Saw the repeat of the Miami Auto Show tonight. The commentator (Eleanor Mondale) describing the SSR was quite positive about it, (except for repeatedly calling it a car) referred to the new available 6 speed manual, and botched her blurb when she talked about the "more mundane 4 speed manual" - I think she meant automatic. The only negative at that stage was her comment that she had never seen a truck bed with carpet before - sheltered child - I guess she's never seen a bedrug in a truck before, even though it's been around for years.
Too bad they showed the SSR with the auto - can't believe GM couldn't provide a manual for the show - I suspect it was February/March timeline, but you would think there was a manual out there somewhere!!!!. They did pick the best color though - yellow
They did not show a manual at SEMA in Vegas either - not the greatest company at getting good Page Ranking mileage. GM had the largest display area, but got their butts kicked by Ford and Chrysler. Ford had 17 Mustangs in its display, most of them modified by Saleen, Rousch, or other aftermarket rebuilders. GM had one Vette, one Prototype SoCal SSR - no manual. They did have the Leno 70 Toronado, which was a very cool custom.
Still don't understand the negative final comment on the SSR - Tony Noakes said "OK - it is revolutionary, but it's got these big fender wells you can't see, begging to be crunched, and the seams aren't flush" Fenderwells? - isn't that the part hidden under the fenders? So, doesn't it make perfect sense that you can't see them?
One of the reasons I bought the SSR was because I love those big fenders. And I haven't crunched it yet. As far as seams - maybe they had one where the tonneau cover didn't sit flush. If so, that's bad marketing on GM's part. They should at least make sure that an SSR seen by 100000 people has the panels lining up.
Anyway, it seemed like a way offbeat reason to call it a loser.
Ray
.....I'm getting wired
Linear Mode
