Noob - son's thinking of Sedona-scared

[geeaea]

I've attempted searches for what I need to know ..but as many of you who frequent message boards know ..they are rendered somewhat useless by way too many like terms.

Anyway, my son rolls home with a 2006 Sendona LX. Nice little thing ..but I've been bitten by the infamous minivan autotrans paranoia from my experiences with my Chrysler. Now DC has worked out most of the bugs with there Ultradrive ..after paying in spades in reputation ..but they're not alone ..they just sold so many of the buggers that even a 2% failure rate would look massive.

Now we're moving to "strange" in terms of modern automatics. They aren't simple ..engineers for the sake of their own insatiable need to reinvent the wheel ...and jump through some labyrinth of hoops to trick the EPA economy cycle have complicated a strong and reliable device into a sophisticated and vulerable piece of equipment. Now it can fool the EPA economy cycle ...and probably save a few fractional hp in losses between the go end of the operation and the fuel tank ...

..but can surely flatten your wallet with prejudice after the fairytale honeymoom is over with your warranty.

So, getting to the question, just what's the track record with the transmissions in these beasts? Engines have been refined enough that if you can keep the timing belt from snapping on them, they're typically good for well over a decade with decent care ..but autos just don't have a good track record, imo.

Also, has Kia been Americanized in term of playing stallball and shell games on making good on warranty. I've heard of coworkers who actually followed the recommended service schedule, including the mandatory (and expensive) timing belt replacement ..and then having a claim denied. That's why the 'Americanized' question comes in. No dealer makes any money on warranty work. The bigger the job ..the more they lose.

Sorry to be long winded ..but I'm afraid of an impulse buy on my son's part and I really don't want to say "I told you so" for the 50,000th time ..each one being more expensive to him in regrets for not talking to me first and doing some research.

Thanks in advance.

[Inky]

The automatic transmission is only one of the many things to be worried about on a Kia. I think I've heard more complaints about the motor, though.

Here's a good discussion (link) mostly between me and Schnauzer, a Kia exec, on whether or not buying a Sedona is a good idea.

On the warranty issue-- I've not heard people say that they needed major service under warranty, received it, and are happy. (Not to say it can't happen.) I have heard a lot of complaints about Kia/Kia dealers avoiding warranty-covered repairs. This thread (link) is one owner's experience.

Welcome to the group!

[geeaea]

Thanks for the reply and the links!! Some (other sources) have said that Kia warranty issues (dealerwise) have improved since Hyundai bought them. That doesn't mean that it's great ..just improved <shrug>.

Your first link was most informative. Thanks again.

[Schnauzer]

Hyundai and Kia use the same powertrains in various models in recent years. As with any large manufacturer, parent company Hyundai Motor Group tries hard not to have a lemon vehicle out of the thousands built during a production run. It can and does happen but unlike those on the forum who might like to say HMC has a major problem with certain models, facts do not hold truth to their statements. On the Sedona I ran years worth of history records and came up with a few problematic vehicles out of the many made since its introduction. The new engines and transmissions now being used are of even tighter tolerance and quality as HMC has pushed extremely hard for world class quality in their design and engineering departments down to the final assembly plants worldwide. HMC isn't getting the awards for both Hyundai and Kia brands because they are not quality reliable vehicles.

Vehicles are built by imagination first and then with engineering talent and HMC has employed many top designers and engineers that were once with our competition. People come to work with Hyundai and Kia because of the bright future and personal/professional growth opportunities. Customers benefit with well built and reliable vehicles. HMC is addressing as quickly as possible the updating of our internal customer service systems as well as training dealership staff to be better at what they do. The huge payout is gaining steam and recently Kia got the highest UK award for its vehicle manufacturering processes. Hyundai and Kia have state of the art factories world wide. Kia will have its new Georgia factory on line by 2009. Hyundai is already open in Alabama making vehicles.

The goal is to build the best cars at the best value. I believe this is the case 99.99 percent of the time. The goal is to better deal with warranty and nonwarranty issues among a few customers with problems. Not all people will be satisfied with the resolutions from HMC or any company.

[geeaea]

Schnauzer, I'm sure what you say is true. No one intends to engineer and/or build a loser. I would point out that Chrysler took over a decade to add enough durability to their Ultradrive transmission to make it consumer capable. Now I'm also sure that the true failure rate for the Ultradrive was quite low ..but that's all it takes to disturb consumer confidence. They (Chrysler/DC) aren't the only ones to engineer themselves into a reputation of 'proceed at your own risk'. I'd say that virtually all contemporary automatic transmission, with few exceptions, have proven very expensive in continued ownership. We're becoming a mass motoring fleet that is getting 10 years of ownership (declining level of service, usually - second car, etc.) ..and most cars end up in the junkyard due to either transmissions that cost 5X the residual value of the car ...or something like a timing belt ...long before they're actually scrap in a literal sense.

While the cost of new cars has been fairly stable or even declined (I could have bought a brand new left over Caravan for essentially the same price, comparably equipped, for the past 14 years), the cost of ownership has not. A vehicle can easily require 50% of its value in repairs with just one major component failure. Like I said, labor rates are paid with real $$ ..not the funny money that keeps the trains on time in market extraction (rebates, factory financing via debt, etc.).

This type of thinking makes me extremely critical of newer automobiles.


That entire rant said ...it appears that the Sedona has a decent reputation so far and the chief complaints are things like handling and fuel economy ...not reliability. My advice to my son will be to return it to the dealer for a better price. He's only been offered the rebates off of list. I'd really prefer him to stay out of the worship of the car mania that this nation is addicted to ..but you can't win them all.

:shrug:

[Inky]

Originally Posted by geeaea

That entire rant said ...it appears that the Sedona has a decent reputation so far and the chief complaints are things like handling and fuel economy ...not reliability. My advice to my son will be to return it to the dealer for a better price. He's only been offered the rebates off of list. I'd really prefer him to stay out of the worship of the car mania that this nation is addicted to ..but you can't win them all.

I think, overall, Kia has had considerable issues when it comes to quality. Granted, under Hyundai, things are supposed to be changing for the better. Still, I would be wary of jumping in quickly. It is too soon for Kia to have accurate figures concerning the long-term quality of a newly-redesigned automobile. Further, when figures do come out, they will be more reliable from a third party than they will be from Kia since no business wants to air its dirty laundry.

Let us know how things turn out.

[geolehman]

We now have 3 Kias in the family, had a 2003 Rio previously, now have a standard 2005 Spectra, a 2004.5 auto Spectra and a 2006 early production Sedona.

Having had many Chrysler vans and a list of problems (transmissions, stalling, electrical, suspension) with them. Our Sedona has not missed a beat, we have had a few minor issues, but also have had great service from Kia of Duluth, MN. The Spectra sedans have also given very good trouble free service.

I remember folks telling me that the 70 Toyota Corona I bought new was a huge mistake and Japanese cars were junk (conventional wisdom at the time). My recent experience is that the Korean cars are better built than the Volvos, Saabs, Subarus and Audis I have owned. It seems most cars built today are pretty good and statistically better than those of a few years back.

Cars are just mechanical appliances to which some folks attach their egos. Every make can give trouble, I bought a 1982 VW Camper new which I keep just to have fun fixing , and it never fails to provide a project when I am bored. Now on 3rd engine and 3rd tranny but love the thing. Point is it gives trouble because I have always pushed it beyond design parameters, not VWs fault.

I understand Kia and Hyundai focus on engineering staffs ahead of bean counters and business types. It sure shows in their recent products. They have been responsive in listening to end users and improving their cars. Kia and Hyundai sell vehicles worldwide with similar drive-trains using the same bearings, seals, pumps, electronics etc. Judging from publications, this and other boards etc. their engines and trannies hold up as well as most, depending upon how they are treated. You cannot tell if you have made a mistake buying until you have lived with the thing 4-5 years, then it is too late! "You pays your money and takes your chances." George in Wisconsin.

[geeaea]

In my continued research, which I'll verify here, is that the scheduled maintenance can be expensive. I understand that this engine has abandoned the HLA method for a solid lift modality for maintaining valve lash ..that is, it doesn't maintain anything. Allegedly, this is not shimmed to adjust lash ..but are replaced "en mass" which requires the cams to be removed. This is allegedly the 60k scheduled maintenance where they are "checked".

I can see this being, knowning basic dealership tendancies with or without the "stealership" quotient, on the major side of a grand. (you've just got too many people into your pocket for a living = owner, parts manager, counter person, service manager, service writer, cashier/clerical, and last, the technician).

No one needs a bill of any substance while still making payments. Not a wise move on Kia's part, if you ask me. This instills visions of the 100k warranty that made you jump through way too many hoops to get it to pay ..and then it was still in question.


Anyway ...still looking for more booby traps ...this could be one issue ..and it's not really a reliability issue at all. It's a programmed liability that offers serious potential for undue expense during the ownership experience.


geolehman, I too have retained vehicles for a very long time. I have my original minivan. A 92 Caravan. I just put a reman engine in it. I wouldn't have had to do that if I had maintained the cooling system a little better and didn't have the heads corrode at the head gaskets. This led to one of those cascading repairs that caused me to say "screw it" and throw in the $2200 long block (keep in mind when shopping, folks, that if you can get a good price from the dealer parts man, you do not pay shipping ..nor do you wait for your core to be "approved"). I can live with that after 175k/14+ years. Now if I can just prevent it from being in an accident or rusting to death, I'll be tickled to death to own it for another 10-15 years.


So, can anyone confirm the 60k deal with this engine???

TIA! Great site!

[Inky]

According to Edmund's article "Lowest True Cost to Own Vehicles for 2006," no Kia vehicle even makes the list. The winner for minivan was the MAZDA5.

Here's the TCO for the 2006 Sedona: link.

In a side-by-side comparison with four other minivans, the Sedona showed the highest TCO (True Cost to Own). It was more than $2,000 higher than the next on the list (Dodge Grand Caravan) and over $7,500 more than the least expensive TCO on the list (Toyota Sienna). It seems like you're spending less when buying a Sedona, but the initial savings get chipped away at in the long run.

I'm not sure what all is called for under scheduled maintainence, but I do know that replacing the timing belt is pretty costly. As I recall, on the older Sedona, it had to be done every 60K miles. And, if it breaks, the engine is destroyed.

[keith.talbot]

Hi

Over here in UK we only have the diesel - I guess in USA you only have the gasoline V6 ??

Anyone have any comments on the diesel engine / reliability / life ?

Regards