Ah, the W body. Say what you will about this line of bread-and-butter sedans, they had staying power. As you read this, the last W-body ’12 Impalas are rolling down the line, to be replaced in a few months with a more luxurious 2013 version. Buick’s version of this platform debuted in coupe form in 1988, but the sedan would take a little bit longer.
The W-body Regal had a somewhat uncommon gestation period. A lot of this had to do with Buick playing musical chairs with their car lines in the ’80s. In 1982 the rear wheel drive Century sedan and wagon were folded into the Regal line, the Regal having been a coupe-only model since 1978 (In its introductory year it was only a coupe, but from 1974-77 there was a Regal sedan). This was short-lived, however.
The wagon disappeared after 1983 (replaced with the new FWD A-body Century wagon) and the sedan was last offered in 1984. This may have been due to the success of the A-body Century sedans, and Buick was just trying to eliminate overlapping models. Also, the upcoming FWD C-body ’85 Electra and H-body ’86 LeSabre would have been very close in size, if not in packaging, to the A/G-body Regal lineup.
The ’81 Regal coupe avoided all this confusion, and remained pretty much the same through the 1987 model year. In 1988, it was replaced with a new FWD Regal on the W-body platform, shared with the Chevy Lumina, Pontiac Grand Prix, and Olds Cutlass Supreme. Just like the 1985-87 Regal, it came only as a coupe.
The coupe-only strategy didn’t last long. The coupe market was beginning to shrink, and more and more folks were getting interested in mid-sized sedans. So for 1990, the Pontiac, Oldsmobile and Buick W-body coupes got four door companions. The Luminas did not debut with their corporate siblings in ’88, so they had two and four door models from their introduction as 1990 models – plus the distinctive Lumina APV “dust buster” minivan.
The W-body Oldsmobile sedans looked like a giant Saturn thanks to their roofline, although the Cutlass Supreme coupes were sharp. The Pontiacs, despite their heavy cladding, were also attractive, but my personal favorite is the Buick version. Actually, my most favorite is the Regal coupe (give me a ’92-’93 Limited with leather interior; dark green, navy blue or burgundy, please!) , but we’re talking about the sedans today, aren’t we?
I do believe the Regal sedan was the best looking four door W. The roofline was subtle, but elegant – just right for a Buick. I also think those turbine-spoke Buick alloys were one of the nicest looking 1990s GM wheels. They remind me of the Sabre wheels on 1950s Cadillacs. The engine lineup started with a 3.1 liter V6 with 140 hp. This powerplant, along with Buick’s supple DynaRide suspension, came standard in Customs and Limiteds, while Gran Sports came with the 170 horse 3800 V6 and Gran Touring suspension for a less-than-traditional Buick experience.
Interiors were appropriate for a Buick, with lots of woodgrain trim and chrome accents. The analog gauges shown here were standard on the Regal Limited and Gran Sport, while entry-level Customs got a digital dash. Remember this interior, for drastic changes were coming, and not for the better.
Regal sedans got a new grille for 1993, among other minor changes. As before, sedans rode a 107.5″ wheelbase – same as Regal coupes – but were one inch longer, at 194.6 inches. The same model lineup of Custom, Limited and GS continued.
With the optional turbine alloys, Limiteds like this one looked an awful lot like a Gran Sport, but GS sedans sported two tone paintwork and slightly more aggressive ground effects. The nice chrome moldings really said Buick, and helped it look like its big brother, the Park Avenue. But they would disappear after 1994, along with many other trim bits. A big decontenting was in the works for 1995.
Which brings us to our featured CC. Now, it doesn’t look drastically different, does it? A new grille, restyled bumpers and side trim, “retro” cursive Regal scripts on the front doors, and new taillights. But that’s just the outside.
While there is no major difference between 1995 and 1996 Regals, I am fairly certain that this one is a 1996 because it is an Olympic Edition. Buick was a sponsor of the ’96 Olympics, and special edition models like this one were offered. It included gold accents on the wheels and side trim and special Olympic badges on the front fenders and trunklid. I am not sure if this was a factory option or dealer installed. Perhaps one of our Curbside Commenters can fill us in.
Remember that instrument panel I mentioned? The elegant, squared off version that the ’88-’94 Regals sported may have been a little old fashioned, but it did look like it belonged in a Buick. It said luxury car. Now what do we have?
Rubbermaid dash! No fake wood, no chrome air conditioning vents, nothing! Just acres of plastic and the same basic radio as Chevys and Pontiacs. This does not look like a Buick interior, it looks like a 1995 Chevy Biscayne, if such a thing had existed. The Brougham content in my blood is getting low just looking at it!
There was no relief from the monotone plastic, even on the door panels and console. Is that a Cavalier center console in the ’95 interior shown on the right? At least you could still get the nice leather seats. The Regal coupes had color-keyed door pulls in a woodgrained surround (shown above left), while sedans had woodgrained door pulls set in a woodgrained garnish panel – perfect for a Buick. At least, they had them until 1995.
Where are those woodgrained door pulls? I want my woodgrained door pulls! This particular car does have one saving grace – two, actually. First, it is tan, and not black or gray. Second, it does have the optional leather seating. But I’d take a ’92 over a ’96, thank you very much.
I found our featured CC at a little car lot in Silvis. What impressed me was how nice it was. No scratches, door dings, wheel rash, or anything else. The leather was perfect too – even the driver’s seat. From all of this, we can deduce that this car belonged to a little old lady or a little old man until very recently. If I was in the market for another car, and had the space, I would have looked really hard at this car. It was that nice.
As for the Regal itself, it morphed into a bar of soap for the 1998 model year. It was essentially a new-for-1997 Century with a different grille and trim. There was a new supercharged version (does anybody else remember the “Supercharged Family” Regal commercials of the late ’90s?), but it never really took off, and most Regals sold were the more bread-and-butter LS model. It lasted through 2004 with only slight changes.
Only in the last couple of years has the Regal (and Buick) come back into its own, thanks in part to improved quality and Opel-derived underpinnings. I test drove a 2010 LaCrosse when they came out, and I really liked it. Me, the dedicated Volvo guy! The last couple of years have been promising, let’s hope Buick can keep it up. I for one would love to see a new Riviera and V8, rear wheel drive Electra. How about it, GM?
Ugh.
Granted, this is probably the most pristine example I have seen of one in, well… ever, and the Olympic Edition is kinda rare/interesting (I’m pretty sure that’s factory – I have a 1995 Buick full-line brochure lying around somewhere that mentions it), but I’ve always h a t e d the drooping beltline on these. It goes down in the middle… and then up again! I mean, WTF, who even thought of that? And the strange oversized wheel wells. And the drooping taillights. And… actually, the whole damn thing is just so awkward looking.
Actually, all of these first gen W-bodies had awkward details and proportions – the Lumina wasn’t any better and the Grand Prix was clunky and overwrought with all its plastic cladding and full-width light bar (in which the middle section was never properly aligned with the headlights – 90s GM quality for ya!). At least its beltline was flat/upswept like a normal car. The only passable one in my eyes was the Cutlass Supreme coupe – the early ones were actually pretty sharp. But then they had to make them weird looking in the 90s with that “six headlight” front (I’m pretty sure that’s the only time a car model has gone from using flush composite headlights BACK to sealed beams)
Hardly anything to get excited about under the skin either. Indifferent build quality, typical brittle FWD GM brakes and suspensions, unrefined powertrains, and power steering pumps that would start failing and whining practically from the factory (the Grand Prix was especially bad – I can one ID one of those things a mile away just by its sound)
At least the A-bodies and B-bodies had an honest “feel” to them, as medicore as most versions were by the mid-90s… these were just plasticized Roger Smith junk from the outset.
Pass.
P.S. – Hate to be nitpicky, but the next gen Century/Regal was actually introduced for the ’97 model year. Those may have been bland, but at least they were pleasant looking, which is more than I can say about this one.
Come to think of it, my high mileage A body ’88 Celebrity Wagon’s P/S pump didn’t “fail”, but as it aged and more miles racked up it did “leak” fluid. The whine and roar was an indication fluid levels were low. I kept a bottle of P/S fluid in the car to top off on the go. Gave it away w/146K on the clock. Ran like a top. Left the car in the garage after we moved away and rented the house to some people. After we sold the house a couple of years later, (Parma, Ohio), we left the title on the seat and gave it to the realtor who wanted a “snow car”. Car started right up, but the brakes failed (rotted lines).
Max,
The new 1997 Century arrived on time with all the other ’97 Buicks, but for some reason the Regal arrived a bit later. I have a ’97 Buick brochure that has the earlier bodystyle Regal in it. A little later in the model year there was a revised brochure that had the new one in it.
As with most aspects in life, it is a matter of opinion (and the pursuit of truth), i.e., the proverbial, “beauty is in the eye of the beholder”. I for one really like the lines of the Buick Regal sedan of the ’90s. To me, it reflects elegance and refinement. Sure, there are things I’d prefer slightly different, more so interior wise — T. Klockau made some excellent comments on some of these nuances for the internal attributes, or lack thereof. I would also REALLY want a GM power plant north of 340 hp around the 2700 RPM range with a more than hefty torque ration to go with it. If I could, I’d certainly make that a goal to shoot for. But in terms of the Regal design, it is one I respect and enjoy. // Thanks TK for this interesting / nostalgic thread.
Cool! Looks like it’s very well taken care of. This Buick is always my favorite among the General’s W-body. THough I prefer the old style dash to the newer, very generic looking dash.
I’ve always considered the Buick W-body sedans one of the prettiest cars GM ever came up. Yeah, I’m talking entire history, 1908-on. There was a touch of European in this one that was done subtly enough to work.
Wasn’t this the GM-10 when it came out? When did it become called the W body?
I gotta go with Max.P on this one. With that droop in the middle of the beltline, the car looked sort of melted. Like old 1950s 4 door hardtops would look when they started to sag from rust and abuse.
I also noever liked the seat styling. the oddly curved seat stitching just looked wierd. These cars just never appealed to me in the least. At least you found a really prime one, and I have to like the Olympic edition, just for the camp factor.
It was called GM-10 in development and I haven’t been able to find any reliable online sources to say for certain how the designation “W-body” or “W-platform” was reached. I assume that it had to do with trying to fit into GMs existing naming conventions at the time – A-body, B-body, C-body, D-body, G-body, H-body, J-body.
GM has since switched to a Greek letter naming system – Epsilon, Gamma, Alpha… etc.
It is interesting how multi-platform manufacturers cannot seem to keep a nomenclature in place long enough for an entire system to develop. Ford went with the animals for awhile, but I think that Fox and Panther were as far as they got before going to another system. Ford kept the old names while giving new models different designations. GM would keep changing names on existing platforms. The C body became the D body (I think) which eventually became something else. Now, how long before they switch to some new system besides greek letters? It’s all so confusing. Maybe that’s the idea, though.
Didn’t they also call the first gen Escort “Erica” too? I seem to remember that in old car magazines.
I believe Erika (pretty sure it was spelled with a k) was actually Ford’s name for the project to develop a small car that turned out to be the Escort, but they may have used it later on as its platform designation.
Up until the mid ’80s, when GM introduced a new platform as a direct replacement for an old one, the new platform would get the old one’s designation, even if some models based on the old platform remained in production. If any models based on the old platform remained in production, they would get a new letter designation, even though their design was the same as it had always been.
So when the FWD A-body was introduced in 1982, the remaining versions of the old RWD A-body that remained in production were re-designated the G-body. And when the FWD C-body was introduced in 1985, the remaining versions of the old RWD C-body that remained in production were re-designated the D-body. Had any of the pre-1980 X-bodies remained in production after the FWD X-body was introduced for the 1980 model year, they would have undoubtedly gotten a new designation.
By 1986, this had changed. The FWD replacement for the B-body was given a completely new designation (H-body), and those models that remained in production using the old RWD B-body continued to be designated as the B-body.
I concur w/Max P. I liked these cars, but I don’t like the beltline droop. Nowadays, the other extreme is the Lincoln MKS. That car makes a “B” pillar upsweep, which is totally awkward and makes a fat, tall car look even taller, fatter and unattractive. I’m 6’0″ and standing next to an MKS is like standing next to a ’51 Chrysler Sedan..
“Me, the dedicated Volvo guy!”
Tom, I’d say that today’s Volvo buyer is exactly who they should pitch Buicks at. Solid and comfortable, not flashy but a little more slick than a Chevy or a Camry.
These cars seem to have disappeared from Rustonia, but their successors are still everywhere, either driven too slow by original owners or too fast by teenage inheritors.
I can relate to this article on two levels.
1. I had the Olds version of this car: 1996 Cutlass Supreme sedan. And yes, it DID look like a big Saturn. I even said this to the salesman when I drove it. Anyway, it had the F41(?) suspension and the 3800 engine, and I hated the wheels. The coupe had cooler wheels than the sedan (more of a spoke design), so I said I would buy it if they swapped out the wheels with a coupe. They did, and an hour later it was mine. Black with gray leather and all the goodies inside (electronic AC/moonroof/some upgraded stereo/CD system). I remember it was $21,000.
2. My next car was a 1999 Buick Regal GSE. Funny, I never thought about it, but I guess “bar of soap” is an accurate description of its looks. It did have power though-255 HP. The new 2012/13 has only 240…?!?!? What’s the deal? 13 years of progress and a REDUCTION in HP…????
1996 Oldsmobile Cutlass Supreme sedan:
W-Cutlass Supremes didn’t have the 3800. Only the 3.1/3100, the Quad 4 or the Twin-Dual Cam 3.4.
Oops, thanks for the update. All I remember is it had a badge announcing the engine on the front fender. And I read here that the new ’12/’13 Regal GS is a four cylinder that gets 240 hp. Wasn’t aware it was a four, thought it was a six. Oops, part 2.
Yea and it’s too bad that GM didn’t ever offer the 3800 in the FWD Cutlass.
I have never had great W-body love, perhaps because they killed my beloved G-bodys and combining that with the death of all but one B-body in 1985, I don’t believe I’ve ever forgiven GM completely.
Having said that the Regal is my favorite of the W-bodys and the only one of the pre-2000 W-bodys I would like to own. Make mine 3800 only please, fully loaded with leather. (OK if I had the cash to buy one new I would have made it a supercharged Grand Sport.)
Actually my common theme for Ws would be 3800/3.9/or 3.6 VVT DI only. Otherwise you couldn’t give me one.
One thing that was always of particular interest to me was that dash redesign you mentioned. Awful.
But the absolute worst thing about it was the switch to oversized numerics on the speedo and radio. This was a Buick thing across the whole car line. They did that to appeal to the geriatric set who, for the most part, we’re the only demographic buying these new by this point. To me, that took away any pretense that these were somehow luxurious or sporty cars. They were neither, just leaving a plasticky, monochrome taste in my mouth.
My oh my what could’ve been…
Those hp numbers are from a 4 banger in a new Regal, so yeah, thats progress.
I think these were the best looking of the GM midsizers at the time. I don’t see many on the road here anymore as when they were new I don;t think they sold all that well in my area. Most people seem to have bought a Century instead, since a large number of them are still kicking around.
” In 1982 the rear wheel drive Century sedan and wagon were folded into the Regal line, the Regal having been a coupe-only model since its 1973 introduction.”
IINM, there were Regal sedans back in the 1973-77 timeframe, when the Regal used the same body as the Century. When the A-bodies were restyled and downsized for 1978, the Regal began using the same personal luxury coupe specific version of the A-body formerly used only by the Monte Carlo and Grand Prix (i.e., not the exact same body used by the Century coupe), and the sedan went away.
The pre-1978 sedans did not have the distinctive styling featured on the coupes — they were essentially nothing more than a top-of-the-line Century sedan — and did not sell in particularly large numbers. Come to think of it, I don’t think the coupes had the distinctive styling for the first year or two, either, and in the very beginning I believe the Regal was actually a subseries of the Century. The boom in the market for personal luxury coupes presumably led Buick to pour more resources into making the coupes more distinctive while letting the sedans languish.
The history of the Oldsmobile Cutlass coupes that were geared towards the personal luxury market during the same time period is similar, although Oldsmobile never made them into a distinct model as Buick did.
“The wagon disappeared after 1983 (replaced with the new FWD A-body Century wagon) and the sedan was last offered in 1984. This may have been due to the success of the A-body Century sedans, and Buick was just trying to eliminate overlapping models. Also, the upcoming FWD C-body ’85 Electra and H-body ’86 LeSabre would have been very close in size, if not in packaging, to the A/G-body Regal lineup.”
When the new FWD A-bodies were introduced as 1982 models, all four affected GM divisions continued to sell the old RWD A-body sedan, wagon and personal luxury coupe, which were then renamed the G-body. (It’s interesting to note, though, that each division handled this in a completely different way in terms of model name usage.) The wagons were retained because the FWD A-body lineup did not initially include a wagon. All four divisions dropped the RWD wagons at the end of the 1983 model year due to a new FWD A-body wagon being introduced for 1984.
Each division the dropped the sedan on its own timetable. Chevy dropped the sedan at the same time as the wagon, after ’83, while Buick sold the sedan through ’84, Pontiac through ’86, and Oldsmobile through ’87. In the early ’80s, when gas prices were expected to keep rising, and the B-bodies were expected to become obsolete in the very near future, there may have been some thought towards using the RWD A/G-body sedans as the basis for new “downsized full-size” models to bridge the gap until the H-bodies were ready. That may have been one of the reasons the old RWD sedans remained in production once the FWD A-bodes were introduced. Pontiac even made a move in that direction, dropping its B-body sedans for ’82 and badging the G-body as the new Bonneville, before reversing course and bringing back the B-bodies the following year.
After it became apparent the RWD A/G-body sedans weren’t going to be needed for this purpose, I think they were always lame ducks that didn’t fill any particular spot in the lineup, and had no long-term future. Falling gas prices prolonged their popularity as midsize sedans, and each division kept making them as long as there was sufficient demand to justify those models in particular, and the A-body platform in general, taking into account the personal luxury coupes and the coupe utilities as well. Once there wasn’t, they were gone.
“The ’81 Regal coupe avoided all this confusion, and remained pretty much the same through the 1987 model year. In 1988, it was replaced with a new FWD Regal on the W-body platform, shared with the Chevy Lumina, Pontiac Grand Prix, and Olds Cutlass Supreme. Just like the 1985-87 Regal, it came only as a coupe.”
The RWD A/G-body personal luxury coupes were in a bit of different position from the sedans and wagons, as the FWD A-body lineup didn’t include models specifically intended to replace them. Another poster recently indicated that the 1985 N-bodies were originally supposed to replace the A/G-body personal luxury coupes. After demand for the RWD G-bodies was better than predicted due to falling gas prices, while demand for the X-bodies cratered due to quality issues, GM repurposed the N-bodies as a replacement for the X-bodies, and simply kept building the RWD A/G-body personal luxury coupes for a few more years. I had never heard this before, but it makes a certain amount of sense, and would explain why the N-bodies initially came only as coupes.
“The coupe-only strategy didn’t last long. The coupe market was beginning to shrink, and more and more folks were getting interested in mid-sized sedans. So for 1990, the Pontiac, Oldsmobile and Buick W-body coupes got four door companions. The Luminas did not debut with their corporate siblings in ’88, so they had two and four door models from their introduction as 1990 models…”
If you look at Chevy, and to a lesser extent Pontiac, it seems like the W-body served as a replacement for both the RWD G-body coupes and the FWD A-body sedans. The coupes introduced in ’88 replaced the former, while the sedans introduced in ’90 replaced the latter. Historically, there had been separate coupe variations for both “regular” and personal luxury coupes, but the shrinking demand for coupes presuambly led GM to consolidate to only one coupe. Chevy dropped its A-body sedan as soon as the W-body sedan appeared. Pontiac sold the two alongside one another for two years.
At Olds and Buick, though, it’s less clear that the W-was intended as a replacement for its A-body counterpart. The two were sold alongside each other for several years, making the W-body sedans seem like more of a four-door version of the existing personal luxury coupe models than a replacement for the A-body sedans. This was reminiscent of the G-body/A-body/H-body/B-body situation in the ’80s, with overlapping designs of various sizes and vintages being produced alongside each other.
I’m curious as to how GM arrived at the above. Was the W-body originally intended to be strictly a coupe to replace the G-bodies, and the sedan was added later? Or was there always a plan to introduce a sedan in a second phase? Were the W-body sedans originally seen as replacements for the A-body sedans (which is what they turned out to be at Chevy and Pontiac), or as four-door versions of the personal luxury coupe concept, in light of falling demand for personal luxury coupes?
The Regal in 73 was sort of a pseudo Cutlass Supreme for Buick, it had the small opera window roofline instead like the Cutlass Supreme instead of the big open window like a LeMans or Chevelle coupe.
Later the W-body sedans were kinda positioned, like you said, as sort of upscale personal luxury semi-sporty midsize cars, you could get the 4 bucket seat option on the Pontiac, Olds and Buick sedans, not to mention the STE, International Series and GS versions of the W-sedans.
The Lumina was introduced later, and although it did sort of replace the A-body Celebrity, it was first intended to be and H-body based Caprice/Impala replacement that got shifted down to the W-platform mid development, which is one of the reasons Luminas were a little bigger than the other 1988 W’s.
I’ve wondered why Chevy didn’t get a W-body coupe until the sedans came out in 1990. Chevy kept selling the old A/G-body Monte Carlo into 1988, but it was a very dated design by then. Then Chevy had no mid-size coupe at all for the 1989 model year (the Celebrity coupe was also dropped, due to slow sales; by this time Chevy had no full-size coupe anymore, either). If the Lumina was originally intended for another purpose, that would at least explain why it didn’t accompany the others in ’88.
That there was initially no Chevy version of the W-body coupe is also consistent with the theory that the 1985 N-body was originally intended as a replacement for the A/G-body personal luxury coupes. The N-body didn’t have a Chevrolet version. Since the 1988 W-body coupes were then developed to serve the role originally intended for the N-body coupes, it makes sense that they wouldn’t have a Chevrolet version either.
These leave another question open, though: what was GM going to do to replace the Monte Carlo? Given that there seems to have been some trend in this era towards Chevrolet not sharing designs with the other divisions (e.g., the L-body, the H-body), was there going to be some Chevy-specific design that never saw the light of day? Or with the decline in the midsize coupe market, did GM feel that Chevy just didn’t need one at all? Perhaps the Lumina coupe was orignally intended (when it was proposed to be a companion to the H-body) to replace both the Monte Carlo and the Caprice coupe?
I’ve wondered why Chevy didn’t get a W-body coupe until the sedans came out in 1990. Chevy kept selling the old A/G-body Monte Carlo into 1988, but it was a very dated design by then…
Chevy and Oldsmobile kept selling the Monte Carlo and Cutlass Supreme coupe in 1988. They sold like hotcakes to the loyalists who realized it would be their last chance to get a V8 powered RWD coupe that wasn’t a Camaro. (I should say GM loyalists who wouldn’t consider a Thunderbird or Cougar.) IIRC the 1988 models were V8 ONLY no stripped down models. If I had been an adult male back in those days who had the money for a new car I would have been sorely tempted to purchase one.
I’ve always wondered if the debut of the W-body coupes caused an up tick in Cougar and Thunderbird sales.
As a Brit – despite having lived in the US for a couple of years, back when the car above was new – the name “Regal” always has precisely the wrong connotations for me.
Of course, we don’t have Buicks in the UK. Someone else registered the name “Regal”, and this is what that transport of delight looked like. There is, no doubt, a collectors’ fraternity:
If any of you all want to see where these Regals still rule the roost, come to the San Francisco Bay Area where they are endlessly popular. A lot of them went from being perfectly maintained cars of the currently dead to popular for customization of the living, particularly in Oakland.
It’s rare to see them without 24s underneath them now, but if I think Falcons are for Hipsters, 1988-96 Regals are for your future hip-hop star in the making. And I would say the fact that these are the only ones that used the 3800 during their first generation (I think the take rate was 70% 3800, 30% 3.1L, which was the complete opposite of all of the other W-bodies in their first generation, most are saddled with their base engine), and the pre-1995 ones were decently enough built that they were the last in a line of good traditional “smaller” Buicks.
And the GS ones can be quite fun to drive. Truth be told if I could get my hands on a 1991-92 GS loaded to the gills with Burgundy leather (the other bonus of these Buicks, they had interior colors besides black, gray and tan) I’d go for it.
I’ll take a 89-91 Regal GS coupe in red, burgundy leather interior, digital dash option, and the 3800 of course.
That is one CLEAN machine . . . . especially if you’re posting from the mid-west. There IS a new RWD “Electra” – The Park Avenue. Holden based; sold in the Middle East and China. I think Buick could do well selling these here – but I don’t think GM in North America would allow it as it would crib sales from Cadillac . . . . Also, I basically like the new Regal, but am somewhat dissapointed as the “leather” interior feels (and smells) miore like plastic . . . . and vis-a-vis the competition, are a little pricey . . .
Tons of these still rolling around Los Angeles. More Buicks than any other W-body of the era, I’d say. Many look to be on their last owner.
From the article: “There was a new supercharged version (does anybody else remember the “Supercharged Family” Regal commercials of the late ’90s?)”
I absolutely remember those commercials. Here’s a flashback to 1998 for good measure: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jF3_68pGdf8
I was 13 when these commercials ran, and even at that age I remember thinking how completely bizarre and out-of-character it was for Buick to market to young, active families — I almost thought it was some sort of joke. I grew up in suburban north San Diego, and Buicks were STRICTLY for the geriatric in 1998. Young families drove either SUVs of some sort or Asian sedans. Accords/Camrys for the everyday family and Acura/Lexus ES for the slightly more flashy/better off. Our area wasn’t ritzy enough for the German stuff. Not one young family drove a Buick or even considered it.
I remember one girl in high school who went by the nickname “Cookie.” She spent all semester one year bragging about how her mother was buying a new car and how she’d get to drive it to school every day because her mother worked night shifts. Turns out her mom bought a brand-new 1998 LeSabre with cloth seats. And Cookie was MORTIFIED. We had a field day with that, and she was known by the updated nickname “Cookie Buick” until graduation.
Man, the ’90s were really rough for GM (self-inflicted, of course). I find the new Buicks extremely appealing cars, as do many of my peers. I’d honestly take a Buick over any Acura these days. A late-20’s young professional girl I know just bought a new Regal. Times they are a-changin.
This generation of Regal were the first Buick I sold back when I worked at a Buick-Pontiac-GMC dealer in summer of 96, though they new Regal was already starting to trickle in, believe it or not there were more than a few loyal Regal customers that were upset about the lack of a Regal coupe in the new 1997’s, so we did manage to sell the last of the “old” 1996 coupes pretty quickly.
The dash and general quality of the interior did take a nose dive after the new dash was introduced, the old 1988-1994 dash may have been a bit odd and “woody”, and it did have those odd non standard DIN radios that somebody at Delco Electronics Divsion really sold GM management on in the 80’s(I almost want to write an article about odd ball GM radios of the 80’s!) but it was much better that the generic test tube dash that came out later, its interesting to note that the dash is shared with the Cutlass of the same generation, its almost identical, the Grand Prix dash is really close to the same design too, but with a few changes, not only was the dash cheaper and plain, but you also lost some of the gauges as well.
One of the other cool early W Regal options was the “4 seater” package, which was available on the Cutlass and GP as well, it gave you these cool looking rear bucket seats, which were’nt really comfy, but they did look cool.
My utiimate W-Regal would be a clean 90 or so coupe in either Limited or Grand Sport trim with the full digital dash option, with the 3800 of course.
I remember driving a 92 or 93 Regal GS sedan, white with burgandy leather 4 seat package and the chrome luggage rack (only a few cars looked good with this luggage rack, the Regal GS, the Bonneville SE (87) and the Grand Prix SE couple (88-90)). It was a dealer demo that my Grandmother was thinking about buying, trading in her 87 Grand Marquis Park Lane (ewww) for it. I must have just gotten my license, and remember driving her over in my mothers 89 6000 STE. My Grandmother wasn’t interested in driving it, she made me drive it. So she could see how the ride was.
From memory, it drove pretty similar to the STE other than the back end felt a little lighter and it felt just a little larger.
Well….it rode too stiffly for her and she ended up with a 94 LeSabre….but I don’t think it was right away.
4-seater package:
Might have been a production model of the Oldsmobile Aerotech III package that showed 4 seats and a drink cooler. good post carmine.
This brings back memories of the 1984 Olympic Edition Buick Century. I still remember seeing that car for the first time at the NY auto show that year. IIRC, it was off-white with a tan interior and odd combination of the T-type alloy wheels with whitewalls.
I used to spend a lot of time in an ’88 Regal when I was in high school a decade ago. A Custom coupe. The dash was certainly a more appealing design than the feature car’s (although the radio design was completely idiotic), and there was plenty of fake wood, which was hideous. “Limited” trim Buicks of the era used a fake burled walnut that was kinda attractive, if not particularly convincing. Customs had some sort of plastic oak that was especially putrid alongside the blue mouse fur seats in the car I used to bomb around in.
But, yes, I wholeheartedly agree that the ’95-’96 interior was an embarrassment. Ditto on the similarly plastic-y interiors of the ’95 Riviera, ’97 Century/Regal and ’00 LeSabre. As recently as the early ’90s, Buicks really did still feel like a cut above the other GM divisions. But the interior of this car could have just as easily been in a Lumina. What’s the point?
My car was getting some bodywork done this week, and my rental was an ’11 Impala. Besides the horrid rear visibility, it was scary how much it felt like that ’88 Regal. Numb controls, cheap plastics, mushy seats, even had the same junky sound when I closed the door. Good riddance to the W-body.
For what it’s worth, I always liked the ’91-’96 Gran Sport sedan.
The ’95-up dash looks like it was designed to take advantage of the then-new Lumina and Monte Carlo dash and HVAC structure.
I always wondered if the unique front clip (fenders, hood, lights and bumper) of the Regal coupe could be installed on a Regal sedan giving it a slightly more chiseled front end. For example, the Roadmaster sedan and wagon front clips are totally interchangeable with each other and even with Caprices of the same vintage.
FYI: Early W-Body Regal GS’ also had the digital dash.
All new for 88 W-body cars had digital instruments standard with even more digital goodness optional, the Regal and Grand Prix had standard digital speedometers, with an analog fuel gauge and idiot lights, the Cutlass had a full digital cluster, with an optional cluster with full digital gauges and tachometer, similar to what the Regal offered. The Grand Prix’s optional cluster had analog tach and cluster with a digital speedometer.
Ah the Olympic Edition Regal… so you can fondly remember the Centennial Park bombing and the glory days of domestic terrorism!
I’m sorry, Tom – but I think you are nuts on this one! In some ways, I can actually appreciate the early models of this car – because they were equipped well and I think they look like a 1950’s flying saucer caricature in side profile, but for practical purposes the Regal sedan was easily the worst looking W-Body.
Was there a less stylish car you could buy in this segment in the mid-90’s? Nope. GM was totally lost at the time and it’s laughable to consider that this was what they had to compete with the Accord and Camry. In fairness, I suppose they were in the difficult position of trying to figure out a balance between not alienating the significant legions of GM diehards who gobbled this crap up and attracting everyone else who had found greener pastures. That’s what the Regal is, a car dictated entirely by compromise and accounting.
Now FWIW, in function – it was not a bad ride at all. Most Regals were appointed very nicely and the W-Body chassis was a good compromise between comfort and agility. The Buick version was most commonly found with the 3800 (I think the 2.8/3.1 was a “credit option”) which really came into it’s own after 30 years and offered good power, surprising fuel economy and almost legendary durability. IMO the coupe look worked much better, especially the early models… by the mid-90’s, that shape was horribly outdated as well. This example is amazingly pristine… surely the prized possession of some dead geezer!
When I was a young lad I used to hang out with this crazy girl who was not yet of legal driving age, but she would steal her mom’s ’90 or ’91 Regal GS sedan and take us on all sorts of late night adventures. Lots of close calls and lost brain cells, and there couldn’t have been a better vehicle to avoid police detection at the time. No matter how risque and self-destructive the behavior inside that car was, it looked terminally unhip to the outside world… just please ignore that plume of grey smoke emanating from the rear window, Mr. Policeofficer. I’ll always have fond memories of that Regal in particular – and from my seat time in it, it did make me appreciate some of the Buick’s finer points – but the breed in general is just another short, sad chapter in the history of a dying icon.
Count me among those turned off by the beltline dip. I also never saw a front end design on a W-body Buick that I liked. But the overall design, especially in the upper trim levels of the later years, was pretty. Had a European feel to it. Not only did it evoke recent Audis, but perhaps more so Audi’s step-mom, the NSU Ro 80.
Good point about the NSU Ro 80. Very similar indeed.
Why does everyone want a rear-wheel drive car? It can’t be a good thing if GM is doing it. (See “2001 Acura TL Curbside Classic” for reference to Front-Wheel Drive perfection.)
I much prefer the 1997 onward Regals and it’s W-body cousins at Pontiac and Olds with the GP and Intrigue. They were much more cohesive designs and drove far better with the 3800 engine, which was std on the Regal/Intrigue and offered as an option on the base SE GP and std on the Gt models.