Topic: 2011 Buick Regal CXL; Day 1

[Dante]

My issue with the Regal Turbo isn't price in absolute terms, it's the price / performance ratio.  Specifically, it's the lame motor and dullsville driving experience - two issues I don't have with the Passat CC 2.0T with a stick.

Here it is again...This is a confusion you've always made (on purpose or not - I don't know) between the base 2.4L and the 2.0T. How is the the price/performance ratio (and I would add features) worst than Passat? How do you know the 2.0T engined model is "lame" and the driving experince is "dullsville"? This particular model (Turbo) is not even available in the dealerships yet (although the prices and specs are available) and the auto journalists that drove it during the press events gave it quite good reviews. Even on the paper it looks very competitive with the Passat (and TSX).

Well, yes, I'm definitlely confused now. 

As between a 2.0T Passat with manual transmission and a normally aspirated Regal, the Passat is way more fun to drive.  The Buick is lame and dullsville.
As between a 2.0T Passat with manual transmision and a base Sonata 2.4l with manual transmission- the Passat is a bit more fun to drive (that turbo is pleasingly torquey) offers a nicer interior and more options that can be added.  Yes, it's more money.
As between the 2.0T Passat and 2.ot Sonata - how the hell would I know - I haven't driven that model and as far as I know they are not on dealer lots.  But I DO  know the turbo Sonata WON'T be available with a manual transmission and I also DO know that this is kind of an important issue for me.  Not deal-breaking in and of itself, but important.

Jaeger

I was refering to your comment about Regal 2.0T which you have the issue with in terms of price/performance (see your post). This is a car that you never drove but yet you have an issue with its performance. 

We are in agreement already that the 2.4L Regal is underpowered and not a good fit for the intent of this car ("premium sport sedan"). On the other hand, the upcoming Turbo model seems to be on par with the direct competition (e.g. Passat 2.0T).

[rrocket]

Me.    I'd buy a Passat or possibly an S60 ( unlikely tho'). I probably wouldn't look at a TSX nor a Sonata and it would not occur to me to go into a Buick store. 

Everyone to their own.

i love the Passat CC...i do...however, what i don't like is the fact you need to use Premium fuel, which you do on most Turbocharged cars...however, the new Sonata 2.0T, you can use regular gas...that is a significant savings...as well, it only suffers a 1 MPG penalty vs the NA 2.4L engine...now, i don't know what the pricing for the 2.0T will be like, but it would make sense that there would be a $3k-$4k premium (and perhaps some other slightly different equipment (suspension, etc)...a Passat CC, equipped with Nav and Premium sound (and auto transmission) is $39k...that is probably about $4-$5k more than the Sonata 2.0T will be, and it still doesn't offer a lot of the features the Sonata has (leather seats vs leatherette, no smartKey system, etc).

yes, i would probably really like the CC, or a C300 Mercedes or a 335i BMW...but the Sonata gives so much, for such a great price, and it is still a nice car to drive...it's tough to beat.

here, have fun:

http://www.hyundaiusa.com/competitive-comparisons/

OH NO!!!  Premium fuel!!!  It will cost you an extra $1 a day to run.  Oh the horror!!

[Sir Osis of Liver]

Me.    I'd buy a Passat or possibly an S60 ( unlikely tho'). I probably wouldn't look at a TSX nor a Sonata and it would not occur to me to go into a Buick store. 

Everyone to their own.

i love the Passat CC...i do...however, what i don't like is the fact you need to use Premium fuel, which you do on most Turbocharged cars...however, the new Sonata 2.0T, you can use regular gas...that is a significant savings...as well, it only suffers a 1 MPG penalty vs the NA 2.4L engine...now, i don't know what the pricing for the 2.0T will be like, but it would make sense that there would be a $3k-$4k premium (and perhaps some other slightly different equipment (suspension, etc)...a Passat CC, equipped with Nav and Premium sound (and auto transmission) is $39k...that is probably about $4-$5k more than the Sonata 2.0T will be, and it still doesn't offer a lot of the features the Sonata has (leather seats vs leatherette, no smartKey system, etc).

yes, i would probably really like the CC, or a C300 Mercedes or a 335i BMW...but the Sonata gives so much, for such a great price, and it is still a nice car to drive...it's tough to beat.

here, have fun:

http://www.hyundaiusa.com/competitive-comparisons/

The Sonata doesn't offer a manual, so that kills it for me right there. VW is still good that way.

[Sir Osis of Liver]

Neither a 135i nor a 128i are dead boring, soul-destroying, lifeless transportation appliances

Your endless whine was that it was slow, not that it was "dead boring, soul-destroying, lifeless transportation appliances". Moving goal posts are we?

I don't see how my criteria are "narrow".  I want a reasonably stylish, spacious and sporty sedan that I actually enjoy driving.  The normally aspirated Buick doesn't meaure up [for me].  The turbo manual transmission probably would.  Why do you find this so terribly objectionable?

Jaeger

If you can acknowledge that people who disagree are entitled to their equally valid opinion, I have absolutely no problem with you not liking it for whatever reason you choose.

[Equalizer]

Me.    I'd buy a Passat or possibly an S60 ( unlikely tho'). I probably wouldn't look at a TSX nor a Sonata and it would not occur to me to go into a Buick store. 

Everyone to their own.

 

Sir O,the way I see it, I am afraid the majority would agree, you can put a jet engine in the Regal but it would still be a BUICK with a jet engine.

[Sir Osis of Liver]

Me.    I'd buy a Passat or possibly an S60 ( unlikely tho'). I probably wouldn't look at a TSX nor a Sonata and it would not occur to me to go into a Buick store. 

Everyone to their own.

 

Sir O,the way I see it, I am afraid the majority would agree, you can put a jet engine in the Regal but it would still be a BUICK with a jet engine.

Which would be awesome!

So you're telling me I should only buy cars based on how others perceive them, not on my own needs and expectations? Kind of a shallow and vapid way of going through life if you ask me. I believe I'll decline.

[dirtyjeffer]

OH NO!!!  Premium fuel!!!  It will cost you an extra $1 a day to run.  Oh the horror!!

the premium fuel requirement is just one part, but yes, it does add up...after 6 years, that's $2000 extra in fuel alone (if not more)...that's just basing it on the difference in price in fuel...i'm not counting the fact the Sonata gets better fuel economy that all of its competitors...that $2000, could easily be $3000, just in fuel costs.

[dirtyjeffer]

The Sonata doesn't offer a manual, so that kills it for me right there. VW is still good that way.

they do, but only on their base model.

i love manuals too, but honestly, my next car will have an auto in it...i'm sick of what is now a hassle...the auto in the Sonata can be "shifted" (tiptronic style) if you so desire...and it works quite well (i tried it on my test drive)...i doubt i will ever do it though.

[Jaeger]

I was refering to your comment about Regal 2.0T which you have the issue with in terms of price/performance (see your post). This is a car that you never drove but yet you have an issue with its performance. 

Ah yes - my bad - in one post I mis-referenced the Regal Turbo, not the normally aspirated model.  Sheesh, you would think the number of times I have said "I think the turbo model will remedy the one real shortcoming of this vehicle" - or words to that effect - would have made the mistake obvious.  That and the fact that the Regal Turbo isn't out yet.

Jaeger

[Jaeger]

Neither a 135i nor a 128i are dead boring, soul-destroying, lifeless transportation appliances

Your endless whine was that it was slow, not that it was "dead boring, soul-destroying, lifeless transportation appliances". Moving goal posts are we?

I don't see how my criteria are "narrow".  I want a reasonably stylish, spacious and sporty sedan that I actually enjoy driving.  The normally aspirated Buick doesn't meaure up [for me].  The turbo manual transmission probably would.  Why do you find this so terribly objectionable?

Jaeger

If you can acknowledge that people who disagree are entitled to their equally valid opinion [and preferences for slow, boring cars], I have absolutely no problem with you not liking it for whatever reason you choose.

There have always been a number of drivers who prefer slow, comfortable cars that present no risk of unintended excitement whatsoever.  Buick has long provided them with transportation.  They have done so again.  And yes, the choices of grandpa and grandma are perfectly valid.  But you see, Buick is trying to tell me that this is a sports sedan.  And having driven it, I'm having a hard time buying that line.

And goog God man, if you think the 128i and 135i are slow (they aren't) how can you possibly NOT think the Sluggal is slow (it is)?  You are the one desperately moving the posts.

Jaeger

[wing]

This is so 2 weeks ago

[safristi]

..ya mean a FRIGHTNITE................. ...............half a MO' there.......


        There woz a regally Buick SexL
         That in regular guise did not sell
        Stick a TURBO in it
         A BMW "twin"it isn't
        But a "Premium" vehicle,ALLS WELL...............

[Sir Osis of Liver]

Neither a 135i nor a 128i are dead boring, soul-destroying, lifeless transportation appliances

Your endless whine was that it was slow, not that it was "dead boring, soul-destroying, lifeless transportation appliances". Moving goal posts are we?

I don't see how my criteria are "narrow".  I want a reasonably stylish, spacious and sporty sedan that I actually enjoy driving.  The normally aspirated Buick doesn't meaure up [for me].  The turbo manual transmission probably would.  Why do you find this so terribly objectionable?

Jaeger

If you can acknowledge that people who disagree are entitled to their equally valid opinion [and preferences for slow, boring cars], I have absolutely no problem with you not liking it for whatever reason you choose.

There have always been a number of drivers who prefer slow, comfortable cars that present no risk of unintended excitement whatsoever.  Buick has long provided them with transportation.  They have done so again.  And yes, the choices of grandpa and grandma are perfectly valid.  But you see, Buick is trying to tell me that this is a sports sedan.  And having driven it, I'm having a hard time buying that line.

And goog God man, if you think the 128i and 135i are slow (they aren't) how can you possibly NOT think the Sluggal is slow (it is)?  You are the one desperately moving the posts.

Jaeger

And here lies the problem. If the opinion expressed doesn't agree with your own, it's wrong and subject to denigration. This Buick, unlike the Avalon for instance, doesn't wallow in corners and can handle rapid transitions very well and completely unlike anything they produced in the past. It is completely unlike Grampa's Buick. The Avalon IS almost exactly like the traditional Buick. Tonnes of straight line speed, but massive understeer and on it's door handles in any sort of corner.

I never said the 128i or 135i are slow. I did say that using your criteria, they'd be considered dogs, because for the same money the Mustang GT demolishes them performance wise. Using more rational criteria, of course that isn't the case, and people buy cars that appeal to their own preferences, and there isn't anything wrong with that.

[Jaeger]

And here lies the problem. If the opinion expressed doesn't agree with your own, it's wrong and subject to denigration. This Buick, unlike the Avalon for instance, doesn't wallow in corners and can handle rapid transitions very well and completely unlike anything they produced in the past. It is completely unlike Grampa's Buick. The Avalon IS almost exactly like the traditional Buick. Tonnes of straight line speed, but massive understeer and on it's door handles in any sort of corner.

I never said the 128i or 135i are slow. I did say that using your criteria, they'd be considered dogs, because for the same money the Mustang GT demolishes them performance wise. Using more rational criteria, of course that isn't the case, and people buy cars that appeal to their own preferences, and there isn't anything wrong with that.

Neither the Avalon (strong engine, soft chassis) nor the Regal (good chassis, anemic engine) are sports sedans.  But only one of them is laughably pretending to be.

Grandpa, just be happy Buick makes a car for you - it's here now and ready for your sleepy Sunday cruise.  It won't EVER snap your head back and sprain your fragile neck. Buy one, it'll make you happy and make them happy. They have a model coming out that should appeal a bit more to actual enthusiasts - capable handling and enough motor to get out of its own way.  Don't hate us because we like that one better.

Feel free to have the last word on the subject, as you so desperately seem to need it.  I won't be responding to any more of YOUR posts on this thread going forward.

Jaeger

[safristi]

...Mr J & Mr S fighting it oot ta the END.................

[Dante]

One thing to keep in mind is that, while the currently available trim would not qualify as a "sport sedan", the upcoming Turbo and GS trims would.

What the current trim confirms is the chassis capabilities and the premium feel - equipment level and the build quality of the car. The powertrain upgrades will probably complete the car as a "premium sport sedan".

[dirtyjeffer]

What the current trim confirms is the chassis capabilities and the premium feel - equipment level and the build quality of the car. The powertrain upgrades will probably complete the car as a "premium sport sedan".

i agree...however, at most likely north of $40k, it better be, as it will be in a very competitive and solid bracket...the question then asks, will the Regal Turbo CXL,well equipped at $40k+, with its 220 HP engine  compete well against other great cars in that price category...while i am sure the added boost from the Turbo will make this car "better" in terms of it being a "Sports Sedan", there is an awfull lot of good company up there...the 335i is $49k, and that is one heck of a ride...someone might think, "Hey, I'm already at $42k, a few more grand and I can get an Audi, BMW, Mercedes, Lexus, Acura, Infiniti, etc".

i mean, from the looks of it, even a Taurus SHO won't be far off (it's $43k right now)...bigger, badder and likely worth more down the road.

[Dante]

The CXL Turbo, with Auto and loaded from the get go, is $35K. For under $40K you get HIDs, upgraded sound,adjustable suspension, etc. (things that you usually don't get in the mainstream cars or base on luxury cars).

My point is that the MSRP for the CXL Turbo puts in-line with the direct competitors, even a bit above IMO. Factor in some incentives after the first year or so and you can end up with a good car for a good price.

[Jaeger]

One thing to keep in mind is that, while the currently available trim would not qualify as a "sport sedan", the upcoming Turbo and GS trims would.

I'm pretty sure I said that, like, a bunch of times.  I'm looking forward to taking a turbo stick out for a spin, and suspect that with the torquey turbo motor the missing link from the sports sedan DNA will be in place.

As for pricing, we'll see.  Options can send this Buick's sticker climbing rapidly.

The non-turbo I test drove stickered around 36k and didn't have all available options.  The turbo may well start at 35k, but I would be (quite pleasantly) surprised if it didn't top $40k without trying hard.  In that zone, it not only has to worry about the Sonata Turbo undercutting it by 8 or 9k - it's also going to get squeezed by the likes of the Genesis and the G37.  I can't see myself choosing the Buick over the G if they are anywhere close in price.

We'll see.

Jaeger

[Dante]

Regal CXL Turbo - start at $35K
G37 - start at $38.7K

Close enough IMO, but you can say the same about the Passat and TSX for example. "Premium" brands are very sqeezed these days between the mainstream and luxury. There is a lot of overlap in the features at both ends as well.

Fully loaded mid-size mainstream sedans (4-cylinder, NA) are just over $30K and the luxury models (6-cyl or Turbo) start just under $40K. Not too much room to play for the manufacturers in this niche.