Drew Dowdell

NAIAS 2012:Chevy Unveils Two Concept Coupes

79 posts in this topic

Well I know I should jump right in and say how much I like that silver thing .........and I do. Yet that red thing has got my attention. No idea what it is I like about it. No idea what it is I don't like about it. Looks oddly old yet it looks surprisingly new. It's one car that I'm going to has to sit on a bit....to see what my brain ends up with.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just an unscientific test:

I had the Tru 140s on my Mac's screen for several minutes when fooling with my tablet. I had five guys come up to me and ask what it was. I then showed them the 130, and the response was far less positive. 'Too retro' and 'for old guys' were the two standout quotes.

Chevrolet should build both. If that's not possible, then I feel the Tru 140s is the one to do. The 130 looks to the past, but the 140 is the future, in my opinion.

Interesting.

I would say that the 140 looks like a copy, while the 130 looks original.

Original is a stretch, since the overall shape is reminiscent of the BMW 1 Series.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just an unscientific test:

I had the Tru 140s on my Mac's screen for several minutes when fooling with my tablet. I had five guys come up to me and ask what it was. I then showed them the 130, and the response was far less positive. 'Too retro' and 'for old guys' were the two standout quotes.

Chevrolet should build both. If that's not possible, then I feel the Tru 140s is the one to do. The 130 looks to the past, but the 140 is the future, in my opinion.

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.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Comments at Autoblog are still twice as many for the 130 than the 140, which means to me means the 130 is twice as interesting.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Comments at Autoblog are still twice as many for the 130 than the 140, which means to me means the 130 is twice as interesting.

Unfortunately the majority tend to be negative.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All these 'looks like Car X' only points to the narrowing funnel of car styling within the constraints of so many restrictions, IMO.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder how a Spark based sporty coupe would look...

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder how a Spark based sporty coupe would look...

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

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I need to master Photoshop..I have an idea in my head of a Spark Stingray...same pointy front end as the regular Spark, but a 2dr w/ a lower roofline and a teardrop pointy tail...

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's what made the front page of the NAIAS section in my province's largest daily:

gallery_1376_41_146428.jpg

gallery_1376_41_283589.jpg

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.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've read somewhere that GM has received much more positive feedback for the 130 than for the 140.

Edited by ocnblu
-1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll bet. I've read somewhere that it was the Mooninites that shot JFK!

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As the days have passed, I increasingly think of the 140 as a slightly cheesy version of the beautiful Converj, and the 130 still grows on me with drivetrain as its trump card.

Still, I see value in both designs.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I read a GM press release today that covered these cars. GM for the most is looking to the public to see what they want to see in a new car. I think both cars are for the most just a bunch of ideas pulled together to see what people like and don't like.

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
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know I mentioned it before, but yeah, it wouldn't surprise me if neither one went to production.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Go read the Motor Trend chief's take on these two.

And pervy, do you need a link? I can give you a link. Let me know.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You mean Andrew Mackenzie's article? The one that says Honda or Ford or whatever could build the 140? Yeah.

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.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It can win them back for 15 minutes because they have such short attention spans. Witness any number of trendy sport coupes that have come and gone before the 140. The 130 is a timeless design that appeals to tuners who miss the Nissan 240SX, Corolla AE86, Mazda RX-7, and the like. The 130 is a more useful competitor for the BRZ... Millenials said they want to take their friends along for the ride. Code 130R is a true 4 seat coupe with appeal to more than 1 generation, not some rakish flash-in-the pan that will last 2 years on the market before those Millenials want something else.

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.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm in that age group. I like the conept of the 130rsvtssrt but not the exceution. Still not sold on it. The 140rsamgattmciaol on the other hand I've liked the styling more the more I've seen it.

As I've said before that both could have a place in the lineup.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 140 is the next generation Eclipse that Mitsubishi won't build..

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not good to fight over which is best. They're different. I know which one I'd pick.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm in the age group the 140S targets and it has no appeal to me whatsoever. Then again, I guess I'm almost nothing like other people in my age group.

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
2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would say that the 140 looks like a copy, while the 130 looks original.

Original is a stretch, since the overall shape is reminiscent of the BMW 1 Series.

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.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re-visiting these concepts after the 'new' has worn off creates the same feelings for me as the day I first saw them (except more extreme).

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
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now