2005 Buick Century Custom Sedan 4-door 3.1l on 2040-cars

Auto blog

2018 Buick Regal GS First Drive Review | More power, style and doors

During our test-drive of the 2018 Regal GS, Buick took us to Atlanta Motorsports Park and hired stunt drivers to teach us mild-mannered journalists how to do a J-turn. It's an emergency maneuver, also known as a Rockford, in which the car reverses at full speed, spins 180 degrees and takes off in the exact opposite direction from where it was headed. It symbolized perfectly Buick's hopes for the Regal GS, its most ambitious attempt yet at a bona fide American sports sedan. Buick is trying to shake off decades of stigma as a maker of grandpa-spec wafters. Since 2008, it has been rebadging the Opel Insignia, developed by GM's German subsidiary and built in Russelsheim, as the Regal. In 2012, Buick revived the Regal GS badge, providing power from a 2.0-liter turbo four, initially at 270 horsepower but then detuned to 259 hp in 2014 as AWD was introduced. Buick had high hopes of challenging the luxury greats, and while the previous Regal GS received good reviews as a genuine sports sedan, it never really caught on in the marketplace. Buick took a risk by redefining the brand, but ultimately, it wasn't quite successful enough to be uttered in the same breath as BMW, Mercedes-Benz and Lexus. The 2018 Regal GS doubles down on that lofty goal with a better-fleshed-out version of the outgoing car. It returns with improved styling and even more power, courtesy of a naturally aspirated 3.6-liter V6 generating 310 horsepower and 282 lb-ft of torque. In other words, the new GS is up 40 horses, but down 13 lb-ft with an engine that comes straight from the GM parts bin. Within GM, it is known as the "High Feature" engine, used in everything from Cadillacs to V6 Camaros to the GMC Acadia. Autoblog has knocked this engine on refinement but generally praised its power, so it's a mixed bag. On the Regal GS, though, the drivetrain exhibited a marked improvement on the refinement front. Buick spokesperson Stuart Fowle attributed this to the new nine-speed automatic it's mated to, a quick and smooth-shifting transmission well-programmed to keep the engine at optimal revs. The result deviates quite a bit from the Opel Insignia, which maxes out with a turbocharged 2.0-liter inline-four good for 197 horses and 300 lb-ft. With turbo 2.0-liter fours now the de facto entry-level engine for most luxury carmakers, having the 3.6-liter V6 makes the 2018 Regal GS more distinctive, a bit more American and less of a European copy-paste job than its predecessor.

2014 Chevy Malibu, Buick LaCrosse recalled over brake mix-up

The recall madness over at General Motors isn't letting up anytime soon, as evidenced by this latest call-back of 8,208 Chevrolet Malibu and Buick LaCrosse sedans. For those keeping track, this is the fifth recall that GM has announced in the past two weeks, not to mention the massive ignition-switch issue from earlier this year.
GM issued a statement saying these sedans are being recalled due to "possible reduced braking performance," according to Automotive News. The problem? Rear brake rotors may have accidentally been installed in the front brake assembly. And since both cars use more robust braking systems up front than out back, braking power could be reduced, increasing the risk of a crash.
Automotive News reports that, of the over 8,000 cars being recalled, about 1,700 are currently in the hands of customers, while the others are still in dealer inventory. GM is unaware of any crashes or injuries related to this problem. All of the affected vehicles are from the 2014 model year.

GM won't really kill off the Chevy Volt and Cadillac CT6, will it?

General Motors is apparently considering killing off six slow-selling models by 2020, according to Reuters. But is that really likely? The news is mentioned in a story where UAW president Dennis Williams notes that slumping US car sales could threaten jobs at low-volume factories. Still, we're skeptical that GM is really serious about killing those cars. Reuters specifically calls out the Buick LaCrosse, Cadillac CT6, Cadillac XTS, Chevrolet Impala, Chevrolet Sonic, and the Chevrolet Volt. Most of these have been redesigned or refreshed within the past few model years. Four - the LaCrosse, Impala, CT6, and Volt - are built in the Hamtramck factory in Detroit. That plant has made only 35,000 cars this year - down 32 percent from 2016. A typical GM plant builds 200,000-300,000 vehicles a year. Of all the cars Williams listed, killing the XTS, Impala, and Sonic make the most sense. They're older and don't sell particularly well. On the other hand, axing the other three seems like an odd move. It would leave Buick and Cadillac without flagship sedans, at least until the rumored Cadillac CT8 arrives. The CT6 was a big investment for GM and backing out after just a few years would be a huge loss. It also uses GM's latest and best materials and technology, making us even more skeptical. The Volt is a hugely important car for Chevrolet, and supplementing it with a crossover makes more sense than replacing it with one. Offering one model with a range of powertrain variants like the Hyundai Ioniq and Toyota Prius might be another route GM could take. All six of these vehicles are sedans, Yes, crossover sales are booming, but there's still a huge market for cars. Backing away from these would be essentially giving up sales to competitors from around the globe. The UAW might simply be publicly pushing GM to move crossover production to Hamtramck to avoid closing the plant and laying off workers. Sales of passenger cars are down across both GM and the industry. Consolidating production in other plants and closing Hamtramck rather than having a single facility focus on sedans might make more sense from a business perspective. GM is also trying to reduce its unsold inventory, meaning current production may be slowed or halted while current cars move into customer hands. There's a lot of politics that goes into building a car. GM wants to do what makes the most sense from a business perspective, while the UAW doesn't workers to lose their jobs when a factory closes.