 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Kia Cars / December 20062006 Kia Sedona-Update
Just an update for folks looking at the new Sedona.... We're approaching 10K miles on this van and it's been flawless. MPG has now improved to about 24MPG at sustained speeds of 80 MPH. Locally it's around 17 MPG. This is athe fully loaded EX and with so much to go wrong nothing has. We're in NY, so the Sedona takes quite a beating on some of our roads. The class leading power of this van continues to impress, but the handling is average. Overall I generally forget that I'm driving a larger vehicle, so it's fine. We've put in Sirius radio and Garmin C340 van...this is a really great long range car. We drive about 400 miles on a tank! Good luck, Robert B NY > Just an update for folks looking at the new Sedona.... > [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > Robert B > NY I also have a 2006 Sedona EX w/6,000 miles. Mileage about 22-23 on hwy and 18-19 in traffic. Lowrance 500c GPS. No problems of any kind. Also have a 2006 Sportage (My toy). 4wd LX. Only 1,100 miles. 21.7 mpg so far. Thomas Thanx for the updates. The one negative I heard was only "so-so" handling. I suspect it has to do with Kia's choice for original equipment tires. When it is time to change them, you may do better. Or not, at least if you have the EX. The LX version has a size from which you have seemingly infinite choices. The EX size, at least for now, has very few alternatives, and most of them don't look very appealing. Maybe, since most won't need tires for a couple of years or so, by then, they will have more and better choices. Sounds like a good van overall. Tom Wenndt >> Just an update for folks looking at the new Sedona.... >> [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > far. > Thomas > Just an update for folks looking at the new Sedona.... > [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > Robert B > NY Glad to hear you are happy with 2006 Sedona, the UK ones are equipped with Bridgestone tyres, 225/70R16 or top model has 235/60R17, I have the 225/70R16 and handling is very good. So far done 1400 miles, the only thing I can find to niggle about is the Coolant Temp. Gauge, it reads about 12% low, but it is constant. All my previous cars have indicated normal, can you let me know if your Temp.Gauge reads normal. Gordon Glad to hear that your sedonas are treating you well. Stop over and check out the Sedona & Entourage forum at http://p067.ezboard.com/bhyundaientourageforum to share your thoughts about the van. We too are enjoying our Entourage (4000 miles now). You have failed to mention that the dealer had to replace the entire vehicle! You are on your second Sedona: Path: g2news2.google.com!postnews.google.com!p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail From: "Capt. RB" <Bobsp...@aol.com> Newsgroups: alt.autos.kia Subject: Re: 2006 Sedona EX fuel pump issues Date: 26 Jul 2006 07:13:19 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com Lines: 17 Message-ID: <1153923199.087429.283920@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com> References: <1153454483.993921.133370@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <u6kcc29343357goha5m2sph2cuplp45me9@4ax.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.90.242.171 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Trace: posting.google.com 1153923202 868 127.0.0.1 (26 Jul 2006 14:13:22 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2006 14:13:22 +0000 (UTC) In-Reply-To: <u6kcc29343357goha5m2sph2cuplp45me9@4ax.com> User-Agent: G2/0.2 X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1; .NET CLR 1.0.3705; .NET CLR 1.1.4322; Media Center PC 2.8),gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe) Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com; posting-host=24.90.242.171; posting-account=Re9X-QwAAAC1cJKueh5ASNgBTdksj8KT And so begin the quality issues with the new Sedona. Can't say I'm shocked... >>> Nonsense. There are bound to be issues. My van also had a noisy fuel pump. Kia replaced the WHOLE VAN. My Subaru ALSO had a noisy fuel pump. Took weeks to fix. My 2006 Sedona has been perfect after 5000 miles and we keep getting calls from Major Kia to make sure we're happy. Free oil changes too! My friend's 2005 Toyota Sienna has tranny and window problems. But even without those problems he prefers my Sedona because it's got a real engine in it. The poor Sienna can't get out of it's own way. Capt RB NY > You have failed to mention that the dealer had to replace the entire > vehicle! > > You are on your second Sedona: > Nonsense. There are bound to be issues. My van also had a noisy fuel > pump. Kia replaced the WHOLE VAN. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > Capt RB > NY How come when Gilligan says your on a 'second Sedona', you say 'nonsense', then confirm you have been given a second Sedona replacement? Gordon> Gilligan is a troll from another group. He doesn't even own a car and basically just trolls these groups with no respect for the folks here. Back to the 2006 Sedona.... Our Kia Sedona was delivered and picked up with two errors. Noisy fuel pump was the main issue. Rather than start us off with a problem, they quickly gave us a whole new van. This was from Major Kia and we just returned from a 1250 mile drive to Ohio and back. Again, this van is amazing! With the Garmin C340 GPS we carefully tracked fuel and speeds. Average speed over 510 miles = 81 MPH Top Speed over 510 miles = 117 MPH Fuel Stops = 1 MPG recorded over 510 miles = 23 MPG A few comments: We drove with AC off for most of the drive. We were three adults and some luggage. I used premium fuel and usually left the van in manual mode locked in 5th. The top speed of 117 MPH may sound crazy, but it was done on an empty stretch of road. The van was still pulling strong at that speed, but the profile of the van is not suited for this type of speed. Still, you can drive for LONG stretches of road at 90-95. It's very secure at these speeds. The large tank of this van means you can run over 400 miles without a stop! On handling: This vehicle was designed to bridge the gap between Honda and Toyota. It outhandles the Toyota, but misses the mark against the Honda. It's a plush ride most of the time, but I do agree that better tires would improve things. The Toyota is just too underpowered to be considered now and is about to get a better engine. Here's some more food for thought: When we visited the service center for our free oil change, not a single 2006 Sedona was in for service. The manager said they have had no problems that kept a single Sedona overnight. In the end you can only go by your own experience. Somewhere someone's Sedona is a Lemon and Kia is not quite on level with the Toyota or Honda yet. The gap HAS narrowed. More importantly you might actually prefer the 06 Sedona over other minivans overall....as we did. At 30K or so, it's not cheap to buy. Kia did not design it to win just on value. It's a better van in many areas than the others. Motor Trend recently did a shootout and the Sedona came in second behind the Honda...but it was a close second. It easily beat the Nissan and Chrysler. Read the review and you'll see that the Sedona was right up there. Toyota refused to enter the shootout....they didn't want to lose to the Kia. Next up: We're waiting for Subaru to bring out a AWD luxury van. Robert B NY >Toyota refused to enter the shootout....they didn't want to >lose to the Kia. Toyota stated this as their reason for not entering? -- Christian > >Toyota refused to enter the shootout....they didn't want to > >lose to the Kia. > > Toyota stated this as their reason for not entering? Let's call it a rumor. I have friends that work at New Rochelle and Manhattan Toyota. The Sienna is ready for a makeover, so why hurt the rep by losing or barely beating the Kia? Remember the Honda, which beat the Sienna is previous tests, barely beat the Kia and some rated it better. After driving all three I think the Kia is the top minivan period. BUT, the Sienna AWD version is a clear winner over the Kia and Honda in areas where it snows a lot. Robert B. >Let's call it a rumor. I have friends that work at New Rochelle and >Manhattan Toyota. The Sienna is ready for a makeover, so why hurt the [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >period. BUT, the Sienna AWD version is a clear winner over the Kia and >Honda in areas where it snows a lot. Understood. If the rumor is true, that's a good marketing decision on Toyota's part since the makeover is so close. A bit weaselly but still good marketing. -- Christian that's a good marketing decision on Toyota's part since the makeover is so close. A bit weaselly but still good marketing. >>> Well, in defense of Toyota, the Sienna IS old now. It does not represent their current design ability. Both Honda and Toyota took risks as they engineered their minivans. Even Chrysler employed stow-n-go seating for two rows showing some imagination. All Kia has done is COPY the best aspects of these vans after careful market research. Kia hit these vans when they were on the tail end of their design arc. Easy prey and an easy target for Kia to hit now. Expect both Toyota and Honda to raise the bar big time and soon. Then we'll see how well Kia can respond. The biggest mistake Kia has made was in calling the 2006 mini-van "Sedona." It's so far beyond the old Sedona in every way, why laden it with a suspect name? The new Sedona feels just like a Honda or Toyota and better in some respects, while the old Sedona felt very cheap. Obviously Hyundai's takeover has really changed things. Robert B NY > Gilligan is a troll from another group. He doesn't even own a car and > basically just trolls these groups with no respect for the folks here. An absolute lie. I pointed out that you KIA had to replace your minivan, which you did not divulge until someone else caught you. Now you attack the one who pointed your omission out as a troll? I have a deep respect for the people here - that is why I demand the truth and full disclosure, something of which you are unwilling to give. > Back to the 2006 Sedona.... > Our Kia Sedona was delivered and picked up with two errors. Noisy fuel [quoted text clipped - 40 lines] > Robert B > NY An absolute lie. >>> Truth, and I never lied as Major Kia simply handed us a new van because they will not accept two errors on a new vehicle out of the dealership. Sadly, even Major Toyota is unable to match that policy. Call them and see. As I said, our new Kia (now with 11K miles) has been 100% perfect. My friends with the Honda and Sienna can't say the same. As I said, Gilligan is a troll. See if you can find ANY posts from him in this forum. He's only here because I'm here. Robert B 2006 Sedona EX >As I said, our new Kia (now with 11K miles) has been 100% perfect. My >friends with the Honda and Sienna can't say the same. What problems have they seen at 11K? >As I said, Gilligan is a troll. See if you can find ANY posts from him >in this forum. He's only here because I'm here. Must be love. {;o) -- Christian > An absolute lie. >>> > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > Robert B > 2006 Sedona EX You posted elsewhere: Path: g2news2.google.com!postnews.google.com!u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail From: "Capt. Rob" <Bobsp...@aol.com> Newsgroups: alt.sailing.asa Subject: Sedona to North Carolina Date: 25 Jun 2006 10:37:30 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com Lines: 28 Message-ID: <1151257050.850645.147790@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.90.242.171 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Trace: posting.google.com 1151257054 31831 127.0.0.1 (25 Jun 2006 17:37:34 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 25 Jun 2006 17:37:34 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: G2/0.2 X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1; .NET CLR 1.0.3705; .NET CLR 1.1.4322; Media Center PC 2.8),gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe) Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com; posting-host=24.90.242.171; posting-account=Re9X-QwAAAC1cJKueh5ASNgBTdksj8KT After a 3000 mile trip, our Sedona is working flawlessly. No rattles, buzzes or other signs of problems. Power is really really nice. MPG averaged on a drive from NYC to North Carolina was 23.1 MPG with 4 people and luggage. Driving throught heavy rain and high winds at typical speeds (75-85 MPH), the van never felt unstable. Noise levels are quite low. So far this continues to be the mini van to beat. The only real issue is that a loaded one is really not all that cheap anymore...but hey, that sound system with DVD 7.1 surround sound is one of th best stock systems on the market. Add Sirius radio and a Garmin C340 GPS and you'll be all set! BTW, the Garmin is better than ANY factory installed unit I've tried (Acura RL & Lexus 330) and can be used in more than one car. Just for kicks I took the Sedona to 110 MPH and was pleasantly surprised that it remained glued to the road. With a mini-van you really want torque on tap and that's where the Toyota really falls short. Then again, just get into a new Sedona and the Toyota and Honda feel dated anyway. I've revised my opinion....the Kia Sedona (as other reviews agree) is now king of the mini vans. But I'm keeping my STI, which I just drove damn fast through heavy rain to stock up the boat! Capt RB 35s5 NY So which version of the story is true? Or is this the first KIA? A phone call to Major KIA reveals it is not their policy to replace the entire vehicle if it has only two defects. So which version of the story is true?>>> Same troll, folks. Anyone with doubts can "really" call Kia. Good luck! Robert B 2006 Sedona EX You realize one of the onboard computers logs rpm, driving speed and such. Driving at 117 mph is logged and flagged. You have voided your warranty. > You realize one of the onboard computers logs rpm, driving speed and such. > Driving at 117 mph is logged and flagged. You have voided your warranty.>>>> Very funny. Robert B 2006 Sedona EX >You realize one of the onboard computers logs rpm, driving speed and such. >Driving at 117 mph is logged and flagged. You have voided your warranty. Gah. I hope you're joking, because believing that would be daft. > >You realize one of the onboard computers logs rpm, driving speed and such. > >Driving at 117 mph is logged and flagged. You have voided your warranty. > > Gah. I hope you're joking, because believing that would be daft.>>> He knows nothing, but the onboard computer does log max RPMs, which are reached in lower gears, but a rev limiter keeps them at safe levels in manual mode. Robert B 2006 Sedona EX > He knows nothing, Here's the OBDII standard required on all cars sold in the US: http://www.obdii.com/background.html Here's a list of what it outputs: http://www.autotap.com/generic_parameters.asp Note vehicle speed is a parameter that it records. You say I have no car - how do you know that? You say I am a troll - yet all that I say is true and helpful. Now you say I know nothing about what is recorded on a car - yet I'm backed up by industry standards and law! Now let's take a close look at the Limited KIA waranty. Care to guess what it says? hmmm? In case that's not enough here's the actual output codes for KIA: http://www.troublecodes.net/Kia/ There are two separate codes for vehicle speed. http://assembly.state.ny.us/leg/?bn=S01422&sh=t Reads as follows: S. 1422 A. 2628 2005-2006 Regular Sessions S E N A T E - A S S E M B L Y January 28, 2005 ___________ IN SENATE -- Introduced by Sens. SABINI, DIAZ, M. SMITH -- read twice and ordered printed, and when printed to be committed to the Committee on Transportation IN ASSEMBLY -- Introduced by M. of A. LAFAYETTE -- read once and referred to the Committee on Transportation AN ACT to amend the vehicle and traffic law, in relation to requiring that every new motor vehicle be equipped with an event data recorder THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, REPRESENTED IN SENATE AND ASSEM- BLY, DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS: 1 Section 1. Section 375 of the vehicle and traffic law is amended by 2 adding a new subdivision 52 to read as follows: 3 52. EVENT DATA RECORDER. EVERY MOTOR VEHICLE REGISTERED IN THIS STATE 4 AND MANUFACTURED OR ASSEMBLED AFTER DECEMBER THIRTY-FIRST, TWO THOUSAND 5 SIX SHALL BE EQUIPPED WITH AN "EVENT DATA RECORDER". AN "EVENT DATA 6 RECORDER" SHALL MEAN A DEVICE WHICH SHALL BE IN OPERATION AT ALL TIMES 7 THAT THE MOTOR VEHICLE IS BEING OPERATED AND WHICH SHALL RECORD AND 8 STORE DATA WHICH WILL INDICATE AT ANY TIME, WHILE THE MOTOR VEHICLE IS 9 IN OPERATION, INCLUDING ANY TIME THE MOTOR VEHICLE IS INVOLVED IN A 10 COLLISION OF ANY KIND, WHETHER THE BRAKES WERE ENGAGED, THE AIR BAGS 11 WERE DEPLOYED, THE SEAT BELTS WERE BUCKLED AND THE SPEED AT WHICH THE 12 MOTOR VEHICLE WAS BEING OPERATED. 13 S 2. This act shall take effect on the first of November next succeed- 14 ing the date on which it shall have become a law, except that any rules 15 and regulations necessary for the timely implementation of this act on 16 its effective date shall be promulgated on or before such date. Now what were you saying about speed not being recorded? hmmm? > http://assembly.state.ny.us/leg/?bn=S01422&sh=t > [quoted text clipped - 76 lines] > > hmmm? That is a short-term recording of a few seconds before a crash so they can tell how fast you were going at that time. It does not keep a record of your speeds for the life of the car. If you crashed your car going 117 MPH then the voiding of your warranty would be low on your list of worries. Now what were you saying about speed not being recorded? >>> The EDR systems is triggered by an impact. Top speeds are not recorded otherwise. Have you ever been right about anything???? A smarter troll would have been to question my speed claim. My Garmin C340 GPS has it saved under Max Speed, 117 MPH. Gilly, go away now. Robert Kia Sedona EX >Now what were you saying about speed not being recorded? >>> > >The EDR systems is triggered by an impact. Top speeds are not recorded >otherwise. Even if it was recorded, a clause about excess speed would either have to be specifically stated in the warranty or the cause of any damage claimed would have to be directly linked to the excess speed. Otherwise, the warranty would not be voided. -- Christian >> http://assembly.state.ny.us/leg/?bn=S01422&sh=t >> [quoted text clipped - 82 lines] > 117 MPH then the voiding of your warranty would be low on your list of > worries. You're absolutely right Jeff, that is the ERD for the airbag system. The ERD for the airbags does not interface to the OBD-II computer system which is separate. The OBD-II system holds data for diagnostic, maintenance and warranty purposes. I've already posted the OBD-II outputs for the KIA Sedona in one of the above meassages. In essence then the KIA has two systems that record vehicle speed. The OBD-II systems records it in memory until it is reset. The memory can be reset by disconnecting the battery, which erases the volatile but not the non-volatile memory. I can look up the factory manual specs for more details and post a link if you are interested. As a dealership service manager, I can say the warranty is valid and fully intact... > You realize one of the onboard computers logs rpm, driving speed and such. > Driving at 117 mph is logged and flagged. You have voided your warranty. I don't know how things in the US work for sure, but as a fairly knowledgeable person when it comes to Kia's I feel obligated to correct the following errors posted about the Sedona in this thread. 1. The 2006 Sedona models CAN reach 117mph. I have personally travelled 220km/h in a 2006 Sedona LX. (136 mph) 2. The OBD II standard does NOT record vehicle information indefinitly, the recording starts at the moment a trouble code is set or in combination with the impact sensors. 3. The 2006 Sedona has received the designation as the safest minivan on the market. Why wait till 2008 to be safe. 4. Kia dealers are free to satisfy their customers any way they see fit, if giving a new client a replacement vehicle to correct 2 problems is their way of kepping this customer happy, then good for them, that is going the extra mile. 5. The Garmin GPS in the van I drove stopped at 200 km/h. I hope this can help shead some light. s...@bankstreetkia.com wrote: > As a dealership service manager, I can say the warranty is valid and > fully intact... > > > You realize one of the onboard computers logs rpm, driving speed and such. > > Driving at 117 mph is logged and flagged. You have voided your warranty. 1. The 2006 Sedona models CAN reach 117mph. I have personally travelled 220km/h in a 2006 Sedona LX. (136 mph) >>> The troll had posted MPH data from the Diesel version of the van. 2. The OBD II standard does NOT record vehicle information indefinitly, the recording starts at the moment a trouble code is set or in combination with the impact sensors. The troll had no idea at all. 3. The 2006 Sedona has received the designation as the safest minivan on the market. Why wait till 2008 to be safe. Yes, due to the frame. The Sienna trails in safety, including rollover rating. Until they match Kia, the Sienna is #3. 4. Kia dealers are free to satisfy their customers any way they see fit, if giving a new client a replacement vehicle to correct 2 problems is their way of kepping this customer happy, then good for them, that is going the extra mile. Major Kia in NY and they took great care of us. They also put in the remote start for free along with an upgraded alarm when all was said and done. Great dealer experience, though they are a bit slow with our free oil changes. 5. The Garmin GPS in the van I drove stopped at 200 km/h. . Yep, and the C340 goes to at least 130 since my friend put one on his motorcycle. Thanks for the info! Robert B 2006 Kia Sedona EX NY > 1. The 2006 Sedona models CAN reach 117mph. I have personally > travelled 220km/h in a 2006 Sedona LX. (136 mph) >>> [quoted text clipped - 35 lines] > 2006 Kia Sedona EX > NY Smackdown! You sure showed that idiot a thing or two! That top speed is really in question. The Michelin Energy LX4 tires (235 60R17 with the T rating) have a maximum speed of 118 mph with an overinflation of 3 psi, otherwise with no overinflation it is 100 mph. Since your van has remote tire pressure sensors, a computer and the OBS-II system it would cut fuel flow to slow the vehicle down so not to overspeed the tires. Did you add extra air to them to go that fast? Says so here: http://www.michelinman.com/specs/energy_lx4/1049.html Since > your van has remote tire pressure sensors, a computer and the OBS-II system > it would cut fuel flow to slow the vehicle down so not to overspeed the > tires. Like I asked, have you EVER been right about anything? The car computer will not cut fuel based on tire pressure sensors since they are only that: Sensors. Same as on my Subaru Tribeca, my friend's Audi S4 and so on. That's a good thing. Cutting fuel flow due to tire pressure could get you killed on a turn. I see that Edmunds just scored the Sedona higher than the Sienna. http://www.edmunds.com/apps/vdpcontainers/do/vdp/articleId=117437/pageNumber=1?s ynpartner=edmunds&pageurl=www.edmunds.com/reviews/comparison/articles/117437/art icle.html MSN shows it to have the highest satisfaction level, even over most cars! Robert B 2006 Sedona EX You claim your Garmin GPS recorded 117 mph. Yet quoted from the Garmin website: ** Speed Limitation Garmin products designed for non-aviation use will display a maximum speed of approximately 90 knots or 103 MPH. This unit will not display speed or position information if this limit is exceeded. Just check and see: http://www.garmin.com/products/gps120/spec.html > You claim your Garmin GPS recorded 117 mph. > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > http://www.garmin.com/products/gps120/spec.html Even odder yet is the KIA Sedona spec of 108 mph maximum speed. How did you get it to 117 mph with 100mph rated tires (standard psi), it could only go 108mph and the Garmin GPS is limited to only 103 mph? Did you add the GPS reading to the speedometer reading? Nothing you say adds up. You claim the car is perfect yet, by your admission, the dealer had to replace the entire car. You claim speed is not recorded, yet the EDR and OBD-II records it and NY law requires it be recorded. You claim to have reached 117 mph in it by the Garmin GPS. Garmin says their non aviation units don't go above 103 mph. The tires aren't rated above 100 mph (factory psi) and the on board computer won't allow it to exceed tire rated speed. Then the spec is 108 mph tops for the car. Your gas mileage claims are suspect too, especially for driving 80-117 mph. Are you going to give this car away as a gift as you claimed you did with your new Subaru Tribeca? Will it sink and be refloated as you claimed your 36 foot racing sail yacht was? Will you be going in and out of it as you claim to have done to all those Women Russian Olympians? Will it appear in a second movie that you direct with the cast from Star Trek? Will it sport American made sails that are really made in China? Will you win another 37K in the lottery in it? Will you lose another big expensive diamond ring in it? Or will you just drive it to one of the many apartment complexes that you own in New York City? Will you continue to call anyone who questions you and is backed up by traceable facts "a troll". How many of the 30,000 or so posts you have on the internet were not trolls? Let the reader beware! >> You claim your Garmin GPS recorded 117 mph. >> [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] >get it to 117 mph with 100mph rated tires (standard psi), it could only go >108mph and the Garmin GPS is limited to only 103 mph? The Garmin c340 does not have the same top speed limitation you cited for the model 120. The advertising copy for the model you cited was probably written long before Garmin started making automotive specific units. The Kia Sedona could easily acheive speeds of 117 mph even with the motor removed... Find a cliff and give it a push! >Did you add the GPS reading to the speedometer reading? > >Nothing you say adds up. > >You claim the car is perfect yet, by your admission, the dealer had to >replace the entire car. That sounds perfect to me. If your car was defective and they gave you a brand new replacement, I think you might consider that pretty close to perfect as well. >You claim speed is not recorded, yet the EDR and OBD-II records it and NY >law requires it be recorded. The NY law you cited does not effect autos made prior to December 31st, 2006. You may want to re-read it! >You claim to have reached 117 mph in it by the Garmin GPS. Garmin says their >non aviation units don't go above 103 mph. The tires aren't rated above 100 >mph (factory psi) and the on board computer won't allow it to exceed tire >rated speed. Then the spec is 108 mph tops for the car. It is probably not a true reading. I sometimes get very high max speed readings on the GPS on my sailboat as the result of the unit being dropped, or suddenly moved. CWM Nahhh! Gilligan's no troll! That's why he just posted the top speed of the 2003 Sedona Diesel. http://www.carpages.co.uk/kia/kia_sedona_review_part_1_18_08_03.asp Oh, he's no troll! Did he just write that the Garmin C340 only tracks speeds to 103 MPH??????!!!! Good lord. I'm out of this thread until I have something new to post. Heading for the 12K mark and no problems with this van, folks. Robert B 2006 Sedona EX > Nahhh! Gilligan's no troll! That's why he just posted the top speed of > the 2003 Sedona Diesel. > > http://www.carpages.co.uk/kia/kia_sedona_review_part_1_18_08_03.asp I'm curious, what is the top speed of your model Sedona? > Oh, he's no troll! Did he just write that the Garmin C340 only tracks > speeds to 103 MPH??????!!!! I believe that Garmin published that on their web page. Can you show otherwise? > Good lord. I'm out of this thread until I have something new to post. Why not post some specifications? Everything that this Gilligan guy posted is traceable to published sources. If he were wrong you would certainly have something new to add. > Heading for the 12K mark and no problems with this van, folks. At least they got it right the second time. > Robert B > 2006 Sedona EX Todd Nozzle 2005 Toyota Sienna, flawless the first time! >> Nahhh! Gilligan's no troll! That's why he just posted the top speed of >> the 2003 Sedona Diesel. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >I believe that Garmin published that on their web page. Can you show >otherwise? Sure! Headers for Todd Nozzle the TROLL and Gilligan the TROLL posted below for comparision. They both came from the same place! ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Path: news1.newsguy.com!lois.pathlink.com!rex!extra.newsguy.com!lotsanews.com!nx01.iad01.newshosting.com!newshosting.com!216.196.98.140.MISMATCH!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!local01.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.comcast.com!news.comcast.com.POSTED!not-for-mail NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2006 08:21:43 -0600 Reply-To: "Todd Nozzle" <troglodite2211@hotmail.com> From: "Todd Nozzle" <troglodite2211@hotmail.com> Newsgroups: alt.autos.kia References: <1162305583.219247.137280@k70g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <xLSdnT8EbdGNRtXYnZ2dnUVZ_oednZ2d@comcast.com> <_e-dnUEP8_nGptTYRVnyvg@pipex.net> <1162834406.479065.66620@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <JMmdnVtiZoFevffYnZ2dnUVZ_q6dnZ2d@comcast.com> <1164596102.220447.132810@f16g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <k5CdnaaoyrHajfbYnZ2dnUVZ_tqdnZ2d@comcast.com> <VemdnQWFhYWvuvbYnZ2dnUVZ_o-dnZ2d@comcast.com> <imamm21qm0akvrat32kt9ud7agln8s3vp0@4ax.com> Subject: Re: 2006 Kia Sedona-Update Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2006 07:21:36 -0700 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2962 X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original Message-ID: <xamdndrNGtfqCvDYnZ2dnUVZ_t6dnZ2d@comcast.com> Lines: 105 NNTP-Posting-Host: 71.196.248.53 X-Trace: sv3-ScdqLyP8SXO5nfOR+40Ir0XM/5XHMmN3Fk7Xwjh6Eu/H0CdQddJni1hdWoJ31OItR7IpQbbAbuCEcWm!CK5vzlKDdBJxOSRUR/gu7EpSZlR5lqt69/LK3TmCpkMyC8rrXKNEpQp4HS6LmT/AaZeX22aJsRkS!dQZ6MAR6aflVFng= X-Complaints-To: abuse@comcast.net X-DMCA-Complaints-To: dmca@comcast.net X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly X-Postfilter: 1.3.32 Xref: news1.newsguy.com alt.autos.kia:5308 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Path: news4.newsguy.com!lani.pathlink.com!lex!extra.newsguy.com!lotsanews.com!border2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!local01.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.comcast.com!news.comcast.com.POSTED!not-for-mail NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2006 11:58:10 -0600 Reply-To: "Gilligan" <glen-harris-milstead@hotmail.com> From: "Gilligan" <glen-harris-milstead@hotmail.com> Newsgroups: alt.autos.kia References: <1162305583.219247.137280@k70g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <xLSdnT8EbdGNRtXYnZ2dnUVZ_oednZ2d@comcast.com> <_e-dnUEP8_nGptTYRVnyvg@pipex.net> <1162834406.479065.66620@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <JMmdnVtiZoFevffYnZ2dnUVZ_q6dnZ2d@comcast.com> <1164596102.220447.132810@f16g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <k5CdnaaoyrHajfbYnZ2dnUVZ_tqdnZ2d@comcast.com> Subject: Re: 2006 Kia Sedona-Update Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2006 10:58:03 -0700 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Response X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2962 Message-ID: <VemdnQWFhYWvuvbYnZ2dnUVZ_o-dnZ2d@comcast.com> Lines: 74 NNTP-Posting-Host: 71.196.248.53 X-Trace: sv3-E6cKxh69Ezn9JEGpvM+USLCzFSylxVH/cSD5NUm6RvNnZkVaqXqqlvBIYa4MjEzv+i8LVlI6fFDa2q0!dTeoIFq1u98kl7CSRVbwJqeNFtaYmuQCokpQc/7fcNc544q1zfXJBvcqmUxJCxw2UT0yVPLUGVvH!z6X8jtTxhPP5sQU= X-Complaints-To: abuse@comcast.net X-DMCA-Complaints-To: dmca@comcast.net X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly X-Postfilter: 1.3.32 Xref: news4.newsguy.com alt.autos.kia:5303 You are welcome! CWM 71.196.248.53 It should, since all your trolling posts as Gilligan and Todd Nozzle came from that singular IP number. >>> No one was paying attention to him anyway. Just about everything he posted is wrong and anyone can see for themselves. The thing about the GPS only showing up to 103 MPH is pretty funny. And he only looks dumb suggesting that the Kia can't do 117. Actually it can do 125-130. By the way, he also admitted elsewhere that he doesn't even own a sienna, which is a very nice van. Edmunds rated the Sienna 3rd behind the Honda and Kia Sedona which is great for a van about to be replaced. Robert B Kia Sedona EX NY >71.196.248.53 > [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] >Kia Sedona EX >NY I wouldn't have even known about this thread if Gilly - Troll hadn't announced in another group that he was "giving you the beating of your life" over in alt.autos.kia I'm quite surprised Scotty, JG, and DSK didn't take the bait. CWM >>71.196.248.53 >> [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > alt.autos.kia I'm quite surprised Scotty, JG, and DSK didn't take the > bait. I'm surprised too. Krusty you could have done a bit better backing up RB. Everything I post is backed up in print. You can not refute a thing. If you have a problem with Garmin speed limiting their non aviation units, go talk to them. The KIA Sedona can't go 130 mph. Do you know why? >>>71.196.248.53 >>> [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > >Everything I post is backed up in print. You can not refute a thing. It's already been completely refuted, dopey. >If you have a problem with Garmin speed limiting their non aviation units, >go talk to them. You are the only one having a problem. >The KIA Sedona can't go 130 mph. Do you know why? I would never attempt to go that fast in a van, so I really don't care. CWM > On Wed, 29 Nov 2006 17:50:11 -0700, "Todd Nozzle" > <troglodite2211@hotmail.com> [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] > > It's already been completely refuted, dopey. Where? By who? >>If you have a problem with Garmin speed limiting their non aviation units, >>go talk to them. > > You are the only one having a problem. What then is the solution? >>The KIA Sedona can't go 130 mph. Do you know why? > > I would never attempt to go that fast in a van, so I really don't care. Even if it was the safest van available? > CWM >>> You claim your Garmin GPS recorded 117 mph. >>> [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > units. The Kia Sedona could easily acheive speeds of 117 mph even with > the motor removed... Find a cliff and give it a push! Let's see proof - anything from Garmin stating top speed for the unit? >>Did you add the GPS reading to the speedometer reading? >> [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > a brand new replacement, I think you might consider that pretty close > to perfect as well. True and if he had to go through 10, 100 or 1,000 cars to get a perfect one that would be perfect too! >>You claim speed is not recorded, yet the EDR and OBD-II records it and NY >>law requires it be recorded. > > The NY law you cited does not effect autos made prior to December > 31st, 2006. You may want to re-read it! That was a bill, not a law. You may want to re-read it. >>You claim to have reached 117 mph in it by the Garmin GPS. Garmin says >>their [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > readings on the GPS on my sailboat as the result of the unit being > dropped, or suddenly moved. Those are not readings of actual speed. Those reading are a result of the GPS circuit losing lock or slipping cycles on the DPSK demodulation. But never the less, speed is recorded, the GPS didn't read an actual 117 mph and the Sedona can't go that fast. Even with help, RB still goes under. Why? Maybe if he stuck to facts, truth and full disclosure the things wouldn't go so badly. I just hope that no one makes a bad decision involving a lot of money based on what he spews. Todd Nozzle > CWM >>>> You claim your Garmin GPS recorded 117 mph. >>>> [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > >Let's see proof - anything from Garmin stating top speed for the unit? No proof needed, Gilligan. Does this number look familiar to you? 71.196.248.53 It should, since all your trolling posts as Gilligan and Todd Nozzle came from that singular IP number. CWM >>>>> You claim your Garmin GPS recorded 117 mph. >>>>> [quoted text clipped - 34 lines] > > CWM And your point is? That you can't refute my well documented facts? Todd Nozzle >>>>>> You claim your Garmin GPS recorded 117 mph. >>>>>> [quoted text clipped - 40 lines] > >Todd Nozzle I don't need to. You've done a swell job of it without any help. CWM > On Wed, 29 Nov 2006 17:51:51 -0700, "Todd Nozzle" > <troglodite2211@hotmail.com> [quoted text clipped - 49 lines] > > I don't need to. You've done a swell job of it without any help. In other words you can't. The terminal velocity of a KIA Sedona is well below 117 mph, so pushing it off of a cliff wouldn't help either. >> On Wed, 29 Nov 2006 17:51:51 -0700, "Todd Nozzle" >> <troglodite2211@hotmail.com> [quoted text clipped - 52 lines] >In other words you can't. The terminal velocity of a KIA Sedona is well >below 117 mph, so pushing it off of a cliff wouldn't help either. Poor, impotent, baby! CWM In other words you can't. The terminal velocity of a KIA Sedona is well below 117 mph, so pushing it off of a cliff wouldn't help either. >>> Seriously, Gilly. You really messed this one up. Forget it. Robert B Kia Sedona EX > In other words you can't. The terminal velocity of a KIA Sedona is well > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Robert B > Kia Sedona EX I think he accomplished exactly what he set out to do. I think he accomplished exactly what he set out to do.>>> I agree 100%. And it was nice to learn that even Edmunds rated the new Sedona above the Sienna. Robert B 2006 Sedona EX http://research.cars.com/go/crp/research.jsp;jsessionid=CHBVTAJDEPIIZLAYIJDZXLA; jsessionid=CHBVTAJDEPIIZLAYIJDZXLA?makeid=47&year=2007&acode=&modelid=436§io n=summary&mode=&aff=national 2007 Sienna is now much, much faster than the Sedona! Sedona = also ran, last year's news! The Fat Man > http://research.cars.com/go/crp/research.jsp;jsessionid=CHBVTAJDEPIIZLAYIJDZXLA; jsessionid=CHBVTAJDEPIIZLAYIJDZXLA?makeid=47&year=2007&acode=&modelid=436§io n=summary&mode=&aff=national > > 2007 Sienna is now much, much faster than the Sedona! It only has 4 lbs more torque than the more efficient Kia powerplant. New Sienna will be out in 2008 and that's the car to wait for. I doubt that the Sienna will beat the 0-60 times of the Sedona, which is 8.2 (MotorTrend), 8.0 (Yahoo) and 7.3 seconds (Automotive). And a new engine doesn't help the Sienna's crash ratings which also trail the Sedona....the safest mini-van ever tested. Maybe in 2008-2009 Toyota will catch up, but then Subaru is planning a serious AWD minivan that is expected to enter the market in the low 30K range. We'll probably trade for that. Robert B 2006 Sedona EX I also think the Sienna will be back on family lists when it doesn't come in 4th place in crash tests. Kia Sedona is #1, followed by Honda, Chrysler and Nissan. The sad part is that the lower rating for the Sienna was for the driver. The Sienna also scored worse in rollover. See automotive.com for test results, though the Sedona's win was in mainstream press. Robert B Sedona EX >I also think the Sienna will be back on family lists when it doesn't >come in 4th place in crash tests. Kia Sedona is #1, followed by Honda, [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >Robert B >Sedona EX When the Sienna was introduced, it was by far the safest minivan ever made. Everybody else had to scramble to catch up or surpass that standard. I'm pretty confident that the next iteration of the Sienna will once again send everyone else scrambling. Toyota has much bigger resources to develop breaktroughs, rather than copycats. CWM When the Sienna was introduced, it was by far the safest minivan ever made. Everybody else had to scramble to catch up or surpass that standard. I'm pretty confident that the next iteration of the Sienna will once again send everyone else scrambling. Toyota has much bigger resources to develop breaktroughs, rather than copycats. >>> The Kia, Honda and Toyota are all so good, it's hard to imagine any sweeping improvements. And Honda was always within step with Toyota. But Toyota bought a stake in Subaru for a reason....access to the drive system and Subaru wants a few of those Toyota engines for their heavy Tribeca and van in the works. I expect Subaru's entry to be worth a look for the symetrical AWD and typically off-beat design approaches. And if any mini-van will handle better than others, expect it to come from Subaru. Kia/Hyundai is powerful enough to design what they want. They're planning to target some of the Mercedes market in 3 years as well. As for the kia, they just gave a loaded Sedona EX to Motortrend for their long term test. Robert B 2006 Sedona EX In other words you can't. The terminal velocity of a KIA Sedona is well below 117 mph, so pushing it off of a cliff wouldn't help either. >>> Seriously, Gilly. You really messed this one up. Forget it. Robert B Kia Sedona EX http://www.autoboardz.com/2006-Sedona-fuel-pump-issues-ftopict175946.html |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.