[kchiew]

Full product info guide:
http://www.autoblog.com/2009/12/18/toyota-releases-full-product-information-guide-for-2011-sienna/

Packages are similar to the 2nd generation...

Someone find a pdf of this and make it a sticky??

EDIT: PDF found by [2aceman] and available below at REPLY#4 http://siennachat.com/forum/index.php/topic,1767.msg12789.html#msg12789
BY: topspy/Mod-Squad

 

[SiennaLTD]

Interesting write-up. Says baby spare to be "available" on AWD models, so does that mean one can get AWD without run-flats?

Also, looks like you can get the backup camera without having to buy NAV system, but if you do get NAV the backup camera will be "panorama" style with on-screen backup guides.

 

[brian_bp]

The press release talks about the front suspension but not the rear suspension. Can anyone tell me if the rear is independent now?

From a table that looks like it came from Toyota in the Autoblog article linked above...
"Torsion beam with stabilizer bar"
In other words, the same design; if the track dimension is unchanged, my guess is that it would be exactly the same parts as the second generation.

 

[brian_bp]

Interesting write-up. Says baby spare to be "available" on AWD models, so does that mean one can get AWD without run-flats?

Not likely. The compact spare has always been "available" for the AWD; it mounts in the well behind the third-row seat. While I believe that this was intended to allow sale of the vehicle in AWD form without run-flats, it seems that combination was never actually sold, and the mounting kit exists only for owners who might want to carry a spare for their own reasons. The only reason to start offering a non-runflat configuration would be to add a lower-cost alternative.

 

[2aceman]

Here is the pdf file of the 2011 Sienna Product Info described above

EDIT: re-formatted original TEXT for EMPHASIS
BY: topspy/Mod-Squad

 

[krispykreme]

I am so pissed at the packages.

Why there is no option pkgs on the SE?

I want navi, and HID for the SE.

It now looks like i have to buy the limited again- then swap out the wheels, suspension, front/rear bumper, and tail light.

That is so stupid!!!!!!!

 

[shineysideup]

The press release talks about the front suspension but not the rear suspension. Can anyone tell me if the rear is independent now?

From a table that looks like it came from Toyota in the Autoblog article linked above...
"Torsion beam with stabilizer bar"
In other words, the same design; if the track dimension is unchanged, my guess is that it would be exactly the same parts as the second generation.

That's too bad. I think the sienna would benefit from a true 4 wheel independent suspension. I am disappointed... I was hopeful (a.k.a. the new highlander).

 

[topspy]

I am so pissed at the packages.

Why there is no option pkgs on the SE?

I want navi, and HID for the SE.

It now looks like i have to buy the limited again- then swap out the wheels, suspension, front/rear bumper, and tail light.

That is so stupid!!!!!!!

I agree. IDIOT marketing people @ Toyota.

 

[brian_bp]

That's too bad. I think the sienna would benefit from a true 4 wheel independent suspension. I am disappointed... I was hopeful (a.k.a. the new highlander).

The current (second-generation) Highlander doesn't look like it uses exactly the same parts as the first generation, but it is still basically the same design: a McPherson strut with parallel lateral controls arms and a longitudinal link. This is the same design which as been used in the Camry for many years, and presumably in other Toyota/Lexus sedans. It just doesn't fit well in a modern van, which is expected to have wide clearance between the wheel/suspension wells, and space for fold-into-the-floor seats. Other vans don't use it, either.

The Honda Odyssey has a multi-link rear suspension, so that can obviously work. This class of suspension is rarely used by Toyota, and among the Toyota-branded models the only example that I can think of is the RAV4 (all generations). That is presumably what is desired here, but I'm not convinced that with the long wheelbase of the Sienna there would be a noticeable improvement in handling or ride.

"Torsion axle" generally means a beam across the vehicle linking trailing arms, all welded into one part with planned flexibility, so that the beam twists with suspension roll. The beam can be right at the axle line, making it not independent at all (e.g. Tercel of 20 years ago, GM minivans...), which I would not find acceptable. The beam can be right up at the arm pivot points (e.g. first 4 generation of VW Golf), making it effectively fully independent but with a built-in anti-sway bar (the beam); this works quite well. The Sienna (first and second generations) is close to the latter setup (nearly independent), and I don't have any issue with it. Smaller Toyota cars (Corolla/Matrix, Yaris) use something not as close to the independent extreme. I'm sure that this is chosen primarily for low cost, but I'm not convinced that spending more would be worthwhile.


If what Toyota means by "torsion axle" for the third-generation Sienna means something different, I'll post a correction when I see it.

 

[shineysideup]

That's too bad. I think the sienna would benefit from a true 4 wheel independent suspension. I am disappointed... I was hopeful (a.k.a. the new highlander).

The current (second-generation) Highlander doesn't look like it uses exactly the same parts as the first generation, but it is still basically the same design: a McPherson strut with parallel lateral controls arms and a longitudinal link. This is the same design which as been used in the Camry for many years, and presumably in other Toyota/Lexus sedans. It just doesn't fit well in a modern van, which is expected to have wide clearance between the wheel/suspension wells, and space for fold-into-the-floor seats. Other vans don't use it, either.

The Honda Odyssey has a multi-link rear suspension, so that can obviously work. This class of suspension is rarely used by Toyota, and among the Toyota-branded models the only example that I can think of is the RAV4 (all generations). That is presumably what is desired here, but I'm not convinced that with the long wheelbase of the Sienna there would be a noticeable improvement in handling or ride.

"Torsion axle" generally means a beam across the vehicle linking trailing arms, all welded into one part with planned flexibility, so that the beam twists with suspension roll. The beam can be right at the axle line, making it not independent at all (e.g. Tercel of 20 years ago, GM minivans...), which I would not find acceptable. The beam can be right up at the arm pivot points (e.g. first 4 generation of VW Golf), making it effectively fully independent but with a built-in anti-sway bar (the beam); this works quite well. The Sienna (first and second generations) is close to the latter setup (nearly independent), and I don't have any issue with it. Smaller Toyota cars (Corolla/Matrix, Yaris) use something not as close to the independent extreme. I'm sure that this is chosen primarily for low cost, but I'm not convinced that spending more would be worthwhile.


If what Toyota means by "torsion axle" for the third-generation Sienna means something different, I'll post a correction when I see it.

Looking at the attached pic, I see nothing to me that resembles "independent suspension". Unless I am missing something the "axle" is one piece. With this setup movement of either the left or right tire directly effects the movement of the other. This is nothing more than a modified version of a solid axle with coil springs. Funny, my brother's hyundai entourage has a rear multilink suspension with folding flat rear seats that have identical fold and stow actions as my sienna. Honda uses a multi link double wishbone rear suspension for the odyssey (with fold and stow rear seating).

Does it really make a difference? One can argue for stability reasons you would WANT independent suspension. When one wheel can absorb a bump and have no effect on the wheel on the other side, this to me is a good thing. I know all things being equal I would buy a vehicle WITH independent suspension over one without. Just my two cents. Toyota could have at least matched the competition here (unless they have - the press release details are quite sketchy). :-\

I wish someone had some pics of the rear suspension (from underneath) from the auto show.

 

[brian_bp]

Looking at the attached pic, I see nothing to me that resembles "independent suspension". Unless I am missing something the "axle" is one piece. With this setup movement of either the left or right tire directly effects the movement of the other. This is nothing more than a modified version of a solid axle with coil springs.

No, in a solid axle the spindles are on the opposite ends of a beam so they stay parallel to each other at all times, regardless of the deflection of the suspension. With trailing arms joined by a beam, the spindes are parallel to the car's floor, regardless of the deflection of the suspension and unrelated to each other. Raise one wheel on a solid-axle suspension while holding the body steady and the other one tilts with it; raise one wheel on a setup with trailing arms joined at their pivot axis by a beam (again while holding the body steady) and the other one doesn't move (although the beam twists) - that's independent. If the beam is part way down the trailing arms, you get a compromise, which is what Toyota means by "semi-independent".

Funny, my brother's hyundai entourage has a rear multilink suspension with folding flat rear seats that have identical fold and stow actions as my sienna. Honda uses a multi link double wishbone rear suspension for the odyssey (with fold and stow rear seating).

Right... multi-link can work, but McPherson struts don't fit.

Does it really make a difference? One can argue for stability reasons you would WANT independent suspension. When one wheel can absorb a bump and have no effect on the wheel on the other side, this to me is a good thing. I know all things being equal I would buy a vehicle WITH independent suspension over one without. Just my two cents.

I agree, but I recognize that the current design is quite close, and really simple... it's an elegant solution.

Toyota could have at least matched the competition here

Assuming that the only competition is Honda, I agree that this is not quite a match. Ford and GM never had independent rear suspension in their minivans, although Chrysler has just gone there. I don't know about the Koreans (Kia/Hyundai), Nissan has made themselves irrelevant in this market (ah, the Quest...), and the rest (Subaru, Europeans) don't sell minivans here.

I wish someone had some pics of the rear suspension (from underneath) from the auto show.

No need - just look under your own Sienna!

 

[shineysideup]

Looking at the attached pic, I see nothing to me that resembles "independent suspension". Unless I am missing something the "axle" is one piece. With this setup movement of either the left or right tire directly effects the movement of the other. This is nothing more than a modified version of a solid axle with coil springs.

No, in a solid axle the spindles are on the opposite ends of a beam so they stay parallel to each other at all times, regardless of the deflection of the suspension. With trailing arms joined by a beam, the spindes are parallel to the car's floor, regardless of the deflection of the suspension and unrelated to each other. Raise one wheel on a solid-axle suspension while holding the body steady and the other one tilts with it; raise one wheel on a setup with trailing arms joined at their pivot axis by a beam (again while holding the body steady) and the other one doesn't move (although the beam twists) - that's independent. If the beam is part way down the trailing arms, you get a compromise, which is what Toyota means by "semi-independent".

So, the piece or "beam" that attaches the two trailing arms can twist? I was not aware of that. This being said, If I had the vehicle off the ground a foot (front and rear) and I placed another jack under one of the rear wheels it would have not effect on the other side? (due to the beam twisting I assume) It looks like a solid connection to me and it would be an interesting experiment. The 2010 sienna model talks about front and REAR stabilizer bars... I don't recall seeing any bars on the rear of my sienna. Is this something new? Did I miss this? Is it done in a manner that is substantially different from the front suspension?

thanks,

Shineysideup

 

[brian_bp]

If you have the suspension hanging on both sides and lift one, the other one will come up (a lesser amount) due to the torque transmitted through the beam and anti-sway bar - but any suspension with an anti-sway bar will do this... that's what an anti-sway bar does. The feature which makes it semi-independent is that the other side will change in camber angle very little, while the wheels on a beam axle will camber together (completely dependent).

Yes, the beam twists relatively easily compared to the large forces involved in the suspension... so easily that the second generation does have an anti-sway bar as well to raise the roll stiffness high enough. It's mounted inside the U-shaped beam, and anchored in the ends with bolts; no links are needed because it runs so close to the pivot axis of the suspension that the trailing parts of the beam act like the lever arms of a more typical bar configuration. It should be visible in the parts diagram, but I'm not seeing that in my current mobile (BlackBerry) mode.

Edit:
It should be visible in the parts diagram, but it is not. I assume that it is included in the "beam assembly": since the beam is one welded component, the only reason to refer to it as an "assembly" is that it includes additional parts which are not broken out in this diagram, and may not even be offered as separate replacement parts.

 

[shineysideup]

If you have the suspension hanging on both sides and lift one, the other one will come up (a lesser amount) due to the torque transmitted through the beam and anti-sway bar - but any suspension with an anti-sway bar will do this... that's what an anti-sway bar does. The feature which makes it semi-independent is that the other side will change in camber angle very little, while the wheels on a beam axle will camber together (completely dependent).

Yes, the beam twists relatively easily compared to the large forces involved in the suspension... so easily that the second generation does have an anti-sway bar as well to raise the roll stiffness high enough. It's mounted inside the U-shaped beam, and anchored in the ends with bolts; no links are needed because it runs so close to the pivot axis of the suspension that the trailing parts of the beam act like the lever arms of a more typical bar configuration. It should be visible in the parts diagram, but I'm not seeing that in my current mobile (BlackBerry) mode.

Edit:
It should be visible in the parts diagram, but it is not. I assume that it is included in the "beam assembly": since the beam is one welded component, the only reason to refer to it as an "assembly" is that it includes additional parts which are not broken out in this diagram, and may not even be offered as separate replacement parts.

Well, I guess I discounted the whole thing as a rather cheap marketing ploy. There is more to the rear suspension than meets the eye! At first glance it looks to me like little more than a modified solid axle/trailing arm setup. Now, if Toyota would have made it a true independent trailing arm they could have had more to brag about! (I'm not convinced that a person would notice the difference though...)

 

[brian_bp]

Now, if Toyota would have made it a true independent trailing arm they could have had more to brag about!

The original generation of Tercel has completely separate trailing arms for its rear suspension, and the front-wheel-drive VW vans have had the same thing. I don't think that it is actually a more desirable design, because under the lateral force of cornering the arms shift on their bushings and toe outward (e.g. in left turn they deflect left and thus point to the right a bit). This inherently causes oversteer, and bushings which are stiff enough to control it well cause a harsh ride. The very wide stance of the one-piece design's mounting points makes it less prone to this problem.

In order to control all of the angles (primarily toe and camber) well, a multi-link design is the next step... bringing us back to the Sienna versus the Honda competition.

I think that maximization of bragging rights is a disturbingly significant factor in some decisions which should be made on a sound technical basis, and explains some of the "me too" design decisions which sweep the automotive world.

 

[mpv4-8]

It looks like the LE gains a a couple of options not available in current models (17" rims, rear sunshades and color-keyed mirrors). However it seems to lose the rear parking sonar option. Shame!

19" rims for the SE!!! and what is "super chrome rims"!? Is that like those tacky chrome rims found in Chrysler products!? Double yuck!

Look like I might be skipping the 2011 Sienna because of the puny 8th seat similar to the Highlander that Chevy is making fun of in its commercial for the Chevy Traverse!

A used XC90 or GL450 might be my next ride

 

[brian_bp]

I wouldn't call 17" wheels an "option" for the 3rd generation: it is the new base size, and there is still a plus-1 "upgrade" size (and a plus-2 "sport" size), so the LE remains in the same place in the lineup wheel-wise.

 

[brian_bp]

I don't know what Toyota means by "super chrome", but the Chrysler (and less commonly GM) product is a chromed plastic cover that fits tightly to a specific (and entirely hidden)alloy wheel; I assume that they never come apart.

I'm not a fan of this design, either. I would rather have a painted alloy wheel with hub cap.

 

[topspy]

I'm NOT a chrome or wood-trim (real or fake) fanboy. But that's just me.....

YMMV.
Good Luck!! 8)

 

[dbthompson]

Pricing info:
http://www.prnewswire.com/news-rele...for-all-new-2011-sienna-minivan-79832922.html
"The base MSRP for the new Sienna will range from $24,260 for the Sienna grade with a four-cylinder engine to $39,770 for the Sienna Limited all-wheel-drive (AWD) V6. Both the Sienna grade ($24,260) and popular LE ($25,345) base MSRP's are lower than the current generation models, reflecting an excellent value. The prices will take effect when production begins in January." ...