Pontiac Solstice Forum banner

Would you consider a cheaper, lower powered Solstice?

  • Yes I would

    Votes: 14 5.9%
  • No I would not

    Votes: 201 85.2%
  • Hmmm, maybe

    Votes: 14 5.9%
  • None of the above

    Votes: 7 3.0%

  • Total voters
    236
1 - 20 of 65 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,901 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
NOTE: This thread was originally posted by me back in June 2005, over 3 years ago.

This popped into my head last night while I was out and about. I was curious how many people would be interested in this. We've recently been having some discussions about the Solstice not getting the Fuel Economy numbers people would like it to have.

What if GM offered a Solstice using the 2.2L ECOTEC engine producing 140HP & 150 lbs-ft while getting about 24/32 MPG on 87 octane fuel? Say you also saved maybe another $1000 on the price of the car, so the base price was $18,995. Do you think people would be interested in an even cheaper car designed more for better Fuel Economy then performance? Yeah it's a sports car/Roadster, but getting good MPG can sometimes bring in even more sales for a car line.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,263 Posts
After driving a 43 HP roadster for 37 years, any improvement is appreciated.

Plus a WARRANTY helps too. Mr. Pontiac needs to improve that, say to 5x50K?

Picked up a MY04 S2K while waiting on my Solstice, but it falls under the category of 'high maintenance' for me. (Fuel/Insurance/Tires/Bells & Whistles)

Take care-Steve

:willy:
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,691 Posts
I think that Pontiac could have certainly done a Z3 which BTW started with about 145 hp in first year and done it right if the higher powered engine were offered up front. Old enough to remember the Mustangs that came with I6 and 3 speed column shift AND the Pony interior with bench seat. Of course they also started off wit hthe 260 V8 followed quite quickly by the 289. A 140, 177 AND 200+ hp would fill a lot more garages. The other key to a successful low hp unit is to have a softer suspension and HIGH MILEAGE and price down around 16k. I'm serious here, the new HHR is base priced under 16 and Bob is flounting it's Lexus-like fit and finish.

Maybe if they had originally announced 140 then 177 would seem substantial.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
76 Posts
brentil said:
This popped into my head last night while I was out and about. I was curious how many people would be interested in this. We've recently been having some discussions about the Solstice not getting the Fuel Economy numbers people would like it to have.

What if GM offered a Solstice using the 2.2L ECOTEC engine producing 140HP & 150 lbs-ft while getting about 24/32 MPG on 87 octane fuel? Say you also saved maybe another $1000 on the price of the car, so the base price was $18,995. Do you think people would be interested in an even cheaper car designed more for better Fuel Economy then performance? Yeah it's a sports car/Roadster, but getting good MPG can sometimes bring in even more sales for a car line.
I believe that would be nothing less than a marketing and public relations disaster for GM.
You know that most of the car mags are down on GM already and they'd use the Solstice-Lite in their comparo tests and the Solstice would always come off sucking the hind teat to all its competitors.
As well, the Solstice would enter an already crowded roadster market with a wimpy offering.
Better they should boost the HP on their initial production run and blow some of the competition away (or at least come close to their performance). :yesnod:
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
940 Posts
brentil said:
This popped into my head last night while I was out and about. I was curious how many people would be interested in this. We've recently been having some discussions about the Solstice not getting the Fuel Economy numbers people would like it to have.

What if GM offered a Solstice using the 2.2L ECOTEC engine producing 140HP & 150 lbs-ft while getting about 24/32 MPG on 87 octane fuel? Say you also saved maybe another $1000 on the price of the car, so the base price was $18,995. Do you think people would be interested in an even cheaper car designed more for better Fuel Economy then performance? Yeah it's a sports car/Roadster, but getting good MPG can sometimes bring in even more sales for a car line.
Nope, but I am considering the turbo version.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
251 Posts
Personally, probably NOT. I voted "maybe" only because I think a segment of the market would indeed go for it...they would be less concerned about performance...and more concerned about driving a great looking car that was also economical, and comfortable as a daily driver...Pontiac would have to soften the suspension...14" wheels...maybe softer seats.

I just don't know if it would be good for Pontiac...a previous post already touched on the image issue...Come to think of it...maybe that would be a good direction for the SKY...since it is already identified as a Saturn...Keep the Pontiac performance image...let the SKY be the dialed down "daily driver"! :yesnod:
 

·
Mod Emeritus
Joined
·
7,468 Posts
I personally would not be interested. The Solstice is already cheap in my book, and I don't have a problem with it's fuel mileage. I wouldn't deny anyone an economy version if they wanted it. It's just not for me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,512 Posts
:agree:
Fformula88 said:
I personally would not be interested. The Solstice is already cheap in my book, and I don't have a problem with it's fuel mileage. I wouldn't deny anyone an economy version if they wanted it. It's just not for me.
:agree: I'm wiht Ff88 on this one. The Solstice is just about right where I want it to be now.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,312 Posts
brentil said:
This popped into my head last night while I was out and about. I was curious how many people would be interested in this. We've recently been having some discussions about the Solstice not getting the Fuel Economy numbers people would like it to have.

What if GM offered a Solstice using the 2.2L ECOTEC engine producing 140HP & 150 lbs-ft while getting about 24/32 MPG on 87 octane fuel? Say you also saved maybe another $1000 on the price of the car, so the base price was $18,995. Do you think people would be interested in an even cheaper car designed more for better Fuel Economy then performance? Yeah it's a sports car/Roadster, but getting good MPG can sometimes bring in even more sales for a car line.
You mean, would people be interested in a Miata?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,844 Posts
OK, would I want one? No way. 177HP isn't enough!
But would a better mileage, smaller engine/smaller wheel and different gearing base version sell? Yes.

Since the announcement that the Solstice would be produced, it has been said it would have all these great looks, 18" rims, CD player and an engine a lot bigger than the Miata's (at the time) for under $20,000.

1.But, by far, the best single thing about the car is the looks. Could they sell those same looks at a lower price. Yes. It's the old, "Who needs that extra HP 'cuz wouldn't you look better in a car that looks as good as this" selling point.

2.It's probable this car will make it into rental fleets. A smaller engine/smaller wheeled base version would be perfect there.

3.Look how many Mustangs and F bodies are (or were) sold with a V6.

4.No other American car has no engine choice and very few offer an either/or choice.

5. In the last year, many people are rethinking their recent purchase of that big SUV because of the increase in gas prices. That market is ripe for a cheap little roadster that sips fuel.

6. Mini Coopers and Miatas both come with engine options.

7. Make the 18" wheels optional on the base model. This would be the same as offering the wings and things on V6 pony cars so they could look like the higher performance versions.

1.(again) There's a lot of people out there that want the Solstice just for it's looks.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
59 Posts
& I agree with Stang here. Even though most people here wouldn't consider it....most people here aren't 'most people'. I believe both the option + lowering the price could double or triple sales.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,143 Posts
My initial response was, like many of you, of course not :nono: .

But since none of us have driven one, I don't know. I'm not planning to take my Solstice to the track - maybe 140-hp is plenty... But if I had to choose, sight un-seen, I'd go with the 200+ hp F/I option :lol:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,135 Posts
cheaper

NO !!!!! whats 1,000.00 these days? I lose that at the casino's in less then a year.( like most betting people do
) I want my solstice just the way it is.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
71 Posts
This is going to be my first brand new car... so I'm going to get all the bells and whistles, including waiting for the turbo. so no, I'm not interested in a stripper version.

If I were more interested in a 2nd car to commute in style, It might be a different story.


And personally... I'd like to think what we're getting now *is* the low powered entry level Sol for the least money. Then we'll get the turbo.... and after a couple years hp will jump. It's just a matter of they're making the lowest hp version have *more* hp than the competitors, and making it cost *less* than the same competitors...
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,901 Posts
Discussion Starter #17
I'm really not suprised by the way the votes are going. The crowd mentality for the most part here seems to the American desire for more power. I was mainly throwing the idea out to see what people thought, I really didn't expect many people here to be interested in it, I just wanted the discussion about it.

DreamerDave hit on a lot of things that made me want to bring this topic up. A lower powered version with much better Fuel Economy might appeal to even more people outside the typical Roadster demographic then what they've already expanded too. It would let them be able to offer a version that could not compete with the new MX-5 on the performance front, but it would destroy it from the Price/Fuel Economy front. Mazda put the official MPG up today and with the lower end models it gets 25/30 MPG, compared to the Solstice's 20/28 MPG it gets now that might turn fuel conscientious people towards the miata even though it'll cost much more. Especially since the Solstice will need 91+ to get it's best performance more then likely, but the 2.2L only uses 87 octane.

Say you dropped the 18" wheels for maybe 16" or 17", save another $500. Possibly drop the base CD player for a non-cd player. Try to find a couple more areas to drop the price a little more, maybe get a base $17,995 car. Pontiac already has the CHEAPEST Roadster on the market, imagine if they could get it a little cheaper. I really think they could open the car up to an even larger demographic then what they have now. A full model line-up for the 2007 year could be very beneficial. Hypotheticaly say they've got the high performance version out at 240~250 HP, maybe they find some things to change with the 2.4L VVT and get 180HP from it. If they added the 2.2L ECOTEC they would have the bottom end of the market covered. Pontiac could create and corner the low end Roadster market. A lot of people stay away from Roadsters because of their price. The cheapest you could get into one before now was ~$22k base. If they had a starting $17,995-$18,995 car people could still get options and keep the price under $20k. A Roadster with options under $20k???
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,901 Posts
Discussion Starter #18
deluke said:
NO !!!!! whats 1,000.00 these days? I lose that at the casino's in less then a year.( like most betting people do
) I want my solstice just the way it is.
$1,000 might not be much to you, but it could be the breaking point for a lot of other people. Especially if it means they can't get options they want because they can't afford it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,060 Posts
brentil said:
What if GM offered a Solstice using the 2.2L ECOTEC engine producing 140HP & 150 lbs-ft while getting about 24/32 MPG on 87 octane fuel? Say you also saved maybe another $1000 on the price of the car, so the base price was $18,995. Do you think people would be interested in an even cheaper car designed more for better Fuel Economy then performance? Yeah it's a sports car/Roadster, but getting good MPG can sometimes bring in even more sales for a car line.
I chose maybe, but really only for the sake of others. I myself wouldn't want one with less HP, not for a grand off anyway. For 140hp, bring it down to the Scion starting range and we'll talk. Cause if it's going to be lower powered, I want to drive it off the lot for under 20k. With all the plusses like AC, ABS, Power, Conv. Basically the extra $3500 worth of options that I ordered for less than 20k with T/T/T included. Then I might consider a lower powered version. Emphasis on the word MIGHT. Yeah... start it at $14,995 so that I can get everything on it that I ordered and head off the lot having spent $19,661... Yeah, that sound better. But definitely not for $1000 less.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,060 Posts
brentil said:
$1,000 might not be much to you, but it could be the breaking point for a lot of other people. Especially if it means they can't get options they want because they can't afford it.
(you posted while I was typing)

Sure a grand might be quite a bit for some people, but damn... when you're spending 20+ grand, saving just 1000 isn't really going to be that appealing. Thus like I said, 5k off for the base would sell a LOT more cars.
 
1 - 20 of 65 Posts
Top