Chevy HHR is Dangerous

CarKid1989 wrote: Its just another applience car.

Agreed. Although I do recall reviews saying the SS was a hoot to drive.

Think of is as a Cobalt SS wagon and you're on the right track. Sounds fine to me.

Great, something else to endlessly cruise eBay for.

According to the HHR forum, only 216 built!

I liked the one I drove for a weekend out of town, except for chintzy seat fabric. OTOH, parents bought a '10 Accord EX last fall and it is just as bad. Do want an HHR SS.

That dark blue ss panel is awesome.

^+1 I'd rock that in a heartbeat.

alex wrote: If I could get an SS Panel, I'd probably buy it tomorrow.

You could get the Panel in an SS. Not for the whole run, but for a year or two.

Should have looked at page 2 before posting.

alex wrote: +1 I'd rock that in a heartbeat.

aircooled wrote: I am highly suspicious the Vibe has even worse visibility issues (never driven one). Look at the size of that C pillar! (or is it a D pillar) But, you might say, note how large the rear window is. But wait, what is all that black stuff on it? Well of course that's 25%(!!) of the window that is just pretending to be a window but is in fact just fake window. The rear side visibility on these things must be horrendous.

I think this version might be worse:

tuna55 wrote: The same people that would advocate driving cross country with a 30+ year old worn out whatever with no dampers even installed and no parts for anything even within the same country say that driving a brand new HHR is dangerous. You guys are weird. Visibility wasn't great, but I thought it was fine to drive and it seemed to handle just fine for driving around town. No issues here.

Not weird, when it comes to safety, we just compare new cars against new cars, not 30 year old cars.

Cotton wrote:

ultraclyde wrote: Cotton - I had some guy try to "run" his HHR SS against my 05 mustang on the way home from work. From what I saw, you probably aren't missing out on much......

He probably couldn't drive. They *should* be pretty quick, but it may be hard to put the power down being FWD. I have an 03 Mach 1 (305HP) and an 09 Solstice GXP Coupe (260HP). Stock they were mid 13s and pretty even. I have not ran them since the Mach got intake/exhaust and the Solstice got the GMPP tune though.

A guy I work with has an Integra with a dyno verified 579hp at the wheels. I raced him in our parking lot and beat him in my stock Solstice GXP, because he couldn't hook up in a distance that short. But he runs low 12's in the quarter and I think my Solstice is about 14 flat. I wouldn't expect an HHR SS to run nearly as fast or be nearly as satisfying as a Solstice.

bravenrace wrote:

tuna55 wrote: The same people that would advocate driving cross country with a 30+ year old worn out whatever with no dampers even installed and no parts for anything even within the same country say that driving a brand new HHR is dangerous. You guys are weird. Visibility wasn't great, but I thought it was fine to drive and it seemed to handle just fine for driving around town. No issues here.

Not weird, when it comes to safety, we just compare new cars against new cars, not 30 year old cars.

The OP is not comparing the HHR to a new car here necessarily, just saying that it is dangerous. I am saying that, say a 1985 MR2, in the OPs garage, is way more "dangerous" from a pure safety viewpoint (I know that the dangerous aspect included more than just crash testing, but I am using that for comparison here). Certainly my argument remains, though, why would someone consider renting a brand new anything more dangerous than driving a 30 year old POS home sight unseen?

bravenrace wrote: A guy I work with has an Integra with a dyno verified 579hp at the wheels. I raced him in our parking lot and beat him in my stock Solstice GXP, because he couldn't hook up in a distance that short. But he runs low 12's in the quarter and I think my Solstice is about 14 flat. I wouldn't expect an HHR SS to run nearly as fast or be nearly as satisfying as a Solstice.

fair enough, but, to be fair, youre also comparing a purpose built sports roadster with a hopped up station wagon pushing the front wheels. I wouldn't expect it to be nearly as satisfying either. But HP per utility, Id say the HHR makes a lot of sense from a practicality perspective, so you need to weigh your priorities.

tuna55 wrote:

bravenrace wrote:

tuna55 wrote: The same people that would advocate driving cross country with a 30+ year old worn out whatever with no dampers even installed and no parts for anything even within the same country say that driving a brand new HHR is dangerous. You guys are weird. Visibility wasn't great, but I thought it was fine to drive and it seemed to handle just fine for driving around town. No issues here.

Not weird, when it comes to safety, we just compare new cars against new cars, not 30 year old cars.

The OP is not comparing the HHR to a new car here necessarily, just saying that it is dangerous. I am saying that, say a 1985 MR2, in the OPs garage, is way more "dangerous" from a pure safety viewpoint (I know that the dangerous aspect included more than just crash testing, but I am using that for comparison here). Certainly my argument remains, though, why would someone consider renting a brand new anything more dangerous than driving a 30 year old POS home sight unseen?

They wouldn't, or shouldn't anyway. But It's silly to compare the safety of a new car to a 30 year old car. Apples and Oranges. Comparing it to a new car is the only thing that makes sense.

tuna55 wrote: ....Certainly my argument remains, though, why would someone consider renting a brand new anything more dangerous than driving a 30 year old POS home sight unseen?

Well, because you know the "POS" is dangerous (relatively) and you drive it as such. The vast majority of accidents can be avoided by the driver if care is taken. The new HHR is safer, and it seems like it is safer when you drive it, so you don't need to drive as carefully. Add to that, that you can't see a lot of the thing you might want to avoid anyway, makes it worse.

Put someone in this:

and put someone in this:

I am sure you will find the former is driven a lot more carefully (and probably sees a LOT better). Obviously there are accidents you cannot avoid, but those are very rare (running lights, stop signs etc.). In those rare cases, the former can be bad news.

So all cars should be as unsafe as possible. Barbed wire around the seatbelts, spikes on the dashboards, excellent idea!

Yes. Give it a try.

Realistically, the best case would be cars should "seem" to be unsafe (so they are driven carefully) yet actually safe in a collision. The perception of safety really is that last thing you want in terms of safety (when human operators are involved).

Humans are very good at working withing the limits (in terms of person comfort with what they are doing) of the "system" they are in. Give them more and they will take more once they have discovered they can take it. Give them better brakes, they wait longer to brake. Make them feel invulnerable they will be more reckless. Make the car super quite and smooth, they will drive faster.

I had an HHR as a rental for a week a few years ago. I'm 5'7", and I agree with the OP, you can't see traffic lights in that thing, and I had to move my head around a little more to see around the A-pillars. I almost felt claustrophobic because of the way the roof came down so low in the front. I wouldn't say visibility was dangerous though.

Overall, the HHR performed perfectly fine as the "stylish" appliance it was designed to be. I drove it from Denver airport to a couple of ski resorts up in the mountains and it did just fine except for on the steepest grades, where it hunted between gears until I just locked it in. It was fairly comfortable, and got really good mileage. It would be curious to see how an SS feels versus the rental version.

Bob

aircooled wrote: Yes. Give it a try. Realistically, the best case would be cars should "seem" to be unsafe (so they are driven carefully) yet actually safe in a collision. The perception of safety really is that last thing you want in terms of safety (when human operators are involved). Humans are very good at working withing the limits (in terms of person comfort with what they are doing) of the "system" they are in. Give them more and they will take more once they have discovered they can take it. Give them better brakes, they wait longer to brake. Make them feel invulnerable they will be more reckless. Make the car super quite and smooth, they will drive faster.

I understand your point, and theory would probably hold for some people (not me, I would guess) but that's not to say that the HHR is dangerous because of that effect.

I thought all cars built in the last five or ten years had giant A pillars and mailslot windows...at least every one I've ridden in was that way.

So why not just buy a Honda Element instead?

Good visibility, optional AWD, hose down cargo area and probably handles as well or better than the HHR.

In reply to tuna55:

I think you are confusing "active" and "passive" safety. My 1985 is a tiny little car with rust issues and no airbags. I am sure it is less safe than the HHR, should I get slammed by a Suburban. But in 1985, it was up on all the safety standards. Had it been made today, it would have airbags, ABS, side intrusion bars, etc. and be comparable to the HHR from a passive safety standpoint.

From an "active" safety standpoint however, I can easily see out of the MR2 in all directions and am highly aware of my surroundings and the flow of traffic and what the other cars are doing. Not so in the HHR. I felt unsafe because I felt that I might drive into something I could not see or mow down some poor pedestrian because they were in one of several huge blind spots.

Compared to the other car in the garage, a Kia Rondo, the HHR looses out in both active and passive safety, not to mention cargo space, ride utility, price and value. (The HHR wins big in style of course, as it has a lot and the Rondo has none.) For a modern car, I was surprised at the shortcomings of the HHR. My 5' tall sister had less of an issue, so it is a personal choice for sure.

In reply to WilberM3 :

Old post ...

 216 ss HHR panels were made  period. only for the model year 2009.. I was lucky enough to buy one recently.

The only other post I have seen on the internet that combines the words "HHR" and "Lucky" was one that went something along the lines of "I was lucky when my HHR started on fire that the insurance company paid me decent money to get something else"

Cameo3124, welcome to the forum!

I like the look of the SS panels, got pics you can post? If so start a new thread about your's.