2014 Chevrolet SS Priced at $44,470

[Stew]

Originally Posted by Number 3

Every component on the Charger is Fiat. Every last nut and bolt. They own the company.

Ferrari is slightly different as it is financially separated from Fiat. When GM owned 20% of Fiat Ferrari was not included.

Calling a Dodge a Fiat is the same as calling a Chevy a GM car.

Ah, in that sense you are right and wrong as yes it is under Fiat, but no Fiat does not own 100%...... yet. honestly, looking at the great things Fiat has done with Chrysler, how could one even elude to it being a bad thing? As for Ferarri, a bit of Ferarri kjnow-how wnet into the Viper. Thew smaller Maserati is going to be based on the next LX derivitive, so they must have some real resepect for that platform.

[MEDISIN]

Originally Posted by Stew

You hold on to those mag times sir, we will see how this plays out on the tracks across the US when it hits the stretets. The average owner seems to have NO problem getting mid 12s from the 392 SRT cars.

Right, and the professional staff at Edmunds, C&D, MotorTrend and MotorWeek all ran in the 12's too. So what's your point?

Originally Posted by Stew

The only logical thing I can imagine is that they had green cars with few miles and it generally takes between 3000 and 5000 miles before the Hemis are at their full power. Same thing with the 5.7 Hemis, once they are broken in mid 13s seem to be no issue, don't believe, do your research.

Now you're making excuses. So the Hemi requires 3000-5000 miles break-in before it can keep up with a Chevy? What happens when the Chevy engine breaks in? Hmmm, back to where we started.

Originally Posted by Stew

Another interesting tidbit. the ONLY test i know of where a Charger SRT8 was put against the GXP on the same day and same tract was done by road and track. The times were close enough to be a wask. The GXP did 0-60 in 4.7, the SRT8 4.9, That gap had actually closed to .1 second in the 1/4 mile, 13.1 for the GXP and 13.2 for the SRT8. Top speeds where 165 for the Charger, 155 for the GXP (limiter). Both cars provided .88g on the skidpad while the SRT8 provided the higher slalom speed at 65.8 vs 65 for the GXP. Those numbers, same day/same conditions are more revelant than any posted by either one of us yet. Now take into effect the SRT8 has seen HUGE upgrades in not only the powerplant, but the suspension as well.

Not paying attention I see. I already brought this up way back at post #167. They were close but the GXP was still faster. The 392 is faster still but only by 2-tenths to 60, 3-tenths and 3mph in the quarter.

Originally Posted by Stew

If you think the SS is going to handle like a ZL1 or 1LE you are more than likely going to get an unpleasant surprise. it is still a sedan and must still maintain more ride compliance than the stiff 1LE and it will not be getting the ZL1s trick magnetic dampers. it wso won't compare with them in braking considering it's front end only Brembos compared to the 1LE, ZL1 (oh and SS and SRT8s) 4 wheel brembos.

Never did I say the SS would handle like the ZL1 or 1LE. Your reading comprehension is abysmal. I merely brought up these cars to illustrate the workings of the Zeta platform in relation to the LX platform. The Zeta has been praised time and again for its handling characteristics. Likewise the LX has been praised for its comfy interstate ride quality. Around a track the LX suffers. The fastest time recorded in the Lightning Lap for an LX based vehicle was the 392 Challenger last year, only one-tenth faster than the 2010 Camaro SS. For the sake of comparison:

2:57.5 CHEVROLET CAMARO ZL1
3:01.5 CHEVROLET CAMARO SS 1LE
3:09.4 DODGE CHALLENGER SRT8 392
3:09.5 CHEVROLET CAMARO SS
3:10.1 DODGE CHARGER SRT8 392
3:16.3 DODGE CHALLENGER SRT8 370
3:18.2 DODGE CHARGER SRT8 370

Given the GXP's performance is just shy of the Camaro SS in a straight line given the extra 150lbs, I'm guessing the SS sedan is smack in Charger 392 territory around a track. Only time will tell.

Ultimately, some will prefer the smaller size and interior of the SS over the Dodge. The Dodge is a bit played out in my opinion. Both are performance bargains. Will most likely come down to brand preference and the uniqueness of the SS relative to the Dodge.

[Stew]

Originally Posted by MEDISIN

Right, and the professional staff at Edmunds, C&D, MotorTrend and MotorWeek all ran in the 12's too. So what's your point?



Now you're making excuses. So the Hemi requires 3000-5000 miles break-in before it can keep up with a Chevy? What happens when the Chevy engine breaks in? Hmmm, back to where we started.



Not paying attention I see. I already brought this up way back at post #167. They were close but the GXP was still faster. The 392 is faster still but only by 2-tenths to 60, 3-tenths and 3mph in the quarter.



Never did I say the SS would handle like the ZL1 or 1LE. Your reading comprehension is abysmal. I merely brought up these cars to illustrate the workings of the Zeta platform in relation to the LX platform. The Zeta has been praised time and again for its handling characteristics. Likewise the LX has been praised for its comfy interstate ride quality. Around a track the LX suffers. The fastest time recorded in the Lightning Lap for an LX based vehicle was the 392 Challenger last year, only one-tenth faster than the 2010 Camaro SS. For the sake of comparison:

2:57.5 CHEVROLET CAMARO ZL1
3:01.5 CHEVROLET CAMARO SS 1LE
3:09.4 DODGE CHALLENGER SRT8 392
3:09.5 CHEVROLET CAMARO SS
3:10.1 DODGE CHARGER SRT8 392
3:16.3 DODGE CHALLENGER SRT8 370
3:18.2 DODGE CHARGER SRT8 370

Given the GXP's performance is just shy of the Camaro SS in a straight line given the extra 150lbs, I'm guessing the SS sedan is smack in Charger 392 territory around a track. Only time will tell.

Ultimately, some will prefer the smaller size and interior of the SS over the Dodge. The Dodge is a bit played out in my opinion. Both are performance bargains. Will most likely come down to brand preference and the uniqueness of the SS relative to the Dodge.

Apparently I am not the only one lacking reading comprehension, i have listed a million times how from the brakes to the HP, to the fact the SS will have softer suspension tuning to iliustrate the SS will not come within seconds of posting track numbers close to the SS or SRT8. 2 other things to consider, in 11 the transmission was an issue on the Charger SRT8 and the main reason the times were slower, that said they have retued the transmission for 12/13 and have fixed the issues (ie the Charger Puruit was right with the older SRTs in the Lightnint lap with that and suspension/hpo upgrades since 09). Another thing, that Challenger the posted the quickest time did not have the latest suspension, whereas they now have the electronic suspension (which BTW has been upgraded from 2 mode to 3 mode even in the Charger since that lightning Lap test.

As for the test of the 09 SRT8 and GXP, you really believe that shows ANY real advantage for any car? the numbers are so close in EVERY aspect that it could be a matter of a 1/10th difference in the 60 ft, or one spun just a little more than the other, it is a dead heat, with the old SRT and I don't honestly see anyway the SS with NO HP advantage and only a SLIGHT weight advantage is going to be any better. And did the GXP have 4 wheel Brembos or just 2 wheel like the SS.

This has been fun but I am to the point I can't read your whole posts because it is the same stuff that has been refuted and you just do not want to accept.If the SS had come out against the last gen SRT8 cars, it would have been a good comparison, but with all the updates in every aspect of the LX cars, the extra 1-2k buys you a hell of a lot in performance over the SS.

Back to the origional issue, I will be surprised if they move half their target, this is just something to put out to show fans that a RWD performance sedan under the Chevy Brand will not sell with the added benefit as adding a little production capacity to the holden plant in Aus.

[Rhyder]

Originally Posted by 45thAnniversary2SS

+1. This thing just looks boring IMO.

+1

[MEDISIN]

Originally Posted by Stew

Apparently I am not the only one lacking reading comprehension, i have listed a million times how from the brakes to the HP, to the fact the SS will have softer suspension tuning to iliustrate the SS will not come within seconds of posting track numbers close to the SS or SRT8.

Not within seconds?? I'll take that bet.

Originally Posted by Stew

2 other things to consider, in 11 the transmission was an issue on the Charger SRT8 and the main reason the times were slower, that said they have retued the transmission for 12/13 and have fixed the issues (ie the Charger Puruit was right with the older SRTs in the Lightnint lap with that and suspension/hpo upgrades since 09). Another thing, that Challenger the posted the quickest time did not have the latest suspension, whereas they now have the electronic suspension (which BTW has been upgraded from 2 mode to 3 mode even in the Charger since that lightning Lap test.

Here we go with the excuses again. So if the engine has 3000-5000 miles, but isn't an '11 with faulty transmission, has the right electronic suspension with XYZ settings and is running with the wind at its back, downhill it will perform adequately? Must be tough coming up with all these excuses...

Originally Posted by Stew

As for the test of the 09 SRT8 and GXP, you really believe that shows ANY real advantage for any car? the numbers are so close in EVERY aspect that it could be a matter of a 1/10th difference in the 60 ft, or one spun just a little more than the other, it is a dead heat, with the old SRT and I don't honestly see anyway the SS with NO HP advantage and only a SLIGHT weight advantage is going to be any better. And did the GXP have 4 wheel Brembos or just 2 wheel like the SS.

I suspect the rear brakes will be the same non-descript single-piston sliding calipers as the Commodore VE (GXP). The fronts are now a two-piece rotor. Not sure this is going to have a tremendous impact over a 2-piston rear. The GT and pre-2013 GT500 also come with non-descript single-piston rear calipers and that doesn't seem to hold the GT back vs the M3

Both the Holden VF and SRT8 have undergone revisions since that 2009 comparison. I have shown you the difference between the old Holden VE (GXP) and the new SRT8 and the difference is slight but tangible.

GXP: 0-60 in 4.7, 13.1 1/4mile at 109mph
SRT8: 0-60 in 4.5, 12.8 1/4mile at 112mph

The new for 2014 VF Commodore and Chevrolet SS will have a number of improvements over the outgoing VE (GXP), slight engine alterations to improve performance and fuel efficiency, a redesigned automatic gearbox for improved gear selection, 88lb weight reduction and lowering center of gravity due to the all-aluminum hood, roof and rear-deck, the switch to electric power steering and a reduction in drag coefficient due to aerodynamic efficiency. There is simply no way to anticipate the impact these will have on the overall performance of the car. We will simply have to wait for the reviews to start rolling in.

Originally Posted by Stew

Back to the origional issue, I will be surprised if they move half their target, this is just something to put out to show fans that a RWD performance sedan under the Chevy Brand will not sell with the added benefit as adding a little production capacity to the holden plant in Aus.

Then why are you so concerned about it? You're not a paid member of the GM marketing team. You have zero skin in the game. You must work for an independent, third party firm that performs sales forecasting for the automotive industry? No, I didn't think so. We can revisit this thread in 6 months and see who was right. Until then, you can go back to whining about the battery in your Lumina.

[Stew]

Originally Posted by MEDISIN

Not within seconds?? I'll take that bet.



Here we go with the excuses again. So if the engine has 3000-5000 miles, but isn't an '11 with faulty transmission, has the right electronic suspension with XYZ settings and is running with the wind at its back, downhill it will perform adequately? Must be tough coming up with all these excuses...



I suspect the rear brakes will be the same non-descript single-piston sliding calipers as the Commodore VE (GXP). The fronts are now a two-piece rotor. Not sure this is going to have a tremendous impact over a 2-piston rear. The GT and pre-2013 GT500 also come with non-descript single-piston rear calipers and that doesn't seem to hold the GT back vs the M3

Both the Holden VF and SRT8 have undergone revisions since that 2009 comparison. I have shown you the difference between the old Holden VE (GXP) and the new SRT8 and the difference is slight but tangible.

GXP: 0-60 in 4.7, 13.1 1/4mile at 109mph
SRT8: 0-60 in 4.5, 12.8 1/4mile at 112mph

The new for 2014 VF Commodore and Chevrolet SS will have a number of improvements over the outgoing VE (GXP), slight engine alterations to improve performance and fuel efficiency, a redesigned automatic gearbox for improved gear selection, 88lb weight reduction and lowering center of gravity due to the all-aluminum hood, roof and rear-deck, the switch to electric power steering and a reduction in drag coefficient due to aerodynamic efficiency. There is simply no way to anticipate the impact these will have on the overall performance of the car. We will simply have to wait for the reviews to start rolling in.



Then why are you so concerned about it? You're not a paid member of the GM marketing team. You have zero skin in the game. You must work for an independent, third party firm that performs sales forecasting for the automotive industry? No, I didn't think so. We can revisit this thread in 6 months and see who was right. Until then, you can go back to whining about the battery in your Lumina.

Ya know, when all the other person can do is start to personally insult you, you know you are winning and their argumaent is invalid, especially when the rehash and rehash. We will see.

As for it taking miles for the Hemi to work at full potential, it take 3750 for the VVT to kick in as seen here:



http://www.chargerforums.com/forums/...5&d=1371002695

That is from a Chrysler tech and the screenshot is from Chrysler internal. Oops, I am sure you will have some reason to refute it. Both the 5.7 and 6.4 has VVT so this does explain why the low mileage Magazine cars run slower than owners with broken in cars.

Another good example

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...term-road-test

Car and Drivers long term test of a Ram Crew cab, from the initial tests when new to the final tests the truck became quicker in the 1/4 mile and the 0-60, each by .3 seconds.

[MEDISIN]

Originally Posted by Stew

Ya know, when all the other person can do is start to personally insult you, you know you are winning and their argumaent is invalid, especially when the rehash and rehash. We will see.

As for it taking miles for the Hemi to work at full potential, it take 3750 for the VVT to kick in as seen here:



http://www.chargerforums.com/forums/...5&d=1371002695

That is from a Chrysler tech and the screenshot is from Chrysler internal. Oops, I am sure you will have some reason to refute it. Both the 5.7 and 6.4 has VVT so this does explain why the low mileage Magazine cars run slower than owners with broken in cars.

Another good example

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...term-road-test

Car and Drivers long term test of a Ram Crew cab, from the initial tests when new to the final tests the truck became quicker in the 1/4 mile and the 0-60, each by .3 seconds.

Excuses, excuses. I suppose when you lack any objective comparison data to support your superflous opinion you resort to making excuses to protect your bias. Many engines have a break-in period. Chevy and Ford are no different. But Dodge deserves special allowances?

[ShnOmac]

[Stew]

Originally Posted by MEDISIN

Excuses, excuses. I suppose when you lack any objective comparison data to support your superflous opinion you resort to making excuses to protect your bias. Many engines have a break-in period. Chevy and Ford are no different. But Dodge deserves special allowances?

LOL, I posted facts and some proof compared to YOUR bias and personal insults, that the best you got? I could really care less how it does, but I have been waiting for a RWD Chevy performance sedan since the killed the Impala SS in 96 and how GM is handling the SS disgusts me, I mean open your eyes they have set it up for failure, if they thought for a second it would sell, it would NOT be a special order car, even if they thought they could only sell 10000........

[Stew]

Originally Posted by ShnOmac

Agreed, enough from me on the subject lol

[Cmicasa the Great XvX]

This car is a Mature look at the way a Sports sedan should be in this country without a Luxo name plate. Every car that comes with a V8 and great performance doesn't have to look like its getting ready to stab U and drink your blood. Shit.. If U want that U can actually buy a Cruze.. which as ever bit as evil looking as a Charger. The SRTs are bulked up surely.. but the paint scheme is what does it for those cars. Don't believe me?? Take a look at a a Base Charger vs an SRT.. No real difference in anything other than a paint scheme.. and the base Charger is about as intimidating as a Camry Hybrid.

Yes.. Chevy premiered the SS in Silver, which would make a 1963 Grand Sport look bland.. but alas.. they have other paint colors in the palette.. and if U want to tack it up.. I'm pretty sure that the "Bowtie" boys have some Camaro stripes to lay down the middle of the car to make U feel right at home when U pull up in your kid's High School parking lot or the trailer park

Here's the differences.. and as a 41 year old.. I have to say that I personally would.. AS FAR AS LOOKS.. take the Chevy and Ford over the juvenile looking Dodge any day and all day. Thrown in the more mature look of the 300 SRT and I would perhaps then give the Chrysler Co the nod. The tack heads were expecting was body cladding and/or craaaaazy paint schemes. The idea of a GROWN-UP Sports sedan not wearing a luxo name escapes them.



But on it's own this car will be the Sleeper of all Sleepers.. I see this barreling down on my in my rear view and decide to challenge I'm gonna get my ass surprised in a new way.



415Hp/415lbs of Torque in a 3700lb vehicle with an already proven ability via G8 GXP and Camaro SS to beat damn near anything in it's price range and $20K more.. I don't think that the speed shop is a necessity.. but considering the LS3 is one of the most tunable and cheapest to modify engines on the planet Earth..

[Stew]

Originally Posted by Cmicasa the Great XvX

This car is a Mature look at the way a Sports sedan should be in this country without a Luxo name plate. Every car that comes with a V8 and great performance doesn't have to look like its getting ready to stab U and drink your blood. Shit.. If U want that U can actually buy a Cruze.. which as ever bit as evil looking as a Charger. The SRTs are bulked up surely.. but the paint scheme is what does it for those cars. Don't believe me?? Take a look at a a Base Charger vs an SRT.. No real difference in anything other than a paint scheme.. and the base Charger is about as intimidating as a Camry Hybrid.

Yes.. Chevy premiered the SS in Silver, which would make a 1963 Grand Sport look bland.. but alas.. they have other paint colors in the palette.. and if U want to tack it up.. I'm pretty sure that the "Bowtie" boys have some Camaro stripes to lay down the middle of the car to make U feel right at home when U pull up in your kid's High School parking lot or the trailer park

Here's the differences.. and as a 41 year old.. I have to say that I personally would.. AS FAR AS LOOKS.. take the Chevy and Ford over the juvenile looking Dodge any day and all day. Thrown in the more mature look of the 300 SRT and I would perhaps then give the Chrysler Co the nod. The tack heads were expecting was body cladding and/or craaaaazy paint schemes. The idea of a GROWN-UP Sports sedan not wearing a luxo name escapes them.



But on it's own this car will be the Sleeper of all Sleepers.. I see this barreling down on my in my rear view and decide to challenge I'm gonna get my ass surprised in a new way.



415Hp/415lbs of Torque in a 3700lb vehicle with an already proven ability via G8 GXP and Camaro SS to beat damn near anything in it's price range and $20K more.. I don't think that the speed shop is a necessity.. but considering the LS3 is one of the most tunable and cheapest to modify engines on the planet Earth..

WRONG, your weight is WAY low, try 3900-4000 pounds for the SS, heck the lightest Camaro SS is around 3850! I am sorry, but "anything in it's price range?" Not stock for stock, the Charger SRT, Challenger SRT, Even the 300C SRT is in it's price range and quicker, not to mention the Camaro SS, SS 1LE, Mustang GT, Boss 302 (well it would have been if still built LOL). It will be a low 13 second car with maybe a VERY rare high 12 (it is heavier with less HP than a Camaro SS wihich is a high 12/low 13 car with the LS3/manual). And at it's time, other cars that will run with it BMW 135, BMW 335i, Subaru WRX/STi, Genesis 5.0 R-Spec. And no the GXP didn't even beat down the old 06-10 SRT8s, the only test were they were put head to head they times and numbers were basically identical.

I also noticed you posted a picture of the Superbee with it's graphics, that btw is suppoed to look a little Immature, instead of the Regular SRT8 which will be the actual competitor.





You can even get the black part body colored if you want and FYI, there are huge differences in the exterior and interior between the SRT and all other model Chargers.


vs


If it was priced like a Charger R/T it would be a huge bargain, instead at around 46k when the GG tax is finally factored in it has ver stiff competition that performas with it or better.

And yes, i said I was done, but I am bored and couldn't resist.

And I don't mean to knock on the SS so much and believe compared to the German sedans in it's size and price braket it is a bargain, I am just upset Chevy half-assed it.

[shaffe]

Seeing all three front ends together confirms it for me. The SS is boring, its not exciting. The charger IMO blows it away in the looks department. hell the the SHO almost looks more sporty as well.

I agree that a sport sedan doesnt have too look like its going to eat your soul (all though that adds to its bad assery) Look at the CTS-V, it looks classy, bad ass, and exciting all at the same time. The SS looks boring, vanilla and lame to me. Part of the appeal of performance cars to me is that they look exciting as well. Thats part of the reason we like Camaros, Mustangs or Challengers. Even "performance" versions of econo cars look sportier than the SS.

This is all my opinion lol, but the SS is just a boring looking car to me.

And I am not a dodge fan by any means, but IMO the nailed the sport sedan with the SRT8

[Bhobbs]

The Cruze is as agressive looking as the Charger?