Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see May lease deals!
Options
Toyota Sienna Maintenance and Repair (2004+)
This discussion has been closed.
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
I posed the question to both Toyota and my dealer as to why I should spend $1,000 on another set of these, when the first set didn't last more than 15K-- even with two scheduled rotations done at the dealership. Obviously, this is an unanswerable question. I proposed the solution of the free spare tire kit, and the regional rep approved it-- probably because it's cheaper for them than a new set of tires, which many others here have demanded.
I've bought six Toyotas over the last 15 years (two Camrys, two trucks, and two Siennas), but only three were purchased from this particular dealership-- so I doubt that made a difference, or that anyone even bothered to check. I just think Toyota has finally (and quietly) acknowledged there is a problem.
The improvement on the ride and road noise with the non-RFTs is quite understandable, looking at the design of the RFT.
My 2004 Sienna Ltd AWD has uneven wears (feathering) rather than premature wear since the uneven wear pattern is not uniform all around. On my other two old AWDs that are driven a lot harsher, never developed such uneven wears. Both 2000 T&C Ltd AWD and 1998 Subaru Outback AWD have about 96k miles on it. Just got a flat on the Subaru and the tire which has about 50k miles on it still has plenty use left with no uneven wear patterns. I frequently check the pressure and rotate tires every 5k miles. Ride on the T&C with load leveling rear suspension and upgraded tires is a lot smoother than the Sienna with RFTs too.
After reviewing my complaint, Toyota CS suggested me to file an arbitration. I do not expect much from their decision but am waiting to hear from the board.
I've been very pleased with my 17" run-flat Bridgestone Blizzaks. They're incredible in the snow, and I haven't experienced the pre-mature wear that I did with the OEM Dunlop RFT's-- which I consider to be strictly summer tires.
I did not think the first option was reasonable, because it would not resolve the problem (remember- "nature of the beast")
I have two problems with the second option. First, the safety issue of laying the donut spare inside the van without being attached to anything. Secondly, it just did not seem right that I should be paying anything to have a brand new vehicle ride without excessive vibration.
The third option? I was astonished that to "resolve" the problem, the dealer was going to make a rather large profit on my trade-in and another profit by selling me a new van. Besides being unethical, I would think that it is illegal!
I have called the Toyota customer service 800 number and they referred me back to the dealer. I called them again and they said that there is nothing they can do.
If you can get four new Michelins (not my favorite brand, though), and the donut spare kit for $400, you're doing well. The cost of the spare tire kit and related parts are at least that much, so you'd be getting the Michelins for free.
It seems to have disappeared the next day. Did I just get water in a spot that didn't like it? Thoughts are welcome. Guess I won't be doing undercarriage sprays again.
I have just over 1000 miles on the van and the last two tanks have averaged around 17-18 mpg with mostly city driving. Very pleased with the van overall. Nervous about some info about water getting into the van and also hearing about AC system backups that leak into the carpets. (Was told to get the system flushed regularly, though not sure what interval is appropriate).
"..the consumer will elect to use the dispute settlement mechanism established by the manufacturer or the state arbitration board. The consumer's election of either the manufacturer's mechanism or the state board will preclude his or her recourse to the method not selected."
If your state is similar and you are pursuing Toyota's National Center for Dispute Settlement program, then you may not be able to file a claim under your state's lemon law.
Good Luck!
Twice, when I had to stop quickly while in a turn, I heard and felt a loud crunch at least 1 full second long that sounded like metal on metal. Both times were at speeds less than 20 MPH. I can't make it happen on purpose, the two times appear to be random. And both times, the van stopped just fine - but with the funny noise.
Any thoughts? I want to wait to take it in until I can reproduce it at will.
As an engineer, not a lawyer, I don't know the details about the law but I went through the process with the same NCDS organization few years back when I claimed my Dodge. The NCDS decided to deny my appeal since the vehicle was not eligible for dispute under the PA Lemon Law. About the same time, I was getting an offer from Chrysler. There was few hundred dollar difference that prevented us to settle. After my lawyer contacted Chrysler and after few negotiations, my lawyer could guide us to make an agreement with Chrysler. My lawyer recovered his costs from Chrysler.
It appears that Toyota started using the same organization for their dispute settlement. Even if the organization supposed to be a neutral decision maker, their role is unclear. Hence, I don't expect much from their decision rather I consider it as a step toward further negotiation.
I may get the same answer saying that PA lemon law is not applicable for my vehicle since it has more than 12k miles on it and since we owned it for more than 12 months. If this is the case then, as before, I may seek a help from a lawyer who is familiar with Federal laws. It will be a slow process though.
Toyota and Goodyear are being sued for what claimants say are "defective" run-flat tires on the Sienna minivan. A New York law firm filed the suit on behalf of one Stanley Monk and other owners, the AP reports, who charge that the run-flat tires wear out after just 10,000 miles of use. The tires were made by Goodyear but sold under the Dunlop imprint on the Toyota minivan. Run-flat tires are designed with stiff sidewalls that provide on-road capability even when a tread puncture deflates the tire. Lawyers allege in the suit that the tire wear effectively means the tires must be replaced yearly at a cost of $1300 or more.
Step 1, lower the head restraint to lowest position, slide to the rear-most lock ..
Step 2 , fold down the seatback..
Step 3, pull the seat lock release lever (red) and swing up the seat.
Where is seat lock realease lever (red)? :mad: I just found 2 red button under the seat, I donot think I can reach it too far when I want to swing the seat.
Do I miss something?
Also, my Sienna runs high - toyota service says that ok - at almost 2! Everything I've pointed out to them, is always "ok" - either they don't "hear" or "see" it; or that's the way its supposed to be - "normal". And can't convince them otherwise - no matter how many times I bring the car back.
The lawsuit only applies to the run-flat tires. The run-flat tires were ONLY on the AWD versions of the van. If you have a FWD version, you don't have run-flat tires as original equipment. Therefore, the lawsuit would not apply to you.
"...and the left front tire "screeches" when the wheel is turned hard left and u take off."
It's not unusual for the inside tire to 'screech' if the wheel is turned all the way in one direction and more than a moderate amount of power is applied. I suppose one could blame the tires (not sticky enough/spin too easily), but the solution (more aggresive thread/rubber compound) would probably lead to other 'problems' (reduced tire life, decreased gas mileage, perhaps more tire noise in general driving conditions). It probably is more pronounced to the left side rather than the right side due to the suspension geometry (FWD vehicles usually have unequal length half-shafts from the transaxle; these unequal length half-shafts usually lead to more torque going to one side than other. This is usually exhibited as 'torque-steer').
'Pulling to the left' sounds like an alignment issue.
We have just replaced the Turanza tires (at 38K miles) with Yokohama Avids. Much better and more controlled ride than the Turanzas. Still get the occasional pull to the left but not as pronounced.
One other thing that is starting to occur is a sort of crunching sound like ball joints going bad when you start rolling forward slowly. We have about 40K miles on the van at this time. I will be taking it in soon (Nov. '05)for regular service and have them look at the ball joints to see if this is also what has historically caused the car to pull to the left.
For cooling mode the blower doesn't start until the A/C evaporator has been chilled enough to cool the incoming air. In heating mode the engine water jacket must reach 130F before the blower starts.
I see a problem here.
The TRZ is a quieter, softer tire. It does improve the ride since the sidewall is much more flexible (the 50 mi you get running a runflat flat is because of a super tough sidewall, which also makes the ride harsher). Haven't had them on long enough to check fuel economy. No, I didn't get the toyota spare. But I'm actually in a better position to fix a flat tire than before. Some might not know it, but to fix a runflat, like I had to do once for a screw, you have to find a tire shop with a runflat capable tire mounting machine. The normal tire mounting machines can't handle the extra stiff sidewall of the rf. So if you get a flat in an RF, you have to find the special shop to repair it. They're growing in number, but aren't saturated yet by any means. With my new TRZ's, any tire mounting machine can take it off, then plug patch it, then put it back on. Thus, my places to repair it are up ten fold. I also carry a compressor, a plug kit, a bottle of sealant, and a AAA plus card (100 mi free towing). The TRZ is also an 80K mi warrantied tire.
My Bridgstones did OK. They liked to wear on the shoulder. I found if I kept them firm at 40psi, they wore much more evenly. Made for a firmer ride though. I had 28K mi them. Could have easily gotten 30-35K, but I rotated religiously every 5K mi.
Just my 2 cents.
My question is. Is this normal? Is something wrong with my car? There was absolutely no difference between having the A/C and and off. All previous cars I have owned with A/C were able to clear the entire car in the same situation in less than a minute with the a/c engaged (and were about the same as the Sienna without the A/C.
BTW I have the manual A/C and the temp outside was about 34 degrees with a steady rain. Does the low outside temp mean that the A/C won't work - if so, then this is a dangerous situation.
In order for the A/C to dehumidify the incoming airflow and thereby be of help defogging the windshield it must chill the incoming airflow down to dewpoint. With the minimum operating temperature of the A/C compressor being slightly above freezing, and the OAT already so near freezing that just simply ain't going to happen.
As a matter of fact, beginning with an OAT consistently at or below ~47F, the outside air must be extraordinarily humid for the A/C to be of any use for dehumidification, windshield clearing, purposes at all.
Something I don't understand...
In the conditions you describe, which actually are pretty standard with a Toyota/Lexus vehicle due to the inherent flaws in their HVAC design, my RX300 will blow so much HOT air to the windshield it will quickly drive you out of the car.
Of course that's assuming the engine water jacket is already above 130F. Before activating defrost/defog/demist I always select MAX HEAT on my automatic climate control system, and that results in LOTS of really HOT airflow to the windshield.
I now have a microprocessor modification in my RX which automatically moves the mixing vane to max heat position when it detects that the outlet airflow control is moving toward the defrost/defog/demist position.
If your engine coolant was already HOT and you turned the heat level to max and you still did not get HOT airflow to the windshield then something is defective. If you got lots of airflow to the windshield but it was not heated airflow then the system's reheat mixing vane has failed. If you didn't get very much airflow at all to the windshield the problem is likely the defrost/defog/demist outlet airflow routing control.
In any case most of us with experience with these idiot Toyota/Lexus HVAC systems designed by NipponDenso, Denso US, have learned to live with them. One of the "secrets" is to lower the rear windows slightly at the very first indication of condensation on the windshield.
I understand physics, but every other car I have had could (and does) handle the situation fine. Just push in the little A/C button and presto - even below 47 degrees.
Why would the outside air have to be humid for the A/C to be effective (it was since it was raining)? It is the inside air that is being dehumidified. I would think dry outside air would be best.
Yes the car was very hot - there was plenty of hot air flowing to the windshield, but driving 60 mph into a 45 mph wind (gusting to 55) takes a lot of that heat out! After 20 minutes of no progress I just turned the air volume down (to cool things off a little) the noise and heat were annoying. The windows did not get any worse.
Once the temp got down into the mid 20's and the precip turned to snow the windows finally cleared.
I long for cars that let the driver make more decisions if they want to,
"...few weeks old and it is not dirty."
Plastic & vinyl components in a new car "outgas" their plastisizer soils horribly for at least the first six months. That typically forms a thin transparent film on the glass surfaces and that makes those surfaces much more subject to misting over, and at the same time especially difficult to demist/defog.
The reason your windshield fogged over was because the cabin air, atmosphere, was humid enough that the CHILLED windshield surface (COLD onrushing airflow continuously impinging on the exterior surface) was very likely well below the dewpoint of the cabin air.
As you said, the system automatically switches to fresh incoming airflow when you select defrost/defog/demist. So it is the already COLD outside incoming airflow that the A/C is trying to dehumidify by further chilling it.
But admittedly your circumstance does seem extreme. The only time I have had a "like" situation was by driving up to the slopes on a COLD day to pick up two very wet and sweaty snow skiers. They and their clothing humidified the car's passenger cabin beyond the capability of the system. But even in that case lowering the rear windows for the initial 5 miles or so solved the windshield fogging problem.
Nevertheless it was still frustrating in a new vehicle.
Outgas - otherwise known as new car smell.
the point being, not only do you want to take care of any initial film buildup due to outgassing of the interior components when the vehicle is new, it's a good thing to clean the inside of the windshield on a periodic basis.
Yes, the outgassing declines but never really stops. There is also the issue of smoking in the car. If you often have a smoker on board then the thin film (nicotine??)from smoking will build up fairly quickly also.