Buick Lucerne

sls002

toyota's V6 gives much better performance than the CTS's V6. Part of the performance is the 5 speed automatic, but even so, the Avalon out performs the CTS and its 5 speed automatic, never mind the Lucerne.

62vetteefp

did not put the Cadallic STS's 3.6 Liter

I would have settled for the LaCrosse's!!

seriously, the reason it is in there is because GM has not closed down the last 3.8L manufacturing module. It still has a few more years in flint. Powertrain modules are very expensive to put together and need to be brought into production as they can be built and afforded. Now why did the Lucerne keep the 3.8L and not some other model get it? Well where would be a better place? The Impala was one model that did use it and could have kept it for the new model BUT there is not enough 3.8 manufacturing capacity for the Impala volume. If they were to use it and the new engine family it would have meant more complicated assembly plant processes. And there is really no place else where it could be used. Epsilon/minivans/etc. never used it. So the LaCrosse and Lucerne and Grand Prix get it until it closes down Flint.

Besides there are a lot of BUICK buyers that love that 3.8 engine and they will buy it.

evandro

Ah, OK. Toyota, Honda, etc, will all wait for GM to close the 3.8 plant, poor GM. Everybody now making way for the old, old GM to pass with its OHV engine in a $35000+ car...

Yeah, right! As it goes, GM will go the way of the typical Buick buyer.

sls002

I think most $35,000 Lucerne's will have the double overhead cam V8. However, the CTS's V6 is not much of an engine compared to the honda and toyota v6's.

1487

The Avalon doesnt deliver "much" better performance than the CTS with 3.6 V6. The CTS is a 6.6 second car with auto and the Avalon is supposedly a 6.1sec car. I dont believe the numbers for the Avalon posted in the C&D comparo because all of those cars were about .5 secs faster than anything previously posted. The 300 in that tets did 0-60 in 7.3 secs when most other tests had that car around 8secs. The lacrosse was listed at 7secs flat and the fastest time I had seen before that was 7.6secs in MT.

The 3800 is under powered for the price, I think that point has been made here. The thing is that it's not the only weak engine in a pricey car. The 525i has 184hp, the 500 has 203hp, the 300s base engine has 190hp, the C class has less than 200hp in it's base engine. Most luxury cars comparable to the Lucerne have much more powerful motors standard motors, but those cars also start in the mid thirties and really arent in the same size class. Honestly, the Lucerne doesnt have many direct competitors because it's a full size car, not a midsize sports sedan. I dont understand why some people want to waste time saying " I would buy the Lucerne if GM management wasnt so stupid". That makes little sense. To me that is saying that you would consider the Lucerne if it werent a GM product. Some people feel like they would be rewarding the company they love to hate if they acknowledged GM made any decent products.

All the stuff about limited availability is nonsense. The car just came out last month and the Avalon has been out since the springtime. Anyone with a little common sense would know the Avalon would be easier to find on dealers lots. This has nothing to do with GM incompetence. On top of that Buick hasnt done that much advertising for the car thus far so dont act like you are seeing Lucerne ads everyday and you cant find any at the dealer. Hopefully for once GM is actually producing the right amount of product so dealers dont get stuck with a 90 day supply of Lucernes.

I picked up a brochure today and it gives a lot of info about the engineering that went into the car. powertrain aside, the car is very impressive.

1487

what are you basing that statement on? The engine in the TL makes 258hp and 232 lb-ft of torque. The CTS makes 255 and 252. The Avalon makes 268 and 248. The 3.6 is quiet, technologically advanced and very competitive with everything out there except the 298hp Nissan VQ V6. I have driven the STS and CTS with the 3.6 and it makes great noises and works well, even in the heavy STS. Almost every imort car is lighter than a comparable american car so if you put the Tls Engine in a heavier CTS I guarantee you the CTS would be slower. The RL is a perfect example, it has 290hp, but because of it's weight and lack of torque it's barely under 7secs to 60mph. The STS with 255hp is just as fast as the Rl even though they have similar weights.

imidazol97

I realize not everyone knows, but the Lucerne replaces the LeSabre as well as the Park Ave as well as being a new, aggressive model. Many of the LeSabre buyers could give a hoot about 0-60 time. They will note that the 3800 (not 3.8) gives plenty of torque in the low end where most of them (me) drive. I don't spent any time flooring it after turning a 90 degree corner, I don't pass uphill in no passing zones where I would need high horsepower for that 10 seconds of terror (I used to do dumb things like that).

I think different types of drivers and people who had different types of car preferences here are each projecting their own desires on others' needs. There are lots of kinds of cars around. Go enjoy what you want without putting down what others think or really do believe they need.

62vetteefp

Ah, OK. Toyota, Honda, etc, will all wait for GM to close the 3.8 plant, poor GM. Everybody now making way for the old, old GM to pass with its OHV engine in a $35000+ car...

I think you mean $27,000 car? The V8 starts at $31,000. Now if the 3.6L was standard it would be a $29,000 car and then for only $2000 more you could of had a V8!.

clarkkent

All the stuff about limited availability is nonsense. The car just came out last month and the Avalon has been out since the springtime. Anyone with a little common sense would know the Avalon would be easier to find on dealers lots. This has nothing to do with GM incompetence. On top of that Buick hasnt done that much advertising for the car thus far so dont act like you are seeing Lucerne ads everyday and you cant find any at the dealer. Hopefully for once GM is actually producing the right amount of product so dealers dont get stuck with a 90 day supply of Lucernes.

NOT TRUE I see an ad on the Lucerne every day (maybe two a day) and there are NO cars let alone a small supply.

So what have you been smoking? You sure havent been reading and auto mags.

Also your remark about dealers not getting stuck with a 90 day supply of Lucernes doesn't sound like you have a great deal of faith in GM or the Lucernes!

PS If as I have just read, some dealers in Mt.and Wy NOW have the car they didn't have any two weeks ago when out of furstration I ordered my new Toyota Avalon!

imidazol97

Good luck with your avalon. I notice you haven't posted there like most people who are buying one would. You might want to read about some of the good and the bad things about the Avalon. Here's a link to the discussion.

clarkkent

I know I'll be happy with the Avalon. It's a known item, and the Luceren is not. I would not have checked out the Lucerne any more than the Avalon. I was just LOOKING for a Lucerne to test drive. I did that with an Avalon.

You don't buy a horse you can't find and can't ride.

sls002

Well, BMW seems to get more performance out of a smaller engine. Honda's 3.5 is rated at nearly 300 HP. Infinity has 280 hp (2005). Toyota's 3.5 has more hp than the GM 3.6. For such a new engine, GM's 3.6 is short on performance. I think that it could have a flat torque curve (like in the LaCrosse), but at a 240 to 250 lb-ft level, which could result in about 285 hp. This would give both the STS and CTS better performance combined with a 6 speed automatic.

alpha01

One thing you need to be careful about in all this discussion of horsepower is which manufacturer's figures are actually SAE certified as per the most recent methodology, which came out 08/04. Almost all of Honda and Toyota's engines have been re-rated, for example, while practically NONE of Nissan's have. Ford and GM, meanwhile, are only re-rating as model years are changed or as modifications are made to engines. This is the reason why the Malibu/G6's 3.5L V6 gained 1 horse, to 201, for example, for 2006.

I, personally, would like to know if any of the 3.6L GM figures are actually SAE certified, or not... I cannot find this information. I do know that the Avalon's 3.5L, re-rated to 268 horses, is SAE certfied.

~alpha

62vetteefp

, personally, would like to know if any of the 3.6L GM figures are actually SAE certified, or not... I cannot find this information. I do know that the Avalon's 3.5L, re-rated to 268 horses, is SAE certfied.

They are not but they will be within +-3 to the numbers already stated. GM procedure was close to the new SAE standards and when looking at GM's restatements the new HP are always within a couple. There will be no huge discrepancies like the Japanese revisions.

sls002

GM's website shows what engines have been rated under the new rules and the 3.6's have not been. Still, Motor Trends comparison shows that the BMW 530 with a 3 liter 6 kept up with the STS with 30 more horsepower. The Infinity M35 was quicker by a half second in 0-60. The Acura was just quicker while the Audi was slower. I think that the 3.6 is ok, but could be better. A variable length intake manifold could probably improve performance. On the CTS/STS/SRX there is a variable intake manifold, but the variation is in connecting or disconnecting the left and right intake manifolds.

chuck1959

Considering Buick's customer base I really don't believe they would care less about what engine it has. The ones that do would probably go elsewhere.

bruneau1

I am happy to see so much discussion in this forum. One thing is pretty sure, the Lucerne is better looking than the somewhat piggish looking Avalon- which is a terrific car. But do all those old folks who buy Avalons really need all that power to cruise to the coast or to Costco?

evandro

One has to keep in mind that most of the competition requires premium gas, unlike GM's 3.6.

Speaking of competition, Lexus came out with amazing direct-injection engines. The 3.5 is rated above 300HP! :shades:

rake2

Unless I'm missing it, the Lucerne doesn't have a coin holder. Seems kind of odd these days, especially when the web site says the console has a coin holder.

bunoy

If GM claims bankruptcy, Delphi claims bankruptcy....would the warranty still be enforced? Would parts for the Lucerne be available say 7 years from today??

imidazol97

Look inside center armrest. May be an extra snap in piece that will hold coins; don't snap it in, you have more room in the cubbie.

62vetteefp

coin holder may be molded in like the LaCrosse. 3 slots along one side of the inner console bin. Simple solution

fadil

I test drove Buick Lucerne today. I have to admit that I was surprised with a taut (no bout like ride) suspension and sufficient power of 6 cylinders engine ( I am not an aggressive driver). The cloth interior is of high quality too. The car looks much more impressive alive than on pictures.The only disappointing thing was a steering wheel. It looked so plain and cheep.Good job, Buick.

sls002

If there is a coin holder, it may either be built into the console or may be removable. My Seville's coin holder is removable and may be attached to the drivers side door inside the map pocket, which is where I have it.

jh1977

If GM can If put a 3.9 Liter engine in the 2006 Impala (3LT/LTZ) with 240 HP they certainly can put the same or similar engine in the 2006 Base Lucerne. I thought Buick was more upscale than Chey, with more powerful engines in their large sedans, whether base or luxury models. For us old timers, remember back in the 1970s, early 1980s when Buick had the Riviera, Lesabre and the Electra 225 (Duce-and-a-Quarter). Even the base models in these cars had strong engines with satisfactory HP. Those were the good old days for Buick.

jh1977

The statement you made is the reason why GM is losing its customer base and car market share to Toyota, Honda and other car manufacturers in the U.S. GM is in the process of cutting 30,000 jobs and closing plants in the U.S. due to its management don't care attitude. If GM keeps this don't care attitude regarding making quality cars with modern technology and modern engines to attract new customers and old customers who left GM for other car manufacturers, GM will surely lose more car market share, cut more jobs and close more plants in the U.S.

rake2

Thanks. It's 3 slots in the front portion of the console that don't look anything like a normal coin holder. Not sure it's going to work well when trying to put change in there while driving (face it, we all do it), but at least it is there.

sls002

I think the really good old days for Buick were in the early 50's, before V8 engines. However, the 3.9 engine you are referring to is based on the Citation engine. The 3.9 is new and not available in unlimited quantities. I do not disagree with you that the Lucerne should have a better V6 engine, but I am not sure the 3.6 LaCrosse engine is all that much better than the 3800 which is a cheap engine for GM to build.

GM has lost many customers and that is why they must down size. I think they will need to downsize even more that they have announced.

vanman1

The Lucerne needs at least the 3.9L as a base engine. The 3800 may keep base cost down a touch but the top line Buick should never have a 197hp engine in 2005. While efficient and smooth, it just doesn't really belong in this car.

Buick needs a new base engine and that new 6-speed auto asap.

sls002

I think that the basic problem is that GM is stuck with the current line up of "stuff" until they get a new contract with the UAW so that they can close down some factories, including the 3800.

jh1977

I agree with you 100%. Buick is suppose to be GM's upscale division just below Cadallic. The Base Lucerne should have the 3.9 or 3.6 Liter engines.

sls002

An "upscale division" should not be sharing a lowend engine with Chevy. I think that Cadillac and Buick should be GM's upper end divisions and should have OHC (mostly double OHC) engines. Chevy and Pontiac should have lower end vehicles with pushrod engines to the extent that GM continues with any pushrods. As far as the Lucerne goes, I do not think that a V6 is a good engine for what is a large and heavy sedan. I think that the only reason for a V6 in the Lucerne is to keep the base price low enough for some LeSabre owners who want something larger than the LaCrosse but would find the V8 Lucerne too expensive.

jh1977

You make a good point but I believe the Lucerne should have a third or middle engine, like the 3.9 or 3.6 Liter engine. The Chrysler 300 has 4 different engines, The Dodge Charger has 3 different engines. Having three different engines in the Lucerne would give customers more choices. If customers' resources are limited, they could buy the low price Lucerne with the 3.8 liter engine. Or if customers have more resources, they could move up in price and buy a mid level Lucerne with the 3.9 or 3.6 Engine. If money is not a problem, customers can buy the Lucerne with the V8 engine with all of its luxuries and accessories.

evandro

According to Bob Lutz, a VIP at GM, the intent is to pair Buick against Lexus. Fat chance with OHV engines...

Although I think that Cadillac would be more in line with Lexus, not Buick. Maybe a hint that GM has too many brands... :confuse:

sls002

I think that they are thinking bottom of the line Lexus, not top of the line Lexus.

imidazol97

I would suspect the North(star) end of Lucerne is Lexus world. The low end has tor eplace LeSabre for normal drivers.

sls002

I think that the Lexus LS model is near Mercedes S-class in refinement. I do not think that Cadillac has anything that is near E-class, much less S-class. Buick is below Cadillac in refinement, although I think that the Lucerne is quite close to the DTS, at least with the V8 models. The Lexus ES is the lowend of the Lexus line and I think Cadillac does compare with this end of the Lexus line up, and perhaps the Lucerne is not far off either.

daryll44

So let's say you spend $30,??? for a new Lucerne or Lexus.

How much do you think both will be worth in 5 years?

sls002

A bottom of the line Lexus is more than $31000, so you will have to revise your question. However, a 2001 Park Avenue is worth about $10,000 or so. A 2001 Lexus ES is around $15,000+++ (maybe $16,000). The ES is probably going to cost about $35,000 new, depending on options.

daryll44

Actually, 10 grand for a 5 year old Park Avenue that has been maintained well might be a bargain. Most were sold to the geezer set who can (and does) afford to maintain them well and garage them. Same for Grand Marquis and Lesabre.

62vetteefp

per the attached 2001 Park's range from $8000 to $20,000.

http://www.internetautoguide.com/usedcars/09-int/2001/buick/park-avenue/

and the es300 is around $16k - 18k on the same site.

http://www.internetautoguide.com/usedcars/11-int/lexus/es300/

sls002

Used cars are generally a bargin compared to new. But they are used and one never knows what sort of care they may have had.

My prices were taken from Edmunds.

I think that the Lucerne is a lot of car for the money. A lot depends on what one is looking for. The overall size of the Lucerne compares with the Lexus LS and Mercedes S-class, so if one is looking for a large sedan, the Lucerne is large at a good price.

fin

Money is not the question here... If you can buy one, you can buy the other and resale value is probably not that important either to many. The real question, as to the ES330 is, "Will everything and everybody I need to carry with me fit inside a 330?" Probably not, if you consider the Lucerne as the size car you really need. These are very different cars, perhaps similar only in price at this point...

sls002

I agree that the ES is a different car than the Lucerne. The Toyota Avalon is closer in size and price. But the Lucerne is larger than the Avalon. One thing that can be said is that in the Lucerne's price range (under $30,000 to about $40,000) there are many options.

daryll44

There ain't no one, no where, payin' 20 grand for a 5 year old Park Avenue, even if it was painted in 18K gold.

sls002

Since the Park Avenue is no longer in production, perhaps it might be considered a collectors item?

62vetteefp

http://www.barrett-jackson.com/auctionresults/common/cardetail.asp?id=177409

2000 sold for $19k.

sls002

GM plans to end production of the 3800 at the end of the 2008 model year. Until then I expect that it will be the base engine for the Lucerne. At the end of the 2008 model, the Lucerne may also end production.

ssiero1

I have a '99 Nissan Maxima that I bought new. It has never given me any problems through the 180,000 miles I have driven it so far. The car sits outside because our garage is taken up by my son's motorcycle, weights, and other stuff. The reason I mention that is because Chicago winters can be brutal and my car has taken it all in stride. My job requires a big, cushy car that won't break down and will impress people. Although the Max shows no signs of slowing down, this car has caught my eye. Question is: could this Buick be on par with the reliability and quality of the Max? Or would it behoove me to go with Lexus like I had been planning?

minarets1

well i too own a Maxima, 1996, with 195,000 and still going strong. i dont require such a car, but i want one. i had a review way back and if you may have caught it, you will see i am only 24 but am loving this car. Buick is a name associated with Grandpa and Grandma to me. the Lucerne name is not my favoirte name, however i love this car.

if you check out JD Powers, you will see Buick is only 2nd to Lexus in intial and longterm quality. many do not know this. yes, Lexus has been on top for soooo long and will continue. they make quality products and a premium price. the Lucerne, however, is a quality product at a more "bang for your buck" price. if your crossing the ES330, the Bucik offers more, imo....everything but service, which Lexus is still 2nd to none, imo.

the IS350/250 is too small for your requirements and about the same price but more sporty. the GS is way more expensive and the first direct comparison as far as featuers go as far as i am concerned (again, to me this is more of a knock on the ES, which to me is truely a rebadged camery)and the LS which is out of 70% of the populations price range on what they WANT to spend.

basically what i am getting at is, i wouldnt worry quality wise about buying a Buick. in fact i would be proud of owning the quality of a buick. for me personally its overcomming the streotype of "oldpeople" and Buick--which i dont think i will have a problem with. i have so many cars on my list right now but the Lucerne is top 4. the 2006 Saab 9-5, the 2006 Chargers SRT-8 (which is unlikely due to the redonkulous mark-ups, and the Acura TL and Infiniti G35 ---i would say the Lucerne CXS in black and black fully optioned would be my #1 choice as of now

cheers