you can't get a Chilton or Haines manual for the van. I hope they publish one soon. I just like having a shop manual on my vehicles. It helps with the stuff I can still do on the vans without special equipment.

BTW, just switched to my snow tires. Evidently the dealership cranked the wheels on when they rotated them, as I broke a new socket, and had to use a cheater bar to get them off.

robert10 · November 2004

Hi all....Just purchased a new 2004 Sedona Ex. We are expierencing some front end noise. Sort of sounds like a thumping/clunky sound. We brought it into our dealership and both front struts were replaced. The sound is still there most noticeable when travling at lower speeds. A slight bump in the road the sound appears. Very concerning being a new vehicle. I've read a few past discussions on this, where people have had the same problem. Has anyone out there been able to succesfully remedy this problem? Has anyone had their strut mounting brackets replaced to remedy the problem? Any comments would be appreciated.

sedonasorento · November 2004

Front struts and strut plates were replaced early on on my wife's 02 Sedona - largely eliminated the noise at that time. A new front end noise has developed over time (different than strut/strut plate noise). I suspect something like a sway bar bushing, but have not yet pursued it with the dealer. Any similar experiences?

jend · November 2004

Casabiaf...I haven't posted in a while and decided to check in! We live in Viera and actually purchased our Sedona in Merritt Island!!

We were very pleased with everything...I can't remember the salesman's name..but I can find out from my husband. And I am sure that we got a good deal (again..that's my husband's department). We got the EX sage/beige combo...moonroof...abs (a must)...don't know why it is offered without?? Have you seen the pics in the Kia brochure that show the van swerving with abs and swerving without abs??? Oh my gosh..who would say "um I think I'll take the van that does a 360 if I hit the brakes too hard!! But then again...I don't know much about that kind of stuff...so please don't bash me anyone...I am just having fun with it...the picture is just kinda funny to have in there.(when given a choice).

No leather here...too hot in FL as you know. Plus we have two little boys..I think the leather just gets too hot for those little guys.

We actually just had an overhead dvd player installed today!! It's hard to see from the second row (lcd screen)..so the boys have to sit in the 3rd row...which is good anyway because the speakers are back there and the little compartment to hold the remote.

I am also short...only 5'. I drove other vans..MPV? mazda..and toyota sienna and nissan quest (which I LOVED the look of...but HATED the ride and interior...BLAH!!!) And they were all much more money... The Sedona was by FAR the most smooth ride...I feel like I am driving in my favorite soft chair!! And the automatic seat adjuster is fabulous...you shouldn't have any trouble seeing..I don't!!

This is a looong post (sorry guys...it's girl talk!) We love our Kia, inside and out! Please feel free to ask me anything..I don't know a lot about the "mechanics" of the vehicle...there are many guys here who are extremely helpful when it comes to that...but I can help you with anything else!!

Happy Holidays and glad that Hurricane Season is finally over!!!!

jcrider2 · December 2004

Has anyone else checked their rear brake shoes for wear at about 48,000 to 50,000 miles? I looked at mine today and they are going to need replacing within 5,000 miles or so. I replace the front pads at 46,000 miles which might be normal on a front wheel drive van ,but I think the rear shoes should last a bit longer. My Chevie pickup has 76,000 mile on it and the rear shoes are only about half worn.
Bluedevils..... I have the factory service manual for my van but it lacks a lot of information on how to preform a lot of work on the van.I hope Hanes will come out with a manual one day.

craigmri · December 2004

JC,

As for the rear brakes, The fact that they need replacement at 50 to 55,000 miles probably is related to the weight of the van and size of the drum system. I know that the only change Kia made to the '05 model was an improved rear drum. Not sure if they up sized it or exactly what they did for '05.

Craig
'04 Sedona EX

bluedevils · December 2004

I haven't checked our Sedona's brakes personally, but at appx 43k our dealer inspected them and pronounced no work needed at this time. We are at about 45k miles now.

stever · December 2004

The Sedona gets an all-new platform for 2006. Edmunds takes an early look: link

Talk about the 2006 Kia Sedona here.

Steve, Host

ksex03 · December 2004

Hello all,
I have EX 03 and need to get the 30k maintenance work done at the dealer. Any input on what's involved in this maint. and anything that I should watch out for such as the dealer trying to sell me some service that I don't need.
Thanks in advance.

Love the van, since the purchase I had no problem with the van ( knock on wood...).

craigmri · December 2004

K,

I'd go for the following:

Oil Change
Air filter
Fuel filter
Coolant flush
P.C.V.
Inspect brakes
Tire rotation

Save the expensive spark plug service for the 60,000 mile service.

Craig
'04 Sedona EX

richiem · December 2004

I just took my Sedona in for the same thing on 12/06. Dealer called me to say that the van was ready. When I asked him what the problem was he said a loose motor mount and if the noise persisted they would have to order a replacement. When I picked it up it was still making the noise so I turned around an took it right back. I told them its not a motor mount and that they should check the struts or sway bar end links or maybe even the rack and pinion steering because its everytime you go over a little ripple or something in the pavement. Dealer called back yesterday and said he had his "master tech" drive it twice and didn't hear any noise. I'm going to the dealer today to take a drive in it with the tech. I'll let you know what I find out.

navyair · December 2004

The 30k service is outlined in the manual. Believe it is all fluids changed, including the tranny. Be careful with the fuel filter change. From previous posts, it is an in-tank unit, and costs a lot to change out. Believe someone said 45k was time to change it.

My Kia dealer service at 30k was a little over $500. Very expensive, but in the Twin Cities, most mechanics make $80/hr +...and I remember when I complained about Porsche mechanics making $50/hr as highway robbery!

60k one will be very expensive, as timing belt and plugs will have to be replaced.

craigmri · December 2004

Navy,

Do you know if the Hyundai built 3.5 litre in our Sedona's are "Interference" engines?

Craig
'04 Sedona EX

whippet · December 2004

I'm in the market for a minivan to replace our 01 Ford Escape which is proving to be a little too small with 2 kids & 2 dogs + the transmission on many 01/02 Escapes have failed, and now mine has as well. A rebuilt tranny will solve that problem for the moment (at a cost $$$), but if the design flaw is still there who's to say when it might happen again. We're considering the Sedona, Odyssey and Sienna. The Ody and Sienna are out of our price range new, so we'd be looking at used. The Sedona is very enticing with the price and warranty, and I would be ready to go for it, but I have heard about the changes in store for the 2006 model. I wanted to get others opinions on whether it would be getter to get one now (got a quote for an LX w/no option for 16999) or wait for the 06, but maybe at a higher price tag.

craigmri · December 2004

Whippet,

First let me say, Had you owned an '02 Sedona your transmission repair would be covered under warranty(assuming you dont have over 100,000 miles.

As for a used Sienna or Honda they sure are awesome products. Buying used however you always take a small gamble. The warranty you get used is little if anything.

As for a new Sedona, I have seen new LX's being offered here in Florida for $15,000 plus dealer fees. Of course if you have a vehicle trade they are likely to not give you such a good trade-in value since they are blowing out the new LX's.

As for the '06 model, you could always wait until they come out(probably august or sept). Your gonna have to bite the bullet on the new Escape tranny anyway so why not drive your new transmission for a little bit. When the '06 Sedona arrives you can evaluate it compared to the left over '05's. I have no doubt at that time they will be giving away the leftovers so you can decide then but in any event, The Sedona offers such tremendous value. When you see and feel how much you get for so little(factoring in good quality, long warranty and low price) you'll laugh all the way to the bank.

Craig
'04 Sedona EX

bluedevils · December 2004

The 2006 model is likely to offer a larger interior. You may want to drive the current 2004/2005 Sedonas now, and plan out whether it will be enough room for your needs.

Deals are great now, but as craigmri noted, the 2005 Sedona deals will likely be even better when the new 2006 Sedona starts to hit showrooms.

silkster · December 2004

I have a 2002 Sedona EX with 42,000 miles on it. . .
I've just purchased my third set of tires. . . and my 2nd alignment in 2 1/2 years. This has never happened with my cars before, so I don't think it's my driving or where I'm driving. I've talked to other owners who've also had problems with tire-wear.

Has anyone else had this problem? . . . What can be done about it?

bluedevils · December 2004

Unless you drive your van like it's a race car, always have your tires improperly inflated, and never rotate them, then something is wrong.

Our original equipment Hankook RA07 tires were replaced at 38,600 miles, although they could have lasted until 45k if I really wanted. We replaced those with Bridgestone Turanza LS-T tires and have logged about 6,500 miles on those so far.

Our Sedona has never needed an alignment. I know it is often recommended to do an alighment when buying new tires, but our Sedona tracks so straight I didn't think it was necessary. Why mess with a good thing?

kfloamy · December 2004

I was told by a Kia salesman that the 2006 Sedona would come with an increased price tag. He said that Kia is becoming the high end Hyundai. They will be releasing a Hyundai minivan in 2006 as well. What appears to be happening is that that van will replace the current Sedona in the market and the new Sedona will take a step up in size, features, and price.

saabturboid · December 2004

Unless you are driving on extremely bad roads or have a tendency to hit curbs, alignments should not be necessary as frequently as you've had them. Regarding tire wear; remember you are driving a 4,800# vehicle, which will wear out tires much faster than lighter vehicles such as cars, however the only way you should be on your third set is if you've been using tires with very low wear ratings. I also suspect you do a lot of city driving, which wears out tires a lot faster than highway driving.

The Hankook tires which come on some of the Sedona's have a wear rating of 440. This is very good and should allow the tire to last a very long time. I bet you didn't have the Hankooks but the Kumhos. I'm not sure what their wear rating is, but I bet it is a lot less as people on this list have mentioned the Kumhos don't last as long.

If length of service is a primary concern, make sure you buy tires with wear ratings of 400+. The reason I say 'primary concern', is softer tires with lower wear ratings may offer other benefits such as better handling (not usually a concern with a minivan) and better traction in wet conditions. Another way to make sure you get the most mileage out of your tires is to rotate them every 5,000 miles.

- Chad

bluedevils · December 2004

I read a magazine article a year or two back that said basically the same thing. Don't remember where I saw that article, but all of the folks I've seen discussing on Edmunds seem to think the opposite: Kia will be the value brand and Hyundai the higher-end brand. Personally, I'm sticking with the 'Kia = high-end of the 2 brands' theory. Overall, Kia has offerings in pricier segments where Hyundai has none-- Sorento in midsize/midprice SUV class and Sedona in minivan class.

craigmri · December 2004

I actually think they are gonna be more like Buick and Oldsmobile......they were much closer in grade than say.....Chevy and Cadillac.

Craig

'04 Sedona EX

xvrm · December 2004

My understanding is that both Hyundai & Kia will release new minivans (2006) based on next generation Sonata platform. Hyundai continues as the higher-content brand ... Kia is to be the 'sporty' brand. Smaller wheelbase Sedona is added to mix in 2007 ... so Kia has two, Hyundai one. We'll see how well THAT works. Maybe smaller van will be at 2005 price point.

Robt.

'04 Sedona LX

bluedevils · December 2004

What do you mean by 'Hyundai continues as the higher-content brand.' I wouldn't say that Hyundai currently is the higher-content brand at this point.

xvrm · December 2004

My apologies, Bluedevils. You're right ... Hyundai is NOT the higher-content brand of the two (Hyundai v. Kia) at this point. Mea culpa.

Robt.

'04 Sedona LX

bluedevils · December 2004

Well I wasn't trying to win the 'argument,' just trying to stir up more discussion. Hyundai is NOT the higher-content brand, but that has not stopped most folks in other parts of the automotive community from claiming that Kia is the budget brand to Hyundai - sorta like a Ford/Mercury relationship, or something like that.

Kia Sedona (2005 and Earlier)

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles