By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
Good information that I wasn't aware of. However, Ford still did try to cover this up instead of trying to investigate.
About Firestones used on GM's now. The long friendship between the Firestones and the Fords (believe a marriage or two in there) was now over not surprisingly. Firestone, without much of a market left probably offered their tires to GM for a real good price.
This is what I was told by a tire exec;
1st grade tires go to the new car makers (for very little if any profit) so that consumers will automatically buy them again when they wear down.
2nd grade go to their own dealerships
3rd grade go to the independent tire shops including gas stations.
By grade they are all OK, just some turn out better than others.
I realize Explorers were #1 every year, and I still can't figure it out....has to be more metal for the dollar theory. Maybe, people who want SUV's are saying...the bigger it is...the better!
2017 MB E400 , 2015 MB GLK350, 2014 MB C250
Good grief, just when they are saying we are gonna catch up with Japan makes, they fall behind Korea? So is Suzuki gonna kick GM butt soon?
I realize the more loaded Buick is probably just fine. Take and put the right stuff on your LaCrosse, and she is fine. But the competition has the right stuff before a side sticker or upgrades. A used Buick may be a bargain. But new cars, with plastic hub caps, and cheapie tires, in a Buick class is a bit out of place.
-Loren
Heck, Europe gets the cool cars too!
We get the warmed overs.
-Loren
The Interior on the Buick has a nice bit of extra on the rear seats, but the dash and navi system is exactly what you'd get on the CXS with the navigation option added. It is actually a lot better than the lower-end models.
The exterior is a bit cleaner, though.
Some things worked OK. Fit and finish was generally alright, ergonomics were largely pretty good (the trip computer had awkward control placement that hints at it being an afterthought, but the radio, A/C controls, and various stalks and switches all fell reasonably to hand), and the stereo was decent. Handling was fair -- not up to snuff with a Honda, but not bad. Compared to the Cavalier that it replaced, a vast improvement, no doubt.
Unfortunately, the most obvious weak points were where they count most: the drivetrain. Not bad around town if demands placed on it were low, but throw in some higher speed driving and a few grades, and the engine loses its composure. Noisy, unhappy sounds, despite the high rev range, and not much useful torque for passing power, despite having larger displacement than most of its rivals. (And there were occasional smells that seemed to be coming from the automatic transmission after hard work, scents that were not exactly comforting on a car with relatively low mileage.) I haven't yet calculated overall fuel economy, but I seemed to get 28-30 mpg based upon mostly highway driving that employed a heavy right foot, versus an EPA rating of 24 city/ 32 hwy, so I suspect that my fuel economy was largely in line with the federal estimates.
While the dash looks better from a distance, the dash plastics are obviously quite cheap when viewed from within the cabin. Likewise, the A/C made odd hissing noises, with the grilles still blowing air even when supposedly closed. On this coupe model, vision was obscured by large C-pillars and a non-functional trunk lid spoiler, the latter of which made a questionable contribution to its appearance.
Overall, this car speaks clearly of GM's problems. While better than its predecessor, it does not beat its rivals, and hits outdated benchmarks already surpassed by its competition. Had this car been released 5-6 years ago, and then since retired in favor of a more modern replacement, then it could be described as being reasonably good for its time. But by today's standards, it falls even lower, and doesn't signal to the buying public that this is built by a new GM that takes cars seriously. While it is better than a 1995 Cavalier, it is not as good as many of the other choices for 2006, so is there a reason to expect many to want to buy it when there are better choices available?
Seems to be much better styling coming from Europe and Asia!
2017 MB E400 , 2015 MB GLK350, 2014 MB C250
Finally, it seems like General Motors is starting to get it. Too bad we Americans won't.
2017 MB E400 , 2015 MB GLK350, 2014 MB C250
Maybe the reason why that car isn't sold here is because it would draw buyers away from Cadillac. It sure would make me think twice. Who needs a Cadillac DTS when the Buick LaCrosse is so nice? That sucker makes a Lexus look like a plain jane.
While a lot of LaCrosses go into rental car fleets as well, the base LaCrosse is also about on par with what a base Regal was. So even if LaCrosse sales are down versus Century/Regal sales, at least more of them are more upscale, prestigious cars. So perhaps that is helping Buick a little bit?
Maybe I do???
This is from Forbes;
link title
The new Buick LaCrosse (replacing Regal and Century cars) came out last fall. It is a decent car, but fully loaded it stickers for $32,000 and is up against great competitors. Year-to-date, Buick sold 34,420 copies of the LaCrosse versus a total of 40,938 Regal and Century models in the same period last year.
Coming this fall is a new larger car, called the Lucerne, which will replace the discontinued Park Avenue and the soon-to-be-discontinued LeSabre. The Lucerne looks attractive, and it will offer a V-8 option. But my guess is that GM will overprice the Lucerne, a common GM practice on new models, and its sales won't match the two cars it's supposed to replace.
2017 MB E400 , 2015 MB GLK350, 2014 MB C250
I think with a decent lineup of newer platform vehicles, Buick would do quite well.
I think there is a reason in there somewhere as to why Buick sales are sinking faster than the Titanic.
Forbes actually thinks Buick is still in business so the dealers won't sue GM for leaving them without a product to sell. GM had to pay dealers millions to get out of Oldsmobiles. It might be a plan to get the sales down to zero so GM can quietly dump the whole line. Interesting theory and does make sense. Might open the door to bringing over those Asian Butoys!
2017 MB E400 , 2015 MB GLK350, 2014 MB C250
True, but no one wants to lose one line of cars, it might mean 20% of their business.
GM should be merging those Asian Buicks in to these dealerships.
2017 MB E400 , 2015 MB GLK350, 2014 MB C250
Lutz wants Buick to be the American Lexus, so why can't Americans buy that car over here? I bet that baby would outsell ES and won't require incentives either!
Rocky
Rocky
Rocky
Rocky
I guess people see it closer to luxury, like an Azera
Would be interesting to test drive Sonata/Azera, Milan or Fusion, Altima, LaCrosse, Mazda6/Mazda3, Camry, Accord, all on the same day, to keep as good a memory intact. Everyone is saying how good the CTS handling is, so perhaps that should be on the list of test drives.
Have test driven the 300, which was pretty good, though the high door sills really is not a plus, as is the small back window. The Mustang V6 seemed OK, but I was not a awe, as the reviews have the car as near perfect. I guess they are right on the facts of how it handles compared to the past models, but I am not sure it is all that great compared to the modern day cars. For looks, I still like the 65 thru 69 years, and the size of the '65 model was large enough. From what I recall of the Tiburon test drive, the car seemed tight, comfortable, and you seemed in complete control. Interior is richer than say the Mustang. More standard features. I may end up with something more practical, like a sedan. You know, like a V6 Altima or a Mazda = zoom-zoom. I may test a used CTS. Would like to see how tight they are after three or so years on the road.
Rocky
Uh...Maybe because it's better than the American LaCrosse (Interior especially)? It is just weird that since Buick is an American brand but consumers here in the states are getting inferior products comparing to the lineups they are offering on the other side of the Pacific.
And that my friend, is what's so special about that Asian LaCrosse.
Rocky :mad:
-Loren
Rocky :sick:
Rocky
Seriously, the status cars live, mass produced cars have their following too. Most BMW owners feel there car is a cut above them all, as do Lexus. BMW means handling, and a Lexus the relentless pursuit of quality. While GM status went to rental cars, and business fleet cars. Cadillac retained the most class status.
The fall, the article said, came in '78. I would say before that date. First they ignored the VW when it hit the US shore, then the quality slide around '75 during the gas crunch was terrible. And they did not have the gas saver cars to compete. Hey, sounds like today? Civic gas mileage is still kickin' butt. How about the '68 Datsun 510 with Macpherson struts, disk brakes, get little engine and such. Then the Z car of '73. US manufactures were asleep.
I disagree with some, but not all of that article posted.
-Loren
I enjoyed driving my '73 Opel Manta Rallye, until the engine was trash at under 18K miles. Good looking and handling. Maybe I just got a bad engine. Would like that car today. Perhaps with a Japanese engine inside
-Loren
anmd since we don't know what the Asian LaCrosse sells for, it's not really fair to compare it to the US version. Is it even the same car? Maybe it only shares a name.
Are ANY of you guys buying rear seat DVD systems? Seems like a huge waste of $ to me, since the rear seat of that car will get used about 0% of the time. (Our other car is our long trip vehicle)
Anyway, the Cutlass is a bad example to use, because it was to the 70's and much of the 80's what the Honda Accord and Toyota Camry are today. Incredible brand loyalty, and people would keep trading them in for new ones, regardless of whether they had really changed much or not.
In 1984, the Supreme was the #4 selling car in America. It did start to slip after that though, falling to #9 in 1985, and swapping places with the Cutlass Ciera, which had been #9 in 1984. It slipped out of the Top Ten soon thereafter, and eventually faded away as the popularity of mid- and full-sized coupes diminished.
Why do I pick 1986 as the beginning of GM's downfall? Well, in 1985, 7 of the top ten selling cars in this country were GM products. There may have been more reliable cars, faster cars, more economical cars, more advanced cars, whatever, but the simple fact remains that the public overwhelmingly chose GM cars back then.
1986 was the year that Ford came out with the Taurus, which suddenly made every other midsized car out there look obsolete. And soon after that, the Accord and Camry started getting more and more popular as they grew, and GM just kept falling from grace.
Also, I don't think having all those things like big tv's, VCR's, microwaves, and other "status symbols" had anything to do with GM's decline. After all, people didn't quit buying cars to buy these other products. They just quit buying GM cars to buy competitors' cars!
Rocky
I've experienced the same thing in my recent GM rentals:
Monte Carlo
Malibu Maxx
Vibe
All would have been ok if this was 1996 ~ 1998. It was as if the General was benchmarking cars of that era when the updates/intros were made to the MC and Bu. The Vibe, knowing it's a Matrix? as well, doesn't speak too highly of Toyota. Not familiar with it but does anyone know if the Matrix use different interior materials, have better fit/finish, better ergonomics (like improved seats, bolstering, cushioning)?
I was not impressed by any of these vehicles.
Why Thank-You
driver, wow I appreciate the link. I really like this car alot. I wonder if it's RWD ? Does it have a 6-speed auto ? It didn't say if it was DVD-Audio 5.1 or better either as far as stereo equip went. I makes me so steamed :mad: that GM doesn't offer this car in the States, or builds cars like this here. :sick:
Rocky
I guess I'm obsessed with "gadgetology" :shades: Hey I'm a Gen Xer and it's natural for us.
Rocky
Rocky
-Loren
Considering price, a DoD V6 or a little four banger, I would pass on that one.
If ya want Buick, just buy used one in a year or two for say $17K to $20K for the top of the line.
-Loren
-Loren
maybe compare it to the Lucerne
or to the CTS
Rocky