Well considering Buick only sold 3 different models in '09 which 2 of them were sold primarily with an engine and transmission from the Reagan administration it's not much of a surprise. Okay, maybe the 3900 isn't that old but still it's far from cutting edge.
Look at Chevy that sells a full line of GM vehicles and it's way below Honda & Toyota. It's pretty sad that Chevy can't match MB which is way more complex.
There's got to be something wrong with those results - something in the way they define a defect. Jaguar is tied for #1 ?? Now I'm not saying that Jaguar's are the Jaguar of old, but they are very complex pieces of machinery.
A vehicle with more systems and more high-tech systems should have more problems with it. I mean a Kia may have 500 things that can be wrong, but a Jag, MB, Caddy have more systems and parts - maybe 3X more. So if nothing else were different I would expect less expensive brands to do well on defects / 100, versus the sophisticated-complex brands.
GM related news: I saw today in Detroit that Toyota had a new hybrid concept that would be priced below the Prius and get better mpg. It's targetted to compete against the much more expensive Volt. This new wave of small economical cars is bad news for Chevy trying to sell many $40K Volts even with the feds planning on giving buyers a large credit.
How did the power windows last in the Jetta? Did they fall down into the door?
Did the check engine light come on repeatedly like on the gas motors? To the extent the dealership couldn't even find what was wrong over a period of almost a year?
If you found the P/A hard plastics, you certainly won't like the Camry offerings of late and the Accords or their higher models for each.
>Maybe I'm the Lemko of VW ownership, but I never had any issues with the Jetta. But, I only had it for about 16 months and and 35k miles or so.
I certainly don't wish you any bad luck with your Jetta. Over a period of time I expect you'll have some problems, as will most cars.
There's got to be something wrong with those results - something in the way they define a defect. Jaguar is tied for #1 ?? Now I'm not saying that Jaguar's are the Jaguar of old, but they are very complex pieces of machinery.
Yeah, that's an eye opener. Jaguar has been consistently improving over the years, but the Jump from 05 to 09 is substantial. Maybe a statistical blip.
A vehicle with more systems and more high-tech systems should have more problems with it. I mean a Kia may have 500 things that can be wrong, but a Jag, MB, Caddy have more systems and parts - maybe 3X more. So if nothing else were different I would expect less expensive brands to do well on defects / 100, versus the sophisticated-complex brands.
Looking at the chart shows many (not all) of the cheaper brands do not score as well. One thing it could be is demographics. Younger, lower income people buy cheaper cars and I think we all can agree they typically don't take as good of care of them.
How did the power windows last in the Jetta? Did they fall down into the door?
Did the check engine light come on repeatedly like on the gas motors? To the extent the dealership couldn't even find what was wrong over a period of almost a year?
Nope, I think I posted I only had it about 16 mos, but I didn't have any issues. My BIL bought a '00 Jetta (gas) at the same time as I did and his went 4 years w/o any trouble, he traded than in on an 04 Passat, that he had for 3 or 4 years w/o any problems. I have an uncle with an '00 Passat GLS v6 that has nearly 150k on it and he still loves it, though it has had a few issues, but none serious enough to get rid of the car. That's all I know.
If you found the P/A hard plastics, you certainly won't like the Camry offerings of late and the Accords or their higher models for each.
Well a Camry or Accord is not a premium car like a Buick is suppose to be (granted the new LaCrosse looks great inside and out). My dad has an 09 Accord EX-L V6 that I find the interior to be very nice when compared to anything in it's price range. I didn't see anything that looked bad or overly cheap.
Yes most cars will have problems, like I've posted before, I've owned several different makes and I've never had a vehicle go past 60k miles w/o some type of problem that required some type of nonroutine service.
".......Well considering Buick only sold 3 different models in '09 which 2 of them were sold primarily with an engine and transmission from the Reagan administration it's not much of a surprise. Okay, maybe the 3900 isn't that old but still it's far from cutting edge."
First of all, the 3800 dates back to the KENNEDY ADMIN, so get it straight
The Lacrosse had the 3.6 as an option, as well as the 5.3 V8. The Enclave is only available with the 3.6
Also, don't forget that the eng+ tranny are only part of the equation. I assume that the accessories in all three vehicles are fairly complex ( like the elec. auto climate control) as they are marketed as an upscale vehicle, and are equipped as such.
I'm always amused by someone criticizing the 3800 in whatever way they can. It drives great in my two cars. It's couple with a 4-speed transmission that doesn't have Honda wanting to charge $5000 to replace it when the extended warranty on it runs out (for a remanufactured unit, at that). :sick:
I was talking to a retired engineer today and he always has a PA and is lamenting he's having trouble finding another one to buy.
I had a girlfriend with a Jetta. Good thing I had a set of metric tools. She was forever having problems with that car. It ate CV joints for breakfast, suffered transmission maladies, and was plagued with electrical gremlins. Parts were expensive and VW customer service was like talking to Tony Soprano after he caught you with messing with his wife and just ran over his dog.
A coworker of mine bought a new 2000 Jetta. He had the same kinds of problems and traded it at a loss for a 2001 Saturn.
I took an LS430 on a test drive to see what all the hype was about and was disappointed. It felt no different than a lot less expensive Buick Park Avenue.
I'm gonna sound like a heretic for saying this, since I have one, but a Park Ave ain't no Lexus! Now to be fair, it's not priced like one either. My 2000 Ultra probably stickered for around $40K with the options it has, while, IIRC, a 2000 LS400 base priced around $54-55K. And even at that price, some things like a sunroof were optional, although they were probably all built with it, making it a "mandatory option" and adding to the price.
If you like a big, roomy, well-equipped, comfy car, a Park Ave is hard to beat, but it does have its shortcomings. The interior is a letdown for a car at this price point. My 2000 Intrepid MSRP'ed for about half the price, but when you take that into consideration, I think its interior was more impressive. The Park Ave wins out because it has more luxury stuff...memory power seats, heated seats, leather, sunroof, trip computer, dual zone a/c, etc. But everything fit together better in the Intrepid. The hard plastics were kept to a reasonable level, and what there was had a decent texture. The carpeting was high quality. In fact, I'd say it was the same stuff that's in the Park Ave! And then there's little things, like the Intrepid's better cupholders, bigger glovebox, larger door pockets, and so on. The Intrepid had a headlight switch that you twisted...1/4 turn for parking lights, another quarter for running lights. Took some getting used to if you're used to a pull-knob, but it felt like a decent piece. In contrast, the Park Ave has this little stub that you pull up at an odd angle. And it's under-sized...doesn't feel like the pull-knobs of days gone by, but more like tugging on a cigarette.
The Intrepid also had struts to hold the trunk up, versus these mammoth gooseneck hinges in the Park Ave. And yes, I've already squashed a box with them!
Now the Park Ave rides better than my Intrepid did, but the handling is worse. It bounces too much, does get a bit wallowy from time to time, and the steering isn't as precise. Now it's possible, I guess, that since my Park Ave is 10 years old, some things are wearing out. But if that's the case, that's not saying much either, as I'm comparing a 56000 mile Park Ave to a 150000 mile Intrepid!
It's quieter than the Intrepid, and definitely has more kick to it...feeling that supercharger kick in on passing/merging maneuvers is a bit addicting! And it's more comfortable to me...although my Intrepid was a base model after all. I wonder how an Intrepid or Concorde with power leather seats would have compared? And it's also impressively squeak/rattle free. I can sometimes hear the seatbelt rattle against the passenger seat on a bumpy enough road, but that's about it.
It's a nice car overall, and I'm happy with it. If I was in the market for a car in this class back in 2000, I'd still probably take the Park Ave over an LS400 because while the LS400 is a nicer car in many respects, it just wouldn't be worth the extra $14-15K or more to me. And the Buick has one big advantage...interior room. Plus, I just like the way the Park Ave looks. Although in its defense, I think the LS400 was a good looker as well. I didn't really care for the 430 though.
But, as much as I like my Park Ave, I can understand why a lot of people wouldn't. Especially if you're used to a BMW, Benz, or Lexus.
"......I'm always amused by someone criticizing the 3800 in whatever way they can. It drives great in my two cars. "
I agree. While I enjoy the 3.6 in the new car, it doesn't have that low end punch of a 231 (then again, the 231 in my old '75 Apollo had no punch either. 105 hp). I understand paying good money for a car with a 50 year old engine design can be a turnoff, but had they reengineered it much like they did the SBC, it may have more fans.
Speaking of Park Aves, guess what just passed my at Rhawn and Tabor in NE Philly - my old 1988 Park Ave. I recognized it because of the paint and the small dent in the left rear door. Still looks pretty much the same, so it didn't get much worse after almost a year. Maybe they're keeping it inside?
I'm always amused by someone criticizing the 3800 in whatever way they can.
I've got an 07 3800 Series III sitting in the garage. I drive it quite often. I'll admit it's a good engine for a $20k car and I'd probably rather have it than most 4cylinders. But IMO, neither it or the 3.9 have zero business in anything that is suppose to be premium.
I guess I demand more from a car, I certainly don't find the 3800 powered GP to be fast or powerful, it's merely adequate, slower than just about any other v6 car w/o getting any better fuel economy overall.
Honda wanting to charge $5000 to replace it when the extended warranty on it runs out (for a remanufactured unit, at that). :sick:
Whatever, I know far to many people that have high mileage v6 Honda's w/o issues. Not saying they didn't have problems, but I'd rather risk it then settle for something I don't like no matter how reliable it is. I've given the domestic dealers enough of my money.
but a Park Ave ain't no Lexus! Now to be fair, it's not priced like one either.
Thank you. And I agree 100%
If you like a big, roomy, well-equipped, comfy car, a Park Ave is hard to beat, but it does have its shortcomings. The interior is a letdown for a car at this price point.
I agree 100%, but it's a great value to buy used if you like that type of car.
But everything fit together better in the Intrepid. The hard plastics were kept to a reasonable level, and what there was had a decent texture. The carpeting was high quality. In fact, I'd say it was the same stuff that's in the Park Ave! And then there's little things, like the Intrepid's better cupholders, bigger glovebox, larger door pockets, and so on. The Intrepid had a headlight switch that you twisted...1/4 turn for parking lights, another quarter for running lights. Took some getting used to if you're used to a pull-knob, but it felt like a decent piece. In contrast, the Park Ave has this little stub that you pull up at an odd angle. And it's under-sized...doesn't feel like the pull-knobs of days gone by, but more like tugging on a cigarette.
Yep
Now the Park Ave rides better than my Intrepid did, but the handling is worse. It bounces too much, does get a bit wallowy from time to time, and the steering isn't as precise.
I've logged thousands of miles on a P/A and for me it was always a car I preferred ridding in than driving. I did enjoy the comfy seats when I drove it from Florida to Indiana, but it was not a car that encouraged any type of aggressive driving. It's just to numb for me. Kind of how the old Buick's back in the day were. Just not my preference.
t's a nice car overall, and I'm happy with it. If I was in the market for a car in this class back in 2000, I'd still probably take the Park Ave over an LS400 because while the LS400 is a nicer car in many respects, it just wouldn't be worth the extra $14-15K or more to me. And the Buick has one big advantage...interior room. Plus, I just like the way the Park Ave looks. Although in its defense, I think the LS400 was a good looker as well. I didn't really care for the 430 though.
But, as much as I like my Park Ave, I can understand why a lot of people wouldn't. Especially if you're used to a BMW, Benz, or Lexus.
Can't argue with that. I've certainly settled for less many times when it comes to vehicles. I'd love to have a MB GL320CDI. But it's just not worth the extra $30k over a Expedition/Tahoe/Suburban, even though it's nicer in about every way, except maybe reliability, but with my experience with a Suburban and my Expe, I don't know how much worse it could be. $30 g's is just a lot of cash, which i can't justify to spend.
Yes. Too dad 60% of GM's sales come from Chevy which got worse than the industry average after 4 years.
Were it not for Buick, GM would be the laughing stock of dependability...as it is, even the new management are aware and accept they still have problems and MUST improve.
Your Caddy is spotty at best and slipped in the 4 year comparison despite the CTS being the best car from the premier GM division in decades after 2008.
"That's comical. Jesus, the 3800 sounds like a garbage disposal with a spoon in it, compared to the Lexus v8"
Thanks man, I have some coffee to clean off my computer screen now...
Sad to say, but that's exactly how the old 231 in my 1982 Cutlass Supreme coupe sounded after the oil pump gears got ground up from all the metal shavings in the oil (didn't know it at the time, but I think it was from the timing gear starting to go?). Shame too, because that would have been such a nice car, if it wasn't for the engine. And the transmission. And the air conditioner. :sick:
I don't really pay attention to the sound of the 3800 in my Park Ave Ultra. Between the sound insulation and the stereo, and the tall gearing that keeps the engine revs down, I really don't hear it unless I stomp on it. And then, it sounds kinda like the 1989 Cavalier Z24 that one of my friends had back in college. Not the sound you'd associate with a luxury car, but I guess it could be worse.
I bought my 1988 Buick Park Avenue "As Is." No problems. Did they try to sell you an "extended warranty" from a no-name warranty company like Joe's Warranty Company and Fish & Chips? I was once foolish enough to buy one. A few months later I got a letter from a bankruptcy attorney's office as the warranty company went belly up. The assets listed was something like $60K and a Mazda 626 sedan. My share might've been half a pack of Juicy Fruit gum that was in the boss's desk drawer.
Sad to say, but that's exactly how the old 231 in my 1982 Cutlass Supreme coupe sounded after the oil pump gears got ground up from all the metal shavings in the oil (didn't know it at the time, but I think it was from the timing gear starting to go?). Shame too, because that would have been such a nice car, if it wasn't for the engine. And the transmission. And the air conditioner. :sick:
Ouch, those were nice cars but back then the 3.8 was pretty lousy, no power or reliability. The 307 powered Cutlass were the ones to get.
I don't really pay attention to the sound of the 3800 in my Park Ave Ultra. Between the sound insulation and the stereo, and the tall gearing that keeps the engine revs down, I really don't hear it unless I stomp on it. And then, it sounds kinda like the 1989 Cavalier Z24 that one of my friends had back in college.
Yeah, the P/A certainly doesn't have a shortage of sound insulation. I don't think my wife's GP has any. The groaning of the 3800 comes through loud and clear. To be fair, I've certainly driven worse v6s. The 3.4 we had in an 01 Impala comes to mind. Same to more noise and less power. Ford's Vulcan 3.0 OHV v6 is probably the worst we've had to endure. Loud, thrashy, gutless and not very thrifty. It made most 4 cyl cars feel fast. Wife had one in an 03 Taurus. If the A/C was on, you literally had to floor the thing anytime you wanted accelerate to merge into traffic. It might have been okay in '86, but by '03 it was over 10 years beyond its freshness date.
Not the sound you'd associate with a luxury car That's really the point I wanted to make. It would have been interesting if GM would have offered the Northstar v8 in the P/A. To me, that would have transformed the car. It would have IMO really improved the refinement of the car. A $40k car should have a powerplant of a $40k car, not a $20k Impala. I would gladly give up some hwy fuel economy for a premium engine. The 3800 could have been a base engine for those who wanted the fuel economy.
I know it took my grandpa a long time to adjust to the idea of a v6/fwd car. He owned an '83 Delta 88, when it was time to replace it, he wanted no part of the fwd/v6 Buicks in '88, so he went to a Caprice Classic Brougham LS. In '92 he went back to Buick when they offered the Roadmaster. After wearing that out, he finally caved and bought a '96 P/A, and later a '00 P/A. He never did really like having a v6 and I remember him debating for a while before deciding to get the P/A.
Did they try to sell you an "extended warranty" from a no-name warranty company like Joe's Warranty Company and Fish & Chips? I was once foolish enough to buy one. A few months later I got a letter from a bankruptcy attorney's office as the warranty company went belly up. The assets listed was something like $60K and a Mazda 626 sedan. My share might've been half a pack of Juicy Fruit gum that was in the boss's desk drawer.
Ouch, that would suck. I've never cared for extended warranties. I've bought a few and didn't need them and haven't and wished I had. I kind of equate it to a slot machine. The odd are in favor of the house. Plus, I don't like the idea of betting on what I'm buying is going to break.
When I was purchasing(lease actually) my 01 Nissan Pathfinder, the snake oil salesmen (finance manager) was trying to sell me an extended warranty. I flat out told him "why am I buying a Nissan if I'm going to need an exteneded warranty". (this is back when Nissan had a very good reliability rating) I was leasing it for 60k miles and the powertrain warranty from Nissan went to 60k miles. Glad I didn't buy it because it would have been $1k thrown out the window.
>The 3800 could have been a base engine for those who wanted the fuel economy.
That's exactly what Buick did with the Lucerne when replacing the leSabre and the Park Avenue with one platform--not a good thing to try to do because of the great suitability of the leSabre for the buyers who wanted an economical to buy and economical to operate 6-passenger sedan. The Lucerne really didn't satisfy that in the low end model. Their mistake was in the options packages they offered requiring the high end models.
Even then Buick is ridiculed by those who're not driving one for the 3800's being in the luxury Lucerne.
Did they try to sell you an "extended warranty" from a no-name warranty company like Joe's Warranty Company and Fish & Chips?
When I went over the paperwork with the sales manager, he did mention an extended warranty, but when I said I wasn't interested he didn't try to push it any further.
That's exactly what Buick did with the Lucerne when replacing the leSabre and the Park Avenue with one platform--not a good thing to try to do because of the great suitability of the leSabre for the buyers who wanted an economical to buy and economical to operate 6-passenger sedan. The Lucerne really didn't satisfy that in the low end model. Their mistake was in the options packages they offered requiring the high end models.
Even then Buick is ridiculed by those who're not driving one for the 3800's being in the luxury Lucerne.
Back in the late 90's and early '00, the 3.8 would work as a base engine, but by '06 it or the 3.9 doesn't belong in a premium car. They should have used the 3.6/6speed in the Lucerne if they wanted anyone other than a die hard Buick fan to take it seriously.
Doesn't really matter now anyway, it's the lucerne going away? I though I read GM doesn't have a replacement schedule for it and something about the Lacrosse kind of taking over as the premium sedan.
Even then Buick is ridiculed by those who're not driving one for the 3800's being in the luxury Lucerne.
I wonder how well the newer Lucernes perform, with the 3.9 V-6? I think the EPA estimates are about 1-2 mpg better, and with an extra 20-30 hp and more torque, the car has to move out a bit better.
I think Buick did make a bit of a mistake in having the Lucerne take over for both the LeSabre and the Park Ave. IMO, the car sort of splits the difference between the two, where the base Lucerne CX is a bit nicer than the old LeSabre Custom, but the top line Lucerne CXS, even though it has the Northstar these days, just doesn't seem as prestigious, somehow, as the Park Ave did.
I think having all the trim levels on the same platform is what "cheapens" it to me, and I think of the Lucerne CXS as more an equivalent to a LeSabre Limited with a Northstar, rather than a direct replacement for the old Park Ave. Maybe if the top levels of Lucerne were on a longer wheelbase, and called something else, I'd fall for it more.
better cupholders, bigger glovebox, larger door pockets, and so on Are we talking about cars or applainces?I understand better handling, better 0-60 & etc...but number of cupholders....
Are we talking about cars or applainces?I understand better handling, better 0-60 & etc...but number of cupholders....
I just don't like the cupholders in my Park Ave. You have to open the center armrest, and then unfold this clumsy, flimsy-feeling thing, and I don't think it'll hold anything bigger than a regular soda bottle or can. No big gulps or thermoses in there! In contrast, on my Intrepid, a car costing about half as much when new, you just pressed a spot in the console and the cupholder slid out, and was big enough to hold larger objects. And when you were done with it, just push it back into place, and it stowed out of sight.
Now my Intrepid had bucket seats, while the Park Ave has a bench. I dunno how the cupholder worked on the bench seat Intrepids. Or the bucket seat Park Aves, for that matter.
And the glovebox in my Park Ave can barely hold the owner's manual! Now these are minor annoyances, and obviously weren't a big enough deal to keep me from buying the car. But I guess I just expect that, if a $20K car can have good cupholders, then a $40K car should be able to have them, too.
Still, for all my quibbling, I'm happy with the car overall. Sure, there are lots of little details that GM could have tended to better, but in the end it's still a comfortable, roomy, solid-feeling car. Good fuel economy too for something this size. It doesn't do too well on some of my really short trips. The <5 mile commute to work on these cold mornings kills economy. Probably would kill economy on just about any car, but I think my old Intrepid warmed up a bit quicker. On longer trips though, my Park Ave does just fine. I haven't taken it on a good, long highway run yet, but I'm guessing it should break 30 mpg without too much trouble.
Nice looking car... Wonder what they are going to do engine wise, the NorthStar is pretty old isn't it? If they go and stuff some corporate V8 out of a truck like they did with those idiotic SS Impalas and Lucernes, I predict huge FAIL. :sick: Shoot, if it's going to be a front driver, I predict it won't so much as crack the stronghold of the Germans/Lexus nameplates.
From what I've read about it, the XTS is basically a stretched version of the 2010 LaCrosse. It can be configured in FWD or AWD form. The Northstar V-8 won't fit though, so they're predicting the top engine will be some form of the 3.6 DOHC V-6.
If they go and stuff some corporate V8 out of a truck like they did with those idiotic SS Impalas and Lucernes,
I gotta admit, before I bought my 2000 Park Ave, I found this low-mileage 2009 Impala SS that I was curious to check out. I don't really care for the Impala, but this thing seemed like a lot of car for the money, and unique enough that I wouldn't be seeing its mirror image every time I went for a drive.
it is nice looking, the only thing I've read is it will have a 3.6 and a plug in hybrid system that will be short of the power available from MB and BMW etc.
Obviously EPA a regulations coming in the future are dictating what they are going to do. MB and BMW are still developing v8s, looks like Lincoln and Cadillac have given up on them. At least Ford developed an alternative with the Ecoboost v6. My guess is the BMW/MB buyer won't mind paying a gas guzzler tax for the luxury of a high HP, high performing luxury sedan. I don't know if Cadillac or Lincoln has that luxury.
While it's easy for me to sit here behind my keyboard typing that it's stupid to not come up with a new more powerful engine for the Cadillac flagship sedan, other things are at play that will dictate what GM can do.
The Ecoboost v6 finding its way into the f150 by the end of the year is interesting. I'm curious to see how much it will really improve fuel economy and whether the truck buying crowd will be willing to go with a twin-turbo v6 over a v8. It might put it in the 16/23mpg range, which is pretty good while offering similar power to the 5.4 and GMs 5.3 v8s.
"......and then unfold this clumsy, flimsy-feeling thing, and I don't think it'll hold anything bigger than a regular soda bottle or can."
It'll hold a 20 ouncer. When you're done, just leave it there. It's in the perfect spot to pretend you have a stick and row thru the gears (yes I do have a sickness) :P
".....My guess is the BMW/MB buyer won't mind paying a gas guzzler tax for the luxury of a high HP, high performing luxury sedan. I don't know if Cadillac or Lincoln has that luxury."
They don't. Thanks to some foolish "Porsche exemption", they are considered a niche car manufacturer, and are exempt from more stringent emissions, or something to that effect, as they make less than 400,000 cars per year. Because Ford and GM own Caddy and Lincoln, they aren't exempt, as Ford Motor Co. and GM make more than 400,000 cars, even though MB and BMW sell more cars than Caddy and Lincoln.
They don't. Thanks to some foolish "Porsche exemption", they are considered a niche car manufacturer, and are exempt from more stringent emissions, or something to that effect, as they make less than 400,000 cars per year.
I think that has something to do with California. I just priced an S class Benz in my zip code and it showed a $3k gas guzzler tax.
I think there is a difference between the emissions and fuel economy. California is trying to regulate emissions (CO 2), and the argument was it in effect circumvented the federal CAFE laws, which, I believe, Cal. has won the right to do. This exemption is for federal emissions standards.
Things might be different these days, but BMW used to get fined on a regular basis because they didn't meet our country's CAFE standards. However, that's different from the guzzler tax. IIRC, the guzzler tax kicks in when the raw, unadjusted combined EPA estimate of any given car falls below 22.5 mpg. For the most part, only high-priced exotics would get hit by this, but it did catch a few "mere mortal" cars too, like the old Gran Fury/Diplomat/5th Ave, which were rated 16/22 on the window sticker (I think it's 15/20 with the newer 2007+ ratings), but in raw numbers were rated 18/28, and 21 combined. That guzzler tax also got the Cadillac Brougham around 1990-92, if you got the optional 350, but by 1993 I think they got the EPA estimates up just enough to beat it. Both the 350 Caddy and the Mopar M-bodies got hit with a $1000 guzzler tax.
The CAFE fine is different though. In this case, they calculate the combined average for the whole fleet that a given manufacturer sells, and if that average is below 27.5 mpg (it's supposed to go up soon I think), then the manufacturer gets fined something like $5.00 for every 1/10 of an mpg that they fall below that average, multiplied by the number of cars sold.
So, if BMW's CAFE average came in at 26.5 mpg and sold 300,000 cars in the US, they'd get fined $1.5M, or $50 per car. BMW, prior to the recession at least, was profitable enough that they'd just pay the fine, rather than try to meet the standards. I dunno if they can still afford to do that though.
You guys have to be something something I'm not aware of to think that the GM V8s are somehow junk. They've made a lot of engines over the years, but the Northstar series are awesome and nearly bulletproof designs.
Next you'll be complaining that the Corvette doesn't have a V12 in it... Sheesh.
As for it fitting, they managed to fit a V8 in the Lucerne, so it should be possible.
You guys have to be something something I'm not aware of to think that the GM V8s are somehow junk. They've made a lot of engines over the years, but the Northstar series are awesome and nearly bulletproof designs.
I never said it was junk, but the competition all have continued to develop their v8s. Heck Hyundai's 4.6 puts outs out a lot more power and torque, as do similar displacement v8s from Lexus, BMW, and MB. Ford's Ecoboost 3.5 puts out a lot more power. That doesn't make the Northstar bad, but 320hp in the STS is near the back of the pack. Sure, 4.4L supercharged Northstar puts out the power, but it's not available as the STS-V is done.
The Lucerne has a different platform (Sigma?) , which is also shared with the Cadillac DTS. It is designed with V-8's in mind. Similarly the old W-platform (Impala) could also get the V-8. That's because it was designed around the 90-degrees 3.8 V-6. The case is not the same with the LaCrosse/XTS. Not only a V8 can't fit, but also the 3.8L, as both have an angle too wide for the new FWD orientation.
I say if GM is smart enough, they will be working on their own version of direct-injection supercharged 3.6L, like Ford's Ecoboost. This is their only option to get maximum power for this platform. Anyone hoping for a V-8 will be disappointed.
I say if GM is smart enough, they will be working on their own version of direct-injection supercharged 3.6L, like Ford's Ecoboost. This is their only option to get maximum power for this platform. Anyone hoping for a V-8 will be disappointed.
Yeah, everything I've been reading says the v8 will be essentially dead for all but the more expensive cars. Looking at the new Cadillac XTS's hybrid powertrain, maybe that's the direction GM will go to get fuel economy and performance.
Be prepared, China is on the Eastern horizon like the rising sun. I predict China will become the new paradigm in all the world's markets over the next few years. The Chinese have managed to replace Japan as the international manufacturer in electronics and automotive components. Not long ago, you couldn't pick up any product without seeing "made in Japan", now its "made in Taiwan". It has been no accident that those holding the keys of power have chosen China to inherit the mantle as the next super power. Those secret controllers had to dismantle extant power structure by devaluing the dollar in order to take over the world markets. The US will be relegated to research and development status for Chinese products and defense industry. India will be the next IT giant with heretofore innovations in cold fusion and anti gravity technologies. Indeed, a new today is dawning.
Comments
Well considering Buick only sold 3 different models in '09 which 2 of them were sold primarily with an engine and transmission from the Reagan administration it's not much of a surprise. Okay, maybe the 3900 isn't that old but still it's far from cutting edge.
Look at Chevy that sells a full line of GM vehicles and it's way below Honda & Toyota. It's pretty sad that Chevy can't match MB which is way more complex.
Even Ford slipped a place to 13th. Tells me the competition will keep GM at the current market share or below.
Buick can't keep GM alive on it's own.
Regards,
OW
A vehicle with more systems and more high-tech systems should have more problems with it. I mean a Kia may have 500 things that can be wrong, but a Jag, MB, Caddy have more systems and parts - maybe 3X more. So if nothing else were different I would expect less expensive brands to do well on defects / 100, versus the sophisticated-complex brands.
GM related news: I saw today in Detroit that Toyota had a new hybrid concept that would be priced below the Prius and get better mpg. It's targetted to compete against the much more expensive Volt. This new wave of small economical cars is bad news for Chevy trying to sell many $40K Volts even with the feds planning on giving buyers a large credit.
B.U.I.C.K.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
How did the power windows last in the Jetta? Did they fall down into the door?
Did the check engine light come on repeatedly like on the gas motors? To the extent the dealership couldn't even find what was wrong over a period of almost a year?
If you found the P/A hard plastics, you certainly won't like the Camry offerings of late and the Accords or their higher models for each.
>Maybe I'm the Lemko of VW ownership, but I never had any issues with the Jetta. But, I only had it for about 16 months and and 35k miles or so.
I certainly don't wish you any bad luck with your Jetta. Over a period of time I expect you'll have some problems, as will most cars.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Yeah, that's an eye opener. Jaguar has been consistently improving over the years, but the Jump from 05 to 09 is substantial. Maybe a statistical blip.
A vehicle with more systems and more high-tech systems should have more problems with it. I mean a Kia may have 500 things that can be wrong, but a Jag, MB, Caddy have more systems and parts - maybe 3X more. So if nothing else were different I would expect less expensive brands to do well on defects / 100, versus the sophisticated-complex brands.
Looking at the chart shows many (not all) of the cheaper brands do not score as well. One thing it could be is demographics. Younger, lower income people buy cheaper cars and I think we all can agree they typically don't take as good of care of them.
Did the check engine light come on repeatedly like on the gas motors? To the extent the dealership couldn't even find what was wrong over a period of almost a year?
Nope, I think I posted I only had it about 16 mos, but I didn't have any issues. My BIL bought a '00 Jetta (gas) at the same time as I did and his went 4 years w/o any trouble, he traded than in on an 04 Passat, that he had for 3 or 4 years w/o any problems. I have an uncle with an '00 Passat GLS v6 that has nearly 150k on it and he still loves it, though it has had a few issues, but none serious enough to get rid of the car. That's all I know.
If you found the P/A hard plastics, you certainly won't like the Camry offerings of late and the Accords or their higher models for each.
Well a Camry or Accord is not a premium car like a Buick is suppose to be (granted the new LaCrosse looks great inside and out). My dad has an 09 Accord EX-L V6 that I find the interior to be very nice when compared to anything in it's price range. I didn't see anything that looked bad or overly cheap.
Yes most cars will have problems, like I've posted before, I've owned several different makes and I've never had a vehicle go past 60k miles w/o some type of problem that required some type of nonroutine service.
First of all, the 3800 dates back to the KENNEDY ADMIN, so get it straight
The Lacrosse had the 3.6 as an option, as well as the 5.3 V8. The Enclave is only available with the 3.6
Also, don't forget that the eng+ tranny are only part of the equation. I assume that the accessories in all three vehicles are fairly complex ( like the elec. auto climate control) as they are marketed as an upscale vehicle, and are equipped as such.
LOL, I stand corrected.
I was talking to a retired engineer today and he always has a PA and is lamenting he's having trouble finding another one to buy.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
A coworker of mine bought a new 2000 Jetta. He had the same kinds of problems and traded it at a loss for a 2001 Saturn.
I'm gonna sound like a heretic for saying this, since I have one, but a Park Ave ain't no Lexus! Now to be fair, it's not priced like one either. My 2000 Ultra probably stickered for around $40K with the options it has, while, IIRC, a 2000 LS400 base priced around $54-55K. And even at that price, some things like a sunroof were optional, although they were probably all built with it, making it a "mandatory option" and adding to the price.
If you like a big, roomy, well-equipped, comfy car, a Park Ave is hard to beat, but it does have its shortcomings. The interior is a letdown for a car at this price point. My 2000 Intrepid MSRP'ed for about half the price, but when you take that into consideration, I think its interior was more impressive. The Park Ave wins out because it has more luxury stuff...memory power seats, heated seats, leather, sunroof, trip computer, dual zone a/c, etc. But everything fit together better in the Intrepid. The hard plastics were kept to a reasonable level, and what there was had a decent texture. The carpeting was high quality. In fact, I'd say it was the same stuff that's in the Park Ave! And then there's little things, like the Intrepid's better cupholders, bigger glovebox, larger door pockets, and so on. The Intrepid had a headlight switch that you twisted...1/4 turn for parking lights, another quarter for running lights. Took some getting used to if you're used to a pull-knob, but it felt like a decent piece. In contrast, the Park Ave has this little stub that you pull up at an odd angle. And it's under-sized...doesn't feel like the pull-knobs of days gone by, but more like tugging on a cigarette.
The Intrepid also had struts to hold the trunk up, versus these mammoth gooseneck hinges in the Park Ave. And yes, I've already squashed a box with them!
Now the Park Ave rides better than my Intrepid did, but the handling is worse. It bounces too much, does get a bit wallowy from time to time, and the steering isn't as precise. Now it's possible, I guess, that since my Park Ave is 10 years old, some things are wearing out. But if that's the case, that's not saying much either, as I'm comparing a 56000 mile Park Ave to a 150000 mile Intrepid!
It's quieter than the Intrepid, and definitely has more kick to it...feeling that supercharger kick in on passing/merging maneuvers is a bit addicting! And it's more comfortable to me...although my Intrepid was a base model after all. I wonder how an Intrepid or Concorde with power leather seats would have compared? And it's also impressively squeak/rattle free. I can sometimes hear the seatbelt rattle against the passenger seat on a bumpy enough road, but that's about it.
It's a nice car overall, and I'm happy with it. If I was in the market for a car in this class back in 2000, I'd still probably take the Park Ave over an LS400 because while the LS400 is a nicer car in many respects, it just wouldn't be worth the extra $14-15K or more to me. And the Buick has one big advantage...interior room. Plus, I just like the way the Park Ave looks. Although in its defense, I think the LS400 was a good looker as well. I didn't really care for the 430 though.
But, as much as I like my Park Ave, I can understand why a lot of people wouldn't. Especially if you're used to a BMW, Benz, or Lexus.
I agree. While I enjoy the 3.6 in the new car, it doesn't have that low end punch of a 231 (then again, the 231 in my old '75 Apollo had no punch either. 105 hp). I understand paying good money for a car with a 50 year old engine design can be a turnoff, but had they reengineered it much like they did the SBC, it may have more fans.
I've got an 07 3800 Series III sitting in the garage. I drive it quite often. I'll admit it's a good engine for a $20k car and I'd probably rather have it than most 4cylinders. But IMO, neither it or the 3.9 have zero business in anything that is suppose to be premium.
I guess I demand more from a car, I certainly don't find the 3800 powered GP to be fast or powerful, it's merely adequate, slower than just about any other v6 car w/o getting any better fuel economy overall.
Honda wanting to charge $5000 to replace it when the extended warranty on it runs out (for a remanufactured unit, at that). :sick:
Whatever, I know far to many people that have high mileage v6 Honda's w/o issues. Not saying they didn't have problems, but I'd rather risk it then settle for something I don't like no matter how reliable it is. I've given the domestic dealers enough of my money.
Thank you. And I agree 100%
If you like a big, roomy, well-equipped, comfy car, a Park Ave is hard to beat, but it does have its shortcomings. The interior is a letdown for a car at this price point.
I agree 100%, but it's a great value to buy used if you like that type of car.
But everything fit together better in the Intrepid. The hard plastics were kept to a reasonable level, and what there was had a decent texture. The carpeting was high quality. In fact, I'd say it was the same stuff that's in the Park Ave! And then there's little things, like the Intrepid's better cupholders, bigger glovebox, larger door pockets, and so on. The Intrepid had a headlight switch that you twisted...1/4 turn for parking lights, another quarter for running lights. Took some getting used to if you're used to a pull-knob, but it felt like a decent piece. In contrast, the Park Ave has this little stub that you pull up at an odd angle. And it's under-sized...doesn't feel like the pull-knobs of days gone by, but more like tugging on a cigarette.
Yep
Now the Park Ave rides better than my Intrepid did, but the handling is worse. It bounces too much, does get a bit wallowy from time to time, and the steering isn't as precise.
I've logged thousands of miles on a P/A and for me it was always a car I preferred ridding in than driving. I did enjoy the comfy seats when I drove it from Florida to Indiana, but it was not a car that encouraged any type of aggressive driving. It's just to numb for me. Kind of how the old Buick's back in the day were. Just not my preference.
t's a nice car overall, and I'm happy with it. If I was in the market for a car in this class back in 2000, I'd still probably take the Park Ave over an LS400 because while the LS400 is a nicer car in many respects, it just wouldn't be worth the extra $14-15K or more to me. And the Buick has one big advantage...interior room. Plus, I just like the way the Park Ave looks. Although in its defense, I think the LS400 was a good looker as well. I didn't really care for the 430 though.
But, as much as I like my Park Ave, I can understand why a lot of people wouldn't. Especially if you're used to a BMW, Benz, or Lexus.
Can't argue with that. I've certainly settled for less many times when it comes to vehicles. I'd love to have a MB GL320CDI. But it's just not worth the extra $30k over a Expedition/Tahoe/Suburban, even though it's nicer in about every way, except maybe reliability, but with my experience with a Suburban and my Expe, I don't know how much worse it could be. $30 g's is just a lot of cash, which i can't justify to spend.
Were it not for Buick, GM would be the laughing stock of dependability...as it is, even the new management are aware and accept they still have problems and MUST improve.
Your Caddy is spotty at best and slipped in the 4 year comparison despite the CTS being the best car from the premier GM division in decades after 2008.
Regards,
OW
Regards:
Oldengineer
http://www.autoblog.com/2006/02/27/chevy-aveo-performs-poorly-in-european-crash-- test/
:sick:
1. Chevrolet Aveo
2. Chevrolet Colorado
3. Chevrolet Trailblazer
4. PT Cruiser
5. Dodge Nitro
6. Ford Ranger
7. GMC Canyon
8. GMC Envoy
9. Hummer H-3
10. Hyundai Accent
Thanks man, I have some coffee to clean off my computer screen now...
LOL, sometimes I tend to go a little overboard;)
Thanks man, I have some coffee to clean off my computer screen now...
Sad to say, but that's exactly how the old 231 in my 1982 Cutlass Supreme coupe sounded after the oil pump gears got ground up from all the metal shavings in the oil (didn't know it at the time, but I think it was from the timing gear starting to go?). Shame too, because that would have been such a nice car, if it wasn't for the engine. And the transmission. And the air conditioner. :sick:
I don't really pay attention to the sound of the 3800 in my Park Ave Ultra. Between the sound insulation and the stereo, and the tall gearing that keeps the engine revs down, I really don't hear it unless I stomp on it. And then, it sounds kinda like the 1989 Cavalier Z24 that one of my friends had back in college. Not the sound you'd associate with a luxury car, but I guess it could be worse.
Ouch, those were nice cars but back then the 3.8 was pretty lousy, no power or reliability. The 307 powered Cutlass were the ones to get.
I don't really pay attention to the sound of the 3800 in my Park Ave Ultra. Between the sound insulation and the stereo, and the tall gearing that keeps the engine revs down, I really don't hear it unless I stomp on it. And then, it sounds kinda like the 1989 Cavalier Z24 that one of my friends had back in college.
Yeah, the P/A certainly doesn't have a shortage of sound insulation. I don't think my wife's GP has any. The groaning of the 3800 comes through loud and clear. To be fair, I've certainly driven worse v6s. The 3.4 we had in an 01 Impala comes to mind. Same to more noise and less power. Ford's Vulcan 3.0 OHV v6 is probably the worst we've had to endure. Loud, thrashy, gutless and not very thrifty. It made most 4 cyl cars feel fast. Wife had one in an 03 Taurus. If the A/C was on, you literally had to floor the thing anytime you wanted accelerate to merge into traffic. It might have been okay in '86, but by '03 it was over 10 years beyond its freshness date.
Not the sound you'd associate with a luxury car
That's really the point I wanted to make. It would have been interesting if GM would have offered the Northstar v8 in the P/A. To me, that would have transformed the car. It would have IMO really improved the refinement of the car. A $40k car should have a powerplant of a $40k car, not a $20k Impala. I would gladly give up some hwy fuel economy for a premium engine. The 3800 could have been a base engine for those who wanted the fuel economy.
I know it took my grandpa a long time to adjust to the idea of a v6/fwd car. He owned an '83 Delta 88, when it was time to replace it, he wanted no part of the fwd/v6 Buicks in '88, so he went to a Caprice Classic Brougham LS. In '92 he went back to Buick when they offered the Roadmaster. After wearing that out, he finally caved and bought a '96 P/A, and later a '00 P/A. He never did really like having a v6 and I remember him debating for a while before deciding to get the P/A.
Oh, I'd much rather have a V-8 as well. You can get a Lucerne with a Northstar.
Ouch, that would suck. I've never cared for extended warranties. I've bought a few and didn't need them and haven't and wished I had. I kind of equate it to a slot machine. The odd are in favor of the house. Plus, I don't like the idea of betting on what I'm buying is going to break.
When I was purchasing(lease actually) my 01 Nissan Pathfinder, the snake oil salesmen (finance manager) was trying to sell me an extended warranty. I flat out told him "why am I buying a Nissan if I'm going to need an exteneded warranty". (this is back when Nissan had a very good reliability rating) I was leasing it for 60k miles and the powertrain warranty from Nissan went to 60k miles. Glad I didn't buy it because it would have been $1k thrown out the window.
That's exactly what Buick did with the Lucerne when replacing the leSabre and the Park Avenue with one platform--not a good thing to try to do because of the great suitability of the leSabre for the buyers who wanted an economical to buy and economical to operate 6-passenger sedan. The Lucerne really didn't satisfy that in the low end model. Their mistake was in the options packages they offered requiring the high end models.
Even then Buick is ridiculed by those who're not driving one for the 3800's being in the luxury Lucerne.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Yeah, they were that bad, guess the fleet managers probably liked them as they were reliable and cheap.
When I went over the paperwork with the sales manager, he did mention an extended warranty, but when I said I wasn't interested he didn't try to push it any further.
Even then Buick is ridiculed by those who're not driving one for the 3800's being in the luxury Lucerne.
Back in the late 90's and early '00, the 3.8 would work as a base engine, but by '06 it or the 3.9 doesn't belong in a premium car. They should have used the 3.6/6speed in the Lucerne if they wanted anyone other than a die hard Buick fan to take it seriously.
Doesn't really matter now anyway, it's the lucerne going away? I though I read GM doesn't have a replacement schedule for it and something about the Lacrosse kind of taking over as the premium sedan.
I wonder how well the newer Lucernes perform, with the 3.9 V-6? I think the EPA estimates are about 1-2 mpg better, and with an extra 20-30 hp and more torque, the car has to move out a bit better.
I think Buick did make a bit of a mistake in having the Lucerne take over for both the LeSabre and the Park Ave. IMO, the car sort of splits the difference between the two, where the base Lucerne CX is a bit nicer than the old LeSabre Custom, but the top line Lucerne CXS, even though it has the Northstar these days, just doesn't seem as prestigious, somehow, as the Park Ave did.
I think having all the trim levels on the same platform is what "cheapens" it to me, and I think of the Lucerne CXS as more an equivalent to a LeSabre Limited with a Northstar, rather than a direct replacement for the old Park Ave. Maybe if the top levels of Lucerne were on a longer wheelbase, and called something else, I'd fall for it more.
Are we talking about cars or applainces?I understand better handling, better 0-60 & etc...but number of cupholders....
I just don't like the cupholders in my Park Ave. You have to open the center armrest, and then unfold this clumsy, flimsy-feeling thing, and I don't think it'll hold anything bigger than a regular soda bottle or can. No big gulps or thermoses in there! In contrast, on my Intrepid, a car costing about half as much when new, you just pressed a spot in the console and the cupholder slid out, and was big enough to hold larger objects. And when you were done with it, just push it back into place, and it stowed out of sight.
Now my Intrepid had bucket seats, while the Park Ave has a bench. I dunno how the cupholder worked on the bench seat Intrepids. Or the bucket seat Park Aves, for that matter.
And the glovebox in my Park Ave can barely hold the owner's manual! Now these are minor annoyances, and obviously weren't a big enough deal to keep me from buying the car. But I guess I just expect that, if a $20K car can have good cupholders, then a $40K car should be able to have them, too.
Still, for all my quibbling, I'm happy with the car overall. Sure, there are lots of little details that GM could have tended to better, but in the end it's still a comfortable, roomy, solid-feeling car. Good fuel economy too for something this size. It doesn't do too well on some of my really short trips. The <5 mile commute to work on these cold mornings kills economy. Probably would kill economy on just about any car, but I think my old Intrepid warmed up a bit quicker. On longer trips though, my Park Ave does just fine. I haven't taken it on a good, long highway run yet, but I'm guessing it should break 30 mpg without too much trouble.
If they go and stuff some corporate V8 out of a truck like they did with those idiotic SS Impalas and Lucernes,
I gotta admit, before I bought my 2000 Park Ave, I found this low-mileage 2009 Impala SS that I was curious to check out. I don't really care for the Impala, but this thing seemed like a lot of car for the money, and unique enough that I wouldn't be seeing its mirror image every time I went for a drive.
Obviously EPA a regulations coming in the future are dictating what they are going to do. MB and BMW are still developing v8s, looks like Lincoln and Cadillac have given up on them. At least Ford developed an alternative with the Ecoboost v6. My guess is the BMW/MB buyer won't mind paying a gas guzzler tax for the luxury of a high HP, high performing luxury sedan. I don't know if Cadillac or Lincoln has that luxury.
While it's easy for me to sit here behind my keyboard typing that it's stupid to not come up with a new more powerful engine for the Cadillac flagship sedan, other things are at play that will dictate what GM can do.
GM better get on the ball, Ford has been busy.
The Ecoboost v6 finding its way into the f150 by the end of the year is interesting. I'm curious to see how much it will really improve fuel economy and whether the truck buying crowd will be willing to go with a twin-turbo v6 over a v8. It might put it in the 16/23mpg range, which is pretty good while offering similar power to the 5.4 and GMs 5.3 v8s.
It'll hold a 20 ouncer. When you're done, just leave it there. It's in the perfect spot to pretend you have a stick and row thru the gears (yes I do have a sickness) :P
They don't. Thanks to some foolish "Porsche exemption", they are considered a niche car manufacturer, and are exempt from more stringent emissions, or something to that effect, as they make less than 400,000 cars per year. Because Ford and GM own Caddy and Lincoln, they aren't exempt, as Ford Motor Co. and GM make more than 400,000 cars, even though MB and BMW sell more cars than Caddy and Lincoln.
I think that has something to do with California. I just priced an S class Benz in my zip code and it showed a $3k gas guzzler tax.
http://usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/cars-trucks/daily-news/090731-Some-German-J- apanese-Automakers-May-be-Exempt-from-U-S-Emissions-Rules/
The CAFE fine is different though. In this case, they calculate the combined average for the whole fleet that a given manufacturer sells, and if that average is below 27.5 mpg (it's supposed to go up soon I think), then the manufacturer gets fined something like $5.00 for every 1/10 of an mpg that they fall below that average, multiplied by the number of cars sold.
So, if BMW's CAFE average came in at 26.5 mpg and sold 300,000 cars in the US, they'd get fined $1.5M, or $50 per car. BMW, prior to the recession at least, was profitable enough that they'd just pay the fine, rather than try to meet the standards. I dunno if they can still afford to do that though.
Next you'll be complaining that the Corvette doesn't have a V12 in it... Sheesh.
As for it fitting, they managed to fit a V8 in the Lucerne, so it should be possible.
I never said it was junk, but the competition all have continued to develop their v8s. Heck Hyundai's 4.6 puts outs out a lot more power and torque, as do similar displacement v8s from Lexus, BMW, and MB. Ford's Ecoboost 3.5 puts out a lot more power. That doesn't make the Northstar bad, but 320hp in the STS is near the back of the pack. Sure, 4.4L supercharged Northstar puts out the power, but it's not available as the STS-V is done.
The case is not the same with the LaCrosse/XTS. Not only a V8 can't fit, but also the 3.8L, as both have an angle too wide for the new FWD orientation.
I say if GM is smart enough, they will be working on their own version of direct-injection supercharged 3.6L, like Ford's Ecoboost. This is their only option to get maximum power for this platform. Anyone hoping for a V-8 will be disappointed.
Yeah, everything I've been reading says the v8 will be essentially dead for all but the more expensive cars. Looking at the new Cadillac XTS's hybrid powertrain, maybe that's the direction GM will go to get fuel economy and performance.