Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!

Buick Lucerne

1…1819212324…32

Comments

  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Member Posts: 6,043
    Correct GM decided to leapfrog the competition and go right to the 6 speed and skip all the development costs of the 5 speed. Unfortunately they are still behind!
  • sls002sls002 Member Posts: 2,788
    Motor Trend indicates that the Impala and LaCrosse will be replaced by a mid-sized RWD models that will also make a Camaro platform affordable.

    The Saturn Aura will be a FWD mid-size sedan. It makes some sense that some version of this could be sold at either Chevy_Cadillac or Buick_Pontiac_GMC dealers. Motor Trend's forcasting is not always accurate, but they do seem to get inside information from time to time.

    Buick is getting the Enclave (perhaps called an Estate xxx) in the very near future. Perhaps the 4T75 is for this vehicle. The Enclave may replace the Lucerne.
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Member Posts: 6,043
    Enclave is a HUGE crossover to replace the Rainier/Miniva/Rendezvous. It is bigger than a Tahoe. Could never replace the Lucerne's market. BUT they could kill off the Lucerne due to very low market need (large inexpensive cars are dieing off).

    It is very possible that the LaCrosse moves to the Zeta but doubtful. Chevy has announced that the Impala will get larger and very probable it will be RWD. Sure seems like the Lucerne could be on the same architecture since the LeSabre and Impala used to be on the same architecture many years ago.

    Aura is the Epsilon 2. Malibu will also become Epsilon 2 as will the G6. Just not positive on the LaCrosse.
  • kfrielkfriel Member Posts: 31
    The Saturn Aura will be a FWD mid-size sedan. It makes some sense that some version of this could be sold at either Chevy_Cadillac or Buick_Pontiac_GMC dealers.

    They do already don't they? I thought that the Saturn was to be late to the party on the Saab 9-3 platform? Don't know the correct GM name of it but isn't the Aura the Chevy Malibu Maxx SS and the Pontiac G6 the same platform?

    And one other comment to the Gentleman that said the LuCerne is not attracting NEW customers only current Buick or Caddie owners. Here's one! that's why I'm on this list!
    First time ever I have a keen interest in a Buick.
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Member Posts: 6,043
    Since GM cannot make money on their small cars they are going to be engineered in a market that can. Platforms going elsewhere: Aveo (Daewoo Gamma), Cobalt(Europe Delta), Malibu(Europe, Epsilon 2). I think everything else will remain herewith the possible exception of a Holden platform.
  • celica8celica8 Member Posts: 42
    The large car market is sizzling these days.

    Nearly 9 thousand Buick Lucernes were sold last month, and it is outselling both the Park AVenue and LeSabre from a year ago.

    The Chrysler 300 is selling very well.

    The Caddy DTS outsells the Deville.

    a Lucerne review:
    http://money.cnn.com/2006/04/07/Autos/carreviews/lucerne_taylor/
  • splatsterhoundsplatsterhound Member Posts: 149
    All this speculation about the future of the lucerne seems a bit odd. The car just came out. I just stopped by Buick/Pont/gmc dealer and the sales manager said they are selling tons of the lucerne -- as in dozens a week. He said they're hardly on the lot before they're gone. Granted, this is in the midwest, so, as we know, people around here aren't as uber cool as they are in, say, L.A. :blush:
  • sls002sls002 Member Posts: 2,788
    I had not looked closely at the Enclave's spec's. It is much bigger than a crossover. The length and width are the same as the Tahoe, with the height about 6 inches less. The crossover was defined by the Audi Allroad I think; GM concept of what a crossover should be is warped. The Enclave will probably weigh over 4000 lbs, even with a V6.
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Member Posts: 6,043
    A crossover is a vehicle that is SUV like but based on a car platform. Enclave is what that is. It is the biggest so far that I know of. It will eat into the Trailblazer XL and short Tahoe market. That is why the Trailbalzer XL vehicles were dropped last month (I go the last one!)

    http://www.bankrate.com/brm/news/auto/car-guide-2004/crossovers1.asp
  • sls002sls002 Member Posts: 2,788
    I think that a crossover should be a few inches taller than a wagon based on a sedan. Most large sedans are less than 60 inches tall, so any crossover more than say 65 inches tall is really a full SUV. Now if they manage to make the Enclave V6 less than 4000 lbs, I might reconsider.

    The Audi Allroad also have a driver selectable suspension height that varied the ground clearance. This allowed a low clearance for highway use and a higher clearance for off road use.
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Member Posts: 6,043
    Crossover is not a definition of car or truck. It is an architecture that "crosses over" both types.

    http://www.boston.com/cars/news/articles/2006/03/07/suvs_losing_ground_to_crosso- ver_vehicles/

    Of course you can have your own definition. ;)
  • xrunner2xrunner2 Member Posts: 3,062
    sls 002 stated:

    "It does not make much sense to me to put a 270 hp V6 in the Lucerne and still keep the 275 hp V8. I do think that a pushrod V6 makes sense for the base Lucerne, then perhaps a DOHC V6 for the CXL, and the V8 for the CXS. But if the 240 hp 3.6 is used in the CXL, then the CX should have less hp, perhaps the 3.5 V6. Otherwise, the 240 hp 3.9 V6 to replace the 3800 makes sense."

    When will GM ever learn. Just put the best engine in all Lucerne models, the Northstar V8. Price competitively with Avalon and Maxima. Don't see Toyota or Nissan offering multiple types of engines on their Avalon or Maxima. GM wastes a lot of resources on offering multiple engines.
  • sls002sls002 Member Posts: 2,788
    Well, what I have been thinking is that I would like a nice station wagon. Something like the BMW 3 or 5 series wagon, but with a dealership closer to where I live than any BMW dealership is (over 300 miles). The Dodge Magnum is a possibility, but the Hemi is too big, although probably gets better gas mileage than the V6 Enclave.
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Member Posts: 6,043
    Not much market for a wagon. I remeber seeing an internal report that said it was a market that no one was asking for. A bunch of us "experts" laughed when the Magnum came out so hot and heavy. No, a little while later, the Magnum is no longer selling. those that wanted something different and sporty with a Hemi bought them in the first year. Not functional enough for anybody I guess.
  • sls002sls002 Member Posts: 2,788
    I think that they have sold about as many Magnums as Buick has sold Lucernes. But since there is now a Dodge sedan to go with the wagon, I would expect wagon sales to slow.

    Checking on sales, about 5000 Magnums in March, less than the Lucerne sales, but still quite strong.
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Member Posts: 6,043
    I somewhat agree except that the Lucerne has quite a price range. There is a good sized market that wants a large car and do not care if it has a large, premium engine. On the other side there is a market for a large car with a premium engine and all the bells and whistles.

    I guess the real answer to this is are they selling all base 3800's or all V8's. I would bet it is around 50/50.

    Now if the new base engine was similar in price and performance (say the 3.6 DOHC) to the V8 then no need for both. However if the 3.9 saves the consumer $2500 - $3000 over the V8 then it will sell.
  • jh1977jh1977 Member Posts: 40
    I agree with you, I believe GM should put the new 3.9 Liter engine in the base Lucerne. What I dislike about the current base Lucerne is its a full size car which has less HP and Torque than the base Lacrosse, Buick's midsize car. I would figure that a car brand's base full size car would have more power than its base midsize car. Maybe I'm missing something, can anyone explain it to me? I realize the 3800 Engine has been a great engine for Buick and other GM brands for a number of years, but time has past it by and its time for a new modern engine in the base Lucerne such as GM's new 3.9 Liter Engine. Any comments from you car experts? Sincerely.
  • imidazol97imidazol97 Member Posts: 27,151
    >competition and go right to the 6 speed

    They ought to just go to the 12-speed. That will shut up those who count on numbers as to which is better, 4- or 5-or 6-speed. I don't understand the philosophy that more is better, always...

    2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,

  • m1miatam1miata Member Posts: 4,551
    I assume they are going with a 6 speed next. Isn't there a joint effort between Ford and GM on the new 6 speed transmission. Or is it for smaller / lighter cars? Don't really know why they are using the 4 speed. And yes, I know it works. I had a 3 speed on the Achieve I had, and it worked too. Time marches on however.
    -Loren
  • splatsterhoundsplatsterhound Member Posts: 149
    "Geriatric Gangsta: DUB Pimps Out a Buick for the Aging Hip-Hopper"

    Once again, those 'crazy' writers at Edmunds are sooooo funny. Nevermind that they don't get it. I lived in Chicago. Lots of mean mutha gangstas driving Buicks there. I can totally see some gangstaed out Lucerne prowling down South State Street. Makes about as much sense as putting dubs on a farm truck....er, I mean an SUV. ;)
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Member Posts: 6,043
    It's the same 3800 series III engine. The difference is minimal and could be due to a couple things.

    First the mufflers may be more restrictive in the Lucerne which lowers hp. There may be other mechanical factors also.

    Seconod the LaCrosse came out before the new rules on HP ratings. As you know most of the Japanese got caught with their pants down and had to significantly lower their published ratings. The Lucerne came out after the rules went into effect. With the old method the companies could round up. With the new they state to the nearest digit.

    So it is possible that the Lacrosse measured 197.6 and they chose to round up to 200. With the new ratings the Lucerne with the same rating would have to go to the more conservative 197. The rules say you do not have to change your rating untill the next major or an engine change in a vehicle so there is no reason to have the LaCrosse revise the HP. Besides 3 hp is minimal and you would easily see that kind of variation in the engines coming off the line.
  • rake2rake2 Member Posts: 120
    I've seen more of the V8s than the 6s on the road. Just saw a burgandy one the other day that looked pretty sweet. Still like my red one a bit better though.
  • ab348ab348 Member Posts: 19,090
    I realize the 3800 Engine has been a great engine for Buick and other GM brands for a number of years, but time has past it by and its time for a new modern engine in the base Lucerne such as GM's new 3.9 Liter Engine.

    As far as anyone here has been able to tell me, the 3.9 is based on Chevy's 2.8 V-6 of 1979, with (obviously) considerable updates. But it's still a pushrod Chevy V-6. I would not call this a "modern" engine.

    I think this is a prime example of where GM's bean-counter mentality is hurting -- maybe killing -- the company. The argument is that engines like the truly modern DOHC 3.6 and the predecessor Shortstar 3.5 DOHC V-6 are too expensive to build -- on the order of $1500 per unit more. Most of that cost differential would appear to be capital amortization -- the DOHC engines do not contain thousands of additional parts that the pushrods do not, and they are not cast from unobtainium. But capital amortization is directly related to the production volume upon which it is based, and if you do not make a commitment to building an engine in volume, yes, it will be more expensive, and old technology will always be cheaper. So it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy -- until you make the leap to new technology you will be forever mired a pushrod world. And this may be what ultimately leads to GMs demise, sadly.

    2017 Cadillac ATS Performance Premium 3.6

  • rake2rake2 Member Posts: 120
    I agree with you. Don't think that the majority of people care about it. Also find it funny that the things I read indicate the 4 speed in the Buick is smoother than the 6 speeds in the competition.
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Member Posts: 6,043
    GM builds a huge amount of cars and engines. Engines are built in "modules" that can build so many engines. there will be multiple modules for each engine family. Each module is a huge investment and take time to set up. You do not just build all the modules at once for both costs and manpower reasons. It also takes major development time and costs to fit an engine into an architecture.

    When the Grand Prix and then the LaCrosse were introduced there were not enough modules to meet all the capacity at GM. Also the 3800 was already in both the W and Lucerne architectures so the development costs was nil.

    Maybe not happy with the reasoning but a lot of money was saved. Also traditional Buick buyers love the 3800.
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Member Posts: 6,043
    $1500 is price delta not costs delta.

    Toyota and others charge about $1500 - $2000 to go from a 4 cylinder to a 6 cylinder. Not that many parts differences here either.
  • imidazol97imidazol97 Member Posts: 27,151
    by two testers who don't thing a Lamborghini or Maserati is the only car people should be allowed to buy.

    http://wheels.coxohio.com/wl/Content.jsp?page=content/cruise/review040806.htm

    2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,

  • sls002sls002 Member Posts: 2,788
    You have not explained why you think pushrod designs are not "modern" or good. As far as cost goes, the DOHC design on a V6 or V8 engine requires 4 times as many canshafts which will cost more to machine. There are probably twice as many valves which will cost more to machine. In the case of the 3.6 vs the 3.9 there are twice as many valves.

    However, is the LaCrosse 3.6 DOHC V6 really better performance wise than the 3.9? Lets look at each graph of torque and horsepower:
    3.6: http://media.gm.com/us/powertrain/en/product_services/HPT%20Library/HFV6/2006_36- - L_LY7_LaCrosse.pdf

    3.9: http://media.gm.com/us/powertrain/en/product_services/HPT%20Library/HVV6/2006_39- - L_LZ9_Impala.pdf

    Note that the LaCrosse V6 produces a maximum of 225 lb-ft of torque. The 3.9 Impala V6 has over 225 lb-ft of torque from about 2000 RPMs to about 5500 RPMs, with a peak torque of more than 240 lb-ft. There are in fact two peaks in the torque, a result of a variable length intake manifold. I would guess that the 3.9 would, all things being equal, out perform the 3.6 or at least keep up with it.
  • amkdevileamkdevile Member Posts: 19
    They brought out the positive aspects of the car. Now try it for yourself.
  • b88lazerb88lazer Member Posts: 21
    Anybody here? No new posts in nearly 36 hours!
  • m1miatam1miata Member Posts: 4,551
    Better call OnStar, we have missing people on this board!
  • jh1977jh1977 Member Posts: 40
    I read Ford will have a new more powerful 3.5 Liter V6 engine with a new six speed automatic transmission in two of its large cars, the redesigned Ford Five Hundred/Mercury Montego for the 2008 model year. I hope GM is taking note of this and plan to upgrade the base Buick Lucerne so it can compete with the 2008 Ford Five Hundred/Mercury Montego. I can't see how the base Buick Lucerne in its current form (dated 3800 V6 engine and four speed automatic transmission) can compete with the redesigned 2008 Ford Five Hundred/Mercury Montego.
  • m1miatam1miata Member Posts: 4,551
    The 500 is a good car. I think the Lucerne will win over customer looking for style though. The big Ford, is a bit bland. It makes the Lucerne look radical in comparison. Isn't the Ford and GM 6 speed the same, as in a joint effort in development, of did I dream all this. For engines, they have the V8 used in the Impala or the 3.9 V6 on hand. The Northstar will be pumped up, no doubt. But why not use the DOD engine from the Impala?
    -Loren
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Member Posts: 6,043
    6 speed was developed and I believe built i the same GM plant.

    3.9 would be a great engine or even the 3.6 when the 3800 dies.
  • poncho167poncho167 Member Posts: 1,178
    They have over a six month supply of these odd looking magnum wagons waiting to be sold. I doubt that they sell even half of what the Lucerne is selling, and the Hemi engine is a pig on gas.
  • sls002sls002 Member Posts: 2,788
    They have sold 13000 magnum's in the first 3 months suggesting that the sales rate is about 40,000 per year. This is not a bad rate considering that there is a sedan version of the magnum. I will agree with you that the hemi is a fuel hog, which is why I would not want a magnum or Chrysler 300C.
  • sls002sls002 Member Posts: 2,788
    The Lucerne plus DTS sales are about 37,000 or a 150,000 to 160,000 annual rate. The spring and summer sales rate should pick up some. The RWD Chrysler/Dodge platform has sold about double that number. It is cheaper though.
  • finfin Member Posts: 594
    Never kept up with sales numbers, just read that Accord and Camry are the leaders by far, the popular size and price. But if the Lucerne/DTS can sell 150k cars in a model year, that looks impressive in the larger car market. And more impressive if you factor in the price of the CXS and DTS models. Right? Or do they need to sell more to be successful? Sounds like good sales to me. :)
  • sls002sls002 Member Posts: 2,788
    Back when GM was making money, LeSabre + Park Avenue sales were about 200,000; DeVille added another 100,000; Pontiac and Oldsmobile (Bonneville and Aurora) were close to 100,000. These were all on the same platform. I don't know what GM's expectations are for the DTS and Lucerne, but I think less than 200,000 for the pair is not profitable.
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Member Posts: 6,043
    It's profitable as long as they keep the ATP up. If they have to puton $4000 rebates then probably not profitable.

    Then again with thelosses last year is anything profitable at GM? Hopefully they will get costs out this year!
  • sls002sls002 Member Posts: 2,788
    Profits depend on sales volume. Rebates are an expense that require greater sales volume to pay for. I think GM would be profitable if they could get sales in the US over 5 million vehicles, depending on the level of rebates.

    Like I said above, I don't know what the expectations are for the Lucerne and DTS. Both cars are on the same basic body with the surface sheetmetal somewhat different. My guess is that they expect the old LeSabre and Park Avenue owners to consider the Lucerne. However, I think GM's upper management may also expect the Aurora and Bonneville owners to look at the Lucerne too. That is not an unreasonable assumption, but how many Pontiac or Oldsmobile owners are really going to look at a Buick? Still, Buick and Pontiac are generally now a combined dealership, so getting the Pontiac owners into the Buick dealership is easy. Oldsmobile owners are probably going to end up there too, or perhaps a Chevy dealer.
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Member Posts: 6,043
    Everyone is very pleased with Lucerne sales. Hope they can keep it up.
  • edkleinedklein Member Posts: 34
    Have you guys seen the DUB edition on the front page of the news? Personally, I think it looks pretty sharp and doesn't really strike me as "gangsta". More like James Bond. After all, with the Enclave concept rolling on 22's, putting them on the Lucerne doesn't look out of place to me.

    I gotta tell you, I'm a 33 yr old guy and I'm really liking the style that I see coming out of Buick here lately. Up to now, I figured I was pretty much locked in to a Sienna or Odyssey for my next vehicle in a few years, but I'm going to give the Enclave a serious look for the family vehicle and this Lucerne I think bodes well of what the production Enclave stylying will bring.

    I've had a chance to since in the new Camry at the Houston Auto Show a few months back and that thing is just ugly inside and out and the Accord styling has done nothing for me for the last two generations. I think if GM can't get the "import only" crowd to at least step into the showrooms, GM could finally make it back.

    How you get those people whose car vocabulary starts with Honda and ends with Toyota into those showrooms is the challenge that GM needs to focus on.
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Member Posts: 6,043
    By Alex Taylor III
    April 7, 2006

    NEW YORK – It takes me only a few minutes to figure out whether I'm
    comfortable in a new car. Sure, familiarity helps, but so do good
    ergonomics, intuitive controls, fine materials, and accommodating seats.

    The 2006 Buick Lucerne felt as comfortable as an old sweater from the
    moment I climbed into it, and my appreciation only grew after logging close
    to 300 miles on the odometer over the span of 36 hours. This is one
    well-thought-out machine.

    Does liking a Buick make me an old fogey? I hope not -- both for my sake
    and for General Motors'. Buick has been taking a beating lately because of
    fears that it is dying along with its customers.

    There's some truth to that. Buick buyers are among the grayest for any
    brand, with a median age of 65, and as they move to that great parking lot
    in the sky, their children and grandchildren are moving on to other
    nameplates. Short of cash, GM has accelerated Buick's decline by diverting
    scarce resources elsewhere, leaving the division with a hodgepodge of
    vehicles that are long in the tooth, badly cribbed from other models, or
    both.

    With the 2005 LaCrosse, its first shot at reviving Buick, GM failed to add
    enough spice, but it has cooked up a winner with the Lucerne. The recipe is
    the same: Take an existing platform (in this case the Cadillac DTS) and
    give it a new look. The difference is the attitude.

    The Lucerne has a rakish stance -- new for Buick -- and seems to be leaning
    slightly forward on its tires. Its metal skin is wrapped tightly around the
    frame, especially in the rear fenders, and it's devoid of ornamentation.
    The front end is forgettable -- the gaping Buick grille evokes no emotion
    of any kind, and the headlamps are nondescript -- but the rest of the car
    looks stylish and contemporary. Fake portholes, an amusing retro touch,
    identify it at once as a Buick.

    Sliding behind the wheel, I immediately noticed that Buick has channeled
    Toyota's knack for making intuitive switches and controls. A special award
    goes to the audio system, which allows you to toggle effortlessly between
    AM, FM, and XM Satellite. It became quickly indispensible during my drive
    in a part of upstate New York that is starved of radio signals. One
    complaint: The headlamp/wiper stalk, which seemingly populates everything
    in the GM lineup, is a bit too familiar.

    The Lucerne comes with a V-6 standard, but the V-8, Buick's first in a
    decade, is the way to go here. It's GM's proven Northstar engine, and it
    puts out 275 horsepower, enough to push the Lucerne to 60 miles an hour in
    7.6 seconds. For a front-wheel-drive car, the Lucerne tracks through
    corners with a minimum of fuss and never feels unstable. This is a big
    sedan, yet it's responsive enough to be fun to drive. The base sticker
    price for the V-8 version: $35,256. The CXS test model I drove, with
    iridescent sharkskin paint, temperature-controlled seats, and other
    goodies, came to $38,480.

    In its struggles for survival, GM has introduced several new models that
    were supposed to save the company but failed to live up to their billing.
    Almost no hype surrounded the industry launch of the Lucerne at the end of
    2005 -- the car appears in dealerships this month -- but it delivers a
    near-perfect blend of brand, concept, and execution and offers a bit of
    hope for GM's future.
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Member Posts: 6,043
    edklien, what is you opinion on the other Buick-LaCrosse? Relative to Camry/Accord/Lexus ES.
  • splatsterhoundsplatsterhound Member Posts: 149
    Just saw another picture of it. Pretty nice lines. Seriously. Compare it a MB550 and see if more than 10 percent of people on the street could really tell it apart. The lucerne is a big sled with style. The only thing in the looks dept are the Chrysler 300, a BMW and the MB. Two of the three are $$$$$$$ and the 300 has take it or leave it driving dynamics (sucks gas, limited visibility, cool but real retro style). The Lucerne looks so much better than the Avalon, which strikes me mroe and more like a Shamu-style early 90s Caprice: fat body, narrow wheel-set.
  • m1miatam1miata Member Posts: 4,551
    Well actually the gas mileage is the same between the Chrysler 300C and the Lucerne V8. 17/25

    What is different:
    Lucerne 275HP and 295# torque FWD
    300C 340HP and 390# torque RWD

    Lucerne has more glass area, which is a plus for visibility and having a more open area feel inside. The interior is richer looking on the Lucerne. Buicks make better used car buys. Both cars can look equally silly with bling-bling wagon wheel sized wheels. Looks like we are slipping back in time to the early 1900's. 16" to 17" are more than adequate and let's say tasteful. The Lucerne is not an IRL car for the big oval. Whatever turns ya on :D -Loren
  • bryanbryan Member Posts: 198
    Wow, you captured me perfectly. I currently own an '03 Aurora 4.0 and an '04 Bonneville GXP. I really like both cars. I really like the V8 engines in both. While they are similar cars in a lot of ways, the driving dynamics of each are very different.

    I usually have two cars at any one time, and have been known to have three or even four for a short time! However, you are correct--my next car will be a Lucerne CXS. I've built it on-line, gone over the brochure several times, and I'm just waiting until I can justify. That usually doesn't take me long once I make up my mind. ;)
  • sls002sls002 Member Posts: 2,788
    I owned a 98 Aurora, which I traded for a 2002 Seville LS. I find the larger 4.6 liter engine better, even with the more fuel efficient gearing, for power. Fuel consumption is about the same. I think that the CXS was designed for a firmer ride and better handling, basically what Oldsmobile tried to sell the Aurora as. Before I owned the Aurora, I had a 95 Riviera, which I liked better in many ways than the 98 Aurora.
  • poncho167poncho167 Member Posts: 1,178
    It may be rated the same, but this engine and Chryslers in general give bad mileage.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles