Pontiac Grand Prix (1996)

It is one of the earliest W-car and unquestionably the most sporty-biased, otherwise it wouldn't have been a Pontiac. Supplying 240 horsepower is the Series II, 3.8-litre supercharged V6. Don't laugh at this outdated pushrod design, although it doesn't rev as clean as modern mutli-valvers, it produces mountains of torque - a massive 280 lbft at low rpm - that is desperately needed by the heavy Grand Prix. Numbers speak the loudest: it takes just 6.8 seconds to reach 60 mph from launch, cool !

However, General Motors seems forgotten that the Grand Prix is a front-wheel-driver riding on MacPherson struts at each corner, as a result, torque steer is inevitable once the supercharger is boosting. By European norm, its Magnasteer electric-assisted steering is well-weighted but the feel is somewhat artificial. The chassis bias towards understeer. Moreover, the length and weight of the body prevent it from being driven in twisty roads with the desired agility and nimbleness. Even so, Grand Prix still handles better than other W-cars because of its stiffest suspension setting. It rolls least but of course ride quality suffers.

After all, the GP is another price-oriented product coming from GM. A storming front-wheel-drive platform incorporating a compulsory 4-speed automatic and riding on all struts suspensions is, shall we say, just a pseudo sports saloon. It is not really exciting to be drive.
 

Oldsmobile Intrigue (1997)

The all-alloy V6 is derived from the famous Northstar V8 family, which includes Cadillac's 4.6-litre unit and Oldsmobile's Aurora 4.0. As it retains the basic structure of the V8, including the 90-degree incline angle, no wonder some journalists described it as a Northstar with 2 cylinders chopped out. The 90-degree design is a cost-oriented compromise which allows it to be built by the same tooling as the V8, but it also requires an extra balancer shaft to be fitted to the V-valley to smooth out the axial vibration. Unfortunately, GM is not Mercedes-Benz and it failed to make the 90-degree V6 as smooth as competitors, say, Toyota Camry's or Honda Accord's V6s. And we have not yet talked about Acura's 3.2 V6 or Toyota's VVT-i V6, which are even better.

Another feature of the Northstar V6 is the large capacity - it displaces 3.5-litres, or half a litre in excess of the industry standard. However, peak power output is rather disappointing - just 215 horsepower - due to the low compression ratio of 9.3 to 1, in other words, the Intrigue can drink fuel of lower Octane grade than competitors without hurting output. Moreover, the maximum torque of 230 lbft proves that "there is no replacement for displacement".

However, this slogan also applies to the comparison between the Northstar V6 and the old Series II 3.8-litre V6, which had been used by the Intrigue until the arrival of the new engine. Traditional push-rod fans regard the Northstar V6 as more peaky than the Series II V6, hence a slower 0-30 mph acceleration recorded, and it is also thirstier. At above 30 mph and especially at the top rev range, the new V6 is of course stronger, smoother and more eager, but then again it couldn't match the Japanese rivals. Too bad.

0-60 mph in 7.9 seconds is reasonably fast for a car weighing 1560 kg, thanks to the 230 lbft of torque. However, the same 230 lbft causes torque steer under acceleration that rarely appears in this segment. Undoubtedly, the all-strut suspensions have nothing to do to prevent that happening. Talking about suspension, it should be noted that Oldsmobile claimed the Intrigue as well as Alero having a "Trilink" rear suspension but actually this is 100% cheating. My English is not very good, but in my understanding the word "Trilink" equals to three links, in other words, multi-link. In fact, it is a conventional strut suspension with the coil-damper unit (Olds sees it as the first link) and a pair of lower control arms (2nd and 3rd links). According to this interpretation, all MacPherson strut in the world could be said as "Trilink" !

Apparently, Oldsmobile knows clearly that all-strut suspension is nothing to be proud of. Almost all European and Japanese saloons of this segment or above are all riding on either multi-link or double wishbones or their derivatives at the rear, with the exception of Passat (torsion beam, but it has four-link for front suspension) and Alfa Romeo 156 (strut at rear, but double wishbones at front). It is not to say all-strut suspension cannot make a driver's car, Porsche Boxster is a good example, but then General Motors is not Porsche. It did employ a stiffer suspension setting and a 4-stage valving damper with integrated rebound springs. It really controls the body movement far better than typical soft-sprung American sedans (in the pre-Lincoln LS era, of course), minimizing understeer pretty well yet provide a good ride quality. It did win many praise from American journalists but still fail to edge out Honda Accord in several comparison tests. But I can't help feeling strange that the journalists praise its "Euro-style" handling but without bringing any European car for comparison. The only European car of this class American know is Ford Contour, or our dear Mondeo, and VW Passast, but nothing was heard about them when they praised the Intrigue's "Euro-style" handling. And what about our European class-leader, Peugeot 406 ? That car rides and handles even better than the Mondeo and makes the Accord and Passat feel dull ! Next time don't mention "Euro-style" without knowing the best of Europe.

GM still haven't sorted out the problem of the Magnasteer electromagnetic power steering. It is not all that rich on feel, as in Cadillac Seville, and over-assisted. Another problem is the weight, which prevent it from changing direction as agile and tidy as European cars or Accord. Brakes, however, is strong and responsive in the Autobahn package. The electronic 4-speed auto also works brilliantly.

Inside, Oldsmobile also tries to offer a Euro-style environment with supportive seats and higher quality dashboard. Again, it beat foreign rivals in both cabin space and trunk volume. Again, fit and finish lags behind the Japanese and Volkswagen, but who else not ?

Although the Intrigue fails to match its toughest foreign opponents, it still worth our respect. At least it is going to the correct direction and it tries hard to do so. I hope this is just the first step for GM, although GM has already got enough unsuccessful "first steps" - Quad 4, Saturn, EV1....
 

Chevrolet Impala (1999)

The W-platform has already been used by Pontiac GP, Olds Intrigue, Buick Century and Regal. The Chevy and Pontiac share the same 2807mm wheelbase, that is, longer than a Volvo S80. But the overhangs of these American cars are even more spectacular to the European - the total length of 5080mm for the Impala is 40mm longer than a standard Mercedes S-class ! so you can imagine how many mm are spent to the front and rear overhangs.

In our computer-enhanced picture, the Impala looks quite pretty. However, in real photos it looks odd and ugly. On one hand the boxy proportion reflects a conservative taste enjoyed by those Camry and Accord buyers, on the other hand the odd face and taillights try hard to be different from others. The result is a car looks neither elegant nor exciting.

It seems that the standard W-platform does not offer sufficient rigidity for today's requirement (oh, it's still rather young !), otherwise GM won't add so much reinforcement to the chassis. There is a pair of braces linking the front suspension towers to the engine bulkhead. A magnesium beam running across the base of A-pillars and hide under the dashboard, similar to the treatment Audi did to the TT Roadster. Normally these reinforcement are only applied to high performance or convertible versions.

So the Impala feels more solid than some older W-cars although not handles as taut as the Euro-feel-biased Oldsmobile Intrigue. Talking about European feel, it is always inadequate to require the Chevrolet to rival a Volkswagen in handling, especially is a car this large. Keep it in the States and most buyers will be content about its relaxed road manner. However, keen American drivers may dislike its over-assisted steering.

The same could be applied to the engine. The familiar pushrod Series-II V6s, either the 180hp 3.4-litre or the 200hp 3.8-litre satisfy the car�s intention. Without asking for excitement or extreme smoothness, they push pleasantly from nearly idle, offering an always-standby torque stream. Reliability is doubtless. Quietness is also respectable if not pushed very hard. As usual, they are mated to the familiar 4-speed automatic.

Build quality is still in questioned. From the exterior to interior the lack of strict quality control is obvious. The cabin looks cheap (It is !), just a combination of plastic and textile elements without careful integration and detailing. Flat seats provide little support. That said, the Impala lacks show-room appeal and hardly catches the heart of those used to buy Japanese cars. In the end, space for money is still the selling point.
 

Chevrolet Monte Carlo (1999)

Monte Carlo was derived directly from Impala, with the same chassis reinforced to the W-platform to make it rigid. However, it does not receive much work of tuning to extract the potential, if any, from the chassis. In other words, it steers, ride and corners like a normal saloon rather than a coupe. Both the 3.4-litre and 3.8-litre V6 do not provide real sparkle to ignite driving enthusiasm.

In fact, it intends to satisfy those want a sporty look (really ?) but don't like to sacrifice saloon-level of comfort. In other words, a pseudo coupe even more pseudo than the Pontiac Grand Prix.
 

Buick Century and Regal (1996)

Century

Regal

The Century rides on typically super-soft suspension offering a ride comfort like magic flying carpet. The trade-off is great deal of body roll and understeer. No wonder most buyers are in their late 50s.

Big chairs provide the least lateral support, once again prove that it is an old man's car. For driving fun ? GM persuade you to try Oldsmobile. In case you insist a Buick (a strange insist), they'll give you a Regal.

Suspension is firmer, if not firm enough. Instead of Century's 3.1 V6 (175hp), the Regal is powered by either the Series II 3.8 V6 (200hp) or the supercharged version with 240hp and 280 lbft. Fire breathing performance seems too much for the chassis. Although front tower bar provide the necessary stiffness to the chassis, the suspension cannot handle the torque steer and the Magnasteer power steering feels artificial (worse than Olds Intrigue). It's not really a sports sedan, even Pontiac GP is more exciting. However, stiffer springs lifted handling at lot from the Century.

Both cars offers big cabin space but outdated styling (exterior and interior) and poor build quality let us down.