Talk:Chevrolet Astro

message: Some Googlers have nicknamed the Astro/Safari as the Astrofari. As for its successors, would the Uplander/Relay be nicknamed as the Uplanderelay? -- Bull-Doser 20:33, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Some Googlers also pick their nose while farting. Please provide references when trying to push such minor memos into articles. Bravada, talk - 20:44, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

text: No, the Astro / Safari's successors would be named UplanderelayterrazaSV6 (or something like that)—you forgot about the Terraza and Montana SV6. So no, there is probably no nickname for the GM U platform minivans. —Reelcheeper (talk) 02:07, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Astrofari 

message: I have removed a reference to the idea that the Astro/Safari and the Ford Aerostar are the only rear drive minivans in existence. In the US alone, the Mazda MPV and Toyota Previa are other rear or all wheel drive minivans.
Acmc 19:56, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Eurovan was front wheel drive, which needs to be adjusted  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.254.217.13 (talk) 07:23, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

text: No, you don't! Santamoly (talk) 05:45, 12 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rear Wheel Drive 

message: The section on safety is extremely biased and inaccurate.
It makes comparisons between two totally different tests (US-NCAP and IIHS) which measure different aspects of vehicle design. The NCAP test evaluates the efficacy of a vehicle's restraints (seatbelts and airbags) while the IIHS test evaluates structure. The "improvements" in the NCAP scores over the years exactly correspond to GM's addition of airbags as standard on the model, and (in 1999) the change to a "depowered" or "advanced" airbag. These changes (to the restraint systems) would not have significantly changed the vehicle's structure.
Additionally, IIHS policy is to retest any vehicle if the manufacturer requests it and agrees to pay for the cost of the vehicle. GM did this for the Cadillac Seville in 2000. References are available on the IIHS and NCAP if anyone has the necessary time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.218.22.250 (talk • contribs) 21:04, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Someone must have heavily modified it, they didn't come with FWD from the factory (or you think it's FWD when it's really not). —Reelcheeper (talk) 02:09, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Safety

message: In the "Chasis" section it is indicated that the 1995 model had a redesigned dash and nose.  I thought the 95 model only had a nose redesign and the dash wasn't redesigned until the 96 model year.  Is this correct? Rb26dett 16:51, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You're right, for the most part. The dash in the 1995s are very close to those in prior years. Only very subtle (and I mean subtle) changes were made for the 1995 year (in terms of the dash). Jon the dodgeboy 23:50, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: 1995 Redesign

message: I edited part of the article that discussed year to year changes. It was originally stated that in 1995, Astro recieved a face lift and redesigned dash, when actually changes to the 1995's dash were only very minor. It was the 1996 model year that received the new dash (partly because of the new passenger-side airbag). I understand how this mistake was made, as this is a common misconception, because the old dash was in the "new" Astro for only one year.  A nice article over all...Jon the dodgeboy 00:03, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  1995-1996 design changes 

message: Is this section relevant at all? Heck, all but two of the special editions are "unaccounted for" anyway. Does anybody care that one particular special edition Chevy Astro was sold to a man in Mexico?!
JoeIcarus 02:17, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  1986 Special Editions, Ice Cream Van, etc, 

message: A merge of General Motors M platform (1985) into this article was proposed, but no discussion was opened.
*Support merge. The M platform article is very short with no unique information; what little is there appears to be already present in the "Background" section of this article. --Sable232 (talk) 21:40, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the point may be moot now, as the other article has been deleted. Joyous! | Talk 23:56, 16 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  July 2022 merge proposal