bitkahuna

iTrader: (20)

thanks as always for your time and review.
i haven't seen one in person, but your review confirms my impressions.
while the exterior is fairly handsome (although a bit of a 'lump'), i really dislike the interior.

mmarshall

The steering wheel rim is real wood....the rest is plastic woodtone, but, IMO, good-looking plastic woodtone. I pointed that out in earlier posts....that it was mostly plastic, under the surface.

mmarshall

Sure. Anytime.


Yes. The exterior is quite Jaguar-esque, tough I find the location of the traditional Buick portholes somewhat awkward.....they should consider, next year, moving them back down to the front fenders, facing out, where they belong.

The interior looks, to an extent, like they started with the basic Camaro layout, added a bunch of flash and garish trim, and slightly expanded the console.

Pearlpower

iTrader: (2)

I'm sure it is a fine vehicle, but if GM ever wanted a penny from me , they would return to me and the rest of American taxpayers the money they took. Otherwise GM is banned from my garage for life.

And have to disagree on the Camaro comparison. The new Camaro is hideous (sat in one) while the one above is not too bad at all (judging from pictures).

mmarshall

I think you misunderstood what I was saying. I wasn't directly comparing the Camaro and LaCrosse's interior. What I said was that they seem to have first taken the basic Camaro dash/gauge layout and then reworked the console shape and, of course, made it far more garish.

Pearlpower

iTrader: (2)

Gotcha. Thanks for the review, I'm sure they are of value to plenty here in the market for their next vehicle.

-J-P-L-

I would actually say that comparing it to Jaguar is an insult to the Lacrosse. That's how good this design is. Even the XF can't compare where I assume the comparisons are being made. I don't see any design similarities with any other Jaguar.

shyguy16

if everyone had this mentality, no one would buy their cars and they'd have no chance repay a penny.

Pearlpower

iTrader: (2)

Actually, everyone including GM agree that it will never be paid back. They do thank us for helping them out when they needed it the most.

it sure is a pretty car though.

mmarshall

The Jaguar XF is considered one of the most beautiful designs in the industry. It's a rare auto buff indeed who would say that comparing a design to the XF insults it, but I'll respect your opinion on that.

I know that the LaCrosse and XF are not the same, but I see the same general theme in their styling, at least to an extent. But like I said in earlier posts, though, I think Buick ruined the traditional portholes on this one by putting them on the hood and making them face up instead of out.....that is ludicrous.

-J-P-L-

I certainly like the XF but I think they screwed up the headlights with the silly bulge at the top. Not that it ruins the whole car but it doesn't help it.

I do agree with you on the Buick's portholes. They need to simply drop them completely from the design as far as I'm concerned. Although I'd have to say that I prefer them hidden as they are instead of prominently on the side panels.

lamar411

ES330 also seemed more luxurious to me...better interior and all. the LaCrosse looks good but it reminds me of the Taurus, good front end but the tail end looks funny. It also has something like the LS460 exhaust tails right?

mmarshall

You are correct. The 330 was superb.....just about as nice as interiors get in the entry-level-luxury range. The Buick Enclave's interior, for example (and the last-generation LaCrosse), is nice to look at, on the surface, but, unlike the 330, is mostly plastic, with a surface coat of chrome and wood-tone to make it look plush. The new LaCrosse apparantly does away with some of the wood to try and increase its sporting factor.

mmarshall

Chrysler managed to pay back the big Federal loan it got in the early 1980's....but, of course, it did so because it made profits when a lot of its people bought their poorly-made products (Lee Iacocca's talk of quality notwithstanding) and got stuck with lemons. (Many GM products of the same era were also poorly-built; some even worse than Chrysler). Most factory warranties were only 12/12 in those days.

Today's GM cars, though not all as well-built as some of their Japanese and Korean competition, are light-years ahead of what was offered back then, and buying one, obviously, is much less of a risk. And shyguy16 is correct when he says that if GM is going to pay back the current loans, the public will have to do its part by buying their products.

Some GM products today, especially those with a good reputation, ARE selling.....the Chevy Malibu, Saturn Aura (too bad Saturn is being axed), almost all Buick models, the Cadillac CTS, Chevy Cobalt, and the Chevy Silverado pickup are good examples. And the Chevy Volt long-range plug-in hybrid, when it debuts, could blow the whole hybrid market wide open.

Threxx

Thanks for the review.

Let's keep one thing in mind here... put a LaCrosse CXL with no added options side by side with an Accord EX V6 or Camry XLE V6 and it's practically the same price for a MUCH nicer car. In reality you're getting a car that's a solid step up from those two cars for the same price.

I respectfully strongly disagree with your sentiment that GM has taken their same ol' interior plastic and simply glitzed it up.

Are there a few relatively hidden areas of the car with more typical GM plastic? Sure. But the large majority of the car is leaps and bounds beyond a typical GM interior in layout, looks, AND in actual material quality. I mean for goodness sakes the majority of the dashboard is softer touch and more leather-bound than anything I've ever seen from Lexus, much less the ES350. The doors if anything remind me of the Acura RL's doors... very nicely dressed and very solid feeling. I really honestly scoured the interior of the LaCrosse in person this past weekend and found no more cost cutting materials than I would in the ES350, which has some of its own similar cheap feeling components in less visible less commonly interacted with places... just like the LaCrosse.

Your review mentions the CXS uses 40 series tires. That's not really accurate. It uses the same series tires as the CXL unless you opt for the optional touring package which upgrades the wheels to 19", changes the tires to sportier tires, and also adds GM's very impressive magnetic ride control suspension which is also used on the Vette as an option and on the CTS-V. It allows a sportier driving experience without harming ride quality... and in some cases actually improving it.

Most reviews I've read have said the LaCrosse's ride quality actually remains about the same with the touring package thanks to the MRC suspension compensating for the much more aggressive wheels/tires.