Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





2011 Buick Regal

1161719212225

Comments

  • zeenzeen Posts: 401
    Metro (or anyone else who actually owns a new Regal):
    What kind of real world gas mileage are you getting? I'm about to pull the trigger on leasing one in the next 2 weeks
  • metrospmetrosp Posts: 10
    My driving is mixed city highway and I am getting 25 mpg according to MPG display in the car . I own the base 2.4 L not the turbo.

    I am filling up about once every 3 weeks which is nice.
  • zeenzeen Posts: 401
    Thanks. Not bad at all. Any other tips for a prospective purchaser? Are you happy with your option package? I'm moving from an Acura TL so my expectations are high (except for acceleration which I can live with)
  • I have added a Buick Verano discussion to the Sedans board.

    Thanks!

    Verano Forum

    :)
  • metrospmetrosp Posts: 10
    Zeen

    I purchased the CXL with the Navigation - I really liked the styling and the interior is excellent and very quite . The Regal is a smaller car than your TL but roomy enough for 4 people . If you are concerned with the acceleration of the 2.4 L you always have the option of buying the turbo with only a slight hit on gas mileage , at least according to the published EPA numbers.

    good luck and enjoy
  • zeenzeen Posts: 401
    edited January 2011
    Thanks. Actually, the Regal is about the same size (exterior) as the 2008 TL. The interior is slightly smaller.
  • I tried to use navigation system at auto show and could not figure out how to use controls near arm rest. It is counter intuitive - typical German design that is impossible to use by ordinary human beings. IMO these controls are unnecessary and just take place on center console that could be used to move cap holders forward and make place for armrest for passenger who needs it more than driver. Otherwise interior has excellent design and high quality materials are used, like in luxury car.
  • overbrookoverbrook Posts: 275
    in 100% city driving I am getting about 15-16mpg which isnt surprising. My Old car was rated at 17 and I routinely got about 14 in the city. The gas tank is huge so that helps with the range. Its listed at 18.5gallons but it takes more than that.
  • overbrookoverbrook Posts: 275
    aside from hp and lacking HIDs I dont see the Regal coming up short to the TL in any way. The materials are at least as nice and obviously you are getting some additional tech in a 2011 model year vehicles vs a 2008 TL. I would say handling has to be at least as good as the Acura and unlike the TL you will be using regular gas.

    I have every option except navigation. The stereo is great and I like the idea of having a 110v outlet in the backseat area- even though I haven't used it much so far. Since the car is from Europe the sunroof is VERY small which I dont like. Contrary to what some reviews have suggested, the dash is EASY to figure out and should be a no brainer for someone coming from an Acura considering how many buttons they use on the dash.

    There are small things on the car that arent even on many "luxury" models. Examples include the contrasting stitching on the door armrests and seats, the split fold rear seat with pass through (standard), the DIC in the instrument cluster that has 8 different screens plus the TOM that shows readings for each tire.
  • zeenzeen Posts: 401
    Thanks Overbrook. Very helpful.
    I may go with the basic Regal since I don't use my sunroof at all and I hear the stereo in the base Regal is pretty good. Most of the other options I can do without. The rear fold down seats are a plus for bike transport.
  • zeenzeen Posts: 401
    Just leased a Regal RL1 non-turbo. (Black/Beige) First impressions are that car is solid and well-built. You can feel the heft. The engine really winds out while accelerating but the acceleration is adequate. I certainly don't feel that is a challenge to accelerate on to a highway.
    Cars are shipped with very high tire inflation to protect tires. Dealer forgot to reduce the inflation so the initial driving was pretty rough. I reduced to the recommended 33 and it's quite a nice ride now.
    Elecrtronics are great and easy to set up.
    Gawkers can't believe it's a Buick.
  • I recently drove the Kia Optima EX and the Regal Turbo. I think the Regal handles much better, but the interior on the Optima is quite nice. The navigation is easier to use in the Kia with its touchscreen. The Kia also has more features--heated and cooled seats, glass roof, etcetera--at a lower price. The Kia is lighter and is rated for better gas mileage.

    The Regal feels more solid, and I feel is worth the extra $5,000 over the Optima. The disadvantage of the extra heft is a penalty in fuel mileage. I guess it depends on one's priorities. :)
  • gregg_vwgregg_vw Posts: 2,437
    The Kia is the better deal as far as content for the money. It is also good looking, very fuel efficient...and faster than the Regal. The Regal is a bit more quiet than the Kia. As both models become more common, the Regal will have more "prestige" and presence, if that is important to you. It costs more, it will cost more on resale, and will make more a of a statement. Some may notice that it handles better too, but for most driving situations, that won't even come into play, as the Optima is no slouch.

    For myself, I think a relatively small sedan with a 4 cylinder engine ought to do better than 19/30 mpg. It really is at the bottom of mid-size 4 cylinder sedans for fuel efficiency. In fact, several mid-size AWD cars do as well or better: Audi A4 (21/29), Legacy (23/31), and Kizashi (23/30). However, not everyone cares all that much about top notch fuel efficiency, so like you say, it depends on your priorities.
  • zeenzeen Posts: 401
    The Kia is a very attractive car but, for some, it's name is still associated with cheap. I rented one a number of years ago and it was a disaster.
    The Buick has more stature and has improved its image in recent years. To some, the Kia is perfectly fine. It's a prestige thing. I am just not there yet for Kia.
  • bugs6bugs6 Posts: 1
    edited January 2011
    As stated in the review this vehicle is based on the insignia in Europe. But, it is offered in a diesel which gets 55 mpg and is offered in a lot more trims. So, no thanks GM, not until we are given the opportunity to buy the same vehicle that this design was "borrowed" from. Top Gear even did a test drive on the sporty version and it was awesome.
  • I just ordered a Turbo w/ Manual Transmission TO3 option package. White w/ Cashmere interior.

    $300 over real invoice (no advertising BS).

    I have $3500 on the GM Card and hoping the loyalty rebate (or something better) is around when the car gets delivered - that will get my out of door price to $26.3k!

    I wonder how long it will take to get the car built and sent over. Does anyone know where the manual tranny is made? I hear the automatic is Chinese (ugh).
  • zeenzeen Posts: 401
    Overbrook: When you have the ventilation system on Auto, is your AC light on? Mine is and if I turn it off, the system goes off Auto. I wonder if the AC is on all the time while the car is heating.
  • ab348ab348 Dartmouth, Nova Scotia, CanadaPosts: 6,577
    I know on my Buick Allure (Lacrosse), the A/C light is on whenever the system is on auto. This time of year I try to remember to turn the A/C button off, though I dunno if that makes any difference.

    2017 Cadillac ATS Performance Premium 3.6, 1968 Oldsmobile Cutlass S Holiday Coupe

  • zeenzeen Posts: 401
    Thanks. My dealer advised that the A/C cycles on to reduce moisture and fogging even when it's below zero outside. I wonder how often it goes on.
  • gottwhatgottwhat Posts: 4
    Our 2011 Turbo makes the same clunking noise from the RF wheel that you describe. Was dealership able to resolve the problem?
  • gorphilgorphil Posts: 27
    I never did mention the noise to the dealership; howver, when the car was in for the 5K km LOF there were a couple of service bulletins posted on my car service records. One was a software update to the ECM and I do not know what the other one was for. The services were performed and I have never heard the noise since.
  • gottwhatgottwhat Posts: 4
    Thanks for the reply. Glad the noise went away for you. Still there for me. It will be awhile until the first scheduled service but I will update after that...
  • ahossa1ahossa1 Posts: 52
    edited March 2011
    Can U give more info on the service bulletin such as numbers or references so that I can check with the service dept
  • gorphilgorphil Posts: 27
    I cannot supply any additional information. However, the bulletins will be posted automatically on your car's service record by GM.
  • pengwinpengwin Posts: 74
    looking to buy a CC or a Regal. I can get a Regal Turbo TO1 for 26.5k thru american express or a CC DSG Sport for 28.5k at a local dealer.

    the 2k isnt a big deal for me but i just want second opinions on the cars.

    anyone for the regal? for the cc?
  • metrospmetrosp Posts: 10
    edited May 2011
    I test drove both the Regal (CXL - turbo wasn't out yet ) and CC
    Both were really nice - CC faster but not as quiet or smooth as the Regal , both looked good and in the end I went with the Regal as it is a 5 seater ( CC only 4 ) , the price worked out great and it included the navigation/HD/DVD system that wasn't available on CC , plus I am 6 feet tall and with the sunroof in the CC head room was tight which is not an issue with the Regal
  • zeenzeen Posts: 401
    edited May 2011
    It would be interesting to hear actual owner experience for 2011 Regal owners. Likes and dislikes, tips to improve ownership experience etc.
    I have a base Regal that I leased in mid-January. Overall, I am enjoying it quite a bit. The engine is noisy when accelerating and the transmission sometimes can't find the right gear in stop and go driving. Power is marginal when accelerating but seems quite adequate on the highway. I can cruise at 80 quite comfortably. The fold down rear seat has been a big help.
    I will have more to report as I go along but wanted to see if there was interest on this board in starting a conversation
  • pengwinpengwin Posts: 74
    i test drove them back to back (Regal turbo and CC). I agree with you, the Regal seems more refined, the CC is a little rouger but the acceleration also "seems" better in the CC (i know the numbers are pretty close).
  • marcus216marcus216 Posts: 78
    My final two car choices came down to the Acura TSX 4 cyl automatic and the Buick Regal turbo automatic. I really wanted to like the Regal better than the TSX, but in the end, I bought the Acura. The main reason was the interior. While the Regal's interior was decent and the seats satisfactory, in my opinion, it did not compare to the TSX's interior and seats. The TSX seats were amazing, much more supportive and comfortable than the Regal. And the rest of the TSX interior was more plush and upscale than the Regal. I have always been amazed how some automakers don't put more emphasis on the seats. Again, the Regal seats were not bad, just not in the same league as the Acura's, in my humble opinion. The Acura also felt more connected to the road during spirited driving while not being harsh at all. The Regal felt a bit more isolated in its ride, but I did find the Regal suspension better over harsh road surfaces. And the Regal had better power with the turbo, but the gas mileage was very mediocre for a 4 banger. The TSX has peppy acceleration though a bit behind the Regal Turbo. Again, I really wanted the Regal to be the better car, but I thought it was not the overall value of the TSX.
  • whoosierdaddywhoosierdaddy Posts: 76
    edited May 2011
    I rented a base Regal 2.4 for 3 days. Very nice interior, quiet ride, nice handling. Great car...except for that engine! I don't need a drag racer, but this Regal had such lame acceleration that I was afraid to pass a car on a 2-lane road, and merging onto an interstate ramp that inclined did not inspire confidence that I could merge into traffic. If the sacrifice in power brought better MPG that would be understandable; but after about 300 miles of 2/3 Hwy and 1/3 city/suburban I averaged 22 MPG (doing the math at the pump)...lame. More power would make this car a well-balanced package for this segment, probably wit hbetter real-world MPG. I drove the turbo briefly after returning this car ands the power was just "adequate," but at an outrageous $3,000 premium! Something like a 24V 3.0 or 3.2 litre V6, at a price between the 2.4 and turbo, would be appropriate for this car.
Sign In or Register to comment.