'05 AWD Sienna Experiences This Winter?

I would be interested in hearing the answers as well. We have the front wheel drive Sienna. We have not had any problems in the snow because we use dedicated snow tires in the winter. The addition of the AWD mechanism required the space normally reserved for the spare tire. So, Toyota put run-flats on the AWD model. These tires are expensive, hard to find, and many tire shops do not work with them. On top of this you pay more for the van. There have been reports of lower gas mileage as well, not a trivial matter with gas approach $2.50 a gallon for premium.

I have found in the past that a front wheel drive with dedicated snow tires handles and brakes better than an AWD with all seasons in the snow. I could also go up steeper hills. One winter, I thought the person was being nice when they parked their Jeep on the road and left the driveway open for me. It turns out they could not get up their driveway with all-seasons and four wheel drive. I was able to make it all the way up without any problems in a front wheel drive with snow tires.

Now, if you had snow tires on an AWD, that would be another story :-)

I bought one this winter. A new 05, AWD, with the works. Here is my take. After 1000 miles, I am still averaging 14.7 MPG. This sucks. Other than that, it works great. I went to a open market (like a flea market on steroids) sale a few weeks ago. The ground was still frozen. Shopped for 3 hours, when we got out the ground was getting muddy. A bunch of cars could not make it out of their parking spots. Keep in mind, the parking to this event was on an old soccer field.

The sienna performed flawlessly. It got out no problem, the AWD helped. A friend in a new odyssey (05) got stuck and so did another dodge grand caravan.

So there was one situation where the AWD helped, however, this Sienna has worse mileage than my 03 4Runner with a v-8 (17.2 MPG). So i will give the Sienna another 500 miles and see if the mileage gets better. If not, I will ask the dealer if this is normal.

Obviously your Sienna has not been broken in yet. That and the winter cold are contributing to your poor mileage. When you get past 5000 miles or so and the weather is warmer, you should get somewhat better mileage.

My brother has been complaining about the mileage in his '05 Corolla which he bought in October, despite that it already has 12,000 miles on it. But I keep telling him that the cold had already settled in by the time his car was broken in, and that his mileage should improve in the spring (this was the first new car he had purchased).

Check out other posts on the mileage of AWD Sienna. Some of them would be happy to get your results.

I went to a open market (like a flea market on

This sounds like fun! More than one person has used a muddy field as the perfect place to teach someone to drive a manual transmission. With a beginner, something has give and the wheels spinning in the mud takes the pressure off the clutch. It is also a great place to teach someone how to recover from a skid. In the mud this happens at speed slow enough for a beginner to learn without panic. I took advantage of a similar situation at an event with parking in a wet field with a V6 Camry and all-season tires.

A bunch of cars could

This can happen when you have all that horsepower in the Odyssey and an automatic. The mentality is to just step on gas and if you don't move, step on the gas even more. Pretty soon you have dug your tires into the mud.

Hi Mark,

We were very happy to have ours during this particularly rough New Hampshire winter.

Every time I get to town and see that the plows have closed in every parking place, I just slowly drive over the "hump" with no trouble at all. An hour later, I drive out of the "trough" with equal ease.

The AWD is of value to me only at speeds lower than about 5 mph. I am deeply concerned about the many folks I see driving on highways at 65 in conditions more appropriate to

1. They can accelerate to any speed they wish with AWD but can't (safely) stop, or steer.

All the best,

Howdy,

I had much the same experience with my '04 Sienna, but...

My mileage stabilized about 17 mph. When I have talked to (several) dealers about this, they all say "I've seen better, but not too frequently." When I ask what can be done to improve the mileage, they all have said "Nothing."

All the best,

'04 RAV4 (4 cyl) AT AWD, 8K miles. We've been averaging 19 mpg. I think that's terrible for such a small car. I thought to check the tire pressure a few weeks ago. They were 29. The tag on the door post says 29. The tires say 44 psi max. I changed the pressure to 39 psi and it resulted in an increase of about 1.5 mpg. That's better, but not great.

'04 Highlander 6 cyl AT FWD, 8K miles. We've been averaging around 17-18. Just checked the tires this weekend: 30 psi. Door post says 30. Tires say 44 psi max. Changed them to

I'm pretty certain that when we got these cars that I set the tire pressure to 39 on both cars. I suspect that when we took the cars in to a dealer for oil changes (twice each) that they set it to "standard" for that model.

Yeah, now that I think about it (got them from different dealers one year ago), one car came set at the factory standard and one came with nearly 50 psi in the tires! I set them both to 39. Looks like I have to tell the dealer not to change them next time I take them in.

To All:

When you check the EPA mpg estimate vs. actual, I think you will find one of the following:

1. The EPA test and estimates on the windows are truly flawed per AAA and Consumer Reports; EPA does not road test, they do it in similar fashion to the new way to smog test, run the wheels on a conveyor which does not take into account, fast, slow or actual driving, stopping and starting, accelerating, etc..
2. The manufacturers and dealers have to know this - they have to. Of course there is always disclaimers they are estimates and mileage may vary...........shit.........
3. My old Dodge 1990 van was estimated at 19 city and 24 highway. 33 tankfuls said 18.04 mpg. I thought I would improve my mileage with a Highlander but have worse not better.
4. Sticker on my 2002 Highlander Ltd. V6 was 18 city 22 highway, actual has been has been far less than that, but you might get that mileage on a 4 cylinder front wheel drive.
5. Independent actual road test finds the V6 at 16.4 city and 19 highway which pretty much equals my experience and I can get less and a bit more at times but I will kiss anyones rear end that can do 18 city and 22 highway, or better, with a 2002 Toyota Highland Ltd. V6 actually being driven on regular roads in city and on highway.
6. EPA mileage estmates on vehicles are not miles per gallon in stone or close, however Nissan EPA estmates are pretty damn close, at least on my son's previous Altima.
7. After the "fat and drug co. suer's" fade perhaps this may be the next class action.......
8. MPG EPA estimates printed on the window of my Toyota Highlander sticker are not clos at all.

I hear the 2004 Sienna is a great van, like they put a Honda van up on blocks and said "How can we improve on this vehicle" and they did.

Daughter recently got a Ford Freestyle or whatever and she loves it and could care less about the upkeep cause she does not have to pay for it.....but automatic closing of doors by column buttons and a whole bunch of stuff......only one child and one husband to haul around.

Regards,

Gord> > How has it performed so far this winter? Worth the extra dough? > > > > Mark >

The EPA does not perfom most of the emission tests - the manufacturers self-perform the test in an EPA approved lab, usually the manufacturer's own facility.

A road test would be flawed because it would be impossible to control some major variables - traffic and temperature, and it would be impossible to capture what is coming out of the tailpipe when driving around on streets.

The only way to do a valid test is on a dynamometer, in an environmentally controlled room, using special test gas. The current test DOES take into account fast, slow, accelerating, braking, etc. The test routine is displayed as a moving graph on a monitor positioned where the driver can see it, and the driver has to match his speed with the graph displayed on the monitor. In effect, he has to make his graph match the EPA test graph. It usually takes inexperienced test drivers several times to get a valid test, and a valid test takes several days to complete since it must be cold-soaked, then pushed, not driven into a special sealed room where evaporative emissions are measured, then pushed out onto the dyno.

While the test is being perfomed, 100% of the tailpipe emissions are captured, passed through an analyzer, then the gas components are separated and stored in what looks like gigantic condoms about 5 feet across when rolled up.

The dilemma that the EPA faces when specifying the test cycle is the impossibility of making the cycle accurately reflect the driving patterns of millions of different drivers in millions of different conditions. For example, I live in the suburbs of Chicago, and all of the vehicles we've owned since we moved here have gotten better than the EPA estimates when I drive and we don't go into the city of Chicago and the weather is above freezing. This includes a 92 4 cyl Camry, a 93 RWD Previa LE, a 97 Avalon, a 2000 LS 400, and a 2003 Sequoia. My wife always gets worse than the EPA estimates, even I can't beat the EPA estimates with even 1 trip into the city and the rest highway.

To make a long-winded explanation short, the difference between EPA and real-world fuel mileage is due to how the EPA specifies the drive cycle and not due to testing on a dynamometer.

The manufacturers are required by law to determine the fuel mileage estimates in a manner prescribed by the EPA so ironically, they can't even legally alter their published estimates upwards or downwards. A salesperson at a dealership has no way to scientifically determine what your fuel mileage estimates will be so all the salesperson cn do is quote the figures that are mandated by the EPA.

IMO, the EPA should adjust the mandated drive cycle to more accurately reflect big-city rush-hour conditions or better yet, instead of a city, highway, and combined figure, publish city, suburb, and highway steady cruise figures.

If the EPA estimates for your Dodge van were higher than for the Highlander for both city and highway mileage, why did you think that the Highlander would get better fuel mileage than the van?

There are plenty of posters in the ng, including me, that get at or better than EPA estimates in Toyotas.

That said, IMO, the EPA drive cycle seems to be more accurate with smaller displacement engines than larger engines. For example, in the 70 or 80 different Toyotas I've driven, I could stomp on the 4 cylinder ones all the time and still get good mileage while even a few stomps per tank will make the Sequoia or Lexus mileage drop dramatically. I don't have any scientific basis for this assertion, just my experience.

I'm not sure if you can sue a government entity, and trying to sue an auto manufacturer that publishes test results that a government agency told them to publish might be difficult.

A free Freestyle or free pretty much anything new is a great deal. I miss getting a new car every 3 or 4 months, having all insurance, gas, maintenance, etc. paid for, and getting a new employee lease every year that included everything except gas, which made getting wheels for teenagers much more affordable.