Reuss Continues Push For Small, RWD Chevrolet
19
Sponsored Links
It goes without saying here at GM Authority that the staff, and most readers, agree that the Chevrolet Code 130R is an amazing concept, and something following its promise should have been built five minutes ago — a small, lightweight, rear-wheel drive coupe centered around the enthusiast customer — whose pockets are only so deep.
“A really nice, light, rear-drive car that’s inexpensive — we know that rings a bell,” GM North America President Mark Reuss mentioned to Automotive News last week. “That’d be a huge win for us if we had that.”
The key word here is “if,” as Reuss reveals that such a vehicle is not exactly on the drawing board quite yet. But the continued strong feedback from the enthusiast niche, particularly of the younger sub-demographic, shows that there’s a market out there for such a vehicle, and its desire doesn’t seem to be fading away any time soon — especially if the vehicle continues to be light, compact, and rear-wheel-drive, while starting at under $25,000.
Here’s to continued hope.
Sponsored Links
He said it won’t look like the 130R, which in my opinion is a good thing. That entire concept looks awkward, but the rear end is just brutal.
What this car needs:
Base model:
-2.5L 4-cyl @ 200hp 200lb-ft
-6spd manual and 6spd auto (with good paddle shift and preloading)
-decent brakes
-good race ‘style’ buckets
-shoot for 2800lb curb weight
-offer things from the Go-Fast model (below), such as seat upgrade as options
-polished aluminum or black 17″ rims
Go-fast Model:
-2.0T LTG @275hp 260lb-ft
-race seats (maybe not expensive name brand, but good factory track seats)
-good breaks (Brembo 4-piston)
-front lip, rocker panels, rear diffuser, more aggressive hood
-same trans options as base model
-E-diff
-18″ rims, polished al or black, unique to this model
-HID + LED
Have options kind of like the Genesis Coupe does, so things like:
-lowering springs
-beefier sways
-‘ultra high performance’ summer tires
-2 different spoilers (flush mount or raised)
-additional cooling
-cold air intake
-exhaust
-dealer tune like the Cobalt SS had
And also eventually offer a stripped down (basic interior, steel rims, etc), unpainted car ready to get a full build for the track.
Who says such a vehicle has to be for a “younger sub-demographic”? I am almost 60 y-o, but I’m not a Corvette “kind of guy”. A Camaro is more my type, but even $35 – 40K generates serious backlash from the vice-president of finance wife, though I/we can very well afford it. Such a vehicle w/ a turbo 2.0L I4 at less than $30K would quickly find its way into my carport, especially if it were like the Nomad that was shown on the Solstice/Sky platform several years ago.
It’s not that the car is appealing to all age groups in some way, just that most of the people excited about something like this are under age 40.
Here’s a Facebook group dedicated to the movement. Even Clay Dean and Michael Albano are members, along with several other GM employees: https://www.facebook.com/groups/250698485001606/?fref=ts
Since there is no 130R coming anytime soon or probably ever, why not just fill this void with the next gen Camaro? It’s going to be Alpha based, a smaller, lighter car than the current Camaro and it likely will have a 2.0T as a base engine. Why bother with trying to squeeze another RWD car below the Camaro?
LFX323HP probably because the car we’re really talking about here is much more along the lines of the Sky/Solstice (coupe and convertible) than the next gen Camaro which will be like the Genesis Coupe.
exactly there could be anywhere from a 300-500lbs difference between this little coupe and the gen6 Camaro
It’s also very possible that the Camaro 6 is going to up in price by a few thousand? Start at $26-27K instead of current $24K+ leaving a bit more room for something else?
Here is an issue GM faces and really has faced for last 25 years, maybe longer: When cars are introduced people litteraly are like where was that 5 years ago, mainly in the design language throughout the car. So the whole build it 5 minutes ago really plays out here… So just thinkin back when they reintroduced the Malibu in the mid to late 90’s, ok nice car but where was that 5 years ago, nothing ground braking and even dated I would say… So then the next BU came out in 04 and it was like WTHeck, dated look and a staple rental fleet car. Then the 08 came out and everyone was in love, but in the back of your mind you were thinkin where the heck was this 5 years ago… My point is as GM raises the bar on its vehicles this perception should go away and the consumer expectations should be that GM is the go to manufacturer for whatever my car needs are… I should not have to wonder hmmm I need a 2 door sport hatch front or rear drive that makes my friends drool, guess I am stuck with a Scion or Nissan or whomever or a used Cobalt SS. No wrong answere there should be no question in my mind I am going to a GM dealer and snagin me some Tru or Code action… Done enough said dont leave room for choice, we allready have too many choices. Why not make GM the only choice…
Oh the Drama! LOL!
People get a grip here. This is a long range plan as GM is still rebuilding the core of their units yet. We just got the Alpha and have not even see all it will present.
Key one here is GM needs a smaller RWD going forward and doing this on the Alpha would not work. Mark and others are pushing for a Sub Alpha car that not only make this a better cheaper deal but more practical for the future CAFE.
This car and platform will come in some form in 5-6 years as they will make a call on it soon. It would be nice to be sooner but GM has bigger fish to fry yet that will produce the profits to make a car like this possible. Believe it or not a small RWD would be nice and make a profit but is not what you would consider a profit center.
With the coming Alpha cars, Omega and replacements for the Nox, Cruze, Colorado and other un announced models GM is spending a hell of a lot of money on new product. There are few companies that could so all they are doing at once .
Before anyone pissed and moans that GM is dropping the ball take a deep breath and look around as all they are doing and what still needs done just at Buick alone.
We have to look at this more than just a want status and look at it from a spending and manpower status. The fact is it is fun picking and choosing models but you still have to account for the money and time it take to build them and not shelve a higher profit ride like the Cruze that sells 200,000 units per year.
Sorry but you still have to run GM like a business.
The key now is to support Mark here and hope he gets what he wants as he has the right idea. There are those inside GM that may argue against this but Mark has Dan’s trust and if he can make a good case we should see this car.
And yes forget the 130 as it will not look like this by the time this comes to market. This was never a production car.
I’m not sure exactly what platform such a car will eventually ride on. What I’m sure about are two things. One is that there is definitely room under the Camaro in price, a space more people can afford and that competitors are coming at, both now and future product. Two is that it cannot, cannot be a “heritage” car in any way, shape or form. All the guys at work 30 and under won’t even mention the Camaro because it’s for old people. Yes, some of that age do, but they are very few. This car must not have any heritage name or styling, so it’s not tied to and thus held back by the past. It has to be all about the present and the future. Or these people who will be buying a lot of this type of car won’t even look at it.
In ten years all the guys at work 30 and under will be old people. And they will have a ” heritage name”
Thankfully no. Nobody wants old names at any age anyway.
Besides, old names like Camry are only any good if they have a positive image in the public’s mind. Chevelle, conversely, doesn’t have a positive image in the public’s mind.
You really want the tired, old, and damaged names back, don’t you?
GM needs to build a small driver’s car. RWD, 2.0T 6MT, torque to weight ratio of a BMW 135i in an uplevel model selling for under $30K. A/C delete as an option. MyLink should also be an option deletable on all trim levels.
And for heaven’s sake, style it so I can see out the rear quarter glass. The Camaro is gorgeous, but you might as well put a bag over the driver’s head when they need to change lanes.
I don’t disagree with the Camaro’s visibility, but if you have your mirrors set up properly and know how to use them, it’s really a non-issue
The problem with the Camaro is that it is one of the examples of taking a concept to production as it stood. A lot of people beg manufacturers to build concepts, then when they get built they bitch because so much has changed, well that is because concepts generally don’t work as road cars. GM got so much praise for the 2006 Camaro concept that they gave the people what they wanted.
Scott well said… But… anyway again well said :-)…
Kingsley, agreed and lol on the Camaro visibility.
Main Wayne, if guys like the ones I work with are buying a heritage car in ten years, it won’t be a GM car at all because none of them own a GM vehicle now. And if GM continues to build just heritage cars, cool but expensive ones and bland ones, none of them will ever even look at one.
As a 3+ year owner of a Camaro5, I am fully qualified to criticize the awful rearward visibility. Turned out, the mirrors are adequate, but it still requires a considerable level of trust of surrounding vehicles when you hit that turn signal lever. Didn’t stop me or a gazillion other people from buying one. An instant classic and driveable work of art.
And while GM is improving driver visibility to the rear, they can also bring the headlamps forward from the vast depths of the front fascia so drivers can turn a corner at night without wondering if there are any pedestrians there.