Buick Lucerne

evandro

Well, it happens that many products are priced higher initially to restrict sales due to limited production capacity, from cars (Tundra, Lucerne, etc) to computers. As production capacity increases, price decreases, and it's a good thing. For this way only those who must have (either matter-of-factly or whimsically) a product are those willing to shell out more $$$ to get it.

vantheman1

hey, thanks for all the feedback on the nav and onstar....these forums are fabulous

poncho167

Some of the people who bought before the employee pricing program feel the same way. So do some people who bought a car with no rebate one week but then find out that there was one the following week.

vic10

Have only seen a couple of Lucernes on the road, and of course a few at the dealer. I like Buicks. My favorite uncle owned Buicks. I had a Park Ave and a Riviera and loved them both. I do like the interior design of this Lucerne. But the exterior misses the mark. It's boring. An LS430 is boring but it looks expensive boring. The Lucerne is, well, it's so boring it isn't even worth noting it's boring. And why the rear end is designed so when following the car you can see all the way up to the rear axle I don't know. Not at all attractive. Caddy's aren't like that. But ***yawn*** they'll have to do better next time around if they want to get my attention....

khmerkenboy

I just saw my first Lucerne on the road today. It definitely looks better in real life then in pictures. It's kinda surprising to me that I haven't seen a new Lucerne, eventhrough I live in Southern California. I seen plenty of brand new Escalades and Tahoes, but not yet a new Lucerne. When I first saw it, I assume it was a Audi A6 or something, but then I notice the Buick insignia. Very sleek looking and elegant porportions. Alot better than the chunky looking Avalon.

kcwolfpack59

Does anyone know if the Lucerne has this feature? I had 3 cars with it in the past and am spoiled to it. Makes a huge difference in taking 3+ passengers and a trunk full of stuff.

1487

I disagree about the styling. With the 17" and 18" wheels the car is very attractive and is just as good looking as any Lexus. In fact to my eyes the Lucerne CXS is better looking than the GS, LS or new ES lexus. Lexus has never been able to get styling right and that seems to be trend that isn't going to change. The proportions of the rear fenders on Lexus sedans are always off and the new models are no different. The GS in particular looks very wrong in profile due to the huge hap between the rear wheels and the beltline.

sls002

I can't find a definitive answer to your question, however GM's media website shows that the Lucerne's rear suspension uses "airlift" shocks of various kinds.

imidazol97

Since auto leveling was standard on leSabres I assume it's standard on Lucerne. I can't find it listed as an option.

buick8

The new Lucerne seems to be a good effort by GM. However, I went to the intro and later drove the 3800 version. Its "okay" but why the smoother, faster 3.6 V-6 5-speed autobox from the LaCrosse isn't on offer is a mystery. Base model with the 3800 is okay, the top with the Caddy V-8 is fine but most Buick buyers are rather practical. The V-8 is nice but thirsty. The 3800 is a bit sluggish. The competition all have high output V6 engines. What happened here :confuse: ?

m1miata

Hard to say, since it is beyond precision - whatever that means.
-Loren

62vetteefp

Yes, 3.6L would be a great base engine. However the base price would have been another $1500 for a base price of $27,500. That is in comparison to a very competitive $26,000. There is a HUGE contigent of loyal Buick buyers who love the 3800. They are the ones that are really making this car a sales success. (V8 is selling well though to both young and old) I also think you can look at it a different way. Buick has trumped the competition with a V8. There are many (and sales are proving this) that would rather have a V8.

There are of course other reasons than making the car more affordable. As you probably know the 3800 has slowly been replaced over the years. The Impala/Monte Carlo no longer uses it. The Mini vans have also dropped it. The volume of the 3800 keeps dropping.

Engines at GM are built in manufacturing modules and they are down to one 3800 module in Flint. They need to keep the module at full production to make it economically efficient.

I have read that the module will close down soon. I would guess that when the LaCrosse/Grand Prix are replaced with new architectures (Epsilon 2/Zeta?) They will put a different engine as base in the Lucerne. My question is what will they do for the LaCrosse/ Grand Prix. Will they keep the 3800 engine alive untill the cars are replaced or put new engines in before then?

imidazol97

> I also think you can look at it a different way. Buick has trumped the competition with a V8.

I have noticed the mantra in the GM-related discussions from a few is always to make it as negative as possible. It's good to see the V8 success pointed out.

The 3800 still has pushrods. The 3800 still has rear wheel drive. The 3800 still has a 4-speed transmission. And you know what? It still does great for the buyers who have chosen it for basic transportation, who don't want to think they can win a stoplight drag race, who don't want to feel they're driving a racecar to work each morning where a 4-cyl would do the job, etc., etc.

Sometimes I grow weary of the complaining. Here's a great new car from Buick and a few try to tear it down.

b88lazer

Amen.

sls002

The LaCrosse with or without the 3.6 V6 does not have a five (5) speed automatic. Only the CTS or STS RWD sedans have the 5 speed automatic. GM is working on a six speed FWD automatic that should become available in the next year or so. However, this transmission will be phased in over a period of time.

62vetteefp

Yes the midsize Camry/Accord/ES sized LaCrosse does have a competitive DOHC V6 aluminum engine to compete.

The Large Avalon does not have a V8 to compete with Lucerne.

sls002

Where GM is falling short of the mark, aside from interiors, is that they only have 4 speed FWD automatics. The LaCrosse 3.6 V6 would have much better performance with a 6 speed automatic. Even the 3800's performance would be better with a 6 speed automatic, but since the 3800 is nearing the end of production, upgrading to a six speed transmission is unlikly.

ab348

As you probably know the 3800 has slowly been replaced over the years. The Impala/Monte Carlo no longer uses it. The Mini vans have also dropped it. The volume of the 3800 keeps dropping.

Engines at GM are built in manufacturing modules and they are down to one 3800 module in Flint. They need to keep the module at full production to make it economically efficient.

I have read that the module will close down soon.

I cannot understand this. The 3800, while old, is a well-loved engine and for good reason -- it is reliable, makes good torque, has a premium image compared to other GM pushrod engines and suits the buyer profile for a lot of models. So they are dropping it in favor of the 3.5 and 3.9 pushrod V-6s based on the old Chevy 2.8? The same engine that gave us the 3.1 and 3.4 versions that have had all sorts of problems and which are gutless and thrashy under load? I've driven 3.4s in many GM rentals and would never buy a car with one. But I wouldn't hesitate to buy a car with the 3.8. Dumb, dumb.

splatsterhound

I agree. The 3.8 is a great engine. Just drove my nephew's decade old honda accord with a 4 cyl. The thing vibrates at idle, sounds really ragged with 150,000 on the clock and doesn't have the same power (by far) as my 175,000 mile 3.8.
The 3.8 isn't there for drag racing. But it will easily provide more real world punch than any 4 cyl in an accord or camry, and who's complaining about their power???

Heck, the 3.8 still has more power than a 525 bmw. Time to get real....I gotten speeding tickets with fewer than 90 hp under the hood. Having 197 sounds pretty good.

62vetteefp

The 6 speed would have minimal performance improvements with the old high torqing 3800 . The high revin DOHC's work much better with more speeds. That is one reason why GM got behind. they kept seeing no reason with the non DOHC engines to have 5 or 6 speeds. But with more DOHC's coming on line at GM and public perception they really missd the mark.

Not sure how a 6 speed helps the newer "cam in block" V-6's GM has developed lately. We will soon find out though!

62vetteefp

The new 3.5/3.9 engine families have little to do with the old 2.8/3.4 except they are also non DOHC V-6's. Much higher technology with cam phasing, etc.

I love the 3800 III but it has fallen behind in technology and it is time to go.

62vetteefp

Yes, compared to the Japanese 4's the GM "cam in block" V6's are a bargain. May not be as smooth but much better "performance" characteristics at the same price to customer. Not sure why the 4 vibrates so bad. Normally they are pretty smooth.

amkdevile

The 3800 and the Northstar V8 have both been in the top 10 engines of the world for a long time. Buick is smart to have both of these engines for the new Lucerne. With the smooth 4 speed transmission, the Lucerne is a winner in it's 1st year. They can always do more with it later. If you don't like the car, don't buy it! If I'm not mistaken, the Lucerne has 3 different suspensions. Not all cars offer that!

sls002

I think that the 3800 would have been helped to some extent. A big part of the Lucerne's 3800 performance is due to the 2.85:1 economy axle gearing. With higher performance gearing the 3800 is better. But the 3.6 V6 and the northstar would do much better with a 6 speed. I doubt that the V8 will get a FWD 6 speed though. I have some doubts that the Lucerne will get a six speed. A lot depends on how long the Lucerne remains in production, which depends on how long Cadillac keeps the DTS. I think both cars will be replaced as soon as a suitable RWD platform is developed.

splatsterhound

Agree that normally honda fours are very smooth. This particular one was ragged, but it's got higher miles and it's been ignored for a long time and needs a little tlc. That said, it IS showing its age -- and there's no way it'll see 200k at the rate its going. Simple point is, my 3.8 has never had any internals replaced. Still runs great, better than the honda, which has fewer miles. I've talked to plenty of mechanics who say the 3.8 is basically unbreakable.

rake2

I don't get this push that some people have to replace front wheel drive cars w/ rear wheel drive. For everyday driving, including snow, I much prefer the front wheel drive to the real wheel drive. I don't I'm the only one. For those of us who prefer front wheel drive, there aren't really many options for it. To eliminate them would be silly, in my opinion.

m1miata

Yeah, the Lucerne as a Buick or as a Cadillac, after GM re-organization, would make sense for those in need of FWD. Seems like some people need, or prefer FWD. The FWD is less expensive to build, so the profit is there. Maybe AWD is the way to go though. As for available cars, my o' my, most are FWD, so you should not have trouble picking up one.

62vetteefp

There are very few who even know what FWD or RWD means or care. There is a market for RWD but it is small. Look at what is being built today in the non performance market. The only RWD cars under 30K (where the huge volume of cars are sold) are the new chryslers and they are not sold in that high of volume compared to all the rest. Their wagon is already crested and is going down in volume. And I surmise that most of those buying the Chryslers are buying because of the "look at me" styling and/or the V8. They would have bought if FWD/AWD/RWD or hook a horse up to it just to be seen!!

Of course nothing wrong with that but a smaller niche market.

FWD is not going away. That being said full size vehicles like the Lucerne and DTS keep losing sales. Mostly old folks who want a car that large. Most younger (under 60) know that a SUV is a much better vehicle for their needs if they need the carrying capacity for family and stuff. Remember our government killed the large car with MPG requirements on the cars and then NOT applying to trucks.

All that said above, with the large car going RWD they can turn up the advetisements and convince the buying public that RWD is upscale and all should buy! It is in performance cars!

poncho167

I don't believe the 3.4 is the same engine block as the 2.8, 3.1, 3.5, 3.9. The 3.4 cubic inch engine was an Oldsmobile engine. The 3.4 from what I have seen and heard has been pretty good.

sls002

The 3.4 is the same engine family as the 3.1, which was re-engineered at some point allowing the first generation 2.8 to be as large as 3.4 liters. The new 3.5 and 3.9 engines are newly re-engineered to, allowing them to become as large as 3.9 liters. I should point out that there are two versions of the 3.5 liter engine, one without VVT (variable valve timing), which has the same stroke as the 3.9 but a smaller bore; and one with the same bore as the 3.9, but with a shorter stroke. Both of the larger bore engines have VVT.

sls002

With winter tires a RWD car is as good as the FWD with all season tires. I drove RWD car for years in winters that have been much worse for snow than we seem to have now, perhaps as a result of global warming. With traction control and skid control, RWD probably is much better than it used to be on icy roads. With a set of winter tires, I think RWD would be perfectly good.

sls002

I do not know what GM is planning for the large sedan. Currently, the Bonneville and the entire Oldsmobile division (which had some large FWD sedans) are dead. The LeSabre and Park Avenue are now one model, the Lucerne. The DTS (old DeVille) is selling less and less.

What I do not like about the FWD cars that I have owned, (the 95 Riviera, the 98 Aurora and now the 2002 Seville) is that they drag their noses on the pavement when the driveways are a bit steeper than ususal. I try to avoid these driveways, but that is not always possible. RWD cars, like the 300, have less front overhang.

62vetteefp

That overhang is a bit more about the latest style/architecture and crash safety. The latest trend today is to move the wheels to the corners of the cars as far as possible. With an older architecture it is impossible to do it because, well, you would have to develop a new architecture. Not only the costs of moving the suspension/drive axles forward but the safety assumptions would all change and there goes the budget. With a new architecture like the Epsilon (G6) and the 300's you start out with the wheels foward and start fresh. You are spending the money anyway.

So once the tires are moved foward the approach angle gets much greater and no more rubbing. It also depends on what is rubbing. Fascia is lower due to styling or aero if that is what is rubbing. Nothing to do with FWD/RWD

sls002

I agree that the overhang is all about design. However, the transaxle design that GM is using required that the front wheels move back. Buick designed a concept car, the Bengal I think, that redesigned the transaxle and moved the front wheels forward. This car was too expensive to put into production.

Rear Wheel Drive cars have generally had the front wheels closer to the front bumpers. The transaxle design of FWD moved them back.

sls002

I looked at pictures on the Pontiac website and I do not see any difference in how the front wheels are positioned relative to the front door and front bumper on the G6 than they are on the Lucerne. The front wheels are very close to the front doors, leaving a large overhang. Compare with the 66 Toronado:
http://www.seriouswheels.com/1960-1969/1966-Oldsmobile-Toronado-Jay-Leno-FA-1024- x768.htm

62vetteefp

I gotta take back some of what I said. Yes RWD allows less front overhang. It all depends on how you design it and the new RWD cars are really pushing the envelope on moving the wheels ahead where the typical FWD will find it hard to get theat little overhang.

dandydon2

I don't know if this will apply for you, but it appears that Buick is offering $500 cash back if your car was invoiced early on. Here's what edmonds.com says about Lucerne V8 incentives:
"$500 Cash to Customer start: 03/16/2006 end: 04/04/2006 Get Dealer Pricing
Restrictions Customer Bonus Cash is only available on vehicles invoiced before 10/17/2005.
Comments Incentives may vary; see your local dealer for details."

sls002

Well, I am not sure if the front wheels were left more or less in place when the transaxle FWD cars were designed, and the firewall and front doors were moved forward into the space that was left empty under the hood when the engine/transaxle were turned around crossways or what exactly happened. I suspect that the front wheels shifted back a bit from where they used to be relative to the front bumper and the firewall/front_doors moved forward. But the Buick Bengal shows that the transaxle could have been put in front of the engine instead of behind, moving the front wheels forward. Changing the current layout would be expensive.

rake2

Not in a luxury or quasi-luxury class.

rake2

No way. Front wheel drive is much better for control in the snow, especially on hills.

rake2

It didn't work that why with either my '89 Camaro or my '01 Camaro. lol

rake2

I think that probably is for current buyers to make up for the difference in price on two cars w/ the same features right now. The exact car I bought in December was about $1,800 less in January, once GM went to the competitive pricing, or whatever they call it.

loyalbuickfan

I am in agreement as to just how much power is REALY needed on a typical day of driving. My 94 Park Ave.
(bought new) has 151,000 on it and it still gives adequate performance 99% of the time. When I order my new Lucerne
this Summer will it be worth $2,000 more for the V-8 and
10 Dollars more a week for gas, for 1% of the time I wish I had more horsepower?

Why am I am THINKING about it?

62vetteefp

I think GM is trying to use the incentives a bit better than a scattershot. they are putting incentives on vehicles that have been sitting at the dealerships or last years models or a refreshed model ('06 SUV's).

the 2006 LaCrosse has a huge $500 rebate . Could not find one on the Automotive News site for the Lucerne. But at the Buick site they show $500 for the Lucerne CX only? Think this means they are selling the uplevel models and the base ones are sitting. I did find the old vehicle $500 rebate on the LaCrosse and Lucerne on the Edmunds site. You just gotta find an old CX and get $1000 back. wonder how many there are?

sls002

Some years ago Car & Driver conducted a test of FWD, RWD, and AWD cars with all season and winter tires. The FWD all season tires were quite good with AWD best. However, with winter tires the RWD was better than the FWD all season. The test results are no longer available on their website though. However, there are some newer results where they have found that the winter tires on a Porsche 911 are better than regular tires on an AWD. Look for snow tires to find the article.

sls002

The Camaro and Corvette both had a fair amount of front overhang, but both are very low slung cars which does not help. Small FWD cars have less overhang, but still have good ground clearance and a shorter wheelbase, which helps.

rake2

Maybe if it has studs it becomes close, but if you want to do that you can just as easily do that w/ FWD and get better traction, it would seem. Also, I'm not about to either buy an extra set of rims to mount snow tires, nor am I about to change tires from the rims for the season. I also am not about to store an extra set of tires w/ or w/o rims. Don't think many people are willing to do that, either. Given that real world scenario, (and my laziness, I admit) FWD is better for the bad weather than any RWD, imo.

m1miata

If I lived in snow country, I would buy a Subaru. No snow here, thank God!

Considering what people like about Lucerne, and to fit the need, it is really best they keep the Lucerne as is. RWD would be a mistake. It is cheaper to build FWD, some need it for snow country, or don't know or care about the difference. The HP is not an issue, so why not use old Betsy. Add up the price they can get for this car, compared to components, GM may be making some profit here. It has size, comfort, and looks a little newer -- that is what people are looking for in a Buick. The LaCrosse may not be catching on with the Buick crowd. Looks OK, but maybe not enough headroom in back, or something. Seems like a different game than the rest of the car industry - different consumers.
-Loren

sls002

Some years back, in the winter, with a snow storm in progress, one of my neighbors had a FWD car with some sort of summer tires. They had moved here from California I think. Anyway their FWD with summer tires would not go in a little bit of slippery snow. I have driven RWD cars in this area for many years with all weather tires and got along quite well. All I am telling you is that RWD with winter tires will work, this has been tested. I certainly understand your point of view that you would prefer FWD and all season tires rather than mess with a second set of wheels and tires for winter use. A perfectly reasonable point of view.

The future of the large FWD sedan at GM is probably in flux right now. The Chrysler 300, Dodge Magnum and Charger are selling at double the rate that GM's large FWD sedans are selling at.

imidazol97

>Summer tires.

I don't know how summer tires on FWD compare to summer tires on RWD. I would assume with same tires the FWD would have better traction. Most cars have an all-weather tire on them. Those will do better with FWD in my experience.

FWD has the weight of the motor and transmission on the drive wheels. Assuming equal tread on tires that has to work better on the typical car.

If you start comparing higher ground clearance vehicles, you're going to get a different reaction. The problem with cars is the snow piling up under the car lifting it in some situations and taking contact away from the tires.

I grew up in snow areas and had that happen sometimes. I carried a shovel in the trunk to dig under the wheels and axle to get the car to move backwards out of the snowdrift. And locked differential is a dangerous thing also because both rear wheels can slip at the same time letting the car move sideways on a curve.

With FWD I can back up with the traction unless the car is run up onto a drift hard.