So unexpected and didn't know it was available here yet.....saw a Buick Lucerne V8 on the street in deep burgundy, in Calgary, Alberta. I have to admit, this car has the 'it' factor...it looks very good.....eons beyond the LeSabre in street presence...not even in the same galaxy. They may be on to something here.

Edited January 22, 200620 yr by HarleyEarl

I know B)

Pictures don't really do this car justice. It's so much better in person....I wasn't always that enthusiastic about the Lucerne. Now I am.

on a side note, just to push another thorn out there, the G2 Aurora still sticks right out in a crowd too, I think GM was on to something along time ago..........hello ! =}:-O

Meh... I seen it again, today, and I think it looks just as horrible as it did the first time. I want a better looking Buick... built by Buick, that looks like a Buick in the true Buick sense. The Lucerne is not even close to that at all. Sorry, but I don't like it.

Don't be so stubborn, BV. You have to admit the Lucerene is a great car.

Don't be so stubborn, BV.  You have to admit the Lucerene is a great car.

I didn't say it was a bad car. I just don't like the styling. It comes off as anything but a Buick. It doesn't look good as a Buick and hell, it wouldn't look good as anything else either. It's just a poor design lacking substance and soul. It's like a foreign design trying it's hardest to be an american one. It simply doesn't work and I don't like it. Either have an american design or a foreign design, not an inbetween one that trying to be the other. The G6 coupe suffers this same problem, just trying to be foreign instead of the other way around. These designs look horrible to me. Sorry, but that's my opinion.

Speaking of which, I got a nice Lucerne brochure in the mail today. I couldn't stop fingering the high-quality, low-gloss, soft-touch cover (a print of the ebony leather), and indeed, it looked beautiful in those pictures. I only wish it were as nice in person... somehow I get the impression that the "milimeter" this and "exceptional craftsmanship" that is nothing more than an ad campaign, created after the car was designed to cover up some faults. IDK, it's just that while sitting in the Lucerne at LAIAS, nothing about it struck me as particularly luxurious or nice.

G6, Cobalt and Lucerne excell in styling far above their predecessors. In order for the Lucerne to look more like a "B U I C K" we might have to "look back to the past" now this might mean.............. "oh no ! its retro !" This is the catch a stylist runs into, damned if they do, damned if they dont. I dont see the G6 as looking like any import, it is a great example of design moving forward and leaving the past behind. Thank goodness the Lucerne is an example of leaving the last two gen of LeSabre far behind. Now we get to enjoy this car and look forward to the next step.

G6, Cobalt and Lucerne excell in styling far above their predecessors. In order for the Lucerne to look more like a "B U I C K" we might have to "look back to the past" now this might mean..............  "oh no ! its retro !"  This is the catch a stylist runs into, damned if they do, damned if they dont. I dont see the G6 as looking like any import, it is a great example of design moving forward and leaving the past behind. Thank goodness the Lucerne is an example of leaving the last two gen of LeSabre far behind. Now we get to enjoy this car and look forward to the next step.

Smartass.

First off, there's a difference between going retro, making a modern reincarnation, and using styling cues from the past. I'm against retro, but not the other two. I'm not agaisnt looking back to the past at all. Doing that, as in like the other two, doesn't end up as blatantly copying. Blatantly copying is completely unoriginal and just plain pathetic. That's retro and that's what I dislike.

Second, american design looking like it's trying to be foreign (or vice versa) isn't saying that it looks like any particular foreign car. It's saying that it's trying to look like a foreign design, as in something that looks like a foreign company would make. They key word is trying as it isn't excelling at it and comes off as inbetween. With that said, that is the G6 coupe and vice versa, it's the Lucerne.

Third, stop with the sarcasm.

Edited January 22, 200620 yr by blackviper8891

When your up against the wall, like much styling was during the 90's with the wind tunnel controlling everything you must find some other direction to go, I think these new GM's have done a good job at finding a new direction, however I would not say cutting edge of styling but thats open to personal taste, sometimes cutting edge might be unappealing. The "cutting edge" that is the 300 is not for me, even the CTS threw me a pretty good loop when it first came out. Enzo gave me the creeps with its pointed nose. Cars like that I need some time to climatize. The Cien and Sixteen and much earlier on the Viper did not do this to me because I recogonized past fimiliarities. Prowler I didnt get but I was never into hotrods and still am not really, I need more sheet metal.

I look forward to this Mustang, Challenger, Camaro muscle car madness, I just wish the other two contenders were in the game now, not 3 years after the fact. Sales should be good.

I hope the same for the G6, Lucerne, Lacrosse, and Cobalt because its gonna be damn hard to move forward if these cars do not sell well.

It's a nice sled. I've seen it at the dealerships and sat in it at the auto show. It's too big for me, but I applaud it as a big leap forward for Buick. It successfully walks the line between being a traditional large sedan and something that aspires to the appeal of an internationally flavored high line vehicle. It is a car that someone a number of years less than the traditional Buick buyer would be content to be seen in. I have yet to see one in motion.

I only wish that, in a freshening, the LaCrosse could borrow some frontal styling cues from the Lucerne as they are needed.

Go Lucerne (...even though that's a dairy brand at Safeway)! Rack up those numbers for Buick Motor Division.

Edited January 22, 200620 yr by trinacriabob

When your up against the wall, like much styling was during the 90's with the wind tunnel controlling everything you must find some other direction to go, I think these new GM's have done a good job at finding a new direction, however I would not say cutting edge of styling but thats open to personal taste, sometimes cutting edge might be unappealing. The "cutting edge" that is the 300 is not for me, even the CTS threw me a pretty good loop when it first came out. Enzo gave me the creeps with its pointed nose. Cars like that I need some time to climatize. The Cien and Sixteen and much earlier on the Viper did not do this to me because I recogonized past fimiliarities. Prowler I didnt get but I was never into hotrods and still am not really, I need more sheet metal.

I look forward to this Mustang, Challenger, Camaro muscle car madness, I just wish the other two contenders were in the game now, not 3 years after the fact. Sales should be good.

I hope the same for the G6, Lucerne, Lacrosse, and Cobalt because its gonna be damn hard to move forward if these cars do not sell well.

I dislike the 300, think the CTS-V is beautiful, and think the Enzo is borderline ugly. The G6 coupe and Lucerne are as I mentioned. The Lacrosse is a mix of what I mentioned. I think the Cobalt looks good, though. It doesn't give me that inbetween vibe. It is decently Chevy.

Anyways, again, I just get this inbetween vibe from them as well as an outdated one. Neither looks like their respective brand's theme nor like any other brand's. Both lack substance and soul as well. They could easily be badged as anything. There's nothing distintive about them that makes it clear which brand they are. That entire combination didn't make for attractive designs. Both look weird, yet bland while the details are dated.

Also, I don't feel that GM went the right direction with them. Truthfully, I haven't really liked much of what GM has come out with lately. It started once Lutz arrived and had input into designs already being developed. Some that are all him, though, have looked good (like the Sky, Aura, Tahoe, and Enclave).

Bah... I can't think what more I wanted to say at the moment. Damn headache...

Sorry, but I'm with BV.

I'm sick of the need to look toward the past in order to appreciate what we actually have now. Just because the Lesabre looked like $h! doesn't mean the Lucerne is gorgeous. I've said it before and I'll say it again. The Lucerne isn't enough to change consumers' perceptions of Buick. Derivative doesn't spark a turnaround, a neither will Lucerne.

Sorry, but I'm with BV. 

I'm sick of the need to look toward the past in order to appreciate what we actually have now.  Just because the Lesabre looked like $h! doesn't mean the Lucerne is gorgeous.  I've said it before and I'll say it again.  The Lucerne isn't enough to change consumers' perceptions of Buick.  Derivative doesn't spark a turnaround, a neither will Lucerne.

Amen! Though I think the Lucerne is a great car in general, there's still nothing there that really makes EVERYONE take notice. That's really what they need, but they never seem to fully figure it out. I've seen a few at a dealer, one of each model, and the only one that really stood out to me was a black/neutral CXS with chromes, but even then, it was still "nice for a Buick" in my mind.

Compared to the LeSabre, for instance, this car is in a completely different universe, but the homely front end and general soft look to the body, the continuing 3.8L use, etc., still leave quite a margin for improvement--a margin they HOPEFULLY will take care of in the future.

As for the Lacrosse, don't even get me started...it only looks DECENT if you get a full-boat, loaded CXS model in a proper color like black...beyond that, it looks like some kind of 6 year old Taurus that got shrunken a bit, some puke-inducing Buick wheels thrown on, an off-roader suspension height, and a mis-matched interior. Driving wise, not bad, but certainly nothing great.

Much better cars than they're predecessors, but that's not saying much. It'd also be nice, just for once, if the only really "nice" models weren't just the most fully loaded, expensive trim lines--not saying put 18" chrome alloys and 2-tone leather on the base Lacrosse CX, but for god's sake, ditch the gawdy hubcaps and mousefur cloth, please!

Not every car has to be a carbon copy of the 300, but at least it stands out and caught attention from EVERYONE from day one...something derivative, ho-hum blobs of cars will never do.

Edited January 22, 200620 yr by caddycruiser

the continuing 3.8L use, etc., still leave quite a margin for improvement--a margin they HOPEFULLY will take care of in the future. 

on the base Lacrosse CX, but for god's sake, ditch the gawdy hubcaps and mousefur cloth, please!

Lucerne item:

give it a rest...me and some others will take dependability over panache...for those not wired the same way, they have the exotic engines

LaCrosse item:

right...there should not be hubcaps AT ALL and "mousefur" is a good description for the cloth which is really mediocre.

I can only look at your sig and consider the source

Speaking of which, I got a nice Lucerne brochure in the mail today. I couldn't stop fingering the high-quality, low-gloss, soft-touch cover (a print of the ebony leather), and indeed, it looked beautiful in those pictures. I only wish it were as nice in person... somehow I get the impression that the "milimeter" this and "exceptional craftsmanship" that is nothing more than an ad campaign, created after the car was designed to cover up some faults. IDK, it's just that while sitting in the Lucerne at LAIAS, nothing about it struck me as particularly luxurious or nice.

that brochure cover feels a lot better than the dash plastic on the Lucerne.

i know, I've felt both.

i know, I've felt both.

What else have you felt, Reg? :AH-HA_wink:

What else have you felt, Reg? :AH-HA_wink:

LoL!

I've felt both and the left one is softer, and hangs lower.

I hit a Buick lot today. a lucerne had a 39k sticker!

OUTRAGEOUS!

its interior is pretty mediocre. ok design, but the overall execution leaves lots to be desired. panels gaps are small though. materials and packaging/ergonomics are off the mark.

Edited January 22, 200620 yr by regfootball

agreed with reg and empowah on the interior issue, lucerne's interior just does not justify the 30k-plus price tag. A Mada 3 has better dash materials and more intriguing design elements than this, so I would say the Lucerne's dash is barely worthy of a Cobalt, but the design is so bloody boring because of that center stack. I can't remember how nice I thought the quality of the wood was though; I was too disappointed with the dash feel to get over it.

I know this won't be a game changer for Buick, but it's enough of a step in the right direction and a quality car to win over some fringe buyers. Now hurry up and put the DI 3.6 engine with 280 hp Lutz was talking about. Hurry!

As for the interior design or layout, you have to remember not all interiors can look like your favorite, if you find your favorite and then feel any other must beat it in your eyes to be worthy, makes no sence. Many adults do not want a sportscar cockpit I would guess. I havent looked over the Lucerne interior since last years photos but the STS that some are bashing on looks excellent to me.

Interior materials have not been much to talk about in well over a decade

I like to take things in context. The Lucerne interior is like night and day compared to the LeSabre that came before. It's not perfect but it's perfectly acceptable.

Fell in love with a Black on Black Lucerne CXS last night while visiting a local Buick dealer's lot. If I had the money for that fully loaded CXS, I'd go for it in a heartbeat (and I'm 31 y-o).

Edited January 22, 200620 yr by GMTruckGuy74

that brochure cover feels a lot better than the dash plastic on the Lucerne.

i know, I've felt both.

I was thinking the same thing! The brochure cover feels a lot like the door "pull" handles on our Passat.

I like to take things in context.  The Lucerne interior is like night and day compared to the LeSabre that came before.  It's not perfect but it's perfectly acceptable.

not at close to 40 grand though!

If you look at the LaCrosse, and then the Enclave (which is everything a Buick *should* be, stylistically speaking) then you can definitely see the Lucerne as a vehicle that shows a company in transition. It's quality and style are both much better than the LaCrosse, but way inferior to the Enclave.

For the record, I love the Lucerne and wouldn't mind having one in my fleet someday.

As for the interior design or layout, you have to remember not all interiors can look like your favorite, if you find your favorite and then feel any other must beat it in your eyes to be worthy, makes no sence. Many adults do not want a sportscar cockpit I would guess. I havent looked over the Lucerne interior since last years photos but the STS that some are bashing on looks excellent to me.

Interior materials have not been much to talk about in well over a decade

So... it must look like the Impala's, Tahoe's, LaCrosse's, etc, etc, etc...? The interior is worse than the exterior. It's pathetic. It has absolutley no originality. Forget trying to look foreign, it isn't trying to look like anything. It's a dash, just a general dash. This is another thing that seems common throughout GM. I'm already on the line with GM... any more and GM may lose me. Interiors like the Enclave are giving me hope, though. I'm just getting sick of it. These so-called transition vehicles are the worse I've seen, design wise, inside and out.

Also, FYI, I don't want every interior to look like my favorite. I don't want that with exteriors either. I just want good designs from GM, specifically Pontiac. I can easily study a design to find out which it is. Seems that most of you guys don't. Perhaps it's because of what I do and plan on doing so for my career.