Pontiac Solstice Forum banner

1 - 17 of 17 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
281 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Some mention of the Solstice in this article:

"The Solstice is as cute as a button, and it looks like a Pontiac, or at least a Pontiac interpretation of a Miata. And the sub-$20,000 sticker is certainly within the sweet spot of Pontiac buyers.

But the word from inside GM is that the car, at least at this late stage of development, is overweight and underpowered. This close to production, there isn’t much that can be done to correct those potentially fatal flaws.

That may be the greatest sin of all for any new car that bears the Pontiac badge: to promise performance without delivering. It’s almost exactly the reverse of the new GTO, which is nimble and quick but expensive and drab."
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
312 Posts
Enough already! These articles just boil my blood. No one mentions that VW is in the toilet (did anyone even buy the Phaeton? The new Jetta looks like a tird!)! Or how about Nissan? Their new models are almost dead (Titan, Armada, Pathfinder, Infiniti FX56/45/35 and Maxima), not to mention the 350Z which is slow selling as well. Or that Toyota, albeit selling more cars, has a profit decline!

Fox News just had a spot about how Honda/Toyota are beating the domestics with Hybrids. They barely mention the fact that GM is the leader in fuel efficiency technology (where it counts in large vehicles...trucks and buses). The current hybrids are fads...it will take 4-5 years to pay yourself back with better fuel economy to offset your initial investment for the hybrid! Even my accountant told me it was a bad deal...and on the highway, they suck just as much gas as their non-hybrid counterparts!

Why does everyone need to bash GM? Solstice, G6 (sedan/coupe/convert) are going to be great cars...the GTO is not too expensive (just a bit boring in the styling dept). As for the Grand Prix...can you even go through a day w/o seeing 20 of them on the highway!?!?! They must be selling very well. Comparing the Torrent to the Aztek and it not being styled enough! No one is ever happy! You know they sold about 25,000 Aztek's/year...that's not bad, considering it shares platforms with the GM Vans and the Buick Rendevous...that's great cost control (platform sharing), if you ask me...and I think the Buick Rendevous sells pretty well still. (Please correct me if I'm wrong). The Chevy Equinox/Saturn Vue are selling very well and they look good too...and different. I'm sure the Torrent will also do well.

I'm sure you know the Silverado + Sierra outsell the Ford F-150 every month...but no one mentions that!

I could go on. GM, keep doing what your doing and bring us the a new Zeta for Buick/Pontiac and you will do fine ( will happily trade off my 2006 Solstice for the '08 Velite Convertible!!!!. We need something that goes head to head with the 300C/SRT too!

RadRiv
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
61 Posts
RADRIV said:
I'm sure you know the Silverado + Sierra outsell the Ford F-150 every month...but no one mentions that!
RadRiv
You can't compare the Silverado/Sierra to an F-150 alone, you have to compare to the F-150, 250, and 350, since the Silverado is sold in ALL of the equivalent configurations(1500,2500,3500). Compare those numbers and I am pretty sure the F-series is still on top, as it has been for about 20 years. Oh and by the way, DON"T BUY A SILVERADO!!! The drivetrain sucks and needs about $500 worth of repairs every 20k or so, due to a greaseless driveshaft "yolk". Also the shiftpoints are funny. Just my opinion, have had both with work. Had the sil. for 2 years, and just got a new F250. Much better truck. Also, qualtiy is down in both trucks from 10 years ago, prolly due to people buying them to have something big other than a SUV and using them as w/e warriors, not work trucks. Alright thats the end of my rant :willy:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
71 Posts
I don't even pay attention to the press in this country anymore.... they're not delivering the news, they're saying whatever the hell they need to in order to get attention.

GM affects many lives in this country because of the fact they are the largest automaker in the world. By telling you that GM can't compete with imports, having financial difficulty, etc, etc... they think more people will take notice because it could affect them negatively and therefore they'll sell more newspapers, get more viewers, or what-have-you...

At the same time they will all tell you that BMW's and Hondas are perfect! Which is total bull! Every car made and every automaker in existence has upsides and downsides, but the press won't sell anything by telling you everything is normal.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,844 Posts
RADRIV said:
Enough already! These articles just boil my blood. No one mentions that VW is in the toilet (did anyone even buy the Phaeton? The new Jetta looks like a tird!)! Or how about Nissan? Their new models are almost dead (Titan, Armada, Pathfinder, Infiniti FX56/45/35 and Maxima), not to mention the 350Z which is slow selling as well. Or that Toyota, albeit selling more cars, has a profit decline!
Or that Nissan basically went Chapter 11 and was bought by Pewjoe (I bet if I was from Canada I could spell that!)
 

·
Senior Member
Joined
·
5,600 Posts
Not underweight and adequately, but not profusely, powered. Like so many reviewers, he sounds like another blowhard that likes to listen to his own voice. Very few people will demand more than 180 HP in this car. It's no slouch. Sure I want 225HP but I am confident I'm in the minority.

Does anybody elese rememember when typical 2700 lb coupes were being powered with 116HP fours?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
58 Posts
At 16.1 lbs per horse, it is as underpowered as these other convertibles...

2004 Mazda MX-5 Miata Cloth 17.2
2004 Mazda MX-5 Miata LS 17.2
2005 Mazda MX-5 Miata Cloth 17.2
2005 Mazda MX-5 Miata LS 17.2
2005 MINI Cooper S Convertible 16.4
2004 BMW Z4 roadster 2.5i 15.9
2004 Mercedes-Benz SLK-Class SLK230 Roadster 15.9
2004 Toyota MR2 Spyder Convertible 15.9
2005 BMW Z4 Roadster 2.5i 15.9
2005 Mitsubishi Eclipse Spyder GTS 15.9
2005 Toyota MR2 Spyder Convertible 15.9
2004 Mitsubishi Eclipse Spyder GT 15.8
2004 Mitsubishi Eclipse Spyder GTS 15.8
2005 Mitsubishi Eclipse Spyder GT 15.7
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
58 Posts
and these

2004 Volkswagen New Beetle Convertible GL 2.0L 26.7
2004 Volkswagen New Beetle Convertible GLS 2.0L 26.7
2005 MINI Cooper Convertible 23.5
2005 Chrysler Sebring Convertible Base 22.4
2004 Chrysler Sebring Convertible Base [Post August Production] 21.8
2004 Chrysler Sebring Convertible LX [Pre August Production] 21.8
2004 Mitsubishi Eclipse Spyder GS 21.1
2004 Volkswagen New Beetle Convertible GLS 1.8L 21.1
2005 Mitsubishi Eclipse Spyder GS 21.1
2005 Volkswagen New Beetle Convertible GLS 1.8L 21.1
2004 Chrysler Sebring Convertible GTC [Post August Production] 17.4
2004 Chrysler Sebring Convertible GTC [Pre August Production] 17.4
2004 Chrysler Sebring Convertible LXi [Pre August Production] 17.4
2004 Chrysler Sebring Convertible Limited [Post August Production] 17.4
2004 Chrysler Sebring Convertible Limited [Pre August Production] 17.4
2004 Chrysler Sebring Convertible Touring Platinum Series (Discontinued) 17.4
2004 Chrysler Sebring Convertible Touring [Post August Production] 17.4
2004 Ford Mustang Deluxe Convertible 17.3
2005 Chrysler Sebring Convertible GTC 17.1
2005 Chrysler Sebring Convertible Limited 17.1
2005 Chrysler Sebring Convertible Touring 17.1
2004 Toyota Camry Solara SE Convertible 15.8
2004 Toyota Camry Solara SLE Convertible 15.8
2005 Toyota Camry Solara SE Convertible 15.8
2005 Toyota Camry Solara SLE Convertible 15.8
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,844 Posts
jimbo said:
Does anybody else rememember when typical 2700 lb coupes were being powered with 116HP fours?
Miata spec history
'90 through '93 at 2116 pounds, had 116HP for 18.24 #/HP (100 ft# torque)
'94 through '95 at 2293 pounds, had 128HP for 17.9 #/HP (110 ft# torque)
'96 through '98 at 2293 pounds, had 133HP for 17.24 #/HP (114 ft# torque)
'99 through 2001 at 2299 pounds, had 140HP for 16.42 #/HP (119 ft# torque)
2002 to present at 2387, has 142HP for 16.8 #/HP (125 ft# torque)

Solstice at 2860 pounds, has 177HP for 16.1 #/HP (165 ft# torque) better power to weight numbers than the half million normally asperated Miatas sold.

Maybe he was thinking, "When I guessed that the SSR was going to be overweight and underpowered at introduction, I lucked out and was right. May as well say the same thing about the Solstice. I might end up right again"
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
27 Posts
The proof of the pudding is in the eating. It's a little ridiculuous to judge this car -- for better or worse -- until someone has driven it. Hopefully we'll see some reviews in the car mags before long by some (relatively) unbiased folks who will tell us how it stacks up.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
284 Posts
mustangnomo said:
You can't compare the Silverado/Sierra to an F-150 alone, you have to compare to the F-150, 250, and 350, since the Silverado is sold in ALL of the equivalent configurations(1500,2500,3500). Compare those numbers and I am pretty sure the F-series is still on top, as it has been for about 20 years.
You also have to include the F-450, F-550, F-650 and F-750 in the numbers to get the total number of "F" series trucks that Ford sells per year (as Ford does). I am fairly sure that GM does not include their medium duty trucks in the Silverado/Sierra numbers, as they are not called a Silverado or Sierra.
 

·
Senior Member
Joined
·
5,600 Posts
mustangnomo said:
Oh and by the way, DON"T BUY A SILVERADO!!! The drivetrain sucks and needs about $500 worth of repairs every 20k or so, due to a greaseless driveshaft "yolk".
Your opinion is noted. My 2000 Silverado has been flawless during 6 years of hellish stop and go commute in the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Area, including the daily grind downtown and crossing the bridge. Here is how much I have had to spend on repairs. $0.00
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
65 Posts
I'll probably get grief for saying this but, speaking as a former journalist, here's how these types of articles get written:
1. The writer or editor decides the angle that the article will have--which is solely determined on how much attention the headline and lead will grab. In other words, truth and fairness don't come into play at all here.
2. Then, assuming that the article will be negative, because that's what usually gets the most attention, the writer tries to get official quotes (by speaking to GM press or officials) to bolster the negative position.
3. If he/she can't get official quotes, as in this case and most cases, then the writer changes tactics and resorts to the old "insiders say..." phrase. In this article, the phrase the writer has used is "the word from inside GM..."

What the reader doesn't know is that the only requirement for the writer is to find just ANYONE who is even the most remotely connected to GM to say something negative. It could be a temp worker who was hired to work in a mailroom for just 24 hours and then laid off... or a disgruntled kid who just got fired from work at the cafeteria at a satellite office 2000 miles away from GM headquarters. And, of course, the writer has free rein to speak with any nummber of people in his/her search to dig up that one negative comment.

And the result is another negative article with no real facts or definitive comparison to other cars or manufacturers. But look how well it worked... people read and paid attention to the article!
 

·
Senior Member
Joined
·
5,641 Posts
Riles said:
I'll probably get grief for saying this but, speaking as a former journalist, here's how these types of articles get written:
1. The writer or editor decides the angle that the article will have--which is solely determined on how much attention the headline and lead will grab. In other words, truth and fairness don't come into play at all here.
2. Then, assuming that the article will be negative, because that's what usually gets the most attention, the writer tries to get official quotes (by speaking to GM press or officials) to bolster the negative position.
3. If he/she can't get official quotes, as in this case and most cases, then the writer changes tactics and resorts to the old "insiders say..." phrase. In this article, the phrase the writer has used is "the word from inside GM..."

What the reader doesn't know is that the only requirement for the writer is to find just ANYONE who is even the most remotely connected to GM to say something negative. It could be a temp worker who was hired to work in a mailroom for just 24 hours and then laid off... or a disgruntled kid who just got fired from work at the cafeteria at a satellite office 2000 miles away from GM headquarters. And, of course, the writer has free rein to speak with any nummber of people in his/her search to dig up that one negative comment.

And the result is another negative article with no real facts or definitive comparison to other cars or manufacturers. But look how well it worked... people read and paid attention to the article!

:) Notice the lack of surprise on my face as to what you wrote!

What makes this ripping of GM even funnier, is his wife's piece this week about problems with her Lexus. She ends by saying, her next car will be equipped with OnStar. Pretty much limits her future choices. :lol:
http://www.globalauto.net/clipsheet.cfm?article_id=2283&today=05/14/05&mode=display&brand_id=3
 

·
Founding Member
Joined
·
5,849 Posts
You're right. One of the first things I was taught in English Writing 101 is to discern whether the writer's viewpoint is slanted or objective.
Moral of the story: "Don't buy into everything you read". & "Don't get your feathers in a huff".
 
1 - 17 of 17 Posts
Top