Posted 16 January 2012 - 06:08 PM
The Tru140 also grabs a sizeable portion of the article dedicated to the show, with the writer outlining the "very attractive" coupe's mountain of technology. There is a mention of the 130, saying it's "interesting" and that it has E-Assist. But that's all.
Posted 16 January 2012 - 06:16 PM
Edited by ocnblu, 16 January 2012 - 06:16 PM.
Posted 17 January 2012 - 02:38 PM
Posted 17 January 2012 - 03:10 PM
Still, I see value in both designs.
Posted 17 January 2012 - 04:32 PM
I think based on what I see and the comments of GM that the 130 is just a bunch of ideas and see what sticks. The 140 I think is an idea of what if we made the ELR show car into a Chevy and sold it cheap with a lot of features. At this point I don't see either going production even as at 85% of what we were shown.
As for popularity I have been reading many comments and they each have their fans and detractors. I have been see about a 33.5% like, 140 33.5% like 120 and 33.5% hate both on these cars.
GM is going to twitter with the public on these cars and see what works and what does not. Parts of these cars may show up some where at best. They plan to do this this year so you may want to watch when they do this to add your 2 cents.
The key here is GM is fishing as the interiors of either car is only rendered in 2D so they have not even gone to the point to finish an interior yet. So at this point no matter what car you like don't get upset if it does not see production. We can argue all day here on these but more than likely we may see the nose as a new face of Chevy or the tail of the car as a new Camaro at best here but only time will tell.
These cars were for feed back and to get people talking. At this point I think they have done this well. It has been a while since GM just has thrown out ideas like this. Many of the recent cars just went to production as they nearly were in show trim. Few of the cars were just done for styling fun and feedback.
Edited by hyperv6, 17 January 2012 - 04:34 PM.
Posted 17 January 2012 - 04:47 PM
Posted 17 January 2012 - 07:08 PM
And pervy, do you need a link? I can give you a link. Let me know.
Posted 17 January 2012 - 07:31 PM
The problem is that the Tru140 will actually sell. Chevrolet needs to court people my age and they would do it handily with the Tru140. Sure Honda could make it. But they haven't, and based on their design direction, likely won't. Chevrolet can take the opportunity to beat the import brands to the punch on this one. Maybe once it starts to sell, then GM can concentrate on the far more niche model, the 130.
As it stands, Chevrolet can count on ol' folks to buy its vehicles. But they're losing the increasingly fickle and tech-oriented Millenial crowd. The 140 can win them back.
Posted 17 January 2012 - 07:46 PM
Did you catch the bit where the 140 tested better with older ppl than the 130 in Chevrolet's research so far? Seems crazy, don't it? But it shows the 130 has wider appeal to more age groups.
Posted 17 January 2012 - 07:59 PM
As I've said before that both could have a place in the lineup.
Posted 17 January 2012 - 08:31 PM
Posted 17 January 2012 - 08:42 PM
Posted 17 January 2012 - 09:09 PM
I'm not going to deny that the 140S has grown on me since GM introduced it, but it still doesn't stoke my fire the same way the 130R does. The drivetrain layout and general specifications are exactly what I would want in a small coupe, there are no compromises.
Edited by black-knight, 17 January 2012 - 09:12 PM.
Posted 17 January 2012 - 09:32 PM
I don't see much of anything specific to the 1-series that warrants calling it out as something inspirational here. 130 has an unusually rigid belt line spine, not sure how I fel about it really.Original is a stretch, since the overall shape is reminiscent of the BMW 1 Series.
I would say that the 140 looks like a copy, while the 130 looks original.
Posted 22 January 2012 - 07:24 PM
1) First and foremost, the 130 is an abomination that needs to be taken out behind the barn and shot... I admire the incorporation of Chevelle-esque side sculpting, but that detail does not rescue a design that is a terrible mix of typical GM bland and typical GM imitation.
2) By in large, BOTH of these concepts look horribly dated all the way down to the ripped off Corvette emblems. Had these debuted about 4-5 years ago, they'd be show stoppers. But now, not so much. The Chevrolet design face (which has a lot of potential) has been distilled into one of the most generic Walmart quality faces ever put on a car. Even the emblems are terrible. that VERY emblem (for the most part) debuted ALMOST A DECADE AGO on the Corvette; and even then it was a TERRIBLE take on years of excellent Chevrolet cross flag emblems.
It's not all bad tho...
1) The more I look at the 140, the more I love it and the more I could CERTAINLY see myself buying one for a daily driver (and that's coming from a 20-something who owns 3 RWD pony cars.
2) The design actually has a sense of aggression, or dare I say, EXCITEMENT. (something that is BADLY needed at GM right now) The fact that it is a little bland on detailing actually aids the design because we've come to expect bland FWD appliances as "something to get excited about" now. Unfortunately, that is NOT a double standard for RWD cars and it adds icing to the cake of the 130s FAIL.
3) I did like it better as a Pontiac.... Naturally, because it was even MORE aggressive and didn't have the "I'm everyone's safe, responsible friend" Chevrolet face.
I'd love to see the 140 come to production... And I'd love to see a RWD alpha coupe slotted below the Camaro (along with an Alpha sedan) but it certainly shouldn't be the 130... At least, if they actually want to sell any.
Edited by FUTURE_OF_GM, 22 January 2012 - 07:26 PM.
Posted 22 January 2012 - 07:52 PM
Posted 23 January 2012 - 05:56 PM
Posted 23 January 2012 - 08:22 PM
And while I'm the first one to call both of those cars a success, there's no doubt that their appeal could've been MUCH more broad.
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users