Howdy, Stranger!

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





Mainstream Large Sedans Comparison

16061636566222

Comments

  • gamlegedgamleged Posts: 442
    ...[rockylee] [joe131] [pat] [rockylee] [batista] [rockylee] [batista] [rockylee] [batista] [rockylee] [batista] by imidazol97

    [OVERBURDEN... CORE CONTAINMENT... MELTDOWN IMMINENT!!! MELTDOooooo POP!]... :shades:
  • tjc78tjc78 JerseyPosts: 5,025
    The funny thing is who are these cars going to appeal too? Its a limited market. There hasn't been a "hot rod" Buick since 1987 with the last Grand National. Buick doesn't have the performance image anymore. I would suspect that 90% of people looking for a true sports sedan will look elsewhere without even thinking Buick. GM should stop playing around with these outdated cars and start refining the 3.6 and a 5 speed tranny to compete both power wise and economy with the rest of the auto makers. Not even Ford was dumb enough to just "drop" a V8 into the new 500 (oops Taurus)... no they did the right thing and massaged the 3.0 into the 3.5 with a lot more power and similar FE.

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

  • patpat Posts: 10,421
  • captain2captain2 Posts: 3,971
    agree- excluding those SC 'Gran Nationals' of 20 years ago, Buick has been nothing but an 'old folks' car - an extremely hard image to change. Even the Avalon is still fighting this - 2 years later. Think, however, that as the Impala goes so will the Buick 'copies', maybe a 2010 Lucerne that is RWD and with one of those V8s - just hope that gas isn't $5+/gallon by then because then those V6s will look a whole lot more appealing.
  • allmet33allmet33 Posts: 3,557
    And what makes it any less of a sports sedan compared to Maximas of the past???
  • allmet33allmet33 Posts: 3,557
    One thing you'll never hear me say...the Azera is nimble! LOL

    Don't get it twisted, I am well aware that the Azera is not the car you want to cut loose with on twists and curves of a mountain road. However, on a nice cruise down the highway...I'll take it!

    I've been talking about acceleration, not handling. In a comparison to a Maxima...I do believe that the Azera will hang with it on a nice stretch of highway. Now you want to start talking corners, turns and curves...oh, the Maxima will leave the Azera behind. Trust and believe, I'm a realist and would not believe that the Azera is anything more than a highway cruiser.
  • allmet33allmet33 Posts: 3,557
    Ummmmmmmmmmmmm...spec out quite similarly with the G35??? I think not...more like the M's!!!

    However, it's hard to know for sure until they drop definitive HP numbers, but Hyundai is saying well over 300 hp and the G is JUST over 300 hp.

    Size-wise as well...the G specs out much closer to the Azera on interior space. The Genesis is supposed to bigger than the Azera.

    Sorry...as much as folks want to knock the upcoming Genesis...it's hard to do so until numbers are concrete. Based on what has been printed on it thus far, it seems to be comparable to the 5-Series and E-Class, which also means it would compare more with the M and quite possibly the GS sedans as well.
  • allmet33allmet33 Posts: 3,557
    Joe, I'm glad someone else sees it that way!!!

    I guess those same folks will really be burned by the Azera/Lexus LS commercial then, huh? LOL
  • captain2captain2 Posts: 3,971
    the gyroscope analogy is a good one - those larger/heavier wheels are, if anything, going to want to limit the car's cornering and stopping abilities, despite the extra rubber on the road. Owned a 92 190hp Maxima, a wonderful car, that got close to 300k on it, it much smaller and 'tighter' than the version today, and some torque steer. Remembering what else was available in the early mid 90s, there really wasn't anything like it, save for some much more expensive German cars which, of course, had the added advantage of RWD and balance. To this day, FWIW, the Maxima does have a certain responsiveness to it that you don't find in this class, a responsiveness you don't find in Avalons or Azeras.
  • plektoplekto Posts: 3,738
    Buick is making some real sleepers these days that really do a number on the competition.

    The top end Lucerne for instance... yes, the 3800 model is a bloated toad. But the CXS(or upcoming super)... They really should make it a different name/model it's so drastically imporved.

    The Magnetic Ride suspension is fully 3/4 of the difference right there. Torque-steer is *gone*. No, really - I was wanting to hate it. My dad and mom have a LeSabre and a Park Ave Ultra and so I know the 3800/Buick feel.(blech) The CXS... no torque steer. no wide-open-throttle lag(tm). It moved exactly like a Mercedes S420 used to. Solid, stable, and great in traffic. 0-60? With only three gears in town(overdrive really is for highway speeds), it has loads of power and a sense of immediancy that the 6 cylinder cars lack. 10-30, 20-40, and simmilar transitions didn't require a downshift - just more gas and presto. Yes, it's not as "fast", but it drives like the best VVT 6 you've ever driven. They set it up for torque and smoothness instead of winning some drag race.

    Hint - the bigger your engine, the fewer gears you need if it's set up right. Now, something like a 2.0L engine in a F1 racecar... needs a boatload of gears. A 5-8L V8? Three plus overdrive is just about right. The Camry/etc - they have a V6 with 5 or 6 gears? Considering that the engine develops maximum HP at close to 5000rpm, more gears robs power like crazy. (most 0-60 times are done manually shifting the automatic and leaving it in 2nd gear until it hits 60mph) Not typical driving by any means.

    This was the first Buick since the Grand National that I had test-driven that you could take a typical city corner at 30mph and the thing didn't lean or wobble. My brain literally had a moment of disconnect because the idea of this car and "Buick" suddenly didn't fit together anymore.

    It's also why I'm looking forward to the new CTS. GM has gotten agressive finally - FINALLY - and started to go after Mercedes and BMW and the rest.

    P.S. The 3800 is a great engine. It's really hard to actually kill one(barring the coolant fiasco. - the car runs fine on the old green antifreeze, GM!)

    The transmission, yes, it's not any more reliable than the others. But I can get that 4 speed in a Lucerne or LaCrosse rebuilt for $1200-$1600 all over town.
  • allmet33allmet33 Posts: 3,557
    Is it fair to put the 300C/Charger R/T up there since those are V-8 Hemi's??? You're talking 340 hp compared to below 300 hp with the V-6's the other's are pushing. If anything, you would compare the 300 (Touring)or the Charger (base) both with the 250 hp V-6...in which case, those standings may change.

    What's really sad is that it takes the Lucerne with the Northstar to compete with the any of the V-6's from Toyota, Nissan, Honda or Hyundai. Same with the Chevy Impala SS...you drop down LTZ and you only get 233 hp with the V-6.

    That being the case, your list would look more like...

    1)Avalon
    2)Maxima
    3)Azera
    4)300/Charger
    5)Impala
    6)Lucerne (LOL) Gotta laugh since it isn't even pushing out 200hp!!! :P
  • allmet33allmet33 Posts: 3,557
    "Hint - the bigger your engine, the fewer gears you need if it's set up right."

    Tell that to Lexus...the bigger their engines, the more gears they see fit to throw in the tranny!!! Look at the LS with the first ever 8-speed automatic!!!

    Only problem with a 4 speed tranny...they cause a car to run so loudly!!!
  • captain2captain2 Posts: 3,971
    the R/T is hemi equipped (340hp), the Impala SS a 303hp V8 and both been known to run in the 5s, the Lucerne is only going to get close with the Northstar V8. The Avalon, Maxima, and Azera (6s) will outrun the Northstar (7s) but not the other 2 V8s. The 300/Chargers (also the 7s)with the 3.5 are not slow in the same vein as the 500 or the 3.8 Lucerne (something approaching 0-60 in a month and a half) ;)
  • plektoplekto Posts: 3,738
    Well, it IS a V8. Gotta love to hear that growl and feel the thing hook up.

    IMO, you should have a vehicle tuned so that it is running at 60% of redline in normal driving. But that means shorter gears or a lot of torque to compensate. The power at silly rpms and tall gearing makes for lovely 0-60 tests and EPA ratings, but there is no soul to it, either. Most of those vehicles(especially the import 6s) have as much personality as a typical subway train. Yes, it goes 0-60 quickly but that's where it ends.

    Take the new Honda Fit. People complain that it runs about 3000rpm at 60mph.(stickshift) - Well, that's exactly where you want it in case you have to pass. Instead of downshifting, you just hit the gas and go. Well worth 1-2mpg IMO.

    P.S. yes, 8 speeds is a nightmare. what's that - between 1500 and 2000rpm all the way up to 100mph?(with a ~5600 redline, no less)
  • tjc78tjc78 JerseyPosts: 5,025
    "Well worth 1-2mpg"

    I am no environmentalist but if every car on the road gave up 1 - 2 MPG just to not downshift to pass how much more oil would we use, and what would start happening to the price of gas then?

    As for the "no soul" comment. My Avalon has plenty of "soul" at any RPM even more so at anything above 4000. While still getting great MPG and being smooth as silk.

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

  • plektoplekto Posts: 3,738
    Eccch. The thing is, the Avalon is a barge. BIg, heavy, and bloated. Loads of power, but the thing winds up so slowly that it NEEDS all of that power.

    Compare the Avalon in typical driving to an Accord with the 4 cylinder engine and a manual transmission. I know which one is more fun to drive and responds better. Or shoot, get a RX-8 out for a test drive. Wind it up mercelessly to 6-8K rpm and enjoy the experience.

    Honestly, the Avalon reminds me a lot of a Towncar. Big, powerful highway cruiser meant for the average person out in Missouri or Kansas. Not a city or mountain road vehicle.
  • captain2captain2 Posts: 3,971
    really think you ought to be talking about something you've actually driven. 0-60 in 6s or so is very much akin to what a 4500lb Town Car will do (in your dreams) - and slow too rev - give me a break - there is no 6 cylinder engine even available that will 'wind up' so effortlessly and quickly. Soft yes - in all but the Touring trim, it is after all an Avalon - a car that has NEVER lost any kind of comparison test in this category - except for those 'run' by folks that have obviously never driven the car....
  • jaymagicjaymagic Posts: 309
    Tell em Cap!!! LOL. Avalon touring is not a sport sedan, but its a LOOOOOONNNNGGGG way from a Town Car.
  • allmet33allmet33 Posts: 3,557
    Right...which is why I'm asking you why are you comparing the 300C/Charger R/T, along with the Lucerne Northstar and Impala SS with the Avalon, Azera & Maxima???

    Oh...now I see, proving a point that the domestic cars NEED a V-8 to run with the foreign V-6's.

    To be honest...how many folks on there really are concerned with a 0-60 time? I mean...I don't think any of us have a need to get to 60 that quickly in any event. Yes, it's nice to know that you have power when needed, but unless you're racing the car...does it really mean much?

    7 second 0-6's really aren't slow when you consider that the FASTEST exotic super car can do 0-60 in 3 seconds flat. We're talking an ultra light car with over 800 hp. So...for a 3000+ lb. car taking only 7 seconds to get to 60 with less than 300 hp, that's really GREAT!!!
  • pernaperna Posts: 533
    frankly didn't know that GM had screwed up the LaCrosse as well by putting that V8 in it - can you say 'torque steer', a problem at the gas pumps, and even more weight imbalance.

    I drove a Grand Prix GXP with that engine, and honestly it has less torque steer than my Maxima. The gas mileage isn't bad either, since it has the cylinder deactivation that a lot of newer engines have. The car is also a lot of fun to drive.

    I don't think I would buy one, simply because the W body is an outdated platform. Those cars have VERY poor space utilization; not Panther (Crown Vic) bad, but still not good.

    I am eagerly awaiting the G8. :)
  • plektoplekto Posts: 3,738
    You might want to note the part where I pointed out that the Avalon is miserable in city traffic and on twisty roads. Like the typical stuff we have in the hills all around Los Angeles.

    Big, heavy, and yes, it does spin up very slowly because you have to practically floor it to get the transmission to not upshift the millisecond it gets over 2500rpm(stupid "intelligent" transmission). It's a fine car, mind you - my uncle has one and I've driven it as well as new ones at the dealership on test drives.

    If you like that thing, I guess you're entitled to it. Me? I'll take small and light anyday.
  • dborthdborth Posts: 474
    Re: # 1940: "To be honest...how many folks on there really are concerned with a 0-60 time?"

    Probably a lot more than you think. 0-60 et's are a performance benchmark and product feature. The auto manufactures / publications and trickle down to the consumer concern themselves with it.
  • batistabatista Posts: 159
    Oh...now I see, proving a point that the domestic cars NEED a V-8 to run with the foreign V-6's.

    This has been the case the last 5 years.
    The GM 3.8L supercharged (240HP/280lbs/ft)was blowing away the competition until Nissan came out with the 240HP 3.5L.
    The big 3 could have competed in the V6 segment if it weren't for the pension/health care costs.
  • allmet33allmet33 Posts: 3,557
    LOL Duly noted, however...in performance comaros...you should keep it real and only use the V-6 models to show how inadequate they really are. ;)

    Imagine if Toyota, Honda, Nissan or Hyundai created an SS, C, R/T or Super version of any of their cars...the Domestic big 3 would be in huge trouble! LOL
  • allmet33allmet33 Posts: 3,557
    I understand that, but to be honest...it's a useless stat. 0-60 doesn't help you in between stop lights in city traffic, 0-60 doesn't help you when merging into highway traffic during rush hour, 0-60 doesn't help in rain or snow and it certainly doesn't do you any good in a residential area.

    So whether your car can do 0-60 in 5.5 seconds and mine does it in 6.4 seconds...ultimately does it affect how much faster you get somewhere?

    Unless it's a performance machine that will be used to perform...it's truly a meaningless number that exists for bragging rights I guess.
  • dborthdborth Posts: 474
    RE 1946: Suffice to say then that it's a product Feature, Advantage and Benefit to some potential buyers as MPG and true cost of ownership is to others.
  • captain2captain2 Posts: 3,971
    allmet-
    will contend that acceleration times whether they be 0-60, or 50-70 utltimately have a lot to do with vehicle safety - the capability the car has to turn onto a fast moving street from a stop, or passing that truck on a 2 lane highway comfortably with room to spare. Granted the effective difference between 5 something and 6 something is minor and likely not something used in either vehicle on a regular basis - but all else equal, the more powerful car will, within some reasonable limits, be the safer car - all else being equal.
    down here in Texas, we have things called feeder roads (generally 2 or 3 lanes themselves) along side our freeways, which are lined with businesses and direct access side streets. The problem is that while the freeways generally move at 70-75, the heavy traffic on these feeder roads usually move even faster than that, making it very difficult to safely get up to speed in front of (or into) the oncoming traffic. 0-60 becomes quite important - as does the difficulties created when you try to do something like this in a car with significantly less power. When I test drove the 500, thought I was 'dead' in trying to get the thing up to speed in exactly this situation. Certainly my own fault for anticipating & expecting more power than what is really there, but at the time dissuaded me from considering that particular vehicle any further.
  • captain2captain2 Posts: 3,971
    Oh...now I see, proving a point that the domestic cars NEED a V-8 to run with the foreign V-6's
    exactly, but you left out a whole lot more fuel as well ;)
  • captain2captain2 Posts: 3,971
    I drove a Grand Prix GXP with that engine, and honestly it has less torque steer than my Maxima.
    well yes it does and no it doesn't - the 'trick' that Pontiac used to 'hide' it - smaller tries and wheels on the front than on the rear. Think about that for a moment just in terms of tire wear because no longer can you rotate front to rear. The essentially identical Impala is a torque steering monster but, then again, all the tires are the same size. Torque steer has always been a trademark and a problem (there are folks that actually like it) for Nissans ever since the late 80s Maximas, the new CVT model FWIU uses that computer controlled tranny and electronic throttle to make it all almost dissappear as well. DOD systems, BTW, offer very little improvement in FE, those cars so equipped noted to have the most outrageously optimistic EPA ratings. Fun to drive (at least in a straight line), sure, 300 hp will do that...
  • tjc78tjc78 JerseyPosts: 5,025
    As Captain said the Avalon will wind up as fast as you want it too. Comparing the underpowered 4.6 V8 in the Town Car/GM/CV to the 3.5 in the Avalon is nuts. The Avalon actually handles pretty well... yes its soft and will understeer, but, for some spirited driving it does just fine. Especially comsidering its size and comfortable ride.

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

Sign In or Register to comment.