1963 Buick Electra 225 4dr - 401 Nailhead 47k Miles on 2040-cars

Auto blog

2013 Buick Encore

City, Slicker
We admit it. We have no earthly idea how this whole thing is going to shake out.
Typically, after driving a new car or truck, we come away prepared to hazard a guess as to whether said model has a good chance of being a sales success. We've amassed enough time watching the industry, scrutinizing the competitors, and so on, to make a reasonably educated bet. Yet here we are, days removed from driving the new 2013 Buick Encore, and we still have no bloody idea.

2024 Buick Encore GX Cupholder Mega Test: Will the Nalgene bottle fit?

I recently reviewed the 2024 Buick Encore GX in its new Avenir trim, appreciating the updates from its mid-cycle refresh and assessing its comfortable driving style. What I didn't dive into, however, were the cupholders. Specifically, I wanted to know if it could accommodate in a convenient location what is my favorite hydration facilitator, a 32-ounce Nalgene water bottle. This, like other oversized water bottles, often can't find a cupholder that will fit it. Its a particularly American problem (we're more obsessed with cupholders than other markets), so can this American budget-luxury crossover satisfy my own obsession with this big, dumb bottle? Let's find out. Ideally, we could put it in the front cupholders. Few vehicles' cupholders are big enough, though, with the Chrysler Pacifica, Lexus GX and Toyota 4Runner being notable exceptions. We can't add the Encore to that list, unfortunately. The cupholders are far too small. Usually, the second best option, if possible, is to put it in the front door pocket. Voila! It fits. No Nalgene rolling around on the front passenger seat in this Buick. But what about in back? The center armrest in the Encore GX is a fine place to rest one's elbow, but what about a big-ass bottle of water? Alas, the rear cupholders are equally dinky as the ones up front, which is often the case. The last-gen Toyota Tundra was an exception, where the rear cupholders were bigger than those up front which is super weird to me. I'mm looking forward to see what's what with the new Tundra. The rear door pockets are much smaller than those up front. This does not look promising. It's just big enough that I can wedge the bottom of the bottle inside, but not big enough to keep it there when the car is in motion. Sorry backseaters, you'd better settle for your lesser bottles, suckers. I had almost overlooked this little cubby in between the front cupholders and center console armrest. It's an odd shape, but with some luck, the Nalgene will fit. That's the ticket! This is even better than putting it in the door. It's not the most secure fit, but it's not so huge a space that the bottle knocks around and falls over with every input to the steering wheel or pedals. This ended up being where I put the Nalgene every time I drove the Encore GX, and, subsequently, I remained content and adequately hydrated. And the cupholders remained open for alternative beverages. Interested in more than just the cupholders?

Lexus tops JD Power Vehicle Dependability Study again, Buick bests Toyota

It shouldn't surprise anyone, but Lexus has once again taken the top spot in JD Power's Vehicle Dependability Study. That'd be the Japanese luxury brand's fourth straight year at the top of table. The big news, though, is the rise of Buick. General Motor's near-premium brand beat out Toyota to take second place, with 110 problems per 100 vehicles compared to Toyota's 111 problems. Lexus owners only reported 89 problems per 100 vehicles. Besides Buick's three-position jump, Scion enjoyed a major improvement, jumping 13 positions from 2014. Ram and Mitsubishi made big gains, as well, moving up 11 and 10 positions, respectively. In terms of individual segments, GM and Toyota both excelled, taking home seven segment awards each. The study wasn't good news for all involved, though. A number of popular automakers finished below the industry average of 147 problems per 100 vehicles, including Subaru, (157PP100), Volkswagen (165PP100), Ford/Hyundai (188PP100 each) and Mini (193PP100). The biggest losers (by a tremendous margin, we might add) were Land Rover and Fiat, recording 258 and 273 problems per 100 vehicles. The next closest brand was Jeep, with 197PP100. While the Vehicle Dependability Study uses the same measurement system as the Initial Quality Survey, the two metrics analyze very different things. The VDS looks at problems experienced by original owners of model year 2012 vehicles over the past 12 months, while the oft-quoted IQS focuses on problems in the first 90 days of new-vehicle ownership. Like the IQS, though, the VDS has a rather broad definition of what a problem is. Because of that, a low score from JD Power is no guarantee of extreme unreliability, so much as just poor design. In this most recent study, the two most reported problems focused on Bluetooth connectivity and the voice-command systems. The former leaves plenty of room for user error due to poor design (particularly true of the Bluetooth systems on the low-scoring Fords, Volkswagens and Subarus), while the second is something JD Power has already confirmed as being universally terrible. That makes means that while these studies are important, they shouldn't be taken as gospel when it comes to automotive reliability. News Source: JD PowerImage Credit: Copyright 2015 Jeremy Korzeniewski / AOL Buick Fiat Ford GM Hyundai Jeep Land Rover Lexus MINI Mitsubishi RAM Scion Subaru Toyota Volkswagen Auto Repair Ownership study