2011 Buick Regal?

[Oilpatch197]

I am just not impressed; underpowered with 274 hp Sonatas and 290 hp Maximas running around for under 30K. They need to drop the base motor, make the 220 bhp turbo standard, and the 255-hp version the step up. A Regal GS with less horsepower than a standard-issue Sonata is a joke given the price premium.

 

I’m sorry but calling this a Sporty model by the dealer would indicate better 0-60 and 1/4 mile performance than my GRANDPAS 2008 Impala which it clearly can’t do with less HP and more weight and steering that is numb and disconnected (think Camry). When GM tried making Oldsmobile into a sporty import fighter we all know what the result was. I think the blue haired buyers that go to look at this car will walk away confused and the much sought after younger buyers will shop elsewhere and buy the real thing. GM needs to get serious if they want to make this a sporty model. The weak 182 Hp 2.4 needs to be shown the door. The 220 HP turbo should be the entry level engine for the 30K this car will command and the 255 HP version should be the up level option. A turbo 3.0 liter V6 with 350 plus HP is the only thing that should be showing up in a Regal with the GS badge not a 255 HP 4 banger than can barely out run an old 2000 Regal GS 3800 with a couple cheap mods.

Edited August 19, 2011 by Oilpatch197

[darkwolf45]

I will probably get flamed for this, but...

 

I'm not much of a GM fan. Sad, since my last three cars were oldsmobile, and my current main machine is a 2002 Pontiac Bonneville. I brought my Cutlass that i have been rebuilding into a Buick dealer a few months ago and got a number of disapproving stares on the sales floor. The parts guys and tech guys were more curious than anything. on the sales floor though, they repeatedly told me "Buick is a luxury brand." Luxury my ass. Buick is the poor man's caddy, always was and always will be. And with Olds gone, they have that niche to fill as well.

 

As for my Cutlass, I consider it much more "Brian" than "GM" at this point, especially given that GM has for all intents and purposes, abandoned the brand. Similar thoughts on Pontiacs.

 

GM's executive structure has been... anemic for going on 30 years and they have a complete unwillingness to adapt the the evolving reality around them. The bailout so far was the pinnacle of that disconnect with reality. I remain faithful to W-bodies, but sadly, the company that used to make them seems by and large to be gone.

 

Maybe they will come back some day, but the diecisions they make just leave me bewildered...

[Mel87]

I will probably get flamed for this, but...

 

I'm not much of a GM fan. Sad, since my last three cars were oldsmobile, and my current main machine is a 2002 Pontiac Bonneville. I brought my Cutlass that i have been rebuilding into a Buick dealer a few months ago and got a number of disapproving stares on the sales floor. The parts guys and tech guys were more curious than anything. on the sales floor though, they repeatedly told me "Buick is a luxury brand." Luxury my ass. Buick is the poor man's caddy, always was and always will be. And with Olds gone, they have that niche to fill as well.

 

As for my Cutlass, I consider it much more "Brian" than "GM" at this point, especially given that GM has for all intents and purposes, abandoned the brand. Similar thoughts on Pontiacs.

 

GM's executive structure has been... anemic for going on 30 years and they have a complete unwillingness to adapt the the evolving reality around them. The bailout so far was the pinnacle of that disconnect with reality. I remain faithful to W-bodies, but sadly, the company that used to make them seems by and large to be gone.

 

Maybe they will come back some day, but the diecisions they make just leave me bewildered...

 

Nicely said

 

GM after the mid to late 90's was poo... all the cars started to look the same, "bubble cars" as I call them. Like the "Cutlass" in 1998, was a badged Malibu... All cars seemed to follow the same concept, and I never got in to it. Yes the styles of cars change over years, and I accept that fact, but I don't know who's footsteps GM was in after the 90's.

 

As far as the 2011 Regal from the OP, I dislike it. Like I said, it looks like a Lexus to me, all the same sh!t... They should really remake the GNX, bring back the G body design with a new aged touch. I know they could do it.

 

I have owned 3 cars, and the newest year I have had is the one now, 1997. I would prefer every car I buy be 1997 or earlier, I just don't like new cars besides the Challenger, and the Camaro

[Z34guy]

I am, as my friends put it, a whore for GM, but even I've been peeved at them.

 

GM has done a lot of stupid things since the 90's. My biggest gripe with them wasn't the styling nor the build quality but rather their stubborn nature regarding engine design. I know I'll get flamed for this, but pushrod engines have no business being in modern production cars, especially if they want to be competitive. GM discontinues their good OHC engines and often doesn't put enough money into the replacement's development.

When asked about performance from the LQ1, GM's performance engineers snubbed their noses to the engine and concentrated on the 3800, which didn't produce enough power to justify it's displacement.

Then There's the Northstar. Which was amazing when released. A competent engine capable of competing with the Europeans. Then GM just let it fester there, never updating it until it was so outdated that it was canceled, and they instead concentrated their money on the LS series small block V8.

More examples? The Oldsmobile Quad 4. This engine was a masterpiece and a marvel of engineering at the time. But Again, GM didn't throw the money needed to updated it periodically in order to keep it competitive. Then in 2002 GM thought, "oh shit, the Quad 4's outdated! What do we do!?" and then an engineer piped up and pointed to Opel's 4 banger, gave it the new name of "Ecotec" and put it on sale. The Ecotec, though DOHC and 16 valves like the Quad 4 before it, was unable to produce power numbers as enticing without forced induction, variable valve timing, or direct injection, none of which the Quad 4 had. The Ecotec to this very day has yet to produce as much as a 1991 HO Quad 4 on the same level. GM would be SO much more competitive by now had they switched to DOHC engines (like Ford did) instead of producing them because they felt they "had to". I have no doubt in my mind that, Had GM done everything they wanted to, every engine from them would be a massively oversized pushrod motor. I also have no doubt that, had the Quad 4 been kept, the ecotec never existed, and the Quad 4 got the updates it needed, GM's everyday grocery getters would be powered by high output 1.8L variants producing more than most competitor's 2.3 and 2.4L engines.

 

Don't get me wrong. I never said pushrod motors were incapable of producing respectable power numbers, nor did I say they were unreliable. however, I have yet to see an OHV engine produce the same power as an OHC engine on the same level/displacement and still be daily driven on the street. Show me a PROPER Northstar successor, a proper Quad 4 successor, and I'll take everything back. The LQ1 and LX5 do have a proper successor in my eyes in the High Feature engine family, which powers everything from base model Chevy Camaro's to top level Buick Lacrosses. There's even been rumors of a turbocharged version possibly appearing in the C7 Corvette.

 

As for the 3800, I do believe there is an engine out there that is as the 3800 SHOULD'VE been. The Hyundai Lambda 3.8L V6 engine as used in the Hyundai Genesis. The freaking KOREANS built a better 3.8L motor. WTH GM.

Edited August 19, 2011 by Z34guy

[xtremerevolution]

I am, as my friends put it, a whore for GM, but even I've been peeved at them.

 

GM has done a lot of stupid things since the 90's. My biggest gripe with them wasn't the styling nor the build quality but rather their stubborn nature regarding engine design. I know I'll get flamed for this, but pushrod engines have no business being in modern production cars, especially if they want to be competitive. GM discontinues their good OHC engines and often doesn't put enough money into the replacement's development.

When asked about performance from the LQ1, GM's performance engineers snubbed their noses to the engine and concentrated on the 3800, which didn't produce enough power to justify it's displacement.

Then There's the Northstar. Which was amazing when released. A competent engine capable of competing with the Europeans. Then GM just let it fester there, never updating it until it was so outdated that it was canceled, and they instead concentrated their money on the LS series small block V8.

More examples? The Oldsmobile Quad 4. This engine was a masterpiece and a marvel of engineering at the time. But Again, GM didn't throw the money needed to updated it periodically in order to keep it competitive. Then in 2002 GM thought, "oh shit, the Quad 4's outdated! What do we do!?" and then an engineer piped up and pointed to Opel's 4 banger, gave it the new name of "Ecotec" and put it on sale. The Ecotec, though DOHC and 16 valves like the Quad 4 before it, was unable to produce power numbers as enticing without forced induction, variable valve timing, or direct injection, none of which the Quad 4 had. The Ecotec to this very day has yet to produce as much as a 1991 HO Quad 4 on the same level. GM would be SO much more competitive by now had they switched to DOHC engines (like Ford did) instead of producing them because they felt they "had to". I have no doubt in my mind that, Had GM done everything they wanted to, every engine from them would be a massively oversized pushrod motor. I also have no doubt that, had the Quad 4 been kept, the ecotec never existed, and the Quad 4 got the updates it needed, GM's everyday grocery getters would be powered by high output 1.8L variants producing more than most competitor's 2.3 and 2.4L engines.

 

Don't get me wrong. I never said pushrod motors were incapable of producing respectable power numbers, nor did I say they were unreliable. however, I have yet to see an OHV engine produce the same power as an OHC engine on the same level/displacement and still be daily driven on the street. Show me a PROPER Northstar successor, a proper Quad 4 successor, and I'll take everything back. The LQ1 and LX5 do have a proper successor in my eyes in the High Feature engine family, which powers everything from base model Chevy Camaro's to top level Buick Lacrosses. There's even been rumors of a turbocharged version possibly appearing in the C7 Corvette.

 

You're looking at this whole thing from an enthusiast standpoint. These points have been argued a thousand times.

 

The reason why GM stuck with pushrod motors is because they're simple, easy to work on, and cheaper to build. It makes absolutely no difference what the displacement of the cylinders is so long as it puts down a decent amount of power and gets decent gas mileage. This is something people seem to miss because they're so obsessed with their design's superiority. I've said it before and I'm saying it again: who cares?

 

Who cares if an LQ1 makes 215hp on a 3.4L, and the L67 makes 240hp on a supercharged 3.8L, when the L67 is easier to work on, weighs about the same, requires less maintenance (read: timing belts), gets about the same gas mileage if not better, and has a reputation outside of the enthusiast market as being a reliable and solid motor. If they fit in the same engine bay, and the L67 is more reliable, more powerful, easier to work on, and cheaper to build, then tell me who actually gives a crap aside from enthusiasts when they go to a dealer and make a choice on which car to buy? Very, very few people actually care, because they don't open the engine bay, and even those who do never see the size of the pistons or the cylinders either. It makes zero difference.

 

The Northstar went through many revisions. The core of the engine remained untouched, but it did go through revisions. However, it was an expensive aluminum block that was not made to be rebuilt, and was not cheap to service. Believe me, I owned one, and I can honestly say despite the 4 cams and the exhaust growl, I'm having a lot more fun with my L67 than I ever did with the Northstar, which didn't make much power till you got higher into the RPMs.

 

The small block V8 is a tried and proven motor. They've nearly perfected it, if they haven't already a dozen times. It makes a lot of power, it get great gas mileage, and its reliable as hell. Again, keep in mind the number of people who actually ever see the size of those cylinders.

 

What does it matter to me if I make 360HP out of a 5.7L V8 or a 360hp out of some European 4.0L V8 when I never open the engine bay.

 

Not sure if I've gotten through to you, but you're hung up on something that's completely worthless. Displacement means nothing. I long ago stopped looking at displacement and started looking at what actually mattered:

 

1. power

2. fuel economy

3. reliability

 

If the OHC motors surpass the pushrod motors in all the above aspects, I'll be buying a car with an OHC motor, but if opposite is true, I'll be buying a car with a pushrod motor, and so will the rest of the American public, because they know nearly nothing about engines. They know that they need to get the oil changed, and they need to take it to the shop if it overheats or if starts making noises, and that's honestly all that really matters to 90%+ of people that will be buying these cars.

 

 

I had a kid with a Civic Si start shit talking me because he made 200hp with a 2L naturally aspirated engine and I made 240 hp stock with a supercharged 3.8L. "My engine is so much more efficient than yours, such better technology, so much better than that antique boat anchor." Guess who won that race. I did. At the end of the day, it didn't matter what the displacement was.

Edited August 19, 2011 by xtremerevolution

[Z34guy]

You're looking at this whole thing from an enthusiast standpoint. These points have been argued a thousand times.

 

The reason why GM stuck with pushrod motors is because they're simple, easy to work on, and cheaper to build. It makes absolutely no difference what the displacement of the cylinders is so long as it puts down a decent amount of power and gets decent gas mileage. This is something people seem to miss because they're so obsessed with their design's superiority. I've said it before and I'm saying it again: who cares?

 

Who cares if an LQ1 makes 215hp on a 3.4L, and the L67 makes 240hp on a supercharged 3.8L, when the L67 is easier to work on, weighs about the same, requires less maintenance (read: timing belts), gets about the same gas mileage if not better, and has a reputation outside of the enthusiast market as being a reliable and solid motor. If they fit in the same engine bay, and the L67 is more reliable, more powerful, easier to work on, and cheaper to build, then tell me who actually gives a crap aside from enthusiasts when they go to a dealer and make a choice on which car to buy? Very, very few people actually care, because they don't open the engine bay, and even those who do never see the size of the pistons or the cylinders either. It makes zero difference.

 

The Northstar went through many revisions. The core of the engine remained untouched, but it did go through revisions. However, it was an expensive aluminum block that was not made to be rebuilt, and was not cheap to service. Believe me, I owned one, and I can honestly say despite the 4 cams and the exhaust growl, I'm having a lot more fun with my L67 than I ever did with the Northstar, which didn't make much power till you got higher into the RPMs.

 

The small block V8 is a tried and proven motor. They've nearly perfected it, if they haven't already a dozen times. It makes a lot of power, it get great gas mileage, and its reliable as hell. Again, keep in mind the number of people who actually ever see the size of those cylinders.

 

What does it matter to me if I make 360HP out of a 5.7L V8 or a 360hp out of some European 4.0L V8 when I never open the engine bay.

 

Not sure if I've gotten through to you, but you're hung up on something that's completely worthless. Displacement means nothing. I long ago stopped looking at displacement and started looking at what actually mattered:

 

1. power

2. fuel economy

3. reliability

 

If the OHC motors surpass the pushrod motors in all the above aspects, I'll be buying a car with an OHC motor, but if opposite is true, I'll be buying a car with a pushrod motor, and so will the rest of the American public, because they know nearly nothing about engines. They know that they need to get the oil changed, and they need to take it to the shop if it overheats or if starts making noises, and that's honestly all that really matters.

1: of course I looked at it from an enthusiast point. A Toyota Camry 3.0L V6 produced similar power to the 3800 at that time and no one goes on and on about how superior that V6 is.

2: you obviously didn't read my second to last paragraph.

I know what you mean about displacement not meaning much. I have my own opinions and I'll stick to them. You have a better chance of changing the US government to anarchy than changing my opinions on pushrods.

[xtremerevolution]

1: of course I looked at it from an enthusiast point. A Toyota Camry 3.0L V6 produced similar power to the 3800 at that time and no one goes on and on about how superior that V6 is.

2: you obviously didn't read my second to last paragraph.

I know what you mean about displacement not meaning much. I have my own opinions and I'll stick to them. You have a better chance of changing the US government to anarchy than changing my opinions on pushrods.

 

I'm not trying to change your opinions, I'm just trying to explain to you why GM makes their decisions.

[darkwolf45]

Not that it matters, since I really have limited knowledge about engines, but xtremerevolutions point resonates much more with me. I have a short list that i go through when it comes to engines, most important on my priority list first:

1. reliability
   
2. ease of access for repairs
   
3. fuel economy
   
4. power
   

The 3100 in my Cutlass is a perfect example. Aside from the manifold intake gasket going bad some 100k + miles ago, that engine has just gone and gone and gone and gone, and was the sole reason I went with my Intrigue after it, and Bonnville most recently. At the end of the day, it's been the most reliable car i have had. The fuel economy is reasonable (though I have noticed something odd recently which i will eventually cover in another thread) and more than enough power to take care of me.

 

Even if the design of the engine is more advanced, at the end of the day, I will choose a more primitve design if the more primitive one has more of the traits I need.

[Z34guy]

I'm not trying to change your opinions, I'm just trying to explain to you why GM makes their decisions.

I understood GM's reasoning for it. My argument is that they didn't WANT to put the money into OHC to make them more reliable, or more fuel efficient. Power is not an issue there. Another of my arguments is that regardless of what's under the hood, people like to brag about their cars. No one wants to buy something outdated. You don't see people bragging about getting a portable 8 track player, you hear them bragging about the newest MP3 player or smartphone. While OHC is an older design than OHV, OHV was outdated the second it was invented.

Yea, you can argue you don't care how much air you can fit into an engine, but at the end of the day, you still do. I've seen 3800 owners brag about their output numbers to drivers of OHC engines, to which the response was usually "and you needed HOW much displacement and HOW much boost to make that? That's pathetic." and said 3800 owner proceeds to turn bright red. I look at things not only from an enthusiast standpoint (though that is my major one), but also from an engineering standpoint. pushrods are dead. Just like big hair bands, 8 track tapes, and live rear axles.

Edited August 19, 2011 by Z34guy

[pwmin]

yeah, pushrods are dead, lol. The LS series of motors are complete junk.

[Z34guy]

yeah, pushrods are dead, lol. The LS series of motors are complete junk.

GM LS3 V8: 6.2L OHV, 436 HP

Mercedes Benz M159 V8: 6.2L DOHC, 563 HP

Ford Coyote V8: 5.0L DOHC, 412 HP

[xtremerevolution]

I understood GM's reasoning for it. My argument is that they didn't WANT to put the money into OHC to make them more reliable, or more fuel efficient. Power is not an issue there. Another of my arguments is that regardless of what's under the hood, people like to brag about their cars. No one wants to buy something outdated. You don't see people bragging about getting a portable 8 track player, you hear them bragging about the newest MP3 player or smartphone. While OHC is an older design than OHV, OHV was outdated the second it was invented.

Yea, you can argue you don't care how much air you can fit into an engine, but at the end of the day, you still do. I've seen 3800 owners brag about their output numbers to drivers of OHC engines, to which the response was usually "and you needed HOW much displacement and HOW much boost to make that? That's pathetic." and said 3800 owner proceeds to turn bright red. I look at things not only from an enthusiast standpoint (though that is my major one), but also from an engineering standpoint. pushrods are dead. Just like big hair bands, 8 track tapes, and live rear axles.

 

You're right. People love bragging about their cars, and I love the fact that they do. That way, every time they brag, I tell them to put their money where their mouth is, and they know perfectly well what both of my antique pushrod motors are capable of and they shut up really damn quick or they try to burn me at a red light and I put them in their place. Its really that simple.

 

I'm not one of those owners who brags about the power they make, and if you ask me how much boost it took, I'll tell you flat out, it took 13PSI, and it took it reliably. I've never seen an L67 owner turn red in the face when asked how much boost it took to get him to his power level. At the end of the day, he still puts down that power.

[pwmin]

GM LS3 V8: 6.2L OHV, 436 HP

Mercedes Benz M159 V8: 6.2L DOHC, 563 HP

Ford Coyote V8: 5.0L DOHC, 412 HP

...and that proves they're junk how?

 

 

the M159 in the SLS AMG gets around 16 mpg highway, while the LS3 in the Camaro and Coyote in the Mustang get 25/26, so not even close in MPG w/ the AMG vs the others and the LS gets about the same fuel economy with more power and a lot more displacement. I realize that's not taking weight into consideration. Not to mention how much harder do you think the others are to work on, especially the M-B?

Edited August 19, 2011 by pwmin

[Z34guy]

oh yes. because a 3.5L new Nissan Maxima wouldn't destroy a stock L67. yup. sure

[xtremerevolution]

GM LS3 V8: 6.2L OHV, 436 HP

Mercedes Benz M159 V8: 6.2L DOHC, 563 HP

Ford Coyote V8: 5.0L DOHC, 412 HP

 

GM LS3 V8: Tried and proven, again, and again, and again. 420lb-ft of torque, and 415lbs

Mercedez Benz 6.2L DOHC V8: more expensive than the car the LS3 came in (x 2 even?)

Ford Coyote 5.0: 412hp...and 390lb-ft. Still less power than the LS3, and 430lbs

 

So let me get it straight. The Mercedes motor, which you can't get unless you want to pay a whole LOT of cash (which I guess at that point should be compared to a Z06 at minimum, if not a ZR1), is superior to the LS3? Why don't we just throwing a few Lambo and Ferrari engines while we're at this, because its clearly relevant.

 

The Ford motor is...eeehhhh...not gonna go there. After what I've seen with the Raptor trucks' frames bending, the Mostang manual transmissions frying, and the dealers refusing to take responsibility, I'm not even going to include them in the conversation.

[xtremerevolution]

...and that proves they're junk how?

 

 

the M159 in the SLS AMG gets around 16 mpg highway, while the LS3 in the Camaro and Coyote in the Mustang get 25/26, so not even close in MPG w/ the AMG vs the others and the LS gets about the same fuel economy with more power and a lot more displacement. I realize that's not taking weight into consideration. Not to mention how much harder do you think the others are to work on, especially the M-B?

 

That's the thing, it doesn't prove their junk. Instead, it proves that they're keeping up, if not competing very nicely to the "superior" competing technology.

[Z34guy]

I have heard no complaints about the Coyote Boss 302, which produces more than the LS3. my point with the M159 motor is that it's equivalent to a supercharged pushrod motor from GM, but doesn't need boost. I would HARDLY argue fuel economy at that point.

 

Look, we can do this for days and you'll dance around the issue of power and displacement. Let's just agree to disagree about which is better and move on to complaining about GM.

Edited August 19, 2011 by Z34guy

[xtremerevolution]

oh yes. because a 3.5L new Nissan Maxima wouldn't destroy a stock L67. yup. sure

 

Nope, it wouldn't actually, because that 3.5L in that maxima gives it a 14.5 1/4 mile, which is pretty damn close to what a 10 year older GTP or GS will do.

[xtremerevolution]

I have heard no complaints about the Coyote Boss 302, which produces more than the LS3. my point with the M159 motor is that it's equivalent to a supercharged pushrod motor from GM, but doesn't need boost. I would HARDLY argue fuel economy at that point.

 

Well no shit you haven't heard any complaints, its only a couple of years old! Have you discovered yet that this is pointless and you're not proving any point?

[Z34guy]

Nope, it wouldn't actually, because that 3.5L in that maxima gives it a 14.5 1/4 mile, which is pretty damn close to what a 10 year older GTP or GS will do.

That's also not factoring in weight.

[xtremerevolution]

That's also not factoring in weight.

 

Unfortunately, its a package deal.

[urbex]

This thread....

 

[Z34guy]

Unfortunately, its a package deal.

Sad but true. it's a pig just like the GTR.

 

This thread....

 

HHR:

 

...

[urbex]

Dude...you have proved you know nothing with this thread, therefore your opinion is invalid.

[Z34guy]

Dude...you have proved you know nothing with this thread, therefore your opinion is invalid.

says the man who bought an HHR.

 

I WOULD buy a pushrod car as a daily driver or a project for shits and giggles. But you can't get me to take them seriously.