I test drove thenew Buick Lacross
08-09-2009, 06:42 PM
#1
Three Wheelin'
Thread Starter
I test drove thenew Buick Lacross
Let me say flat out, the TL is better hands down. If anyone cross shops the The Buick and the TL, don't drive the TL. I saw the Lacross that the auto show and from the distance I was allowed to view it, I was wowed. I have not had an American car since 1972, but I like the way the Lacross looked. Took the Tl for a test drive and came home with it, so I never looked at the Buick as it was not out yet.
A Buick dealer I had spoke with as me to come down for a test drive, so I did.
The first thing I notice is you sit high in the seat like being in an SUV. The interior, while designed nice, looks cheap in comparison to the TL.
Started the car and off I went.(base model) Mashed on the gas and..... my foot was 3/4 to the floor and the car had not get up and go. I was shocked. If my foot was 3/4 on the TL I would have snapped my neck. To even hold a nice speed I had to hold the peddle way down whereas the Tl I just feather the peddle. As you would expect the ride was floaty compared to the TL
I made a U turn int he car and I can say, the turning radius was nice. After coming out of the turn, I floored that car and again, no thrill, No punch, nada.
Then came the brakes. In a word, Marshmallows. That is what comes to mind. The breaks just has no feel to them at all. Very mushy.
I love a good audio system, and the Buick has a acceptable one, but in comparison to the TL tech packaged, its junk. This car is still for grampa IMO
If anything the Buick help me to appreciate how good the TL is.
A Buick dealer I had spoke with as me to come down for a test drive, so I did.
The first thing I notice is you sit high in the seat like being in an SUV. The interior, while designed nice, looks cheap in comparison to the TL.
Started the car and off I went.(base model) Mashed on the gas and..... my foot was 3/4 to the floor and the car had not get up and go. I was shocked. If my foot was 3/4 on the TL I would have snapped my neck. To even hold a nice speed I had to hold the peddle way down whereas the Tl I just feather the peddle. As you would expect the ride was floaty compared to the TL
I made a U turn int he car and I can say, the turning radius was nice. After coming out of the turn, I floored that car and again, no thrill, No punch, nada.
Then came the brakes. In a word, Marshmallows. That is what comes to mind. The breaks just has no feel to them at all. Very mushy.
I love a good audio system, and the Buick has a acceptable one, but in comparison to the TL tech packaged, its junk. This car is still for grampa IMO
If anything the Buick help me to appreciate how good the TL is.
08-09-2009, 08:18 PM
#2
Intermediate
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 43
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's designed to compete directly with the Lexus ES. Here's a good review:
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-f...6908678.column
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-f...6908678.column
08-09-2009, 10:16 PM
#3
Three Wheelin'
I think the new 2010 Ford Taurus SHO would be a closer and better rival to the TL. The SHO has a killer engine and is much faster (despite being larger and heavier than the TL). Of course, the TL has a better interior, fit & finish, reliability and resale value. However, that new Ford Ecco-Boost engine is terrific. It has direct-injection just like the new BMW engines, has 2 self-cooling turbos, and produces 365 hp/355 ft-lb torque while getting similar gas mileage to the TL's.......geezus, why can't Acura produce something like that!
Last edited by PetesTL; 08-09-2009 at 10:20 PM.
08-09-2009, 10:24 PM
#4
I feel strongly both ways
I think the new 2010 Ford Taurus SHO would be a closer and better rival to the TL. The SHO has a killer engine and is much faster (despite being larger and heavier than the TL). Of course, the TL has a better interior, fit & finish, reliability and resale value. However, that new Ford Ecco-Boost engine is terrific. It has direct-injection just like the new BMW engines, has 2 self-cooling turbos, and produces 365 hp/355 ft-lb torque while getting similar gas mileage to the TL's.......geezus, why can't Acura produce something like that!
For that car to have really been competitive in the segment it would have had to come in at least 400 lbs. lighter.
08-09-2009, 11:08 PM
#5
All the latest American offerings have mind blowing figures but are heavy and are geared extra tall for one of the reasons they are failing in the first place, gas mileage. At least they know that for most, mpg and engine ratings are often viewed before performance stats.
Everytime I drive another type of car I swear that is what I am looking for. Drive a Lexus and you want that luxury, drive BMW and change your mind, no, I want the ultimate driving machine. Acura gets my dollar becuase they offer the best of both worlds without sacrificing much of either.
Everytime I drive another type of car I swear that is what I am looking for. Drive a Lexus and you want that luxury, drive BMW and change your mind, no, I want the ultimate driving machine. Acura gets my dollar becuase they offer the best of both worlds without sacrificing much of either.
08-09-2009, 11:27 PM
#6
05 slate grey e500 AMG sp
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: St Simons Island Ga
Age: 59
Posts: 345
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From everything I read there's no doubt that Ford will be selling a lot of the Taurus'. But in spite of those jaw dropping engine output numbers, the car is a tad slower to 60 and thru the quarter than the TL. And it has all the driving dynamics of 1990's vintage Sedan De Ville. As for those mpg ratings, let's just say I'll believe it when I see it (after a few thousand people have a chance to report their real world mpg numbers).
For that car to have really been competitive in the segment it would have had to come in at least 400 lbs. lighter.
For that car to have really been competitive in the segment it would have had to come in at least 400 lbs. lighter.
08-10-2009, 08:47 AM
#7
Three Wheelin'
From everything I read there's no doubt that Ford will be selling a lot of the Taurus'. But in spite of those jaw dropping engine output numbers, the car is a tad slower to 60 and thru the quarter than the TL. And it has all the driving dynamics of 1990's vintage Sedan De Ville. As for those mpg ratings, let's just say I'll believe it when I see it (after a few thousand people have a chance to report their real world mpg numbers).
For that car to have really been competitive in the segment it would have had to come in at least 400 lbs. lighter.
For that car to have really been competitive in the segment it would have had to come in at least 400 lbs. lighter.
What do you mean slow?....The Taurus SHO does 0-60 in 5.2 sec as tested by MT in the latest issue. And lateral acceleration is pretty good at .87g You have to realize this car is bigger and heavier than the TL, yet it's faster and has similar gas mileage.
Last edited by PetesTL; 08-10-2009 at 08:49 AM.
Trending Topics
08-10-2009, 09:07 AM
#8
I haven't driven the Taurus, but I remember reading car and driver and they said it's heavy, really heavy. Probably that is why he said it's slow?
08-10-2009, 10:27 AM
#9
Three Wheelin'
The other problem is that the SHO with the good stereo and Nav will be something like $43k. I just don't think I can trust the resale value of the car yet to put that much money into a Ford. There would have to be some very significant incentives or lease deals to make me consider it.
08-10-2009, 12:00 PM
#11
Pro
Join Date: Jan 2009
Age: 42
Posts: 745
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The SHO had a pretty mediocre slalom speed reported on the Edmunds comparison test. I'd consider the TL to be near the limit of maximum size for a sedan, so the Taurus is well past that point.
08-10-2009, 12:42 PM
#12
Three Wheelin'
The regular Taurus may be slow but the SHO version is fast....it will keep up with a G37 or a 335i. 0-60 in 5.2 sec and Quarter mile in 13.7 sec @ 103 mph......blows away a TL that's for sure.
Acura needs an engine like the twin-turbo Ecco-Boost in the next 5G or a future Type-S. (Whoever thought Acura would one day lag in engine technology to a Ford?!)
08-10-2009, 02:24 PM
#13
Three Wheelin'
The regular Taurus may be slow but the SHO version is fast....it will keep up with a G37 or a 335i. 0-60 in 5.2 sec and Quarter mile in 13.7 sec @ 103 mph......blows away a TL that's for sure.
Acura needs an engine like the twin-turbo Ecco-Boost in the next 5G or a future Type-S. (Whoever thought Acura would one day lag in engine technology to a Ford?!)
Acura needs an engine like the twin-turbo Ecco-Boost in the next 5G or a future Type-S. (Whoever thought Acura would one day lag in engine technology to a Ford?!)
Look at the CAFE rating for the RL. With 300 hp, it's mileage is worse than most luxury cars with 100 more hp.
The moderators may want me to start a new thread, but anyone want to throw in the Hyundai Genisis sedan to compare to the TL?
08-10-2009, 05:01 PM
#15
Three Wheelin'
I'm not trying to turn this into a pissing match btw, just curious as to everyone elses opinion of the Genisis - especially if anyone here has driven one.
08-11-2009, 02:42 AM
#17
You'll Never Walk Alone
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Age: 37
Posts: 9,511
Received 841 Likes
on
524 Posts
On paper that car is brilliant.
08-11-2009, 08:38 AM
#18
Pro
Join Date: Jan 2009
Age: 42
Posts: 745
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think Ford has the right engine, but the wrong car. I'd really like to see the Ecoboost engine in an AWD Fusion. Now that would be interesting.
08-11-2009, 03:00 PM
#19
Three Wheelin'
I'm not understanding your point? Who questioned the 4G? It simply so ugly that many people are having trouble deciding whether they can walk out in the garage and face it every morning.
08-11-2009, 06:21 PM
#21
Instructor
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Staten Island
Age: 39
Posts: 113
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Your personal annotations on the aesthetics of the 4G are immaterial so please spare us. The fact that you dislike the 4G makes you the ambassador for every alternative out there even the pathetic Buick which has the build quality of dog shit.
08-11-2009, 09:10 PM
#22
Three Wheelin'
I've owned four Honda Accords, Eight Honda Motorcycles, three Acuras (including a 3G TL) and a Honda Lawnmower. Does that sound like a troll?
My CTS is off lease in six months and I follow the forums closely for the vehicles I may consider buying. I'm honestly trying to give the 4G a chance because I think its a great car for the money, except it's ugly. I'm trying to decide over time if I can get past that or not.
I have a tremendous amount of experience on forums, so I understand where ya'll are coming from. If you think I'm an outsider I'm not allowed to say the car is ugly. But that opinion is all over this forum by hundreds of other people other than me, so why call me a troll?
I know a lot about all cars, and I think there is merit to discussing the pros and cons of all cars. If all ya'll want is a love-in, then it won't take long for me to leave ya'll alone anyway.
08-11-2009, 11:26 PM
#23
Three Wheelin'
Tell me with a straight face that that is not the usual retarded ramblings of a troll. If you don't like the 4G, fine, just say it....no need to go out of your way and deliberately insult the owners who bought them. And I don't give a shit if you're the president of Honda.
08-12-2009, 06:59 AM
#24
Three Wheelin'
Tell me with a straight face that that is not the usual retarded ramblings of a troll. If you don't like the 4G, fine, just say it....no need to go out of your way and deliberately insult the owners who bought them. And I don't give a shit if you're the president of Honda.
If your idea of insulting is having a five year member of the forum say that the 4G is ugly, then you have awfully thin skin.
08-12-2009, 08:01 AM
#25
08-12-2009, 08:38 AM
#26
05 slate grey e500 AMG sp
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: St Simons Island Ga
Age: 59
Posts: 345
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
08-12-2009, 09:06 AM
#27
Instructor
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Egg Harbor Twp, NJ
Age: 41
Posts: 133
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why do you people care what jjsC5, or anyone else for that matter, thinks about how the car looks? If he's really a troll, then by replying to him like that, you're just feeding him. Based on that logic, you all should know better than to feed the troll.
I personally don't think he is a troll as everyone's entitled to an opinion, especially on something as basic as looks.
Buying a car for the approval of others is incredibly superficial. Sorry, but insecurity based on your appearance and seeking acceptance from others are female traits.
I love my car, and could really care less what anyone else thinks. I think it looks awesome just how it came from the factory, and that's my opinion.
I personally don't think he is a troll as everyone's entitled to an opinion, especially on something as basic as looks.
Buying a car for the approval of others is incredibly superficial. Sorry, but insecurity based on your appearance and seeking acceptance from others are female traits.
I love my car, and could really care less what anyone else thinks. I think it looks awesome just how it came from the factory, and that's my opinion.
08-12-2009, 11:06 AM
#28
Did they all say "ugly that many people are having trouble deciding whether they can walk out in the garage and face it every morning" or they just say they don't like the exterior look?
08-12-2009, 02:45 PM
#29
Instructor
This thread and the review itself is rediculous, especially coming from a biased current TL owner, it tells us nothing.
I own two Acura's including a 2008 TL, so I'm a fan as much as anyone but comparing a base model LaCrosse with 184 hp to a TL with 280 hp seems a bit unfair, let's compare the 280 hp LaCrosse similarly equipped and we have a fair comparison.
To say the interior looks "cheap" is out of line, I've seen these two vehicles up close and can tell you the LaCrosse is competitive with the TL, I still like the TL a bit more in this respect but I would hardly say the Buick looks cheap.
Here's an interesting clip from an article regarding the interior:
The LaCrosse interior is also very well done (interestingly, it was conceived in Buick’s Chinese studios). The shapes are fresh and pleasing, lacking the conservative concept of the Lexus without seeming odd. More surprising is that the quality of the materials seems better than on most of the competition. A little less glossy wood and chrome would be more to our taste, but given the example set by Lexus perhaps this is a category necessity. Again, final judgment awaits direct comparison, but nothing about the Buick design jumped out as an important faux pas, whereas we’ve been put off by materials and detail design on many a Lexus and Infiniti of late.
Here's another piece on the ride:
The LaCrosse ride and handling mix is modern and in a way outstanding. First of all, springs and dampers are nicely firm. The car doesn’t roll much, and certainly doesn’t float or wallow. The suspension definitely has a stiffer setup than the typical Lexus fare. Like almost all modern cars, the LaCrosse will understeer when pushed, but the predominant sensation from the car is one of balance.
There are choices in the handling package, as well. We drove the maximum supreme CXS with adjustable damping and compared it to the mid-line CXL. The CXS in sport mode is clearly firmer, and in normal mode is still not soft. CXS ride quality is quite good, with excellent isolation of crumbly pavement. By comparison, the CXL is well damped, but on the soft side and gives a slightly better ride on horrible pavement. We tried at CXL with AWD and found the balance to be enjoyable. None of these suspensions is even vaguely reminiscent of the LeSabre.
All very poistive including the styling which I think GM has done a great job with, I won't speak of the TL by comparison as it seems that is forbidden.
Haven't driven the car but the opinions of the reviews seem to be much different than our review here.
I just think the folks here need to be a bit more honest in terms of comparison, Acura makes nice cars but GM is coming on strong.
When you look at the new CTS, LaCrosse, Equinox, Malibu, Traverse, Acadia/Enclave and Tahoe/Escalade tandems you have to admit the landscape is changing.
Acura and others don't have the significant advantage they used to, they are losing market share every day and when you consider we are all now owners of GM at 61%, all the more reason to take them seriously as your tax dollars support them.
Just because some of us don't agree with the opinions of other here doesn't make us troller's guys, sorry.
I'm still keeping my CL and TL and I'm a fan of the new TL in some respects but I like what I'm seeing from the American's.
I own two Acura's including a 2008 TL, so I'm a fan as much as anyone but comparing a base model LaCrosse with 184 hp to a TL with 280 hp seems a bit unfair, let's compare the 280 hp LaCrosse similarly equipped and we have a fair comparison.
To say the interior looks "cheap" is out of line, I've seen these two vehicles up close and can tell you the LaCrosse is competitive with the TL, I still like the TL a bit more in this respect but I would hardly say the Buick looks cheap.
Here's an interesting clip from an article regarding the interior:
The LaCrosse interior is also very well done (interestingly, it was conceived in Buick’s Chinese studios). The shapes are fresh and pleasing, lacking the conservative concept of the Lexus without seeming odd. More surprising is that the quality of the materials seems better than on most of the competition. A little less glossy wood and chrome would be more to our taste, but given the example set by Lexus perhaps this is a category necessity. Again, final judgment awaits direct comparison, but nothing about the Buick design jumped out as an important faux pas, whereas we’ve been put off by materials and detail design on many a Lexus and Infiniti of late.
Here's another piece on the ride:
The LaCrosse ride and handling mix is modern and in a way outstanding. First of all, springs and dampers are nicely firm. The car doesn’t roll much, and certainly doesn’t float or wallow. The suspension definitely has a stiffer setup than the typical Lexus fare. Like almost all modern cars, the LaCrosse will understeer when pushed, but the predominant sensation from the car is one of balance.
There are choices in the handling package, as well. We drove the maximum supreme CXS with adjustable damping and compared it to the mid-line CXL. The CXS in sport mode is clearly firmer, and in normal mode is still not soft. CXS ride quality is quite good, with excellent isolation of crumbly pavement. By comparison, the CXL is well damped, but on the soft side and gives a slightly better ride on horrible pavement. We tried at CXL with AWD and found the balance to be enjoyable. None of these suspensions is even vaguely reminiscent of the LeSabre.
All very poistive including the styling which I think GM has done a great job with, I won't speak of the TL by comparison as it seems that is forbidden.
Haven't driven the car but the opinions of the reviews seem to be much different than our review here.
I just think the folks here need to be a bit more honest in terms of comparison, Acura makes nice cars but GM is coming on strong.
When you look at the new CTS, LaCrosse, Equinox, Malibu, Traverse, Acadia/Enclave and Tahoe/Escalade tandems you have to admit the landscape is changing.
Acura and others don't have the significant advantage they used to, they are losing market share every day and when you consider we are all now owners of GM at 61%, all the more reason to take them seriously as your tax dollars support them.
Just because some of us don't agree with the opinions of other here doesn't make us troller's guys, sorry.
I'm still keeping my CL and TL and I'm a fan of the new TL in some respects but I like what I'm seeing from the American's.
08-12-2009, 05:39 PM
#30
Three Wheelin'
Why do you people care what jjsC5, or anyone else for that matter, thinks about how the car looks? If he's really a troll, then by replying to him like that, you're just feeding him. Based on that logic, you all should know better than to feed the troll.
I personally don't think he is a troll as everyone's entitled to an opinion, especially on something as basic as looks.
Buying a car for the approval of others is incredibly superficial. Sorry, but insecurity based on your appearance and seeking acceptance from others are female traits.
I love my car, and could really care less what anyone else thinks. I think it looks awesome just how it came from the factory, and that's my opinion.
I personally don't think he is a troll as everyone's entitled to an opinion, especially on something as basic as looks.
Buying a car for the approval of others is incredibly superficial. Sorry, but insecurity based on your appearance and seeking acceptance from others are female traits.
I love my car, and could really care less what anyone else thinks. I think it looks awesome just how it came from the factory, and that's my opinion.
First of all, thanks for you supporting me.
While I do somewhat agree with your comments about whether we should care about looks or not, that is only to a point. Honestly, the looks of my CTS are not really to my liking, but I don't think it's ugly either. But there is a point at which it does become important.
For what it's worth to anyone on this forum, I'm not offended in any way by your comments because I take them for what they are - your opinion, and not aimed at anyone specific. I'm ok with that.
08-12-2009, 06:51 PM
#31
Looks are important (who wants to buy an ugly car) but they are very subjective...just take a look back in time at some of the eye-sores that have been produced that have sold relatively well.
To many, myself included, after looks, the next important thing is how well will a particular car hold up over time.
Not just mechanically but the components that go into the car.
This is the area that has gotten the American products into trouble.
Nothing gets my dander up more than cheap arse parts that break, plastic parts that fade and get brittle, headliners that fall out etc.
Will cars like the Buick mentioned here pass the test of time?
Is it worth spending the dollars to find out?
For the sake of the car industry I hope cars like the Buick do prove themselves worthy
The past American track record for dependability is a hard thing to turn around.
How can you compare a late model Buick's dependability to that of an Acura/Honda with their respective track records?
And I agree, it's not fair to compare the Acura to the Buick power wise.....all other categories are fair game and it's interesting the read the different opinions and reviews
my 2 cents
To many, myself included, after looks, the next important thing is how well will a particular car hold up over time.
Not just mechanically but the components that go into the car.
This is the area that has gotten the American products into trouble.
Nothing gets my dander up more than cheap arse parts that break, plastic parts that fade and get brittle, headliners that fall out etc.
Will cars like the Buick mentioned here pass the test of time?
Is it worth spending the dollars to find out?
For the sake of the car industry I hope cars like the Buick do prove themselves worthy
The past American track record for dependability is a hard thing to turn around.
How can you compare a late model Buick's dependability to that of an Acura/Honda with their respective track records?
And I agree, it's not fair to compare the Acura to the Buick power wise.....all other categories are fair game and it's interesting the read the different opinions and reviews
my 2 cents
08-12-2009, 09:49 PM
#32
Racer
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 267
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
First of all, thanks for you supporting me.
While I do somewhat agree with your comments about whether we should care about looks or not, that is only to a point. Honestly, the looks of my CTS are not really to my liking, but I don't think it's ugly either. But there is a point at which it does become important.
While I do somewhat agree with your comments about whether we should care about looks or not, that is only to a point. Honestly, the looks of my CTS are not really to my liking, but I don't think it's ugly either. But there is a point at which it does become important.
I know this is slightly off topic (sorry) as it isn't specific to the new LaCrosse, which personally I don't consider major competetion to the TL. It does however relate to a comparison of GM cars to the TL.
BTW, I'm a fellow Vette owner, a '00 Corvette Coupe that I witnessed come off of the line at the factory in Bowling Green in November '99.
08-13-2009, 07:07 AM
#33
Three Wheelin'
Just curoius, what are your impressions of the CTS after leasing it? I bought an '08TL Navi last August because I liked the looks of the 3rd Generation TL better than the 4th Generation. I was considering a CTS also, but couldn't bring myself to trust a GM product as much as Acura after owning both Honda and GM products. My personal experience has been that Honda's have been more dependable.
I know this is slightly off topic (sorry) as it isn't specific to the new LaCrosse, which personally I don't consider major competetion to the TL. It does however relate to a comparison of GM cars to the TL.
BTW, I'm a fellow Vette owner, a '00 Corvette Coupe that I witnessed come off of the line at the factory in Bowling Green in November '99.
I know this is slightly off topic (sorry) as it isn't specific to the new LaCrosse, which personally I don't consider major competetion to the TL. It does however relate to a comparison of GM cars to the TL.
BTW, I'm a fellow Vette owner, a '00 Corvette Coupe that I witnessed come off of the line at the factory in Bowling Green in November '99.
The CTS has been very mixed for me. I've had it 18 months and have 25,000 miles on it. First of all, I'm not very comfortable in the seats. They are very hard, but don't have much countour to them. They are not uncomfortable, but I just never feel that good in them.
Second, the refinement of the engine (DI engine) and transmission is really lacking. It's not very smooth and is a bit herky-jerky in action. Interestly, there is an article in the current C&D about the new SRX that makes the same comments about it.
In fairmess to the car, it is very well equiped (mine is pretty loaded) and has a beautiful interior. And my car has had virtually no quality problem. It did have a bad rattle in the package tray that I fixed myself, and a minor re-flash to fix some very minor bugs in the Nav screen (and I do mean minor). But thats it.
I've owned many, many vehicles and generally I agree with your concerns - that's why I leased the CTS. I have no intention of getting another one. It just doesn't have the level of refinement that most foreign cars have. Admittedly I'm extremely picky and they don't have too far to go - so I actually give them a lot of credit for doing what they did with the CTS.
08-13-2009, 07:47 AM
#34
Intermediate
Join Date: Oct 2008
Age: 72
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This thread and the review itself is rediculous, especially coming from a biased current TL owner, it tells us nothing.
I own two Acura's including a 2008 TL, so I'm a fan as much as anyone but comparing a base model LaCrosse with 184 hp to a TL with 280 hp seems a bit unfair, let's compare the 280 hp LaCrosse similarly equipped and we have a fair comparison.
To say the interior looks "cheap" is out of line, I've seen these two vehicles up close and can tell you the LaCrosse is competitive with the TL, I still like the TL a bit more in this respect but I would hardly say the Buick looks cheap.
Here's an interesting clip from an article regarding the interior:
The LaCrosse interior is also very well done (interestingly, it was conceived in Buick’s Chinese studios). The shapes are fresh and pleasing, lacking the conservative concept of the Lexus without seeming odd. More surprising is that the quality of the materials seems better than on most of the competition. A little less glossy wood and chrome would be more to our taste, but given the example set by Lexus perhaps this is a category necessity. Again, final judgment awaits direct comparison, but nothing about the Buick design jumped out as an important faux pas, whereas we’ve been put off by materials and detail design on many a Lexus and Infiniti of late.
Here's another piece on the ride:
The LaCrosse ride and handling mix is modern and in a way outstanding. First of all, springs and dampers are nicely firm. The car doesn’t roll much, and certainly doesn’t float or wallow. The suspension definitely has a stiffer setup than the typical Lexus fare. Like almost all modern cars, the LaCrosse will understeer when pushed, but the predominant sensation from the car is one of balance.
There are choices in the handling package, as well. We drove the maximum supreme CXS with adjustable damping and compared it to the mid-line CXL. The CXS in sport mode is clearly firmer, and in normal mode is still not soft. CXS ride quality is quite good, with excellent isolation of crumbly pavement. By comparison, the CXL is well damped, but on the soft side and gives a slightly better ride on horrible pavement. We tried at CXL with AWD and found the balance to be enjoyable. None of these suspensions is even vaguely reminiscent of the LeSabre.
All very poistive including the styling which I think GM has done a great job with, I won't speak of the TL by comparison as it seems that is forbidden.
Haven't driven the car but the opinions of the reviews seem to be much different than our review here.
I just think the folks here need to be a bit more honest in terms of comparison, Acura makes nice cars but GM is coming on strong.
When you look at the new CTS, LaCrosse, Equinox, Malibu, Traverse, Acadia/Enclave and Tahoe/Escalade tandems you have to admit the landscape is changing.
Acura and others don't have the significant advantage they used to, they are losing market share every day and when you consider we are all now owners of GM at 61%, all the more reason to take them seriously as your tax dollars support them.
Just because some of us don't agree with the opinions of other here doesn't make us troller's guys, sorry.
I'm still keeping my CL and TL and I'm a fan of the new TL in some respects but I like what I'm seeing from the American's.
I own two Acura's including a 2008 TL, so I'm a fan as much as anyone but comparing a base model LaCrosse with 184 hp to a TL with 280 hp seems a bit unfair, let's compare the 280 hp LaCrosse similarly equipped and we have a fair comparison.
To say the interior looks "cheap" is out of line, I've seen these two vehicles up close and can tell you the LaCrosse is competitive with the TL, I still like the TL a bit more in this respect but I would hardly say the Buick looks cheap.
Here's an interesting clip from an article regarding the interior:
The LaCrosse interior is also very well done (interestingly, it was conceived in Buick’s Chinese studios). The shapes are fresh and pleasing, lacking the conservative concept of the Lexus without seeming odd. More surprising is that the quality of the materials seems better than on most of the competition. A little less glossy wood and chrome would be more to our taste, but given the example set by Lexus perhaps this is a category necessity. Again, final judgment awaits direct comparison, but nothing about the Buick design jumped out as an important faux pas, whereas we’ve been put off by materials and detail design on many a Lexus and Infiniti of late.
Here's another piece on the ride:
The LaCrosse ride and handling mix is modern and in a way outstanding. First of all, springs and dampers are nicely firm. The car doesn’t roll much, and certainly doesn’t float or wallow. The suspension definitely has a stiffer setup than the typical Lexus fare. Like almost all modern cars, the LaCrosse will understeer when pushed, but the predominant sensation from the car is one of balance.
There are choices in the handling package, as well. We drove the maximum supreme CXS with adjustable damping and compared it to the mid-line CXL. The CXS in sport mode is clearly firmer, and in normal mode is still not soft. CXS ride quality is quite good, with excellent isolation of crumbly pavement. By comparison, the CXL is well damped, but on the soft side and gives a slightly better ride on horrible pavement. We tried at CXL with AWD and found the balance to be enjoyable. None of these suspensions is even vaguely reminiscent of the LeSabre.
All very poistive including the styling which I think GM has done a great job with, I won't speak of the TL by comparison as it seems that is forbidden.
Haven't driven the car but the opinions of the reviews seem to be much different than our review here.
I just think the folks here need to be a bit more honest in terms of comparison, Acura makes nice cars but GM is coming on strong.
When you look at the new CTS, LaCrosse, Equinox, Malibu, Traverse, Acadia/Enclave and Tahoe/Escalade tandems you have to admit the landscape is changing.
Acura and others don't have the significant advantage they used to, they are losing market share every day and when you consider we are all now owners of GM at 61%, all the more reason to take them seriously as your tax dollars support them.
Just because some of us don't agree with the opinions of other here doesn't make us troller's guys, sorry.
I'm still keeping my CL and TL and I'm a fan of the new TL in some respects but I like what I'm seeing from the American's.
No one will be cross shopping a base model, which starts at 27K or so, and a TL...
If anything, a legitimate comparison would be with the top end CXS, with the 280hp engine; even with every option available, the car would be priced below a TL (FWD) Tech...
10-13-2009, 08:40 AM
#35
Intermediate
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Indiana
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for that. I have been critical of Acura, accusing it of making a Japanese Buick. Reading your review of the LaCross gives me hope. Maybe I've just been too critical. Thank you.
10-13-2009, 12:40 PM
#36
Senior Moderator
Taken from the Buick Lacrosse thread in Auto News:
http://blogs.edmunds.com/karl/2009/1...ge-almost.html
Two weeks ago I wrote about GM's "May the Best Car Win" ad campaign, in which Ed Whitacre states, "Car for car, when compared to the competition, we win."
I questioned the accuracy of that claim, but in these last two weeks I've driven two all-new GM products, the 2010 Buick LaCrosse and the 2010 Chevrolet Equinox.
My experiences have confirmed GM unequivocally is making better cars today than it was just a couple years ago. Are they making "...the best cars..." that will "win" in today's ultra competitive market? Well...
My first experience in new GM product came in the Chevrolet Equinox. This car is a quantam leap forward for GM's midsize crossover efforts. The exterior styling may be a bit polarizing (I personally like it), yet in terms of comfort, control layout, interior quality, fuel efficiency and overall driving dynamics the Equinox is right there with the segment leaders.
Is it "the best car" in it's class? Close, but the Equinox we drove had an easily confounded transmission that would, literally, lock up depending on how much throttle you gave it and/or if the wheels were pointed straight or turned at the time. I'd like to think it was a quirk of our particular pre-production test car, but there's a pattern here (more on this in a moment).
However, if you ignore the transmission and write it off as a pre-production quirk the car is a worthy alternative to segment sales leaders like the CR-V and RAV4. Not the clear winner, but fully competitive.
My next all-new GM product experience came in the 2010 Buick LaCrosse over this past weekend. I'd heard good things about the LaCrosse from both fellow staffers and numerous published road tests, so I was anxious to experience the car myself. And knowing it was not a pre-production vehicle had me convinced I'd get a solid sense of how good the new Buick really is.
Within a few minutes of leaving the Edmunds.com offices it was clear something was amiss in front wheel area. Flat spotted tires? Major wheel imbalance? Faulty steering linkage? Don't know, but the speed-dependent wobble in the steering wheel was unmistakable. It was at its worst right after I started driving the LaCrosse home and gradually diminished over the next 50 miles, suggesting the flat-spotted tire scenario. However, while the vibration diminished it never completely went away after driving the car for 250 miles over the course of four days.
This was a subtle vibration (after it diminished a bit) and one many customers might not even notice. But for a car, and a division, trying to copete with the likes of Lexus (and using terms like "quiet tuning") it's doesn't help make Mr. Whitacre's claim.
I was prepared to write the steering wheel vibration off as (another) test car quirk and not count it against the Buick. On my 50-mile drive home I basked in the LaCrosse's excellent iPhone interface, capable audio system, roomy interior and comfortable seating. By the time I pulled into the driveway and shut the car off I was starting to think GM had a definite player on its hands.
Then the car wouldn't let me out.
I pulled on the LaCrosse's interior door release and nothing happened. I pulled again. Nothing. I checked the lock plunger at the top of the door and it looked to be in the "up" position, but I hit the key fob's lock/unlock buttons and watched it go down and up, just to be sure. The car still wouldn't let me out.
Next I checked the ignition status to confirm it was off (the LaCrosse uses a push-button start system instead of a key). A car shouldn't have to be completely shut off before it lets you out, but whatever. The ignition seemed to be in the off mode, but I started and stopped the engine again just to be sure. Still nothing. I pulled the door release again and shoved my body against it. Nothing.
Finally I hit the electric lock and unlock bottons on the keyfob (again) and started and stopped the engine (again). The first pull on the door release did nothing (and yes, it was already unlocked), but the second one popped the door open as if nothing was ever wrong. I was free!!
The whole process couldn't have taken more than a minute. The LaCrosse uses an electronic door release mechanism and clearly the sensor for the interior release is faulty. It was mildly annoying, but I wrote it off as (another) quirk and almost forgot about it.
The next day, as I drove into work, I got an opportunity to pass a vehicle on Malibu Canyon Road. The passing zones are pretty short on this road, but one opened up and I floored the throttle. The transmission completely froze for about a second, then I heard it downshifting and the car was just about to launch forward (at least two seconds after flooring it) before I lost confidence in the manuever and backed off the throttle.
I got to work still generally impressed with the vehicle overall...and the car wouldn't let me out again. I went through all of the above actions again...and again...and again. After about two minutes of failing to open the driver's door I climbed over the center console and got out on the passenger side. It happened again when I got home that night, but by now I'd come up with a new exit method that proved effective and less physically demanding: lower the driver's window, reach out and pull on the exterior door release.
Okay, so if the Equinox's transmission confusion was a pre-production quirk, what's up with the LaCrosse transmission? Another quirk unique to the test car? Maybe, but our other test car had the same issue. Our long-term Pontiac G8 freaked out more than once when I floored it, too (which is weird because that rear-wheel-drive car's transmission has nothing in common with the Equinox of LaCrosse). Of course our last LaCrosse didn't occasionally hold drivers hostage, and nobody complained of steering wheel virbration, so maybe my test car really was cursed.
I'll be honest, I really want GM to make cars that win its self-imposed "May the best car win" challenge.
And the newest models almost can. But after the past 30 years (not to mention the past 12 months) GM can't "almost" win, they have to surpass the competition so convincingly that potential buyers will forget the past (distant and recent).
I like the new Equinox and the LaCrosse. But, based on my personal experiences, I'm still not convinced.
Have you driven the newest GM product, and if so, are you?
I questioned the accuracy of that claim, but in these last two weeks I've driven two all-new GM products, the 2010 Buick LaCrosse and the 2010 Chevrolet Equinox.
My experiences have confirmed GM unequivocally is making better cars today than it was just a couple years ago. Are they making "...the best cars..." that will "win" in today's ultra competitive market? Well...
My first experience in new GM product came in the Chevrolet Equinox. This car is a quantam leap forward for GM's midsize crossover efforts. The exterior styling may be a bit polarizing (I personally like it), yet in terms of comfort, control layout, interior quality, fuel efficiency and overall driving dynamics the Equinox is right there with the segment leaders.
Is it "the best car" in it's class? Close, but the Equinox we drove had an easily confounded transmission that would, literally, lock up depending on how much throttle you gave it and/or if the wheels were pointed straight or turned at the time. I'd like to think it was a quirk of our particular pre-production test car, but there's a pattern here (more on this in a moment).
However, if you ignore the transmission and write it off as a pre-production quirk the car is a worthy alternative to segment sales leaders like the CR-V and RAV4. Not the clear winner, but fully competitive.
My next all-new GM product experience came in the 2010 Buick LaCrosse over this past weekend. I'd heard good things about the LaCrosse from both fellow staffers and numerous published road tests, so I was anxious to experience the car myself. And knowing it was not a pre-production vehicle had me convinced I'd get a solid sense of how good the new Buick really is.
Within a few minutes of leaving the Edmunds.com offices it was clear something was amiss in front wheel area. Flat spotted tires? Major wheel imbalance? Faulty steering linkage? Don't know, but the speed-dependent wobble in the steering wheel was unmistakable. It was at its worst right after I started driving the LaCrosse home and gradually diminished over the next 50 miles, suggesting the flat-spotted tire scenario. However, while the vibration diminished it never completely went away after driving the car for 250 miles over the course of four days.
This was a subtle vibration (after it diminished a bit) and one many customers might not even notice. But for a car, and a division, trying to copete with the likes of Lexus (and using terms like "quiet tuning") it's doesn't help make Mr. Whitacre's claim.
I was prepared to write the steering wheel vibration off as (another) test car quirk and not count it against the Buick. On my 50-mile drive home I basked in the LaCrosse's excellent iPhone interface, capable audio system, roomy interior and comfortable seating. By the time I pulled into the driveway and shut the car off I was starting to think GM had a definite player on its hands.
Then the car wouldn't let me out.
I pulled on the LaCrosse's interior door release and nothing happened. I pulled again. Nothing. I checked the lock plunger at the top of the door and it looked to be in the "up" position, but I hit the key fob's lock/unlock buttons and watched it go down and up, just to be sure. The car still wouldn't let me out.
Next I checked the ignition status to confirm it was off (the LaCrosse uses a push-button start system instead of a key). A car shouldn't have to be completely shut off before it lets you out, but whatever. The ignition seemed to be in the off mode, but I started and stopped the engine again just to be sure. Still nothing. I pulled the door release again and shoved my body against it. Nothing.
Finally I hit the electric lock and unlock bottons on the keyfob (again) and started and stopped the engine (again). The first pull on the door release did nothing (and yes, it was already unlocked), but the second one popped the door open as if nothing was ever wrong. I was free!!
The whole process couldn't have taken more than a minute. The LaCrosse uses an electronic door release mechanism and clearly the sensor for the interior release is faulty. It was mildly annoying, but I wrote it off as (another) quirk and almost forgot about it.
The next day, as I drove into work, I got an opportunity to pass a vehicle on Malibu Canyon Road. The passing zones are pretty short on this road, but one opened up and I floored the throttle. The transmission completely froze for about a second, then I heard it downshifting and the car was just about to launch forward (at least two seconds after flooring it) before I lost confidence in the manuever and backed off the throttle.
I got to work still generally impressed with the vehicle overall...and the car wouldn't let me out again. I went through all of the above actions again...and again...and again. After about two minutes of failing to open the driver's door I climbed over the center console and got out on the passenger side. It happened again when I got home that night, but by now I'd come up with a new exit method that proved effective and less physically demanding: lower the driver's window, reach out and pull on the exterior door release.
Okay, so if the Equinox's transmission confusion was a pre-production quirk, what's up with the LaCrosse transmission? Another quirk unique to the test car? Maybe, but our other test car had the same issue. Our long-term Pontiac G8 freaked out more than once when I floored it, too (which is weird because that rear-wheel-drive car's transmission has nothing in common with the Equinox of LaCrosse). Of course our last LaCrosse didn't occasionally hold drivers hostage, and nobody complained of steering wheel virbration, so maybe my test car really was cursed.
I'll be honest, I really want GM to make cars that win its self-imposed "May the best car win" challenge.
And the newest models almost can. But after the past 30 years (not to mention the past 12 months) GM can't "almost" win, they have to surpass the competition so convincingly that potential buyers will forget the past (distant and recent).
I like the new Equinox and the LaCrosse. But, based on my personal experiences, I'm still not convinced.
Have you driven the newest GM product, and if so, are you?
10-13-2009, 04:50 PM
#37
If it was, the base model wouldn't come with steelies. No, it's just an expensive competitor to the Accord/Mazda6/etc that can be optioned up to stratospheric levels, with accompanying epic depreciation.
If you buy it thinking that it's a true competitor to the ES/TL/etc, you will still one day pull up next to a Lacrosse that looks exactly like yours except for two missing hubcaps (one on each side).
If you buy it thinking that it's a true competitor to the ES/TL/etc, you will still one day pull up next to a Lacrosse that looks exactly like yours except for two missing hubcaps (one on each side).
10-13-2009, 08:38 PM
#38
Suzuka Master
I think the new 2010 Ford Taurus SHO would be a closer and better rival to the TL. The SHO has a killer engine and is much faster (despite being larger and heavier than the TL). Of course, the TL has a better interior, fit & finish, reliability and resale value. However, that new Ford Ecco-Boost engine is terrific. It has direct-injection just like the new BMW engines, has 2 self-cooling turbos, and produces 365 hp/355 ft-lb torque while getting similar gas mileage to the TL's.......geezus, why can't Acura produce something like that!
I looked at a SHO in person about 3 weeks ago, did not dirve it becasue the interior as with most American cars is crap. Teh Americans can whine all day about how they build a nice car and they probably do until you get in it. The SHO interior was cheapo plastic and for a $40K car the interior was a huge turn off. Also the over all rack of the side profile makes it look like the 70's with a rear end lift kit!
10-13-2009, 09:33 PM
#39
Senior Moderator
I looked at a SHO in person about 3 weeks ago, did not dirve it becasue the interior as with most American cars is crap. Teh Americans can whine all day about how they build a nice car and they probably do until you get in it. The SHO interior was cheapo plastic and for a $40K car the interior was a huge turn off. Also the over all rack of the side profile makes it look like the 70's with a rear end lift kit!
10-13-2009, 10:53 PM
#40
Three Wheelin'
I looked at a SHO in person about 3 weeks ago, did not dirve it becasue the interior as with most American cars is crap. Teh Americans can whine all day about how they build a nice car and they probably do until you get in it. The SHO interior was cheapo plastic and for a $40K car the interior was a huge turn off. Also the over all rack of the side profile makes it look like the 70's with a rear end lift kit!
Say what you want about the interior, however, you can't deny the Ecco-Boost is one sweet engine! It's got the thrust of a V8 and the gas mileage of a V6 (identical to the TL's as a matter of fact). Acura can only wish to make an engine this good.