Nope dealer hasnt been able to figure it out. They claim it is the tires. They've swapped my tires out with other LX's (KUMHOS) on the lot and got the best set they tell me based on the balancing results. Still have same vibration at 75 MPH. Its smooth as can be up until then. Not bad for running around town/ country roads, long trips on a highway are tiresome with it vibrating like it does. I guess if I just follow the speed limit and dont go 5 over I'll be alrigt
brand new to Forum, excuse spellings etc. Vibration in steering wheel too! Model is 2006 EX with the 17" wheels and Michelin tires. Vibration doesn't seem to be there above or below that 73-75 mph range, seems to always come in for sure after accelerating up past the 75 mph mark and then coasting into that 73-75mph range. I thought maybe it was the 17" wheel and tire set up but looks like it's there in the 16" set up as well. Have had things balanced but it's still there like the other posts have said. We all need to get to the bottom of this problem and unless everyone is lying, the manufacture should be getting feed back from it's dealer around the country on this issue.
Interesting.. We just took the new red 2006 Sedona EX on about a 300 mile trip over the weekend and I specifically looked for vibration in the wheel and saw and felt absolutely none. Very smooth ride. We enjoyed the trip in the new vehicle... So it appears that not all are having this issue..
Looks like you're the go to person on this vibration thing. Please post if you ever get this resolved. I have a suspicion the vibes might be related to the TPMS (tire pressure monitor system). The device is attached to the other end of the valve stem in each wheel. There's a picture of the unit in the new Entourage brochure. It doesn't look very small and maybe just maybe something is happening there at that threshold speed. Doesn't seem like everyone is having the problem but there seems to be a significant number that are. My only thought on the TPMS, is to remove the device and replace with regular valve stem and then try rebalancing the wheel and tire unit and road test.
That was my first impression also, the TPMS thingy. Our LX does not have any vibrations but I have to admit we havn't taken it above 70. The gas mileage really has me down. We are getting 14.5-15 with mixed city/highway driving. I think think the EPA rating was a farce. Peter
I think all the EPA ratings are a farce.. The numbers are based on standards set in the 70's. Anyone that buys a car and expects it to get the numbers suggested in the EPA ratings had better put an egg under their gas pedal the first day.. Here is some data that explains how those ratings are calculated a little better..
Info about the current EPA test:
Adjusting Estimates
In the early 1980s, an EPA study found that drivers were typically achieving lower fuel economy than predicted by EPA laboratory tests. As a result, EPA required the laboratory-derived city and highway MPG estimates posted on the labels of new vehicles to be adjusted downward by 10% for city estimates and by 22% for highway estimates to better reflect the MPG real-world drivers could expect from 1985 forward.
Fuel Economy Test Schedule Characteristics City - Low speeds in stop-and-go urban traffic Simulated Distance 11 miles Time 31 minutes Average Speed 20 mph Top Speed 56 mph Stops 23 Idling 18 % of the time Engine Temp at Startup Cold Lab Temperature 68 - 86 degrees F Vehicle Air conditioning Off
Highway - Free-flow traffic at highway speeds Simulated Distance 10 miles Time 12.5 minutes Average Speed 48 mph Top Speed 60 mph Stops None Idling None Engine Temp at Startup Warm Lab Temperature 68 - 86 degrees F Vehicle Air conditioning Off
So you can see, people, these tests are NOT reflective of "real world in 2006" driving.
Average speeds of 48 mph on highway.. Even my Grandma drives faster than that...
Amen to that.I average around town between 13 mpg (air on)to about 15-16 mpg (air off).This 2006 is my thrid Sedona,none got any better mpg around town. Got as high as 22mpg on the road with my 2003 Sedona. Not to much worst then other vans i`ve had.I`ve had a 1986 Voyager with a 2.6 4 cyl.,lucky that got 20 mpg on the road. :shades:
Same here with the gas mileage. We are getting no where near the estimates. We've got about 1300 miles now on the van and no improvement on the mileage. My 2002 Sedona did better on gas mileage. I got around 17-18 around town with it and 20 on the highway. It's EPA estimate when I bought it was 15/20. My 2006 sedona is only getting about 14-15 around town. I would have thought they would have made something with better fuel economy rather than worse.
You've got to give that engine some time to break in.. You aren't going to get fantastic gas mileage until that engine gets broke in.. At least wait until your second oil change to start questioning it. Also read my post earlier.. If you aren't averaging 48mph freeway then you aren't going to see that 25 mpg mark.. I think 20mpg highway will be a realistic number to expect with normal driving with this van. I'd be happy with that... Remember people this is a big heavy vehicle.. In city you aren't going to get good MPG.. My other vehicle is an 06 Dodge Charger with a 5.7L V8 and about 9000 miles.. The first 3000 miles I was lucky to get 15 highway.. The amazing thing is that I get 20+ MPG with that on highway now but it was EPA rated at 25MPG Highway. But I only about 15 in the city. The Kia Sedona is a mini-van.. And to be honest I'd be amazed if it ever hit that 25mpg highway mark. And stop and go in the city is never going to be good when you are dealing with a vehicle that heavy.
"Fuel economy is measured under controlled conditions in a laboratory using a standardized test procedure specified by federal law. Manufacturers test their own vehicles—usually pre-production prototypes—and report the results to EPA. EPA reviews the results and confirms about 10-15 percent of them through their own tests at the National Vehicles and Fuel Emissions Laboratory."
I wonder if the EPA has verified the results that KIA sent them regarding the 2006 Sedona fuel economy.
Have a 2006 with almost 8000 miles on it. Now getting almost the EPA estimate on highway at 65-70 mph with air running. My wife gets 1-2 mpg less as she does not use cruise and likes to use the brakes! City is 15-18 with the low being 1 mile commutes (wife should walk!). At first was getting 18-19 on highway but it was winter which takes a toll on mileage anyhow. George in Wisconsin.
Apparently not. I have had two other new vehicles (toy and ford) and they both fell in between their ratings. The thing is, there needs to be some truth in advertising here . Not much I can do now but pray the thing uses less as it "breaks in". On the other hand, the commute car (toy camry) get almost 30 mpg! my 2 cents, quite for now. Peter
Test drove a Sedona 2006 LX yesterday with Hankook tires. Major vibration between 70 and 80 mph. Looked for another vehicle to test drive and discovered one with Kumho tires. Test drove great. Bought it for 4000.00 off sticker. Salesman told me the Hankook tires were actually made by Michelin. The very low end Michelin's. Maybe he's right. Korean subsidary?? Wonder if all vehicles with Michelins be it Hankook or the 17" Michelin's are having the problems working with the TPMS.
We have the KUMHOS on ours and have the vibration between 70-80 MPH. Its a little better after the dealer balanced all the wheels and changed out 2 rims and tires. However it is still there.
I think all the EPA ratings are a farce.. The numbers are based on standards set in the 70's. Anyone that buys a car and expects it to get the numbers suggested in the EPA ratings had better put an egg under their gas pedal the first day..
True. Our 05 Nissan Quest has averaged nearly 23 mpg total, including city and highway. We've gotten tanks as high as 27.5 and recently recorded 25.9 on a 500 mile highway trip at 75 mph with 6 passengers.
Wow guess I should have bought a quest then.. Of course I think for the difference in price I can deal with a few less MPG highway over the life of the van
We had to Dealer locate my new Sedona Lx. We were supposed to leave on vacation the following morning. We had to take the van back to the dealership the very next morning. Major vibration at 70 to 75 MPH. Service took off all 4 tires and replaced with Kuhmo's. Service said Hankook(sp) tires were defective. All 4 tires had a flat type problem in the tread. New Tires did make a major improvement. Van was totally loaded with gear and six people and we got 21 mph on first tank and 23 and the last tank, mostly interstate driving. The extra room in this van is great.
Wow guess I should have bought a quest then.. Of course I think for the difference in price I can deal with a few less MPG highway over the life of the van
No need to be defensive, just wanted to counter the argument that all vehicles get lower than the EP mileage. We drive it 20,000 miles per year. We paid $25,175 for an SL. BTW our Honda Accord V6 has also returned MPG over the EPA ratings. The Odyssey does not seem to do as well by comparison.
I thought the 06 Sedona was to get better mileage than the older models?
The dealers still profess to know nothing about the SWB model.
Well the stats that I posted earlier are not a stretch.. They are officially how the EPA test is done.. The average speed on the highway test is 48mph.. I know there is a big difference from traveling 48mph and 75mph and the big variant is how fast you get up to that speed. I can get 23mpg out of my 5.7 in my Charger on a trip if I never touch that cruise control and I've also seen reports of people getting up to 29mpg. But under normal driving conditions I get around 20MPG and I'm happy with that as I didn't buy the car for the gas mileage.
But back to my wife's sedona, she now has about 600 miles on it and is averaging 19mpg. She has a heavy foot just like I do so I'm sure she isn't going to see 25mpg. I'm confident that after the engine is broke in and and with normal driving though she'll see 22-23MPG which I'm personally quite happy with. I'm just saying that more vehicles than not will fall short of that EPA highway mark unless you duplicate the conditions posted earlier. There are alot of variables there. Maybe your Nissan is the exception. I'll give up a little of that gas mileage for something that gets me down that entrance ramp to the freeway a little faster and I think the 3.8 in the Sedona is a pretty peppy engine. The van drives more like a car than any of the GM/Chrysler vans I've had previously and for that reason I like it so far. Now as long as it is dependable I'll be happy with my purchase.
I would be happy will 19mpg! But we are not even getting 18 mpg which is the low end of the rating. We are getting 14.5 - 15.0 and that is mixed city/hwy driving. We have about 800 miles. That is just too off for rating. Glad you get what you get. Peter
Hankook makes many different products worldwide. Read that Michelin has a 10% stake in Hankook MFG. Willing to bet both the Michelin and Hankook KIA tires come out of the same factory in Korea. IMHO a quality tire from your local tire shop will fix your vibration problem. Payed for by KIA of course.
According to a Sacramento dealer, the 2006 SWB Sedona will be out in October. I also found October mentioned in Wikipedia (towards the bottom of the article).
Just wondering if anyone knows for sure whether it's true that the 2006 SWB Sedona won't have the fold-in-floor rear seat. I have read this in a couple of articles, and it seems that the UK version doesn't have it either. I wonder if there just isn't room in the SWB version.
We currently own a 2002 Sedona and were hoping to trade up, mainly for the folding third row seat. We would prefer the SWB for easier handling (mainly backing up), and were hoping it's fuel consumption would be less (some of the numbers being reported for the 2006 Sedona are dismal). If it won't have the folding third row seat, however, we may look elsewhere or just wait to see if the mileage numbers on the LWB Sedonas improve.
The Sedona ("Carnival" in some other places) is on sale in other parts of the world as a short wheelbase model already.
It's 4.81m long, or 189.5" long - almost identical to the Caravan. The seating layout in Europe is unusual for a US minivan, don't know if it will be preserved:
I like the 189" length. The van I buy is mainly just for myself so I don't need the LWB. IF the SWB gets better mileage (it should) than the LWB - there may be more than the 1 in 10 sales that Kia approximates - due to the high price of gas and the many MPG dissatisfied 06 LWB owners in this forum. Wouldn't it be nice if Kia tried to make the SWB as economical as possible using an even smaller engine and somehow cutting down on weight. It's too late for this model but something they should consider in the future.
The Euro models have a smaller gas engine than the US - or a diesel. The specs on the diesel on the UK site are 23mpg city, 40.4mpg "Extra Urban" and a 0-62 mph acceleration time of 16.2 seconds - and that's with one passenger.
Our 2006 Sedona with 3800 miles has just been about perfect with the exception of a buzz coming from the floor above the fuel tank at idle. For the noise to occur, the tank must be at or below 1/2 full and the engine at idle. The noise is loud enough for everyone in the van to notice and comment. Placing a very slight amount of load on the engine, like turning on the lights or the moving the steering wheel makes the noise disappear, but it returns when the load is removed. I suspect it is the fuel pump or relief valve.
there may be more than the 1 in 10 sales that Kia approximates>>>
No fold away seats? No cargo well? Forget it. The LWB van is better. We're getting 22.5 highway....and about 17.5-18 around town. I'm not about to give up the stowage aboard for a few pennies in saved gas. And the LWB is easy to park with the backup sensors. Works like a charm...and I live in NY. I'm sorry to say that some folks don't know how to use the MPG computer...which is not 100% accurate anyway. I now know three people with the same model and we all get the same mileage. Moreover, I have the loaded EX which is heavy. 22.5 MPG recorded over 5 hours with 3 adults, child and cargo aboard. Average speed 83 MPH according to Garmin GPS. If you're getting 14 MPG you're either doing the math wrong, using the computer wrong or driving the van like it's a Lotus.
14-15 mpg, using a calculator and by doing it by hand in case the calculator is incorrect There is no MPG computer on the LX. Maybe its the Michelin tires vs Kumho or Hankook which is having a bad effect on the mileage. And if you are averaging 83 MPH, are you sure you are not the one driving a LOTUS?
Just so everyone knows, my Sedona is an '05. I pulled the air filter housing completely off. I replaced with a cone filter from my local O'reillys and used a 2 7/8" tail pipe piece to connect from the air intake to the filter and now I run in town 17-18mpg. And yes I think it is a giant locust...I mean lotus
These mpg are real numbers I have tracked for the last two weeks since changing the air filter. This is also loaded with 1400lbs including my self once a week.
there may be more than the 1 in 10 sales that Kia approximates>>>
No fold away seats? No cargo well? Forget it. The LWB van is better. We're getting 22.5 highway....and about 17.5-18 around town. I'm not about to give up the stowage aboard for a few pennies in saved gas. And the LWB is easy to park with the backup sensors. Works like a charm...and I live in NY.
Short wheelbase vans like the Dodge Caravan, Mazda MPV, and upcoming Sedona are the same length as most mid-sized sedans like Toyota Camry, Honda Accord et al. So if you are parked in a residential area that does not have lined parking spaces, they fit in the space vacated by those cars: the big minivans do not. I know being from NY you can do everything better than everyone, but you cannot fit a 202" long vehicle into a space that only fits a 189" long vehicle.
The SWB vans also weigh hundreds of pounds less; generally have longer service lives for drivetrain components; and cost $3-5,000 less. In the Suburbs you see few SWB vans - in Boston 1/3rd to 1/2 the minivans are Caravans or MPV's. The Mazda5 is selling 30% above projections.
The SWB vans also weigh hundreds of pounds less; generally have longer service lives for drivetrain components; and cost $3-5,000 less.>>>>
Service live will not be effected by the SWB in any way. Utter nonsense. How you drive and maintain it are the real factors. The difference in weight is too small to be a factor.
I know being from NY you can do everything better than everyone>>>>
Yep. My van is bigger. It has a garage and it fits. We get 22 MPG because we don't have a bad attitude. I own a watch that cost more than your house and tonight we're going yachting on our "Heart of Gold." http://hometown.aol.com/bobsprit/index.html All because we're in NY, folks!
Nice Blow-Boat RB! Just curious-- how many wine bottles & Beer cans have you lost out the Stern? First larger Boat I've seen without a Transom (of sorts) not counting the 12 meters. Plus, one of your pics must have been in winter, or delivery, I see NO Boom!!
Good luck with your Sedona. My 04 EX is Humming along at 26K. Can't seem to get anymore than 16/17 mpg in town though.
Service live will not be effected by the SWB in any way. Utter nonsense. How you drive and maintain it are the real factors. The difference in weight is too small to be a factor.
Capt RB NY The Caravan is demonstrably more reliable and durable than the Grand Caravan - with mostly identical driveline components. Whether this will be true for the Sedona remains to be seen.
But that few hundred pounds doesn't make a difference - go ahead, have another cheeseburger.
I used my 89 Caravan (swb) which is about 179" long for work and really enjoyed parking it on the street. I removed the middle seat and have had it stored in the house ever since '95. The only "folding down" within the van is the back of the 3rd seat. The space between front and rear seats comes in handy for loading large items. Guess you can say "vanwise" I've been roughing it - but then my 1st van was a '69 VW Westfalia Camper with AC(I became a mechanic out of necessity working on the underpowered engine AND air conditioning - rebuilt the engine twice in 13 years)- but it was great for camping but hard on the hearing.
Did the dealer check the brake disc rotors for excessive runout (warping)? I drive an '03 LX (company van)that had the same symptoms. Bridgestone's finest tires and alignments didn't cure it. Replacement disc rotors @ 70K miles during brake pad replacement made it go away!
Also owned an '04 EX that had the same issue until the dealer replaced the discs at 3K miles. The steering wheel would swing back and forth @ 5mph... Had to run 75mph for a smooth ride...
Recently traded for an '06 EX. Hopefully all four discs stay smooth on this one. Braking and ride is much improved. :confuse:
just a note to let you know you're not alone -I have a loaded EX,with 17in alloy wheels-michelin tires and I have the same problem--get it up to about 75mph and it starts to vibrate to the point I can see my hand shaking on the steering wheel. took it into the local dealer in ft myers fl and they supposedly balanced the wheels. vibration still there-no change! I've seen it posted that some suspect the tpms system, might be apossibility-I also have trouble with that which the service mgr thinks is ok. I've also seen others blame it on strut problem that kia has a fix on- I doubt that as the vibration has to be caused by some rotating item. hopefully kia is working on this problem but i had a 2003 sorrento (2 wheel drive) that had a similar vibration at 80 mph that they never fixed.
I don't know how long it was, but my dad used to park a 1970 FORD LTD Country Squire Wagon in NY. My Uncle was a cab driver and he used to park a 1973 Lincoln towncar there.
But for his commuter car my uncle had a 1964 VW Bug.
My Sedona LWB seems to be shorter than the 1986 Buick Lesabre Estate Wagon I used to drive.
Hi there.. ..I know you asked about your '06, but I have an '03 Sedona that I bought chrome tube steps for and it looks very sharp. I got them from motorimpact on the net..perhaps they have them for the 06's as well, but I'm not sure. You could always check...good luck.
This was in the Sacramento Bee Aug 27,2006 ASK DOW JONES/ by Tom Herman.
Q: I plan to buy a car in late 2006 or 2007. When would be the best time to buy to take advantage of the sales-tax deduction?
A: That deduction expired at the end of last year. Congress still hasn't resurrected it but may do so in coming weeks. This provision allowed millions of people who itemize their deductions to choose to deduct either their state and local income taxes or their sales taxes- but not both. If Congress takes no action this year, taxpayers will still be allowed to deduct state and local income taxes on their returns for 2006, but not sales taxes. This is especially important in Texas, Florida and other states that don't have their own state income tax. :mad:
Comments
I have a suspicion the vibes might be related to the TPMS (tire pressure monitor system). The device is attached to the other end of the valve stem in each wheel. There's a picture of the unit in the new Entourage brochure. It doesn't look very small and maybe just maybe something is happening there at that threshold speed.
Doesn't seem like everyone is having the problem but there seems to be a significant number that are.
My only thought on the TPMS, is to remove the device and replace with regular valve stem and then try rebalancing the wheel and tire unit and road test.
The gas mileage really has me down. We are getting 14.5-15 with mixed city/highway driving. I think think the EPA rating was a farce.
Peter
Info about the current EPA test:
Adjusting Estimates
In the early 1980s, an EPA study found that drivers were typically achieving lower fuel economy than predicted by EPA laboratory tests. As a result, EPA required the laboratory-derived city and highway MPG estimates posted on the labels of new vehicles to be adjusted downward by 10% for city estimates and by 22% for highway estimates to better reflect the MPG real-world drivers could expect from 1985 forward.
Fuel Economy Test Schedule Characteristics
City - Low speeds in stop-and-go urban traffic
Simulated Distance 11 miles
Time 31 minutes
Average Speed 20 mph
Top Speed 56 mph
Stops 23
Idling 18 % of the time
Engine Temp at Startup Cold
Lab Temperature 68 - 86 degrees F
Vehicle Air conditioning Off
Highway - Free-flow traffic at highway speeds
Simulated Distance 10 miles
Time 12.5 minutes
Average Speed 48 mph
Top Speed 60 mph
Stops None
Idling None
Engine Temp at Startup Warm
Lab Temperature 68 - 86 degrees F
Vehicle Air conditioning Off
So you can see, people, these tests are NOT reflective of "real world in 2006" driving.
Average speeds of 48 mph on highway.. Even my Grandma drives faster than that...
"Fuel economy is measured under controlled conditions in a laboratory using a standardized test procedure specified by federal law. Manufacturers test their own vehicles—usually pre-production prototypes—and report the results to EPA. EPA reviews the results and confirms about 10-15 percent of them through their own tests at the National Vehicles and Fuel Emissions Laboratory."
I wonder if the EPA has verified the results that KIA sent them regarding the 2006 Sedona fuel economy.
The thing is, there needs to be some truth in advertising here . Not much I can do now but pray the thing uses less as it "breaks in".
On the other hand, the commute car (toy camry) get almost 30 mpg!
my 2 cents, quite for now.
Peter
True. Our 05 Nissan Quest has averaged nearly 23 mpg total, including city and highway. We've gotten tanks as high as 27.5 and recently recorded 25.9 on a 500 mile highway trip at 75 mph with 6 passengers.
EPA highway for the Quest? 25.
No need to be defensive, just wanted to counter the argument that all vehicles get lower than the EP mileage. We drive it 20,000 miles per year. We paid $25,175 for an SL. BTW our Honda Accord V6 has also returned MPG over the EPA ratings. The Odyssey does not seem to do as well by comparison.
I thought the 06 Sedona was to get better mileage than the older models?
The dealers still profess to know nothing about the SWB model.
But back to my wife's sedona, she now has about 600 miles on it and is averaging 19mpg. She has a heavy foot just like I do so I'm sure she isn't going to see 25mpg. I'm confident that after the engine is broke in and and with normal driving though she'll see 22-23MPG which I'm personally quite happy with. I'm just saying that more vehicles than not will fall short of that EPA highway mark unless you duplicate the conditions posted earlier. There are alot of variables there. Maybe your Nissan is the exception. I'll give up a little of that gas mileage for something that gets me down that entrance ramp to the freeway a little faster and I think the 3.8 in the Sedona is a pretty peppy engine. The van drives more like a car than any of the GM/Chrysler vans I've had previously and for that reason I like it so far. Now as long as it is dependable I'll be happy with my purchase.
That is just too off for rating.
Glad you get what you get.
Peter
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kia_Carnival
We currently own a 2002 Sedona and were hoping to trade up, mainly for the folding third row seat. We would prefer the SWB for easier handling (mainly backing up), and were hoping it's fuel consumption would be less (some of the numbers being reported for the 2006 Sedona are dismal). If it won't have the folding third row seat, however, we may look elsewhere or just wait to see if the mileage numbers on the LWB Sedonas improve.
Any info you have would be helpful.
Thanks!
It's 4.81m long, or 189.5" long - almost identical to the Caravan. The seating layout in Europe is unusual for a US minivan, don't know if it will be preserved:
Wouldn't it be nice if Kia tried to make the SWB as economical as possible using an even smaller engine and somehow cutting down on weight. It's too late for this model but something they should consider in the future.
Anyone else experiencing this?
Peter
No fold away seats? No cargo well? Forget it. The LWB van is better. We're getting 22.5 highway....and about 17.5-18 around town. I'm not about to give up the stowage aboard for a few pennies in saved gas. And the LWB is easy to park with the backup sensors. Works like a charm...and I live in NY.
I'm sorry to say that some folks don't know how to use the MPG computer...which is not 100% accurate anyway. I now know three people with the same model and we all get the same mileage. Moreover, I have the loaded EX which is heavy. 22.5 MPG recorded over 5 hours with 3 adults, child and cargo aboard. Average speed 83 MPH according to Garmin GPS.
If you're getting 14 MPG you're either doing the math wrong, using the computer wrong or driving the van like it's a Lotus.
RB
NY
These mpg are real numbers I have tracked for the last two weeks since changing the air filter. This is also loaded with 1400lbs including my self once a week.
No fold away seats? No cargo well? Forget it. The LWB van is better. We're getting 22.5 highway....and about 17.5-18 around town. I'm not about to give up the stowage aboard for a few pennies in saved gas. And the LWB is easy to park with the backup sensors. Works like a charm...and I live in NY.
Short wheelbase vans like the Dodge Caravan, Mazda MPV, and upcoming Sedona are the same length as most mid-sized sedans like Toyota Camry, Honda Accord et al. So if you are parked in a residential area that does not have lined parking spaces, they fit in the space vacated by those cars: the big minivans do not. I know being from NY you can do everything better than everyone, but you cannot fit a 202" long vehicle into a space that only fits a 189" long vehicle.
The SWB vans also weigh hundreds of pounds less; generally have longer service lives for drivetrain components; and cost $3-5,000 less. In the Suburbs you see few SWB vans - in Boston 1/3rd to 1/2 the minivans are Caravans or MPV's. The Mazda5 is selling 30% above projections.
Service live will not be effected by the SWB in any way. Utter nonsense. How you drive and maintain it are the real factors. The difference in weight is too small to be a factor.
Capt RB
NY
Yep. My van is bigger. It has a garage and it fits. We get 22 MPG because we don't have a bad attitude. I own a watch that cost more than your house and tonight we're going yachting on our "Heart of Gold."
http://hometown.aol.com/bobsprit/index.html
All because we're in NY, folks!
LOL!
Capt. RB
NY
Good luck with your Sedona. My 04 EX is Humming along at 26K. Can't seem to get anymore than 16/17 mpg in town though.
Boxwrench AKA Salty Dawg
Capt RB
NY
The Caravan is demonstrably more reliable and durable than the Grand Caravan - with mostly identical driveline components. Whether this will be true for the Sedona remains to be seen.
But that few hundred pounds doesn't make a difference - go ahead, have another cheeseburger.
Also owned an '04 EX that had the same issue until the dealer replaced the discs at 3K miles. The steering wheel would swing back and forth @ 5mph... Had to run 75mph for a smooth ride...
Recently traded for an '06 EX. Hopefully all four discs stay smooth on this one. Braking and ride is much improved. :confuse:
But for his commuter car my uncle had a 1964 VW Bug.
My Sedona LWB seems to be shorter than the 1986 Buick Lesabre Estate Wagon I used to drive.
It does not seem "too" long to me.
Peter
..I know you asked about your '06, but I have an '03 Sedona that I bought chrome tube steps for and it looks very sharp. I got them from motorimpact on the net..perhaps they have them for the 06's as well, but I'm not sure. You could always check...good luck.
ASK DOW JONES/ by Tom Herman.
Q: I plan to buy a car in late 2006 or 2007. When would be the best time to buy to take advantage of the sales-tax deduction?
A: That deduction expired at the end of last year. Congress still hasn't resurrected it but may do so in coming weeks.
This provision allowed millions of people who itemize their deductions to choose to deduct either their state and local income taxes or their sales taxes- but not both. If Congress takes no action this year, taxpayers will still be allowed to deduct state and local income taxes on their returns for 2006, but not sales taxes. This is especially important in Texas, Florida and other states that don't have their own state income
tax. :mad: