Thank you, Missileman. I can imagine the oil collecting in those horizontal channels for visibility.
I wouldn’t like the turbocharger either. I don’t like them in general, but a super charger might be a different thing for me. I used to think about trying to make my own electric super charger.
I really don’t think the HHR needs a turbo. They probably had it because there was a PT Cruiser Turbo. The HHR may look like a mini truck (styling was inspired by a fifties Suburban), but it is just a Cobalt wagon with retro styling. A V6 would make no more sense here than in a Matrix or Impreza. The retro-truck styling is just for fun. It’s still a small economy car at heart.
The HHR is certainly no smaller than my V6 powered Pontiac G6. Having the V6 instead of the L4 provides a quiet ride that will make interstate driving a breeze, plus provides good mileage because it is not working hard at all.
The HHR, alas, was not a success. It was intended to compete with the PT Cruiser, but by the time it came out the PT Cruiser was no longer popular.
Just like GM with some new vehicles; a day late and a dollar short.
The Mustang went retro in 2005, and Chevy didn’t bring the Camaro back until 5 years later, after the mustang got a redesign and already had a foothold in the retro muscle car look. Even Dodge beat them to the punch with the new Challenger in 08.
oxymoron…
The Camaro had been outselling the Mustang some months, so being late to that party may not have hurt too much. The Camaro is certainly the more striking design, remarkably close to the Camaro show car that made the auto show rounds a couple of years before production. People were all over those show cars, in a way I’ve never seen. Too bad the chopped roofline gives lousy visibility through those gunslit windows. I also think the retro dash looks cheap and tacky, but that is a problem many Mustangs have shared.
I’m sure the HHR would have been nicer to drive with a V-6, but it was based on an inexpensive economy car and was priced accordingly. I’m sure they could have squeezed a six in, but the engine compartment was designed for a four. The V-6 would have also made it a lot more expensive and it was already a failure as a cheap car. The PT Cruiser had some fancy versions when it was trendy, but the HHR never had that chance. A shame, as it was better in many ways, if not as striking.
It also fo9llowed the PT Cruiser by 5 years, a lifetime in a world of automotive design. The PT Cruiser had already milked that retro theme by the time the HHR was released. It was stale before it hit the showrooms.
This is going to upset some GMaholics, but I’m going to state it anyway. Chevy is no longer a design leader in the industry. They’re a follower. They’re highly “risk-averse”, choosing to offer Chevrolet versions of trends started by other manufacturers, including Chrysler. But there’s a pretty well established maxim in marketing that the first one into a market segment gets the bulk of the benefit. I believe that GM pays dearly for that lack of courage. I think that’s what happened with the HHR. Had the HHR come out before the PT Cruiser, I think it would have done much, much better.
Let the dart-throwing begin. That’s my opinion and I’m stickin’ to it.
all I hear is crickets mountainbike, gm lost a lot of support in recent years
I believe we did innovation a great disservice when we bailed them out. can you imagine if they had been allowed to fail and had been sold to the highest bidder. say bill gates or warren buffet had arranged to take control. what great possibilities that would have opened. or if they had backed elon musk.
Ii agree, wes. I don’t believe anybody really benefitted from the bailout. Except perhaps specific politicians trying to influence voters. With GM, it’s just business as usual. Only by allowing them to sink or swim on their own would their have been real change.
But we’ve done that thread already.
is that called beating a dead horse or tenderizing red meat?
I think I’ll just let it go before anybody gets upset.
I’m not upset. Like I said, I’ve only owned one Chev and that was a Corvair. Otherwise its been Olds, Buicks, Pontiacs. I just can’t hardly stand to think of having a Chev name plate on a car in my garage. I think they made a big mistake dumping Olds and Pontiac for the cheapo Chevs. Likewise for Caddy. I just can’t own one. So what’s left for someone like me? Buick? So I don’t feel as loyal as I used to, kinda like they left me, I didn’t leave them, but I do believe the bailout was necessary for the country. OK GM, either give me a blank nameplate that no one knows what it is, or give me an Olds with a little upgraded interior and some sheet metal bent a little better and I’ll be happy.
I’m pretty sure Chevy knew the HHR was irrelevant before they introduced it, as PT Cruiser sales were falling sharply. But they’d put a few years into it by then and there was always a chance it would appeal to buyers. It was so similar to the Cobalt mechanically that they could have produced them on the same lines.
I think the bigger shock for Chevy was the complete failure of the SSR convertible sport pickup. It looked great and had no close competition and was being covered favorably by the automotive press. The only big problem was the price. It cost too much for a novelty, without having much cachet. At least it isn’t completely idiotic, unlike that convertible Murano crossover. I’ve seen exactly one of those on the street, and even thst one surprised me. It would be useful for driving parade grand marshalls, but that’s about all.
I can think of a lot of people who would have lost their jobs if not for the bailout who aren’t politicians or lawyers.
I always liked the Corvair, having learned on one and driven my dad’s in HS, and will always believe that it was unfairly maligned. The weaknesses outlined by Ralph Nader were common in cars of that era, and not unique to the Corvair. I’ve always believed that had it not been for “that book” the Corvair could have been a real competitor for the Japanese.
some one would have bought them out. and doing away with the union may have allowed them to expand and lower prices. I m not against unions in theory, but I believe the pendulum has swung to far and that they now ruin companies and education and government.
as far as chevy, I think the el camino would be a better car to fill that niche. perhaps re designed with a shorter bed and a back seat as well as the standard version.
and I miss olds and Pontiac too. my dad had a couple 442 s and his mom had the 88 s . great old cars. if I was ever to get a gm car it would have been an old olds