"Originally Posted by Stealth
I live in a large metropolis and a stick isn`t my idea of fun, and when I`m on the freeway, it`s basically flat and straight."


I live in a large metropolian area too, with a drive to work is either 45 or 50 miles. The 45 mile drive is interstate and city roads the 50 mile is country , a little interstate and city.

I'm like the guy in the old Mercedes comercial, I take the longer way because it's fun.

Now that I've had my SS for three day, all I can say is WOW what a fun car to drive with a stick.

Yes it is all what you like, and I'll always pick a stick over an auto every time just for the FUN value.

Like the song says "Love the one your with" Your choice can never be wrong for you.

 

Turbo lag is limited due to design; read below

Twin-Scroll Turbocharger
The Ecotec 2.0L Turbo uses an advanced, electronically controlled turbocharger to increase power. With a turbocharger, exhaust gas leaving the cylinders spins a turbine on one end of the turbo shaft. An impeller at the opposite end of the shaft forces compressed air into the induction system, increasing the amount of oxygen available for the combustion process.

The 2.0L Turbo’s turbocharger applies a unique, twin-scroll design. Each of two scrolls on the turbine is fed by a separate exhaust passage—one from cylinders one and four, the other from cylinders two and three. The twin-scroll design virtually eliminates turbo lag at low engine speed—the time it takes for the impeller to spool up and generate boost pressure—and delivers the throttle response of a high-performance naturally aspirated engine

The turbocharger generates maximum boost of 20 psi. Because direct injection cools the intake process compared to port injection, it allows the 2.0L Turbo to safely operate at higher boost and higher compression (9.2:1) than a conventional turbo engine, increasing both output and efficiency.

There is a lot of technology built in to this little powerhouse. Good Job GM.

 

this leads me to believe that there is definitally going to be a stage kit for the HHR SS. Even if it is all electronic upgrades and nothing mechanical, there is going to be something

 

direct quote from the GMlaunches HHR Launch dealer information FAQ:

"Will you be offering Stage Kits to upgrade the horsepower and torque of the HHR SS at some point?
While we feel 260 hp and 260lb-ft of torque is more than enough for most customers of this vehicle, we are currently evaluating the Stage kit potential for the 2.0 liter turbocharged engine. We have nothing to announce at this point"

In my opinion though, since they already detuned the automatic cars to protect the torque limited auto trans, I can't see why they would do a stage kit on them since they already have to limit the engines power a fair amount below current potential.

 

Only time will tell. A RUMOR that I have also heard from GM regarding the power loss in the automatic is also attributed to economy numbers. As i just said, it is a RUMOR that I heard. But apparently the automatic would not pass the gas milage standards that are necessary for new cars and suvs of the 2008 models year. The manuals would pass but the auto's would not and since trucks and such are important to GM, they needed to have the automatics tuned from the factory for more economy and less power. But computer re programing should fix this. Once again this is a rumor that I have heard and not sure if it is true or not

 

Since fuel economy ratings are made at cruising speeds and around town city driving that is NOT full throttle, there would be no need to reduce full power ratings, because it does not effect fuel economy, unless you reduce the size of the engine to reduce that power. The computer is fully capable of making the best fuel economy at cruise, AND the best full power at full throttle.
Now if the computer reduces boost to protect the fragile automatic, that will not effect economy either, except at full throttle, which isn't where the ratings are taken anyway.
Besides, if fuel economy ratings are so important to GM for the 2008 Truck model year, why are they still making a 2008 12 MPG Trailblazer SS Automatic???

 

Once again, its a RUMOR.....so lets not get all testy over this subject all over again. This is part of the Presidents bill for fuel economy standards. The large SUV and Trucks of GM are not going to be cut, nor can they be made anymore efficent then they already are, henceforth GM has to compenstate for this. Since its an overall average being taken for an entire product line, and the Trailblazers, Silverados, Suburbans, Tahoes, etc. are very very popular, not to mention contribute the most to GM earnings, they are not going to be sacraficed. I know that in the newspapers in my area, they were talking about how the Corvette may not be able to be built as the car it is now due to the economy ratings that it gets and the sheer money that GM would have to pay in fines for not reaching these economy standards, so thinking that GM will alter computer programming in anyway to save fuel economy in the effort to save the vette is not so abstract. There are many different factors attributed to economy numbers. And many differet ways that it can be compensated for. Its an overall averge that is then reduced by 10% for city driving and 22% for highway driving, its not just crusing speeds. There are alot of cars that are said to have "fragile" automatics, I dont see all of them with reduced engine power and torque associated to that directly. The debate of automatics and manuals will continue for the remainder of time, there are positives and negatives to each. It comes down to what you want, and what your going to do with it. If you want an automatic, and more power, you will pay the extra money to do that, plain and simple. I feel that GM knows this, and will provide stage kits accordingly, and if they don't, tuners will do the work that GM won't do and get the numbers up that way. Either way there is room for improvment on both manuals and automatics. Only time will tell where it comes from.

 

We have ALL heard rumors. But you seem to be real defensive and feel a need to strongly support a "rumor"....just an observation from me.

I heard a "rumor" it might be a combination of a few areas........Federal and State emission requirements being one, transmission being another Course it was just a "rumor" . But I heard that before the vehicle was on the road.

 

I am not getting defensive over this issue, this has been a debate that has been raging for sometime now. The truth of the matter is, until so real world experiences come back from owners like us, this is all just talking. There are not hard feelings on this thread, if people think there is, I apologise for that impression. I just like friendly debating . I know ONE thing that we all have in common, we have a passion for the Chevy HHR, and we like talking to others who share that passion hence why we are on this site, everything else in the long run is just preference.

 

Likewise for me. I don't want to be defensive either. This forum is for discussion and sharing of information, and with an engineering background, I feel sometimes compelled to find the facts, and to dispell what is not fact. I'll be the first to say, that all things being equal (the engines power and axle ratios), I am faster with an automatic as far as in drag racing and, well, impromptu street engagements. Thats the facts. However, I do enjoy shifting, and the feel that goes with running thru the gears, and also the fuel economy that goes with stick shifts.
But for the majority of the people reading and deciding on their car choice based on what they read, and knowing that MOST HHR SS buyers are not going to modify their HHR but just drive and enjoy it, I feel they need to know the present facts. I've learned quite a bit on here.
The automatic has armrests, the stick doesn't. I don't like that, but its a fact, and yes, probably fixable with enough money or parts.
Even though the GM Powertrain lists the auto at 250 hp, Chevrolet is the user of that powertrain, programs and installs it in Chevy's vehicle, and is ultimately responsible for it, and for warranty claims on it.
It would have been easier for GM to say that fuel economy concerns caused them to reduce the output of the auto cars, but they stood up and said, hey, we aren't happy with the strength of our automatics when paired with all 260 hp of that engine, so we are going to dial it back a bit for durability concerns. (That is their words). Yes, Tuners can get that back, but how many here want to chance their transmission, AND WARRANTY, for that extra few horses? The Trailblazer SS is indeed dialed back on power to protect the transmission, its called TM, or Torque Mangagement, where they greatly reduce engine power on shifts and low traction events. Yes, tuners can take that out, and the SS's run quite a bit better, but: the TBSS Forums are littered with transmission failures on modified TBSS's.
Fact: Most all road testers commented on the difference on feel between the two cars, so how about we go with that? That is what most people are going to notice and to have when they buy their HHRSS, the car just as it comes. Good with the bad. Choices, lets have informed choices.