[Nhwheelman]

Good point about the safety considerations - definitely a big factor for us, too. In fact a full suite of "advanced safety" features was a must have for us and one of the great things about Subaru.

The sienna we got has all the auto braking, blind spot monitoring etc, but one thing we did give up compared to the ascent is crash test performance (I'm assuming the ascent will be phenomenal, probably a safe assumption). The sienna did pretty well overall, though, with the small overlap test only getting "acceptable" and the safety cage getting marginal for that test). I would definitely prefer better performance in that test, but I still think it's a very safe vehicle overall. The small overlap performance probably translates generally to better performance overall, but it doesn't seem like real life crash type to me. Thoughts, anyone?

So, yes we did have to compromise on safety some, but at the end of the day it was pretty much the only vehicle that met our requirements. I think if we had 2 kids instead of 3, (or maybe if we didn't have a dog) we would have ended up with a 3 row crossover (most likely Ascent limited). We will definitely use the space and almost certainly would have been disappointed with a 3 row crossover in the space department.

In all we are thrilled with the Sienna and got a smoking deal (15% below MSRP). And now I get to drive the 2016 outback, which is a great vehicle, too.

Obviously you have done your due diligence in the desicion-making process with needs considered..... the one aspect that you mention is the Toyota safety system - Toyota's pre-collision system doesn't necessarily stop the vehicle..... toyota's video on the system says ".... it MAY stop the vehicle...." another Toyota article describes the Pre-collision system as "braking just before impact..." hopefully your research provided this info as part of your decision process... it seems that pre-collision is not as robust as eyesight..... as Toyota describes its own system. Something to consider.

 

[Sparkland]

The Sienna is definitely a family hauler. If your kids are older (20+) or you often transport more than four adults, then the Sienna or any other minivan would definitely be the vehicle of choice. The entry/exit is so much easier for people in the third row than a mid-size SUV like the Ascent, Pilot, Highlander, CX-9, or Santa Fe. Personally, I would choose the Honda Odyssey if I were to purchase a minivan, but the Ascent is the winning SUV.

 

[Orestes85]

The Sienna is definitely a family hauler. If your kids are older (20+) or you often transport more than four adults, then the Sienna or any other minivan would definitely be the vehicle of choice. The entry/exit is so much easier for people in the third row than a mid-size SUV like the Ascent, Pilot, Highlander, CX-9, or Santa Fe. Personally, I would choose the Honda Odyssey if I were to purchase a minivan, but the Ascent is the winning SUV.

A few years ago I'd agree with you about the Odyssey...but I've been unimpressed with Honda quality for the last few years...they certainly aren't nearly as hardy as they were 10 or 20 years ago.

 

[GHP1]

A few years ago I'd agree with you about the Odyssey...but I've been unimpressed with Honda quality for the last few years...they certainly aren't nearly as hardy as they were 10 or 20 years ago.

Agree with that. My favorite Honda was the 90 Accord. I had 2 . Bulletproof with a interior that would last 20 years plus. The last Honda that I had and really liked was a 2002 CRV. The one with the tire on the back.

 

[Orestes85]

Agree with that. My favorite Honda was the 90 Accord. I had 2 . Bulletproof with a interior that would last 20 years plus. The last Honda that I had and really liked was a 2002 CRV. The one with the tire on the back.

currently DDing a 1993 del Sol with the old D15. 350k miles, oil consumption is probably about what the fuel economy is, at 32 mpg (not really, but it burns 4 qts in about 2k miles, lol), and no a/c (r12 coolant, and i'm not putting a dime into this thing). But it starts up on a dime with no hiccups rain or shine, hot or cold. Paid 800 cash for it a few years ago and have enjoyed having all the cars paid for.

 

[GHP1]

currently DDing a 1993 del Sol with the old D15. 350k miles, oil consumption is probably about what the fuel economy is, at 32 mpg (not really, but it burns 4 qts in about 2k miles, lol), and no a/c (r12 coolant, and i'm not putting a dime into this thing). But it starts up on a dime with no hiccups rain or shine, hot or cold. Paid 800 cash for it a few years ago and have enjoyed having all the cars paid for.

Nice , Picked up my in- laws 1991 Civic wago-van with 77k original. 5- speed with A/C that still works. Needs exhaust (600.00 from Midus) and thats it. Nice high revving engine, great cargo space but a body made out of uses coke cans!

 

[Foveator]

I traded my '04 Sienna XLE AWD with 186,000 miles for an Ascent Touring.

My observations:

The Sienna has a very solid feel. The ride is quite smooth. The Ascent "feels" the road more with a sportier suspension. The driver in the Sienna is sitting further forward and higher, giving a better sightline directly in front of the van. The Ascent is a car with the driver sitting lower in the vehicle with a larger hood in front of him. Even at its highest position, the driver's seat is not quite high enough to match the feel of the Sienna (but the Ascent IS a car, not a van). The Ascent Touring has the front view camera, which gives a bumper's-eye view of the surroundings, a very nice touch. The Ascent has the added benefit of adjustable shin support (a manual extender coming out of the front of the seat) for the driver. The leather seats on the Sienna were luxuriously comfortable through the day I traded the van. Toyota's seats cushion you in a pillow of soft foam, while the Ascent, with classic Subaru seat technology, gives you a much firmer, more solid seat. I preferred the Sienna pillow type seats, for comfort and overall support but after a week in the Ascent, I found some pretty comfortable ways to adjust the seats to suit me. The Captain's seats in the Sienna were some of the most comfortable automobile seats I have ever sat in. They are higher, giving better shin support, and have more legroom than the Ascent, which has a few fewer inches of legroom. The Captain's seats in the Ascent are the same firm seats that the driver has, but there are no real adjustments other than a reclining back and the ability to move the seat forward to give more legroom to anyone attempting to sit in the rear seats. Shin support in the rear seats is virtually nil for adults. If your feet are on the floor, your knees will elevated enough that your shins may not touch the seat. Okay for kids, but I wouldn't want to be an adult sitting like that for a 6 hour journey. Ascent does have more legroom than many other vehicles in its class. You have to remember that the Ascent is a car with lots of ground clearance; the Sienna is a van with deep floor wells to give the passengers more legroom and storage. The Sienna with AWD comes with run flat tires (no spare), which were expensive to replace and didn't last very long. The Ascent comes with a tiny spare mounted under the vehicle.

A few other features of the Sienna that are not present in the Ascent. While the Ascent has 19 cup holders, the Sienna's designers were clever enough to put small storage compartments in every door armrest. Additionally, for those of you who may stop to pick up dinner on your way home from work, the Sienna had a retractable hook that is built into the left side of the front console near where the passenger's left leg would be. You can hook a bag on the hook and it will never fall over. Nice feature.

I think if you need the most room and comfort for long rides, the Sienna is still the way to go. It is a van designed to do just that. For something just a bit smaller with better gas mileage and LOTS of features, good comfort and pickup, the Ascent make a lot of sense. It's a Subaru and they have been building nearly indestructible cars for generations.

 

[xydadx3]

I haven't driven the Sienna, but had an Odyssey recently. The main reason for getting a minivan at the time was having young kids (including twins) and strollers to tote around. Other than full size SUV's, the minivan was the only thing that could fit a twin stroller in the trunk with the 3rd row up. It was fully loaded and kept the kids entertained, but they're not stroller age anymore so I feel like I also got to graduate to more of a big-boy vehicle myself.
I went with the Ascent because it still has a roomy trunk with the 3rd row up compared to similar SUV's, and the ground clearance is amazing compared to a minivan. An AWD system will help, but wont get you too far when youre plowing snow. Also, those rear doors are huge in the Ascent! My kids can get in/out of the 3rd row easily, so remote-operated sliding doors are no longer a must.
Each vehicle fit my needs at different times. Each vehicle is plenty safe enough (presumably on the Ascent of course). So weigh your pros and cons and get a good test drive in with all your gear when you make a decision

 

[Steve in Denver]

It's been almost 1 year, so I figured I would follow up on my experiences with the Sienna.

It has about 20,000 miles in 11 months (I know), including about 4,500 miles of towing (2800 lb (loaded) camper in the Colorado mountains)

Overall I'm really happy with it, and it was definitely a good decision for our current situation, but I do daydream about the day when we will have the option to get an Ascent (or something similar). If we didn't have 3 kids and a dog, we wouldn't really need the space for daily use, but I do find myself using the space for other things (a load of 2x4s, moving a large woodworking tool, I can put my mountain bike in the back standing up...etc).

Pros:
Space - this is probably the main reason for getting it over the competition.
Sliding doors...why don't more cars have sliding doors? Not quite enough of a reason by itself to get a minivan, but close.
Engine - terrific, powerful (~300 HP), smooth, fuel efficient considering the size.
Transmission (8 speed auto) - excellent. 2017 and early 2018s had some shifting issues (software patch supposedly fixes it) but mine has been great from day 1.
Visibility is good
Good highway vehicle - smooth ride, quiet, comfortable.

Cons:

• Cargo capacity is too low, particularly with the AWD. This has been a PITA for us since we have a fairly high cargo weight with the whole family loaded up and we also tow a camper. I have to pack carefully, and I remove the 60 portion of the rear seat (it weighs about 65 lbs) to save on weight (particularly rear axle weight)
• Crash test results, particularly passenger small overlap. It really pisses me off that they updated the driver's side structure to pass the (then new) driver small overlap test, but didn't add the same structure to the passenger side.
• Arm rests are narrow, and not quite long enough.
• Ground clearance isn't high enough to feel comfortable on some of the BLM / forest service roads I would like to go on.
• Pretty sloppy handling - worse than it "needs" to be. I think it could be a lot better without sacrificing much comfort.

Other thoughts:

• Run flat tires (AWD only) are bad, but not as bad as I thought.
• AWD is much better than I thought it would be, particularly with Blizzak WS80 tires (the tires deserve a lot of credit, for sure) It's not as good as my 2016 Outback, especially in icy or situations where only one or two wheels has traction.
• It's a very old design (9th year, I think) which means things like technology and interior design are lagging, but also means most of the problems have been worked out.
• It has been a great part-time-use tow vehicle, with some caveats:

1. I had to add air springs to the rear to help with sag
2. Cargo capacity (and therefore hitch weight) is a factor, so I have to be careful with weights and loading.
3. It has a tow rating of 3500 lbs...so small trailers and pop-up campers, but probably not any "real" travel trailers.


I would buy it again (I don't regret the choice), but I probably won't buy another one (by the time I need a new car, I won't need the space or sliding doors, which are the main benefits)

Cheers

Steve

 

[BoxerRules]

Does your Sienna have a sunroof? I sat in one a couple of years ago, and my head was pressed up against the roof in the second row seat (yes second row seat, not third row) even with the seat partially reclined. I’m just under 6’ tall. Perhaps it’s something they’ve fixed in more recent models. I think without the sunroof there is enough headroom.

 

[sunflwr50]

I just sold my 2017 AWD Sienna XLE for an Ascent. I lost a good amount of room, but did not like the Sienna. It had a rough ride, power door issues that Toyota has no repair for, tons of road noise, and the seats were not comfortable. The run flats were terrible. I hydroplaned even at low speeds with the run flats. We did change to all weather tires after about 8000 miles, but I was not confident the car would handle snow, ice, etc. When I received another recall notice regarding the transmission 3 weeks ago, I was ready to move on. I'm so glad a did! The Ascent is amazing. My kids love it too. We may have to reduce what we would take on trips a touch, but that is a good thing. I always pack more than I need. I can't wait for our first trip!

 

[sba]

I paid for about the same to get an Ascent Limited and a Sienna LE (Gen 4 hybrid), both for ~$40k. The current market conditions fills gap of MSRP difference: Subaru has VIP discounts, whereas some Toyota models are really hard to come by.
Despite the Sienna will cost less to own in the long run (fuel, reliability), and being much roomier, the Ascent does feel much more premium in almost every way, and safer. Both are of great value to own though.