Pics...Buick Terreza & Saturn Relay

I hesitated posting this....IMO it ain't pretty....

http://www.saturnfans.com/photos/data/500/1448relay_and_terraza_pic_only.jpg

Ouf! :o

Now, I know they are 'just' minvans... but... wow.

They look so skinny and tall... :shame:

Originally posted by Darth Xed
Ouf! :o

Now, I know they are 'just' minvans... but... wow.

They look so skinny and tall... :shame:

No, no, they're not minivans, they're crossover sport vans :rolleyes:.

Anyhow, pretty ugly. They look kinda European to me. And I see GM is back at using the same sheetmetal for for the various iterations, something I though they moved away from with their Trailblazer sextuplets.

:yuck: :cry: :barf:

I always thought if you're going to build a new minivan, do something to make it different from all the others out there. The styling of minivans has to follow a basic formula after all...but I don't think this is the kind of "different" I was looking for.

ouch....say it aint so..looks bad :(

Those are f'ing UGLY.

Looks like they were designed and built in a 3rd world country.

They look like Ventures with ugly front ends added. I hope those aren't the real versions.

I was very sad to see those pics. I am not going to buy a mini van at all but I had high hopes for the new GM vans. The styling is a big dissapointment.

The market is already flooded with this $hit. WHY are they making this? Anyone with any basic business knowledge, or common sense for that matter, would scoff at the idea of making a new pos suv/minivan hybrid pile of crap..........:rolleyes:

It may be my imagination, but theres a hint of the Bel Air concept in the front of that Buick.

Is it possible that these are fakes???????? :confused:

I thought the new vans were going to have an SUV look?

God help us all. The GM studios really have lost their minds. :cry:

Unfortunately, these are the real things.

Think about it. Is there any way for a "Crossover Sport Van" to look good?

It doesn't even look crossover at all, it's just Venture with different front end pasted onto it.

So now we have:

Venture
Montana
Olds (going extinct)
Terraza
Relay???

Originally posted by Z28x
I thought the new vans were going to have an SUV look?

I think that's what they're trying for, with their more pronounced and horizontal noses. Mazda tried that on the 2nd gen MPV too, and tried to make people think it had SUV genes in it.

Personally, I like the direction Nissan went with their new Quest. While I don't like their grilles, I think the overall shape is the way to go.

Remember Saturn going away from Composite Body Panels?

Now it seems a little more obvious why they're doing it after seeing these pictures.

:no:

Originally posted by R377
And I see GM is back at using the same sheetmetal for for the various iterations, something I though they moved away from with their Trailblazer sextuplets.

Yes... this is most disappointing...

The traditional 'different grille' brand marketing. :(

I wonder why they didn't hide the sliding door tracks under the windows like on the Chrysler minivans.

IMO, they should be copying the Chrysler formula for size and basic look and the Oddesey and Sienna for features and quality.

This SUV/minivan crossover BS is not going to work.

Those are nearly as exciting as the beige walls in my office. :blah:

I was hoping a 7 passenger version of this would be the new Buick "van" (http://www.new-cars.com/concept/2003/buick-centieme-concept-photos.html)

Buick Centieme (http://www.bellaonline.com/articles/art11012.asp)

wait a second... i thought the Asstek designers were all fired. did GM rehire them? :confused:

Lutz?

hmm....umm....I guess I am the only person who doesn't think they are ugly. Well thats noting new--I am usually a non-comformist.

That Buick is better looking then a Rendevous and the Saturn reminds me a bit of a VW styling.

Now that 4 door ION makes mwe want to:barf: hahah

I saw KIA or was it Hundai's (sp) version or similar to this..is it made by GM???
it had the same hood and fender lines and was almost like those two GM cars..wish I still had the paper..I was like that the car GM is making..
I think it was a KIA...not sure..

Originally posted by morb|d
wait a second... i thought the Asstek designers were all fired. did GM rehire them? :confused:

yeah but unforuntatley they kept the interns ;)

i looks like a van with a 6" lift. I could see in they introduced this as a different veichle, but to change your mini vans to this??

Originally posted by Z28x
I was hoping a 7 passenger version of this would be the new Buick "van" (http://www.new-cars.com/concept/2003/buick-centieme-concept-photos.html)

Buick Centieme (http://www.bellaonline.com/articles/art11012.asp)

Now this I can handle! Those other two are verrrry fugly! I don't even like driving my wifes Montana all that much but I'll keep it if these two are the future. That centieme is ver y purty tho!

I just watched the GM webcast of the unveiling of the 2 vans.
Those pics that were posted here make them to look worse than they really are.

The front ends are still bad, but the rest of the vehicles are pretty nice (for a van). The rear 3/4 angle looks good. Lutz said they wanted to make it look more like an SUV rather than a minivan.

They are longer than the old vans. They feature the 3.5L HF V-6 at 200 hp. FWD is standard. AWD is optional. All the sheet metal is new as is a lot of the structure. They have 17" wheels & tires and are a bit taller than the old ones. They include IRS.
The interiors are the biggest surprise. They looked really nice. Especiallly the Buick's. Very European in looks. Lotsa features including an overhead console system on rails (like the F-150). The rear seats fold flat on the floor. The middle seats also fold down.

I think GM is gonna have a winner here.

Check this out:

http://www.buick.com/terraza/virtual/

After seeing this I'm feeling a little better about the designs....

All the shots I have seen from the interior look great. I do feel better about it now that I have seen that.

Originally posted by HuJass
I just watched the GM webcast of the unveiling of the 2 vans.
Those pics that were posted here make them to look worse than they really are.

The front ends are still bad, but the rest of the vehicles are pretty nice (for a van). The rear 3/4 angle looks good. Lutz said they wanted to make it look more like an SUV rather than a minivan.

They are longer than the old vans. They feature the 3.5L HF V-6 at 200 hp. FWD is standard. AWD is optional. All the sheet metal is new as is a lot of the structure. They have 17" wheels & tires and are a bit taller than the old ones. They include IRS.
The interiors are the biggest surprise. They looked really nice. Especiallly the Buick's. Very European in looks. Lotsa features including an overhead console system on rails (like the F-150). The rear seats fold flat on the floor. The middle seats also fold down.

I think GM is gonna have a winner here.

It is a HV V6 (high Value) I think they look fien, not that I will ever buy a mini-van but why does GM continulally put underwelming HP ratings ion lots of their cars? THe Honda Oddessy, Nisssan van have 240hp

Originally posted by Joe K. 96 Zeee!!
Check this out:

http://www.buick.com/terraza/virtual/

After seeing this I'm feeling a little better about the designs....


Hmmm... steering wheel is straight out of the 04 Grand Prix....

I meant HV. I was thinking HV but my fingers must've been thinking HF.

And somebody in the audience asked about the difference in hp. Some GM guy stood up as said that basically "we looked at the competition and we feel this motor meets the needs of the intended customer". I was thinking "what a canned response that was".

Shouldn't it be more than about just meeting needs? Shouldn't it be about blowing them out of the water?

Will all 4 have the same engine? I think the Saturn and Buick should get DOHC engines. Maybe the 245HP 3.6L V6 like in the Rendevous for Buick, and a 2.8L 200HP DOHC for the Saturn.

uhmmmm.....can I ask a couple of questions???

First....how many of you have a mini-van on your shopping list?

Second.....if not, do you believe that you know what those buyers want?

Third......knowing that there's only so much money that GM/Ford/DCX has to spend on new products, would you rather that they do a complete 'fresh sheet of paper' mini-van/crossover vehicle.........and spend well over a billion dollars.......OR......would you rather them do what they've done.....and have some more money for the kickass stuff that GuionM just posted? (killer engines, new RWD performance cars.......etc???)

Just thought I'd ask the question.........................

More money for my 2007 Z28!! :metal:


Colin
98 Z28

Originally posted by Red Planet
uhmmmm.....can I ask a couple of questions???

First....how many of you have a mini-van on your shopping list?

Second.....if not, do you believe that you know what those buyers want?

Third......knowing that there's only so much money that GM/Ford/DCX has to spend on new products, would you rather that they do a complete 'fresh sheet of paper' mini-van/crossover vehicle.........and spend well over a billion dollars.......OR......would you rather them do what they've done.....and have some more money for the kickass stuff that GuionM just posted? (killer engines, new RWD performance cars.......etc???)

Just thought I'd ask the question.........................

Wouldn't it be nice if they just didn't even bother with the Saturn and Buick versions and used that money to make a Chevy minivan that was top notch, better than everyone else's?

I can't even think of why these minivans are even needed. Buick will be the only luxury brand with a minivan and the saturn will just end up competing with the Chevy minivan.

More models = more sales = more profits.

Saturn needs the van, sales have been down lately. I imagine Saturn dealers have been asking for more models.

It's just too bad there is a lot of "badge engineering" going on.

THere are some good pics over at http://www.gminsidenews.com and Thecarconnection (http://thecarconnection.com/index.asp?article=6663&sid=175&n=156) and here (buick only) (http://www.car-data.com/xpage.preview/pre.template.asp?mfg=buick&model=terrazza) and here (Saturn pics) (http://www.velocityjrnl.com/jrnl/2005/vmd10306pf.html) and here (more on the Saturn) (http://www.car-data.com/xpage.preview/pre.template.asp?mfg=saturn&model=relay)

Originally posted by Red Planet
uhmmmm.....can I ask a couple of questions???

First....how many of you have a mini-van on your shopping list?

Second.....if not, do you believe that you know what those buyers want?

Third......knowing that there's only so much money that GM/Ford/DCX has to spend on new products, would you rather that they do a complete 'fresh sheet of paper' mini-van/crossover vehicle.........and spend well over a billion dollars.......OR......would you rather them do what they've done.....and have some more money for the kickass stuff that GuionM just posted? (killer engines, new RWD performance cars.......etc???)

Just thought I'd ask the question.........................


If this is done... then yes...

If this is a precursor to another round of "grille and badge" styling, then no...

:)

Originally posted by Z28x
More models = more sales = more profits.

This is the problem that GM got into in the 80s. All their car families were virtually identical: X cars, J cars, A cars, N cars, C cars, H cars. It was so blatantly obvious that only a badge separated a Chev from a Buick. Why spend the marketing money trying to differentiate 4 identical cars when that money could be better spent improving the vehicle itself?

As to the basic equation, "More models = more sales = more profits", Honda, Ford, and Toyota all manage to outsell all three GM minivans combined, and I'll bet you at least Honda and Toyota are making money on minivans. GM is not.

The real equation should be "more models = more cost = less engineering $ = inferior product = diminishing sales". GM's answer? Let's make even more models, then!

Originally posted by R377
This is the problem that GM got into in the 80s. All their car families were virtually identical: X cars, J cars, A cars, N cars, C cars, H cars. It was so blatantly obvious that only a badge separated a Chev from a Buick. Why spend the marketing money trying to differentiate 4 identical cars when that money could be better spent improving the vehicle itself?

As to the basic equation, "More models = more sales = more profits", Honda, Ford, and Toyota all manage to outsell all three GM minivans combined, and I'll bet you at least Honda and Toyota are making money on minivans. GM is not.

The real equation should be "more models = more cost = less engineering $ = inferior product = diminishing sales". GM's answer? Let's make even more models, then!

True for the manufactorer, but not for the dealers. If Saturn never got an SUV then dealers would have missed out on 100,000 sales a year.

Originally posted by Z28x
True for the manufactorer, but not for the dealers. If Saturn never got an SUV then dealers would have missed out on 100,000 sales a year. true but without the manufatorer the dealers wouldn't have a job.

Originally posted by Red Planet
uhmmmm.....can I ask a couple of questions???

First....how many of you have a mini-van on your shopping list?

Second.....if not, do you believe that you know what those buyers want?

Third......knowing that there's only so much money that GM/Ford/DCX has to spend on new products, would you rather that they do a complete 'fresh sheet of paper' mini-van/crossover vehicle.........and spend well over a billion dollars.......OR......would you rather them do what they've done.....and have some more money for the kickass stuff that GuionM just posted? (killer engines, new RWD performance cars.......etc???)

Just thought I'd ask the question.........................

Ahha RP!!!!....this question is right up my alley bud! I'm just going to come right out and say it......I THINK MINI-VANS ARE THE BEST DAMN THING SINCE SLICED BREAD!!!!!!!!!!

If you're looking for 7 passenger seating, lot's of room and utility, nice ride and drive....a mini-van sure beats a 6500 lbs, 12mpg, $40,000 truck...all IMO of course. If you're looking for sliding doors ( both for their utility AND MORE IMPORTANTLY....so your kids don't ding your Camaro parked next to it in the garage), mini-vans are your only choice.

They drive and handle so exponentially better than trucks too.

The problem is that some people percieve mini-vans as "uncool". Those people include my wife, who doesn't want another mini-van. We are currently vehicle shopping and I wouldn't mind another mini-van.....wifey wants more panache however.

Out of all the vehicles we've seen, the Chrysler Pacifica comes closest to satisfying both of us.........if it only had just alittle more room, I'd own one right now.

So to answer your question RP......

Priority #1:

Build me the 5th gen Z/28 of my dreams.

Priority #2:

If GM made a 7 passenger vehicle, with the utility of a mini-van...but not the stigma, stylish sheetmetal and interior, driving dynamics comparable to a car.... rather than a truck, MPG substantially north of low-teens and cost $30-$35K....I would already own one and finally have something to dump my GM points on.

I'm guessing the Chevy and Pontiac will have different front end clips otherwise they would have just showed all 4 at the same time.

Since Chevy and Pontiac already have minivans on the market, they probably don't want to give potential customers a reason to postpone a sale. Not that anyone would want to wait for these ugly ducklings anyhow.

well...there's definitely a case for badge engineering here, perhaps.......however..........consider THIS:

The manufacturer, in their agreement with their dealers agree to provide a portfolio of products that will allow them to make a respectable return on their investment. That means that GM must ensure that the Buick or Saturn dealer has products to fit a market...and to allow the Buick or Saturn dealer to make that return on his/her investment.

Now.......yes......in a perfect world, Buick would get a premium upscale "crossover/minivan" and so would Saturn.......but they would be two separate vehicles.........now.....going back to my previous comments about "only so much money" I'll ask you this:

(and remember, I'm gonna knock you out of the office if you post something that is undoable......)

You are the Chairman of GM...how would YOU have treated this issue???

Originally posted by Red Planet
You are the Chairman of GM...how would YOU have treated this issue???

How much R&D money would it cost to make two different hoods, bumper covers, head lights, and front fenders?

I think the problem is that most of us here don't understand how much some thing that seems as simple as this cost.

Originally posted by Red Planet
You are the Chairman of GM...how would YOU have treated this issue???

I would recall the earlier days of GM and remember how Alfred P Sloan took market leadership away from Ford. He reduced the number of makes and models produced by GM and aimed each of the 5 divisions at a slightly different part of the market. As a consumer became more prosperous they would move from one division to another, all the while staying in the GM family. That's what helped build GM into a post-war powerhouse that almost got broken up because of anti-trust legislation.

Fast forward to today. Sure, times have changed, but the basic concept is still valid: each division has a mission, and it should overlap as little as possible with the other divisions. What's the point of GM selling a $25,000 Impala and a $25,500 Century? I would venture a guess that the dealers themselves prompted much of this overlap in exactly the manner you described: they see a successful model in another GM dealership and bitch that they need one too, completely forgetting what each brand's mission is supposed to be. This is how you get Cimmarons. All the dealers care about is short-term profitability, not a long-term vision. It is up to GM to enforce this long-term vision and remind them that maybe, just maybe, it's not Buick's mission to sell minivans. (Speaking of Buick, aren't they aspiring to be an American Lexus? Does Lexus sell minivans?)

When Lutz was hired by GM he made the statement that there were too many divisions and models all chasing the same buyer, and that some trimming and reorganization needs to be done. Hence Olds got deep-sixed. At one time I recall GM bragging about how they've reduced the number of models offered. Has this strategy now changed?

Originally posted by Red Planet
well...there's definitely a case for badge engineering here, perhaps.......however..........consider THIS:

The manufacturer, in their agreement with their dealers agree to provide a portfolio of products that will allow them to make a respectable return on their investment. That means that GM must ensure that the Buick or Saturn dealer has products to fit a market...and to allow the Buick or Saturn dealer to make that return on his/her investment.

Now.......yes......in a perfect world, Buick would get a premium upscale "crossover/minivan" and so would Saturn.......but they would be two separate vehicles.........now.....going back to my previous comments about "only so much money" I'll ask you this:

(and remember, I'm gonna knock you out of the office if you post something that is undoable......)

You are the Chairman of GM...how would YOU have treated this issue???

I certainly do not have a problem with platform sharing, even powertrain sharing, etc... but... when the Buick and the Saturn are using the exact same headlamps and other obvious styling pieces, it's hard to really accept the fact that Buick is moving 'upscale' to the position Cadillac once held.

If Buick is to be an 'entry level luxury' brand, and Saturn is to be a lower-cost type brand... it sure makes you scratch your head as a potential Buick buyer.

I know it would cost more money, but the things you can see on the styling of the car really should be different. GM has shown they can do this quite well (Impala/Monte Carlo/GrandPrix/Century).... fairly well (TrailBlazer/Bravada/Envoy/Ranier)... and not so well... (Terazza/Relay or Colorado/Canyon).

Originally posted by Red Planet

You are the Chairman of GM...how would YOU have treated this issue???

Welp, if I were the Chairman..... and my advisors told me that we need to take an obsolete mini-van, graft a dubious nose on to it and market it as an upscale crossover because our dealers NEED this product NOW as a stopgap for the upcomming Lambda platform......then you've got to do what you've got to do.

But you won't fool too many people with it....not even my wife.

Summary of my conversation with her:

ME: "Hey look at Buick's new Crossover/SUV."

WIFE: " That's a mini-van....I told you, I don't want another mini-van".

And you know what.....the product is not compelling enough to get me to fight for it.

Originally posted by Darth Xed
I know it would cost more money...

Exactly, and if you're going to try to pass Buick off as more upscale it's going to take the spending of money to demand the higher sticker and customer respect. I certainly wouldn't expect people to buy Natty Light with a Dom Perignon label and price tag on the bottle, so why would GM expect people to view an obvious badge-switched vehicle as something better?

I'm still praying that the Camaro budget isn't only allowing for the "just good enough" look, feel and characteristics. :)

well, the Buick does have a much "richer" interior and more luxury options than its Saturn clone(i wouldn't even call them twins, they don't look alike, they look THE SAME), but the fact that Buick is even selling a mini-van is all bad...

-CARWARS-
-Episode II-
-Attack of the Clones-

Starring:

Buick Terrazza
Saturn Relay

Also Featuring:

GMC Envoy
Chevy Trailblazer
Saab 9-3
Izuzu Ascender
Oldsmobile Bravada
Buick Ranier

Originally posted by WERM

Also Featuring:

Saab 9-3


WHat car is the Saab 9-3 a clone of????? it shares a platform with the Malibu and Malibu Maxx but looks 100% different than both those cars.

Sorry. I meant 9-7.

Originally posted by WERM
Sorry. I meant 9-7.

Got any pics of the 9-7?

Originally posted by Red Planet
uhmmmm.....can I ask a couple of questions???

First....how many of you have a mini-van on your shopping list?

Second.....if not, do you believe that you know what those buyers want?

Third......knowing that there's only so much money that GM/Ford/DCX has to spend on new products, would you rather that they do a complete 'fresh sheet of paper' mini-van/crossover vehicle.........and spend well over a billion dollars.......OR......would you rather them do what they've done.....and have some more money for the kickass stuff that GuionM just posted? (killer engines, new RWD performance cars.......etc???)

Just thought I'd ask the question.........................

First....have you ever heard of a "multi-car" household?

Second....I'd say that mini-van buyers want something that doesn't emphasize the "mini" in "mini-van."

Third....there is a fine line between neglecting mainstream buyers and over-servicing a small market comprised of performance enthusiasts.

Red Planet, I'm not even going to launch into a detailed discussion on GM's current (and future) minivans. After all, that's not your department.:bow:

However, I can observe that the vans in question are largely "carried over" in regard to basic body structure. I can see a new nose clip, new tail lamp treatments, bumper covers, and a possible suspension lift - not to mention larger wheels. Oddly enough, the whole treatment (the roof rack in particular) reminds me of the MG-Rover's new "Streetwise" model. Like the GM's reworked vans, the "freshened" Rover is a product of not-so-recent vintage with a new marketing twist. The similarities end there, hopefully.:lol:

Originally posted by Red Planet
well...there's definitely a case for badge engineering here, perhaps.......however..........consider THIS:

The manufacturer, in their agreement with their dealers agree to provide a portfolio of products that will allow them to make a respectable return on their investment. That means that GM must ensure that the Buick or Saturn dealer has products to fit a market...and to allow the Buick or Saturn dealer to make that return on his/her investment.

Now.......yes......in a perfect world, Buick would get a premium upscale "crossover/minivan" and so would Saturn.......but they would be two separate vehicles.........now.....going back to my previous comments about "only so much money" I'll ask you this:

(and remember, I'm gonna knock you out of the office if you post something that is undoable......)

You are the Chairman of GM...how would YOU have treated this issue???

There is nothing wrong with "badge-engineering" as long as the shared product is sound to begin with. People frequently use the example of the J-car in this context. There was nothing wrong with the concept of Chevrolet, Pontiac, Oldsmobile, Buick, Cadillac, Opel, Vauxhall, Holden and Isuzu sharing the same platform. However, the engineering was faulty in many repects, quality was variable, and there wasn't enough "model differentiation" in shared markets. If GM made the same sort of attempt today, the results would be far more satisfactory.

Personally, I don't think that the "brand-values" of Saturn or Buick preclude a shared product. For that matter, I don't think that a Trailblazer based 9-7, or a Subaru Impreza based 9-2 diminishes Saab as a brand. If GM can "move units" and turn over a buck or two, it's a good strategy.

:barf:

Originally posted by redzed


Personally, I don't think that the "brand-values" of Saturn or Buick preclude a shared product. For that matter, I don't think that a Trailblazer based 9-7, or a Subaru Impreza based 9-2 diminishes Saab as a brand. If GM can "move units" and turn over a buck or two, it's a good strategy.


I don't think anyone is arguing this... I think most people's problem is that they look nearly identical.

Originally posted by Darth Xed
I don't think anyone is arguing this... I think most people's problem is that they look nearly identical.

So what if they "look nearly identicle?" I'd say that the underlying product is the issue, not the badge. If anything about these "new" vans disturbs me, it's the fact that the product seems pretty far from "new." By the time the still-too-small Venture clones premier, Honda will have a new Odyssey on the market.

After the long wait, GM should have produced a genuinely "new" and competitively sized mini-van. Hopefully, GM will compensate for the meager dimensions (not to mention the what appears to be an increased ride height/higher center of gravity?) by offering standard Stabilitrak. I seriously doubt that is going to happen.:think:

Isn't it amazing that GM can ante up $4.3 billion for Cadillac, but an extra $1 billion for a volume product that will sell through 4 divisions is a NO-CAN-DO?

Originally posted by redzed
So what if they "look nearly identicle?"

General perpective "A", The Buick buyer:

~~ By purchasing a Buick, I generally want a luxury image... Since this Buick offerng looks identical to a Saturn, whose image is one of an entry-level kids-car, or dare I say "cheap"? Why would I buy a Terazza?


General perspective "B", The Saturn Buyer:

~~ By purchasing a Saturn, I generally want a youthful, hip image... Since this Saturn offering looks identical to the Buick, whose image is that of old fogies and waterbed like handling, Why would I want a Relay?

Originally posted by Darth Xed
General perpective "A", The Buick buyer:

~~ By purchasing a Buick, I generally want a luxury image... Since this Buick offerng looks identical to a Saturn, whose image is one of an entry-level kids-car, or dare I say "cheap"? Why would I buy a Terazza?


General perspective "B", The Saturn Buyer:

~~ By purchasing a Saturn, I generally want a youthful, hip image... Since this Saturn offering looks identical to the Buick, whose image is that of old fogies and waterbed like handling, Why would I want a Relay?

Before you get too excited, remember you're talking about Buick and Saturn. Between Tigers Woods, Harley Earl, and the return of the "port holes" on the Park Ave, I don't have the foggiest idea of where Buick is going. The same goes for Saturn, where the latest Ion commercial features clowns, lots of frantic clowns.:confused: Even Saab is the "fuzziest" of the European makes, with no obvious purpose except as an eccentric alternative to Volvo - assuming you just have to have a Swedish car.

The big question is whether a Relay or Terazza will be the best minivan in the segment? Can a 9-7 compete against "built-from-the-ground-up" luxury SUVs? If the Relay and Terazza are just spiffed up Ventures and the Saab 9-7 is just a Trailblazer at heart, what do you think? Forget the badge and consider the vehicles they put it on!

Originally posted by redzed
Before you get too excited, remember you're talking about Buick and Saturn. Between Tigers Woods, Harley Earl, and the return of the "port holes" on the Park Ave, I don't have the foggiest idea of where Buick is going. The same goes for Saturn, where the latest Ion commercial features clowns, lots of frantic clowns.:confused: [/I].



I agree.

And how will this ever change if they look the nearly identical? :confused:

At best, it makes the situation worse .

Originally posted by Darth Xed
I agree.

And how will this ever change if they look the nearly identical? :confused:

At best, it makes the situation worse .

Assuming that Buick and Saturn has strong and well defined brand identities, the "look alike factor" might have mattered. As it is, Buick has better long-term prospects in China than the United States. Worse, Saturn is in limbo after the Ion. (Don't expect any more platic paneled Saturns, and even the Ion's "wierdness" is due to be toned down.) In the end, Buick and Saturn are just brands of GM, and not exactly the most covetable names in the business.

I think the major issue is whether the "new" vans can stand on their own merits? With aggressive pricing, upgraded build quality and generous standard equipment, they might just have a shot. If the product is older and smaller, I would expect it to be cheaper as well.:D

I'm not a potential mini van customer, so I'm not even going to pretend I know what minivan buyers demand.

BUT, Chrysler's redone 2005 minivans look just like the current one. Ford's new Freestar looks like the Windstar with an upgraded interior. Most of all the "import" minivans are essentially carryovers with redone interiors. At least GM put a front end that looks nothing like it's current minivans. And it seems GM is designing interiors that look great.

Is there anyone here that's actually going to go out and actually buy a minivan? If not, and noone else is putting bags of money on a new minivan structure, and there's nothing wrong with the vehicle, it's still selling, and people want them, what do we care that it's based on the old one. What do we care if GM, Ford, & Chrysler want to put money back in CARS!

Again, GM has alot of really amazing stuff coming up (providing General Motors doesn't have a melt down). There's a reason I posted those possibilites of future vehicles. ;)

BTW: Here are some better pics:
http://wieck.com/public/*2PV_062244
http://wieck.com/public/*2PV_062241
http://wieck.com/public/*2PV_062239
http://wieck.com/public/*2PV_062229
http://wieck.com/public/*2PV_062220

The more I see the Buick the more I am starting too like it. Interior looks nice. The only downside is that it looks exactly like the Saturn and it will be hard to sell people on why they should spend more for the Buick, when it is the exact same van.

Originally posted by guionM
I'm not a potential mini van customer, so I'm not even going to pretend I know what minivan buyers demand.



Call me Joe Minivan. I've got three kids and they've got lots of stuff and friends......did I mention the car pool?

There are NO vehicles other than mini vans, that have the packaging advantages of mini vans. NONE!

Wrap some good looking sheetmetal around all that non-truck utility.....AND I SWEAR TO YOU.........YOU WILL HAVE THE NEXT BLOCKBUSTER SEGMENT!!!!!!

Over the past few weeks I have become the reluctant 7 passenger SUV/Crossover vehicle expert (see my previous post).

Today we checked out the Dodge Durango (for the second time) and GMC Envoy.

Let me start with the Envoy. Compared to some others we've seen.....I find the Envoy sadly lacking. I've got all these GM points burning a hole in my pocket...I really, really, REALLY, wanted to like it. I was hoping that just maybe,.... some how, some way...I'd like it more than the Trailblazer.

Nope.

The quality of it's interior would look second rate....even if this were 1979. Frankly, it looked like it came from a third world country. The seams on the upholstery looked like they were made by my second grader in arts and crafts. The paint had specks of dirt under the clear coat. It's live rear axle felt crude compared to Explorer/Aviator/Mountaineer's IRS. The extended wheelbase version (remember, I'm looking for a third row)....just looks odd....sort of like a badly done stretched limo. Did I mention the MSRP was over 40 grand?

Durango:

The Dodge dealer let us take it home for the day. Beautiful interior....GM design should take a look at one. Good power from the HEMI. Lots of space. Lots of features for the price. I think Dodge has a winner! The only problem......IT IS ONE BIG HONKIN' TRUCK. I think my wife feels like a teamster driving it, it is going to be her car after all.

You know what I'd like? I'd like an Equinox with a third row seat.

Anyone ever think of that?

If we don't find something pretty soon....I'm afraid wifey is going to stick me with a Lexus GX 470 :cry: . Beautiful vehicle.....but lottsa cash.:(

take a look at the nissan murano. =)

Originally posted by Aeromaks
take a look at the nissan murano. =)

The Murano is neat....but I need a third row.

Originally posted by Z284ever
...Durango:

The Dodge dealer let us take it home for the day. Beautiful interior....GM design should take a look at one. Good power from the HEMI. Lots of space. Lots of features for the price. I think Dodge has a winner! The only problem......IT IS ONE BIG HONKIN' TRUCK. I think my wife feels like a teamster driving it, it is going to be her car after all...


That's exactly how I found Durango. It really does have a good interior, but it's also pretty d*mn big! Anyone expecting this to be simply a restyled version of the old Durango is in for a surprise.

You simply can't judge the size of it in picture. GTO has that problem too, but in it's case it's smaller than it looks in pictures.

I'm looking forward to checking out the production Ford Freestyle next month when it's revealed in Detroit.

Anyone know much about the upcomming Chevy Uplander? I get the feeling that it'll be yet another rehash of the uncompetitive Venture. The press releases make it sound good...... but then again the previous GM press releases made the Relay and Terreza sound like all new, revolutionary products.

What a disappointment. :(

Originally posted by Z284ever Anyone know much about the upcomming Chevy Uplander? I get the feeling that it'll be yet another rehash of the uncompetitive Venture. The press releases make it sound good...... but then again the previous GM press releases made the Relay and Terreza sound like all new, revolutionary products.

What a disappointment. :( [/B]

Since the Uplander is being built on the same platform as the Relay/Terazza, my guess is the sheetmetal will be exactly like the photos in the first post except with a chrome spear grille.

Originally posted by Z284ever
the uncompetitive Venture.

What makes Venture so uncompetative?

A co-worker of mine has a Venture, and loves it. In fact, he originally had a 1997 Venture, and recently traded it in on a new 2003 Venture...

On course, 2 others at my office have newer Caravans, and my brother-in-law has a 2003 Windstar... they all seem to be happy as well... but none of the above dismissed Venture (or Montana/Silhouette as being inferior)

Originally posted by Darth Xed
What makes Venture so uncompetative?



Well, for one it's old. It is at least a generation or two behind class leaders like Honda Odessy and DCX Town&Country/ Caravan. The Nissan Quest and and Toyota Sienna are also new.
By the time the next Lambda architecture mini-vans come out...all of the above will certainly be into a new generation. Lambda will literally need to leap frog 2 or 3 generations to be competitive.

I'm sure your friend's Venture fullfils his needs.....but in the mini-van game....GM is currently a bottom feeder.

I'm fine with that. I realise that GM only has so much developement money to spend. No problem.

But the point that I was making is.....how GM takes an outdated program...makes some mild revisions...and then tries to convince us that these are fresh, segment busting products. My bullsh!t meter has a very low tolerance.

This from Edmunds:

Pros: Carlike ride and handling, power-sliding doors, eight-passenger seating option, available DVD entertainment system.
Cons: Flimsy modular seats, poor interior fit and finish, coarse engine character, mixed crash test results.
What Edmunds.com says: Not terribly refined, but loaded with value, the Chevy Venture is a solid minivan if you don't need all the latest features and gadgets.

Originally posted by Z284ever


But the point that I was making is.....how GM takes an outdated program...makes some mild revisions...and then tries to convince us that these are fresh, segment busting products. My bullsh!t meter has a very low tolerance.


Well... again, perhaps jumping the gun on bashing this?

The new vans aren't even out yet...