DecodedCarsBuick Lacrosse/Allure
6 model years from 2005 to 2010, compared on size, efficiency, safety and reliability.
- Model years
- 2005–2010
- Class
- Midsize Cars
- Latest engines
- 2.4L 4-cyl, 3.6L 6-cyl, 3.0L 6-cyl
- Best MPG
- 21–23 combined, by year
- Latest rating
- Not rated
- Recalls
- 0 campaigns, all years
The 2010 Lacrosse/Allure in brief
The 2010 Buick Lacrosse/Allure is a midsize car offered with 3 engines (2.4L 4-cyl, 3.6L 6-cyl and 3.0L 6-cyl) and front-wheel drive and 4-wheel or all-wheel drive.
EPA rates its most efficient version at 23 MPG combined (19 city / 30 highway), 4% better than the 2010 midsize car average of 22.2 MPG, for an estimated $2,900 a year in fuel.
There are no recalls or owner complaints on file with NHTSA for this model year.
The Buick Lacrosse/Allure has 6 model years in our data, from 2005 to 2010.
Its most efficient year was 2010 at 23 MPG combined; across all years the best version ranged from 21 to 23 MPG.
How the 2005 Lacrosse/Allure compares
The 2005 Buick Lacrosse/Allure is a midsize car offered with 2 engines (3.8L 6-cyl and 3.6L 6-cyl) and front-wheel drive.
EPA rates its most efficient version at 21 MPG combined (18 city / 27 highway), 2% better than the 2005 midsize car average of 20.6 MPG, for an estimated $3,200 a year in fuel.
2010 Lacrosse/Allure pros & cons
Full 2010 details →What's good
- AWD / 4WD available
- Few owner complaints0 complaints filed with NHTSA versus about 140 for similar models.
- No recalls so far
Watch out for
No weak spots against similar models in the data.
Lacrosse/Allure changes by model year
- 2010
- Engines added: 2.4L 4-cyl, 3.6L 6-cyl and 3.0L 6-cyl
- Engines dropped: 3.8L 6-cyl and 5.3L 8-cyl
- All-wheel or four-wheel drive now available
- Best combined MPG up from 21 to 23
- 2009
- Engine dropped: 3.6L 6-cyl
- 2008
- Engine added: 5.3L 8-cyl
Years without a measurable change are left out.
Show all 6 model years side by side
| Year | Latest engines | Best MPG / range | Length | Weight | Overall | Recalls | Complaints |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2010 | 2.4L 4-cyl, 3.6L 6-cyl, 3.0L 6-cyl | 23 MPG | – | – | Not rated | 0 | 0 |
| 2009 | 3.8L 6-cyl, 5.3L 8-cyl | 21 MPG | – | – | Not rated | 0 | 0 |
| 2008 | 3.8L 6-cyl, 3.6L 6-cyl, 5.3L 8-cyl | 21 MPG | – | – | Not rated | 0 | 0 |
| 2007 | 3.8L 6-cyl, 3.6L 6-cyl | 21 MPG | – | – | Not rated | 0 | 0 |
| 2006 | 3.8L 6-cyl, 3.6L 6-cyl | 21 MPG | – | – | Not rated | 0 | 0 |
| 2005 | 3.8L 6-cyl, 3.6L 6-cyl | 21 MPG | – | – | Not rated | 0 | 0 |
Alternatives to the 2010 Lacrosse/Allure
| Model | Best MPG / range | NHTSA overall | Recalls |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2010 Toyota Camry | 34 MPG | Not rated | 8 |
| 2010 Toyota Prius | 50 MPG | Not rated | 10 |
| 2010 Hyundai Elantra | 29 MPG | Not rated | 4 |
| 2010 Chevrolet Malibu | 29 MPG | Not rated | 3 |
| 2010 Volkswagen Passat | 25 MPG | Not rated | 4 |
| 2010 Nissan Altima | 34 MPG | Not rated | 2 |
Sources: EPA, NHTSA, Transport Canada, Wikipedia, Wikimedia Commons. Not affiliated with NHTSA, the EPA or Buick. How we calculate this →