GM Reveals 2018 Buick Regal Sportback/TourX

[FenwickHockey65]

The Sportback body style IS how Buick is standing apart from whatever Chevrolet or Cadillac builds. And it looks nowhere near as awkward as the Malibu Maxx did. GM has always designed the Insignia hatch to be virtually indistinguishable from the sedan model, just this time they won't be selling the sedan in North America due to the collapse of the sedan market.

And according to GM, bringing the wagon over to the states is a minimal expense. If GM can pick up a few sales with it then why not.

[One Sick Camaro]

Originally Posted by DRKS1D3

It is ultimately a tedious, balancing act of not over-stepping boundaries between Chevy and Buick. This is how GM got into trouble the last time. They had all of these brands overlapping each other and essentially, the company was competing against themselves as well as other brands. GM made so many models where they simply swapped badges. For example, the Cobalt and Pontiac G5.

I can't give any advice, but Buick needs to stand apart, obviously in between Chevy and Cadillac. Seeing these new models (hatchbacks on a sedan body and a wagon)...this doesn't seem promising. IMHO, they are missing the mark. These two vehicles bring back memories of potentially the most embarrassing GM vehicle, besides the Pontiac Aztek...the Chevy Malibu Max. And yes, they even made an "SS" variant of it.

I agree with you here.

[DGthe3]

Originally Posted by shaffe

When I think crossover I think something like the Ford Edge or the way they have the Acadia now.

These are, to the best of my knowledge, the 4 best selling crossovers in America.

Honda CR-V:




Roof rails, plastic fender flares, plastic rocker guard




Nissan Rogue:



Roof rails, plastic fender flares, plastic rocker guard




Toyota Rav4:



Roof rails, plastic fender flares, plastic rocker guard




Ford Escape:


Roof rails, plastic fender flares, plastic rocker guard


I could keep going, but do you see my point now? No, the body shape is not that of a crossover. But those three tacked on things are extremely common on crossovers and quite rare on cars. The only reason to put them onto a wagon is to make it seem more crossover like. GM even tacked on an X (or 'cross') to the name. There is little more they could do without re-engineering the structure of the thing to turn it into an actual crossover. This is about as close as they could get to making it look like a crossover while still keeping it an Opel Insignia ... err ... Buick Regal wagon.

[FenwickHockey65]

And let's be honest, all a crossover really is is a tall station wagon. If you took all of those CUVs above and shrunk them vertically, you'd end up with cars that looked more or less like the TourX.

[hotlap]

Look at how chopped up the cladding is. They took an elegant looking wagon and butchered it.

[WVracer]

II think they should scrap this idea, and remake the Grand National and the GNX!

[DRKS1D3]

Originally Posted by WVracer

II think they should scrap this idea, and remake the Grand National and the GNX!

It would be nice; however, they need vehicles that sell to the masses in order to turn huge profits so they have the capital to produce low-volume, niche vehicles that may sell 1,000 per year for very little profit.

I've said it on here dozens of times: Fiat/Chrysler is the largest offender of mismanagement. They dumped millions $$$ into engineering, designing and producing the Dart and 200, only to have them last 4-5 years and fail. Talk about a kick in the pills. They lost all of that money and now, the CEO is attempting to produce low-volume, high-horsepower vehicles at every turn (Hellcat, Jeep TrackHawk, Demon, etc.). Hey, it's cool, but these types of vehicles aren't turning the profit they need to survive in the business world. Car companies need a flagship vehicle. Having several flagship vehicles is even better. GM has a lock on the compact segment with the Cruze. The mid-size segment is doing well too. The Malibu and Impala do quite well. FCA's thought process is quite perplexing.

Lastly, I don't think GM would want a Grand National stepping on the toes of the Camaro or Corvette. They don't want to flood the market and be competing against themselves. Just my $.02

[shaffe]

Originally Posted by DGthe3

These are, to the best of my knowledge, the 4 best selling crossovers in America.

Honda CR-V:




Roof rails, plastic fender flares, plastic rocker guard




Nissan Rogue:



Roof rails, plastic fender flares, plastic rocker guard




Toyota Rav4:



Roof rails, plastic fender flares, plastic rocker guard




Ford Escape:


Roof rails, plastic fender flares, plastic rocker guard


I could keep going, but do you see my point now? No, the body shape is not that of a crossover. But those three tacked on things are extremely common on crossovers and quite rare on cars. The only reason to put them onto a wagon is to make it seem more crossover like. GM even tacked on an X (or 'cross') to the name. There is little more they could do without re-engineering the structure of the thing to turn it into an actual crossover. This is about as close as they could get to making it look like a crossover while still keeping it an Opel Insignia ... err ... Buick Regal wagon.

True but all of those CUVs have more the look of an SUV(Like you said)

Also I know at least with the Escape while technically a crossover Ford markets it as an SUV. I think the Rav-4 is marketed as an SUV as well. I just think the cladding is a mistake with the Buick, it just looks like such a tacked on after thought.

Originally Posted by FenwickHockey65

And let's be honest, all a crossover really is is a tall station wagon. If you took all of those CUVs above and shrunk them vertically, you'd end up with cars that looked more or less like the TourX.

That is true. I think the look of an SUV is what really draws people in, and hell most of the people that buy them probably don't even know that they are crossovers and think they are SUVs.

[DGthe3]

Originally Posted by DRKS1D3

It would be nice; however, they need vehicles that sell to the masses in order to turn huge profits so they have the capital to produce low-volume, niche vehicles that may sell 1,000 per year for very little profit.

I've said it on here dozens of times: Fiat/Chrysler is the largest offender of mismanagement. They dumped millions $$$ into engineering, designing and producing the Dart and 200, only to have them last 4-5 years and fail. Talk about a kick in the pills. They lost all of that money and now, the CEO is attempting to produce low-volume, high-horsepower vehicles at every turn (Hellcat, Jeep TrackHawk, Demon, etc.). Hey, it's cool, but these types of vehicles aren't turning the profit they need to survive in the business world. Car companies need a flagship vehicle. Having several flagship vehicles is even better. GM has a lock on the compact segment with the Cruze. The mid-size segment is doing well too. The Malibu and Impala do quite well. FCA's thought process is quite perplexing.

Lastly, I don't think GM would want a Grand National stepping on the toes of the Camaro or Corvette. They don't want to flood the market and be competing against themselves. Just my $.02

Its not really the Camaro or Corvette that's the biggest problem (although stealing sales from them doesn't help). No, the biggest issue is the ATS. A Grand National would pretty much be a Buick skinned ATS, copying every powertrain and selling for thousands less. Thats an impossible business case to build.

If you want a rwd luxury appointed sport sedan with a turbocharged V6 from General Motors ... what is wrong with the ATS-V? They'll even let you buy it in something other than black if you like.



I've said it before and I'll say it again, if Buick is going to make a cool throwback halo model the Riviera makes much more sense. Bold, but elegant styling. Powerful, but not overtly sporty. Make it something unique that appeals to folks who aren't already buying something else in the GM lineup but still fits in with the Buick brand.

The idea of a halo car is to be the epitome of the brand, to be as close to the perfect representation of what the brand stands for as possible. A Grand National will not do that. A Riviera could. But it would still be hard to pull off in todays market. Maybe if people get sick of crossovers and turn back to cars en-mass it will become possible. But with sedan sales shrinking and the coupe nearly extinct it simply wouldn't work.

[DGthe3]

Originally Posted by shaffe

True but all of those CUVs have more the look of an SUV(Like you said)

Also I know at least with the Escape while technically a crossover Ford markets it as an SUV. I think the Rav-4 is marketed as an SUV as well. I just think the cladding is a mistake with the Buick, it just looks like such a tacked on after thought.



That is true. I think the look of an SUV is what really draws people in, and hell most of the people that buy them probably don't even know that they are crossovers and think they are SUVs.

Most people don't know the difference between a crossover and an SUV. They're all just high riding boxes and SUV as a term is more widely recognized than crossover. And if you try to explain that crossovers are fwd based with a unibody while SUVs are derived from body on frame truck platforms with rwd they'll just nod and say 'uh huh' to get you to stop talking because they don't know what most of those terms mean either.



As far as the crap on the Buick ... I too believe its a mistake (see my first post in the thread). And it most certainly is tacked on as an afterthought because its European cousin that its based off of doesn't have that cladding (still have the roof rails though).

[FenwickHockey65]

Well actually the Insignia Country Tourer and Commodore Sportwagon will both have "off-road" versions like the TourX.

[FenwickHockey65]

Also:

http://www.gminsidenews.com/articles/64970-2/

GM Canada accidentally leaks the GS. 3.6L V6 with twin-clutch AWD.

[lbls1]

I started yawning (again) until I got to the second part of OP's thread. The cross-over is an interesting looking vehicle option. I think Buick should really run with this.

As for the sedan, Buick means well but it is uninspiring to look at (I feel the same way about the current Malibu). I was hoping that Buick would start putting more flair back into their designs. I was hopeful after seeing one or two of their Acura inspired designs that Buick would hopefully put out some interesting shapes. It seems that the last few years has been a bit disappointing IMO in terms of their designs. I am very sure that the Buicks are competent automobiles, but at this moment I'm not too inspired to shop for Buicks.

[DGthe3]

Originally Posted by FenwickHockey65

Well actually the Insignia Country Tourer and Commodore Sportwagon will both have "off-road" versions like the TourX.

I guess I was wrong then. Its not an 'afterthought' ... just a bad idea.

Originally Posted by FenwickHockey65

Also:

http://www.gminsidenews.com/articles/64970-2/

GM Canada accidentally leaks the GS. 3.6L V6 with twin-clutch AWD.

Maybe they leaked it out of spite for not letting Canadians get the wagon.