Regal engines

[jaydee]

Originally Posted by mbukukanyau

Forget keeping Buick in its place. May the best brand win. Why does Cadillac need to be protected from Buick?


If Cadillac managers cannot come up with better product than Buick Managers, screw em, screw Cadillac, Buick should go all out and get its name out there.
There is bigger fish to fry than trying to protect cadillac. Thats my view.

I agree. If this competes with Caddy, it's Caddy's problem, not Buick. Besides what would this compete against that Cadillac has anyways? CTS? I doubt it. Some overlap is ok as long as there is substantial difference in styling.

[K-1]

Originally Posted by ARCANGEL

Not true at all. If the lacrosse tops off at 41 k and the ATS starts at 35 one being fwd/awd and the other being rwd/awd caddy would begin where Buick ends. Then the cts would be at 50k and so on and so forth. Different drivetrains different engines different approaches.

Why should Buick be bound on the top end? A big-ass car (a la DTS) would be right at home under Buick. There's no use soften Caddy's image for that spot.

[ARCANGEL]

Originally Posted by K-1

Why should Buick be bound on the top end? A big-ass car (a la DTS) would be right at home under Buick. There's no use soften Caddy's image for that spot.

So then Cadillac is irelevant

[InvictaMan]

Originally Posted by K-1

if Buick makes Caddy look bad, Caddy also looks bad to BMW, MB, Audi, Lexus, Lincoln, etc.

Then I suppose they will just have to buy a Buick if it is more appealing than a Cadillac. No one is making Caddy look bad but themselves. Buick has been held back "way" too long because GM cannot get Cadillac where it needs to be. I say "build a better Buick and let the best car win — the sales". It all benefits GM in the long run, does it not?

[ARCANGEL]

Originally Posted by InvictaMan

Then I suppose they will just have to buy a Buick if it is more appealing than a Cadillac. No one is making Caddy look bad but themselves. Buick has been held back "way" too long because GM cannot get Cadillac where it needs to be. I say "build a better Buick and let the best car win — the sales". It all benefits GM in the long run, does it not?

Invicta man you have read my mind. I am more excited by Buick than Cadillac and if cadillac cant get to were it needs to be but Buick starts selling like hot cakes oh well may the best car win!

[Z284ever]

Originally Posted by CRBoyd91

Still, a sport sedan NEEDS a manual option. GM has to grasp the concept. It would do wonders for their perception...

I agree. And really, take rate be damned. From the Chevy Citation I had in 1980 to the CTS I currently drive, they've all been sticks. For me, no stick, no deal. And honestly, if you are serious about a more youthful image, about a different demographic, about penetrating a different niche, having an available manual is huge - even if the take rate is 5% or less.

[ARCANGEL]

Originally Posted by Z284ever

I agree. And really, take rate be damned. From the Chevy Citation I had in 1980 to the CTS I currently drive, they've all been sticks. For me, no stick, no deal. And honestly, if you are serious about a more youthful image, about a different demographic, about penetrating a different niche, having an available manual is huge - even if the take rate is 5% or less.

I am with you only two vehicles I have owned were ever autos both SUVs. The rest all manuals and they appealed to me for that reason. The manuals low take rate or not allow a different perception of the vehicle and a different client age and mentality wise to consider it.

[vcs2600]

Originally Posted by InvictaMan

Then I suppose they will just have to buy a Buick if it is more appealing than a Cadillac. No one is making Caddy look bad but themselves. Buick has been held back "way" too long because GM cannot get Cadillac where it needs to be. I say "build a better Buick and let the best car win — the sales". It all benefits GM in the long run, does it not?

Love it when everyone gets drunk on the GM Kool-Aide.

Back in reality, the Buick brand is on very thin ice, and it's still an open question if they will be successful with their current strategy. Push Buick up into the Cadillac price range, and they would be dead in an instant.

[ARCANGEL]

Originally Posted by vcs2600

Love it when everyone gets drunk on the GM Kool-Aide.

Back in reality, the Buick brand is on very thin ice, and it's still an open question if they will be successful with their current strategy. Push Buick up into the Cadillac price range, and they would be dead in an instant.

Ummm no one said push Buick up to cadillac prices? Where did you get that? We said if Cadillac should move up so not to overlap with the highest Buick model. Also Buick is going nowhere when china alone can carry the brand. Cadillac can barely survive in america, and is def not surviving outside of America. So which one is on thin ice?

[JBsZ06]

Originally Posted by BlackGTP

And then GM can play on Ford's marketing and call it EgoBoost!

If I remember correctly GM created the 2 liter turbo 4 that went in the Solstice GXP, Sky redline, HHR SS, Cobalt SS way before ford even thought of its Ecoboost nameplate..

GM really could create a great audi A4 fighter with an turbo regal and pass on the v6 engine altogether for this model... Leave that for the Lacrosse...to carry a higher level of luxury.

I don't believe Audi even offers the a4 with a v6 engine any more...The 200hp turbo 4 was more than powerful enough for its customer base...

If GM offered up the 2 liter 260 hp turbo four....it really would upstage the audi. IMO

[ARCANGEL]

Originally Posted by JBsZ06

If I remember correctly GM created the 2 liter turbo 4 that went in the Solstice GXP, Sky redline, HHR SS, Cobalt SS way before ford even thought of its Ecoboost nameplate..

GM really could create a great audi A4 fighter with an turbo regal and pass on the v6 engine altogether for this model... Leave that for the Lacrosse...to carry a higher level of luxury.

I don't believe Audi even offers the a4 with a v6 engine any more...The 200hp turbo 4 was more than powerful enough for its customer base...

If GM offered up the 2 liter 260 hp turbo four....it really would upstage the audi. IMO

You are correct Audi dropped the v6 in the A4 it will only carry the 2.0T I believe 210hp as of now. The regal can definitely be an A4 fighter

[Baggage Handler]

Originally Posted by Z284ever

I agree. And really, take rate be damned. From the Chevy Citation I had in 1980 to the CTS I currently drive, they've all been sticks. For me, no stick, no deal. And honestly, if you are serious about a more youthful image, about a different demographic, about penetrating a different niche, having an available manual is huge - even if the take rate is 5% or less.

Yes. We won't even look at it if it isn't available with a manual.

If the Regal comes in a stick with a turbo 4, we'll certainly very seriously consider it should the Saab (only 4 person GM sedan actually available with a stick at the time) ever need replacing.

[ponchoman49]

It should be interesting to see how the public perceives another mid size lower end Buick with 4 cylinder only powerplants in the volume models. They have tried this before with little interest ala Skyhawk with a turbo 2.0 liter and stick, tech IV Centurys, Quad 4 Skylarks and such. Save the Skyhawk most buyers opted for the smoother more liveable V6 engines. When I hear Buick I think V6. They have a long heritage with that engine configuration and I think the LaCrosses base 3.0 SIDI would make a better choice than the higher stress more noisy 2.0 liter turbo.

[ZeeTwentyFour]

Originally Posted by JBsZ06

If I remember correctly GM created the 2 liter turbo 4 that went in the Solstice GXP, Sky redline, HHR SS, Cobalt SS way before ford even thought of its Ecoboost nameplate..

GM really could create a great audi A4 fighter with an turbo regal and pass on the v6 engine altogether for this model... Leave that for the Lacrosse...to carry a higher level of luxury.

I don't believe Audi even offers the a4 with a v6 engine any more...The 200hp turbo 4 was more than powerful enough for its customer base...

If GM offered up the 2 liter 260 hp turbo four....it really would upstage the audi. IMO

QFT

[avro206]

Originally Posted by ponchoman49

When I hear Buick I think V6. They have a long heritage with that engine configuration and I think the LaCrosses base 3.0 SIDI would make a better choice than the higher stress more noisy 2.0 liter turbo.

Just 2 things to keep in perspective:

The general public has no clue about the Buick V6 (3.8) or that Buick had V6s generally before other automakers. Plus I bet they'd use alot of insulation for turbo 2.0--it also has a lot of tq down low and super flat curve. The 3.0 has to rev alot higher to get it's peak hp number.