Buick suffered from neglect while GM attempted to put its Cadillac franchise in order, and tried to support more brands than it could handle. However, by moving Cadillac up and giving it a more sporting edge, product planners gave Buick a niche closer to the lower reaches of Lexus. This placement is much closer to Buick’s traditional market as the low-profile luxury alternative to flashier Cadillacs of GM’s glory days of the 1920s to 1960s.
Prime Numbers
- Price: $33,015. As Tested: $35,760
- Engine: 3.6-liter V6 with four valves per cylinder and variable valve timing on the intake camshaft only
- Horsepower: 280 @ 6,300 rpm
- Torque: 259 lb.-ft. @ 4,800 rpm
- Drivetrain: Transverse front-drive with six-speed automatic transmission.
- Suspension, F/R: MacPherson struts, twin-tube gas-charged shocks, anti-roll bar/four-link independent with twin-tube gas-charged shocks, anti-roll bar
- Length: 197-in.
- Width: 73.1-in.
- Height: 59.2-in.
- Wheelbase: 111.7-in.
- Weight: 4,065-lbs.
Who’s The Buyer
This car is for you if:
- You find sleek, handsome styling with an American flair appealing.
- Overall capability is more important than outright performance.
- “Peace and Quiet” not only describes interior sound levels, but the character you look for in a car.
This car is NOT for you if:
- You still associate the name Buick with “Social Security.”
- The brand’s misguided and conflicting forays into motorsports and performance cars like the GNX while turning its profit from cars like the Century, the favorite rolling sofa of old Aunt Bessie, turn you off.
- You are afraid your purchase comes with free AARP membership and coupons for Metamucil—and that your children will say a Buick makes you look older than you really are.
Alternatives To Consider
Lincoln MKZ: This is the entry-level Lincoln. Stuck in a no-man’s land between what Mercury ought to be and what Lincoln should be, the MKZ is based on Ford’s current and excellent Fusion platform, but given just enough leather, wood and technology to make you think it’s more than it really is. All-wheel-drive is optional.
Toyota Avalon: For many, this car epitomized what would happen if a Japanese company built a Buick. Larger, heavier and roomier than the Camry, it offers a silky ride, and a generous, quiet interior like Buicks of old. Priced similarly to the LaCrosse, it is slightly smaller in most dimensions. All-wheel-drive is not available.
Acura TL: Built off Honda’s Accord, the TL is the middle child in the Acura lineup. The last generation car was smoothly sexy and luxurious, but tried to put too much power through the front wheels. The latest generation ditches the Alfa-like bodywork for a more Japanese design, finishes it off with a large chrome “can-opener” grille and adds Honda’s amazing Super Handling All-Wheel-Drive. Like that person you took to the junior prom in high school, the TL has a “nice personality.”
THE “NEW GM” HAS TWO LUXURY BRANDS, CADILLAC AND BUICK. Distinguishing them from each other, however, was only part of the problem GM faced. For decades Buick had bounced from being the poster car for the AARP to providing race engines for the Indy 500 and building bizarre performance cars like the GNX. Buick needed a coherent image and character, and found it as a competitor for vehicles at the top of the Toyota lineup and the bottom of the Lexus family tree.
Engine, Transmission, Drivetrain
The LaCrosse powertrain is a strong point. Not only do you have more than adequate horsepower and torque available, this energy is sent through a smooth six-speed automatic transmission that drives the front wheels. Oddly, only the mid-range CXL offers all-wheel-drive as an option, and its 255 hp and 217 lb-ft should be enough to do the trick. However, the top of the line 3.6-liter V6 would be better suited to driving an all-wheel-drive LaCrosse with the confidence and sophistication expected of a Buick, and be more in line with the premium image Buick aspires to. (Follow-up 3/25/2010: Buick has announced it is dropping the 3.0-liter V6 from the lineup, and mating all-wheel-drive to the 3.6-liter engine for the 2011 model year.)
The 3.6-liter is GM’s premium V6. Like all of the other engines in the LaCrosse range (a 2.4-liter inline four and 3.0-liter V6), it uses direct fuel injection for greater efficiency. The 3.6 also has variable valve timing (VVT), but only on the intake valves and not the exhaust. Though most of the performance benefit of VVT comes on the intake side, adding it to the exhaust cam increases the ability to squeeze even greater efficiency out of the engine in terms of power, and in particular better fuel economy and lower emissions. Still, the engine produces a stout 280 hp and 259 lb-ft of torque, numbers that not too many years ago were hailed as impressive for V8s.
And while some manufacturers have moved to seven- and eight-speed automatic transmission, the LaCrosse uses its six-speed quite effectively. It could be argued that with the LaCrosse powertrain’s ability to smoothly move up and down the range, coupled with decent fuel economy (17 city/27 highway/21 combined mpg), there’s little to be gained by adding more gears, especially when the transmission is hooked to a relatively large-displacement and torquey engine.
The four cylinder? With just 182 hp and 172 lb-ft of torque powering a 4,000-lb car, it might be a bit tough to run the power through all four wheels with the unstrained gusto one should expect from a Buick. Thus it’s available only in front-drive form. Though we’d argue that the four-cylinder doesn’t belong in the lineup at all, it probably appeals to the ladies at Sun City for its frugal nature, and you don’t need all-wheel drive to putter around Florida or Phoenix.
Suspension, Steering, Brakes
The spec sheet reads like a favorite recipe: MacPherson strut front suspension, multi-link independent rear suspension, magnetic variable-assist power steering, electronic stability control, traction control, anti-lock brakes and brake assist. However, it is in how you add the ingredients and in what quantities that determines whether the dish is palatable or not. For the most part, the Buick engineers got it right. The LaCrosse stops just short of the dreaded “float” that was so common in the luxury cars Detroit built in the 1960s and 1970s, yet it retains the composure to ignore rough pavement. You’ll never mistake it for a sports car, but that’s not to say that the LaCrosse won’t go around corners quickly. It will, and with a serving of understeer to remind you that dignity demands a slightly slower speed and a more graceful arc through the turns.
The steering is light and direct, but somewhat lacking in feel. It has none of the “light as air” feel found in Buicks of old, and doesn’t twirl from right to left wheel lock with little effort. Thankfully, it has a weight appropriate to the vehicle. What it doesn’t have, however, is consistency. Enter a freeway on-ramp at speed, catch a slight bump that takes a bit of weight off the front wheels and you suddenly find yourself wondering if the car is connected to the earth at all. Granted, this is an infrequent situation, but one that will send a quick chill up your spine when you encounter it.
The brakes, on the other hand, worked well in all real-world situations. They may not stop the car without fading and smoking if asked to bring the LaCrosse down from top speed on a desert highway, but who in their right mind is ever going to ask that of a Buick?
Body, Design, Quality
The LaCrosse is based on an upgraded version of GM’s Epsilon platform found under the Chevy Malibu. And it’s a testament to that Malibu donor car that the LaCrosse showed no structure-induced squeaks, rattles or groans. In fact, the body proved impressively tight, and provides a strong base on which the rest of the vehicle is built. This ensures that the suspension, steering and brakes can do their jobs without having to also adapt to the inconsistent ride motions a less rigid base might introduce.
As for exterior design, the pictures speak for themselves. Though it looks long and narrow, almost dachshund-like from some angles, the LaCrosse is a handsome vehicle with Lexus-like overtones. The body side character line that dips and rises is reminiscent of the “side sweep” found on Buicks of the 1960s and 1970s, but without the overtly retro look favored by cars like the Chevy Camaro, Ford Mustang and Dodge Challenger. Nicely done.
Close examination shows tight panel gaps, especially in the hard to control sections between the plastic front and rear fascias and the steel fenders they mate with. All of the body creases line up (no mean feat considering they often traversed both horizontal and vertical planes), and the trim fits snugly to the body.
Interior, Ergonomics
You just had to know there would be a problem somewhere: the interior design lacks cohesion, especially in lighter colors. It has an instrument panel that sweeps from door-to-door, and is tilted away from the passengers. This necessitates use of a gauge cluster that awkwardly sits in front of the panel and looks like an afterthought. The upper panel sweeps below the windshield and is bisected by a trim piece that includes a light on its upper edge. This casts a faint ice-blue light at night that complements the lighting used for the instruments. However, this ribbon of light does not carry over into the door panels and tie the interior together. Chevy did exactly opposite on the Camaro with its red accent lighting. Was money so tight when these cars were designed that GM couldn’t afford the extra cost, or was someone worried that customers would notice that both cars used wrap-around accent lighting? Either way, it doesn’t make much sense.
After driving a few new GM cars back-to-back, I can say that the interior designers ran out of ideas when it came to the center stack. You can almost draw the unit in your sleep: tall, slender air vents on either side of a navigation/audio screen sitting atop a mass of buttons. Oh yeah, and a large selection knob dead-center among the buttons. How confusing is it? It took me two days before I could remember the general area where the switch for the heated steering wheel was located, or accurately find the seat heaters on the first try. And friends who own recent GM offerings say they still have trouble finding the right buttons after months of daily use.
There’s plenty of room for five in the cabin, but it nevertheless seemed a bit tight. Why? The A-pillars sweep aggressively toward the front seats, promoting feelings of unease and claustrophobia among taller drivers because the windshield header seems too close. Then there’s a high window line, plus overstuffed seats, and shapes that compete against each other. A darker interior color (the test car was a dark titanium/light titanium mix, not the darker two-tone shown in the GM-supplied photos) would help, as would a “less is more” design ethic.
Audio, Video, Navigation
The navigation system adds $1,995 to the list price, but comes with an indispensible feature: a backup camera. Without it, and the lines superimposed on the screen to show you where the car is headed, maneuvering the LaCrosse in reverse would be an interesting pursuit. The sonar units imbedded in the rear bumper aren’t enough because they only provide an audible warning that you are close to another object or vehicle. The screen lets you see that potential impediment, and determine the best course of action. But this is the price that we pay for the low nose/high tail shapes that improve a vehicle’s ability to cut through the air, and most contemporary sedans have this same problem.
The 384-Watt audio system is from Harmon-Kardon, and drives sound from the AM/FM/XM/CD/MP3 sound system through 11 speakers. A USB port is located in the center console, and there are redundant controls for the audio system located on the steering wheel.
Conclusion
ALONG WITH THE ENCLAVE, the LaCrosse is a true “new Buick.” Forget the Lucerne and other stopgaps that have come before. This is the car that sets the stage for what is to follow, and redefines the brand’s image. Which is all the more reason to question the lack of all-wheel-drive on the top model, availability of a four-cylinder that probably only appeals to skin flints that drive 0.5 miles a day for the Denny Early Bird Special, and an interior that isn’t in tune with the very handsome exterior. As proven by the steering and some minor details, it needs a once-over with a fine tooth comb before it can claim perfection.
You must log in to post a comment.