Sajeev Mehta

It was hilarious, I took it the right way. What I meant to say was that it got me writing here. Now that I mention it, how many other car-reviewers reply back to C&G's members, hmm? Until Caddy offers more cars with manual trannys and insanely-tight sport packages like BMW, I'm gonna say the V-series is aimed right at the cushy AMG Mercedes cars. Granted they don't make a twin-turbo V12, but that could change if they green-light the Cadillac Sixteen concept. That's pretty much where I am at, and that's why I call out the Lucerne for what it is. I also tried to hammer that into the Buick-folk who took me on the press junket. Don't let the beancounters rule the roost. For example, don't let me find a better shift knob in a $20,000 Camry, or better dash plastics in my old 1980 Buick Century next time around.

I try not to get bogged down in semantics. Not being there when Lutz said it (or blogged it), I don't know the exact wording, but just keep in mind that Lexus' lower product offerings is Buick's target here. Lexus' higher offerings are part of Cadillac's mission, though I see Caddy's designs having their sights set on Mercedes primarily. I thought that too, but then I drove the Lucerne and disagreed with myself. Your results may vary. Oh, and another reason I decided to join C&G to talk with you folks: the first time I was blogged/mentioned here someone suggested I should be "drowned in curry sauce." That's not a very nice thing to say, and it certainly got me writing. Thanks for the spirited discussion, I do enjoy my time here and I hope you all aren't asking the admin to ban me.

Its simple: I need to learn from others to make better agruements and/or stroke my own fragile ego.

Because even Bob Lutz uses Lexus as Buick's frame of reference. Bob ain't no fool. Automakers benchmark the competition all the time, thankfully Lutz has the balls to put everyone on notice. Sorry I don't have a link to this quote from Autoweek, its now dead. Come on now. Sure a 3.8L Lucerne is the price of a loaded Camry, but the CXS is right in Lexus ES territory. I dont understand why you guys are slamming me for comparing it to Lexus when everyone else does, including the folks at the RenCen. 1. Lexus is the best selling luxury car brand in the country, its what Buick and Cadillac used to be, wrapped into one brand. 2. Even though they sell tons of them, they can still appease all their customers and earn #1 customer satisfaction ratings. Buick and Mercury are right below, but they have less market share to go with it. 3. GM's mission is to beat its competitors and make Lexus-like profit margins on their products. You better believe the folks at the RenCen are looking to make Buick the "American" Lexus. How's that?

http://www.detnews.com/2005/autosconsumer/.../F03-345652.htm Is this the Quiet tuning you're talking about? I couldn't fault that quote: sure the Lucerne is quiet at cruising speeds...provided you never need to step into the throttle to pass or go up a hill. How about this: I am getting a Lexus ES 350 for review next week (fingers crossed). I will come on C&G and personally give you my thoughts on Buick's quiet tuning compared to a Lexus. If my sarcastic/biased ears hear Lucerne levels of intake roar from the Lexus while maintaining a speed via cruise control in hilly terrain I will officially apologize to Buick here on C&G and TTAC.

Course I'm not a domestic lover. GM and Ford sold me out years ago with their dull and uncompetitive products, losing market share all the way. Stop assuming things. Now you owe me a few Krispy Kremes. Once again, I drive a Lincoln. It has a rowdy Mustang Cobra engine and was made in Wixom, MI. Our style of writing is made to entertain/offend everyone, not just Buick. Some people love it, others hate it. That's the way it goes. Forget the dB ratings at cruising speed and put the cruise control on in hilly conditions. The Northstar constantly reminds you that this ain't no Lexus. Need to pass someone? The 4-2 downshift really wakes up the Northstar and silences all interior conversations. I did that while talking with two passengers and everyone remained silent until I got off the throttle. That doesn't happen in a Lexus. Good or bad? I donno. But it's not my definition of Quiet Tuning. I only get 800 words to write a smartass but somewhat informative review, so I hope that clears up my "beef" with Quiet Tuning. The Merc's chassis and suspension poise feels way better than the Lucerne. Get one with the handling package and it feels pretty damn good. Until GM has the balls re-engineer this (Aurora based?) chassis like Ford did the Panther chassis, its gonna have a hard time impressing me. Do I wish the Mercury was redesigned and had a better interior? Damn right I do, but I still feel its the best Buick sedan currently on the market. Why spend so much money for a car with obvious cust cutting measures? A Camry's shfiter knob doesn't wiggle at all. Do you really think its okay for Buick to do that? Don't you wanna hold them accountable for their ruthless bean-counting? I sure as hell do. I wanna like the Lucerne, but its got too much wrong with it. Whatever my bias is, I'm not the one to judge it...but unless someone knows the fleet/retail percentage of current Lucerne sales, there's a good chance the American public feels the same way too.

Well I thought we went over this before with the LaX thread, but hey, let's do it again. 1) Read my Toyota Camry review and tell me I have a bias against domestic vehicles. Ditto the Tundra. I challenge any and all of you to find someone who speaks up about Toyotas quality control problems like I do. I call 'em like I see 'em. Sorry guys and gals, that's why I'd be in one of these WAY before any current Buick: 2) The Lucerne isn't loud, the Northstar is. And that's a GOOD thing. This quiet-tuning campaign is nuts, the Lucerne is a hot rod from the airbox to the tailpipes, and should be promoted as such. That's all I am saying. 3) I didn't add anything new from my original road test, other than the fact that Buick thought I was worthy to attend their press junket. Which is fine, but I had more seat time to crystalize my beliefs about this half-baked car: it needs chassis stiffening, better tires (CXS), a high quality shift knob and a piece of plastic in the middle of the dash that matches the good stuff on the doors. And don't worry, I'm not a journalist. With any luck, I'll add "spizzarkle" to one of my MBA-level term papers next semester, and see what happens. Maybe my prof will set me straight. Thanks for reading, have a good day.

I saw the MONK episode with the Lucerne, last Friday. It was a nice placement, except for the Lucerne's owner's contrived dialogue about the Northstar engine when bragging about it. She talked about how rich she is (being a Realtor) but drives a Lucerne and not an STS. But hey, that's splitting hairs.

Thank you. Not being a journalist, I soon realized that I better not take comments too seriously. Its become funny: people saying I hate Detroit with one review, and I'm a "Jap-basher" (or something like that) with another. Last time I checked I'm an equal opportunity trash-talker. The Death Watch thing has some merit, the name just polarizes people. Its nice to see the chronicle of missteps (managerially speaking) and that I appreciate. If and when GM pulls out of this, I guess Farago's gonna eat crow. Not that I'd know, or do I think its gonna happen anytime soon. No matter what happens with the UAW, Delphi, Kirk or Rick, we need to see better product before awarding any long-term success. That's probably the new focus of the Death Watch. That's the problem these days: people look at the short term profits, quarterly this-and-that, and refuse to see that long term success is King. And that duty lies squarely on class-leading products. In my opinion, of course.

There are plenty of places for objective data, thanks to the internet. You don't need me for that. Of course, nobody needs me to review a car, but people gotta do something during the workday that involves their passion: cars. We also reviewed the car in your signature, but you probably shouldn't read it, we were rather opinionated about it. I'd like to think its much more than annoying, but hey, I never forced anyone to read it. After it was suggested that I should be drowned in curry on this forum (I'm sure that was a joke, funny at that) I decided to speak up. And its been a pleasure chatting with everyone, I might add.

Show us all how to do it. TTAC's editor welcomes new faces, so the floor is all yours.

The door panels of the LaX are the same soft material as the dash? Really? I guess we don't understand each other, and I must have girly soft hands.

Wrong. Read my review of the Mercury Grand Marquis. Sorry, if I had $22k or so, I'd be in one of those well before any Buick. The W-body is out of its league these days, but the Panther chassis Fords still have some magic about them.

Thanks. Can a get an even 80%? Since you mentioned it, the Intrigue is my favorite W-body. It was a nice car, maybe not class leading, but it did a lot of things right. If they put the blown 3800 in it, or if it lived long enough to see these new 5.3L V8s...oh well, what's done is done.

I can't, but the Camry's starting price is about $18,000, so its expected. I slammed it for other quality problems inside, however. But here's the thing: I expected the LaX to feel more decadent. To feel like a Buick. The interior trimmings on our old 1980 Century were far better, and I expected the LaX to be a modern day interpretation of my Century. Both are small Buicks, but one was more of a Buick than the other. Or to put it another way: its too close to a Chevy inside for my tastes. I think it is a design home run. The car looks beautiful and rich in pictures, but some of the trimmings seem Chevrolet to the touch. Someone cut corners after the designers finished the masterpiece. Again the four banger Camry is a bit cheaper than the LaX. Its got torque, but the 3.8L is almost as crude and vibration prone as a modern day four-pot. Even worse, the Camry's four cylinder with vario-cams and 5-speed automatic give decent power for most people's needs. The four banger Camry's powerband isn't as flat as a 3.8L Buick, but its not very far off. That extra gear in the tranny helps out like you would not believe. When you pony up to the V6 Toyotas, you get a lot of peak hp. (265hp?) With the 6-speed auto, low end grunt isn't missed...by the vast majority of people. Sure it won't grunt like a 3.8L (which I praised for its torque) but the end result is that the multi-speed Toyotas will out muscle the Buick. And that ain't cool.

Give ME a break. If I don't get a good overall impression of a car, I write the article that way. CASE IN POINT: My Camry review was the most critical write-up you'll ever see of that car. Nothing is sacred.

I see where you are coming from. The 220 inch cars are the Caprice, Roadmaster, Crown Vic types, but those cars aren't as space efficient as modern dar FWD cars. Unfortunately those cars have been a niche market since GM, Ford, and Chrysler went to smaller FWD cars in the 1980s. The cars that the majority of people have driven for the past 20 years have grown by leaps and bounds. Its that whole cab-forward thing Chrysler started with the LH cars. The new Camry or Ford 500 are great examples: rear seat space is as good as a new Crown Vic, its short hood and tall (not long) trunk make it amazingly space efficient. They also look boxy and stunted, but that's another topic. Aside from Buick's core fanbase, fleet buyers, company cars, and bargain hunters, I simply don't see who actually wishes to purchase it. You're gonna have to clue me in here, how is the LaCrosse competitive? 1. What percent of sales goes to fleet customers? (I spotted at least 10 of them at my last trip to a Hertz counter, I rented one too, it had the nicer 3.6L V6) Buick sure looks like its dumping cars to fleet sales. 2. Why is its interior quality (hard door panels, loose console) sub-par to a $20,000 Camry, much less an Avalon? I'm not talking about style, this is quality of interior materials. 3. Why does it still have a coarse 3.8L standard when its competition has smoother V6s for around the same price? 4. Why does its arthritic W-body chassis feel older than its 1989 blueprint? Driving the LaCrosse, these questions came to mind. I had no answers for them, and the road test reflected it. I appreciate you taking the time to talk with me. Thank you.

You have got to be kidding me. Sure everything is smaller than the full size 1976 GM sedans (right before the downsizing) but everything from the Honda Civic to the Ford Taurus (turn Ford 500) grew larger every generation since the 1980s. Cars are huge, and people who carry big stuff generally gravitate to SUVs these days. When I tested a 2007 Camry, I parked it next to a Crown Vic and a 1992-ish Camry. Guess which car was closer to its size? EDIT: Park a 1985 Century next to a 2000 model. Same story at Buick. Nope, I praised the Lucerne for its trunk...that's a Buick product ya know. I try to focus on the model tested, not the brands.

I'm at the University of Houston...I'm a Texan, sorry. But if it helps, I did spend a year in Metro Detroit, so there's a little Michigan in me.

Hi there, I'm a nOOb surfing in from google. I'd like to hear from C&G folk about my latest review, a Toyota Camry. http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/?p=1826 I also road tested the Lucerne and LaCrosse, as those in the Buick Forum saw. You guys have a great forum here.

That's right, they do. But posteriors are so big these days, the dogleg hinges aren't a big problem spacewise. Witness the new 5-series, it ditched the last gen's struts. When I test a trunk, I imagine I'm a parent with a grocery cart full of bags, a kid, and I'm running to the parking lot in a bad rainstorm. All of my cargo needs to get in my car ASAP. If I have to fight a dirty, slippery trunk to get it to close, I complain. Since I'm not a journalist (as that's been proven here) I am open to suggestions/comments on how to improve my methodology. I like my way, but I also came here to listen. Thanks for the welcome.

Well, let's put it this way:if I need a finger or three on the paint (Lucerne) to finish the job, that's fine. But if I have to use my entire hand, rubbing dirt into a new car's paint, fighting gas struts to shut the lid (LaCrosse) that's not cool. I'm picky, I'm anal and I expect better. flybrian: mad props to you, keep up the good work.

That's cool. You said you read it a few times, so either its impossible to understand or it was somewhat entertaining. I'm pretty happy. Toyota's Tundra is next on the list, so stay tuned. (pretty please?)

Its not that trivial when you consider best sellers like the Camry take the time to do it right. The Lucerne's trunk closes easily too. Fear not, my lack of journalistic integrity and anal retentiveness met the Toyota Camry LE. GM folk will probably like what they see. Well if they don't, that's okay too. http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/?p=1826

Hello Everyone, I found this thread doing an Ego Search on google. It's nice to see who reads me and what they think of my umm...writing. Yup, I'm not a professional writer, I'm an MBA student who loves cars. The LaX's trunk fails high school physics because (like I said in the article) its impossible to close without getting your hand on the outside decklid's paint...which was dirty at the time. Other rides (Chrysler 300) have this problem too, I don't like that double hinged/strut design. I complimented the Lucerne's trunk for doing it right, however. Ergonomics, baby. I'm 29 and my daily driver is a Lincoln. I know a thing or two about "old man's cars." But the LaX doesn't cut it in my book. Thanks for reading, and thank you for your spirited discussion.