Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





Buick LaCrosse: Real World MPG

1235

Comments

  • crankeeecrankeee Posts: 297
    Thanks for the feedback. I was curious about the I-4 on the road. We have the 2010 CXL with 3.0L V-6. 28-29.5 on the highway but low 20's in town. That seems to be the major diff - the city MPG. The 3.6L MPG posted by others is also diff. due to more HP I guess. We wanted a car with 20/30 and feel we got pretty close. most of our miles are highway so we are pleased with our choice. sounds like you are also.
  • ar15ar15 Posts: 58
    I'm a muscle car guy and like lots of power. My 4 cyl LaCrosse was provided to me as a company car. I just can't believe how well this car performs with a little 4 cylinder. For a car of this type (family sedan), I honestly don't see why anyone would feel like this car was underpowered, or would feel like they need any more power. After driving it, I just could not justify paying more for a v6.
  • e_net_ridere_net_rider Posts: 1,380
    Thought I'd chime in because of the suggestions to reset MPG while cruising in lieu of having INST MPG on the vehicle. I tried it the other day. There is no way that can give an accurate reading.
    Cruise locked at 60MPH, it was jumping up and down like a yo-yo for the 20 miles I checked. Although still jumping around a bit, it looked to be around 25.8 MPG. On the return run, once I got to the interstate again, I locked at 65 MPH. Again it jumped all over the place and started to settle some past 20 miles. I was in cruise for about 35 miles and the display was showing 32.5 MPG. BS for sure. The only conclusion I could possibly derive is that it possibly get better MPG at 65 MPH than 60 MPH.
  • e_net_ridere_net_rider Posts: 1,380
    Sounds like you are happy which is number 1.
    And because yours is basic, you won't be having some of the headaches, but watch out for basic issues such as sticking caliper, etc. :blush: ;)
  • crankeeecrankeee Posts: 297
    ar: We had a 350 HP 327 Chevelle, 69 Olds 442 and a 90 300ZX so we enjoy the power side also. the new Lacrosse with either engine choice is a great car IMO. I-4 was not available when we bought our 2010 CXL. The 3.0L V-6 is actually a pretty small displacement but was well matched to our cars weight and 6-speed so performance is great. City MPG is much lower than your I-4, highway is comparable. We paid for ours (no co. car) and feel the value is outstanding vs. other models.
    Enjoy the car.
  • e_net_ridere_net_rider Posts: 1,380
    Just chiming in. The 3.6L has more than sufficient power even if categorized as luxury sport or family sedan. I don't know the full capabilities, but my salesman told me he had had one up to 140 MPH. I certainly hope he was not test driving mine. It takes a lot of power to push one that fast and said it had more to give. I will say at speeds not near that fast, it is fairly quiet and well on the road.
    And at upper speeds the joggle and sway seems to disappear. That is just great. You have to drive it at speeds of big tickets and gas guzzling to realize some of the features of the vehicle.
    I certainly think some dunder-head needs to be removed from the ranks of GM. They must think more power will sell more vehicles with the 2012 change for this engine. It was probably cheaper to squeeze more power than to make it more efficient.
    I do have to wonder if some old rules of durability start to come in with the vast difference between 2.4L and 3.6L. Going back just a couple of decades, I4 did not last as long as I6 and that did not last as long as V8. If you were unfortunate to have one of those aluminum I-4 from the days of Chevy Vega, you might make 50K and that was with a lot of oil and dead mosquitoes. (They did use a cast iron block in some and that was quite durable)
    What I'm getting at is the final drive ratio. Will the V6 outlast the I4? If we went back a number of years, for some reason Volvo had I4 that would outlast a lot of engines. Yet, today you can even get a V8 in a Volvo when such was not available years ago.

    It certainly brings questions of how they will address the now getting close MPG requirements.
    I'd heard the big rear wheel drive of Ford is gone. I questioned an officer wondering what they'd do. They apparently have tried some of the Dodges and are not happy with them from dependability and durability perspective. He told me that there are none better than the crown vic, not even a close second. So police are advance buying large quantities of them into storage. I don't understand why, but they want rear wheel drives, he said.
  • ar15ar15 Posts: 58
    edited August 2011
    I don't think the 4 cyl will reach 140, but I had mine up to 107 easily. The fact is, the 4 cyl has enough power (IMO) to satisfy 90% of the buyers of this car.

    Back when 4 cylinders were only lasting 50K miles, owners of v8's were lucky to go past 100K without needing major engine work. Today's engines are typically the most reliable part of a car, and it is the accessories (AC, auto transmissions, brakes etc.) that break down and and cause so much expense to repair. If an owner changes the oil and keeps his vehicle maintained, this 4 cyl should go 200k easily.

    And at highway speeds, the 4cyl is typically turning between 2500 and 3000 rpm's .
  • I took great pains to measure my MPG on my latest trip from Portland, OR to Silicon Valley, CA - a trip of 655 miles on freeways over mountain passes and through valley flats. On the return trip, which did not include any city driving (but we did get caught in a traffic jam on the I-5 freeway caused by exiting fans from the OR vs. OSU Civil War football game yesterday), we got 27.03 mpg. On the trip down of 678.6 miles (I had driven at home for a bit before we took off) we got 25.99 mpg. Perhaps different lengths of uphill grades on the trip south accounts for some of the difference (1 mpg). Overall, with a side trip to Angels Camp and back to Silicon Valley, the entire trip with lots of short shopping trips within Silicon Valley over 1 1/2 weeks, we got 26.06 mpg for the 1507 miles we put on the car. The trunk and back seat were fully loaded and my wife and I were the occupants. I did the only driving. As a result I am fully satisfied that my 3.6 V6 is delivering as advertised (27 mpg highway). I have a total of 9365 miles on the car purchased Oct. 2010. And I'm lovin' it! Did I mention the comfort on these trips? Oh yeah!
  • emb140emb140 Posts: 2
    Seeking real world MPG for the 2012 Buick Lacrosse e-assist.
  • crankeeecrankeee Posts: 297
    bob: we confirm your expereince on our 2010 CXL with 3.0L V-6. At 65 MPH the car gets the best highway MPG at 29.8 on 700 mile trip. 75 MPH drops it to 27-28 or lower with all hills. If spped is kept at 65-70 and the terrain is flat the cars seem to get the best MPG. Great for a heavy VERY comfortable car. We just bought a 2012 Sonata to replace a 14 year old GM model. Only 500 miles but the highway MPG is outstanding. Very light car with I-4 non turbo engine but a very good value and so far seems to exceed the 24-35 EPA MPG rating. Two different cars but that is what we needed.
  • Got my 2012 lacrosse eassist february 18th so i have it now for a little more than one month. I'm dissapointed with the actual mpg delivered. The car's computer says 18.9 mpg in suburban driving. That's about 7 less miles than advertised for city driving. I am not an agressive driver and cant really understand the reason for the low mpg, i have read other posts about similar low mpg being delivered by the 2012 eassist. Maybe someone from Buick can give a few tips on how to get the advertised mpg, if it is real, of course. :cry:
  • dodgeman07dodgeman07 Posts: 573
    I have a 2011 Lacrosse CX with the 2.4L DI 4-cyl engine (no e-assist) and do much better than 18.9 mpg. I get 23 mpg average with no problem and I get into the throttle quite a bit. 20 mpg in town is easy to make (for me) and 28-29 on the hwy driving 70 to 75 mph.

    I can't answer why you get worse mileage than I do. You should have no problem hitting 25 mpg. Might consult your dealership because you are getting mileage that the 300HP 3.6L engine should achieve.
  • gmcustsvcsarahgmcustsvcsarah Posts: 1,964
    juniorjunior,

    Congratulations on your new 2012 LaCrosse! I can understand why you may be feeling disappointed about your fuel economy. The EPA's fuel economy estimates are designed to allow consumers to comparison shop, but your fuel economy will almost certainly vary from EPA's fuel economy rating. This is based on a number of factors, such as weather, road conditions, your driving and maintenance habits, and your use of air conditioning.

    www.fueleconomy.gov has some great information on how to improve fuel economy (See "Gas Mileage Tips"), and if you decide to get this looked into
    by your dealership please be sure to let us know as we're available to assist in any way we can.

    Regards,
    Sarah
    GM Customer Service
  • dj_lbcdj_lbc Posts: 4
    Sarah, I understand that real world mpg can vary due to all of those factors but it seems like it would be really difficult for a 2012 Lacrosse with E-assist to see mileage under 19 mpg unless someone was really trying hard to make that happen. It would be interesting to hear if you hear back regarding the issue and possible resolution.
  • Thanks, GMCust and Dodge Man, i think i will have the car looked at by the dealer and see what they say.
  • Totally agree, i'll keep you all posted.
  • Have a NEW 2012 Lacrosse 4cy with e-assist. I have been averging 25 mpg in mixed driving. No issue here. My HUGE issue is with highway mileage. 26-27 mpg with cruise set and no AC. What gives Buick??? Horribly overstated highway mileage. I just got rid of 2005 Prius with 300K on the odometer (which I still averaged 40+mpg the day I junked it)for this American car hoping to get 30mpg...Could have bought a Benz or Audi and got the same mileage.
  • crankeeecrankeee Posts: 297
    edited November 2012
    Sounds like 25 average is on the number so city MPG is ok or better. The highway # is off but probably within the "acceptable range". Our 2010 CXL with3.0L V-6 gets 28-29 at speed limit of 65 - 75. Drops off at more speed. City MPG is predictably low at 16-20 depending upon conditions. Moving that 4000# car from a stop requires energy. Hybrids do very well on city MPG, but approach or slightly exceed on highway, so did not work for us with mostly trip miles. Each car is set up for maximum city or highway. New Camry hybrid seems to reach best balance if you feel the need.
  • tjc78tjc78 JerseyPosts: 5,023
    My HUGE issue is with highway mileage. 26-27 mpg with cruise set and no AC

    Odd, my 2012 PIII V6 get that (or better) on the highway @ 75MPH.

    1999 Chevy S10 / 2004 Merc Grand Marquis / 2012 Buick LaCrosse

  • gmcustsvcgmcustsvc Posts: 4,001
    Good morning bricklacrosse,

    Congratulations on your new LaCrosse!

    Generally, a new vehicle will not achieve it's optimal fuel economy until the engine has broken (this will take 3 to 5 thousand miles). A gradual increase in fuel economy can be expected - please keep us posted on this, though! We're here to answer any questions about the product you may have, assist in the process of working with a dealership, or look into any warranty or recall questions.

    Sarah, GM Customer Service
Sign In or Register to comment.