Edmunds: Chevrolet HHR

[TBR]

In other words, you'll wait for something that agrees with you and proclaim that "decent".

No, I'll wait for R/T or C/D to review and base my conclusion off of their conclusion. You seem set on the idea that I am biased in some weird and crazy ways. One day you will insist i am biased against Buick and the next tell me I am biased towards Chevrolet, while in reality I try to give every brand a decent shot. That is all I am doing here, edmunds has held many unfair reviews and comparision tests so why should I automatically proclaim that a vehicle is a bad value from one of their reviews?

[ifcar]

In other words, you'll wait for something that agrees with you and proclaim that "decent".

And I think you've found your "decent source": Motor Trend. They apparently put the HHR ahead of the PT in a just-released comparison test because they thought the PT looked like a girly car.    

[TBR]

I haven't read their review yet, though I do know the results and I haven't mentioned them yet because I don't trust MT all that much either.  

[ifcar]

In other words, you'll wait for something that agrees with you and proclaim that "decent".

No, I'll wait for R/T or C/D to review and base my conclusion off of their conclusion. You seem set on the idea that I am biased in some weird and crazy ways. One day you will insist i am biased against Buick and the next tell me I am biased towards Chevrolet, while in reality I try to give every brand a decent shot. That is all I am doing here, edmunds has held many unfair reviews and comparision tests so why should I automatically proclaim that a vehicle is a bad value from one of their reviews?

You said the same about Edmunds.  

I think you are biased towards your initial conclusions more than anything else, sticking with them to the end be they right or wrong. But I can be the same sometimes, so who am I to criticize?

I am also interested to see what C/D says (R/T doesn't put enough in comparison form for my taste), hopefully they don't proclaim that newer is automatically better, or focus only on the retro styling's PT origins.  

[TBR]

Also, you are the one that is drawing conclusions from a single review from a source that isn't all that reputable.  

[ifcar]

I haven't read their review yet, though I do know the results and I haven't mentioned them yet because I don't trust MT all that much either.

Just trying to get that one out of the way before it even could get started.

[TBR]

"I think you are biased towards your initial conclusions more than anything else, sticking with them to the end be they right or wrong. But I can be the same sometimes, so who am I to criticize?"
I think you did thing described in the quote, from the get go you have been insisting that the HHR will not be as good as the PT Cruiser so as soon as you see a review that agrees with you you proclaim that you were right. Please just consider the source.

[ifcar]

Also, you are the one that is drawing conclusions from a single review from a source that isn't all that reputable.

You calling it disreputable doesn't make it so. People are just content to call Edmunds biased and/or inept whenever they disagree with a review, and their slow acceleration times seem to convince everyone that they are correct in their assumptions. But I always prefer a solid pro-and-con review that doesn't praise every car in its conclusion, and there aren't that many reviewers like that.

[TBR]

The results of their comparos often seem to have nothing to do with their comments, that is my main problem.

[ifcar]

"I think you are biased towards your initial conclusions more than anything else, sticking with them to the end be they right or wrong. But I can be the same sometimes, so who am I to criticize?"
I think you did thing described in the quote, from the get go you have been insisting that the HHR will not be as good as the PT Cruiser so as soon as you see a review that agrees with you you proclaim that you were right. Please just consider the source.

Actually, I was one of the few people in the "give the HHR a chance" camp when it was unveiled. As others bashed it as a PT wannabe, I said that we had to wait for the fact to be in to see which is better. As more facts appeared however, I sided with the better-value PT Cruiser.  

[ifcar]

The results of their comparos often seem to have nothing to do with their comments, that is my main problem.

Explain.  

[TBR]

It has been to olong since I have read one of their comparos. If I have time tonight I will read one and then post my comments here.

[ifcar]

Don't pick and choose, either. How about one of their most recent ones, AWD luxury sedans or Sonata vs. Accord vs. Camry?

[TBR]

I'll pick and choose if I want, I was thinking the Japanese luxury and midsize truck comparos because those are the ones I remember not being happy about.

[ifcar]

You can find one example of a discrepancy in any source, so go into a comparison that you've never read before and see what you find. They really aren't as bad as they're constantly portrayed.

[VetteZ06]

Do you think that they invented their complaints?

That's very unlikely, but other reviews (like the one from TCC) have completely disagreed with Edmunds' comments about the brakes. Why is that?

[TBR]

I will look at those other two, but first I will look at the two I mentioned.

[ifcar]

Do you think that they invented their complaints?

That's very unlikely, but other reviews (like the one from TCC) have completely disagreed with Edmunds' comments about the brakes. Why is that?

Is this the TCC review you're talking about?
http://www.thecarconnection.com/Vehicle_Re...S181.A9004.html

They didn't provide the indication that they did extended brake testing in their review, anything more than routine use. Edmunds tested simulated panic stops, and it swerved all over their track.

And the TCC-type test is more of an extended test drive than anything else. Not at the same level as an Edmunds or C/D complete test, which includes track testing and stricter evaluation.

[ifcar]

I will look at those other two, but first I will look at the two I mentioned.

Give the Edmunds Evaluation its own thread, if you don't mind.  

[VetteZ06]

They didn't mention the brakes once in their review.  <_<

Did you even read the review?  

"Braking, too, was balanced and powerful despite cost-saving rear drums."

Also, Motor Trend got identical 60-0 numbers for the HHR and PT Cruiser: 136 feet.

[ifcar]

They didn't mention the brakes once in their review.  <_<

Did you even read the review?  

"Braking, too, was balanced and powerful despite cost-saving rear drums."

Also, Motor Trend got identical 60-0 numbers for the HHR and PT Cruiser: 136 feet.

I edited, the Find search failed me once again (checked "brakes" and "braked" but not "braking"). And Edmunds didn't criticize the HHR's braking distance so much of its inability to stop straight. They got around 136 feet too, I believe.  

[VetteZ06]

It just seems so strange to me that Edmunds was so vocal about it and we haven't heard about a similar problem from the other reviews. I'm not trying to imply that Edmunds lied, because I don't think they would ever do that, but maybe there was something wrong with their test vehicle?

There usually isn't that much of a discrepency between reviews. It's wierd.

[ifcar]

MT would be the only other reviewer I know of who does actual track brake testing whose HHR review is already out. So it remains to be seen which review represents the norm and which the discrepency.  

[VetteZ06]

MT would be the only other reviewer I know of who does actual track brake testing whose HHR review is already out. So it remains to be seen which review represents the norm and which the discrepency.

They never referenced the brakes directly (other than to say it has discs up front and drums in the rear), but I have a hard time believing they wouldn't make a big deal if they had the same problem Edmunds did. They obviously did a test for braking, so it makes me wonder.

[ifcar]

That still leaves their handling complaints, but it would be good if the braking issue weren't widespread.  

[VetteZ06]

Motor Trend did say that the HHR is "not quite as nimble as the PT," but it wasn't regarded as a huge problem. Both vehicles were fun to drive, apparently, but the PT was more tossable around the corners. They did complain about the Chrysler's driving position, though, which hampered the fun-to-drive quotient a bit.

[ifcar]

I've never noticed any discomfort driving the PT, I'll have to see what they said. But I always get my magazines later than most people.

[VetteZ06]

I can type up the pertinent parts for you, if you'd like.

[ifcar]

That's all right, I can just be patient. :)

[TBR]

So far I have read both the comparos ifcar suggested and am writiing them up as an article. If Dan wants to put it up he can, if he doesn't I'll start a thread.