caddycruiser

Now that I've seen the full options/standards sheet, the colors, the wheels, the power, etc., I too agree that this will be an awesome car--the size and solidity of the outgoing LeSabre, but finally matched with style, a high quality interior, and lots of cool features. Even without seeing one in person, I'd put it at the top of my list if looking for a relatively large, refined, luxury sedan under $40k http://www.cheersandgears.com/public/style_emoticons//AH-HA_wink.gif This car seems SO, SO much nicer than the Lacrosse could ever dream of being.

The 3.8L that was in the '02 LeSabre rental we had for a month was very quiet, smooth, and had a transmission that shifted flawlessly. At lower speeds, it was kinda punchy, but up at normal speed, it was a dog and pretty much died off, making for a few strained highway merging situations. This was with a base car, and therefore, the base axle. Similarly, my grandmother has a '99 Intrigue GX 3.8L that was built before they made the switch over to the 3.5L. It too has the punchy low speed torque feel and is very nice around town, but, like the Buick, it seems strained when the terrain gets hilly or you have to pass. Perfect example is one quite steep hill heading out of the town where she lives--at first, the car seems to be moving well. Start up the incline and it dogs so much, that I've had to push the pedal deep into the floor, wait a few seconds, and then, MAYBE, get a transmission kick down and a little more juice. For being so sprightly around town, it kinda scared me the first time I went for a longer drive in it and watched the speedometer needle sink back more and more, as the pedal went deeper and deeper. Problem-wise, they've also had a pretty good oil leak from the pan 3 times now, the last being a while ago before the warranty ran out, and it seems to be holding. Overall, I still think it's a good motor, and REALLY does sip gas. If they have the gearing and shift points calibrated right (something that seems to make a HUGE difference with this motor) in the Lucerne, the majority of V6 model buyers will be quite satisfied, just as they have been for years with LeSabre's, etc. On the other hand, there still should be something newer, lighter, much more powerful, AND still gas sipping to replace it. Think the 3.5L Toyota has in the new Avalon--regardless of whether or not you like the car's design, the engine is magnificent, smooth, silky, strong, AND very easy on gas, no to mention certain added "details" like a much nicer exhaust/running sound and perfect transmission shift points.

Actually, after looking over the ordering guide for this car, seems VERY nice. For example, there will be NO hubcaps (finally), but rather the base model will use one of the current LeSabre upgrade wheels. Also, there are LOTS of exterior paint colors to choose from, more than, I think, I've ever seen on a GM car, plus a new interior shade called "Tuxedo Blue/Shale", which I'm assuming is some kind of combination deep navy blue and lighter cashmere color--very European-like. Here's the wheels: 16" Machined Face Aluminum (standard CX) 17" Premium Painted Aluminum (standard CXL) 17" Chrome Plated Aluminum (optional CXL) 18" Premium Painted Aluminum (standard CXS) 18" Chrome Plated Aluminum (optional CXS) And the rest of the option/color book stuff (To get the full print book, click Print Book, Print Model, then Print): '06 Lucerne Options/Colors

GOOD NEWS! "...will ultimately as we build capacities on those transmissions, it will migrate to the whole line" -Lutz explaining, in a podcast from today, how a few speculated here, that once production of the 6-spd gets up to speed, it WILL be put in every model. Good, but too bad once again, GM powertrain wasn't ready at the same speed of the rest of the car.

GOOD NEWS! "...will ultimately as we build capacities on those transmissions, it will migrate to the whole line" -Lutz explaining, how a few speculated here, that once production of the 6-spd gets up to speed, it WILL be put in every model. Just too bad it's another case of GM powertrain use always being ready fully one year LATER than a new vehicle design. Kind of like my '93 Fleetwood Brougham which was a completely redesigned car that year, but didn't get its new engine until '93. Same with the Intrigue having the 3.8L for the first year and a half because the 3.5L wasn't ready, the CSV's only having the 3.5L until the 3.9L option was ready, etc., etc.

True. The LeSabre has always been a strong seller. I just hope the "name game" doesn't screw this car initially, like it did with the G6. Lucerne sounds fresher and cooler in my opinion, but I think with the Buick lots being devoid of LeSabres and stocked with new Lucernes instead, it won't take long at all for the typical blue hair buyer to make the switch. For example, for the longest time after the Lacrosse was introduced, I only ever saw ONE within 20 miles of my house, and it was the same one--a silver blue CXS. Stayed that way for some time, but now, especially after the discounts, they're everywhere--and the local lot seems to have experienced a "switch", being out of Lacrosse's, but full of Century and Regal trade-ins.

Much better overall, and even nicer than the Cobalt in many aspects, but that rear end is worrying me. Looks like the roofline is cut too quickly and low, which looks good, but really cramps the back seat even more. That, and the trunk/rear fender profile looks like it might resemble the Cobalt sedan's worst feature a little too much. Also hope it doesn't end up with the same jacked-up, off-roader height of the Cobalt sedan. Otherwise, cool car, and GREAT for Saturn.

Yeah, that actually seems like it will be more of the problem. It has the fuel economy issue aced, but might be too much of a dud powerwise for such a relatively large, new luxury sedan. Then again, the lower models ARE replacing the LeSabre, in effect, and they've done fine for years with the 3.8L, albeit unimpressive as they were.

Gee....let's see--because they are the ONLY ones to already offer 2 wheelbase lengths for each model to begin with!? People who like the short ones like them because they ARE short, but still have room for 5, and can squeeze in a couple more if need be. Plus, on a daily driving basis, they're just easier to move around. On the other hand, people like us, who typically have lots of stuff and the people & dogs to go with it MOST of the time, the lack of having both cargo AND people room turned us off from the Tahoe/Yukon immediately, hence the Suburban. I could see maybe another inch or so in the shorties, just to free up a bit more leg and cargo room, but overall more important was that maybe the engineers could have done a little better packaging in making a more adaptable 3rd row, like they did with the middle row.

The WHOLE everything of the Armada feels cheap and junky. To this day, they're still having problems with massive rattling, clunking, squeaking, etc. from almost every part of the vehicle, the interior materials are more back yard shed than anything else, and the same goes toward the overall feel. The Nissan/Infiniti big ute's have TONS of interior room, cool looks, and great power, but they're virtually absent of real refinement and quality.

Not too bad, I guess, but get used to seeing 90% Gold and Silver painted ones wearing the most hideous Buick hubcaps and a front bench seat on a dealer lot coming to you soon.....just hope the Lucerne looks better as a "base" than the LeSabre does. Comparison to the 300/300C and it's $24-34k base, RWD, and bolder looks is inevitable, but it should still do strongly. Similarly, it better have as good of driving characteristics, refinement, and materials like the Avalon.

Very true, and up until recent times, the core characteristics of the truck were still making it do well in comparisons. As of late, it had been shot down a few notches because of the cheap and old interior, somewhat imprecise steering and brakes, and lack of newer features the competitor's have like side curtain airbags and more adaptable seats....ALL things that have now been heavily worked over. Actually, as I first read through the specs sheets yesterday, it seemed like the General finally took into consideration nearly EVERYTHING the current ones got downgraded for, except for the 3rd seat issue. They should do very well, even in the top auto mag's once again, like they did a few years ago.

While I love most everything about this new truck so far, I still keep thinking, in the back of my mind, that Toyota is just grinning silently at the moment, thinking to themselves "Oh yeah....you just wait!" And regardless of how much some here hate Toyota, it's almost a GUARANTEE they have something big, and something special waiting behind closed doors with the new Seqouia and Tundra. It will probably be ugly or have something weird or TOO car-like about it again, but fuel mileage and features will probably be at the very top....I just hope it isn't true.... :unsure: Then again, even if it has some of the most innovative features and best MPG's of any truck ever, the oddball/boring looks and/or "delicate" little car feel might still keep it behind the GM's.

Why? It gives it a more rugged, less wimpified look, which is quite fitting, IMHO, on a truck. Then again, being an ex-owner of one of the ORIGINAL Avalanche's before they got stripped naked of everything and forced to use the uglified Silverado nose bits, I was and still am a HUGE fan of that trucks look, and after owning it, the functionality of it all.

For a good, but INSANE comparison, here's the pricing breakdown of a fully loaded '06 Suburban 4wd LTZ: MSRP: $56,840 :o :o Invoice: $49,612 I never knew they had gotten this high, especially for a CHEVY.... :blink: ...some nice wheels and Denali leather or not.... :o

Agreed. I also don't see the point of the LTZ on the Tahoe, or any of the other Chevy models they introduced it on lately like the Cobalt, Impala, and Malibu, because it's just a fully loaded LT with a few unique trim pieces. Plus here, like you said, it kind of steps on the Denali's tail. Looking at what I posted again, I'd agree the prices should be even lower, just to give buyer's that "wow...in a good way" kind of reaction when they see the trucks and then the sticker on them, especially when compared to the competitor's.

The current ones were getting ancient compared to modern standards, and are notoriously OVERpriced from an MSRP standpoint, so no fake sales went down...BUT, overall, while not expanding leaps and bounds, the same people who were buying them before still continued to buy them and the market stayed quite steady. Anyone know people who are on their 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, etc. Tahoe? I know several and we ourselves are already on #2 in the big GM 'ute stable of choices. As far as pricing, here's what I think would work, considering just the Tahoe/Suburban: *Tahoe LS 2wd--$30,595 base, with more standard features than anyone else *Suburban LS 2wd--$31,595 base *Tahoe LS 4wd--$31,595 base .... *Tahoe LTZ 4wd--$43,595 with EVERYTHING *Suburban LTZ 4wd--$44,595 with EVERYTHING Edited my "pricing outline" above.... No more stripped base models starting at $37k and above, no more Chevy's with $53k price tags, and MOST important, no more $5k rebates or other insane blue light specials. Such a pricing strategy can't hurt margins too much, especially considering 95% of the GMT-800's sold to date were discounted to levels below those above anyway.

Actually, it is, as it has always been, ALL Suburban, with the rearmost glass and roof panel chopped and replaced by the cool bed system. The Tahoe is too short for it, but body panels, interiors, wheels, etc. should be identical between the 3 Chevy's.

Anyone notice the image of the Yukon, shown inadvertently in one of the acoustics pics? Looks like it really is a carbon copy of the Envoy look, just larger.

I think you got that backwards....the 6.2L is the only one WITH the 6-spd standard. All the others have the 4-spd.

No, not at all. Not only is the 2nd seat back a little bit farther in the Suburban, but so is the 3rd seat, pushed back further into the cargo hold and because the wheel base is also longer, the floor steps down where your feet go in the Suburban's 3rd row and is actually just as comfortable as sitting in any of the other 2 rows. Now the Tahoe, that's a different story. It's simply a case of having a flat cargo floor, from the second row back, and latching a set of seats right down to that floor--your butt sits right at floor level, knees in the air, and forward leg room lacking. Not as bad as something like a Toyota Highlander with it's joke of a 3rd seat, but the smaller Explorer is more comfortable and more naturally positioned to sit in. No wonder we went for the Suburban....cargo AND passenger room.

Well, at least they've taken a more realistic view of things, rather than thinking they're going to revolutionize the world and have everyone buying one.

It's the second row http://www.cheersandgears.com/public/style_emoticons//AH-HA_wink.gif....as shown in the cool video on GM TV today: GM TV 9-20-05

Here you go: GM TV 9-20-05

Um, with the dimensions being so close to those of the current-gen Tahoe, there's no way it will have more passenger and cargo room than the Durango--it's always been the most "cramped" full-sizer, but that's actually a good thing for most buyers.