Buick Lucerne

samchinch · March 2006

Hi everyone,

I just drove the 2007 Toyota Camry LE with a 4 cyl and then I drove a Buick Lucerne right after.

There is no doubt the Camry is better in performance. The 4 cylinder was a lot more peppy then the Lucerne. No one can say the Lucerne outperforms Toyota it just ain't so.

calhon · March 2006

Thanks. I just couldn't remember the source. Here's the article:

http://www.autonews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060213/SUB/60210064&SearchI- D=73238475919285#

bumpygreens · March 2006

last time i tested a camry the seats drove us away. they rated somewhere between a 1934 john deere and the oarsman board on a galley ship.

exalteddragon1 · March 2006

I really do not think the lucerne and camry are comparable, the lucren is one larger size class. Compare it to the Avalon. The fact that you wish to insult this bigger, heaver car by saying that to you, a 4cyl toyota is more powerful is not going to change any prospective buyers mind.

The Lucerne is too impressive not to deserve a second look. the Idiots at GM made a huge mistake in not giving it a base of at least the 3.9L, but even so, the V8 is a formidable sedan, and the V6 will defenetly match a 4cyl toyota.

Still, that camry is probably 200 or more ilbs lighter than lucerne. I do not see a point to this comparo.

fin · March 2006

The 4 cyl Camry is some 500 lbs lighter than a Lucerne and is a totally different car (to me). Lucerne and Avalon probably steal sales from each other daily. My understanding is that they sell about the same number each month now. Anybody know for sure? And the new Azera would love to jump in and grab a share here also, but that may take a while... if ever.

samchinch · March 2006

I'm telling you I drove both cars. The Lucerne drove like it was dead in the water compared to the Toyota Camry. I am 32 years old and I certainly know about speed and whether a car can get up and go and the Lucerne can definitely not get up and go. It is perfectly fine for the crowd it attracts but they wanted this car to be attractive to younger buyers and it certainly will not stand up. I'm not telling anyone to not buy the car nor am I telling them to buy it. Everyone has different things they look for in a car.

samchinch · March 2006

I have test driven the Azera and let me tell you that is one fine car. The seats in that vehicle sit very nice. The powerplant is totally awesome in that you hit the gas pedal you are off. The only thing is it is made by Hyundai and with that name you are going to take a big hit in value right from the start they just depreciate way to fast.

exalteddragon1 · March 2006

Lucerne has more get up and go than Avalon or Azera, it is also bigger than the hundai and probably that toyota.

The V6 is slow no doubt, once again thats GM's mistake and I hope they rectify it soon.

for anyone in a cold climate, the lucerne also has heated washer fluid that neither competitor has, I wonder if any owners out there have used this feature?

rake2 · March 2006

I have used it, but haven't had a really cold winter in the Philly area. Was hoping to test it out by not having to scrape the front windshield and instead just melting it, but haven't had severe enough frost to test it. I have used it to get some sap like substance off of the windshield, however. Nice little gadget.

62vetteefp · March 2006

That is one feature of the heated fluid not talked about. The hot water will clean the windshield much more effectively than cool water.

sls002 · March 2006

Car & Driver has tested the 4 cylinder Camry. 0-60 is about 8.5 seconds, 0-110 is over 30 seconds. This may be somewhat quicker than a 3800 Lucerne. However, the V8 Lucerne on 0-110 is 7 seconds faster. But a 3.5 V6 in the Camry or Avalon will be much quicker than the V8 Lucerne. However, do we really need to zip from a standing start to 60 MPH in under 7 seconds

62vetteefp · March 2006

I love power but on one side there are folks buying hybrids that save gas but will never pay back (unless gas gets up to over $4 for years) and those who say rooten tooten HP is more important. To each his own!!!!

My opinion is that few looking at standard Camrys or Lucernes care much about 0-60 or excessive HP. However both vehicles in their base engines better have enough pep to give a feeling of safety in performance. We have been here before and both do have plenty of Ummpp for almost all of the market they are after. If you want more HP the uplevel engines have plenty. If you want more go look at a performance vehicle.

imidazol97 · March 2006

Well said.

Does the 4 cyl Camry have that much horsepower and torque or it is just geared so low that it gets a good 0-60 time? It must run out of steam at 80. My 3800 in leSabres is still going fine at 80; lots of torque left. Just need an invisibility shield from radar and laser to travel at that speed.

splatsterhound · March 2006

Bottom line: drive 'em! Test driving by the stat sheet is meaningless.

It wasn't that long ago that a car -- any car -- within a few hp of 200 ponies had some serious muscle. Now people complain that a car has 'only' 197 hp and more than 200 flb torque. Get real.

I drove the Lucerne v8 and the Avalon touring back to back. The lucerne had much better oomph off the line and a smoother transmission. The avalon really hauled when you gave it a couple seconds to wind up. But I personally find the quick power of the v8 more useful in real-world driving.

But everything is relative, isn't it? i learned to drive on a rusted VW van with, what?, 68 hp and a top speed of maybe 75.

I currently own an olds 88 with the 3800 v6 and the thing is an absolute rock. 175,000 miles on it now and the only things replaced: spark plugs (once), belts, a water pump at 155,000. That's all. It still gets 30-plus on the highway, it easily passes emissions tests, it can run at 90 mph without breathing hard and, most importantly, it has never ever failed to start or run smoothly. Will it win drag races with a Corvette? No. Do I care? No.

m1miata · March 2006

I don't live in a cold area of the USA, except the last couple of weeks, so I rarely have to de-ice the windshield. I have put warm water on the windshield, but always wondered as to how hot the water can be. Anyone one know? Seems to me going from extreme cold to warmer-hotter has the risk of cracking the windshield. But I don't know.

Loren

sls002 · March 2006

One assumes that GM tested this. Not so long ago I drove thru a snowstorm in New Mexico and gave up for the day in Gallop. The next morning the windshield was frozen over with a lot of snow/ice. I decided that the easy way to clean it off was to pour some water over it. I used cold water because I was afraid that the windshield might crack. One point that should be made is that the water is heated to about 175 degrees and then is sprayed on. The spray in icy weather will cool before it hits the glass, and even so, in small drops is not the same thing as taking a tea kettle and puring boiling water over the windshield.

62vetteefp · March 2006

Will not crack the windshield.

62vetteefp · March 2006

Camrys 4 cylinder has a rooten tooten 158 hp and 161 torque.

Lucerne has 197 hp and 227 torque.

Lucerne weighs 3764, Camry weighs 3307.

bruneau1 · March 2006

The seats in the Azera are vastly inferior to those in the Lucerne, even the base Lucerne. The Azera's seat cushion is too short, the adjustability of the driver power is limited in range, and the passenger seat is flat non-adjustable. I wouldn't want to travel very far in the Azera. As for the Lucerne's V6, not a race car for sure, but drive it with overdrive off until highway speeds and it performs just fine.

sv7887 · March 2006

Hi All,
I don't think the comparisons to a 4 Cyl Camry have any merit. I've owned 4 Lexus LS400/430's and a Toyota Tercel and Corolla.

My point is: Toyota isn't perfect. Lexus service in the Boston area is one of the worst I have encountered in a long time. I used to drive a 1989 Buick Park Avenue and it was a fantastic car with great dealer support.

All this talk of Toyota value is overrated. My Park Ave never broke down and when there was a problem it wasn't that expensive to fix it. I just paid $1,700 on a new Power Steering rack for my '92 Lexus LS400 with 97K on it..I've had to nearly sue the Lexus dealer because of fraudulent repairs. Lexus Corporate was no help.

I bet that repair would have been half the $$$ on a Buick. My son's new 2006 Corolla rattles like crazy. The tires are Goodyear Integritys' which got some of the worst ratings on TireRack. Not very impressed with Toyota these days.

The Buick Lucerne is a great car. I've seen them in person and am very impressed. It is a much better value than the Avalon with eye catching styling. I can't think of a single car below $35K that has a V-8. I've driven the ES330 many times and noticed the jerky transmission right away. The new interior of the ES350 is nothing special.

Is the Lucerne perfect? No, but what car in this segment is? All I can say this is one of GM's best cars in a very long time.

-Sam

m1miata · March 2006

Hyundai kinda jumped the gun. Seem far too early for them to consider the luxury car segment. This comes so close to the rebuilding era after a very shaky start in the US market. The Sonata seems like a more logical place to stop.

Perhaps the Lucerne, with a V8, will pick up some additional customer once the Caddy DTS goes RWD. Seems like there are those that prefer FWD, or feel it is better in snow country. Anyone here cross shopped the DTS and the Lucerne, then bought the Buick? The Buick is well liked in China, and if there are no more FWD big cars of luxury in the Cadillac line, those GM loyalist will be buying Buick. They name may just be saved, when many thought it to be the next to go. Now Pontiac, and its performance car image, one could say could also fit as well in the Chevy line. Hummm?

-Loren

m1miata · March 2006

You were very lucky not to have bought an '87 model year. I had an Olds98 and the window had a whistle to it, the engine stopped running some times. They replaced a mass air flow sensor, programmable operation manager, tried numerous adjustments, and finally changed the crank case sensor. The transmission blew at 62K miles. The paint on the roof top went bad. The handle for the brake release came off. The rear window mirror fell off. I am sure I forgot some stuff, but you get the picture. All of this was in about 3 years time. This was a car that sticker priced around $20K back when. I paid around $18K. About 3 1/4 years, give or take, later the car was a $6k something, trade-in.

As for the Lucerne, if GM is in business, the car has a good reliability record for two years, and I could find a good used V8 for under $20K, I would consider one. Or a DTS. The Lexus line up seems overpriced to me. Nothing too interesting in the low end line-up by Lexus.

-Loren

poncho167 · March 2006

Sorry Consumer Reports is not a legitimate source being that only members auto's are evaluated.

m1miata · March 2006

Better tell GM to only sell the good ones to Consumer Report members.

Sounds like a vast right wing conspiracy of some sort. Someone needs to look into this. :shades: CR members are buying different cars than the rest of America :confuse: While CR members could, in theory, possibly see the automobile in a different way than the rest of humanity, the questions are directed to problem areas on the car. The cars are not pre-sorted in any way which the people are buying. I would have to say, unless someone did cook the books, Consumer Reports is the best source for data on these cars. As for the Lucerne, it is new and thus no one knows what quirks, if any, are in this auto. It could be anywhere from perfection to awful. JD Powers may be able to tell ya if the car has had few problems reported within a few days, or months. The engines have a pretty good track record as of late, so they will likely not be a major source of problems. Wait a couple years for CR data, or chance it. The engine is traditional and the transmission has been around for years, so one could surmise that the Lucerne should be better than average for reliability, based on parts. But no one knows for sure about the car as a whole. It looks to be solid in appearance. Hopefully for customers of Buick, it is indeed sound.

A betting man would say this car will rate average to above average, even for CR owners. Lucerne has its good points to it.

Loren

poncho167 · March 2006

I believe the base Malibu with 4 cylinder is slightly quicker than the 4 cylinder Camery.

poncho167 · March 2006

I have never done this but have been told that it will crack your windshield on a cold day/night?

rake2 · March 2006

Believe it heats up to the area of 150 F.

sls002 · March 2006

Cadillac heats to 176 degrees. Lucerne heats to 149 degrees.

pmerk28 · March 2006

"The new interior of the ES350 is nothing special."

Yeah it's only the best in it's class. Every Lexus interior is special. GM interiors are normally awful.

"It is a much better value than the Avalon with eye catching styling."

The Avalon looks just as good maybe better. I doubt the Luceren's resale will match the Avalons. Your point on repair costs are well taken though and the Lucerne looks to be a very good effort from GM. I might give it a look even though I'm barely into my 30's, not 65 like a normal Buick buyer.

1487 · March 2006

If you think the Avalon looks good I doubt you are in your 30s. The Avalon is not attractive from any angle. Basically it's a bloated camry. The last Avalon was so ugly that everyone is making a big deal about the current one because it's not as bad. Taking the car on it's own merits it isnt that good looking.

"Yeah it's only the best in it's class. Every Lexus interior is special. GM interiors are normally awful. "

Get caught up with the times. I would like you to name 5 terrible GM interiors, not including models being replaced this year like the trucks.

Please check out pics of the Lucerne, lacrosse, enclave, Vue, GTO, Escalade/Tahoe, Impala, DTS, STS, cobalt, torrent, 9-5, 9-7x, etc. before talking about how bad GM's interiors are. The ES350 has a nice interior, but that doesnt mean GM's interiors are bad. I think the DTS' interior is comparable to the new ES, but not the Lucerne. Lexus makes great interiors, but when you check out some of toyota's more affordable offerings like the Corolla, Rav4, Sequoia, Highlander and FJ Cruiser you will Toyota interiors arent all they are cracked up to be. Fake wood can only take you so far. I would take a modern GM interior over a dull Toyota interior any day. Only exception would be the new camry.

tjc78 · March 2006

You forgot the Crown Vic / Grand Marquis. Maybe the V8 Lucerne is a value, but comparing the base model with the ancient 3800 to a base model Avalon its not even close. I am comparing the two right now although Buick advertises the V8 for 30,000 I have yet to see one on the lot under 34,000 with the V8. You can get an Avalon touring with heated seats, leather and stability control for under 32,000. I haven't started pricing them out yet, but I bet the Toyota will give a much better lease, due to the vehicle holding its value better.

m1miata · March 2006

My first impression of the new Avalon was that they made a car similar to an Oldsmobile. Not too bad, other than a bit awkward up front. The new Camry needs a little re-work on the nose too. Front wise the Lucerne is a bit cleaner looking. Its eyes are a bit big, but I take it that's better to see you with.

As to interiors, it looks like a good job was done on the Lucerne, and Impala, but the Cobalt looks cheap to me.

-Loren

robchemist · March 2006

The discussion of how good an interior looks, seems to me, silly at best. Presumably, if one is driving a car, one is not spending time looking at the interior. Maybe a glance down at the instrument cluster or radio control, but that would be about it. If one does spend lots of time looking at the interior of your car, all I can say is that I really do not want to be on the road when that person is driving!

sls002 · March 2006

I looked at the dealer inventory around here (online), and found list prices range from $33,000 to $35,000, depending on options. With a few options, the price will be around $32,000 or so. Some listed at $33,000 with a sunroof, so without sunroof the price could be less. Without a trade in, the sticker price is probably negotiable. Leasing is not something I know about, but since BMW's don't depreciate in the first year

, they may be the best lease.

navigator89 · March 2006

It isnt really a silly discussion. An interior should reflect the amount of money put into the car, and it should be either at par for the money, or better. But there are times when you have a chance to look at the interior of your car. How about when you are waiting for someone, waiting in traffic and at red lights, or parked.

The interior discussion is also something which makes people look forward to driving their car. I know I would really look forward to a car with a nice interior, such as the new Impala, compared to the old Impala. Or the LeSabre compared to the Lucerne.

1487 · March 2006

Really ergonomics are more important than interior quality. To some degree material quality is subjective anyway so it's hard to get a consensus on a certain vehicle's interior design. I dont believe there are many "bad" interiors on the market today. Some are more dull than others but compared to what was offered 10 or more years ago I think most vehicles today are fine. I definitely dont see a huge gap between GM products and Toyota products in 2006. Many people love the Avalon's interior but I find it kind of cheesy. I dont like the silly door that hides the radio, I dont like how the dash has two different levels and I dont like all the fake metallic trim that will eventually rub off after years of use. It's too over the top and reminds me of Buicks and Oldsmobiles from the 90s.

priggly · March 2006

I dont like the silly door that hides the radio, I dont like how the dash has two different levels and I dont like all the fake metallic trim that will eventually rub off after years of use.

You are right, the interior of the new Avalon is a mess. I do not find it attractive at all. Acres and acres of fake metallic trim. The little doors are not merely annonying, they are also subject to malfunction: jamming, failing to open, etc. Just check the Avalon board for stories of replacement of the "little doors." An ergonomic error. The interior of the Lucerne is far, far better.

62vetteefp · March 2006

I love the look of the Avalon doors. Makes the dash nice and smooth and uninterupted by small buttons and such. BUT, they will break and will mostly be open anyway so that the components can be used. Go ahead and cover up rarely accessed bins but the others will need to go away.

sls002 · March 2006

My 98 Aurora had a cover over the trip computer so that the numerous buttons would not show unless one was using it. I did not beat on it so had no problems. I wish that my SLS had more functions in the driver information center to display some engine items like oil pressure.

calhon · March 2006

My sense is that styling preferences (contemporary, high-tech, traditional, clean, detailed), and "look and feel" are being presented under the guise of interior or material quality by much of the automotive press.

pmerk28 · March 2006

My sense is that Lexus will always make fantastic interiors and GM interiors will always be quote "improving but still short of class leaders"

lnt · March 2006

I am wondering what kind of gas mileage in town and interstate driving the Lucerne V8 gets.

vantheman1 · March 2006

I am buying a Lucerne CXS, and have determined all options except for the navigation. I do a lot of traveling in the northeast, and have always used mapquest for directions, which is actually pretty reliable....i am seeking comments of those who have had nav as to whether it is truly something they use, or whether it is just cool to have it....(it is an expensive option)....also comments on whether the new onstar directions makes the need for nav moot, or at least makes worth considering which would be more user friendly and thus more valuable....finally, i test drove an acura last year and it had a system where you could say out loud, "find the nearest starbucks" or "change CD to track 5" and it would tell you...now, that to me would be valuable....i am assuming that this lucerne system is not that advanced.let me know your thoughts...thank you

rake2 · March 2006

"Around town" I'm averaging 16 to 17 mph, although none of that is just town driving. Think I'm up to about 23 to 24 mph on strickly highway drives, although not positive about that yet. First strictly highway trip was when I had about 400 miles on the car, and it got about 21 -22 mph then.

rake2 · March 2006

If you haven't purchased it yet, I'm assuming one built since March with turn by turn navigation will be sufficient. You must make sure it has the Gen 7 On Star, however, as the dumb bleeps didn't put that version of equipment in until then. Just one of the reasons I feel that those of us who bought early got a little shafted by GM.

Turn by turn nav should enable you to get directions from OnStar downloaded to your car, and you will be prompted when to make turns. Won't need to look at screens, and if you get off course, it will tell you automatically how to get back on course. Also, I believe that OnStar in general will allow you to find the nearest restaurant or gas station by just hitting the button and asking the rep, although I haven't tried that yet to know for certain.

vantheman1 · March 2006

thanks rake

62vetteefp · March 2006

I fyou get the traditional OnStar driving and directions you can ask the person just about anything. Where the nearest gas station is, church, etc.

rake2, sorry you did not get the new system. No one should have told you your car had it. It was meant to be an interim intro. I can only believe, since I was not there, that the new components were just not ready until March. IF they could have they would have had this new system in at start of production. Heck they would have put it in many other cars if they could. There is always a stating point for every new technology. Maybe they should have waited for the 2007 fall intro?

62vetteefp · March 2006

If you want a simple to use nav system get the OnStar system. So easy. If you want a pretty screen to impress your friends or you like to see the XM channels easier(I love the screen for that, shows the band and song) then get the screen.

dandydon2 · March 2006

I have a 2004 Lexus ES 330 with nav and am buying a CXL V8 instead. After considerable study and research, I decided to go with the OnStar TBT system rather than getting another screen type. I use the nav fairly often, but believe that it is an unnecessary distraction to refer to the display while under way.

If you want a preview of what TBT will give you, go to http://tinyurl.com/zwfj4 and download the 15 minute video for V-com voice navigation system. I believe (educated guess) that it uses the same database that TBT uses. If so, the capabilities should be similar. You will be impressed.

rake2 · March 2006

It's just rubbing the salt in the wounds from my perspective. GM insisted on the higher sticker prices on the Lucernes when they first came out, then 2 months later lowered all of the prices by about $2,000. So now, not only is the better technology available, GM is charging less for it. Given that their lowering the sticker also lowered the invoice, which was what my cost was based on, I paid more for less. Right or wrong, I feel that I got screwed by being one of the first to buy the car. Unfortunately, I tend to not forget that feeling either the next time it comes to buying a new car. That Challenger retro concept is looking better all of the time.

Buick Lucerne

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles