You have saved this page | See all saved pages
Pontiac Montana
1485 messages, Last post on Feb 15, 2013 at 1:58 PM
You are in the Pontiac Montana Forum.- Your Host is kcram
What is this discussion about? Pontiac Trans Sport, Pontiac Montana, Van
#376 of 1485 2000 Pontiac Montana at 25000 miles by dwsterrett
Jan 28, 2001 (8:22 am)
Just wanted to weigh in with my experience.We bought a new 2000 last year. We selected based
on price and features versus both the Chrysler
and Honda products we looked at.
We were able to get a 1500 rebate and 0.9 financing so we saved a considerable amount over
the competition who acted as if you should feel
privledged to buy their product.
After 25000 miles we feel like we made the right
decision. The Montana is not perfect. We think
the suspension is a little clunky and the engine
could be quieter (I would prefer that GM put
the 3.8L V6 in this van). However, the interior
seems to be holding up well, the tires and
consumables seem to be doing fine and overall
we like the ride and handling. I think for the
money, it is a very solid minivan. Time will
tell whether it holds up over time. But for now
I would give it an A-.
#377 of 1485 so far so good! by bobvv
Jan 28, 2001 (10:44 pm)
I've just bought my '01 Montana ext. a week ago and I think this van is great. I got a loaded one with everything but the over priced montanavision . This van has all the looks,ride,comfort,and power that was looking for,( Dodge=old lady grocery getter, Chevy=beater,Ford=its a Ford!, Honda=no looks andits foriegn!,Toyota=beater) I know its still new and will keep you posted on any problems , but for now I'm going to load up my family of 5 and go for a cruise to the Smokey Mts. and put the sports suspension to the test on some of those hilly roads,and see how the van holds up.#379 of 1485 crash test results by jacobjo
Feb 12, 2001 (3:35 pm)
perhaps someone can help me - i am looking at crash test results for the montana in consumer reports. The offset crash test results show it as having a poor performance, but it is shown as having above average results with respect to injury claims. My hypothesis is as follows: 1) the offset crash test results do not accurately portray real crash situations 2) there are features in the montana (such as superior braking for example) that prevent it from getting into the simulated crashes 3) injury data unreliable Can anyone out there shed some light on these possibilities???#380 of 1485 jacobjo by drew_
Feb 12, 2001 (4:15 pm)
There was recently a lengthy discussion about this in the Chevy Venture topic. Rather than have it repeated over here again, I recommend that you have a look at the posts in that topic starting with #658, by clicking here and reading onwards.WRT the real world crashes, the offset crash test can predict the performance, but there are other variables to consider as well, of course. You may be interested in these real world front offset collision pictures of the GM minivans. Note the same buckling of the roofs/doors as in the IIHS offset crash test in all of these vans, as well as the updriven steering wheel columns. Again, there are other variables to consider, but it could happen: http://albums.photopoint.com/j/ViewPhoto?u=137587&a=10126395&p=40511478 (Keep clicking on the "next" button to move to the next picture).
Good luck
Drew
Host
Vans, SUVs, and Aftermarket and Accessories message boards
#381 of 1485 2000 montana...Great Van!! by engine12
Feb 13, 2001 (7:21 am)
I swore up and down left and right i would never buy American again....Well we bought a 2000 Montana in Nov. of 1999 and have been turned around,On certain GM vehicles that is!,Pontiac seems to have there ducks in a row.I'm actually researching a 2001 Grand Prix GTP for my next Vehicle,after driving 4x4 trucks for 16 years i've had it with the lousy gas mileage!The Montana is a big vehicle and is VERY comfortable,We drove from Central Mass. last Summer to Lake George N.Y. ( fully loaded with 4 adults and two children,and a soft sided storage pod on the roof)and was shocked at how comfortable this van is,rides like a dream,This trip is what turned me on to Pontiac and getting a car again!I recommend this van to anybody!Thanks PONTIAC for getting me psyched about GM again and wanting a car again!!!!
#382 of 1485 Check Engine Light by eddiemad
Feb 13, 2001 (7:27 pm)
Hi.. my wife has a '99 Montana with 42,000 mi on it. The "Check Engine Light" just came on. Was wondering if this light is programmed to come on at this time for periodic maintenance (oxygen sensor, etc) or if there's actually something wrong with the engine. Has anyone else had this light come on and, if so, what was the problem? Thanks.#383 of 1485 Montana/Transport"Check engine light" by engine12
Feb 14, 2001 (7:49 am)
Eddiemad.....Bring it to the dealer,I hope you have a extended warranty on your van!#384 of 1485 Check engine light by drivesman2
Feb 14, 2001 (12:49 pm)
eddiemad,The check engine light doesn't come on unless there is a problem. I had the same thing happen with my 99 Montana (now with 43,000 miles). The solution to my problem was the gas cap wasn't on tight. Carefully check to see if it is loose before tightening. It takes a couple of minutes for the light to go off but solved my problem.
#385 of 1485 #326, #328, TCS for Abracadaba by drivesman2
Feb 14, 2001 (1:23 pm)
The only time the TICS light on the dash should come on is at start-up and if there is a problem with the TICS system in which case the light should remain on.The reason for the switch is to disable the TICS system in case of getting stuck in mud etc. When the TICS system senses wheel spin, it automatically applies brakes and limits ram. Being able to shut the system off is important when performing an emission test with a dyno where both front wheels must spin at highway speed.
To POST a message, please
Sign In.
Advertisement
Most Popular in Forums
Search Forums
Enter Keyword(s):
Learn More, Do More
Edmunds Community
Advertisement