I saw one of those last night - I think I'll keep my 99 Silhouette and avoid offset frontal collisions if I can. They are *****!
Took a ride in an 06 Uplander yesterday
- Thread starter 55Test
- Start date
- Status
LOL@you guys crucifying 55 over what HIS BROTHER did.
About 8 years ago, I drove from Kissemmee to Orlando International in a piece of garbarge Mitsubishi Galant rental(that was FILTHY) in second gear on I-4, it was an Auto trans. That was fun!
They essentially strong-armed us purchase gas when I picked up the car otherwise I'd have to "stand in THAT line sir" at check in. "THAT line" meant our wait would have been ANOTHER 45 minutes. I was determined to use every drop of gas I could.
Of course, the engine had that "burnt" smell to it when I arrived. Ever spend about 30 minutes at or near 6000 RPM? That was so much fun. Got my money worth out of the 'mandatory' fuel purchase, too!
[ June 21, 2006, 11:09 PM: Message edited by: ToyotaNSaturn ]
They essentially strong-armed us purchase gas when I picked up the car otherwise I'd have to "stand in THAT line sir" at check in. "THAT line" meant our wait would have been ANOTHER 45 minutes. I was determined to use every drop of gas I could.
Of course, the engine had that "burnt" smell to it when I arrived. Ever spend about 30 minutes at or near 6000 RPM? That was so much fun. Got my money worth out of the 'mandatory' fuel purchase, too!
[ June 21, 2006, 11:09 PM: Message edited by: ToyotaNSaturn ]
I've had good service from several ex-rentals, but I'll sure think twice before trying that again.
G. Gordon Liddy said it best "never argue with the invincibly ignorant"
G. Gordon Liddy said it best "never argue with the invincibly ignorant"
Let's get this back on topic and compare notes. I have an '05 Terraza, the Buick version of the Uplander. IMO, they could have done better on the outside. I like the idea of an SUV-ish front end, but I think the execution in this case was poor. I LOVE the interior, though. Everything is clean, simple, well designed and easy to use. I just found out, after having the van for a year, that the trays between the seats extend 4 inches if you pull on the rear cupholders. What a cool idea!
The next time you're in an OnStar-equipped vehicle, please feel free to press the blue button. You won't get charged for anything. The operators can walk you through the system, explain the features, tell you what your subscription includes and what's available in higher-end packages and are very friendly and well-trained overall. You should keep the emergency button for true emergencies so someone with a real need doesn't get blocked out, but even if you did press it, there would be no real ramnifications. The advisor would make sure to clarify there was no real emergency, but they would still be friendly.
All in all, I'm very happy. There have been no problems except for a chipped window that the dealer replaced under warranty.
Actually not. The 3.5L was the only engine available in '05. With a full load of people and luggage, the acceleration and handling are really no different, surprisingly enough. I have the air shocks in back, so the handling may suffer a bit on models without that (they were standard on mine, though), but power should be no different.
The engine does this because the gas pedal is no longer directly linked to the throttle plate. The computer controls the plate with an electric motor based on the position of the gas pedal. One advantage to this is they can make a rev limiter that doesn't pulse the gas on and off. The computer just won't open the throttle past a certain point when you're in park or neutral. In everyday driving, throttle response is completely normal.
I see 24 mpg at 70 mph average speeds, 18 around town as calculated from fuel reciepts.
Hmmm, mine is nice and tight all the time even in corners. It's quite good, especially for a minivan.
I work for OnStar. The microphone is specifically designed to discriminate against everything except the driver's voice (the way it should be IMO). A front seat passenger would have a little bit of a hard time working the system. It would be nearly impossible for someone in the rear seat. Either way, passenger noises should not usually interrupt the driver's commands to the system. I've even driven an XLR (Caddy Corvette) with the top down and had no trouble working the voice commands. It even works surprisingly well with foreign accents. Many of my coworkers are Indian and Middle Eastern and have no trouble working it.
The next time you're in an OnStar-equipped vehicle, please feel free to press the blue button. You won't get charged for anything. The operators can walk you through the system, explain the features, tell you what your subscription includes and what's available in higher-end packages and are very friendly and well-trained overall. You should keep the emergency button for true emergencies so someone with a real need doesn't get blocked out, but even if you did press it, there would be no real ramnifications. The advisor would make sure to clarify there was no real emergency, but they would still be friendly.
Minivans have a lot of space to fill with sound. Without a subwoofer, the factory system is not going to sound ideal in ANY minivan, no matter the manufacturer.
All in all, I'm very happy. There have been no problems except for a chipped window that the dealer replaced under warranty.
Triple_Se7en
$50 Site Donor 2024
GM has-had the worst exterior & interior designers for the past 20-something years. On top of all that, their vehicles are the most difficult to hand-wash -- with so many nooks & crannies.
My Colorado has an interior that resembles the 1980s. The radio is pathetic -- reminds me of the early-days (1970s) of stereos. The dashboard is very plain & ancient - plus no armrest padding anywhere.
I'm done buying this crap. The only good parts to the Colorado are looks (rare for a GM), ride/handling & efficient engine.
My Colorado has an interior that resembles the 1980s. The radio is pathetic -- reminds me of the early-days (1970s) of stereos. The dashboard is very plain & ancient - plus no armrest padding anywhere.
I'm done buying this crap. The only good parts to the Colorado are looks (rare for a GM), ride/handling & efficient engine.
I agree about the Colorado's interior. There's a huge difference between that and the minivans, though. The minivan interiors are very nice. I disagree that most of GM's vehicles are ugly, though. Most look very good, with a few notable exceptions. The minivans, the Chevy SSR and maybe a couple others that I can't think of are the only ugly ones.
Huh? There is much more stress on the bearings on the combustion sequence.
I don’t buy this. An engine is always under load, even when “free” revving. An engine under “heavy” load is burning a lot more fuel and putting a lot more stress on the bearings. Free revving an engine to 6000rpm is much easier on an engine than loading an engine at full throttle at 6000 rpm.
Not buying this either. And engine is set up balanced without anything attached to it.
Nonsense.
I don’t see any big deal about it at all. Basically, revving and engine under VERY LITTLE load (there is never NO load) isn’t going to do anything and is certainly less stressful than bombing down the highway in 2d gear at 6000 rpm. The engine was obviously DESIGNED to rev to 6000rpm with a sizable safety margin. Just no big deal at all.
[ June 22, 2006, 10:48 PM: Message edited by: Drivebelt ]
With no load on the engine the engine's RPM's increase faster then oil supply, the rings under no load sling the oil off dureing acceleration and deceleration with no load and do not seal well, ring movement is also unpredictable under no load,the main bearing and rod bearing are also beiing asked to switch driection faster then designed wich increase the stress on all of bolts in the bottom end and increases the chances of metal to metal and metal to bearing contact. The load that an engine is under dureing accelerationhelp to reduce the velocity of the piston and rod before they must switch directions wich takes a lot of dynamic load off of the rod bolts and main cap bolts.
The centrifugal force on the oil in the oil channels (rods, crankshaft) goes up instantaneously with rpm forcing the oil to the bearings at higher pressure. The oil pressure likely rises extremely fast elsewhere, and in any case, there is a constant flow the lubricant to the other parts of the engine anyway. The oil pressure is also limited above a certain rpm (the oil bypass will open) -- likely before 4000 rpm. So obviously, a lower oil pressure is adequate for a higher rpm and oil pressure does not go up continuously everywhere in the engine with rpm. And it’s not like there is no oil supply -- a good oil film there already. I see no concerns here whatsoever.
There is not no load on the engine while free revving. The engine has to run the camshafts, oil pump, water pump, power steering pump, alternator, and air conditioner pump. Not to mention the friction losses that all increase as the motor rpm increases. The rings would also undergo much more stress under full rpm and full load. I would think 6000 rpm with little load is relatively easy on the rings compared to a full load/full throttle 6000 rpm run.
Are we to suppose that every time someone who drives a standard transmission and pushes in the clutch at 4000 rpm to shift gears, and unloads the engine, is causing more stress and wear to his engine while the engine revs with little load? I’ve seen no evidence that mere shifting gears in a MT equipped car causes engine damage or more engine wear.
And then what about the “negative” loading with a MT equipped car? When a person lets off the gas and uses the engine to decelerate in gear, there is less loading on the engine than even in a “free” revving situation. The momentum of the car is pushing through the transmission on the engine crankshaft reducing its load. The load probably gets negative on the engine at times. I don’t see how owners of cars with MT’s can get any useable life out of their vehicles if this is causing premature wear or damage to the engines. Every time someone in a MT equipped car lets off the gas in gear he would be damaging his engine.
6000rpm is 6000 rpm whether under heavy load or light load -- bearings switch direction same speed in both cases at TDC.
4000 … 5000 rpm … is = 4000 … 5000 rpm whether under heavy or light load. An engine piston still has to compress the same volume of air at 5000 rpm whether under a heavy load or light one (very slight difference because of the different fuel volume).
I’m not saying that 6000rpm is a non event -- or less stressful than keeping revs lower. But, I just don’t see any case that can be made that just free revving an engine (with low load) will cause any issues.
The reason that there is a rev limiter is because damage will occur to the engine if the rpm's are brought OVER that speed. I know many people that bounce their cars off the rev limiter on a daily basis, sometimes for several minutes. None of them have suffered any engine problems, and their cars run just as well as any others.
- Status
Similar threads
