In today’s small field of minivan offerings, brands cover a broad spectrum from spartan to luxurious, with numerous trim levels all under one model. Yet when the minivan was a new and hot segment, with almost every brand hurrying to add one to its lineup, the idea of a dedicated luxury minivan was a reality. In fact two of them emerged at almost the exact same time, each representing very different ideas of what a luxury minivan should be.
On the one end of the spectrum, there was the Chrysler Town & Country. Beating the Oldsmobile Silhouette to the market by just a few months in mid-1989, the 1990 model year Town & Country was a very traditionally-styled, conservatively-minded minivan. A rebadged version of its K-car based Dodge Grand Caravan/Plymouth Grand Voyager siblings, which in short-wheelbase form had been around since 1983, the Town & Country featured inoffensive yet anonymous straight-edged, boxy sheetmetal.
Furthermore, the Chrysler added plenty of costume jewelry such as faux woodgrain siding, ribbed lower body cladding, chrome waterfall grille, stand-up hood ornament, lace-pattern alloy wheels, and loosely-gathered cognac leather seating surfaces. It’s honestly a shocker that the Town & Country didn’t feature a vinyl top, opera lamps, and wire wheel discs. The first Chrysler Town & Country proved just a one year affair, but a new one arrived in 1991, coinciding with the first redesign of its Dodge and Plymouth siblings.
While styling of the 1991 was more rounded and aerodynamic inside and out, the look was very similar to the 1990 model as Chrysler didn’t want to alter its winning formula too much, and all the previous Town & Country’s gingerbread add-ons were retained — including the station wagon-like wood trim which now could be deleted for gold pin striping — continuing its persona as a very conservative luxury minivan.
As North America’s largest automaker, GM hardly sat still on the sidelines through the 1980s as Chrysler fattened its wallets with its highly profitable minivans. GM’s first “bigger is better” rear-wheel drive Astro/Safari twins did little in chipping away at Chrysler’s market dominance, but its second crack at it was a much closer copy of Chrysler’s winning formula, at least on paper. After all, How hard can it be to make a minivan?
With its new U-body minivans, GM saw itself poised to gain a large portion of Chrysler’s market share. Like Chrysler, GM’s first front-wheel drive minivan was sold under three separate divisions, enabling for greater distribution and a wider range of prices, personalities, and appeal. Also like Chrysler, one of these three variants was positioned as a luxury model, in the form of the Oldsmobile Silhouette. Versus the Town & Country, the Silhouette was at the complete opposite end of the luxury spectrum, possessing none of the Town & Country’s traditional K-car qualities. Little did we know, this wouldn’t necessarily be a positive.
On the positive, the Silhouette, like its Chevrolet Lumina APV and Pontiac Trans Sport siblings, sought to be more innovative and family-friendly, with features such as dent-resistant polymer plastic body panels, an available rear air inflation kit with hose, and modular rear seats that could be individually removed and reconfigured for numerous flexible seating arrangements.
In the Silhouette, seven passenger seating was standard in the somewhat unusual for a North American minivan 2+3+2 configuration, while even more unusually, six passenger seating was an optional package for its first several years. When specified, this 2+2+2 seating configuration replaced the three middle row modular seats with two outboard-positioned modular seats with integral armrests for greater comfort, and a center walk-through aisle to the third row. Perforated leather seat upholstery was optional, though curiously when optioned, door trim panels remained cloth.
More obvious, while the Town & Country was comfortably conservative and familiar in appearance, the Silhouette radiated radical styling with one of the most ambitious exterior and interior designs of its time for any vehicle. Based on the 1986 Pontiac Trans Sport concept car, the dramatic space-age styling was unlike anything that came out of Detroit before.
When it came down to the details, at least Oldsmobile didn’t grace the plastic sides of the Silhouette with simulated wood trim, as was de rigueur on the Town & Country. In lieu of vinyl wood trim, Oldsmobile applied a thick band of black stripes just above the bodyside moldings. Large “SILHOUETTE” decals also graced the rear of each side and the trunk, and a black painted roof was standard, giving the illusion of a glass roof as in the original concept. Unfortunately the concept’s overall styling did not translate to the production version quite so favorably, leading to a rather memorable nickname.
Now nicknames can be a good thing, but this one really sucked. As it’s well-known, the side-profile view of these minivans greatly evoked the shape of the Dustbuster, Black & Decker’s popular handheld cordless vacuum, garnering the nickname “Dustbuster minivans”. In fact, after styling, this nickname is easily the most memorable aspect of the Silhouette et al.
The Silhouette, however, earned a much more favorable nickname from the 1995 comedy film Get Shorty, where it was proclaimed “The Cadillac of Minivans.” Prominent product placement in the film also highlighted its unique feature of a remote power-sliding door, a minivan first.
Nicknames and movie stars aside, it is clear to see that luxury minivan buyers didn’t warm up to Silhouette’s shape and styling, gravitating in far greater numbers to the more conventional Chrysler Town & Country. Overall, GM’s “Dustbuster” U-body didn’t do much to Chrysler’s market dominance, with Chrysler minivans continuing to sell better than ever during the early-to-mid 1990s. These days, few beyond the community of automotive enthusiasts even remember the Silhouette and its siblings. When it came to the defining the “luxury minivan,” it’s clear to see which original competitor won.
Photos Credits to Chris Green, Will Jackson, and SoCalMetro
Note: a rerun of an older post.
Rode in two of these; one the “Chevy”, the other was (I believe) was a “Pontiac”. The “Pontiac” was quite new. The “Chevy”, was not old or new. ((about three years along))
Both, as I recall seemed “noisy”. The “Chevy” , clattery, too.
Neither time was a long ride.
I saw an identical one to the beige one from the top shot recently and was struck by one detail:
The sliding door has a keyhole! Why? I don’t think I’ve ever seen a second row door have a keyhole on another car.
Those Chrysler vans are just the best of the best. Love the interiors and the boxy outside.
We actually had some in our Hawaiian rental fleet. I arrived in Maui once and my Corvette wasn’t available, so I was given a new Silhouette . The moment I got in I immediately saw a problem. A massive dash that stretched over the horizon. I felt as though I was driving from the back seat. It was horrible. The automatic transmission was an old 3 speed and the engine was like out of a Chevy Celebrity. It was a weird body sitting on an old car. AMC kind of stuff.
So, I got to my resort lodgings and spent a day trying to drive it.
After work, I went to a beach and dropped off the parking pad trying to park it. This buried the front tires into the sand, getting me seriously stuck. Exasperated I was rescued by beach staffers.
The van had a huge obvious flaw. It sucked to drive it. Those removable seats weighed 60 pounds each and were no help. The van was a huge mess. GM failed to get the basics right.
On paper it shouldn’t be hard to duplicate the Chrysler Minivan. It’s just the OBVIOUS choice for a shape. Square (ok rectangle). Really the only choice (other than a VW bus, but that’s not a van, it’s a “bus”, I guess). It just has to be. Ya know, rectangle, shaped like a “van”, but ‘mini’. Not a lot of other choices. GM be like, hold my beer.. and tried to redo it or outdo it (Overdo it?). Whatever, it didn’t work. There’s some irony there (I think), not sure if it was a bad Joke to name it SILHOUETTE, when is has probably the worst ‘silhouette’ of any “Minivan”, neigh, Motor Vehicle since the 1st Oldsmobile.
Speaking of “Cadillac of Minivans”, they shoulda done a Cadillac version if they wanted luxury. Sure, it didn’t work for the luxury Cavalier, the Cimarron, BUT nobody asked for a “luxury Cavalier”. I think a Cadillac Silhouette (or Cilhouette?) would have worked a lil better, at the cost of a few Cadillac Badges.
The Silhouette scene in “Get Shorty” was the most blatent product placement since “Mac and Me”, which was a 2-hour-long McDonalds commercial.
If the Silhouette wasn’t the Cadillac of Minivans, at least it was the Dyson of Dustbusters. I drove the Pontiac version through a snowstorm and those large unwiped triangular glass panes kept filling with snow that couldn’t be cleared by the wipers.
Mercedes-Benz is planning a luxury minivan for the US market based on their new VAN.EA (electric) and VAN.CA (combustion) van architectures, both which look promising. MB already has a luxury small van for the Euro market. In the meantime, though lacking full-luxury brands, recent top-line versions of the Pacifica, Sienna, and Odyssey, and Carnival are very much luxury vechicles.
It was at least funny…
“How hard can it be to make a minivan?”
As when Mick Jones was fired from the Clash, “How hard can it be to write a Punk song?”
I live in the general area of GM’s Arlington plant. In the days before everyone had cel phone cameras– late 80s– I once saw a Tahoe with manufacturer plates and the same “up in the backlight” tail lights as this generation of minivan. Only that one time. Certain there’s a story attached…
Ah, yes, Cut the Crap was the 1958 Packard of punk-rock albums…
Someone at Hyundai must have been thinking about the “Dustbusters” when designing the Staria: there’s an uncanny resemblance between the two! This van has been around in other markets since 2021 and also has luxury variants as well. And given GM’s relationship with Hyundai to co-develop/produce vehicles, a Chevrolet-badged version of the Staria may come to the US by the end of this decade. MotorTrend has an article all about it: https://www.motortrend.com/news/2029-chevrolet-staria-what-we-know-future-cars
Coincidently, Kia has just revealed a new EV minvan concept, the PV5.
It’s unknown if (or when) it might see production or if it will make it to the US.
You know what’s a perfect amalgamation of the U-body and Chrysler minivans? The Ford Aerostar! Maybe GM should have realized, when that failed to gain much traction, that the 8/10s van package was what the market wanted and just made that. Instead, they pushed the wedge front end as far as practical and left Chrysler another five years or so of laughing all the way to the bank. Then they got caught resting on their laurels though, as Japanese makes caught up and SUVs made big inroads in the market anyway. The 2nd-gen Honda Odyssey seemed to mark the end of Chrysler’s reign, but it seems obviously they did so while fitting perfectly in Chrysler’s mold. Meanwhile, GM continued to play second fiddle: I don’t think any of their minivans could be considered much of a stand-out. The Silhouette and its siblings were at least a bold effort. Given that, I want to like it more than GM’s more ho-hum offerings. Still, you can’t ignore that they were trying to design a space ship of a minivan, only to end up with… a dust-buster.
Funny that you bring up the Aerostar as I owned a ’96 extended model from 2012 to 2018. As noted in the “How Hard Can It Be To Make A Minivan?” series, nobody knew at the time where the minivan market was actually going to head, and all things considered the Aerostar was the best compromise between the (Grand) Caravan/Voyager and the Astro/Safari. And you could even get one in Eddie Bauer trim starting in 1988–could THIS count as a luxury model? At least in my experience it was a truly great vehicle when you could still get replacement parts for it, but there’s almost ZERO support for this model now. There ARE still some decent examples left out there but good luck finding one that’s for sale. This is one of the last photos of mine before a deer collision took it out permanently…
I was lucky enough to see the Trans Sport in person at Epcot in June of 1986 – I still have the promotional handout card with a photo and specs somewhere. I thought I was seeing the future. Typical GM, nice show car but weird changes made for production. Same story ten years later with the Aztek and Rendezvous. My dealer, Reilly Oldsmobile had three new 1993’s that sat on the back of lot for at least six months before they disappeared.
Epcot was the first I saw of these vans as well, although I remember it being the Lumina APV. I have that same handout card with the specs. I think it had the Lumina sedan on it as well
I was in love with these since before they hit dealer lots. Of course I was only 13. I had magazine articles at home, and photos taped inside my locker. Despite the Dustbuster or space shuttle appearance, they still had lean and clean lines, they were not jellybeans. I still love the looks of the 90-93 Chevy and Pontiac, and the Silhouette all the way to 96 since it never got the horrific nose chop. The stripes I think are meant to evoke a similar vibe as the slatted grilles on other Oldsmobiles of the era.
I read that GM wanted the Oldsmobile version at the last minute. Perhaps when news of the Town And Country came along, GM needed to complete. So there wasn’t much time to differentiate the Olds from the others (like the Cimarron story). Chevy body with a grille divider added. Pontiac interior with an Olds steering wheel and optional leather seats. Pontiac taillights with additional divider stripes added. Different color scheme on the roof. Wheels from the Cutlass Supreme. Definitely not the Cadillac of minivans, more like a Buick.
I don’t understand why this trio got such a bad rap. The initial V6 couldn’t tow much (I had one) but was just fine moving itself along. At least it got a V6 as standard, Chrysler didn’t even offer one for several years. Like the Chrysler being K based, this one had A body underpinnings, cradle and firewall. There was no space lost at the windshield or change in driving position, it simply extended over part of the engine. I doubt you could see the front of the Aerostar from the drivers seat either. However I think these were much sleeker and prettier. The seats were only 34 lbs each and quick and easy to reconfigure or remove with zero tools. I was married with 3 kids between us and we did a lot of that. The only reasoning I can think of for the platypus engine, was to keep the trans from working too hard under the extra weight of the van, until the 4T60E was developed. Since GM already had a more powerful 3.1, 3.3, and 3.8 with a 3 and 4 speed available as a direct drop in from the A body, cradle and all. But mine never gave me any problems. And once the 3800 and 4 speed was ready 2 years later, it’s said it was the best performing minivan on the market. I had one of those too, and with even with over 300k it towed my camper and firewood trailer often. Yeah the door handles were cheap pot metal. But it always ran good.
I think these were just a little ahead of their time. I think the inspiration for the production model came from the Renault Espace. And if that had made it to the USA, maybe we would have been primed and these vans wouldn’t have been such a shocker. Later on, vehicles started getting large dashboards, and similar body shapes.
The GM Dustbusters personified the GM design philosophy perfectly-put the money where the customer can see it-styling-and push everything else to the back burner. I heard a lot of complaints that because of the design of the dashboard and the windshield it was virtually impossible to clean the windshield. Chrysler had the proper idea with a boxy shape for the minivan. The public agreed.
Great comment. It’s like Chrysler made a practical minivan with families in mind, GM with stylists in mind. The first time these appeared at the Houston Auto Show I remember sitting in the driver seat and thinking “no way” in looking over that tennis court sized dash.
In Europe, we received the first generation of the GM minivan as the Pontiac Trans Sport. The only minivan that ever moved me in any way. I still find it appealing to this day. Unfortunately, its crash safety was reportedly poor.
I find that surprising, due to the steel space frame construction required to support the plastic body panels. Like a roll cage. I can’t seem to find the crash rating for these, everything says n/a. Being a unique design at the time, there should have been one.
The next generation for 97 had a horrible crash rating.