I think the X-car version shows just how much equity the Skylark name had at the time! The X-car Skylark was dropped after 1985, a year it still managed to sell around 90,000 units. Yet the name carried on, used for the N-body, from 1986 on up through around 1996-97 (these cars persisted for a year or two as fleet-only models along with the Olds Achieva, after being dropped from general public availability). In contrast, the Citation name was retired completely after 1985, and the Phoenix and Omega had the plug pulled after 1984!
I don't know if the Skylark really was built better than the other X-cars, or maybe it just appealed to an older clientele that maintained them better, but somehow it more or less side-stepped the bad rap that the other X-es had.
Still, I just don't care for the name anymore. To me, it's one of those names that sounds great on an old 50's or 60's car, but it just has more of a nostalgic ring to it, that seems out of place on a modern car. It's kinda like seeing a hot, sexy young supermodel or stripper, and then finding out later that her name is Audrey or Myrtle or Ethel.
For some reason, I always thought the name "Skyhawk" was good...if not the car the name ended up on.
Yeah I think the 3.9 might be a bit better-suited to the Lucerne. I think it's EPA-rated at 17/26, while the Lucerne's 3.8 was rated at 16/25 using the new rating system (19/28 under the old). And it has a bit more power...227 hp versus around 195. I forget the torque specs, but it's better there, too.
As for durability, I haven't heard anything bad about these newer 3.5/3.9 engines. The old 2.8/3.1/3.4 tended to blow head gaskets, and they also went through a rash of plastic intake manifold problems, but I don't think those traits have been engineered out, with the newer engines.
Drove a Park A up to 200,000 miles and donated it to our office janitor in very good mechanical condition. Now own a Regal which just hit 200,000 miles and runs well. Just tested(rented for 2 days) the new LaCross and loved the ride, not crazy about the blind spots but nice automobile. Not sure I'm jumping on this one! Drivetrains on my old Buicks were flawless....That said, I did have plenty of issues with power options, windows/door locks and such. I kind of liked my Buicks!!!!!!
Ugh!!! The Skyhawk was the WORST car to wear the Buick tri-shield! I'd like to find the guys who green-lighted the Skyhawk and make like Jigsaw on them!
Anybody remember the Buick Apollo? That name might've meant something back in the late '60s / early '70s with the NASA moon landing missions of the same name. The Buick Apollo was nothing but a Nova clone anyway.
The Buick Apollo was nothing but a Nova clone anyway.
Some of those Nova clones were pretty upscale inside, if you got the higher trim levels. But once the Nova Concours and Nova LN (Luxury Nova) came out, it made the Buick/Pontiac/Olds versions a bit redundant. And to add insult to injury, by 1977-79 at least, the Nova offered a bigger engine. You could get a Chevy 350 right up through the end, but by that timeframe the Phoenix/Omega/Skylark only offered a 305 as the top engine. And I think the non-California Phoenixes might have offered the 301.
this thing is almost a perfect match-up to the Passat 2.0T. But VW is about to dump the existing Passat in favor of a larger cheaper sedan with a less powerful more boring engine, because the existing Passat won't sell.
Does this bode well?
I forget if I've seen the specs on the new S60 - will it outgun this new Regal? The only other thing I can think of offhand in its price range is the Acura TSX, which isn't a strong competitor and has the poor sales to show for it. Oh, and then there's the new A4, a spiffy competitor if ever there was one (but for more money, right?).
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
What we were told at a product update back a couple of months ago was that the new S60 will launch with a 300 hp version of the 280ish hp T6 currently in the S80/XC70/XC60. It will have AWD standard.
Later on I would expect the non-turbo version of that motor to come out with FWD and hopefully in the US we will get a four or five cylinder with direct injection similar to the Ecoboost setup ford has.
GM is launching the Regal the way I think Volvo should launch the S60 in this economic climate. Launch the car with the two more base engines first then bring out the top of the line motors later in the year.
".....GM is launching the Regal the way I think Volvo should launch the S60 in this economic climate. Launch the car with the two more base engines first then bring out the top of the line motors later in the year. "
Even in this "gotta have it NOW, yesterday, if possible please" era we live in, it probably is smart to establish yourself, and then ratchet it up a notch. I would imagine that funds are tight right now. If they weren't I'll bet GM could've made a small fortune selling diesels from Europe last year, but the money to convert them to clean status in this country wasn't (and still isn't) there.
Well yeah, that whole 350 thing was a little joke. But I still think this new Regal should come with a standard engine that's a cut above the likes of the Malibu, Camry, Accord, Fusion, etc. And if it only has 182 hp standard, that's not really a cut above. Isn't the Accord's 4-cyl up to something like 192 hp these days?
".....I assume you're joking because, otherwise, how do you reconcile 350 with the government's fuel economy standards? "
Well, we're old school. There is NO reconciling the government's FE with performance. I say reproduce the Stage 3 455, and FI the engine. Start with that, and move up from there.
The Accord LX 4 cylinder has 177 hp and the EX has 190 so, you're right, the naturally aspirated Regal is a little weak by comparison. Of course, there are other factors, in addition to horsepower, to consider in a car comparison, but I also read that the rear seat leg room of the Regal will be rather tight. That would be two deficiencies that the Regal would have to compensate for, when compared with the Accord.
Now, unusual as it may seem, Buick has sometimes scored higher than Honda on reliability in the past couple of years, but I don't know just how (uh) reliable that information is. Besides, it's too early to know how reliable the Regal will be.
Could it be that the Regal will surprise us and outscore the Accord on handling, ride comfort or fuel economy? I suppose it's possible. The one area where the Regal may have an advantage is in styling. Based on the pictures I've seen, I like the Regal better than the Accord. I'd also vote for the Regal in terms of interior styling.
that I picked up at the library yesterday, which was running a cover story on Hyundai.
I think Honda and Toyota will be more worried about Hyundai then anything. The Sonata's probably going to have better mpg, power, warranty and lower price when comparably equipped then anything else in the class. Hyundai's main problem may be making enough of them and keeping the quality up
"......"Of course, there are other factors, in addition to horsepower, to consider in a car comparison, but I also read that the rear seat leg room of the Regal will be rather tight. That would be two deficiencies that the Regal would have to compensate for, when compared with the Accord.
Well, I would assume that a 455 with a 6 speed auto and 3.08 rears would return 22 or 23 on the highway, but when you are capable of pulling 10.5 second quarter miles, WHO CARES!!
Well, I would assume that a 455 with a 6 speed auto and 3.08 rears would return 22 or 23 on the highway, but when you are capable of pulling 10.5 second quarter miles, WHO CARES!!
I imagine they could still build something like that, but it would have to be low volume. And they'd have to build a bunch of economical cars to offset it for CAFE purposes. And as long as they could keep the raw fuel economy numbers above around 18/28 (~15/20 on the window sticker), they'd probably avoid the guzzler tax.
I wonder if they can make an automatic transmission that skips gears under the right conditions, like that manual can do on the Corvette? That might help boost the fuel economy a bit.
".....I imagine they could still build something like that, but it would have to be low volume. And they'd have to build a bunch of economical cars to offset it for CAFE purposes. And as long as they could keep the raw fuel economy numbers above around 18/28 (~15/20 on the window sticker), they'd probably avoid the guzzler tax."
Andy your heart is in the right place. But alas, I don't think it would ever fit in a car as small as the Regal. Now, if they made some sort of super sedan out of a Lambda platform................
"General Motors announced an attractive price on its 2011 Buick Regal, which is generating a lot of positive buzz. But the automaker likely will lose money or at least not make much on every one it sells in the early going."
That is the unfortunate part of the weak dollar. Who knows, maybe when the Oshawa plant opens, they can make some Insignias here to make up the difference.
I'm glad the "attractive price" part wasn't your words! When I saw $27K, I said then what are the 4-cyl Altima, Legacy, and Sonata amongst other competitors?
This is why GM is going to sell 35K of them; mainly to people who are Buick fanatics or just find something they like about the styling. What Buick needs are models that sell 5-10X that amount! They need some HR's; not a HBP.
Is this all Buick is offering? No breakthrough to put it above the competition? Want $27K or $30K from me? Show me a car that gets 40mpg with 300hp, or a car that flies or submerges. At least give me some gull-wing doors! Do something other than waste tax-payers $ by producing another in a string of expensive, me-too sedans with no panache.
I checked out the Encore at the Washington Auto Show. It's a polarizing design, as is the Juke, for example, but I think it fits in the Buick lineup as the brand's small car. I'm going to follow it to see how it sells.
"Buick has had three consecutive years of sales growth and sold more than 180,000 vehicles last year, up about 2% from the previous year and the most for the brand since 2007.
“What's important about this growth is that so many of our customers are new to the brand. More than 43% of Buick buyers come from non-GM brands, and half of those came from imports,” said Tony DiSalle, Buick’s U.S. marketing manager."
Comments
I don't know if the Skylark really was built better than the other X-cars, or maybe it just appealed to an older clientele that maintained them better, but somehow it more or less side-stepped the bad rap that the other X-es had.
Still, I just don't care for the name anymore. To me, it's one of those names that sounds great on an old 50's or 60's car, but it just has more of a nostalgic ring to it, that seems out of place on a modern car. It's kinda like seeing a hot, sexy young supermodel or stripper, and then finding out later that her name is Audrey or Myrtle or Ethel.
For some reason, I always thought the name "Skyhawk" was good...if not the car the name ended up on.
As for durability, I haven't heard anything bad about these newer 3.5/3.9 engines. The old 2.8/3.1/3.4 tended to blow head gaskets, and they also went through a rash of plastic intake manifold problems, but I don't think those traits have been engineered out, with the newer engines.
Just tested(rented for 2 days) the new LaCross and loved the ride, not crazy about the blind spots but nice automobile. Not sure I'm jumping on this one!
Drivetrains on my old Buicks were flawless....That said, I did have plenty of issues with power options, windows/door locks and such.
I kind of liked my Buicks!!!!!!
Anybody remember the Buick Apollo? That name might've meant something back in the late '60s / early '70s with the NASA moon landing missions of the same name. The Buick Apollo was nothing but a Nova clone anyway.
Some of those Nova clones were pretty upscale inside, if you got the higher trim levels. But once the Nova Concours and Nova LN (Luxury Nova) came out, it made the Buick/Pontiac/Olds versions a bit redundant. And to add insult to injury, by 1977-79 at least, the Nova offered a bigger engine. You could get a Chevy 350 right up through the end, but by that timeframe the Phoenix/Omega/Skylark only offered a 305 as the top engine. And I think the non-California Phoenixes might have offered the 301.
My first car!!!! Too bad it had the 105 hp. 231 instead of the 350 4bbl.
Autobahn, because it's a reskinned Opel Insignia.
They should offer it as a coupe as well.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
http://www.autoblog.com/2009/11/19/breaking-buick-confirms-2011-regal-2-0t-to-co- me-with-manual-tra/#comments
Does this bode well?
I forget if I've seen the specs on the new S60 - will it outgun this new Regal? The only other thing I can think of offhand in its price range is the Acura TSX, which isn't a strong competitor and has the poor sales to show for it. Oh, and then there's the new A4, a spiffy competitor if ever there was one (but for more money, right?).
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Some are here http://www.leftlanenews.com/volvo-s60.html and I think edmunds has some too.
What we were told at a product update back a couple of months ago was that the new S60 will launch with a 300 hp version of the 280ish hp T6 currently in the S80/XC70/XC60. It will have AWD standard.
Later on I would expect the non-turbo version of that motor to come out with FWD and hopefully in the US we will get a four or five cylinder with direct injection similar to the Ecoboost setup ford has.
GM is launching the Regal the way I think Volvo should launch the S60 in this economic climate. Launch the car with the two more base engines first then bring out the top of the line motors later in the year.
Even in this "gotta have it NOW, yesterday, if possible please" era we live in, it probably is smart to establish yourself, and then ratchet it up a notch. I would imagine that funds are tight right now. If they weren't I'll bet GM could've made a small fortune selling diesels from Europe last year, but the money to convert them to clean status in this country wasn't (and still isn't) there.
$26,995 for the CXL.
Made in Germany until the Oshawa plant is up and running.
A 4-cyl Regal almost sounds blasphemous. Base engine should at least be a 350! :P
I assume you're joking because, otherwise, how do you reconcile 350 with the government's fuel economy standards?
Well, we're old school. There is NO reconciling the government's FE with performance. I say reproduce the Stage 3 455, and FI the engine. Start with that, and move up from there.
Now, unusual as it may seem, Buick has sometimes scored higher than Honda on reliability in the past couple of years, but I don't know just how (uh) reliable that information is. Besides, it's too early to know how reliable the Regal will be.
Could it be that the Regal will surprise us and outscore the Accord on handling, ride comfort or fuel economy? I suppose it's possible. The one area where the Regal may have an advantage is in styling. Based on the pictures I've seen, I like the Regal better than the Accord. I'd also vote for the Regal in terms of interior styling.
I think Honda and Toyota will be more worried about Hyundai then anything. The Sonata's probably going to have better mpg, power, warranty and lower price when comparably equipped then anything else in the class. Hyundai's main problem may be making enough of them and keeping the quality up
Not quite:
http://www.edmunds.com/new/2011/buick/regal/101249102/VehicleComparison?op=2&tab- =specs&maxvehicles=5&basestyleid=101249102&styleid=101184446&styleid=101138067&v- ehicleindex=2&removestyle=101138067&styleid=101201281
Front and rear leg room are essentially the same, and a little more luggage room in the trunk of the Regal in a car 4 inches SMALLER.
And, the 220 horse 4 will more than make up for it, which is standard in the CXL.
I imagine they could still build something like that, but it would have to be low volume. And they'd have to build a bunch of economical cars to offset it for CAFE purposes. And as long as they could keep the raw fuel economy numbers above around 18/28 (~15/20 on the window sticker), they'd probably avoid the guzzler tax.
I wonder if they can make an automatic transmission that skips gears under the right conditions, like that manual can do on the Corvette? That might help boost the fuel economy a bit.
Andy your heart is in the right place. But alas, I don't think it would ever fit in a car as small as the Regal. Now, if they made some sort of super sedan out of a Lambda platform................
GM Prices Buick Regal; Losing Money on Every One? (AutoObserver)
This is why GM is going to sell 35K of them; mainly to people who are Buick fanatics or just find something they like about the styling. What Buick needs are models that sell 5-10X that amount! They need some HR's; not a HBP.
Is this all Buick is offering? No breakthrough to put it above the competition? Want $27K or $30K from me? Show me a car that gets 40mpg with 300hp, or a car that flies or submerges. At least give me some gull-wing doors! Do something other than waste tax-payers $ by producing another in a string of expensive, me-too sedans with no panache.
“What's important about this growth is that so many of our customers are new to the brand. More than 43% of Buick buyers come from non-GM brands, and half of those came from imports,” said Tony DiSalle, Buick’s U.S. marketing manager."
2013 New York Auto Show: GM debuts Cadillac, Camaro and two Buicks (LA Times)