Lucerne Sales for June 2006

[Satty]

I want to see the fleet/retail mix. Enterprise seems to love the Lucerne.

[GMman]

The Charger and 300 are good looking designs, but the interior on both are CHEAP-O. Lots of road noise in both. We rented a 300 and were extremely unimpressed with the stark, hollow, cheap interior.

The Lucerne doesn't have a 'daring' style to it, but I think it's elegant looking. It's also very quite on the road. I'll take the Lucerne....

[Angry Dad]

Wow - very insightfull, too bad the Avalon's sales are up and now are only a couple thousand behind the Lucerne/Lasabre.

In 2004 - Toyota sold 36k Avalons all year and in 2006 they sold that many in the first 5 months.

I sure bet GM wishes they had a flop like that Avalon to deal with.

170649[/snapback]

GM is trying to get away from the reputation the Avalon is earning, that being an ugly, shoddily built POS.

By the way, Avalon sales are trending down.

[evok]

GM is trying to get away from the reputation the Avalon is earning,  that being an ugly, shoddily built POS.

170654[/snapback]

This is meaningless opinion because there are 45k people this year that disagree with you. As for shoddily build - I have not seen any data that would indicate that.

By the way, Avalon sales are trending down.

Sorry but a data point or two do not make a trend. That is something that is taught in HS math.

Edited July 24, 2006 by evok

[Ghost Dog]

I have family in Buffalo and when I'm there (I haven't been there in a while) it completely BLOWS my mind at how many American cars I see when I pull up to a traffic light there.  In Houston - it's nearly the opposite (although GMT800s and Chevy and Ford trucks and SUVs and new GMT900s are everywhere, probably the only American products I see tons of here in Houston).  In Houston, Toyota and Honda rule the roost as far as your typical 4 door sedan or coupe, it's actually kind of annoying. 

Lately, I have been seeing more of the new Impalas and Buick and Pontiac products, but many of those have the bar codes on them, probably better than half actually.  Lots of Impalas, most of them with bar codes on the window or someone who obviously looks like a salesperson (fleet company car).  I would say the most popular GM *car* (not SUV) that I see in this market that doesn't have a bar code on the window might be a toss up between the G6 and perhaps the Malibu or HHR.  Now that I think about it, I see a lot of HHRs on the road here.  No bar codes either.  But overall, I'd say the market is definitely skewed in favor of the imports here in the Houston area, and out on the West Coast.

GM - you have a lot of work to do in areas that aren't close to your home or in areas where there aren't very many ties to the auto industry.

169654[/snapback]

Buffalo has Alway Been A Chevy/Pontiac Town. With a share for Ford as well. Chrysler has never been anything but distant third at its best.

[Flybrian]

In 2004 - Toyota sold 36k Avalons all year and in 2006 they sold that many in the first 5 months.

170649[/snapback]

In 2004, the Avalon was a lame(er) duck. Plus, that model was a plain stinker.

In 2006, the Avalon sold alongside the old Camry with the old ES in the stable across the way. I'd wait for numbers over the next few months now that both the new Camry and ES have rolled out to determine if the Avalon can accurately be called a success. I predict it - like its predecessors - will have 20 months of glory followed by 3 years of being a second-rate also-ran that people walk right by, favoring instead a car that gives you the same for less (Camry XLE) or more for a very little more (ES350).

I will add to the fact that these little monikers people bequeath on the Avalon, like 'Poor Man's Lexus' ignores the fact that the car itself is not that financially advantageous and also that Lexus has always had a poor man's Lexus called the Lexus ES. Upon seeing more of the new ES350 in person in colors other than Dell Silver and Puke Bronze, I will say its a pretty handsome vehicle on the outside, much more so than the somewhat disjointed Camry and galaxies ahead of the obese-woman-on-a-bike that is the Avalon.

[GMman]

To me the avalon, like the t100 and tundra thingy, have a goofy look about them. Something odd. I've always heard that toyota was attempting to have a Buick "type" vehicle with the avalon....which really means a quite, nice riding, dependable, large, affordable, and quality vehicle. Face it. America has ALWAYS been japan's inspiration. Just like the F150 was toyota's inspiration in their attempt at a fullsize pickup....and so on.

Around these parts (Dallas) there's a whole bunch of everything. The domestics still outnumber the imports, but there still a bunch of them (imports). Funny, I see a lot of Asian folks driving Buicks. Isn't Buick big in China?..

[GMman]

the obese-woman-on-a-bike that is the Avalon.

170696[/snapback]

That's a good description....

[evok]

In 2004, the Avalon was a lame(er) duck. Plus, that model was a plain stinker.

In 2006, the Avalon sold alongside the old Camry with the old ES in the stable across the way. I'd wait for numbers over the next few months now that both the new Camry and ES have rolled out to determine if the Avalon can accurately be called a success. I predict it - like its predecessors - will have 20 months of glory followed by 3 years of being a second-rate also-ran that people walk right by, favoring instead a car that gives you the same for less (Camry XLE) or more for a very little more (ES350).

I will add to the fact that these little monikers people bequeath on the Avalon, like 'Poor Man's Lexus' ignores the fact that the car itself is not that financially advantageous and also that Lexus has always had a poor man's Lexus called the Lexus ES. Upon seeing more of the new ES350 in person in colors other than Dell Silver and Puke Bronze, I will say its a pretty handsome vehicle on the outside, much more so than the somewhat disjointed Camry and galaxies ahead of the obese-woman-on-a-bike that is the Avalon.

170696[/snapback]

The 2003 Avalon sold 50k copies compared to the 2006 sales of 45k.

We shall see what happens. But most cars only see a sales spike the first 2-3 years into the run after launch for the most part before the slide begins.

But it seems to have found a niche in a crowded market for the time being.

GM has the same overlap in product that you mention Toyota having. Just think of all the G body iterations they once had.

[Flybrian]

GM has the same overlap in product that you mention Toyota having.  Just think of all the G body iterations they once had.

170811[/snapback]

Somewhat I suppose on the surface, but if you break it down, you'll see the '01 Aurora went up against the TL, ES, I30; the LeSabre/Park Avenue took on the Grand Marquis, LHS, Concorde; and the Bonneville challenged the 300M and Intrepid.

They were also far more specialized, with the LeSabre/Park Ave having softer rides, styling, and bench/column shift options, the Bonneville being very American and muscley, and the Aurora simply occupying a higher plane.

Now, there was certainly overlap within the lines, like Bonneville SE vs. LeSabre Custom and pretty much LeSabre and Park Avenue, but as a whole, I don't see it. The Bonneville's biggest problem seemed to be the Grand Prix, though the Bonnie was far more refined, Pontiac buyers simply don't care; I believe a V8 offering for the 2000 model year would've been a big boon to sales.

Right now, I don't see that much seperating the Avalon from any of the other two it shares underpinnings with. Its not that luxurious in comparison to the new Camry, the power output is the same, the trunk is larger by like a cu. ft., the Camry also has reclining rear seats as an option, and they got rid of the senior-tailored 6-seat/column shift option that won over people in 2000. All three are also conservatively styled, bordering on luxurious and now the Avalon seems the least 'pricey' of them all. Generally, the large car market doesn't exist anymore and the Avalon seems to be there for the sake of being there.

Again, you're right; we'll see. But I think the Avalon's numbers were artificially boosted by the wow factor of the first year and that it went unchallenged within Toyota for almost two whole years. I don't see why they just don't import a decontented Crown with a bench seat. I bet you'd sell out the whole shipment with vinyl tops and vogue tires.

[daves87rs]

In 2004, the Avalon was a lame(er) duck. Plus, that model was a plain stinker.

In 2006, the Avalon sold alongside the old Camry with the old ES in the stable across the way. I'd wait for numbers over the next few months now that both the new Camry and ES have rolled out to determine if the Avalon can accurately be called a success. I predict it - like its predecessors - will have 20 months of glory followed by 3 years of being a second-rate also-ran that people walk right by, favoring instead a car that gives you the same for less (Camry XLE) or more for a very little more (ES350).

I will add to the fact that these little monikers people bequeath on the Avalon, like 'Poor Man's Lexus' ignores the fact that the car itself is not that financially advantageous and also that Lexus has always had a poor man's Lexus called the Lexus ES. Upon seeing more of the new ES350 in person in colors other than Dell Silver and Puke Bronze, I will say its a pretty handsome vehicle on the outside, much more so than the somewhat disjointed Camry and galaxies ahead of the obese-woman-on-a-bike that is the Avalon.

170696[/snapback]

It's funny-after reading these posts..I was thinking along the same lines...

soo...

[daves87rs]

I want to see the fleet/retail mix.  Enterprise seems to love the Lucerne.

170652[/snapback]

I agree with a fleet mix..gotta see...

THough I don't see many Lucrernes by the big E here....which is surprising-considering that they are built in this area....strange...

[daves87rs]

GM is trying to get away from the reputation the Avalon is earning,  that being an ugly, shoddily built POS.

By the way, Avalon sales are trending down.

170654[/snapback]

Umm...No. It has pretty soild sales....

You might want to back that POS info you seem to have....

I may not be a fan of the car-but at the same time I"m not going to bash it unless

I have a clue what I'm talking about...

My neighbor works at a Toyota dealership-and they have had only a few in for minor problems....and it sells well around here...

[evok]

Right now, I don't see that much seperating the Avalon from any of the other two it shares underpinnings with. Its not that luxurious in comparison to the new Camry, the power output is the same, the trunk is larger by like a cu. ft., the Camry also has reclining rear seats as an option, and they got rid of the senior-tailored 6-seat/column shift option that won over people in 2000. All three are also conservatively styled, bordering on luxurious and now the Avalon seems the least 'pricey' of them all. Generally, the large car market doesn't exist anymore and the Avalon seems to be there for the sake of being there.

Again, you're right; we'll see. But I think the Avalon's numbers were artificially boosted by the wow factor of the first year and that it went unchallenged within Toyota for almost two whole years. I don't see why they just don't import a decontented Crown with a bench seat. I bet you'd sell out the whole shipment with vinyl tops and vogue tires.

170825[/snapback]

There is 8 inches separating the Camry from the Avalon and similar if you include the ES.

This is no different than what GM was doing with the LaSabre and the Park Ave. And no the SC V6 was not standard on the Park so the majority of sales at 76% of the mix were the base 3800. Than factor in the Deville/DTS. It is all the same thing no matter what mainstream OEM we are discussing.

The difference being that Toyota was a lot more successful at it with respect to sales than GM. Toyota expanded and GM regrouped?

Nissan uses the same strategy with the Altima and Maxima and at one time with the I30. In that case the market was not fooled.

I have driven plenty of Avalons over the years excluding the latest. I can assure you they all have been very nice vehicles in doing what they are designed to do. They might not be an enthusiast's "wet dream", but they are very smooth, competent, comfortable vehicles filling a niche that was once dominated by GM.

[The O.C.]

Somewhat I suppose on the surface, but if you break it down, you'll see the '01 Aurora went up against the TL, ES, I30; the LeSabre/Park Avenue took on the Grand Marquis, LHS, Concorde; and the Bonneville challenged the 300M and Intrepid.

They were also far more specialized, with the LeSabre/Park Ave having softer rides, styling, and bench/column shift options, the Bonneville being very American and muscley, and the Aurora simply occupying a higher plane.

Now, there was certainly overlap within the lines, like Bonneville SE vs. LeSabre Custom and pretty much LeSabre and Park Avenue, but as a whole, I don't see it. The Bonneville's biggest problem seemed to be the Grand Prix, though the Bonnie was far more refined, Pontiac buyers simply don't care; I believe a V8 offering for the 2000 model year would've been a big boon to sales.

Right now, I don't see that much seperating the Avalon from any of the other two it shares underpinnings with. Its not that luxurious in comparison to the new Camry, the power output is the same, the trunk is larger by like a cu. ft., the Camry also has reclining rear seats as an option, and they got rid of the senior-tailored 6-seat/column shift option that won over people in 2000. All three are also conservatively styled, bordering on luxurious and now the Avalon seems the least 'pricey' of them all. Generally, the large car market doesn't exist anymore and the Avalon seems to be there for the sake of being there.

Again, you're right; we'll see. But I think the Avalon's numbers were artificially boosted by the wow factor of the first year and that it went unchallenged within Toyota for almost two whole years. I don't see why they just don't import a decontented Crown with a bench seat. I bet you'd sell out the whole shipment with vinyl tops and vogue tires.

170825[/snapback]

My gut reaction is that GM probably wanted the Aurora to target those imports but I bet there was a tiny fraction of import buyers that actually even considered the Aurora.

I bet if you pull up cross-shop data (maybe Evok can find that somewhere) I bet you'll see Aurora cross-shopped mostly with other GM products and maybe some other domestics.

Just like I bet there is next-to-no cross-shopping of even the Lucerne or LaCrosse with the Lexus ES, Acura TL, or I bet even Avalon.

With Toyota, I find three distinct pricing levels with each of their cars (Camry, Avalon, ES.) Also, neither vehicle shares any exterior panels or interior fittings with each other.

Here's the pricing levels for the "volume" versions of each....(based upon a recent "survey" at Power Toyota in Irvine and Newport Lexus...

Camry LE 4-Cyl - $21,080 (I'd say 90-95% of the Camrys they had in stock were this configuration.)

Avalon XLS Leather - $32,445 (I'd say maybe 50% were this config...with a remaining 20% Touring....20% Limited.....and 10% XL.)

Lexus ES350 - $37K start....up to almost $50K. (I didn't take as detailed of a look at what packages were volume....but with a base price around $37K, I think that differentiates it, pricing-wise, nicely from Avalon....and it has an even more premium interior treatment.)

That's a realistic look at Toyota's product differentiation.

[Flybrian]

My gut reaction is that GM probably wanted the Aurora to target those imports but I bet there was a tiny fraction of import buyers that actually even considered the Aurora.

I bet if you pull up cross-shop data (maybe Evok can find that somewhere) I bet you'll see Aurora cross-shopped mostly with other GM products and maybe some other domestics.

171059[/snapback]

Among the older set, sure. But older folks make up a surprisingly small percentage of Aurora buyers from the data I saw (no I don't remember exactly where or when) at least in comparison with the traditional Oldsmobile clientele.

I would dispute your general assertion based on the fact that many Aurora (not Oldsmobile) owners bought Acuras, Lexus, or Infiniti cars or the Cadillac Seville. My proof of this is anecdotal based on dozens of posts on other forums where former Aurora owners remark how GM 'doesn't have anything for them,' so they defected to import midlux cars and also the countless times I've heard people mention to me in person, "I almost/wish I had bought one of those, but I got a Legend/TL/RL/ES/I30 instead." Again, there would be no 'offical' way of documenting this, but that's the best proof I have right now.

Call it biased love, but I really believe the Aurora was less of an 'Oldsmobile' and even less of a typical 'GM' than many give it credit for being. I really feel it was on the cusp of truly crossing over and becoming a real player in the entry-luxury market, if it hadn't to a good extent by 2001.

[evok]

I have not seen data on the Aurora based upon age so I will not dispute or support any arguments to date.

But I just went through the sales of the vehicles Gen 1 & 2 from 1999 until end of mass production in 2002/3.

2000 sales hit their peak at 28k. 1999 16k.

After 2000 sales were under 10k and not even worth going into.

Therefore besides a blip in 2000 from the most recent data that I reviewed, there really is not much to talk about.

[The O.C.]

Call it biased love, but I really believe the Aurora was less of an 'Oldsmobile' and even less of a typical 'GM' than many give it credit for being. I really feel it was on the cusp of truly crossing over and becoming a real player in the entry-luxury market, if it hadn't to a good extent by 2001.

171134[/snapback]

Oh I liked the Aurora.....especially the first-gen that really took a step out in regards to styling.

The FWD platform maybe hurt it later in its lifetime as RWD was coming back in vogue with the Japanese (Infiniti, etc.) and the Europeans (not to mention Lincoln with the new LS.)

But I think the Aurora suffered more due to it's affiliation with GM. I think too many people dismissed it because it was a GM product. GM still faces that challenge way too often with way too many of their products....even the really good products.

[razoredge]

Aurora - Love it or hate it styling, way out of the box, either you can see yourself in this kind of car or you cant, the shy fainting sheep will remain in the pasture and the black sheep will make the break for the hole in the fence. No need to examine the percentage of followers to ecentrics. I also know for a fact that many Aurora potentials just went to the STS or SLS. Generation 2 never stood a chance but its funny to see all the cars today that have a similar appearence

Questions - How was the Aurora priced compared to the import competition ? I have been under the impression it was higher. Aurora required premium gas, did its competition ? Wasnt Aurora larger than what the typical Japanese car buyer was used to ? Larger engine, lower gas milage, just far distant from the assumption of what constitutes a proper car for the "I love foreign" crowd.

Lucerne - Im already seeing as many Lucernes around here as Lacrosses so all is not lost, which was the feeling I got when scanning the roads for Lacrosse. I believe Lucerne styling is aggressive for recent Buick, and its not enough to make most people walk away like Aurora may have. The last LeSabres are a financial steal as far as used cars go but not exactly the look thats gonna get you excited as you walk across the parking lot to get in your "new" car, much like Camry and Avalon, forgetable, yet history of the market has shown most people dont care about that sort of thing.

"Hey everybody ! Come take a look at my Avalon ! Hey ! Hey ! Where ya'll going ? Wait, wait, come back, this is my Avalon ! "

I parked our LSS next to a friends Avalon at work last summer. It was a nice car but I couldnt see any advantages other than it was newer. He loves them and it was their second. They have a previous generation as well. He traded a late 90's Cutlass for it. Hardly a comparision of equals but he stated a few problems with the Cutlass that made him feel "all American cars are junk". As usual the great GM's take a fall for the shortcommings of the cheap GM's. A tuff place to be when your company has so many models and brands, then everyone assumes these problems are across the board..................but its such a huge board.

[intrigued]

actually the 2nd aurora was better priced than the competion and DID NOT require premium gas. Compare it to the ES 300 or RL of the time it coame off very well.

v6 aurora had 215 hp and 235 ftlbs of tourque compared to the ES's 200, 200 (which must have been overated back in the day)

And the RL had 225, 225 (also udoubtedly overated)

then with the aurora you had the option of the 4.0 V8 which blew all of the FWD competition except for the infitinis out of the water.

the auora also offered a lot of tech standard the other only offered as options or not at all. I think the aurora's sales didnt take off in the second gen like they could have because only a few months after it hit the street Olds, became a defunct brand on lifesupport. Advertising for the aurora never really ramped up because of this though I do remember some print adds from back in the day that were very nice. I liked this car so much I almost got one to replace my alero whe it died this year but I didnt have the cash to buy a used car up front and used car financing sucks.

Edited July 26, 2006 by intrigued

[Flybrian]

Yeah, Olds dying not a year after the '01 Aurora was launched sure didn't help. What kind of equity is there is that? But in reality, those who chose an import instead of an Aurora for the 'dead Olds' reason missed out on some wonderful deals. There's still an untitled, unsold 2004 Alero somewhere when I looked on eBay two weeks ago. 24 miles.

[razoredge]

Thats interesting info, I was hopeing to hear from OC and Evok on this one too. Seems they know all the details.

The Asian imports just now trumped GM in the power department so it seems, but so many posters here always give me the impression that GM has always been behind.............my 91 Regal did a good job up against an Intregra or Legend 2dr. but I knew/know nothing about them, I thought I was going to get my antiquated butt kicked.

We still see one or two, sometimes even more G1 Auroras every weekend we go somewhere. I'm just afraid of the repair costs of the external engine, wear items, other wise we would be in a white 2002 4.0 as I write this. I seem to keep forgetting that the G2 could run regular.

Edited July 26, 2006 by razoredge

[evok]

Not only was Olds a lame duck brand right after the Aurora was launched, the vehicle was expensive compared to the vehicle it really replaced in the line up.

http://www.nctd.com/review-intro.cfm?Vehic...ra&ReviewID=880

http://www.lotpro.com/cars/1999/oldsmobile/88

Remember at that time Olds was not a premium brand but a discount brand like much of GM is today.

Remember the Gen2 Aurora really replaced the 88 in the line up.

Edited July 27, 2006 by evok

[razoredge]

OK, why was Olds a lame duck brand right after Aurora was launched ? Im not getting your point, Olds was heading for lamedom anyhow or because of the Aurora ?

I understand the loss of Eighty Eight and Regency buyers but reading the review it seems the Aurora had everything right that so many complain about not being right in GMs today. So what I have never been able to understand is why if all things were equal with competition which this author seems to indicate, and consumers had no preassumptions about quality why does the statement about Lexus/Acura/Infinity buyers never cross shopping the Aurora exist? This author seems to compare up Mercedes and BMW more than the Asians which one would think was a good thing.

I understand this is an irreveltent point today in regards to the Aurora itself but as a failure study it seems quite important. This car seems to have been everything GM has supposedly needed but yet it was written off. I see todays Lucerne as being the same car in the same spot but couriously five years later, and its interior is getting critizied, its base engine....critized and all the other things. Sure the base model is more inline for affordable pricing but who wants one of them ? It seem a respectable Lucerne is just as expensive as a respectable Aurora was, disregarding inflation that is.

Confused ? I guess what Im saying is if a car like the Aurora could not work for GM what does it take ? What car is going to do it for GM ? What car is going to change this perception problem ? Is it possible to change this perception problem or is it a lost cause and GM is just throwing money away because Americans just hate anything American or presume anything Asian or German is just inherently better ? Seems to me the answer to the Aurora question is also the answer to GM's mid lux sports sedan question.

Edited July 27, 2006 by razoredge

[evok]

OK, why was Olds a lame duck brand right after Aurora was launched ? Im not getting your point, Olds was heading for lamedom anyhow or because of the Aurora ?

6 months after the Aurora II was released, the announcement was made to kill Olds. Hence the brand became a lame duck.

Confused ? I guess what Im saying is if a car like the Aurora could not work for GM what does it take ?

Dynamic, consistent, highly styled product over time.

What car is going to do it for GM ? What car is going to change this perception problem ?

The CTS and Escalade did it for Cadillac and the 300 did it for Chrylser.

But bland product like the STS, SRX, zeta Commodore and Statesman will not turn around GM in NA. And neither will rental queesn like the questionably styled Charger.

Is it possible to change this perception problem or is it a lost cause and GM is just throwing money away because Americans just hate anything American or presume anything Asian or German is just inherently better ?

Time and the right product, year after year and model after model. But that also means investment.

Seems to me the answer to the Aurora question is also the answer to GM's mid lux sports sedan question.

The question might not have a good answer for Pontiac and Buick. Too much time may have passed to make them viable in their current place in the GM portfolio. The Enclave might be the product that determines if Buick is saveable.

Personally I loved the Aurora I&II. But...we see what happened there. Too little too late.

[razoredge]

I think GM blew it in the low end market and that rep transfered over to the higher end market cause I may be ignorant but I just dont see the superiority of product from Japan over the decades in the larger Buick/Oldsmobile/Cadillac range.

Well good luck Lucerne its a hard uphill pull when the odds are stacked against you.

[trinacriabob]

Somehow this became an Aurora thread, so I'll chime in. I appreciate the Gen 01 Aurora but like the Gen 02 Aurora a lot better. I only wish it had retained a closer rendition of the beautiful wrap-around dash of the Gen 01 version.

We can't even compare the Lucerne as being in the same ball-park. In CX guise, the Lucerne is an entry-level big car, but a very good one. The Aurora is more of a specialty touring sedan.

While I like most things about the Lucerne, I don't like the seating. You can look at the seating from the window or when the door is open and see that the buckets (or the 40-20-40 bench portions) are shapeless and lacking in support. While this car should be anything but a Grand Prix, there needs to be more sculpting in the actual seats themselves to make for a better ergonomic fit and more comfort on a long road trip.

[evok]

I think GM blew it in the low end market and that rep transfered over to the higher end market cause I may be ignorant but I just dont see the superiority of product from Japan over the decades in the larger Buick/Oldsmobile/Cadillac range.

Well good luck Lucerne its a hard uphill pull when the odds are stacked against you.

171945[/snapback]

Actually it is the other way around. Historically GM has always relied on their upper mid and fullsized cars. It was in the 80s after the second gas crunch when GM downsized those vehicles and added the look alike styling that the market went south fast. Also in the day GM always sold those cars at a premium compared to the competition. It was not that long ago that GM was selling a million fullsized cars a year.

And now in that segment there is only the DTS and Lucerne in the traditional fullsize market and the 3 W's. And we all know the premium pricing just is not there today.

It is an uphill battle and as time passes the viablity of the Buick brand has to be questioned. Where will Buick be in 3 - 4 years?

I know that I used the Chrysler 300 as an example. There is one major difference. Chrysler is in the company's name. Buick is not. For that very reason the is more reason for Chrysler to succeed and receive the necessary investment than Buick.

And what happens if a zeta Buick is a bust. What then?

[Drew Dowdell]

And what happens if a zeta Buick is a bust.  What then?

172037[/snapback]

If it looks anything like this... with the VE interiors we've already seen, Buick will be quite safe. Lucerne is selling quite well, no? A VE buick would really eat into the Lexus crowd.

[Paolino]

If it looks anything like this... with the VE interiors we've already seen, Buick will be quite safe. Lucerne is selling quite well, no? A VE buick would really eat into the Lexus crowd.

172047[/snapback]

Oh, that's beautiful! I wish the 2007 did look like that!

[evok]

If it looks anything like this... with the VE interiors we've already seen, Buick will be quite safe. Lucerne is selling quite well, no? A VE buick would really eat into the Lexus crowd.

The Lucerne is selling on par. It is not growing businees and it is not loosing.

And since this is the the future we are talking about, to speak it absolutes would be foolish. The correct response is, a VE Buick MAY/COULD/POSSIBLY really eat into the Lexus crowd.

But 5 years from now is a long time.

[Drew Dowdell]

And since this is the the future we are talking about, to speak it absolutes would be foolish.  The correct response is, a VE Buick MAY/COULD/POSSIBLY really eat into the Lexus crowd.

But 5 years from now is a long time.

172096[/snapback]

well, ya....

I mean one of those in 2007 :AH-HA_wink:

*sigh*

if only

[VenSeattle]

Dynamic, consistent, highly styled product over time.

171924[/snapback]

Definitely agree on consistency. Most of GM's divisions lack consistency (except maybe HUMMER & GMC). Some worse than others, but every vehicle in a brand needs to convey a consistent message and image. Every single vehicle built by GM needs to have a justifiably assumed level of quality built into it.

The question might not have a good answer for  Pontiac and Buick.  Too much time may have passed to make them viable in their current place in the GM portfolio.  The Enclave might be the product that determines if Buick is saveable.

171924[/snapback]

I don't feel time will be held against Buick. Warren Brown wrote a (non GM) car review in the Washington Post. The way he phrased the change in direction for a certain manufacturer was near perfect about how I feel regarding Buick's situation:

People change. Companies can change, too. It's a matter of pride, of deciding that yesterday's failure won't be allowed to summarize your life's work or to undermine tomorrow's potential for success.

I believe 100 percent that the above statement is key to Buick's success. With Buick's continued success in China, Buick's combined market volumes can sustain a single line-up of premium and luxury vehicles. Buick can not allow a temporary tarnished image in the US to prevent it from claiming back what it actually is.

The root of it all goes back to consistency. Buick needs to be the same here as it is in China.

[evok]

I don't feel time will be held against Buick. Warren Brown wrote a (non GM) car review in the Washington Post. The way he phrased the change in direction for a certain manufacturer was near perfect about how I feel regarding Buick's situation:

I believe 100 percent that the above statement is key to Buick's success. With Buick's continued success in China, Buick's combined market volumes can sustain a single line-up of premium and luxury vehicles. Buick can not allow a temporary tarnished image in the US to prevent it from claiming back what it actually is.

The root of it all goes back to consistency. Buick needs to be the same here as it is in China.

172104[/snapback]

There is a distinction between what Brown talks about that must be made with regard to Buick.

Buick is not a company it is just a brand that does not sell global product.

Look where BMW's "English Patient" Rover is now.

What about Fiat's Lancia and Alfa?

Buick needs to be the same here as it is in China.

Selling recycled Daewoos is not going to help Buick in NA. Selling the new zeta Statesman is not going to help Buick in NA.

What I said by consistent product refers to good, high quality appealing product, model after model, year after year.

They have been selling consistent product, just to a smaller audience that has less and less appeal.

The Lucerne is a good vehicle in search of a bold face.

http://news.u-car.com.tw/news-detail.asp?nid=4431

Edited July 27, 2006 by evok

[VenSeattle]

There is a distinction between what Brown talks about that must be made with regard to Buick.

Buick is not a company it is just a brand that does not sell global product.

Look where BMW's "English Patient" Rover is now.

What about Fiat's Lancia and Alfa?

Selling recycled Daewoos is not going to help Buick in NA.  Selling the new zeta Statesman is not going to help Buick in NA.

What I said by consistent product refers to good, high quality appealing product, model after model, year after year.

They have been selling consistent product, just to a smaller audience that has less and less appeal.

The Lucerne is a good vehicle in search of a bold face.

http://news.u-car.com.tw/news-detail.asp?nid=4431

172116[/snapback]

I'm not saying sell the "current" Chinese Buicks here now... but going forward they need to offer the same line-ups.

However, I would bring the 2007 Excelle over here if it meant Buick would share the next LaCrosse and Lucerne/Statesman/Royaum internationally. (Aren't they going to export the Enclave to China?) I haven't seen the interior pic of the 2007 Excelle, but I'd want to offer it in NA under Buick completely loaded (Quiet-Tuning, ESP, ABS, TC, Xenon headlights, Onstar, power everything, even memory heated seats) except with two engine choices (Ecotec 4 or 2.8lHFV6) and two options (leather & navigation). Tune the engines for optimal fuel economy, and price it from $21k-$24k. Sure it wouldn't be completely competitive HP wise, but if it offered everything standard along with the longer warranty and good MPG it would be a good alternative and an upscale entry for Buick (sort-a like the TSX is for Acura). It would also allow for the 3.6l to be standard on the LaCrosse and the 4.6l V8 to be standard on Lucerne.

I definitely approve of the front end on the Excelle. I think it looks great.

The Lucerne is selling on par. It is not growing businees and it is not loosing.

You have to give Buick credit. The Lucerne is a transitional vehicle and Buick is remarketing itself as a premium/luxury brand in NA. For the Lucerne to be selling on par is a good sign. Olds wasn't so lucky with its transitional vehicles.

[Chicagoland]

A short time ago, Cadillac was considered 'dying', 'irrelavant', 'old mans car', 'done'.

Lucurne is getting some attention, and only tru domestic haters in the media have given it bad reviews.

[The O.C.]

You have to give Buick credit. The Lucerne is a transitional vehicle and Buick is remarketing itself as a premium/luxury brand in NA. For the Lucerne to be selling on par is a good sign. Olds wasn't so lucky with its transitional vehicles.

172325[/snapback]

You are right....

Except one thing that has to change is Buick's reliance on entry-level models that are substandard and non-competitive in the marketplace...IF, as you say, they are truly going to remake themselves as a premium/luxury brand in NA.

I'm referring to Lucerne CX, LaCrosse CX, pushrod V6 engines, soft and unresponsive base-level suspension tuning with high-aspect-ratio inexpensive tire choices, split-bench seats with column shifters, etc.

I'm not saying every Lucerne has to be a $38K CXS....but Buick/GM has got to start sweating more of the details on the $26K version.

[razoredge]

Look some people do want a bench seat and column shifter so some people need to quit crying about it. It has absolutely nothing to do with quality or premium or "substandard" its just something that is also available for those that want it.

I'd be more concerned about the choice of material used on cloth seats as GM and the Japs have had someone with really really grotesque taste shopping for the fabric. Whoever decided dress suit dry cleaning material on seats was the bomb did just that.....bomb. Then colors - taupe/ tan/ baby poop/ whatever, is the worst color in the world for staining and grey is gray, dull, boring, uninviting, and black is black, hot, dull boreing overwhelming. This three color only interior trend needs to take a long hike back to Japan.

Yes GM's "base" suspensions spring rate specs need to be thrown away and whatever they call "sport suspension" need to be the base and the sport suspension needs to be tighter. BUT they are not unresponsive, just too soft. Unresponsive incase anyone does not know means you turn the wheel and the car does nothing, goes straight off the road...........OK ? They are still however the best riding highway cruisers available and many many buyers want that.

Expensive tires for DOT legal driveing which most people abide by are a waste of money and little more than an ego endorsement. Small stamped steel wheels and plastic hubcaps however are unexceptable in a Buick........as was the styling of most alloy wheels GM used for the last 10-15 years.

Crying about the 3.8 STILL when everyone who is supposed to know what is planned and coming in the future is a sign of making noise for noise sake. Even worse when everyone who is on the ball knows the 38 was and still is one of GM's most desired engines by those that really know anything about the engine or has owned a car with them. It is not a substandard engine, new engines are comming, get over it.

If the cloth wasnt so grotesque and a spring rate upgrade option at say $200 was available the 38 powered $26,000 Lucerne is probably the best buy on the market for a quality car. Leather is a $900-1200 option and that is what it is. Ive talked to many people that are upset becasue they can not get a CXS with the 38, which would also be my gripe. I doubt many Lucerne or Lexvalon buyers take their cars to the big bad drag strip on Sundays or spend Saturday nights going head to head for "pinks" stop light to stop light. This is however the way the mag/rags view an auto and now have all the self proclaimed enthousiasts viewing cars.

I imagine my antiquated 240/280 L67 LSS will still hold its own against the big bad azzed "new" Lexvalons and I can bring her up over the mountain and through the wood fast enough to make 99% of the worlds drivers crap their panties.

If American market Buicks are going to be made in China, just put out the lights. Might as well change the name to Suchan and fogetaboudit.

Edited July 29, 2006 by razoredge

[trinacriabob]

172047[/snapback]

Where did you get that? Magazine or chop? By who?

That's an impressive and tasteful vehicle. Foreign manufacturers: RUN !

[Satty]

Looks like a NOS chop.

[enzl]

Look some people do want a bench seat and column shifter so some people need to quit crying about it. It has absolutely nothing to do with quality or premium or "substandard" its just something that is also available for those that want it.

I'd be more concerned about the choice of material used on cloth seats as GM and the Japs have had someone with really really grotesque taste shopping for the fabric. Whoever decided dress suit dry cleaning material on seats was the bomb did just that.....bomb. Then colors - taupe/ tan/ baby poop/ whatever, is the worst color in the world for staining and grey is gray, dull, boring, uninviting, and black is black, hot, dull boreing overwhelming. This three color only interior trend needs to take a long hike back to Japan.

Yes GM's "base" suspensions spring rate specs need to be thrown away and whatever they call "sport suspension" need to be the base and the sport suspension needs to be tighter. BUT they are not unresponsive, just too soft. Unresponsive incase anyone does not know means you turn the wheel and the car does nothing, goes straight off the road...........OK ? They are still however the best riding highway cruisers available and many many buyers want that.

Expensive tires for DOT legal driveing which most people abide by are a waste of money and little more than an ego endorsement. Small stamped steel wheels and plastic hubcaps however are unexceptable in a Buick........as was the styling of most alloy wheels GM used for the last 10-15 years.

Crying about the 3.8 STILL when everyone who is supposed to know what is planned and coming in the future is a sign of making noise for noise sake. Even worse when everyone who is on the ball knows the 38 was and still is one of GM's most desired engines by those that really know anything about the engine or has owned a car with them. It is not a substandard engine, new engines are comming, get over it.

If the cloth wasnt so grotesque and a spring rate upgrade option at say $200 was available the 38 powered $26,000 Lucerne is probably the best buy on the market for a quality car. Leather is a $900-1200 option and that is what it is. Ive talked to many people that are upset becasue they can not get a CXS with the 38, which would also be my gripe. I doubt many Lucerne or Lexvalon buyers take their cars to the big bad drag strip on Sundays or spend Saturday nights going head to head for "pinks" stop light to stop light. This is however the way the mag/rags view an auto and now have all the self proclaimed enthousiasts viewing cars.

I imagine my antiquated 240/280 L67 LSS will still hold its own against the big bad azzed "new" Lexvalons and I can bring her up over the mountain and through the wood fast enough to make 99% of the worlds drivers crap their panties.

If American market Buicks are going to be made in China, just put out the lights. Might as well change the name to Suchan and fogetaboudit.

172761[/snapback]

There is a ton of potential in Buick. I think its a matter of poor stewardship on the part of GM rather than any inherent failure of the 'brand mission."

That being said, the lineup under Cadillac in the GM hierachy should have the 'almost' best of everything. I just don't see that happening with their current lineup.

Here's a lost opportunity in the marketplace> How about a clever 6 passenger option?....think past generation Taurus front bench (with reversible armrest and cupholder thingy during 5 passenger use) meets a Coach - style execution. It would be an upgrade to those that want it....

I'm not as concerned about the product execution, its the details that still escape the General...no real innovation or outside the box thinking....

[The O.C.]

Look some people do want a bench seat and column shifter so some people need to quit crying about it. It has absolutely nothing to do with quality or premium or "substandard" its just something that is also available for those that want it.

172761[/snapback]

You are right.

That's why every "premium" auto manufacturer offers bench seats and column shifters.

<note heavy sarcasm>

[Drew Dowdell]

You are right.

That's why every "premium" auto manufacturer offers bench seats and column shifters.

<note heavy sarcasm>

173930[/snapback]

Here is a way for the Buick Lucerne to get the O.C. seal of approval:

1. Change the name to Buick Motor Works.

2. Remove the Buick name from the cars; use initials instead

3. Borrow Pontiac grills

4. Convert to RWD

5. Keep column shifter

6. replace all other controls <including steering wheel and brakes> with a single dial; name the dial.

7. add a big fat butt

8. change the name. The car is about 5 meters long... so start there. It comes with a 4.6 litre engine. We want to keep some heritage, so we'll use the first letter of the old name. So we have a 546L.

9. Base price: $71,000

10. Profit.

[The O.C.]

Here is a way for the Buick Lucerne to get the O.C. seal of approval:

1. Change the name to Buick Motor Works.

2. Remove the Buick name from the cars; use initials instead

3. Borrow Pontiac grills

4. Convert to RWD

5. Keep column shifter

6. replace all other controls <including steering wheel and brakes> with a single dial; name the dial.

7. add a big fat butt

8. change the name.  The car is about 5 meters long... so start there. It comes with a 4.6 litre engine.  We want to keep some heritage, so we'll use the first letter of the old name.  So we have a 546L.

9. Base price: $71,000

10. Profit.

173938[/snapback]

Noting YOUR heavy sarcasm.....here's MY list of getting a seal of approval for Lucerne....(noting some are easier than others...)

* Bring back the "Premium American Motorcars" tagline

* Make Lucerne RWD

* Std 3.6L VVT HF V6, Opt. 291hp 4.6L northstar from DTS "high-performance" version.

* Get rid of bench seat/column shifter configuration - even in base CX.

* Bring CX and CXL suspension and steering tuning on a par with CXS. Tire/wheel differences can account for the different models. CXS can remain exclusive with magnetic shocks. (Note...even CXS has a comfy ride...it's not like I'm asking it to be BMW-stiff.)

* Add features we've all asked for....(xenons, articulating headrests, power t/t, auto up and down on all four windows, etc.)

* Some more DTS-level dash material instead of the hard plastic.

Other than that, it's great. I have no problem with styling....inside or out.

[razoredge]

Sorry OC but you would just begin cryin about the 3.6 not being powerful enough, "base model should come with a quad underovercam (thats QUOC its in the works just for you)) 16 valves per cyl, no less than 14 cylinders, 16 speed minimun, thought control operated rear windows, wipers on the headlights, tailights, directional and side markets, laser brake lights so you blind everyone behind you when you stop, 28" wheels with 385/10/28's and interior appointments made by the sleep number matress company

[RCD]

... Lucerne looks to have outsold the segment, depending how you define it.  Too bad GM didn't hype that more.

Here's the only mention I could find of it:

http://www.friendsofbuick.com/news/07-20-2006.html

Not a GM site, but still...

[GMman]

a few factoids:

1. The Lucerne is a great looking car.

2. The avalon looks like ass.

3. The chick that does the Mercury commercials is HOT.

4. The Aurora was a great looking car.

5. The 300 looks good, but is like a tin can inside.

[Drew Dowdell]

Noting YOUR heavy sarcasm.....here's MY list of getting a seal of approval for Lucerne....(noting some are easier than others...)

*  Bring back the "Premium American Motorcars" tagline

*  Make Lucerne RWD

*  Std 3.6L VVT HF V6, Opt. 291hp 4.6L northstar from DTS "high-performance" version.

*  Get rid of bench seat/column shifter configuration - even in base CX.

*  Bring CX and CXL suspension and steering tuning on a par with CXS.  Tire/wheel differences can account for the different models.  CXS can remain exclusive with magnetic shocks.  (Note...even CXS has a comfy ride...it's not like I'm asking it to be BMW-stiff.)

*  Add features we've all asked for....(xenons, articulating headrests, power t/t, auto up and down on all four windows, etc.)

*  Some more DTS-level dash material instead of the hard plastic.

Other than that, it's great.  I have no problem with styling....inside or out.

173968[/snapback]

I'm sure even after all of that you'd find something to gripe about.

[The O.C.]

I'm sure even after all of that you'd find something to gripe about.

174372[/snapback]

You'd like to believe that......

Instead of agreeing that I'm offering fair criticism.....whether you think I'm right or not....

[The O.C.]

Sorry OC but you would just begin cryin    about the 3.6 not being powerful enough, "base model should come with a quad underovercam (thats QUOC its in the works just for you)) 16 valves per cyl, no less than 14 cylinders, 16 speed minimun, thought control operated rear windows, wipers on the headlights, tailights, directional and side markets, laser brake lights so you blind everyone behind you when you stop, 28" wheels with 385/10/28's and interior appointments made by the sleep number matress company

174064[/snapback]

You really are quite humorous.....

Unfortunately (for you and others like you) the market is responding (or should I say NOT responding) to GM's recent product decisions.....and that is not good news for GM.

It's just sad you can't see the big picture.

I'll just be comfortable somewhat that my criticisms and comments are being vindicated by that very same marketplace.