The NEW SS lineup...

[Stubbles]

As i searched this site and other automotive news sites the past few days, i've noticed one recurring theme, That the new lineup of Chevy SS's have been recieving the BEST reviews we've seen from a chevy in a LOOOOONNNNGGG Time!

I don't know about all of you, but i KNOW that if they can build a whole line-up of great cars, why can't they build EVERY car that good?

The Malibu SS, Cobalt SS, Monte Carlo SS and Impala SS are great, but why cant the base Cobalt or Monte be just as good as it's brotheren?

That is my question. It's not a matter of can they do it (b/c it obvious that they can!) but why they don't do it!

C'mon GM! If they built EVERY car to the standard that they hold their SS line-up to, EVERY GM car would be a class leader!

Keep up the good work on your SS line-up, and don't let the standard fall due to budgeting in the next few years!

Does anybody else feel the same way? Edited December 3, 2005 by Stubbles

[NeonLX]

I like the SS series as well. Of course, I'm so old that I remember when they first started putting the SS package on Impalas and what a big deal that was. We'd actually stop to look at one if it was parked along the street or in a parking lot. Jeez, a full-sized car with bucket seats, a grab rail over the glove box, and knock-off wheelcovers! I hope they can generate the same level of excitement as they did back in those simpler days.

[Sixty8panther]

I like the SS series as well. Of course, I'm so old that I remember when they first started putting the SS package on Impalas and what a big deal that was. We'd actually stop to look at one if it was parked along the street or in a parking lot. Jeez, a full-sized car with bucket seats, a grab rail over the glove box, and knock-off wheelcovers!  I hope they can generate the same level of excitement as they did back in those simpler days.

[post="53070"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Three words that are essential to a successful SuperSport moedl line:


------------- REAR ------------- WHEEL ------------- DRIVE


No, not every car has to be RWD but they sure as hell need a couple RWD cars. I think the 1996 SS Lineup was FAAAAAR better then the current one. And I really like the Coblat SS.





I mean a full size RWD Impala SS & Camaro SS with a ram air scoop... that's a real SuperSport lineup right there. Edited December 5, 2005 by Sixty8panther

[lakefire]

Three words that are essential to a successful SuperSport moedl line:
------------- REAR -------------    WHEEL  -------------    DRIVE
No, not every car has to be RWD but they sure as hell need a couple RWD cars. I think the 1996 SS Lineup was FAAAAAR better then the current one. And I really like the Coblat SS.
I mean a full size RWD Impala SS & Camaro SS with a ram air scoop... that's a real SuperSport lineup right there.

[post="53105"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

I agree that RWD is a better option; but the million dollar question to you is "how do you defind success?"

If the 1996 Lineup was faaaar better, how come they didn't continue making the impala after that year, and shortly after that the camaro ceized to be. I agree with you that those cars are awesome. But in my opinion Success is selling cars to people better than what you did before.

[z28luvr01]

Most people forget that the association between SS and RWD began because RWD was the only powertrain configuration used by Chevrolet cars at the time, as well as the majority of other cars at the time. Had the 60s A, B, and F bodies been FWD, and the cars ended up achieving the same legendary status, then today's FWD SS vehicles would be looked at in a more positive light. Today's SS vehicles are among the best GM has ever made. Say what you want, the current Impala SS is probably quicker than any 60s Impy. The new Monte delivers near LT1-Fbody performance. It's a driver's race between a Charger RT and the Trailblazer SS. The Cobalt SS has made quite a name for itself on the racetrack. The two "weakest" SSs would have to be the Malibu (no different than a G6 GTP) and the Silverado (started out behind the pack, and losing steam). Even still, they each represent what SS has fundamentally meant to Chevrolet: upgraded performance and suspension over the base models, with a few cosmetic upgrades to boot.

[NOS2006]

The Cobalt and Impala SSs can stay FWD for all I care. Make the Monte RWD though! WTF! We already have a FWD Impala, why do we need a Monte in FWD too? crap, I don't care if they make the Monte AWD and the Camaro RWD to supplement it. But why keep the Monte FWD when we have that in the Impala? Oh, and please give me that Z06 SS :)

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

IMO, the current SS vehicles are very strong and very nice vehicles. But, should they be SS? No. (With some exceptions) In my opinion, a lot of what are Chevrolet SS features should be standard on Chevrolets and I think that would "go the extra mile" in curing GM's image problem.

[NOS2006]

Bingo! I agree soo much with that statement, FOG.

[lakefire]

Here are some great SuperSports in my mind:

1963 Chevy Nova SS

Comments: The performance image was added in 1963 with the addition of the Super Sport package on the Chevrolet Nova. Strictly an appearance package, the SS option added special trim and wheel covers, bucket seats, instrumentation, and a deluxe steering wheel, all for the bargin price of just $161. This was the only year that the SS option was available on the Nova convertible.

Production: 42,432
Engines: 194 I6 120 bhp.
Performance: 194/120: 0-60 in 15.9 seconds, 1/4 mile in 21.0 seconds @ 67 mpg.


1973 Chevrolet Chevelle SS

Comments: 1973 was the last year of the Chevelle SS. Product dilution reached its lowest point and the SS package was technically available on the Chevelle station wagon. The 1973 Chevelle was completely redesigned and the engines were further detuned.

Production: 2,500 (SS 454 option)
Engines: L65 350 V8 145bhp@4000, 255lb-ft@2400rpm. L48 350 V8 175bhp@4000rpm, 270lb-ft@2400rpm. 454 V8 245bhp@4000rpm, 375lb-ft@3200rpm.
Performance:

THere are many more like this, but I'm too lazy to find them all. SS has always been a marketing ploy, and you'd be a fool to think it was something else. Edited December 5, 2005 by lakefire

[NOS2006]

Sorry, but 0-60 in nearly 16 seconds almost made me pee my pants.

[Teh Ricer Civic!]

Wooo a '73... yah... uhmmm... 1970 and 71 owns that in power.

[NeonLX]

Sorry, but 0-60 in nearly 16 seconds almost made me pee my pants.

[post="53336"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Heh. That 194 CID six could really snap your head back with all that torque, couldn't it? Or did they test the Nova SS with the standard 153 CID four-banger? :blink:

I remember seeing 1960s Impala SS models with standard sixes under the hood. After 1961, most of them probably came with the low compression 283 V8 with 2V carb (at least up thru '67). The first SS, in 1961, had the hi-po 348 V8 as standard and the 409 made its debut as an option in that model mid-year (though the 409 was theoretically available in other full-sized models that year too). After '61, the SS lost some of its exclusivity and was more of a package of options like bucket seats, grab rail over the glovebox, fancier wheelcovers, etc.

[91z4me]

I agree that RWD is a better option; but the million dollar question to you is "how do you  defind success?"

If the 1996 Lineup was faaaar better, how come they didn't continue making the impala after that year, and shortly after that the camaro ceized to be.  I agree with you that those cars are awesome.  But in my opinion Success is selling cars to people better than what you did before.

[post="53134"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

I can actually answer that one.

The B-body was supposed to pack up and be shipped south of the border to Mexico and continue production, an IRS system was even in the works and the LS1 was already certified within GM for the Impala and Caprice. Heck I bet that a new interior was only a year or so away for the big boat. But what happened is that GM saw that more people were buying fullsize BOF SUVs, which were more profitable than the b-bodies, so they converted the plant to produce BOF SUVs and packed up the b-body equipment. Why production was not moved I do not know. Probably some bean counter decided they might as well cut their losses as opposed to letting the line run a few more years, remember the B-body had the gas tank behind the rear axle and it was the last car to do so from GM. That was a major concern, as exemplified by the Crown Vic and its fire issues. So the B-body died. The B-bodies were very profiable and popular until they were killed. In fact when the announcement came out that 96 was the last year so many police orders came in cars that were scheduled to be Impala SSs or were already completed as SSs were converted back to 9C1s to fill the orders. CHP also threw a BIG hissy fit when they found out they weren't getting anymore Caprice's but instead Crown Vics.

[62impala]

I just test-drove an '06 Impala SS the other day; what a ROCKETSHIP!! I parked my '04 Impala LS next to the '06 after the test-drive to compare the two cars visually; the new one is so much cleaner and sleeker, though I'm still not hot for the new taillight treatment - it seems that almost every new sedan has those triangular taillights... I loved the V8's "rumble' as it idled... The new one rides much quieter and with less jostle than my '04; I really felt like I was driving a much more expensive luxury car... Loved the new interior, the car had black leather with the "brushed metal" trim that looked really modern and appropriate for this model, though I like the wood trim that I've seen on new Impalas, too. Not crazy about the color pallette for the Impala SS this year; so I might wait for some new colors in '07, but I have to tell you guys: THE NEW IMPALA SS IS AN AWESOME CAR!! Those of us that love Chevrolet have our next car all picked out...

[knightfan26917]

Those of us that love Chevrolet have our next car all picked out...

*raises eyebrow ever so cautiously*

So....if I want a Monte Carlo, Impala or Malibu (RWD, that is) and will not consider FWD monte carlos, impalas and malibus ... I do not love Chevrolet?

Sure hope my viewpoint of your statement is altered/controled by the pain in my abdomin that has kept me out of work since Dec 1 with no pay ... because I'd hate to think that my strong dislike for FWD "versions" of RWD vehicles would mean that I do not love Chevrolet ... would hope that my current crop would speak for itself in that department....


Cort, "Mr MC" / "Mr Road Trip", 32swm/pig valve/pacemaker
MC:family.IL.guide.future = http://www.chevyasylum.com/cort/
Models.HO = http://www.chevyasylum.com/cort/trainroom.html
"It's coming down to nothing more than apathy" ... The Fray ... 'Over My Head'

[62impala]

*raises eyebrow ever so cautiously*

So....if I want a Monte Carlo, Impala or Malibu (RWD, that is) and will not consider FWD monte carlos, impalas and malibus ... I do not love Chevrolet?

Sure hope my viewpoint of your statement is altered/controled by the pain in my abdomin that has kept me out of work since Dec 1 with no pay ... because I'd hate to think that my strong dislike for FWD "versions" of RWD vehicles would mean that I do not love Chevrolet ... would hope that my current crop would speak for itself in that department....
Cort, "Mr MC" / "Mr Road Trip", 32swm/pig valve/pacemaker
MC:family.IL.guide.future = http://www.chevyasylum.com/cort/
Models.HO = http://www.chevyasylum.com/cort/trainroom.html
"It's coming down to nothing more than apathy" ... The Fray ... 'Over My Head'

[post="62259"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Sorry to get you all worked up, KnightFan --
Of course, if you want a RWD Chevy, you are just gonna have to wait -- maybe for a long time...

What I should've said, is that those of us that love the Impala have our next car picked out... I will agree with you, that FWD and that V-8 in the new SS might be a very interesting combination, though.... when you punch down on the accelerator from a dead stop. you had better be steering straight ahead, or you could get into some trouble...

[ToniCipriani]

No, not every car has to be RWD

[post="53105"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

This freaks me because it came out of Sixty8's mouth.

I can see that GM is just putting SS to do what Z used to do and a bit more. I don't see why not, because the market seem to be fine with it. At least the SS models are more powerful than their base counterparts, not just an appeareance package.

Just if GM can make the SS to be as famous as Type-R, making everyone want to stick an SS badge, even if they drive an Camry.

Heritage is important, but sales is what keeps a company running. Oldsmobile had plenty of heritage, but couldn't avoid the axe.

[knightfan26917]

Sorry to get you all worked up, KnightFan --
Of course, if you want a RWD Chevy, you are just gonna have to wait -- maybe for a long time...

Not a problem, 62impala ... was hoping I had just misinterpreted what you wrote.....

What I should've said, is that those of us that love the Impala have our next car picked out...

Hmmm...but, see ... I love the Impala, too. My dad had a 68 Impala SS that I'd love to have back ... as well as a '58 Impala convertible that would be sweet to have. But, frankly, I would hope that Dad would never buy a FWD impala ... it's bad enough that he and Mom have a FWD monte carlo..... To me, the FWD versions are a slap in the face....

*shrugs*


And, I agree with Sixty8 ... not every car has to be RWD. I've never asked for that...never want it. I'm just sick'n'tired of GM/Chevrolet slapping names of former RWD cars on FWD cars that, well ... never mind ;).

[62impala]

Not a problem, 62impala ... was hoping I had just misinterpreted what you wrote.....

What I should've said, is that those of us that love the Impala have our next car picked out...

Hmmm...but, see ... I love the Impala, too. My dad had a 68 Impala SS that I'd love to have back ... as well as a '58 Impala convertible that would be sweet to have. But, frankly, I would hope that Dad would never buy a FWD impala ... it's bad enough that he and Mom have a FWD monte carlo..... To me, the FWD versions are a slap in the face....

*shrugs*
And, I agree with Sixty8 ... not every car has to be RWD. I've never asked for that...never want it. I'm just sick'n'tired of GM/Chevrolet slapping names of former RWD cars on FWD cars that, well ... never mind ;).

[post="62646"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

[avro206]

I have read magazine reviews of the C5 and C6 Corvettes. Many writers state that if Chevrolet put the same effor into every car they build that they would be much beter cars. I like the SS line up, lots of variety. A RWD car or two would be good as well but theres nothing wrong with a FWD SS. And for the record--my 2.4L Cobalt SS can smoke a 67-69 350 SS Camaro. And mine was developed by GM Performance Division just like the 2.0 S/C SS.

[2005 EquinoxLS]

Like I have said, there is nothing wrong with the FWD ones that are here now. But there should be some RWD versions for those that want them. Then let the market decide.