OBI WAN
02-05-05, 07:15 PM
People who know me well will gladly tell you that I ''suffer from a surfeit of self-confidence,'' as a friend once carefully put it, and I will not disagree since one of that condition's symptoms is not caring if other people find you irritating.
This condition also causes me to have enormous trouble understanding people's actions as a result of a lack of self-confidence, and this tends to come up a lot when you consider why they buy or don't buy certain vehicles.
For example, I cannot identify with those unfortunate folks who spend thousands and thousands of dollars more for ''cachet'' cars whose few extra charms are vastly outweighed by dubious quality standards, all because they need the approval of their similarly insecure friends.
But the people who most amaze me are the men who view minivans as something that brings their masculinity into question, since minivans are mostly associated with families, or something like that. I can hardly bring myself to believe that's possible, but I am reliably informed by auto executives that it's all too common.
As a result of this insecurity, these men buy SUVs, which are less useful, less safe, usually more expensive, and less comfortable. Who knows what they're thinking?
While it's not clear to me what causes such a lack of confidence in men, there's no question to anyone in the auto industry that it directly impacts on minivan sales and design.
This is why General Motors went to so much trouble turning its lineup of workmanlike minivans into ''compact sport vans'' with various SUV-like design cues, including a new front, a roof rack, and a pillar at the end of the sliding side door. That pillar is critical to the makeover, by the way.
As it happens, this transformation worked pretty well, since the Buick Terraza, Chevrolet Uplander, Pontiac Uplander and Saturn Relay all maintain the minivan's packaging positives while adapting some SUV design traits.
http://macleans.auto123.com/ArtImages/35528/inline_01.jpg This is not exactly the case with the regular-wheelbase versions of the Chevy and Pontiac models that GM created specifically for Canada, however. GM executives decided not to include that pillar at the back of the sliding door, because they thought it didn't look right.
Well, it's hard to imagine how bad the design looked with that extra pillar, since the shape they did create is sometimes ungainly. Specifically, the Uplander I drove recently looked like an SUV from the front and a minivan from the side and rear.
But this did not bother me in the slightest, since the regular-wheelbase Uplander turns out to be a fairly nice package at a decent price.
This equation obviously appeals to Canadians, and explains why GM of Canada expects about half of its annual volume in the new compact sport-vans to be of the regular-wheelbase variety.
Regardless of what you think of its styling, you should enjoy the other significant changes to the Chevrolet mid-van for 2005. Those would include the new 3.5-litre V-6 and the interior renovation, which resulted in great ergonomics and a vast upgrade in quality.
This condition also causes me to have enormous trouble understanding people's actions as a result of a lack of self-confidence, and this tends to come up a lot when you consider why they buy or don't buy certain vehicles.
For example, I cannot identify with those unfortunate folks who spend thousands and thousands of dollars more for ''cachet'' cars whose few extra charms are vastly outweighed by dubious quality standards, all because they need the approval of their similarly insecure friends.
But the people who most amaze me are the men who view minivans as something that brings their masculinity into question, since minivans are mostly associated with families, or something like that. I can hardly bring myself to believe that's possible, but I am reliably informed by auto executives that it's all too common.
As a result of this insecurity, these men buy SUVs, which are less useful, less safe, usually more expensive, and less comfortable. Who knows what they're thinking?
While it's not clear to me what causes such a lack of confidence in men, there's no question to anyone in the auto industry that it directly impacts on minivan sales and design.
This is why General Motors went to so much trouble turning its lineup of workmanlike minivans into ''compact sport vans'' with various SUV-like design cues, including a new front, a roof rack, and a pillar at the end of the sliding side door. That pillar is critical to the makeover, by the way.
As it happens, this transformation worked pretty well, since the Buick Terraza, Chevrolet Uplander, Pontiac Uplander and Saturn Relay all maintain the minivan's packaging positives while adapting some SUV design traits.
http://macleans.auto123.com/ArtImages/35528/inline_01.jpg This is not exactly the case with the regular-wheelbase versions of the Chevy and Pontiac models that GM created specifically for Canada, however. GM executives decided not to include that pillar at the back of the sliding door, because they thought it didn't look right.
Well, it's hard to imagine how bad the design looked with that extra pillar, since the shape they did create is sometimes ungainly. Specifically, the Uplander I drove recently looked like an SUV from the front and a minivan from the side and rear.
But this did not bother me in the slightest, since the regular-wheelbase Uplander turns out to be a fairly nice package at a decent price.
This equation obviously appeals to Canadians, and explains why GM of Canada expects about half of its annual volume in the new compact sport-vans to be of the regular-wheelbase variety.
Regardless of what you think of its styling, you should enjoy the other significant changes to the Chevrolet mid-van for 2005. Those would include the new 3.5-litre V-6 and the interior renovation, which resulted in great ergonomics and a vast upgrade in quality.