GM minivans: APV vs CSV

ifcar · May 16, 2007, 05:27:13 AM

Take your pick.

omicron · May 16, 2007, 05:55:45 AM

Uplander. Only because I couldn't handle a dashboard the size of the QM2 so as to allow for the raked windscreen of the Lumina.

nickdrinkwater · May 16, 2007, 05:59:35 AM

You didn't include the Chevrolet Trans Sport, which would've been my choice!

heelntoe · May 16, 2007, 06:01:41 AM

trans sport was a pontiac and just a newer version of the lumina, i think.

ifcar · May 16, 2007, 06:05:06 AM

Quote from: heelntoe on May 16, 2007, 06:01:41 AM
trans sport was a pontiac and just a newer version of the lumina, i think.

He's probably talking about the second-generation, which is an older version of the Uplander (et al).

I kept this specific to the most-despised models, to make it more interesting. :P

nickdrinkwater · May 16, 2007, 06:59:49 AM

(Similar to the Vauxhall and Opel Sintra, but longer and with a bigger engine)

goldenlover1101 · May 16, 2007, 08:04:50 AM

Uplander, looks better but still beat with every ugly stick on earth

heelntoe · May 16, 2007, 08:09:17 AM

Quote from: nickdrinkwater on May 16, 2007, 06:59:49 AM

(Similar to the Vauxhall and Opel Sintra, but longer and with a bigger engine)

that is called the venture.

93JC · May 16, 2007, 08:53:03 AM

Don't know why this is "more despised" than the horrid Venture. Considering when the APV was designed, I think it's a brilliant product.

heelntoe · May 16, 2007, 09:15:45 AM

Ha! i made it 50%.(the lumina, ofcourse)

TheIntrepid · May 16, 2007, 09:18:18 AM

Lumina APV. The new CSVs are some of the worst-looking vehicles on the road right now, IMO.

Tave · May 16, 2007, 09:41:20 AM

I'd avoid the Uplander like the plague. I think it's one of the uglier vehicles in recent memory.

But that means I have to pick the Lumina

chevyguy06 · May 16, 2007, 10:28:35 AM

Uplander.

CMan · May 16, 2007, 11:31:08 AM

As ugly as it is, go sit in an Uplander with quad leather buckets.

the Teuton · May 16, 2007, 12:03:17 PM

Why can't I pick a Venture?

93JC · May 16, 2007, 12:06:09 PM

Why would you want to?

the Teuton · May 16, 2007, 12:17:22 PM

My mom has one (as shoddy as I may think it is at times) and I would pick it over both of the other choices. I really would. Have you ever been in a dust buster?

93JC · May 16, 2007, 01:11:48 PM

Guy, my dad HAS a Lumina APV. As gnarly as it had been sometimes, I'd take one way before a Venture (my only point of reference on those being a friend's Pontiac Montana, which doesn't drive too badly, but is an ergonomic nightmare).

CJ · May 16, 2007, 04:54:22 PM

Uplander...

Raghavan · May 16, 2007, 04:55:30 PM

Uplander i guess.

nickdrinkwater · May 16, 2007, 05:57:08 PM

Quote from: heelntoe on May 16, 2007, 08:09:17 AM
that is called the venture.

Sorry for the big pic. But you can see 'Trans Sport' on the side. Unless it's a photoshop!

Mind you I only ever saw one or two of these things. I thought this was the Venture:

There's one around the corner, but I think it's a grey import, don't think the Venture was ever sold in Europe - only the Trans Sport. Doesn't look to be many differences except the styling and that only the Trans Sport was sold in Europe.

TheIntrepid · May 16, 2007, 05:59:58 PM

You're right, Drinkwater. It was sodl as the Chev Trans Sport in Europe, and as the Venture in North America. The Trans Sport was sold as a Pontiac on our shores.

the Teuton · May 16, 2007, 08:34:15 PM

Quote from: 93JC on May 16, 2007, 01:11:48 PM
Guy, my dad HAS a Lumina APV. As gnarly as it had been sometimes, I'd take one way before a Venture (my only point of reference on those being a friend's Pontiac Montana, which doesn't drive too badly, but is an ergonomic nightmare).

The ride in the APV is ponderous at best compared to the Venture, the dash is huge, it has early-1990s GM design and interior plastics, and the layout isn't as flexible as the newer vans. I guess the #1 redeeming feature that the APV has is that it came with an optional 3.8 liter engine and it's aerodynamic as hell. You could drag race it against your neighbor's turbo Caravan, I guess.

93JC · May 17, 2007, 07:50:30 AM

Quote from: the Teuton on May 16, 2007, 08:34:15 PM
The ride in the APV is ponderous at best

And... ? Surely you don't mean to suggest the Venture is markedly better?

Quotecompared to the Venture,

Ah ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!

Quotethe dash is huge,

So?

Quoteit has early-1990s GM design and interior plastics,

Which is WAY better than mid-'90s GM design and plastics. Trust me. It may be boring, but it's far, far better.

Quoteand the layout isn't as flexible as the newer vans.

Other than not having a driver's side sliding door, I have no idea what you're getting at. My dad's Lumina has seven buckets: it's easily the most versatile van of its time, and way better than the Venture.

QuoteI guess the #1 redeeming feature that the APV has is that it came with an optional 3.8 liter engine

Quoteand it's aerodynamic as hell.

the Teuton · May 17, 2007, 11:29:53 AM

The ride and handling in the Venture is far better. I will contend that. The APV is far more floaty than the Venture, but the rear view and thinner pillars in the APV does make for a better view.

I hate the dash in the APV and the rear seats are way too low in the car. You might as well sit Indian-style in them because they're that uncomfortable. I didn't realize you have the 7 bucket seats option, so I will retract that statement.

And lastly, I will contend that later 1990s GM materials, while they looked cheap (and were) were probably better than those in the APV.

93JC · May 17, 2007, 11:38:48 AM

I pass wind on your kooky ideas about Venture superiority.

the Teuton · May 21, 2007, 06:02:07 PM

Quote from: 93JC on May 17, 2007, 11:38:48 AM
I pass wind on your kooky ideas about Venture superiority.

Other than the 3.8, how is the Dustbuster the better vehicle?

Laconian · May 21, 2007, 06:10:30 PM

The acres of dashboard which collected much dust to bust!

GM minivans: APV vs CSV

Which do you dislike least?

Raghavan