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

jchan2 · January 2005

I had 63,000 miles on the van, therefore it was out of warranty. I was lucky to even get a free transmission.

klma · January 2005

In November I finally talked my husband into buying our first minivan and first foreign car, the 05 Odyssey, because I too believed that they were more reliable, etc.... I've changed my mind now! In two months the back seat latch broke and both electric sliders have stopped working. Also, we think there might be something wrong with it because it is such a bumpy ride. We are working with Honda to see what they will do about our problems. Most likely we will be selling our 05 Odyssey and looking for something else. Bummer! I really like the safety features (3 rows of airbags) as we've had several friends killed/injured in accidents. It also handles great in the snow.

samnoe · January 2005

...Bummer! I really like the safety features (3 rows of airbags) as we've had several friends killed/injured in accidents. It also handles great in the snow...

Hey, if these are the only 2 points you're in love with the Odyssey, than there is good news. All other large minivans (except for the GM's) do offer side curtain airbags for all 3 rows (and let me tell you a "secret": you will be equally protected whether the airbags are "standard" or "optional" equipped...), and all other vans will handle as great in snow, although the DC vans do not offer stability control. GM and Toyota will even give you AWD plus stability.

tamu2002 · January 2005

Sorry to hear that. I hope they'll do an exchange for you or something. As for the bumpy ride, I read on the Ody board that the culprit might be overinflated tires. Good luck, and let us know what happened.

isucyclonesfan · January 2005

I own a Montana SV6. It was as basic as I could find (26,645 MSRP including Delivery). Therefore I was researching the same question. I came across this bulletin at http://www.gmtechlink.com/images/issues/cnt_mo/TLcme.html#story1

Here is what it says

System 3 -- DVD RSE

The following two kits (p/n 15136091 and 15136092) are released for the 2005-07:

- Buick Terraza

- Chevrolet Uplander

- Pontiac Montana SV6

- Saturn Relay

TIP: The remote control will work only in these GM vehicles. Channel 2 of the wireless headphones will work only in these vehicles (Channel allows you to listen to DVD and Channel 2 allows you to listen to RSA).

There are two DVD systems available:

- A base system U56 comes with a remote control kit only (no headphones available).

- An uplevel system U42 comes with a remote control kit and a headphone kit (fig. 3).

TIP: Headphone kit TX3 can be added to either system.

TIP: Batteries are not included.

15136091 (Hosiden) Headphones Only Package (DVD RSE)

part number quantity item

15185391 2 Headphone Assembly

(Dual Channel Wireless)

15136092 (Hosiden) Headphones Only Package (DVD RSE)

part number quantity item

15190411 1 Control Assembly - Video Player Remote

TIP: If a kit is misplaced or was not shipped with the vehicle, follow established procedures for misplaced/missing components. The service part numbers for the kits are the same as the OEM part numbers.

Hope this helps. Bill.

spartanmann · January 2005

Anytime you buy a completly redesigned vehicle in its first model year, you can expect these types of problems. If they are corrected under warranty you should be OK. I bought the original 99 Honday Odyssey and it had a few bugs as well. The vehicle was virtually trouble free from then on and now has 320,000 miles and still runs great. The new Quest and Sienna also have had their problems. In fact all of the Siennas were recalled originally for faulty gas tanks. In general it's always good to wait a year on a new vehicle. The bugs are usually worked out and often the popularity is gone as well which leads to a lower purchase price. Based on GM's track record it would be surprising if their new vans don't have a few bugs as well.

vanman1 · January 2005

The new GM vans aren't all that new. It's all fairly common or proven stuff. Doubt there will be much in the way of problems.

wdn1 · January 2005

I have researched the pricing structure with Edmunds. The dealerships have told me that the invoice pricing quoted by edmunds is not correct. The $28K invoice for a CXL should be $31k. This makes it hard to negotiate pricing when you are being told by the dealerships that you have incorrect pricing. How do you know who is giving you the correct information? I would like some ones advice since I am looking at the Buick Terraza.

stever · January 2005

Ask the dealer to show you their invoice and compare it to ours and Kelley's and everyone else's. Except for regional ad fees, they all should be within a hundred bucks of each other, if not identical.

Or just skip the back and forth and tell them what your bottom line is and negotiate to get that number, and avoid getting bogged down in the details of the line items, invoice/MSRP numbers, ad fees, ADM, etc. ad nauseum.

Steve, Host

montanafan · January 2005

It would appear that someone is mixing up their Terrezas. The Front Wheel Drive CXL would be $28++, and the All Wheel Drive would be $31ish.

samnoe · January 2005

http://www.thecarconnection.com/index.asp?article=8019

dan165 · January 2005

I like the relay, it's front end looks good. I guess these vans are turning out to be better than some here predicted.

gmhellman · January 2005

Today my wife and I were at the local mall and a brand new sv6 parked next to a 04 Montana and the sv6 does look more like an SUV except the sliding doors. It has a more refined look to the body. With the kidney shaped grilles it does look like a beamer minivan. I was impressed with the looks. The couple that owned the van were leaving at the time that I was getting out of the minivan and the engine was quiet and the off the line power when they merged on the highway was very impressive. I really want to test drive one but our dealership does not have any on the lot. Every van that comes in is sold before they even get the wraps off from the factory. Apparently these are quite popular in this area.

vanman1 · January 2005

I still prefer the out side look of our 04 Montana but the SV6 is growing on me and the interior, all discs and engine are all a big improvement.

spartanmann · January 2005

Sadly, you are correct that the new vans aren't all that new, but anytime you put a new drivetrain in a vehicle you can expect a few teething pains. For the new van not to have any significant problems would mean that GM has gotten its act together on new product launches. Lets hope so, but their track record is not encouraging.

irg · January 2005

Here is my situation. I will need a minivan in the near future (3rd child on the way). I currently lease a Saturn L300 and I can get out of that lease now (officially over at the end of May). If I stick with GM, then I will be looking at these "new" GM vans. From the research I have read, most of the competition (Odyssey, Sienna, Caravan) is still better, although the new GMs are significantly better. I do wish they had side airbags, but as long as they receive 5 star crash rating, I guess I am ok with that omission (for now).

Budget drives everything for me. I will probably lease again, or in GMs case, use the SmartBuy opion. Their own web page makes the payments seem a lot lower using the smart buy option. Still, I will negotiate the best price possible for this vehicle.

The question is, after checking the costs using this website, which van offers the best value? The Uplander LT is $28,209 TMV, the Buick CX (optioned like the LT) is $28,797 TMV, the Saturn 3 (again, optioned the same way) is $28,855 TMV and the Pontiac 1SB is $26,856 TMV. Since the Pontiac is the cheapest by almost $2k is this model the best value? I don't have a local Saturn dealer and don't want a dealer now that isn't close. Pontiac local dealer is small and they don't usually carry the vans, but they can order me one, $100 over invoice is their policy. Chevy dealers are local, but have not been able to get an Uplander in stock yet, and the Buick dealer is also not local, but not far away.

I also have a $1500/$750 loyal rebate check to use, but it expires at the end of this month. Could I apply it now, if I ordered something for later?

Also the incentives are not substantial now($1k for all but the Saturn, which is $1,250). Would it pay to wait a few more months, or will that hardly make a difference?

And lastly, should I just wait and get somthing else like the Honda or Toyota come June? With the GM Smartbuy, I should be able to get a van in the $325-$350 range, I don't know if I could get a comparable van from them in the same range.

Any and all advice is welcome. I've learned a lot from this site.

One more thing, this van will be the primary vehicle for my wife, and she isn't all that picky. It only gets driven about 8-10k miles a year at most. I am also going to need another commuter car soon (thinking Honda Civic) so I need to keep both payments reasonable. Thanks!

isucyclonesfan · January 2005

Get a GM card. You will get 5% credit for each of your purchases that can be used towards a GM Van. This is currently limited to $1,000. However, last fall/winter (ended 1/3/05) they "topped up" my points to $2,500 for a limited time and that's when I bought my Pontiac Montana SV6.

vanman1 · January 2005

spartanman : The drivetrain is all proven also. The 3.5L has been around for a couple of years and the transmission and Versatrak AWD system are all classic GM, very reliable. Very little in the way of likely issues.

irg : Strange that the Saturn isn't a bit cheaper given it's a fixed price? Also, are you sure you are comparing apples to apples with these vans in terms of options?

irg · January 2005

Hi Vanman1,

Pretty much, I am trying to compare the exact same models with the same features. Evne though they are all GM, they seem to package their vehicles diffrently, which makes it very confusing. I test drove a Uplander LT AWD last night. Nice van by the way. I need the AWD in the upstate NY region. Anyway, the only options this one had was the remote starting $175, and a 6 disc changer, somewhere like $500. The MSRP is $32,895. A similarly equipped Pontiac SV6 (need to include the convenience package, climate package and side airbags to be similar)is $30,930. Not a huge difference, but some.

Part of the reason I think is that both Pontiac and Buick offer the AWD versions in 2 models, for Potiac the 1SA or 1SB, same thing with Buick, whereas the Chevy and Sturn only offer the AWD in their top of the line version, LT for Chevy.

It just struck me as odd, that the Chevy which is supposed to be the budget version, is more $ than the Pontiac, which I always thought was the more sport version, hence somewhat more $. The Saturn and Chevy are pretty close in price, and the Buick the most, but not by a lot.

Problem for me, has been finding one to drive. If they are hard to get, chances of me getting the van near invoice price might be difficult, but the local Pontiac dealer always states that any vehicle is $100 over invoice. We'll see.

While I did like this van, if you don't need or want the AWD version, I think given the relatively little money available in incentives ($1000 now) there are better choices for about the same money. They do look quite sharp in person though. At least the Uplander I drove did.

My biggest complaint though, is that they really should have done the seats better. The fold down seats in the back and middle, aren't as slick as Honda, Toyota or the Caravan. And getting to the back seats seems awkward for adults, fine for kids.

I have a $1500 loyalty reward I want to use before the month is over (6 days) but I think I might be better off waiting just a couple more months before making this decision. Thoughts?

dan165 · January 2005

I live in Ontario and believe me you don't need AWD. FWD is just fine unless you live in a very rural area in which case I can see some use.

irg · January 2005

Well I think my wife needs (wants) the AWD more than I do. She's from Atlanta, and hates driving in the snow. Basically AWD is needed here only a month or two out of the year. I would like to test drive a regular FWD version, but no dealer has one so far.

vanman1 · January 2005

What is the premium for AWD?

We have a FWD and it's fine on snow, better than I thought it would be. Still, AWD is always nice to have.

irg · January 2005

For the Uplander, the LT AWD is $31,385 (MSRP) or $28,403 invoice. The FWD LT is $28,676 sticker, or $25,956 invoice. So the premium is about $2500+ That might include a few other things, but I don't think so. The regular LT model (but not the LS models) also features Stabilitrak as an option I think about $500. Maybe this is the way to go instead of AWD? I am test driving a Buick Terraza in a moment that is FWD. I am curious to see how that drives in comparison. I'll post soon.

danno · January 2005

I just bought an Uplander LT with FWD. I always buy 4 winter snow tires with a new vehicle. My dealer cut me a good deal on 4 steel OEM rims and Dunlop SJ6 Grandtrek snow tires. (225/60-17 size - stock) AWD helps in acceleration but does not help in stopping or turning which are more important IMHO.

4 snows over AWD is my recommendation.

PS I live in Northern Ontario.

irg · January 2005

Thanks for the reply. I just drove a FWD Buick Terraza, and drove on some snow/slush filled roads. It seemed to do fine, I think you are right, FWD and snow tires will be fine for us. Actually it isn't me, it is the wife, who is from Georgia, and doesn't care for winter driving too much. Possibly we may move down to GA at some point, making even winter tires moot. But I like your idea, get 4 stell wheels and the tires, and make that a part of the deal. I will look into that for sure.

I did notice driving the Terraza, and the traction control would kick in now and then. Do you have Stabilitrak with yours? As I was driving this, my salesman confused that with the AWD system (Versatrak). I had to educate him, as they were too different systems. He seemed lost. Anyway, the Stabilitrak is standard on the Buick, I think it is an option on the Chevy LT. For the $400 or so, it seems worth it. But like you said, the biggest advantage is the snow tires.

So how do you like your Uplander LT? What options did you get? The Buick CXL seems to have few options, I think the heated seats and remote start are about it. Even leather is standard. Overall I liked the Buick better, just seems a little more upscale. Not that I need that. I will seldom get to drive it anyway!

Let me know your thoughts on the Uplander. Can I ask you what price you paid? The Buick dealer will selle me the Terraza for $100 over invoice. Or about $28XXX. Seems fair for a new vehicle like this.

danno · January 2005

I had traction control in my previous Venture but did not order it for the Uplander as I want to control the wheel spin vs. the computer. I always found myself turning it off. When there is snow on the road, I find some wheelspin is useful to find the best traction and to stabilize the vehicle. It's a personal preference. I would order the option for your wife. I tried to order Stabilitrak but it was not available when I ordered my van(late October). I think you need the load leveling suspension when you order the Stabilitrak which pumps up the price by another $1,000. I got pretty well every other option. dual power doors, DVD, back-up sensor, LT package. I would definitely recommend these options. Kids and wife love them.

How do I like it?

It's a van and it's purpose is to haul vast amounts of people and stuff in comfort - which the Uplander does very well. It's just hard for me to get emotional about this van.

I paid Canadian dollars and had a fleet discount thrown in - but invoice cost seems to be a good place to start.

Hope this helps.

stever · January 2005

Top 10 AWD/4WD Vehicles for 2005

Steve, Host

irg · January 2005

Thanks for the comments. It is helpful. Any reason to pick the LT over the LS? I can get all the options you mentioned (except Stabilitrak) on the LS that I can on the LT for about $1100 less (U.S.) Traction control which I will get comes with the Sport Suspension package- an option on both models. I will also get dual power doors and the backup sensor - seems like a good safety item to have.

I too can't get too excited about a van purchase, unlike my kids who can't get me to order one fast enough. All they really care about is the dvd player.

Are the captains chairs in the LT much different than the ones in the LS? That might make it worth, I will have to wait and see one to compare.

danno · January 2005

The LT captains chairs are light years ahead of the LS second row chairs. That alone is enough reason to go with the LT trim.

I find top of the line trim level with Chev usually is a good choice as it gives the little extras that add value and comfort.

drwilsc · January 2005

Car and Driver recently tested the Buick Terraza. They thought it was O.K. except thought the engine was a bit underpowered, taking 10.6 seconds to go from 0-60. This is compared to the 2004 Honda Odyssey that did it in 7.5 seconds. I understand that these are minivans and acceleration is not the primary reason to buy this type of vehicle, but why not at least give us the option of getting the new 3.6 liter engine? Some of us still want our minivan to be able to get out of its own way.

irg · January 2005

I read that article in Car & Driver. It was as I expected from them, and mostly fair. I do feel the 3.5 is a bit underpowered for uphill driving. but otherwise fine. The 3.6 would have been a better choice for sure. The Odyssey does have a 55hp advantage, and a better seat configuration system over the GM models. Clearly, GM didn't want to invest in redoing the van in a way that Honda, Toyota, DC and even Nissan felt was worth doing. With that said, the "new" GM vans are overall much nicer and are fine for most of my needs. Bottom line will be price, and as C&D pointed out, with the typical incentives available, the GM vans will sell for much less. Comparing sticker prices is pointless. The Odyssey and Toyota can sell for near sticker. The GM will be thousands less than sticker. Depends what you value most I guess.

irg · January 2005

Thanks for that info. I haven't seen a single picture of the LS seats. Question, are the captains chairs still worth it if I will have both an infant and a 3 year old in a car chair in those seats? I also like the lT feature of the cd and radio controls on the steering wheel. I found that feature instantly useful during a test drive. If I go the Uplander route, I will probably go with the LT model, or the 1SB if I go with the Pontiac SV6.

danno · January 2005

Your choice of the model of seat may depend on how long you keep the van. If you keep it for more than 3 - 4 years, you will appreciate the LT chairs. I keep my vehicles for 8 years and plan space and needs accordingly. I drove an LS (salesman's demo van) while my LT was getting snow tires fitted. Go for the LT.

corsicachevy · January 2005

After having spent some time with the Buick Terraza at the Madison Auto Show and reading about it in a few magazines I've concluded that, if forced to choose, I would pick the Mercury Monterey over the Terraza.

That petty much puts the "new" GM vans at the bottom of the minivan heap in my book. What makes that an even more damning statement is that these are the new kids on the block and one would expect their parent company to have done a better job of reading the market and responding to the competition.

This is a very disappointing effort from the crew at GM. Its not a simple fix either, like the engine or the transmission or the interior but rather the sum of all its deficient parts that makes this the worst van on the market.

vanman1 · January 2005

But have you actually driven both vans?

I agree with other posters though, a 3.8, 3.9 or 3.6L optional engine would be very welcome. That said, I have NEVER found I had a lack of power in our 3.4L Montana.

corsicachevy · January 2005

"But have you actually driven both vans?" - vanman

I have driven a 2005 Ford Freestar with the 4.2L V6 on several occasions and found it to be a perfectly average vehicle. Its fit and finish, ride, driving position, ergonomics and vehicle dynamics are all acceptable. The second row seats, but especially the third row seats, are a little too low for adult males, but that is rarely a concern. The engine is a little rough on acceleration and the fuel economy kind of stinks. Other than that, its a decent van - just not up to Honda, Toyota or DC standards. But, given the price (with rebates), it may prove to be a good value especially since initial quality reports have been positive.

There was nothing - nothing - about the Buick that I would point to as being better than the Mercury. And, after reading the recent issue of Car and Driver I don't think a test drive would change my opinion.

danno · January 2005

I bought my Uplander for $15,000Cdn less than a comparable Odyssey or Sienna. I included all incentives from all the manufactures as I tried to be as objective as possible. It was about $5,000 less than a Freestar/Monterey. The Uplander interior blows the Fords out of the water. With that difference in price, in my books, the Uplander skyrocketted to the top of the minivan pile rankings.

Of course,this is my specific circumstance.

irg · January 2005

We don't have that great of incentives on the GM vans, yet. I have driven both the Uplander and the Buick version, and I liked both. Funny the 3.5 in GM's Colorado/Canyon pickup are a 5 cyl and yet have 20 more horsepower. If these vans had about 40 more ponies, they would be well ahead of Ford vans. And the Ford/Monterrey do not have a 60/40 or 50/50 fold down back seat, which for me will be essential with 3 kids. The Mercury is expensive, even with the discounts. I do like the cooled seats though.

I think though, that the DC vans, especially the Grand Caravan SXT may offer the best overall value, better than the Honda and Toyota too. Those seats are impressive, and if GM did that at least with their back seats, they would win me. But they did nothing in this department, and that bothers me. But the overall interior feel/look is quite nice.

The bottom line will be price though, and I can see why going for the Uplander is a good van with the right incentives. I am going to keep looking for a while longer. irg

irg · January 2005

I have driven the Buick, but not the Mercury. The Buick drove very nicely for a van. I also drove the AWD Uplander, and again I was impressed. Yes, they could use a little more power, but so could the Mercury. Also the Merc doesn't have AWD even as an option. It also does not have split rear seat, and this for me is essential, since I will have 3 kids soon, and one will have to sit in the back, and so the option of her sitting there, and the ability to fold down the other half of the seat is a necessity for me. Not for others perhaps.

Every review I have read has stated the Fords/Merc drive more truck like than car/minivan. May not be that big a deal for some, but I will put that out there. AT least the GM drives nicely, and they all have very nice interiors now. And the Merc's gas mileage is one of the worst for the minivan market. Kia being the other.

Both GM and Ford have not made the full attempt at making the "ultimate" van that Honda Toyota and DC have put forth. But I don't think the GM is the worst on the market. I think Ford or Kia have that title all wrapped up to themselves.

vanman1 · January 2005

The Ford isn't too bad but the mileage is just rotten and the handling wasn't great either, the thing felt heavy. Other wise it's good.

Kia is junk, no question.

Honda and Toyota are likely about the best but you have to pay $$ dearly.

Chrysler is likely the best value but I am still a little wiery of those always shifting DCX transmissions.

I have yet to drive a new GM van but the dash is really nice and the auto start, standard DVD / OnStar and bigger wheels make it a viable alternative. Add in some incentives and it should be great. We love out 04 Montana so I can't imagine how the new vans couldn't be even better.

delirious_car · January 2005

GM has left out a few key features with their new vans. Features such as 3row side curtain airbags! Excuse me if I am wrong, but aren't minivans supposed to lead in safety? I am wondering if GM will eventually make this an option. I am sure that the new vans will have better safety ratings than their predecessors , but the side curtain mite make a BIG difference in side crash test.

drwilsc · January 2005

Car and Driver made the point that because of extra weight compared with the previous model the new 3.5 liter Terraza is actually SLOWER than the previous generation 3.4 liter vans (10.6 sec 0-60 vs. 10.2 sec). So because your van has, in your experience, adequate acceleration does not necessarily mean the new ones will.

Adequate power is in the eye of the beholder. Some people can live with this level of performance, others want more. Why should GM settle for less when Honda and Toyota (and even Ford and Chrysler) offer more?

corsicachevy · January 2005

The "new" GM vans have added so many pounds that they, despite the addition of a larger, more powerful engine, now accelerate on par with the Aveo. Not good. The Ford twins on the other hand scoot to 60 in under 9 seconds, or about the same as a Duratec Taurus.

I understand that vans aren't supposed to win the pole at Daytona, but they shouldn't be rolling road slugs either.

danno · February 2005

How often do you use the 10.0 second 0 - 60 that is available to you?

Maybe 0.00001 percent of the time?

corsicachevy · February 2005

My point about acceleration times for the vans was to highlight the dramatic difference between the new GM vans and those offered by Ford, Toyota, Nissan and Honda. The competition can achieve GM's maximum performance without working up a sweat. In short, the competition has better matched its drivetrains with its vehicles.

My experience with the 4.2 Ford in the Freestar was satisfactory. A mountain of torque at low rpm makes for a relaxed highway ride - even on hilly terrain. I wonder how much gear hunting goes on with the 3.5V6/four speed automatic in the 4500 pound GM vans?

Please don't think of me as a GM basher. My last two cars have been GM products (Chevrolet and Oldsmobile). I love the Malibu and Cobalt. I think they are top notch cars that offer tremendous value. Cadillac is producing some wonderful machines. The Canyon is pretty nice little truck. But these new vans are not very good - period.

By the way, my local Lincoln-Mercury dealer is offer 2005 Montys with the mid-level package (nicely equipped) for $22,000. That is a good value.

dirkwork · February 2005

I hear the HP argument all the time, and in some terrain it might be a big factor, but here in Houston, my Oldsmobile van has enough power AND gets the best MPG of any minivan I've seen.

For me, max horsepower is of little use. We go pick up my daughter from day care, commute to work in rush hour traffice that crawls, go to the sprawl-mart shopping, etc. Even on road trips the 3.4 has good torque and excellent gearing that lets it loaf at 80 mph while getting 26-27 mpg. I don't know the top end speed but it easily goes 90, which given the intended use of the vehicle, is plenty fast. Heck, even in rush hour traffic with AC on we get 22-23 mpg.

Can I rule the stop light drags? No, but I'm not in high school anymore and I'm usually listening to the radio and comfortable in my leather bucket seat, so the van is different attitude - at least for us.

The H and T vans are nice, no doubt, but also expensive.

DD

vanman1 · February 2005

I could care less about 0-60 times. Because the 3.5L is an OHV, off the line is quite fast. Further, it's rated at 220 ft. lbs of torque which is how power really should be rated. I have never found my self worried about power, even with our Montana all loaded up for summer vacation.

Still, I really hope GM offers the new 3.9L as an option next year. Add in DOD and some air curtains and this van will be a much stronger contender.

I think the GM vans will sell well (seem to be already). The SUV look is a nice niche for anti-van people.

cla1 · February 2005

We've had our Terraza CXL about two weeks, and so far we love it. Yes, I'm aware the Honda is at the head of the pack bec of its engine, cylinder disabling for mileage, and very nice navigation system. But I don't like putting up with the typical dealer's attitude, and didn't want to pay another 5k. The van we almost bought was DC, but again it cost more and I don't like the electric tailgate, which you can't delete with the Limited. When hauling boxes over the weekend (helping our dau and son-in-law move, the DC seat stowing would have been nice. But those seats in the second and third row do not match the GM or Honda. I agree GM should have gotten a little more creative with the rear seat and why not put curtain airbags in for the 2nd and 3rd row? But it's still a very nice van, very quiet and smooth, very sophisticated electronics, auto leveling rear suspension, nice audio and DVD system..hardly the worst of the pack. Most people like the looks. BTW, I found out where some of the weight is in this thing, take out the second seats, they weigh a ton. Nice to sit in though. Plus, we like the 25 gal tank. I don't give a rip about the power; it's fine, but it's not a great engineering accomplishment to go from the best mileage van to a mediocre one and lose a tick on performance to boot.

dan165 · February 2005

January 04

SV6 1638, Montana 461 / Uplander 3519, Venture 1070

Jan 03

Montana 1200 / Venture 2808

source http://www.gm.com/company/news_events/press_releases/

vanman1 · February 2005

I'm not surprised, the vans are well priced and equipped and have a unique look. Even the base models have big wheels and have a nice SUV look to them. It's a good niche, expect others to copy this idea.

I see Saturn sold another 1283 and Buick 801. Add it all up and these vans sold 7241 units in January.

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

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles