Howdy, Stranger!

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

Buick Lucerne



  • rake2rake2 Posts: 120
    The info appears in the same gage as the speedometer. You have to press buttons on the left of the dash to get through the information.
  • eric6eric6 Posts: 10

    A sore back is also my concern after the long commute. What have you heard about the Lucerne seats? Did it feel comfortable when you sat in it? How was the head room? I am looking for a large sedan, with comfort and easy access being a very high priority. Any suggestions?

  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Posts: 6,048
    see 765 and 766 for user comments
  • All gasolines do not have the same additive packages. The following is from Top Tier Gasoline Follow the link to see which gasolines meet the top tier standards.

    Top Tier Detergent Gasoline

    TOP TIER Detergent Gasoline is a recently established new standard for gasoline performance. Four of the world's top automakers, BMW, General Motors, Honda, and Toyota recognize that the current EPA minimum detergent requirements do not go far enough to ensure optimal engine performance.

    Since the minimum additive performance standards were first established by EPA in 1995, most gasoline marketers have actually reduced the concentration level of detergent additive in their gasoline by up to 50%. As a result, the ability of a vehicle to maintain stringent Tier 2 emission standards have been hampered, leading to engine deposits which can have a big impact on in-use emissions and driver satisfaction.

    These automakers have raised the bar. TOP TIER Detergent Gasoline help drivers avoid lower quality gasoline which can leave deposits on critical engine parts, which reduces engine performance. That’s something both drivers and automakers want to avoid.
  • rake2rake2 Posts: 120
    I have a CXS. I am 6'3" and weigh about 260. I've been on 5 hour trips w/ the car, w/ no back pains whatsoever. I have excellent leg room and head room, and the car has the sun roof. I have two settings for the seats, one for when I have passengers in the rear. Even w/ the seat up, I have plenty of leg room, more than in my '98 Regal. Not sure, but I don't believe I even have the seat all of the way back.
  • 14871487 Posts: 2,407
    I sat in the Lucerne at the Philly autoshow and the material quality was impressive. Everythign was well put together to my eyes. I actually liked the light colored interior better, it makes the interior look more luxurious. I was hoping they had a car with Nav there but they did not. Quite a few people were checking out the Lucerne and not all were retirees.
  • rake2rake2 Posts: 120
    I'm glad that they didn't have the nav in one. Was originally mad because they didn't have nav available when they first came out, and when I bought mine. Funny how noisy other cars sound now after driving the Lucerne for a while.
  • I plan on buying a CXL V8 in the next few months and wonder if the OnStar Directions & Connections feature is a good substitute for a nav system. Has anyone tried it out and if so, what do you think? What are the pros and cons of using it vs. a regular nav system w/display?
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Posts: 6,048
    It depends on what you want.

    My opinion on +'s and -'s

    The indash nav looks cool, hard to input address while driving, needs expensive updates every few years to stay up to date, gives out real time directions while driving, has initial high cost (~$2000),

    OnStar has no initial cost but monthly fee (but as part of this fee you get other benefits), hands free location of address(just push the button), can also just ask for nearest whatever and the live advisor will find it (ie gas station, mcdonalds), does not give real time directions. This is the only real negative of the OnStar nav. When you ask for directions the live advisor says: go 3 miles, turn right, go 1.5 miles turn left on XXX, go blah, blah, blah and that is about where I give up. They do now have a recorder that records the directions and you can play them back which really helps.

    BUT, they just announced a new system that will give you real time directions as you drive. Not sure when it will get into the LuCerne but it will be one of the first GM cars to get it. It will also have a cheaper monthly rate. The way it works is you tell the live advisor where you want to go and they download it to your car. The car then gives out the real time directions as you drive. The only negative to this system that I can think of is that you do not get the cool screen.
  • jh1977jh1977 Posts: 40
    Can any of you Car Experts out there explain to me why GM does not offer 3 different engines for the 2006 Buick Lucerne? If the Lucerne had 3 different engines I believe more people like myself would consider buying the car. I currently own a 2001 Buick Lesabre. Chrysler offers 4 different engines for its 300 Sedan. For those of us who do not want the V-8 Cadallic Engine in which premium gas is recommend and the 3800 Engine (Which will cease production in 2008) which is now for the Senior Citizens, the Lucerne should have another V-6 engine with modern up to date technology which provides good acceleration going from zero to 60 MPR within 8.0 seconds. The 2005 Buick Lesabre and earlier models can accelerate that fast. Can any of you Car Experts please give me some feedback. Thank You.
  • Thanks for the reply. Your last para describes the D&C system that I am talking about. One year of it comes standard with the new Lucerne. As I understand it, OnStar op generates a route solution on their computer and then downloads via satellite to your onboard system. From then on you hear computer generated directions like a nav system would give in your own car.

    What I want to know is has anyone actually tried this new system and compared it to a traditional nav system with a display. Should I go for it rather than the traditional kind?
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Posts: 6,048
    What I want to know is has anyone actually tried this new system and compared it to a traditional nav system with a display. Should I go for it rather than the traditional kind?

    No one in the public has tried it that I know of because it is not out yet. It was explained to me about 3 years ago and was one reason LaCrosse did not get the Nav screen. I believe the OnStar nav system will beat the heck out of the screen nav IF the monthly bill is not too high. The only other reason it may not do as well is because buyers will prefer the appearance of the cool screen.
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Posts: 6,048
    Plant complexity and development costs are the reasons why only two engines. The old Lesabre buyer will be happy with the 3800. They love that engine. Those that want a premium experience will get the V8 which DOES NOT need premium to run great. You are right that the 3.6L engine would be perfect for the car but it costs almost as much as a V8 so the difference in price would not be that much. However I would bet that when the 3800 goes away the 3.6 will go in.
  • jh1977jh1977 Posts: 40
    Thank you for replying to my message. What about putting the 3.9 Liter Engine (Currently in the 2006 Chevy Impala) in the Lucerne, would its cost be cheaper that the 3.6 Liter Engine?
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Posts: 6,048
    Yes, its cost is probabbly very close to the 3800, in fact cheaper since the 3800 is low volume now. Issue is that it is not as "premium" as a DOHC engine in many eyes. BUT it is a great replacement engine for the 3800 due to its increased HP.

    Now why is the 3800 still around anyway? GM builds many millions of cars and trucks. To replace an entire engine family takes time and GM installs assembly tooling in modules. Each module builds XXX engines per year. They are very expensive modules and therefore GM adds modules in stages. There is one last 3800 module left in flint. The last question is how GM decided to use the last 3800's in the new Buicks (LaCrosse and Lucerne) instead of some other vehicle. Basically because the 3800 is a traditional Buick engine and loyal Buick buyers love it and the 3800 was already in those architectures. Perhaps not a good excuse to many out there who feel Buick should have ditched its traditional buyer and go premium (that means expensive) right away. Olds did that and you can see where that went.
  • alpha01alpha01 Posts: 4,747
    I agree; I felt the Lucerne CXL V8 that I sat in was easily the best GM entry that I saw in the show; the only thing I didnt care for was the instrumentation.

  • jh1977jh1977 Posts: 40
    Thank you for the information about the Buick Lucerne. You are very informative. GM should hire you and put you in their Public Relations Section. Sincerely.
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Posts: 6,048
    You do not know how close you came to my job description at GM that I left almost 2 years ago!! ( not PR but product manager at Buick)
  • Just curious, why did you leave your job at GM?
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Posts: 6,048
    First I loved my job and things were going great. I felt I was making a big difference in the product to the better and had been in many different jobs over the years. I left because they were offering buyouts at half pay for two years and decided to not employ a nanny anymore and stay home with the kids. Wife has an excellent job with GM with great potential to be high enough to be in the newspapers some day! Sorry I left but I have a new great career!
  • 14871487 Posts: 2,407
    You seem to have a lot of inside information. Do you know how much longer the 3800 will be around. I read on another website that it will be in production until 2008 which is a long time from now. Of course, that doesnt mean it will be in the Lucerne until that time, but it is possible. I am thinking it will soldier on as the base engine for the Lacrosse and GP until it's death. I hope that is the plan.
  • Sounds like a great decision. I left a job at Kmart HQ 4-5 years ago to stay home with the kids - wife had a good enough job and paying for day care and having others raise our kids was such a waste. I would not trade the opportunity of being with my kids for anything. I now work part time and am in the process of earning a masters in teaching. You must live in the Detroit area like me.
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Posts: 6,048
    you got out in time? Kmart hq I think is gone? Live right down the street. I can never work for GM again but I have multiple degrees in Engineering so I can always find a part time job in a few years once the kids are in all day school.
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Posts: 6,048
    I do not give out inside info that I have that is restricted. I do want GM to suceed and do not want to do anything to hurt it. I do not know the restricted plans for the 3800 but either the 3800 will go away first or the LaCrosse will! If it is the 3800 first I do not know what they will do but I would guess either make the 3.6 base and take ~$1500 base price increase due to engine costs and the stuff that goes with it or put in the 3.9L at 240hp. The 3.6 could go up to the latest improved HP around 270 (see Enclave). This would probably happen around '08 or '09?? Do not really know. If Lutz really wants Buick to become more premium making the 3.6 base would be the thing to do but it would hurt sales due to price increase.

    But then again the 3800 may stick around until the new LaCrosse comes out?
  • alpha01alpha01 Posts: 4,747
    Theres a well written article in the newest issue of Fortune... on GM's... fortunes, or more specificially, the plan to restore them.

  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Posts: 6,048
    read it last week. if you go to the "Styling, will it save GM" forum a lot of the article has been covered there. Bottom lne is that most of the vocal press has written off GM. GM says it is not going bankrupt. Who do we believe? And whos fault is it really?
  • keith3keith3 Posts: 17
    I have been following this engine thread with interest as I have a V6 Lucerne on order (invoiced to dealer last week - should be here any day now). I have two comments and one basic questions:

    1. Last summer we looked at replacing my wife's car. I test drove the Lacrosse, comparing 3.8 and 3.6. To my surprise I liked the 3.8 better. Plus it was cheaper, a bit lighter and had better fuel economy. Admittedly my focus is on normal driving, not winding it out to the max. And maybe I was swayed by the price. But I honestly did not see a clear advantage to the 3.6 - certainly not one that would justify a noticeable price increase. We passed on the Lacrosse, mostly due to small back seat, but I was left wondering what is the big plus for the 3.6? Surely a second or two in the quarter mile can't be the reason - at least not for normal driving.

    2. My second observation is about engines and performance. From 1994-97 I worked in Germany. Before going overseas my daily commuter car was a Mercedes 190 with a 2.3 liter four. When we arrived in Germany I bought a new BMW coupe as a commuter. But for my wife, the company had a deal on a Mercedes E Class station wagon with a 2.3 four. The engine looked just like the one in my old 190. This car had been driven for less than a year by an executive they transferred to the U.S. It was well equipped, with a rear facing third seat and self leveling suspension. We bought the car and drove it four years, with a lot of touring, including the Alps and high speed autobahn driving - sometimes with the seats full. It turned out to be a great car - even with the 2.3 liter four. I admit, it was not "quick" (I stayed out of drag races). But it accelerated adequately and would run comfortably at 100+ MPH (the car was more comfortable than I at those speeds, but we did some of that when traffic permitted). Since then I have been amazed at the HP race that is going on.

    I should also say that my daily driver is an '04 325 BMW coupe with a standard shift. It has a modern engine and I do enjoy the engine in it. I also like the stability control, sophisticated steering, etc. and would have liked to see them on the Lucerne. But for the Lucerne I'm thinking the 3.8 will be fine..

    Bottom line, I am having trouble understanding the fuss about the 3.8 and the call for the 3.6. With your experience in the industry can you summarize for me the real operating advantages of the 3.6 over the 3.8?
  • bartalk3bartalk3 Posts: 692
    Since you worked at Buick, obviously you're the guy to ask about their cars. Here's one question: why did they put a 4-speed transmission in the Lucerne when most cars these days are going to 5-speed and the new Camry will have a 6-speed?

    So many GM decisions make it seem that they have a death wish.
  • evandroevandro Posts: 1,108
    I am having trouble understanding the fuss about the 3.8 and the call for the 3.6.

    Different expectations, I guess. I drove two LaCrosse back -o-back, one with the 3.8 and the other with the 3.6. My conclusion was that the 3.6 was as strong as the 3.8 off-the-line and stronger in highway passing. Besides, the 3.6 was smoother and sounded better.

    I have a Bonneville 3.8 and an Intrigue 3.5 and in these cars one engine is good where the other lacks. The 3.6 was the best of both, IMO, lacking in no usage range.
Sign In or Register to comment.