Buick LaCrosse

dan165 · May 2005

The 3800 is faster off the line than most OHC engines. One of the nice things about the 3800 as that instant power you get when you pound the pedal.

I love the 3800 in my Grand Prix GT, I'll take it over a 4 cyl. of anykind. In fact I used to have a 4 cyl. Accord and this is much better for the same money.

drwilsc · May 2005

CXS is actually SLOWER than the car it replaces, the Regal GS. It seems to me that with most other manufacturers the performance IMPROVES from one generation to the next.

I actually owned a 99 Regal GS (kept it for less than 2 years because I could not stand all of the dash board and other rattles). I could not see getting excited about moving on to a CXS, which has gobs less torque.

I would also note the Accord offers a hybrid, which according (no pun intended) to CR, does 0-60 in 6.9 sec and gets 25 mpg in mixed driving (compare to LaCrosse in previous posts).

vanman1 · May 2005

Accord hybrid is quite amazing, expensive though and I can see dealers charging a premium.

venus537 · May 2005

"I am somewhat confused by your postings with respect to your use of the word "quality". Namely, you appear to be using quality in a way very different that JDPowers uses that word. In the JDPower survey, they are simply using the word quality to describe the lack of defects. They are not saying anything about how solid a door feels, how luxurious the plastic dashboard looks, etc. As far as I can tell, you are including many other aspects of a car in your definition of quality. Thus, you and JDPower are looking at 2 completely different things."

that's exactly the point i was trying to make! some posters are strongly implying from JDPowers results that GM scored very well in "quality". i'm simply stating that JDPowers was measuring just one aspect of quality.

vanman1 · May 2005

Fortunately there are many other studies from JD Power and other organizations that confirm GM and Buick quality is very good and / or tops. It's not just one study and it's also being repeated year after year.

venus537 · May 2005

yup, everything is just peaches with the product from GM and Buick.
it's just a matter of getting the word out. if GM's market share for sedans continues to slide i'm sure it will have nothing to do with product.

based upon the vastly improved sonata and the upcoming azera it's hyundai that stands to benefit the most from the "word" getting out.

imidazol97 · May 2005

The thinly veiled smart remarks really taint discussions and make it not even interesting to try to have a dialogue. But I'll try.

If there are more and more companies making cars, then each company in a particular type of car is going to sell fewer; i.e., the pie is being cut into more pieces. Adding Hyhonda to the mix will take away sales from all competitors although in differing degrees.

I've noticed a lot of Hyhonda products in our area in the 4-door sedan sizes that Accord, Camry, Malibu, 500 are each aiming at. They are getting sales from somewhere. We'll see how the durability works out.

venus537 · May 2005

i didn't mean to imply that honda and toyota were immune from hyundai's success. quite to the contrary.

my point was that the lacrosses and other new sedans from GM are having little impact on the market unlike what the new sonata may do.

what's a hyhonda? do you know about a merger between honda and hyundai that's in the works? oh dear, i hope not.

you make a good point about the pie getting cut into more pieces.

imidazol97 · May 2005

The Hyhonda is because the emblem for Hyundai is similar to Honda's "H" and the Amanti is better looking as a four-door sedan than an Accord and even as a LeSabre size substitute. I see many cars in our area and I believe Hyundai is cutting into Honda's Accord market. There are only so many upside down bathtub-shaped Accords you can push into a market, even based on the concept that Hondas are the perfect car and never have problems.

I see Hyundai as a serious competitor to Honda just as Toyota and Honda are sometimes called ToyHon or vice-versa.

venus537 · May 2005

so there's no merger afterall. whew.

just like that hyundai has leaped frog cars such as the the malibu and impala to become serious competitors of honda and toyota? :P

i have a hunch the low pricing of the sonata will take some sales from GM and the upcoming azera looks like a lacrosse type car.

and there's the upcoming fusion from ford. and an early release of the new camry next year. this segment seems to be brutal.

yanker · May 2005

My family owned Buicks in the 1950's and none since then. The last American car I owned was a 84 Ford It was terrible. Since then I've owned 2 Honda's 6 Toyotas and 4 subarus. and only now will I look at a Buick Lacrosse as a remote possibility as a replacement for an Accord or a Camry. They (Buick) were no darn good for years,

62vetteefp · May 2005

'50's was 55 years ago. Datsuns and Hondas in those days (ok later on) were also garbage. Remember it took an American to go over to Japan and teach them quality and it took them many years.

Your '84 is also 20 years ago and that is about when the japanese were finally starting to build quality cars. America had no competition and they built what they wanted. It was also a major time for change since the gas crisis caused the American companies to scrap their large cars and reengineer a fleet of smaller, more fuel efficient vehicles.

Please take a look at the comments of actual buyers of LaCrosse's and give Buick another chance. I feel you will be quite happy with the car if it is the type of vehicle you like to drive.

vanman1 · May 2005

Quality and product are not the same thing. Quality is there whether you believe it or not.

Whether people like the LaCrosse or any other car is another story. I didn't ever say LaCrosse is the best car in it's class.

In the end, I am not sure why you post here as you have no interest in the LaCrosse. Constructive posts would certainly be more appreciated.

venus537 · June 2005

True, i don't have an interest in the LaCrosse in terms of buying it. But I do have an interest in the car in general automotive terms.

When i read your dictates about GM being #1 (or was it #2) in "quality" based upon JD Powers latest initial quality survey i feel compelled to retort and elaborate on what is meant by quality.

This is the same survey where the Hummer's poor gas mileage was considered a problem by its owners. from James Healey (USA Today auto writer) chat on Friday "JD Power's IQS is based entirely on owner responses to a survey. Whatever an owner considers a problem is a problem. There is no independent testing or evaluation"

Sorry you don't find my posts constructive. I state my position and do my best to illustrate my reasoning for having it.

imidazol97 · June 2005

>don't find my posts constructive.
Maybe it's the repetitive negativity.

>don't find my posts constructive.
That's the same as problems here, on the Accord discussions, Pilot discussions, Camry discussions, LeSabre Discussions. If someone is dissappointed with something about the car, it's a problem; big to them albeit, minor to others, albeit.

>compelled to retort and elaborate on what is meant by quality.
JD and others seem to have a definition of quality already.

pat565 · June 2005

I have owned many buicks over the years,going back to my first car ,a 1965 buick special.All of them gave me many years of mostly problem free service.I currently own a 1991 regal with almost 150k on it and a1995 regal with 135k.I also just bought a 2005 accord.The reason I went with the accord was not reservations about buick quality ,but rather I felt for the money on the base lacrosse, ABS and side airbags should have been standard and it should have come with the new engine of the CXS.It's not that the 3800 was'nt a great engine( i still own 2 regals) but on brand new model,the new design should have been used.

ab348 · June 2005

I can understand your decision Pat. The car is priced oddly for the equipment available and the new engine should be available in something other than the top-line model. Hope you didn't end up with a 4-banger cocktail shaker Accord though...

jmw4 · June 2005

"In the end, I am not sure why you post here as you have no interest in the LaCrosse. Constructive posts would certainly be more appreciated. "

Well put and I fully agree. Why anyone posts to a site for a car they have no interest or desire for, and only to talk up and promote other vehicles is rather interesting. Having recently traded an Acura TL in for a CXS, and having followed the TL site, most posts were from owners who spoke of their ownership experience with the car, both positives and negatives. Some were happy with their decision, others were not, and if not, expressed their desire that their next purchase would be another make. The common thread was that their interest in the brand was from their ownership experience, or in their interest to pursue information about the car to help determine if they want to buy one. I did not recall any GM owners however, consistently posting in the TL site about lack of quality in Acura cars. And if anyone checks the problems and issues section of the TL board, one will find they have their share of issues.

62vetteefp · June 2005

Do you think that with employee discount pricing the price is more in line with the Accord you bought? How about the CXS, which would have the engine you wanted? A base CXS, which includes ABS would be under $25,000. Need to add $395 for curtains though. The base CX is under $20k. Unbelievable deal. They must really want to close out their inventory.

GM has been talking about making there cars more value priced. I would forsee a price drop for '06 on all their models with prices closer to the employee discount, with incentives used a bit more rarely or less $$.

pat · June 2005

is not he subject of our conversation.

Everyone is free to express his or her opinion in any of our discussions as long as the expression is done in accordance with the Membership Agreement - i.e., topical, civil, without profanities or unacceptable promotions, etc. (Full details available in the link on the left side of the page as well as the link to our Rules of the Road at the top.)

Everyone is ALSO free to - and expected to - ignore those posts they find irritating for whatever reason.

No one is free to tell anyone who may or may not post here except for the administrative staff.

If any of you have a problem with a post, your recourse is to email the host of the discussion, NOT take it upon yourself to tell someone he or she is not welcome to contribute. All discussions name the host and provide a link to the host's profile (which contains the host's email address) at the top of each page.

If any of you have any questions about any of this, feel free to email me. Otherwise, stick to the subject and let the host do the hosting.

Thank you.

62vetteefp · June 2005

Could you tell me about your opinion on the TL vs CXS?

I found the TL in my comparison drive to have an unacceptable ride for Michigan roads. Really bad ride. Seemed to handle well but I could not put it thru a good road course. Of all the midsize vehicles out there I put the TL at the top for my kind of styling. A bit sporty but not overdone like the 300M. Hey maybe that would be a good thread to start?

Interesting that the Acura site gives a slight advantage in comparably equipped price to CXS. The CXS comes up short on rear HVAC controls, seat memory, cassette, side seat airbags, HID's, memory mirrors, 30 hp, 235 tires, 5 speed, (they are incorrect on the other items I believe) so it would seem that if you go by MSRP Acura would have the win. I wonder if there are any other items not available on the TL that are on the CXS like the rear backup sensors and folding rear seat backs that they forgot to mention? Does the TL have tilt and tele steering column? The TL also has a much smaller trunk and a little smaller interior and quite a bit smaller rear seat area.

If you look at the latest pricing though there is quite a price advantage to the buick.

drwilsc · June 2005

Has anyone seen the new Car and Driver, they did a 6 car comparo of family sedans, and the CXS placed 5th of 6. It was the third fastest behind the Maxima and Avalon, going 0-60 in 7 seconds flat. It was also the most expensive (rebates not included). Overall, they were not particularly impressed. Other competitors were the 500, 300, and Amanti. The Amanti was the only car the CXS beat in the ratings. The Avalon won the comparo, followed by the Chrysler. Interestingly, one of the strikes against the CXS was the rear seat being the smallest, not very Buick-like in my opinion.

62vetteefp · June 2005

Yea, with the new employee pricing the same car would have been about $28,000 as tested just above the cheaper 500 and below the Kia. Another reason for GM to drop the pricing to a reasonable level and scrap the huge incentives. Screws up comparisons unless they really look at actual sale prices. Base CXS is less than $25K!!!

I am a bit confused about the rear seat comfort. I spent hours in the backseat with two in the backseat. Very comfortable. Problem, as they stated, is that the sporty coupe like roofline crowds the head laterally. With the normal two in the back it is great.

I did a quick rear seat dimensional comparison. The LaCrosse is very competitive with the Kia and Altima that it competes with and they are all within an inch one way or the other. The larger 500, 300 and Avalon were more roomy but not by a whole heck of a lot. Shoulder room, which is closest dimension listed to lateral head room ranged from 56.0 to 58.2 with the Avalon the widest and Altima the skinniest. The LaCrosse was in the midd pack.

I really do not think that the LaCrosse or the others are meant to compete with the Avalon. Would like to have seen the Accord, Camry or maybe even an ES300 for a stretch target.

vanman1 · June 2005

I didn't think the back seat of the car was particularly small. It's not huge, but it was fine. On a numbers base, it's about the same as the Accord.

venus537 · June 2005

there hasn't been a mid-size comparison test from car and driver since feb 2002. i think they're long overdue for one since this segment has seen quite a few changes since then. and i agree the lacrosse should be compared with cars such as the the V6 accord, altima and camry.

venus537 · June 2005

my recent posts were basically stating that JDPowers IQS is not the greatest barometer for all aspects of quality in a car.

i'm sure there are many posts from posters who have not experience the ownership of the TL on the TL site. this is true of this site also - i would say the vast majority of posters here haven't experience the ownership of the lacrosee. the car is simply too new yet.

i guess i am guilty of promoting other cars over the lacrosse on this thread in an indirect manner. in my opinion the new avalon is what GM wanted the lacrosee to be in terms of how it would impact the market. i wouldn't buy the avalon any more than i would the lacrosse, just an honest observation on my part.

62vetteefp · June 2005

The old and new Avalon were never looked at for LaCrosse competitor. I would think that GM would like the kudos that the Avalon is getting for all their new models though. Look to the Lucerne to be more Avalon competitive. The CX/CXL LaCrosse is aimed right at a mid priced to high priced Camry and the CXS to the high priced Camry and straddles to the ES330.

The CXS is a tweener. It is almost a car to its own market. Its ride is so much better than the typical sporty sedans (TL, Maxima, Grand Prix, G35) yet its a bit sportier than a Camry XLE, Avalon (old one), ES330. Good or bad that is where it is at.

62vetteefp · June 2005

Absolutely right. JD Power IQS2 measures only things gone wrong in the first 3 months of ownership. They also have a reliability report (3 year ownership) and APPEAL report (how owners like their cars-ie appeals to them).

To get an overall impression of the quality of cars that is unbiased you need to look at all three and also Consumer Reports customer data.

sgr · June 2005

My dealer had to trade cars from another dealer to get me a LaCrosse with a Sunroof. I was trading in a SC Regal with a moonroof that went into the headliner and not over the top of the car. So I assumed (I know I know) that it would do the same. Anyway, I am now wondering if this sunroof might be an aftermarket... Does anyone know? Do all the sunroofs in the Lacrosse go up and over the roof and back? I mean it is really loud on the highway, the regal was nice and quiet.

On a second note, why did they do without the SC engine for this car? I really miss all that torque during initial acceleration. The Lacrosse isn't slow but the Regal was MUCH quicker off the line.

62vetteefp · June 2005

Sunroof is installed at factory IF it was ordered from the factory. Some dealers do install there own. All factory installed are the same as the Grand Prix and go above the roof. Part of the reason to do this was to get more headroom in the car with the sportier roofline. This was a minor complaint in the old car. You save about an inch of headroom.

As far as the SC. It would have been easy to put it in. Lots of pressure to use it because it was in the plant already and in the architecture. However for Buicks place at GM, a bit more premium, the OHC 3.6L was the way to go. Read some of the above comments and read the auto mags. They lambast Buick for using the old 3.8L. I hate to see the complaints if they had the 3.8SC instead of the 3.6L that is also used in the base cadillac.

I love the 3.8L SC for its raw power and HP would be around 255 like the Grand Prix but it is not quiet nor refined enough for a top end Buick

sgr · June 2005

I guess I understand... I guess I was never able to smoke the tires on my uncle's LS400 either but it would have been nice. I bet you could in the rear wheel only drive STS... but if refinement is the goal, so be it. It is a nice smooth excellerating car I might add. As for the sunroof, that might be the reasoning behind it but I don't agree. Lose the inch I say and have a nice clean open roof feeling without the wind noise and ugliness of the open sunroof... Refined like what???? the Gran Prix?!?!? cmon. Hide the glass... that;s refinement!!

Thanks for the post 62vetteefp
steve

vanman1 · June 2005

I disagree that JD Power is "not the greatest barometer". It's got flaws but it's no worse than any other organization. Their surveys are very thorough, I have done one.

As for the Avalon, it's not really a competitor, it's a full size car. The upcoming Lucerne would be a direct competitor. LaCrosse is really a large midsize, not a fullsize.

drwilsc · June 2005

I guess GM figured if people are interested in the 3.8 SC they would migrate toward the Grand Prix (which also offers a V8 now). They tried to give the CXS a more refined, if less torquey, flavor.

alpha01 · June 2005

Price seems to make it a competitor. The Maxima isnt actually large size either, but it was thrown in the mix by C/D as well. You think a 195 horse 3.8L Lucerne at $30,000 is going to stack up to the Avalon better than the Lacrosse?

~alpha

dan165 · June 2005

The Lucerne will be a larger car than the LaCrosse so yes, it will be a more direct competitor. The Lucerne also has an optional V-8 which will be the engine of choice I'm sure. The V-8 should be a very strong competitor for the Avalon and price should be about the same from what I have seen so far.

LaCrosse should be compared with the Accords, 500's, Altima's and Camrys of the world. It's really a midsize car as was the Regal built on the same platform.

imidazol97 · June 2005

The avalon is built on the camry chassis, just the same way last year's was built on an older camry chassis. How does it become a full-size car being based on a Camry?

badgerfan · June 2005

LaCrosse is actually a bit longer than Avalon, so I believe it is fair game to compare the two and with 500 as well, as 500 is 2.7" longer. See Edmunds recent comparison of Avalon, 500, 300 and LaCrosse. 500 should not be put into the same size class as Accord, Camry and Altima. Ford Fusion, coming this fall, is more appropriate to compare to the Camcordaltima size range.

LaCrosse's major shortcoming is it's relatively large size considering it's internal accomodations, and it gets pretty pricey when bought equipped above it's base model (though with the inevitable steep GM rebates, and now employee pricing to everyone, the actual out the door price may be relatively good) Avalon also gets pretty pricey when equipped other than its base configuration for that matter, but Avalon does have the same standard high horsepower engine and drive train in it's base model, while Lacrosse does not. I am not arguing that that much power is really needed in a family sedan, but when comparing them, that item does stick out favoring Avalon.

imidazol97 · June 2005

You always have to consider the attitude of buying at an Avalon store: the addon charges, well, just because we always could add on charges ($495 dealer/doc fee?) and people would buy; the low trade-in value, because, well, you're trading in a piece of junk and we're selling a quality foreign brand product; the lack of reduced pricing in negotiations, well, because we don't need to do that to sell our product when people just drool to purchase our failure-free cars.
You can tell I've had bad expriences with ToyHon salespeople in the past.

alpha01 · June 2005

Is it really going to be available at a $30,000 price point? Doubtful. Otherwise, the vehicle looks very impressive. As noted, the LaCrosse is larger outside than the Avalon in some dimensions. It stacks up on price and content except on the high end, where the Avalon makes available many features that you cant have on the LaCrosse, and thus edges above $37K (the LaCrosse tops just above $34K).

imidazol-"You always have to consider the attitude of buying at an Avalon store: the addon charges, well, just because we always could add on charges ($495 dealer/doc fee?) and people would buy; the low trade-in value, because, well, you're trading in a piece of junk and we're selling a quality foreign brand product; the lack of reduced pricing in negotiations, well, because we don't need to do that to sell our product when people just drool to purchase our failure-free cars. You can tell I've had bad expriences with ToyHon salespeople in the past."

Operative word being "past". No, things arent roses at the ToyHon dealerships, but with the advent of the consumer information age and internet, its much easier to go in and get what you want. Our last Toyota purchase experience was without drama or add-ons, and at an extremely good price. Besides, you dont have to live with the salesman, but you do have to live with the vehicle you purchase.

~alpha

badgerfan · June 2005

I am not particularly a Toyota fan, never owned one or seriously considered buying one. Our purchases in recent years have been Fords for cars andDodge for minivans, as we have not had significant problems with any of them, and could not see the price/value proposition in going with Toyota or for that matter any of the "import" brands, though the label gets more and more fuzzy as the transplants build plants in North America. Also have had excellent experiences with our local Ford dealer, not quite as good with the Dodge dealer, however passable.

I just wanted to point out to alpha that from a vehicle size standpoint, it is definitely valid to compare Avalon to LaCrosse. Current Avalon, though much improved from a styling and probably a handling standpoint from the previous generation, will still never be on my radar screen as it is pricier than what I would be willing to pay, even in its base configuration. One could argue that Toyota is stepping on their Lexus line with the current Avalon, and that is a valid point, in my opinion.

LaCrosse could potentially be on my list for future vehicles, however GM is just doing too much trying to prolong that aging platform and really needs to develop new, more space efficient configurations, even if based on the old platform--ie raise the roof line and seats to obtain more room in the same or shorter length vehicle, as virtually all the competition is doing these days.

62vetteefp · June 2005

Thats one very good reason why Toyota and Honda dealers have such poor CSI (customer satisfaction Index) numbers. I believe Buick dealers are near the top of the CSI scores and always have been.

Remember though that dealers are independent business's and the manufacturers have very little control over them. In fact the dealers sometimes can push the OEM's around.

62vetteefp · June 2005

I think you will see a shift in MSRP pricing with the '06 models. This employee pricing is the first step. I have read everywhere where GM will reduce MSRP's to salable levels. This makes sense to me. Get people into the showroom with the actual prices which will be lower/competitive and visible on the internet. Comparisons will be much easier. The problem today is that when you go to a site like Edmunds and they show the comparisons GM seems more expensive and it is hard to determine the incentive of the week.

The press have asked why GM has not followed thru on all their vehicles with the lower value pricing. But how do you do a price sticker drop in the middle of a model year? One way is to call it employee pricing and send new window stickers to the dealers for all cars on the lots and this is what they did. I bet we will see lower stickers coming from the factory of '06.

Again the LaCrosse is a mid size car. Yes, due to its architecture and styling it is not volume efficient. It is not a high roof car. It does have a longer overhang in the front. The Avalon is also more than a Camry. It is stretched in many dimensions and is larger than the Camry.

dan165 · June 2005

From what I know, the Avalon is a stretched Camry platform. Anyone have a dimension comparison?

I still think the Lucerne is more of a direct competitor than the LaCrosse. LaCrosse is to compete with Camry, Lucerne with Avalon. The LaCrosse starts in Camry 4 cyl territory, about $8-10K less than an Avalon.

badgerfan · June 2005

Right here at Edmunds:

http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drives/Comparos/articleId=105147/pageId=63250'

Camry is 189.2" long, but has a bigger trunk than Avalon, hard to figure that out.

62vetteefp · June 2005

9" is a lot. The 300 is heavy for its length and what a long wheelbase. Looks like a very efficient architecture except for its weight.

Avalon has about the same headroom as LaCrosse but an inch more shoulder room. Does not seem that much bigger except the legroom is 3" more.

Avalon looks like the better packaging untill I can get a LaCrosse for under $20K and the Avalon is over $30K.

johnclineii · June 2005

No matter what Avalon LOOKS to be, until you've driven it, I wouldn't be comparing it to LaCrosse, Five Hundred or 300. Once upon a time, an automotive writer referred to Avalon as a "Japanese Buick," and the term seemed to stick. By that he meant it had a relatively unsporting suspension and boulevard ride.

Interestingly, this month's Car and Driver compares midsize sedans and finds the Avalon to be best, with the LaCrosse well down the list....

vanman1 · June 2005

The problem I have comparing the Avalon to the LaCrosse is that the LaCrosse / Allure starts at around C$25,000 and the Avalon starts at C$40,000. So they are clearly comparing cars in different classes. While they may be close in size, they are not in the same league which makes comparing them inconsitent with typical testing methodology and unfair to the Buick.

The Lucerne will undoubtedly start around the same price as the LeSabre (around C$35,000) which will make comparing a V8 Lucerne and an Avalon a much better and fairer match. That's my 2 cents.

62vetteefp · June 2005

and that it was comfortable, up scale, and other good things. Not that it was a bad vehicle. It was not after the enthusiest buyer which is a minority of the buying public.

A lot more boring Accords/Camrys/Impalas/Regals/Centurys etc. are sold than sporty vehicles.

1487 · June 2005

Everyone who wants to put down the lacrosse is quick to compare it to the Avalon, but the reality is in terms of pricing, power and equipment the Lacrosse is closer to the camry. The Lucerne would be the logical competition for the Avalon due to it's space and price overlap. I would expect the Lucerne to start at $29K and go up to $38K which is right in the range of the Avalon. While the 3800 is the base engine, I wouldnt expect to see a lot of those in the hands of owners. My guess is that they stuck that engine in there to offer a low base price and a fleet model. Obviously the Lesabre is a big fleet seller and they werent going to give that up completely.

Buick's biggest car should be compared to Toyota's biggest car. I cannot understand why no publication is willing to compare the Lacrosse to other high end midsize cars.

johnclineii · June 2005

None of this would have even started had not Mr. Lutz invited comparisons of the LaCrosse to the . . . Lexus!!! Yes, the Lexus. He said the LaCrosse was superior to Lexus...not us. So how anyone can complain when it is compared to the Camry based Avalon is beyond me....

Buick LaCrosse

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles