Regal GS - No AWD

[truth411]

Guys if they added AWD it would have weighed about 4000lbs!!! waaaaaay too much for a car thats a little smaller than a malibu.

[DGthe3]

The Buick Regal GS is supposted to be sporty, right? If so, I just don't see what AWD would have added to this car. I highly doubt it would have an active torque transfer or something similar to enhance handling. It certainly isn't overpowered with its turbo 4. It would add weight, but thats not exactly a positive.

[FenwickHockey65]

Originally Posted by DGthe3

The Buick Regal GS is supposted to be sporty, right? If so, I just don't see what AWD would have added to this car. I highly doubt it would have an active torque transfer or something similar to enhance handling. It certainly isn't overpowered with its turbo 4. It would add weight, but thats not exactly a positive.

The concept used an XWD system that transferred as much as 80% of the power to the rear wheels. That was what many people were counting on.

[Number 3]

Originally Posted by FenwickHockey65

The concept used an XWD system that transferred as much as 80% of the power to the rear wheels. That was what many people were counting on.

Counting on or hoping for, Fen?

This will be an awesome car. Plain and simple. I've only driven a 2.4 and that car is great. I have one lined up for an upcoming road trip and am eagerly looking forward to it.....................unless a certain convertible lands in my lap.

Very few people will notice the lack of AWD in the real world. Only snow states in the middle of winter might really even tell the difference. The High Performance Front Strut with the linked H-arm rear suspension is simply world class for ride and handling.

Yes, it would spec out nice to have AWD, but given the choice of the added cost and mass vs. the very limited improvement in handling????? I'd probably not order it.

The FWD car will be more than sufficient.

And keep in mind, the GS will be a lower volume entry in the Regal lineup. And an AWD version woujld be even lower volume.

IMO, of course, I am simply shocked to read Fenwick going on this way.

[FenwickHockey65]

Originally Posted by Number 3

Counting on or hoping for, Fen?

This will be an awesome car. Plain and simple. I've only driven a 2.4 and that car is great. I have one lined up for an upcoming road trip and am eagerly looking forward to it.....................unless a certain convertible lands in my lap.

Very few people will notice the lack of AWD in the real world. Only snow states in the middle of winter might really even tell the difference. The High Performance Front Strut with the linked H-arm rear suspension is simply world class for ride and handling.

Yes, it would spec out nice to have AWD, but given the choice of the added cost and mass vs. the very limited improvement in handling????? I'd probably not order it.

The FWD car will be more than sufficient.

And keep in mind, the GS will be a lower volume entry in the Regal lineup. And an AWD version woujld be even lower volume.

IMO, of course, I am simply shocked to read Fenwick going on this way.

From a lot of comments I've read on GMI, Autoblog, and other sites, AWD was expected. I feel as though a lot of the frustration and disappointment extends from people wanting the GS to stand out in the segment it would be competing in by offering standard AWD. Moreover, a lot of people felt as though the GS would be America's version of the Insignia OPC, albeit with a less powerful engine.

At the very least, AWD should be an option. Across the Regal lineup, for that matter.

I have no doubt that the GS will be a phenomenal car...but AWD would've made it much more special.

[wbt]

Originally Posted by Dave McFly

bah, I would MUCH rather have THIS:

Me too!

[DGthe3]

Originally Posted by FenwickHockey65

From a lot of comments I've read on GMI, Autoblog, and other sites, AWD was expected. I feel as though a lot of the frustration and disappointment extends from people wanting the GS to stand out in the segment it would be competing in by offering standard AWD. Moreover, a lot of people felt as though the GS would be America's version of the Insignia OPC, albeit with a less powerful engine.

At the very least, AWD should be an option. Across the Regal lineup, for that matter.

I have no doubt that the GS will be a phenomenal car...but AWD would've made it much more special.

I bet the less powerful engine has a lot to do with it. Once you cut power, the AWD won't help the acceleration too much under most conditions (if at all, due to weight). Plus, I bet it would hurt the fuel economy of the smaller engine more than it does on the V6. At that point, making it AWD probably becomes pretty hard to justify.

[8cd03gro]

It is too heavy already anyway. . . AWD would have made it an absolute dog.

[King Sun]

gm trolling again.

[Stew]

Originally Posted by FenwickHockey65

I think it might be related but isn't the exact same engine. Not sure though, that's just what I heard as the reason it isn't in Regal.

Plus, there are supposedly some reliability issues with it in the SRX...

Ah, gotcha. They could do the full on DI 3.6, I think that would not only be better for power, but probably give it a smoother all around feel. I can understand the 4 cylinder only lineup, but when compared with the competition I think it could very well hurt them instead of help. IMHO some kind of V6, NA or turbo, should be available.

[8cd03gro]

Originally Posted by King Sun

gm trolling again.

Whatever, it's the truth. The car is way overweight and lacks in the performance department compared to it's competition. AWD would only hurt it. It needs more motor.

[King Sun]

maybe that plan all a awd regal coupe with awd 3.6 di............... with some kind of turbo option. we can dream right?

[Russell James]

I owned a Regal GS a few years back. Supercharged 3800, 4spd auto trans. Loved that car, great power, mileage.... could get nearly 30 mpgs. Engine smooth as silk and pulled real strong. To me that was a great GS. I have zero interest in a 4 cyl stick shift Buick. And AWD would add zero additional interest.

Don't get the great hype over AWD? Is there a thought that this car is going to lack traction and be sliding all over? I've had several FWD's with more power, the Regal GS, had a GTP for a while... never once thought -man I wish this thing was all wheel drive. AWD kills the power to the ground and mpgs. If you don't need it, realistically you don't want it.

I can understand a 1000 hp super car having trouble spinning the tires at 70 mph needing AWD, but a 4 banger commuter car? If it chirps the tires, I'd be surprised. The last thing it would need is more powertrain drag.

[Stew]

Originally Posted by Russell James

I owned a Regal GS a few years back. Supercharged 3800, 4spd auto trans. Loved that car, great power, mileage.... could get nearly 30 mpgs. Engine smooth as silk and pulled real strong. To me that was a great GS. I have zero interest in a 4 cyl stick shift Buick. And AWD would add zero additional interest.

Don't get the great hype over AWD? Is there a thought that this car is going to lack traction and be sliding all over? I've had several FWD's with more power, the Regal GS, had a GTP for a while... never once thought -man I wish this thing was all wheel drive. AWD kills the power to the ground and mpgs. If you don't need it, realistically you don't want it.

I can understand a 1000 hp super car having trouble spinning the tires at 70 mph needing AWD, but a 4 banger commuter car? If it chirps the tires, I'd be surprised. The last thing it would need is more powertrain drag.

Ah, loved the 3800 supercharged in my GTP. That said after a few mods and the ability to run 13 second 1/4 mile times, the FWD torque steer was a pain. It also made it difficult to gert a decent 60 ft. That said, after that car I swore I would never own a high power FWD car again. I am sure with just 255 HP the Regal GS will be fine though.