Trinacriabob review of rental LaCrosse test drive

[trinacriabob]

After many tries at snagging a LaCrosse from Alamo or Avis for a weekend, I finally succeeded. It was at the Alamo location at LAX. Interestingly enough, I had just taken a Friday off in Las Vegas where I had a Grand Prix, so I got to test them back to back. In short, I used to drool over the LaCrosse. Now, it's just a nice car. Chief among my disappointments was the purported quietness. Maybe this only applies when equipped with the 3.6 VVT V6. With the base 3800, the engine roar is just a tad quieter than it is on the Grand Prix. I took the LaCrosse out to the desert and back as well as all around the West side. The ride is fairly controlled yet pavement gaps do cause some undulation -- Buick style. It is not a tight riding vehicle. In terms of cornering, it does so more flatly than its predecessor but still does not beg to be pushed. I noticed this in the cloverleaf exits from the 405 onto Wilshire Boulevard. It is a nicely appointed car. The instrumentation is clean and (as Paulie always questions) it's illumination is green at night. While the Grand Prix groups its chimes and warnings more succintly, the LaCrosse has a zillion little indicators in the instrument cluster. It was almost distracting. In terms of ergonomics, the seating up front is comfortable and the flatness of the buckets allows one to move over to reach things. The flatter panel gives the illusion of roominess, but it would be no easier than in the more cockpit like GP to crawl over the console and get out. Now, the Buick sports the glassier greenhouse. However, this works best for vision over to the rear passenger side of the car. In changing lanes to the left, the doubling up of the pillars to make for that little opera window make it a challenge. The LaCrosse is a clean, safe car in terms of its exterior sheetmetal. It won't age quickly. However, I just saw the new Lucerne last weekend. (Kudos to Buick for a leapfrog over the LeSabre/PA, but it's too big for me). However, I will have to say that the crisp, canted angular grille would work wonders for the LaCrosse. In comparison, the LaCrosse's front end styling approaches the "frump zone." This is all very fresh since I lived in a Grand Prix the preceding day in Las Vegas. The GP's big liability is the overstyling...particulary in the front. It is, however, much more of a driver's car. The handling inspires confidence and it does what is asked of it. Smoothness at cruise and the sense of quiet (when the engine is pushed and via wind intrusion) are not markedly different from that of the LaCrosse. And, with the split exhaust pulled out of the base model, the exhaust burble (or fart) that I found offensive in the 2004 is a more subdued and more even exhaust note. But, when one hits the pavement joints and freeway ripples, GP reacts crisply and stays composed. The dashboard, while quite different, is a pilot's domain...you really are in a cockpit of sorts. All in all, I think I would opt for the Grand Prix. I like both cars. It's just that I like the GP more. Now, if the LaCrosse spruced up the front and made it more angular while the GPs stayed the same, I would pop for the LaCrosse. If the converse occurred whereby the GP got rid of the "Smokey and the Bandit" pinched fascia while the LaCrosse kept its chromey oval, I would go into the GP with that much more enthusiasm. Either way, proven "old school" platforms and cast iron 3800s can't be argued with. Edited December 28, 2005 by trinacriabob

[bobo]

A few weeks ago, I made the comment of the interior of the LaCrosse being fitting for a rental car, and many people took offense to it. It's not that I think the LaCrosse is a bad car--it's just doesn't really excel in any one area and does not come across as aspirational. Perhaps I expect too much. It would be an easy enough car to live with day in and day out, and for the money it is a good buy. But a few upgrades could make it a great car.

[Paolino]

I am SO touched you remembered to comment on the illumination!! LOL Thanks for the commentary on the LaCrosse... maybe you'll get a CXS one weekend and let us know if you liked it any better. :)

[Robert Hall]

I had an '06 Grand Prix for 6 days in Oregon last week.... a pain to parallel park (with the high belt line and long overhangs), but very enjoyable on windy country roads...maybe the best handling FWD GM I've had the experience to drive. Excellent foul-weather traction, also (I got stuck in one heck of an ice storm on I-5). Though I thought the interior plastics were a bit cheesy, I thought the ergonomics/layout was excellent--loved the steering wheel and liked the faux-aluminum interior trim. The speedometer was HUGE. I'll be picking up something at Avis at LAX tommorow...maybe another GP, an Impala, or a LaCrosse... Edited December 28, 2005 by moltar

[razoredge]

Just a driving tip for those who care..... tune up on your left and right side mirror skills and backing, lane changes, parking or any other rearward visibility issues will no longer be an issue. I never look over my shoulders anymore, havent in years, since I had to learn how to use mirrors that is. The styling of the GP has grown on me quite a bit, Im surprised myself, its the black only plastic interior thats depressing. It wouldnt take much for Buick to improve the Lacrosse but I dont think we will see it.

[Mike The Canadian]

I had an '06 Grand Prix for 6 days in Oregon last week.... a pain to parallel park (with the high belt line and long overhangs), but very enjoyable on windy country roads...maybe the best handling FWD GM I've had the experience to drive. Excellent foul-weather traction, also (I got stuck in one heck of an ice storm on I-5).
  Though I thought the interior plastics were a bit cheesy, I thought the ergonomics/layout was excellent--loved the steering wheel and liked the faux-aluminum interior trim.  The speedometer was HUGE.    I'll be picking up something at Avis at LAX tommorow...maybe another GP, an Impala, or a LaCrosse...

[post="64107"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

I've got a Century (same shit)
a little tip on the parallel parking, of course be parallel to the car your parking behind, and keep moving up until the other cars taillights are at the end of your rear window. Then turn the wheel 3/4 and keep backing up till his taillights reach close to your mirror, then turn the wheel all the way to the other side.

Now this takes a little bit of practive, but i've found it works on every car i've driven so far...some need a little bit of an adjustment, but otherwise it works.

[Robert Hall]

I've got a Century (same shit)
a little tip on the parallel parking, of course be parallel to the car your parking behind, and keep moving up until the other cars taillights are at the end of your rear window. Then turn the wheel 3/4 and keep backing up till his taillights reach close to your mirror, then turn the wheel all the way to the other side.

Now this takes a little bit of practive, but i've found it works on every car i've driven so far...some need a little bit of an adjustment, but otherwise it works.

[post="64237"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Yeah... I'm a bit rusty on parallel parking...I probably do it once a month at most normally...most all of my parking is in garages and lots. I'm comfortable parallel parking my Jeep--I know where the ends are and if I have bump up over the curb to do it, no problem (ground clearance).

[Flybrian]

Yeah...  I'm a bit rusty on parallel parking...I probably do it once a month at most normally...most all of my parking is in garages and lots.    I'm comfortable parallel parking my Jeep--I know where the ends are and if I have bump up over the curb to do it, no problem (ground clearance).

[post="64274"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

For some reason, I'm great at parallel parking. For anyone wanting a challenge, try parallelling a '95 or '96 Aurora - the ones before the dipping passenger mirror. Seriously. You're five inches off the ground in a 17-foot-long car with tiny podded sideviews and a narrow rear backlight that's distorted on both sides. I've whipped this puppy into a space I swear was 17'1". Scared the crap out of the chick who owned the SC430 behind me.

[Mike The Canadian]

For some reason, I'm great at parallel parking. For anyone wanting a challenge, try parallelling a '95 or '96 Aurora - the ones before the dipping passenger mirror. Seriously. You're five inches off the ground in a 17-foot-long car with tiny podded sideviews and a narrow rear backlight that's distorted on both sides. I've whipped this puppy into a space I swear was 17'1". Scared the crap out of the chick who owned the SC430 behind me.

[post="64278"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

lets go :P
I konw what your saying, but the buick isnt as long as the aurora...
but man it's fun parallel parking this thing, all my friends ask how the hell I dod that :lol:

[Robert Hall]

lets go :P
I konw what your saying, but the buick isnt as long as the aurora...
but man it's fun parallel parking this thing, all my friends ask how the hell I dod that  :lol:

Try parallel parking an older car without power steering..I've done it in a '68 Cougar..manual brakes, manual steering (huge wheel), 3-spd manual tranny... easy enough to see out of, though.

I think my worst PP experience was in a '69 Mustang Mach 1--felt like being in a cave trying to see out...(huge rear blind spots, sloping rear window, giant steering wheel, sitting on the floor...), hair-trigger throttle.. Edited December 28, 2005 by moltar

[razoredge]

I can parallel park a tractor trailer........toooooot, toooooooot, BFD I know. :lol: the thing I cant do is back the LSS in a parking lot and not hang the front out into the lane. I dont know what my problem is but that 5 foot long overhang must throw me somehow. Im always 2 ft forward of where I should be.....always ! :rolleyes: I dont do it with the older C chassis 90 Regency which is the same chassis.

[The O.C.]

Either way, proven "old school" platforms and cast iron 3800s can't be argued with.

[post="63992"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Yes they CAN be argued with.......

<_<

That "old-school" platform gives the LaCrosse, Impala, and GP simply awful interior packaging (mostly back-seat woes) relative to their quite-large exterior size...... not to mention the design woes such as the overly large front and rear overhangs.

I've already ranted about how the 3800 is well past its prime.....these cars need the HF 2.8 standard and the HF 3.6 optional.....at LEAST.....

[Mike The Canadian]

lol man this parallel parking stuff is getting intense :P :lol: as for the 3800 vs 2.8 compare the mileage on both engines, and then the power. I hate the 2.8, it's so useless, on the CTS it gets the same mileage has the 3.6

[trinacriabob]

Yes they CAN be argued with.......

<_<

That "old-school" platform gives the LaCrosse, Impala, and GP simply awful interior packaging (mostly back-seat woes) relative to their quite-large exterior size...... not to mention the design woes such as the overly large front and rear overhangs.

I've already ranted about how the 3800 is well past its prime.....these cars need the HF 2.8 standard and the HF 3.6 optional.....at LEAST.....

[post="64713"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

It is past its prime. However, having just turned over 220,000 hassle free miles in my 3800 powered 92 Regal coupe, I like the thought of not having to deal with auto woes. As for the back seat issues, I can only think of 10 times or so that anyone ever sat in my back seat (no smart ass comments, gents). I'll get more adventurous with the purchase subsequent to the upcoming one. Edited December 30, 2005 by trinacriabob

[razoredge]

Im willing to bet that a very high percentage of Buick, Oldsmobile and Pontiac drivers/owners, that have the 38 in their cars would not care to have a 2.8 and be mixed on the 3.6. Any Supercharged 38 owners most definantly would not. I wish people would just leave the subject alone. We all know whats comming in the future so why does it always have to be the priority of non GM and non 3800 owners to make sure they get their little poke (or "rant") in ? The future holds everything you all want so why can we not rest in peace ? Its the current Buick engine, highly available and in full production in the US of A, Just let it go PLEASE ! PLEASE !

[The O.C.]

Im willing to bet that a very high percentage of Buick, Oldsmobile and Pontiac drivers/owners, that have the 38 in their cars would not care to have a 2.8 and be mixed on the 3.6. Any Supercharged 38 owners most definantly would not.

I wish people would just leave the subject alone. We all know whats comming in the future so why does it always have to be the priority of non GM and non 3800 owners to make sure they get their little poke (or "rant") in ? The future holds everything you all want so why can we not rest in peace ? Its the current Buick engine, highly available and in full production in the US of A, Just let it go PLEASE !

PLEASE !

[post="64933"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Well, I AM a GM-owner.....and I've owned probably 3-4 different cars in the recent past equipped with the 3800....and I've driven countless Buick company cars in the past with 3800s (SC and non-SC.) So, I have a high level of experience that brings me to my opinions.

The 3800 is absolutely reliable, in my opinion. That's not my issue with it.

I think the only Buick or Pontiac owners that would care about the 3800 versus one of the HF engines are really only the 3800 FANS like you guys out there.....and that's okay for the fans to be enthusiastic....

However, most Buick and Pontiac owners probably could care less about the history or significance of the 3800.

[Chicagoland]

I doubt that there are any LaCrosse CXS cars to rent. The agencys buy in bulk, and GM isn't going to give away loaded cars.

[trinacriabob]

I doubt that there are any LaCrosse CXS cars to rent. The agencys buy in bulk, and GM isn't going to give away loaded cars.

[post="65269"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

There are. There are. ALL of the LaCrosses I could have picked at Alamo/National location in Portland over Christmas were CXSs (twin tailpipes) so I opted for a GP because I would not be buying the 3.6 VVT V6.

[razoredge]

There are.  There are.  ALL of the LaCrosses I could have picked at Alamo/National location in Portland over Christmas were CXSs (twin tailpipes) so I opted for a GP because I would not be buying the 3.6 VVT V6.

[post="65297"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

really ? why is that trinacriabob (thats quite a keyboard full :) ), the buying part ?

I sure would value your rundown on a comparision including the CXS. Especially after your comments on suspension on standard Lacrosse. I would like your opinions on the engine as well. I thought it was quite nice, but didnt see it haveing anything on the L67 other than use of regular gasoline and different kind of powerband.

[turbo200]

The 3800 is absolutely reliable, in my opinion.  That's not my issue with it.

I think the only Buick or Pontiac owners that would care about the 3800 versus one of the HF engines are really only the 3800 FANS like you guys out there.....and that's okay for the fans to be enthusiastic....

However, most Buick and Pontiac owners probably could care less about the history or significance of the 3800.

[post="65264"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Totally agreed OC. Most Pontiac and Buick owners could care less whether it's the 3800 or the 3900 or the 3400. It's that extra degree of refinement that is missing from those engines compared to the competition (excepting the 3900, which has other issues: fuel economy and availability) that is keeping Toyota, Honda, Nissan et al buyers away. And that is after all the goal, to steal buyers back from these companies.

Furthermore, Toyota, Honda and Nissan engines make it past the 200k mark on a regular basis, and are legendary for thier dead reliable nature. Fans of the 3800 appreciate its reliable characteristics, but ALL of Honda's and Toyota's engines regularly achieve that stature, that is no spectacular achievement. Those companies still improve and change their engine designs. They keep up with the times, upgrade power, improve fuel efficiency, all while meeting the benchmarks of refinement, power, flexibility in the rev range, and fuel efficiency. The 3800 had a lot of things going for it for many years, but it's simply been outclassed, five years ago.

[CaddyXLR-V]

Totally agreed OC. Most Pontiac and Buick owners could care less whether it's the 3800 or the 3900 or the 3400. It's that extra degree of refinement that is missing from those engines compared to the competition (excepting the 3900, which has other issues: fuel economy and availability) that is keeping Toyota, Honda, Nissan et al buyers away. And that is after all the goal, to steal buyers back from these companies.

Furthermore, Toyota, Honda and Nissan engines make it past the 200k mark on a regular basis, and are legendary for thier dead reliable nature. Fans of the 3800 appreciate its reliable characteristics, but ALL of Honda's and Toyota's engines regularly achieve that stature, that is no spectacular achievement. Those companies still improve and change their engine designs. They keep up with the times, upgrade power, improve fuel efficiency, all while meeting the benchmarks of refinement, power, flexibility in the rev range, and fuel efficiency. The 3800 had a lot of things going for it for many years, but it's simply been outclassed, five years ago.

[post="65521"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Actually I do care. I like how the 3.8 SC can be modded easily. I wouldn't want a 3.6L over the 3.8 SC for that reason, unless it was the DI 305hp version. I would however, take the turbo 2.8L over the SC 3.8.
In fact, a $70 pulley for the SC 3.8 will give you another ~25hp.

[Paolino]

Actually I do care. I like how the 3.8 SC can be modded easily. I wouldn't want a 3.6L over the 3.8 SC for that reason, unless it was the DI 305hp version. I would however, take the turbo 2.8L over the SC 3.8.
In fact, a $70 pulley for the SC 3.8 will give you another ~25hp.

[post="65532"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Series 2 or 3?

[razoredge]

Totally agreed OC. Most Pontiac and Buick owners could care less whether it's the 3800 or the 3900 or the 3400. It's that extra degree of refinement that is missing from those engines compared to the competition (excepting the 3900, which has other issues: fuel economy and availability) that is keeping Toyota, Honda, Nissan et al buyers away. And that is after all the goal, to steal buyers back from these companies.

Furthermore, Toyota, Honda and Nissan engines make it past the 200k mark on a regular basis, and are legendary for thier dead reliable nature. Fans of the 3800 appreciate its reliable characteristics, but ALL of Honda's and Toyota's engines regularly achieve that stature, that is no spectacular achievement. Those companies still improve and change their engine designs. They keep up with the times, upgrade power, improve fuel efficiency, all while meeting the benchmarks of refinement, power, flexibility in the rev range, and fuel efficiency. The 3800 had a lot of things going for it for many years, but it's simply been outclassed, five years ago.

[post="65521"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

More BS ! 200,000 - 300,000 is an achievement, any engine any manufacture...just another way for you to demote GM for ever having achieved anything..typical :rolleyes:

Now you are basing your opinions on what Buick buyers know and want on what ????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

Then the rest of your "refinement' speel is just that, only very recently have they managed to reach the levels of the 3800 and their high performance engines have just finally reached the level of the premium burning L67, so we that know sit here and wonder just how much bias ignorance can you possibly have.

I SAID IT BEFORE AND I WILL SAY IT AGAIN AND AGAIN UNTIL SOME OF YOU LEARN THE MEANING OF THE WORD RESPECT. LETS LEAVE THIS TOPIC ABOUT THE 3800 THE F ALONE. WE ALL KNOW WHATS COMMING IN THE FUTURE. WHY DO SO MANY HAVE TO IGNORANTLY CONTINUE TO KEEP HARPING ON AND ON ABOUT IT.

ITS LIKE AN OLD MAN THAT HAS BROKE HIS BACK FOR DECADES MAKING YOU LOTS OF MONEY. HE NEVER GOT A VACATION, NEVER GOT A BONUS, NEVER GOT ANY MONEY REINVESTED IN HIS FUTURE, YET HE KEEPS GOING AND GOING, NOW HE IS COMMING UP FOR RETIREMENT AND INSTEAD OF SHOWING HIM SOME RESPECT AND LETTING HIM REST IN PEACE YOU INSIST ON BEATING AND POUNDING ON HIM WITH THE BS STICK SO HE CAN NEVER GET A BIT OF THAT RETIREMENT GLORY.

THERE WAS NO REASON WHATSOEVER FOR YOU OC TO EVEN REPLY TO TRINACRIABOBS STATEMENT ABOUT "CANT ARGUEWITH" BUT YET YOU NEEDED TO, YOU JUST HAD TO, YOU JUST COULDNT RESIST DOWNING SOMETHING SOME OF US LOVE. NOW HERE COMES TURBO BACK TO JUMP IN ON THE BANDWAGON

WHY ARE YOU HERE ? WHY DO YOU GUYS COME HERE ? WHY ? ITS A CONTINOUS BOMBARDMENT OF NEGITIVISM AND DEGREDATION

LEAVE IT THE F ALONE ! IT IS SO FRIGGIN UNNECESSARY TO KEEP HARPING AND HARPING ON THIS TOPIC. SO HOW ABOUT GROWING UP AND SHOWING SOME DAMN RESPECT FOR THE BUICK OWNERS, DRIVERS, BUYERS AND BUICK V6 ENTHOUSIASTS ON THIS HERE GM FORUM AND BUICK TOPIC AREA !

DAMN IT ALL TO HELL !!!!!

[The O.C.]

The 3800 had a lot of things going for it for many years, but it's simply been outclassed, five years ago.

[post="65521"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

.......ESPECIALLY with automakers now giving us the new Toyota 3.5L, Ford 3.5L Duratec 35, Hyundai with new 3.3L (Sonata) and 3.8L (Azera), BMW's new magnesium-clad 3.0L inline-6s, Mercedes-Benz' new family of 2.8L and 3.5L V6s, VW with their 276hp 3.6L, Audi with their 255hp 3.2L, and on and on and on.

GM, itself, has a good engine in the 3.6L. The LaCrosse CXS I drove was smooth, responsive, QUIET, and very refined. How nice to boot the throttle of a Buick and see the tach needle swing around the dial with such refined enthusiasm!!!

[The O.C.]

Actually I do care. I like how the 3.8 SC can be modded easily. I wouldn't want a 3.6L over the 3.8 SC for that reason, unless it was the DI 305hp version. I would however, take the turbo 2.8L over the SC 3.8.
In fact, a $70 pulley for the SC 3.8 will give you another ~25hp.

[post="65532"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

OK Caddy.....good point.....

......but I think the point we are trying to make is that you are in a SEVERE minority in your enthusiasm for modding the 3800........there's not enough of you guys out there to make the 3800 a viable long-term prospect.

[The O.C.]

More BS ! 200,000 - 300,000 is an achievement, any engine any manufacture...just another way for you to demote GM for ever having achieved anything..typical  :rolleyes:

Now you are basing your opinions on what Buick buyers know and want on what ????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

Then the rest of your "refinement' speel is just that, only very recently have they managed to reach the levels of the 3800 and their high performance engines have just finally reached the level of the premium burning L67, so we that know sit here and wonder just how much bias ignorance can you possibly have.

I SAID IT BEFORE AND I WILL SAY IT AGAIN AND AGAIN UNTIL SOME OF YOU LEARN THE MEANING OF THE WORD RESPECT. LETS LEAVE THIS TOPIC ABOUT THE 3800 THE F ALONE. WE ALL KNOW WHATS COMMING IN THE FUTURE. WHY DO SO MANY HAVE TO IGNORANTLY CONTINUE TO KEEP HARPING ON AND ON ABOUT IT.

ITS LIKE AN OLD MAN THAT HAS BROKE HIS BACK FOR DECADES MAKING YOU LOTS OF MONEY. HE NEVER GOT A VACATION, NEVER GOT A BONUS, NEVER GOT ANY MONEY REINVESTED IN HIS FUTURE, YET HE KEEPS GOING AND GOING, NOW HE IS COMMING UP FOR RETIREMENT AND INSTEAD OF SHOWING HIM SOME RESPECT AND LETTING HIM REST IN PEACE YOU INSIST ON BEATING AND POUNDING ON HIM WITH THE BS STICK SO HE CAN NEVER GET A BIT OF THAT RETIREMENT GLORY.

THERE WAS NO REASON WHATSOEVER FOR YOU OC TO EVEN REPLY TO TRINACRIABOBS STATEMENT ABOUT "CANT ARGUEWITH" BUT YET YOU NEEDED TO, YOU JUST HAD TO, YOU JUST COULDNT RESIST DOWNING SOMETHING SOME OF US LOVE. NOW HERE COMES TURBO BACK TO JUMP IN ON THE BANDWAGON

WHY ARE YOU HERE ? WHY DO YOU GUYS COME HERE ? WHY ? ITS A CONTINOUS BOMBARDMENT OF NEGITIVISM AND DEGREDATION

LEAVE IT THE F ALONE !  IT IS SO FRIGGIN UNNECESSARY TO KEEP HARPING AND HARPING ON THIS TOPIC. SO HOW ABOUT GROWING UP AND SHOWING SOME DAMN RESPECT FOR THE BUICK OWNERS, DRIVERS, BUYERS AND BUICK V6 ENTHOUSIASTS ON THIS HERE GM FORUM AND BUICK TOPIC AREA !

DAMN IT ALL TO HELL !!!!!

[post="65738"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Razor, you need to chill and get a life.

If I want to rag on the 3800, or anything else, I'll DAMN well do it......I have my reasons.....

Don't try to control my ability to share my OPINIONS.......if you don't like it, go to another thread. Lord knows there are plenty of people on here that don't agree with ME....and that's OKAY.....

It so happens that I don't share your "blind loyalty." Guess what, Razor, lots of others on here don't share it either.

Oh, and by the way.....I probably have TEN TIMES the ties to Buick than you will EVER have.....so drop your comment about givinig "respect to Buick owners, drivers, buyers, and Buick V6 enthusiasts."

You have NO idea what you are talking about in that instance.......

Now.....let's please drop the immature attacks on others on here....... and get back to the business at hand.......

<_<

[trinacriabob]

Toyota, Honda and Nissan engines make it past the 200k mark on a regular basis, and are legendary for thier dead reliable nature. Fans of the 3800 appreciate its reliable characteristics, but ALL of Honda's and Toyota's engines regularly achieve that stature, that is no spectacular achievement.

[post="65521"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Before I comment on the above, let's keep this on track and avoid the pot-shots.

Yes, the above is true. I have a friend from college who has 2 small Japanese car daily drivers with over 200,000 miles on each ... and an old Porsche in the garage as a toy. Do I like the cars themselves? No. I remember one night last year when I was visiting him, he decided to drive from Whittier CA to Tijuana Mexico (Nick's favorite place - LOL). There is nothing quiet or comfortable about these cars, especially when they age. Now, doing the jaunt in an Olds or a Buick would have been different...and I could have gotten some snooze time at 3 am on the way back up.

It's just that the 3800 provides the reliability TOGETHER with the packaging of a decent sized smooth riding GM vehicle some of us are accustomed to. Twenty years ago, the frame of reference would have been the Olds Rocket 350 V8.

Part of my aversion to the HF engines is that I don't understand them. If I can't take a quick mental visual picture of what it is doing, then I lose interest. (It's harder to "picture" calculus than trigonometry, so I lost interest, to some extent).

Another thing is that the numbers are not well established. We don't know how long a 3.6 VVT V6 typically lasts without a tear-down. We don't know the typical service life of the new 3900 V6. (BTW, I drove a 3900 in a rented Impala LS recently and it was gruff under throttle). If you get a company car or you trade in often, then this is less of an issue. I like to keep a car for as long as it runs well and looks good, so I look for a track record I can rely on.

So, folks, do we like the LaCrosse or not? Edited December 31, 2005 by trinacriabob

[evok]

WHY ARE YOU HERE ? WHY DO YOU GUYS COME HERE ? WHY ? ITS A CONTINOUS BOMBARDMENT OF NEGITIVISM AND DEGREDATION

Because some of us have an objective, working knowledge of the auto industry, and can point out the errors in GMs ways. Or we can think for ourselves.

[Cananopie]

I think the LaCrosse is a good vehicle and is definitely a more refined vehicle than the Regal/Century. However an image came with the Regal that the LaCrosse can not live up to and that is in the sport department. When you have a supercharged vehicle that pretty much signifies that you have some power to show off. The 3.6 doesn't do what the 3.8 S/C did and that is a MAJOR factor for me in particular.

Also the LaCrosse seems to be far more feminine than the Regal in style and in power. In no way is a feminine car bad- almost all of Lexus' vehicles are feminine in nature. Quiet, refined, and unaggressive styling. These are very popular characteristics in the luxury market, none are meant to be making fun of the vehicle, but that isn't why I fell in love with Buick and is why the LaCrosse Super is badly needed in my opinion. The LaCrosse is nice, but it IS lacking any excitement.

The 3800 should be the base engine. For someone looking to get a cheap reliable vehicle they can be proud of the LaCrosse is an excellent choice if you're not a car enthusiast. It is WAY better than the Century and they sold like hotcakes. If you don't like the 3800 then you are upset at its power output, gas mileage, or noise levels... honestly these are small things to complain about to someone getting a base-level vehicle... which is what the 3800 is good for.

The old base engine for the Century was the 3.1 liter engine... which not only didn't produce as much power but doesn't have the lasting power of the 3800. The gas mileage it creates is still very average and the fact is now the 3800 is producing SULEV emissions. I think those of you who are so pushy to just drop the 3800 are acting a little foolish. Here we have an engine that is an all around perfect base engine. It's virtually indestructable, fairly clean, and fairly powerful for a base level vehicle. I've never met anyone upset at the 3.8. And for a $36,000 Lucerne damn right there should be a better, more refined engine in my car... or even a $30,000 LaCrosse... but the $20,000-$25,000 Buicks the 3.8 is the best engine out of all GM engines to have if you want a reliable engine. The other engines, though not poor, still havent stood the test of time the 3800 has proven. Plus what makes the 3.6 or 3.9 so good that we should ditch a tried and true engine because of a "growl" noise it makes when accelerating? That noise isn't something that has turned off any base-vehicle buyer. A refined vehicle? The $30,000+ vehicles? Yea- that might become a factor, but to get rid of the 3.8 is harsh because it is an all around good engine that none of the other engines have anything over. More computer chips doesn't automatically mean awesome engine. Relax and give people the option.

[zoomtm]

heh guys...lets not turn this into "the other forum"...we all know the 3800 is awsome but is a bit outdated... :ph34r:

[trinacriabob]

heh guys...lets not turn this into "the other forum"...we all know the 3800 is awsome but is a bit outdated... :ph34r:

[post="65835"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Zoomtm. I'm going to come to Alabama to beat you up! :P Just kidding, buddy.

Actually, in reading Cananopie's post above, he makes a lot of good points - about engines and their relation to price point, marketing niches, etc. Smart thinking!

[Cananopie]

Zoomtm.  I'm going to come to Alabama to beat you up!  :P Just kidding, buddy.

Actually, in reading Cananopie's post above, he makes a lot of good points - about engines and their relation to price point, marketing niches, etc.  Smart thinking!

[post="65859"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Thanks Trinacriabob. I mean I agreed that it's becoming dated, but for a base engine it is as superb as they get.

[turbo200]

Thanks Trinacriabob. I mean I agreed that it's becoming dated, but for a base engine it is as superb as they get.

[post="65876"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

My problem is with it still powering Buicks. Despite razor's ranting, there is nothing aspirational in the design characteristics or operation of the 3800. It's just a solid engine that can make a lot of torque, along with a lot of noise, in most cases. It just shouldn't be in Buicks today, when a V6 Accord gets 240 hp with equivalent gas mileage. I don't have a problem with it being in cars before, the problem was the 3800 and the 3400 were all GM offered throughout the entire lineup of midsize cars until very recently. Competitors just offered much better engines long ago.

[turbo200]

More BS ! 200,000 - 300,000 is an achievement, any engine any manufacture...just another way for you to demote GM for ever having achieved anything..typical  :rolleyes:

Now you are basing your opinions on what Buick buyers know and want on what ????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

Then the rest of your "refinement' speel is just that, only very recently have they managed to reach the levels of the 3800 and their high performance engines have just finally reached the level of the premium burning L67, so we that know sit here and wonder just how much bias ignorance can you possibly have.

I SAID IT BEFORE AND I WILL SAY IT AGAIN AND AGAIN UNTIL SOME OF YOU LEARN THE MEANING OF THE WORD RESPECT. LETS LEAVE THIS TOPIC ABOUT THE 3800 THE F ALONE. WE ALL KNOW WHATS COMMING IN THE FUTURE. WHY DO SO MANY HAVE TO IGNORANTLY CONTINUE TO KEEP HARPING ON AND ON ABOUT IT.

ITS LIKE AN OLD MAN THAT HAS BROKE HIS BACK FOR DECADES MAKING YOU LOTS OF MONEY. HE NEVER GOT A VACATION, NEVER GOT A BONUS, NEVER GOT ANY MONEY REINVESTED IN HIS FUTURE, YET HE KEEPS GOING AND GOING, NOW HE IS COMMING UP FOR RETIREMENT AND INSTEAD OF SHOWING HIM SOME RESPECT AND LETTING HIM REST IN PEACE YOU INSIST ON BEATING AND POUNDING ON HIM WITH THE BS STICK SO HE CAN NEVER GET A BIT OF THAT RETIREMENT GLORY.

THERE WAS NO REASON WHATSOEVER FOR YOU OC TO EVEN REPLY TO TRINACRIABOBS STATEMENT ABOUT "CANT ARGUEWITH" BUT YET YOU NEEDED TO, YOU JUST HAD TO, YOU JUST COULDNT RESIST DOWNING SOMETHING SOME OF US LOVE. NOW HERE COMES TURBO BACK TO JUMP IN ON THE BANDWAGON

WHY ARE YOU HERE ? WHY DO YOU GUYS COME HERE ? WHY ? ITS A CONTINOUS BOMBARDMENT OF NEGITIVISM AND DEGREDATION

LEAVE IT THE F ALONE !  IT IS SO FRIGGIN UNNECESSARY TO KEEP HARPING AND HARPING ON THIS TOPIC. SO HOW ABOUT GROWING UP AND SHOWING SOME DAMN RESPECT FOR THE BUICK OWNERS, DRIVERS, BUYERS AND BUICK V6 ENTHOUSIASTS ON THIS HERE GM FORUM AND BUICK TOPIC AREA !

DAMN IT ALL TO HELL !!!!!

[post="65738"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

It seems you need a lesson in opinions. Yours is just as valid as mine. Mine is just as valid as yours. Everyone is going to have an opinion. Not everyone is going to be right. There are those that cannot be convinced to change thier mind no matter what based on thier own idea of what thier experiences may have been [my idea of you], and then there are those that are more willing to listen to reason and logical debate [my idea of me].

You have to take my opinion for what it is, an opinion. Everyone's got one. And for all every Buick owner here knows about me, I am some dumbass snot-nose, so get over my opinion.

I try to deduce in a logical and respectful manner, and yet I get consistently accused of being disrespectful. It is getting to a point where this is no longer fun. I understand it seems as though we are beating a dead horse, but read carefully our opinions and understand the perspective we are coming from. We are not atttacking the creation of your beloved engine, or the W-body, we are simply asserting its uncompetitive nature in today's market. GM is beating a dead horse by repeatedly offering this engine in cars it has no business offering it in.

I could sit here and respond to every point in your post, but it would seem to you like I am harping. I will just repeat that 200k miles on an engine is not a special accomplishment, when Japanese manufacturers do it on a daily basis, with next to no problems on thier cars. Hence the legendary reliability that got the Toyota gravy boat started. I am not on that gravy boat, but I will come to a time where I will be able to do mass purchasing of vehicles for those in my immediate family; if GM doesn't offer the sophistication and class I am looking for, I will move on. I am a sympathetic person and have put a lot of effort into communicating to GM what I have beleived thier problems were; but enough is enough. Edited January 1, 2006 by turbo200

[razoredge]

For the sake of my "life" I would like to open this post saying this is all in mild sincere tone and attitude. So here goes.....

Exactly, enough is enough. We all know what is comming in the future. As all of us with " objective, working knowledge of the auto industry" and those of us without know, plans have been made to shut down the plant, the announcement was made along time ago, In the meantime with our "objective, working knowledge of the auto industry"we know we have a plant at full production in the USA building these last run of engines for our cars, thats the way it is. So I just dont see any reason to just continue harping on about it or cruising threads looking for a chance to throw some extra dirt on things that just cant be changed. As we have seen there are many with my opinion on the engine as well, and more could be rounded up but Im not that kind of person and that too would prove to accomplish nothing. I just would like some of this stuff left alone so we could have some form of peace around here. There are those of us that do drive, buy, own, enjoy these cars and you are directly insulting us and our tastes. There are also those that until reading some posts around here may have been willing to buy one of these new or used cars powered by this engine, but hell you all have almost convinced me to ship mine off to the junk yard.

Just think about it, think about some of the oh so negitive posts made, some of the greatest anti GM propaganda exists right on this site. Some of the best Lexus, Toyota, Nissan, Mitsubichi, Honda commercials exist right on this site. I dont have a blind eye or what ever number of terms have been used, I just know better than to poke around under the carpet to find every little tid bit of dust to drag GM down by, it serves no positive purpose whatsoever. This has been going on in extremes for months and months. GM just released over the past 2 or 3 years a fair amount of new product and "its all no damn good". Now we know its another couple of years before what ever is next is comming to market......if GM makes it. With the handful of members here seemingly doing their best to make sure no one buys or finds anything good about any of the current product.....if that sentiment were to be extended everywhere, GM could very well not make it to the next new "batch". BUT, regardless of my opinions of the effect of all this negitive publicity right here on our very own site, just the thought of having to listen to this same harping for the next 2 or 3 years until the next "batch" does arrive has obviously left me in very stressed out sorts......and why wouldnt it ? 2 or 3 more years of complaining about the W body, 2 or 3 more years of complaining about the G body, 2 more years of complaining about the 38, 1 ? or 2 ? more years of complaining about the 4 sp ? , who knows how many more years of complaining about the 3.5&3.9, how many more years of complaining about the trunk space in the Solstice, how many more years of complaining about the rear headroom in the G6, and the list could go on but Im tired. Very tired. Absolutely nothing has met the approval of a handful of very loud or frequent (if you prefer) posters around here.......ya know what ? thats not to much "fun" either. Well this has inspired some very loud posting on my behalf and I would think that would be very understandable for those with " objective, working knowledge of the auto industry"

I can only hope at this time, that in this post I have been tactful and carried the proper tone to not annoy some of the people that are annoyed with me. I also hope I have made some kind of points that might sink home to some of those that I have been taking issue with.

[turbo200]

It is not our fault that most in the marketplace have continued to view GM's newest products as undesirable and not totally groundbreaking. If GM caves in the next few years it will have nothing to do with a website that has 1500 members and maybe a couple thousand visitors per month; it will be because they didn't understand the consumers' needs and desires. A lot of things have gotten out of thier hands, and the perception that people have of the company, and its competitors has reached a very dire point. This perception has now been extended to the Midwest, GM's core market, and many more there are purchasing the "superior" imports. This perception exists not because of me and a couple other members here, we are just helping to identify it. The perception exists because GM hasn't learned to fix it. One way would be to introduce longer warranties, perhaps. An entirely different, earth-shattering way, would be to put all the dollars they can into the development of these cars and produce cars that exceed the benchmarks of the segment. So far they have not done this. GM has had plenty of time to learn from its mistakes, and yet they continually have produced cars that barely met the standards of the current competition, when the current competition was long on its way out. I can think of the Malibu and Camry as the latest example of this. I said "have produced"; I have hope for the future. Though with each, exciting and sophisticated new product Toyota introduces I am becoming more and more worried. The Lacrosse, we don't have to beat on it. I understand where you are coming from. It is what it is. A dowdy and inefficient design, to me. I would never buy it; it's antiquated-looking and lacks any sort of passion or excitement, as someone up above stated. The Regal "looked" better, imo. I would also not buy a car that I felt didn't meet up to the standards out there, and I feel the Lacrosse does not. My opinion. Yours can be different, and the Lacrosse owners here should be very happy with thier cars, they're very good cars. I understand why you would think we are harping on things by consistently bringing up the bad stuff; maybe that's something I have to work on, but there are some things you say there in my mind are a distorted vision of the truth, and so internet debate works. Why not just live with it, or ignore it? The Lacrosse is a competent car that is quite derivative and unspectacular in nature, but I am one person and you are another, perhaps it fits your needs perfectly. I know it could fit the needs of many people perfectly, but what needs are those, and could they be better filled by another car. There's just too much competition out there to not build the best car you can build. Read my post, and move on. As I said some people will never change thier opinion because they feel thier experience has led them to the point and idea they have. Edited January 1, 2006 by turbo200

[trinacriabob]

It is not our fault that most in the marketplace have continued to view GM's newest products as undesirable and not totally groundbreaking.

[post="66062"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

A lot of GM's products do seem to trail a little bit in following an example across either "pond."

However, looking at Toyota, it too has some stalwarts in its line up that are successful and where changes occur slowly. They also make ground breaking moves. Nothing wrong with keeping some reliable products around and freshening them as long as this is accompanied by breakthroughs that garner some attention...and sales.

(Just noticed you are in LA...didn't realize there was this much West Coast representation on the boards)

Some good points, to be sure.

[razoredge]

Thats your opinion Turbo and your opinion has been that GM have never had anything decent or "groundbreaking".........your opinion.......it shows up in every topic on this board, never ending. And you state your opinion strongly and insistantly as it is fact and should be the opinion of everyone on here and let me say I believe you are doing a great job at turning everyone off to GM Much has been done by many to dispute your claims, evidence, other personal opinions, some legitimate prove, yet every topic must be continously bombarded.....it has taken all the enjoyment away. I have tried in every concievable way to get you or others to just let some air in around here and find some good, or something positive for a change but as was evidenced in your reply you are going to continue to conduct the tone of every topic into negitivity toward GM, its something that really makes no sense to me whatsoever, that is why I have asked the question I have asked so many time, becasue none of it makes any sense to me. When I have a job that sucks, I eventually find someplace else to focus my ambitions. I dont continue to show up everyday to tell everyone this job sucks or this employer sucks. There is not a single other car out there in its segment I would choose over that Lacrosse unless it were a Grand Prix and that is not "blind" bias, the Maxima or Ultima or whatever it is is ugly to me, the Toyota is handsome but so very typical and common, the other Toyota is a freaky looking piece of sheetmetal, but yet all you know is the Lacrosse sucks, even though it has much going for it. You are not gaining anything anything around here with all the complaining, your not soley turning GM and steering GM, they are working on it and it takes time. In the mean time this horrible attitude shadows every thread and apparently you feel that is your job for the next 2 or more years, until you see the next batch of worthless Gm products at which time you will begin another list. Keep at it and soon enough you will convince any here that have considered the Lacrosse or find good in the Lacrosse to forget about it. Ill just sit and watch you do it, Ill guarantee buy the end of this thread you will have more people seeing the world through Nissan, Toyota, Honda, and Lexus eyes and they will never look at a Buick again. Theres a decent Lucerne thread going, Im sure many could go there and throw some water on that fire. I give up, the mood surrounding every GM model must be one of high suckage factor and frankly it has made this a horrible experience.

[The O.C.]

I think the LaCrosse is a good vehicle and is definitely a more refined vehicle than the Regal/Century. However an image came with the Regal that the LaCrosse can not live up to and that is in the sport department. When you have a supercharged vehicle that pretty much signifies that you have some power to show off. The 3.6 doesn't do what the 3.8 S/C did and that is a MAJOR factor for me in particular.

Also the LaCrosse seems to be far more feminine than the Regal in style and in power. In no way is a feminine car bad- almost all of Lexus' vehicles are feminine in nature. Quiet, refined, and unaggressive styling. These are very popular characteristics in the luxury market, none are meant to be making fun of the vehicle, but that isn't why I fell in love with Buick and is why the LaCrosse Super is badly needed in my opinion. The LaCrosse is nice, but it IS lacking any excitement.

[post="65828"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

You've got a good point about the LaCrosse being more "feminine" and I agree.....my parents have a 2000 Regal GS with 100k miles on it.....and the car has always had a sportier personality than the LaCrosse CXS I drove.

HOWEVER, the CXS seems a way more competent car than my parents' GS (even when it was new.) Even though the GS had the "gran touring suspension" I feel the LaCrosse CXS is still an even tidier and better handler. The CX and CXL maybe not....but the CXS was a much better driver. And it's MUCH quieter and smoother.

As far as engines, the SC3800 runs good.....but I'll take the 3.6L as it was in the LaCrosse anyday. Why? First, it was really quiet and smooth, but with a nice, expensive growl as you rev it up. As we all know, the SC3800 has never been the best overall engine in NVH....you get on it in my parents GS and it makes sure you don't forget it with engine growl and a bit of SC whine. My impression of performance is that the GS charges off the line a bit quicker, but from 45 on up, the 3.6L is not that far behind....and on the freeway, say from 60-80, I'd definitely put my money on the 3.6L actually.

Here's some interesting numbers.......from C&D, 12-01 (Regal LS 3800), 7-03 (GP GTP Comp Group), 7-05 (LaCrosse CXS.)

I'm assuming C&D testing procedures have remained relatively consistent over the years....and I'm also taking into account that the GP's Series III SC is 20hp stronger than my parents' '00 GS.

3800 - 200hp, 225lb/ft
SC 3800 - 260hp, 280lb/ft
3.6L - 240hp, 225lb/ft

0-60 - GP 6.6sec, CXS 7.0sec, Regal LS 8.1sec.
1/4mile - GP 15.0@93mph, CXS 15.4@92mph, Regal LS 16.3@86mph
30-50mph - CXS 3.1sec, GP 3.2secs, Regal LS 3.4sec
MPG C&D observed - Regal LS 24mph, CXS 19mpg, GP 17mpg

I think this shows how competent the new HF 3.6L is overall. It's surprisingly close to the powerful GTP in 0-60 and 1/4mile (less than 1/2 second) but look at the trap speed.....only 1mph slower than the GTP in the 1/4mile. It's obviously significantly quicker than the non-SC 3800 in the Regal LS.

Also, look at the actual 30-50mph run....CXS actually nips the more powerful GTP....suggesting the higher-revving nature of the 3.6L doesn't hurt it in the low end as much as some might fear.

I'm sure the mpg figures are not as apples-to-apples 'cause they were different trips with different drivers, etc...however, I think it suggests a nice compromise for the 3.6L in mph when you consider the still-strong performance and dramatic increases in refinement, nvh, and smoothness over the 3800s.

NOW.....what would REALLY be nice, is the oft-rumored LaCrosse Super/Ultra/whatever. With a little bit of styling spark on the exterior and interior, the LaCrosse could begin to make up some of the ground it lost from the "sportier" Regals.

AND....Buick.....how about looking at a SC version of the 3.6L? You know....for old times' sake?

B)

[The O.C.]

You are not gaining anything anything around here with all the complaining, your not soley turning GM and steering GM, they are working on it and it takes time. In the mean time this horrible attitude shadows every thread and apparently you feel that is your job for the next 2 or more years, until you see the next batch of worthless Gm products at which time you will begin another list.

Keep at it and soon enough you will convince any here that have considered the Lacrosse or find good in the Lacrosse to forget about it. Ill just sit and watch you do it, Ill guarantee buy the end of this thread you will have more people seeing the world through Nissan, Toyota, Honda, and Lexus eyes and they will never look at a Buick again.

Theres a decent Lucerne thread going, Im sure many could go there and throw some water on that fire.

I give up, the mood surrounding every GM model must be one of high suckage factor and frankly it has made this a horrible experience.

[post="66097"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

:blink:

<groan>

<....Chris slaps palm to forehead....>

Razor do you REALLY think Turbo, with his comments and opinions, is going to turn everyone on here into Nissan/Toyota/Honda/Lexus-kool-aid-drinking automatons...?

I happen to think Turbo is one of the clearest-thinking, most-logical, and intuitive posters on here....and you know what? He IS a GM-fan.....he's just like me in that he doesn't WANT to have to continue to make excuses for the General.....

[razoredge]

Thanks for digging that out, I have always wondered.* The mileage is varied enough to need to be disreguarded. The 3.6 has lower final drives but that does not effect mileage so its a non issue, it does improve the performance. The 3.6 would suffer with the final drives used in SC38, but again it is a non issue as long as mileage is = we must remember CAFE rules on Monday morning. Our L67 is insanely quick for 55-80mph passes, in fact if you just put it down by the time you are past and let off you will be closer to 90. Another plus to the 3.6 compared to the L67 or L32 is it does not require high octane. Today thats 5 dollars on 17 gallons.....roughly. It is an excellent running engine..the 3.6 but with the plastic engine cover I really couldnt tell what service was going to be like. We all know service on N* is.......questionable. Depending on ones purse this is of varied importance, but this is also the greatness of the flexability of offereing the two different style of engines, to some of us. Initial cost and future costs. *is there a way to access older test results and whatnot online or does one need to have the magazines laying around ?

[The O.C.]

Thanks for digging that out, I have always wondered.*


*is there a way to access older test results and whatnot online or does one need to have the magazines laying around ?

[post="66128"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

You know.....I have to use a couple of different methods. On the latest stuff, you can access their road tests online (C&D.com, MT.com, etc.)

BUT for older stuff, I pull out my old rags.....they are in chrono order, and I have rags from every year back to the mid-80's....and have tons of ones older than that that aren't complete years...

Plus, it helps if you can kinda remember all the road tests and comparos that have been done...and about when they were done....which I seem to be kinda good at...

[razoredge]

:blink:

<groan>

<....Chris slaps palm to forehead....>

Razor do you REALLY think Turbo, with his comments and opinions, is going to turn everyone on here into Nissan/Toyota/Honda/Lexus-kool-aid-drinking automatons...?

I happen to think Turbo is one of the clearest-thinking, most-logical, and intuitive posters on here....and you know what?  He IS a GM-fan.....he's just like me in that he doesn't WANT to have to continue to make excuses for the General.....

[post="66120"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Steve..slams head into table 10 times, blood gushes from his forehead and all he can think is Im so sorry and concerned that no one can comprehend what I am trying to say.

and the moderaters wonder why I get so agitated.

just like GM I am damned if I do and damned if I dont, am I the only one that can see and evaluate the entire issues or product as a whole. Without a pile of fixation on the negitive.

Incidently I was not attacking turbo but was simply talking directly to him. I dont think hes an unclear thinker by any means, on my part there is no need to stick up on his behalf. I just want some positive light or less fixation on the fact that GMs do not look, taste and feel just like everyones favorite import.

I dont what to keep going round and round over this but no one is getting my point either.

I really believe this "makeing excuses" and what not has been takin way to far, I do not see the clear thinking in that regard, myself.

[Cananopie]

Interesting test results The OC. I agree with all the points you're making about the 3.6, it is a very good replacement for the supercharged 3.8 (especially because the S/C 3.8 pretty much needed premium gas, right? while the 3.6 can take regular, the S/C engine was not nearly as reliable as the stock 3.8, and it is a more refined engine all around). It's just (this is only my opinion though) that I thought the S/C Regal was due for a power upgrade and when they released the LaCrosse CXS it came very close to the Regal GS stats for power and performance, but it wasn't anything more you could really brag about... the S/C 3.8 was becoming less powerful compared to the competition and the CXS stays around the same power. That IS why I'm all about the LaCrosse Super because the LaCrosse deserves (for the Regals sake) a V8 or at least more power. My main defense for the 3.8 is it's a terrific base engine. What competitors offer isn't anything so much more terrific that it beats the 3.8 in every way especially for the price range they are keeping the 3.8 in. It's a reliable engine for base-vehicles. I also would love the see a supercharged 3.6 as an option on the LaCrosse but car companies don't give us the exciting things they would've in the past.

[The O.C.]

Interesting test results The OC.


My main defense for the 3.8 is it's a terrific base engine. What competitors offer isn't anything so much more terrific that it beats the 3.8 in every way especially for the price range they are keeping the 3.8 in. It's a reliable engine for base-vehicles. I also would love the see a supercharged 3.6 as an option on the LaCrosse but car companies don't give us the exciting things they would've in the past.

[post="66167"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Good points Cananopie.....really......Now, here's my thoughts on that, though.....and PLEASE bear with me.....and understand I'm not arguing against the 3800/pushrod fans on here....I'm trying to look at GM's perception in the marketplace.....

If you continue to use the 3800 as a base engine.....what PERCEPTION does that give ALL those import, Ford, and DCX consumers that PERCEIVE pushrod technology and GM's pushrod V6s as "outdated" and "uncompetitive?"

Isn't one of GM's biggest challenges actually how to get all those consumers that walked away from GM BACK into GM showrooms? Isn't that a BIG way as to how they will begin to turn the tide in the marketshare slide?

Everyone on this site complains about how it's really the public's PERCEPTION of GM that is the problem....not their actual quality and reliability. So if that's indeed true, why would you still resort to utilizing technology (3800) that SO MANY people in the marketplace PERCEIVE as outdated, inefficient, and uncompetitive? (whether we think that's necessarily true or not....)

This argument is not about the 3800/pushrod fans on here.....it goes way beyond that.....it's about GM making product development decisions that will improve the public's perception of their products, their technology, and their overall viability as a recognized quality choice in the marketplace.

THAT's why I think even using the 3800 as a "base engine" (or using ANY of GM's pushrod V6 engines ANYWHERE) is not the kind of product development choice that will help GM turn the marketshare slide around.

[razoredge]

Im not aware of any less reliability of the SC 38 ? In fact the SII NA hurt us plenty with the plastic intake and related gasket problems. I personally believe that at 260/280 the L32 is still class competitive for performance and it is actually a very mild tune of its true potential. Its history anyhow but should be allowed to fad away in peace.

[turbo200]

OC is right. If some or many of those customers were turned off by the unrefined nature of GM's older engines, and we are assuming these people are educated enough to know the engine type and name, why continue to offer the same engines? For too long GM delivered the same cars with the same platforms and the same engines. They were not competing in different segments, nobody was fooled into thinking Buick was actually a competitor for Lincoln and especially not Lexus. These cars competed with themselves. And not distinguishing them enough through different engine types really hurt GM. Not updating the technology enough has also hurt GM. Just cruise through Edmunds, that's about a billion times more negative that what you will hear here, and you'll see what several million people think of the engines and other technology found in GMs. A big problem with the Lacrosse is too many dealers like to stock the lower models. GM also charges extra for chrome that does wonders to the exterior, and wheels that give elegance to the design. And engines that propel this car into the right class. Buick is undeserving of such low class feel. Edited January 1, 2006 by turbo200

[Cananopie]

Everyone on this site complains about how it's really the public's PERCEPTION of GM that is the problem....not their actual quality and reliability.  So if that's indeed true, why would you still resort to utilizing technology (3800) that SO MANY people in the marketplace PERCEIVE as outdated, inefficient, and uncompetitive? (whether we think that's necessarily true or not....)

This argument is not about the 3800/pushrod fans on here.....it goes way beyond that.....it's about GM making product development decisions that will improve the public's perception of their products, their technology, and their overall viability as a recognized quality choice in the marketplace.

THAT's why I think even using the 3800 as a "base engine" (or using ANY of GM's pushrod V6 engines ANYWHERE) is not the kind of product development choice that will help GM turn the marketshare slide around.

[post="66177"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Honestly don't think the 3800 debate goes much farther beyond automobile enthusiasts. It's hard for us, as entusiasts, to look at a car the way a normal person looks at a car who sees it as a big deal and a part of their lives but not enough of a deal to get to the knitty gritty of how it works and what powers it or anything.

However had a normal person do some research on their next car, and they see the stunningly beautiful Lucerne for example they may research it. I will find it hard that a make-or-break point will be the fact that the 3.8 is a pushrod engine... if they are buying it to last them at least 10 years they'll be happy to know the 3.8 is one of those engines that has stood the test of time and is highly renowned for its durability or quality. If they are looking for a car that gets them very good gas mileage because their biggest concern is fuel prices then Buick just isn't the company they should be looking at.

Typically we give foreign cars the benefit of the doubt when it comes to engine reliability. No matter what the Asian's can not do wrong when it comes to reliability. But that is a mentality fromt he 80s and we are in a modern world now and the truth is GM has proof of their reliability with the 3800. The Avalon may be more powerful and fuel efficient with its base engine, but it isn't the same engine they were using a decade ago in the same vehicle.

You might look at that as a positive thing but it questions its reliability, doesn't it? Plus the 3.6 at 240HP can't compete with the 3.8 with fuel efficiency. Technically the 3.8 has better fuel efficiency than the 3.6 and I don't know how many engines meet SULEV standards but I don't the the 3.6 or Toyotas 3.5 reaches that standard... but to many of us on here that is a moot point. Cleanliness of the vehicle isn't important so long as it's efficient with the gas.

Whatever takes the 3.8's spot needs to be at least more fuel efficient because 200 HP for a base engine is more than enough for many people. I have it in my Regal LSE and I don't feel like I could ever use more power for getting on highways or passing vehicles or anything like that and I'm positive neither will the average driver. I've also test drove the Lucerne and the 3.8 doesn't lag in power. More power than 200 is for the enthusiasts.

I think GM needs a more competitive fuel efficient base engine for things like the LaCrosse and the Lucerne, and I don't know if the 3.8 can do it. But the 3.6 isn't doing it now and would be a horrible trade-in for the 3.8 just so we can prove we can keep up with the best. The Northstar V8 and the 3.6 engines in the better models prove that GM can do it, but GM gives people the choice to stick with reliability. There is nothing other than a little more HP that the 3.6 can offer that the 3.8 can't.

What do you suggest is better than the 3.8 for the job it's doing? I have no doubt the 3.8 is cheaper to produce than the 3.6 and it has a lot less of a hassle. I think a lot of people feel more comfortable (as somebody pointed out) having an engine they can understand how it works in their head. You raise some good points but I don't see the 3.6 as the answer to the 3.8 because the 3.8 is doing everything the 3.6 is doing except for not producing enough power... but does the 3.6 reach SULEV standards? Because the 3.8 could be more powerful if it didn't too.

[razoredge]

chrome is now an option because of all the chrome bashing over the years.......damned if they do damned if they dont other manufactures may charge for wheels too but I would not know Buick does not have a low class feel and is undeserving of such implications Edmunds sound like a good place to take all those millions of negitive anti American sentiments

[razoredge]

Cananopie - we could expect that the 3.6 would improve over time as the 38 did so that might help some of the issues you have thought of. GM does need to jump its mileage ratings a few miles on the gallon, soon.