At MSRP of about 39K, and I'm sure a very large markup until supply reaches demand. Check out the latest Car and Driver.
This discussion has been closed.
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
there is a nice article with tech spec and pics
Anyone see anything official yet?
For anyone who hasn't seen it, there is a very informative web site, ssrrs.com. They seem to update current info very quickly.
They do the Zz1 Tahoes, Burbs, Extreme pickups and blazers.....etc....along with tons of specialty cars......502 Impala SS was cool too.
The truck I am talking about is a pick up...not an el-camino...
I think I know John!!!
An aluminum 5.3L tuned like a Vette would likely yield around 325HP. Makes a lot more sense to me in a performance truck to loose the 500lbs. to only sacrifice 20HP.
Also why don't they offer it with the 6spd manual from the Vette, this is supposed to be a performance "driver's" truck after all.
I wonder if the same retractable roof will be offered with other GM vehicles. I like sunroofs, but a retractable roof would be even nicer. Didn't Ford make a car with a retractable roof back in the late '50s or early '60s? I think I remember seeing a Fairlane that had one.
I just happened to be talking about the SSR with a friend of mine at work last night and his neighbor also has one on order from a different dealer that I'm using. If the dealer you went to doesn't want your business, just go to another one...it's not like Chevy dealers are rare! Even at the volume they are predicting to produce they'll be all sold by time they hit the dealers.
It will be interesting to see how the pricing holds up, I know won't be paying a premium on top of the estimated $38K. I'm on my second BMW Z3 so I know exactly how much performance car you can get for that kind of scratch if the General wants to get greedy!
"The engine features new quiet-profile pistons to ensure that the pistons track straight in their bores, minimizing clearances as the pistons rock under gas pressure.
The pistons are polymer-coated to reduce cold scuffing and engine noise. Polymer-coated pistons, long a mainstay in luxury car engines, enable tighter bore clearances, provide enduring wear surfaces between pistons and cylinder walls, and further reduce piston motion."
Perhaps the answer lies here.
so when you gonna sign up over the obyone?
It appears with the exception of the vette, GM has chosen not to compete in the performance arena with the Lightning, the S/C Harley Davidson edition, and the new Dodge Ram SRT-V10. Course these trucks are not built for everyone, then again, neither is the SSR. The original design of the SSR had the 6.0 only to be downsized to the 5.3. Bean counters at work?
Impala SS with a s/c 3.8? Seems GM is content to denigrate a once performance associated name. Guess the same thing that Chrysler did with the 300M. Sure hope they do kill the Camaro and not install a s/c 3.8 in there as well.
They blew it? Have you driven one? NO BECAUSE ITS NOT EVEN OUT YET!!! So how can you say chevy blew it?
Where did all of this weight come from? It was supposed to weigh something like 3800lbs - is Gilbert Brown hiding in the trunk? All that extra weight won't help the vehicle's handling, either. And, who's idea was it to square-off the rear wheel flairs?
I like the idea - no other company has anything like it. Even the Lightning is in a different class. I'm just a little disappointed in the execution.
Yes, the '94-'96 Impala SS had the LT-1 engine that made 260 ponies, but it was big and heavy. Its 0-60 time was even slower than the Regal and GTP (7.1 versus 6.5 seconds). And yes, the same Impala could produce some pretty good burnouts, and it was also great looking (especially the black ones). But the '04 Impala SS is supposed to get a minor facelift and a "tweaked" version of the S/C 3800 that will make ~250-260 ponies.
So when you say things like "Seems GM is content to denigrate a once performance associated name", you're only insulting people who own a Regal GS or Pontiac GTP. Unless you didn't mean it that way.
Remember this Buick?
Or this one? This is a SC 3.8. Ever tried comparing it to the one offered today?
My point is simply this...with the SSR, GM elected not to install the 6.0 but rather the 5.3. I would have hoped that they opted for the 8.1 which would truely distinguish the SSR. Same with the Siverado SS. Can't understand what the're trying to accomplish with it especially with Dodge rolling out with their new SRT-10.
This also goes for the SC 3.8. Manufacturers like Nissan has naturally aspirated engines putting out 260HP, same goes for Honda and with less cubic inches to boot. All this while GM is content to place the same SC 3.8 in a Buick or a Pontiac with dubious build quality and expect people to buy them. Would you spend $40K on a Park Avenue with the SC 3.8? BTW, I own two GM products, a Denali and a Silverado. With the offerings from the other manufacturers, I seriously doubt that my next vehicle which I will be acquiring in February 2003 will be a GM.
If people are satisfied with what they buy, that's all that really matters. What I think of their choice is not relevant. My only question would be....if they had really made an informed decision?
(1) I've seen some video of SS burnouts (forgot the website). The car was indeed powerful. However, I've also seen some Regal GS burnouts (looks hilarious to see the front wheels smoking).
(2) Yes, I've seen a few Buick Gran Sports in my long days on this planet (I'm 58). They were a great looking and performing car. I own a '98 Regal GS and found out the GSCA has a branch for newer GS owners. Check out their site:
(3) I've also seen quite a few Grand Nationals on the street, and one GNX at a car show. I talked with a kid who brought his GN in for a tire rotation. We had a long discussion while we were waiting. Said he had a new intercooler installed. He said the car was the ultimate sleeper, and turned a few heads (chick mobile).
Good luck to you in February, 2003 when you plan on purchasing a new vehicle. I was wondering though, if you don't like GM cars or trucks, why do you bother to post messages in a Chevy forum?
During the gas crunch in the early 70's, I dumped my gas hog V8 390 Ford Galaxie and bought a gas miser import. Since then I've mostly bought Japanese imports until '93 when I leased a Lincoln Mark VIII. I found that I had missed the big car ride and the V8 HP and torque. So again in '95 I leased another Mark VIII. I was quickly reminded of American build quality as the car spent 2 of 24 months of its lease in the shop. So I nixed Ford and Lincoln on my next go around and ended up with a 97.5 Regal GS. Similarly I was reminded of the build quality so in 2000 I said I would get an older designed GM product which was the '00 Denali seeing what the newly designed Yukon caused many of its owners.
The Denali has performed much to my expectations except for three recalls related to the OnStar system. Ironic that something that is supposed to provide added protection actually cause me to get stalled as it inadvertantly under certain conditions, kills the battery. My '00 Silverado based on the new design had qualified for buyback under the lemon law. However, since most of the problems were repaired, I decided to keep the vehilce with a 6/100 Major Guard bumper to bumper $0 deductible warranty free courtesy of GM.
One of the reasons that I post in the Chevy/GMC topics is to aid other owners who are experiencing what I had already gone through with either their dealers stonewalling them or the tons of problems with their trucks that have TSB's associated but still encounter dealer's service departments denial.
My only point as I had stated above is GM's obvious opinion of the American buying public. Those that continue to acquire GM products though quality, performance, and perceived value is somewhat questionable. I'm finding it particularly difficult to purchase another GM product base on my last three vehicle experiences.
BTW, you never did answer my question regarding purchasing a front wheel drive, SC 3.8, $40k Park Avenue. My thinking is that for $40k one should get a little more value, maybe something like this....with RWD, 340Hp V8.
Back to the topic...why do you suppose that GM selected the 5.3 to install in the SSR? Other than costing less and requiring the 4L-60E vs. the 4L-80E which that in itself saves a ton of money, would there be any other reason? Do you think that GM will lower their introductory price because of this?