Howdy, Stranger!

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

Howdy, Stranger!

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

Did you get a great deal? Let us know in the Values & Prices Paid section!
Meet your fellow owners in our Owners Clubs

2010-2011 Buick LaCrosse



  • e_net_ridere_net_rider Posts: 1,380
  • cooleyddcooleydd Posts: 105
    I was using the Nav yesterday going to a place I had never been before and all of a sudden it stopped working. I could not change radio, no voice instructions, none of the buttons seemed to work (didn't try air, etc.) The radio stayed on at the chosen station. All of the lights were on, the nav screen was on and frozen. I could not shut anything down or find anyway to reboot while driving.

    I had to pull off the road, stop the engine and restart and this cleared the system. Anyone have this experience before and anyone know how to reset the system while driving.
  • cooleyddcooleydd Posts: 105
    edited March 2011
    Above the indicator on the dash board that tells you what gear you are on there is a little line that moves back and forth. Can someone enlightened me as to what this little line indicates?
  • cooleyddcooleydd Posts: 105
  • cooleyddcooleydd Posts: 105
    Found this in GM TechLink - thought there was some conversations on this lately.


    2010-2011 LaCrosse – Clunk or Scrape Type Noise from Rear of Vehicle

    Replace left and right rear spring seat insulator with new part number Replace rear coil springs and control arms
  • e_net_ridere_net_rider Posts: 1,380
    Sorry GM, this is not it, but maybe 2nd.
    Vehicles previously owned:
    62 Buick Skylark convertible (terrible engine, maybe GM first aluminum)
    68 Mustang Hi-Perf (Getty up go with rattles)
    73 Mazda rotary (very reliable smooth ride w/power, sucked gas)
    65 Chevelle (married into it and it was totally worn out)
    74 Lasabre(sort of a nice big ride feel, poor handling. Used, abused, & old QuakerState)
    73 TownCar(big floating barge, learned the odometer was probably played with, other areas solid & clean, poor mileage)
    74 Grand Marquis(a lemon, factory mistake would through it sideways skid with moderate braking, maybe 6 months ownership)
    79 Pontiac Bonneville(good ride, very durable. Olds 307 engine was tough. Sold to son-in-law who blew tranny. Floored from stop, uphill, over 3000# behind it. 154K then.
    84 Mercury Topaz "diesel", Mazda drivetrain(a number of first year mistakes, Ford not Mazda. Great small family & work car. Surprisingly quiet and well mannered. {Surprisingly heavy, solid, bit underpowered, =diesel} 38MPG everyday, 48 highway. Kept longer than any other vehicle.
    88 Mercury Sable, high end(very heavy compared to later versions, almost a tank. Likely quieter too. Good mileage and ride. 3.0L before 24valve very hard to kill. Other issues common to this family of family vehicles. Gave to daughter.
    8? Buick Skyhawk(think cheap Chevrolet, motorized rollerskate. Kid first car, totalled)
    86? Pontiac Parisienne(acquired minor front damage and resurrected from being mechaniced to near death. Good ride & MPG for size. Another shining example of Olds 307. Very stable with proper tires and OE swaybar. Rearended by 50MPH Bronco. Jammed doors & buckled roof but no injuries with 5 passengers.
    92 Ford Taurus(so much lighter than earlier body w/ same tweaked 3.0L, seemed like a rocket compared. Good mileage, reliable, good handling, but noisy compared to many vehicles. Gave to youngest daughter, then someone totalled it)

    93 Buick Regal(very good MPG, 3.1L, the one plagued with intake coolant issues. Rode OK with Michelins but thinking back I'd say it was just bigger version of the Skyhawk. Gave to daughter after Taurus totalled. Actually swapped it for 96 Aurora, her replacement, but unsafe with condition at that time. She dumped after intake coolant/overheating issues arose again.
    97Sable wagon(not bad for a wagon as to handling, 3 seats. Far better than Buick Roadmaster which I swear swims up the road[may not have had swaybar] & 70's Chrysler Newport with U-haul behind. Still a noisy vehicle despite triple seals, with weak metal framing of windows. Cheap wiring. Still it was an economical ride with evertough 3.0L 12V. Tranny killed by Jiffy. They dropped pan and did not refill when they tried to sell change to wife. Did not catch it in time.
    KIA Rondo, wife bought, she loves, I hate for handling & torque steer. No alignment adjustments other than toe. Camber out of tolerance on three wheels and bad castor on both front. Now 60K and nothing but oil, rotate&balance. Almost amazing!

    For ride and handling, 96 Olds Aurora wins hands down. Something about the suspension system, very different design, was auto direction correcting against road surface deviations, wind bursts, or passing tractors. Far less side sway when encountering road variations. Much of this can be eliminated on Lacrosse by engaging sport mode but then the ride can be harsher/stiffer.
    As mentioned earlier, I resurrected this vehicle. Daughters friend sold it to her. Had been wrecked on front shown by bad panel alignment, paint damage on bumper, & a dirty repaint. First time I got in the tilt mechanism broke and wheel fell into lap. Tires were of mixed sizes and brands, all too small. Miswiring of cooling system. Brakes totally shot, grabbing, and wet with fluid. After fixing these issues, changing/flushing all fluids, new tires and alignment, I found what a sweet car it was. High powered for its birth time. 19MPG local [email protected], [email protected], very quiet for a hardtop, Excellent soundsystem, controls on steering, dual air, heated/memory seats & mirrors, load leveling, cornering lamps. Excellent non-fatigueing leather seats. Traction & ESC. Only the latest gadgets missing. Absolutely no torque steer. The only ride I'd compare to is rented TownCars from 90's that you could drive all day & have no fatique or soreness, anywhere! It obviously did not have that huge platform handling, a bit sportier.
    Two solenoids in tranny were failing and on my a-roun-to-it list. Daughter & wife talked me into cash for clunker, which was not really a good deal. Discounts offered earlier would have been better deal. Hated idea of payments too, but bought 09 Malibu.
    09 Malibu LT2, I4 AT6 (quite surprising for what had been a somewhat lowend chevrolet. A very nice ride for size of car and excellent mileage. Suede leather, heated, very firm seats. Fit me almost perfectly for minimum ache/pain & fatigue on long drives. I4 not overpowered, but plenty for loaded car combined w/AT6. Far faster than AT4 version. And surprising quiet with new acoustic glass. Maybe even less road noise than Lacrosse w/ GYtires. Some surfaces sound like driving rumble strips. That is Firestones may have been quieter, but horrible traction on wet and easy to slide sideways. Something is wrong when you easily spin tires from stop when making turn and moderate acceleration from I4. A trim panel missing from factory. Plastic and metal paint did not match, gold. Terrible headrests, even worse on Lacrosse. Speed sensitive wipers missing from Lacrosse. Storage better than Lacrosse. Electric seats without memory are a pain because it is near impossible to return to the last position. Manual seats sit a lot lower, maybe because of seat mechanism, but the seat itself is superior to the mechanical cloth. Experience from in-shop loaners/Enterprise rent. I definitely would not want poorly supported cloth or AT4. Other items were somewhat vague or hard to figure because those vehicles would have been un-rentable through their normal customers, think rent-a-wreck totally abused & neglected.
    Title continued,
  • bwiabwia Boston Posts: 2,314
    e-rider, it seems although Magnasteer and Servotronic are the same thing.

    According to the link you provided it describes Magnasteer as follows:
    Magnasteer is an electronic device added to conventional power rack and pinion steering to vary the amount of e ff ort required to steer the car, dependent on vehicle speed. At low speeds, steering effort is lower, for ease in parking. As speed increases, steering effort is increased, for greater road feel. Additionally, on some models, evasive steering maneuvers also affect steering effort.

  • e_net_ridere_net_rider Posts: 1,380
    Besides some annoyances that corrected themselves such as sticking calipers, vibrations that came & went seemingly connected to breaking in CV joints, and above mentioned, there were the following. The steering wheel felt a bit small for the broad shouldered, the rim was not round/tubular and had high points the full diameter that created pressure points against my hands joints. Very painful for me but mostly overcome with lined leather gloves even in summer. These rake designs I hate compared to real tilt which will actually get out of way entering or exiting. Lacrosse should have used Lucernne tilt. Tilt much easier to return to previous position too. I'm certain I've left out some minor things.
    Dangerous concerns: I was exiting dealer with right turn & merge when rear started sliding sideways like on ice. Fortunately I have experience and did all the correct things to avoid sliding sideways against very high curb. At no point did I sense the Anti-lock/traction/ESC system activating. On that vehicle it was supposed to cut throttle, apply braking at proper wheels redirecting power to wheels in a course correcting manner corresponding to steering direction. Either I was faster than the system or it did not happen and combined with crappy factory tires. Only one time, thank God.
    The car would drift sideways and you dared not take your eyes off road or you could end up in adjacent lane. This handling issue was never found. 4 alignment checks did not fix and showed in tolerance.
    When coming upon a lateral road seam, they had to be perfectly flat. If the two surfaces met at any angle it would cause the vehicle to dart sideways and very unpredictably. On one such surface at a merge in Chicago, on a curve, it put the nose under the belly of tractor trailer.
    The handling/control made this vehicle unsafe to drive.
    And the final straw. Something was wrong with EPS. The first hints were the steering wheel would momentarily jerk to the right. It would do this about once every thousand miles. One of the last times was not momentary but lasted at least a second. Fortunately I had leather gloves, both hands on wheel, or I would never have been able to hold it. The force was so great it jammed my right shoulder causing need for some strong pain killers. I should have left it in that city, but demonstrating amazing pucker power and jitters I drove home. This was never fixed either and lemon law applied.
    Vehicle was trucked then sold. Buyer tracked me somehow. She was having the same bad handling problems, but had not yet had the wheel jerk. I pray she don't and is able to get others fixed.
    I will finish my appraisal of Lacrosse later.
  • e_net_ridere_net_rider Posts: 1,380
    Sounds about right. The low speed lower effort is because of less power to magnasteer which would normally add effort, working against the normal power rack and pinion system. I did not throw the evasive maneuver stuff out to prevent further confusion of magnasteer system. I believe the Lacrosse is included in that group but don't know what parameters effect it. Might be a sudden forcefull input to wheel tells it to lower resistance. Might be connected with antilock/traction/ESC system and don't know if it increases resistance under some circumstances other than normal fast driving.
    Simple is getting complicated. I've often wondered why they have not used a variable vane pump for power steering. That type of pump is widely used in transmissions. It provides only the necessary pressure/volume avoiding excess power using work.
    On PS the vanes could be controlled by a simple solenoid taking input from computer. MPH & engine RPM/load. Going slow/parking, increase pressure/volume to decrease effort within demand. Going fast and straight, less demand, decrease vane pressure/volume thus decrease fuel gobbling load.
    All older systems had pump and gearbox or rack&pinion. The pump had to meet minimum for steering at idle. Engine running faster created an excess and was partially handled by a pressure relief/bypass valve. This meant the system was using more energy rolling the highway than necessary.
    Does anyone know details of current system on Lacrosse, besides having Magnasteer?
  • If it's the one I am thinking of, it moves left or right depending on the feature you have in the center display. The ring on the turn signal stalk moves up or down and controls the feature like avg. speed, trip odo. If you change the display, you should notice the bar gets larger as there are only three features to display.

    Hope this helps.

    2010 LaCrosse
  • gmcustsvcgmcustsvc Posts: 4,252
    Has your concern been resolved with your clock? If you are still having concerns I would recommend speaking with your local dealership. Your sales respresentative should be able to assist you further. If you have any other questions or concerns, please feel free to contact me by email. Thank you.

    Tricia, GM Customer Service.
  • rainman5542rainman5542 Posts: 114
    Yesterday, rushing to an appointment, I got a warning I was low on fuel. My gauge suggested I was on fumes!

    I was pleasantly surprised when my NAV system automatically asked if I wanted nearby gas stations. A quick press on my screen (I need to learn and remember there is a control button) then popped up a list by Brand Name, ordered by distance. Sweet! I press "Mobil .8 mile" and was saved some walking.

    Hope everyone is enjoying their ride.
  • dwight9dwight9 Posts: 8
    kjs8, read your note about the memory seat with great interest, Can you pls. tell me the problems you were having previously; I'm especially interested in the function that moves the seat forward when you unlock the door with the door handle. This has always been a problem with my 2010 CXS model and the dealer told me that this was the way it was designed and the only way around this was to turn the feature off, which is what I have done, but it sounds like the new module your dealer installed gives you some time to get into the seat before it starts to move forward. On mine as soon as you touched the door handle (from the outside) it would start to move forward, making it difficult to get into the seat.

    Pls. advise.

    Thanks, Dwight
  • e_net_ridere_net_rider Posts: 1,380
    Hey GM representative!
    By design? Design mistake if so. How much complaining will it take before the nuts fix it?
    No way this makes luxury. Seat should not move ahead until the person is seated. There are probably a half dozen ways to fix. Tie the weight on seat , seat belt, to system. Wait until start, accessory is activated.
    And provide a way to set the retract point. It would be easier getting out/in if the seat retracted a bit farther. Not to the limit though because then you are nearly in the back seat.
    I hate the rake system because it is difficult to hit the same exact spot every time unless you go to limits. And that dumb design for release handle. If you don't lock after moving wheel to best available exit position it is hanging there to bang a knee getting out or in.
    I'm beginning to think the design team was all about eye candy for sales but don't know the first thing about functionality.
    And on the list of function concerning seat movement, if I use the remote to unlock the seat is moved ahead before I get near vehicle. And what is the dumb quirk about the front seat moving ahead if the front door is left open and then you open rear door. Is this some Chinese thing where the driver is actually a chaufer and it moves ahead to make easy entry to the back for the boss?
    Good luck Dwight.
    Mine still has to go in for punch list. It has been on hold because of other commitments such as hospitalized for tests.
    I am becoming an outspoken advocate against GM because of the number of mistakes and no sign of GM fixing "all" existing problems.
  • dwight9dwight9 Posts: 8
    I totally agree with your comments here concerning the memory seat problems. It makes me think that the design team did not try this function out after they had designed it; who in there "right mind" would want the seat to start to move before you get into it !!!!.

    I currently have a 2006 Cadillac STS and the memory seat function is tied to when you start the car; when you shut the engine off seat moves rearward (gives you the option of how far to the rear you want to set it). when you get into the car and start the engine it then moves forward (again gives you the option of how far forward you want to set it).

    I understand that there is a price difference between the two cars, but Buick would have been better off not even putting the feature on the car,and the fact that you can turn it off makes me think the designers maybe realized that they had messed this up and rather then spend more time correcting it, just made it so you could turn it off - seems like a crazy way to design cars.
  • e_net_ridere_net_rider Posts: 1,380
    edited March 2011
    I can't go along with the thoughts on turning it off because there are many other functions that you can turn on or off as well. They stumbled upon the ability to turn off as a short term solution which is totally unsatisfactory. It is time for GM to step up to the plate and do fixes for these vehicles.
    I paid for an unusable option? Slam Buick & GM. And as those who have followed my posts and other posters, there is a long list of issues. Too long for this to be a top rated vehicle. (unless comparing to some other GM's)
  • kjs8kjs8 Posts: 53
    edited March 2011
    Glad to respond on the issue. The original module started the seat moving forward as soon as you unlocked and opened the door. Then it became intermittent and did not move the seat forward at all. The new module for the first two weeks had a 10 second delay so that you had some time to be seated before the seat moved forward. Worked well until it too decided to operate incorrectly once again as the first module did. Sometimes the seat moves forward when the door is unlocked, sometimes with a 10 second delay and now about 50% of the time it does not return at all. You then have to manually move it forward or press the seat memory button to return it. It also now does not remember the programed position at all and you never know where it is going to go. I have turned the feature off for the most part but activate it once in a while to maintain my disapointment level with GM and Buick over this issue. The seat is only one of many unsolved problems that this 2010 CSX has and there are no answers to these issues.
  • tomi60tomi60 Posts: 6
    I finally got the am radio reception problem solved. The dealer adds additional tint on all the new cars they receive (another way to drive up their profits) and it was determined by GM engineer that the tint on the rear window was possibly interfering with the antenna. When the tint was removed the radio works as it should.
  • benc3981benc3981 Posts: 9
    My memory seat ,as soon as I sat in it it moved forward pinning me to the steering wheel, I had to really struggle to get my self free, now the seat when I get in I have to mamually move it to my position, when I exit it returns to the exit mode automatically.
    GM fixed my steering , overall I am very happy with my Buick
  • samm43samm43 Posts: 195
    Your post confused me. I can't imagine anyone being so happy with a car that pins you to the steering wheel every time you get in it? It sounds like it is a memory seat that you have to move manually except for exiting?

    I have read many other issues also in basically all the car brands with very complex technology. And it would be a non-issue I suppose, except for the vastness of complaints with the technology, either the design or features not being conducive to making one's life better (simpler, or more convenient) or simply not ever working properly at all. And many are unsolved over half a year after car ownership! This doesn't seem to be a very good direction for manufacturers to follow if you ask me. And guess who pays to fix it out of warranty? (or give up and live with it broken and the extra depreciative hit that a non-functioning option or feature/creature comfort entails) And if they are having trouble fixing it under warranty, I can't imagine it being any easier to fix outside of warranty and years down the road!

    Is this truly what the modern car shopper and/or luxury car shopper wants? My questions are more general in nature here and not intended to be directed to anyone on this thread, but surely we are not all so gullible? Or maybe we are.

    I do hope that those "GM Customer Service" posters see my post though and respond, but not if all it will be one of those corporate one-size fits all responses.

  • bobinorbobinor Posts: 63
    Well said, Sam. It seems the gm thread monitors pick and choose which items to offer to follow up for us. The simpler issues, it seems, get attention.

    I've also been fighting with the "advancing seat" in my 2011 CXS, trying to beat it to the spot. It's become a contest that's unwinable. My other issue with the memory seat is that when it retreats after the engine is shut off and the door is opened, I swing my legs around to get out and they don't hit the ground! I have to shift my body forward to get enough of me out the door to get to the ground. Now I'm 5'11" but I feel like my 5 YO grandson who has to jump out of cars. The forward edge of the seat is much higher than the back part of the seat, which makes it one of the most comfortable car seats I have experienced, but when the seat is withdrawn for exit, that seat front elevates my legs such that it causes the problem stated.

    So will the thread stewards gather the gumption to respond to these issues on behalf of GM? As evidenced above, dealerships seem not to be able to cure this effectively.
  • bobinorbobinor Posts: 63
    I've been away from the boards for a while but tried to search for this and wasn't successful. Has anyone found out why the DIC doesn't do instant MPG? The owner manual describes the function so why don't we have it?

    My wife's 2010 Equinox has the same series of functions to scroll through in its DIC presented in the same sequence as the LaCrosse yet it has the instant MPG. Why were we left out?
  • crankeeecrankeee Posts: 298
    edited March 2011
    Samm: Agree totally with your general comment. Ford has attracted unwanted attention with the SYNC system offering total interface and therefore total driver distraction. Increasing race to offer options as marketing gimmicks results in overly complicated car that even the dealer can not service. Down the road the old "power window" failure will grow to many features that require only "dealer magic" to service.
    Our search for the good old fashioned, dependable, mechanically well designed transportation requires weaving in and out of the models with needless frills aimed at selling, NOT maintaining, good vehicles.
    Keep posting and good luck.
  • e_net_ridere_net_rider Posts: 1,380
    In times of increasing gas prices, the fix would seem more pressing. The though occurred to me the other day, when I ran across something, that maybe I found the reason for disabling it.
    I monitor some other forums, particularly Acadia and timing chain issues on the 3.6L. Many think that their failure, sometimes less than 10K, is related to DI, but the issue seems to go back to 2007 when DI was not installed. The DI seems to be connected to high gas content in oil, shown by doing UOA. And on many of these vehicles they are decreasing the OLM as to when to change oil. This is on top of GM requiring dexos.
    But wait a minute! Didn't I point out that the issue goes back to 2007, pre-DI. So what is GM thinking? Are they just blindly shotgunning a problem?
    There is a bit of hope though. Someone just posted a picture showing installation of timing chain. I asked the poster to verify it was for 2011 3.6L and so far no response. It could be a picture of 3.5L which uses more traditional timing chain, so I won't breathe easier until I know.
    "The something", was from a link and it pertained to re-programming the tranny for stated reason of "customer satisfaction".
    There was a lot of this being done on Malibu's for the same reason because some were unable to adapt their driving skills to the tighter programming. I had no issue with it, that is learning to drive it.
    Of large concern to me is that GM stated gas mileage will decrease!
    It occurred to me that GM may have disabled the INST MPG in connection with this change because the mileage would suffer most during acceleration and particularly the lower gears such as stop & go city driving.
    The bulletin showed the change in shift points. All shifts were moved to a higher speed. And engagement of the TCC was removed from gears 2,3,&4. Definitely incurring more slippage and poor MPG.
    Personally, if it is incorporated on mine, I'd want it removed!
    On the Malibu, one of the common complaints among many related to shifting was the misinterpretation of downshifting on the highway. In reality what was happening that under mild acceleration it would down shift once. Under heavier, somewhat moderate, definitely not WOT, it would simultaneously down shift and disengage TCC giving the feeling of downshifting 2 gears. The two gear feeling was the big complaint. With some driving experience and paying attention, I was able to memorize those exact points of the accelerator pedal. Going to the first point yielded mild acceleration, good for some conditions. It seems this did not satisfactorily meet many expectations and they just kept applying more accelerator until they reached TCC unlock and then complained about it.
    Certainly the driver should be able to figure how much acceleration they want? Think of it a bit like manual transmission where you downshift for maximum acceleration which is definitely a driver decision.
    Push accelerator to a certain point for downshift and mild acceleration. If you want more, stab accelerator past that point & TCC also unlocks. (Depending upon speed at time of initiation you might drop 2 gears.) If you must have maximum acceleration, just go WOT. Of course there is another just short of WOT which would start shedding load such as AC.

    Does this sound hard to do or understand?
    As mechanics know, sometimes the problem is located behind the wheel.
  • e_net_ridere_net_rider Posts: 1,380
    I'm not familiar with SYNC but would disagree some with total driver distraction. I certainly hope it is better than this GM thing that lacks the ability of being totally voice controlled. I have noted the extra buttons on the wheel shown in Lincoln hoping they enhance SYNC capabilities over this GM thing.
    I do strongly suspect owners are being steered though. Take crank window regulators. They almost always lasted the life of the vehicle. Enter electric. At first they were always breaking and expensive to maintain. Eventually they became mainstream and much more reliable. Then mainstream to the point that is standard equipment. The "steering" started with crank systems becoming unreliable to the point no one really wants them allowing Detroit to do away with them. Are they safer than crank systems? Certainly at the level of auto up & down since it only takes an instant to initiate compared to 15 seconds of cranking.
  • samm43samm43 Posts: 195
    One could say that our cars are driving us instead of the other way around :(

    At one point I thought I wanted to get a newer car, but I am finding that in order to purposely avoid a lot of this complexity by choosing an entry level car if possible, it still isn't that simple. Even cars like the Cruze have a LOT of technology that is shared with the rest of the line even in their base base car. Maybe it was just me but I found just adjusting the radio tone and balance controls anything but intuitive. I have never had that problem in the past except on maybe an old Blaupunkt over 20 years ago.

    I think a lot of the issues we have can be traced back to ridiculous steps taken to extract the tiniest advantage in fuel economy. We still want our cars to be powerful, but we want our cake and eat it too when we fuel them. I think the point of diminishing return is history by a few years already. Computer processing power has become so impressive(?) that it requires more and more elaborate software to instruct it. It's all man designed. Man made. Man programmed etc, and man is not infallible. We know enough to cause us some serious troubles.

    Hope you and the rest can get this memory seat issue sorted out soon.

  • cooleyddcooleydd Posts: 105
    edited March 2011
    DIC, MPG, 3.6L, 10K, DI, ULA, OAM, trany, INST, TCC, WOT, AC

    Isn't it amazing how many things like the above can be put into a conversation without any thought that not everyone would know or understand what they stand for. I am sure most know a few of them but the rest is like a foreign language.

    He asks " Des this sound hard to do or understand?" - yes it is to me and I know a little about cars. It would be nice if in a post the first time these letters are used they could be spelled out and then the initials after that.

    It would help understanding to some - maybe to most.

    With that said - let me say I appreciate the time and energy that the poster puts in his posts - they are very informational and makes us think.
  • samm43samm43 Posts: 195
    I know a thing or two about cars also, and try to keep myself informed with an ongoing effort, but of that lineup there are a lot there I don't know or maybe partially know. Usually I Google, but in this case I would spend more time Googling than reading here.

    DIC - something to do with direct injection combustion?
    DI must be direct injection
    UOA will be something oil analysis I think
    OLM oil life monitor?
    INST instruments?
    TCC - torque converter controller?

    I tried to put in a suggestion to the site to create an acronym dictionary link we could hit for all things auto-oriented, but apparently that suggestion part of the site is not working and it wouldn't accept my username. Kept telling me a I didn't exist.

    It seems every year there are more and more trade mark acronyms used by all the brands so it will do nothing but get more confusing.

  • cooleyddcooleydd Posts: 105
    edited March 2011
    Having once worked for a software company and its programmers and end users let me give you a little of what I learned.

    An idea is had by someone in the company (or an end user) that, in their opinion should be added to a program, next to the manager of the programming department (and perhaps to the CEO) who add, delete, change the idea and give it to the engineers and then the programmers. The programmers have their own idea of what it should be (perhaps with no idea as to the long term goal) write the program to what they think is needed. After the program is written and the approval process takes it back through the chain of command with each putting in their two cents worth and back to the programmers, back to approval until everyone is happy except maybe the end user who doesn't really understand what the hell is going on.

    It reminds of when we were kids and we all set in a row of chairs and a "secret" was wispered in the ear at the beginning of the row and each in turn whispered the "secret" to the next in line. At the end the versions were compared and found usually their is little resemblance between the first and last kids "secret".

    Often times these ideas have to be exposed to many users who experience them in real time and the recommendations are made in mass and sent back to the company. Sometimes programming can be changed (which brings in more chances of errors) and then back out. Sometimes the programs in the sold products can be changed with a download but sometime it may be more complicated than a simple download - requiring major or minor hardware changes which puts us back to the top of this post.

    Rarely is everything right in the first end product and the early buyers kind of have to live with it. We have learned this many times through the years. Remember the advise given many times - don't buy the first model of cars wait until the next model when, hopefully, the kinks are worked out.

    We are still in the first model in the 2010 and 2011 of the first model of the Lacrosse.

    With that said - I love my Lacrosse and am willing to put up with some problems - hoping someday they will be corrected - and I will keep asking.
  • imidazol97imidazol97 Crossroads of America I70 & I75 Posts: 23,186
    DIC driver information center

    UOA used oil analysis

    TCC torque converter clutch

    2015 Cruze 2LT, 2014 Malibu 2LT, 2008 Cobalt 2LT

Sign In or Register to comment.