Buick Lucerne real world pictures

[Flybrian]

old platform--large exterior bulk, interior inefficiency [big problem in my book

Everything else, besides the platform, is spot-on.

See, this 'old platform' criticism again I see as unfounded. The Lucerne is six inches larger overall (203 vs 197), but its not all fairings. The wheelbase is longer as well (115.6 vs. 111) and a wider track as well, which I would attribute the better ride to.

As far as the interior roominess goes, this is something I've always found to be subjective and for a journalist to write off a car for being 'cramped' to him is unfair and inaccurate. So, going by the numbers, Lucerne compares very favorably to Avalon offering a bit more overall interior volume and seemingly more where it would count to many (an inch more head and legroom up front, for example).

Cargo capacity is no questions with the Lucerne offering 17 cu.ft. vs 14.4 for Avalon, which should be all resonable judgement be embarassing for a car its size.

I do agree the stack could've been dressed up more, but the bland steering wheel and shifter are easily remedied by readily-available options like a wood wheel and shifter as shown in the Lucerne brochure I have. Granted, these should be standard on the CXS and optional on the CXL and CX.

As far as 'going the extra mile,' I would have reservations about that. Overall, the car is still very lacking key equipment that Buick and GM have had for years now, most notably a load-leveling air suspension that allows the car to travel with five or six occupants and cargo and not suffer from major Ass Saggage. I would say while Toyota put a little more effort into the interior, Buick put a little more effort into content and its at this point where preference comes into play.

If I had no pedigree to favor the Buick (which I admittedly do), my decision would lean towards Lucerne because of its looks, the V8 engine, and its content while someone similar to me would choose the Avalon because they like the interior more.

[Cananopie]

I don't see how a center stack makes or breaks a car for anyone. When I look at both of them I think they both work well in the vehicle's they're in. I don't think they would be able to switch them. Both interiors are executed uniquely and they both look pretty good in my opinion. It's the feel, where things are placed, the exterior of the vehicle, and the room that are really selling people. A center stack preference argument is ridiculous and if anything the Avalon's center stack is very "busy" compared to the Lucerne's or Lacrosse's. If you haven't driven both the Avalon and the Lucerne then you're only judging based on looks and if a center stack is what makes your "Toyota quality" for you then thats great, but no reason to give the Lucerne any "con" for your preference. What about the "dated platform" actually displeases you? Fly seemed to make a good argument on why there is nothing wrong with the older platform. Nobody here is saying that the Avalon isn't a formidable contender, but you were claiming that the Lucerne is just a joke for the price and since everybody was able to combat intelligently with every dislike you have you still are trying to find minor, worthless, opinion-based problems with it. If it's just not your style (and the Toyota definitely isn't my style) then that's that... but just admit it is a fair opponent to the Avalon and not a "gimme" choice. Say what you will about Buick reputation but it exceeds Toyotas. Just because Toyota has had a more "pop-culture" reputation doesn't make it automatically the better vehicle. Buick IS becoming the better vehicle now (not that it has ever been far behind) but for quality and solid reputation Buick is now the leader in mass market brands. Buick has the statistical reputation now, if you want to cling to a past dream where Toyota was better thats fine, but Toyota is slipping. It isn't the untouchable brand anymore. Buick is there and it is equal in comparison.

[sciguy_0504]

No one is saying the center stack makes it or breaks it for them. I'm saying it looks rediculous because the rest of the car is great, then I get to that area and think, "what happened?" Honestly, look at the gauges, look at the flow of the dashboard and then look at the center stack. Beautiful, beautiful, tacked-on. I understand the need to keep costs down and to use the same switchgear, but does there need to be a swath of black plastic surrounding the corporate controls? Of course, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. As I pointed out in my original post, I was judging based on the pictures. I sat in the Avalon at last year's Philly Auto Show and didn't have any problems. I'll sit in the Lucerne at this year's show so I can compare the two. No one mentioned anything about how a car's center stack design makes the car high quality. To the average buyer, however, interior design can make all the difference. They don't know about the Buick plant quality awards or JD Power rankings, all they know is what they like and how they feel. When I look at the Avalon compared to the Lucerne, I see a difference of perceived quality, not actual quality, but perceived quality. Some people on the boards were wondering why MT didn't give the Lucerne COTY. Besides the obvious bias on MT's part (I've read the article), do you really think they'd give that award to a car whose platform was created a decade ago? Sure there may not be anything inherently wrong with the G-body but it's that notion that it isn't good enough. The Lucerne is a very fair opponent to the Avalon, probably the only large FWD car that is. The 500 and Montego can't compete because of their powertrains and possibly their interiors. The Maxima can't compete because of its interior. The Lucerne isn't a joke for the price. The only thing that could be considered a joke is the base engine for the Lucerne. Yes, yes, it has the Northstar but what if people don't want a V8? I guess we'll agree to disagree.

[Flybrian]

The only thing that could be considered a joke is the base engine for the Lucerne.  Yes, yes, it has the Northstar but what if people don't want a V8?

[post="55533"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

This is very true. And its not the base engine that bothers me, its the lack of a nice midrange engine in the form of the 3.6l that its stablemate LaCrosse has in CXS guise.

CX - 3.8l-std/3.6l-opt
CXL - 3.6l-std/4.6l-opt
CXS - 4.6l

This give it a nice lineup of 197hp/245hp/275hp and literally something for everyone.

[Paolino]

This is very true. And its not the base engine that bothers me, its the lack of a nice midrange engine in the form of the 3.6l that its stablemate LaCrosse has in CXS guise.

CX - 3.8l-std/3.6l-opt
CXL - 3.6l-std/4.6l-opt
CXS - 4.6l

This give it a nice lineup of 197hp/245hp/275hp and literally something for everyone.

[post="55536"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Fly, you forgot something...

CXS - 4.6l-std/6.0L-opt ^_^

Let's say it's the "Super" or "Reserve" or "Limited" or whatever, boasting 360-375hp :)

[Paolino]

Wait... nevermind... FWD and 375hp? Can't imagine that'd work too well.

[VenSeattle]

A new base engine will be in the Lucerne within 2 years.

[sciguy_0504]

This is very true. And its not the base engine that bothers me, its the lack of a nice midrange engine in the form of the 3.6l that its stablemate LaCrosse has in CXS guise.

CX - 3.8l-std/3.6l-opt
CXL - 3.6l-std/4.6l-opt
CXS - 4.6l

This give it a nice lineup of 197hp/245hp/275hp and literally something for everyone.

[post="55536"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Exactly. A nice spread so people can choose the power and MPG they want.

[The O.C.]

Okay.....I finally got my first in-depth look at a Lucerne CXS at my local Buick dealer. First of all, I'll say that I am really impressed with the styling and roominess of the new Lucerne. However, (and I know that I'm seen as one of the ones that bitches the most about this) I was truly appalled at all the hard, brittle plastic on the dash, center stack, and console. GM.....Here we go again....... I can just about excuse it in a $25K Impala......but on a $39K Buick, it's unforgiveable. In fact, if I remember correctly, the LaCrosse doesn't even have that high of a level of hard plastic on its dash or console. Now at least the plastic is not shiny....it's nicely done in a matte finish and the grain is pretty good too. However, it still has that hollow, brittle execution that makes GM's hard plastic so much cheaper than what everyone else uses. Actually, in a Lucerne, I don't expect ANY hard plastic to be acceptable. Not if GM wants this car to appeal to consumers also shopping Lexus ES300, Avalon, or maybe even some Acura and Infiniti models. Now that my bitching is over, the REST of the execution of the interior is first-class and very up-to-date with nice seats, buttery leather, attractive gauges, GM's "new" and impressive HVAC and radio controls, and logical ergonomics. The wood DOES look fake though.....but it's better than LaCrosses. I still like the car and would probably still buy one (if shopping for such a car.) I also think/hope it will do really good in the marketplace. I just don't understand why GM cuts corners in certain areas like material quality. As stated before, GM can't just be competitive in order to pull buyers back into their showrooms....they need to LEAD the way.

[Croc]

The wood is real, and looks it. I have sat in one. What hard brittle plastic are you referring to? I saw none, and trust me I tapped and caressed the dash for several minutes looking for flaws; I found none. The plastic is actually soft-touch and has a nice matte, low-gloss sheen to it. I found NOTHING wrong with the plastic. I also sat in a LaCrosse, and if you honestly think it has better plastics, you are crazy. I'm sorry, but there is just no cheap plastic in the Lucerne on the center stack!

[The O.C.]

The wood is real, and looks it.  I have sat in one.  What hard brittle plastic are you referring to?  I saw none, and trust me I tapped and caressed the dash for several minutes looking for flaws; I found none.  The plastic is actually soft-touch and has a nice matte, low-gloss sheen to it.  I found NOTHING wrong with the plastic.  I also sat in a LaCrosse, and if you honestly think it has better plastics, you are crazy.  I'm sorry, but there is just no cheap plastic in the Lucerne on the center stack!

[post="57628"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Dude...I JUST got back from looking at one.....a CXS at $39K....and ALL the plastic on the dash below the woodgrain (around glovebox, etc.), and on the side of the center stack (next to the black area where the HVAC and radio stuff is) and all on the console is the SAME hard brittle stuff that we've seen in the new Impala.

There is CERTAINLY nothing soft about it.

The dash TOP is nice and soft, expensive looking....and the door panels are all soft.

So maybe they made a running change...or maybe you sat in a pre-production unit or something....but I can assure you the one I sat in (dealer JUST got it in) is hard and cheap. Edited December 13, 2005 by The O.C.

[titan]

This is very true. And its not the base engine that bothers me, its the lack of a nice midrange engine in the form of the 3.6l that its stablemate LaCrosse has in CXS guise.

CX - 3.8l-std/3.6l-opt
CXL - 3.6l-std/4.6l-opt
CXS - 4.6l

This give it a nice lineup of 197hp/245hp/275hp and literally something for everyone.

[post="55536"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

I gotta disagree with ya... I think the 3.6L should be standard, and the 4.6L should be opt... just my opinion.

[The O.C.]

I gotta disagree with ya... I think the 3.6L should be standard, and the 4.6L should be opt... just my opinion.

[post="57639"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

I agree.....3.6L standard but the optional 4.6L should be the "high power" DTS version.....291hp, I believe?

[Croc]

Dude...I JUST got back from looking at one.....a CXS at $39K....and ALL the plastic on the dash below the woodgrain (around glovebox, etc.), and on the side of the center stack (next to the black area where the HVAC and radio stuff is) and all on the console is the SAME hard brittle stuff that we've seen in the new Impala.

There is CERTAINLY nothing soft about it.

The dash TOP is nice and soft, expensive looking....and the door panels are all soft.

So maybe they made a running change...or maybe you sat in a pre-production unit or something....but I can assure you the one I sat in (dealer JUST got it in) is hard and cheap.

[post="57636"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Below the woodgrain is the same squishy vinyl GM has been using there for forever. Now, if you are referring to the side of the console area in the footwells, well of course that's hard plastic as it has to hold up to scuffs. The underside of the dash is harder, but the center stack does NOT have hard plastic. That is soft-touch plastic as every review has noted. You want hard plastic, you check out the dash in the Equinox. NOTHING like that is in the Lucerne. I think you might be forgetting that all plastic has to have a degree of hardness, but the plastics in the Lucerne all have matte finishes and are not crunchy-hard.

EDIT: Seriously, if you're still planning on attending LAIAS on the 13th let's just settle this then, shall we? Edited December 13, 2005 by Croc

[The O.C.]

Below the woodgrain is the same squishy vinyl GM has been using there for forever.  Now, if you are referring to the side of the console area in the footwells, well of course that's hard plastic as it has to hold up to scuffs.  The underside of the dash is harder, but the center stack does NOT have hard plastic.  That is soft-touch plastic as every review has noted.  You want hard plastic, you check out the dash in the Equinox.  NOTHING like that is in the Lucerne.  I think you might be forgetting that all plastic has to have a degree of hardness, but the plastics in the Lucerne all have matte finishes and are not crunchy-hard.

EDIT: Seriously, if you're still planning on attending LAIAS on the 13th let's just settle this then, shall we?

[post="57648"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

No! No! AARRRGGHH....!

Below the woodgrain is not squishy.....it's hard and brittle. I'm not talking "hidden" areas of plastic....

I'm talking about the MAIN part of the dash, below the woodgrain, that stretches from the right door panel, around the far right vent, around the center stack, around the steering column, around the far left vent, ending up at the driver-side door.

Plus, all along the sides of the console all the way back to the armrest is hard and brittle as well.

It feels really cheap...! Although the rest of the interior is top-notch.

So everyone's going the 13th??? We can definitely clear this up then. God, Croc...I'm really looking forward to meeting you.....contrary to what others on here may think, you are WAY too much fun to fight with.....

B)

[Croc]

Those "others" are just pussies ISO some thicker skin.

[Paolino]

Arg. People won't be happy until the entire interior is made of real wood and Jell-O. :rolleyes: I admit some surfaces should be soft/squishy, but c'mon, not everything. I would love to see the doors treated with suede or something to that effect. Maybe a Buick insignia embossed into the suede? Something classy, something to stand out. How about lighted door-sills? Chrome door sills with the word "Buick" illuminated in the same blue as the IP and other lights? Or the word Lucerne in chrome somewhere in the dash.

[The O.C.]

Arg.  People won't be happy until the entire interior is made of real wood and Jell-O.

:rolleyes:

I admit some surfaces should be soft/squishy, but c'mon, not everything.

I would love to see the doors treated with suede or something to that effect.  Maybe a Buick insignia embossed into the suede?  Something classy, something to stand out.

How about lighted door-sills?  Chrome door sills with the word "Buick" illuminated in the same blue as the IP and other lights?

Or the word Lucerne in chrome somewhere in the dash.

[post="57697"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

I know, I know....

But for Buick's top-of-the-line sedan, they should be able to put stuff in there that's competitive with ES330 and Avalon.......

Look at ANY $35-$40 sedan out there and give me one that uses that much cheap stuff inside their car.....you just don't find hard stuff on the dash with other makes....at that price.....

[The O.C.]

Those "others" are just pussies ISO some thicker skin.

[post="57696"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

LMFAO....!

No crap.....hahahahhah

So where are we all meeting at LA on the 13th and at what time, etc...? Did you set this little get-together up?

How will we all know each other? Should we wear cute little signs on our chests with our C&G names?

:lol:

[The O.C.]

LMFAO....!

No crap.....hahahahhah

So where are we all meeting at LA on the 13th and at what time, etc...?  Did you set this little get-together up?

How will we all know each other?  Should we wear cute little signs on our chests with our C&G names?

:lol:

[post="57705"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Hey....how come when I type "sh-t" it comes up as "crap?"

Who's controlling now what we can type on here? DAMN.....too much P.C'ness going on....

[Croc]

Well, I started a thread that you most definitely responded to called LAIAS (Part I). I figured we'd meet outside the convention center. I am by principle opposed to wearing anything "cute." As for me, it will depend greatly on the weather, but if it's a typical January day in LA I will prolly be in some kind of PUMA tracksuit. As for time, I think the consensus was to make a day of it, so I'd say meet there at 11am? That way I won't be expected to wake up too early.

[Paolino]

Well, I'm not saying the Lucerne's interior is horrible by any means--I think it's a GORGEOUS interior. I just think it needs just a tiny bit more to be perfect, or to stand out a bit. I would have loved to see something "unique" in the Lucerne. I would have loved to have seen a new direction for gauges--say, extremely high-quality, classy, LED gauges. Something different with a new direction for Buick. But, again, I feel the Lucerne has that whole "transition" element inside it. And as much as has been changed, there's still part of it allocated towards the older crowd (which isn't stupid). I await next year when the 3800 is out and the 6A is in. Let's see what other little changes will be in store. I doubt any others, but who knows?

[The O.C.]

Well, I started a thread that you most definitely responded to called LAIAS (Part I).

I figured we'd meet outside the convention center.

I am by principle opposed to wearing anything "cute."  As for me, it will depend greatly on the weather, but if it's a typical January day in LA I will prolly be in some kind of PUMA tracksuit.

As for time, I think the consensus was to make a day of it, so I'd say meet there at 11am?  That way I won't be expected to wake up too early.

[post="57714"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Sounds good to me.....

Oh....and by the way.....wearing the "cute" signs.....was a JOKE.....

[The O.C.]

Well, I'm not saying the Lucerne's interior is horrible by any means--I think it's a GORGEOUS interior.  I just think it needs just a tiny bit more to be perfect, or to stand out a bit.

I would have loved to see something "unique" in the Lucerne.  I would have loved to have seen a new direction for gauges--say, extremely high-quality, classy, LED gauges.  Something different with a new direction for Buick.

But, again, I feel the Lucerne has that whole "transition" element inside it.  And as much as has been changed, there's still part of it allocated towards the older crowd (which isn't stupid).

I await next year when the 3800 is out and the 6A is in.  Let's see what other little changes will be in store.  I doubt any others, but who knows?

[post="57715"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Paolino,

I agree with you....it IS beautiful in design and ergonomics.....and 10 years ago, I probably didn't think GM could design an interior this nice.

That's why it upsets me all the more to see them do everything so NICE and then cheap out in a way that is so noticeable.....

And I'm with you.....electroluminecent gauges (a-la Lexus) would be really nice in this car.

[Paolino]

Paolino,

I agree with you....it IS beautiful in design and ergonomics.....and 10 years ago, I probably didn't think GM could design an interior this nice.

That's why it upsets me all the more to see them do everything so NICE and then cheap out in a way that is so noticeable.....

And I'm with you.....electroluminecent gauges (a-la Lexus) would be really nice in this car.

[post="57725"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

absolutely on the gauges, but with a traditional Buick color... just bluish/green LED, maybe with white needles like the LaCrosse has. A little pizzazz. Maybe a small LCD screen for the trip computer, various functions, etc, instead of the dot-matrix thing.

[titan]

I agree.....3.6L standard but the optional 4.6L should be the "high power" DTS version.....291hp, I believe?

[post="57645"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Not only do I agree with ya, but I think the power should be bumped to the 340-350 range. The Caddy's V8s should be bumped to better compete with the new S500's 388HP, the 750iL's new 375+HP (I forgot the specific number), and the next LS's and Q's bump are coming. When you've got Infiniti's VQ making 280HP (with auto) in the G, there's not much of a gap between that number and the Lucerne Nothstar's 291HP.

[Paolino]

Not only do I agree with ya, but I think the power should be bumped to the 340-350 range. The Caddy's V8s should be bumped to better compete with the new S500's 388HP, the 750iL's new 375+HP (I forgot the specific number), and the next LS's and Q's bump are coming. When you've got Infiniti's VQ making 280HP (with auto) in the G, there's not much of a gap between that number and the Lucerne Nothstar's 291HP.

[post="57736"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

YES! Absolutely!

[Croc]

Oh, I knew it was a joke. But it would be out of character if my response weren't dry.

[The O.C.]

Oh, I knew it was a joke.  But it would be out of character if my response weren't dry.

[post="57751"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

OK enough bickering on the interior plastics.....

I can tell you, the black CXS with chrome wheels I looked at had REAL eyeball. I thought the car was gorgeous and I couldn't pull out one bad part of the exterior execution. Too bad the beautiful headlight clusters won't offer xenon lamps.

I REALLY think this car has the potential to do VERY well in the marketplace. I'll have to drive it before I can report on the ride and handling, but initial reviews are positive on the CXS. I really hope the CX and CXL aren't too floaty. According to Buick there are three suspension tuning levels....CX and CXL V6 as ONE.....CXL V8 as the SECOND.....and CXS as the THIRD level of tuning.

NorthStar power should be adequate. Based upon my driving of an '05 DeVille rental with the same 275hp engine, performance should be decent.....but I hope the CXS has the same, nice, V8 growl and burble that was in the DeVille. However, the DeVille's performance did lack real outright thrill. It had nice pull, but didn't feel that outright fast.

I shudder at the thought of the 3800 in this car.....but that's another rant for another time.....

[Flybrian]

NorthStar power should be adequate.  Based upon my driving of an '05 DeVille rental with the same 275hp engine, performance should be decent.....but I hope the CXS has the same, nice, V8 growl and burble that was in the DeVille.  However, the DeVille's performance did lack real outright thrill.  It had nice pull, but didn't feel that outright fast.

[post="57958"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Having had a DeVille base for four days, I can agree with that. My rented Caddy certainly scooted away quicker than my Aurora, but it didn't have that same feel, which IMO has alot to do with its suspension and handling setup. You're not supposed to really feel that acceleration in a DeVille, merely realize you're moving at a faster rate of speed. Plus, it floated like a bitch and honestly, that got irritating after awhile.

As far as CX ride, I would suspect/hope nothing worse than a LeSabre with Touring Package, which gives you a nice boulevard ride without unneeded float.

[Croc]

My favorite part of the Lucerne is the C-pillar. Absolutely perfect in execution. Perfect shape. This car is an instant classic.

[The O.C.]

My favorite part of the Lucerne is the C-pillar.  Absolutely perfect in execution.  Perfect shape.  This car is an instant classic.

[post="58070"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Alas Croc.....you and I TOTALLY agree on something!

:AH-HA_wink:

[pow]

Alas Croc.....you and I TOTALLY agree on something!

:AH-HA_wink:

[post="58230"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

It's too vertical, IMO, leaving too big of a rear 3/4 area.

[Croc]

That's what I like about it. It is a formal, sturdy-looking pillar. I am so tired of the anorexic, spindly curved pillars of 90s jellybean designs.