Jump to content
Create New...
  • Blake Noble
    Blake Noble

    Chevrolet's Code 130R packs big muscle into a small package


    If you're a fan of rear-wheel drive GM muscle, then this year's Detroit Auto Show should give you a decent reason to rejoyce. Photos of the new Chevrolet Code 130R concept have recently begun to hit the internet and, so far, the small, rear-drive Chevy coupe is shaping up to be an interesting proposition.

    The Code 130R is one of two new Chevrolet concept vehicles GM is rolling out for Detroit. With its blistered fenders and square-shouldered roofline, the styling can definitely evoke strong images of the classic 1970 through 1972 Chevelle muscle cars. However, unlike the classic Chevelle, GM says the Code 130R could be capable of up to 40 mpg if it were to go into production thanks in part to its 1.4L turbocharged four-cylinder engine augmented by eAssist technology and linked up to a six-speed manual transmission. The Code 130R is also signficantly smaller as well -- photos suggest that this would be somewhere close to the current BMW 1-Series in size. Depsite its small stature, the Code 130R still has room for four people.

    GM also says that if the Code 130R were to go into production it would carry a price tag somewhere in the ballpark of $25,000. If so, the Subaru BRZ and Scion FR-S may have something to worry about. Now, about that name ...

    Click over to page two to read the press release and view the gallery here.


    Here's a Concept: Chevrolet Puts Next-Gen Buyers in Charge

    Two concept coupes designed to inspire ideas and create discussion

    DETROIT – Chevrolet today introduced two concept coupes at the 2012 North American International Auto Show aimed at inspiring next-generation buyers to take the wheel and suggest ideas for a car they can co-create.

    "Chevrolet has always stood for making the aspirational attainable for all generations" said General Motors North America President Mark Reuss. "These two concepts interpret that vision for a new generation. We're seeking out our newest customers' opinions, listening to their advice, and engaging them in new ways."

    According to U.S. Census data, there are 80 million American consumers approaching 30. They represent 40 percent of today's potential car-buying public and a combined $1 trillion in purchasing power.

    Over the past year, Chevrolet has conversed with young consumers across the United States. Based on their feedback, the Chevrolet concepts explore the styling and functionality this group of new buyers says they are looking for in a car.

    Code 130R, the first Chevrolet concept, is a four-seat coupe with a simple upright profile. Painted in an all-new red metallic paint with matte anodized gold wheels, Code 130R features heritage performance-inspired styling and rear-wheel drive. With an aggressive front fascia, Chevrolet fender flares, straight body side and Chevy crossflag emblem, Code 130R makes a link to Chevrolet's performance heritage.

    Code 130R's designers conceived the turbocharged engine to be tuned to work in tandem with eAssist technology. By shutting off the engine at stops, recapturing braking energy, and smoothing torque during acceleration, this concept takes automotive electrification to the next level and balances turbocharged performance with fuel economy.

    Tru 140S, the second Chevrolet concept is a front-wheel-drive, "affordable exotic" four-seat sporty coupe. The three-door hatchback was designed to be an attractive-yet-affordable sports car. Shown in an all-new matte white with Chevy performance chrome wheels featuring crossflag emblems, Tru 140S is designed to look confident, exotic, expensive and fast. Tru 140S is based off the same platform as the Chevrolet Cruze and the groundbreaking Chevrolet Volt electric vehicle with extended range.

    Tru 140S designers want to demonstrate technologies typically found in more expensive cars, including direct injection and a starter-based stop-start technology, balancing internal combustion and electrification to deliver high value and improved fuel economy.

    The concepts share attributes younger buyers say they value:

    Sedan-sized functionality in performance coupe form that seats four passengers

    Interior connectivity and convenience featuring innovative storage, WiFi, smart phone integration with Chevrolet MyLink and heads-up display

    40 MPG with a 1.4L Turbo Ecotec engine with approximately 150 horsepower

    Possible production price range in the low $20,000s

    "Young customers tell us they want functionality with coupe-like aesthetics. Both the Code and Tru body styles resonated with this audience," said Frank Saucedo, director of the GM North America Advanced Design studio in Los Angeles where the two concepts were developed.

    Inside the concepts, connectivity and personalization enable the individualization that the generation says is essential.

    "This buyer prizes connectivity. Allowing them to stay connected by integrating their personal devices through MyLink and WiFi enabling the vehicle to be their own docking station," said Saucedo. "The interiors currently exist in 2D only. This allows us the flexibility to continue the discussion and encourage more dialogue as we continue to develop these concepts."

    From Detroit, the pair of Chevrolet concepts will travel to major auto shows, key lifestyle events, one-on-one experiences and other venues such as college campuses. Chevrolet also will engage customers using the social media tools that young consumers use to talk with one another.

    "For the car company that can successfully engage this generation, there is a tremendous opportunity," said John McFarland, senior manager for Chevrolet Global Marketing, who heads youth research for the brand. "At Chevrolet, we want to build authentic and meaningful relationships with these customers on their terms. We want to hear what they have to say, engage them in our design process, and give them what they want – not what we think they want."

    * * *

    Founded in 1911 in Detroit, Chevrolet is now one of the world's largest car brands, doing business in more than 140 countries and selling more than 4 million cars and trucks a year. Chevrolet provides customers with fuel-efficient vehicles that feature spirited performance, expressive design, and high quality. More information on Chevrolet models can be found at www.chevrolet.com.

    CHEVROLET CODE 130R CONCEPT COUPE SPECIFICATIONS

    Overview

    Model: Chevrolet Code 130R Concept Coupe

    Body style / driveline: four-passenger coupe, rear-wheel drive

    EPA vehicle class: compact car

    Engine

    1.4L Ecotec turbocharged DOHC I-4 w/ eAssist

    Displacement (cu. in. / cc): 83 / 1364

    Bore and stroke (in. / mm): 2.85 x 3.25 / 72.5 x 82.6

    Block material: cast iron

    Cylinder head material: cast aluminum

    Valvetrain: overhead camshafts, four valves per cylinder, continuously variable valve timing

    Ignition system: individual coil on plug

    Fuel delivery: sequential multi-port fuel injectors with electronic throttle control

    Compression ratio: 9.5:1

    Horsepower (hp / kW): 150 / 110

    Torque (lb.-ft. / Nm): 148 / 200

    Recommended fuel: regular unleaded

    Max engine speed (rpm): 6500

    Emissions controls: close-coupled and underfloor catalytic converters; Quick-Sync 58x ignition system; returnless fuel rail; fast light-off O2 sensor

    Estimated fuel economy (hwy): 40

    Transmissions

    6-speed automatic

    6-speed manual

    Wheels/Tires

    Wheels: 20-inch matte gold

    Tires: P245/40R20

    Dimensions

    Exterior

    Wheelbase (in / mm): 109.3 / 2775

    Overall length (in / mm): 173.1 / 4396

    Overall width (in / mm): 71.5 / 1816

    Overall height (in / mm): 54.7 / 1390

    Track (in / mm):

    front: 60.4 / 1535

    rear: 61.8 / 1569

    Interior

    Seating capacity (front / rear): 2 / 2

    Headroom (in / mm):

    front: 30.7 / 780

    rear: 33.1 / 841

    Note: Information shown is current at time of publication.

    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments



    Not bad, I don't care for how upright the rear roof line is, and it looks like something I've seen before, can't quite put my finger on it though.

    Nevertheless there's certainly room for a small RWD slotted below the Camaro to compete with the FR-S, BRZ, and to a less extent the Genesis Coupe.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Nice to see an upright roofline in an era when so many cars are fastbacks w/ 6 inch long decklids. The proportions (not the detailing) remind me a lot of the 1-series. Build it, call it the Vega or Baretta.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I can't help but think of this:

    1966_Chevrolet_Nova_Hardtop_Front_1.JPG

    and I want it badly. Like this spring.

    On another site I saw a rumor that Chevy was looking at reviving the Nova name...wonder if the 130R could become a new Nova.

    Edited by Cubical-aka-Moltar
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    And I like that, in making this, that they shied away from the trend of having headlights that go all the way up the fenders. It has a very classic look, but fits right in with the current Chevy showroom. Please make this....now!

    • Agree 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I was thinking this is 6th Gen Camaro design language too... I've always had the thought that the next gen Camaro would take after the '70-73 Camaro as the current 5th Gen takes after the '67-69. It's not too much of a stretch for me to see (split grille, small wide-set headlights/taillights, duck wing spoiler)

    http://www.retro.net/keywords/1974_camaro/1974_camaro_8.jpg

    http://www.bobbittville.com/CamaroZ28-1978GregBrayton.jpg

    Edited by NOS2006
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    That is the most mixed up bunch of awkward styling I have seen since the 3000GT and the 1st gen LX Charger.

    Like the 140S, Chevy has to come up with a better grill setup.

    I like the concept, including the quasi-notchback roofline. But GM seems to have lost the ability to make a good looking coupe door cut. The front and rear look like a lot of the same ole' same ole' for Chevy concepts.

    If both are based on Alpha, as I understand, GM is only going to be able to build one, which is a real shame. Ideally, the 130R could make a new Nova (with a LOT of styling help), but the 140S should have been offered as a Pontiac.

    • Agree 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Not feeling. I hope it is better when I see it in person.

    Just not much flow to the styling in the photo's It might look better in person.

    As for this being a Camaro. Maybe under the skin but not in this body. This would have to be a different name and car than the Camaro. We will see this chassis but we will get a different body will be my guess and it will be a Camaro. The tail could be a future Camaro styling element.

    So far the guys at work all are not really thrilled with the styling but are excited with the drivetrain.

    Edited by hyperv6
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Not feeling. I hope it is better when I see it in person.

    Just not much flow to the styling in the photo's It might look better in person.

    As for this being a Camaro. Maybe under the skin but not in this body. This would have to be a different name and car than the Camaro. We will see this chassis but we will get a different body will be my guess and it will be a Camaro. The tail could be a future Camaro styling element.

    So far the guys at work all are not really thrilled with the styling but are excited with the drivetrain.

    I agree that Camaro will never use a body like this car.

    Seems to me it all depends on when the new Camaro comes as I don't see Chevy offering two coupes on Alpha.

    Not that I'd object, mind you.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I could see the next Camaro having this platform and wheelbase, but would it be this small (thought I read this concept was about 175 inches long)...that would be quite a downsizing from the current model's reasonable size.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I could see the next Camaro having this platform and wheelbase, but would it be this small (thought I read this concept was about 175 inches long)...that would be quite a downsizing from the current model's reasonable size.

    That all depends on Alpha's degree of dimensional flexibility.

    That said, the current car is reasonably sized - for a Chevellle that is.

    Camaro should shrink a bit.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    With regards to Alpha flexibility - Sigma goes away on the next generation of CTS and Cadillac has made it plain that they intend to use the CTS to compete with the E-Class and 5-series head to head on size both internal and external. The next CTS is Alpha. Given the weight reductions GM has shown here and the weight gain BMW has shown on the 5-series, the world could end up turned upside down.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    LOVE LOVE LOVE the 130! This would be a fantastic rebirth of the Nova nameplate (or at least the Nova "idea"), in coupe, sedan and convertible. The true coupe roofline really does it for me.

    The 140 reminds me of a last-gen Celica with a Lambo body kit.

    Many more people are commenting on the 130 than the 140 over at Autoblog... the 130 has TWICE as many comments... a good indicator to Chevrolet on which car should be built. The 130 has people talking, and hoping anew for an affordable, smaller RWD sporty car from GM.

    The 140 is flash-in-the-pan trendy... it wears earmarks of many other small, sporty coupes that have had short shelf lives. Not what GM should be doing. The 130 is something no other manufacturer can do. The 140 smacks of Celica, Eclipse, even last-gen Cougar. It is a shocker that will grow stale quickly, imo.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    gallery_51_326_3518.png

    1970%20Chevrolet%20Chevelle%20Malibu%20SS-396%20Sport%20Coupe%20-%20rVl.jpg

    Seriously? Please don't tell me I'm the only one here who sees the very clear influence in the side sculpting.

    (Also, rumor has it GM was considering using the Chevelle name for the Code 130R. In spirit of the idea behind this and the Tru, however, GM wanted the names of both concepts to be chosen by the target audience, hence the uninspiring monikers. Chicane would have been the name attached to the Tru 140S, from what I hear.)

    Edited by black-knight
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I agree that Camaro will never use a body like this car.

    Seems to me it all depends on when the new Camaro comes as I don't see Chevy offering two coupes on Alpha.

    Not that I'd object, mind you.

    It might could happen.

    The Code 130R should preview the F6 Camaro in:

    • Its platform (that's a given).
    • Its general dimensions (leaving room for an inch or two here and there).
    • The drivetrain layout, save for the four-cylinder engine. You can probably bet money that eAssist will be optional somehow on the Alpha Camaro.

    The Code 130R possibly differs from the F6 in the fact it was designed to be fuel efficient first and foremorst while still being fun to drive. The Code 130R, from what I understand, was primarily designed to use four-cylinder engines without any consideration for six or eight-cylinder engines. The F6 Camaro will allow room for all three, with emphasis still on a V6 and V8.

    A small, fuel efficient coupe with practical headroom and leg room for four adults that shares a majority of its parts and engineering with the next Camaro can make sense. The Camaro becomes cheaper to build due to it sharing so much content with the Code 130 and the ATS, and the Code 130R's fuel efficiency can only boost CAFE scores, even at a low volume. Sure, a four-banger Camaro might sell, but this little coupe could sell even better because of one simple reason: it isn't a Camaro.

    I'm saying there's a 40/60 chance on this playing out. GM designed the Code 130R (and the Tru 140S) to potentially carry on into production for a very good reason.

    Edited by black-knight
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Wow, yeah Jacket. Looking at them both together, I can see what you're talking about. The '72 Heavy Chevy graphics emphasized that sculpting, and the sunken back glass is another item these two share.

    To me though, Chevelle was bigger than the Code130R projects. This new concept calls out "Nova" to me in the lineup pecking order. I'd love to see the Code130R spawn a family of fun, small RWD vehicles... coupe of course, but also convertible and sedan.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I love this thing aside from the color of the wheels. The only element of the 140 I like is the rear, but as a overall package I prefer this car. It's retro without being obvious about it. It's unique especially with that upright roof, I'm not a fan of compact cars usually, but this is a sweet coupe.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Wow, yeah Jacket. Looking at them both together, I can see what you're talking about. The '72 Heavy Chevy graphics emphasized that sculpting, and the sunken back glass is another item these two share.

    The level of design influence the '70 through '72 Chevelle had on the 130R is similar to how the '69 Camaro influenced the current fifth-generation Camaro -- it's retro without being a feckless rip-off of the original car, genuine and modern.

    To me though, Chevelle was bigger than the Code130R projects. This new concept calls out "Nova" to me in the lineup pecking order.

    The Chevelle was certainly larger than the 130. I don't think GM designers were too hung up on that, though. And while I see your point about the Nova, I think the ignorant lore assoicated with that particular name has almost barred it from ever returning.

    I'd love to see the Code130R spawn a family of fun, small RWD vehicles... coupe of course, but also convertible and sedan.

    That would be a real dream come true, but I think we'll have to keep our fingers crossed for just the coupe first.

    I hate to bring up the Arrowhead card, but if Pontiac were still around, well ... we both know how this would be playing out instead. There's no need to divulge any further.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    gallery_51_326_3518.png

    1970%20Chevrolet%20Chevelle%20Malibu%20SS-396%20Sport%20Coupe%20-%20rVl.jpg

    Seriously? Please don't tell me I'm the only one here who sees the very clear influence in the side sculpting.

    (Also, rumor has it GM was considering using the Chevelle name for the Code 130R. In spirit of the idea behind this and the Tru, however, GM wanted the names of both concepts to be chosen by the target audience, hence the uninspiring monikers. Chicane would have been the name attached to the Tru 140S, from what I hear.)

    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.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    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.

    How on earth do you see the Monza Towne Car in this?

    monza1.jpg

    The 130R's b-pillar has a dramatic forward slant to it and isn't upright like the Towne Coupe's. The only way the windsheilds are the same is in the fact that they're pieces of glass installed on the car to keep bugs out of the driver's teeth.

    I also fail to see the Nomad concept (I'm assuming you mean the Kappa version) anywhere in this design, ditto the second-generation Monte Carlo (the 130R's back glass certainly isn't creased in the center like the baroque Monte's; where are you seeing that?).

    The Camaro influence is there in the taillights to a degree, but then again that's understandable. The Cruze, Volt, Spark, and Sonic are the only four Chevrolet cars that are devoid of having their own spin on the Camaro's taillights (and even then the Volt is debatable to a degree).

    I love all of these older cars but not in one car. There is just no cohesiveness or flow to this model in styling.

    Don't get me wrong, there are a few small details I would probably change, but all in all I'm not seeing what has people so up in arms about the styling of this car. As a whole, it's great and is unappologetically a Chevy. I also don't understand how people are seeing design elements in this car that aren't really there.

    Edited by black-knight
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I like the 130R ... to a point. Definitely a good start, but needs some "fine touches".

    Course, I'd like to see this in person before I completely judge it. After all, some cars look better (or worse) in person than in pics/vids.

    At least the 130R is RWD, but what to name it? Chevette ... Chevelle ... Monte Carlo ... Malibu?

    Cort | 38.m.IL | pigValve + paceMaker + cowValve | 5 MCs + 1 Caprice Classic

    CHD.MCs.CC + RoadTrips.hobbies.RadioShows.us66 = http://www.chevyasylum.com/cort

    "Let's make sure we don't give up" __ Tim McGraw __ 'Maybe We Should Just Sleep On It'

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Monza Towne Coupe recall comes in the no-nonsense, upright, true coupe roofline and simple quarter glass. To me, the rising fender line recalls Corvette. The side sculpting is '71-'72 Chevelle. The general, overall demeanor, for me, is a cross between Camaro and '66-'67 Nova.

    This is a "correct" COUPE roofline. For reference, look at countless photos of 1930s and '40s coupes. You will see a relatively short (lengthwise), high, and CLOSE COUPLED greenhouse as the defining feature. It is a designer's definition of "coupe" played perfectly, imo.

    Love it!

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    The car looks better when it isn't trying to look like an extended cab Miata:

    gallery_51_326_3518.png

    That's actually close to one of the small tweaks I had in mind -- hiding the b-pillar behind the glass, similar to the Dodge Challenger. It really cleans up the daylight opening.

    Other changes I would make would be slightly larger headlamps and certain elements of the front fascia massaged and rearranged.

    The rear end and side scuplting are perfect as is. I also don't mind the c-pillar. Perhaps that's because I'm quite used to a very upright roofline.

    Edited by black-knight
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    The car looks better when it isn't trying to look like an extended cab Miata:

    gallery_51_326_3518.png

    That's actually close to one of the small tweaks I had in mind -- hiding the b-pillar behind the glass, similar to the Dodge Challenger. It really cleans up the daylight opening.

    Other changes I would make would be slightly larger headlamps and certain elements of the front fascia massaged and rearranged.

    The rear end and side scuplting are perfect as is. I also don't mind the c-pillar. Perhaps that's because I'm quite used to a very upright roofline.

    I really dislike the cutline that the trunk makes in the rear quarter.

    • Agree 2
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    One last thing...someone on another forum commented that the greenhouse resembles the Neon coupe..hmmm...I see a resemblance in the c-pillar and side window.

    Wow, yeah, Neon coupes were also strict adherents to the textbook definition of "coupe". Nice reference! And Nick, old boy, where you been at? Yes, the 1-Series is another reference point. Also that Nissan coupe concept from a few years back, when we falsely believed Datsun was bringing back the 240SX in a traditional, upright coupe bodystyle.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    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.

    Edited by hyperv6
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites




    Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
    Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

    Guest
    Add a comment...

    ×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

      Only 75 emoji are allowed.

    ×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

    ×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • google-news-icon.png



  • google-news-icon.png

  • Subscribe to Cheers & Gears

    Cheers and Gears Logo

    Since 2001 we've brought you real content and honest opinions, not AI-generated stuff with no feeling or opinions influenced by the manufacturers.

    Please consider subscribing. Subscriptions can be as little as $1.75 a month, and a paid subscription drops most ads.*
     

    You can view subscription options here.

    *a very limited number of ads contain special coupon deals for our members and will show

  • Community Hive Community Hive

    Community Hive allows you to follow your favorite communities all in one place.

    Follow on Community Hive
  • Posts

    • GMC Hummer EV drivers can now charge their gargantuan EVs on Tesla Superchargers, according to an announcement on GMC's website. Enabling Supercharging requires an update to the myGMC app; however, users can use the Tesla app and register temporarily as a Rivian R1S until the app update completes. Drivers who expect to use the Tesla Superchargers network regularly may wish to sign up for a $12.99 subscription through the Tesla app, which grants a 10c/kWh discount.  With a 200 kWh battery, just two charges from 20% - 80% per month would cover the membership fee. The myGMC app will also allow owners to purchase an official NACS to CCS adaptor.  While third-party NACS to CCS adapters are available for purchase, they are not officially approved for use on Tesla's network. With this change, GMC says that Hummer EV drivers now have access to approximately 195,000 charge points across North America.  Most Tesla Superchargers are of the 250kw variety, and while not specified in GMC's announcement, we suspect that the Hummer EV is not eligible to charge on the 150kw chargers, much like the Ford EVs, which cite the same 15,000 number for eligible Superchargers.  Limited to 250kw charging speeds, Hummer EV drivers may wish to limit the use of Tesla stations to a last resort while traveling as they will not reach the full 350kw charging speeds their vehicle is capable of. GM has also partnered with Flying-J / Pilot to offer 350kw charging at truck stops nationwide and is a founding member of the new IONNA Network that will offer both CCS and NACS charging without an adaptor. There is no announcement yet on Tesla Supercharger Access for their other EVs.  Drivers can identify 250kw chargers by the black collar at the end of the charging cable. View full article
    • COST, Apartment owners are very stingy even here in Liberal PNW, there is city mandates now to get apartment owners to install chargers as renters are complaining. Yet up north by my area where I live around Lynnwood, Mountlake Terrace, Edmonds and Mukilteo Apartment owners who have installed L2 chargers rarely have vacancy so yes, it is valuable I believe and of course the Tesla Supercharger stations are packed all the time. Workwise, Seattle has been very progressive in having building owners install chargers and I had at one time posted pictures of all the chargers at my work where 2 years ago, there were 4 and now there is 20 and still they are filled up, so demand is truly there, but resistance to change is still very hard among older folks. With GOP Trump having control of the Rural he has them sold on Toxic Diesel is the life and EVs need to die, so I doubt rural will get chargers without the Feds forcing the install and then we have to deal with the idiots cutting the cables or icing the chargers. I hope there is a future way to have the cables shock the idiots that attempt to cut the cables as it is just stupid.
    • That's hella ugly, but people will buy it because it says "off road"   Look at how it tackles that gravel road that a Nissan Sentra could easily navigate.
    • True, but some larger apartment complexes or parking garages could put in level 2 chargers, maybe even level 1 for places like an airport extended parking.  If people have their car sit 12 hours at their apartment, or 8 hours in a parking garage while at work, there is opportunity there also for charing without having to build out expensive super chargers. And really it is rural America that should be embracing EV's way more because there aren't many gas stations when you get into farm country, you might have to drive 30-40 minutes to find a gas station in some parts of rural America, but they have houses with electricity and can easily charge.  
    • Meh, just another forgettable appliance...styling very similar to the Polstar something something...
  • Who's Online (See full list)

  • My Clubs

×
×
  • Create New...

Hey there, we noticed you're using an ad-blocker. We're a small site that is supported by ads or subscriptions. We rely on these to pay for server costs and vehicle reviews.  Please consider whitelisting us in your ad-blocker, or if you really like what you see, you can pick up one of our subscriptions for just $1.75 a month or $15 a year. It may not seem like a lot, but it goes a long way to help support real, honest content, that isn't generated by an AI bot.

See you out there.

Drew
Editor-in-Chief

Write what you are looking for and press enter or click the search icon to begin your search