something about the neo-retro cars of the early/mid 2000s has started to charm me lately. the hhr, ssr, prowler, nu thunderbird, even the hummer h2, they're just so of-their-time, comfy and nostalgic. anyone have experience with the ssr? are they actually terrible and lame or could they start seeing some new interest as they come of age?
>>28954708The nuthunderbird is comfy the round window is everything You know what really kicked it all off was the success of the VW Bug throwback
>>28954719Pic related
the issue with the hhr, ssr, and thunderbird was that they were slow and handled poorly, and were not cheap either
>>28954727At least the LS2 years (05-06) could do 5.3 seconds with a manual. That was damn quick for the time.
>>28954731>old fashioned pushrod v8 that got horrid fuel economybmw and mercedes and audi all offered twin cam v8s by that pointwell, technically I bet merc was still sohc, but still, not a pushroddomestics barely tried, and barely sold as a result
>>28954727Those turbo ecotec were pretty quick, 290hp with the dealer installed stage 1 tune.
>>28954727the hhr was cheapthe hhr is not in the same league as the other two, its the equivalent of a pt loserits a shitbox
>>28954733So why does the 05 545i do the same 0-60 and quarter mile times as an 05 SSR?
>>28954768it does so while using far less gas and is likely much smoother
>>28954733It's a convertible pickup truck. Why should it get good fuel economy?
>>28954772Why is it slower than the previous GM convertible pickup truck?
>>28954777>t-tops=/= convertibleprobably bc an s-10 chassis weighs a 1000lbs less than a vehicle with power hardtop
>>28954733at least they weren't retarded enough to sell rotaries like mazda was doing in that same time.
>>28954750only NPCs hate pt cruisers btw
>>28954708a buddy of mine inherited one when his dad passed and it was still a pretty new car at that time.they're sorta unusual looking on the outside but the inside is standard GM cost-cutting and not something I'd want to spend a lot of time in.he drove it for a few weeks and ended up selling it since it wasnt really for him either. Its just a strange vehicle and you have to wonder wtf possible market GM thought they were going after. (see also: HHR, Plymouth prowler, etc.)
>>28955072only special snowflake estrogenic millennials like them
>>28954708Anyone ever slap one on a dually 4we chassis? It already has the rear fender flares...
>>28954708>hhr/ssrThey're only ugly in pics. In person, they're actually ugly AF. Chrysler-design knockoffs>prowlerThese things are pretty damned good looking. The later models have some decent power stuffed under the hood.>T-birdFord's great retro idea? "Hey, lets take a bodystyle with beautifully integrated fins and lop the fins off - it DEFINITELY won't look stupid and there's obviously no point in stuffing our worldclass 4.6 DOHC motor into it - that might make it fast as fuck and nobody wants that".>h2not even worth mentioning
>>28954708The prowler, HHR, and H2T are the only ones that appeal to me visuallyAnd it's really only the HHR
>>28955245>am i fitting in yet?
>>28955467Youre.....weird.Those vehicles have nothing in common.
This is the best 2000s retro car.
>>28956076variety is the spice of life
>>28954708>Modernchod is so shit, mediocre crap from the 90/00's is starting to look desirableYup
>>28956078Shame it couldn't win Le Mans, though.
>>28954708I sort of felt that way about the PT Cruiser back when it first came out.But now I'm not sure
>>28956249Sick burn dood
>>28956202This might be an influential factor indeed
>>28956268Not really a burn. It's just a statement. No need to get so broken up about it.
>>28956267I liked these since I was 8 and now im not allowed to like them because of bitches and whores
