2010 Buick LaCrosse Spied, Inside and Out

[ToniCipriani]

I have to wait till that cloak is off before I make further comments. Right now it looks like an ES in bags.

I do like the interior though.

[Drew Dowdell]

Thank you.

A four cylinder engine has no place in this car. All the cars this car will compete with have V6 bases.

I'm going to predict a 3.6L V6 on the CX/CXL, and a DI 3.6L for the Super. All with 6A.

EDIT: If there is going to be a smaller Buick (which signs point to yes), then let that have the 4-cylinder engine, paired to a 6A.

Well, I'll disagree with you also. I think the 4-cylinder turbo ecotec <260hp>, and turbo 2.8HF <280hp>, and DI 3.6HF <300hp>, and 4-cylinder turbo Ecotec BAS-II hybrid, would make for a very interesting lineup.

The trim names, respectively, could be Lacrosse, Lacrosse Special, Lacrosse Super, and Lacrosse Electra.

[Bimmer325]

Oldsmoboi, let's just hope "Lacrosse" isn't part of the name.

[Drew Dowdell]

but you get the point....

[Paolino]

Well, I'll disagree with you also. I think the 4-cylinder turbo ecotec <260hp>, and turbo 2.8HF <280hp>, and DI 3.6HF <300hp>, and 4-cylinder turbo Ecotec BAS-II hybrid, would make for a very interesting lineup.

The trim names, respectively, could be Lacrosse, Lacrosse Special, Lacrosse Super, and Lacrosse Electra.

Nice, yes, but I was looking at most-possible lineup to come out of GM next year.

[Northstar]

Well, I'll disagree with you also. I think the 4-cylinder turbo ecotec <260hp>, and turbo 2.8HF <280hp>, and DI 3.6HF <300hp>, and 4-cylinder turbo Ecotec BAS-II hybrid, would make for a very interesting lineup.

The trim names, respectively, could be Lacrosse, Lacrosse Special, Lacrosse Super, and Lacrosse Electra.

That's too many engines. 3 engines within 40HP of each other? That's 3 engines to certify, too. Doesn't make much sense to me, really. Put the turbos in the Saabs, leave Buick naturally aspirated except for possible performance models. Perhaps the entry level sedan could get the 2.0 turbo in a performance model. Giving the LaCrosse the 2.0 and 2.8 gives it very similar engines to what the 9-3 and 9-5 will have, and the turbo engines are a selling point for the Saabs.

[Drew Dowdell]

That's too many engines. 3 engines within 40HP of each other? That's 3 engines to certify, too. Doesn't make much sense to me, really. Put the turbos in the Saabs, leave Buick naturally aspirated except for possible performance models. Perhaps the entry level sedan could get the 2.0 turbo in a performance model. Giving the LaCrosse the 2.0 and 2.8 gives it very similar engines to what the 9-3 and 9-5 will have, and the turbo engines are a selling point for the Saabs.

Then drop the 3.6 and make the 2.8 Turbo 300hp and the Turbo-Ecotec 250hp. It's everything behind the firewall that makes the Buick unique from the Saab. I'm also trying to think about a reasonably large Buick sedan <at least Malibu sized> in a $4.00 a gallon world. The new Buick sedan is going to need to at least tickle 30mpg.

[Carguy]

So the way its looking now this will be the bases for a next generation SAAB 9,5 and CHEVROLET IMPALA also! They should offer the SAAB with A base TURBO 2.0L I4 and an opt TURBO 3.0L V6. While the Chevy has NA 2.4L I4 with opt NA 3.6L V6 with the BUICK having a regular 3.6L V6 base and a DI 3.6L version as an opt.

[ZL-1]

So the way its looking now this will be the bases for a next generation SAAB 9,5 and CHEVROLET IMPALA also! They should offer the SAAB with A base TURBO 2.0L I4 and an opt TURBO 3.0L V6. While the Chevy has NA 2.4L I4 with opt NA 3.6L V6 with the BUICK having a regular 3.6L V6 base and a DI 3.6L version as an opt.

And while we're at it, move the NG Saab 9-3 to DeltaII and offer 3-door, 5-door, sedan and wagon, all with optional XWD.

[Paolino]

While the Chevy has NA 2.4L I4 with opt NA 3.6L V6 with the BUICK having a regular 3.6L V6 base and a DI 3.6L version as an opt.

This makes most sense to me.

[Northstar]

Then drop the 3.6 and make the 2.8 Turbo 300hp and the Turbo-Ecotec 250hp. It's everything behind the firewall that makes the Buick unique from the Saab. I'm also trying to think about a reasonably large Buick sedan <at least Malibu sized> in a $4.00 a gallon world. The new Buick sedan is going to need to at least tickle 30mpg.

The people who can afford the LaCrosse will be able to pay $4/gallon for gas. In addition, the 2.8 turbo isn't that great on gas anyways. In the 9-3 (which weighs less than 3600lb) it only gets 16/26 with a 6-speed auto. The CTS, which weighs 300 lbs more, gets 17/26 with the 3.6DI, so the 2.8 turbo would likely get worse mileage. ES and TL, the main competitors to the new LaCrosse, IMO, only offer 1 engine, both V6s. Those that want better fuel mileage can look at 4cyl LTZ Malibus and 4cyl XR Auras. In addition, Buick should be offering the 3.6 paired to the two-mode while Malibu and Aura have the 2.4 with the two-mode. The Buick should start at $30k and be loaded at $40k, Malibu and Aura don't even reach $30k right now. The Aurabu should not be cross-shopped with the LaCrosse very often is what I'm getting at.

I'm also not too confident the 2.0 turbo is going to get that great of mileage in such a big vehicle, nor do I think many people are going to pay upwards of $30k for a car with a 4cyl if it isn't a performance model (Solstice GXP, EVO, WRX, etc). The Solstice GXP only gets 19/26 with the auto and it weighs 1000lbs less than the CTS... I can't imagine the fuel economy staying above 17/26 after you add 800-1000lbs, which I assume will be close to the additional weight of the LaCrosse vs Solstice.

[Drew Dowdell]

The people who can afford the LaCrosse will be able to pay $4/gallon for gas. In addition, the 2.8 turbo isn't that great on gas anyways. In the 9-3 (which weighs less than 3600lb) it only gets 16/26 with a 6-speed auto. The CTS, which weighs 300 lbs more, gets 17/26 with the 3.6DI, so the 2.8 turbo would likely get worse mileage. ES and TL, the main competitors to the new LaCrosse, IMO, only offer 1 engine, both V6s. Those that want better fuel mileage can look at 4cyl LTZ Malibus and 4cyl XR Auras. In addition, Buick should be offering the 3.6 paired to the two-mode while Malibu and Aura have the 2.4 with the two-mode. The Buick should start at $30k and be loaded at $40k, Malibu and Aura don't even reach $30k right now. The Aurabu should not be cross-shopped with the LaCrosse very often is what I'm getting at.

I'm also not too confident the 2.0 turbo is going to get that great of mileage in such a big vehicle, nor do I think many people are going to pay upwards of $30k for a car with a 4cyl if it isn't a performance model (Solstice GXP, EVO, WRX, etc). The Solstice GXP only gets 19/26 with the auto and it weighs 1000lbs less than the CTS... I can't imagine the fuel economy staying above 17/26 after you add 800-1000lbs, which I assume will be close to the additional weight of the LaCrosse vs Solstice.

'08 Malibu with a 2.4 litre/4speed gets 22 / 30 mpg. Detune the Turbo-Ecotec to around 250hp and tune it for fuel efficiency. It'd probably be 26-28 highway with a 6-speed.

[turbo200]

i think the sticking the point is GM should be to realize more fuel efficiency from thier midmarket engines. from the 2.2 ecotec to the 3.6 V6...to even the eventual Cadillac V8s....all must improve on fuel efficiency. The focus first, has to be on these engines that power 'everything', from the ecotec in base Cobalts to the finest V6 engne placed in Caddys, performance Pontiacs, and Buicks.

I don't think sharing engines and engine configurations is a problem, as long as they can realize different tuning, and the core mission of the car is maintained. Buick is meant for subdued performance, elegance, stateliness, executive luxury.

a theoretical 2.0 turbo could fit the picture, tuned for luxury, comfort, power, and supreme efficiency but I don't know that a lesser-powered 4 cylinder engine would be able to achieve the tenants of a Buick luxury sedan, considering the size of the upcoming Lacrosse. tenants of a Buick luxury sedan should be exuding technological refinement, sophistication in operation, and maximum levels of power and efficiency out of an environmentally conscientious package.

A 2.2 with high technology packaging could fit the bill for a $28k entry level Buick, so long as the resulting Buick is powerful, quiet, and above all represents some big technology strides as well as maintaing this core Buick tenant of luxury. Most of you will be quick to dismiss this and say no one will pay for a 4 cylinder Buick at that price, but I'm talking about a 2.2 tune for efficiency, torque, and refinement. My line of thinking would be a 2.2 DI with 160 lb/ft torque and 26/36 mpg. for reference the recently updated ecotec in the Cobalt now has 35 mpg highway and over 140 lb/ft toruqe. For the mainstream engine, a 3.2 DI with 240-250 hp is sufficient. Buick's focus is not on performance, but on elegance, comfort, supreme design and luxury in smart and reasonable priced packages. A 28k starting price for a midlevel Buick that is also thier entry level luxury competitor gives you an idea of where the rest of the lineup would look like in my mind.

I don't think the focus for each brand should be the inclusion or exclusion of engines, but rather GM needs to focus on developing the right engine packages, diversifying, focusing on refinement and advancing fuel economy, and using technology and tuning to differentiate the brands.

[Paolino]

i think the sticking the point is GM should be to realize more fuel efficiency from thier midmarket engines. from the 2.2 ecotec to the 3.6 V6...to even the eventual Cadillac V8s....all must improve on fuel efficiency. The focus first, has to be on these engines that power 'everything', from the ecotec in base Cobalts to the finest V6 engne placed in Caddys, performance Pontiacs, and Buicks.

I don't think sharing engines and engine configurations is a problem, as long as they can realize different tuning, and the core mission of the car is maintained. Buick is meant for subdued performance, elegance, stateliness, executive luxury.

a theoretical 2.0 turbo could fit the picture, tuned for luxury, comfort, power, and supreme efficiency but I don't know that a lesser-powered 4 cylinder engine would be able to achieve the tenants of a Buick luxury sedan, considering the size of the upcoming Lacrosse. tenants of a Buick luxury sedan should be exuding technological refinement, sophistication in operation, and maximum levels of power and efficiency out of an environmentally conscientious package.

A 2.2 with high technology packaging could fit the bill for a $28k entry level Buick, so long as the resulting Buick is powerful, quiet, and above all represents some big technology strides as well as maintaing this core Buick tenant of luxury. Most of you will be quick to dismiss this and say no one will pay for a 4 cylinder Buick at that price, but I'm talking about a 2.2 tune for efficiency, torque, and refinement. My line of thinking would be a 2.2 DI with 160 lb/ft torque and 26/36 mpg. for reference the recently updated ecotec in the Cobalt now has 35 mpg highway and over 140 lb/ft toruqe. For the mainstream engine, a 3.2 DI with 240-250 hp is sufficient. Buick's focus is not on performance, but on elegance, comfort, supreme design and luxury in smart and reasonable priced packages. A 28k starting price for a midlevel Buick that is also thier entry level luxury competitor gives you an idea of where the rest of the lineup would look like in my mind.

I don't think the focus for each brand should be the inclusion or exclusion of engines, but rather GM needs to focus on developing the right engine packages, diversifying, focusing on refinement and advancing fuel economy, and using technology and tuning to differentiate the brands.

Well, that being said... when are the new V8's here for Cadillac? And the Flagship for Buick should have an optional V8. What about that 3.2DI V6? I thought GM wasn't going to make a 3.2 anymore.

[pow]

Did I miss something where people are walking away from ES350s or Acura TLs?

Well, both the ES and TL start at $34K, way more than what Buick currently charges for the Lacrosse or Lucerne. Judging by the Enclave, Buick doesn't seem ready to charge luxury brand (i.e. Cadillac, Lexus, BMW) base prices just yet, even if fully-loaded examples command high MSPRs -- and rightly so. It would be a mistake to position the LaCrosse right into the fiercely competitive entry luxury segment, regardless of how capable a fully-loaded model may be. I'm not saying charge less for an equivalent product, but like the Enclave, offer a lower starting price either through less equipment or a refined four-cylinder engine, so as not to alienate current LaCrosse owners or upper-level Camry or Accord shoppers.

[Toyota.vs.GM]

Well, both the ES and TL start at $34K, way more than what Buick currently charges for the Lacrosse or Lucerne. Judging by the Enclave, Buick doesn't seem ready to charge luxury brand (i.e. Cadillac, Lexus, BMW) base prices just yet, even if fully-loaded examples command high MSPRs -- and rightly so. It would be a mistake to position the LaCrosse right into the fiercely competitive entry luxury segment, regardless of how capable a fully-loaded model may be. I'm not saying charge less for an equivalent product, but like the Enclave, offer a lower starting price either through less equipment or a refined four-cylinder engine, so as not to alienate current LaCrosse owners or upper-level Camry or Accord shoppers.

Wrong.The average transition price on the Buick Enclave is $39,000.

[Toyota.vs.GM]

BTW,the base price of the Buick Lacrosse will most likely be in the $28,000-$30,000 range.

[Northstar]

'08 Malibu with a 2.4 litre/4speed gets 22 / 30 mpg. Detune the Turbo-Ecotec to around 250hp and tune it for fuel efficiency. It'd probably be 26-28 highway with a 6-speed.

Malibu only weighs 3400lbs though. The LaCrosse is likely to be in the 3800lb range if it's longer (we know it will be significantly wider). 26-28 highway is not very impressive when the 300HP 3.6 DI gets 26 in the CTS. If all someone wants is good fuel economy then they might as well offer the 2.4 DI and 6-speed.

GM needs to move the car upmarket away from Malibu and Aura. Offering a 4cyl engine is not the right idea unless gas is so expensive that every car offers an engine that's both cheap (not a hybrid) and fuel efficient. The Aura can cover anything under $30k, judging from the pictures of the interior, so I see no reason why the LaCrosse needs to start below $29k, and certainly it shouldn't be offering a 4cyl above $30k.

[Paolino]

God I'm dyin' for a press release on this car!

[james614]

I don't expect the new Buick to start more than $2K over the comparable Saturn. Given how poor Saturn sales are at the current price range and the need for a Buick home run, I expect the pricing to be aggressive. Plus the 'Bu and Aura will be on the same platform in a few years so I can't see GM pricing this model out of the comparable mid-size market place. I don't see this as an ES competitor at all. I expect it to take on Acura not Lexus. Buick is no Lexus and never will be. The quality and image are not there.

Also, with fewer models in the lineup, I expect there will be a high MPG engine option to satisfy CAFE. The 2.4 DI 6 speed sounds like the ticket. Plus with development costs shared with the Chinese market, GM may well have more models coming than we think.

[Toyota.vs.GM]

I don't expect the new Buick to start more than $2K over the comparable Saturn. Given how poor Saturn sales are at the current price range and the need for a Buick home run, I expect the pricing to be aggressive. Plus the 'Bu and Aura will be on the same platform in a few years so I can't see GM pricing this model out of the comparable mid-size market place. I don't see this as an ES competitor at all. I expect it to take on Acura not Lexus. Buick is no Lexus and never will be. The quality and image are not there.

If you don't see this as a ES competitor then your a dumass.

Edited April 15, 2008 by Toyota.vs.GM

[Toyota.vs.GM]

Buick is no Lexus and never will be. The quality and image are not there.

If you know any you would know that Buick and Lexus are tied in reliability.

[Cory Wolfe]

These shots are intriguing. I must say, I'm curious to see what's beneath the camo.

[pow]

If the LaCrosse will be priced like a CTS... then I'll take a CTS, thanks.

[Toyota.vs.GM]

If the LaCrosse will be priced like a CTS... then I'll take a CTS, thanks.

I got bad news for you.Come 2010 the CTS will get a MCE,with the MCE the CTS will become the 5-Series fighter for Cadillac as GM will drop the STS.

Edited April 15, 2008 by Toyota.vs.GM

[Northstar]

I got bad news for you.Come 2010 the CTS will get a MCE,with the MCE the CTS will become the 5-Series fighter for Cadillac as GM will drop the STS.

Makes perfect sense. 2010MY or CY? These changes go into the coupe as well, correct? (and wagon)

I think the ES pricepoint -$2k is perfectly fine. That's where Buick should be.

[InvictaMan]

Well, not much to be seen in the new teaser shot. If it truly is a photo of the car, the details have been blurred out. Not sure what to think of the bulges at the side windows.

Why can't the production models have sweet rear views like this. The mirrors on the new Insignia are huge in comparison and look clunky.

Edited April 16, 2008 by InvictaMan

[§carlet §wordfish]

The picture looks like it was shot from a slightly top-down angle; I'd guess that the bulges are the rear fenders.

[james614]

If you know any you would know that Buick and Lexus are tied in reliability.

Let's keep it civil over here.

I come from a Buick family having been taken home from the hospital in one and can not recall the family not having a Buick. I currently drive a Buick and I have also been in many a Lexus. It is my personal opinion that Buick has a ways to go in build quality to catch up with Lexus. The mechanical quality may be equal but the Buick is not as solid or well assembled. I hope that the Invicta closes the gap otherwise I may see my favorite marque go the way of Olds. I have driven the Aura as a rental car and was surprised at how GM has cheapened the materials from even my austere Rendezvous. The arm rests bowed-in when used since they are hollow and the A-pillar was dented due to the thiness to the metal. The Aura was not well assembled and lowered my expectations for both the 'Bu and the Invicta. I hope to be proven wrong but have been less satisfied with each subsequent GM purchase over the years. It is time for GM to step up their game otherwise another diehard will move on to Toyota......

Edited April 16, 2008 by james614

[Supremus]

Peek-a-boo:

http://www.chinacartimes.com/wp-content/new-regal.jpg

[Robert Hall]

Why can't the production models have sweet rear views like this. The mirrors on the new Insignia are huge in comparison and look clunky.

Yeah, reality intrudes in moving from concept car to production...to be useful, mirrors have to be reasonably large...

[!!!TED!!!]

Peek-a-boo:

http://www.chinacartimes.com/wp-content/new-regal.jpg

What a tease. If you examine the lines closely, it is not a rebadged Insignia. At first glance, it does look like it though.

[Robert Hall]

What a tease. If you examine the lines closely, it is not a rebadged Insignia. At first glance, it does look like it though.

Interesting...you can definitely make out the Buick sweepspear on the door, and the front door glass looks Malibuish. I'm still wondering what it will be called in NA (not LaCrosse/Allure, I assume).

[91z4me]

Peek-a-boo:

http://www.chinacartimes.com/wp-content/new-regal.jpg

Helloooooo, Nurse!

[intrigued]

I thought this car was supposed to be shown in concept form by now. When is the shang hi show?

[pow]

Peek-a-boo:

http://www.chinacartimes.com/wp-content/new-regal.jpg

Sweet! I just hope the sweep-spear isn't too Elantra/A5-ish.

[InvictaMan]

Well Moltar, much to our surprise the rear views are much more streamlined and elegant than the Insignia; Still big, but better. I've been comparing the Insignia with this new shot of the "whatever" and the similarities are so great that I fear there will be too little difference between this and the new Aura. GM needs to make more differentiation in the production models to justify the price difference, or they will be doing Buick no favors. I'm anxious to see the cleaned up show car. The sweepspear looks more afterthought than graceful in this image. I'm waiting to see how it ties into the lines flowing into the front fascia. Looks like the headlight pod, even in rough mule format, will be more sophisticated than the drawings, which is a relief. I seem to be in the minority on the rear fascia design on the renderings. I actually think it is a perfectly modern interpretation of the Buick style on the tail lamps. The Lucerne tail was going a little Mazda for me. Wheels are different too from the previous spy shot.

Don't mean to sound negative here, just apprehensive. From what we see so far, this car is light years ahead of the one it replaces.

On another note: Remember when Opels were Buicks and not Saturns? I wonder why GM didn't just change the name of Olds to Saturn instead of starting a whole new company and killing one with history. It might have been a more congenial public relations move. Olds was on the way to becoming Saturn style and they could have done it with more grace and clout than trying to sell the earlier models Saturn produced. The whole space thing... Olds and their rocket ship and Saturn's rings in relation to the new Olds logo sans rocket... would have been an easy, believable transition. Saturn simply took the new Olds design cues and cheapened it up for an economy box. Opel as Olds, instead of Buick, would have been an easy consolidation.

Edited April 16, 2008 by InvictaMan

[balthazar]

Of course, Opels were never 'Buicks', just sold thru their dealers.

Chinese Buick whasis has an extremely tall nose; the lip spoiler is lower than the rockers- unorthodox in the sedan segment.

[Sixty8panther]

Another FWD transportation pod....

The last REAL Buick was built in 1996 and had an LT1 between two FRAME RAILS.

The last decent pseudo-Buick was the Park Ave Ultra.

[Paolino]

Another FWD transportation pod....

... and boy am I looking forward to this one!

[InvictaMan]

Of course, Opels were never 'Buicks', just sold thru their dealers.

Chinese Buick whasis has an extremely tall nose; the lip spoiler is lower than the rockers- unorthodox in the sedan segment.

They may have been imports, but they were actually originally marketed as Buick Opels. And if I remember correctly, they had a Buick logotype emblem attached to them, since imports were not too keen at the time. I used to love to drive them when I was working at the local Buick dealership, when I was a teenager. An old girlfriend had one in college, but I think they were simply Opels at that point, distributed by Buick.

[InvictaMan]

Of course, Opels were never 'Buicks', just sold thru their dealers.

Chinese Buick whasis has an extremely tall nose; the lip spoiler is lower than the rockers- unorthodox in the sedan segment.

Good observation. Do you think maybe they haven't applied a rocker cladding yet? The almost on spot rendering shows a more involved rocker design.

[thegriffon]

I thought this car was supposed to be shown in concept form by now. When is the shang hi show?

It's Beijing and it's the 20th onward.

GM will have it's premiere night on the eve of the show (Saturday the 19th). Expect the Invicta concept then. http://vipchat.sina.com.cn/content/auto1/3222.html

Chevrolet, Wuling and Opel will be on the 20th, on the show floor.

[Supremus]

Here it is. Stunning, inside and out.

[Croc]

Yea, this is absolutely stunning. Well done, Buick!

[CSpec]

[vonVeezelsnider]

Win.

[The O.C.]

And you know this how? You think Buick/GM doesn't realize they have to change their image for being cars for grandparents?

Anyways, this vehicle is going to knock the crap out of the Lexus ES. The ES interior looks 10 years old by comparison. Buick is going to survive. Now on to Pontiac... Alpha vehicle to compliment the G8 and that brand will survive (please do not make this into a topic about Pontiac, BTW).

I'm not defending SMK, but he does have a point in the fact that Buick continues to dumb down the driving experience of each of it's cars (Enclave seemingly not, however)......the current LaCrosse and Lucerne are both two of the floatiest, most un-coordinated rides out there. In my experience, both CSX models, however, had just about a perfect ride-and-handling compromise for a Buick. Problem is, that tuning needs to be standard on the base CXs and up.....but Buick never does that.

They are going to have to make MAJOR strides in the chassis tuning of this vehicle to make it anywhere competitive......and I truly hope they do......(that doesn't mean they have to be sport-sedan harsh, just have superior body control and chassis control.)

And.....Buick/GM has known for DECADES that they have to "change their image for being cars for grandparents" yet we still get the same old Buick......Enclave is a thankful first step....and I PRAY Invicta is the next one.....

[The O.C.]

The Enclave is a separate category of goodness...it's a CrossOver (so the market is hot) & it's a superior product (space/economy/styling). My concern revolves around whether a FWD ES competitor is something that the public is clamoring for from Buick. That doesn't mean it won't be a good product, just not the great product that Buick needs to become relevant again.

A large Park Ave (think Commodore) RWD sedan or a Riv coupe (to partner off the Camaro assempbly line) make more sense to me, if volume is no longer a huge concern with the GMC-P-B channels. They would also command higher prices, solidify Zeta in the product program mix & could be built in NA and exported internationally, giving GM the benefit of the weak $.

They would also be 'premium', rather than a Lexus-like permutation of EpII.

I would have rather seen this car, as it is, a RWD version of Sigma! Did anyone consider that? I think a CTS-sized RWD Buick, with Buick styling and luxury (compared to the sportier CTS) would have been a winner......

[The O.C.]

nor do I think many people are going to pay upwards of $30k for a car with a 4cyl if it isn't a performance model (Solstice GXP, EVO, WRX, etc).

Well, I don't think most people see SAABs as dedicated "performance" models and they sell quite a few (for SAAB numbers) 4cyl turbos......and the A4 2.0T is the best-selling model in all of Audi's lineup....

Granted....a Buick is a completely different vehicle than a SAAB or Audi......so I don't know if a 4cyl would work actually......