Who did I call names? I don't remember myself doing any name calling but apparently you do. I remember you calling someone names. Yes I do have boards and splash guards. I've have them on since I purchased the vehicle almost two years ago. Guess what......I still have chips on my fenders with both installed. There are chips on the running boards themselves also. So should I demand that Chevy reimburse me for what I paid for my boards and demand a repaint every couple of months? Maybe it's time to call the BBB. What are you going to do when you get chips in your paint even though you have running boards? Call the BBB and demand Chevy buy your vehicle back because you have chips in your paint? Running boards aren't a magic solution and everything just goes away with them. They help minimize the chipping at best but paint chips will still appear just like any other vehicle. You shouldn't let my opinion bother you so much. It's just that....my opinion. I personally don't see why everyone is demanding something everyone else pays for when Chevy is already offering to repair what some people find to be a problem and also where everyone got the notion that running boards are the end all solution when it comes to paint chips. There is similar damage in all vehicles with bulging rear fenders from all years and makes so that must mean there are a lot of really bad engineers out there that like to purposely put design flaws into their vehicles and a lot of auto manufacturers that like to put flawed vehicles on the market. Talk about flawed logic. But that's right, it's all a big Chevy conspiracy.

 

Can I get in this line? I think GM should send us all a rebate check that bought the running boards with the car. Oh and since I had to take my time to make sure the fuses were all seated correct and we get that to the total.
Oh and the flaw in where the window switches are lets add that to my total

 

Before anyone points it out that at the begining of the thread I said I had no chips look at the date on the post. It was well over a year ago. I had only had my HHR for like half a year or so at that point. Now almost two years after purchase and a couple of winters later there are chips.

 

I still see this is an ugly subject! Unfortunately I have not had time to take my car to the dealer about the chipped paint. i guess what some people are not realizing is the extent of damage we are seeing here. I can accept that we will get rock chips in the paint. That is natural but what I am seeing here is damage unlike anything I have seen on a normal vehicle! This damaged area literally looks like the inside of your wheel well. I love my HHR and unfortunately with this damage it is impossible to truly show it off....the vehicle always looks neglected and abused. And this is in less then one year of driving.

As far as GM's response to this problem...well.....they are doing the minimal to appease the people who point it out. The vast majority of people will never take the time to see them about it and just accept it. There was sarcastic mention of a recall for this and well...that was just sarcasm. Recalls are for safety issues not aestetic problems.

 

Just curious, could you post a pic of this damage that looks as bad as the inside of your wheel well? I posted a pic of the way salt strikes my ride, and I don`t have a stone guard/pad, even with boards a certain amount gets past and onto the fender.

 

I wonder why...

I think it's more because 99.9% of people who buy a car know that it's going to have wear and tear and depreciate rapidly over time. The worst people who don't believe this have got to be Honda owners. When I was selling tin, we'd have people bringing in 10 year old Accords with 180,000 miles on them and they'd expect us to give 'em full original MSRP back on the trade! "Well, that car's good for another 180k!" To which I'd say, "So, why are you getting rid of it?"

ptownhhr, why don't you post those documents yourself? If you're going to throw gas on the fire, at least help out the unwashed masses and let them get the free boards they deserve!

 

Scanning and posting a document in the gallery is just as easy as a photo...

 

I still don't understand why everyone keeps calling this a design flaw. The basic design, fender style, was used for decades by Detroit. and guess what, they had the same issue. If you look at pics of cars from the 40's you will see on many of them pads much like what GM put on the HHRs that did not have running boards. If you want a retro-based design, then you will experience that same issues the the original cars did. So I don't see this so much as a "design flaw", more like an old design that has always had problems and the methods used then for the issues are still being used. ie: running boards or fender pads.

 

Exactly, GDZHHR....

That's what I have been saying based on CORRECT AND ACCEPTED engineering terminology. Frankly, I'll say it again, it's design oversite or error.

But, "When one allows emotion to control ones logic, intelligent expression becomes limited to incitement and/or verbalized in, generally, unacceptable social norms". (Psychology 101).

 

But isn't the design doing what it should, for good or bad? If so, then no design error. And how could it be an over site if they over two options, running boards or the pads?

Looks to me like GM knew about the issue and planned accordingly. The concession in the TSB, in my mind, is more PR than an admission of a design error. It's much easier to try to placate a customer than to win them back.