[fibber2]

Subaru and Audi use what I'd consider 'full time' AWD. They shift torque front to rear thru active center differentials. The Audi is biased towards RWD, the Subaru biased towards FWD, but the torque applied to either axle never drops to zero. By comparison, most other AWD systems out there bring the rear axle on board only when the computer thinks it's needed and often that delay makes all the difference.

I've never driven on them, but people say the Nokian WRG3 "All Weather" tire is the compromise you might be looking for. Hearty enough to survive the summer, yet better gripping than conventional all season tires in the winter.

https://www.nokiantires.com/tires/passenger-car/all-weather-tires/

 

[fibber2]

It's been crazy here. Record temp of 78' F last week, then a mother of storms this past Friday, with another foot coming on Wednesday. I hate driving my snows on those hot days, but appreciate the grip when it plunges and snows/ices.

 

[phlfly]

Why would you compare SUV vs Minivan?

Subaru Ascent = Toyota Highlander.
Toyota, Honda or Dodge vans are more comparable to Suburban or Ford Expedition, is their size. Vans has more leg rooms at any row than any SUV.

SUV is towing, Van is people mover for long distance, believe me we had Escalade ESV. Its was big, but Sienna or any van is more comfortable with kids, parking and ect.
Sienna AWD is great for winter as well. If I have to tow something, I would buy Tahoe or F-150, but we don't have any towing needs. ROLA box is perfect mount on installed hitch.

Hello all,

I am in market for a 3 row vehicle and need some advice. We are a family of 6, 4 adults and 2 kids. We need a vehicle that is practical in space as well as has AWD for our ski trips to Tahoe area. I hate to get out of the car to put chains in freezing cold and low visibility, especially with kids on board.

I am really torn between Sienna AWD and Subaru Ascent. From my measurements the ascent has combined legroom of 112.5 inches and Sienna has 114.4 inches. Apart from third row being low in Ascent than Sienna, there does not seem to be much difference in legroom.

Secondly, Ascent offers bench seat in the middle row making it more practical for seating configurations.

Cargo is considerably more in Sienna, but I heard about the RFT, so the spare tire will take some room in the trunk. On the Ascent, I can put a cargo roof top carrier for extra storage.

From your experience with AWD Sienna (and/or SUV owners, Subaru owners), what would you advice for a family of 6?

 

[Geezer1]

Thats cool. Now you know why I am debating between the two

Would you take Ascent instead of your sienna if you had a choice now?

I doubt it. For one thing I really dislike CVT's and what I consider the excess noise they produce when climbing hills at highway speeds ... we bought a 2012 Prius v Five with ATP new but have taken it out of town only twice due to the noise - it's covered only 35,000 miles in six years.

I would have to know a lot more about the Ascent before I could consider it and it would have to pass my "safety checklist". I first considered the Sienna in around 2004 but it wasn't until 2013 that it met my safety checklist and even then it was only the Limited with ATP that passed.

 

[fibber2]

Face it, the Prius sacrificed most of it's noise abatement at the alter of fuel economy. An extra 20 lbs of foam and matting in the right places would have totally transformed the Prius into a 'real' car. I've rented a few, and found the experience disappointing. Even the 2015 Camry hybrid was noisy compared to it's gas-only siblings. And that might also be that Toyota has yet to master programming of the CVT.

CVT has been the mainstay of Subaru since 2010. There is more than one (TR580 and TR690), multiple torque converters and program files depending on the matching. The paddle shifters can emulate either a 6 speed or an 8 speed, and the total ratio range is pretty wide.

Like any good automatic, they will step down to a lower ratio to raise RPM to extract adequate torque when needed, and then 'upshift' as speed builds. You won't find them screaming away as on some other CVT implementations.

Perhaps the biggest question will be if the turbo flat 4 has adequate torque in this application, given the weight. Their last larger platform (the Tribeca) used the flat 6.

On the Safety front, Subaru's Eyesight system has an excellent reputation, but like Toyota it's rollout and take rate were initially too slow. It was available (barely) when I went shopping in 2013 but not on any of the cars I saw. In retrospect, I wish I'd waited a few months.

 

[NNW]

Subaru and Audi use what I'd consider 'full time' AWD. They shift torque front to rear thru active center differentials. The Audi is biased towards RWD, the Subaru biased towards FWD, but the torque applied to either axle never drops to zero. By comparison, most other AWD systems out there bring the rear axle on board only when the computer thinks it's needed and often that delay makes all the difference.

I've never driven on them, but people say the Nokian WRG3 "All Weather" tire is the compromise you might be looking for. Hearty enough to survive the summer, yet better gripping than conventional all season tires in the winter.

https://www.nokiantires.com/tires/passenger-car/all-weather-tires/

I have a Subaru and a ‘16 awd sienna. I also have nokkian WRG3 tyres.

I am an awd snob and have extensive experience of Audi systems, Subaru systems, BMW’s 2 systems and no comparison. Subaru system is in a different league to Toyotas system that is in the sienna. But the sienna system is not totally rubbish and wholly adequate for a low ground clearance minivan.

Wrg3, better than most snow tires unless you are talking about blizzak or nokkian hakkapalita. Also very good in the summer and more importantly light off-roading in the mountains. They truly are an all season tyre.

If the ascent has been available in ‘16 I would have bought one of those. But the sienna fits more in comfortably. Better for road trips if you have 3 or more kids. The ascent would also be good but when you add in bikes, skis, kayaks,etc whatever you choose X 5+ people plus all the baggage for clothes etc. No comparison. The sienna is just a bigger box that contains more.

The Subaru will always do better in more extreme snow conditions but the sienna does just fine in snow with the right tires.





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[bbbuzzy]

Is there a next best option? Are there any all wether option that could serve the purpose of snow as well as summer? No middle ground?

Like a good snow grip but will last little more may be 25-30k miles and can be used all through the year,

Yes, Nokian WRG3

 

[bitflogger]

We have an Outback and Sienna SE.

Over and over the van's size wins for lots of hauling and lots of people. Even the 2WD SE is fine in winter most of the time.

Maybe compare the new big Subaru dimensions to a Pilot, but my cousin has near daily regrets for going from Odyssey to her Pilot. She says chain laws are an issue a maybe 12 times a year but space, handling and comfort pop up as issues hundreds of times a year.

Our Subaru and our Toyota experience has been quality and reliability with both makes. Having had standard suspension and SE, we're very biased toward the SE.

I'm probably in a minority that actually needs AWD via ski area director and trail builder. Even with that a modern front drive vehicle works most all the time. As much as I really like our Subaru, the Ascent looks ugly to me.

With minivans and big CarUVs in the family, the minivans are always better for trips and 5+ people. When my wife compared Highlander and Pilot to the vans she could tell made with same platform. Highlander to SE van had her thinking it was stupid to get less utility and lesser handling for most all the time you spend behind the wheel, but to be fair she was also comparing it to the SE van.

Having liked turbos in Kenworths, Macks and the Volvo car we had, the Subaru engine is appealing.

 

[bbontheb]

I have watched some reviews that say the headroom is poor in the second row for adults in the Ascent.

 

[Geezer1]

I have watched some reviews that say the headroom is poor in the second row for adults in the Ascent.

Was the reviewer in the NBA? 40 inches of headroom for the middle row is a lot and more than any version of the gen 3 Sienna: https://www.caranddriver.com/subaru/ascent/specs

Give us a link to these reviews.

 

[bbontheb]

https://youtu.be/-_0-CJvWumg?t=4m21s

Doesn't look like much headroom.

 

[Geezer1]

https://youtu.be/-_0-CJvWumg?t=4m21s

Doesn't look like much headroom.

I must have sat in the Ascent version without the huge panoramic moonroof at the Kansas City Auto Show last Spring since I had lots of headroom. Here are the headroom specs from the Subaru Ascent brochure at https://www.subaru.com/content/dam/subaru/downloads/pdf/brochures/2019/Ascent/2019_Subaru_Ascent.pdf

Ascent Headroom (front/middle/rear) - 41.3 inches/40.0 inches/36.3 inches (with available moonroof: 40.1 inches/38.7 inches/36.3 inches)

Headroom in the Sienna similarly suffers when equipped (Limited only) with the huge opening rear moonroof.

Sienna Headroom with front moonroof only (front/middle/rear) - 39.1 inches/39.7 inches/38.3 inches (with dual moonroof: 39.1 inches/38.0 inches/35.9 inches)

There's no comparison when it comes to legroom for the third rows: Ascent: 31.7 inches; Sienna: 36.3 inches

What surprised me about the Ascent was that I could sit in the 3rd row without my head touching the headliner. The next vehicle I sat in was the new 3-row Lexus RX and I had to cock my head to the side and duck to sit in its 3rd row and there wasn't enough 3rd row legroom to rotate the 2nd row seat back backward to its normal position.

The Sienna 3rd row can easily handle two average size adults while the limited legroom in the Ascent makes it practical only for children or for adults on short trips. Even though the Ascent 3rd row is short on legroom it has way more (4 inches) than the current Highlander 3rd row (which I somehow compressed myself into) which has only 27.7 inches of legroom.

Comparing vehicles is like football - it's a game of inches!

 

[bbontheb]

Haha, I agree-definitely a game of inches.

I was disappointed with the 3rd row in the Highlander although I do like the new body style. It just wasn't big enough for our family.

I do really like the Subaru Ascent though.

 

[Steve In Denver]

I'm a Subaru guy and patiently awaited the launch of the Ascent. It seemed like the answer to our prayers - 3 kids, 2 adults and a dog...the Outback was too small and we needed something with a 3rd row. We actually test drove several competing 3 row SUVs and it was a frustrating process - they are all plenty big enough on the outside, but not so big on the inside.

After a lot of talking, I think I have finally convinced my wife that a minivan is the right option. (this has been a 15 year conversation) She actually convinced herself after doing some research and coming up with these facts / figures:

Sienna has nearly twice the cargo volume behind the third row compared to Ascent. (39 vs 17.8 cf)
Sienna has more cargo with the third row folded than Ascent with both rows folded. (87 vs 86.5 cf)
Sienna can fit full sheets of drywall/plywood in the cargo compartment (tailgate closed)
The exterior dimensions of the Sienna are *nearly identical* to the CX-9
Sienna: 200″ L x 78″ W x 69-71″ H (cavernous inside)
CX-9: 199″ L x 78″ W x 69″ H (cramped inside)


The Sienna is just so so so much larger for more or less the same exterior dimensions. That's not to say that the Ascent (or other 3 row crossovers) aren't nice - they are. (I do dislike the Ascent interior trim pieces (the ivory chunky dash / door panel parts), but for the most part it drove well (great engine) and has an excellent AWD system and comes well equipped at very competitive prices. But it suffers from the same issue that most crossover SUVs suffer from - in the quest to be the "un-minivan" they made design choices that make them less useful. (namely going for a long hood and not using sliding doors).

I test drove and rode in an Ascent and a Sienna, and as far as seating space (this applies to all of the crossovers I tested) the Sienna wins hands down. As a previous poster mentioned, ignore the numbers and go sit in the two vehicles. It's not even close. Passenger room in *all three* rows is significantly better than the Ascent. Access to the rear row is also much easier in the sienna (taller ceiling, flat floor, aisle between captains chairs)

As far as a bench seat for the second row, I don't think Sienna offers that in AWD, so that might be a factor. Access to the back row with a bench would be much easier in the sienna compared to most (all?) other crossovers due to the wide door opening and huge travel of the middle row.

4 adults and 2 kids in a Sienna would be workable. I sat in the second row captains chair and it was fine. The third row is good for small to medium sized kids, but once they approach adult size they might start complaining...but that's probably just too bad (unless a full sized SUV is an option)

The sliding doors alone are enough reason to get the Sienna, particularly with kids.

 

[Crazyfingers]

We've been a loyal Subaru and Toyota family for a LONG time. I drive the Subaru Outbacks. Wife drives the Siennas.


Reliability-wize, our old Sienna gave us very few reliability issues. The Subaru was very good but a few more issues most recently. But I kept that for 17 years and the old Sienna only 14 years. The old Sienna died of a crash, not natural causes.



We only just got a new to us AWD Sienna so I have no experience with how it handles in snow. My Outback is great in the snow but who knows on the new Accent. It's probably good.



It looks to me from the photos that if you plan to be using a cargo box either way that the Accent has a more flexible rail system on top and the roof is lower to the ground so it would be not as hard to get up there to on and off stuff.



The current gen 3 Sienna have a more limited rail system that pushes stuff to the rear and can (and does for me) cause problems with things extending too far back such that the hatch when lifted, will hit things on top of the car.



That's based on so someone with no experience with an Accent or an AWD Sienna. So take it for what it's worth.

 

[johnmharte]

I only have experience with the Gen2 Sienna AWD, we have 175k miles on ours. It’s an always on AWD, so at all times 50/50 power distribution. That’s also why the AWD has worse gas mileage.

The gen3 sienna is not always on. It’s based on slip. Details discussed here. https://www.siennachat.com/forum/40...eral-discussion-gen-3/1777-2011-sienna-all-wheel-drive-system.html#/topics/1777

www.siennachat.com/forum/40-general-discussion-gen-3/1777-2011-sienna-all-wheel-drive-system.html#/topics/1777

A video comparing Subaru vs Toyota AWD. I believe this older Highlander system is the dynamic AWD like in the gen2 sienna.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Crazyfingers]

That video is really interesting as we just got the 2011 Sienna AWD. But I'm getting very confused. Do the Gen3 Sienna AWD systems behave more like the Subaru or like the Toyota in the video that failed?

 

[johnmharte]

Like the Toyota Highlander in the video. It’s an “active torque control system”.
More reference reading on the sienna AWD
https://www.wilsonvilletoyota.com/awd-4wd-systems/awd-active-torque-control/



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[keriazy4]

i don't think that ascent sold a lot of cars i saw only one ascent in the streets so someone can compare but if you are interested i have the 08 tribeca "old ascent" and i bought a 2011 awd sienna , both awd limited edition if you are interested i can compare them

 

[edycol]

I just joined this forum, so bear with me if I missed something.
I got few days ago 2015 Sienna AWD limited. I ski twice a week so AWD is helpful, though not a must. In minivan it is desirable, especially with suspension like SIenna as it has lot of torque steer. Not good thing in snow or ice.
However, I ski in most ridiculous weather. I love skiing when it snows, and here in Colorado, it can get dicy in A. Basin where I usually ski. I drove two winter VW CC FWD with Bridgestone Blizzak LM-60 snow tires, never had an issue over passes in the Rockies. Managed to get Subaru Outback out of ditch that had something that resembles tires since driver thought AWD and Subaru is only thing she needed for snow.
Personally, I would take FWD vehicle with snow tire any day over AWD vehicle with all seasons. Do not forget guys, going forward is not a must, stopping is actually a must, and only good winter rubber helps there.
As for this debate Sienna or Ascent, I just traded in my 2013 X5 35 diesel with 425 lb-ft torque. It was vehicle that handled curves better then many cars that were designated as "sports." I am still going through withdrawal crisis and highly doubt I will ever get over the fact I do not have that vehicle any more. But, SUV's are really not practical. I was looking VW Atlas, Highlander, Pilot, but in the end, they all drive similar to Sienna, but have much less space.
I never tested Ascent. And reason for that is, that although I like turbo engines and they are much better choice if power is important in high altitude, CVT transmission in Subaru for me is deal breaker. It is limiting factor in off roading or if car gets stuck in snow, regardless how good AWD system is. It is prone to issues if towing is regular occurrence. So, if Ascent is option, keep these thing in mind.