Sienna 2013 AWD. MSRP $33,700.

Questions on how we spend our money and our time - consumer goods and services, home and vehicle, leisure and recreational activities

Sienna 2013 AWD. MSRP $33,700.

Postby goru1 » Wed Feb 13, 2013 11:32 am

Please comment.

Thanks.

Looking for:
* AWD/4WD
* 7 Seats
* V6

Sienna:
* 2013
* LE
* 7 Passenger
* AWD
* Engine: 3.5L V-6 cyl
* City MPG: 16
* Hwy MPG: 23
goru1
 
Posts: 201
Joined: 14 Jun 2007

Re: Sienna 2013 AWD. MSRP $33,700.

Postby Postmon » Wed Feb 13, 2013 11:53 am

Our's is an older FWD model. The reason I didn't go with the AWD is that there was no spare tire and they used run flat tires. Not sure if that's still the case. If so, run flats were very expensive at the time and didn't last very long. Also, I was very uncomfortable relying on those tires if I got a flat.
Postmon
 
Posts: 96
Joined: 2 Jan 2012

Re: Sienna 2013 AWD. MSRP $33,700.

Postby AnimalCrackers » Wed Feb 13, 2013 2:50 pm

We've been very happy with our 2011 Sienna XLE AWD. No buyer's remorse whatsoever.
"Everybody has a plan until they get punched in the face." -- philosopher Mike Tyson
User avatar
AnimalCrackers
 
Posts: 384
Joined: 19 Mar 2007
Location: Northern Front Range, Colorado

Re: Sienna 2013 AWD. MSRP $33,700.

Postby praxis » Wed Feb 13, 2013 3:04 pm

I have been reading good reviews on the new Ford C-Max hybrid. It seems to fit your criteria and price range (if you order it completely loaded). Test drivers like its wider tires and heavier build, and they comment on the fit and finish being great. I wonder if it can pull a boat or trailer? Here is a link to the Edmund's review:

http://www.edmunds.com/ford/c-max-hybrid/2013/?mktcat=ford-c-max-hybrid-years-658667&kw=ford+c-max+hybrid+2013&mktid=ms61729304&msite=w
User avatar
praxis
 
Posts: 211
Joined: 6 Sep 2009

Re: Sienna 2013 AWD. MSRP $33,700.

Postby momar » Wed Feb 13, 2013 3:41 pm

praxis wrote:I have been reading good reviews on the new Ford C-Max hybrid. It seems to fit your criteria and price range (if you order it completely loaded). Test drivers like its wider tires and heavier build, and they comment on the fit and finish being great. I wonder if it can pull a boat or trailer? Here is a link to the Edmund's review:

http://www.edmunds.com/ford/c-max-hybrid/2013/?mktcat=ford-c-max-hybrid-years-658667&kw=ford+c-max+hybrid+2013&mktid=ms61729304&msite=w

The cmax only has seating for 5 and the trunk space leaves much to be desired. I drove one this past weekend and was excited, but ended up disappointed. Especially with the energi, there is very little room in the trunk.
"Index funds have a place in your portfolio, but you'll never beat the index with them." - Words of wisdom from a Fidelity rep
User avatar
momar
 
Posts: 1359
Joined: 13 Nov 2011

Re: Sienna 2013 AWD. MSRP $33,700.

Postby tyrion » Wed Feb 13, 2013 3:45 pm

The c-max also lacks AWD/4WD, which is presumably a major criteria.
User avatar
tyrion
 
Posts: 684
Joined: 8 Feb 2008

Re: Sienna 2013 AWD. MSRP $33,700.

Postby TRC » Wed Feb 13, 2013 5:18 pm

Can you explain your need for AWD?

Edit & adding to my response

I ask this question becuase most people who have AWD/4WD don't equip their vehicles with snow tires. When on snow or ice with FWD or AWD, your stopping and steering power will be the same. Tires are what make the difference. A lot of times people magically think that AWD / 4WD vehicles are "snow machines". When in fact, if you run regular all season tires, you're really not any better off compared to a FWD vehicle with all seasons (again for stopping and steering). AWD / 4WD does nothing for stopping & steering. It's all about the tire. Climbing hills AWD/4WD has an advantage over FWD if both are equiped with the same tires. However, I do think a FWD Van with good snow tires would drive better in the snow and ice than an AWD Van with all season tires.

Ground clearance on mini-vans aren't great. And with an AWD van, you're paying the price 365 days a year with poor gas mileage compared to a FWD van. So I guess the point I'm trying to make is that you pay more for an AWD van, you pay more in annual gas consumption, but I don't really think the benefit is there if your primary concern is winter safety.

I went through this exhaustive analysis when we bought our minivan. We considered the AWD Sienna, but chose the FWD Odyssey instead and run Blizzaks from Nov - April. I also wasn't keen on having run-flats ont the Sienna. I like having a spare tire.
Last edited by TRC on Wed Feb 13, 2013 6:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.
TRC
 
Posts: 1256
Joined: 20 Dec 2008

Re: Sienna 2013 AWD. MSRP $33,700.

Postby interplanetjanet » Wed Feb 13, 2013 5:28 pm

TRC wrote:Can you explain your need for AWD?

It could be a key advantage if the OP wants to compete in something like this eventually:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3VJDIeeSdAE

(the carnage starts after about 4 minutes)
User avatar
interplanetjanet
 
Posts: 2149
Joined: 24 Jan 2011
Location: the wilds of central California

Re: Sienna 2013 AWD. MSRP $33,700.

Postby btenny » Wed Feb 13, 2013 6:16 pm

There are tons of SUV and CUV vehicles that met those criteria as well. Things like the Chevy Tahoe, Chevy Suburban, Chevy Traverse, Ford Flex, Ford Exibition, Ford Explorer, Dodge Durango, Honda Pilot, Toyota Highlander, etc...

Most people who are spending enough to buy a nice van also look at the Highlander SUV. It is much better in the mountains and bad snow IMO. Plus if you are going to spend $40K maybe you would like the Highlander Hybrid which gets great gas mileage, like 28ish.

I also like the Chevy Tahoe or Suburban for their bigger sizes and towing capability and snow road performance. Plus these are American made.

What other criteria are you looking for? In my opinion the Toyota van is OK but only if you are not drivng in really bad road conditions. They are just too low to the ground and poor performers in snow. Plus they are VERY expensive if you buy one with many options. Think $40K. This poor bad snow performance is also why most van buyers just get the 2WD versions.

Bill
btenny
 
Posts: 2217
Joined: 7 Oct 2007

Re: Sienna 2013 AWD. MSRP $33,700.

Postby willardx » Wed Feb 13, 2013 6:29 pm

When our 2001 Honda Odyssey finally bites the dust, I was considering this car also. We rarely need AWD or 4WD, we go to the mountains once or twice a year. We do, however, have 3 kids and haul around a lot of gear, so the low clearance helps most of the time.

I did not know about the absence of a spare tire and the run-flat tires being the only option on the AWD model, that might make me pause. I generally dislike SUVs for their poor gas mileage, dirtier exhaust (classified as trucks still, right?) and higher step-in and harder to get to 3rd row. I'm also a man who had to convince my wife to get the less cool minivan instead of a big ole SUV.
User avatar
willardx
 
Posts: 69
Joined: 11 Jul 2011

Re: Sienna 2013 AWD. MSRP $33,700.

Postby Rodc » Thu Feb 14, 2013 11:37 am

TRC wrote:Can you explain your need for AWD?

Edit & adding to my response

I ask this question becuase most people who have AWD/4WD don't equip their vehicles with snow tires. When on snow or ice with FWD or AWD, your stopping and steering power will be the same. Tires are what make the difference. A lot of times people magically think that AWD / 4WD vehicles are "snow machines". When in fact, if you run regular all season tires, you're really not any better off compared to a FWD vehicle with all seasons (again for stopping and steering). AWD / 4WD does nothing for stopping & steering. It's all about the tire. Climbing hills AWD/4WD has an advantage over FWD if both are equiped with the same tires. However, I do think a FWD Van with good snow tires would drive better in the snow and ice than an AWD Van with all season tires.

Ground clearance on mini-vans aren't great. And with an AWD van, you're paying the price 365 days a year with poor gas mileage compared to a FWD van. So I guess the point I'm trying to make is that you pay more for an AWD van, you pay more in annual gas consumption, but I don't really think the benefit is there if your primary concern is winter safety.

I went through this exhaustive analysis when we bought our minivan. We considered the AWD Sienna, but chose the FWD Odyssey instead and run Blizzaks from Nov - April. I also wasn't keen on having run-flats ont the Sienna. I like having a spare tire.


A couple of years ago in the NE winter I forgot I was driving our Accord, not the Subaru, and went to make a U turn where the front tires would go through some 6-8 inches of snow, back tires on pavement. Ended up taking 30 or 40 minutes to dig, rock, etc, but did end up getting out. :oops: Subaru would not have noticed. I drive on snowy roads fairly often, pull into unplowed hiker parking lots etc. AWD may not help stopping, but sometime you need to go. AWD makes a big difference in the go department. Sometimes helps in turning as well, because sometimes what you need is a little power to push through a turn, and with front only you are trying to do everything, traction for turning and traction for going, with only two tires. I'm no expert, but in the snow electronic traction control seems better with AWD as well, which is not surprising as the traction control simply has more variables to work with.

Snow tires do help of course. Sometimes I run them, but with good all season tires and AWD my Subaru is wonderful. Seems much more stable in heavy rain (say hit a flooded out area on the highway) as well.

The only down sides to AWD that I see is that you pay more up front, pay more for gas every day. Personally I have never had to repair any thing associated with the AWD system, though I'm sure that happens from time to time as well. So, certainly a trade-off there to consider.

I would also add that if one is only going to run all season tires, seems to me that only strengthen the value of AWD.

YMMV
We live a world with knowledge of the future markets has less than one significant figure. And people will still and always demand answers to three significant digits.
Rodc
 
Posts: 9447
Joined: 26 Jun 2007

Re: Sienna 2013 AWD. MSRP $33,700.

Postby pshonore » Thu Feb 14, 2013 11:44 am

Have you looked at the Subaru Tribeca? ( 7 passenger, AWD)
pshonore
 
Posts: 2754
Joined: 28 Jun 2009

Re: Sienna 2013 AWD. MSRP $33,700.

Postby SurfCityBill » Thu Feb 14, 2013 12:34 pm

I've owned two Sienna's and my big complaint is the body hardware. The rear hatch handle, a side door handle, and the drivers side window mechanism all failed. Total cost to repair over $1,500 due to the labor intensive need to disassemble door/hatch panels to access the problems. $1500 without ever having to open the hood. Unbelievably frustrating. If you look at Consumer's Reports you'll see that Sienna's consistently are very poorly rated in this area. Otherwise we've liked the vehicles.
User avatar
SurfCityBill
 
Posts: 323
Joined: 1 May 2012
Location: Southern California

Re: Sienna 2013 AWD. MSRP $33,700.

Postby iceman99 » Thu Feb 14, 2013 2:12 pm

Another vote for the Highlander Hybrid. Although, when optioned out can push the MSRP close to $50K.
User avatar
iceman99
 
Posts: 121
Joined: 19 Mar 2010

Re: Sienna 2013 AWD. MSRP $33,700.

Postby smackboy1 » Thu Feb 14, 2013 2:34 pm

For more information go here http://www.siennachat.com

We have a 2007 Sienna Limited AWD. Here are my thoughts after 90K miles:

- Our car was the first year with a new V6 engine. Bodystyle was introduced in 2004. The car has had a few major repairs. Some covered by Toyota, some not. For those that expect Toyotas and Hondas to be completely bulletproof, they are not. But our car has been generally more reliable than many US and Euro cars we have owned.
- AWD, while nice when stuck, has a weight and MPG penalty. In winter I shoe all our cars with Blizzak winter tires and we've been good for whatever winter throws us. Winter tires trump AWD every time. I would rather drive my RWD sports car w/ Blizzaks than an AWD w/ all seasons. That is how much all season tires suck in the ice and snow. If I had to buy another minivan I would buy FWD. I cannot recall a single time the AWD in the Sienna made a difference. On the bright side the AWD system is transparent and had been maintenance free.
- RFT are great. Yes, they are more expensive and weigh more. But we have 2 cars with RFT and when a tire goes flat and it is snowing/raining and dark out I am glad I can drive home at up to 50 mph without having to change a tire by the side of the road. RFTs have saved our bacon numerous times.
- Don't think that SUV big all terrain tires work well in the snow/ice. They do not.
- It's a behemoth. Get a rear view camera (OEM or after market).
- After owning many SUVs, station wagons, sedans etc., nothing beats the convenience of electric sliding doors if you have kids.
- The Toyota GPS navigation system sucks. It locks out functions for liability reasons when the vehicle is moving. Go aftermarket e.g. Garmin Nuvi.
Disclaimer: nothing written here should be taken as legal advice, but I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night.
smackboy1
 
Posts: 523
Joined: 14 Mar 2007

Re: Sienna 2013 AWD. MSRP $33,700.

Postby Rodc » Thu Feb 14, 2013 2:56 pm

Just as an aside:

That is how much all season tires suck in the ice and snow.


I have found wide variance in how well different brands of all season tires did in the snow. I had one set that truly did suck, just awful. I've had others that rivaled my snow tires. Pays to be careful.
We live a world with knowledge of the future markets has less than one significant figure. And people will still and always demand answers to three significant digits.
Rodc
 
Posts: 9447
Joined: 26 Jun 2007

Re: Sienna 2013 AWD. MSRP $33,700.

Postby btenny » Thu Feb 14, 2013 3:15 pm

Likwise various M/S rated tires vary a lot as well in how they handle. I have two Jeeps Grand Cherokees for the winter. One has Michelin X Radial LT tires. They are great in the snow and ice. The other has Michelin LTX Radials. They are mediocre. I bought them both at Costco thinking they were the same. Not so. Go figure...

Bill
btenny
 
Posts: 2217
Joined: 7 Oct 2007

Re: Sienna 2013 AWD. MSRP $33,700.

Postby MN Finance » Thu Feb 14, 2013 3:37 pm

TRC wrote:Can you explain your need for AWD?

Edit & adding to my response

I ask this question becuase most people who have AWD/4WD don't equip their vehicles with snow tires. When on snow or ice with FWD or AWD, your stopping and steering power will be the same. Tires are what make the difference. A lot of times people magically think that AWD / 4WD vehicles are "snow machines". When in fact, if you run regular all season tires, you're really not any better off compared to a FWD vehicle with all seasons (again for stopping and steering). AWD / 4WD does nothing for stopping & steering. It's all about the tire. Climbing hills AWD/4WD has an advantage over FWD if both are equiped with the same tires. However, I do think a FWD Van with good snow tires would drive better in the snow and ice than an AWD Van with all season tires.

Ground clearance on mini-vans aren't great. And with an AWD van, you're paying the price 365 days a year with poor gas mileage compared to a FWD van. So I guess the point I'm trying to make is that you pay more for an AWD van, you pay more in annual gas consumption, but I don't really think the benefit is there if your primary concern is winter safety.

I went through this exhaustive analysis when we bought our minivan. We considered the AWD Sienna, but chose the FWD Odyssey instead and run Blizzaks from Nov - April. I also wasn't keen on having run-flats ont the Sienna. I like having a spare tire.


I disagree entirely with the statement that running snow tires on a FWD vehicle gives anything near the same drive as AWD, even with crappy tires. OP hasn't said where they live, but where I live, I rarely see anything AWD in trouble in the winter, if ever. Of course stopping doesn't matter but steering maters greatly, as well as the obvious acceleration. I can run nearly bald tires on my Audi and get multiples better drive than a FWD with snow tires.

We too own a Siena AWD 2011 and despite my machismo based hesitance, hauling kids around is a dream. FWIW, I would buy a Toyota like this new, since they hold their value and you don't save much by getting something a couple yrs old.
MN Finance
 
Posts: 1107
Joined: 22 Dec 2012

Re: Sienna 2013 AWD. MSRP $33,700.

Postby enebyberg » Thu Feb 14, 2013 4:37 pm

We have a 2008 Sienna XLE FWD and have been using Nokian Hakkapeliitta Winter tires on all four wheels from November 15 to March 15 in the mountains of Colorado. It works really well and I would say that combination is equal to friends with Sienna AWDs that are driving on four season radials. Three years ago, we moved (with our Sienna) to Sweden and all cars are required to have four winter tires during the Winter months. Works well and reduces the need for 4WD or AWD in most conditions and cases.
enebyberg
 
Posts: 34
Joined: 26 Sep 2012

Re: Sienna 2013 AWD. MSRP $33,700.

Postby stoptothink » Thu Feb 14, 2013 4:51 pm

MN Finance wrote:
TRC wrote:Can you explain your need for AWD?

Edit & adding to my response

I ask this question becuase most people who have AWD/4WD don't equip their vehicles with snow tires. When on snow or ice with FWD or AWD, your stopping and steering power will be the same. Tires are what make the difference. A lot of times people magically think that AWD / 4WD vehicles are "snow machines". When in fact, if you run regular all season tires, you're really not any better off compared to a FWD vehicle with all seasons (again for stopping and steering). AWD / 4WD does nothing for stopping & steering. It's all about the tire. Climbing hills AWD/4WD has an advantage over FWD if both are equiped with the same tires. However, I do think a FWD Van with good snow tires would drive better in the snow and ice than an AWD Van with all season tires.

Ground clearance on mini-vans aren't great. And with an AWD van, you're paying the price 365 days a year with poor gas mileage compared to a FWD van. So I guess the point I'm trying to make is that you pay more for an AWD van, you pay more in annual gas consumption, but I don't really think the benefit is there if your primary concern is winter safety.

I went through this exhaustive analysis when we bought our minivan. We considered the AWD Sienna, but chose the FWD Odyssey instead and run Blizzaks from Nov - April. I also wasn't keen on having run-flats ont the Sienna. I like having a spare tire.


I disagree entirely with the statement that running snow tires on a FWD vehicle gives anything near the same drive as AWD, even with crappy tires. OP hasn't said where they live, but where I live, I rarely see anything AWD in trouble in the winter, if ever. Of course stopping doesn't matter but steering maters greatly, as well as the obvious acceleration. I can run nearly bald tires on my Audi and get multiples better drive than a FWD with snow tires.

We too own a Siena AWD 2011 and despite my machismo based hesitance, hauling kids around is a dream. FWIW, I would buy a Toyota like this new, since they hold their value and you don't save much by getting something a couple yrs old.


The only advantage an extra pair of drive wheels offers is that it may help get you moving in slippery conditions, it certainly isn't going to help you steer or stop or get moving in the right direction once you begin to slide.
stoptothink
 
Posts: 1119
Joined: 31 Dec 2010

Re: Sienna 2013 AWD. MSRP $33,700.

Postby TRC » Thu Feb 14, 2013 6:01 pm

MN Finance wrote:
TRC wrote:Can you explain your need for AWD?

Edit & adding to my response

I ask this question becuase most people who have AWD/4WD don't equip their vehicles with snow tires. When on snow or ice with FWD or AWD, your stopping and steering power will be the same. Tires are what make the difference. A lot of times people magically think that AWD / 4WD vehicles are "snow machines". When in fact, if you run regular all season tires, you're really not any better off compared to a FWD vehicle with all seasons (again for stopping and steering). AWD / 4WD does nothing for stopping & steering. It's all about the tire. Climbing hills AWD/4WD has an advantage over FWD if both are equiped with the same tires. However, I do think a FWD Van with good snow tires would drive better in the snow and ice than an AWD Van with all season tires.

Ground clearance on mini-vans aren't great. And with an AWD van, you're paying the price 365 days a year with poor gas mileage compared to a FWD van. So I guess the point I'm trying to make is that you pay more for an AWD van, you pay more in annual gas consumption, but I don't really think the benefit is there if your primary concern is winter safety.

I went through this exhaustive analysis when we bought our minivan. We considered the AWD Sienna, but chose the FWD Odyssey instead and run Blizzaks from Nov - April. I also wasn't keen on having run-flats ont the Sienna. I like having a spare tire.


I disagree entirely with the statement that running snow tires on a FWD vehicle gives anything near the same drive as AWD, even with crappy tires. OP hasn't said where they live, but where I live, I rarely see anything AWD in trouble in the winter, if ever. Of course stopping doesn't matter but steering maters greatly, as well as the obvious acceleration. I can run nearly bald tires on my Audi and get multiples better drive than a FWD with snow tires.

We too own a Siena AWD 2011 and despite my machismo based hesitance, hauling kids around is a dream. FWIW, I would buy a Toyota like this new, since they hold their value and you don't save much by getting something a couple yrs old.


This video validates my point. "FWD vehicle with 4 winter tires performs better than AWD vehicle without winter tires in Winter condition".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9BXupo38Pew&sns=em
TRC
 
Posts: 1256
Joined: 20 Dec 2008

Re: Sienna 2013 AWD. MSRP $33,700.

Postby NateH » Thu Feb 14, 2013 6:14 pm

TRC wrote:
MN Finance wrote:
TRC wrote:Can you explain your need for AWD?

Edit & adding to my response

I ask this question becuase most people who have AWD/4WD don't equip their vehicles with snow tires. When on snow or ice with FWD or AWD, your stopping and steering power will be the same. Tires are what make the difference. A lot of times people magically think that AWD / 4WD vehicles are "snow machines". When in fact, if you run regular all season tires, you're really not any better off compared to a FWD vehicle with all seasons (again for stopping and steering). AWD / 4WD does nothing for stopping & steering. It's all about the tire. Climbing hills AWD/4WD has an advantage over FWD if both are equiped with the same tires. However, I do think a FWD Van with good snow tires would drive better in the snow and ice than an AWD Van with all season tires.

Ground clearance on mini-vans aren't great. And with an AWD van, you're paying the price 365 days a year with poor gas mileage compared to a FWD van. So I guess the point I'm trying to make is that you pay more for an AWD van, you pay more in annual gas consumption, but I don't really think the benefit is there if your primary concern is winter safety.

I went through this exhaustive analysis when we bought our minivan. We considered the AWD Sienna, but chose the FWD Odyssey instead and run Blizzaks from Nov - April. I also wasn't keen on having run-flats ont the Sienna. I like having a spare tire.


I disagree entirely with the statement that running snow tires on a FWD vehicle gives anything near the same drive as AWD, even with crappy tires. OP hasn't said where they live, but where I live, I rarely see anything AWD in trouble in the winter, if ever. Of course stopping doesn't matter but steering maters greatly, as well as the obvious acceleration. I can run nearly bald tires on my Audi and get multiples better drive than a FWD with snow tires.

We too own a Siena AWD 2011 and despite my machismo based hesitance, hauling kids around is a dream. FWIW, I would buy a Toyota like this new, since they hold their value and you don't save much by getting something a couple yrs old.


This video validates my point. "FWD vehicle with 4 winter tires performs better than AWD vehicle without winter tires in Winter condition".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9BXupo38Pew&sns=em


your quote completely left out the part where the 4WD with regular tires dominated the winter tires.
If i were driving mostly on frozen lakes, like this video i would probably get winter tires.

This whole topic of tires is WAY off from the OP's question about the van. winter tires are pretty much akin to paying down the mortgage vs investing. Do what makes you feel better.
4X top-twenty S&P 500 prognosticator. I'd start a newsletter, but it would only have one issue per year.
User avatar
NateH
 
Posts: 407
Joined: 27 Feb 2007
Location: Minnesota

Re: Sienna 2013 AWD. MSRP $33,700.

Postby MN Finance » Fri Feb 15, 2013 12:56 am

Maybe this has been taken off topic with the AWD discussion, but I laughed tonight and thought about this thread. I was actually on a lake earlier tonight. I drove my AWD Audi with tires that have about 4mm of tread left - they're summer high performance tires. Another hockey parent was driving what appeared to be a brand new Siena which was clearly FWD. As I drove comfortably home I watched in my rearview mirror as a suburban towed the van up the boat landing with his chains. True story. I didn't link to the story about tires but 20 years of driving in the snow 6 mos a year has certainly brought me to a definitive conclusion about the value of AWD.
MN Finance
 
Posts: 1107
Joined: 22 Dec 2012


Return to Personal Consumer Issues

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: deanbrew, IlliniGuy, slbnoob, vectorizer, Yahoo [Bot] and 35 guests