GM Inside News Forum banner

Code 130 RS = 2.0 turbo.

22K views 100 replies 57 participants last post by  99SonomaSLS 
#1 · (Edited)
So the question came up as to what the "RS" signified on the Code 130 RS at the LA show. "RS " signifies a 270 HP, 2.0L turbo. The business case for the Code appears to be moving along with significant internal support. Also, this car is being considered as a "very different" type of car from the next Camaro.


That's all for now.....
 
#4 ·
I can see this Code 130 RS 2.0 turbo being the top performance model bridging the gap between the 6th gen base Camaro which is also to use the 2.0 turbo. The Code RS being a pure driver at a lower price point to take on the likes of the Sub/Toy twins while the base Camaro can offer the 2.0 turbo to help with fuel economy and also be used as an entry level trim on a larger pony car platform that is to support much higher HP models up the food chain.
 
#6 · (Edited)
If this is produced I wonder if the Camaro will actually get the 2.0L turbo 4. Unless the power is raised to 300+. The lower output turbo 6 with around 330hp and 8 speed trans would work just fine for the base model Camaro starting at 27K. I pray GM can pull this off in a timely manner.
 
#15 · (Edited)
Except you can buy an BRZ/FR-S and by the time that GM comes close to releasing one it will be more money and about 3 years late to the party.

The thing about the BRZ and FR-S is they will have a ridiculous aftermarket supporting them. So buyers will be presented with two options: 1) Car with a 3 year history and thriving aftermarket or brand new car support by no one yet. I know which I would pick.

GM is not about taking chances, it's about going with what is proven in the market by others. Good, Bad or indifferent. The volt/vette is about the only exceptions I can think off. I would include the CTS-V but it's GM's answer to the M5 and AMG.
 
#8 ·
Was very nice to see something about this earlier tonight. Love the little 2.0T hints that were dropped.

Cobaltss_King, I am also wondering if the base Camaro would need to have the 2.0T as the base if the C130RS is filling that spot below the Camaro. Maybe the Camaro can use the 3.0L V6 that the base CTS uses. That would help differentiate Camaro and the C130RS.
 
#9 ·
I believe that the 2.0T is locked in as the base Camaro engine. I do wonder what was meant by " very different" type of car.
 
#10 ·
There have been hints and rumors that the body style might change on the C130RS to help keep it from competing with the Camaro. Hatch or shooting brake are the most logical changes and have been hinted as well. I still think the size, design and engine and price difference will be enough to separate the two in the market place.
 
#59 ·
Or perhaps the Camaro will again become a hatch like the 3rd/4th gen?
 
#12 ·
The styling of the 130RS is subjective--I like it and then I don't. My hope is that if they do bring it to market, that it will not be a flop, like the SSR was, due to inadequate power and functionality. I loved the SSR and would love to own one... but, it came out way too underpowered with the 5.3 and no manual option... then came the 6.0 with a manual, unfortunately too late.

Good luck with this little booger! My best regards.
 
#14 ·
Chevy really needs this car. Chevy have a gap in it's line-up for a compact rear-wheel drive car to compete with the Toyota/Scion/Subaru triplets, Hyundai Genesis, Mazda RX-8, and the BMW 1-series. But I would change the name to Chevelle, or Nomad, to honor the history of small rear-wheel cars at Chevy.
 
#16 ·
My MINI is my wifes. If it ain't RWD, I ain't driving it. SO, I'm thrilled at the idea of a low cost RWD car. But, the styling on the concept is terrible. TERRIBLE. It looks like a 7 year old boy drew it. Basic, bland, ugly.

Young people (you know, the target audience), want hot hatches. BUT, not styled like a station wagon. Can you imagine a GTI/Mazda 3 5 door/Subaru STi type car in RWD with a 270hp turbo 4 priced where this car is aimed?! That also would give it the DIFFERENCE from the Camaro they are wanting.
 
#17 ·
So we might see this by 2016? GM's fear of coupes will likely kill it before then. :(
 
#20 ·
So the question came up as to what the "RS" signified on the Code 130 RS at the LA show. "RS " signifies a 270 HP, 2.0L turbo. The business case for the Code appears to be moving along with significant internal support. Also, this car is being considered as a "very different" type of car from the next Camaro.
Just curious, but did this information come from someone in product development or has it been released?

It's hard to imagine that they produced an RS variant and didn't issue a press release or have the details available at the show.

And... if the RS is primarily a powertrain upgrade it completely messes with that nameplate designation.
 
#21 ·
Autoline.tv has this a interview with Ed Welburn, and the GM design studio....well you can skip to about 50:00 or so, and when its question time, and he gets asked about the Code 130r, prior to that question he said all concepts that are built from now on are possible production cars...from his reaction, I think the 130r is a go...

 
#24 ·
I could see a solstice 2.0 or a RWD voloster type of thing in a 2+2 configuration and built on the shortest Alpha leaving the Camaro to use the longer alpha
as for power is the 1.4/1.6T engines RWD configurable? the 2.5L might make a "BASE" engine as it is RWD configured in the ATS
IMHO 2.0T 270 BHP as the ONLY engine and minimum of specs available and a 23K price still leave space for a 1.6T 200 BHP sonic "supersonic" hotted up H/B or a cruse touring model 1.6T for those looking for more room/versatility and "hotted up" performance
 
#25 · (Edited)
I like the concept of a small, lite, inexpensive, RWD, coupe. I do not like the styling of the current 130 show car, but that can be changed. My question is how do you take a platform designed for Cadillac, the 33k+ ATS and the new 40k+ CTS, and make a car the sells for less than the base Camaro price of 24k, that will be made off the same platform. In reality what you end up with is another competitor for the base Camaro/Mustang pony cars. I doubt the market for base pony cars will expand significantly enough to make 2/3's market volume support both the Camaro and the 130. The most likely outcome is that the two GM cars wile cannabilize each other and Mustang volumes wiil remain close to constant. GM would be far better off to do a Coupe or Hot Hatch off the Sonic, Gamma platform. The TRU 140, could be a 2800 pound car with 200 hp that could retail nicely equiped for 19k would be a hit that brings in buyers are currently buying non GM products.

If GM wants to add another RWD product to its list of cars it should be as a Buick, to replace the slow selling Regal that is losing sales to its Verano and LaCrosse stablemates. With a 110 in wheelbase, 4 doors, a choice of turbo fours, and a 28k base price you would have an upmarket family car that does not cannabilize Buick or Cadillac. Do it as a hatch, with choices of turbos at 1.6/175 hp w/eAssist, 1.8/215hp, and 2.0/275hp GS, and maybe a low volume GN with a turbo V6 @330 hp
 
#27 ·
Since I am a huge coupe and RWD fan I hate to say it but I think

RS= Rairly Sold

Until the youth of America show me that they "get it" when it comes o RWD I don't have much faith in a car like this. All we read about is young people not only not buying cars buy completely uninterested in them other than being a necessary tool. So I doubt a fun type of car with RWD (omg snow) will do very well.

I certainly hope I'm wrong though.
 
#35 · (Edited)
Until the youth of America show me that they "get it" when it comes o RWD I don't have much faith in a car like this. All we read about is young people not only not buying cars buy completely uninterested in them other than being a necessary tool. So I doubt a fun type of car with RWD (omg snow) will do very well.
Youth of America (Read: the few Millennials who have actual spending power in this economy) want an affordable Sport Sedan. An affordable 3-series, if you will. We want sedans because we drive around our friends. We aspire for premium brands but will settle for mainstream brands if they're nice enough. Don't confuse this group with the youth of America still trying to figure out where they fit in society as they live in a loft with 3 other people and live paycheck to paycheck because their Liberal Arts degree failed them when searching for jobs out of college.

Because of snow (and I live in the heart of the snowbelt with FWD and I still want "MOAR TRACTION"), AWD option is a MUST.

If GM can build a solid sport sedan under $30k then they have a winner. The 1.6L turbo could be the base engine and the 2.0T could be the top engine.

Make it happen. My wallet would be open.

EDIT: even though this is somewhat contradictory to what I previously said, if the Camaro had a AWD option I'd very seriously consider one.
 
#29 ·
No business case would support a car that looks this ugly. But at Government Motors this is exactly the type of product they introduce and then regret. I'm sure this sorry product will not only be a Chevrolet, but it will become a Buick and a Cadillac and all together will sell less than 15,000 units a year.
 
#30 ·
I have this feeling that next year's auto show it will be badged "SS". Then 2-3 years after that it will come in production form with a weaksauce 1.4t or 1.8. (If it happens)

Less horsepower than the Toyobaru twins with a higher price tag.

By then, the twins will be on gen 2.
 
#31 ·
Maybe. Far be it from me to defend the things that GM does sometimes. But I'll tell ya, this concept came out of nowhere less than a year ago and it's sort of taken on a life of it's own and GM keeps bringing it around in different colors. So.......who knows......
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top