Minivans: Mazda 5, Odyssey, Sienna and 'sweet spot' year?

[jeromedawg]

Hey guys,

We're considering getting a mini-van in the distant future and I'm debating between the Mazda5, Sienna and Odyssey. Are there any particular years we would want to avoid or, on the flip-side, try to attain? Probably not a super-recent/current model but perhaps one within 5 years or less? What is a good price point based on year and mileage that we'd want to look at? e.g. I saw a listing for a 2011 Sienna (LE 8-passenger) with under 50k going for around $16k. Is that too much?

[Papa bear]

I am 100% a Chrysler minivan fan. It's the only minivan (town and country, caravan, and new Pacifica) that offers stow and go seating for back and middle rows. 

I would not buy a Mazda 5 as it can't handle 4x8 sheets in the back.  That's a serious no go. I don't even consider it a minivan. Don't ruin minivan names with that.

If stow and go was not my most important piece, I'd opt for an odyssey.

1) chrysler
2) Honda
3) Toyota
4) anyone else
5) Mazda isn't a minivan


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[jeromedawg]

I am 100% a Chrysler minivan fan. It's the only minivan (town and country, caravan, and new Pacifica) that offers stow and go seating for back and middle rows. 

I would not buy a Mazda 5 as it can't handle 4x8 sheets in the back.  That's a serious no go. I don't even consider it a minivan. Don't ruin minivan names with that.

If stow and go was not my most important piece, I'd opt for an odyssey.

1) chrysler
2) Honda
3) Toyota
4) anyone else
5) Mazda isn't a minivan


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Thanks! What would you say is a good price point/year/mileage to look for on these? Are they pretty reliable w/ low maintenance and expenses?

[Papa bear]

Another poster here got a grand caravan, 2012, for under 15k I believe. 

I know people who routinely get up to 200k miles on the Chrysler products, but there had been problem years in the past with transmissions.  I'd start looking at CL and other sites to get pricing ideas. 

Myself, I'm waiting a bit to buy a used Pacifica, as they just came out for 2016 models.  I've seen some around 22k, but I'm still waiting. 

Not a day goes by that I don't wish I had one of my old minivans =(


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[startingsmall]

I love my Mazda5.

The third row is good for occasional use, but it drives (parallel parks, etc) like a compact car. That said, I think it's best suited to a family of 4 who only needs the 3rd row for occasional/intermittent use. There's really NO cargo space when the 3rd row is up.

[MightyAl]

I am a Toyota fan and have been working on them for years so that is why I lean towards the Sienna.  I have a 10 year old XLE and love it. 

As far as the Odyssey is concerned the only complaint I have heard consistently is rear visibility.  The C-pillars on it are huge and make seeing out the back difficult especially for shorter people.

The pentastar offerings are nice.  We looked at the dodge and Chrysler offerings at the auto show a couple years ago and thought they were nice. 

I would agree that the Mazda 5 is only minivan-esque.   

[TrMama]

In addition to being much smaller than the others on your list, the Mazda5 is poorly designed and cheaply built. I had a 2008 until December.

Apparently the sliding doors are designed in such a way that water gets in the latch that holds the door closed when it rains. If the water then freezes the door will open, but not latch closed again. The only way to get the door closed is to somehow warm the latch (it's plastic) and melt the ice. You can either pull it into a warm garage (if you're close enough) or run the engine with the heat on and hope it's enough to thaw the latch.

When I called the dealership to ask them about how to solve this problem I was told not to drive the car in cold weather. I live in Canada. This was hardly a satisfactory plan.

I solved the problem by selling the Mazda5 and buying a Subaru.

[MayDay]

We have a 2004 Sienna, almost 200k miles, going strong with virtually no repairs (a few minor things we choose not to fix like a broken latch on the glove compartment, but no engine type repairs).

Now, I do feel like the transmission might be starting to slip. But I've been saying that for a year and it hasn't gotten any worse.

My parents had Chrysler and Dodge ones when I was a kid. I realize things have probably changed, but they had such reliably shitty transmissions that we never seriously considered them.

When we were looking to buy we literally did not care between Toyota and Honda. They got comparable reviews and the reasons people had for picking one vs the other were trivial. I actually never even test drove them. I told him to pick whatever, and he agreed with me that it didn't matter and we should go with whatever was the best deal.

We were looking in 2010ish, at ones a few years old. We found that 1-2 year old.ones were overpriced. You had to go older
 We ended up going much older due to being given ours by a family friend when they got a new one. But I've been thrilled with it. Even a 2004 is very fancy to me other than still rocking a tape deck :)

[daverobev]

Another poster here got a grand caravan, 2012, for under 15k I believe.

You can probably get a new one for close to that.

[englishteacheralex]

We want a Mazda 5 so bad. But we are in circumstances that make it seem like a good bet: family of four, no pets, live in Hawaii in a condo that has teeny tiny tandem parking spots for which the sliding door would be ideal. I don't think we'll pull the trigger on one for a while because we're too cheap and our commutes are so short it doesn't really matter that we're driving buckets o' bolts.

[blub]

We're also in the market, looking for a Sienna or an Odyssey. One thing I've discovered is that 2007+ Siennas have a timing chain, and older ones have a timing belt.

[Gone_Hiking]

I drive a 2010 Mazda5, bought in 2011.  The car is ideal for my family (me, DH, child, occasional MIL) and, as long as the third row of seats is down, the cargo space is more than adequate.  Forget cargo with 3rd row of seats up, and the third row is best suited for cross town trips rather than cross country.

We take the car for our road trips and it is quite comfortable for all 6 foot tall and below, albeit doesn't claim hills easily.  Easy to park, too.  One battery replacement so far and no major repairs. 

[SuperSecretName]

depends how much you want to spend.  I'm on my 3rd 2006 mazda5 (due to accidents.  low value cars don't take a lot to total).  I got one last summer for 3500 and 65k miles.  had to put 2k of work, but it's a great value.  There really isn't another vehicle like it.

Though, in the 2006 (first model year), there is no air register in the middle.  It all comes from the front.  That was a design flaw corrected in subsequent years.

[Scotland2016]

We love our Mazda 5 and don't understand why they discontinued it. However, I agree that it's best for a family of four.

[AnotherFI_IT_Guy]

I have a 2011 Sienna and like everything about it, except the damn run-flat tires.  They are very expensive and wear out faster than regular tires.  If you get a nail, it might or might not be patchable.  Even hitting a pothole can ruin them.

[Mgmny]

One of things that excites me the most about having kids I'm a few years is the excuse to buy a Honda Odyssey Touring Ellie. It has a central vac!! It's the Cadillac of minivans.

[meandmyfamily]

Our Siennas have been great.  Our 2004 got to 174,000 miles and lasted 11 years before it had some problems.  We have a 2015 that we love right now and plan to love hopefully over 200,000 miles. 

[tyrannostache]

I'm reviving this oooold thread as I debate purchasing a Sienna (was a trade-in at a local dealership). We're a family of four, and at least once a week would like to carry an extra kid or two. Currently have a small wagon (partner's work vehicle) and a beater sedan. Beater sedan is not long for this world.

2007, 130K miles, AWD, asking price 9900.

We want to make this our family adventure van--it's probably big enough to sleep all of us in back (the 2 kids are still small) for a few years. AWD is a huge plus in our neck of the woods (far north, tons of snow, minimal road maintenance, used to driving Subarus).

We'll take it in to our mechanic later today for a once-over. Unless he uncovers anything big, we'll probably offer 8500 + trade-in of my beater (probably worth $200 tops, if the dealer even takes it. If not, off to craigslist it goes).

Any concerns or red flags? Anyone just want to gush about vans?

[Ecky]

The data says get the Sienna:



The Odyssey lost major points during the early 2000's when Honda was making terrible transmissions. Newer models are better, but Toyota is still top of the heap in terms of reliability.

[MayDay]

You know that 2004 Sienna that I said the transmission was slipping on?

Still chugging at 210k. Transmission so the same ,A/C is dodgy, but overall I can't complain considering we've put nothing into it!

Honestly I don't know of the beast will ever die!

So I still recommend :)

[Mgmny]

The data says get the Sienna:



The Odyssey lost major points during the early 2000's when Honda was making terrible transmissions. Newer models are better, but Toyota is still top of the heap in terms of reliability.

What is this dataset? I have literally no idea what these numbers mean.

[RWD]

The data says get the Sienna:

The Odyssey lost major points during the early 2000's when Honda was making terrible transmissions. Newer models are better, but Toyota is still top of the heap in terms of reliability.

What is this dataset? I have literally no idea what these numbers mean.

Source:
http://www.dashboard-light.com/reports/Minivan.html

The numbers are drivetrain reliability relative to the average vehicle. Dataset is from vehicles traded in at dealers, I believe.

[ketchup]

The data says get the Sienna:

The Odyssey lost major points during the early 2000's when Honda was making terrible transmissions. Newer models are better, but Toyota is still top of the heap in terms of reliability.

What is this dataset? I have literally no idea what these numbers mean.

Source:
http://www.dashboard-light.com/reports/Minivan.html

The numbers are drivetrain reliability relative to the average vehicle. Dataset is from vehicles traded in at dealers, I believe.

Any idea the validity of the ratings there?  I have a 2001 Volvo V70 and according to their data, it's a real POS.  Mine's still chugging along 18 years old and 172,000 miles strong.

http://dashboard-light.com/vehicles/Volvo_V70.html (1.9 out of 100 for those that don't feel like clicking)

My guess is that the numbers for that particular model are skewed due to a design flaw in the electronic throttle module that causes the throttle position sensor to fail.  And Volvo's replacement part would just fail again too.  However, most of those models still on the road probably have had the part replaced with one with a permanent fix (I did mine at 145,000).

It's a problem, for sure, but such a low rating implies the engine is going to fall apart at 80K miles or some shit.

[RWD]

Any idea the validity of the ratings there?  I have a 2001 Volvo V70 and according to their data, it's a real POS.  Mine's still chugging along 18 years old and 172,000 miles strong.

http://dashboard-light.com/vehicles/Volvo_V70.html (1.9 out of 100 for those that don't feel like clicking)

My guess is that the numbers for that particular model are skewed due to a design flaw in the electronic throttle module that causes the throttle position sensor to fail.  And Volvo's replacement part would just fail again too.  However, most of those models still on the road probably have had the part replaced with one with a permanent fix (I did mine at 145,000).

It's a problem, for sure, but such a low rating implies the engine is going to fall apart at 80K miles or some shit.

I believe it's a good ballpark for a lot of vehicles, but shouldn't be viewed as absolute. It should give a good sense of frequency of issues but not necessarily the severity or cost. And as you mentioned, some vehicles have a known issue that can be worked around (reading model-specific forums helps a lot for figuring these out).

I also noticed that a decent number of vehicles have a "0" rating which means I think their scaling is messed up a bit. The "1.9" rating on your Volvo doesn't necessarily mean it's essentially as bad as a "0". You may gain more insight by looking at the distribution of issues by category (Powertrain, Transmission, Engine) and the Yearly Defect Ratio graphs (shows specific model years on a percentage chart relative to average).

[bognish]

I have a 2011 Sienna. The 4wd model. I didn't realize it when we bought it, but there is no spare tire. I never considered that even a possibility. They sell it with run flat tires. After we saw the price tag to replace them we decided to get regular tires and AAA, and an emergency can of fix a flat. I think newer models have a spare tire. Thats the only thing I would change.

[tyrannostache]

Yeah, I discovered the lack of a spare while we were checking it out the first time. I am definitely not interested in run-flat tires, particularly since we do a fair amount of travel in the boonies. We'd have to get a spare and keep it in the back. Not ideal.

It's a moot point for the moment--we took the rig to our trusty mechanic for a once-over, and he said the transmission needs replacing. Unless they want to cut the price by a whooooole bunch, we're out for now. Ugh. I hate used car shopping (though I hate it less than car payments).

[Mgmny]

I have a 2011 Sienna. The 4wd model. I didn't realize it when we bought it, but there is no spare tire. I never considered that even a possibility. They sell it with run flat tires. After we saw the price tag to replace them we decided to get regular tires and AAA, and an emergency can of fix a flat. I think newer models have a spare tire. Thats the only thing I would change.

My 2006 Acura RL (not a minivan) came with PAX (run-flat) tires, and so did a few years of the Honda Odyssey (not sure which, buyer beware). No spare tire as well, but I changed out the wheels, tires, and added a donut spare in the trunk (unfortunately, trunk not really designed to hold a spare, which is lame),  for about $300 more than just new run-flat tires. This should save me $1000s in future tire expenses, and my car actually handles a lot better - those run-flat tires were HEAVY AS HELL. Definitely not something a casual car buyer would even consider when purchasing a vehicle, but i have since learned my lesson!