2008 looks nearly identical to the 2001 model. That's too many years w/o any major changes. Can't expect to keep increasing sales by doing that.


2001

2008

 

I think for 09 They changed the Tail lights only.

 

i've been driving my pt cruiser rental for 2 wks now and i can tell you are cars our cars are so much better on EVERY level. but i was 15 when the pt first came out and thought it was the coolest, then came the gt. the convertible was named on several "ugly lists due to it looking like a bread basket. now adays they are common as jettas,corrollas, civics, etc.. it's kinda hard to completely design new bodystyle for cars like ours cause they were modeled of 1 certain car to begin with same with minis,beetles,fj cruisers, and the last gen of t-birds. makes me wonder what the challenger, mustang, and camaro will look like in 5 years...

 

LOL anyone else think the 2001 looks better than the 2008?

i dont think its fair to compare the PT to the HHR.

yes, they're both retro wagons,
but the pt was built on an already aging platform (and not even a good one!) and feels like it was crammed on to it... it handles IMO like an 80's car, its in no way easy to enjoy/drive... it just feels like its a compromise with a weak outdated neon engine.

the HHR handles like a modern car, has a smooth engine/trans combo (cant speak for the SS, never driven one.) looks good inside and out... looks "uncompromised" and, i must say: both the 2.2 and 2.4 ecotecs are peppy for their size!

and...

here's the kicker for me...

the HHR?

HAS A HELL OF A LOT MORE USABLE CARGO SPACE... its like chevy actually thought about what it would be used for!

 

This is the part I never understood. When i was thinking of getting my hhr i did a ton of research and some of the comparisons were between the hhr and the PT (not that i wanted a pt...) However it would always list the pt with more cargo room and more interior space. Just by looking at the 2 side by side i never understood how that was even possible.

Just looking at the 2 you can see the PT has a much shorter back, that alone proves it wrong. I got my hhr because i needed cargo room and i wanted a nice car at the same time. I used to have a Jimmy, and although the cargo height in the back is a little smaller, and the hatch is a little smaller, i have almost the same amount of usable space.

 

Given the difficulties that I was going to have the HHR,( in Italy is not marketed) I was a step away from pt cruiser.
I am sorry that they do not build anymore.
How does one leave the building so sinuous forms?
Forms arising from the past but do not show time....it's a sin

 

It looks more like a very old bathtub, on 4 wheels.

 

Nine years with little change has to be one of the longest runs in history and I agree it is time to put it out to pasture. We have owned three PTs (check my gallery) and no complaints. I now have a 08 panel and agree the drive train is much smoother and a little more powerful. Wish Chevrolet would have done better marketing at the start, than maybe there would have been more after market products for the HHR.

 

I read several comparative reviews that quoted the PT had more cargo room, but read only ONE that mentioned you had to remove the back seats in the PT to give you that amount of room. Who wants to yank out the back seats instead of just folding them down like in the HHR when you want cargo room?

 

Think the HHR will be around for awhile. The concept of having a wagon/van in a compact sport vehicle is the selling point, especially in the SS model.