Hmmmm...in a topic that compares SUVs and MVs, no one should mention what they don't like about SUVs. Hmmmmmm
I think Steve meant gratuitous IDLSWDY type comments since they don't fit in with the SUV vs. Minivan topic. The same would apply to similarly gratuitous IDLMWDY type comments. And I think everyone probably understood that unless they are attempting to be sophomoric - or was that sophist?
2. In the sample size of about 90-100 SUVs that I carefully observed spanning various times of the day (8-9:30 in the morning, 12-1 afternoon, 6-10 in the night, spread across various days in various durations) exactly 1 SUV was carrying 4 people (an explorer, mom, dad two kids) and that was the highest number of passengers. I would say roughly 60-70% had one driver, and a few had two.
If you do a similar study on cars, at any given moment more than 80% of of cars are occupied by driver alone. Why haven't you gotten rid of the rear seats or the passenger seat yet?
Besides, it is July; how do you exactly find out if the user need AWD or ground clearance for snow conditions?? It's like seeing all convertible having tops up in January, and therefore declaring that no convertible is ever driven with top down!
I said that the HL is a bit higher than most MVs. It is. Only about a half inch higher than the Sienna (which I didn't specify) but more than that for others. Weight and frame stiffness is not as much of a factor in that comparison, as I said.
I'm not sure how you get that half inch difference in frame height. The Sienna and Highlander frames are practically identical except for MV being longer, wider and heavier. The 0.4" difference in ground clearance comes from underbody plastic trimmings. The MV has more air dams, for a more, well, "sporty" look. 500lb extra weight is seriously "aggressivility"; a few pieces of plastic (or the lack of) underbody is quite irrelevent.
MV and SUV based on the same platform with identical drive train constitute head-on comparison between MV vs. SUV. Comparing apples to oranges does not a convincing argument make.
Are you serious?? You used to drive an Astro?? A monster that guzzles 14/17mpg?? Are you sure a sedan wasn't enough to move your kids around? LOL. No wonder you are jealous of my 18/24mpg Highlander. Just kidding.
Perhaps it would help to think of this as more of an Acura RSX vs. Scion tC type of discussion.
And I'm trying to get Tides to do a California road trip next month but he's holding out on me. :-)
btw, my ski buddy picked up a classic 20-something foot sailboat a month ago (naturally the name escapes me at the moment). He has a truck to haul it around. Maybe we'll get it wet before the summer is out. :-).
And we took our brand new, year old tandem canoe down the Boise River yesterday and we were able to give a guy and his recreational Kiwi-style kayak a ride from the take-out to the put-in in our volumuous and versatile minivan. It would have been tight in the Outback, especially since it doesn't have real canoe racks on it.
I'm not sure how you get that half inch difference in frame height.
I look up the specs. 7.3 v 6.9.
That's ground clearance, no frame height. Besides, it's 0.4"; nothing like exaggerating by 25%, eh?
The 0.4" difference in ground clearance comes from underbody plastic trimmings.
You got a verifiable source for that?
Go to your nearest Toyota dealer and measure it yourself. I checked the underbodies when I was cross-shopping between the two.
MV and SUV based on the same platform...
I said HL and MVs. Not MVs and SUVs based on the same platform.
Comparing MV vs. SUV sharing the same platform and drive train gives one an honest comparison between MV vs. SUV (all else being as equal as possible). Comparing vastly different platforms only serves to confuse the issue.
But, a minivan beats a small/midsize SUV in practically everything...including price.
Price had a lot to do with my choice of Highlander over Sienna in the spring of 2004. I bought the top of the line Highlander Limited with every option for $31.7k, and the Sienna comparably equippped at the time would have cost $38k.
Now onto the practically everything part, minivans, small and midsize car-sized SUVs are essentially wagon versions of full-size, compact, and mid-size sedans, respectively. Obviously, mid-size sedans are the most popular, much more so than full-size cars. Most people don't need or want 200"+ vehicle length.
The idea family car would have to be the Jetson's - it always was the perfect size, whether there were two or eight in it, the whole top flipped up for easy entry, and it folded up so you didn't have to find a parking space!
That's pretty much what a modern midsize SUV is. Take Highlander for example, its vehicle length is 184", less than that of the most popular midsize family sedan Camry (189"), for parking convenience. It can seat up to 7 or take on 81 cu.ft cargo behind the first row. How do they do that? Space Utilization in the Vertical dimension.
“Pound for pound across the vehicle types, cars almost always have lower death rates than either pickups or SUVs.
Do you know what that means? You buy a 2 ton car and you buy a 2 ton SUV. Guess which one you'll be safer in?
Have you checked how many 2-ton+ sedan models are out there?? Just to give you a hint, that's 4400+lbs. None of regular length Audi A8 variants make the grade; nor does S500; nor does Lexus LS430 or Cadillac DeVille. S500 4Matic barely misses the grade by 10lbs. It takes the V12 monsters to make the grade. I doubt they are paragons of fuel efficiency or safety to other motorists. Out of all the statistics, it is repeatedly shown that out of all the parameters the one best correlated with low accident death rate is actually vehicle resale price (whether it's due to owner or simply the vehicle is better engineered). It doesn't take a genius to realize that pound for pound, cars are much more expensive than SUVs; the price difference probably has much more to do with your pound-for-pound argument than anything intrinsic to cars or SUVs.
Large cars and minivans dominate among vehicle models with very low death rates. The models with the highest rates are mostly small cars and small and midsize SUVs, many of which also have high rates of death in single vehicle rollover crashes.
"Midsize SUV" is such a polyglot of vehicles that it may well not be a class at all for safety studies. Some of them are indeed very unsafe, and some of them are among the safest vehicle out there, such as X5 and RX. The class is about as meaningful as "import cars," which include both the likes of LS, S, 7 and A8, as well as Kia Rio, not exactly useful taxonomy for vehicle safety study.
For a great many folks that are considering a family vehicle, that is, when they realize they need a bigger vehicle, and they consider a MV or SUV, a strong factor sending many to the SUV is the "MommyMobile" image of the MV vs the "AdventureGuy" image of the SUV. This is exemplified by the countless exclamations of those saying "I wouldn't be caught dead in a MV".
So where are these counless people?? So far we only have delange who doesn't care about the image thing, and myself, whose other vehicle is a stationwagon (how louder can it scream mommy mobile anyway?? I don't even have kids, yet). Yet we are both being presumptiously questioned by someone on whether we bought our vehicles for image considerations, that same someone who bought a prototypical image car RSX for himself . . . talk about projection. Frankly, I'm sensing a trend here: those who equate SUV with imagemobile are often owners of image-conscious entry-level sport-lux cars themselves.
We just made the decision between an Odyssey and the Pilot (chose the Pilot). Here were the merits of each that were important to us:
Odyssey: - more room for passengers in second and third rows, which means than my kids could fit in it when they are teenagers - better gas mileage - more cargo room
Pilot: - much, much easier for me to get into the drivers seat (I can't twist at the waist due to fused vertebra, so this is a HUGE deal to me) - shorter by about a foot, it really makes a difference in our garage - higher ground clearance, I don't remember by how much, but enough to go over small fallen branches, bumps, etc. better - making it a little easier to park in non-paved areas and drive the gravel shortcuts around here
I am not enough of a car person to notice the driving difference between the two, generally I get to used to what ever I'm in pretty quickly.
But, these are all facts that can be compared side-by-side at the Honda Web site. So, it all gets back to what you and your wife want - will your happiness at not driving an MV outweigh the room you'll be giving up for the Pilot? And, ultimately, that's a question only you can decide.
One must define their fruit before a rational argument re them can follow. I did and you went somewhere else.
Wrong. You have it exactly backwards. Check the message you were replying to again. The original poster suggested that Highlander and Pilot are probably more comparable to Sienna and Ody than truck-based SUVs; that's a very correct assumption based on platform similarity. He/she was comparing apple to apples. Your response on the other hand tried to drag orange and mango into it by comparing HL with unrelated MVs that are neither based on the same platform nor even in most cases offer AWD anyway.
sails: "", a strong factor sending many to the SUV is the "MommyMobile" image of the MV vs the "AdventureGuy" image of the SUV. This is exemplified by the countless exclamations of those saying "I wouldn't be caught dead in a MV".
bright: So where are these counless people?? So far we only have delange who doesn't care about the image thing, and myself, whose other vehicle is a stationwagon (how louder can it scream mommy mobile anyway?? I don't even have kids, yet). Yet we are both being presumptiously questioned by someone on whether we bought our vehicles for image considerations, that same someone who bought a prototypical image car RSX for himself . . . talk about projection. Frankly, I'm sensing a trend here: those who equate SUV with imagemobile are often owners of image-conscious entry-level sport-lux cars themselves
exactly!.....this exact funny thing has been pointed out many times....how people who have negative things to say about SUVs...are often in the same image boat as the very people they are criticizing.... ahem...
and there is nothiing wrong with buying for image, even if it is the boyracer RSX image... :P ...not one iota...or else we would all be driving civics and VW rabbits
herc:: 2. In the sample size of about 90-100 SUVs that I carefully observed spanning various times of the day (8-9:30 in the morning, 12-1 afternoon, 6-10 in the night, spread across various days in various durations) exactly 1 SUV was carrying 4 people (an explorer, mom, dad two kids) and that was the highest number of passengers. I would say roughly 60-70% had one driver, and a few had two.
brightness: If you do a similar study on cars, at any given moment more than 80% of of cars are occupied by driver alone. Why haven't you gotten rid of the rear seats or the passenger seat yet?
me: yes... I think I also agree...and pointed this apparent anomaly...as did others here. Most people should get mopeds or ...gasp ! GEM electric cars....!!
Besides, it is July; how do you exactly find out if the user need AWD or ground clearance for snow conditions?? It's like seeing all convertible having tops up in January, and therefore declaring that no convertible is ever driven with top down!
because some people can judge what others needs are.....even though they have no idea the what or who or how or when of those people....
me: Although - now you have me thinking of "bo-and-duke"ing up my Pilot just a bit...
Nitromax: Don't forget the skid pads on the hood!
This morning we were running late, I'm scrambling out the door carrying three bookbags, purse, etc., herding the kids, and I couldn't stop thinking how if only I could slide across the top, while deftly tossing all the stuff through the passenger side window, jumping into the drivers seat.....
I think that you left out a few points, though they may be unimportant to you at the moment:
the Pilot's bumper height is better positioned to engage a greater number of vehicles...such that the bumper would be used to absorb impact forces, as opposed to a minivan. I saw this in real life close up last July 4th weekend, when my friends' sienna was rear ended by a commercial F-150 pu. We transferred all the kids into the Pilot, since the whole rear hatch of the sienna was caved in, and exhaust gas was leaking into the sienna, causing a carbon monoxide threat and danger to the kids. ...those foldable rear seats really came in handy . The sienna driver and wife drove in the mv the rest of the way, with the windows down, but said they could still smell the exhaust gas....luckily they did not get the poisoning, at least not enough to go unconscious...
in the pilot, ya don't have to put on snow chains in mild snow conditions, and can even clear higher snow obstacles ....
I priced/test drove a Highlander as well when shopping for Sienna(purchased Mazda MPV)in July 2004. It was 24k-26k just to start out on the Highlander(around 24k for the 4 cyl...26k for the 6 cyl). Sienna LE with package #7 about $26,500 extremely well loaded. Didn't price out the high end models because I didn't want to go there.
The Mazda MPV, extremely well loaded, with more seating and space than Highlander was had for $20,500. If one did not need or want the extra seating/space that comes with a minivan...then a small or midsize suv would be an option. But, there is no way you're going to fit 7 people in a Highlander unless 3 of them are acrobatic circus performing toddlers.
Hey everybody! Thanks for helping me out with the decision... oh yeah, that's right... all I got was flamed!!!!!!!!
Well you did come in here shooting. (I hate minivans, friggin minivans, wouldn't be caught dead in a minivan) We just shot back. :-)
As Tidester said, get what your wife wants...you earn bonus points for that stuff to be redeemed at a later time. :-) Besides isn't it going to be her vehicle?
Just think of all the lumber you can put in the back of the Sienna! :-)
I was shopping around last month and was leaning towards the Sienna also. I went with something smaller since we only have one child now and I felt the full blown minivan was overkill for one child. The only issues I have heard of on the Sienna's were problems with the second AC compressor that they added for this years models. Something about the coolant lines rubbing and leaking over time.
You might want to check out epinions.com for other reviews. Edmund sis still the best because it has the ....ahem...."hardcore" audience, but just looking at the Edmunds problems and solutions forums can be pretty disturbing. You have to remember, those P&S boards are only going to have people complaining so it looks worse than it is.
Whew, and I thought everyone just had stock in "Seattle's Best" or something. I didn't mind the friendly banter, and now I appreciate the facts and legitimate opinions about my dilemna. Now I still have to decide lease vs. buy and trade in vs sell it myself... Thanks John
minivans may not be overkill, since they are safer, on the whole, than smaller sedans... You have someone invaluable and irreplaceable....IMO, it is good that you start thinking about minivans. Back in 1994, we moved from a civic to a Previa due to the birth of our first child ..and used the minivan to move all our belongings to our new home. 16 previa loads, I believe. The kids loved the minivan..since it was also one of the first to have passenger side air bags...
Tractor Trailer causes pileup on I-80....3 killed... so lets see what the dangers are ... objectively...:there is something for everyone..and maybe we can get a discussion going....
Not sure you can draw a lot of conclusions based on this accident - looks like the MV was the first and primary target of the semi - the other vehicles were later in the food chain. Not sure any MV or SUV would really come out of this situation very well. Actually, I am stunned anyone survived. Let's face it, some situations are just too extreme - it's too bad for that family.
That's pretty much what a modern midsize SUV is. Take Highlander for example, its vehicle length is 184", less than that of the most popular midsize family sedan Camry (189"), for parking convenience. It can seat up to 7 or take on 81 cu.ft cargo behind the first row.
Your big MV's are ~ 1.5 ft longer, but you also get more space (for roughly the same gas mileage). 30+ cu ft cargo space with 7 passengers vs 10.5 cu ft w/ 7 passengers in the highlander (do you need it? - personal preference). Also, that 3rd row seat is very tight for adults and not particularly accessible for anyone. We got an Odyssey - with 3 very young children, the convenience that sliding doors aid to getting everyone in cannot be over-estimated. Plus we don't have to worry about jr dinging neighboring cars when he opens his door (a regular problem with our preceding Grand Prix). We found an ingenious solution to fitting the 201" van in the garage - clean out the excess stuff (trying to patent the idea ). And as best I can tell, the 05 Odyssey is at least as safe (if not safer) as any other passenger vehicle on the road.
So where are these counless people?? So far we only have delange who doesn't care about the image thing, and myself, whose other vehicle is a stationwagon (how louder can it scream mommy mobile anyway?? I don't even have kids, yet). Yet we are both being presumptiously questioned by someone on whether we bought our vehicles for image considerations, that same someone who bought a prototypical image car RSX for himself . . . talk about projection. Frankly, I'm sensing a trend here: those who equate SUV with imagemobile are often owners of image-conscious entry-level sport-lux cars themselves.
Surely you do not deny this factor is at work at some level. If the heads of the auto co's are saying it (with all their access to focus groups and marketing data), there is probably some shred of truth to this theory. Does it apply to all SUV drivers? Of course not - but that does not mean it is not a significant factor. I personally know of a few people who had "image" issues with MV, in addition to the posters who have admitted the same on this board. If you get a highlander vs. a seinna, I suppose it is a wash IMO. But if you get an Expedition or Suburban (w/ low teen gas mileage, at best) for primarily image reasons - that's a different story
It seems like there are some conclusions that we can draw from this accident :
1- driving is inherently dangerous, with lots of large trucks and lots of fast cars with the potential to do damage. (including SUVs)
2- semis may cause more severe injuries ( no brainer ?!)
3- SUV s can and do rollover...and may present a danger to its occupants and others. In this case, good thing the they came out only slightly injured. Jetta driver was not harmed....
4- guy in the Ford thunderbird was an astute driver, who AVOIDED being hit by a barreling semi.....
Now....what do you guys /gals thinnk ?
1- would all vehicles smaller than a semi suffer the same fate as the unfortunate people in the minivan ? of course, we don't know at what speed the semi was traveling, whether it was fully loaded, did he apply the brakes, and how soon he did it...and did he swerve..etc...
2- would it be possible, if a vehicle with higher bumpers and more mass/weight was the first hit ( in place of the minivan) , , for its passengers to have suffered less severe injuries ? In other words, would a larger vehicle , under certain conditions, protect its passengers more than , say, a smaller vehicle , when both are hit by a semi...... ? Obviously, if the trailer was going full throttle, nothing short of a tank would survive...but how about a glancing blow at 30 mph ? full hit rear end at 25 mph ?
Not sure any MV or SUV would really come out of this situation very well. Actually, I am stunned anyone survived. Let's face it, some situations are just too extreme - it's too bad for that family.
while I agree that the minivan was unfortunately first to be hit....and feel bad for the family....
1- do you really think that alll situations involving semis are severe ...meaning no vehicle would survive ?
2- It seems that you are stunned that anyone survived. I think that most people hold the same view...that semis are dangerous when they are one of the collision partners/factors. But is it possible that people do survive collisions with SEMIs ?
3- If yes it is possible, then would it not be possible for different vehicles with different characteristics , lets say diff weight, diff bumper heights, diff crumple zones, diff visibilities, to actually mitigate the severity of a collision with a semi ? Is that possible ? Objectively speaking ?
me:...the countless exclamations of those saying "I wouldn't be caught dead in a MV".
you:So where are these counless people??
Take a perusal at the topics across Edmunds. Including this one, IDLSWDY, Wagons v SUVs, etc.
...we are both being presumptiously questioned...
One who presumes does not question. Thanks for the self-rebuttal :=) And I don't recall asking you.
Try to stick to the topic...hint, it's not me. And try to be objective...the SUV cheerleading is a bit grating.
on GC: Go to your nearest Toyota dealer and measure it yourself. I checked...
Did you measure the top of the frame or just the bottom? Frame material? Density of structure? No vehicle has a totally consistant and constant GC at all points. It's a rough average of sorts. My statement was that the HL's frame is higher than most MVs. That's true. You seem to be interested in something other than objective discussion.
sails....glad to hear you assert again that the topic is about the vehicles, not the person....
let's see how long this lasts... :P
SUVs are fine for certain uses, including but not limited to : image, utility, self gratification,family needs, towing, carrying people, higher ride height, etc....
minivans are also fine for certain uses, including but not limited to: utility, family needs, image, carrying people, etc.
a 'minivan' board. they referenced a motortrend review of 3 popular minivans. the mileage was between 18.4 and 19.8. i just came back from about an 1800 mile round trip (4 to 5 passengers plus cargo box on the top). average mpg was 18.5 with my v8 explorer. last leg of the trip 650 miles in 11.5 hours. this included 2 border crossings, 1 stop for gas, and a couple of meal/comfort stops. this means we were not toddling along in the slow lane.
2024 Ford F-150 STX, 2023 Ford Explorer ST, 91 Mustang GT vert
Comments
I think Steve meant gratuitous IDLSWDY type comments since they don't fit in with the SUV vs. Minivan topic. The same would apply to similarly gratuitous IDLMWDY type comments. And I think everyone probably understood that unless they are attempting to be sophomoric - or was that sophist?
tidester, host
I just know you must have gotten that shipment of decoder rings in to be posting in code again...right tidester?
And, obviously, you received the decoder ring I sent you since you were able to decode what I wrote - congratulations and welcome to the club!
tidester, host
Not quite - da Vinci deals with the Golden Ratio and that cipher is reserved exclusively for members who can walk on water!
tidester, host
Steve, Host
Gratuitous? Gratuitous? That means they are "not called for".
You mean comments about not liking SUVs are not called for in this topic? You and Steve ought to go on a road trip :=)
And I think everyone probably understood that...
Me, too. I like SUVs. Why,...Don't You?
If you do a similar study on cars, at any given moment more than 80% of of cars are occupied by driver alone. Why haven't you gotten rid of the rear seats or the passenger seat yet?
Besides, it is July; how do you exactly find out if the user need AWD or ground clearance for snow conditions?? It's like seeing all convertible having tops up in January, and therefore declaring that no convertible is ever driven with top down!
I'm not sure how you get that half inch difference in frame height. The Sienna and Highlander frames are practically identical except for MV being longer, wider and heavier. The 0.4" difference in ground clearance comes from underbody plastic trimmings. The MV has more air dams, for a more, well, "sporty" look. 500lb extra weight is seriously "aggressivility"; a few pieces of plastic (or the lack of) underbody is quite irrelevent.
MV and SUV based on the same platform with identical drive train constitute head-on comparison between MV vs. SUV. Comparing apples to oranges does not a convincing argument make.
I look up the specs. 7.3 v 6.9.
The 0.4" difference in ground clearance comes from underbody plastic trimmings.
You got a verifiable source for that?
MV and SUV based on the same platform...
I said HL and MVs. Not MVs and SUVs based on the same platform.
Comparing apples to oranges does not a convincing argument make.
One must define their fruit before a rational argument re them can follow. I did and you went somewhere else.
And I'm trying to get Tides to do a California road trip next month but he's holding out on me. :-)
btw, my ski buddy picked up a classic 20-something foot sailboat a month ago (naturally the name escapes me at the moment). He has a truck to haul it around. Maybe we'll get it wet before the summer is out. :-).
And we took our brand new, year old tandem canoe down the Boise River yesterday and we were able to give a guy and his recreational Kiwi-style kayak a ride from the take-out to the put-in in our volumuous and versatile minivan. It would have been tight in the Outback, especially since it doesn't have real canoe racks on it.
Steve, Host
I look up the specs. 7.3 v 6.9.
That's ground clearance, no frame height. Besides, it's 0.4"; nothing like exaggerating by 25%, eh?
The 0.4" difference in ground clearance comes from underbody plastic trimmings.
You got a verifiable source for that?
Go to your nearest Toyota dealer and measure it yourself. I checked the underbodies when I was cross-shopping between the two.
MV and SUV based on the same platform...
I said HL and MVs. Not MVs and SUVs based on the same platform.
Comparing MV vs. SUV sharing the same platform and drive train gives one an honest comparison between MV vs. SUV (all else being as equal as possible). Comparing vastly different platforms only serves to confuse the issue.
Price had a lot to do with my choice of Highlander over Sienna in the spring of 2004. I bought the top of the line Highlander Limited with every option for $31.7k, and the Sienna comparably equippped at the time would have cost $38k.
Now onto the practically everything part, minivans, small and midsize car-sized SUVs are essentially wagon versions of full-size, compact, and mid-size sedans, respectively. Obviously, mid-size sedans are the most popular, much more so than full-size cars. Most people don't need or want 200"+ vehicle length.
That's pretty much what a modern midsize SUV is. Take Highlander for example, its vehicle length is 184", less than that of the most popular midsize family sedan Camry (189"), for parking convenience. It can seat up to 7 or take on 81 cu.ft cargo behind the first row. How do they do that? Space Utilization in the Vertical dimension.
Do you know what that means? You buy a 2 ton car and you buy a 2 ton SUV. Guess which one you'll be safer in?
Have you checked how many 2-ton+ sedan models are out there?? Just to give you a hint, that's 4400+lbs. None of regular length Audi A8 variants make the grade; nor does S500; nor does Lexus LS430 or Cadillac DeVille. S500 4Matic barely misses the grade by 10lbs. It takes the V12 monsters to make the grade. I doubt they are paragons of fuel efficiency or safety to other motorists. Out of all the statistics, it is repeatedly shown that out of all the parameters the one best correlated with low accident death rate is actually vehicle resale price (whether it's due to owner or simply the vehicle is better engineered). It doesn't take a genius to realize that pound for pound, cars are much more expensive than SUVs; the price difference probably has much more to do with your pound-for-pound argument than anything intrinsic to cars or SUVs.
Large cars and minivans dominate among vehicle models with very low death rates. The models with the highest rates are mostly small cars and small and midsize SUVs, many of which also have high rates of death in single vehicle
rollover crashes.
"Midsize SUV" is such a polyglot of vehicles that it may well not be a class at all for safety studies. Some of them are indeed very unsafe, and some of them are among the safest vehicle out there, such as X5 and RX. The class is about as meaningful as "import cars," which include both the likes of LS, S, 7 and A8, as well as Kia Rio, not exactly useful taxonomy for vehicle safety study.
So where are these counless people?? So far we only have delange who doesn't care about the image thing, and myself, whose other vehicle is a stationwagon (how louder can it scream mommy mobile anyway?? I don't even have kids, yet). Yet we are both being presumptiously questioned by someone on whether we bought our vehicles for image considerations, that same someone who bought a prototypical image car RSX for himself . . . talk about projection. Frankly, I'm sensing a trend here: those who equate SUV with imagemobile are often owners of image-conscious entry-level sport-lux cars themselves.
I guess your question got lost in the summer heat. My recommendation is to swallow your pride and go with what your wife wants!
Seriously, I think if you list your realistic requirements the choice of vehicle type will follow directly. Good luck.
tidester, host
I noticed you skillfully skipped over the "S" word in your reply!
Got any tips for Starbux? (I mean relative to his question about which vehicle he should go for?)
tidester, host
We just made the decision between an Odyssey and the Pilot (chose the Pilot). Here were the merits of each that were important to us:
Odyssey:
- more room for passengers in second and third rows, which means than my kids could fit in it when they are teenagers
- better gas mileage
- more cargo room
Pilot:
- much, much easier for me to get into the drivers seat (I can't twist at the waist due to fused vertebra, so this is a HUGE deal to me)
- shorter by about a foot, it really makes a difference in our garage
- higher ground clearance, I don't remember by how much, but enough to go over small fallen branches, bumps, etc. better - making it a little easier to park in non-paved areas and drive the gravel shortcuts around here
I am not enough of a car person to notice the driving difference between the two, generally I get to used to what ever I'm in pretty quickly.
But, these are all facts that can be compared side-by-side at the Honda Web site. So, it all gets back to what you and your wife want - will your happiness at not driving an MV outweigh the room you'll be giving up for the Pilot? And, ultimately, that's a question only you can decide.
Wrong. You have it exactly backwards. Check the message you were replying to again. The original poster suggested that Highlander and Pilot are probably more comparable to Sienna and Ody than truck-based SUVs; that's a very correct assumption based on platform similarity. He/she was comparing apple to apples. Your response on the other hand tried to drag orange and mango into it by comparing HL with unrelated MVs that are neither based on the same platform nor even in most cases offer AWD anyway.
some of the guys here have some personal issues with SUVs....but they are basically nice guys...jsut have to work out their SUV - frustrations...
for some , its a natural reaction, or proaction...
I support ya...good post.
sails: "", a strong factor sending many to the SUV is the "MommyMobile" image of the MV vs the "AdventureGuy" image of the SUV. This is exemplified by the countless exclamations of those saying "I wouldn't be caught dead in a MV".
bright: So where are these counless people?? So far we only have delange who doesn't care about the image thing, and myself, whose other vehicle is a stationwagon (how louder can it scream mommy mobile anyway?? I don't even have kids, yet). Yet we are both being presumptiously questioned by someone on whether we bought our vehicles for image considerations, that same someone who bought a prototypical image car RSX for himself . . . talk about projection. Frankly, I'm sensing a trend here: those who equate SUV with imagemobile are often owners of image-conscious entry-level sport-lux cars themselves
exactly!.....this exact funny thing has been pointed out many times....how people who have negative things to say about SUVs...are often in the same image boat as the very people they are criticizing.... ahem...
and there is nothiing wrong with buying for image, even if it is the boyracer RSX image...
brightness: If you do a similar study on cars, at any given moment more than 80% of of cars are occupied by driver alone. Why haven't you gotten rid of the rear seats or the passenger seat yet?
me: yes... I think I also agree...and pointed this apparent anomaly...as did others here. Most people should get mopeds or ...gasp ! GEM electric cars....!!
Besides, it is July; how do you exactly find out if the user need AWD or ground clearance for snow conditions?? It's like seeing all convertible having tops up in January, and therefore declaring that no convertible is ever driven with top down!
because some people can judge what others needs are.....even though they have no idea the what or who or how or when of those people....
Nitromax: Don't forget the skid pads on the hood!
This morning we were running late, I'm scrambling out the door carrying three bookbags, purse, etc., herding the kids, and I couldn't stop thinking how if only I could slide across the top, while deftly tossing all the stuff through the passenger side window, jumping into the drivers seat.....
congrats on your choice.
I think that you left out a few points, though they may be unimportant to you at the moment:
the Pilot's bumper height is better positioned to engage a greater number of vehicles...such that the bumper would be used to absorb impact forces, as opposed to a minivan. I saw this in real life close up last July 4th weekend, when my friends' sienna was rear ended by a commercial F-150 pu. We transferred all the kids into the Pilot, since the whole rear hatch of the sienna was caved in, and exhaust gas was leaking into the sienna, causing a carbon monoxide threat and danger to the kids. ...those foldable rear seats really came in handy . The sienna driver and wife drove in the mv the rest of the way, with the windows down, but said they could still smell the exhaust gas....luckily they did not get the poisoning, at least not enough to go unconscious...
in the pilot, ya don't have to put on snow chains in mild snow conditions, and can even clear higher snow obstacles ....
The Mazda MPV, extremely well loaded, with more seating and space than Highlander was had for $20,500. If one did not need or want the extra seating/space that comes with a minivan...then a small or midsize suv would be an option. But, there is no way you're going to fit 7 people in a Highlander unless 3 of them are acrobatic circus performing toddlers.
Well you did come in here shooting. (I hate minivans, friggin minivans, wouldn't be caught dead in a minivan)
We just shot back. :-)
As Tidester said, get what your wife wants...you earn bonus points for that stuff to be redeemed at a later time.
:-)
Besides isn't it going to be her vehicle?
I was shopping around last month and was leaning towards the Sienna also. I went with something smaller since we only have one child now and I felt the full blown minivan was overkill for one child. The only issues I have heard of on the Sienna's were problems with the second AC compressor that they added for this years models. Something about the coolant lines rubbing and leaking over time.
You might want to check out epinions.com for other reviews. Edmund sis still the best because it has the ....ahem...."hardcore" audience, but just looking at the Edmunds problems and solutions forums can be pretty disturbing. You have to remember, those P&S boards are only going to have people complaining so it looks worse than it is.
Good luck
Thanks
John
Did not come up with anything on search.
how thoughtful of you.....you rascal you....
"You have to remember, those P&S boards are only going to have people complaining so it looks worse than it is.
I have to agree with nitro....sometimes the problems are exaggerated (
plus the people who have no problems tend not to post as much....
minivans may not be overkill, since they are safer, on the whole, than smaller sedans... You have someone invaluable and irreplaceable....IMO, it is good that you start thinking about minivans. Back in 1994, we moved from a civic to a Previa due to the birth of our first child ..and used the minivan to move all our belongings to our new home. 16 previa loads, I believe. The kids loved the minivan..since it was also one of the first to have passenger side air bags...
Tractor Trailer causes pileup on I-80....3 killled...
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2005/07/19/BAG0BDQ4KS1.DTL&hw=crash+80+killed- - - &sn=001&sc=1000
the vehicles involved include: semi, minivan, suv, compact cars, large car.
police are looking at driver factors such as sleep and alcohol, and car factors such as mechanical condition.
so lets see what the dangers are ...objectively...:there is something for everyone..and maybe we can get a discussion going....
so lets see what the dangers are ... objectively...:there is something for everyone..and maybe we can get a discussion going....
Not sure you can draw a lot of conclusions based on this accident - looks like the MV was the first and primary target of the semi - the other vehicles were later in the food chain. Not sure any MV or SUV would really come out of this situation very well. Actually, I am stunned anyone survived. Let's face it, some situations are just too extreme - it's too bad for that family.
Your big MV's are ~ 1.5 ft longer, but you also get more space (for roughly the same gas mileage). 30+ cu ft cargo space with 7 passengers vs 10.5 cu ft w/ 7 passengers in the highlander (do you need it? - personal preference). Also, that 3rd row seat is very tight for adults and not particularly accessible for anyone. We got an Odyssey - with 3 very young children, the convenience that sliding doors aid to getting everyone in cannot be over-estimated. Plus we don't have to worry about jr dinging neighboring cars when he opens his door (a regular problem with our preceding Grand Prix). We found an ingenious solution to fitting the 201" van in the garage - clean out the excess stuff (trying to patent the idea
Surely you do not deny this factor is at work at some level. If the heads of the auto co's are saying it (with all their access to focus groups and marketing data), there is probably some shred of truth to this theory. Does it apply to all SUV drivers? Of course not - but that does not mean it is not a significant factor. I personally know of a few people who had "image" issues with MV, in addition to the posters who have admitted the same on this board. If you get a highlander vs. a seinna, I suppose it is a wash IMO. But if you get an Expedition or Suburban (w/ low teen gas mileage, at best) for primarily image reasons - that's a different story
Now, now calm down. What are you insinuating?!
redeemed points could also mean a night out with the guys shooting pool, going to a ballgame, hockeygame, or whatever
but you may have been right the first time
;-)
.i am taking your advice....
1- driving is inherently dangerous, with lots of large trucks and lots of fast cars with the potential to do damage. (including SUVs)
2- semis may cause more severe injuries ( no brainer ?!)
3- SUV s can and do rollover...and may present a danger to its occupants and others. In this case, good thing the they came out only slightly injured. Jetta driver was not harmed....
4- guy in the Ford thunderbird was an astute driver, who AVOIDED being hit by a barreling semi.....
Now....what do you guys /gals thinnk ?
1- would all vehicles smaller than a semi suffer the same fate as the unfortunate people in the minivan ? of course, we don't know at what speed the semi was traveling, whether it was fully loaded, did he apply the brakes, and how soon he did it...and did he swerve..etc...
2- would it be possible, if a vehicle with higher bumpers and more mass/weight was the first hit ( in place of the minivan) , , for its passengers to have suffered less severe injuries ? In other words, would a larger vehicle , under certain conditions, protect its passengers more than , say, a smaller vehicle , when both are hit by a semi...... ? Obviously, if the trailer was going full throttle, nothing short of a tank would survive...but how about a glancing blow at 30 mph ? full hit rear end at 25 mph ?
Not sure any MV or SUV would really come out of this situation very well. Actually, I am stunned anyone survived. Let's face it, some situations are just too extreme - it's too bad for that family.
while I agree that the minivan was unfortunately first to be hit....and feel bad for the family....
1- do you really think that alll situations involving semis are severe ...meaning no vehicle would survive ?
2- It seems that you are stunned that anyone survived. I think that most people hold the same view...that semis are dangerous when they are one of the collision partners/factors. But is it possible that people do survive collisions with SEMIs ?
3- If yes it is possible, then would it not be possible for different vehicles with different characteristics , lets say diff weight, diff bumper heights, diff crumple zones, diff visibilities, to actually mitigate the severity of a collision with a semi ?
Is that possible ? Objectively speaking ?
you:So where are these counless people??
Take a perusal at the topics across Edmunds. Including this one, IDLSWDY, Wagons v SUVs, etc.
...we are both being presumptiously questioned...
One who presumes does not question. Thanks for the self-rebuttal :=) And I don't recall asking you.
Try to stick to the topic...hint, it's not me. And try to be objective...the SUV cheerleading is a bit grating.
on GC:
Go to your nearest Toyota dealer and measure it yourself. I checked...
Did you measure the top of the frame or just the bottom? Frame material? Density of structure? No vehicle has a totally consistant and constant GC at all points. It's a rough average of sorts. My statement was that the HL's frame is higher than most MVs. That's true. You seem to be interested in something other than objective discussion.
Hmmm...based on these quotes, I don't think he's really looking for advice:
...I don't care for minivans... I'd actually rather be riding my Harley...
Maybe I'm just lookin for adventure...
You commented on my post, which spoke of the HL and MVs frames (post #756).
...that Highlander and Pilot are probably more comparable to Sienna and Ody than truck-based SUVs...
I agreed with that assessment, but you missed it.
How about an anti-minivan?
"Mercedes Builds a Minivan/Wagon/SUV/Safety Vehicle/Luxury Sedan Crossover." Talk about covering all the bases!
First Drive: 2006 Mercedes-Benz R-Class
Steve, Host
http://associatedcontent.com/content.cfm?content_type=article&content_type_id=2750
let's see how long this lasts... :P
SUVs are fine for certain uses, including but not limited to : image, utility, self gratification,family needs, towing, carrying people, higher ride height, etc....
minivans are also fine for certain uses, including but not limited to: utility, family needs, image, carrying people, etc.