Review: 2010 Buick LaCrosse CXL
10-10-09, 05:47 PM
#1
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
Review: 2010 Buick LaCrosse CXL
By widespread CL member request, a Review of the 2010 Buick LaCrosse.
http://www.buick.com/vehicles/2010/lacrosse/overview.do
In a Nutshell: New styling/equipment/options, far better handling, but underneath the interior surface glitz, still a lot of the same old GM plastic.
(Note: most of the available Google images are of the CXS version.....I reviewed the CXL).
The new 2010 Buick LaCrosse, like its 2010 Ford Taurus competition, has generated a lot of interest, both here in CL and with the auto press itself. There have been a number of different CL threads on both cars, and those threads have generated a lot of posts. I got a number of CL review requests forboth cars, and was able to review a Taurus SEL some weeks ago (Ecoboost Taurus SHO models are special-order only). However, Buick, because of some well-publicized quality-control problems at the factory with the dash/front-door wiring and electronics, delayed the non-press (public) release of the car for almost two months. Other parts of the country started getting them (in a trickle) a few weeks ago; in the Middle Atlantic area (MD/VA/PA/DE), the rural and outlying dealerships seemed to get them (still in a trickle) before the local Buick shops here in the D.C. area. What few came in were either factory program cars or already pre-sold. Finally, one unsold one was available, this morning, within a reasonable driving distance...a black, FWD, mid-range CXL model. The dealership said it was available for a test-drive, so finally, after a long wait for a LaCrosse review, it was into my Outback and off to check it out.
Buick's mid-sized cars have been quite popular for many years, and, despite their typical-GM interior plasticky cheapness, have sold quite well in the American market.....and it is no secret that Buick is also becoming very popular in China as well. The Century/Regal also developed a reputation for better-than-average reliability, according to Consumer Reports. A supercharged 3.8L Regal version was sold for a number of years, but did not prove as popular as the regular version.....most customers who wanted the blown 3.8L in a mid-size car ended up buying the Pontiac version in the Grand Prix GXP. When Buick dropped the Century/Regal several years ago, it was replaced by the all-new, first-generation LaCrosse, which ended up, in many ways, being more or less just a downsized version of the big Buick Lucerne. The first-generation Lacrosse, like the Century/Regal before it, maintained a relatively good reliability record, especially by American-nameplate standards.
But Buick's mid-sized cars, like most Buick products in general, have, for years, been unfairly saddled in the auto press and among enthusiasts as AARP, Grandpa-Grandma cars. This was generally because Buick's marketing has been, traditionally, to emphasize ride comfort/quietness, and, in some cases, plush interior looks, over sportiness, performance, and handling. According to the way many in the auto press think, Buick attributes and those of most enthisiasts are simply irreconcilable. There was (and is) at least some truth to that line of thought, as it is a known fact that many Buicks have indeed appealed to a lot of old folks.....Buick has had an intensely loyal core of older customers, and gained a number of them from Oldsmobile when GM dropped that brand in 2004. So that is probably why Buick, so far, has survived the axes at GM that have cut off Saturn, Pontiac, Saab, and Hummer.
But the image of Buick as a classic geezer car has been clearly oversold. The majority of Buick customers, yes, are getting up in years, but more younger people drive them than the auto press would think. And, people, get this......I myself had two used Buicks, as a teen-ager, before the age of 20....and I liked them both, especially the larger, more comfortable one. I also had a Plymouth Barracuda for sportiness....but the fact was that I liked both muscle-cars and luxury cars when I was young. And, even today, though it is not common to see younger people with Buicks, it is not as unusual as portrayed. I see a number of them in my area. The Enclave, especially, has been rather popular with younger well-weeled families with children and pets.
For 2010, Buick has totally redesigned the mid-sized LaCrosse, to the point where, except for the Buick waterfall-grille and triple-shield logo, it is totally unrecognizable, inside and out, from the 2009 model. Indeed, the body, with its hump-back roof line and sleek, jelly-bean looks, now reminds one more of the new Jaguar XF than a traditional Buick. Buick's own marketing people (no doubt pressured by the enormous influence of the auto press) say the objective is to try and appeal to a younger age group (never mind the fact that it has been mainly retired folks that have kept the company in buisness until now), in the same manner that the Cadillac CTS has done. It is a very tricky undertaking for Buick.....to try and satisfy both Buick traditionalists who like comfort and plushness and those who want a car that is somewhat sportier and more responsive.
For 2010, as with other Buicks, three trim levels of the new Lacrosse are offered....CX, CXL, and CXS. All three models come with an ultra-smooth 6-speed automatic transmission with manual-shift mode. CX and CXL models come with a 3.0L VVT V6 with 255 HP and 217 ft-lbs. of torque. CXS models come with a 3.6L V6 of 280 HP and 255 ft-lbs. of torque (The smaller 3.0 V6 may be underrated, power-wise....more on that later). An AWD version is offered with the mid-level CXL version, but not on the others....why it is not offered on the top-line model beats me. As described above, I tested a black, FWD, CXL without NAV.
Details coming up.
Model Reviewed: 2010 Buick LaCrosse CXL FWD
Base Price: $29,645
Options:
Entertainmant/Stereo Package: $650
Comfort/Convienence Package: $550
Carbon Black Metallic Paint: $195
Destination/Freight: $750
List Price as Reviewed: $31,790
Drivetrain: FWD, Transverse-mounted 3.0L VVTi V6, 255 HP @ 6900 RPM, Torque, 217 Ft-lbs. @ 5100 RPM,
6-speed automatic transmission with manual-shift gate.
EPA Mileage Rating: (FWD) 17 City, 27 Highway
Exterior Color: Carbon Black Metallic
Interior: Light Titanium Leather with Dark Titanium trim
PLUSSES:
Buick will probably survive the GM reorganization.
Excellent 5/100 Drivetrain and 4/50 Bumper-to-Bumper warranty.
Previous Buicks better-than-average in reliability.
Available AWD on CXL version.
Smooth, relatively torquey 3.0L V6.
Ultra-smooth 6-speed automatic transmission.
Good wind noise isolation.
Better ride comfort (on CXL version) I than expected.
Steering response MUCH quicker than other Buicks.
Excellent underhood layout with 3.0L V6.
Solid exterior sheet metal.
Excellent paint job.
Handsome (IMO) alloy wheels on CXL version.
Slick-fold/snap exterior side mirrors.
Fairly good exterior trim.
Fairly roomy trunk (but rather small lid opening).
Nice seat leather.
Well-finished, glittery dash/console (but with some underlying plastic cheapness).
Killer Harmon-Kardin stereo sound.
Soft, padded-surface dash and door panels.
Good front/rear legroom.
Good headroom in front.
Nice (IMO) aqua-blue dash lights.
60/40 split-folding rear seat.
Slick-operating fore/aft shifter with no zig-zags.
MINUSES:
Buicks unfairly (and inaccurately) saddled with Grandpa/Grandma image.
Demand currently exceeds supply.
AWD not available with the larger 3.6L V6 engine.
Plasticky interior hardware/trim typical of GM.
Numb, overboosted power steering.
Somewhat spongy brake.
Very poorly-placed brake pedal.
Thin, flimsy gas-cap cover has no lock.
Twin, trapezoid-shaped side mirrors too small, IMO.
Awkward-looking chrome Buick portholes on top of hood instead of on the side.
Only 8 exterior colors.....and most of them are quite dull.
Extra-cost for 3 of the exterior colors.
No body-side moldings for parking-lot ding protection.
Not enough interior wood-tone trim (IMO) for a Buick.
Somewhat hard-to-grasp interior door pull-handles.
Old-fashioned ignition switch in CXL version.
Stiff steering-wheel-rim leather stitching (on CXL version) rather uncomfortable to hold.
Marginal headroom in the rear.
Electronic tab-operated parking brake.
Uncomfortable front-seat headrests for big, tall people.
Unimpressive cargo-area finish.
Rather small trunk-lid opening.
Temporary spare tire.
Thin-fabric headliner/sun-visor material OK but could be nicer.
EXTERIOR:
Walking up to it, to say that the new LaCrosse has a different body is probably the undestatement of the year. It is totally different, on the outside, from last year's 2009 model. The roof line is lower, more arched/humpback, and the front and rear ends are both more rounded off. The old LaCrosse's four round headlights have been tossed for twin headlights of a mild, sweep-up, cat's-eye style. The traditional Buick fender portholes have been moved from the front fender to where they now, with thick chrome borders, face straight up, vertically, on the sides of the hood....an awkward look, IMO. There are no more body side mouldings to help-prevent parking-lot dings.....a growing cost-cutting move on a number of new cars. The twin outside mirror-housings, with turn-signals on them, snap/swivel and fold/lock slickly and securely (those on many other American-designed vehicles move stiffly), but they are poorly-shaped and, IMO, are too small for optimum visibility. The body/door sheet metal, as is usual with GM, is fairly solid-feeling, and the paint job is first-rate....GM paint-work has improved enormously in the last several years. Only 8 exterior colors are offered, though, and most of them are quite dull. Three of the colors.....Red Jewel Tintcoat, White Diamond Tintcoat, and the Carbon Black Metallic on my test car cost extra, Euro-car style. Besides the aforementioned portholes, only the chrome waterfall grille and Buick logo remain to let you know that you are still looking at a Buick. The tall, non-aggressive, smooth-riding, 60-series tires of theprevious model have been traded, on the CXL model for lower-profile 50-series tires, and to even lower-profile 40-series on the upscale CXS model....a cause of immediate concern for me, as Buick's forte, and what has endeared it to its traditional buyers, has always been ride comfort. Fortunately, the deterioration in ride comfort was nowhere near as bad as I had feared......more on that below. The gas-filler door was very light, flimsy plastic and did not have a locking feature for security.
UNDERHOOD:
With one minor exception, an excellent layout. Open the rather solid hood, and two nice gas struts hold it up (Buick owners won't tolerate cheap prop-rods, especially the older ones whose arms and shoulers are weak). Under the hood, of course, is a nice insulation pad to keep engine noise/vibration down....a must in a Buick. The transversely-mounted 3.0L V6, in the CXL version, fits in very nicely, without annoying engine covers to block access to components. There is plenty of room to reach and work on engine components in front and on the sides of the block, and, unlike most cars these days, the oil filter is high enough, on the front side of the block, to be easily accessable for DIY'ers without having to put the car on a lift and going under below. All dipsticks, reservoirs, and filler caps are easily accessable. The only annoying feature underhood is the cover for the battery that has to be unclipped and removed for access....a needless restriction, IMO.
INTERIOR:
The interior of the new Lacrosse, like the exterior, is also vastly different from the old model. Gone are the big, wide swaths of wood-tone from both sides of the dash (in fact, IMO, there isn't enough wood-trim left inside for a Buick), though smaller strips are left on the upper-dash, console, and door panels. The basic layout, in front, with the twin-gauges and blank right-dash, looks more or less pattered off of the new Camaro, but, of course, far more ornate. Nice padded materials cover the upper parts of the dash and most of the door panels, and there is a lot of chrome and glitter, but underneath a lot of that surface glitter and flash (as on other Buicks) is a lot of the same old GM interior plastic....same stuff, different look. There is adequate headroom in front for tall people if the seat cushions are adjusted down, but rear headroom is marginal. Legroom/footroom is fine, both front and rear. The (optional) Harmon-Kardin stereo sound quality is superb (I laid off the Hard-Rock/Heavy Metal today, and listened to some more relaxing, soothing tunes), but the stereo buttons/***** were rather confusing, even without the integrated NAV system. The steering wheel had a manual tilt/telescope feature, but didn't adjust quite high enough for my tastes. I didn't care for the spoke design, and the steering wheel rim, while beefy enough for comfort, had stiff, poorly-finished stitching that was somewhat uncomfortable to hold, The door panels were generally well-done, with nice, padded materials, but soft, protruding ridges just above all four door-pull handles made them somewhat awkward, for large hands and fingers, to grab. The seats wre generally comfortable (they have to be in a Buick) and had nice, smooth, dove-gray leather with darker trim (IMO, nicer leather than in a lot of far more expensive BMW and Mercedes products, especially the M-B Tex Mercedes uses). I didn't like the headrest design, though....I fiddled with it for some time and still couldn't get a very comfortable position for it, as, even in the tallest setting, it kept digging into my rear upper-shoulders.
The big console had some nice wood-tone trim on it, but angled back at an awkward, shallow angle, and was wide enough to affect front knee-room and pedal placement (more on that below). There was a lot of chrome trim (which really chromed light-GM plastic) and a lot of console-mounted butttons/*****. The ***** and buttons were generally clearly marked, but, for the stereo and climate control, were rather complex, and were made of, IMO, too-light plastic and did not have a solid feel. The glove box door felt fairly slid and had a good amount of room inside. The headliner and sun visors were OK, but the thin, somewhat cheesy-feeling light fabric on them could have been a little nicer. The dash gauges were somewhat Camaro-like in their design, with two large circular pods set in semi-square bins. The smaller gauges, though, are integrated in the dash instead of on the console like the optional Camaro late-60's retro package. I liked the light aque-blue dash lighting.....the same shade now found in many newer GM products.
CARGO AREA/TRUNK:
The low, humpback-whale roofline cuts into the size of the rear trunk lid, so the size of the lid itself, and the opening, is rather small. The cargo area itself is roomier than the size of the small lid would suggest, and the lid's hinges allow the lid to go up high enough to make good use of the available opening space. The interior of the trunk has a rather so-so finish, with thin, somewhat cheap-feeling, dark gray nap-fabric covering both the floor and walls. Underneath the floor is (what else?) a temporary spare tire....and this one looks somewhat smaller/thinner than the usual-sized temporary, but not as small as a donut spare. But, the majority of Buick owners probably don't change a flat tire anyway.....they are likely to use GM's Roadside Assistance Service. The split 60/40 rear seats fold down to expand the cargo area, but must be done from the back seat itself...there is no remote release in the back of the trunk like on some upscale cars.
ON THE ROAD:
Start up the 3.0L V6 with an old-fashioned, side-column, ignition switch and key/fob (the top-line CXS model gets a START/STOP button), and the engine come to life with the usual Buick library smoothness/quietness at idle. There is some slight exhaust noise on moderate-to-hard acceleration, but certainly not to sport-sedan levels. Despite its smoothness and silence, this is a fairly responsive powerplant, and, if desired, will give you a noticeable shove in the back...its 217 ft-lbs. of torque, at a high 5100 RPM, may (?) be underrated a little. On the road, of coure, it is Buick-quiet and unobtrusive, and is an ideal powerplant for lokg, relaxed cruises.
And so is the quiet, ultra-smooth (in the Buick tradition) 6-speed automatic transmission, which lacks shift paddles but has a manual-shift gate on the console. Though the old 4-speed automatic in the former LaCrosse was also smooth and slick, this new one is far more flexible, with well-chosen ratios, and probably accounts for some of the zip that is noticeable in the 3.0L v6. The slick, wood-grained shifter, sliding fore/aft instead of those annoying zig-zags, adds to the pleasure of the transmission itself.
The chassis, as advertised, is vastly different from the old LaCrosse as well. Steering response is much, and I mean MUCH, quicker than in past Buicks, although it is unclear if that is from a new steering-rack gear ratio or just a feature of the new suspension/tires. Cornering, though not totally without body lean, is also much flatter than the old Buick Roly-Poly motions. The power-steering boost level, however, seems to still be directed at Buick's traditional older crowd with weak, arthritic arms, shoulders, and hands.....it is almost dead-numb in feel, especially at lower speeds. Wind noise was well-controlled and quiet (a Buick necessity), but tire/road noise, perhaps now due to the more aggresive, wider, lower tires used on the new LaCrosse, was quiet on smooth surfaces but rose noticeably on coarse surfaces and and porous asphalt.
On the road, though, the feature I was most concerned about, however (and what a lot of Buick traditionalists will also be), was ride comfort, and I was glad (and relieved) to say that, with the 50-series tires on the CXL, it did not deteriorate as much as I had feared. The ride comfort and bump absorbtion was almost up to the level of the former Lacrosse, and did not provide any real discomfort, even over bumps and pavement irregularities. I did not test a CXS, however, with the 40-series rubber.......I suspect that the CXS's ride will be more sport-sedan-like than the CX and CXL.
I had mixed feelings about the brakes, with the pedal showing a bit of initial sponginesss, but then the response getting progressively better, and less sponginesss, with more pressure. The pedal design/location, though, for big feet, was awful. The pedal was way too close to the gas pedal, and too high, for my big size-15 clodhopper shoes, and they invariably caught up badly on the underside of the brake pedal when I moved them from gas to brake....I had to be very careful about this every time I used the brake. Part of this problem, I think, stems from how and where the design of the wide center console forces the pedal locations to be.
THE VERDICT:
With some exceptions, those shoppers who want a Buick that is not a Buick will find it here. The new LaCrosse offers Jaguar styling, far better handling, a fairly punchy V6 even in the low-line models, a vastly different interior/console, good underhood access, an new AWD option for bad-weather traction, 2 more gears in the transmission for more flexibility, and an excellent paint job.
Other things in the new LaCrosse are more traditional Buick. The butter-smooth transmission-shifts remain, as does the lack of wind noise, the novocaine-numb power steering boost, the funeral-home paint colors, the spongy (at first) brakes, and the the flashy but over-plasticky trim/buttons/hardware. The ride comfort, with the 50-series tires, is sort of at an in-between stage......not quite as silky as the old LaCrosse, but smoother and more comfortable than I had feared.
Buick ads target the new LaCrosse at the Lexus ES350. To be honest, comparing the old and new ES models, I have never been impressed with the present-generation ES350 (The ES330, IMO, was a much better entry-level luxury car), and, though the ES350, admittedly, still has some better materials inside than the LaCrosse, there is at least some truth to the ads.....the new LaCrosse, overall, gives a pretty good account of itself against the ES350. The LaCrosse also (like its new rival Taurus), has an AWD option for bad-weather areas, something that the ES350 still lacks.
http://www.buick.com/vehicles/2010/lacrosse/overview.do
In a Nutshell: New styling/equipment/options, far better handling, but underneath the interior surface glitz, still a lot of the same old GM plastic.
(Note: most of the available Google images are of the CXS version.....I reviewed the CXL).
The new 2010 Buick LaCrosse, like its 2010 Ford Taurus competition, has generated a lot of interest, both here in CL and with the auto press itself. There have been a number of different CL threads on both cars, and those threads have generated a lot of posts. I got a number of CL review requests forboth cars, and was able to review a Taurus SEL some weeks ago (Ecoboost Taurus SHO models are special-order only). However, Buick, because of some well-publicized quality-control problems at the factory with the dash/front-door wiring and electronics, delayed the non-press (public) release of the car for almost two months. Other parts of the country started getting them (in a trickle) a few weeks ago; in the Middle Atlantic area (MD/VA/PA/DE), the rural and outlying dealerships seemed to get them (still in a trickle) before the local Buick shops here in the D.C. area. What few came in were either factory program cars or already pre-sold. Finally, one unsold one was available, this morning, within a reasonable driving distance...a black, FWD, mid-range CXL model. The dealership said it was available for a test-drive, so finally, after a long wait for a LaCrosse review, it was into my Outback and off to check it out.
Buick's mid-sized cars have been quite popular for many years, and, despite their typical-GM interior plasticky cheapness, have sold quite well in the American market.....and it is no secret that Buick is also becoming very popular in China as well. The Century/Regal also developed a reputation for better-than-average reliability, according to Consumer Reports. A supercharged 3.8L Regal version was sold for a number of years, but did not prove as popular as the regular version.....most customers who wanted the blown 3.8L in a mid-size car ended up buying the Pontiac version in the Grand Prix GXP. When Buick dropped the Century/Regal several years ago, it was replaced by the all-new, first-generation LaCrosse, which ended up, in many ways, being more or less just a downsized version of the big Buick Lucerne. The first-generation Lacrosse, like the Century/Regal before it, maintained a relatively good reliability record, especially by American-nameplate standards.
But Buick's mid-sized cars, like most Buick products in general, have, for years, been unfairly saddled in the auto press and among enthusiasts as AARP, Grandpa-Grandma cars. This was generally because Buick's marketing has been, traditionally, to emphasize ride comfort/quietness, and, in some cases, plush interior looks, over sportiness, performance, and handling. According to the way many in the auto press think, Buick attributes and those of most enthisiasts are simply irreconcilable. There was (and is) at least some truth to that line of thought, as it is a known fact that many Buicks have indeed appealed to a lot of old folks.....Buick has had an intensely loyal core of older customers, and gained a number of them from Oldsmobile when GM dropped that brand in 2004. So that is probably why Buick, so far, has survived the axes at GM that have cut off Saturn, Pontiac, Saab, and Hummer.
But the image of Buick as a classic geezer car has been clearly oversold. The majority of Buick customers, yes, are getting up in years, but more younger people drive them than the auto press would think. And, people, get this......I myself had two used Buicks, as a teen-ager, before the age of 20....and I liked them both, especially the larger, more comfortable one. I also had a Plymouth Barracuda for sportiness....but the fact was that I liked both muscle-cars and luxury cars when I was young. And, even today, though it is not common to see younger people with Buicks, it is not as unusual as portrayed. I see a number of them in my area. The Enclave, especially, has been rather popular with younger well-weeled families with children and pets.
For 2010, Buick has totally redesigned the mid-sized LaCrosse, to the point where, except for the Buick waterfall-grille and triple-shield logo, it is totally unrecognizable, inside and out, from the 2009 model. Indeed, the body, with its hump-back roof line and sleek, jelly-bean looks, now reminds one more of the new Jaguar XF than a traditional Buick. Buick's own marketing people (no doubt pressured by the enormous influence of the auto press) say the objective is to try and appeal to a younger age group (never mind the fact that it has been mainly retired folks that have kept the company in buisness until now), in the same manner that the Cadillac CTS has done. It is a very tricky undertaking for Buick.....to try and satisfy both Buick traditionalists who like comfort and plushness and those who want a car that is somewhat sportier and more responsive.
For 2010, as with other Buicks, three trim levels of the new Lacrosse are offered....CX, CXL, and CXS. All three models come with an ultra-smooth 6-speed automatic transmission with manual-shift mode. CX and CXL models come with a 3.0L VVT V6 with 255 HP and 217 ft-lbs. of torque. CXS models come with a 3.6L V6 of 280 HP and 255 ft-lbs. of torque (The smaller 3.0 V6 may be underrated, power-wise....more on that later). An AWD version is offered with the mid-level CXL version, but not on the others....why it is not offered on the top-line model beats me. As described above, I tested a black, FWD, CXL without NAV.
Details coming up.
Model Reviewed: 2010 Buick LaCrosse CXL FWD
Base Price: $29,645
Options:
Entertainmant/Stereo Package: $650
Comfort/Convienence Package: $550
Carbon Black Metallic Paint: $195
Destination/Freight: $750
List Price as Reviewed: $31,790
Drivetrain: FWD, Transverse-mounted 3.0L VVTi V6, 255 HP @ 6900 RPM, Torque, 217 Ft-lbs. @ 5100 RPM,
6-speed automatic transmission with manual-shift gate.
EPA Mileage Rating: (FWD) 17 City, 27 Highway
Exterior Color: Carbon Black Metallic
Interior: Light Titanium Leather with Dark Titanium trim
PLUSSES:
Buick will probably survive the GM reorganization.
Excellent 5/100 Drivetrain and 4/50 Bumper-to-Bumper warranty.
Previous Buicks better-than-average in reliability.
Available AWD on CXL version.
Smooth, relatively torquey 3.0L V6.
Ultra-smooth 6-speed automatic transmission.
Good wind noise isolation.
Better ride comfort (on CXL version) I than expected.
Steering response MUCH quicker than other Buicks.
Excellent underhood layout with 3.0L V6.
Solid exterior sheet metal.
Excellent paint job.
Handsome (IMO) alloy wheels on CXL version.
Slick-fold/snap exterior side mirrors.
Fairly good exterior trim.
Fairly roomy trunk (but rather small lid opening).
Nice seat leather.
Well-finished, glittery dash/console (but with some underlying plastic cheapness).
Killer Harmon-Kardin stereo sound.
Soft, padded-surface dash and door panels.
Good front/rear legroom.
Good headroom in front.
Nice (IMO) aqua-blue dash lights.
60/40 split-folding rear seat.
Slick-operating fore/aft shifter with no zig-zags.
MINUSES:
Buicks unfairly (and inaccurately) saddled with Grandpa/Grandma image.
Demand currently exceeds supply.
AWD not available with the larger 3.6L V6 engine.
Plasticky interior hardware/trim typical of GM.
Numb, overboosted power steering.
Somewhat spongy brake.
Very poorly-placed brake pedal.
Thin, flimsy gas-cap cover has no lock.
Twin, trapezoid-shaped side mirrors too small, IMO.
Awkward-looking chrome Buick portholes on top of hood instead of on the side.
Only 8 exterior colors.....and most of them are quite dull.
Extra-cost for 3 of the exterior colors.
No body-side moldings for parking-lot ding protection.
Not enough interior wood-tone trim (IMO) for a Buick.
Somewhat hard-to-grasp interior door pull-handles.
Old-fashioned ignition switch in CXL version.
Stiff steering-wheel-rim leather stitching (on CXL version) rather uncomfortable to hold.
Marginal headroom in the rear.
Electronic tab-operated parking brake.
Uncomfortable front-seat headrests for big, tall people.
Unimpressive cargo-area finish.
Rather small trunk-lid opening.
Temporary spare tire.
Thin-fabric headliner/sun-visor material OK but could be nicer.
EXTERIOR:
Walking up to it, to say that the new LaCrosse has a different body is probably the undestatement of the year. It is totally different, on the outside, from last year's 2009 model. The roof line is lower, more arched/humpback, and the front and rear ends are both more rounded off. The old LaCrosse's four round headlights have been tossed for twin headlights of a mild, sweep-up, cat's-eye style. The traditional Buick fender portholes have been moved from the front fender to where they now, with thick chrome borders, face straight up, vertically, on the sides of the hood....an awkward look, IMO. There are no more body side mouldings to help-prevent parking-lot dings.....a growing cost-cutting move on a number of new cars. The twin outside mirror-housings, with turn-signals on them, snap/swivel and fold/lock slickly and securely (those on many other American-designed vehicles move stiffly), but they are poorly-shaped and, IMO, are too small for optimum visibility. The body/door sheet metal, as is usual with GM, is fairly solid-feeling, and the paint job is first-rate....GM paint-work has improved enormously in the last several years. Only 8 exterior colors are offered, though, and most of them are quite dull. Three of the colors.....Red Jewel Tintcoat, White Diamond Tintcoat, and the Carbon Black Metallic on my test car cost extra, Euro-car style. Besides the aforementioned portholes, only the chrome waterfall grille and Buick logo remain to let you know that you are still looking at a Buick. The tall, non-aggressive, smooth-riding, 60-series tires of theprevious model have been traded, on the CXL model for lower-profile 50-series tires, and to even lower-profile 40-series on the upscale CXS model....a cause of immediate concern for me, as Buick's forte, and what has endeared it to its traditional buyers, has always been ride comfort. Fortunately, the deterioration in ride comfort was nowhere near as bad as I had feared......more on that below. The gas-filler door was very light, flimsy plastic and did not have a locking feature for security.
UNDERHOOD:
With one minor exception, an excellent layout. Open the rather solid hood, and two nice gas struts hold it up (Buick owners won't tolerate cheap prop-rods, especially the older ones whose arms and shoulers are weak). Under the hood, of course, is a nice insulation pad to keep engine noise/vibration down....a must in a Buick. The transversely-mounted 3.0L V6, in the CXL version, fits in very nicely, without annoying engine covers to block access to components. There is plenty of room to reach and work on engine components in front and on the sides of the block, and, unlike most cars these days, the oil filter is high enough, on the front side of the block, to be easily accessable for DIY'ers without having to put the car on a lift and going under below. All dipsticks, reservoirs, and filler caps are easily accessable. The only annoying feature underhood is the cover for the battery that has to be unclipped and removed for access....a needless restriction, IMO.
INTERIOR:
The interior of the new Lacrosse, like the exterior, is also vastly different from the old model. Gone are the big, wide swaths of wood-tone from both sides of the dash (in fact, IMO, there isn't enough wood-trim left inside for a Buick), though smaller strips are left on the upper-dash, console, and door panels. The basic layout, in front, with the twin-gauges and blank right-dash, looks more or less pattered off of the new Camaro, but, of course, far more ornate. Nice padded materials cover the upper parts of the dash and most of the door panels, and there is a lot of chrome and glitter, but underneath a lot of that surface glitter and flash (as on other Buicks) is a lot of the same old GM interior plastic....same stuff, different look. There is adequate headroom in front for tall people if the seat cushions are adjusted down, but rear headroom is marginal. Legroom/footroom is fine, both front and rear. The (optional) Harmon-Kardin stereo sound quality is superb (I laid off the Hard-Rock/Heavy Metal today, and listened to some more relaxing, soothing tunes), but the stereo buttons/***** were rather confusing, even without the integrated NAV system. The steering wheel had a manual tilt/telescope feature, but didn't adjust quite high enough for my tastes. I didn't care for the spoke design, and the steering wheel rim, while beefy enough for comfort, had stiff, poorly-finished stitching that was somewhat uncomfortable to hold, The door panels were generally well-done, with nice, padded materials, but soft, protruding ridges just above all four door-pull handles made them somewhat awkward, for large hands and fingers, to grab. The seats wre generally comfortable (they have to be in a Buick) and had nice, smooth, dove-gray leather with darker trim (IMO, nicer leather than in a lot of far more expensive BMW and Mercedes products, especially the M-B Tex Mercedes uses). I didn't like the headrest design, though....I fiddled with it for some time and still couldn't get a very comfortable position for it, as, even in the tallest setting, it kept digging into my rear upper-shoulders.
The big console had some nice wood-tone trim on it, but angled back at an awkward, shallow angle, and was wide enough to affect front knee-room and pedal placement (more on that below). There was a lot of chrome trim (which really chromed light-GM plastic) and a lot of console-mounted butttons/*****. The ***** and buttons were generally clearly marked, but, for the stereo and climate control, were rather complex, and were made of, IMO, too-light plastic and did not have a solid feel. The glove box door felt fairly slid and had a good amount of room inside. The headliner and sun visors were OK, but the thin, somewhat cheesy-feeling light fabric on them could have been a little nicer. The dash gauges were somewhat Camaro-like in their design, with two large circular pods set in semi-square bins. The smaller gauges, though, are integrated in the dash instead of on the console like the optional Camaro late-60's retro package. I liked the light aque-blue dash lighting.....the same shade now found in many newer GM products.
CARGO AREA/TRUNK:
The low, humpback-whale roofline cuts into the size of the rear trunk lid, so the size of the lid itself, and the opening, is rather small. The cargo area itself is roomier than the size of the small lid would suggest, and the lid's hinges allow the lid to go up high enough to make good use of the available opening space. The interior of the trunk has a rather so-so finish, with thin, somewhat cheap-feeling, dark gray nap-fabric covering both the floor and walls. Underneath the floor is (what else?) a temporary spare tire....and this one looks somewhat smaller/thinner than the usual-sized temporary, but not as small as a donut spare. But, the majority of Buick owners probably don't change a flat tire anyway.....they are likely to use GM's Roadside Assistance Service. The split 60/40 rear seats fold down to expand the cargo area, but must be done from the back seat itself...there is no remote release in the back of the trunk like on some upscale cars.
ON THE ROAD:
Start up the 3.0L V6 with an old-fashioned, side-column, ignition switch and key/fob (the top-line CXS model gets a START/STOP button), and the engine come to life with the usual Buick library smoothness/quietness at idle. There is some slight exhaust noise on moderate-to-hard acceleration, but certainly not to sport-sedan levels. Despite its smoothness and silence, this is a fairly responsive powerplant, and, if desired, will give you a noticeable shove in the back...its 217 ft-lbs. of torque, at a high 5100 RPM, may (?) be underrated a little. On the road, of coure, it is Buick-quiet and unobtrusive, and is an ideal powerplant for lokg, relaxed cruises.
And so is the quiet, ultra-smooth (in the Buick tradition) 6-speed automatic transmission, which lacks shift paddles but has a manual-shift gate on the console. Though the old 4-speed automatic in the former LaCrosse was also smooth and slick, this new one is far more flexible, with well-chosen ratios, and probably accounts for some of the zip that is noticeable in the 3.0L v6. The slick, wood-grained shifter, sliding fore/aft instead of those annoying zig-zags, adds to the pleasure of the transmission itself.
The chassis, as advertised, is vastly different from the old LaCrosse as well. Steering response is much, and I mean MUCH, quicker than in past Buicks, although it is unclear if that is from a new steering-rack gear ratio or just a feature of the new suspension/tires. Cornering, though not totally without body lean, is also much flatter than the old Buick Roly-Poly motions. The power-steering boost level, however, seems to still be directed at Buick's traditional older crowd with weak, arthritic arms, shoulders, and hands.....it is almost dead-numb in feel, especially at lower speeds. Wind noise was well-controlled and quiet (a Buick necessity), but tire/road noise, perhaps now due to the more aggresive, wider, lower tires used on the new LaCrosse, was quiet on smooth surfaces but rose noticeably on coarse surfaces and and porous asphalt.
On the road, though, the feature I was most concerned about, however (and what a lot of Buick traditionalists will also be), was ride comfort, and I was glad (and relieved) to say that, with the 50-series tires on the CXL, it did not deteriorate as much as I had feared. The ride comfort and bump absorbtion was almost up to the level of the former Lacrosse, and did not provide any real discomfort, even over bumps and pavement irregularities. I did not test a CXS, however, with the 40-series rubber.......I suspect that the CXS's ride will be more sport-sedan-like than the CX and CXL.
I had mixed feelings about the brakes, with the pedal showing a bit of initial sponginesss, but then the response getting progressively better, and less sponginesss, with more pressure. The pedal design/location, though, for big feet, was awful. The pedal was way too close to the gas pedal, and too high, for my big size-15 clodhopper shoes, and they invariably caught up badly on the underside of the brake pedal when I moved them from gas to brake....I had to be very careful about this every time I used the brake. Part of this problem, I think, stems from how and where the design of the wide center console forces the pedal locations to be.
THE VERDICT:
With some exceptions, those shoppers who want a Buick that is not a Buick will find it here. The new LaCrosse offers Jaguar styling, far better handling, a fairly punchy V6 even in the low-line models, a vastly different interior/console, good underhood access, an new AWD option for bad-weather traction, 2 more gears in the transmission for more flexibility, and an excellent paint job.
Other things in the new LaCrosse are more traditional Buick. The butter-smooth transmission-shifts remain, as does the lack of wind noise, the novocaine-numb power steering boost, the funeral-home paint colors, the spongy (at first) brakes, and the the flashy but over-plasticky trim/buttons/hardware. The ride comfort, with the 50-series tires, is sort of at an in-between stage......not quite as silky as the old LaCrosse, but smoother and more comfortable than I had feared.
Buick ads target the new LaCrosse at the Lexus ES350. To be honest, comparing the old and new ES models, I have never been impressed with the present-generation ES350 (The ES330, IMO, was a much better entry-level luxury car), and, though the ES350, admittedly, still has some better materials inside than the LaCrosse, there is at least some truth to the ads.....the new LaCrosse, overall, gives a pretty good account of itself against the ES350. The LaCrosse also (like its new rival Taurus), has an AWD option for bad-weather areas, something that the ES350 still lacks.
Last edited by mmarshall; 10-10-09 at 05:58 PM.
10-10-09, 06:26 PM
#2
Great review as usual,MM.
Although not a car a car I would buy.If I was to buy an American badge,it would be a Ford product.Probably the Taurus SHO for two reasons.I like it much more and Ford didn't take a GOV handout.
Although not a car a car I would buy.If I was to buy an American badge,it would be a Ford product.Probably the Taurus SHO for two reasons.I like it much more and Ford didn't take a GOV handout.
Last edited by Joeb427; 10-10-09 at 06:30 PM.
10-10-09, 06:58 PM
#5
Lexus Fanatic
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 7,864
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for the review mmarshall.
I absolutely love the new Lacrosse (and hated the first one). I think it's exactly what Buick needs to be. Many of today's cars prove that you can have a smooth comfortable ride while not having to build cars that float and bounce around like sail boats like many GM and Ford cars did for decades.
The styling, as I've said before, is brilliant. I'm 30, and I wouldn't mind driving it. I would even choose it over it's target, the ES350, even though I know the Lexus would undoubtedly stand the test of time better regardless of how much improved GM's quality is. The Lacrosse is simply a much more compelling product with big road presence and a cutting edge design.
I absolutely love the new Lacrosse (and hated the first one). I think it's exactly what Buick needs to be. Many of today's cars prove that you can have a smooth comfortable ride while not having to build cars that float and bounce around like sail boats like many GM and Ford cars did for decades.
The styling, as I've said before, is brilliant. I'm 30, and I wouldn't mind driving it. I would even choose it over it's target, the ES350, even though I know the Lexus would undoubtedly stand the test of time better regardless of how much improved GM's quality is. The Lacrosse is simply a much more compelling product with big road presence and a cutting edge design.
10-10-09, 07:10 PM
#6
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
Sure. Anytime.
There's a lot of interest in both the Taurus and LaCrosse. It will be interesting to see which one takes the sales numbers.....they are both being aimed, more or less, at the same class of auto-buyer.
The Taurus, of course, got a head start because it was released sooner. If you want an SHO, you are probably going to have to order one and just wait...the Ford people tell me that they are now special-order only, like the Flex Ecoboost..
I reviewed the Taurus SEL several weeks ago, here on CL....you probably saw it.
Although not a car a car I would buy.If I was to buy an American badge,it would be a Ford product.Probably the Taurus SHO for two reasons.I like it much more and Ford didn't take a GOV handout.
The Taurus, of course, got a head start because it was released sooner. If you want an SHO, you are probably going to have to order one and just wait...the Ford people tell me that they are now special-order only, like the Flex Ecoboost..
I reviewed the Taurus SEL several weeks ago, here on CL....you probably saw it.
10-10-09, 07:14 PM
#7
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
Trending Topics
10-10-09, 07:16 PM
#8
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
10-10-09, 07:25 PM
#9
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
Sure. Anytime.
You're obviously one of the potential new customers that Buick is aiming this car at.
Like I said in the review, you can get a reasonably smooth ride with lower-profile tires if you do the suspension right, but don't kid yourself........on a rough road with potholes, frost heaves, cracks, etc..... NOTHING beats the ride of the big, old American cars with the soft tires and Cream-of-Wheat suspensions. I got to drive a 1969 Lincoln Continental (some 5500 lbs.) You would not BELIEVE the ride that car had. Sure, they handled like a battleship, but you rode on a magic carpet.
I absolutely love the new Lacrosse (and hated the first one). I think it's exactly what Buick needs to be.
The styling, as I've said before, is brilliant. I'm 30, and I wouldn't mind driving it. I would even choose it over it's target, the ES350.
The styling, as I've said before, is brilliant. I'm 30, and I wouldn't mind driving it. I would even choose it over it's target, the ES350.
You're obviously one of the potential new customers that Buick is aiming this car at.
Many of today's cars prove that you can have a smooth comfortable ride while not having to build cars that float and bounce around like sail boats like many GM and Ford cars did for decades.
10-10-09, 07:25 PM
#10
Sure. Anytime.
There's a lot of interest in both the Taurus and LaCrosse. It will be interesting to see which one takes the sales numbers.....they are both being aimed, more or less, at the same class of auto-buyer.
The Taurus, of course, got a head start because it was released sooner. If you want an SHO, you are probably going to have to order one and just wait...the Ford people tell me that they are now special-order only, like the Flex Ecoboost..
I reviewed the Taurus SEL several weeks ago, here on CL....you probably saw it.
There's a lot of interest in both the Taurus and LaCrosse. It will be interesting to see which one takes the sales numbers.....they are both being aimed, more or less, at the same class of auto-buyer.
The Taurus, of course, got a head start because it was released sooner. If you want an SHO, you are probably going to have to order one and just wait...the Ford people tell me that they are now special-order only, like the Flex Ecoboost..
I reviewed the Taurus SEL several weeks ago, here on CL....you probably saw it.
I'd choose the Taurus over the Buick but I just don't buy American badges anymore.
Maybe sometime in the future but not now.
10-10-09, 07:32 PM
#11
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
Thanks.
The Taurus (comparing it to the LaCrosse CXL) seems to be set up slightly more for sporting....its ride is slightly stiffer, and the power steering is not as heavily boosted. The new LaCrosse has very quick steering (especially by Buick standards), but there is more novocaine-deadness in the boost than in my dentist's office. 
I'd choose the Taurus over the Buick but I just don't buy American badges anymore.
Maybe sometime in the future but not now.
Maybe sometime in the future but not now.
10-10-09, 07:38 PM
#13
Thanks.
The Taurus (comparing it to the LaCrosse CXL) seems to be set up slightly more for sporting....its ride is slightly stiffer, and the power steering is not as heavily boosted. The new LaCrosse has very quick steering (especially by Buick standards), but there is more novocaine-deadness in the boost than in my dentist's office.
The Taurus (comparing it to the LaCrosse CXL) seems to be set up slightly more for sporting....its ride is slightly stiffer, and the power steering is not as heavily boosted. The new LaCrosse has very quick steering (especially by Buick standards), but there is more novocaine-deadness in the boost than in my dentist's office.
The Enclave has helped Buick but I find that to be quite an ugly vehicle,not Aztec gross but ugly
10-10-09, 07:43 PM
#14
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
I'm no young pup as it is (57)...but I'm in generally good health, live a sensible lifestyle, swim and walk regularly, and I should have a lot of years still ahead of me.
I DID age a couple of years, though, when Lexus replaced the ES330 with the 350.....I was very disappointed with the 350.
10-10-09, 07:47 PM
#15
Lexus Champion
Both the LaCrosse and ES350 appeal to an older conservative segment of car buyers. Good thing you didn't test them back to back it could of added 10 years.
After the inital buzz dies down it will be interesting to see who actually is buying the new LaCrosse.
After the inital buzz dies down it will be interesting to see who actually is buying the new LaCrosse.