No one is saying the center stack makes it or breaks it for them. I'm saying it looks rediculous because the rest of the car is great, then I get to that area and think, "what happened?" Honestly, look at the gauges, look at the flow of the dashboard and then look at the center stack. Beautiful, beautiful, tacked-on. I understand the need to keep costs down and to use the same switchgear, but does there need to be a swath of black plastic surrounding the corporate controls? Of course, beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
As I pointed out in my original post, I was judging based on the pictures. I sat in the Avalon at last year's Philly Auto Show and didn't have any problems. I'll sit in the Lucerne at this year's show so I can compare the two.
No one mentioned anything about how a car's center stack design makes the car high quality. To the average buyer, however, interior design can make all the difference. They don't know about the Buick plant quality awards or JD Power rankings, all they know is what they like and how they feel. When I look at the Avalon compared to the Lucerne, I see a difference of perceived quality, not actual quality, but perceived quality.
Some people on the boards were wondering why MT didn't give the Lucerne COTY. Besides the obvious bias on MT's part (I've read the article), do you really think they'd give that award to a car whose platform was created a decade ago? Sure there may not be anything inherently wrong with the G-body but it's that notion that it isn't good enough.
The Lucerne is a very fair opponent to the Avalon, probably the only large FWD car that is. The 500 and Montego can't compete because of their powertrains and possibly their interiors. The Maxima can't compete because of its interior. The Lucerne isn't a joke for the price. The only thing that could be considered a joke is the base engine for the Lucerne. Yes, yes, it has the Northstar but what if people don't want a V8?
I guess we'll agree to disagree.