Chevrolet Uplander Review
An airport car rental attendant recently handed me the keys to my temporary chariot and declared “Your car is down the row to your right. It’s an ‘06 Uplander.” A what? “It’s kind of an SUV,” she kind of explained. The butt-end of a something large and ugly poked out of stall 97. The bow tie on the trim above the license plate revealed the vehicle’s manufacturer: Chevrolet. Apprehensively, I slid behind the wheel of the awkward-looking beast. I looked around. I turned to my colleague. “No wonder GM is in such bad shape.”
The Uplander’s exterior could have been penned twenty-five years ago. The awkward yet infinitely bland exterior displays all the styling finesse and surface excitement of a 1981 Chevy Malibu– with none of the stalwart sedan’s balanced proportions. You can see how GM’s designers tried to transform their plane Jane minivan into a “Crossover Sport Van”: a longer than needed snout, big-ass B-pillars, slightly larger wheels and faux skid plates. It’s an entirely unconvincing effort that somehow manages to capture the worst of both the SUV and minivan genres.
Once inside, a flip-down DVD screen attached to ceiling rails provides the only indication that “Bette Davis Eyes” isn’t about to debut on the radio. Again, it’s an interior from another era– before Chrysler, Honda and Toyota showed American soccer Moms that you could schlep the team in something very much approaching style. Hell, you can’t even get comfortable in the thing. The Uplander’s driver’s seat wouldn’t retreat far enough to accommodate my frame, and my preferred steering wheel position fell somewhere between two notches. Hello? I’m 5’11”.
Otherwise, the comfort sucks. The Uplander’s architecture, inherited from the 1997 Chevrolet Venture (whose running gear lives in perpetuity) is still too narrow to accommodate its [theoretical] complement of seven adults. And the Uplander’s plastics seem designed by rental car companies for rental car companies; their ability to withstand endless applications of industrial strength ammonia being their only saving grace.
Needless to say, the Uplander is as dreadful to drive as it is to inhabit. The loose steering requires constant tending at anything other than a dead stop. The suspension crashes more often than a demolition derby driver. The long wheelbase and epic turning circle make parking lot maneuvering a seemingly endless chore. It leans excessively in corners. But wait! There’s less!
The CSV’s 3.9-liter V6 pushrod powerplant boasts (in the ironic sense of the word) a cast iron block with cast aluminum heads, hooked-up to Ye Olde Four Speed. With constant aural reminders that it would much rather be switched off, the ancient, rough-revving mill delivers a class-leading 240hp @ 6000rpm. But it's not enough to motivate the ponderous beast into a jog. In short, the Uplander’s performance doesn’t even deserve the noun.
To GM’s credit, the Uplander completed its assigned task: transporting my colleague and me safely from airport to office, office to hotel and back. The vehicle’s lights, windshield wipers and turn signals worked. There was plenty of cargo room. The engine made the thing move forward and the brakes brought it to a stop. I observed no sharp objects that might threaten to cut or maim passengers. But all of this was done with Soviet-repressed bureaucratic adequacy.
If you doubt that the Uplander is a half-assed has-been that never was and never shoulda been, click on this link from the Uplander’s menu and select Braking, Engine and Transmission. Three years after the model’s debut and the information is still “Not yet published.” In terms of design, refinement and packaging, competitive minivans (yes, minivans) from Honda, Toyota and Chrysler are literally decades ahead of the Uplander. And proud of it.
How could a thing such as an Uplander come to be? Hundreds of GM employees spent years on its development and implementation: designers, engineers, marketers and senior management. Ultimately, all of them stamped their approval on the Uplander and proclaimed to the world THIS IS OUR BEST IDEA. If fact, the company as a whole considered the concept so inspired they felt compelled to badge engineer this execrable automotive aardvark as the Saturn Relay, Buick Terraza and Pontiac Montana.
The General has hit some home runs with a couple of products lately (e.g. the Corvette and the Pontiac Solstice / Saturn Sky). Cadillac is heading in the right direction. But these are niche vehicles, not machines for the masses. To recover from its well-documented woes, GM needs volume sales of mainstream products. Otherwise, they’re heading straight for bankruptcy. But if bankruptcy is the only way to stop GM from inflicting crap vehicles like the Uplander on unsuspecting rental car drivers and (God forbid) buyers, then I can’t help but wish the world’s largest automaker a speedy Chapter 11.
More by William C Montgomery
Latest Car Reviews
Read moreLatest Product Reviews
Read moreRecent Comments
- Big Wheel The Mk8 is NOT the generation to have.I'm the second owner of a MK7 2021 GTI, purchased in 2022. As others have said, great car, fun to drive. We were so lucky to find the perfect spec we wanted. We didn't want an MK8 because they were too new at the time, & had the blasted haptic/touch buttons everywhere. Plus the huge tacked on screen. So we wanted one close to or at the end of the MK7 run. White exterior color due to the Florida sun (even though it's in a garage most of the time). Base S trim with the must have plaid cloth seats. No sunroof. Real hard buttons on the steering wheel make controlling the radio & other items a breeze. Three round HVAC dials as God intended. Just a small touchscreen, but fully integrated into the dash, that we don't use anyway. And of course the six speed manual, topped with the golf ball dimpled shift knob. My youngest son learned to drive on it, & loves it more than anything (he's got several GTI posters on his bedroom wall). I think he's going to have it for many many years. Only 38,000 miles on it now, & no issues (knock on wood). I'm aware of the water pump issue & I think ignition coils are also a sore spot for these engines. Keeping my fingers crossed. Put a set of Michelin Pilot Sport AS4 tires on it 2 years ago, with Enkei rims. Love it.
- Buickman Classic Buzz Kill
- Lorenzo The 1970s! When mid-size cars of the late 1960s became full size coupes just by getting a couple inches wider, and a foot and a half longer, on the same wheelbase. But the interiors were marvelous, compared to what came before.It's just as well neither of the optional engines were chosen, since the old Cruise-O-Matic was the only transmission option. OTOH, that extra width and length added hundreds of pounds of curb weight, adding to the sluggish performance. Having lived through the 1970s, I could not understand why cars were getting bigger, while engines were becoming less powerful (and not just because of the switch to net horsepower) while gasoline prices were going up, and octane ratings were going down.Then again, you would be hard pressed to find interiors with such luxury touches today, especially color choices. This is a good example of a lot of sheet metal moving slowly while the driver sits in the lap of luxury, later to be rendered junkyard fodder when parking spaces everywhere were downsized.
- Redapple2 flawed product. from the jump
- Parkave231 The shot of the climate controls (well, the whole interior, really) brought back memories of my dad's '74 Ranchero 500. Little five-year-old me couldn't comprehend why there was a place for a rear window switch...and yet the rear window in dad's Ranchero didn't go down.
Comments
Join the conversation
Cope
This guy is a pretentious knob. Great car. Drives fine. Holds lots of stuff. Easy to see out of. Plenty of power.