I do too....also like the brakes!

 

Unfortunately that car looks pretty good to me.

I might have to do something about the grille though.

 

A nearly forty-thousand dollar front drive based Buick? No thanks.

It's a good looking car, but Viagra couldn't turn me on to that thing.

 

That's the stigma GM needs to fight. The "FWD based, starting in the mid-30's fully loaded AWD sedan" idea seems to do just fine for Audi. And Volvo. And Subaru... where even a WRX STI starts at $35k now. This thing is going to be in the same price point as a WRX STI. It's also not a "Buick" in the same way the old Regal was.

But that's the problem. People will think a Regal GS and think of it as inferior because it isn't a tire smoking RWD sedan with a V8. Even though it is a very nice car for the segment and you'll get some pretty good stuff for the money.

 

Talking to Jim Federico, VLE of the Insigna/Regal, he said he wants to get more power out of the 2.0T. A lot more, and still maintain the gas milage.
Also, in GS mode, 85% of the power can be sent to the rear wheels.
The target for the GS's steering and handling is the Pontiac G8 GXP.
They do not want to put a V6 in this car, and they will try and fight it for as long as they can. They would rather boost the 2.0T to make V6 power then drop a V6.
This is all form Jim's mouth.


If its not the car for you, its not the car for you. But it will be the car for a lot of people. It has class, quality, beautiful design, and now a performance edge.

 

Interesting stuff, Al.

 

I think this would be a great car for GM to debut a real impressive four cylinder. Something with up near 300hp and great gas mileage. That would draw attention and create some great PR for this car. I'm pretty sure they should be able to get the turbo 2.0L to do that and still pass durability testing. We will see.

 

GM's stage 1 kit for the Cobalt and HHR push it to 290 hp and over 300 lb/ft . Those kits were subject to all the durability and emissions testing prior to certification .

 

So maybe they will give this higher content and higher price point Buick the equivalent of that stage 1 kit from the factory. That would be V6 power from a 4 cylinder. How do the HHR and Cobalt do on gas mileage with this kit?

 

As good as your right foot determines.

If I can get 20-22 mpg out of a 1979 2.4 (bored out) turbo lima engine, getting 30 mpg from these should be easy!

 

The question is, with a giant 3900lb sedan and AWD to shove around, what will the mpg, handling and pickup be like?

In the Sky/Solstice, the LNF could be bumped to 290hp/340tq - and the Halidex AWD system could handle the extra juice. The more important question is why (in all the details we've seen so far) they spew only 255hp/295tq in their descriptions. I suspect reliability has something to do with it...
I'm betting the stage kit decreases the engine life enough that GM was expecting an increase in warranty - which is partially why the kit is priced so dang high for just a flash and a MAP sensor. I'd bet here we have the same issue - having to accelerate a big heavy car is going to keep the engine in boost longer and more often than a little Cobalt - so the engine's full potential is kept locked out in an attempt to balance engine life expectancy and power. Could we see another GM stage kit? to bump the extra power? I sure hope so!

 

I cant attest as to why its so expensive , but I can tell from expirience the Ecotec engine is a stout little piece . My 05 longblock lived 60K miles of its life @ a few ticks over 300 modded hp and never missed a beat . Theres not a whole lot different from a 05 lsj block and 08-current LNF block and what is different is improved upon . I think GM is probably more concerned about fuel economy figures with the heavier car , over durability worries . If tuned >correctly< and no mistakes are made , the weakest part being the cast pistons are living in at or above 400 hp . The stock crank and rods are forged , the block is proven strong via race teams that use factory blocks . The stock cometic head gasket and studs could be improved upon , but overall ...yea , the ecotec is strong lil engine . As far as fuel economy with a stage 1 tune on a LNF , I cant personally comment as Ive not ventured there . I can say a majority of LNF owners ( cobalts anyways ) , under normal driving have gotten better fuel economy than stock with a tune . Whether it be a Hahn Racecraft , trifecta or GM stage 1 ect ect . My supercharged SS got much better fuel economy modded under normal driving circumstances . I was getting an average of 36 mpg all highway and 26-28 mpg combined . The stock tune is PIG PIG PIG rich and the stock credit card maf sensor sucks , I switched to a LS2 MAF .

To bad it will cost so much . This AWD, LNF powered Buick is gonna be sweet ....it just wont sound as nice as a DI3.6 , which I think is great sounding v6 .

 

Is it the same 2.0T found in the recent 9-3s? My wife's 06 9-3 had that motor and at 210 hp it moved the car around decently, but the curb weight was only around 3200 lbs iirc. They'd need to work that lil 2.0 quite a bit to get to to move 3900 lbs around nicely.

 

The turbo 2.0 in your 9-3 is the 1st gen of ecotec engines Chuck . Iron block , aluminum head , much has changed since then .

 

So was the LNF the gen 2 of that motor? I thought the 2.0T in the Saab was Sweed-specific (insert smiley that says "Im an idiot")