-June 2024 Special Lease Deals-
2024 Chevy Blazer EV lease from Bayway Auto Group Click here
2024 Jeep Grand Cherokee lease from Mark Dodge Click here
2025 Ram 1500 Factory Order Discounts from Mark Dodge Click here
2024 Chevy Blazer EV lease from Bayway Auto Group Click here
2024 Jeep Grand Cherokee lease from Mark Dodge Click here
2025 Ram 1500 Factory Order Discounts from Mark Dodge Click here
Options
Buick LaCrosse
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
http://www.buick.com/lacrosse/features/
Do you like it? Should it be standard on all or standard on the uplevel only or available on the base CX?
Question for Buick/GM - WWLD [What would Lexus do]? "
Answer:there is no trunk lock on the ES330.
I'd still like to see an American nameplate on a Lexus-quality car.
http://www.media.gm.com/division/2005_prodinfo/powertrain/2005%20HPT%20Library/HFV6/LaCros- se/2005_36L_LY7_Buick_LaCrosse.pdf
This shows 200 hp in LaCrosse? Look at the torque curves for the two engines. Look at the horsepower at the higher rpms.
Driving the 3.6 may feel a lot peppier if they use a higher number overall drive ratio. If people pay for a higher engine, they usually would want more pep and lower gas mileage. I'll settle for a 3800 with high mileage and good torque...
Print out the two graphs. Use a ruler to go up to torque and horsepower readings at 2000, 3000, where I do most of my driving. The two torque curves look the same to me.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Torque starts at 195 @ 1000 rpm vs 205 for 3800 at same speed. At 2000 rpm, a speed for many city street speeds the 225 vs 215 approx for 3800 could hardly be differentiated by most drivers.
A difference would come from gearing choices and torque converter ratios to make one seem much different from the other.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
I know I'm comparing a DOHC and OHV engine specs in that argument, but it just seems odd that GM would cease upgrading their bread and butter car engine and let it ride for 10 years. Wasn't it the 95 or 96 model year when the "Series 2" debuted? I know Pontiac came out with series 3 a couple of years ago, but it only seemed to improve performance in the s/c vehicle.
Just curious what those of you that likely know more than I do have to say/think on the subject.
Series 3 added structural oilpan and other NVH improvements.
To take a OHV and change into a OHC would not work. Need to start from a clean sheet.
What is a structural oil pan?
What are NVH improvements?
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
NVH is Noise, vibration and harshness.
I would not be surprised to see the 3800 gone in 4-5 years in spite of what GM says.
Warning ... they weren't exactly thrilled with the LaCrosse ...
I have not tested the car but the handling / steering issues they speak of have not been mentioned here so I wonder about those comments.
They did have good things to say also, it wasn't all bad and the car is actually sitting on an older platform so it's at a bit of a disadvantage there.
Hopefully GM tweaks the car before I look at buying in 2-3 years.
When they updated it in the mid 90's, it was more than competitive, but that began to change and they stood pat with the exisiting #'s...not a bad engine by any means but the public files that away in their quest for all things new and improved.
Thanks...
(This is a direct quote from the article)
"For $33,650, the LaCrosse skimps on the amenities. Our test car came to us without a CD changer, a sunroof or adjustable vents for the backseat. Head-protecting side curtain airbags were part of the deal, but torso-protecting side airbags for the front seat are not even an option."
~alpha
Buick is barely a full size sedan, no mention of that of course. Funny also that they say the interior is sub par in text but praise it in the video?
Obvious that the Toyota would win. Edmunds will always feel Toyota can do no wrong. I think the Toyota is a good car, but it's dull and looking and very expensive.
I would have picked the 300.
So then you must think the LaCrosse CX and CXL are totally underpowered as well, given that they are slower than the Five Hundred. Funny, I dont remember you mentioning that before.
And Edmunds.com is hardly Toyota blinded- check out the Corolla's finish it its last comparison.
Check the specs on the Buick, outside its hardly "barely a full size sedan", its just the poor space efficiency that gets it. (The LaCrosse is longer than BOTH the 300 and Avalon, and wider than the Avalon as well, with its wheelbase but half an inch shorter.)
~alpha
The upcoming Lucerne clearly looks like a rebadged Impala with portholes for much more money.
Things like this are why there is talk about GM dumping Buick or Pontiac.
http://money.cnn.com/2005/03/29/Autos/buick_pontiac_future/index.htm
Longer does not mean bigger in cars. The Corvette is long but it has very little room inside.
;-)
MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR
Need help navigating? kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
Share your vehicle reviews
Whats your point about Edmunds.com not testing the 3800? You stated that the Five Hundred is underpowered. Since it can outrun the 3800 LaCrosse CX and CXL (which are a majority of the vehicles sales), I just called you on the fact that those models must also be underpowered by your logic.
~alpha
Anyone know how new the Avalons platform is? As far as I know the Avalon is a modified verion of the current camrys platform and the current camry is on the same platform as the two previous platforms.
A Camry is a Camry.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Fact is the LaCrosse is just a bit smaller due to its somewhat dated platform and roofline, which particularly cramps the rear seating head room.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Car Overall height Ground clearance Passenger compartment height (Relative height)
Lacrosse 57.4 6.5 50.9 (0.926)
Chr. 300 58.4 5.6 52.8 (0.96)
Ford 500 60.1 5.1 55.0 (1.0)
Avalon 58.5 5.3 53.2 (0.967)
Thus, there is a >7% difference in height between the highest and lowest vehicles. From my perspective, 7% is non-trivial. The other interesting feature, and one that we did not consider before buying the Lacrosse, is the significantly greater ground clearance of the Lacrosse. Relative to the other 3 cars, it has 18% (Chr. 300), 27% (Ford 500), and 23% (Avalon) more ground clearance. While this is disadvantageous in terms of overall passenger compartment height and volume, it can be very advantageous in going over large bumps, sharp driveway cuts, etc.
Note: The ground clearances were found by doing a Google search on "[Car] ground clearance".
You also cannot use head room data as this depends on seat height data.
If maximum ground clearance is your criteria for picking a vehicle, then LaCrosse is your car.
Finally, as I noted in my previous post, we did not consider ground clearance when we chose to buy the Lacrosse - it was primarily its ride and quiteness that attracted us. For the type of roads we occassionally drive on in the hills of Colorado, the higher ground clearance will likely be an added benefit.
The old Avalon also have very upright side glass for more side clearance to the head. It is pretty unattractive from the rear. I think they fixed it on the new one but am not sure.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Just a point...
One reason I never seriously considered the LaCrosse, regrettably, is that there is no AWD offered....
I've found front wheel drive more than adequate with good tires on it. That wouldn't be a reason NOT to buy a car for myself.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Now if you live in the boondocks AWD or 4WD may be needed. Seems like those folks (I used to live out there) have at least one truck in the family for the snow.
I take the point about the 3.6, $33K LaCrosse lacking many expected amenities, as noted in the edmunds article. You have to believe that Buick/GM considered all of the missing content and decided against including it. They are saying, "you customers won't care, anyway, and that money looks better in our pockets". Exactly the opposite of the Toyota mindset.
Whatever platform the Avalon rides on, it's clearly superior, in terms of space efficiency, to that of the LaCrosse. Just sit in one. As to tall cars wasting gas fighting the wind, the 500, 300, etc. seem perfectly capable of 20 to 30 mpg under a light foot. As does the LaCrosse. Even my tall 'n' flat Rendezvous can do that.
What kind of MPG did that AWD Rondy get?
If it was even, GM and the other domestics could put in another $1000 of content. They cannot. Sorry for complaining but IMO things are not going well in this country. We are still the best place to live. Not saying I have any answers but the domestics do have some issues that will be very hard to get over.