LMAO!! Chevrolet SSR pickup $42,000

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
NFS4

NFS4

No Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
72,636
47
91
Yeah right, like I'd pay that much for a New Beetle that humped a Silverado
rolleye.gif


Picture

http://www.auto.com/industry/iwirb18_20030118.htm
 
M

MrBond

Diamond Member
Feb 5, 2000
9,911
0
76
The reason the pt cruiser was so popular was its combination of retro looks and low base price. I think GM would have been better off going the route Daimer-Chrystler did and keep the price low and the car weak until sales spiked, then offer the $42,000 "SS" model that's super fast.
 
B

BooneRebel

Platinum Member
Mar 22, 2001
2,229
0
0
Yeah, it's a shame. Between the inflated price and the lack of performance, I predict that this will have an untimely demise much as the Lincoln Blackwood did.

If they could have offered it with a 0-60 time of 6 seconds or so at a price around $30,000 it would have sold like hotcakes.
 
T

TrueBlueLS

Platinum Member
Jul 13, 2001
2,931
1
0
I was going to buy one until I realized how much my monthly payments for it would be. There'd be no way I could do that making $1,100 a month.
 
B

BooneRebel

Platinum Member
Mar 22, 2001
2,229
0
0
Originally posted by: TrueBlueLS
I was going to buy one until I realized how much my monthly payments for it would be. There'd be no way I could do that making $1,100 a month.
Click to expand...
Gross or net?

 
GasX

GasX

Lifer
Feb 8, 2001
29,033
6
81
Originally posted by: NFS4
Yeah right, like I'd pay that much for a New Beetle that humped a Silverado
rolleye.gif
Click to expand...
I was thinking a prowler hit an Audi TT
 
W

wyvrn

Lifer
Feb 15, 2000
10,074
0
0
It looks pretty cool but I wouldn't pay that much for it. Boring looking cars are boring to drive.
 
MichaelD

MichaelD

Lifer
Jan 16, 2001
31,528
3
76
This vehicle is aimed primarliy at the 45-60 year old demographic...like the Prowler.
 
L

LikeLinus

Lifer
Jul 25, 2001
11,518
670
126
GM...haha pretty lame.

250,000 to $350,000 for a Cadillac Sixteen

The day after GM unveiled the Sixteen with its 1,000-h.p. V-16 that claims to propel it from zero to 60 mph in just 4 seconds


Despite 1,000 h.p., Lutz insists Sixteen is an economy car, thanks to displacement-on-demand, which shuts off the supply of fuel to cylinders when not needed to conserve gas.

Lutz is Nutz.

1000 hp and only 0-60 in 4.0??

Sad.
 
W

WinkOsmosis

Banned
Sep 18, 2002
13,990
1
0
Originally posted by: LikeLinus
GM...haha pretty lame.

250,000 to $350,000 for a Cadillac Sixteen

The day after GM unveiled the Sixteen with its 1,000-h.p. V-16 that claims to propel it from zero to 60 mph in just 4 seconds


Despite 1,000 h.p., Lutz insists Sixteen is an economy car, thanks to displacement-on-demand, which shuts off the supply of fuel to cylinders when not needed to conserve gas.

Lutz is Nutz.

1000 hp and only 0-60 in 4.0??

Sad.
Click to expand...

Well it's bigger than a Suburban. I don't know if it can even be considered a car.
 
Mr.IncrediblyBored

Mr.IncrediblyBored

Lifer
Jun 18, 2000
11,214
781
126
Originally posted by: LikeLinus
GM...haha pretty lame.

250,000 to $350,000 for a Cadillac Sixteen

The day after GM unveiled the Sixteen with its 1,000-h.p. V-16 that claims to propel it from zero to 60 mph in just 4 seconds


Despite 1,000 h.p., Lutz insists Sixteen is an economy car, thanks to displacement-on-demand, which shuts off the supply of fuel to cylinders when not needed to conserve gas.

Lutz is Nutz.

1000 hp and only 0-60 in 4.0??

Sad.
Click to expand...
Compared to its (would be) competition, 4 seconds is extremely fast. Remember, the size and luxury appointments put the Sixteen in the same class as Bentley, Maybach, and Rolls Royce.
 
L

LikeLinus

Lifer
Jul 25, 2001
11,518
670
126
<<the size and luxury appointments put the Sixteen in the same class as Bentley, Maybach, and Rolls Royce. >>

You actually said Rolls Royce and Bentley in the same breath as Caddy. You sir should be shot.

Bentley's and RR are HAND BUILT down to the hand stitched leather. To even suggest that GM could create a car of the quality that Bentley/RR do is wrong, so wrong.

GM's just trying to do this whole "bigger = better" which is NOT the case. If you can afford a $250,000 automobile and want to drive fast, you definitely won't be purchasing a damn Caddy.

It's fugly anyway Only person who'd be driving that crap is Master P. Nice Bling Bling wheels....really has the elegance of a Bentley.
 
NFS4

NFS4

No Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
72,636
47
91
Originally posted by: KnightBreed
Originally posted by: LikeLinus
GM...haha pretty lame.

250,000 to $350,000 for a Cadillac Sixteen

The day after GM unveiled the Sixteen with its 1,000-h.p. V-16 that claims to propel it from zero to 60 mph in just 4 seconds


Despite 1,000 h.p., Lutz insists Sixteen is an economy car, thanks to displacement-on-demand, which shuts off the supply of fuel to cylinders when not needed to conserve gas.

Lutz is Nutz.

1000 hp and only 0-60 in 4.0??

Sad.
Click to expand...
Compared to its (would be) competition, 4 seconds is extremely fast. Remember, the size and luxury appointments put the Sixteen in the same class as Bentley, Maybach, and Rolls Royce.
Click to expand...

But it's STILL a Caddy!!!!!!! Cadillac lost its prestige 50 years ago.
 
Mr.IncrediblyBored

Mr.IncrediblyBored

Lifer
Jun 18, 2000
11,214
781
126
Originally posted by: LikeLinus
<<the size and luxury appointments put the Sixteen in the same class as Bentley, Maybach, and Rolls Royce. >>

You actually said Rolls Royce and Bentley in the same breath as Caddy. You sir should be shot.

Bentley's and RR are HAND BUILT down to the hand stitched leather. To even suggest that GM could create a car of the quality that Bentley/RR do is wrong, so wrong.
Click to expand...
The Sixteen concept was completely hand-built, and I'd imagine the production version would have been as well.

As a side note, where did this stigma of hand-built = quality come from? Bentley's and RR's are hand-built because the customizations and intricate details go beyond what the average assembly line robot is capable of. To say a vehicle is high quality simply because its hand-built is absolute lunacy.

GM's just trying to do this whole "bigger = better" which is NOT the case. If you can afford a $250,000 automobile and want to drive fast, you definitely won't be purchasing a damn Caddy.
Click to expand...
I think your attitude is precisly why the Sixteen won't be built. GM has the resources to compete with any manufacturer on this planet. Whether the vehicle will sell is a different argument altogether.

It's fugly anyway Only person who'd be driving that crap is Master P. Nice Bling Bling wheels....really has the elegance of a Bentley.
Click to expand...
Uh, have you seen the RR Phantom? Its essentially the same regurgitated design they've been milking since the 50's. The Bentley Arnage/Continental is no better. The Sixteen and Maybach at least stray from the norm, and IMO they're both beautiful.
 
NFS4

NFS4

No Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
72,636
47
91
Originally posted by: Cfour
Originally posted by: NFS4
Yeah right, like I'd pay that much for a New Beetle that humped a Silverado
rolleye.gif


Picture

http://www.auto.com/industry/iwirb18_20030118.htm
Click to expand...

rather have that than a thunderbird
Click to expand...

I think just the opposite. The Thunderbird doesn't make claims to be a performance machine, it's a boulevard cruiser. Chevy is trying to pass the SSR off as a performance pickup.

That being said, the Thunderbird has 280HP and the SSR has 285HP. The T-Bird will probably STILL smoke the SSR and the T-Bird actually looks decent compared to that deformed SSR.
 
Mr.IncrediblyBored

Mr.IncrediblyBored

Lifer
Jun 18, 2000
11,214
781
126
Originally posted by: NFS4
Originally posted by: Cfour
Originally posted by: NFS4
Yeah right, like I'd pay that much for a New Beetle that humped a Silverado
rolleye.gif


Picture

http://www.auto.com/industry/iwirb18_20030118.htm
Click to expand...

rather have that than a thunderbird
Click to expand...

I think just the opposite. The Thunderbird doesn't make claims to be a performance machine, it's a boulevard cruiser. Chevy is trying to pass the SSR off as a performance pickup.

That being said, the Thunderbird has 280HP and the SSR has 285HP. The T-Bird will probably STILL smoke the SSR and the T-Bird actually looks decent compared to that deformed SSR.
Click to expand...
I vaguely recall you referring to the Thunderbird design as a "retarded guppy."
 
radioouman

radioouman

Diamond Member
Nov 4, 2002
8,632
0
0
Why would anyone pay this for a car/truck? I mean, this is about 1/4 the cost of a reasonable house in a decent neighborhood. Nothing spectacular, but for $168,000, you could get into something decent.

Houses generally appreciate over time. Cars depreciate 1/3->1/2 of their total value in the first 18 months.

So why do people buy these things?

I work with guy who does basically the same thing that I do. I'm guessing that he makes $50,000 gross per year. Let's say that 1/3 of that goes to taxes and 401k, so he ends up with a yearly income of $33333. He just bought a new Chevy full size, extendo cab, 4x4 truck. The truck was slightly more than what he makes in ONE FULL YEAR!
He didn't put down any money. He didn't trade a vehicle in on this one. He bought it at 0% interest for 60 months, and will make $585+ monthly payments for five years.

Why are people will to spend an entire year's earnings on a vehicle? It's not an investment for sure.

Oh ya. He bought this truck as a replacement for his 2001 Saturn SC1 with 70,000 miles that he bought with home equity.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom