What a great article. Maybe word is finally getting out there.

Lucerne Trumps Those Annoying Buick Prejudices

USA Today

By James Healey

Jan. 27, 2007

What a fine surprise. Buick has replaced two cars, Park Avenue and LeSabre, with a single big sedan called Lucerne, and it's a honey.

Based on the chassis used for Cadillac DTS, Lucerne winds up nicer than the Caddy – more pleasant to drive, more appealing inside, slicker-looking outside.

In fact, Lucerne is among the best big, front-drive sedans on the market. Yes, better in significant ways than Toyota Avalon, the standard-setter for the mainstream, big-sedan category.

We won't make this totally a one-vs.-the-other discussion, but some comparisons should be made.

Lucerne's interior is more tasteful and roomier than Avalon's. The trunk is bigger. The Buick offers an optional V-8 engine, which the Toyota doesn't. Driving Lucerne is a smoother, more pleasing experience. The Buick's automatic transmission is a four-speed instead of the Toyota's modern five-speed, but Lucerne's gearbox is smoother-shifting than Avalon's.

Where Avalon rules is efficiency. It weighs about 400 pounds less, and its 3.5-liter Toyota V-6 puts out 71 horsepower and 21 pounds-feet of torque more than Lucerne's base 3.8-liter V-6. Lucerne needs the optional General Motors Northstar V-8 to outdo the Avalon's V-6 power ratings.

Avalon's fuel-economy rating is better. In government tests, it gets 25 mpg in combined city-highway driving. Lucerne's V-6 is 22, and the V-8 is 20. The Buick V-8 needs premium fuel to get the advertised horsepower. The Toyota and Buick V-6 engines use regular.

To properly regard Lucerne, we need to address three prejudices.

Detroit models have inferior quality.

Get over that one, folks, especially in this case. Buick outscores Toyota, Honda and some other highly regarded brands in J.D. Power and Associates' surveys.

Power's 2005 tally of things gone wrong the first 90 days of ownership showed the Buick brand was fourth, behind Lexus, Jaguar and BMW and ahead of Cadillac, Mercedes-Benz and Toyota.

Buick also places fourth in Power's 2005 study of problems with 3-year-old vehicles behind Lexus, Porsche and Lincoln.

Toyota can do no wrong.

Get over that one, too. The 2005 Avalon was recalled last year, its first on the market, because somebody forgot to weld the steering mechanism together on some cars, meaning the driver might not be able to steer, according to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.

The auto industry, in its frenzy of cost-cutting that's become corner-cutting, has sunk back into the first-year bugs of the old days, so Lucerne could have some teething problems, too. So far, though, NHTSA files show no complaints, investigations or recalls involving Lucerne, on sale since October.

Buicks are fogey cars.

Man, are you out of touch. No, Buick's not a young, hip brand like Scion. But it has a high-performance heritage that is decades old and is being renewed in Lucerne. There's even a sports Lucerne model, CXS, that has bigger wheels, tires and brakes than the others and a firmer suspension for more agile handling.

One trade-off of the big wheels is a 44-foot turning circle diameter, as big as a full-size pickup. That makes it clumsy in some parking lots.

Yes, Buick has had stinkers. But the 1953 Skylark convertible and the 1971 boat-tail Riviera are collectible classics. The 1960s Wildcats offered enough power to spin the tires almost at will. Grand National and GNX turbocharged models of the '80s were blisteringly quick. More recently, supercharged 3.8-liter V-6s have been punchy enough to substitute for V-8s.

And since when are a comfortable ride and pleasant amenities bad things? Been in a Mercedes-Benz lately? Or a big BMW or Lexus? Buicks by another name.

Let's just enjoy the marvelous package Lucerne is.

The V-8 model, powered by a 275-horsepower version of the 4.6-liter Northstar engine used in Cadillacs, is more fun than the model with the 3.8-liter V-6. But the 197-horsepower V-6 is no dog. It's just that the mildly tuned Northstar seems right in the Lucerne, giving it the kind of oomph that once made large Detroit sedans such marvels of quick comfort.

The V-8 gurgles and growls softly, reinforcing your impression that the car will do about what you ask it to with your right foot. The V-6 sounds and feels a bit coarser, but is more than adequately powerful.

Inside, back-seat leg and knee space are adult-size. And the car is wide enough that three child seats can be strapped across the back seat, not just two. Or, if you hook your kid seat in the middle of the back, there's room on either side for grownups (as long as they don't make a living playing in the NFL).

Interior trim, fabric, controls, the way parts fit together are all premium. Front seats are comfortable without requiring the tinkering that some chairs need to fit you right. Proper driving position is easy to find.

Lucerne wraps the goodies in a smoothly drawn body. You have to accept the Buick tradition of portholes, though. The V-8 model has four on each side of the hood; the V-6, three. They are faux vents, meant to suggest exhaust outlets. Some folks will think they're stupid. But they've always been a Buick signature.

Lucerne might not be for you, but if you decide that ahead of time, powered by prejudice, you're cheating yourself.

Watch your back, Toyota.

Detroit models have inferior quality.

Get over that one, folks, especially in this case. Buick outscores Toyota, Honda and some other highly regarded brands in J.D. Power and Associates' surveys.

Power's 2005 tally of things gone wrong the first 90 days of ownership showed the Buick brand was fourth, behind Lexus, Jaguar and BMW and ahead of Cadillac, Mercedes-Benz and Toyota.

Buick also places fourth in Power's 2005 study of problems with 3-year-old vehicles behind Lexus, Porsche and Lincoln.

Toyota can do no wrong.

Get over that one, too. The 2005 Avalon was recalled last year, its first on the market, because somebody forgot to weld the steering mechanism together on some cars, meaning the driver might not be able to steer, according to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.

The auto industry, in its frenzy of cost-cutting that's become corner-cutting, has sunk back into the first-year bugs of the old days, so Lucerne could have some teething problems, too. So far, though, NHTSA files show no complaints, investigations or recalls involving Lucerne, on sale since October.

Holy schnickes! Did I just read that? And from Healey no less. Are people already tired of Toyota being number 1 even before they get there.?

OMGz whAt are tey FREEKING thninking, GM msut have bribed HealEY!!!!!~~~1

In all seriousness, though, it's nice to see the media openly changing perceptions of domestic cars, even if they're not entirely accurate, IMO. The DTS uses more expensive materials than the Lucerne, the Lucerne's driving position is compromised by the lack of a telescopic steering column, and so on.

Edited January 27, 200620 yr by empowah

I just saw one of these on the road today. It looks so great. If it had a NAV system I would trade in my CTS in a second.

Wow. I'm stunned.

usa today review

Short but nice review. Lucerne compares well to Avalon. He talks about bias against Buick, heritage, the fact that Buick's four speed automatic shifts better than Avalon's 5, and finally that 3800 is adequate.

Awesome review! The Lucerne IS a very, very nice car...

That was a fresh, pleasant read! Great job Buick!

This was already posted in the Buick forums this morning.

I just saw one of these on the road today. It looks so great. If it had a NAV system I would trade in my CTS in a second.

Supposed to be a late availability option.... though I don't know why.. you can get NAV in a DTS right now.

A fairly loaded CXS prices out at 37,135 on CarsDirect.com... I even added the engine block heater.

Not bad... not bad at all!

For comparison, a loaded Avalon prices out at 36,490. Also not a bad price. Though I <and I'm sure others> would pay the 600 for a V8 Northstar.

Buick priced this one right.

Edited January 27, 200620 yr by Oldsmoboi

A fairly loaded CXS prices out at 37,135 on CarsDirect.com... I even added the engine block heater.

Not bad... not bad at all!

For comparison, a loaded Avalon prices out at 36,490. Also not a bad price. Though I <and I'm sure others> would pay the 600 for a V8 Northstar.

Buick priced this one right.

It's really quite a good value for the money, I think..

Supposed to be a late availability option.... though I don't know why.. you can get NAV in a DTS right now.

The Lucerne website shows pics of a NAV system...

Healey has always been the best auto journalist, for years now. this is another example of a fair and honest article, which is what he typically writes.

good job buick.

Healey has always been the best auto journalist, for years now.  this is another example of a fair and honest article, which is what he typically writes.

I get his newsletter very Friday. The two items I most enjoy are the pictoral review with brief comeents and his question and answer column. Fun

The Buick V-8 needs premium fuel to get the advertised horsepower.

Um, I learned that putting Premium in a car that only requires regular, doesn't make it have more hp. Is this wrong? Or is what I've learned right?

Um, I learned that putting Premium in a car that only requires regular, doesn't make it have more hp. Is this wrong? Or is what I've learned right?

You are right. A car that only asks for regular will not get more then the advertised horsepower if you put premium in.

In the Lucurne V8's case, they say that it won't detonate with regular, but if you want the full 275, you need to put premium in.

You are right. A car that only asks for regular will not get more then the advertised horsepower if you put premium in.

In the Lucurne V8's case, they say that it won't detonate with regular, but if you want the full 275, you need to put premium in.

Wait, wasn't that something a few on here were crowing about Toyota doing, having people use premium fuel to get the full HP rating?

Wait, wasn't that something a few on here were crowing about Toyota doing, having people use premium fuel to get the full HP rating?

Yes but that was for simple family sedan, not up market performace alternative.

Wow. I'm stunned.

Ditto.

Wait, wasn't that something a few on here were crowing about Toyota doing, having people use premium fuel to get the full HP rating?

That was just one factor. Even still, Buick *tells* you what will happen with different fuels.

That was just one factor. Even still, Buick *tells* you what will happen with different fuels.

Link, please?

The Lucerne commercial in heavy rotation now is the one that focuses on the availability of a V-8. I find it interesting that they call it the "legendary Northstar" to emphasize the Cadillac engine. They show the CXL V-8, and the front fascia without the foglights just looks bad.

Yes, I don't see why foglamps aren't standard on the CXL as well. Not like they actually matter as equipment since the only time people use them is the wrong time, but still good to have to fill up space.

Yes, I don't see why foglamps aren't standard on the CXL as well. Not like they actually matter as equipment since the only time people use them is the wrong time, but still good to have to fill up space.

Agreed... it makes such a huge difference. Even if the CX doesn't get them, at least keep the same bumper design, and make the fog light "hole" a faux-brake duct or something.

A great review for a change! The Lucerne deserves it. He also noted that the Lucerne's gearbox is smoother than the Avalon's.

The Lucerne commercial in heavy rotation now is the one that focuses on the availability of a V-8.  I find it interesting that they call it the "legendary Northstar" to emphasize the Cadillac engine.  They show the CXL V-8, and the front fascia without the foglights just looks bad.

I still have yet to see the new Lucerne commercials. I've seen the heated windshield washer fluid ones twice many months ago, but that's about it.

Lucerne Trumps Those Annoying Buick Prejudices

USA Today

By James Healey

Jan. 27, 2007

Lucerne winds up nicer than the Caddy – more pleasant to drive, more appealing inside, slicker-looking outside.

In fact, Lucerne is among the best big, front-drive sedans on the market. Yes, better in significant ways than Toyota Avalon, the standard-setter for the mainstream, big-sedan category.

Lucerne's interior is more tasteful and roomier than Avalon's. The trunk is bigger. The Buick offers an optional V-8 engine, which the Toyota doesn't. Driving Lucerne is a smoother, more pleasing experience. The Buick's automatic transmission is a four-speed instead of the Toyota's modern five-speed, but Lucerne's gearbox is smoother-shifting than Avalon's. Yea but now someones got an 8 speed so now our whiners will cry until GM developes a 10 speed, not knowing why, just crying.

Detroit models have inferior quality.

Get over that one, folks, especially in this case. Buick outscores Toyota, Honda and some other highly regarded brands in J.D. Power and Associates' surveys.

Toyota can do no wrong.

Get over that one, too. The 2005 Avalon was recalled last year, its first on the market, because somebody forgot to weld the steering mechanism together on some cars, meaning the driver might not be able to steer, according to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. 

Buicks are fogey cars.

Man, are you out of touch. No, Buick's not a young, hip brand like Scion. But it has a high-performance heritage that is decades old and is being renewed in Lucerne. There's even a sports Lucerne model, CXS, that has bigger wheels, tires and brakes than the others and a firmer suspension for more agile handling.

One trade-off of the big wheels is a 44-foot turning circle diameter, as big as a full-size pickup. That makes it clumsy in some parking lots.

Yes, Buick has had stinkers. But the 1953 Skylark convertible and the 1971 boat-tail Riviera are collectible classics. The 1960s Wildcats offered enough power to spin the tires almost at will. Grand National and GNX turbocharged models of the '80s were blisteringly quick. More recently, supercharged 3.8-liter V-6s have been punchy enough to substitute for V-8s.

And since when are a comfortable ride and pleasant amenities bad things? Been in a Mercedes-Benz lately? Or a big BMW or Lexus? Buicks by another name.

Let's just enjoy the marvelous package Lucerne is.

The V-8 model, powered by a 275-horsepower version of the 4.6-liter Northstar engine used in Cadillacs, is more fun than the model with the 3.8-liter V-6. But the 197-horsepower V-6 is no dog. It's just that the mildly tuned Northstar seems right in the Lucerne, giving it the kind of oomph that once made large Detroit sedans such marvels of quick comfort.

Wait, wasn't that something a few on here were crowing about Toyota doing, having people use premium fuel to get the full HP rating?

This was explained in full in two different posts over the past 2 months, either you get it or you dont, I understand it so it shouldnt be that hard.....right ? The Northstar has always been a high compression high performance engine, always requireing high octane..just like the Supercharged 3800.....yet we have Jap companies claiming to out power our conventional NA engines........when in reality they are high compression, high performance engines. In the case of this 3.5 Toyota engine its power should be compared to the Supercharged 3800 to be completely fair, then suddenly the Toyota engine no longer looks so amazing...especially when the Supercharged 3800 is where its been for 10 years.

Either you get it or you dont, thats entirely up to the individual, it has been spelled out so clear in so many posts.

I know the NorthStar was recalibrated to run on regular gas years ago... What am I missing here??

Um, I learned that putting Premium in a car that only requires regular, doesn't make it have more hp. Is this wrong? Or is what I've learned right?

you are right. that northstar is tuned for regular, just as it is in the lower level DTS. the performance DTS takes premium.

so, thats one minor flaw for the USA Today article.

it cracks me up that buick outscores cadillac. am i wrong or is the Lucerne a little quieter than the DTS.

GM still needs to make the 3.6 standard in this car, and the six speed automatics can't come soon enough. the mpg and accelration would both benefit and would be commensurate with the feature content of cars in this price range.

Well, see what GM can do if they push hard? Some complained that dropping the LeSabre was a mistake, but here it shows that it was a good thing. If the new car had an old name, it wouldn't attact new buyers.

And the name 'Park Ave.' may as well be 'Depends undergarmets' or 'Polident'.

OMGz whAt are tey FREEKING thninking, GM msut have bribed HealEY!!!!!~~~1

In all seriousness, though, it's nice to see the media openly changing perceptions of domestic cars, even if they're not entirely accurate, IMO. The DTS uses more expensive materials than the Lucerne, the Lucerne's driving position is compromised by the lack of a telescopic steering column, and so on.

I would say the cars are changing more than the media. Build cars or trucks close or at the top of class, get a good review.

GOOOOOOOOO---BUICK!!---------------Now if it were only RWD like it should be!!----Otherwise GOOD JOB BUICK/GM!!

Get over that one, too. The 2005 Avalon was recalled last year, its first on the market, because somebody forgot to weld the steering mechanism together on some cars, meaning the driver might not be able to steer, according to the National Highway Traffic Safety

FUNNY... I never heard about that one...

Lucerne might not be for you,

automatic disclaimer

Watch your back, Toyota.

HELL YEAH!

***Finally a decent FAIR review that ***ding, ding*** Isn't import biased..

Hell Yeah!!! Way to go Buick!!!

I know the NorthStar was recalibrated to run on regular gas years ago... What am I missing here??

LOL... MOST journalists don't do RESEARCH on domestics... We all know that.

What? What was that?!?!?!? Damaged brands?!?!?!? The young 'uns seem to like the Solstice just fine and the Lucerne is getting the wheels turning FAST at Buick!

If the whole GM line up were as nice as the new Buicks with good style and power then people would flock to GM for new cars. If they offered rear wheel drive then a whole lot of people might show up on Buicks doorstep looking for a new set of wheels (think Chrysler 300).

If they offered rear wheel drive then a whole lot of people might show up on Buicks doorstep looking for a new set of wheels (think Chrysler 300).

I really wonder about the rear drive thing. It could be argued that only entusiast care that much about it. #oo sales are still good but slowing. The Dodge charger and Magnum sales are not so good. Also didn't Volvo sales increase when they switched from rear wheel drive to front wheel drive?

300 and Magnum/ Charger sales are much much brisker than the industry average. Actual volume numbers are very good, too, esp considering where they are coming from ('Chrysler baggage' bullsh!t and all that).

volvo is too 'outer fringe' to be a good indicator of much.

But I agree that most consumers don't know or care: FWD / RWD.

But I agree that most consumers don't know or care: FWD / RWD.

I agree that most consumers dont know which wheels drive their car. I wish someone would do a survey to see how many people actually know. It would be interesting.

I agree that most consumers dont know which wheels drive their car. I wish someone would do a survey to see how many people actually know. It would be interesting.

In the North they know. Men, woman and children living in the North know which wheels drive their cars, and they do care.

As far as the fuel issue, it's all based on how the ignition is programmed, when it picks up the lower octane it retards timing, hence lower power. If the ignition did not make any timing changes then in actuallity the car would be quicker with the 87 octane vs premium fuel. It's just timing dragging down the power for reliability issues.

Just an FYI - I saw a Buick Lucerne CSX yesterday afternoon - and the car is hot.. It definitely stands out on a crowded street.. Buick did great with this vehicle...

I know the NorthStar was recalibrated to run on regular gas years ago... What am I missing here??

I know that in 2000 the Northstar in both 275 and 300 hp varients were both given new heads and revised compression ratios to burn regular 87 octane gas. Why do the 2006 motors now need super to get the 275 number. I'll bet it has something to do with the new SAE ratings. The Northstars probably lost a couple of hp but were recalibrated to make that up with super unleaded. Not sure on this but it's a possibility. Is this coming from the Lucerne owners manual or Buick press release articles?

Just an FYI - I saw a Buick Lucerne CSX yesterday afternoon - and the car is hot.. It definitely stands out on a crowded street.. Buick did great with this vehicle...

I saw a black one parked on the street in a town up in the mountains Saturday.. they really stand out in dark colors...looked great. I disagree with Car & Driver's view that it looks like a '90s Camry...if it resembles any other car, it's the 2006 Passat somewhat, as far as the C-pillar and tail treatment go.

Its a great car. I can't wait for it to get a 6spd auto with the 3.6L 270hp V-6 from the Enclave. Checkmate!

I saw a black one parked on the street in a town up in the mountains Saturday..  they really stand out in dark colors...looked great.  I disagree with Car & Driver's view that it looks like a '90s Camry...if it resembles any other car, it's the 2006 Passat somewhat, as far as the C-pillar and tail treatment go.

How in the world does C&D think the Lucerne looks like a 90's Camry. I see virtually no resemblance whatsoever. The Lucerne has far more presence than Toyotas dullmobile and far more chrome trim and those neat portholes. The rear resembles a VW if anything and the front looks very Buick like. I think they just have Toyota on the Brain!

Good review-I'm surprised. I mean not surprised that he liked the car, but I've never liked this car to date-just doesn't look like a Buick, seems like the same old stuff, and I thought the interior was vastly inferior, etc., but maybe it has a brighter future than I realized.