hyperv6

With hearing more and more about a small Chevy I worried it might effect this one. It got quiet for a long time on this one and I had hoped we had heard more about it by now. But with GM often if one thing get canceled often something else may take its place. The ATS convertible is off but now there is talk of a small roadster. It might just pay to wait and see how this pans out vs doing the piss and moan dance.

Have you seen the guy who built the monster truck Smart car yet. If not it will give you an idea. LOL!

Rear Seat in Place Rear Seat Folded Buick Encore 18.8 cu. ft. / 533 liters 48.4 cu. ft. / 1,372 liters BMW X1 16.9 cu. ft. / 480 liters 47.4 cu. ft. / 1,350 liters Audi Q3 16.2 cu. ft. / 460 liters 48.2 cu. ft. / 1,365 liters Good as any better them many in class. It is funny how I have done a lot of hauling this years. Most was done with a 08 HHR, 04 GTP and 09 Silverado. I have found each haul somethings better than others. The HHR and GTP will haul longer items better then the truck as they can take 8'-9' items with no issues. The GTP will not take tall items but the HHR will. The truck being an open 6 foot bed will take take taller and wider items like a quad that will not fit inside the HHR. As it has been none are a haul all vehicle and depending on what I am moving is what vehicle I take. So cargo ability is a variable based on what you are hauling anymore. There are few one thing hauls all unless you have a long bed truck. WIth the popularity of crew cabs and extended cabs most trucks are 6 footers anymore. The bottom line the Buick offers as good or better in class cargo ability and that is what counts. It is up to the buyers to decide if it fit just what they plan to haul. A quad guy will pass but a woman with crafts or shopping items will love it. The Buick has enough room to take care of most odd shaped items many average people haul.

The shame is some of the most profitable cars are the most boring or lest fun. Hopefully growth in profit of appliances will lead to a continued supply of fun vehicles for enthusiasts (V-series models, SS models, Corvettes, etc).. Did you just figure this one out? Profitable companies can afford to play and do it right. Companies going broke that try to play come up with half baked good ideas. The better the bread and butter cars sell the more money they can spend on fun and image cars.

One of the most talked about GM car of all time was the Aztek too. Talk is not a gauge to judge a car by alone. I agree that with todays box that stylist can work in get smaller and smaller and smaller all the time. It will become more and more difficult to really be creative without being weird.

I think the issue with the front ends has to do with the crush space rules in many markets anymore. These are making the hoods and nose rise higher and higher. I really think many designers have yet to think of a good way to deal with it yet. I think they feel making the grills larger hides how high the hood is. Either way many people are looking for ways to reinvent the CRX and Mini. This one as odd as it is has garnered great attention. It only lacked power and that is now solved. Chevy needs to be on notice. This segment of the market will become more and more important as cars get smaller and more expensive. You get this segment model correct and you can own it. In this class they want power, cool, utility, Image and good MPG. This is a class were GM could really use the little Opel Astra GTC right now, I hope they get to it soon.

The shame is some of the most profitable cars are the most boring or lest fun.

Yes the the quarter window shape was all the pretty much changed and the quarter profile was pretty much the same. The above photo bares this out above. While the quarter panels had the same profile but they did make some changes to them. They did have some change to the shape on the side in the fender well and side body line. Also the light caps were replaced with metal in the rear for 70-72.

I passed around the photo's to the gear heads at work. These are not import guys either. Most are GM fans and most drag race in every thing from coupes to rails. As of now the 140 was loved nearly by all. The nose was the only issue. The 130 was given a pass by all but one. He was a BMW guy. Most thought it was too small and did not like the styling. But this was also not scientific but it was focused at the kind of people who should be interested in a RWD coupe.

One thing Honda needed to do is leave trying to make a better Ferrari behind. This is what they could never understand with old NSX. I think they have with this car. Honda never understood no matter if you built a better Harley or Ferrari it was still not a Harley or Ferrari. There is a heritage and image you buy. That is what Honda can not design into a car. They need to earn it with their own thing and this car can help do that. It still takes time as you still have to earn it.

Because it just doesn't work. It looks like they tried to do a Chevelle or Monte Carlo and ran out of room. It's very cobbled together, like the designer got tired of erasing and starting over and just said "F** it, I'll go with this." (I mean, I've felt like that before sometimes, but really?) This is how I pretty much feel. It is not the upright window so much it is the fact it looks like they ran out of room. The parts of this car are fine it is the sum of them all together on a car this size that is what is not working. When you see a well styled car you kind of feel it inside. This one just left me cold and almost wishing GM had not shown it in this state. Like I said I hope it is just a car they threw a lot of ideas on to see what people like and disliked. This way they can go back and use what works and what didn't. The B pillar is all wrong styling wise and ergo wise. That tells me this has low production value at least this way.

I'm not saying the 140S is a terrible looking car, what I'm saying is that it's a case of "been there, done that." It brings nothing new -- styling and hardware-wise -- to the table in the current market. It's derivitive and, quite frankly, its not a Chevrolet. Am I saying it shouldn't be built, though? No, it piggybacks off of the Cruze and the ELR in theory so it would be relatively cheap to build. As much as I don't like it, it does appeal to a certain buyer -- buyers of Civics, Eclipses, and other cars of that ilk. Given the general dimesions of the 130R, such a design change would be disasterous unless you wanted to turn it into a hatchback. Let the record also show that the roofline of the '68 - '69 and '70 - '72 Chevelles were quite upright. GM designers at the time were very good at hiding it, though. GM designers masked it on the '68 - '69 Chevelles by having the rear quarter glass kick up dramatically on the bottom. The '70 - '72 Chevelles illustrate just how much more upright the roofline is versus the '68 - '69 models after the rear quarter glass was changed to be less dramatic. However, the change to the rear quarter glass changed the width of the c-pillar slightly to make the rear slope of the backglass look more extreme than what it actually was. Those particular Chevelles were not fastbacks. The closest GM came to building an A-Body fastback was probably the Olds Cutlass Holiday coupes and, even still, that wasn't a true fastback coupe. Here's a profile shot of the Code 130R. Not quite as upright like in the GM press shots, huh? Also notice how the back glass wraps around slightly, which tends to hide how its sloped. You're grasping at staws here. The Aerocoupe (which, technically, is not a fastback) is in a higher demand versus the regular '80s MC/SS because it was built in low production numbers and was one of the last cars built for the sole purpose to be homologated for use in NASCAR, not because it offers any greater styling advatage over the regular car. In fact, that huge rear window killed the functionality of the MC/SS's otherwise very large trunk. Again, not unless you wanted to turn it into a fourth-generation Camaro-style hatchback. But Sorry I struck a nerve here. You have taken a lot of my post way out of context. Here it is clean and simple You like the 130 and I don't. Why don't I like it? Is it the upright rear window? Not really. What I hate is the car has no flow or proportion to it or flow. The nose and tail really don't fit the styling. It is like the front, roof and rear were done by 3 different people. My point is not to just make a coupe just to say you have a coupe is based on accepting this car. I feel GM should do a coupe but I am not willing to settle just for this car. It cost no more to style the Bently GT than it would to create a outstanding design here. GM has some of the best designers in the world and this car is not near what they can or should do. If you tired to pass this off as a Chevelle or Camaro Ford would love you. Now with that said this is only my opinion and that is all it is. You can disagree with it but remember there is no right or wrong here for either of us it is just an opininon. I am good with your opinion even if I don't agree with it. I can deal with please try to do the same. I am not the only one here that thinks GM could do this car so much better. FYI the new Accord Coupe concept has a major fast back and is not a Hatch even in a similar shape and size. The greenhouse on that car is very nice but the rest of it is pretty plain accept the rear. The roof would be fine on a larger car but not on this car. As for the chevelles 68-72. Back in the day they were called fastbacks. How do I know I lived through that time and my dad had every year of them I even owned a 68 SS myself. It was not an maxed out fast back but it was still termed a fastback roof line.

Some see Mitsu in the 140 I see a little Lambo or even itallia with a back seat I just think if they used a roof line closer to this on the 130 and give the C pillar a 69 Chevelle shape it would send a better design messsage. 1968-72 were the most popular Chevelles and they were not upright coupes without any flow to the roof line. The bottom line is coupes can be made useful and still good looking. We have many examples over the years. Even today the 80's Monte Carlo fastback is much more in demand over the flat rear window one. God knows it was not for the performance. Even if they added a rear window to the 130 and bent it like a 77 Impala Coupe it would help. But to have a coupe just to have a coupe is a waste of time. The Aztek was a very useful product but the styling killed it. You get the useful part and styling right to where it appeals to all and you will not be able to build enough of them. All many of us are saying is GM can do better on the 130. Imagine a Monte Carlo that had the flow and grace of a Bently GT. I am not saying make a copy but give it the feel and flow of a car like this vs a out of proportion Prelude. Coupes also can afford to be a little impractical, People generally buy coupe for styling first. If they want practical today they buy sedans and CUV's.

Sorry. I thought they had a sign somewhere on the entry plaza where one side said California Adventure and the other said Magic Kingdome. That is what you I hear the main park called back here in FL. I spent little time on the name as we went in as soon as we got there. I think they get the idea if it really matters. It is amazing how they got so much stuff in such a small area. The Walt Disney Company when they created the "Disneyland Resort" refers to the two parks as Disney's California Adventure and Disneyland Park. They can call it what ever but it is the house of the mouse to most of us LOL!

This car taps into the female segment all the way. It has all the things they like or want. It sits high It has AWD It has a lot of cargo room It will be easy to drive and park It carries many of the traits of a Minivan and SUV in one small package. It will have luxury of a larger SUV but not the bulk. My wife wants a SUV like vehicle but she does not want a Tahoe or Enclave. She said they are a lot bigger than she needs or wants to drive daily. The Nox or Terrain are what she likes sizewise. But even those are larger than many females want or like to drive. Keep in mind many of them can't drive vehicles that are not easy to see out of. The size and visiability of this one will play to those who want the comfort but without the bulk. This untapped market will take off with the Encore and I expect others will soon follow. Lets face it the Escape and Honda are not much for comfort. If a guy here got to the point where he would say I have got to have one of these I would think he is already stranded in a Minivan already. This is not a car that I would expect anyone here to buy. But with that said we here no longer are the main focus of the market anymore.

The one thing I notice in the real photo at the show is the B pillar leaning as it does would be in the way of people getting in and out. It could be a head wacker.

The roof line is not bad in it's self but it is too big for the car. It looks out of proportion to the rest of the car. If they would put this greenhouse on a larger car I think it would look better. To me it makes me think that it looks like they took a greenhouse off of a Camaro size car and planted it on a smaller Cobalt size car. As the lower car is it would look better with a Convertible top or a GT fast back roof line. Like I said the parts are not bad but they are just trying too much here. It may be GM is just threw a lot of ideas on one car to see what we think? As it stands I don't see this as any kind of production car. GM can do better than this. Note this is based just from the photo's I could change my mind in person. Also I am not a fan of the BMW 1 series either. To me it is a little car trying to look big and just does not flow well. It is just not a design that you can feel inside and stirs the soul. Audi has been doing this much better of late accept for the near identical front end on every car.

I had been past the California park many times but never stopped in till I had a kid. I never really had the time anyways as there is so much else to do there. California is my theme park. It is a great place to visit but I would not want to live there. A week or two a year is fine with me. I really need to get back to Hawaii. That is where I really love the beaches. Too bad they closed down Crusier Bob's on Maui. It is a blast riding a mountain bike from the top of a 11,000 foot Volcano to the ocean. I guess someone got killed and spoiled the fun. I about froze my butt off in August as it was only 34 degrees at the top.

Finally someone understand that this is not Buicks only move here. I expect at least one more in the middle and a Mini Van like vehicle yet to come. With the way this will sell in China it is worth a shot here. Home many thought the Verano was a major mistake and the critics love it. We still have to see how the public does but I think it will do well. Another thing is this has a lot of cargo room for such a small vehicle. If it were a Hyundai many people would be singing praise for such a bold move to add Luxury to this class where there is none.

Sorry. I thought they had a sign somewhere on the entry plaza where one side said California Adventure and the other said Magic Kingdome. That is what you I hear the main park called back here in FL. I spent little time on the name as we went in as soon as we got there. I think they get the idea if it really matters. It is amazing how they got so much stuff in such a small area.

You're getting your wish, partially. When the new CARS Land opens in Disney California Adventures park this summer, one of the rides (through Radiator Springs) uses the test track system. So while you may not get the GM feel of the "Test Track" attraction, you will get a similar ride experience. I saw right after we were there last they were turning the California Adventure into the Pixar park. We got there at a great time. We hit the Magic Kingdom before School was out in CA but was already out in Ohio. We did all but 3 rides in one day. We went back the second day [We have a place in San Diego to stay at] we hit the California Park and rode everything by 1 PM. We then hit the rides at the Magic Kingdom and picked up the rides we had missed and still had dinner in Newport Beach and was home in San Diego by Midnight. We are planning to get to the one in FL at some point but we just don't get that way often. Sorry I am not a big fan of FL. It is just a place we go when we get on a cruise. I really need to spend some time down there as I am sure I will like it. The beaches look cleaner and warmer than CA. I need to finish the PCH as I have driven it From Mexico to San Fran. I need to start at the Golden Gate and go North now. I have family up north of the bridge that have been wanting us to go out. They also have a Cobra kit car with a real 427 side oiler in it that I have been offered a drive in. I need to take him up on it.

I see Chevelle bulges on the fenders, Nomad show car from a few years ago in the front fender curve, Monza town car in the winshield and B pillar, 5 Gen Camaro tail and the rear window I see maybe 2nd gen Monte. A lot of good elements that just don't fit together in one small car. I love all of these older cars but not in one car. There is just no cohesiveness or flow to this model in styling. The tail would make a great tail for an updated Cruze.

Anyone notice the return of USA 1 Plates on both cars. This was something missing on the return of the 5th Gen Camaro that would have flowed well with the retro look. Funny Chevy goes global and now is using the USA 1 tag again. It may not mean much to some here but overseas in some places it would be a cool thing for many. American cars have their pockets of fans around the world.

GM made it clear they will be working to lower the weight on all their new platforms. The Alpha is only the first to show the results of their work.

Arlen Vanke was from here and I still remember seeing the Duster he used to run in NHRA prostock. It was so very stock based. He still comes back from AZ every year here to run some of the old Super Stock Pontiacs he used to drive for Knafel. He and a few other old Tin Indian drivers come back to drive some of the old cars. That is fun to watch. They are the real cars too not repo's.