LA Auto Show: 2017 Buick LaCrosse

I am not 100% sold on the exterior.  The interior and features offered are beautiful.  It'll sell well, I think.  Not a fan of the steering wheel... think it looks cheap.  I would have liked to have seen either a little more chrome or a little wood on it.

Gorgeous. Looks a class above IMO. Interior is to die for. 

and jeeeezus.. with 116" WB? WTF are they gonna do in that car have a bachelor party?  

That is a stunner. They've really cleaned up the sheetmetal. This is a proper successor to the clean and stately 2010-13 Lacrosse design, which I loved. The interior design is super classy as well.

After dropping 300 lbs and pairing the new V6 with the slick 8-speed auto, this Lacrosse might be a bit of a sleeper. I'd love to see a turbo V6/AWD model to really elevate the Buick brand.

Over all very nice looking car, interior is excellent. The look does have a bit of Jag to it.

I am not 100% sold on the exterior.  The interior and features offered are beautiful.  It'll sell well, I think.  Not a fan of the steering wheel... think it looks cheap.  I would have liked to have seen either a little more chrome or a little wood on it.

I'm with Paolino on the LaCrosse's exterior. Something just seems off and I can't put my finger as to why. I think I need to see this car in person.

Having just purchased a 2013 Buick LaCrosse Premium I sedan for my wife, I must say I am impressed with the new 2017 model.  The interior alone is amazing, and I'm waiting for still shots of the side profile and rear three-quarter angle to come out before really committing to this new design (I saw a video that eased some of my concerns with those two angles).  I think this will leap in MSRP based on the amount of standard features mentioned in the press release, which may put it out of our future price range.  So far I will say I'm liking what I'm seeing and look forward to seeing it in person in the new year (Philly Auto Show,Jan 30-Feb 7).

I keep seeing a TON of the first generation LaCrosse in the 3/4 views.

My wonderful "artistic" skills put to work, I've combined my wife's 2013 alongside the new 2017

Three generations of the Buick LaCrosse:

I keep seeing a TON of the first generation LaCrosse in the 3/4 views.

I see it too, in the six-window roof style, the creases in the hood, and in the sweep spear rear haunch design.

It looks like a much longer car in person even though the overall length hasn't increased much.  It is a very attractive car in person.

It looks gorgeous. The current model is very very nice. I almost bought one myself before I ended up getting my Impala.. but had this 2017 been out.. I think I would have went Buick. Looks like the one thing that held me back from the Lacrosse has been fixed.. the TRUNK. The new one looks to have the Impala's sized trunk.. which I do use often in transporting equipment from certain job sites. 

Looks pretty awesome. The front looks leaner and sleeker and the back looks a little more muscular with the wheel "hunches". I really like what the did with the front end. Nothing major but it was nipped and tucked very very well. I also think the horizontal bar in the grill looks good.

 

I am not 100% sold on the exterior.  The interior and features offered are beautiful.  It'll sell well, I think.  Not a fan of the steering wheel... think it looks cheap.  I would have liked to have seen either a little more chrome or a little wood on it.

 

I'm with Paolino on the LaCrosse's exterior. Something just seems off and I can't put my finger as to why. I think I need to see this car in person.

 

It's what i feared from seeing the teaser, the teaser looked 'off', this reveal confirms it.  It's a Chinese car.  This misses 'Buick'.  This is a retrograde step from the current LaCrosse.

It's off the same way the Envision is off.

This has equal flavor Acura ILX kick line and 1st gen Hyundai Ajera kick line in the back.  Greenhouse is generic, not rakish like previous gen.

There is no 'sweepspear' present.

Front grille looks clumsy, are we back to dowdy LeSabre days?

Tailights are nice.

What does this bode for the Regal?  At least we know the Regal won't be on a 116" wheelbase.

A ford Flex like Buick would be great on this wheelbase.

Interior is not bad even with some of the higher end Kia / Hyundai vibe.

It's pretty clear to me there is no North American styling flavor assigned to Buick anymore.

 

 

I am not 100% sold on the exterior.  The interior and features offered are beautiful.  It'll sell well, I think.  Not a fan of the steering wheel... think it looks cheap.  I would have liked to have seen either a little more chrome or a little wood on it.

 

I'm with Paolino on the LaCrosse's exterior. Something just seems off and I can't put my finger as to why. I think I need to see this car in person.

 

 

It's what i feared from seeing the teaser, the teaser looked 'off', this reveal confirms it.  It's a Chinese car.  This misses 'Buick'.  This is a retrograde step from the current LaCrosse.

 

It's off the same way the Envision is off.

 

This has equal flavor Acura ILX kick line and 1st gen Hyundai Ajera kick line in the back.  Greenhouse is generic, not rakish like previous gen.

 

There is no 'sweepspear' present.

 

Front grille looks clumsy, are we back to dowdy LeSabre days?

 

Tailights are nice.

 

What does this bode for the Regal?  At least we know the Regal won't be on a 116" wheelbase.

 

A ford Flex like Buick would be great on this wheelbase.

 

Interior is not bad even with some of the higher end Kia / Hyundai vibe.

 

It's pretty clear to me there is no North American styling flavor assigned to Buick anymore.

 

I see literally zero of what you're seeing, but I've seen the car in person. 

I like the interior.  The inside has a bit of a 1st generation Hyundai Genesis to it, and that is a good thing.  The interior layout was good in that car.  The new Lacrosse interior is elegant, and clean and straight forward.  The current car was too busy and the layout was weird.  I give them an A on the interior for the $35,000 full size car segment.

The outside however reminds me of a Nissan, I just can't get excited by it.  Has some Azera in the rear 3/4 and C-pillar area, not really a fan of the wings off the hood ornament, I'd rather focus on the waterfall grille since that is their signature.

Interesting how this car gets a STANDARD 3.6 liter V6, yet the Cadillac ATS, CTS, and CT6 get a standard 4 cylinder.  That makes no sense, if Cadillac is a full level above Buick.   CTS and CT6 should have a standard V6 as well.

I think the point of the 2.0lin both cars is because the competition offers a turbo 4. The Buick Lacrosse main competition is the ES350, which is standard and singular 3.5 v6. My bet is in the Chinese market the LaX will have a 2.0l or smaller choice as well for to taxation. I will also point out that in NA. the Buick's 3.6l is rated almost with the 2.0lturbo when one considers the lighter weight and torque in the CT6 configuration.

BTW. I wouldn't bet on the CT6 being 4cylinder heavy in sales. The 3.6l will be volume if for no other reason than the slight upcharge in price

Mixed bag :

• I generally don't care for the full-width 'bar' under the chin (dislike it on the ATS), but the way Buick swept it into the corners and (visually) into the lower body lines is very well done.

• Beyond tired of the 4-spoke wheel.

• Overall interior looks excellent, design-wise.

• Tails are expressive without looking like they tried to make that way; they're organic.

• Disappointed to see the SweepSpear dropped.

• Can't tell for sure, but the Ventiports are looking too de-emphasized IMO. I liked them on the hood; I'd like to see them stamped in to the sheet metal withOUT chrome trim for a change.

• Are those 20" rims?

•The biggest concern is the Chinese-pics (seen elsewhere) where the LaCrosse looks like it has an enormous frontal overhang. I was looking forward to a profile shot here...

Overall interior/exterior grade : 88 

I think the point of the 2.0lin both cars is because the competition offers a turbo 4. The Buick Lacrosse main competition is the ES350, which is standard and singular 3.5 v6. My bet is in the Chinese market the LaX will have a 2.0l or smaller choice as well for to taxation. I will also point out that in NA. the Buick's 3.6l is rated almost with the 2.0lturbo when one considers the lighter weight and torque in the CT6 configuration.

BTW. I wouldn't bet on the CT6 being 4cylinder heavy in sales. The 3.6l will be volume if for no other reason than the slight upcharge in price

The E-class has a standard V6 and is the segment gold standard, the Lexus GS is a standard V6, Infiniti Q70 has a standard V6.  Anything the CT6 is supposed to compete with has 6 or 8 cylinders.  Cadillac is also the challenger, not the leader, they should use the 3.6 V6 as their base model, a 3.0 TT as a mid-level engine.

I think the point of the 2.0lin both cars is because the competition offers a turbo 4. The Buick Lacrosse main competition is the ES350, which is standard and singular 3.5 v6. My bet is in the Chinese market the LaX will have a 2.0l or smaller choice as well for to taxation. I will also point out that in NA. the Buick's 3.6l is rated almost with the 2.0lturbo when one considers the lighter weight and torque in the CT6 configuration.

BTW. I wouldn't bet on the CT6 being 4cylinder heavy in sales. The 3.6l will be volume if for no other reason than the slight upcharge in price

The E-class has a standard V6 and is the segment gold standard, the Lexus GS is a standard V6, Infiniti Q70 has a standard V6.  Anything the CT6 is supposed to compete with has 6 or 8 cylinders.  Cadillac is also the challenger, not the leader, they should use the 3.6 V6 as their base model, a 3.0 TT as a mid-level engine.

That Mercedes is a fat fat fat pig and its only the gold standard to people who don't kno any better

Mixed on this. The interior is a winner. The exterior, I'd have to see it in person.

 

I think the point of the 2.0lin both cars is because the competition offers a turbo 4. The Buick Lacrosse main competition is the ES350, which is standard and singular 3.5 v6. My bet is in the Chinese market the LaX will have a 2.0l or smaller choice as well for to taxation. I will also point out that in NA. the Buick's 3.6l is rated almost with the 2.0lturbo when one considers the lighter weight and torque in the CT6 configuration.

BTW. I wouldn't bet on the CT6 being 4cylinder heavy in sales. The 3.6l will be volume if for no other reason than the slight upcharge in price

The E-class has a standard V6 and is the segment gold standard, the Lexus GS is a standard V6, Infiniti Q70 has a standard V6.  Anything the CT6 is supposed to compete with has 6 or 8 cylinders.  Cadillac is also the challenger, not the leader, they should use the 3.6 V6 as their base model, a 3.0 TT as a mid-level engine.

Meanwhile the Audi A6 and BMW 5-Series both have turbo-fours as their base engines.

I am glad I am not the only one who sees the first generation LaCrosse in the window design in the theme overall look of this car.  It looks like someone took the first generation LaCrosse and redesigned the car.  I think the Chinese designers did the second generation because it was a concept car and the American GM designers did the the third generation.  I guess we will have to see it in person.  I think I see  1st generation plus the 2nd generation. which equals the  3rd generation.

I am glad I am not the only one who sees the first generation LaCrosse in the window design in the theme overall look of this car.  It looks like someone took the first generation LaCrosse and redesigned the car.  I think the Chinese designers did the second generation because it was a concept car and the American GM designers did the the third generation.  I guess we will have to see it in person.  I think I see  1st generation plus the 2nd generation. which equals the  3rd generation.

I also wanted to say also the see two cars in the tail lamps.  I see the first generation  La Crosse tail lamps mixed with the Regal/Insignia tail lamps.

That wheelbase is as long as the B Bodies were in the 1980's.  That car is still less than 200 inches long.  It is big as the downsized H and C bodies were in the 1980's.

So, this is like the complete opposite of the MKZ. The exterior and interior are very well done, if not a bit too understated. The powertrain is bit disappointing, though. I would have liked to see something more than just the run-of-mill V6. I suppose Buick still has to cater to its long-living demographic regardless of what the advertising will tell you. 

I think the car looks nice overall, if a bit conservative. I'm amazed that they were able to drop 300 pounds from the platform-clearly the Camaro is not a one-shot deal in that regard.

The only real jarring thing I can see on the car is the long nose does its best to suggest RWD, but the distance from the front door cuts to the wheelwells says otherwise. Beyond that, a pretty solid effort IMO.

So, this is like the complete opposite of the MKZ. The exterior and interior are very well done, if not a bit too understated. The powertrain is bit disappointing, though. I would have liked to see something more than just the run-of-mill V6. I suppose Buick still has to cater to its long-living demographic regardless of what the advertising will tell you. 

I think the Buick demographic is why there is a V6 instead of a turbo 4.  The Buick customer is going to see a 4-cylinder as an entry level engine or not enough for a full size car, and the V6 would probably be smoother in that you aren't relying on boost to make power.

If you want more than a run of the mill V6, that is what Cadillac is for.  Unfortunately, many Cadillacs have turbo 4's and run of the mill V6s.

I like the interior. The inside has a bit of a 1st generation Hyundai Genesis to it, and that is a good thing. The interior layout was good in that car. The new Lacrosse interior is elegant, and clean and straight forward. The current car was too busy and the layout was weird. I give them an A on the interior for the $35,000 full size car segment.

The outside however reminds me of a Nissan, I just can't get excited by it. Has some Azera in the rear 3/4 and C-pillar area, not really a fan of the wings off the hood ornament, I'd rather focus on the waterfall grille since that is their signature.

Interesting how this car gets a STANDARD 3.6 liter V6, yet the Cadillac ATS, CTS, and CT6 get a standard 4 cylinder. That makes no sense, if Cadillac is a full level above Buick. CTS and CT6 should have a standard V6 as well.

Picture on Buicks website looks like some current gen taurus influence on the front end too.

I think the car looks nice overall, if a bit conservative. I'm amazed that they were able to drop 300 pounds from the platform-clearly the Camaro is not a one-shot deal in that regard.

The only real jarring thing I can see on the car is the long nose does its best to suggest RWD, but the distance from the front door cuts to the wheelwells says otherwise. Beyond that, a pretty solid effort IMO.

Did you see the curb weights of the new Malibu at Motor Trend's car of the year testing? Base model was 3125 lbs and the loaded Premier 2.0T was just 3300!! Insane how much weight they've dropped, yet the Malibu was still one of the quietest rides in the competition.

So, this is like the complete opposite of the MKZ. The exterior and interior are very well done, if not a bit too understated. The powertrain is bit disappointing, though. I would have liked to see something more than just the run-of-mill V6. I suppose Buick still has to cater to its long-living demographic regardless of what the advertising will tell you. 

The new powertrain is hardly run of the mill. The V6 has start/stop and cylinder deactivation mated to a brand new 8-speed. With a huge drop in curb weight, this big sedan is likely to be QUICK (like running mid-14s) and still achieve over 20/30 mpg.

I think the car looks nice overall, if a bit conservative. I'm amazed that they were able to drop 300 pounds from the platform-clearly the Camaro is not a one-shot deal in that regard.

The only real jarring thing I can see on the car is the long nose does its best to suggest RWD, but the distance from the front door cuts to the wheelwells says otherwise. Beyond that, a pretty solid effort IMO.

All of GM's car platforms are going through substantial weight reductions

Not liking that interior much either.  Too much of anything is bad, including wood.

Overall, nice improvement.  Nothing ground breaking.

A beautiful update, to be sure.  It is a shame to me that Hyundai stole some Buick DNA with their bigger cars (Azera?  Genesis?) a while back... that now it could be perceived that Buick is actually the thief.  Sad state for a proud American brand.

Love this new LaCrosse though.  Want to see it in person.

The greenhouse looks a lot like the Equus, esp. the sweep of the quarter window.   I like the tailights, something different.   Looks like a nice cruiser.

 

So, this is like the complete opposite of the MKZ. The exterior and interior are very well done, if not a bit too understated. The powertrain is bit disappointing, though. I would have liked to see something more than just the run-of-mill V6. I suppose Buick still has to cater to its long-living demographic regardless of what the advertising will tell you. 

 

The new powertrain is hardly run of the mill. The V6 has start/stop and cylinder deactivation mated to a brand new 8-speed. With a huge drop in curb weight, this big sedan is likely to be QUICK (like running mid-14s) and still achieve over 20/30 mpg.

 

I'm sorry... is that really considered quick these days? My 11 year old Avalon would run mid-14s and hit 60 in about 6 seconds (and would do over 31 mpg highway), which is likely where the new LaCrosse will be at. I wasn't wowed by that car's power, so I'm not going to be wowed by this either. The current LaCrosse is a 2-ton porker, so losing 300lbs merely brings it back down to average weight and performance for the class. Again, there's nothing exciting here. It's a run-of-the-mill powertrain in every single way for the year 2017. Kthxbai. 

What I would really like to see is the MKZ's powertrain with the LaCrosse's body. Perfect boulevard cruiser.

I assure you guys, like Drew, that pictures don't do this car justice. You have to see it in person, and the silhouette looks much leaner, and the car exudes a very relaxed styling. It's not trying to be something it isn't. Though the steering wheel, I feel is the only thing I'd get rid of right away.  

 

I think the car looks nice overall, if a bit conservative. I'm amazed that they were able to drop 300 pounds from the platform-clearly the Camaro is not a one-shot deal in that regard.

The only real jarring thing I can see on the car is the long nose does its best to suggest RWD, but the distance from the front door cuts to the wheelwells says otherwise. Beyond that, a pretty solid effort IMO.

 

Did you see the curb weights of the new Malibu at Motor Trend's car of the year testing? Base model was 3125 lbs and the loaded Premier 2.0T was just 3300!! Insane how much weight they've dropped, yet the Malibu was still one of the quietest rides in the competition.

 

That's a nice mention... the quote was:

Inside, the Premier and Hybrid models felt downright luxurious with rich leather, ventilated seats, and quiet rides. “The best of the Malibu bunch,” Jason Cammisa said of the hybrid. “It rides great and is way quieter than the Audi A6 on the road.”

Says a lot of about what this car's mission is at this point.. not to mention what to expect from the upcoming LaX and Regal. The Malibu is proof positive that the Impala we all kno and love is not long for this world in its current form. They just seem to bump up against each other too much in the line-up. I'm still putting up the idea that the next gen will be on a de-contented Omega. 

 

 

So, this is like the complete opposite of the MKZ. The exterior and interior are very well done, if not a bit too understated. The powertrain is bit disappointing, though. I would have liked to see something more than just the run-of-mill V6. I suppose Buick still has to cater to its long-living demographic regardless of what the advertising will tell you. 

 

The new powertrain is hardly run of the mill. The V6 has start/stop and cylinder deactivation mated to a brand new 8-speed. With a huge drop in curb weight, this big sedan is likely to be QUICK (like running mid-14s) and still achieve over 20/30 mpg.

 

 

I'm sorry... is that really considered quick these days? My 11 year old Avalon would run mid-14s and hit 60 in about 6 seconds (and would do over 31 mpg highway), which is likely where the new LaCrosse will be at. I wasn't wowed by that car's power, so I'm not going to be wowed by this either. The current LaCrosse is a 2-ton porker, so losing 300lbs merely brings it back down to average weight and performance for the class. Again, there's nothing exciting here. It's a run-of-the-mill powertrain in every single way for the year 2017. Kthxbai. 

 

What I would really like to see is the MKZ's powertrain with the LaCrosse's body. Perfect boulevard cruiser.

 

Start/Stop and 8-speeds have been around for a few years. I saw a Ford engineer say that 90% of 2017 Escapes will be sold with start/stop, this is pretty standard stuff now, I think in 2020 it will be as common as ABS.

The Lacrosse will be fast enough for what it is. 305 HP is a lot for front wheel drive. And it is more important that a car like the Lacrosse has enough power to move around with the engine at 3,000 rpm or less. The typical Lacrosse buyer doesn't want to be revving to 6,000 rpm and bearing engine noise all the time.

Start/Stop and 8-speeds have been around for a few years. I saw a Ford engineer say that 90% of 2017 Escapes will be sold with start/stop, this is pretty standard stuff now, I think in 2020 it will be as common as ABS.

The Lacrosse will be fast enough for what it is. 305 HP is a lot for front wheel drive. And it is more important that a car like the Lacrosse has enough power to move around with the engine at 3,000 rpm or less. The typical Lacrosse buyer doesn't want to be revving to 6,000 rpm and bearing engine noise all the time.

I hate agreeing with U. It literally makes me sick.. but yes.. I concur. The truth of the matter is that the MKZ's use of a TTV6 setup only shows that Ford really wants a RWD set-up.. but can't seem to get past the Mustang and Trucks to do it. We are talking about minimum 4200lbs in a mid-sizer

Start/Stop and 8-speeds have been around for a few years. I saw a Ford engineer say that 90% of 2017 Escapes will be sold with start/stop, this is pretty standard stuff now, I think in 2020 it will be as common as ABS.

The Lacrosse will be fast enough for what it is. 305 HP is a lot for front wheel drive. And it is more important that a car like the Lacrosse has enough power to move around with the engine at 3,000 rpm or less. The typical Lacrosse buyer doesn't want to be revving to 6,000 rpm and bearing engine noise all the time.

How many vehicles have start/stop, cylinder deactivation, AND 8-speeds or more? I'll wait, it's a super short list.

 

 

So, this is like the complete opposite of the MKZ. The exterior and interior are very well done, if not a bit too understated. The powertrain is bit disappointing, though. I would have liked to see something more than just the run-of-mill V6. I suppose Buick still has to cater to its long-living demographic regardless of what the advertising will tell you. 

 

The new powertrain is hardly run of the mill. The V6 has start/stop and cylinder deactivation mated to a brand new 8-speed. With a huge drop in curb weight, this big sedan is likely to be QUICK (like running mid-14s) and still achieve over 20/30 mpg.

 

 

I'm sorry... is that really considered quick these days? My 11 year old Avalon would run mid-14s and hit 60 in about 6 seconds (and would do over 31 mpg highway), which is likely where the new LaCrosse will be at. I wasn't wowed by that car's power, so I'm not going to be wowed by this either. The current LaCrosse is a 2-ton porker, so losing 300lbs merely brings it back down to average weight and performance for the class. Again, there's nothing exciting here. It's a run-of-the-mill powertrain in every single way for the year 2017. Kthxbai. 

 

What I would really like to see is the MKZ's powertrain with the LaCrosse's body. Perfect boulevard cruiser.

 

This post is a f@#king joke. A 2004 Avalon had a 3.0L V6 with just over 200 horsepower and a 4-speed auto. It's a tin can compared to modern cars, and I don't believe for a damn second it could run anywhere near 14s.

 

 

 

So, this is like the complete opposite of the MKZ. The exterior and interior are very well done, if not a bit too understated. The powertrain is bit disappointing, though. I would have liked to see something more than just the run-of-mill V6. I suppose Buick still has to cater to its long-living demographic regardless of what the advertising will tell you. 

 

The new powertrain is hardly run of the mill. The V6 has start/stop and cylinder deactivation mated to a brand new 8-speed. With a huge drop in curb weight, this big sedan is likely to be QUICK (like running mid-14s) and still achieve over 20/30 mpg.

 

 

I'm sorry... is that really considered quick these days? My 11 year old Avalon would run mid-14s and hit 60 in about 6 seconds (and would do over 31 mpg highway), which is likely where the new LaCrosse will be at. I wasn't wowed by that car's power, so I'm not going to be wowed by this either. The current LaCrosse is a 2-ton porker, so losing 300lbs merely brings it back down to average weight and performance for the class. Again, there's nothing exciting here. It's a run-of-the-mill powertrain in every single way for the year 2017. Kthxbai. 

 

What I would really like to see is the MKZ's powertrain with the LaCrosse's body. Perfect boulevard cruiser.

 

 

 

 

Second the idea that your 2010HP 2004 Avalon is going to be faster than the new LaX, while getting superior fuel economy is ridiculous. The 2004 Camry SE barely pulled it off with a 14.6 seconds @ 97.0 mph, and was lighter. This Lacrosse, should certainly improve upon the numbers laid by my heavier Impala.. Fuel economy is certainly going into the 30s.. 

 

I love the idea of Run of the Mill when is incorporating start/stop, cylinder deactivation and an 8-speed tranny.. all wrapped in a sweet honey bun of an exterior. U want 12 second 1/4 miles.. go buy a Cadillac.. or even a Chevy. Buick is about smooth luxury. Everyone doesn't need their car to be a performance car.. and that's coming from some one who predominately has REAL performance cars.

 

Excuse my typo, I meant 10 year old.

My 2005 Avalon weighed a hair over 3600lbs, was rated at 280 hp, quoted at 14.6 seconds @ 99 mph in the quarter and 6.0 seconds to 60, and was rated at 22/31 mpg.

I'm not saying the LaCrosse won't be able to match it, I simply don't see it exceeding it by much, if at all. Also, for what it's worth, 10 years on, and the Avalon hasn't improved upon itself either. It is also just run-of-the-mill these days. It's not necessarily a bad thing for Buick to do the same, but there's nothing exciting here besides an 8 speed auto that others have had for years. With Buick itself stating they are perfectly happy with the LaCrosse being their flagship sedan, I would've expected more... a risk or two. Instead, it's been played safe, likely to keep its current cult of owners happy. Meanwhile, Lincoln, which is basically just a Buick competitor these days, is taking those risks... It's just too bad they don't have a better stylist. 

 

 

 

So, this is like the complete opposite of the MKZ. The exterior and interior are very well done, if not a bit too understated. The powertrain is bit disappointing, though. I would have liked to see something more than just the run-of-mill V6. I suppose Buick still has to cater to its long-living demographic regardless of what the advertising will tell you. 

 

The new powertrain is hardly run of the mill. The V6 has start/stop and cylinder deactivation mated to a brand new 8-speed. With a huge drop in curb weight, this big sedan is likely to be QUICK (like running mid-14s) and still achieve over 20/30 mpg.

 

 

I'm sorry... is that really considered quick these days? My 11 year old Avalon would run mid-14s and hit 60 in about 6 seconds (and would do over 31 mpg highway), which is likely where the new LaCrosse will be at. I wasn't wowed by that car's power, so I'm not going to be wowed by this either. The current LaCrosse is a 2-ton porker, so losing 300lbs merely brings it back down to average weight and performance for the class. Again, there's nothing exciting here. It's a run-of-the-mill powertrain in every single way for the year 2017. Kthxbai. 

 

What I would really like to see is the MKZ's powertrain with the LaCrosse's body. Perfect boulevard cruiser.

 

 

This post is a f@#king joke. A 2004 Avalon had a 3.0L V6 with just over 200 horsepower and a 4-speed auto. It's a tin can compared to modern cars, and I don't believe for a damn second it could run anywhere near 14s.

 

This is the problem with new members here. No sense of community history. Argumentative and full of attitude. Can't use facts accordingly. 

I made a typo, for which I am terribly sorry. Really, gravely sorry. I should be beaten and hung from the cross for it. Truly. If, however, you would take the time to either A: Read through my signature to see mine was a 2005, or B: Look through my history to see that indeed, it was a 2005, these filth ridden posts wouldn't have to exist. You have your opinion, I have mine, which I've completely backed up with facts to certify any claims I've made. Again, Kthxbai. 

 

 

 

 

So, this is like the complete opposite of the MKZ. The exterior and interior are very well done, if not a bit too understated. The powertrain is bit disappointing, though. I would have liked to see something more than just the run-of-mill V6. I suppose Buick still has to cater to its long-living demographic regardless of what the advertising will tell you. 

 

The new powertrain is hardly run of the mill. The V6 has start/stop and cylinder deactivation mated to a brand new 8-speed. With a huge drop in curb weight, this big sedan is likely to be QUICK (like running mid-14s) and still achieve over 20/30 mpg.

 

 

I'm sorry... is that really considered quick these days? My 11 year old Avalon would run mid-14s and hit 60 in about 6 seconds (and would do over 31 mpg highway), which is likely where the new LaCrosse will be at. I wasn't wowed by that car's power, so I'm not going to be wowed by this either. The current LaCrosse is a 2-ton porker, so losing 300lbs merely brings it back down to average weight and performance for the class. Again, there's nothing exciting here. It's a run-of-the-mill powertrain in every single way for the year 2017. Kthxbai. 

 

What I would really like to see is the MKZ's powertrain with the LaCrosse's body. Perfect boulevard cruiser.

 

 

 

 

Second the idea that your 2010HP 2004 Avalon is going to be faster than the new LaX, while getting superior fuel economy is ridiculous. The 2004 Camry SE barely pulled it off with a 14.6 seconds @ 97.0 mph, and was lighter. This Lacrosse, should certainly improve upon the numbers laid by my heavier Impala.. Fuel economy is certainly going into the 30s.. 

 

I love the idea of Run of the Mill when is incorporating start/stop, cylinder deactivation and an 8-speed tranny.. all wrapped in a sweet honey bun of an exterior. U want 12 second 1/4 miles.. go buy a Cadillac.. or even a Chevy. Buick is about smooth luxury. Everyone doesn't need their car to be a performance car.. and that's coming from some one who predominately has REAL performance cars.

 

 

Excuse my typo, I meant 10 year old.

 

My 2005 Avalon weighed a hair over 3600lbs, was rated at 280 hp, quoted at 14.6 seconds @ 99 mph in the quarter and 6.0 seconds to 60, and was rated at 22/31 mpg.

 

I'm not saying the LaCrosse won't be able to match it, I simply don't see it exceeding it buy much, if at all. Also, for what it's worth, 10 years on, and the Avalon hasn't improved upon itself either. It is also just run-of-the-mill these days. It's not necessarily a bad thing for Buick to do the same, but there's nothing exciting here besides an 8 speed auto that others have had for years. With Buick itself stating they are perfectly happy with the LaCrosse being their flagship sedan, I would've expected more... a risk or two. Instead, it's been played safe, likely to keep its current cult of owners happy. Meanwhile, Lincoln, which is basically just a Buick competitor these days, is taking those risks... It's just too bad they don't have a better stylist. 

 

22/31 mpg was the OLD rating system. The 2005 Avalon is rated 19/28 mpg by the new system, a whopping ONE mpg better in the city compared to the much heavier outgoing 18/28 mpg Lacrosse. Meanwhile the actual quality and luxury differences between an old Avalon and the epsilon II Lacrosse is night and day. Total apples and oranges comparison.

Your post-count elitism is adorable and your facts are dubious.

Looks good, but it readily identify as a Buick in my eyes. Interior is nice, but not earth-shattering. I'd like to see this car get an option like the 400hp AWD Lincoln that was also shown. 

22/31 mpg was the OLD rating system. The 2005 Avalon is rated 19/28 mpg by the new system, a whopping ONE mpg better in the city compared to the much heavier outgoing 18/28 mpg Lacrosse. Meanwhile the actual quality and luxury differences between an old Avalon and the epsilon II Lacrosse is night and day. Total apples and oranges comparison.

Your post-count elitism is adorable and your facts are dubious.

If you will remember, they never retested those older vehicles; the EPA simply estimated a loss. My personal 60k worth of test data perfectly matched up to the old rating. Same could be said of my old Cobalt which also had it's loss estimated.

If you wish to match up a current Avalon to a current LaCrosse, be my guest. You'll find that Toyota hasn't advanced since 2005 either. And in terms of luxury and the current LaCrosse, its not night and day. A little quieter, more convincing fake wood, and a more swanky design. Not exactly apples and oranges there. Though, yes, the new one appears to have an interior that's more on par with a Cadillac than a fancy Toyota.

Also, it's not elitism, merely the fact that the influx of new members have, on the whole, been extremely argumentative, quick to throw attacks, and generally dismissive towards reason. There are standouts among all of you who certainly add a lot of positive material to this forum. I'm not even saying that you aren't one of the standouts, but calling my facts a "f@#cking joke" isn't doing yourself any favors here. When I first joined way back in 2003, anyone who's been here that long can tell you I was the same way-argumentative and likely immature. I received my fair share of castrating reality checks by many of the more senior members.

 

22/31 mpg was the OLD rating system. The 2005 Avalon is rated 19/28 mpg by the new system, a whopping ONE mpg better in the city compared to the much heavier outgoing 18/28 mpg Lacrosse. Meanwhile the actual quality and luxury differences between an old Avalon and the epsilon II Lacrosse is night and day. Total apples and oranges comparison.

Your post-count elitism is adorable and your facts are dubious.

If you will remember, they never retested those older vehicles; the EPA simply estimated a loss. My personal 60k worth of test data perfectly matched up to the old rating. Same could be said of my old Cobalt which also had it's loss estimated.

If you wish to match up a current Avalon to a current LaCrosse, be my guest. You'll find that Toyota hasn't advanced since 2005 either. And in terms of luxury and the current LaCrosse, its not night and day. A little quieter, more convincing fake wood, and a more swanky design. Not exactly apples and oranges there. Though, yes, the new one appears to have an interior that's more on par with a Cadillac than a fancy Toyota.

Also, it's not elitism, merely the fact that the influx of new members have, on the whole, been extremely argumentative, quick to throw attacks, and generally dismissive towards reason. There are standouts among all of you who certainly add a lot of positive material to this forum. I'm not even saying that you aren't one of the standouts, but calling my facts a "f@#cking joke" isn't doing yourself any favors here. When I first joined way back in 2003, anyone who's been here that long can tell you I was the same way-argumentative and likely immature. I received my fair share of castrating reality checks by many of the more senior members.

 

Bud, YOU started the argumentative tone with that condescending post about your Avalon capped off with "kthxbai" like a petulant 14 year old girl. Then you got embarrassed and defensive about getting your dick caught in your zipper in the first Avalon post and started trying to throw it back on me instead of taking it on the chin. Do you not see the irony of telling someone how negative and argumentative they are WHILE contributing to it? Or calling my facts into question while presenting skewed information of your own?

Then you deny post-count elitism and rant about how you've been here since 2003 and you USED to be immature and grew up over time, but you seem to overlook that you have no idea my age, background, or experience outside of this forum. That's exactly the fallacy of post-count elitism.

If you're going to throw out personal anecdotes like "I got the old EPA rating in my Avalon" instead of using the controlled constant of the new rating system, then I'll happily point out that I have shots on my phone of averaging 32 mpg highway in my port-injected 3.6L Malibu--a car rated 17/26--and owners in a number of GM 3.6L DI sedans report 30+ mpg highway (including Casa, I believe).

The Buick competes with the ES, by the way, not the Avalon, and the journalistic comparisons didn't go well for the Lexus.

The LaCrosse absolutely competes with the Toyota Avalon, that is the car is was modeled after pretty much.  The Avalon actually has a higher base price than the LaCrosse, so do the Cadenza and Azera.   The Lexus ES costs more than all of those cars, and until a couple years ago the Lexus ES was about the size of a Regal.  

Buick is not a luxury brand either, it is a premium brand.  Cadillac is the luxury brand of GM.  If you want more than 300 hp buy a Cadillac.  This is also why I have been saying Cadillac should make the 3.6 V6 base in the CTS and CT6, 3.0TT as a mid-level volume engine.  Buick doesn't need a 400 hp car, Cadillac makes 400 hp cars.

Lincoln can put all the power they want into the MKZ, it is still a Fusion.  The 400 hp is to cover up the inferior chassis underneath.  And that won't really help sales all that much, it might just get some people that were going to buy an MKZ anyway to spend more money on it.