General HHR Discuss anything related to the Chevy HHR that doesnt seem to fit into the more specific categories below.

What is the stupidest design error?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 07-14-2011, 08:32 AM
  #151  
Senior Member
 
db/sb's Avatar
 
Join Date: 06-26-2006
Location: San Bernardino, California
Posts: 1,876
Originally Posted by ChevroletCustomerService
Dear Silverfox and other members of the forum,

I would like to thank each and every one of you for taking the time to post your feedback about the Chevrolet HHR. I have documented your comments. This information is saved within the system and it is available for various departments within General Motors to access.

I hope that you all have a great day.

Sincerely,
Michelle, Chevrolet Customer Service
Since production of the HHR has reached the end, what good will that do?
db/sb is offline  
Old 07-14-2011, 09:44 AM
  #152  
Senior Member
 
nacademus's Avatar
 
Join Date: 09-10-2010
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
Posts: 904
Originally Posted by db/sb
Since production of the HHR has reached the end, what good will that do?
Considerations for later models-not necessarily HHR?

nacademus is offline  
Old 07-14-2011, 10:05 AM
  #153  
Senior Member
 
db/sb's Avatar
 
Join Date: 06-26-2006
Location: San Bernardino, California
Posts: 1,876
I don't know. I think it's just a customer service based answer. The thread is about so called 'design errors' in the HHR. Don't see how that helps other models. Besides, HHR's have been out since, what, the fall of 2005? I think GM would already have compiled most if not all of the feedback they'd need in 6 years........
db/sb is offline  
Old 07-14-2011, 10:14 AM
  #154  
Senior Member
 
nacademus's Avatar
 
Join Date: 09-10-2010
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
Posts: 904
Originally Posted by db/sb
I don't know. I think it's just a customer service based answer. The thread is about so called 'design errors' in the HHR. Don't see how that helps other models. Besides, HHR's have been out since, what, the fall of 2005? I think GM would already have compiled most if not all of the feedback they'd need in 6 years........
You can compile feedback from reviewers, testers, general public perception, etc. however, receiving input from a community that chose the vehicle based on a more in-depth appreciation for it than say, the average user, is forever more useful.

It could very well be a generic customer service reply. On the other hand, this representative is on these forums a lot more than the average user is, and they offer real support for many of us here through PMs and thread posts. I doubt that it was BS.
nacademus is offline  
Old 07-14-2011, 10:34 AM
  #155  
Senior Member
 
db/sb's Avatar
 
Join Date: 06-26-2006
Location: San Bernardino, California
Posts: 1,876
Don't get me wrong; I'm not equating the reply with BS., but, considering how long the vehicle has been in production, I'm just not sure how much useful info can be gained at this stage of the game. Not if GM has been listening all along.
db/sb is offline  
Old 07-14-2011, 03:34 PM
  #156  
Senior Member
 
diskullman's Avatar
 
Join Date: 01-10-2008
Location: NJ
Posts: 681
As a former Saab nut (had about 10 different saabs between the years of 97-93) I'm quite familiar with the Ecotec engine. I converted 2 Saabs from 3 speed automatic to 5 speed manual. This swap was like a turbo upgrade, as the 3 speed was a major slug and slow off the start, the 5 speed allowed for much faster acceleration.
Same problem with the HHR, with the 4 speed auotomatic, and the AC on, this pig is like a slug trying to get rolling. Other vehicles with the same engine (Sky , Solstice) use a 5 speed automatic, and I heardone of the newer Chevy models will have a 6 speed automatic.
Is it really a design flaw? Well, this has been common knowledge for over 20 years. The basic 2 liter engine is bullet proof and a great engine, but more gears in the trans really helps. Also 22/28 MPG is rather crappy for a 4 cylinder, but again, that's about what my last saab used to get.
diskullman is offline  
Old 07-14-2011, 03:59 PM
  #157  
Senior Member
 
Mowgli's Avatar
 
Join Date: 06-09-2009
Location: Clinton, Mass
Posts: 2,950
Originally Posted by diskullman
22/28 MPG is rather crappy for a 4 cylinder, but again, that's about what my last saab used to get.
32 highway here

Mowgli is offline  
Old 07-14-2011, 06:31 PM
  #158  
Senior Member
 
Silverfox's Avatar
 
Join Date: 08-26-2008
Location: Sequim Washington
Posts: 1,488
33 -34 Hiway here..2011 2.4L w/auto 87 Octane fuel. Tires 32lbs. all around

But I drive like I'm Still SANE. (most of the time)
Silverfox is offline  
Old 07-14-2011, 06:59 PM
  #159  
Moderator
 
donbrew's Avatar
 
Join Date: 01-23-2009
Location: Fredericksburg,VA
Posts: 25,325
When I drive ALL highway, 4 car lengths behind a truck I get 39 mpg (no truck 32). But in my real life I am averaging 22-28.

Regarding the auto trans; remember that those "3 speed" Saabs where actually 2 speed + overdrive and the HHR "4 speed" is 3 speed + overdrive. Meaning, you start out in a godawful gear, NOT geared for "pink slip acceleration" more for "little old lady with a cast on her ankle acceleration".
donbrew is offline  
Old 07-15-2011, 03:48 PM
  #160  
Senior Member
 
diskullman's Avatar
 
Join Date: 01-10-2008
Location: NJ
Posts: 681
Originally Posted by Mowgli
32 highway here

You get that kind of mileage with a CEL and the oil light on?

And yes, just like Saabs, the turbos get better mileage.
diskullman is offline  


Quick Reply: What is the stupidest design error?



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:19 PM.