It was the right call.

The last thing GM needs is another badge engineered roadster. The Solstice/Sky will drop at about the same time as the similarly sized, similarly priced, similarly powered new Mazda Miata. Why does GM need to "double team" the Miata? The roadster market has cooled off recently, and the bottom end (which is pretty much down to just to the current Miata, at the moment) is about a slow as you can get.

From where I stand, GM has one to many roadsters at the moment. Instead of paying for two product launches which will cancel each other out, GM should have concentrated on just one roadster. Pontiac should have had North American exclusivity on the Kappa platform for 12-18 months. Of course, they've already releasing too much Solstice information, too soon. By the time the thing hits the streets, it will already seem old because the pre-prototype, pre-launch and pre-production publicity. Pontiac did foul up the launch of the 2004 GTO. And I almost forgot that the normally aspirated Solstice will probably have the sort of weak acceleration that keeps Saturn buyers "coming back for more."

Maybe Saturn should have gotten to launch its Sky first?

 

Didnt Pontiac say they were only expecting to sell 20,000 Solstice a year? How many Sky's are Saturn expected to sell?

"Of course, they've already releasing too much Solstice information, too soon. By the time the thing hits the streets, it will already seem old because the pre-prototype, pre-launch and pre-production publicity"

Funny you mention that, because I've started feeling the same way about the new Mustang. I really liked it the first time I saw it in person but it hasnt taken long for it to be just another car on the road to me.

 

Combined Solstice/Sky production will probably not exceed 35,000 units.
GM knows that no roadster will sell more than 20,000 units.

It'll be interesting to see what the Sky/Solstice breakdown will end up being. One thing for sure, if Pontiac dealers think that they're going to pull another '04 GTO fiasco...I can see Saturn taking the majority of that production.

 

But TWO roadsters can sell 17,500 units each?

I guess it was cheaper to "badge-engineer" the Saturn Sky rather than produce the coupe version of the original Solstice concept to go along with the roadster. A 35,000 unit volume for a single nameplate wouldn't have been a stretch if the Solstice had been give both body styles.

 

Just because they are on the same platform does not mean they are "Badge Engineered"...

From what we have seen, they look very little alike.

GM has proven they can do a good job at making vehicles on the same platform look different (Impala/Monte Carlo/Grand Prix/etc) and a poor job (Mailbu/Cutlass , minivans, etc)

 

Actually the Saturn Sky is simply the Opel version of the Kappa Roadster. My guess is that Saturn is giving Opel the volume needed to make it profitable.

I will agree with you on the big need for a coupe version of the Solstice. If Pontiac (or Chevrolet or Saturn) were to make a version of that Solstice coupe from a few years ago with either a turbo or supercharger for around $22K, it would probally be enough to nudge me into finance land again.

 

I would have liked to seen the Solstice coupe produced. If the roadster is $20K That probably would have put the coupe at $18,000 which would have been a cool commuter car.

 

Thats would you would think, but they would prob put some additional
items on the caoupe, and make it more like $22K

 

Saturn will be showing 2 cars @ NAIAS. One being the Sky and one to be called "Aura" (not Aurora). So maybe this could be a coupe version of the Sky or maybe the Ion replacement because I thought the new Saturn sedan was to be called the "Signal" and new larger crossover to be called the "Outlook" (But GM can change one of those names to "Aura" if they wanted).

 

Look closer.... Other than a different front clip, I don't see where there's much change between a Solstice and Sky. Even the names sound like they came from the same "focus group."


The Impala/Monte Carlo/Grand Prix/etc all looked different from one another, but I can't honestly say that a single W-body car ended up looking "good" or even borderline attractive. They all had the "corporate GM" look and huge overhangs.


1. The last-generation Olds Cutlass was always intended as a short-term replacement for the Cutlass Ciera. There was no reason to spend money "diferentiating" a product with a 1-2 year lifespan.

2. It's hard to make one minivan look different from another minivan. People on this board gripe that the 2005 Saturn Relay doesn't look much different that a Buick Terraza or a Chevy Uplander. Having look-a-like minivans isn't a big deal. The big problem is that the 2005 minivans are just redressed 1997 minivans and GM's 1997 vans weren't very impressive even back in 1997.

 

Front clip, grille, headlights, hoood - the entire front is different. The rear ends are as similar as Trans Am and Camaro SS. If you want to talk about "badge engineering", then Opel sold as Sky comes to mind. They are virtually identical. But to say that Sky and Solstice are badge-engineered.... is like TSX and Accord are badge engineered, or Pontiac and Chevy f-bodies.

 

Actually, the Acura TSX is nothing other than a "re-badged" Honda Accord - the Accord that's sold in Europe and Japan. (The American build Accord is sold in Japan as the "Honda Inspire."

 

That I know, but I did not draw comparison between Euro Accord and North American TSX. I drew comparison between TSX and North American Accord.

 

I though I'd better be specific because plenty of Canadians have fallen for the Acura EL, which is nothing but a Honda Civic sedan with a bigger price tag. Thankfully, the itty-bitty Acura was never deemed fit for American consumption.

 

Ya, we got the itty-bitty RSX....