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
Personally, I don't have a problem with the Freestar/Monterey. It's just that the sticker price is too high, when I know I can get a feature packed Odyssey EX-L for less. The incentives help level the field price wise with Honda. And when I'm paying more for a Freestar, I don't get anything more than what I might get from an Odyssey, minus the reverse sensing system.
When the Freestar came out, Ford announced that it will be priced about the same, or lower than the outgoing Windstar. Is it true? well, if you take the base model without any options, it would be true, but once you start adding options, the prices are flying very high. For example, The 2003 Limited Windstar was about $34,000 with everything included (except for the rear entertainment system), and now the limited has about the same price, or even lower ($33,775), but adding all options will bring the price to $38,540! (options includes: safety canopy system with side air bags; self sealing tires; power passenger seat and drivers seat memory & heated seats; roof rack crossbars; first row floor console; advanceTrac & traction control with brake assist; reverse sensing system; and rear DVD player, etc.)
The same thing is with the new Sienna. Toyota announced that the new 2004 Sienna will be priced by almost $1000 lower than the old Sienna. Now, this is true; but once you add options or go with higher models, you can top over 40 grand!
And then, Ford gives already about $3,000 in rebates for the Freestar, while Sienna not.
I hope the new GM sport vans will be better priced, because if not, they will have about the same results as the Freestar's slow going sales, although the Freestar has a 3rd row seats which folds into the floor.
And CR rated the GM minivans only slightly above the Windstar a few years ago, and the Freestar is already a bit improved over the Windstar.
samnoe-"But to compare the new Sienna (which you say, is 11 months old) to a Freestar (6 months) while you know that Freestar is just an updated Windstar, is just not fair."
Of course its fair! Just because a car is on an older platform means one cannot compare? I disagree. The Freestar and the Sienna have the same target audience, and very similar MSRP price ranges. They are direct competitors regardless of platform age.
For what its worth, you are correct, I do like Toyota products (though myself I own a Nissan). But I would never say "Its just not fair to compare a Lexus GS300 to a Mercedes E320, the Lexus has been around for 6 model years now, while the MB was brand new for 2003!".
Also, "The same thing is with the new Sienna. Toyota announced that the new 2004 Sienna will be priced by almost $1000 lower than the old Sienna. Now, this is true; but once you add options or go with higher models, you can top over 40 grand!"
I'm not too sure where youre going with this. A comparably equipped Sienna is about $1000 cheaper than an outgoing similarly equipped model, without even adjusting for inflation. Yes, the price can top 40 grand, but only does so with the addition of an added trim line over the previous generation, AWD (not offered on the previous generation), and literally dozens of options unavailable on the previous generation (major ones including side curtains, power liftgate, moonroof, rear DVD, navagation, back-up camera).
According to the WSJ, the average retail MSRP for new Sienna sales is about $29,500. Putting this in terms of an acutal vehicle, this would equate to the LE 8 passenger model with the most expensive option package, very similar to the one that Car and Driver tested in the April 03 issue.
~alpha
As for the GM vans, you could not sit in them so we will all have to wait and see how good the seats and dash are. From the outside though, the Buick seems to be the nicest.
Alpha, the Sienna is a pretty nice van though I don't like the nose. it's not very high priced either, around $30000 CDN for a base model. No incentives in Canada at all from what I see though.
If true it seems rather dumb to me, nearly everyone I know who has an 8 seat GM minivan only got it because of the 8 seats and would hardly have looked at GM otherwise!
Odyssey EX: 18/25
Sienna XLE: 19/26
Venture LT: 19/26
Sedona EX: 15/20 (not sure)
Quest 3.5 SE: 18/25
Grand Caravan SXT FWD: 17/24
Base MSRP: $28,210
Exterior: Matador Red
Interior: Pebble CLOTH.
Options:
$395 Active Safety Pkg I: Panic Brake Assist, Traction Control, AdvanceTrac
$290 Electronics Group: Electrochromic Rearview Mirror, Auto Headlamps, Overhead Console with exterior temperature and compass
$245 Value Group I: Perimeter Anti Theft, Adjustable Pedals
$795 Second Row Low Back Dual Captain's Chairs
$695 Safety Canopy, including side airbags
$685 Destination & Delivery
MSRP: $31,315
Discount: $3,000 Cash Back
GRAND MSRP: $28,315
Without the cashback, waaay overpriced. With the cashback, more in the Odyssey's ball park, but still lacks the Power Sliding Doors. And what were they thinking when they made a bench seat standard on a $28,000 minivan? Shouldn't bucket seats come standard and not an $800 option?
In regards to the GM group, I hope GM does not overprice the mainstream versions (Relay, Uplander) like Ford overpriced the Freestar to make room for the Incentives. I hope the pricing is low straight from the start.
Unless of course it is a Sienna, then you have to add on to the MSRP sometimes.
"Y-O-U-R-E means you are, Y-O-U-R means your!"
-Ross, Friends.
irony?
~alpha
Sometime people do make mistakes while typing, we are human. I am not above the occasional mistake.
Anyway...
~alpha
"Sports crossover van"!
Do not make this mistake again :-)
We are busy with the Freestar, while this is actually the GM new vans board
Back to vans. Seems the first 05 DC minivans have hit the dealers floors, and the initial impressions are that the DC stow and go seats are really winners, along with overall interior design.
It would seem this puts even more probability that this GM freshening will not result in increased sales. I would predict GM and Ford will likely both lose market share in this segment.
It seems both of these manufacturers have decided not to fully support their minivan product lines, concentrating more on SUV's and crossover vehicles, while DC, Toyota, Honda and to a lesser degree Nissan will be fighting it out with the most up to date designs.
Not that that is all bad. I doubt if the US minivan market is big enough to support all of the players to the volume they would like.
BTW, why doesn't Toyota offer separate temperature control for driver and front passenger on the Sienna CE and LE? Why doesn't Honda offer the feature on ANY Odyssey?
Toyota vehicles have been the most reliable brand for me but "real" Chevy vehicles (1980 Chevy Van and 2001 Blazer LT) and my Ford F-150 have also been very reliable.
GM is unwise to rebadge junk from Daewoo with a GM name. Same with Suzuki and Isuzu junk. Toyota does not cheapen the Toyota name by placing it on inferior vehicles made by other companies. Hopefully, Honda learned a lesson with the unreliable Honda Passport that was just a re-badged piece of Isuzu junk.
Is the gas guzzling Kia Sedona with EPA ratings of 15/20 the "OPEC Van of the Year".
-juice
"BTW, why doesn't Toyota offer separate temperature control for driver and front passenger on the Sienna CE and LE?" Because they want you to spend 30K + on an XLE, because they are leading this segement right now, and none of the domestic vans, save perhaps possibly the new DCX twins, are anything NEAR threatening to Toyota's current PPSS (Profit Per Sienna Sold).
~alpha
However, the facts are that DC has developed more of the nice features of a minivan than any other maker. Honda was the first to offer the modern, convenient "fold-into-the-floor" 3rd row seating. Mazda was first with roll down windows in the sliding doors. Toyota was first with the split fold into the floor 3rd row seating.
Chrysler has developed too many nice features to be able to list here.
Nippon Advertising Monthly will never forget the poor reliability of the Chrysler 4 speed automatic altho they rarely mention the Toyota engine sludge problem that happened far more recently.
However, this forum is about GM products. GM Astro and Safari have been very successful, reliable vans with almost no changes since introduction almost 20 years ago. The original GM FWD minivans had styling that was too futuristic for most of us. GM has made many mistakes but even CR admits that the new GM 3.5L V6 delivers alot of power and excellent fuel economy in the new Malibu.
-juice
The Astro/Safari are on truck platforms and hardly leading edge designs.
-juice
The truth is very few people really need seating for 8 and the seating for 8 is pretty marginal anyway in vehicles this size.
When you have a very successful design, why change it?
I am guessing that by "successful" you mean that GM has been "successfully" duping people into these crude machines for about 20 years now. That doesnt make the vehicles themselves successful, or good for that matter.
And not for anything, they Chrysler Ultradrive issue was widespread. The sludge issue has affected this percentage of Toyotas: .001% (Thats one thousandth of one percentage point)
~alpha
The Astro engines will last forever. Some have reported 700,000 miles on the vortec 4.3L V6 in an Astro.
Many Astro owners loved the 27 gallon fuel tank and the 23 to 24 MPG highway mileage.
Concerning sludge in Toyota engines, your quoted percentage is as far off the truth as to say 50% of Toyota 3.0L V6 had sludge problems.
I have had excellent experience with Toyota so don't think I am trashing Toyota. Just want to keep people honest when discussing GM.
Theres a lot more to a vehicles reliability than an engine, in the case of the antiquated Safastros, and they didnt always offer the Vortec 4.3L. Im not making this up, check CR.
Youre right about the space- I should have looked the numbers up first, my apologies.
~alpha
I read CR to look for ideas on features that are available on vehicles, refrigerators, washing machines, camcorders, DVD players, etc. (Never did pay attention to their ratings of condoms).
CR is as biased and opinionated as any owner of any vehicle.
I am also biased: I think Toyota vehicles are the most reliable across the entire line. GM reliability can be spotty and more questionable with the linkup with Daewoo, Isuzu, Suzuki, etc.
3,300,000/7,200,000=.458 or 45.8% covered to vehicles sold 96-02 (Approx 1.2m per year)
GM's last big recall: 80/1,800,000=0.00004 or .004% complaints to vehicles covered.
Also the IIHS/HLDI rate the AWD Safari as "substaintialy better then average" and the lowest injury rate for minivans in their latest rankings. Even scored better then the Montana, pushing it to third, its worse ranking ever.
-juice
My apologies!
That said, it wasnt a recall, did not involve NHTSA.
"Also the IIHS/HLDI rate the AWD Safari as "substaintialy better then average" and the lowest injury rate for minivans in their latest rankings"
Injury claim rates lay heavily in the hands of the behaviors of drivers, as compared to the crashworthiness/safety of vehicles. Crash tests on all GMs current minivans show that they are among the least crashworthy of vehicles today. Ditto most of GMs older designs- think Cavalier, Blazer, Grand Am/Alero...
~alpha
So, if I understand, then the other vans are driven by easy to injure, quick to complain drivers, and GM's vans are driven by a heartier stock? I always thought that you could only get injured if the vehicle crashed. So injury has to be releated to crashworthiness. ;-)
Since he had owned a couple of trucks, that comment by CR was the highest praise they could give to him.
Additionally, in 1991 the Astro had MUCH more power, larger fuel tank, and in real world driving the mileage was as good as the anemic engines in the Caravan and Aerostar.
I, too like trucks and own the Ford F-150 4WD and my Chevy Blazer LT. My wife also prefers either truck over the Toyota Corolla wagon for trips over 10 miles long.
GM has been laughing all the way to the bank with the profits from the Astro/Safari that have had NO significant changes in almost 20 years.
GM found a niche market that no other company has ever challenged.
Do I think Astro/Safari are superior? NO.