By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
The frustration I have is both Honda and Toyota do not offer 8+ seating on the most high-end optioned vans (Touring and Limited). For someone like myself with 4 children I don't want half-powered low optioned vans to accomodate my family.
The only thing that is of concern is the back bench is right up against the back lid just as in alot of SUVs that claim 7 seating arrangements. But we wouldn't use the back bench very often -only during special circumstances.
As far as the Yugo vs. Volkswagen comment -- be careful. :mad: The Koreans are making huge progress (see JD Power, Intellchoice, Consumer Reports). Don't bury your head in the sand (or in the Honda/Toyota Ghetto). As well, in my opinion, I don't think Volkswagen ever had the quality of Honda or Toyota anyway.
The "Minivan Wars" are in progress! I am glad each company is trying to one-up each other. It's only better for us as consumers in the end.
However it is nice to know that there are uncoming Korean alternatives to the Honda/Toyota vans, which will keep Honda etc on the straight and the narrow and not allow them to relax their manufacturing standards by too much. :shades:
My perspective on the Koreans:
Today, the Koreans may not have the best mechanical technology in automotive engineering, but they have tried their best, and best yet, have given their customers the best they got. It is funny that our 05 Honda Odys has JD Power ranking of 2 stars out of 5 for the first year of production (many assembly and design problems) and while most Hyundais achieved 3 stars or better in recent years. Last year, they tied with Toyota for the first place on initial quality on some segments.
We can dispute that Hyundai vehicles have not achieved the reliability status of Honda or Toyota. And they are working hard on that too. In the last couple years, Hyundai has specified their powertrain to last 300 K miles as an engineering target. Some of their traditional suppliers could even made it.
They have spared at no expense to implement the best technologies for their vehicles. When they design a $20,000 vehicle, their engineers actually brought along a vehicle costing $40,000 for testing and demand their suppliers to match it. Any funny thing is sometime, they got it for free! Most of the time, they got quite a bit. Their engineers are a big pain to work with, but I have great respect for their tenacity of hard working and willing to take risk. The same could not be said about their US or Japanese competitors.
Just to prove the point of how far and fast the Koreans have come: just read the Edmund comparison between the new 06 Sonata vs. Accord/Camry. They are here for good and they are as tough if not tougher than the Japanese. Competition is great !
jt
I will never ever buy a Korean car again, except for the 06 Sonata and SanteFe/Tuscon. Never a KIA.
The electricals,interior and anything other than the engine were crap.
The AC kept breaking down.
Do you know if you have to pay for parts, it will cost you more than BMW to buy parts for these mobie trash cans?
2 days ago I bought a 06 Odyssey and am very bitter about the 7K loss I had to take on the KIA.
Please for goodness sake never ever buy a Sedona or any other KIA again.
But in recent years, after being bought by Hyundai, new Kia vehicles have gradually migrated to Hyundai platforms. Those are good ones to consider. The new Sodena is probably using Hyundai platform (probably new Sonata or new Santa Fe) and it probably is not the old version (weight as much as a Tahoe) make over. It is rumored to have 3.8L V6 with very competitive Horse Power. I would expect that new mill will produce in the neighborhood of >244 HP based on what Hyundai did on their new 3.3L (230 HP). On top of that, it will experience a weight loss thanks to Hyundai technical assistance. So in all likelihood, Kia new vehicles are badged Hyundai with more sporty tuning (Pontiac vs. Chevy).
jt
Just curious what others are being charged by the dealer for this service? I got one estimate for $125.00, which seems high to me.
This same dealer also insisted that I needed Schedule A, not Schedule B which he was basing on the mileage not on what the MID is reporting.
What is the difference between Schedule A and Schedule B? Should I be trusting this dealer?
I logged into the "Owners Link" website and found that Maintenance Minder A is an oil change, and Maintenance Minder B is an oil change/tire rotation.
Based on that info, that one dealer quote is outrageous and I should go tell them that!
I agree with your thoughts and concerns about the Koreans. It's hard when I am about to lay out 30K+ for a new van -especially when I am saving up for it to pay in cash. So as I approach my decision I would like to get as many features for the dollar (which the Kia would bring). However, as I depart with my hard earned savings I feel better putting this towards a Honda Odyssey then a Kia. Thinking of handing a 30K check to a Honda dealer is much more reassuring then handing it to a Kia dealer.
Your right Kia has not earned the trust yet --even in one or two model years. I think it would be better to give Kia a try on a commuter-class car in the price range of 10k-14lk
Well, considering a loaded Sedona with virtually everything except the DVD system has a TMV of around $22k+TTL, your 30k check should get you a Sedona + $8k in change.
I would not argue that the 2006 Odyssey will probably be more reliable and retain the $ 8,000 difference in value for at least 10 years of ownership.
MODERATOR
Need help getting around? claires@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
Tell everyone about your buying experience: Write a Dealer Review
Thanks
Good grief. Do you at least get dinner and a movie out of it first?
Do not buy the $2500...
Cyn in HI
There were 4 main reasons why we chose the Odyssey over the Sienna.
1. The ride. The 2005 Sienna we tested rides like an American car - soft and squishy. The Honda ride is firmer and tighter. We like the latter.
2. The fuel "recommendation". You may think it's not true, but it's in the documentation, and several reliable Toyota mechanics in our area concurred that it is preferable. I am not interested in paying more for fuel!
3. Resale. In our area (anyway), the Honda Odyssey has a slightly better resale value than the Sienna.
and
4. Price - by the time we added in simply the safety deatures of the Sienna and the Odyssey, the Odyssey was slightly cheaper (different from 2004).
Toyota has equipped their Corolla too with a non-independent beam suspension in the rear, while Honda has equipped their competing Civic with an independent and dynamic double-wishbone rear suspension.
I wonder why Honda does not point out such major shortcomings in their primary competitor through aggressive ad campaigns.
The interesting thing is that Toyota equips all of their Lexus offerings with independent suspensions but equips their lower-end Toyota products with such el-cheapo non-independent beam suspensions, including the Matrix, Corolla, Echo etc. The Camry, Avalon and Highlander benefits from an independent suspension, since it has a corresponding Lexus equivalent model (ES330, RX330 etc). But I had no idea of the setup on the Sienna, since I had implicitly assumed that it would be equipped with an independent suspension, front and rear.
A torsion beam suspension is not the same as a solid axle suspension (as the word torsion implies). It offers better driving dynamics than a solid axle; although, most would probably prefer an independent setup for a passenger vehicle.
The above is something along the lines of:
Moving around with a wheelchair is better than moving around with a pair of crutches. Both options are bad but one is less worse. Sorry, could not help it. :shades:
Forgive me almighty hosts if this appears later multiple times. I was having problems getting it to show up.
Actually Honda just went back to the independent suspension on the new Civic after abandoning it on the previous model.
I wonder why Honda does not point out such major shortcomings in their primary competitor through aggressive ad campaigns.
It's a minivan for goodness sake - for the majority of the market, a sporty ride isn't a concern.
Of course, the sienna is ultra quiet on the highway, whereas my wife often ask: have we roll up all the windows yet?
Sorry, the New Civic (2006+) and the previous model (2001-2005 ?) and the one before that, were all equipped with independent suspensions. It is just that in the last 2 generations (the new model and the one right before that), Honda switched to a strut based independent suspension in the front while retaining a double-wishbone independent suspension in the rear, while the series before that, had a double wishbone independent suspension in the front and rear. In the 4 generations of the Civic that I know of (at least the past 10 years), Honda always equipped the Civic with Independent suspensions. No "abandonment" there !!
It's a minivan for goodness sake - for the majority of the market, a sporty ride isn't a concern.
An independent suspension is not intended to provide a "sporty ride" alone. It is to allow each wheel to independently react to shocks from the road (potholes etc) and not transmitting the jarring effects onto the other end.
The 'torsion bar' is NOT a solid axle running from one rear wheel to the other. The torsion bar takes the place of coil springs. (in fact, a coil spring is simply a torsion bar wound into a helix).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torsion_beam_suspension
BTW - for decades the rear-suspension on the Porsche 911 was a torsion bar suspension (until the 964 series was introduced as the Carrera4 in 1989)
The reason the Sienna uses a torsion bar is for packaging reasons; the torsion bar runs from the rear suspension area FORWARD under the van (perpendicular to where a rigid axle would be).
FWD minivans ALL use independent rear suspensions for one major reason: packaging. If you have an rigid rear axle/suspension, you can't drop the interior floor down low enough for comfortable 3rd row seating/cargo room.
http://www.toyota.com/vehicles/2006/sienna/key_features/ext360.html
Rotate the van upside-down. And you will see that indeed the torsion beam suspension is not the same as a solid axle--it is independent (with a caveat). My guess is that Toyota went with this design to save space. My last quote was incomplete, as it should have been worded to say that most would probably prefer the independent suspension (ON THE HONDA)--coil springs can offer progressive spring rates. This basically mean the stiffness of the spring can be designed to vary with the amount of compression. A simple example of a torsion beam is a diving board. Theoretically, it will only have one spring rate assuming the material it is constructed from is uniform (as we would hope for suspension components on a car). This, of course. assumes you are within the elastic limit of the beam material (scientific details). There are more details, but I think you get the picture.
I hate writing long posts, but sometimes I suppose longer is better.
The previous generation Passat was saddled with a torsion beam while the corresponding Audi A4 (on which it was loosely based) had a true independent suspension. But the A4 obviously costed a lot more.
Second - the excessive body roll in the Sienna has nothing to do with the torsion bar suspension. It has to do with the 'spring rate' of the bar (a thicker, shorter bar would have a higher equivalent spring rate). It has to do with the suspension geometry (design/location of the trailing arms and torsion bar). And it has to do with the shock design.
Toyota designed the van to be smoother and quieter. Some prefer the suspension calibration of the Odyssey (I do for example), but to insinuate that the ride of the Sienna is inherent to a torsion bar suspension is incorrect. That salesman was completely clueless.
Odyssey: 4 wheel independent suspension
Sienna: Front independent suspension
Does that provide any clues ?? Did Edmunds forget that the Sienna's rear is independent ? Or is it that they don't consider the torsion beam on the Sienna's rear as independent ?
Torsion beam suspension
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
Torsion beam suspension, also known as a torsion bar or torsion spring, is a vehicle suspension system. One end of a long metal bar is attached firmly to the vehicle chassis; the opposite end has a lever, perpendicular to the bar, that is attached to the axle of a wheel. As the wheel travels up and down it "twists" the bar along its axis to provide the spring force. This system was used extensively in European cars as well as by Packard in the 1950s and Chrysler throughout the 1960s. The system was applied to many new armoured fighting vehicle designs during the Second World War.
The main advantages of torsion beam suspension are durability, easy ride height adjustability, and a smooth ride. It provides a longer travel than older leaf spring systems, and takes up less space in a vehicle compared to coil springs. One major disadvantage is the lack of a progressive spring rate which can lead to sloppy handling.
Some vehicles use torsion bars to implement automatic leveling with sensors and motors to dynamically adjust the torsion in each bar in response to changing loads and road conditions.
A variation on this theme is often called a twist beam suspension, as is found on VW Golfs and other economy cars. It usually consists of trailing arms connecting to a twistable beam that runs from one side of the car to the other. This design's advantages are mainly space and cost, and does not offer the performance or ride height adjustability of torsion bar suspension. You will often see the names for these suspension types used interchangeably in marketing literature and in conversation which can cause a great deal of confusion.
The more commonly used coil spring is merely a torsion bar formed into a helix.
Please also see http://www.autozine.org/technical_school/suspension/tech_suspension21.htm
for the images that go with the following explanation:
Torsion beam suspension
Most modern mini cars up to C-segment (for instance, VW Golf) employ torsion beam as the rear suspension. Why? compare with double wishbones, multi-link and trailing arm suspensions, it engages little width of the car, thus enable greater rear seat room. It is cheaper too. Compare with MacPherson strut, its shock absorber is shorter and can be inclined steeply away from the vertical, thus engage less boot space.
In fact, torsion beam suspension is only half-independent - there is a torsion beam connecting both wheels together, which allows limited degree of freedom when forced. For some less demanding compact cars, this save the anti-roll bars. On the contrary, it doesn't provide the same level of ride and handling as double wishbones or multi-link suspensions, although in reality it is superior to its only direct competitor, MacPherson strut. Most of the Europe's best handling GTIs employed this suspenion.
For those who think handling is not a big deal on minivan, try driving on narrow road and full of pot holes at high way speed, the Odys will impress you with its stability.
If all roads are perfect, the Chrysler van with solid rear axle aand Siena with Torsion bar would probably work very well.
It is the rough road which separate boys from men.
jt
should be modified to:
If all roads are perfect, the Chrysler van with solid rear axle aand Siena with Torsion beam would probably work very well.
The following is the Sienna's suspension from www.toyota.com :
MacPherson strut front suspension with gas-filled shock absorbers and torsion beam rear suspension with coil springs and gas-filled shock absorbers, and front and rear stabilizer bars
I'm just glad to see that you now at least admit that you were wrong to say that a torsion beam suspension is the same as a solid rear axle. That, my MS (where I grew up) friend is progress.
Independent Suspension:
Odyssey: 4 wheel
Sienna: Front
So the Torsion beam in the Sienna's rear, as admitted by toyota themselves, is NOT INDEPENDENT.