Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Buick LaCrosse



  • dispencer1dispencer1 Posts: 489
    Several people compared the LaCrosse to a Taurus, Lexus, etc. The LaCrosse does resemble a Taurus but it also resembles the present mid-size and full-size Buicks. It looks as if Buick went into the parts bin and threw together what was loose. You have the old oval grille and other bits and pieces. At least they didn't put the silly Roadmaster holes in the hood. The Cadillac 2005 STS illustrates a real design breakthrough and so does the XLR roadster. The LaCrosse just looks old hat. It could be any year from 1997-2004. I can't believe the folks on this list are so enthusiastic about it. I guess Buick wanted to continue to attract the people who bought the Century and Regal and keep the bland rounded Buick "look". It will make a comfortable rental car.
  • 14871487 Posts: 2,407
    yes the lacrosse lacks the compelling design of such class leaders as the camry and accord. The midsize sedan segment is known for avant garde styling.
  • johnclineiijohnclineii Posts: 2,287
    Hmmm. I never realized the Aztec was a midsize.
  • dispencer1dispencer1 Posts: 489
    Why Buick - when they had the opportunity to launch a completely new car - made it look like an old one.
    I understand that the interior is nice and the engines are better than the old 3.1. The car unfortunately just doesn't look either elegant or even sporty. I'm not crazy about the swoopy look of the Camry and Solara (last year's Solara was better looking) but when you put out a new car that doesn't really look like a new car it is strange.
  • johnclineiijohnclineii Posts: 2,287
    Or comforting to the old buyers, which matters not to new buyers when they had been paying exactly ZERO attention to Buick. Midsize buyers are allergic to high style. They do NOT want it.
  • alpha01alpha01 Posts: 4,747
    You do realize that your opinion on styling is just that- an opinion on a purely subjective (not objective) measure? My dad, at the NYIAS, thought the LaCrosse looked "really sharp". He wants an AWD vehicle, and I dont know that hed go back to GM, but that was what he said, nonetheless.

    If the LaCrosse competes in ride, handling, NVH, safety, and reliability- AND is marketed correctly (seem to be doing a good job so far) I think it could be EXACTLY what Buick needs- a good midsize entry, NOT a ground-breaking, crazy hot, Queer Eye avant guarde design. Remember when Ford tried that for the 1996 model year?

  • yurakmyurakm Posts: 1,345
    We have a Regal in our family, and would like to buy a second one.

    The exterior of Regal exactly fits our tastes. A generic car which does not attract attention. Can label it bland, or "such a character". Substance only, no flash at all.

    The best colors are maroon, followed by navy blue. For the same reason - the colors fly under radars. Both of our cars are maroon.

    BTW, our second car is 98 Chevy Malibu, with even more generic exterior.

    Probably, GM knows, that there are millions of peoples with similar tastes, and they make reasonably good customers? Who like discounts and rebates, but let GM save on advertisements?
  • dispencer1dispencer1 Posts: 489
    Actually I think the Regal (and Century) are nice looking cars. I also have a Malibu (a 2001) and a 2003 Deville > I think the 2000-up Devilles were very nice looking -properly proportioned -nicest looking ones since the 1965-67 models. My mother in law (82) drives a '99 Century. I think that getting in is a problem -the roof seems too low -but that is subjective too. I had a 2000 LeSabre. I thought the design of the 1992-1999's was better (I had a '94).
    Anyway - there are lots of people who like the design of the present Buicks. The company has branched out with the new SUV's and the van which are differently styled but I suppose that they know pretty much what Buick mid-size and full size buyers want and will continue to build cars that appeal to them. Who am I to knock success? It would be nice, however, if once in a while Buick tried something different to appeal to a different group of buyers. Remember the Grand National? I think that was the name of the Buick muscle car. The Deville was a 30k mile ex-rental car. It cost about as much as a new LeSabre so I thought it would be nice to try one out. It was certified and came with a 6 year 100k 0 deductible warranty and 4 new Michelins.
  • fastdriverfastdriver Posts: 2,273

    HOW ARE YOU!! Since I never got the Regal, I don't go into the Regal topic here. Glad to see that your cars are holding up well. I agree with you. Not everyone wants edgy styling or look at me cars. GM seems to be doing okay for themselves.

    I will be looking at the new LaCrosse as the lease on my Acura CL-S expires in September. Just not sure if I want to subsidize the oil companies when they play games with their gas prices. Might just get a Toyota Prius and get 50 miles per gallon instead of in the 20's on REGULAR gas!!!


    PS Remember I had that red "Car of the Year" 99 Chrysler 300M! Pics in my profile above! ;-))
  • yurakmyurakm Posts: 1,345
    Hi! Glad to hear you! How are you?

    I am fine. Bought a home since we eat together the Louis hamburgers :-). 3 stents were installed in my heart :-(.

    Both our cars are fine.

    No problems at all with Regal, except it was rear-ended once on Route 15. Nothing serious, only the muffler / pipes assembly and bumper cover were replaced. Just yesterday put a set of new tires @34k miles. Bridgestone Potenza E950.

    The Malibu is a lemon. Replaced transmission in beginning of 2002, @ 47k miles, and replaced half of a/c the last summer. However, when in order, it runs very nice. Malibu was a mediocre car with OEM Affinity tires, but with Firestone Firehawk SH30 it has completely different character. I would say, almost sporty. Put the tires @37k miles. Currently the car has 64k miles on odometer. Good car for commuting through suburbs / city and for short trips. I am using the Malibu at least 95% of time, while the Regal is mostly my wife's car.

    My son is growing, he is 13.5 already. This is why I started to research new cars, and went to the LaCrosse forum. We like our Regal, and would like to buy another one. LC looks as a natural extension. Have some doubts concerning the engine power, though. Any case, I am not in hurry: will need the third car only in 2.5 to 4 years...

    P.S. When we met, you already had the nice Acura, not 300M.
  • yurakmyurakm Posts: 1,345
    I cannot remeber Grand National. We immigrated in 1996.
  • fastdriverfastdriver Posts: 2,273

    WOW! Time flies! You never got to see "Christine" as I called my 300M based on a Stephen King novel/movie! You're lucky! ;-)) The Acura was just 3 years old on 3/28. The transmission went last June and Acura replaced it. It has a 7/100,000 mile extended warranty from Honda. Only have 30,000 miles on the car now. Lease is up in September. Looking forward to seeing and driving the LaCrosse. That's one brand that my brother carries at his dealership in RI.

    When he sends me info on it, I'll scan it and send it on to you. He said that he thought they were going to be ordering them soon.

    Glad you're doing better after your stents. My mom had two stents about 8 years ago and she's doing fine. She's 91 1/2 now and still going strong. Sometimes I think she has more pep than me! ;-))

  • dispencer1dispencer1 Posts: 489
    I'll take back what I said about the LaCrosse. I saw it in person at the Albuquerque Auto Show and it looks really great - very elegant. The photos do not do it justice. It was a really nice looking silver grey.
  • Kirstie_HKirstie_H Posts: 11,042
    dispencer1, that's really great to hear. Very few members have been enamored of the LaCrosse having only seen photos, but what about it was misleading in the photos?


    Need help navigating? - or send a private message by clicking on my name.

    Share your vehicle reviews

  • dispencer1dispencer1 Posts: 489
    The photos need to show the side elevation of the car like the photos of the new BMW 6 Series that are in the auto magazines. A 3/4 view makes the car look compressed and makes it resemble a 2004 Grand Prix. It also seems to accentuate the trim, grille, various stuck on trim pieces, etc. The car is much better looking than either the Park Avenue or LeSabre without the round bulbous look.
  • theo2709theo2709 Posts: 476
    This has always been my favorite angle:*2PV_065048
  • dispencer1dispencer1 Posts: 489
    I agree that the broadside view is the best one but the car actually looks much better in person. Even the front view looks better when you can see the length of the hood. The photos make the hood look shorter for some reason.
  • mbukukanyaumbukukanyau Posts: 200
    Rebates and discounts are actually just a #'s game, the car is worth what you pay for it. not what they tell you you are 'saving'. The only way you'd save is if you never paid anything out of pocket. then no money left you, so you saved, and got something in return.

    So, when GM sell you a car loaded with rebates that is how much GM thinks their own car is worth. they are charging you full price. No savings.

    What do you think of the Velite concept. Its a very hot design if you ask me.
  • dispencer1dispencer1 Posts: 489
    I'm not familiar with it.
  • rctennis3811rctennis3811 Posts: 1,031
    That's my favorite angle too!
  • theo2709theo2709 Posts: 476
    And NO, it does not share the Grand Prix's roofline:

    Look closely.
  • badgerfanbadgerfan Posts: 1,565
    I agree, it does not share the GP's roof line. It shares the Taurus roofline. See post 302. Spittin' image.

    At least they copied a good looking car. I got one in my garage!
  • yurakmyurakm Posts: 1,345
    Thank you for explanation.
  • jchan2jchan2 Posts: 4,956
    This is my favorite angle too! Looks less Taurus like from that angle.
  • drwilscdrwilsc Posts: 140
    I got a little mini-brochure on the LaCrosse at the Buick dealer. I was very disappointed to see that you can not get the flip-and-fold seat on the CXS trim, which is the only trim that has the 3.6 liter engine. I have 4 children and would like the car to fit the whole family (also have a minivan), but I can not see being happy with the old 3800 engine. Why would Buick not offer the combination of the 6 seater and the good engine?
  • theo2709theo2709 Posts: 476
    I agree, the 3.6L should be available on the CXL.
  • 14871487 Posts: 2,407
    they probably figure most buyers who are interested in 6 seats arent too concerned about multivalve engines. I would tend to agree with them on that.
  • yurakmyurakm Posts: 1,345
    I believe, GM will not make enough new engines. As with the late Olds Intrigue: At first the new tech 3.5l engine was available only with the most expensive trim. Later it propagated to all trims.
  • dispencer1dispencer1 Posts: 489
    Why is the 3800 engine unpopular all of a sudden? It has a great reliability record, gets 30-31 MPG on the road, lasts 200k miles or more with standard oil changes. I've had this engine on three Buicks and never suffered any engine-related problems in 120k miles. 205 HP is plenty for passing in the 50-75 MPH range. On the other hand, I haven't had great luck with the 3.4 and 3.1 engines - I'll stick with a winner.
This discussion has been closed.