[TriShield]

I saw one on the road here yesterday. It's an awful looking car.

The best thing GM can do is kill this car, it's stupid name, and design a new Regal every bit as good as the Enclave.

 

[sasha_g_98]

Re: 2008 Buick LaCrosse Super

I can't wait to see an old lady driving a 300hp Buick! What are the 0-60 and 1/4 mile times on this thing, it's gotta be hard to launch.

Buick is following a tried and true formula: keep your cars conservative,appeal to an older driver population and don't develop anything too radical. It is a formula that doesn't appeal to younger buyers, but works at the bank. Here's the problem: The NorthStar V8 is an Overhead CAM engine,and is expensive to produce. It can only fit into the Buick LeCurne, that can also be bought with the good old Reliable OHV 3800 series motor with 200 HP, but plenty of torque. In order to stuff a V8 motor into a smaller chassis, Buick took a Chevy 350 (5.7 liter) motor, made it 5.3 Liter, by destroking it, and put an Overhead Valve Engine to compete with OverHead Cam Engine designs, and not to compete with the NorthStart in the Cadillac DTS and Buick Lucerne. The Buick Lucerne is a Cadillac DTS power train on a Buick budget. The Lucerne and the LaCross cross over in terms of price, so there is no compelling reason to buy a $31,000 SuperSport LaCross,when for the same money, you can have the bigger Lucurne. Also, at $31k, it's competing with sport sedans such as the Infinity G35, and Mercedez Benz CL320 and Chrystler 300. All of those cars are rear-drive, and anytime a 300 HP engine is a front wheel drive car, it's a shame. What's the good of hitting 60 MPH in 5.9 Seconds, if a 3.8 liter motor can do it in 7.3 seconds, but cost you at least $10k less in price,and a car with the same "perceived" value. This car with the 5.3Liter motor is alot of motor in a light car, but in FWD layout, and no better value in terms of luxury image than identical car with V6, and so, is wrong marketplace I think for this type of power.

 

[sasha_g_98]

I think this is very much a matter of opinion. Like the very popular comment by smarmy reviewers "The interior plastics are not a high quality as the industry leader in interior plastics Toyota..."

I have had zero interior quality issues with my CXS during the first year, or as Ming would put it, "well past the initial quality period."

I have to laugh that every reviewer gets one with bolts missing, etc. I believe these are exagerrations at best, and flat out lying at worst. They should caveat the review with "I hate Buick and I am forced to write this review anyway."

I think the automotive press in general is not favorable to American Cars and is very snotty toward American Cars. I think that if they took "perceived value" of the name brand out of the picture, and simply evaluated the cars as cars, in themselves, they would do all of us more justice. Since when is a car, even if it's FWD, that can hit 0-60 in 5.9 Seconds a bad car? I've seen automatic equipped, 260 HP V6 cars hit 0-60 in 7 seconds, but you put a Camry name on them, or Honda Accord, and they are loved. But you put a OHV 5.3 V8 in a Buick, hit 60 MPH a full 1.1 seconds faster, and suddenly, the car is hated! This thing stops and accelerates as fast an Infinity M45, and cornes are nearly the same rate. Yes, it's stupid to put so much power in a FWD car, and no, it's not at Lexus or Infinity luxury levels, but it doesn't cost $45,000-$50,000 either!
The automotive press is far removed from the economic reality of most car shoppers that buy American cars. Most consumers simply can't afford $50,000 cars, and most midsize sedans are between $21,000-$27,000 that is the buying range of most family car buyers. Anytime you offer the performance envolope of a much more expensive sedan in a much less expensive price tag, it's too be complimented. I think Buick deserves respect for trying to bring back its former glory days

 

[Michael_S]

I think the automotive press in general is not favorable to American Cars and is very snotty toward American Cars. I think that if they took "perceived value" of the name brand out of the picture, and simply evaluated the cars as cars, in themselves, they would do all of us more justice. Since when is a car, even if it's FWD, that can hit 0-60 in 5.9 Seconds a bad car? I've seen automatic equipped, 260 HP V6 cars hit 0-60 in 7 seconds, but you put a Camry name on them, or Honda Accord, and they are loved. But you put a OHV 5.3 V8 in a Buick, hit 60 MPH a full 1.1 seconds faster, and suddenly, the car is hated! This thing stops and accelerates as fast an Infinity M45, and cornes are nearly the same rate. Yes, it's stupid to put so much power in a FWD car, and no, it's not at Lexus or Infinity luxury levels, but it doesn't cost $45,000-$50,000 either!

The Infiniti M45 is incredibly quick, something like 5.3 seconds 0-60 mph. The LaCrosse Super is fast, but it's not that fast.

Several things hurt GM's FWD V8s in relation to the import V6s, for the automotive press. First, the V6s possess much less torque off idle so generally speaking off-the-line torque steer is less of an issue. Second, four speed automatics are perceived as old technology especially when import competitors offer a manual transmission. Third, GM has some embarrassing pushrod engines in production next to its world class pushrod engines, and a lot of people wrongly assume all pushrod engines GM makes are equally poor. Fourth, in recent memory GM sold some FWD sedans with absolutely abysmal handling on the same W-body platform, and that colors the impression of reviewers. Fifth, unlike a typical car buyer, many of these journalists are reviewing a Mazda Miata, Saturn Sky, Lotus Elise, M3, Porsche Cayman, or some other vehicle with super handling nearly back to back with GM's FWD V8s, so handling problems you and I wouldn't notice will be glaringly obvious to them. Sixth, a few years ago you could get a V6 Camry, Altima, or Accord for $23,000. Now the price on those cars is $25,000 or higher, but still well below the $28,000+ for an Impala SS or $31,000+ for a LaCrosse Super. There are a ton of good choices available in that price range, especially if you also consider a slightly used vehicle.

Against that, I have several points in GM's favor. The handling on these cars really is quite good for FWD. You also can't really exceed the handling limits of these sedans in a safe way on regular roads - so most of the performance edge of RWD is irrelevant unless you plan on taking the car to the track. There's a lot to be said for a gorgeous V8 burble at idle and a nice low rumble when you accelerate, and for being able to accelerate immediately with a tap of the gas - no downshift required. I also spend way too much time stuck in traffic to seriously consider a manual transmission, so the lack of one is irrelevant. And I know at least one 50 year old man with lots of disposable income who likes powerful FWD cars because he knows they're easier to drive in snow and he doesn't give a hoot about handling.

I had a 2001 Impala, and once I had driving experience with several other cars I realized the handling is awful. But I got to drive a 2006 3LT Impala with the 3.9 and 17" wheels, and the difference was just out of this world. It was more than agile enough to keep me 100% satisfied to drive it all year long, especially with a V8. I'd prefer the Impala SS over the LaCrosse Super because it does better on crash tests. If I could figure out how to budget one, I'd buy one immediately.

The automotive press is far removed from the economic reality of most car shoppers that buy American cars.

Of course they are. I bet most of them get into auto journalism solely for the chance to drive tons of cars they could never personally afford. I know I would.

Most consumers simply can't afford $50,000 cars, and most midsize sedans are between $21,000-$27,000 that is the buying range of most family car buyers. Anytime you offer the performance envolope of a much more expensive sedan in a much less expensive price tag, it's too be complimented. I think Buick deserves respect for trying to bring back its former glory days

 

[mbukukanyau]

To me this car combines everything that almost brought GM to its knees, from what it is, to the adoring fans that encourage its construction.

 

[code blue]

I have a slightly more appropriate image: :

 

[Hitman1970]

I have a slightly more appropriate image: :

A few of us, LaCrosse owners, are still a few decades away from that trim level. What do you call it? The CFN?

 

[AndrewGS]

I have a slightly more appropriate image: :

Because you don't need sat-nav where you're going.

 

[Jesda]

Re: 2008 Buick LaCrosse Super

Am I the only one who thinks that FWD V-8s are as dumb as 4 cylinders with automatic transmissions?

Yes.

 

[Michael_S]

Re: 2008 Buick LaCrosse Super

What's the good of hitting 60 MPH in 5.9 Seconds, if a 3.8 liter motor can do it in 7.3 seconds, but cost you at least $10k less in price,and a car with the same "perceived" value.

To be fair, the Lucerne V6 gets to 60 mph in closer to 8 seconds, and I think some reviews have even tested it at 8.5 seconds.

That's as good or better than most 1980s or 1990s V8 sedans, but weak for a modern V6.

 

[Hitman1970]

The 3.6L will get you into 6.9-7.3 range depending on what review you read. You take a hit in mileage for it too. Would have been nice to get the touring suspension option with the 3.8L.

I finally drove a 3.8L Gran Prix and found it to be more than adequate power for a daily driver. The engine that is.

 

[Michael_S]

The 3.6L will get you into 6.9-7.3 range depending on what review you read. You take a hit in mileage for it too.

I'm sure the 3.6 does better. If you hunt around for the dyno charts at the GM media site, it has excellent torque at all RPMs. The 3.6 is also mated to a shorter 3.69 final drive in the LaCrosse. The 3.8 is only mated to a 3.05.

Would have been nice to get the touring suspension option with the 3.8L.

I finally drove a 3.8L Gran Prix and found it to be more than adequate power for a daily driver. The engine that is.

It's not slow. Most 4-cylinders these days have more than enough power to be safe in day to day driving. I had an Impala with the 3.4, which undercut the 3.8 about 10% on torque and horsepower, and it had plenty of acceleration on tap when I needed it.

I was just challenging sasha_g_98's assertion that moving from the LaCrosse 3.8 to the V8 will only shave 1.4 seconds off of your 0-60 mph time (7.3 to 5.9). The difference is closer to two and a half seconds, a substantial improvement.