The Buick Thread: Your Enclave for all things Buick

  • Thread starter YSSMAN
  • 275 comments
  • 27,421 views
It's still a Buick so I can't even remotely think of it as a cool car. Why GM rebadged the Insigna as a Buick instead of a Chevy is something I don't understand. But then again a company ran by a team of idiots and the American government is bound to make some stupid moves.

Chevy already has the Malibu though. And the next Malibu should be a little smaller than the current one, bringing it more in line with the Camry and Fusion. So they really don't need the Insignia.
 
Depends on how you want to look at it. The Regal serves a purpose of acting as an entry level executive car, especially when you are counting out the Saab brand. The car becomes a nice stepping stone between the Malibu LTZ and the LaCrosse CX, the Regal GS really being the (slightly) cheaper alternative to the CTS 3.6 AWD.

If they can stick to the suggested $30K price point, I can't think of too many entry level luxury vehicles to offer that kind of performance (and value) for money.
 
I still think at that point I'd want something from the Germans, even if they are a few thousand dollars more. I think the Regal is a decent car and I'm staggered GM is starting to bring cars to the US market that don't suck, but I can't get past the badge.
 
Just to consider...

2010.audi.a4.20296934-E.jpg

Audi A4 2.0T Quattro - MSRP $32,350

2009.bmw.3%20series.20244523-E.jpg

BMW 328i - MSRP $33,150

2010.acura.tsx.20287825-E.jpg

Acura TSX 2.4 - MSRP $29,310

2010.volkswagen.cc.20309394-E.jpg

Volkswagen Passat CC Sport 2.0T - MSRP $27,550


Compared to the mainstream entry-level luxury cars, the Regal GS (as proposed) really plays interestingly into that field. At a little more than $30K, it undercuts the two best cars in the segment (A4 and 3-series) by several thousand, presumably out performing them as well. With the "standard" Regal CXL due to start right around TSX levels of pricing, the GS seems like a pretty reasonable step forward. They just have to make sure they steer clear of the CTS' territory.
 
:odd: It is from the Germans. It's an Opel Insignia with a funny badge.

Badged as a Buick, which isn't German. What I'm talking about is BMW, Audi, Mercedes, and VW...I just didn't want to have to type them all out.
 
I can understand the Buick hate, but its a different brand now. Not just in the fancy way that they wanted to make it a Lexus competitor back in 2005, but as a legitimate brand that makes cars and crossovers that people in any age bracket would want to buy. The Enclave was the first big shot forward for the brand, the new LaCrosse has been a spectacular effort as well. The Regal, whether in CXL or GS form, is supposed to be the Buick for the rest of us.

Although my love for GM has faltered greatly as of late as Ford has pretty much knocked it off my top pedestal, the Buick GS reasserts a lot of what I think is right with the company. When the right people are handed the keys, the right cars are produced. I don't think GM is expecting to change the world by offering the GS in the US, but it does a lot to change the image of the brand.

Lets just hope this doesn't go the way of the GTO and G8 GXP before it.
 
The problem is Buick had crap for so long they will pretty much be forever tainted, at least in my book. I know a lot of other people think the same way I do about the whole thing too. I'm not sure if anything can be done to jumpstart the brand. I know Buick have tried desperately to shake their older person's image and they've made progress but I'm still not so sure they defeated it.
 
I don't think GM is expecting to change the world by offering the GS in the US, but it does a lot to change the image of the brand
Unless the same demographic starts buying these. Which, lets face it, is going to happen. Buick hasn't sold a single car to anyone under 45 since 1987, and covering an Opel with cheesy scoops, grills and chrome isn't going to change that regardless of how sporty they made the pedals look.

On thing I'm curious about: If they were able to get this much torque out of the Solstice motor, why did they continue to put the gutless 3.0 DI V6 in anything whatsoever? I mean, I know 4-cylinders + Cadillac is a kinda scary idea, but so is an engine that has to rev to 7000 rpm to get any power in a 4500 pound SUV.
 
Last edited:
Unless the same demographic starts buying these. Which, lets face it, is going to happen. Buick hasn't sold a single car to anyone under 45 since 1987, and covering an Opel with cheesy scoops, grills and chrome isn't going to change that regardless of how sporty they made the pedals look.

On thing I'm curious about: If they were able to get this much torque out of the Solstice motor, why did they continue to put the gutless 3.0 DI V6 in anything whatsoever? I mean, I know 4-cylinders + Cadillac is a kinda scary idea, but so is an engine that has to rev to 7000 rpm to get any power in a 4500 pound SUV.

Probably because V6 sounds better. It all has to do with marketing. Or at least that is most likely the reason.
 
On thing I'm curious about: If they were able to get this much torque out of the Solstice motor, why did they continue to put the gutless 3.0 DI V6 in anything whatsoever? I mean, I know 4-cylinders + Cadillac is a kinda scary idea, but so is an engine that has to rev to 7000 rpm to get any power in a 4500 pound SUV.

On paper, it seems to make more sense I think. Delivering the power of the old 3.6L unit, with less fuel consumption if you're driving it calmly. Problem is, as you pointed out, the power delivery is far too peaky... And you really have to ring it out to use it. Which is why it bothers me so much that its the engine of choice in the Equinox and Terrain. Why?
 
Delivering the power of the old 3.6L unit, with less fuel consumption if you're driving it calmly.
Did you know Cadillac has eliminated the base 3.6 in the entire CTS range? You lose most of the tractability of the old engine and about 11% of the torque, yet you gain a staggering 1 mpg combined. And I'm not sure I even buy that, considering how much gear hunting the transmission has to do to actually do anything.

Quite frankly, I don't think the engine should have ever even been made. It barely gets any better mileage than the old one, loses most of its usability and is particularly unsuited for half of the things they are sticking it in. Direct injection is not some magic stand-in for forced induction or displacement, no matter how much GM wants to spin it as such; and GM in general seems intent as hell in repeating 1970s-style automotive efficiency rather than what they can do with the technology of today.
 
Last edited:
I'd seriously consider it. I'm almost sold on anything new that is a car and comes with a stick.. A domestic? Wow.


Cheers,
Jetboy
 
Did you know Cadillac has eliminated the base 3.6 in the entire CTS range?

Not just the CTS range my friend, across the board. The last holdout for the LY7 was in the Lambda crossovers (Enclave, Acadia, etc), but they've all been ditched in favor of slightly de-tuned LLTs (the DIG version from the CTS).

EDIT: On second thought, you can still get a LY7 in the Malibu. That's probably going to change quick. No idea if GM plans on stuffing the LF1 in there or not...



Given that I haven't driven one of the vehicles with the 3.0L LF1, I really can't say too much about it. While I do completely agree that sticking it in the crossovers is a bit silly, especially given their peaky performance bands, but in some of the cars, its presumably not as bad. If GM had a solid performance coupe or sedan, lighter and weight and that whole lot, I would suspect that the LF1 would be pretty awesome. But, seeing as how they're apparently going to pimp the 2.0L LNF out to everything now, this may be the end of the LF1 before it even starts to penetrate the market.
 
The last holdout for the LY7 was in the Lambda crossovers (Enclave, Acadia, etc), but they've all been ditched in favor of slightly de-tuned LLTs (the DIG version from the CTS).
That just makes me even more angry, because it tells me that there are people at GM that are intelligent, but the idiots who run the company still won't let them make decisions. In the CTS, the LLT gets identical mileage to the LF1, so I'd imagined detuned it might even be a bit better. Why does the LF1 exist?

While I do completely agree that sticking it in the crossovers is a bit silly, especially given their peaky performance bands, but in some of the cars, its presumably not as bad.
Presumably not as bad, but still worse than how it was. Is GM going to do what Ford did with the Five-Hundred and leave an underpowered engine in the car until everyone complains about it, only to miraculously discover that they had a more competent engine all along that produces the same MPGs?
 
I'm glad they have gone with the Opel / Vauxhall Insignia and its particularly good that they went for the VXR body style for the Regal because the standard European body can be considered quite forgetful. Someone now needs to GNX that thing!!! :crazy:

For those wondering about the front 'fangs' it was a show piece on the Opel GTC Concept which is where that style came from. I don't think it looks all that bad at all, at least you remember it!

Robin.
 
Grand National, GNX and T-Type Are Returning to Buick

Buick is bringing back the Grand National, the GNX and the T-Type, three legendary performance nameplates from the brand's high times of the 1980s. All three cars will be sedans and they'll use GM's new rear-wheel-drive Alpha platform first introduced in the Cadillac ATS sedan.

That's the plan anyway, according to a reliable source who spoke to Edmunds.

As in the 1980s, the T-Type and Grand National will share powertrains and suspension calibrations, but the T-Type will be offered in a full color palette, while the GN will come in black only. Details on the exact drivetrain that will be used are still hard to come by at this point.

Buick's current turbocharged 2.0-liter has the right vibe but lacks the muscle, and the normally aspirated V6 has the guts but just doesn't feel right for these nameplates. A more likely scenario is the use of GM's long-rumored, and recently spotted, twin-turbocharged 3.6-liter V6. It's expected to produce between 350 and 400 horsepower, which would be more than enough power in a bad black Buick with a Grand National badge.

So what's left for the legendary GNX nameplate? How about GM's new LT1 V8? We've already confirmed that a V8 will fit in the confines of the Alpha platform,so it's not an issue of "if" it can be done, but one of "how" it will be done.

With a V-Series version of the Cadillac ATS almost certainly in the pipeline, a Buick version with a slightly less powerful V8 could be the ticket for the GNX. A six-speed manual transmission and six-speed automatic could be available in all three sedans.

Buick will also make changes to the sedan's interior and exterior to bring it into the Buick family. The size of the sedan should remain unchanged, however, (the Cadillac ATS is exactly the same size as a BMW 3 Series) and all of its subsystems such as steering, brakes and suspension will be shared with the ATS.

so we'll have to wait at least another year before this crop of performance Buicks even gets a mention in public. Figure the 2014 Detroit Auto Show is a good bet.
Edmunds Inside Line




buick_gnx_f34_ns_112612_717.jpg


buick_gnx_r34_ns_112612_717.jpg
 
I know those are 'shopped, but I love the back end.

Front end is shonky. The grille needs to be smaller, not bigger.

A V8 might just make the Vectra Insignia Regal something you might actually want, too.
 
Shoe-horning the T-Type, GN and GNX into a space where the ATS already is seems both incredibly stupid and absolutely brilliant at the exact same time. Keeping in mind that the Alpha chassis will join the Omega and Epsilon II by going under everything, there will be a bit of room to do some tinkering.

Assuming that the T-Type would be essentially the same as the ATS 2.0T, it would be a great way to break into the entry-level executive realm with something a bit different. Give or take, if this thing handles as well as the ATS but stands to be a few grand cheaper, why wouldn't you choose this over a new 3-series or the ATS?

The GN itself would essentially exist as a stepping stone between the ATS 3.6 and ATS-V. Assuming that it's price isn't astronomical and it's size stays well away from that of the Chevrolet SS, why not? My only hesitation would be that they aren't planning to offer it as a coupe. That would be the only way to get it, I'm afraid.

Even then, a V8-powered GNX would be pretty interesting. But, I'd rather have an even more powerful version of the twin-turbo V6. It would just stand up to the history of the name in a much better way. But, again, if this one is cresting 400 BHP, it still has to watch out for the Chevrolet SS. And to that end, we still don't know much about the ATS-V.

Product overlap is almost going overboard here, but if done right, it could make for a hell of a car. Buick would have to be content with doing this in small numbers, or making it a global product. They'd have to let it keep it's distance from the ATS in terms of content, but not performance.

Either way, it's a hell of a time to be a Buick fan. To think that there would be two, even at this point, that I'd like to buy... That has been completely unexpected.
 
A V8 GNX with similar to a Camaro SS's performance or another model similar to a ZL1's performance would be great.
 
o4s9g23tuovskej5jpai.jpg

ioxjikb9b325cvbplniz.jpg

iamtbangkopv2bsixrot.jpg

mzyrukzuqglruerhbc3r.jpg


Good looking, reasonably production-ready car. Heavy emphasis on CONCEPT when you consider some of the sheetmetal and interior bits. But, overall, a great way to spearhead the Buick brand as a halo car. Fair bet is that it shares its platform with the CT6, and if it hits the streets, will have RWD or AWD.
 
Looks nice. Also, it has a 9 speed DCT apparently. That's... something. I still think 8 is enough, and that 9 is on the verge of pushing it too far.
 
Back