Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
Yes CR and other magazines can test back to back but do they know you and what you like or want in a van? Do they know if remote start or On Star are more important than flip and flop seats? I don't think so. That's why you should buy what you want, not what you or a magazine tells you to.
On the quality side, the difference between #1 and #5 is probably only 20 problems per 100 cars. Yes some are better than others but in the end, quality is much less of an issue than it used to be. Even the Korean companies seem to be closing in on whomever is #1. Lots of studies (like the latest from JD Power) show GM is pretty darn close to Toyota and Honda now, even ahead in some categories, and every year that passes the gap is smaller.
So I drove the other vans, liked the Toyota and Honda a lot, a lot more than the GM, and then studied all of the features that came with each package to the point that I knew more about each van, than just about all of the salesman I visited. What it came down to was price, and in the end financially the Sienna was the better deal - and at the same time it was easily apparent to me that it was the better van quality wise too - the same basic conclusion the CR came to as well. The article did not make me buy it, it just opened my eyes as to how different one product from another could be, and listed pros and cons about everything. In the end, what convinced me was what vanman has been saying, and what I have agreed with, buy what suits you. It seemed obvious to me, that if 2 vans are close in price, and yet one drives better and has better features, it makes sense to buy that van, which is what I did. So when someone else in van shopping, I have no problems sharing my findings from my personal van buying experience, because I think it will benefit others.
If you try the GM van and that works for you, find buy it. What do I care? If someone is going to fork over $25k+ for a van, and all they have considered is GM, I will politely mention they should consider the other 3 for comparison sakes, and then decide. If the GM is still the one, great again. That is my main advice to anyone, don't be hung up on brands. Vanman and others are, and it is GM. I am not, I don't think the Sienna is the greatest van ever made, but it's close. The Honda and Dodge all make good vans too, each with their strengths and the Nissan seems to be a good value for some too. Next year the van to get may be the Hyundai, who knows.
I think CR is a valuable tool for some things. Comparing cars and paint is a silly exercise here. Maybe the ingredients did change - how would you really know what brand has changed what in their ingredients? You said you worked reatil, but that isn't the same thing as working for a paint manufacturer. I would imagine the basic ingredients are the same, but there can be tons of varieties within these parameters. And maybe some paints really do last longer than others, hence the change in the rankings. Are you basically saying that no one ever changes their paint formula year in and year out? I buy a lot of paint for my house, and I can tell you the difference in a Sears brand paint and the Behr paint I've been buying from Home Depot lately, there is a big difference. The Behr is much superior for both coverage, color and durability. Funny, it is CR's #1 pick I believe. I am not a paint or car expert, very few here are on this board. CR can be a good resource, and I don't profess it is the only one, as I have stated before if you read my previous posts. I have yet to see though, any magazine that is neutral (not owned by GM, Toyota, etc.) that has ever in recent memory ranked a GM van first, or even towards the top. The last test C&D did last year, they didn't even consider a GM van to test.
By the way, I don't subscribe to CR, and I don't think it is great for everything. They test audio equipment (another hobby of mine) in a way that makes me cringe. For speakers, they test the audio frequency, and make judgements that way. Scientific maybe, but it doesn't tell you a damn about how a speaker actually sounds. One year they gave Bose a bad review (they definitely got that right) and Bose sued them. Bose lost, but in the years after that, CR never came right out and gave Bose a bad review again. I didn't like that - I liked the fact that CR stood up and actually published the frequency response of their speakers (something Bose never publishes - the only speaker company that doesn't, as far as I am aware). But I digress.
I agree with one of your points, no car today is going to be like your '55 caddy, that is a true statement for sure. Because that was 50 years ago. They don't build 'em like they use to, and maybe that's a good thing. Probably wouldn't be any oil left at this point.
Let me tell you about Toyota Quality.. I leased a Sequoia when they came out and the engine would click all the time. It was so bad that Toyota finally offered to let me out of the lease as it could not be fixed. I was offered another but ended up with a Tahoe instead which was flawless for the 2 years I had it. I then realized that GM quality was back and it was an influence on my wife's purchase as was the quality of my current Grand Prix which has also been flawless.
No one is wrong for buying anything. We bought the 3rd house we looked at, why? Because we liked it. I have seen many many more homes since we bought and some are very nice but I still love our house. Same goes for cars, if you like something buy it.
Anyway, we are looking at the Montana SV6 and a Toyota Sienna but are kind of stuck in the middle. The first time I saw the CSV's I loved them. I absolutely love the SUV look it sure beats the old boxy out of style body the minivans have had for so long, the change is really nice. I agree, the inside of these vans are beautiful. How is the gas mileage? Is everything holding up well? Did you get the remote starter? I think that would be a really great feature. If you don't mind telling me I'd be interested in knowing what kind of a deal you got on your Uplander.
Sorry to hear about your bad luck with your Sequoia. No manufacturer is immune from this, unfortunately. And GM is on the rise, you're right. But Toyota is still tops, in most categories. Both are heading in the right direction, which is what ultimately matters - better products for all consumers. My expeience with GM was not terrible like you had with Toyota, but it wasn't exactly confidence building either. I expect any vehicle in the 2-3 year window when you lease something like your Tahoe or my Blazer or Saturn to be pretty much maintenace trouble free. Your Sequoia wasn't and my Saturn wasn't. I understand well why you switched brands, I would have too. The only brand of cars I have bought more than one of is GM, and I might still consider them in the future. If my Sienna is trouble free like I expect, I would definitely consider Toyota again, if not, I'll try something else.
Next time I buy a van, I won't automatically consider the Sienna, I will look at most of the main players, drive them all, and then buy or lease the one that best matches my budget and preferences. I give that advice often, and I follow it as well.
I understand your points, although in general I do disagree. I don't think CR is irrelevant necessarily. I just think that is too general to say. For many years now, their rankings of (used and new) cars that are the most reliable have been one of the reasons, IMO, that companies like Honda and Toyota have catapaulted in market share, and the same reason in part, why the fortunes of GM and Ford have been in decline for years. That makes it relevant. You may not agree or like their findings or conclusions, but they're relevant nonetheless.
Now I do agree that some of their tests also leave me wondering. I guess they can't test products in every different way possible that would make everyone happy. If nothing else, what I do find helpful on the rare occassions I buy CR, is to find out what else is out there, whether I am buying a new dishwasher, TV or van. I often don't know what is available, so I like CR as a starting point, to consider their findings, and then take it from there. I don't it view it as the bible of shopping or anything like that.
As for Toyotas "top ratings", they are not tops by much and have fallen from the top in some categories. While still good, it's pretty obvious that over all Toyota is not all that special anymore and their products for the most part are dull. Over time I suspect their sales will slow when people realize this (they still have the reputation) unless they spice things up a bit.
What happened? Everyone's so quiet. There hasn't been a post since May 27. irg not around to argue with? Well, I'll stir something up then.
Yesterday I saw a Montana SV6 on the road and it looked sharp. It was black and very sleek but it looked kind of narrow for a van. I was wondering if this is something they changed or if all of the Montanas are narrow and I just haven't noticed it before? I usually don't look at the older body styles so I really don't know. Do they have less room than other vans (width wise) or is it just an illusion with this new body style?
How about the G6. Even with Oprah's help, they aren't selling many of these. Design wise, they are almost Camry dull, yet the Camrys and Accords keep selling well, but the G6, not lookng so good. Maybe things will pick up.
Toyota's quality is still excellent. When you buy one of these "dull" products, for the vast majority of owners, they get a vehicle that is well built, dependable, and has very good resale. More of an appliance true, they do lack some personality. But for the typical car buyer that is not really into cars, a Toyota experience is more than sufficient. Quality, reliability, safety, and resale. If GM can nail all of these things, they will be back on top. Don't see that happening just yet. Don't see Toyota or Honda faltering too much either, no matter what you might believe (or wish).
My wife and I then went back and forth between the Quest and the DGC SXT. It came down to the price. The Quest we bought has standard side curtain airbags, traction control, 4 wheel disk ABS, power passenger side door, power liftgate, parking sonar assist, power rear flip out window, and of course the small stuff like floor mats, splash guards, microfilter, cargo cover and cargo organizer. To get those things in a Dodge Grand Caravan SXT, we would've paid about $23K, 1K more than the Nissan. We tried real hard in the beginning to get the DGC, but sort of gave up on it once we realized it wasn't gonna happen for $22K. The feature we miss the most in the Caravan is the 3rd row plit seating. We love the 2nd row stow-n-go as well, but the Quest's 2nd row almost folds flat although without the two storage wells. On the other hand, we love the Quest's vast head and leg room, big and comfy seats, and its modern querky looks inside and out We also considered the base model Quest which doesn't have the power door and hatch and rear sonar but is $15K cheaper. Finally we decided it'd be worth paying the extra for the added convenience. BTW, the Dodge salesperson was very nice to work with. Happy motoring everybody :shades:
G6 isn't selling?? Really? 12000 units in May and the 4 cyl., coupe and 240 hp GTP aren't even out yet. Might want to check your story.
Back to vans..
Remote start is a must I think if you live in a hot or cold (or both) climate. Nothing like getting in a climate controlled environment! Can you tell we got remote start??
My favourite feature of the Uplander is the MP3 player. Who needs an iPod!!!
:P
Good luck shopping.
The remote start is important to me. We live in a climate where the weather fluctuates from one extreme to another. I do not tolerate the cold very well but at least I have heated seats, however, I hate sitting on a leather seat that has been sitting in 100+ heat. I have had my legs burned more than once because I forget to start my car ahead of time in the summer. The remote start would be great!
It sounds like your van is doing well on the MPG and that is always important.
Thanks for the information!
The kids are so pumped about the DVD and my wife and I already love the XM radio. The only features not on ours are the six disc cd changer and the Sport Suspension/Stabilitrac. We also opted not to get the full leather seats. The base seats are trimmed in leather and really look and sit nicely as well.
The buying experience was fair. I was in and out of two dealerships that I was unhappy with. Either they were pressuring you or lying to you to get you in. I ended up at a smaller dealer, outside of the big city and was very satisfied there. I paid about $500 over invoice. I realize that may not be the best deal going, but this dealer had a lower processing fee than most (by about $200) and honestly I had a hard time finding the one I wanted so I had less room to deal. Does anyone know why they are still pretty hard to find? They had to drive mine in from a town about 100 miles away. In addition, I wanted to buy by last night since the 2K cash back expired then. Good thing I did because I noticed that GM's new incentives, just released today, are less, down to $1,000 cash back on the Uplander, or some special finance rates.
My van was produced in December 2004. Vanman, do you know what production period the alternator TSB covered? I did not notice any flickering lights last night and am wondering if it was corrected by then. The TSB number is 05-06-03-003 as previously reported on this site. I think it would be helpful if someone would post a link to this TSB or attach a PDF file. Also, does anyone know what month in 2004 that production began on the Uplanders?
Finally, I think GM is on the path to success if they continue to produce vehicles that are as appealing as the new Uplander, Cobalt, and G6. Hopefully these vehicles and others will sway some of the negative public sentiment.
As for "Beats me why people buy other than quality reputation." that alone is reason enough. Over the last couple of decades, many consumers became fed up with the poor quality that was coming out from Ford, GM and Chrysler. And while that has somewhat dissappated, it still hasn't completely faded away. And certainly consumer sentiment has not faded. And Toyota/Honda aren't exactly sitting on their laurels and doing nothing. The hybrid technology is a good example of that. Quality too, means you can buy or lease a Toyota Tundra, and 3 years later have a residual of 71%.
As for vans, the GM clones just aren't that competitive to what DC (still the leaders in sales), Honda and Toyota are offering. And sales reflect that.
From the several articles I have read, the G6 so far, has not sold nearly as well as anticipated, and has sold less than the Pontiac Grand Am it replaced, surprising considering the G6 is a significantly better vehicle. I'm sure the Camry you rented was a vanilla car, many rentals are from my experience. I just rented a Lincoln last week (the largest version they make, the Continental I believe), and preferred my Sienna for driving experience and comfort by far. If you want an "exciting" Camry or Honda Accord, get the v-6 with a 6 speed (accord coupe).
I'm not sure where you get your "information" from but G6 sales have steadily climbed every month since introduction. Last month over 9000+ units (official sales data) sold and the 4 cyl base model, GTP, coupe and coconvertible aren't even out yet!
Vans sold a combined 12500+ this May about the same a year ago. Sales are down over all so no big gains.
Like I have said many times before your Sienna is wonderful (I know that's what you want to hear) but it costs more money and doesn't offer many things the GM vans do and has no short version either. Not everyone can afford a Sienna and not everyone wants one.
In fact.. Funny story for u. Our friends have a Sienna and were over on the weekend. The wife was holding the door open when putting her daughter in. I asked if the door was broken and she said, no... not according to the dealership. They say it's suppose to not hold open when the window is down? How dumb is that? She is not impressed and told me she has told the dealer to fix it to stay. They told her they would get back to her.
2. Remote start / MP3 (I love these 2)
3. Well appointed interior
4. Ride quality
5. Price and value
The Uplander has a lot to offer for the buck, more than meets the eye. It's easy to say buy a Toyota I suppose but Chevy has a very decent van and should not be over looked.
I tried to find the articles I have read about the G6, not that it matters anymore. I usually find them in the business section at msnbc.com or cnn or drudgereport. That was back in March or April I believe. Yes, each month they have sold more, setting all time records for the G6, which is basically a laugh because it is a brand new vehicle. Not much to compare it to. I would hope it sets new records each month. But it hasn't outsold the grand am, which is weird, because the GA wasn't a great car, but it did sell well for GM, and G6 was supposed to supplant it in overall sales. Just hasn't happened yet, maybe it will, especially with more incentives slapped on. I would like to see a G6 wagon. The couple looks sporty, but is anyone buying coupes anymore? Ford never bothered with the Taurus or the 500, Accord and Camry coupes are niche vehicles too. The G6 needs more power in its v6 to compete. 200 hp just isn't very impressive. You think the 4 cyl model will bring in many more buyers? I wouldn't hold my breath. GM thought it was clever offering the sunroof that folds open all the way. I haven't seen one in person, (I seldom see any G6d) and it isn't a cheap option, and anyone shopping a "value" type car usually don't pack on the options like they would maybe a Mercedes. So the one thing that sets the G6 apart, no one is getting hardly. Guess this has nothing to do with Vans though.
There was another good article I read yesterday - and I can't find it at the moment (I really need to start bookmarking these things for you) that featured an economist and professor at the U of Maryland, that was talking about GM's woes (legacy stuff, union contracts, etc.) which he claims if they don't get resolved in the near future, GM will be out of business in 3-4 years. For me that is hard to believe, but everything is pointing to a not so rosy future for GM. And Ford is close behind. DC on the other hand seems to be doing some good things lately. This is not all the fault of bad product, some of it is, but a lot of it has to do with GM management of the company, which IMO has never been very good. It always seems to be a band aid approach on how to fix things there.
When GM tries, things like Cadillac result. New product, RWD cars that can compete with BMW, etc. and they have had their best sales quarter in over 12 years. But GM built their future on trucks and SUVs, and they aren't selling as well as they used to. Toyota has a lot of trucks and SUVs too, but they didn't build their foundation on it. The Uplander is a band aid approach. They took an 8 year old design, redesigned the front, updated the interior, but the added weight with an underpowered 3.5 has actually made this van slower. This is how GM should not do things. And sales prove this.
I think the Sienna is a fine van, not that I need anyone's validation on it. It is still a van, and not a Porsche, and not that I get to drive it very often anyway. True, it has no short version (no short GM version in the US yet either) and I wouldn't want one anyway. It doesn't cost more, even though you might think it does (true, a loaded XLE will cost more than a base Uplander, but an Uplander LS or LT can cost very close to similar Toyota models - I spec'd them all out this year), and it offers most of the same features GM vans do, and a whole lot more to boot. If you want to compare feature to feature, let me know. No, not everyone can afford a Sienna, nor can everone afford the Uplander either, and I wouldn't believe for a second everyone wants one. What a boring world that would be (but a reliable one).
The GM vans have a 240HP 3.9 engine option coming this summer. Personally I will take the lower horsepower for better mileage. I am not racing people with my van. All vans had around 200hp a few years ago and some how people lived through it.
They are selling base RWB Uplanders for $20,000 CDN. Cheapest Sienna is about $30,000 CDN. My well equipped LS MSRP'd for under thirty. The Sienna is more money and they don't offer the lower rates GM does either. Sienna is more money no matter how you slice it.
I doubt your Sienna will be any more reliable than my Uplander either.
Our neighbors, who just bought a new Caravan, are very impressed (if not a little jealous of the SUV look). Some other friends with a Windstar say that their next van will be an Uplander after seeing ours.
I realize that GM didn't build this vehicle new from the ground up and I'll admit that it bothers me a little that the rear hatch and a few other parts are re-cladded venture parts. However, once you sit inside the van it feels, drives, and sounds different from the Venture. After one week of service, I still haven't heard a rattle or squeak. How refreshing. I hope the 3.5 will be an improvement over the 3.4 in terms of reliability. The last thing I want to see on this forum is the intake issue re surfacing.
It looks like some kind of frankenvehicle...
Of course, people appreciate different things in their vans and we all should buy according to our needs. Personally speaking, the Uplander unfortunately doesn't have one single attribute that's attractive to us.
I'm amazed at the deals available now, it must killing used prices. I saw a Vue advertised for about $15,000, and as reported here you can get a $30k + GM van for low 20's if you go through the hoops.
If I wasn't so cheap, I might actually buy a new van with these deals!
S
The new vans - competition is stiff - but I would consider the ones with the new motor if it drives doesn't suck a lot of gas. I can barely get going with Houston traffic, so really the motor shouldn't be an issue with me, the 3.4 can go 90 all day long on the highway (well, not in mountains), faster than the law allows...so it fills the bill.
Let us know how the Nissan holds up vs the GM vans.
DD
ClaireS, Host
Coupes & Convertibles | Vans & Minivans
MODERATOR
Need help getting around? claires@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
Tell everyone about your buying experience: Write a Dealer Review
Lets hear more stories of those who got a good deal recently on their GM vans.
GM vans forever!
Dirk
Our first week around town the Uplander got 20 mpg. About what we expected. Should do 24 on a trip. We love it. I have an appointment scheduled Monday to get the generator replaced. I'm still not sure it needs it, but I want to be covered just in case. I'm planning to ask the service mgr. for a copy of the TSB to see the production periods involved.
Vanman, I've seen your postings in other GM forums, do you drive an Uplander?