Agreed completely Kingfrog. Its sometimes the little things that annoy me. Because if they cut corners on something so insignificant as door lock knobs where else are they cutting corners that you can't see. Its all about perceived quality. Thats why I like German cars. My GTI feels like a car costing twice as much. The look and feel of them is perfect even if the reliability isn't there but I don't think their reliability problems are really for lack of trying, however VW really has to improve their service reputation. Thats where they really falter, though my local VW dealer service dept has been really good to me, including giving me loaners when my car was in for service.

 

Kingfrog....

This is absolutely NOT TRUE......in regard to the lowest bidder. This is the area of employment that I retired from.

I can tell you the Japanese, like the Americans, use the LOWEST vendor. The REAL DIFFERENCE is in the engineering drawings and specifications for a part, that is sent to the proposed suppliers for price quotes. The Japanese and German engineering groups are very specific directed. Americans are not.

Your example.....$1.00 more for a part to last longer....is correct but a little misleading. That $1.00 difference for longevity is NOT the responsibility of the supplier. It is the RESPONSIBILITY of the REQUESTER (or auto company is this example) to design/engineer/spec. that into the quote (and I have seen this many, many times). Simple example......a part is specified to be made from 301 stainless steel. It is not the suppliers responsibility to produce the part from 304 stainless, to give it better wear or longevity....it is the requesters. It would be nice if the supplier advised he could make the part, for the same price or increase the longevity for a penny or two in cost. But, that would seldom happen (from American suppiers...but was offered many times by foreign suppliers....and some times accepted).

I learned this when submitting engineering items for quotes internationally. I ALWAYS received calls from the Asians & Germans for explanations or questions in regard to the drawings/specs. This is over simplifying but..like the example of glued vs threaded door lock knobs....which was referred to the requesting engineer. Many times the responsible engineer couldn't answer the question without doing research. Many times, the drawings were incorrect....for the proposed part and were corrected by our Japanese counterparts (with a "comment by" the requesting engineer).

American suppliers requested additional information...seldom. With one or two exceptions, I never had a request for a drawing change because of something incorrect. They just created the sample part and we may have found the error, at it's submission.

You are correct, based on my exposure to the foreign engineering community, that they do hold their suppliers to a higher standard. In many instances it is an HONOR "thing". Many instances, if the faulty part was caused by the supplier, he will eat the costs of the correction. AND, DEPENDING ON THE SEVERITY OF THE CORRECTION, the supplier will NEVER supply that auto manufacturer with another part.

Now, I need to say these reflections are based on my experiences which ended several years ago. Changes by GM, were being made at that time, to adopt a different way of thinking. I would suggest that way of thinking is still continued, based on the increased quality of GM vehicles.

But, to understand this in entirety, you need to work for a company as large, as bureaucratic, as political, as protecting.....as GM. IT takes awhile to turn a large ship around.

 

That makes a lot of sense

Thank you for that correction and education. I am always appreciative when some corrects misconceptions I have held for years.

 

I drove two 2.2 automatics before I test drove the one I bought. The one I bought ran much stronger than the previous two, have no idea why, maybe mine is a factory freak, an oddity. Who knows. I came out of a 1995 (LT1) Vette that ran mid 13's (on Firestone Firehawks... they don't hook on launch that great, but their lateral grip was good), I'm only mentioning that for street cred on being able to discern strong acceleration. Some people I'm sure that have an HHR never had a fast car to refer to as reference as to what feels fast... they might have had another economy type car and the HHR feels pretty fast to them. That's okay. All I'm saying is my 2.2 seems to run strong...for a 2.2. My HHR is still far from fast as far as what I use as a reference for fast. I'm sure there are people coming out of, or with, cars that run 10's and 11's that would scoff at the 13's my former car ran and would say I don't know "fast." Where my HHR feels a bit sluggish is when cruising around 35 - 40 mph in OD with the torque converter locked down, you go to give it a little pedal it just kind of sits there until you give it some extra foot, mainly because of the programming I think keeps the tc locked as long as possible for fuel economy, plus the whole electronic drive-by-wire throttle means the ECU has the final say no matter how your foot moves. The 2.4 is a better engine though by a good measure, especially if you want to mod for more pull later on-- the 2.4 uses a different ECU which as of right now has much broader support by tuners, i.e. the 2.4's ECU setup is more tuner friendly, or so I am told. Plus the 2.4 as you know has VVT, the same drive-by-wire throttle as the 2.2, plus high pressure injectors which will have more capacity. If I had it to do over yes I would probably spend the extra $650 (2007 model yr) and get the 2.4, but all the in-stock 2.4 HHR's were bloated up with options I didn't want to pay for and this 1LT 2.2 I got sat long enough in inventory (see sig) that I got a pretty tight deal on it.

 

if chevy offered a few different versions for 2008-9...this is what i would really like to see: the turbo 4 with all wheel drive and/or a small v6 with about 190 horses and all wheel drive. The reason i mention AWD is becuase it would be great for all weather traction and hopefully no front wheel torque steer. So imagine the chevy hhr with awd, turbo 4 0r small 6 cyl....and a much nicer interior! eventually it will happen as general motors has just about completely revamped all their vehicles inside and out....and chrysler upgraded the PT cruiser over the years to where its a pretty nice little car for the money. By the way..i read somewhere that GM has sold about 100,000 HHR's in the usa. Here in canada..its the cobalt thats a bigger seller, only few hhr's ON THE STREETS OF VANCOUVER, canada. By the way...anyone ever drive the front wheel drive cobalt supercharged version? how is the torque steer in that car? Anyone drive the rear wheel drive pontiac solistice with the turbo 4? good motor? Everyone have a great night!

 

All I know is the wife's Spyder feels like a Corvette after driving the HHR. And it's the GS...

So the HHR has paid off handsomely indirectly. Really the 2.2 is probably fine, I cannot imagine anyone buying this car for race or accelertion performance.

 

Thats something I've noticed on here. I saw a post in forum on this site where someone claims they raced a Mustang GT and kept up with him almost the entire time. I've seen other similar posts on HHR forums making outlandish claims like that. To even begin to assume the 2.2 or the 2.4 can keep up with a stock Mustang shows a lack of understanding of cars and their drivers. Obviously the guy in the GT was not trying or he would have raped the HHR. Same thing goes for my GTI. I would never take on a Mustang GT in a straight heads up race because I know I'd get my ass handed to me. I'm realistic. Hell I would not race a new Chevy Cobalt SS because he would likely whip my ass. My 2001 GTI is only 150HP and thats with the turbo. Its about an 8.5 second car to 60 with its auto, stick would be about a half second quicker but of course depending on the driver. 2002 to 2005 ones have 180 with the same motor and can pull off mid 6 second runs to 60 with a stick, again depending on the driver. The current generation with the new 2 liter turbo is rated at 200hp

 

I'm not so sure a 6 cylinder is a great idea for the HHR. I think it takes away the economical factor. The turbo 4 is the best choice. Still reasonable on gas but with performance to boot and without the added weight of a 6. I understand that since we VW guys feel the VR6 GTI while a bit smoother than the 4 suffers from an heavy front end making for less balanced handling.

 

Yeah, but that VR6 is a neat engine. I think that's one of the things VW did right.

In some respects, I think it would have been nice to have the HHR built on the Epsilon platform with the Malibu/G6/Aura/Saab 9.3. A little bigger, V6 options, and pretty much the same economy. I think it probably would have been competing too much with the Equinox so they just didn't do it.

 

The HHR was never designed to be a "performance" car. The SSR failed because it was too expensive. I don't think GM wanted to make the same mistake twice.

The HHR is a, ECONOBOX and is sold that way. I bought it because it had MORE room then what I was looking at AND more importantly is economical to drive and certainly to buy fully equipt second hand. The look is nice too but it's strong point for me. I traded a 2003 Explorer which had more room but not THAT much more.

I just could not find another car equipt this way, with the fuel economy, small garage foot print, cargo space, low mileage and yes style for the money I paid

It is purely bang for the buck for me. If I wanted to spend $18,000- $20,000 on a car the HHR would not have been in the running. IN fact I was not even looking for HHRs when I stumbled upon it at A Chrysler Dealership while test driving a Caliber for the hell of it.

My short list was Scion, Toyota Matrix, Pontiac Vibe, KIA Sportage, and the Versys. None of them could be had locally for less than $14k loaded with only 11k miles. Would have had to buy new for another few thousand. When you pay cash another few thousand is a lot.
I like loaded cars, that have everything, although What it looks like on the outside does not hold a lot of weight with me. Loaded cars are usually better in areas that matter besides chrome. I will never buy a car just because of the way it looks to others. (See prior choices LOL)

With On Star I don't need a GPS and its fun to talk to those people. XM Radio has turned out to be a nice addition. The Stereo System is GREAT.
Never had remote Start, ALL the air bags are nice. The 2.4 is worthy.......Its a good deal.