Deal Details

It’s cheaper since no one can afford the gas for this beast.

You obviously have no idea what you’re talking about. Minivans are by and large car-based, not truck based, and get about the same mileage as sedans.

Well, that depends entierly on the sedan. I just bought a midsized 08 Sonata that gets 36mpg compared to 21mpg for this Montana. And a big ol’ Chevy Avalanche gets 19mpg so that makes the Montana way closer to trucks when it comes to fuel economy.

I mean maybe if you compare with a really large sporty sedan you can say it is similar fuel economy as a Montana but I’d say Wassam has a pretty valid point in general.

Well, you do have to make a valid comparison, I think you’re comparing your hwy with the Montana’s city....unless you’re getting wildly better mileage than they’re rated at....but my point is that just b/c these are large doesn’t make them that energy hungry...hardly a best.

MPG city/hwy
Chevy Malibu: 29 / 43
Toyota Camry: 24 / 34
Pontiac Montana: 22 / 33
Honda Accord: 21 / 31
Hyundai Sonota: 20 / 30
Cadillac Escalade: 16 / 26

a beast...a beast, I mean

andyp, where do you get your info ?

I use fueleconomy.gov, and I get different numbers.

As an example…

2008 Chevrolet Malibu, 4 cyl, 2.4 L, Automatic 4-spd, Regular

22 City, 30 Hwy --> 25 combined

That’s nowhere close to your number.

I took them from the manufacturers, or in one case edmunds.com.

Also, I’m assuming the Pontiac Montana is called the Torrent in the US.  Here are the numbers for that one.

Pontiac Torrent FWD 6 cyl, 3.6 L, Automatic (S6), Regular

( I couldn’t find a rating for a 3.9L, which is probably worse )

16 City, 24 Hwy ---> 19 Combined

More weight means crappier gas mileage.  There’s no magic solution around that.

ie.
http://www.gm.ca/gm/english/vehicles/chevrolet/malibu/options
Mi. / imp.gal. (city / hwy / combined):
LS / LT: 29 / 43 / 34
LTZ: 30 / 46 / 35
Hybrid: 33 / 46 / 38

I don’t doubt that manufacturers numbers are skewed versus real-life testing, but I just tried to keep it the same.  I’ll check out the fed site too…

No, the Torrent is quite different than the Montana.

Whatever.  There’s no way the 3.9L gets good gas mileage.

using http://www.fueleconomy.gov
MPG city/hwy
Toyota Camry: 19 / 26
Chevy Malibu: 18 / 29
Honda Accord: 19 / 29
Hyundai Sonota: 19 / 28
Pontiac Montana/ Chevy Uplander: 16 / 23
Cadillac Escalade: 12 / 19

Still, I say it’s closer to a sedan than a truck, and certainly not a “beast”.  My original point stands, I think.  Of COURSE it’s going to be poorer than a lighter vehicle...but only an extra 10gal to drive 1000 miles…

andyp you come across defensive and desperate to prove your point

give up already!

Really?  I thought I was just providing facts against a blanket (and wrong minded) comment.  I really have nothing to prove, so I don’t think I’m either...and will gladly give up!

We have a extended 2008 Montana. Highway mileage is pretty decent, about 8-9 L / 100km. City mileage is not great, about 14L / 100km.

Over all we are very happy. It drives great. Lots of room. Better than an SUV!

Even with higher gas prices, at $18 grand (and I’m sure you can negotiate a little more off that), the money you are saving will pay for a little more $$ in gas.

Wow… this one drifted off-topic really fast.
People buy minivans because they need the extra seats and space.  At $18,000 this well equipped Montana is a great price.  My family has owned many generations of the Montana dating back to when it was called the Transport.  For a vehicle of it’s size the fuel consumption is comparable to every other minivan out there.  Don’t compare apples and oranges.  Don’t assume that because it has a 3.9l that makes it a gas guzzler. Sure it’s a little more thirsty when driven in the city, but on the highway that engine just purrs along with good consumption.  If I was in the market for a minivan, this would definitely have my attention.

LOL!  Last dying throws of a company on the brink of disaster.  What’s next?  Giving away a free Montana with every XL Tim Horton’s coffee?

We’ve got a 2005 Toyota Sienna AWD CE.  Nice car, but it cost about $36k.

If I could do it again, would I consider buying a Montana for half the price?  Maybe.

I’m not a big NAmerican car fan- currently we’ve got two Toyotas and a Honda in the household- but I firmly believe that the more players there are in the market, the harder they all have to work to offer products that appeal to the customers.

Take away some manufacturers, GM included, and the others may become complacent, which isn’t good news for the consumer.

We have had 3 GMs, all have been good and no more problematic than our Honda cars.

Well we have a 2005 Odyssey that we’re leasing and we’re considering getting out of the lease early to get this Montana. It’s also around half the price of our Honda and saving $17,000 covers a lot off gas and repairs.

And on a side note, I state 36mpg for my Sonata because I have a V4 and the ~30mpg model is a V6.

Seriously though we need American pricing on vehicles sold in Canada.

Oxbaker, isn’t it pretty hard to get out of a lease?  Think a lot of the time, you’re on the hook for the value of the contract.  And if it’s an 05, wouldn’t the lease almost be over?

Notwithstanding the low price of the Montana, if it was reasonable to buy out the Oddity (as a friend of mine calls his!), and it’s been reliable, might that not be a better approach?  And it remains one of the best vans on the market.

... and would the Sonata be an I (as in inline) 4?

wassam, i agree regarding better pricing on cars in Canada.  i was under the impression that GM HAS been pretty good in that respect, passing on savings- am I wrong?

...now if only Toyota and Honda would do the same across their product line, and not just certain models.

I was referring more to the import vehicles. Yes Honda is known for quality, but the cars are made here with most parts coming from GM and who knows where else. So why do companies like Honda continue to up-charge us so much more?

because they can…

seriously, seems like they’re finally getting the message that people will not put up with it and they’re bringing at least some of the prices in line with US equivalents.

I had a Chevrolet Venture and I was pretty happy with it. “Only” 190 horses, I guess the 240 in the 3.9 engine are even better. The Venture was decent on gas, when I was driving like a normal person. If I would be in the market right now for a minivan, I would get this Montana or the Uplander. I just don’t need one.

If someone takes advantage of this deal I would love to hear about it, like if you were able to negotiate even lower as one comment suggested, and also whether you could weasel out of freight and admin charges.

Some good comments on the Pontiac Montana.  I had a 2002 Montana a long time ago.  It had a 3.1L V6 Engine.  I was complaining of the gas prices back then I’m seriously considering a Hybrid for my next car.  I know the short term cost would be higher.  Wonder if GM will come out with a Hybrid SUV or minivan.

I’ve had the Grand Caravan now for a few years and it gets around 25 miles per gallon or 34 Hwy on average, as long as you keep it running well and don’t slack off on the maintenence. I had a Pontiac Transport Van prior to this and It got a little better mileage but it was a little smaller then the Caravan. My Daughter has a Montana Van and it’s fuel is almost the same as my Dodge. I had a Taurus car as well and it’s mileage wasn’t much greater then these vans. Now going back aways farther i had a Ford Escort Wagon that got Amazing Mileage, I could fill up the tank a go for about 2 wks before next fill. Under my usual driving habits. I normally drive about 2oooo K’s per yr. 

This is the regular van.  How about the extended version ? Is there a deal on that unit as well ?

I test drove the Montana with quad seating the other night, as I am in URGENT need of a van.  We found the leg room in the 2nd row seats really tight.  I’m just an avg sized adult but my knees were up against the back of the front seats.  Any one else notice this?  Any suggestions?

We have an 2007 SV6 and it gets 26 mpg (imperial) combined.  The V6 sedan we traded in for it got 25 mpg combined.

Operating cost is only one part of TCO (total cost of ownership).  It doesn’t make much sense to buy a more fuel efficient vehicle if the higher monthly payment more than offsets the fuel savings.

BTW US sites use American measurements.  The Canadian mpg figures for the SV6 are 22 city, 33 highway.

ciscochampion:
for hybrid SUVs, VANs, etc - hybridcars.com.

Even though I can’t complain about my 9L/100km hwy, 14/100 city 2003 Montana’s mileage, my next vehicle will not be gas-driven. At least not 100%.

Bought this Montana.  Really came down to deciding whether I pay $20,000 for the Montana or $40,000 for the Odyssey.  Simple math made it easy.

We now have 4 cars, 2 Gm, a Nissan Sentra and a Honda. We’ve been a loyal / stubborn GM family for 20+ yrs. Had 3 of these vans, still have 1, starting with the Transports and now the Montana. My wife loves the space but the repairs and poor quality are killers. Same recurring problems year after year starting with the large engine & transmission repairs going down to leaky foggy headlights, sliding doors that fall off the tracks, front defrost that doesn’t get the full windscreen, etc, etc. You need to decide to buy quality import and hopefully be repair free - or go GM and pay for repairs down the road.
If we need another van then a used Chrysler may be the way - otherwise we’re now off GM - probably adding a Toyota next - even my mechanic says they’re bullet-proof.

You see its not always simple math. You can buy the more expensive car, have hopefully have less repairs and sell it for more money later. The difference in the overall long term cost may not be $20,000 at all. In that time frame you’ve enjoyed a higher quality car with less headaches.