2009 Buick Lucerne vs. 2004 Chevrolet Tahoe
To start off, 2009 Buick Lucerne is newer by 5 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2004 Chevrolet Tahoe. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2004 Chevrolet Tahoe would be higher. At 4,807 cc (8 cylinders), 2004 Chevrolet Tahoe is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Buick Lucerne (292 HP @ 6300 RPM) has 32 more horse power than 2004 Chevrolet Tahoe. (260 HP @ 5200 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2009 Buick Lucerne should accelerate faster than 2004 Chevrolet Tahoe.
Because 2004 Chevrolet Tahoe is rear wheel drive (RWD), it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, it will be much easier to do with 2004 Chevrolet Tahoe. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2009 Buick Lucerne, being front wheel drive (FWD), will offer much better control with better grip. With that said, do keep in mind that many other factors such as speed and the wear on your tires can also have significant impact on traction and control. Let's talk about torque, 2004 Chevrolet Tahoe (393 Nm @ 4000 RPM) has 2 more torque (in Nm) than 2009 Buick Lucerne. (391 Nm @ 4500 RPM). This means 2004 Chevrolet Tahoe will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2009 Buick Lucerne.
Compare all specifications:
| 2009 Buick Lucerne | 2004 Chevrolet Tahoe | |
| Make | Buick | Chevrolet |
| Model | Lucerne | Tahoe |
| Year Released | 2009 | 2004 |
| Body Type | Sedan | SUV |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 4565 cc | 4807 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 2 valves |
| Horse Power | 292 HP | 260 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6300 RPM | 5200 RPM |
| Torque | 391 Nm | 393 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 4500 RPM | 4000 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Front | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 6 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 5170 mm | 5010 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1880 mm | 2010 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1480 mm | 1950 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2940 mm | 2950 mm |
| Fuel Consumption | 10.7 L/100km | 12.4 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 15.7 L/100km | 14.7 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 13.1 L/100km | 13.8 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 68 L | 98 L |
