Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see May lease deals!
Options
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
MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR
Need help navigating? kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
Share your vehicle reviews
b4z : 200 is fine. I have driven a Montana recently and it was fine. People look for features in these things, not 0-60.
reg : Wheel could be better, but it's 100% better than the ION.
Anyone know when the Pontiac and Chevy versions will be shown?
The interior does nothing for me. The Buick looks most like the Kia Sedona, the Saturn plasticky.
The V6 feels peppy in the 'bu, but it'll strain under a full payload in the vans.
-juice
Anyone make it in?
Steve, Host
I guess vans are vans and there isn't as much you can do to make them different. I don't think there is a lot of money in vans anyway and it's a shrinking market so GM figures it wasn't worth spending another billion going all out on these. I think the updates (which is what they are) are good and should make the vans competitive. I read somewhere the Chevy version will look more like a traditional van.
Maybe I will take a look at a 04 Montana in August, I'm sure GM will be giving them away then. I have always thought the Montana was one of the better looking vans on the market.
I think they missed an opportunity to be a lot more innovative. Hide the door tracks, let the rear side windows roll down, get the seats to fold truly flat, etc.
Compare them to the Malibu Maxx - that 5 door is far more innovative, IMO.
-juice
4-spoke steering wheels are for old geezers, too senile to know any better.
"200 is fine. I have driven a Montana recently and it was fine. People look for features in these things, not 0-60."
not sure why you can have only one and not the other. you should have BOTH hp and features.
"I don't think there is a lot of money in vans anyway and it's a shrinking market"
no one has been able to prove this as true.
"Look at demand for the Sienna, most sell for MSRP. You don't think GM dealers would kill for a product with that kind of demand and profit margins?"
you'd think......LOL......
The Sienna is a certified hit. It and the Prius and #1 and #2 in terms of demand (lowest inventory in the industry), because both designs are very innovative.
Sienna apparently has it all, too. Seating for 7 or 8 offset at the shoulder, windows go down, split-fold magic 3rd row, AWD, good power/torque, 5/60 warranty, etc.
Amazingly, some of them price out above $40k and people are lining up to buy them on wait lists.
GM chose to continue competing based on price I guess, so expect rebates right about at launch. Malibu already has incentives and honestly it seems like a better effort than these vans.
-juice
2. 200hp and 220lb. ft will be taxed in this van. Ok... these 4 vans. Does anyone have the final word- which models will be available larger engines, and what will those engines definitely be? (No speculation, if possible).
3. The interiors of the Terazza and Relay seem nice enough, and as I've said, to me look way better than the 80s inspired Freakstar/Monterey.
4. GM did miss an opportunity in not providing any of the recently pioneered and heralded features like fold flat seats, hidden tracks, or roll down rear windows. But, as is obvious, these vans arent going to be selling like Siennas, nor will they command sticker like Siennas. I assume GM knows this, and was concerned that the minis would need discounts anyway, even if they were equipped with these features. So they had a choice:
A. Take a big risk and incremental cost increase by engineering the best features into these vans without knowing for sure that sales would be higher and discounts minimal.
OR
B. Play it safe, expect discounting, and therefore, do not SPEND $$$ to improve the vans significantly.
GM played it safe, IMO. Perhaps this is not the wisest move, but it saved money.
4. Dindak- Youd be willing to purchase the current Montana, KNOWING that its offset-crash scores are among the WORST the IIHS has ever tested? I'd rather take a risk and buy a not-yet-tested Terazza/Relay/Uplander/SV6 than for sure purchase the outgoing model.
~alpha
Hidden tracks aren't new, the very old Previa van had them way back when. The Odyssey does still have them, however.
Roll down windows appeared in the MPV when it came out, early enough that GM product planners knew it could be done, I'm sure.
-juice
Playing it safe....
Without being really into pickups, it's apparent that Ford has done a pretty amazing job on their new F-150. Makes one wonder that if any of the domestics put just 1/10 of that kind of an effort into their cars and vans, they'd probably be a lot more innovative and competitive.
A. Take a big risk and incremental cost increase by engineering the best features into these vans without knowing for sure that sales would be higher and discounts minimal.
OR
B. Play it safe, expect discounting, and therefore, do not SPEND $$$ to improve the vans significantly.
GM played it safe, IMO. Perhaps this is not the wisest move, but it saved money."
GM has new vans coming out in a few years. This is a mid-cycle update. It cost them very little money to design Terraza/Relay, so there's little to lose.
reg : As a family guy on a budget, in a van I would take better mileage over 1 second of 0-60 anyday. I would think you would also.
alpha01 : Like montanafan says, Montana has pretty decent crash tests as far as I know. Not the best, but all right.
And Montanafan, for what its worth, I completely respect your liking of the vehicle, and your purchase of it. Different people have different tastes and preferences, and I am thankful to have the privelige to discuss those on forums like this. However, GM can do a better job of making its vehicles crashworthy. I hope we see improvement for the new models. That said, the 40% offset crash is statistically more likely than the NHTSA full frontal, and if you recall, the first real world crash ever in which two vehicles with airbags collided (two Chrysler LeBarons) was an offset collision on a two lane road. Crashes like that one are the reason the IIHS chose the offset.
~alpha
*So what* the interior now is acceptable and not just awful. This, in my opinion, is just a disaster in the face of an upcoming Chrysler van with TWO fold down row of seats. The Sienna is near Lexus quality. A new Odyssey is on the way.
Does GM (or Ford with its new Freestar) really think these models are going to stand up until, like, 2010??? Because that's how long it is going to take until they redesign these "acceptable is good enough" models. I see a lot of GM vans and Freestars gracing rental car and fleet lots in the future.
I'm a patriotic American who wants to see our carmakers turn out the best iron, but it's starting to get embarassing. Tepid Malibu's based on platforms that turn out sharp European models, a Ford line STILL devoid of any modern sedans or a competitive domestic luxury lineup. What's wrong with the domestic automakers??? (I say banging my fists on the table...)
Bret
I heard from www.freep.com that the Mopar vans will debut at the Detroit Auto Show next month. Hope they are not as lame as the 2001 "updates" were. (One of the causes of their loss of sales, they ignored the demand for fold flat seats)
Some Sienna hit $42k, and they're selling. Most break $30k.
-juice
"I would think you would also."
HAHAHAHAHA
WRONGO. lets say the GM gets 2.5 mpg better a year on 15,000 miles. (20 vs. 22.5 mpg)
15,000 / 20 = 750 gallons @ 1.50 gallon = $1125
15,000 / 22.5 = 667 gallons @ 1.50 = $1000
net savings $125 bucks a month / 12 months =
10 bucks a month. 33 cents a day.
I will leave one or two useless options (power sliding doors!?!?!?, is my arm NOT USABLE? how lazy are people these days) off the price of the vehicle in return for the highly enjoyable less second of 0-60 time. The more responsive motor will make driving enjoyable as opposed to being a chore, or being plain incidental. Driving is a sport. I want fun.
I can still haul crap in a big bloated vehicle and still have fun, can't I?
I'm one of those guys that actually buys premium gas for my vehicle if the mfr. requires it. Unlike all those tight wads out there who pay 500 bucks a month for a new car payment and then whine about spending 8 bucks a month more on gas. PUHLEASE.
Now if we are talking like 7-10 mpg difference, yeah let me look at it.
The underpowered motor in these minivans will not have the same efficiency as it does in the malibu.
You know I still don't get the law that must be out there that you can't have a van or sedan that isn't fun. Why people close their minds to that stuff........
~alpha
reg : I have kid # 2 on the way and gas is more like $2/gal up here so I'll take any savings I can get and do the fun driving in my Intrigue. Vans (even the Ody) and trucks are no fun anyway, why bother. My wife will be off for a year, it will be a lean one.
jchan : Bu is a great car but take what you read in CR with a grain of salt. They aren't car people they are lab dweebs.
The new vans need more power.
For those of you concerned about mileage you should buy something different or much lighter.
Wish we could convince GM to start making station wagons again.
Hwy mileage is almost identical to the sedans they are based on.
An Impala wagon would be perfect.
30 mpg on the hwy.
tbcreative : Mazda seems smaller and doesn't it have a Ford transmission? I personally think the steering wheel is ok in the Relay.
I do not know about GM, but Ford is not planning on keeping the refreshed Windstar (AKA: Freestar) until 2010. The Freestar was never intended to be a class leader and Ford knows this. They simply refreshed the Windstar because, well, they desperately needed to. I think in 2007, after Fords introduction of a new much more powerful and modern 3.5 liter V6, will they make their Van, at least, a viable alternative to the Japanese entries.
"... a Ford line STILL devoid of any modern sedans or a competitive domestic luxury lineup. What's wrong with the domestic auto makers??? (I say banging my fists on the table...)"
You used the word "still" in that statement but you have to remember that it really was not that long ago since they gave the Taurus a large and modern update; 2000 to be exact. In 2005 they are introducing many new models and Ford has said that that year will be the year of the Car, at least for Ford. These new models are crucial for Fords revival and i would be very surprised if they skimped on the quality and refinement of these vehicles. From everything i have heard on these boards and on others, these vehicles are suppose to be everything but a traditional and [non-permissible content removed] American sedan
As for Ford luxury division i am likewise pretty dissapointed, I would love to see another American competitor to the Euro and Japanese brands. However, since Cadallac went into the European luxury market i would highly doubt that Ford will follow. This is because there are still many people who love their huge granny-mobiles, and all the people who have shopped Cadallac for years will now probably go to Lincoln for a traditional and conservative car like the Town Car. This is just an assumption i could be totally wrong about Fords intent of Lincoln, but it just makes sense for them to stay in the conservative >60 market.
Bob Lutz has done a fabulous job at GM thus far, but it is clear what GM spends their money on at any given time. Mid and late 90's GM spent their money on the truck and SUV market, and now in 2003, it is clear they are spending most of their money on Cadallac. Thanks to this money Cadallac has become, and is still becoming, a great and innovative division once again. However, the fact that the Malibu is not a class leading car like it should have become shows that GM can not concentrate on more than one division at a time. The Malibu will get most of its sales off of versatility and its low price, not exactly the best thing to flaunt in the automobile market. In other words, i would much rather flaunt the fact that my car has a killer interior or a big fast engine then the fact that my car as a lot of cubby space or fold down rear seats or a cheap price...
Uplander 3.5 V6
Relay 3.5 V6
Terraza 3.6 V6
If the RDV can have the 3.6 as an option so should the Terraza. Giving them all the same 3.5 seems like a big mistake. Interiors look pretty good but as usual GM can't get it right in the engine dept. I know most people in this segment do not care about 0-60 times but the 3.5 does not stack up that well against the leaders. The Terraza is the premium crossover, so give it the premium 3.6 V6. Just my opinion.
What's the deal with the 3rd folding seat? Looks like to achieve this you loose floor to ceiling room. The overhead rail system might give you the impression of being squeezed from above.
But did you notice that the climate control is rotary dials, not digital.
Wonder who at Chrysler signed off on that little bit of cost savings?
Chevrolet Uplander: 3.5
Saturn Relay: 3.5
Pontiac Montana SV6: 3.5 with the 3.9 as a $750 option
Buick Terraza: 3.5 on the CX, and the 3.6 on the CXL.
There should be a second row bench seat available on the Uplander and Relay, with the Montana SV6 and the Terraza with sport bucket second row seats. And add a second row fold flat seat too. Combine the second row from the Quest and the third row from the Sienna, add the improvements from above, throw a price that is competitive, and these should sell decent, if not well.
The 3.9L is a pushrod so it will have excellent performance off the line.
Where most people want it.
I have driven the 3.6L in the CTS and it is strong.
Very good off the line performance for a DOHC motor due to the VVT.
The 3.6L will be more refined and quieter.
Which is very important.
Especially when you are competing against the likes of Honda and Toyota.
Oh yeah, GM will probably put 3.05-3.29 gears in these vans.
Pacifica has a 4.28 and it is still a dog in the power department!
The 3.6 goes in the Rendezvous so I'm not sure why they wouldn't offer it in the Terraza.
also, I agree with everyone that a premium van should have a premium engine!! heck, the 3.3L in the Sienna makes 230HP when the 3.5L in the GM vans makes only 200HP. i bet many new families at GM dealers, who don't know much about engines, will be a little bit puzzled!! if GM actually listens to the public for a change, they hopefully with put the 3.6L in the new vans a year later, even if it is an option..