You are here: Forums Sedans Buick Lucerne Buick Lucerne: Edmunds Reviews

Buick Lucerne: Edmunds Reviews

28 messages,  Last post on Apr 04, 2006 at 4:34 PM

You are in the Buick Lucerne Forum. Your Hosts are pat & karens

What is this discussion about? Buick Lucerne, Sedan

Messages Page 4 of 4 1 2 3 4 Prev Next Last

Go To Msg # Search This Discussion

#23 of 28 Re: The HP issue [exalteddragon1] by pat HOST Apr 04, 2006 (3:29 pm)
Replying to: exalteddragon1 (Apr 04, 2006 11:36 am) HEY EXALTEDDRAGON1 , if you want to be heard by the editors, you need to use the "Contact Us" tab at the "Help" link which is on the left side of the page. Quite frankly, I have no more influence over them than anyone else posting here ...
#24 of 28 Re: The HP issue [imidazol97] by 62vetteefp Apr 04, 2006 (4:34 pm)
Replying to: imidazol97 (Apr 04, 2006 1:28 pm) Its the DTS and Lucerne.
#25 of 28 review by 1487 Apr 04, 2006 (1:55 pm)
The review was typical edmunds. They didnt like the vehicle from the door and they had to nitpick to find fault with the vehicle. They talk about features it doesnt have but dont mention it offers features some of it's competitors lack. That is always the case when American cars are reviewed by Edmunds and many other publications. They dont mention remote start, they barely mention the heated washer fluid and the cooled seats. Their comments about the car's handling and interior quality totally contradict everything I have read about this car thus far. Even C&D was mostly positive about the Lucerne and they love Japanese cars as much as Edmunds does. reading that review you get the impression that the Avalon is some type of German sports sedan compared to the Lucerne. No car in this segment is intended to be sporty and every other reviewer has said the Lucerne is just as capable as any Avalon.   What was up with the falling headliner? Give me a break, only edmunds manages to have GM press cars with pieces falling off. I really thought they had given up on that whole thing, but I see they are back to their old tricks.   Never in my life have I read a review where they complain about the heated seats being too warm. That is stupidity if I've ever seen it. When the chief editor had a forum on here I corresponded with him and was very surprised at how openly biased against GM he was. He wasn't too fond of Ford and Chrysler either, but he gave them more credit than GM. I dont believe there were any GM products he felt were competitive. Replies to this message: splatsterhound (Apr 04, 2006 2:18 pm) 1487 (Apr 04, 2006 3:55 pm)
#26 of 28 Re: review [1487] by splatsterhound Apr 04, 2006 (2:18 pm)
Replying to: 1487 (Apr 04, 2006 1:55 pm) I agree. The "falling headliner" thing was an eye-roller. Come on, these cars they review are pool cars that go from publication to publication. You're telling me a car that goes from pub to pub to pub and ferried by some press flack is going to have a hanging headliner? And why no pictures of it? That's what a camera is for, fellas! Point out the problems with pictures! I want proof!   I guess that's why I'm steamed about Edmund's crappy journalism. If I was their managing editor they're be a Hell to Pay meeting, simply because of their many errors. I guess they don't care. I can roll my eyes slightly at salesman who don't know their stuff, but when, ahem, 'automotive journalists' don't know their stuff, it bugs me. Replies to this message: 1487 (Apr 04, 2006 3:55 pm)
#27 of 28 Re: review [splatsterhound] by 1487 Apr 04, 2006 (3:55 pm)
Replying to: splatsterhound (Apr 04, 2006 2:18 pm) Dont look for any quick corrections in the article. I dont think they really care since it's the Lucerne.   Trust me, that review was positive compared to what they used to say about GM products. They have been getting better of late, but their bias is still apparent. Every GM vehicle (and Ford to some extent) is guilty of being crap until proven innocent. To put this in perspective, Karl said in his old forum that he doesnt even like the Vette. If he doesnt like the Vette or any of the Cadillacs, imagine what he thinks of lower vehicles like the Lucerne. Sadly, I suspect a lot of edmunds reviewers feel the same way. The comment about the car being worth about 10K less than it's MSRP says it all. Edmunds doesnt think domestic cars are bad as long as they cost 25% less than a comparable Toyota.
#28 of 28 Edmunds review by vanman1 Apr 04, 2006 (4:34 pm)
I hate to say it but Edmunds always seems particularly hard on Buicks and GM in general IMO. That said, the Lucerne does also have it's share of deficiencies. 4-speed auto and weak V6 come to mind.   In the end GM could do better and Edmunds could look at Buicks a little more objectively.

Messages Page 4 of 4 1 2 3 4 Prev Next Last

Go To Msg # Search This Discussion

You are here: Forums Sedans Buick Lucerne Buick Lucerne: Edmunds Reviews