Interior quality rant
07-09-2012, 08:07 PM
#11
Senior Member
Join Date: 07-05-2009
Location: High Bridge
Posts: 388
your rant is interesting and SOMEWHAT relevant BUT,
you apparently weren't around for the vehicles of the 50's, 60', 70's and maybe the 80's. Those interiors, even though made of more substantial material, were close to trash at that time. This was a major complaint by the consumer....according to manufacturer surveys. Glove box wouldn't close, doors fit like they were "dropped" together, dash materials split, upholstery faded and and ripped easily (unless it was leather), carpet didn't fit under the floor trim....trim alignment between 2 pieces was off by 1/4 inch, windows leaked water.
In short, the consumer was testing the vehicle for the manufacturer.
While, yes, the materials are plastic and thus fuel efficient lighter, the design, fit and finish is far superior.
The real question.....eliminating ALL other efficiencies, would you pay maybe $1500-2000 for an upgraded interior to metal products, heavier carpeting and better upholstery with maybe 3-4 MPG less?
Remember, while the HHR is an interesting design, it is essentially an economy car.....even in the SS version.
you apparently weren't around for the vehicles of the 50's, 60', 70's and maybe the 80's. Those interiors, even though made of more substantial material, were close to trash at that time. This was a major complaint by the consumer....according to manufacturer surveys. Glove box wouldn't close, doors fit like they were "dropped" together, dash materials split, upholstery faded and and ripped easily (unless it was leather), carpet didn't fit under the floor trim....trim alignment between 2 pieces was off by 1/4 inch, windows leaked water.
In short, the consumer was testing the vehicle for the manufacturer.
While, yes, the materials are plastic and thus fuel efficient lighter, the design, fit and finish is far superior.
The real question.....eliminating ALL other efficiencies, would you pay maybe $1500-2000 for an upgraded interior to metal products, heavier carpeting and better upholstery with maybe 3-4 MPG less?
Remember, while the HHR is an interesting design, it is essentially an economy car.....even in the SS version.
07-09-2012, 08:15 PM
#12
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: 02-19-2010
Location: Buffalo ny
Posts: 1,529
your rant is interesting and SOMEWHAT relevant BUT,
you apparently weren't around for the vehicles of the 50's, 60', 70's and maybe the 80's. Those interiors, even though made of more substantial material, were close to trash at that time. This was a major complaint by the consumer....according to manufacturer surveys. Glove box wouldn't close, doors fit like they were "dropped" together, dash materials split, upholstery faded and and ripped easily (unless it was leather), carpet didn't fit under the floor trim....trim alignment between 2 pieces was off by 1/4 inch, windows leaked water.
In short, the consumer was testing the vehicle for the manufacturer.
While, yes, the materials are plastic and thus fuel efficient lighter, the design, fit and finish is far superior.
The real question.....eliminating ALL other efficiencies, would you pay maybe $1500-2000 for an upgraded interior to metal products, heavier carpeting and better upholstery with maybe 3-4 MPG less?
Remember, while the HHR is an interesting design, it is essentially an economy car.....even in the SS version.
you apparently weren't around for the vehicles of the 50's, 60', 70's and maybe the 80's. Those interiors, even though made of more substantial material, were close to trash at that time. This was a major complaint by the consumer....according to manufacturer surveys. Glove box wouldn't close, doors fit like they were "dropped" together, dash materials split, upholstery faded and and ripped easily (unless it was leather), carpet didn't fit under the floor trim....trim alignment between 2 pieces was off by 1/4 inch, windows leaked water.
In short, the consumer was testing the vehicle for the manufacturer.
While, yes, the materials are plastic and thus fuel efficient lighter, the design, fit and finish is far superior.
The real question.....eliminating ALL other efficiencies, would you pay maybe $1500-2000 for an upgraded interior to metal products, heavier carpeting and better upholstery with maybe 3-4 MPG less?
Remember, while the HHR is an interesting design, it is essentially an economy car.....even in the SS version.
The main point i was making was that to gain maybe 5mpgs, the interiors are skipped out on. and while they feel cheap, they are still a relatively sleek design for being plastic. I'm 99% fine with my interior. with the exception of the spot where i rest my arm, which im used to
07-09-2012, 08:18 PM
#13
Senior Member
Join Date: 04-04-2012
Location: Sarasota, FL
Posts: 1,307
You can always make it your own. You can change whatever you want for some $$$$$.
Well I was born in 1990. So the 80's are a grey area for me.
but I do recall my dads camaro have a cracked dashboard.
Well I was born in 1990. So the 80's are a grey area for me.
but I do recall my dads camaro have a cracked dashboard.
07-09-2012, 08:26 PM
#14
Senior Member
Join Date: 07-05-2009
Location: High Bridge
Posts: 388
The cracked dash thing was very common back in the day. What made that even worse was that the dashes were usually made of foam underneath the surface, so where the interiors cracked you'd see this exposed foam rapidly discoloring.
07-09-2012, 09:06 PM
#16
Senior Member
Join Date: 11-19-2010
Location: Springfield, Oregon
Posts: 620
I respectfully disagree with the OP's opinion.
While I have a 2LT with the leather seats, I have driven a 'plain' 1 LT with the cloth seats (which I believe are the same as the LS seats). I found those seats to be be perfectly acceptable. Everything fits together well. I saw no evidence of shoddy workmanship. It was actually a very big improvement over my last Chevy, which was a '96 Blazer. The only issue that I've had in the interior is a loose dash 12v outlet. I find the area behind the front seats to be extremely versatile. I've had to haul a Little Giant ladder around, and all I have to do is flip the right half of the back seat down and it swallows it right up. I've been able to put an amazing amount of stuff in the back.
While I have a 2LT with the leather seats, I have driven a 'plain' 1 LT with the cloth seats (which I believe are the same as the LS seats). I found those seats to be be perfectly acceptable. Everything fits together well. I saw no evidence of shoddy workmanship. It was actually a very big improvement over my last Chevy, which was a '96 Blazer. The only issue that I've had in the interior is a loose dash 12v outlet. I find the area behind the front seats to be extremely versatile. I've had to haul a Little Giant ladder around, and all I have to do is flip the right half of the back seat down and it swallows it right up. I've been able to put an amazing amount of stuff in the back.
07-09-2012, 09:24 PM
#17
Senior Member
Join Date: 04-04-2012
Location: Sarasota, FL
Posts: 1,307
Agree with you. I have an ls with the cloth seats. Everything flows together. J happen to like the grey interior. My only interior gripes are the door locks which stick up when locked, arm killer with window down. And the fragile interior door handles. Other than that I live it.
07-09-2012, 09:31 PM
#18
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: 02-19-2010
Location: Buffalo ny
Posts: 1,529
I am not compaining about the interior at all.....Im complaining about people complaing how cars are built like crap especially the interiors. I said i was fine with mine and it looked pretty sleek. I agree also that its nice for being an "economy" car....I never once complained about the interior and i respect the fact the chevy put suede inserts in the seats.... It could be worse. the engines in these cars are meant to last the life of the car, if not longer. and the "100,000 miles plus" members will probably tell you that if anything, the engine still runs like new. the ecotec is one of the best and most versatile engines around
how cars are built like crap especially the interiors. I said i was fine with mine and it looked pretty sleek. I agree also that its nice for being an "economy" car....I never once complained about the interior and i respect the fact the chevy put suede inserts in the seats.... It could be worse. the engines in these cars are meant to last the life of the car, if not longer. and the "100,000 miles plus" members will probably tell you that if anything, the engine still runs like new. the ecotec is one of the best and most versatile engines around
