Yesterday, I wrote about how none of my friends listen to me when I tell them there are vehicles they can buy that are not the Toyota Grand Highlander. Many of you had thoughts on this post and left hundreds of comments. One person who saw these comments was my friend, the physics professor who just purchased a Grand Highlander. Not only does he have thoughts, but he’s also tested at least one of your theories and proved it wrong.
Did I mention that he’s a professor of physics at a prestigious university? Also, did I point out that his wife is a psychology professor at a different, equally prestigious academic organization? I can promise you that the two of them approach every major decision with both a scientist’s eye for quantitative facts and a psychologist’s ability to suss out the deeper meaning behind human choices. The best way I can describe them is that they once invited us over to their house for a lovely homemade pizza dinner and a board game about winemaking that takes roughly three hours to play.
I probably should have mentioned to them that I was writing this article, but I know they read it because I got a text message from the physics professor this morning stating that “I see I made the press!” to which I replied, “Names were changed to protect the guilty.”
Specifically, he wanted to talk about a comment in this thread wherein regular V10omous pointed out that people are maybe too quick to assume minivans are always the answer. Other commenters accepted this notion, but then this exchange happened:
ADVERTISEMENT
You are going to be shocked to learn this, but the household with two college professor parents has a kid who plays the cello. And if that surprises you, you’ll be even more flummoxed when you learn that the physics prof tested this theory and sent me a photo:
Photo: My Friend
He proudly pointed out that he could fit two cellos and, honestly, it looks like I could put two more in there if I didn’t care about the cellos ever being used again.
I laughed so hard when I got this response from my friend, both because it’s exactly the kind of thing he would do and because the Grand Highlander has way more string instrument capacity than I realized. I knew I’d write a follow-up piece and asked if my friend had more to add.
He did. Below is the email I got from him this morning:
ADVERTISEMENT
It’s great to hear everyone’s comments about the new purchase. Here are some of my thoughts on what led us towards the Grand Highlander.
#1) We wanted a fuel-efficient car, preferably a hybrid. This is our primary long-distance road trip vehicle. I really enjoy driving fully electric vehicles, but charging adds significant time and mental stress to a road trip. Plus, in the NYC region, electricity is expensive (> $0.30 a kWh in home, fast charging station significantly more). At this rate, a fuel-efficient vehicle like the Grand Highlander Hybrid (35 MPG) has a comparable, if not cheaper, energy cost-per-mile than a Kia KV9. Aside: We didn’t consider the significantly less fuel-efficient Max version.
#2) I’m biased towards Toyota’s hybrid e-CVT engine/transmission. It’s been around for decades, and I feel very confident in its reliability. My mother had a Prius for nearly 20 years and never had a problem with the engine/transmission.
#2) We have three kids, including two teenagers, plus we often transport grandparents and friends. The third-row legroom was a real issue for us. Many 3-row crossovers have very little leg room in the back (Toyota Highlander, Mazda CX90, Volvo XC90, Hyundai Santa Fe, etc..). Comparable vehicles with enough legroom, like Pilot or Telluride, didn’t have a hybrid option. Note: We never considered a truck frame SUV like a Dodge Durango, Toyota Sequoia, Chevy Suburban. The added weight, cost, and poorer fuel efficiency removed them from our consideration.
#3) In general, I agree with commenters that the minivan does everything we need and is potentially a more practical vehicle. For us, it was just a feel thing. I like to be happy driving a vehicle. I prefer the driver position, relative to the vehicle dimensions, and more relaxed seating in a crossover/SUV. I also prefer the higher vehicle clearance and having a spare tire, something not found in some minivans. Minivans are utilitarian, with gizmos like TVs and removable seats on rails, but it’s just not my thing.
Source: My Friend
Source: My Friend
#4) Some caveats. I don’t like the size and shape of the Grand Highlander front end. Granted, it is a very large vehicle, but it appears as though they tried to emphasize its size. There is a fair amount of space under the hood – like more than 6 inches above the engine. Maybe they could have made it slope down more, akin to a Volvo XC90. Perhaps the extra space is for the Max version of the engine, though I suspect they were trying to appeal to the desires of the North American market. Also, to be pedantic, but I’m not fan of the name “Grand Highlander.” Toyota makes a lot of vehicles, and maybe they didn’t have enough time to come up with another name. It feels uninspired, like the creation of the Grand Cherokee from the Cherokee. I wish they just numbered their vehicles like some of the competition: for example: Audi, BMW, and Mazda. However, maybe a lesson can be taken from Jeep’s example. I wouldn’t be surprised if the Grand Highlander soon outsells the Highlander.
One of my other questions for him was if he got an actual color, and his response was great:
We initially wanted white, but white makes a car look bigger (my psychologist wife keyed me in on this). That’s why we turned to blue.
I will say, selfishly, I’m also excited about this move because it means that my daughter will be able to go along with them for various adventures and save me a trip in our car. The excuse of “We only have the wagon” will no longer fly!
My friend also gave me a subtle hint as to why the Grand Highlander was a great purchase. He’d just spent a few weeks in South Africa and drove across that country in this thing, stuffed with seven people and luggage:
Photo: My Friend
That is a Toyota Rumion, which is actually a Suzuki Ertiga. It’s a small MPV. While I think this little van is awesome, I’m sure a couple of weeks in it would also make me reach for the biggest Toyota I could find the day I got home, which basically is what happened.
Ok point taken on the cello but still, it’s not going to be as easy as a minivan for a full string quartet, two parents, and all four instruments. That’s obviously more going to be based in personal priorities, but let’s not pretend a minivan isn’t still more spacious with the third row cargo well!
This became a running joke in my friend group as one of the stricter moms didn’t let her daughter go to quartet practice after she got a bad grade on an English paper, but that was stupid because we had a performance the next week (which was also graded). So we packed everyone into the van and brought the quartet to her house. She couldn’t say no to rehearsal when we had brought everyone and everything over in one car!
I will say, though, I love Minivans and loading them up with ridiculous things.
When I was 18 I wanted a motorcycle and found a great Honda CX500 that needed some work and would have to be hauled home. My sister decided last minute she wouldn’t let me use her husband’s truck because she thought motorcycles were corrupt or something…. so we stow’n’go’d the seats in my parents’ town and country and put the bike in the back on a tarp. Worked like a dream!
Our Odyssey got plenty of use as a moving van for various relatives where its low load deck and cavernous space made it extremely useful (my dad moved an entire one-bedroom apartment from Los Angeles to San Jose in only two trips), but my favorite childhood memory is still sitting with my brother and father in the rear cargo area with the third-row stowed and having a picnic in the trunk while watching snow fall around the van. There’s just so much possibility in the world of minivanning!
I’m all for everyone buying what they want and need, but I still think vans open up a different mindset entirely that can’t be overlooked by saying ‘now CUVs are just as big!’ The ‘room on wheels’ concept with sliding patio doors, removable and reconfigurable seats, and basement storage really changes your perspective on motoring.
I seek many lifted and normal height pickup trucks towing trailers with the simplest things on them (IKEA flat pack), because they don’t want to lift it into that tall bed. I’ve never seen a minivan doing this.
Minivan for the win.
Also, don’t put musical instruments in the back of a pickup truck. Tuning them after being exposed to the elements will be tricky for a while.
My mom’s dream car! That or a Fleetwood hearse, she’s not picky.
Acd
2 days ago
I don’t understand all the criticism towards someone who finds the vehicle that best satisfies their needs and then buys it. When the critics write the check then maybe they can have some say in someone else’s vehicle purchase decision.
Autopians out here driving the most impractical, unreliable, (formerly) sporty car they can find throw a fit when someone says they like sitting 3 more inches off the ground.
But you could and you should. First, it’s not criticism, it’s opinions on the topic. Second, there’s nothing wrong with criticizing. It’s a healthy thing to do and to take.
Bkp
2 days ago
For many years, my mom has bought vehicles based on how easy it is to haul around her double bass.
Mom did say that an Audi wagon was the nicest solution during one of her vehicle searches (a while back), but she didn’t want to spend the bucks on the Audi.
And yet you woke up enough to scroll down and waste more time to write a meaningless comment?
Knightcowboy
2 days ago
I’m old enough that when my parents turned their leases in, they weren’t looking for what had the biggest third row, they were looking for a third row period (that also wasn’t a minivan. Must be a Gen X thing, although I don’t think any of my grandparents ever had one). Teenage me and my brother had to do somersaults over 2 second-row car seats to squeeze our asses into the third row of a Dodge Journey (that needed a new transmission at 9k miles because recession era). Folding your legs in to fit in the third row builds character. Kids these days are soft.
I’m an ‘old millenial’ it was new car time and we wanted something with a third row. Our kids are 6 & 10, so the third row doesn’t need to be ultra spacious, it’s only used on occasion. We settled on a (used) BMW X5 with the 3rd row and you know what, it gets used all the time. My son and his friends love sitting back there. It just makes the car that little bit more practical. I’m sure if we needed a permanent 3rd row the X5 probably wouldn’t have been top of the list. But we don’t so now when grandparents come, we only need to take one car. For birthday parties, it’s one car. Makes our lives that little bit easier. And you know what. Tough shit if they have to squeeze back there when they are older, they didn’t grow up with a 1974 Ford Cortina wagon with a hole in the floor. Or a 1986 Ford Telstar that leaked water. Or I’m sure entirely illegally squeezing four kids across the backseat of a 1992 Toyota 4Runner (that was my dads solution to when my brother and I both wanted to bring a friend along).
I do remember being told as a kid that the front seat is the most dangerous seat for a kid, but I think that was because of airbags (I’m assuming that’s not a problem on a 1992). It’s just astounding how back in the day, everything was a family car if you tried hard enough, and nowadays we got purpose-built family cars that do shit our houses don’t even do (looking at you, built-in vacuum and borderline-dystopian back seat megaphone) all at a time when people are having LESS families. It’s like once crossovers got to the fuel efficiency of cars from 20-30 years ago everyone said “good enough for me” and here we are.
When I was a kid you put the baby in the rear facing car capsule in the front passenger seat. Apparently that was thought of as the safest place for a baby. But not every car had retracting seat belts in the back. There were still a lot of 70s cars around in the early 90s, that could be the reason. And no the 4Runner did not have airbags. My mum had a ‘92 Nissan Bluebird that had a drivers airbag only – passengers are allowed to be maimed apparently. We didn’t have either the 4Runner or Bluebird until the late 90s, our 2 seat Hilux and leaking Telstar had 0 safety equipment whatsoever. Seat belts were it. And even the 90s cars only had a lap belt in the rear middle seat.
A. Barth
2 days ago
He proudly pointed out that he could fit two cellos
He mentioned that a kid (NFI) is the cello player. Are those adult-sized cellos or are there scaled-down options for smaller folks?
No, (I think all) violin-family instruments come in reduced sized version, which are labeled ”7/8 size” and “3/4 size” (and maybe “1/2 size”), even though they are actually larger than those fractions indicate. Not entirely as learners’ instruments, as I recently learned that IIRC more pros use 3/4 or 7/8 double basses than full size. Though maybe that’s different in classical groups than in jazz?
Stryker_T
2 days ago
This is some prime grade A+ “The Autopian” content.
Dogisbadob
2 days ago
Too bad Suzuki doesn’t sell cars here anymore 🙁
That Ertiga is awesome!
Username Loading....
2 days ago
You’d be surprised how many cellos I can fit in the truck of my Miata with the help of a woodchipper.
Strings will jam the chipper. Must remove them first.
Jdoubledub
2 days ago
“I prefer the driver position…”
This right here is what it always comes down to. No matter how much other vehicles will meet or exceed 99% of someone’s criteria; that is always the citing factor of why they didn’t go with the more “logical” choice. And because of this everything is and will continue to be, a CUV or larger.
Hell, I walked away from a Fiat Abarth because I couldn’t manspread comfortably.
And really, how much more logical does it get than that? Like, sure, a minivan might be able to carry full sheets of plywood, but are a couple New York professors ever going to use that feature?
Driving position is something that’s a big deal every single time you use the car.
I once had a car that I couldn’t get a half sheet into. The car had the space, but the door and hatch openings just were not big enough. After spending childhood with mid to large big-3 cars this was surprising. I actually need to go get a half sheet of OSB – my electrician notched my I-Joist and I want to beef it up – hopefully my new car that is less design driven has the ability to swallow something 48” wide.
My equinox can fit a 4ft wide panel (certainly not 8ft long) but just 1 and super tight on the diagonal. something with a little flex to it, I can fit a couple. The cherokee I had prior? not even close, maybe you could get 44″ in there diagonally. I don’t understand how they can make a vehicle that big have so little room in the back.
The last part is my problem, but that’s an issue with even larger vehicles thanks to massive center consoles. I had far more room in an early ’80s Subaru than in much larger modern cars. Now I wonder if part of the reason people like the higher seating is that the giant console effectively sits lower, giving more room for knees (if only in comparison to cramped lower vehicles). Strangely enough, I find my GR86 to be pretty comfortable, which is a good thing as I hate sitting up high, though it took a day or two to find a good position where my knee wasn’t also too close to the start button.
Nah, i was part of body structure engineering at Honda – the 6″ here and in the new Palisade are purely cosmetic. The ped safety standards can be challenging, but it has more to do with where the hood structure is. Only a minimal amount of space is needed between the top of the engine and the hood.
One good example is the Ridgeline refresh. Mechanically the 2020 and 2021 Ridgelines are the same, but the 2021 had its hood/grille pulled way up for cosmetic reasons. Everything fits fine under the diving hood of the 2020, but it looked too “minivan” like.
Annoyingly, this also hurts gas mileage, but I’ll admit the newer face does look much better.
In the case of the Grand Highlander it’s too much, though. That front end is bad.
What about outward visibility? The higher hood (hello – Chevy Silverado) is bad enough around town, but you get out into the woods, go up a hill, and all you see is hood.
Visibility zones aren’t directly dictated by FMVSS. My employer has their own internal specs, but I guarantee they wouldn’t be satisfactory for you. Pedestrian protection, crash testing, styling, and customer polling are all more important than outward sightlines.
Yep. I’m staring at a map of exterior cameras, OSRVM cameras, cross traffic cameras, and a dozen ultrasonic sensors while writing this. At least the ultrasonics should detect a kid or obstacle before you run it over.
It was a fantastic job and I miss it a lot, but I’ll take a less interesting job over living in Ohio all day every day. Sometimes I think auto OEMs put their engineering offices in the midwest to make sure there’s nothing of interest to distract engineers from working all the time.
And getting out of the rust belt does help my beloved Mazdas 🙂
Partly true, as the height of the hood ‘nose’ dictates where the impact zone is located. Lower the nose, the closer to the windshield the head impact zone moves. Yes only a small gap is needed to the engine, but frequently a large gap is dictated by lifting the nose to move the pedpro zone forward away from the cowl/wiper system/hood structure.
True, but most SUVs are tall enough already that it’s not really a consideration. For cars (and sports cars especially) this has more of an influence and is why dramatically sloped hoods on sports cars have been disappearing.
I see how you think that, but in my experience, it’s still a consideration. Moving the pedpro zone forward lets you reinforce the cowl section of the hood and eliminate cowl shake on rough roads. For low slung cars completely agreed.
I’m currently working on one of the massive SUVs you referenced, and the pedpro zone still extends more than half way up the hood.
True – once you get into the weeds you recognize ped safety impacts everything. I was actually in body structure reliability, which meant we wanted to make everything sturdier while safety wanted everything “squishier.” I was heavily involved in the cowltop design for the MDX and Pilot and ped safety was always the sticking point.
As a generality, though, I think these 6″ gaps from hood to engine are driven more by styling than regulation. I guarantee the hood-line wasn’t raised by engineering for safety after styling was complete.
At least at my employer, the exterior/interior design people also generate the pedpro and similar zones as it drives their criteria. By the time it gets to me (electrical component packaging and integration – EVs), we have a zone we have to stay out of under hood. That zone is significantly less than 6″, but I’m also exclusively on EVs with a frunk so it doesn’t really impact me.
I’d bet on ICE vehicles (my employer) the significant gap starts with exterior design and pedpro, engineering places engine as low as possible for dynamics, which results in a gap between for beauty covers, better airflow, etc. but still meets all the required criteria in FMVSS.
And then the high hoodline dictates high belt line (small windows), and with all that sheet metal on the sides leads to bigger wheels (for proportions)… and then we have pillboxes on wheels.
In all fairness to the OEMs, this is happening in home building too. It’s less of a big deal with new homes, but good luck if you try to remodel an older home and then have to comply with modern building, electrical, seismic, fire, planning, and zoning codes.
Don’t get me wrong – I am fan of regulations, but there is no one looking at them in their entirety with any authority to do something about it.
With all of the recent focus on pedestrian impact, how do the BRZ and GT86 continue to exist? These coupes have the antithesis of the “Frankenstein’s forehead” hoodline that we see so often on trucks and SUVs.
You know what doesn’t have an overly bulbous front end? One that does not block your forward vision for the sake of vanity?
Lol, it’s fine that people buy these, even though they’re not to my taste. Again, I just wish more people would consider vans so that maybe I had more than 4 to choose from.
America has conclusively chosen the Battle Wagon look because we’re pissed off and we’re gonna kick some ass. Rah, rah, tough, tough. Comin’ thru…
ESBMW@Work
2 days ago
I’m mostly unfamiliar with the unit of measurement known as a Cello. For me, a scientist-person. I need to see some sort of comparative. Clearly, you now must acquire a Sienna. Then tell us how many Cellos fit back there? I believe there is two Violins in a Viola, three Violas in a Cello, and two Cellos in a Bass. And finally 7 basses in a Orchestra.
Man I wish that was the normal for younger orchestras. When I was growing up, the most I had was 5 when my class was introduced to it in middle school, and by 6th grade, that went to a whole 1…. me!
I will only read this article if the measurements are in proper metric units. How hard would it be to include the ONLY CORRECT measurement of 20 decicellos? Gosh!!! /s
To be fair, our double bassist drove a last-gen Celica. But it was a one-seater (aka ‘the driver’) once the instrument was loaded into the hatch.
Spopepro
2 days ago
But for real, Viticulture is a really good game, and a great light-euro intro for the casual player.
World24
2 days ago
Cello’s?
As a former (though I’d love to get back into it) double bassist, all I have to say is…
tsk. tsk. (Joking, of course!)
Sid Bridge
2 days ago
I have video up on my Instagram where I demonstrate how my gear bag, backpack and my 5-string StingRay bass guitar all fit nicely in the trunk of my NA Miata.
It’s so nice to be self-sufficient. When we just had the Wrangler, I always had to rely on my drummers to transport my gear. It always fit just fine in their vans and pick-ups, but it meant I had to leave when THEY were ready, which, you know, drummers. I love my CRV for that. Rock on!
Lol! It’s a rare gig that I show up with my own gear, though. Our subwoofers live at my house. We just downsized our family car from a Honda Odyssey to a Bronco Sport, and that little Bronco is able to carry both subs, my 15″ bass cab, my Hartke head, two basses, my gear back and a few other things.
Maryland J
2 days ago
Well, this might be another example of a distinctly American phenomenon, where we tend to consider ‘worst case scenario’ as a higher priority consideration for car size.
That is, seating for two plus three kids, plus the in laws, plus two cellos, for a comfortable drive halfway across the country.
Will this happen frequently enough to justify a full purchase over just renting a minivan? Who knows. But I know it can handle it!
Not judging here – this is the same line of logic that got me, prefers paychecks over kids, in a three row SUV anyway. Just in case I need it, I’ve got the third row.
Same. We were shopping for a second vehicle. I was going to insist on a smaller vehicle for daily economy, but that vehicle wouldn’t typically be driven more than 20 miles a day.
Renting a van two weeks a year would have consumed all the fuel savings of a smaller second car, and covered the payment difference between the smaller car we were considering and the minivan we bought.
The minivan costs more to own, but for us, owning one is cheaper than owning a smaller car and renting a minivan two weeks of each year.
My justification is that vehicles are expensive, and we no longer have the ability to have numerous vehicles for numerous applications (sedan for work, van for road trips, etc). So if you’re only able to afford 1 vehicle, it needs to do what several vehicles did in the past. And that’s always going to be SUVs, CUVs, or trucks.
*Before anyone comes and chimes in with wagons, I need ground clearance when my vehicle is loaded with hundreds of pounds of friends and camping gear to get down those roads, my CRV is better for this than my Camry wagon was. (YMMV-which is fine, different people have different needs and don’t all live in a sunshine state where we can get away with RWD).
What I don’t get is people factoring in outside parties—everyone else has cars, probably more car than they often need—why buy more car for the rare occurrence of driving outside parties on top of everyone in your household?
If the grandparents move in with you and/or want to spend a lot of time hanging around with the kids (especially for road trips) than it will be a common use case that is worth planning for. Sometimes people want to spend time with each other when traveling and driving seprate cars does not easily enable that.
I’m not talking about road trips—though a loaded car of kids is a nightmare even to parents I know—I’m talking about just schlepping kids around town to their curated and scheduled “play dates” and organized activities.
We Americans will spend significant sums of money to cover edge cases, because the money is cheap compared to dealing with said edge cases individually, as the cost is time averaged out across the ownership of the vehicle. Sure the monetary savings would more than cover several edge case events, but they would also cost time no one wants to spend.
Just curious, have you rented a vehicle recently? It’s a massive PITA and rather expensive in terms of both money and time.
TheDrunkenWrench
2 days ago
I’m with the Professor in that I find most Minivans have too high of a seating position.
I’m 5’7″ with short legs, and vans consistently demand a position where I’m unable to get my left leg straight.
This is a problem because of an old injury and I have to cycle between straight and bent while driving.
So SUVs, with their ability to sit closer to the floor, are FAR more comfortable for me to drive.
Interestingly enough, Vans have high seating positions compared to the floor for both outward visibility and more efficient packaging reasons. Lower seating that would allow you to stretch your leg would eat into 2nd row legroom significantly.
Even if they are EXACTLY the same size inside, a van is going to have one MASSIVE advantage over a 3-row crossover. Sliding doors. Much bigger opening, and your sprogs won’t be flinging doors open into the side of my car that you parked next to.
They also allow you to stand in the open doorway for loading stuff on the roof rack!
I just wish we got the reasonably sized minivans from other markets. The current US “mini”vans are 20″ longer than my Mazda5 and nearly 10” longer than the regular Highlander!
For sure, US minivans are just “vans” at this point. The Mazda5 was such a nice smaller option. I actually really like the form factor of the Transit Connect as well, though it’s certainly more “industrial”.
I heavily considered the Transit Connect as a future replacement, but I was really disappointed by it when I drove one. It’s definitely a commercial van first, and it feels like it.
If it at least had the Maverick hybrid powertrain and more towing capacity it would jump back to the top of the list, but it’s just too compromised as-is when there are plenty of used highlander hybrids out there that check all the boxes despite losing the sliding doors. Fortunately my kids are old enough to be trusted with swinging doors.
Loading bulky items into something with sliding doors will change your life. That huge open space you can approach from either direction makes it so much easier. It’s like having a removable door but you can do it with the pull of a handle.
I am a huge fan of vans, especially once they got sliders on both sides. I just don’t need QUITE that much space in my life, so for me a proper station wagon is a better compromise – I haul stuff, but rarely people. But when you need to haul a bunch of people around they are the right tool for the job.
I agree. In addition to being good all-around vehicles, proper wagons have one superpower that’s lacking from all of the other vehicles we’re discussing. Dedicated rear egress for the third row. No more folding seats and climbing over siblings. No more waiting for access to the shared doors. All the kiddos can enter & exit in parallel, with none of the fuss required by a van, SUV, or CUV. This saves more time and prevents more bickering than you’d think. A really useful feature that is nearly forgotten today.
As someone who has owned all of these vehicle types, I still routinely choose to drive the wagon when hauling kiddos. It’s just easier to manage.
There’s no reason a CUV or SUV can’t offer this feature. Tesla actually does, though their seats look too small to be very useful.
TL;DR – It’s time to bring this feature back into mainstream vehicles.
There’s a safety argument for rear-facing third rows too. In a rear end crash you’re going to be in the crumple zone one way or the other, and medical science is better at fixing legs than brains.
As a person whose childhood looked a lot more like the 70’s or 80’s despite his 90’s upbringing (I spent a lot of time in the 3rd row of wagons, both rear facing and side facing) while I’d like to see 3 row wagons be given another chance, I have trouble imagining anyone wanting their young kids back there. #1 – rear facing and sitting on or behind the rear axle = vomit for a lot of people. #2 – people are way more up in their kid’s shit these days (for good and less good reasons) and it’s hard to see what’s going on back there.
Michael Beranek
2 days ago
Hmmm, instrument cases? Are we sure this isn’t a Nissan or Renault?
Rippstik
2 days ago
HE HAD THE RECEIPTS. Honestly, props to the owner for making a rational, informed, and not incredibly biased decision.
Some people legit just drive to the first dealership they see and buy a car they like based solely on color (with no research done).
Last edited 2 days ago by Rippstik
Church
2 days ago
Did cellos have to be purchased or rented for this or were they already available?
Minivans are utilitarian
Yeah, that’s why they are great! But to each their own.
Bizness Comma Nunya
2 days ago
Yeah…but if we are going to compare current Toyota product to current Toyota product. You can’t remove or fold the 2nd row seats in the current gen Sienna. They slide forward and the lower part flips up. I think this means that the Grand Highlander can hold longer objects vs. the current Sienna.
I do think the current hybrid Sienna is a great vehicle, but just something to keep in mind. I think it was a (small) failure of Toyota to make the 2nd row seats non removable in the Sienna, or they could have made them fold in to the floor, where the Pacifica shines.
Interesting, didn’t think of that. Or at least I didn’t think there could be enough IP tied up with a seat folding design to warrant others not being able to make a design that was close, but not the same in design.
1) The floor beneath the seats needs to be tall enough to store the seat, which makes the van either taller, lower ground clearance, or less headroom
2) The seats need to be as compact and foldable as possible, which makes the seats much less bolstered and less comfortable
3) The hybrid battery needs to live somewhere, along with (optional) awd driveshafts and rear diff, exhaust, and fuel tanks. That’s a lot of real estate taken up by seats.
4) Still needs to be safe. Seats get heavier and heavier every year.
Many vans have foldaway 3rd rows, but the second row has always proved to be a duzy.
I like the concept of stow ‘n go – but if I was buying a van I would want captain’s chairs in the middle row. Those folding seats are as uncomfortable as they are convenient. I’ll wrestle them out when I need max cargo capacity.
I think Toyota could find a way around that if they really wanted to. The Odyssey had a 3rd row that folded flat into the floor before Chrysler introduced the StowNGo 2nd row seats. There are probably packaging issues and/or a lack of customer demand to have 2nd row seats that fold flat or are removable in the Sienna. That would annoy me because one of the great things about my family’s old Mercury Villager was that you could remove the 2nd row seats and slide the 3rd row bench forward to get more cargo space.
I’m REALLY surprised the second row seats aren’t removable. That seems like such a standard van thing. My folks actually removed the 2nd rows from their two Windturds and very rarely ever put them back in. Pretty much only when I borrowed the thing to haul friends around.
I don’t know, maybe with power accessories in the 2nd row becoming common Toyota decided not to bother with making them removable. I’d have no problem with needing to disconnect a wiring harness to remove a seat.
Toyota and Kia have gone the Mainland China route to make the middle seats a lot more plush with built in recliners and stuff for global markets (not sure if we get that in the states). The trade-off is not having removability. Luckily the ancient Honda still offers that, and as we’ve discussed the Mopar vans have the foldable church-pew seating.
The non-removable 2nd row in the Sienna is a deal-breaker for us. One of the great differentiators of the van versus a 3-row SUV is being able to create an absolutely ridiculous large cargo hold for crap. I’ve hauled a lot of stuff in the van, yes, including sheet goods.
My experience is that while the 2nd row foldable seats aren’t as comfortable as competitors, they’re just fine, especially for children that don’t sit directly on them anyway.
I love the Stow N’ Go (also great extra storage when the seats are up), but I can understand why some people would rather just remove the seats on occasion. Which you can do with the Odyssey and the Pacifica PHEV. Not sure about the Carnival? The Sienna is super disappointing.
If you can’t remove the second row seats in a new Sienna, we may buy something else when the time comes to replace the 2011 Sienna. Luckily shouldn’t need to anytime soon.
I’ve pulled seats in our Odyssey pretty often. I like being able to pack long items (pop-up shelters, 2×4, bicycles…) and still get passegers in (one second-row, one or two in the 3rd, depending which side I fold down).
Helping friends move is a real use-case, too. I leave both 2nd-row seats at home, fold the third row down and I can put a LOT of boxes in that vehicle.
They’re heavy and annoying, but the flexibility is nice.
You couldn’t fold the seats into the floor of the current Sienna even if it weren’t patent protected, that’s where the HV battery is located. Also, removable seats cannot be electrically powered or have integrated airbags.
We use cookies to optimize our website and our service.
Functional cookies
Always active
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
Preferences
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
Statistics
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes.The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
Marketing
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
We use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. We do this to improve browsing experience and to show (non-) personalized ads. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behavior or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
Functional cookies
Always active
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
Preferences
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
Statistics
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes.The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
Marketing
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
Ok point taken on the cello but still, it’s not going to be as easy as a minivan for a full string quartet, two parents, and all four instruments. That’s obviously more going to be based in personal priorities, but let’s not pretend a minivan isn’t still more spacious with the third row cargo well!
I hope you’re ready for part three of the series tomorrow where they fit a jazz quartet including drum set and piano 😀
lololol, sending my keyboard over to his place right now…
I’d like to see them try! 😛
This became a running joke in my friend group as one of the stricter moms didn’t let her daughter go to quartet practice after she got a bad grade on an English paper, but that was stupid because we had a performance the next week (which was also graded). So we packed everyone into the van and brought the quartet to her house. She couldn’t say no to rehearsal when we had brought everyone and everything over in one car!
I will say, though, I love Minivans and loading them up with ridiculous things.
When I was 18 I wanted a motorcycle and found a great Honda CX500 that needed some work and would have to be hauled home. My sister decided last minute she wouldn’t let me use her husband’s truck because she thought motorcycles were corrupt or something…. so we stow’n’go’d the seats in my parents’ town and country and put the bike in the back on a tarp. Worked like a dream!
Our Odyssey got plenty of use as a moving van for various relatives where its low load deck and cavernous space made it extremely useful (my dad moved an entire one-bedroom apartment from Los Angeles to San Jose in only two trips), but my favorite childhood memory is still sitting with my brother and father in the rear cargo area with the third-row stowed and having a picnic in the trunk while watching snow fall around the van. There’s just so much possibility in the world of minivanning!
I’m all for everyone buying what they want and need, but I still think vans open up a different mindset entirely that can’t be overlooked by saying ‘now CUVs are just as big!’ The ‘room on wheels’ concept with sliding patio doors, removable and reconfigurable seats, and basement storage really changes your perspective on motoring.
I seek many lifted and normal height pickup trucks towing trailers with the simplest things on them (IKEA flat pack), because they don’t want to lift it into that tall bed. I’ve never seen a minivan doing this.
Minivan for the win.
Also, don’t put musical instruments in the back of a pickup truck. Tuning them after being exposed to the elements will be tricky for a while.
Banning music practice due to a bad grade on a paper is like banning broccoli after my kid refused to eat green beans.
Similar in a van:
https://youtu.be/sR_rPd_ufK4?si=mh__Ui8z9v8cmqd4
That has shades of Clown Core performing inside a Toyota Previa.
Meanwhile a 1996 Buick Roadmaster can carry the whole symphony.
My mom’s dream car! That or a Fleetwood hearse, she’s not picky.
I don’t understand all the criticism towards someone who finds the vehicle that best satisfies their needs and then buys it. When the critics write the check then maybe they can have some say in someone else’s vehicle purchase decision.
Because this is the internet.
Autopians out here driving the most impractical, unreliable, (formerly) sporty car they can find throw a fit when someone says they like sitting 3 more inches off the ground.
But you could and you should. First, it’s not criticism, it’s opinions on the topic. Second, there’s nothing wrong with criticizing. It’s a healthy thing to do and to take.
For many years, my mom has bought vehicles based on how easy it is to haul around her double bass.
I used to transport a double bass in the back seat of a W126. Sure, the head was out the window, but didn’t stick out any more than the side mirrors.
The last 2 or 3 vehicles have been Rav4s. Everything fitting inside, along with ease of hauling the bass in and of the vehicle were key.
I could fit mine in my old Saturn wagon somehow!
Mom did say that an Audi wagon was the nicest solution during one of her vehicle searches (a while back), but she didn’t want to spend the bucks on the Audi.
The first car I bought with my own money, I brought my entire drum kit in their cases and told the sales guy I can’t buy it unless all that fits.
He looked at me rather funny. Wasn’t the last time that has happened.
Uhhh…are you my brother-in-law?
Well, Jeni, I’m not sure.
Call me at 867-5309 and we’ll find out!
I legit fell asleep reading this.
And yet you woke up enough to scroll down and waste more time to write a meaningless comment?
I’m old enough that when my parents turned their leases in, they weren’t looking for what had the biggest third row, they were looking for a third row period (that also wasn’t a minivan. Must be a Gen X thing, although I don’t think any of my grandparents ever had one). Teenage me and my brother had to do somersaults over 2 second-row car seats to squeeze our asses into the third row of a Dodge Journey (that needed a new transmission at 9k miles because recession era). Folding your legs in to fit in the third row builds character. Kids these days are soft.
I’m an ‘old millenial’ it was new car time and we wanted something with a third row. Our kids are 6 & 10, so the third row doesn’t need to be ultra spacious, it’s only used on occasion. We settled on a (used) BMW X5 with the 3rd row and you know what, it gets used all the time. My son and his friends love sitting back there. It just makes the car that little bit more practical. I’m sure if we needed a permanent 3rd row the X5 probably wouldn’t have been top of the list. But we don’t so now when grandparents come, we only need to take one car. For birthday parties, it’s one car. Makes our lives that little bit easier. And you know what. Tough shit if they have to squeeze back there when they are older, they didn’t grow up with a 1974 Ford Cortina wagon with a hole in the floor. Or a 1986 Ford Telstar that leaked water. Or I’m sure entirely illegally squeezing four kids across the backseat of a 1992 Toyota 4Runner (that was my dads solution to when my brother and I both wanted to bring a friend along).
I do remember being told as a kid that the front seat is the most dangerous seat for a kid, but I think that was because of airbags (I’m assuming that’s not a problem on a 1992). It’s just astounding how back in the day, everything was a family car if you tried hard enough, and nowadays we got purpose-built family cars that do shit our houses don’t even do (looking at you, built-in vacuum and borderline-dystopian back seat megaphone) all at a time when people are having LESS families. It’s like once crossovers got to the fuel efficiency of cars from 20-30 years ago everyone said “good enough for me” and here we are.
When I was a kid you put the baby in the rear facing car capsule in the front passenger seat. Apparently that was thought of as the safest place for a baby. But not every car had retracting seat belts in the back. There were still a lot of 70s cars around in the early 90s, that could be the reason. And no the 4Runner did not have airbags. My mum had a ‘92 Nissan Bluebird that had a drivers airbag only – passengers are allowed to be maimed apparently. We didn’t have either the 4Runner or Bluebird until the late 90s, our 2 seat Hilux and leaking Telstar had 0 safety equipment whatsoever. Seat belts were it. And even the 90s cars only had a lap belt in the rear middle seat.
He mentioned that a kid (NFI) is the cello player. Are those adult-sized cellos or are there scaled-down options for smaller folks?
Wouldn’t those just be violins?
No, (I think all) violin-family instruments come in reduced sized version, which are labeled ”7/8 size” and “3/4 size” (and maybe “1/2 size”), even though they are actually larger than those fractions indicate. Not entirely as learners’ instruments, as I recently learned that IIRC more pros use 3/4 or 7/8 double basses than full size. Though maybe that’s different in classical groups than in jazz?
This is some prime grade A+ “The Autopian” content.
Too bad Suzuki doesn’t sell cars here anymore 🙁
That Ertiga is awesome!
You’d be surprised how many cellos I can fit in the truck of my Miata with the help of a woodchipper.
“Wood chipper is always the answer.”
Fun fact: you can count how many seconds it takes for a piece of wood to go through the chipper.
One Steve Buscemi
Two Steve Buscemi
Three Steve Buscemi…
I know a lot about wood chippers… And I can tell you that they can chip up a whole lot more things than just wood. 😉
How much wood could a woodchip chip if a woodchip could chip wood? 😛
Convertible utility is underrated. You can carry a bunch of 2×4’s in a Mustang, plus it’s easy to load in car seats!
(Not at the same time.)
Strings will jam the chipper. Must remove them first.
“I prefer the driver position…”
This right here is what it always comes down to. No matter how much other vehicles will meet or exceed 99% of someone’s criteria; that is always the citing factor of why they didn’t go with the more “logical” choice. And because of this everything is and will continue to be, a CUV or larger.
Hell, I walked away from a Fiat Abarth because I couldn’t manspread comfortably.
And really, how much more logical does it get than that? Like, sure, a minivan might be able to carry full sheets of plywood, but are a couple New York professors ever going to use that feature?
Driving position is something that’s a big deal every single time you use the car.
I once had a car that I couldn’t get a half sheet into. The car had the space, but the door and hatch openings just were not big enough. After spending childhood with mid to large big-3 cars this was surprising. I actually need to go get a half sheet of OSB – my electrician notched my I-Joist and I want to beef it up – hopefully my new car that is less design driven has the ability to swallow something 48” wide.
My equinox can fit a 4ft wide panel (certainly not 8ft long) but just 1 and super tight on the diagonal. something with a little flex to it, I can fit a couple. The cherokee I had prior? not even close, maybe you could get 44″ in there diagonally. I don’t understand how they can make a vehicle that big have so little room in the back.
Conversely I’d take a wagon over a CUV pretty much anytime due to the lower seating position.
this guy gets it. CUV seating positions are not comfortable
They should make the Abarth in a single-front-seat version.
The last part is my problem, but that’s an issue with even larger vehicles thanks to massive center consoles. I had far more room in an early ’80s Subaru than in much larger modern cars. Now I wonder if part of the reason people like the higher seating is that the giant console effectively sits lower, giving more room for knees (if only in comparison to cramped lower vehicles). Strangely enough, I find my GR86 to be pretty comfortable, which is a good thing as I hate sitting up high, though it took a day or two to find a good position where my knee wasn’t also too close to the start button.
Crotch vents really do need to come back.
Pedestrian cushioning explains the six inches.
Nah, i was part of body structure engineering at Honda – the 6″ here and in the new Palisade are purely cosmetic. The ped safety standards can be challenging, but it has more to do with where the hood structure is. Only a minimal amount of space is needed between the top of the engine and the hood.
That’s insane, but totally tracks with the Battle Wagon thing.
One good example is the Ridgeline refresh. Mechanically the 2020 and 2021 Ridgelines are the same, but the 2021 had its hood/grille pulled way up for cosmetic reasons. Everything fits fine under the diving hood of the 2020, but it looked too “minivan” like.
Annoyingly, this also hurts gas mileage, but I’ll admit the newer face does look much better.
In the case of the Grand Highlander it’s too much, though. That front end is bad.
What about outward visibility? The higher hood (hello – Chevy Silverado) is bad enough around town, but you get out into the woods, go up a hill, and all you see is hood.
Visibility zones aren’t directly dictated by FMVSS. My employer has their own internal specs, but I guarantee they wouldn’t be satisfactory for you. Pedestrian protection, crash testing, styling, and customer polling are all more important than outward sightlines.
And the rise of 360 cameras allow automakers to get away with poor off-road visibility in the name of styling.
Yep. I’m staring at a map of exterior cameras, OSRVM cameras, cross traffic cameras, and a dozen ultrasonic sensors while writing this. At least the ultrasonics should detect a kid or obstacle before you run it over.
Customer polling doesn’t confirm people want to see out of cars? No wonder we ended up with the Camaro.
Subaru, Tesla, and Honda seem to have figured out how to offer great outward visibility and still comply with all the regulations.
PS How can I get into focus groups?
From my understanding, buy/lease a new car from my employer every 2 years at least 3 times, then they might ask and immediately discard your opinion.
Hahahhahaha. That’s awesome.
I can see the internal annual scorecard now:
“Capture input and feedback from repeat customers.”
Check. (Glances in overflowing garbage can near desk/on computer’s desktop).
Wow that’s awesome 😀
And of course, a Honda is less rusty than 4 more Mazdas 😛
It was a fantastic job and I miss it a lot, but I’ll take a less interesting job over living in Ohio all day every day. Sometimes I think auto OEMs put their engineering offices in the midwest to make sure there’s nothing of interest to distract engineers from working all the time.
And getting out of the rust belt does help my beloved Mazdas 🙂
I grew up in Ohio. Sometimes, I tell people that I left Ohio as soon as I realized that I was allowed to leave!
Partly true, as the height of the hood ‘nose’ dictates where the impact zone is located. Lower the nose, the closer to the windshield the head impact zone moves. Yes only a small gap is needed to the engine, but frequently a large gap is dictated by lifting the nose to move the pedpro zone forward away from the cowl/wiper system/hood structure.
True, but most SUVs are tall enough already that it’s not really a consideration. For cars (and sports cars especially) this has more of an influence and is why dramatically sloped hoods on sports cars have been disappearing.
I see how you think that, but in my experience, it’s still a consideration. Moving the pedpro zone forward lets you reinforce the cowl section of the hood and eliminate cowl shake on rough roads. For low slung cars completely agreed.
I’m currently working on one of the massive SUVs you referenced, and the pedpro zone still extends more than half way up the hood.
True – once you get into the weeds you recognize ped safety impacts everything. I was actually in body structure reliability, which meant we wanted to make everything sturdier while safety wanted everything “squishier.” I was heavily involved in the cowltop design for the MDX and Pilot and ped safety was always the sticking point.
As a generality, though, I think these 6″ gaps from hood to engine are driven more by styling than regulation. I guarantee the hood-line wasn’t raised by engineering for safety after styling was complete.
At least at my employer, the exterior/interior design people also generate the pedpro and similar zones as it drives their criteria. By the time it gets to me (electrical component packaging and integration – EVs), we have a zone we have to stay out of under hood. That zone is significantly less than 6″, but I’m also exclusively on EVs with a frunk so it doesn’t really impact me.
I’d bet on ICE vehicles (my employer) the significant gap starts with exterior design and pedpro, engineering places engine as low as possible for dynamics, which results in a gap between for beauty covers, better airflow, etc. but still meets all the required criteria in FMVSS.
And then the high hoodline dictates high belt line (small windows), and with all that sheet metal on the sides leads to bigger wheels (for proportions)… and then we have pillboxes on wheels.
In all fairness to the OEMs, this is happening in home building too. It’s less of a big deal with new homes, but good luck if you try to remodel an older home and then have to comply with modern building, electrical, seismic, fire, planning, and zoning codes.
Don’t get me wrong – I am fan of regulations, but there is no one looking at them in their entirety with any authority to do something about it.
Halfway up the hood? Dear Lord.
With all of the recent focus on pedestrian impact, how do the BRZ and GT86 continue to exist? These coupes have the antithesis of the “Frankenstein’s forehead” hoodline that we see so often on trucks and SUVs.
…that’s what she said…
Hahaha!
“Vanilla is too boring, so I got vanilla bean.”
You know what doesn’t have an overly bulbous front end? One that does not block your forward vision for the sake of vanity?
Lol, it’s fine that people buy these, even though they’re not to my taste. Again, I just wish more people would consider vans so that maybe I had more than 4 to choose from.
America has conclusively chosen the Battle Wagon look because we’re pissed off and we’re gonna kick some ass. Rah, rah, tough, tough. Comin’ thru…
I’m mostly unfamiliar with the unit of measurement known as a Cello. For me, a scientist-person. I need to see some sort of comparative. Clearly, you now must acquire a Sienna. Then tell us how many Cellos fit back there? I believe there is two Violins in a Viola, three Violas in a Cello, and two Cellos in a Bass. And finally 7 basses in a Orchestra.
Man I wish that was the normal for younger orchestras. When I was growing up, the most I had was 5 when my class was introduced to it in middle school, and by 6th grade, that went to a whole 1…. me!
Ok, but how many world’s tiniest violins can fit into the space of a standard violin?
Suzuki?
How many Suzukis can fit into the trunk of a Suzuki?
😛
I will only read this article if the measurements are in proper metric units. How hard would it be to include the ONLY CORRECT measurement of 20 decicellos? Gosh!!! /s
To be fair, our double bassist drove a last-gen Celica. But it was a one-seater (aka ‘the driver’) once the instrument was loaded into the hatch.
But for real, Viticulture is a really good game, and a great light-euro intro for the casual player.
Cello’s?
As a former (though I’d love to get back into it) double bassist, all I have to say is…
tsk. tsk. (Joking, of course!)
I have video up on my Instagram where I demonstrate how my gear bag, backpack and my 5-string StingRay bass guitar all fit nicely in the trunk of my NA Miata.
It’s always nice when stuff fits in places.
When I was in high school, I managed to fit my 5-string bass, amp, and gear in the back of a Plymouth Sundance Duster.
I would constantly forget those were hatchbacks until seeing one opened up.
Presumably the direct box rides in the gear bag? Because conspicuously absent from your list are power and speakers…
We have everything else at our practice house. If I do take it to a gig, my Rumble 100 amp fits in the front seat just fine.
It’s so nice to be self-sufficient. When we just had the Wrangler, I always had to rely on my drummers to transport my gear. It always fit just fine in their vans and pick-ups, but it meant I had to leave when THEY were ready, which, you know, drummers. I love my CRV for that. Rock on!
Lol! It’s a rare gig that I show up with my own gear, though. Our subwoofers live at my house. We just downsized our family car from a Honda Odyssey to a Bronco Sport, and that little Bronco is able to carry both subs, my 15″ bass cab, my Hartke head, two basses, my gear back and a few other things.
Well, this might be another example of a distinctly American phenomenon, where we tend to consider ‘worst case scenario’ as a higher priority consideration for car size.
That is, seating for two plus three kids, plus the in laws, plus two cellos, for a comfortable drive halfway across the country.
Will this happen frequently enough to justify a full purchase over just renting a minivan? Who knows. But I know it can handle it!
Not judging here – this is the same line of logic that got me, prefers paychecks over kids, in a three row SUV anyway. Just in case I need it, I’ve got the third row.
I will say that before I bought my van, I priced a rental for a week. It was outrageously expensive.
Same. We were shopping for a second vehicle. I was going to insist on a smaller vehicle for daily economy, but that vehicle wouldn’t typically be driven more than 20 miles a day.
Renting a van two weeks a year would have consumed all the fuel savings of a smaller second car, and covered the payment difference between the smaller car we were considering and the minivan we bought.
The minivan costs more to own, but for us, owning one is cheaper than owning a smaller car and renting a minivan two weeks of each year.
My justification is that vehicles are expensive, and we no longer have the ability to have numerous vehicles for numerous applications (sedan for work, van for road trips, etc). So if you’re only able to afford 1 vehicle, it needs to do what several vehicles did in the past. And that’s always going to be SUVs, CUVs, or trucks.
*Before anyone comes and chimes in with wagons, I need ground clearance when my vehicle is loaded with hundreds of pounds of friends and camping gear to get down those roads, my CRV is better for this than my Camry wagon was. (YMMV-which is fine, different people have different needs and don’t all live in a sunshine state where we can get away with RWD).
What I don’t get is people factoring in outside parties—everyone else has cars, probably more car than they often need—why buy more car for the rare occurrence of driving outside parties on top of everyone in your household?
If the grandparents move in with you and/or want to spend a lot of time hanging around with the kids (especially for road trips) than it will be a common use case that is worth planning for. Sometimes people want to spend time with each other when traveling and driving seprate cars does not easily enable that.
I’m not talking about road trips—though a loaded car of kids is a nightmare even to parents I know—I’m talking about just schlepping kids around town to their curated and scheduled “play dates” and organized activities.
Especially here in the US, where you can eliminate everyone in your household with a gun far more conveniently than driving on top of them.
We Americans will spend significant sums of money to cover edge cases, because the money is cheap compared to dealing with said edge cases individually, as the cost is time averaged out across the ownership of the vehicle. Sure the monetary savings would more than cover several edge case events, but they would also cost time no one wants to spend.
Just curious, have you rented a vehicle recently? It’s a massive PITA and rather expensive in terms of both money and time.
I’m with the Professor in that I find most Minivans have too high of a seating position.
I’m 5’7″ with short legs, and vans consistently demand a position where I’m unable to get my left leg straight.
This is a problem because of an old injury and I have to cycle between straight and bent while driving.
So SUVs, with their ability to sit closer to the floor, are FAR more comfortable for me to drive.
Interestingly enough, Vans have high seating positions compared to the floor for both outward visibility and more efficient packaging reasons. Lower seating that would allow you to stretch your leg would eat into 2nd row legroom significantly.
I know WHY they do it. But knowing doesn’t change the driving position.
Figured you would, but most people probably don’t know the why behind the what.
The amount of people who complain about what cars people buy is too damn high.
The amount of people who complain about people who complain about what cars people buy is ALSO too damn high!
::squints, does some subtraction::
“The amount of people who complain is too damn high.”
There, fixed! 😉
Hahaha!
Even if they are EXACTLY the same size inside, a van is going to have one MASSIVE advantage over a 3-row crossover. Sliding doors. Much bigger opening, and your sprogs won’t be flinging doors open into the side of my car that you parked next to.
Yes. Our minivan’s sliding doors are superb.
They also allow you to stand in the open doorway for loading stuff on the roof rack!
I just wish we got the reasonably sized minivans from other markets. The current US “mini”vans are 20″ longer than my Mazda5 and nearly 10” longer than the regular Highlander!
For sure, US minivans are just “vans” at this point. The Mazda5 was such a nice smaller option. I actually really like the form factor of the Transit Connect as well, though it’s certainly more “industrial”.
I heavily considered the Transit Connect as a future replacement, but I was really disappointed by it when I drove one. It’s definitely a commercial van first, and it feels like it.
If it at least had the Maverick hybrid powertrain and more towing capacity it would jump back to the top of the list, but it’s just too compromised as-is when there are plenty of used highlander hybrids out there that check all the boxes despite losing the sliding doors. Fortunately my kids are old enough to be trusted with swinging doors.
Loading bulky items into something with sliding doors will change your life. That huge open space you can approach from either direction makes it so much easier. It’s like having a removable door but you can do it with the pull of a handle.
I am a huge fan of vans, especially once they got sliders on both sides. I just don’t need QUITE that much space in my life, so for me a proper station wagon is a better compromise – I haul stuff, but rarely people. But when you need to haul a bunch of people around they are the right tool for the job.
As versatile and great as my van is, if someone offered a proper wagon I probably wouldn’t have converted to van life.
I have been a wagon man for decades, LOL. From Volvos to Peugeots to BMWs and Mercedes.
And I have a soft spot that kind of wants a proper mid-80s American plywood pleasure palace with some suspension mods to take the float out. 🙂
And I took my driver’s test in the ultimate station wagon – an ’84 3/4 ton diesel Suburban!
I would love to get a 90s GM wagon as the family cruiser.
I just like the looks of the earlier square ones better. Especially the Buick Electra Estate.
I agree. In addition to being good all-around vehicles, proper wagons have one superpower that’s lacking from all of the other vehicles we’re discussing. Dedicated rear egress for the third row. No more folding seats and climbing over siblings. No more waiting for access to the shared doors. All the kiddos can enter & exit in parallel, with none of the fuss required by a van, SUV, or CUV. This saves more time and prevents more bickering than you’d think. A really useful feature that is nearly forgotten today.
As someone who has owned all of these vehicle types, I still routinely choose to drive the wagon when hauling kiddos. It’s just easier to manage.
There’s no reason a CUV or SUV can’t offer this feature. Tesla actually does, though their seats look too small to be very useful.
TL;DR – It’s time to bring this feature back into mainstream vehicles.
There’s a safety argument for rear-facing third rows too. In a rear end crash you’re going to be in the crumple zone one way or the other, and medical science is better at fixing legs than brains.
As a person whose childhood looked a lot more like the 70’s or 80’s despite his 90’s upbringing (I spent a lot of time in the 3rd row of wagons, both rear facing and side facing) while I’d like to see 3 row wagons be given another chance, I have trouble imagining anyone wanting their young kids back there. #1 – rear facing and sitting on or behind the rear axle = vomit for a lot of people. #2 – people are way more up in their kid’s shit these days (for good and less good reasons) and it’s hard to see what’s going on back there.
Hmmm, instrument cases? Are we sure this isn’t a Nissan or Renault?
HE HAD THE RECEIPTS. Honestly, props to the owner for making a rational, informed, and not incredibly biased decision.
Some people legit just drive to the first dealership they see and buy a car they like based solely on color (with no research done).
Did cellos have to be purchased or rented for this or were they already available?
Yeah, that’s why they are great! But to each their own.
Yeah…but if we are going to compare current Toyota product to current Toyota product. You can’t remove or fold the 2nd row seats in the current gen Sienna. They slide forward and the lower part flips up. I think this means that the Grand Highlander can hold longer objects vs. the current Sienna.
I do think the current hybrid Sienna is a great vehicle, but just something to keep in mind. I think it was a (small) failure of Toyota to make the 2nd row seats non removable in the Sienna, or they could have made them fold in to the floor, where the Pacifica shines.
StowNGo is still patent protected for a couple more years.
Interesting, didn’t think of that. Or at least I didn’t think there could be enough IP tied up with a seat folding design to warrant others not being able to make a design that was close, but not the same in design.
The other issue with StowNGo (specifically) is:
1) The floor beneath the seats needs to be tall enough to store the seat, which makes the van either taller, lower ground clearance, or less headroom
2) The seats need to be as compact and foldable as possible, which makes the seats much less bolstered and less comfortable
3) The hybrid battery needs to live somewhere, along with (optional) awd driveshafts and rear diff, exhaust, and fuel tanks. That’s a lot of real estate taken up by seats.
4) Still needs to be safe. Seats get heavier and heavier every year.
Many vans have foldaway 3rd rows, but the second row has always proved to be a duzy.
I like the concept of stow ‘n go – but if I was buying a van I would want captain’s chairs in the middle row. Those folding seats are as uncomfortable as they are convenient. I’ll wrestle them out when I need max cargo capacity.
I don’t think the AWD Sienna has a driveshaft anymore; doesn’t it just have an electric motor on the rear axle?
I think Toyota could find a way around that if they really wanted to. The Odyssey had a 3rd row that folded flat into the floor before Chrysler introduced the StowNGo 2nd row seats. There are probably packaging issues and/or a lack of customer demand to have 2nd row seats that fold flat or are removable in the Sienna. That would annoy me because one of the great things about my family’s old Mercury Villager was that you could remove the 2nd row seats and slide the 3rd row bench forward to get more cargo space.
I’m REALLY surprised the second row seats aren’t removable. That seems like such a standard van thing. My folks actually removed the 2nd rows from their two Windturds and very rarely ever put them back in. Pretty much only when I borrowed the thing to haul friends around.
I don’t know, maybe with power accessories in the 2nd row becoming common Toyota decided not to bother with making them removable. I’d have no problem with needing to disconnect a wiring harness to remove a seat.
Toyota and Kia have gone the Mainland China route to make the middle seats a lot more plush with built in recliners and stuff for global markets (not sure if we get that in the states). The trade-off is not having removability. Luckily the ancient Honda still offers that, and as we’ve discussed the Mopar vans have the foldable church-pew seating.
The non-removable 2nd row in the Sienna is a deal-breaker for us. One of the great differentiators of the van versus a 3-row SUV is being able to create an absolutely ridiculous large cargo hold for crap. I’ve hauled a lot of stuff in the van, yes, including sheet goods.
My experience is that while the 2nd row foldable seats aren’t as comfortable as competitors, they’re just fine, especially for children that don’t sit directly on them anyway.
The captains chairs in the Pacifica PHEV just come out decently easily, which means it can have a heroic amount of room.
I love the Stow N’ Go (also great extra storage when the seats are up), but I can understand why some people would rather just remove the seats on occasion. Which you can do with the Odyssey and the Pacifica PHEV. Not sure about the Carnival? The Sienna is super disappointing.
If you can’t remove the second row seats in a new Sienna, we may buy something else when the time comes to replace the 2011 Sienna. Luckily shouldn’t need to anytime soon.
Those 3rd Gen Siennas are unkillable.
Yup. Once did that in a Pacifica PHEV to pickup a bathtub, two toilets, and a sink from the local home store. It worked great.
IIRC, the only times we have removed the 2nd row seats on our Sienna was for cleaning purposes.
My Little Green Clean Machine has seen some things….
I’ve pulled seats in our Odyssey pretty often. I like being able to pack long items (pop-up shelters, 2×4, bicycles…) and still get passegers in (one second-row, one or two in the 3rd, depending which side I fold down).
Helping friends move is a real use-case, too. I leave both 2nd-row seats at home, fold the third row down and I can put a LOT of boxes in that vehicle.
They’re heavy and annoying, but the flexibility is nice.
You couldn’t fold the seats into the floor of the current Sienna even if it weren’t patent protected, that’s where the HV battery is located. Also, removable seats cannot be electrically powered or have integrated airbags.
2nd row Sienna seat removal video: https://youtu.be/-LRqhDpFwxQ
HV battery location: 50226.jpg (400×209)