My Mom/Grandmother both would buy a Buick over an Avalon for the mere fact that it DOES have LESS horsepower. My Mom/Grandmother gets scared of the Monte/Grand Prix GT with the 205hp 3.8. Would not consider something with more then that. You have to realized there is something as TOO much horsepower for a target demographic.

But that's hard for us pea sized brained enthusiasts with horsepower on the brain to understand...

 

Re: "11 year old chassis" on the Lucern (and DTS).

I'm not sure it is fair to call it 11 years old just because it may trace its roots back to the G-body that debuted on the '95 Aurura. I swear I've read before how Toyota will base redesigns of new vehicles on existing architecture (a pretty common practice among all makes, as far as I can tell). For example, is the current Camry a complete, clean sheet, from-scratch design? Or was it modified and improved from the previous gen? Will the new for '07 (?) Camry be based on the current (and competent) car, or will it be totally new from the ground up?

Judge the cars for the total package; don't let a press snippet about being based on the G-body cause you to decide in advance that they are inadequate.

As for the 3800 as the base engine, I too am a little surprised by it. On the other hand, maybe they know there are enough "senior" buyers who are loyal and will buy the car for the looks, the ride, the room, and the Buick name, even if a hamster is under the hood. They know they will sell plenty of those to make money (bigger profit margins on 3800s than on the 3.6L). I can sort of see making that the base engine when viewed from that light. Besides, while the new Avalon is pretty quick, for most people a 0-60 time in the 7.8-8.2 second range is plenty quick enough. Add in the age of the target market for the V6 Lucern, and the 0-60 time is even less relevant. The car will have adequate power, be VERY quiet, and get good fuel economy.

What does suprise me is that the 3.6L is not available as an upgrade. The jump from the 3800 to the Northstar seems pretty big to me. A high tech V6 would look good to the younger buyers Buick is after, without forcing them to go to the less fuel efficient (but still fairly high tech) Northstar.

As for the six speed auto, I too wish it were in the car, but the bottom line is that it wasn't ready yet. The transverse six speed autos will debut in '07 on the Saturn Aura. I don't know when/how quickly it will permeate to the rest of the fwd/awd lineup. But the Lucern will get it sooner or later (probably with an upgrade to the 3.6L, since that is the engine that will have the six speed auto in the Aura, to start with).

As a related aside, I'm not sure when Ford will release its first version of the GM-based transverse six speed auto (the six speed in the Five Hundred is purchased from Aisin or ZF, iirc; not sure about the upcoming Futura six speed...).

 

One thing that's interesting about this whole platform age argument is that you rarely here in the press of when Toyota and Honda have done updates and when they are new from the ground up redesigns. The current Camry platform I know is based on the last one before it, just take a look at the proportions and you will see not much changed. All of the derivations are based on that circa 1998 Camry platform too (only on updated versions of that same platform). With GM, all you hear in the press is this car is based on this platform, it's basically the same as what debuted in the Aurora, yada yada yada. While never really acknowledging that this is a process that is fairly equal among all automakers. I guess the major difference has been that in the past GM has not engineered really structurally sounds platforms, whereas the competition has, and when you start with a solid platform it can go on and on for years. The Aurora when it debuted had all of the structural rigidity of an eqrthquake, vibrations in the mirrors, but it was a decent platform, the sloppy steering really killed it though.

 

Actually, a little research will show that the Camry has been on its current platform since 1992.

Humorous note: You can easily tell which cars are based on the current Camry platform by the awkward kink in the tailpipe where it kicks below the rear axle. ES300s, RX330s, Siennas, Highlanders, etc ad nauseum.

Still doesn't excuse GM from the poor choices they made on Lucerne.

 

1) I can read a window sticker. I don't care what Pontiac's website says. If I didn't know for a fact it says 30, I wouldn't argue the point here. Capiche? The G6 brochure claims 18/24 on a G6 GTP AT when the window sticker says 18/26. It claims 18/26 for the 6 speed rated at 18/29. It claims 23/33 for the 4 banger that gets 23/34. Sometimes they have issues. But hey, whatever makes you feel better...

2) I don't sell GMs "for a living"...its an on-the-side job on Saturdays. Get your facts straight And if you bothered to actually read the posts I've put up, you'd see I'm not exactly a GM fanboy either...I seem to remember concurring with you that the engine choices on the Lucerne (mainly the 3800) are a joke.

3) You do pump Toyota too much, and I'm far from the only person who's called you on it. Then again, you also defended the Ridgeline, for which there is no defense...I guess I need to consider the source here.

4) I admittedly was not aware the Avalon was as large as the Bonnie AND also got over 30 MPG. I'll give you that...

The rest? Nah

 

I'm 98% positive that the 2002 Camry was built on a ground-up redesign. Completely fresh platform including the chassis and almost everything else in the car.

The chassis before was used first as a 1992 model and used last in the 2001 model year.

2007 will likely be a major overhaul on the current chassis but not a true ground-up redesign... then again who knows.

And yes I do know what you're talking about with the 'kink' in the tailpipe, though that's only with the 3.0L and 3.3L V6 in Camry-platformed vehicles (Sienna, RX, Highlander, ES, etc) The 3.5L GR-series V6 will be replacing the 3.0/3.3 in all of those vehicles over the next year to a year and a half, even if they don't immediately change to the revised 2007 Camry chassis, so you may see that 'kink' disappear.

 

To be honest, its target audience had the chance to buy nearly the exact same car a decade ago as the '95 Old Aurora. That car was what I'd call a breakthrough. The same thing recycled again 10 years later is not.

I think that current Buick owners will be pleased with this vehicle. I don't see Buick attracting a lot of new owners, though.

 

I can say that it looks like the Camry has at least had the same exhaust pipe down the center of the car since the late 90's.... (and therefore, I'd assume, the same basic platform...)

If you are behind a Camry, and look toward the center of the car on the underbody, you can see a part of the pipe that juts down and back up again (looks like it would drags on the ground over big bumps almost, though I am sure it doesn't)... it really stands out to me... and it's been there since whenever the major redesign was around 97 or so.....

 

Been there since 92. It's the same platform.

 

Thanks for clearing that up.

That makes the Camry platform even older than I thought... and pretty old by any standard... even compared to some of these older GM platforms like W.

 

I'd love to see a link, since like I said above, I'm pretty sure it was redesigned from the ground up for 2002.

But if youi want to employ selective listening then that's your choice.

 

OK, fair enough.

I am assuming what he said was true, based on the exhaust pipe that I know has been around since at least 97(ish), and probably before.

Feel free to prove him wrong...

 

After some quick searching... it looks like perhaps the sedan was redone in 02, but the Solara still carried on with the old.

http://toyota.jbroadtests.com/Camry/2002/


FWIW, the quirky exhaust pipe bend is still there (it's probably close to the catalytic converter) on the new sedan models... so I wonder just how "all-new" the platform could be if it uses the same (or very close) exhaust pipe bends...

 

This new Buick would have been great if it came out in the 90's. I definetly don't think it is going to be resposible for many "conquest" sales.

I am sure Redzed would tear this thing to pieces, although all too often his opinion is rife with bias. It has been alittle too quiet around here though, I wonder where he has been.

 

Nope. Get an 02+ and a 92 up on a lift and look at them. They're the same chassis.

That's what I'm basing my commentary on, not marketing-pabulum from Toyota. Do you really think they're going to TELL you they're using an ancient chassis? Apparently GM is the only company stupid enough to do so.