The O.C.

I agree.....3.6L standard but the optional 4.6L should be the "high power" DTS version.....291hp, I believe?

GM I believe has since hired a company that configures all their auto show displays. Unfortunately, these are people that don't have their "heart" in it....or are not GM/Buick fans, etc. They really don't care what they order as long as they have the correct numbers of models, etc. When I was at Buick, we (District Managers) were responsible for ordering all auto show cars and placing them IN the show before it opened. I was involved in both the San Jose and San Francisco auto shows when I lived up there working for Buick. Back THEN....we took alot of time to carefully consider what cars to display, what colors to order them in, and what options to put on them. We took pride in it.....and also made sure the cars looked good....with sunroofs all open, seats in decent positions, etc. We ordered mostly Buicks with Gran Touring packages......because the larger wheels/tires and more attractive alloys really made the cars look better in the show...also ordered sunroofs, etc. We'd also do "base" cars when there was a good pricing story to tell. We'd also order the different colors with some more unique color schemes that looked attractive....as opposed to the sea of white, beige, and silver that Buick dealers tend to stock. Sadly, I'm afraid that "committee-think" has taken all of the personalized care in setting up an attractive auto show with attractive cars.

Dude...I JUST got back from looking at one.....a CXS at $39K....and ALL the plastic on the dash below the woodgrain (around glovebox, etc.), and on the side of the center stack (next to the black area where the HVAC and radio stuff is) and all on the console is the SAME hard brittle stuff that we've seen in the new Impala. There is CERTAINLY nothing soft about it. The dash TOP is nice and soft, expensive looking....and the door panels are all soft. So maybe they made a running change...or maybe you sat in a pre-production unit or something....but I can assure you the one I sat in (dealer JUST got it in) is hard and cheap.

You can't control what the dealer orders or the District Manager sends the dealer.....unless you special-order the car.....

Okay just saw my first Lucerne CXS at my local Buick dealership today...... THEY CHARGE $100 FOR THE "HEATED WINDSHIELD WASHER FLUID." ARE they CRAZY? Okay maybe $100 is not alot of money.....but I figured something like this would be STD on this $39K Lucerne... AND the car is here in southern California....???????

Okay.....I finally got my first in-depth look at a Lucerne CXS at my local Buick dealer. First of all, I'll say that I am really impressed with the styling and roominess of the new Lucerne. However, (and I know that I'm seen as one of the ones that bitches the most about this) I was truly appalled at all the hard, brittle plastic on the dash, center stack, and console. GM.....Here we go again....... I can just about excuse it in a $25K Impala......but on a $39K Buick, it's unforgiveable. In fact, if I remember correctly, the LaCrosse doesn't even have that high of a level of hard plastic on its dash or console. Now at least the plastic is not shiny....it's nicely done in a matte finish and the grain is pretty good too. However, it still has that hollow, brittle execution that makes GM's hard plastic so much cheaper than what everyone else uses. Actually, in a Lucerne, I don't expect ANY hard plastic to be acceptable. Not if GM wants this car to appeal to consumers also shopping Lexus ES300, Avalon, or maybe even some Acura and Infiniti models. Now that my bitching is over, the REST of the execution of the interior is first-class and very up-to-date with nice seats, buttery leather, attractive gauges, GM's "new" and impressive HVAC and radio controls, and logical ergonomics. The wood DOES look fake though.....but it's better than LaCrosses. I still like the car and would probably still buy one (if shopping for such a car.) I also think/hope it will do really good in the marketplace. I just don't understand why GM cuts corners in certain areas like material quality. As stated before, GM can't just be competitive in order to pull buyers back into their showrooms....they need to LEAD the way.

Well, considering Gramps was 75, prolly CX with bench-seats and a colum shifter...... :lol:

Once again.....GM has bastardized a treasured nameplate..... It all started with the two-door Lumina that they called "Monte Carlo" and ended up with the current generation (and the "new" '06) that is a haphazardly-designed, bulbous, oversized excuse for a midsize personal coupe.

I'm mostly referring to the "limited in appeal" comment. If I'm right, the Civic will continue to be one of the best-selling compacts in the segment....and you can hardly call that "limited in appeal."

No arguments with you on the Mazda3......however, regarding your opinions on the Civic, let's revisit your comments in about a year....when we have solid sales figures. You will be proven wrong.

My answer does not take into account sales numbers....it's simply my honest opinion of GM cars. My answer would be....."in general".....NO.....they do not make class-leading or competitive products. Do they make competitive products or even class-leading..? SURE but in VERY small quantities. Of course, Corvette. I'd call the new GMT-900's DEFINITELY class-leading.....based on my early view of them. I don't consider the current full-size pickups class-leading......they've been eclipsed by Ford, Dodge, and the imports in too many areas. The CTS is definitely a contender.....even though some of the interior plastics are inferior, overall the car is definitely competitive...it's a great drive. The STS? Not even a chance.....a major disappointment. G6 could be.....with an up-to-date drivetrain (HF V6 and 5-or-6-speed auto.) Cobalt close....but it's styling and shoddy interior quality just got eclipsed by Honda...and has never been as good as Mazda3. As much as I like the LaCrosse and Impala, they really cannot be competitive overall without abandoning the ancient W-Car/GM-10 architecture....and they still lack 5-or-6-speed automatics. GM's current crossovers are not competitive.....Equinox and Torrent suffer from nasty steering feel, underpowered pushrod V6s, and crappy interior quality and trim. I LOVE the Lucerne....but sadly even IT is still not really competitive from the standpoint that it lacks way too many features that are becoming commonplace on sedans in its pricerange. 3800 engine and 4-speed auto are substandard to begin with and it now looks like the NorthStar is even underpowered for it's "V8" status.....(I think I read it only hits 60mph in 7.5secs? A V6 Avalon is 6.0 flat.) There's plenty of GM cars I would say I LIKE......but me liking them AND me considering them class-leading and competitive are, sadly, two different things.

Croc's right.....you JUST don't get it......

OMG......ROTFLMAO :lol:

[quote name='razoredge' date='Dec 10 2005, 11:02 PM'] I didnt read this whole page but there are a few things I wanted to comment on. Correct, somethings wrong with the 3.6 as I just stated, we need to build them here for this market, I dont care what anyone says. Its like GM needs 300,000 of them yesterday. [I/] [QUOTE] Even the 80-year-olds in Leisure World/Laguna Woods drive Accords and Camrys here.... Of course they do, its Lagunafornia where you are shuned for driving American built cars. W bodies - I know I had a 91 Regal Limited, great little personal car, wouldnt want to sit in back seat, I tried it, Im long legged and showing wear. Seat was nice enough for comfort but hey its a small car. My daughter liked it but her other choice at that time was the big LSS and theres just no comparision for back seat room. She did say the older 90 Regency was the best we've had yet. She was origionally spoiled by two NYers and the 86 LeSabre Limited, while being a two door it does have ample rear room. Wonder how that back seat of one of them 90's Accords was ? :lol: :AH-HA_wink: One can see from the styling how Toyota accomplished great rear head & leg room. Id be happy with a compromise, I dont like the styling results much. [QUOTE] The 3800 is old, dated, unrefined, and should be put to bed. It was great in its time....15-20 years ago.....when the imports weren't focusing on V6 or bigger engines. once again its currently 10 years old, it is not primitive by construction or refinement, its just been ignored because they have spent the R&D elsewhere. It is being retired and we need not listen to a bunch of you degrading it like it came from the dark ages. So long as you do we will continue to waste all this space on the forum. GM made piles of money selling - great and highly appreaciated cars with that engine. Do not degrade it, it has only recently been surpassed and that is in its NA form, not its SC form, which is the equivelent of the refinement others have done to get to that level....Problem ? 92 octane gas $ [QUOTE]Now, however, it's completed overshadowed.....by the competition. BS same as above : 260/280 - 21/28 - 200,000+ is not an overshadow by any means. [QUOTE]nice. it don't even crack 200 hp in the lucerne. how the hell are you supposed to sell that car with a 50-70hp deficit and expect any market impact? bo log na , so whats in that Camry again ? 190. Whats in the Ford ? What one is it that has like 225 but only 215 TQ or something kinda wimpy like that. BS, BS, BS ! So where these 50-70hp surplus engines :blink: 350Z ? Oh, did you forget that the L32 was 260/280 :unsure: :rolleyes: to quote my Man Robert Plant "talk , talk, talk " So just leave it alone. Its an old hard worked man, going into retirement and it deserves respect. Calling it for what it is, is one thing but calling it what its not is another. You cant back it up, you can only spout exagerations, insults and obvious predjudice. It has not been perfect, it has not been flawless, it has been retooled radically 3 times since 85 with a few upgrades midterm . It has not been retooled or recieved any real developement in 10 years. Its HO version will run against your favorite V6 and hold its own. So really whats the point ? Really ? [post="56688"][/post] [/quote] No....the Camry's NOT a hotrod..... BUT that "low-power" 190hp Camry ran 0-60 in 7.6secs (C&D 12-05.) C&D's original test of the V6 Malibu LT got o-60 in 7.9secs. Hmmm....maybe the Camry's FIVE-speed automatic helped compensate for the small lack of power compared to Malibu's 3.5L...?

That's where you are wrong. Customers may or may not be tech-savvy enough to understand what "pushrod" means compared to "DOHC", etc... BUT....they DO know when they test drive a car how the engine performs....is it quiet? Is it responsive when merging on the freeway? Does it sound "expensive?" Does it rev freely? How does it pull away from a stoplight? How is overall NVH from the drivetrain? They don't need to understand the dictionary meaning of the terms.....they just need to be able to experience how the "up to date" technology improves the driving experience. Also.....if all the "new" technology really doesn't mean anything.....and customers could "give a rats" about VVT, pushrods, etc.....other than a few exceptions (DCX's "HEMI" V8)..........WHY is GM the only holdout on this uncompetitive engine architecture? WHY are they the only ones to continue to develop mainstream V6 engines off this architecture?

While DRLs make some people feel safe, they are annoying and distracting to others (me.) Invariably in the daytime when I see GM's (BRIGHT they are) DRLs on, they cause me to glance and see what's shining....taking my eyes OFF driving my car on the road. I turn mine off every time I get in the car.

Ok guys.....THE POINT IS......(and I think Croc was trying to say this...) The 3800 is old, dated, unrefined, and should be put to bed. It was great in its time....15-20 years ago.....when the imports weren't focusing on V6 or bigger engines. Now, however, it's completed overshadowed.....by the competition. Plus, you cannot argue the perception (perception BEING the key word....for right OR for wrong) gap that consumers have considering the value of the technology available in import V6s versus the "dated" 3800 pushrod architecture..... That's the BIGGEST argument even....the perception. If the consumers you are trying to appeal to all believe that OHC/DOHC/multi-valve technology is superior and/or more desirable.....THAT'S what you better offer them or they won't consider your product. Plus, modern DOHC/multi-valve technology has advanced far enough with features like VVT that any former low-end-torque advantage that GM's pushrod V6s offered is negligible at best. The Passat 3.6L (276hp) that I drove recently is a perfect example. It had almost too much torque off the line for the front wheels, yet was creamy in it's ability to rev quickly and never turned thrashy. Plus, they don't lose their breath as you climb the rev range....they continue to produce power much further up....should high-rpm acceleration be desired by the driver.....while low rpm tractability doesn't suffer at all.

The "W" Body is a perfect example of why you can't just spout numbers as the truth. Regardless of what the numbers say, if you get into an Impala, LaCrosse, or Grand Prix, the back seat room and comfort is substandard......especially considering the exterior bulk of the cars. First of all, you sit low with your knees shooting straight up with minimal under- thigh support. Secondly, the foot area below you gets extremely cramped as you try to get out of the car, or slide in. You cannot simply slide your foot sideways to get out....you have to twist your foot in all manner of contortions to swing your legs out of the car...then try to haul your butt up off the sunken bench seat. Thirdly, there simply is not that much leg or knee room in the back. The acutal width of the car....not to mention the inflated headroom offered by the distance from the sunken bench seat to the roof.....probably add to the dimensional numbers advantage. But it's not a real-world advantage. Newer architectures like even the Malibu/G6 are more comfortable, real-world, for two people in the back seat than the W-Body.

WRONG-O....! It IS the factory's fault in this case.....(or so says my local Buick dealer....who STILL doesn't have his first Lucerne in stock incidentally enough.) My local Buick dealer told me that they get NO action on LaCrosses. He says IF Buick would give him more CXSs with the 3.6L, leather buckets, etc., he'd do much better. Apparently his Buick rep will not allocate him CXSs....he says they are in short supply. He has maybe one CXS on the lot at a time. Therefore, he's stuck with ugly, geriatric bench-seat CXs, or pricey pushrod CXLs. Neither works in this market. Even the 80-year-olds in Leisure World/Laguna Woods drive Accords and Camrys here....

Of course, living here in California for nine years, I'm used to this area being import-dominated. But when I did my count, even I was shocked by the lack of General Motors cars. Driving around L.A., of course, I see Cadillacs on the freeways.....and you see a few "W" bodies.....new Impalas and LaCrosses......a few HHRs and Cobalts.....G6s....but as you look closer and closer, most of those have rental barcodes in the side windows. I didn't even see a new Fusion/Milan, etc. I think there were one or two DCX LX cars in my count....but that was IT for domestic cars (non-trucks.) When I did the count in Aliso Viejo, (not being a "tourist" area) I realized a more true representation of what people actually drive as their own car (hence I didn't see any rental vehicles in the count).....and it's not GM vehicles at all with the exception of full-size SUVs and Pickups. I plan on repeating my count....at different locals....(Irvine Spectrum, various office parks around town....and if I get time, the parking garage at John Wayne/Orange County airport.) I'd love to hear what other parts of the country come up with....!

Thinking about the recent thread of Buickman's "Return To Greatness" and the struggles GM has in overcoming the perception gap they face with import automakers, I decided to conduct my own little, very unscientific, yet real-world look at demand for GM cars in my little corner of the world in southern California. I took 30-40 minutes today and drove through some of the parking lots at the Aliso Viejo Town Center in my city and counted 237 cars. The Town Center is a mix of retail, bars, restaurants, and a 20-screen theatre adjacent to numerous office parks and a medical center. In case you are curious about the demographics and population of this area......Aliso Viejo (pop. 43,721) is a greater-L.A. area suburb located in the southern portion of Orange County (pop. 3,105,556.) A.V. is located 3 miles from the Pacific Ocean, 48 miles south of downtown Los Angeles, 77 miles north of downtown San Diego, and interestingly enough, just 6 miles from Ford's P.A.G. headquarters in Irvine. Median age, 31. Males, 47.6%. Married, 60.7%. Median household income, $80,245/yr. Median home price, $637,000. Please keep in mind that this area is predominantly caucasian and predominately Republican. (I.E....not much hispanic and/or asian influence in car-buying habits.) Here's what I found........out of 237 cars and trucks...... Total Domestic (NOT including "overseas" brands such as Volvo.) 71 cars for 30.0% Total Asian (including 1 Hyundai Sonata and no other Korean.) 116 cars for 48.9% Total European 50 cars for 21.1% To break it down by certain brands of interest.......... Toyota (Toyota, Lexus, Scion) - 51 cars for 21.5% Honda (Honda, Acura) - 35 cars for 14.8% GM (Bu, Olds, Cad, Chev, GMC, Pont., Hummer) - 20 cars for 8.4% Mercedes-Benz - 19 cars for 8.0% BMW - 10 cars for 4.2% NOTE......Out of the 20 total GM cars, I did not count ONE Buick.....nor any new Impalas, G6s, HHRs, Cobalts, etc. I'd say 90-95% of those 20 GM vehicles were full-size SUVs and Pickups. Also NOTE.....there was only ONE less Mercedes-Benz in the lots than TOTAL GM entries. I'll reiterate.....TOTAL GM marketshare in my (admittingly) small and unscientific survey.....8.4%. I'll ASSURE you that my area is not alone in this.....and neither is California alone in this....it's happening in MANY places around the country.

It IS cramped......attractive? Sure.....but cramped. I think the narrow windows and low roofline really contribute to the feeling...... Personally, I think they are all decent vehicles except Vibe/Matrix. I've never been impressed by them when I've driven them.

I think I'm gonna be embarrassed at NAIAS when I cream my pants while standing in front of the Concept....... :P

Sad.....truly sad...... I just saw my FIRST SS on the road the other day. ALL the others have been LS and LT models. In fact, when next to them, EVERY SINGLE ONE I've seen has a "rental barcode" in the rear side window. It pisses me off because I REALLY like the Impala.....even if the exterior is bland, it's attractively-bland....not ugly-bland like a Taurus, etc. I have issues with the rear-seat room and comfort, and some of the hard plastics are of inferior quality inside the vehicle, but for the most part, it's got one of the most uncluttered and up-to-date interiors in a GM vehicle. Even the base LS interiors look good (except the bench seat/column shifter configuration.) This car deserves WAY much more than "Fleet Car of the Year."

You're right Croc.....BUT if he did hire assistants, he could have delivered that many. Listen.....certainly Jim is a good salesperson and probably did achieve the levels of success he alludes to. HOWEVER, I think the point that myself, Croc, Turbo200, and others are trying to make is that REGARDLESS of how successful Buickman was.....it's a WHOLE different animal trying to repeat that kind of sales success with the Buick brand (or Pontiac, or Chevrolet cars, etc) in a market like California, or the southeast, or the northeast, or D.C......areas where imports are increasingly dominent. I've said many times that I don't believe for a MINUTE that Michigan, (or the midwest in general) is in any sense a true, realistic view of the automotive market. Simply put, you've got WAY too many people tied to the Big3 (employees, retirees, suppliers) that may get their purchase decisions HEAVILY influenced by either who employees them (company loyalty) and/or the huge discounts they are allowed BECAUSE of where they work.