Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!

The Rebirth of Buick.........

1356789

Comments

  • hpmctorquehpmctorque Member Posts: 4,600
    You make some good points in comparing the mileage of your supercharged 3800 to that of the Mazda 3, and the respective space and comfort tradeoffs, but the conclusion depends largely on one's point of view. Also, it should be noted that premium fuel is recommended or required (don't know which) for the supercharged V6, whereas the mazda I-4 runs on regular. Did you achieve 27.5 mpg using regular or premium?

    Unfortunately for Buick, an increasing number of wallets are endorsing Mazda and a decreasing number have been choosing Buick. Buick's challenge is to turn this trend around. The jury is out regarding whether it will succeed.
  • hpmctorquehpmctorque Member Posts: 4,600
    "...hopefully there won't be a Buick-badged Aveo or Cobalt!"

    If it doesn't make sense for Pontiac to have a rebadged Aveo, then it doesn't make sense for Buick to have a rebadged Cobalt. However, if it does make sense from and overall perspective to have a rebadged Aveo in Pontiac showrooms - to keep the Pontiac-Buick-GMC network competitive, for example - then it seems to me that it would be okay for Buick to offer a rebadged Cruze (Cobalt replacement).
  • sls002sls002 Member Posts: 2,788
    Since World War II, GM has based its production on the concept of making a number of makes out of a basic body. In the early 50's they had three basic sizes, but one basic body design. At the end of the 50's they moved the full sized cars to two basic sizes. Then a number of smaller cars were put into production during the 60's. The smallest cars were Chevy and Pontiacs. Midsized were found at all but Cadillac.

    I think GM's current problems are more in having too many platforms Globally, not so much that there are too many re-badged models. The re-badged models need to be definitively different from the other makes on the same platform or need to be sold in different countries. Making 5 different makes on one platform is far less expensive than building 5 different platforms for one make.
  • tlongtlong Member Posts: 5,194
    Making 5 different makes on one platform is far less expensive than building 5 different platforms for one make.

    But isn't the much more fundamental problem that they shouldn't have 5 makes in the first place?
  • jwbrothersjwbrothers Member Posts: 1
    To paraphrase your quote, Audi means a solid, durable, reliable, conservative, understated, and luxurious premium car just a notch below Mercedes. Audi is known for their excellent interiors and great steering feel. Though most Audis are not performance cars, they do offer premium performance.

    I bought 3 Audis out of my last 6 vehicles. Despite the fact that Buicks are aimed right at my demographic group, I never even test drove one. I wanted to drive a CTS, but the dealer treated me like an idiot and I left. I ended up choosing a car that cost $10,000 more than the comparable Buick. This is why...

    1. I like a performance car. Oh, I don't drag race any more and I let my SCCA membership lapse, but I still like a car I can Drive with a capital D.
    2. Every time I get in one of my Audis, I marvel at the quality and comfort of the interior. The newer one has better ergonomics, but I have an 18 year old V8 Quattro with Connelly hides, walnut trim and Wilton wool carpets that still looks near perfect.
    3. Driving an Audi is satisfying. I'm glad everything works so smoothly and so well. I'm glad I own a car that can be driven out of almost any emergency situation. I'm glad I don't have to do the Corvette Crawl through small towns. Audis are stealthy. I'm glad that I drive a luxury/performance car that gets decent gas mileage. Last, but not least, I'm glad that I've never been stuck while driving on ice or snow.

    None of this makes Buick a bad car. Buick makes perfectly adequate executive cars. But there is nothing outstanding about them. I made some comparisons below. (2008 numbers)

    Audi A6 -V6-6-speed auto-FWD-250HP-21/29 MPG-3,858lbs
    Lucerne CXL-V6-4-speed auto-FWD-197HP-16/25 MPG-3,869lbs

    Audi A6 V8-6-speed auto-AWD-350HP-18/25 MPG-4.222lbs
    Lucerne Super-V8-4-speed auto-FWD-292HP-15/22 MPG-4,004lbs

    Buicks, once again proving that good enough isn't good enough.

    Many Thanks
    Jim
  • hpmctorquehpmctorque Member Posts: 4,600
    You make some excellent points in your A6-Lucerne comparisons, especially since both manufacturers use similar adjectives to describe their cars. Without diminishing your points, I would add that, for many car buyers, the price difference between the A6 and the Lucerne means that these cars really don't compete. Each car appeals to a different niche.

    I realize that price is one factor, but it's a significant one for most motorists.
  • lemkolemko Member Posts: 15,261
    Funny you should say that as I thought of Audi as a German Buick. However, an Audi is also more expensive than a Buick. I could probably get the ultimate Lucerne CXS V-8 and still not spend as much for it than an A6.

    Repair and service costs are also significantly more than an Audi. I'd have to take the A6 to an Audi specialist whereas the guy on the corner could service and repair a Lucerne.

    Those fuel economy figures seem off for the Lucerne V-6. I do much better than that in my 1988 Park Avenue and slightly better with my V-8 Cadillac DTS Performance.
  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 25,655
    Those fuel economy figures seem off for the Lucerne V-6. I do much better than that in my 1988 Park Avenue and slightly better with my V-8 Cadillac DTS Performance.

    Lemko, that 16/25 rating for the Lucerne V-6 is for a 2008 3.8 model, and using the newer, dumbed-down EPA ratings. Using the older rating system, the Lucerne was something like 19/28. I think your Park Ave would be 19/29.

    As for comparing Audi to Buick, it's really a hard comparison to do directly. If you were go compare just on size, Buick doesn't even make anything as small as an A6. It's sized more like a Malibu or Aura. Yet a base A6 starts around $42K, which would probably get you the nicest Lucerne ever built. To get something Lucerne sized, you need to look to the A8. And even that's not quite cutting it...you have to move to the A8L (extended wheelbase), and at that point you're probably looking at $75K or more. Now granted, an A8 is a heckuva lot nicer car than a Buick Lucerne. At that price it better be!
  • sls002sls002 Member Posts: 2,788
    The fundamental problem is that GM started out buying up existing makes to become a larger company. As I have suggested elsewhere, Chevy could have become the small car division, Pontiac the midsized, then Olds could have been the low priced full sized, Buick could have been a medium priced full sized, leaving
    Cadillac as the luxury division. This would still leave at least three different platforms, but GM has about 8 car platforms in production for the North American market, and there are additional platforms outside of North America.

    World wide I can see needing a small car platform, a midsized and a big car. Each platform should allow for more than one size. At a minimum then, there should be about 6 sizes of cars possible from three platforms, and I think 8 sizes is likely. One can then spread the 8 sizes out in 5 different makes in a way that makes each make different. Since GM is trying to reduce dealers to two basic groups (Chevy/Cadillac and Buick/Pontiac/GMC) the need to duplicate platforms for each make is greatly reduced. At one time the Buick, Pontiac, Oldsmobile and Chevrolet dealers all wanted compact, midsize and full sized cars.
  • sls002sls002 Member Posts: 2,788
    The Audi number for the A6 for 2008 are different from what was posted:
    A6 FWD is 18/27
    A6 AWD V8 is 16/23
    Still better than the Lucerne. But for 2009 the Lucerne with the V6 is 17/26. The V8 for the Lucerne is limited to the Super model I think. The new (for the Lucerne) V6 has more power, with up to 227 HP optional in some areas.
  • sls002sls002 Member Posts: 2,788
    You have mis-stated the 2008 Audi EPA numbers :surprise:

    I think when Buick was making the T-type models, they were better handling. Audi is considered by the car magazines to have the best interiors in general. I would put Audi in the same category as Mercedes, BMW and other luxury cars. Buick is what I would call a medium priced brand, more like the Chrysler and Mercury, maybe Toyota Avalon, and now the Genesis.
  • hpmctorquehpmctorque Member Posts: 4,600
    "The Audi number for the A6 for 2008 are different from what was posted:
    A6 FWD is 18/27
    A6 AWD V8 is 16/23
    Still better than the Lucerne. But for 2009 the Lucerne with the V6 is 17/26."

    A factor to consider when comparing fuel economy is that Audis run on premium while Buicks take regular.
  • cooterbfdcooterbfd Member Posts: 2,770
    Jim,

    Thanks for posting. I'm really glad to see this thread getting attention.

    The problem with your post though is not your opinion, but where GM has put Buick right now.

    You show the A6 AWD as 350 hp, and Buick's V-8 (a northstar V8, I believe) as 292 hp. The reason this was done was so that the Lucerne wouldn't infringe on Cadillac, in which the same engine puts out 320 hp in the FAR more expensive STS.

    You said it best, it makes an excellent executive sedan. At this point however, GM hasn't set Buick up to compete in a luxury performance arena (we can only hope).
  • bvdj84bvdj84 Member Posts: 1,724
    I am not sure I would get a Buick. Have you looked at their interiors? I was pretty disappointed. I don't see as many people buying them. Not when there are so many other alternatives to a car offering better fit and finish, better package.
    No, the Buick is certainly not on par with luxury. You put it next to a new Acura TL, CTS, or even an Accord, that is very entry level, but up there, and it still falls short.I am not sure why anyone would pick any Buick, when frankly there are so many cars out there that are more better looking, fun, more bang for the buck. Even on a CTS, though fun, not sure I would want to overpay on that car either, when it is still made by GM, and many other cars that are less in cost, and offer more fun. I almost feel they didn't want to push it too far with their Buick line up, as they would be taking away from the other "million" cars they have on the road. The Buick now, feels like a basic rental. Like a nice hotel, but certainly not a suite.

    Sounds like I am bashing the GM name, but honestly, there are only a few cars in their line up that impress me, but even then, I am not sure I could get myself to buy the car. Ironic enough, I have an 08 Pontiac G6, Loaded, Not by choice, but I am getting new liking to the GM name, they did put some thought into it. But, I will be back to the Honda, from which I came from.
  • stovebolterstovebolter Member Posts: 53
    Making 5 different makes on one platform is far less expensive than building 5 different platforms for one make.

    But isn't the much more fundamental problem that they shouldn't have 5 makes in the first place?


    I think 5 brands of the same platform could work quite well - but not the way GM has been trying to do it. If you are going to make multiple cars on the same platform, they should be designed to fill a particular niche as well as the platform can be adapted for it, rather than having 5 cars targeted towards the mainstream that are primarily differentiated by cosmetics (or in the worst cases, badges).

    Chevrolet is obviously GM's 'mainstream' brand - as such, it is fine to have a car that offers a lot of compromises in terms of performance in order to compare well in terms of price, appearance and utility to the other mainstream vehicles. The Malibu does this well, in my opinion. But so does the Saturn Aura - I don't see any real difference between these cars other than cosmetics. The current Lacrosse strikes me as targeting the same market, but with a bit of marketing towards 'near luxury'. The G6 is more of the same, with an attempt to make the styling 'sporty'. This is where GM fails - the Aura, Lacrosse, and G6 should not be viewed as the same car (yes, I am aware that the current Lacrosse is a different platform, but it is my understanding that the next generation will share its underpinnings with the others).

    If GM wants Pontiac to be the performance division, they need to make the decision and commit to making the G6 into a car that can at least outperform the Mazda6, Accord, and Altima - if it gives up something in terms of 'civility', so be it - the market that should be targeted are those who are willing to give that up for performance.

    Buick is in a more difficult position. GM wants it to be 'near luxury', but this is a shrinking market segment as the 'lower' brands have been inching closer and closer to the 'higher' brands in terms of comfort. This really makes 'near luxury' into low-priced luxury. For GM to nail this, they need to make the Lacrosse a genuine competitor to cars like the Lexus ES, not the Camry. This is a problem though, as Lexus has a much higher limit and can use the prestige factor to move the lower end cars - Buick can't do this without becoming Cadillac. Either Caddy has to move even further upmarket or Buick needs to find a new niche.

    I stated earlier that Buick holds no appeal to me - hopefully GM realizes this and does something specific in response - that is, understand that Buick will not and should not appeal to everyone. It's ok that I don't have any desire to even look at a Buick. I'm 28 years old and more interested in performance than comfort, so I should be in Pontiac's market segment anyway.

    However, GM has some serious problems in its brands that I don't see a solution to in the near future. They have brands that they claim are targeted towards various segments, but they don't make them fit those segments. If they can't field a G6 that someone in my position would seriously consider, I don't see a future for Pontiac.
  • sls002sls002 Member Posts: 2,788
    The FWD Cadillac, the DTS has the same engines as the Buick. The RWD Cadillac's have the VVT Northstar, which produces 320 hp.
  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    If Buick is a notch below Cadillac, then why are the Buick cars so different from Cadillacs (if I am not mistaken, the remaining time of the old school, FWD DTS is VERY short, and rightfully so)? I can understand that GM would not want to cheapen the Cadillac brand by having entry-level versions of its cars, but couldn't Buick offer cars on the Cadillac platforms, but tuned for ride comfort, and lacking in some of the power and amenities of the Cadillacs?

    I am with stovebolter, there isn't anything sporty about the Pontiacs, except for the Solstice. By the same token, there isn't enough upscale in the Buick line to distinguish it from all the other brands at the General, not to mention Mercury.

    I could possibly see the future of Buick as a sort of "80% of Cadillac" brand, but then it has to share platforms and engines with Cadillac. They can be one step down for each respective model, but they can't be so similar to the lesser cars at Chevy and Saturn.

    Certainly, if what I believe will happen DOES happen, and the future of Buick is as the North American outlet for GM China's products, we won't see it fulfilling that "80% of Cadillac" role.

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • dave8697dave8697 Member Posts: 1,498
    I think it is for People who want a quieter, more comfortable ride than the Impala. The typical customer I think, would rather have a Lucerne but can get near matching quiet, comfort, and same engine for $4-6k less. An entry level Buick.

    Can anybody talking about the fit/finish flaws actually name a specific item on a brand new one that they test drove with possible intention to buy or is this the same old same old that no longer applies? My '84 Camaro had 10 fit/finish issues. My '01 Chev had maybe 3. The trend is towards zero.

    So GM makes a few good nameplates, like about 20, and Honda makes more? The CRV from my neighborhood has vibrating tinny noises that sound like all the other 150k plus mile Hondas I've rode in. The sound of falling apart drivetrains.
  • sls002sls002 Member Posts: 2,788
    Yes, the DTS/Lucerne platform is to be replaced by a RWD platform. Not sure if there will be a Buick version. However, the other Cadillac platform (sigma) is also going to terminate at the end of the current CTS model. The sigma platform is an expensive to build platform, and Buicks would not be profitable. Buicks could be built on Holden or Opel platforms though.

    What I see as GM future is bankruptcy followed by reoranization with only Chevy/Cadillac as the makes/models that survive.
  • circlewcirclew Member Posts: 8,666
    What I see as GM future is bankruptcy followed by reoranization with only Chevy/Cadillac as the makes/models that survive.

    Agreed. Then, they can stop competing within themselves. Makes perfect sense for a new business model...oh, and kill the UAW as well.

    Regards,
    OW
  • dtownfbdtownfb Member Posts: 2,918
    What I see as GM future is bankruptcy followed by reoranization with only Chevy/Cadillac as the makes/models that survive.

    Agreed but I think you can add Pontiac to that mix. Perfect opportunity to use Pontiac to continue the "mission" of Saturn. Pontiac can be the European division with a flair. Keep Buick strictly for international sales since it is doing so well in China. Besides not competing against itself, GM can't afford to support all these different divisions.
  • cooterbfdcooterbfd Member Posts: 2,770
    ...oh, and kill the UAW as well.

    If you don't like the UAW, or are just jealous of their benefits, that's fine, but that Thread is read only. Don't let this thread denigrate to pros and cons of unionism. I want a discussion about Buicks going forward.
  • circlewcirclew Member Posts: 8,666
    OK, but it's part of that Bad Business Model! Like it or not.

    Regarding Buicks, if it were me, I'd have Holden whip up a new Grand National.

    The G8 Zeta could be modified for 2 or three versions for Buick including a AWD version.

    Regards,
    OW
  • tjc78tjc78 Member Posts: 15,852
    Regarding Buicks, if it were me, I'd have Holden whip up a new Grand National.

    I couldn't think of a worse time to introduce something like that. Economy isn't doing great and gas prices are still high. Why spend all that developmental $$ on a limited production model.....

    IMO keep the Enclave as is, and give Buick a luxo version of the G8 with the bulk of the models using the 3.6 and if they feel the need a "super" version with the V8. Main competitors (Toyota Avalon / Hyundai Genesis)

    Then I would bring a version of the Aura/Malibu only avail with the 3.6 to compete with the Lincoln MKZ and ES 350.

    Offer all these models with all the "tech" toys (touch screen NAV, hard drives, MP3 support, bluetooth, keyless start, etc) they can find and tune them to be a balance of ride comfort with just enough sport to keep the younger crowd interested.

    The Lacrosse and Lucerne should be dumped ASAP as they are not bad cars but riding on old platforms and engines. By updating the fleet to some of GMs newer offerings you could possibly bring in a few foreign buyers without hurting the other divisions too much.

    2023 Mercedes EQE 350 4Matic / 2022 Ram 1500 Bighorn, Built to Serve

  • bumpybumpy Member Posts: 4,425
    Naah, just move the steering wheel and plop some badges on this:

    Holden W427
  • circlewcirclew Member Posts: 8,666
    Yes, that's perfect! You see, you won't sell many but it will indicate Buick has been born again. You don't do that by just another sleepy FWD.

    "Feel the Power!" That would be the new slogan...not go to sleep on down the road!

    Regards,
    OW
  • cooterbfdcooterbfd Member Posts: 2,770
    I would hope that it would come in coupe version as well. While I agree they would sell very few, it WOULD bring people in the showroom. Now, if there were a more sedate sedan to go along with them that is just as snazzy, that is where sales will really come from.
  • cooterbfdcooterbfd Member Posts: 2,770
    "General Motors’ Buick brand is in need of a freshening, which will come in the form of the next-generation LaCrossee. Although the next-gen LaCrosse has been put on hold for a few months, new details have surfaced on the near-luxury sedan, which should give us a pretty good idea of what to expect from the LaCrosse — whenever it finally takes the show stage.

    According to GM Inside News, the 2010 Buick LaCrosse will be offered with two powerplants – a base 3.0L V6 and an up-level 3.6L V6.

    The LaCrosse’s base motor is all-new for GM, but won’t be skimping on high-level features. The new powerplant will feature direct-injection, which will aid in both performance and fuel economy. Expect the 3.0L to produce 250 horsepower but still return about 30 mpg on the highway.

    The LaCrosse’s step-up motor will be a version of the Cadillac CTS’s 3.6L V6. It too will feature direct-injection, but will be slightly detuned from CTS-guise, putting out a still healthy 290 hp. Both powerplants will be mated to GM’s 6T70 six-speed automatic transmission.

    The LaCrosse is also set to feature a plethora of luxury content, such as HID headlamps, a rear-view camera and a heads-up display. All-wheel drive is also said to be part of the mix, but no word if the LaCrosse’s AWD option will be reserved for 3.6L cars. "

    Good stuff for Buick fans. I know I want one.
  • lemkolemko Member Posts: 15,261
    My girlfriend said she would definately consider another LaCrosse. This one looks like a winner. Heck it makes her current ride look OLD!
  • cooterbfdcooterbfd Member Posts: 2,770
    Lem, tell her I will fight her to be first in line for one ;)

    Seriously, the '99 Ultra has been around long enough (6 yrs). I'll give it to my nephew when he gets his licence in about 15 months. I WANT ONE!!!!
  • berriberri Member Posts: 10,165
    I've read speculation that they are going to price it like an Acura or Lexus. If that's the case I don't think it will be that successful. However, if it is in Accord/Camry V6 territory it may sell alright. I see some Malibu styling cues on it inside and out.
  • cooterbfdcooterbfd Member Posts: 2,770
    Well, considering that Camcord V6 territory is around $30K, that sounds reasonable.
  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    2 tons for the FWD, a 4200-pound curb weight for the AWD? Yikes, that's heavier than some trucks. All except the CXS will get a 3L engine with 211 lb-ft of torque to push all that steel around? They called the Five Hundred slow off the line when it was pushing 3600 pounds around with that much torque and displacement, and that was four years ago.

    Is it a bit of a price shock to jump to a base price of $30K so quickly, and how does that align with pricing for the Lucerne?

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • hpmctorquehpmctorque Member Posts: 4,600
    The weight of the 2010 LaCrosse bothers me too. However, you don't mention even one positive about this car. I think the interior and exterior looks good, for example. The direct injection and 6-speed automatics are also leading edge.
  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 25,655
    Good lord, 4200 lb?! That's about what my '85 Silverado weighs! :surprise:
  • lemkolemko Member Posts: 15,261
    All cars are too heavy nowadays. I'm pretty sure my girlfriend's LaCrosse outweighs my '88 Park Ave and my Cadillac DTS Performance feels like a Tiger tank compared to my '89 Brougham. Geeze, 4200 lbs? What does a 1979 New Yorker weigh? That figure sounds only a few hundred pounds short of my 1979 Park Avenue.
  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 25,655
    According to specs I've seen, the base weight of a 1979 New Yorker is 3850 lb. I'm wouldn't be surprised if mine is still above the 4,000 lb mark. One thing I'm a bit unclear on is whether a/c was standard on a NYer or not that year. That alone could easily account for 100 lb or more. And I imagine the 5th Ave has enough insulation, padding, and other crap to pork it up a bit over the base NYer.
  • hpmctorquehpmctorque Member Posts: 4,600
    "All cars are too heavy nowadays."

    That's true, but 4,000-4,200 lbs. may set a new record for a mid-price car. That begs the question, what will the next Lucerne and large body cadillac weigh?

    My first reaction is that the weight figures are disappointing for a car that seems to otherwise be very competitive. However, let's see if the inside dimensions, trunk space and other attributes justify or mitigate the porky aspects before we pass final judgment on this new LaCrosse.
  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 25,655
    One thing I'll say in defense of the current Malibu and Aura, which are also pretty porky for their size, is that they do seem like very sturdy cars. When you close a door, it just has an extra-solid feel to it. The area around the door openings, such as the lower sills and such, also seems extra thick.

    So if the new LaCrosse is built on this same platform, it's just taking that solid feeling to new highs?

    As for interior room, one area of criticism I've seen pointed out with the Aura and Malibu is the tight shoulder room, especially in the back seat. I think it's only something like 53.7", which is probably about the same as a 1980's Grand Am or Calais. Way too tight for 3-across seating, although IMO truly comfy 3-across seating went out in the 1970's with downsizing.

    So if this new LaCrosse is targeted as an upscale car, rather than a mainstream family car, the tight shoulder room might not be too much of a concern.
  • hpmctorquehpmctorque Member Posts: 4,600
    "...if the new LaCrosse is built on this same platform..."

    The '10 LaCrosse is built on the second generation Epsilon platform. Is it possible that they enlarged some of the interior dimensions from the first generation?

    Based on the pictures, they nailed the styling, and the interior is also nice, in my opinion. If the interior dimensioins are similar to those of the Delta platform, I could live with that more than the weight, which seems excessive.
  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    Everyone is making a fuss over the looks, but I think they are just OK, since you asked. It looks better than the Lexus ES, but that's not a high hurdle to leap!

    Does the base engine get the DI too? That and the 6-speed auto are certainly two points in its favor, I agree.

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • hpmctorquehpmctorque Member Posts: 4,600
    "Does the base engine get the DI too?" Yes
  • hpmctorquehpmctorque Member Posts: 4,600
    In terms of weight and maybe features, the '10 LaCrosse overlaps and competes with the Lucerne. I'm wondering whether this means that the next generation Lucerne will be RWD, to differentiate it from the LaCrosse. Or, will the Lucerne be dropped?

    FWD works for mid range cars, but buyers tend to favor RWD for luxury cars, and, it seems, for the near-luxury category too. If, in going more upscale, the '10 LaCrosse is positioned to compete with the Toyota Avalon, Lexus ES350, Acura TL and Lincoln MKZ, then I presume the next Lucerne will have to compete with something above this level.
  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    Of course, the next ES350 will not just be a modified Camry V-6, it will be a unique model on a RWD platform. At least, that's what Toyota promised two or three years ago when times were flush....

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • lemkolemko Member Posts: 15,261
    ...if they do replace the Lucerne with a RWD/AWD model, I suggest they call it the Park Avenue!
  • cooterbfdcooterbfd Member Posts: 2,770
    One thing about this I find intriguing (the 4000 lbs bothers me too, as my Wildcat weighs in at 4080 lbs), is the fact that it has an anti sway system in it, much in the way the new F-150 does. Could this mean that it will be capable of towing 3500, 4000 lbs???? Could that be a reason for some of this extra heft??? I mean, why have that even available if it can only tow 1500 or less???
  • hpmctorquehpmctorque Member Posts: 4,600
    "Of course, the next ES350 will not just be a modified Camry V-6, it will be a unique model on a RWD platform."

    I hadn't heard that, but you may well be right. If the ES was reconfigured for RWD, how would Lexus position it vis-a-vis the IS250/350 and the GS?
  • lemkolemko Member Posts: 15,261
    Speaking of Lexus - I've seen somebody do something AWFUL to a GS - the owner put a HUGE wing on the back, a tacky ground effects kit, and blingy wheels on it! It was an abomination!
  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    Weren't they getting set to make the DTS RWD? In that case, couldn't a future Lucerne follow the pattern of the current one and borrow that RWD platform, perhaps with different engines?

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

Sign In or Register to comment.