Saw an SSR yesterday on the highway. I was on the service road so I didn't get a great look, just the 3/4 and rear glimpse. From that angle, did not look great. The bed looks like a box. In photos, it looked maybe retro cool. In real life on the road in yellow, it looked kinda ridiculous.

On another note, saw a Chrysler PT Cruiser convertible. Is it me or when the top is down, it looks like a tub? I guess that's the look they wanted.

 

I've seen one the other day with the top down. it really sticks out from other traffic.

 

In mags it looked like its nice--but in person it is HUGE, it is a rolling joke--Expensive and doesn't perform. However, they are putting the LS2 in for '05 to give it the muscle it at least was supposed to have. In my opinion it sucks. Now the SRT10 Ram is a different story :D

 

SSR is overpriced and ugly. PT convertible is just ugly.

BTW...Why in hell is Chrysler not coming up with an SRT version of the PT? It was supposed to be a hot rod throw back right? How trick would that be with some fatty tires in the back, pizza cutters in front, and flames blazing down the sides and out the exhaust pipes. Nah, lets see how much HP we can get out of a Neon! Thats why I will never buy a Chrysler anything. They are still behind the others and always will be. Even if Benz owns them.

 

That would be really trick, since the PT Cruiser is front wheel drive... :p

Regards,
Gordon

 

I think they are cool looking, although they are too big.

The weight really makes them perform poorly.

 

Ok so put the fattys up front and the pizza cutters in back then!

 

The SSR is totally impracticle. Since they decided to make it a convertable, you lose alot of space. It has all the impracticalities of both a car and a truck. I think they are useless unless you have an extra wad of cash and like ugliness.

-JiM

 

The SSR and PT Pooper are both a waste of metal IMO.

 

i also think the SSR is the stupidest thing out of detroit in... maybe forever.

 

I think the PT Cruiser is nice--I just never would drive one. The SSR is garbage. Once the LS2 goes in maybe I will respect its performance; but $45,000--that can kick rocks.

 

I don't know. Tha Aztek was pretty lame. Not surprising, the Chevy dealership where I live nearby is selling five SSR's.

 

There's a dealer here in SoCal (around Long Beach/Carson) that's visible from the freeway with a penchant for putting rows of yellow cars along the edge of their storage structure. One time they had 5 or 6 SSRs lined up, all yellow, I'd be amazed if anyone showed up at their lot for the couple weeks that was their display.

From what I've seen of them, there is no angle from which that thing looks presentable in any color, and yellow really amplifies the effect (although GM's yellow has nothing on Mazda's shade)

 

They are butt poor ugly and don't perform too well.............

 

The SSR weighs 4750 lbs.
Why didn't GM put the aluminum 5.3 with cylinder shutoff (DOD) and couple that to the 5L50e and short gearing?

 

Don't they do market research before they put a car into production?

 

nono, the Aztek was a good concept with horrible styling, just really really bad awful styling. but still a good concept which they maintained and remarketed as something else... can't think, woke up 5 minutes ago.

 

Haha. Yeah the Aztek was really ugly. There were some features Pontiac displayed when they started their ad campaign. They should've just put those features in their minivans or something. Trickle-down effect?

 

You guys didnt think the whole tent out the back thing on the Aztec was pimpin'? LOL! I want to know what jerkoff at these companies is like "lets get the loudest, ugliest color to match this ugly car!" Yellow only looks good on a handful of sports cars. Yet they insist on painting every new ugly concept car of their's a bad shade of yellow.

 

What is the SSR's main target anyway? Young people can't afford it, rich people don't want it, it's practically useless as a truck, so what it's for? The power produced won't help overcome the sheer weight (thank you, Captain Obvious aka shelleys_man_06). I'm surprised this thing is still in production. I thought it was going to be a one-off.

 

Its a novelty car. That is all.

--JiM

 

i think it looks cool, but i don't see any reason for it to weigh that much.

the fact that it's so impractial makes it worth getting to some.

 

Some people, including my thermo teacher, calls the rotary engine a novelty.

 

Novelty:
1 : something new or unusual

And it is in some regards. How many people on the forum bought the Rx-8 primarily because it has a rotary? I know it influenced my decision a bit. It is the novelty of being unique. My argument is that at least the 8 has more to it than just being unique.

---JiM

 

I guess there are good novelties, and bad novelties.