The Chevy Code 130R could have been the American alternative to the Toyobaru twins

"LJ909" (lj909) 10/24/2017 at 11:49 • Filed to: None

4

46

Source: Netcarshow.com

Just look at it. It had mini Camaro looks, was properly RWD, fuel efficient and could have been cheap. But as in typical GM fashion, they canceled it. Could it have given the FR-S/GT86/BRZ a run for their money?

The Code 130R was introduced at the 12' NAIAS along with the Tru 140S:

which to me was the weaker of 2 concepts in the looks department, looking like something between a last gen Mitsubishi Eclipse and a Chevy Cruze. But anyway, back to to the Code 130R.

According to then GM chief Mark Reuss, the concepts were to appeal to young customers (i.e Millennials of course) and were a way to gauge what they wanted in a car. “ Chevrolet has always stood for making the aspirational attainable for all generations. 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 ”, He was quoted as saying. Supposedly the Code 130R was the result of their feedback with young consumers.

Side profile kind looks like a 1 Series

Along with being properly rwd, it was powered by a 1.4 turbocharged Ecotech with 150 horses coupled with eAssist and was said to deliver 40 mpg. It also had seating for 4, and the usual array of Chevy Mylink with Wifi, and other tech goodies. It was pretty much production ready. Supposedly the platform it rode on was a shortened variant of the Alpha platform that underpinned the ATS. A 6 auto would have been standard with a 6 speed manual as an option.

So what happened? GM pussied out and canceled them coming to production. But maybe properly so. Rumors swirled that the code 130R was coming to production with a base price of 19-20 grand and that GM had been watching the Toyobaru twins since introduction. Their strong initial sales and then sliding sales are rumored to have been what caused GM to cancel the project in 15'. Reuss confirmed it when asked about it at the New York show of that year after being one of the programs biggest supporters.

Could it have ran with the Japanese twins? I think so. It would have been a good alternative since not many other automakers do cheap sporty and fun. A pie in the sky dream would be a convertible version to run with the Miata. The Code 130R would have likely been spec for spec with them, although down on power. An RS or SS Code 130R could have corrected that. What I don’t get is how this got canceled, but we got things like the ELR, which was a failure. I don’t think we’ll ever know how it could have done. Its not likely that GM would try something as daring or fun again when the extreme market shift to non fun offerings. What do you guys think?
 

Shoop > LJ909 10/24/2017 at 11:52

1

My heart. This car hurts it.

TheHondaBro > LJ909 10/24/2017 at 11:55

1

Just look at it.

I can’t.

promoted by the color red > LJ909 10/24/2017 at 11:56

1

Could you imagine how cool it would be if it had the 260HP Cobalt SS turbo engine? 

I would have bought one over a Miata and spent 90% of my income on tires.

KusabiSensei - Captain of the Toronto Maple Leafs > LJ909 10/24/2017 at 11:57

1

To be frank, if they were going to put it into production with that nose, then it deserved to be cancelled.

Needs some automotive rhinoplasty (mainly change that awful grille), and then maybe..............

LJ909 > TheHondaBro 10/24/2017 at 11:58

0

Is it the gold trim?

TheHondaBro > LJ909 10/24/2017 at 11:58

2

It’s the bits around the gold trim.

LJ909 > promoted by the color red 10/24/2017 at 11:59

1

It would have been a little monster. Im sure this thing would have weighed under 3,000 lbs, but then again this is GM we are talking about.

260 horses in this though, the answer wouldnt have been Miata anymore.

LJ909 > KusabiSensei - Captain of the Toronto Maple Leafs 10/24/2017 at 11:59

0

Im sure that nose would have changed some with the laws the way they are.

merged-5876237249235911857-hrw8uc > LJ909 10/24/2017 at 12:04

1

Maybe if they put the volt or bolt powertrain in it, then they’d have a chance to compete with the Tesla model 3, and maybe they can make a business case for that, no need to have a electric car that looks like a crap can.

KusabiSensei - Captain of the Toronto Maple Leafs > LJ909 10/24/2017 at 12:05

1

LJ909 > merged-5876237249235911857-hrw8uc 10/24/2017 at 12:06

0

The Volt powertrain could have worked, but even with either of those, it would have been a niche of a niche. At the price point, which I assume with an EV powertrain would be over 30 grand before any credits, you have an impractical daily driver that only appeals to a certain number of people. It really wouldnt have worked then.

Smallbear wants a modern Syclone, local Maple Leafs spammer > LJ909 10/24/2017 at 12:08

4

It IS in production. It’s the Camaro. Alpha platform RWD 2-door available with the 2.0T.

Remember all the talk of “This could be the new Camaro”? Yeah. That.

Wacko > LJ909 10/24/2017 at 12:16

3

cough, cough

Nissan chickened out too.

jimz > LJ909 10/24/2017 at 12:18

4

The Chevy Code 130R could have been the American alternative to the Toyobaru twins

another slow-selling, underwhelming afterthought?

besides, they did the right thing. Every single automaker who has tried to target the “youth market” has had their efforts fail. GM was just smart enough to remember young people can’t afford the cars they say they want and canceled it before wasting money on the program.

Jayhawk Jake > LJ909 10/24/2017 at 12:19

2

Ignoring the electric nonsense it absolutely would have competed well with the Toyobarus, but there just isn’t a very big market there. It would not have been a good idea for GM to try to take a slice of a small pie when half of it was already taken by Toyota & Subaru with another third eaten up by the Miata.

Car enthusiasts tend to ignore that, at the end of the day, making cars is a business. Yes, there are cars that would be awesome. Yes, there are people that would buy those awesome cars. But is it enough people? Is there space in the market? Those are often harder to answer and typically why the enthusiast’s favorite concepts die, like the Nissan IDX.

Toyota paraded the GT-86 idea for a while before introducing the car. In that time we saw GM, Nissan, and even Kia tinker with competitors (the Stinger GT4), but once it became clear that the FR-S/BRZ would be a pretty niche product with slow sales after initial excitement no one else entered that space.

Jayhawk Jake > merged-5876237249235911857-hrw8uc 10/24/2017 at 12:22

0

I don’t think there’s much of a market for an ‘impractical’ electric car at the moment. The typical electric car buyer either has a family or is young and wants to drive friends to places. Any 2 door EV is going to struggle unless it’s really cheap (the 500e is everywhere in LA).

Jayhawk Jake > jimz 10/24/2017 at 12:24

1

Yeah, the youth car market just isn’t really a thing anymore. Many millenials can’t afford a car, and those that actually make enough money to get a car typically are trying to live in bigger cities and urban areas where car ownership isn’t a thing.

The various attempts at ride sharing and automation are going to capture the attention of millenials more than a fun little sports car will, I think.

LJ909 > Smallbear wants a modern Syclone, local Maple Leafs spammer 10/24/2017 at 12:25

0

True. Its like they kinda gave it to us. But they didnt. People wanted smaller and more efficient. CHEAP. The Camaro is small though. Car and Driver just did a test of the ZL1 or something and they called it impractical for daily use.

LJ909 > Wacko 10/24/2017 at 12:27

1

They’re content with their 15 year old Z, ten year old GT-R and boring CVT powered everything else.

LJ909 > jimz 10/24/2017 at 12:29

0

Truth. Many of us cant afford cars, and the ones that do dont buy anything fun. A lot of others have no interest in owning one. They could have tried though. Like I mentioned, they threw money away on the ELR and that failed, and they approved toys before. The SSR was a literal rolling Hot Wheel.

Wacko > LJ909 10/24/2017 at 12:30

0

you make it sound like a good merger partner for Dodge/Chrysler.

LJ909 > Jayhawk Jake 10/24/2017 at 12:35

0

Oh yea of course at the end of the day its always a business of making money. And they did smartly watch how the GT86/BRZ sold. But at the end of the day business is also about taking chances as well, and like I mentioned to someone else they have taken chances and gambles on things no one wanted or asked for and they were failures.

The market for this type of car may be small but we will never truly know how they would have done. Like I mentioned to someone else, this is a company that took a chance on making an electric Cadillac that ultimately failed. Made a convertible hot rod pickup that looks like the stuff of boyhood dreams. They could have tried. But they were smart to back off though. GT86/BRZ sales havent even plateaued. They just fell off because everyone that wanted one bought one.

Smallbear wants a modern Syclone, local Maple Leafs spammer > LJ909 10/24/2017 at 12:41

2

No, they DID give it to us. The Camaro starts at ~$27k. For comparison:

Civic $24k

Charger V6 $28k (coincidentally, a V6 Camaro is right around the same mark)

Elantra Sport $22k

Focus ST $25k

Fiesta ST $22k

Accord Sport $25k

Aaaand... Toyota 86 $26k. Since that’s the one you seem to be comparing it to most, there’s really no room to complain. The 86 is just over 26k, the Camaro just under 27. They’re about $5-600 apart.

One more for good measure: Miata. $31,500.

Using the ZL1 to support your opinion that the 20.T Camaro isn’t a performance bargain? nah bro

CobraJoe > LJ909 10/24/2017 at 12:41

3

One thing car manufacturers can’t seem to understand: Little and cheap fun cars have to be useful too!

Give it some decent cargo room, give it “emergency use” back seats at least. Make it so that a college kid can haul laundry home on the weekends.

It seems like most of the reasons people avoid the Miata or 86 twins is because of practical reasons. Even the Mustang and Camaro are falling short on useful back seats and cargo room.

Give it a hatch back, and call it good. I don’t care if it is a bit slow or poor handling, a good RWD setup hatchback will have a great aftermarket.

jimz > LJ909 10/24/2017 at 12:44

0

I don’t think they spent that much on the ELR. I saw it as a (failed) cynical attempt to recover some of the Volt’s development costs with a higher-priced model.

the SSR was a good idea in theory; the “retro craze” kicked off by the PT Cruiser meant that its heart was in the right place. Don’t confuse “poor execution” with “bad idea.”

LJ909 > Wacko 10/24/2017 at 12:46

0

Nah that would be terrible. As it stands now with the sharing thats been going on between Nissan and Daimler, they should absorb them.

LJ909 > CobraJoe 10/24/2017 at 12:48

0

Yea practicality is a big thing and a lot of these cars in these segments are regulated to either weekend use, or single owner use in a mutlti car household because of interior space. Like I mentioned to someone else, Car and Driver recently tested the Camaro ZL1 or something and they called it impractical for how small it is. I think it may be smaller than the Mustang.

Jayhawk Jake > LJ909 10/24/2017 at 12:50

0

The convertible hot rod pickup was pre-recession, it really wasn’t that crazy to do that sort of thing back then. The ELR seemed less risky at the time than a Code 130R would have been - electric cars were becoming popular among luxury buyers and it was basically just a re-body of a Volt.

LJ909 > Smallbear wants a modern Syclone, local Maple Leafs spammer 10/24/2017 at 12:52

0

Price wise they may be similar, but on paper they aren’t. Base wise the Camaro out guns them with its 4. On paper the Camaro is bigger in every measurable dimension. The 130R would have not only been dimensionally similar, but it would have undercut them price wise as well.

Wacko > LJ909 10/24/2017 at 12:55

0

I know it would be terrible, it’s cause of the old platforms.

LJ909 > jimz 10/24/2017 at 12:56

0

Well for one, I know they dumped nearly $40 million into the Detroit-Hamtramck Assembly plant for the ELR and its tooling. So theres that. They are a steal used by the way.

The SSR was a good idea, if you were into niche cars that are more toy than practical use. It was cool, not only in the way it looked but in its features. But it was a bad execution that was a bad idea: it was pricey, it had a pick up bed that was more a long trunk than an actual pick up bed, it came to market with an engine that gave it so so performance because the damn thing was so heavy, and only after ti was about to go away, in typical GM fashion did they give it the engine it needed, the 6.0 small block. It was one of Lutz’s toys that he got approved. Thats one thing I appreciated about him: he knew fun and performance.

Smallbear wants a modern Syclone, local Maple Leafs spammer > LJ909 10/24/2017 at 13:00

2

I highly doubt any of that. Remember the 130R was just a concept... you’d have more weight, higher beltline and resulting styling changes to accommodate collision regs. So... Camaro. And prices are going up. It’s inflation. Consider this: In 2007 the Camaro would have cost $22k. For RWD, 270hp, Manual...

Also you missed that part where the Camaro undercuts the Miata

LJ909 > Jayhawk Jake 10/24/2017 at 13:06

0

Yea it was a re-bodied Volt. But it was pricey. Comparisons to the Model S didnt help it either nor did the high price and the fact that it was pretty much a 2 door compact car that was 75 grand. They are steal used though. I would pick one up if I had a proper place to charge it. I read somewhere that sales always averaged just 93 a month.

LJ909 > Smallbear wants a modern Syclone, local Maple Leafs spammer 10/24/2017 at 13:15

0

I dont think any of that would have added that much more weight. And I think that the styling wouldn’t have changed much. They wanted this thing to be a sub model under the Camaro, thats where the 19-20k starting price came from. That would have only driven Camaro prices higher.

And yea the Camaro undercuts the Miata, but not by much. Only about $2950 I believe. 

CobraJoe > LJ909 10/24/2017 at 13:16

1

My highschool and college cars were Fox Mustangs (one V6, one GT). They were the ideal highschool/college car. Not too powerful, hatchback room, reasonably usable back seat, fun to drive, huge aftermarket...

The GT-86 twins are the only things that come close, and they’re far more claustrophobic and the trunk is less usable than a liftback hatch. Plus, there’s no cheap/weak option for new drivers.

Jayhawk Jake > LJ909 10/24/2017 at 13:25

1

It was a good idea executed poorly. An entry into that market wasn’t wrong, but that wasn’t the right way to enter.

Smallbear wants a modern Syclone, local Maple Leafs spammer > LJ909 10/24/2017 at 13:29

1

Never going to happen. The market is saturated as it is. This was a concept to drive youth interest... the people who generally don’t buy new cars. Especially sports cars. They hinted pretty strongly at the time that this was going to become nothing other than the Gen6 Camaro.

Consider that the Charger and 86 are pretty much the same as the Camaro price-wise, and all the ones below them are massaged FWD econoboxes. $3000 is a pretty decent gap. About 11-12%.

Dusty Ventures > LJ909 10/24/2017 at 14:00

1

“Just look at it”

Please don’t make me

ranwhenparked > CobraJoe 10/24/2017 at 19:15

1

I don’t know, I had a Mustang for awhile, and the trunk was usefully sized - the trouble was the letter box sized opening, which could make it awkward to use at times. The back seats weren’t generous, but two adults could fit back there when needed. Perfectly usable for a single person or a couple, a small family with one or two kids could make it work if they had to, but that’s where the idea starts to fall apart.

Now, the Challenger I have now is a different story. Gigantic trunk with a good sized opening and five actual person sized seats inside, and it rides like a big sedan on the highway. I’ve taken several trips in excess of 1,000 miles with it and drove 9 hours straight this past Sunday and have found it to be surprisingly comfortable and relaxing to drive - averaged 31mpg, too.

I think Fiat Chrysler’s deservedly negative reputation and the polarizing retro styling keep people from looking at them, but it actually is a very practical car.

CobraJoe > ranwhenparked 10/24/2017 at 22:00

0

The Mustang is definitely a “Could make it work” sized interior, but it just is a bit too cramped to be useful. The roof line is too low, the rear bucket seats really make car seats difficult, and a trunk lid is always less convenient than a hatchback.

It’s really annoying because the Fox Mustang was about the ideal version of what I’d want. It’s roughly the same size inside as the new model, but the rear seats were flat and could fold flat, the roof was higher in the back seat, the hatchback made it carry far more than it appeared, and the lower end models in 1986 were priced at mid range Escort prices ($17k in 2017 money). It was a genuinely useful and affordable small car with a more powerful engine option.

I’m glad to hear the Challenger is a good option though, it’s pretty high on my list for possible future vehicles.

ranwhenparked > CobraJoe 10/24/2017 at 22:58

0

The Challenger is basically just a Charger coupe, its still a full-size car, so it does everything a full-size sedan does, just with 2 less doors.

Only real catch is the liftover height for the trunk is a big high, but it is quite spacious and with a good size opening.

Why the current Mustangs aren’t hatchbacks is beyond me, I wondered that the whole time I had the car - the rooflines are even shaped like they could be one.

Nauraushaun > LJ909 10/25/2017 at 16:29

1

Americans don’t have a good history with building or buying smaller cars. And the toybaru doesn’t sell that well as it is. I’d like it to work but I don’t think it would

gawdzillla > LJ909 10/31/2017 at 11:44

0

why is this so difficult ?

2 door coupe is fine (clownshoe is better)

make it 240z ish hatchback so it can haul bigger things in the back

give it 4/2 pots brake (or ATS brembo)

use that 2.0 turbo 4 in the camaro, 6 speed, Cadillac Getrag diff

280hp under 2800 lbs

watch it sell like hotcake

LJ909 > gawdzillla 10/31/2017 at 11:52

0

I wish it were that easy. But like I pointed out, GM actually watched the sales of the Toyobaru twins and when the sales fell off just 2-3 years into the models being on the market, thats when they pulled the plug. Someone else on here tried to argue that they gave us the Code 130R in the form of the Camaro moving to the Alpha platform shared with the ATS making it slightly smaller and giving it the same 4 and 6 cylinder engines. I think thats a stretch.

gawdzillla > LJ909 10/31/2017 at 12:00

2

because toyobaru twins didnt follow my instructions

not hatchback
no 4/2 pots (or brembo brakes)
wimpy r160
only 200hp

fail

oh price range needs to be 22-30k

if anyone is able to pull that off i dont see why it wouldnt sell

Nomadtsunami > gawdzillla 04/09/2018 at 13:30

0

Yeah, the toyobaru twins are terrible in every aspect except for handling. They have crappy interiors, wimpy engines, and little space.