mmarshall

Actually, the car that I've seen driven more by old folks than any other is probably the Cadillac DeVille/DTS. It is a true white-hair vehicle (by today's standards) if there ever was one. Although not unheard of, it is rare to see anyone less than 50 or so driving one. The Mercedes S550 also seems to be almost exclusively senior-citizen (not quite as much as the DTS).....probably because few younger folks can actually afford one LOL.

I didn't include the Lincoln Town Car because, while many of the TC's private-owners are old, a lot of them are also driven by younger Chauffeurs working for limo/executive car firms.

The only reason the Regal Grand National/GNX had the popularity it did was that, in the mid-late 1980s, it appealed to more or less the same Baby-Boomer crowd (by then, starting to age) that had been into the American muscle-car scene some twenty years earlier. The Camaro SS, Pontiac Trans-Am, and 5.0L Mustangs also competed for a slice of that crowd....although, as ponycars, they were somewhat smaller than the mid-size Grand National.

Joeb427

iTrader: (1)

Oh my....

mmarshall

With me, you never know. That could (?) just be a smokescreen. I might just be saying that to hide my real intention.

Anyhow, agreed....it's off-topic. We were discussing the GS.

MattyG

The Regal GS has the shadow of the Audi A4 hanging over it. I see more younger buyers in A4's than in Regals and even Veranos. It's not always about price. Clearly luxury car buyers will pay more for perceived brand status, especially if they are car enthusiasts. The real elephant in the room is that Audi uses the longitudinal drive train layout in this segment.

Here you are still getting the ole warhorse 3.6 and transverse engine layout. Details matter.

mmarshall

Though it's a great sedan in many ways, the problem with the A4, though, engine-wise, is that, unless you move up to an S4 (an additional 15K), you can't get a V6. That's not to belittle the excellent standard 2.0L gas four in any way (the 2.0L TDI diesels, of course, are still on hold). But many people still prefer a V6...and the new GS will (apparently) have one available.

MattyG

I agree with you on let's say, paper comparisons about drive train options. But the reality is that reviewers and owners constantly praise VW/Audi turbo 4's. You can compare the 0-60 times. This Regal GS (which is the performance variant here) goes what? 6.5 secs to 60. The Audi already has that nailed down with 5.2 secs. And it's down on horsepower by about 60 hp on the V6. So what's the advantage of the V6 here? And heaven forbid any sporting driver in a GS runs up against an S4 because it will blast to 60 in 4.3 secs!

The thing is that it's about performance, image, youthfulness. The Buick has made some astonishing progress but it has had a tough time losing it's stodgy old people's image. You can see even in this latest model how Buick, is shedding that big ole "1950's soda stand" image. They're using the Opel grill cues.

Now of course you can say that it's not all about C&D stats etc but when a car performs exceptionally well on some benchmarks, you know it's going to be outstanding in normal driving. The A4/S4 twins should be Buick's benchmark. That would be the spirit of the old GN's, GNX's. If all you want to do is offer an alternative to the Fusion Sport, then you have a winner.

mmarshall

True that N/A V6s don't always outrun the smaller turbo fours. But brute force is not always what a N/A/ V6 is about......the main advantage is smoothness and refinement, though I'll admit that VW/Audi does one of the best turbo-fours in the buisness. N/A/ engines are also easier maintain, and have fewer parts in them to fail.

drgrant

Not only that but those of us that owned older GSs still have a bad taste in our mouths. The motor and the transmission were great, the brakes were anemic and basically warped if you thought about them the wrong way, the seats feel comfortable for about 4 minutes until your "back is like **** you there's no lumbar support here, at all" as well as a bunch of other random cheap **** on the car that made what would have been a great car a marginal one.

Not to mention you get the car to 200K and it's done. Like as in, throw it away, forget about it. Not sure if current GM products are still that bad. At least with a Lexus if you want to keep it 200K plus, you can, without spending a fortune to do it.

-Mike

mmarshall

Yeah, GM used crap brake rotors for a number of years, with poor metal-quality....resurfacing or replacement of the rotors around every 15,000 miles was more or less standard. Those days are gone, especially with today's Opel-sourced Buicks...which includes the Regal.

I had a late 90s-vintage plastic-body Saturn SL-2, though (a GM design), where the rotors weren't too bad...but they weren't as durable as the ones in my later Verano (another Opel-sourced Buick).

IMO, ANY car, regardless of brand, that gives you 200K miles has more than done its duty, and doesn't owe you one thin dime.

niklow

While in college, i remember being upset that my parents gave me their 96 regal and not going for a civic like the other younger crowd. However that 3.8 torque while surprising many drivers at the light. It was a great car in the end, this GS is worth a look. 90s buicks were cars to get as you knew they were very well maintained an not abused by its ownership crowd.

MattyG

Well, then you're back to the point: is Buick a car for people who don't care about ultimate performance or do they want ultra-lux-smooth quiet motoring? It's a tough segment. Really we could argue about V8's, V6's and then move to turbo/supercharged power plants. Some of the local yokel F150 drivers seem to happily enjoy showing off the torque of their basically primitive truck platforms routinely, where I live. And they are doing it with what would have been heresy just 10-15 years ago. Turbo V6 power-plants.

Audi has a history of getting big bang out of small displacement. But Buick does not (other than the 60's 70's big bore V8's and of course GN's). I still think that this GS could have a role in really showing something about Buick's performance and you still have Cadillac to deal with.

Toys4RJill

Regal and A4 are really in a kind of different segment. A4/IS/3/C all in the same category. The A4 should have superior performance driving while credentials while the Buick Regal should have better day to day driving satisfaction. If I had the choice, the Regal would be the car I would want to get.

Hoovey689

iTrader: (16)

You've mentioned in multiple posts that you don't trust GM

Toys4RJill

And I sure as hell don't trust Audi. If I were to set aside reliability, I would never get a Toyota or a Lexus. Best looking car that has caught my eyes in the last few years is the Buick Cascada. Perhaps when I retire and don't have the driving miles requirements, perhaps I would lust towards something other than a Toyota.

But you are right, I do not trust GM.

Hoovey689

iTrader: (16)

So sounds like they won't ever see a dime from you, but if someone said "I have a free A4 or Regal GS for you, which would you like?" you'd take the Regal.