just out of curiosity....

I bought my Montana because I was looking at the dodge caravans and heard from everyone (my father who owns one included) that they have bad transmissions and head gasket issues. I figured I'd stick with GM since they've been good to me in the past. I'm bummin around on the caravan forum, and theres lots of people with high mileage vans that havn't even had transmission problems. Seems everyone here doesn't get very far on their vans. How many people out there have high mileage on their Venture/Montana/Silouette ( greater than say 110K miles)?? I'd just like to know there are some people out there who actually have had good success with their van and not make me regret not going the caravan route.

My dad has 215,xxx on his '98 Venture with no major problems. I can take a pic of the odometer if you want. He is the second owner. It doesn't appear to have had major repairs, but its hard to be sure without maintenance records. He drives it nearly every day. My '99 (now has 68,xxx miles on it)has been fine except for a faulty MAF sensor.

From my experience, you are almost guaranteed to have to change an intake manifold gasket on the GM 3.4L.

From my experience, you are almost guaranteed to have to change an intake manifold gasket on the GM 3.4L.
Unfortunately, that is pretty much true! I haven't had it done yet, but heard of a lot of people that have.

Granted, the intake gasket is a given, but if you look at any minivan, they've all got some major problem; be it intake/head gasket, or transmission. But the intake gasket is minor (sub $400 repair at local shop) and if you buy one used, chances are its already been done. I just stop leaked mine (it had been done already about 30K miles ago) and the leak went away, so i'm crossing my fingers......

Granted, the intake gasket is a given, but if you look at any minivan, they've all got some major problem; be it intake/head gasket, or transmission. ......I just stop leaked mine (it had been done already about 30K miles ago) and the leak went away, so i'm crossing my fingers......
I agree, they all have problems of some kind. Keep an eye on the leak so you don't find yourself with a trashed engine.

My mother has a 2001 Montana with about 70,000 miles on it and she has had no transmission or engine trouble at all. She had some electrical trouble with it, but it was under warranty so the dealership fixed it. But other then that, great gas milage and lots of power for the little thing. My dad now uses it for his job.

I've got 127,000 miles on my 98 Venture and I still get 25 miles per gallon at 3/4 highway and 1/4 city driving!

I bought it with 89,000 miles 2 years ago and have had no repairs to it whatsoever.

The van is invaluable and I plan to run this one till 200,000 miles since I try to do the maintenence on time. I just replaced the wires/plugs at 100,000 miles.

I have not heard about any transmission problems with these GM vans.

It's true that almost any vehicle, except Japanese ;-) will have its share of problems, but the big difference with the Chrysler problem is that Chrysler refused to ever acknowledge that there was ever a problem. IF you read those forums, you'll see that many folks have to sue Chrysler to get the transmission problem addressed; what a TERRIBLE way to conduct business. When Ford realized that a recent model (I forget which one) had head gasket problems, they announced that anyone owing that vehicle coud stop by a local dealer and have a new gasket (re-engineered) installed free of charge.

That's the problem with Chrysler, they will not stand behind their product while the other car companies typically do.

Also keep in mind that you see so many problems because the only people posting are the ones with problems. What does that relate to in real world statistics, who knows? You don't see many posts saying how great their vehicle is.

the only known problems with GM minivans are the intake, which all go bad, and the power window gremlins. Other than a leaky roof rack, which can be cured by putting clear silicone on the threads of the bolts (remove one at a time), and both problems mentioned above, my girlfriends 97 trans Sport has been a great vehicle, doing everything we expected of it and more. Versitile, plenty of power, and nice rideing/handling. I wouldn't hesitate to buy another.

i haven't had any serious problems with my 2000 (113K miles), but i got tired of paying the high insurance and license rates and am now selling it and am buying something older and a bit more economical to help save $$$.

i've been trying to sell it for 2 months w/o luck (see my other thread), so keep in mind that resale might not be easy...even if you're only asking trade-in value or less...you might want to just plan on trading it in so you don't have the same headache i currently have.

My dads 2000 Montana has currently 310,000kms. Original engine and tranny. Recently have been having tons of problems with it, recently did intake gaskets(289,000), PCS for tranny changed, having brake problems right now, new cat, and various other little "bugs". All in all, it has been reliable. Fluids get changed religiously, oil at 3500kms(Mobil1 10-30), tranny service every 30,000kms, coolant done approx every 85k, although I put antifreeze conditioner that i get from the dealer every 6 months.

I agree with those who have posted on the relative merits for or against. When I look around our neighborhood, there are tons of Montana vans (or clones) just about everywhere.

I think some folks (like me???) have an expectation that when they spend upwards of $38,000 CDN for a van, it should have certain innate characteristics that indicate that it was an intelligent and valuable purchase. The longevity is debatably; - seems to be about the length of time it takes to roll over a 36-month lease on one.

In my case, I bought it to drive it for a very long time as I do with all of our vehicles. We have a 1978 Dodge Diplomat, a 1991 Isuzu Stylus and a 1999 Montana van. None of them have reached the 100,000-mile club yet. But the age of the first two is telling; - I keep 'em running as long as possible through routine maintenance.

In my case, relative to that criteria, the van has not been a purchase based on value. Its nuisance value based on the number of defects detected and repaired by the manufacturer and repaired outside of the warranty period combined with materials that have worn prematurely lead me to believe my money could have been spent in a more productive way. Some of the repairs on our van and those of folks who have posted here wouldn't even classify as routine or normal.

That having been said, the imports are a low cost alternative, however when you figure in the high cost of replacement parts to repair them (ie.: our Isuzu Stylus - exhaust system components are almost prohibitive in price) it is almost an even trade-off.

I'd just like to see the North American manufacturers recognize the lack of quality and step up to fixing defects in materials that are clearly at issue. None of the majors are of that breed however.

I like the Sears Craftsman slogan: 'Made in America; Guaranteed forever!' and while I don't expect any manufacturer to stand behind a vehicle forever, when a pattern of defects emerges the manufacturer should step up to the issue rather than take a 'head-in-the-sand' approach. It's just good business.

Ray Kroc (McDonald's) said it best: "Look after the customer and the business will take care of itself"

Coouldn't agree with you more Montana man !!
I got 2 of these 99 and 02 and had to replace 3 out of 4 rear light circuits because of the shorts. also had to replace intake manifold gasket. Good thing I ambit handy with fixing cars or I would be in world of hurt.

What's interesting is that the North American manufacturers are all trying to increase market share. The Marketing folks at the majors have their heads jammed up their butts for sure. GM, for example spends Millions on TV advertising to 'promote the brand' and bring customers into the dealership.

They talk about brand loyalty and 'customers for life'. That's a GM catch phrase by the way. How do they expect to generate brand loyalty when they ignore the very people who will NEVER come back after the way they have been treated due to lack of quality, shoddy workmanship and materials?

Realistically, how many 'new' customers are there out there before the car companies cycle through them all?!

If customers shop for vehicles based on price because the manufacturer hasn't even attempted to win them over as customers, then I guess the car companies won't be any better off than the gas companies where most of us shop on price versus brand now. (I tend to buy Sunoco, but in a pinch will run Petro Canada)