Detroit, 11:27 AM
Tue Nov 24
24 posts in the last 24 hours
Tip your editors:
tips@jalopnik.com
Editor-in-Chief:
Ray Wert | Email | AIM
Road Test Editor:
Wes Siler | Email
Weekend Editor:
Murilee Martin | Email
Associate Editor - Houston:
Matt Hardigree
Associate Editor - Detroit:
Ben Wojdyla
Editor-at-Large:
Mike Spinelli
Contributors:
Mark Arnold
John Krewson | Email
Andy Didorosi
| posts about #2010buicklacross more → |
2010 Buick LaCrosse: First Drive |
2010 Buick LaCrosse: Crushing Brand Perceptions |
2010 Buick LaCrosse: Blue Hair No More! |
Original material is licensed under a Creative Commons License permitting non-commercial sharing with attribution.
Jalopnik 
07/15/09
07/15/09
Another French-Canadian usage of "la crosse"? "Swindling." With the old model, this was very much truth in advertising.
07/15/09
07/15/09
07/15/09
07/15/09
07/15/09
07/15/09
C&D agrees:
"Old Habits Die Hard
It’s not all beer and skittles inside, though, as we did catch a few lingering whiffs of cheapness. The most glaring is the in-dash info screen on cars without navigation. When a high-res, high-contrast screen can be found on a $200 base Garmin or TomTom navigation system, a pixelated display that looks like a refugee from a ’70s calculator is inexcusable in any car with upmarket aspirations. The screen looks especially cheap compared to the beautiful, multifunction display tucked between the speedo and tach.
We were also disappointed with a rear-view mirror that suggests GM will never understand how to gracefully shape black plastic, as well as the hard plastic used to form the exceptionally shallow map pockets and glove-box door. We also noticed a slight vibration from the seat coolers—which are among the most effective we’ve ever experienced—when the car is stationary, but it was unnoticeable once we got moving."
And just for the record, that sexy info pod between the gauges is not standard.
So just because the car isn't as good as we hoped it would be, we're not going to give GM a pass. I'm sorry, I might live in Detroit, but i'm not going to be a homer.
07/15/09
07/15/09
All Wheel Drive? Who the Hell do they think is coming to buy this thing, Kenny Block?
/Яepudiate Sixties POLAЯ
07/15/09
07/15/09
I'd also like to let GM know ahead of time that if they become financially solvent enough to bring us the ute, I'll buy a stripper model with the G8's LY7/LLT 3.6 in about five years.
07/15/09
I wasn't sleepy when I started reading the article and looking at it, but then when I finished, I had one of those "startle yourself" wake-up moments and wondered where I'd been for the last few minutes.
This car really had a chance to be decent, if Buick could just figure out what the hell it is supposed to be. I'm sure they'd be good at it if they had some general direction.
Could someone post something and get this off the front page?
I'd like to echo Fromabuick6's sentiment that it looks good (from certain angles-- the front isn't one of them) and the AWD system sounds like it could be pretty good.
Somehow its rear reminds me of the new Mazda6-- actually, I picked up much of the snoozey-yet good looking lines that I see in the new generation 6.
Actually, this car is what would happen if you made the current generation Mazda6 less good looking.
07/15/09
07/14/09
07/14/09
I believe.. and Im sure thousands of others who have never set foot in here.. would agree...
That just because THIS emporer changes its clothes... and tries to sell it.. saying...
Oh we are totally new and fantastic!
Doesnt really mean.. a god damn thing.
07/15/09
The new Lacrosse is a new vehicle, from a company that has consistently offered solidy engineered cars for decades - it deserves to receive honest evaluation, not your ignorant skin-deep critique.
07/15/09
By the way - medium-large, four-door, front-wheel-drive sedan, good powertrain, interior with definite high and low points, bland and slightly ugly styling... hey, this thing is just an Accord with a higher MSRP, isn't it?
07/14/09
Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.
07/14/09
Sorry but Buick is too old fogy to me, I want a nice car thats cheaper than a Caddie, but not mundane like a Chevy. As a Saturn they had that lineup now, as a Buick they just are moving all of Saturns cars to the old man segment and changing the marketing.
07/14/09
That said, the Haldex, AWD, quality ride and quiet, all win. Very impressive.
Buick needs to be about EFFICIENCY and LUXURY. Performance isn't really where LaCrosse lives. Adequate is all that is needed for this segment. The 30MPG is where I start to get interested. Quiet, competent in the snow and rain, and pretty darned good mileage. This is the quinessential interstate highway commuter, and what most people really need.
Sure, GM can work on style points, and materials, but what they need to do here is give HONEST QUALITY. They can forget ever returning to profitability without it. The days of fooling the buyer with ersatz faux luxor are...
Gone With The Wind...
"As God is my witness, I'll never buy fake pleather again..."
07/14/09
07/14/09
07/14/09
07/14/09
That's because it's styling. Unless it is on a Jeep or truck, there is little in the manner of "functional" exterior styling. You may not like it, but the fact that it isn't functional doesn't make it bad.
07/14/09
07/15/09
I disagree. Form follows function. Any 'style' that does not derive from purpose is ephemeral and unnecessary. Aerodynamics actually dictate much of what we see today. There is of course an envelope within which that aerodynamics requirement is satisfied, but 'style' within that limit should communicate the purpose and nature of the car. Narrowing the 'hips' of the car with this style element, is typically used to make a car appear 'muscular' and a bit more aggressive. This element is incongruous in a Buick built for efficiency and not really built for performance. Design should communicate the nature of the device by a mere glance. This design fails, in my not so humble opinion, to do that.
07/15/09
And form does not always follow function, it merely guides it- for example, if we had stuck simply with function, every car would still have chrome separated bumpers, as opposed to painted bumpers that transition nicely into the rest of the body.
In my opinion, because of the slope of the front character line and the overall lean of the proportions, this styling evokes a smooth cruiser- something akin to a Rolls Royce. Just because the designer decided to lift the rear a little doesn't make it a performance vehicle, even if it is a bit aggressive. If you want to see the completely aggressive version of this, look at a Charger.
07/14/09
I drove your buick today
And it doesn't matter much to me
As long as it's dead
07/14/09
07/14/09
Add a bunch of stuff and you've added a bunch of stuff. But you had a perfectly functional car before all that stuff got stuck on. So now, when the stuck-on stuff breaks, you've got a broken piece of shit stuck on your car, which isn't broken and there you are tooling through town with broken shit stuck in your car.
Leave off the shit that breaks. Then when it does break, it breaks on somebody else, and you're tooling through town with slightly less shit in your car, but it isn't stuff that breaks. And when you car finally does break and needs work, all that stuck on crap isn't in the way of mechanics find their way to your wallet one slow $60 hour at a time.
07/15/09
Also: in what paradise do you live, where labor is only $60/hour?
07/14/09
07/14/09
Funny part is..
If this is their interpretation of a 93 Lex GS...
And Buick was BAD then...
Imagine how good a LEX is now..
They make good headway...
Just 15yr so years behind schedule.
Remember this is the company who just figured out they could build more than one vehicle on 1 frame.
Holy shit..
if they figure out how to build everything in one factory (*cough* HONDA *cough*) we might be in real trouble HAHA!!
07/14/09
And you're saying GM just now figured out how to build more than one car on a platform? Where have you been for the last 40 years of platform engineering?
07/14/09
For the last 20yrs
Ive been sitting back and watching them move one shit car car from one frame to another.. with little appreciation for brand value or any design distinction what-so-ever.
This is a company who spent hundred of mega billions of dollars trying to figure out ho to do an interior.. then spread it around through 8 brands.
GM is failure incarnate.
However..
I agree with you on the Lexus reviews. I do my best not to read them.. but I can only imagine they aren't doing so hot.
They took the IS went from a sporty entry with a powerful motor and a hatch in 01 to a dumpy dirtbox styled by wet noodles and soap in the 09-10 model year.
ES.. is Camry. No more comments needed.
RX is just larger, and more disconnected.
I cant believe I liked the GS.. but now.. its just also ran.
And the LS.. is just big BIG and BIG.
07/14/09
07/14/09
And it'd be nice if it had more storage space than my Volvo 240 - which, for reference, has a gaping hole under the climate controls, two ashtrays, one cupholdery bit, and a glovebox. Any car with the door pockets broken off shouldn't have more interior cubbyholes than a new Buick, I'm sorry.
So close, GM. Work on the interior and give it some less-garish taillights, and you'll really have something.
01/11/09