Used Vehicle Review: Chevrolet Astro/GMC Safari

[Ming]

Used Vehicle Review:
Chevrolet Astro/GMC Safari minivans, 1985-2004



In 1983, Chrysler Corporation caught the auto industry flat-footed with the introduction of its 1984 "Magic Wagon" minivans, vehicles which combined tremendous cargo space and seating for seven with driving characteristics similar to the front-wheel-drive K-Cars upon which they were based. The success of these innovative vehicles prompted other manufacturers to respond by launching competitive models.

General Motors was one of many manufacturers to market a vehicle to compete in what would become one of the most lucrative market segments of the 1980s and 1990s. Its early interpretation of the minivan - the 1985 Chevrolet Astro and GMC Safari - was vastly different from Chrysler's, with GM choosing to base it on the same rugged truck platform that underpinned the S-10 and S-15 compact pickups.


Where the Chrysler minis were vans designed to drive like cars, Astro and Safari were trucks through and through. A high seating position, vague steering and a soft, floaty ride were the defining characteristics of the driving experience. Sharing all that truck hardware set these vans apart: a front-engine, rear-wheel-drive drivetrain layout made repairs a little more straightforward, and trailer towing was a relative cinch thanks to the rugged body-on-frame design.

Originally only available in one size, at 4491 mm in length and with a wheelbase of 2819 mm, an extended-length version became available a few years into Astro/Safari's life. It shared the same wheelbase as the original, but grew in overall length to 4745 mm.

If you had parked an Astro or Safari in the midst of a lot full of first-generation Chrysler minivans, it would have stuck out like a sore thumb. At 1882 mm tall, it towered over the Chrysler by 238 mm, and its 1956 mm girth was significantly wider than Chrysler's more car-like 1833 mm. Its dimensions led many to refer to these vehicles as "midi-vans": smaller than a full-size van, but larger and more rugged than other minivans.

The extra exterior size translated into extra interior space, too. The original standard-length Astro/Safari had a cargo volume of 4,299 litres with both rows of rear seats removed, compared to the 3,256 litres a first-generation Chrysler mini could hold. The extended-length Chryslers could take on 3,936 litres with all the rear seats out. The extended-length Astro/Safari raised the ante, with 4,825 litres of cargo volume. An extended-length Ford Aerostar was the only vehicle short of a full-size van that offered as much cargo space, with a volume of 4,749 litres; even the gigantic Ford Excursion would only accept 4,146 litres of cargo with all of its rear seats folded flat.

While Aerostar came close to matching Astro/Safari in cargo volume, the GM vans had an edge in power. A 4.3-litre V6 propelled these vans from the beginning, with power output ranging from 150 hp to 165 hp and about 235 lb-ft of torque in early models, to 190 hp and 250 lb-ft of torque in 1995-and-newer versions.

Astro/Safari only really had one true competitor, Ford Aerostar, which was also based on small-truck mechanicals. The original Mazda MPV, introduced in 1989, was also rear-wheel-drive and used truck components, but was closer in size to Chrysler's minivans. But Aerostar disappeared altogether after 1997 and MPV went to a front-drive layout in 2000, leaving Astro/Safari as the only truck-based minivan on the market.

Among the minimal changes made to these vans over the years were the addition of an all-wheel-drive option for 1990, a new front end for 1994, the aforementioned power increase in 1995 and standard four-wheel disc brakes and 16-inch wheels in 2003 (all previous models had rear drum brakes and 15-inch wheels and tires). On early models, access to the rear cargo area was via two traditional outward opening doors, but later models had a nifty three-door arrangement: the top half of the tailgate swung up hatchback style, with two half-doors that swung open. Astro/Safari was never offered with a second, left-side sliding door.

Anti-lock brakes were standard equipment pretty well from the start, and driver and passenger airbags were made standard in the early 1990s.

The traits that made Astro/Safari great for heavy-duty hauling had negative trade-offs too. The ride was floaty, the steering vague and handling was ponderous at best. Fuel economy was unimpressive: while the numbers varied slightly year to year, Natural Resources Canada reported fuel economy numbers of 15-17 L/100 km in city driving, and 10-13 L/100 km on the highway. Rear-wheel-drive models were generally a little more efficient.

GM obviously knew Astro/Safari filled a need in the marketplace. It continued producing them even after the introduction of its first car-based minivans - the "dustbuster-on-wheels"-inspired Lumina APV and Pontiac Transport - for the beginning of the 1990s. And like the Energizer Bunny, these vans kept going, and going, and going, surviving a 20-year lifespan with only minor changes and updates. Despite the different names, GM never bothered setting the two apart in any way. They were identical mechanically, cosmetically, and in price from the beginning.

Opinions about these vans' reliability are mixed. On one hand, Astro/Safari gets a dismal reliability score in the 2003 Canadian Automobile Association Autopinion Vehicle Ownership Survey. On the other hand, Consumer Reports gives 2000 and newer models an average reliability score, citing durable major mechanical components. Older models received significantly lower ratings. Whatever the case, Astro/Safari contains proven mechanical components shared with several other General Motors light trucks, so replacement parts should be affordable and easy to find.

If reliability has been hit and miss, it's very clear that these vans are a tremendous value on the used market. A two-year-old, fully-loaded, all-wheel-drive 2003 LT model retails for $21,450, according to the Canadian Red Book. That's less than two-thirds of its MSRP of $33,560. Go back a couple more years and that same fully-loaded, all-wheel-drive LT retails for $13,150, or 37 per cent of the $35,430 it sold for new. And if you don't mind driving a 10-year-old vehicle, a budget of about $4,000 would buy a well-optioned 1995 Astro or Safari in good condition, according to the Canadian Red Book older vehicle price guide.

http://www.canadiandriver.com/articl...tro-safari.htm

[TaHoE]

I also wrote a Used Vehicle Review on the GMC Safari, glad to see it's missed.

[PeterPuck]

Does anyone have any sales figures for these things? It seems like every fourth vehicle on the road is an Astro/Safari, but I don't remember seeing them on sales charts.

[Mischief007]

Started driving with a 1988 GMC Safari SLX when I was 16 and then continued we traded in the Grand Am for a 1997 GMC Safari SLX. For a long time we had both in the family. At 254,000 city km, the 88 was at the end of its life. We parked and it was towed away from our house just this past spring. After 127,000 reliable km, the 97 was traded in for a 2002 Dodge Ram pick up.

The 1988 was bought for $5500 CDN in 93 and we sold it for $75 CDN to the junkyard.

The 1997 was bought for $25,000 CDN in early 98 and traded in in 2005 for $4500.

Those were good vehicles.

[paul8488]

I still think a slightly lowered black SWB Astro/Safari with deep tint, ridiculous chrome rims, and a red pinstripe would make a killer ride.