USA Today: There should be more cars like the Buick LaCrosse

[ksr]

Overall a decent review, but Healy always seems to search for any nitpicky bad thing he can find.

I imagine he'd be a rather annoying person to have a beer with.

[TKR]

I don't like goosenecks either but if there is a positive about them it is that you do not need to replace the struts when they give up - usually quite expensive.

[landjet06]

This assclown spends more time on little annoyances then what's good about the car. He constantly nit picks GM cars even if others do the same thing.I think when he was young,his parents wouldn't buy him a Camaro,so he holds it against GM!

[smithb]

Originally Posted by cdp326

Gooseneck hinges wouldn't be such a big deal if it weren't for the fact that they're so thick on the LaCrosse. It doesn't matter what other cars do and we shouldn't rationalize it by saying what others do - it won't change the fact that the LaCrosse has a small trunk for its exterior size and they should have put more effort into getting at least more volume than a Cobalt out of it.

That is kind of a dumb statement. We shouldn't compare it to another car, then you compare it to another vehicle? Then you say it has a small trunk for its exterior size (but not comapred to another vehicle)? What's the appropriate size for a trunk relative to exterior size, and how is this equation derived? Using that logic I say the Lacrosse is a piece of crap because it doesn't fly, cost more the $5, and gets less than 1,000 mpg. However, that is a stupid and useless review of a car. You have to compare a car to the technology available and how its features and performance compare to its competition.

If there is problem with the trunk space compared to its competition then that is a legitimate complaint. If someone doesn't like the designer's choice in hinges, but it is comparable to equal or better cars in function and quality then that is nitpicking. The GM designers traded some cargo space for improved opening/closing. If you would have preferred another choice, that is fine, but it is not fair to say the designer's choice (and in reality many other people's choice) is any less valid.

I do hope the new LaCrosse is significantly better than the ES 350. It seems like GM keeps putting out cars that are nearly on par with the class leader, better in some respects, but with a few details lacking, however the competition (in this case) is at least 3 years old. GM should be putting out cars other makers struggle to match. The days of so-so + GM loyalty selling cars is over.

[cdp326]

Originally Posted by smithb

That is kind of a dumb statement. We shouldn't compare it to another car, then you compare it to another vehicle? Then you say it has a small trunk for its exterior size (but not comapred to another vehicle)? What's the appropriate size for a trunk relative to exterior size, and how is this equation derived? Using that logic I say the Lacrosse is a piece of crap because it doesn't fly, cost more the $5, and gets less than 1,000 mpg. However, that is a stupid and useless review of a car. You have to compare a car to the technology available and how its features and performance compare to its competition.

To clarify: by saying we shouldn't compare it to another car, I meant in order to rationalize what it's doing which in this case was earlier mentioned "BMW/Mercedes use gooseneck hinges," and I was talking specifically about the hinges - not about comparing it altogether. It's fine to say to say why the LaCrosse uses gooseneck hinges (so it pops up), but it wasn't being compared to a true competitor. Granted, neither is the Cobalt as I mentioned as a vehicle that is physically smaller yet has a larger trunk; but, several of the LaCrosse's competitors do have more trunk space. I didn't compare it to the competition in my post because the topic has been discussed a good deal in other threads on this forum, so for the topic to come up again it's like it's the same conversation picking up again (and others mentioned the small trunk size in this thread before I did).

If there is problem with the trunk space compared to its competition then that is a legitimate complaint. If someone doesn't like the designer's choice in hinges, but it is comparable to equal or better cars in function and quality then that is nitpicking. The GM designers traded some cargo space for improved opening/closing. If you would have preferred another choice, that is fine, but it is not fair to say the designer's choice (and in reality many other people's choice) is any less valid.

I don't think you quite understand what I mean. I don't mind gooseneck hinges and I'm well aware of why they chose them for it - but that isn't my issue, and I didn't say what I'd prefer. The hinges of the LaCrosse appear extra thick, as though they take up more cargo space than others; maybe the better way to say it is the hinge housing. It's all mostly visual. The Toyota Avalon, the closest comparable vehicle dimensionally, has 14.4 cubic feet vs. the LaCrosse's 13.3 (12.8 for the CXS 3.6). It, too, uses hinges but the housing appears smaller (the Avalon trunk itself appears to be taller but not as deep).

LaCrosse:



Avalon:



(If you're wondering, the ES has 14.7 cubic feet and is about 5.8" shorter but has less rear legroom, making it less directly comparable than the Avalon which has similar exterior/interior dimensions to the LaCrosse.)

Would a smaller hinge housing on the LaCrosse make much difference? Probably no more than a few tenths...but every little bit would help. Will it or won't it matter to buyers depends on the buyer's personal preferences. Though it could be an issue if any owners of the outgoing LaCrosse (at 16 cu. ft) are looking at the new model.

[plane]

Originally Posted by cdp326

Would a smaller hinge housing on the LaCrosse make much difference? Probably no more than a few tenths...but every little bit would help.

Yes, the typical U.S. consumer does base purchase decisions on the last 1/10 of an inch of hinge housing. Consumer reports has three categories alone devoted to this subject. NIST standards are being created daily to handle this vital need. Government scientists are working overtime on nanomaterials that will someday shrink gooseneck hinges to acceptable proportions. GM engineers in a top secret Michigan laboratory are feverishly working on miniaturizing the next round of pickup truck gooseneck hinges, just to stay one step ahead of the competition.

Remember, you read it here first,
truth through a megaphone,
on GMI channel 1.

[Gagarin]

Originally Posted by cdp326

LaCrosse:

Wow, I didn't really belive that the trunk was small.
But, yes, that is smaller than I would expect.

Getting some objects into that trunk would be a pain because of the hinges getting in the way of the opening.

But, yes, most of the time the trunk is empty. But nothing will piss an owner off more than not being able to get a bag into a car before driving on a trip!

[Exploder]

I have no love for FWD boats, but as long as they improve the trunk space and engine options, the LaCrosse will be fine.

[BigThreeForever]

Hey, Sal, it is not our idea of a big car, is it?

I'm sick of hearing the LaCrosse, Impala, Taurus, MKS and Avalon being called "big" or "full-size" cars, because they're not.

Hopefully, Buick (and Cadillac) will offer us a true full-size car at some point in the future. Maybe when they have made some major advances in Volt-type technology. Imagine a new B-body size Roadmaster and Fleetwood which get 90 - 100 mpg on the EPA cycle . . .

We can but dream.

[tripowergto]

I just can't get over the fact that my 361HP 6.0L V8 G8 GT gets similar fuel economy to the new Lacrosse direct injected 3.0 V6. Plus the G8 is much larger yet weighs less. This is progress to new GM?

[Akucaen]

Originally Posted by zete

The six-speed is one of those learning ones, so it'll probably shift oddly until it learns.

As to the goose neck hinges, they're on 7-series BMWs and S-series Benzes. So, it's not like Buick is cheaping out. Has this guy bemoaned those hinges on those cars? I don't think he has.

This is a general problem. If BMW, Mercedes, or someone else puts a fancy looking gooseneck it's OK. GM, it's bad bad bad.

And I'm one of those guys who hate goose neck hinges. I'd prefer the little strut arrangements.

And, yeah, a lot of people I know love it when the trunk opens full. I don't personally care, but some people see to.

Oddly enough I like the hinge arrangement. The "bags with rain" scenario that was mentioned earlier is perfect for this too. On my Alero the trunk pops up about four inches. With how the trunk lids curves, no water will get it unless it's blowing (literally) sideways. I can quickly lift it only has high as I need for bag clearance with one finger, and then close the thing with one finger.

I actually hate the strut systems. They throw the trunk up as far as they'll go and you have to work against them shut the thing. The hinge arrangement (or rather, the particular one on my Alero) can be opened and closed with little effort and one finger.

I know it all boils down to personal opinion, but still. There are high points to the hinge setup.

[Sal Collaziano]

Originally Posted by ksr

Overall a decent review, but Healy always seems to search for any nitpicky bad thing he can find.

I imagine he'd be a rather annoying person to have a beer with.

Sounds to me like what every business needs - the exact opposite of a "yes" man. A business needs to hear the bad things about their product in order to improve. Or maybe you'd rather have nobody say anything about these shortcomings...

Originally Posted by BigThreeForever

Hey, Sal, it is not our idea of a big car, is it?

I'm sick of hearing the LaCrosse, Impala, Taurus, MKS and Avalon being called "big" or "full-size" cars, because they're not.

Hopefully, Buick (and Cadillac) will offer us a true full-size car at some point in the future. Maybe when they have made some major advances in Volt-type technology. Imagine a new B-body size Roadmaster and Fleetwood which get 90 - 100 mpg on the EPA cycle . . .

We can but dream.

Yeah, I hear ya.. While I'd love a new car the size of a Fleetwood (I love big cars), I'd settle for something that's as big inside but smaller outside. Mercedes, BMW, Audi, Jaguar, Toyota (Lexus) and Hyundai still make these cars - and they're relatively affordable. So until the domestic automakers make another one, I'll keep buying from foreign companies. No skin off my back, really. But it would certainly be nice to be in a Cadillac again...

[neshapop]

Originally Posted by majicbz07

I have a CTS with the struts ( called canteliever hinges) not sure if its spelled right, but it does not pop open just unlocks. While I like the hinges because they look better and take up less space, I really wish they would pop open. There are many times when I've just come out of the store with something big or lots of bags and the keys in my hand to unlock the trunk but still have to drop what I have to lift the trunk open. However for me this is not a deal breaker in a car.

Old LaCrosse/Allure's trunk with pop up feature also has struts and 16 cu.ft. capacity, so to me gooseneck + less useful trunk space is a big letdown. Yes, comparing to W body it has more leg room at the back but I drive my kids not elephants of fat politicians therefore it was fine from the day one. However I managed to put the entire stroller and weekly groceries with no sweat.

This is not the way to attract younger people to buy Buick. Most likely I will go with new or used CTS instead this new LaCrosse. Or maybe Canadian made Regal if it is executed right but for now I will hold my breath and stay away from LaCrosse. BTW I liked Allure, way better name...

[Ambalanche]

Originally Posted by Sal Collaziano

Sounds to me like what every business needs - the exact opposite of a "yes" man. A business needs to hear the bad things about their product in order to improve. Or maybe you'd rather have nobody say anything about these shortcomings...



...

Sal, while I agree with you that we don't want "yes men" extolling the virtues of every new car the General makes, I also don't want some auto writer blowing up some small item that will make the vehicle look like a dismal failure because of a feature, or lack there of, that he doesn't chide other automakers of using. That's my only point about Healy's comments. He spent an inordinate amount of his article whining about these things and barely mentioned any dynamics about the car which really makes me wonder if he even drove it. That being said, I too am surprised they didn't use the strut type hinges on this car. GM already uses them in many others so I guess this was a cheap-o solution. GM needs to not let things like this escape the bean counters offices in the future, everything from here on out should be class leading!

[red_rider]

Not a bad review (at least the beginning) but was anyone else put off by his caveman grammar (never seemed to use a or the). Takes away from the credibility a little IMO.