Howdy, Stranger!

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





Mainstream Large Sedans Comparison

1296297299301302333

Comments

  • scwmcanscwmcan Niagara, CanadaPosts: 393
    I would guess you Volvo comment might have some impact on the Taurus direction, sincde it is basically a Volvo platform with a ford body and drivetrain. I guess I would have to say,(as others have) figure out what you need out of the car and buy the one that best fits your needs. You may find that hyundai parts (out of warrenty which is a fairly long time of course) may be higher priced than the ford ones (you will need to check this out yourself, I haven't looked in a long time, I just know that the prices of hyundai parts used to be fairly high, this may no longer be the case, and of course you have a longer time before you need to buy any so it could even out). I would say get the car you like best and don't let anyone change your mind, you are the one that will be driving it for a long time. I think with proper care either one will meet you requirements.
    Scott
  • busirisbusiris Posts: 3,490
    If you actually put 225K miles on it, you are correct. However, if you get in an accident and the car is totalled, then residual value may become very relevant....

    When I was much younger, I purchased a car that would have been perfect for me, except that I was hit 5 months afterward, totaling the car. Since it was a model with a high up-front devaluation (similar to Hundai's and Kia's at this stage in their development in the USA market), I wound up being upside down in the loan after payoff. It was a financially difficult time, when to me, a nickel was the size of a Conestoga wagon wheel.

    Not any disagreement here, but just one more thing to consider when buying a car...
  • captain2captain2 Posts: 3,971
    However, if you get in an accident and the car is totalled, then residual value may become very relevant....
    True enough - but an odd perspective - worrying about a car's value just in case it is totalled. In this case I would guess that you would have a 'value' problem almost regardless of what you bought, Ford or Hyundai, or even had you 'sprung' for the more expensive Avalon with usually higher resale values.
    When I bought my Avalon (with a substantial (5 figure) down payment) and financed the rest - the dealer was 'disappointed' that he couldn't justify selling me some additional 'upside down' insurance - something that covers the difference between a car's market value and what you might owe on it. The point being that it is possible to insure yourself against the 'upside down' stuff, and while it may be more likely to happen on cars with traditionally higher depreciation, it also happens to the Toyotas of the world. Some added peace of mind I guess in that unlikely event that you total a new car.
  • plektoplekto Posts: 3,733
    Well, that's a shame, then. The 3.6 was their best engine by far.

    The maximum torque for the 3.6 is roughly 2000rpm, but that is literally 2-5% higher - a slight blip - than the rest of the torque curve. ie - you get roughly 200 lb-ft at 1600rpm. That's right where the thing is in overdrive at 65-70mph. You don't need to drop a gear to pass someone.

    LaCrosse CXS:

    Horsepower: 240 6000 RPM
    Torque (lb-ft): 225 2000 RPM(roughly 200 or so at 1600, and stays above 200 until redline)

    Avalon:
    Horsepower: 268 6200 RPM
    Torque (lb-ft): 248 4700 RPM (1600 rpm is closer to 150lb-ft)

    You have to rev it really hard to get that power. The problem is that with its mega-speed transmission, it has two modes. Grandmother and drop down several gears to pass. Getting it to do a normal roll-on from 40-60mph is not something that it wants to do without down-shifting. GM's mating the older CXS with the 3.6 and their 4 speed transmission means it will stay in a gear to utilize that power for longer.

    It really does drive much better in city traffic as a result. Other than it being FWD, it actually was better than the CTS 3.6 as well. Oh, and it had the same basic suspension as the last generation CTS.(2007 CTS base vs CXS = about the same)

    Why they dropped that sweet engine/trans combination I just don't know. The V8 is front-heavy, gets poor gas mileage, and doesn't drive really much differently due to it being an old pushrod they yanked from their truck division. Maybe it pulls a little harder than the 3.6, but in traffic, power comes on much slower.
  • louisweilouiswei Posts: 3,717
    Torque (lb-ft): 248 4700 RPM (1600 rpm is closer to 150lb-ft)

    Do you have the torque curve to back that up? Last I checked the 2GR has a rather flat torque curve so I would say 1600 rpm is probably more likely to be 200 lb-ft. Also, what's wrong with down-shifting when I have the taller gear at cruise which returns better FE than that ancient 4-speed?
  • captain2captain2 Posts: 3,971
    at 1600rpm. That's right where the thing is in overdrive at 65-70mph
    do you know that or just guessing ? Not that GM is above some 'gearing tricks' (they've done that for years and years with the 3.8) - it is really low (the Avalon turns 2100 at 70) It would figure that the EPA highway mileage would be better than it is if your 1600 rpm is right. :confuse:
  • louisweilouiswei Posts: 3,717
    Buick has just announced the prices for the Lucerne Super and CXL special edition and here are the summaries:

    Lucerne Super:
    - 4.6L Northstar V-8
    - 292 horsepower
    - 288 lb.-ft. of torque
    - MSRP: $39,395 (including a $765 destination freight charge)

    Lucerne CXL Special Edition V-6:
    - 3.8L V-6
    - 197 horsepower
    - 227 lb.-ft. of torque
    - MSRP: $32,150 (including a $765 destination freight charge)

    Lucerne CXL Special Edition V-8:
    - Northstar 4.6L V-8
    - 275 horsepower
    - 295 lb.-ft. of torque
    - MSRP: $33,850 (including a $765 destination freight charge)

    Source: Buick Lucerne Super finally arrives, brings CXL Special Edition with it

    $40k for a Buick? $32k for a Buick with an ancient V6 that produces less than 200hp? What the heck are they thinking? To be honest, at $34k the V8 CXL Special Edition is not that bad of a deal if one is into V8 American land yachts but that brings up the question: Who the heck is going to buy the Super given that the CXL Special Edition has similar performance with $6k less? :confuse:

    If Buick is tired of selling sedans they should just tell us...
  • allmet33allmet33 Posts: 3,557
    It really seems like Buick is really getting the shaft when it comes to powerplant technology. The sad thing is...GM has a V-6 that's capable of producing the same numbers as the 4.6 in the CXL Special Edition. That's sad, truly sad!!!
  • tjc78tjc78 JerseyPosts: 5,025
    In all fairness there is a $1500 rebate on all Lucernes and the dealer will sell at probably a couple hundred above invoice... so that puts the price more in line. However, at MSRP I truly see your point. You know whats even funnier? The Lacrosse Super has more power than the Lucerne Super. I know the Northstar in the Lucerne is certainly more refined than the 5.3 in the Lacrosse, but still how does your flagship have less power than its baby brother?

    Its amazing the thinking that goes on over at Buick.

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

  • thegraduatethegraduate Posts: 9,731
    Its amazing the thinking that goes on over at Buick.

    What thinking? :surprise:
  • busirisbusiris Posts: 3,490
    Welcome to the wonderful world of General Motors management and planning!

    You really have to wonder what's going on (or maybe not going on) in the minds of GM's corporate planning management division...
  • alexstorealexstore Posts: 264
    What about Ford Taurus having more HP than Lincoln Town Car? Similar thinking still exists at Ford.
  • tjc78tjc78 JerseyPosts: 5,025
    Similar thinking still exists at Ford

    I see your point, but, the TC/GM/CV have one foot in the grave already. I would say without fleet sales they would be gone. The TC in its current form dates back to 1990 with only sheet metal changes. The "panther" platform I believe goes back to 1980! Still they are surpisingly good driving/riding cars other than being totally uncompetitive in their respective classes.

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

  • allmet33allmet33 Posts: 3,557
    The Town Car having less HP than a Taurus can simply be the thinking that the Town Car is aimed at older retirees who just want solid transportation and don't need all the HP found in the likes of the Avalon, Maxima, Azera, ect. I'm not saying all retirees think like that, but there is a great many that do as evidenced by the number of "old" folks you see driving Town Cars, Grand Marquis and Crown Vics.
  • kdshapirokdshapiro Posts: 5,751
    "old" folks you see driving Town Cars, Grand Marquis and Crown Vics.

    In my town the "old" folks drive 750s, AMG 500s, etc. :surprise So I don't have a basis of "comparison".
  • captain2captain2 Posts: 3,971
    GM has a V-6 that's capable of producing the same numbers as the 4.6 in the CXL Special Edition
    actually that V6 (with DI the 3.6 can exceed 300hp) is also capable of matching the V8 in the Super - $40k for a Buick is OK because nobody who actually buys the things expects to pay even 'invoice' for it. Kinda of a Catch-22 for a number of manufacturers these days and not limited to just GM/Buick - but the pricing theory does work, overprice something that you intend on discounting heavily and the customers somehow think they got something for nothing when, in fact, they only got exactly what they were willing to pay for. Does wreak havoc with those resale values though, and a jewelry/furniture store type of philosophy that only proves PT Barnum's adage?
  • tjc78tjc78 JerseyPosts: 5,025
    the Town Car is aimed at older retirees who just want solid transportation

    The only reason that the platform is even around is because of the fleets. Ask any NY cabbie and many law enforcement personnel what the vehicle of choice is. The cars can take a beating. The TC survives because they are making the CV anyway. IF Ford wanted to they could have dropped in the 4.6L DOHC from the Mark VIII anytime they wanted.

    I see your point about older people driving them... heck my Grandfather has had nothing but TCs/ or GMs my whole life. I tried to get him into an Avalon last time and got laughed at. Although he does like my Avalon at 80 its hard to change his mind. V8 and RWD the only way for him!

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

  • captain2captain2 Posts: 3,971
    thought that the CV was only available thru the fleet dept.? but the GM and TC could still be had - even if the TC sets depreciation records every time one is driven off the lots.
    There is, however, something that can be said for these heaving, space and fuel inefficient dinosaurs - most any 'shade tree' mechanic can repair them easily from parts available in the salvage yards.
  • alexstorealexstore Posts: 264
    Does anyone know where manufactures of vehicles on this forum post demographics about people purchasing their cars. It will be interesting to know average age for large mainstream sedans buyer on this forum.
  • captain2captain2 Posts: 3,971
    the previous version (04 and earlier) Avalon was a median age of 64 - a bit different then 'average' age but also something that has gone down a few years since the 05 came out.
    Would suggest to you that this particular vehicle type - large sedan and given the fact that they are generally the more expensive 'top of the line' models would lend itself quite naturally to an Avalon-type demographic. The Maxima and possibly the 300/Charger would likely be more appealing to those younger folks but still have an 'older' owner then most other vehicles.
Sign In or Register to comment.