V6 and Six-Speed Auto Contribute Lively Feel - 2015 Kia Sedona SX-L Long-Term Road Test

Edmunds.comEdmunds.com Member, Administrator, Moderator Posts: 10,315
edited January 2016 in Kia
imageV6 and Six-Speed Auto Contribute Lively Feel - 2015 Kia Sedona SX-L Long-Term Road Test

Driving a 2015 Kia Sedona is not a completely soul-sucking experience. A strong V6 and responsive transmission are helpful contributors.

Read the full story here


Comments

  • daryleasondaryleason Member Posts: 501
    Before anyone gets very far into my post, please understand that I love classic muscle cars. I'm not a big fan of minivans, but I consider them practical and useful if you have two or more kids. Thankfully, I only have one kid, so I've not looked at buying one. But, I was musing over the comment about the Sedona's 1/4 mile time. It's funny how close a minivan today is compared to performance cars of the past. I'm posting the 0-60 mph & quarter mile times for some of the best cars from the past for comparison. It just shows how far we've come, across the board, in performance. With a little tweaking, a modern minivan could conceivably stomp a classic performance car. Plus, remember, these were press cars that were prepped by the car companies to allow the press (in this case, Car & Driver) to test them. So actual performance of a normal car was probably less. For instance, the GTO that was used as a press car had a larger, blueprinted engine, even though they were told it was a stock 389 Pontiac. Enjoy.


    1966 Shelby gt350h automatic 3.89 rear- 15.2@93
    1966 Satellite hemi 4 speed 3.54- 13.8@104
    1966 GTX 440 automatic 3.23- 14.4@98
    1966 442 4 speed 3.55- 14.6@100
    1966 SS396 Chevelle 4 speed 3.55- 14.66@99
    1966 GTO tripower 4 speed 3.55- 14.0@105
    1966 Buick GS automatic 3.36- 14.92@95
    1966 Fairlane gt 390 automatic 3.89- 14.26@99
    1966 Cyclone gt 390 4 speed 4.11- 13.87@103
    1966 AC Cobra 289 4 speed 3.77- 13.73@101.58
    1968 Charger hemi automatic 3.23- 13.5@105
    1968 SS396 (375 hp)Nova 4 speed 3.55- 14.5@101
    1969 SS396 Chevelle(325 hp) 4 speed 3.55- 14.4@97
    1969 Super bee 383 4 speed 3.55- 14.0@99
    1969 Fairlane Cobra 428 automatic 3.50- 14.0@100.6
    1969 Cyclone 428 automatic 3.91- 13.94@100.89
    1969 roadrunner hemi automatic 3.54- 13.54@105
    1969 Boss 302 Mustang 4 speed 3.50- 14.57@97
    1969 Corvette 427 435 hp 4 speed 3.70- 13.8@106.8
    1970 Challenger hemi automatic 3.23- 14.1@103.2
    1970 GTO 455 4 speed 3.31- 15.0@96.5
    1970 Z28 automatic 4.10- 14.2@103.3
    1970 LS6 Chevelle automatic 3.70- 13.81@103.8
    1970 Duster 340 4 speed 3.91- 14.39@97.2
    1970 Boss 302 mustang 4 speed 3.91-14.93@93.45
    1971 Roadrunner 440 automatic 3.23- 14.9@95.4
    1972 Barracuda 340 4 speed 3.55- 15.5@97.7

  • longtimelurkerlongtimelurker Member Posts: 455
    edited January 2016
    Love minivans...nothing else is so flexible

    Hemis, whether in front of a 4-speed or a Torqueflite, even with those long rear-end ratios...bad news.
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    Me too. B)
  • nagantnagant Member Posts: 176
    A decent set of drag radials on any of those old muscle cars and they would drop at least one full second of the 1/4 if not more. My moms side of the family loved Vettes and my dads loved Fords, AMCs and Pontiacs. Drop in a Uni-Lite (curved of course) and then get another 1/2 second with hardly any effort. When HEI came out in 74 both my uncle's 71 Stingray 350 and his 67 SS396 got them and getting rid of the points made a HUGE difference. Those cars were awesome performers even for the tech of the day and with just some simple additions they are just as fast in a straight line as most new performance cars.........but one really has to work at it and hope for no curves or having to stop!
  • allthingshondaallthingshonda Member Posts: 878
    Great post @daryleason and you said exactly what I was thinking. I don't know how fast people expect to go now days. Clearing the quarter mile at almost 90 mph in a Mommymobile is very good. I was looking at all those classic muscle cars thinking that they are faster than the van accelerating but I bet the minivan handles better than those old muscle cars.
  • daryleasondaryleason Member Posts: 501
    @allthingshonda : Not just the handling. The ability to stop quickly is probably in the minivan's favor. I had a '65 Mustang Coupe with the 289 when I was younger. I loved that car. But power nothing and drum brakes weren't the friendliest for stopping. A buddy of mine had a '68 Malibu Same deal. Built to run, not to stop.Of course, he also had those folding beach chairs with the nylon webbing for front seats, bolted to the floor because he was going to "someday" redo the interior.
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    If you considered a small car but ended up buying something larger, a reporter wants to talk with you. Please email PR@edmunds.com by Friday, 2/5/16 with a few words about your decision including the make and model that you chose.
Sign In or Register to comment.