Has anyone owned both of these cars? We are trying to decided which would be the most useful most of the time. I am REALLY not interested in hearing from anyone who simply hates SUVs and therefor is always pro-minivan.
On the Odyssey: can it take some off-road driving? It would be about 1/4 mile each weekday, nothing bumpier than half curb height. How about ground clearance when pulling out of a steep driveway nose first (our Saturn scrapes it's nose)? How well can three older kids fit in the second row?
On the Pilot: How comfortable is the third row for a 6 hour+ ride? How easy/hard is it for a kid to get into the third row?
I will also post these questions on the owners boards, so hopefully, someone somewhere will give honest real-world feed back. Thanks!
I've never been inside a Pilot. I have been inside the Odyssey. Odyssey has plenty of room. It is a big vehicle. You should take your boys and sit in both. I think you may high center with the minivan long before you do with the Pilot. The Pilot is a foot shorter and can tow more. It is also less expensive. Go drive them with the boys. Best way to see what you like and don't like.
Then you can do a "compare vehicle" to get this info:
Pilot is a foot shorter, but the Odyssey has 2" more legroom in row 2 and 11" more in row 3...that's a lot. Cargo space behind row 3 in the Pilot is 16 cubic feet but 38 in the Odyssey. Max interior cargo volume is 147 cu ft in Odyssey vs 90 in Pilot, but that's also because the 2nd row in the Odyssey comes out. Towing is better for Pilot (4500 vs 3500lbs). Ground clearance is 8" for Pilot vs 4.3 -5" for odyssey. Prices about the same, depending on the options you want.
So there's more space in the Odyssey, but if it won't meet your driving needs because of the lower ground clearance then it may not work.
Thanks to both of you for responding - I really appreciate it and the information you gave!
I have test driven them both and checked all the numbers at Edmunds and cars.com, but I am reluctant to take a loaner Ody though my normal commute in case it can't handle it. And, on the Pilot, my oldest says its comfortable for a short ride, but that still doesn't tell me how she would do for a long road trip.
But, I will keep persevering to try to find the answers.
It sounds like the Odyssey would be better as far as driving comfort, but the back breaker may be the driveway entry angle
Is there any way that you could "test drive" one of these into your driveway to test the entry/exit angle? Tell the salesman that you won't buy until you test it.
When we bought our Freestyle I told the salesman that there is an extremely steep hill near our house and we wanted to see how the Freebie would handle it. The car that we replaced with the Freebie had a hard time hunting for the proper gear to handle the steep grade of that hill.
I just did an Edmunds vehicle comparison (odyssey, pilot, freestyle), but on the specs it doesn't show any data for the 3rd row. There were a lot more specs on Cars.com (hope you don't kick me off here!)
An interesting stat I did find was the pounds smog-forming pollution per 15000 miles: Odyssey 20.8 - 25.0 Pilot 12.3 - 12.9 Freestyle 5.3 - 6.3
I think your right. I wouldn't even mind if the salesman wanted to do the driving. We are less than 2 miles from the dealership, so I will give your suggestion a try. If it passes the driveway test, then I am more than willing to immediately return to the dealership and buy the thing! From what other moms are saying, I really think that the third row in the Pilot wouldn't be a comfortable fit for my kids, especially as they get older/taller. After our last trip I will never again underestimate the benefits of separating the kids on a long drive!
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 . . .
Cars got lower much earlier than they got smaller. The "lower, longer, wider" mantra was invented by GM in the 50's and early 60's. What came out of it were land yachts with rocket like fins. They were certainly not small.
As for wagons being displaced by SUVs in the 90's, it had a lot to do with CAFE standard. Even Subaru finally gave up the ghost in 2004, and their "sport utility wagon" is now a truck in its registration with EPA. Law of unintended consequences :-)
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 can't be right. Have you seen car designs lately? They are all getting taller, from Focus, Jetta, to Ford 500, BMW 7 series, etc.. A far more likely reason for the naming change, IMHO, is nothing more than that, a naming change. The name "SUV" has been used for 21 years, and is getting a bit stale. The vehicles won't change much but their "classification" name will. Not unexpected, after all, when the term SUV was invented by Jeep, Cherokee was not that different from all the other truck-based wagons of the time. Chevy Suburban used to be called a wagon, then became an SUV in name. . . still serving essentially the same market segment.
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.
The old volume per length argument again. An 18 wheeler with a trailer delivers even more interior space per outside dimension; yes, an 18 wheeler with a trailer can carry more cargo weight than its own weight, something a Minivan can not. The absurdity of trying to convince everyone to have an 18 wheeler to maximize cargo-to-vehicle size ratio is obvious: most people don't need that kind of space or size. Same goes for Minivans.
For those don't need the 6-7 passenger capability there are mid-sized sedans.
Sedans are hardly ever enough for family life. Historically, there was always the wagon for hauling all the bags, and an occasional furniture/TV purchase/weekend trip etc.. For those who do not need a wagon as big as a modern full sized Minivan, most mid-size wagons happen to be classified as "SUV" today.
There are other ways of separating the kids, such as the wide center arm rest. That being said, if you need to load kids into the third row all the time, Minivans are usually better because they are designed for easy entry/egress into the third row. The sliders are better than regular doors anyday (as host Steve will heartily agree). You definitely want to try out the two vehicles yourself. My wife and I found the 2004 Pilot head rest uncomfortable (for our body type only, obviously) when we were shopping last year; an odd revelation that probably does not show up on any stats.
well , you know...I did let my adrenaline get the best of me at that time...
IT was a deserted stretch of I-5 ....lots of vacant land on bothsides...straight as an arrow for almost 5 miles...no vehicles ....so went fast for perhaps 3-5 secs...
I have been driving at normal speeds since...flowing with the traffic...
An interesting stat I did find was the pounds smog-forming pollution per 15000 miles: Odyssey 20.8 - 25.0 Pilot 12.3 - 12.9 Freestyle 5.3 - 6.3
Wonder how they tested the vehicles. I can't think of anything that would make Ody that much more polluting than the Pilot under the same circumstance. Are they testing on the same day and warming up the engines similarly?
good for her....the awd really is good....I had the Previa...but not AWD...and got stuck ...
one time on I-89 near lake tahoe , the front lost traction altogether....and both sides were sheer drops....yikes..
I am sure her lux minivan is really good...congrats ..
you can order any level of interior nowadays.....
as some here already know...I have a rather sedate suburban, whose previous owner spent over $80,000 to upgrade....kinda too much for most people's taste...but the driver's husband was the CEO of an internet com company....so I imagine they could afford it...
All the newer Suv and minivans can be ordered with TV monitors and 8 air bags...so they are great nowadays....
First the usual silliness about how "it's the driver". Hey guys, when the same driver chooses a MV or an SUV, the difference is the vehicle, not the driver.
Gee, does that mean an SUV driver is not to blame if he crashes his "unsafe" SUV? I can see it now--SUV driver crashes into another vehicle, then tells that driver, "Hey, it's not my fault, it's the SUV's fault...I can't help it if the auto manufacturer designed such an unsafe vehicle!". Ummm...yeah, right.
The absurdity of trying to convince everyone to have an 18 wheeler to maximize cargo-to-vehicle size ratio is obvious: most people don't need that kind of space or size. Same goes for Minivans. "
The fact that this forum is called "SUVs vs Minians" probably means people reading this forum have a need to carry lots of people/cargo, so to stick with the intent of this particular forum, I'm only pointing out that a minivan has more interior space than an SUV of comparable exterior dimensions. There are other benefits of having an SUV, such as the comparison between the Pilot and Odyssey with respect to ground clearance, towing capacity, etc. If people have needs that an SUV provide, then that's what they should buy; however, if they don't have SUV needs, then getting the extra space of a minivan might be the way to go.
If you want to start a forum small SUVs vs Sedans, that would be the place to talk about your other issues.
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. Depends on who's sitting in the third row; as a person of adult stature, I sure as heck would not want to be a third-row passenger in those SUVs...
I think that the driver factor just became an issue when using the insurance data on real-life accidents versus crash dummy test. The reason being that by adding in another variable (the driver) then you'd have to account for that somewhere in the data analysis.
So for example you could have the safest vehicle (car X) as far as crash dummy tests go, but if, for example, 80% of the owners of car X are driven by 18-25 year old males and you know that 18-25 year old males account for 80% of all vehicle accidents (for example) then the just by looking at the number of deaths/vehicle X would make it appear that vehicle X is a dangerous vehicle. On the other hand, if car Y is driven mostly by senior citizens driving 200 miles/year at an average of 20mph, then the deaths/vehicle Y might be really low even if the crash tests with dummies indicated that vehicle Y was really unsafe.
You also don't see anything about accidents that were avoided. The tiny sports car may not make out too well on a head-on accident with a big SUV; however, if the tiny sports car is able to maneuver to avoid accidents, that fact won't be picked up on any safety statistics. Bottom line is that it's not a black and white issue when it comes to safety ratings.
I saw the Toyota Highlander Hybrid out at the Kentucky State Fair today. It had cut away sections where the roof, right side of vehicle and floorboard were removed to show where engine, batteries etc were located. One interesting observation was that the gas tank was directly behind and almost underneath the drivers seat. Engine was in the back. Batteries...I can't remember(front I think),,,the kids were with us.
Couldn't help recall a recent conversation I had about the interior space of the Highlander. But, if the future Highlander Hybrid (what available in 2006?) is the same size as todays Highlander(it looked to be exactly the same)...well there just isn't much room in the thing. A very nice looking vehicle, good choice for a family of 4 or smaller.But, very little room in second row center seat...the third row fold down seat was a joke. Cargo area behind third row seat...very small.
Toyota is coming out with a hybrid version of it's Sienna in the near future I believe. Both should do very well.
The fact that this forum is called "SUVs vs Minians" probably means people reading this forum have a need to carry lots of people/cargo,
And for many people, modern SUVs are big enough. Count for yourself how many times anti-SUVer's on this forum try to convince me to get a Minivan because it has 120+ cu.ft even after I have stated numerous times the 81 cu.ft of my Highlander is plenty enough for me, and for most people. Sedan trunks top out around 15-18 cu.ft; Minivans start at 120+ cu.ft for max cargo space. That's a huge gap into which wagons and SUVs thrive. In the 60-100 cu.ft range, most wagon choices are marketted as SUVs. SUVs are simply playing the role of tranditional wagons. Why is the supersized wagon like a Minivan especially desirable in the minds of an anti-SUVer is beyond comprehension.
however, if they don't have SUV needs, then getting the extra space of a minivan might be the way to go
I have no idea how one can logically make the point that SUV is a waste if sedan is all one needs yet at the same time Minivan is a good choice because of the extra space when a smaller wagon/SUV is all one needs..
A very nice looking vehicle, good choice for a family of 4 or smaller
Agree. Given the average woman in the US give birth to only two children, half of all marriages fail, and children stay home only till 18 when they go off to college whereas average life span is 74yrs, it's not hard to conclude that most households have 4 people or less at any given time. That's why midsize wagons and SUVs have always been a great seller as family vehicles. That being said, if I have more than two children, I'd get a minivan too; probably getting one if and when the 2nd is born.
There are other ways of separating the kids, such as the wide center arm rest.
You must not have two kids. Unless the armrest includes a force field, it just won't do the trick for a full 8-10 hours.
Thanks for the feed back. You must have missed the post where I stated we had already taken test drives in them both, but I still appreciate your suggestion. Your last point is so true - until the person buying it actually sits in it, no way to tell how comfortable it will be for you.
[brightness04]Sedan trunks top out around 15-18 cu.ft; Minivans start at 120+ cu.ft for max cargo space. That's a huge gap into which wagons and SUVs thrive. In the 60-100 cu.ft range, most wagon choices are marketted as SUVs. SUVs are simply playing the role of tranditional wagons.
If you're comparing the trunks of a sedan as 15-18cu.ft, then you should compare that to the trunk space (ie behind row 3) of a minivan, not the max cargo space. With all three rows up and in use, then minivans have from 20-40cu.ft for cargo. With mid-sized SUVs, when 3 rows are in use it's usually a sedan-size luggage space behind row 3. To get comparable space in an SUV you have to move up to the really big ones. With mid-sized SUV, if you go on weekend trips and end up using all three rows you need to put the luggage on the roof. So the Minivan vs SUV comparison when you're looking at comparable space would need to be a comparison to the big SUVs, not a mid-sized.
SUVs are simply playing the role of tranditional wagons That's too simple, becaue there are small, mid-sized and really huge SUVs, so generalizing that SUVs are playing the role of traditional wagons is incorrect. There are Volvo, VW, Suburu, etc wagons available. And now there are crossovers available to compare to the mid-sized SUVs, but not too many. And there are quite a few small wagons that have about the same space as the small SUVs. And minivans for comparison to the large SUVs.
I think the first determination is whether you need the three rows of seats. If you do and you think you'll use them pretty often, then either a full-sized SUV or minivan would work. If you only need the car for 5 or less people, then a mid-size SUV or wagon would work, or one of the cross-overs. And if it's mostly just two or three, there are quite a few small station wagons available at all price levels to compete against the small SUVs. It's just a matter of comparing the vehicles and seeing which one meets your needs.
I have a 2002 Honda Odyssey. I have 3 young (3, 5, 7) kids. My kids have playdates, so occasionally we take 2 or 3 other children in the vehicle. My parents and in-laws visit from time to time. I enjoy dirtbiking and have a trailer with 3 dirtbikes on it (2 for my kids). Next week I will be taking my family and my in-laws away for a few days, and taking the dog and the dirtbikes too. 7 people, dog plus towing about 1,000 lbs. I'll probably put our rooftop carrier on as well. I've done this load before and averaged about 20 mpg on mainly highway driving - I can't see an SUV getting close to that mileage with that kind of load... A minivan is perfect for this kind of lifestyle and family size.
On a side note, we have a Toyota Prius for driving locally, and the 5 of us fit quite nicely in that.
nitro... get it right, the differential sings, not groans. what i am wondering is if you load a mv or crossover, and keep up with left lane traffic, will it get any better gas mileage that i get now? overall, i prefer rwd, with 4wd as an option, if i think i need it.
2024 Ford F-150 STX, 2023 Ford Explorer ST, 91 Mustang GT vert
I have a Pilot, traded in our 2004 Sienna... I miss my Sienna every single day! My husband thinks I am nuts. The Pilot is certainly going to handle the tough part of your daily drive, but the 3rd row is nowhere near as convenient as a minivans. My kids are 5 and 3... the 5 year old climbs right over the seat but has a hard time buckling the belt with a booster, so having an adult get back there to assist is tough. How old are your kids? We recently took a long trip, and I too missed being able to separate them. Good Luck, we use our Pilot on the beach almost every day, or I never would have given up my minivan!
Long time no posts from me forum people (some may say thankfully). However, read this in the WSJ today and couldn't resist posting when I saw the last paragraph. Got me ROTFL.
The headline says "Regulator defends fuel exemptions for large SUVs" Basically, they are continuing to exempt big SUVs from the federal fuel efficiency standards which apply to ALL other vehicles.
And the last paragraph - "Christopher Preuss, a spokesman for Detroit based GM, said these vehicles are built for "very extreme environments" and deserve to be exempted."
He was talking about the Suburban here. And the "very extreme environments" was paraphrased in the article, I dint do it.
No flames. Not my statement My current mood - ):))
If you're comparing the trunks of a sedan as 15-18cu.ft, then you should compare that to the trunk space (ie behind row 3) of a minivan, not the max cargo space.
Why? The largest contiguous space (actually "the largest inscribing cylinder with rectangular cross-section that can fit through the door/gate" if you really want to describe the issue mathematically) is what matters. That's why wagon shaped two-box designs have always been popular with families.
SUVs are simply playing the role of tranditional wagons That's too simple, becaue there are small, mid-sized and really huge SUVs, so generalizing that SUVs are playing the role of traditional wagons is incorrect.
Just as there were small, mid-sized and really large traditional wagons in the wagon hey days.
There are Volvo, VW, Suburu, etc wagons available. And now there are crossovers available to compare to the mid-sized SUVs, but not too many.
The production volume of these wagons are miniscule compared to the main stream brands such as Honda and Toyota. I have one of those exotic wagons, a Saab 9-5 sportwagon; less than 5k of those are sold every year, compared to over 100k Highlander/RX platform-mates.
And there are quite a few small wagons that have about the same space as the small SUVs. And minivans for comparison to the large SUVs.
Notice, you conveniently omitted the mid-size, by far the most popular size. And the mid-size is where most current wagon offerings are marketted as SUVs. BTW, small low-rding wagons offer much less space for given vehicle length than small SUVs; compare Jetta Wagon to Rav4 and you will know what I mean, and Jetta Wagon is already halfway towards SUV in height.
I think the first determination is whether you need the three rows of seats. If you do and you think you'll use them pretty often, then either a full-sized SUV or minivan would work. If you only need the car for 5 or less people, then a mid-size SUV or wagon would work, or one of the cross-overs. And if it's mostly just two or three, there are quite a few small station wagons available at all price levels to compete against the small SUVs. It's just a matter of comparing the vehicles and seeing which one meets your needs.
It's simple only because your wordsmithing glossed over the most common scenrio: a family that usually travels with only 2-3 people onboard, occasionally carry 5, but on very rare occasions carry even more. Life, unfortunately/fortunately is not so cut-and-dried. In the wagon hey days, the most popular configuration for family wagon was a 5+2 seater, with a third row facing backwards and can be flipped under the cargo floor. Now try to pidgeon-hole that one in your 3-tier system. Yet it was the most popular American family wagon of the 60-70's, one that gave many baby-boomers nighmares recalling those roads receding fast backwards :-) The mid-size SUVs with 2+1 rows are a straight-forward modern translation of that.
There's no doubt, the populararity of SUV's has CAFE standards to thank for. Chrysler invented both Minivan and SUV segments in 1984 as "trucks" to skirt around the CAFE disadvantage of traditional wagons as heavy cars.
In case you didn't know....the Highlander is an SUV brightness. The dealership should have told you this when you bought it.
Of course I know that. I also know that it is a mid-sized wagon based on Camry. The next iteration will actually be called a sportwagon instead of the SUV marketting tagline, according to the info we have. Does a wagon suddenly become evil when it is called SUV; does a SUV suddenly become benign when it is called a sportwagon? Even if the vehicle remain more or less the same?
good post about those 'retro' wagons. brings back memories of the world going by in reverse. maybe there are some that didn't live through those days. most people with kids like a wagon body, as matter of fact, my kids prefer sitting in the 3rd row at times(when watching a movie). based on my preferences, an suv is great.
2024 Ford F-150 STX, 2023 Ford Explorer ST, 91 Mustang GT vert
Well...Toyota can call it whatever they want. But, the Highlander screams small to mid- size SUV.
"Does a wagon suddenly become evil when it is called SUV"
You must be confusing me with someone else. I never even remotely insinuated that SUV's were evil. My position is, and has always been, SUV's are one of the safest vehicles...with minivans being the safest. The problem with SUV's has been the driver not knowing their vehicle and exercising some common sense. No need to look over your shoulder so much brightness..not everyone is out to get the SUV.
My position is, and has always been, SUV's are one of the safest vehicles...with minivans being the safest.
Not to quibble, but the two bell curves overlap so much as to make the SUV vs. MV safety comparison moot, somewhat akin to the uproar we had a few years back regarding bell curves. Individual models differ so much within each category that individual model comparison becomes far more relevent than broad one category vs. another comparison.
The problem with SUV's has been the driver not knowing their vehicle and exercising some common sense.
So do many MV drivers who are new to vehicles that long and heavy.
An AWD Minivan just doesn't have the ground clearance needed for the beach. Daily, I see Outback wagons and Volvo Cross country wagons that get stuck in the sand. If I was only concerned about snow, than the Sienna AWD would have done the job.
"Does a wagon suddenly become evil when it is called SUV"
It does, when it stops following the safety standards applicable to all other cars.
Unsafe bumper height.
Unsafe light height.
Three times more prone to rollover in an accident - both single and multi vehicles - endagering both the SUV driver and everybody around them. I do not care about the drivers though, they brought it upon themselves.
People who defend SUV as beeing safe are dilusional, uneducated and manipulated by aggresive marketing compains aimed at their insecurities.
SUV are just fine if used off-road or in sparsely populated areas exclusively, or if they adhere to car safety laws and are stable in all driving situations. Many new car based SUV are a considerable improvement. Unfortunately the most popular cheap brands from the likes of GM are most definitely not in this class.
"Does a wagon suddenly become evil when it is called SUV"
It does, when it stops following the safety standards applicable to all other cars.
Then it is not just a name change, is it??
Unsafe bumper height.
The bumper height of cars were drasticly lowered in the 1950's. That of the trucks and 18-wheelers never changed much. Yes indeed the bumper height for low riding cars have been unsafe since the 1950's.
Unsafe light height.
See above regarding the lowering of cars since the 1950's.
Three times more prone to rollover in an accident - both single and multi vehicles - endagering both the SUV driver and everybody around them. I do not care about the drivers though, they brought it upon themselves.
What kind SUVs are you talking about?? SUV rollovers are concentrated in a few old truck based models. Cars roll over too, especially the sporty ones. Many modern SUVs have rollover prevention mechanism. BTW, thank you for you humanity towards "them"; I guess dehumanizing SUV owners make you feel really good.
People who defend SUV as beeing safe are dilusional, uneducated and manipulated by aggresive marketing compains aimed at their insecurities.
People who critize SUVs are uneducated, manipulated by aggressive media tactics aimed at their insecurities and self-righteousness. Heck, from what I can see from this post, some SUV critics are inhumane to boot.
SUV are just fine if used off-road or in sparsely populated areas exclusively, or if they adhere to car safety laws and are stable in all driving situations. Many new car based SUV are a considerable improvement. Unfortunately the most popular cheap brands from the likes of GM are most definitely not in this class.
The new design and cheap ones like Chevy HHR and Equinox are actually much more car-like than the more expensive models like Blazers and Suburbans. The SUV-critics just love the strawman tactic.
Thanks for setting the record back on an even course. Those of us that have been disillusioned by the elitist in our institutes of higher learning are hard pressed to know which direction is best. One group of educated elitist write ads that get us into a frenzy over the latest and greatest SUV. Another group of these highly educated people preach that we are low life uneducated scum because we listened to the other educated people. Then we see our leaders driving around in the best of the best SUVs the Suburban. Strange that the secret service choose the Suburban as the vehicle to protect our commander in chief. Even the wannabe president types have 5 or 6 Suburbans just in case they get elected. What are we in the uneducated masses supposed to do? For me I drove little cars when every one else drove big tuna boats. Now I have enough money I can drive what I want. I guarantee it will not be some goofy looking mini-barge, that looks like a bloated Oscar Mayer wiener mobile.
PS dae: We learned to spell it "delusional" when I was in school.
I think SUV owners haven't felt public pressure like they are going to feel with this explosion of gasoline prices. There will be all kinds of people jumping on the anti SUV bandwagon now. SUV sales have been falling in the past year or two. What do you think they will do now? Likely to drop like an anvil on Jupiter? Minivans are seen as an economic necessity.
Comments
Yes, I do. But, that doesn't bode to well for either one of us does it?
Well, Mr brightness..it's been fun. I think I'm going to turn you back over to lil sailor...maybe he can do something with you.
On the Odyssey: can it take some off-road driving? It would be about 1/4 mile each weekday, nothing bumpier than half curb height. How about ground clearance when pulling out of a steep driveway nose first (our Saturn scrapes it's nose)? How well can three older kids fit in the second row?
On the Pilot: How comfortable is the third row for a 6 hour+ ride? How easy/hard is it for a kid to get into the third row?
I will also post these questions on the owners boards, so hopefully, someone somewhere will give honest real-world feed back. Thanks!
http://research.cars.com/go/crp/summary.jsp?logtype=6&aff=national&call=crp&makeid=18&year- =2005&modelid=6528
Then you can do a "compare vehicle" to get this info:
Pilot is a foot shorter, but the Odyssey has 2" more legroom in row 2 and 11" more in row 3...that's a lot. Cargo space behind row 3 in the Pilot is 16 cubic feet but 38 in the Odyssey. Max interior cargo volume is 147 cu ft in Odyssey vs 90 in Pilot, but that's also because the 2nd row in the Odyssey comes out. Towing is better for Pilot (4500 vs 3500lbs). Ground clearance is 8" for Pilot vs 4.3 -5" for odyssey. Prices about the same, depending on the options you want.
So there's more space in the Odyssey, but if it won't meet your driving needs because of the lower ground clearance then it may not work.
I have test driven them both and checked all the numbers at Edmunds and cars.com, but I am reluctant to take a loaner Ody though my normal commute in case it can't handle it. And, on the Pilot, my oldest says its comfortable for a short ride, but that still doesn't tell me how she would do for a long road trip.
But, I will keep persevering to try to find the answers.
Vehicle Comparison
:shades:
Steve, Host
Is there any way that you could "test drive" one of these into your driveway to test the entry/exit angle?
Tell the salesman that you won't buy until you test it.
When we bought our Freestyle I told the salesman that there is an extremely steep hill near our house and we wanted to see how the Freebie would handle it. The car that we replaced with the Freebie had a hard time hunting for the proper gear to handle the steep grade of that hill.
An interesting stat I did find was the pounds smog-forming pollution per 15000 miles:
Odyssey 20.8 - 25.0
Pilot 12.3 - 12.9
Freestyle 5.3 - 6.3
Cars got lower much earlier than they got smaller. The "lower, longer, wider" mantra was invented by GM in the 50's and early 60's. What came out of it were land yachts with rocket like fins. They were certainly not small.
As for wagons being displaced by SUVs in the 90's, it had a lot to do with CAFE standard. Even Subaru finally gave up the ghost in 2004, and their "sport utility wagon" is now a truck in its registration with EPA. Law of unintended consequences :-)
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 can't be right. Have you seen car designs lately? They are all getting taller, from Focus, Jetta, to Ford 500, BMW 7 series, etc.. A far more likely reason for the naming change, IMHO, is nothing more than that, a naming change. The name "SUV" has been used for 21 years, and is getting a bit stale. The vehicles won't change much but their "classification" name will. Not unexpected, after all, when the term SUV was invented by Jeep, Cherokee was not that different from all the other truck-based wagons of the time. Chevy Suburban used to be called a wagon, then became an SUV in name. . . still serving essentially the same market segment.
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.
The old volume per length argument again. An 18 wheeler with a trailer delivers even more interior space per outside dimension; yes, an 18 wheeler with a trailer can carry more cargo weight than its own weight, something a Minivan can not. The absurdity of trying to convince everyone to have an 18 wheeler to maximize cargo-to-vehicle size ratio is obvious: most people don't need that kind of space or size. Same goes for Minivans.
For those don't need the 6-7 passenger capability there are mid-sized sedans.
Sedans are hardly ever enough for family life. Historically, there was always the wagon for hauling all the bags, and an occasional furniture/TV purchase/weekend trip etc.. For those who do not need a wagon as big as a modern full sized Minivan, most mid-size wagons happen to be classified as "SUV" today.
well , you know...I did let my adrenaline get the best of me at that time...
IT was a deserted stretch of I-5 ....lots of vacant land on bothsides...straight as an arrow for almost 5 miles...no vehicles ....so went fast for perhaps 3-5 secs...
I have been driving at normal speeds since...flowing with the traffic...
its the driver, you know...
Odyssey 20.8 - 25.0
Pilot 12.3 - 12.9
Freestyle 5.3 - 6.3
Wonder how they tested the vehicles. I can't think of anything that would make Ody that much more polluting than the Pilot under the same circumstance. Are they testing on the same day and warming up the engines similarly?
I got stuck several times skiing....it was snowing, and got stuck in the parking lot.
About 2 times got stuck at the cabin.....
maybe the global warming is warmer in your parts ....
but I think tides says we also take turns if no one volunteers...
one time on I-89 near lake tahoe , the front lost traction altogether....and both sides were sheer drops....yikes..
I am sure her lux minivan is really good...congrats ..
you can order any level of interior nowadays.....
as some here already know...I have a rather sedate suburban, whose previous owner spent over $80,000 to upgrade....kinda too much for most people's taste...but the driver's husband was the CEO of an internet com company....so I imagine they could afford it...
All the newer Suv and minivans can be ordered with TV monitors and 8 air bags...so they are great nowadays....
Gee, does that mean an SUV driver is not to blame if he crashes his "unsafe" SUV? I can see it now--SUV driver crashes into another vehicle, then tells that driver, "Hey, it's not my fault, it's the SUV's fault...I can't help it if the auto manufacturer designed such an unsafe vehicle!". Ummm...yeah, right.
The fact that this forum is called "SUVs vs Minians" probably means people reading this forum have a need to carry lots of people/cargo, so to stick with the intent of this particular forum, I'm only pointing out that a minivan has more interior space than an SUV of comparable exterior dimensions. There are other benefits of having an SUV, such as the comparison between the Pilot and Odyssey with respect to ground clearance, towing capacity, etc. If people have needs that an SUV provide, then that's what they should buy; however, if they don't have SUV needs, then getting the extra space of a minivan might be the way to go.
If you want to start a forum small SUVs vs Sedans, that would be the place to talk about your other issues.
Depends on who's sitting in the third row; as a person of adult stature, I sure as heck would not want to be a third-row passenger in those SUVs...
The smaller vehicle , unfortunately, will lose out most of the time....
it is called common sense...
Actually, what you describe is called physics...
So for example you could have the safest vehicle (car X) as far as crash dummy tests go, but if, for example, 80% of the owners of car X are driven by 18-25 year old males and you know that 18-25 year old males account for 80% of all vehicle accidents (for example) then the just by looking at the number of deaths/vehicle X would make it appear that vehicle X is a dangerous vehicle. On the other hand, if car Y is driven mostly by senior citizens driving 200 miles/year at an average of 20mph, then the deaths/vehicle Y might be really low even if the crash tests with dummies indicated that vehicle Y was really unsafe.
You also don't see anything about accidents that were avoided. The tiny sports car may not make out too well on a head-on accident with a big SUV; however, if the tiny sports car is able to maneuver to avoid accidents, that fact won't be picked up on any safety statistics. Bottom line is that it's not a black and white issue when it comes to safety ratings.
Couldn't help recall a recent conversation I had about the interior space of the Highlander. But, if the future Highlander Hybrid (what available in 2006?) is the same size as todays Highlander(it looked to be exactly the same)...well there just isn't much room in the thing.
A very nice looking vehicle, good choice for a family of 4 or smaller.But, very little room in second row center seat...the third row fold down seat was a joke. Cargo area behind third row seat...very small.
Toyota is coming out with a hybrid version of it's Sienna in the near future I believe. Both should do very well.
And for many people, modern SUVs are big enough. Count for yourself how many times anti-SUVer's on this forum try to convince me to get a Minivan because it has 120+ cu.ft even after I have stated numerous times the 81 cu.ft of my Highlander is plenty enough for me, and for most people. Sedan trunks top out around 15-18 cu.ft; Minivans start at 120+ cu.ft for max cargo space. That's a huge gap into which wagons and SUVs thrive. In the 60-100 cu.ft range, most wagon choices are marketted as SUVs. SUVs are simply playing the role of tranditional wagons. Why is the supersized wagon like a Minivan especially desirable in the minds of an anti-SUVer is beyond comprehension.
however, if they don't have SUV needs, then getting the extra space of a minivan might be the way to go
I have no idea how one can logically make the point that SUV is a waste if sedan is all one needs yet at the same time Minivan is a good choice because of the extra space when a smaller wagon/SUV is all one needs..
Agree. Given the average woman in the US give birth to only two children, half of all marriages fail, and children stay home only till 18 when they go off to college whereas average life span is 74yrs, it's not hard to conclude that most households have 4 people or less at any given time. That's why midsize wagons and SUVs have always been a great seller as family vehicles. That being said, if I have more than two children, I'd get a minivan too; probably getting one if and when the 2nd is born.
You must not have two kids. Unless the armrest includes a force field, it just won't do the trick for a full 8-10 hours.
Thanks for the feed back. You must have missed the post where I stated we had already taken test drives in them both, but I still appreciate your suggestion. Your last point is so true - until the person buying it actually sits in it, no way to tell how comfortable it will be for you.
If you're comparing the trunks of a sedan as 15-18cu.ft, then you should compare that to the trunk space (ie behind row 3) of a minivan, not the max cargo space. With all three rows up and in use, then minivans have from 20-40cu.ft for cargo. With mid-sized SUVs, when 3 rows are in use it's usually a sedan-size luggage space behind row 3. To get comparable space in an SUV you have to move up to the really big ones. With mid-sized SUV, if you go on weekend trips and end up using all three rows you need to put the luggage on the roof. So the Minivan vs SUV comparison when you're looking at comparable space would need to be a comparison to the big SUVs, not a mid-sized.
SUVs are simply playing the role of tranditional wagons
That's too simple, becaue there are small, mid-sized and really huge SUVs, so generalizing that SUVs are playing the role of traditional wagons is incorrect. There are Volvo, VW, Suburu, etc wagons available. And now there are crossovers available to compare to the mid-sized SUVs, but not too many. And there are quite a few small wagons that have about the same space as the small SUVs. And minivans for comparison to the large SUVs.
I think the first determination is whether you need the three rows of seats. If you do and you think you'll use them pretty often, then either a full-sized SUV or minivan would work. If you only need the car for 5 or less people, then a mid-size SUV or wagon would work, or one of the cross-overs. And if it's mostly just two or three, there are quite a few small station wagons available at all price levels to compete against the small SUVs. It's just a matter of comparing the vehicles and seeing which one meets your needs.
A minivan is perfect for this kind of lifestyle and family size.
On a side note, we have a Toyota Prius for driving locally, and the 5 of us fit quite nicely in that.
overall, i prefer rwd, with 4wd as an option, if i think i need it.
The headline says "Regulator defends fuel exemptions for large SUVs"
Basically, they are continuing to exempt big SUVs from the federal fuel efficiency standards which apply to ALL other vehicles.
And the last paragraph -
"Christopher Preuss, a spokesman for Detroit based GM, said these vehicles are built for "very extreme environments" and deserve to be exempted."
He was talking about the Suburban here. And the "very extreme environments" was paraphrased in the article, I dint do it.
No flames. Not my statement
Why? The largest contiguous space (actually "the largest inscribing cylinder with rectangular cross-section that can fit through the door/gate" if you really want to describe the issue mathematically) is what matters. That's why wagon shaped two-box designs have always been popular with families.
SUVs are simply playing the role of tranditional wagons
That's too simple, becaue there are small, mid-sized and really huge SUVs, so generalizing that SUVs are playing the role of traditional wagons is incorrect.
Just as there were small, mid-sized and really large traditional wagons in the wagon hey days.
There are Volvo, VW, Suburu, etc wagons available. And now there are crossovers available to compare to the mid-sized SUVs, but not too many.
The production volume of these wagons are miniscule compared to the main stream brands such as Honda and Toyota. I have one of those exotic wagons, a Saab 9-5 sportwagon; less than 5k of those are sold every year, compared to over 100k Highlander/RX platform-mates.
And there are quite a few small wagons that have about the same space as the small SUVs. And minivans for comparison to the large SUVs.
Notice, you conveniently omitted the mid-size, by far the most popular size. And the mid-size is where most current wagon offerings are marketted as SUVs. BTW, small low-rding wagons offer much less space for given vehicle length than small SUVs; compare Jetta Wagon to Rav4 and you will know what I mean, and Jetta Wagon is already halfway towards SUV in height.
I think the first determination is whether you need the three rows of seats. If you do and you think you'll use them pretty often, then either a full-sized SUV or minivan would work. If you only need the car for 5 or less people, then a mid-size SUV or wagon would work, or one of the cross-overs. And if it's mostly just two or three, there are quite a few small station wagons available at all price levels to compete against the small SUVs. It's just a matter of comparing the vehicles and seeing which one meets your needs.
It's simple only because your wordsmithing glossed over the most common scenrio: a family that usually travels with only 2-3 people onboard, occasionally carry 5, but on very rare occasions carry even more. Life, unfortunately/fortunately is not so cut-and-dried. In the wagon hey days, the most popular configuration for family wagon was a 5+2 seater, with a third row facing backwards and can be flipped under the cargo floor. Now try to pidgeon-hole that one in your 3-tier system. Yet it was the most popular American family wagon of the 60-70's, one that gave many baby-boomers nighmares recalling those roads receding fast backwards :-) The mid-size SUVs with 2+1 rows are a straight-forward modern translation of that.
Two mid-size wagons: a 2004 Toyota Highlander Ltd AWD, and a 2001 Saab 9-5 wagon.
Of course I know that. I also know that it is a mid-sized wagon based on Camry. The next iteration will actually be called a sportwagon instead of the SUV marketting tagline, according to the info we have. Does a wagon suddenly become evil when it is called SUV; does a SUV suddenly become benign when it is called a sportwagon? Even if the vehicle remain more or less the same?
most people with kids like a wagon body, as matter of fact, my kids prefer sitting in the 3rd row at times(when watching a movie). based on my preferences, an suv is great.
"Does a wagon suddenly become evil when it is called SUV"
You must be confusing me with someone else. I never even remotely insinuated that SUV's were evil. My position is, and has always been, SUV's are one of the safest vehicles...with minivans being the safest. The problem with SUV's has been the driver not knowing their vehicle and exercising some common sense. No need to look over your shoulder so much brightness..not everyone is out to get the SUV.
Not to quibble, but the two bell curves overlap so much as to make the SUV vs. MV safety comparison moot, somewhat akin to the uproar we had a few years back regarding bell curves. Individual models differ so much within each category that individual model comparison becomes far more relevent than broad one category vs. another comparison.
The problem with SUV's has been the driver not knowing their vehicle and exercising some common sense.
So do many MV drivers who are new to vehicles that long and heavy.
It does, when it stops following the safety standards applicable to all other cars.
Unsafe bumper height.
Unsafe light height.
Three times more prone to rollover in an accident - both single and multi vehicles - endagering both the SUV driver and everybody around them. I do not care about the drivers though, they brought it upon themselves.
People who defend SUV as beeing safe are dilusional, uneducated and manipulated by aggresive marketing compains aimed at their insecurities.
SUV are just fine if used off-road or in sparsely populated areas exclusively, or if they adhere to car safety laws and are stable in all driving situations. Many new car based SUV are a considerable improvement. Unfortunately the most popular cheap brands from the likes of GM are most definitely not in this class.
It does, when it stops following the safety standards applicable to all other cars.
Then it is not just a name change, is it??
Unsafe bumper height.
The bumper height of cars were drasticly lowered in the 1950's. That of the trucks and 18-wheelers never changed much. Yes indeed the bumper height for low riding cars have been unsafe since the 1950's.
Unsafe light height.
See above regarding the lowering of cars since the 1950's.
Three times more prone to rollover in an accident - both single and multi vehicles - endagering both the SUV driver and everybody around them. I do not care about the drivers though, they brought it upon themselves.
What kind SUVs are you talking about?? SUV rollovers are concentrated in a few old truck based models. Cars roll over too, especially the sporty ones. Many modern SUVs have rollover prevention mechanism. BTW, thank you for you humanity towards "them"; I guess dehumanizing SUV owners make you feel really good.
People who defend SUV as beeing safe are dilusional, uneducated and manipulated by aggresive marketing compains aimed at their insecurities.
People who critize SUVs are uneducated, manipulated by aggressive media tactics aimed at their insecurities and self-righteousness. Heck, from what I can see from this post, some SUV critics are inhumane to boot.
SUV are just fine if used off-road or in sparsely populated areas exclusively, or if they adhere to car safety laws and are stable in all driving situations. Many new car based SUV are a considerable improvement. Unfortunately the most popular cheap brands from the likes of GM are most definitely not in this class.
The new design and cheap ones like Chevy HHR and Equinox are actually much more car-like than the more expensive models like Blazers and Suburbans. The SUV-critics just love the strawman tactic.
Thanks for setting the record back on an even course. Those of us that have been disillusioned by the elitist in our institutes of higher learning are hard pressed to know which direction is best. One group of educated elitist write ads that get us into a frenzy over the latest and greatest SUV. Another group of these highly educated people preach that we are low life uneducated scum because we listened to the other educated people. Then we see our leaders driving around in the best of the best SUVs the Suburban. Strange that the secret service choose the Suburban as the vehicle to protect our commander in chief. Even the wannabe president types have 5 or 6 Suburbans just in case they get elected. What are we in the uneducated masses supposed to do? For me I drove little cars when every one else drove big tuna boats. Now I have enough money I can drive what I want. I guarantee it will not be some goofy looking mini-barge, that looks like a bloated Oscar Mayer wiener mobile.
PS
dae: We learned to spell it "delusional" when I was in school.
Minivans are seen as an economic necessity.