New Chevrolets: Code 130R and Tru 140S

  • Thread starter Thread starter DDAAVVIIDD82
  • 34 comments
  • 3,451 views

Which new Chevrolet would you prefer first?

  • Code 130R

    Votes: 12 44.4%

  • Tru 140S

    Votes: 15 55.6%
  • Total voters
    27
DDAAVVIIDD82

DDAAVVIIDD82

Messages
1,057
United States
Nor*Cal
Messages
PutItInH
I was checking out coverage from the 2012 North American International Auto Show and couldn't notice a couple of new Chevys that may come down the line. However, it seems that the company is looking for input as to which one comes out (or at least gets priority). The Code 130R is to be a rear-driver in the vein of the BMW 1 and the Tru 140S is a forward-looking front-driver. Now, I'm a RWD enthusiast through and through, but the Code looks rather bland in my opinion, while the Tru is very attractive and seems to take profile cues from the now-dead Pontiac G6 coupe. Any thoughts from anyone else?

chevrolet-code-130r-concept-photo-436432-s-1280x782.jpg

Code 130R

chevrolet-tru-140s-concept-photo-436436-s-1280x782.jpg

Tru 140S
 
Last edited:
I don't like either, not just because they are Chevy but the fact that they are both UGLY as hell. If I had to go with one it would be the Code 130R. If I designed it though, I would have fastbacked it to the rear lights. Sure, would have looked like a muscle car but it would have looked better that what it does now.
 
Considering how much they would both weigh and what engine GM says they would put in them, I don't care if either of them come out.
 
Although I must say, if Chevy went with a big engine in the middle, that Tru140S looks like it could be pretty ballsy...Looks too much like a Quattro though.

Even though it runs on the Cruze's platform, if they decided to go high performance and make it a supercar, it looks like it would be pretty quick. It would definitely serve better as a supercar I think.
 
Doubt either would get a big engine, probably max 2.4l, but a LSX in either would be sweet (even if it's a front-drive LS3 between the rear wheels of the Tru instead of a four up front). I don't see any Quattro at all.
 
The first one looks like a combination between the Chevrolet Camaro and the BMW 1 Series. Therefore, the first one is ugly.

I'd take the second one.
 
I like the look of the Code 130R. I know it looks alitte odd but I like that odd it has.
 
The first one is ugly as sin. The second one is pretty good looking.... I don't see any quattro in it. If they used the firsts platform and the second ones looks we would have a winner.
 
The Code looks like a Camaro that's been hit with a shrink ray.

The Tru, now, that does looks pretty beautiful. I'd want that more.
 
The Tru looks better to me, but I wouldn't call any of these two beautiful.

EDIT: The Code looks like someone threw a Solstice, BMW Series 1 Coupe and Camaro in a blender, drank that cocktail and pooped it into a showroom.
 
Aren't these just show cars meant to show off GM's new design language or something?
 
Time to get detailed...

I actually like both cars. The 130R seems more like a baby Camaro or an American MX-5/Miata (only MUCH larger, of course). The Tru 140S is very handsome to me. Being a swoopy FWD machine reminds me of the 2006-ish Mitsubishi Eclipse. The whole point of these two cars (in my view) is to make a quality automobile for the 30 and younger set. One thing I read was about how the latest Camaros are mostly bought by those 31 and older, so to fill the young buyer gap, these two concepts were made. The majority of younger buyers interviewed seemed to be most interested in four-passenger coupes. So therefore, these two concepts were created. Whichever car gets green-lighted as a production model, and whatever the name of the car will be; I'd be happy either way with either car.

Here's what I'd say:

* The Code 130R has about the best chance of perhaps being made. When I saw a YouTube video from Inside Line Video had the guy saying the Code 130R is styled like the BMW 1-Series, only much better looking. Hell, I think the 1-Series BMWs look very nice. So I resented that guy hating on the 1-Series' looks. It's like a baby muscle car with its RWD layout and mean stance. And I don't really see this being an American alternative to the MX-5/Miata in regards to affordable RWD sports cars.

* On the other end, there's the Tru 140S. This is supposed to be a FWD hatchback with swoopy style inspired by sweet Italian supercars. I could possibly see this one happening. However, most people would likely say "do we need ANOTHER peppy FWD hatchback?" This Tru 140S is stylish to me. It has a good deal of style like the Cruze. With the new Sonic, this Tru 140S would be a nice compliment to the Sonic. It may sound silly, but if the Tru 140S isn't built, I think it should be a possible prototype for if Chevrolet may want to build some mid-engine supercar to rival the Ford GT. But of course, do you want to rival the Corvette as your company's flagship sports car? Even more silly would be if Chevrolet wanted to make a 21st Century version of the Pontiac Fiero with the 140S- just re-work the car to be a mid-engine/RWD two-seater.


To be honest, I don't know which would actually be built because both would be solid additions to Chevy's lineup for the 30 and younger set. If I HAD to choose which would be made, I'd say the Code 130R because it's different and distinctive for a car in its class. I wouldn't be surprised if the Tru 140S was created rather than the Code 130R. I think the young buyers who want a Chevy won't be disappointed either way with these two concepts.
 
Toronado
Considering how much they would both weigh and what engine GM says they would put in them, I don't care if either of them come out.
Click to expand...

Considering that the 130R would likely be based on the surprisingly lightweight Alpha chassis (take a look at the weight claims for the ATS), it shouldn't be too bad. It depends on what engine and transmission they put in there to make everyone happy. Well, that assumes GM can make a business case for it in the first place...
 
YSSMAN
Considering that the 130R would likely be based on the surprisingly lightweight Alpha chassis (take a look at the weight claims for the ATS), it shouldn't be too bad. It depends on what engine and transmission they put in there to make everyone happy. Well, that assumes GM can make a business case for it in the first place...
Click to expand...

Going by what we know about the concept:

25 grand if they built it. 600 pounds heavier than the BreezeFreeze (probably even more) and 50 horsepower down. 100 pounds lighter than the Mustang (probably not even that much), but with less than half the power (and two grand more). It would be a "sport" coupe that would be outrun all day long by a base model Camry.



They might as well load people into buses and drive them to Ford and Scion dealerships. It would be cheaper than spending any money developing it and watching people respond the same way themselves.
 
Last edited:
I'll take code 130R. That other one looks too much like overused bar of soap from prison, not to mention that it's far too generic.
 
I'm guess the 130R will actually weigh in the region of 1,350-1,400 kilograms with four seats. Hopefully 1,300 kilograms flat. Which won't be too bad.

It's an interesting idea. Won't be as hardcore as the FT86 or the MX5, but it should be a nice piece of kit... probably aimed at the BMW 1-series rather than being marketed as an out-and-out sports coupe.

I can dig it.
 
The Code 130R is the best looking, but even that one falls way short. It looks like it missed the mark on normal by _ that much, but it's just wrong. The proportions look off, the entire car looks off. Overall, none of these are really good looking.
 
niky
I'm guess the 130R will actually weigh in the region of 1,350-1,400 kilograms with four seats. Hopefully 1,300 kilograms flat. Which won't be too bad.
Click to expand...

I seriously doubt this. Chevy has recently started a habit of making cars far heavier than they should be or need to be. My best guess is as good as any, but I estimate around 1700kg.
 
Chevrolet's small cars aren't any worse than the competition. The Spark, Sonic and Cruze are right in the ballpark against the competition. Since the 130R is being pitched against a Cruze-based 140S, that means it's in the same size range, and any weight above 1,400 (or 1,450) kilograms would be an unrealistic assumption. Especially considering this only has a 1.4 liter turbocharged engine.

To hit 1.7 metric tons, this would have to be exactly the same size as the Camaro. And it isn't.
 
niky
Chevrolet's small cars aren't any worse than the competition. The Spark, Sonic and Cruze are right in the ballpark against the competition.
Click to expand...

The sonic is 200+lbs heavier than the Fit and Fiesta.
 
eSZee
The sonic is 200+lbs heavier than the Fit and Fiesta.
Click to expand...

It is offset by the extra torque with the turbo engine, so that's a bonus.

The ATS is likely the start of a new direction. Time will tell. GM has said before they want to start using more carbon fiber in more of their vehicles.
 
Which is needed because of the weight disadvantage. That wasn't the point though.
 
No, I agree with you. It is unfortunate that it is that much heavier, but when it feels that solid while still being able to sprint around and feel funky, I'll take it. I've driven the Sonic LS and a Fiesta SES, and I have to say, even in stripped-out form, the Chevrolet drives a hell of a lot better. I don't know what they did at GM, but everything just seems right out of the door.
 

Latest Posts

Back