rcutclif wrote:
by the way, I just started looking a bit. I saw this thread and thought, oh, well this SS is probably just a slightly cheaper cadillac.
ATS-V = 60k, v6 twin turbo 450 hp
CTS-V = 83k, v8 supercharged 620 hp (same 6.2 ls base engine as the SS probably though)
SS = 45k, v8 NA 415 hp
Nope.
An interesting inbetweener that's often overlooked though is the "V-sport" CTS. It's no slouch, and with a 420-hp, twin-turbo 3.6-liter V-6, it's power surpasses the SS and is arguably a nicer car.
It should be... sticker is ~$60K new. Intriguing though, as a V-sport can be bought certified used for ~$45K all day.
No manual trans in the V-sport may be a dealbreaker though.
I love the SS, it's like the perfect car for me. I just wish it came out a few years earlier so that the used ones would be cheaper now.
One is a Malibu, one is an SS. See the problem now?
Meh, so it's a sleeper. I'm fine with that. Less attention from Johnny Law.
In reply to Tom_Spangler:
I think it's bigger than that. If it looks just like your other products, and the name is pretty much invisible by design, and advertising is basically nil, how is the sales force going to move the thing? This feels like an Old GM mistake and not something that the marketing wizards from Kraft or Rubbermade or whoever is running New GM now should have let happen.
Same problem GM had with the last GTO- everyone said it looks just like a "normal" Pontiac. A shame, they were nice driving cars.
45 large for a 4 door sedan? The V6 FWD Impala's start about 20k less. I don't see 20 grand worth of additional hardware there. Crack Pipe.
pres589 wrote:
In reply to Tom_Spangler:
I think it's bigger than that. If it looks just like your other products, and the name is pretty much invisible by design, and advertising is basically nil, how is the sales force going to move the thing? This feels like an Old GM mistake and not something that the marketing wizards from Kraft or Rubbermade or whoever is running New GM now should have let happen.
I agree that the name and marketing are terrible, but my understanding is that the only reason we are even getting this car is to fulfill an obligation to the union at the Holden plant where they are made. The contract only specifies a certain number of cars, I don't know what it is, but it's pretty low. And 2016 will be the last year for it. So, they are choosing not to market it kind of by design.
But it is too expensive, IMO.
volvoclearinghouse wrote:
Same problem GM had with the last GTO- everyone said it looks just like a "normal" Pontiac. A shame, they were nice driving cars.
45 large for a 4 door sedan? The V6 FWD Impala's start about 20k less. I don't see 20 grand worth of additional hardware there. Crack Pipe.
Gonna have to agree. WAY too expensive.
Coldsnap wrote:
volvoclearinghouse wrote:
Same problem GM had with the last GTO- everyone said it looks just like a "normal" Pontiac. A shame, they were nice driving cars.
45 large for a 4 door sedan? The V6 FWD Impala's start about 20k less. I don't see 20 grand worth of additional hardware there. Crack Pipe.
Gonna have to agree. WAY too expensive.
When you are rebadging a Holden Commodore from Down Under where there is a big difference in currency exchange....
Tom_Spangler wrote:
pres589 wrote:
In reply to Tom_Spangler:
I think it's bigger than that. If it looks just like your other products, and the name is pretty much invisible by design, and advertising is basically nil, how is the sales force going to move the thing? This feels like an Old GM mistake and not something that the marketing wizards from Kraft or Rubbermade or whoever is running New GM now should have let happen.
I agree that the name and marketing are terrible, but my understanding is that the only reason we are even getting this car is to fulfill an obligation to the union at the Holden plant where they are made. The contract only specifies a certain number of cars, I don't know what it is, but it's pretty low. And 2016 will be the last year for it. So, they are choosing not to market it kind of by design.
But it is too expensive, IMO.
Originally, it was not going to be for sale to the general public. Police vehicles only.
Low sales as cop cars likely spurred the need to offer a civilian version so as to meet production number commitments.
I'm going to keep my eye on these. Might be something great to buy in 4 years. Maybe drive train seekers would move onto something else then
NickD
Reader
10/9/15 12:39 p.m.
In reply to Coldsnap:
I don't think the LS engine is going to be losing popularity any time soon
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Chevrolet-Caprice-K9-Police-9C3-Interceptor-PPV-/121778745509?forcerrptr=true&hash=item1c5a9430a5&item=121778745509
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Chevrolet-Caprice-PPV-Sedan-4-Door-/272007130687?forcerrptr=true&hash=item3f54e36e3f&item=272007130687
Ranger50 wrote:
Coldsnap wrote:
volvoclearinghouse wrote:
Same problem GM had with the last GTO- everyone said it looks just like a "normal" Pontiac. A shame, they were nice driving cars.
45 large for a 4 door sedan? The V6 FWD Impala's start about 20k less. I don't see 20 grand worth of additional hardware there. Crack Pipe.
Gonna have to agree. WAY too expensive.
When you are rebadging a Holden Commodore from Down Under where there is a big difference in currency exchange....
Can't help but wonder though...what if they'd just used the Impala's V6 (which is a damn fine engine, very torque and thrust-y, I've driven one) turned it longitudinally and drove the back wheels, maybe offered a row-your-own as an option, and charged maybe a 5K premium over the Impala for the extra engineering.
NickD wrote:
Harvey wrote:
NickD wrote:
Driven a few of the Caprices at work when the NY State Troopers bring them in for major problems. Pretty nice cars. Definitely a car to be on the lookout for in a few years when they start retiring them from the fleet. Parts availability could be troublesome by then though.
The Chevy SS (or the "Just SS" as I've dubbed it) is one of GM's best kept secrets. IT's got very reserved but handsome styling, a great drivetrain and chassis and a surprisingly nice interior. They are a lot of car for the money. Too bad GM saddled it with a stupid/confusing name and never advertised it. Our '14 sat on the lot for a year and a half because no one knew what it was (A lot of people, salesman included kept calling it an Impala SS or Malibu SS). It ended up selling for a $10K discount simply because they wanted it gone, which was a helluva steal.
Figured this would happen once I saw the thing. I thought about waiting for the inevitable discounts and buying one, but decided I would just get out of the high performance giant sedan thing for a while.
The same thing happened with the only 2nd-gen CTS-V we got, which was a CTS-V wagon. It sat on the lot for 2 years and we lost our tail when it got deeply discounted. Never got another CTS-V after that. Meanwhile though, we move $115K C7 Z07s all day (Sold 4 of them so far. And this is in a town of 30,000 in an economically-depressed area)
I'd love to have a CTS-V wagon, but the $70-80k for a new one kinda put me off of that. I think most people who want the wagon can't afford it.
It has me wanting a big sedan. Maybe an SHO.
volvoclearinghouse wrote:
Can't help but wonder though...what if they'd just used the Impala's V6 (which is a damn fine engine, very torque and thrust-y, I've driven one) turned it longitudinally and drove the back wheels, maybe offered a row-your-own as an option, and charged maybe a 5K premium over the Impala for the extra engineering.
And crash test it, mileage test, EPA certification, chase out all the NVH bugs, etc, etc. What you're talking about is pretty involved in this day and age. It'd be easier and cheaper for them to make a Chevy sedan off the Caddy ATS/CTS platform.
neon4891 wrote:
It has me wanting a big sedan. Maybe an SHO.
Yeah, you and me both. I've been taking a closer look at SHOs lately. They aren't as quick as the SS, but they are cheaper, AWD, and have more/better lux options, in my opinion.
Why do I covet these fast 4 door sedans when 95% of the time I'm driving its just me in the car..
Coldsnap wrote:
Why do I covet these fast 4 door sedans when 95% of the time I'm driving its just me in the car..
The only thing better than a fast sedan is a fast wagon. 
volvoclearinghouse wrote:
Ranger50 wrote:
Coldsnap wrote:
volvoclearinghouse wrote:
Same problem GM had with the last GTO- everyone said it looks just like a "normal" Pontiac. A shame, they were nice driving cars.
45 large for a 4 door sedan? The V6 FWD Impala's start about 20k less. I don't see 20 grand worth of additional hardware there. Crack Pipe.
Gonna have to agree. WAY too expensive.
When you are rebadging a Holden Commodore from Down Under where there is a big difference in currency exchange....
Can't help but wonder though...what if they'd just used the Impala's V6 (which is a damn fine engine, very torque and thrust-y, I've driven one) turned it longitudinally and drove the back wheels, maybe offered a row-your-own as an option, and charged maybe a 5K premium over the Impala for the extra engineering.
they sell that car... they call it a Camaro...
Hasn't this been on sale for a couple years? And according to this thread some of us car guys didn't know what a Chevy "SS" was until now. Great job advertising, GM.
BlueInGreen44 wrote:
Hasn't this been on sale for a couple years? And according to this thread some of us car guys didn't know what a Chevy "SS" was until now. Great job advertising, GM.
As I said, it's kinda on purpose. And I think most of us knew about it. I certainly did.
