I'm in the market for a new minivan and recently test drove a 2003 Kia Sedona. Seems like a good van overall and as far as ride quality and noise level its seems just as good as the Honda Mazda and Toyota we test drove, but it dosen't have the fancy vanishing back seats or roll down sliding windows which I don't really care about anyway.
If anyone on the group has owned one of these for awhile please let me know how your experience with this van has been. A comparably equipped Honda or Toyota is $6000 or more than this car and dosen't come with near the warranty so this van is starting to look like the winner.
Joe, If you have the means, grab a Toyota and revel in the knowledge that your vehicle will have some value to it at the end of financing. The KIA will always depreciate in value at a rapid rate and you would be disappointed at trade time.
We've owned a 2002 EX model since 12/31/01. I would recommend it to anyone; it has more standard features for much less money. There's been no major mechanical issues whatsoever. We did have one electrical issue in the drivers door, but it was repaired over a year ago.
Some complain about the mpg, but I've gotten everything from 15 all city to
26 all highway. ymmv
I could go on an on, but I think you've already figured it out.
I've been the happy owner of a '03 LX for a few months, at about 4000 miles right now.
The Sedona is very well equipped right off the lot. A zillion cubby holes and drink holders. The seats are firm and comfortable.The build quality is great, no rattles, everything is well constructed, the controls are very nicely laid out, very logical and easy to use, and have a solid feel. The doors and windows are tight and open and close smoothly. It's quiet at highway speed with the AC running and the windows shut.
It handles well, very smooth and controlable. It negotiates our urban Philadelphia streets without a glitch, and cruises the highway like a champ.
The sound system is an unexpected pleasure. The AC and cruise control work without a problem. It starts instantly everytime, has plenty of pep and passing power on the highway.
So far, no problems worth mentioning. The warranty is very reassuring.
The downside? It's a Kia, and lots of folks seems to like busting on Kias. The gas mileage is pretty disappointing, but then the $4000-$6000 I saved on a compriable Voyager, Oddessy or Windstar will buy an awful lot of gas! The storage area behind the back seat is pretty sparse, so get a luggage rack like I did.
Of course, 4000 miles is nothing, and the real test will come with time. But thus far, I have no regrets.
I've owned 3 Chrysler mini-vans in the past, and after owning the Kia, I can't imagine going back.
OK Frank, fair enough but you may want to do more research that what I can provide. I own a KIA (2002) Spectra and a 2000 Camry...You get what you pay for.
formatting link
* Your 1 year old 25,000 kia is worth 11,319 tops for trade at a dealership. (if they are willing to give that.) There is only one year of mfg run on the Sedona so there is no reporting yet on the long term reliability and value retention of this vehicle. I can only base my *OPINION* on facts gathered from other models or siblings in the sedan market. It would not fare very good sense that KIA would excercise all it's efforts of quality in the minivan/SUV market and sell it's small sedan owners out to shoddy workmanship. Bottom line, time will tell and you get what you pay for. Edmonds.com would not be a good link for you to do research on the top minivans for 2002 or 2003 as KIA wasn't mentioned in the reviews.
Wow. Let the misinformation flow. You got to love the Internet.
1) Kia did put much effort into the Sedona- for those out there stuck between the quality coming from north central North America and the expense of something more reliable, the opportunity Kia is leveraging is obvious. Moreover, they delivered a prototype van in 1998, but decided to spend three years to refine the offering. I'd have to say that the strategy on that paid off.
2) Edmund.com lists the Sedona as an Editor's Most Wanted:
"Honorable Mention: Kia Sedona
Kia added a fourth model to its 2002 mix, and it turned out to be a winner of a minivan. Moderately priced compared to its competitors, the Sedona is a true value with a beginning MSRP of less than $22,000. That's about $7,000 less than our Most Wanted Honda Odyssey, and for minivan shoppers who are on a budget, or for those who simply don't need the extra goodies that Honda packages into its Odyssey, the Sedona is a solid second choice. And thanks to the van's outstanding crash tests results, Sedona buyers can feel confident about strapping precious cargo - their children - into the rear seats."
There's also a First Drive and a Full Test review that cover just about every aspect of the van, and the accolades flow throughout both articles. There's also a great owners forum on the Edmunds site.
By the way, the consumer ratings for the Ody and the Sedona, non-scientific for sure, are both listed as 8.6.
As for "getting what you pay for", the biggest problem in the minivan segment is that the cliche has an opposite result. Pay more, get less.
Finally, depreciation in the context of non-business use vehicles is a marketing (salesman) argument, and not relevant for a family hauler vehicle. To me, the warranty off-sets this somewhat since the total cost of ownership after year 3 is reduced compared to other van offerings - or you can pay an extra $1k up front for the same piece of mind in the case of some other low-warranty vans.
I own a Sedona; and it's exceeded all expectations.
I suppose this "misinformation" does not bear mentioning?
Top 9 Minivans With the Worst Residual Value for 2003 Date Posted 05-07-2003 The percentage following the vehicle is the total amount of depreciation that takes place, based on five years and 15,000 miles per year. The bigger the number, the worse it is. Keep in mind that the depreciation percentages are based on the national TMV price plus typical options plus destination charge. Note: Only nine minivans are reflected due to the very limited number of eligible entries.
Chrysler Voyager - 69.67%
Ford Windstar Cargo - 69.65%
Chevrolet Astro Cargo - 68.71%
Dodge Caravan - 67.45%
Chevrolet Astro - 67.08%
Ford Windstar - 66.49%
Oldsmobile Silhouette - 66.41%
Kia Sedona - 65.14%
GMC Safari Cargo - 64.37%
All domestics (except KIA)
conversely:
Top 9 Minivans With the Best Residual Value for 2003 Date Posted 05-07-2003 The percentage following the vehicle is the total amount of depreciation that takes place, based on five years and 15,000 miles per year. The smaller the number, the better. Keep in mind that the depreciation percentages are based on the national TMV price plus typical options plus destination charge. Note: Only nine minivans are reflected due to the very limited number of eligible entries.
Toyota Sienna - 47.58%
Honda Odyssey - 49.95%
Volkswagen EuroVan - 55.51%
Mazda MPV - 59.76%
Dodge Grand Caravan - 62.80%
GMC Safari - 62.87%
Chrysler Town and Country - 63.42%
Chevrolet Venture - 63.77%
Pontiac Montana - 63.87%
Again, the figures speak for themselves. What will these vehicles be worth at trade decision time? Some folks use a vehicle 2 - 4 years and then trades for another before the goody is gone. It is nice to know which vehicles have staying power over the long haul and not just in the short term. BTW you should read what is really covered during the warranty periods on KIA autos. You may find there is not that musch disparity considering the overall quality of a better import or domestic even after the warranty period has expired.
When 20k is depreciated 65% the remaining value is then worth 35 %. Which is better? 50% of 28k or 35% of 20k would be a more realistic comparison. Put in another way, is your auto worth 14,000 after 5 years or 7,500? To the loyal buyer, if he were to buy the same vehicle who would have less to pay for a new vehicle at 5 years? About the the same except the Toyota owner is financing a superior vehicle with less stress while the KIA owner is awarded
1/3 of the former value of his vehicle for his trade.
I have an '02 EX that we've owned since 10/01. So far the only problems we've had are (1) the passenger seat motor died and was replaced and (2) the passenger visor light just went out yesterday.
I often compare it to my buddy who's got an '02 Honda Oddesy that he bought in September 2001. They ride about the same, have about the same room inside and get about the same mileage. His Honda has that dissapearing third row, which I find rather inconvinent. His gas tank is somewhat smaller than mine due to the seat. In addiition, I currently have one of the rear seats in the garage. I like having the two middle seats and one third row seat. It is a good balance between room and seating.
My only complaints are the road noise, which is apparently a minivan issue, the paint, which seems to scratch more than my other cars, and the interior room, which is really small. I find my friend's Olds Silhouette more roomy in the front seat area.
As for the depreciation thread, that only makes sense if you are planning on (a) financing it for a long time and you need to insure the value over your debt, or (b) turning it in after two or three years. I always keep my cars until they drop then donate them anyway, so it makes no difference what the depreication is. I fincanced this Kia with a three year payment at 1.9%. I'll be done paying it off next year.
I've had one for approximately 5 months and have put over 9000 miles on it. I've had a lot of ppl joke with me about it, but I paid a little under 22,000 for a fully loaded EX. You can't touch anything like that for that amount of money.
So far, we took a 2600 mile trip cross country and this is the first minivan I was able to actually sleep in. It cruises so good on the highways that you never know you're doing 80. The gas mileage isn't that great, but thats basically because the thing weighs so damn much. I'm not really that concerned, more steel means its safer. Besides, we do mostly highway driving and the mileage isn't too bad there.
Since we tend to keep cars (the last two cars we bought new we racked up 140,000 each), the warranty was another deal clincher. In our previous cars, it seemed everything started crapping out after 40,000 miles. This car came with a 5 year 60,000 bumper-to-bumper, and 10 year 100,000 drivetrain, so I know we won't be spending anything outside regular maintenance for at least 5 years.
Long term its hard to say. But as long as you take good enough care of it, it should last a good long while.
Its nice that you put figures like this in front of us. Keep note that you pay less for it up front anyway. In the long run you will have this van longer because of that long ass warranty it has. Take a look at all of the complaints about the Chrysler vehicles throwing transmissions 5-6 times before it even reaches 100K. The repair costs alone make these other vans not worth the time and hastle. I owned a Grand Voyager for 3 months, it was the biggest piece of SH&% I have ever owned, got a good deal on it then ended up dishing out another $1k before I dumped it for the Sedona. I haven't owned it long but this is definitely something to look at. If you spend $20K on a van and keep it for 10 years (because of the massive powertrain warranty.) ANY vehicle would be worth virtually NOTHING anyway. My opinion, they are willing to stand by their product (LONGEST warranty in America!,) come forth!
I purchased an '02 in June '04. So far so good. Although, please be aware they started making these vans in '02. Finding parts is difficult (although the warranty makes it not matter at the moment.) There is also no history to fall back on hence no way to compare how reliable the power train is. Because of the price and the warranty I believe it would be worth the money/time.
MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.