Making a car "cheap' does not equate to "crap". 15 inch rims with taller sidewall tires would give much better ride. Before you say I dont know that, YES I DO. Had a 03 Cavalier with 16s and when I changed to 15 with slightly taller tire, the difference was amazing. Bumps were less harsh, ride was smoother and road noise went down by half.
Before you say anything about handling,....how many of you road race with your HHR??? HMMM?? Also there is zero noise isolation material, every noise is amplified by vibrating sheetmetal.
The wheel bearings are self destructive, its well documented here. So are the crappy sway bar end links and bushings.
Like I said before, I love my car but am really pissed that GM is still the crap that almost sank the company. My next new vehicle will be a Ford. At least they didnt kiss Obammy's arse.

 

sorry Im gonna keep my baby, just pissed at GM. I will beef up everything and make her better than GM ever could.

 

I intend to take care of her, just tired of GM skimping on quality. I expect parts to break with normal wear and tear not from poor design. And that is what we have , poor design. Those engineers at GM know when a part is crap, they just figure on it breaking after warranty.

 

The market has completely gone away from 15" rims. I own an '82 Datsun 280ZX and a '91 Saab 900 that wear 15s. I tried to get used tires for them and it was nearly impossible, as the switch has been on for years to 16s, and now 17s and 18s. This isn't a function of GM putting those rims on your car - it is what the public wants and demands.

Am looking at a new 2012 Beetle and it comes standard with 17s and the option is for 18s at a higher price. My Solara has 17s, and the list goes on and on. And, boy would our HHRs look stupid with 15s in my opinion. (so thought GM and the public as well)

No question the brakes (rotors) have been a pain for some of us, and wheel bearings as well, but other than that - what is to complain about? The 2.2 and 2.4 are solid engines, the trannys have held up well, the rear-end - no complaints. So, it seems we've got a few "little" things that aren't perfect. Buy a Mercedes or a Jaguar and pay $50 grand and have it live in the shop. Now, that would get me pissed.

I didn't quite get the jist of "how many of us road-race or whatever", but if that was the purpose of buying a HHR LT, you went down the wrong road. Our HHRs are nice cars designed for a market of people needing some storage, maybe a retro look and not "cookie-cutter", able to carry a spouse and a couple of kids, good gas mileage, etc. Perhaps the SS was a nitch market for them, but I sort of questioned that at the time.

I had my car up on a lift the other day and couldn't believe the undercarriage. Not a speck of rust - remember the 70s? My father's '73 LTD - the bumper rusted right off.
I think they missed a couple of things, but if you read posts from our HHR forum, the positives far outweigh the negatives.

 

X 2 ^^

 

Well this thread answers my ?? about my new buy, as did my mechanic, when after a test ride he only was concern about a slight clunking in the rear. I can live with the rest while getting looks...not many panels, which aren't work vehicles here...and cranking up the tunes!

See you down the road

 

and when was the last decade that you saw a new car come off the assembly line with a 15" wheel? GM designs cars for the masses, not the exceptions. This is also why most sports cars, from all manufacturers, leave a lot on the table in the handling department. People that want the extreme handling are only a small segment of the buying public. If GM built cars with enough options to perfectly please every buyer, they would definitely be out of business, as well as all aftermarket companies.again, cheaper car gets less of that type of stuff. I almost feel bad for you, because you expected much more out of the HHR, in this area. As a plus for the HHR though, how many cheaper cars have you ever seen that had all the isolation matting between the engine compartment and the interior, like the HHR does?

Go drive a Focus (same market) and see how it compares to a Cobalt (your HHR). I'm sure you won't be singing Ford's praise for vibration, comfort, quality, etc, etc, after that

I just don't understand the problem. When you buy a car, you test drive it so all the "noise and vibration" is already a known entity before you make an offer.

To be honest I bought my HHR brand new in 2009. When I bought it, I went in with the thought of it being my bad weather beater car (my other cars don't see any foul weather). I figured where else could I get a new car so cheap ($20k), that still had a little personality and still had a dependable drivetrain that this came with. Before the HHR, I don't think I'd paid such a low price for a new car in over 10 years. I've owned this car for just over 2 years now, and if it dies tomorrow it already owes me nothing because of all the money it has saved me in that time, opposed to what another car's costs would have been in the same amount of time

 

Much has been said about the balance of the price-quality.
Producer, able to find a middle ground, condemning yourself for success.
I think GM has done this (at least - came close) in their model HHR. Shortcomings exist, but not many and they (very important!) are inexpensive to repair.
The success of the vehicle is confirmed attention from American car rental companies. These guys know how to count money. I'm sure a lot of small US businesses use the HHR in their commercial traffic.

At the same time I am respectful to the feelings of the owner, dissatisfied with the quality of HHR. HHR - a real beauty, it is impossible not to love. But the human heart comes in the gloom on the understanding that the object of his love is not perfect and needs some indulgence.

 

I have never complained about the EcoTec engine, it is by far one of the best 4 bangers GM ever made.
As for the "road race", my point was, sure 16's with low profiles handle better but they ride like crap. Period. Its like the argument I have with people all the time about the Mustang. People gripe about it no having IRS in it. Why?? No need for it. The live axle has been around for years and is solid as a rock and dirt cheap. Why put in an IRS and add $3k to the car, who NEEDS an IRS anyway?? Most people drive it back and forth to worth, not in the Indy 500. So, the NEED for 16 and rubber band tires is crap. If you are gonna use a 16 but taller tires on the darn thing so it will ride decently. AND!! I recently read an article in Car and Driver where they did several tests. 14 inch rims and tall tires and much less rolling resistance and got better mileage than 16 17 and 18 inch rims with low profiles.
Brakes and rotors are crap on all cars now days. But the worst offender is the puny wheel bearings. small diameter needle bearings cant hold up to the load that the old cars did with the old style bearings. They are crap.
My point is , GM always has and still does cut corners in the wrong places. My God Father was an Engineer at GM in Indiana for years. I heard some really bad stories from him. They knowingly put crap out the doors in the 80's and 90's. And That is what brought them down.
I love my HHR , I hate GM. Especially after the bailout. Never buy another UAW piece of crap.

 

...