The typical used car recommendations of Corollas and Civics and whatnot are just fine, unless you need to move around more than one or two people. If your seating requirements go beyond that, you’re going to need to look at a crossover or a van. So today, we’re going to check out one of each, still staying below our $2,500 threshhold.
Yesterday, we looked at a couple of rusty beaters from up in Minnesota. One of them didn’t look rusty, but I fear for the areas you can’t see. Nonetheless, that car, an Oldsmobile 88 (sorry, Eighty Eight) won handily. The visible rust on the Honda Accord scared off too many of you.
I get it – but the horror stories I have heard about H-platform subframes rusting out give me pause. I couldn’t recommend that Oldsmobile to someone unless I saw underneath it, preferably on a lift where you can really get a good look at it. The Honda is probably in need of a similar inspection, honestly, and whichever one seemed more structurally sound after that inspection would get my vote. So it’s not as cut-and-dried as it may seem, just looking at the pictures.
Today’s vehicles hail from the Austin, Texas area, so rust shouldn’t be nearly as much of an issue. They’re also newer, which helps. These are both seven-passenger vehicles, with plenty of cargo space as well. Hey, sometimes someone can’t afford a car payment, but still needs a decent-sized vehicle. Let’s check them out.
2005 Chrysler Pacifica Touring – $2,250
Engine/drivetrain: 3.5-liter OHC V6, four-speed automatic, FWD
Location: Austin, TX
Odometer reading: 158,000 miles
Operational status: Runs and drives well
The original Chrysler Pacifica is a weird vehicle. Chrysler called it a “Sports Tourer,” but it was really the prototype for basically every three-row crossover available today. The Pacifica didn’t do so well in sales, partly because nobody really knew what the hell it was supposed to be, and partly because it wasn’t put together very well.
Originally, the Pacifica came in only one trim level, with all the bells and whistles. For 2005, Chrysler introduced some lower trim levels to bring the price down and offer more choices. All Pacificas had the same engine, however, a single overhead-cam V6 displacing 3.5 liters and making 250 horsepower. That may sound like a lot, but the Pacifica is a heavy vehicle, and the engine works hard – and the gas mileage reflects this. Later Pacificas came with more power to help acceleration, but used even more fuel. This one runs and drives just fine and has newer tires, but the seller notes that it has a power steering leak that needs topping off once in a while.
It’s a mid-level Touring model, optioned-up with leather seats and some other goodies. The Pacifica was meant to be a luxury vehicle, not necessarily a family hauler, but with three rows of seats, it will do the job of ferrying kids around just fine. It has a DVD player in the back to play the same Disney movie over and over again, too (do kids still do that?). The seller notes that the rear windows no longer open, which could be a lot of things, all of them annoying to fix.
It looks decent outside, but I question the difference in color between the front and the back. Is that a trick of the light? Or has part of it been repainted? It’s hard to tell. It is losing a little clearcoat here and there too. And all four wheel center caps have left the chat as well.
2011 Kia Sedona EX – $2,400
Engine/drivetrain: 3.8-liter DOHC V6, six-speed automatic, FWD
Location: Austin, TX
Odometer reading: 137,000 miles
Operational status: Runs and drives well
In most other parts of the world, the Kia Sedona minivan is known as the Carnival. Why they chose to name it after a town in Arizona known for New Age retreats instead of a cruise line, I don’t know, but in 2021 the Carnival name reached the US. Back in 2011, however, it was still the Sedona, available only in long-wheelbase configuration, because nobody in the US bought the shorty version.
Only one engine and transmission combination was available in the Sedona, a 3.8-liter V6 from Hyundai and an automatic transmission, upgraded from five to six gears for 2011. This one runs and drives well, and everything works, but the title is listed as “salvage.” However, the ad text says it is a “blue title,” which, if I’m understanding right, means it was considered totaled for some reason or other, but given a clean bill of health, so it’s basically the same as a regular title. If anyone in Texas can explain it better in the comments, please feel free to do so.
It’s in good shape inside, with few signs of wear, and the seller says the air conditioning works fine, as do all the windows. It has power sliding doors on both sides, and it sounds like those work fine, too. It has captain’s chairs for both of the two front rows, so middle-row passengers get a little nicer ride than they would with a bench.
It looks a little scruffy outside, but it won’t embarrass you. I don’t know what happened to cause the title weirdness, but I don’t see anything obvious. It is missing one hubcap, but that just makes it look tough.
The nice thing about both of these is they’re a little newer than our typical fare, and therefore have some more safety features to them. That’s important when you’re shuttling kids around, of course, and not a terrible idea for everyone else either. One is a little cushier, the other is a little roomier, and they’re both good and cheap. If you knew someone in need of a family vehicle for peanuts, which one would you recommend?
I had a Sedona for a while with the Merc 2.9 diesel engine. It was a fine appliance and never let me down. Braking was an issue with 7 people in the car as it had rear drums and the front disks were the size of tea saucers and I could never get the stink of dog out of it.
Wow two vehicles I’ve actually cross shopped. Pacificas usually end up with electrical gremlins and the 3.5l, and later 4.0l, have timing belts. Which this one is almost 60000 miles overdue if it hasn’t been done yet. And Sedonas are either lemons that need multiple engines or bulletproof and will go 250000 miles or more on the original drivetrain. Considering the title issues with the Sedona and my propensity for buying Chrysler products, I went Pacifica in the end. I enjoy the 3.5l in my Journey, although it has two extra gears over the Pacifica, and the belt in it probably had 158000 on it when I got it replaced. Unsure due to lack of receipts.
Those are a couple of perfectly adequate people movers, but have you considered the one and only PPL MVR?
Tough choice. I have driven a Sedona of this vintage and it frankly wasn’t very good. I recall the driver’s seat being uncomfortable and oriented strangely relative to the wheel and pedals. I also recall the engine sounding loud and harsh, and wind noise was even worse than other minivans. The interior materials were also conspicuously low quality.
However, I strongly dislike the Pacifica. It is a minivan wearing a thrift store SUV costume. I’m not sure why drivers think a vehicle suddenly becomes cool if you get rid of the sliding doors, make it 20% less roomy and useful, and rebrand it. When I see vehicles like the Pacifica (or the worst offender, the Honda Pilot), I can’t help but admire the marketing genius that convinced buyers these are somehow cool when a 97% identical minivan isn’t.
I ended up voting for the Kia – it might not be good, but it is at least honest.
Black leather vs. tan cloth and me in the desert makes the answer Sedona.
The Pacifica is more interesting, or at least less boring. But those problems are disqualifying.
To me, it’s a toss up between the two. I voted for the Sedona for the added practicality.
If it was an earlier Kia I would say Pacifica but that’s about the time they started getting good. I can’t tell you the last time I saw a Pacifica on the road I know a few people a decade ago people tha had had enough of them and sent them to the junk pile. I still see those kias they are pretty simple and parts are cheap. It looks decent enough for what it is.
I, rather reluctantly, picked the Sedona. The even older Chrysler product with more bells and whistles (that are actively failing) isn’t my favorite choice. Plus, having to move seats to access the third row would get old fast.
The Kia isn’t better, just…less bad? Probably easier to sell again when you’re done with it because a cheap van is easier to unload than a cheap old Chrysler luxury wagon/crossover/thing.
Fun note, my Aunt and Uncle had a Sedona of similar age after they got rid of their Sienna. The Kia had a door fall off at Thanksgiving about four years into ownership. Hilarious stuff from the era of getting a Rio free with purchase of a Sedona (okay, a few years late, but pretty danged close).
Pacifica! Definitely an easy vote…never KIA…they are ugly junk.
I wouldn’t normally buy a Pacifica, but I still kinda like those and have warmed up to them some. They sound comfortable and can carry a lot of people. The color is nice too.
So I would for sure recommend this one to the non gearhead (or family in this case) and steer them away from KIA trash that was possibly in an accident (they look that way from the factory anyway ha ha)
The Pacifica won the most buttons on the dash award back in ’05.
I don’t love either of these choices, but what are you gonna do with only $2500? I chose the Kia, because betting on a 20-year old Mopar product seems slightly iffy.
Having had a Sorento from roughly that era (a slightly newer 2011), my guess is the Sedona is pretty well used up. I went the opposite direction, thinking the Kia would be the iffier bet. (And for the record, neither of these options is a safe bet.)
That’s reasonable.
You still see a ton of those near 20yr old Pacificas on the road, which to me, shows that they weren’t all that poorly built as they’re claimed to be.
I’ve long thought they were vastly underappreciated for what they bring to the table; especially so in today’s market where you can get them for peanuts.
Great Showdown as always, Mark!
My aunt drove hers for a loooong time (thought I know it was the 4.0L) – I think ultimately the NW Ohio road salt got it.
For the purposes of today’s comparison, though, I have to wonder if that’s just because Chrysler sold a lot more Pacificas than Kia did second-generation Sedonas.
Pacifica because I’m not sure how titling the Sedona where I live would go. Otherwise I would look at the Sedona.
Pacifica, in fact we already have one. My grandma’s car for 12 years, then my family’s “teenager learning car,” and then my dad gave it to me and my roommates once it lived out its usefulness at home. It has 260K miles or so, and survived the trip from Florida to Maryland with the only problem being a clogged AC line that made the floorboard wet. Our very own wet-ass P-word! It’ll live out its final years here until it rusts away due to experiencing winter, or “blows its wad” mechanically as my dad always puts it for some reason.
When we had our second kid, I swapped my convertible for a brand-new ’08 Pacifica. Needed to be able to fit both car seats in the back, after all.
Its rack-and-pinion steering was… not great. It had to go back to the dealer to have the rack replaced within the first 1000 miles. Even after it was put together properly, the turning radius was enormous. My wife, the actual car enthusiast, hated driving it so much! She called it “the drunken rhino.”
So, yeah, never again.
The Sedona all the way. Had one very similar at one point and it was a durable vehicle and a surprisingly responsive engine.
Even a salvage title Sedona is better than Krysler Kwaliteeeeeee LOL
Sedona, hands down! I was leaning that way at the article’s title. Then, I got to the part where the Pacifica that “runs and drives well” also has rear windows that don’t open, a power steering fluid leak, crappy gas mileage… So Kia all the way.
I don’t get the point of bad minivans, even if the original Pacifica was a better bad minivan than the idiotic 3-row CUVs of today. So the proper minivan Sedona for me.
I don’t trust Hyundai/Kia engines, especially with 100k on them. Give me the Chrysler.
It doesn’t take much to total a cheap old car. My ’99 Corolla was totaled by a minor fender bender. I kept the car and simply hammered the fender out so it wouldn’t rub the tire. I could have properly fixed it for the price of a junkyard fender, and I bet something similar happened to this Kia. I couldn’t be bothered.
Anyways, I’ll have the Kia. It probably won’t be a great car, but I’d rather have that that a Chrysler that’s already falling apart.