Repair-It

None of us has been in a G8 but I've read that they're very spacious cars enough times to know it's not just talk. So I compared a 2014 Charger to a 2014 Chevy SS.

The Chevy SS has more room in every dimension, like front and rear legroom, front and rear shoulder room and front and rear hip room. Trunk space is the same.

When you factor in that the Charger is sitting on a 5.6" longer wheelbase with 400 extra pounds, it's hard not to be impressed with the Holden VF platform (and VE) packaging efficiency.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nM_-xRPRulM

An interesting angle in this video review by The Smoking Tire. They got some auto detailer personality to drive the car, and I guess he bought a 1995 Impala SS in the early 2000s...

Anyway it's mostly predictable. They kind of got hung up on the looks. I guess it depends what you want. They talked about firm ride...well the ride is better than the Charger SRT-8 while still handling better. Some perspective would have been good. This is a fantastic car for $45k.

AW drives the SS, again. Now we've gone plaid.

http://www.autoweek.com/article/2014022 ... dailydrive

Check it out in red.

In summary, they love it. Some choice quotes:

What I can say, though, is the new SS isn't bad in messy conditions. Not bad at all. Consider the SS's rear drive and oodles of horsepower, and last night had all the makings of a complete disaster. I was pleasantly surprised. It was no problem. The car does have Bridgestone Blizzak winter tires on it so much credit to those. They are terrific tires. The car cruised through the slop just fine. The traction control barely flashed.

So well-balanced RWD cars with snow tires work well in the snow. I already knew that.

It's an understated looking car overall, though I did have someone in an old Monte Carlo run me down on the expressway and pace me for a couple of miles in the next lane while snapping photos on his cell phone. Car people know what it is, while the rest of the general public probably won't even take a second look at it when it zooms by them on the road.

Still, the Chevy SS is a heck of a car. It's a good size, is seriously fun to drive with plenty of power, swift handling reflexes and has simple and sporty looks. I would probably pick it over the more powerful Dodge Charger SRT8 if given the choice. Not saying I don't like the Charger SRT8, but I prefer the Chevy's lighter-on-its-feet handling and more compact dimensions.

This is how all American cars should be. Indeed, this is how all cars, period, should be made: powerful, taut, responsive and fast. This is what used to constitute an American sedan, so why can't we have that now?

I love the 2014 ChevroletSS. It's understated on the outside, yet powerful under the hood and quicker than a dingo when you launch it. At speed it tracks straight and true. Come on, America, buy all of these so that GM (and Ford and Dodge) will make more! You shouldn't have to do with the utility compromises of two-door pony cars to get the performance of a sports sedan.

I like this one:

I would get one of these before I got a BMW 5-series and maybe even before I got an AMG E-class. Yes, I said it.

All 415 hp and 415 lb-ft of torque were eager to get on the road. There was no lag in the six-speed automatic transmission, no sense that the torque converter was eating up all the torque. It is an efficient powertrain with no leaks.

What a wonderful car. It stops well, steers well, rides well; the beefy four-piston Brembo brakes have excellent modulation and feel perfect for this veritable limousine. The steering is weighty and elastic: it turns in firmly and bounces to center with a reassuring snap. The six-speed auto shifts quickly but smoothly. This car just wants to cruise over 80 mph all day. Not higher, that would be irresponsible; not lower, because it feels bogged down, as if the post-Carter mandate of 65 mph freeway limits is a pace best reserved for parking lots. 80 mph is its comfort zone, and it feels the least encumbered by physics and effort. Municipal governments should raise their speed limits accordingly.

The SS isn't just a novelty for misty-eyed nostalgia freaks imbued with more testosterone as Tim Allen. Is it the perfect family hauler? Sure, just climb inside. There's tons of headroom front and rear. The trunk is huge enough to contain all your cliché “dead body” jokes.

kevm14 wrote:The thing is, the C5 Z06 level of numbers is totally adequate for me. I don't need any more than that. But all the dynamics/feel stuff I have come to really value (yes Bob, it's true), so I am thrilled it is there. At least it is according to the auto rags. It's a good sign that they all seem to agree on that.

I think a sign that you're maturing as a car enthusiast is that you begin to appreciate the intangibles.

It takes a while. I got AW since 1994 (not currently, though). Before you can drive, it's all numbers. Even after that, I think the numbers were more interesting to me than any of the intangibles. Perhaps perspective comes with owning lots of cars, which would explain how long it took me to come around. The other part I attribute directly to the CTS-V. I had no idea it would be possible to drive a car like that so close to its limit and be in total control (and not ride like shit, for the performance level). That's the new expectation for me. And where the SS seems to trump the Charger.

With the SS, I think how good it appears to be in all categories (including feel) totally trumps the fact that it has the Chevrolet family styling. Though, that comment leads me to a pretty important aside: all the 60s muscle cars very much resembled their stable mates. But you have Ford pimping the GT500 image from Gone in 60 Seconds, and Chrysler's cars were always boisterous. GM was always more conservative. A lot of that probably had to do with their position in the market during that era (as #1). But now the perception is "how can GM afford to make the SS look so conservative? They need a hit!" I don't agree with the sentiment of that comment, though. Besides, it looks very much like the Holden Commodore (like the G8 did and like the GTO looked like the Monaro).

At the end of the day, asking to make the SS to look "cooler, like the Charger or Mustang" is like asking GM to rewrite history.

I think my first "it's not all about the numbers" experience came after moving from my 94 Prelude to the 95 Z28. While the Z28 had better numbers, it was severely lacking in terms of refinement, feel and build quality compared to the Prelude. Buyers remorse? Maybe, but it was an important part of my car development and a good learning experience.

My problem with the F-body is it is pretty uninteresting to me. The initial novelty of a car that runs 14.0 @ 100 wore off after a year or so. It had few other redeeming qualities (ok it sounded great with the Dynomax muffler I put on, and had remarkable throttle response).

By interesting I mean that there are no qualities about the car (good or bad) that you didn't expect. I find my Caprice much more interesting (and imagine if it actually had a decent powertrain) because the expectation is so different from reality, imo. Pony cars are default cool to most folks. A B-body is not. Automatically I like the B-body more. Many car folks actually shun 4 doors, which I never really understood. I'm a contrarian like that.

http://www.autoweek.com/article/2014031 ... dailydrive

AW drives an SS to a Lemons race as an organizer. I have one main issue: they claim they couldn't disable traction control and thus couldn't drift it around. That's just wrong. GM sometimes changes how you disable the traction control (long presses and double presses do different things depending on the car model). But I know it can be fully disabled, so I really had to take the interior criticisms with a grain of salt. The interior is all Holden, yet, the steering wheel tilt mechanism is out of a "Blazer?" A Blazer? Come on, that's just weak-ass writing. There's no way. This isn't 2001.

I should send this to Autoweek. http://youtu.be/nM_-xRPRulM?t=2m36s

In fact I was so angry I sent this little nastigram to AW:

I have no idea which e-mail address to use, so I used this one.

In your recent article about using a 2014 Chevy SS as the race organizer car for a weekend Lemons race, you claim traction control cannot be disabled. That’s not true. First, here is the evidence: http://youtu.be/nM_-xRPRulM?t=2m36s

Second, you should know that not all GM cars disable the active handling system the same way (and that the system has multiple modes). GM is one of the hold outs that actually still ALLOWS you to disable everything. Not to mention, they are also known for letting you get away with a lot with the system engaged, and even more in competitive driving mode.

Here’s the owner’s manual: http://www.chevrolet.com/content/dam/Ch ... _sedan.pdf

PDF page 263. You need to press and hold the TCS/StabiliTrak button until both the traction off light AND the stabiltrak off light come on. BOTH. You probably just pressed once to disable traction control, but with stability control still activated, it wouldn’t allow drifting. This is easy stuff guys. GM’s had this basic system since 1997.

So ignorance on this topic was irritating for me. Please correct your article accordingly.

I got a reply!

Hey Kevin,

I drove here in an SS, in the snow. You’re right, TCS and StabiliTrak can be fully disabled. I’ll make the change in the story and I’ve forwarded this to our contributor.

Thanks,

Rory

Rory Carroll
Executive Editor

Now I wish I was slightly less snarky. But I could have been a lot MORE snarky, also, and discussed how I USED to be an AW subscriber...