2005 Buick LaCrosse CX from North America - All Comments

I'm a reasonably intelligent (Mensa-level IQ) professional. In purchasing a new car I'd have to weigh the evidence:

1) Buick is higher in owner satisfaction than Toyota.

2) Buick's 3.8 engine is one of the most reliable engines on the planet. (according to numerous service technicians who work on many makes)

3) The likelihood of being killed in a Buick is less than HALF the likelihood of being killed in a Toyota.

4) GM is based in America and benefits the American economy directly (not by hiring a few workers to make profits that go to another county's economy).

5) Toyota has had thousands of recalls this year regarding such serious issues as defective air bags and accelerators sticking on the floor.

6) Numerous comments cite defective brakes, erratically shifting automatic transmissions, coolant leaks, poor build quality, lack of power and poor fit and finish on Toyota products (including Scion). One Toyota owner tells of having the engine in his NEW Toyota blow up at only 34,000 miles.

7) Even a number of Toyota owners are honest enough to admit to experiencing the above-mentioned problems.

Now, which vehicle do you think I'm going to trust my family's safety to? Based on the facts above, there is simply no way I'd put my beloved family in a Toyota product. My family has owned over a dozen GM products. Not one has ever had a mechanical problem of any kind. The only vehicle that has ever left my wife stranded in traffic was a friend's nearly new Toyota Corolla.

Please explain to me why, if Buicks are the greatest cars on earth, GM has decided to cut back its funding and may ultimately eliminate the brand a la Oldsmobile?

Unfortunately Buick has, over the years, earned a reputation as an "Old folks car". I think that has a great deal to do with poor sales, rather than any problems with the cars themselves. In our youth-oriented society even older people are hesitant to be identified as "older people!!". The facts of Buick's high owner satisfaction ratings and bullet-proof reliability are not in question, nor is their superior build quality. In our modern culture image is everything. That is how a mediocre, underpowered and less than reliable compact such as the Camry became popular. Advertising dollars wield far more power over a gullible public than facts.

HMMMM, well given GM spends more money on advertising per year than most companies on earth (and most car companies) your theory would have GM having a market cap greater than Google.

But we live in the real world where Toyota has a market cap greater than the Big Three combined, and is now the world's largest automaker.

I agree most people buy American cars due to false patriotism and low prices - otherwise you could never explain the success of the Cavalier, a car that was not even competitive when it was new in 1982.

How about the Corvette?

Corvettes, Vipers, GT40s, Shelby Mustangs are the exceptions to the rule and are certainly not cars that will keep their makers in the black single handedly, plus they are not true mass market cars.

Considering that Toyotas are exactly TWICE as likely to kill their occupants in crashes, have a lower owner satisfaction rating than Buick, cost far more to maintain than a Buick, and have a shorter life expectancy than Buick, just why does it make sense to pay more for one of them than a much better built Buick? I don't see many 70's Toyotas around. I see plenty of 70's Buicks still being used as daily drivers.

16:27 is exactly right, iihs. org data shows Camry is twice more likely to kill or injure passengers than buick does, for 2003 to 2005 model year, Camry is 10% worser than average (average means all cars on the market), buick LeSabre is 45% better than average. But the buying factors on the market is, however saving gas (this may be true, BTW LeSabre is great, 20/30 MPG as a 3.8L engine), problem free (this is not always true), such things, buyers put into consideration first, that's why you see more Camry running on the road. But for wise persons, they take safety issues as the most important factor, on this factor, Camry or Accord are not good, especially if you see these pictures:

http://www.geocities.com/toyota_camry_06

When You are 100 years old and driving 30 mph top speed it is hard for you to die in a crash. Sure you do hit a few people here and there and kill pedestrians, but hey, I have a Buick and I do not care.

19:33, you probably don't read English, 20/30 MPG, that's fuel economy, not MPH, or if you read English, then you have no car knowledge, because any car can top to 100mph.

In a casual survey of our community it is very obvious now that the people driving the sporty and sleek new laCrosse are significantly YOUNGER than those driving the much more sedate and stodgy Camrys. Two of our relatives drive Camrys. Both are over 70. 3 young couples in our neighborhood have bought new LaCrosses. None of them are over 35. Around town I see lots of new LaCrosses, and most are driven by people obviously under 50. The much sportier styling and very spirited performance of the newer Buicks is definitely shifting the focus to younger drivers. Even major automotive magazines have noted that the Camry was much more suited to elderly people who don't care for performance or sporty styling. Camry owners who make an issue of Buick's appealing to older drivers is definitely a case of the pot calling the kettle black. Even with age not a factor, the greater safety and fuel economy of the Buick make it a far more sensible car for those concerned with their family's safety and their pocket book.

Don't you people find it ironic that you're going on and on about how safe the Buick is yet when it comes to any SUV discussion safety isn't mentioned once (other than "my SUV is soooo big I know it's safe)?

It's just too funny for words.

The commenter on Dec 19th 13:16 states that several sports cars are not truly mass market cars. The commenter is ignorant of facts and should not be writing anything on the 'net. Please check out www.wardsauto.com (key auto data page). One will find that for the last two months the Mustang is the 10th most purchased passenger car. That, my friend, is a mass marketed auto. If it is not, all the following car OEMs have never built cars in 2006 for the mass market; VW, Volvo, Cadillac, Lincoln, Kia, Hyundai, Subaru, Mazda, and and and... Please check the FACTS before you post a bone-head comment, and that goes for lovers of all OEMs; Japanese, Korean, Germany, domestic--- Everyone needs to stop stating opinions as facts!

I just received my Buick LaCrosse CX company car that another employee had. I got it with 7,000 miles and drove it from San Diego to Phoenix. The car is a nice cruiser and is very quiet inside. The V6 is very powerful and passing another car is a breeze. My complaints are: 1.there's no driver window express up feature and the passenger window doesn't have express down or up. 2. Driver seat power controls are only for seat bottom, the seat back is controlled manually. 3. Seat cushions are flat and don't hold you in well. 4. no dual A/C controls. 5. vanity mirrors aren't lighted. These features should be standard on a 2006 car. I also don't like the fact that it's made in Canada.

Why you don't like it was made in Canada, GM's Oshawa, Ontario plant has received 3 J.D. Power and Associates highest initially quality awards in the last 4 years, you should prond of it, and it makes Buicks, the top America car. I love Canada, Go Canada, make good cars, beat toyota and honda.