Where you're concerned that may well be true. Where "hot chicks" are concerned, wallet contents trump cars.
Buick Lucerne vs VW Phaeton
- Thread starter G-MAN
- Start date
- Status
And the Continental GT before it.
The Bentleys are totally manufactured and assembled in Crewe, however. It's not like what BMW does with the Rolls-Royce, i.e., manufacture the engines and bodies in Germany and ship them to England for final assembly.
I love my Buick and have had almost no problems over its 80K miles. I am 29 and would not hesitate to buy Buick again. If you look at any of Buicks design concepts at this past years auto shows, I think you will find it obvious Buick is trying to move their age demographic down--they have some sharp looking cars on the horizon. My Buick dealer treats me well as well.
Amen Brother!quote:
Originally posted by bfg9k:
What I'll never understand is why VW felt they needed a high end luxury car when the same manufacturer builds Audi. In any case, the profit margins increase much faster with price than does the added cost to build the higher end car.
However, if VW had built their 2001 Microbus concept instead of the Phaeton (from what I've read they didn't have the $ to do both), they'd be awash in profits with the coolest minivan on the market:
Instead VW's going to rebadge next-gen Dodge Caravans.
VW's management battles has been a problem if you ask me. Currently, he and COO Wolfgang Bernhard are having a battle with ex-CEO (and the grandson of Volkswagen founder Ferdinand Porsche)Ferdinand Piëch to determine who is really in charge. One of the reasons Pietschesrieder is on the hot seat is because he pulled the Phaeton (Piëch's pet project)from the US.
VW lost $1B Euros last year in the US.
I need a 4-door van-type vehicle and was hoping to buy a Microbus to replace my 1998 GTi VR6. Instead they gave us the Phaeton, which nobody wanted. Where is my Microbus? Supposedly the project is back on....
rshaw125. I wouldn't put European cars
behind American. European buyers are more
fussy about their cars than American car
buyers so they will bring their cars in
more often if the car is not up to their
standard. I've owned a buick before. One
of the worst cars I've ever owned. The fit,
finish, paint was no better than a Cavalier.
Look at Ford and Chrysler. The Ford 500 is
a Volvo and the Chrysler 300M is a cheaper
version of a Mercedes. Compare those cars
to what Ford and Chrysler had before and
you'll know what I mean.
behind American. European buyers are more
fussy about their cars than American car
buyers so they will bring their cars in
more often if the car is not up to their
standard. I've owned a buick before. One
of the worst cars I've ever owned. The fit,
finish, paint was no better than a Cavalier.
Look at Ford and Chrysler. The Ford 500 is
a Volvo and the Chrysler 300M is a cheaper
version of a Mercedes. Compare those cars
to what Ford and Chrysler had before and
you'll know what I mean.
I have a 300M and I assure you it's not a cheaper version of anything. The current RWD 300s do in fact share the basic suspension design with the previous generation E Class Benz, but the platform itself is not shared with any Mercedes car.
The Ford 500 does, however, share its platform with a Volvo.
G-Man II. The 300M is a great car. I thought
it shared one of the platforms. Even if it
dosn't, you can tell Mercedes had some say in
this car.
it shared one of the platforms. Even if it
dosn't, you can tell Mercedes had some say in
this car.
I don't see how since the LH platform (300M, Concorde, LHS, Intrepid) was designed by Chrysler before the merger/takeover with Daimler-Benz.quote:
Originally posted by 2KBMW:
G-Man II. The 300M is a great car. I thought
it shared one of the platforms. Even if it
dosn't, you can tell Mercedes had some say in
this car.
BTW: I saw a piece on "Sunday Morning" where in China the Buick is the hip car to have in the 20 and 30 somthing age group. Just goes to show that they haven't been held up on the road by an old "Blue Hair" with the two handed death grip on the steering wheel going 25 mph under the speed limit.
I am extremely happy and proud of my '00 Buick LeSabre; and I am not ashamed to admit it in front of this seemingly anti-GM crowd that has descended upon this thread.
Notice how no one complaining about their Buicks mentions the car's model year. I'd be interested to learn that information. Buick's quality over the past few years or so is supposed to be very high, right on par with Toyota and Honda. My new Buick minivan is no exception to that. I've had virtually no problems, save for some chipping in one of the windows. This was replaced with no questions asked. In fact, they had their window person come and inspect the car before they ordered the replacement to make sure nothing else was causing the problem. I'm sure this was done to avoid having to do a second replacement. I was quite impressed with their service.
2002 Buick Century, I know a regular of the blue hair crowd. It has a little younger rims and isn't maroon or white in color--but when I bought it and had it sitting out in the drive at a party, I had more than one person my own age comment on how sharp the car looked. I got all the extras I was looking for as standard on the Century and that really was the difference for me. Get used to the anti-GM rhetoric, and really anti-American brand on this forum. I have found that many (not all by any means) of the owners of European autos, to be the loudest bashers of American iron on this forum-with a few extremely obnoxious Asian brand only posters who really take the cake. Some people just refuse to believe that you can be happy with, and have/had a reiable American vehicle--ignore it.
VW is also experiencing a loss of sales on the Touareg, especially the diesel model. Fer 'chrissakes, the thing sells for over $50K!!!
I took my info from a USA Today article on the JD Powers report that said for several years in a row the American brands were of a higher over all build quality than the Europeans.VW in particular bringing up the rear. I suppose its like the 3000 mile oil change myth. Takes awhile for people to accept a change.
I don't care for the Crown Victoria/Mercury Marquis, or the big Cadillac (except in certain colors -- ruby is interesting). I didn't like the late, unsung Olds 98 sedan (though I loved my Cutlasses). In short, I'm usually unimpressed with the big American cars which normally get dismissed as "White Belt, White Shoes, Early Bird Dinner at Denny's" cars.
But I like the Buick LaCrosse and Lucerne! They have a smooth elegant line to them, especially in dark colors. The styling, both inside and out, appeals to me. And everything I've been reading, even from biased-against-Detroit reviewers, suggests that they'll be fun to drive, too.
My plan: Get one in a dark color, put sportier wheels and tires on it, and drive it like I stole it. Thus proving to Audi_Guy that not everybody driving a Buick wears a fedora and putters along under the speed limit in the left lane!
-- Paul W.
But I like the Buick LaCrosse and Lucerne! They have a smooth elegant line to them, especially in dark colors. The styling, both inside and out, appeals to me. And everything I've been reading, even from biased-against-Detroit reviewers, suggests that they'll be fun to drive, too.
My plan: Get one in a dark color, put sportier wheels and tires on it, and drive it like I stole it. Thus proving to Audi_Guy that not everybody driving a Buick wears a fedora and putters along under the speed limit in the left lane!
-- Paul W.
That's funny you mention the Mercury Marquis: There is one 2005 LS still on the local Lincoln-Mercury lot in York, PA. It's totally loaded, has 40 miles on it, and they can't get rid of it for $12,888. Though it's really not my taste, I have to admit that's a LOT OF CAR for the money ($13k is Echo/Sentra/Rio territory). Maybe it could be converted into a Marauder...or simply put a flood light on it and make everyone in your vicinity drive 5mph under the speed limit.
MotorWeek Road Test
2006 Buick Lucerne CXL:
ENGINE: 4.6 liter dual overhead cam 32 valve NorthStar V8
HORSEPOWER: 275
TORQUE: 295 lb feet
0-60 mph: 7.2 seconds
60-0 mph: 133 feet
Mixed Loop: 23 mpg
Old man's car? Heck, I could easily live with a Buick with these specs!
2006 Buick Lucerne CXL:
ENGINE: 4.6 liter dual overhead cam 32 valve NorthStar V8
HORSEPOWER: 275
TORQUE: 295 lb feet
0-60 mph: 7.2 seconds
60-0 mph: 133 feet
Mixed Loop: 23 mpg
Old man's car? Heck, I could easily live with a Buick with these specs!
LTVibe,
That's all wonderful and such, but at the end of the day it's still intended for crusing at 70mph in the left lane while the occupants engage in complete and utter detachment from the driving experience. Seriously, do you really need to go from 0-60 in 7.2 seconds just to boat along at the nationally mandated pace of maple syrup? And you can jazz up the braking all you want, but it's not going to have any impact on the reaction time of the driver, irregardless of how lucid he is in his quest for buffet or bingo.
As for the NorthStar V8, it's just a marketing gimmick to get a few odd-ball buyers into the showroom; at the end of the day, Buick is toast (along with Pontiac). Buick's are expensive, they do not sway 35-55 year-old buyers away from the imports (and GM prays not from Cadillac), and in the end they shouldn't. Their place in GM's lineup is to offer a great, comfortable car to those who can't step up to a Caddy, but want more prestige than a simple Chevy. Unfortunately, that demographic is small and shrinking drastically. When it's no longer profitable to produce vehicles for this demographic (ie, NOW), GM should cull the brand. What's the big deal? Did anybody shed a tear for Oldsmobile? If GM was healthy, they could endulge Buick; but they're not and they need to focus on the future of their more successful brands.
But hey, I might be wrong. Maybe GM will license another five seconds of a Led Zeppelin tune, questionably project Buick as having Autobahn capabilities, and turn this baby around (ie: Cadillac). I hope so, because we need to keep every manufacturing job we can...
[ March 21, 2006, 04:58 PM: Message edited by: Mustang_Cougar ]
That's all wonderful and such, but at the end of the day it's still intended for crusing at 70mph in the left lane while the occupants engage in complete and utter detachment from the driving experience. Seriously, do you really need to go from 0-60 in 7.2 seconds just to boat along at the nationally mandated pace of maple syrup? And you can jazz up the braking all you want, but it's not going to have any impact on the reaction time of the driver, irregardless of how lucid he is in his quest for buffet or bingo.
As for the NorthStar V8, it's just a marketing gimmick to get a few odd-ball buyers into the showroom; at the end of the day, Buick is toast (along with Pontiac). Buick's are expensive, they do not sway 35-55 year-old buyers away from the imports (and GM prays not from Cadillac), and in the end they shouldn't. Their place in GM's lineup is to offer a great, comfortable car to those who can't step up to a Caddy, but want more prestige than a simple Chevy. Unfortunately, that demographic is small and shrinking drastically. When it's no longer profitable to produce vehicles for this demographic (ie, NOW), GM should cull the brand. What's the big deal? Did anybody shed a tear for Oldsmobile? If GM was healthy, they could endulge Buick; but they're not and they need to focus on the future of their more successful brands.
But hey, I might be wrong. Maybe GM will license another five seconds of a Led Zeppelin tune, questionably project Buick as having Autobahn capabilities, and turn this baby around (ie: Cadillac). I hope so, because we need to keep every manufacturing job we can...
[ March 21, 2006, 04:58 PM: Message edited by: Mustang_Cougar ]
- Status
Similar threads
