: Buick Lucerne: A home run?



Jesda
02-16-06, 08:37 AM
http://www.usatoday.com/money/autos/reviews/healey/2006-01-26-lucerne_x.htm

FSU_Noles
02-16-06, 08:47 AM
Saw a CXS model on the road the other day and was quite impressed. It really does look better in person. As for looking better than the DTS, I guess that is a matter of opinion but I would definitely jump in one of these Buick's before looking at a Toyota.

This writer must be an outcast, or will be soon, as he has spoke ill of the holy grail car manufacturer that Toyota has seem to have become -- next someone will say something bad about Honda :helpless:



To properly regard Lucerne, we need to address three prejudices.
Detroit models have inferior quality.
Get over that one, folks, especially in this case. Buick outscores Toyota, Honda and some other highly regarded brands in J.D. Power and Associates' surveys.
Power's 2005 tally of things gone wrong the first 90 days of ownership showed the Buick brand was fourth, behind Lexus, Jaguar and BMW and ahead of Cadillac, Mercedes-Benz and Toyota.
Buick also places fourth in Power's 2005 study of problems with 3-year-old vehicles behind Lexus, Porsche and Lincoln.


Toyota can do no wrong.
Get over that one, too. The 2005 Avalon was recalled last year, its first on the market, because somebody forgot to weld the steering mechanism together on some cars, meaning the driver might not be able to steer, according to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.
The auto industry, in its frenzy of cost-cutting that's become corner-cutting, has sunk back into the first-year bugs of the old days, so Lucerne could have some teething problems, too. So far, though, NHTSA files show no complaints, investigations or recalls involving Lucerne, on sale since October.

Elvis
02-16-06, 10:02 AM
Very nice article. Good to read something positive about ANY GM model.

I like the Lucerne a little better every time I see one. If I were in the market for a sedan right now, that would be my first visit. I'd much rather have a Lucerne than a CTS or STS. But I'd probably buy a leftover 2005 DeVille.

Caddy Man
02-16-06, 10:12 AM
Lucerne looks great!...and for the price, you CANT go wrong!

bobkat
02-16-06, 10:30 AM
Yeah the Lucerne is a real looker, that's for sure. I was impressed the first time I saw one. However, early reports say it is destined to become Buick's "chick-mobile" -- so watch out guys !!! :suspense:

nickc50310
02-16-06, 11:20 AM
Looks nice but I would much rather have my CTS.

Night Wolf
02-16-06, 11:54 AM
Nice.

Look at the pictures... it really is a sweet car.

And, it still way cool to see the 3800 living on as the base engine... I thought GM was killing it... long live the 3800!

slk230mb
02-16-06, 12:32 PM
I like them. Seeing them on the road, they look much more appealing. Glad to see GM got one model right.

noahsdad
02-16-06, 12:33 PM
Hooray for James Healy and USA Today! It's about time the American press recognized that quality is no longer exclusive to the Japanese.

Go drive a Lucerne - it's a masterpiece.

elwesso
02-16-06, 01:21 PM
You know what comes to mind... Back when this forum was just starting, Sal posted an article that said that Buick was trying to compete against Lexus.. I said, sal your crazy... I think they are really doing a great job..

Last summer I drove a lacrosse, and damn, that was a nice car for the money.. We drove a decently equipped one and it was cheaper than the grand prix we had just bought...

For the money, I would rather have a buick lucerne than a G35 sedan, Lexus GS, and so on... Of course the fanboys will be brand loyal, but the general public is not stupid, if a car is really good people will want it..... The G35 is what saved Infiniti, IMO.

Putting in the V8 was a great idea, because it offers power that no one else in the segment has... What GM needs to do, is go for a 5 speed auto, and not the old 4 speed, granted, a bulletproof trans.

Zorb750
02-16-06, 02:45 PM
Nice.

Look at the pictures... it really is a sweet car.

And, it still way cool to see the 3800 living on as the base engine... I thought GM was killing it... long live the 3800!

Long live - until 2007. :confused: Why they designed a car using an engine destined to be discontinued... Why they didn't just put the 3.6 in it... :cookoo:

The 3.8 is a decent engine, definitely more refined and powerful than that POS 3.4 GM uses so much now. Noisy snarly piece of junk.

I~LUV~Caddys8792
02-16-06, 03:36 PM
I definetly think it's a big improvement over the Park Avenues, which were really, pretty good cars also. While it's not as solid as the last V8 powered Buick (Roadmaster) it's much more modern, and refined. It's got almost all of the accessories and goodies that the DTS has at $10,000 less.

Even though it's got the N*, it's still not as quick to 60 as the V6 powered Passat, Avalon and its just about as quick as the new Hyundai Azera. I'm confused about that. It's got just as much hp, and more torque than any of those those others. Does it weigh a lot more? It should be noticeably quicker.
And I'm not diggin that front end design too much, but those are my only two complaints

I think it is a home run!

Night Wolf
02-16-06, 03:45 PM
You know what comes to mind... Back when this forum was just starting, Sal posted an article that said that Buick was trying to compete against Lexus.. I said, sal your crazy... I think they are really doing a great job..

Last summer I drove a lacrosse, and damn, that was a nice car for the money.. We drove a decently equipped one and it was cheaper than the grand prix we had just bought...

For the money, I would rather have a buick lucerne than a G35 sedan, Lexus GS, and so on... Of course the fanboys will be brand loyal, but the general public is not stupid, if a car is really good people will want it..... The G35 is what saved Infiniti, IMO.

Putting in the V8 was a great idea, because it offers power that no one else in the segment has... What GM needs to do, is go for a 5 speed auto, and not the old 4 speed, granted, a bulletproof trans.

The Lacrosse scored "average" on all the car and driver stuff.... go figure.... Plus they compared it to the Avalon when it is a whole lot less..

the Lucrene OTOH... now its a nice car.

Night Wolf
02-16-06, 03:50 PM
http://www.car.ee/galleryPic.php/16616.jpg

http://www.car.ee/galleryPic.php/16617.jpg

http://www.car.ee/galleryPic.php/16618.jpg

http://www.car.ee/galleryPic.php/16623.jpg

http://www.car.ee/galleryPic.php/16631.jpg

http://www.car.ee/galleryPic.php/16634.jpg

http://www.car.ee/galleryPic.php/16635.jpg

http://www.car.ee/galleryPic.php/16625.jpg

http://www.car.ee/galleryPic.php/16637.jpg

http://www.car.ee/galleries/buick-lucerne/ee/

Now imagine if Oldsmobile was still around and got a version of this...

I~LUV~Caddys8792
02-16-06, 06:24 PM
Now imagine if Oldsmobile was still around and got a version of this...

I like to think of this as Buick's late version of the Aurora.

Jesda
02-16-06, 06:56 PM
Its nice to think that Oldsmobile lives on in some way. :)

SilverFleetwood85
02-21-06, 01:20 AM
I have sat in a few of these Lucernes they are really nice, with a very classy interior. I do have to say the headlight switch is an unusual type of switch.

Its nice to see a positive review on an American car, I get so tired of seeing the Japanese (especially Toyota) being praised for these bland, mudane cars.

I don't remember is the 3.6 OHV or DOHC? Its sad that GM is retiring the 3800, but I guess it is time for a new more modern engine to replace it.

elwesso
02-21-06, 08:34 AM
the 3.6 is twin cam.

elwesso
02-21-06, 08:35 AM
Despite the apparent more horsepower, it really does not feel much faster than the 3800..... I think its like 200ish vs 240, and I cant tell the difference... the 3800 has some of that remaining american torque, just not as much as a V8... :)

Playdrv4me
02-21-06, 07:15 PM
Except for looking like a giant blob, I think it competes well in the segment. The only other thing it needs in my book?...

yes, you guessed it... Xenon headlights!

I~LUV~Caddys8792
02-21-06, 08:34 PM
Xenon headlights, is that what Lincoln tried (and failed) on the 93 Mark VIII?

Playdrv4me
02-21-06, 08:58 PM
Xenon headlights, is that what Lincoln tried (and failed) on the 93 Mark VIII?

Actually, Lincoln attempted to implement the only ever AC powered application of Xenon headlamps in a passenger car in early 1996 models and failed horribly. They retrofitted alot of the cars with Halogen setups and then attempted again in 1997 with a more traditional DC powered setup in the 97 and 98 Mark VIII.

The irony is... the halogen headlamp assemblies in the 93-96 Marks are of such poor quality and reflect such a small amount of usable light, that alot of people now swap THEM out for the AC powered Xenons that went into limited production in 96... as there were alot of cars that did make it out with that design.

I~LUV~Caddys8792
02-21-06, 09:05 PM
Yeah, thats the one really bad thing about the Mark VIII's...the headlights.

DBA-One
02-22-06, 10:43 AM
I like the car myself. It's strange being 33 and admiring a Buick other than a GN, GNX, or T-Type! Well, I like the 60's Riviera, too

Lord Cadillac
02-22-06, 11:05 AM
I liked the Buick Lucerne until I saw it in person. Now I love it.. It really is a very nice car that stands out in a crowd.. All it needs is REAL wood and a 5-speed automatic transmission.. The design is right on the money for a family sedan...

I~LUV~Caddys8792
02-22-06, 11:40 AM
It's strange being 33 and admiring a Buick other than a GN, GNX, or T-Type!

Imagine how I feel, having a Roadmaster at the age of 17!

SilverFleetwood85
02-28-06, 01:58 AM
This weekend I drove a Lucerne, it was a very nice driving car. The one I drove had the 3800 V6 in it, and it had plenty of power with GM's typical smooth shifting 4 speed tranny. I was really impressed by the attention to detail by GM on the Lucerne's interior. It had really soft leather and attractive wood inserts inside the cabin, plus a soft ride (a tad bit stiffer then my Deville), and an excellent drive train, which made for one impressive car.

I think it is really cool that buick brought back the port hole design on the front fenders. 3 holes=the v6, 4 holes=the v8.

Tombo47
02-28-06, 03:08 AM
Lucerne exudes a great deal of class over the Gs by Lexus. I think we can all agree that buick makes a great car.

90Brougham350
02-28-06, 05:25 AM
Why is a 4-speed slushbox called old or outdated? Why does a car need 5 or 6 or 7 speeds to be considered modern? If the torque curve is nice and fat, 4 gears is fine! I'm really impressed though, that the media decided to run this story. You can bet your ass a lot of people out there had no clue about Buick, or GM's quality, or anything of the sort.

Jesda
02-28-06, 05:30 AM
Why is a 4-speed slushbox called old or outdated? Why does a car need 5 or 6 or 7 speeds to be considered modern? If the torque curve is nice and fat, 4 gears is fine! I'm really impressed though, that the media decided to run this story. You can bet your ass a lot of people out there had no clue about Buick, or GM's quality, or anything of the sort.

Because you can improve acceleration and fuel economy even more with 5 gears. Its how the Lexus LS430 keeps up with other cars despite a wheezy engine.

davesdeville
02-28-06, 10:00 PM
Anything over 5 speeds is overkill unless you have a peaky 4cyl like an S2000 or something.

Night Wolf
03-01-06, 11:44 AM
Why is a 4-speed slushbox called old or outdated? Why does a car need 5 or 6 or 7 speeds to be considered modern? If the torque curve is nice and fat, 4 gears is fine! I'm really impressed though, that the media decided to run this story. You can bet your ass a lot of people out there had no clue about Buick, or GM's quality, or anything of the sort.

Because Toyota has it, and anything Toyota does is "industry standard"

I personally LIKE the 4spd.... too many gear, no need. the 5, 6 and 7spd autos are for engines with no bottom end... they need a really short final drive to accelerate then lots of gears to keep the RPM down at higher speed.

GM knows how to make engines with low end torque, and then gets away with a taller final drive, and less gears. Who is really falling behind now?

But to the general car public.... stupid people.... more is better, so 5 is better then 4....

I~LUV~Caddys8792
03-01-06, 12:50 PM
Rick, you brought up an interesting point a while back, if your '79 had an overdrive, it would be useless because that motor with the 3 speed and the 2.28 gears already is at like 1900RPM at 75mph. If it had an overdrive, the RPM's would be just too low.

Now think if Caddy had installed a 5 speed overdrive in our deVilles. At 75 MPH, I'm at about 2200 RPM. If I had an 5 speed, it would probably be like 1300-1400 RPM which is really just above idle.