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
Comments
It does not mean that every ounce of metal in the motor is aluminum.
The valves and springs, piston rings, crankshaft and camshaft, gears, sparkplugs, threaded fasteners, etc. are going to be steel, not aluminum.
Now, I must respectfully disagree with you on the question of power vs torque which provides acceleration. It's been a long time since I was at college so, unashamedly, I googled for a good definition of Newton's second law of motion and came up with this:
"Newton's second law of motion explains how an object will change velocity if it is pushed or pulled upon.
"Firstly, this law states that if you do place a force on an object, it will accelerate, i.e., change its velocity, and it will change its velocity in the direction of the force.
"Secondly, this acceleration is directly proportional to the force. For example, if you are pushing on an object, causing it to accelerate, and then you push, say, three times harder, the acceleration will be three times greater.
"Thirdly, this acceleration is inversely proportional to the mass of the object. For example, if you are pushing equally on two objects, and one of the objects has five times more mass than the other, it will accelerate at one fifth the acceleration of the other."
There you have it - the force we have is called torque - a twisting force {lb ft, by the way - not ft lb}. For comparing car against car, one should consider the torque at the driving wheels (to compensate for gearing differences) and of course the car's weight.
Power, on the other hand, is an entirely different animal, defined as work (ft lb) over time. (You may recall 1 HP = 550 ft lbs/sec) Power is basically what a vehicle needs to acquire energy, both kinetic and potential, and overcome air resistance which will ultimately determine its top speed.
For sure, torque and HP are related in the sense that a big engine will give you lots of both. However, it is torque that gives you the acceleration and personally, I like to get it in the low rev. range say between 2-3000.
Not having to downshift is a big plus. Today I was riding with my father - they were buying a new LCD computer monitor and wanted my input. Fair enough. He has a 2000 LeSabre, which is exactly the type of engine/car we were discussing.
Twice he had to move quickly, and while it did, there was a noticeable "thunk" as it downshifted and revved to 4000rppm. After a full second delay or so since he isn't in the habit of stomping on it to get it to respond. It was very much NOT refined and once it actually was a bit jarring like a big turbo kicking in.
This sort of behavior is what I personally detest. In a small car, you can get around it with a manual transmission and/or a good power to weight ratio and tightly spaced egars. But in the Avalon and GMs with the 3.8L engines - I figure for that much car, it should be at least somewhat refined. This lurching up to speed is purely a matter of gearing. Any jump from 1500-1200rpm to twice that will result in this, no matter what engine it is.
The V8 - no such jarring. Plenty of oomph at low rpms to make a modest speed change without it panicking and going into a lower gear... or two in the case of the Avalon when stomped hard in city traffic. The Avalon should be better and more driveable, but the darn transmission tries to be smarter than you. So instead of getting a 5-4 and get up to speed decently well, it does a 5-3 downshift and you're back in GM-ville.
Gimmie a small V8 every time. (though the Lucerne CXS *could* stand to shed about 400-500lbs)
if this were true - then why are not the best cars out on the roads (in terms of acceleration) not things like diesels? How about because that they don't develop that power, work over time as we agree, nearly as quickly as a gasoline engine? An admittedly extreme comparison, but the the same "laws" apply. But, of course, the larger the engine the more HP and torque, all else being equal, and usually at the expense of fuel consumption.
And yes, we could take all the cars in this group, divide curb weight by HP and come up with a close order of finish 0-60, 30-50, quarter mile or whatever. IMO and based on road tests I've seen - 300C, Impala SS, Avalon, Maxima, Lucerne V8, Azera, 300/Charger 3.5, Impala LT, Kia, Five Hundred, Lucerne 3.8. Interestingly, doing the same on the basis of torque/lb., the results are close to identical, except for a notable exception - the 3.8 Lucerne which by the torque is 'king' rule should do better? And then you can do the same sort of thing with FE, and come up with almost a reverse order of finish EXCEPT for the Avalon and Maxima which DO end up at or near the top of both lists.
Memories - As a former owner of several Healeys, Sunbeams, TRs, a Morgan - Lucas (6V positive ground notwithstanding) was fine until it looked like rain! Couldn't afford a Jag at the time - the XKE one of the most beautiful cars of all time!
The problem with torquey engines is that they run out of gears. But they are quick to get up to speed, that's for sure. OTOH, who really *needs" to go faster than about 90mph? Now, a 6-speed automatic with super tight gearing and a big V8... oh yeah - now we're talking
Why not a 6-speed auto tranny with super tight gearing and a very efficient V6? Many V6s today are able to produce V8-like power and theoretically speaking would give you better MPG.
Lexus has the 8-speed auto tranny on its new LS460.
GM and Toyota are odd in that it has mile-high gears and a high-revving V6(all the power is up at the top end). They need fewer gears if they are that tall. In fact, my old Buick with the Gm 4 speed automatic worked 100% better if I manually locked out overdrive and ran it around town as a 3-speed. 200% better if I manually shifted it between 2nd and 3rd around town.
The Lucerne has enough torque to make use of the tall gears, so it's a good match. Toyota - their gearing is still silly high - it's almost as if they just added a second overdrive gear on their old 4 speed.
BTW - this is why Volvo and BMW had such a good reputation for sporty sedans for so long - they match their engines up with gearing that's purely made for performance. Revs quickly, has gearing to perfectly match - and enough gears to make use of it. All for a couple MPG loss. Well worth it, IMO.
I don't think you had a chance to test out the new Toyota 6 speed with the 2GR. I don't know about the one on Camry but the ones one Avalon and IS350 definitely rev very quick and have a very peppy feeling with it.
Let's say 5mpg better economy out of the Lexus. 12K a year. $3 a gallon for gas(to keep the math simple)
60K miles in the Lucerne(20mpg avg)=3000 gal/$9000 in gas.
60K miles in the Avalon(25mpg avg)=2400gal/$7200 in gas.
Hey - guess what - exactly what you pay extra for the transmission in the Toyota. :lemon:
Except... $3500 is enough to crash anyone's budget. It's really hard to absorb compared to $1500-1800. That's why the mega-speed transmissions make such news. It's a really expensive repair that's a significant chunk of the car's entire value. And the look of a $3500 repair bill on a customer's face - It's a look that you see many first-time Mercedes and BMW owners have at the repair shop. They start wondering if they made the right choice. The next time they go shopping, that silly price they paid for the transmission is first in their mind - so they look harder at the completition. Unless they are made of mney, that is - but those types usually buy a Mercedes or BMW right off.
60K miles in the Lucerne(20mpg avg)=3000 gal/$9000 in gas.
60K miles in the Avalon(25mpg avg)=2400gal/$7200 in gas.
Hey - guess what - exactly what you pay extra for the transmission in the Toyota.
Hey, plekto -- do you realize this is a classic example of false economy?
First, your $1,800 represents annual recurring savings, so you will save another $1,800 (or more, if cost of gas goes up and up) every year of ownership. On the other hand, your transmission "savings" is a one-time event (if at all).
Second, there is no history of Avalon's 5-speed transmission needing repairs; but let's suppose my Avalon transmission will fail some day. For about $1K I bought the 7-year extended warranty that will cover this repair (at Zero cost to me) and will cover as well the many fairly common things that can fail, such as sensors, electronic this or that, or power this or that -- the typical, and expensive, failure issues of any recent model cars.
So for me, having spent what the Avalon was worth, plus $1K for the 7-year warranty, represents a recurrent savings of $1,800 per year and peace of mind for 7 years of ownership. Optionally, if I want to sell my Avalon before the 7 years are up I can count on its deservedly higher market value, since the extended warranty is transferrable.
By the way, I have owned my 2005 Avalon XLS for over 1 1/2 years and driven over 32,000 km so far, and I have spent $0.00 in anything beyond gas -- my first 4 lube & oil service calls were free with the extended warranty package.
I think I'm not alone in buying into this car investment model. It's worked very well for me in owning 3 Toyotas since 1987, and it seems to work well for greatly increasing numbers of Toyota owners, worldwide.
Let's see... $1,800 x 7 years = $12,600 in savings... Hmm...
As far as those 'old fashioned' GM trannies, you had better get them while they're hot anyway - given FE and safety system requirements in place with our erstwhile government, they too will soon be replaced by these more expensive to repair electronic ones. Besides which, the consumer seems to want these 5, 6, or 7 speeds, even if they are not really needed!
Never heard anybody try to justify real fuel savings against assummed repairs, especially with something like a Toyota - kind of amusing...
5 year Cost of ownership 06 Avalon Ltd - $37680.00, excellent rating
5 year Cost of Ownership 06 Lucerne CXS - $48584.00, poor rating.
Cost of ownership includes depreciation, money costs, insurance, repair estimates and fuel usage.
The only car from this group that is cheaper to own out of this group, the Impala LT! The Azera would seem to be a real candidate for a low number as well - too new for actual statistics
You can certainly choose not to believe any of this, but 11 grand sure seems like a lot of money to me! Also 'discovered' the Northstar requires premium (?), turns right at 1850 rpm at 70 (the Avalon 200 rpm more), and road test mpg (C&D) was 15 mpg as opposed to the Avalon's 23 - although I personally don't believe that the Avalon really gets 8 mpg more - probably closer to 5 (away from the test tracks).
'Silly high' IMO, way way off-base, that treasured V8 is only about 200 rpm less at the same speed!
synthetic fluid I would bet most of these trans problems would stop.
Unless your credit rating is 800+ you will never get the advertised 0%.
If MSRP is used as the assumed new car sale price of both cars, but huge discounts from MSRP are only available on the Lucerne, the resale percentages would be way off, favoring the Avalon.
It isn't the Lucerne - it's nearly 20 GM cars with that 4-speed in them. It's no problem to find a shop to swap out the torque converter and get you on the road for $1500 or so by comparison. I used the Lucerne since it has the most thirsty non-Cadillac engine that uses the 4-speed transmission. A fairer comparison would be to use a LaCrosse. Nearly identical MPG as the Camry or Avalon.
I surely don't want to pay up to $2K more for a new transmission. $1500 is nearly impossible to afford as it is when it happens.
The Toyota dealer in this area is like to have added $1000 in pack, mudflaps, windwhield polish, etc., and add on hundreds in dealer fees after the negotiated price on the way out the door, well, just because he 'can.'
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Those overpriced 'option packages' that you are talking about BTW, are generally from the distributor in Toyota's case, not the dealer - and you are right - it is because they CAN. If the 'Detroit' mfgrs. COULD, they might even be making some money!
She still hasn't hinted how much extra they added on after that. She doesn't like to negotiate, didn't want to take her daughter or me to help.
I believe the pricing GM uses is with discount by dealer or rebates in mind. It helps the image, at least it's needed until the blush or halo finally wilts off the foreign, Accord and Camry types, where people believe they are the only perfect car ( and that's finally in question--read the discussions of problems here).
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
As the US big 3 continue to close plants and move production to wherever, it will be interesting to see if the American car buyer begins to understand that the most 'American' cars probably have foreign names!
Sad, but true I afraid, and the funny part is that they continue to sell more and more every month!
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
That's the experience I had the one time I was on a Toyota lot. Sorry, but they couldn't convince me that their car was worth more than a Ford. Yes, their resale would be higher after 10 years . . but not by more than the extra they were charging up front. When you present value out the differnce, buying the less expensive car makes more sense. (Bearing in mind that in MY experience, the Toyotas/Hondas haven't had any better reliability than the Ford products I've owned).
To be fair, I think we ALL do. Some more than others, though, I suppose.
But it's our PERCEPTION of the "image" that differs.
Hi there.. glad to hear you like your Lucerne.. I was in the car market just 2 months ago and like others here, I test drove the Lucerne and then the Avalon and I have to tell you in all honesty, it was a tough decision for me but I ended up with the 07 Avalon. and am now happy that I did..I will admit to you that I think the Buick has a "softer" ride. As far as styling goes, I thought they were about the same, but when it came to comparing specs, that's another story.. first of all the avy comes standard with a 268 hp engine.. you have to pay extra to get the 275 hp northstar.. also, I traded in a cadillac with that northstar engine when I bought my avy, and the reason I was trading it in was because that engine gave me alot of trouble. In fact, at the time I traded it in I had to because the cadillac dealership told me I was getting antifreeze in the cylinders and it would cost me about 3 grand or more to fix it. So while I enjoyed the rush of the power the northstar provided, my previous experience with it told me no thanks. Interior wise, no comparison, in my opinion, the avy interior is much nicer. Not to mention the avy gets superior gas mileage..and theres that Toyota reputation for dependibility that GM products just don't share yet. Just my thoughts on the subject.. good luck with your buick though.. hope you have years of good service from it.
Roland
I am glad you like the Avalon I am just really partial to American cars and it probably shows but I just will not buy a foreign car and put Americans out of work. I know they are probably made i nthe US now for the most part but either or.
Also if you look at Reliability ratings I think it was JD Power rate Buick higher than Toyota as far as Reliability. But when you start getting into the reliability realm of Toyotas and Buicks it is really probably 6 of one half a dozen of the other.
I had 212,000 miles on a 91 leSabre when I got rid of it and I have 170,000 on my 97 right now and never any major issues with either one.
My 91 I had to do a valve cover gasket a fron axle and an alternator in the time i owned it.
my 97 I had to do an intake gasket, an alternator and the ignition has been issue a couple times.
So with those few problems in that amount of mileage I will take it.
Anyway good luck and thanks for the input
Walter
Bob
Walter.. thanks for the kind words...for the most part these forums are pretty good, but every once in awhile you can tell theres a tone of bickering... sort of like "my car is better than yours ". The way I see it is I bought what I wanted and You bought what you wanted... and I sincerely hope we are both happy with our decisions... Like I said in my first post..my decision between the lucerne and the avalon was a tough one for me to make... In fact the weekend I decided to buy the car, My wife and I went to the local buick dealership and drove the Lucerne again... after we got back to the dealership and "got away from the salesman" for a few minutes to talk, my wife said to me, you're going to buy the Lucerne, I can tell... I was so impressed with the car that I was that close to closing the deal..the pros on the buick greatly outweighed the cons as far as I was concernced.. but 30 minutes later I test drove the avalon and it just impressed me more than the Lucerne..but like I said... i was "that close" to driving home the lucerne... as far as you having problems with the northstar.. you should be fine. That engine has been out a number of years now and they've worked the bugs out of it.. Remember my northstar was on a 96 model.. so even though it went to hell in a handbasket on me, it still provided me with pretty much trouble free service for nearly a decade... hard to complain about that... and yes, like you, I loved stepping down on that accelerator and filling the power the northstar provided...Fortunately my little V-6 in my Avalon provides me with almost the same amount of horsepower as your big 8 ( hahahaha,, my engine is better than yours ) JUST KIDDING. Actually I thought the cars were pretty evenly matched with a few exceptions so in my case it really comes down to a matter of personal preference...again, hope you get years and years of good service from your buick. Enjoy your Lucerne my friend.
Roland
20K and way better for that money than any import. So what if it's a year or two old? Let some other fool eat the initial depreciation.
Just read Toyota forums and you can see they now have more issues than Buick or Caddy.
I drove buick for many years and now still have it as my second car. it still rides and knock on wood its supercharger still works trouble free after 12 years. I have maxima, but Buick Park avenue Ultra has almost same power and with GT suspension, it holds car flat on any turn.
But the real gem is the CTS with the 3.6 engine and stickshift. Low price since it isn't the loaded V8 CTS-V model, yet it has the sporty suspension. Like a Lucerne CXS but in a LaCrosse sized package.
18K is quite easy to find. Way better than any new Sentra or Civic. It's a solid, serious car built to compete with the C class and Lexus GS - so bit better brakes, bit bigger engine, bit better seats... than a Civic or simmilar.
Plus, even the cheapest Caddy cruises down the highway like a dream.
People who have a bad image of GM need to look again at their upper-end offerings - a year or two old. Fantastic deals by then.
You meant Lexus IS. The GS is in the same category as the E-class and STS.
Think Toyota's problems are really functions of 2 things:
1) Keeping up with demand - they are having difficulties finding enough qualified help at the factories and,
2) New technologies - Toyotas are full of it, the Avalon engine/tranny a good example. Anything that is new and also complicated will by definition be more troublesome, Toyota brand or not.
Which, brings us back to the "American" manufacturers that have almost exactly the opposite problem - overcapacity, more time than they really need to build a car and almost non-existent with new technologies. There should be a whole lot less problems with that Lucerne let's say that relies on an engine that dates back to the 50s combined with a tranny not quite that old.