Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
HHR Future Powertrains?
It would be nice if they offered a performance engine for people who want hot rod performance and don't care much about MPG and an economy powertrain option with high mpg.
The current offerings that combine the unfortunate combination of weak acceleration with low-ish gas mileage leave much to be desired.
They should, at the very least, offer a 5-speed automatic instead of only 4-speed auto.
You would get slightly better performance from more closely-spaced gear ratios combined with an extra-tall overdrive gear for quieter and relaxed highway driving at lower rpm and lower fuel useage.
The current offerings that combine the unfortunate combination of weak acceleration with low-ish gas mileage leave much to be desired.
They should, at the very least, offer a 5-speed automatic instead of only 4-speed auto.
You would get slightly better performance from more closely-spaced gear ratios combined with an extra-tall overdrive gear for quieter and relaxed highway driving at lower rpm and lower fuel useage.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Most cars get good mileage driving at a steady highway speed (even a 268HP Camry can get 30 mpg on the highway), so 30 mpg on highway trips is expected, but mix in stop and go city driving other people say they get more like 22 MPG (which is V6 territory).
The problem with the HHR is that it seems to give you V6 gas mileage with the performance, noise and vibration levels of a 4 cylinder.
What kind of acceleration numbers have the mgazines got when the HRR has the automatic transmission? I only see test results with the 5-speed manual.
The 2.4 would probably be fine if it had a 5-speed automatic instead of that old 4-speed. A couple more mpg and a little better acceleration without having to drive and try to resell a manual transission model down the road.
The very heavy weight of the HHR is probably what causes the sluggish performance and so-so fuel economy.
The Edmunds review tested the HHR with the 2.4 engine and automatic at 0-60 of 9.5 seconds. That seems just adequate if a little slow.
If the 2.4 is that slow, then the 2.2 with automatic must really be dangerously slow for merging onto highways with a load of passengers.
A V6 would be nicer and would move the vehicle's weight around without working as hard, but their V6s probably don't fit the engine department or they would offer one.
So jaxs1, what vehicle out there, well loaded, station wagon like, that really get 27.9 mpg, for <$20K beats the 2LT?
Chevy just should not put engines designed for the much lighter Cobalts into such a very heavy vehicle as the HHR.
Or maybe the HHR just shouldn't be as heavy as it is and then the Cobalt engines wouldn't have to struggle to move that weight around as much as they do.
The Vibe " 2700lbs/126HP = 21.4lbs/HP.
The Mazda5 " 3389lbs/157HP = 21.6lbs/HP.
Once again, you are full of baloney.
SRT4 Caliber weighs 2966lbs/ 300HP=9.9#/HP
Caliber RT weighs 3308lbs/172HP=19.3#/HP incl AWD
I just wanted a little better performance, better mileage and a quieter, lower RPM cruising at highway speeds with the automatic. All that can be accomplished with a 5 speed automatic.
It would be better still if they also offered an engine that better handled the heavy weight of the HHR (like a V6) or if the vehicle was not so heavy to begin with.
There was a big difference going from 3 speed automatics to 4 speed automatics with lockup torque converters (which lock and unlock on very flexible programs), but not so much in going from 4 speed to 5 speed automatics.
I owned and extensively drove all the vehicles mentioned above except the Fit.
I test drove a New Beetle with a 6 speed automatic. Guess what - not any better than the 4/5 speeds in the other cars (but from reports better than VW's old 4 speed).
What seems to make the most difference is the programming of the automatic. The 4 speed auto in our Dodge Neon was nimble, locking up and unlocking, downshifting and upshifting crisply and responsively. The automatic in the PT felt sluggish and reluctant to shift in comparison. I understand the auto in the Neon in the year before ours got dinged for being unresponsive, but got reprogrammed the following year.
Owners of the new 268 HP RAV4 do claim to get near 30MPG on the highway.
You compare city mpg of the V6 RAV4 with your highway mileage of an HHR and that is not valid.
The HHR has Cobalt powertrains and it is not a lightweight Cobalt, so it is expected that it performs and gets fuel economy like a Cobalt loaded down with many hundred pounds of passengers and cargo would.
As far as the engine comments, I'm with jaxs1 on this. The 2004 Malibu LT sedan we had with the 3500 pushrod (I can hear the moans already) felt more powerful all around than the Cobalt sedan we recently had as a loaner. All that while returning roughly 24-26 city and as much as 35 highway miles per gallon. Besides the obvious image problems some might have with the pushrod, I can see this being a very good optional powerplant for the HHRs.
If GM puts a good clean diesel in the HHR I will put the HHR in my driveway.
Not much but may help some.
Was also reading there's a rumor going around that in early 2007 there would be an HHR with a 260HP engine like the one in the Saturn Sky! What a little rocket that would be!!
this happened with the PT cruiser
it started with a 1600cc petrol then a 2litre petrol then a 2.4 petrol then a 2.4 turbo petrol all of which had low MPG.
THEN they fitted a 2.2 diesel Turbo (European version) and low and behold it had POWER and gave an average of 38mpg, such was the difference the stayhard petrol heads started to buy the new DIESEL version, or importing the 2.4 turbo petrol high output LHD.
The diesels of today DONT smell, are NOT as noisy as they used to be, yet give GOOD power for less fuel against the petrol engine.
But there again good old USA want BIG BIG BIG engines YET want BIG MPG as well (oil/fuel price crisis)
Fit a diesel engine , a GOOD diesel engine, dont spend millions of $$$$$ developing a suitable engine or makkle up an old existing diesel engine.
GRIT your teeth, save your money and buy in a GOOD well known engine that delivers what the HHR needs POWER and ECONOMY (Mercedes, Honda, GM ) to name a few.
are you really LISTENING or are you going to carry on making STUPID mistakes for the sake of "THE COMPANIES " name and continue manufacturing a vehicle that CANNOT compete within the motoring market place.
There are two types of people those that "say what they mean"
and those that "MEAN what they say"
CHEVROLET which are YOU??????????????
Vauxhall Frontera 2.2 Diesel Turbo
Signum 1.9 " "
signum 3.0 v6 Diesel turbo
Vectra 2.0 diesel turbo
vectra 1.7 " "
all these engines are real fliers
General Motors owns:
-Buick
-Cadillac
-Chevrolet
-Daewoo (GM owns 44%)
-Fiat (GM has decided to divorce itself from Fiat as of Feb '05, but will retain 10% ownership.)
-GMC
-Holden
-Hummer
-Oldsmobile (brand discontinued)
-Opel
-Pontiac
-Saab
-Saturn
-Suzuki (2.5%, from 20%)
-Vauxhall
so WHERE is the problem getting a GOOD diesel engine for the HHR?????????
maybe GM think you Americans are ALL stupid and wont take the initative and buy a quick diesel HHR
BMW have diesel engines now , the same as Jaguar or Saab so why NOT an HHR (makes sense to me.
We are unlucky in the UK you cant buy an HHR for love nor money (unless you import) and the diesel HHR I think would sell well over here.