Quick Drive: 2014 Chevrolet SS

While many including myself find this a bland looking car, I really do hope it is a success for GM as they need a Halo Family sedan for Chevy.

General Motors gets undue critical pressure RE sales volume.

Sure, if you're making a profit per vehicle, you make more profit, but GM (or any other maker for that matter) will never again see 50% marketshare, and crushing volume is not going to be the best indicator of 'success'. IOW, while volume projections for a particular model are all well & good, not meeting that goal does not mean the model was better off not being built.

It just gets tiresome to so frequently read GM = huge volume... except these 'failures'.

Was not the GTO production-volume / import restricted, and actually sold right up to that quantity?

- - - - -

I haven't seen an SS up close yet, have to see if my local dealer has one.

Sounds like what a lot of people have been waiting for.  Who needs 50% market share when higher profits and better cash flow are the real name of the game?

As for the car itself, this is really great.  Now if only there were a 6cyl version to directly compete with the 300/Charger twins. . . . .

Sounds like what a lot of people have been waiting for.  Who needs 50% market share when higher profits and better cash flow are the real name of the game?

 

As for the car itself, this is really great.  Now if only there were a 6cyl version to directly compete with the 300/Charger twins. . . . .

Keep dreaming on that last part.

A couple of comments on the car:

1. The car is 98% there. Two things missing that prevents SS from greatness - a) LT1 and b) 7-speed Tremec and/or 8-speed GM/Aisin auto.
2. Dimensionally and performance-wise the car is really close to the CTS V-Sport. Yet both vehicles are distinct. If CTS-V sport gets 17/25 mpg, so should the SS. However, possibly due to aggressive transmission setup and having lower number of cogs, the vehicle is being handed the GG Tax.

Is it possible that it has the transmission due to already being a produced auto for Australia and as such would require more work to upgrade the transmission?

I would think if the transmission could handle the HP / Torque and it would get better gas mileage, then GM should have upgraded the transmission before importing it. This seems like a common sense upgrade that should have been applied before importing the engine. Or is it that GM needs to fulfill a contract and figure those that want the performance will pay the GG Tax and we get the contract fulfilled and if all sales go well then upgrade the Transmission in year two?

I do not think logistics is the issue. IIRC, transmissions and engines (V8s at least) for zeta cars are built in USA and shipped to Australia. That is why GTO power-train could be upgraded within 1 year of production or G8-GXP then had the 6.2, while other zetas did not have that engine.

I think by 2018 SS in its current form will disappear as Australian production terminates, unless GM retools one of the Oshawa or Lansing lines and continues the production. There is a darn possibility that given GM mentality more resources won't be put in the car. Thus, the engine will not be changed and there may be some hollowness to the rumor of the car getting stick-shift.

Bummer, that is a sad thought. GM should be investing in this auto.

It is more, I think about, not killing the sacred cows. I can see LT1 would have been held up for Corvette and such would be the case for the 8-speed due to it going in the Cadillac CTS first.

It is more, I think about, not killing the sacred cows. I can see LT1 would have been held up for Corvette and such would be the case for the 8-speed due to it going in the Cadillac CTS first.

Also, I think GM's sales goal for the SS (which is 3,000 per year I think) doesn't make any sense to that stuff at the moment. Which is a shame, because I really think an eight-speed could do some wonderful things.

 

It is more, I think about, not killing the sacred cows. I can see LT1 would have been held up for Corvette and such would be the case for the 8-speed due to it going in the Cadillac CTS first.

 

Also, I think GM's sales goal for the SS (which is 3,000 per year I think) doesn't make any sense to that stuff at the moment. Which is a shame, because I really think an eight-speed could do some wonderful things.

 

Is 3,000 per annum a capacity restriction in the Victoria plant or GM's reluctance to build more?

 

 

It is more, I think about, not killing the sacred cows. I can see LT1 would have been held up for Corvette and such would be the case for the 8-speed due to it going in the Cadillac CTS first.

 

Also, I think GM's sales goal for the SS (which is 3,000 per year I think) doesn't make any sense to that stuff at the moment. Which is a shame, because I really think an eight-speed could do some wonderful things.

 

 

Is 3,000 per annum a capacity restriction in the Victoria plant or GM's reluctance to build more?

 

More of the latter

 

 

 

It is more, I think about, not killing the sacred cows. I can see LT1 would have been held up for Corvette and such would be the case for the 8-speed due to it going in the Cadillac CTS first.

 

Also, I think GM's sales goal for the SS (which is 3,000 per year I think) doesn't make any sense to that stuff at the moment. Which is a shame, because I really think an eight-speed could do some wonderful things.

 

 

Is 3,000 per annum a capacity restriction in the Victoria plant or GM's reluctance to build more?

 

 

More of the latter

 

That is what I figured. Then GM is to blame for not giving this car a chance to be what it wanted the car to be. If executives make excuse that people didn't buy it, even though we offered a "great car", then they need to be "shown the light".

 

 

 

 

It is more, I think about, not killing the sacred cows. I can see LT1 would have been held up for Corvette and such would be the case for the 8-speed due to it going in the Cadillac CTS first.

 

Also, I think GM's sales goal for the SS (which is 3,000 per year I think) doesn't make any sense to that stuff at the moment. Which is a shame, because I really think an eight-speed could do some wonderful things.

 

 

Is 3,000 per annum a capacity restriction in the Victoria plant or GM's reluctance to build more?

 

 

More of the latter

 

 

That is what I figured. Then GM is to blame for not giving this car a chance to be what it wanted the car to be. If executives make excuse that people didn't buy it, even though we offered a "great car", then they need to be "shown the light".

 

AKA Show them the DOOR! We need young people who are willing to think long term on building quality auto's that people can love.

They can be older people also as long as they are still willing to learn and change and not set in their way.