Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!

Honda Odyssey vs. Toyota Sienna

1…7475777980…107

Comments

  • bobber1bobber1 Member Posts: 217
    Good points. If your not planning on having adults ride in the stow-n-go seats, comfort isn't a high priority.

    I've thought the Dodges offer a lot of value and you proved that point with your post.

    I really wanted the stability control feature Honda had as well as the many other safety features. The roll up sun shades and great seats in back were also a plus. We got the power side doors, but no power tail gate. We ended up paying $4,000 more then you and we think it's worth the extra money, but hey I think you did well too. :)
  • pernaperna Member Posts: 521
    Having not seen one on the roads yet, I didn't realize they were in dealers now, or I would have said "last generation seats were lacking" in the comfort department. Sorry for the misinformed post!

    Actually, we bought an '07 which is the "last of the breed" of that generation of van. They changed the material of the SnG seats after the initial model year (or maybe mid-year on the '06s..?), so as far as I know only the '05 vans had the paper-thin padded chairs.
  • pernaperna Member Posts: 521
    Ah, ok, I had *thought* that maybe SAC stood for stability something-or-other, but didn't want to look like an idiot. :P

    I think stability control would be one of those "nice to have, but not critical" things. I think it would be more useful in a vehicle more prone to tipping over like an SUV. But, not having had a car with it, I can't really say how useful it would be.

    Before I had ABS, I thought it was for people who didn't know how to brake. Now, I can see where it keeps the brakes from locking up, so IS nice to have in emergency situations. The thing that amazes me about ABS more than anything is how it allows you to brake even on icy roads. In Michigan, I've avoided getting rear ended (and sliding into intersections myself!) thanks to ABS.

    Traction control can be neat "sometimes", but I think it is more useful in a RWD vehicle. Having only owned FWD cars, several of which HAVE had traction control, I never used it.

    So, the wife's van has 2/3. Like a lot of people who need corrective vision she is a poor judge of distance, so the ABS for her is invaluable. Traction control, eh.

    I have to say I'm more than impressed that nobody has called our Chrysler "junk" yet, given that this is a Japanese van forum. We minivan owners must be a mellow lot. :shades:

    That said, the one thing that does concern me about buying a Chrysler product is the long-term mechanical quality of the thing. PARTICULARLY the transmission. Ironically, though, when I was researching vans the thing that came up again and again about the Odyssey was its flaky transmission. Now, Honda has been making them long enough where they've hopefully fixed it, but then again that's what I tell myself about our T&C. :)

    At the end of the day, I had to put my aversion to Chrysler products aside and suck it up. I have no doubt the interior will disintegrate LONG before an equivalent Japanese van, if my Maxima is any indication. That car just doesn't seem to age.

    The one negative thing I have to say is I don't get Edmunds' love of the Kia van. Honestly when I sat in the Sedona I felt like the Town and Country was a luxury sedan by comparison. The Sedona's interior reminded me of my wife's 1998 Chevy Cavalier; it was just really, really nasty and cheap. The Koreans, for whatever reason, love to just plow as much chrome and fake wood into their cars as possible. The problem with doing this is it has the opposite effect of what they intended; it comes off like a Lexus as imagined by a 3 year old.

    That said, I actually like some of the newer Korean cars like the new Sonata. While I can't *personally* see myself owning a Korean car in my lifetime, I wouldn't be surprised if my kids do. I went against my old man when he said never to buy a Chrysler because they're all garbage, so I would imagine my children will do the same thing. :P
  • bobber1bobber1 Member Posts: 217
    I checked out the Kia when I was looking for vans and had a similar experience. I wasn't overly impressed with it. However it does offer about every feature in the book for a price significantly cheaper then pretty much every van out there.

    My wife also had a Hyundai Scoupe which was a pile of junk. However Korean quality scores seem to be getting better and that may be why Edmunds rate them the way they do. Remember Toyota didn't always have the stellar reputation it does now either.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Chrysler still uses a pushrod engine, but torque is decent and that's what you need in a van, so I don't consider the higher-revving, high HP engines that the competitors have a significant advantage.

    I had a neighbor that was a carpet distributor that went through Dodge vans like we go through toilet paper, and his trannies kept failing right around 70-80k miles. Maybe it was the weight.

    Funny thing was, he kept buying more of 'em, not exactly sure why. He just planned on one trans rebuild.

    But yes, I've seen plenty of Honda owners complain, so I would not list that as an advantage for those.

    And Toyota has had plenty of issues with new Camry transmissions. The older 3.3l Siennas were fine, but it gets the same 3.5l in the new Camry, so who knows.

    I'd put a big question mark there, and not give any of them a clear advantage. Perhaps that's why, as you stated, noone called the DCX vans junk. They aren't.

    -juice
  • pernaperna Member Posts: 521
    I think part of the problem with minivans in general is that they're engineered like cars, but are sometimes asked to perform tasks that you need a truck for.

    I remember driving my folks' Pontiac Montana halfway across the country with 6 people + luggage, and that was SCARY. You could SMELL the brakes whenever you came to anything less than a really gradual stop. It accelerated like a pig with no legs, and wallowed like one too. It's no surprise that minivans are renowned brake and transmission eaters.
    I can't imagine what the drive had been like if I had been towing anything.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    I'm not sure that was a competitive van even when they were new. Today's best vans are far better.

    GM made those narrow so they could also be sold in Europe, a big mistake IMO. The Uplander still shared a lot of that DNA and should be put out of its misery if it hasn't already.

    -juice
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Someone shared this pic with me today...
  • cmh707cmh707 Member Posts: 2
    I am new to these boards, but have been avidly reading posts regarding Odyssey vs Sienna vs Chrysler, for the last week, as we are in the research phase. We're finally looking to move to a minivan, from the very reliable, but ancient, Olds station wagon, that has back killing seats (we use all kinds of little padded supports, etc. to help with that), but a non-rough ride.

    I have already eliminated the Sedona/Entourage twins, based on test drives yesterday (our daughter remarked that she felt like she was in a boat, but maybe that's the way all minivans are, giving you that sort of swaying feeling???), and depreciation.

    I'm also wondering how the new '08 Chrysler might compare...?

    We've owned Hondas for 28 yrs., which other family members drive, and I have neck/back issues, so we don't want to spend megabucks on a vehicle that will give me a headache, literally, every time I drive it, due to a rough or bouncy ride. Already have a pickup truck that does that! And, you can't always tell these things on a little test drive. Our dealers aren't too keen on letting you take the vehicle home for a day, either.

    So, question to all you owners out there - which has the least bumpy ride, Odyssey or Sienna or Chrysler?
  • cccompsoncccompson Member Posts: 2,382
    The Odyssey rides notably firmer than the Sienna. When I'm alone, my Touring is almost too stiff for my taste. When fully loaded, it is just right.

    The Sienna is much softer, at least with only a driver aboard. Haven't been in one loaded up.

    Don't know about the current Chryslers.
  • bobber1bobber1 Member Posts: 217
    We bought the Odyssey because we thought it handled better than the Toyota and was more responsive. Because of that you tend to feel more of the bumps too. The Toyota has a softer ride.

    I heard one guy compare the Toyota van to a Cadillac as it has a relatively soft ride, while the Honda could be compared to a BMW with a more sport tuned ride.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    Yeah, that was me. Unfortunately, a Toyota driver got offended with the Cadillac/Lincoln reference. I didn't mean the whole vehicle resembled Lincoln/Caddy, just the ride characteristics (plush).
  • bobber1bobber1 Member Posts: 217
    Oh yeah I remember that exchange. That was silly. It was intended as a compliment. You were comparing apples to oranges and really wasn't saying one was better than the other, just different.
  • pernaperna Member Posts: 521
    The Odyssey rides notably firmer than the Sienna. When I'm alone, my Touring is almost too stiff for my taste. When fully loaded, it is just right.

    The Sienna is much softer, at least with only a driver aboard. Haven't been in one loaded up.

    Don't know about the current Chryslers.

    I would put our T&C in between the Toyota and Honda vans as far as ride goes. The Honda isn't bad, but it definately carries the bumps into the cabin, which the others don't. I drive a Maxima so I don't mind this, but I can see how this wouldn't be a favorable trait to a lot of minivan buyers.

    Actually, I think the Toyota -> Lincoln analogy works very well, although I'd be more inclined to say Toyota -> Buick. It's a very soft, wallowy ride. I personally like this kind of ride in a minivan, I'm more interested in comfort than cutting curves.

    IMO the Chrysler's ride and handling are more similar to the Toyota, but it's not quite as numb and isolated and therefore has a touch of the Honda.

    Better yet, cmh should go test drive all 3 and get back to us. :shades:
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    Your post sounds about right to me.

    The Odyssey, in my opinion, is the minivan for people who really don't want one, therefore they have made it as carlike as possible (sportier handling, lower seating position). The other two fully embrace their mini-van-ness with a soft ride for its passengers, and no fun whatsoever behind the wheel as a result. The Odyssey tries to compromise, the others do not. As a result, you end up with very different driving experiences.
  • pernaperna Member Posts: 521
    Just of the sake of being complete, the Nissan Quest is quite a bit like the Honda. It drives a lot like a giant Maxima, actually. :shades:

    Too bad the driver's seat only goes like 13 inches back from the brake pedal. It is seriously built for dwarves and hobbits.
  • benchbench Member Posts: 14
    I need a minivan to aid in lifting an oxygen generator. Our present vehicles are the Ford Five Hundred and Toyota Avalon. We already have an arm lift in the Avalon but have difficulty easily putting it in or taking it out of the trunk, especially on vacation with frequent moves. With a minivan we thought we could eliminate the 3rd row of seats to install the lift but not certain if the flooring would allow installation and space. If we left the seating as designed I believe we'd ruin the last row by installing and placing 50 lbs. of equipment on the collapsed seat. Any suggestions?
  • hondalovahondalova Member Posts: 189
    Maybe so but, unlike the Toyota and Honda, which have Average or Above-Average reliability ratings in CR, the Quest is a solid black dot (worst possible rating).

    I found that surprising (both the Quest and the Titan) - coming from a Japanese carmaker that is probably making the next Accord fighter in the new Altima and whose models otherwise have fairly good reliability (I used to own a Maxima - great car).

    -FS
  • crestonavecrestonave Member Posts: 209
    I don't think 50 lbs is a whole lot of weight. Several bags of groceries might add up to close to that.

    In any case what I would do would be to first lay down a sheet of plywood, cut to cover the rear seating area over the top of the folded down seats, and place the oxygen generator on top of the plywood. The plywood should help disperse the weight of the equipment.
  • caravan2caravan2 Member Posts: 198
    I don't know what to make of CR ratings. How could rate a 2007 models so soon? Specially, Sienna just came out.

    I probably would not put a lot of weight to their ratings. Historically, ODY and Sienna have been Nos. 1 & or 2&1... with new engine in Sienna, I suppose it also had a new transmission... who knows what problems it will have....
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    They forecast reliability unless a model is brand new.

    While the engine is new, they have data on that engine from other Toyotas.

    I think they only publish the details if they get a sample size of 1000 or greater, so we won't know those until next year's auto issue.

    -juice
  • cccompsoncccompson Member Posts: 2,382
    Suggest your best course here is to consult with a company that does vehicle modifications for lifts, etc. They should be able to offer some very practical ideas for how best to go about what you wish to accomplish.
  • benchbench Member Posts: 14
    :confuse: My husband and I have been researching minivans until I'm blue in the face, hence my icon is a correct expression. We took your advice, located Advanced Mobility and learned they'd be able to install a lift in a minivan without problems. Due to back problems a passenger power seat seems to lead us to the Sienna XLE or XLE Limited, so now it's a matter of making a decision and taking a loss on the Ford with only 1000 miles on it. I don't like the AWD feel of our Ford Five Hundred but is it wise to have a minivan with it?

    I appreciated the posting comparing the Odyssey to a BMW and the Sienna with a Cadillac, regardless of offence taken by some. With a bad back I'd rather have a soft ride than a hard one that drives the seatback into your spine. Any advice or suggestions would be appreciated.
  • flylowflyslowflylowflyslow Member Posts: 6
    :surprise: what region of the country do you live in? I live in a snow prone area and am a huge advocate of AWD. My experience in a Grand Caravan AWD leads me to believe it is the safest drive system for getting power/torque to the road with the least amount of drama. Never do I experience wheel spin or a pull to the steering from sand or slippage. Plus the weight and power distribution ensures better breaking and steering.
    What was it about the Five Hundred that you didn't like?
  • flylowflyslowflylowflyslow Member Posts: 6
    My understanding (layman) of most FWD transmission problems has to do with the shock to the drivetrain (and a small pin) when the wheel spins jerks and grabs on loose gravel sand etc. Funny thing is the AWD (Caravan) has an excellent reliability history possibly due to the distribution of power to 4 wheels..
  • benchbench Member Posts: 14
    We're at 275 ft. elevation in So.CA but family lives at 4500 ft. where they have winter snow. Also, it's our desire to travel again to the Sierras at 7-11,000 ft. elevation as well as seeing the Grand Canyon and other sights east of us. All these are also too high for my husband without access to a refillable portable oxygen tank which we haven't had the opportunity to try yet since we were told it couldn't be put in the Five Hundred on its side and putting it manually in the back seat means a lift and twist. My husband likes his Five Hundred, I like my Avalon but neither trunk is high enough for the oxygen generator to stand upright. Oxygen isn't necessary where we live but going to the mountains is a problem. Maybe we're just two stubborn people who refuse to give up to age?
  • mnrep2mnrep2 Member Posts: 200
    I'm a long time awd Dodge driver and have 7K miles on an awd 2006 sienna le. Love the Toyota, and LOVE AWD. You will like the vehicle. Gas mileage has been pretty poor for the first 6K miles, just rounding out now to about 21-22 on the highway and 18-20 in town. The Dodges I owned did a little better with the gas but did not ride as well nor were they as quiet... Good Luck and stay stubborn :shades:
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    BENCH SAID:....I appreciated the posting comparing the Odyssey to a BMW and the Sienna with a Cadillac, regardless of offence taken by some. With a bad back I'd rather have a soft ride than a hard one that drives the seatback into your spine. Any advice or suggestions would be appreciated....
    ------------------
    You are quite welcome. I do want to clarify that the Odyssey does not ride harshly. It is the firmest minivan on the market (with the best handling), but it also rides much softer than my Accord, which rides quite well as it is. I recently took a trip with my great aunt and grandmother from Birmingham to Oklahoma City to visit my parents. It is a 750 mile trip that my aunt's 2005 Odyssey made very comfortable. The seats fit me very well (that doesn't mean they will fit you well, it is best to try them out), and the ride is so much softer than my Accord it was creamy in comparison. A Sienna will ride softer than an Odyssey, with a loss of handling capability, but to be honest, it sounds like the Sienna is a better fit for you.

    Not trying to sound like a know-it-all here, just trying to help. Make sure you test drive them both to get an idea of which you prefer more.

    **By the way, halfway through the trip, we hit a massive hailstorm which turned the road into a nearly solid coating of hail/ice. The VSA (Vehicle Stability Assist) light was blinking indicating it was working to keep us pointed straight around I-40s curves (even though we had slowed drastically at this point), and the system performed flawlessly. I felt it cut the power at one point, apparently keeping me on my intended path. After this experience, and the much better brake-pedal modulation and feel, I know I'd feel more confident in an Odyssey than in many vehicles. I didn't find AWD necessary at all. If you have a lot of snow for months out of the year however, you might want to give AWD a try.
  • benchbench Member Posts: 14
    Oops! There I go being offensive again. :blush: Sorry Odyssey owners. Who knows, the way we're going we could still end up with Honda. If it would fit the bill I'd have the Pilot I lusted after it's first year out.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    No No, You weren't being offensive. I was just trying to put things in perspective. No harm at all in what you're posting! :)
  • benchbench Member Posts: 14
    :sick: My thin skin is giving me a sunburn! I think it's time to regroup. A friend suggested we go with an SUV instead of a minivan. I'm not as sure, regardless of my interest in the Pilot, as I think the sliding doors and the tailgate would make our travels much easier. We'd still have the lift for an oxygen generator and the smaller piece of equipment that accompanies it but it would be just the two of us most of the time. They're forgetting a woman's luggage! Need I say more? OR does a minivan need the more equally distributed weight of additional people to ride/drive well? Thanks for the input...it's still welcome.
  • taxesquiretaxesquire Member Posts: 681
    A minivan is a lot of car for 2 people. If you've got a lot of stuff, it makes for a wise choices, especially with all the configurations. For us, on long trips, we have the 60% back seat up, which is where my son's car seat is; the 40% rear is folded flat for better storage; the front driver's side captain's chair sits my daughter and we totally removed the other captain's chair, which also allows for easy storage.

    Maybe you want to look at Mazda's minivan which is a lot smaller, but still a minivan?

    I'm not a fan of the SUV, so I'd probably go with a cross-over or station wagon if not a minivan...
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    They're forgetting a woman's luggage! Need I say more? OR does a minivan need the more equally distributed weight of additional people to ride/drive well? Thanks for the input...it's still welcome.

    The Pilot is based on the Odyssey minivan, so their suspensions will likely handle similarly. My aunt is single, and has driven minivans (odysseys) since 2000. We had a 2000 model ourselves, and rarely had 3 people or more in it. It handled and rode just as well as when it had more people in it.

    Trust me, I recently traveled with my grandmother and my great aunt in her Odyssey. Having the power doors and low load height of the minivan's cargo area made traveling much easier than being in an SUV.
  • practicalpractical Member Posts: 53
    When coming to AWD, Sienna is the only one, we all know.

    But, how bad, I mean $$$ for replacing RFT. They are the standard on ALL AWD.

    Sales not sure if ok to replace them w/o the rim.

    '06 AWD on TireRack.com don't show RFT. What's the point?
  • mnrep2mnrep2 Member Posts: 200
    TireRack does indeed show the Bridgestone B 380 runflats for the 06 Sienna AWD. They will sell them to you for $155.00 a tire! I will probably opt for just the mini spare, and conventional tires when the Run Flats wear out / warranty doesn't cover their replacement...
  • loncrayloncray Member Posts: 301
    Can you put conventional tires on the Sienna RFT rims? The rims on the Ody Touring RFT's are an odd size - if you go to conventional tires you need to replace the rims as well. And $155 a tire is not bad from my point of view - I just bought new tires for my Ram 4x4 at $191 apiece from TireRack and they're the OEM Michelins - not even bigger than normal tires.
  • crestonavecrestonave Member Posts: 209
    Will changing either the tires and/or the rims cause issues with the TPS?
  • mnrep2mnrep2 Member Posts: 200
    The Sienna Runflat tires and OEM rims will allow you to go to a conventional tire on the OEM rim.

    The Bridgestone tires have a very stiff sidewall, do not offer great traction and they will probably wear very quickly from the looks of their UTOQ numnber. The local tires plus in MN rotates the tires free with their semi synthetic oil change for $15.00 so I will rotate every 5K ;) and decide what to do at the time they are worn...
  • jm38jm38 Member Posts: 27
    Just picked up my new Limited yesterday. It replaced my 2004 Limited. I got the Limited Package #1 and noticed on the window sticker this package includes one pair of wireless headphones. But also on the list is one pair of wireless headphones for $82. Why does Toyota give you another pair and charge you for them? Who needs 4 sets of headphones?
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Well, you've got 5 seats back there, right?

    Sounds to me like you're one short. :P

    If you only need 4 seats than a Yaris offers plenty of room. ;)
  • crestonavecrestonave Member Posts: 209
    In that case I'll head to my local Costco/Price Club when I need tires. They'll rotate and balance the tires for free for life and offer a free road hazard warranty.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    I used to go there, but they no longer mount tires if you don't buy them there (i.e. from TireRack). :mad:
  • bobw3bobw3 Member Posts: 2,989
    If you like the Ford 500 but need a higher trunk, then get the Ford Freestyle. Inside it's almost identical to the 500. It's really just the Ford 500 station wagon.
  • benchbench Member Posts: 14
    My husband & I are still researching the Sienna and Odyssey but leaning toward the Honda. We like Honda's back storage well which would be perfect for the lift and to keep the medical equipment or other luggage from shifting around. My husband is concerned about the postings re: acceleration problems on the Toyota.

    I had a backache yesterday before trying both the Honda and Toyota so there's still uncertainty about which passenger seat is more comfortable. I do wonder why Honda ignores a passenger's comfort and only offers a power adjustment to the driver.

    It would seem that our final decision will be based on the storage well and the passenger seat comfort. I just hope both features are in the same vehicle. Purely from a woman's point of view, or should I be specific and say THIS woman's, why do designers think that fake orange wood trim looks good with gray leather, i.e. Toyota. I prefer the look of Honda's brushed stainless dash.

    Regarding the Ford Five Hundred, we drove over 1,000 miles in it last week and it was more comfortable than I would have thought but we wouldn't want to trade for a crossover. I made a mistake when I had previously stated that the mileage was 1,000 miles total...it was actually 10,000 miles and now has almost 12,000 miles on it. We'd keep it if we could get the medical equipment upright in the trunk. At time of purchase my husband had no need for an oxygen generator.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    That's a matter of taste.

    I call plastic wood "plood", and some of those designs warm up an interior. I think it looks OK.

    Silver painted plastic simulates aluminum trim, which I call "pluminum". Often times that can look fake and cheesy. I don't recall the Ody's stuff in particular, but a lot of those tend to scratch and show marks more easily than plood does.

    It's all a matter of personal taste, I guess.
  • benchbench Member Posts: 14
    Help! :confuse: It hadn't occurred to me that "pluminum" would scratch more easily than "plood". I like your definitions for both.

    After all the research of the morning I'm ready to cut and run, keeping the Ford Five Hundred and Toyota Avalon, putting the generator on its side and gambling on its welfare. My husband doesn't agree so forward we go. Any suggestions are appreciated.
  • taxesquiretaxesquire Member Posts: 681
    I don't think you can go wrong with either vehicle, but I have a couple of comments from your prior post:

    We like Honda's back storage well...
    Toyota has that same well - did you notice a difference between the two?

    My husband is concerned about the postings re: acceleration problems on the Toyota.
    I haven't seen those, but we've had no problem with either our '04 XLE or our '06 XLE Limited (we traded in our '04 after a pick-up truck whose driver was admiring the new cadillacs on the roadside smushed our XLE up against a delivery truck :cry: ).

    The '04-'06s had good acceleration - the'07s have more torque and HP, so they should move well, too.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    CR just tested the new 3.5l Sienna. Theirs was 4 tenths quicker than the Odyssey to 60mph, and both got 19mpg.

    So the Ody, even with VCM, did no better, and it's not quite as quick. Not that 0.4s is a significant difference, especially in a van.
  • benchbench Member Posts: 14
    The storage space behind the third row of seats in the Honda is recessed 6-8 inches more than the surrounding floor but the floor on the Toyota behind the third row of seats is almost completely level. We're thinking that the "well" might keep the equipment/luggage confined. Regardless, our final decision will be based on which will handle installation of the lift and store the 62 lb. oxygen generator in an upright position; also which passenger seat is more comfortable for my aging frame, whether it is power or manual.

    Sorry about the demise of your '04. I know I would still prefer our old '83 Crown Victoria with velour bench seats and the trunk that would probably have made this search unnecessary. It was easier for me to parallel park and driving it was a dream. I know "time marches on" but I hated to see that one deteriorate.

    Wish us success and thank you for the input.
  • rorrrorr Member Posts: 3,630
    "The storage space behind the third row of seats in the Honda is recessed 6-8 inches more than the surrounding floor but the floor on the Toyota behind the third row of seats is almost completely level."

    Okay, now I'm REALLY confused. We looked hard at both the Sienna and the Odyssey, particularly the storage behind the 3rd row in both vans. I DISTINCTLY remember that, just like the Odyssey, the Sienna had a deep well behind the 3rd row. The only time there is a 'level floor' is when the 3rd row is stowed in the storage well, but that is the same for both vans. The only real difference was the ease of stowing (and raising) the 3rd row seats in the well; and that was only a minor difference.

    Did they change the Sienna for '07?
Sign In or Register to comment.

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles