That's exactly my experience. I test the brake in park to see if the hard pedal is gone before I start to back up.

 

I guess normally I accidentally have the engine running long enough to get the required pressure. But the other day I was late to pick up my son from the school bus stop and didn't wait at all. It was the first time I got the hard brake pedal with very poor stopping distance. It really was a surprise, and the unexpected extra stopping distance could have caused an accident the intersection half a block from my house. Luckily there were no cars there, as braking distance was far more than expected. At least GM is working on correcting it.

It is a poor design and should not have gone to manufacturing this way. At least GM is working on the correction now. Since it's a known issue, so be sure to let it run for a few extra seconds to be safe until the fix is available. Personally I don't understand why GM has left themselves wide open to so much liability. They know about the issue, and 99% of owners probably aren't on boards like this so don't know about the problem. If the temporary solution is to let the vehicle idle for an extra 30 seconds before driving off, it seems like GM should cover their butts by notifying registered owners of that. Otherwise I can't see how GM would not be liable for an accident caused by this when they've known about it and have not made any attempt to notify registered owners.

 

No, not at all my friend. Your just using common sense.

 

I'll never fit in with the crowd now!

 

LOL, don't feel bad. If you get 36mpg overall city and highway on 87 octane with an avg speed of 37, you'll get branded "undeserving" of an SS. That's about as far outside the crowd as you can get.

 

Speaking of mileage...

 

Many times there are things that come up in production cars that are not found in prototypes.

Everyting from harsh rides on streets that were never found the mule cars never left the test tracks to bouncing headlights. You would be shocked how often they are fixing things right up to the release and well into the first year.

Now on the other hand I am not a lawyer but it is possible that they would be reponsible for anything if they acknowledge any flaw. Once they have a fix they acknowledge the flaw and offer the repair then it is the owners responsibility to respond to the offer.

GM has acknowledged the Antilock system working in place of low vaccume but vaccume seems to be lower than expected.

One thing for sure they did not release this car with a known problem like this and I am sure they are working as quickly as possible to solve it. It is in their own best interest to do so. The loss of one major injury law suit would be enough to motivate them on this.

I have driven enough cars that I have worked on with no brakes that this really does not freak me out too much. To me it iis kind of like driving in snow and just have to adjust for it.

I have flown some wounded birds in and some could be a real hand full.

I had an little old lady [original owner] with a 1960 Catalina 4 door [the size of an aircraft carrier] with a broken engine mount, This is the kind once it breaks the engine flops over and will want to make the car run 60 MPH with out hitting the gas. What made this worse was it has no power steering or power brakes.

 

It is what it is.

GM will modify it eventually.

 

OK XXL, my SS brakes seem fine except at high speeds, where more is probably better. I don't brake too much so maybe i'll experiment to see when i pull away today from my parking spot.

 

My parents are currently in the process of doing the Lemon Law on their 2008 HHR SS. It has the "Brick For A Brake Peddle" problem. They have taken to the deal four or five times. Today they dropped it off for a GM rep. to test drive it. Her final decision was, and I quote, "We can not fix it."

I must add that this forum was very beneficial to their quest for a solution, be it a fix to the problem or another vehicle.

Thank you, I will you posted!