By on August 8, 2013

encore buickIMG_0283_r

When the Buick Encore compact crossover was introduced, some questioned if it was the right vehicle for the brand, but apparently GM underestimated initial demand for the Encore.

 

When the car was introduced in January, dealers report to Automotive News that demand was “red hot”, but subsequent shipments of the little CUV from GM Korea slowed as the Encore competed for production slots with its Opel Mokka sibling whose sales have been strong in Europe.  The supply issue was made worse when Encores were kept portside in New Jersey waiting for “a retrofit”. Currently, dealers report now having a sufficient supply after production has increased.

For their part, Buick says that tight supply is solely due to sales that were “triple or quadruple” GM’s projected sales in recent months. GM says that dealers now have an adequate supply but some say demand still “far exceeds” current supply.

Previous to the Encore, Buick’s most recent success has been the compact Verano, and the Encore’s sales of just over 12,000 units in its first six months was better than the Verano’s performance in its first six months on sale. They sold another 3,000 or so units in July so the Encore is already on track to exceed analysts’ predictions of between 13,600 and 18,500 annual sales. It’s already surpassed the lower figure and is likely well surpass even the most optimistic predictions as well. GM isn’t the only one who underestimated the Encore’s demand.

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

110 Comments on “Buick Encore Pleasantly Surprised GM, Dealers As Demand Far Higher Than Analysts’ Predictions...”


  • avatar
    AMC_CJ

    I get it, but I sure as hell wouldn’t buy it.

    • 0 avatar
      FuzzyPlushroom

      Exactly. Small, efficient, high seating position, optional AWD… It’s Got What Shorter Women Crave.

      And some guys too, I assume, but that’s not really the intended market.

      Glad to see it making money for GM and not taking up five parking spaces or drinking obscene amounts of fuel… everyone wins when someone buys an Encore. Well, aside from other automakers, but they’ll bring out their own competitors.

      • 0 avatar
        Sam P

        I’m glad that my wife is tall enough not to “need” a small crossover. She’s happy with her Mini.

        • 0 avatar
          NormSV650

          The Encore’s front passenger seat folds down for almost 65 cubic feet.the front seats in general are very generous never giving claustrophic feeling. And there is plenty of leg room on long trips to make adjustment to your seating position without jeopardizing driving the car.

          • 0 avatar
            ixim

            The 1/3 larger RAV4/CRV have 70+ cubic feet of space with the second row folded; the front passenger seat doesn’t even fold. My new ‘Nox lists at 63 cubes. So, I can put my wife and all our beach stuff and still see 30+ MPG. Now, if the General had updated the Aztek/Rendezvous with some version of the Lambda drivetrain we’d have 105 cubic feet – Tahoe territory – with a ‘Nox footprint. Too bad it didn’t happen.

  • avatar
    Flybrian

    Not to be that guy, but I called this before. Everything about it sales ‘market segment success’ despite it not being everyone’s personal cup of tea.

    • 0 avatar
      DeadWeight

      It comports to the New Normal of downwardly mobile America, which is a firmly entrenched trend.

      This is the Upper-ish New Middle Class type of choice, versus the solidly non-Upp-erish New Middle Class Chevy Sonic.

      Hakuna Ma-Mokka.

      I’m anxiously awaiting the unveil of the Lincoln Horseless Carriage & Coach Company’s MKB, which will no doubt be a more well optioned version of the Ford Fiesta, on stilts.

      • 0 avatar
        J.Emerson

        I firmly agree. There’s nothing that says hard times are among us more effectively than a ~$30k CUV with ten airbags, leather, and interior toys out the wazoo flying off dealer lots.

        • 0 avatar
          28-Cars-Later

          To people who really can’t afford them and can’t use them for much more than grocery getters. Lack of other options, ZIRP, and 72 month loans sell these, not their merits.

        • 0 avatar
          azmtbkr81

          People are paying 30K for these things?! Yeesh.

        • 0 avatar
          DeadWeight

          @ Emerson -

          I’m not sure these are “flying off the lots” by conventional metrics commonly associated with volume sales (and GM’S conservative projections help the w1nning! claim), and besides, this is probably the default tiny CUV choice for single crazy cat ladies & also Shawanna with the 6 inch nails and her baby daddy given the red tag, no pulse, trashed credit, $0 down sign & drive lease specials.

          • 0 avatar
            Flybrian

            No, Shawanna cannot qualify for this. She can, however, drive away with a Rogue or Journey because those are driving down prices all across Santander/RAC lanes

          • 0 avatar
            DeadWeight

            Everybody has an Ally.

            True story.

      • 0 avatar
        azmtbkr81

        I think it is more of a factor of changing tastes. From the 50′s through the 90′s longer = greater status. Nowadays taller = greater status.

        10 years from now most vehicles will have the egg on wheels proportions of the current Smart ForTwo scaled to fit various needs-aerodynamics be damned.

    • 0 avatar

      On the other hand, I was dead wrong about this.

  • avatar
    Detroit-X

    I’m sorry to see that even when GM wins, it still inevitably bungles something in the plan, to temporarily lose. Who needs a GM marketing and planning department, filled with six-figure know-it-alls, when their predictions luridly veer between underestimating demand by 400%, to overestimating it by 100%? Are you listening Akerson??

    That said, hooray for GM. In AWD form, this should really give the ‘burned-on-endless-repairs’ Subaru owners a viable option.

    • 0 avatar
      Sam P

      Subaru reliability is one of this site’s favorite things to howl about. From the comments posted here, one would think they were as undependable as turbocharged Audis.

      That wasn’t my experience with two Subaru Outbacks both purchased used and driven a total of 100k miles, but everyone’s entitled to their own opinions.

      • 0 avatar

        Sam, you got rid of them just in time. The next owners I’m sure were stuck with replacing the head gaskets, since that’s what makes a 2.5 Subaru, a 2.5 Subaru.

        Oh, and did you do that 90,000 mile maintenance? Or is it 110,000 miles? You know, the one where you replace the timing belt…and the gears, and while you’re in there, the water pump?

        My wife’s ’05 has 176,000 and is on its second set of head gaskets. I got a look as the car was on the rack at the dealer. The drivers’ side gasket is starting to leak again…not enough to warrant replacement yet but the tell-tale oil leak is there along the bottom of the block.

        Meanwhile the Parts Manager tells me they just did gaskets on an ’09 Outback.

        It’s her decision, but I hope she considers another make when it’s time to replace the Outback.

        • 0 avatar
          Sam P

          The first Subaru was purchased at 147k and driven until 214k. 1998 Outback. 2.5 liter DOHC engine. 5-speed. No head gasket failures while I owned it. The previous owner had the head gasket done while the car was still under warranty. It never gave any issues while I owned it.

          I had the timing belt changed at 210k right before I sold it (which was part of the 105k service). It didn’t need a water pump at that time.

          The second Subaru was a 2000 Outback with the 2.5 liter SOHC engine and an automatic. Purchased at 95k miles. Timing belt was done at 105k per the recommended service schedule. Driven until 130k miles. No head gasket problems. Literally the only problem that we had with that car was a minor oil leak, which was fixed for a couple hundred bucks.

          The only reason that car was sold is that my wife thought the turning radius sucked and bought a new Mini because she wanted something easy to park and fun to drive.

          • 0 avatar
            amca

            My Mom’s carefully cared for Legacy wagon ate its timing belt ten thousand miles before its scheduled replacement. And it left a 70 year old woman stranded on a country road.

      • 0 avatar
        Detroit-X

        Sam P: “Subaru reliability is one of this site’s favorite things to howl about”…

        Well, this site IS called “The Truth About Cars.” And by the way, my opinion is based on owning four of them, and observing owner’s experiences with several others.

  • avatar
    PrincipalDan

    Good little option in the compact CUV segment, although I think it would look so much better with a slightly more airy greenhouse.

  • avatar
    stephenjmcn

    Are Chevy releasing the Trax in the US? You’d think they’d want their most popular division getting a slice of this segment.

  • avatar
    NormSV650

    I picked up an Encore last week. A 24 month lease deal helped.

    I wanted AWD, fuel economy, and utility. It is very quiet for the $20K range and handles like a car exceeding how most owners will drive it. Fuel economy has been backed up by the BuickForums as we are exceeding EPA numbers for my all highway, two way average at either 60 or 65 mph is just under 40 mpg…making it the most efficient AWD, gasoline you can buy. Some more break-in miles and a few tankfuls for a better indicator of fuel economy.

    • 0 avatar
      Sam P

      Norm.

      You claim that your Saturn Sky also 40 mpg, so in the real world, upper 20′s (maybe low 30′s) highway fuel economy?

      http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2013/06/qotd-how-will-sports-cars-survive-in-the-kit-age/

      • 0 avatar
        NormSV650

        A forced inducted, 2.900 lbs with lots of torque can exceed epa. Whether it supercharged or turbo, Hahn Racecraft or DDM, you can boost the 2.4 Ecotec for a little over $3K.

        Just think of a diesel with torque low in the operating range can be very effficient.

        • 0 avatar
          epsilonkore

          I remember when you first stated this, and I immediately questioned the claim. I owned a modified 2.4 Sky as well and came no where CLOSE to 40, if I hit 29 I was excited but bored with feather footing the roadster. I have a new co worker with a DDM 2.4. He viewed your post and wants to know your secret. He has headers, solo performance exhaust, and stage 3 supercharger kit from DDM with ECU tuning. I had everything he has except the supercharger and we are within 3MPG+- of each other in our experience. Now the REDLINE 2.0 twinturbo I can see with mild modification getting mid 30′s easy, but you still bump up against the Sky’s nasty drag co efficient and rear end gearing before hitting the 40s. Also the on board MPG estimator is garbage after all the modifications, especially the ECU and injector upgrade, are you giving us numbers from it or from manual math Trip distance divided by fill up gallons? And yes you are right, a supercharger/turbo can provide a bump in economy with a car that needs the low end torque and is feather footed… but that bump is about 2-3mpg on a car like this, not 10, and if you are constantly feather footing a DDM Sky 2.4 for economy, you are missing the point of the car and its upgrades.

          • 0 avatar
            NormSV650

            Why are there so many turbocharged engines these days compared to superchargers?

            Have you been on any of the Kappa forums? Even supercharged owners can see well into the 30′s in fuel economy. Tire pressures in the 40 psi range, a good alignment, B&G lowering springs for almost 2″ drop, and a steady 60 mph with top up. Ican see 41 mpg with the AC on. Top down the numbers do drop.

            Even Dave at DDM was beffudled when I told him that my Saab turbo-4 could read positive pressure at the throttlebody under highway cruise.

            Mine was the first turbo Sky with Hahn Racecraft turbo 2.4l and now has 55,000 miles and only needed a clutch mostly because with 13 psi the engine output doubled to 350hp/400trq.

            Now take the smaller 1.4T optioned in about all small cars. Smaller displacement means less reciprocating mass. Add in gobbs of torque in a light weight package, along with direct injection, and the small cars are getting well into the 40 mpg range.

          • 0 avatar
            epsilonkore

            I am not arguing that “some” cars with turbos get better mpg than supercharging (though you did reference DDM which is a supercharging company for Kappas). I am arguing that any Sky without aero kits (lowered or otherwise) with the 2.4 and tweaked to get 250-400hp are getting 40mpg+?! GM has a miracle child on its hands! That must be why they killed the Kappas, to keep the oil barons happy! I completely understand the other, smaller 1.4 GM Ecotech turbos and the small ecoboosts from Ford getting higher mileage… in slick light aerodynamic package with sub 200hp figures. A flying (beautiful) brick (aerodynamically) Sky with 400hp getting 40mpg+… thats something that I never see in the multiple Kappa forums that I belonged to.

    • 0 avatar
      ant

      for those not in the know, fuel mileage reports from NormSV650 should not be taken at face value. Seek a second opinion.

      So, Norm, have you driven the Verano at all? How quiet is this compared to that car?

      Just as a side note, GM has had some pretty nice products in the compact segment lately, and getting this lil truck-like-thing to market first was a nice move.

  • avatar
    billfrombuckhead

    The small crossover will soon replace midsize sedans as the most popular form factor. I bet Chevy gets a version when they switch production from Korea to Spain and when Buick gets it’s Equinox equivalent, the Anthem.

    I think another vehicle the pundits will be wrong about is the new Cherokee.

    • 0 avatar
      NN

      I agree completely re: the Cherokee. Despite all the hate on the web amongst enthusiasts, I bet the design will win most over before long, and it will mop the floor when it comes to sales. With the ballsy styling, classic name, and real off road capability it could arguably be the only “cool” CUV. It ultimately may become Fiat/Chrysler’s best selling product worldwide.

      • 0 avatar
        Hummer

        “real off road capability”

        Come on now, we used to take old dodges/chevy/ford RWD muscle cars through more offroading then the new cherokee could ever do.
        Especially if coming back in one piece is a requirement.

        While I don’t disagree it may sell on that “ideal” the first person to take it on anything more than a gravel path is in for a surprise.

        • 0 avatar
          Lie2me

          Oh, knock it off, there’s a lot more off-roading then just rock-crawling and there’s a lot off-roading that a wide-ass tank would be foolish to attempt

          • 0 avatar
            azmtbkr81

            I don’t get it, Cherokee badges on a Dart don’t make it any more of an off-roader than Corvette badges on a Malibu would make it a sports car yet the Cherokee seems to get a pass from most on this board.

            Sure, most buyers will never drive the thing off-road but Jeep, perhaps more than any other brand, relies on image to sell vehicles. Tarnish that image and Jeep loses its competitive edge completely.

          • 0 avatar
            danio3834

            You don’t get it because you don’t understand that the Cherokee isn’t a Dart with a different badge.

            With better off roading angles and ground clearance than an XJ and locking differentials, it’s hardly all hat.

            If you hate the way it looks, just say so. There’s no need to let your preference get in the way of facts.

          • 0 avatar
            Hummer

            And for that I have a scout II, but regardless offroading consists of different things depending where one may live, whether it be rock crawling, trail riding, mudding, or whatever else, it doesn’t matter because it could not do any of it, offroading is not going down a gravel trail that gets graded often.

            Don’t sell something on an nonexistant merit any type of offroad equipment put on the Cherokee is nothing more than increased profits for fiat group.

          • 0 avatar
            azmtbkr81

            @danio3834
            No amount of lockers (of which it only has in the rear), plastic skid plates and hype can overcome the fact that the chassis, suspension, axles, and drive train are not designed to handle off-road driving the way that they are in a truck, Wrangler, or old XJ.

            I think I’ve been through this with you once before but here are the actual numbers again since I’m such a nice guy and I don’t want you to be fooled by those slick marketing types over at Jeep:

            http://www.allpar.com/SUVs/jeep/2014-cherokee.html.

            The new Cherokee Trailhawk can’t best the Patriot much less it’s 15 year old predecessor. Sad.

        • 0 avatar
          danio3834

          “Come on now, we used to take old dodges/chevy/ford RWD muscle cars through more offroading then the new cherokee could ever do.”

          Having experience in both areas, you’re wrong.

      • 0 avatar
        azmtbkr81

        I disagree, the Cherokee is all hat and no cattle as we say in Arizona. As silly as the Encore is it doesn’t pretend to be anything it isn’t.

    • 0 avatar
      28-Cars-Later

      You may be right and if this becomes the case, stop the planet i want to get off.

    • 0 avatar
      bball40dtw

      I saw a Chevy version yesterday outside the GM Tech Center. They aren’t selling it in the US for now, but I think Canada gets the Trax.

  • avatar

    Compact premium/luxury crossovers = huge right now. Not just in the US, either. Look at recent numbers on X3 and Q3 global sales. I don’t get it, but I don’t have to — I’m not the market.

  • avatar
    thornmark

    Here comes another one:
    http://www.hybridcars.com/small-cuv-coming-to-hondas-lineup-in-2014/

  • avatar
    Scribe39

    Uglier than home-made sin.

  • avatar
    Summicron

    And people still deny the alien tech we’ve been reaping since Roswell.

    BTW, little grey guys do NOT consider this a chick ride.

    • 0 avatar
      Lie2me

      They have to spoon-feed us on the alien stuff. If they gave it to us all at once we’d be jumping out of first-floor windows

      • 0 avatar
        Kenmore

        Yeah, look what happened when they tried to pass Michael Jackson as an earthling. Things just got out of control and they had to claim “plastic surgery” and “bleaching”.

        • 0 avatar
          Kenmore

          Lie2Me, like my makeover?

          You oughtta see the messianic gleam in my eyes now.

          Just wish I didn’t scare my kitties…

          • 0 avatar
            Lie2me

            I’m sorry, do I know you?

          • 0 avatar
            Kenmore

            Soon the world will know of Mediocre Man.

            I’ve already got my kid working on the website. HTML 5 whoohoo…

          • 0 avatar
            Lie2me

            “Some men are born mediocre, some men achieve mediocrity, and some men have mediocrity thrust upon them.”

            ― Joseph Heller, Catch-22

          • 0 avatar
            28-Cars-Later

            Summicron at least put your real name in parenthesis after “Kenmore”.

          • 0 avatar
            Kenmore

            @28

            I was gently chided for juxtaposing appliances with “Summicron”. I agree with that criticism.

            Minolta, Petri, Yashica, Ricoh… there were many perfectly good lens lines back in the day. Appliances.

            Leica lenses were simply the best. Excellence. And cost like it.

  • avatar
    Hummer

    Great news for Buick, its definately popular on the east coast, I see them everywhere.

  • avatar
    Summicron

    Blingwheels on a car for taxpayers.

    Oh, the irony and insult.

  • avatar
    ddx12000

    The ‘Experience Buick’ campaign has a lot to do with this vehicle’s success…GM, via relaxed qualifications and easy terms, was able to draw a lot of consumers into a Buick that may not have given them a thought previously. The Encore is a little small for my tastes, but for the first time soccer mom that wants practicality with a dash of luxury it’s a no brainer. It’s a well-appointed small CUV that’s priced decently across trim lines that isn’t a Kia.

    • 0 avatar
      Hummer

      I recently had a warranty item taken care of at what used to be a cadillac/HUMMER/Saab dealer, which now is a cadillac/GMC/Buick dealer, I hope the Buick experience isn’t one I saw, hungry salesmen waiting for anyone to drive through, with 5 tryin to approach each person, when they weren’t beig sharks they were standing beside the building cussing and making jokes that would rival a kid in high school.

      As long as you can get past the salesman the service department is a pleasure to work with.

    • 0 avatar
      thornmark

      It’s called cheapening or diluting the brand. Initially it helps sales alot. But Buick really isn’t a luxury brand anymore so I guess they have little to loose by cheapening it further.

      It was a big deal when Packard went downmarket, something that really killed them. But Buick has had similar badge-engineered economy cars for decades.

  • avatar
    Dave M.

    I found the interior chintzy as possible for the price they were asking. Didn’t get to drive it; as well the style does nothing for me.

    That said, I’m glad for this success for Buick, and the mpg is very impressive.

    I’ve decided to turn off the mpg caculator on the new car; I’ll just check it every fill-up. My daughter said I was driving like a grandpa.

    There is still a dash indicator that glows yellow when you gas it, green when you nurse it. Duh.

  • avatar
    APaGttH

    I’m not surprised. When I saw my first one at the Seattle Car Show last very early spring I felt Buick had a winner, It does have fit and finish issues IMHO – living in an urban environment where ability to park is becoming a bigger and bigger issue, this is on my list of’ “vehicles to consider in 2015.”

    I wish they would put in the GM 2.0 under the hood.

  • avatar
    rpol35

    It reeks!

  • avatar
    RatherhaveaBuick

    Just sat in one at the Buick dealer while my mother was purchasing her new Verano. It IS ugly as sin, and the inside is ugly. The thing is just too damn tall and the windows are too small in the back. It doesn’t fit as a Buick but its Korean at heart anyway so…If its selling, good for Buick.

    For what its worth, my mom’s new Verano is a really excellent car for the money. Couldn’t afford the Turbo version so the car’s not that quick, but it is appointed quite nicely for its size. She traded in her 06 Volvo S60 which was having transmission problems after 72k miles. The Verano certainly isn’t as quick but very impressive otherwise. Intellilink is great.

  • avatar
    bryanska

    I wish I could codify these answers into buckets, because “wah icky” and “it makes sense for some people” seem to be the dominant responses. The graph would be bimodal.

  • avatar
    Beerboy12

    I am not surprised it is selling well. There are a few things about it that cut through all the nonsense and give the average consumer what they need and want.
    Sadly though, after a brief visit to the web site I find the options limited in areas I am interested in and bewilderingly profuse in areas I am not. I guess I am not the average buyer. It’s the absence of transmission and engine choices that will exclude this car from my shopping list, not the car mind you, just the missing options.
    I still think the success of this car is a good thing and a sign of things to come.

  • avatar
    J.Emerson

    I don’t really get the complaints about the styling. The headlights are too big, but that’s the way everything is these days. The rest of it is pretty conventional. The carping about the wheels doesn’t make any sense either- this thing would look stupid on anything less than 17′s. If you don’t want nice rims, this probably isn’t the genre you’re shopping in anyway. Not everything has to be a 14″ steel with some utterly disposable hubcaps thrown on.

    • 0 avatar
      28-Cars-Later

      The whole thing basically hurts my eyes, but that could be set for most of the segment. I do agree on the wheels though, a smaller wheel isn’t going to help its looks the wheels look appropriate.

      RenCen if you’re listening, I’m ok with 80% of your product being garbage if you use the profits to build a small amount of attractive models (i.e. Chevy SS).

    • 0 avatar
      mkirk

      Nope, if it is a truck it can be 15-16 inch steelies with that little chrome beauty ring if it is a nice truck!

  • avatar
    CoreyDL

    You don’t need to “use a quotation” every time you’re “making a reference” to things said in a “press release/article.”

    And given this is an American site, the punctuation goes inside the parenthesis “like this,” when necessary.

    For my car comment – I’ve seen a few driving around now, and they’ve all been brown. Start selling them in different colors, or at least showing ads/displays with other color options!

  • avatar
    NormSV650

    Encore AWD base just sipped through it’s first tank to 35.8 mpg. That consists of three trips to work of 60-65 mph. A little rain and no AC.

    Could the Encore be the most efficient all-wheel drive in America with gasoline engine?

  • avatar
    reclusive_in_nature

    I think a big part of Buick’s resurgence can be attributed to their Quiet Tuning technology. When the bulk of one’s driving is spent in traffic dealing with the assorted douchebags that populate our roads and highways, some quiet isolation is a HUGE selling point.

    Kudos to Buick for being on the ball with this.

    • 0 avatar
      NormSV650

      I got to experience Buick’s laminated glass first hand driving into a head wind 2 hours for a test drive in my 2004 Saab 9-5 is no econobox seemed very loud compared to the Verano drive againist the same wind.

      I think they really hit the Japanese makers as they tend to skim in the noise reduction area according to reviews.

  • avatar
    el scotto

    This will be a huge hit in the ‘burbs. Easy to drive and cheap. No, a lot of its buyers won’t be taking out sub-prime loans or referred to in slightly racist tones. Finance manager? No, I’ve already talked to my bank/credit union. I know some on here regard S/CUVs as the rolling minions of Satan. Guess What? Some of us like, buy, and drive them. Yep, soon to be seen in parking lots with youth soccer league bumper stickers on them.

  • avatar
    ixim

    Drove one to replace a RAV4. Wanted to like it/buy it. Too small and too slow. Got a FWD Equinox instead, cheap. Those new RAV’s are expensive! Lovin’ the ‘Nox, so far.

    • 0 avatar
      CoreyDL

      LOL @ FWD CUV.

      • 0 avatar
        missmySE-R

        Don’t laugh – in a US market without wagons, what alternative does one have if they’re looking for a reasonably priced vehicle with utility?
        The lower cost, improved fuel economy, and less expensive maintenance make FWD a smart choice in my book if you don’t absolutely need AWD/4WD which I think describes a majority of us.

        • 0 avatar
          CoreyDL

          A wagon or hatch is available, and will have just as much utility without the weight penalty and ridiculous pretense of an FWD CUV.

          • 0 avatar
            missmySE-R

            Enlighten me – most hatchbacks are in the compact class (my wife drives a Mazda3 hatch) and the few wagons are small, expensive, or might as well be a CUV in the case of the Outback.

          • 0 avatar
            CoreyDL

            Aveo5 with seats folded, 42 cu.ft. HHR, 57.7, Elantra Touring 65.3, Nissan Versa hatch 50.4. Mazda 3 42.8. Prius V 67.3.

            Equinox 63.7.

            Get over yourself.

  • avatar
    missmySE-R

    Seems we’re looking at this from very different perspectives. Happy Friday by the way.

    For people with children and pets, the seats folded cargo room of the compact vehicles you’ve identified is generally theoretical. Plus, you’ve got to be careful taking the cu.ft. specs the manufacturer’s provide at face value. Any real-world look at the Equinox vs. the not produced since ’11 HHR would show the former to offer significantly higher utility with the rear seats in place. And that’s without considering the benefits of the sliding 2nd row in the Equinox.

    That said, I was rather impressed with the seats up cargo capacity of the V when I saw it at Chicago auto show earlier this year. If it wasn’t such a penalty box to drive, I’d love to add a vehicle with that packaging to my garage.

  • avatar
    jimbob457

    I really thought from its early photos and description that it was mostly meant for the China market, sold in the US mostly for bragging rights in China. Then I drove one. Not too bad. It is slow, but well appointed and quiet, and it rides OK. Styling still looks odd to my eye. If a peak of 20,000 units in the US and 10,000 units in Germany is good for GM, it looks like they will get it.

    It is expensive for what you get, but it should have some market in crowded old-style cities with narrow streets and lots of traffic. It thrives on high gas prices, but gas prices in the US are crumbling as we speak, and summer is not even over. How will it hold up? Buzzy little mass produced 4-bangers? We shall see.


Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Subscribe without commenting

Recent Comments

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Staff

  • Authors

  • Brendan McAleer, Canada
  • Marcelo De Vasconcellos, Brazil
  • Matthias Gasnier, Australia
  • W. Christian 'Mental' Ward, Abu Dhabi
  • Mark Stevenson, Canada
  • Faisal Ali Khan, India