Any hope for a good minivan?

[WCCPSGM]

Do I have any hope at all of expecting a decent Chevy mini next time I'm in the market? I understand Lambda is supposed to brng a new van with it, but I've not heard anything about what it will be like. Chevy abandoned vans when the original Venture arrived and the uplander combines ugly with out of date in such a wonderful way .

My current van, a '96 Villager is showing its age and functions as a second vehicle. I would like to get a new mini in a couple of years to replace my car, kids are getting big and all, and would like to move back to Chevy again.

So does anyone have any info on features on this proposed van?

[ehaase]

So does anyone have any info on features on this proposed van?

The van is probably 3 years away, and there probably won't be much information for another 2 years.

[91z4me]

So does anyone have any info on features on this proposed van?

Dual power sliding doors and power rear lift gate optional or standard, keyless standard, 3.6 HF and 6 speed auto standard, AWD optional, very high quality interior materials (see Outlook for an idea), ESC and ABS and Onstar standard, bigger in size than most minivans (like a cross between the fullsize BOF vans and unibody minis), power 2nd row seats are probably likely, remote start either standard or optional, XM optional, power passenger seat optional, DVD Nav optional, rear DVD system optional or possibly standard, side curtain air bags 2nd and 3rd rows standard, seat mounted side bags for front row optional.

Just a few probably guesses based on GM's current offerings and promised things, Onstar, ESC, and ABS standard on all cars by 2010.

[C.H.U.D.]

My guess is the Chevy lambda crossover will be the next "Uplander", where the next minivan will be something more traditional with sliding doors.

[I hope GMRULES again]

Don't hold your breath. Better tune up the Villager if your waiting for a competitive van from GM.

[WCCPSGM]

My guess is the Chevy lambda crossover will be the next "Uplander", where the next minivan will be something more traditional with sliding doors.

No, The new crossover is a recent decision. Chevy and Saturn have been slated to recieve a Lambda van from the start. I had heard 2008 for the first model year. They were definately to follow the crosovers which, in typical GM fashion, seem to be growing to obscene numbers of offerings.

Any word on the rear, is fold away something GM is considering? I know its not on the current van in favor of awd, but I was wonc=dering if both could be offered on the new one. You know, a FWD model with the hidden seat, and an AWD model with a seat similar to the current one.

[Northstar]

I'm guessing the next van will be pretty good, considering Lutz said "judge me after my next minivan." The Lambda crossovers have AWD and fold-flat seats, so there's no reason why the minivans won't as well.

[Moto_08]

From Autoweek:

GM hopes new sport vans will revive sales in minivan segment

JASON STEIN | Automotive News

Posted Date: 7/20/05

DETROIT -- General Motors is developing a new line of minivans with a radically different look in an effort to revive its sales in the segment.

GM will launch at least three new minivans for the 2009 model year on the automaker's Lambda architecture, a platform designed for front-wheel-drive and all-wheel-drive minivans and sport wagons.

Current Chevrolet, Saturn and Pontiac minivans, known internally as U vans, will move to the Lambda architecture. GM may not replace the Buick Terraza minivan, supplier and company sources say.

Production will begin in 2008. GM hasn't announced a location. A year later, GM will offer extended-wheelbase versions of its minivans.

GM began building its crossover sport vans - vehicles based on GM's existing minivan architecture but with SUV-like front ends - last year at its Doraville, Ga., plant. GM's Lambda architecture will debut early in 2007 with sport wagons built at a new plant in Lansing, Mich.

Sources say the new minivans will offer fold-flat seating similar to the minivans offered by the Chrysler group, along with a radical, rounded exterior design.

A GM insider says the GM minivans "look like spaceships."

GM could use a minivan sales boost. It sold more than 300,000 minivans a year from 1997 to 2000, but sales have declined steadily ever since. Last year GM sold 157,169 minivans.

Through the first six months of this year, GM sold 87,524 minivans and held 14.8 percent of the minivan market, down from 15.3 percent a year earlier. Through June, segment leader Chrysler sold 226,908 units and held 38.4 percent, up from 34.0 percent.

The Buick Terraza, Chevrolet Uplander, Pontiac Montana SV6 and Saturn Relay are new for the 2005 model year. But GM hasn't gained any ground with the new minivans.

GM uses the term "architecture" to signify a common set of components, performance characteristics, a common manufacturing process, a range of dimensions and connecting points for key component systems.

Link: http://www.autoweek.com/news.cms?newsId=102800

[Chicagoland]

"A GM insider says the GM minivans look like spaceships."

Hopefully not too far out like the 1990 Dustbusters!

[FAPTurbo]

Space...ships...

[91z4me]

From Autoweek:

The Buick Terraza, Chevrolet Uplander, Pontiac Montana SV6 and Saturn Relay are new for the 2005 model year. But GM hasn't gained any ground with the new minivans.

163626[/snapback]

Montana SV6 is dead. I think we will end up with an Chevy, Saturn, and either a GMC or Buick but that should be it. I can't see GM having another one it did NOT turn out well.

[Moto_08]

I think they should just stick with Chevy and Saturn for minivans 2 is good enough.

[VenSeattle]

'Buick-Pontiac-GMC' dealers need a minivan... but I still think the top-of-the-line luxury GM minivan needs to stay with Buick.

[C.H.U.D.]

No, The new crossover is a recent decision.  Chevy and Saturn have been slated to recieve a Lambda van from the start.  I had heard 2008 for the first model year.  They were definately to follow the crosovers which, in typical GM fashion, seem to be growing to obscene numbers of offerings.

Yeah, too bad you missed the point. Chevy will probably discontinue the Uplander once the Lambda Xover debuts. A couple years after, a minivan will "resurface", probably with more traditional minivan styling compared to the hog-nosed CSV's.

Also, your info is outdated anyway. Saturn's minivan was nixed in favour of a GMC variant.

Edited July 7, 2006 by C.H.U.D.

[WCCPSGM]

Be warned from someone who's spent time in the segment. Minivan buyers do not typically like "radical" styling. The best bet, used by the Japanese and Koreans, is to copy the demension of the Grand Caravan and give it conservative corperate styling. Nissan went radical on the Quest, but this year toned it down and made it more conventional because it was hurting sales.

Space ships? Anyone know that the dustbusters were a virtual clone of a startrek shuttlecraft? I think spaceship is definately the wrong way to go. GM is not as far off the mark as you think now. The vans need to be wider, have better seating, and a more powerful motor.

How does a GMC minivan, not truck based, make any sense? I thought GMC was "Professional Grade"? Nw its Professional grade + a minivan!

Edited July 7, 2006 by WCCPSGM

[62impala]

Chevrolet had better go back to the name store for the next minivan/wagon, whatever...

"Uplander" is a ridiculous name for any kind of Chevrolet, especially a minivan/wagon.

Some suggestions from years past (in no particular order):

Townsman

Beauville

Nomad

Kingswood/Parkwood/Brookwood/Lakewood

Delray

Cameo

Bel Air (if its very sporty and has a very cool sunroof)

Concours

Any other suggestions? Anything but "Uplander".... Jeez...

Edited July 11, 2006 by 62impala

[Moto_08]

What about Venture? LOL

[62impala]

What about Venture? LOL

165238[/snapback]

Yes, what about Venture? I completely forgot; great name, lousy van.

[91z4me]

Space ships?  Anyone know that the dustbusters were a virtual clone of a startrek shuttlecraft?  I think spaceship is definately the wrong way to go.  GM is not as far off the mark as you think now.  The vans need to be wider, have better seating, and a more powerful motor.

Space ship done right:

[76ChevyTrucker]

Just for giggles sake, how about we dig up the S10's frame, slap a van body on it and go back to calling it the AstroVan and Safari (there was nothing wrong with those fans except that they lost a real "home" when it came to things after the dustbusters came out)

[Mule Bakersdozen LS]

I was thinking of naming the Chevy Lambda minivan Kingswood and styling it after the Nomad, more or less. I really hope GM reconsiders plans to give GMC a minivan-the Acadia is bad enough in turning a once-proud (if not shamelessly rebadged/regrilled from Chevy) truck-only marque into a diluted truck+FWD car-based crossovers and minivans one-big, big mistake-send the Acadia to Chevy, kill the Torrent, and send that minivan to Buick as a serious luxury rival; give Saturn Zafira and name the Opel/Vauxhall Galaxy rival the Relay, and thus kill the minivan there.

[WCCPSGM]

Space ship done right:

165301[/snapback]

That will NEVER sell to a minivan buyer. No chance. Look at what sells in minivans. Chrysler's new minivan is even squarer that the previous because that's what the market demands. Minivan buyers tend to put utility above all else, so you cannot hope to win them over with flash styling. GM needs a big box, FWD, possibly awd, that is as useful and safe as Dodge, Honda, Toyota, and Kia's offerings.

I'm all for a new Astro, but it can't be looked at as a replacement for a real FWD mini. They just don't sell as high. But for camper towers and others, a tough Cayon based Astro w/ 4 doors could be a real hit, Esp. if the Trailblazer disappears.

[ehaase]

I was thinking of naming the Chevy Lambda minivan Kingswood and styling it after the Nomad, more or less. I really hope GM reconsiders plans to give GMC a minivan-the Acadia is bad enough in turning a once-proud (if not shamelessly rebadged/regrilled from Chevy) truck-only marque into a diluted truck+FWD car-based crossovers and minivans one-big, big mistake-send the Acadia to Chevy, kill the Torrent, and send that minivan to Buick as a serious luxury rival; give Saturn Zafira and name the Opel/Vauxhall Galaxy rival the Relay, and thus kill the minivan there.

166332[/snapback]

I favor doing anything that will mean more profits for GM, including taking crossovers and minivans away from Buick and Pontiac and giving them to the more popular GMC brand.

[WCCPSGM]

Uplander follows an old, failed, American philosophy. If you change the name, people will think the same POS is a wonderous new model. I've screamed against this idea for years and Kia proved it wrong. What was then name of Kia's crappy old SUV? Sportage. Name of Kia's new, really good, SUV? Sportage. Number of people who seem to care that it has the same name as the old one, zero.

The Uplander has not gained a single customer by not being called the Venture, the sales figures prove this.

[regfootball]

GM making the new vans look like 'spaceships' is a bad idea

they should play it safe unless their design is REALLY stunning and in no way compromises any expected van function.

[Drew Dowdell]

I dunno, these could be some pretty badassed mini-vans.

[regfootball]

I dunno, these could be some pretty badassed mini-vans.

166707[/snapback]

moms who just forced a huge kid through their pelvis and are in the high hormonal stages of post pregnancy don't want 'badassed' vehicles to tote their newborns around in

Edited July 15, 2006 by regfootball

[FAPTurbo]

Does James Earl Jones supply the GPS voice?

...or do we have to settle for Mark Hamil... (I guess he could use the money)

[WCCPSGM]

moms who just forced a huge kid through their pelvis and are in the high hormonal stages of post pregnancy don't want 'badassed' vehicles to tote their newborns around in

167050[/snapback]

Its not just moms. Any parent who has to carry smal kids very often wants one thing from a vehicle, easy access. Its not that you don't like "cool" stuff anymore, is just that its too hard to sacrafice convienience for it.

[rkmdogs]

moms who just forced a huge kid through their pelvis and are in the high hormonal stages of post pregnancy don't want 'badassed' vehicles to tote their newborns around in

167050[/snapback]

Cut out the chauvanistic crap! Who says that Moms are the only ones who buy

or use minivans?

An AWD minivan makes an excellent camping/towing vehicle!

Not the crap that they are trying to cram down our throats today!!

I too vote, bring back an up-to-date, state of the art Astro--- with either the good

V-6 or the 5.3 V-8!!

Look at the ad focus for the Dodge Durango --- they pitch for both sides, as a dual

attitude vehicle!

Edited July 22, 2006 by rkmdogs

[FAPTurbo]

Look at the ad focus for the Dodge Durango --- they pitch for both sides, as a dual

attitude vehicle!

170003[/snapback]

Well, considering they've only sold like 9, maybe it's time for a new strategy.

... or perhaps a less sucktastic SUV.

[regfootball]

the astro was horrid.

[rkmdogs]

the astro was horrid.

170496[/snapback]

AND..... you are speaking from experience, I presume?

Please tell us your credentials to make such as observation, Mr Expert!

[rkmdogs]

Well, considering they've only sold like 9, maybe it's time for a new strategy.

170006[/snapback]

You need to clean your glasses and stop smokin' them funny cigareette'es.....

so that you can get your head and figures straight!

AND........ we were talkin' about ad focus, towards a particular audience...

and the message concept.

Now I realize that these terms may be beyond your dictionary at this time,

but coloring books about Dick & Jane will come back again!

[regfootball]

AND..... you are speaking from experience, I presume?

Please tell us your credentials to make such as observation, Mr Expert!

170578[/snapback]

ex coworkers Astro was POS. was always in the shop. i know this because i used to give him rides to pick it up FREQUENTLY.

current co worker who bought a lightly used one (10k miles on it) about 2 years ago hates it and wants it gone. Says its a POS. sucks fuel and the drivetrain needed a bunch of work.

I've ridden in both, kids in shop class could build a tighter go kart.

my sister in law has one too, but its older (from the Paleozoic i think) and she uses it to schlep flowers around. I can't make a big judgment on that one other than to say it sure looks like a POS and that sometimes she can't get it started or keep it running.

Edited July 24, 2006 by regfootball

[91z4me]

ex coworkers Astro was POS.  was always in the shop.  i know this because i used to give him rides to pick it up FREQUENTLY. 

current co worker who bought a lightly used one (10k miles on it) about 2 years ago hates it and wants it gone.  Says its a POS.  sucks fuel and the drivetrain needed a bunch of work.

I've ridden in both, kids in shop class could build a tighter go kart.

my sister in law has one too, but its older (from the Paleozoic i think) and she uses it to schlep flowers around.  I can't make a big judgment on that one other than to say it sure looks like a POS and that sometimes she can't get it started or keep it running.

       

170607[/snapback]

So you know of 2 personally that weren't reliable. That is a great judgement against an entire model. The one that was in the shop all the time was it new? What was it in there for?

The Astros had the 4.3 Vortec and 4L60E or 700R4 trannies that is a very reliable combination. Heck the S series trucks and W/T GM fullsizers are still using it!

[rkmdogs]

So you know of 2 personally that weren't reliable.  That is a great judgement against an entire model.  The one that was in the shop all the time was it new?  What was it in there for?

The Astros had the 4.3 Vortec and 4L60E or 700R4 trannies that is a very reliable combination.  Heck the S series trucks and W/T GM fullsizers are still using it!

170656[/snapback]

Consider the source, Z, you know a tin can with only two stones in it makes more noise than one that is full.

You all have seen my history of personal ownership of 3 Astros.

The '88 is still going in TN., on a farm, with over 313,000 miles on it!

The '95 AWD is carrying a U.S. G.I. and his wife around CO., in their weather,

and it left me @ 187,000 miles in great shape.

The '00 AWD left my hands in fantastic shape, and got traded only because my

wife and I could no longer lift seats in and out to convert usage.

GM left us by not updating the Astro to have contemporary features, but instead

ran the "cash cow" dry, so to speak!

Shame on them!

I still prefer many features that the Astro offered(Dutch Doors instead of a 1-pc

hatch); 5000 lb. tow capability, RWD or AWD drive train, etc.

Wake up GM !!!!!! Is anybody listening?

[regfootball]

Consider the source, Z, you know a tin can with only two stones in it makes more noise than one that is full.

You all have seen my history of personal ownership of 3 Astros.

The '88 is still going in TN., on a farm, with over 313,000 miles on it!

The '95 AWD is carrying a U.S. G.I. and his wife around CO., in their weather,

and it left me @ 187,000 miles in great shape.

The '00 AWD left my hands in fantastic shape, and got traded only because my

wife and I could no longer lift seats in and out to convert usage.

GM left us by not updating the Astro to have contemporary features, but instead

ran the "cash cow" dry, so to speak!

Shame on them!

I still prefer many features that the Astro offered(Dutch Doors instead of a 1-pc

hatch); 5000 lb. tow capability, RWD or AWD drive train, etc.

Wake up GM !!!!!! Is anybody listening?

171041[/snapback]

the topic is minvans and most contemporary minivan buyers don't go for the truck chassis/rwd based configs like the astro was. nor the dutch doors either. the astro was a niche product. caravan/sienna/odyssey define the segment. gm should duplicate that formula.

the GMC savana or chevy express would be your cup of tea now.

[rkmdogs]

the topic is minvans and most contemporary minivan buyers don't go for the truck chassis/rwd based configs like the astro was.  nor the dutch doors either.  the astro was a niche product.  caravan/sienna/odyssey define the segment.  gm should duplicate that formula.

the GMC savana or chevy express would be your cup of tea now.

171097[/snapback]

Duh!! I think you took an overdose of dumb pills, ol' football!

NOBODY is offering a minivan based on a frame or RWD today! So where is the choice?

BTW, the Astro was not on a truck chassis either. It was a unibody construction

with sub-frames!

AND nobody besides Astro ever had Dutch doors, so again where is the choice?

I can site you more negatives about one-piece rear hatches than you can about

Dutch doors....... but the issue boiled down to.... money! It is cheaper to make a

one-piece hatch than Dutch doors, or even conventional van style, - 2 hinged doors!

Your definitition of "niche products" would put the majority of all of GM's product lines in that category. So What!!

I agree, that for now the D-C vans, Dodge & T&C, the Toyota Sienna, and the

Honda Odyssey are leading the pack........ with the Kia breathing down their

backs!

But when did the General update the Astro to match their features? Never!

And it had features that the current competition have never even offered.....

like Dutch doors, for example.

I have to seriously question your perceptions of what the minivan market demands are, based on your casual statements----- you obviously are not a

user of this type of product, or you would know better!

BTW, I also have had an Express 3500 van. It was too big and cumbersome for our needs and usage.

My daughter currently has an Express van conversion, but she only bought it because the dealer gave her a better price on it than a comparably equipped

Astro conversion! She wishes that it was smaller. They pull a 28 ft travel trailer,

which the Astro could do, but none of the other brands of minivans can!

Edited July 29, 2006 by rkmdogs

[CARBIZ]

Just to wade into the fray here....

Astro customers were a fairly loyal lot. I have customers who bought a new one every 4 or 5 years going back to the '80s and really liked them.

The 4.3 must have something going for it. Don't take my word for it, ask Mercruiser because their 4.3 V-6 is the same engine design and they would know a thing or two about reliabity and dependability.

The Astro was allowed to wither on the vine, for sure. They were tough, reliable but gas suckers. I considered one in late '97 when I wrote off my'91 Caprice, but I chose the Blazer instead, mostly because I didn't need the size, didn't like the small footwell for the driver and my (then) partner threatened to leave me if I bought it. However, to tow my 3,000 lb boat, there weren't many choices then. FWD sucks for hauling a boat out of the water. I know because I watched a guy in a LHS have his wife and daughter sit on the hood because the front wheels spun while he tried to pull his boat out - and it was the same size as mine! LOL

Just my two cents. A lot of plumbers/electricians are sobbing now because the Astro is gone.

[rkmdogs]

Just to wade into the fray here....

  Astro customers were a fairly loyal lot.  I have customers who bought a new one every 4 or 5 years going back to the '80s and really liked them.

  The 4.3 must have something going for it.  Don't take my word for it, ask Mercruiser because their 4.3 V-6 is the same engine design and they would know a thing or two about reliabity and dependability.

  The Astro was allowed to wither on the vine, for sure.  They were tough, reliable but gas suckers.  I considered one in late '97 when I wrote off my'91 Caprice, but I chose the Blazer instead, mostly because I didn't need the size, didn't like the small footwell for the driver and my (then) partner threatened to leave me if I bought it.  However, to tow my 3,000 lb boat, there weren't many choices then.  FWD sucks for hauling a boat out of the water.  I know because I watched a guy in a LHS have his wife and daughter sit on the hood because the front wheels spun while he tried to pull his boat out - and it was the same size as mine!  LOL

  Just my two cents.  A lot of plumbers/electricians are sobbing now because the Astro is gone.

172775[/snapback]

Well said Carbiz, and as you would surmise, I concur with your sentiments 100%.

The only weakness that I wish GM had addressed specifically on the Astro 4.3V-6,

was the fuel induction system. It was a weak link...... and avery expensive one

at that!

The used a single injector system routed thru a bunch of plastic tubing under the manifold. Thru age and heat, those tubes would deteriorate and leak..... causing

serious fire hazard.

And, you could not replace each one individually, you had to buy the whole damn

octopus system..... which was very expensive, and the replacement of them was

complicated because you had to remove the intake manifold, and everything

above it to get to them...... also very expensive.

Why they never adapted a multi-port fuel injection system for this engine is

a mystery, since they did it for the 350 V-8 cousin.

It all goes back to the neglect that GM foisted onto this poor vehicle. If they had

improved the fuel system management, I do believe that the mileage figures

would have also gone up...... but that is just my opinion.

[rkmdogs]

Just to wade into the fray here....

  Astro customers were a fairly loyal lot.  I have customers who bought a new one every 4 or 5 years going back to the '80s and really liked them.

I considered one in late '97 when I wrote off my'91 Caprice, but I chose the Blazer instead, mostly because I didn't need the size, didn't like the small footwell for the driver and my (then) partner threatened to leave me if I bought it. 

172775[/snapback]

Yeah Carbiz, the footwell situation was not good if you had clodhoppers bigger than a size 7. It was improved however on the drivers side when they revised the

dashboard in '96. The passenger side tho, still was lacking.

Again, upgrading this model by giving it a slight "nose" ala Venture, and pushing the front axle and engine cradle forward would have solved that issue..... and should have come with the '96 changes when the extended body became the only offering! But again the bean counters won the war..............!!!!

As an aside, does anybody know if they ever made the Astro in an export RHD

version, with the slider door on the left side?

I saw some Dodge Ramwagons down in Bermuda that were reversed in that

fashion, and they came from the factory that way!

[regfootball]

Just to wade into the fray here....

  Astro customers were a fairly loyal lot.  I have customers who bought a new one every 4 or 5 years going back to the '80s and really liked them.

  The 4.3 must have something going for it.  Don't take my word for it, ask Mercruiser because their 4.3 V-6 is the same engine design and they would know a thing or two about reliabity and dependability.

  The Astro was allowed to wither on the vine, for sure.  They were tough, reliable but gas suckers.  I considered one in late '97 when I wrote off my'91 Caprice, but I chose the Blazer instead, mostly because I didn't need the size, didn't like the small footwell for the driver and my (then) partner threatened to leave me if I bought it.  However, to tow my 3,000 lb boat, there weren't many choices then.  FWD sucks for hauling a boat out of the water.  I know because I watched a guy in a LHS have his wife and daughter sit on the hood because the front wheels spun while he tried to pull his boat out - and it was the same size as mine!  LOL

  Just my two cents.  A lot of plumbers/electricians are sobbing now because the Astro is gone.

172775[/snapback]

part of the reason my buddy wants to get rid of his is because he says he only gets 13-15 mpg.

[regfootball]

IIRC, you had to STEP UP into an Astro. Minivan buyers don't want that. Same thing with the dutch doors, besides there is no way to power operate the rear hatch then, which is a feature that makes minivan moms 'excited'.

[rkmdogs]

IIRC, you had to STEP UP into an Astro.  Minivan buyers don't want that.  Same thing with the dutch doors, besides there is no way to power operate the rear hatch then, which is a feature that makes minivan moms 'excited'.

172840[/snapback]

Until they start falling on your heads, like the bit with the Toyota Sienna

investigation(read cover-up)!

Power operation does not make that one-piece monster any lighter!

AND..... they could have power operated both the upper hatch and the lower

rear doors, on the Astro system but again GM would not spend any money to upgrade the cash cow!

[evok]

Until they start falling on your heads, like the bit with the Toyota Sienna

investigation(read cover-up)!

Power operation does not make that one-piece monster any lighter!

177670[/snapback]

Do you actually expend brain cells to make this drivel up?

Wrong and wrong!

[enzl]

Do you actually expend brain cells to make this drivel up?

Wrong and wrong!

177678[/snapback]

They don't like to let the truth get in the way of some mud-slinging...

GM hasn't marketed a competitive true minivan....ever. The lambda's are a good first step...20 years late to the party!

[rkmdogs]

Do you actually expend brain cells to make this drivel up?

Wrong and wrong!

177678[/snapback]

And pray tell Mr. Brain Power, how and why am I wrong?

Maybe you don't have the engineering know-how to do it, but it can be,

correction: could have been done!

[CARBIZ]

You guys have all the answers. I will be the first to admit that the current Uplander is not competitive, except on price where it is $10,000 less than either the Odyssey or Sienna - powerful incentives for many "moms" that you look down on so much.

HOWEVER, the Venture circa 2000 was, in fact, a damned good minivan when compared to the Sienna (sludge problems) of the '98 body style, or the Caravan in its then current manifestation.

Back then, with the flip and fold seats that were available, the available 8 passenger seating, the standard height adjustable driver's seat, the best in class gas mileage, the standard ABS and side air bags and all the available options, the Venture was, in fact, quite competitve - even best in class at the time.

Yes, GM let it slide. Yes, the Uplander is clearly a stop gap measure. But to say that GM has NEVER marketed a competitive minivan is not only wrong, it is clearly uninformed and biased.

[pow]

You guys have all the answers.  I will be the first to admit that the current Uplander is not competitive, except on price where it is $10,000 less than either the Odyssey or Sienna - powerful incentives for many "moms" that you look down on so much.

177893[/snapback]

No, those moms, or at least the informed ones, would buy a IIHS Gold-rated Sedona, which is also sub-$20K after discounts. There's no reason at all to buy an Uplander.