GM's lambda minivans

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.

Spaceships?!?!? :confused:

I know that someone allreally said it but I am gonna say it again, they should only build one or two vans and spend more money on R and D and make a much better product.

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

So they didn't learn anything from the dustbuster years or the new Nissan Quest? :think:

So they didn't learn anything from the dustbuster years or the new Nissan Quest? :think:

I always thought the Quest looked like a Spaceship.

I wouldn't own one but I'm not overly offended by the Quest, and that dash is just plain hideous. I suspect a rounder, gentler dustbuster is in the works. Hey, looking like a spaceship may not be all bad so long as it's an attractive spaceship. Anything will be an improvement on the looks of the socalled CSVs. Nice interiors, horrible exteriors.

So they didn't learn anything from the dustbuster years or the new Nissan Quest? :think:

GM has learned one thing - AWD is now a "must have" feature in the minivan market. It isn't enough just to offer "Stow n' Go" style fold-in-the-floor 2nd row seats.

Nissan, Honda and Chrysler failed to learn that lesson. That's why you see Toyota's $30K+ AWD Sienna dominating the "high end" of the entire minivan market.

IMHO the only 2 divisions of GM in NA that need a minivan are Chevy and Saturn. Pontiac does not need a minivan as its supposed to be the "Performance Division"

IMHO if they want to keep that aura then a good step is eliminating the minivan from Pontiac. Buick as well does not need a minivan. It just does not fit with Buicks image, and as of to this date I have NEVER seen a Buick minivan on the highway or anywhere.

are these minivans going to have the more lower and longer, closer to carlike proportions that these new minivan/crossover vehicles? Like the Pacifica and Mercedes..

GM has learned one thing - AWD is now a "must have" feature in the minivan market. It isn't enough just to offer "Stow n' Go" style fold-in-the-floor 2nd row seats.

Nissan, Honda and Chrysler failed to learn that lesson. That's why you see Toyota's $30K+ AWD Sienna dominating the "high end" of the entire minivan market.

I don't think the AWD minivan market is that big, which is why it's offered only by a couple of players now. Notice that DCX, the volume leader, no longer offers it.

When designing a minivan you basically have to choose between "stow and go" seats or AWD. They both require the same underfloor real estate so it's either one or the other. I think more people are drawn in by "stow and go" seats than they are by AWD.

I hope Pontiac is not part of the mix. They don't need a minivan.

I hope Pontiac is not part of the mix. They don't need a minivan.

Agreed. Unfort. it sounds like they are. Keep the vans for Chevrolet and maybe Saturn, but not Pontiac. :no:

I don't think the AWD minivan market is that big, which is why it's offered only by a couple of players now. Notice that DCX, the volume leader, no longer offers it.

When designing a minivan you basically have to choose between "stow and go" seats or AWD. They both require the same underfloor real estate so it's either one or the other. I think more people are drawn in by "stow and go" seats than they are by AWD.

Toyota Sienna offers fold down seats and AWD.

Toyota Sienna offers fold down seats and AWD.
Only on the 3rd row, not the 2nd row where a driveshaft needs to go.

The Pontiac van should be cut, not the Buick.

AWD on a minivan isn't a huge selling point.

The bad thing is that the Montana actually has brand identity. It might have the strongest brand identy of all the minivans GM makes.

With that being said I also agree that only saturn and Chevy need to make vans.

The bad thing is that the Montana actually has brand identity. It might have the strongest brand identy of all the minivans GM makes.

With that being said I also agree that only saturn and Chevy need to make vans.

It's been a while since I've sat in an Alison-Fisher review (that's a company that charts brand identity -- among other things -- for the auto industry....) but Montana, as I recall was way down on the list....and that's why the name was dropped.

Not sure what will happen, but you can be assured that not every division will have a mini-van. Looking at the channel strategy (where Pontiac/Buick/GMC are combined under one dealership roof) it would seem --at least to me -- that GMC would probably be the other mini-van.....depending on how the mini-van market holds up. (and by the way, I have absolutely no imput whatsoever into that decision.....)
That market, as I recall, (and I could be wrong) is shrinking as many former mini-van owners either become empty nesters....or move to SUVS or cross-over vehicles. Seems I saw a study not too long ago that showed that the Chrysler Pacifica got a very large portion of its owners from Mini-vans........same with the Equinox.

I've noticed alot of older people driving minivans now. Like retirees in flordia. They love them. I know two older couples with them.

BTW the orginal post called the pontiac van the Montana SV6. I never knew that they dropped the name, I thought that they dropped the transport name. I would bet that the montana has more brand identity than the venture.


BTW I wouldn't bet much, we are talking minivans here.

From what we shown to the press the Lambda crossovers are Buick, GMC, and Saturn. That may or may not change the Minivan lineup but it could possibly.

It's been a while since I've sat in an Alison-Fisher review (that's a company that charts brand identity -- among other things -- for the auto industry....) but Montana, as I recall was way down on the list....and that's why the name was dropped.

Not sure what will happen, but you can be assured that not every division will have a mini-van. Looking at the channel strategy (where Pontiac/Buick/GMC are combined under one dealership roof) it would seem --at least to me -- that GMC would probably be the other mini-van.....depending on how the mini-van market holds up. (and by the way, I have absolutely no imput whatsoever into that decision.....)
That market, as I recall, (and I could be wrong) is shrinking as many former mini-van owners either become empty nesters....or move to SUVS or cross-over vehicles. Seems I saw a study not too long ago that showed that the Chrysler Pacifica got a very large portion of its owners from Mini-vans........same with the Equinox.


IMHO, if the Buick/Pontiac/GMC group is going to have a minvan, it should be Buick.

But not the Buick minivan we have today.

Pontiac shouldn't have one... doesn't fit the desired performance image at all .

GMC, with all due respect to Scott, shouldn't have one because what is "professional grade" about a minivan? Unless you go back to an Astro/ Safari-like minivan that plumbers and electricians could legitimately use.... keep the kiddy haulers away from your "professional grade" truck division.

That brings us to Buick. The "entry-level luxury family brand"... a perfect place for a minivan, but it has to be one that is significantly different and more upscale and luxurious than the simple rebasge job that the Terazza is.... give people a REASON to WANT the Buick minivan over the basic Chevy (or Ford... or Dodge...) minivans... true distinctive luxury qualities and looks, and not a carbon-copy look of other GM minivans.

I don't think the AWD minivan market is that big, which is why it's offered only by a couple of players now. Notice that DCX, the volume leader, no longer offers it.

When designing a minivan you basically have to choose between "stow and go" seats or AWD. They both require the same underfloor real estate so it's either one or the other. I think more people are drawn in by "stow and go" seats than they are by AWD.

1. Chrysler's AWD minivans were overpriced ($35K+MSRPs). More to the point, the availability was practically nonexistant. If Chrysler had offered a full model-range of practically priced vans, they might have been successful.

2. It isn't impossible to combine a fold-in-floor 2nd row along with AWD. The big problem is that most manufacturers have lacked the vision to make it work.

1. Chrysler's AWD minivans were overpriced ($35K+MSRPs). More to the point, the availability was practically nonexistant. If Chrysler had offered a full model-range of practically priced vans, they might have been successful.

2. It isn't impossible to combine a fold-in-floor 2nd row along with AWD. The big problem is that most manufacturers have lacked the vision to make it work.

Have you ever even turned on a Unix workstation? Didn't think so... :rolleyes: :death:

IMHO, if the Buick/Pontiac/GMC group is going to have a minvan, it should be Buick.

GMC shouldn't have one because what is "professional grade" about a minivan? Unless you go back to an Astro/ Safari-like minivan...
It's settled then. :)