|
The Uplander was
introduced for the 2005 model year as the updated and renamed successor to the
Chevrolet Venture. This “crossover sport van” (GM’s marketing term for a
minivan with a large, blunt nose) shares its design with three other GM “CSVs”:
The Buick Terraza, Pontiac SV6, and Saturn Relay. Unfortunately for these four
vans, most competitors have been more fully updated since 1997, some seeing
two full redesigns in that time. And those that haven’t compensate for their
flaws somewhat with generous rebates that give them a strong price advantage.
Without unique strong points, and without especially low pricing, there is no
strong case to buy any of the four CSVs, including the lineup’s sales-leading
Uplander.
The Uplander rides stiffly even on smooth
pavement. It does not absorb bumps well, or recover quickly after passing one.
Unfortunately, it doesn’t handle well either. This van feels like the SUV that
it pretends to be: cumbersome, and with pronounced body roll. The steering is
slow to respond and lacks feel. The standard 3.5-liter V6 is overwhelmed by
the mass of Uplander, struggling most noticeably in uphill acceleration and
high-speed passing. An optional 3.9-liter V6 arrived for the 2006 model year,
and it would have been logical to have that $500 option included on the
Uplander reviewed here. However, it proved impossible to find such a vehicle;
the 3.9-liter seems to be routinely produced only for the Buick Terraza and
Pontiac SV6. The 3.5-liter is loud and rough-sounding under acceleration, and
is only quiet at idle. Wind and road noise are also excessive. Fuel economy
could also be better.
Inside, the Uplander features hard, misshapen,
and unsupportive front seats, though there is plenty of head and leg space.
Lateral support is most apparently lacking with the leather seats. The second
row captain's chairs are better, but the backrest is flat, and there ought to
be more leg space. The third row is adequately roomy, but too low, hard, and
flat to be comfortable. The third row seat folds flat, but unlike in the
others here, it does not fold into a floor well but into a four-inch-high
storage compartment on top of the floor that itself needs to be removed for
maximum cargo space. Cargo space does not stand out for this class, even after
the seats are wrestled out. The recently redesigned dash uses mostly
high-quality materials that fit together well. The gauges are large enough,
and reasonably clear. Instruments are well laid-out, suitably sized, and easy
to use. The driver sits comfortably enough, but rearward visibility is
obstructed by large roof pillars, and shorter drivers won’t be able to see
well over the vehicle's large, high front end. Entry/exit is easy enough to
the front and second-row seats, though third-row access is impeded by
difficult-to-move second row seats with only a narrow passage between them.
The Uplander showed inconsistent performance in
crash test results. It earned the maximum five out of five stars for both the
driver and for the front passenger in the NHTSA frontal crash test, and four
out of five stars for the driver and five out of five stars for the second-row
passenger in the NHTSA side crash test. It earned three out of five stars for
its estimated 20% chance of tipping up in a single vehicle accident from NHTSA
as well. The IIHS rated it Good in its offset crash test, the highest of four
ratings, but only Marginal (the second-lowest) in its side crash test with the
optional side airbags. Furthermore, the second-row seat broke loose from its
anchors in that test, and the van’s front head restraints were rated Poor, the
lowest rating.
The Uplander reviewed here came in at $30,053,
reasonably well-equipped. At that price, it includes a rear-obstacle detection
system, an integrated child seat, GM’s exclusive OnStar assistance system, and
a remote starting system. However, the van doesn’t offer a power liftgate,
automatic climate control, or three-row curtain side airbags (torso-protecting
side airbags with extensions to protect the head are offered for first and
second-row passengers as an alternative).
Overall, the Uplander
fails to be either a good van or an especially inexpensive one. It costs some
$2,500 more than several competitors, both good and bad, and doesn’t offer any
real strengths. It is underpowered, noisy, has uncomfortable seating, rides
and handles poorly, and returns mediocre fuel economy. The availability of
GM’s OnStar system is the van’s only class-leading aspect that can stand up
against its flaws. Even if GM really built Uplanders with the much better
3.9-liter V6 in appreciable volume, it would be a last-place vehicle in this
comparison.
NEXT: 9th Place
|
