ritchierich1 Posted July 27, 2004 Report Share Posted July 27, 2004 I was wondering how many regals were actually on this site. Not many people seem to like them, but I think they are great. I would like to see some more pics also if I could. Thanks Oh yea. 1994 Buick Regal GS Coupe 89,300 miles now Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MIKELABZ Posted July 28, 2004 Report Share Posted July 28, 2004 somebody on this site has a white regal.. not too shabby... i kinda like those cars.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteOut Posted July 28, 2004 Report Share Posted July 28, 2004 Its not that we don't like them, its just that there's only a handful of them in comparison the the legions of Cutlass's, Grand Prix's, and Lumina's. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Anonymous Posted July 28, 2004 Report Share Posted July 28, 2004 Grand prix's seem to rule the roost here followed by the cutlass and lumina, like he said. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
90TGP Posted July 28, 2004 Report Share Posted July 28, 2004 Cause most of them are running 20s with 4 12s. 8) On a serious note, I'd love to have a GS as a daily driver. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
99RegalGS Posted July 28, 2004 Report Share Posted July 28, 2004 There have never been many Regal's here... Anyway, there are some pics of mine on my webpage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justin Posted July 28, 2004 Report Share Posted July 28, 2004 Grand prix's seem to rule the roost here followed by the cutlass and lumina, I'm not so sure about that... Maybe if you count Gen II Prix's they might be ahead, but I think there might be more Gen I Cutlass's than Prix's 'round here, and who really cares about those newer cars anyways? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Anonymous Posted July 28, 2004 Report Share Posted July 28, 2004 who really cares about those newer cars anyways? ahhh to hell with new cars!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THe_DeTAiL3R Posted July 28, 2004 Report Share Posted July 28, 2004 Its not that we don't like them, its just that there's only a handful of them in comparison the the legions of Cutlass's, Grand Prix's, and Lumina's. I love Regals.. I mean I think they are great cars that are super luxurious inside (something I don't mind at all!) and the exterior styling is nice, but not my favorite (I like it better than Lumina, with the exception of Z34). I think the GP, Cutlass, and Luminas are simply more sporty looking cars which is the answer to your question. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ritchierich1 Posted July 28, 2004 Author Report Share Posted July 28, 2004 I think we all can agree the Grand Prix is the sportiest one of them all. But, I think the regal coupe is second in line, looks wise. I also give credit to the cutlass. I like the interior and the body on that as well. However, I wouldn't want to trade for any of them. I dunno why. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SigEpCutlass Posted July 28, 2004 Report Share Posted July 28, 2004 haha the cutlass owns Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mfewtrail Posted July 28, 2004 Report Share Posted July 28, 2004 My parents have a 94 Regal custom sedan..I don't own any Regals at the moment, I wouldn't mind having a older and a newer GS as I like them. A picture of my rents Regal can be seen here http://www.members.aol.com/mv540paq/ that's the only picture I have of it at this time, I might take some pictures of it after I wash/wax it for them sometime soon(shitty weather here for the next week or so :oops: ). I believe its "seafoam" green, the paint looks awesome for a 94 w/ 110K on it, very reflective/shiny when clean. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZeroDCX Posted July 28, 2004 Report Share Posted July 28, 2004 I own a Regal also (92' Regal Custom Sedan), I would get some pics up, but my little brother broke my Digicam. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DiscoStudd Posted July 28, 2004 Report Share Posted July 28, 2004 You wanted more Regals, well here ya go, then: http://www.users.qwest.net/~ace69/pics.htm 95-96 Coupes are the only Regals worth owning, IMHO. Why? Lemme see: 1. Smooth styling - all the gaudy side mouldings of the 88-94's are shaved. Grille is smaller. Tail lights are void of gaudy chrome or black trim. 2. Dash is modernized - gauges aren't microscopic. You can mount an aftermarket head unit with ease. Dual Airbags. Console has dual cupholders. 3. Seatbelts are mounted to the B-pillar - I abhor GM's door mounted "passive restraints." GM's passive restraints are the second worst "innovation" in automotive history next to Ford's (and imports) "motorized" passive restraints. 4. Upgraded brakes - Late 95's and all 96's have the larger front brakes. All 95-96's have the upgraded rears. They also have the improved e-brake pedal. 5. "Saginaw" steering column - set up the same as most GM columns since 1970. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GnatGoSplat Posted July 28, 2004 Report Share Posted July 28, 2004 I love the Regals. They tend to look a little less sporty to me, mostly because of the "formal" (more vertical) C-pillar. I usually prefer a more raked rear glass and C-pillar. However, the 88-94 Regal GS still has a very sporty look... it says "sporty, yet refined". I completely disagree with DiscoStudd on which Regals are worth owning: 1. 95-96 is bland styling compared to an 88-94 GS. Sure, it looks good compared to an 88-94 anything-but-GS, but 88-94 GS ground-effects is what gives it that sporty and aggressive flair. Otherwise, it just looks like a grannymobile. The black trim on the taillights also gives it that hint of sportiness. I don't feel any hint of sportiness out of a 95-96. 92-94 has the smaller grille and integrated foglights. 2. 95-96 Dash is boring, devoid of personality. Is it a late-90's Chevy? Olds? Pontiac? Honda? Hyundai? Toyota? Nissan? It's so generic, it could be anything. 88-93 has the digital gauges cluster that's very badass, it's 2nd only to the Cutlass digital gauges cluster, IMO. It even has a feature the Cutlass cluster doesn't have, and that's a digital readout for the tach in addition to the bargraph. It's very cool to drive one of these cars and see all the bargraphs doing their thing while the digital numbers change. Plus, it has an oil pressure and volts gauge, important items which I believe are missing from 95-96. 3. Seatbelts mounted to the B-pillar are a lot more inconvenient and uncomfortable than mounted to the doors on a coupe. Plus, the path is clear for backseat passengers to get in and out since they don't have to lift the seatbelt and duck under it to get into the back seat. The stupid $5 guide loop attached to the seat also tends to break easily. For safety reasons, sure the B-pillar mounted seatbelts MIGHT be safer (no evidence I've seen suggests it's really any safer) and SLIGHTLY reduce the weight of the doors. However, the door mounted belts are a lot more convenient. 4. 94's have the upgraded rear brakes too, although the upgraded front/rear brakes isn't particularly difficult to swap into an older car. My 89 Cutlass has 96 brakes all around. 5. I don't know what a saginaw steering column is, but I do think the square 88-93 columns look a lot more modern than the 1970's looking round column used 94-up. I'm not sure why they switched back to the antique looking column, I assume it was because they couldn't get an airbag clockspring into the older, more modern looking column. At any rate, I personally don't like 1970's looking stuff in a newer car. Myself personally, I would get a 94 for the upgraded rear brakes, park brake pedal, and front fascia with integrated foglights, but it also has the old interior so I could swap in that badass digital cluster. On the other hand, I did find a black 90 Regal GS with the red stripe with a bad motor for $300. I'm tempted to offer them $100 and put a motor in it. Then again, I already have too many cars as it is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeremy Posted July 28, 2004 Report Share Posted July 28, 2004 .....seriously though, i like the pre-95 regals a ton better too Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DiscoStudd Posted July 28, 2004 Report Share Posted July 28, 2004 Did I touch a nerve there, Gnat? Otherwise, it just looks like a grannymobile. Can you say "sleeper?" 88-93 has the digital gauges cluster that's very badassThe Cutty digital cluster is the only cluster that's badass. The Regal's cluster is totally gay. Digital clusters in general are so 80's... Plus, it has an oil pressure and volts gauge, important items which I believe are missing from 95-96.GM dropped these 2 on all its cars (except for Chevy trucks) after 95...Seatbelts mounted to the B-pillar are a lot more inconvenient and uncomfortable than mounted to the doors on a coupe. Plus, the path is clear for backseat passengers to get in and out since they don't have to lift the seatbelt and duck under it to get into the back seat. The stupid $5 guide loop attached to the seat also tends to break easily. Way more comfortable. Belt is not riding on your neck. I never use the stupid guide loop and nobody ever rides in my back seat (that's what my wife has a 4 door for.) I don't know what a saginaw steering column is, but I do think the square 88-93 columns look a lot more modern than the 1970's looking round column used 94-up. I'm not sure why they switched back to the antique looking column, I assume it was because they couldn't get an airbag clockspring into the older, more modern looking column. Saginaw columns are an all around better design, plus their longevity makes them a proven design, too. The columns in the early Berettas and W bodies are complete junk (you can never find any in the boneyards.) I'm sure they switched back because of the clockspring issue, though... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GnatGoSplat Posted July 28, 2004 Report Share Posted July 28, 2004 Did I touch a nerve there, Gnat? Not really, just that I sooooo don't get it. Just everything you like about the Regal is exactly what I don't like and vice versa. Makes me think "what's wrong with this guy". Can you say "sleeper?" All W-bodies are sleepers, no one expects them to go fast. So why not have a cool looking one instead of a BLAH looking one? The Cutty digital cluster is the only cluster that's badass. The Regal's cluster is totally gay. Digital clusters in general are so 80's... Cutty digital cluster is badass, and so is the Regal one in its own way. 1980's electronics in general is cool, it was the start of the digital display revolution. I don't think the Regal cluster is gay at all, the low-tech analog crap we have today is gay, except for Lexus which has the holographic-looking analog cluster that looks cool. If digital clusters are "so 80's", then what would you call the analog cluster which has remained essentially the same since the Model T Ford, or older? Maybe it's "so 1880's"? So boring... 1920's, 1930's, 1940's, 1950's, 1960's, 1970's, 1980's, 1990's, and 2000's.... all the same old boring analog clusters. The same type your father, grandfather, and great-grandfather stared at in the days when dinosaurs roamed the Earth. The only break we've had from analog was during the 80's and early 90's. You may call it dated, I call it refreshing and unique, truly a milestone in instrumentation technology. GM dropped these 2 on all its cars (except for Chevy trucks) after 95... Yup. Lame. Way more comfortable. Belt is not riding on your neck. I never use the stupid guide loop and nobody ever rides in my back seat (that's what my wife has a 4 door for.) The belt never comes anywhere near my neck. Sit up straight and quit slouching. Saginaw columns are an all around better design, plus their longevity makes them a proven design, too. The columns in the early Berettas and W bodies are complete junk (you can never find any in the boneyards.) I'm sure they switched back because of the clockspring issue, though... How are they better in design or otherwise? I've never had ANY column problems with the 88, 89, and 90. I haven't seen too many posts about column problems on the forum either. The 94 on the other hand, has a broken hazard button and so has lots of 94+ that I've looked at. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DiscoStudd Posted July 28, 2004 Report Share Posted July 28, 2004 Not really, just that I sooooo don't get it. Just everything you like about the Regal is exactly what I don't like and vice versa. Makes me think "what's wrong with this guy". I know we'll never see eye to eye on this issue, so lemme give you my side of the story. Let's just say that I'm a diehard, closed-minded GM loyalist. That being said, I believe that even GM has had its share of fuckups. I've practically owned 1 of every FWD GM platform ever built and I have my favorites. I shied away from the earlier W bodies because I've known many, many people (mechanics even) that have owned one and I've heard all the gripes. Brakes suck, steering columns broken, e-brake doesn't work, hood release broken, etc etc. The way I look at it is GM threw a bunch of shit at the wall with the early W's to see what would stick. They had many innovations that later carried over to the other FWD platforms, but they seemed like guinea pigs at the start. Look at everything they introduced and later changed in the following years because the design was shitty (like the brakes.) To me they seemed like the square peg in the round hole of GM. I know I'm taking the easy way out by buying a newer W, but right now I don't have the time, money, or space to buy an older one and upgrade it, but hey at least I don't have a 97-up GTP! All I'm saying is, to me, the 95-96 Regals fall in line more to my liking of what I think a typical GM product should be. Again, I'm a GM loyalist above all else. Oh yeah, did I mention I'm "closed-minded" in that aspect also? Now you know what's wrong with me! All W-bodies are sleepers, no one expects them to go fast. So why not have a cool looking one instead of a BLAH looking one?I like the "smooth" look. I also like the look of shock on riceboys faces when I blow past them. Grandpa cars rule!!! I wouldn't call any Grand Prix a sleeper, though (or a Z34 for that matter...) If digital clusters are "so 80's", then what would you call the analog cluster which has remained essentially the same since the Model T Ford, or older? Maybe it's "so 1880's"? So boring... 1920's, 1930's, 1940's, 1950's, 1960's, 1970's, 1980's, 1990's, and 2000's.... all the same old boring analog clusters. The same type your father, grandfather, and great-grandfather stared at in the days when dinosaurs roamed the Earth. The only break we've had from analog was during the 80's and early 90's. You may call it dated, I call it refreshing and unique, truly a milestone in instrumentation technology.I agree it was a milestone for the instrumentation industry, but personally, I prefer analog. I wear an analog watch because I don't like digital watches, and I don't like digital gauges in my vehicle. The reason for my 80's comment is because when I was 10 years old I absolutely loved the show "Knight Rider" and the digital dash on KITT. Well, as I grew older, my view of the show was nostalgic, and just like that, so is my view of digital instrumentation. To me, digital dashes on cars is like a bad acid trip that I (and the rest of the auto industry) would rather try to forget... The belt never comes anywhere near my neck.Sit up straight and quit slouching. Again, with my GM bias, I hate some of their "innovations" and purposely tried to avoid GM's with these belts. I have, unfortunately, owned 2 GM's with the passive restraints. I just dealt with their position, but my wife couldn't (she needed to use one of those "child clips" to reposition the belt away from her neck! ) So, yeah I'll admit that she's probably the main reason for my angst against them ("We're never buying another car with those damn belts ever again!!!") Where's the emoticon for "whipped?" How are they better in design or otherwise? I've never had ANY column problems with the 88, 89, and 90. I haven't seen too many posts about column problems on the forum either. The 94 on the other hand, has a broken hazard button and so has lots of 94+ that I've looked at.Maybe I should clarify. I mean I prefer most Saginaw columns. The ones in the newer W's do seem kinda junky compared to the rest of the Saginaws. I've never had a problem with the signal switches in any other Saginaw. They're what I am familiar working with cause almost every GM I've owned had one in it (except for the 2 cars I had that had passive restraints, hmmm ) and I love their (fairly) sturdy design. I've known at least 4 people with the "square" column whose tilt mechanisms broke and they had a hard time finding another column in the boneyards (this was before "Car-Part.com") I guess I am biased towards the standard issue "Square-Head" GM key or something... So hey, no hard feelings man, I guess from here on in we'll agree to disagree. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GnatGoSplat Posted July 29, 2004 Report Share Posted July 29, 2004 I know we'll never see eye to eye on this issue, so lemme give you my side of the story. Thanks for the explanation. I'm just the type of person that thinks the whole world is on crack but me. Well, I'm sure I'm the weird one, but in my mind I'm the one normal sane person in a world full of weirdos. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ritchierich1 Posted July 29, 2004 Author Report Share Posted July 29, 2004 I like the seatbelts in the door. I would like to see a digital gauge, then I could say how good they were. I am just glad my car is running good and I havn't blown the tranny yet. Other stuff is just minor to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
92gransport Posted July 29, 2004 Report Share Posted July 29, 2004 My daily driver is a Regal. It's a '92 GS Coupe in White w/ Blue interior 4 seater. It looks very similar to 93RegalGS's car w/o the luggage rack & moonroof. Sorry, I have no pics that I could have posted for you. I always used to think they were kinda weird looking, guess my taste has changed a bit as they've really grown on me, especially since I bought mine in Jan. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MIKELABZ Posted July 29, 2004 Report Share Posted July 29, 2004 My daily driver is a Regal. didnt want to feel left out so i joined the quote-fest.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kev819_01053 Posted June 10, 2014 Report Share Posted June 10, 2014 I was wondering how many regals were actually on this site. Not many people seem to like them, but I think they are great. I would like to see some more pics also if I could. Thanks Oh yea. 1994 Buick Regal GS Coupe 89,300 miles now I own a 1994 Buick regal gs coupe 195,000 runs good tranny finicky overdrive kicks in early hazard button missing don't ask me how it was there when I bought the car. hard to find button on internet. overall great car. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Imp558 Posted June 10, 2014 Report Share Posted June 10, 2014 Cool, I have a 96, put some pics in your profile so we can see it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.