From the logbook: 2010 Buick LaCrosse CXS

According to Autoblog, GM has been taking their time building LaCrosses, shipping 300-400 or so in August and then stopping for a few weeks to work out bugs. Given the importance of this car to Buick, and how often LaCrosse advertisements compare the car to Lexus, patience in manufacturing to work out quality issues may be a virtue.

But we weren’t patient to find out how the new LaCrosse would perform, so following our typical testing timetable we grabbed one of the first to hit dealers’ lots. Our loaded LaCrosse CXS comes with GM’s 3.6-liter V6; lesser-level LaCrosses come with a 3.0-liter V6 similar to the one in our tested Chevrolet Equinox. A 2.4-liter four-cylinder engine will become optional this winter.

Our car has the touring package (19-inch wheels, continuously variable suspension damping), navigation, and an “oversized” sunroof. (That makes it sound like it doesn’t fit, or there is no roof left.) All in, the car lists for $37,555. Given the car’s size and content, it is a relative bargain compared to a comparatively-equipped Acura TL or Lexus ES.

You might be wondering if a Buick really should be mentioned next to a TL or ES. After all, most recent Buick sedans have been based on dated platforms. So far, our logbook entries suggest that this is indeed a very different Buick:

“Impressive drive. Very refined and inviting.”

“Wide A-pillars and short rear window impact outward visibility.”

“Driving position is narrow – high console and footwell intrusion from left.”

“No car with 40-series tires should ride this well.”

“Wish it was a Cadillac. Not sure if people who would appreciate this car would appreciate buying a ‘Buick.’”

“Good steering, smooth powertrain.”

“Sea of buttons in center stack.”

“Lots of features for the money--a good step forward for GM.”

“Trunk access is a bit tight.”

“Feels like sitting in a tub with high beltline with a very deep dash.”

“Nav system is easily the best that I’ve used. This one actually agrees with the route picked from (previous) mapping. Recalculates quickly, no U-turn, no persistence (to stay) on the planned route.”

“Great handling, nice steering feel.”

“World-class luxury interior. Quiet.”

“Big A-pillars are like blinders. Other than that and the busy control layout, a delightful car overall. I might like this more than the CTS.”

“Wraparound dash limits access and inside door pulls put style over function.”

“Refreshing styling. A woman wanted to trade her Camry for the Buick.”

“Overall quite competitive. It drives like no other Buick ever before, but falls down on some important details.”

“Was told it looks like a Lexus--maybe GM can pull this off after all…”

Our initial thoughts show that, in general, we’re pretty impressed with the LaCrosse. We’ll see how it does against the redesigned Ford Taurus and other large sedans soon.

—Tom Mutchler 

Comments

[CyCarConsulting]

I've always been impressed by Buick for many years. I would prefer that car over any Lexus. 2 issues preventing me from buying one:

1. Poor resale
2. Failure to sell the public on the brand.

Unfortunately when buying a car at those numbers, resale is the number one factor for me.

I stand at auctions year after year and watch Japanese cars bring over wholesale book, and domestic cars bring thousands less. That's why I've only owned used Buicks. Can't wait until 2012 for this car.

[Cale]

Build quality, features, and driving dynamics sound impressive. That it weighs over 2 tons is less impressive. I'm guessing 19 mpg overall for the 3.6L CXS. Would have been in the low 20's (like the Lexus ES and Acura TL) were it lighter.

[coolcar]

Interesting. I can't wait to see how it rates.

[Sjones]

Unfortunately this will get a subpar score just like 90% of GM's products tested by CR. The Equinox matched the Forester in every category except mileage and got a poor score while the Subaru got a best in class score. No realy justification for the disparity was given so I can only assume the Equinox got the standard GM penalty. As far as I can tell any product with what is deemed a "too large" turning circle gets a poor score and many GM vehicles have large turning circles. I can't come up with any other reasoning. I predict the Lacrosse will be luckly to score 75.

[coolcar]

Sjones-

I have to disagree. The test scores are not completely based on fuel economy, and definitely not turning circle.

Just because the vehicle's fuel economy is not as good as the competition (take into consideration the Equinox's hefty weight), this does not mean that it will score poorly. As far as small SUVs go, the Equinox is a fairly competitive choice, and surpasses much of the competition which may get better fuel economy (Suzuki Grand Vitara, Jeep Compassand Patriot, Kia Sportage, Hyundai Tucson, and Saturn Vue, among others)

As with turning circles, the pre-freshening Ford Fusion had a fairly large turning circle, yet had a competitive score.