Pontiac Solstice Forum banner

1 - 20 of 41 Posts

·
Senior Member
Joined
·
5,600 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
What's the matter, boopy? Still feel bad about the tiny trunk in your new pontiac solstice? Well consider this...

2006 Pontiac Solstice

Base Price..... $19,995
Trunk volume, top up... 4 CF
Trunk volume, top down... 2 CF


2004 Porsche Carrera GT

Base Price..... $440,000
Trunk volume, roof panels installed... 2.5 CF
Trunk volume, roof panels stowed... 0.5CF

Just food for thought.

If you still feel bad about the small trunk, just disguise the car by placing Lancia or Maserati emblems over all the Pontiac shields. Nobody expects large trunks in exotic cars.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16 Posts
2000 Ferrari 360 Modena

Base Price ... ~$140,000
4.2 CF behind the seats
7.8 CF in the front boot

What's your point again? :smile
 

·
Senior Member
Joined
·
5,600 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
No point. Just wish the Solstice was here already.

I want a test drive! :willy:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
58 Posts
JonAqua said:
2000 Ferrari 360 Modena

Base Price ... ~$140,000
4.2 CF behind the seats
7.8 CF in the front boot

What's your point again? :smile
I am sure that if we wanted to spend another $120,000 dollars we could have a nice trunk too. :smile I'll take it as is and be glad to have a machine like this.
 

·
Mod Emeritus
Joined
·
7,468 Posts
If I had a Porsche, I wouldn't mind a lack of trunk space since I could likely afford a second vehicle with a ton of storage space. :cheers
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,901 Posts
jimbo said:
Nobody expects large trunks in exotic cars.
Ok, the problem with this entire argument is that the Solstice and even the Sky are not even close to being exotic cars. They're cheap, every day Joe roadsters. And the every day man usually owns his main car as a daily driver, which a daily driver needs some usable trunk space. Trunk space is a huge factor for the majority of people who have never owned a car like this, but are now thinking about it. You might be hard core enough to ignore it, but teh genral public GM needs to sell these cars more then likely isn't.

You're far better comparing trunk space to cars in its segment.
Car : Cost : Trunk Space

Solstice : $19,995 : 2/4 cu.ft.
Miata : $22,098 : 5.1 cu.ft.
Mini Cooper S : $24,400 : 4.2 cu.ft.
MR-2 : $25,145 : 1.9 cu.ft.
S2000 : $32,950 : 5.0 cu.ft.
Crossfire Roadster : $34,085 : 6.5 cu.ft.
350Z Roadster : $34,150 : 4.1 cu.ft.
Z4 : $34,300 : 9.2 cu.ft.
Audi TT : $35,500 : 7.8 cu.ft.
Elise : $39,985 : 4.1 cu.ft.
Boxster : $43,800 : 9.9 cu.ft.
SLK : $45,500 : 6.5 cu.ft.
Corvette : $51,445 : 10.4 cu.ft.

Besides the MR-2 nothing else drops below 4 cu.ft. of space. Yes they all cost more, but these are all cars that are far more realisiticly in the price range of a Solstice buyer. The Miata and the Mini are very close in price to be real options to a Solstice or Sky, with more then twice the usable trunk space with the top down for only $2k-$4k more.

::EDIT:: added S2000
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,901 Posts
Fformula88 said:
If I had a Porsche, I wouldn't mind a lack of trunk space since I could likely afford a second vehicle with a ton of storage space. :cheers
You'd also have 5 times the usable trunk space too.

But then you'd be out twice to three times the cash left over to spend. :D
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,206 Posts
brentil said:
Ok, the problem with this entire argument is that the Solstice and even the Sky are not even close to being exotic cars. They're cheap, every day Joe roadsters. And the every day man usually owns his main car as a daily driver, which a daily driver needs some usable trunk space. Trunk space is a huge factor for the majority of people who have never owned a car like this, but are now thinking about it. You might be hard core enough to ignore it, but teh genral public GM needs to sell these cars more then likely isn't.

You're far better comparing trunk space to cars in its segment.
Car : Cost : Trunk Space

Solstice : $19,995 : 2/4 cu.ft.
Miata : $22,098 : 5.1 cu.ft.
Mini Cooper S : $24,400 : 4.2 cu.ft.
MR-2 : $25,145 : 1.9 cu.ft.
Crossfire Roadster : $34,085 : 6.5 cu.ft.
350Z Roadster : $34,150 : 4.1 cu.ft.
Z4 : $34,300 : 9.2 cu.ft.
Audi TT : $35,500 : 7.8 cu.ft.
Elise : $39,985 : 4.1 cu.ft.
Boxster : $43,800 : 9.9 cu.ft.
SLK : $45,500 : 6.5 cu.ft.
Corvette : $51,445 : 10.4 cu.ft.

Besides the MR-2 nothing else drops below 4 cu.ft. of space. Yes they all cost more, but these are all cars that are far more realisiticly in the price range of a Solstice buyer. The Miata and the Mini are very close in price to be real options to a Solstice or Sky, with more then twice the usable trunk space with the top down for only $2k-$4k more.
But not a single one of these cars looks as good as the Solstice or Sky. None of these have a reverse-clamshell decklid. And none of these have AFBTS's :D
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,901 Posts
solsticeman said:
But not a single one of these cars looks as good as the Solstice or Sky. None of these have a reverse-clamshell decklid. And none of these have AFBTS's :D
hehehe

I'll give you the AFBTS's. :D
There are a couple of those that pesonally I like as much as the Solstice or Sky, but that's the Elise and the Corvette, and both of those cost twice as much and are out of my price range.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
81 Posts
In my mind, the comparison that makes the most sense is the Honda S2000. It's another front engine, rear wheel drive covertible with an inline 4 and double wishbone suspension. It's also similar to the Solstice in size and weight. Here's what the trunk looks like:



I think the fact that the storage area is a good deal smaller in the Solstice is due to 3 design decisions made by GM (note I say "decisions," not "mistakes"; there's no right answer, just inherent trade-offs I will try to enumerate)

1) 18 inch wheels - These are a bit on the large side for a car of this size. Once you account for suspension travel and the need to fit suspension components, these cut in to the amount of space available for storage.
PROS: Look nice, can fit large brakes
CONS: Unsprung weight, cost, packaging issues

2) Rear hinged, one piece trunk & top cover - This was a very distinctive element on the concept car, so GM probably felt obligated to keep it. They could have put a split down the middle and put a rear hinged top cover along with a conventionally opening trunk. This would have added two additional seams, but my have actually been cheaper to produce, and lighter as well. There certainly seems to be a substantial ammount of bracing on the trunk, and the rear hinges in the open trunk photo look to take up a large amount of space.
PROS: Simple, clean look
CONS: Additional weight & cost (?) packaging issues

3) AFTBS - I don't think these are a huge impact, but it's one more thing that must be made room for when the top is stowed.
PROS: Sleeker roofline when top is up
CONS: Additional complexity for top operation, small weight and cost penalties

One thing I take away from this: During development, the decision was made to be true to the form and style of the concept, even when at the expense of additional cost and weight. GM should be applauded for this, even if it means the top/storage issue will be a deal breaker for some (me). Had they gone the other way with the choices above, they would have likely been slammed for releasing a car with smaller wheels, a more cluttered rear, and a more awkward roofline than the concept. It's a tough spot to be in.

-Stephen M
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,901 Posts
I knew I forgot a car, had it on my list but forgot it some how. I'll add it in too.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
10,471 Posts
Well the new Corvettes have a trunk, but my 1970 convertible did not have one, at least not one that opened. I can no longer afford a Vette (I have owned 3) do not like them any ways, I would love a Viper but thats even higher in price. Buttom line, for less than probably $27,000.00 with an after market blower(bradyb) I will have my MINI VIPER./(SKY) :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,570 Posts
Stephen M said:
In my mind, the comparison that makes the most sense is the Honda S2000. It's another front engine, rear wheel drive covertible with an inline 4 and double wishbone suspension. It's also similar to the Solstice in size and weight. Here's what the trunk looks like:
Looking at that photo, it looks like you get a spare tire too, not just a fix-a-flat can or whatever. Also I think the S2000 is a smaller car than the Solstice isn't it? The Japanese appear to be much better at packaging.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
7,210 Posts
AeroDave said:
...Also I think the S2000 is a smaller car than the Solstice isn't it? The Japanese appear to be much better at packaging.
Around same size as Sol (S2K little longer, Sol little wider).
 

Attachments

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
10,471 Posts
But to be fare it is not a clamshell design, there is really no comparison to any production car. Maybe if they had more time to bring the car to production, some of this problems might have been resolved.
However no one in this forum can say with certainty, how much overall storage this car will really have, unless you are GM, and of course you can not say anything about it. More storage, less storage, only time will tell, so for all of you GUEST of this forum, please remember this discussions are based on what WE think we know or percieve we do know. I for one have said I do not care, but for you that might, do not throw in the towel base on our lively discussions, until we all, are absolutly sure there is very little trunk space. The same things holds true about the operation of the top or what the production top will look like. What we all do know for sure,is both of this cars are GORGEOUS. :thumbs
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13 Posts
Get Your Priorities Straight!

Ok..."sports car". Definition, since, oh, forever...a car you drive for fun, and by definition, is NOT practical...not in any way whatsoever! I've got 3 kids...they won't all be riding in my new Solstice...my wife, sure...gotta have a babe with you in one of these things. 1 of my kids with me...sure, top down, sunny day drive to soccer practice...priceless. Golf clubs...sure, you golfers are worried...take up bowling, or darts, like me, both of the equipment for those sports will fit in my Solstice. I do think that an ingenious "trunk rack" design, would sell well, on the Solstice, however, who wants to ruin the hot lines with a set of golf clubs. No, the clubs go in the passenger seat...if I ever go, with me... Consider this...most of us drive, mostly, to and from work. I do so on I71, in Ohio. 10 minutes, I'm at work. 15 minutes, if I take the back roads home (which I'd do...lots of winding roads...fun drive in a Solstice). If you've got to have practical...what are you doing looking at a Solstice?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
58 Posts
big_daddy_mpd said:
Ok..."sports car". Definition, since, oh, forever...a car you drive for fun, and by definition, is NOT practical...not in any way whatsoever! I've got 3 kids...they won't all be riding in my new Solstice...my wife, sure...gotta have a babe with you in one of these things. 1 of my kids with me...sure, top down, sunny day drive to soccer practice...priceless. Golf clubs...sure, you golfers are worried...take up bowling, or darts, like me, both of the equipment for those sports will fit in my Solstice. I do think that an ingenious "trunk rack" design, would sell well, on the Solstice, however, who wants to ruin the hot lines with a set of golf clubs. No, the clubs go in the passenger seat...if I ever go, with me... Consider this...most of us drive, mostly, to and from work. I do so on I71, in Ohio. 10 minutes, I'm at work. 15 minutes, if I take the back roads home (which I'd do...lots of winding roads...fun drive in a Solstice). If you've got to have practical...what are you doing looking at a Solstice?
I couldn't agree with you more! Even my wife who is not really a sports car nut said basically the same thing you just said. Why are these people trying to turn a sports car into a family car. :rant I am keeping my car for everyday use and for the absolute fun of driving I am buying the hottest sports car around ...read SOLSTICE ! :cool
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,901 Posts
We're not trying to turn it into a family car, you're turning what we're saying into that. We're trying to say that to be 100% competitive with the other cars in its segment that it should have a trunk space equvilant to them. The only other car it comes close to with the roof down is the MR-2 Spyder, and it's going the way of the Dodo.
 

·
Mod Emeritus
Joined
·
7,468 Posts
LatinVenom said:
But to be fare it is not a clamshell design, there is really no comparison to any production car. Maybe if they had more time to bring the car to production, some of this problems might have been resolved.
However no one in this forum can say with certainty, how much overall storage this car will really have, unless you are GM, and of course you can not say anything about it. More storage, less storage, only time will tell, so for all of you GUEST of this forum, please remember this discussions are based on what WE think we know or percieve we do know. I for one have said I do not care, but for you that might, do not throw in the towel base on our lively discussions, until we all, are absolutly sure there is very little trunk space. The same things holds true about the operation of the top or what the production top will look like. What we all do know for sure,is both of this cars are GORGEOUS. :thumbs
GM did publish the trunk volume numbers as 4 cubes top up, and 2 cubes top down. Granted we don’t know all there is about the trunk and any other possible storage, but either of those figures is not very much space anyway you cut it.
 
1 - 20 of 41 Posts
Top