Topic: First Drive: 2013 Buick Encore

[ChaosphereIX]

I personally like the Encore.  It's proportions look off in pictures but it looks better in person. 

The Encore (FWD 2900lbs, AWD 3000lbs) is lighter than the Cruze (3100lbs).  So the 1.4T engine should move it fairly well.   The vehicle is well layed out and very space efficient.  My wife is seriously considering the Trax if GM Canada can offer some decent financing on it [currently at 4.99%]. The Trax is actually built in Mexico while the Encore is built in Korea not sure I understand why?

As for the debate on turbo engines.  You can't beat the law's of physics.  It takes a certain amount of energy to accelerate an object of a specific mass to a velocity and maintain it.  Turbo engines are not magic.  If you get into the boost you will suck the juice.  But turbo charging allows you to get away with using a smaller displacement engine so at idle or taking your time accelerating to minimize the boost you can get better fuel economy.

PS Consumer Reports are full of idots.  Some of the worst automotive reporting I have ever seen.

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

[dirtyjeffer]

Oh please enlighten us

i don't know about recently (as i don't follow them), but i know in year's past they would tell you to stay away from (example) a Chevy Cobolt because it was a poorly built and unreliable car, but then recommend the Pontiac G5 and praise it for its built quality and reliability.

[Solstice2006]

So back to my real question, have you driven the Mazda5,

Yes, and you can read my thoughts in some detail here    http://www.autos.ca/car-test-drives/long-term-test-update-4-2012-mazda5-gs-manual/

and if so, do you find it slower than the CX-5 or the same. 

The CX-5 felt slower.  Now a couple important qualifiers.  1) The Mazda 5 I drove was a manual and those always seem to feel faster than their automatic counterparts.  That said, I drove it with a very full load of pasengers and gear and never felt like it was struggling. 

Ok, I understand what your saying.  Didn't know your wrote that Mazda5 review.  As it is tough to know who is who in the forums...but in the review your name is there.  The automatic in the Mazda5 doesn't rev quite as high as the manual on the highway.  And I agree with the stereo.  I have the GT, and was hoping it would have a better stereo than the base model.  Like some other Mazda's have the Bose on the GT.  Not sure what to do, do want to change the factory deck.  Maybe adding an amplifier will do?  Bass isn't a major priority for me,so I don't want a sub. It just doesn't go very loud.  And when pushed near the max it gets distorted, and I don't want to lose much space.

Thanks for the  other input.

[Noto]

The Encore (FWD 2900lbs, AWD 3000lbs) is lighter than the Cruze (3100lbs).  So the 1.4T engine should move it fairly well.   

Not sure where you get your facts, but from GM's press release of the Encore:
Curb weight (lb / kg):
FWD: 3190 / 1447
AWD: 3309 / 1501

The Cruze is 3,102lbs.

Weight is the same if FWD, but almost 200lbs heavier than the Cruze in AWD trim.  Add in the coefficient of drag that the added height comes with, and the Encore will get worse fuel economy at speed and keep that lil' motor in higher boost (suckling more from its tank)

Turbo engines are not magic.  If you get into the boost you will suck the juice.  But turbo charging allows you to get away with using a smaller displacement engine so at idle or taking your time accelerating to minimize the boost you can get better fuel economy.

Correct - they're engineering masterpieces for better performance, if done correctly...but they are not necessarily replacements for displacement.  The amount of fuel saved during idling is minimal and taking your time accelerating is not necessarily better for fuel economy - sure, it beats flooring it, but there is an optimal range to be accelerating within.

PS Consumer Reports are full of idots.  Some of the worst automotive reporting I have ever seen.

I'm guessing an idot is some new Apple contraption?  In the event that you meant "idiots," that's just unwarranted libel from a company that tests cars very well in favour of consumer's interests.  You are welcome to disagree with what they believe, but their reports are well-supported, fair, and point out issues that consumers may not notice when they walk into a dealership and get pushed to sign on the dotted line quickly.  I, for one, greatly appreciate their work, as I do with Autos.ca staff.



As for the Encore, since this is an Encore thread, my only concern is that a 1.4T in a vehicle this heavy that is meant for urban driving with responsive acceleration, is a poor choice for both real-world fuel economy and intended driving responsiveness without a manual transmission option to give the driver proper control of the engine's abilities.  I know nobody would buy it with a manny anyway, but that's more reason to not use a small turbo.  A 2.4 I4 would have been smarter and probably cheaper (turbos aren't cheap).  Point is, much heavier, bigger cars with I4s are getting better fuel economy than the Encore will - the 1.4T is a marketing gimmick and used to get more vehicle mark-up.

As for styling, it's subjective and I withhold judgement.  As for premium/luxury appointments, Buick is heading in a good direction with quieter cabins and finer materials.  I can't comment on whether or not they have succeeded.

[Travel360]

Solstice 2006-Many moons ago my cousin told me if I only have a few bucks for upgrade , swap the speakers! And in my case I found a set of Pioneer 720PRS for $230.00 which transformed my  Honda factory issued NOISE into rather enjoyable music!

[dirtyjeffer]

Solstice 2006-Many moons ago my cousin told me if I only have a few bucks for upgrade , swap the speakers! And in my case I found a set of Pioneer 720PRS for $230.00 which transformed my  Honda factory issued NOISE into rather enjoyable music!

for solstice, you would need to see what he has for speakers already...speakers only play what they are being fed...if they are being fed a distorted mess, that is what they will play (until they blow)...a quality head unit (amp) on a mediocre pair of speakers will sound 10x better than a quality pair of speakers on a mediocre amp...it might not be much to upgrade the whole lot, considering the aftermarket market for car audio is about 2% of what it was 20 years ago.

[Neromanceres]

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.
 

Not sure where you get your facts, but from GM's press release of the Encore:
Curb weight (lb / kg):
FWD: 3190 / 1447
AWD: 3309 / 1501
The Cruze is 3,102lbs.

I got my numbers from the Opel Mokka specifications.

What else is odd is that GM Canada website has different numbers yet again:

http://www.gm.ca/gm/english/vehicles/buick/encore/compare-options-and-specifications#ui-accordion-header

Base Curb weight (kg / lb): FWD M/T: 1,363 / 3,005
                                      FWD A/T: 1,382 / 3,047 AWD: 1,476 / 3,254 

Oh please enlighten us

i don't know about recently (as i don't follow them), but i know in year's past they would tell you to stay away from (example) a Chevy Cobolt because it was a poorly built and unreliable car, but then recommend the Pontiac G5 and praise it for its built quality and reliability.

Exactly or that they would recommend a Toyota Matrix yet pan the Pontiac Vibe.

I'm an engineer that used to work in the automotive industry.  And I could find Monkeys that have a better idea how cars are built and work than the people at Consumer Reports.

[Noto]

Exactly or that they would recommend a Toyota Matrix yet pan the Pontiac Vibe.

I'm an engineer that used to work in the automotive industry.  And I could find Monkeys that have a better idea how cars are built and work than the people at Consumer Reports.

They are called CONSUMER Reports, not Engineering Reports.  They aren't giving you advice on how cars are built and how they work (maybe some clarification, but that's the extent) - their purpose is to tell consumers what they should look for when shopping or cross-shopping.  When they say "stay away" - it is their opinion...media opinions can be powerful and many time unwarranted, but thanks to Freedom of Speech, y'can't stop 'em...and I haven't found their opinions to be too harsh at all. 

They are critical, but that helps manufacturers make changes.  I applaud them for it.  Look at the 2013 Civic redesign as an example.

[aaronk]

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?

[Noto]

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?

...if that's the case that they do sell, then unfortunately, yes.

However, they haven't sold by the boatload just yet

[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.

[aaronk]

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.

[Snowman]

4 pages on the Encore.   Just imagine the excitement a GN or GNX will bring.

[Fobroader]

4 pages on the Encore.   Just imagine the excitement a GN or GNX will bring.

Yeah, but that will bring Buick from an "old people that cant afford a Lexus/BMW/Merc/Acura" car to something that 12-92 year olds will drool about......if they dont screw it up with fwd, 4 doors or hire the freak that designed the new "Cherokee" to style it.

[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.

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

How many 4 cylinder CUVs have you done that calculation for? Its power to weight isn't out of line.

With the new fuel economy standards people are going to see slower and slower 0-60 times. That's life.

[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.

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

Thats what the turbo Kia Sportage is for my power hungry friend!!! I agree with you, 150 horses and that little torque in a car that weighs over 3000lbs wouldnt cut it for me either.

[dkaz]

My old Mazda 5 had 153 HP and 148 ft-lb torque from its 2.3L engine and it was 3450 lb curb. The 5 speed manual did certainly help. The 2012-13 with the bigger 2.5L engine only has 157 HP but 163 ft-lb torque, curb weight remains the same. It felt a little slow I admit, I normally upshifted at 2,500 RPM but it was slow down there. Side note, amazing my Mazda 3 Skyactiv delivers about the same numbers...

New 2014 Kia Rondo will have 164 HP and 156 ft-lb torque. Chevy Orlando has 178 HP I believe...

You guys are forgetting that the turbo 1.4 will deliver peak torque from 2,500 RPM, lower with the manual transmission in the Chevy Trax. For most of us, it's still anemic, but for the mainstream driver who wants a fuel efficient super-mini crossover, the Encore will feel peppy enough.

[Solstice2006]

I sat in this at the auto show.  I don't share the critique of its styling.  It is decent enough looking.

AP, we agree on something...how about that!

[rrocket]

I sat in this at the auto show.  I don't share the critique of its styling.  It is decent enough looking.

AP, we agree on something...how about that!

Yea, we weren't griping much about this at the AutoShow.

[Snowman]

I sat in this at the auto show.  I don't share the critique of its styling.  It is decent enough looking.

AP, we agree on something...how about that!

Yea, we weren't griping much about this at the AutoShow.

I was there and agree.