Chevy Uplander/Pontiac Montana SV6/Saturn Relay/Buick Terraza

badgerfan · March 2004

Looking at Edmunds MSRP pricing for 2005 Grand Caravan SE, the base model price is $21995 and the SE+ which includes the stow and go option is $24990.

I'm probably not comparing apples to apples because option mix changes from year to year, but it appears with the 2005 model year, DC rolled back the MSRP with the probable intent of not providing as many rebates as before. Were your numbers for the 2004 model compered to the 2002 instead of the 2005?

ateixeira · March 2004

I posted what Edmunds shows currently under New Cars. Probably is a 2004.

Interesting if they change their strategy. I guess we'll never see those $100,000 rebates after all!

I say hurray.

-juice

spartanmann · March 2004

Agree with most of you on the silly rebate game, especially on brand new models that are introduced with a rebate (like the Ford Freestar).

DC appears to have stopped the madness on the 2005 vans. The base Grand Caravans with the stow and go seating appear to be competitively priced and similarly equipped to Honda, Toyota and Nissan.

ateixeira · March 2004

Another complaint I have is the options list - I mean, Dodge's is several pages long! You need a PhD just to figure out what it'll cost to get what you want!

In fairness, GM is a little better about this.

-juice

jchan2 · March 2004

Honda's even better at controlling the options list!

dan165 · March 2004

Actually the current GM vans are not bad in the options. Honda is better but they cost a lot of $$$$$$$$$$. Yikes!

montanafan · March 2004

Timely disscussion on MSRP and costs. At church saw a new 2004 Montana and spoke with the owner. Duplicated the 1997 he had without the 2 child seats and cassette radio and with the antitheft, heated mirrors, parking assist. MSRP difference was $1,900 (29,765 vs 27,859) or 6.8% more then the 1997. 6.8% over 7 years. (I think my cable bill went up 6% in January). With the $3000 rebate, the 2004 cost $1,000 less then the 1997, 7 years ago. So much for the theory of MSRP creep whipping out the rebate gains.

mbukukanyau · March 2004

Are the same old van, with different front facia, back bumper different interiors and new branding. Nothing new.

montanafan · March 2004

Nothing new if you don't count, the engine, brakes, interior, moldings, wheels, tires, audio systems, front fenders, hood, front frame rails, and names.

alpha01 · March 2004

Its seems to be in the marketing definition. GM calls these all new crossover vans, but in Toyota speak, for example, the above changes wouldnt constitute a an "all new" designation. Witness the 2004 RAV4, which has a new engine, brakes, interior, moldings, wheel designs, hood, and standard stability control, as well as newly optional side curtains. Funny, they didnt call it "all new"?????

~alpha

montanafan · March 2004

Excellent, another "new" to add to the list-"marketing definition".

spartanmann · March 2004

Why not just call it what it is - an improved, updated and partially revised Venture/Montana.

Ford called their partially revised and updated Windstar an "All-New Freestar". It didn't fool anyone. Sales are a disappointment, the factory has been closed once for inventory control, and the rebates are quickly up to $2500.

Does GM really expect anything different?

spock1 · March 2004

I don't like to post messages but I feel obligated to warn others about an issue. I own a 2001 Montana van that has 43000 miles and I've owned some GM's before as I considered myself a fan of theirs as I don't like Ford or Chrysler. Last fall, I noticed my coolant was low (when I only had about 35000 miles). I could not tell because I wasn't sure if it was exactly full when purchased. Anyway, I began to watch it and I filled it to the line. By the time I was at 40,000 miles it was obviously using coolant as I'd used a gallon. I checked around and found that GM V6's and many other engines have built a reputation for bad gaskets. Mechanics told me that the red coolant "Dexcool" and the plastic gaskets are suspect and many need replacing. This wasn't my experience in the 70's and 80's. Mechanics consistently told me it started when the Dexcool was introduced in the mid 1990's. But, I've also seen the gaskets and they are cheap looking plastic. The Japanese models don't seem to be having these issues. Their engine gaskets are a different material. GM refused to cover anything on my problem. I've signed the class-action petition against them. Look online. There's almost 5000 other people signed up. I spent $600 in maintenance and hassles. Some people have spent thousands. BBB says it's out of warranty- sorry. Is this good enough? Will you buy cars that have serious mechanical breakdowns by 40,000 miles? Don't take my word for it. Ask your mechanics what they think of this situation. Buyer beware.

jona57 · March 2004

Unfortunately, every automaker still has their lemons. A quick Google search on even the supposedly "best" automaker (e.g. Toyota engine sludge) will reveal some unhappy owners with their own on-line petitions for redress. I sincerely hope that you & all other disgruntled owners achieve satisfactory resolutions to your problems.

OTOH- The majority of new car buyers today are happy with their vehicles. Objective sources (e.g. the J.D. Power owner surveys) indicate that there are now fewer defects in ALL makes vs just a few years ago. Even traditionally anti-US Consumer Reports in its April annual car issue lists Buick as having much better than ave reliability.

Personally, I buy an affordable vehicle I think I will enjoy living with. Although I've never owned a Buick, I am interested in seeing these new GM vans. The available info sounds appealing. If I like them I'll buy one.

FWIW- Based upon my 20+ years of new car buying, I now pay more attention to the dealer I am buying from than the automaker's reputation. A bad dealer can make living with the best car a chore (e.g. messing up or scratching your beautiful new car during routine service). OTOH- a good dealer can be a huge help in solving problems with a stubborn automaker.

dan165 · March 2004

These "new" GM vans have a new nose, an upgraded interior, engine and braking system so I guess they can call them new. I have driven an 03 Venture and I was surprised how smooth it was and how good the handling was compared to a Caravan I had rented before. With these upgrades, I figure this "new" set of vans has to be pretty good even though everyone seems to want to dump on them. It's the same old dump on everything GM before the vehicle is even out.

I am not a van guy at all (though I rent them every so often), but GM mini vans are just not that bad. In terms of the gasket issue, I wonder if there are more of those or Toyota engine sludge issues per capita?

ateixeira · March 2004

By now GM has written off enough that they can lower the price.

Any how, Dodge is the guilty party in the example I gave.

-juice

pontiacjeff · March 2004

The montana sv6 is a nice change to the gm family of minivans but its just not right. The front end looks a little retarded and out of place for the rest of the body. It looks like they turned a bonneville into an SUV and slapped it on the front of a demented montana. Whats worse is that its still a lonnnnnng skiny van. They should have made it wider. Besides, its a family vehichle and believe me, you need a lot of space to separate restless children. Maybe they should have thrown in an optional left to right sliding second row seats. And the 200hp engine is still not enough. why the heck are they putting a family sedan malibu engine into an SUVan? They should have at least topped off ~toyota~ and thrown in a 250hp. they've got such a mix bag of customers that they might as well of put an optional hood scoop on it!Although I am happy they bumped it up from that 160hp they had before thats so mushy and sluggish. The interior looks crammy too probably because of how slim it is. What I really like and was looking for was the 50/50 fold flat which is really great because like in honda, mazda, ford and the venture you lose three seats which leaves you with only four seats. (Although, it should have been a 60/40.) Not very good for a family vacation! The problem with all these fold flats is that most of them are like six inches off the ground. Don't they get that that is very uncomfortable for someone over five feet tall. They might as well just ditch the rear overhead audio and climate controls if everyone supposedly sitting in those seats are under 5 feet tall. Another thing they need is center consoles. Cup holders nowadays are really inconvenient, besides, with a standard front console, second row passengers can have access to heat and air which is much better than blowing it down from the roof because by the way people -heat rises^! One thing i really hope is that gm doesn't give chevy an olds the same design or we're really in for a mix bag!

samnoe · March 2004

"Besides, with a standard front console, second row passengers can have access to heat and air which is much better than blowing it down from the roof because by the way people -heat rises^! "

Just to let you know, those roof mounted vents are for A/C only. Heat has a separate vent on the floor of the van. And so are all other vans, too.

prefergm · March 2004

I cannot even believe that GM is not offering the new 3.6VVT in these vans! With the Rendevous sharing the same platform this makes no sense.
Also, no stabilitrak with AWD? What gives GM!!??

ateixeira · March 2004

Might be limited production capacity for that 3.6l engine, which goes in the CTS and SRX, plus the RDV.

They should boost production, though.

-juice

jchan2 · March 2004

slap on massive incentives.

dan165 · March 2004

3.6L production is limited but I understand a smaller derivative is in the works. Probably won't see it until the next generation van.

3.5L will work, I think the 3.4L is fine in the current van.

theo2709 · March 2004

They are selling the HF DOHC 3.2L VVT V6 in Europe already, with 230/230. The 2.8L is going in next year's CTS, making about 200 HP. There is also a 3.8L technically, but that is tuned for torque and may be produced as a Holden or something.

dan165 · March 2004

GM really needs to cut down on the number of engines it makes.

I suspect they are keeping some engine plants open to keep the unions happy though. Can't think of why they have so many otherwise though the 3.4 and 3.1 are both done this year.

jchan2 · March 2004

I wonder if in 2007 GM will add the HF 3.2 in the vans. (or maybe they'll just wait for the 2009 Lambda platform vans)

ateixeira · March 2004

I agree, they should streamline a little. Look how many medium-sized V6s they have globally.

-juice

wheelz4 · March 2004

what happened to "dindak"? He used to post to these boards all the time but seems to have disappeared around Feb.5-6th.

alpha01 · March 2004

I believe, there was some... how should we say... foul play, and some TH members got cut. Oh well. Not missing them, personally.

~alpha

ateixeira · March 2004

Too bad, he seemed pretty cool.

I guess it's a lesson for all of us - to avoid falling for troll's bait, being drawn into uncivil discourse.

-juice

Kirstie_H · March 2004

Sometimes we have to cut members loose if they fail to comply with the membership agreement on a repeated, unrepentent basis. We try our best to work with members, but some folks just won't cooperate.

dpd2 · March 2004

Is he not dan165? Once you get banned on these forums cant you just come back with a new name?

rctennis3811 · March 2004

that's what I thought. They do sound awfully alike.

wheelz4 · March 2004

I was thinking he might be too, but if he is, I guess he "moved" and traded his Aleros. (of course, that could be part of his cover!)

dan165 · March 2004

I assure you I am not "dindak", though I am Canadian.

;-)

ateixeira · March 2004

Dan's profile says member since 2001, so nope.

-juice

Kirstie_H · March 2004

<insert worst German accent ever>
Ve have vays of finding deez things out, neva fear.

dan165 · April 2004

You guys are funny.

jchan2 · April 2004

that's funny!

bluetrainstop · April 2004

Does anyone know what the pricing is for these new vans? Went on the Saturn site and they had alot of information but no price. Also, is the engine offered in the Relay the same Honda engine in the VUE?

ateixeira · April 2004

No, Vue gets the Honda 3.5l V6 from the Odyssey, while the Relay gets the GM 3500 engine from the Malibu. It's an updated OHV pushrod engine, putting out 200hp and 220 ft-lbs.

The Honda engine in the Vue puts out 250hp.

-juice

alpha01 · April 2004

I forgot to post here after my observations at the Auto Show. The Uplander is beastly. They went for SUV styling and manage to foul it up really well. OTOH, the Saturn Rebate and Buick Terazza were much better looking. The Saturn has this Volvo-esque front end thing going for it. Interiors LOOKED nice. Of course, that doesnt speak to functionality, versatility, tactile quality, etc. And theres the issue of the low power engine....

IMO, these vans will not do WORSE than the Ford Freestar/ Mercury Monterey, which now carry HEFTY incentives making them much more attractive than they are.

~alpha

joey2brix · April 2004

I checked around at the new van displays at the different divsions: only tumble weeds were listening to the presenters ( whatever the chicks with the mikes are called). Real shame, GM wasted money on these things. GM needs a Freestyle / Pacifica entry. Somebody wake Lutz up.

dpd2 · April 2004

Can someone confirm that side curtain airbags for all three rows will be available on these models. If not, I have no interest. If yes, contrary to most of the opinions here, I think these are decent vans that will be had for 5-7k less than the Nissan/Honda/Toyota vans.

theo2709 · April 2004

http://www.media.gm.com/division/buick/products/05terraza/safety.- htm

No, GM was skimpy and irresponsible with the safety:

"Optional seat-mounted side-impact air bags now also provide head and torso protection for the both the front passenger and the driver."

ateixeira · April 2004

Are they that much less? I've seen Siennas starting at $22k with freight, I doubt a GM van would be much cheaper. $24k for an LE, even.

-juice

montanafan · April 2004

Average Transaction Price in a JD Power survey done last quarter of 2003, had the Sienna at $29,000+, and GMs $24,000 and less.

bigdaddycoats · April 2004

Just curious where you got that information.

montanafan · April 2004

montanafan Feb 3, 2004 10:45am!keywords=allin:msgtext%20limit:.ef1698f%20montanafan

http://www.detnews.com/2004/autosinsider/0402/03/a01e-54395.htm

alpha01 · April 2004

Still thats an average transaction price. There are now plenty of Sienna LEs and CEs on dealer lots, in 7 and 8 passenger, with different options package, and a well-equipped Sienna with the good safety stuff can be had for about $26,000. If I were in the market, I'd skip (cheap GM) leather and extra power doors and other niceties in favor of three row curtains, stability control, power, resale value, room, interior flexibility, reliability, crash scores, etc...

~alpha

dpd2 · April 2004

GM can cross this potential (one of the few) van customers off its future sales forecast numbers. I seriously would have considered the Buick. But no side curtain protection for the kids is deal killer for me. So GM expects parents to purchase these vans that could possibly be t-boned and the parents survive and kids get seriously injured or die. I will not take that chance. So that leaves the nissan, toyota, ford, chrysler, and ford with the curtain protection. Are there any others?

Chevy Uplander/Pontiac Montana SV6/Saturn Relay/Buick Terraza

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles