Topic: Test Drive: 2011 Buick Regal CXL

[Sir Osis of Liver]

Man, it would sure be nice if we could actually talk cars in this place.

we are talking cars...for some reason, when someone says this "Sport Sedan" isn't very "sporty", all heck breaks loose.

Now, as I see it, that's not the issue at all.

Some people like the car as is, some require more power. That's all good. The problem starts when personal attacks are used to denigrate and call into question the judgement and enthusiast credentials of those who do like it.

Now to the Regal itself, the ride and handling characteristics are very good. It has a very composed ride with minimal understeer. A person can, and I have, throw it through some twisty stuff (at least as twisty as you can find here) and it works very well in corners. To me, that puts it on the sporty end of the spectrum.

As has also been pointed out, it matches the TSX in acceleration. A few comments were made about power output when the TSX was introduced, but not two very contentious threads rife with nasty comments. The question to me is what is different? The only answer that I can see is that it's a GM product, and a few of the more vociferous voices on here have a history of seeing the negative in anything GM does.

Just so you know where I'm coming from, I've only owned one new GM car, a Pontiac Vibe. I've owned 4 Toyotas (if you count the Vibe), a couple of Fords, a Jeep, a Dodge (Mitsubishi) Colt, a loathsome Eagle Premier ES (Renault 25) and my current Subaru. I'm not especially partial to any brand, I buy what suits the need at the time. Hardly a "slappy" for any brand. If I was, from my history, it'd have to be Toyota.

As Topgun has brought up, is the Miata any less a sports car, just because it can't do 0-60 in less than 7 seconds? Why should it be any different for a sports sedan? Especially when two more powertrain options are in the offing in a few months?

To the question of the importance of acceleration times, look at the history of the pony cars. Through most of their history, the Mustang was slower than the Camaro/Firebird, and yet Mustang almost always outsold them, quite often both cars combined. Now if pony car buyers don't select their cars, cars whose raison d'être is acceleration, on the basis of acceleration times, just how important is it really to sedans of any stripe?

How's that for a long winded answer to a very short question?

[Truth be told]

The Opel, a European Branch of GM has been hemorrhaging huge losses for over ten years now, GM has been unsucessful in turning Opel around since then. Even the German Goverment has turned their back to Opel, sniffing imminent company collapse and pretty much labeled it not worth saving.  This Buick is a mere rebadged Opel, Conventional Wisdom dictates that one should look at other brands and not consider this doomed rebadge Buick.  Just look at those of who bought Saturns (rebadge Opels also) that are now stuck with a discontinued brand and savage depreciation, truth be told.....

That might be relevant if we were discussing corporate financing.

I get it, you are one of those stubborn guys that refuse to believe your cruise ship is sinking.  Make no mistake, when the German Government gave the order to abandon Opel, you should find the nearest life boat.  Look around you (listen to the overwhelming postings) and jump off the sinking Opel ship, you are the only left, truth be told.....

...Similar in category, but with darker implications than ignoratio elenchi, a "red herring" is an answer, given in reply to a questioner, that goes beyond an innocent logical irrelevance. A "red herring" is a deliberate attempt to divert a process of enquiry by changing the subject.

NO, the opel rebadge is your red herring of a "sports sedan".  If you can't see the implications the Opel is a doomed brand, then you are not as astute as you want us to think you are.

[Sir Osis of Liver]

.

[Truth be told]

.

Question
Looks like a.......
a)Saturn Aura
b)Buick Regal
c)doomed Opel
d)Like the Saturn, all soon to be terminated
e)all of the above

ANSWER......E!

[Jaeger]

Man, it would sure be nice if we could actually talk cars in this place.

we are talking cars...for some reason, when someone says this "Sport Sedan" isn't very "sporty", all heck breaks loose.

Exactly correct.

Like I said - the truth only hurts when it's true.  Some people here are obviously so wedded to this car emotionally that they simply cannot conceive that anyone could find it lacking in any way.  It doesn't matter how many reviews come out from how many sources saying the same thing, the response is to deny, deny, deny that big weight and little power do not a sports sedan make. I guess the writers of the two reviews that have been the subject of threads in this subforum are "haters" too.  After all, they seemed to think that this car was underpowered and lacking credibility as a sports sedan.  How dare they!  Looks like toolatecrew called this one right real early in the thread:

To be clear, it’s not that the powertrain is poor; it’s simply underwhelming and has no business in a car being marketed as a sport sedan

Another domestic hater...how dare a journalist who has actually driven the car call it anything but accepatble or adequate.

What is unreasonable is Buick’s expectation that the base model will be taken seriously by anyone in the market for a sporty car.

But but but the Turbo is coming......Buick marketing couldn't have possibly made a mistake by instiducing the top model Turbo AFTER the undewhelming base model..could they?

Seems quite a prophetic prediction of the response of the true believers, doesn't it?

Don't worry, it's a thread about a GM car, so it will be locked soon. Jaeger and his ilk ensure that happens every time. A shame, really.

Are you sure Greg - um, I mean, cat... whatever?  I know you obsess over counting posts - who has more in this thread, SirO or me?  I haven't really been reading his, but he seems to have really quite a few.  Is he still obsessively quoting and responding to every single one of my posts?  He seems to like that as much as you like counting them.  It's nice to be appreciated. 

Jaeger

[Erik]

Man, it would sure be nice if we could actually talk cars in this place.

we are talking cars...for some reason, when someone says this "Sport Sedan" isn't very "sporty", all heck breaks loose.

Of course this is not talking cars. This is a pile on of GM haters who just take every opportunity they can to trash a new GM product whenever they can.

When all heck breaks loose around here is when someone tries to say something not negative about a GM product. Yup, in this place, being called a GM slappy (and I still really don't know what that is) is the result of just not hating a GM product enough. Trying to be positive at all about a GM product just leads to attack after attack.

What is the end result of this? We just keep losing more and more members. A review of the active member statistics is very enlightening. This board is slowly bleeding itself to death. I really don't get why the board owners and administrators allow it to continue. Gotta be hurting their ad revenue in a big way.

[Shnak]

 

[newf1946]

  After taking one for a test drive I cannot see what all the fuss is about this car. It is overpriced and boring to drive. With freight this car is almost $34,000 plus taxes. It is not that sporty looking. Spend your money on a Mustang or Camaro if you really want a sporty car from the big three at this price.

[Jaeger]

After taking one for a test drive I cannot see what all the fuss is about this car. It is overpriced and boring to drive.

I think you just answered your own question. 

Jaeger

[TopGun]

After taking one for a test drive I cannot see what all the fuss is about this car. It is overpriced and boring to drive. With freight this car is almost $34,000 plus taxes. It is not that sporty looking. Spend your money on a Mustang or Camaro if you really want a sporty car from the big three at this price.

Well, if you're on that line of...um...thinking, then why not buy a motorcycle if you really want something sporty?  They're not even made by the Big 3...bonus!

[toolatecrew]

As has also been pointed out, it matches the TSX in acceleration. A few comments were made about power output when the TSX was introduced, but not two very contentious threads rife with nasty comments. The question to me is what is different? The only answer that I can see is that it's a GM product, and a few of the more vociferous voices on here have a history of seeing the negative in anything GM does.



As Top Gun has brought up, is the Miata any less a sports car, just because it can't do 0-60 in less than 7 seconds? Why should it be any different for a sports sedan? Especially when two more powertrain options are in the offing in a few months?

In terms of the TSX its being ignored that even if the Auto to Auto 0-60 numbers match that it does not address the quality or "feel" of the powertrain. Numerous reports cover the less than smooth nature of the Regal transmission and the coarse nature of the engine. I don't remember ever hearing the TSX transmission being called clunky or the engine coarse (torque deficient yes). The TSX is also available with a manual transmission that makes it quicker and more "sporty"  GM didn't introduce the Regal with a comparable drivetrain to the TSX they gave it an inferior one.

The Miata drivetrain is acknowledged as very good in its class. It has one of the best shifters in the business. The engine while not powerful is free revving and has a nice exhaust note. I've yet to read a review that complains about its clunky drivetrain or that it moans and groans. The Miata is a 2 seat, inexpensive convertible. How does its performance compare to other 2 seat inexpensive convertibles? Well there aren't any right now but its last competitor the Solstice/Sky the Miata was comparable in 0-60 and miles ahead in feel.  Now if anyone comes out with a Miata competitor that weighs the same has 15 HP less, has a crude transmission and a course engine it should be criticized whether its made in the USA or Japan.

For me I really wanted to see Buck succeed. GM just keeps letting me down by going part of the way by putting subpar drivetrains in what are potentially very good platforms.

[Sir Osis of Liver]

As has also been pointed out, it matches the TSX in acceleration. A few comments were made about power output when the TSX was introduced, but not two very contentious threads rife with nasty comments. The question to me is what is different? The only answer that I can see is that it's a GM product, and a few of the more vociferous voices on here have a history of seeing the negative in anything GM does.



As Top Gun has brought up, is the Miata any less a sports car, just because it can't do 0-60 in less than 7 seconds? Why should it be any different for a sports sedan? Especially when two more powertrain options are in the offing in a few months?

In terms of the TSX its being ignored that even if the Auto to Auto 0-60 numbers match that it does not address the quality or "feel" of the powertrain. Numerous reports cover the less than smooth nature of the Regal transmission and the coarse nature of the engine. I don't remember ever hearing the TSX transmission being called clunky or the engine coarse (torque deficient yes). The TSX is also available with a manual transmission that makes it quicker and more "sporty"  GM didn't introduce the Regal with a comparable drivetrain to the TSX they gave it an inferior one.

The Miata drivetrain is acknowledged as very good in its class. It has one of the best shifters in the business. The engine while not powerful is free revving and has a nice exhaust note. I've yet to read a review that complains about its clunky drivetrain or that it moans and groans. The Miata is a 2 seat, inexpensive convertible. How does its performance compare to other 2 seat inexpensive convertibles? Well there aren't any right now but its last competitor the Solstice/Sky the Miata was comparable in 0-60 and miles ahead in feel.  Now if anyone comes out with a Miata competitor that weighs the same has 15 HP less, has a crude transmission and a course engine it should be criticized whether its made in the USA or Japan.

For me I really wanted to see Buck succeed. GM just keeps letting me down by going part of the way by putting subpar drivetrains in what are potentially very good platforms.

Just as many reviewers have said the powertrain is muted and the transmission is responsive. YMMV. That has certainly been my experience. Compared to anything with a CVT it's damned near silent and certainly more responsive.

Any number of manufactures have introduced an entry level model first, followed by the higher end model: Ford Taurus SHO, GTI, Mazdaspeed 3 and 6, TSX V6 etc. Somehow it's only a cardinal sin when GM does it.

In its class, the Regal is on the cheaper end of the spectrum, just like the Miata is in sports cars.  If you want more power wait and get the turbo, or get a V6 Lacrosse, or a V6 Malibu, or Accord, or G37 or whatever your pleasure is. 

Jaeger: Nice strategy: LALALALALA CAN'T HEAR YOU!

[rrocket]

Any number of manufactures have introduced an entry level model first, followed by the higher end model: Ford Taurus SHO, GTI, Mazdaspeed 3 and 6, TSX V6 etc. Somehow it's only a cardinal sin when GM does it.

In its class, the Regal is on the cheaper end of the spectrum, just like the Miata is in sports cars.  If you want more power wait and get the turbo, or get a V6 Lacrosse, or a V6 Malibu, or Accord, or G37 or whatever your pleasure is. 

But save for the TSX, NONE of those cars you listed were HEAVILY advertised as "sports sedans".....and none of those cars had a engine/tranny combo that didn't fit the definition of what those cars were supposed to do.  Big difference.

For example, no one would be pissed if the new Mustang was introduced with the V6 first, since it offered excellent performance from the smaller engine.  Or, for example, the Fiesta.  If Ford had put the smaller Mazda engine in it, I don't think people would be too upset, because it would be perfectly good for what it is...a sub-compact economy car.  But the Regal under performs (quite a bit according to some) for what it is...a sport sedan.

And the 4 banger TSX was criticized for being underpowered (because of the added weight)...and with the V6 as making the package even heavier and not possessing the "spirit" of the original TSX.  The original TSX nobody cared about NOT having a V6 because it was SOOOO good.  It handled great, was light enough and coupled with the revvy engine (that had personality) and a great manual tranny, a bigger engine was not missed.  Not so with the Buick.

[toolatecrew]

Just as many reviewers have said the powertrain is muted and the transmission is responsive. YMMV. That has certainly been my experience. Compared to anything with a CVT it's damned near silent and certainly more responsive.

Any number of manufactures have introduced an entry level model first, followed by the higher end model: Ford Taurus SHO, GTI, Mazdaspeed 3 and 6, TSX V6 etc. Somehow it's only a cardinal sin when GM does it.

In its class, the Regal is on the cheaper end of the spectrum, just like the Miata is in sports cars.  If you want more power wait and get the turbo, or get a V6 Lacrosse, or a V6 Malibu, or Accord, or G37 or whatever your pleasure is. 

Jaeger: Nice strategy: LALALALALA CAN'T HEAR YOU!

Still missing the point on Model intros.

Lets look at some examples.

GTI- It competes in the Sport Compact market. When they introduced the GTI (which is a separate model (its not Gold GTI or Rabbit GTI but GTI) it was introduced with a single engine and two transmissions.

Speed 3- Once again its an Entry to the SPORT COMPACT market. Its not meant to compete with economy cars.

Its a cardinal sin to introduce a new car with non class competative powetrain..it has nothing to do with who makes it.

The TSX was introduced as a new model with a 2.4 l 4. The engine was class competative at the time. The car was a class leading car for a few years and estabilished itself. Then they restyled it and the problems started but at that point it wasn't NEW.

Did Infiniti lead with the G25 and then bring the G37?
Did lexus introduce only the IS 250 Auto?

You lead with your best punch. Buick clearly didn't and I simply can't figure out why. Maybe the Turbo will be all that..but if it IS why not lead with it and create a huge stir?

Even Buick admits that the base powetrain isn't "right" and that they tried to launch it ASAP and obviously its had some negative consequences.

Buick says it's working on transmission improvements and making exhaust and other refinements to give the 2.4-liter four-banger a sweeter voice.

It was important to get Regal on sale as fast as possible, Buick notes, and somewhere between the shift to Canada and the launch of 2012 models next year, Regal will be right as rain, Buick says.

They launched an imperfect car to meet a launch deadline (I see it all the time with software and it often leads to bad word of mouth from early adopters)

[Sir Osis of Liver]

Still missing the point on Model intros.

Lets look at some examples.

GTI- It competes in the Sport Compact market. When they introduced the GTI (which is a separate model (its not Gold GTI or Rabbit GTI but GTI) it was introduced with a single engine and two transmissions.

Speed 3- Once again its an Entry to the SPORT COMPACT market. Its not meant to compete with economy cars.

These are the top of their respective model lineups just as the Regal GS will be the top of its lineup. You are pointing out a distinction without difference.

The entry level Regal has similar acceleration times as other entry level cars in its class.

Its a cardinal sin to introduce a new car with non class competative powetrain..it has nothing to do with who makes it.

The TSX was introduced as a new model with a 2.4 l 4. The engine was class competative at the time. The car was a class leading car for a few years and estabilished itself. Then they restyled it and the problems started but at that point it wasn't NEW.

The original TSX was no more competitive with the G35 than the Buick is with the G37, or entry level BMWs in terms of acceleration.

You lead with your best punch. Buick clearly didn't and I simply can't figure out why. Maybe the Turbo will be all that..but if it IS why not lead with it and create a huge stir?

This is your opinion, but it helps to introduce a new car, then in a few months introduce the super-duper version of that same car. It's the "Tide" marketing principle if you will.

Even Buick admits that the base powetrain isn't "right" and that they tried to launch it ASAP and obviously its had some negative consequences.

Buick says it's working on transmission improvements and making exhaust and other refinements to give the 2.4-liter four-banger a sweeter voice.

It was important to get Regal on sale as fast as possible, Buick notes, and somewhere between the shift to Canada and the launch of 2012 models next year, Regal will be right as rain, Buick says.

They launched an imperfect car to meet a launch deadline (I see it all the time with software and it often leads to bad word of mouth from early adopters)

That was an engineer talking about a preproduction model. It's certainly not the first time that has cropped up.

[Sir Osis of Liver]

But save for the TSX, NONE of those cars you listed were HEAVILY advertised as "sports sedans".....and none of those cars had a engine/tranny combo that didn't fit the definition of what those cars were supposed to do.  Big difference.

For example, no one would be pissed if the new Mustang was introduced with the V6 first, since it offered excellent performance from the smaller engine.  Or, for example, the Fiesta.  If Ford had put the smaller Mazda engine in it, I don't think people would be too upset, because it would be perfectly good for what it is...a sub-compact economy car.  But the Regal under performs (quite a bit according to some) for what it is...a sport sedan.

And the 4 banger TSX was criticized for being underpowered (because of the added weight)...and with the V6 as making the package even heavier and not possessing the "spirit" of the original TSX.  The original TSX nobody cared about NOT having a V6 because it was SOOOO good.  It handled great, was light enough and coupled with the revvy engine (that had personality) and a great manual tranny, a bigger engine was not missed.  Not so with the Buick.

The TSX certainly was marketed that way! And as most cars, the vast majority were sold with the automatic, which gets the same acceleration as the Regal. That revvy engine is also very peaky, so even though the Regal doesn't have as much peak hp, it has it much lower in the rev range, making it more accessible.

The thing is, people are getting hung up on the marketing pap. Everyone overstates their car's capabilities. BMW had its "Ultimate Driving Machine" campaign. Was it really? Was a 318i really an ultimate anything? Is even an M6 "Ultimate" to a guy with a Bugatti?

I could see your point if this was the only engine option, but two more are coming. So why and moan about the one you don't like?

[Erik]

 So why and moan about the one you don't like?

Because that is what they do.....

[rrocket]

The TSX certainly was marketed that way! And as most cars, the vast majority were sold with the automatic, which gets the same acceleration as the Regal. That revvy engine is also very peaky, so even though the Regal doesn't have as much peak hp, it has it much lower in the rev range, making it more accessible.

The thing is, people are getting hung up on the marketing pap. Everyone overstates their car's capabilities. BMW had its "Ultimate Driving Machine" campaign. Was it really? Was a 318i really an ultimate anything? Is even an M6 "Ultimate" to a guy with a Bugatti?

I could see your point if this was the only engine option, but two more are coming. So why and moan about the one you don't like?

Did you even read what I wrote?  I said "But save for the TSX, NONE of those cars you listed were HEAVILY advertised as "sports sedans"".  So yea, I pointed out that the TSX was the only car you listed marketed as a sports sedan.  Tool.   

And why can't we about car stuff on a car forum?  I have no idea why you guys get all butt-hurt when there are people who scrutinize, analyze and moan about car stuff on a.....car forum.

FWIW, I think the IS250 SUCKS with the 2.5L V6 (204HP) and the BMW 2.3 is also a joke.  So if I think those 2 cars suck with those engines, why wouldn't I think (or others) that the Regal sucks with it's underpowered POS powertrain that is LESS potent than either of those 2 other cars, yet weighs more?

[Erik]

And why can't we about car stuff on a car forum?  I have no idea why you guys get all butt-hurt when there are people who scrutinize, analyze and moan about car stuff on a.....car forum.

No one is saying they can't. It just gets really old and boring when 80% of the posts in any GM related threads turn into the same attack over and over again. In most forums, that would be considered trolling. The admins around these parts seem to be ok with it. Aside from trolling, it is incredibly tedious.

[toolatecrew]

And why can't we about car stuff on a car forum?  I have no idea why you guys get all butt-hurt when there are people who scrutinize, analyze and moan about car stuff on a.....car forum.

No one is saying they can't. It just gets really old and boring when 80% of the posts in any GM related threads turn into the same attack over and over again. In most forums, that would be considered trolling. The admins around these parts seem to be ok with it. Aside from trolling, it is incredibly tedious.

80% are the same attack? What about the posts defending any possible criticism ?

If you feel is trolling why feed the troll? Why not use ignore and go on with our day? If you feel the need to respond it gives the impression there is some legitimacy to the other opinion does it not?