Cananopie

A supercharger just isn't a reliable piece of any vehicle... it's made to push harder than it should be and I've heard of a common problem with the supercharged 3.8 but I don't know it offhand. I'm sure it's fairly reliable but not as reliable as the 3.8 NA.

Fly, I think you misunderstood what I wrote... I never gave the air pollution score of the 3.8 in the LaCrosse. I said the 3.6 burns about a half a ton more greenhouse gasses a year THAN the 3.8. Not that the 3.8 burns a half a ton of gasses... Is that what you meant? Because I never even gave the actual figures, just the difference in them.

Oh man! You must be in the shadows when I post. 2 seperate times you replied like immediately. I understand your concern but the 3.6 will bring in no more non-GM fans than the 3.8. That 40 extra HP isn't so extraordinary to bring in other customers. As I said the 3.8 adheres to SULEV standards and is actually slightly more fuel efficient than the 3.6 (miniscule, but still a fact), and it's reliable... the fact it keeps GM loyalists is just an added bonus to it. In fact, using the 3.6 as opposed to the 3.8 would just cause more environmental harm for Buick, according to fueleconomy.gov (yea, I didnt know it existed either) the 3.6 in the LaCrosse releases about a half a ton more greenhouse gasses than the 3.8. The Avalon only reaches ULEV standards but somehow releases less greenhouse gasses than the Lucerne or LaCrosse... this is probably because it has better gas mileage. Had we put the 3.6 standard in the LaCrosse and Lucerne they'd be producing about a ton more greenhouse gasses a year than the Avalon. It's obvious that GM needs to work on its gas mileage in its engines. But it's also obvious that Toyota isn't an environmental as they portray themselves having the 4Runner, Land Cruiser, Sequoia, Tacoma, and Tundra all being just as or more toxic than the Hummer H3. That is just an interesting piece of information for all those people who are solely hating on Hummer when Toyota is just as bad. I think it could work to Buick's advantage dropping the Rainier (which they are) and becoming a very clean car company. They don't have much farther to work towards that with DoD coming. They just need better fuel efficiency. However I maintain the move to the 3.6 would just evoke more and heavier criticisim.

No offense Zoom But I doubt the announcement debut of the production Velite would be on a childrens coloring page for Taiwanese Buick site. That's just a guess.

Decka, why'd you have to bring that up? The LaCrosse concept was by far my favorite Buick concept, even more than the Velite, and they never even really considered building it. And the current LaCrosse is a shame to share the same name as THAT LaCrosse. As far as I'm concerned, even if that LaCrosse was built today, nobody would ever talk crap about Buick again because they'd be afraid the REAL LaCrosse would jump out of woods and eat them. Because thats what cars like that do. They eat people. And who doesn't want to own one of those?

I understand what you're saying OC, but the only difference in our beliefs is I don't think ditching a very good engine is going to make people look twice. As you said it's the idea that GM isn't competitive... it's not what type of engines they use. Consider the arguments against the pushrod 3.8... people say it's outdated. Anyone who claims that you can argue all the points I gave above... But if you put the 3.6 in there as a replacement to rid of the argument of a dated engine you will lose the "fuel efficiency" argument because the Avalon for example can boast almost 270 HP and get better gas mileage than the 3.6 and with the 3.6 you don't have the argument of reliability and being a SULEV engine, GM just looks stupid. The 3.8 is still desirable to many people, and these are the people who are going to buy GM for sure. Trying to convince a Toyota lover that GM has desirable engines is like trying to convince a hardcore southern baptist that other peoples beliefs are just as valid as theirs (no offense to any hardcore southern baptists reading this post), but you best waste your time doing something more constructive is all. GM will have this image for a while and it won't go overnight... GM is doing a fair job in improving and competing with Asian brands. Buick has higher quality than Toyota now and the Lucerne, despite its not-as-fuel-efficient base engine is very comparable to the Avalon and many people who never considered Buick before are now because the quality rivals Toyota and the styling is getting to be better than Toyota. But the complaints will be there no matter what engine is there by the GM haters. But let's not ditch a reliable and clean engine just because of a complaint that isn't very necessary. I really would appreciate if someone could find how many engines reach SULEV requirements because they seem to be widely ignored but it could go real far with the people who are all pro-environment.

The Velite, Lucerne, LaCrosse, Rendezvous, Rainier, Terraza, Century, LeSabre, and Park Avenue all had waterfall grilles just to name a few. It's the idea that Buick needs vertical bars on the front of their vehicles to be considered a Buick... the Riviera and the Regal each had uniquely styled grilles without the vertical bars in the ovalesque shape. That's what we want to see- Buick creating new things, not just sticking with the old. (However I believe that there should always be at least a couple Buicks with a waterfall grille, it's not that it's ugly, I just want to see what else they can do)

If the DOD, 6 speed AT, and a scheduled hybrid the 5.3 liter engine not being there is the least of my concerns. Everything else is what will really draw people to look at Buick.

Honestly don't think the 3800 debate goes much farther beyond automobile enthusiasts. It's hard for us, as entusiasts, to look at a car the way a normal person looks at a car who sees it as a big deal and a part of their lives but not enough of a deal to get to the knitty gritty of how it works and what powers it or anything. However had a normal person do some research on their next car, and they see the stunningly beautiful Lucerne for example they may research it. I will find it hard that a make-or-break point will be the fact that the 3.8 is a pushrod engine... if they are buying it to last them at least 10 years they'll be happy to know the 3.8 is one of those engines that has stood the test of time and is highly renowned for its durability or quality. If they are looking for a car that gets them very good gas mileage because their biggest concern is fuel prices then Buick just isn't the company they should be looking at. Typically we give foreign cars the benefit of the doubt when it comes to engine reliability. No matter what the Asian's can not do wrong when it comes to reliability. But that is a mentality fromt he 80s and we are in a modern world now and the truth is GM has proof of their reliability with the 3800. The Avalon may be more powerful and fuel efficient with its base engine, but it isn't the same engine they were using a decade ago in the same vehicle. You might look at that as a positive thing but it questions its reliability, doesn't it? Plus the 3.6 at 240HP can't compete with the 3.8 with fuel efficiency. Technically the 3.8 has better fuel efficiency than the 3.6 and I don't know how many engines meet SULEV standards but I don't the the 3.6 or Toyotas 3.5 reaches that standard... but to many of us on here that is a moot point. Cleanliness of the vehicle isn't important so long as it's efficient with the gas. Whatever takes the 3.8's spot needs to be at least more fuel efficient because 200 HP for a base engine is more than enough for many people. I have it in my Regal LSE and I don't feel like I could ever use more power for getting on highways or passing vehicles or anything like that and I'm positive neither will the average driver. I've also test drove the Lucerne and the 3.8 doesn't lag in power. More power than 200 is for the enthusiasts. I think GM needs a more competitive fuel efficient base engine for things like the LaCrosse and the Lucerne, and I don't know if the 3.8 can do it. But the 3.6 isn't doing it now and would be a horrible trade-in for the 3.8 just so we can prove we can keep up with the best. The Northstar V8 and the 3.6 engines in the better models prove that GM can do it, but GM gives people the choice to stick with reliability. There is nothing other than a little more HP that the 3.6 can offer that the 3.8 can't. What do you suggest is better than the 3.8 for the job it's doing? I have no doubt the 3.8 is cheaper to produce than the 3.6 and it has a lot less of a hassle. I think a lot of people feel more comfortable (as somebody pointed out) having an engine they can understand how it works in their head. You raise some good points but I don't see the 3.6 as the answer to the 3.8 because the 3.8 is doing everything the 3.6 is doing except for not producing enough power... but does the 3.6 reach SULEV standards? Because the 3.8 could be more powerful if it didn't too.

I agree, they are Crossovers. Calling something like the Pacifica a modern day wagon or a minvan are both just wrong. For example the Ford Focus has a wagon... that is a modern day wagon. A Crossover is something that is part wagon, part minivan, and part SUV.

I chose "somewhat" because it is fairly nice but I feel Buick is so concerned with incorporating things like "waterfall grilles" and looking luxurious that they are compensating for lack of innovation. I'm not saying the LaCrosse grille is bad in any sense but it's pretty much universally agreed the innovation in the styling is lacking. I just mention it because it was the Regal replacement (rightfully... the Century was hardly a vehicle to brag about its styling) and the Regal was the sole Buick that proved you didn't need a waterfall grille to call it a Buick. I wanted to see another Buick that did the same thing.

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

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

I think the LaCrosse is a good vehicle and is definitely a more refined vehicle than the Regal/Century. However an image came with the Regal that the LaCrosse can not live up to and that is in the sport department. When you have a supercharged vehicle that pretty much signifies that you have some power to show off. The 3.6 doesn't do what the 3.8 S/C did and that is a MAJOR factor for me in particular. Also the LaCrosse seems to be far more feminine than the Regal in style and in power. In no way is a feminine car bad- almost all of Lexus' vehicles are feminine in nature. Quiet, refined, and unaggressive styling. These are very popular characteristics in the luxury market, none are meant to be making fun of the vehicle, but that isn't why I fell in love with Buick and is why the LaCrosse Super is badly needed in my opinion. The LaCrosse is nice, but it IS lacking any excitement. The 3800 should be the base engine. For someone looking to get a cheap reliable vehicle they can be proud of the LaCrosse is an excellent choice if you're not a car enthusiast. It is WAY better than the Century and they sold like hotcakes. If you don't like the 3800 then you are upset at its power output, gas mileage, or noise levels... honestly these are small things to complain about to someone getting a base-level vehicle... which is what the 3800 is good for. The old base engine for the Century was the 3.1 liter engine... which not only didn't produce as much power but doesn't have the lasting power of the 3800. The gas mileage it creates is still very average and the fact is now the 3800 is producing SULEV emissions. I think those of you who are so pushy to just drop the 3800 are acting a little foolish. Here we have an engine that is an all around perfect base engine. It's virtually indestructable, fairly clean, and fairly powerful for a base level vehicle. I've never met anyone upset at the 3.8. And for a $36,000 Lucerne damn right there should be a better, more refined engine in my car... or even a $30,000 LaCrosse... but the $20,000-$25,000 Buicks the 3.8 is the best engine out of all GM engines to have if you want a reliable engine. The other engines, though not poor, still havent stood the test of time the 3800 has proven. Plus what makes the 3.6 or 3.9 so good that we should ditch a tried and true engine because of a "growl" noise it makes when accelerating? That noise isn't something that has turned off any base-vehicle buyer. A refined vehicle? The $30,000+ vehicles? Yea- that might become a factor, but to get rid of the 3.8 is harsh because it is an all around good engine that none of the other engines have anything over. More computer chips doesn't automatically mean awesome engine. Relax and give people the option.

Wow! AND a Buick hybrid planned by 2009! If the LaCrosse was a good change for Buick, and the Lucerne was a great change for Buick, then the Enclave will be a phenomenal change for Buick if everything that is on here is true. The only consistent problems with Buick has been no 5 or 6 speed tranny, no DOD, or perhaps (though no one really complains about this with Buick but GM needs to start making them) not excellent gas mileage. The Enclave will cover all these problems. I am excited for this and I hate Crossovers/SUVs.

Congratulations on your new child Minarets! I'm glad to hear such a good review on the Lucerne. It is crucial for Buick, hearing this from a 24 year old who has never considered a Buick before is good news.

I might be wrong but this person could've just seen a lowered LaCrosse CXS with ground effects. CXS's come with dual exhaust and Buick would never put ground effects on any stock car, and chances are Buick wouldn't lower it much either. He could've just been mistaken on the grille. But maybe I'm wrong like I said.

I didn't mean to start anything by it- but come one, admit it- the Solstice is an incredibly impractical vehicle. It's just awesome looking- I'm not denying that, and nobody else is... but I do hold for what the Lucerne OFFERS over the Solstice, the Solstice lacks in almost everything but size and weight. The Solstice is a very vain vehicle- strictly eyecandy. I'm not saying that's the downfall of the car- all cars should have such appeal. But the Lucerne is terribly practical and elegant, especially for the price it's at is all... I mean the Lucerne looks good but everybody looks in awe at the Solstice so the Lucerne could fly and get 2000 miles per gallon on top of it, I still think people would choose the Solstice is all I'm saying.

If the Solstice wasn't in the running I'd say the Lucerne might have a chance to win... but EVERYBODY has a boner over the solstice. That thing will place first- period, even though it has obvious problems, the styling is just breathtaking.

haha, I'll second that.

Paolino- You must be confused, they're talking about a minivan :P

Aren't you contradicting yourself right there? "warmed over" and "nothing looked familiar"... wouldn't you be able to to tell the Lucerne was the LeSabre/Park Avenue replacement if it was "warmed over" or that the LaCrosse was the Regal/Century replacement if it was "warmed over," and how can you judge that the Enclave is "warmed over" when virtually nobody has seen it yet? And in fact those who have have raved about its styling. Buick has been getting a lot of new names, but Buick's image was hurting bad just a few years ago with the oldest average buying age in the industry. GM has decided to give Buick a new fresh image... last time they did this was with the 1959 Invicta, Electra (which ran for about 30 years) and LeSabre (which ran for almost half-a-century) so it's not exactly a bad idea. If you think they're so warmed over, get in one and test drive it and tell us where the warmed-over parts are, we'll be waiting for an educated judgement.

You know, I thought the Terraza was selling well just by seeing so many of them compared to any of the other minivans. I'm really happy for Buick. It's more than obvious GM didnt spend almost any time on the minivans and everyone expected them all to sell relatively poorly. Not so much what each offered but the exterior design was so similar it was insulting. The Rendezvous was never supposed to be what it turned out to be either. I really dont understand how GM couldnt save the brand, it is pretty much outselling all of their expectations. But I agree that Buick should keep the minivan. People obviously still look to Buick for quality. Otherwise they wouldn't be selling so much. Buick is not necessarily a name traditional for being a young and sporty brand, but this idea is totally okay with a parent that needs a nice reliable automobile. Plus some people don't trust Chevy as much as Buick because Buick is traditionally more reliable than Chevy. It was Chevy that really got the bad name against the imports so much more than the rest of GM.

I actually went to the Lucerne premiere night tonight and I am assuming this would be the thread to post our experiences as well. Well the guy that met us was really nice and friendly. I'm 22 and my brothers 19 and we showed up. I dont think anyone else was there besides the dealers and the people who worked in the shop behind the dealership. They only had a silver CX in the showroom but it was still a nice base vehicle. the seats were cloth and it was a column shifter and the cloth seats looked gaudy. However when I sank in to them they were the most comfortable cloth seats I've ever sat in, and I have been in many-a-cloth seats. Definitely an "A" for comfort with cloth, if it didnt look so cheesy I'd prefer it over the leather. The dealer was very nice and he offered us to test drive a red CXL (V6) around. He said that he hadn't gotten the V8 version of it or the CXS so he apologized we couldn't ride that. However the CXL looked like it had everything but the engine. The ride and the car is wonderful over all. I really believe this is a terrific replacement for the LeSabre. The heated seats, dual climate control, everything was just really nice. And it is really silent inside the car. The 3.8 V6 picks up like a charm at about as fast as any normal person would ever usually go. The attention to detail is most definitely there and I want to see where anyone thinks the Avalon has better materials because they were damn fine materials. The rear parking assist is something I hadn't used before and I used it to turn around and it is very helpful. Overall it was a positive experience and I wish more people would've taken advantage of it. This car is going to sell. It's spectacular.

I'm not saying you were here to make fun of the name, but zoom is right, there really is nothing hard about Lucerne. It follows the rules of standard modern English in every way possible even if it is named after a Swiss city. There is no word in the English language (or any foreign language as far as I know) where an "e" sound comes magically between an 'r' and an 'n'. For example serene has that ending you initially were thinking of but the "e" is prominent between the 'r' and the 'n'. Terraza, Enclave, even Rendezvous you might have a fair argument. But you have to really try to mess up Lucerne if you're actually reading it is all.