Consumer Reports: Lucerne

[wildcat]

Consumer Reports magazine has reviewed the Buick Lucerne. To read the article, "First Look," click here.

[Paolino]

Interesting how some can call the 3.8L coarse and unrefined, and others can say it was smooth and quiet.

Also, I love the comparison of the 5 and 6 speed autos used in RWD Cadillacs to the 4-speed FWD tranny. Good one.

[DetroitNut90]

Here goes the OHV vs. OHC debate again...The 3.8 is a dead-reliable engine, so who really cares (besides CR) how the valvetrain is set up?

The Lucerne floats...no kidding! It's no one's M3, nor does it pretend to be.

The middle seat in the front bench is not really meant to be occupied for long distances, so why would GM put a 3-point belt there, and even if they wanted to, where would it fit?

And regarding the transmission: it shifts. It doesn't drop gears a la Camry did, and CR even says it shifts smoothly. So, why are they complaining? Yes, a 6-speed would be nice, but four gears are plenty to get you where you're going.

Sensless nitpicking if you ask me...

[buickguy]

Consumer Reports...probably owned by Toyota.

They lost their objectivity a long time ago.

[pow]

GM needs to improve their base models, particularly in the powertrain and suspension department. I'm sure the $37K CXS is nice, but the majority of consumers (and CR) go for the V-6.

Buick should replace the 3800 and Northstar with a sole 3.6 HF V6 and have CXS-quality suspension on all models, IMO.

Edited June 7, 2006 by empowah

[ocnblu]

Baloney, they need a V8 option in this car, even if it isn't a Northstar.

[CARBIZ]

A client of mine's husband died behind the wheel of their LeSabre last year on their way down to South Carolina. She was very fortunate that the LeSabre had 6 passenger seating because she was able to get her foot across the hump (no console) and apply the brake while fighting the steering wheel - something a 70 year old woman wouldn't be able to do if she had to hike her heels over the console!

There is something to be said for old geezers driving Buicks and Chevys with 6 passenger seating!

And, BTW, I never read CR any more - IRRELEVANT.

[Mr.Krinkle]

2 things that stuck out to me: a the cabin noise, as it has been proved one of if not the most quiet cabins around and b) the way they get that shot in the end with "it pales in comparison, unrefined or unpolished and not as good as anything else made by everyone else, BUT it is the best buick you can by.

why do they have to prove anything? it starts off listing their faults. not worked throughout the body of the review like everything else. its a blatantly biased attack, and quite repulsive.

if you ever need info about cars, check www.consumerguide.com

its much better and believe it or not more in line with actual objective reviews.

what jackasses.

[-Camaro-]

Consumer reports is a joke when it comes to cars.. I don't know about other appliances.

[The O.C.]

Here goes the OHV vs. OHC debate again...The 3.8 is a dead-reliable engine, so who really cares (besides CR) how the valvetrain is set up?

The Lucerne floats...no kidding! It's no one's M3, nor does it pretend to be.

The middle seat in the front bench is not really meant to be occupied for long distances, so why would GM put a 3-point belt there, and even if they wanted to, where would it fit?

And regarding the transmission: it shifts. It doesn't drop gears a la Camry did, and CR even says it shifts smoothly. So, why are they complaining? Yes, a 6-speed would be nice, but four gears are plenty to get you where you're going.

Sensless nitpicking if you ask me...

"Senseless Nitpicking."

The opinion of WAY too many GM executives and product planners for WAY too many years.

That's why GM is in the predicament that it is today.

[The O.C.]

Buick should replace the 3800 and Northstar with a sole 3.6 HF V6 and have CXS-quality suspension on all models, IMO.

BINGO!

While I'd still like the V8 option, I agree with you.

That's GM's M.O......the top level suspension/tire/wheel/brake package of most of their cars are really where the base car should be at.

[Snate]

I dunno...from my perspective the Lucerne's powertrains are a gigantic eyesore. Probably the only really big flaw of the car. The V8 is nice but I'm sure they could squeeze more power out of it and the V6 is pointless. No not because of its design but because it makes 197 hp in a 3800+ lb car. It should also at least have a 5 spd.

On the other hand, Buick's primary clientele is older people who I'm going to guess don't put much emphasize on performance. I'm not sure in these times whether a base V8 would sail well with them.

I won't criticize GM management too much because I'm sure they did the research. You can't always predict what people will buy. I thought the Scion brand would have flopped completely but I was wrong.

[ponchoman49]

The 3800 would have been somewhat acceptable in the base CX model only with it's 1995 power levels of 205 hp and 230 torque and 3.05:1 gears as used in the previous Park Aves with the base engine and Lesabres with the optional touring suspension. But the more expensive CXL V6 versions need a better more refined and powerful motor such as the 3.6. The fact that GM somehow managed to lose 8 hp and 3 lbs ft of torque in a newer series III engine is totally embarrasing to start with considering it puts out 200 hp and 230 torque in the smaller, cheaper LaCrosse and GP but to add insult to injury they made it the only V6 available in their top of the line car with only 2.86:1 gears available in a car that weights considerably more than the old LeSabre. What in the world were they thinking? And why does the V8 get such piss poor mileage? Any previous Devilles which are even heavier than the Lucerne that had the same 275 hp Northstar and 3.11:1 gears were rated at 27 highway and got it too! GM's mileage figures have gone down noticeably the past couple of years. Both of the Lucernes engines need a lot of work along with the outdated tranny. And why can't Buick make the CXL models with the same suspension as the CXS but with the smaller 17" tires?

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

Notice how... Since it's a GM vehicle, they handicapped it right out of the gate by opting for the V6 that they KNEW was inferior. It'll get the same generic YAWN rating that all GM's get in CR (Although they do reccommend the G6 now---That made me happy)

They bitch about "falling roof panels" That seems to be an import stalwart these days.

Then they limit the buyer base by saying: "It's the best BUICK on sale" (IMPLIED: If you're willing to sell your import loving soul for a paltry domestic)

Seriously though... The Lucerne NEEDS a better V6 and a better transmission to realize it's full potential.

Funn y there was no mention of the class leading safety... You'd think CR would want to exploit that. Oh, wait... Not in domestic land.

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

BINGO!

While I'd still like the V8 option, I agree with you.

That's GM's M.O......the top level suspension/tire/wheel/brake package of most of their cars are really where the base car should be at.

I couldn't agree more!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Prime example: Look at all of the Chevrolet SS cars.

[cavalier36]

Buick should replace the 3800 and Northstar with a sole 3.6 HF V6 and have CXS-quality suspension on all models, IMO.

why they dont use the 3.9L HV as the base engine in this car dont make sense to me.. still making the 3800 dont make much sense eiether.. its only used in three cars now, the lucerne, lacrosse and the grand prix.. I think we are seeing the 3800 being phased out.. 07 or 08 will probably be the end of the line for the 3800..

[enzl]

And why does the V8 get such piss poor mileage? Any previous Devilles which are even heavier than the Lucerne that had the same 275 hp Northstar and 3.11:1 gears were rated at 27 highway and got it too! GM's mileage figures have gone down noticeably the past couple of years. Both of the Lucernes engines need a lot of work along with the outdated tranny. And why can't Buick make the CXL models with the same suspension as the CXS but with the smaller 17" tires?

EPA changed the criteria for testing in the last few years. Real world results should be the same.

[evok]

EPA changed the criteria for testing in the last few years. Real world results should be the same.

No they have not. Testing is the same.

[VenSeattle]

No they have not.  Testing is the same.

The changes to EPA testing go into effect in 2008, correct?

[enzl]

The changes to EPA testing go into effect in 2008, correct?

Yes.

My bad. I just Googled it. '08 Model Year is when changes take place. I could have sworn I remember the old test numbers being downgraded by some percentage.

[ehaase]

I just wonder if the 3800 will continue in production until late 2010, when the next generation RWD Lucerne reportedly debuts.

[evok]

Ven/enzl: For CAFE, any EPA changes will no alter the results.

It is my understanding, any changes to "an" EPA MPG test in the EPA suite of tests will be for consumer information not CAFE.

[evok]

I just wonder if the 3800 will continue in production until late 2010, when the next generation RWD Lucerne reportedly debuts.

GM already announced the plant closure in 08 I think.

[trinacriabob]

Consumer Reports...probably owned by Toyota. 

They lost their objectivity a long time ago.

Funny. Probably so.

At any rate, does CR have the words "coarse and unrefined" on their clipboards. Deja vu.

When IS the 3800 going out of production, end of 2007 MY, end of 2008 MY... I need to snag me one. My 3800 Series I just turned over 225,000 miles yesterday so CR can go to hell.