Chevy SSR Forum banner

1 - 15 of 15 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
13 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
On my 03 SSR that satin bar comes off at the passengers side headlamp
even if you press the bar back to that "velcroe band" . Only if I push very hard it stays on a little longer, but comes off I guess because of the vibrations of the whole vehicle.

Anyone experienced this problem ? What can be done to attach the
bar so that it stays ? Part number for these velcroe bands / clips ??

Regards from Germany

Alex :ssr
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,454 Posts
Sorry I can't help with your problem but I see you appear to be in Germany. Do you really have an SSR in Germany? That must be incredibly fun if you do!
 

·
I'm not cool...
Joined
·
2,096 Posts
for a temporary fix...

use some "dum dum", I don't know what they call it over there but it's a black tar used to seal tail lights, windows and other things on cars. they use it on older subaru and audi tail lights.
if you put a small amount (pea sized ball) on the velcro then push the pieces together it will hold better but still be removeable.
it sounds like some kind of fitment problem, the whole piece comes off after removing two 7mm bolts under the hood. if you haven't already checked, pull it loose and see if something is wrong.
good luck over there :flag
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
13 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
Yes it is fun, weatherwise not as much as in Florida or California, but as we do not
have a speed limit one could go 125 mph (so the documents tell) but I guess the SSR is not build for that speeding as it is based on the trailblazer chassis.

In addition to that the gas prices are even higher these days with the oil price topping the
highest level ever, we are at 4 $/gal for the 91 octane . Gasoline is around 3,50 $/gal .

So one could go fast but it doesn´t make much sense.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
178 Posts
125mph

cinquecentoe said:
Yes it is fun, weatherwise not as much as in Florida or California, but as we do not
have a speed limit one could go 125 mph (so the documents tell) but I guess the SSR is not build for that speeding as it is based on the trailblazer chassis.

In addition to that the gas prices are even higher these days with the oil price topping the
highest level ever, we are at 4 $/gal for the 91 octane . Gasoline is around 3,50 $/gal .

So one could go fast but it doesn´t make much sense.

The documents are accurate as to top speed for stock configuration. :thumbs
 

·
Senior Privileged Member
Joined
·
4,100 Posts
You are only limited to that 125 mph for 2 reasons:

1. The tires are not rated for higher speed

2. The stock gearing is not set up for high speed, but rather for fuel economy.

My computer software says that my SSR, with the correct tires safety rated for higher speed of course, will, with its 4.56 gearing, hit at least 154 mph.

Jim G
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
172 Posts
154 MPH??? I'm confused.

:confused HI Jim G,
I'm a bit confused. :confused I thought that the 4:56 gearing would be quicker than stock gearing and make your top speed go down..and the 4:10 gearing would bring it down even more, but be even quicker... Does the 154MPH come from the computer adjustment??? sorry to hit you with a silly question like this.
Zack
05 SSR 6 speed :confused
 

·
Senior Privileged Member
Joined
·
4,100 Posts
Zack: The way it NORMALLY used to work, before we got car companies obsessed with better corproate fuel mileage, was:

The numerically higher the gearing, the quicker the acceleration but the lower the top speed. So, 4.11 would be quicker but slower than 3.73, and 4.56 would be quicker but slower than both the 4.11 and 3.73. This worked well when car companies geared cars for maximum speed rather than for fuel mileage.

However, once the car companies started to gear for fuel mileage, this rule fell apart, as they then always gear way numerically low in order to keep the highway rpm very low, which improves gas mileage a VERY small amount, but reduces the acceleration capabilities a LOT. This is why a Corvette pulls only 1500 rpm at 60 mph, and has almost no acceleration capability at that speed in 6th - it has to be downshifted to accelerate.

Horsepower required to move a car down the highway is directly proportional to the aerodynamic shape/size of the vehicle, but rises with the CUBE of the speed. ie. going twice as fast requires 8 times as much power. The top speed of a vehicle is determined by how the shape of the engine power curve interacts with the air drag caused by high speed.

For maximized speed, you have to gear the vehicle so that the point in the power curve where peak horsepower occurs coincides exactly with the speed to which that power should be able to push that specific vehicle (based mostly on its coefficient of drag and slightly on its weight). If the engine peaks "lower" or "higher" than that specific speed, your top speed will be reduced. gearing for best gas mileage is NOT consistent with gearing for best top speed.

When a vehicle is geared for mileage versus top speed, you do NOT in general lose top speed when you regear to a numerically higher ratio. Instead, you often GAIN top speed.

In the case of the stock SSR, if you put on proper speed rated tires and remove the speed restiction in the computer that is based on the speed rating for the stock tires, but leave the gearing stock, it will go about 144 mph.

The computer says that my own SSR will likely do, under the same unrestricted conditions, about 154 mph, because of the combination of BOTH better gearing and more power due to the headers, exhaust, and dyno tune.

Jim G
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
172 Posts
JimGnitecki said:
Zack: The way it NORMALLY used to work, before we got car companies obsessed with better corproate fuel mileage, was:

The numerically higher the gearing, the quicker the acceleration but the lower the top speed. So, 4.11 would be quicker but slower than 3.73, and 4.56 would be quicker but slower than both the 4.11 and 3.73. This worked well when car companies geared cars for maximum speed rather than for fuel mileage.

However, once the car companies started to gear for fuel mileage, this rule fell apart, as they then always gear way numerically low in order to keep the highway rpm very low, which improves gas mileage a VERY small amount, but reduces the acceleration capabilities a LOT. This is why a Corvette pulls only 1500 rpm at 60 mph, and has almost no acceleration capability at that speed in 6th - it has to be downshifted to accelerate.

Horsepower required to move a car down the highway is directly proportional to the aerodynamic shape/size of the vehicle, but rises with the CUBE of the speed. ie. going twice as fast requires 8 times as much power. The top speed of a vehicle is determined by how the shape of the engine power curve interacts with the air drag caused by high speed.

For maximized speed, you have to gear the vehicle so that the point in the power curve where peak horsepower occurs coincides exactly with the speed to which that power should be able to push that specific vehicle (based mostly on its coefficient of drag and slightly on its weight). If the engine peaks "lower" or "higher" than that specific speed, your top speed will be reduced. gearing for best gas mileage is NOT consistent with gearing for best top speed.

When a vehicle is geared for mileage versus top speed, you do NOT in general lose top speed when you regear to a numerically higher ratio. Instead, you often GAIN top speed.

In the case of the stock SSR, if you put on proper speed rated tires and remove the speed restiction in the computer that is based on the speed rating for the stock tires, but leave the gearing stock, it will go about 144 mph.

The computer says that my own SSR will likely do, under the same unrestricted conditions, about 154 mph, because of the combination of BOTH better gearing and more power due to the headers, exhaust, and dyno tune.

Jim G
Thanks for your input Jim,
That was very informative. I guess my confusion was because I thougt that the lower RPM's your revving at 60mph, like the vette, the more RPMs you have left, thus the faster you can go. I wasn't considering the power curve and the drag.
My brother has an 04 Vette 350hp and wants to trade up to the z06. I keep trying to tell him that he doesn't need a car that will go 180mph and that he should gear the vette down so it'll only go about 140...but get there real quick! I had a 79 Z28 like that.. It had no top end but it took me a long time to find a car that would beat me from 60MPH to 110MPH which is where most people run when they are racing on the hwy.. seems I always had to slow down for traffic but I had already blown the other car's doors off and they had no clue they could take me over 110mph.. I never knew what gear that car had. My dad thought it was a 4:11.
I've had a few high speed accidents and by the grace of God I walked away from them so I don't want my SSR to go over the limited speed on it. My goal with it is to be hot street car and when I line up to a Stang or a Vette at a light I want to make them wish they had bought an SSR.
Sounds like you are saying that the 4:56 gear is the gear for this application.
Thanks again your info is like a light at the end of the tunnel.
Zack
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
189 Posts
JimGnitecki said:
Zack: The way it NORMALLY used to work, before we got car companies obsessed with better corproate fuel mileage, was:

The numerically higher the gearing, the quicker the acceleration but the lower the top speed. So, 4.11 would be quicker but slower than 3.73, and 4.56 would be quicker but slower than both the 4.11 and 3.73. This worked well when car companies geared cars for maximum speed rather than for fuel mileage.

However, once the car companies started to gear for fuel mileage, this rule fell apart, as they then always gear way numerically low in order to keep the highway rpm very low, which improves gas mileage a VERY small amount, but reduces the acceleration capabilities a LOT. This is why a Corvette pulls only 1500 rpm at 60 mph, and has almost no acceleration capability at that speed in 6th - it has to be downshifted to accelerate.

Horsepower required to move a car down the highway is directly proportional to the aerodynamic shape/size of the vehicle, but rises with the CUBE of the speed. ie. going twice as fast requires 8 times as much power. The top speed of a vehicle is determined by how the shape of the engine power curve interacts with the air drag caused by high speed.

For maximized speed, you have to gear the vehicle so that the point in the power curve where peak horsepower occurs coincides exactly with the speed to which that power should be able to push that specific vehicle (based mostly on its coefficient of drag and slightly on its weight). If the engine peaks "lower" or "higher" than that specific speed, your top speed will be reduced. gearing for best gas mileage is NOT consistent with gearing for best top speed.

When a vehicle is geared for mileage versus top speed, you do NOT in general lose top speed when you regear to a numerically higher ratio. Instead, you often GAIN top speed.

In the case of the stock SSR, if you put on proper speed rated tires and remove the speed restiction in the computer that is based on the speed rating for the stock tires, but leave the gearing stock, it will go about 144 mph.

The computer says that my own SSR will likely do, under the same unrestricted conditions, about 154 mph, because of the combination of BOTH better gearing and more power due to the headers, exhaust, and dyno tune.

Jim G

Jim,

Your explaination and Zacks comments beg the question, what does the combination of gearing, dynotune, and headers/exhaust do to your car in terms of 0 to 60 and 1/4 mile times? Are they comparable with the 05 SSR times?

Thanks,

Rob
 

·
Senior Privileged Member
Joined
·
4,100 Posts
raveschi: My software says that given the dyno ctuve I have, I should be in the high 5s on 0 to 60 and high 14s on 1/4 mile, BUT I am being held back by some form of torque management, abuse management, traction control, or electronic throttle management.

My SSR feels VERY nimble at part throttle in normal daily use, but when you floor it, it still won't break the tires loose except for a a very brief time and then the PCM shuts its down even though the traction control switch shows disengaged.

This is why I am studying the GM PCM to figure out what I need to change.

It is NOT obvious, as GM has written the controls to inter-relate with each other in what seem like deliberately obscure ways in order to limit tampering.

When Reese figured put recently how to moderate the PCM's throttle reduction during shifts, the vehicle suddenly started to CATAPULT forward during each shift - much stronger than before he moderated that setting.

The search continues.

Jim G
 

·
Retired GM Program Manager/ Chief SSR Engineer
Joined
·
549 Posts
Related to the original thread, I would remove the bar and try to reset it for full contact with the headlamps. There are two screws on the top and two clips on the back. If you have everyting centered, you should have equal contact with both headlalamps.
 

·
I'm not cool...
Joined
·
2,096 Posts
I agree with freezer

freezer said:
Related to the original thread, I would remove the bar and try to reset it for full contact with the headlamps. There are two screws on the top and two clips on the back. If you have everyting centered, you should have equal contact with both headlalamps.
hopefully it's just a small adjustment problem :flag
 
1 - 15 of 15 Posts
Top