Buick Lucerne

splatsterhound

I really want to hear from someone who has driven this thing. Dealers, sales, owners???

The pics look really good.

Anyone even seen 'em on a dealer lot? It can't take a month to ship, or can it?

Lots of questions, no answers.....

imidazol97

I talked to the dealer a couple of days ago and he had driven them compared to ES330s at a dealer drive/compare. He said it was quieter. He said it drove better. The Lucernes had the optional engine, not the 3800. They were preproduction Lucernes that were brought in. He indicated production could be better built.

62vetteefp

Production will have better fit and finish than preproduction. Car looks great.

bigdaddycoats

My local dealer has two in stock. I think they just came in yesterday. One is a CXL w/V8 and the other looks like a V6. I might check them out tonight if time permits.

62vetteefp

Please report back on how bad the quality is and how inferior it is.

bigdaddycoats

Huh? What does that mean?

jbgraham

I checked the Lucerne "build" area and noticed that the options list for the CXL V8 has shortened - now excluding the heated windshield fluid and more importantly, StabiliTrak. Perhaps other options have disappeared, but those were two in which I had interest. Not a good sign in my view. Hope it's just error.

62vetteefp

I can find out but most likely they are standard with the V8. I am pretty sure the StabilitTrak is.

splatsterhound

What state/city is your dealer?

I'm waiting for them to trickle into dealers near where I live...hopefully soon.

splatsterhound

Also, does anyone know where there are more pics...esp. interior options...other than the buick website?

I'd like to see some 'real' photos taken by regular folk instead of the few highly stylized photos on the website.

Thanks...

splatsterhound

Also, does anyone know if you can get stabilitrack in the v6? Buick website doesn't answer it....

As to power of 3.8, I've got 175000 miles on one and it still runs fast enough to get to 100 mph pretty quick. No troubles whatsoever on it. And gets 30+ mpg on the highway. It's a great engine.

imidazol97

>3.8, I've got 175000 miles on one and it still runs fast enough to get to 100 mph pretty quick.

My 03 will give a 38 mpg on a flat land cruise to the dealer and back at 55 and less at times with one stoplight in a village. A 3800 probably won't do that in gentle, normal driving on interstate with extra weight of the newer car, but it certainly delivers.

bigdaddycoats

Shelton Buick in Rochester Hills, MI.

jb7227

Should be getting my new CX in a few weeks. Ordered on 10/3 and according to dealer printout it was produced on 10/31. (CX Ming Blue/Cashmere, Entertainment Pkg, Driver Confidence Pkg, 40/20/40 bench, Comfort & Convenience Pkg, and upgraded stereo) I will hopefully be able to see it for the first time at the New England Auto Show tomorrow. My impressions from listening to the dealer comments about the ride & drive is that the car is larger in person than it appears. BTW - I checked the Shelton Buick website just now - either they sold both Lucernes right away, or they havent updated their inventory. I was able to find a few on GM buypower, but no prices on the window sticker - even though Edmunds has had the pricing info for a month!

1487

The December issue had a very short write up on the Lucerne. They said the fit and finish was lexus like but the materials werent as good as the Avalon. Shocking assessment, I wouldnt have expected them to say anything different. They did say that the handling was superior to the Avalon. I'm not surprised about that either.

navigator89

http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drives/FirstDrives/articleId=107882

1487

pretty positive overall. I'm not surprised the picked out the missing features. The previous generation Avalon didnt really offer too many exclusive features but Edmunds acts like it has always been the runaway class leader. The new Avalon is much better than the old one and the Lesabre, but it's only been out since last year. The Lucerne is missing some features, but naturally there was no credit given to the Lucerne for offering features like remote start, 18" wheels, Magneride, dual depth airbags, Onstar or heated washer fluid when those features aren't on the Avalon. They mentioned those features (except remote start) but didn't tell you the Avalon is lacking those features. Obviously there were some trade offs if a loaded Lucerne costs about the same as a loaded Avalon. Why can't they just acknowledge that both cars have some exclusive features instead of saying the Lucerne is "missing" stuff? Perhaps some people are willing to trade a telescoping wheel for magnetic ride control? Not that I would expect edmunds to think that way.

imidazol97

An even-handed treatment like that wouldn't maintain the antiGM bias that permeates the auto world these days. Then when someone points out the subtle bias and the damning with faint praise, they are called GM lovers, etc.

fsmmcsi

I certainly have less of a problem with GM only offering the laser cruise control on the Lucerne's platform-mate, the Cadillac DTS, but a telescoping steering column may be essential for taller drivers to obtain a comfortable seating position. I want to move the seat back to have space for my legs, but do not want to sit with my arms straight out, or worse yet have to be hunched forward.

It would cost GM nothing except maybe some brochure and web site update costs to make a running change and offer the telescoping steering column. They should do so immediately.

jbgraham

I agree. Depending on how they have set up the driving position it could be a deal breaker. I'm 6'3", and am not so pleased that Buick would dismiss me as a potential customer.

Although I agree that the Lucerne has some features not available on the Avalon, some of the ones that Buick skipped are big ones for me. Xenon/high discharge lights are something that once experienced become very important to some people, myself included. I don't know if I would want to go back go halogens.

We all get spoiled for certain things. Since I have never experienced the backup sensors, I wouldn't miss them. Perhaps that could be the deal breaker for someone comparing the two vehicles however - and give the advantage to Lucerne. Except for these equipment diffences, the reviews so far are very positive for Lucerne, and that's a good thing in my view - whether I'm a potential customer or not. I have hated seeing GM's slide and am pleased that some of these new vehicles are so competitive in so many ways.

The Azera is another matter though - value, perceived or real, is important to everyone.

62vetteefp

Although I agree that the Lucerne has some features not available on the Avalon, some of the ones that Buick skipped are big ones for me. Xenon/high discharge lights are something that once experienced become very important to some people, myself included. I don't know if I would want to go back go halogens.

I noticed in the latest issue of Consumer Reports they remark that the LaCrosse has excellent headlamp performance. Can someone tell me what they said in the review? They are Halogens but Buick spent a lot of time getting the spread and distance tuned in. Perhaps the Lucerne will also have the same kind of performance? Something to think about.

imidazol97

Buick forgot to include one major feature that Avalon has:

toolate2, "Engine Hesitation (All makes/models)" #2167, 8 Nov 2005 11:39 pm

fsmmcsi

It really makes no sense for GM to keep trying to live in the 1960s and think that they can force a buyer to buy a Cadillac DTS if the Lucerne which is built on the same assembly line does not have certain features available.

62vetteefp

HID's are very expensive. The Lucerne team has to make decisions on what to include because if you include everything the price goes up and you lose your target market.

Now which items you include is very hard to determine. I personally would rather have excellent lights (which the LaCrosse has) which might not be HID and have the saved money in some other item.

Buick is known for comfort and quiet and quality and safety. I love the backup sensors because they help park a large vehicle in tight spots. Of course you could park like the women this morning that used her bumpers on my vehicle to park while I was in the car. :mad: no dmage but she thought nothing of it. Also the remote start for both hot and cold is another comfort item that is wonderful that others do not have. We could argue the merits of every item but you cannot have them all w/o having an expensive vehicle.

I do believe the lack of adjustable pedals OR tele column is a big mistake and have no idea why they are not there.

imidazol97

>force a buyer to buy a Cadillac DTS

I certainly don't see that "forcing" anyone to buy a DTS instead of Lucerne!!! It's a matter of how many people need that option vs other options or features...?????

robchemist

I agree that HID's are completely unneeded. In terms of car lighting, one can obtain equivalent lighting between the HID and halogen with an appropriate lens. For example, assuming that Consumer Reports is reasonably accurate, the Lacrosse halogen lighting is better than other cars with HID's. The only "disadvantage" of the halogen is that it will consume about 3x the power of an HID for equivalent light output. Assuming 150 W halogens, the 2 halogens will consume about 200 W extra power, although the halogen will be slightly lighter due to simpler power requirements. This differences will be irrelevant with respect to the cars gas mileage.

Where a HID is very advantageous, however, is if you bicycle a lot at night (such as myself). Since you provide all of the power, the much lighter battery needed for equivalent lighting is extremely important and useful.

Likewise, I have never seen any need for a telescoping steering wheel (I am 6'2") - I simply adjust the seat to where it is comfortable, and go. The only group(s) of people for whom this feature is probably needed are those with disproportionate arms/legs and body height. Presumably, the a manufacturer chooses a fixed steering wheel/pedal position to be the most comfortable for a typically proportioned human.

jbgraham

I have not yet had the experience of halogens being better than HID's - though I have experienced xenon's that performed more poorly than others. I subscribe to CR online, but could not find any reference of that type. CR did state that the LaCrosse headlight performance was "very good overall". I hope that you are right, and that Buick has designed something superior. I look forward to that.

With respect to the lack of a telescoping wheel - let's hope that Buick's intended clientele for the Lucerene are all "typically proportioned" - and not like the rest of us for whom they designed the telescoping/tilt steering wheel on the LaCrosse!

62vetteefp

The headlight reference is in the summary in the latest auto review CR. Does somebody know what was said in the full review?

62vetteefp

http://autoweek.com/article.cms?articleId=103482

1487

Before telescoping wheels people didn't need them, now if a car doesnt have one it is suddenly off the shopping list. I have never yearned for a telescoping wheel in my life. Hopefull Buick will add it so that the Lucerne can become a best seller. Whatever the Lucerne is missing is apparently essential to the car buying decions of many people here. For the record the Avalon doesn't have standard HIDs and they are only optional on the expensive models.

jbgraham

Thanks for the reality check. It's good to be reminded occasionally that conceit is self-given and we should be very careful with it. I let some irritations rise to the level of importance. Sorry about that. I think I'll chill for a while!

fsmmcsi

While I was happy with my 2002 Mountaineer without a telescoping steering wheel, I simply could not sit comfortably in a Ford Five Hundred / Mercury Montego because it is not offered on those vehicles. While I have driven a 2006 DTS for three days, I have only seen the Lucerne at Auto shows on rotating platforms, so do not yet know if that feature is essential for me or not. By the way, I am 6'1, 192 Lbs, with a 34" inseam and 34" sleeve length, so quite normally proportioned. Whatever the case, with it being such a common feature, and already in the parts bins on the assembly line, it is downright stupid for them not to have offered it. As for vehicle price, why not let the buyers decide how much they want to spend? It is no skin off of GM's nose if they offer all of the features which are on the DTS and not the Lucerne as options, and collect the money when people order them. Don't they like money?

The Lucerne does have many nice features (e.g. the V8, rain sensing wipers, the dimming exterior mirrors, the 40-20-40 front seat option, stability control, OnStar, XM radio, good looks, and so forth).

62vetteefp

http://www.detnews.com/2005/autosconsumer/0511/09/F03-376152.htm

vanman1

Telescopic steering is available on cars like the Malibu so why not Lucerne? Don't care about the headlights and I'd rather have a NAV system I can take into my van, much like out portable DVD player.

Glad to see lots of very positive articles on this car even with a 3800. GM needs this car to succeed and the quality should be primo.

pat

Edmunds review? That's Autoweek. What Edmunds has said so far is at this link: 2006 Buick Lucerne.

1487

No G platform car has ever had a manual tilt and telecope wheel. I dont know the reason for that, but I would assume the tilt/telescope column from the Epsilon cars wouldnt fit in the Lucerne. Even the base model DTS doesnt have a telescoping wheel. The logic behind omitting it doesnt make sense to me, but unless you cant get comfortable it's a not issue. Considering they sold hundreds of thousands of Lesabres without one I think it's safe to say most buyers will be OK with the Lucerne.

imidazol97

With the 10-way power seats I can't believe someone couldn't adjust to comfortable driving position. The telescoping column probably is a collision airbag requirements nightmare too.

alpha01

"The telescoping column probably is a collision airbag requirements nightmare too."

Not at all sure what that means? Lots of cars have telescoping steering wheels, and they are not any more or less safe than those without?

~alpha

fsmmcsi

The Buick site only shows two or three Lucernes in southern CA, even though Automotive News shows that 3,486 of them have been built. Unfortunately, in the past several days I have not been anywhere near the dealer who supposedly has what I may want - a CXL V8 with every option, including the 40-20-40 front seat. I hope that the front seats are better than those in the DTS, which are tight on the sides of the backrest and flat on the bottom cushion (I drove a DTS for three days). Once I can drive one, I'll let everyone know it the telescoping steering column is an issue.

bigdaddycoats

http://www.thecarconnection.com/Vehicle_Reviews/Sedans_and_Coupes/2006_Buick_Lucerne.S180.- A9603.html

rake2

Spoke with a regional rep for GM about the lack of the nav system in the Lucerne. He pointed out that OnStar offers a feature that serves the same purpose, under the Direction and Connections service (as I recall). Basic OnStar is about $200 per year, while the service with the navigation is $400. Seems cheaper than the $2000 it will cost to have the nav system put in by the factory, plus cd updates of the maps, with the only drawback being you won't actually have a map to look at.

priggly

while the service with the navigation is $400. Seems cheaper than the $2000 it will cost to have the nav system put in by the factory

This service costs $660/year in Canada including the taxes.

I'd much prefer the Nav system and quite frankly would not buy the car without it. Quite frankly, if you own a cell phone OnStar is an unnecessary expense and GM is likely hurting their sales by forcing it on potential customers.

62vetteefp

Quite frankly, if you own a cell phone OnStar is an unnecessary expense and GM is likely hurting their sales by forcing it on potential customers.

Here in the states OnStar has linked with Verizon to offer hands free calling using the minutes on your cell phone. Works great. They keep threatening to require hands free systems here to cut down on the accidents.

Also the base OnStar system is great for accidents and also if something happens like you lock your keys in the car. $200 is pretty cheap if you are somewhere dark anc cannot get in the car.

rake2

Bottom line is that it's an option for those who want that service available. Maybe not as nice as having a map on a screen in front of you, but it's probably less expensive and more accurate, given that the cd/dvd for the maps require payment for updates after a certain amount of time, and the in-car navigation may not have the up to the minute information on traffic problems that OnStar should have. Although I think I'd like having the visual confirmation that the nav system has, it won't be a deal breaker.

1487

That review was great, but they didnt mention Nav is coming later in the model year. They made it seem like it wasnt coming at all.

fsmmcsi

We forward set our cell phone to forward to the On-Star number itf there is no answer, then turn it off when we are driving. All you have to do to receive a call is push the button on the mirror. The in-car microphone also allows everyone in the car to converse witht he caller. It is safe and very convenient.

However, Bluetooth would be even better. Chrysler offers Bluetooth as an option on the 300, Magnum, and Charger (and maybe other models), and that would be even better, since our cell phone minutes are far less expensive than the OnStar minutes, and there is no way to forward the On-Star number to another numnber if there is no reception and the call does not reach the car.

I would already own a 300 or Magnum if not for the difficulty seeing out of those cars. Besides Bluetooth, (and Navigation for those who want it), they have the main thing missing from the Lucerne - rear wheel drive.

kcwolfpack59

Sat in and looked over one at a local dealer. They got 3 in and sold them immediately. The interior is much improved, roomier than the current Lesabre, and was high quality.
The car looks better than the photos I have seen. The car looks good from every angle. Elegant and I like it more than a similar Caddy, or for that matter, anything close to the price range.
The one I looked at was a mid level CSX[?]with a V6. The sticker was about 32K, and the options were a $995 paint job and a $1200? or so option package.
I am highly impressed with the overall package. Getting one next summer for sure.
The only dissapointments were that this car was sold and they understandably would not let me test drive, and the hinges on the trunk lid would crush anything under them when closed.

62vetteefp

CXS

fredvh

What is this $995.00 paint job? Is GM charging EXTRA for painting their vehicles now?

bigdaddycoats

BMW, Audi, Saab, Cadillac and others charge extra for so called "premium" paint.