Automotive News / Industry / Future Vehicle Discussion Automotive news and discussion about upcoming vehicles

SSR set to weight 4500lbs!

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Sep 19, 2002 | 11:18 AM
  #1  
formula79's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 3,698
From: USA
SSR set to weigh 4500lbs!

I was shocked to see that. Car and Drive says it will way at least that much and GM is predicting 16 second quartemile times! sorry hehe

Last edited by formula79; Sep 19, 2002 at 11:48 AM.
Old Sep 19, 2002 | 11:23 AM
  #2  
RiceEating5.0's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 1,313
It is a "truck". A hideous one at that.

Pretty hefty. At that weight and power, it'll have trouble hanging with regular trucks. Can this even be considered "performance".

The truck needs the power and numbers to back up the image and attitude
Old Sep 19, 2002 | 11:23 AM
  #3  
FRDnemesis's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 228
From: Charleston AFB SC
It deserves no better than that either

D@M a truck! Like there isnt already millions of them on the road. I hope that project sinks like the TITANIC!


Nahhhhhhh, I'm not bitter
Old Sep 19, 2002 | 11:33 AM
  #4  
Darth Xed's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 8,504
From: Ohio
4500 lbs?

It's not that big of a vehicle!

What did they use? Uranium for body panels or something?!

Old Sep 19, 2002 | 11:45 AM
  #5  
guionM's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 13,713
From: The Golden State
Thumbs down Re: SSR set to weight 4500lbs!

Originally posted by formula79
I was shocked to see that. Car and Drive says it will way at least that much and GM is predicting 16 second 0-60 times!
Being that the mechanisms to fold & store the roof aren't exactly lightweight, I'm inclined to believe the weight (though is seems a bit exagerated).

But.... I really don't believe the 0-60 times for a minute. The only way a 4500 pound vehicle would be that slow is if it was powered by something alot less powerful than the 3800 V6.
Old Sep 19, 2002 | 11:51 AM
  #6  
formula79's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 3,698
From: USA
Re: Re: SSR set to weight 4500lbs!

Originally posted by guionM
Being that the mechanisms to fold & store the roof aren't exactly lightweight, I'm inclined to believe the weight (though is seems a bit exagerated).

But.... I really don't believe the 0-60 times for a minute. The only way a 4500 pound vehicle would be that slow is if it was powered by something alot less powerful than the 3800 V6.
Sorry I meant 1/4 miles


It is built off the Trailblzer platform...Pretty much same drivertrain and chassis has the Buick Ranier...which will supposedly be the only short wheel base one on that platform to get the 5.3. 0-60 times were like 8 seconds.
Old Sep 19, 2002 | 11:53 AM
  #7  
guionM's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 13,713
From: The Golden State
Wink Re: Re: Re: SSR set to weight 4500lbs!

Originally posted by formula79
Sorry I meant 1/4 miles


It is built off the Trailblzer platform...Pretty much same drivertrain and chassis has the Buick Ranier...which will supposedly be the only short wheel base one on that platform to get the 5.3. 0-60 times were like 8 seconds.
I'd believe that 100%!
Old Sep 19, 2002 | 12:05 PM
  #8  
FRDnemesis's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 228
From: Charleston AFB SC
Originally posted by FRDnemesis
It deserves no better than that either

D@M a truck! Like there isnt already millions of them on the road. I hope that project sinks like the TITANIC!


Nahhhhhhh, I'm not bitter


Where's an ICEBERG when you need one?
Old Sep 19, 2002 | 12:29 PM
  #9  
Z28Wilson's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 6,165
From: Sterling Heights, MI
Unhappy

Guys, I really liked the original concept SSR. It was a unique kind of vehicle that actually had some style in an otherwise bland lineup of Chevys. Then I saw the toned-down production version. Smaller engine, less dramatic styling. Errrm, ok. Now that I see it is going to be an overweight pig to boot I am left to say "this is just another GM car that got all messed up in the transition from theory to reality." As it is now, it is a Prowler-type car that will only exist for a few years. Sad, I think it could've been a lot more.
Old Sep 19, 2002 | 01:01 PM
  #10  
Z284ever's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 16,176
From: Chicagoland IL
Originally posted by Z28Wilson
Guys, I really liked the original concept SSR. It was a unique kind of vehicle that actually had some style in an otherwise bland lineup of Chevys. Then I saw the toned-down production version. Smaller engine, less dramatic styling. Errrm, ok. Now that I see it is going to be an overweight pig to boot I am left to say "this is just another GM car that got all messed up in the transition from theory to reality." As it is now, it is a Prowler-type car that will only exist for a few years. Sad, I think it could've been a lot more.
STOP THE PRESSES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Wilson and I are in complete agreement!
Old Sep 19, 2002 | 02:56 PM
  #11  
CLEAN's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 2,575
From: Arlington, Texas
No doubt. Can GM say "PROWLER"? I mean come on! Ok, the Prowler looked kind of neat, probably got some people into the showroom, but nobody bought them unless they had some serious money to burn, annnd didn't care about performance. Not to mention what happened to the Lincoln Blackwood, that thing was DOA, I have yet to see one. Lets see, heavy truck, slow, permanently fixed bedcover, expensive.... If I were GM, I'd be shaking in my boots right now, unless I freely admited that I expected the SSR to be an EXTREMELY limited production niche vehicle, and am expecting sales only in the low thousands.
Old Sep 19, 2002 | 03:51 PM
  #12  
jrp4uc's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,724
From: Hebron, KY
Who were some of the people behind this project? I wonder how easily it would have been to assign those people and resources to a 5th gen Camaro instead.

I see what GM is going for with it as more of an image car, but it would be nice to at least have one car wearing SS badging that delivers performance. More power and 6spd are supposed to be on tap after a year or too, I don't see the point in holding it back.
Old Sep 19, 2002 | 06:46 PM
  #13  
DaxsZ28's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 503
From: Big Orange Country!
Angry

Leave it to GM to screw up something that could have been an alright vehicle. How can they do such a good job on trucks (don't you guys think so) and screw up cars so bad! I don't understand?
Old Sep 19, 2002 | 09:10 PM
  #14  
guionM's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 13,713
From: The Golden State
Unhappy

Originally posted by jrp4uc
Who were some of the people behind this project? I wonder how easily it would have been to assign those people and resources to a 5th gen Camaro instead.
Me too.
Old Sep 19, 2002 | 09:16 PM
  #15  
Ray86IROC's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Sep 1998
Posts: 642
From: Atlanta, Ga
I haven't been keeping up with it, what did they do go and decide to stick the same old lameass 3800 in it? That is just soooo ..... I don't know but it actually makes me angry and I don't even really care about the SSR...

You know all this great stuff about the GTO we keep hearing? I bet it comes out with some tired *** 300hp (at most motor) and is truly lackluster, I'm just getting tired of GM's sh*t.



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:29 PM.