Buick Lucerne: Engine & Performance

poncho167 · April 2006

The 3800 engine is much better than good, it's the best V6 ever made (over 30 million produced) and is world renown for that. I agree it is dated and probably should be replaced, but for the most of us a V6 is all that is needed. The Lucerne is not much more in weight than the LaSabre, so again a V6 should be plenty of muscle for the average driver. I personally no longer drag race from the lights and am rarely in a hurry that I need to start passing traffic, so a V6 would be my choice for mileage and regular driving. The V8 as offered is there for those who need the extra muscle, or to help remind them that this is a premium car with a premium engine available.

sls002 · April 2006

The 3800 performance in the Lucerne is partly due to the axle gearing used, 2.85:1, while the V8 gets a 3.11:1 ratio. The 3800 used to get a 3.05:1 in most applications. I used to own an Oldsmobile diesel, which had adequate power, so using that as a standard, yes, I would say the 3800 is more than adequate, even with the economy gearing.

The basic difference between the the pushrod engines (3800, 3.9) and the DOHC V6s is that the pushrod engines are cheaper with more noise, vibration and hashness (NVH); the DOHC V6 family (2.8-3.6 liter) is a global V6 with reduced NVH (in theory). I think that the GM 3.6 is not as good as some other 3.5 liter V6's from other makers. BMW's straight 6 is the best for NVH.

Regarding the 3.9: It has more torque, see plot:
http://media.gm.com/us/powertrain/en/product_services/HPT%20Library/HVV6/2006_39- - - L_LZ9_Impala.pdf

Note that it has more than 225 lb-ft of torque from 2000 RPMs to 5500 RPMs. This engine would be much better than either the 3800 or the LaCrosse 3.6. Note that there is a double peak in torque, this is the variable length intake manifold, which none of the 3.6 engines has as yet, although the CTS 3.6 has a variable intake manifold. The variable 3.6 has independent left and right intakes for each bank of cylinders, but at high speeds a valve connects the two banks.

For NVH, the 3.9 is probably no better than the 3800, so this engine would be good for the CX, keeping its price down. But then the LaCrosse 3.6 would not give better performance in the V6 CXL, although axle ratios or transmission choices could make a difference. The LaCrosse 3.6 gets a 3.69:1 axle ratio to give it an edge on performance, but it EPA fuel consumption is greater.

While the Chrysler 300 offers 4 engines, the 2.7 V6 is too small, and the 425 hp engine is too big. I have never been too impressed with the 250 hp 3.5's performance in the 300M either. It seemed to me that it should have done better.

jh1977 · April 2006

Your messages are very informative. In your last message you stated that GM's new 3.9 Liter V6 engine is probably no better than the 3800 V6 engine. The 3.9 Liter V6 engine can deliver 240 HP and 240 pounds of torque while the 3800 delivers only 197 HP and 227 pounds of torque in the Buick Lucerne. How can both engines have near equal power according to you? Please explain. Sincerely.

sls002 · April 2006

I clearly stated that for noise, vibration and harshness, the 3.9 might not be much better than the 3800. However, the 3.9 is a 60 degree design rather than a 90 degree design, which does make some difference. But the 3800 was upgraded many times to improve the NVH. The 3.9 and the smaller 3.5 are both much better designs than the older 3800.

The Lucerne will probably continue with the 3800 for as long as it is in production, which will be through the 2008 model year. The new 2007 Saturn Aura will have the 3.5 liter as the standard engine with (surprise

)the 4 speed automatic. The 3.5 is upgraded to 220 lb-ft of torque and 224 hp. This engine might be a good base engine for the Lucerne.

sls002 · April 2006

There are two considerations for the replacement engine, engine smoothness and performance. The DOHC 3.6 liter V6 is supposed to be a premium engine with greater smoothness than the pushrod V6 3.5 or 3.9 liter engines. I have not driven any of these engines, so cannot say. The pushrod engines are less expensive to make.

The 3.9 liter V6 has about 240 lb-ft of torque and 240 horsepower. This engine would be a good replacement for the 3800 in both the CX and CXL.

But, for added smoothness, the 3.6 would make a good choice to put in the CXL, with a 6 speed automatic. The best 3.6 would be the 250 horsepower, 250 lb-ft of torque Aura version. However, then the CX should get less torque and horsepower, so the 3.5 Aura engine would make sense.

The Buick Enclave (and Saturn Outlook) are getting a 3.6 V6 with the 6T75 automatic, that will have nearly 270 horsepower. The torque is rated at nearly 250 lb-ft. This engine would be a good choice for the CXL, and then the 240 hp 3.9 would make a good choice for the CX. But what would be the point in the CXS's slight increase in hp of only 5 more for the V8? Perhaps the V8 should be dropped.

ab348 · April 2006

The 3.9 and the smaller 3.5 are both much better designs than the older 3800.

Upon what do you base that conclusion?

I have yet to be convinced that either of these, with their 1970's 2.8 Chevy Citation V-6 origins that in turn spawned the shameful 3.1 and 3.4 V-6s known for their thrashiness, problems with leaks, and general underachievement, are superior to the timeless 3.8.

62vetteefp · April 2006

They should bump up the V8 to Cadillacs 292 hp.

3.9 CX
265hp CXL
292 SCX

b88lazer · April 2006

You predict that the Lucerne will remain in production only through the 2008 model year. Please share with present Lucerne owners and prospective buyers any hard information that you have, insider or otherwise, to substantiate your contention. Thanks.

jh1977 · April 2006

Thank you for explaining to me and others in this forum about the different V6 engines that could be the replacements for the 3800 V6 engine in the Buick Lucerne. I would also like to thank Edmunds.Com for having this forum available for people like me (who are not car experts) who can send messages to car experts about items pertaining to cars in which people have an interest in. Sincerely.

sls002 · April 2006

The Lucerne will remain in production through the 2008 model year and the standard engine will probably be the 3800. The 3800 is going out of production at the end of model year 2008 as part of the downsizing or cost cutting program. What happens with the Lucerne for model year 2009 is somewhat speculative at this time, but I expect it to remain in production with the V8, and perhaps no V6, or one of the alternate V6's as I outlined above.

sls002 · April 2006

There are many who think your discription of the 3.1 and 3.4 apply to the 3800 too. I will say that the 3.5 and 3.9 engines are all new, with a new, larger block, as the old 2.8 block was not big enough for a 99 mm bore.

splatsterhound · April 2006

Just sold my Olds 88 with the 3.8. 175,000 miles, not a drop of oil burned. Sold it on one day on Craigslist. Ten years old; 2500 bucks. Sold it to a guy who knew the engine and knew it would last for another ten years.....

Still ran at 90 easy, and moved my 3600 lb car with authority. Great engine, in my mind. Not a dollar of repairs beyond a water pump on the engine. Can't say that about a lot of cars...

Lucerne base engine buyers should be plenty satisfied with the power. Ten years from now, they'll still be cruising around without a problem (and no smoke from the tailpipe)

For what it is worth...

m1miata · April 2006

You were lucky enough not to have bought a pre- 1988 model year, no doubt. After 1987, I guess they ran OK. As to power of the engine, I suppose it does the trick for many. Looks like more Lucy's are selling compared to LaCrosses.... but that is just an observation based on inventory stacked up on the car lots I pass by. So only a guess on popularity. Saw the first SKY sports car yesterday at Saturn. Pretty little thing, but at around $30K, a bit overpriced for a little four banger drop top. No roll bar = ouch, thy head!

Buick perhaps needs a new running mate like the upcoming Aura, which Saturn got. Though they may try selling those cars at over $25K. My guess is that Lucernes go with the 3.9 V6 next year. The two engines would be all that is needed. Unless they wanted to float the idea of the DOD 303HP V8 for the Lucerne. The Northstar may be the safer bet for reliability though.
-Loren

larouse · April 2006

Good for you!
Just looked at the Lucerne yesterday and we were very impressed. For us, the V6 engine seems to have enough power, and the ride is great and the car super quiet. Very comfortable seats. We have two Hondas, and have been very happy with them. However, have been checking the Camry XLE and the Honda Accord and the Accura. I do not know about reliabilty in the long run, but in our view, the Lucerne offers more for the price. We are seriously thinking of making going with it.

1487 · April 2006

Buicks have good quality. I wouldn't be concerned about the Lucerne being more unreliable than a Toyota or Honda. This car isnt on a new platform, nor is it using a new powertrain. The kinks in this car have been worked on on previous Devilles, Bonnevilles, Auroras, etc. Besides, the Buick comes with an extra year of warranty.

carguy57 · May 2006

In response to post #1456--I purchased the Lucerne CXL V-6 2 months ago and I now have about 2 thousand miles on my car and I find the V-6 to have more then enough power and I can't think of one occasion when I needed more power.
As for the engine noise I don't find the engine to be noisy at all. Where I live reg. gas cost about $3.15 a gallon and I fill up around every 200 miles or so and had I had the V-8 it would have burned another gallon and a half so for my needs the V-6 was definitely the right choice but I can also understand why others are willing to pay extra on a fill up for the advantages of having the extra power they desire to have in the V-8 engine which I understand is a great engine. My car gets fantastic mileage on the highway {27-31}---but not so great in the city--{17-19}and i'm sure if you drive mostly in city traffic your miles will be a lot less then that in the city.
I really like my lucerne and I find it to be the best car on the market in it's price range.

sls002 · May 2006

My experience in owning a number of 3800's (86 Electra T-type, 90 Riviera, 91 Reatta, 95 supercharge Riviera) is that their fuel consumption is about the same as the northstar's (98 Aurora, 2002 Seville LS). My city mileage was around 20 MPG (more in the summer, less in the winter). Highway consumption depends on cruising speed, but the 3800's generally gave me about 27-28. My northstars were about the same, however, I have found that limiting my cruising speed to 70 MPH, will allow the northstars to average about 29 MPG. I think that the current 3800 might do a bit better, say about 30 MPG, but that is not much better.

mark_wny · June 2006

I know the merits of humble V-6 versus Northstar have been addressed in other threads. Here's my situation: I live in the Buffalo/Niagara area of western NY; the roads are wide, flat and often a bit rough; very few hills here and those that exist are gentle; most of the time, I'm the only one in the car; most cruisin' is 45 to 60 mph - rarely over 65. Given all this, I would think the V-6 would be sufficient; what do 'Lucerne experts' think?

loyalbuickfan · June 2006

Will it be sufficient? In a word yes, but the longer answer follows:
I think the KEY word here is FLAT. I think the V6 will do just fine!
IF you said , sometime encounter hilly terrain, then do as I do, put it in 3rd.(preventing useless upshifts to overdrive) and get a bit more aggressive with the gas pedal.

Now IF you said STEEP hills often ,the V8, may have been a better choice.

This is only my opinion based on driving the V6 (3800) engine for 12 years.

As for "rough roads" the CX W/16" Tires has the most road isolation,and the softest ride.(Our choice)

The CXL W/17" Tires comes with the V6 and cost $3,000 more, has leather, a bit firmer suspension,more ride control, with a bit more tire road noise, and a Luxury package is avail that includes "memory seating positions". But if someone wants the V8, it will cost 2,000 more, for a total of 5K more than than entry-level CX. Now it
certainly IS a "premium" car with respect to it's performance.

Be sure to test drive each one for at least 20-25 Min. Good Luck.

mark_wny · June 2006

rceggl · July 2006

Am not a Lucerne expert, but, the 3800 engine is, indeed, a super engine with great mileage. Also remember, there is absolutely nothing new about the Northstar. It is, itself, in need of some real improvement. In fact, Buick really bothers me here in that they take this engine from Cadillac as if that in itself was a real improvement. I cruise in my PA at 70mph and easily obtain 30 mpg with the 3800.

loyalbuickfan · July 2006

I agree,but the V-8 offers consumers a choice. It lets US choose between what we know, 30mpg exceptional reliability(V-6),OR a car/engine combination(V-8) that puts a smile on your face when asked to accelerate quickly on the highway.Performance is FAR beyond what is found in the "everyday" V-6.

I ordered a Lucerne with the V-6 but it will be interesting to see what percentage are sold with Northstar,yearly,

I too care about MPG and fuel cost. Not all "state of the art" Variable Valve Timing V-6's are free from their OWN negative traits. The Hyundai Azera I tested had terrific power reserve, but mpgs are said to be dissapointing. The Toyota Avalon I drove seemed noisy at idle,and louder than expected when forced to downshift AND wants to be treated to premium fuel too.

I remember at a car show 3-4 years ago at the Caddy area,a display that showed the inner cutaway of Northstar and went on to explain the great number of features of this engine,then GM'best.
I recently found that this engine was quieter and I think smoother than those mentioned above and again the 4-speed auto was always willing.(GM don't introduce 5or6 speed trannys until you get it as right,and reliable, as you did here!)

If the 3800 is a little low tech then it's durability and performance make up for that.(25+years=lots of improvements on a great design)

In an earlier message I said that on the day we bought Lucerne we would have bought the CaddyDTS/Northstar choosing performance over economy IF it offered cloth seats. My wife and I loved the looks AND smooth power this Northstar equppied car offered!

So instead I am 10 grand ahead, and am really looking foward to Buick #5.

aalter · July 2006

I have a 3800 in my 2000 LeSabre and keep on reading how it is a low-tech pushrod design. On the other hand, I get about 23mpg in the city, 29 on the highway, get great power and quiet operation. So I'm wondering if the car mags want technology for its own sake. My Ford Taurus with its Duratec 16Valve V-6 gets about 18Mpg with less power than the Buick. If I traded in my LeSabre, I would get the V-6. The only problem that I have with the Lucerne is that it is so much heavier than the LeSabre that it might need the power of the V-8 to get the same performance as I get in my LeSabre.

loyalbuickfan · July 2006

Not true.The car's power feels more than adequate(to me)and for all but a few drivers.

I wonder if someone CAN comment as to why the 3800 went from 205HP to 197HP?Is it now measured differently?

Dealers are more than happy to let you drive a Lucerne.
It cost nothing but some of your time. Try more than one version.Let readers here know what YOUR impressions are!

62vetteefp · July 2006

First, with the old HP rules GM would round up or down to a multiple of 5 with a little wiggle room. So the advertised 205 was probably actually somewhere around 202-203.

Next the new Lucerne has been engineered with quieter exhaust that caused a HP loss of around 4-5 HP or so.

And with the new HP advertising rules the actual HP must be reported which is 197. With the old rules it wouyld have been advertised at 200. I believe the LaCrosse still advertises 200 even since it was released before the new HP advertising rules went in force.

In the end +- 3 hp is within tolerance of engine manufacturing. Also recall that GM had much tighter rules on advertising correct HP than the Japanese who almost invariably had to reduce their HP ratings by a whole bunch more (up to 30 HP I believe).

dispencer1 · July 2006

I bought a 2006 LT2 Impala with the "economy" 3.5 litre engine and it gets lousy mileage in the city -around 17-19. I should have gotten a Lacrosse with the 3800. My mistake! Never again. The city mileage on my Deville is around 15-17. I'd expect that with 275 HP but the Impala isn't much better. When I get a DTS I'll dump the Impala and cut down on the number of cars. The Impala is a disappointment. I'd get a Lucerne with the 3800 in a heartbeat. I've had three LeSabres with that engine and all were very dependable until I got rid of them at 100,000 miles. I guess I got caught up in the Impala publicity. Too bad.

62vetteefp · July 2006

Strange, My FIL is getting 30 on the highway with his Impala. Perhaps you need a few more miles?

loyalbuickfan · July 2006

Thanks for prompt answer about horsepower ratings.

What is FIL?

Do you mind telling us how many/what kind of cars you own?

Is it remotely possible that by quieting down muffler on Lucerne(increasing back -pressure )if this could shorten engine life?
I want another 155k!

rake2 · July 2006

I believe it means father-in-law.

loyalbuickfan · July 2006

Thanks, makes sense. I guess if I used text-messaging as the kids do I wouldn't need to ask!

aalter · July 2006

My son has the old Impala design that I liked so much better with a 3800 and it is really great. This horsepower rating really drives me crazy. When I see the rated horsepower, it always is under RPMs that you wouldn't see in normal driving conditions. I like to look at low end torque ratings, because that is where the 3800 beats any V-6 that I have ever tried. A lot of Japanese engines have higher horsepower ratings but don't have the low end torque that the 3800 has, so I can beat them from a cold stop. My other car, a Taurus with a 200HP Duratec engine doesn't feel as powerful until I'm in 4th gear. My LeSabre with the 205HP 3800 has a very even power curve. Even though the two engines have nearly the same horsepower ratings, the 3800 is clearly more powerful. And it is hardly working most of the time. I check the tachometer often and most of the time it is under 2000RPMs, even at 65MPH on the highway.

62vetteefp · July 2006

Will not effect engine life.

smitty52 · September 2006

I just bought a 2006 Lucerne CXL, up till now I have had 3 Park Avenue's.
Every Park Avenue had intake manifold problems, a inherent problem with those engines.
Can I expect that same problem with my Lucerne with V6 engine?

loyalbuickfan · September 2006

I owned a 1994 Park Ave (Bought New) for 12 years, it had 157,000 miles when I sold it, and the engine only needed
a water pump during that time! It still ran great when sold.

I respect your remarkable allegiance to Buick after your
repeated problems.

I frankly did not believe your situation until I "Googled"
same and sure enough I found aftermarket "kits" for this
situation for the 3800 Engine for the 1995 thru 2003 model years! It would seem that after 2003,problem resolved.

You and I are now in the "same boat" as I too bought a new Lucerne CX (3800 Series 3 Engine).

My car now has 1000 Miles on it and it has exceeded my expectations for it's really comfortable ride, smooth engine and transmission performance,and MPG 29-30 highway.

Buick had a longer warranty at 4years/50,000miles as compared to Chevy/Pontiac(3/36,000),but Gm has just increased the duration on all 2007 GM cars.

It is now 5 Years/100,000 miles on the Engine/Transmission.
(We will automatically receive info about the extension in the mail)

Good Luck, and I hope you enjoy the new Lucerne.

62vetteefp · October 2006

http://www.leftlanenews.com/2006/10/30/gm-unveils-buick-pontiac-sema-car-lineup/- #more-4329

http://www.leftlanenews.com/wp-content/plugins/iimage-gallery.php?idpost=4329&id- g=1&idi=3

http://www.leftlanenews.com/wp-content/plugins/iimage-gallery.php?idpost=4329&id- g=1&idi=11

http://www.leftlanenews.com/wp-content/plugins/iimage-gallery.php?idpost=4329&id- g=1&idi=15

http://www.leftlanenews.com/wp-content/plugins/iimage-gallery.php?idpost=4329&id- g=1&idi=27

imidazol97 · October 2006

colors among the spiffy stuff. The Blue rims at the top with the blue car I could like but I hate rubber band tires.

If Lucerne came in more colors and style like this they'd sell even more!

vic10 · October 2006

Yo Mamma! Amazing how with just a little bit of tweaking and some sharp tires and wheels you can turn what I consider a fairly dull design into a RIDE. If Buick sold the Lucerne dressed like this (call it the Pimp option), they'd pull me in (and at 60, I still like my comfortable cars to be exciting)....

imidazol97 · October 2006

We bought a leSabre in Crimson Pearl Red with Chrome rims because it looked sharp-better than the burgundy Park Avenue that ws the brightest red available in Park Avenues in those days.

Some colors in the lineup and some sharper rims would really make the sales pick up. I note a lot of carefully picked rims show up on the last generation of Prk Aves and even leSabres around thise area. Many are NOT on the rubber band tires. They really have some sparkle that way. I've even seen some repaints that are good colors, and some that aren't, I'm sorry to say.

jpstax1 · February 2007

While waiting for an oil change for my '99 Regal GS, I test drove an '07 Lucerne CXS. The salesman went with and was trying to get me to trade my car for the Lucerne. I laughed and said no friggin way, my Regal could beat this thing going backwards. Of course I didn't tell him I had a 3.5" S/C pulley installed. I said if Buick ever decided to install the 5.3 liter engine in the Lucerne, give me a call. He said (as others in this forum have said) that Buick was going to come out with a RWD, V-8 car sometime in '09. I said it had better have plenty of low-end torque and active fuel management like the 5.3 in the Impala SS and Pontiac GXP.

pawel1 · April 2007

Lucern has now rigid aluminum intake manifold.
This should fix an old problem.
IMO this is one of the best engines ever manufactured.
Plenty of torque.
Old design is not necessarily bad.

imidazol97 · April 2007

>I frankly did not believe your situation until I "Googled"
same and sure enough I found aftermarket "kits" for this
situation for the 3800 Engine for the 1995 thru 2003 model years! It would seem that after 2003,problem resolved.

What you found is that the intake manifolds FIT the same years. The "condition" doesn't exist up to 2003. The changes were made in 1999 to ameliorate the symptoms. Gasket materials were changed, upper intake manifold design was changed and those went on 2000 cars. Changing DexCool at 2 years or 24000 mile intervals like regular antifreeze prevents the possibility of deterioration from people who believed it should have lasted 150000 miles not changing it. When DexCool additives wear out the coolant becomes problematic in some systems, especially if they're not filled to eliminate air bubbles properly.

There were continuing changes made for replacement brands of upper manifolds and, I presume, for GM's replacement. The original gaskets are rumored to have deteriorated. The passage up through the upper intake manifold for the hot exhaust gases to pass deteriorated from the temperature and deteriorated into the nearby coolant passage allowing leakage (there is a metal tube sticking up through that passage that's part of the lower metal manifold);

There is a replacement gasket for lower intake manifolds that has not been around too many years. Some of the manifold leak problems are not from the upper but from the gaskets on the lower (metal manifold to block) gaskets deteriorating. The replacement, from GM, has aluminum as a frame to hold it in place.

After 2003 the UIM is metals so the replacement manifolds don't fit after 2003.

The motors were a very good motor. Part of the problem is that people didn't check their coolant level regularly to notice a slow loss of coolant at first so they could have the problem checked and an early repair made (I did). The maintenance schedule in the owner's manual says to check fluids regularly.

imidazol97 · April 2007

I have owned 3 of these motors and one before that which was modeled on the 3800 (the 3300). They are very good. They last hundreds of thousands of miles with regular maintenance.

I'd buy my next car with one and I'm sorry to hear they're being phased out. I may buy a used car with one since I fully understand the intake features.

gregman · August 2007

I too am a fan of the 3800 and am considering another, but mine's not done yet!
Had the intake failure at 168,000 miles. Now have 234,000. GM knew these engines were prone to fail but managed to cover up the problem all these years. When I asked the dealership why the intake failed, they said it wore out!
A little research revealed that other gm engines had the same problem including the 3.4.
I get a constant 30mpg on the hwy, and sometimes better!
Does anybody know if the new "aluminum" intake is one piece, or 2 piece aluminum/plastic? Don't know if I want one that may still fail. I checked my fluids regular and had it in 2 shops 3 times for slow coolant loss to no avail. The coolant apparently was leaking into the combustion chamber and burning away until the gasket really let go. Oh well. Good car, my '95 Bonneville.

imidazol97 · August 2007

The Series III intake completely solves the problem, be it Dexcool related or just poor intake design for the EGR tube related. Some have asked if they can put the aluminum upper onto a Series II-based 3800. Grin.

But the original GMs are good for about 75000 miles. Many people never have had a failure, like yourself, in the time most people would keep a car. It's low but irritating percentage. I've seen how they used a different EGR tube up through the plastic intake with a larger air space around the metal tube and that would fix the heat deterioration. People who repaced with a different brand on first failure don't usually have a second failure. Some think the Dexcool not being changed at 24000 miles/2 years like ordinary antifreeze is a factor since in some cars it deteriorates, primarily those who have low coolant levels and the hot coolant is mixed with air.

The replacement of the upper intake is relatively cheap. At first some dealers were really gouging, almost like foreign dealers. But now individuals change their own and many find independent shops doing it cheaply.

Series III-okay. Justchange Dexcool frequently, it's cheap.

thegraduate · December 2007

I'd buy my next car with one and I'm sorry to hear they're being phased out. I may buy a used car with one since I fully understand the intake features.

I know this post is old, but I figured I'd respond anyway.

Here's why its being phased out:

Buick Lucerne: 4-speed Automatic 197horsepower, 227 lb-ft 16/25 EPA Estimates

Ford Taurus: 6-speed Automatic 260 horsepower, 245 lb-ft 18/28 EPA Estimates

Toyota Avalon: 6-speed Automatic 268 horsepower, 248 lb-ft, 19/28 EPA Estimates

The 3800 in the Buick is not really competitive at all with cars from the 21st Century. It was fine 10 years ago, but when you can have more power AND economy from one of its competitors (even GMs own Impala has more power and mileage), the Buick starts looking obsolete.

usaicon · December 2007

I have a V6 2006 Buick Lucerne with 24000 miles. I have recently noticed a vibrating noise from the engine compartment that sounds like a hollow plastic box, when the engine is under torque. I removed the black plastic cover that says 3800 and the noise seems to have disappeared. Is there a way to tighten down this cover so it doesn't vibrate?

mborak · January 2008

When driving at steady speeds I sense periodic subtle resistance and slight tugging resulting in a choppy driving experience instead of smooth.
I have taken it into 2 different dealers who have not acknowledged the problem. I drive 80 miles each day and still feel like something is not right.
Vehicle has only 2000 miles on it.
Any ideas?

imidazol97 · January 2008

At 2000 miles, the dealer can go over tire pressures and wheel alignment. If the tire pressure recommended is 30, I run 32-33. I like to feel the road. I'm suggesting your push and pull sensation could be tires.

It also could be alignment. They will realign up to 12000 without having to stomp your feet.

The other could be fuel quality? Or a misfire in the plugs in the motor. Try driving in 3rd gear instead of OD which allows the car to shift into 4th gear. How fast are you going when you feel this tugging sensation?

mike391 · September 2009

I will try to explain this and not try to confuse anyone. I have a new 2009 lucerne. Sometimes when I make a slow 90 degree, 20 mph turn or so, I feel something in the steering wheel. My other car that I still have is a 2000 olds intrigue. It had somewhat of the same problem. Sometimes when I made a slow turn there would be a feeling that you were turning a ratchet a few clicks. It turned out to be the intermediate steering shaft. I can't remember if there was any noise associated with it or just the feel of it. Now imagine turning a ratchet one click. This is what it feels like in my lucerne. This does not happen every time I make a turn. Probably 10 percent of the time, maybe more. If I take it back to the dealer, which I will eventually, it may take several trips before they can recreate the problem. If anyone has any ideas or suggestions I would appreciate it.

mhanks · December 2009

Has enyone seen any oil spots on the floor?
I have seen one or two everytime we come in from a drive. We have ownes two parkavenues
before the lucrene cxl we bought two weeks ago. Mabey it's not bad but our park avenues
never leaked any thing. Should I take it to the
dealer?
Thanks Mike.

Buick Lucerne: Engine & Performance

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles

Buick Lucerne: Engine &amp; Performance

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles

Buick Lucerne: Engine & Performance