PT vs. HHR in motor trend

[calicranberry]

check out new issue of motor trend, page 48. have the first head to head test of the new HHR and refreshed cruiser. article says the HHR is more pleasant to drive, but ultimately says it is a toss up and gives the HHR the nod because they think the cruisers styling is "er...more feminine." (their words, not mine) interesting read...

[purple04]

I haven't seen it yet, but it sounds like it's a case of the new kid getting the nod. If they compared closely, that speaks volumes for a platform that's 6 years old. Most of the time, anything that is "last generation" is called outdated. Of course, GM is not known for great vehicle dynamics (vette aside).

[quicksilverdon]

I'll have to see one in person, but I really don't believe the HHR would appeal to someone interested in a PT - looks more like an SUV than the PT does.

[JohnM]

I just got my copy of Motor Trend yesterday, and read the article. The HHR is also a nice looking car in my opinion, but it doesn't eclipse the PT Cruiser either. The article compared a top of the line 172hp HHR which stickered at $24K to a non-turbo PT with 150hp which stickered at $19K. Wouldn't it have been more fair to compare a PT with more similar horse power - a turbo lite - or a PT with a similar sticker price - a HO GT?

I almost got the impression that Chevy bought the article. Never-the-less, they were still pretty favorable on the PT.

The retro car that would really get me excited would be a Chevy SSR with a 2-door wagon style rather than the current roadster pickup style. 400hp and RWD would be nice and the wagon style would stiffen that chassis flex that's been critized in the SSR.

Oh and there was also a cool article about the Dodge Magnum SRT8 in this same issue. It was (favorably) compared to a Mercedes E55 (AMG) wagon. That Merc wagon did a 12.2 @ 113.8 in the quarter!!!! The SRT8 wasn't too shabby either at 13.1 quarter.

[robinjoe]

Let me see if I got this straight. I'm getting my statistics from AutoWeb.com: http://tinyurl.com/dka5z

The PT Cruiiser is smaller on the outside, but has more cargo and passenger room in every dimension except .4" shorter front head room (who really needs more than 39").

It's amazing, the PT is 2" narrower, but has 1" more shoulder room. The PT is 7.4" shorter, but has more cargo room adn legroom.

The PT Cruiser is (probbaly) lighter, but more powerful (even in the non-turbo)

The PT has 7yr/70,000 mile powertrain warranty to the HHR's 3/36,000

The PT has a great reliability record, while the HHR is unknown.

But somehow the HHR gets the "nod".
That's interesting.

[fritz_t_coyote]

And since the HHR is based on the Cobalt, there is a possibility of some serious GoFast parts in its future.

Presuming GM doesnt screw it up.

Or they could go the other way, and follow up on the 'miniature Suburban' look and figure out a way to stuff 4WD into it.

[Gunner]

To the best of my knowledge, the brass in Germany has done away with the 7/70 powertrain warranty for the 06 models. I'm not a big fan of the new look for the cruiser. However, in defense of Chrysler how do you update a retro styled vehicle? Guess I'll keep mine till she'll go no more.

[PT-ERA]

I just found that article at the newsstand, and I can't believe they actually liked the HHR. [:0] It's just big! Granted it may have the same functionality as the PT, but non of the flair, the style, the look of fun the PT has. The HHR is a truck. It has "utility" written all over it. I doubt anyone who look at it and ask him/herself "I wonder how fast it'll go?" They'll ask "Can I get all my crap in it?" The PT can haul stuff and still be a load of fun to drive! The PT is all about versatility. The HHR is a beast of burden. My 2 cents *Kaplink*kaplink*

[8)] Cruise on!

[robinjoe]

The HHS may LOOK like a truck and while it is bigger on the outside, it has 1 cubic foot less cargo space than the PT. And it has less passenger space too.

The PT is really a piece of engineering genius.

Joe

quote:Originally posted by PT-ERA

I just found that article at the newsstand, and I can't believe they actually liked the HHR. [:0] It's just big! Granted it may have the same functionality as the PT, but non of the flair, the style, the look of fun the PT has. The HHR is a truck. It has "utility" written all over it. I doubt anyone who look at it and ask him/herself "I wonder how fast it'll go?" They'll ask "Can I get all my crap in it?" The PT can haul stuff and still be a load of fun to drive! The PT is all about versatility. The HHR is a beast of burden. My 2 cents *Kaplink*kaplink*

[8)] Cruise on!

[purple04]

Finally got the mag at work. The 2 seem pretty evenly matched across the board. They pick on the driving position, but for tall people, it's fine. I think the power seats strike again on that point. They also complain about the steering wheel angle. It's adjustable, people! I think it comes down to brand loyality and style preference. I've already voted (see below)