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

jchan2 · July 2004

I would also like to add that if your company is perceived as having poor quality, reliability and products, you have to take even more effort just to stay on buyers lists. It'll take several generations of kick butt engine minivans that are all fully loaded and a irrestible value for consumers to change. GM products have to OUTPERFORM, OUTCLASS and most importantly, UNDERPRICE. If I can buy a Saturn Relay for $28,000 and a Honda Odyssey EX for $28,000, which one am I going to buy? Obviously the Odyssey since it has a kick butt engine, safety features, convienience features and it's a great value. (well the 04's are, at least) I'm not going to pay $38,000 for a Terrazza when I can get a better designed Sienna XLE Limited for the same amount of my money. The Malibu is a first step, it's up there with the Big Four, according to CR. (Passat, Accord, M6, Camry) And the Malibu is a good buy. But that's just one model. The ideas of the Malibu have to carry over to other GM models in order to stay being the largest automaker in the world. Your opinions on this issue?

ateixeira · July 2004

I think you're onto something.

Perception lags behing reality, usually by several years. A good example is Hyundai, they beat Toyota in JDP IQ study overall, but they're still joked about. Maybe that'll change in 3 years.

So yeah, even if the new vans are great, they'll have to sustain that greatness for a few years to appear on enough radar screens to gain market share.

Also - resale value will be based on the outgoing model. So they'll have to sell based on value and rebates until they can boost resale values as well.

-juice

tamu2002 · July 2004

Precisely my point! I came to this revelation just in the last few months when we finally checked out the "pricier" imports vans. The price differences were actually minimal for comparably equipped vans.

Your assessment is right on. Bottom line is Detroit needs a RADICAL and drastic strategy. Hyundai did exactly that and they're winning over hearts everyday.

alpha01 · July 2004

Yes, but did you see where Hyundai fell on JD Power's 3 year dependability study? (5th from last, with 100 more problems per 100 cars than the industry average).

~alpha

ateixeira · July 2004

Yes, a poor showing, but I think those were 2001 models, something like that, i.e. previous generations for the most part.

But you bring up a good point - there is a further lag that occurs to measure the improvement, assuming there is one.

So if it takes them another 3 years to improve on the durability stufy, public perception might take, well, forever basically, to catch up! LOL

-juice

tamu2002 · July 2004

Precisely my point! I came to this revelation just in the last few months when we finally checked out the "pricier" imports vans. The price differences were actually minimal for comparably equipped vans.

Your assessment is right on. Bottom line is Detroit needs a RADICAL and drastic strategy. Hyundai did exactly that and they're winning over hearts everyday.

dan165 · July 2004

ateixeira, Hyundai as a company still ranks low on long term reliability and I still think they are built from cheap parts though initial quality is indeed up.

I think the new vans may surprise some doubters as I still think the current offering has one of the best ride qualities in the van biz. We shall see in a few months I guess.

In terms of looks, Chrysler still wins with me. Very attractive and modern. The Quest looks like a frog, way over the top and the Honda is too conservative. Toyota could be good if they fixed the nose.

ateixeira · July 2004

I agree completely on styling.

-juice

bigdaddycoats · July 2004

SV6 at Mcdonalds today. Only saw the outside and it looked better than I thought. Still pretty much looked like the old minivan from the windshield back. Looked good in red though.

rctennis3811 · July 2004

I agree with you - the CSVs aren't great, except on interiors which are best in class IMHO. While some of thsoe on this board will tell you that most people will overlook side-curtains, they are wrong. The buying public is smart and when buying a car, most people look at different models from different makes. So if they see that every other minivan in this class has a certain feature(s) and the CSVs do not have those, then obviously the smarter shopper will move to a DCX, Freestar, Quest, Sienna, or Odyssey.

vanman1 · July 2004

We bought a 2004 Montana in April and we love it. Smooth power train, great ride, tight turning radius, awesome mileage and well priced. It only has SABs (which are standard by the way) but I am fine with that. It really was not really an issue for us and even if they were offered I doubt I would have bought them as they likely would have come in some $1500 package. I did get full traction control added though, I think it is a lot more important to keep control of your van in the first place.

New vans will be good I think. Maybe not tops in class but whatever. My big issue is the looks which is why we bought an 04. Maybe it will look better in person but I didn't care for the picture of the 05 Montana. Interior looks real nice though.

a_l_hubcaps · July 2004

They are not offering side curtains AT ALL on these vans? That's pretty pathetic. If a manufacturer is going to have one safe vehicle in their fleet, it should be the minivan.

-Andrew L

tamu2002 · July 2004

Side curtains can literally be a life saver in a side crash. They're really the only thing that protects the head. A side crash caused by someone who runs a red light has nothing to do with your driving skills and ability to control your vehicle. I'd definitely want my family's heads protected in a crash like that. Side curtains shouldn't cost above $1K to get. If I remember correctly the canopy on the Freestar costs only about $500.

dan165 · July 2004

I read somewhere the head curtains will be available next year on the GM vans. I agree they could save your life or from further injury, but only in very specific circumstances. If a big truck hits your van on the side they might help. If a car hits you, they won't.

That all said, a government report recently showed that in many cases for cars, they did not improve safety.

rctennis3811 · July 2004

Only in specific circumstances!?! Even if it's not a bigger car plowing through the side of your minivan, you can still get injured. Your head could hit something sharp, and that's where the side-curtains come into effect. Also in rollovers, side-curtains prove to be effective. I know this for a fact because I was in a side-impact wreck awhile back and side-curtains help - heck, I wasn't even hit directly, the other guy hit the side of my trunk!

alpha01 · July 2004

Provide a link to that "government study", please.

~alpha

hansienna · July 2004

GM makes the large, safe Chevy Suburban and GMC Yukon XL while Ford makes the large, safe Ford Excursion. Crash tests where a vehicle is driven into a fixed barrier show how each vehicle is affected in one, isolated, specific scenario.
No small, lighter weight vehicle will be as safe as the large, heavy SUV's.
Safe driving habits CAN prevent most accidents. A safe driver is alert at all times with eyes scanning the front and all 3 rear view mirrors....mentally preparing the evasive action necessary to avoid an accident.

rctennis3811 · July 2004

Ok, say you're a driver who constantly practices "safe driving habits". That doesn't mean you can't get into an accident. There's plenty of people out there who run red lights. Even if they are driving a big SUV and they plow into your midsize sedan's side, side-curtain airbags will help. Would you rather have your head hit tons of glass and metal, or have a "pillow" deploy from the roof to cover as much glass and metal as possible?

tamu2002 · July 2004

I completely agree with what you said, however accidents can be and are being caused by other reckless drivers. Plus, it'll be the wife driving the van. I can't be sure that SHE will practise defensive driving all the time, especially with the kids screaming in the bakc

So better get all the air bags you can get...

ateixeira · July 2004

plow into your midsize sedan

But these are minivans, and the window lines are much higher, I believe. So you have far more natural protection already.

The seats are also probably farther away from the sides of the car, so you have a bigger crumple zone.

I'm not sure that side curtain air bags would help a child strapped to a child seat at all. I doubt he'd reach it.

Bigger kids, maybe, if they're really tall.

-juice

vanman1 · July 2004

Vans are indeed higher up so cars hitting the side are no where near the glass. Big trucks yes maybe, but I think head curtains have limited use. A stronger frame to protect from side impact is FAR more useful than an airbag at providing protection. Some of you seem to be forgetting that fact. The current GM vans are already well rated there.

Don't get me wrong, the more protection the better. I just think some people are over emphisising the need for curtains. Give me a strong frame, ABS and traction control any time over air curtains.

envoysle · July 2004

I'm leasing a Pontiac Montana 2002, my lease ends in july 2005. At first, it was a realy nice ride, but since then, i'm starting to ear lots of rattle noise in the cabin. It seems like everything is getting loose somehow. I did not do anything special with it, did not carry heavy things and never got more than 4 or 5 passenger in it. I have 48,500KM on it.

I've talked with other owners of Montana/Venture and they all say the same thing, good for the first year and then it slowly start to break apart.

alpha01 · July 2004

The GM minivans indeed do well in the NHTSA side impact test. But that test is terribly antiquated, and ALL minivans and SUVs (with their higher seating positions) get at least 4 stars in that test, so its usefulness is extremely limited. Since the striking barrier is lower than the body of the occupants, this test basically shows that where people sit higher, a regular passenger (well, actually one with a flat nose design from the 1980s) will inflict little injury. STOP THE PRESSES! Or not. This is something we all could have figured out by ourselves. But- there are a lot of SUVs on the road. There are lot of minivan. And pickups. What happens when you're struck by one them? Well, even if you're a couple of inches more away from the door in a minivan than in the passenger car, which Juice contends, thats still precious little crush space.

I agree with you that a strong frame, ABS, and traction control are very valuable. But the fact remains that inflatable side head protection increases your chances of surviving a side impact by a WHOPPING 45%. With other manufacturers at least offering all of your above requirements, why should GM be pardoned for not?

"A stronger frame to protect from side impact is FAR more useful than an airbag at providing protection."

http://www.iihs.org/vehicle_ratings/ce/html/side/s0402.htm

The Mitsu Galant achieved the highest rating for Structure in the IIHS test, a "Good". Still, the SUV designed barrier inflicted "fatal" injuries to the head, neck, and torso.

The Toyota Camry, whose structure also held up well, but not quite as well as the Galant (it got an "Acceptable" mark for that measure) inflicted similar injuries when not tested with the side curtain airbag.

But when tested with curtains, still with the same "Acceptable" structure, injuries went from fatal to easily survivable: http://www.iihs.org/vehicle_ratings/ce/html/side/s0315.htm

My point is only that in terms of side impacts, structure alone is not going to get the job done. For that matter, neither will side head protection (reference the Hyundai Sonata, whose poor structure couldnt be compensated by the side airbag). Both structure and restraint systems are vital in this type of crash, and GM, with this next gen minivan, is failing to provide part of the equation.

~alpha

tamu2002 · July 2004

"Give me a strong frame, ABS and traction control any time over air curtains."

The argument is not whether these active safety features are important. The argument is why GM does not offer the customers even the choice of having an ADDED important protection. Plus even if the frame holds up perfectly in a side impact, the passenger's head and torso could still slam into the side of the vehicle causing injuries.

It's really beyond me why GM decided to forgo such an important saftety option. And I have been a happy customer always rooting for them.
Please GM, do something. Now I don't even know if we'll seriously consider their new vans.

dan165 · July 2004

Yes, the curtains do help side crash injury in some cars BUT, would we get the same results in van? I doubt it. Like vanman says, vans sit up higher and I don't think the same improvement would be seen.

It would be interesting to see what percentage of buyers who get vans that have air curtains available, actually buy the option. I'll bet it's very low given the number of base models I see with plastic wheel covers, but that's not to say it's not a usefull option.

spartanmann · July 2004

Those of you with your heads in thde sand, look around. Minivans marketing stresses safety first because most vans have mommies and little kids in them. It really doesn't matter how effective side curtain air bags are. The fact is that the competition has them and GM doesn't. The average minivan buyer isn't going to review crash statistics and studies. They just will look at who made the effort to incorporate available safety features and who didn't. GM will have enough problems trying to sell these things anyway, but leaving side curtains out was just plain stupid. Of course leaving out the rear hide as seat that everyone else has, was also stupid. Kind of gives you the idea that GM isn't particularly interested in competing in this segment.

ateixeira · July 2004

Not at the *top* of the segment, any way. I think that decision was deliberate.

-juice

dan165 · July 2004

I suppose I have my head in the sand then.

Why would it be deliberate?

ateixeira · July 2004

They chose to compete on price and on the lower end of the segment.

Not everyone aims to be the best car in the segment. Koreans have competed on price for decades.

-juice

tamu2002 · July 2004

GM did not intend to compete with the top dogs, judged by the vans' new great looking classy interior. Their vision was blurred somewhere along the development line. Too bad really.

alpha01 · July 2004

Juice,

The Koreans have competed on price for the last two decades primarily because that was the only competitive advantage that could be offered with their products. That is changing, though, as more often, vehicles like the still value-rich Elantra are doing quite well in evaluations by the likes of high readership publications such as Consumer Reports and Car and Driver.

GM should not be competing solely on price with these minivans, but it is going to (same as currently for Ford). GM has been around long enough that it should understand the pitfalls of offering a poor product just to be in that market segment, IMO. Really, it all goes back to the antiquated structure unions play- GM is crippled by the fact that it simply cant afford to close plants (as well as by its astronomical pension costs).

This post was a bit wide-ranging, but I hope you follow my though process.

~alpha

vanman1 · July 2004

The Terazza should compete head on with Honda and toyota. Chevy is definitely going for the lower end but that's ok. Most people I see driving vans are young families and most of them are on a budget. The lower end is bigger so Chevy should do well there.

ateixeira · July 2004

Hyundai has moved up, and even Kia's new Spectra has side-curtain air bags and variable valve timing standard.

That's impressive, some of the giants don't do that yet. Certain vans don't even offer either of those...

<ducks for cover>

-juice

spartanmann · July 2004

Nobody understands why GM does lots of things. They can turn out great new products like the new Caddys and at the same time give a warmed over uncompetitive minivan to two additional division to sell. Who knows why. Remember they still have almost all of the same management team in place that thought the Aztec was going to be a big success!

ateixeira · July 2004

Actually the team leader for the Aztec was promoted. True story.

-juice

montanafan · July 2004

What is overlooked in the Aztek situation, is that they got the predicted production volume correct. Just backwards. The Aztek sold at the volumne they expected the Rendevous to sell at, and the Rendevous sold at the volumne they thought the Aztek would.

And as far as the Aztek brand manager, I wouldn't call it a "promotion" to be moved up to a non visable position in the OnStar group. Bing change from being on 60 minutes or Dateline or whatever he was featured on.

ateixeira · July 2004

Is that really where he ended up? I thought he was promoted to run a new products division or something?

Maybe I'm thinking of that person's boss.

-juice

montanafan · July 2004

GM Media site has a great serch function. Found him.

DON BUTLER - VICE PRESIDENT, ONSTAR COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT
Don Butler, vice president of OnStar Commercial Development, is responsible for the development of key business relationships critical to sustaining the OnStar business. He assumed this position on Jan. 1, 2002. Butler joined OnStar in spring 2001 as vice president for OnStar Virtual Advisor.

Butler began his General Motors career as a college coop student in 1981 at Pontiac Engineering. In 1986, he became a design engineer for the Corvette Electrical Systems Group at the former Chevrolet-Pontiac-GM of Canada in Warren, Mich. Four years later he became a systems engineer for Advanced Vehicle Engineering in Pontiac, Mich. In 1990 he was named market analyst for GM Marketing and Product Planning.

He returned to Pontiac in 1992 when he was appointed zone marketing manager for the Detroit Zone. The following year he moved to Pontiac Central Office as market planner of the Grand Am. In 1994 Butler was named brand-planning manager of the Grand Am. In 1995, he became a manufacturing systems manager at Lansing Auto Division (LAD), before being named assistant brand manager-product for the Grand Am in 1996, the position he held prior to being promoted to Aztek Brand Manager on July 1, 1997.

A native of Columbia, Miss., Butler was born on Dec. 4, 1963. He received his Bachelor of Science degree in electrical engineering from GMI in 1986 and his MBA from Harvard Business School in 1990.

dan165 · July 2004

One thing you have to keep in mind (and a lot of people forget) is that there are financial constraints that a company must meet. GM is saddled with huge pension burdens to make things worse. Given GM is pouring billions into some cars (Cobalts and G6s) and the Cadillac division means it has less to go elsewhere. I was reading an article the other day that rich pensions alone mean GM is at a $1500 disadvantage to other makes.

It's easy to say GM does dumb things but it's a 100% better company than it was 10-15 years ago when I abandoned it due to unreliable cars. Yup, they still do dumb things but so do most other car makers. Hopefully an all new van will come soon and hopefully in the mean time they make some more improvements to these coming vans over the next year. Apparently head curtains would make a few of you happy and wouldn't break the bank.

spartanmann · July 2004

I agree with just about everything you say. I have no doubt they have a $1500 disadvantage from pension and health care obligations. However, when rebates hit $3000-$5000 or more to try to sell vehicles plus the cost of 0% financing, you have to ask yourself at what point is that money better spent going into product development as opposed to bribing customers to buy an uncompetitive product.

spartanmann · July 2004

You're forgetting that the Aztec sold so poorly that it was immediately redesigned (unprecedented in this day and age) to make it slightly less ugly. The expense involved in just cosmetic changes is enormous. As for their brand manager, he was not the guy who approved putting it into production. He was the guy stuck trying to explain what the hell happened. The Vice Presidents who actually approved putting it into production are the ones responsible for it.

ateixeira · July 2004

Brand Manager for Aztek, OK. I think I read about someone above him in Automotive News getting a promotion, might have been in Autoweek also. Wish I could remember the name...

-juice

vanman1 · July 2004

Aztek was ahead of it's time is all. Not to say I like it but there is tons of ugly crap out now and nobody makes the big deal about it that they did when Aztek came. Look at the Element, Scion X something. Same stupidity.

It's too bad GM is so far in the whole. It's nice they take care of their retirees but it's killing the company.

ateixeira · July 2004

Pontiac went out of control with gills, scoops, soilers, etc. The original concept wasn't that bad, actually.

Scion xB is boxy but a very clean design, with none of the goofy "accessories" on the Pontiac. It's selling well, well beyond demand, they actually had to adjust production to make more xB models and fewer xAs.

Element is also selling way beyond expectations.

Price may have something to do with it - both are well below market prices for competitors. Aztek gave people sticker shock.

-juice

spartanmann · July 2004

You are correct about the sales for the Scion and Element. It's all about understanding your market. The Scion and Element are intentionally ugly and unconventional. They are also cheap and functional and marketed directly to the gen X crowd that has a limited budget and thinks driving something funky looking is actually cool, sort of like their tattoos and eyebrow piercings.

The Aztec on the other hand was priced only slightly less than the GM minivans. GM somehow expected older and more mature types to go for that styling and spend 25K or more on it - totally unrealistic. That explains why the more normal looking Rendevous sold much better despite costing more.

ateixeira · July 2004

Bingo, exactly.

Element costs less than the similar CR-V it's based on, even though it has 16" rims.

Scion xB carries a dirt cheap MSRP, it's reverse-sticker-shock.

-juice

dan165 · July 2004

Scion and Element are both marginal products though. Quality and crash tests on thr Element has been sub-Honda. Aztek did drop it's price substantially and I have seen them at year end with C$9-10K off sticker.

I don't even notice Azteks when I see them anymore. Nothing very shocking.

Aztek type vehicle based on a cheaper platform would sell better. I actually do know a few younger folk that would have bought had the price been less.

ateixeira · July 2004

None of those factors have affected sales.

What's impressive is that Element is selling at twice the projected rate, yet it has not cannibalized CR-V sales, which are also strong. From a marketing stand point, it's a smashing success. So is the xB.

Aztek was a dud from the beginning.

It's not alone, the Baja was a dud as well. Again, higher than expected prices.

Avalanche was successful, though.

I guess if you're going to build an out-there styled vehicle, it had better be priced right. It seems the same people that are willing to go out on a limb in terms of styling are NOT willing to bet the bank on it.

Just an observation.

-juice

dan165 · July 2004

Yup, priced right anything will sell. I don't consider beating a company produced low projection to neccesarily mean a vehicle is a success though. The local dealer has lots of Elements sitting on the lot week after week and I don't see almost any on the road. It's not that big a deal really, its a niche car.

samnoe · July 2004

is company quality. Scion (Toyota) and Element (Honda) sells quality, while Aztek is "just" a Pontiac.

IMO, the Lexus RX-330 looks similar to the Aztek. Many people out there just hate the looks of the RX-330, while the looks of the older RX-300 was very nice. And look how good it sells! And for what price! That's Lexus quality people go for, and of course excellent driving dynamics with so many features adds to the excitement. In such case, who cares about looks?

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

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles