trinacriabob

It's been 3 years that I've owned the 2008 LaCrosse CX. The Regal is gone, fetching $1,500 at 271,000 miles. So, here I am with another W-body, a line which ceased production in 2009. The LaCrosse has been a reliable performer. It has not gone back in for warranty work. The build quality is quite good and it feels solid (well, it weighs over 3,600 pounds). The dashboard makes a lot of sense and I've finally started to understand the available commands in the center stack. Some of them are informative and I've had to make use of the tire pressure monitor which led me to the tire store. The powertrain is reliable. Best of all, the automatic transmission shifts seamlessly, sometimes giving the sensation it could be continuously variable because you can't feel the shifts. The 3800 Series III has plenty of power when called upon. If pushed hard, it gets a little raspy. Now, here's a tidbit of weird information. I was surprised that the engine (babied and oil changes every 2,500 from the start) used some oil during the last oil change cycle. I spoke with the dealer about this. It was not alarming, but I am not used to a 3800 (Series I) using any. Let's see where this goes. There is a technical bulletin (not a recall) saying that the Series III uses some oil, but not an alarming amount. One angry poster said that they had to keep tinkering with a good engine and keep on adding all these bells and whistles and made it inferior. I don't know about this. It feels quite well put together, save for the electronic throttle control which makes the feeling between the foot and the car's running on hills a little vague. The overall ride is quiet. It feels best on the highway, where 29 to 30 mpg can be had. On the boulevard, while it can feel a little wallowy, it is reasonably responsive when you have to make a maneuver. I will say that the steering feels a little heavy in the parking lot. I am comparing this car to the Intrigue which, in base form, handled better than the LaCrosse. In terms of ergonomics, I like the shape of the dashboard. It makes sense. I like the fingertip controls on the steering wheel. They free up the turn signal stalks from extra electronics. I also like the telescoping wheel (standard). Now, badda-bing, let's talk about the seats. I've rented these cars and was thrilled about driving one. However, after 3 years, I will have to admit that I am still hunting around for a comfortable seating position (I'm 5-10 and 180 lbs, so this shouldn't be a problem). The seats are a little hard and the fabric is not soft and pliable. Furthermore, the extra opera window in the back looks nice, but creates a manageable blind spot. I guess I am lamenting the cars of the 80s. The most comfortable car I've ever had was my 84 Cutlass Supreme Brougham coupe (hand-me down) where the "living room on wheels" was a great 80s feeling and, along with great seating positions and upright notchback backlites, both the comfort and visibility were top notch. I like the LaCrosse a lot. I don't love it. I was expecting to. Sometimes, I'll see a Monte Carlo of the same time-frame wizz by and wonder if. Oh well. I can say that the plump buckets in that were more comfortable but I was hemming and hawing about a new(er) engine with VVT for the first time. But I have a Buick. I think it will go for the long haul. I hope it will. There is NOTHING on the market that minimally interests me, except for maybe the Fusion/Milan. The LaCrosse is best described as highly competent. Because of this potential oil issue (minor at this point) and the harder seats (even compared to the 98-04 Regal), I give the car a B+. (The Intrigue got at least an A-). However, I am satisfied with the purchase because they delivered a car with great build quality and one that is generally tasteful in most regards in an era of automotive weirdness where one is made to feel more like an astronaut and less like the driver of their daily driver.

What else, but a Grand Le Mans! Not a nice 75 or 76 coupe, but the downsized 78 sedan. It was the medium cream and looked a little frumpy, but, hey, it was turning on a major intersection in Portland. My eyes would have popped out of my head had it been a mint-condition 75 or 76. Grand Le Mans, baby!

Sunbelt cities also grew because they are located in states that were tax friendly. Neither TX, NV nor FL have state income taxes (3 of the 6 that don't), and businesses believe there are incentives to locating there. There is also the weather component. Despite blazing tropical summers in the S.E and South Central and blazing dry summers in the desert SW, the other 3 seasons are mild ... and, after footing a steep A/C bill for the summer, the living is easy during the other seasons. Another thing could be the source of our immigration patterns. Historically, Europeans got off the ship in NY or Boston and, if Canada was their destination, that would have been Halifax. Even though air travel is the dominant form of international travel, the ports of entry to the US from Latin America and Asia are now Miami and Los Angeles, respectively. The importance of Atlanta and Houston as Delta and Continental hubs also fuels the growth of the Sunbelt and has made it much more international than "Southern."

Rob: Exactly what I was thinking. The V6 lived on in 3.8 carbureted form in the 80s GM mid-sizes, and even some full-sizes (early Impala/Caprice and Parisienne). The in-line 6 was present, along with V6s, in '73-'77 mid-sizes. IIRC, the distribution went like this: Chevrolet: inline 6 in all of these years in the Malibu - makes sense, it's a Chevy engine Pontiac: inline 6 in LeMans in '75 and '76, V6 (odd firing) in '77 Oldsmobile: ditto Buick: V6 in '75-'77 (odd-firing) - makes sense, it's a Buick engine The reason I started this thread is because I remember that the inline 6 in my Dad's '70 LeMans was a lot more pleasing to ear than the 3.8 2 bbl. V6 in his '76 Regal coupe.

The Camaro is an eye-catcher but the visibility isn't the greatest and their overall practicality is limited (but, then, that's not why people buy Camaros). That leaves the Regal. Since I need to have things "proven," the 2.4 has turned out to be a good powerplant and NOT having a turbo makes this all that much easier. That's my 2 cents.

I think about this every now and then. As for the 3800 V6 engine by Buick, once it went transversely mounted, received roller hydraulic lifters and fuel was delivered via port injection, it became one of the best engines ever. I'm closing in on 270,000 miles on the old car and still love the car and this engine. However, I also think back to a 1970 Pontiac LeMans coupe my Dad owned. He never thought much of Pontiac, until he bought this car. He loved "la Pohn-tee-ak"...and so did our Australian Shepherd. It had the 250 inline 6 with a 1-barrel car and NO air conditioning, so the engine compartment was a mechanic's dream, with every plug easily accessible and lots of free space. It was a very smooth running engine and they had a 7-main bearing crank, pointing to long life. Now, the inline 6 has had a great track record since it was "born." The Buick V6 had some teething problems...older ones were odd-firing and prone to throw timing chains. So, then, here's the question: Under the exact same maintenance regimen, which of these two long-lived GM engines is more durable and reliable? I voted Chevy inline 6, but I could be wrong.

Great story. I have taken in an abandoned pet for a while every now and them; however, I have definitely fed quite a few. Some of them really warm up to you and others keep their distance as they eat the food you give them. I'm glad there are people who have some empathy for disadvantaged animals.

A white 2006 or 2007 Monte Carlo in the next lane and behind me (per the rear view mirror). It really caught my eye because the rally wheels had gone into that "illusionary slower spin" mode. It looks great in white.

Mid-size coupe (and sport sedan) person all the way ... how long have I been posting here now? ... how time flies... Answer to thread: Minivans - of the GM variety - I like the Terraza and liked the Silhouette. I like them because one gets the ride of a car, decent gas mileage and a place to sleep or, with the seats taken out, an incredible amount of room to carry things. I am not crazy about the less than optimal reliability ratings and that these are intended to cart around soccer brats. Incidentally, today I saw a white Monte Carlo with the 2006-07 snout and I was experiencing some cognitive dissonance.

There is definitely a way to pull off upscale luxury touring sedan/coupe seating in cloth. And make it look New Millenium and not 80s. I am sure the seating design experts could work up something and make it durable, well-crafted, comfortable and not detrimental to the image. However, I don't see it happening, because of the expectation that all cars over $35,000 feature leather seating. At my price point, I get cloth anyway, but if I got a chunk of change, I wouldn't mind having one of the more subtly styled Cadillacs, and not have to put on the sheepskin covers during the summer. A DTS in ice blue metallic, with alloys, and a dark blue cloth interior wouldn't be bad. I hear they get about 25 mpg on the highway, which is pretty damn good.

I was also thinking about the furniture analogy and think that there a lot of people who choose cloth over leather, and who could realistically afford either. However, I think there are also a lot of people who think the "living room on wheels" (what my Dad called the higher-end BOP cars, and he meant that in a good way) concept went away in the 80s and should never come back.

Wow, when I started this thread, I thought I would be the lone wolf. Conditioned is the work I was looking for. I started the thread because seeing that DTS made me think of periodic sightings of late 1980s Coupes and Sedan De Villes, in perfect condition, that have the dark brown, dark blue or burgundy cloth interiors with the Cadillac crest in the upper cushion and the wide-ribbed horizontally banded velour in the lumbar area. It's well done. I also say this because my 84 Cutlass Supreme Brougham (loose cushion velour interior) coupe was far and away the most comfortable road-trip car of any car me or my family has ever owned. I could drive from Northern Cal to the PNW and take it all in stride 10 hours later. @ oldsmoboi - right, I remember noticing that on some mid-level BMWs while over there @ samadei - I remember that "shorts during the summer" problem in my Dad's Pontiac (vinyl seats) when I was a kid in L.A. - in the coastal basin, it might be a little uncomfortable....cross the pass into the San Fernando Valley and leave the car in the 100 degree sun for a couple of hours and I didn't want to even deal with the cool-down period (OUCH)...plus, I don't like the fine hairline cracks that eventually develop in the seats.

Today, a 1977 Mercury Cougar in tri-cream, with the padded landau roof, in MINT condition while I was parking at the post office. I nodded to the person who also got out of the car and he proceeded to tell me that he inherited it from his mom, that it had the 400 V8 and not the 351 V8, and that it ONLY had 73,000 miles! He said it's a hobby car and that it's not his daily driver. I had forgotten how long the hood is on FoMoCo personal luxury coupes of those years. Yikes.

Today I saw the most current version of the DTS driving alongside me on a major boulevard. I was thinking about how this car had "cleaned up nicely" and that there is nothing too overstyled about the Cadillac brand anymore (though I don't like the new heavy "eggcrate" CTS grille). At any rate, since it tends to be hot in inland Northern California, I remembered how Cadillac typically offered a cloth interior on the DeVille series. It was nicely detailed and very comfortable. Because of the heat, I will always own a car with a cloth interior. I was thinking that, on one model, possibly the DTS in Trim Level 1 form, a cloth interior should be offered in a couple of generic colors ... and that it could be a credit option. Now, I know that some of you may think this could be something that would make the import brands (and even Lincoln) double over laughing...and probably so. What's your opinion?

I was sort of thinking the same thing. That's funny.

Considering I have a (Catholic) high school diploma, I'm still Catholic.

Yesterday...unbelievable and very funny... ...a 1970-ish Dodge Dart coupe, in baby blue, with white upper paint (not even a vinyl top) in MINT condition...I was waiting to see who was driving the car and it was a 20-something (very)red-haired chick who worked as a checker or grocery clerk at the very Safeway I was going into for a deli sandwich.

Come to think of it, they've (2010)all been silver. I'm having a tough time digesting this new car.

I'm not knowledgeable in that area. However, along the lines of a trivia thread, what is the acronym to remember the Great Lakes? Answer: H.O.M.E.S. Huron Ontario Michigan Erie Superior Moving right along...

When I go on vacation over Memorial Day, I will remember to take a picture of a Bob's Big Boy

This is crazy BUT...a white Buick Terraza. A few things: (1) they are fairly rare, it seems, (2) if I had to buy this genre, it would be this (since the Silhouette is gone), and (3) I was looking at the grille...and the blacked-out treatment, contrasting the white paint, looked great. I wish they had used this treatment for the LaCrosse instead of the bright chrome featured in the grille.

Moltie, have you ever gone for their free breakfast? That coupon shows up every other month or so, with an asterisk saying "except Houston" or some other city. At any rate, I went once. The line was absurd, but I endured it. Then I figured out that the cost of gas to get there did not offset the "savings" in the free breakfast, but at least I experienced it. The only thing I've bought at IKEA were some cost-efficient fluorescent bulbs. I hate the sterility of the place and their merchandise.

Unbelievable. The 1981-1986 Grand Prix was beautiful, and got increasingly better through this span of years, ultimately adding the 4.3 TBI Vortec V6 (though the 4.3 Pontiac 265 c.i. V8 was a nice little engine as well). I always thought there was a big gap between the Cutlass and the Grand Prix, but in these years, the Grand Prix was catching up (but didn't completely catch up, IMHO). Of these models (1981-1987ish), my ranking would be: Cutlass, Grand Prix, Regal, Monte Carlo. But, back to the GP: the rear lights with the taper out where it met the bumper were great, the fender sculpting was not too much/not too skimpy, the grille was clean (w/ or w/o hood ornament), the dash was really interesting when the circles had actual gauges, and the interior finishes, especially in the Brougham or LJ, were plush and comfortable. I've driven one or two and, true to Pontiac form, it handled a little better than the others, with the Regal having the vaguest handling of the quartet during this period. I liked this car as well, though I wound up "inheriting" a 1984 Cutlass Supreme Brougham coupe in the mid-90s. I will always miss this GM vehicle platform.

This will be a short work week, as I am taking Friday off to make it a 3-day Easter weekend and flying out of town. Friday will mean some good fish for lunch and dinner (maybe salmon and halibut) and Easter Sunday ought to bring a good brunch buffet. Today is Passover. I asked one of my co-workers if he was celebrating the Seder meal, but he told me he was not observant. I would like to get invited to one someday to experience it. Are you doing anything to celebrate this week's religious holidays? Resting? Traveling somewhere?

I like that commercial for the 1975! I only wish that the vinyl top was silver instead of black. The tri-silver on 70s GM cars, possibly with a red or white pinstripe, looked great. BTW, that was the L.A. Coliseum in the background. I grew up within 10 miles of that place.