By on November 1, 2015

2017 Buick LaCrosse

For such an elderly car, Buick is getting awfully creative with its teasers. Released last week, Buick teased its 2017 LaCrosse in an image and video ahead of the Los Angeles Auto Show, where it will be officially revealed.

The silhouette of the LaCrosse shows hips and shoulders similar to Buick’s Avenir concept — and not much else. (Thankfully, the bulbous Vulcan rear end of the Avenir appears to be gone.)

Separately, Buick offered a short video of the front of the LaCrosse — which sports the Avenir’s grille —complete with headlights that appear to work.

The thin sheet over the hood of the LaCrosse doesn’t do much to cover the creases, which are decidedly more prominent than the current, ancient LaCrosse. The eyebrow-daytime running lights appear to live on, but what’s unclear is if the 3.6-liter V-6 does too. The Avenir Concept plugged in a 3.6-liter mill and 9-speed automatic, and we’d expect something similar in the LaCrosse.

The Buick LaCrosse will be shown at the Los Angeles Auto Show when it begins Nov. 17.

What? Did our headlamps give it away? Happy #Halloween. In case you’re still guessing, yes it’s a 2017 #BuickLaCrosse

Posted by Buick on Saturday, October 31, 2015

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

Recommended

126 Comments on “Buick Releases Two Teasers of 2017 LaCrosse Ahead of Reveal (Video)...”


  • avatar

    So sue me, but despite being a late-Millenial just entering his thrties, this is the only marque I really get excited about.

    And just as a reminder that – as with Ventiports – Buick gets a free pass on the side sculpting/Sweapspear elements. You don’t have to like it per se, but Buick has been using it for longer than most of us have been alive.

    • 0 avatar
      highdesertcat

      I remember how excited I was in 1962 about buying an old 1949 Buick with a Straight-8 and Fluidrive.

      • 0 avatar
        Lorenzo

        I remember how excited I was when I swapped an old Rambler for an old 1962 Buick LeSabre, and grandma could get into the back seat instead of sitting in front, complaining.

        BTW, Fluid Drive was Chrysler’s semi-automatic. You must mean the Dynaflow 2 speed. My LeSabre had a modified version of the same damn transmission, highly inefficient, but worked great in WW2 tanks, where the driver had other things to worry about besides fuel mileage.

    • 0 avatar
      matador

      I’m pretty close to being a “Buick enthusiast”. I own a 1995 LeSabre, and love it. The problem for Buick is that I can be easily swayed with plush seating, woodgrain trim, and a smooth ride. That’s not what the typical buyer wants.

      I don’t think that Buick will ever really shake that older demographic image. That doesn’t bother me, though- my father is a lot smarter than I am. He certainly knows what a good car is….

      • 0 avatar
        MrGreenMan

        It’s just a shame that they don’t have a second “bigger” car to be the LeSabre to the upmarket LaCrosse. For a very long time, the LeSabre was an extremely affordable deal that still had a few niceties and had tons of power. With a 200 hp 3800 Series II, it was almost cheap and cheerful in a Buick in that generation you have, but was too nice with even the base model to feel Chevy-cheap.

        • 0 avatar

          You could really peak out a LeSabre around ~29k MSRP and drive off with everything – heated memory seating w/dual power, Concert Sound II, moonroof chrome wheels, pearlescent tri-coat finish, and even HUD. Best value on the market in the early-00s.

          The feature content, the look, the spaciousness, and the ride – that’s what a Buick is all about to, despite the BMWization of the rest of the marketplace.

          This past week, I’ve been driving a 2012 Audi A6 2.0T w/19″ Sport Pkg. A fine car indeed. Competent on the highway (though disturbingly and almost dangerously sluggish off the line even in sport/hold gearing), good fuel economy, but just not…comfortable. Not in urban driving at least. Too much chop and too much road feel. I took a ’12 Enclave ‘Leather’ for last night and today because I’m helping with my girlfriend’s sister’s wedding and, man, I’m home again. Smooth, plenty powerful, comfortable, and just plain a joy to cruise in. I can see why people keep buying these though its an ‘aged’ design by now.

          Not everything should be a ‘Bahn burner and the way we drive in the US, a fullsized Buick with a Gran Touring Suspension (responsive with a touch of float), plush seating, all the creature comforts, and is much closer to my ideal Ultimate Driving Machine than ANY BMW.

          • 0 avatar

            well said. an accurate description of why Buick’s the Buy!

          • 0 avatar
            GS 455

            With my 05 Deville I can’t take corners as quickly as I’d like because the BMW drivers in front of me are taking curves slower than the suggested speed.

          • 0 avatar
            Kyree S. Williams

            I’m figuring that out, too. I’m already in my early twenties, and I think my next car will be something long, floaty and American in spirit. The current Impala and Avalon are on my shortlist (although I’ve seen reviews that claim the latter is somewhat firm). Short of an air-suspended S-Class, I don’t think I’ll do another German car for a while.

          • 0 avatar
            VoGo

            You drove a Sport Sedan with a Sport Package riding on 19’s. And found the ride too choppy with too much road feel.

            Maybe tomorrow you can review water and find out if its wet.

          • 0 avatar
            28-Cars-Later

            A high percentage of roads are not even appropriate for such “bahn burners” in their true form, yet stupidity wins every time.

            Yes I’d like the stiffest suspension and the biggest wheels you have for my commute over the Martian landscape, please.

          • 0 avatar

            German cars are designed for German autobahns where they can effortlessly cruise at/over 200 kmh. American roads are not smooth and well maintained and speed limit is like 140 kmh, let alone that left lane are occupied by slow cars. True German cars are waste of money in US road conditions and in developing countriesalso.

          • 0 avatar
            krhodes1

            @28

            Historically German cars did NOT have enormous wheels and stiff suspension, nor do the non-sport models now. Even the sporting models generally only have 18’s stock, as on my M235i. Rather the Germans understand the art of suspension dampening. Which is what gives a superb ride AND confidence inspiring control, as opposed to the wallowing mess that most American cars are. And then you add low profile wagon wheels for that extra touch of stupid.

            My BMW 328! rides NOTABLY more smoothly than my current Lacrosse rental. It is on 17’s with a decent amount of sidewall, and even with the stock RFTs the ride is quite serene on any surface. And even better on the non-RFT winter 16’s. Why Buick saw fit to put 20’s(!) on the Lacrosse is beyond me. You have a suspension without enough dampening combined with inappropriate tires and you get a wallowing crashy mess. Not as horrid as the land barges of old, but still not something I want to drive every day.

          • 0 avatar
            28-Cars-Later

            @khrodes

            18inch wheels sound pretty big but you’re driving it so if it feels good it must be appropriate I suppose.

            “Why Buick saw fit to put 20’s(!) on the Lacrosse is beyond me. ”

            Stupid is as stupid does I suppose. The only reason I can think of is inspired by the old Chappelle skit:

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I859Uym2sAQ

            I’m from the streets man!

            So buyers who think “rims” are “cool” will think the Buick looks “good”.

        • 0 avatar
          matador

          The Series II 3800 wasn’t in the LeSabres until 1996.

          That said, the Series I 3800 that I have gives plenty of power, and can still return almost 30MPG on the highway.

          It’s an old clunker, but I’m very happy with it. With 224k on the clock, it’s starting to show it’s age, but when the time comes, I would definitely consider replacing it with another Buick- maybe even another 1990s LeSabre with lower miles.

          • 0 avatar
            Kyree S. Williams

            I don’t think it was in *anything* until 1996. I remember the all-new 1995 Riviera carried over the Series I 3800 for just one year, then received the Series II in 1996. The Series III was better still.

        • 0 avatar
          bd2

          With the upcoming demise of the XTS for Cadillac, there is the possibility that Buick will get what would essentially be its successor, but then again, the market for full-size sedans is shrinking and GM would be better served using its resources to fill out Buick’s and Cadillac’s respective crossover lineups.

          • 0 avatar
            Lorenzo

            The market for full size family sedans isn’t shrinking, it’s just moved to 4-door trucks. Make a sedan with bench seats for six where people sit upright, the driver sits high, looking out of large windows, and can see the corners of the car, and you might sell a bunch. IOW, a 1965 Impala with the same drive train and brakes they’re putting into the LaCrosse.

        • 0 avatar
          ponchoman49

          A friend of mine has a 2005 LeSabre Celebration loaded to the hilt and also a 2014 Lincoln MKS. We actually prefer the old Buick for everyday comfort and that good old low down torque to squirt away from stop lights. Surprise it’s actually quieter than the MKS on the highway with less engine noise and much quieter 16″ tires vs the ridiculous noisy harder riding 20″ on the MKS. The MKS is primarily used for when the roads get really deep in snow.

    • 0 avatar
      JohnTaurus_3.0_AX4N

      Youll get no guff from me. The more brands try to target our age group (early 30s here), the more put off I am.

      The only thing Scion made that I was remotely interested in was the original xB, and they totally screwed the pooch on that with the bloated, ugly second generation. The FR-S is interesting, but Id probably get the Subaru version just to keep my money from going to Toyota.

      I love the (V-6) Lincoln MKZ more than the Focus and Fiesta STs. Dont get me wrong, I think its great that they build them, but its just not my style. Part of me likes cars like them and the Civic Si, but Id buy an Accord if I bought a new Honda today. I did like the Element, though, but none of my peers did. My friend’s girlfriend’s mom had an Element and loved it. Id almost bet that she still does (been 5+ years since Ive seen her).

      Ever since my age was in the single digits, Ive loved the Taurus and the Tempo. Fox body Mustang GT was great, but if my 9 year old self walked into a Ford dealer to buy a new car at the time, it wouldve been a Taurus more than likely. This became even stronger when the 94+ Mustang was out, and I still dont care for that style today.

      The Regal is probably the top mainstream GM product Id consider right now. I do like the ATS, its a fantastic looking car and I love that it is RWD. Id almost be inclined to buy one just to piss dw off, Lol! Dont they offer it in coupe/manual form? If so, that.

      My favorite FCA product (until the amazing Giulia drops) is the Chrysler 300C. I think they should keep the Challenger for Dodge’s pony car and make the Barracuda a Chrysler-brand full size personal luxury coupe. They wont, but itd be sweet if they did. Go all out on the interior. Benchmark the S-Class coupe’s interior, NVH, etc. Itll never bring S-Class money, but that isnt the point, itd pretty much be a class all to itself. Nobody makes an affordable PLC (I guess the nearest one to it would be a loaded Accord coupe), itd be great if FCA brought it back.

      Give me a G body Cutlass or Regal over a similar vintage Camaro anyday (hell, you could almost say “any vintage Camaro”). The one F body I liked was when Pontiac put a sweet Inline 6 (OHC if I remember correctly) in the early Firebird. Early Mustang? Id rather have a Fairlane or Galaxy coupe.

      So, I guess my choices tend to be “old man cars”, but so what? We like what we like.

      • 0 avatar
        Lorenzo

        The problem with the Scion xB was not enough Millennials were buying them, but plenty of Boomers were, since they were easy to get into and out of, and had plenty of greenhouse. That wasn’t the intended market for a “youth” brand.

    • 0 avatar
      ajla

      Yea, I’d be willing to buy a big (like over 200 in) Buick sedan.

    • 0 avatar
      TW5

      I hope Buick will morph into an American-version of Lexus ES/RX. Bulletproof powertrain and excellent overall reliability, but with relaxed American styling.Cadillac is moving upscale. Maybe the new Lacrosse will differentiate itself from Chevrolet.

      • 0 avatar
        bd2

        The current LaCrosse is already pegged as the main ES competitor and Buick has steadily been moving the LaCrosse upmarket with a special interior package.

        Expect the new LaCrosse to be a full-on ES competitor in terms of ride comfort and luxury.

    • 0 avatar
      dividebytube

      You’re making me miss my ’91 Park Avenue that I bought as a winter beater car… and my ’94 Roadmaster which was my daily for a few years.

      Both cars, even though they had different drive trains, shared a similar ability to smooth out the worst aspects of Michigan roads.

    • 0 avatar
      CoreyDL

      How is it being a young man car dealer? Do you enjoy it? I thought you were much older!

      • 0 avatar
        28-Cars-Later

        Flybrian is like an alternate history me located in Florida. Funny as I figured two me’s on the same plane of existence would create a black hole or Nexus or something.

        • 0 avatar

          CoreyDL, I love it. Kind of fell into it through circumstance, but I do love it.

          28, the black hole is floorplan. *ba-dum-cha*

          • 0 avatar
            28-Cars-Later

            So that’s where it was! I have to sit down and pick your brain at some point in the next few months. I’m writing something, I need some anecdotes and ideas. I have my own but they are not enough to fill more than a few chapters.

          • 0 avatar
            CoreyDL

            I guess it’d be easier in a place with no snow and no dark winter for 5 months scaring customers off.

            Heading toward your own dealership one day? You dump that beat up QX56 with aftermarket rims yet? That’s the car I recall when I think of your website.

          • 0 avatar

            Corey, that QX56 was sold a month ago and I took on a ’10 RR Sport in trade, which I then resold and took on trade a ’14 Wrangler Willys Wheeler, which I then made like $4k on. So, that ghetto cruiser ended up making out great.

            P.S. I originally bought that for the owner’s 52 year-old wife to drive. And she loved it. And she never really figured out those rims were aftermarket.

          • 0 avatar
            CoreyDL

            That sounds to me like someone was desperate to get out of an RR Sport!

  • avatar
    energetik9

    If that video is supposed to generate some excitement, Buick needs to hire a new ad agency. That is about the cheapest video I think I’ve ever seen.

    Buick is desperately trying to change it’s image. it seems to me that most of the Buick demographic isn’t deeply engaged with social media or car blogs seeking out the latest teaser.

  • avatar

    The Buick Lacrosse felt like a big car built on a small car’s platform (The Regal). I felt more comfortable in the Regal than the Lacrosse. Driving it felt more natural. The Lacrosse had a strong engine – but torque steer was a nightmare.

    At current: I’d rather take an Impala over a Lacrosse.

    Thing is: the Lacrosse offers AWD so people who aren’t willing to pay Cadillac prices are more likely to get the Lacrosse if they want to stay with GM.

    • 0 avatar
      nickoo

      The Lacrosse actually used two different suspension designs. The cheap models used standard MacPherson strut setup. The uplevel models used the HiPer strut, which is far superior, better emulating a SLA suspension.

      Typical garbage thinking from a garbage company putting out garbage vehicles and part of the reason I’ll never buy another one. Why the heck would you every cheap out your luxury competitor by offering an inferior suspension package? No excuse for that decision.

      At least Chrysler puts a proper suspension in their 300.

      • 0 avatar

        This was the same luxury 300 that debuted with a base model running a 190hp 2.7l, wheel covers, manual cloth seats, and a plastic clock?

        • 0 avatar
          nickoo

          That was Daimler era 300, you could easily put it up against a 2004 era LeSabre (my mother has one, what a retched vehicle) or the even worse abortion known as the 2006 LaCrosse…

          Let’s compare the current 300 to the current LaCrosse, shall we?

          • 0 avatar
            ajla

            I’m obviously not the biggest FCA fan, but the ride/handling balance on the nonSRT LX cars is great and almost certainly lower cost compared to the HiPer strut or Magneride stuff used by GM.

        • 0 avatar

          I’ve owned the Chrysler 300 with the 2.7-L, the Chrysler 300 SRT and the Chrysler 300 SRT 392.

          The 2.7 – from an interior space standpoint was excellent. Plenty of headroom. Rear seat was slightly cramped. The 6.1-L SRT was roughly the same, but I loved the seats more because of the bolstering. The suspension was stiff and the car was fun to drive.

          My 392 lost-headroom and I’m not happy with the seats – at least not as happy as I was with the 6.1.

          YES – Chrysler DOES have better suspensions.

        • 0 avatar
          nickoo

          Flybrain, my 1991 LeSabre was a better vehicle in literally every single aspect that matters than my mother’s 2004 LeSabre. It’s not even close, actually. I don’t know what happened over at Buick during that era, but there’s a reason Buick sales started careening down the mine shaft in the late 90s and hit the end of the tunnel in 2004 and have yet to recover.

          And they never will.

          • 0 avatar
            matador

            The 2000s LeSabres weren’t even close to the 1990s ones. I rode in a 2002 LeSabre a fair amount, and we owned a 2000 Impala for five years. Honestly, I don’t know why you would choose a 2000s LeSabre over the Impala. The interior wasn’t better, the comfort levels were comparable, and the reliability should be identical.

            I’m not a fan of the early 2000s Impalas, but they were just as good in my mind as the LeSabres of the era. The last really good LeSabres were made in 1999.

          • 0 avatar
            ponchoman49

            My 2000 LeSabre was superior in most every way to my parents 1992. Not only did it feel 10 times more solid but it took corners at more than double the speeds of the floaty 92, felt far more confident on every road surface and was just as reliable as there car. The only issue my 2000 had was a service bulletin that replaced an undersized power steering line that caused a humming sound on full turns. There 92 in turn needed a re-flash of the computer that caused occasional cool morning stalls at stop lights. My 2000 also had larger better gripping 16″ tires vs the tall squealing 15’s on there car, had much more up to date equipment and a more modern better thought out interior with more supportive seats. Even the 3800 was superior sounding more muted and pleasing compared to there more grumbly thrashy 3800 series I engine. It was also considerably quicker, got better highway fuel mileage and the 4T65 transaxle shifted better and smoother than there ever thought of.

    • 0 avatar
      cwallace

      “I’d rather take an Impala over a Lacrosse”

      Looks like Buick heard you– the side profiles look similar enough to be interchangeable.

    • 0 avatar
      Kyree S. Williams

      I know they call the Regal mid-sized, but to me, it sort of straddles the line between mid-sized and compact. Maybe it’s just the styling, or the fact that the Accord, Altima and Fusion are practically full-sized by comparison.

    • 0 avatar
      CoreyDL

      My biggest complaint is the interior of the Lacrosse, which manages to shrink the interior volume of the car to about 30% lower than it should be. Stupid swoopy door panels get on my last nerves.

      It’s also looking old, and overall is too tall and bathtub-like.

      • 0 avatar
        ponchoman49

        Ditto my friends new style Taurus. The interior is a joke and feels claustrophobic with the tiny side windows and the huge center console that is always in the way of your legs and knees while providing little to no benefit otherwise. Ironically he likes his 2005 LeSabre Celebration better as a daily driver for interior room, comfort and ride quality.

  • avatar
    matador

    That’s not a Buick!

    I’ll show myself out….

  • avatar
    RideHeight

    Sedans are for dead people. Where’s that Envision CUV?

    Encore is carrying this brand in the US and needs a slightly bigger brother.

  • avatar
    nickoo

    For the love of satan, please tell me this is a lift-back.

    • 0 avatar
      Lorenzo

      Forget the liftback. It’s a four door coupe. A lower seat cushion will recover head room from that low roof line.

      • 0 avatar
        RideHeight

        “A lower seat cushion will recover head room from that low roof line.”

        But it won’t ease getting in or out. How colossally stupid is it for a car with Buick’s traditional demographic to be this way?

        Maybe that’s how they intend to decouple Buick from old people? If it hurts to get in, get outta here?

  • avatar
    DeadWeight

    Cadillac & Chevrolet make Buick as vestigial as Mercury or Oldsmobile were…

    …assuming Cadillac can actually manage to field competitive products, actually manage to identify its brand and purpose, and radically reform its image in the next several years (which is unlikely).

    Buick is in no man’s land at present, with its only reason for being Cadillac’s total incompetence.

  • avatar
    GS 455

    Even smaller windows way to go Buick. And the war against visibility continues.

    • 0 avatar

      that is a common complaint I hear way too often. many Lacrosse owners won’t trade for, or lease another after having blind spot trouble.

      • 0 avatar
        davefromcalgary

        I’ve had a few Lacrosse rentals. Huge outside, small on the inside. Terrible seats.

        Overall, terrible space utilization, terrible visibility, wouldn’t recommend.

        • 0 avatar
          bd2

          Essentially the same basic problem as the Taurus.

          • 0 avatar
            CoreyDL

            If you made me pick, I’d have a Taurus over a LaCrosse, any day of the week.

          • 0 avatar
            28-Cars-Later

            Its a Hitler/Stalin argument but, damn.

          • 0 avatar
            ponchoman49

            After having spent a weekend in my buddies 2014 Taurus I would gladly buy the LaCrosse any day if I had to choose. The Taurus is the size of a large car with the front seat space of a compact. It also has 3 times more tire roar a much noisier engine, less back seat space, a much plainer cheaper looking interior and an truly inferior sound system to the rental LaCrosse with leather we had a week before. It’s only and I mean only saving grace was a larger trunk which has been a LaCrosse issue since 2010 when it was introduced. It is just a far more polished smoother quieter more expensive feeling car than the Taurus.

          • 0 avatar
            dal20402

            Both have bad space utilization but the Taurus’s is worse. The LaCrosse drives better, too. It’s lighter and you can really feel that. The ride height is also just a bit lower. If forced to pick one I’d take the LaCrosse without hesitating.

  • avatar
    65corvair

    The most expensive Chevy needs to cost less than the cheapest Buick, the cheapest Cadillac needs cost more than the most expensive Buick. Does that leave a viable spot for Buick? I’m not sure.

    When I asked my 85 year old dad if he had ever considered a Buick, he said that old people drive Buicks!

    • 0 avatar
      George B

      65corvair, the Alfred Sloan brand ladder no longer works in 2015. A brand is either a relatively low-volume prestige brand or a high-volume economies of scale brand with no room in the middle. Buick can be different than Chevrolet, but there’s no room for it to be more expensive than a well equipped Chevrolet. Since customers won’t pay more for Buick, it’s likely more profitable to simply build more units of Chevrolet.

      • 0 avatar
        TW5

        There’s room. Virtually all luxury manufacturers have a bifurcated model lineup of crappy volume cars that get leased to yuppies, and exclusive low-volume luxury yachts.

        No reason Buick can’t be the Lexus ES/RX and Cadillac can’t be the LS/LX.

    • 0 avatar
      bd2

      That’s just silly and impractical.

      The Toyota Land Cruiser is more expensive than most Lexus models and the GT-R is more expensive than any Infiniti and the Corvette is more expensive than most Cadillac models (will change some as Cadillac adds 2 higher end sedans and a full-size crossover).

      • 0 avatar
        Lorenzo

        Apples and oranges. Sports cars and trucks are in a different category and price range.

        • 0 avatar
          bd2

          Not really – as people still perceive them to represent that brand.

          And it’s not just crossovers/SUVs and sport cars.

          The Avalon is more expensive than the Lexus CT and there is talk of Lexus doing a smaller CUV below the NX which would also be priced below the Avalon.

  • avatar
    krhodes1

    Timely, as I have a loaded Lacrosse as a rental this weekend in Seattle. It’s “OK”. Goes nicely with the six, rides a little floaty with some crashing thanks to the silly wagon wheels. Interior is nice, but cheap in places. Fairly quiet, but the roads here are very coarse. I’d like it a lot more if I could see out of it. And I think it is ill-proportioned, if not quite ugly.

    In theory I am in the Buick demographic, late 40’s, professional. But this car does not appeal to me at all. My BMW simply does everything so much better, for not THAT much more money. An Impala is the same thing for less money, and more attractive.

    This is an old persons car.

    • 0 avatar
      CoreyDL

      “In theory I am in the Buick demographic”

      Only in theory! You’re quite German loyal, and not quite boring enough to want a mediocre Buick.

      • 0 avatar
        krhodes1

        @CoreyDL

        In practice, I have owned 2X as many Swedish cars as German cars, and I have owned more Peugeots than BMWs.

        The Regal Turbo suits me just fine, I could see owning one with a stick. Of course, that IS a German car! But that is the best of the Buicks, I agree the Lacrosse is pretty mediocre.

    • 0 avatar
      ponchoman49

      The trouble is old folks don’t really like the Lacrosse due to the visibility issue. They lost a ton of sales at Buick because of this issue. I too would easily pick the current Impala over the Lacrosse and especially the stiff hard riding noisy Taurus any day of the week

  • avatar
    mikey

    I will be 62 next month., I’ve come to the conclusion, that I much prefer driving my 8 year old Mustang, than I do my 2 year old Impala. I’m thinking of going to one car. The Impala makes me think “old mans car”….. I don’t see anything from Buick that doesn’t scream “grand pa” at me.

    • 0 avatar
      highdesertcat

      “I’m thinking of going to one car.” Knowing your fondness for everything GM, I would think you would consider an AWD Enclave, Traverse or Acadia if going to only one car. Very popular with the 62 and over crowd in MY area, as is the JGC.

      For me, were I to only have one vehicle, my choice would be a four door, 4×4 Tundra 5.7L (any trim). That would ring my bell.

      • 0 avatar
        nickoo

        Excellent choice on a single vehicle. I’m torn between keeping the Tahoe (which I loath) as a backup vehicle and buying a new mustang, thereby going back to owning two vehicles, or simplifying and just getting rid of the tahoe and getting a 4×4 quad-cab Tacoma.

        Really thinking the Tacoma is the way to go, but I sure would miss not having the mustang because Tacomas with 100k and 10 years old sell for 18+ around here, might as well buy it new, drive it 10 years/100k and sell it off.

        • 0 avatar
          highdesertcat

          My son in Brownsville, TX, is replacing his old Tacoma 4-dr 4×4 with a 2016 Tacoma 4-dr 4×4 TRD. It’s the perfect size for him.

          His daily driver is a Border Patrol Tahoe 4×4, and he absolutely hates it.

        • 0 avatar
          ponchoman49

          You would seriously need to be out of your mind paying that kind of money for any Tacoma with 100k miles that is 10 years old. I see 3-4 year old examples all the time with paint peeling off the rims rusted frames and loads of door dings along the sides due to it’s thinner sheet metal. A fool and his money are soon parted in this case.

      • 0 avatar
        mikey

        I don’t want an CUV. The full size Chevy tucks .? Too big, too hard on gas, and too much money. The CTS coupe , has my attention , but it’s too much dough, for what it is. ?????? I keep coming back to the 2.3 Turbo Mustang, loaded , with leather . The price is right , it’s just that ” Blue Oval,” that gives me doubts…???

        • 0 avatar
          highdesertcat

          A great deal depends on how many people you would transport at peak need.

          I know people in our age demographic who have downsized to one vehicle and it was a Subaru Legacy, 4-cyl. Those interested in skiing and well-heeled usually go for the Audi Quattro or M-B 320 4-matic.

          Of course their needs are that they only transport two adults, at max peak. If they need something larger, like for the Holidays when kids/grandkids come home, they rent a Van.

          Ultimately, you buy what works for you. That’s all that matters.

          But getting to that point where you are ready to commit, can be an exhausting research experience.

          • 0 avatar
            mikey

            Yeah it have some thinking to do, but I’m not going to buy Buick ,, Maybe next time, we will see.

          • 0 avatar
            highdesertcat

            I was an Oldsmobile fan. I can only imagine what today’s Olds would have to offer, had they lived.

            There was just something majestic about the 455 Custom Cruiser and 455 Toronado we owned.

            That was then. This is now. And it is a good thing they don’t make them like that anymore. I’m too old to tool and wrench on my vehicles now.

        • 0 avatar
          Kyree S. Williams

          My friend is getting rid of his 2015 Mustang EcoBoost Premium w/Performance Package, and with the 2.3-liter turbo I4. Neither he nor I has ever been able to get it past 26 MPG. I’m kind of pissed because the 3.7-liter V6 is a superior engine for fuel economy and performance (but probably less tuneable), yet Ford down-rated it and then offered it with so few options that you’re forced to get the EcoBoost if you want *any* amenities.

      • 0 avatar
        CoreyDL

        I am absolutely not sold on the reliability of the GM CUV vans on offer currently. And they’re ugly too, save for the Enclave in certain colors.

    • 0 avatar
      nickoo

      My engineering opinion is that Ford has always been a better engineered vehicle than Chevy going back to the 1932 model 48 with the flat-head v8. There were one or two year gap periods where Chevy got their next generation tech out first (example: overhead valve small block v8 beat the ford Y block to market, but the Y block was far superior and ford innovated the hell out of their v8s over the next 4 decades while chevy trudged along with the inferior and cheap small block).

      During the muscle-car era there was nothing even close to the Ford 427 SOHC cammer hemi v8. That motor reached the peak of v8 muscle and when properly retrofitted with gears to replace the timing chains, is still incredible. Chrysler actually conspired to get it banned from NASCAR it was so good.

      Today the Coyote v8s and their mod engine predecessors are still world beating motors with possibly Toyota’s UR/UZ being the closest competition.

      Chrysler is second with their modern v8s, but they have issues with barely meeting pollution requirements. GM with their overheating, metal shaving messes of v8s is last.

      In other words, it doesn’t Surprise me one bit that you like driving your Mustang more than your Chevy. For every category, for as long as I can recall, the equivalent Ford has been better than the equivalent Chevy, with very few exceptions.

      • 0 avatar
        highdesertcat

        My 2-cents: I own two Toyota all-aluminum, 32-valve DOHC, 5.7L V8s in truck guise and I am very partial to them. Magnificent engines! If I could afford it, the LS460 would be my choice in sedan V8s.

        I would rate those Toyota V8s as the equivalent Rolex of the automotive universe. Only other engines as refined are the M-B and BMW V8s and V-12.

        Ford, GM and RAM are archaic dinosaurs by comparison. I have owned them. I speak from personal experience.

      • 0 avatar
        JohnTaurus_3.0_AX4N

        Nickoo, I agree. There are exceptions as you mentioned. GM’s 3800 was better than Ford’s 3.8L from a reliability stand point. Even with bad intake manifolds and Dexcool, Id still choose a GM 3800 over Ford’s awful 3.8L. Ford didnt even come by their engine honest. They reverse engineered a GM 3800 and decided to go with aluminum heads to reduce weight. It might have reduced weight, but it also reduced the life of the engine considerably. If one isnt overheating and drinking coolant while leaving a white cloud everywhere it goes, its knocking so as to make a 7.3L PowerStroke seem quiet by comparision. Boat anchors, pure and simple. If my Taurus had the 3.8L but everything else was the same, I wouldnt have bought it. I made damn sure it had a Vulcan before I spent any gas (or diesel, rather, was in dad’s F-250) to go look at it.

        The 4.3L Vortec is hit-and-miss. In the full size trucks, its reliable and long lasting. In Blazers, its a ticking time bomb (but at least it matched the rest of the vehicle in that respect lol). Likewise, the Cologne Ford 4.0L OHV was decent, but the SOHC’s tendancy to eat timing chains is shameful. Ford 2.8 and 2.9L V6s were awful, but so was the GM 2.8L.

        The Ford 3.0L Vulcan is more reliable than the GM 3100/3400 (based off the old 2.8L I believe), and the Duratec 3.0L was smoother and more refined than the 3800 Series II.

        Ford’s 2.3L OHC “Lima” and the GM “Iron Duke” were both good engines. Short on get-up-and-go, but long lasting. Ford’s 2.3L HSC was marginally better than GM’s 2.2L (they eat timing chains, too), but the 2.0L Zetec crushed it with better MPG, more power, more refinement and was easier to deal with as it had a belt but was non-interferance (dont confuse it for the paint-shaker 2.0L SPI in the 97-02 Escort sedan, it is interferance and refined it was not).

        I much prefered the Festiva and Aspire to the Metro. Same with the Aerostar and the “we-dont-need-no-stinkin-foot-room” Astro. The FWD minivans from both were equally terrible, either maker’s RWD minis were preferable to the FWDs.

        Up until 1998, the Town Car was much better than de Ville. After the 98 was cost-cut down by old Jac the [equipment] Ripper, the Caddy probably squeeks ahead unless you consider how much more reliable (but not more powerful) the 4.6L Modular was to the Northstar. Id take a 98-02 Conti over a Seville anyday. That generation Conti doesnt get the respect it deserves. It was a damn fine car to drive, the Intec 4.6L would make it fly and the adjustable suspension was actually useful (moreso than in other cars of the era Ive driven with it). Comfortable, too, and not bad looking (especially compared to Town Car and Concorde/300M).

        • 0 avatar
          nickoo

          Spot on with the analysis of the ford 3.8L v6 vs the gm 3800/3.8L. Dissimilar metals often have different coefficients of thermal expansion causing them to expand and contract at different rates during heating and cooling cycles. That is why aluminum heads/iron block or aluminum block/iron heads eat head gaskets and head tie-rod bolts.

          Ford could have built that motor as all-iron cheaper and better. I can’t recall if the supercharged ones used the alum heads or if it was just weak head gaskets, but the supercharged versions were notorious for blown head gaskets in the supercoupes.

        • 0 avatar
          nickoo

          I should also state that I was trying to keep it between Chevy and Ford, the two brand base offerings, without bringing in the upper GM brands. If I recall correctly, the GM 3.8L didn’t make it into a Chevy until the 1995 Camaro and then saw a second limited use in the Impala, with GM preferring to stick Chevy with the highly inferior 60 degree v6 family.

      • 0 avatar
        ajla

        I’ve dealt with more GM engine problems than Ford engine issues, but I’ve also dealt with more Ford transmission failures or differential problems than GM trans/differential failures.

        And neither seems especially capable of building a reliable HVAC system.

        • 0 avatar
          nickoo

          What gets my goat regarding my tahoe is that “high” is particularly noisy for the AC/fan and yet it barely blows at all. I thought my Tbird had a much better AC/fan that was a bit quieter. Unfortunately, I’ve never owned a ford pick-up to compare against my tahoe.

          HVAC automotive engineers should seriously considering benchmarking their automotive fans in cfm per decibel and start doing continuous improvement on that metric.

        • 0 avatar
          Lorenzo

          You must not be old enough to remember when Chrysler owned Airtemp and GM owned Frigidaire. By the early 1970s, GM and Chrysler cars had ice-cold air conditioning that was pretty reliable. BTW, Chrysler sold Airtemp in 1975, Gm sold Frigidaire in 1979, though they still bought units for years afterward.

          It wasn’t until Freon (a GM patent) was banned and the simpler, reliable AC units had to be modified to accommodate the newer, less efficient coolant that AC units became more trouble prone.

      • 0 avatar
        ponchoman49

        Um the only Gm V8 that is shaving it’s innards is one very particular Corvette mill. There is no issues with the 5.3 and 6.2 V8’s in the Chevy pickups and we sell these vehicles in the 1999-2010 range all the time with 200-300K miles on the bone stock original engines.

        Who in there right mind wouldn’t like driving a Mustang over a rental car Impala. That doesn’t even make sense. They are two completely different cars. But there is no way on earth I or most folks today could live day to day with a RWD pony car with no back seat space a dinky trunk and lousy mileage for that purpose. My 2013 Impala is a perfect everyday sedan with a nice big trunk, a Taurus embarrassing amount of front seat room and comfort, 100% reliability since day one and up to 32 MPG on the highway. And we won’t even talk of the new style Taurus slaughtering Impala will we.

        And saying Ford V8’s are better than Small blocks is like saying black is better than white and quite pointless.

  • avatar
    28-Cars-Later

    The Church laments the fact the wrong power-plant bring is used in this Buick.

  • avatar
    RideHeight

    Why doesn’t Buick get what the Encore’s and Enclave’s success (and the abject failure of everyone’s large sedans) is telling it?

    Or does it understand the situation perfectly well and is committing resources to further large sedan development solely for the Chinese market but still hoping for some vestigial sales in the US?

  • avatar
    davefromcalgary

    Enh. I think the Lacrosse is a turd, and the shrinking windows don’t fill me with hope.

    I grew up on Lesabres, 88s and 98s, and my dad is still driving an 88 and a 98. They wallow down the road, but they have great seats and great visibility, and ooze along effortlessly at low revs. Thats what these cars should be, and they just aren’t comfortable! Which is totally missing the point IMO.

    Mainly that greenhouse though. yuck.

  • avatar
    JEFFSHADOW

    We are about to buy a home in the SoCal High Desert as the basin area is just too overpriced and the neighborhoods have too many homes packed too close together. Hard to park 14 vehicles in most tracts!
    The vehicle of choice to get to work down the hill:
    Our 2001 Buick Park Avenue with 33,000 miles!
    28 MPG, soft ride, massive styling (may have to add OEM ventiports)and ultimate reliability.
    Next on the list of drivers for the commute: 2006 Rainier, 2000 Eldorado ETC and 2008 Buick Wildcat.
    The 455 V8 Toronados get to rest for awhile.

    • 0 avatar
      kmars2009

      Does that Eldorado have a Northstar? If so, has the head gasket given you problems. …or the screw threads gone on the cylinder heads? I like the look of those Eldorados but the Northstar issues that loom, scare me.

      • 0 avatar
        28-Cars-Later

        Every Cadillac sold between 1993 and 2003 uses a Northstar except Fleetwood (SBC 5.7L V8) and Catera gen 1 (Ellesmere Port 54 degree 3.0L V6) and Deville/Sixty Special between 1993 and 1995 (Cadillac 4.9 V8).

        • 0 avatar
          CoreyDL

          Oh dear.

          The 93 Sixty Special would disagree heartily with all 4.9 liters.

          SNEAKY ALTERATIONS LATER!

          • 0 avatar
            28-Cars-Later

            For a moment I was reading it and though wait isn’t there a Fleetwood FWD and was like wait it was gone in 1992, then I was like sh*t there was that one off Sixty Special.

      • 0 avatar
        ponchoman49

        It is hit and miss. Not every Northstar has this issue and sometimes it doesn’t present itself until very high mileage. Sometimes they just need a new intake gasket and sometimes it is the head bolts or gasket. Seems to vary by the year also. Not one 2004 on up Cadillac or Buick has given our dealership any fits and the 2003′ s don’t seem too bad.

      • 0 avatar
        JEFFSHADOW

        Yes the 2000 ETC has a Northstar and yes the car had the
        “Service Engine Soon” light on when I bought it at auction for $3,400. It had 86,000 miles and was a one-owner example, in Cashmere.
        I had it shipped to Carroll Custom Cadillac in Texas for the proper rebuild. They delivered it to me in Scottsdale, Arizona on the same day as the annual Arizona Oldsmobile Club Car Show.
        The Eldorado now runs better than new!

        • 0 avatar
          kmars2009

          Thank you! I live in Mesa. I’m moving to Scottsdale in the spring.
          It’s a shame GM couldn’t have done it right from the get go. Some lucky person got a you Cadillac done right.
          Hopefully they will hang on to it for many years, after all your efforts.

  • avatar
    Whatnext

    Just what the world needs, another sedan with too fast a roofline and a stunted trunk. Why would would choose a full size GM product over a Chrysler 300?

    • 0 avatar
      Lorenzo

      Well, I bought a used 2005 LeSabre because it had bigger windows than the 2006 Chrysler 300 I was checking out at the time. I won’t “upgrade” to a late model LaCrosse for the same reason.

    • 0 avatar
      ponchoman49

      Are you serious. Talk about a car with silly gangsta stunted windows and a short stubby trunk. The 300 is more of a mid size than a full size like the current Taurus with it’s compact size front seat space and low roofline. Both of these cars share the same deficiencies with the Buick in one form or another. The one 300 plus is it’s RWD chassis design that is getting rather dated BTW and Chryslers quality control scares the hell out of me.

      • 0 avatar
        Lorenzo

        What’s with all the Chrysler quality control complaints? They’re as well put together as any other car. If some parts don’t fit well, it’s the parts that weren’t made to fit well, not the assembly. Chrysler QC is not the culprit, it’s the third rate parts that will cr*p out on ya.


Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • HotPotato: I mean, Nardelli is literally the worst CEO in America…but your point stands.
  • HotPotato: Elantra looks nice, drives nice, lots of room. Stiff ride for such a long-wheelbase car though.
  • HotPotato: The Toyota Tercel was my least favorite car at the time. Incredibly light and fragile bits assembled with...
  • DenverMike: It’s just one more reason to pay cash, but once you’re doing that, you’re staring down...
  • HotPotato: Man, I was so excited to drive a Capri XR-2 due to that blistering straight-line acceleration I’d...

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Staff

  • Contributors

  • Timothy Cain, Canada
  • Matthew Guy, Canada
  • Ronnie Schreiber, United States
  • Bozi Tatarevic, United States
  • Chris Tonn, United States
  • Corey Lewis, United States
  • Mark Baruth, United States
  • Moderators

  • Adam Tonge, United States
  • Corey Lewis, United States