HHR Replacement/ Chevy Orlando
09-10-2008, 06:00 PM
#31
Senior Member
Join Date: 10-02-2005
Location: VA
Posts: 1,245
I don't get why both Chevy and Chrysler both seem to think that the HHR and the PT can't evolve a bit like every other model car in the world without being totally replaced. Other than very minor changes, the PT has been the same car since day one, aside from the convertible model. Other than the SS, which really isn't that different either, the HHR is the same. Why can't the styling of these retro looking cars be gradually, subtly tinkered with every couple/few years, so they are still their own distinctive type of car, where you say, "It looks a bit different now, but yeah, that's an HHR," just like you can do with, say, a Mustang, or Corvette, or even a Civic? I don't understand why it's an all or nothing deal with these two cars. The old cars they're based on didn't overnight turn into something totally different; surely there are lots of classic design elements that can serve as inspiration to gently evolve the HHR and keep it as a model. Heck, the HHR itself is a perfect example of what the PT could have evolved into if Chrysler had seen the car as changable, and if the designer of both cars' bodies had kept his services with Chrysler.
Or am I just nuts? (Also a completely possible thing...)
Or am I just nuts? (Also a completely possible thing...)
Unfortunately, for both GM and Chrysler, their corporate cultures are F'ng STUPID!!
Not an opinion here.... Their bottom line financials are living proof. 
09-10-2008, 06:10 PM
#32
Senior Member
Join Date: 05-26-2007
Location: ...
Posts: 1,554
09-10-2008, 06:12 PM
#33
Senior Member
Join Date: 03-28-2008
Location: Oshawa
Posts: 1,115
Still don't see those cup holder thingies again.
Maybe GM thinks that cup holders are part of the "No cell phone while driving laws". When will they ever learn.
Give us cup holders that are convenient...
Maybe GM thinks that cup holders are part of the "No cell phone while driving laws". When will they ever learn. Give us cup holders that are convenient...
09-10-2008, 06:42 PM
#34
Senior Member
Join Date: 03-08-2008
Location: United States of Texas
Posts: 505
Man! That thing is UGLY!
Looks like a cross between an Aztec, Vibe, Equinox and the old Volkswagon Thing. All of which are hideously ugly and I would not have anything to do with the POS.
I bought the HHR because I like the classic style stying and good gas mileage. I would prefer it to be rear wheel drive but it is what it is. It still looks good and gets good gas mileage.
I also believe that Chevy is making a big mistake in making the Impala, Nova, Cobalt and all other cars look so similar. I do not want a generic, front wheel drive car. You get to choose your color and size but they all look the same...............
Chevy dropping the Camaro was absolutly sheer stupidity. Probably millions of people went out and bought the Ford Mustang because it looks good and Chevy did not feel they want to market to that crowd any longer.
Sure, I understand Chevy trying to move certain vehicles but when you kill one of the most popular cars of all time you are making a big mistake.
The kids in High School want the Camaros and Mustangs. Sell them one of them and then later in life they will probably come back and buy the mini-vans and trucks.
When you try to stuff a generic looking car down our throats they will end up losing sales and customers even from life long Chevy people like me. Curly
I bought the HHR because I like the classic style stying and good gas mileage. I would prefer it to be rear wheel drive but it is what it is. It still looks good and gets good gas mileage.
I also believe that Chevy is making a big mistake in making the Impala, Nova, Cobalt and all other cars look so similar. I do not want a generic, front wheel drive car. You get to choose your color and size but they all look the same...............
Chevy dropping the Camaro was absolutly sheer stupidity. Probably millions of people went out and bought the Ford Mustang because it looks good and Chevy did not feel they want to market to that crowd any longer.
Sure, I understand Chevy trying to move certain vehicles but when you kill one of the most popular cars of all time you are making a big mistake.
The kids in High School want the Camaros and Mustangs. Sell them one of them and then later in life they will probably come back and buy the mini-vans and trucks.
When you try to stuff a generic looking car down our throats they will end up losing sales and customers even from life long Chevy people like me. Curly
09-10-2008, 07:20 PM
#35
Senior Member
Join Date: 07-05-2008
Location: Akron Ohio
Posts: 5,464
This thing is not ugly it is just conforming. It will sell but it is just what the HHR is not special.
The HHR is selling at about 100,000 units per year and this thing will 75,000 if it is priced right.
We all here have to consider that we are looking at this from the HHR lover view and the hard truth is not everyone loves a HHR as it is a polarizing design.
There are people who like to be identified by their car and that is us and then there are those who just buy what they can afford and will get them there. That is what the Orlando is all about.
There is nothing wrong with this new model and it will sell ok but I hate to see Chevy give up on having special models that set them appart from a Mazda or Toyota.
What ever GM does we do need a new HHR design by around 2010-13 as this style will have had it's time. I just pray if they do keep the HHR they do not pull a PT and redesing it but still look the same. I think a modern 50's look would be kool.
The HHR is selling at about 100,000 units per year and this thing will 75,000 if it is priced right.
We all here have to consider that we are looking at this from the HHR lover view and the hard truth is not everyone loves a HHR as it is a polarizing design.
There are people who like to be identified by their car and that is us and then there are those who just buy what they can afford and will get them there. That is what the Orlando is all about.
There is nothing wrong with this new model and it will sell ok but I hate to see Chevy give up on having special models that set them appart from a Mazda or Toyota.
What ever GM does we do need a new HHR design by around 2010-13 as this style will have had it's time. I just pray if they do keep the HHR they do not pull a PT and redesing it but still look the same. I think a modern 50's look would be kool.
09-10-2008, 07:29 PM
#36
Senior Member
Join Date: 05-26-2007
Location: ...
Posts: 1,554
I don't know hyperv6, HHR's are flying off dealer lots within days or week of them arriving. Part of it is MPG and the wagon body which allows much practicality. I think a lot of HHR buyers lately are buying for the price, mpg and utility as opposed to the styling.
09-10-2008, 09:33 PM
#37
Senior Member
Join Date: 08-26-2008
Location: Sequim Washington
Posts: 1,488
I don't get why both Chevy and Chrysler both seem to think that the HHR and the PT can't evolve a bit like every other model car in the world without being totally replaced. Other than very minor changes, the PT has been the same car since day one, aside from the convertible model. Other than the SS, which really isn't that different either, the HHR is the same. Why can't the styling of these retro looking cars be gradually, subtly tinkered with every couple/few years, so they are still their own distinctive type of car, where you say, "It looks a bit different now, but yeah, that's an HHR," just like you can do with, say, a Mustang, or Corvette, or even a Civic? I don't understand why it's an all or nothing deal with these two cars. The old cars they're based on didn't overnight turn into something totally different; surely there are lots of classic design elements that can serve as inspiration to gently evolve the HHR and keep it as a model. Heck, the HHR itself is a perfect example of what the PT could have evolved into if Chrysler had seen the car as changable, and if the designer of both cars' bodies had kept his services with Chrysler.
Or am I just nuts? (Also a completely possible thing...)
Or am I just nuts? (Also a completely possible thing...)
The PT will go away at the end of 2009. The spy photos of the 2010 replacement looks like just another SUV. "Geez these guys are dumb"
They both got it right because they built a cargo hauler not a passenger car.
I have thought about it and wondered what could they come up with if they decide not to continue this style platform or one like it.
As far as I can see......Nothing of value.
My vote would be to slightly modify each rig and include some smart fixes they both could use while your at it. These two rigs have been out there long enough now to fiqure out what fixes they should do.
If they get it right, they will have most all current owners, plus totally new buyers drooling to get the new generation vehicles. That should carry them for another 5/7 years
Personally I'm already getting tired of looking at the new crossover look alikes.
Common GM....Show a little more "CLASS"
09-11-2008, 05:02 AM
#38
New Member
Join Date: 04-10-2008
Location: Niagara Falls ,USA
Posts: 10
09-11-2008, 05:58 AM
#39
Senior Member
Join Date: 07-05-2008
Location: Akron Ohio
Posts: 5,464
I looked at one that had a $26K sticker a dealer marked down to $15K and I could buy it because it was too dang ugly. Needless to say it was there for a long time.
No matter how cheap or paractical you make something it has to appeal to someone. With the HHR wile it may not appeal to all it does strike a cord with many.
Other than a new retro styling upgrade in about 3-4 years I would like to see an improvment to the interior along the lines that the Malibu has seen. Imagine a 2LT HHR with a LTZ type interior available.
I like my HHR interior but there are some in the public who want a little more and Chey can offer this as an option.
