That's true. It does all come down to your own preference. It doesn't need to be a logical decision. Most people probably buy SUVs for the same reason they buy sports cars--they like fun vehicles. But as Brightness hinted, an SUV is considerably more practical than a sports car, whether taking your family to the beach or carrying home your new snowblower.
"Just to bright (bring) the conversation back to SUV vs. MV, they are also significantly shorter than MV's that share the same platforms...."
What if they don't share the same platform? There are also short wheelbase minivans that are very easy to park and garage (i.e Mazda MPV and Dodge Caravan). As well as many SUV's that are extremely difficult to park and garage(i.e Ford Expedition, Chevy Suburban) The choices are there.
Highlander/RX, Pilot/MD-X, Explorer, just to name a few. Most people don't need 7 seats except for very rare occasions. The third row in those SUV's are well suited for the market.
What if they don't share the same platform? There are also short wheelbase minivans that are very easy to park and garage (i.e Mazda MPV and Dodge Caravan).
We have already been through this several times on this forum. MPV and Caravan are still longer than Highlander, and delivers worse gas milieage than comparably equipped Highlander, heavier and more dangerous to others as well as passengers inside than Highlander, not to mention not available in AWD in the short versions.
As well as many SUV's that are extremely difficult to park and garage(i.e Ford Expedition, Chevy Suburban) The choices are there.
The per centage of these models as overall SUV sales is much smaller than full-size Minivans as part of Minivans overall.
We have already been through this several times on this forum. MPV and Caravan are still longer than Highlander, and delivers worse gas milieage than comparably equipped Highlander, heavier and more dangerous to others as well as passengers inside than Highlander, not to mention not available in AWD in the short versions.
MPV- 189.5 inches 3772lbs luggage capacity 17.2cu ft. max capacity 127cu ft. Highlander(A car based SUV which I consider a tall wagon) 184.6in 3705 lbs luggage capacity 10.5cu ft. max capacity 81cu ft.
Wow less than 5 inches and 67 pounds makes that much difference in safety. The main difference I see is comfort and usable space. Have you ever sat in the back seat of these so called midsized 7 passenger SUV's. After about 60 minutes you wouldn't be calling them seats.
Wow less than 5 inches and 67 pounds makes that much difference in safety. The main difference I see is comfort and usable space. Have you ever sat in the back seat of these so called midsized 7 passenger SUV's. After about 60 minutes you wouldn't be calling them seats.
I beg to differ. I bet 7 passengers will fit fine.
Yes, really very little difference at all when speaking of vehicle weight and length between the MPV and the Highlander. The statement about the MPV being more dangerous to the passengers inside the Highlander was pretty funny.
In a side by side comparison to the MPV... the Highlander was fairly lame in comparison....IMO. MPV almost twice as much luggage capacity (using brightness method of exaggerated comparison) And a third more max. capacity per number soco gave. Ride in Highlander stiff and unforgiving. MPV drove more car like...better handling. Highlander cost much more for comparable equipment. Highlander fits 4 comfortable and 3 Oompa Lompas(or Munchkins) in the middle and 3rd row seat(which is a joke)The MPV fits 7 comfortable. The Highlander has no utility advantage at all over the MPV ...except if one buys the 6 cyl to tow or off road.
SUVs are used for the purpose that the owner bought it for.....be it higher seating, better views , better bumper matchup with larger vehicles, going to snow country, etc....
it is rather easy to assume that one knows what the other person's real needs are....what their purpose or usage would be.
minivans are OK....but just not what I would want , since one gets stuck in the snow easily...
Even though it's already been said, but the SUVs with three rows, row 3 is for limited use (unless it's a big SUV), as compared with minivans that are designed to use all three rows comfortably. Plus the luggage capacity on SUVs with the 3rd row up are pretty tiny. If you're trying to maximize interior space with the smallest exterior dimensions, then minivans will always win out (yeah, I said "always" so I'm sure someone will prove me wrong). But for some, that's not an issue because they'll use the safety card; however, with side airbags, traction control, stability control, etc...I'd feel that the safety of a minivan is good, even if the larger SUVs are safer. If safety were the only concern, then I'd drive a bus or walk! But when you're looking at safe minivans or safe SUVs, I don't think (and I don't see any studies proving) that the difference is huge. The statement that bigger is safer may be true in general, but again, I'm not just going to go to the insurance reports and buy the vehicle that had the least number of deaths last year. Personally, I drive a Ford Freestyle, because I wanted the more car-like handling with almost the space of a minivan. I looked at the Pilot/Highlander but the 3rd row in those was too small, plus I still wanted the car handling/drive.
Well, I wouldn't say highlander lacked common sense just because he took his vehicle over 100mph on a wide open road with no other vehicles in sight.Maybe, a slight disreguard for the law. But, he knows the situation and his abilities more than you or I do.
Saying he lacked common sense is like saying people shouldn't buy SUV's unless they are going to tow something or offroad. A bit judgemental.
Buy what you like to please yourself and your family... drive safely...and let everyone else mind their own business.
Wow less than 5 inches and 67 pounds makes that much difference in safety. The main difference I see is comfort and usable space. Have you ever sat in the back seat of these so called midsized 7 passenger SUV's. After about 60 minutes you wouldn't be calling them seats.
Now tell me why I should have the extra 5in length, 67 pounds, no side curtain airbags and worse gas mileage when the Highlander is perfectly big enough for me?? Just to say I have a minivan?? In crash test ratings by IIHS, Highlander is rated as "Good," the top rank, whereas MPV is rated "Average" or "Margin" depending on the model year.
The statement about the MPV being more dangerous to the passengers inside the Highlander was pretty funny.
Check out the IIHS crash ratings for yourself, funny man. Highlander is rated "Good," the highest rating from the institution, and MPV is only rated "Acceptable" or "Marginal" depending on which model year.
In a side by side comparison to the MPV... the Highlander was fairly lame in comparison....IMO.
The market has spoken, and MPV is apparently the lamer one, with all due respect to your unsolicited opinion. MPV is about to be disontinued next year, to be replaced by a full size minivan.
MPV almost twice as much luggage capacity (using brightness method of exaggerated comparison) And a third more max. capacity per number soco gave.
"Twice as"? since when is 10.7 x 2 == 17.5? Have you ever tried loading the two? They are very close in real useable space inside. The MPV volume rating advantage comes from the greater interior height, which unless you transport bear cases all the time, is nearly useless. The available floor space behind the seats are very comparable. I find the greater ground clearance much more useful than the extra height inside. Highlander has the added advantage of being able to lower the front passenger seat, which accommodates longer objects that MPV can't. Try shop between the two some time.
Ride in Highlander stiff and unforgiving. MPV drove more car like...better handling. Highlander cost much more for comparable equipment.
MPV can hardly get out of its own way with the torqueless ford engine. There is simply no way I will want own any vehicle with that patheticly unreliable ford engine and tranny combo. MPV's are cheaper for a reason.
Highlander fits 4 comfortable and 3 Oompa Lompas(or Munchkins) in the middle and 3rd row seat(which is a joke)The MPV fits 7 comfortable.
I have no idea how over-weight people are in your neck of woods, but I regularly load five people into my Highlander, comfortably. It has more second-row shoulder room than most mid-size and large sedans that are the standard fair for 5-person transportation. I hardly ever use the third row, nor do most people; therefore why should I live with pathetic engine performance, lack of reliability and lack of safety just to have two extra seats that I hardly ever use.
The Highlander has no utility advantage at all over the MPV ...except if one buys the 6 cyl to tow or off road.
Ever heard of AWD? Ever experienced quiet and confident engine performance? and smooth transmission? How about vehicle stability control? I would not put my kid in any vehicle without it. MPV doesn't even have basic traction control.
It's simply not fair to MPV to even compare such an old mid-90's econo platform with the Toyota/Lexus mainstay platform of the 2000's. That's why I started with comparison of SUV vs. MV that share the same platforms.
speaking of fords, you drive a freestyle which has 3 rows of seating. compare the 3rd seat to an explorer and a freestar. blanket statements don't usually work. don't forget the explorer is almost a foot shorter than a freestyle. i personally prefer an suv because the roads in the northeast can be really crappy. my explorer takes the frost heaves and pot holes in stride. just got back from western pa. 375 miles in 6 hours door to door. I-80, I-81, I-84. 1 stop for food. computer reads 20.6 mpg. it is pretty much downhill heading east. heading west i got about 19 mpg. i saw more minivans than any other vehicles, on the road, other than 18 wheelers.
2024 Ford F-150 STX, 2023 Ford Explorer ST, 91 Mustang GT vert
A reporter is hoping to hear from residents of Southeast Michigan who fit either of the following descriptions: - feel as if the cost of gasoline is significantly driving up their commuting costs (no pun intended) - have been impressed with their vehicles' gas mileage
Please respond to jfallon@edmunds.com no later than Thursday, August 25, 2005 with your daytime contact info, year/make/model of vehicle, city of residence and city of employment.
Thanks for your consideration, Jeannine Fallon Corporate Communications Edmunds.com
MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR Find me at kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name. 2015 Kia Soul, 2021 Subaru Forester (kirstie_h), 2024 GMC Sierra 1500 (mr. kirstie_h) Review your vehicle
Ever heard of AWD? Ever experienced quiet and confident engine performance? and smooth transmission? How about vehicle stability control? I would not put my kid in any vehicle without it. MPV doesn't even have basic traction control.
Oh its AWD that changes things makes the car heavier than the MPV at 3970lbs. Now I don't own a MPV I own a Honda Odyssey. It has side airbags VSC, smooth transmision, faster 0-60 times and braking that is 7 feet better than the Highlander per motor trend. Has 38.6 cu ft storage with 8 passengers. Of course its 4500 lbs but I get almost 22MPG. I looked at the Pilot/XC90 didn't want the minivan stigma but we just didn't fit! I think the rear crumple zone is almost non existant when the rear set is being used on some of the small minivans/midsized SUV's. My friends 2005 nissan Pathfinder is heavier and gets about 16mpg. He does live on a dirt road so I think he made a fine choice for him.
If your family can not fit in a Highlander/Pilot/XC90, the comparison is a moot point. Get a Odyssey by all means. I would. On the other hand, my wife and I can fit in the Highlander just fine. The extra 2 feet length would have made it difficult to fit into the garage, or even getting the 200+" land yacht into and out of the garage at all without hitting other cars parked in the drive way perpendicular to my garage entrance.
I looked at the Pilot/XC90 didn't want the minivan stigma
I don't care about stigma at all. Our shopping list started with Odyssey, and we already have a stationwagon as the other car, which we actually drive more than the Highlander.
I can't remember ever getting stuck in the snow. And I have been driving in New England for 22 years.
I guess I'm just good?
Or that your life style is localized if not urban. Get a few acres of land in the hills of MA or NH, not to mention a few hundred acres in VT, or visit a friend that has one, you will find out why AWD are so popular.
Your misinformation on the MPV is as inaccurate and misleading as was your post on vehicle weight and overall capacity. If you would care to check out NHTSA you would see that the Mazda MPV has a five star saftey rating. In case you don't know...that's the best.
The market for a smaller sized minivan obviously is not there. Though the MPV still has almost 2 times the space the Highlander has(using your scoring method). The quality and reliability of the MPV is equal to any minivan on ther market.Consumer Reports 2004 minivan comparison had the MPV rated the highest in reliability and in overall quality. The recent slide into the not recommended category was due to a programming glitch in the transmission that was easily fixed.My 2004 MPV has all the torque and power I need...it is a family car you know. It shifts smoothly and handles extremely well. No problems in over a year of ownership.Though SUV's are safe driven properly...minivans are safer as a general rule.
Your statement about the MPV not having traction control shows an overall lack of knowledge of the vehicle. It does indeed have traction control...as well as 4 wheel antilock disc brakes. The MPV is not coming back as a "full size"minivan.It is coming back as a slightly larger version of the current model. The decision has not been made by Mazda if the MPV is coming back to the U.S market. Though it will in other parts of the world as it is popular and well recieved. The Ford Duratec engine is one of the most reliable on the market.
Perhaps people in your neck of the woods are underfed? But, I shopped the Highlander when looking at minivans ...and the middle seat in the second row looked to be pretty tight. The two seats on the outside were roomy. For Toyota to say that the Highlander seats 7 is almost fraudulent. It will seat 4 comfortably. The Highlander that I drove did not have much in the way of torque. The ride was a bit stiff and handling wasn't that great. There really was not very much room in the thing. Our old Buick Century wagon had more storeage capacity than the Highlander did. You don't need a nice roomy comfortable vehicle that seats 7...but I did. We have no use for any front passenger fold down seat.
Overall, the Highlander was a disappointment from what I was expecting . That plus the fact that it was much more expensive than a comparably equipped MPV. Quality and fit and finish being equal in my opinion.
Luggage behind R1 81.4 85.2 (91.7 including 1st row pass seat folded) R2 44.0 47.3 R3 13.7 15.79 & 20.84 (I think the larger number includes stacking to the ceiling
I get about 24mpg avg with the Freestyle. Comparing the Freestyle to the Explorer, the Explorer is more truck like in driving characteristics (ride, handling, etc) and the Freesytle more car like. The Freestyle is 10" longer, but has more interior space. Not a lot, but then it's only 10" longer yet 4" lower. Not a huge difference. For me, the Freestyle is good enough for snow, potholes, etc., and I'd rather not sacrifice the little bit better mileage, space, and car handling for a truck based SUV. Plus I only paid $23,500 for my Freestyle, so it didn't make sense for me to pay more for the Explorer. If I had to tow more than 1000lbs, then the Freestyle wouldn't cut it, or if I was doing off-road type driving. But since those aren't my uses, then for all the reasons mentioned, it didn't make sense for me to go for the Explorer.
I've read about this Krispy Kreme handout before...but I've yet to see one. I will gladly "razz" anyone and everyone if it means I can get me one of those hot...just out of the oven...Krispy Kremes.
Or that your life style is localized if not urban. Get a few acres of land in the hills of MA or NH, not to mention a few hundred acres in VT, or visit a friend that has one, you will find out why AWD are so popular.
No urban living living for me. I have to be situated within a couple hours of the ski areas. I did spend a few years living in southern NH, and the rest of the time was spent in the northern Mass burbs, but that hardly compares to living in the sticks.
As I've said before, the population density in the areas that you speak of are hardly comparable to what you see in the burbs..or the urbs.
The market for a smaller sized minivan obviously is not there.
That is a shame. I always liked the looks of the MPV over all the other minivans. If they put a small diesel engine in them it would be on my list of possible vehicles.
That is a shame. I always liked the looks of the MPV over all the other minivans. If they put a small diesel engine in them it would be on my list of possible vehicles.
They have a new Mazda minivan out now. Smaller than the MPV. Looks like they're going to try and get in on the big and small people mover market.
Diesel may not be the way to go. Look at the Jeep LIberty diesel. That's only getting in the 20 mpg range. Add to that the high cost of diesel. Pretty pathetic if you ask me.
Your misinformation on the MPV is as inaccurate and misleading as was your post on vehicle weight and overall capacity.
Less accurate and misleading as yours. So do you have an MPV or are you trying to sell MPV's? Why are you so worked up about it?
If you would care to check out NHTSA you would see that the Mazda MPV has a five star saftey rating. In case you don't know...that's the best.
With statements like that, and you accuse me of misleading? FYI, NHTSA gives Kia Sedona 5-star rating, too; does that mean the Kia is the best? NHTSA 5-star rating on the MPV's does not change the fact that IIHS crash test, which is much more strigent, only gives "Acceptable" and "Marginal" ratings on MPV's depending on model year; whereas Highlander gets 5-stars from NHTSA, and "Good," the top rating from IIHS. BTW, I never even described Highlander as "the best" only that "Good" being the highest rating at IIHS; whereas your statement above attempted to imply that MPV is the best, when in fact it is not even as good as Highlander.
The market for a smaller sized minivan obviously is not there.
Gee, I wonder why.
Though the MPV still has almost 2 times the space the Highlander has(using your scoring method).
Where are you deriving my scoring method? This is beyond misleading; it's an outright lie until you prove somehow there is such a thing my scoring method (would be news to me). IIHS did the scoring, not me. As far as I know, IIHS does not score cargo capacity, so you are caught in a lie.
The recent slide into the not recommended category was due . . .
Need I say more?? I buy cars to enjoy trouble-free rides, not to spend time at the dealership and listen to their excuses.
Your statement about the MPV not having traction control shows an overall lack of knowledge of the vehicle. It does indeed have traction control...as well as 4 wheel antilock disc brakes.
So they added traction control since I looked . . . my original point still stands: where is the vehicle stability control? This is 1998, you know. 4 wheel disc ABS brakes, is that something to brag about in 2004-5?? I have not owned a car without 4 wheel disc ABS brakes since, oh, circa 1990?? Where is break force distribtuion?? Like I said, Highlander has more safety features than MPV. Your statements so far has not even made a dent on that contention.
You don't need a nice roomy comfortable vehicle that seats 7...but I did. We have no use for any front passenger fold down seat.
Then get yourself an MPV, big deal; a Kia Sedona will do just as well, which also has 5-star from NHTSA, you know You still have not made the point why I, with very rare need for 7 seating, should get MPV over my Highlander. I happend to value up-to-date safety features, such as curtain airbags, vehicle dynamic control and brake force distribution, etc., none of which is on the MPV.
The Highlander that I drove did not have much in the way of torque.
Talk about misleading statement. You obviously drove a 4-cyl Highlander, and now try to compare that to a 6-cyl MPV. If you ever tried apple-to-apple's comparison, there is no contest between the Toyota 3.3 VVT-i vs. Ford 3.0 Duratec when it comes to torque at low rpm.
Look, if I had sub-$20k to spend and need to trasport 7 people or 5 overweight ones, I might consider MPV or Sedona too. The reality is that I had $30-40k to spend for transporting 2-3 people plus an 90lb dog, and a lot of cargo on regular basis for business purpose, and I have to be able to get to places rain or shine or snow storm, on time. Highlander AWD was simply the most suitable choice for me, one that even if it did break down (god forbid), I could explain to the client that it's a frigging brand new Toyota after all.
To quote brightness04, "The reality is that I had $30-40k to spend for transporting 2-3 people plus an 90lb dog, and a lot of cargo on regular basis for business purpose, and I have to be..."
In these circumstances, the Highlander is a great choice. That's the point of this forum, to help people make the right choice based on their needs and constraints.
For someone driving with 6-7 people a few times/week, then a minivan is a good choice, but if they need the off-road capability or larger towing capability, then mabye an SUV. Of course, people can always buy what they want even if they don't need it.
Funny you should mention the Mazda 5 nitro. I was looking in a Mazda 5 brochure the other day when getting the MPV's oil changed at the dealeship. Mazda doesn't advertise it as a small minivan...but as an all-activity vehicle...something along those lines.They really play up the sporty,exciting to drive and can still do a little bit of everything image.Mazda says there is nothing out there in the market like it. To me it seemed part minivan, part wagon, part sedan ...and whatever else is out there..except SUV(sits really low). The 5 looks as if it sits about 2 feet lower than the MPV...so I'm sure it has a really Zoom Zoom of a sporty ride. Excellent low range torque from what I read. Three rows of seating...very stylish and nice looking in and out. Dealership had about 5 on their lot. Didn't care for the all black interior on all models...as well as the silver middle console area.
I agree gagrice...we thought the MPV to be one of the nicest looking minivans. I hope Mazda brings back the MPV...the more choices there are for the consumer the better. With gas prices the way they are...bringing back the current MPV with a more fuel efficient engine available might be the way to go.
Well...from your misinformed comments I would think the last time you looked at an MPV must have been around 1990. The MPV does have electronic brakeforce distribution(standard)...or did you even bother to look? The MPV also has the driver/passenger side airbags that also work as head protecting(or curtain airbags). But, no...it does not have second or third row curtain airbags or vehicle stability control...you got that part right.
The MPV may not be the safest on the road....but it is one of the safest and is an extremely safe vehicle. I'm sure your 90lb(obese?) pooch would be much more comfortable in the roomy rear cargo area of the MPV than the cramped, small area of the Highlander.
The Highlander is a nice vehicle that fits your needs...I don't believe I suggested you sell it and buy a MPV. But, if you spent 30-40k on the Highlander...it appears you may have gotten ripped off. I also had 30-40k to spend on a vehicle. But, I got one that can do everything yours can do...and more. Plus, I saved 20 grand.
Well...from your misinformed comments I would think the last time you looked at an MPV must have been around 1990.
Funny you bring that up. Early 1990's MPV was a truck-based Minivan. It's fits every anti-SUVer's criticism of their strawman SUVs much better than any modern car-based SUV's. Goes to show you how meaningless the distinction between SUV and Minivan really is.
The MPV may not be the safest on the road....but it is one of the safest and is an extremely safe vehicle.
So what, if you make the model list 50,000 long, a death trap like Mazda Miata can be "one of the" safest too, perhaps safer than some Morgans. Not saying MPV is less safe than many cars out there; that does not change the fact that however it is less safe than Highlander, both dynamicly and passively: AWD, vehicle dynamic stability control, curtain airbags, IIHS crash tests, just name a few.
I'm sure your 90lb(obese?) pooch would be much more comfortable in the roomy rear cargo area of the MPV than the cramped, small area of the Highlander.
I have a malamute; they often grow to 100lbs if not more. You know what they say about "assume" ;-) BTW, it's usually kept in a cage when riding with me for safety, so the limiting factor for her room is not even the cargo area itself. She has plenty room in the cage, thank you for your concern.
The Highlander is a nice vehicle that fits your needs...I don't believe I suggested you sell it and buy a MPV.
Apparently not according to all the hostile sugguestions why I did not get an MPV instead.
But, if you spent 30-40k on the Highlander...it appears you may have gotten ripped off. I also had 30-40k to spend on a vehicle. But, I got one that can do everything yours can do...and more. Plus, I saved 20 grand.
I spent $31.7k + tax for the Highlander; the personal check at the dealership I wrote came close to $34k IIRC. It was a tough call between the Highlander Limited AWD with every option and the RX330 with premium plus package at $5-6k more. Now please tell me where you can find brand new MPV for $11.7k.
Absolutely agree. If someone has to drive 6-7 people a few times per week (heck even once or twice a week), a big minivan is a better choice than midsize SUVs like Highlander. Most people however never drive 6-7 people around even once in a month.
My wife never got stuck in her Sienna xle ltd awd. BTW, her vehicle is so luxurious it put a lot of luxury suv to shame.
Sienna XLE Ltd is practically an RX330 stretched. I don't understand why the hostility MV owners feel towards SUVs when the two types of vehicles are converging, fast. When I bought my Highlander, the new Sienna just came out, so the dealer was not budging from MSRP; that would have resulted in $9k price difference between the top of the line Highlander and the top of the line Sienna . . . as much as I love the sliders and the powered rear gate, the practical side got hold of me; that and the parking difficulties with a 200+" vehicle.
I've had four mini vans with the last being an 04 Sienna and the only only one I did not like. It was the worse vehicle I ever owned;(owned over 40 new vehicles). Wind would push it all over the road and badly paved roads would do the same. The transmission would have burned up if you drove it in the mountains all the time. The only good thing was the 20 mpg average, but it was too big and a smaller might do much better.
Don't knock the Liberty diesel. It is a little work horse and for those that do a lot of off road driving or who live in Colorado or one of the mountain states will have a great vehicle.
The torque of a diesel is wonderful, wonderful, wonderful
DC , VW or anyone else, add a little diesel to a smaller mini or something like VW had years ago in the micro bus, especally the camp-mo-bill. Make one that will get about 25 or better mpg and you will have a winner. A diesel would be the to choice.
brightness04...Just don't keep using the word "most" in your sentence when you say, "Most people however never drive 6-7 people around even once in a month." There are a whole lot of soccer-moms out there carpooling that many every day! I'd say that most people who buy a minivan have the need to carry 6+ passengers pretty often. Plus with car seat, booster seats, etc., even a family of 5 needs three rows of seats plus cargo space for strollers, etc for even weekend trips, so they need something with 20-30 sqft of cargo space behind row 3.
A reporter would like to hear from consumers who have recently had trouble selling their gas-guzzlers for a decent price. If you have a story to share, please respond to jfallon@edmunds.com with your daytime contact info, city/state of residence and the make/model in question no later than Monday, August 29, 2005.
MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR Find me at kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name. 2015 Kia Soul, 2021 Subaru Forester (kirstie_h), 2024 GMC Sierra 1500 (mr. kirstie_h) Review your vehicle
I don't need to transport 6-7 people daily, weekly or even monthly. There are 3 in the family - me, my 9 year old son and my 70 year old father who is handicapped. I also have an arthric German Shepherd who needs monthly vet visits. I'd get a little Subie Forester in a heartbeat, but it won't work for dad or the dog. In the future, when it's just 2 of us, there will be a Subaru in the driveway.
I settled on the Ford Freestyle after comparing everything larger on the market - SUVs, station wagons, sedans, minivans. I hated the Highlander's ride and it wasn't good on corners. For the price, the extras should be standard.
The center seats in the Chrysler T&C (and Dodge Grand Caravan) were cramped. The small wheel base T&C does not come with ABS, but you can get it if you spend a lot more. :confuse: In comparison, the Freestlye & Highlander had more spacious seating and standard ABS.
I don't care about being labeled a 'soccer mom' (my son doesn't play it). Bottom line, the minivans may be cheaper, but by spending a few thousand more, I'll get exactly what we need.
In our case, there may be few people in the seats, but we need the big vehicle to keep everyone comfy and tow the wheelchair and other important cargo.
You are absolutely correct. I should use the phrase "most people" carefully in the context of these forums (or "fora:??). When anti-SUVer's use the term "most people never" they try to imply that "most SUV owners never." That was not my intention. I'm a firm bliever in that people are usually capable of making intelligent choices for themselves, and repect the choice others make; ie. if I see one woman driving a minivan by herself (and indeed most times even MV's are loaded with only one or two people), I'd still give her the benefit of the doubt that chances are that she probably needs the vehicle for car pooling, not at the present instant but often enough to justify buying such a vehicle.
When I wrote "most people never drive 6-7 people around even once in a month" I meant the majority of vehicle owners or licensed drivers, not the majority of MV owners. Since MV, large SUVs and privately owned school buses still only are a small minority of vehicles on the road, overwhelming majority of cars on the road can not even carry 6-7 people, it is relatively safe to assume that most licensed drivers do not drive 6-7 people around even once a month. Hence for most people, a spacious wagon/hatchback on a mid-sized car platform (ie. "midsize SUV" in current marketting lingo) is a more suitable vehicle of choice than a MV.
Right...for "most" people as you defined not needing to carry 6-7, they probably just need a car, or a small wagon for more space, not a minivan or SUV. So when I see "most" people driving SUVs with only 1-2 people, then I wonder. But that's for another forum. This one is for minivans & SUV owners or potential owners, and being a potential owner of a minivan probably means they carry a lot of passengers.
i'm trying to post facts. the explorer is not for everyone, but i am trying keep the record straight. i have not driven a freestyle, so i don't comment on that type of thing. i posted about the 3rd seat because i knew some of the opinions posted were not accurate. guess the freestar 3rd seat doesn't need to be mentioned. same goes for handling. i think the explorer handles great, not as in absolute g's or whatever, but in terms of when you hit a frost heave or pothole mid corner.
how about this as something to banter about? i have an '02 explorer. it's almost a foot shorter the a freestyle, about 4 foot shorter turning circle, carries as many passengers with comparable 3rd seat room, has 3 mode 4wd, and v8 power. i'll skip all the eddie bauer features. why should i consider a freestyle?
2024 Ford F-150 STX, 2023 Ford Explorer ST, 91 Mustang GT vert
Right...for "most" people as you defined not needing to carry 6-7, they probably just need a car, or a small wagon for more space, not a minivan or SUV. So when I see "most" people driving SUVs with only 1-2 people, then I wonder.
There is a huge difference between the probability of carrying 6-7 people vs. the probability of 4-5 people. The world is not neatly made of the two extremes: either 1-2 people cars or 6-7 minivans. Most people need only to carry 1-2 people on daily basis, but occasionally or even often need space for 4-5 people, and hardly ever 6-7. That's why mid-size cars and mid-size SUVs (what used to be mid-sized wagons) are the best sellers. There's always the active-lifestyle or pack-rat crowd like myself: the mid-size wagons market has been in existence for as long as the cars have. Manufacturers stopped making mid-size wagons by and large since the mid-90's (Accord stopped in 1993, Camry stopped in 1995, and Taurus grew to large proportions to accommodate taxi fleet requirement). That's left market wide open for mid-size SUVs. What's more interesting is that mid-size cars used to be the size and shape of today's mid-sized SUVs until GM came up with the idea of making cars lower wider and longer in the 50's and early 60's in pursuit of style. If anything, the re-emergence of easy-entry (seat at the height of butt, without having to lower into a car) mid-size two-box designs, a category that would be called a mid-size SUVs as of last yeat but probably would be called mid-size "crossover (sport) wagons" next year is really a return to functionality over form. If anything , the low riding cars are the result of pursuit of style, not "SUVs."
how about this as something to banter about? i have an '02 explorer. it's almost a foot shorter the a freestyle, about 4 foot shorter turning circle, carries as many passengers with comparable 3rd seat room, has 3 mode 4wd, and v8 power. i'll skip all the eddie bauer features. why should i consider a freestyle?
You should take this up in the Freestyle forum. There's nothing to talk about over there. (No engines blowing up, differentials groaning, electrical issues etc) The biggest news over there is the cd player skips.
The Freestyle fans are bored and need something to talk about so send your question over there. :-)
I'd say the reasons cars became smaller and lower was because of the switch from a frame design to a uni-body design, plus the need to make cars more fuel efficient in the 70's. Then gas prices stabilized, economy was good, being healthy became in, and SUVs became more and more popular. Station wagon sales went down and so the car companies stopped selling them in the USA...the same for hatchbacks.
Small SUVs became cool and hatchbacks not cool. Mid sized SUVs were cool, Taurus wagons were not. Even if the hatchbacks and wagons had better mileage, handled better, were more comfortable, easier to drive, etc...plus the marketing was better for SUVs. Car companies sell what people want to buy.
Now crossover-type vehicles are becoming more popular. Maybe it's because people realize that the qualities of a regular car (low riding as you call it) are more important that the fashion statement ("I am an outdoor active person) made by driving an SUV (for those who don't need the offroad or towing capability). I'd say that the basic minivan is the most utilitarian of all vehicles, as it maximizes interior space for the smallest outside dimensions and weight. For those who need the offroad there are the SUVs. For those don't need the 6-7 passenger capability there are mid-sized sedans. For those who want the "sporty" appearance and more fun to drive cars there are sporty cars. For those that want the more "athletic" image there are small & mid-sized SUVs.
Comments
But this isn't SUVs v. Sports cars.
What if they don't share the same platform? There are also short wheelbase minivans that are very easy to park and garage (i.e Mazda MPV and Dodge Caravan). As well as many SUV's that are extremely difficult to park and garage(i.e Ford Expedition, Chevy Suburban) The choices are there.
Highlander/RX, Pilot/MD-X, Explorer, just to name a few. Most people don't need 7 seats except for very rare occasions. The third row in those SUV's are well suited for the market.
We have already been through this several times on this forum. MPV and Caravan are still longer than Highlander, and delivers worse gas milieage than comparably equipped Highlander, heavier and more dangerous to others as well as passengers inside than Highlander, not to mention not available in AWD in the short versions.
As well as many SUV's that are extremely difficult to park and garage(i.e Ford Expedition, Chevy Suburban) The choices are there.
The per centage of these models as overall SUV sales is much smaller than full-size Minivans as part of Minivans overall.
MPV- 189.5 inches 3772lbs luggage capacity 17.2cu ft. max capacity 127cu ft.
Highlander(A car based SUV which I consider a tall wagon) 184.6in 3705 lbs luggage capacity 10.5cu ft. max capacity 81cu ft.
Wow less than 5 inches and 67 pounds makes that much difference in safety. The main difference I see is comfort and usable space.
Have you ever sat in the back seat of these so called midsized 7 passenger SUV's. After about 60 minutes you wouldn't be calling them seats.
Have you ever sat in the back seat of these so called midsized 7 passenger SUV's. After about 60 minutes you wouldn't be calling them seats.
I beg to differ. I bet 7 passengers will fit fine.
http://www.kansasoz.com/infomunchkins.htm
:-)
In a side by side comparison to the MPV... the Highlander was fairly lame in comparison....IMO. MPV almost twice as much luggage capacity (using brightness method of exaggerated comparison) And a third more max. capacity per number soco gave. Ride in Highlander stiff and unforgiving. MPV drove more car like...better handling. Highlander cost much more for comparable equipment.
Highlander fits 4 comfortable and 3 Oompa Lompas(or Munchkins) in the middle and 3rd row seat(which is a joke)The MPV fits 7 comfortable. The Highlander has no utility advantage at all over the MPV ...except if one buys the 6 cyl to tow or off road.
The smaller vehicle , unfortunately, will lose out most of the time....
it is called common sense...
And keeping your speed well below 100 mph is also called common sense but there are some who abandon common sense on occasion.
tidester, host
I thought you understood that this is perhaps important info for cayenne buyers.
going below 100 mph where there are other cars and people or buildings is common sense....
I think most people have occasionally gone over the speed limit, though they are loathed to admit it....
it is rather easy to assume that one knows what the other person's real needs are....what their purpose or usage would be.
minivans are OK....but just not what I would want , since one gets stuck in the snow easily...
Saying he lacked common sense is like saying people shouldn't buy SUV's unless they are going to tow something or offroad. A bit judgemental.
Buy what you like to please yourself and your family... drive safely...and let everyone else mind their own business.
but I think any one of us could have gone over 100 mph safely , under the ideal circumstances that I did....
I plead.....no contest and am willing to pay 100 KKs...
thanks , jipster....
Have you ever sat in the back seat of these so called midsized 7 passenger SUV's. After about 60 minutes you wouldn't be calling them seats.
Now tell me why I should have the extra 5in length, 67 pounds, no side curtain airbags and worse gas mileage when the Highlander is perfectly big enough for me?? Just to say I have a minivan?? In crash test ratings by IIHS, Highlander is rated as "Good," the top rank, whereas MPV is rated "Average" or "Margin" depending on the model year.
Check out the IIHS crash ratings for yourself, funny man. Highlander is rated "Good," the highest rating from the institution, and MPV is only rated "Acceptable" or "Marginal" depending on which model year.
In a side by side comparison to the MPV... the Highlander was fairly lame in comparison....IMO.
The market has spoken, and MPV is apparently the lamer one, with all due respect to your unsolicited opinion. MPV is about to be disontinued next year, to be replaced by a full size minivan.
MPV almost twice as much luggage capacity (using brightness method of exaggerated comparison) And a third more max. capacity per number soco gave.
"Twice as"? since when is 10.7 x 2 == 17.5? Have you ever tried loading the two? They are very close in real useable space inside. The MPV volume rating advantage comes from the greater interior height, which unless you transport bear cases all the time, is nearly useless. The available floor space behind the seats are very comparable. I find the greater ground clearance much more useful than the extra height inside. Highlander has the added advantage of being able to lower the front passenger seat, which accommodates longer objects that MPV can't. Try shop between the two some time.
Ride in Highlander stiff and unforgiving. MPV drove more car like...better handling. Highlander cost much more for comparable equipment.
MPV can hardly get out of its own way with the torqueless ford engine. There is simply no way I will want own any vehicle with that patheticly unreliable ford engine and tranny combo. MPV's are cheaper for a reason.
Highlander fits 4 comfortable and 3 Oompa Lompas(or Munchkins) in the middle and 3rd row seat(which is a joke)The MPV fits 7 comfortable.
I have no idea how over-weight people are in your neck of woods, but I regularly load five people into my Highlander, comfortably. It has more second-row shoulder room than most mid-size and large sedans that are the standard fair for 5-person transportation. I hardly ever use the third row, nor do most people; therefore why should I live with pathetic engine performance, lack of reliability and lack of safety just to have two extra seats that I hardly ever use.
The Highlander has no utility advantage at all over the MPV ...except if one buys the 6 cyl to tow or off road.
Ever heard of AWD? Ever experienced quiet and confident engine performance? and smooth transmission? How about vehicle stability control? I would not put my kid in any vehicle without it. MPV doesn't even have basic traction control.
It's simply not fair to MPV to even compare such an old mid-90's econo platform with the Toyota/Lexus mainstay platform of the 2000's. That's why I started with comparison of SUV vs. MV that share the same platforms.
i personally prefer an suv because the roads in the northeast can be really crappy.
my explorer takes the frost heaves and pot holes in stride.
just got back from western pa. 375 miles in 6 hours door to door. I-80, I-81, I-84. 1 stop for food. computer reads 20.6 mpg. it is pretty much downhill heading east. heading west i got about 19 mpg.
i saw more minivans than any other vehicles, on the road, other than 18 wheelers.
- feel as if the cost of gasoline is significantly driving up their commuting costs (no pun intended)
- have been impressed with their vehicles' gas mileage
Please respond to jfallon@edmunds.com no later than Thursday, August 25, 2005 with your daytime contact info, year/make/model of vehicle, city of residence and city of employment.
Thanks for your consideration,
Jeannine Fallon
Corporate Communications
Edmunds.com
MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR
Find me at kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
2015 Kia Soul, 2021 Subaru Forester (kirstie_h), 2024 GMC Sierra 1500 (mr. kirstie_h)
Review your vehicle
No. One is legal and the other is not. Besides, my buddy, Highender, knows I have to razz him!
But we'll give him a pass, just this once, since he's providing the Krispy Kremes!
tidester, host
Oh its AWD that changes things makes the car heavier than the MPV at 3970lbs. Now I don't own a MPV I own a Honda Odyssey. It has side airbags VSC, smooth transmision, faster 0-60 times and braking that is 7 feet better than the Highlander per motor trend. Has 38.6 cu ft storage with 8 passengers. Of course its 4500 lbs but I get almost 22MPG. I looked at the Pilot/XC90 didn't want the minivan stigma but we just didn't fit! I think the rear crumple zone is almost non existant when the rear set is being used on some of the small minivans/midsized SUV's. My friends 2005 nissan Pathfinder is heavier and gets about 16mpg. He does live on a dirt road so I think he made a fine choice for him.
I can't remember ever getting stuck in the snow. And I have been driving in New England for 22 years.
I guess I'm just good?
I looked at the Pilot/XC90 didn't want the minivan stigma
I don't care about stigma at all. Our shopping list started with Odyssey, and we already have a stationwagon as the other car, which we actually drive more than the Highlander.
I guess I'm just good?
Or that your life style is localized if not urban. Get a few acres of land in the hills of MA or NH, not to mention a few hundred acres in VT, or visit a friend that has one, you will find out why AWD are so popular.
The market for a smaller sized minivan obviously is not there. Though the MPV still has almost 2 times the space the Highlander has(using your scoring method). The quality and reliability of the MPV is equal to any minivan on ther market.Consumer Reports 2004 minivan comparison had the MPV rated the highest in reliability and in overall quality. The recent slide into the not recommended category was due to a programming glitch in the transmission that was easily fixed.My 2004 MPV has all the torque and power I need...it is a family car you know. It shifts smoothly and handles extremely well. No problems in over a year of ownership.Though SUV's are safe driven properly...minivans are safer as a general rule.
Your statement about the MPV not having traction control shows an overall lack of knowledge of the vehicle. It does indeed have traction control...as well as 4 wheel antilock disc brakes. The MPV is not coming back as a "full size"minivan.It is coming back as a slightly larger version of the current model. The decision has not been made by Mazda if the MPV is coming back to the U.S market. Though it will in other parts of the world as it is popular and well recieved. The Ford Duratec engine is one of the most reliable on the market.
Perhaps people in your neck of the woods are underfed? But, I shopped the Highlander when looking at minivans ...and the middle seat in the second row looked to be pretty tight. The two seats on the outside were roomy. For Toyota to say that the Highlander seats 7 is almost fraudulent. It will seat 4 comfortably.
The Highlander that I drove did not have much in the way of torque. The ride was a bit stiff and handling wasn't that great. There really was not very much room in the thing. Our old Buick Century wagon had more storeage capacity than the Highlander did. You don't need a nice roomy comfortable vehicle that seats 7...but I did. We have no use for any front passenger fold down seat.
Overall, the Highlander was a disappointment from what I was expecting . That plus the fact that it was much more expensive than a comparably equipped MPV. Quality and fit and finish being equal in my opinion.
Explorer Freestyle
Length 189.6 199.8
Height 72.1 68.2
Width 72.1 74.4
Head, shoulder & hip room about same for both.
Leg
R1 42.4 41.2
R2 35.9 40.2
R3 34.8 33.3
Luggage behind
R1 81.4 85.2 (91.7 including 1st row pass seat folded)
R2 44.0 47.3
R3 13.7 15.79 & 20.84 (I think the larger number includes stacking to the ceiling
I get about 24mpg avg with the Freestyle. Comparing the Freestyle to the Explorer, the Explorer is more truck like in driving characteristics (ride, handling, etc) and the Freesytle more car like. The Freestyle is 10" longer, but has more interior space. Not a lot, but then it's only 10" longer yet 4" lower. Not a huge difference. For me, the Freestyle is good enough for snow, potholes, etc., and I'd rather not sacrifice the little bit better mileage, space, and car handling for a truck based SUV. Plus I only paid $23,500 for my Freestyle, so it didn't make sense for me to pay more for the Explorer. If I had to tow more than 1000lbs, then the Freestyle wouldn't cut it, or if I was doing off-road type driving. But since those aren't my uses, then for all the reasons mentioned, it didn't make sense for me to go for the Explorer.
I've read about this Krispy Kreme handout before...but I've yet to see one.
I will gladly "razz" anyone and everyone if it means I can get me one of those hot...just out of the oven...Krispy Kremes.
No urban living living for me. I have to be situated within a couple hours of the ski areas. I did spend a few years living in southern NH, and the rest of the time was spent in the northern Mass burbs, but that hardly compares to living in the sticks.
As I've said before, the population density in the areas that you speak of are hardly comparable to what you see in the burbs..or the urbs.
That is a shame. I always liked the looks of the MPV over all the other minivans. If they put a small diesel engine in them it would be on my list of possible vehicles.
They have a new Mazda minivan out now. Smaller than the MPV. Looks like they're going to try and get in on the big and small people mover market.
Diesel may not be the way to go. Look at the Jeep LIberty diesel. That's only getting in the 20 mpg range. Add to that the high cost of diesel. Pretty pathetic if you ask me.
Less accurate and misleading as yours. So do you have an MPV or are you trying to sell MPV's? Why are you so worked up about it?
If you would care to check out NHTSA you would see that the Mazda MPV has a five star saftey rating. In case you don't know...that's the best.
With statements like that, and you accuse me of misleading? FYI, NHTSA gives Kia Sedona 5-star rating, too; does that mean the Kia is the best? NHTSA 5-star rating on the MPV's does not change the fact that IIHS crash test, which is much more strigent, only gives "Acceptable" and "Marginal" ratings on MPV's depending on model year; whereas Highlander gets 5-stars from NHTSA, and "Good," the top rating from IIHS. BTW, I never even described Highlander as "the best" only that "Good" being the highest rating at IIHS; whereas your statement above attempted to imply that MPV is the best, when in fact it is not even as good as Highlander.
The market for a smaller sized minivan obviously is not there.
Gee, I wonder why.
Though the MPV still has almost 2 times the space the Highlander has(using your scoring method).
Where are you deriving my scoring method? This is beyond misleading; it's an outright lie until you prove somehow there is such a thing my scoring method (would be news to me). IIHS did the scoring, not me. As far as I know, IIHS does not score cargo capacity, so you are caught in a lie.
The recent slide into the not recommended category was due . . .
Need I say more?? I buy cars to enjoy trouble-free rides, not to spend time at the dealership and listen to their excuses.
Your statement about the MPV not having traction control shows an overall lack of knowledge of the vehicle. It does indeed have traction control...as well as 4 wheel antilock disc brakes.
So they added traction control since I looked . . . my original point still stands: where is the vehicle stability control? This is 1998, you know. 4 wheel disc ABS brakes, is that something to brag about in 2004-5?? I have not owned a car without 4 wheel disc ABS brakes since, oh, circa 1990?? Where is break force distribtuion?? Like I said, Highlander has more safety features than MPV. Your statements so far has not even made a dent on that contention.
You don't need a nice roomy comfortable vehicle that seats 7...but I did. We have no use for any front passenger fold down seat.
Then get yourself an MPV, big deal; a Kia Sedona will do just as well, which also has 5-star from NHTSA, you know You still have not made the point why I, with very rare need for 7 seating, should get MPV over my Highlander. I happend to value up-to-date safety features, such as curtain airbags, vehicle dynamic control and brake force distribution, etc., none of which is on the MPV.
The Highlander that I drove did not have much in the way of torque.
Talk about misleading statement. You obviously drove a 4-cyl Highlander, and now try to compare that to a 6-cyl MPV. If you ever tried apple-to-apple's comparison, there is no contest between the Toyota 3.3 VVT-i vs. Ford 3.0 Duratec when it comes to torque at low rpm.
Look, if I had sub-$20k to spend and need to trasport 7 people or 5 overweight ones, I might consider MPV or Sedona too. The reality is that I had $30-40k to spend for transporting 2-3 people plus an 90lb dog, and a lot of cargo on regular basis for business purpose, and I have to be able to get to places rain or shine or snow storm, on time. Highlander AWD was simply the most suitable choice for me, one that even if it did break down (god forbid), I could explain to the client that it's a frigging brand new Toyota after all.
I have to be..."
In these circumstances, the Highlander is a great choice. That's the point of this forum, to help people make the right choice based on their needs and constraints.
For someone driving with 6-7 people a few times/week, then a minivan is a good choice, but if they need the off-road capability or larger towing capability, then mabye an SUV. Of course, people can always buy what they want even if they don't need it.
I agree gagrice...we thought the MPV to be one of the nicest looking minivans.
I hope Mazda brings back the MPV...the more choices there are for the consumer the better. With gas prices the way they are...bringing back the current MPV with a more fuel efficient engine available might be the way to go.
The MPV may not be the safest on the road....but it is one of the safest and is an extremely safe vehicle. I'm sure your 90lb(obese?) pooch would be much more comfortable in the roomy rear cargo area of the MPV than the cramped, small area of the Highlander.
The Highlander is a nice vehicle that fits your needs...I don't believe I suggested you sell it and buy a MPV. But, if you spent 30-40k on the Highlander...it appears you may have gotten ripped off. I also had 30-40k to spend on a vehicle. But, I got one that can do everything yours can do...and more. Plus, I saved 20 grand.
Funny you bring that up. Early 1990's MPV was a truck-based Minivan. It's fits every anti-SUVer's criticism of their strawman SUVs much better than any modern car-based SUV's. Goes to show you how meaningless the distinction between SUV and Minivan really is.
The MPV may not be the safest on the road....but it is one of the safest and is an extremely safe vehicle.
So what, if you make the model list 50,000 long, a death trap like Mazda Miata can be "one of the" safest too, perhaps safer than some Morgans. Not saying MPV is less safe than many cars out there; that does not change the fact that however it is less safe than Highlander, both dynamicly and passively: AWD, vehicle dynamic stability control, curtain airbags, IIHS crash tests, just name a few.
I'm sure your 90lb(obese?) pooch would be much more comfortable in the roomy rear cargo area of the MPV than the cramped, small area of the Highlander.
I have a malamute; they often grow to 100lbs if not more. You know what they say about "assume" ;-) BTW, it's usually kept in a cage when riding with me for safety, so the limiting factor for her room is not even the cargo area itself. She has plenty room in the cage, thank you for your concern.
The Highlander is a nice vehicle that fits your needs...I don't believe I suggested you sell it and buy a MPV.
Apparently not according to all the hostile sugguestions why I did not get an MPV instead.
But, if you spent 30-40k on the Highlander...it appears you may have gotten ripped off. I also had 30-40k to spend on a vehicle. But, I got one that can do everything yours can do...and more. Plus, I saved 20 grand.
I spent $31.7k + tax for the Highlander; the personal check at the dealership I wrote came close to $34k IIRC. It was a tough call between the Highlander Limited AWD with every option and the RX330 with premium plus package at $5-6k more. Now please tell me where you can find brand new MPV for $11.7k.
Sienna XLE Ltd is practically an RX330 stretched. I don't understand why the hostility MV owners feel towards SUVs when the two types of vehicles are converging, fast. When I bought my Highlander, the new Sienna just came out, so the dealer was not budging from MSRP; that would have resulted in $9k price difference between the top of the line Highlander and the top of the line Sienna . . . as much as I love the sliders and the powered rear gate, the practical side got hold of me; that and the parking difficulties with a 200+" vehicle.
Don't knock the Liberty diesel. It is a little work horse and for those that do a lot of off road driving or who live in Colorado or one of the mountain states will have a great vehicle.
The torque of a diesel is wonderful, wonderful, wonderful
DC , VW or anyone else, add a little diesel to a smaller mini or something like VW had years ago in the micro bus, especally the camp-mo-bill. Make one that will get about 25 or better mpg and you will have a winner. A diesel would be the to choice.
MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR
Find me at kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
2015 Kia Soul, 2021 Subaru Forester (kirstie_h), 2024 GMC Sierra 1500 (mr. kirstie_h)
Review your vehicle
I'd cross-shop an Explorer with sliders. The 5 sounds good too - like the Axxess with a bit more style.
Steve, Host
I settled on the Ford Freestyle after comparing everything larger on the market - SUVs, station wagons, sedans, minivans. I hated the Highlander's ride and it wasn't good on corners. For the price, the extras should be standard.
The center seats in the Chrysler T&C (and Dodge Grand Caravan) were cramped. The small wheel base T&C does not come with ABS, but you can get it if you spend a lot more. :confuse: In comparison, the Freestlye & Highlander had more spacious seating and standard ABS.
I don't care about being labeled a 'soccer mom' (my son doesn't play it). Bottom line, the minivans may be cheaper, but by spending a few thousand more, I'll get exactly what we need.
In our case, there may be few people in the seats, but we need the big vehicle to keep everyone comfy and tow the wheelchair and other important cargo.
When I wrote "most people never drive 6-7 people around even once in a month" I meant the majority of vehicle owners or licensed drivers, not the majority of MV owners. Since MV, large SUVs and privately owned school buses still only are a small minority of vehicles on the road, overwhelming majority of cars on the road can not even carry 6-7 people, it is relatively safe to assume that most licensed drivers do not drive 6-7 people around even once a month. Hence for most people, a spacious wagon/hatchback on a mid-sized car platform (ie. "midsize SUV" in current marketting lingo) is a more suitable vehicle of choice than a MV.
i posted about the 3rd seat because i knew some of the opinions posted were not accurate. guess the freestar 3rd seat doesn't need to be mentioned.
same goes for handling. i think the explorer handles great, not as in absolute g's or whatever, but in terms of when you hit a frost heave or pothole mid corner.
how about this as something to banter about? i have an '02 explorer. it's almost a foot shorter the a freestyle, about 4 foot shorter turning circle, carries as many passengers with comparable 3rd seat room, has 3 mode 4wd, and v8 power.
i'll skip all the eddie bauer features.
why should i consider a freestyle?
There is a huge difference between the probability of carrying 6-7 people vs. the probability of 4-5 people. The world is not neatly made of the two extremes: either 1-2 people cars or 6-7 minivans. Most people need only to carry 1-2 people on daily basis, but occasionally or even often need space for 4-5 people, and hardly ever 6-7. That's why mid-size cars and mid-size SUVs (what used to be mid-sized wagons) are the best sellers. There's always the active-lifestyle or pack-rat crowd like myself: the mid-size wagons market has been in existence for as long as the cars have. Manufacturers stopped making mid-size wagons by and large since the mid-90's (Accord stopped in 1993, Camry stopped in 1995, and Taurus grew to large proportions to accommodate taxi fleet requirement). That's left market wide open for mid-size SUVs. What's more interesting is that mid-size cars used to be the size and shape of today's mid-sized SUVs until GM came up with the idea of making cars lower wider and longer in the 50's and early 60's in pursuit of style. If anything, the re-emergence of easy-entry (seat at the height of butt, without having to lower into a car) mid-size two-box designs, a category that would be called a mid-size SUVs as of last yeat but probably would be called mid-size "crossover (sport) wagons" next year is really a return to functionality over form. If anything , the low riding cars are the result of pursuit of style, not "SUVs."
i'll skip all the eddie bauer features.
why should i consider a freestyle?
You should take this up in the Freestyle forum. There's nothing to talk about over there. (No engines blowing up, differentials groaning, electrical issues etc)
The biggest news over there is the cd player skips.
The Freestyle fans are bored and need something to talk about so send your question over there.
:-)
Small SUVs became cool and hatchbacks not cool. Mid sized SUVs were cool, Taurus wagons were not. Even if the hatchbacks and wagons had better mileage, handled better, were more comfortable, easier to drive, etc...plus the marketing was better for SUVs. Car companies sell what people want to buy.
Now crossover-type vehicles are becoming more popular. Maybe it's because people realize that the qualities of a regular car (low riding as you call it) are more important that the fashion statement ("I am an outdoor active person) made by driving an SUV (for those who don't need the offroad or towing capability). I'd say that the basic minivan is the most utilitarian of all vehicles, as it maximizes interior space for the smallest outside dimensions and weight. For those who need the offroad there are the SUVs. For those don't need the 6-7 passenger capability there are mid-sized sedans. For those who want the "sporty" appearance and more fun to drive cars there are sporty cars. For those that want the more "athletic" image there are small & mid-sized SUVs.