Buick Enclave Video Discussion Thread

[z28luvr01]

VIEW THE ENCLAVE VIDEO HERE(Windows Media Format)

I'll try to add more formats as the need arises.

Discus away.

[Cadillacfan]

Looks good. It's funny though, with the white openings in the cladding for the taillights, it looks like a Lexus RX330.

[zete]

What? No LED tail lights? That's just stupid.

[prototype66]

Classy chassis, It should kick that Lexus to the curb.

[nzr]

Haha, no led taillights. Cheapo.

[boblutzfan]

Haha, no led taillights.  Cheapo.

199117[/snapback]

The LED tailights are saved for the Acadia.

I doubt that the average Enclave buyer will mind. Obviously the money was spent on the overall styling and the very classy and luxurious interior.

This will be Buick's biggest hit in decades.

[Ultra Magnus]

Looks great. Still waiting for the V8 though.

[Drew Dowdell]

Haha, no led taillights.  Cheapo.

199117[/snapback]

this just demonstrates that GM could build a fully working model of Christ himself and someone would complain that the water to wine function only dispenses a Merlot.

[Intrepidation]

Looks close to the concept, the interior is thankfully identical to the concept. I dare say that's one of the finest interiors. Period. It is kinda lame that it doesn't get LED tail laights yet the less luxurious GMC will. Doesn't the Aura have LEDs too? ANyway, it's not a big issue or anything, just odd. As long as the saved money went into that interior...who cares

[scharmer05]

As long as the saved money went into that interior...who cares

199130[/snapback]

Does it really cost too much more to develop and produce LED tails that regular incandescent? I don't know I guess. I can't be too much more can it?

Edited September 29, 2006 by scharmer05

[PurdueGuy]

Do LED tails even cost more? I mean, development-wise, it seems like it'd be about the same, and LEDs are not expensive... I'd think the cost difference would be so minimal that they could just decide that every new model gets LEDs and be done with it...

[scharmer05]

We're on the same page Purdue. I don't think there could be too much of a difference in price.

[Drew Dowdell]

This just demonstrates that GM could build a fully working model of Christ himself and someone would complain that the water to wine function only dispenses a Merlot.

199124[/snapback]

[balthazar]

For something that's not a 'big issue', sure are a lot of you harping on LED taillights. Are you saying the bulb in the taillight lessens the entire rest of the vehicle? Not everyone cares, wants or even likes them. For me, unless their 'veiled' (ala the '00 Deville)- they look stupid.

[scharmer05]

For something that's not a 'big issue', sure are a lot of you harping on LED taillights. Are you saying the bulb in the taillight lessens the entire rest of the vehicle? Not everyone cares, wants or even likes them. For me, unless their 'veiled' (ala the '00 Deville)- they look stupid.

199160[/snapback]

I'm not saying that it is a BIG deal, just would be cool, and I know exactly what you mean about the 00 Deville's. They are what started my love of LED tails, the STS's SRX's and Escalade's followed up on that. It would just be a nice thing to see on there I think.

[jbartley]

i don't know if it was a matter of cost, but maybe rather asthetics. I don't think the LED's would give the effect they wanted in the tailights. Much like how the current CTS has the neon bulb CHMSL.

And it doesn't look like the concept had LED brakelamps either. so i guess we can't fault them for "not staying true to concept"....

Edited September 29, 2006 by jbartley

[titan]

It would have been nice to have LEDs. Not necessary though. The interior looks great.

[Northstar]

LEDs are cool but I don't really care. The jeweled look goes better with the rest of the vehicle anyways, I think.

[Paolino]

I think LEDs gives the creator some flexibility to be unique with taillamps. One thing I don't like about Buick's are that the brake lights and directionals are the same lamp. I like it when you have them separate. Call it silly, but it's just a preference.

As for LEDs, I understand they wanted the jeweled look... but again, do something creative. Besides, LEDs are nice because they last a lot longer.

[GMman]

I am wondering if those wheels will be production. I'm not a big fan of the typical giant wheels of today, but the 21's on the concept were fantastic looking. It gave the vehicle a very wide, stable, substantial look. Are those wheels off of something else, or are they new? That friggin' camo works well. You can't see any real lines on that Enclave. Without some well known 'tell-tale' signs, we'd of never known it was an Enclave...

The shots of the interior look like they stayed true to the concept. Couldn't see if the stitching was there on the dash, but overall it looked the same....which is great.

Hard to figure why so many are worried about taillights.....also hard to figure that if LEDs are considered "nicer" than "regular" bulbs, why GMC would get them instead of BUICK. BUICK is more "high end" than GMC.....

[Paolino]

I am wondering if those wheels will be production.  I'm not a big fan of the typical giant wheels of today, but the 21's on the concept were fantastic looking.  It gave the vehicle a very wide, stable, substantial look.  Are those wheels off of something else, or are they new?

199207[/snapback]

Looks like the wheels are the 18's off the Aura XR...

[zete]

It aggravates me as it looks like they cheaped out. It's like the idiocy inside my CTS, with no reading lamps in the back and no light in the globebox. Sure, you can go on about how it's a little thing, but it's those little things that aggravate me to no end.

I'm still going to look at the Enclave, but if they screw up a little thing like the tail lights by going cheap there, where else did they cheap out?

Edited September 29, 2006 by zete

[Flybrian]

Maybe its me, the but execution of most LED taillamps are horribly ugly when unlit.

[Intrepidation]

It aggravates me as it looks like they cheaped out. It's like the idiocy inside my CTS, with no reading lamps in the back and no light in the globebox. Sure, you can go on about how it's a little thing, but it's those little things that aggravate me to no end.

I'm still going to look at the Enclave, but if they screw up a little thing like the tail lights by going cheap there, where else did they cheap out?

199212[/snapback]

That's sad...especially considering Shadows came with glovebox lights.

Edited September 29, 2006 by Dodgefan

[sciguy_0504]

I love the attitude on here towards the LEDs. A few months ago some of you were laughing at/complaining about the Avalon not having them when the Azera does. Why the sudden change? For me, the Enclave should have them and Acadia should not. Then again, like Dodgefan said, I'd rather have a great interior than LEDs.

Either way, if I could buy this car I would without giving it a second thought. Unfortunately, I'm 19 and money doesn't grow on trees. To me, this is the most significant vehicle GM has made in a long time. It's the whole package.

[Flybrian]

I love the attitude on here towards the LEDs.  A few months ago some of you were laughing at/complaining about the Avalon not having them when the Azera does.  Why the sudden change?  For me, the Enclave should have them and Acadia should not.  Then again, like Dodgefan said, I'd rather have a great interior than LEDs.

199233[/snapback]

Mocking the Avalon for lack of LEDs is but one more strike against a near-stricken and hillarious-looking vehicle. Sometimes, you want to kick 'em when they're down, just like Nixon.

[usa1]

Looks nice, but I would never buy it. In my very biased opinion, Buick is a dying brand for 60+ year olds. I don't see this product changing that.

Mark

[zete]

That's sad...especially considering Shadows came with glovebox lights.

199231[/snapback]

After I bought the CTS Cadillac sent me a letter asking for honest feedback on my 2004 CTS. I happily obliged and you should've seen the list of "deficiencies" I sent to GM. I got a nice letter from Cadillac saying they'd address those issues with the next gen CTS including what I called the "horridly Teutonic interior". I'm hoping they do. The pictures imply they have.

The lack of reading lights, which even the cheapest of my prior cars had, is totally unacceptable. It's why when I see the Enclave, which most probably will be our next car, such a little thing as non-LED tail lights aggravates me. It's supposed to be a Lexus fighter, right? So, fight Lexus not Toyota.

As to the comment from another poster re: how old Buick owners are, remember Cadillac owners 6 years ago were well near death. Buick can be resuscitated by good product as well. I see a lot of people my age (mid-40s) driving Lucernes. And it does have a certain presence, though not my type of car. I was expecting to see the same demographic that bought Lacrosses, namely those in retirement, but that's not the case. In fact, Camrys are the cars mostly driven by the elderly in my neck of the woods. One drive in that numbness inspiring, passionless "vehicle" is all you need to do to comprehend why Camrys are loved by those that want to drive an appliance.

[buickguy]

Buick is totally getting away from "a dying brand." I'm 36 and bought a Lucerne and my wife and I are totally planning on trading in our BMW x-5 for the Enclave.

The Toyota Camry has really become the "favorite car of the elderly," at least here in NY.

[GMman]

Looks nice, but I would never buy it.  In my very biased opinion, Buick is a dying brand for 60+ year olds.  I don't see this product changing that.

Mark

199263[/snapback]

In my very biased opinion you're very wrong about this.

This product is going to change more than you can imagine.

In time, you'll understand.

BTW, just because you're 60+, doesn't mean you can't drive a cool car. Like buickguy, I'm 35 years old and there will be an Enclave in my garage (on my wife's side).

[Dsuupr]

My wife and I are considering adoption and have talked about buying an Enclave for what would be our 4 children. Of the 3 it has the best looks by far.

Yeah, maybe they are missing somethings, but so is every other product out there. It's about the total package, and for me no one else offers the total package.

[RJB]

Just come to Michigan, the Acadia, Outlook, and Enclave are all driving around Metro Detroit streets. I see them everyday, some camoed some not.

[Delta Force79]

Well in all my years (23 soon to be 24) I've never wanted something so bad that I couldn't wait a couple years to get one used. The Enclave concept really wowed me that much. I've never been a huge truck fan, and I was never a fan of SUV's but this is the "one" I mean its graceful, beautiful, elegant....from the grille back, from the dash back. The gauges remind me of a modern version of the gauges in my '95 Riviera which is part of what sold me on the Enclave. The stitching on the dash and all of the little details make the concept and hopefully the production version stand out. I don't care about LED lights or any of that crap, what I care about is driving a reliable, comfortable and beautiful car. The Enclave is one.

The only difference I've noticed on the Enclave in the video and the concept is that the rear wiper is now facing the other way, and the wheels....which I think look horrible, and I hope they are not the production wheels. I dislike them so much I actually just reconsidered buying one. I really hope the concepts wheels or a smaller variation of them make it to production. Buick you are doing well, I'm just about to turn 24 and will be buying a new Buick Enclave, and along with my Riviera will own 2 Buicks

[GMman]

  I dislike them so much I actually  just reconsidered buying one. 

199444[/snapback]

I know what you mean man, but don't worry. Tires/wheels dramatically change vehicle appearance and we've all fallen in love with the sporty, wide stance of the concept..... Surely not all versions will have big 21 inch wheels, but surely Buick will make them an option. Dont' write it off yet....

z26luvr01,

did you take that video yourself? I think it's awesome and if you did do it, thanks for sharing. I was watching it again and thinking, whoever took this video spent a lot of time following that Enclave around. Pretty cool...

[Regalguy01]

........................Salivating......................................

[Cananopie]

Wow, did half the people in this forum get hit with the stupid stick?

Why in the WORLD would the Enclave have LEDs when it was stated very plainly that the production version would be something like 99% accurate to the concept. The Enclave concept did not have LED tail lights, therefore- duh- neither will the production version.

When they say 99% accuracy they don't mean they keep the 21 inch wheels and center console that attaches all the way to the 3rd row seating and drop the non-LED taillights- it means that they'll be dropping the former things to cut the price of the Enclave some.

It's so stupid- it seems people simply enjoy commenting on this forum to complain about anything to make sure GM and in particularly Buick just can't get anything right. Believe it or not LED lights are not the ultimate in good vehicle fashion. The Enclave taillights are very beautiful and elegantly styled. The LED's immediate changes in intensity would look clumsy on this decadent design.

Cadillac on the other hand has a very sharp and intense styling. Sharp corners give Cadillac a sharp look- LEDs are appropriate for that. LED's are sharp in color change and give Cadillac more of an edgy look. Buick isn't edgy and LEDs would make the Enclave look clumsy. However GMC has an edgy look too- and LEDs are once again proper for GMC- not Buick.

The subtle warm glow of bulbs and the way they designed the bulbs to shine are very appropriate and properly styled and fit in perfectly with the elegant smooth design of the whole vehicle. But some people on here just have such an itch to complain about anything Buick does. Design is so subjective- if it isn't your style then it isn't. If you need it to be a high brow brand that never appeals to those with financial sensibility then DONT come to Buick.

LEDs do not mean Buick is cheapening out. LEDs cost pennies a pound practically. It's simply design. LEDs would not look right (and never were intended for) the Enclave. Deal with it.

[z28luvr01]

z26luvr01,

did you take that video yourself?  I think it's awesome and if you did do it, thanks for sharing.  I was watching it again and thinking, whoever took this video spent a lot of time following that Enclave around.  Pretty cool...

199526[/snapback]

I wish, because that would mean I'd be in posession of some top notch video camera equipment. But no, all credit goes to CD/BP. I did convert it from MP4 to WMV so the majority could play it.

[Regalguy01]

Wow, did half the people in this forum get hit with the stupid stick?

Why in the WORLD would the Enclave have LEDs when it was stated very plainly that the production version would be something like 99% accurate to the concept. The Enclave concept did not have LED tail lights, therefore- duh- neither will the production version.

When they say 99% accuracy they don't mean they keep the 21 inch wheels and center console that attaches all the way to the 3rd row seating and drop the non-LED taillights- it means that they'll be dropping the former things to cut the price of the Enclave some.

It's so stupid- it seems people simply enjoy commenting on this forum to complain about anything to make sure GM and in particularly Buick just can't get anything right. Believe it or not LED lights are not the ultimate in good vehicle fashion. The Enclave taillights are very beautiful and elegantly styled. The LED's immediate changes in intensity would look clumsy on this decadent design.

Cadillac on the other hand has a very sharp and intense styling. Sharp corners give Cadillac a sharp look- LEDs are appropriate for that. LED's are sharp in color change and give Cadillac more of an edgy look. Buick isn't edgy and LEDs would make the Enclave look clumsy. However GMC has an edgy look too- and LEDs are once again proper for GMC- not Buick.

The subtle warm glow of bulbs and the way they designed the bulbs to shine are very appropriate and properly styled and fit in perfectly with the elegant smooth design of the whole vehicle. But some people on here just have such an itch to complain about anything Buick does. Design is so subjective- if it isn't your style then it isn't. If you need it to be a high brow brand that never appeals to those with financial sensibility then DONT come to Buick.

LEDs do not mean Buick is cheapening out. LEDs cost pennies a pound practically. It's simply design. LEDs would not look right (and never were intended for) the Enclave. Deal with it.

199545[/snapback]

Yeah!!! I totally agree!!!!! :sign0200:

[zete]

I didn't get hit by a stupid stick, but then I don't remember the concept being driven about, either, so how would I know what the tail lights were like?

I can see the argument, but I still think people will think Buick cheapened out. It strikes me that way. And yes, I do appreciate the fact that LEDs go ON and then OFF with a suddenness that is disconcerting to some -- and they're bright.

Like I said, I've been burned with little aggravations by GM in the past. I saw this, it aggravates me. I still point to my very expensive and fully loaded CTS and the small stupid things that GM should never have not done, like the lack of reading lamps, handle on the passenger side, etc., etc., etc.

And had I seen the CTS as a concept it, too, might be 99% accurate and still be stupid in that they forgot some pretty -- in my opinion -- fundamental things, like lights in the glovebox and in the back seating area!

[titan]

I think LEDs gives the creator some flexibility to be unique with taillamps.  One thing I don't like about Buick's are that the brake lights and directionals are the same lamp.  I like it when you have them separate.  Call it silly, but it's just a preference.

As for LEDs, I understand they wanted the jeweled look... but again, do something creative.  Besides, LEDs are nice because they last a lot longer.

199204[/snapback]

Agreed. That's the point I was trying to make. For instance, the Infiniti M's LEDs look beautiful when turn on (two touching led circles, one larger than the other) at night. Those are my favorite taillamps on the market one time.

[Drew Dowdell]

Guys, if the L.E.D. taillights are that much of a deal breaker for you, GMC will be more than happy to sell you an Acadia Denali with L.E.D.s

[zete]

Guys, if the L.E.D. taillights are that much of a deal breaker for you, GMC will be more than happy to sell you an Acadia Denali with L.E.D.s

199687[/snapback]

But since GM isn't badge engineering like the bad old days these two vehicles look radically different (inside and out) and I find the Acadia OK but I really like the lines on the Enclave, so that solution is not viable.

It's not a deal breaker, but it is an aggravating nit.

[carstar]

i like what i'm seeing (enclave), but i'm not fooled as this being a 'true to the concept' car when it's more like a '95% pre-production concept' car.

[Drew Dowdell]

all this bitching about something that wasn't on the original concept, I can't wait to hear the bitching about things that actually were on the concept but were removed.

[GMman]

I didn't get hit by a stupid stick, but then I don't remember the concept being driven about, either, so how would I know what the tail lights were like?

I can see the argument, but I still think people will think Buick cheapened out. It strikes me that way. And yes, I do appreciate the fact that LEDs go ON and then OFF with a suddenness that is disconcerting to some -- and they're bright.

Like I said, I've been burned with little aggravations by GM in the past. I saw this, it aggravates me. I still point to my very expensive and fully loaded CTS and the small stupid things that GM should never have not done, like the lack of reading lamps, handle on the passenger side, etc., etc., etc.

And had I seen the CTS as a concept it, too, might be 99% accurate and still be stupid in that they forgot some pretty -- in my opinion -- fundamental things, like lights in the glovebox and in the back seating area!

199627[/snapback]

You drive a VERY expensive CTS? So you have a CTS-V?? Probably not, because if you did, you wouldn't worry about reading lamps and handles. You'd be having a blast smoking all the guys that have reading lamps and handles....

Dude, if you don't like the CTS, then why did you buy it? I see you made your point about the reading lamps and the handle thing and a glovebox light??? But what about the etc, etc, etc...is there anything substantially wrong with the car? I think you're ASSuming too much by saying that people are going to think Buick "cheapened out" by not having LED taillights.

[Cananopie]

I didn't get hit by a stupid stick, but then I don't remember the concept being driven about, either, so how would I know what the tail lights were like?

199627[/snapback]

no light in the glovebox does show cost cutting- using bulbs instead of LEDs does not. Bulbs and LEDs give a different style, feel, and look the vehicle- and just because it's not the newest fad doesn't mean it's cost cutting.

Edited October 1, 2006 by Cananopie

[sciguy_0504]

You drive a VERY expensive CTS?  So you have a CTS-V??  Probably not, because if you did, you wouldn't worry about reading lamps and handles.  You'd be having a blast smoking all the guys that have reading lamps and handles....

Dude, if you don't like the CTS, then why did you buy it?  I see you made your point about the reading lamps and the handle thing and a glovebox light??? But what about the etc, etc, etc...is there anything substantially wrong with the car?  I think you're ASSuming too much by saying that people are going to think Buick "cheapened out" by not having LED taillights.

199736[/snapback]

You're missing the point. We have seen time and time again the small details that GM overlooks to bring down costs. Is a glovebox light a dealbreaker? No. Does it hurt Caddy's luxury image? To me, yes.

[GMman]

You're missing the point.  We have seen time and time again the small details that GM overlooks to bring down costs.  Is a glovebox light a dealbreaker?  No.  Does it hurt Caddy's luxury image?  To me, yes.

199842[/snapback]

The point is crystal clear here...and that is that some folks think Buick is being cheap by not using LED taillights. I disagree.

The point of my comments regarding zete's very expensive CTS, is that if a fella has so many gripes about a vehicle..why purchase it? My '93 Chevrolet pickup has a glovebox light, so it's peculiar to me why a CTS, especially a very expensive CTS wouldn't have one. I understand wanting the reading lamps, the handle thing, etc, and zete's Caddy should have them. I grant you that it looks like GM was being cheap by the absence of those items. But to me those things don't have anything to do with Buick not using LED taillights. As has been shown by Cananopie and others, the concept didn't even have them, so why all of a sudden does the production car have to have them??? It is a double edged sword though...how many times does mercedes or bmw get criticized for being so expensive? And and I guess we can attibute that to them not ever cutting any corners to save $$.

[Mule Bakersdozen LS]

A) What are LED's? B) What's the point of spy shots when the thinly-disguised concept car was already unveiled half a year ago? (Nice shots though-haven't seen the video yet), and C) If a luxury car/car-based SUV has LED taillamps, whatever they are, Buick better have them, no questions asked. Buick needs to stop being equipped like a Chevy and start being equipped like a luxury car, from base to top model, no questions asked.

[Cananopie]

A) What are LED's? B) What's the point of spy shots when the thinly-disguised concept car was already unveiled half a year ago? (Nice shots though-haven't seen the video yet), and C) If a luxury car/car-based SUV has LED taillamps, whatever they are, Buick better have them, no questions asked. Buick needs to stop being equipped like a Chevy and start being equipped like a luxury car, from base to top model, no questions asked.

200068[/snapback]

These are LEDs, they're simply a lot of tiny tiny bulbs as opposed to one or two regular sized bulbs. The positive aspect of LEDs is that they almost never go out. They also are immediate in their intensity change.

Bulbs do go out (like once in how many years) and cost about $10 for the most rare and expensive ones. So even though there is a long term cost to a bulb as opposed to a panel of LEDs it is insignificant compared to important long-term issues such as engine, transmission, etc.

I can't help you with "B" but it's neat to see how the production version is coming along. And your "C" mentality helps drive home the point that I was stating in the first place. LEDs are not necessarily luxurious as opposed to being a fad. As you stated you didn't care what LEDs were- they could've been the least functional and most gaudy things in the world but because they're part of the luxury fad you feel they're necessary.

We have to remember Buick's role in the marketplace. Buick is not a fully luxury division- and there's no shame in that. A lot of people like to say that the Buick of yore were for those who either couldn't afford a Cadillac or for those who didn't like the flash of a Cadillac. In other words Buick was made for those people who want a quality car but don't want their pants pulled down over the price. In even more other words this means Buick isn't going to play the fad game all the time.

Fads are what make things expensive. If you buy a Porsche are you buying so much more because the engineers really put that much more money in to the car? Not typically- typically it's because once you get a fast enough engine under the hood you can price the car whatever you want. Luxury cars are also known as profitable cars because once you reach in to a luxury zone you are paying for the name- not necessarily for too much more. Just a few key points.

When you pay for a Buick you're paying for something that is typically reasonable in price- and you can still live in 98% of the comfort of a luxury division- only you didn't get your pants pulled down over the price.

Edited October 2, 2006 by Cananopie