GM was famous for its “dream cars” during the Motorama years. But the SSR is a different kind of dream car, at least for me. I sometimes have very intense visual dreams with cars in them, inevitably bizarre, a combination of mash-ups of real cars and “original” but Dali-esque images. When I encounter an SSR, I have to pinch myself to make sure I’m not fast asleep.
The SSR is a classic Bob Lutz-mobile; a showy and flashy toy from a guy who always had to have the biggest and best toys. What’s practicality got to do with cars anyway? Of course there’s some truth to that, but it’s all a matter of degrees. And the SSR pretty much takes the cake when it comes to being impractical. And as well as some other Lutz-dream-mobiles, it didn’t sell; some 24k found homes, undoubtedly with white males between the age of 55 and 68. (Update: 2004 MY sales of 9000 units were “below expectations”, and after inventories ballooned to a 301 day supply, the Craft Center was shut down for some time to try to bring inventories down).
This SSR may be sitting among other pickups, but that name doesn’t really apply. Has anyone ever taken the lid off their SSR? I mean the “bed cover”, not the retracting top.
Am I awake yet?
Like the Prowler, the SSR was touted as a “factory hot rod”. The problem with the whole concept is that most hot rod purchasers want a very personalized vehicle, which is tough when they call come off of an assembly line.
The other problem is that most hot rodders want more horsepower than either the Prowler or SSR came with from the factory, and not many people are willing to forgo the factory warranty on a brand new vehicle to mod the engine.
I’ve heard a similar argument–that no factory vehicle can, by definition, be a hot rod as it is by its very nature a personal creation of the builder.
The later SSR came with the 6.2 shared with the GTO, didn’t it? That seems plenty of horsepower, but it’s still a fundamentally unsatisfying vehicle.
6.0 litre LS2, a 6 speed manual was added too. For every hot rodder that has to “build his own” there still were apparently enough that wanted to buy 24,000 of these things, it’s the same thing as a Harley-Davidson, you can buy a base one and make it your own, but the Harley dealer already has one on the floor that is all accessorized to the max that someone will buy too.
I’ve heard a similar argument–that no factory vehicle can, by definition, be a hot rod as it is by its very nature a personal creation of the builder.
I think the problem is in the era the Prowler concept came about the Hot Rod world was still all high tech in the vein of the Boydster, which I never considered a real hot rod either. To me a hot rod is a production car body littered with a mishmash of factory parts from other cars, seasoned only with a sprinkling of aftermarket parts for it to all jive. The whole “high tech” Hot Rod thing was 3/4 aftermarket production parts, parts designed with the specific intent for… Hot Rods, with the rest being a customized body/interior. The Prowler really just rubbed out the last tiny fraction of REAL hot rodding, which itself was even becoming aftermarket production fodder(fiberglass bodies anyone?).
That’s not to defend the prowler necessarily, but Hot Rods were shallow cookie cutter image machines by the late 90s too, the Prowler just took out the last bastion of personal input left.
At least the Prowler was half good looking.
+1
It was?
Half good looking? Which half?
The front
I think you nailed it, although it was nailed right when this and Prowler came out. The ‘factory hotrod’ is a myth by definition. It will definitely sell a few to the upper middle aged guy or gal with the money to own a custom ride but not the skills, vision, time, patience, or equipment to actually build one. As Carmine said, these sold decent for a niche vehicle. It definitely drummed up some showroom traffic.
The PT Cruiser and HHR were a little better approach. A mass market vehicle that looks cool, has appeal that’s beyond skin deep and anyone can afford. Trouble is, with 4 cyl fwd platforms this is more of a ‘tuner’ approach and domestics have had only random pockets of success with penetrating that crowd. A better approach for both would’ve been a rwd platform with everything from basic motivation to serious power. Its working just fine for the 3 pony cars.
Oh you think the SSR is a truck? No wonder you’re confused. It’s obviously a business coupe, i.e. a two-door coupe with a very large trunk.
A business convertible surely. Kinda like the reverse mullet of cars.
“Kinda like the reverse mullet of cars.”
Love it!
I felt that way about seeing a PT Cruiser convertible a while back – I knew of the concept car and own the Revell model kit, but had forgotten they actually built the real car.
The SSR always struck me as GM’s version of the 2000s Thunderbird in truck form. Super retro, super impractical, super heavy, and SUPER expensive. Even the headlights look the same. The HHR and PT Cruiser were conceived in a similar retro mindset, but they were practical mass-market products… these were just weird and almost too-niche-for-their-own-good.
Another car built in Lansing (does GM just build everything here?), I see them enough to know I’m not dreaming. Never, ever seen one with the bed cover off though… why bother?
Well, these were the last cars built at the LLC, the Lansing Craft Centre, which was a small volume plant that GM used to make niche products starting with the Buick Reatta in 1988, later GM EV1 was made there, the last Eldorados and the SSR. It was closed in 2006.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lansing_Craft_Centre
“Centre”??
Ye Olde Worlde Craftsmanshipe in the heart of Michigan..e.
When, where and why did GM start using their own vocabulary? i.e. gages, litres, tyres, lyghts, grilles, colonnades, ampres, sentinel. Centre, engyne blocke, watre, washre, motre, speakres, leathre, tape playre, fluide, wipres and theatre I’m sure they have at least entertained the thought of using, or used if given an oportunity, er opretunity.
Have you ever seen what is under that bed cover? A truck bed that has carpeting on every inch of the thing. Very impractical for a Home Depot lumber run.
It’s ironic to compare the SSR with the retro-Bird in that Lutz had a beautiful concept built that would have been a direct competitor to the Ford: the 2002 Bel Air. The story is that GM couldn’t afford to build both cars, so Lutz chose the bizarre SSR. It didn’t help matters much that the Thunderbird ended up being a flop, as well. Still, it seems obvious that building the Bel Air instead of the SSR would have been a no-brainer.
The SSR might have worked out okay, but they tried so hard to cover all bases with the goofy hard folding top and hard-shell tonneau cover, as well as that ungainly front grille bar splitting the headlights. Maybe if it had been built with a normal cab, open bed, and normal headlights, all for a much lower price, it could have been a success. But all that gimmicky crap priced the SSR weirdo-mobile into the stratosphere, dooming it to failure for the very same reason the Aztek flopped so badly: it was just too damn expensive for its market.
It was also interesting that both concepts are BOF truck based, both the SSR and the Bel-Air were based on the GMT 360 SUV platform, I liked the Bel-Air way more too, it used the straight 6 4200 from the Trailblazer/Envoy.
Yeah, I suppose there was some kind of market study that said the truck-based Bel Air wouldn’t sell because of a too ‘truck-like’ ride. The lack of a V8 probably would have doomed it, too, undoubtedly making it a performance slug.
But it’s still a shame because the Bel Air had what should have been a usable rear seat, putting it up against the Chrysler Sebring as a comfortable, more spacious, non-ponycar, reasonably-priced, domestic convertible, something that’s been missing from the domestic market since the early seventies.
Undoubtedly, the demise of the Mercury Marauder helped, since there was a great convertible concept based on it around the same time, too. All of these things surely contributed to the decision to axe the Bel Air and go with the SSR.
I always thought the Bel Air concept was kind of homely. Sure, the side sculpturing that evoked the ’57 trim was a nice touch, but the nose and tail were anonymous and the whole thing just looked massive in a not-good way. Almost like it couldn’t hide its truck underpinnings.
The Marauder convertible, on the other hand. Now if *that* had gone into production I would have been first in line, whatever I had to beg, borrow, or steal to get the money. But I’m an admitted Panther fanboy. At least was able to own one of the sedans…
It didn’t sell…….only 24,000 found homes….
Let’s examine that statement again.
Twenty four thousand is a HUGE number for an expensive odd ball specialty vehicle only aimed at small slice of the market. I don’t know if GM made money on it, but they couldn’t have really managed to sell anymore than they did.
Really.
Were going to knock it for practicality too? It wasn’t aimed at the 5 seat family sedan market. It was a 2 seater with a really big carpeted trunk and a retractable roof. Thankfully there are car manufacturers out there that like to do something weird and different every once in while, if not we would be in a sea of silverchampagemist metallic Camcordtimas.
I’m surprised that they sold as many as 24000. These were always very rarely seen, and I seem to recall that many of them languished on dealer lots until they were discounted fairly deeply.
That said, I mostly agree with you. Chevy has always had a lot of fanboys and it didn’t hurt to cater to them with something like this. Say what you will about Lutz, he had a way of putting vehicles in showrooms that excited the fan base both at Chrysler and later at GM. The thing never really appealed to me, but the world is a more interesting place with it than without it.
At least some of these made some real power, compared to the Prowler and the Thunderbird wich never really had any.
I was too, I never bothered to check how many were sold, I would have said 12,000 tops.
” These were always very rarely seen”
No doubt stashed away in storage by speculators. Likewise with the Prowler. But who in their right mind would use one of these up as a daily grinder?
If you look on AutoTrader, there are always a bunch of these for sale with really low mileage – 20k miles or less, sometimes way less. Either they were bought for speculation, or they were bought as second/third cars and driven only occasionally.
They actually seem like they would be a pretty good used car buy – you could probably pick up a nice one for $20,000 or so, which seems pretty good for a Corvette powered convertible that looks like nothing else on the road.
I wish I could!
I’m surprised that they sold as many as 24000. These were always very rarely seen, and I seem to recall that many of them languished on dealer lots until they were discounted fairly deeply.
Come to any car show in the Illinois burbs of St. Louis. There are always several of them. Most if not all are the original owners who, no surprise, are of the demographic Paul cited. Lots of union retirees who had no trouble paying the SSR’s steep MSRP.
On any given weekend with good weather there will be an SSR or two with the top down out with all the Miatas, Harleys and bicyclists on the Great River Road between here and Grafton.
They must have sold all SSR’s in the Midwest. In car crazy Los Angeles I only remember ever seeing one example on the street. The Prowler, however was a much more common sight.
That is better than the Reatta did (21,000+).
If they were able to keep the line running at close to capacity and they didn’t have a better use for those resources and it at least broke even, then I guess the SSR achieved some level of success. I would still question:
– Was such a small niche was even a market that should even interest GM?
– Provided that it was justifiable on the basis that it was a “halo car”, was this particular design a good idea to go forward with?
Lots of times cars like these are approved because their low volume allows you to play with certain “not ready for prime time” production methods that you can hone on a small volume, slow moving line, I remember GM bragging about the stamping method for those HUGE fenders on the SSR, which was later used again the Solstice/Sky roadsters.
Yeah, but the numbers just illustrate how many were manufactured and eventually sold to the public. What they don’t tell you is how long each SSR sat collecting dust on the dealer’s lot and how steep the discount was to finally move the metal.
Perhaps the first ones sold as soon as they hit the lot for sticker and above but by the time I was peddling Chevys in 2005-2006, the SSR just sat collecting dust. Ours was bright yellow with a six speed, an attention getter that was actually quite exhilarating to drive. The SSR should have had the LS1/LS2 from the very beginning IMO; that powertrain delivered on the promise the looks suggested. Anyways, an older gentleman eventually took the unloved SSR off our hands. Don’t know if he moth balled it or used it as a weekend toy, but he sure was happy to take delivery.
Carmine, I enjoy your reality checks – 24K is way more than I would have guessed. I’m going to bet that a good number of these were sold in SoCal. I’ve seen and continue to see them around. Rare but around. Same with the retro T-Birds, a number of which are still seen around here (and out in the desert – hat tip to Don W.) as daily drivers.
Were they hugely discounted? The sticker price was shocking at the time.
Thanks, CA Guy, almost didn’t read this post as I had little interest in these SSR’s. In fact, although I’ve seen a scant few around, only saw one up close and personal, when an Elvis-type guy (you know the look, middle-aged, longish styled dyed hair, dark shades, gold chains, shudder!) pulled up next to me at a red light a couple of years ago. Top down, radio blasting, gassing the engine, it was quite the “look at me” sight. That’s been my image of these cars ever since. That said, as for the comment above comparing this silly SSR to the Thunderbird and saying that the T-Bird ended up being a “flop,” I couldn’t disagree more. Some 68,000 copies of the T-Bird sold over its four year run, hardly a flop. You still see a lot of them around the Palm Springs area, as you mention, and thank you very much, I still love my little “flop,” and drive it most every day.
FWIW, the 9,000 sold in the 2004 MY “were below expectations”. There was a 301 day supply of them in the summer of 2004, prompting an extended shutdown of the Craft Center. Clearly, the hopes were for stronger sales.
I don’t know who was making those bets, I don’t think there would be lines around the block for expensive, 2 seat, convertible trucks.
24k total is still significantly less numbers than what the F bodies sold in their final year alone(which itself wasn’t stellar). I seriously question GMs justification for cancelling those, themselves specialty cars with little practicality, and bringing out this not long after the final F body Camaros left the lot.
Closing the plant in Quebec
I didn’t like the cancellation of the F-bodies either, I remember that it did have something to do with GM wanting to close St. Therese where F-bodies were made, I never thought that the SSR was in anyway a replacement for the F-body, the Pontiac GTO that came out around the same time was the closest thing to an F-body replacement, though due to a jump in the value of the Aussie dollar, it ended up in the mid thirties price wise, which put it in loaded WS6/SS F-body money, it was originally aimed at about $29,000 price range.
24K is actually quite a lot, more than I’d have imagined based on how few I’ve seen on the road.
For perspective, if you total the overall production of the XLR and add to that the overall production of the Marauder (other limited production performance-inclined vehicles by domestic manufacturers in a similar time frame), you’re only at 26,500. I’m sure a lot of other specialty vehicles will give you similar numbers. So 24K overall is impressive, especially at nearly $50K each.
THANK YOU!!! Not everyone wants to drive a Toyota Corolla!
Never cared for these. Even when they came out and I was around 10, I knew how bad these were. I know “SSR” stood for “Super Sport Roadster”, but I always think of “Soviet Socialist Republic” when I hear those letters. Ironic considering Chevy’s ad campaign around this time was “An American Revolution”.
I drove one at a GM event in ’04, it was pretty unimpressive. It didn’t feel especially powerful, and the automatic didn’t help. The V8 didn’t make any especially exciting noises. The interior was very plastic-y, and the overall fit and finish wasn’t great. The whole thing was just meh. I wasn’t a fan when I climbed in, and nothing had changed when I climbed out.
Ironically, Chevrolet has 94% of the market in the former Soviet Socialist Republic of Uzbekistan! Not sure if the SSR was ever sold there, though.
They could have had an ad campaign….Back in your….back in your….back in Your SSR!!!
Oh, to live in an alternate universe where this never saw production but instead we actually got the Chrysler Phaeton. i’d be driving one right now, cost be damned.
Its a cute ute not the real Mc Coy, I liked them when they came out though Ive yet to see a live one a good little runabout with room in the back for your lunch and some tools.
I can’t decide if we could’ve done worse or not. This was one of the last nails in the coffin of the ’90’s retro-explosion, but I still like the manic retro concepts more than I like whatever horsepower-and-anger-Monster-Energy-Drink-arms-race we have in this decade. Even the Viper, the most sinister car of the era, still wore a sort of smile.
I agree. Many of our new-model year cars, and especially the trucks, have been designed to be these angry-looking aggressive extensions of their drivers. No wonder road rage is the norm.
Not everyone is as bad-a$$ as their 20-inch low-profile, blacked our window- 350-HP cod-piece seem to imply. After all most of us are just average shmoes going to work or picking up bread and milk at the store.
As much we harp on the SSR, it’s cartoonish grill makes smile! I wouldn’t mind siting next to one in traffic. Its time manufacturers make “happy” cars again!
SSR tale from back in my dealership days – we were a Chevrolet dealer, but not a Corvette dealer – so it was a big deal to finally have another “performance” vehicle to sell (remember, no Camaros after 2002). We took a flyer and ordered one – and it sold the day it came in. At full sticker! Woohoo, we’ve got a gold mine here! Of course we ordered another one – and it sat in our showroom for 3 years before someone finally took it off our hands.
Products like the SSR and Prowler always tend to fail. If there’s no volume the car can’t/won’t do a thing for your image no matter how good, take for example the Ford GT.
High-style products that are affordable and have selling points besides their looks can help a company’s image and even be profitable. The Chrysler PT Cruiser and Chevy HHR are good examples. They both were nice to drive (esp. the HHR) and offered decent utility.
If you want something like that today the Kia Soul is your only choice. It’s selling like crazy and has a very young clientele. A car company’s dream.
Interesting point… The HHR seemed to want to play off the SSR (forget which came first, not gonna look it up, either), but came across as “frumpy” to me, and still seems that way. The PT, I liked at first, but it hasn’t aged well, especially since they’re like roaches now – everywhere.
I like the Soul, but it’s so quirky, it probably won’t age well. Twenty years from now it will look cool again, but not the PT or HHR.
One could make an argument that the New Beetle helped save VW in NA, and it was reasonably successful, selling around 100K units annually. The followup Beetle is a nice looker, but as a former NB owner and current Beetle owner, it’s lacking a lot of the charm of the NB. The Beetle’s production seems to be off to a slow start…
The New Beetle is an interesting case. The first gen was a failure in all markets except the US. In those other markets the old adage “if it doesn’t have anything going for it other than styling it won’t sell well for long”, applied textbook perfectly. The new one doesn’t seem to be doing a thing sales wise, anywhere.
It must have been a very tough call at VW on whether to do a second gen. Seems to me anyone who would want something like a Beetle would be better served by the Mini, which drives better and has a more useful hatch.
All that said the first gen NB is what turned around the VW brand in the US. That and the Jetta III, the one with the chunky styling.
Unfortunate as the 2nd-gen is more attractive in general, less feminine, and I think truer to the styling of the original beetle than the 1st-gen. You can even get it with wheels resembling the steelies & dog dish caps. But retro cars in general would sell best in the US market, and I think most of the people who wanted one bought a 1st gen (they were certainly around long enough). Either they had problems (as many of them did) and were turned off to the car or VW in general, or the novelty wore off and they moved on to something else. The ones that held up well and were reliable are still in service with their original owners. No matter what, the new one wasn’t going to sell in that case.
trouble with the New Beetle is you are paying more for a Golf that is slower and has less room. hard to justify that if you think about it.
People weight purchasing criteria differently. Speed and cargo/passenger space may be weighted highly for you, but not for someone else. I found my 90hp 5-speed TDI to be plenty fast enough for my rural commute, and the curved roof had plenty of headroom for a 6′-5″ tall guy. It also had quite usable cargo space – with that long dash, I found I could carry a half-dozen 2×4 studs *inside* the car with the hatch closed. But my main criteria was the styling and the manual/diesel drivetrain.
That’s a great point about auto buyer’s priorities, particularly regarding the New Beetle. Whatever negatives someone has to say about that car, they do have cavernous headroom thanks mainly to the high roofline.
In fact, I’d go so far as to say it’s my favorite convertible, thanks to the expansive area between the windshield header and the driver. You actually get to see the sky while driving with the top down, as opposed to just about any other new convertible where the windshield header is mere inches from one’s forehead thanks to the extreme rake of new windshields.
The demand for cartoon-retro has moved on, although there’s still a niche for cute-retro, a la the Mini and Fiat 500. I wish VW had shrunk the Beetle to the size of these… imagine a mini-Beetle that recaptured the vibe of a People’s Car… with really basic features, rubber floors, fun to drive, and a low, low price to beat the cheapest stuff from Asia.
I like how you’re thinking there. D’you reckon it would sell more than 24,000? I’ve no idea.
I wish GM would have taken the Chevy Nomad beyond the concept stage. I’m not a big fan of the Solstice underpinnings but with a little work this could have been a very nice car. They could have paid for it with the money they spent on the Sky, which wasn’t something they needed.
@Old Pete: I have no idea… I suppose it would have to sell in pretty high numbers to pull off a low price.
BTW, if you squint your eyes while looking at the Fiat 500, you can pretty well imagine what a mini-Beetle would look like.
The problem is that you can shrink it all you want, but there’s a certain amount of labor that remains in the manufacturing cost, regardless of how small you make it.
The thing is that VAG has a modern rear-engined A-segment car (the Up/Mii/Citigo) that they can also sell in quantity in Europe. It’s not a retro car — it looks like a miniature Polo with a mouth grill — and I don’t think anyone is really crying out for it to be. My impression was that the New Beetle had long since become pretty much a North American thing and probably still is. (If it was briefly fashionable elsewhere, I thought it was for like 10 minutes in the late ’90s.)
Calibrick – I’d expect the Nomad would cost a lot more than the Solstice re-skin, just the new rear hatch would have cost more. Would have been interesting though.
Aaron – the production VW Up is fwd, apparently they put the rear engine in the too hard basket.
They could have done a smaller Beetle on the Polo platform, but I wouldn’t be surprised if the US Jetta platform is cheaper to build.
Yes, PT Cruisers are everywhere- they built 1.35 million of the roaches. One of them resides in my driveway. It has, unfortunately, been such a trouble-free roach that I can’t justify getting rid of it. In another year my daughter will get it.
The HHR sold about 490K in six model years.
The SSR is just weird.
I just don’t get the Soul, myself. The original xB was a better looking car all around, I even like the 2nd gen much better. I came up behind a Soul the other day…it was painted an antique white, like an ’80s Whirlpool dryer. My ‘special ladyfriend’ agreed, it looked like a Maytag on a trailer!
IMHO, the ‘new’ new beetle is what it always should’ve been: A little lower, a little longer, and a little more butch. In turbo form and a bold color, its not a girls car anymore.
“The PT, I liked at first, but it hasn’t aged well, especially since they’re like roaches now – everywhere.”
Careful there – you’re close to infringing on GEOZINGER’S copyright on the phrase: “Cockroach of the Road”!
You ALMOST owe him a beer! I owe him several…
Products like the SSR and Prowler always tend to fail. If there’s no volume the car can’t/won’t do a thing for your image no matter how good, take for example the Ford GT.
I think that if you do a car like this, it has to have something really obvious in common with the rest of the cars you’re selling. Otherwise, what’s the point? The SSR and Ford GT primarily reminded us that both companies built much cooler cars 40-50 years ago.
It was an interesting vehicle. it was almost like GM was using it to gauge interest(albeit an expensive trial) in ether a return of the El Camino or if us folks in the US of A would welcome an Australian like Ute. Sadly it was too expensive for most folks.
Looking at one of these SSR always reminds me of the Holden 50-2106 Coupe Utility(which is still a damn fine looking vehicle some 60 years after it came out)
Also the 1948-53 Chevrolet ute.
I’ve heard a couple of interviews with Bob Lutz, where he explains how his ‘way’ works. I’ve heard him say the Trailblazer XUV was too far along to stop although he knew it wouldn’t work, but never anything about this car. Then again they may have done it for other reasons than just as a halo car, eg for test bed purposes.
If only those styling cues were used on the Silverado and Tahoe.
I have to wonder what sales would have been like if it had been just a bit more practical and a lot less expensive. Lose the retractable top, make the bed longer, and then it’s just a little truck with some early 50s styling touches.
When it was released, there were some concepts going around that pretty much foreshadowed the HHR. Both in 4 door wagon and full panel truck versions. Had they done the HHR on this platform, it would’ve solved 2 issues: Helped amitorize the tooling for the SSR, and been a more legit mass market vehicle that could’ve been priced more like a Camaro…making it a good platform to actually be embraced by hotrodders.
The SSR always looked to me it like it had stepped off the screen of “Who Framed Roger Rabbit.” Shame the money didn’t go to developing a proper next gen El Camino.
An astute observation, quite like the one where someone said the new Camaro is more akin to a Hot Wheels car. The SSR follows the exact same theme as looking like something that was styled and sold by Mattel.
In fact, ‘Styled by Mattel’ sounds like it might be a great theme for a new series of CC articles.
Paul, what a coincidence! I saw one today, exactly like the one pictured in your article with a guy-he looked to be in his 60’s-driving it. I had not seen one for years, the last one I saw was owned by a guy I used to work with. It’s certainly not my cup of tea, it always struck me as a toy for people who wanted to get noticed and nothing more.
Ah, now I know… now I know where I am… back in that old shithole, the Chevy dealership!
The thing about a car like this is yes, some people will really think it’s awesome. Very few in the grand scheme of things, but some. Everyone else in the world is either repulsed or mustering a “WTF” at best. I can conceptualize in my mind what a “cool Chevy” would be, and this is like the 180 degree opposite version of it.
This car is every boring dad’s midlife crisis, it’s every unimaginative child’s fantasy, it’s a tone deaf love song to people who were never going to buy anything but a Chevrolet in the first place.
I’m glad Chevrolet is apparently done catering to the Heartbeat of America exclusively and starting AN AMERICAN REVOLUTION of shitty cars. I love the new Impala, like the Malibu and Sonic, think the SS is great except for that name (which hearkens back to the bad old days – a “something SS” would be fine). And it’s amazing that when Chevy was selling these, Cadillac was going through such a convincing and successful transformation. That picture with Bob Lutz is a great example of how schizophrenic GM often is. Not that the XLR was an incredibly important car, but those styling themes were – and they worked bigtime. Way more daring than a retromobile, too.
I find it interesting and ironic that another pickup well known for it’s undersized bed, the Ford Sport Trac, is parked in the background.
Thus, the rooftop cargo box…
They aren’t that common here in Mid-Michigan, but not exactly rare either.
I have a friend who considered one, but passed when he discovered there was no manual transmission option.
My observation at the time was that affordable retro cars sold pretty well, (PT, Mustang, Beetle) and the high end retro cars didn’t (Thunderbird, SSR, Prowler)
I’m just wondering about the development, tooling and production cost of this buggy – and what that amount of cash could have accomplished for the greater good of American buyers elsewhere in the GM product line…..
GM comes in for a lot of criticism, much of it justified, but they do have really smart marketing people. Wonder if they have any accurate metrics to tell them how much a product like the SSR adds to showroom traffic? I am guessing that they do and can even measure the percentage of that traffic that ultimately bout something from them.
I don’t know, but what’s more likely?
a) GM has a scientific marketing team that can estimate showroom traffic and purchase conversions
b) Lutz told them some grand tales about the Viper and other halo cars
I always thought the SSR was GM listening to their own hype. They showed it off and (as always) got some positive auto press. Then they insisted the public was simply demanding them to build it.
Not GM listening to its own hype- listening to Bob Lutz hype. Remember he was the golden boy who would fix everything, just like he did at Chrysler….
I reckon some folks liked them. They sold about 25,000 of them. Personally I classify them as useless as the ElCamino and Ranchero.
Cant believe no one has mentioned the 2004 Super Bowl commercial where the kid walks out of the house, sees the new Chevy SSR and mouths “Holy Shi…”, a classic, better than the vehicle. I’m sure its out there on the internet somewhere.
Did GM really make these? Of course they did! My next door neighbor has one just like the top photo, too. Many reside in the West Chester, OH area. One guy owns TWO of them about 6 miles from me!
Personally, I think they’re really cool cars and wish I had one. Why? Simply because they’re different. Why else would I have owned a Gremlin, a C-101 Jeepster Commando and a Dart Lite?
‘Nuff said.
I got to see this car everyday during my high school years, it graced the same teacher’s parking spot everyday and was owned by the meanest teacher in the whole school. I spent 4 years thinking how a woman like her could own a car like that, they didn’t seem to go together well.
I’m a white male between 55 and 68 who also grew up in a European-car-only family from the early 1950’s on, but I find the SSR very appealing. I see them regularly though not frequently. Call it a truck, call it a business coupe or call it a 2-seat convertible with a huge trunk, but whatever it is, it was a big risk for GM but will at least be remembered more fondly than other risks like the Aztek or Malibu Maxx. Not to mention the Nissan Murano convertible ….
I liked the idea of Chevy actually through and building what I thought was going to be another lost show car/prototype. However, I feel that they did this to smooth over the death of the Camaro. Though the Camaro returned, no one was sure this was going to happen after its “first death” so I never really liked the SSR because of that.
The SSR which was actually based from the shortened Chevrolet Trailblazer SUV chassis was indirectly supposed to pickup where the larger 1978-83 Chevrolet Malibu based El Camino left off back in 1987. The SSR which had a BOF Truck Platform Construction was a true truck while the El Camino had a BOF Chassis derived from the Malibu and Monte Carlo and for all its intents and purposes a pickup car commonly known as Utes.
When the SSR came out, I remember thinking “How can General Motors possibly make money making something like that?” Turned out they couldn’t. I even liked the retro Chevy theme and had a chance to experience the more down-to-earth HHR mini panel truck. It drove like a pillbox, and I exchanged it for a different rental the next day. At least that picture of Bob Lutz will come in handy if CC ever does an article on narcissism. (And all this time I thought he was “car guy”!)
This goes down for me as one of the nuttiest GM products to be greenlit over the past 30 years – Sure, it’s fast, and has a retrac. hardtop. But has anyone ever sat in one? Plastics that make a Cobalt feel well-finished! And the sticker price…It always seemed to me that anyone who could buy one of these would choose a Corvette instead…
I test drove an SSR when they first came out at a Chevrolet promotional event along with the newest Corvette at the time. They had a road course set up with pylons and pretty much let you have at it. There was so much chassis flex along with squeaks and rattles it was hard to believe it was a new vehicle. I remember finding it to be a some what disappointing experience.
I remember the day these were announced for production, my teenage self was LIVID that GM apparently couldn’t build Camaros/Firebirds anymore, but they could build this stupid thing for some reason.
It’s too bad GM squandered its resources creating this silly thing when they should have marketed a Cobalt that people wanted to buy rather than tolerate as a rental.
Too bad GM built this instead of putting safer key switches in the said Cobalt!
Paul,
Sorry to nitpick your story, but I wanted to share a few things about the SSR, the timeline of development and the actual involvement by in that process by Mr Lutz. The first concept was done in 1998-1999 as best I can recall. There was an advanced team working on concepts of many types for advanced product developement in the newly gathered all digital studio at a the tech center. The initial digital model was done with an offsite design consulting vendor and finalized on by GM design and modeling staff. The first physical model was CNC milled direct from the data, resulting in a painted hard Foam model that was reviewed Internaly by the board of directors. The company felt strongly that retro concepts were important to develope and bring to market, so the SSR was further developed into a full concept vehicle and shown in 2000. This was the first time the idea was shown to the public. The reaction was positive enough that GM gave the green light to start work on the production version. Mr. Lutz was hired in 2001, by which time the SSR was in full swing with the production engineers and vendors for component designs. If he didn’t like the car there probably wasn’t much he could do to change it at that point. There were several vehicles that he reportedly wanted to change when he was toured through the Design facility and other sites, but was unable due to product timing, etc..
Images of the concept released in 2000:
http://www.netcarshow.com/chevrolet/2000-ssr_concept/1600×1200/wallpaper_02.htm
http://www.carstyling.ru/en/car/2000_chevrolet_ssr/images/143/
“Mr. Lutz was hired in 2001, by which time the SSR was in full swing with the production engineers and vendors for component designs.”
Why does this strongly remind me of DeLorean’s experience with the Vega?
David, Thanks for setting the record straight. If this was a “Curbside Classic”, I’d be embarrassed at my lack of research. It’s an “Outtake”, and one that obviously was a very spontaneous and subjective “take” upon stumbling across these shots in my files.
An important reminder that not every automotive truism you hear on the internet is correct. Like any successful auto exec Bob has a few turkeys under his belt but not everything unusual that failed at GM was his idea. I do blame him for the Solstice and XLR though. Both are a classic “let’s do a sports car” idea from someone who had worked in the industry for a long time. The Nomad would have been an infinitely more successful product off of that small RWD platform.
He elevated the voice of Design so that engineering standards and cost weren’t the only considerations. Cadillac found its voice under Lutz. The 2007 Chevy Malibu was a terrific and very successful car that probably would’t have been that way without Lutz. Putting more money into the product is his rightful legacy not low volume halo products that failed.
I like its looks. Although I’ve never seen one in person.
Tonight I finally experienced the CC Effect. As I walked out my front door to get the mail prior to going to work tonight, a red SSR identical to the one in the photos went down our street.
There are days when the only Subaru I see on the streets of Alton is the one I’m driving, yet I’ll see at least one SSR.
Car and Driver test drove a stock 2006 and got 14.2 in the quarter mile. Retro look, retractable hardtop, 400 horsepower, Tremec 6 speed…………would love to have one in my garage parked next to my Corvette for a change of pace.
Retro designs seem to sell like hotcakes in the U.S. only when they: 1) Are built by the same manufacturer that built the original, 2) Recall the styling of an original that sold extraordinarily well, as in hundreds of thousands of units, 3) Are memorable to a sufficient number of people who are old enough to fondly remember the originals when new, yet young enough to still buy and drive vehicles, and 4) Sell at a reasonable price.
One exception: The Chrysler PT, which didn’t meet the first three points, but was priced low enough and was reasonably practical.
But in the case of the SSR, those who owned them new are either no longer with us, and those who are bought the originals to farm or perform a trade – and probably don’t see it as a vehicular toy to which to aspire. With the T-bird, people forget that the original two-seaters never sold particularly well in the first place (although better than the Corvette).
Those appear here (Austria) from time to time, usually owned by older pimps or restauranters. They certainly attract attention, which is what their owners want, so I suppose that to that extent they are successful…
I know of one SSR that worked for a living, when we bought custom blinds for our front bay window the dealer used her SSR to deliver them.
At the time I’d never seen one before, and after taking a good look at it I decided:
– It was more interesting than the blinds it was delivering
– It would be more interesting as a sedan and not a semi-functional convertible pickup
Ouch! I just looked up the original price of these, the one tested by C&D had a list of $47k
I always thought that the best concept for this would have been to make an SUV out of the SSR, I imagine this would have probably been a big hit as a retro styled Blazer sized SUV with RWD and V8 instead of the 2 seat pickup configuration.
In the SSR’s defense, the retractable hardtop was still quite a novelty back in 2003, as only Mercedes and Lexus had them up to that point. Still doesn’t mean it was a good car…
And Mitsubishi had them too, earlier than this on the 3000GT Spyder.
Oops…forgot about the Spyder! That one is even more rare than the SSR.
Why undoubtedly white males?
Almost three decades of El Caminos and Chevy never went so far as to make T-tops for them — and yet they can somehow tool up for a complicated retractable roof for a niche-market convertible sportruck that nobody asked for.
That said, I don’t hate these — although I see no need for all of them to have been retractable converts. Why no fixed-roof base model — wouldn’t that have helped a lot with entry-level buyers? And why no manual — wouldn’t that have helped a lot with the leadfoot crowd? And why no long bed variation — wouldn’t that have helped a lot with tradesmen and other truck-needers? Maybe even a more heavy-duty version with GMC badging?
A 6 speed manual was available starting the 2nd year.
Not to nit pick but the Tremec manual 6 speed became available in the 3rd year of production. The final two years of production ’05 and ’06 saw several changes including replacing the previous engine with the new more potent LS2 aluminum Corvette motor along with the availability of the manual 6 speed.
Like them or not they do have a dedicated following…….
http://s249.photobucket.com/user/ohhawk/library/SSRs%20Galore?sort=6&page=1
Sounds similar to the GTO, or did they jump up to the 6.0 in the second year?
As a comparison they sold 40k in 3 years, quite a lot more than the 12k Monaros sold in Australia!
“The CC Effect”? Geez, is that what its called? I work at O’Reillys and had a guy on the phone today trying to find a cooling fan motor for a SSR. Black guy, got angry when I told him that I knew what an SSR was. I wanted to go Tony Stewart on him but kept my cool. Didn’t have the fan motor anyway.
Wow. What an assinine comment about Tony Stewart. That spelling is NOT a mistake.
Never had any use for those grossly overweight pigs. never did know that GM sold 24k of them, makes them more successful than the idiotic Lincoln Blackweird, er, Blackwood.
I see a red one almost daily, and a yellow one about once a week or so, so it’s lost it’s “That’s wierd!” look at this point. I used to see an orange one a lot, but it disappeared about 2 years ago or so.
They both look showroom new and are both owned by guys in their late 60’s, judging by their looks. Both of them always gawk at my car (2010 Challenger R/T) as I pass them, even though they’ve been seeing it a lot in the 3.5+ years I’ve had it. The guy with the red one has an old Nova too.
As a middle aged white FEMALE very proud owner of a 2005 Red SSR, I’d like to try and respond nicely (if I can hold my tongue) to some of you folks. First of all, I don’t know what you drive, and if I did I would respect your choice of vehicle. Secondly, to compare an HHR to an SSR is as to compare a mule to a stallion. Third, and last, so I don’t lose my temper over this Super Sport Roadster (thus the SSR, which has never claimed to be a pick um up truck), and which I adore…it is my suggestion you drive one just once before putting them down so. Oh, and one more thing NRD515…the yellow ones are called Slingshots, the reds Redlines, and they never came in Orange…must’ve been a custom job. (Also the blacks are Smoking
Asphault, the Silver Ricochet, the Aqua Aqua Blur…etc…) Of course, you have to actually know something about the vehicle to know these little tid bits..Like they don’t ALL come with carpet bedliners!!!
Beth you must be new here and if so welcome. People spouting off about cars they know little about is de rigueur at CC 🙂
Way to represent on the SSR!
I remember an older lady (60 maybe?) having one of these as a daily driver when I was a kid. These didn’t make a good truck, nor a good convertible. Also, IIRC these leaked like a basket in the rain.
Might be good for future hipsters who want something ‘ironic’ or original.
I have 2005 SSR,Custom Paint,Stainless steel Grill.and a spoiler,6.2 LS2,390 HP,406 Torque, I paid $25,000 for it 5 years ago,38,000 miles .I live in North Little Rock,Ar. I have owned a wide Variety of Cars and Trucks and wouldn’t even think of ever buying a SUV or a Humongous PU, or a 4 door sedan.I am a 75 year old Bachelor and like oddball vehicles as i have also Have a 2002 Ford ZX@, A Can Am Spyder and 2 Motor Cycles. Buy whatever You want.