Topic: Preview:2013 Buick Encore

[CanuckG35]

i don't think it looks that bad,

Indeed, while styling is subjective, it ain't the ugly duckling all the haters in this thread are making it out to be. 

Isn't that a little contradictory?   

[Jaeger]

i don't think it looks that bad,

Indeed, while styling is subjective, it ain't the ugly duckling all the haters in this thread are making it out to be. 

Isn't that a little contradictory?   

More than a little contradictory. Styling is "subjective" but if you think it's an ugly duckling, you're wrong, and a hater to boot?  And it is an ugly duckling.    Yes, I am only judging from photos - but I somehow doubt the ill-proportioned blobbiness is somehow resolved in the metal.  The interior does look nice.  But who knows - maybe it's crap in person.    Funny how only negative comments based on a photo are countered by playing the "wait to see it in person" card.

Jaeger

[richink]

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, I'll wait to see one at CIAS or at a dealer before passing final judgement but it does bear a striking resemblance to the Rendez-Vous and Pontiac Aztec models on paper. I found those to be futtbucking ugly, gangly things where others adored the styling. Had to bite my tongue once when having lunch with a prominent doctor in Quebec as she announced that she had just picked one up and thought it was the cat's meow. More like a cat standing on it's nails sliding down a chalkboard if you ask me.

[AP]

No contradiction at all.  By "not that bad" I could have simply meant "it's bad but not as bad as it is being made out to be".  No contradiction there.  

Alternatively, I could have simply meant (which is what I actually meant) I do not see the styling as being a negative talking point for this vehicle.  "The styling ain't bad."  Again, no contradiction.

Also, Jaeger, one can admit that styling is subjective and still acknowledge the possibility of a true ugly duckling since some styling is so polarizing that it only appeals to the most nuanced of subjective preferences.  Again, no contradiction.  

[CanuckG35]

No contradiction at all.  By "not that bad" I could have simply meant "it's bad but not as bad as it is being made out to be".  No contradiction there.  

Alternatively, I could have simply meant (which is what I actually meant) I do not see the styling as being a negative talking point for this vehicle.  "The styling ain't bad."  Again, no contradiction.

Also, Jaeger, one can admit that styling is subjective and still acknowledge the possibility of a true ugly duckling since some styling is so polarizing that it only appeals to the most nuanced of subjective preferences.  Again, no contradiction.  

I still think your point was completely contradictory.  Styling is subjective, that we agree.  From the pics, I do think this vehicle is indeed an ugly duckling.  Are you saying I'm wrong in what I see just because you don't agree with it?  Your post certainly suggests it.  And because I don't care for the look of this vehicle, why am I labled a hater?

[AP]

I still think your point was completely contradictory.  Styling is subjective, that we agree.  From the pics, I do think this vehicle is indeed an ugly duckling.  Are you saying I'm wrong in what I see just because you don't agree with it?  Your post certainly suggests it.  And because I don't care for the look of this vehicle, why am I labled a hater?

My post was not inspired by a difference of styling preferences but rather the vehemence of the styling objections being raised, e.g., vomit emoticons, etc.  If you don't like it, you don't like it.  That does not make your view wrong.  But I imagine a consensus would exists even among those who don't care for it that it is not in the league of something as polarizing as the Aztek, as one of the other posts implied.  Nothing more to it than this. 

[Jaeger]

No contradiction at all.  By "not that bad" I could have simply meant "it's bad but not as bad as it is being made out to be".  No contradiction there.  

Alternatively, I could have simply meant (which is what I actually meant) I do not see the styling as being a negative talking point for this vehicle.  "The styling ain't bad."  Again, no contradiction.

Also, Jaeger, one can admit that styling is subjective and still acknowledge the possibility of a true ugly duckling since some styling is so polarizing that it only appeals to the most nuanced of subjective preferences.  Again, no contradiction.  

I still think your point was completely contradictory.  Styling is subjective, that we agree.  From the pics, I do think this vehicle is indeed an ugly duckling.  Are you saying I'm wrong in what I see just because you don't agree with it?  Your post certainly suggests it.  And because I don't care for the look of this vehicle, why am I labled a hater?

Correct across the board.

Jaeger

[safristi]

..Encore...means DO IT AGAIN.................any takers......??

[Vanstar]

You guys forgot the most important thing: no diesel and no manual transmission!

Yup, and they might sell three of each. Or those three cars would molder against the back fence for a year and then be fire-saled

[JRM]

Could this be GM's replacement for the now defunct Pontiac Vibe only more upscale?  If so, I don't see it selling nearly as well.

[Sir Osis of Liver]

Could this be GM's replacement for the now defunct Pontiac Vibe only more upscale?  If so, I don't see it selling nearly as well.

I think that's part of it. There used to be a lot of Pontiac-Buick dealers. With Pontiac gone, those dealerships lost their small cars. This and the Verano will partially fill the void, but at a higher price point and with lower sales.

[mik101]

How does this compare in size to say a Merc B200? I thought that would be more the market this was after. Maybe I'm off on picturing it's size.

Most grocery getting soccer/hockey Mom's won't care about the engine, but the efficiency + packaging might be good for many looking for a tiny cuv.

If it's priced right it could sell. Those who said this is really more a vehicle for Asia might be right though. I didn't think it was as ugly as many of you seem to think it is. I thought it fit okay with the rest of the lineup (and throws a bone to former Pontiac-Buick dealers). Those hood/fender vents need to die though IMO.

[Sir Osis of Liver]

Those hood/fender vents need to die though IMO.

 

[Jaeger]

Those hood/fender vents need to die though IMO.

 

+2.  I wish they would disappear from the automotive landscape entirely. Buick is not the only offender.

Jaeger

[nlm]

Could this be GM's replacement for the now defunct Pontiac Vibe only more upscale? 

Then it doesn't replace the Vibe does it?

[nlm]

No contradiction at all.  By "not that bad" I could have simply meant "it's bad but not as bad as it is being made out to be".  No contradiction there.  

Alternatively, I could have simply meant (which is what I actually meant) I do not see the styling as being a negative talking point for this vehicle.  "The styling ain't bad."  Again, no contradiction.

Also, Jaeger, one can admit that styling is subjective and still acknowledge the possibility of a true ugly duckling since some styling is so polarizing that it only appeals to the most nuanced of subjective preferences.  Again, no contradiction.  

I still think your point was completely contradictory.  Styling is subjective, that we agree.  From the pics, I do think this vehicle is indeed an ugly duckling.  Are you saying I'm wrong in what I see just because you don't agree with it?  Your post certainly suggests it.  And because I don't care for the look of this vehicle, why am I labled a hater?

That's how it cam across to me as well.

[Ice]

By "Encore" do they mean a follow up to the Aztek? Certainly doesn't seem to be anything special, kind of looks like a mesh between the Matrix and the Smart For2 - and nothing I would consider paying for.

The Encore may not be a looker but nothing is so terrible as an Aztek. I saw one the other day... hideous! The Encore isn't anywhere near that.

[bigjodyg]

I think it's a nice effort, but I'm leery on Daewoo products 
I like the interior allot, exterior is ok, but it looks to humped up and stubby and  then theres the lack of power.
Nice, but not in my scopes till they match the 5 yr 100,000 kms bumper to bumper warranties of some other makes.
I'll take 5, 100,000 btb over 3/60,000 btb combined with 5/160,000 pwrtrn any day.
You listening gm, I like some of your new products but they wont get me out of my Hyun anytime soon to you rectify the warranty isuue.
Same goes with F and C.. Fine products, but I also like a good warranty incase something ever crops up 4-5 hrs down the road thats not 'inside' the powertrain .

[tazcubed]

By "Encore" do they mean a follow up to the Aztek? Certainly doesn't seem to be anything special, kind of looks like a mesh between the Matrix and the Smart For2 - and nothing I would consider paying for.

The Encore may not be a looker but nothing is so terrible as an Aztek. I saw one the other day... hideous! The Encore isn't anywhere near that.

The Encore may not offend as much as the Aztek, but I have to say it's far from a decent looking design - overwrought with bizarre Buick design elements that had their heyday a half-century ago. Frankly, given that the Aztek actually had some additional functionality (camper conversion or something similar), this one offers less functionality and less space, I'd actually be more inclined to buy an Aztek - not that would EVER happen). GM should have kept Pontiac or Oldsmobile and trashed Bu-hick. Bu-hick seems to have the persona of an old fart.