Spoiler alert: At some point in this review, I am going to make the idiotic suggestion that the Buick Regal GS ought to come with a manual transmission. I’m assuming you’re all somewhat familiar with the Buick Regal, a lightly Americanized version of the European-market Opel Insignia. By our standards, the Insignia is legitimately European. It’s a hatchback masquerading as a sedan, which is (or at least used to be) a popular bodystyle in Europe.

1. New Buick Regal 2018
2. 2018 Buick Regal Manual Transmission
3. 2018 Regal Gs

It’s built in Germany, which is more than a lot of BMWs and Benzes can say. By European standards, though, the Insignia is – well, it’s sort of a Buick. It’s wallowy and a bit soft around the tummy. The GS is the hod-rod model, which dumps the 2.0-liter turbo four and replaces it with a 310 horsepower version of GM’s corporate 3.6-liter V6. It gets a nine-speed auto tranny and all-wheel-drive, bigger front brakes with red-painted Brembo calipers, unique front and rear fascias, and fancier gauges and front seats. Surprisingly, the GS’ suspension differs little from the regular car. The front springs are calibrated to carry the extra weight of the V6 engine, and the Regal GS gets Continuous Damping Control, which is GM-speak for adjustable shocks.

(One wonders why the Regal didn’t get the magnificent Magnetic Ride Control system. My guess is that CDC offers more discernable variation between driver-selectable drive modes.) How does it drive? For the most part, it’s quite good. If you’ve ever driven an Audi A4 and thought, “Well, that was a bit overrated,” you’ll understand my feelings about the Regal GS. This is a competent car that does what you’d expect a 300-ish horsepower all-wheel-drive sedan to do. The steering feels nice. The grip is strong.

There’s no corner-exit drama, and if you push too hard it raps you lightly on the knuckles with a bit of gentle understeer. You can crank it up to pretty high speeds in the corners and it won’t embarrass itself. I’m not the world’s greatest hot-shoe, nor am I the world’s biggest coward (though I’m more of the latter than the former), and the Regal GS didn’t do anything that scared me. Unfortunately, it didn’t do anything that really thrilled me, either. Let’s start picking things apart, shall we? Before we get to performance, I’d like to talk about appearance. (Ideally, a good sport sedan generates a little adrenaline pressure before you open the door.) I happen to think the Regal Sportback is a good-looking car to begin with, and the GS looks fine to me.

From the outside, at least. Inside, not so much. Not that there’s anything wrong with the new Regal’s interior; goodness knows it’s a huge improvement over the old one. But a video speedometer and some piano-black trim isn’t enough to differentiate the GS from lesser Regals. How about some red stitching on the dash and seats? How about a big fat “GS” embroidered on the headrests?

How about programming that video IP so it glows red when you select “Sport” or “GS” mode? As I said earlier, there’s nothing really wrong with the suspension setup. Buick engineers had to get down with the whole Quiet Tuning thing. And frankly, they did a pretty amazing job.

The Regal GS is as peaceful as a library and has an exceptionally comfortable ride, which is no small accomplishment considering how well it handles. No, the big letdown is the powertrain. High Feature V6, j’accuse!

It doesn’t help the GS’ case that the 2.0T engine fitted to the regular Regal is a solid powerplant. Of course, there’s a good argument for replacing a turbo four with a V6: Better off-the-line performance courtesy of strong low-end torque.

Problem is, the 3.6 doesn’t have any. The 2.0T in the Regal Sportback delivers 295 lb-ft of torque when equipped with all-wheel-drive, with peak delivery between 3,000 and 4,000 RPM. The 3.6 delivers 282 lb-ft of torque, and it peaks at 5,200 RPM. I’d be willing to bet that the average human can’t detect a 13 lb-ft deficit. But you could have all of the nerve endings in your back and buttocks removed and still figure out that the V6-powered Regal doesn’t take off any better than the 2.0T.

Of course, an engine doesn’t have to be fast to feel fast. There are tricks of the trade: Enough low-end torque to push you back in your seat (and we know that boat has been missed), or a deep, throaty engine note.

Nope, the GS doesn’t have that either. Buick claims the Regal GS has a sport-tuned exhaust. Apparently, the sport in question is badminton. My point – and I probably should have gotten to it earlier – is that the $39,995 Buick Regal GS isn’t enough of an improvement over the regular Regal Sportback. Not enough to justify the $5,200 premium over the top-of-the-line Regal Essence, and sure-as-feck not enough to rationalize the $14,000 increase over the entry-level Sportback. So what could Buick have done differently?

Well, for one thing, they could have put a stick shift in it. For the record, I hate, hate, hate it when automotive writers make this ridiculous assertion, especially when the automotive writer in question is me.

Don’t get me wrong: I love manual transmissions. If I had my druthers, everything would come with a manual transmission. Who wouldn’t want a Wraith with a three on the tree?

But the reality, as we all know, is that few people buy manuals. (Although they’d probably buy more if there were more to buy.) Pointing out that a given car ought to come with a manual does nothing but highlight the fact that we can’t get what we want. Pour a little lemon juice in the wound, why don’t you. We can all guess the reason why the GS doesn’t come with a manual: Budget.

The Euro-market Insignia obviously comes with a manny-tranny, but it’d cost a bunch o’ money to get U.S. Emissions certification for a stick Regal, and it’s just not worth it for the few copies they would sell. Complicating this is the fact that American performance enthusiasts aren’t that important to Buick. For every car Buick sells in the US, they sell five and a half in China. While I can’t claim to know the mind of the average Chinese auto buyer, I have a feeling they aren’t exactly looking for Lancer Evo clones with Buick badges. Now, we know GM can build proper performance cars. Anyone who has driven a late-model Corvette, Camaro, ATS-V, or twin-turbo CT6 can attest to that.

Buick could have built a Regal GS that would have knocked our socks off, but it probably didn’t make good financial sense – and that’s why the GS appears to be best suited to overweight oldsters who haven’t been able to drive a stick since their knees started acting up a few years ago. So there’s no business case – but what ever happened to brand pride? Back in ’65, Buick lied about the displacement of the 401 V8, calling it a 400 so that they could skirt the corporate rules restricting the maximum engine size for an intermediate car. If we were back in the 1960s – the days when GM divisions were competing against each other, and not just the rest of the world – Buick would have built a world-class GS.

Sadly, outside of Chevrolet and GMC, brand pride at GM seems to be a relic of the past. Imagine if that spirit of FU was still alive at Buick.

In my dream world, the Regal GS would have a high-output version of the 2.0T cranked up to 300 hp and 300-or-so lb-ft of torque. It would have a six-speed manual lifted from the Insignia. It would have an interior that would make the Civic Type R look as sedate as a Volkswagen Golf. It would have adopted the flappy-valve exhaust from the Corvette, and at the press of a button would go from church quiet to popping and farting on the overrun. It would have the same fantastic suspension setup, with the body dropped a half-inch or so to hug its standard-fit summer performance tires.

It would have been a bargain at the GS’ $40k price tag. The GS I am envisioning would have been ridiculously expensive to engineer and never would have justified the few sales it would garner in the US. But you know what it would do? It would get people like you and me to sit up and take notice of Buick. It would have made us realize that, hey, maybe we had Buick all wrong. Maybe not all Buicks are old man cars or gussied-up rental-quality Chevys.

Maybe they’re ‘60s cocktail cool, elegant cars with big-ass motors and hot styling. Maybe it’d get us to seriously consider Regal Sportbacks and TourXs, just as the ’65 GS cars got people to buy Special Deluxes and Skylarks and LeSabres. And then Buick would follow up the Regal GS with a Regal TourX GS wagon, and wouldn’t that make people like us lose our shit!

Sadly, I know I’m dreaming. The Buick Regal GS I want is simply not realistic.

In fact, Buick tried something like this with the 2012 Regal GS. It didn’t sell many, and I don’t think it did much for Verano, LaCrosse, or Enclave sales, either. So, like I said, my suggestion that Buick build a stick-shift Regal GS is just plain stupid.

Still, can you blame me for thinking the 2018 Regal GS is a missed opportunity? Images: General Motors.

PrincipalDan How are the seats? I’ve been reading every review I could get my hands on for this sucker and some reviews have said: “World Class Seats!” others have said: “The massage function is effin’ useless – like having a kindergarten student kick you in the back!” Actually all the reviews seem bi-polar for this vehicle. One will say: “Where’s the flappy paddles? The next review will say: “Doesn’t need flappy paddles. This transmission is wonderful!” One will say: “Too subtle of a GS model.” Another: “Just right styling for a Buick.” I’m getting whiplash. Aaron Gold The seats: You know, I rarely comment on seats in my reviews because a) seat comfort is so subjective and b) I rarely notice a seat as being bad unless it’s really, really,.really. bad.

So, these seats: Well, they work. The bolsters inflate and the thigh extender extends. I actually thought the inflatable bolsters were kind of a funny thing considering how many people who buy this thing will be pudgy like yours truly. Paddles: The GM folks said “People never use shift paddles.” I am inclined to agree; IMHO, if the transmission is any good, you won’t need them. But they are an expected thing and the Regal GS ought to have them.

Price of entry. No surprise that the reviews are all over the place. IMHO, the Regal GS is good to drive, and if this was 2001 I might be really impressed but GM can do better, and I think they should have. Peter Gazis Aaron Had a few things to do yesterday. Ended up driving my 2016 AWD Regal GS around for 8 hours straight with a. Because I’m “fat and old” I would expect to get some aches and pains driving a normal car around, but in the Regal I was perfectly fine. Point is the seats are fantastic, and you have no clue what you’re talking about.

You should stick to reviewing fan boy racers, and leave the real cars to adults. BTW The Regal – 37,000 miles through the worst streets, traffic and weather Chicagoland has to offer. Zero issues and still looks like I just drove it off the lot. Civicjohn Re: Parousia, You hit the nail on the head. Just wait for the discounts. I wish they would have tried harder, but obviously Corporate had a different idea.

Mary is being pulled in so many directions. There’s a fair amount of people out there that think V-6 means a whole different driving experience.

In most cases it doesn’t, but the owners get to enjoy the crappy MPG that a V-6 gives you, and they’ll get it then. GM – the definition of a company that probably knows what the customer wants, but will never deliver unless it’s a truck. Ponchoman49 The V6 not only sounds light years better but has much better 40-100 MPH pull when the tiny turbo engine is struggling.

Yes some places do allow for speeds above 65 MPH. Having seen quite a few LFX 3.6 Gm engines with over 200k miles with no issues at all other than one valve de-carbon procedure speaks volumes on how this engine hold up with proper care.

New Buick Regal 2018

Would have doubts on that tiny turbo 4 banger. Then you have the regular 87 fuel that a 3.6 can burn versus premium that is recommended on the turbo otherwise power and mileage drop. Thegamper Nice review. I like this car, like the lift back design. The bright red, not so much. Having been a turbo owner, I appreciate the NA engine and its relative simplicity. I love that I can get a Buick with 300 hp and AWD that doesn’t have a completely stupid name like “Lacrosse”.

I think you are right that people who wanted a stoplight assassin or a Nurbergring champ out of this car are going to be disappointed. But I also think that you, and the other guy will just have to get over it. 300hp and AWD is probably all the power that vast majority of us would ever need and pretty competitive in this segment at this price. Keeping the price reasonable is appreciated. It ticks a lot of boxes, adding speed, appointments, etc would put this car in price territory that it really doesn’t play well in. Im not disappointed at all. Making a car available with a stick these days is nice, for press fleets.

Good luck finding one to test drive on a dealer lot unless its an MX-5, Corvette, Mustang, etc. KalapanaBlack7G And most of the “wish list” describes the oddball, flawed, enthusiast-courting-on-a-budget, awkwardly youthful-leaning last generation Regal GS. Which was both financially unsuccessful for GM and did bupkiss for the enthusiast commentariat, hence the continued moaning of “when will something come along that makes the enthusiast sit up and take notice of Buick?” Which other way could they go? Besides, this is a lame duck now the PSA owns Opel/Vauxhall. And given the sales of the “we threw everything at it” new Lacrosse, or lack thereof, can ya blame em? TW5 Buick = American Lexus Ditching the 2.0T I4 for the 3.6 V6 was the correct move.

The 3.6 will be more reliable in the long run and V6’s are generally smoother. The lack of any noticeable performance upgrade, beyond the more sporty styling, means the Regal GS is functioning like F Sport trim for Lexus. Unfortunately, it seems the interior appointments, infotainment and overall interior design are still lacking.

2 out of 3 ain’t bad. The 3.6L V6 is the smart move for longevity and refinement. Using GS as F Sport trim is a smart move. Allowing the interior to lag behind the competition, and referring to the dodgy interior as “affordable luxury” is an airball.

2018 Buick Regal Manual Transmission

Ponchoman49 Mh buddy has a 2012 Impala with the LFX and 202K miles on the original motor with no issues other than a valve de-carbon about 50K miles ago. He also has a 2012 LLT equipped Traverse with 156K miles and it still purrs like a kitten with zero issues.

My other friend had a 2013 Impala LTZ with the LFX that had 188K miles and other than the valve de-carbon was flawless. We have also sold a good -2015 Impala’s, Traverses, Equinoxes and Lacrosses equipped with these engines and well over 100K and they have been flawless with a zero return rate.

The key- proper maintenance and the use of the correct oil (Dexos). My 2013 is closing in on 80K miles and it too has been flawless enginewise. Zero oil use between changes and it runs perfect. The timing chain issue was corrected years ago and the oil burning seemed to affect the older series original DI motors with improper oil use. TW5 GM doesn’t refer to Buick as American Lexus. I refer to Buick as American Lexus, and I judge it as such because that’s what it must be.

American manufacturers don’t define the luxury segment anymore. The Germans and Japanese do. Cadillac is already after the Germans. Buick needs to target the Japanese.

The new Regal is basically a carbon copy of the Lexus ES in terms of exterior dimensional proportions. The base Regal should be offered with the 2.5L LCV. Unfortunately, it’s offered with the 2.0T LTG. The LTG will probably be unaffordable depreciation and unaffordable long-term maintenance, not affordable luxury. Dumb decision by GM, imo.

However, the GS is offered with the 3.6L LGX and AWD. That’s smart. Similar to the winning formula used by Lexus. Buick needs to offer the LGX with FWD in virtually all non-base Regals. Buick refers to themselves as affordable luxury. It’s smart if you understand the car business and the latent inefficiencies in luxury car manufacturing. It’s incredibly dumb if you understand consumer psychology.

I’m ignoring whatever Buick thinks it is, and I’m judging it how it must be judged. 30-mile fetch “It would get people like you and me to sit up and take notice of Buick” I know you’re speaking for yourself, butspeak for yourself. If it had the ridiculous gaudiness of Civic Type R and boost-it-till-it-bursts 300hp 2.0T you propose, I’d be noticing it the same way I notice a WRX with a fart can.

As it is now, it’s a very tasteful and attractive looking sedan with a linear 300hp six and a price point that would very much have me cross-shopping it against the class-leading A4, 330, and C300 that have a brand perception a full level above Buick. Does reasonably tactile steering drive away mainstream consumers? Because that’s one improvement that could make it more attractive to “enthusiasts” without alienating normal buyers. It seems guaranteed that in the current automotive environment this car isn’t going much of anywhere, but cross-breeding it with hot hatch genes isn’t going to make it any better either. Mikey @ daveI’ve been following your Verano story since day one.

Yes GM managed to get you into a rolling t—d Your Buick would be the poster vehicle in the leasing vs buying argument. My theory for what it worth??

The major down side of assembly line manufacturing is the odd ball thrown into the schedule. We ran a few manuals back in the Pontiac 6000 STE days.

At the time GM assigned people to nothing more than chase the manuals down the line. I’m truly sorry you had a sour experience with a GM product.

I’ve mentioned before here at TTAC of my horrible experience with an 89 S 15. Were it not for the GM logo on my pay cheque that POS would have been the last GM product I ever bought. I traded it for a new 97 W.T that never gave a moments problem. Davefromcalgary Thanks for commenting Mikey. It seems to make sense that the oddball nature of my order messed them up, because it was a factory order, and not one out of a set production run of manuals. I can certainly see why that might have caused issues, though it doesnt really excuse it.

My main gripe though was GM Canada’s lack of give a damn over the situation. It might be petty but I’m pretty sure it cost them more to fix than it would have for them to buy it back or terminate the lease early, and I am happy about that. Ive always been a GM guy and GM has always been a mainstay in my family. I’m window shopping for a truck and looking strongly at 13 and 14 Sierras with the 6.2.

That way I can have my truck I want but GM will never see another dime from me, at least not soon. PartSource and a good indy from here out. As Ive said before, the saddest thing about my particular experience is that had the thing been trouble free, I would be the first to sing its praises. I think the Verano is a good car, not my Verano.

Fordson He’s surprised that the V6 isn’t making torque down low like the 2.0T is? Factory says the turbo is making 295 lb/ft from 2500-4000, not 3000-4000. And it’s making 270 lb/ft by 2000 rpm. It’s a turbo.

The V6 is making maybe 200 lb/ft max at 2000 rpm. Who is this guy? Why is any of this a surprise to him?

In 95th percentile throttle application, the 9-speed will be able to keep the V6 in its narrow powerband and it will be slightly fasterin all other driving, the 2.0T will feel more powerful. Aaron Gold Factory says the turbo is making 295 lb/ft from 2500-4000, not 3000-4000.

Double-check the specs. The FWD (260 lb-ft) engine peaks from 2500 to 5200, while the AWD (295 lb-ft) engine peaks from 3000-4000. Reading this was a “Wait, what?” moment for me, but there you are. Turbo lag, though going away, is still an issue. A nice big V6 should punch you in the back right out of the hole. The GS doesn’t. Happenstance meant that I drove a TourX right before.and.

after the Regal GS press junket. The butt dyno didn’t register enough difference between ’em. Jerome10 I wish more companies would stick with naturally aspirated engines. Sorry but a V6 is just nicer than an I4. Sounds better. I bet real world negligible difference in MPG, or if you’re Ford probably better than turbo engines.

It’s a load of garbage. Just cuz a smaller turbo makes same power or whatever doesn’t make it better. Power isn’t everything and I’m a little tired of cars that seem to think stats are important while missing completely on how a car feels (see BMW the last decade). So yeah I applaud the V6 even if it doesn’t rally make the car “faster”.

Driving an I3 BMW 118i in Europe right now. I’m sure BMW will tell me it makes more power and torque than a naturally aspirated 4 cylinder. This engine sucks.

Feels like a diesel. Revs like a diesel. Doesn’t give fuel economy of a diesel. I doubt the GM 2.0 4 sucks but you get my drift. They should make them all with the V6. BTW does this make the regal a potential Ace of Base? Or does it make the TourX the one to buy in this range?

Would love a review of that car! Krhodes1 They are better at everything except making me happy – and that is ultimately all that matters. Thus I refuse to buy a new car with an automatic. No stick, I won’t even consider the car. I may be rare, but I am not alone. The first smart maker is the one who realizes that the true manual transmission people like me will pay MORE for the manual transmission. I would cheerfully pay a couple grand to have a manual in an F31 3-series wagon or an Alfa Giulia, just to name two cars that would be in my garages today if that were possible.

Jbm0866 I think everyone (including the author of the article) is missing the point, and something all car companies do when launching a new/redesigned model.and that’s holding a bit back for later. As soon as the excitement of the new Regal/GS (ha.just humor me) dies down they’ll slap a turbo or supercharger on the V6 giving it around 360 hp, tighten up the suspension, put a wing on the back and call it the “Grand National” or something. Anyway, this isn’t the Regal I’m interested in, that would be the TourX (used in a couple years of course) which I think looks stunning.except for the gawdaful plastic wheel arch things.

If there’s bare, painted sheet metal underneath and those things aren’t too difficult to remove, a TourX could be in my future. Hell, just make one without the AWD/wheel arch spats and call it “Tour”that’s the one I want. PrincipalDan My local dealer has ONE sportback and no Tour Xs or GS models. I searched Auto Trader Friday and found TWO 2018 GS in the whole country. Given that the only one I’ve seen for reviews is red – I’m guessing the press fleet is ONE GS ONE Tour X and ONE regular Sportback. I understand that these suckers have to cross the Atlantic to get here but given how many reviews are being run in many different media outlets, it seems like you’d want to get cars on dealer lots faster.

Hopefully I can find one to test drive by mid 2019 when I’m looking. It doesn’t feel like GM wants to put a whole lot of GS out there. Much cautiousness on their part. Given the cars German roots I wonder if it is expensive to manufacture and they’re afraid of loosing money. DC Bruce Turbo engines are ideally suited to automatics.

With lots of low rpm torque, they give off the line punch. And, given that automatics have to be prodded really hard to do redline shifts, the fact that most turboed engines run out of breath at 4000 rpm is not a serious problem, especially given the prevalence of 8,9, 10 speed automatics.

And, the electronic brain that manages everything in the drive train can compensate for turbo lag and, mostly, deliver apparent linear throttle application. However, 4 cylinder engines bigger than 1.6 liters run roughly, idle roughly and are generally “agricultural.” Boosting with a turbo just accentuates this coarseness. OTOH, a manual transmission and an N/A engine are a happy combination. If the driver is in a hurry, he just goes deeper into the rev band to get more power and torque. If not, he can just short-shift (and burn less gas). People who prefer the sound of any 4 to a V-6 obvious have never heard (or driven) the 3 liter Yamaha V6 in the original Taurus SHO. More power and torque right up to the 7,000 rpm redline, and asking for more.

All before the days of variable valve timing. So, I agree with the reviewer: this car sounds like it needs a manual. Krhodes1 That Yamaha V6 is like the n52 in my 328i – makes max power at the redline. But it also doesn’t do much in the mid-range, just like the BMW motor. I really don’t want to have to bang the thing off the limiter to make it go.

That is too much like work no matter how nice it sounds doing it. And my BMW has the BMW Performance Intake and Exhaust, so it sound glorious.

Still too much work, and uses too much gas. Saab got this right – 2.ish liter turbo 4 tuned for torque pulling nice long gears. No need for fuss to go fast, and incredibly efficient when driven normally. If I wanted to rev the nuts off something to make progress I would buy an old Vtec Honda or Acura. Ernest This discussion reminds me of my own household, circa 1961. Dad drove a Mercedes 220S. From his perspective, it was sensibly sized, well made, and enjoyable to drive quickly.

My mom, on the other hand, thought the car was small, noisy, uncomfortable, and a chore to drive (it had manual everything back then). Dad was many things, but a fool he wasn’t- he bought mom a T-Bird. The upshot of this is simply this- does the car meet the intended expectations of the owner? There is no right or wrong answer.

Celebrity208 Although the GM pictures are nice you should add some pictures of the car you drove. The corporate pictures are designed to show the car at optimum angles and would never show a defect, blemish, or quirk. That’s what you can do with your photos. I don’t car if the car you drove was dirty or all you had was a 20yr old 1.2MP camera, show that. This goes for all reviews. If I’m interested in more pretty pics of the car I’ll see professionally touched photos on their site. You’re TTAC, not Car & Driver.

Geozinger “Still, can you blame me for thinking the 2018 Regal GS is a missed opportunity?” Yes. First world problems and all that. Enough with about the histrionics of GM in the 1960’s; no one remembers or cares about that sh!t anymore. The cheapest car you can buy today is 10 times better than any car you could have purchased in the time you referenced in the OP. We suffer from a myriad of great choices (yes, even a Mitsubishi Mirage) for relatively little money. Up until several years ago, I would have wanted a nice resto modded car from the 70’s or 80’s. Now, I’d rather have a newer far more reliable and cleaner car from the 2010’s, even if I have to go back into car payments.

This Regal could be a contestant for that ideal. Ponchoman49 This. My ancient 2013 W-body Impala outperforms any older 60’s-80’s car I have ever driven, does 0-60 in well under 6 seconds, has seen 34 on the open road going 74 MPH, is far more comfortable with meat locker A/C, fireplace heat in the winter, dramatically better braking, steering and handling and has never once left me stranded on the side of the road or got stuck in the WInter. And this is an old outdated platform that debuted in 2000 as an update to an even older platform. People today have no clue how luck they have it with cars now even compared to what was offered in the 90’s.

As a follow-up to what we like about the, it’s now time to list a few of our dislikes. While we haven’t spent nearly enough time with the car—let alone really drive it—there are a handful of oddities. Let us know if you agree or disagree with us in the comment section below. No paddle shifters Buick says customers of the previous-generation Regal GS never used them, so they’re not present in the 2018 Regal GS.

While it’s likely a savvy way to cut costs, we do find it odd this is a sport sedan without a set of paddle shifters. Many less-sporting nameplates offer them as standard with automatic transmissions, and the fact they’re missing here is kind of a letdown. Drivers can, however, shift the car via the gear selector.

The manual transmission is dead To be fair, the manual transmission died with the last Buick Regal GS, but we still miss it. It may not have improved performance, but the fact a Buick sport sedan could be equipped with a manual gearbox really solidified Buick’s old days were behind it.

Plus, rowing your own gears is simply more fun. The naturally-aspirated V6 engine This landed on our as well, but we think there’s a case to dislike it, too. The is a very good engine, but we hope once we’re given extensive drive time with the car that it doesn’t turn out to be more of a dud. 310 horsepower outdoes the old Regal GS’s turbocharged four-cylinder engine, but it’s actually down on torque.

The engine finds a home in so many different GM cars, crossovers and even trucks, so we hope Buick’s engineering team ensured the engine feels at home in the 2018 Regal GS. And we’ll say it: some of us will miss the turbocharged engine. Some of us find it fun, we love the direct connection, and it just makes for a more exhilarating drive in our eyes. I’m 41 now, and have owned 4 manual transmission cars previously (3 GMs, 1 Ford). I see both sides of the coin, therefore the CHOICE would have been nice. As it stands, GM wants me to buy a stripped Cruze or Colorado (can’t get a stick on loaded versions), or an all out sports car (Camaro/Corvette). Or an ATS, which is small, TOO small for my family.

(The SS sedan is going, going.). I don’t know if I could buy a car without paddles. But I “finally” let myself buy my first automatic. Thank goodness for paddle shifters though. I almost died (literally) in a pontiac G8 GT because it didn’t have paddle shifters.

After that I sold the car and swore I’d never buy an automatic again (the thing takes an hour to downshift. You can put the peddle to the floor in 6th gear and it just sits there like a dead horse while oncoming traffic peers down on you- I had to go into the berm because the dang thing wouldn’t accelerate.

It was freaky). Finally I bought an auto with paddle shifters and its a lot better- when I’m about to pass, two taps and I’m down to 4th gear with plenty of pulling power. I don’t know how people in the country, where your passing 5-10 times a day do it without paddle shifters. What I dislike about the GS: No Foglights! The previous version didn’t have them either, but all other non-GS Regals do get them. Doesn’t make sense. The front seats.

Perhaps they are comfortable, but they are just so ugly. I never liked racing seats, so the resemblance doesn’t win any points from me. Reminds me of something some redneck would install in an 80s G-Body or some punk kid in a junky 90s Civic. A Buick deserves some nice adjustable articulating headrests.

Not available on the wagon. This is the one I was waiting for. I have no interest in the high riding, unpainted cladded, 2.0T crossover wannabe TourX.

This report and the what we like are nice reports, but they don’t sound like reports from driving the car. What about cornering, AWD, Sport/GS mode, stereo, dash info, etc. Ordering a GS may take awhile to get it, due to made in Germany. A GS with some options puts it into the Cadillac ATS price range.

2018 Regal Gs

The way GM gradually adds features, they will see if GS has a demand. IF they would ever come out with a TTV6 in Regal GS as an option or in a GNX, it would be in a future year. They always phase in the higher performance versions after the first year, IF they will be built. We are older by a lot, we want to trade our Volvo S60 AWD and I was waiting for the GS because no GM have AWD in a smallish sedan. We wanted more Sport too like the Old Grand Sport.

Not sure 310 HP is going to do it justice at 3,800 to 4,000 lbs. My ride is a Chevy SS from Holden, I had to add the LSA supercharger, lower it, add gauges to get it where it was at least respectable on the street. I suppose you could add power to the 3.6 Liter V6 but will all the other bits stand up? Why did I pay nearly $50K for a Chevy then another $15K to get it right. You just can’t find cars that work for us old folks anymore. I should never have sold my Ron Fellows Z06, Dang it!