<VV>GM

[Tony Underwood]

At 02:03 PM 11/19/2006, MyGroups wrote:
>The HHR was designed by the very same guy that did the PT Cruiser. 
>GM hired him away from D-C...


...and GM still went with a "me too" vehicle.    Oh well... they've 
done much worse over the last decade or so.


>Wonder if that is all he can design? Reminds me of the "Very Brady 
>Movie" spoofing Mr. Brady where all his designs look like his house.
>
>I LIKE the retro look of some of the new models though - the PT 
>'vert and the HHR and the SSR.

I don't mind the looks of the HHR or the PT.   The SSR is not quite 
as interesting IMHO although I can appreciate the engineering in the 
vehicle, however I do NOT appreciate the price.


>I DON'T think they look ANYWHERE as good as the originals did.


Ya know, it almost makes me wonder how many 1957 Chevrolet 
reproductions GM would sell if it built that car again... same 
outside and inside (except for updated stuff like gauges and 
electronics etc) although fitted with modern engine, trans, diff and 
ECM, brakes, and so on.     If someone believes there's enough market 
for retro-styled vehicles, what about going for broke and offering up 
a reproduction with modern systems updates...?

Getting DOT specs met may be a bit of a problem, but I bet people 
would buy the car if it cost less than the going price for a restored 
'57 Bel-Air.   I bet they could get it to handle and stop at least as 
good as a typical SUV.

Same way that Ford *Should* have done with that T-Bird... or at least 
got closer than they did, instead of making it look like a '54 Corvette.


>Guess I need to buy something from the 30's and then update the 
>mechanicals so I have the retro looks and the model 
>driveline/suspension/brakes.


Or something similar to the reproduction thing...   although with GM 
in the shape they're in, if they did it they'd never sell it for a 
price that its intended market could afford.   Then again, I'm 
rattling off without knowing anything about what I'm rattling.


tony..