Buick Rendevous

[radionut98]

Just got back from a travelling trip and<BR>talked to several Rendevous owners along<BR>the way. Everyone says it is probably one of the nicest buicks ever made with one ananimous complaint, The engine is not quite<BR>big enough even with 180 plus HP. 4 out of<BR>5 stated they wrote to the district manager<BR>to see if Buick intends to upgrade the engine<BR>size. Most say they average between 24 and 26 MPG at 65/70 highway speed. Any comments.

[Guest]

ugly

[rocketraider]

But not as ugly or bizarre as its Pontiac Aztek genesis! To quote me esteemed and often opinionated Grandpa, "ugly, damned ugly and ugly as hell".<P>The boys in the Styling Studio must have been doing some powerful hallucinogens when the Aztek was designed. They remind me of some of the bizarre stuff Nissan built in the 70s- B210s, and of course the F10- an earthbound Buck Rogers-mobile rocketship if ever was. It had the look, but not enough power to launch!

[NTX5467]

It's been my contention that the Rendezvous should have had the 3.8L Buick V-6 in it from the start--especially with the allegedly necessary 3rd seat and the extra weight that will go back there. Plus, it would make it "All Buick" then too!<P>Considering that it's built in the same plant as the Aztek, which has no engine options either, it's not surprising that the Rendezvous is locked into the same engine choice. There might be a logistics issue with getting the Buick V-6 to the Mexico plant (and related costs too), not to mention EPA certification.<P>The Chevy V-6 seems to do ok in the Venture vans so the "low power" complaint might have more to do with individual driving styles. But considering the more upscale orientation of the Buick Rendezvous over the Aztek and other similar GM vehicles, I would think that it should have had the Buick 3.8L V-6 in it from the start--especially considering that the Chevy 3.1L V-6 in a current Century has the same EPA mileage as the 3.8L Buick V-6 in a current Regal. Production cost of the two engines should be roughly the same, but the added cost of getting the Buick V-6 to Mexico and if there would be enough production capacity for the 3.8L Buick V-6 might be the issues.<P>If enough Rendezvous owners complain and threaten to jump ship when the payment book is empty, that might get the attention of the people who can make those Buick V-6s get to Mexico and under the hoods of future Rendezvous.<P>Just some thoughts . . .<BR>NTX5467

[ranchero]

Gee, GM was able to fly Allante bodies from Italy to Michigan, to get Rivieras from New Jersey to Lansing to make into convertibles and is sending Chevrole V-8s to Australia to put in Holdens. Ford flew Yamaha V-6s to the USA for the first Taurus SHO and now Honda is even flying steel to Ohio to build Accords. You'd think GM could figure out a way to get the 3.8 V-6 to Mexico to put in Buicks.

[Dave@Moon]

I didn't mind the Rendevous so much when it first came out. With some time to have it find it's way into the market now, my opinion is somewhat less than it was. <P>In general I see the car (and it is a <I>CAR</I>) as a half-baked semi-attempt to extend Buick's range. It's not <I>that</I> ugly, I think it's just boring looking. Most problematically, the car doesn't seem to be all that exceptional in any one aspect. You cannot be a late arrival at the market with an also-ran product and expect success. <P>The real test for it, and any other new Buciks to come, will be the <I>Consumer Reports</I> quality surveys after the car's 5-6 years old. If it holds up the way Buicks used to generations back, then the story will be <B>very</B> different.

[BUICK RACER]

But if we are already building 3.4s in Ramos Arzipe, wouldn't you use the readily available engine??? Probably... not that I don't agree that the 3.8 would have been a much better choice, but it's all business!<BR>Wonder if that is the reason that the Rainer will get the 5300 instead of the L-6? Cause they blew it on the Rendezvous! My .02. RV

[Guest Skyking]

Ugly, with a "capital U"

[Guest]

I watched,with interest the 40 MPH crash tests.The Pontiac looks were actually IMPROVED after the barrier impact!!!

[Guest]

I must differ, Dave. It's not a car. If it were it would have a lower center of gravity, lower mass, and therefore better handling. But you say it's not a truck because it can't really "work"? It must be a Silly Useless Vehicle

[NTX5467]

The word "car" is being grossly misused by the general public these days. I've heard people refer to Suburbans and Tahoes as a "car" when they are built on a truck platform. Same with minivans too. Seems no one really cares as long as it performs the same functions as their older sedan or station wagon.<P>Personally, I don't care for "SUV" either. That original nomenclature was put on Jeep Cherokees and such as they had the hauling space for active lifestyle people who went road biking or bike racing or camping or such and needed to haul their gear (that would not fit in a downsized sedan and a car chassis station wagon did not have enough ground clearance). Now, it's become a generic name that carries a certain amount of scorn with it in some respects. Then there's the BMW X5 that is called a "sports activity vehicle" although it has basically no load area, yet it handles sporty driving verrrry well.<P>Remember the Subaru Brat? It was able to be imported at that time purely because it had four seats and could be called a "passenger vehicle" instead of an import truck. Sometimes, creativity has its limits.<P>Just some thoughts . . .<BR>NTX5467

[Barney Eaton]

Somewhere...I read that the 3800 would not fit. Seems like they would have thought about. It may be a mute point when Buick gets the Bravada, and it comes with a V8