All they need to do to make Buick into a viable brand is to switch from front to rear wheel drive, switch from V6 to inline 6, and put a BMW roundel over the Buick roundel. Then you’d have a winner.

Madcapp, Agreeed.

GM never should have killed their Zeta platform. I never saw so many people dying for GM to get back to being bad ass again.

F/econ be danged. Just push V6 powertrains more.

Buick is in need of a quick DEATH.

It’s amusing to watch GM get bit on the ass by its own bullsh*t branding strategy. Not that I want GM to fail — that would bring down two cars that God drives, Corvette and Camaro.

Madcapp, Blakkarr:
You guys are ridiculous. The reason why its FWD is because of northern SNOW. Not everyone lives in California or Arizona, okay? If GM switched those cars to RWD then the sales will go DOWN because no one wants to drive a RWD car in the SNOW.

If you want an American RWD brand, go see Cadillac.

This is not Buick news, or any news at all for that matter. Aside from sales numbers from the first 11 months of the year (which you could have pointed out in your best and worst sellers of 2008 blog post above), there is nothing factual here. It’s just a bunch of editorializing about something that is already completely obvious – small is the new big, next lacrosse will be awesome, lucerne might get chopped, whats new?

fx22,

Actually, NO ONE wants to drive in the ice and snow. Nothing can get grip on ice. FWD gives the illusion of better traction but only as long as you have exactly the right tires in perfect shape and one habitually drives like they are scared of their own car. RWDs have more leeway, but balding tires, and “summer only” help no one.

If you lose rear wheel traction in a FWD, you are boned. The only thing you can do is hit the brakes and if that does not do it, just hope you don’t die. RWD gives you more options for control, including using the gas to dig the snow (Again, with ice you are screwed.) It’s not invincible but then neither is AWD.

If you drive cautiously then you are fine. If you don’t or can’t you get what you deserve for you lack of skill.

Also do not discount Traction Control, Anti-Lock Brakes (ABS), and Stability Programs (ESP – to be mandatory in 2010). They can make either FWD or RWD drive almost like a purpose made AWD car on al possible surfaces.Since these systems are fairly common options or standard equipment on cars over $18K, I don’t see why it would be a fault to shift over to RWD and in those states where ice and Snow are an issue just have them on the car upfront.

Why deny people a great driving machine because of the chance of Snow? If it snows that badly then don’t drive or buy a machine that gives you what you want as much as need. I don’t think every one is going to be happy driving FWD when they could have RWD and still get the safety they need.

The switch to FWD was a cost measure not because it was better. FWD is cheap and nothing else.If the car is small then it isn’t a problem but the larger the car the more of an issue it becomes. People got along just fine with RWD in the snow. Trucks and SUVs do just fine. Weight balance will always be an issue.

But RWDs always place a higher premium on balance than FWDs, being seen more as performance machines which works in their favor. FWDs being nose-heavy, they will always have a problem keeping rear traction, so go extra slow through that turn (no weight and no dig). Older RWD cars, like empty pick-up trucks, will have that problem. But newer RWD cars are balanced closer to 50/50, being seen as performance vehicles) so that ceases to be an issue. If it is do what any snow driver would. Put some weight in the trunk. (a sack of rocks, a spare tire, so gym weight plates(works best and takes up less trunk space), and so on)

FYI, I live in TEXAS. If it does not rain hard or long enough the roads can be “slimy”, with dust mud, oil, and what not, until dry. But FWD and RWD are both equally vulnerable.

Seriously, if you are going to make such a broad argument try not to be so narrow minded.

Buick’s not getting rid of the Lucerne. They are revamping it for 2010 with a new V-6 – the 3.9L from the Impala LTZ. I don’t see them getting rid of it becasue it’s a niche product that does resonably well that has it’s buyers. It’s a good product and it’s pretty attractive and cheap.

Blakkarr
Okay
Ultimately, if you were to choose a car for the snow, would you go with RWD+snow tires or AWD+all season tires?

like it or not, most consumers would go with AWD and all seasons.

MB and BMW are primarily RWD and German winters are pretty harsh. So I don’t think it’s a weather thing.

The problem with Lucerne is that there will be no other full-sized FWD sedans to share platforms with once Cadillac merges the DTS and STS on a RWD platform.. and making the Lucerne RWD would be redundant with the Pontiac G8 sitting on the other side of the same showroom.

Blakkar: As a So Cal who moved to the mountains. Its been a steep learning curve for me in the snow. BUt what Ive learned is no matter what wheels are drive, tires are the number one factor on Ice. Frnt wheel drive is easier to control for most average drivers. Personally I like rear-drive, it allows me to left foot brake. Its the most efective way of turning a car. When braking weight shifts forward giving the front tires more bite, as soon as the frnts bite and the car starts turning, apply gas while maintaining brake pedal pressure. This will keep frnt tires cutting and rotate rear with more gas. I have learned to do this uphill first, then downhill. So much fun and safer.