Fuel Economy Update for May - Holding Steady - 2015 Kia Sedona

Comments

• kirkhilles1 Member Posts: 863

  June 2016

  What I'm realizing is that the 19 MPG in our Pilot is getting expensive especially when you compare it with our new 16 Civic which will get 42 MPG on the highway. I COMPLETELY understand the appeal of a bigger vehicle with DVD player and plenty of room, but you may want to do the math before throwing down $42k.... wait, $42k? Oh man. Buy a Sedan and make it work for half the cost.

  1
• ebeaudoin Member Posts: 509

  June 2016

  My wife drives a 2010 Odyssey LX (no VCM on this model) and we've averaged 20.1 MPG hand-calculated. The van is rated for 16 City/23 Highway/18 Combined. I'm happy to be averaging 20.1 considering we do probably 65% city with it, if not more.
  
  All that to be said, I'll keep this van until it dies. Then I'll hopefully find her something a little more fuel-efficient.

  0
• yellowbal Member Posts: 234

  June 2016

  The Sienna has an old 3.5L port-injected engine. Not only does the Sienna get better fuel economy, it should be more reliable with no intake valve carbon buildup that comes with many direct-inject engines.

  0
• desmolicious Member Posts: 671

  June 2016

  You gotta compare 2016 Odysseys and Siennas to the Kia. Not vans that you had 5 yrs ago. Maybe the Kia is heavier due to mandatory safety equipment and whatever was checked on the options sheet? Maybe the Kia has a more powerful motor? I'm not defending it, it just isn't useful to say a van that you can no longer buy new gets better mpgs.
  Do a comparo review of the current minivans.

  0
• sigarms Member Posts: 3

  June 2016

  I bought my 2015 Sedona SX-L 16 months and would do it over again. A 3 MPG difference is a small compromise considering the style, performance, comfort, features, and reliability I get with the Sedona.

  0
• clouder Member Posts: 5

  June 2016

  sigarms said:

  I bought my 2015 Sedona SX-L 16 months and would do it over again. A 3 MPG difference is a small compromise considering the style, performance, comfort, features, and reliability I get with the Sedona.

  Totally agree. We traded a '15 Odyssey for our '16 Sedona SX 8px tech w/dvd. After driving everything, including the Pacifica, this thing was hands-down the nicest. We passed it up last time because I had ill-conceived notions that Kias were still crapcans. Boy was I wrong.

  0
• the_big_al Member Posts: 1,079

  June 2016

  I just bought a '16 Odyssey at the end of April which was influenced a lot in part to the 2011 one you guys had. I had been following the blog on the Kia, but still didn't feel confident enough to plunk down the 30k+ for one especially since my habit is to keep cars until they die or we outgrow their usefulness. We had an Impala we bought brand-new 12 years ago and put 130,000 mostly trouble free miles (only required a water pump at around 115K) and so I was looking at long-term longevity. I still feel we made the right choice and are currently at 5,000 miles averaging almost 24 MPG via the on-board computer calculations.
  
  The Kia was a strong contender and I'm glad to see this van doing so well, but like the stigma GM can't seem to get over with Cadillac, Kia still suffers from. Maybe in 12 years when I'm ready to replace the Odyssey and I'm still seeing 2016 Sedonas on the road I'll think differently....

  5
• ingram1225 Member Posts: 5

  August 2016

  yellowbal said:

  The Sienna has an old 3.5L port-injected engine. Not only does the Sienna get better fuel economy, it should be more reliable with no intake valve carbon buildup that comes with many direct-inject engines.

  Except you will be replacing the external dual pulley water pump around 60-90K with that old 3.5L chain driven engine. And reliability? check out the recalls on the 2015-2016 Siennas. More than a 2015-2016 T&C. No joke.

  0
• ingram1225 Member Posts: 5

  August 2016 edited August 2016

  yellowbal said:

  
  Totally agree. We traded a '15 Odyssey for our '16 Sedona SX 8px tech w/dvd. After driving everything, including the Pacifica, this thing was hands-down the nicest. We passed it up last time because I had ill-conceived notions that Kias were still crapcans. Boy was I wrong.

  why did you not want the Pacifica? Curious as the Sedona and Pacifica are my top two choices right now.

  0
• Passion0217 Member Posts: 1

  January 2021

  This fuel comparision was misleading. The sxl trim is rated 17/22, the one you were testing. If you want to compare MPG, use any other trims, which are rated at 18/24 (or 25). If that is the case, the MPG is similar to Toyota's.

  0