I just traded a Honda Odyssey in on a 4Runner. I liked the Odyssey but It had it's shortcomings. BTW it did do extremely well in the snow. But, it couldn't go off road. The 03 4Runner has a much better stereo than the Odyssey ( what doesn't) , rides almost as well on the road, carries 4 passengers with ease. (The one time I had 6 people in my Odyssey it bottomed out at the end of my driveway) I came to this topic with my flame suit on and with asbestos gloves.
If you require a vehicle that does real off roading (I assume this is not dirt/gravel off roading ;-) ), then this is a no-brainer. You need an SUV, not a MV.
That's the new, redesigned 4Runner right? Do they all come with the 4.7L V8? If not, what other engines are available? I've seen them at dealers but haven't stopped to look.
With current GM discounts and rebates you should be able to get into a brand new Suburban for under $30K which would seat nine full size people or a whole gaggle of kids. For about $30K you would get a 2WD LS but with the locking diff you are not likely to get stranded, and you can look down your nose at all the mini-SUVs and minivans and be in style for the next ten years or more since this vehicle has looked about the same since 1936. Happy New Year.
It lacks shoulder belts and head rests in some center positions, unless they added these recently. Even with the longer distance to the rear from the third row, an adult or tall child in a booster is at much higher risk without these features.
The Ford Expedition is not quite as big, but it does have headrests and shoulder belts in all seating positions. Plus, for 2003 it also has a new independent rear suspension, wider track, rollover sensing and canopy side impact airbags, tire inflation monitors and Advancetrac stability control. If you get all these options, it's a nice step up from most large SUVs in terms of safety... The Suburban also still lacks LATCH from what I understand...
I'd still rather have my family in a minivan, personally, but SUVs are finally catching up with advanced safety features.
Wouldn't most consumer vehicles, be they minivans, SUVs, or full-size vans, be well over the payload limit if carrying 9 full-size adults? At 180 pounds each, that's 1620 pounds. My sense is these payload limits are quite conservative and reflect manufacturer CYA more than engineering limits of the vehicles, but it's still a concern.
SUVs on large truck frames probably have much higher payload capacity than car-based minivans or SUVs. On the negative side, a full load of passengers will make a top-heavy, rollover prone vehicle more susceptible to poor handling and rolling. See table 4/5 and section 4: http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/pdf/nrd-30/NCSA/RNotes/2001/15VanRollNote.pdf .
My 4runner has a 4.7l V-8. The dealer I bought my 4runner from had an 03 Limited with a V-6. The V-8 has its torque and HP at about 3 K RPM - lower RPM than the V-6. I think they recommend premium in the V-6. It's 87 octane in the 8. BTW I had reliability problems both with a 96 DC and a 99 Odyssey. I got the 4runner primarily because it's a Toyota. I can take it off road, too. Somthing both I and my wife have wanted to do for several years. I have previously owned 2 Jeeps which I took off road. Low end torque is crucial for off road use, in my experience. I did like the hand throttle on the stick shift jeeps after stalling out on a steep hill. .
My Mercury Village has just died and I NEED a vehicle. Due to our situation and wants, this is a very difficult decision.
1. There is no luxury minivan available. The top trim lines of available minivans cannot be confused with Mercedes, Lexus, or BMW poshness. There should be an option for people who need a minivan and who want such luxury.
2. We use a wheelchair lift. The rear openings of SUV's are usually too short for such lifts. 41" are needed. The Sequoia only offers 38", and the Lexus GX470 only offers 37.5". I wish that SUV's could have larger rear openings!!!!!
3. The new 3rd row seats in Honda and upcoming Toyota minivans is not a good thing for us! The lift must be bolted to a solid floor in the rear corner. The disappearing seat's well prevents such a mount. If we go with such a van, we may have to get a converter to reconstruct the entire rear of the vehicle.
4. If the rear problems cannot be overcome, Chrysler and Ford minivans are options. We have read about possible reliability issues with the Chryslers. The Ford are always disappointing in terms of the interior. However, we may not have any choice. :-(
We will visit showrooms this weekend to recheck the possibilities. The new VW SUV deserves a look and rear opening measurement. The upcoming Sienna is eagerly awaited. The opportunity to get a new car should be a great time. However, this SUV (rear opening, entry height) vs minivan (no luxury, rear seat issues) is a big problem.
True, there are no minivans on par with the luxury vehicles in other classes, including SUVs. My opinion on the minivans with the most luxurious-feeling interiors would be a loaded Chrysler Town & Country Limited and possibly a loaded Windstar - I think there's a Limited model? These vans may not feel as luxurious as luxury SUVs or luxury cars, but they do have lots of bells and whistles and probably are as 'luxurious' as one can get in a minivan.
The new Sienna should be in most showrooms by now, but it has a "magic" seat in the rear. But it's a split seat, so maybe there's a way to kludge a lift support.
Thanks Steve and deepan for the links! My wife has become very knowledgeable about this area, but we are always looking for new info. The general information is also helpful. Thanks again.
Toyota will have a rampvan conversion for the new Sienna. I think that the picture on page 5 in deepan's link comes from this rampvan. This will be an option for us. However, we are first hoping for a solution with a hoist-type lift in the rear. At this point, my wife's mobility allows us the option of having a standard van with a rear lift. The lowered ground clearance and required side space are concerns to us about the rampvan concept. But it is nice to know that such an option exists. Thanks.
"probably are as 'luxurious' as one can get in a minivan"
bluedevils - I just see no reason that manufacturers couldn't make a true luxury minivan. In fact, the concept of a luxury minivan seems no less reasonable than a luxury SUV. I would wager that most luxury SUV's rarely leave pavement anyway. Many luxury SUV buyers might choose a luxury minivan.
Our 2000 Toyota Sienna XLE is a very nice car. However, the lack of optional features such as a powered passenger seat, a great stereo, and even a glovebox light are noticiable and perplexing. Our hypothesis was that Toyota must have been trying to keep the price below a certain level. Subsequent Siennas have improved in these areas.
If Toyota/Lexus were to make a luxury minivan, I would guess that a lot of people who now buy BMW X5's, Mercedes M-class vehicles, Acura MDX's, or Lexus RX/GX/LX vans would consider such a vehicle. (Due to the size of the rear opening and the seating height of these luxury SUV's, these are not feasible options for us.)
BTW - are you a Duke Blue Devils fan? I am a UNC supporter.
I think they both have their strengths & weaknesses. For me, my 95 pathfinder gets me into the backcountry for fishin' & mtn biking--4wd is something I need for that (pathfinder is a passable off-road vehicle, not a "serious" 4 wheeler, I have determined from off roading in it that I'll never get another "not-so-serious" 4x4/suv, e.g. w.o. an LSD or locker on it). Back when we used to get snow here in CO--this drought is a killer--it is nice to have a vehicle that'll get around no problem in snow/ice. Its fairly tough (95, anyway has lots of steel, is built on truck chassis), can tow a small trailer, and has decent cargo room for my gear. Its fairly small & maneuverable, as far as suvs go. It does get pretty bad mpg, especially considering its not real fast/powerful, about 18 - 23 (depending on h.w./city driving, if I REALLY baby it. can go down to 16 if I'm 4wheeling, leadfooting, etc...Its way too crowded for 3 kids on a road trip.
My 01 silhouette minivan has lots of room for my 3 kids, 2 dogs, and a huge pile of our "stuff" we always end up with. lol That's what its all about. Its very comfortable, not "fast" but plenty powerful, has heat/ac in the back, has front/side airbags, and most importantly for me, it gets 20 - 25 mpg, which is awesome for such a big 'ol car! It was very reasonably priced, bought used, 30000 miles ~6 months ago for $17000. We briefly considered a suburbanexcursion-type vehicle, but the horrible gas mileage, much higher purchase price, higher insurance, etc. scared us. And as far as replacing pfinder with a huge suv for off roading, no thanks, it'd be like trying to 4wheel in an ocean liner! (yes I've driven suburbans) lol Van seems pretty "plastic", and although I could probably tow our little camper with it, I don't think I will (still considering that--would need aftermarket trans cooler). The prospect of doing my own maint/repairs on van is a little frightening--although that probably holds true with most 01 + vehicles.
But both vehicles serve their purpose fairly well. Ideally, in the next few years, I plan to keep van, get rid of suv, and get a little 40 - 50 mpg econobox for commuting/around town, and find a jeep wrangler (with a locker, winch, etc.) for the off roading.
I do think, as has been argued elsewhere for almost 30000 posts by lisailor , that most (not all) people with the huge suvs really don't probably need 'em and would be better served by a minivan, sedan, or wagon, or even in some cases a small pickup. Its a status symbol and the mistaken notion that "if I have a huge, heavy vehicle, I'll have the advantage in an accident" that sells so many of those tahoes/expeditions/suburbans, rather than people actually needing them. But hey, to each his own, live & let live, & all that...
...as has been argued elsewhere for almost 30000 posts by lisailor ...
Hey, I resemble that remark ;-)
Nice post, good summary of a particular use pattern. Of course, you're a part of the small % of SUV owners that actually do off roading, so that has to be accounted for.
But hey, to each his own, live & let live, & all that...
I, too, am surprised that no manufacturer offers a true luxury/high-end minivan. It would seem such a vehicle would sell quite well, especially since the first one introduced would have the advantage of no real competition at least for a while.
In my earlier post, I didn't mean to imply it was not possible for automakers to cram any more luxury into minivans than they currently do; I was simply pointing out my opinion on which 2 offer the most luxury.
It's embarrassing for some of these $30k+ MSRP minivans not to include a power front passenger seat. And front heated seats are only recently becoming more widely available. Still, not many minivans are available with a moonroof, which is also a head-scratcher to me.
While it's certainly not the most luxurious minivan out there, the Kia Sedona actually offers a moonroof, a power passenger seat, and power rear quarter windows with driver and 3rd row controls, in the EX model. If Kia can include these features in a $24k minivan along with a fairly hi-tec, though not high-performance, powertrain (24V DOHC 3.5L w/5-speed automatic), why can't some of the competition include such features at much higher price points? We are very satisfied Sedona owners, by the way.
How about a minivan with power/heated front seats with 2 driver seat/mirror memory, vehicle info system/trip computer, leather interior, moonroof, power side doors and liftgate, heated/auto-dimming mirrors, electroluminescent guages, ABS, AWD or traction control, tire pressure monitoring system, 10 speaker Infinity sound system with 6 disc CD changer, adjustable pedals, steering wheel mounted audio & cruise controls, load-leveling suspension, alloy wheels, remote keyless entry, auto on/off headlights...and of course, wood trim?
Spent a few minutes looking at the stuff on Toyota's web site. Sounds like the '04 Sienna will leapfrog to the head of the class in some key areas - room, trickiest 3rd-row seat, etc.
It appears that the 'slide-forward' 2nd row seat - for easier access to a kid/infant in a child seat - is available only on 8-seater Siennas; i.e., only the 2 lower trim levels (CE and LE), not XLE and XLE Limited. That's disappointing.
Powertrain will surely be zippy, but Toyota is really only catching up with the Joneses by offering a 230-hp 3.3L V6 and 5-speed automatic.
My guess would be that a Lexus-badged Sienna would cost more than $40k though.
I have looked at the higher-level T&C and other Chrysler vans in the past. Both my wife and I immediately didn't like them. In addition, the talk about reliability issues concerned us. We will likely look at the T&C again during this round. Wheelchair lift manufacturers routinely put lift into the Chrysler and Ford vans without problems.
The features that you mentioned are certainly steps towards luxury. The new Sienna sounds as if many of these features will be included. The current Sienna (at least my 2000 XLE) lacked some of these (e.g. a decent stereo, power passenger seat, lumbar support, etc). A car manufacturer should take these features, upgrade the remaining aspects, and create a complete luxury experience.
A 40-45k Lexus "Sienna" would sell very well in my opinion. Some Sienna buyers would opt for this vehicle; other SUV buyers would conclude that off-road driving is not a real option for them. It would be great to have a choice.
The new Mercury Monterey may also feature luxury components. It is an upgraded Windstar that will appear later in the year. I have only seen the exterior drawings or photos.
BTW - My wife dreams of Maybach reclining seats in a luxury minivan. Such a layout should be quite possible in a luxury minivan for about 250k less than the Maybach. ;-)
I agree that chances of getting a lemon are very slim regardless of make or model, there's more to reliability differences than a simple lemon/no lemon indicator. A vehicle can have lots of little problems that annoy the owner but don't affect the owner's ability to use the vehicle on a daily basis. And a vehicle can have mechanical problems that do render it inoperable, unsafe, etc.
There are bad samples of every vehicle make & model. Choosing one with a better reliability/quality record simply increases your chances of having one with fewer problems.
'ultimate' as in the biggest, heaviest, fuel-thirstiest SUV in the U.S. market?
I'm an SUV owner and a minivan owner. My impression is that most Excursion owners are practicing the ultimate in excess. There are plenty of smaller and more fuel-efficient vehicles, SUVs and probably even AWD cars, that can plow through snow as capably as an Excursion. I see lots of Excursions here in SE Michigan, and I do not believe I've ever seen more than 4 people in one at the same time. 80-90% of the time it's just the driver.
Plus, many trucks use obsolete 4WD systems ( good primer here http://home.attbi.com/~eliot_www/awd.html ). Modern AWD systems may actually do better in poor weather, as they can react faster with more wheels getting power without actually locking them. I don't know what type is on the Excursion.
Ironically, the only vehicle I saw on the side of the road after the 4" snowfall a few weeks ago was an Excursion. Probably no fault of the vehicle, most likely overconfidence on the part of the driver. AWD/4WD doesn't make your stopping distances any shorter...
"I can't understand why people turn up their noses at minivans and then spend an extra 10 grand for an S.U.V. with less space"
"With S.U.V. owners on the defensive, minivan owners can hold their heads high again. In a recent article in The New Republic on the S.U.V. — labeled on the cover as the "Axle of Evil" — Gregg Easterbrook not only confessed to owning a Honda Odyssey but also boasted about its 240-horsepower V-6 engine. While he didn't quite call it a muscle car, he proclaimed his minivan just as powerful as an S.U.V. while using less fuel and spewing less pollution."
Accelerates better, handles better, brakes better, and gets better MPG's than the minivan I previously drove.. The SUV has less interior space then the MV, but we haven't missed it, and the rear seats fold easier in the SUV. 1999 Windstar was the MV, current SUV is an Escape.
People are always brushing broad strokes implying that all minivans are better than all SUV's, but there are exceptions.
People are always brushing broad strokes implying that all minivans are better than all SUV's, but there are exceptions.
Was that a compliment for MVs? ;-)
I think more folks go the other way, actually...but I agree with you that broad strokes do not tell the whole story.
My SUV also handles better and accelerates better than my previous MV. Braking is probably about the same and the mpgs were better. The MV had double the space and I would have missed it then. The fold down seats are better in the SUV, but I had more room behind the 2nd seat in the MV than I have in the PF with the seats down.
My parents had an '88 Astro conversion van. Many a long family trip was taken in that van. Still, comparing a 17-year old minivan to a more current SUV seems like an apples and oranges comparison.
I do agree that broad strokes don't always tell the whole story, but comparing a really old minivan against a very recent SUV isn't a fair comparison. Nor would be an old SUV vs. a new minivan. I dare say that would be even more one-sided in favor of the newer vehicle.
In any case, other than the addition of the 4WD option, I believe my characterization of the Astro would apply to the current model as well. It really hasn't changed that much.
Absolutely right - seems like few mechanical or cosmetic changes in almost 20 model years! There can't be too many other vehicles out there right now with the same claim. Not exactly something to be proud of.
I had to talk my dad out of buying another Astro. He liked the idea of AWD and minivan room. I had to remind him repeatedly of how trucky the thing felt.
We got it because we had two kids, needed a lot of room and I was always carrying a lot of stuff...kid stuff and Home Depot stuff. And boy, did it have room! 170 cu ft behind the front seats!!! Compare that to the Excursion (largest SUV cargo area) with 146.
Yes, it was trucky, the handling was pretty awful, numb steering and all...but, you know...it was a workhorse. We kept it for 10 years, never had a major problem and it served us well.
After 10 years and 170k miles or so, my parents' Astro had become the worst-riding vehicle I had even been inside. The suspension was HORRIBLE. My dad donated it to charity after 16 or so years of trusty service. Only big problem it had was while I was driving it on a Michigan to NYC trip, shortly before the warranty expired. Back then, I was a 17-year old punk kid who knew nothing about cars. My dad showed me how to check the oil level on the dipstick before the trip, but it went in one ear and out the other. I did check it once during the trip and there was no oil on the dipstick. Upon returning home, I declared to my dad that the dipstick must be broken or something. Dealer ended up replacing the engine under warranty. The Astro went another 100k+ miles after that.
"Minivans - once the most popular family movers in suburbia - are beginning to re-emerge from the shadow of the SUV as a less expensive and more environmentally friendly alternative for baby boomer couples with children."
its one of those things imo where there's definite advantages and disadvantages to both. Its nice having the floor area clear & open with column shifter, however its probably more "user-friendly" & easier to shift if on the floor
not that there's anything wrong with that, but the AstroVan is a monster - an old-fashioned van - one of the only ones that can tow, if I recll correctly (at least as of 5 years ago when I bought my Grand Caravan)
it's no wonder Bess likes her SUV better than he minivan - her minivan was a piece of garbbage ( a Ford Windstar - hardly the head of its class) and her Escape is probably pretty nimble
my minivan is WAY better than an SUV of its same vintage that I occasionally drive, a Ford Explorer
but the Explorer is better in the snow, so I borrow it to go to Tahoe, but drive the Explorer every day? yuck - that thing drives like a friggin TRUCK!!
:-)
I prefer the minivan for everyday driving (though I would much prefer more fun in the everyday drive, don't get me wrong)
For my needs, comparing the Escape to ANY minivan puts it far ahead. The choices,needs and preferences we had made the Escape a better choice for us than any mini-van regardless of brand.
A summary: we did not have a need for the extra row of seats that a mini-van offers. So with the Escape (and several other mini-suv's out there such as the CRV), we got a vehicle that handled better, performed better, gets better mpgs, with similar features, and a much lower price than the mini-vans on the market.
If the choice was between a mini-van or an Explorer, then I would also lean towards the mini-van. However as the mini-suv fit me and my families wants and needs well, we chose that over the mini-van.
We just got back from our spring break vacation trip 500+ miles each way (8+ hours each way with kids ages 4 and 7), and it was a pleasure to drive, as usual.
Comments
tidester, host
The 03 4Runner has a much better stereo than the Odyssey ( what doesn't) , rides almost as well on the road, carries 4 passengers with ease. (The one time I had 6 people in my Odyssey it bottomed out at the end of my driveway)
I came to this topic with my flame suit on and with asbestos gloves.
The Ford Expedition is not quite as big, but it does have headrests and shoulder belts in all seating positions. Plus, for 2003 it also has a new independent rear suspension, wider track, rollover sensing and canopy side impact airbags, tire inflation monitors and Advancetrac stability control. If you get all these options, it's a nice step up from most large SUVs in terms of safety... The Suburban also still lacks LATCH from what I understand...
I'd still rather have my family in a minivan, personally, but SUVs are finally catching up with advanced safety features.
BTW I had reliability problems both with a 96 DC and a 99 Odyssey. I got the 4runner primarily because it's a Toyota. I can take it off road, too. Somthing both I and my wife have wanted to do for several years. I have previously owned 2 Jeeps which I took off road. Low end torque is crucial for off road use, in my experience. I did like the hand throttle on the stick shift jeeps after stalling out on a steep hill.
.
1. There is no luxury minivan available. The top trim lines of available minivans cannot be confused with Mercedes, Lexus, or BMW poshness. There should be an option for people who need a minivan and who want such luxury.
2. We use a wheelchair lift. The rear openings of SUV's are usually too short for such lifts. 41" are needed. The Sequoia only offers 38", and the Lexus GX470 only offers 37.5". I wish that SUV's could have larger rear openings!!!!!
3. The new 3rd row seats in Honda and upcoming Toyota minivans is not a good thing for us! The lift must be bolted to a solid floor in the rear corner. The disappearing seat's well prevents such a mount. If we go with such a van, we may have to get a converter to reconstruct the entire rear of the vehicle.
4. If the rear problems cannot be overcome, Chrysler and Ford minivans are options. We have read about possible reliability issues with the Chryslers. The Ford are always disappointing in terms of the interior. However, we may not have any choice. :-(
We will visit showrooms this weekend to recheck the possibilities. The new VW SUV deserves a look and rear opening measurement. The upcoming Sienna is eagerly awaited. The opportunity to get a new car should be a great time. However, this SUV (rear opening, entry height) vs minivan (no luxury, rear seat issues) is a big problem.
page 5 photo 7 looks like no 3rd row seats
http://www.toyota.com/html/shop/look_ahead/conceptcar.html#fchv Go to the top right grey area and click on "2004 Sienna".
Some of our comparison articles might give you some research ideas.
You're probably already familiar with the info in this article, but I'll toss it out here anyway. Good luck!
Steve, Host
Toyota will have a rampvan conversion for the new Sienna. I think that the picture on page 5 in deepan's link comes from this rampvan. This will be an option for us. However, we are first hoping for a solution with a hoist-type lift in the rear. At this point, my wife's mobility allows us the option of having a standard van with a rear lift. The lowered ground clearance and required side space are concerns to us about the rampvan concept. But it is nice to know that such an option exists. Thanks.
Seb
bluedevils - I just see no reason that manufacturers couldn't make a true luxury minivan. In fact, the concept of a luxury minivan seems no less reasonable than a luxury SUV. I would wager that most luxury SUV's rarely leave pavement anyway. Many luxury SUV buyers might choose a luxury minivan.
Our 2000 Toyota Sienna XLE is a very nice car. However, the lack of optional features such as a powered passenger seat, a great stereo, and even a glovebox light are noticiable and perplexing. Our hypothesis was that Toyota must have been trying to keep the price below a certain level. Subsequent Siennas have improved in these areas.
If Toyota/Lexus were to make a luxury minivan, I would guess that a lot of people who now buy BMW X5's, Mercedes M-class vehicles, Acura MDX's, or Lexus RX/GX/LX vans would consider such a vehicle. (Due to the size of the rear opening and the seating height of these luxury SUV's, these are not feasible options for us.)
BTW - are you a Duke Blue Devils fan? I am a UNC supporter.
Thanks,
Seb
The other rumor I've heard is that Mercedes-Benz is planning a minivan for 2007.
Steve, Host
I think they both have their strengths & weaknesses. For me, my 95 pathfinder gets me into the backcountry for fishin' & mtn biking--4wd is something I need for that (pathfinder is a passable off-road vehicle, not a "serious" 4 wheeler, I have determined from off roading in it that I'll never get another "not-so-serious" 4x4/suv, e.g. w.o. an LSD or locker on it). Back when we used to get snow here in CO--this drought is a killer--it is nice to have a vehicle that'll get around no problem in snow/ice. Its fairly tough (95, anyway has lots of steel, is built on truck chassis), can tow a small trailer, and has decent cargo room for my gear. Its fairly small & maneuverable, as far as suvs go. It does get pretty bad mpg, especially considering its not real fast/powerful, about 18 - 23 (depending on h.w./city driving, if I REALLY baby it. can go down to 16 if I'm 4wheeling, leadfooting, etc...Its way too crowded for 3 kids on a road trip.
My 01 silhouette minivan has lots of room for my 3 kids, 2 dogs, and a huge pile of our "stuff" we always end up with. lol That's what its all about. Its very comfortable, not "fast" but plenty powerful, has heat/ac in the back, has front/side airbags, and most importantly for me, it gets 20 - 25 mpg, which is awesome for such a big 'ol car! It was very reasonably priced, bought used, 30000 miles ~6 months ago for $17000. We briefly considered a suburbanexcursion-type vehicle, but the horrible gas mileage, much higher purchase price, higher insurance, etc. scared us. And as far as replacing pfinder with a huge suv for off roading, no thanks, it'd be like trying to 4wheel in an ocean liner! (yes I've driven suburbans) lol Van seems pretty "plastic", and although I could probably tow our little camper with it, I don't think I will (still considering that--would need aftermarket trans cooler). The prospect of doing my own maint/repairs on van is a little frightening--although that probably holds true with most 01 + vehicles.
But both vehicles serve their purpose fairly well. Ideally, in the next few years, I plan to keep van, get rid of suv, and get a little 40 - 50 mpg econobox for commuting/around town, and find a jeep wrangler (with a locker, winch, etc.) for the off roading.
I do think, as has been argued elsewhere for almost 30000 posts by lisailor
Hey, I resemble that remark ;-)
Nice post, good summary of a particular use pattern. Of course, you're a part of the small % of SUV owners that actually do off roading, so that has to be accounted for.
But hey, to each his own, live & let live, & all that...
Hmmmmm...biting my tongue ;-)
In my earlier post, I didn't mean to imply it was not possible for automakers to cram any more luxury into minivans than they currently do; I was simply pointing out my opinion on which 2 offer the most luxury.
It's embarrassing for some of these $30k+ MSRP minivans not to include a power front passenger seat. And front heated seats are only recently becoming more widely available. Still, not many minivans are available with a moonroof, which is also a head-scratcher to me.
While it's certainly not the most luxurious minivan out there, the Kia Sedona actually offers a moonroof, a power passenger seat, and power rear quarter windows with driver and 3rd row controls, in the EX model. If Kia can include these features in a $24k minivan along with a fairly hi-tec, though not high-performance, powertrain (24V DOHC 3.5L w/5-speed automatic), why can't some of the competition include such features at much higher price points? We are very satisfied Sedona owners, by the way.
It appears that the 'slide-forward' 2nd row seat - for easier access to a kid/infant in a child seat - is available only on 8-seater Siennas; i.e., only the 2 lower trim levels (CE and LE), not XLE and XLE Limited. That's disappointing.
Powertrain will surely be zippy, but Toyota is really only catching up with the Joneses by offering a 230-hp 3.3L V6 and 5-speed automatic.
My guess would be that a Lexus-badged Sienna would cost more than $40k though.
I used to believe all the hype about, "this car isn't reliable, that car's the best, yada yada yada."
All car companies use standardized production methods and your chance of getting a lemon with any manufacturer is extremely slim.
I wouldn't worry about Chrysler reliability any more than Mercedes, Audi, Volvo, BMW, Honda, Buick, etc.
The features that you mentioned are certainly steps towards luxury. The new Sienna sounds as if many of these features will be included. The current Sienna (at least my 2000 XLE) lacked some of these (e.g. a decent stereo, power passenger seat, lumbar support, etc). A car manufacturer should take these features, upgrade the remaining aspects, and create a complete luxury experience.
A 40-45k Lexus "Sienna" would sell very well in my opinion. Some Sienna buyers would opt for this vehicle; other SUV buyers would conclude that off-road driving is not a real option for them. It would be great to have a choice.
The new Mercury Monterey may also feature luxury components. It is an upgraded Windstar that will appear later in the year. I have only seen the exterior drawings or photos.
BTW - My wife dreams of Maybach reclining seats in a luxury minivan. Such a layout should be quite possible in a luxury minivan for about 250k less than the Maybach. ;-)
Seb
There are bad samples of every vehicle make & model. Choosing one with a better reliability/quality record simply increases your chances of having one with fewer problems.
tccmn1 "Mazda MPV 2000+" Feb 16, 2003 11:35pm
Steve, Host
http://photos.thedieselstop.com/showphoto.php?photo=10942&siz- e=big&papass=&sort=1&thecat=500
;-)
I'm an SUV owner and a minivan owner. My impression is that most Excursion owners are practicing the ultimate in excess. There are plenty of smaller and more fuel-efficient vehicles, SUVs and probably even AWD cars, that can plow through snow as capably as an Excursion. I see lots of Excursions here in SE Michigan, and I do not believe I've ever seen more than 4 people in one at the same time. 80-90% of the time it's just the driver.
Plus, many trucks use obsolete 4WD systems ( good primer here http://home.attbi.com/~eliot_www/awd.html ). Modern AWD systems may actually do better in poor weather, as they can react faster with more wheels getting power without actually locking them. I don't know what type is on the Excursion.
Ironically, the only vehicle I saw on the side of the road after the 4" snowfall a few weeks ago was an Excursion. Probably no fault of the vehicle, most likely overconfidence on the part of the driver. AWD/4WD doesn't make your stopping distances any shorter...
"With S.U.V. owners on the defensive, minivan owners can hold their heads high again. In a recent article in The New Republic on the S.U.V. — labeled on the cover as the "Axle of Evil" — Gregg Easterbrook not only confessed to owning a Honda Odyssey but also boasted about its 240-horsepower V-6 engine. While he didn't quite call it a muscle car, he proclaimed his minivan just as powerful as an S.U.V. while using less fuel and spewing less pollution."
I Am Minivan, Hear Me Roar (New York Times - free registration required)
Steve, Host
1999 Windstar was the MV, current SUV is an Escape.
People are always brushing broad strokes implying that all minivans are better than all SUV's, but there are exceptions.
Was that a compliment for MVs? ;-)
I think more folks go the other way, actually...but I agree with you that broad strokes do not tell the whole story.
My SUV also handles better and accelerates better than my previous MV. Braking is probably about the same and the mpgs were better. The MV had double the space and I would have missed it then. The fold down seats are better in the SUV, but I had more room behind the 2nd seat in the MV than I have in the PF with the seats down.
'86 Astro was the MV, PF is the SUV.
I do agree that broad strokes don't always tell the whole story, but comparing a really old minivan against a very recent SUV isn't a fair comparison. Nor would be an old SUV vs. a new minivan. I dare say that would be even more one-sided in favor of the newer vehicle.
In any case, other than the addition of the 4WD option, I believe my characterization of the Astro would apply to the current model as well. It really hasn't changed that much.
I had to talk my dad out of buying another Astro. He liked the idea of AWD and minivan room. I had to remind him repeatedly of how trucky the thing felt.
We got it because we had two kids, needed a lot of room and I was always carrying a lot of stuff...kid stuff and Home Depot stuff. And boy, did it have room! 170 cu ft behind the front seats!!! Compare that to the Excursion (largest SUV cargo area) with 146.
Yes, it was trucky, the handling was pretty awful, numb steering and all...but, you know...it was a workhorse. We kept it for 10 years, never had a major problem and it served us well.
An incredibly practical vehicle. Image not inc.
;-)
Cincinnati Enquirer
Steve, Host
2004 sienna.
its one of those things imo where there's definite advantages and disadvantages to both. Its nice having the floor area clear & open with column shifter, however its probably more "user-friendly" & easier to shift if on the floor
not that there's anything wrong with that, but the AstroVan is a monster - an old-fashioned van - one of the only ones that can tow, if I recll correctly (at least as of 5 years ago when I bought my Grand Caravan)
my minivan is WAY better than an SUV of its same vintage that I occasionally drive, a Ford Explorer
but the Explorer is better in the snow, so I borrow it to go to Tahoe, but drive the Explorer every day? yuck - that thing drives like a friggin TRUCK!!
:-)
I prefer the minivan for everyday driving (though I would much prefer more fun in the everyday drive, don't get me wrong)
It's bigger than other MVs (largest cargo capacity) but it is universally considered a MV.
Just want to set the record straight.
A summary: we did not have a need for the extra row of seats that a mini-van offers. So with the Escape (and several other mini-suv's out there such as the CRV), we got a vehicle that handled better, performed better, gets better mpgs, with similar features, and a much lower price than the mini-vans on the market.
If the choice was between a mini-van or an Explorer, then I would also lean towards the mini-van.
However as the mini-suv fit me and my families wants and needs well, we chose that over the mini-van.
We just got back from our spring break vacation trip 500+ miles each way (8+ hours each way with kids ages 4 and 7), and it was a pleasure to drive, as usual.