Toyota Sequoia

slackers · February 2004

OAC3: Still funny to me, as I've posted before.......I wish the Sequoia was bigger. My views are typically not mainstream, and I am 6'3", but this vehicle rides and handles like a small car (to me). Intimidating ? Wish it was. Guess our different perspectives are what makes the world go 'round........did that help ?

flyfish4life · February 2004

IMO, the Armada is probably the single most hideous SUV on the road. Looks like a poorly pieced together truck with a camper - an obvious rush job by Nissan. Consumer Reports did not have a glowing report either, commenting especially on the stiff ride and inferior interior. Having said that, I am sure it will appeal to the typical American buyer looking for bling, bling. Oh well, enough about Nissan, just my $.02.

slackers · February 2004

I've also seen the Armada in the flesh. Something is not quite right when you look at the vehicle from the rear. The back third of the vehicle seems like a mismatch in design to the front 2/3.....very strange effect. I liked the size and bulk, but can't imaging anyone finding this design appealing. Despite many claiming that the Sequoia is a boring design, I find it distinctly recognizable and very appealing. The rear spoiler is a bit weird, but I'd rather have it than not. Wonder if the '06 redesign will have it looking like a pregnant 4-Runner ? Really like the 4-Runner body....just too small.

oac3 · February 2004

The Sequoia is not BIG enough for you ? Well, then I suggest the Sub or Excursion may fit your needs for size. To many people, myself included, the Seq is a big, and I mean, a really B-I-G truck ! It weighs over 2 tons you know ! That is a lot of mass and steel to haul around daily and not feel it.

WRT the Armada, I do agree that the rear quarter panel of the truck looked *bolted on*. From the front, however, it does not look that bad

BUT, will Nissan sell enough of this truck relative to its competition ? Guess, time will tell. But I like the direction Nissan is taking, they are not being conservative at all - Murano, Armada, new Maxima, new Alt, new Z, etc... Love them or hate them, they are not conservative in styling and design. Just my .02 cents worth.

toyotatoys · February 2004

Yes, my 01 Seq with 52K is still going strong. Not a single problem so far, except for the TSB on the brake. AC was never touched and still AOK. I always keep my cars until they fall to the ground. For example, my '93 Lexus SC300 has 116K and still plenty to go. I have no regrets for buying this Seq.

My wife and I are both small people, so to us the Seq is also huge. My wife and I have no problem driving it, but I dislike washing it. Some parts of this truck are hard for me to reach.

Keeping our fingers crossed.

slackers · February 2004

Hey, don't think I didn't have my eye on the Excursion....that's my size-kind-of-vehicle ! I had Ford Club Wagons (the E350 one tons) for twenty years before my "downsizing" to the Sequoia. I loved the size of those vans, being a drummer in a band. The Excursion would have been a 4x4 alternative to those vans. Maybe you can better understand my perspective on the "little" Sequoia after that. The Excursions had such poor reviews, Consumer Reports consistently had them at the bottom of the ratings regarding repairs. You know I'm just giving you a hard time, OAC3. The Sequoia meets all my hauling needs and the quality of this vehicle is so far superior to anything I've owned, I feel very fortunate. Just a guy who likes big stuff

oac3 · February 2004

slackers: do I read you right that you DO have a Seq ? You have a way with words you know. So I better ask before I assume wrongly. If you do, great. If not, what's stopping you ?

Toyotatoys: Yeah, old timers eh ?? How many are left on this site? I wonder. I believe only Cliffy1 was here ahead of me, and even he has gone fishing

You know, since we hardly drove the Seq., I didn't realise the correct mileage on it. It now has exactly 50,002 miles. The two brats (ehm, kids), grandma and wifey and I are heading out of town to Vegas for an extended weekend. I figure this has to give us plenty of use for the truck, and maybe we'd be lucky in Vegas and win something, for a change. We'll see how the truck behaves on the 10hr roundtrip. Maybe we'll fall in love with it all over again

slackers · February 2004

Indeed I do. Have been on this board for a couple years now. Started with an '01 and got such a good trade, went for an '03 a year ago. My '03 is a Limited, Phantom Gray. I've added TRD Catback exhaust, wood dash kit, in-channel Weather-flector vent visors, tinted driver/passenger windows, hands-free phone system and a Revtek lift kit (2 1/2" front, 1" rear lift). T'is a thing of beauty.

pschreck · February 2004

I'm still around. On high blood pressure medicine now and have two grandchildren. Still kickin'.

fanman8 · February 2004

Its nice to check in now and again and see some familiar names posting here. I do still enjoy my 2001 Limited with just over 15,000 miles. It has been a fun ride even if driven only to and from work. It seems like most of the gang is still here minus one controversial poster by the name of Heatwave. I understand he moved out of the country and is now the proud owner of a brand new Toyota dealership in Sydney. I'm Kidding! My blood pressure is also becoming problematic. The abduction and murder of Carlie Brucia which took place here in Sarasota has many of us here still grieving and trying to cope with the tragedy.

toyotatoys · February 2004

Too late for Heatwave to open a Toyota dealership in Sydney. Yossarian is already there, and there was also another name that I forgot. It sounded like aka for Yossarian....

plogic · February 2004

I've just reached 30,000 miles on my 02 SR5 can anyone tell me what type of maintenance I should do at this milage? I avg 65/35 hwy/city, I use synthetic oil every 3K. I did have the 15,000 mile service done at a cost of $485.00 I just want to avoid superfluous dealer charges. Any advice would be appreciated.

petro33 · February 2004

I have not made many posts but began here in '01 to learn about a potential purchase of a sequoia. I have learned a lot over the years, on this site and one for my old echo and its replacement a my2 spyder. The traffic volume has gone down over the years I guess because the vehicle is not so new and not so many questions. My '01 limited is still the best vehicle I ever owned!

tdo123 · February 2004

I was at the dealer today driving the 2004. Seems very similar (in fact, I really can't tell any differences) to the 2001. The dealer told me that in 2005 the engine would be a 285 HP with VVT and there will be many more luxury appts added.

Any truth to this on the rumor mill?

shopinful · February 2004

My husband and I are considering buying a Sequoia. We own a 4 runner now which will be passed down to number 2 son. This will be my husbands vehicle replacement so of course he took it for a test ride. He said that the drivers seat was uncomfortable and he couldn't get it back far enough. He is 6 ft. and has never had a problem with either of our two 4 runners but said that he felt the seat in the Sequoia fit different and is not sure if he could live with it. He test drove the SE5 for he doesn't want the spoiler or sun roof in the LE. Anyone else notice the comfort or distance of the drivers seat?

katzat · February 2004

There are many different ways to be 6 ft tall. I am 6'2" and could never fit comfortably in a 4Runner. As I recall, it was the head room in models with sun roofs. The Sequoia, however has plenty of leg and head room for me. Granted, I do have the seat all the way back (seems like an easy way to mark my spot in lieu of memory in the seats). I am also a little short legged/long waisted for my size.

Have your husband go back and sit in it again. As I recall, the sit is quite different from a 4Runner in that the 4Runner sits more like a car (lower seat) and the Sequoia sits up a little higher. He may get used to it. To my knowledge, the leg room was not noticeably different between the Sequoia and any of the other full sized SUVs my wife and I sat in except for possibly the Range Rover. With the Seats all the way back in the RR, I couldn't reach the pedals.

shopinful · February 2004

My husband and I are considering buying a Sequoia. We own a 4 runner now which will be passed down to number 2 son. This will be my husbands vehicle replacement so of course he took it for a test ride. He said that the drivers seat was uncomfortable and he couldn't get it back far enough. He is 6 ft. and has never had a problem with either of our two 4 runners but said that he felt the seat in the Sequoia fit different and is not sure if he could live with it. He test drove the SE5 for he doesn't want the spoiler or sun roof in the LE. Anyone else notice the comfort or distance of the drivers seat?

slackers · February 2004

I'm 6'3" and with the seat all the way back, and tilted to max (highest in front), it's totally comfortable. I actually had problems with other vehicles when shopping.....example, my head hit the ceiling in the Denali, could only fit in one minus the sun roof. I can't imagine at 6' 0" that he wouldn't have more than enough room in the Sequoia.

gkatz1 · February 2004

Either the seat didn't go back all the way or your husbands legs are very looooooooong!

aggiedog · February 2004

Did you install the TRD Catback exhaust yourself?

slackers · February 2004

No., I had a good muffler shop do it for me, and glad I did. The tailpipe didn't sit straight(rear view) with that installation. They had to cut the pipe and adjust it so it looked right exiting from the rear. They did a great job. I paid $100 for the install and provided my own parts (purchased from Carson Toyota in Calif.) via internet. Watched them install it and unless you've got a good helper and a lift, I wouldn't mess with it..... and don't know what I would have done with a crooked install anyway !

low_ball_88 · February 2004

I paid $211 for the 15,000 mile service on my 02 LTD 4WD. I think you need to go to another dealer. You have been charged way too much. I believe that the 30K mile service costs about what you paid for in the 15K mile service.

watchdog3 · February 2004

TDO123, What dealer where you at? This is what I have been waiting to hear. I do not want to bite the bullet only to find out in 6 months I "could a had a bigger V8". I would like confirmation. about a month ago rumors surfaced on the web about a 5.5 ltr which is what they use in Toyota Race cars I believe.

Anybody have concrete confirmation of the bigger motor??????

slackers · February 2004

Here's what I did for my 15K service....it's called an oil change. Give me a break. Look at the specs for the 15K service.....all it is, is an oil change ! Save your $, it's a concoction of the dealer.

tdo123 · February 2004

I was at a dealer in Kansas City. Actually, since I heard that last Monday, I have had many other people tell me the same thing.

We are in the same boat. I don't want to buy one now if new engine and updates are on the horizon.

Also, I was comparing the Expedition to the Sequoia. Although the reliability of toyota is unquestionable, I think you get more option on the Ford. Air conditioned seats, rear-back up beepers, folding seats etc....and it is a few bucks cheaper than Toyota. I am missing something?

slackers · February 2004

Just a thought about a new engine for the Sequoia. The 4.7 is tried and true. one heck of a performer for many, many years......same as in the Land Cruiser and Lexus. A new engine would be in it's first year, and you know what they say about anything in it's first year. Something to consider.
Regarding comparison of an Expedition to the Sequoia.......the two don't share the same planet, my friend.

watchdog3 · February 2004

Slackers with all due respect. The 4.7 at one point was also a first year engine, previous to that the in line 6 for the landcruiser. Toyota to my knowledge, has not made a mistake like the domestics on first year engines. At least not recently.

BTW, from what I have read this new 5.5 liter is not new. They have been using in the race car for some time.

If I am going to drop $40K on a new truck, I can wait another 6 months to get the new engine. I just would be too disappointed if the 2005 has the big gun. If not, I will move forward. So far though most of what I am picking is rumor.

Just my opinion.

mseenviro · February 2004

I'm in the initial process of evaluating the purchase of either an Armada or Sequoia. Section 179 is just too compelling to not take advantage of it to replace my 2002 Exploder, er Explorer.

I am having a very difficult time deciding which one to go with. My heart tells me the Armada, as I prefer its styling, engine, quad seating, and looks over the Sequoia, but my head tells me the reliability of the Sequoia. I am especially concerned about the resonance issue with the Armada.

My primary concern is reliability, as I drive about 30,000 miles a year. I realize this is the Sequoia board, but I would appreciate those of you who have gone through this same drill to give me your thoughts.

I haven't driven either one yet, so it may be a moot point after I drive each of them.

Thanks!

Mike

bp3959 · February 2004

I think the decision really depends how you handle inconveniences. I'm not sure about the reliability of the Armada, but we'll go with the assumption you made in your post that the Sequoia is more reliable(I have 79k miles on my 2001 with no problems so far).

Warranties are so long these days, both vehicles will suit your needs, but if going to the dealer a few times for free repairs isn't something you want to do then you should go with the most reliable.

If not, then you can base your decision on other factors without worrying about reliability.

Sorry if I'm rambling a bit, it's getting late.

714cut · February 2004

Hey gang, haven't posted for a long time. I started having these horrible flashbacks when someone mentioned heatwave...
Administrators, is this guy still around on the forum? Another user name maybe??

oac · February 2004

Well, well... another oldtimer checking in. Good to see you are still around, er lurking.... CHecking in already are pshreck, petro, fanman8. BUT where are the others like thirdsuv, hookey, rucking1, mommyotter, miamiheat, movan, seqlady, 2heeldrive, etc... etc... I mean this board was so much alive in the good ol' days when all of us were new to the Sequoia experience. We complained to no end on everything from retracting radio antenna (instead of diversity), to the PM package which provides leather seating but without leather inserts in the door trims, to teeny weenie arm rests, poor A/C unit, front brake pads that are too small for the size of the truck, sulfur-like smell from the back, engine ticking, clicking, etc.. etc.. Oh, how much the debate raged on - payload, towing, quality, reliability, price, features, performance, etc... etc... The good ol' days ! It was so much fun. I am nostalgic already as you can tell .... Oh, the car dealers made it even more interesting - cliffy and diane, until the latter was banished from Edmunds

What do we have to do now to get this board fired up ? How about creating some controversy ?

:):) Anyone have something that can get many of us riled up ? Something not too hair-raising for the hosts to shut it down ? Steve, Tidester hope you are going to permit us some fun here, eh ???

cjaubert · February 2004

I had a 2002 Durango and loved it, while finding it a bit pedestrian. It had the basic features I wanted - three rows, big but not too big, nice looks - but not all the "bells and whistles" that my 2000 JGC had, and that I like very much. I anxiously awaited the '04 Durango when I started looking for a new SUV in the fall of '03, and I ordered a Limited 4WD Hemi one the first week I could. I waited and I waited and I waited, but they kept delaying the intro here, and my order was not close to coming in.

Then, I had a car I wanted to trade in. The offer I got was too good to pass up, but the Durango was not here and I did not want to lose the tax break on the trade in. So, I bought an '04 Sequoia 2WD Limited in early December.

I liked the Sequoia OK. It rode VERY nicely, was quiet, and obviously very well built. But, it did not have all the stuff the Durango has. My Durango came in about 20 days ago, and they delivered it to me to test drive it and consider trading in the Sequoia. Well, after about 10 minutes, I fell in love with the Durango. It is AWESOME. It is powerful, as smooth and quiet as the Sequoia, has every imaginable option, and appears to be just as well built.

Basic differences that led me to trade in the Sequoia: 40/20/40 Durango back seat affords easier access to the backseat for the kids (I have four); the in-dash Sirius radio (the add-on in the Sequoia worked fine, but was not easy to reach); fold-flat rear seats MUCH more convenient; memory seats/radio/a/c VERY convenient and MUCH missed in the Toyota; better steering wheel radio and cruise control buttons; rear doors open to 84 degrees that makes kid access easier; easier to use DVD with cool remote storage place (I wish the headphones were auto on-off, though); better visibility; rather much faster acceleration; the seat-belt recepticals in the Durango are hard plastic that makes them easier to latch with one hand (the Sequoia are on a strap that is limp and needs two hands to latch); and I like the little storage drawer behind the back row of seats.

Things I like better about the Sequioa: one-touch up and down windows in both front windows (only one touch down on the Durango driver's window); the little top console with the pad in it; seats a little (VERY little) more confortable; bigger sunroof; better DVD headphones (auto on-off); and there seems to be more room in the front seat, and more headroom.

Long story short - I got a great trade in from my Dodge dealer and I now and the proud and happy owner of the Durango. I cannot tell you how happy I am with this car - it is better in virtually every way than the Sequoia, and is more than $5K less when comparably equipped.

As for you Chrysler haters, I've had four in the past four years - those mentioned above and a 2001 T&C minivan. I've got to tell you - maybe I'm just lucky - but all four have been great. Troublefree, comfortable, well built, no rattles, powerful, etc. I have decided that pretty much all cars are pretty good. Technology has come a long way and the market just won't permit crappy cars to stay on the market very long. Put another way, if Chrysler products were SO bad, how come the company is still in business? How come they sell millions of cars every year.

I have also decided that one's proclivities determine whether a car is good or bad. If one wants to like a car, he finds a way/reason to like it. If one does not like a car, he finds a way/reason to not like it. There is no question that a Sequoia is a nice car - well built, etc. But, it is NOT for everyone. If you start from the premise that all cars are reasonably well built and all car companies are reasonably well run, then, for the most part, all cars are "good enough." Once a car is "good enough," then things like "bells and whistles," price, quality and location of dealership, and other intangibles come into play.

For me, the Durango beats the Sequoia hands down. Just my two cents....

tidester · February 2004

Steve, Tidester hope you are going to permit us some fun here, eh ???

It's great fun for the participants and hosts to engage in on-topic discussion and within the rules of the road! :-)

tidester, host

fanman8 · February 2004

I don't want to burst your bubble or your enthusiasm for the purchase of your new Durango but this statement:

if Chrysler products were SO bad, how come the company is still in business? How come they sell millions of cars every year.

Well, since your asked: First of all they are cheaper. Not only in price but a more inferior product from a quality standpoint. Pricing has a lot do with why many Chryslers are sold. Reliability, on the other hand is measurable. Plainly put Chrysler is not in the same league. If they were then data from Consumer Reports would back up your statement that all cars are reasonably well built. In fact, they are not. Almost the entire line of Chrysler products with the exception of a few have poor reliability ratings. To suggest that these vehicles are close in reliability to a Toyota Sequoia is more than a stretch of the truth. I can understand the zeal you have for your new ride but please don't even try selling the Durango to this group because we know better!

bluestar1 · February 2004

"Once a car is "good enough," then things like "bells and whistles," price, quality and location of dealership, and other intangibles come into play"

That statement pretty much sums up the attitude of many car-buyers in the past. Just good enough ! Then 3-4 yrs later, its trade-in time bcos, guess what, its no longer "just good enough". In today's internet-based culture, spending $40K-ish on a truck that is "just good enough" may be OK for some, but not for many others. To each his/her own.

Enjoy the Durango. You made a good choice for you.

jimxo · February 2004

I am told Lexus is working on a full size SUV that will share the same platform with the new Tundra, Sequoia and Lexus SUV due out in 2006 as a 2007 model year. Hybrid motors will be available (optional) on all three units.

MPG on the test mule is 33 city.

oac · February 2004

Good point. So let's see this potential *debate* between the Seq and the Durango. We have an owner of an '04 Seq and an '04 Durango. Given the totality of cjaubert's post on the two trucks, it would appear to ME that he did not give the Sequoia a chance to earn its keep. It was only to fill the gap until the Dodge arrived.

So cjaubert has his Dodge with the Hemi engine. Yippee... I guess that came with a 0% interest rate too. Throw in a 7/70 warranty, and you got yourself a winner. Good luck. Have you seen the ad for the new Durango ? All the guy cared about the truck was the Hemi engine. I guess it has to be the only thing worth caring about! Hehehe....

petro33 · February 2004

When I purchase a vehicle, reliability was at the top of the list. Not the warrenty. It is not convienent to take the vehicle back 10-20 times under warrenty even if it is free. I would much rather pay up front and have no trouble. In my way of thinking it is like gambling, you are paying a lower price hoping you are the "one" that will make it with no repairs.

All that said if the Durango meets all of your needs and the seq does not, then the seq is not a vehicle you should even consider. The power of the durango, the memory seats and other unnamed bells and whistles may be enough to sway you to this vehicle. Maby you need more power for a trailer, maby you need greater convince in the third row of seats, etc.

Does the Durango beat the Seq "hands down"?? When you stack up the options you wanted it does but all of those features are in other SUVs with better reliability ratings than Durango, did you look at them or was price the deciding factor?

Good luck on your vehicle, is it red? I think that is the only color I have seen that vehicle come in!!

mahd · February 2004

OAC,

That pretty muchs sums it up.

BTW,I haven't been here in a LOOOONG time. How are ya OAC?

oac · February 2004

Doing good and staying out of trouble, thank you. My company has had a rough 2004 thus far, with another round of layoffs and jobs moving to India. Thankfully mine is still not affected just yet, so I am keeping fingers and legs crossed

Hope all is well with you as well.

raddboy41 · February 2004

Layoffs and outsourceing to India?!?!? Hey, is that you typing away in the cube next to me!?!?!? :^)

petro33 · February 2004

speaking of old problems! Are they still problems? Has anyone who had the dreaded engine ticking noise or piston slap on the early models had any further problems??

How about front brakes! Does any ones last more than 15K miles?

Has anyone found a memory system for the front seats?

Does anyone but me like the booming bass on the radio?

Does any ones car use oil between changes?

Does anyone use synthetic oil?

Finally has anyone put the turbo on their seq?

I have 65K miles on this vehicle and the only real problems were self imposed. Driving with the emergency brake on. That cost me about $350. I love the way the car drives. It feels solid all the time and I know the VSC and anti lock brakes will keep me honest.

Good to see old names on this board!

fanman8 · February 2004

You don't keep your Chrysler's long enough to know how poorly built they are. Maybe that kind of wear and tear is good enough for you.You have had four of them in the past four years!! Maybe I am lucky??? Heck, they haven't been broken in yet!

Heres what you said in your post:

As for you Chrysler haters, I've had four in the past four years - those mentioned above and a 2001 T&C minivan. I've got to tell you - maybe I'm just lucky - but all four have been great. Troublefree, comfortable, well built, no rattles, powerful, etc. I have decided that pretty much all cars are pretty good. Technology has come a long way and the market just won't permit crappy cars to stay on the market very long. Put another way, if Chrysler products were SO bad, how come the company is still in business? How come they sell millions of cars every year.

It would seem that you would perhaps be lucky, however, if one changes vehicles as often as you than an Edsel would be GOOD ENOUGH What do you think?

Here is a posted reply to you from schulaj on the Durango board dated 2/19/04. Maybe he keeps his Chryslers longer than you because he had two before and both were junk (His words), yet he still bought a Dodge Durango. Why? Cause in his own words he bought it cheap for under dealer invoice. Why would a guy buy a Chrysler after having two lemons in the past? Why? I think its price or else he figures what are his chances of getting another lemon? Notice, he had a Cadilac Escalade, no problems, Ford Expedition, no problem yet right back to another Chrysler! These are his words and I think he says a mouthful about Chryslers what to do think?
Post from 2/19/04 Durango board:

My last SUV (which I just sold) was a white 1998 Jeep Grand Cherokee (junk junk junk junk junk), before that a 2000 White Escalade (liked it), then a 2000 White 300M (loud road noise and returned it at 18 months into lease....came out of an Expedition (liked it). This is just one example of many that illustrates that Toyota and Chrysler couldn't be on further ends of the reliability spectrum.

low_ball_88 · February 2004

I have a 2002 4WD LTD Sequoia and I am very please with it except for a few minor things like cheap plastic, no frills interior design, questionable quality factory leather and at the time no steering wheel controls.

Why did I buy it? Because my main priority was reliablity. I really don't care if you give me 10yr/100,000mile warranty just as long that I do not have to take it in for any other service but schedule maintenance.

I would have purchased a Honda Pilot, but it is too small. I have had pretty good luck with Japanese make vehicles (1991 Accord with 200K miles and still going strong. Expect to go reach at least 250K miles). The last American make vehicle I owned only lasted for 50K miles. I will never touch another one again. I believe that there is a reason for American automakers to offer such great incentives, 0% financing and $5-7K below MSRP.

oac · February 2004

Yep, that's me.... Hehehe !!!

Seriously tho', it kinda sucks to have to see so many excellent programmers and software developers lose their jobs for cheap labor in India and China. Just sad. I hope something is done to reverse the trend.

cjaubert · February 2004

I can appreciate the zeal with which you guys defend your cars, but I should say that some of your posts are downright nasty and rude. Seems to me that if you were so confident in your choice of car, you would be kinder and less defensive.

In any event, here are some clarifications to some of the points raised in the diatribe against my prior post:

Why would I buy a fourth Chrysler after previous "lemons"? Or, "if Chrysler is so good, why did I have to buy four in four years"?

My previous Chrysler products were as follows:

2000 JGC - owned for 36K miles over two years and nine months - in the shop a total of 1 day - traded in on a 2002 Durango because I needed a third row seat for my fourth child.

2001 T&C minivan - my wife's car that was owned for 38K miles over two years and two months - in shop three days - traded in for her on a 2004 Ford Excursion (go ahead, make some more snide comments) because my fifth child came and we needed more seats and more room.

2002 Durango - Owned for 18K miles over one year and six months - never in shop once - traded in on '04 Sequoia in 11/03 because I wanted a more pleasurable and quiet ride - the '02 Durango was a bit too "truck-like" for my daily tastes.

POINT: Three Chryslers, 92K miles and six years and five months of total ownership with 4 days total in the shop. I will place that reliabillity record against any Toyota on the road today. Is this normal? Maybe, maybe not. All I can say is, it is my personal experience - like it or don't. Put simply, I would hardly describe any of my Chrylers as a "lemon" - quite the contrary.

2004 Sequoia - owned for 2K miles over two months - not in shop at all - When I bought it, I really liked it and I intended to keep it and not get the Durango. My feelings on the Sequoia are noted above. Only two problems noticed: Ticking/clatter in the sunroof and a mediocre stereo. I would have brought the car in for the sunroof had I kept it. Bottom line: It was a terrific car, but soulless and hardly exciting.

As for the Durango price - no, I did not get 0% financing - I am a cash buyer for all cars. I paid what I paid, and I paid about $1K over invoice for the Sequioa.

As for warranty, perhaps I am missing something, but which car has the longer warranty, Toyota or Dodge?

As for resale: I concede that Toyotas have superior trade-in values as compared to Dodges (or most other cars for that matter). I do not, however, buy cars for the trade-in value. I buy them for their usefulness, comfort, and functionality on a daily basis TODAY, not what a currently-unknown person may pay for it in one, two, or three (or more) years. I certainly understand the value of good trade-in value, and I wish my cars had better trade-in values than they do, but, in my world, that is beside the point - I would prefer a car that I LOVE daily but that costs me a little more in depreciation than a car that is OKAY daily but that costs me less.

That's how I see it. I guess that is why they make different flavor ice cream. Now, go ahead, guys, shoot away. But, this time, how about being polite and mature?

stever · February 2004

This really isn't a comparison topic although it's natural to compare the Sequoia to other makes in here. Carry on, but don't get too carried away since most people probably want to focus more on the nitty gritty of the Sequoia.

Most of the Durango comparison topics, fwiw, seemed to butt heads with the 4Runner, not the Sequoia. But the Durango is compared to the Sequoia on our New Car pages.

The active comparison discussions are the Toyota Sequoia vs Cadillac Escalade vs Lincoln Navigator vs GMC Yukon Denali vs Chevy Tahoe and Toyota Sequoia vs Chevy Suburban/GMC Yukon XL ones.

Steve, Host

slackers · February 2004

OK, I'll shoot away.....can't resist on this one.....92K with 4 days in the shop, 3 different vehicles, making up this total with 38K max on one of the three ? Me thinks that was 4 days too much. Give me a break. I wouldn't expect a day in the shop for those initial miles on the Sequoia or any "decent" vehicle fot that matter, let alone 4 days in for 92K on "one" vehicle. Also, for someone who trades in vehicles so frequently, you would be wise to consider trade in value. The premise of your post is absurd. Call me rude, dude.

katzat · February 2004

Cjaubert, some folks here do seem a bit uptight. The lack of many features in the Sequoia that are widely considered standard leaves folks to question the additional money they spent on their Sequoias. The quality comparisons bandied about on this site with regard to Toyotas historical quality records compared to many of the other manufacturers are indisputable, as is your personal anecdotal experience. Personally, had we not needed the vehicle this year, I would have preferred to wait for Toyota to catch up with the features before buying the truck. I suspect that when Lexus releases a version of the Sequoia it will be spectacular (and spectacularly expensive as well).

My wife and I have had our 04 Sequoia Limited 4x4 now for just over a month and have put about 1,300 miles on it. Some of your comments in your earlier post (as well as others) have become apparent to me and to a lesser degree to my wife. She is more like the passionate Toyota guys on this site  she criticizes some aspects of the truck personally with me, but would not trade it for anything on the road (except for possibly the next Sequoia that is offered with an in/on dash navigation system). The feel of quality in driving the Sequoia and the perception that this is backed by hard evidence left us no alternative.

Some of the things we have noticed with respect to the Sequoia are:

There is a noticeable difference with the Sequoia in just opening and closing the doors. A brand new Expedition says bang, small rattle when closing the doors. The Sequoia just says poof no matter how hard you slam any of the doors. I checked this at the Chicago Auto show against a bunch of other SUVs (GMs including Cadillac, the new Durango, even the Armada to a lesser degree). This test means nothing in and of itself, but it gives me a good feeling.

Many have discussed the lack of power with regard to the Sequoia. Ours seems to have plenty of power in comparison to the larger engine equipped Expedition although I have not towed anything yet.

I drove the Sequoia on a 500 mile trip the fifth day we had the truck in the snow with ice covered roads. The traction and stability control worked incredibly well  I was not prepared for how well this truck handled on snow and ice patched highways at 60+ mph. During a week with a similarly equipped Expedition, the stability control system shut off at least once. I had to stop and restart it to correct the problem.

I havent noticed rough shifting (cold or warm), or any piston slap whatsoever in driving the Sequoia for the month of February in Chicago (lots of sub-zero mornings).

You cannot lock the Sequoia without all of the doors closed. This is annoying as when getting kids out of the car, I would prefer to open the doors, lock them, then put the keys away while gathering the kids into a pack and closing all of the doors. With the Sequoia, I have to keep the keys available until the whole process is completed.

The lack of seat memory and a fully adjustable passenger seat is annoying. Because the Sequoia is officially my wifes truck, this has made me almost exclusively a passenger for short trips  I prefer not to adjust the seat and she prefers not to have to adjust it back. Having the memories available makes changing drivers a non-event in our 96 Volvo.

Ive recently decided that the flat folding third row is a gift from God (or just about all of the other manufacturers) that I just cant have. Even with the third row seats tumbled in the Sequoia, they still take up a considerable amount of space. With them in the vehicle and tumbled, the rear cargo area is roughly the same size as the back of my 96 Volvo 850 (although slightly narrower because of the wheel wells). I was terribly discouraged to discover this when I transferred a crib mattress from the Volvo to the Sequoia and the thing was harder to get into the Sequoia than it was to get into the Volvo.

Has anyone else noticed the sound of the air handling unit in the Sequoia when the blower is higher than the 2 bar setting on the temperature control console? At 3 bars and higher, the sound of air rushing out of the vents interrupts normal conversation. I noticed this in the Expedition as well to a lesser extent. For this reason, my wife doesnt use the Auto function for the heater. The Volvos HVAC is only noticeable at the highest fan speed when defrosting the windshield.

A lot of folks here have complained about the cheap plastic in the interior of the Sequoia. I have not noticed this. In fact, the interior seems to me to be superior to all of the competition including the Escalade (but not the new Cadillac SRX or the Lincolns). My 04 does not have a noise issue with the sunroof either.

I have not driven all of the other SUVs including the new Durango, but the handling and general driving experience of the Sequoia (not towing) is superior to the Fords and far superior to the base model GMs.

While we have always driven our vehicles until we either towed them to the yard or given them (because they were practically worthless due to miles and age), I suspect that my wife will want to have a new Sequoia when an updated model comes out with all of the modern standard conveniences that the competition offers: flat folding seats, quieter air handler, Nav system, seat and mirror memory, etc.). When and if this happens, we will be pleased with the high retained value of the Sequoia  unless the release of the updated model destroys it.

wdog · February 2004

Thanks for taking the time to provide further details on your Chrysler purchases and the considerations you make on those purchases. I share several, especially resale value.

Initial responses are sometimes, I think, more than just misunderstood. At times they also elicit unfair comments on another maker's products. Different considerations, one as worthy as the next, may sometimes be expressed with a certainty that their own is best. However, it does make for interesting reading and a lively board.

I loved my first car, a new '63 Valiant from Chrysler. Each of my sisters made their first car the companion Dodge Dart, and each was held 17 years. I was once young, so my next car was a 65 Plymouth. A bad experience lasting a few years. In the '80's my wife got a LeBaron. Call it okay and the resale terrible. Sold privately for $2,000 after 3-4 years. My '95 Dodge Ram had little trouble and got back 55-60% four year later. That was from the dealer of the next car, but not tied to a purchase price.

I've closely followed Chevy's Tahoe and this board for six months, Nissans Armada and Infiniti's QX56 sibling since inception. I'd buy a Tahoe or Sequoia right now if either had a navigation system. Risks associated with a model's first year and the oft reported resonance problem, one that may be inherent in Nissans full size SUV design, has put consideration of the latter two aside. If the resonance issue is resolved the next independent company's award will be well deserved.

From what I recall, in '57 Chrysler realized they had a serious design problem. Allegedly a decision was made to wait out the three or so years of the model run. At the time Chrysler was not far behind Ford for number two in sales. It can take awhile for a companys reliability to deteriorate, but the cause can happen fast.

All told, if the Sequoia comes out with a navigation system (my opinion, Lexus makes the best) I'll probably go with it. Seems to have everything else I want. If the Tahoe offers it and doesn't mess with the firm ride of the Z71 and 4WD (AWD in Denali and Caddy) it will be close. If Durango offers a navigation system it too will be considered.

To find an SUV with the features I want, then prove an enjoyable test ride, take into account consideration of what has been posted, and finally to find a reliable dealer, hopefully nearby and one whom I can make the purchase from is hard enough. If I can do all of that and don't get a lemon I'd want to keep it.

Thank you Edmunds and those who post what could be serious issues for a prospective buyer. And thank you again cjaubert for your thoughts.

Toyota Sequoia

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles