Ask Me About: 2019 Buick Regal GS

[A Horse With No Name]

1 hour ago, surreal1272 said:

Someone got seriously ripped off if they paid $32K for a Soul! That salesman was doing the cocaine celebration dance for real after that customer left. My wife's is the exact same as the one I took almost two years ago cross country. The book on the this one is right at $16K (only 23K miles on a 2015 helped) so we got a good deal that doesn't start anywhere near underwater financially. She is happy which makes me happy. I was plotting a serious act of destruction against her old HHR so I am glad that don't have to get rid of any evidence lol.

You say act of destruction...back in the day a few of the guys who ran the shredder at Buckeye Steel would make cars disappear for a modest fee. Co worker got tired of paying on his camaro...it disappeared...never to be heard from again.

[Cmicasa the Great]

4 hours ago, surreal1272 said:

Are you drunk? You are the one who invited me to this site years ago when most of us here were on the MT forums. 

 

For the record, the crazy talk started with you and it still continues. You also don’t understand the concept of a “joke”. Stop it BUB. Just stop it. This is about the GS and not about your delicate sensibilities where criticisms of GM are concerned.

 

?????

 

Its really not. I just don't like car payments.. same as U apparently. And the whole not knowing who U were and calling U "pet names" was my just joking with U Kitty Kat ??

Edited February 6, 2019 by Cmicasa the Great

[Cmicasa the Great]

Look I went all out and explained my point of view on the Regal GS. I love the car's handling, looks, and interior.. just think  the engine could be more powerful. As a daily driver it would certainly suffice. Possibly more so than even my Impala, which is fast on its own with an earlier version of the 3.6L. In a smaller car.. hell in the Camaro RS.. it works.. is a quick lil whip.. but I just think that if the GS is the TOP.. the TOP performance vehicle in the Buick line it should be afforded the TT3.6L.

The Kia is not my thing. I find it weird looking, derivative, its a Hyundai, which I hate almost as much as Toyota, if not equally.. and if I wanted a NEW RWD Sedan for almost $40K I'd just go get a Charger RT.. if NEW wasn't a necessity.. I'd go get a used '14-16 CTS-VSport.. a used '16-17 Chevy SS.. a used '13 CTS-V.. So many options. 

[A Horse With No Name]

21 minutes ago, Cmicasa the Great said:

Look I went all out and explained my point of view on the Regal GS. I love the car's handling, looks, and interior.. just think  the engine could be more powerful. As a daily driver it would certainly suffice. Possibly more so than even my Impala, which is fast on its own with an earlier version of the 3.6L. In a smaller car.. hell in the Camaro RS.. it works.. is a quick lil whip.. but I just think that if the GS is the TOP.. the TOP performance vehicle in the Buick line it should be afforded the TT3.6L.

The Kia is not my thing. I find it weird looking, derivative, its a Hyundai, which I hate almost as much as Toyota, if not equally.. and if I wanted a NEW RWD Sedan for almost $40K I'd just go get a Charger RT.. if NEW wasn't a necessity.. I'd go get a used '14-16 CTS-VSport.. a used '16-17 Chevy SS.. a used '13 CTS-V.. So many options. 

CTS V Sport FTW if we allow used.

[Cmicasa the Great]

2 hours ago, A Horse With No Name said:

CTS V Sport FTW if we allow used.

and U would have one of the slickest, most luxurious sports sedans on the planet.

[A Horse With No Name]

20 hours ago, Cmicasa the Great said:

and U would have one of the slickest, most luxurious sports sedans on the planet.

One of the very best as any price....or from any time period.

 

[dwightlooi]

On 1/31/2019 at 5:54 AM, Cmicasa the Great said:

Seriously.. as good as the 3.6L is as a goto engine.. it should not be in anything that is billed as a performance or luxury vehicle when they have better alternatives that would blow the competition away. This is a another prime place where the now defunct XTS VSport's TT 3.6L LF3 would shine. 

The LF3 -- the last of the LF-series motors -- is going out to be phased out of production with the sunset of the CTS. GM is not going to put it in anything new. The Regal GS could have used the 3.0L TT 404bhp / 400 lb-ft (LGW) engine instead of the 3.6L NA (LGX) though. Or, if they wanted to keep it "cheap" it could have had the 2.7L 4-cylinder Turbo from the Silverado which makes 310 bhp / 348 lb-ft.

[dwightlooi]

Just a thought...

Put in a 2.7T tuned to 410~420 hp and 380~420 lb-ft and they can call it the Regal GNX.

[A Horse With No Name]

4 minutes ago, dwightlooi said:

Just a thought...

Put in a 2.7T tuned to 410~420 hp and 380~420 lb-ft and they can call it the Regal GNX.

I love this idea.

[regfootball]

5 hours ago, dwightlooi said:

Just a thought...

Put in a 2.7T tuned to 410~420 hp and 380~420 lb-ft and they can call it the Regal GNX.

i like the idea.  using the 4 pot instead of the 3.0tt v6 would help keep weight in check.  And with the 2.7, the issue would be how smooth it would be in a passenger car iteration vs. truck.  Obviously if it's going into the CT4-V Cadillac figures it will have good operating characteristics.  So assuming that, why not put it in the Regal GS at least.  Traditionalists will balk at calling it a GNX.

[dwightlooi]

15 minutes ago, regfootball said:

i like the idea.  using the 4 pot instead of the 3.0tt v6 would help keep weight in check.  And with the 2.7, the issue would be how smooth it would be in a passenger car iteration vs. truck.  Obviously if it's going into the CT4-V Cadillac figures it will have good operating characteristics.  So assuming that, why not put it in the Regal GS at least.  Traditionalists will balk at calling it a GNX.

Vibration wise it is a balance shafted four so it's not going to shake. But, 420 hp from 2/3 as many firing pulses is going to sound a little coarser than from a V6. Still, because twin turbo V6es inherently sucks from a tiurbo response standpoint compared to an single turbo Inline-4 (due to the interrupted exhaust pulses of three cylinders feeding a turbo) an Inline-4 will be more responsive and come on boost sooner.

[regfootball]

19 minutes ago, dwightlooi said:

Vibration wise it is a balance shafted four so it's not going to shake. But, 420 hp from 2/3 as many firing pulses is going to sound a little coarser than from a V6. Still, because twin turbo V6es inherently sucks from a tiurbo response standpoint compared to an single turbo Inline-4 (due to the interrupted exhaust pulses of three cylinders feeding a turbo) an Inline-4 will be more responsive and come on boost sooner.

when i drove the silverado with the 2.7, i thought it was pretty smooth.  in a higher tune, not sure, but i do understand what you say on the advantage of a turbo4 vs a turbo6 and the boost.  pretty frustrating reading the new reviews of the VW Arteon.  It bills the Arteon as a upscale option that is not expensive like the A7.  Never in any of these articles hardly does it mention the Regal GS as competition.  It mentions the Maxima etc.

The 2.7t and a good chassis tuning would turn the Regal Sportback into something they might mention in those articles.  Problem is GM gave up on the car.  

Edited June 17, 2019 by regfootball

[dwightlooi]

5 minutes ago, regfootball said:

when i drove the silverado with the 2.7, i thought it was pretty smooth.  in a higher tune, not sure, but i do understand what you say on the advantage of a turbo4 vs a turbo6 and the boost.  pretty frustrating reading the new reviews of the VW Arteon.  It bills the Arteon as a upscale option that is not expensive like the A7.  Never in any of these articles hardly does it mention the Regal GS as competition.  It mentions the Maxima etc.

The 2.7t and a good chassis tuning would turn the Regal Sportback into something they might mention in those articles.  Problem is GM gave up on the car.  

A higher state of tune generally will not affect the NVH unless you put in a stupid muffler to make extra noise. What it will do is give up on a bit of the bottom end turbo spool. Instead of hitting 348 lb-ft @ 1,500 rpm. It'll probably hit 348 lb-ft @ ~1,800 rpm on the way to 420 lb-ft @ 2,200 rpm. The plus side being that instead of holding that 348 lb-ft torque peak only till 4,000 rpm. You hold a higher torque plateau of 420 lb-ft through 5,200 rpm. This gets you over 100 more horsepower.