By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
Now we all know how many question CU's reviews. I could argue, but they do cite some pretty objective issues with the Lucerne:
- Lucerne was the most expensive of the tested cars, at $30,680 (others were v6's as well)
- It was praised for ride, quietness, and controls
- V6 was coarse, lower in acceleration and economy than competitors
- Long braking distances with poor emergency handling
- 44ft turning circle
- four speed automatic
- non-telescoping steering wheel with coarse tilt only
- non-folding rear seat
Those seem like pretty objective measures. Why would anybody pay more, for these deficiencies, in a car that depreciates so rapidly?
I guess the lemmings buying Honyota might actually have some good reasons.
Then there's the Northstar engines, which are easily as advanced as Toyota's designs. Toyota really doesn't have a V8 lineup.
Some Toyota V6s (IS350)have better performace than Northstars(Lucerene), GM is probably decade behind refinement when compared to the V8 on GS/LS430. The upcoming Tundra engine will take it even further.
And of course, there's the pickup and commercial truck lines. Toyota is seriously lacking in these areas by comparison.
Toyota sells tonnes of commercial vehiles with diesel engines in asia.
Honda, IMO, would be more likely to do this - they are in a position behind Toyota, have nearly no trucks, and well, they really don't have any inroads into fleet sales in the U.S.
The way to improve fleet sales is not have R&D and be without best in class products, this way you will be forced to sell to low margin buyers. I doubt Honda is aspiring for this.
Nicely researched. And the objective issues are listed, and the non-objective might include;
*depreciates rapidly,
*that quiet smooth ride is not what most people want today, they prefer a firmer ride and that sensation known as a feel for the road,
*bland looks (buy a 2006 and it looks like a 2000 Buick)
*trust - will it hold up over the long run even if initial surveys are good - and it did fall in latest JD surveys
*will GM warranty faulty seals etc., they haven't in the past?
*many people buy a car (rightly or wrongly) because of the image it denotes - is the conservative, elderly person, image what most new car buyers are looking for?
The only reason for choosing the Buick is because you really believe size matters (had to say that
2017 MB E400 , 2015 MB GLK350, 2014 MB C250
This not necessarily a bad thing considering the age of typical Buick buyers, they would rather wish it was still 2000.
He is getting up in age. This may be his last Hoorah, and he wants it to be a big one. Nissan does have cars that GM needs. Nissan could use help in the truck building arena. It would be interesting. It is kind of amazing that an 8% interest in GM can wield that much stroke.
GM and Nissan company headquarters would be much closer together.
Maybe Ghosn and Kerkorian have been talking this idea over for a while now.
Nissan directors approved exploratory talks and Renault directors are meeting about the issue today. Wonder what GM board members are saying in private?
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060703/bs_nm/autos_renault_meeting_dc
Main thing about the Northstar - it's now 15 years old with no updating! Class leading then, but old tech now. Toyota has Variable Valve Timing for their V-8s. A Lexus 4.3 V-8 will make 290hp vs. the Northstar's 300hp.
For the life of me, I can't see anybody benefitting from a merger with GM. Unless you like flabby dealer networks, duplicated, overlapping brands and pushrods a lot.
You conveniently left out the displacement of Northstar that makes 300HP. Lucerne: 4.6LNorthstar 275hp.
How much torque at 2500?
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
How much torque at 2500? '"
Why don't you ask this question to GM, which installed a less torquy northstart in the uplevel DTS, 286 lb-ft vs 292 lb-ft (base) @ same RPM?
THEY NEED TO REVIEW IT WITH THE V8
What happens is that it's either out-handled by the smaller, less expensive cars (DUH!), or it's out-powered since the base engine is a slug.(DUH)
I've read *one* review to date of it with the V8 and it was glowing. But every other review lists the V8 as a footnote in their base model review. Quote:"more powerful V8 is available". Or something very close.
I guess it would be simmilar to comparing a base Accord VP to a Higher-end Hyuundai. Well, of course the VP is rubbish compared to the Hyundai at that price-point. But that would be heresy and the Honda fanatics would have the magazine practically set on fire.
For GM and Ford, such review tactics are all too common.
- Lucerne was the most expensive of the tested cars, at $30,680 (others were v6's as well)
- It was praised for ride, quietness, and controls
- V6 was coarse, lower in acceleration and economy than competitors
Well, DUH. The 3800 is exactly the same problem you'd face if you put the Accord's 4 cylinder engine in an Avalon. But, hey, let's test it anyways!
- Long braking distances with poor emergency handling.
Well, DUH again. It's easily a few hundred pounds heavier and if you put it side by side against, say, a Towncar, it's pretty comparable. This is exactly like comparing, hey - a Towncar/Crown Vic to these two cars. Which one do you think will have worse braking and handling? Shoot - they might as well compare an A4 to a RX-8. The Buick should be in a totally diferent category. The LaCrosse with the 3.6 engine is a Camry competitor - and for very close to the same price.
- four speed automatic
- non-telescoping steering wheel with coarse tilt only
- non-folding rear seat
The last two issues are meaningless. Nobody cares that a Crown Vic or S500 or a Caddy doesn't have a fold-down seat. It's a huge car and you don't haul things in it besides luggage and so on. - You use your SUV for that.
But as for the automatic - that's right - they didn't drive the V8. The V8 and the 4-speed are a very good match. Plenty of power and torque to compensate for the tall gearing. 5 speeds - well, what's next? 6? 8? Well - how about let's just stick a 13 speed Fuller transmission from a Kenworth in the next Lexus - because it's crap unless it has more numbers on it than the competiton.
Fact: the 4 speed GM costs 1/2 as much to repair as the Lexus. It's also been de-bugged and tested fro a decade or two, and suffers from no problems like Toyota's, since there's no learning mode/AI trying to think for you.
But yeah - $3000 for a Camry transmission. $1500 for the GM. Both will get you up to speeds fast enough to get a ticket - in well under ten seconds. Toyota is going Mercedes/BMW with a million pieces of electronic junk to break on you and GM is sticking with what works.
Before the reviewers start to complain about the lack of a 5 or 6 speed transmission, why don't they actually drive the Lucerne CXS first?
He'll be 90 next year. Which makes it odd in a way that he wants to get involved in a major project that he probably won't be able to see through to completion.
Well, the CXS in particular is $7,000 more expensive than the faster yet thriftier Avalon: 0-60 in 6.0 seocnds and 22/31 mpg. One could surely break the Avalon's tranmission twice and still save money.
I'm sure that the executive officers are not happy. As for the Board of Directors, I'm sure that a certain Rick Wagoner is less than pleased (you can bet that he would be replaced by Ghosn on the Board), while Jerome York is most certainly helping to drive it.
Here's a link to a list of the GM board members. It would be interesting to know something about their personalities and interactions, and how those might affect the outcome.
But, again, it's not an Avalon - it's a DTS for $7K less, with a Buick Logo. Find me a Caddy for $34K after rebates.
Still can not see how the Northstar, other than a fancy name is better than other engines. The Camry V6 is more fuel efficient and pumps out nearly the same HP out of a six. For reliability, I would imagine the V6 Lucerne and LaCrosse to be better values. I am leery of the Northstar.
-Loren
will post figures later
sls002, "Will Styling Save GM?" #6720, 30 Jun 2006 7:55 am
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Ahem....not conveniently at all. I assumed everyone knew the Northstar is 4.6L. Not extraordinary output from that engine at all.
You don't seem to realize that everything that comes out of Detroit is extraordinary. (Ever since I learned to lower my standards, everything is so much clearer to me now...)
-Loren
Ghosen 4 Prez in 2006'
I need to get me a bumper sticker. :P
Rocky
So do you. June is June, not January. It's summer time. Huge inventories. Therefore, this June should have been great too. And previous June had great sales because of the heavy incentives and employee-pricing, and yet, it was still a money-loosing month as they paid people to take the cars away. Great sales yes, but not great month.
Let's admit it, this year's value pricing didn't work with mediocre and unwanted products - the unwanted products being great SUV's like the Tahoe: down 46% this month.
THEY NEED TO REVIEW IT WITH THE V8
Well, it was a 6cyl against other 6cyls. And the Lucerne was already the most expensive car. And it already got poorer fuel economy. Are you saying that the Lucerne is not in the same class as the Camry and Accord?
guess it would be simmilar to comparing a base Accord VP to a Higher-end Hyuundai. Well, of course the VP is rubbish compared to the Hyundai at that price-point.
If the Lucerne is a "higher end car, why doesn't it have better mileage, better handling, folding rear seat, tighter turning circle, and telescoping steering wheel? Would it not be the case that the only additional advantage of the V8 is better power at the expense of poorer gas mileage? And isn't gas mileage a reasonably important consideration in a family sedan?
Well, DUH. The 3800 is exactly the same problem you'd face if you put the Accord's 4 cylinder engine in an Avalon.
IMHO the Accord's 4 cyl is still smoother and less thrashy than the GM 3800.
Well, DUH again. It's easily a few hundred pounds heavier and if you put it side by side against, say, a Towncar, it's pretty comparable.
There are many larger and heavier vehicles with better braking performance. Your comment suggests that as a vehicle gets heavier, it should always get worse in braking performance.
he last two issues are meaningless. Nobody cares that a Crown Vic or S500 or a Caddy doesn't have a fold-down seat.
What does this have to do with the Lucerne? Are you suggesting that the Lucerne is too big to be compared to the other family sedans? So because it is bigger we don't care about adjustable steering column and/or folding rear seats?
Fact: the 4 speed GM costs 1/2 as much to repair as the Lexus.
The review I mentioned did not have a Lexus in it.
And although a 5 speed tranny may cost more, the total cost of the V6 Accord, Camry was still less than the Lucerne.
I cited plenty of objective criteria that might be important to a family sedan buyer that was looking to pay around $30K tops. You try to refute the differences, but I still don't see you admitting why so many buyers are, in fact, buying the Honda, Toyota, and Hyundai alternatives. Buying a V8 Lucerne instead at >$30K is not going to be an option for most of those people.
You suggest a LaCrosse instead. How do you think it would do in objective measures against the Azera, Accord, and Camry, since that may be a better comparison?
Just think how Opel's distribution network could aid Renault in Europe, as one example.
We are headed down the road to having only one domestic automaker, I think. Kerkorian will find a way to make this happen if this is what he really wants, I'm sure. And weren't there rumors that GM AS WELL AS Ford was trying to hook Ghosn earlier this year or late last year?
GM could desperately use a dose of what the turnaround king has to offer, IMO.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
If the Lucerne is a "higher end car, why doesn't it have better mileage, better handling
The Lucerne with the V6 and the standard suspension is still a different car. It's WAY bigger - it's a *large* car and not a midsize one. Seats 6. A Crown Vic would be a fairer comparison.
But add in the magnetic ride suspension and it's no longer in the same class as the others. While the V8 equipped model isn't as "advanced" as some of the other luxury models, their engines and transmission are not even close to being free of gremlins and then agan, there's the price.
Oh - about the Camry. Ye, it'll do 0-60 in 6.0 seconds, but only if you flog it like you're trying to kill it. I mean make the engine scream and the drivetrain vibrate like hell as the thing snaps through the gears. The Camry is like the GM 3.8 in that manner - it's mirror smooth going around town in old-person aceleration mode, but hammer it to GET the listed performance and the illusion instantly drops.
As for the seat -
http://cars.about.com/od/toyota/fr/ag_07camryle.htm
Note the red line in the picture halfway down. It hardly qualifies as even useable as a pass-through. A large enough trunk makes a pass-through not necessarry.
The Lucerne V8 is slightly slower but smooth as an older S-Class. Go drive one - it's a completely different car. So much so that they should have named it something different. Gobs of torque as well.
Camry:
Weight: 3483 lbs
Max Horsepower: 268hp@6200 rpm
Max Torque: 248 ft-lbs @ 4700 rpm
Luggage capacity: 14.5 cubic ft.
Seating: 5
Lucerne:
Weight: 4013 lbs.
Max Horsepower: 275 hp @ 6000 rpm
Max Torque: 295 ft-lbs @4400 rpm
Luggage capacity: 17.0 cubic ft.
Seating: 6
That's a completely different car. Way larger, Way heavier, and a much more powerful engine. Oh - and it can be had with a bench seat and is actually wide enough in the rear to fit 3 adults comfortably.
It's a size larger than the others - and doesn't belong in a comparison of midsize sedans. The reviewers set it up to fail going in.
Any sane person would instead compare a LaCrosse with the 3.6 engine to a Camry or Accord. That's a very fair comparison. Same size, same price, same number of cylinders.
Is there really anything that GM offers Renault in the way of European distribution? I can see this perhaps for North America or perhaps Asia, but I don't know what GM has to offer to Renault in Europe that Renault doesn't already have.
is this an echo of the Daimler Chrysler "merger" we saw in the 90s?
With a few exceptions, I would hope not. As far as I can tell, DCX has had some severe growing pains post-acquisition, and the much-promised "synergies" have largely not materialized. (No surprise there, as synergy is often overhyped and underdelivered.)
I really wonder what Renault hopes to get out of this. If it thinks that this is an opportunity to reintroduce French cars to the US buying public, then I would expect any such plan to fall flat on its face. And while it is understandable that Renault would be chasing synergies in the form of platform and component sharing, I'll bet that trying to create consistency across lines will cost more than it saves. But hey, if Kirk can get GM's hands on the money and the CEO, more power to him.
Got a great lease rate, then at the end of the lease the dealer called me in for a meeting. They said a new lady did the paperwork on my car and the dealership was out $800 and would I be "honest" enough to pay it up because of this poor lady (like I was going to be responsible for her being fired).
Told them the papers were signed and a deal is a deal. If it was reversed and I was out the money would they call to give me a refund?
IMO read the papers over carefully. If they are in order a contract is a contract. I am not a lawyer but I think it all depends on what was signed and the fine print (does it give dates the promotion is in force for example?)
Good luck, G6 is one of the nicer GM's at this point and the convertible is a good lookin car.
Don't give in too easily to there...we'll get you a good lease rate deal...sounds like the contract is a done deal.
2017 MB E400 , 2015 MB GLK350, 2014 MB C250
Not even logical. What's to do with what.
Check the June data for last 5 years or remove last year with the Employee Discounts. Then the sales won't be so out of line. You'll find sales depressed with gas prices but not to the extent that makes dramatic doom is here headlines in the media.
Value pricing was what everyone was yapping for last year. If only, if only, if only Gm did what we suggested the world would be saved. GM has lessened the dramatic price pushes, as they should, and now when sales are down once again we have the know-it-alls with you shoulda, coulda, woulda solutions. It's like the workplace with the Monday morning quarterbacks during the season.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
the Lucerne is a car above the Camry and Accord in market. There's no reason for it to compete directly with them. Compare with the baby Lexuses, e.g.
EDIT:
See post 6840. It explains the lack of comparison clearly.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Just ramblings
Nissan (and Renault) are not in the light truck game. The Titan's many problems would be forgotten if it were replaced by GM's light truck line. The large GM SUV line is also a natural fit.
Nissan and Renault have a great line of small and mid size vehicles. The common rail Renault diesel is a winner if laws here will allow it to be sold in cars.
Nissan and Renault have no premium range. Cadillac would solve this lack very well.
Holy! I thought they were being overly fair and generous comparing a Lucerne to a Camry and Accord.
You think it should go up against a Lexus!!!
On About Cars a Camry gets 4 out of 5 stars (about the small pass through with the folding seat...it is just for skis etc so doesn't need to be like a station wagon, and at least it is there...hard to fit skis in a Lucerne, maybe back shelf to windshield) and the Lucerne gets 31/2 stars, and the LaCrosse which is supposed to compete with the Camry/Honda gets 3 stars and a very poor write up.
LaCrosse review
The "Baby Lexus's" IS and even better ES330 each get 4 stars.
Lucerne and LaCrosse don't match the competition which ever one they are up against!
2017 MB E400 , 2015 MB GLK350, 2014 MB C250
The
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
I would demand some proof in writing that the loan was denied. Assuming that the loan was denied legitimately and there's not much you can do about that, here's my suggestion -- go to a credit union or bank and get a new loan that you can use to payoff the loan that you got (or thought you were getting) from the dealership. The dealer is going to use this as an opportunity to take you for a ride, so cut him off at the pass by getting a loan from somewhere else.
Unfortunately, what has happened to you is not uncommon. I'm just curious -- did you give up a rebate in order to get this financing? All things being equal, I think it's often better for consumers to choose the rebate over the financing, as you won't have any problem collecting the rebate, whereas problems with the financing are not unknown.
Good luck to you.
Now, it does appear as if the 0% financing doesn't apply to 2007 models, but if it's a 2006 model, then your're golden. Nothing they can do. If your state has no "cooling off" period like California and several others, then they're likely hosed.
"Told them the papers were signed and a deal is a deal."
I agree with this sentiment. The thing is - it's a contract. They messed up(or some salesperson realized that they are making $200 on it) and you are under no obligation to change it for them. Since your car is already sold or gone to an auction, most likely, backing out of the "deal" isn't really possible and I'm sure a Judge would side with you. But be prepared to spend a day in court before it's all over.
Their butt is definately getting fried by GM corporate for the mistake. If GMAC won't run the finance through and you have a signed contract, laywer-up and enjoy the ride. Or mention all of this via your lawyer and suggest that it might be worth the dealership's time to have you bring it in - IF you could get a better car for the same terms.(ie - I'm not paying for your mistake)
Say - a 2006 G6 with all the goodies and 0% financing(which is currently ongoing). You get a year older, better optioned out car with the big 3.9L engine, and they save their butts.
EDIT: I hate GMAC. OTOH - if, as the previous posater said, you gave up cash rebates to get the financing, it's a bit greyer - they owe you the rebates in any case, which should pay for the interest on your credit union loan. If it comes to bringing it back, walk in with a check, minus the rebate, and walk out.
I agree with this sentiment.
Unfortunately, that's often not true. The papers may have said that the loan had not yet been made, and was subject to approval. In that case, the buyer left the showroom not with a loan, but with a loan application.
That's one reason to first make sure that your loan was denied by GMAC or whomever. Don't take the dealer's word for it -- have them prove it with official correspondence from the lender explaining the denial, and why it was denied. (In the meantime, I'd be shopping for a new car loan, anyway.) The F&I department is trying to squeeze you for every dime, and if they can rewrite the deal that they thought you had, they get dollar signs in their eyes and push for it.
Their butt is definately getting fried by GM corporate for the mistake.
I doubt that this was a "mistake" -- this stuff is deliberate. Don't be fooled, this is not an uncommon gimmick in the car business meant to extract more money out of the consumer's wallet.
If they pulled a credit report on you at the dealership (and you know that they did), then there is absolutely no legitimate reason for this to have happened, as they are well aware of the credit standards of the lender and are experienced enough to know what can be approved. My guess is that they used the 0% as a way to close the deal, and figured that they could use this "subject to approval" language to hit you for more later.
If Nissan merges with GM it might cost Nissan alot of sales. Any body remember when Ford put a Ford tranny in thr Mazda 626 in the mid 90's? Alot of people swore off Mazda afdter that. The same could happen to Nissan if they do this merger in my opinion.
One thing that he notes that's worth checking: the dealership may now be charging you an extremely high rate, instead of the 0% that you thought that you were going to get. And then they'll try to repo the car if you don't pay this exorbinant amount.
This needs to be sorted this out right away. I'd work on getting a new loan approved from your credit union or bank as soon as possible, and then be prepared for a fight at the dealership. You will have far more leverage if you have the ability to pay them off immediately than you will if you leave your fate in the hands of the F&I manager.