Shot by Rivera Notario in Lima, Peru
Liked their style when new, and still do. I think their looks have aged a bit better than 5hat of their Olds and Pontiac coupe cousins.
Very nice early example, but clearly a repaint. The little square flag was a Regal thing that disappeared during this car’s run, it belongs between the wheel and door.
Thought the door handles were really awesome until I had discovered that one couldn’t use either hand to open it. Didn’t like living with that issue for years.
Those absolutely terrible seat belts that should have never been permitted to be installed on any car, at any time.
The dull dashboard design.
This car looked a whole lot cooler than it was in real life. Nice looking, oddly executed.
I bought a used 96 Olds Cutlass version of one of these for my son when he when off to college. I think the door handles were made of ‘pot metal’ because I had to replace then twice in one year. They kept breaking off. Luckily, eBay seemed to offer plenty of replacements.
The Cutlass had the firmer FE3 suspension which actually handled quite well. However, the 3.4 L V6 finally gave up its crankshaft bearings as my son never checked the oil in 30K miles,
> The dull dashboard design.
This generation of Regal had two distinct dashboards. The early ones (up to ’94) had a very nice dash with a full-width recessed panel that was dark and deep where the gauges and displays were, very similar to the dashboards in several later cars like the 4th gen Honda Prelude, 2nd gen Toyota Avalon, and the last Mazda Cosmo. Weird square radio that repels attempts to install aftermarket units, but otherwise nicely done. Later models (95-96) got a cheap-looking, plastic-y typical ’90s GM dash mostly shared with the Cutlass Supreme, necessary to hold a passenger side airbag. GM wasn’t going to bother with distinct dashboards for the two remaining model years.
Never gave these much thought, but as I look at this photo I realize I’d never noticed how the line of the bottom of the greenhouse forms a perfect elipse. And that’s all the thought I have on this.
A friend of mine bought one of these when they first came out. Nice looking car but it was a lemon.
Constant dead battery issues and the steering rack failed all in the first three months. The seventh visit for dead battery was the last straw. The complaint was legit as the dealer had experienced it themselves.
I was employed by GM at the time and I always wondered if the dealer had been using the proper testing procedures for a parasitic draw.
I happen to have a parasitic draw to find on a Bobcat skid loader. One of my racing buddies has this Bobcat that he purchased used. Previous owner installed a knife switch on the battery because the battery dies over night and no one has been able to figure out what the cause is.
I’ll give Buick some credit with these, they were the only one of the W bodies coupes that looked different from the sedans when they were added to the lineup, consequently I think these remained a little more special. It’s hard to appreciate these with the come down from the G bodys and of course its swansong GNX but taken for what it is it’s not a bad looking design, and the GS models were actually quite handsome. I think Joseph is right that they aged the best.
Not exactly the most thrilling cars to drive though, despite the GM10 program costing an absolute ungodly fortune to develop I can recall my high school days where one friend had a Regal and another an N body Skylark and another friend with a Cavalier and I’d be hard pressed to describe any substantive difference between any of them that didn’t come down to engine performance, handling, ride, build quality etc was pretty indiscernible. Ford similarly unwisely way overspent on the MN12 platform the W body coupes competed with, but they at the very least felt very distinct from the Mustang Escort and Taurus.
Right front looks a bit low.
Nice proportions if you only moved both axles forward about 6 inches. Best looking W body (GM10) of this generation.
Those 3rd gen Eclipse GT wheels actually look decent on this.
I wonder how far they stick out of the front fenders. The original W Body (and a few other GMs of the time, like the L Body and related N Body) also suffered from this. The front bodywork was pinched inward so much past the front track that PA had to exempt them from the modified truck-related safety inspection rule about tires sticking out past the bodysides. And that was with their factory 205 and 215 width tires.
You realize what exterior design turds these were, when you see it beside a much better proportioned and styled competitor.
Virtually none of the sophistication or nuisance of the Chrysler example. Just compare how the rocker panels were handled. The Regal C pillar is just awful, as is the rear deck. Like it was designed by a committee, with no attempt to create a reasonably beautiful and well-integrated final design. As was clearly Chrysler’s aim with the LeBaron.
It’s really saying something when a K-car derivative looks better. 🙂 But I have to agree. The Buick is quite attractive from the front bumper to the B-pillar, the C-pillar/quarter window area seems unresolved, then it morphs into an unfortunate blocky rear. Were these direct competitors?
The LeBaron coupe and convertible released in 1987, was probably the most attractive of all the K variants. And certainly one of the best looking domestic personal luxury cars of the 80s. So, a high benchmark in terms of a styling comparison. IMO, the original W bodies were significantly less attractive than the cars they replaced. The over-styled Grand Prix perhaps being the best looking. Competitors like the LeBaron and Thunderbird (with styling dating from 1983), just looked more cohesive, cleaner, and better proportioned. Better designs.
Holy wah, eh! I’ve never put these two side-by-each like this, but…yeek! The Buick looks like one of those pathetic China-market copies of major-brand cars.
Heh yeah I might have to walk back my complimentary statement, graded against the other GM10 coupes the Buick is pretty nice, graded against the competition is a resounding meh. Add the 89 Tbird to that list as well, the Buick looks like a toy
Chrysler design doesn’t get enough credit during this time period, the sedan Lebaron was handsome too. Taurus hogged all the accolades with its design and all it had over these really were those instafog plastic headlights.
I think that this generation Regal was heavily influenced by the Buick Reatta. It looks like a stretched Reatta to me.
Well I could add is an 89 regal served my woman roommate well for 5 years ! the two things that took these cards out was the early ones had a bad computers !! & lack of transmission fluid changes took most of them out !! Its for Sale !, now as someone gave her a newer car it as 99,900 well maintained for $ 1,100 as CL is full of time wasting scammers ! sad ! I am in NY LI
My dear departed Uncle had one of these, bought used at the same place I think he bought all his cars. He wasn’t a car person, I think he trusted a person at that place to find a good car for him. We never lived in the same town (in fact live 1600 miles away) but I think I got at least 1 ride in it back in the day.
The interesting thing is that he bought a coupe rather than a 4 door…he had a family with 3 kids, so I’d have thought a 4 door would have been a better choice….which his other cars all were (that and a few minivans). He might have owned a 2 door back in his bachelor days, but I wasn’t paying attention to his cars much back then. He had a couple “hand me down” cars his Aunts would otherwise have traded in when they bought a new car, all of them 4 door Oldsmobiles…so he probably felt at home in the Buick. Said Aunts eventually stopped driving, at that point he probably started buying cars at the same place.
Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *
Notify me of follow-up comments by email.
Notify me of new posts by email.
This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.
Copyright 2011 - 2021 Curbside Classics. All Rights Reserved.