Cananopie

speaking about Lucerne promotion, you can hardly go to any well known site these last few months without seeing the Lucerne in an ad somewhere nearby. They are advertising the Hell out of it online, it must be working.

Just because there isn't a vehicle in that market doesn't mean there isn't a market for it. If you have similar vehicles below that price range as well as above it, from a marketing perspective, doesn't that mean there should be a demand for something in the middle as well? If GM actually had the balls to allow Buick to make a Velite coupe/convertible or something similar and could fit it in between that price range and marketed it as such ( saying it's not equivilant to something like the XK which is "too expensive" but boasting its betterness over the cheaper products) it would be priced exactly where...a BUICK should be priced! Middle class! It wouldn't only help improve their image as a middle of the road company that isn't too expensive nor too cheap, but it'd finally give Buick some zest.

You aren't kidding! I'd consider buying Buick merchandise if the word GOLF and the Nike logo weren't plastered everywhere. I like Buick for its cars... not for golf.

1.) When Lutz said what he said I'm fairly certain what he had in mind in particular was sound deadening, which Lexus was notorious for and also which Buick has competed properly with that feature alone. The reason why I think the whole brand falls 'short' of Lexus is because Buick is still supposed to be a mid-lux vehicle, a Lexus typically falls closer to Cadillac prices than Buick prices. Buick nips at the heals of Lexus, and I think they do that with success, and Cadillac competes in the upper end. Buick's becoming more unaffordable isn't what Buick needs. 3.) The 3800 is still a fine engine and it is an engine many loyalists (the ones who are definitely going to buy the car) associate with Buick, losing that engine may have more implications than you think. It was a proper bridge marketing move for Buick. If it was any other GM subsidary the implications would be less for losing the 3800 but whether Buick likes it or not many people associate Buick with the 3800 and many people are happy with that. The 3.6 is the semi-premium motor and when you have the 3.6 you've officially entered in to Lexus territory. The choice for using both engines is a very intelligent marketing move to keep the old and to bring in the new. 4.) That's not a bad point- I'm concerned the epsilon might be too small to make a midsize sedan for Buick- but I can't verify that and it might fit well. Whatever the reason they used the W I still don't think it makes it a poor vehicle. A lot of people find many things wrong with it but I feel the LaCrosse never met its full potential ever since Lutz delayed it a year for refinement, at least the Lucerne had a whole extra year and that seems to generally please everybody. As for opportunity squandered- I'm not sure- you're asking for the LaCrosse to have blown Century+Regal sales combined out of the water and a perception image doesn't happen overnight. Even though you mention things like downgraded quality in the Camry the overwhelming stigma behind Toyota is still 'better' for most of the nation. There will be many more people who won't consider a Buick and buy a Camry that may not be as high of quality for the price its at and still be happy because they know it's a Toyota. And the problem with the LaCrosse is it still doesn't scream anything special (which is why Buick needs a halo car, but I digress) , Buick still kept in mind the conservative styling to please definite buyers, I think many people forget how close Buick was (at the debut of the LaCrosse) and still is very close to following Olds to its grave... a complete image change- as Olds did- can be deadly.

1. It has been known for a while that the Fleet Sales from GM and Buick have been significantly dropped and many of the sales are actually that- sales- to real customers that are people. You said you didn't know who this car would appeal to outside of rental companies, business cars, and ... bargain hunters... which you're basically admitting that the LaCrosse is a bargain for what it's being sold at- so I don't know exactly what your issue is with the vehicle if it's being sold at its appropriate price for what it is. Whether or not you "see" rental LaCrosses on the road doesn't mean that they are sold massively and mostly all across the country to Fleet sales. The fact that Lutz said once a long long time ago (roughly around the debut of the LaCrosse) that Buick was going to be the next "American Lexus" doesn't mean anything this many years later. The only reason that quote stuck around is because this is exactly what foreign-lovers were wanting to hear... they wanted to have a quote so they could directly compare Buick to something like Lexus and say how much Buick isn't like Lexus. Which is fine by me. I don't want my Buicks to be Lexuses, I want them to be Buicks. 2. The quality of the materials inside the LaCrosse are good. At least to me. The hard-plastic discussion has been made on this forum many times over and it is hotly debated each way. I just know that after a while you can't clean the soft plastics nearly as well as the hard plastics because soft plastics start to absorb the dirt from over the years while the hard plastics stay nice. It's not like the hard plastics in the LaCrosse are uncomfortable, I've driven in one many times and have been very comfortable inside of it. You hardly touch any of the hard plastics inside the LaCrosse and they are fit together really well and to me- and obviously many people who chose the car to buy for their own- look very elegant and sophisticated. It's just the style they chose- the plastic isn't movable or tinny or any of those other things that make plastic feel cheap, it is durable, hard, and solid. When you get the price per pound of the plastics to prove its cheapness and how much they would've saved choosing one plastic over the other then your argument might have a base, otherwise you can't really prove quality because I definitely see it there. 3. The 3.8 argument is also hotly debated and not a hands down matter as you wish it to be. Though the limelight for the engine is waining it is still a very modern engine and the very low and quiet rumble it produces when you floor it (which is really the only time you hear the 'coarse' engine) is only exhilerating for me. The fact that I have had twice on two seperate occasions my mothers LaCrosse and two seperate people were surprised to realize the engine was on (one inside the car and the other was outside of it) makes it perhaps not as coarse as you wish it would be for your condemnation. It is an incredibly smooth engine, especially the series III, absolutely a major step up from the series II in my Regal. Unless you can scientifically test this 'smoothness' you're talking about I can just imagine that it's comparable to its competitors and that there is nothing really poor about what you're talking about here. 4. The W body needs to be updated, but that doesn't break the car... most people don't take their Buicks to the slalom course so it should be okay. Like I said- it's not a sports car so the W body is okay for the vehicle to be on.

Because there isn't one right with with anything with life, what makes cars any different? I do believe the LaCrosse could've been a better product but I do not think it is a poor product. I think the major flaws of the vehicle are the fact that it is only a 4 speed and its MPG isn't anything to brag about. GM as a whole needs to improve those two things in particular. Everything else is a matter of taste and choice. I would enjoy a Buick with more bold exterior styling at some point, but going from the Century to something bolder than the Lucerne would turn Buick in to the next Olds hands down, there is more at stake than pleasing people who constantly put foreign vehicles at the top of the list. I do not want my Buicks to be styled like Toyotas which magazines to import lovers across America praise like each new vehicle is a God among Gods. To me it is the Toyotas that are blandly styled both exteriorly and interiorly. I do not enjoy their style, and it is most obvious that quite a few of you do enjoy it- which is not wrong, but it is possible to like things that are different than you like. A lot of the mindset that American vehicles can't 'compete' with foreign vehicles comes from the mindset that foreigners set the standard and American vehicles need to catch up with them, if American vehicles try and take another direction then those American vehicles are "way off the mark" and get their usual stigmas attached to them that have been attached for the last 30 years. It's not the gas shortage anymore that gave the foreign competitors their great reputation for reliablilty which came strictly because they were comprised of a steering wheel, 2 very cramped front seats, and if youre lucky back seats that a midget if he got in the fetal position could fit in, and a 4 cyl engine that hardly sipped gas... the reliability came from the fact that there was absolutely no power or luxuries to those vehicles... now that these foreign competitors make these vehicles they too are having just as many reliability problems, if not more in some instance (VW especially) than the American companies. Toyota is living on a reputation that started in the 80s and now they are understanding what it is like to run a large chunk of the automotive world and their recent recalls are proving that. Foreign vehicles aren't indomitable. Their styling isn't perfect nor the one right way to style. Honda comes out with the Element and Toyota comes out with the Scion xB and yet it is praised. However the LaCrosse- a conservatively styled yet elegant vehicle that runs smoothly and quietly on an engine that has more reliability than Toyotas popular historical reputation in the US is condemned for being 'outdated.' It doesn't matter that it happens to be one of the last engines that true mechanics that don't have a computer programming degree can really understand and that it just means that less things have the potential going wrong with it- to many of you the engine means 'outdated' as if there are severe advtantages to any other engine that produces similar HP. The only reason that Toyota comes out with things such as hybrid vehicles or more computer enhanced engines or more gears in their vehicles is because GM spent over a lifetime creating a large automotive empire that gave its workers more than fair wages and allowed them to live life comfortably. Now that the market is more competitive GM is having a hard time keeping things up because their sales aren't up anymore. I can forgive them for going through this financial crisis because as a whole I don't find GM to have been a very evil corporation especially with the power it wielded and I'm willing to still support it in its time where I won't be getting the 5 mpg more in the city a mile or doesn't have that extra gear to shift. But as for its vehicles, the LaCrosse in particular being a joke? No it certainly is not. I enjoy driving and riding in my mothers LaCrosse. I enjoy the handling and power just fine and it has been complimented many times. I have ridden in foreign competitors vehicles and happier with the aesthetics of the LaCrosse. I definitely don't find foreign styling any more "exciting" than American. I do think that the LaCrosse could definitely look more Buick, but I don't think something like the Camry sceams excitement either. You in particular The OC live in an area that everybody agrees that foreign cars are better even if an American vehicle beat out a foreign vehicle in every last possible way-maybe not you in particular- but Souther California as a whole... but theres a whole rest of the country out here. PS- sorry about the novel.

You can't base the sales numbers necessarily on where you live alone. If you lived in Southern California you'd wonder how American car companies stay in business at all, while if you live where I do in Western New York, more people than not are still loyal to American car companies and they are seen quite often. Yesterday alone I saw 6 Lucerne's on the way home from work- 0 Avalons. Just this spring my family went down to Myrtle Beach and the Lucerne's there outnumbered all other vehicles around, it was really amazing to see. So the midwest isn't necessarily the only place where the Lucerne's are being sold, they're popular in the East still all up and down the coast. Oh- and the reason why you mistake it for the Passat is because Buick blatantly stole their rear-end.

Maybe I should've been more specific. Cars as a whole are constrained to being much smaller than they were in the past. For over the last fifteen years we've seen vehicles go from being over 220 inches being called a full size sedan to vehicles hardly reaching over 200 inches being the largest of offered fullsize sedans. Granted companies like VW and Toyota vehicles have gotten much larger than their signature Foxes and Tercels in the late 80s and early 90s, that is only because those companies were not big players in the larger sedan market. Midsize vehicles have stayed relatively the same size as well and space in those vehicles count just as much, if not more thank ever. A 1993 Regal is within 5 inches of a 2007 LaCrosse. Of course for a short time during the gas shortage all vehicles shrunk drastically but for well over the last decade midsize vehicles have not gotten noticeably larger. Just because there are many more brands now that compete in the midsize market doesn't mean that cars are getting larger, there is just more competition, there is a big difference there. However you do not see anymore 220 inch long cars anymore, so they are definitely getting smaller. Obviously you say that is what an SUV is for, but there is still a large market that prefers cars over SUVs, even for carrying bulky items, and Buick is still serving that market. I wasn't saying you in particular were brand bashing, I'm saying it's easy to find faults in brands you typically aren't friendly with- whoever you are. So what might be a space saving convenience for one company in a persons eye can be a trunk closing problem in another persons eye. And sometimes the bias isn't even noticed. All I meant by it was it was all about perspective. A lot of times when you have a certain perspective on things you forget the alternate is out there. The trunk as well as anything else you discount in your article as making the LaCrosse such a poor vehicle that it can't even 'compete' with the foreign market are examples of these. You choose to view it like a Picasso painting, with both eyes on one side only looking for things such as Slalom driving and breaking like a sports vehicle and discounting something that is made for the luxury of the vehicle like quiet tuning. It sounds like you wanted to test a Civic, not mid-lux vehicle. The LaCrosse is very competetive in its market and still is at least equal to many of its competitors, it just chooses to appeal to a group of people that you probably are not in. Car companies rarely make real duds, because if they did they wouldn't be a car company anymore. However when you call a car a "definite loser" as you did in your article, that is bias, whether or not you got this bias from knowing the brand or you just refuse to accept who the crowd might appeal to I don't know. But the laughable wood grain might just be an opinion over a fact considering almost all wood grains are fake and each try to appeal to a different group. For example the pee-colored wood in the new Avalon doesn't necessarily appeal to me but you can't judge the whole cars quality based on personal opinion.

Obviously it could never happen, but I think a few of these could qualify as halo cars.

I find the Roadmaster way too Cadillac... because of the Sixteen, however if Buick COULD pull off having a window open like that and it still be allowed by laws that would sell in a heartbeat. I personally like the Wildcat. THAT would get people looking at Buick no matter what they sold, and it's a good adaptation of the Boat tail of the old Rivs and the Velite which is unique and Buick in itself. GM would be amazing for making that. I'd buy it no matter how much it cost. I'd find a way.

Of course nothing this good would happen but I did enjoy some of the chops found on this site, in particular the boat tail Velite they chopped. If they made a vehicle that looked like that for Buick it'd put the Corvette to shame (so obviously they won't do it)... but that would be one beautiful vehicle. Here is the link: http://www.gminsidenews.com/naias/revitalization/ I found out about it via an Edmunds article that is roughly 2 weeks old but I did not notice anything on here about it and thought I'd share. It's cute how the article points out their severe bias in their "What this means to you" section which exclaims: "At least somebody is still excited about Buick." Jerks. http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/News/articleId=115997

Your imagined situation is where your issue comes in to play for judging it. Some people might have a bike, or go on vacations often, or something similar where space is crucial in the trunk and those hinges become a huge problem. You claim the rear ends of vehicles are so large these days that it doesn't even matter but all vehicles have gotten smaller and smaller in the last 30 years or so, especially full sized sedans... when the Impala classifies as full size you know that space is a major issue for vehicles. Trunk space is not getting larger and it is still very crucial. Vehicles are not only made to do things in imaginary crucial situations that happen MAYBE once a year to a very particular group of people where as someone might ride their bike weekly or daily perhaps all year round, or go on vacation often. More space is the better option in those other situations which I personally believe are more real and renowned and wishing to close trunks with pinky might be something you look for in a vehicle but many people still prefer more practicality in their vehicle. For the person who is constantly going in their trunk with full hands- yes, your imaginary situation is appropriate, but I think there are more people who pack their trunk over people who are constantly full handed, even when closing the trunk. I know personally I've run in to the hinges being a problem inside the trunk multiple times (and I neither bike or vacation often) but can't recall a single time where the ease of shutting the trunk was crucial. It's not like it's really that hard anyways, it just takes more effort than the two fingers you feel is necessary. When it comes down to it, it's really what brands you have bias towards however. If you don't like a company and they have dogleg hinges you can rag on them for the room, if you don't like a company and they have space efficient hinges you can use your argument... to be truly unbias you say (for example, a situation without the dogleg hinges) Company X decided that more space was more important in their trunk with their new model Y (and the opposite) Company Z decided ease of trunk closing trumped space with new model A. That's how you understand the choice... one is not necessarily better than the other when you're writing a journalist entry, it's important to show what is gained with a decision and also what is lost, but do not focus on either or as 'right' and 'wrong'.

Buick has had compact cars as late as 1997 (or 98 with Fleet) with the Skylark. The Reatta I'm sure fits in to the compact category as well too. Buick has made compacts but just not consistently.

It's conservatively styled purposefully to help the transition to a younger generation buying crowd. It's very important however that Buick does not lose the elderly buying crowd with their new vehicles as well. The Century was the big seller to the elderly and it was not an exciting vehicle. The LaCrosse isn't the most sporty or liberally designed vehicle but it has to bridge from the Century. The LaCrosse has a lot more class and style than the Century and that is what brings in new buyers while not losing the older one. It at least has curves and some more character and elegance than the Century.

They're obviously bias and they try and hide behind it by saying things like "I guess my glowing review of the Corvette Z06 wasn't good enough"... The Corvette is the only GM vehicle that foreign ass-kissers are allowed to like and praise. But the regular vehicles can never compare to the "amazing" foreign competitors. Obviously basing their mindset on a 25 year old stereotype that the Japanese and Germans build a better vehicle because back during the gas shortage they sipped gas and had nothing more to them than a cramped back seat and an engine so they'd 'last forever.' But face it guys- We can see Toyota in Lexus and we can see Chevy in Buick, obviously- they're part of the same company so some things are going to be shared. But today all cars are pretty much on the same playing field. Toyota materials never were glorious over Buicks, Toyota has always and continues to make extremely bland and boring designs both interior and exterior as has Hyundai or Kia. Usually something like Honda has better design skills especially with their upper-brand level Acura but it's usually very cheap. It's so interesting because all of a sudden the most important thing to these import lovers are anything that the American counterpart doesn't have... (soft plastics being one of the most recent ones I remember) or "reality of fake wood" or something to the effect that really doesn't matter. Currently the Japanese vehicles have a better fuel efficency, that's a fact, but everything else is subjective. I know how chic and cool it is to have as many electronics as you can put in an engine possible... but believe it or not having more things to break or give you pointless error messages or be forced to get fixed during an inspection even though it has nothing to do with how the car runs isn't exciting for some people... sometimes a "25 year old engine" is just more reliable and trustworthy. For some reason some people really can't see that and want to put it as a 'con' as opposed to a vehicle miracle to have invented something so venerable.

Any Buick with the Super tag attached will not a be a Buick worthy of being made fun of. It's going to be a top-of-the-line Buick and it'll be the most powerful Buick in over a decade. When it comes to cars with the "Super" name it's a totally seperate context from when Big Gay Al from South Park says it. When you tell people you have a LaCrosse Super the first thing they'll notice is that it's not a cheap car. It's not going to have 15 inch hubcaps with cloth seats with no CD player or something- I can see people start making fun of it then... but chances are your LaCrosse or Lucerne Super will be better than their car so let them make fun of a classic name. Try saying it like "LaCrosse Super" instead of "LaCrosse Thuper" and there should be no mistakes between the two.

Man, whats wrong with you guys? Super is Buick! It's way better than the letters they pulled out of the air now for Buick. CX, CXL, CXS... that's cheesy. Insignificant lettering is the cheesy thing. I can understand if Super wasn't a historic name for Buick. You should be thankful they're finally using their heritage a bit to help sell their vehicles instead of washing everything away that reminded us of a Buick before 2000. If Kia or someone similar used Super that WOULD be cheesy, there is no significance for them... but Kia or any of them don't even use any words similar to Super so I don't even know where that basis comes from. It's definitely a good thing Buick is finally drawing from their heritage.

I think the real point is is that the Bengal is a dated concept that its inception this late in the game would bring nothing short of mocking. The Bengal was good for its time but it's over. Even the Velite is getting a little ridiculous to build. A concept that comes out in what? 2004? shouldn't start production in 2010, thats just the way I look at it. If Buick is getting a flagship car it better be ahead of BOTH those designs.

I think that line spoken now at least a year or 2 ago I believe was blown out of proportion. Buick is still going for affordable luxury. You're hard pressed to find a Buick over 40k while Caddys are now up in the 75k range. There is most obviously a hierarchy between the two and there always has been since they both were in General Motors together. Especially with almost the whole Cadillac lineup now offered with a "V" series option Cadillac stays well above Buick. I believe the true muddle comes with Saturn and Pontiac considering Saturn is headed very much to where Oldsmobile should be today, which is just a step down from Buick. The whole reason of ousting Oldsmobile in the first place was because of the market constraints and that Pontiac, Buick, and Olds were too close. Buick has definitely moved up to be on average #2 in the GM price hierarchy and luxury hierarchy so it isn't confused with Pontiacs or Saturns. But Pontiac and Saturn are now what is confusing. 5 years ago... maybe even as short as 2 years ago Saturn was a brand that was most definitely below Pontiac on this hierarchy, but very recently Saturn has been offering vehicles above Pontiac leaving Pontiac a pretty cheap excitement division, especially since Saturn doesn't mind creating their own excitement (Sky in particular) the Aura, and the Astra. So really Saturn and Pontiac are the ones butting heads, not Buick and Caddy.

I suppose the big dip in Buick's case came from the fact that they have two relatively new vehicles with new problems that might not be fixed on the first and second year. I also heard the Rainier was having a lot of problems with seat malfunctions. But I think it's ridiculous that Cadillac is still up there and Buick plummeted to below industry standard. This upsets me, it's one of the few things Buick really had going for it. I can't believe Chevy, who has about 30 more vehicles than Buick has a better average than Buick, that's disturbing. Really what the Hell happened... Buick even uses the most dated and reliable parts such as the 3800 engine and 4 speed transmission.

Yea, I agree. I have a hard time believing Statesman will even be used

Statesman isn't bad, but I dont think it'd hurt to use a traditional Buick name for once.

That's when it starts production, big difference from when it starts being sold.

Wow, so an early 2006 concept that was supposed to be out by early 2007 isn't coming out til almost 2008 now... great.

In the power section they claimed this: Wasn't it the 1987 and wasn't it the GNX, not the Grand National? I'm not trying to poke holes in the website, I'm just trying to clarify. But also I noticed this too: The LaCrosse and Lucerne base models both produce slightly less than 200 due to the new Series III engine, right?... but really that's a small fault, it's virtually 200 HP. Also: I always was fascinated with the Buick GS Stage 1 because of its massive power and it was a Buick. But strangely I've found very few facts on this vehicle. 0-60 times vary but last I remember the GS was quicker than all GM muscle cars and only the 4-4-2 was faster than it. I'm just interested in any further information on it is all.