I agree with your comments and I don't understand the complaints with the new Sienna, or the verbosity of some of the posts here.
However, I disagree with you about the shifter. I can't think of a better place for it to be. I would be more likely to hit it, if it were on the tree, (steering column) or a center console. I have long arms (6'3") and haven't come close to mistakingly bumping it. I have worried about knocking it from D to 4 at times and found that to be unfounded as well.
The AC and wet/snow traction are great, the run flats are awesome, engine & drivetrain are smooth, love all the doo-dads...including the laser cruise control and adjustable HID headlights!
Let's see, I started looking at 1994 Ford Aerostars and have held off on getting a minivan till now, hehe! I wanted something that was not sub-par in reliability, and the Caravan always was bad. I actually rented Aerostars and liked them quite a bit. But it was a Ford.
Enter the 2004 Sienna. We have always had Honda Accords, but when we looked at the Odyssey, we found the only 2 points we liked over the Sienna was the peppier engine and the deep well in back and headroom over it. Then we read about the tranny problems, and decided to stay away from Honda this time.
We are in Northern VA and shopped at Koons Tyson's Toyota - paid full sticker price as they said they weren't dealing on Siennas or Priuses. People were driving them off the lot left and right and they have been sort of hard to find at all in this area. Got the AM pkg. #1, wireless headphones and Z1 preferred acc. pkg 1. They charged a $540.00 delivery, processing and handling fee (!). Sticker price on our LE was 25,966.00 and with all taxes a fees, it came to 27,131.29. No bargain, BUT I can say that it was stress-free not having to haggle! We were content in simply knowing we WERE ripped off. Just like everyone else was :-) No one else got it cheaper unlike when you worry after haggling.
Just got it 3 days ago, but so far I cannot believe how wonderful everything is about it. Only possible problem is that we are only getting 12-13 mpg and I will be checking into this on Monday with the dealer. Is this typical for the break-in period? I have only about 80 miles on it.
I thought I would hate the gear shift, but coming from driving stick, I have found it kind of fun - just in the right place and easy to use. The seats are very comfortable, the air hits me right in the face just where I want it and the AC is strong and cools immediately - very cold. Love the lights dimming just at the right time and lights coming on inside just when you need them. It is so easy to drive, it "just feels good". And I am very fussy. Rear hatch is so easy to open, you touch that membrane button and it lifts itself up easily. Side non-power slider is super easy to open and close. And the passenger power door works great. I love sitting up high even though it doesn't look like a tall car from the outside - you really do see eye-to-eye to all the big boys now. They really have thought of everything. I guess I wouldn't mind the peppy engine of the Honda, but the turning circle and intuitive control layout on the Sienna makes up for any lack of pep it may have. I will replace the speakers with better ones - they are OK, but lack treble. And too much bass will really rattle them - and the doors. Put an XM Roady in it (I have Sirius in my older car) and the sound is awesome compared to Sirius and the programming is better.
Stop debating on what minivan to buy - just buy a Sienna and enjoy it. Its awesome! This coming from someone who debated for 10 years on which one to buy (conversion van? minivan? motorhome? BMW?!) See my van here:
Thanks for the post and pics. I wouldn't worry about the mileage just yet. It should start improving in just a few tanks but it may be several thousand miles before it falls into line with the EPA estimates.
Since you only have 80 miles, I assume that you are using the dash computer to calculate the mileage. That's not likely very accurate this early in the game either. After it breaks in some, I'd track a few tanks manually to see how it compares to the computer.
They charged a $540.00 delivery, processing and handling fee (!).
Don't feel bad about that. That's just the standard fee other companies call "destination charge". Toyota now includes it in the price of the vehicle, but it's in line with what other carmakers charge and it is always non-negotiable since there's no markup on it.
You needlessly missed some wonderful years without a minivan.
I purchased a new 94 Eddie Bauer Aerostar AWD in late 93. Never a problem.
My son purchased a 92 used Aerostar AWD with 23k miles at about the same time. At 125k miles his transmission started acting up, wouldn't upshift when cold. Not very soon after that it developed a leaking head gasket.
So he's now driving my 94 and after $1000 in the shop for new head gaskets and a DIY replacement of the vacuum modulator on the transmission the 92 is again running fine also.
Very nice, reliable, AWD minivans, it's a real shame Ford discontinued the product.
Not 4th to 3rd, but D to 4th. We've never accidentally done it, but if the passenger in the front seat gets out of her chair and goes toward the back of the van, that is a possibility.
What kind of damage will you do if you accidentally shift to 4th and drive for a long distance? I read someone shift to 4th all the time to prevent hesitation in acceleration (which was reported by some owners).
there shouldn't be any damage done if not driven in that gear for an extended period of time. it is like shifting into low gear. you should hear a louder whine from the engine. i agreed with rorr that your gas mileage will be suffered a bit.
when towing uphill. Otherwise the van is in D all the time. Gas mileage, based on the trip computer, drops about 2.5 mpg when in 4th and the RPM increases from just below 2000 to about 2700. Of course, this is way below redline. Won't hurt anything.
Still, like I've said, we've never accidentally hit the shift lever and changed gears. The lever is on an upward angle and even when you get out of a the passenger seat while driving and walk next to it, you would have to extend your knee upwards and over quite a bit to move the lever from D to 4. The lever is closer to the driver and is on an upward sloped plateau of sorts.
I been at two dealers who know not much about the navigation system available in the Sienna. Tried calling Toyota, but left on hold too long. Searched here, but didn't find much.
The questions I have are: how large is the POI database? Do voice directions stop when going from verified to non-verified areas? Is there a destination input by intersection and does that work? How often are updates available?
Is this nav the same on some other Toyota car, so that I may find one to check out. Hard to find Sienna's here, impossible with a nav.
Very good resolution, overall, for urban areas. If your often travel in the suburbs then the resolution can be moderate to poor. Rural areas are always poor resolution.
In rural areas it often says, you're now on your own, use the compass for further guidance.
Bellingham, WA, is considered rural, no URBAN areas nearby.
I read somewhere that the run flat tires add considerably to the interior noise. One of the things the Sienna has going for it over the Odyssey is less interior noise? Comments?
My XLE Limited AWD purrs and gets great traction in the snow and recent ice storm we had. The Run-flat is the way of the future, embrace it and do not be afraid!
Run flat tires might be way of the future, but tire manufacturers definitely overstate their benefits, especially when one takes price of tire and mounting into consideration (see posts #710, #749, #796 on this message board)
My main complain is that contrary to tire manufacturers push, driving with run flat tires WITHOUT a SPARE (standard configuration on Sienna AWD models) has a higher risk of being stranded than driving with conventional tires and a spare. So where is the benefit for the price which is multiples of the conventional tire?
I own Sienna LE AWD and bought a spare wheel/tire to have in the van.
Regarding the noise, these tires (Bridgestone B380) so far (12,000 miles) are as noisy as an average passenger tire. They are, however ride harsher, especially when under inflated, even by one-two PSIs.
How do those of you with Sunroofs like them? It looks fairly large in a picture of a Limited I have seen. Ordered an XLE with package #14 (Sunroof), vs. Package #12. Gave up the 17" wheels/tires, and gained the 6cd changer plus the 'roof. Also, what brand/model tires has everyone been receiving? I have seen Dunlop SP4000, Bridgestone Turanzas and Michelin (do not remember the model).
The sunroof is indeed large! We love it. The runflat tires are Bridgestone and they are fine. I have no issues w/not having a spare with no plans to buy one. With the AWD there's no where to put it anyway. I do have AAA plus and it has paid for itself many times in years past...before I started driving Toyota's!
Just got my Sienna LE with alloy wheel. I noticed that there is no balancing wieght on the wheel. Is this right? All my cars in past has this though. How can you balance the wheel without the weight? I checked another Sienna on dealer's lot does not have the weight either. Should dealer balance the wheel (and add the weight) when prepare the van? What about your van?
The weights can be put on the inside of the rim...looks better.
Spare on the roof? What's the point? Good way to trash the roof and get injured when the average person trys to get it down!
Also, the roof racks work great with Yakima low-riders for my canoe. Or...if you need to grab on to something for leverage as you try to get the spare tire off the roof! LOL!!!
AAA membership will not help in case of damaged RFT tires: 1. Most of the times RFT tire need to be replaced after run flat operation. One would have two problems with that: replacement tire will not be immediately available and installation requires special machine to compress side walls of the tire for installation (For mores details check posts referenced in post #1181). 2. Proper repairing of tire (although most Toyota dealers will tell you that tire should be replaced, not repaired) will again require a special machine. In my experience it took days to get replacement tire (tirerack.com is the only place which had them in stock), and my spare came very handy. Regarding the space for storage, check the manual and a sketch included in the compartment where jack is stored. Both documents indicate that spare tire in AWD models (dealer installed option) can be stored behind driver side portion of the third row. Check back wall of that cavity (behind the third row) - it has round shape to go around the tire laying in the well.
>has any one seen it/own it? What are the pros/cons besides one's own personal taste? Is it too white?
We have an Arctic Frost XLE. Wasn't our first choice in color, it was what the dealer had available. But I felt in love with it on first sight. It is the same exact color used on Lexus brand. I would chose this color if we were to do this over again.
The paranoia about run-flats has already been discussed here. Get used to them, they aren't going away, (remember when radials and unleaded gas first appeared? They were hated too!) replacements ARE available. I have no problem going down the road with run flats and no spare and I drive in VERY rural areas for a living. I need the space in the back of the van for better pursuits. My fear is hitting a deer, pheasant, or turkey at 80 mph in the remote areas I drive and then not having a cell-signal to call AAA plus.
...they will go away? Otherwise, they are here to stay no matter how hard you wish. Technology will improve. They make sense. Did you oppose seat belts and hydralic brakes?
Not aggressive, passive, I refuse to participate....
I'm setting here trying to remember just when it was the last time I actually had a flat...
Hold on, still thinking...
I know it really had to be more recent but the last that I can remember was in about 1987.
The really nice thing about a spare is when a tire does fail, can't be repaired, I can buy only one new tire to hit the "road" with the spare and put the worn tire as spare.
wwest: With flats being so few it seems ridiculous to fuss about RF-Tires. However, I understand. Change comes hard for some. AND...Oh that's right...you are the one trying to convince us all in earlier posts that RWD is better than FWD or AWD for inclement weather.
I seldom agree with wwest on anything, but in this case I'm with him. I think the whole concept of run flat tires is flawed. In the first place, they're supposed to be good for 50 miles. Here in the west it's easy to be a lot further than 50 miles from a place you could get a tire repaired. And in the common situation where you need the tire replaced, forget it--the availability of replacements is very low indeed. As far as frequency of flat tires is concerned, for years I had very few, but in the last 6 years I've had at least 4 flat tires, and in 3 of the 4 instances the tire needed replaced. One of them was a run flat tire. So it's a very real issue to me.
I keep hearing the argument that it cant be repaired easily..or limited availability...why not just replace it with a regular cheap tire ( which is available at every corner), if you cant get it repaired or replaced easily...and then move on to your destination...hello?
If the availability of RF tires was increased substantially, and the cost was in line with non-RF tires, would you (or wwest for that matter) still have an issue with them? I ask because availability WILL increase and costs WILL come down as RF's become more commonplace.
The only rational alternate to the RF tires is the "temporary" space saver spare. I say "temporary" because theoretically, they aren't to be used for long driving distances either (or for speeds in excess of 50mph). So, in regards to your concern about the 50 mile limitation, I don't see where a space-saver donut has any advantage.
Do you think that all the manufacturers will simply go back to issueing full-size, standard duty tires and rims for spares in lieu of either space-savers or RF's if we all simply "refuse to participate"?
In my case the run flat tire that needed replacement was from an SC430. I don't think 18" tires that will replace them are available on every corner (especially out in the middle of the desert or in the mountains). A lot of the places I drive on road trips have no cell phone coverage, so I can't expect to be able to call for roadside assistance, either. On such trips I would not feel comfortable unless I had a full service spare on board. I don't see any alternative to it on the horizon.
I'm not convinced one way or the other about the run-flat tires, but they seem reasonable. Of course, the suggestion that you simply buy a cheap tire replacement and cruise on to your destination will only work if your destination isn't all that far and you plan on keeping your speed down -- handling characteristics will change, sometimes dramatically, with mismatched tires and you might even damage your drive train. Hardly worth the risk to me.
Or we could all just follow the lead of Dallas area drivers who routinely cruise and pass and cut in/out of traffic at the standard 10-miles-over North Texas speed with one (more?) of those little "temporary" donut tires on their car (usually on the front for even more of a thrill). WhoooEEEEEE!!!! Or maybe I should say, YEEEEEHAAAAAWWWW!!!!
Remember that if you take the whole lot of us, those that participate in ETH, we're not even 1% of the auto buying public. So in the end, our opinions mean very little when compared to the "masses".
FWD, AWD, & RWD...
What I have said was that overall, RWD is safer than FWD or front torque bias AWD.
And I learned to avoid the Dallas area many years ago now. But then this summer I took the most southern bypass/loop I could and still encountered 100mph PUs with flapping fenders.
When I was coming of age in Iowa and Missouri, I tried to avoid getting behind the slow-off-the-line pickups at traffic lights. There it was most likely a farmer or some worker not in too much of a hurry to get back to the heavy labor that would be there waiting no matter what.
Around Dallas the pickups are the ones to get behind, if you have to get behind anyone. Not only are they the most numerous and quickest off the line, but they provide a pretty decent draft to help save your gas too! ;-)
Sadly my new Yukon XL (2003) will not allow me to provide that service to others as handily as my dearly-missed 1999 F150 Supercab (gem-like Toreador Red with a custom Gold two-tone band and rakish running boards). Even my wife is suffering some amount of emotional distress as she tries to give up her competitive driving habits and content herself with the more sedate performance of the XL. I suppose we'll just have to buy a travel trailer next... ;-)
P.S. For those interested, our redhot pickup is available from CarMax Irving for only $4,000 more than the generous price they paid me for it. It's had all it's oil changes, recommended services, shots, etc.
Yup...wilbur west...I too miss the days of fishtails and doing donuts in the snow...No matter how I try I can't get my AWD Sienna, or FWD Camry to do that! Maybe if I find a big patch of ice and hit the emergency brake?
" what if you get a SECOND flat? - by dako_tian" I've actually HAD this happen to me about 10 yrs. ago in Parkersburg, WV - on a Sunday night. Of course both rims were bent and it was another AAA plus moment (tow and motel) as I was going nowhere until the dealer opened Monday AM. You may be better off with 2 flats and run-flats though, unless you are in the habit of carrying two spares?
Why is the trend for manufacturers to use FWD instead of RWD? It must be cheaper somewhere down the line. I've driven many FWD and I prefer RWD. I'm sure there are benefits for both but I think price is more of a factor.
I've been lucky and only had one flat in 16 years of driving. I like the idea behind RFTs but it is not an option I'd pay more for.
FWD has been mainstream for twenty years or more, so I'm not sure you can call it a trend. Actually the renewed emphasis in RWD cars seems more of a new trend to me.
Yeah, I guess trend wasn't the best way to describe it.
I remember when FWD was introduced and it has come along way in 20 years. I guess what I really meant was that when vehicles are re designed they usually fall to the FWD design. I really don't mind the hump and don't care for the torque steer.
My real question is why? I suppose cost is a large factor because if it is less expensive to design, install and maintain their profits are better.
Really, no snow here. I did drive on ice a few times with FWD and didn't have any trouble. In fact, the first time I drove was in a parking lot covered in ice in a 5 spd RWD Toyota.
"...is exactly where you end up the very moment you lose traction on that FWD vehicle..."
And there's where the difference is. You lose traction at a MUCH LATER POINT w/FWD, AWD or 4WD than with RWD. Have you EVER driven in snow before Willard? I've been to Redmond, WA and I know they can get snow.
Comments
I like the shifter. Much easier to find than a stalk next to wiper controls.
However, I disagree with you about the shifter. I can't think of a better place for it to be. I would be more likely to hit it, if it were on the tree, (steering column) or a center console. I have long arms (6'3") and haven't come close to mistakingly bumping it. I have worried about knocking it from D to 4 at times and found that to be unfounded as well.
The AC and wet/snow traction are great, the run flats are awesome, engine & drivetrain are smooth, love all the doo-dads...including the laser cruise control and adjustable HID headlights!
Enter the 2004 Sienna. We have always had Honda Accords, but when we looked at the Odyssey, we found the only 2 points we liked over the Sienna was the peppier engine and the deep well in back and headroom over it. Then we read about the tranny problems, and decided to stay away from Honda this time.
We are in Northern VA and shopped at Koons Tyson's Toyota - paid full sticker price as they said they weren't dealing on Siennas or Priuses. People were driving them off the lot left and right and they have been sort of hard to find at all in this area. Got the AM pkg. #1, wireless headphones and Z1 preferred acc. pkg 1. They charged a $540.00 delivery, processing and handling fee (!). Sticker price on our LE was 25,966.00 and with all taxes a fees, it came to 27,131.29. No bargain, BUT I can say that it was stress-free not having to haggle! We were content in simply knowing we WERE ripped off. Just like everyone else was :-) No one else got it cheaper unlike when you worry after haggling.
Just got it 3 days ago, but so far I cannot believe how wonderful everything is about it. Only possible problem is that we are only getting 12-13 mpg and I will be checking into this on Monday with the dealer. Is this typical for the break-in period? I have only about 80 miles on it.
I thought I would hate the gear shift, but coming from driving stick, I have found it kind of fun - just in the right place and easy to use. The seats are very comfortable, the air hits me right in the face just where I want it and the AC is strong and cools immediately - very cold. Love the lights dimming just at the right time and lights coming on inside just when you need them. It is so easy to drive, it "just feels good". And I am very fussy. Rear hatch is so easy to open, you touch that membrane button and it lifts itself up easily. Side non-power slider is super easy to open and close. And the passenger power door works great. I love sitting up high even though it doesn't look like a tall car from the outside - you really do see eye-to-eye to all the big boys now. They really have thought of everything. I guess I wouldn't mind the peppy engine of the Honda, but the turning circle and intuitive control layout on the Sienna makes up for any lack of pep it may have. I will replace the speakers with better ones - they are OK, but lack treble. And too much bass will really rattle them - and the doors. Put an XM Roady in it (I have Sirius in my older car) and the sound is awesome compared to Sirius and the programming is better.
Stop debating on what minivan to buy - just buy a Sienna and enjoy it. Its awesome! This coming from someone who debated for 10 years on which one to buy (conversion van? minivan? motorhome? BMW?!) See my van here:
http://www.bewitched.net/newcar2.jpg
http://www.bewitched.net/newcar1.jpg
Wendy
Since you only have 80 miles, I assume that you are using the dash computer to calculate the mileage. That's not likely very accurate this early in the game either. After it breaks in some, I'd track a few tanks manually to see how it compares to the computer.
Steve, Host
Don't feel bad about that. That's just the standard fee other companies call "destination charge". Toyota now includes it in the price of the vehicle, but it's in line with what other carmakers charge and it is always non-negotiable since there's no markup on it.
I purchased a new 94 Eddie Bauer Aerostar AWD in late 93. Never a problem.
My son purchased a 92 used Aerostar AWD with 23k miles at about the same time. At 125k miles his transmission started acting up, wouldn't upshift when cold. Not very soon after that it developed a leaking head gasket.
So he's now driving my 94 and after $1000 in the shop for new head gaskets and a DIY replacement of the vacuum modulator on the transmission the 92 is again running fine also.
Very nice, reliable, AWD minivans, it's a real shame Ford discontinued the product.
The Sienna is a very good choice.
Still, like I've said, we've never accidentally hit the shift lever and changed gears. The lever is on an upward angle and even when you get out of a the passenger seat while driving and walk next to it, you would have to extend your knee upwards and over quite a bit to move the lever from D to 4. The lever is closer to the driver and is on an upward sloped plateau of sorts.
The questions I have are: how large is the POI database? Do voice directions stop when going from verified to non-verified areas? Is there a destination input by intersection and does that work? How often are updates available?
Is this nav the same on some other Toyota car, so that I may find one to check out. Hard to find Sienna's here, impossible with a nav.
In rural areas it often says, you're now on your own, use the compass for further guidance.
Bellingham, WA, is considered rural, no URBAN areas nearby.
Also, how necessary is premium?
My main complain is that contrary to tire manufacturers push, driving with run flat tires WITHOUT a SPARE (standard configuration on Sienna AWD models) has a higher risk of being stranded than driving with conventional tires and a spare. So where is the benefit for the price which is multiples of the conventional tire?
I own Sienna LE AWD and bought a spare wheel/tire to have in the van.
Regarding the noise, these tires (Bridgestone B380) so far (12,000 miles) are as noisy as an average passenger tire. They are, however ride harsher, especially when under inflated, even by one-two PSIs.
Spare on the roof? What's the point? Good way to trash the roof and get injured when the average person trys to get it down!
Also, the roof racks work great with Yakima low-riders for my canoe. Or...if you need to grab on to something for leverage as you try to get the spare tire off the roof! LOL!!!
1. Most of the times RFT tire need to be replaced after run flat operation. One would have two problems with that: replacement tire will not be immediately available and installation requires special machine to compress side walls of the tire for installation (For mores details check posts referenced in post #1181).
2. Proper repairing of tire (although most Toyota dealers will tell you that tire should be replaced, not repaired) will again require a special machine.
In my experience it took days to get replacement tire (tirerack.com is the only place which had them in stock), and my spare came very handy.
Regarding the space for storage, check the manual and a sketch included in the compartment where jack is stored. Both documents indicate that spare tire in AWD models (dealer installed option) can be stored behind driver side portion of the third row. Check back wall of that cavity (behind the third row) - it has round shape to go around the tire laying in the well.
We have an Arctic Frost XLE. Wasn't our first choice in color, it was what the dealer had available. But I felt in love with it on first sight. It is the same exact color used on Lexus brand. I would chose this color if we were to do this over again.
Stephen
I have no problem going down the road with run flats and no spare and I drive in VERY rural areas for a living. I need the space in the back of the van for better pursuits. My fear is hitting a deer, pheasant, or turkey at 80 mph in the remote areas I drive and then not having a cell-signal to call AAA plus.
"Get used to them, they aren't going away."
If the public, in general, doesn't accept them, they will go away!
I'm setting here trying to remember just when it was the last time I actually had a flat...
Hold on, still thinking...
I know it really had to be more recent but the last that I can remember was in about 1987.
The really nice thing about a spare is when a tire does fail, can't be repaired, I can buy only one new tire to hit the "road" with the spare and put the worn tire as spare.
However, I understand. Change comes hard for some.
AND...Oh that's right...you are the one trying to convince us all in earlier posts that RWD is better than FWD or AWD for inclement weather.
Moving on...
The only rational alternate to the RF tires is the "temporary" space saver spare. I say "temporary" because theoretically, they aren't to be used for long driving distances either (or for speeds in excess of 50mph). So, in regards to your concern about the 50 mile limitation, I don't see where a space-saver donut has any advantage.
Do you think that all the manufacturers will simply go back to issueing full-size, standard duty tires and rims for spares in lieu of either space-savers or RF's if we all simply "refuse to participate"?
Or we could all just follow the lead of Dallas area drivers who routinely cruise and pass and cut in/out of traffic at the standard 10-miles-over North Texas speed with one (more?) of those little "temporary" donut tires on their car (usually on the front for even more of a thrill). WhoooEEEEEE!!!! Or maybe I should say, YEEEEEHAAAAAWWWW!!!!
FWD, AWD, & RWD...
What I have said was that overall, RWD is safer than FWD or front torque bias AWD.
And I learned to avoid the Dallas area many years ago now. But then this summer I took the most southern bypass/loop I could and still encountered 100mph PUs with flapping fenders.
Around Dallas the pickups are the ones to get behind, if you have to get behind anyone. Not only are they the most numerous and quickest off the line, but they provide a pretty decent draft to help save your gas too! ;-)
Sadly my new Yukon XL (2003) will not allow me to provide that service to others as handily as my dearly-missed 1999 F150 Supercab (gem-like Toreador Red with a custom Gold two-tone band and rakish running boards). Even my wife is suffering some amount of emotional distress as she tries to give up her competitive driving habits and content herself with the more sedate performance of the XL. I suppose we'll just have to buy a travel trailer next... ;-)
P.S. For those interested, our redhot pickup is available from CarMax Irving for only $4,000 more than the generous price they paid me for it. It's had all it's oil changes, recommended services, shots, etc.
" what if you get a SECOND flat? - by dako_tian" I've actually HAD this happen to me about 10 yrs. ago in Parkersburg, WV - on a Sunday night. Of course both rims were bent and it was another AAA plus moment (tow and motel) as I was going nowhere until the dealer opened Monday AM. You may be better off with 2 flats and run-flats though, unless you are in the habit of carrying two spares?
I've been lucky and only had one flat in 16 years of driving. I like the idea behind RFTs but it is not an option I'd pay more for.
Dano
I much prefer FWD in my minivan (hate the hump).
Steve, Host
I remember when FWD was introduced and it has come along way in 20 years.
I guess what I really meant was that when vehicles are re designed they usually fall to the FWD design. I really don't mind the hump and don't care for the torque steer.
My real question is why? I suppose cost is a large factor because if it is less expensive to design, install and maintain their profits are better.
Steve, Host
RX400H
Really, no snow here. I did drive on ice a few times with FWD and didn't have any trouble. In fact, the first time I drove was in a parking lot covered in ice in a 5 spd RWD Toyota.
I notice many FWD advocates recommend a light application of the parking brake for recovery at that point.
Steve, Host
And there's where the difference is. You lose traction at a MUCH LATER POINT w/FWD, AWD or 4WD than with RWD. Have you EVER driven in snow before Willard? I've been to Redmond, WA and I know they can get snow.
Let's move on please.
Steve, Host