Last post on Aug 24, 2013 at 6:00 PM
You are in the Kia Sedona
What is this discussion about?
Kia Sedona, Van
#4005 of 4592 Re: Hello, everyone. [killerk]
Sep 03, 2004 (12:29 pm)
Sedona is heavier than it needs to be. I feel Kia decided not to spend extra money on better engineering or lighter materials at the expense of fuel economy. That said, fuel economy seems to be closer to other minivans than the EPA numbers would suggest. The 2004 models have higher EPA ratings than the 2002-2003, which I think were on the conservative side at 20mpg highway. Sedona's curb weight is actually more like 4800 pounds, not 4600! Still, there are several vans that weigh 4000+ pounds. I believe the AWD Chrysler T&C is about 4500 and that's the closest competitor in weight. In our use of the van, it still feels peppy and responsive. This is a good engine/transmission combo, even if the professional reviewers don't think so.
The extra weight does not bother me. Car and Driver's review pointed out that some aspects of Sedona's underbelly are pretty heavy duty. Except for a fuel economy and possibly handling penalty, I see no drawbacks. Our minivan is a minivan and to me it handles just fine. We get 21-25mpg highway depending on the circumstances, and this is reasonable for a minivan.
Sedona LX models come with a bench seat in the 2nd row. I don't recall if it is rated for 2 passengers or 3.
Sep 05, 2004 (5:27 am)
I read with interest the exchanges regarding tires. We had 48,000 miles on our 2002 EX and needed to replace them. Step one, call the dealer. He tried to sell us Firestones that were S rated. I was looking to replace the original Hankooks. He said he would order them if I wanted them, but that the tire he was suggesting was better. I could tell from our brief discussion that he was not the guy to talk speed ratings with and decided to shop around.
I discussed speed rating with Sears and the biggest "local tire guy." Both were willing to order H rated tires for me, but BOTH recommended S rated tires (from two different makers).
Next step, go to the Hankook site and talk to a Hankook authorized dealer. There was only one in our area. A small local shop with great service and a no-nonsense approach. Not surprisingly, he recommended Hankooks, but he too suggested an S rated tire, the Mileage Plus. We talked at length about the speed rating difference. He explained that the Mileage Plus had better traction and treadware that the H rated original tires. He said Kia put H-rated tires on as the original equipment because of the top speed of the van. He explained that the H rated tires were good, but that he believed the S rated tire he was recommending was safer because of the better wet and snow traction. He fininshed by giving me quotes on both. The original Hankooks were 15 dollars cheaper per tires -- hardly a difference.
I chose to go with his recommendation. We have about 2000 miles on the Mileage Plus and very pleased. Naturally, the van rides smoother, quieter and handles better -- new tread alone would account for that. But, I think it rides and handles a bit better than when it was new. Of course, I could be deluding myself to justify the purchase.
It goes without saying that just about any new tire would be safer than H rated tires with 48,000 miles on them. So, I am not concerned about the choice we made. I am curious though what others hear when they talk to "the tire guys" when it comes time to replce the originals.
#4007 of 4592 Re: tires [akwilliams]
Sep 05, 2004 (6:18 pm)
Sounds like you did your homework.
Which brand is the 'Mileage Plus' tire you chose?
Sep 06, 2004 (6:30 am)
The Mileage Plus are Hankooks. Four of them installed cost us $345. I had them do a front end allignment for an additional 40 bucks. They ride great and have an 85000 mile warranty. Worth a look if you can find a dealer nearby.
#4009 of 4592 Kia through Hurricane Frances!!
Sep 06, 2004 (5:19 pm)
We only had 200 miles on our Sedona EX before having to evacuate Melbourne Florida because of this hurricane! I only owned my Kia for one week!
Just wanted to let you know that we loved having the Sedona to withstand stop and go traffic on the roads...millions were evacuated! And most of the travel time was spent at a complete stand still...I-4 was a parking lot!
Gas mileage was good..so my husband says..I don't pay too much attention to that..although I know I should with prices these days! I also have to say that having the (portable DVD player) at a time like this was a BLESSING!! Remember I was the one asking about installing overhead or headrest version. Needless to say..we haven't done either yet.
Thanks again for all your comments..we love our Kia!
#4010 of 4592 Re: Kia through Hurricane Frances!! [jend]
Sep 06, 2004 (6:12 pm)
Congrats on your new Sedona. We too weathered the storm here in Tampa but our Sedona stayed tucked away in the garage and didnt see a drop of rain. Glad you enjoyed the Sedona even in a stressfull time.
'04 Sedona EX
#4011 of 4592 lubing sliding doors on 2003 Sedona
Sep 08, 2004 (8:26 am)
Occasionally, our sliding doors hang up a little bit. The dealer said that they use Syl-glide to keep them well lubed. Was wondering if anybody has dealt with this product? Was thinking of getting some to keep at home.
Also, when being closed, the passenger window has developed a click at the end of its travel. Seems to come and go. So far, does not seem to affect operation of the window at all.
If these points have been discussed recently, I apologize for rehashing them - I have not checked out the site for several months.
Sep 08, 2004 (9:17 am)
The Honda Odyssey people seem to have good luck with something called Shin-Etsu or similar (I never can remember the spelling).
#4013 of 4592 For the Sedona tire discussion
Sep 09, 2004 (6:58 am)
Hi, everyone. I know that not everyone cruises different boards. This is worthy of repeating on the speed rating of tires discussion we were having earlier. It does a much better job of explaining why (personal opinion) to stick with the OEM speed rating of the tire to have that defined safety margin.
From the tires forum:
"#4129 of 4141 Re: Importance of speed ratings [bluedevils] by yurakm Sep 02, 2004 (9:03 am)
Tires blow out or fall apart when hot, Ford Explorer style. They turn hot for different reasons, or more often a combination of reasons: high speed, overloaded (or heavy) car, low tire pressure, hot air / pavement, etc.
Tires are rated for temperature resistance. The best rate used to be A, but now some tires are rated AA; the worst rate is C. Most cars have B-rated tires, with C-rated factory installed on many tracks. The infamous Firestone tires factory installed on Ford Explorer were rated C.
In theory, the speed rating and temperature rating are different. In practice, tires H-rated for speed are A-rated for temperature, while S- and T-rated tires are B-rated. Z rate came with AA. At least it was so the last time I checked at Tirerack.
It means that even if you never drive as fast as 120 mph (or even at 90 mph for this matter), with H-rated tires you will have much better safety margins against underinflated tire, factory defects, long trips with family (load), etc. Especially important with your heavy minivan.
#4130 of 4141 Heavy minivan by corvette Sep 02, 2004 (9:26 am)
Egads, 4800 lbs? And that's before you strap Aunt Edna to the roof for the family roadtrip! Be sure the load rating on the replacement tires is at least as high as the originals.
Don't Michelin tires have the lowest failure rate?
#4131 of 4141 Re: Importance of speed ratings [bluedevils] by capriracer Sep 04, 2004 (6:55 am)
Some background on speed ratings:
Speed ratings are based on an indoor wheel test that relates very well to the real world. But like many types of ratings, there are things that folks need to be aware of.
A tire's actual speed capability can be adversely affected by many things. Inflation pressure is one of them. Even if the tire has enough inflation to carry the load being applied, it's speed capability goes down with reduced inflation - I've seen as much as 2 steps.
Speed ratings are based on smooth road surfaces. Add some bumps and the speed capability goes down.
As tires age, their ability to perform decreases. This applies to speed as well. The latest research I have seen indicates that this performance degradation is very much age related and not related to the amount of usage the tire has seen. The research said the degradation can be as high as 2 steps in speed capability.
This also means that an unused tire in the spare rack has degraded performance at about the same level as the tire that is has been used for 40,000 miles and is practically worn out. While I have some problems with this research, my experience seems to agree with this. So my current recommendation is that tires should be replaced when they are 10 years old regardless of the state of wear and where they have been used, and that folks that live in AZ, CA, NV, TX, NM, and FL, the age limit is reduced to 6 years. Other places are in between 6 and 10 years depending on how far north they live. For example TN would be 8 years.
It is always good engineering practice to overdesign and underutilize. This means that while the vehicle may not be going 130 mph, it is safer with H rated tires than with S rated tires."
Hope this helps.
#4014 of 4592 Re: For the Sedona tire discussion [navyair]
Sep 09, 2004 (12:54 pm)
Good idea to cross-post that info here.
I have concluded that, in the specific case of Kia Sedona and Hankook RA07 (H speed rated) and Bridgestone Turanza LS-T (T speed rated) tires in stock P215/70R15 size, the safety margin is no better with the Hankook than with the Bridgestone. Perhaps more accurately, the Bridgestone will provide enough safety margin to allow me to sleep well at night.
I base this on several factors:
1. Perceived quality of the Turanza LS-T tire line.
2. Our Sedona is never driven above 80 mph.
3. Specs of several P215/70R15 tires as follows:
Brand / Model / Speed Rating / Treadwear Rating / Trac rating / Temp rating / Max Load (lbs) / Max pressure (psi) / Price per tire
Hankook RA07 H 440 A B 1653lbs 35psi $58
Kumho 798 H 440 A B -- -- $55 (info not specified on tirerack.com)
Bridgestone Turanza LS-T T 700 A B 1620 44 $83
Michelin Hydroedge T 760 A B 1620 35 $102
Michelin Energy MXV4 V 340 A A 1609 44 $135
Comparing the tire with the max and the min load rating - Is there any real difference between a tire rated for max load of 1653 pounds vs. a tire rated for max load of 1609 pounds? This seems like an insignificant difference.
I was surprised to see the H-rated Hankook rated for max 35 psi while the T-rated Turanza was rated max 44 psi.
Traction and temperature ratings for all 5 tires were the same: A traction and B temperature.
We put Turanza LS-Ts on our Sedona rather than a new set of Hankook RA07, even though I had no gripes with the Hankooks and a set of 4 would have saved us about $100. Why? Because in spite of the Turanzas' T speed rating, I felt they were better tires and were perfectly safe for our Sedona.