2009 People Mover Comparison
October 2, 2009 by Matt Brogan
Honda Odyssey vs. Hyundai iMax Shuttle vs. Kia Grand Carnival vs. Mitsubishi Grandis vs. Toyota Tarago
Models Tested:
- 2009 Honda Odyssey; 2.4-litre, four-cylinder, petrol; five-speed automatic; wagon – $43,990*
- 2009 Hyundai iMax Shuttle; 2.5-litre, four-cylinder, diesel; four-speed automatic; wagon – $42,490*
- 2009 Kia Grand Carnival; 2.9-litre, four-cylinder, diesel; five-speed automatic; wagon – $41,990*
- 2009 Mitsubishi Grandis VRX; 2.4-litre, four-cylinder, petrol; four-speed automatic; wagon – $44,950*
- 2009 Toyota Tarago GLi; 2.4-litre, four-cylinder, petrol; four-speed automatic; wagon – $53,250*
Words Matt Brogan Pics Paul Maric
People movers; the mere thought of the words is enough to send the average car nut to sleep. But in testing five of Australia’s top-selling models this week the crew here at CarAdvice found that, as underwhelming as they might appear, this handful of practical and versatile family haulers really do have more going for them than meets the eye.
These vehicles aren’t exactly anyone’s idea of exciting motoring, I mean there’s no push in the back, no wind in the hair and there’s certainly no chance of turning heads at the traffic lights, but if you’re expecting all of that from a people mover then perhaps there’s a prescription-only medication out there with you’re your name on it.
The humble people mover is better thought of as ‘whitegoods’ motoring, an automotive commodity that is always willing to serve, week in and week out, through all those mundane duties that are – point in fact – the people mover’s textbook design brief.
If the school run, the groceries, weekend sport, or the three-generation drive — young kids, you plus ageing parents — are on your automotive dance card, then people movers are what you’re looking at.
As you’d expect from a test such as this we discovered this week that each of these vehicles manages different aspects of the daily grind with a varying aptitudes. There’s a mixture of petrol and diesel engines, and seven- and eight-seaters comprising the best seller list, significant variation in price, build quality, value and features.
It was a tough call but slick styling and features weren’t enough to stop the Mitsubishi Grandis wearing the wooden spoon.
Visually the Grandis is probably the second-best bus here, coming runner-up only to the stunning Honda Odyssey. Inside it’s a similar story with a simple yet practical approach to layout making Mitsubishi’s people mover one that is not only easy on the eye, but easy to live with as well.
Offered in a single specification level here in Australia, the VRX does come with a couple of features not seen in our other contenders, such as dual sunroofs and reverse parking sensors, but in considering the price difference, it’s obvious once again that Grandis is behind the pack in terms of what’s excepted as standard equipment with our base model rivals all comparing favourably.
The Grandis offers plenty of space with seven seats boasting accommodation levels suited to both adults and children alike. All seating positions are well serviced in terms of ventilation and visibility that makes for a comfortable ride no matter which pew you choose.
Grandis is also a flexible and versatile vehicle with 50:50 split third-row and 60:40 second row seating. The rear seats also fold flat in to the floor to more almost treble the 320 litres of cargo space in to a cavernous 1520 litres.
Under the bonnet Grandis is powered by a 2.4-litre, four-cylinder, petrol engine coupled to a somewhat antiquated and dull four-speed automatic transmission. Delivering 120kW of power and 216Nm of torque the figures are enough to let you know that in a vehicle weighing close to 1700kg unladen, that with a few people and baggage on board progress is bound to be a little sluggish.
Another important factor to consider here is that with a smaller engine working at near capacity to maintain the status quo, fuel economy is likely to suffer. The Mitsubishi Grandis totalled 12.5L/100km (combined) this week, some 2.5L above that of the official ADR fuel consumption figure.
The mechanical package is reasonably competent and within the confines of the urban environment the Grandis manages to keep up with fast-paced traffic while still offering a manageable drive with light steering and turning circle of 11.0 metres (the best in our test) making it easy to park as well.
The Grandis is not a bad bus, in fact in isolation it’s actually pretty good. But with its aging design and lack of crucial electronic safety equipment – namely ESC and Traction Control – the trusty Mitsubishi just fails to compete on the same level as our other players.
For a complete individual road test of the Mitsubishi Grandis, click here.
Kia’s Grand Carnival demonstrates how a relative newcomer to the Australian car market can enter a segment filled with big name stalwarts and enjoy a fair degree of success.
But with the car’s bulky design beginning to show its age, the Grand Carnival is now left with only one major drawcard: a strong yet frugal diesel engine.
Inside the dated design is equally obvious. Basic, plasticky décor comprising monotone plastic and velour trim highlights dated style cues that now appear familiar and dull.
The good news is that Grand Carnival does offer spacious and comfortable seating, with an agreeable driving position and ample room for eight adults, in fact the Grand Carnival is topped only in terms of space by its Korean cousin, the Hyundai iMax.
The feature list is however beginning to lag behind that of its base model competitors – yet another indication of Grand Carnival’s aging design.
With upwards of three years research and development benefiting three of our five competitors (Tarago, iMax and Odyssey), the Grand Carnival simply fails to deliver the same level of intuitiveness or fluidity in many of its basic functions.
Take for example the seating arrangements that, whilst versatile, can be cumbersome to utilise. The third row seats are especially bothersome with a clumsy, heavy action.
In saving the Grand Carnival from last place however is it’s 2.9-litre, four-cylinder, turbo-diesel engine. Offering 136kW of power and a hearty 343Nm of torque the engine provides capable performance both around town and on the open road.
Mated to a somewhat vague and indecisive five-speed automatic transmission the Grand Carnival makes up in fuel economy what it lacks in finesse with our week returning an average of 9.8L/100km.
Standard safety equipment includes ESC with Traction Control, ABS braking with EBA and EBD as well as dual front, side and curtain airbags (the latter two of which are optional).
Three point inertia reel seatbelts are not fitted in all eight seating positions with the two centre seats missing out. Child safety harness mounting points available in both the second and third rows.
A roomy and versatile bus the Grand Carnival leads the pack on both price and fuel economy, two points certain not to discount the Kia from any bargain shopper’s list.
For a complete individual road test of the Kia Grand Carnival, click here.
For the best part of three decades now Toyota’s Tarago has been the default option when buying a people mover, and to this day remains a sensible selection with a lot to offer.
Stepping away from the typical box-like styling, Tarago offers a futuristic take on the people mover segment with angular and edgy lines both inside and out.
The cabin features a mix of traditional plastics and felt-like cloth combined with a touch of soft faux metal finishes to give Tarago a bit of interest and personality, a trait not often associated with people mover innards.
Equipment levels see Tarago take a step up from our fourth and fifth place getters but when it comes to functionality, some features are a touch awkward with climate control buttons hindered in access by the retractable cup holders and the central instrument cluster distracting and slow to read. There’s even a little parallax error which makes an accurate speed check rather annoying.
These issues aside Tarago does offer spacious and comfortable seating for eight adults with enough versatility in design to almost double the capacity of the cargo compartment.
Tarago is powered by an engine similar in capacity to that of Mitsubishi’s Grandis at 2.4-litres. This four-cylinder petrol unit provides 125kW of power and 224Nm of torque, but as Tarago is heavier, at 1725kg, the additional power fails to satisfactorily motivate once you have a full house of people and baggage.
The one saving grace to this mathematical dilemma is Toyota’s smooth and quick thinking four-speed automatic transmission that really keeps the engine in that sweet spot. Delivering lively unladen performance the transmission even sees Tarago earn the title of second fastest accelerating vehicle (from 0-100km/h) in our test.
Another positive to come from this situation is that the Tarago also adheres closely to the ADR combined fuel economy figure with our week seeing a return of 10.6L/100km.
Optional ESC with Traction Control joins standard safety kit including front, side and curtain airbags plus disc brakes with ABS, EBA and EBD to earn Tarago a very respectable four-star ANCAP rating.
A civilsed and modern vehicle Tarago’s adequate internal proportions, generous feature levels and name synonymous with the segment could have seen it earn a better ranking – were it not for the all important question of price.
At $12,000 dearer than our cheapest competitor, the Kia Grand Carnival, Toyota’s Tarago has lost that important price edge, and as such it’s third place.
For a complete individual road test of the Toyota Tarago, click here.
The i-Series vans have made quite a name for themselves since their 2008 release.
Delivering a simple, safe and well-priced package with exceedingly generous proportions, the iMax benefits from a capable turbo-diesel engine that brings a strong level of dynamism back to what’s otherwise a rather gutless segment.
With a comfortable cabin iMax is also quiet once on the open road, a nice surprise from the big diesel, which leaves time to enjoy a fit and finish bereft of squeaks and rattles – a pleasing sign of quality.
Looks are quite conservative, but that boxy shape does afford iMax internal proportions that allow maximum utility for passengers and luggage alike – an important consideration for family buyers.
The downside to all this vehicular real estate is that some family buyers may see iMax as too big, or intimidating to drive, and while it certainly doesn’t feel that way, the evident bulk was a strong rationale in our choice to award the Hyundai second place.
Otherwise the iMax recipe is a tasty one with a decent standard feature list, competitive pricing, impressive safety levels plus a long and rather comprehensive warranty all big positives in scoring the runner-up’s place.
iMax does lack a rear windshield wiper, but most other kit is available after-market, and for buyers wanting no nonsense, no frills family motoring, these hip pocket saving are certain to bring a smile long after the novelty of a few extra gadgets has worn away.
And it’s that smile that is sure to return again and again when driving the iMax – and when it comes time to filling up.
A super strong and surprisingly quiet 2.5-litre, four-cylinder, turbo-diesel engine – boasting 125kW of power and an impressive 392Nm of torque – translates to a drive that is willing and confident, even when packed to the rafters.
Power delivery is smooth thanks to Hyundai’s slick shifting five-speed automatic transmission while fuel economy returns are equally impressive at 10.1L/100km, the second best result in our test.
As touched on earlier the iMax is right up there in terms of safety scoring a four-star ANCAP rating thanks to its standard inclusion of ESC, Traction Control, disc brakes with ABS, EBA and EBD plus the added reassurance of dual front, side and curtain airbags.
Were it not for the Hyundai’s massive external proportions, and omissions on the options front, the result could have seen this already top notch bus win our competition, but as it stands Hyundai’s commercial-van based people mover scores a highly commendable second place.
For a complete individual road test of the Hyundai iMax, click here.
Taking the blue ribbon in our people mover comparison this year is the exemplary Honda Odyssey.
The suave and stylish lines of the sassy low-slung Odyssey represent all that’s right with family motoring, and in doing so, proves that practical family motoring doesn’t have to be boring, pricey or a pain to drive.
Odyssey’s smaller proportions make it an absolute delight behind the wheel with a hatch-like ease that sees squeezing in to those ever diminishing parking spaces easier than ever.
Despite this Odyseey is still a true seven-seater thanks to some intelligent design work and clever packaging of the fuel tank and rear suspension. The cabin boasts a surprising level of accommodation that’s wonderfully comfortable, quiet and well equipped.
As you’d expect from the Honda nameplate Odyssey offers a quality fit and finish with features that are both intuitive and user-friendly in function.
Simply put: everything just works, and works well. There’s no compromises, no need to settle, no “it’ll do”, and it’s that sentiment that sees the Odyssey deserved of its first-place win.
Motivating the Odyssey is a 2.4-litre, four-cylinder petrol engine that develops a brawny 132kW of power and adequate 218Nm of torque delivered through an intelligent and smooth five-speed automatic transmission.
Fuel economy returns are equally impressive with a combined average of 10.2L/100km bettering that of the Odyssey Luxury tested by CarAdvice earlier this year.
A stress free drive Odyssey offers pliant suspension and sharp electric power steering to make the whole package feel alive and enjoyable with no cause to second guess the car’s intentions.
Seating allows a versatility that is easily the best of all the cars tested. Cargo capacity, although not the greatest in our test, is satisfactory for Odyssey’s intended purpose.
With a high-level of standard safety equipment and excellent visibility Odyssey is a solid proposition for family buyers. ESC with Traction Control, disc brakes with ABS, EBA and EBD, plus front, side and curtain airbags all adding to that feeling of reassurance important in a family hauler such as this.
Each of Australia’s favourite people movers spent some considerable time with all of our Melbourne staff this week being put through the rigours of family life, the horrid commutes and long highway travel, yet funnily enough, we all came to the same conclusion.
The stylish Honda Odyssey represents an excellent value for money package that is certain to keep family buyers happy for many years to come, and no matter what task you set it to, is capable, relaxed and frugal as well.
Specifications (click on chart to enlarge):
Print it: 
About time Honda got something right!
What are you talking about? Accord Euro, Accord, CR-V, Jazz, Civic are all good vehicles.
Except for the fact that they’re overpriced
I only see the Accord Euro and Jazz as cars Honda ‘got right’. IMHO the Civic is nothing special. What are Honda thinking selling the Si Hatch for only a few hundred dollars less than the Type R? Thank god you didn’t mention the City as that would have to be one of the most over-priced small cars on the market, especially for a Japanese car that really isn’t! As good as Honda are, they need to get over themselves. They are starting to behave like some of the European manufacturers!
If civic is nothing special then what about toyota corolla..so bland it puts me to sleep only by looking at it.
I am not just talking about styling etc Hayzel. Not to mention, where did I say that the Corolla was ‘more special’ than the Civic? I love it when people assume things!!
Why is it that as soon as anyone says anything negative against a brand other than Toyota, people automatically ‘assume’ you are a ‘Toyota lover’ and get defensive and start bagging Toyota. I guess you own a Civic Hayzel and are trying to justify your purchase! I agree, a Civic is more ’special’ than a Corolla, however there are still a few more ’special’ small/medium cars out there than the Civic.
PS: I do not own a Toyota and never have. Sure, they are a very reliable brand that are great to get from A to B, but they are hardly exciting or fun to drive.
Great review. Thank you.
Only additional element, that would have been handy, would be the inclusion of meaningful “optional extras” available and their pricing. The bits and pieces that can convert a “working car” into a joy. Rear parking sensors, sat nav, cruise control and the like.
I’m sure these luxuries are available… even an indication that they were would have been handy. Right now, I’m off to find out for myself on the manufacturer websites, but it would have been nice to see them here (maybe one more data table?).
One more thing, for the budget shoppers out there (ie, me), how many years back can we count for these people movers and still get a “like” model. In essence, if I wanted to buy a 2nd hand Oddessey, is the current model a facelift of the 2007 model? Same basic vehicle? Not the primary target of your article, granted, but important for thos eof us with growing families but not flush with $50k to buy brand new! ;)
Good review – TA. Can you also comment on cost of ownership? It is a big factor in deciding on a people mover.
You may want to amend your article as a rear wiper/washer has been standard on iMax and iLoad since March production.
Yeh, in addition to that the Tarago has had a full facelift a couple of months ago. Seems a little unfair to compare the latest release from some car companies and not others.
The Tarago that was reviewed was the old model
Not much difference to the old model. For the price you might as well go for the 6 cylinder.
For the price, you may as well go with the competition and bank the difference!
Otherwise buy a 2nd hand one but even 2007 models are going for over 30K.
Where did you find that info? I checked out the hyundai site and can’t find it listed anywhere.
Somewhat a foregone conclusion, not surprised to see Odyssey on top and iMax second. I do wonder may be can put some 7 seat SUV in the mix as well, since i’m sure many families nowadays will look at a 7 seat SUV in place of a tradtional people mover.
The Grandis is still the looker of the bunch despite its age but an engine that’s not the latest 2.4 and a 4-speed auto just don’t cut it anymore. The Tarago would have also done better with an extra gear. The Odyssey is still the ideal people mover, but is torque available early enough to haul seven and their luggage?
It would of been nice to see how the Citroen would of done in comparison with these, becuase if i was in the market for a 7 seater i think the Citroen would be high on my list.
I agree, the French do the people mover thing way better than the Koreans and Japanese I reckon; these five vehicles are so ugly I don’t think I’d wanna be seen dead in one of them! At least the French try to eliminate the ‘white-goods’ image from their vehicles. Also, the Renault Grand Scenic could have been a contender here, and perhaps even the Peugeot 308 Touring…
I spent some time recently with a 308 touring. Nice car, but way to small, you have to be a gnome to fit in the back and no lugguage room in the boot. Sort of defeats the purpose of a people mover. Ive heard similar complaints about European people movers in Aus.
I agree Sammo. I was at a cafe the other day and i saw an i-max park outside it and i thought to myself
thank god i dont have one of them.
They are just so big and ugly. I think it is a shame we dont the the Renault Espace here in AU though becuase they are great cars.
The only reason to buy an Imax would be for a hotel shuttle bus. It’s just a vegie van with seats.
I actually like the IMax. It’s not the most handsome vehicle, but as far as people movers go I quite like it.
Other omissions in this review were the VW and Mercedes people movers and I particularly like the looks of the VW multivan and caravelle but the pricing is totally out of my league.
The Odyssey is great on paper but in reality it’s a seven seater at a stretch with little luggage space. Here the IMax shines. 8 seats plus room for a pram AND the weeks groceries. Frugal yet with massive torque, you can load it up and it still moves briskly. Try that with any of the petrol vehicles reviewed and the consumption would go through the roof as you’d need to push it hard to get it moving.
Just disappointing about the lack of cruise and single folding 2nd row seat is on the road side.
Time to go for a test drive!
The iMax is an excellent car, however it only has anchor points for child restraints in the middle three seats.
With the new Qld laws children up to 8yo need to be in proper restraints. Hyundai told me I would have to have additional anchor points fitted myself using an Automotive Engineer.
Anyone have any comments or advice about this?
No one really buys citroen or even peugeout in Australia. It’s just not worth the time and effort to review them. It’s better to review products people actually buy, which is what CA has done here. Besides…French cars have the ABSOLUTE WORST reliability.
Sorry Hayzel but I have to disagree. I DID buy the C4 Picasso about 2.5 years ago, and it has been a fantastic car to drive and own. I’ve had no reliability issues.
The only reason Australians don’t buy them is because of outdated opinions based on experiences in the 80’s and 90’s when the French auto manufacturers were protected from external competitors, which led to much complacency.
The products have now improved significantly since the PSA alliance started sharing, and the quality control is now up there with other European brands.
So many friends have loved my Picasso and have wanted to buy one, but in the end, they have taken the “safe & boring” path into the other more mainstream brands because ultimately, there’s always someone they know with an outdated and unfounded perception such as yours who makes them nervous.
This is why they don’t sell well in Australia, not because they are not good cars. The majority of Aussies want to be the same as everyone else, not different; this is why the Toyota Whitegoods Corporation is the #1 seller.
Vive la Différence.
Wow the Grandis last? That shocks me abit – it’s been my fave people mover since it came out. Maybe Mitsubishi should release the Delica D5 (the previous model Delica is probably the most popular import if you don’t believe me take a dive down Sydney’s Parramatta Rd – the used car yeards are full of them) with all the modern crap.
I’m still not liking the Odyssey though. It’s so expensive (for what it is) and the interior plastics are crap to be honest. The Luxury fixes a few issues but it’s like $55k on road. Ouch! The Taragao continues Toyota’s tradition of highwy robbery for it’s products. And yet you have to spend $80k just to get leather as standard (On the V6 Ultima). Someone should stop that – it’s just crap! KIA well meh it’s alright, the diesel sounds to be a good engine. The Hyundai is a good car too.
It’s no wonder why people buy SUVs rather than these. They’re better equipped, look better and offer the off-road ability if need be. I thought I’d never say that, being a school-run SUV hater but it’s true. Spending $80k on a Tarago Ultima or Grand Voyager Limited is harder than spending the same amount on a slightly used Audi Q7 (or spending $15k more on a new Q7). If more were available (Renault Espace, Ford S-Max/Galaxy, VW Sharan etc) maybe the large people mover Market would grow but I severely doubt that’ll happen.
i really like this succinct wrap up on the front page… means you waste less time reading about models you care less about
i like the Hyundai… simple reason… rwd, rear locker diff… can tow real well unlike the others
surprised a commercial vehicle made it to 2nd
I-Max has no cruise? C’Mon Hyundai – get with the competition!
Another dissapointment for the IMax is the single seat in the rear is on the road side of the car. So each time you load the rear seats with kids, you need to move the 2nd row double chair to get them in. Such is the price of sales to the LHD market.
the problem with the imax is that it’s just a i800/iLoad/Starex whatever commericial van with windows and some crappy seats
it’s never gonna have the polish of the dedicated movers like the Honda
but saying that it has the weaknesses of a commerical van it also gets the strengths… which are apparent to anyone who have driven these things
it’s probably least likely to struggle with a real load (with the exception of the kia except it is FWD I beleive)
Actually its not just an iLoad with seats. The iLoad has a live axel where as the iMax has fully independant rear suspension to give it car like handling.
Therefore not just an iLoad with seats ;-)
The design for the Odessey is sort of alright on the outside but on the inside, the combination of textile upholstery and woodgrain trim is a little too dodgy. (I think) and the audio popping out of the dash just doesn’t look right. Surprisingly, good ergo by putting everything in about the same place
I agree. The Odessey lokks nice on the outside and dives ok, but its just a bit tacky on the inside. The mixture of fabrics, plastics, textures and colours is a bit OTT.
Out of those I would probably pick the Odyssey but I’d get the old model- it looks better and would be cheaper.
Only problem is that the Honda isn’t a people mover!!!
Didn’t know the Kia was available in a diesel.Huge vehicle with economy has to be the choice in this segment(Iload also). Never had the sort of torque steer issues u mentioned with the Kia and mine was the petrol 3.8 l. Perhaps u need to spend some time at the gym.LOL.
Why is the Odyssey not a people mover?
Fuel economy is not really a concern in terms of money reason. The difference between 1L/10km vs 1L/8km for example is not big at all if you look at the figure that results annualy. Fuel economy is really just for saving the planet.
I think these are all horrid cars and I am incredibly glad that I have no need for any of them. But then, I suppose the idea of these cars is that if you need one you must have enough joy in your life (kids) to not really care what you’re driving.
I think the problem is in the choices that Australians have in this segment. If you want a full size people mover in Europe, nothing beats the Espace. It’s an excellent car and it even looks pretty good. However, I must note that the Chrysler Grand Voyager is probably class leader. It has a nice interior, it looks good, it has good engines and is massively practical. You’d be mad to buy a Tarago over a Voyager.
If you need a smaller seven seater though, I don’t know how anybody could go past the C4 Picasso. It looks great, it has a nice interior and you can get a diesel one that is really economical and has way more pull than the nearest competitor tested here, the Honda Odyssey. The Odyssey also has a nasty interior and it just doesn’t look as good a the relatively handsome previous model.
I think the thing that’s hardest to ignore here though is all the good looking and depression sparing seven seat SUVs. The Mazda CX-9, the Land Rover Discovery, the Volvo XC90 or even cars like the Ford Territory are probably all much better choices and they just aren’t as embarrassing as a normal people mover. I suppose it comes down to what you need and what you can afford though.
Some of us have our egos less attached to what we drive.
I think you “think” to much.
The third row in the Honda is useless i.e for midgets or ten year olds and luggage space is virtually non existant which makes it useless. Not even enough room for the groceries!!!
Is a swish Wagon or estate not a people mover IMO.
People mover needs to be practical!
You are clueless about what people mover actually is….
“there’s certainly no chance of turning heads at the traffic lights”
Sure, people movers turn heads… away, that is.
Perhaps you won’t have more than 2/3 kids and you won’t have a problem? Meanwhile those who need to transport a larger than average family are grateful for this segment and this review.
I love the look of the Odyseey even the older one.
But compared to the other “People Mover” its actually “cramped in the back.
I think thats a major “down-side” and should of prevented it from finishing first automatically. Because at the end…. A People Move has to fit 7 people comfortably.
The Tarago, I feel finished the way it is because… its overpriced… 85K driveaway for a FULLY-SPEC’d Ultima…. geez!! But its spacious.
The other 2 Hyundais, are good for value, and realistically what MOST families can afford. But I want to see reliability and warranty claims for them and also “real-world” crash test evaluations.
isn;t ancap rating good enough? Who would be crazy enough to crash their car in “real world”. You are weird….
Great comparison. Except you the cars totally wrong. The Mitsubishi and the Honda are wagons with extra seats. The competition for these is the Kia Rondo (People mover of the year 2008)
The I Load is a van with seats. The only two true people movers in this line up are the Toyota and the Carnival.
Good read guys. But remember just beacuse a manufacture calls it a people mover it dosent make it one.
Ah, the Rondo. Not a bad vehicle, but would you really want to buy something that sounds like it has been named after a biscuit?
Perfect review !! Honda are always all rounded. Love their refinement
The Korean diesels are only marginally more efficient than the Japanese petrols. They are still a few notches behind in engine technology. Sadly though, there aren’t oil burners from Honda, Toyota or Mitsu for mainstream vehicles in this country. The economy difference could have been much more noticeable.
Beg to differ. Fill all these people movers up with people and luggage and the diesels will pull harder and use substantially less fuel.
Don’t forget the ADR fuel consumptions and these driving reviews posted are based on empty vehicles. More realisticly, day to day useage for the average owner will see them carrying a lot more.
Simon is correct, it’s the same with the Prado, Petrol 12.8, diesel 11.6/100 respectively, but load them up or tow a caravan and the gap widens dramatically. Diesel rocks.
You are absolutely correct about petrol burning significantly more then Petrol when loaded up… But got to say I easily average 9.3l/100 km on my D4D Prado… The pre-D4D diesel prado’s averaged in the mid 11’s…
3 great 7-seat people movers that we should get in Australia are the Opel Zafira, Ford S-Max and Mazda 5. They would never match the Hyundai iMax for space but each of them would eat Honda’s Odyssey for breakfast.
I think the VW Sharan should be available in Australia, that was a cracking MPV.
The Ford S-Max would be cool, particularly now that there’s a diesel auto. I have a 2005 Mazda 5/Premacy here in Australia, it was our car in Japan which we brought back with us. It’s a really nice little car, the sliding doors are brilliant, but it needs to be wider, it only has the lap seat belt in the middle of the second row and I hate having anyone in the rear seat because they’d get killed in an accident. Am thinking of Citroen Picasso.
Terrible review!!! How can the reviewer claim that the GC “…simply fails to deliver the same level of intuitiveness or fluidity in many of its basic functions.”, then gives the example of the folding rear seats – sure they maybe heavy but they do fold into the floor unlike the iMax or the Tarago. Also the iMax does NOT have curtain airbags nor side airbags – only dual fronts. (see Hyundai website). I think that is worthy of comment if you are taking kids around. Finally no mention of the woeful lap belts for middle seating positions in the GC.
BTW I don’t own a GC, nor have any Kia. I’m just floored by the poor review.
For a bit of fun, see a iMax at the Nurburing http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V8VdP_YYpco
i have hired both Tarago 2.4 and Grand carnival 3.8 v6 and driven them both for approximately 3 weeks each on yearly holidays with my family.
Tarago went well considering it was a camry engine! and it was brilliant on fuel.
Kia drank like there was no tomorrow, but my god, did it GO!!! i was constantly nailing anyone who thought they could get the big bus at the lights, 185kw of v6 made mincemeat of anything non turbo or not v8 that dared give it a go!
Kia was HUGE compared to the tarago, and when loaded with 7 people, still had room for their luggage and more left. Tarago had very little luggage space with 7 on board, and the Kia, im afraid, was the best place to be!! and at almost HALF the price of the tarago, was a better machine! itd take a long time, for the extra fuel you used, to make the cost come up to that of the toyota!
kia ftw!
oh and its NOT the same kia carnival that has thousands of people in agony over engine breakages, the grand carnival, luckily was a lot better vehicle!
I would like to try those traffic light games in the v6 tarago though, apparently the 200kw v6 propels it over the 1/4 mile in the high 14 seconds bracket!! Amazing!
:)
Bring on the updated Santa Fe and Sorento with their new 400Nm+ 2.2 turbo diesel mated with a slick new 6 speed auto and they’ll annihilate anything in this field for fuel efficiency and IMHO a lot more stylish.
What about the Dodge Journey, Citroen C4 Picasso, Volkswagen Caddy Maxi Life, Mercedes Viano? I think at least one of these should have been included in the comparison.
do they come with automatic rear side doors? (driver controlled, closes/opens automatically when doors are lightly pushed/pulled) coz i just came back from US and we rented a toyota sienna (tarago like) and a honda odyssey and they both have auto doors
The Carnival has three models. Grand. Grand Premium and Grand Platinum. The last two have remote electric sliding doors and more.
I have three young children and I think that this review completely missed the point – clearly the testers don’t have children. Put simply you can’t get the stated number of passengers into any of these vehicles (other than the Hyundai) and you certainly can’t get three child seats across the second row of any of these vehicles – so what is the point of them? They’re cars for families without children? Families composed entirely of very small adults? You cannot get three kids across the middle bench of the Odyssey and until recently they didn’t even bother to fit a three-point seatbelt in the middle seat (which, in 2009, should be illegal – are you listening Kia?) so why is it number one? As of this year the Australian road rules require all kids to be in child seats or boosters until they turn 7 (a wildly overdue requirement). But you will not be able to get three boosters, let alone capsules, across the back seat of any of these cars, let alone the Odyssey. So, you say, put them in the rear seat …. the problem is that in a rear end accident the kids in the rear seats (and because of the lack of space it will nearly always be kids sitting there because they’re the only ones who will fit) will be killed: no ifs, no buts. Even the Tarago puts the rear seat passengers up near the glass.
I lived in Japan for a long time and have driven nearly all of these vehicles as well as MPVs like the Alphard and Elysion that were never imported into Australia (and I owned a couple of MPVs not sold here, the Honda Stream and Mazda Premacy (no, the current sliding-door model, not the earlier hatchback/wagon that was actually sold in Australia) and nearly bought an Elysion). There are two problems with most of the Japanese cars sold in Australia that simply reflect the Japanese domestic market: first, they are too narrow to have three proper seats across the middle – this is because in Japan the dimensions of a particular class of car are rigidly set by Japanese tax regulations and the 2.0 l people mover market can only be as wide as, for example, the Grandis. If you want a wider car you have to go to a bigger engine, like is the case with the Alphard or Nissan El Grand, but those vehicles aren’t imported into Australia. The second problem is seat-belts and safety restraints for kids: neither are required in Japan. It is still the rule in Japan that rear-seat passengers don’t have to wear seat-belts … as though the laws of physics don’t apply in the rear seat. Children are now required to be in child restraints but I’d guess that 1% would comply, and it is not enforced by the police. It is in fact widely considered cruel to put kids in car seats, or even to have them wear seat-belts. I used to cop heaps from my wife’s family for insisting that my kids be in boosters etc. It’s disturbingly common in Japan to see MPVs barrelling down the freeways at 130 km/h with kids leaning between the two front seats or running around the back with no restraints on (and if you’ve been sold the stories about Japanese all tootling around at 40 km/h then you’ve been badly misled – everyone exceeds the posted speed limits and I never once saw anyone pulled over for speeding.) Nissan used to refuse to put child restraint anchors in its MPVs (e.g., the Serena) – unbelievable as that is, the imported cars were worse: Audi Japan used to specifically require that the factory installed Isofix mounts be removed from the cars being sent to Japan! Honda and Mazda did start to fit Isofix and top-mount (”latch”) around 2005 but only on export models which were also sold in Japan and only then because it had become a requirement in the US. The domestic cars that they never intend to sell OS still don’t have child restraint anchors and as anyone who’s tried to fit a capsule in an Odyssey will tell you, they are very much an afterthought.
Here’s a thought: why don’t you re-run the test with either an actual family of 8 or an equivalent number of child seats?
So my current shortlsist of family cars is quite different to yours: (old) Mazda MPV, Territory 5 seater (not the 7 seater, no way would I put kids in the back of that), Volkswagen Caddy Maxi and Citroen Picasso C4. If I had one more child I’d be looking at the Chrysler Grand Voyager and Volkswagen Caravelle out of necessity.
So what would be my ideal car? The Toyota Alphard or Nissan El Grand. Because of their boxy shape they are big enough to genuinely carry 7/8 people but were quite compact (their height makes them look big, but they’re actually easier to park than the current Odyssey, and I say that from experience in Tokyo), had good equipment levels and were available in AWD. And I hear very good things about the economy of the Alphard hybrid …
Oh, and another car I wished was available here is the Ford S-Max: it’d be on my list if it was available here.
Mate…you have hit the mark in many areas, especially in regards to the use of the 3rd row for anyone, let alone kids. I have a Territory Ghia so am comfortable with the safety, but not past the 2nd row. I can’t see much difference with some of these so-called people movers.
***
Quote: As of this year the Australian road rules require all kids to be in child seats or boosters until they turn 7 (a wildly overdue requirement).
Your kids must be quite petite! My 3 year old can bearly fit in any child seat and the boosters are an absolute joke!
What happened to that little 2yr old girl is unfortunate but will happen to any child in a serious accident of that ferocity, child seat or not (talking about belt damage).
It is not practical for a struggling family (requiring a PM) to buy a Voyager as you dictate and more to the point, for manufacturers to make family cars that ordinary families can’t afford. Are you listening Lexus? Love your crumple zones but don’t have a spare $160,000.00.
Yes child safety is important but so is the safety of all passengers as far as possible, without compromising practicality.
The way you describe things, we should all be buying Hiace 12-seaters and only using the middle rows to be totally sure.
I fit 3 kids seats fine in the Kia GC (2nd or 3rd row) and the 3rd row is far enough from the back glass. Again, any ferocious accident will cause damage.
Lets inject some safe practicality back into life without pie-in-the-sky wish lists that no one can afford.
Kia Lover
- My kids aren’t petite – they’re at the top of the bell curve for their age-groups.
Child seats: you may not have seen them in use but there are child-seats (which look like scaled-down car-seats) that fit kids up until 9+ years of age. They are nothing like the cushion style boosters you’re thinking of.
- I don’t think I suggested the Chrysler Voyager as an option – I suggested the old Mazda MPV, Territory 5 seater, Volkswagen Caddy Maxi and Citroen Picasso C4. Hardly a “pie-in-the-sky wish lists that no one can afford”.
- If the Kia puts the 3rd row at least 50 cm away from the rear glass then that helps, but I saw photos of a Saab that was rear-ended by a 4WD with a bull-bar and the Saab’s boot ended up near the rear doors …