Chevrolet hopes to excite first-time buyers and city residents when the Spark mini car joins the brands small car family next year in the United States and Canada. The Spark is a five-door, four-passenger hatch that is on sale in Chevrolet markets around the world.
For young, urban dwellers, the 2013 Chevrolet Spark can be their key to the city, said Chris Perry, vice president, global Chevrolet marketing and strategy. Sparks vibrant exterior and interior colors make a statement, but it is a practical car, too. Affordable, maneuverable and very fuel-efficient, Spark will be easy to own and easy to drive.
More details about the Spark, the smallest Chevrolet in the U.S. and Canadian lineups, will be unveiled next month at the Los Angeles International Auto Show. The first version of the Spark is being sold in Europe, Korea, India, Mexico, South America and Australia.
The Chevrolet Spark is 14 inches shorter than the recently launched Chevrolet Sonic. Its three feet longer than the Smart Fortwo and four inches longer than the Fiat 500. In the United States and Canada, the Spark will be powered by a 1.2L four-cylinder engine that delivers 83 horsepower (61 kW). The standard transmission is a five-speed manual. An automatic transmission will be available.
The Spark will offer more interior room than other mini cars, and it will be the only car in the segment to provide standard benefits such as a five-year, 100,000-mile powertrain warranty and the safety and security of OnStar.
Available packages include uplevel features such as color touch screen radio; Chevrolet MyLink infotainment connectivity with Pandora and Stitcher internet radio; Bluetooth; exterior enhancements such as chrome accents; heated leatherette seats and alloy wheels.
The Spark was originally seen as the Chevrolet Beat concept at the 2007 New York Auto Show. Show goers and online fans chose the Beat over two other concepts, and it was developed into an updated version of the Spark that will come to the United States and Canada.
Explore further: Study shows forward osmosis desalination not energy efficient