Buick was too early? Tour X

Joined
Nov 24, 2003
Messages
3,234
Location
Middle of Iowa
I have spent most of my life swapping cars, owning multiple models at a time, etc. I have owned everything from mid 90's BMW 750's to modern Mercs to Alfas to Miatas, Firebirds, built off roaders, SUV's, Abarths...always looking to drive something unique.

Anyways, out of everything I have owned, I have never received so much attention as I have in the Tour X the last 6 months or so. Dads, Moms, Co-workers, folks at gas stations are all walking up and asking what it is. Now, I have de-badged it as much as possible, so it is hard to know what it is...as well as swapped to 20" summer rims and tires. The common two questions are "is it fast" and "what kind of mileage does it get". They are surprised at both...and even more surprised when I tell them it is 4+ years old, AWD, and you can't get one anymore.

Anyways...with the latest fuel prices, I wonder if something like this would be the new norm. I have to say with my detest of driving what everybody else has, I would have to find something new...but at least it would drive up the value of my current DD.
 

Pew

Joined
Mar 12, 2018
Messages
2,090
Location
Illinois
I've seen more Ferrari F12s in the wild than I have seen any of the TourX. I seriously contemplated one before I chose the CX5 and I still wonder till this day if I should have gotten the TourX.
 
Joined
Apr 6, 2018
Messages
2,755
Location
Somewhere in time
A turbo wagon?

Combining car handling with SUV space, while avoiding the abysmal fuel economy of SUVs?

Sounds like a great idea for a car…
I think you have this backwards.

According to Fuelly.com, the Buick TourX averages about 23+ mpg, while a similar vintage Honda CR-V averages 28+ mpg and a Toyota RAV-4 averages about 27 mpg.

And I'm sure the 111" TourX wheelbase (a full 6" longer than the CR-V and RAV-4) does nothing to help it handle like a car.
 
Last edited:

Astro14

$100 Site Donor
Staff member
Joined
Oct 10, 2010
Messages
16,173
Location
Virginia Beach
I think you have this backwards.
According to Fuelly.com, the Buick TourX averages about 23+ mpg, while a similar vintage Honda CR-V averages 28+ mpg and a Toyota RAV-4 averages about 27 mpg.

And I'm sure the long wheelbase on the TourX does nothing to help it handle like a car.
I was being facetious.

I own four turbo wagons that handle well and get good fuel economy.

They‘re Swedish.

I don’t find most SUVs attractive. They are often big bloated, excessive machines that don’t handle well. They don’t do well with MPG.

You’re paying a lot for capabilities that are never used, while living with the compromises of excessive weight and size.

The RAV 4 and CRV, while getting decent MPG, have poor acceleration and handling compared with a turbo wagon.

You really don’t get much practicality out of most SUVs.

It‘s nice to sit up high, but you pay a price.
 
Joined
May 27, 2008
Messages
5,028
Location
Parts Unknown
A turbo wagon?

Combining car handling with SUV space, while avoiding the abysmal fuel economy of SUVs?

Sounds like a great idea for a car…
Like a Passat turbo wagon, or a Jetta/Golf wagon with a turbo engine?

but they can't match a hybrid SUV in mileage (compared to a compact) or the space and mileage of a midsize 3-row SUV....

as my old Passat 2.0T wagon couldn't match the SUV space of my current Highlander hybrid AWD... but the Passat was more fun to drive than the Highlander, with being tuned, and lowered with Eibach springs (powder coated to VW specs) with bilstein B8 dampers withH&R RSB and having 3 pedals to drive, even though the TNGA platform with the softly sprung non-XSE Highlander is no slouch when it comes to curvy road driving
 
Joined
Sep 23, 2008
Messages
10,758
Location
Ontario, Canada
I have spent most of my life swapping cars, owning multiple models at a time, etc. I have owned everything from mid 90's BMW 750's to modern Mercs to Alfas to Miatas, Firebirds, built off roaders, SUV's, Abarths...always looking to drive something unique.

Anyways, out of everything I have owned, I have never received so much attention as I have in the Tour X the last 6 months or so. Dads, Moms, Co-workers, folks at gas stations are all walking up and asking what it is. Now, I have de-badged it as much as possible, so it is hard to know what it is...as well as swapped to 20" summer rims and tires. The common two questions are "is it fast" and "what kind of mileage does it get". They are surprised at both...and even more surprised when I tell them it is 4+ years old, AWD, and you can't get one anymore.

Anyways...with the latest fuel prices, I wonder if something like this would be the new norm. I have to say with my detest of driving what everybody else has, I would have to find something new...but at least it would drive up the value of my current DD.
We didn't even get them in Canada, which is odd since we tend to get a few more wagons than the US. Opel still makes the vehicle though, but I guess its now more likely to show up at a Chrysler dealership with Stellantis owning both?
Our Outback is as close as we could get to an AWD midsize wagon, and only suffers about a 6% hwy mileage penalty to a Legacy sedan with the same drivetrain. The Outback is about 1.4% more efficient in on they hwy than the Forester which also has the same drivetrain. So atleast in government mileage tests, the difference between a sedan, lifted wagon version of the sedan, and a SUV with the a bit less interior volume is not huge.
Anyways I wasn't regretting getting the slower fuel efficient version before gas prices went crazy, and reasonable hwy mileage on regular keeps the current gas prices tolerable...
 
Joined
Apr 6, 2018
Messages
2,755
Location
Somewhere in time
I was being facetious.
FYI, facetiousness tends not to translate well on the internet.

I don’t find most SUVs attractive. They are often big bloated, excessive machines that don’t handle well. They don’t do well with MPG.

You’re paying a lot for capabilities that are never used, while living with the compromises of excessive weight and size.

The RAV 4 and CRV, while getting decent MPG, have poor acceleration and handling compared with a turbo wagon.

You really don’t get much practicality out of most SUVs.

It‘s nice to sit up high, but you pay a price.
Ok so you don't like SUVs and for some reason you don't think they're practical. Can you provide some details as to why you think they're not practical, maybe as compared to a sedan?

The sales numbers seem to show that most other people would disagree with your perspective. What are people getting wrong inasmuch that SUV sales are so high and sedan sales so low?
Not to mention that the TourX (a badge engineered Opel) was canceled after 3 years due to poor sales.
 
Joined
Sep 23, 2008
Messages
10,758
Location
Ontario, Canada
I think you have this backwards.

According to Fuelly.com, the Buick TourX averages about 23+ mpg, while a similar vintage Honda CR-V averages 28+ mpg and a Toyota RAV-4 averages about 27 mpg.

And I'm sure the 111" TourX wheelbase (a full 6" longer than the CR-V and RAV-4) does nothing to help it handle like a car.
Actually the longer wheel base does help it handle better, and compared to SUV's with similar power to weight ratios, I'm sure it would be much quicker to hustle down a smooth winding road anyways. A Forester XT averages about 21mpg on fuelly which equalizes the turbo factor atleast.
 

Astro14

$100 Site Donor
Staff member
Joined
Oct 10, 2010
Messages
16,173
Location
Virginia Beach
FYI, facetiousness tends not to translate well on the internet.


Ok so you don't like SUVs and for some reason you don't think they're practical. Can you provide some details as to why you think they're not practical, maybe as compared to a sedan?

The sales numbers seem to show that most other people would disagree with your perspective. What are people getting wrong inasmuch that SUV sales are so high and sedan sales so low?
Not to mention that the TourX (a badge engineered Opel) was canceled after 3 years due to poor sales.
Not sure the majority of people make good decisions on anything.

Look at people’s retirement savings for a data point on how well the average person makes decisions.

I’ve owned several SUVs. Expedition, Explorer. 4Runner. Rented dozens more.

Sluggish, gas guzzling dogs, all of them. The 4Runner was taken off road routinely. Happy to put up with poor handling and poor MPG for the unique capability that I enjoyed using.

But for street use?

A car, hands down. Make it a wagon, and I have all the cargo room of an SUV, none of the drawbacks.

What’s the point of paying the price (on vehicle cost and fuel economy) for a frame, transfer case, and 4WD that never get used? They’re a waste for most purposes.

Please spare me the “snow” argument.

4WD vehicles were the ones that crashed most in Vermont winters. Couple a flatlander, with a 4WD SUV, and all season tires, on vacation in Stowe, and Willy’s towing service was always busy.

Willy never had to pull a car with proper tires out of a ditch.

People buy cars for lots of reasons. Rational thought and practicality are rarely part of that calculus.
 
Joined
May 27, 2008
Messages
5,028
Location
Parts Unknown
Not sure the majority of people make good decisions on anything.

Look at people’s retirement savings for a data point on how well the average person makes decisions.

I’ve owned several SUVs. Expedition, Explorer. 4Runner. Rented dozens more.

Sluggish, gas guzzling dogs, all of them. The 4Runner was taken off road routinely. Happy to put up with poor handling and poor MPG for the unique capability that I enjoyed using.

But for street use?

A car, hands down. Make it a wagon, and I have all the cargo room of an SUV, none of the drawbacks.

What’s the point of paying the price (on vehicle cost and fuel economy) for a frame, transfer case, and 4WD that never get used? They’re a waste for most purposes.

Please spare me the “snow” argument.

4WD vehicles were the ones that crashed most in Vermont winters. Couple a flatlander, with a 4WD SUV, and all season tires, on vacation in Stowe, and Willy’s towing service was always busy.

Willy never had to pull a car with proper tires out of a ditch.

People buy cars for lots of reasons. Rational thought and practicality are rarely part of that calculus.
So, what new wagon for sale these days has 3 rows of forward facing seats, in case you need to make a person suffer in the 3rd row in an emergency?
 

Astro14

$100 Site Donor
Staff member
Joined
Oct 10, 2010
Messages
16,173
Location
Virginia Beach
So, what new wagon for sale these days has 3 rows of forward facing seats, in case you need to make a person suffer in the 3rd row in an emergency?
I’m glad your car works for you.

My cars serve my requirements better than any SUV.

My truck is used for towing and hauling heavy loads, like car engines, or rear differentials, that cannot be moved with any, repeat any, SUV.
 
Joined
Sep 23, 2008
Messages
10,758
Location
Ontario, Canada
FYI, facetiousness tends not to translate well on the internet.


Ok so you don't like SUVs and for some reason you don't think they're practical. Can you provide some details as to why you think they're not practical, maybe as compared to a sedan?

The sales numbers seem to show that most other people would disagree with your perspective. What are people getting wrong inasmuch that SUV sales are so high and sedan sales so low?
Not to mention that the TourX (a badge engineered Opel) was canceled after 3 years due to poor sales.
I think if everyone thought practically about cars, the default car should be a midsize 2wd wagon with a kids only 3rd row option. Need better mileage? get a compact wagon. Need all weather capability on public roads? add AWD to your wagon. It is a bit odd that these two vehicles barely exist in the US, but are pretty common in the rest of the world.

Only when you are going on unmaintained roads or live in an area with extreme snowfall, or off road, does adding ground clearance do anything good for you, other than let you be closer to eye level with everyone in an SUV or pickup...

In rural New Zealand, I think the most common car we saw was a compact wagon, followed by a hatchback, like a Corolla. More midsize wagons too. Gas is a bit more there, and on the North Island atleast snow isn't a factor in most places.
There's lots of winding roads with almost an unobtainable 60mph speed limit too, so putting more gas into an AWD RAV4, compared to a wagon, to suffer more in the corners, while paying more for the RAV4, doesn't compute for people there at least. Full size pickups don't really exist there but there are lots of midsize SUV's which more are used for SUV stuff, and less SUV's used as suboptimal minivans.
 
Last edited:
Joined
May 27, 2008
Messages
5,028
Location
Parts Unknown
I’m glad your car works for you.

My cars serve my requirements better than any SUV.

My truck is used for towing and hauling heavy loads, like car engines, or rear differentials, that cannot be moved with any, repeat any, SUV.
you didn't answer my question
 
Joined
May 27, 2008
Messages
5,028
Location
Parts Unknown
I think if everyone thought practically about cars, the default car should be a midsize 2wd wagon with a kids only 3rd row option. Need better mileage? get a compact wagon. Need all weather capability on public roads? add AWD to your wagon. It is a bit odd that these two vehicles barely exist in the US, but are pretty common in the rest of the world.

Only when you are going on unmaintained roads or live in an area with extreme snowfall, or off road, does adding ground clearance do anything good for you, other than let you be closer to eye level with everyone in an SUV or pickup...

In rural New Zealand, I think the most common car we saw was a compact wagon, followed by a hatchback, like a Corolla. More midsize wagons too. Gas is a bit more there, and on the North Island atleast snow isn't a factor in most places.
There's lots of winding roads with almost an unobtainable 60mph speed limit too, so putting more gas into an AWD RAV4, compared to a wagon, to suffer more in the corners, while paying more for the RAV4, doesn't compute for people there at least. Full size pickups don't really exist there but there are lots of midsize SUV's which more are used for SUV stuff, and less SUV's used as suboptimal minivans.
According to:

The best selling car in New Zealand is the Ford Ranger truck, then the Toyota Hilux, then Mitsubishi Outlander, then RAV4, then the Mitsubishi ASX (Outlander Sport), the Mitsubishi Triton (pickup truck), then finally a car, the Corolla, then back to a pickup truck.
 
Joined
Nov 20, 2006
Messages
28,933
Location
MA, Mittelfranken.de
New one coming in 2024 unfortunately not to the USA. This one will be based on the Citroen DS9 and available in SW and sedan.
It wont be a Buick badge but maybe at Chrysler dealers this time.

Opel-Insignia.jpg
 

Astro14

$100 Site Donor
Staff member
Joined
Oct 10, 2010
Messages
16,173
Location
Virginia Beach
So, what new wagon for sale these days has 3 rows of forward facing seats, in case you need to make a person suffer in the 3rd row in an emergency?
A minivan.

Which gets better mileage, has a better third row, and has more space, than most three row SUVs.

You want an apples to oranges comparison.

The Buick is a five passenger wagon. It doesn’t have three rows.

Two of my Volvo V70s do.

And my R model runs rings around just about any SUV, in economy, braking, handling, and acceleration, while having as much cargo room as the mid size SUVs with which it should fairly be compared.
 

harbor

Site Donor 2023
Joined
Dec 13, 2002
Messages
409
Location
Rochester Hills, MI
DH - Please post a pic of that beast when you get a chance.
My kids are grown and I’m no longer a station wagon/minivan guy, but those Regals always caught my eye. I thought the styling looked much better than Volvo,VW etc wagons.
Thanks.
 
Top