According to an article in the March Automobile mag-the solstice,sky and bengal will be built on a lightweight space frame. The chassis is being called tubular within gm (wouldnt suprise me if it isnt really a modified fiero chassis). Story talks about using some delta parts still? Cost of vehicle just like gasoline keeps going up- now 25k. Solstice prod will start jan 06 as a 07, Bengal 6 months later as 07 may have a back seat and Saturn in jan 07 as a 08 and saturn will be a 2 seater and NOT 4 as shown. Volumes were only around 20,000. This sounds like an unprofitable business case.

Since a space frame can be easily made wider or longer dont
be suprised to see other cars on this platform (maybe camaro/fb/ta?). All I will say is that GM risks alienating a huge pool of former fiero customers like me if they dont make another mid-engine 2 seater with this platform. For the same 25k we could have a mid-engine with the inline 6 with 270 hp and with corvette like handling. So long Boxster S. With the vette going up in horse this type of car wouldnt be a threat to the flagship car. The fastback gt style blows away the jellybean- looking solstice. (Note to GM: Fastbacks are becoming hot again look what your competitors are offering, might be time to dust off the 90 gtp/gta)
I do have to give GM credit for leveraging a competative adv they have with the space frame but why not allow it to meet its world class potential? A LS6 powered alum chassis fiero could run with a ferarri. Fiero prototypes had that chassis in 1986!!!

 

Sounds like a Saturn (once Fiero) deal. A member of the Fiero.nl board posted an email he'd received from Bob Lutz about a great new car that we'd all like to be debuted at NAIAS last year, which we later knew as the Solstice.

 

I saw that at pennocks also,spend alot of time there. This may/may not be built in a saturn plant. The new chevy equinox is being built on a space frame (shared with vue) at the cami plant in canada-could be there also.

 

I know we've gone back and forth a few times on the whole Fiero thing over the life of this forum, and this is not meant as a flame, BUT:

1) Fiero has been gone since 1988... that's 15 years ... do you think GM is conserned about 'alienating' Fiero customers at this point?

2) I still don't buy the fact that GM (or any automaker) would seriously consider using the architechure from a car that debuted 2 decades ago in 1984.

3) With the whole "Fire Problem", actual, or perceived, I doubt GM would want to link any future car to the Fiero... It'd be pigeon-holed from the start.

Just my .02...

 

I believe that the space-frame Saturn models (with their plastic body panels) were derived from the original Fiero design. The Fiero had a lot of potential and by 1988 was ready for greatness. Maybe 15 years later the successor of its successor may actually see that greatness, front engine though it may be.

 

Interesting...

I will not claim to be a Fiero expert, but I did do a quick web search, and the only thing I could find was this as far as Saturn and Fiero similarities:

"It was the first mass-produced car entirely outfitted with plastic body panels rather than sheet metal. That technology, which hangs plastic panels on a skeletal frame, now is used in GM's Saturn and APV minivan.· "

From here:
http://www.michiganfieroclub.org/spinout.htm

To me, that just means it used the idea of the body panels, and not the actual artitechure, but, again, I am not a Fiero expert...

 

Darth's points are dead on. I like Fieros, and I think they were prematurely pulled. Seems the market went through a mini explosion a couple of years later. However, I think the idea of GM risking alienation of a customer base over a car that's been gone 15 years that had it's chassis development started in the 1970s, isn't very realistic.

Fiero did serve as the forefather of the 4th gen f-body's construction, and Saturn's plastic skin on spaceframe is all but directly from Fiero. However, if Team Corvette was pretty hostile to gen 4 Camaros & Firebirds having near Corvette performance levels, frankly, the idea of another 2 seater sportscar at GM with Corvette performance that is not more expensive than a Corvette, doesn't have a chance at production.

 

1) I havent bought a new pontiac since 88, but would like to. GM should follow its heritage and offer another mid-engine. The fiero sold just as many units per year as the GTO did during its run. Many people underestimate the following these cars have. The whole strategy behind solstice is flawed. Despite all the bad press- it is their mid-engine that holds the 2 seat us yearly sales record, not a front engine. But they instead want a miata competitor. There is alot of competition in the affordable front engine 2 seat segment, little in mid-engine segment. Maybe it is gm's plan to be in both segments?

2)Saturn is using that same type of structure today (except in fwd form). The mill-drill machines used to insure a precise fit of body panels on saturns came from: the fiero plant in pontiac. Many of the people involved in fiero went to start up Saturn. By the way the alum chassis I mentioned above did make production-on the ev1 in fwd form. Chassis itself was 220lbs lighter than a steel version. I have heard that the overall weight reduction on a vehicle could be as much as 700lbs using alum chassis.

3) Rename the car-Banshee, Predator or maybe use one of the models on "Hiatus". Banshee name could even work on Solstice since it was front eng 2 seat concept in 60's.

 

The GTO has been gone for nearly 30 years and even Pontiac admits it will bring customers to the dealerships who didnt consider Pontiac recently. Research shows that a person who buys a brand once is very likely to buy that brand again. (assuming the product is still sold).

 

I agree with you jeff on the GTO bringing new people to Pontiac, but I think for a reason different than what you are saying.

Take my instance. My previous car was a Thunderbird SC with manual transmission. It was a big roomy car that could run with Mustangs of the day (and outrun the newer heavier pre99 SN95 Stangs). With a pulley & exhaust change, it was as quick as an LT1 F-body on freeway Grand Prixs (accelerating from 50-60mph). When I was ready for a new car, Ford had dropped the SC & was making Mustangs slower. Yet Pontiac Grand Prixs, though quick, were FWD, so I snubbed them all & went for a Z28.

The Z's great, but putting passengers in the back seat turns out to be a test of friendships or devotion of family members. The GTO is definately on my short list for my next car because it's as close to exactly what I wanted to replace my SC as humanly possible.

It's low-keyed but good looking, it has a stick, it's RWD, it's not a step down in performance (0-60 in about 5.5, and a top speed of at least 160mph!), it's roomy and well made, and assuming it's price stay's around $32K (roughly where the SC's original price was with 10 years of inflation), it's exactly what I'm looking for.

But at the same time, I know it's unlikely I'll buy another Pontiac after the GTO. Moving up in GM would mean Cadillac, more excitement at GM in a few years will likely mean Chevrolet, and if I loose all sense of car enthusiasm it'll mean Buick .

But if Pontiac follows up with a CTS type sedan at a lower price, then it may be hard to leave them. I suspect alot of people like me aren't brand loyal unless a car company offers what a consumer's looking for. If a brand isn't loyal to it's buyers, I don't see a reason to remain loyal to the brand.

GM got me when Ford screwed up. If it wasn't for the GTO, it's very, very likely I would either go back to Ford (new Mustang) or Chrysler (new RWD magnum powered coupes & sedans). But GM seems to be getting back on the ball, and making it more challenging for people like me to find a better package anywhere else.

I think that's where brand loyalty begins.