First reaction:  It looks like a Mercury more than a Buick.

What's with the dash?  Is it a Cadillac CTS borrowing?  I can't tell what platform this car is on, let alone if it is a W-body.

I do like the wood applique and general proportions of the console better than those of our LaCrosse/Allure.

It is indeed W-body. I personally see zero CTS in the interior.

So, yeah...negatory on that front clip. It also completely lacks any flow with the rest of the car.

I don't know why everyone is so in love with the hood ornament. The big-ass winged-whatever on Chinese Buicks look so funny on their rounded bodies.

I don't know why everyone is so in love with the hood ornament. The big-ass winged-whatever on Chinese Buicks look so funny on their rounded bodies.

I am NOT in love with the hood ornament. I think that the grille medallion and the hood ornament in such close proximity fight each other. Pick one or the other.

There are a lot of things on this Chinese car that do NOT go together. I don't like the greenhouse shape. It is small Lincoln Town Car like. That's why I asked what the platform was. I think that the current LaCrosse/Allure has a nicer greenhouse.

Aside from a nice touch here and there, I think the execution is clumsy, for lack of a better word.

Edited February 26, 200620 yr by trinacriabob

The HFV6 in the base Commodore is de-contented and lower-powered. While the LaCrosse gets a 240 hp version with dual-VVT, the Commodore gets a 230 hp version with only inlet VVT to save money, as did all V6 engines with VVT before the LY7 (Toyota and then Mercedes followed with Dual-VVT shortly afterward). It's possible the cheaper 3.6 does not meet US emissions regulations, which are far stricter than Australia's.

Ok fair enough. Then sell a lower spec version in lower spec LaCrosses. In this higly competitive market there is no excuse for selling a 20+ year old pushrod V6 (despite how good it might actually be) when a better modern engine is available and affordable. You can argue all you like the virtues of the Series II V6, but when the competition from abroad has powertrains that are perceived to be better they will sell. It is vital that GM remember this.

The Australian emissions regulations mirror those of Europe which, while possibly not be as tough as those found in the US, are far from leniant. It is not unreasonable for GM to fit its latest and newest engine to the entire range of such an important car as the U.S. LaCrosse.

Ironically, the 20+ year-old pushrod V6 in question is one of the cleanest V6 for sale today (in Series III form shared by the LaCrosse, Lucerne, and NOS' Camaro)

Ironically, the 20+ year-old pushrod V6 in question is one of the cleanest V6 for sale today (in Series III form shared by the LaCrosse, Lucerne, and NOS' Camaro)

It looks amazing! Lucky Chinese!!

Ironically, the 20+ year-old pushrod V6 in question is one of the cleanest V6 for sale today (in Series III form shared by the LaCrosse, Lucerne, and NOS' Camaro)

You know I am with you on this. Foregoing the dependability and mileage of such a powerplant for the chi-chi HF factor, 10 more hp you will hardly ever use and slightly less gas mileage makes no sense to me.

that is the standard of ugly, IMO

I think the front of the Chinese one is better, but apart from that I think overall the US one looks better!

Overall, ours does look better. It's more cohesive. But, see what I have been saying all along about a grille that needs to be canted back.

yea it does!

Their Regal is really nice looking too:

Why didn't ours look like that?!

Yeah, why didn't the NA Regal look like that? Especially the taillights...these look much better!

As for the LaCrosse...the front has character, something the NA one doesn't have...but as far as the taillights on the Chinese market one, they have to go.

Yeah, why didn't the NA Regal look like that?  Especially the taillights...these look much better!

Agree wholeheartedly! Those taillights on the Regal are great compared to the blob of red that goes across the entire rear of the American version...it's proportions actually mimic those of the Intrigue.

Ok fair enough. Then sell a lower spec version in lower spec LaCrosses. In this higly competitive market there is no excuse for selling a 20+ year old pushrod V6 (despite how good it might actually be) when a better modern engine is available and affordable. You can argue all you like the virtues of the Series II V6, but when the competition from abroad has powertrains that are perceived to be better they will sell. It is vital that GM remember this.

The Australian emissions regulations mirror those of Europe which, while possibly not be as tough as those found in the US, are far from leniant. It is not unreasonable for GM to fit its latest and newest engine to the entire range of such an important car as the U.S. LaCrosse.

Australian emissions regulations have been far more lenient than Europe's. Australia only required compliance with the Euro3 standard beginning in January 2006. Europe is transitioning to the Euro4 standard which many vehicles already meet, and a Euro5 standard is not far off. US Tier 2 standards are somewhere between Euro4 and Euro5 and are also getting stricter (a state of the art Euro4 diesel would not meet imminent US standards).

Their Regal is really nice looking too:

Why didn't ours look like that?!

This would have been a great mid life freshening for the retired regal, minus the pop-up Buick ornament(belongs on a car out of that 70's show).

Buick has done a great job with their Chinese products. They all look more upscale than their competition.

And the Royaum. Hmmm.

It's working, American's desiring Chinese made Buicks.

The Royaum sucks. Old, outdated, they can have it.

Some one ought to call GM and tell Rick Wagoner this would get GM out of trouble, put these cars on American streets

So this is the car that TCC had in their spyshots section. WTF? Why is it that the Chinese LaCrosse has such a nice interior, and overall better exterior design compared to the NA LaCrosse? I mean, just look at these images

--

If nothing else, this is the interior that SHOULD be in the LaCrosse. As for the exterior, I like it a lot, it looks more muscular than the shapeless NA version, although I have to admit i see a little Ford Five-Hundred in the front end design XD If they put the NA Lacrosse's rear end or even the Lucerne's rear on the back of the Chinese LaCrosse, it'd be a knockout. Again, why is it we in NA get the dull, unimaginative interior, while the Chinese get something that looks like a true Luxery car interior? One more thing, why does the Chinese LaCrosse get a Nav system but not the NA LaCrosse? GM...you're so friggen' stupid...

One other thing...how come during the design of both LaCrosse cars, GM didn't build them on the more modern Epislon platform? Seems like a smarter idea than sticking with the architechure they're stuck with now.

FYI I'm 19, new to the forums, and a DCX fan, but I do happen to like the newer Lucerne (and some of GM's new designs) I just can't comprehend their stupidity sometimes. XD

Edited March 1, 200620 yr by Dodgefan

Looks good. I can see a little bit of Lexus by the headlights. And what happened to the stand up hood ornaments? Kinda miss them.

97804[/snapback]

They were mandated as pedestrian "unfriendly" by the Feds, and mandated to be removed by Federal law!

They were mandated as pedestrian "unfriendly" by the Feds, and mandated to be removed by Federal law!

202720[/snapback]

Wrong. Not true.

UAW DEMANDS / HIGH LABOR AND PENSION-BENEFIT COSTS

INCOMPETENT MANAGEMENT

97998[/snapback]

UAW DEMANDS / HIGH LABOR AND PENSION-BENEFIT COSTS

INCOMPETENT MANAGEMENT

98000[/snapback]

Wow Reg, Im impressed, you're starting to see what I had been seeing is wrong with GM for years now