Why can't Chevy build a real SS?
Platinum Member
Joined: 05-09-2006
Posts: 6,805
From: "Upland" Mesa, Arizona
My records show that gas was $0.899 a gallon in 1988. I remember the "gas shortage" of the early 70s and gas was about $0.409 a gallon. Regular gas was running around $1.17/gallon in the summer of 1999. Gas was around $1.50 in 2003, at least in Florida.
Where were you living in the 70s where gas was $1.75/gal?
Where were you living in the 70s where gas was $1.75/gal?
I remember gas in AZ in the low to high .30's in the early 70's (just as the gas crunch can in, after Kissenger convinced the Arabs to form OPEC). I had just moved here from Michigan, where it was .25/gal. depending on the brand AND who owned the station. Michigan's large cities...Detroit, for instance.....always had gas wars going. I even remember paying .17/gal for Sinclair at a privately owned station, in the 60's.
Joined: 01-06-2007
Posts: 6
From: SoCal
Come on..... 14.8 seconds at 98.5 mph??? Thats no SS I know and remember.
Even the lowly heavy metal 1969 Nova SS with 375 HP did 13.8@105MPH...........WITH AN AUTOMATIC!!
A 1970 BUICK GS with an Automatic ......... 13.38 @ 105MPH.......Yep heavy ass grandpa's BUICK.
The HHR is MUCH MUCH lighter then those cars and is still a whole second behind and cannot break 100 MPH with a 4 Speed BOX!!!!! NO EXCUSE.
I dont want to even bring up the 5th fastest American muscle car off the showroom floor 1970 Chevy SS Chevelle 450HP 13.1@107MPH. Now THATS an SS.OK I did.
We have been dumbed down into believing the SS is really a muscle car.
Those who have never been in the driver seat of a real muscle car will never know the feeling of driving off a showroom lot pinned back in the seat with a deep rumbling sound that matches the performance..
Oh for the good ole days for those of us that were there,
On the bright side the HHR does match up well with the 50th fastest production muscle car ever made with the at the small 2 seater 1964 289ci 271HP Cobra 4 speed.
Thats not terrible company to be in apparently by todays standards,
Even the lowly heavy metal 1969 Nova SS with 375 HP did 13.8@105MPH...........WITH AN AUTOMATIC!!
A 1970 BUICK GS with an Automatic ......... 13.38 @ 105MPH.......Yep heavy ass grandpa's BUICK.
The HHR is MUCH MUCH lighter then those cars and is still a whole second behind and cannot break 100 MPH with a 4 Speed BOX!!!!! NO EXCUSE.
I dont want to even bring up the 5th fastest American muscle car off the showroom floor 1970 Chevy SS Chevelle 450HP 13.1@107MPH. Now THATS an SS.OK I did.
We have been dumbed down into believing the SS is really a muscle car.
Those who have never been in the driver seat of a real muscle car will never know the feeling of driving off a showroom lot pinned back in the seat with a deep rumbling sound that matches the performance..
Oh for the good ole days for those of us that were there,
On the bright side the HHR does match up well with the 50th fastest production muscle car ever made with the at the small 2 seater 1964 289ci 271HP Cobra 4 speed.
Thats not terrible company to be in apparently by todays standards,
Banned
Joined: 10-24-2006
Posts: 1,761
From: The Show-Me State
Why on earth would you buy a FWD car like the HHR and expect to go drag racing in it? Thats moronic, SS badge or not. Even if they dumped 300hp into it, its still FWD and would need a torque limiter due to torque steer whcich would mean the cars power would fall flat around 5k RPM and it would be just about as slow. If you are looking for a modern day muscle car, go buy a Charger R/T or SRT8 or the upcoming Challenger. Your money will go ALOT farther.
Senior Member
Joined: 07-17-2006
Posts: 6,053
From: Dallas, GA
Now I do remember in the late 70's - 1981 that gas did hit around $1.50 for a short time. But I had no bills other than my car (in HS at the time).
Best of my knowledge, SS stands for Super Sport. There are so many non muscle cars today that will spank most muscle cars of the 60's, and they will do it with tripple the gas mileage. The HHR might not outrun a 70 454 SS in the quarter, but I bet it would spank it at the ring. There is a lot more to a performance car that how fast it goes in a straight line.
From the start, you have *****ed about the HHR in some form or fashion. I'm still confused as to why you bought it. Lucky I don't get to see your posts unless someone quotes you
(blocked).
Best of my knowledge, SS stands for Super Sport. There are so many non muscle cars today that will spank most muscle cars of the 60's, and they will do it with tripple the gas mileage. The HHR might not outrun a 70 454 SS in the quarter, but I bet it would spank it at the ring. There is a lot more to a performance car that how fast it goes in a straight line.
From the start, you have *****ed about the HHR in some form or fashion. I'm still confused as to why you bought it. Lucky I don't get to see your posts unless someone quotes you
(blocked).
Senior Member
Joined: 04-10-2006
Posts: 195
From: Simi Valley, CA
I'm waiting for my SS because I want a balanced, fun car that's quick and does it all pretty well. I think GM did this one right. I have a 400 hp (at the rear wheels) 1935 Ford sitting in my driveway, it is fun to drive but doesn't do everything as well as the HHR SS.....my old drag racing days (in the '60s) were fun but those cars actually weren't very good "drivers". If you look at the SS overall you'll find that GM built a very balanced "Super Sport" package here........not just a cosmetic "trim" package that they were so famous for over the past 15 years.
Senior Member
Joined: 06-23-2007
Posts: 419
From: British Columbia, Canada
I'm waiting for my SS because I want a balanced, fun car that's quick and does it all pretty well. I think GM did this one right. I have a 400 hp (at the rear wheels) 1935 Ford sitting in my driveway, it is fun to drive but doesn't do everything as well as the HHR SS.....my old drag racing days (in the '60s) were fun but those cars actually weren't very good "drivers". If you look at the SS overall you'll find that GM built a very balanced "Super Sport" package here........not just a cosmetic "trim" package that they were so famous for over the past 15 years.
Exactly what he said.
Senior Member
Joined: 06-27-2006
Posts: 732
From: Kingsville On
Don't forget guys the muscle cars era those cars got big engine with big displacements and a lot of torque too. A 70 SS chevelle with a 454 got 450 hp but pretty close to 500 lbs of torque due of it's big cubic inches. Put that kind of engine today with a good electronic injection device and you'll get an awsome bunch of HP. The new HHR SS will get 260 hp pretty nice for small cubic inches but what it'll get for torque about 260 lbs of torque it's half way from a V-8. Just my 
Senior Member
Joined: 11-10-2006
Posts: 163
From: Montana
If you want real torque wait till 2009 when chevy releases the turbo diesel vette 350 hp 675 lbs of torque 0-60 in 4 seconds.GM says if it gos well with buyers they my drop puting gas engines in the vette.Put a bully dog propane conversion on that and you will have 500 hp and 900 plus lbs of torque.
Platinum Member
Joined: 05-09-2006
Posts: 6,805
From: "Upland" Mesa, Arizona
http://cars.about.com/b/2007/04/01/c...r-for-2009.htm