HHR and PT: the real deal
Jason Vines’ latest tirade has been directed not at the journalists who can so easily take (much more public) revenge, but at Chrysler’s old hero, Bob Lutz, now over at GM. Lutz, whose remarks have recently taken a turn for the less than purely rational, recently called the new HHR SS “the real deal” compared with the new PT Sunset Boulevard. Lutz has a point in a way - the SS is much more significant a vehicle than the Sunset Boulevard, which is a mere color and trim package. However, until this year, Chrysler has also made a little thing called the PT Cruiser GT each year, which was more than a match for the SS.
As Bill Cawthon pointed out, the PT Cruiser “is seven model years old but is still in the top 15% of American light vehicles by current year-to-date (YTD) sales. It was in the top 11% in 2006.”
Though both vehicles were styled by the personable Bryan Nesbitt, the HHR hasn’t ever been as popular as the PT, nor has it really made much of a splash. Sales are not bad, but the PT still beats out the HHR, even after being severely decontented in 2003 and then again in 2006, with a clearly cheapened interior (albeit accompanied by better soundproofing). Chrysler officials’ frequent downplaying of the PT as a one-trick pony with no future has probably hurt sales as well, especially given GM’s support of the HHR in advertising.
The PT Cruiser was the original and, at least in the first generation, had an interior that matched the exterior; GM had a full opportunity to beat it, and somehow failed. The Chevy HHR could have been bigger and included a V6, occupying a different market niche and addressing critics’ main two PT concerns; instead they copied the PT almost inch for inch. The HHR could have been lighter and nimbler, but it wasn’t, at least not by much. In short, the PT was and remains, for now, the real deal.
That will almost certainly change when Chrysler gets around to dropping the PT, after cheapening and milking it for years, and bad-mouthing it consistently since just after its introduction. (After all, it isn’t a product of Superior German Engineering.) But until then, it’s the Real Deal.
this is the truth! if lutz says the hhr is the real deal, mabey he should ask his designer from chrysler. sad. so very sad. they steal all the popular segments many years after there creatated. like the minivan. they failed horriably with all of there tries. so if chrysler sticks to the original and gives it a more chrysler interior and puts a world turbo in it and give it 17’s big brakes with the srt on the calipers and a hood scoop and stuff like that. i would defently buy it! but as the fate was sealed for its platform mate back in 2005 then its fate is sealed in 08. *tear* chrysler move the pt to the caliber platform and give it the srt treatment and awd. just dont uglyify it like you did with the neon to the caliber.
Just move the comparo of the SS to the Caliber SRT-4 and see who comes out on top in performance. It’s a comparable platform, and probably more in line price wise as well. Welcome to the party Chevy, 5 years later. And the first iteration of the HHR was still a turd compared to the 5 year old PT Cruiser platform, which was based on the Neon platform. Who was ahead of the curve? PT Cruiser will be out of the game, knowing they would be before the HHR was going to start production. You can’t stay retro forever.
Which is worse, stealing segments or abandoning them?
If not for Daimler, the 2008 minivans would have been out two years ago…
It would be a shame to let the PT fade away, there is still so much potential left for it in the market place.
Just as the neon was dropped way before it’s time, Had the German connection not gone with cheap head gaskets, it would still be a contender.
Does anyone remember the Rampage? A PT pickup truck would look hot, deliver great economy and likely be a segment buster.
Heck with the styling being a 30’s something, I bet you could run a little chrome stack up the side as a rendition to the LIL Red Express!
Perhaps that would then look like a copy of a Chevy SSR, except everyone could afford it! (turnabout is fairplay)
Or use (Stow and go seats) that would fold into the bed (Like an old rumble seat)
There is so much left to do with this model, I would like to see it continue.
I submitted the above ( PT Wagon) idea, to “Ask Dr Z.
The answer was : There was not a market for it at this time!
You can’t blame the Neon head gaskets on Mercedes - they didn’t take over until 1998 - but you can blame them on Bob Eaton.
Solid points, really shows the situation so well.
The HHR was such copycat — yet the concept was not improved upon. GM even took the designer (who must have been told to copy and not invent); very strange as it did not come across as honorable behavior — and Lutz is such a great car guy, he should know better.
I believe the main reason the HHR is doing anything, really is the price. GM really put a low sticker on it. The PT was a conquest seller — people who buy other brands would buy it “dispite” it being a Chrysler. The HHR was designed to secure the GM buyers who might get a taste of a Chrysler product and would never return.
Thank you for your article.
Even the current PT interior completely outlclasses the HHR interior. It’s not even close.
I would hope that Cerberus is going to usher in a new era, AS THEY ARE saying that is what their intentions are. In that sense, I sincerely do hope that they don’t get stupid, and drop the PT. The potential for this singular vehicle is still way out there. Yes, a small pick up based upon this vehicle would shake the forest, blowing the leaves off the Furd and GIMCEE brands. Doll up the interior, smack down a customer choice U build option list, with some REAL options, a couple of nice engines (bring back the 2.2!) and (keeping quality in mind FIRST) you probably couldn’t build them fast enough. Which is OK. Make a list for those who WAIT! And for those Plymouth hopefuls, well why not tack on some reworked Plymouth badges to go with the reworked Pentastars and see if there is tangible results. Food to mentally snack on. And no, lets NOT go on about Chrysler Depot and all that. Nardelli is firmly in hand. If you see some good things, let Cerberus know. If you see some poor things… well, just hollar like hell to anyone that will listen!! So then all together now: KEEP THE PT! Repeat over and over, and send the mail to Cerberus. We will soon find out if someone is listening there.
I Hope Cerberus continue the Pt, if it´s a Cash Cow so be it, keep it the way it is with minor upgrades untill the market looses profitable interest in it, it´s the smart way to go, IMO
My bad on the head gaskets (Mercedes) Bob Eaton’s Bad on killing a great car before it’s time!
As I recall when the PT cruiser was still a concept, There was either a concept rendering or perhaps even a prototype PT Pick up, I remember seeing back in the day. (If someone finds an archive it’s there)
I really can’t help but wonder, if the other Bob, used that concept for the SSR.
I know for a fact historically that the PT version was shown before the SSR was a concept.
Today I saw a Red, PT convertible, If the sides were shaved down level to the doors!
Well lets just say it would be easy to do.
Almost like adding a Bikini, Windjammer and a Duster to a Wrangler (stow and go or folding removable rear seat)
Betcha Dodge could whip one together pretty quick!
Where can I sign up for my Lil’ Red Cruiser!
I’d love to see Cerberus revive the old California Cruiser concept that Chrysler showed off back in ‘02-’03.
Exactly what a PT *should* look like, style-wise.
I’m sure it’d be possible to modify the design to fit the Dodge Journey/JC49 platform.
If they went that route, I’d put in a pre-order tomorrow. It’d be an HHR killer for sure, especially if they made a GT model.
The PT has gone on way too long, it either needs to be restyled or cancelled. Almost everyone I talk to dislikes not only the PT but the HHR as well. It is a niche vehicle and it is very funny how GM decided to copy the PT 4-5 years after its introduction. GM is very good at coming late to the party as a substandard vehicle (GM vans, Trailblazer anyone?) Chrysler needs to get rid of the PT and Caliber and bring us an actual sedan and coupe and for crying out loud fire the guy who has been designing the interiors.
My apologies to any and all PT Cruiser fans in Allpar land, but I’m glad the PT has been dropped by the Chrysler board. I ordered a PT Cruiser from the local Chrysler dealer in March 2003 (and didn’t take delivery until late summer!), and after driving it for a week, my spouse said to me “you got rid of the Dodge Shadow for THIS????”
What can I say about the Chrysler PT? Sloth-like acceleration, sluggish handling (my Dakota Quad-Cab handles better), deplorable gas mileage (about 16 MPG-if I’m lucky!), a cheap-looking and poorly-fitted interior, and constant rattles and squeaks from the doors and body-work. A friend of mine rented a PT last month and told me “that PT was a piece of crap-just like your car….”
In 1992 I bought a Dodge Shadow (new) from the dealer, and it was a SUPERIOR car compared to the PT (and the Shadow was supposedly an “econobox”). The fit and finish was superb, and the 2.5 liter engine was very dependable……even after 170K miles, I still managed 21-22 MPG! And unlike my Dodge Shadow, I don’t think I’ll miss the PT Cruiser once I get rid of it……
For the record, I’ve been a proud MOPAR owner since I bought my first car back in 1978 (’74 Plymouth Duster). During the past 29 years, I’ve purchased many Dodge/Plymouth products, some used, but mainly new vehicles, but I’m about ready to write off Chrysler and purchase a GM or Toyota for my child…..the Chrysler I admired and respected is long-gone, and I don’t think it’ll ever come back.
Sounds like the PT must have gone downhill in its last few months. My 2003 GT model never got lower than 20 mpg and corners quite well - much better than my Shadow used to. No squeaks or rattles, no problems. I’m surprised you only got 21-22 mpg in the Shadow.