2009 Detroit Auto Show: 2010 Buick LaCrosse

Something wrong with its proportions...
It looks like a bullet train/shuttle/tram.
It has no distinct hood nor trunk.
But it is nice inside and is definitely better to be in than a ES350.

This is an Avalon fighter anyways...
The Avalon's interior is still nicer.

The Avalon's exterior and this LaCrosse's exterior are equally repulsive.
This Buick looks so much like a monorail they should have covered up the wheels with body panels like on some older cars.

If the interior looks as good in real life as it does in pictures, and if a lion's share of that 4,000lb curb weight has gone into sound deadening, then this car will have succeeded in being a true competitor to the ES. Let's hope they've pulled it off.

This car is better looking than the Malibu. Here's hoping it's a success!

This car did not gain 500lbs. The current Lacrosse weighs between 3600-3800lbs depending on trim line with the Super being the heaviest. The FWD Lacrosse is about 250lbs more than the current model. This car is also a considerably larger car. Its almost as big as the Lucerne.

Interior is best in segment.

"The Avalon's interior is still nicer."

Surely you jest. The Avalon's interior is one step above the Corollas and seems to be inspired by early 90s GM models. Its a joke.

I just read the detailed article about the car. This vehicle may only be an inch shorter than the current one but the current car is on a 20 year old platform and is not space efficient. Cars like the camry have more interior space in spite of being 8 inches shorter. The new lacrosse likely has more room than an Avalon because of the new platform. The rear seat room is likely much better in this new car.

The lacrosse is not 500lbs heavier than the 2009 and its not heavy compared to the CTS which is only 191 inches long.

Vast improvement in terms of product execution, quality, perceived quality, design and styling from Buick but no matter how good this car is its still going to have a few issues trying to snatch some Lexus ES/Toyota Avalon owners as they pretty much are repeat loyal buyers of both vehicles.

One major hurdle would be the legendary Lexus sales and customer/dealer service experience which Ive had the pleasure of experiencing. Best service Ive ever experienced from any brand by far......period!

Lexus also has that legendary reliability reputation, not that Buick is severely lacking in this area, but Lexus does have a reputation of being one of the more reliable luxury marques.

One more major attribute thats going to relentlessly elude Buick is the brand image or cachet that Lexus possesses being a recognized full line luxury automaker, at least here in the U.S. I'm certainly not a badge whore as I respect a well executed product no matter the country of origin but there are many in the luxury segment that value brand prestige and cachet, both of which Lexus possess. I truly wish Buick the best as its going to have to fight really hard to become a valid Lexus alternative.

hondacura4- you make good points and that further illustrates how a large pecentage of car buyers behave. It simply does not matter how good competitors have become because they will simply swear by Lexus no matter what. That has nothing to do with the quality of alternative offerings. The ES350 is on a very old and very primative chassis yet most people don't seem to care. It's all about the "L" on the hood and the service they receive and little to do with the actual car itself.

Let's not cry all over the place because Lexus buyers are loyal, there are plenty of cars I've seen on the road that aren't Lexuses. I'd say at least half. So maybe some of those people would be interested in this. For $%^& sake, everything in the world doesn't have to become a Toyota vs GM blog-a-thon.

I can see where people find the proportions awkward, but overall I think it's a really good looking car. I'm sure there are other fat cars as well, [no doubt a list of Toyota weights will follow] but 4000+ lbs for a front wheel drive mid/fullsize car is a bit much (and shows in the epa ratings).

1487, How do you know the interior is best in segment?

Chavis, what makes you say that ES350 is on a very old and primitive chassis, when its ride is praised by many, interior is vast and quiet? You think it's more primitive than the Camrys? Camry is, according to 1487, more space efficient than lacrosse since it's on a more modern platform.

As for the car itself, it doesn't inspire luxury when you look at it. Especially the front end. The car itself looks bloated, not very composed, and proportioned in a way that makes you feel it's competing with camrys and accords.

Also, there is nothing wrong with following the same brand if you are a satisfied customer. I, however, have owned 4 cars - all different brands - and still have yet to find one that truly satisfies my needs.

Looks good, except for the awkward taillights.
1487, how do you know that its interior is best in class? That's a crock, considering you've never sat in the Lacrosse. The Avalon's interior was rated higher than that of the VW Passat, Chrysler 300, and Mercury Montego in a comparison test, so I'm not sure how it's just a "step above the Corolla". My guess is that you've never sat in an Avalon, either...the interior is basically the same as the interior of the Lexus SC430. The interior of the Avalon is one of its most liked aspects. Plus, I guarantee that it will be quicker and get better fuel economy than the new LaCrosse (that Toyo V6 is a thing of beauty).

I'm not saying which car is better, but please don't judge based on the fact that the Buick is built by GM when you haven't even sat in one yet.

Also, this new LaCrosse is about the same size as before, which you'd know if you read the article. Making this the same size as the Lucerne would end the Lucerne for Buick since no one would pick it over the new LaCrosse, which has a crappy, aged interior and an uninspiring exterior. GM just did a fantastic job of making it look twice as big.

The only thing keeping the Lucerne alive for Buick now will be the fact that it is quite a bit bigger than the new LaCrosse.

Also, this new LaCrosse is about the same size as before, which you'd know if you read the article. Making this the same size as the Lucerne would end the Lucerne for Buick since no one would pick it over the new LaCrosse, since the Lucerne has a crappy, aged interior and an uninspiring exterior. GM just did a fantastic job of making it look twice as big.

The only thing keeping the Lucerne alive for Buick now will be the fact that it is quite a bit bigger than the new LaCrosse.

Also, 1487. this new LaCrosse is about the same size as before. That's just common sense. Making this the same size as the Lucerne would end the Lucerne for Buick since no one would pick it over the new LaCrosse, since the Lucerne has a crappy, aged interior and an uninspiring exterior. GM just did a fantastic job of making this new LaCrosse look twice as big (in blue, from the rear, it probably looks remarkably like a beached whale).

The only thing keeping the Lucerne alive for Buick now will be the fact that it is quite a bit bigger than the new LaCrosse.

Whoops.

"Vast improvement in terms of product execution, quality, perceived quality, design and styling from Buick but no matter how good this car is its still going to have a few issues trying to snatch some Lexus ES/Toyota Avalon owners as they pretty much are repeat loyal buyers of both vehicles."

Buick has excellent customer service and reliability per JD Power and CR. Not sure why you are pretending they trail Lexus there.

"Also, 1487. this new LaCrosse is about the same size as before. That's just common sense. Making this the same size as the Lucerne would end the Lucerne for Buick since no one would pick it over the new LaCrosse, since the Lucerne has a crappy, aged interior and an uninspiring exterior. "

The Lucerne is only 6" longer than this car and 5" longer than the current model. A crappy interior? You obviosuly have not been in one, especially the Super with its stitched leather dash. Just more "it must be crap because its American" nonsense. Why not sit in the car before making outrageous claims?

The Lacrosse is almost as large as the Lucerne because the Lucerne is likely to be phased out. The Regal from China is likely to come to the US and become the midsize car for Buick. This new Lacrosse is bigger than the Hyundai Genesis which is considered a large car. Its longer than any Japanese car sold here except the LS.

"1487, how do you know that its interior is best in class? That's a crock, considering you've never sat in the Lacrosse. The Avalon's interior was rated higher than that of the VW Passat, Chrysler 300, and Mercury Montego in a comparison test, so I'm not sure how it's just a "step above the Corolla". My guess is that you've never sat in an Avalon, either...the interior is basically the same as the interior of the Lexus SC430. "

Zoom I'm not nearly as ignorant as you want to believe. My evaluation of the interior is based on the CTS, Enclave and Lucerne interiors. The Lacrosse's interior is an evolution of the CTS interior- period. I have been in the CTS numerous times and it is beautiful. I have seen no such review in which the Avalon's interior is consdiered better than the PAssat's but I disagree 100%. The Avalon's interior is OK for a $25k but lacking for a $38k car. The Es350s interior is far more sophisticated. The faux metal trim on the Avalon is excessive and hard to the touch. The design itself is reminiscent of 90s Buicks with the two tiered dash. I do not like it at all. The Avalon's interior MAY be better than the 300 but its too close to call, especially if you are talking the 300C with metallic accents and tortoise shell trim.

If you do not recognize the improvement in GM interiors I dont know what to tell you. At this point evey new GM interior is expected to be better than what Toyota is offering. I have not been in the new Equinox but I would be disappointed if its not superior to the hard plastic interior found in the RAV4.

"1487, How do you know the interior is best in segment?

Chavis, what makes you say that ES350 is on a very old and primitive chassis, when its ride is praised by many, interior is vast and quiet? You think it's more primitive than the Camrys? Camry is, according to 1487, more space efficient than lacrosse since it's on a more modern platform.

As for the car itself, it doesn't inspire luxury when you look at it. Especially the front end. The car itself looks bloated, not very composed, and proportioned in a way that makes you feel it's competing with camrys and accords. "

1. This car is a hit on the internet. Check out comments on autoblog and other places. You are in the minority.

2. The W platform is 20 years old- there arent many cars no on newer platforms in 2009. The ES350 is on the old camry platform.

3. Lots of cars ride quietly and smoothly these days. My car (Saturn) has 66db of noise at 70mph which is lexus territory. Its not unique these days. The Enclave is quieter than the RX350. Buciks were doing soft rides before Lexus was even born, its not hard to do.

4. Interior is best in segment to peole who care about design and execution. Better than TL, better than Avalon, etc. The ES350 is still nice inside but this has more pizzaz and flair and LED lighting. At worst its right up there with best in class. I would say it stacks up well with the recently launched Maxima and TL.

"I can see where people find the proportions awkward, but overall I think it's a really good looking car. I'm sure there are other fat cars as well, [no doubt a list of Toyota weights will follow] but 4000+ lbs for a front wheel drive mid/fullsize car is a bit much (and shows in the epa ratings)."

Few FWD cars are this big. The TL is smaller and weighs between 3700-4000lbs. Maxima is 3700lbs. MKS is 4100lbs with FWD. Lucerne is about 4000lbs as is the DTS. A6 is about 3700-3800lbs. Toyotas are always amongst lightest in class.

"Chavis, what makes you say that ES350 is on a very old and primitive chassis, when its ride is praised by many, interior is vast and quiet? You think it's more primitive than the Camrys? Camry is, according to 1487, more space efficient than lacrosse since it's on a more modern platform."

How about you go research this yourself but I'll indulge if I must. The Camry platform is flexy and old. It's currently the only mid-full sized FWD chassis that still uses struts for it's rear suspension. Notice the new RX finally has switched to a control arm set-up for many reason. #1, struts take up cargo space. #2 the tri-link strut system cannot effectively employ anti dive/squat geometry since the strut physically locates the entire axle. Also, the platform needs addtional bracing in order to step up the suspensions calibration. Notice how the Camry SE prohibits a split folding backseat because of the extra structural members placed directly behind the rear back rest. Do you need any more proof?

Let me briefly school you on suspension tuning. A loose body with a low natural frequency can be easily be tuned to ride very smoothly. Why? Because the body as well as the suspension are flexing and absorbing bumbs. However, if you attempt to stiffen the ride, the body will continue to flex and an unyielding suspension will pass these motions into the body leading to squeak and rattles. Do you think those old Buicks and Cadillac were modern and rigid because they rode so smoothly? hardly.

The W platform is even older than the Camry's, I don't see where anyone argued this. The W platform so old that GM's current 6 speed transmission cannot be mounted due to dimensional contraints in the engine bay. Toyota doesn't publish the bending stiffness of their vehicles to my knowledge but the latest W cars were pretty rigid at 22.4 HZ. A Corvette is just north 26 HZ to give you some perspective. The W platforms main flaw was it's inefficient use of space. They had long front overhangs due to the torque axis engine mounting scheme as rear seat room was tight because of the low rooflines. All of those issues seem to have been resolved with the Espilon II platform.

As far as the Avalon is concerned, the interior is a mess. Why is the radio covered with that cheap plastic trap door? What is up with all the faux metallic or faux wood covering virtually every surface? Focus on the lower console where the shifter resides- it's a sea of faux metal trim that is simply overdone and tacking. Compare this interior to that of the ES350 and tell me the Avalon does not look downright low rent and cheao. The design lacks any sort of cohesion and looks like something from the '80s. If you don't get nav, there's a huge font auxiliary display sitting there that looks like an afterthought. It reminds me of the Oldsmobile Trefeo with all of these screens and readouts placed haphazardly throughout the dashboard. It's proof that whatever Toyota spits out the critics will just accept and hail as the benchmark. The Camry's interior looks much nicer by comparison.

I don't know how much sense it makes to comment on an interior of a vehicle that no one here has sat in or touched. Claiming it as best in class is even more silly.

This happens all the time - ie people claiming the Cruze/Equinox interiors are best in class when no one has experienced them yet

Also, its silly to compare 2011 GM interiors to 2008/9 Toyota interiors. We don't know what the 2010/11 Avalon interior will look like, or what the 2010/11 Corolla will look like. Maybe it will be better then the LaCross/Cruze, maybe it will be worse.

Stating something as fact that cannot be proven is very misleading.

When did I say that I don't recognize the evolution of GM interiors? In fact, I've said numerous times that the CTS' interior is a thing of beauty. The CTS and LaCrosse are aimed at different buyers, however, so the LaCrosse's interior is NOT an evolution of the CTS'. It is an evolution of the Malibu's interior, and a good one at that. You can't make claims based on the fact that you've been in a CTS when they are two vastly different cars.

The new Equinox' interior does indeed look nice, nice enough to wonder what GM was thinking when putting virtually the same interior into the new SRX. I don't like the RAV4's interior and I never said anything about the RAV4 or the Equinox, but I understand the point you are trying to make. The Equinox will certainly give the CRV a run for its money in the nicest interior in the class category.

My apologies for calling the Lucerne's interior "crappy", as that was the wrong choice of word. Dated and awkward are two better words. My point was that the LaCrosse is nice enough now that Buick should probably just get rid of the Lucerne altogether.

Still, I don't think that this Buick is going to be the one car that will help them compete with Lexus. Because of Buick's history, when people say they drive a Buick, others will think to themselves "huh, couldn't afford a Cadillac?". When people say they drive a Lexus, even if its a ten year old ES300, people will ooh and ahh like its the Fourth of July. It's all in the brand name, and Lexus is the king of luxury brand names. I hope that GM realizes that people would rather have a Caddy than a Buick, especially if the interiors/features are similar and therefore the price is similar as well.

BTW, this whole nice interior thing from GM couldn't have come at a worse time, when people don't give a rat's ass about that kind of stuff and just want affordable transportation. Why do you think the Corolla sold 300,000+ in 2008, one of the worst years on record for the auto business? And for a look at how Toyota interiors will be when competing with these 2010/2011 GM models, check out the new RX and Venza. I've sat in both, and both are class leading interiors.

"1. This car is a hit on the internet. Check out comments on autoblog and other places. You are in the minority."

I'm puzzled. How being a hit on the internet constitutes best in class interior? That makes 0 sense. And what do you mean by 'the minority'? You mean among those who don't make ridiculous conclusions like 'this car has best interior in its class' without having been inside the car? I'd say I love where I am.

"The ES350 is on a very old and very primative chassis yet most people don't seem to care. It's all about the "L" on the hood and the service they receive and little to do with the actual car itself."

Chavis, it's great that you 'schooled' me on something that had nothing to do with my original comment. Your point about lexus having an old platform being irrelevant to buyers who only want the "L" on the front end does not hold ground because consumers really don't care about the platform and dealer service is definitely not #1 reason for buying a lexus. Here's a much simpler research for you - read about the latest consumer satisfaction ratings, which are comprised of ride, comfort, build quality, reliability, etc. See where GM is and compare that to toyota/lexus. Even though EX350 is on an old and primitive as you call it platform, somehow it manages to attract more buyers.

"For $%^& sake, everything in the world doesn't have to become a Toyota vs GM blog-a-thon."

Aint' that the truth!

This isnt a bad looking car inside or out but I do have a few issues with the exterior:

- The exterior seems flat...very little surface tension. Makes is appear high shouldered or bulky from some angles.

-That "signature Buick" character line on the side doesnt match the rest of the cars lines. Seems a bit forced and reminds of the bad execution of the character lines on the Accord sedan and Acura TL.

-Id also like GM to top using so much damn chrome. Maybe use satin chrome or make the chrome pieces thinner and more streamlined. That big chrome slab on the rear looks a bit ovedone and cheap. Chrome isnt in GM!

-GM also needs a new debut color besides this red color. This color belongs to the CTS and Im getting sick of seeing it.

As far as the ES or Avalon are concerned, I wouldnt consider either styling kings as both are on the typical Japanese generic side (sorry dad). I will say that both look upscale especially the ES as the paint, chrome and initial "finish" are very very good. The ES design is odd but the detailing makes it look expensive. I dont think the Buick looks any better than the ES or Avalon although its interior looks a bit more modern.

"I don't know how much sense it makes to comment on an interior of a vehicle that no one here has sat in or touched. Claiming it as best in class is even more silly. "

Whats silly is acting like the LAcrosse would be a step down from the already released CTS and Enclave. Have you been in either vehicle? I have so I know what GM is capable of in luxury vehicles. The DESIGN is best in class. The materials cannot be evaluated until we sit in the car but since it looks to be on par with the CTS I will assume materials are top notch.

"Also, its silly to compare 2011 GM interiors to 2008/9 Toyota interiors. We don't know what the 2010/11 Avalon interior will look like, or what the 2010/11 Corolla will look like. Maybe it will be better then the LaCross/Cruze, maybe it will be worse.

Stating something as fact that cannot be proven is very misleading. "

Doug,

I know its your duty to lower expectation for every GM product and warn us about how they are likely not as good as advertised but you are making no sense. People can compare information about upcoming vehicles with vehicles on the market now. When the Lacrosse goes on sale it will compete with the CURRENT Avalon and Es350, not the 2011 or 2012 models. Talking about models from the competition that have not been announced is just stupid. The Corolla was new for 2009 which means an all new model wont be out until 2015 or so. It is silly to say we shoudlnt consider the Cruze's interior because an all new and much better Corolla may be on the scene next year to compete. That is just untrue. The corolla is a recent product. We can also compare the Cruze's interior to the 2010 3 which has been well covered in recent weeks. If the 3 is the benchmark I believe the Cruze stacks up pretty well.

"The CTS and LaCrosse are aimed at different buyers, however, so the LaCrosse's interior is NOT an evolution of the CTS'. It is an evolution of the Malibu's interior, and a good one at that. You can't make claims based on the fact that you've been in a CTS when they are two vastly different cars. "

first of all the LAcrosse has NOTHING do do with either car. I know the LX is not an evolution of the CTS but its design theme inside is indeed an evolution of the CTS. For example the CTS is one of the first GM vehicles to not use an inserted headunit and have a totally integrated center stack. The Lacrosse, Cruze and Nox have this same theme going. Same with Volt and SRX- its the way all GM interiors will be. The materials in the LX appear to be very similar to whats in the CTS. The stitching on the dash is inspired by Lucerne Super, SRX, STS-V and CTS. The window switches appear to be from CTS. The Soft touch materials on the armrests and dash appear to be very similar to the CTS. I do not see how one would expect GM to start making worse interiors than they have on the market now. The Lacrosse's interior is likely to be as good or better than the CTS' simply because it's newer. The Lacrosse's interior certainly has NOTHING to do with the Malibu's and the platform is totally new as well.

"I'm puzzled. How being a hit on the internet constitutes best in class interior? That makes 0 sense. And what do you mean by 'the minority'? You mean among those who don't make ridiculous conclusions like 'this car has best interior in its class' without having been inside the car? I'd say I love where I am."

Let me ask you a question genius: What is the point of visiting sites like this one if you believe that you cannot tell anything about a car from pictures and words? If you believe pictures are useless you have no business here in the first place. Automakers release all of this info to internet publications because the pics and specs DO get people excited about their products. I have eyes and I like what I see. I did not say the Lacrosse will drive like a BMW or anything similar. I can say that its styling and features are very admirable and I applaud Buick for that. Many people on other sites seem to share my opinion and few have called the car unattractive.

"My apologies for calling the Lucerne's interior "crappy", as that was the wrong choice of word. Dated and awkward are two better words. My point was that the LaCrosse is nice enough now that Buick should probably just get rid of the Lucerne altogether. "

Dated compared to what? Avalon? Lucerne interior is very straightforward and devoid of gimmicks- kind of like a last gen German interior before they got into game controllers and column mounted gear changers. In terms of ergonomics and materials the Lucerne's interior is quite nice.

"Here's a much simpler research for you - read about the latest consumer satisfaction ratings, which are comprised of ride, comfort, build quality, reliability, etc. See where GM is and compare that to toyota/lexus. Even though EX350 is on an old and primitive as you call it platform, somehow it manages to attract more buyers."

Ignorance truly is bliss. Buick consistently ranks near Lexus (and above Toyota) in reliability and dealer satisfaction surveys. Saturn has ranked #1 or #2 in dealer service in the past as well. Jaguar also has ranked very high. GM has several brands that routinely beat Toyota in dealer satisfaction. Toyota is known for many things but dealer service isnt one of them. If anything Toyota dealers believe they are doing you a favor by allowing you to buy one of their products. The other attributes you mention with regards to Lexus (comfort, build quality, quality) could be applied to Buicks as well. Buick has a much smaller lineup than Lexus (one SUV instead of 3 for example) and does not sell as many units as Lexus. Buick and cadillac compete with Lexus and combined they outsell Lexus.

"-Id also like GM to top using so much damn chrome. Maybe use satin chrome or make the chrome pieces thinner and more streamlined. That big chrome slab on the rear looks a bit ovedone and cheap. Chrome isnt in GM!"

Actually its been used more generously by import manufacturers in recent years. Also, the car shown is a loaded CXS. I doubt that level of brightwork is standard. I dont get why people complain about optional features. That said, I'm not sure whom you have consulted when you claim chrome is out of date. Sure has not hurt sales of the Escalade or Enclave or any Lexus model.

"-GM also needs a new debut color besides this red color. This color belongs to the CTS and Im getting sick of seeing it."

That is a lame complaint but go to buick.com so see the car in silver. You are really stretching if you are reduced to complaining about the color of the preview model.

"I know its your duty to lower expectation for every GM product and warn us about how they are likely not as good as advertised but you are making no sense."

I had to chuckle at that. In a thread with 33 posts, 12 of them are yours. If anyone has a duty to do anything, you have an obligation to personally address every last criticism and pseudo-criticism made about a car that no one has driven, seen, or even sat in. Now, once again, yet another thread has degraded into a GM vs The World argument. I have to say that the only thing that will make me want buy a GM product is the product itself. People on the internet who act like pushy salesmen: telling me that I'm wrong for liking something else, making snide remarks at fellow posters ("Ignorance truly is bliss. ,Let me ask you a question genius") actually push me away from liking GM. Sure, there are people out there who don't really know what they're talking about when it comes to the current crop of GM vehicles, but putting them down isn't going to make them want to learn the truth. Don't be a pushy salesman.

"Doug,

I know its your duty to lower expectation for every GM product and warn us about how they are likely not as good as advertised but you are making no sense."

Just like it is your duty to claim every future GM vehicle is better then the equivalent Honda/Toyota/BMW/etc, and that every other car magazine agrees with you, and how we are all constantly wrong and you are constantly right?

Do you ever read what I write? Man, its like speaking to a wall sometimes. I'm not lowering the expectation of every GM product. Despite what you constantly state, I'm not anti-GM or anti-Detroit. I quite frequently prove this in my posts.

Unlike you, however, I don't believe you can make statements about the interior design of a vehicle, including whether or not it is best in class, without actually sitting in and experiencing it.

"Talking about models from the competition that have not been announced is just stupid. "

I agree...just like how talking about interior design and materials of a model from a few pictures is stupid.

"We can also compare the Cruze's interior to the 2010 3 which has been well covered in recent weeks. If the 3 is the benchmark I believe the Cruze stacks up pretty well. "

Would you kindly point me to a first-drive, or an interior review of the Cruze that constitutes more then just an editor having a brief glimpse inside at an autoshow?

Doug, here's a FACT that even you can grasp. Toyota's quality has been slipping in recent years while GM's has been improving. Don't take my word for it, go sit in a Carmy, Corolla, Highlander, RAV4 and then go sit in a Malibu, Enclave, Lacrosse (current), or Impala. My parents '08 Impala has better build quality than an '08 Camry XLE I've sat in. That car had a bunch of flashing and sharp edges of hard plastic that used to be the hallmark of GM's interiors. The Corolla? Ton of rock hard plastic and I noticed obvious flashing as well. Check it out. Highlander? Nothing but hard plastic on the dash and upper door trims. Very thin and cheap feeling. Why do you think Toyota is making a big deal about the new Venza's interior quality and craftmanship? They know they have been cutting corners and are trying to correct this before the public begins to realize.

Even the current LaCrosee has good craftmanship. The body panels are really tight and the interior is pretty plush and looks high quality. I don't know how anyone could look at the Avalon and think it's a class leading design. It is terrible and tacky. Only Toyota could release such a garish design and not take flak. I haven't seen one comment on the RX's new and uglier asymmetric interior scheme. The car looks worse than the old one in every single aspect.

Even the current LaCrosee has good craftmanship. The body panels are really tight and the interior is pretty plush and looks high quality. I don't know how anyone could look at the Avalon and think it's a class leading design. It is terrible and tacky. Only Toyota could release such a garish design and not take flak. I haven't seen one comment on the RX's new and uglier asymmetric interior scheme. The car looks worse than the old one in every single aspect.

chavis: I didn't say anything about Toyota being better - I said we don't know what it will be like in 2011.

In fact I agree with you about current Toyota products - the interior on most of their vehicles is lacking in design, materials and fit/finish. There isn't a Toyota vehicle today that I would actually buy. There are lots of GM/Ford products I would.

But thanks for reading my post and not just responding ad hoc.

"Now, once again, yet another thread has degraded into a GM vs The World argument. I have to say that the only thing that will make me want buy a GM product is the product itself. People on the internet who act like pushy salesmen: telling me that I'm wrong for liking something else, making snide remarks at fellow posters ("Ignorance truly is bliss. ,Let me ask you a question genius") actually push me away from liking GM."

Well that changes everything. Not buying a car because of posts from someone on the internet is one of the stupidest things I have read in a while. You say GM needs good product to get "smart" customers like you and the Lacrosse is one example. Now you are saying you wouldnt consider it because you dont like me. You dont even know me. If you are going to go on the attack you need to be well informed. Many people whpo worship at the altar of Toyota/Lexus are ill informed and believe that Toyota engineers are responsible to every good thing known to man. Toyota makes reliable cars. That is not the same thing as Toyota making best in class cars.

BAsed on your commentary here and in other places my guess is that you are Anti GM (and american vehicles) regardless of the specifics. Spare me the talk of being "driven away" by my posts. You strike me as someone who is probably very concerned about what people think about what you drive and thus wouldnt by GM because people in your circle might look down on you. Not a good reason for me but to each his own.

"Just like it is your duty to claim every future GM vehicle is better then the equivalent Honda/Toyota/BMW/etc, and that every other car magazine agrees with you, and how we are all constantly wrong and you are constantly right?"

Doug I leave the sweeping generalizations to you. Never said every new GM vehicle is best in class. You did. For the record I dont think its all that difficult to overtake Toyota and Honda products in terms of design and performance. GErman cars are a different story as they typically look better and perform better. BTW, who is included in "all"? I disagreed with you, not everyone here. I dont see the point of reading up on these cars if you are going to dismiss cars you dont like because we havent driven them yet. That would be like me saying I dont believe the GTR is a great car because I haven't driven it in real life. Do you say "wait until we drive it or sit in it" when talking about an M3 or C63 or Ferrari? Can you believe the specs and pictures and reviews? I suppose no car can be validated without your detailed personal inspection.

"Unlike you, however, I don't believe you can make statements about the interior design of a vehicle, including whether or not it is best in class, without actually sitting in and experiencing it. "

What about the design can I not evaluate from the pics? Material quality cannot be assessed but design can be without physical interaction. I have not been in the 2009 Pilot but I can tell you the design is terrible. The new RX likely has nice materials and construction but I do not like the design. Seeing it at the auto show isnt going to change my mind.

"I agree...just like how talking about interior design and materials of a model from a few pictures is stupid."

How can you compare to the two things? Are you serious? You are saying evaluating a vehicle based on pictures, first hand accounts and press release info is the same as evaluating cars that havent even been revealed yet? That is just absurd. Design is a visual thing. I am lost as to how you can say we are not permitted to comment on design based on pictures. People shop for cars based on pictures seen in brochures or on the internet. The pictures are what give you your first impressions. Car ads for new models incite interest by showing the car inside and out. Are you getting this?

"chavis: I didn't say anything about Toyota being better - I said we don't know what it will be like in 2011."

But that is irrelevant. We dont know what GM or anyone else would be doing in 2011. The Cruze is over a year away so I will let you pretend an all new corolla may spring up next year. Lets put that aside. The Lacrosse is due out in late spring and it will compete with the Es350, Avalon and TL that we know about today. Same with the Equinox vs the RAV4 and CRV. Even though I have not sat in these vehicles my GUESS is that they will be as good or better than comparable interiors from Toyota BASED on my experience with the interiors of the CTS, Vue, Enclave, Malibu, etc.

"Doug I leave the sweeping generalizations to you."

Right, I'm sure that if you look back through my posts I'm the one that is known for sweeping generalizations.

"Never said every new GM vehicle is best in class. You did."

No, I didn't. You did imply though that the LaCross will be best in-class because the CTS and Enclave are.

"I dont see the point of reading up on these cars if you are going to dismiss cars you dont like because we havent driven them yet."

I'm not dismissing any cars, the LaCross included. I would never dismiss a car that I haven't driven, and I don't know where you get off suggesting that.

"Do you say "wait until we drive it or sit in it" when talking about an M3 or C63 or Ferrari? Can you believe the specs and pictures and reviews?"

Talking about an extensively reviewed vehicle that EXISTS is different from a car that hasn't even seen natural light outside a convention centre.

"Design is a visual thing. I am lost as to how you can say we are not permitted to comment on design based on pictures."

If you're talking about design from an aesthetic point of view, then you need to say so. Yes, aesthetics can be commented on from photos. If you're talking about overall design, including ergonomics and materials, then no, they cannot be evaluated from a photograph. An interior may look great but completely not work once you get inside -> the knobs are too small, the buttons feel cheap, etc. This is all DESIGN that you cannot extrapolate from a photograph.

"Talking about an extensively reviewed vehicle that EXISTS is different from a car that hasn't even seen natural light outside a convention centre."

I should further qualify this statement by saying that imo, its fine to use reviews to learn about a car. Obviously I think that or I wouldn't be here. My comment with regard to the LaCross and Cruze is just that these reviews don't exist yet. The only reviews out there talk about engine data and styling impressions. For the Cruze there are just a few comments about the interior based on an editor's brief glimpse inside at an autoshow.

"Now you are saying you wouldnt consider it because you dont like me."

Read my post again. I never said that. I said that, like a pushy salesman, your arguments (and more specifically the way you make them) have had a negative affect on my perception of GM and its fans. That wouldn't stop me from buying GM because as you said, that would be ridiculous, but you can be sure that you are not helping.

"Many people whpo worship at the altar of Toyota/Lexus are ill informed and believe that Toyota engineers are responsible to every good thing known to man."

I don't remember saying anything about Toyota, but I will just to set the record straight: I'm not a fan. The richest automaker in the world can only make one interesting car (IS-F)? Gimme a break.

"BAsed on your commentary here and in other places my guess is that you are Anti GM (and american vehicles) regardless of the specifics."

More proof that you don't read what others write. I think that the G8, CTS, Malibu, Vette, etc. are great cars. I'd also love to see the American auto industry succeed in a big way, and I think that they can. Go back and read my first post in this thread, and you'll see just how anti-GM I am not.

"You strike me as someone who is probably very concerned about what people think about what you drive and thus wouldnt by GM because people in your circle might look down on you."

Umm...I drive a GM product. Nice try though.

So back to my point: Be nice. Most folks around here are well-informed regulars who understand that almost every auto maker selling cars today has some winners and losers in its lineup.

As for the LaCrosse, I think it looks a helluva lot better than the ES, and the interior looks like a homerun too. I especially like the blue ambient lighting which gives a really upscale look. As long as its quiet and smooth, it should have a chance at winning over Lexus-lovers.

"Let me ask you a question genius: What is the point of visiting sites like this one if you believe that you cannot tell anything about a car from pictures and words? If you believe pictures are useless you have no business here in the first place. Automakers release all of this info to internet publications because the pics and specs DO get people excited about their products. I have eyes and I like what I see. I did not say the Lacrosse will drive like a BMW or anything similar. I can say that its styling and features are very admirable and I applaud Buick for that. Many people on other sites seem to share my opinion and few have called the car unattractive."

Oh wow, here we go again... My answer to you is I'm doing here exactly what the majority of the normal visitors is doing, but unlike you I'm not spitting out reactionary nonsense, but instead gather enough research and don't come up with ridiculous conclusions like "the interior is best in class". How old ARE you? Five?

You can look at the pictures all you want and all you will know from them is that the dashboard appeals to YOU. Automakers release the photoshopped pictures of their future cars to create hype among naive consumers, hoping that after seeing the pics they will think something like "this car has a great interior! Must be best in class".

And what's with constant switching to comparing GM products with other brands? The talk is about this particular car and this particular brand. We're not interested to hear that you feel it's getting unfair treatment compared to other carmakers.

"People shop for cars based on pictures seen in brochures or on the internet. "

Which planet are you from? People go to dealerships and take test drives where they get to see, feel, drive, and get first hand experience with the car. Only THEN they decide to buy or not buy it.

Sometimes your thinking/imagination or lack thereof is simply dumbfounding. Do you really believe you are being taken seriously?

Doug: "Do you ever read what I write? Man, its like speaking to a wall sometimes. I'm not lowering the expectation of every GM product. Despite what you constantly state, I'm not anti-GM or anti-Detroit. I quite frequently prove this in my posts."

My thoughts exactly.

1487, you have way too much time on your hands if you actually care to sit there and pick through every single thing that you deem "anti-GM" or "anti-detroit". I have applauded GM twice as much as you have applauded anything non-GM, so who's the bad guy here? Who's the biased one? I hope that some day I will sit down and read a post where you actually agree with someone, but I'm pretty sure that that hope is in vain. It IS like talking to a wall, as Doug said.

It ISN'T fair to compare a 2011 GM model to a 2009 Lexus model. THE ONLY REASON GM IS RELEASING ITS 2010/2011 MODELS NOW IS TO COVER ITS ASS UP FROM ITS PAST AND PRESENT. The company has suffered in the past and is currently on the brink of going under, so they're marketing strategy (besides the whole pathetic built by GM....surprised?? thing) is to release future cars well before they are due in an effort for the public to accept them and see who they will be in the upcoming years. This is as much about GM trying to save themselves as it is about actually being competitive with their competition. The LaCrosse is a perfect example.

And as for the Lucerne, that car is boring, aged, and lifeless. Slapping a stitched dash onto an otherwise sedate and aged interior isn't a good way to improve the car...similar to how GM thought it was ok to do so with the Corvette ZR1. They should've created a new interior for that car altogether. The Cadillac DTS is currently the car that is dragging Caddy down, mainly because it is just an old car. The interior reflects this, much like the IDENTICAL interior of the Lucerne does. The steering wheel of the Lucerne was also used in GM models dating back to 2000 so you really can't win here (although I'm sure you'll try).

If you want people to be agreeable with you and "like" GM, try being agreeable with them. No one is going to give you any respect or give a shit what you have to say (I take back saying "sorry" about the Lucerne's CRAPPY interior) unless you give some respect as well.

BTW, my next car is going to be a CTS, so your bull about how I don't like American made cars is just that....bull. And that 'genius' comment, however clever you might think it was, only cemented the fact that you argue like an angry sixth grader.

Sorry, 1487. I just had to say one more thing (which is how everyone feels about you, p.s.)

"The Soft touch materials on the armrests and dash appear to be very similar to the CTS."

Yet another bullsh*t statement. HAVE YOU SAT IN A 2010 LX? How do you know they're soft touch? They could very well be, but how do you know this? The interior of the Corolla looks soft touch, but it isn't. Same with the many other cars. That was a statement, not a suggestion, and you cannot ridicule others about they're lack of knowledge when you know nothing about an interior which you are so boldly making statements about. Worse yet, you lie about doing so when it is painfully obvious.

Also, if your aim is to coo over the LX like it's your job, then I wouldn't mention how the window switches are from the CTS, as they are worse feeling and cheaper (hollow, actually) than the switches in my 6.

I'd nit pick and post more, but then I'd start looking (and sounding) like you.

"No, I didn't. You did imply though that the LaCross will be best in-class because the CTS and Enclave are."

Design wise. Thats it. I doubt it will lead in performance with this weight.

zoomzoom,

I know you probably have missed this in the course of your attempted persecution of my posts but journalists have seen this car in person and sat inside the car. Nothing I have read on ANY site from those who saw the car in the flesh has indicated the interior LOOKS good but feels CHEAP. I just want to know what basis you have to support your assertions that this interior might be on teh same level as the corolla. The CURRENT LAcrosse has soft touch materials. You probably have never been in one, much less driven one. I rented one for 3 days and drove it about 500 miles. The interior is full of soft touch materials. The Lucerne has soft touch materials. The Enclave has soft touch materials except for certain panels on the dash and console. What would make any intelligent person ASSUME that the LAcrosse's interior only looks good in photos?

"Also, if your aim is to coo over the LX like it's your job, then I wouldn't mention how the window switches are from the CTS, as they are worse feeling and cheaper (hollow, actually) than the switches in my 6."

Now you got me. Yes the CTS window switches are "cheap" and I'm sure you have seen the invoice prices from the suppliers for those switches. All window switches are hard plastic. I cannot tell a cheap one from a "premium" one. If that is enough for you to not buy a car I feel bad for you. I guess you are looking for any excuse you can find.

"Talking about an extensively reviewed vehicle that EXISTS is different from a car that hasn't even seen natural light outside a convention centre."

The car HAS been seen up close by many journalists. Their photos and impressions are all over the web. No one has suggested the interior was cheap feeling.

"BTW, my next car is going to be a CTS, so your bull about how I don't like American made cars is just that....bull. And that 'genius' comment, however clever you might think it was, only cemented the fact that you argue like an angry sixth grader."

I am glad to know you have some common sense. I dont know why you try hard to obscure that fact with some of your statements and rants.

"If you're talking about design from an aesthetic point of view, then you need to say so. Yes, aesthetics can be commented on from photos. If you're talking about overall design, including ergonomics and materials, then no, they cannot be evaluated from a photograph. An interior may look great but completely not work once you get inside -> the knobs are too small, the buttons feel cheap, etc. This is all DESIGN that you cannot extrapolate from a photograph."

Doug you decide what you cannot evaluate. I like the design. The lighting, the layout, the overall vibe. I know how the buttons and switches feel in modern GM products so that is not a question for me. Maybe it is for you. If so, wait until you sit in the car to make a decision. At this point GM is establishing consistency in its interiors in terms of fluidity of controls and damping of moving parts. I am not concerned that the Lacrosse will "feel" like a Focus when I sit in the car based on Gm's recent track record. Its the same way I wouldnt assume than a new Mercedes or BMW model would feel cheap inside before actually experiencing the car.

"If you want people to be agreeable with you and "like" GM, try being agreeable with them. No one is going to give you any respect or give a shit what you have to say (I take back saying "sorry" about the Lucerne's CRAPPY interior) unless you give some respect as well."

The facts are what they are. Not sure why you think I can convince you to "like" GM products. I am merely stating the strengths and weaknesses of certain products. Since we are in a GM product blog it happens to be about a GM product. Imagine that. You post about a Buick and then get mad that posts following yours are complimentary of Buicks and other GM products. I dont get that. You act like I am posting in a Toyota blog about GM products. To be honest I dont even know what you are mad about or why you have gone off on this tangent.

"You can look at the pictures all you want and all you will know from them is that the dashboard appeals to YOU. Automakers release the photoshopped pictures of their future cars to create hype among naive consumers, hoping that after seeing the pics they will think something like "this car has a great interior! Must be best in class"."

There are real photos taken by 3rd parties on autoblog and leftlanenews.com. I am not talking about renderings. Unlike you I actually checked this vehicle out in detail before commenting. The fact that you think I am talking about Photoshopped manfacturers pics only shows you havent seen much at all.

Next.

zoom,

I dont know where you have come from or what you know about me but you are so off base that its frankly embarrassing. I never agree with anyone? Surely you jest. There are numerous people who post around here frequently who I think make sense. Chavis, Rayinsaw, hondaacura, Stingray454 and AuraKR are a few I can name off the top of my head. Just because I dont agree with you about one or two things doesnt mean I dont agree with anyone. You are really taking this too hard.

I dont need to defend any imports since I'm on a site where there are dozens of posters ready to defend the honor of imports at the drop of a dime. My help is not needed there. If you find anyone disparaging the 335i, 2004-2008 TL or the 2009 6 let me know and I will be there in a hurry. I am sorry that I don't feel the camry and avalon are God's gift to car fans. Did not know that makes me "anti import". If you are an import fan and feel those cars are examples of Toyota's engineerng and design prowess more power to you. I'm not that impressed.

"It ISN'T fair to compare a 2011 GM model to a 2009 Lexus model. THE ONLY REASON GM IS RELEASING ITS 2010/2011 MODELS NOW IS TO COVER ITS ASS UP FROM ITS PAST AND PRESENT."

You show your ignorance once again. Auto shows are about PREVIEWING UPCOMING PRODUCT. I did not know Toyota and Honda did not engage in this. Oh wait, the 2010 Prius is debuting next week as is th 2010 Insight. How did that happen? Oh, they must be making up for past mistakes. The Lacrosse will be in production in the 2nd qtr of this year. The reason the Cruze has been shown so early is because it goes on sale in Europe and China THIS YEAR. It has nothing to do with any of the crap you mentioned. The Lacrosee is a 2010 model so I am unsure as to how you are saying its unfair to compare it to a 2009 or 2010 ES350. Please explain. When the Lacrosse goes on sale the ES will still be on sale unless I am missing something. A new Es is likely for 2012.

"This is as much about GM trying to save themselves as it is about actually being competitive with their competition. "

Isnt every automaker trying to survive and get a leg up in this down market? You are criticizing GM for trying to show off new and improved product? WTF?

"And as for the Lucerne, that car is boring, aged, and lifeless. Slapping a stitched dash onto an otherwise sedate and aged interior isn't a good way to improve the car...similar to how GM thought it was ok to do so with the Corvette ZR1. They should've created a new interior for that car altogether. The Cadillac DTS is currently the car that is dragging Caddy down, mainly because it is just an old car. The interior reflects this, much like the IDENTICAL interior of the Lucerne does. The steering wheel of the Lucerne was also used in GM models dating back to 2000 so you really can't win here (although I'm sure you'll try)."

1. DTS and Lucerne have totally different interiors
2. DTS was thorouhgly updated for 2006 model year.
3. No automaker creates a unique interior for ONE trim level. Why would Chevy do that for the ZR1? Do you see a completely unique interior in the M5 or S63 or M5?
4. The Lucerne's interior is no more aged than any other car that came out in 2005. Its not state of the art because its not the newest car in its class. The same could be said of virtually any 3 year old car on the market. What's your point? The interior is still well made and contains high quality surfaces.
5. The car is sedate because thats what its buyers want. The Avalon, Azera, 300 V6 and ES350 could also be considered "sedate". Whats you point? its not a sports sedan. It supposed to be quiet, roomy and easy to drive at 80mph- you know the same stuff people were praising Lexus for earlier in this blog.

"And what's with constant switching to comparing GM products with other brands? The talk is about this particular car and this particular brand. We're not interested to hear that you feel it's getting unfair treatment compared to other carmakers.

"People shop for cars based on pictures seen in brochures or on the internet. "

Which planet are you from? People go to dealerships and take test drives where they get to see, feel, drive, and get first hand experience with the car. Only THEN they decide to buy or not buy it.

Sometimes your thinking/imagination or lack thereof is simply dumbfounding. Do you really believe you are being taken seriously?"

I would hope I am being taken more seriously than you are. Car ads are about getting people into showrooms. HOw do they do that? By appealing to the eye by showing you the design and features of the car. This is not rocket science. It all starts with the LOOKS of the car. Why the hell would you visit a dealership if the images of the car did not compel you to check it out?

Other cars came up when people suggested the Avalon was "high quality" on the inside and not fodder for criticism. Bilt9 is the one who said the Avalon's interior was nicer and was no worse on the exterior. I beg to differ. I did not bring up the Avalon.

Whats dumbfounding to me is that you are getting so upset over nothing. You are the latest internet hero sent to vanguish 1487 when I have said nothing profane or outrageous. Honestly, what are you angry about? I dont even know why you are attacking me to be quite frank. You are on the interent looking at cars and making the nonsensical argument that we cant form intelligent opinions unless we go to the dealership. If that be the case I do not know why you waste one second reviewing information on this site. Just wait until June and go check out the car in person. Don't read about it, dont check out photos, dont read any comments.

I will say this: The interior of the Lacrosse would have to be damn cheap in person for me to change my views and determine that this car is worse than the Avalon or TL. The only major question for me is pricing because that is critical. If its priced lower than the TL and ES its the better car to me based on its looks AND features. I dont know if we are allowed to evaluate features since we havent used them in real life yet but I am just stupid enough to believe that the press release info is actually describing features that will be on the production car. if you believe that a real life visit with the Lacrosse will show the car is a fraud with interior quality rivaling a Neon that is your right. Dont shoot me for not sharing that view.

sabastian

you made much more sense in that last post. Not sure why you cant just stay in that mode. Since you are such a GM fan I am perplexed as to why you have an issue with my lack of fervor for vaunted import stalwarts like camry, accord and avalon. Why exactly are you mad at me again? Refresh my memory. Those who give it need to be able to take it. Sorry but I do get annoyed with people who combine ignorance with zealotry. I'm sorry if my responses to those posting inaccurate information offended you.

Statements like this: "1487, how do you know that its interior is best in class? That's a crock, considering you've never sat in the Lacrosse. The Avalon's interior was rated higher than that of the VW Passat, Chrysler 300, and Mercury Montego in a comparison test, so I'm not sure how it's just a "step above the Corolla"." get me started because I dont like double standards.

1487,
it appears that you have completely ignored my post and went on with your incoherent rambling about nothing. It really is about nothing at all except for distracting the reader. So what have we learned? You don't read other people's posts, you don't post on topic, and you twist and spin the argument with false facts/accusations. And one of the most ridiculous things about you is that after all your posts you're trying to tell me I shouldn't be here. I don't know how else to put it but will you snap out of your own little world? How can you be so blind as to not see you're the one being the fifth wheel here. If you don't believe me - read the above section again and again and again, but I'm sure it won't help you.

The last thing I'm going to tell you, 1487, is that I was attacking your most ridiculous and ignorant statement about the interior. You know it was ridiculous whichever way you attempt to put it. You lost the argument and you know it as well as everyone else on this forum. In fact, you never really were arguing, but hopelessly trying to spin the argument. Nobody bought it but instead you've confirmed your position of an immature histerical self loving whiner. I do mean immature. That's just what you appear to be here on the forum. I'm hoping you're nicer in real life but if you aren't - I feel sorry for the people who you deal with. If you want to retain whatever attention and serious treatment you may still deserve, I suggest you start listening to what other people on this forum are trying to tell you.

1487,

First of all, my dad has a current LaCrosse, so that's another trite remark that I'm going to ignore. Nice try, though. Saying I rant and that it thus ruins my credibility is also the single most hypocritical thing I've read in this forum.

I'm not talking about me at all. I could frankly care less about what you think of my opinions. If you think I buy a car based on window switches, then go ahead, think that - you're the one who bragged about the LaCrosse sharing window switches with the CTS. I bring valid points to the table and I'm sure that many others can back that up.

Thank you, once again, for ignoring my posts. I don't really know why I even bother. You try to manipulate what I say without ever really giving valid arguments to my actual points. You pick out what people say, attack them, and then expect them to listen. I don't know what kind of social skills you have outside these forums, but I sure hope they're better than what you bring to the table here. I don't get mad at anyone for their opinion, and I stated clearly in my last post that I am not anti-GM. Unlike you, I'm not one to argue against something I deem wrong. However, I am one to argue against someone as close minded and, frankly, cruel as yourself. I like the new LaCrosse, but you failed (somehow) to understand that. When people attack you, it isn't because they disagree with your points - rather, it's because of your general attitude towards them. I'm not going to sit here and let some ignorant hot head belittle others without saying something first, and I know I'm not the first one to mention this to you. Get that through your thick skull.

Oh, and as for embarrassing: I am not embarrassing. Having 19 posts on a forum of 54 - that's what's embarrassing.

"You post about a Buick and then get mad that posts following yours are complimentary of Buicks and other GM products. I dont get that."

My post about this Buick was complimentary, but I'm sure you never actually read it. I bet there's a lot of things that you just don't get, and no one here wonders why.

"I am sorry that I don't feel the camry and avalon are God's gift to car fans."

Thank you for proving my sixth grader point. As much as others say that you're statements are laughable, this one literally made me laugh. All hail the mighty Toyota Avalon! Praise Camry! Is that what I said? I've talked about the Avalon in this forum and this forum only, and now I'm an Avalon lover. Go figure.

If I had to rank midsize sedans, I'd put the Camry near the bottom of the pack. Again, nice try. As for the Avalon, I was merely stating that its interior is well above the interior of the Corolla...by doing so, I also essentially said that the Corolla has a bargain basement interior. Huh, imagine that.

"Since you are such a GM fan I am perplexed as to why you have an issue with my lack of fervor for vaunted import stalwarts like camry, accord and avalon."

I'm not really a GM car fan per se, I'm just a car fan. Like all companies, GM makes some cars that I like, and some that I don't. As for the cars you mentioned (Accord, Camry, Avalon), I doubt that you'll find many around here (IL is an enthusiast site, remember) that have much fervor for those models. At least when it comes to my views, I would say that I respect the Avalon for its smoothness, the Accord for its general all-around goodness (steering, reliability), and the Camry for pretty much nothing.

"Why exactly are you mad at me again? Refresh my memory. Those who give it need to be able to take it. Sorry but I do get annoyed with people who combine ignorance with zealotry. I'm sorry if my responses to those posting inaccurate information offended you."

The overly aggressive nature of your responses gets to me. Like I said before, most folks around here know that GM makes a number of good models, so you could probably stand to turn it down a couple notches I only read a handful of posts that say things like "It's American so it must be crap," and everyone who posts here regularly (or knows anything about GM's current lineup) knows that those posters are misinformed.

The 2010 LaCrosse will engender a new image for Buick. My next car will be another all wheel drive sedan. I currently have an '05 G35X. If Buick decides to put the larger engine in the all wheel drive LaCrosse, then by golly, they might just get a new customer. A near 300 hp all wheel drive Buick would be a nice option. Too bad GM feels they need a less powerful engine in the LaCrosse all wheel drive. Are they afraid it would take sales from the(too expensive)CTS? Now if Lexus made the ES350 available in all wheel drive.....