The sliding door on the passenger side if not slammed with force would not close completely, making the interior lights stay on and a reminder on the instrument panel would tell you the passenger door is not closed.
Even though the van only had 54000 km's the front suspension or steering components made a noise like a wheel bearing crackle or a loose tie rod.
The head rest from the rear seat gave this van a huge blindspot.
Passing on the highway would make the van feel wobbly.
The interior is very roomy and the seats are very comfortable.
The exterior design is elegant looking, not like Chrysler minivans.
I'm not sure what size V6 engine the Uplander has, all I know is that it consumes gas like a big V6.
If I were to purchase a minivan, I would consider the Uplander if gas prices and costs were not a huge factor.
Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes
Review Date: 12th June, 2008
13th Jun 2008, 12:22
I am the original reviewer. I forgot to mention the thing that annoyed me the most about the Uplander was that the only door you could unlock the minivan from is the driver door! If you wanted to unlock any door besides the driver door, you would have to first unlock the drivers door then use the power locks to unlock all the other doors. It is annoying when you want to let let your passengers in first.
2008 Chevrolet Uplander 3.9 from North America
No problems to date.
This minivan has been very reliable and has great value when compared to the competition. The standard features are numerous even on the base model.
The 3.9 engine is very capable even when the van is loaded. But the fuel consumption is about 12l/100km in 50/50 city/highway driving. Although it is a Flexfuel model there are no E85 stations in the Greater Toronto Area. Just as well as the mileage would be even worse.
If I was to find fault it would lie with the seats and the transmission.
The seats are comfortable, but the armrests are short and the rear passengers have no armrests on the base model. That's fine if you are using child seats though.
The van drives more like a car than the other domestic minivans that I drove, but it does rock a little in high winds at highway speeds. The transmission is also a little rough in the city when switching between 1st and 2nd.
Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes
Review Date: 29th January, 2008
29th Jan 2008, 22:34
My parents have the '03 Pontiac Montana, a virtual sister to the Uplander (except with the 3.4L V6).
It's been absolutely fault free for 65,000 miles now.
2nd Apr 2009, 14:25
Bought an ex-rental 2007 LS with 30,000 miles and without power sliding doors. Had the front rotors replaced before we signed the paperwork, but apparently, they were over- or unevenly torqued by their mechanic. Had the same issue with our '01 Malibu & '94 Lumina until I began torquing the wheel nuts only when the brakes were cold and using a torque wrench. So when I finally need to replace the front pads, I'll buy new rotors and fix it myself. I'm convinced by the 300k miles on the Lumina & the 195k on the Malibu that, especially considering the price, that this van was, by far, the best value in its class.
Yup, I've had a few rotors warped by tire shops. I bought a set of used tires, and when I got home, I re-torqued them. I actually had to back them off first as they felt like 200 ft-lbs instead of 105. They got a little crazy with their impact wrench. Most places would never intentionally over tighten wheels, as this is just as dangerous as a loose wheel (studs can break later).
I'm sure they did it accidentally, but I was pretty steamed when I found out! But I got over it :)
This was on a Crown Victoria, but incidentally you should be EXTREMELY careful about wheel torque on GM FWD vehicles. I have only been a tow truck driver for two years, and I have towed two Buick Century's, an Alero, a Pontiac Montana, and a Grand Prix, that front wheels have fallen off of. They all had one wheel stud that had been broken for quite some time, and the other four were fresh breaks.
This would indicate to me that GM uses brittle studs (most hardened metals are brittle), and therefore should NEVER be over-torqued! And don't drive it with 4 nuts or a broken wheel stud, as some people seem to think it's OK to do.
Just my two cents :)
2006 Chevrolet Uplander LS 3.9L with Flexfuel capability from North America
Ugly duckling, that rides nice and feels decent
Nothing yet, it's a good riding vehicle. I was actually surprised.
I'm not a Chevy person by any means, but I was actually impressed with the Uplander. It's kinda ugly, and the interior is cheap and the windows make you feel as if you're completely exposed to the world. But it's a nice riding vehicle that will get you from point A to point B without trouble.
On the freeway the acceleration is really decent. The only thing is that when you're in stop and go traffic, the van jerks a little bit.
Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Don't Know
Review Date: 11th July, 2007
24th Jul 2007, 11:46
I drive a Pontiac Montana which is in the same family with Chevrolet, my Montana jerks in heavy traffic too.
27th Jul 2007, 13:16
2006 Chev Uplander...13 months old and it has been a perfect van. No recalls, excellent gas mileage for such load carrying capacity; that is 7 persons or less with much luggage. Have had about 5 oil changes, it has 24000 kilometres that is 15000 miles and that has been the only service. I am extremely pleased with the Chev. It kind of looks real aggressive and was at least $10,000 less than minivans from the Japanese suppliers. Too bad GM will stop producing the Chev Uplander and also Pontiac's Montana...2007 will be last production year. Excellent pricing right now on these great vans... I would buy another in a "heartbeat".