Besides looking terrible, what exactly is wrong with this car?

>>14021563
it's not a lolracecar

>>14021563
It's got white tail lights?

>>14021563
They underpowered it. That car might have been popular with boomers if they offered it with a powerful v8 and into some kind of sport truck.

>>14021571
I take that back, I see at the end of production they added a bigger engine. Maybe was too late.

>>14021578
Yeah, I was about to say I thought at some point it did have a V8.

It's a Chevy; thus, it's redneck tier.

>>14021587
I confused this with the Plymouth Prowler, which only had a v6. Not sure why this didn't sell, must just be because it is ugly like you said.

>>14021587
Seems a v8 couldn't help it get ahead of its fatass design:
> the chassis and mechanicals for the SSR were borrowed from GM's corporate midsize SUV program, making the putative performance machine heavy, underpowered and unforgivably lazy. It was no more hotrod than Britney is the next Helen Mirren. In the next couple of years, Chevy amped up the SSR but by then the credibility was gone.

http://content.time.com/time/specials/2007/article/0,28804,1658545_1658544_1658543,00.html

Wait wut? This had a V8? I don't remember that. But I never particularly cared.

File: image.jpg (371KB, 1280x960px) Image search: [Google]

371KB, 1280x960px

Same case with this car.

Looks pretty bad from the outside (though I will say it did a better job than some other retromodern designs), but other than that very little seems to be actually wrong with it.

I think what killed this and the SSR was that both were way too overpriced, and they weren't really marketed that much by their manufacturers.

>>14021618
Well, you couldn't get one of those for a period of time. Seems they just didn't make very many. A buddy of mine's wife wanted one so bad they waited on a list for over a year. The they were told "no haps, sorry". Tokk them 4 more years to find a good used one that wasn't priced up thousands above the original MSRP.

>>14021629
That was a huge chick car

I don't remember them being hard to get though

>>14021629
No, they didn't make a lot after the first year, when it wasn't selling well (and continued to slide for the remainder of production). Ford never really cared to support the car either, talk was around at the time of creating a high-performance version of the Thunderbird but that never happened. Dealers charged thousands more than the MSRP on sticker, so it further drove customers away.

>>14021563
Ausfag visiting the US here. Actually saw one of these the other day. Are they rare? I like the nod to the old Chevy pickups but man is it a weird looking car!

>>14021690
According to Wikipedia, around 24,000 were made. Not terribly rare, just uncommon to see.

>>14021606
I also found out in its last year of production, the SSR was sold with a 6.0 liter LS2 V8 that was also in the C6 Corvette and Pontiac GTO. It was even offered with a manual transmission (in which case the engine produced a whopping 400 hp) in its last year, which apparently was not the case with the earlier models.

>>14021704
Cheers. I thought it might have spied a rarity, given how it looked.

>>14021618
To back up my point about them being overpirced, I found out that the SSR in 2004 was being sold for $42,000.

$42,000 for a car that could easily be sold for 10 grand less. This is again paired with its low amount of marketing, which is currently killing another nice Chevrolet, the Australian-built SS.

>>14021763
>This is again paired with its low amount of marketing, which is currently killing another nice Chevrolet, the Australian-built SS.
GM doesn't want to sell SSs, they lose money on each one due to exchange rates.
>>14021563
It had sporting pretentions but was still a truck, so it was very heavy and didn't handle.

It also wasn't that fast until it was about to be cancelled.

>>14021832
Then why bother selling it at all?

Just to appease the few diehards with money that have been pestering GM ever since the Pontiac G8 stopped selling?