C/D review of Lucerne on stands

[turbo200]

By "better materials" in the Fusion you obviously didn't mean that their plastic is any "softer" than the Lucerne's plastic because it's either equal or harder in feel. The Lucerne isn't "hard" plastic in the sense that it is a typical hard plastic, it is a softer plastic that bends and squishes to a degree throughout the whole vehicle. My 97 Skylark had hard plastic and it was very obvious, the Lucerne's plastic is higher quality material. The Fusion's plastics do not compare. You also didn't mean the black plastic surrounding the Fusion's HVAC is any higher in quality than the black plastic surrounding the Lucerne's I hope because they are both surrounded with black plastic. Now if you honestly find the design of the center console of the Fusion more inspiring you might not be a proper interior aficionado. There are very obvious reasons why the interior of the Lucerne far outclass the Fusion's and I think it pretty rude and ridiculous to keep classing it with vehicles like 5 or 10 years ago.

Aside from the fact that you could probably fit a pen inside the gaps in the Fusion and they're practically invisible in the Lucerne, their center console is as dull as it gets with undoubtably lesser refinement on every last thing in there. The Fusion shifter is a joke while the Lucerne's is very classy looking. You might not find it your style since a lot of interior is subjective but it is definitely not surpassed by the Fusion's interior as you are claiming. But even if you want to defy all that EVEN Car and Driver, The USA Today, and almost every other reviewer on the vehicle all admit the interior is above par in quality. Car and Driver even had to break down to admit it and obviously since they're comparing the Lucerne to a 90s Camry (see page 2 of this thread if you forgot what they were comparing it to) you know they wouldn't have given credit for the interior if it wasn't due.

This is nothing to you personally but people need to seriously stop throwing Buick to five years ago, for your instance in particular the pictures alone just prove the Lucerne outclasses the Fusion with a glance. It is a current vehicle and it is a competitive vehicle and everybody needs to accept that. I don't like Toyota vehicles but I accept that they are a competitor even though their quality isn't as good as Buick's anymore. The Avalon isn't something I'm going to dismiss as a poor vehicle and neither should the Lucerne to those of you who typically find Asian cars more attractive.

Styling, especially interiors, are very much a subjective issue. To keep downing the Lucerne as throwback vehicle to where they were 5 years ago is ridiculous. I guess luxury isn't quieter than Lexuses, I guess luxury isn't some of the tightest gaps in the industry, I guess luxury isn't a smooth finish that is obviously apparent in the picture above where the Fusion is not. I'm not saying the Fusion is a bad vehicle, because it's not... but it is not near in quality to the Lucerne and thats obvious. It's even more obvious in the seating, power, reliability, and options that the Fusion don't offer. Get realistic with your comparisons. The Fusion holds nothing to the Lucerne. You want to say the Avalon's a better vehicle? That's a judgement call and I won't find it something worth arguing against because they're both on the same level. But don't get foolish and compare it with something so ridiculous. If the Lucerne isn't your type, that's fine, but don't just trash it with unfounded claims comparing it to a vehicle thats at its best $5k less than the Lucerne's worst.

The interior materials the Fusion does better than the Lucerne is the dash pad. In the Fusion it's a softer material that gives when pushed, and in the Lucerne it's a low gloss [Fusion's is also low-gloss] hard to the touch platic. It doesn't give much, if any at all, and mostly all cars in the class manage this area better. The radio controls are also nothing to write home about, they're nice, but then so are the Fusion's.

You're putting thoughts into my posts by comparing the Fusion to the Lucerne. I was not comparing the overall execution, I just mentioned the dash materials on the Lucerne, and I said the Fusion does some materials better than the Lucerne. Personally, I'm more of a driver-oriented interior kind of guy anyways, and the Lucerne's dash seems tall and oversized, but I was not complaining about this, that's just my personal preference.

In terms of overall design presence and overall quality of materials, even though every other material may be pretty good, the dash plastic is really important, in those terms, the Lucerne is still a step behind competitors. Avalon has better materials and a more intriguing, luxurious design. But these are nitpicks, and ultimately Lucerne will sell well, and offers a lot compared to the Avalon. Lucerne is a gigantic leap forward, and is being recognized as so. The fixes that need to be made are slight, but I hold Buick to higher standards than Toyota, they have made a great, stylish, even fun to look at car, but stopped short in a couple, frustrating ways.

[razoredge]

I wonder why they went to these single material moldings ? A dash pad used to have at least three materials.

4 spoke wheels suck

Im surprised no one has ever said anything about Buicks steering wheel controls?

Big knobs suck, I like them small and pert

But DAMN that car is one sexy bitch of sheet metal

[Cananopie]

In terms of overall design presence and overall quality of materials, even though every other material may be pretty good, the dash plastic is really important, in those terms, the Lucerne is still a step behind competitors. Avalon has better materials and a more intriguing, luxurious design.

I know you're being serious and you as a person truly believe this... but honestly doesn't is sound like bull$h! really? I mean are there even qualifications to stack one up against the other? Avalon has "better" materials and a more "intriguing" luxurious design. How are they better and what makes it more intriguing exactly? The plastic is perfect to the touch for you? Would a carpet be a better interior because of it's softness? And without the Fusion material right next to the Lucerne material I really think it's not really a fact rather than your opinion. I'd like you to find other people to agree with you on that.

Your points about the Fusion being better than the Lucerne were this:

-The hard dash materials on the Lucerne

-The black plastic around the HVAC controls

-Uninspiring design of the center console

The hard dash material I addressed. I really think it's worse than finnicky. It's not the same plastic you're going to find in the Cobalt, but it's no $60k vehicle either. If the dash plastic makes or breaks a single buy I will be very amazed. And if it won't affect a single sale then your point is really moot.

The black plastic around the HVAC controls still confuse me... because not only is the execution of the HVAC controls on the Fusion look far more poorly executed but there is black plastic around THOSE HVAC controls... so what are you even trying to say? It's higher quality black plastic? Softer black plastic? more interesting black plastic design around the HVAC controls? All these aren't just as you say 'nitpicks' because I can not even fathom what is so great about those obviously bland HVAC controls and their black plastic that surrounds them that just floors and surpasses the Lucerne's black plastic around the HVAC.

This is where I had the biggest issue- the design of the Fusion is more inspiring to you than the Lucerne? Is it the huge black square in the center of its console that really proves it to the smoother edges of the Lucerne? The cheap looking vents? The fact that the plastic actually bulges out around the black plastic in the center console? And I don't know if you count the shifter but in the Fusion it's obviously a joke.

I really can't understand the smooth flowing design of the Lucerne without a sharp angle in sight is just surpassed by the Fusion. Even if it just is the center console, between the two pictures in my mind the Buick obviously has a better design. I don't think the Lucerne is lacking in anything but gas mileage and perhaps an extra gear and probably RWD, but sales are more on FWD I think. Other than that I think there is nothing significantly wrong with the Lucerne... like I said if it's not your style, it's not your style, but I would like to meet the man who was GOING to buy a Lucerne until he felt the dash plastics and went for the Avalon instead. Seriously. It just isn't enough of an accusation to say the Lucerne is good for "maybe 5 years ago" but not now. YOU said that about the Lucerne not 3 posts ago but at the same time you're admitting they're 'nitpick' problems and that the Lucerne was so close to just surpassing all competition... but at the same time you say the overall design is good for "maybe 5 years ago" how can you justify both of these positions? Especially when you base almost all your argument on the dash plastic. The DASH plastic of all things to put a car 5 years behind!

Edited February 10, 2006 by Cananopie

[turbo200]

Cananopie, here's what I said:

Better materials are available in the Fusion, for about 5k less. It's the hard dash materials, as well as the black plastic surrounding the radio and HVAC controls, and the uninspiring design of the center console of the Lucerne that really disappoint me most.

The only thing I said about Fusion was a general statement in response to you saying the Lucerne had the best materials available in the price range. It's a general statement because I didn't refer to exactly which pieces are better, but I did say there are materials that are better in there than in the Lucerne, for 5k less.

Then I went on to say the most disappointing aspects of the Lucerne's interior. I wasn't comparing the Fusion to it, just saying what I found most unappealing.

Sit in an Avalon and compare. The design is more appealing, more special. This is all because of that dull, pieced-together looking center console of the Lucerne. The Avalon's materials disappointed me even, but they were still better than Lucerne. Sit in and compare them and you can see for yourself. Even down to the radio controls, they are more substantial and refined feeling in the Avalon.

Ask objective people here who have sat in both and they'll let you know, or just see for yourself.

Oh, and the Fusion really does have nicer dash materials. Disappointing, for a nitpicky car critic like me, but I'm sure others would have no problem with it. Then again, I truly believe there will be at least one sale lost to the overall just average interior design and, in some cases, quality.

[Cananopie]

Ask objective people here who have sat in both and they'll let you know, or just see for yourself.

See, the USA today guy raved about the quality of the materials and the interior of the Lucerne over the Avalon. So it's not just that simple, your views are obviously not objective. I'm not saying the Avalon is lesser quality, I'm just saying the Lucerne is a competitor to todays vehicles.

[pow]

Ask objective people here who have sat in both and they'll let you know, or just see for yourself.

The Lucerne would REALLY benefit from the DTS's higher quality dash materials, which are on par with the Avalon's.. The Fusion also uses premium stuff, but they're not screwed together as nicely. I'd like to comment further but I've got two tests tomorrow.

[turbo200]

objective people=empowah

[among others here]

[razoredge]

everyone need some claim to fame, history has proven "critics" are legends..........in their own minds.......yet the things they went out of their way to try to destroy........live on

must be hard to juggle high school and windshield time in the showroom...or is that windshield time from the arm chair ? Lets go dig up some magazine qoutes so it sounds like we're smert

[turbo200]

objective people=empowah 

[among others here]

just so you know Cananopie that wasn't a dig at you, or others here, and I don't think you've sat in both....I was just highlighting how I thought empowah is a pretty constructive, objective person.

[Croc]

Cananopie, you have not sat in the Lucerne. I can tell that by your posts. Get back to us when you have. The Lucerne is far behind in its class. I wouldn't really call it a luxury car, but rather a nice fullsizer. To me, Lucerne = Caprice. As a Buick, it needs to be much better.

[Flybrian]

One thing that is getting tiresome as of late are these accusations about people sitting in cars. Now, I admit I myself have alluded to it once or twice in the past and I have remarked in the past that we shouldn't completely rail or praise a car's material texture based soley on a picture and until we've sat in it.

But the tone this has taken lately is annoying. When one opines in a way contrary to your opinion, it doesn't mean they haven't 'sat in the car' and 'sat in the car' should not be a catch-all qualifier for the validity of one's opinions.

For the record, I've sat in the Lucerne and of all the things that would make me not consider this car, the dash plastics aren't one of them. To me, it doesn't matter that much. But, remember, I sat in the car, apparently unlike Cananopie, so that makes my opinion worth more.

[VenSeattle]

I've been staying out of this one to see where it went. This is pretty much the only review that agrees with some of the complaints on this board. The majority reviews have been very favorable.

I don't disagree that the Lucerne can be improved, it's just that I think the Lucerne's flaws have been made out to be bigger than they really are. Many people here are so focused on the faults that they can't see how the Lucerne is a good vehicle, good value, and competitive. Competitive does not mean best in class in all categories. A car does not need to win in every category to be considered competent or competitive. It means the vehicle offers what most buyers in that market are looking for and has its own list of advantages compared to competitors.

• No one has commented that this reviewer received the same 0-60 time in the Lucerne V8 as Edmunds received in the "much lighter" (400 lbs lighter) Avalon with its 5-spd automatic. So performance benefit of the Avalon over the Lucerne is a wash.

• Since the Lucerne V8 can be had at under $30k, it's hard to say in this class that pricing will be much of a buyer's concern when comparing the two. The V8 Lucerne is very obtainable.

• Space? Interior and trunk, Lucerne is larger in every dimension.

• Warranty? Lucerne's warranty is superior to Avalon’s. There’s been debate about why GM doesn’t match Hyundai’s… but the quality ring bearer Toyota needs to add road-side assistance and match Buick’s warranty before people should complain about Buick.

• Standard OnStar also helps with providing an advantage of Safety & Security. With the new upgrades coming this year, it will even be more of an advantage.

• The good thing about the Lucerne and Avalon are that they look completely different. This causes much of the decision making to be based on styling. Neither is superior or inferior. They approach the large market differently. Which styling you prefer is not class-indicative.

Much of what I've seen of the above article is not objective. It's very opinionated.

• Lucerne's wood is not obviously fake. It's no more fake looking than the Avalon's.
• The "torque-less" comment has already been addressed several times.
• The lower/middle dash material, which everyone is up in arms about, is probably the only material quality issue someone could have. Leather quality? Carpet quality? Door panels? Head-liner quality? Ride? Quietness? Fit/finish? They're all competitive or leading. Yes, even fit/finish. The hard plastic is tastefully grained and matte finished. The stereo controls aren't loose in their plastic housing. The knobs turn with precision. In ebony trim, the center stack is hardly noticeable. Only in light trim does it stand out, which could be addressed by GM coloring it similar to match the dash like how the panel is colored for the headlight controls.
• The blue interior lighting is traditional for Buick. It looks nice and is inoffensive. Despite one or two reviewers, I have no problem reading anything inside the Lucerne. Perhaps it's because I'm use to reading everything in blue instead of white.

Are there things I’d add/change to the interior? Sure: add power tilt/telescoping wheel, heated rear seats, adjustable rear head rests, exchange the hard lower dash material for soft-touch material, and why not… add a power rear window sunscreen.

Requesting to change the transmission is not reasonable, because it’s not even available yet. Now after 2007MY, GM won’t have an excuse for that. But the current transmission performs very well, and that’s backed up by several reviews. HIDs or LEDs aren’t actually important to me, they’re just glorified more than anything in magazines and publications. Yes, Lucerne’s image would benefit from offering them or having them standard.

Are any of the above changes that I’d do deal breakers to 90% of large car buyers? No. Despite some areas available for improvement, the Lucerne is competitive in its price class.

[sciguy_0504]

Comparing V6s, the Lucerne cannot keep up with the Avalon. I would hope with a V8 it is able to or else there would be a little bit of a problem.

Ven, I like how you pointed out how the Avalon and Lucerne are much different from each other on the outside.

[Cananopie]

Cananopie, you have not sat in the Lucerne.  I can tell that by your posts.  Get back to us when you have.  The Lucerne is far behind in its class.  I wouldn't really call it a luxury car, but rather a nice fullsizer.  To me, Lucerne = Caprice.  As a Buick, it needs to be much better.

Croc, I'd appreciate it if you didn't accuse me of lying, and then being rude on top of that. Different opinions don't constitute your arrogancy. I went to the Lucerne Premiere night and drove a Lucerne, not just sat in it. I got to look it over for a while too. At any point did I say something completely untrue? I have only been arguing that the Lucerne is competitive in todays market where it is chic to accuse every single Buick that comes out to be dated an not competitive in todays market.

Nowhere did I say the quality of the Lucerne is superior to the Avalon or any other car in its playing range. When I initially said 'it's the best you're going to find in its class' I didn't mean it was #1, hands down, nothing can even compare (I can't think of any car that can do that with anything), I just meant it's able to compete with the best in the class. I have admitted its shortcomings even. I have said that if you believe the Avalon is a better vehicle overall than the Lucerne then it is completely an opinionated accusation because the Lucerne is competitive to the Avalon. Period. Not better, not worse. Competitive.

As Ven said, people are making the Lucerne problems bigger than they really are. I have never claimed the Lucerne to be the best car available, I have only claimed it is competitive to the vehicles in its category. Everyone else here who is disagreeing with me specifically is adamently refusing that credit to the Lucerne.

Edited February 10, 2006 by Cananopie

[turbo200]

For the record, I've sat in the Lucerne and of all the things that would make me not consider this car, the dash plastics aren't one of them. To me, it doesn't matter that much. But, remember, I sat in the car, apparently unlike Cananopie, so that makes my opinion worth more.

I can agree with that. The average buyer of the Lucerne won't be quite as focused on the design and materials as I am. And the Lucerne is a wholly competitive car with the Avalon, on nearly every level and in a lot of respects is better. Thus making it completely competitive, and not any better or any worse [though the styling would sway me towards the Buick truthfully].

Croc said Lucerne interior isn't befitting of what a Buick should be, and on that note I totally agree with. However, that just detracts from the overall experience of Lucerne, it doesn't make it a bad car by any stretch of imagination. A Buick interior should be more special in my mind, for the position they want to achieve. It's not enough to sway people from buying it, as evidenced by early sales numbers. I believe Lucerne will keep the momentum going well into next year, and when the Enclave comes around, the two cars will help keep Buick alive, and give it a much higher class image.

EDIT: bolded content

Edited February 10, 2006 by turbo200

[turbo200]

The reason so many of us seem to amplify this issue is because it has been one of the damned biggest issues with GM for a long time. And if this is supposed to be the harbinger of what's to come, and the latest product round is supposed to prove to America they will be around for decades to come, then they better bring all they've got. It's an issue we've bitched and moaned about for many years here. I don't think any of us don't acknowledge the improvements that've been made, but a lot of the time we can't hold back disappointment that the best wasn't brought out.

[Flybrian]

There is great truth in that. Yet, let's not be so quick to continue holding up Toyota on its pedestal. Its clear to many objective people that for the past generation or so, the majority of their product has been resting on Toyota's once-deserve laurels. The 2002 Camry, 2000 Avalon, 2000 Rav4, and 2003 Corolla are all vehicles that didn't own up to Toyota's accolades in certain aspects and to varying degrees. All brands of all manufacturers go through their natural crests and troughs.

I'm not going to amplify Ven's repeated and very valid points vis a vis Avalon. While the Lucerne lacks a potent midlevel V6 and some interior accruments, the Avalon lacks interior and cargo volume and some levels of content. We could go on, but the horse has long since passed.

One thing I would like to expound upon is the tone a few people have around here lately. I'm not naming names because you probably know who you are, on-both-sides. When I see someone being badgered and critisized on their opinion because it differs from your own, it raises a flag. When I see comments akin to "All those ignorant Jap lovers" or "All those ignorant GM fanboys", that sets off the alarm. Together, it results in a line being drawn in the sand.

We should all be able to handle ourselves maturely without the snide winks and public asides about "us" and "them." We have for a long, long time and I don't see how something as trivial as dash materials causes people to act like that.

If someone thinks the lower dash on the Lucerne is fine, they're not an idiot or a blind follower - they just don't think its a big deal.

If someone thinks the lower dash on the Lucerne is crap, they're not a moron or a troll - they just think it should be better.

Thank you.

[pow]

There is great truth in that. Yet, let's not be so quick to continue holding up Toyota on its pedestal. Its clear to many objective people that for the past generation or so, the majority of their product has been resting on Toyota's once-deserve laurels. The 2002 Camry, 2000 Avalon, 2000 Rav4, and 2003 Corolla are all vehicles that didn't own up to Toyota's accolades in certain aspects and to varying degrees. All brands of all manufacturers go through their natural crests and troughs.

I'm not going to amplify Ven's repeated and very valid points vis a vis Avalon. While the Lucerne lacks a potent midlevel V6 and some interior accruments, the Avalon lacks interior and cargo volume and some levels of content. We could go on, but the horse has long since passed.

One thing I would like to expound upon is the tone a few people have around here lately. I'm not naming names because you probably know who you are, on-both-sides. When I see someone being badgered and critisized on their opinion because it differs from your own, it raises a flag. When I see comments akin to "All those ignorant Jap lovers" or "All those ignorant GM fanboys", that sets off the alarm. Together, it results in a line being drawn in the sand.

We should all be able to handle ourselves maturely without the snide winks and public asides about "us" and "them." We have for a long, long time and I don't see how something as trivial as dash materials causes people to act like that.

If someone thinks the lower dash on the Lucerne is fine, they're not an idiot or a blind follower - they just don't think its a big deal.

If someone thinks the lower dash on the Lucerne is crap, they're not a moron or a troll - they just think it should be better.

Thank you.

Nicely said.

[pow]

I can agree with that. The average buyer of the Lucerne won't be quite as focused on the design and materials as I am. And the Lucerne is a wholly competitive car with the Avalon, on nearly every level and in a lot of respects is better. Thus making it completely competitive, and not any better or any worse [though the styling would sway me towards the Buick truthfully].

Croc said Lucerne interior isn't befitting of what a Buick should be, and on that note I totally agree with. However, that just detracts from the overall experience of Lucerne, it doesn't make it a bad car by any stretch of imagination. A Buick interior should be more special in my mind, for the position they want to achieve. It's not enough to sway people from buying it, as evidenced by early sales numbers. I believe Lucerne will keep the momentum going well into next year, and when the Enclave comes around, the two cars will help keep Buick alive, and give it a much higher class image.

EDIT: bolded content

I agree also. As evidenced by the number of C&G'ers here who don't mind the interior, I think it'll sell just fine, as befits a sucessor to the popular LeSabre. However, I have trouble believing that Buick will gain new conquest buyers with the Lucerne, either by offering something new or doing the Buick heritage proud. Based on what GM had to begin with, I'd say it's a competent car, though hardly a significant stand-out in the market. In this respect, the Lucerne really reminds me of (sorry Cananopie!) the last-gen Acura RL.

But if you put all this in perspective, the Lucerne really does speak volumes. It's the transition car that proves GM can indeed build competent, tasteful, and well-assembled vehicles. Now it's time to use the creativity and passion that drove them in the '60s.

Edited February 11, 2006 by empowah

[Cananopie]

A Buick interior should be more special in my mind, for the position they want to achieve. It's not enough to sway people from buying it, as evidenced by early sales numbers.

"More special" is way way different than "5 years ago" interior. The main argument against your stand is that you say this car isn't a good current competitor. You're dancing around the topic saying things on how you understand how your special taste won't influence most buys but that the interior should be that one step ahead of the rest... I'll admit it isn't totally and completely above the rest and I'll admit I'd like to see it there, but there are some aspects of the interior that are above the competition, there are some aspects equal, and few aspects that are lower... but it is a currently competitive interior that rivals the Avalon... not behind it. That is the main point you dance around when people disagree with you.

So is it a competitive interior or is it a throwback 5 years interior? Above and beyond all competition would be nice to see from Buick, thats obvious. But that is hard for any company to do otherwise they'd all do it. But to call it dated that is competitive to vehicles 5 years ago is an atrocity.

I'm not saying this to just pick on you exclusively but this cliched bashing needs to end on Buick- not just from you but from everyone who just feels it's a gimme to say crap like that. Buck is current. The Lucerne is very current and competitive with all other current and competitive vehicles in its class. If you really find something that makes it so bad that it is only competitive to 5 years ago be prepared to have to fully justify it.

[pow]

So is it a competitive interior or is it a throwback 5 years interior? Above and beyond all competition would be nice to see from Buick, thats obvious. But that is hard for any company to do otherwise they'd all do it. But to call it dated that is competitive to vehicles 5 years ago is an atrocity.

I can't speak for turbo, but to me, the inspiration and design of the Lucerne interior is five years behind. But looks aren't everything to everyone; the Lucerne is competitive enough "technically" (as in quality or equipment) regardless of design.

'06 Lucerne vs. '01 Passat:

Other manufacturers have moved on, IMO.

[turbo200]

I can't speak for turbo, but to me, the inspiration and design of the Lucerne interior is five years behind. But looks aren't everything to everyone; the Lucerne is competitive enough "technically" (as in quality or equipment) regardless of design.

'06 Lucerne vs. '01 Passat:

Other manufacturers have moved on, IMO.

that's exactly what I was thinking.

[razoredge]

Whats with the "moved on", what was "moved on" to ?

GM "moved on" from the interior in my 97 but guess what ? I like the 97 better overall. So much for "moving on"

I also believe the Lucerne very much stands out in the crowd

There is a few stand out cars out there now and the Lucerne is one of them, in fact GM has quite a few......but then they always have !

[pow]

Whats with the "moved on", what was "moved on" to ?

Just like architecture or fashion or music... "moved on" to newer trends.

[jry]

i think we are going to get to the point where there isn't going to be much more that you can do with interior, and more specifically, dash design.

[balthazar]

'06 Lucerne:

'06 passat:

'01 passat:

Frankly, I don't see any "moving on" twixt '01 & '06.

[buickguy]

Volkswagen needs to worry about other things than interiors.

Have you seen the latest JD Power Dependability surveys?

VW has fallen to below average.

[razoredge]

look how narrow the foot area of the Passat is !

The newer Passat interior looks to have gone back to the narrow band separating the upper and lower, similar to our LSS........however back then the LSS, Aurora and Riviera used a wrap around into the door.......a very nice touch in my opinion. Our 89 NYer even had it.

There both using foolish slalom run steering wheel....but the new VW wheel is very, non sexy ! I do like the location of the controls ......however

Im not crazy about any of the arm rests I have seen

shifter in VW does nothing for me

Hmm ?

Damn

that

Lucerne

is one nice Buick !

[Cananopie]

The '01 Passat is obviously behind the Lucerne and the '06 Passat and the Lucerne I say are right on par with each other. No navigation system yet to compare it to but overall I'd say both the Passat and the Lucerne have very nice and competitive interiors.

I think I've made my point with the agreement of a few other people on the fact that the Lucerne is most definitely competitive with todays "moved on" designs as much as the next vehicle. There are just way too many people who have reviewed in magazines and newspapers as well as people right here in C&G that definitely do not agree with this "5 years behind" idea. And there are nit-picky, non-fact-based opinions that seem to be driving this idea. If one person could point out "Look, this reason right here is a factual reason why the interior is so dated" but there have only been about two or three very opinionated reasons on why the Lucerne isn't competitive.

In my personal opinion the interior of the Avalon is too cluttered all in the center and the lame futuristic minimalism is everywhere else on the front. It looks cold and unwelcoming. But it is most definitely competitive. The difference is I don't let my opinion weigh on the quality and currentness of the vehicle. I don't need my vehicles to be done in some goofy crazy new way every time they're made.

I don't know if it's because some people believe Toyota SETS the standard and Buick has to come as close to Toyota as possible without ripping it off for the interior in order for it to be good or if some people are just really intolerant to a little difference in design but I say it's clearly obvious the Lucerne is competitive.

But I am tired of repeating myself. There is no obvious correlation between the 01 Passat or the old Acura RL and the Lucerne. These are just feelings a couple of you are getting about the vehicle... which is totally fine but that doesn't qualify it as dated.

[Cory Wolfe]

Since being competitive now seems to be a hot topic... I'll just say that I've never said it wasn't competitive, just that the design and some materials are lacking. Was there anything wrong with it? Other than my typical way of making that clear...? And my annoyance with Razor...? Or anything thing else like that...?

[62impala]

Wow... quite a boisterous forum for a car that so many apparently don't like all that much...

I am a total GM guy, usually a Chevy buyer -- I have an '05 Tahoe and an '04 Impala LS. I've been thinking about replacing my Impala with either an '06 Impala SS, or a new Lucerne, so I drove a Lucerne this week, and here are my impressions.

First, the exterior: for a Buick, this is a very aggresively styled 4 door sedan; the rear doors remind me a bit of the Infiniti G35, and it really looks like quite the sporty sedan. I drove a white top of the line CXL with the V8. I really like the look and the size of this car over the Impala, and that is really saying something for me...

The interior? It is OK... although not all that different from the Impala in terms of switchgear and positioning of the gauges, audio and climate controls. I really did not care for the black plastic trim around the center stack; even the Impala in its base model (that sells for under $20K) offers wood trim around the center stack. The overall design of the instrument panel is a bit uninspired, but not unattractive; so I was a bit disappointed in the view from the driver's seat.

The seats themselves are very comfortable and more substantial than the Impala, which you would expect from a premium GM sedan; I LOVED the air conditioned seat option; lots of rear legroom, and the perforated leather appears fairly uplevel. The car I drove had the ebony interior package, which I don't care for all that much; I think the camel/beige looks much better on a white car. It is quiet in there, more so than the Chevy; at my stage of life (53), I like that in a car...

The ride was great; on the level of a Cadillac, but not floaty or giggly at all; the acceleration of the V8 was fine but not anywhere close to the 327 in the new Impala SS (which is an absolute rocketship). Why didn't Buick use the same engine in the Lucerne?

My lasting impression of the new Lucerne was that of a really refined premium, full-size American sedan; some details, especially in the interior, could use a bit of attention; otherwise I was very favorably impressed by this new Buick.

Edited February 12, 2006 by 62impala

[pow]

The '01 Passat is obviously behind the Lucerne and the '06 Passat and the Lucerne I say are right on par with each other. No navigation system yet to compare it to but overall I'd say both the Passat and the Lucerne have very nice and competitive interiors.

I think I've made my point with the agreement of a few other people on the fact that the Lucerne is most definitely competitive with todays "moved on" designs as much as the next vehicle. There are just way too many people who have reviewed in magazines and newspapers as well as people right here in C&G that definitely do not agree with this "5 years behind" idea. And there are nit-picky, non-fact-based opinions that seem to be driving this idea. If one person could point out "Look, this reason right here is a factual reason why the interior is so dated" but there have only been about two or three very opinionated reasons on why the Lucerne isn't competitive.

In my personal opinion the interior of the Avalon is too cluttered all in the center and the lame futuristic minimalism is everywhere else on the front. It looks cold and unwelcoming. But it is most definitely competitive. The difference is I don't let my opinion weigh on the quality and currentness of the vehicle. I don't need my vehicles to be done in some goofy crazy new way every time they're made.

I don't know if it's because some people believe Toyota SETS the standard and Buick has to come as close to Toyota as possible without ripping it off for the interior in order for it to be good or if some people are just really intolerant to a little difference in design  but I say it's clearly obvious the Lucerne is competitive.

But I am tired of repeating myself. There is no obvious correlation between the 01 Passat or the old Acura RL and the Lucerne. These are just feelings a couple of you are getting about the vehicle... which is totally fine but that doesn't qualify it as dated.

We agree to disagree. The Lucerne is a competent car that's homely in design but nevertheless competitive.

[ponchoman49]

I actually sat in both a 2005 Lesabre Limited with a tan interior and a 2006 Lucerne CXL 3800. I was very surprised to find myself liking the LeSabres dash and door panal material better than the Lucernes. Everything from the lower portion of the dash to the passenger side to the top part and even the glovebox and door panals had a much more pleasing finer grain and it was all soft touch material that pushed in slightly when touched. In contrast the Lucerne's dash was hard course grain plastic in most of the same areas with that black center stack that looks at odds with everything else. I did like the woodgrain better in the Lucerne and the guages themselves were nicer but I really wish Buick had carried over the previous finer grain soft touch dash pad covering. I also wish the passenger side of the dash was broken up with two tone or some kind of speration line. The 06 Impala suffers this too.

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

Looked at one in a dealership today...

It's a GREAT car! Can't see why anyone would criticize (Unless they wanted to nit pick) But, that said, it could be nicer.

(And yes, criticizing and improvement are 2 different things)

[The O.C.]

The tilt column thing seemed absurdly nit-picky to me..  I think my Jeep only has 5 positions...I didn't realize any car had more than that.

I don't see any Camry, but I see a lot of Passat in the C-pillars and tail.  The front would look better without a different headlight treatment, IMHO.... something more horizontal would look better...(and wider Buick taillights).

Newer tilt systems have infinite adjustment.....not 5 separate settings......

That's one of the reasons many of us on here would like to see power tilt-and-telescope.....and even the clumsy manual versions (where you "unlatch" the wheel then move it and then "relatch" it) offer infinite adjustments....

Personally, for a manual system, I don't mind GM's tilt mechanisms.....but they are not as convenient as a power t&t.

[The O.C.]

I've sat in a Lucerne and the materials are fairly high quality. $60k plus "high quality" materials? No. But thats because the car is friggen $25k starting. Did you forget that? The materials are the best you're going to get in that price range.

Not even close......and not even the best you can get at $25K.

Hell, LaCrosse has overall nicer materials....and soft-touch.

[The O.C.]

By "better materials" in the Fusion you obviously didn't mean that their plastic is any "softer" than the Lucerne's plastic because it's either equal or harder in feel. The Lucerne isn't "hard" plastic in the sense that it is a typical hard plastic, it is a softer plastic that bends and squishes to a degree throughout the whole vehicle. My 97 Skylark had hard plastic and it was very obvious, the Lucerne's plastic is higher quality material. The Fusion's plastics do not compare. You also didn't mean the black plastic surrounding the Fusion's HVAC is any higher in quality than the black plastic surrounding the Lucerne's I hope because they are both surrounded with black plastic. Now if you honestly find the design of the center console of the Fusion more inspiring you might not be a proper interior aficionado. There are very obvious reasons why the interior of the Lucerne far outclass the Fusion's and I think it pretty rude and ridiculous to keep classing it with vehicles like 5 or 10 years ago.

Aside from the fact that you could probably fit a pen inside the gaps in the Fusion and they're practically invisible in the Lucerne, their center console is as dull as it gets with undoubtably lesser refinement on every last thing in there. The Fusion shifter is a joke while the Lucerne's is very classy looking. You might not find it your style since a lot of interior is subjective but it is definitely not surpassed by the Fusion's interior as you are claiming. But even if you want to defy all that EVEN Car and Driver, The USA Today, and almost every other reviewer on the vehicle all admit the interior is above par in quality. Car and Driver even had to break down to admit it and obviously since they're comparing the Lucerne to a 90s Camry (see page 2 of this thread if you forgot what they were comparing it to) you know they wouldn't have given credit for the interior if it wasn't due.

This is nothing to you personally but people need to seriously stop throwing Buick to five years ago, for your instance in particular the pictures alone just prove the Lucerne outclasses the Fusion with a glance. It is a current vehicle and it is a competitive vehicle and everybody needs to accept that. I don't like Toyota vehicles but I accept that they are a competitor even though their quality isn't as good as Buick's anymore. The Avalon isn't something I'm going to dismiss as a poor vehicle and neither should the Lucerne to those of you who typically find Asian cars more attractive.

Styling, especially interiors, are very much a subjective issue. To keep downing the Lucerne as throwback vehicle to where they were 5 years ago is ridiculous. I guess luxury isn't quieter than Lexuses, I guess luxury isn't some of the tightest gaps in the industry, I guess luxury isn't a smooth finish that is obviously apparent in the picture above where the Fusion is not. I'm not saying the Fusion is a bad vehicle, because it's not... but it is not near in quality to the Lucerne and thats obvious. It's even more obvious in the seating, power, reliability, and options that the Fusion don't offer. Get realistic with your comparisons. The Fusion holds nothing to the Lucerne. You want to say the Avalon's a better vehicle? That's a judgement call and I won't find it something worth arguing against because they're both on the same level. But don't get foolish and compare it with something so ridiculous. If the Lucerne isn't your type, that's fine, but don't just trash it with unfounded claims comparing it to a vehicle thats at its best $5k less than the Lucerne's worst.

You are a Buick man so I figured you'd know.....

Lucerne has TONS of hard, tacky plastic all over the dash......it's all the part below the woodgrain......it isn't shiny, and looks good IF you don't ever touch it. BUT it's hollow and brittle when you do.

Fusion has very LITTLE hard plastic anywhere I've looked....

People's claims on here aren't "unfounded." Hard plastic is a FACT. NOW, there can be differing opinions on the success of the quality of the interior, but hard plastic is hard plastic.

And the fact is, Lucerne doesn't match up to just about any $20K-$25K sedan....much less sedans costing upwards of $40K.

BTW....I LIKE the look of the Lucerne interior....the gauges....the fake woodgrain.....and I LOVE the new center stack controls that are MUCH superior for GM (compared to the stuff in Malibu, G6, Cobalt...and the controls in LaCrosse.)

I just think the finish and plastics suck royally.

[The O.C.]

just so you know Cananopie that wasn't a dig at you, or others here, and I don't think you've sat in both....I was just highlighting how I thought empowah is a pretty constructive, objective person.

Empowah IS objective.....very true.

And you know, DTS is ALOT better. They carry the nicely-grained soft touch stuff from the top all the way down the dash in the DTS and JUST doing that makes a HUGE impression.

Plus, you don't have that hard stuff all over the console like you do in Lucerne (where your hands/arms tend the lean and touch when you are driving.)

To me, GM's decision in what materials to use in these two cars just SMACKS of "....we have to put lesser materials in the "Buick" in order to protect the heirarchy of the "Cadillac"...."

That kind of old-school GM-thinking is complete GARBAGE.

[The O.C.]

[*]No one has commented that this reviewer received the same 0-60 time in the Lucerne V8 as Edmunds received in the "much lighter" (400 lbs lighter) Avalon with its 5-spd automatic. So performance benefit of the Avalon over the Lucerne is a wash.

Let's compare C&D test results for Lucerne and Avalon since that will be WAY more consistent....eh?

0-60.....Lucerne, 6.9secs. Avalon, 6.0secs. In fact, LaCrosse CXS, 7.0secs (close to V8 Lucerne.)

1/4mile.....Lucerne, 15.3@94. Avalon, 14.6@99. LaCrosse, 15.4@92.

HERE's the argument about Lucerne's relative lack-of-torque.......

Street smart 5-60mph.......Lucerne, 7.4secs. Avalon, 6.2secs. LaCrosse, 7.6secs.

SO....performance is not a "wash." A V8 Lucerne needs much more grunt than this.

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

Let's compare C&D test results for Lucerne and Avalon since that will be WAY more consistent....eh?

0-60.....Lucerne, 6.9secs.  Avalon, 6.0secs.  In fact, LaCrosse CXS, 7.0secs (close to V8 Lucerne.)

1/4mile.....Lucerne, 15.3@94.  Avalon, 14.6@99.  LaCrosse, 15.4@92.

HERE's the argument about Lucerne's relative lack-of-torque.......

Street smart 5-60mph.......Lucerne, 7.4secs.  Avalon, 6.2secs.  LaCrosse, 7.6secs.

SO....performance is not a "wash."  A V8 Lucerne needs much more grunt than this.

It DOES seem that this detuned version of the Northstar is more for refinement and novelty than anything else in this particular application...

Oh well, maybe it was a compromise... Afterall, we wouldn't want top of the line Lucerne's tooling around with 195hp OHV V6's

[Cananopie]

Fusion has very LITTLE hard plastic anywhere I've looked....

I see you've taken an all-out assault to try and revive this dead argument with 5 seperate rebukes. I'm not upset or anything but I still think it pretty much stands that the Lucerne is competitive.

Whatever you want to say about the Lucerne interior is very nit-picky because overall it has been a widely praised interior. If the plastic was softer but the gaps were wider then you'd probably be arguing that the Avalon is far better because the gaps in the Lucerne are wider and doesn't have the same precisional quality of the Avalon.

Of course I can't prove that but that's the feeling i get. I quoted your comment on the Fusion because I've recently been in one of a friends and the soft plastic, especially around the HVAC area (which is similar to a VW Golf I was recently in) permanantly scratches if your nail hits it.

Now if that's the kind of material you believe is quality material we obviously have different viewpoints. I was not uncomfortable in the slightest when I was in the Lucerne with any of the plastic and nothing felt cheap to me and that had a lot to do with having some of the tightest gaps in the industry. It was solid so that means it's most definitely not brittle. Brittle is something that you fear is going to fall apart. I suggest you get in to some other vehicles below $20k to find truly cheap plastic.

Once again your defense is mostly nit-picking. You complain about the Lucerne performance but ignore the engine refinement. You ignore things like the Magnetic Ride control which were only available on extremely high-end GM vehicles before this. You ignore that Buick has some of the tightest gaps in the industry and you ignore that it is quieter than Lexuses. Had any of your complaints been tended to instead of these things you would call the Lucerne an inferior vehicle for missing what it is leading in. The Avalon isn't inferior for not having the same engine refinement as the Lucerne? The Avalon is still just as great of a car with larger gaps? The Avalon is louder than the Lucerne but that has no bearing in its competitiveness? The Avalon does not have the room the Lucerne provides... yet thats easily overlooked when the Lucerne is better.

There are many places where the Lucerne excels and the Avalon falls short. The point is they are both current and competitive vehicles. No doubt it'd be nice to see a bit more of an edge in the Lucerne for power... but does that break the vehicle? No. Neither does the plastic being used. If you believe the Lucerne still isn't competitve in its price-range then you are just in the overwhelming minority.

Edited February 15, 2006 by Cananopie

[Flybrian]

and even the clumsy manual versions (where you "unlatch" the wheel then move it and then "relatch" it) offer infinite adjustments....

God help me if any more GM cars get this feature. I hate that its on the Malibu and I hated it on every other car I've ever sat in. Its such a pain the the ass and requires two hand and the car being at a full and complete stop if you want to adjust the tilt of the wheel. I don't care if I had three adjustments, I'd take a notched wheel over this. Agreed that tilt-'n'-telescope should be an option on CXL and std on CXS, though, since the Caddy has this feature.

[pow]

God help me if any more GM cars get this feature. I hate that its on the Malibu and I hated it on every other car I've ever sat in. Its such a pain the the ass and requires two hand and the car being at a full and complete stop if you want to adjust the tilt of the wheel. I don't care if I had three adjustments, I'd take a notched wheel over this. Agreed that tilt-'n'-telescope should be an option on CXL and std on CXS, though, since the Caddy has this feature.

It's a perception thing... having the steering wheel fly up when you push down on the lever is kinda cheap feeling.

Oops, I "nitpicked."

[gm_rocks]

It's a perception thing... having the steering wheel fly up when you push down on the lever is kinda cheap feeling.

Oops, I "nitpicked." 

Well I guess you're allowed to..lol

I'm actually thinking about buying a Lucerne CXL V6, I believe I will be going to the dealer Saturday to test drive it.

There are things that I do think should be on the Lucerne, but hey anything on that is a lot better than my current 1997 Grand Prix, so I guess I could live with it

Even though there is things to nitpick, there is things to say.. wow.. that is a nice feature.

How many cars have a remote starter that can turn on the a/c or heat depending on the outside temp, have heated and ventilated seats, have memory settings, have rainsense wipers with heated washer fluid?

Of course the answer would be other cars like the Avalon, Cadillac's , etc.. but even an Avalon lacks some features the Lucerne has.

I think are some things to nickpick about, but overall it is a great car

Edited February 16, 2006 by gm_rocks

[turbo200]

I see you've taken an all-out assault to try and revive this dead argument with 5 seperate rebukes. I'm not upset or anything but I still think it pretty much stands that the Lucerne is competitive.

Whatever you want to say about the Lucerne interior is very nit-picky because overall it has been a widely praised interior. If the plastic was softer but the gaps were wider then you'd probably be arguing that the Avalon is far better because the gaps in the Lucerne are wider and doesn't have the same precisional quality of the Avalon.

Of course I can't prove that but that's the feeling i get. I quoted your comment on the Fusion because I've recently been in one of a friends and the soft plastic, especially around the HVAC area (which is similar to a VW Golf I was recently in) permanantly scratches if your nail hits it.

Now if that's the kind of material you believe is quality material we obviously have different viewpoints. I was not uncomfortable in the slightest when I was in the Lucerne with any of the plastic and nothing felt cheap to me and that had a lot to do with having some of the tightest gaps in the industry. It was solid so that means it's most definitely not brittle. Brittle is something that you fear is going to fall apart. I suggest you get in to some other vehicles below $20k to find truly cheap plastic.

Once again your defense is mostly nit-picking. You complain about the Lucerne performance but ignore the engine refinement. You ignore things like the Magnetic Ride control which were only available on extremely high-end GM vehicles before this. You ignore that Buick has some of the tightest gaps in the industry and you ignore that it is quieter than Lexuses. Had any of your complaints been tended to instead of these things you would call the Lucerne an inferior vehicle for missing what it is leading in. The Avalon isn't inferior for not having the same engine refinement as the Lucerne? The Avalon is still just as great of a car with larger gaps? The Avalon is louder than the Lucerne but that has no bearing in its competitiveness? The Avalon does not have the room the Lucerne provides... yet thats easily overlooked when the Lucerne is better.

There are many places where the Lucerne excels and the Avalon falls short. The point is they are both current and competitive vehicles. No doubt it'd be nice to see a bit more of an edge in the Lucerne for power... but does that break the vehicle? No. Neither does the plastic being used. If you believe the Lucerne still isn't competitve in its price-range then you are just in the overwhelming minority.

Let's get this straight. Lucerne is absolutely competent and competitive but falls short in a couple obvious ways. The same cannot be said for the Avalon.

You like to list a lot of little half-truths and half-baked facts that support your argument, but you refuse to look at the whole picture.

Tangent alert: the dash plastics that are being compared in the Fusion and the Lucerne are the dash pads. Not the plastic surrounding the HVAC controls. Not the plastic that houses the center stack. The plastic the covers the entire dash. In the Fusion, it is a soft vinyl plastic. In the Lucerne, it is coarse, rough to the touch, decidedly truckish in feel, and not up to the standards of the Avalon and many others in its class. You wanna talk cheap plastics, the Ridgeline has a dash padding that feels better than this. It's the same plastic that's in the Impala, and it is inexcusable.

I have already shared how I think this will affect sales, and I have also reiterated how this does not make Lucerne overall an uncompetitive vehicle, just obviously inferior in some areas.

OC does not ever say Lucerne is inferior to Avalon. I think you focus too much on one thing, and don't see the overall picture enough. Avalon may not be quietest vehicle in the world [to quote Razor, BFD], but it's a really quiet car, in fact all Toyotas are. Avalon lacks the refinement of NS? Don't think so. Avalon has a more advanced engine that manages to make similar power ratings and allows Avalon to achieve higher speeds much faster while saving gasoline. This is a BIG deal. Northstar is a sweet engine. But the Avalon's engine is nothing to sneeze at. Nothing. So that argument fails in my book. Avalon's engine wins by a couple seconds thanks to newer tech and better efficiency.

Tightest gaps? Why is this a revelation? GM should always have the tightest gaps in the segments they compete in. They're the number one company in the world, and this short-changing of customers needed to stop long ago. And the Avalon has tight gaps too, again no revelation.

Lucerne has more overall room. Ya, it's like 10 inches longer, at least, it better have more room.

Here's the big issue....when looking at the two cars and comparing objectively, there just aren't many places the Avalon falls short. To me, it's biggest fault is its exterior, which is subjective and many people don't care about design, though when they see something they like, they know they want it, and so a Buick with a nice design sells, or any other carmaker.

Can you list the flaws of the Avalon?

Avalon does not fall short in interior design, interior quality, engine refinement, engine tech, reliability, efficiency, driving dynamics......need I go on? It's an extremely extremely good car. Lucerne is also an extremely good car....unfortunately it does lag in some areas that are quite evident if you look objectively at the whole picture.

GM must win back market share to survive. And to stem the growth of the juggernaut Toyota. In order to do this, they must produce the best cars they can, no compromises. The Lucerne is still compromised in some very obvious ways. Does that mean it falls short of the Avalon? This should'nt even matter, GM has the goods to blow that car away, but they settled for being just good enough.

One final time: none of us says the Lucerne is uncompetitive, but what little flaws it does have are painfully obvious.

[The O.C.]

Once again your defense is mostly nit-picking. You complain about the Lucerne performance but ignore the engine refinement. You ignore things like the Magnetic Ride control which were only available on extremely high-end GM vehicles before this. You ignore that Buick has some of the tightest gaps in the industry and you ignore that it is quieter than Lexuses. Had any of your complaints been tended to instead of these things you would call the Lucerne an inferior vehicle for missing what it is leading in. The Avalon isn't inferior for not having the same engine refinement as the Lucerne? The Avalon is still just as great of a car with larger gaps? The Avalon is louder than the Lucerne but that has no bearing in its competitiveness? The Avalon does not have the room the Lucerne provides... yet thats easily overlooked when the Lucerne is better.

There are many places where the Lucerne excels and the Avalon falls short. The point is they are both current and competitive vehicles. No doubt it'd be nice to see a bit more of an edge in the Lucerne for power... but does that break the vehicle? No. Neither does the plastic being used. If you believe the Lucerne still isn't competitve in its price-range then you are just in the overwhelming minority.

Please, please don't put words in my mouth. You say I "ignored" those things about Lucerne.

I didn't ignore ANYTHING. The topic in this thread I was responding to was interior quality.

No where did I ever say Lucerne wasn't a "good car" or that I didn't think it was "attractive" or "bad quality."

I happen to like the Lucerne and would even consider purchasing one if in the market for that type of car.

However, that doesn't change the fact that my opinion is that Buick/GM dropped the ball in interior style and quality. AND, constructive comments from MANY members on C&G SHOW that I am not in the "overwhelming minority."

Oh....and by the way....that Avalon V6 is every bit as refined, if not more, than the NorthStar....(and YES, I've been in both.)

[The O.C.]

God help me if any more GM cars get this feature. I hate that its on the Malibu and I hated it on every other car I've ever sat in. Its such a pain the the ass and requires two hand and the car being at a full and complete stop if you want to adjust the tilt of the wheel. I don't care if I had three adjustments, I'd take a notched wheel over this. Agreed that tilt-'n'-telescope should be an option on CXL and std on CXS, though, since the Caddy has this feature.

I'm with you that I hate the clumsiness of the action....but I love the infinite adjustability.

[pow]

Let's get this straight. Lucerne is absolutely competent and competitive but falls short in a couple obvious ways. The same cannot be said for the Avalon.

You like to list a lot of little half-truths and half-baked facts that support your argument, but you refuse to look at the whole picture.

Tangent alert: the dash plastics that are being compared in the Fusion and the Lucerne are the dash pads. Not the plastic surrounding the HVAC controls. Not the plastic that houses the center stack. The plastic the covers the entire dash. In the Fusion, it is a soft vinyl plastic. In the Lucerne, it is coarse, rough to the touch, decidedly truckish in feel, and not up to the standards of the Avalon and many others in its class. You wanna talk cheap plastics, the Ridgeline has a dash padding that feels better than this. It's the same plastic that's in the Impala, and it is inexcusable.

I have already shared how I think this will affect sales, and I have also reiterated how this does not make Lucerne overall an uncompetitive vehicle, just obviously inferior in some areas.

OC does not ever say Lucerne is inferior to Avalon. I think you focus too much on one thing, and don't see the overall picture enough. Avalon may not be quietest vehicle in the world [to quote Razor, BFD], but it's a really quiet car, in fact all Toyotas are. Avalon lacks the refinement of NS? Don't think so. Avalon has a more advanced engine that manages to make similar power ratings and allows Avalon to achieve higher speeds much faster while saving gasoline. This is a BIG deal. Northstar is a sweet engine. But the Avalon's engine is nothing to sneeze at. Nothing. So that argument fails in my book. Avalon's engine wins by a couple seconds thanks to newer tech and better efficiency.

Tightest gaps? Why is this a revelation? GM should always have the tightest gaps in the segments they compete in. They're the number one company in the world, and this short-changing of customers needed to stop long ago. And the Avalon has tight gaps too, again no revelation.

Lucerne has more overall room. Ya, it's like 10 inches longer, at least, it better have more room.

Here's the big issue....when looking at the two cars and comparing objectively, there just aren't many places the Avalon falls short. To me, it's biggest fault is its exterior, which is subjective and many people don't care about design, though when they see something they like, they know they want it, and so a Buick with a nice design sells, or any other carmaker.

Can you list the flaws of the Avalon?

Avalon does not fall short in interior design, interior quality, engine refinement, engine tech, reliability, efficiency, driving dynamics......need I go on? It's an extremely extremely good car. Lucerne is also an extremely good car....unfortunately it does lag in some areas that are quite evident if you look objectively at the whole picture.

GM must win back market share to survive. And to stem the growth of the juggernaut Toyota. In order to do this, they must produce the best cars they can, no compromises. The Lucerne is still compromised in some very obvious ways. Does that mean it falls short of the Avalon?  This should'nt even matter, GM has the goods to blow that car away, but they settled for being just good enough.

One final time: none of us says the Lucerne is uncompetitive, but what little flaws it does have are painfully obvious.

I can't agree with everything you said... the Avalon suffers from techno-silvery bits and a non-woven headliner, for instance. But my main issue with the Lucerne is that Buick set out to make it representative of the "new" GM, the revolutionary GM that will dispel myths and change perceptions. You can see it in their commercials and brochures and press releases. Yet the Lucerne carries on a few inexcusable bad habits, obvious cost-cutting traits like the low-budget materials. The Lucerne could have, should have been something revolutionary for GM.

[razoredge]

I like telescoping wheels, hell my 64 Alpine had one. I enjoyed it on my buddies C5. Long legs and I put the seat back but I like the wheel closer, so Id use tele, Im sure.

I dont care about the lever action GM wheel, works great for me, but ya know........ya gotta keep up with the Jones. It only took me one try to know I didnt want to pull the lever without holding the wheel, sometimes it pays to get left behind. I drive with wheel pretty much down and need to raise it up to get out, its habit and I like it, its fast and handy and works for me.......especially those old two spoke 8:00 - 4:00 wheels

[razoredge]

I can't agree with everything you said... the Avalon suffers from techno-silvery bits and a non-woven headliner, for instance. But my main issue with the Lucerne is that Buick set out to make it representative of the "new" GM, the revolutionary GM that will dispel myths and change perceptions. You can see it in their commercials and brochures and press releases. Yet the Lucerne carries on a few inexcusable bad habits, obvious cost-cutting traits like the low-budget materials. The Lucerne could have, should have been something revolutionary for GM.

It cant be revolutionary using previous drivetrains and platforms. Its great for the next Buick, I mean wasnt the 00 LeSabre such a disappointment from at least the sheet metal aspect......though I do know people that liked it.....younger car people too......something about having a modern take on old chop top hotrods.......not for me. The revolutionary GII G body was the Aurora.........so how did that go ? I believe it also had all the interior layout appeal most seem to like.......so how did it go ?

Someone said something about Caddy having wheel feature and Buick not......this stems to another one of my comments, elsewhere, about coddling divisions and seemingly thinking they need to one up within the corporation.........this will kill divisions in these times. I believe another member has also said the DTS has these better materials, I can only ask......are the materials that much more expensive or is this more coddling ?

I think alot of people are going to miss the soft cushyness of the Park Avenue and Regency types or like the NYer's, where you sit in the seats and they form around you...........ahhhhhhh, so nice !