Howdy, Stranger!

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





Buick LaCrosse

18990929495110

Comments

  • imidazol97imidazol97 Crossroads of America: I70 & I75Posts: 17,707
    I'm not sure what the statemetn
    "Hard to believe that they're not company cars" means but in this area they're not company cars. I am seeing a lot of them and the rate is about the same as Regals and LeSabres used to be. The buyer demographics seems broad as well. Can't stereotype it as an older, wiser, carbuyer's vehicle.

    This message has been approved.

  • Oh I don't know, who could possibly be head quartered in Detroit?

    In Detroit everyone and their uncle knows someone who work for the big 3, and as such benefit from employee discounts from those manufacturers. So wouldn't this market be slanted to those makers?

    Its like driving through Auburn Hills (DaimlerChrysler) headquarters and not be surprised that every other car is going to be a brand new Pacifica, Durango or 300.

    I'm sure Stuttgart has its share of Mercedes and Bimmers driving around but I don't think that would be reflective of what the rest of Europe is driving.
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Posts: 6,048
    All he said is that they are not company cars and that they are selling well here. Yes, many get employee discounts, even you can!!! :D
  • 14871487 Posts: 2,407
    I dont live near Detroit but I am seeing more and more lacrosses. Admittedly I wasn't seeing many three or four months ago, but now I am seeing quite a few. Most of them are the mid level model, but I do see CXS models now and then. The car looks much better with the 17" rims, which I feel should be standard. I hope they upgrade this car for '07 to make it superior to the cheaper Impala.
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Posts: 6,048
    CXS should sell about 10% of total volume. That is about what the GS Regal sold when combining Century and Regal sales.

    Yes 17" would look better but the ride would suffer and the CX/CXS need to have a great ride. And I do not mean the Buick ride of the past. The cars with 16" have a ride comparable to the Camry but slightly firmer than the Lexus.
  • It sure is underpowered. I miss the 280 lb-ft of torque that my sc 3800 engine had in my 99 Regal. With variable valve timing the torque curve is flat from 1500 RPM to 5000. That helps a bunch, but does not make up for that supercharger. I was a little surprised that they got away with regular gas with a 10.2:1 compression ratio. That may have something to do with the reduced torque rating compared to the same engine in the CTS. Sometimes packaging constraints force intake and exhaust compromise that can reduce power as well.
  • Yes that is combined. I drive about 22 miles one way to work and that is about 50/50 interstate highway and city. My Regal typically lost about 1mpg in the summer with AC on. The dealer reset my average to zero on the on board computer to see if the initial idling etc while it was on the lot at the dealer was dragging down the average. It helped about 0.3 mpg so far. I'm all the way up to 19.6 average. Whoppy!
  • Your CX has the 3800 engine. Down on power compared to the 3.6L and geared differently. My CXS runs about 2400 rpm at 70-75 mph. All part of the tuning. If you went from a 91 with 155k to an 05 you made a giant leap in sophistication and NVH. I noticed a big difference from my 99. I found myself driving slower at first because it was so quiet and smooth. My 99 Regal was the fastest car I've had since my 69 Camaro SS w/ a 396. That tells you how old I am. I guess we fit the typical Buick demographic.
  • vanman1vanman1 Posts: 1,397
    Have you tried different brands of gas? I know a lot of people complain about Costco gas mileage for example. Mite be another idea to get better mileage.
  • I read that 3.8L 3rd generation engine meets SULEV standard (90% less emissions gases than 2003 tire 1 models!), that's why maybe different tuning and entire design approach. Not sure about 3.6 VVT, I think higher than that, maybe ULE or so...can that affect the engine performance? I guess so...see link below

    http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/by model/2005_Buick_Lacrosseallure.shtml

    I am not that old :shades:, maybe just "an old school" ("only" 37 but with wife is the most conservative driver/passenger as "supervisor"). That's why we picked CX, enough power and great value after all incentives. Here in Toronto I got mine for <$25K US "on the road". Anyway in Metro area you can't spread your wings too much, traffic is mostly average to slow...I could step on old Regal and have zoom effect more than new Allure but now the new baby goes with Pink Floyd CDs nice and SMOOTH! We loved the style too, meanies compare it with Taurus but I would say older E Class MBenz. Especially in black/gray color!
  • vanman1vanman1 Posts: 1,397
    The Allure is a much nicer car than the Taurus. With a V6 and quiet interior It's more like a nicer Camry at the CX level. Premium midsize sedan.
  • I had a 99 Regal GSE and it was a very good car. Acceptable mileage and with the SC3800 engine, great performance. Mine had 85K miles when I traded it on an 05 Lacrosse. The only real problem I had with it was brake pulsations or shudder caused by warped discs. This is a problem GM has had for years. I figured out on my own that the cause was over torqueing lug nuts. The dealer never did agree with me and always said they torqued lug nuts properly. I had the same problems on previous GM cars I have owned and finally resorted to re-torqueing lug nuts myself every time the wheels were removed. I noticed when reading the owners manual for my LaCrosse that GM actually says that over torqueing lug nuts causes brake pulsations right in the manual. Some dealers may hand torque lug nuts on request, but most use a pneumatic impact wrench. Buy yourself a low cost torque wrench and torque the lugs before you drive the car after wheels are removed for tire rotation etc. I always used around 75 to 80 ft-lbs. If the dealer wont do it for you re-torque then in their parking lot and they may start to cooperate. If you brake with your left foot, make sure you do not inadvertently ride the brake. It is heat that causes the warpage. I figured the over torque caused stress in the disc and heat partially releaved the stress then when the discs cooled they warp. It doesn't take much warpage to feel it in the brake pedal.
  • Interesting, my CXS turns about 2400 RPM at 70 MPH and gets 19 MPG. I'm not happy with that at all!. Otherwise the car is very quiet and comfortable. The 3.6L VVT is down on power compared to my old 99 Regal SC3800.
  • imidazol97imidazol97 Crossroads of America: I70 & I75Posts: 17,707
    > always used around 75 to 80 ft-lbs.

    Check your LaCrosse manual to see what the torque is for the wheels. My LeSabre is 100 lb-ft.
    Dragging calipers also can exacerabate the uneveness in the rotors.

    This message has been approved.

  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Posts: 6,048
    Question for those interested in buying a LaCrosse. What would be a good choice for an uplevel model of LaCrosse? Would need to choose a basic engine from GM's choices.

    Perhaps a turbo DOHC 3.6L, perhaps a supercharged DOHC 3.6L, perhaps the tried and true supercharged 3.8L, or even the same V8 that is in the Pontiac/Impala?

    I would assume that HP would be around the V8's 300hp. Or maybe there is no need for a higher performance version of the LaCrosse, after all the Lexus ES and Camry have less HP. (218 vs. 240) And the Accord only has 244. Of course the TL has 270 so maybe that will be enough? Or perhaps potential Buick buyers do not care about performance and there is no need for that reason.
  • Your engine choices in a LaCrosse are limited. No Turbo or supercharged 3.6L or SC3800 available. The DOHC 2 valve 3.6l is the same basic engine used in the Cadillac CTS although much detuned. The CTS has 255 hp and 252 lb-ft vs. the Buick at 240 hp and 225 lb-ft of torque. Don't just look at horsepower ratings. Look at torque as well. My old 99 Regal had the SC3800 at 240 hp and 280 lb-ft of torque; BIG difference in performance compared to the 3.6L LaCrosse. Your other choice is the venerable 3800, but I drove one before buying my CXS and it is a dog! A vary reliable engine that has been around for a long time and should get you mid 20s mileage. So far my mileage is very disappointing at 20 mpg. It is slowly improving from 19, but don't know if it will get to 22 to 23 or not. Other than that the LaCrosse is very quiet and comfortable with nice bells and whistles on the CXS. I have worked in the auto industry for 20+ years and was rabidly buy American, but I have gotten over it. I figure the US auto makers don't deserve my loyalty. If you can afford a Lexus, you can't go wrong. What ever you decide, drive one first and not just for a short ride around the block. I test drove my CXS and knew it was down on performance, but did not realize how much until my first drive into work in a familiar situation. I had some serious buyer's remorse from the loss of performance. I was used to merging onto the interstate and jumping in the left lane and accelerating to 70 mph quickly in my Regal, but the CXS just didn't have it. It all depends on what you are used to. Good luck!
  • Your right about the mix of cars in the Detroit area. I get up to my "favorite" customer in Dearborn about once a week and I see a completely different mix on I94 than I see around home.
  • vanman1vanman1 Posts: 1,397
    The power of the 3.6L may be down but it's still a peppy engine. It's also a more refined power. I suspect as the engine gains more use (it's coming for the Saturn Aura) you may see some mods available that will give you more power. If it's been de-tuned from the CTS, no doubt some one will tune it.
  • I read a lot complains about fuel economy in various car reviews, I did my homework prior vehicle purchase. EPA suggests city/highway mileage as AVERAGE therefore it may vary +/-10% from posted rating. 20/23/29 mpg was OK for me. I am getting 21-22 mpg so far but at 60/40 city/highway driving.

    http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/ratings_description.shtml

    Look at the link below how the cars were tested, reading your comment I noticed that your driving style is more aggressive vs test conditions and your mpg will be lower. I tried my CX with growling RPM with a lot acceleration 50-75 mph and got lower mpg as well. Driving in accordance with their standards I got even lower mpg for highway!

    http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/fe_test_schedules.shtml

    Speaking of power and torque I also noticed that imports (i.e. Accord V6 or Camry 4 cyl.) were pretty lazy and underpowered. My friend has Accord V6 and I must admit that those 240 HP were well hidden, not to mention poor 4 cyl. with Camry. I read that Buick was aiming for Lexus ES 330 and we have a plenty of those in my neighborhood and they looked to me slow and bouncy as old Buicks. Not to mention extremely boring style... Sorry to read about your buyer's regret but I work in similar industry and I am familiar how Marketing and Sales can make the things look promising but there is a long paragraph on the bottom in fine print to say the opposite. I am happy with my purchase, got what I was looking for. Maybe Audi 1.8 T would meet your spec or BMW series 5 but I don't thing that will be better on mpg, sporty driving style does not go with fuel economy. Or maybe new Lucerne with V8? I would not buy Japanese because everybody has it, just 200 ft down my street I see 4 Infinity G35s. What's the point? I came from ex communist country and I get rash when I see one car model for everybody in only two colors! :P
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Posts: 6,048
    Exactly, you were used to the great torquer 3.8L engine. Even though the 3.6 in the CXS has a great flat torque curve it just does not have the torque of the 3.8L. You need to rev up a OHC engine to get into the HP peak. Have you driven a Lexus ES or Camry V6 in the same situation? Wondering what your opinion of their performance would be.
Sign In or Register to comment.