Topic: Test Drive: 2011 Buick Regal CXL

[dirtyjeffer]

Is it a heavy car? Yes, it's a heavy car. It is made to be safe and solid and all the things that structure gives you. It is not made using pop-can thin sheetmetal like certain other brands that are so popular here. I don't want to mention any names. But I know that Honda and Hyundai/Kia are not using exotic alloy bodies and suspension components to make their cars lightweight.

actually, you are incorrect...the new Sonata has a lot of lightweight alloys used in various suspension/steering components to reduce unsprung weight...their plant in Montgomery, AL is one of the most advanced auto plants in the world using a variety of state of the art automation systems and supply chain integration...it is likely the new Elantra and other future models will carry this forward...Hyundai has spent a LOT of money on engineering and creating a whole new "brand" for themselves...their new DI engines are class exclusives...their new 6sp automatic was designed in house and offers 25% fewer parts for improved performance, reliabilty and reduced weight...the Turbocharger on their new 2.0L DI Turbo engine is built into the exhaust manifold to save space, weight and cost and improve reliability with fewer components and complexity involved in integrating into a "standard" engine.

[Dante]

Are the TSX 2.4L Passat 2.0T, Volvo S60 2.4L sport sedans?

[dirtyjeffer]

Not apples to apples. That $36k Regal is pretty much loaded, the 323i and C250 are pretty basic. The Regal Turbo starts at $34k.

The Malibu V6 is the GM equivalent model to the Fusion. Buick as a whole is moving back upmarket, where it always used to be. For some that won't make sense, for others it will. I like the Fusion a lot, but I like the Regal too. It would be a difficult choice.

well, they aren't that far apart...keep in mind, in premium brands, a lot of the features that are "standard" are extras in lower brands...that is part of why their starting price is higher...in many cases, things like "Automatic Lights, Automatic Climate Control, Leather Seats" are all standard, but may be optional on "lesser priced" vehicles.

i drove a Fusion SEL with the 2.5L I4 a couple of weeks ago...it was a nice ride, and the car was well equipped with leather and the "Moon & Tunes" package so it had the Sony 12 speaker audio system...while the car was no "street racer", i found the engine to be adequate for what i would need...i did find the Sonata to be "quicker and more nimble" in feel, but it might be more of a "feel" than true real world results...with the deals Ford is having the $31k price was down to $26k...i would say the loaded up SEL with the 2.5 I4 engine is very comparable with the Regal, and is substantially less expensive...GM might say "No, the Fusion competes with the Malibu, the Regal is much higher end than a Fusion", but why?...the Fusion looks great (i don't mind the Buick either, but i do like the Fusion looks better, it just looks more like a "sport sedan", even though it isn't one), it has a great interior (in the SEL trim), a great sound system, and about the same power as the Buick, yet costs $10k less...sure, some of that difference is due to the incentives on now, but even at full MSRP, it is $5k less.

we keep having this debate...i don't think anyone is saying the Buick is crap, it just doesn't seem to "fit" in the category that GM is saying it is...when compared against other true "Sports Sedans", it fails flat out...i have yet to read one review, from any reviewer, say anything positive about the powertrain...honestly, if i wanted this car, instead of paying $36k for it, i would wait 3 years, and get a lease return for $15k.

[Sir Osis of Liver]

Not apples to apples. That $36k Regal is pretty much loaded, the 323i and C250 are pretty basic. The Regal Turbo starts at $34k.

The Malibu V6 is the GM equivalent model to the Fusion. Buick as a whole is moving back upmarket, where it always used to be. For some that won't make sense, for others it will. I like the Fusion a lot, but I like the Regal too. It would be a difficult choice.

well, they aren't that far apart...keep in mind, in premium brands, a lot of the features that are "standard" are extras in lower brands...that is part of why their starting price is higher...in many cases, things like "Automatic Lights, Automatic Climate Control, Leather Seats" are all standard, but may be optional on "lesser priced" vehicles.

i drove a Fusion SEL with the 2.5L I4 a couple of weeks ago...it was a nice ride, and the car was well equipped with leather and the "Moon & Tunes" package so it had the Sony 12 speaker audio system...while the car was no "street racer", i found the engine to be adequate for what i would need...i did find the Sonata to be "quicker and more nimble" in feel, but it might be more of a "feel" than true real world results...with the deals Ford is having the $31k price was down to $26k...i would say the loaded up SEL with the 2.5 I4 engine is very comparable with the Regal, and is substantially less expensive...GM might say "No, the Fusion competes with the Malibu, the Regal is much higher end than a Fusion", but why?...the Fusion looks great (i don't mind the Buick either, but i do like the Fusion looks better, it just looks more like a "sport sedan", even though it isn't one), it has a great interior (in the SEL trim), a great sound system, and about the same power as the Buick, yet costs $10k less...sure, some of that difference is due to the incentives on now, but even at full MSRP, it is $5k less.

we keep having this debate...i don't think anyone is saying the Buick is crap, it just doesn't seem to "fit" in the category that GM is saying it is...when compared against other true "Sports Sedans", it fails flat out...i have yet to read one review, from any reviewer, say anything positive about the powertrain...honestly, if i wanted this car, instead of paying $36k for it, i would wait 3 years, and get a lease return for $15k.

As I said, I really do like the Fusion, but I like the Regal too, and for me it would be a difficult decision. The Regal I'm really interested in is the turbo with the manual transmission, a combo not offered by the Fusion. I'd be fine with the base motor and a manual transmission but it isn't offered, hence the turbo. Different strokes for different folks.

I've driven the Regal and liked it very much. It's ride/handling compromise is very good. The interior is very nice and quiet, and the chassis is very rigid. Most reviews have said the power train is adequate, which is how I feel. Sometimes enough is enough. Your mileage may vary.

[Jaeger]

we keep having this debate...i don't think anyone is saying the Buick is crap, it just doesn't seem to "fit" in the category that GM is saying it is...when compared against other true "Sports Sedans", it fails flat out...i have yet to read one review, from any reviewer, say anything positive about the powertrain...honestly, if i wanted this car, instead of paying $36k for it, i would wait 3 years, and get a lease return for $15k.

Agreed.  Not a crappy car - just not a sports sedan.  And as a $15k grocery getter it makes a lot of sense.

Jaeger

[Truth be told]

we keep having this debate...i don't think anyone is saying the Buick is crap, it just doesn't seem to "fit" in the category that GM is saying it is...when compared against other true "Sports Sedans", it fails flat out...i have yet to read one review, from any reviewer, say anything positive about the powertrain...honestly, if i wanted this car, instead of paying $36k for it, i would wait 3 years, and get a lease return for $15k.

Agreed.  Not a crappy car - just not a sports sedan.  And as a $15k grocery getter it makes a lot of sense.

Jaeger

"grocery getter" 

 

[Truth be told]

Truth be told......This Buick is as sporty as a  ...... Corolla "S".

People will take a Hyundai like Sunday over this Buick seven days a week.

[Sir Osis of Liver]

Truth be told......This Buick is as sporty as a  ...... Corolla "S".

People will take a Hyundai like Sunday over this Buick seven days a week.

The Hyundai is cheaper, so I would imagine so. The Focus will sell more too, however, I predict it will sell better than the Rolls Royce Phantom.

Your point is what exactly?

[Shnak]

The Buick is underpowered.....but,

The Regal is not the only car being marketed as a "sports sedan," "sports car," "sports injected," or "sports anything" that's underpowered. There aren't as many commentators calling out those cars, companies, or marketing departments.....

Like...?

[Dante]

The Buick is underpowered.....but,

The Regal is not the only car being marketed as a "sports sedan," "sports car," "sports injected," or "sports anything" that's underpowered. There aren't as many commentators calling out those cars, companies, or marketing departments.....

Like...?

Let's start off with the current Acura TSX (2.4L) ...

[Shnak]

What makes you say the TSX 2.4L shouldn't be marketed as a sports sedan?

[Ice]

You know I've been in a current gen (and previous gen) TSX 2.4L as it was wrung out and while it's not a super car... it's a pretty good sports sedan in my estimation. I know I was holding on in the corners and rapid acceleration. If the Regal is similar then I'd say it's in at the low end of the sports sedan range. All of them are far and above what my Corolla XRS tries to do as a "sporty sedan" (by no means a sports sedan).

[Dante]

What makes you say the TSX 2.4L shouldn't be marketed as a sports sedan?

You asked, I answered. Now you tell me why it should be. For starters, it's big (bloated), 200 hp doesn't make it any faster than most family sedans, it doesn't handle much better than those either, there is nothing special about the chassis, so why?

[Shnak]

What makes you say the TSX 2.4L shouldn't be marketed as a sports sedan?

You asked, I answered. Now you tell me why it should be. For starters, it's big (bloated), 200 hp doesn't make it any faster than most family sedans, it doesn't handle much better than those either, there is nothing special about the chassis, so why?

Funny. It's lighter than the Regal I4, has a free-revving engine that produces more power and it generally regarded as a very good handling FWD sedan. Just do a google search for TSX Sports sedan... you'll get a bunch of reviews that contain those words.

[Dante]

You know I've been in a current gen (and previous gen) TSX 2.4L as it was wrung out and while it's not a super car... it's a pretty good sports sedan in my estimation. I know I was holding on in the corners and rapid acceleration. If the Regal is similar then I'd say it's in at the low end of the sports sedan range. All of them are far and above what my Corolla XRS tries to do as a "sporty sedan" (by no means a sports sedan).

While I totally agree that in the current state the Regal might not even be at the lower end or what is called "premium sport sedan" due to the total lack of "sport" in the current engine, there is more to come.
However, in this current form, the Regal nails the "premium" part in this marketing segment IMO.

I guess GM, and any other manufacturer, builds the advertising towards the top end not the low end of the product line.
The nay sayers seem to be hanging on to the base model (I know the review is about this particular trim, but they refuse to look few months down the road), which may only be in the line-up for CAFE reasons as well as the traditional Buick buyers (not too many old folks go fast around corners or smoke the tires at the stop light, but they surely appreciate a luxury environment and the quiet, comfortable drive in a relatively smaller package).
The upcoming 2.0 Turbo and the performance oriented GS model is most likely what the GM advertising is all about. Pretty much all reviews noted that the car's chassis is very good and it can take on much more than the current engine can deliver.

[aknutson]

Buick has on its hands a car that is 'good for the money'. It won't sell on its abilities alone, but rather it's ability to undercut the price point of the market leaders. Nothing saying its a bad car but there are others that do it better, and they cost more...simple as that. A Regal will never be a 335i, nor will it come with the price tag.

[Dante]

What makes you say the TSX 2.4L shouldn't be marketed as a sports sedan?

You asked, I answered. Now you tell me why it should be. For starters, it's big (bloated), 200 hp doesn't make it any faster than most family sedans, it doesn't handle much better than those either, there is nothing special about the chassis, so why?

Funny. It's lighter than the Regal I4, has a free-revving engine that produces more power and it generally regarded as a very good handling FWD sedan. Just do a google search for TSX Sports sedan... you'll get a bunch of reviews that contain those words.

Picked the first one that came in handy. Enjoy the read and hopefully this will shed some light (check out the performance numbers and comments on the sidebar).

http://www.insideline.com/acura/tsx/2009/full-test-2009-acura-tsx.html

[Shnak]

I give up! 

[Dante]

I give up! 

No need to. This is just a car discussion on an Internet forum.
Besides, I'm sure Jeager will come to your rescue shortly.

[Sir Osis of Liver]

We tested a TSX with the five-speed and its 0-to-60-mph time fell to 8.6 seconds

If you end up on a back road with a 2009 Acura TSX, it probably won't be something you planned. Yes, the chassis has some life to it, but it's in such a conservative state of tune that the TSX is prevented from showing the kind of athleticism that enthusiast drivers like.

At a pace that sane people might drive, the '09 TSX has the compliant, springy ride that's characteristic of Honda, and the car feels light and willing. But as soon as you start to attack the corners, the TSX raises the white flag. There's considerable body roll and the P225/50R17 Michelin Pilot HX MXM4 all-season tires run out of grip quickly. And the lack of steering feedback makes you feel like you're driving the 2009 TSX half-blind.

So the base Regal is as quick to 60 as the TSX automatic, yet handles much better. Funny I don't remember all the wailing and gnashing of teeth when the TSX was introduced.