Double Review: 2008 Saturn Sky Turbo/Non-Turbo
10-16-07, 06:20 PM
#1
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
Double Review: 2008 Saturn Sky Turbo/Non-Turbo
By CL member request, a review of the 2008 Saturn Sky Redline (Turbo), with a check/mini-review of the non-turbo.
http://www.saturn.com/saturn/vehicles/sky/overview.jsp
In a Nutshell: Roadster fun, with easier entry/exit than Japanese competitors, but so-so overall build quality and several poorly-designed features.
It is no secret that the original 2-seat British sports cars of the late 1940's through the 1960's were quaint and fun to drive, but also quirky, almost defenseless against the elements, and notoriously unreliable as well. The main problem was the horrendous British Lucas electrical system, but other serious problems were present as well, such as poorly-designed gaskets that let engine and powertrain fluids leak out like a sieve, Munchkin-sized interiors that were unfit for the average American male....especially on the MG Midget, and ill-fitting side curtains that made even light rain seem like driving through Niagara Falls. Wheels, carburators, mirrors.....you never knew what was going to come apart or fly off these cars with little or no warning (yes, even wheels were known to fly off while driving).
Well, fun to drive or not, eventually most Americans simply stopped buying these vehicles because of the poor quality, and as the market for these cars dried up one by one, their parent British companies pulled out of the American market....all except for Lotus. The Triumph TR8, with its wedge shape and Buick-built aluminum V8 engine, was the last of the original ones sold here (1981-82). The equally unreliable and poorly-made Italian Fiat, Lancia, and Alfa Romeo roadsters (but also equally fun-to-drive) followed suit...their parent companies also either packed up and left or dropped these models from the American market.
However, by the late 1980s, nostalgia for these cars, and the increasing reliability of modern computer design and Japanese engineering, led to the hugely successful Mazda Miata....to date, the world's best-selling 2-seat roadster. There is no need for me to cover the Miata's success in detail.....most of you are already well aware of it. The Miata combined all the charm of the old British sports cars with the reliability of new Hondas and Toyotas (for years it has been one of Consumer Reports' Ten Best in reliability). The Miata also introduced a snap-to-use top so simple a monkey
can do it.
Other competitors followed.....the mid-engine Toyota MR2 (which actually predated the Miata in 1985), and the Honda S2000, which introduced substantially more power but torque peakiness as well. The Mercury Capri, based on the old Mazda 323 platform, was the first domestic-badged attempt along these lines, but was unsuccessful primarily due to its production in a low-quality Australian plant.
Which, of course, now brings us to the latest (and more up-to-date) domestic attempt to compete with the Miata....the Pontiac Solstice/Saturn Sky twins. They are marketed as twins, and are in fact based on a common platform and drivetrains, but the exterior styling of both is quite different (I personally prefer the Sky's styling to the Solstice's, but that is an individual choice). Actually, they can be considered triplets, if you include the Vauxhall VX Lightning, a strictly-European version of this platform.......the Vauxhall's exterior styling is pretty close to the Saturn's.
The Solstice and Sky, to date, have been successful, but have not sold in the Miata's huge numbers yet. Like the Miata, when first introduced last year, high initial demand and low supply meant dealer price-gouging. A friend of mine, in September 2006, was extroardinarly fortunate to get a new Solstice with just the colors and options he wanted, at list.....it was even sitting in the showroom just a short distance away (he is a minister...I don't think that was a coincidence). I went along and checked the car out for him (see the associated story and mini-review I posted at the time).
The Sky Red Line was the specific request I got for this review...and the availability of them on dealer lots right now is more than I expected. The closest Saturn dealership to my house (only about 3 miles) had 3 turbos and 3 non-turbos in stock (but only one of them was actually on their inventory web site), so they are generally there for the taking. When I got there, they were not allowing ANY of the Skys in stock to be test-driven....turbo or non-turbo. When I told them I was a free-lance auto writer and was looking at the cars by specific request, though, it was another matter. First they asked me if I wanted to take the base, non-turbo model out (but still no turbo test-drives), so I said sure....and I did (after a through examination, of course).
Then, when I brought the non-turbo model back, the sales manager came out and asked if I wanted to sample the turbo. I said sure, but I had been told no earlier. He said "I'm the boss here, Mr. Marshall, not the guy you were with earlier". He tossed me the keys and a dealer license plate and said "Bring it back in a reasonable amount of time and don't damage it." So, out I went......again........and was careful to note both the similarities and differences of both versions.
So, how do the two versions compare with each other.....and their competition? Read on.
Model Reviewed: 2008 Saturn Sky Redline (Turbo)
Base price: $29,175
Major Options:
18" chrome wheels: $545
Leather seats: $475
Monsoon Audio System: $395
Spoiler: $275
Destination: $620
List Price as Reviewed: $31,485*
*Suggested list.....Saturn dealers can set their own list.
Exterior Color: Chili Pepper Red
Interior: Black Leather
Top Color: Black
Drivetrain: RWD, 2.0L turbo/intercooled, Direct Injection, VVT-i, in-line 4, 260 HP @ 5300 RPM, Torque 260 ft-lbs. @ 2500-5200 RPM,
5-speed manual transmission, Limited-slip differential.
Model Reviewed: 2008 Saturn Sky (Base)
Base Price: $25,040
Major Options:
Premium Trim Package (Includes Leather): $750
18-inch Chrome Wheels: $795
Monsoon Audio System: $395
Freight: $620
List Price as Reviewed: $27,600* (see above)
Exterior Color: Black Onyx
Interior: Black Leather
Top Color: Black
Drivetrain: RWD, 2.4L, VVT-i, in-line 4, 172 HP @ 5800 RPM, Torque 167 ft-lbs. @ 4500 RPM,
5-speed manual transmission.
PLUSSES:
Serious power and minimal turbo lag from the Red Line version.
Short-throw, easy-to shift manual transmission.
Flat cornering with good steering response in both versions.
Well-insulated, high-quality convertible top.
Better-than-average paint job for a GM product.
Relative ease of entry/exit for big and tall people.
Fluid reservoirs easy to reach underhood.
Well-done brakes.
Ultra-short turning radius.
Comfortable, well-supportive seats.
Nice paint color choice.
Well-designed interior control layout.
Nice 3-spoke steering wheel design and quality.
Good climate control and A/C.
Relatively quiet for a roadster with top up.
Not quite as cramped inside as Japanese competitors.
No noticeable cowl shake.
MINUSES:
Minimal (?) rollover protection.
Poorly designed and inconvienent top-folding mechanism.
Somewhat coarse and unrefined engines.
Primary gauge tunnels too deep.
Steering wheel rim hides upper gauges for tall people.
No standard locking gas cap...it is a separate option.
Poorly designed, awkward hood and hinges.
Flimsy, awkward exterior mirrors.
Bring back the Saturn plastic, dent/rust proof body panels.
Ridiculous extra cost for yellow paint.
Typical GM interior with El Cheapo plastic and surface glitz/chrome.
Small, flimsy glove box in the dash (a second one is between the seats).
Relatively stiff ride (for my tastes).
No analog temperature gauge, even on Red Line version.
High insurance premiums for 2-seaters....especially the turbo.
The first impression you get of this car, as you walk up to it, besides its obvious small size, is its more or less uniqueness in the styling department, despite being a corporate "twin" of the Pontiac Solstice. The rear end is not unlike that of the Solstice, but the front end is far different....and IMO far better-looking. The up-slanted headlights are somewhat reminiscent of a Corvette or Viper, but the upper/lower grilles and large cutouts for the fog lights are unique. The ultra-low front bodywork and side sills make it almost impossible to get a hose underneath the car far enough to flush off the underbody....but most people don't drive a car like this in snow or road salt conditions anyway. In fact, many people in snowy climates with rear-drive roadsters park them in garages and don't drive them at all during the winter...their re-emergence in March or April is one of the signs of spring.
Anyhow, IMO, the body lines are smartly done.....I don't have many complaints with the car's overall looks. Paint-wise, there are the usual funeral-hearse shades and some nice bright colors as well.....Sunburst Yellow, Bluestone, and Chili Pepper Red. The quality of the paint jobs I saw, especially the Chili Pepper Red, is better than average for a GM product. That color, especially, was smooth, even, glossy, and alost totally devoid of orange peel. The Black Onyx had some orange peel, but still not bad. But WHY does the Sunburst yellow have to cost extra? It probably doesn't cost any more to actually paint a car that color than it does any other, in contrast to European automakers' habit of charging extra for metallics, which DO cost more to paint with.
Exterior hardware is another matter. The twin outside mirrors are too small, use too flimsy a plastic (typical GM), and are quite difficult to easily snap back and forth on their swivel-stops. The general outside trim and door handles are acceptable in quality but nothing to write home about. The chrome bar on the front grille, though is not bad....it looks and feels classy. There is a reverse fender-scoop just behind each front wheel that is strongly reminiscent of classic Ford Mustangs....that, of course, doesn't hurt the looks any. The optional chrome wheels on both of my test cars lookes nice and classy with their mag-style five spokes. The low-profile 45-series 18-inch tires, of course, contribute to the car's low stance, but are pretty much expected in a car of this type....especially on the Red Line version.
Up front, the design of the hood, IMO, is one of the car's major problems. The hood is hinged at the front, which is normally no big deal (many sports cars have that feature), but the WAY it is hinged is the problem. The two hinges are relatively close together at the center of the hood....mounted to a bracket in front of the engine. When you raise the hood from the back (you must remember to shut the door first, or it will bind), it wobbles back and forth slightly on the narrow hinges. Fully open, of course, it blocks access to front-mounted components. Then, when you lower the hood back down, you must, of course, again make sure the doors are shut.....then it wobbles back down again on the narow hinges, and you have to carefully hold it in place as it closes to make sure it align correctly with the body panels and latches properly. In plain English, it's an unneccessary inconvienence and a pain in the a * *. Under the hood itself, though, the longitudionally-mounted in-line four, in both turbo and non-turbo form, actually fits in pretty good (the Solstice-Sky platform was specifically designed FOR this engine block, despite the attempts of aftermarket tuners to stuff in V6 and even V8 powerplants). The turbo version actually has a smaller displacement than the non-turbo....2.0 liters to 2.4. Most of the clear plastic engine fluid-level containers were readily accessable along the sides, but the engine-oil dipstick was buried low on the left-rear of the engine block. A gray plastic cover blocks some things on top of the engine, but it is becoming harder and harder to find engines without them nowadays.
The cloth convertible top, which comes in two colors (black or tan) was exceedingly well-made, and IMO was easily one of the car's best features. The cloth felt durable, thick, very well-lined and insulated (the test-drive proved this), and came with a heated glass rear window. Unfortunately, the poorly-designed, inconvienient, manual top-lowering mechanism and stowage compartment was another one of the car's major problems....here is one area where the Mazda Miata just CLOBBERS this car. In the current Miata, you just reach up, unsnap one lever above the windshield, flip the top up and over with your right arm without even getting out of the seat, and push the top back down behind you. Not in this car....no comparison. You take the key fob and press a button.....that unlocks two catches behind the rear window. Then you unsnap two different levers under the roof with a pull-out-and-twist motion. Then you have to get out of the car, pull up the rear-hinged "trunk" cover, lift the roof up and over, carefully lower it into his housing, then flip the trunk cover back down again, cover the folded-up roof, and then flip both of the double-clip covers back down to complete the operation. Then, of course, when it is time to put the top back up, the whole operation is done in reverse. Perhaps that is why the Miata handily outsells this car....and its brother Solstice, which has more or less the same top-fold mechanism.
Which leads us to the car's third major problem....the lack, or apparant lack, of any real roll-over protection behind the seats. The car apparantly met DOT standards for convertible rollover protection, but I don't know how. It has neither a roll-bar behind the seats, nor the G-force-induced pop-up bars that you find on more expensive convertibles, nor does it have a teapot-handle device like on the PT Cruiser convertible. It does have two small humps on the top-compartment cover behind the seats, but they are neither reinforced nor even as high as the tops of the seat headreats themselves. Of course, the flip side (no pun intended) to this is that ultra-low-slung cars like this, with their extremely low centers of gravity, are quite resistant to roll-overs to start with, so unless you are sliding sideways at a good clip and the tires hit a curb or hang up on something, chances are it won't happen.
Inside, I had mixed opinions. Open the doors and get in. Entry/exit is noticeably easier than in the Miata or MR2......GM apparantly shaped the doorsills, rooflines, and seat mounting for taller people. The seats themselves have fairly nice leather, are quite well-shaped, and are well-supportive for big, tall guys...I was well-pleased with their comfort level. But the manual seat controls were awkward, the knobbly ratchet-wheel for seat rake was almost impossible to find and use (it was hidden behind the seat back in a small slot), and, like with most 2-seat roadsters, there really was no place for the seat back to recline without sliding the bottom cushion too far forward.
The interior, for the most part, on both models I reviewed, was just basic black, with some chrome and metallic trim on a few of the ***** and trim pieces. A two-tone black and red leather interior is shown in the brochure, but I didn't see it on Saturn's web site (perhaps I just missed it). Tan leather (or black cloth) is also available. Most of the interior hardware and controls/***** are the typical GM budget-grade plastic, though with a few nice touches and a couple of chrome rings. The steering wheel is a step above the rest of the interior in quality and looks, but its top hides the fuel gauge when it is in the full-up position (adjusted manually). I couldn't find a telescope function, and it isn't listed.
I was also pleased with the layout of the stereo and climate controls, which were simple, well-designed, and easy to use. Like on the VW R32 I reviewed last week, you can see all the pre-set stations at once before you press the button for each one....they remain on continual display. The stereo itself, though......while it was not bad, I've heard better, especially considering that both cars I drove had the optional ($395) Monsoon system. Like I said, it is not necessarily a bad sound system, but I did miss the Lexus Mark Levinson units while in this car. This car, with the well-made soundproofing of its convertible top, could use a nice sound system....it doesn't get drowned out by road and wind noise like in many ragtops with the top up.
The primary gauges were clear and round, and generally well-designed, though I didn't care for their yellow-orange coloring at night, like on big-brother Saturn Aura. the numerals were easy to read, but both cars I reviewed lacked a temperature gauge...puzzling in a sports car. The non-turbo model had black-faced gauges with white numerals; the turbo model had lower-black-faced gauges with white upper-parts, and the same white numerals. Both models had the primary gauges set too deeply into circular tunnels...it was sometimes hard to see tham at an angle.....and, for tall people like me, the rim of the steering wheel obscured the fuel gauge at the top.
Headroom, with the top up, and legroom were also pretty good in this car, considering it is a small roadster. Both the Solstice and Sky noticeably outdo the current-generation Miata in both categories....and the current-generation Miata noticeably outdoes its own predecessors as well (the original Miata, like the MG Midget and the Lotus Elise, was basically a car for gremlins). In essence, (and not surprising, since it was designed by GM), the Solstice/Sky was built for full-size American adults.
But the Miata, once again, wins out in trunk space. The simple and clever top-down mechanism that Mazda installs in the Miata allows a lot more trunk space, with the top down, than in the Solstice/Sky. with the Miata, you can actually take along a small-to-reasonable anount of luggage with you on a sunny day. Not so with these cars. And, like the Miata, MR2, and most small 2-seaters, the Sky has a small, pull-down glove box behind you, between the seats....an equally awkward place to reach when you are siting down facing forward. A dual cupholder pops in and out just under the rear glove box.
Well, this is a roadster, and, of course, a roadster is built to DRIVE, so time to drive....let's do it.
Start it up with a conventional key and ignition switch (perhaps the next-generation Sky will have a button) and the rather coarse and unrefined GM Ecotec in-line Four catches with a noticeable jerk and settles into a less-than-perfectly-smooth idle. while a long way from a tractor engine (and better than some past GM 4-cylinders), this car is no Lexus in idle refinement. On the road, the two engines were also less than perfectly refined, but, again, more civilized than some of their predecessors. The non-turbo model has about the same power-to-weight ratio as a non-turbo Miata, and had roughly similiar acceleration characteristics with the manual transmission, and a roughly similiar torque curve as well. (I didn't drive an automatic). The turbo was a completely different animal when you really put that right foot down.....its much greater torque, much lower RPM torque peak, much flatter torque curve, and almost complete lack of turbo lag shot the car forward like a slingshot....you were pressed way back into your seat. Saturn quotes a 5.5 second 0-60 time in the literature.....this car felt at least as fast as that, if not faster....and, of course, being a brand new car (and mindful of the sales manager's instructions not to tear it up), I wasn't even redlining it or pushing it to its maximum. Unrefined or not, GM has done an excellent job of integrating the turbo with this engine.....response was not only powerful, but almost without turbo lag as well...about half a second. This, in contrast to the also-powerful Honda S2000 that you have to rev the engine to almost-motorcycle-levels to get.....HP and torque peaks are in the 7000-8000 PM range.
Outside of the engines, on the road, there wasn't a whole lot of difference between the two models. Both had quick (but not extremely quick) steering response, quite flat cornering with virtually no body roll, an ultra-tight turning radius, a moderately stiff ride that was a little on the too-firm side for my tastes, and basically good steering feel that, naturally, fell a little short of BMW-feel (of course, what other car does, outside of Porsche, though the new Accord coupe came close). The turbo model was (maybe?...hard to tell) just a tiny bit stiffer and more responsive than the non-turbo, probably from suspension differences. Cowl/body flex, a traditional problem in older convertibles, was not noticeable enough in these two cars to have any discernable steering-wheel shake or frame twisting and its resulting squeaks and rattles.
Brakes, in both versions, were not the sponginess you often get from GM products...the pedal was reasonably firm (though not quite as firm as in many German cars), responsive, and quite effective. The brake and gas-pedal positions also had no problems accomodating my big feet moving either way with any hang-ups. Saturn, again, in its literature, quotes a Porsche-like 116 feet from 60-0. I, of course, didn't panic-stop the car, but the near 50/50 weight distribution undoubedly helps somewhat by preventing the excessive nose-heaviness usually found in front-drivers. Rear and mid-engine cars like Porsches and the Toyota MR2 normally do better under heavy braking loads than even front engine, 50/50 cars like the Sky because, with the weight of the engine and transmission behind you, that weight transfers forward and the EFFECTIVE center of braking is in the middle of the car, forcing all four brakes and tires to do their equal share of the braking load. That's why few other cars can equal Porsche braking distances.
The clutches and 5-speed manual transmissions in both cars felt about the same, despite the fact that the one in the turbo model had, of course, a lot more torque to handle. The two clutches engaged about a third of the way up, the shift linkage was smooth and precise but a little notchy (I never missed a shift in either car), and the stubby shifters, in sports-car tradition, had a short throw....not quite as short as the Miata or MR2.
Road and wind noise isolation, with the top up, was quite good for a small roadster....as good or better than the soft-top Miata (the Miata, of course, also comes in a folding hard-top version). This seems to reflect on the quality of the material that GM uses for the soft top, which I have described earlier.....if only the quality of the top-folding mechanism matched the quality of the top itself. You did get some noticeable engine roar under heavy acceleration, but that is to be expected in a small sports car....you don't buy a car like this for Lincoln Town-Car quietness.
The Verdict?
Overall, a nice domestic alternative to the Mazda Miata and Honda S2000, but, outside of the Sky's good ragtop materials and the excellent turbo integration, a distinct quality notch below both of them. GM, noting the abundance of tall and oveweight potential buyers in their mid-life crises shopping for sports cars, has done a good job designing the car for ease of entry and exit and a reasonable amount of room inside for a roadster. The seats are quite comfortable for bigger people as well. The Red Line version goes like stink when you hammer the right foot down. The brakes, steering, climate control, turning radius, paint job, top-insulation, and interior control layout are all well-done.
But the car, sadly, IMO, has some major design faults as well. Much better rollover protection (apparantly) needs to be installed behind the rear seats. The top-folding mechanism needs a complete redesign. So does the hood-latch mechanism. Better-quality materials need to be used on the dash and console.....a common problem with many GM vehicles. A locking gas cap should be standard....and a temperature gauge added. And yellow paint should not cost extra (that is a minor issue to fix, of course). And ALL Saturns, including the Sky, need to go back to the plastic body panels...that was one of the main features that made a Saturn a Saturn. The company, sadly, has almost completely forgotten that.
Still, for those who want to supprt GM or buy American, it is a credible, fun-to-drive roadster...but check out the Pontiac version as well. The Solstice can sometimes be had for a lower price if you find a dealer who won't price-gouge from supply/demand....but both turbo and non-turbo versions of the Solstice have less standard equipment than the Sky does....the Sky is considered slightly more upscale. And, of course, this is a personal opinion rather than an objective one, but I never liked the Solstice's Bucky-Beaver-tooth grille either. Others, however, may like it....so that, of course, is your choice.
http://www.saturn.com/saturn/vehicles/sky/overview.jsp
In a Nutshell: Roadster fun, with easier entry/exit than Japanese competitors, but so-so overall build quality and several poorly-designed features.
It is no secret that the original 2-seat British sports cars of the late 1940's through the 1960's were quaint and fun to drive, but also quirky, almost defenseless against the elements, and notoriously unreliable as well. The main problem was the horrendous British Lucas electrical system, but other serious problems were present as well, such as poorly-designed gaskets that let engine and powertrain fluids leak out like a sieve, Munchkin-sized interiors that were unfit for the average American male....especially on the MG Midget, and ill-fitting side curtains that made even light rain seem like driving through Niagara Falls. Wheels, carburators, mirrors.....you never knew what was going to come apart or fly off these cars with little or no warning (yes, even wheels were known to fly off while driving).
Well, fun to drive or not, eventually most Americans simply stopped buying these vehicles because of the poor quality, and as the market for these cars dried up one by one, their parent British companies pulled out of the American market....all except for Lotus. The Triumph TR8, with its wedge shape and Buick-built aluminum V8 engine, was the last of the original ones sold here (1981-82). The equally unreliable and poorly-made Italian Fiat, Lancia, and Alfa Romeo roadsters (but also equally fun-to-drive) followed suit...their parent companies also either packed up and left or dropped these models from the American market.
However, by the late 1980s, nostalgia for these cars, and the increasing reliability of modern computer design and Japanese engineering, led to the hugely successful Mazda Miata....to date, the world's best-selling 2-seat roadster. There is no need for me to cover the Miata's success in detail.....most of you are already well aware of it. The Miata combined all the charm of the old British sports cars with the reliability of new Hondas and Toyotas (for years it has been one of Consumer Reports' Ten Best in reliability). The Miata also introduced a snap-to-use top so simple a monkey
can do it.
Other competitors followed.....the mid-engine Toyota MR2 (which actually predated the Miata in 1985), and the Honda S2000, which introduced substantially more power but torque peakiness as well. The Mercury Capri, based on the old Mazda 323 platform, was the first domestic-badged attempt along these lines, but was unsuccessful primarily due to its production in a low-quality Australian plant.
Which, of course, now brings us to the latest (and more up-to-date) domestic attempt to compete with the Miata....the Pontiac Solstice/Saturn Sky twins. They are marketed as twins, and are in fact based on a common platform and drivetrains, but the exterior styling of both is quite different (I personally prefer the Sky's styling to the Solstice's, but that is an individual choice). Actually, they can be considered triplets, if you include the Vauxhall VX Lightning, a strictly-European version of this platform.......the Vauxhall's exterior styling is pretty close to the Saturn's.
The Solstice and Sky, to date, have been successful, but have not sold in the Miata's huge numbers yet. Like the Miata, when first introduced last year, high initial demand and low supply meant dealer price-gouging. A friend of mine, in September 2006, was extroardinarly fortunate to get a new Solstice with just the colors and options he wanted, at list.....it was even sitting in the showroom just a short distance away (he is a minister...I don't think that was a coincidence). I went along and checked the car out for him (see the associated story and mini-review I posted at the time).
The Sky Red Line was the specific request I got for this review...and the availability of them on dealer lots right now is more than I expected. The closest Saturn dealership to my house (only about 3 miles) had 3 turbos and 3 non-turbos in stock (but only one of them was actually on their inventory web site), so they are generally there for the taking. When I got there, they were not allowing ANY of the Skys in stock to be test-driven....turbo or non-turbo. When I told them I was a free-lance auto writer and was looking at the cars by specific request, though, it was another matter. First they asked me if I wanted to take the base, non-turbo model out (but still no turbo test-drives), so I said sure....and I did (after a through examination, of course).
Then, when I brought the non-turbo model back, the sales manager came out and asked if I wanted to sample the turbo. I said sure, but I had been told no earlier. He said "I'm the boss here, Mr. Marshall, not the guy you were with earlier". He tossed me the keys and a dealer license plate and said "Bring it back in a reasonable amount of time and don't damage it." So, out I went......again........and was careful to note both the similarities and differences of both versions.
So, how do the two versions compare with each other.....and their competition? Read on.
Model Reviewed: 2008 Saturn Sky Redline (Turbo)
Base price: $29,175
Major Options:
18" chrome wheels: $545
Leather seats: $475
Monsoon Audio System: $395
Spoiler: $275
Destination: $620
List Price as Reviewed: $31,485*
*Suggested list.....Saturn dealers can set their own list.
Exterior Color: Chili Pepper Red
Interior: Black Leather
Top Color: Black
Drivetrain: RWD, 2.0L turbo/intercooled, Direct Injection, VVT-i, in-line 4, 260 HP @ 5300 RPM, Torque 260 ft-lbs. @ 2500-5200 RPM,
5-speed manual transmission, Limited-slip differential.
Model Reviewed: 2008 Saturn Sky (Base)
Base Price: $25,040
Major Options:
Premium Trim Package (Includes Leather): $750
18-inch Chrome Wheels: $795
Monsoon Audio System: $395
Freight: $620
List Price as Reviewed: $27,600* (see above)
Exterior Color: Black Onyx
Interior: Black Leather
Top Color: Black
Drivetrain: RWD, 2.4L, VVT-i, in-line 4, 172 HP @ 5800 RPM, Torque 167 ft-lbs. @ 4500 RPM,
5-speed manual transmission.
PLUSSES:
Serious power and minimal turbo lag from the Red Line version.
Short-throw, easy-to shift manual transmission.
Flat cornering with good steering response in both versions.
Well-insulated, high-quality convertible top.
Better-than-average paint job for a GM product.
Relative ease of entry/exit for big and tall people.
Fluid reservoirs easy to reach underhood.
Well-done brakes.
Ultra-short turning radius.
Comfortable, well-supportive seats.
Nice paint color choice.
Well-designed interior control layout.
Nice 3-spoke steering wheel design and quality.
Good climate control and A/C.
Relatively quiet for a roadster with top up.
Not quite as cramped inside as Japanese competitors.
No noticeable cowl shake.
MINUSES:
Minimal (?) rollover protection.
Poorly designed and inconvienent top-folding mechanism.
Somewhat coarse and unrefined engines.
Primary gauge tunnels too deep.
Steering wheel rim hides upper gauges for tall people.
No standard locking gas cap...it is a separate option.
Poorly designed, awkward hood and hinges.
Flimsy, awkward exterior mirrors.
Bring back the Saturn plastic, dent/rust proof body panels.
Ridiculous extra cost for yellow paint.
Typical GM interior with El Cheapo plastic and surface glitz/chrome.
Small, flimsy glove box in the dash (a second one is between the seats).
Relatively stiff ride (for my tastes).
No analog temperature gauge, even on Red Line version.
High insurance premiums for 2-seaters....especially the turbo.
The first impression you get of this car, as you walk up to it, besides its obvious small size, is its more or less uniqueness in the styling department, despite being a corporate "twin" of the Pontiac Solstice. The rear end is not unlike that of the Solstice, but the front end is far different....and IMO far better-looking. The up-slanted headlights are somewhat reminiscent of a Corvette or Viper, but the upper/lower grilles and large cutouts for the fog lights are unique. The ultra-low front bodywork and side sills make it almost impossible to get a hose underneath the car far enough to flush off the underbody....but most people don't drive a car like this in snow or road salt conditions anyway. In fact, many people in snowy climates with rear-drive roadsters park them in garages and don't drive them at all during the winter...their re-emergence in March or April is one of the signs of spring.
Anyhow, IMO, the body lines are smartly done.....I don't have many complaints with the car's overall looks. Paint-wise, there are the usual funeral-hearse shades and some nice bright colors as well.....Sunburst Yellow, Bluestone, and Chili Pepper Red. The quality of the paint jobs I saw, especially the Chili Pepper Red, is better than average for a GM product. That color, especially, was smooth, even, glossy, and alost totally devoid of orange peel. The Black Onyx had some orange peel, but still not bad. But WHY does the Sunburst yellow have to cost extra? It probably doesn't cost any more to actually paint a car that color than it does any other, in contrast to European automakers' habit of charging extra for metallics, which DO cost more to paint with.
Exterior hardware is another matter. The twin outside mirrors are too small, use too flimsy a plastic (typical GM), and are quite difficult to easily snap back and forth on their swivel-stops. The general outside trim and door handles are acceptable in quality but nothing to write home about. The chrome bar on the front grille, though is not bad....it looks and feels classy. There is a reverse fender-scoop just behind each front wheel that is strongly reminiscent of classic Ford Mustangs....that, of course, doesn't hurt the looks any. The optional chrome wheels on both of my test cars lookes nice and classy with their mag-style five spokes. The low-profile 45-series 18-inch tires, of course, contribute to the car's low stance, but are pretty much expected in a car of this type....especially on the Red Line version.
Up front, the design of the hood, IMO, is one of the car's major problems. The hood is hinged at the front, which is normally no big deal (many sports cars have that feature), but the WAY it is hinged is the problem. The two hinges are relatively close together at the center of the hood....mounted to a bracket in front of the engine. When you raise the hood from the back (you must remember to shut the door first, or it will bind), it wobbles back and forth slightly on the narrow hinges. Fully open, of course, it blocks access to front-mounted components. Then, when you lower the hood back down, you must, of course, again make sure the doors are shut.....then it wobbles back down again on the narow hinges, and you have to carefully hold it in place as it closes to make sure it align correctly with the body panels and latches properly. In plain English, it's an unneccessary inconvienence and a pain in the a * *. Under the hood itself, though, the longitudionally-mounted in-line four, in both turbo and non-turbo form, actually fits in pretty good (the Solstice-Sky platform was specifically designed FOR this engine block, despite the attempts of aftermarket tuners to stuff in V6 and even V8 powerplants). The turbo version actually has a smaller displacement than the non-turbo....2.0 liters to 2.4. Most of the clear plastic engine fluid-level containers were readily accessable along the sides, but the engine-oil dipstick was buried low on the left-rear of the engine block. A gray plastic cover blocks some things on top of the engine, but it is becoming harder and harder to find engines without them nowadays.
The cloth convertible top, which comes in two colors (black or tan) was exceedingly well-made, and IMO was easily one of the car's best features. The cloth felt durable, thick, very well-lined and insulated (the test-drive proved this), and came with a heated glass rear window. Unfortunately, the poorly-designed, inconvienient, manual top-lowering mechanism and stowage compartment was another one of the car's major problems....here is one area where the Mazda Miata just CLOBBERS this car. In the current Miata, you just reach up, unsnap one lever above the windshield, flip the top up and over with your right arm without even getting out of the seat, and push the top back down behind you. Not in this car....no comparison. You take the key fob and press a button.....that unlocks two catches behind the rear window. Then you unsnap two different levers under the roof with a pull-out-and-twist motion. Then you have to get out of the car, pull up the rear-hinged "trunk" cover, lift the roof up and over, carefully lower it into his housing, then flip the trunk cover back down again, cover the folded-up roof, and then flip both of the double-clip covers back down to complete the operation. Then, of course, when it is time to put the top back up, the whole operation is done in reverse. Perhaps that is why the Miata handily outsells this car....and its brother Solstice, which has more or less the same top-fold mechanism.
Which leads us to the car's third major problem....the lack, or apparant lack, of any real roll-over protection behind the seats. The car apparantly met DOT standards for convertible rollover protection, but I don't know how. It has neither a roll-bar behind the seats, nor the G-force-induced pop-up bars that you find on more expensive convertibles, nor does it have a teapot-handle device like on the PT Cruiser convertible. It does have two small humps on the top-compartment cover behind the seats, but they are neither reinforced nor even as high as the tops of the seat headreats themselves. Of course, the flip side (no pun intended) to this is that ultra-low-slung cars like this, with their extremely low centers of gravity, are quite resistant to roll-overs to start with, so unless you are sliding sideways at a good clip and the tires hit a curb or hang up on something, chances are it won't happen.
Inside, I had mixed opinions. Open the doors and get in. Entry/exit is noticeably easier than in the Miata or MR2......GM apparantly shaped the doorsills, rooflines, and seat mounting for taller people. The seats themselves have fairly nice leather, are quite well-shaped, and are well-supportive for big, tall guys...I was well-pleased with their comfort level. But the manual seat controls were awkward, the knobbly ratchet-wheel for seat rake was almost impossible to find and use (it was hidden behind the seat back in a small slot), and, like with most 2-seat roadsters, there really was no place for the seat back to recline without sliding the bottom cushion too far forward.
The interior, for the most part, on both models I reviewed, was just basic black, with some chrome and metallic trim on a few of the ***** and trim pieces. A two-tone black and red leather interior is shown in the brochure, but I didn't see it on Saturn's web site (perhaps I just missed it). Tan leather (or black cloth) is also available. Most of the interior hardware and controls/***** are the typical GM budget-grade plastic, though with a few nice touches and a couple of chrome rings. The steering wheel is a step above the rest of the interior in quality and looks, but its top hides the fuel gauge when it is in the full-up position (adjusted manually). I couldn't find a telescope function, and it isn't listed.
I was also pleased with the layout of the stereo and climate controls, which were simple, well-designed, and easy to use. Like on the VW R32 I reviewed last week, you can see all the pre-set stations at once before you press the button for each one....they remain on continual display. The stereo itself, though......while it was not bad, I've heard better, especially considering that both cars I drove had the optional ($395) Monsoon system. Like I said, it is not necessarily a bad sound system, but I did miss the Lexus Mark Levinson units while in this car. This car, with the well-made soundproofing of its convertible top, could use a nice sound system....it doesn't get drowned out by road and wind noise like in many ragtops with the top up.
The primary gauges were clear and round, and generally well-designed, though I didn't care for their yellow-orange coloring at night, like on big-brother Saturn Aura. the numerals were easy to read, but both cars I reviewed lacked a temperature gauge...puzzling in a sports car. The non-turbo model had black-faced gauges with white numerals; the turbo model had lower-black-faced gauges with white upper-parts, and the same white numerals. Both models had the primary gauges set too deeply into circular tunnels...it was sometimes hard to see tham at an angle.....and, for tall people like me, the rim of the steering wheel obscured the fuel gauge at the top.
Headroom, with the top up, and legroom were also pretty good in this car, considering it is a small roadster. Both the Solstice and Sky noticeably outdo the current-generation Miata in both categories....and the current-generation Miata noticeably outdoes its own predecessors as well (the original Miata, like the MG Midget and the Lotus Elise, was basically a car for gremlins). In essence, (and not surprising, since it was designed by GM), the Solstice/Sky was built for full-size American adults.
But the Miata, once again, wins out in trunk space. The simple and clever top-down mechanism that Mazda installs in the Miata allows a lot more trunk space, with the top down, than in the Solstice/Sky. with the Miata, you can actually take along a small-to-reasonable anount of luggage with you on a sunny day. Not so with these cars. And, like the Miata, MR2, and most small 2-seaters, the Sky has a small, pull-down glove box behind you, between the seats....an equally awkward place to reach when you are siting down facing forward. A dual cupholder pops in and out just under the rear glove box.
Well, this is a roadster, and, of course, a roadster is built to DRIVE, so time to drive....let's do it.
Start it up with a conventional key and ignition switch (perhaps the next-generation Sky will have a button) and the rather coarse and unrefined GM Ecotec in-line Four catches with a noticeable jerk and settles into a less-than-perfectly-smooth idle. while a long way from a tractor engine (and better than some past GM 4-cylinders), this car is no Lexus in idle refinement. On the road, the two engines were also less than perfectly refined, but, again, more civilized than some of their predecessors. The non-turbo model has about the same power-to-weight ratio as a non-turbo Miata, and had roughly similiar acceleration characteristics with the manual transmission, and a roughly similiar torque curve as well. (I didn't drive an automatic). The turbo was a completely different animal when you really put that right foot down.....its much greater torque, much lower RPM torque peak, much flatter torque curve, and almost complete lack of turbo lag shot the car forward like a slingshot....you were pressed way back into your seat. Saturn quotes a 5.5 second 0-60 time in the literature.....this car felt at least as fast as that, if not faster....and, of course, being a brand new car (and mindful of the sales manager's instructions not to tear it up), I wasn't even redlining it or pushing it to its maximum. Unrefined or not, GM has done an excellent job of integrating the turbo with this engine.....response was not only powerful, but almost without turbo lag as well...about half a second. This, in contrast to the also-powerful Honda S2000 that you have to rev the engine to almost-motorcycle-levels to get.....HP and torque peaks are in the 7000-8000 PM range.
Outside of the engines, on the road, there wasn't a whole lot of difference between the two models. Both had quick (but not extremely quick) steering response, quite flat cornering with virtually no body roll, an ultra-tight turning radius, a moderately stiff ride that was a little on the too-firm side for my tastes, and basically good steering feel that, naturally, fell a little short of BMW-feel (of course, what other car does, outside of Porsche, though the new Accord coupe came close). The turbo model was (maybe?...hard to tell) just a tiny bit stiffer and more responsive than the non-turbo, probably from suspension differences. Cowl/body flex, a traditional problem in older convertibles, was not noticeable enough in these two cars to have any discernable steering-wheel shake or frame twisting and its resulting squeaks and rattles.
Brakes, in both versions, were not the sponginess you often get from GM products...the pedal was reasonably firm (though not quite as firm as in many German cars), responsive, and quite effective. The brake and gas-pedal positions also had no problems accomodating my big feet moving either way with any hang-ups. Saturn, again, in its literature, quotes a Porsche-like 116 feet from 60-0. I, of course, didn't panic-stop the car, but the near 50/50 weight distribution undoubedly helps somewhat by preventing the excessive nose-heaviness usually found in front-drivers. Rear and mid-engine cars like Porsches and the Toyota MR2 normally do better under heavy braking loads than even front engine, 50/50 cars like the Sky because, with the weight of the engine and transmission behind you, that weight transfers forward and the EFFECTIVE center of braking is in the middle of the car, forcing all four brakes and tires to do their equal share of the braking load. That's why few other cars can equal Porsche braking distances.
The clutches and 5-speed manual transmissions in both cars felt about the same, despite the fact that the one in the turbo model had, of course, a lot more torque to handle. The two clutches engaged about a third of the way up, the shift linkage was smooth and precise but a little notchy (I never missed a shift in either car), and the stubby shifters, in sports-car tradition, had a short throw....not quite as short as the Miata or MR2.
Road and wind noise isolation, with the top up, was quite good for a small roadster....as good or better than the soft-top Miata (the Miata, of course, also comes in a folding hard-top version). This seems to reflect on the quality of the material that GM uses for the soft top, which I have described earlier.....if only the quality of the top-folding mechanism matched the quality of the top itself. You did get some noticeable engine roar under heavy acceleration, but that is to be expected in a small sports car....you don't buy a car like this for Lincoln Town-Car quietness.
The Verdict?
Overall, a nice domestic alternative to the Mazda Miata and Honda S2000, but, outside of the Sky's good ragtop materials and the excellent turbo integration, a distinct quality notch below both of them. GM, noting the abundance of tall and oveweight potential buyers in their mid-life crises shopping for sports cars, has done a good job designing the car for ease of entry and exit and a reasonable amount of room inside for a roadster. The seats are quite comfortable for bigger people as well. The Red Line version goes like stink when you hammer the right foot down. The brakes, steering, climate control, turning radius, paint job, top-insulation, and interior control layout are all well-done.
But the car, sadly, IMO, has some major design faults as well. Much better rollover protection (apparantly) needs to be installed behind the rear seats. The top-folding mechanism needs a complete redesign. So does the hood-latch mechanism. Better-quality materials need to be used on the dash and console.....a common problem with many GM vehicles. A locking gas cap should be standard....and a temperature gauge added. And yellow paint should not cost extra (that is a minor issue to fix, of course). And ALL Saturns, including the Sky, need to go back to the plastic body panels...that was one of the main features that made a Saturn a Saturn. The company, sadly, has almost completely forgotten that.
Still, for those who want to supprt GM or buy American, it is a credible, fun-to-drive roadster...but check out the Pontiac version as well. The Solstice can sometimes be had for a lower price if you find a dealer who won't price-gouge from supply/demand....but both turbo and non-turbo versions of the Solstice have less standard equipment than the Sky does....the Sky is considered slightly more upscale. And, of course, this is a personal opinion rather than an objective one, but I never liked the Solstice's Bucky-Beaver-tooth grille either. Others, however, may like it....so that, of course, is your choice.
Last edited by mmarshall; 10-16-07 at 06:56 PM.
10-16-07, 08:11 PM
#2
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
http://www.pontiac.com/solstice/index.jsp
http://www.mazdausa.com/MusaWeb/disp...ehicleCode=MX5
I'll attach the official Pontiac Solstice and Mazda Miata websites, too, just for comparison's sake.
http://www.mazdausa.com/MusaWeb/disp...ehicleCode=MX5
I'll attach the official Pontiac Solstice and Mazda Miata websites, too, just for comparison's sake.
10-16-07, 08:23 PM
#3
I like the Sky better than the Solstice as well.
I have not driven it, but I definately agree with your comments on quality, size, and ease (or lack thereof) of using the ragtop. It's definately made for American midlife crisis individuals that want something a little more flashy/distinctive than its Japanese counterparts...
I have not driven it, but I definately agree with your comments on quality, size, and ease (or lack thereof) of using the ragtop. It's definately made for American midlife crisis individuals that want something a little more flashy/distinctive than its Japanese counterparts...
10-17-07, 10:32 AM
#4
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
I like the Sky better than the Solstice as well.
I have not driven it, but I definately agree with your comments on quality, size, and ease (or lack thereof) of using the ragtop. It's definately made for American midlife crisis individuals that want something a little more flashy/distinctive than its Japanese counterparts...
I have not driven it, but I definately agree with your comments on quality, size, and ease (or lack thereof) of using the ragtop. It's definately made for American midlife crisis individuals that want something a little more flashy/distinctive than its Japanese counterparts...
And, getting back to the Solstice and Sky.....even they were designed on a joint American-European platform, in conjunction with the British Vauxhall VX Lightning roadster.
Last edited by mmarshall; 10-17-07 at 10:36 AM.
10-17-07, 12:26 PM
#5
I owned a base Sky from March 06 to August 06. My VIN was under 1000, I had one of the first units. I loved the looks of the car, I received many on the road.
What I did not like was the quality of the interior. Very cheap feeling. The base engine was also under powered.
Because it was one of the first units, there were many trips to the dealer for minor adjustments...all under warranty.
It was a fun car to have for the summer, and I sold it so I would not have to carry it through the winter.
If you are not picky, for the price I think it is a BUY!! I would spend the extra $$ and get the turbo.
Just my 2 cents
on the road. What I did not like was the quality of the interior. Very cheap feeling. The base engine was also under powered.
Because it was one of the first units, there were many trips to the dealer for minor adjustments...all under warranty.
It was a fun car to have for the summer, and I sold it so I would not have to carry it through the winter.
If you are not picky, for the price I think it is a BUY!! I would spend the extra $$ and get the turbo.
Just my 2 cents
10-17-07, 02:02 PM
#6
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
Seriously, though, the Solstice offers more or less the same car at a lower price, but it comes with less equipment, more room for dealer mark-ups, and the nesessity of more options to get up to the Sky's comparable equipment level, so you may or may not send up saving money by actually getting one. I also agree that the Sky has substantially better looks.
10-17-07, 03:42 PM
#7
Lexus Champion
[QUOTE=mmarshall;2992094]The turbo will run you more than just 2 cents.
QUOTE]
Lol, wise guy
I think both cars are great. They carry the distinctive look which many auto enthuiasts care about. The form is well executed and the ride quality I can't comment on it coz I've never ridden or drive one.
The buck tooth look on the Solstice takes a while to get used to for some people (though I was ok with it from the get-go) but it's difinitely American.
Them car nuts in Japan would prolly kill for any of these "American POS" that we take for granted here.
To respond to your review, I'm glad you find that the noise isolation is slightly better than the banner roadster Miata. Again, I think we can take a moment to shed off the Toyo-Fan-Boy jersey and take comfort in knowing American automakers are doing something right. It's taking them a quite a while, and they most likely might never measure up with the quality and feel of foreign plate, but their efforts should be generously acknowledged.
QUOTE]
Lol, wise guy
I think both cars are great. They carry the distinctive look which many auto enthuiasts care about. The form is well executed and the ride quality I can't comment on it coz I've never ridden or drive one.
The buck tooth look on the Solstice takes a while to get used to for some people (though I was ok with it from the get-go) but it's difinitely American.
Them car nuts in Japan would prolly kill for any of these "American POS" that we take for granted here.
To respond to your review, I'm glad you find that the noise isolation is slightly better than the banner roadster Miata. Again, I think we can take a moment to shed off the Toyo-Fan-Boy jersey and take comfort in knowing American automakers are doing something right. It's taking them a quite a while, and they most likely might never measure up with the quality and feel of foreign plate, but their efforts should be generously acknowledged.
Trending Topics
10-17-07, 04:01 PM
#8
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
=tzu911;2992305]Lol, wise guy
I think both cars are great. They carry the distinctive look which many auto enthuiasts care about. The form is well executed and the ride quality I can't comment on it coz I've never ridden or drive one.
The buck tooth look on the Solstice takes a while to get used to for some people (though I was ok with it from the get-go) but it's difinitely American.
Them car nuts in Japan would prolly kill for any of these "American POS" that we take for granted here.
To respond to your review, I'm glad you find that the noise isolation is slightly better than the banner roadster Miata. Again, I think we can take a moment to shed off the Toyo-Fan-Boy jersey and take comfort in knowing American automakers are doing something right. It's taking them a quite a while, and they most likely might never measure up with the quality and feel of foreign plate, but their efforts should be generously acknowledged.
I think both cars are great. They carry the distinctive look which many auto enthuiasts care about. The form is well executed and the ride quality I can't comment on it coz I've never ridden or drive one.
The buck tooth look on the Solstice takes a while to get used to for some people (though I was ok with it from the get-go) but it's difinitely American.
Them car nuts in Japan would prolly kill for any of these "American POS" that we take for granted here.
To respond to your review, I'm glad you find that the noise isolation is slightly better than the banner roadster Miata. Again, I think we can take a moment to shed off the Toyo-Fan-Boy jersey and take comfort in knowing American automakers are doing something right. It's taking them a quite a while, and they most likely might never measure up with the quality and feel of foreign plate, but their efforts should be generously acknowledged.
That is primarily a function of two things. First, the thick, well-insulated top, and, Second, the additional insulation in the chassis. But there is a reverse side to that coin......those noise-deadening features also add to the car's weight, which make the somewhat lighter Miata a little noisier but also a little more responsive in the steering....it has less understeer than the Sky and responds quicker to steering inputs. Both cars, though, have an extremely short turning radius.
10-17-07, 04:26 PM
#10
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
10-18-07, 07:24 AM
#11
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
Have any of you actually bought or leased a Sky? If so, please share your dealer experience and the terms you actually got on the deal....and if you were satisfied. It will be interesting to see what kind of actual selling prices you got, considering Saturn's traditional policy of strict list pricing vs. their newer policy of allowing dealerships some leeway. Pontiac dealers, of course, when selling the Solstice, are free to charge whatever the market will bear.
10-18-07, 08:14 AM
#12
Zombie Slayer
Great review mmarshall!!!
What are your thoughts on the price point?? Do you think the roughly $32,000 suggested price is warranted? Seems a hair high to me, especially after reading of some of the cheap area of the vehicle.
I was amused by your intro referring to older British sports cars. My father owned a 1962 MGA with the 1800cc motor back in the late 60's. He loved that car to no end, but he still tells stories of how it drove fanatastic in the rain (as long as you didn't leave the garage!
). He also told me of a time he took the car for inspection and the DMV employee put his foot right through the floorboard (the MGA's were made of wood)!!!!
What are your thoughts on the price point?? Do you think the roughly $32,000 suggested price is warranted? Seems a hair high to me, especially after reading of some of the cheap area of the vehicle.
I was amused by your intro referring to older British sports cars. My father owned a 1962 MGA with the 1800cc motor back in the late 60's. He loved that car to no end, but he still tells stories of how it drove fanatastic in the rain (as long as you didn't leave the garage!
). He also told me of a time he took the car for inspection and the DMV employee put his foot right through the floorboard (the MGA's were made of wood)!!!!
10-18-07, 09:05 AM
#13
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
Great review mmarshall!!!
What are your thoughts on the price point?? Do you think the roughly $32,000 suggested price is warranted? Seems a hair high to me, especially after reading of some of the cheap area of the vehicle.
I was amused by your intro referring to older British sports cars. My father owned a 1962 MGA with the 1800cc motor back in the late 60's. He loved that car to no end, but he still tells stories of how it drove fanatastic in the rain (as long as you didn't leave the garage!). He also told me of a time he took the car for inspection and the DMV employee put his foot right through the floorboard (the MGA's were made of wood)!!!!
What are your thoughts on the price point?? Do you think the roughly $32,000 suggested price is warranted? Seems a hair high to me, especially after reading of some of the cheap area of the vehicle.
I was amused by your intro referring to older British sports cars. My father owned a 1962 MGA with the 1800cc motor back in the late 60's. He loved that car to no end, but he still tells stories of how it drove fanatastic in the rain (as long as you didn't leave the garage!
). He also told me of a time he took the car for inspection and the DMV employee put his foot right through the floorboard (the MGA's were made of wood)!!!!
I usually give a history of each car I review and of preceeding models that lead up to it. It often helps the reader understand the context in which the current model fits into today's auto market.The old British and Italian roadsters were actually the grandsons of the current Solstice/Sky, Miata, and S2000...and were the sons of the original Miata. The more modern roadsters were done, of course, to address the primary shortcomings of the old ones...some of which you note.
Do I think that the 32K for the Turbo model is justified? Yes and no. Hard to give a firm answer........it depends on how you look at it. Mazda and Honda both build a roadster with somewhat better overall quality inside and out and more refined drivetrains, although it is hard to fault the insulation quality of the Sky's ragtop. And, though well-made, the Sky's ragtop is a pain to raise and lower. The S2000, without a turbo, has close to the Turbo Sky's HP, but at much higher RPM, and a distinct lack of low-RPM torque. It sells for a little more than the Turbo Sky's 32K.
The Miata has a snap-to-use roof, better agility than the Sky, and, like the S2000, has a long-proven reliability record. It also offers the option of a folding hardtop for better security in high-theft areas. Its price, for both turbo and non-turbo versions, is not much different from the Sky.
So, compared to the turbo Miata and S2000 and their better overall quality, I'm not sure if the turbo Sky's 32K is justified. But.....when you compare the turbo Sky's price to the non-turbo Sky's, I think it IS worth the extra money for the much stronger response at lower RPM you get with the turbo model. I am not a speed freak by any means (you guys know that), but there is no question that the Red Line Turbo model is much more fun to drive.......so if it boils down to a question of if the 32K for the turbo is worth the extra 3 or 4K over the base model (which is really not that much extra), I'd say yes in a heartbeat. And, for larger and heavier people, the higher quality of the Miata and S2000 also comes with a more difficult and uncomfortable entry and exit (though the new Miata is distinctly better than the old ones)....something else to take into consideration in the value department.
Another thing, IMO, that makes the Red Line Sky a better deal than the base model is that GM recommends the same gas octane for both engines (premium recommended but regular 87 allowed), so you don't necessarily have to buy more expensive gas for the turbo. The turbo does, however, require more oil maintenance.....preferably with synthetic.
Last edited by mmarshall; 10-18-07 at 09:13 AM.
10-18-07, 11:57 AM
#14
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
One thing I forgot to post with the turbo model was the apparant lack of a turbo boost gauge as well as the lack of a temperature gauge. But perhaps the boost gauge is no longer as critical as the temp gauge. With the increasing computerization and electronic controls in today's engines, the computer will probably open up the wastegate at critical overboost and bleed off the excess pressure anyway.
10-18-07, 12:14 PM
#15
Driver School Candidate
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: oh
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"require more oil maintenance.....preferably with synthetic"
This is not true...according to the THREE service managers I spoke with. They all said to use regular ol' oil in my Sky Red Line.
I looked at both the Sky and Miata. It wasn't a hard decision to make at all. You are right about the cheap hinges on the trunk and hood and it is silly that they couldn't design the hood to open/close unimpeded by an open door, but I don't agree with your issue with the ragtop. First, I prefer that the top be hidden away in the trunk. Secondly, and more importantly, unless your not of the human race, the top is EASY to stow away. You think getting out of the car is an issue? It literally takes no more than 20 seconds to put up or down. No problem here.
The scroll **** on the seats are awkward, to say the least. You pretty much have to open the door to get to them. But how often do seat positions get changed?
The trunk, with the top down fits more than you would think. I can fit my golf clubs, bag and all, with no problem. I can fit quite a few bags of groceries. No hard luggage will fit, but there's no issue with a weeks worth of cloting for two people stowed away in duffle bags or soft luggage. And remember, this all with the top stowed IN THE TRUNK. There's a lot more room if the top is up.
I could care less about an analog temp gage.
There is ton more power with the Red Line compared to the Miata. Getting in and out is definitely easier.
Sure, the Miata may be engineered better, but they have 20 years on the Sky.
And one thing that is undeniable is that the looks of the Sky are much better than the Plain Looking Miata.
Edit: Forgot to mention...
I find your opinion about roll overs strange. Is there test data to prove that the Sky is worse than the Miata? The Sky has a 5 star on the government safety ratings. Not sure what the Miata has, but regardless, you make it sound like your opinion is fact.
This is not true...according to the THREE service managers I spoke with. They all said to use regular ol' oil in my Sky Red Line.
I looked at both the Sky and Miata. It wasn't a hard decision to make at all. You are right about the cheap hinges on the trunk and hood and it is silly that they couldn't design the hood to open/close unimpeded by an open door, but I don't agree with your issue with the ragtop. First, I prefer that the top be hidden away in the trunk. Secondly, and more importantly, unless your not of the human race, the top is EASY to stow away. You think getting out of the car is an issue? It literally takes no more than 20 seconds to put up or down. No problem here.
The scroll **** on the seats are awkward, to say the least. You pretty much have to open the door to get to them. But how often do seat positions get changed?
The trunk, with the top down fits more than you would think. I can fit my golf clubs, bag and all, with no problem. I can fit quite a few bags of groceries. No hard luggage will fit, but there's no issue with a weeks worth of cloting for two people stowed away in duffle bags or soft luggage. And remember, this all with the top stowed IN THE TRUNK. There's a lot more room if the top is up.
I could care less about an analog temp gage.
There is ton more power with the Red Line compared to the Miata. Getting in and out is definitely easier.
Sure, the Miata may be engineered better, but they have 20 years on the Sky.
And one thing that is undeniable is that the looks of the Sky are much better than the Plain Looking Miata.
Edit: Forgot to mention...
I find your opinion about roll overs strange. Is there test data to prove that the Sky is worse than the Miata? The Sky has a 5 star on the government safety ratings. Not sure what the Miata has, but regardless, you make it sound like your opinion is fact.
Last edited by tbardoni; 10-18-07 at 12:35 PM.