How is the 335i faster? Even with a 400 lb. weight advantage, I don't see how that can make up for having 30% less horsepower. The badge does not add performance.
Seriously for the same price you can get a 335i which should not only be a hair faster, but comes with complementary maintenance and doesn't come with ugly?
Swing and miss for GM. Ugly with no manual. This car is an abortion.
How is the 335i faster? Even with a 400 lb. weight advantage, I don't see how that can make up for having 30% less horsepower. The badge does not add performance.
...seriously? Is it 1968 in here?
I think he was implying the Bimmer would outhandle it. Outclass in general.
Luckily GM knows their audience, and doesn't bother with anything that doesn't put concrete easily-digestible numbers on paper.
And you already know it handles poorly?
Let me guess, you'll go on with the tired old argument on how the car can only go straight. You are right this is 2013, not 1968.
It's a Chevy Sedan "Halo" car. Sure Chevy has the Camaro and Corvette. But it's missing a key car in it's lineup that Dodge and Ford have. That is a performance Sedan. Even their other badges have them like Cadillac with their V series. It wants a bottom brand Family hot rod like the Charger SRT-8 or the Taurus SHO. Now I would probably get either of these over the SS, if that was my market.I agree that the Japanese and European four-doors in the mid-size RWD segment are not roomy for rear passengers.
But looking around at various photos, I'm not seeing how the Holden is any better than either of the other mentioned sedans:
http://performancedrive.com.au/2012...-commodore-ss-v-redline-ve-series-ii-legroom/
But I don't see it as a big factor, either way. Which brings to mind the reason why I find this car so abhorrent in the first place: someone at GM wants to call this their halo car? Are you freakin' kidding me? It's hard to say anything other than something along the lines of 'hey GM, your halo would be easier to obtain if everyone had done the right thing and let you die.'
It's a Chevy Sedan "Halo" car. Sure Chevy has the Camaro and Corvette. But it's missing a key car in it's lineup that Dodge and Ford have. That is a performance Sedan. Even their other badges have them like Cadillac with their V series. It wants a bottom brand Family hot rod like the Charger SRT-8 or the Taurus SHO. Now I would probably get either of these over the SS, if that was my market.
But I wouldn't be so quick to trash this as well it has to be a poor handling "Merican" car. GM has the CTS-V. The CTS-V has gotten great reviews world wide for its handling and overall performance. The Holden that the GTO/G8 was based on also had glowing reviews, for a lot of what have been trashing it for. It's a developed and runs as a fun car that you toss around corners, that you spin the wheels. Part of it was value as well, but that is kind of lost here. But that's not the point, want a better sports car, get the Corvette. Want a better handling car. Get the CTS-V. Want a car that they can have fun from redlight to red light, that you can try to convince the wife to let you get because it can fit the kids, get the SS.
Good points, at least it has decent performance potential and could function as a family vacation car perfectly. I've seen GM slap the "SS" badge on occasion with very little performance enhancements. When I bought my current Malibu the "SS" version offered only 40 more HP than the base V6 and a slightly sportier suspension and dual exhaust, for 6K extra not worth it IMO...
Arghh...
http://www.autoblog.com/2013/02/16/this-is-your-2014-chevrolet-ss/
Much less impressed. Only 415hp (could you at least just match the Camaro Chevy) and no manual. Looks like they are going more for the luxury aspect...what are they thinking...as others have said in this forum...that is what Cadillac is for. For whatever reason the pics above look more pedestrian than the pics of the Holden I posted in the OP.
Oh well... I shouldn't be surprised.
If it walks like a duck and talks like a duck...
Google says the G8 GXP did an 8:30 around the Nurburgring. Which is not bad, until you take into consideration than it was DESIGNED for that damn track (literally referred to as 'Nurburgring-tuned'). Its bloated ass needed the high speed sections to post something respectable. And then you get to consider that the Cobalt SS was still eight seconds faster. I don't see many people arguing against the fact that a perfomance Cobalt is still crap. Because it's a Cobalt. I don't want a race-tuned Kia Rio, either.
Like I said, GM knows how to make GREAT cars...on paper.
Seriously for the same price you can get a 335i which should not only be a hair faster, but comes with complementary maintenance and doesn't come with ugly?
Google says the G8 GXP did an 8:30 around the Nurburgring. Which is not bad, until you take into consideration than it was DESIGNED for that damn track (literally referred to as 'Nurburgring-tuned'). Its bloated ass needed the high speed sections to post something respectable. And then you get to consider that the Cobalt SS was still eight seconds faster. I don't see many people arguing against the fact that a perfomance Cobalt is still crap. Because it's a Cobalt. I don't want a race-tuned Kia Rio, either.
...seriously? Is it 1968 in here?
I think he was implying the Bimmer would outhandle it. Outclass in general.
Luckily GM knows their audience, and doesn't bother with anything that doesn't put concrete easily-digestible numbers on paper.
He clearly said "faster".
Oh, he clearly said that ambiguous word that can mean a whole pile of different things?
If that makes you say HOOOO LOOKIT THAT AMURICAN MUSCLE BEAT THEM PANSY GERMANS, yeah, you're stuck in the 60's. And you have no taste. Sorry.
On a more positive note, the Holden isn't that bad looking. It's extremely interesting how Chevy made such small changes and managed to make it look absolutely awful instead of just 'kinda bland.'
ROFL. Are you five? Take a nap before your head explodes. There's nothing ambiguous at all about the word "faster"