EUR 24,780JPY 3,047,940BGN 48,465CZK 638,110DKK 185,084GBP 21,490HUF 8,034,419PLN 106,705RON 117,990SEK 267,104CHF 28,019ISK 3,414,684NOK 242,819HRK 183,652RUB 1,814,154TRY 167,840AUD 40,049BRL 110,873CAD 37,460CNY 191,430HKD 218,342IDR 401,414,194ILS 99,484INR 1,958,549KRW 33,036,696MXN 533,211MYR 116,015NZD 42,265PHP 1,459,492SGD 38,077THB 876,270ZAR 395,851
World War II brought to Rüsselsheim the only year in the history of Opel – 1945 – in which it produced fewer vehicles since that first Lutzmann-authored Opel was made in 1899. Before the conflict broke out, the Adam Opel AG had established itself as the largest motor vehicle manufacturer in Europe. The combination of Opel know-how with GM resources had produced outstanding results. In spite of stifling red tape, the economic atmosphere in Germany in the 1930s had powerfully fertilised the growth of this and other auto companies, but in the case of Opel, at least, the expansion of this industrial machine clearly was not directed in any way toward military objectives.
The range has a high level standard specification compared to similar vehicles from other manufacturers, including a lane departure warning system, cruise control, speed limiter, trip computer (instant MPG, average MPG, average speed, stop watch and trip computer), tyre pressure monitoring system, electronic stability program and traction control, front fog lamps and cornering lamps.
All figures quoted relate to the EU base model with standard equipment. Fuel consumption and CO2 emissions are determined according to regulations R (EC) No. 715/2007 and R (EC) No. 692/2008, taking into consideration the vehicle weight in running order, as specified. Additional equipment and options may lead to higher results than stated. The figures do not relate to a specific vehicle and are not part of an offer. They are provided only for the purpose of comparison between different vehicles but may differ from the actual fuel consumption and Co2 achieved in real-life driving conditions which are influenced by driving style and operating conditions. Additional equipment may increase the weight of the vehicle when empty and in some cases the permissible axle weights as well as the permissible total weight and reduce the permissible towing weights. This may lead to a reduction in top speed and increased acceleration time. Driving performance figures assume a 75 kg driver plus a 125 kg load. 2 H gas in m3/100 km.
The handling and ride are basically fine, but are all but invisible from the point of view of a keen driver. The Crossland is tidy through corners, with reasonable steering weight but no actual feedback, and the body tilts over only to a reasonable angle. The ride is a touch stiff in its damping, especially around town (which is disappointing, given that any Crossland will probably spend most of its life in town) but it does improve on the open road. Refinement is only average though with quite a bit of wind and road noise. There’s little point in having Opel’s phone-based OnStar concierge service fitted if you can’t hear what the operator is saying . . .
the Chevy Chevette, while a MUCH better car than the Vega was at the time, and even now, that’s not saying a whole lot, other than it WAS infinitely more durable and longer lasting and reliable than the Vega, though by ’76, the Vega was decent enough, but the damage was done. I know as my Mom drove a ’76 Vega from roughly 78-83 with the only major thing being the carb being rebuilt around 1980. The Chevette was basically a redesigned Kadett/Vauxhaul Chevette.