You are here: Forums Vans & Minivans Chevrolet Uplander Chevy Uplander/Pontiac Montana SV6/Saturn Relay/Buick Terraza

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

2869 messages,  Last post on Nov 29, 2009 at 11:25 AM

You are in the Chevrolet Uplander Forum. Your Host is Karens

What is this discussion about? Chevrolet Uplander, Pontiac Montana, Saturn Relay, Buick Terraza, Pontiac Montana SV6, Van

#1435 of 2869 by vanman1 Sep 14, 2004 (11:59 am)
Great post. Glad to hear the van looked pretty good. The dash is the only big down fall of our 2004 Montnana so if that's fixed I think that is a good thing.   The van shouldn't be much smaller, it's just a little more narrow than most vans.
#1436 of 2869 by dan165 Sep 17, 2004 (5:47 am)
I have seen a lot of articles as of late giving GM a lot of credit for putting out something a little different, a van with an SUV look. Judging by a few looks inside, it sounds like it's not as bad as some people were making it out to be.
#1437 of 2869 Yes by alpha01 Sep 17, 2004 (4:01 pm)
There certainly is nothing like a reskin and the marketing folks conjuring up a faux category, lol. Even for the budget conscious, Im not sure a compelling reason exists to buy this minivan. The new Ody and Sienna will be dynamically far superior, and the 2005 DCX minis more versatile and similarly priced, and the overweight Kia Sedona is still cheaper.   Somebody fill in the competitive advantage, because Im missing it....   ~alpha
#1438 of 2869 Re: Sat in a Relay this weekend [mattw8] by ck1966 Sep 17, 2004 (5:48 pm)
Replying to: mattw8 (Sep 14, 2004 9:52 am) I live in SE Michigan and have seen the Terazzo and the Uplander up close. Although they are an improvement, and have very nice interiors, I think the minivan's will be a big flop. They have decided not to offer a product which is competitive with the competition:   1. No true fold flat seat, or rear stow well like the Chrysler, Honda, Toyota, Nissan and Ford products. 2. Underpowered and old tech (but newly re-designed) OHV V-6. The competition's best has DOHC V-6's with at least 230 HP. GM thinks people don't pay attention to what's under the hood. 3. Undersize minivan's like the Mazda MPV and now GM's offerings aren't what people want. People want room and big cabins. 4. Nobody will be fooled by the enlarged snout that this isn't anything but a "refreshed" Chevy Venture. These came out in 1996. It isn't state of the art in any respect. And trying to differentiate this model over four brands? Please. Bob Lutz probably came on too late to kill it, or delay it. Look for lots of incentives as they try move these. Sounds like some ghosts remain at GM from the brand management and dark years of the early 1990's.   One has to wonder why GM didn't develop a minivan with all of the right attributes on it's fine global platform underpinning the Saab, G6 and Malibu. Probably don't have the cash right now. I understand this may bridge the gap until 2008-2009 MY when an all-new van comes.   We have two little ones and are looking at a minivan. I've always bought GM and will give it at least a look but I can't help feeling that GM dropped the ball on this one.
#1439 of 2869 GM Vans by jchan2 Sep 18, 2004 (4:39 am)
Sure, I can't think of a competitive advantage, but if you have GM Card points, and there's a massive cash back, and you plan to drive it into the ground, the GM vans could be a bargain.
#1440 of 2869 jchan2 by alpha01 Sep 19, 2004 (7:28 am)
GM card- great point. That definitely could serve as a competitive advantage.. otherwise, these vans seem to lack what it takes.   ~alpha
#1441 of 2869 True by gmhellman Sep 19, 2004 (11:20 am)
It is true that the new minivans are just a refreshed model, but it is still an improvement. I sat in a terraza this weekend and the build quality is improved in the model I sat in. All gaps equal, I was unable to remove any plastic pieces by hand. The door closed with a very reassuring thud. In regards to the hp rating I know that Fords and DCX minivans have more hp, but they felt slower. I did notice that they were geared to more towing than the GM. I know several people that own the current GM minivans and have had very little trouble with them...all are high mile vehicles. My grandpa has a 1999 chrysler town and country...takes excellent care of it...and he has had numerous and expenisve problems. (AC compressor, entire instrument panel had to be replaced, a transmission and all new cv joints at 45,000 miles) No, he is not a bad driver, just a crappy vehicle. The pushrod v6 has been a good enigne for GM and until they build a new one from the ground up they should continue to use this one.
#1442 of 2869 Cashback by jchan2 Sep 19, 2004 (12:33 pm)
The Cashback could be like $5,000 at model year end, and combine that with GM card points, anybody could drive off the dealer lot with a new Chevrolet, Pontiac or Saturn minivan loaded for a lot less than a midlevel Sienna or Odyssey! (The Terrazza would cost more, but still be a great bargain)
#1443 of 2869 Dealers by samnoe Sep 19, 2004 (4:33 pm)
When will these new sports van arrive at dealers?
#1444 of 2869 power by tamu2002 Sep 19, 2004 (7:43 pm)
I agree that GM should up the ante on HP. But in reality one probably can't feel much difference among all these vans. I drove the Quest, didn't feel that strong pull I expected from its 240 hp engine. The old Venture has a very good acceleration number. Coupled to its good fuel economy, I don't see a reason to abandon it for a "high tech" and "new" OHC engine, other than to shut you guys up   I'm extremely disappointed however, to see the comments on the new vans' small size. Heck, why does GM think people want mini vans? I already have a sedan that I can't fit all our junk in!

You are here: Forums Vans & Minivans Chevrolet Uplander Chevy Uplander/Pontiac Montana SV6/Saturn Relay/Buick Terraza