Kinda O/T? Chevy's new SSR...

[Kojack]

I know this thing has been a concept for a while now, but while heading to work I actually saw one for the first time on the road... I didn't realize they were actually selling the things already. What do you guys think of 'em? I do like that more and more car companies are trying to look back at the design of cars back from the 40's and 50's, extending fenders out a bit more, making them lower and longer, and dropping a few retro traits in cars. Most of these have been high up models... everyone's favorite PT Cruiser of course was one of the first, but then came the new Ford Thunderbird, The Plymouth Prowler, Chysler Crossfire, the new Bug even... and now the SSR which kinda looks like some goldchainer's, GoodGuys winning wetdream. What do you guys think about these guys? A good idea? Or a good idea going in the wrong direction? I kinda dig the SSR, and for a new car, I do like that New Crossfire...

[briggs&strattonChev]

I saw a red one a few months ago, looked kinda cool. Of course it wouldnt be practical for North Dakotans that are hauling stuff and need a REAL pickup. The interior was nice though................Briggs

[rikaguilera]

I think it is pretty cool. It has a 327, and looks like a smoothed and chopped 1950 chevy truck, just modernized. I do agree that it looks like the kind of vehicle that Coddington would build, but I give Chevy and the other two real car companies (Ford and Dodge) credit for building vehicles that do not fit the cookie cutter mold.

[desertdroog]

In my opinion, U.S. auto manufacturers have been out of touch with design elements since the 1935, 1936, and 1940 Ford, but what do I know. Oh yeah, and the 1941 Buick Sedannette.

[daddylama]

Saw one on the road this morning, for the first time... didnt even know they were selling them.
Kinda un-decided. Looks like an instant gold-chainer, with easy financing.
Really havent liked any of the other retro cars... well, maybe the VW a little... but that's just cause i saw the concept car like 8 years ago, and fell in love with the model standing next to it.
Glad the manufacturers are trying to do something different, though... new cars have been getting more and more cookie-cutter-ish...

[flying clutchman]

this year they only produced and sold a certain number. it wasnt a lot. but 2004 i hear its supposed to go into full production.

[chromedRAT]

i got to crawl around one because my cousins have an enormous sued car lot that also sells new cars, alot of times before the factory dealerships because they have all kinds of connections, and have had connections since they drag raced. it has alot of good design points. i think it looks alot better with the top up too. the thing i HATE though, is that it has fake dual exhaust and is about as quiet as my grandparents 92 roadmaster. single exhaust (it splits back again and exits as 2 pipes) on something like that that is as expensive as that?

[DrJ]

Beats the hell out of just one more utility box or melted gummy bear on wheels but why the almost Corvette pricetag on a fuckin' minitruck?

Ah, I know why, so they can reap the other car sales off the people who come in to just look at it and then stop making it in a few seasons "because it just didn't sell in the numbers we expected, we decided it's not what people want after all"
Bull shit, it's just priced out of the market of the people who might want it!

[DIRTYT]

yea my dad has one of those turds right now he works for gm so he got one of the prototypes. its junk way to much wind noise for a brand new car and it has no power i was not at all happy with driving it. it is modeled after a 54 chevy i belive. but all they used from the truck was the five grill bars, i wouldnt pay 45g for it thats just my 2cents

[Tuck]

I think its the next PT Cruiser. I'm not sure what to think about it... It kinda looks like a S=10 with one of those body kits. Oh well. I dont think I would buy any brand new FORD/CHEV/CHRY right now anyways. They're all disposable cars. Now a twin turbo audi might get my attention...

http://www.coupsdecoeur.net/indexwallpaper/voitures/audi%20tt.jpg

[Sailor]

I seriously think GM should consentrate on coming up with some good, fast and welldesigned sedans, and look forward rather than dreaming back to when they ruled. They are lagging waaay behind these days. Same goes for Ford.

[av8]

I'd love to see Ford do something like a re-creation/tribute to the early F-100. Disregard the silly hole in the hood and imagine this beauty with drivetrain and underpinnings of the Lightning . . .

[McGrath]

I liked the RT Charger, but 2drs would have been better...

[Sailor]

Ditto on that. I have more respect for Chrysler than GM and Ford these days.

[Tuck]

yeah Chryslers design dept. is AWESOME....
-they can go from computer rendering to production with the push of a button... I wish that they would hike up the quality. Its one thing to design a car that looks beautiful... its another to build it to last.

They want you to sell it and buy a new one every two years. I agree sailor they need to focus on the now and start building cars that rule.

[Assdragger]

Whatever happened to the Ford 49? That was a good looking car that I would have liked to have seen in production.

http://www.supercars.net/cars/2002@$Ford@$49%20Convertible%20Conceptg.html

The car looked alot better in the black hardtop version that was in Rod&Custom though.

[Kojack]

True... I remember reading about the 49. I hope they do make that guy... I have to admit, I really like it. I'd place a bit more tasteful chrome on it in different places... and get rid of the dubs. http://www.jalopyjournal.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif

[Fat Hack]

Tuck, Chrysler can go from design concept sketch to assembled production vehicle because they do things....ummm...odd. (For lack of a better word!)

They design and engineer their vehicles with the aid of computers, and skimp on 'trivial' stuff like extended durability testing, extreme weather conditions evaluations, and other things that Ford and GM spend lots of time and money on. Knowing people that worked for Chrysler confirms this...they were floored upon seeing things like chassis dynos, wind tunnels and around-the-clock durability drives at Ford!

Chrysler's theory is to build it quick and let the consumer find the problems while they rush the NEXT design into production. It's how they got where they are today.

Once upon a time, Chrysler was a contender, and built some dynamite cars and trucks...but these days they're an also-ran, filling the void left by the later years of AMC as "the OTHER domestic car maker".

As for the SSR, I like it in some ways...and could see buying one if it were priced in the S-10/Ranger class where it belongs. GM seeks to market it as an upscale Yuppie 'truck' for nostalgia-crazed types who seek the momentary novelty of driving something that LOOKS retro. Such strategy is doomed to failure almost every time!

Only a small percentage of REAL car buyers even WANT a retro-styled vehicle. Ford is about to learn this again with the ugly new Mustang coming in 2005 that seeks to imitate it's 60s grandfathers. The Mustang was a success the FIRST time around because it was NEW and FRESH...not because it looked like a forty year old car! As the Mustang evolved, it changed in the interest of FORWARD progress...even if not all of it's phases were well received by enthusiasts. For better or worse, it always moved towards the FUTURE rather than trying to pretend it was out of the past!

Take the new T-bird...the handfull of people who actually WANTED to own the thing and could afford to do so bought them and left Ford wondering why it didn't become the huge hit they had hoped for. It's a car with a very small target consumer base, made smaller yet by it's fat price tag.

The PT Loser was an accident in every sense of the word, but Chrysler at least had the smarts to realize that it could cash in on bored consumers with it. Originally designed to be produced as a low cost economy vehicle for OVERSEAS markets, it became a surprise hit here when mindless Yuppies saw it and exclaimed "Oh, how CUTE...it looks like an old fashioned car!", and they lined up in droves to buy them. Since it was designed to be produced as a cost-effective transportation vehicle, Chrysler could afford to make changes to get them up to domestic crash and emissions standards and still get them to showrooms in a reasonable amount of time.

The Yuppies went wild for their Instant Nostalgia mini-vans, and other automakers mis-read their enthusiasm as a signal to give the retro-styling ploy a try. The PT Cruiser was a Happy Accident that benefited from proper timing and the ability to ready them for sale quickly...something Chrysler DOES do well (even if quality often suffers for it).

If you DO have to stoop to using nostalgic styling to sell otherwise boring new vehicles...then at least make the things cost-effective enough so that you can price them to MOVE...and to CONTINUE moving once their novelty wears off.

Cars of the past always used strides towards the FUTURE to sell them...futuristic new lines and technical innovations brought customers into the showrooms...there was no need to build cars that resembled covered wagons or horses to attract automotive buyers back then!! The auto industry was always fueled by ADVANCING styles and technology....back when that EXCITED people!!!

The fins of the 50s weren't part of some goofball nostalgic trip to lure in people who dreamed of their fisherman ancestors...they were a styling cue borrowed from the jet and space age! Stuff that generated bold NEW ideas on the sketchpads of the leading design teams!!!

I suppose that new cars have become so dull and lifeless lately that marketing types are fresh out of ideas to help sell them! The tripple-butt-ugly angular lines of crappy cars like the Pontiac Aztec couldn't excite anyone with halfway close to 20/20 vision...so now the thought of the day is to try selling the PAST to the automotive consumers of the PRESENT and FUTURE! If that isn't the automakers admitting that they've run their course and exhausted their creativity...I don't know what it IS!!!

I, for one, will always love the old cars, as I'm sure everyone HERE does. But, truthfully...I wouldn't mind seeing the automakers muster up the courage and bravado to push the envelope once again and make history HAPPEN, rather than retreating into their shells and relying on retro-styling to help sell their snoozers! I wanna see the new Mustang hit a Grand Slam with fresh NEW lines and aggressive raw performance...if I wanted a 65 Mustang, I could easily buy one for what the 2005 model will cost!! I think it's sad that domestic automakers have begun to throw in the towel and shy away from taking chances and knocking down barricades! To see them limping around hoping to score a hit with pathetic attempts to peddle the past is heartbreaking and embarrasing!

To really throw some stink on the topic...the only automaker I see taking chances, pushing forward and shaking things up a little is NISSAN! Their aggressive new models don't look like boxy old Datsuns...they look...well, like NEW and different cutting edge cars and trucks! Sure, some of their looks are striking and will not appeal to everyone...but it shows the gutsy swagger I miss seeing in domestic designs! Good on them, I hope they do well with their current and forthcoming model launches!

At least us HAMBers can appreciate our old iron and we know how to build them and keep them running. We don't need Detroit trying to sell us stuff that LOOKS like old cars, because we're already THERE! If nothing else, maybe these retro-styled larks will keep posers and fair-weathered auto buffs away from the older tin so there will be more for US to play with! (Always try to look for the silver lining!!)

Anyhow, that's my penny and a half!

[Deyomatic]

Sailor, I agree completely, I've always been a Chevy guy, until a year ago when I bought a Ford, now, with an open mind, I'm noticing that GM is just a bunch of hacks. They have the worst ads, they have the least exciting cars, and they are years behind everyone else.

"I like baseball, apple pies, hot dogs and Chevrolet?" If you are going to try to play up a "good ole days" theme, how about, "See the USA in your ChevroLET..."

When they first started talking about this truck, it was about 8 years ago, or something, trying to ride on the coat tails of the Pt Snoozer, but with more of an upscale and performance target. They havnen't had an original idea since the C5 in 1997. And they have the balls to call their new 4 door "sport truck" the "SS." With all the creature comforts it has and it's slow 1/4 mile times, it is a disgrace to the badge. They should have made something that could compete with the Lightning and saved some kind of Luxury Sport badge for the "SS" POS.

[autocol]

i read an interview with some important designer guy with volkswagen or chrysler (memory's not too hot today!) who said one of the major problems with "retro-styling" was trying to update the car after its three or four year run...

i mean, do you make it MORE retro? or do you advance the styling three or four years from the year the original was based on... which means if your car is based around a late thirties, early forties shape, you have to stop making it because the war starts!

i don't think that car will be around in five years.

[whitewallslick]

I kinda like the SSR idea, but it's a damn shame that they think this is a replacement for the camaro/firebird. I've noticed the big 3 will have a really cool futuristic concept sketch of a new car, uglify the design so it doesn't 'scare' buyers, then over the course of 10 years gradually add all the neat features, & finally produce the cool car from the original sketch ... only now it's a 10 year old idea & it looks dated. I think new cars used to be cool & anticipated because they were retooled more often. Will they retool every couple years like the old days? I doubt it ... too costly. WWS

[Deyomatic]

My engineer buddy and I were just talking about this subject yesterday, how Japan and Germany aren't allowed to have an army, so they focus all of their top engineers on Automotive interests, and it could be argued they are kicking everyone's ass in styling and performance. Now, here in the U.S., with our role as the super power, all of our engineers are in the Defense field, so our Automotive designs, for the most part, suffer.
Not that I think we should cut defense, I'd gladly have it this way, because I don't ever plan on buying a new plastic econobox anyway.

[Deyomatic]

Oh and the other thing that really gets my goat with GM. They are "introducing" a Monte Carlo SS and an Impala SS this year with the Supercharged 3800 V6. Like it is some kind of new engine. It is the SAME thing they made 15 years ago, with almost the same output. At least beef it up. 240 HP out of a Supercharged 3.8 V6 is not impressive in the least, when you think about the Japs getting 280 out of a 2 liter inline 4, and 300 out of a 2.5 liter boxer 4.

[choprods]

I have always been a loyal Chevy guy- but I think they are falling down as of late and I do not have as much faith in their engineering or little desire to see their new stylings either.In their and others defense- I think they should do a retro styling of one of their class acts -but it shouldn't be a 99 percent new looking morphidite with ONE PERCENT-"authenticity" applied to it on the way out the door like a cheap ass emblem or sticker!SORRY but that the way I see it.......... http://www.jalopyjournal.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused.gif

[Evilfordcoupe™]

Silly hood?? Thats killing me. Yeah, I would take a lightning set up any day. NOT!!!

-Jason

[kustombuilder]

i see them EVERY DAY. they are built at the plant right next door to the plant i work at in Lansing (Michigan). last week there were about 70 or 80 of them in the lot waiting to be loaded on trucks. everyday i see a few loaded on the trucks along with the Cadillacs that are built across town and the Malibus, Aleros and Grand Ams we build. i also see a couple of the "big wigs" leavin work in there company car SSRs as i'm coming into work. they even brought one into our plant for us to look at one day. i think they are great for a new car but the price just pisses me off. they have indeed priced it right out of the range of the people who would enjoy it most. had they been closer to 30K like they should have been, i may have ordered one myself but at $45,000 i'll let the millionaires like my in-laws next door neighbor buy them and i'll settle for goin for a ride around the block in it. if i could afford a $50,000 TOY i'd buy a new Vette but i honestly belive i'll get more enjoyment out of my model A when it's done than i would in some "rich boy, mid life crisis, cookie cutter car"(tm) anyday!

[elcaminokid]

I loved a lot of what was shown at last years Detroit motor show. Especially the Cadillac Sixteen and the Chevy SS.
And if they (GM) can sell the GTO again, why not the El Camino (Holden SS Ute or HSV)?
Oh, and Tuck, don't bother with the Audi titi. It's been voted the worst car in Europe several times. It's rubbish.

[johnnynailhead]

I like some of the things that the big three are coming out with, but ford and crysler show less inhibition in letting something fly off the drawing board.

GM needs to fire everyone above middle management, and let the designers put some cars on the street that aren't watered down with bullshit bureacracy. Anyone at GM who has any level of responsibility is afraid to make a decision, so they keep passing things(designs) around the top until their so mutated and bland, that the average blind person would puke if they could see what was in the showrooms.

Hope I didn't offend any executives... http://www.jalopyjournal.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif

[McGrath]

Heres that 2005 Mustang

[tootallrodder]

How about Pontiacs GTO which is due to be sold here, I believe, next year, inported from OZ (Australia) with a 350 mounted correctly and driving the correct set of wheels. I hope they bring in more models such as thier version of the El Camino. They may not be Vintage styled but at least they are RWD with a hole bunch of POWER. http://www.jalopyjournal.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif

[McGrath]

2002 Golden ute SS

[Byron Crump]

Deyomatic, Japan and Germany both have armed forces. Japan can not use them outside the country due to constitutional restrictions and Germany has had a very active military that was put back together as soon as the WW2 was over and was a key NATO member that was ready to bare the brunt of a Soviet attack if it ever came. So the engineer argument is not really valid...the modern German tanks are kissing cousins of the M1 A1 for example.

As for the SSR, this one took too long to get to the show room and is just too late. If it had come out three years ago when the concept appeared they might have had something.

GM is messed up, plain and simple. I know most of you are not muscle heads etc., but have you seen how bleak new GM lots are now that the Camaro and Firebird are gone? When muscle was making a return they killed the cars...great move there GM. If you want a V8 rear wheel drive American car you gotta go Stang at this time. The GTO is due any day now, and people all over love the power train but it is a snooze to look at. The import cars are the only thing exciting that people can afford...best bets right now are the G35, 350Z, Evo, STI, and my fav right now the NEON from hell. If you want to buy a new car with power, style (and yes that can be argued), and a fun factor within reach of the common joe these are the cars you have to look at along with the stang. The stang is tired right now, and people can not wait for the next gen. That pic of the silver one is the concept, many of the ques from it will make it into production. It is a sad world we live in for muscle heads and car guys that want a traditional "American" experience...I miss the F bodies myself.

[McGrath]

Web Says 350 horse for the new Goat. It oughta be a runnin s.o.b.

Sure not much in the looks department though. Reminds me of a Honda Prelude...

[Byron Crump]

[ QUOTE ]
Web Says 350 horse for the new Goat. It oughta be a runnin s.o.b.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, a fast jelly bean with little soul...I know the Australians have made a fine car, but it really does not say GTO at all...it looks like everything else. How old is this plantform in Australia btw?

[McGrath]

Looks like a 2 dr Grand Prix. Are they still making Grand Prixs?

[Byron Crump]

Yeah, they still make them but they may drop the name...I have not checked GMinsider in some time but I think that was the name that was gonna get dropped in favor of some number letter combo.

[cool57]

[ QUOTE ]
Whatever happened to the Ford 49? That was a good looking car that I would have liked to have seen in production.





[/ QUOTE ] http://www.supercars.net/PicFetch?pic=2002_ford_49_convertible-1.jpg Who does one contact at FOMOCO to encourage production of this baby? http://www.jalopyjournal.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

DANG! I thought I had this pic posting thing figgered out! http://www.jalopyjournal.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/mad.gif

[kustombuilder]

actually it's the Grand Am that is being dropped in favor of the "G6". i know cause i build the Grand Ams and will begetting laid off right after the first of the year. more time for hot rods i guess, just no money http://www.jalopyjournal.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/frown.gif.

the GTO is sad in the looks department. too generic looking. if you did'nt see the grill you'd have a hard time telling what brand it was let alone what model. just another boring new car. but at least it has some BALLS and a rear wheel drive platform. it would have kicked SERIOUS ass had it been styled more like the Hot Wheels "GTO3". now THAT is a sweet blend of nastalgia and modern. if i could get GM to "donate" me one i'd modify it to look like the HOT WHEELS version!!

[DrJ]

[ QUOTE ]
Looks like a 2 dr Grand Prix. Are they still making Grand Prixs?

[/ QUOTE ]

Since the idiots only make it in a four door I wish they would drop the name. A GRAND PRIX is supposed to be a two door, only!
Thye started the Grand Am series to have a similar size car with too many doors and now the Grand Am is the only two door in that size.... Someone definitly had their head up their ass on that decision!

[DrJ]

[ QUOTE ]
I like some of the things that the big three are coming out with, but ford and crysler show less inhibition in letting something fly off the drawing board.

GM needs to fire everyone above middle management, and let the designers put some cars on the street that aren't watered down with bullshit bureacracy. Anyone at GM who has any level of responsibility is afraid to make a decision, so they keep passing things(designs) around the top until their so mutated and bland, that the average blind person would puke if they could see what was in the showrooms.

Hope I didn't offend any executives... http://www.jalopyjournal.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

They already did, hopefully... They hired Lutz from Chrysler. His influence wont be seen across the board for another couple of years though. You can already see it in the cleaned up Pontiacs. He had them shit can that butt ugly corrugated plastic body clading, they ran for far too many years. Now all they need to do is quit the stoopid BMW wannabe split grill stuff and they got it made.

[DrJ]

http://www.supercars.net/PicFetch?pic=2002_ford_49_convertible-1.jpg

[kustombuilder]

[quote Now all they need to do is quit the stoopid BMW wannabe split grill stuff and they got it made.

[/ QUOTE ]

hey Mr. KNOWITALL. that split grill has been a PONTIAC trademark for decades. it's about the only part of the car that has stayed true to the Pontiacs of yesterday.

[DrJ]

[ QUOTE ]
[quote Now all they need to do is quit the stoopid BMW wannabe split grill stuff and they got it made.

[/ QUOTE ]

hey Mr. KNOWITALL. that split grill has been a PONTIAC trademark for decades. it's about the only part of the car that has stayed true to the Pontiacs of yesterday.

[/ QUOTE ]

The first one to use I was the '59, then the '60 did NOT have it. then the '61 brought it back again. Since the lats two decades of Melted gummybears just don't count in the history books of car style (unless they are in a chapter called the Dark Ages) There were a whole bunch of Pontiacs built without that feature. Now take the BMW They've always had thatdouble oval split grill feature. On them it's as distinctive as the Packard an d the Rolls Royce grills.
But I suppose if you didn't remember new Pontiacs before 1959, I guess you'd think they were all supposed to have that feature. I think it's either a hinderance to stylists doing something really original or lazyness not getting past it. Or maybe they should all still have those chrome "streaks" down the middleof the hood and trunk like was started in '35 and carried up to the middle 50s? Don't know why Oldsmobile picked up a split grill "tradition" either, but it sure made for a bunch of dowdy looking cars...

[chromedRAT]

i'd rather see the split pontiac grille on gm car in the last 3 yrs or so than what chevies have had. cavaliers, especially. given the choices of domestic cars, i think pontiacs generally looked a good bit better throughout the 90s in many areas. so what if BMW has a similar grille, i think pontiacs carry it well, and have often had a similar grille in the past, so it has some claim to lineage, if it is somewhat BS in todays cars. compare the corsica and the grand am, and even throw in a ford contour and whatever mopar has in the class. the grand am, even some 4 door versions, always looked a little more bitchin, and this progressed as the 90s and this decade went on. i dunno. i like 90s pontiacs, wouldn't mind having a 97 or so grand prix, myself. new cars are boring though, no surprise. maybe the whole debate wouldn't be such a big deal if designers were allowed to see more of their ideas come to fruition and we'd have more than 3 or 4 types of interesting cars.

one thing i have wondered is why in the hell new cars haven't gotten lighter. all the components are built lighter and cheaper, yet cars are STILL overweight pigs. that new GTO weighed in at 3,950 lbs when tested by road and track, i think it was. bare bones it weighed well over 3,800. that kinda made me smile, though. in 54 pontiacs were heavier than ever before at 3,780. mine is a 50, so it ought to be somewhat lighter, especially by putting a MUCH lighter engine and trans combo than the cast iron I8 and hydramatic. i HOPE to be pushing comparable horsepower too; i should anyway. won't be very fuel efficient, but that's still cool to me. my "leadsled" sounds lke it would contend with a new goat in a straight line. not sure how it would shape out, but that's still kinda cool to think about while i'm putting shit together this winter.

DrJ, is that a rendering of the 49? can't tell if it's just a pixellated photo or not. if it is a rendering, DAMN that looks good.

[DrJ]

[ QUOTE ]
...
DrJ, is that a rendering of the 49? can't tell if it's just a pixellated photo or not. if it is a rendering, DAMN that looks good.

[/ QUOTE ]
It's the picture COOL57 couldn't quite get to load..That's all I know about it. other than the car didn't have a convertible looking roof when I saw it in L.A. (The picture that is, the car was a Ford concept car)

I don't have a problem with Pontiac having the splits on some of their cars when the design just works with it, but as far as a tradition goes, in the far past it was a once in a while thing that started in the early 30's with just a chrome strip down the grill, then in '34 it was gone and then in '35 they started the chrome streak panels that dominated the center of the hoods and ran down the middle of the grill too and the streaks lasted till I think it was '57, when they put two sets of them on the hood, but the post war cars didn't have a split grill opening till 59, then gone in '60. it was only when it worked with the rest of the design they used it, not because it was a requirement of all their designs.