Topic: First Drive: 2013 Buick Encore

[ChaosphereIX]

head in to your local gm dealer now and you will find much lower rates, think 0.99%

Not on the Trax or Encore yet unfortunately.

yes head into a dealer and ask what the rates are...I know you can get a Trax for 0.99% right now...the Encore is not far behind, will check at work tomorrow so I can have some concrete "facts" to back up my claim...

[Noto]

My CrossTrek is 3200lbs and has 148hp and 145ft-lbs torque. I don't understand your issue.

It's not the power to weight ratio that is the problem...it's the method of delivery.

Small-displacement turbo engines will rely on the turbo boost more often for routine acceleration.  Turbos are for power, not fuel savings - the fuel saved at idle is marginal!!! 

That's my point - small, turbo engines with auto trannies will not deliver great real world fuel economy - too many variables (wind, weight [incl AWD hardware], highway passing, etc) cause the engine to go into higher boost more often (which is more efficient for combustion, but uses more fuel to do so).

Manual transmissions give the driver the POSSIBILITY (not the guarantee) of better fuel economy because they can keep the engine in its most fuel efficient range.  This is why Subaru's new CVTs and Nissan's long-used CVTs do so well with fuel economy.  People, stop hating CVTs.  I'd rather better technology in transmissions than newer engine technology at the moment - that's why Mazda went for the Skyactiv treatment.

If you don't believe me, for example, there's the Veloster - the Manny gets 27 MPG combined and the Auto gets 25 combined with a 1.6T, FWD, at 2584lbs curb weight.  There is no way that a taller, heavier, auto only, 1.4T Encore even in FWD will get better COMBINED mileage than the Veloster.


Let me be clear - I LOVE turbocharging...but for performance - not fuel economy.  Calling it more "fuel efficient" is just a marketing lie.  Compared to older V6s with terrible auto trannies?  Sure...but compared with modern V6s in real world driving?  No chance.  Not to mention that they're more expensive to make, maintain, and repair...I'm not convinced.

[Sir Osis of Liver]

In my experience, driving style affects turbo cars more than NA cars. The 1.4L Cruze is getting pretty good fuel economy numbers in real life. I won't write off the Encore (or Trax) quite yet.

I haven't driven an Encore, but the Trax was the most surprising car we tried. Quieter than the CrossTrek and roomier for passengers. The 6 speed auto worked completely unobtrusively and ride/handling was pretty decent for a small CUV.

[ChaosphereIX]

In my experience, driving style affects turbo cars more than NA cars. The 1.4L Cruze is getting pretty good fuel economy numbers in real life. I won't write off the Encore (or Trax) quite yet.

I haven't driven an Encore, but the Trax was the most surprising car we tried. Quieter than the CrossTrek and roomier for passengers. The 6 speed auto worked completely unobtrusively and ride/handling was pretty decent for a small CUV.

agreed. Drive in boost with fun and speed in mind, you wont see gas savings. drive normally, and you probably will.

[ChaosphereIX]

head in to your local gm dealer now and you will find much lower rates, think 0.99%

Not on the Trax or Encore yet unfortunately.

yes head into a dealer and ask what the rates are...I know you can get a Trax for 0.99% right now...the Encore is not far behind, will check at work tomorrow so I can have some concrete "facts" to back up my claim...

Encore and Trax have identical finance rates: 0.99% for 60 mo for example

[Vanstar]

3,300 lbs for this little porker! With 148 lb-ft torque, and fighting the aerodynamics of a brick, this will be struggling to keep up with mid-90's Tercel's. It's bloated, heavy, ugly and not really that practical yet it will sell by the boatload...does that mean it's successful?

My CrossTrek is 3200lbs and has 148hp and 145ft-lbs torque. I don't understand your issue.

What's not to understand? All cars need 400 hp, soft touch interiors and cost $20,000.

[Sir Osis of Liver]

3,300 lbs for this little porker! With 148 lb-ft torque, and fighting the aerodynamics of a brick, this will be struggling to keep up with mid-90's Tercel's. It's bloated, heavy, ugly and not really that practical yet it will sell by the boatload...does that mean it's successful?

My CrossTrek is 3200lbs and has 148hp and 145ft-lbs torque. I don't understand your issue.

What's not to understand? All cars need 400 hp, soft touch interiors and cost $20,000.

Ah! That's where I went wrong. 

[Fobroader]

3,300 lbs for this little porker! With 148 lb-ft torque, and fighting the aerodynamics of a brick, this will be struggling to keep up with mid-90's Tercel's. It's bloated, heavy, ugly and not really that practical yet it will sell by the boatload...does that mean it's successful?

My CrossTrek is 3200lbs and has 148hp and 145ft-lbs torque. I don't understand your issue.

What's not to understand? All cars need 400 hp, soft touch interiors and cost $20,000.

No, but enough power to pass safely on an uphill undivided highway would be nice, or merging on to a highway with a full complement of passengers and cargo. Not 400, but a nice round 350 would be nice 

[Rupert]

Yeah, just the place to pass...on a hill that you can't see over.

[Fobroader]

Yeah, just the place to pass...on a hill that you can't see over.

Most passing lanes in BC and here are uphill.......

[Sir Osis of Liver]

Yeah, just the place to pass...on a hill that you can't see over.

Most passing lanes in BC and here are uphill.......

That is much less of a problem here. 

[Fobroader]

Yeah, just the place to pass...on a hill that you can't see over.

Most passing lanes in BC and here are uphill.......

That is much less of a problem here. 

  True that.....Hold up, there is that part of highway 16 that dips down into a valley by Fort Quappelle....... 

[aquadorhj]

power is good, right?

so more of good thing is better, right? 

hence everything needs more power.

flawless logic.   


the otherday, i drove my company fleet smart again, and i was completely flat to the floor and barely maintained 115 on slightest uphill.   i was laughing so hard, never encountered cars like that in my life. 

[Sir Osis of Liver]

Yeah, just the place to pass...on a hill that you can't see over.

Most passing lanes in BC and here are uphill.......

That is much less of a problem here. 

  True that.....Hold up, there is that part of highway 16 that dips down into a valley by Fort Quappelle....... 

I KNOW! Why don't they bridge that thing or something! It's so weird and three dimensional! 

[Northernridge]

Yeah, just the place to pass...on a hill that you can't see over.

Most passing lanes in BC and here are uphill.......

That is much less of a problem here. 

  True that.....Hold up, there is that part of highway 16 that dips down into a valley by Fort Quappelle....... 

My office window faces west. If I squint I can see Regina.

[Fobroader]

Yeah, just the place to pass...on a hill that you can't see over.

Most passing lanes in BC and here are uphill.......

That is much less of a problem here. 

  True that.....Hold up, there is that part of highway 16 that dips down into a valley by Fort Quappelle....... 

My office window faces west. If I squint I can see Regina.

This is another reference to having the ability to watch your dog run away for 3 days or if you stare at the horizon correctly you will be able to see the back of your own head?? 

[dirtyjeffer]

3,300 lbs for this little porker! With 148 lb-ft torque, and fighting the aerodynamics of a brick, this will be struggling to keep up with mid-90's Tercel's. It's bloated, heavy, ugly and not really that practical yet it will sell by the boatload...does that mean it's successful?

My CrossTrek is 3200lbs and has 148hp and 145ft-lbs torque. I don't understand your issue.

A power-to-weight ratio of a Greyhound bus is my issue. This would be like driving a Geo Metro towing a U-Haul.

go look up a Pinzgauer "truck"...it isn't exactly overflowing with power, but is almost unstoppable as a utility/off road vehicle (within reason).