Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Justin Bimmer

Suprise! Consumer Reports gives LaCrosse "meh" review

23 posts in this topic

I got my issues last night and I went to the back to see how the Buick did and it was rated around a 74 mid pack and CR found some "defects" in it and they couldn't see out of it, so basically it sucks. Oh yeah, and its a Buick so that's like -10 right there on the CR scale.

More details tonight when I get home.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I used to give that publication the benefit of the doubt but I do not any more, not because what they say about American cars I like but because of what they have said about German and Asian cars. As a used car dealer I speek with many people and see many cars and know that a lot publication just give the foreghn auto maker the benifit of the doubt.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As usual an North American publisher unfairly has it out for their own nation's products. It's sickening. The unfortunate part is that people listen to these clowns! According to them every vehicle I've had has been inadequate, a point that I would beg to differ on.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I stopped reading it years ago. They have to be taking kick backs some where.

I always found it strange how they could also say something great about one GM car and trash another built in the same plant and on the same platform. It most times was something related between the two also that made it stranger.

Of late I find it strange how Ford is getting all the praise with about the same cars it has sold for the past couple years [less the Taurus even though we all know there is a 500 hiding under it] Now Toyota is gettling slammed for building the same old cars it got praised for just a couple years ago.

This just feeds into my feeling outside forces pick and choose who gets the praise and who does not. Funny how George Soros who has a lot of control over money world wide is investing heavy in Ford?

I am not really a conspiracy Nut but sometimes I start to wonder with the crap I see going on anymore with the way the money values are getting jerked around and companies getting slammed.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The new issue is out? Oh good, now I don't have to fight the crowd at Costco for more toilet paper....

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I stopped reading it years ago. They have to be taking kick backs some where.

I always found it strange how they could also say something great about one GM car and trash another built in the same plant and on the same platform. It most times was something related between the two also that made it stranger.

Of late I find it strange how Ford is getting all the praise with about the same cars it has sold for the past couple years [less the Taurus even though we all know there is a 500 hiding under it] Now Toyota is gettling slammed for building the same old cars it got praised for just a couple years ago.

This just feeds into my feeling outside forces pick and choose who gets the praise and who does not. Funny how George Soros who has a lot of control over money world wide is investing heavy in Ford?

I am not really a conspiracy Nut but sometimes I start to wonder with the crap I see going on anymore with the way the money values are getting jerked around and companies getting slammed.

It would be nice if things were like they were in 1940 and we had several different news sources to go to. Back then, lots of different newspapers.

Now everything seems to be owned by a few people...hmmm.

Consumers reports is more or less worthless.

Chris

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, I got the rag in front of me. Here are some excerpts.

First, in the test they were testing the Avalon, Azera, MKZ, and the LaCrosse and Taurus. They finished in that order (with LaCrosse and Taurus a tie).

The Buick has a total of 72 points with the top car in the "Large Upscale Sedan" class being the Genesis 3.8 with 92 points. The ES350 has 91. Also of note the Lucerne V8 is tied with the LaCrosse with 72 points.

Apparently handing is not important because the cars finishing ahead of the LaCrosse both had "lackluster handling" and the Avalon did get dinged for its stupid radio cover.

What CR said about the LaCrosse:

"the quiet ,spacious interior is inviting, luxurious, and well finished. But the cockpit is a bit narrow, the dashboard is busy, and the view out is quit restricted."

"Most trim pieces fit together very well, but we noted a few flaws, including a sharp edge on the console's cup-holder well and some loose trim."

"Gauges aren't that easy to read and the shiny chrome bezel trim creates reflections. Controls are straightforward, but picking from the sea of similar buttons requires some studying."

Highs

Ride, quietness, powertrain, front-seat comfort, fit and finish, crash-test results.

Lows

Visibility, tight cockpit.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

clowns!

This word sums up CR pretty well.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it me or is the review basically a giant contridicton.

Spacious yet tight.

Straightforward yet confusing.

Good fit and finish yet flaws.

Quiet yet noisy.

Good ride, yet bumpy.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, I got the rag in front of me. Here are some excerpts.

First, in the test they were testing the Avalon, Azera, MKZ, and the LaCrosse and Taurus. They finished in that order (with LaCrosse and Taurus a tie).

The Buick has a total of 72 points with the top car in the "Large Upscale Sedan" class being the Genesis 3.8 with 92 points. The ES350 has 91. Also of note the Lucerne V8 is tied with the LaCrosse with 72 points.

Apparently handing is not important because the cars finishing ahead of the LaCrosse both had "lackluster handling" and the Avalon did get dinged for its stupid radio cover.

What CR said about the LaCrosse:

"the quiet ,spacious interior is inviting, luxurious, and well finished. But the cockpit is a bit narrow, the dashboard is busy, and the view out is quit restricted."

"Most trim pieces fit together very well, but we noted a few flaws, including a sharp edge on the console's cup-holder well and some loose trim."

"Gauges aren't that easy to read and the shiny chrome bezel trim creates reflections. Controls are straightforward, but picking from the sea of similar buttons requires some studying."

Highs

Ride, quietness, powertrain, front-seat comfort, fit and finish, crash-test results.

Lows

Visibility, tight cockpit.

So shiny bezels, narrow and slight sharp edge on the cup holder over rides Ride, quietness, powertrain, front-seat comfort, fit and finish, crash-test results?

Dang them Koreans they have the lead on Cup holders and dull interiors and who cares how it drives or hold up in a crash.

The funny part is if GM had built the wide car it would be too wide for easy driving.

I think we here at C&G should rate CR as toilet paper. Pages are bit sharp and could cause Cheek paper cuts and the ruff paper could cause chafing and roids. We found the quality of the paper is too thin and could cause failure while wiping.

We rate CR below average and should not be considered good enough to wipe your butt with.

We recomend you should stay with the Sear catalog and We do not recomend CR for even for puppy training and it should be dispose of in the proper way buy use in the bottom of as bird cage.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it me or is the review basically a giant contridicton.

Spacious yet tight.

Straightforward yet confusing.

Good fit and finish yet flaws.

Quiet yet noisy.

Good ride, yet bumpy.

Well the reviewer started with a GM template which CR has not changed for years, added the stuff he saw about the car and kept the ratings unchanged because after million phone calls to Renaissance Center he did not get any checks for CR.

The amount of people read this is appalling. The other day I saw a girl from McKinsey reading on the plane and she wanted to buy a decked up Camry V-6 after reading it.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So shiny bezels, narrow and slight sharp edge on the cup holder over rides Ride, quietness, powertrain, front-seat comfort, fit and finish, crash-test results?

Dang them Koreans they have the lead on Cup holders and dull interiors and who cares how it drives or hold up in a crash.

The funny part is if GM had built the wide car it would be too wide for easy driving.

I think we here at C&G should rate CR as toilet paper. Pages are bit sharp and could cause Cheek paper cuts and the ruff paper could cause chafing and roids. We found the quality of the paper is too thin and could cause failure while wiping.

We rate CR below average and should not be considered good enough to wipe your butt with.

We recomend you should stay with the Sear catalog and We do not recomend CR for even for puppy training and it should be dispose of in the proper way buy use in the bottom of as bird cage.

LOL+100

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please don't FLAME! But, CR is right about the chrome. For some reason it is placed in angles that allow for reflection that not even polarized sunglasses can remedy.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what did CR say about unintended acceleration, rusted out or cracked frames, buckling tailgates, sludge, engine schrapnel, and transmissions that won't shift again?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who the hell reads that dying rag. Don't they know they are not in a monopoly anymore, the truth will come out sooner or later. When it does, CR is dead.

Right or Wrong, Look at what Fox News(aka alternative viewpoint) has done to CNN and MSNBC, imagine if there was a Fox News equivalent to CR, Edmunds, Cars.com, etc.

The Times are indeed changing.

We will lose the drone media.

Long Live the FREE PRESS!!

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please don't FLAME! But, CR is right about the chrome. For some reason it is placed in angles that allow for reflection that not even polarized sunglasses can remedy.

Condem a car for Chome Bezels? It is ok to bring it up but to rate a car lower just for that? I find it more a subjective thing thany anything.

That is the issue with CR. They should rate cars objective vs subjective. Leave the Objective to Car and Driver.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who the hell reads that dying rag. Don't they know they are not in a monopoly anymore, the truth will come out sooner or later. When it does, CR is dead.

Right or Wrong, Look at what Fox News(aka alternative viewpoint) has done to CNN and MSNBC, imagine if there was a Fox News equivalent to CR, Edmunds, Cars.com, etc.

The Times are indeed changing.

We will lose the drone media.

Long Live the FREE PRESS!!

I think there would be a mrket for a good automotive magazine anymore. Most of the advertised ones are controled by their advertisers. I see it with my company in all the magazines we advertise in. When we spend money we get high profile spots and promotion in their stories. We do not get featured on Hot Rods cover by accident.

As for CR they are like PBS. They say they are not biased but they are not livining on circulation alone. PBS may not comercial but they sure as heck take a lot of corperate money.

Also Autoweek published how political the car of the year deal is at Motor Trend a couple years ago.

The automotive world could use a alternative view magazine to spill the truth if someone could afford to publish it. The magazine business has been dying and with the economy of late they are dying faster than ever.

While we have a free press that does not mean that there is no corperate or political influance here. It has been that way for years. Just look at William Randolf Hearst. Even in the 1800's it often was guided.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't believe they picked the AVALON to win of all cars! That car was terrible when it was launched a few years ago, and it has surely gotten worse relative to the competition since.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

CR is fundamentally flawed to the degree that it has no genuine credibility.

They make a mockery of independent evaluation by using the very criteria they do.

No, they are not even a worthy substitute for TP.

Edited by Camino LS6
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like they can't follow their own editorials: what about the mea culpa they printed 2 years ago where they virtually apologized for giving Toyota free reign on their new model releases? (But only after the 'new' Avalon had so many serious defects - far beyond shiny chrome pieces, that they had to acknowledge SOMETHING.)

It's a rag, and I wouldn't let my cat crap on it.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The new issue is out? Oh good, now I don't have to fight the crowd at Costco for more toilet paper....

Yep.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

CR writing staff group photo, 1990 - 2009:

photo.jpg

Look! To the left there appears to be one staff member brown nosing the Toyota representative!

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hate CR with the best of them and putting the old 2005 designed Avalon on top is utterly ludicrous but...

The 2010 LaCrosse is a car with many baked in flaws that I know first hand from a couple of good friends at the local Chevy/Buick/Cadillac dealer that has cost it some sales. Number one on peoples list of gripes- poor outward visibility and a garish overdone dash.I personally find the dash ok but I agree about the tiny squinty windows and massive thick A-pillars which give the car a hemmed in feeling. Other gripes include a way too small trunk that is taken up by goose neck hinges and trim/carpet that surround those hinges for a finished off look. Well the 22K Malibu uses non intrusive struts as does the larger Impala so why does the LaCrosse go back to this inefficient design that many of it's Asian rivals still use? Other things mentioned were poor mileage and excessive curweight, even on base models. Note the base CX and upper CXL trim 3.0 liter V6 LaCrosse trims are rated for 17/26 compared to last years 17/28 figure in the old W-Body version and 18/28 for the 2010 Taurus SE which has a larger more powerful 3.5 V6. Base curweight is nearly 4000 overbloated LBS which is nearly 500 more than before. Other misses include interior door pull handles that are poorly designed, exterior chrome bodyside moldings that are mounted at the very bottom of the doors where they do no good whatsoever and offer no protection from dings and those plastic fascia wheels have no place on a 28K Buick. Of course to every bad there is good and this car does have an abundance of rear seat legroom and the rear seat heaters work well. The ride is very hushed and composed even over some of the worst broken pavement I could find. The 3.0 liter V6 while lacking in low end grunt is indeed smooth and quiet around town and under way but the 6 speed transmission paired to it could use some reprogrammed shift points and some finesse.

Edited by ponchoman49
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your content will need to be approved by a moderator

Guest
You are commenting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   You have pasted content with formatting.   Remove formatting

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0



  • Who's Online (See full list)

    There are no registered users currently online

  • Who's Chatting

    There are no users currently in the chat room