regfootball

excuses

rotflmao!!!!!!!!!!!

i am saying that most americans need or want a car with more substance under the hood and at much fewer rpm than this thing. i stick by my earlier statement that one big reason this car won was because it was offered also as a hybrid. take that away and the merit of this car line becomes extremely ordinary. it offers no distinct superiority in engines, performance, styling, packaging, room, price, ANYTHING. MT was simply humping the hybrid bandwagon and throwing a bone at the ricers so they could lower their subscriber demographic.

LOL

what bothers me about why the 3800 was so celebrated is because it was 'reliable' as if to suggest 'its rare that a GM engine was ever relaibel so man that this thing can last more than 80,000 miles without teardown really kicks ass!' as if doing such warranted a medal or trophy or something. Like no one would expect anyone to build acar with an engine that would last awhile. i mean, the asian competitors built reliable engine after reliable and complex engine and we have celebrate the fact that GM can build ONE stinking engine that outlives your payment book? In deifying this average engine we've also come to include suggestions that the thing was a miracle performer also. It was a PRETTY GOOD engine that unfortunately was left out to pasture and became dated a few years ago. I've driven like 10 cars with the 3800 or some variant and I just never saw what any of the fuss was about. The good mpg was more than offest by its slow revving, growly nature, and huge footprint under the hood. GM move on please. why this thing is in the Lucerne speaks volumes about what sort of KNUCKLEHEADS are planning product at GM and the Buick division. STILL.

point is, its gone soon and maybe then GM can move on, and up in the v6 world. it was great in its day. by 2000 or so it was not up to par.

128 torque is not enough for everyday driving.

if you want to stay in business you find a way to get the product out in shorter time, faster, and better all around. Toyota is able to get a project out in 24 months now i believe. it takes GM that long to determine if they should turn a show car into a production model. by the time they decide on anything, they are 4 years in and still need 4 years to do it. "The product is not so easily improved" better pack it in buickman, and start looking for that toyota dealer to work for. if GM wants to keep the doors open, they need to start to figure out how to match toyota tit for tat on features, engines, performance, all sorts of stuff, and they'll need to allocate $$$$$ to fund R&D and production processes to be able to get a car project done from start to finsih in 24 months, or less. evolve or die. that's what your Buick guys need to hear from you. it used to mean something to own a Buick. Our family had a bunch of them. at some point, they seem to have become irrelevant. The Lucerne is nice, but really its not going to make a big impact. Buick ought to have another 3-4 new models in the hopper for the next 18 months. BUT, they won't.

not on a base LaCrosse. not even as a standalone option. they need to offer the 3.6 in the CX as a standalone.

said passat cracked 6 seconds in a C/D test. there's no lack of low end torque there.

maybe if they made the 3.6 standard, put decent buckets in it, with an autostick stype 5 or 6 speed tranny, well, and add about 4 inches of leg room (which you could try to get from the enormously out of proportion hood length or front overhang) and sold it a CX price levels.....Buick and GM have never been smart enough or willing enough to try that approach. A college graduate who has gotten their first real job and is making big bucks now...they want to buy a car. these are the types that love to buy cars and spend money. you honestly think someone like that wants a COLUMN SHIFTER, BENCH SEAT, and lazy motor? Even the 50 year olds are looking for engines with zing and a coddling cabin.

reliable, assuming we aren't talking about having to blow a grand to replace a manifold gasket

nice. it don't even crack 200 hp in the lucerne. how the hell are you supposed to sell that car with a 50-70hp deficit and expect any market impact?

"reduce certain emissions up to 90 percent"

God people, get a grip, that center stack is nothing to write home about. what flybrian was insinuating is right, it has a bad cheap n trendy look to it that might look kinda neat right now, but 12 months from now it will look as cheap and out of touch as anything. the center stack on my diamantes were nicer so its no accomplishment what toyota has done here.

i figured since you were lance's testicles and she is his better half, i figured maybe you were well acquainted with her hotness. :CG_all:

sorry, she didn't get out of my house first.

has GM? its ass is getting kicked around in the v6 department. what GM car under 30 grand can you get a COMPETITIVE v6 in?

#21 fire the idiots who order the cars and fire the production folks who produce the cars no one wants

the kind you see in the Kohl's ad for the 'lowest prices of the season' sale? LOL>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> now you know where tyota's desginers get their inspiration

then how come all the dealers had the same crappy stock?

good luck selling that lesabre with a pushrod engine and heinous interior and sloppy bench seats and ten year old design to a well to do urban professional, or boomer that grew up on accords and civics. I saw my first lucerne the other day. ugly cloth, bench seats, 3800, BIG price tag. Good luck getting any conquest sales with that. The LaCrosse may have had a chance if it obviously wasn't a visible rehash of the old wbody proportions and the greenhouse of the fleet king, the taurus. every time i hit buick lots this summer looking for possibly a lacrosse, the only cheaper versions were with the 3800 and bench seats. Like anyone shopping mainstream sedans under the age of 60 is gonna want that combo.

you know what, looking at the new pics again, maybe i am liking it more than my first impression.

i went back and looked at the kris horton camro pics and i think i'd prefer those to this.

glass half full: look at how many folks get to drive these cars who otherwise might not. and look at the volume they sell to fleets, who would give that up? the problem is they need to make them desirable retail cars as well. if the cars themselve are outstanding than the retail will still be good even if they put a lot into fleets.