Iacobi,

It is a contested issue, even among traditionalists, if Vatican II is, in and of itself, heretical.  You can find literature supporting both sides of the debate. 
.
I realize this is of course frustrating, because it seems like there is a big difference between the council itself being heretical and its interpretation being heretical.
.
However, I submit that while there is a theological difference, that question needn't be answered in order for us to, at the very least, know what to do.  For, the Church does not just teach that she is infallible in solemn session, but that she is infallible in her ordinary magisterium, which is the day to day teaching activities of the bishops and the pope in union with each other.  And if there is anything that everyone agrees on, it's that you can certainly not trust that the episcopate in its entirety (i.e., the Novus Ordo hierarchs, on the hypothesis that they and they alone are corporately the hierarchy of the Catholic Church) to teach and witness the orthodox, apostolic, Catholic faith.  In fact, what you find is that the way they interpret Vatican II is extremely problematic and in many cases heretical.  And on those grounds alone we can be assured that regardless of the Council's intrinsic status, we should certainly not submit to those unorthodox teachings, nor to the impious liturgy they imposed on us.
.
One of the main reasons I say this is that there are theological problems with stating something like "The docuмents of Vatican II are themselves boldly or obviously heretical."  For, these docuмents were signed by what certainly seem like a moral unanimity of the world's bishops, and although the bishops are not infallible as a body unless there is a pope, that doesn't mean they're free to put their name to obvious, technical heresy.  They leave the Church if/when they do that, which creates far more problems than it solves.  So, I think it is OK for someone to await additional information and remain agnostic on the question of "Is Vatican II heretical in the strict sense?" because the information and reality before us shows that whatever Vatican II is or isn't, we can't trust what our ostensible leaders say it is.
.

I remember in 1966 I decided to attend a class on Vatican 2 in which we used the Abbot English edition.
A very liberal and leftist priest was the instructor.
I remember his very first introduction: Forget what those good Nuns taught you in Bible and Catechism
Class. We are starting all over.
He implied that Vatican II is replacing the Church that I grew up in.
I did not return to any more classes.