Lacrosse outsells Chrysler 300

[carlover23]

remember the LaCrosse likely as absurd sticker prices that are likely higher the 300 and need market adjustment.

I do think the Intrepid/Concorde/LHS/300 outsold the latest LX cars, but I would need to look that up again.

[post="8529"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

you're right they did, however, Intrepid/Concorde/LHS/300 had to sell at serious discounts. Used 300s with the 2.7 V6 are still selling close to sticker, at least around here in NJ/Philly. I like the LaCrosse, however, the fact that the backseat is smaller than the competition despite it being a longer vehicle is unacceptible. The fact that you can get a more fuel efficent Chevy Malibu/Impala with the same or more HP is crazy. Shouldn't buick be an upgrade over other Non-Cady GMs?

[VenSeattle]

Well, by upgrade do you mean bigger? or more powerful? In that case a Chevrolet Impala puts the regular Cadillac CTS to shame... but that's not the case. However, the Impala is also bigger than the LaCrosse and should have more interior space... the Malibu is just not in the same class as the LaCrosse. There's more to being a premium sedan than size or power. The LaCrosse comes with a longer warranty, more available features, and a quieter ride. I haven't been inside the Impala yet, but people are still complaining about the lack of quality materials and hard plastics (same with Malibu)... that's not the case in the LaCrosse. As for HP/fuel economy being an "upgrade" trademark... Luxury brands are the worst offenders in Gas Guzzling.

[razoredge]

If that Impala is a grade up from the Lacrosse there must be someting wrong with my taste buds. Looks, its simple, if you like the 300 you are going to put down the Lacrosse I guess, it seems quite obvious. If you like the Lacrosse the 300 is probably not for you. I briefly checked out a Charger today but it didnt excite me enough to get too involved in and I ignored the Magnum that sat beside it so theres your stimulation, either of those cars would require some viagra on my behalf and I am a drug free zone, so there. I did spend a long time crawling around a BMW 3 & 5 just to see what all the buzz was about. I see its a pretty expensive "buzz". I think there is alot of buzzing going on in this topic too. ;-) Bravo Lacrosse, lets see some more.

[Dsuupr]

With gas prices the way they are, I see this trend staying. Especially as Buick introduces nicer vehicles.

[Sixty8panther]

$29,000 for a LaCrosse is just laughable. I'm a huge GM fanatic but I would NEVER recomend a V6, FWD midsize car to anyone looking for a $25,000+ car. It's absurd.

[HarleyEarl]

The LaCrosse sure gets everyone's bloodpressure up lol.....who would have thought..

[Flybrian]

$29,000 for a LaCrosse is just laughable. I'm a huge GM fanatic but I would NEVER recomend a V6, FWD midsize car to anyone looking for a $25,000+ car. It's absurd.

[post="9810"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

You really need to look around at the marketplace more.

[VenSeattle]

$29,000 for a LaCrosse is just laughable. I'm a huge GM fanatic but I would NEVER recommend a V6, FWD midsize car to anyone looking for a $25,000+ car. It's absurd.

[post="9810"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Oh come on 68... the 2003 Regal GS had an MSRP of $28,235.00. The LaCrosse is superior in almost every way for about the same MSRP price.

Camries, Altimas, Accords etc can all go up to $27k-$30k+ when maxed out. The LaCrosse (with the employee discount) is perfectly priced to match the mentioned V6 competitors.

Even Chrysler's own FWD Sebring sedan maxes out at $27k. Now THAT is absurd. :rolleyes:

Here's my thing... There are obviously those on C&G who have 300/LX envy. Any vehicle/platform that doesn't equal that one car/platform is going to be a source of contention for them. Fact of the matter is, not everyone wants a 300 or Charger. Those people aren't stupid, ignorant, or dumb for wanting something other than a 300 or Charger. It's about taste and preference. Calling GM stupid for not discontinuing EVERY FWD VEHICLE to create a horde of RWD cars that compete against two sedans is also absurd. Main reason is the sales volume...

The 300, Magnum, & Charger "technically" have an exclusive market by being RWD. Although sales are good... they're not exceptional in the $20k-$35k market. In fact, for cars that range from $20k-$35k, their individual sales pale to several others. The 300 might sale 140k units this year... that's not spectacular. Sales should be much higher (and waiting lists runneth over) if that much demand for RWD vehicles were present. Basically, demand for the LX cars hasn't even exceeded the LH vehicles they replaced. If the LX vehicles can not exceed LH demand, then what type of market is there for RWD vehicles to compete in from Ford, GM, Toyota, Nissan, Honda, VW, Mitsubishi, Hyundai/Kia, etc...

Do you or any manufacturer want to rush out to join in dividing 300,000 annual sales between 15 different RWD vehicles competing from different manufacturers? True, there are the loyalists of each manufacturer (such as several GM fans here who want a 300/Charger but refuse to buy a Chrysler or other competitor's product) that are in the woodwork waiting for their favorite manufacturer to make a RWD sedan. BUT! GM has to figure out how many?

• Are those in the woodwork already willing buyers of current FWD vehicles? Mostly.
  
• Several of those who are not willing to buy a FWD GM vehicle have already bought a CTS or STS.
  
• There are some who can't afford a Cadillac and are holding out for a $20k-$30k RWD sedan.
  
• Many RWD GM fans just purchase pre-owned vehicles and are not going to purchase a new vehicle regardless if it’s RWD, FWD, or AWD.
  
• Then there are the GM fans who have already jumped ship and have bought a 300, Magnum, or Charger.

Tricky situation. Tricky to figure out the actual market potential for mainstream RWD vehicles. Tricky to determine how much is needed to spend on the project and then justify the expense.

A lot of the people here on C&G demand GM to build a RWD Chevrolet or Pontiac sedan with every conceivable feature available on Cadillac, BMW, or Mercedes and have it standard for around $20k. I'm telling you now: IT WILL NEVER HAPPEN! That's NOT a realistic expectation/demand at all! Even the 300 starts around $24,000 with manual A/C, 4-sp Automatic transmission, 4-speaker sound system, 190hp V6, and cloth seats. ABS, Traction Control, and Stability Control are still an extra charge (comes grouped in a Stability Control Program package)!

Not impressive at all for $24,000.00.

I’m personally a “new car” consumer that doesn’t really care if it’s FWD or RWD. I openly admit that I'm one of the reasons GM is hesitant to invest in a RWD platform for sedans. They know I'd be perfectly happy with a large sedan built on Chi (a rumored platform that is apparently an updated FWD/AWD version of the G-Platform.) Why go to the expense and create a new RWD architecture when you already have a good foundation (G-Platform) for vehicles that will continue to make your customers happy?

[Flybrian]

I have to agree with Ven. Also, its not as if the 300 is a paragon of automotive design. They scaled the whole car around a waffle iron grille. Take that away and what do you have? A generic, blocky sedan with a midgrade interior.

One also has to realize that this model year will see the highest number of LX sales ever. By the time the '06s start moving out, everyone who wants a 300 will have already purchased one.

[razoredge]

$29,000 for a LaCrosse is just laughable. I'm a huge GM fanatic but I would NEVER recomend a V6, FWD midsize car to anyone looking for a $25,000+ car. It's absurd.

[post="9810"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

and your reasoning for that is ???????????? because they cant do donuts in their family sedan????????????????because they cant turn .86G on skidpad?????????????because they cant do "low 14's" on Sunday????????????? because it will achieve 24 avg mpg rather than 19 ????????

Now really, what is laughable and absurd ?

I believe our LSS sold around $28,000 in 97, it lacks nothing BTW but Im sure somebody knows all of whats wrong with it. :rolleyes:

The STS sold around 40 just a few years ago, and Im sure somebody knows all of whats wrong with thoses cars too ??????

I mean I dont agree with 28,000 for any car
or 3.45 for any gas
or 300,000 for any house
or 1200 for any insurance
or 400 a month for school taxes

but.........

this is the new millinium..........the new global economy.........a new way of doing things........a way of changing the face of America..........

if I'd only realized the problems were as simple as FWD and V6's :unsure:

[turbo200]

razor, it's simple. the lacrosse is outdated. the proportions and space utilization are outdated. the interior is the equivalent of what was found in a last generation accord. in order to get a competitive engine you have to pony up for the CX package or just pay more (I'm talking about the 3.6L engine that still only has 225 hp and not enough mpgs, the 3.8 is outdated and not powerful/refined/sophisticated enough.) In order for GM to succeed in the new millenium they have to offer cars that not only match the competition but put them far ahead of the competition, and offer a measurable sense of classic American style that will make GMs even more desirable. This is the new millenium and there are far too many consumers unlike you who are more than willing consider imports, and they judge GM, rightfully, as being not built to the best standards. In many cases they are right. You, my friend, are biased towards GM. It's not a bad thing, but it is not condusive to intelligent arguments. You have to be open-minded, and you have to be willing to see things from different perspectives. Go out and drive, and enjoy, that's what we are all here for. By the way, nobody is demanding GM drop FWD cars in favor of RWD. The point all along has been to offer variety. RWD and AWD are where the real profit lies. They are for premium markets. Premium cars are designed with a more solid balanced platform in mind that can handle powerful engines. That's how I see the 300, and that is why it is such a resounding success. Nobody says GM should stop selling a Lcrosse-like vehicle for Buick with FWD and V6, however, we are asking for AWD and RWD and V8s and emotive styling. Is that too much to ask for?

[razoredge]

I dont think thats why people but Jap cars, sorry. They buy them because people like you tell them to. Tell them all about the percieved things. When I drive around in my SII powered cars I just have riceroni blowing me away at every oppertunity. Yarite ! And the RWD v8 powered American muscle just smokes me off every stop light and I never even knew we were racing. Ive just got to get it in my head every time I get in the car that Im racing. I dont know whats wrong with me. I think now would be a good time to bring back the 454/455 and 460 hell hows abouts a Cadillac 837 for good measure. No more, more , hows abouts a Caddy 982 with a overall lenght of 258", full frame, and made out of "real" sheet metal I hears there a good market for Riceroni V14's placed in cars with cheaply copied styling and more room in the rear cabin than your average limo. With all this going on theres no way Buick could ever have a "good enough" car. yarite Maybe I could get a job writing for the anti GM publications, I think Im catching on to how its done. Id like to say Im sorry for all the tounge in cheek attitude but I really am getting sick and tired of the BS. Im pretty sure all the top selling cars are so called enimic, bland, boring, cheap, and possibly FWD. I wish I wish upon a star A Kenworth grill upon my car.

[Cananopie]

razor, it's simple. the lacrosse is outdated. the proportions and space utilization are outdated. the interior is the equivalent of what was found in a last generation accord. in order to get a competitive engine you have to pony up for the CX package or just pay more (I'm talking about the 3.6L engine that still only has 225 hp and not enough mpgs, the 3.8 is outdated and not powerful/refined/sophisticated enough.) In order for GM to succeed in the new millenium they have to offer cars that not only match the competition but put them far ahead of the competition, and offer a measurable sense of classic American style that will make GMs even more desirable. This is the new millenium and there are far too many consumers unlike you who are more than willing consider imports, and they judge GM, rightfully, as being not built to the best standards. In many cases they are right. You, my friend, are biased towards GM. It's not a bad thing, but it is not condusive to intelligent arguments. You have to be open-minded, and you have to be willing to see things from different perspectives. Go out and drive, and enjoy, that's what we are all here for.
By the way, nobody is demanding GM drop FWD cars in favor of RWD. The point all along has been to offer variety. RWD and AWD are where the real profit lies. They are for premium markets. Premium cars are designed with a more solid balanced platform in mind that can handle powerful engines. That's how I see the 300, and that is why it is such a resounding success. Nobody says GM should stop selling a Lcrosse-like vehicle for Buick with FWD and V6, however, we are asking for AWD and RWD and V8s and emotive styling. Is that too much to ask for?

[post="10794"][/post]

Make sure what you're talking about first please. The interior is one of the best put together in the industry- better than any Honda, and comparable TO Lexus. Very tight. Very silent, also comparable to Lexus... oh... and these are things that come STANDARD with EVERY LaCrosse. That means people are paying $20,000 for this interior.

Please don't make broad, generalized statements without putting any facts behind them, "interior is the equivilant found on the last generation accord" makes no sense and you have no reason to back it up. Look for yourself

LaCrosse


Accord



Wow, you're right- the steering wheels in the same spot, the seats are in the same spot, you're making me see plenty of the 'similarites.'

And now the 3.6 is 240 horsepower, not your made-up, unresearched, 225 hp. And it's a celebrated refined engine. And on this Buick thread alone there have been many arguments about the pros and cons of the 3.8. Many of us are still fans- there is not one type of engine for all cars.

And you have the audacity to call razor bias toward GM when you first don't have your facts straight on the LaCrosse and that Buick IS actually one of the most quality vehicle makers according to JD Powers and other sources. Buick ranks up there always in the top 5 of best built, longest lasting vehicles- and yea- they're GM. Is all GM like that? No. But Buick is still around for a reason- a reason you refuse to even care about because you're bias against anything GM apparently.

Asking for something more different from Buick is fine. But ripping them apart without even knowing what they sell in a GM/Buick thread discussion is ridiculous. Don't just go marching in and yell at people who defend a different viewpoint than your own. It's obvious you were acting far too arrogant about Buick AND the LaCrosse. The LaCrosse is a quality vehicle- no it doesn't scream sports sedan and no it isn't the most exciting looking vehicle in a world that worships ricers.

Buick maintains style and class with their vehicles. They're not for everyone. Just please don't come in being another GM/Buick hater without any solid reasons... you don't like that Buick isn't the sportiest car company? Me neither-- but damnit they're good cars.

[turbo200]

You're right Canopie, I was being too broad when I attacked the interior of the Lacrosse. Most of the attributes you mentioned are right on--it does have a silent interior and it does all fit extremely well. I should have specified my problem with it, which is and always has been, that GM shoots too low with the materials and design. Take a look at that picture of the Accord and see how the center stack flows into the console so well. See how those oversized buttons look so high quality. Sit in an Accord and sit in a Lacrosse and you will see that there are some areas where the Lacrosse still falls short in terms of material quality. Keep this in mind: the Lacrosse is actually supposed to be from a higher class of cars, it's in a higher price range and is from a "premium" carmaker. Sit in those Accord seats and you'll know the Japs must also be freakin' massage therapists. Feel the door panels and they all feel solid and like they'll last forever. The stalks, buttons, panels, all feel like they are the right level of quality for this car. The Lacrosse is nice, and a lot of it is very high quality, but the design is still lacking, and the materials are still a step behind.

They got most everything right on the Lacrosse, I only wish a few things were different. My biggest problem is I wish it would have just started on a different platform--for me, even though it is overused, a highly differentiated and luxury-minded Epsilon would have been better. Or just introduce a whole new luxury platform for Buick--Buick deserves to respected and more exclusive than it is now. It deserves to be looked at by Lexus-intenders. That is not a deal breaker for me, however, because what they've done for the platform on the Lacrosse is excellent imo....The only thing I wish they would have worked on more is fixing the damn styling and design; the proportions on this car are silly and downright from the '80's. Maxima's proportion of the early '90's were better than this car. My next problem with the Buick is obviously the powertrains; there is no excuse for having a highly refined, technologically advanced and efficient engine in all Buicks. The 3800 is not that. Fine if they make it a base engine, but don't charge an arm and a leg for the 3.6--and definitely don't allow the uplevel engine to be less powerful and less efficient than the competitors or than a previous engine (3800SC). Again, this wouldn't be as big of a problem if other things were fixed. The interior and space utilization are my only other major problems with it. And the fact that it is dowdy and grandpa-looking. In fact, that's my biggest problem with it. If it didn't look like every other Buick, this car could have had a chance, but it does so it it doesn't.

I was definitely not yelling Canopie, and I do have a lot of knowledge on these cars, I don't just come in and read about Buick once in a blue moon. Everybody in this forum can tell you I am here nearly everday and I have an immense respect towards Buick and what they could be. Emphasis on "could"; as it stands whether you like it or not Buick makes not a damn thing that excites me. And we could have different opinions--it's not a bad thing. And it really doesn't bother me whatever misconceptions you or razor have of me. I'll just keep typing away....

Razor: People buy Jap cars because of thier reputations. That's it. It's as simple as that. You're right in thinking that thier cars are not something groundbreaking or amazingly better than American cars, but we've still got a lot of catching up to do. And I have seen the future for Japanese cars and we either better have some damn good wares or we better duck and cover because competition as disciplined as the Japs are won't let up ever, competition only intensifies and a fool underestimates the enemy.

I don't go telling people to buy Jap cars, otherwise I wouldn't be on here. I advise you to take a break, relax and get over thinking of me as your enemy, I'm only telling it like it is. And I do recommend Chevys, Pontiacs, Caddys, Saabs WHENEVER the opportunity comes up. I am also not going to lie to someone. Edited September 8, 2005 by turbo200

[enzl]

Make sure what you're talking about first please. The interior is one of the best put together in the industry- better than any Honda, and comparable TO Lexus. Very tight. Very silent, also comparable to Lexus... oh... and these are things that come STANDARD with EVERY LaCrosse. That means people are paying $20,000 for this interior.

Please don't make broad, generalized statements without putting any facts behind them, "interior is the equivilant found on the last generation accord" makes no sense and you have no reason to back it up. Look for yourself

LaCrosse


Accord

Wow, you're right- the steering wheels in the same spot, the seats are in the same spot, you're making me see plenty of the 'similarites.'

And now the 3.6 is 240 horsepower, not your made-up, unresearched, 225 hp. And it's a celebrated refined engine. And on this Buick thread alone there have been many arguments about the pros and cons of the 3.8. Many of us are still fans- there is not one type of engine for all cars.

And you have the audacity to call razor bias toward GM when you first don't have your facts straight on the LaCrosse and that Buick IS actually one of the most quality vehicle makers according to JD Powers and other sources. Buick ranks up there always in the top 5 of best built, longest lasting vehicles- and yea- they're GM. Is all GM like that? No. But Buick is still around for a reason- a reason you refuse to even care about because you're bias against anything GM apparently.

Asking for something more different from Buick is fine. But ripping them apart without even knowing what they sell in a GM/Buick thread discussion is ridiculous. Don't just go marching in and yell at people who defend a different viewpoint than your own. It's obvious you were acting far too arrogant about Buick AND the LaCrosse. The LaCrosse is a quality vehicle- no it doesn't scream sports sedan and no it isn't the most exciting looking vehicle in a world that worships ricers.

Buick maintains style and class with their vehicles. They're not for everyone. Just please don't come in being another GM/Buick hater without any solid reasons... you don't like that Buick isn't the sportiest car company? Me neither-- but damnit they're good cars.

[post="11055"][/post]

Couple of comments: 1. Stop drinking the GM kool-aid. It's affecting your judgement.

If you've ever been inside an Accord, its just a simple,,logical fact that the look, feel and design of the basics are more 'right' than the Buick LaCrosse. If you want to state that the Buick is a huge leap from where GM was before, I'd buy that.

If you simply analyzed it from the perspective of the average buyer, comparing vehicles based on MSRP (as most consumers do), you will find that your LaCrosse ends up being compared with vehicles in a different class than the Accord anyway, so, even if you're right about the relative merit of the interior and exterior fit, finish and design, it ends up being a moot point.

My livelihood depends upon GM producing decent products (although, to be honest, we sell other makes as well, though not in the same volume) and they are still not there...maybe the next generation, but as of right now, its just not there. I know this is something the other posters get upset about, but, unfortunately, its true. Vast improvements over their predecessors, absolutely. First rate and world class...no. That crown has been taken by others, so its time to buckle down, see the reality of a tough marketplace and be creative and bold. Rehashes of yesterday's product, no matter how good, are still behind the curve.

Buick needs to innovate, not imitate, and a cut-rate Lexus won't do! It's just not going to work, regardless of the apologists who stick their heads in the sand.

[HarleyEarl]

The LaCrosse to me is a Buick of the recent past. It's a good car in it's own right. But it's not where Buick should be. I want more form Buick. I've been in one with a black interior and it's very impressive. I like it. But it still comes across as a Regal with a better interior. I was hoping for more.

[caddycruiser]

This Lacrosse is MUCH better than what came before it, but like seems to be GM norm, still not even equal to a lot of the more distinguished competition. After sitting in and playing with things in almost every car at this year's Philly auto show, for instance, I just was NOT impressed by the Lacrosse. More solid than before? Absolutely. Better materials and fit than before? Sure, but still kind of a mix--nice door panel pieces, and some nice dash bits, but a terrible center stack, both from a materials and design standpoint.

Better than the Accord? NO way, not a chance. The interior design and shapes alone in the Honda are worlds ahead of the Buick, especially in higher end models.

The Lacrosse is not a bad car by any means, but more of a slightly pathetic stopgap than some people like to believe....overpriced, ungainly styled (from a lot of angles), cramped interior, a not so tasty mixture of interior materials and design, and old, gruff technology (think 3.8L, regardless of how many refinements it has gotten over the years).

But it still comes across as a Regal with a better interior. I was hoping for more.

That's a PERFECT way to describe the car. Fixes a lot of the excess cheapness of the Regal, but still really doesn't go far to even meet the more recognized competition.

The Lacrosse, along with most GM cars, really needs and should have been a "WOW!" kind of a car. Edited September 8, 2005 by caddycruiser

[buickguy]

I've driven both the Accord and the Lacrosse and the Buick blows away Honda. The Buick feels much more luxurious, and has some personality. The Accord looks like the Camry, yada, yada, yada. The two are not in the same league. Honda competes with Chevy, and Saturn and Pontiac. Honda's Acura brand competes with Buick.

[razoredge]

Its a 20-28000 thousand dollar car. Its Buicks lowest car for whatrever thats worth at this point in time. Hey Im sick of all this moulded plastic but apparently thats what the riceroni buyers wanted so GM is now making all molded plastic panels. In the 80's and up to 90/91 most interior panels in Buicks and Oldsmobiles were still padded or cushioned cloth. Id like to find a 90 Toyota or Honda that could compare with my 90 Regency or our 86 LeSabre Limited or my former 91 Regal Limited. Im still cruising in class and quality thats 19 and 15 years old. Then theirs our 97 LSS. Now I spent quite a bit of time crawling around inside both a new BMW 3__ and a 5__ and Ill tell you right now. They have some more modern features than our now 8 year old LSS but as for the interior they have nothing on that car, unless you want to talk features. Now Im not ignorant and I know there is a different level of suspension and powertrain refinement but these BMW's were very pricy. The 3__ would simply be no replacement for the LSS, its smaller and has less for a back seat. Then it has all the stupid molded plastic panels that are crap regardless of what car they come in. That stuff is just crap so dont go off on GM for following along with the crowd on moulded plastic crap. Plastic crap is plastic crap, can we agree on that ? Then the 5__ had was all plastic crap for interior panels to. The leather was no more of better than the LSS, and frankly nothing was. OUr LSS is a high level of car and its say one generation older than the Bonneville and LeSabre they just stomped so that makes it two. GM just spent a fortune on Saab, Fiat, killing Olds, Cadillac, Humjobs, and satanurine so damn them to hell for putting another Buick on the high selling W body. Well you know what ? Thats what they had left to work with and millions of W body owners probably dont mind that ya'll have a problem with it. In fact I cant think of current or previous W body owners that had all the problems with the W body that ya'll non W body owners have. Same for owners of cars powered by the 3.8. Is the latest Camry chassis really any different than the older Camry chassis ? Yarite ! I dont think any of us pro Buick or GM people said anything about Buick vrs Honda, I think that came from a Honda lover. I had a 75 or so Civic CVCC way back and that did it for me I have never looked at a Honda again and never will. Not just because I think they are crap but because I think I get damn good cars when I shop for well cared for Buicks and Oldsmobiles. I'll look no further because I will not drive riceroni to prove Im a yup yup yup yup yup yup yup yup yuppy ! I have over a million miles worth of 3.8 Buick powered Buicks and Oldsmobiles right here in my garage and they are still running with class and little plastic. But I wish I wish upon a star a big fat Kenworth grill upon my car.

[HarleyEarl]

Razoredge, I love your passion. And your sense of humor...lol.

[Cananopie]

turbo- I don't have anything against you in particular but there were too many broad generalizations you made for me to think you've been paying too much attention to the LaCrosse. I look at the Accord and try and see where you say Buick is emulating it but I just don't see it. The LaCrosse's interior is no more similar to that accord interior than the Ford Five Hundred or numerous other cars. You feel the Accords center stack flows into the console so well... I honestly have no idea what you're talking about. The LaCrosse interior just looks so much better to me and I can not see where you say it looks like a copycat of the Accord and in the past I say Buick used materials that were cheaper but I really think the LaCrosse interior looks a hell of a lot better than the Accord's. Those large buttons don't look high quality on the Accord, they make it look goofy in my opinion. There are interiors on other cars that I would say surpass the LaCrosses but that Accord is not one of them. Of course interior is a fairly large portion a matter of opinion. Opinions on what makes a seat comfortable etc etc are all just that- opinions. I have sat in neither the Accord or the LaCrosse and could not tell you which has a more comfortable seating arrangement- but even if I could that is just a matter of opinion. And maybe you could tell me what materials are in the LaCrosse that aren't as good as the Accord because I see very quality materials in the car. I honestly feel the LaCrosse is an incredibly classy car- especially when you can get one for in between $20k and $30k. Though it does run a couple grand higher than the Accord a lot of this "higher quality" that you don't believe is there, but I definitely see it there (once again, specifics please-- you agree with all the pros I gave but no specific cons on what materials are poor quality) you can get in LaCrosses cheaper than a decent portion of Accords. As for the platform it upsets a lot of people. But the Epsilon wouldn't be right for the LaCrosse, it's too small and it's a much lighter platform. A light Buick to me feels wrong. I'm not entirely sure whats wrong with the proportions, I like it- it has a longer look to it, most of the cars today, especially Japanese ones look very square. But I agree that the LaCrosse could've been more innovative looking- it's not a design miracle we all can agree but there are marketing reasons for this. In order for Buick to step forward and not die like Oldsmobile they need to not radically change their vehicles overnight. The LaCrosse is a good stepping stone for its next generation or replacement. I mean the average age of a Buick buyer was 70 only a couple years ago- You got to take it a few steps at a time, the conservative styling but improved everything else is worth it to keep Buick alive. Remember- they're treading on thin ice and I expect Buicks flagship to be the first Buick since 87 that people actually crave to own. I hope so at least. I'm 22 and you bet I was disappointed to see that the Lucerne only recieved 275 HP while the Impala SS, Monte SS, and Grand Prix (the Regals twin practically!) get 305 (I believe) and LaCrosse only got a 240 HP slower engine than the Regal. But the 3.6 is not the be-all end-all. I live in a very GM friendly area of the country and one of the few Buick dealers in the area said they aren't even ordering the CXS's because the engine is still too new and too unreliable. My parents are looking at buying one. Personally I disagree about the 3.6- I haven't heard any problems with it yet and its been out a couple years already. But the 3800 is arguably the best engine of all time, especially in my opinion. I had a car with a hair under 300,000 with that engine, my brother is on 250,000 with one LeSabre, and 200,000 with the other, My father is at 150,000 with his LeSabre and none had ever had one engine problem. Call it old fashioned but it's a damn good engine. If I could I'd always make it available on any Buick. And you're right- Buick needs more exclusivity and Buick also deserves a sports division because every other god damn GM company has a sports division. But for what the LaCrosse is aimed at right now it's not a bad car. It's no worse than any others in my opinion, and I feel I back it up pretty well. I'm a Buick man and I like Buick styling. It's even a step up from the square Impala or the rehashed Grand Prix. I am not a big fan of the back though- it is to GMized with the trunk that reminds me of the Cavalier and the tail lights that have no Buick character. Enzl- I don't drink GM kool-aid and if GM cuts Buick I will never by a GM again. That's a fact. I believe in my Buicks and trust in my Buicks and its a shame anytime GM needs to interfere with their quality, build, and style to save cash- because thats all GM is there to do is save cash. If you notice I almost post on no other GM thread. It's not that I don't like some GM vehicles outside of Buick- I do... but I also like other vehicles outside of GM- I've been impressed with Chryslers styling lately with the 300, Crossfire, and even the Pacifica, I also am a big fan of Nissan's styling with all their vehicles. But as you can read above our Buicks have been trustworthy, and they are unique vehicles that hit a part of the market I like. They're classy and they're not a dime-a-dozen. You can always expect quality with every Buick (aside from perhaps some of the late 80s/early 90s low end models such as the Skylark). I'm a Buick fan through and through for their quality, unique unabandoned history, and afforadability. GM can fuck themselves every time they deny Buick styling and power freedom. I'm sorry your best defense for the Accords interior is because it feels and looks more "right" but if you're basically telling me your opinion weighs more than mine you can stop drinking your high-horse kool-aid because that is getting to your head. Don't give me anything about bringing up the Accord being a "moot point," he compared the 2 in the first place, I just took it farther. And I agree Buick needs to innovate, not imitate- Buick was best at that in the past... but with the chokehold GM is putting on Buick right now making sure it's not too sporty for Pontiac, and doesn't cross into Saturn's new position taking over Oldsmobile, and giving Chevys as much options as Buicks, and making sure Buick doesn't compete in luxury or power with Cadillac leaves them in a pretty tight place. Buick should be allowed to show up any of those companies if they can't stay ahead, and Buick used to be allowed to if they so desired. Today it's all about not stepping on anyone elses toes under the GM umbrella... only it seems that nobody seems to care if the rest step on Buick's toes. Edited September 9, 2005 by Cananopie

[enzl]

Enzl- I don't drink GM kool-aid and if GM cuts Buick I will never by a GM again. That's a fact. I believe in my Buicks and trust in my Buicks and its a shame anytime GM needs to interfere with their quality, build, and style to save cash- because thats all GM is there to do is save cash. If you notice I almost post on no other GM thread. It's not that I don't like some GM vehicles outside of Buick- I do... but I also like other vehicles outside of GM- I've been impressed with Chryslers styling lately with the 300, Crossfire, and even the Pacifica, I also am a big fan of Nissan's styling with all their vehicles. But as you can read above our Buicks have been trustworthy, and they are unique vehicles that hit a part of the market I like. They're classy and they're not a dime-a-dozen. You can always expect quality with every Buick (aside from perhaps some of the late 80s/early 90s low end models such as the Skylark). I'm a Buick fan through and through for their quality, unique unabandoned history, and afforadability. GM can fuck themselves every time they deny Buick styling and power freedom.

I'm sorry your best defense for the Accords interior is because it feels and looks more "right" but if you're basically telling me your opinion weighs more than mine you can stop drinking your high-horse kool-aid because that is getting to your head. Don't give me anything about bringing up the Accord being a "moot point," he compared the 2 in the first place, I just took it farther. And I agree Buick needs to innovate, not imitate- Buick was best at that in the past... but with the chokehold GM is putting on Buick right now making sure it's not too sporty for Pontiac, and doesn't cross into Saturn's new position taking over Oldsmobile, and giving Chevys as much options as Buicks, and making sure Buick doesn't compete in luxury or power with Cadillac leaves them in a pretty tight place. Buick should be allowed to show up any of those companies if they can't stay ahead, and Buick used to be allowed to if they so desired. Today it's all about not stepping on anyone elses toes under the GM umbrella... only it seems that nobody seems to care if the rest step on Buick's toes.

[post="11646"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

[/quote]


First, I wholeheartedly agree that you are entitled to your opinion...that's what makes this board fun...however, I was not taking the Accord's 'side' (in fact, if you read my post carefully for ALL of its content, you would notice that I work for a co. that sells GM product!)

Now that that's out of the way...it seems we basically agree. Buick's product is not what is should or could be. I concede that many of the improvements have made the LaCrosse a vastly better car than its predecessor. I don't speak as a hater. I've been a car nut my whole life, I've owned or lived with 100's of vehicles, most used and from every manufacturer. I get a different car every 2 weeks from work, so I've literally seen it all. GM, Ford, Nissan, Chrysler, Hyundai and many others have some products that are sub-par: fit and finish, mechanical issues at low mileage, poor design and function, etc...

The LaCrosse is better than average in many areas: reliability (if past experience is a guide), good ride (if you're not pushing the car) and decent workmanship. But it leads its class in zero categories and is not roomy for its size (as an old architecture, it needs more room for tech, safety and structure to meet or exceed new standards), nor is the Taurus meets Sonata (old) meets Jag design fresh or interesting (although it is unoffensive).

Again, while your spirited defense of Buick is well intended (and respected on my part) it fails to acknowlege that the competition has moved on. The game is competitive and GM is just not getting it done. They wasted Billions on side projects and foreign jobs...it should have gone to a Buick equivalent of the Sigma architecture of Caddy or any one of a number of projects that would pull GM ahead of the pack instead of following the leader.

[Drew Dowdell]

$29,000 for a LaCrosse is just laughable. I'm a huge GM fanatic but I would NEVER recomend a V6, FWD midsize car to anyone looking for a $25,000+ car. It's absurd.

[post="9810"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Why? Given that budget, what would you want your mother to drive in a Boston winter? Keep in mind that she's probably not going to invest in snow tires, she's probably not the best in bad weather. I much rather have my mother is a relatively tame FWD car with decent stability, some luxury features, and good looks.

That's why I picked out a nice V6 Aurora, Hertz special for her. Fairly loaded for a V6 model, 6,000 miles, $26,000. It's a 2001 that she bought in 2002.

A LaX CXS would be a great replacement for her.

[Flybrian]

That's why I picked out a nice V6 Aurora, Hertz special for her. Fairly loaded for a V6 model, 6,000 miles, $26,000. It's a 2001 that she bought in 2002.

[post="11844"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

By Hertz special do you literally mean that?

Nice choice, by the way. :)

[Drew Dowdell]

Take a look at that picture of the Accord and see how the center stack flows into the console so well. See how those oversized buttons look so high quality. Sit in an Accord and sit in a Lacrosse and you will see that there are some areas where the Lacrosse still falls short in terms of material quality. Keep this in mind: the Lacrosse is actually supposed to be from a higher class of cars, it's in a higher price range and is from a "premium" carmaker. Sit in those Accord seats and you'll know the Japs must also be freakin' massage therapists. Feel the door panels and they all feel solid and like they'll last forever. The stalks, buttons, panels, all feel like they are the right level of quality for this car. The Lacrosse is nice, and a lot of it is very high quality, but the design is still lacking, and the materials are still a step behind.

[post="11082"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Are you doing any of your assesment of the LaX from actually sitting in one or spending any reasonable amount of time behind the wheel? The impression you are giving is that all your assesment is from those pictures.

I think you need to go twiddle the knobs in a LaX before compairing them to an Accord because they are one of the things on the LaX that made me think Audi. The center stack in the LaX does flow rather well. If you're going to go after a poor flowing stack from GM, feel free to attack my CTS for it, but the LaX shouldn't be on your hit list. The LaX does have softer seats, the accord has firmer ones. That is a personal preference thing. I don't find either seat particularly comfortable but I prefer the LaX to the Accord. One of the things that sold me on my CTS was that the seat felt like it was designed specifically for my butt.

[Drew Dowdell]

By Hertz special do you literally mean that?

Nice choice, by the way. :)

[post="11845"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Well Hertz/Avis/Alamo... it was one of those. I did all the negotiation 350 miles from the actual car. Got her a 6 year, 60,000 mile warrenty lumped in to boot.

[turbo200]

Now that that's out of the way...it seems we basically agree. Buick's product is not what is should or could be. I concede that many of the improvements have made the LaCrosse a vastly better car than its predecessor. I don't speak as a hater. I've been a car nut my whole life, I've owned or lived with 100's of vehicles, most used and from every manufacturer. I get a different car every 2 weeks from work, so I've literally seen it all. GM, Ford, Nissan, Chrysler, Hyundai and many others have some products that are sub-par: fit and finish, mechanical issues at low mileage, poor design and function, etc...

The LaCrosse is better than average in many areas: reliability (if past experience is a guide), good ride (if you're not pushing the car) and decent workmanship. But it leads its class in zero categories and is not roomy for its size (as an old architecture, it needs more room for tech, safety and structure to meet or exceed new standards), nor is the Taurus meets Sonata (old) meets Jag design fresh or interesting (although it is unoffensive).

Again, while your spirited defense of Buick is well intended (and respected on my part) it fails to acknowlege that the competition has moved on. The game is competitive and GM is just not getting it done. They wasted Billions on side projects and foreign jobs...it should have gone to a Buick equivalent of the Sigma architecture of Caddy or any one of a number of projects that would pull GM ahead of the pack instead of following the leader.

[post="11780"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Emphasis on this post. Thank you for putting it so eloquently, this is exactly how I feel about Buick and its cars.

[turbo200]

Are you doing any of your assesment of the LaX from actually sitting in one or spending any reasonable amount of time behind the wheel? The impression you are giving is that all your assesment is from those pictures.

I think you need to go twiddle the knobs in a LaX before compairing them to an Accord because they are one of the things on the LaX that made me think Audi.  The center stack in the LaX does flow rather well. If you're going to go after a poor flowing stack from GM, feel free to attack my CTS for it, but the LaX shouldn't be on your hit list.  The LaX does have softer seats, the accord has firmer ones. That is a personal preference thing.  I don't find either seat particularly comfortable but I prefer the LaX to the Accord.  One of the things that sold me on my CTS was that the seat felt like it was designed specifically for my butt.

[post="11847"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

I have spent time in both.

[Cananopie]

First, I wholeheartedly agree that you are entitled to your opinion...that's what makes this board fun...however, I was not taking the Accord's 'side' (in fact, if you read my post carefully for ALL of its content, you would notice that I work for a co. that sells GM product!)

Now that that's out of the way...it seems we basically agree. Buick's product is not what is should or could be. I concede that many of the improvements have made the LaCrosse a vastly better car than its predecessor. I don't speak as a hater. I've been a car nut my whole life, I've owned or lived with 100's of vehicles, most used and from every manufacturer. I get a different car every 2 weeks from work, so I've literally seen it all. GM, Ford, Nissan, Chrysler, Hyundai and many others have some products that are sub-par: fit and finish, mechanical issues at low mileage, poor design and function, etc...

The LaCrosse is better than average in many areas: reliability (if past experience is a guide), good ride (if you're not pushing the car) and decent workmanship. But it leads its class in zero categories and is not roomy for its size (as an old architecture, it needs more room for tech, safety and structure to meet or exceed new standards), nor is the Taurus meets Sonata (old) meets Jag design fresh or interesting (although it is unoffensive).

Again, while your spirited defense of Buick is well intended (and respected on my part) it fails to acknowlege that the competition has moved on. The game is competitive and GM is just not getting it done. They wasted Billions on side projects and foreign jobs...it should have gone to a Buick equivalent of the Sigma architecture of Caddy or any one of a number of projects that would pull GM ahead of the pack instead of following the leader.

[post="11780"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

[/quote]

I did notice you earned your revenue from GM when I did post but it does not change the fact that when most people say anything about Buick the first thing they have to say is always negative, always ignoring anything positive. I'm only spirited in my defense because the LaCrosse isn't a bad car, but you're right- it doesn't lead in anything. We do agree for the most part, but from what the Regal was to what the LaCrosse is to what the LaCrosse replacement should be I have no problem with the LaCrosse how it is now so long as they get a little more... interesting with the next version of the LaCrosse. Buick was heavily damaged in the last decade with the lack of care GM gave it... and the LaCrosse and Lucerne is no $3 billion worth of Buick product (what ever happened to that) but its the first time Buick has been able to lift up from the slow downward spiral they were taking. Giving the LaCrosse a million different options and types and extroverted chancy styling could've killed Buick-- like Oldsmobile. For what Buick is climbing out of it will be a slow journey because GM needs to recognize this company they've let alone and forgotten about for so long needs attention too. The LaCrosse was the first real step towards that and I'm proud of what Buick could do with it.

It's important to know that even though the LaCrosse doesnt lead in class in any particular thing, it has more than most every other car out there at the same time. The conservative styling and lack of excitement are its only real downpoints.

[The O.C.]

I think what Turbo200 is trying to say, and I agree wholeheartedly with him, is that the LaCrosse is an immense disappointment to many Buick/GM fans out there (he and I included) and he was citing some of the main reasons why..... outdated architecture leads to inefficient interior roominess compared to exterior bulk that same outdated architecture and suspension lends the LaCrosse a ride-and-handling compromise not as sophisticated as the competitors... outdated powertrain (3800 and 4-speed auto) leads to substandard driveability, refinement, fuel economy, performance. lack of a cohesively-designed interior that still fails to match the volume leaders in the midsize segment (specifically the Accord) in terms of fit-and-finish, knob and switch tactilability, and material quality. In the mind of many consumers, Buick does NOT play in a league ahead, certainly NOT Lexus, Acura, or Infiniti. If you look at TRANSACTION prices (Buick having far higher incentives than Honda for example) you are looking at comparable prices for the LaCrosse and most LX-and-higher-trim-level Accords.

[enzl]

I did notice you earned your revenue from GM when I did post but it does not change the fact that when most people say anything about Buick the first thing they have to say is always negative, always ignoring anything positive. I'm only spirited in my defense because the LaCrosse isn't a bad car, but you're right- it doesn't lead in anything. We do agree for the most part, but from what the Regal was to what the LaCrosse is to what the LaCrosse replacement should be I have no problem with the LaCrosse how it is now so long as they get a little more... interesting with the next version of the LaCrosse. Buick was heavily damaged in the last decade with the lack of care GM gave it... and the LaCrosse and Lucerne is no $3 billion worth of Buick product (what ever happened to that) but its the first time Buick has been able to lift up from the slow downward spiral they were taking. Giving the LaCrosse a million different options and types and extroverted chancy styling could've killed Buick-- like Oldsmobile. For what Buick is climbing out of it will be a slow journey because GM needs to recognize this company they've let alone and forgotten about for so long needs attention too. The LaCrosse was the first real step towards that and I'm proud of what Buick could do with it.

It's important to know that even though the LaCrosse doesnt lead in class in any particular thing, it has more than most every other car out there at the same time. The conservative styling and lack of excitement are its only real downpoints.

[post="11917"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

[/quote]


If it makes you feel any better, I/ve got plenty of negative things to say about a bunch of products out there...Buick does tend to get picked on, but it is the victim of being in the wrong place at the wrong time.

If Hyundai can become synonymous with thrifty quality in a matter of 5 years (ever sat in/driven a 2000 or earlier product of theirs? Avoid if possible.), I'm pretty sure Buick can get her mojo back.