LaCrosse CXL review

[wildcat]

Sajeev Mehta has written a review of the Buick LaCrosse CXL for the truthabout cars.com. To read the review, click here. It is not a positive piece, declaring the vehicle a "rental car" that is bested by Hyundai.

EDIT AFTERTHOUGHT: Now that I've read it over several times, I find the review insulting and amateurish. They can think the LaCrosse is a good or bad car, that's their opinion. I'm saying the writing style is nasty and less than professional. I presume that the author is not a professional journalist.

Edited July 5, 2006 by wildcat

[trinacriabob]

I say we drown Sajeev in curry sauce.

[DetroitNut90]

It's quiet fo-sho, but that’s not what you call “sizzle” in the highly-competitive mid-size sedan market.

I like how he phrases that...

And I don't agree with him about the 3.8L sounding bad at half-throttle...it sounds good to me at any rpm.

[wildcat]

I'm not implying that Sajeev Mehta has to like the LaCrosse. I think it's a car in need of many improvements. What I am saying is this review is not written in a professional manner, unless the audience is high school dropouts or prison inmates.

A professional writer doesn't use phrases like:

" . . . harmonizing like a barbershop quartet on ecstasy."

"A country that's been a democracy all of 19 years makes rides that hand David Dunbar Buick's legacy its collective ass."

And there's too many cutesy lines like the reference to Calgon.

Also, what, for instance, does "While the trunk fails high school physics . . . " mean? Why does it fail?

The LaCrosse simply wasn't for Sajeev Mehta's age bracket, which I suspect is juvenile.

[Igor2]

TTAC has been dissapointing in quality recently ... their editorials omit facts, their reviews are racey just to be provocative.. TTAC is on its way to be subscription only and I think they are tryingto etablish themselves as in your face honest, but thye simply come off as ignorant

Unfortunately, I have been uite displeased with them lately.

Igor

[ponchoman49]

The CXL Lucerne is anything but rental car territory.

[Cananopie]

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.

[enzl]

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.

eh....LaCrosse is a rehash...a marginal product, bottom line. Lutz himself has stated that Buick has Lexus in its crosshairs...when you make those pronouncements and fall short, you get reviewers who pick up on your failed boasts. That's commerce in a free country.

If the LaCrosse were a Hyundai, we'd be clowning it....just because it has a GM badge doesn't mean its worthy of a passionate defense.

GM is currently running 50/50 in terms of overall excellence in its new products. They need to be a whole lot closer to 100% to pull out of their nosedive.

Personally, I don't see this as that harsh a review...it could have been alot worse, as I find the styling to be a stately update of a Taurus with Buick cues...not what Buick intended, I'm sure.

[Cananopie]

eh....LaCrosse is a rehash...a marginal product, bottom line. Lutz himself has stated that Buick has Lexus in its crosshairs...when you make those pronouncements and fall short, you get reviewers who pick up on your failed boasts. That's commerce in a free country.

If the LaCrosse were a Hyundai, we'd be clowning it....just because it has a GM badge doesn't mean its worthy of a passionate defense.

GM is currently running 50/50 in terms of overall excellence in its new products. They need to be a whole lot closer to 100% to pull out of their nosedive.

Personally, I don't see this as that harsh a review...it could have been alot worse, as I find the styling to be a stately update of a Taurus with Buick cues...not what Buick intended, I'm sure.

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.

[Bimmer325]

I found the review extremely forgiving on Buick's behalf.

Perfect proportions? The Lacrosse has all the proportion and packaging issues associated with every W-body still on the market. From a styling standpoint, I'd call the CXL generic and dated-looking, not "harmonizing". Everything the reviewer mentioned in regards to performance is correct. As long as Buick continues to bend over backward for the Geritol crowd, their cars will continue to garner lukewarm reviews.

enzl said it best. The Lacrosse is a marginal product that'd be subject to bashing around here if the Buick badge weren't part of the equation. There are better alternatives for the money, and if I were in the market for this type of car, the Lacrosse certainly wouldn't get my money.

[toyoguy]

The Lacrosse is a marginal product that'd be subject to bashing around here if the Buick badge weren't part of the equation.  There are better alternatives for the money, and if I were in the market for this type of car, the Lacrosse certainly wouldn't get my money.

163509[/snapback]

marginal?

can you name an inferior product in its class?

[Bimmer325]

What?

[toyoguy]

What?

164377[/snapback]

yup, none.

the Buick Lacrosse is the ultimate

[enzl]

yup, none.

the Buick Lacrosse is the ultimate....

164462[/snapback]

....blandmobile.

Any one of a number of Japanese nameplates are more attractive & MSRP for far less than a decent spec edition of the LaCrosse...

Additionally, when correctly optioned, it touches on Lux nameplate vehicles it can't beat...

So I guess that means it's nowhere.

[pow]

....blandmobile.

Any one of a number of Japanese nameplates are more attractive & MSRP for far less than a decent spec edition of the LaCrosse...

Additionally, when correctly optioned, it touches on Lux nameplate vehicles it can't beat...

So I guess that means it's nowhere.

164577[/snapback]

The LaCrosse is pretty pointless when a comparably equipped Lucerne is not much more.

[enzl]

The LaCrosse is pretty pointless when a comparably equipped Lucerne is not much more.

164614[/snapback]

It doesn't stack up too well against anything....except previous Centuries & Regals. This is one of those models that Lutz touched at the last minute. I think his newer work is far superior. This is just not the vehicle you want taking on the Camry, Accord, Passat, Lx's, etc...it has no real place except as a catchall for Century/Regal trade-ins & rental companies.

I think Lutz is doing much better now.

[WCCPSGM]

C'mon you guys. Don't you know ANYTHING about GM! The LaCross is Buick's Chevy. Look, like has been said, it doesn't slot all that low below the Lucerne and it really is a stop-gap vehicle flung onto the market because the Century/regal thing wasn't working.

That said, this reviewer is typical of the breed. 1. He seems to think because HE prefers the handling characteristics of a ricer, everyone does. Some of us like cars to feel like AMERICAN cars. 2. He still believes the Japanese quality myth. 3. If all else fails, pick nits! Find something trivial that the jappies have and make it a major selling point. I saw a good example of this in Autoweek this month, they showed the new Caravan and stated that Chrysler added, "finally" roll down windows. This has been a battle cry since stow and go trumped the Honda's rear seat trick. Now, I live in the mid Atlantic region. That is half way down the country. I have never, let me repeat, NEVER seen a minivan with the windows rolled down. 'Round here we use something called AIR-CONDITIONING, you may have heard of it.

Buick needs to sell what Americans want. This is not a country of twisties, its a country of interstates. You don't want the car to wallow, but its far more important to deliver a Buick that quietly chauffers 4 real-sized adults at 80 down the interstate than to worry about the roughly 1% of buyers that go to the track and aren't going to buy a Buick anyhow. That said, I would like to see the new Lacrosse focus on a sporty character next time out, and a less gay sounding name. I liked Regal and Century myself. Liked LeSabre too FTM.

[VenSeattle]

marginal?

can you name an inferior product in its class?

164373[/snapback]

(GM divisions & products exempt)

Over-all inferior products:

Kia Amanti

Kia Optima

Mitsubishi Galant

Chrysler Sebring

Dodge Stratus

In lower Trim levels (CX, CXL - Competitive in price, standard equipment, & options):

Base Chrysler 300

Base Dodge Charger

Base Ford Five Hundred

In CXS form - competitive to:

Ford Five Hundred SEL

Chrysler 300 limited (still only a V6)

-------------------------------------------------

When the LaCrosse debuted in 2004 as a 2005 model, it was competitive or better than the existing:

Toyota Avalon

Toyota Camry

Hyundai XG350

Hyundai Sonata

Ford Taurus - given

Mercury Sable - given

Mitsubishi Galant - still

Chrysler Sebring - still

Dodge Stratus - still

Anything Kia - still

Anything Suzuki - still

And competitive to (in CXS trim):

Honda Accord

Nissan Altima

In its 3rd year, it seems to be a generation behind (since everything has been updated and remodeled), but it was competent and a completely competitive package with the then-current competition when it debuted. GM & Buick were playing "catch up" with the LaCrosse, which was a success. The LaCrosse is about to be refreshed for 2008 with an early 2009 release for the all-new 2010MY LaCrosse.

[regfootball]

i saw 3 new lucernes in a five mile highway stretch through yuppie land on the way into work today. its safe to say the public likes it.

the truth about cars is almost not worthy of anyone's time. we shouldn't even acknowledge their existence for articles like this by creating topics for them. maybe whatever is good on the site like mkaresh's comments will go elsewhere and the rest of the site will just die a quick death. then the world would be a better place.

if i want real raw good journalism than autoextremist is a better outlet. I hope TTAC invests some effort in becoming a more interesting site.

Edited July 14, 2006 by regfootball

[Satty]

I mistook a Lucerne for a Passat from behind earlier. It still looks like a Sable up front from a distance. And the LaCrosse is a rental car, sorry its just not what Buick needs to get a sales bump.

[trinacriabob]

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.

163403[/snapback]

Very well said, Cananopie. This car isn't looking to abandon its niche market (which is growing larger, by the way) while attracting some new buyers. This is a car that isn't meant to shout. (NO here). This is a car that wants to keep its following happy primarily through its competence and reliability. Edited July 14, 2006 by trinacriabob

[Sajeev Mehta]

Hello Everyone,

I found this thread doing an Ego Search on google. It's nice to see who reads me and what they think of my umm...writing.

A professional writer doesn't use phrases like:

" . . . harmonizing like a barbershop quartet on ecstasy."

Also, what, for instance, does "While the trunk fails high school physics . . . " mean?  Why does it fail?

The LaCrosse simply wasn't for Sajeev Mehta's age bracket, which I suspect is juvenile.

162889[/snapback]

Yup, I'm not a professional writer, I'm an MBA student who loves cars.

The LaX's trunk fails high school physics because (like I said in the article) its impossible to close without getting your hand on the outside decklid's paint...which was dirty at the time. Other rides (Chrysler 300) have this problem too, I don't like that double hinged/strut design. I complimented the Lucerne's trunk for doing it right, however. Ergonomics, baby.

I'm 29 and my daily driver is a Lincoln. I know a thing or two about "old man's cars." But the LaX doesn't cut it in my book.

Thanks for reading, and thank you for your spirited discussion.

Edited July 18, 2006 by Sajeev Mehta

[Robert Hall]

Hello Everyone,

I found this thread doing an Ego Search on google. It's nice to see who reads me and what they think of my umm...writing.

Yup, I'm not a professional writer, I'm an MBA student who loves cars.

The LaX's trunk fails high school physics because (like I said in the article) its impossible to close without getting your hand on the outside decklid's paint..

168335[/snapback]

Hmm...every car I've ever had requires touching the outside decklid's paint to close..(except for my Jeep, which has a handle). that seems to be a trivial complaint...

as far as the rental car comment, I've always viewed GM's FWD models (except for K/G-bodies) as being best for rental only, IMHO..

Edited July 18, 2006 by moltar

[wildcat]

I stand by what I said. Sajeev Mehta's post does nothing to change my opinion of his umm... writing.

[Paolino]

The only car that I've ever seen with a handle to pull down the trunk lid was a Mercedes S500... (well, whatever was before the last generation S500)... it was this little metal piece that stuck out and when you shut the trunk gently, the motors closed it completely and the handle tucked into the chrome moulding. Honestly, what's the big deal with touching the paint? If someone is so concerned that the car is dirty when they shut it, uh, wash the damn car. If not, wipe your hands on a tissue and shut the f@#k up. Sorry, the heat is getting to me and I'm getting testy.

[Sajeev Mehta]

Hmm...every car I've ever had requires touching the outside decklid's paint to close..(except for my Jeep, which has a handle).  that seems to be a trivial complaint...

Its not that trivial when you consider best sellers like the Camry take the time to do it right. The Lucerne's trunk closes easily too. Fear not, my lack of journalistic integrity and anal retentiveness met the Toyota Camry LE.

GM folk will probably like what they see. Well if they don't, that's okay too.

http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/?p=1826

[Sajeev Mehta]

I stand by what I said.  Sajeev Mehta's post does nothing to change my opinion of his    umm... writing.

168352[/snapback]

That's cool. You said you read it a few times, so either its impossible to understand or it was somewhat entertaining. I'm pretty happy.

Toyota's Tundra is next on the list, so stay tuned. (pretty please?)

[Robert Hall]

Its not that trivial when you consider best sellers like the Camry take the time to do it right.  The Lucerne's trunk closes easily too.  Fear not, my lack of journalistic integrity and anal retentiveness met the Toyota Camry LE. 

GM folk will probably like what they see. Well if they don't, that's okay too.

http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/?p=1826

168372[/snapback]

Ok, I suppose I haven't closed the trunk lately on a Camry...I just don't see how you can close ANY trunk or hatch without touching the paint (unless there is a handle) (and I don't mean the Cadillac style electronic pull-down--you still have have to close it most of the way). I know I'm always getting fingerprints on the decklid of my BMW..

Edited July 19, 2006 by moltar

[Flybrian]

Toyota's Tundra is next on the list, so stay tuned. (pretty please?)

168457[/snapback]

If its the new one, I'll read it if you Red X the pics.

Thanks for coming on here anyway...hope you do check back in every now and then because as you can see, we're pretty passionate about cars, too.

P.S. I've got you beat. I'm 21 and drive an Oldsmobile.

[Sajeev Mehta]

Ok, I suppose I haven't closed the trunk lately on a Camry...I just don't see how you can close ANY trunk or hatch without touching the paint (unless there is a handle) (and I don't mean the Cadillac style electronic pull-down--you still have have to close it most of the way).  I know I'm always getting fingerprints on the decklid of my BMW..

168461[/snapback]

Well, let's put it this way:if I need a finger or three on the paint (Lucerne) to finish the job, that's fine. But if I have to use my entire hand, rubbing dirt into a new car's paint, fighting gas struts to shut the lid (LaCrosse) that's not cool.

I'm picky, I'm anal and I expect better.

flybrian: mad props to you, keep up the good work.

[pow]

Well, let's put it this way:if I need a finger or three on the paint (Lucerne) to finish the job, that's fine.  But if I have to use my entire hand, rubbing dirt into a new car's paint, fighting gas struts to shut the lid (LaCrosse) that's not cool.

I'm picky, I'm anal and I expect better. 

flybrian: mad props to you, keep up the good work.

168678[/snapback]

I'm picky, too, but I prefer gas struts to gooseneck hinges. They generally allow for more forehead clearance.

Welcome to the forum, btw.

[Sajeev Mehta]

I'm picky, too, but I prefer gas struts to gooseneck hinges. They generally allow for more forehead clearance.

Welcome to the forum, btw.

168738[/snapback]

That's right, they do. But posteriors are so big these days, the dogleg hinges aren't a big problem spacewise. Witness the new 5-series, it ditched the last gen's struts.

When I test a trunk, I imagine I'm a parent with a grocery cart full of bags, a kid, and I'm running to the parking lot in a bad rainstorm. All of my cargo needs to get in my car ASAP. If I have to fight a dirty, slippery trunk to get it to close, I complain.

Since I'm not a journalist (as that's been proven here) I am open to suggestions/comments on how to improve my methodology.

I like my way, but I also came here to listen. Thanks for the welcome.

[trinacriabob]

I found this thread doing an Ego Search on google. It's nice to see who reads me and what they think of my umm...writing.

Yup, I'm not a professional writer, I'm an MBA student who loves cars.

168335[/snapback]

Yo, Sajeev, where are you doing your MBA? U of M Ann Arbor (since you love cars)? Somewhere else?

Edited July 20, 2006 by trinacriabob

[Sajeev Mehta]

Yo, Sajeev, where are you doing your MBA?  U of M Ann Arbor (since you love cars)?  Somewhere else?

168893[/snapback]

I'm at the University of Houston...I'm a Texan, sorry. But if it helps, I did spend a year in Metro Detroit, so there's a little Michigan in me.

Edited July 20, 2006 by Sajeev Mehta

[enzl]

(GM divisions & products exempt)

Over-all inferior products:

Kia Amanti

Kia Optima

Mitsubishi Galant

Chrysler Sebring

Dodge Stratus

In lower Trim levels (CX, CXL - Competitive in price, standard equipment, & options):

Base Chrysler 300

Base Dodge Charger

Base Ford Five Hundred

In CXS form - competitive to:

Ford Five Hundred SEL

Chrysler 300 limited (still only a V6)

-------------------------------------------------

When the LaCrosse debuted in 2004 as a 2005 model, it was competitive or better than the existing:

Toyota Avalon

Toyota Camry

Hyundai XG350

Hyundai Sonata

Ford Taurus - given

Mercury Sable - given

Mitsubishi Galant - still

Chrysler Sebring - still

Dodge Stratus - still

Anything Kia - still

Anything Suzuki - still

And competitive to (in CXS trim):

Honda Accord

Nissan Altima

In its 3rd year, it seems to be a generation behind (since everything has been updated and remodeled), but it was competent and a completely competitive package with the then-current competition when it debuted. GM & Buick were playing "catch up" with the LaCrosse, which was a success. The LaCrosse is about to be refreshed for 2008 with an early 2009 release for the all-new 2010MY LaCrosse.

166508[/snapback]

If Buick is to regain its luster, 90% of the vehicles mentioned above shouldn't even be mentioned as competitors. To defend the LaCrosse by stating that its better than a Amati or Galant only makes the point that the mighty have fallen.

Buick/Pontiac need such a desperately rethought direction. I can only hope the rumors regarding the Zetas are true, cause its getting scary at the local B-P-GMC dealers with the truck market falling into the toilet.

[VenSeattle]

If Buick is to regain its luster, 90% of the vehicles mentioned above shouldn't even be mentioned as competitors. To defend the LaCrosse by stating that its better than a Amati or Galant only makes the point that the mighty have fallen.

Buick/Pontiac need such a desperately rethought direction. I can only hope the rumors regarding the Zetas are true, cause its getting scary at the local B-P-GMC dealers with the truck market falling into the toilet.

168937[/snapback]

For history... Buick's entry level sedans have always competed with optioned-out or upper-end mainstream vehicles. I guess you forgot the LaCrosse replaced the Century & Regal which were dead center in that list of vehicles. So, it wasn't in defense. It's just fact.

Remember, the LaCrosse starts at $22k and goes up to $28k. EVERY ONE OF THOSE vehicles fall into that price range.

Also, that list does NOT prove "the mighty (Buick) have fallen." It only shows the competition is getting better. Buick is too.

If you don't want a Buick that competes with any of those vehicles, then you'll need to accept a $30k base LaCrosse. As a dealer, you aren't ready to openly abandon all those Century/Regal-level buyers from Buick are you?

[enzl]

For history... Buick's entry level sedans have always competed with optioned-out or upper-end mainstream vehicles. I guess you forgot the LaCrosse replaced the Century & Regal which were dead center in that list of vehicles. So, it wasn't in defense. It's just fact.

Remember, the LaCrosse starts at $22k and goes up to $28k. EVERY ONE OF THOSE vehicles fall into that price range. 

Also, that list does NOT prove "the mighty (Buick) have fallen." It only shows the competition is getting better. Buick is too.

If you don't want a Buick that competes with any of those vehicles, then you'll need to accept a $30k base LaCrosse. As a dealer, you aren't ready to openly abandon all those Century/Regal-level buyers from Buick are you?

168944[/snapback]

You miss the point....Buick is 'supposed' to be an aspirational product. 9/10 of the vehicles mentioned above don't fall into that category.

I recognize that the Century/Regal were competing on the low end with these products..the LaCrosse, as per Bob Lutz- not me, was heading upscale, thus a direct replacement for the Century (or the long dead Skylark) was not intended as the LaCrosse's mission. Deep discounting/Fleet sales have resulted from the completely uninspired LaCrosse---thus, by default, it has again drifted down into Century territory, rather than reaching up into euro-import, low end Lexus territory.

I'm not disputing that the pricing is similar, just that the use of those mediocre vehicles as a counterpoint is exactly NOT what Buick or GM wanted....they would have been better served to develop another, more formal Epsilon than dragging this half-assed update into Buick's attempted revival.

[Cananopie]

That's right, they do.  But posteriors are so big these days, the dogleg hinges aren't a big problem spacewise.  Witness the new 5-series, it ditched the last gen's struts.

When I test a trunk, I imagine I'm a parent with a grocery cart full of bags, a kid, and I'm running to the parking lot in a bad rainstorm.  All of my cargo needs to get in my car ASAP. If I have to fight a dirty, slippery trunk to get it to close, I complain.

Since I'm not a journalist (as that's been proven here) I am open to suggestions/comments on how to improve my methodology.

I like my way, but I also came here to listen. Thanks for the welcome.

168743[/snapback]

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'.

Edited July 20, 2006 by Cananopie

[Sajeev Mehta]

vehicles have gotten smaller and smaller in the last 30 years or so, especially full sized sedans...

You have got to be kidding me. Sure everything is smaller than the full size 1976 GM sedans (right before the downsizing) but everything from the Honda Civic to the Ford Taurus (turn Ford 500) grew larger every generation since the 1980s. Cars are huge, and people who carry big stuff generally gravitate to SUVs these days.

When I tested a 2007 Camry, I parked it next to a Crown Vic and a 1992-ish Camry. Guess which car was closer to its size?

EDIT: Park a 1985 Century next to a 2000 model. Same story at Buick.

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,

Nope, I praised the Lucerne for its trunk...that's a Buick product ya know. I try to focus on the model tested, not the brands.

Edited July 21, 2006 by Sajeev Mehta

[Cananopie]

When I tested a 2007 Camry, I parked it next to a Crown Vic and a 1992-ish Camry. Guess which car was closer to its size?

EDIT: Park a 1985 Century next to a 2000 model.  Same story at Buick.

Nope, I praised the Lucerne for its trunk...that's a Buick product ya know.  I try to focus on the model tested, not the brands.

169450[/snapback]

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.

[The O.C.]

You miss the point....Buick is 'supposed' to be an aspirational product. 9/10 of the vehicles mentioned above don't fall into that category.

I recognize that the Century/Regal were competing on the low end with these products..the LaCrosse, as per Bob Lutz- not me, was heading upscale, thus a direct replacement for the Century (or the long dead Skylark) was not intended as the LaCrosse's mission. Deep discounting/Fleet sales have resulted from the completely uninspired LaCrosse---thus, by default, it has again drifted down into Century territory, rather than reaching up into euro-import, low end Lexus territory.

I'm not disputing that the pricing is similar, just that the use of those mediocre vehicles as a counterpoint is exactly NOT what Buick or GM wanted....they would have been better served to develop another, more formal Epsilon than dragging this half-assed update into Buick's attempted revival.

169132[/snapback]

Lutz PUBLICLY stated when LaCrosse was being introduced that they (GM) were going directly after Lexus ES.....specifically with the CXS model.

Obviously....now that LaCrosse has been rendered not much more than another GM midsize "rental queen," it's the Lucerne they are touting as Buick's match for the ES...

[The O.C.]

The LaCrosse is very competetive in its market and still is at least equal to many of its competitors,

169603[/snapback]

I know you are a big Buick fan.....but how....seriously....CAN you make this statement with a straight face?

[VenSeattle]

Lutz PUBLICLY stated when LaCrosse was being introduced that they (GM) were going directly after Lexus ES.....specifically with the CXS model.

Obviously....now that LaCrosse has been rendered not much more than another GM midsize "rental queen," it's the Lucerne they are touting as Buick's match for the ES...

169632[/snapback]

1st thing, Lutz did not say that. The LaCrosse targeted lexus in terms of noise levels, fit-n-finish, and materials only. If he did say that, I'd like to reread that press release or blog.

2nd, the LaCrosse is not a "rental queen." That's the Grand Prix and Impala. I would be interested in seeing the LaCrosse's fleet/retail sales mix though.

[trinacriabob]

2nd, the LaCrosse is not a "rental queen." That's the Grand Prix and Impala. I would be interested in seeing the LaCrosse's fleet/retail sales mix though.

169666[/snapback]

I wish it was just a tad more of a "rental queen." Except for once at LAX, I have difficulty snagging one from the rental lots so I can live in one for more extended periods of time the way I have in GPs. And I always ask for one, too.

[Regalguy01]

Hello Everyone,

I found this thread doing an Ego Search on google. It's nice to see who reads me and what they think of my umm...writing.

Yup, I'm not a professional writer, I'm an MBA student who loves cars.

The LaX's trunk fails high school physics because (like I said in the article) its impossible to close without getting your hand on the outside decklid's paint...which was dirty at the time. Other rides (Chrysler 300) have this problem too, I don't like that double hinged/strut design.  I complimented the Lucerne's trunk for doing it right, however. Ergonomics, baby.

I'm 29 and my daily driver is a Lincoln. I know a thing or two about "old man's cars." But the LaX doesn't cut it in my book.

Thanks for reading, and thank you for your spirited discussion.

168335[/snapback]

I don't mean to be rude but, give me a break. You are decidedly against the car and your article shows it. It is clear from the few articles I have read that you all are a bunch of foreign car geeks. The fact that you say you drive an american car only serves to prove you know 'THE TRUTH ABOUT CARS' ,where YOUR hard earned dollars count anyway...

Most of yall 'foreign only' folk just 'perceive' those cars as better simply because you are not accustommed to them from daily use. My wife just HAD to have the 03' ES330, and it is a comfortable commute no doubt, but I have to ask her OUT of my Regal many days. Why? She hates that damn herky-jerky transmission when you step into the gas, you know, the one owners bitch and complain about on ANY user website you can find?

The Lacrosse is directly competitive with every car in its class including your best from overseas. I say that, and I am not even a huge fan of the car! I even made my own criticisms of the car in a discussion about the upcoming Lacrosse super:

http://www.cheersandgears.com/forums/index...pic=10155&st=40

Edited July 22, 2006 by Regalguy01

[Sajeev Mehta]

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.

I see where you are coming from. The 220 inch cars are the Caprice, Roadmaster, Crown Vic types, but those cars aren't as space efficient as modern dar FWD cars. Unfortunately those cars have been a niche market since GM, Ford, and Chrysler went to smaller FWD cars in the 1980s.

The cars that the majority of people have driven for the past 20 years have grown by leaps and bounds.

Its that whole cab-forward thing Chrysler started with the LH cars. The new Camry or Ford 500 are great examples: rear seat space is as good as a new Crown Vic, its short hood and tall (not long) trunk make it amazingly space efficient. They also look boxy and stunted, but that's another topic.

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.

Aside from Buick's core fanbase, fleet buyers, company cars, and bargain hunters, I simply don't see who actually wishes to purchase it. You're gonna have to clue me in here, how is the LaCrosse competitive?

1. What percent of sales goes to fleet customers? (I spotted at least 10 of them at my last trip to a Hertz counter, I rented one too, it had the nicer 3.6L V6)

Buick sure looks like its dumping cars to fleet sales.

2. Why is its interior quality (hard door panels, loose console) sub-par to a $20,000 Camry, much less an Avalon? I'm not talking about style, this is quality of interior materials.

3. Why does it still have a coarse 3.8L standard when its competition has smoother V6s for around the same price?

4. Why does its arthritic W-body chassis feel older than its 1989 blueprint?

Driving the LaCrosse, these questions came to mind. I had no answers for them, and the road test reflected it.

I appreciate you taking the time to talk with me. Thank you.

[Sajeev Mehta]

I don't mean to be rude but, give me a break. You are decidedly against the car and your article shows it. It is clear from the few articles I have read that you all are a bunch of foreign car geeks.

Give ME a break. If I don't get a good overall impression of a car, I write the article that way.

CASE IN POINT: My Camry review was the most critical write-up you'll ever see of that car. Nothing is sacred.

Edited July 22, 2006 by Sajeev Mehta

[Guest YellowJacket894]

4. Why does its arthritic W-body chassis feel older than its 1989 blueprint?

Probably because that particular platform has been cursed since the beginning. It's no secret that GM lost money on the damned project at launch, which is the reason why it's stuck around as long as it has.

Of course, I will say that the platform isn't the worst thing since castration or Chinese water torture -- the handling of the first W-Body Impala is pretty great and the (sadly now defunct) Olds Intrigue is a winner when it comes to fit and finish and design. (Combine the Impala's handling with everything else from the Intrigue and you'd have one nice car. Just a thought.)

I thought the LaCrosse review you did, by the way, was 78 per cent fair. The LaCrosse isn't a bad car, by no means. I think it's pretty competent as a whole. But it has a lot of niggling shortcomings which warrant notice.

[Regalguy01]

Aside from Buick's core fanbase, fleet buyers, company cars, and bargain hunters, I simply don't see who actually wishes to purchase it. You're gonna have to clue me in here, how is the LaCrosse competitive? 

Try the 3 people in my subdivision alone that drive Lacrosse's. One is a single mother with two children and one working mother who's husband is a Nissan Titan driver. The other is owned by the more traditional buick owner, a gray-haired couple who is retired and has a 94' or 95' model Lesabre as well.

1. What percent of sales goes to fleet customers?  (I spotted at least 10 of them at my last trip to a Hertz counter, I rented one too, it had the nicer 3.6L V6)

Buick sure looks like its dumping cars to fleet sales.

I will admit that I have seen quite a few LAX rentals myself. No more than the corollas, five hundreds and stratus/sebrings I see a lot of also.

2. Why is its interior quality (hard door panels, loose console) sub-par to a $20,000 Camry, much less an Avalon? I'm not talking about style, this is quality of interior materials.

Here is where the subjectivity comes in. Step into a base model Camry and honestly tell me that it makes you feel 'pampered' by the plastics parade on display in there. Maybe the buicks wood is faux, but it is no more/less offensive than the drab switch gear I see in the Camry. Or give it a once over and notice that it has cheap, tacky plastic wheel covers? And those ugly filled in areas where the fog lamps should be. I'm sorry, that just screams low-rent to me. I don't mean to paint LAX out to be a design home-run, but just again to show it is definetly competitive within the segment.

3. Why does it still have a coarse 3.8L standard when its competition has smoother V6s for around the same price?

The LAX'S standard V6 with its 230lb feet of torque is MUCH more powerful than 06' Camry's inline 4 which makes a paltry 160lb feet of torque. Step up to Camry's highest output 3.3 V6 and torque is measured at 220lb ft with its peak coming at 3600 rpm vs the LAX 3.6's 225lb ft @ 2000 rpm. Can't really put a spin on raw numbers now can we?

4. Why does its arthritic W-body chassis feel older than its 1989 blueprint?

I will conceede, the W-body has its limitations and thus the Lacrosse as well. This should be addressed when the new generation comes out and this one is put to rest.

Overall though, you can't pick too many bones with the LAX when weighed against its competition. Is it the most modern interpretation of the midsized car? Hardly. Is it a solid car which can hold its own in the segment? Damn straight.

Edited July 22, 2006 by Regalguy01

[Cananopie]

I know you are a big Buick fan.....but how....seriously....CAN you make this statement with a straight face?

169633[/snapback]

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.

Edited July 22, 2006 by Cananopie