It’s not dead yet

[wpgsonic]

The bottom line is that trucks and SUV'S are what is selling in large numbers.The Sonic sales numbers have dropped very steady since its debut.GM never promoted it.For a long time all I would see is Chevy Cruze commercials and they were always front and center on the dealers websites.The 2019 Sonic is not even sold here in Canada.

When I traded my 2014 in for a 2018 model there were hardly any to choose from.The salesmen told me that the Sonic was a poor seller and there was basically no profit margin on it.This came from the largest GM dealer in my city.He also told me the number one GM car that was selling on their lot was the Cruze.I would love to see the Sonic continue,but it makes no financial sense from GM's point of veiw.

 

[Chazzz]

Same here in the states as very few dealers currently keep the Sonic in their inventories. Word was that the Sonic was to be discontinued after 2018, but plans had been changed to continue production for the US market due to the fact that there was a surplus of parts still on hand. True that the likely outcome will be that the Trax/Encore will become the alternative to the Sonic, and we probably won’t see a redesign after the current model ages out, probably after the 2019 model year. However, with the demise of the Cruze who knows what the future holds for sure. Only time will tell....

 

[Nataphen]

If they redesign the Sonic, I’d assume that it moves up into the slot for a Cruze replacement. Probably a little bigger and more expensive. It’s true that dealers make almost no money on the Sonic. They make ~$500 max per unit.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[LorbeerTLC]

...one other thing...

There's one other thing about the Chevy Sonic that could help after the other said models are no longer available.

You have a choice between either a Hatchback or a Sedan. You don't get that with the Chevy Spark. If GM does pull the plug on the Spark, the Chevrolet Sonic will once again be the lowest, entry-level GM production car for the U.S. market like it was back when it was introduced in the 2012 MY.

Edited:
It also just occurred to me that maybe the CAFE Fuel Standards might have saved the Chevy Sonic from the chopping block in order to boost Chevrolet's overall MPG average for their vehicles. While the Spark might squeak a little better mileage, the thinking might be you get more 'bang for your buck' with the Sonic. Who knows? Maybe a diesel might be offered as a future option?

--> And maybe... just maybe the Next Generation Sonic will be 100% Electric! I mean, when you think about it... it's manufactured at the same site where the Bolt is. Who knows why the Sonic 'appears' to be saved (for now). ???

 

[Tormach]

Yes, hopefully this is a good sign that the Sonic will survive and we will see the 2nd Gen version in 2020/2021. A sport model, standard and hybrid or EV versions. Would be a great way to absorb the canceled Volt while maintaining competition for the Prius and other hybrids.

A big plus would be to offer it with awd with both auto and manual (would def draw people to it)

Look at Toyota with the new 2019 2.0l CVT or 6MT hatchback Corolla.

Have to say the 1.5t in the Cruze is nice but I am still iffy on it and like motors that have the integrated exhaust manifold in the head.

Sent from my moto z3 using Tapatalk

 

[dannyg]

There's one other thing about the Chevy Sonic that could help after the other said models are no longer available.

You have a choice between either a Hatchback or a Sedan. You don't get that with the Chevy Spark. If GM does pull the plug on the Spark, the Chevrolet Sonic will once again be the lowest, entry-level GM production car for the U.S. market like it was back when it was introduced in the 2012 MY.

Edited:
It also just occurred to me that maybe the CAFE Fuel Standards might have saved the Chevy Sonic from the chopping block in order to boost Chevrolet's overall MPG average for their vehicles. While the Spark might squeak a little better mileage, the thinking might be you get more 'bang for your buck' with the Sonic. Who knows? Maybe a diesel might be offered as a future option?

--> And maybe... just maybe the Next Generation Sonic will be 100% Electric! I mean, when you think about it... it's manufactured at the same site where the Bolt is. Who knows why the Sonic 'appears' to be saved (for now). ???

EV Sonic! The Bolt is pretty close to the same size as the Sonic though. Not sure if they'll have two EVs so close in size. To me I'd prefer a cheap hybrid Sonic using tech from the Volt (which has been dropped so I guess that won't happen). Lastly, diesel. The 1.6T diesel in the Sonic would have plenty of torque and excellent MPG. Stick shift option of course!

 

[SuperFudd]

It looks to me that 2019 is the last year for the Sonic as we know it and the 2020 "Sonic" will get mixed reviews at best by us.

 

[dannyg]

Turns out GM has an interesting new 3cyl 1.3T (about 150hp) in Asia these days, would make an interesting choice for an updated Sonic:

2019 Chevy Malibu Gets New 1.3L Turbo 3-Cylinder Engine | GM Authority

Plus a 200hp performance option of course...7 speed manual like Vette...hey I can dream!

 

[JTee2017]

Turns out GM has an interesting new 3cyl 1.3T (about 150hp) in Asia these days, would make an interesting choice for an updated Sonic:

2019 Chevy Malibu Gets New 1.3L Turbo 3-Cylinder Engine | GM Authority

Plus a 200hp performance option of course...7 speed manual like Vette...hey I can dream!

*sigh* - - It DOES sound great. Well, as long as that 1.3L engine can get those power figures on regular gas. The draw back of the 2.0L is "recommended premium."
Maybe there will be some newer tech added to some of the smaller I-4 engines like the sliding cam shaft variable lift feature in the new turbo 2.7L Chevy truck engine.
I would like to see a Sonic the same size as we have now. . updated but with at least 153 HP for a base engine, no CVT and can use regular gasoline.
And .. manual transmission available in all trims. The 2.0L turbo needs to be an option on any new Sonic IMHO .. . .
Come on GM. . . . do it . . . .
:banana:opcorn:

 

[Nataphen]

Just to put this out there, any performance oriented turbo motor should be running on premium fuel. Yeah, I know there are cars like the Focus and Fiesta ST that can run on 87, but all you have to do is datalog a little to see that it’s not such a great idea. Especially if you like to drive aggressively.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[JTee2017]

FYI . . I did data logging on my 1.8L and it turns back timing with 87 octane. So I run 91 or 93 octane even for my 1.8L. Performance is better on it as well, but you must run about 2 tanks through to let the ECM tables adjust to no retard on the premium fuel. Many people try a few gallons or just one tank of premium and say it makes no difference. I usually only fill up 10 gallons so a few more $ a tank full.

However, when many people are buying an economy compact or subcompact car, they balk when they see it will need premium fuel.

 

[Nataphen]

Isn’t the 1.8L a non-turbo? It’s pretty crazy that 87 is that bad, even for it.

My 1.4 Sonic was seeing a ton of knock even with 93 octane in normal driving. I started running it on E50. No more knock.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[JTee2017]

Isn’t the 1.8L a non-turbo? It’s pretty crazy that 87 is that bad, even for it.

My 1.4 Sonic was seeing a ton of knock even with 93 octane in normal driving. I started running it on E50. No more knock.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yes. . the 1.8L is non turbo. But timing still gets pulled under hard load or spirited acceleration.
I got the idea of trying premium 91 or 93 octane from the Aussey Barina website where specs, for the smaller also non turbo 1.6L, says that PULP (Premium Unleaded Petrol) can give slightly better performance. With my OBD II set for data logging I could see the timing getting pulled with E87. It doesn't with 91 or 91 premium.
Note. . it does take at least 2 full tanks of premium before you will see any difference.

 

[JTee2017]

Isn’t the 1.8L a non-turbo? It’s pretty crazy that 87 is that bad, even for it.

My 1.4 Sonic was seeing a ton of knock even with 93 octane in normal driving. I started running it on E50. No more knock.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yes. . the 1.8L is non turbo. But timing still gets pulled under hard load or spirited acceleration.
I got the idea of trying premium 91 or 93 octane from the Aussey Barina website where specs, for the smaller also non turbo 1.6L, says that PULP (Premium Unleaded Petrol) can give slightly better performance. With my OBD II set for data logging I could see the timing getting pulled with E87. It doesn't with 91 or 91 premium.
Note. . it does take at least 2 full tanks of premium before you will see any difference.
It isn't a huge difference, but noticeable and the engine pulls better and gets up to the 3500 to 4200 RPM sweet spot more smoothly and quicker. The 1.8L, in spite of what many believe, comes alive starting at +3,500 RPM even with an automatic. Using Manual Shift Mode especially is then fun.

 

[dannyg]

Yes. . the 1.8L is non turbo. But timing still gets pulled under hard load or spirited acceleration.
I got the idea of trying premium 91 or 93 octane from the Aussey Barina website where specs, for the smaller also non turbo 1.6L, says that PULP (Premium Unleaded Petrol) can give slightly better performance. With my OBD II set for data logging I could see the timing getting pulled with E87. It doesn't with 91 or 91 premium.
Note. . it does take at least 2 full tanks of premium before you will see any difference.
It isn't a huge difference, but noticeable and the engine pulls better and gets up to the 3500 to 4200 RPM sweet spot more smoothly and quicker. The 1.8L, in spite of what many believe, comes alive starting at +3,500 RPM even with an automatic. Using Manual Shift Mode especially is then fun.

I'm not sure my "butt dyno" can detect much difference between running 87 or 93 with the 1.8L. I tried it with three straight fillups, possibly a tad "smoother" but I'd say not worth the $$. No noticeable effect on MPG, 0.5MPG if even that. At the time I was doing a +50mi/day commute so I was able to make a direct comparison (same route, same speeds, etc.). Thank goodness I don't have to do that any more!

Lots of people as you know run 87 with their 1.8L with no issues, myself included. But it's your money, and it certainly can't hurt, so go for it!