Last post on Sep 07, 2011 at 7:13 PM
You are in the Buick Lucerne
What is this discussion about?
Buick Lucerne, Sedan
#411 of 2217 Re: I Don't Understand [jh1977]
Dec 10, 2005 (4:32 am)
"Can Somebody please explain to me why GM did not add more HP(Maybe at least 230 HP)to the old 3.8 Liter engine currently in the Base 2006 Lucerne. For 2006 the HP in the base Lucerne is 197. Or why didn't GM put the 3.9 Liter engine with 240 HP (Currently in the 2006 Chevy Impala)in the base 2006 Lucerne. For me the V8 engine in the 2006 Lucerne waste a lot of gasoline and I don't need a V8 engine for my driving needs. I Currently have a Buick Lesabre and was thinking about buying the new Lucerne with a V6 engine until I found out the V6 engine in the Base Lucerne has less HP than my Lesabre. I'm considering buying the 2006 Chevy Impala with the 3.9 Liter engine."
As was said above the 3.8L is gone very soon for a number of reasons so it would make no sense to redesign it for HP. 200 is plenty for everyday driving for most customers. It is only left in the LaCrosse, Grand Prix and Lucerne. I believe it was used in the Buicks because GM gradually ramped up the manufacturing capacity of the new 3.9 engine family and Buick has had a tradition, and customer base, using the 3.8L. To me it should be the last ones to use it of any division. There are a lot of Buick buyers that love the engine.
As far as less HP than the older one it is the same exact engine except for some noise improvements. In actuality due to the new way of measuring/advertising HP there is probably a true difference of 6HP and that is lost due to the quieter mufflers. Not many will notice the 6HP. Also most will buy the V8 in the Lucerne.
As far as the Impala, the LaCrosse is available with the 3.6L DOHC with 240HP.
#412 of 2217 Re: daryll44 [2bobp66]
Dec 10, 2005 (4:35 am)
I agree. You haven't been able to buy a new LeSabre for 18000 for several years. Even with the GM discount this past summer, you couldn't get one that low. When I bought my 95 Roadmaster in 96, you could get one at that price. Talking about RWD, they never should have stopped making the Roadmaster!
#413 of 2217 Re: daryll44 [roady1]
Dec 10, 2005 (5:46 am)
I agree...the Roadmaster was a nice throwback to the golden era of GM. And a nicer alternative to the Caprice of that era and a better size than the larger Cadillac Brougham.
Is Impala on the same platform as Lucerne or LaCrosse?
#414 of 2217 Re: daryll44 [daryll44]
Dec 10, 2005 (6:26 am)
Impala is the W architecture same as Grand Prix/LaCrosse/Monte Carlo
Dec 10, 2005 (6:32 am)
“By all accounts the 3800 is soon going away...as such, it will not be modified at this late date. As for the V8, don't forget it DOES have displacement on demand...”
To be clear, since this is the Lucerne thread, the Impala’s (and Grand Prix’s) 5.3L OHV V8 has DoD. The Northstar V8 version available in the Lucerne does not.
Enjoying DoD . .
#416 of 2217 Re: daryll44 [jb7227]
Dec 10, 2005 (11:57 am)
I have owned a few Buicks in the last ten years, so I was interested to see what Buick has done with the Lucerne. I drove the cxs and a middle model with the v-6. It is a very quiet car and seems to be nicely made. The v-8 is more energetic, of course, but it needs a 5-spd- it tends to need prodding on to get the performance. Unfortunately, the alignment was bad and there was a tire balance problem. The magnetic shock absorbers do a good job, but I don't care for the 50 series tires which pick up too many little bumps. The trend toward lower and lower profile tires is one I deplore. The v-6 had a smoother ride under most conditions, but the old 3800, while improved once again, seemed lethargic, especially with only 4 speeds. It too took prodding, only more of it. The rear end is too plain, but I like the front. Nice car, but not for me right now.
#417 of 2217 Re: I Don't Understand [jh1977]
Dec 10, 2005 (1:57 pm)
I don't either. Apparently, each model has a premium engine. The Lucerne the base is the 3.8 V6 and the premium, the 4.6 V8; the La Crosse, 3.8 V6 and 3.6 V6.
It's really a pity, for the 3.6 V6 in the La Crosse has all the virtues of the 3.8 V6 (low-end torque) without its vices: it's a smooth engine with a spirited response over its entire RPM range.
I own a Bonneville '02 with the 3.8 V6 and love it, but it's time for it to go.
And, no, the 3.9 V6 is too coarse compared to the 3.6 V6. At least on a Buick, IMO.
#418 of 2217 Re: daryll44 [daryll44]
Dec 10, 2005 (2:38 pm)
So, what did you not understand in my post #401. I said that the LeSabre moved onto the Aurora platform in model year 2000.
#419 of 2217 Re: RWD [62vetteefp]
Dec 10, 2005 (2:46 pm)
The SRX is not a station wagon. It is an SUV built on a car platform, otherwise it is nearly like the trailblazer in size. A CTS wagon would not be more than 60 inches tall, the SRX is 68.
#420 of 2217 Re: RWD [sls002]
Dec 10, 2005 (3:31 pm)
Ahh, the definition of a truck comes up. SRX is considered a truck but so are can most all station wagons.
There are no rules that define a station wagon to be a car by height or any other dimension. Most rules say if it has a flat load floor it is a truck. Depends on who is making the rules. But the SRX uses the same architecture and suspension as the CTS. Just a bit taller. No one wants to build a vehicle anymore and call it a station wagon. Kiss of death. (unless you are mercedes)