View Poll Results: Why I bought my HHR
Style, economy
199
87.67%
Performance
28
12.33%
Voters: 227. You may not vote on this poll
Why I bought My HHR
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: 05-13-2006
Posts: 2,334
From: Chicago,IL
Why I bought My HHR
This is a poll, exploring the reasons for purchasing the HHR.
Performance (potential) you know, "Gonna Smoke me some Mustang
".
Or, economy, practicality and basically Style.
Many people have done small mods to the motor, air filters, spark plugs, etc;
but I want to know what the adverage person purchased their Ride for.
Performance (potential) you know, "Gonna Smoke me some Mustang
".Or, economy, practicality and basically Style.
Many people have done small mods to the motor, air filters, spark plugs, etc;
but I want to know what the adverage person purchased their Ride for.
Banned
Joined: 10-14-2005
Posts: 9,121
From: Rochester,N.Y.
Neither of the above really but style did play a part in my choice. I don't know why anyone would buy a 2.2 or 2.4 liter 4 banger station wagon with performance in mind. 
Not to say that we shouldn't do performance mods to our vehicle but there is no way in hell even using forced induction that the HHR will ever be considered a performance vehicle. 
I love seeing, "I've read the Ecotec build book and I can squeeze over a 1000 HP out of my daily driver.". 
Not to say that we shouldn't do performance mods to our vehicle but there is no way in hell even using forced induction that the HHR will ever be considered a performance vehicle. I love seeing, "I've read the Ecotec build book and I can squeeze over a 1000 HP out of my daily driver.".
Senior Member
Joined: 03-10-2007
Posts: 211
From: Ottawa, Ontario
Show me another vehicle that can carry 4 adults, a border collie in the back, and carry it off with style at that price!
I needed a vehicle that would fill a lot of practical needs and was DELIGHTED when Chev introduced the HHR. More room, cheaper, and better looking than a PT to boot!
All smiles here
I needed a vehicle that would fill a lot of practical needs and was DELIGHTED when Chev introduced the HHR. More room, cheaper, and better looking than a PT to boot!
All smiles here
Senior Member
Joined: 03-10-2007
Posts: 211
From: Ottawa, Ontario
C'mon CH, that 2.0L Turbo from the Solstice GXP would look mighty nice under the HHR's hood. 260hp and 260 lb-ft would make for one quick Wagon!
Of course, the Torque steer would rip your arms out! But it would be a good kind of pain....
Of course, the Torque steer would rip your arms out! But it would be a good kind of pain....
Banned
Joined: 10-14-2005
Posts: 9,121
From: Rochester,N.Y.
You're still going to be smoked by even a stock V6 Camry (268 HP) but your car will be making the cool turbo spooling noise while you lose. Don't even test anything other than grocery getters unless you really want your ass handed to you. No matter what you do short of dropping a Vette engine in, switching to RWD, changing the brake system, changing the suspension, and redesigning the HHR so it's more aerodynamic is going to make the HHR a performance vehicle. The HHR wasn't designed as a performance vehicle and will never even be considered in the performance vehicle category, even if Chevy decides to finally come out with an SS HHR. I think the reason Chevy is taking so long coming out with a SS HHR is because they realize it's pointless and it would only serve a very small niche market.
Last edited by captain howdy; Mar 20, 2007 at 09:12 AM.
Senior Member
Joined: 10-19-2005
Posts: 20,687
From: Miami
Senior Member
Joined: 12-28-2005
Posts: 2,531
From: Worcester County, MA
I liked the looks, and I liked the fact that it had all that cargo space and got good fuel economy. Performance? HAH! My S-10 goes faster in reverse. But it's a great car and I'm gonna keep it.
Senior Member
Joined: 03-10-2007
Posts: 211
From: Ottawa, Ontario
Maybe I should add a little to my statement about the HHR's potential performance.
I didn't mean to imply that the 2.0 turbo would turn the HHR into a fire-breathing, Mustang GT slaying, NASCAR-ready powerhouse. I just look at the numbers a 230hp/245ft-lb 2006 PT Cruiser GT was able to put up: 0-60mph in 6.8 with a 1/4 of 15.4@92mph and figure that a 260hp/260ft-lb HHR could be made to go faster. I know those numbers are not Corvette quick, and yes, a 2007 Camry V6 with its 0-60mph time of 5.8 seconds will still kick your butt. But then, that time matches the Mazdaspeed3!
I mean, if people are buying PT Cruisers (with Turbo), Mazdaspeed3s, and WRX Wagons then there is a market for practical vehicles with upgraded performance over their more pedestrian siblings. I mean, if you NEED a small wagon, wouldn't having the availability of a more perforamance oriented model pique your interest? I mean, why did you go for the 2.4L VVT over the 2.2L?
Then again, it can be said that no one buys a wagon for performance, and that a wagon purchase automatically makes it a practical choice. Then again, if I WAS shopping for performance a Mazdaspeed3 would look great in my laneway!
I didn't mean to imply that the 2.0 turbo would turn the HHR into a fire-breathing, Mustang GT slaying, NASCAR-ready powerhouse. I just look at the numbers a 230hp/245ft-lb 2006 PT Cruiser GT was able to put up: 0-60mph in 6.8 with a 1/4 of 15.4@92mph and figure that a 260hp/260ft-lb HHR could be made to go faster. I know those numbers are not Corvette quick, and yes, a 2007 Camry V6 with its 0-60mph time of 5.8 seconds will still kick your butt. But then, that time matches the Mazdaspeed3!
I mean, if people are buying PT Cruisers (with Turbo), Mazdaspeed3s, and WRX Wagons then there is a market for practical vehicles with upgraded performance over their more pedestrian siblings. I mean, if you NEED a small wagon, wouldn't having the availability of a more perforamance oriented model pique your interest? I mean, why did you go for the 2.4L VVT over the 2.2L?
Then again, it can be said that no one buys a wagon for performance, and that a wagon purchase automatically makes it a practical choice. Then again, if I WAS shopping for performance a Mazdaspeed3 would look great in my laneway!
Banned
Joined: 10-14-2005
Posts: 9,121
From: Rochester,N.Y.
I guess my point was I don't see why anyone would actually buy a 4 cylinder for performance. Just like how I see kids with thousands invested in their little Civic to only have 200-300 HP. Like I said I can see doing performance mods to your HHR but no matter what we do or how much we sink into them they will never be performance vehicles. I didn't have a choice in my engines because I would only buy a 2LT. If I'm going to drive a cheap car it's going to be the highest quality most optioned cheap car I can drive. No LS for me! If someone is buying a vehicle based on performance or potential performance I'm sure the HHR isn't even in the running. I think most people buy HHRs because they look cool and for practical reasons like low cost, good gas mileage, they have a decent amount of storage room, and so forth. 
I think most people buy HHRs because they look cool and for practical reasons like low cost, good gas mileage, they have a decent amount of storage room, and so forth.
