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

Buick Lucerne

1141517192032

Comments

  • prigglypriggly Member Posts: 642
    How can this not be a luxury car just because it didnt have two features at launch? Now that it has navigation I presume you are saying it isnt luxurious because it has no HIDs. In case you haven't noticed Acura is the only brand that makes HIDS standard. That means there are $50K+ Audis, BMWS, Cadillacs and MBs riding around with standard halogen lights.

    You are a prime example of the effectiveness of advertising psychology. I am saying the Lucerne is not a luxury car because the Lucerne is not a luxury car! For that matter, neither is the TL, Cadillac, the Audi, BMW's or the presently mechanically unreliable M-B's. These are all upscale automobiles whose respective companies have been successful in marketing them as luxury cars. The number of real luxury cars is properly very small and relegated to the likes of Rolls-Royce, Bentley, Ferrari and cars of this ilk.

    Now as far as the issue of HID's is concerned you can rationalize all you want about how they are not necessary, too bright, etc. The fact of the matter is that they are the next standard in automotive lighting, are being made at least optional by other upscale purveyors of cars, and the more forward-thinking of these are beginning to make them standard, viz. the TL. The others, as previously noted, at least have them as optional as the market adjusts to this innovation just as it has to what previously have been considered "luxury" features in the past such as dual-zone HVAC, sunroofs, and automatic transmissions, all of which (and many more) features were once considered "luxury" and non-essential features.

    The point is that if Buick is going to appeal to a wider perspective of buyers, which it and GM's other divisions must if GM is to avoid bankruptcy, it must discover the concept of offering more and increasingly desired and market-driven features for less money such as Acura has done in the TL. It is very much an issue of exceeding market expectations, not merely meeting them, and at a better price point to boot. In my view, a car which does not even have HID's available at any price in this day and age most certainly is not exceeding my market expectations.

    By the way, cooled seats, 18" wheels and tires and rainsense wipers and remote start are in no way analogous to HID lights. If you live in a hot climate, cooled seats are nice but in the North or in Canada they are a convenience whereas it gets dark everywhere. 18" wheels are a styling trend, one which leads to more expensive tires with stiffer rides and more easily bent wheels when hitting potholes. If one is too lazy to flick a windshield wiper control stalk when one sees water on the windshield, well, what more can be said? Remote start is a convenience, hardly a safety and performance issue.
  • imidazol97imidazol97 Member Posts: 27,122
    >Most newer Japanese cars have stability control standard or as an option on all trim levels

    When is the Honda TL a competitor for Lucerne? The Edmunds shows 300, 500, Marquis, Avalon

    2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,

  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Member Posts: 6,043
    I would say the TL and ES330 are competitors to the CXS model except the Lucerne is a larger vehicle inside and out.

    Competitors are very hard to quantify because you have to look into the minds of many, many consumers. I can easily see a Lucerne buyer looking for a sporty yet comfortable ride looking at the ES. The Lucerne would get a few more points for ride, handling and interior comfort and roominess.

    TL has a very harsh ride and would be a tougher sell as a competitor but I could still see someone looking for a premium vehicle with sportiness looking at the CXS.
  • imidazol97imidazol97 Member Posts: 27,122
    Now I'm with you on the info. That helps me put it into perspective. I'd never shop the Honda TL after test driving an Accord in 03 for my last purchase. But I can see a driver wanting a sportier car than I need or want could consider both despite the size difference just as they might shop the Avalon.

    2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,

  • sls002sls002 Member Posts: 2,788
    It does not matter what sort of headlights you have, you will not see as well as you do in the daytime. Still, I would buy HID headlights if they are available. What Cadillac is doing with HID headlights is most puzzling: standard on the DTS; CTS and STS only offer them as part of an expensive sport package. I did not look beyond this. The Corvette offers HID low beams with halogen high beams :confuse:
  • rake2rake2 Member Posts: 120
    LOL. Now you're not only biased, you're a snob as well.
  • rake2rake2 Member Posts: 120
    You never answered my question as to whether you've actually driven a Lucerne to test the lights. Seems that you probably haven't. Just drove my 2001 SS Camaro last night for the first time at night since I bought the Lucerne. The difference in the lights is remarkable, both low beams and high beams.
  • prigglypriggly Member Posts: 642
    You never answered my question as to whether you've actually driven a Lucerne to test the lights. Seems that you probably haven't. Just drove my 2001 SS Camaro last night for the first time at night since I bought the Lucerne. The difference in the lights is remarkable, both low beams and high beams.

    I've driven the Lucerne CXS but not at night.

    Specifically, how are the Lucerne's halogen lights better than the Camaro's?
  • finfin Member Posts: 594
    To those of you who have one and drive daily:

    We went to the dealer again. It had rained hard shortly before we arrived. When we opened the front doors we found a lot of water in the weatherstrip V channel rubber seal on the door sill. Soaked a leg getting in. When this rubber V strip gets dirt in it from everyday use, it looks like even more of a problem.

    Anyone else notice this? A problem? Or not. It did not appear the doors could have been left partly open during the rain. Thanks.....
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Member Posts: 6,043
    I have driven neither the Camaro nor Lucerne but have spent considerable time developing the headlights on the LaCrosse and other GM vehicles. Sometime in the late 90's/early 2000's GM revised their lighting philosophy to be more european. This is due partially to the fact that GM started using european headlight assembly suppliers.

    The europeans use a distinctive hockey stick pattern that has a very distinctive cutoff at the horizontal plane with a kick up on the rh side. Before that the beams were a bit more rounder with the center of the beam directly forward of the driver. It can take some getting used to when you drive in the country (dark everywhere) and on hilly roads with the new system. Above this horizontal line it is pitch dark and as the car bobs this horizontal cutoff moves up and down. With the old way there was no distinct cutoff and light lit up higher but faded off. Hope this makes sense.

    With the HID's you must follow this pattern or you will blind/haze oncoming traffic.

    A little technical here now. A light bulb only puts out so much energy/light. How you project it makes a big difference. You could make a pencil beam and put light down a mile like a spot light but this would be very dangerous. The new horizontal cutoff lets the designer use the unused lighting pattern above the line down below giving more energy/light to project.

    The old Camaro was the old way. The LaCrosse (which CR drove at night and actually made a very positive comment) and GM cars beyond it uses the new way.

    Also the LaCrosse, and I assume the Lucerne, use 4 bulb burn. this means that when using your high beams all 4 front bulbs are on. This allows both a very bright pattern way down the road and right in front of the car. Doubt the Camaro has this. YOu can simulate this on some cars by holding the high selector in high position (flash to pass).
  • imidazol97imidazol97 Member Posts: 27,122
    Is this why my 03 lights appear much brighter than 98 leSabre lights? They use the same bulb IIRC. Or are Lucerne lights even better designed than my 03's?

    2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,

  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Member Posts: 6,043
    Are you talking an '03 LeSabre? Not sure what they did technology wise but I am sure they did improve them. The '03 LeSabre was developed back in '97 or so (new for '99 model year?). I doubt they used the european pattern but I could be wrong.

    I am sure the Lucernes would be better.
  • imidazol97imidazol97 Member Posts: 27,122
    The 00 was the first of the new (Aurora-based) leSabre design. The lights are much, much better than 98.

    2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,

  • rake2rake2 Member Posts: 120
    They are brighter on the road. Suspect that's why I've had a few flashes of the high beams, because the lights are not misaligned.
  • rake2rake2 Member Posts: 120
    I have not had that problem at all. I have noticed that when you open the trunk in the rain, it allows waters into the trunk, however.
  • sls002sls002 Member Posts: 2,788
    This link:
    http://www.intellexual.net/hid.html

    Has some pictures that may illustrate your discussion. Also discusses various HID lights.
  • m1miatam1miata Member Posts: 4,551
    Or you can buy the new Camry with a V6, and have more HP than the Lucerne, less expensive, higher resale, and a 6 speed transmission. Don't think they will be able to milk the Lucerne for very much profit if people start to do the math. New Camry look better. A bit like a BMW and Japan care came together as one, but none-the-less a better car than the previous. Between the Camry, Avalon,Chrylser300,and Accord as choices, the market is gonna be slim for the Lucerne.

    Loren
  • imidazol97imidazol97 Member Posts: 27,122
    >have more HP than the Lucerne, less expensive, higher resale, and a 6 speed transmission.

    More horsepower and torque than a Northstar v8? Hard to believe. Got data? It's torque that determines how most cars feel in respect to power.

    Is that before or after the correction in advertised horsepower by Toyota? grin:grin:
    http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060313/AUTO01/603130350/1148-

    2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,

  • m1miatam1miata Member Posts: 4,551
    No, I am saying more than the 3.8 V6. The Cadillac DTS V8 is not much more HP, however and nothing to brag about.
    I would say the feel on the car is going to be that you have been robbed without a gun. Sorry but to truly compete with Japan makes, GM will have to use the V8 as the base model or at least use the 3.6 V6. A four speed automatic won't cut it. Buick is falling down and can't get up.

    Loren
  • m1miatam1miata Member Posts: 4,551
    Stats on Camry v6 2007
    V6 Horsepower: 268 hp
    Max Horsepower: 6200 rpm Torque: 248 ft-lbs.

    Not bad, starting at $23,000, with some resale value two to twenty year down the road.

    Loren
  • imidazol97imidazol97 Member Posts: 27,122
    Torque 248 lbs-ft at 6200 rpm???

    3800 puts out 210 approx at 1500 -2000 rpm!!! IIRC

    2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,

  • m1miatam1miata Member Posts: 4,551
    So? What RPM will you be at when passing a car on the highway?

    -Loren
  • blckthreeblckthree Member Posts: 153
    Let's add premium fuel to the Camry to get that 268hp. Let's also be get into a vehicle with less interior room for it's passengers. You also probably don't want to expect any low end torque out of that V6.

    But if you are looking for a nice vanilla car that blends in with all the rest you just might have something with a Camry.

    Myself, give me the Buick and it's 4 year warranty and comfort and size and ride and make it a Northstar.

    Mike :)
  • rooskierooskie Member Posts: 26
    Depends on what stats you want to compare. The Camry has less front head room, less front leg room, less front hip room than the Lucerne. Obvioulsy, the Lucerne would be a more comfortable car for a driver and passenger to ride in than the Camry.

    Most people don't buy either a Camry or Lucerne for RPM - they want a comfortable 4-door sedan - and the Lucerne is "head and shoulders" above the skimpier Camry in that regard.
  • splatsterhoundsplatsterhound Member Posts: 149
    Small bit of info. Saw the new Camry. It's ugly. :sick: The front end looks like a car mated with a Chinese paper dragon.
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Member Posts: 6,043
    Well 6200 in a Camry, 4000 in the LaCrosse.
  • m1miatam1miata Member Posts: 4,551
    Ah yes, then the LeSabre used would be quite the buy. Or a DTS in a year or two for $25 to $27K used is a bargain. Actually, if HP doesn't matter, the Chrysler 300 base model is just $24K, though I think that 2.7 V6 is may not be a good all around quality engine by any means. My car I bought back in 1987, the Olds98 Regency was comfortable, but came loaded with problems. You name it, there was something wrong nose to tail. But the gas mileage of that 3800 V6 was not bad, as was that 150HP, for its time.
    My Dad got a 2000 model year Camry, with a four cylinder for less, or the same than I paid for the Olds back in '87, and it is smoother, more quiet, with better handling and almost zero problems - zero major problems, though it is possible some had sludge problems that year. Actually my 1998 Corolla was a more satisfying car than the 1987 Olds98.

    Now, I must say the old family Buick built in '61 or '62 was a super car indeed. Very classy LeSabre indeed.

    As for looks the current Camry and Avalon to me are just as stylish as is the Lucerne. The Lucerne is plain vanilla.

    The V6 uses regular gas.
  • m1miatam1miata Member Posts: 4,551
    stats on new Camry:
    3.5 liter DOHC 24 Valve V6 with dual VVT-i, aluminum alloy block and heads

    HP: 268 @6,200 RPM
    Torque: 248 @ 4,700 RPM

    Regular fuel
    Weight : 3,440#

    Standard on even the CE which is around $18,300 are 4 wheel disk brakes with anti-lock, 160watt stereo. Air bags all around and knee bags. Tilt and telescopic steering column.

    Now the LaCrosse and Lucerne look OK, and they may be a good ride. And yes, the ultimate value is in if ya like the car over time. Do not expect to buy the car and sell it within a couple years and not take a whopping hit. If ya buy and hold, and love it all the way, and get a healthy discount from GM on the car, it may just be perfect. Lucerne is an improvement over say the Bonneville in looks. Pretty clean looking design. LaCrosse is to me a little more interesting, with a little Jag thing going on up front, yet the older Buick is some ways too. Just nothing which pulls me in to buy one.

    Loren
  • rake2rake2 Member Posts: 120
    So why is it that the reviews I've read liked the Buick transmission better than those 6 speed automatics? Too many people get caught up in these things and haven't even driven them to know any better.
  • rake2rake2 Member Posts: 120
    As for looks the current Camry and Avalon to me are just as stylish as is the Lucerne. The Lucerne is plain vanilla.

    Do you realize how stupid that sounds? Just as stylish as vanilla?
  • jvprjvpr Member Posts: 48
    nothing GM makes will ever compete with a Lexus- much less a beemer (BMW)!
  • jvprjvpr Member Posts: 48
    sorry dude but GM will never compete with BMW! not even close or in their wildest dreams!
  • m1miatam1miata Member Posts: 4,551
    Yes, you are so correct. Should read, all three are pleasing enough to the eye, and somewhat plain vanilla - though some things do taste great in vanilla flavor. The Camry and Avalon are just as rich looking, and/or classy, is what I should have said. Thanks for allowing me to clarify my position. :)

    -Loren
  • m1miatam1miata Member Posts: 4,551
    sorry dude but GM will never compete with BMW! not even close or in their wildest dreams!

    Ummm, who said they compete one to one with BMW?
    Not I said the wise old man!

    -Loren
  • m1miatam1miata Member Posts: 4,551
    Ummmm, yeah! Who said they do???
    Wait a minute, the Cadillac does compete with Lexus. Compete is not synonymous with winning however!

    -Loren
  • imidazol97imidazol97 Member Posts: 27,122
    Probably 3500-4000 because with good low speed torque I don't have to sound like a sewing machine to make a nice smooth, safe driver pass. If I want testosterone stimulating car driving like I might have at 20, I'd buy a car suitable. I outgrew that stage and left the Mustangs behind.

    I like a car with torque from the stop signs so I don't have to sound like the car across the street leaving home racing up through the gears to hit 40 down the street in his Honda Acura with OHC.

    The four-speed transmission seems to be another irritant to the hate GM crowd. It works. Sorry 'bout that. And they don't break nearly as often as the others at Honda.

    2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,

  • calhoncalhon Member Posts: 87
    Overall, Lexus sells a lot more cars than Cadillac, but in the $42K+ segment (traditionally considered the luxury segment) it's the other way around. Lexus is actually 4th behind Cadillac, MB and BMW in that order.

    Over 70% of Lexus sales are in the sub-$40K category - ES, IS and RX330. GM uses both Buick and Cadillac to compete in this segment.
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Member Posts: 6,043
    I'd like to see the data source for that. Is there a report or did you look at the sales data and do your own analysis?

    Not sure that $42K is the Luxuty cut off but I guess it sounds close. I would then consider the $33K to $42K MSRP the premium segment. (for cars, trucks would be a different story)

    thanks.
  • sls002sls002 Member Posts: 2,788
    The luxury tax is gone, but was on the over $40,000 price level. Entry level luxury is thought of as the CTS, BMW 3-series and so on. Luxury is probably at a base price level over $40,000.

    I have looked for a new Camry test of the V6 model and can't find one. However, the concept that the Camry is "best" comparing with the Lucerne depends on one's definition of "best" and the whole argument is silly. The Camry is a smaller FWD sedan and that may be better for some. The Lucerne is larger, particularly in the rear seat area, which may be better for others. Performance is hard to say at this point as a V6 test of the Camry is not available. However, the old Camry with V6 and 5 speed auto is available. Compared with the V8 Lucerne 0-60 is slower by more than .5 seconds, 0-110 is slower by more than 4 seconds.
  • m1miatam1miata Member Posts: 4,551
    I do believe the new Camry V6 is going to blow the doors off the milk wagon. May be quicker than the V8 Lucerne. As for size, I guess the old Intrepid is best in that regard. The new Chrysler 300 has RWD. So the Buicks are basically for people wanting larger car, with FWD. Hummm, how about a minivan. Lee Iaccoa has the van for you. OK, seriously, the Lucerne meets the demands for many people just fine. It looks OK, is big, and the engine gets it along the road with fairly good gas mileage. I just thought a new car should be, well let's say, ummm - new. What they will do is sell the V8 for the price of the Camry or Avalon with the V6, and thus have a better comparison.

    Loren
  • rooskierooskie Member Posts: 26
    As a former BMW owner, I receive BMW magazine. Chis Bangle, head of BMW USA, stated in a recent article that BMW has taken notice of Cadillac's success with the CTS and STS, and that no doubt those new models likely have cut into BMW 3 and 5 US sales.

    Anyone who thinks GM can't or doesn't compete with BMW is uninformed - just ask BMW.
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Member Posts: 6,043
    Why would you ever believe something that an expert in the auto field like Chris over the unknown, whomever they are, experts on this forum? :P
  • sls002sls002 Member Posts: 2,788
    The Avalon (I forgot the Avalon) with the 3.5 V6 and only 5 speeds, is much quicker than the V8 Lucerne. The Chrysler 300 and Lucerne are very nearly the same size, passenger space and cargo. Both the Lucerne and the DTS (aka DeVille) are aging platforms and while many probably want FWD, there are many handicaps with large FWD vehicles.

    For my money, the BMW 3-series wagon is an interesting choice. The Magnum with 5.7 might have better performance, but would use more fuel.
  • m1miatam1miata Member Posts: 4,551
    I think they are competing for the same dollars as BMW, but not attempting to build the same class of car. The CTS doesn't have the interior quality, has several V6 engines, but no inline 6, good handling, but nothing like a BMW. It is an interesting car, and one a potential car buyer may go for. A BMW owner which is a driver may show less interest in the CTS than one looking for a sort of sporty, and classically styled entry luxury car, like the CTS / Cadillacs. The STS looks like a slightly larger and more rounded CTS. Other than larger and more HP, what's the point? I would expect the larger car to be more styled as the price rises.

    Now if it is the intention of Cadillac to compete one to one with BMW, all I can say is good luck. It will not have the resale, and has never had road reputation of BMW. Somewhere in-between is fine. A sporty car, and nearly as rich an interior, and handling selling a few grand below a Bimmer does make sense. So will it take away some sells - yes certainly. Those people really did not need, want, or could afford the BMW. They are the near BMW pool. Something the Lexus and Acura shoots for as well.

    The CTS, once they add telescopic steering column, new interior overall, and the 3.6 V6 as a std. engine for $30K, have a winner. It is any wonder there is no 3.8 V6 version :P

    Loren
  • poncho167poncho167 Member Posts: 1,178
    Sorry, the Camery is not competitive with the Lucerne. The Camery is in the catagory of Malibu/Impala which are a better buy than the homely Toyota.

    This evaluator is pro Japan and he hangs out at all the GM boards spreading propaganda about how Japanese cars are better at this and that, blah, blah, blah. He then goes into resale value based on people who keep their cars a couple of years (not the norm anymore). He doesn't want to accept fact that some GM cars lower resale price is based on the incentives, fleet, and other discounts given at the time of sale which come back at the time of resale. $2000 cash back at the time of purchase generally means $2000 less at resale, etc.
  • imidazol97imidazol97 Member Posts: 27,122
    >$2000 cash back at the time of purchase generally means $2000 less at resale,

    That simply doesn't have to be true. The used price of a car in 3-4 years depends on the buyer interest in that particular model. Incentives at the beginning would only affect near term apparent value for used.

    2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,

  • m1miatam1miata Member Posts: 4,551
    Reality is sometimes hard to grasp. Within a couple years, it will be harder for some to understand just has occurred over the last three decades, as they were quite unaware of a steady, but sure decline.

    As for category of cars, the Malibu doesn't seem to have a place, the Impala is a pretty fair value, and when bought at or below $20K competes well with the Hyundai Sonata, which is another solid car which looks good and travels well. The Camry, Accord, to name a couple are in a class above. The Avalon is a classier Camry, but you won't have to look that high to surpass the competition.

    Makes no difference to me which country is making the best car where is comes to give recognition for a job well done. If the personal experience has been positive with a Japan make, less so with a domestic make or GM, that naturally lowers the score in that individuals view. When others find the same to be true, they too will express the same opinions. When the scores come in for repairs required on a vehicle they own in surveys such as Consumer Reports, those become statistical facts. When sales slump to the point where a company is on the brink, those are facts. Resale near term and very long term is better on Japan makes. Just the facts. You can actually sell a Corolla with 100K miles on it ten years later and get good money for it - just facts.
    I bought one back in 1998 and got a thousand off the sticker. They do discount Japan makes too. They do not have sales which appear to be going out of business sales. The Corvette is an excellent effort by GM. I think most people acknowledge that. The Solstice looks great. There are a few sparks coming off the old flame. And then there was the 1969 Camaro and Malibu, which were awesome looking cars back when. If they do good, that goodness will be rewarded. Treat the customer to a great car, and even better service and backing when things go terribly wrong. Good luck to you all !

    Loren
  • calhoncalhon Member Posts: 87
    There is a report which I can't locate at the moment, but the sales data confirm it. For example, as of the end of Feb, Cadillac sold almost twice as many DTS/STS/XLR as Lexus LS/GS/SC - 13,784 versus 7,083.

    http://www.theautochannel.com/news/2006/03/01/212226.html
    http://www.theautochannel.com/news/2006/03/01/212164.html
  • 14871487 Member Posts: 2,407
    Why are you here? i cannot understand why you waste your time going into GM forums to talk about Toyota. That is absolutely pathetic. No one here wants to talk about the camry. It is better than the old car but it's still dull and a rehash of the old model. Only the SE model looks somewhat respectable. IF GM cars are so bad and you are so convinced that no one wants them why do you spend time trying to sell everyone on the superiority of Toyota? I dont get it. Toyota are so great they can sell themselves, they dont need your constant cheerleading.

    The Lucerne looks better than the Camry to me and I would assume most people under 50 would agree. The Camry and Avalon are probably attractive to a certain segment of the population but I am not in that segment. If price and number of gears were the only consideration in buying a car then no one would buy the Lucerne. You are talking as if the car is a total flop and yet it has one of the quickest turnover rates at GM. Its selling this well with a weak base engine and while facing a tough competitor in the Avalon. Most "experts" like yourself probably thought the Lucerne was DOA because of the 268hp Avalon but it hasnt happened. Before you say the Lucerne's sales are due to fleets keep in mind that most of the models I have seen thus far were CXLs, not base CX cars. Another thing, if the Avalon is so great why is it getting creamed by the 300 AND Charger on the sales charts? Right now those two cars are the hottest full size cars on the market.

    This topic is about the Lucerne, its not a place for people to write dissertations on GM's troubles. Being a GM critic is about as difficult as breathing. I do not understand why some people feel they are bringing something new to the table with tired old critiques of GM products. Give it a rest.
  • 14871487 Member Posts: 2,407
    There is a guy on autonews who writes an article about luxury sales every year. You are 100% correct that Cadillac sells more vehicles at $42K+ than anyone else. Lexus is a luxury manufacturer who gets a large amount of sales with vehicles under $40K. There arent many people buying LS430s, SC430s and LX470s these days. In fact when you really think about it Lexus' V8 models make up a minority of their sales.
Sign In or Register to comment.