Did you recently take on (or consider) a loan of 84 months or longer on a car purchase?
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
Options
General Motors discussions
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
(Hyundai "VCR" Azera vs. Lucerne)
Rocky
Ah, C'mon, rocky, give me a break here!!
Am I still a moron IYO? :surprise:
With the improved power a upgraded suspension, it whipped the Avalon in back to back tests(dealers across the street from each other) like(insert analogy of choice).
Felt like a 8-10 year old Mercedes S class. Sure, it's not a NEW S class, but even then the S500 was one of the top ten cars in the world at the time. For Buick to even get that close a decade later - it's no lemon of a car by any means.
Now it will make Rocky really cry when he reads about the new Lacrosse;
"Pros
Smooth and quiet ride, powerful 3.6-liter engine in CXS model, available six-passenger seating.
Cons
Unimpressive handling, some low-grade interior materials, unsupportive seats, tight rear legroom, noisy base V6, stability control limited to CXS.
What's New for the 2006 Buick LaCrosse
For the 2006 Buick LaCrosse, head-protecting side curtain airbags and antilock brakes are now standard on all models."
For the 2006 models they put in some basic safety features, probably so it would be acceptable in a crash test.
I actually like your comments Rocky....never boring!
2017 MB E400 , 2015 MB GLK350, 2014 MB C250
Rocky
Rocky
Rocky
If ya like the Lucerne, calmly wait a couple of years, and buy the V8 car for about half the price. Should be low mileage cars, rarely driven over 65 MPH. Great used car buys.
-Loren
-Loren
OTOH What is that tinament ya'll call Hyundai going to be worth in 2 years ? 1/4th it's price :surprise:
Rocky :P
-Loren
Loren,
Why will a used Lucern only be driven 65 mph and under + mostly low mileage ? :confuse:
Now in two years time, I would say we could find unknown gremlins running around inside the Sonata, which over the past two years has proven reliable to date. Anything can happen in a couple years time. That also goes for GM, which may selling cars like hot cakes, or may be as hard to sell as a Mitsubishi. Who knows!
Now the question here on this forum is one of style. Lucerne may have more style than the Japan and Korean makes, but not by far. There is nothing really 100% knock out about the looks, nor is it really all that unique. It is pleasing enough. Not bad. Actually, the 2005 Monte Carlo has more uniqueness to it.
-Loren
I am glad I do not have to look at the exterior of my Sienna while driving or it would have never been purchased.
GM "crossover" vehicles are almost as ugly as my Sienna. If my decision had been based on exterior styling only, the Mazda MPV would have been tied with DaimlerChrysler minivans for 1st choice...with the Odyssey close behind.
Hey, you may be right?
Rocky
Actually, the Duratec 2.5/3.0 line was developed in the mid 90's for the Contour/Taurus. The 3.0 Vulcan 60 degree OHV v6 was introduced in '86 and has soldiered on with minor updates. Regardless, my wife has a 500 and the 3.0 Duratec, while quick reving, is certainly not anywhere near the top of the class in terms of power & NVH. What was good (being generous) in 1995 isn't so good in 2006.
Rocky
The 3.3 L G6DB version was introduced with the 2006 Sonata. It produces 237 hp (175 kW) at 6000 rpm and 228 ft·lbf (306 N·m) at 3500 rpm.
made out of soup cans? Well for all we know it could blow up or only last a year, but odds are it is going to be one heck of a superior engine compared to the dinosaur line. I guess the advantage of old engines in a line of cars is knowing they at least work to a certain degree. Poor Japan and Korea makes have to make something modern. Gee, don't ever want to see those modern engines. Or is it GM which don't? Well some don't
Now we will here about how Hyundai, Honda, or Toyota can not build as good as engine as the GM 3.8 V6, and blah, blah, blah. All right already, the 3.8 V6 was good cheap HP for say the Camaro. Got good gas mileage, and provided 200HP to the rear. That is good. Was better at the time than the Mustang. Hey, it works. But really now, the time has come for at least the top line cars to have more.
Wonder why Subaru and Porsche are the only ones making the boxer engines? Costly? Where problems?
Just curious.
Subaru, now there is an example of how NOT to use styling to save a company. What's up with those strange noses, and will the Impreza ever impress?
-Loren
Rocky
They are simply still behind everyone else.
BTW the 3.3 "Weed Whacker" you call a engine, sounds like my weed whacker at full song. ZZZZZZZZZZZZiiiiihhhhh :P
Hyundai copied GM's 3.8 V-6, because they wanted to have a real engine. They also copied GM 3.3, but their was a big difference in the contruction of the two. Wanna know what the major factor was ?
GM had UAW workers making there engines,
"Ain't I a Stinka"
Rocky
The quality seems to be rising with every passing year. Long term durability is something I have no way of telling. That said, I have never had a GM large or smaller car last more than a few years - usually good for 3 to 5, though some had quite a number of problems from the first month on. Some were better, but simply wore out, leaked water, paint going, and well ya know, no longer looking as good as a ten year old Japan make.
It appears that GM cars are lasting longer, and most on the road are looking better after a couple - three years on the streets. So perhaps GM and Hyundai need a second chance. Both were pretty crappy a few years back. So give them both a chance. Oh yeah, Hyundai is selling for less, with a real warranty. Maybe I would give GM a chance by just buying used. Best price, and short warranty, so what's the difference - save 35 to 50% :shades:
Well I gotta have something to do when I come down from warp speed.
But on a serious note, I didn't have the urge to speed as often if I had something like the voice recognition system and DVD-Audo to occupy my mind.
Rocky
P.S. I'll take the GM product new.
Rocky
http://www.edmunds.com/new/research/buick/lacrosse.html
2017 MB E400 , 2015 MB GLK350, 2014 MB C250
It will be here in about 15 months. Expect a 4.6L V8 in the 330-350 hp range and maaaaaybe a base 3.8 V6 around 275hp.
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Features/articleId=106903
Hyundai copied GM's 3.8 V-6, because they wanted to have a real engine. They also copied GM 3.3, but their was a big difference in the contruction of the two.
Son, you need to go back to bed. The Lambda V6 has nothing to do with any engine GM ever made, except the cylinder count.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyundai_Lambda_engine
This was most amusing reviews I read of late "Floaty ride, unathletic handling, long braking distances, laughable fuel economy, below-average fit and finish, cruise-ship turning radius. "
NorthStar on Lucerne offers V6 performance with V8 fuel economy. I particularly liked "laughable fuel economy" comment on Lucerne - the Avalon was 50% more fuel-efficient and faster by over a second to 60.
It's 44ft turning radius makes Suburbans and Hummers look downright maneuverable. Stopping distance for 0-60 in 138 feet is too high for the reflexes of most Buick buyers (over 65) - I wouldn't put my grandpa in one.
The Avalon has a nice interior, but its instrument panel reminds me of my Mom's circa 1965 Lady Kenmore washing machine. The Azera on the other hand is nothing more than a fake Camry. Geeze, faking a Camry? That makes as much sense as faking a Bulova watch. I used to like Hyundai when they were something of an iconoclast with the XG300 and last-generation Sonata. The current Sonata is a rip-off of the Accord. If I want a Japanese car, I'll get the original and not a Korean imitation. Current Hyundais are no better than those Chinese rip-offs of the Mercedes E-Class.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/23/automobiles/autospecial/23AUTO.html
The Highlight of which says:
"While Hyundai has just brought out its own competitor, the Azera, the main rival in price and image remains the Toyota Avalon, which was redesigned last year. The Avalon is also a nice sedan, but aside from Toyota's sterling reputation its main advantage seems to be its slightly better fuel economy."
The NYTimes author preferred the 3.6 V6 Lucerne. The NYTimes author saw fit to compare the 3.6 V6 Lucerne mpgs (Edmunds, of course, compares the V8 Lucerne to the Azerra and Avalon V6 mpgs. Why?) to the competitors, where it did much better than Edmunds reports.
Edmunds does an alright job with the true market value and round up function. I've found the reviews to be away from what the majority reviewers say.
But I suppose people here will latch onto whichever perspective fits the particular axe they wish to grind.
Class action lawsuits are a dime a dozen. Toy was a defendant in the Sludge affair. Honda was named in class action lawsuits involving cracked windshields and a gearing issue.
Class action lawsuits almost always turn out to have no merit. They go away after the deep pocket defendant bribes the plaintiff attorneys.
The end result, IMO, ends up being a car that compromises a bit and falls in between the two cars it replaces. On one hand, the base Lucerne is nicer than the LeSabre was. I'd say about the only shortcoming is that the Lucerne is heavier, so the 3.8 doesn't move it as quickly as it did the LeSabre. I've seen 0-60 times of around 9.5 seconds for the V-6 Lucerne. In contrast, I've seen 0-60 as quick as 8 for the 2000-2005 LeSabre.
But as a replacement for the Park Avenue, the car just seems a bit downscale somehow. Even though it exhibits better fit and finish than the Park did, and offers V-8 power, I just think that a car in the Electra/Park Ave class should still be a bit more prestigious somehow. I tend to equate the V-8 Lucerne as about the modern-day equivalent of a V-8 LeSabre.
#3896
Here are some highlights;
Over the years, we've driven cars that disappoint, cars that irk, cars that thrill. We've even sampled a few that made us laugh. But the 2006 Buick Lucerne CXL V8 is the only car we've ever driven that has caused us physical pain. The cooling part of the package was fine, but using the seat heaters turned the Buick's front seats into torture devices. Now we know what it's like to sit on an open flame.
The last Avalon we tested was even quicker. Buy a Lucerne with the standard V6 and you should expect to be shut down by the ice cream truck.
Also, the power steering quit after about an hour! GM has a long way to go to survive with cars like this.
2017 MB E400 , 2015 MB GLK350, 2014 MB C250
You made reference to a 3.6 Lucerne in your post about fair comparisons between the Buick and some Asian competitors. I didn't think that Buick offered the DOHC 3.6 V6 in the Lucerne.
Didn't Buick take the curious step of offering the pushrod 3.8 GenIII engine in the base model and the Northstar for high end models? If this is true, I can understand why comparisons were made between the Northstar equipped Buick and the V6 competitors. A V6-to-V6 comparison wouldn't be fair.
By the way, I have driven a Lucerne V8 and a Toyota Avalon. The Buick is more comfortable and better looking. Choosing between the two would be difficult.
The NYTimes author appears to feel the 3.8 is a good engine and a good match to the V6s in the competitors.
By the way, the NYTimes author got higher combined gas mileage from the V8 than Edmunds as well.
First off, I do like the Lucerne, but I want more than adequate when spending $30k plus.
I do not know a whole lot about this particular Times writer. I do read the Times regularly. From my experience, I think the author is clearly saying the engine and drive train meet his expectations for the car.
Again, he drove the Avalon equipped near the same price. In his opinion, the two cars differed primarily in the two makers' reputation.
I really do not have too much of an opinion myself. The only FWD vehicle I could see paying more (and even there, not much more) than 30K for would be the 9-3 SportCombi Aero. When I start looking at cars over 30k, the CTS and 3 Series come across as far more compelling.
I suppose if I were one of these executives who need to be driven about I would look at the Lucerne. You can get a Towncar for not much more, however.
Not much meat as far as gas savings or pricing.
-Loren
As for the Japanese style of the Lucerne, about all I can see is that the front-end vaguely recalls the '95-99 and '00-03 Maxima, although I always thought those cars looked slightly Buicky in the front, even back then. And the taillights faintly recall a Mazda6 or Acura RSX, although they also fainly resemble a Cavalier or a VW Passat as well. And at a quick glance, sometimes the Lucerne roofline makes me think of the previous style (1999-03?) of Acura TL. Not a direct rip off of any of these styling elements, but just enough to be similar.
Sure , they'll sell some , but there are many better choices out there.That's the case with 90% of what GM produces. Lutz and Waggoner just continue to sing a happy song. This revival for Saturn will go about as well as Buicks big re-vamp. Lots of hype, but once the initial splash is over, there's little or no ripple effect. Once again billions were spent with nothing to show for it. Corvette,Escalade, and the maybe 2008 Camaro are not enough to save this dinosauer. Bill C.
If you regularly drive with 4 adult passengers or some seriously big people, the larger size of an Avalon or Lucerne make a difference. An executive who travels about with computers and blue prints, etc., might like the larger back seats as well.
For the most part, these big FWD sedans seem like relics to me.
All the '06 SKYs and Sosltices are apparently sold already.
The SKY, Aura, and Prevue all received a lot of praise in the New York Press during the Auto Show.
A tall driver who occasionally carries passengers in the back seat, and doesn't like feeling knees in his back, will also appreciate a larger back seat! That's the main reason I like a big, roomy car.
Also, IMO, the actual external dimensions of, say, an Avalon versus a Camry or a Lucerne versus a LaCrosse are negligible. You get a lot more interior room, but not that much more exterior bulk, so to me it's a no brainer. And in the case of the Buicks, you go from having no backseat to having a spacious one. Trust me, if I'm driving a LaCrosse, nobody is going to want to sit behind me!
-Loren
Good point.
At 6'0", I am only slightly above average height. It is easy for people my height and below to underestimate taller people's need for leg room.