Autoblog

Absolutely agree. Dealers are rolling the dice when they're counting on only one chump to pick it up.

↓↑report

I agree. Greedy dealers.

↓↑report

I went to the local Pontiac dealer the other day (Todd Wenzel in Grand Rapids, Michigan) looking to test-drive a "basic, Clubsport, stripped-down" version of the Solstice. Much to my surprise, every model they had was fully-loaded, nearly every option box checked, even on the GXP models. Fewer than half had manual transmissions, many of which also had the tacky GM add-ons that don't do anything to enhance performance.

You wanna know what the salesman said?

They won't have a stripper on the lot unless a customer orders one. IMO, thats bad business. Even Saturn across the street knows enough to keep the stripper models on the lot...

↓↑report

I believe the Miata's sales are really strong. Once again I looked at a solstice up close and the quality is just not there they couldn't even figure out how to make the convertible top look fitted in the closed position? Any freshman level engineer could have shown them how to accomplish that task. Sad

↓↑report

That is exactly what happened to the now discountinued Ford Thunder Bird. When this retro car came out it was a very good looking retro car but dealers wanted $10,000 more than list. Even though it was built in limited supply very few were willing to pay the price.

↓↑report

great idea in theory (always nice to keep things fresh), but not economically feasible in today's market. Throw in the trouble GM has with making money on their cars, and it's suicide.

Also, discontinuing and reintroducing models so often is not the best way to build a loyal customer base.

↓↑report

I disagree with your last statement 'discontinuing and reintroducing models so often is not the best way to build a loyal customer base."

If anything it would take the emphasis away from the actual models and shift it to the brand - plus there would be no time for a model to become stale, Buick for example would always have refreshed models every year or two even if the remodel is just skin deep.

The whole reason I brought up the part about moving the vehicle from brand to brand would be to save money on production - no need to re-engineer the car - just a sheet metal refresh - cant cost that much compared to the rest of the auto business - and if its a success it would be better than forcing stale 5 year old models on the public by the way of cash incentives.

↓↑report

U Morons....
Thats the fastest way to kill a car company. You you guys want its called badge engineering..and thats what ruined GM in the first place..each brand should be unique and shouldnt have just e surface reskin..but different porportions and motors..based on the brand and the target market ....a 4-5 year life cycle its normal for a vehicle.where every year minor changes should happen.
i would be pissed If I buy something this year and something new should come out next year. Thats the only way to refine something anyway..by fixing it everyyear...Personally I think that the SKY will age faster than the solstice..the GXP is what the solstice should have looked in the first place..gotest drive one ..you are going to love it.

↓↑report

xxxxxxx, Sorry, you are wrong. Automakers can't justify having a platform exclusive to one brand - case in point the PONTIAC Solstice and SATURN Sky.

My point is that fresh style every 1-2 years would be a good thing - you wouldn't feel like you have an old car but rather the unique 2005 model - and there's no reason why they couldn't make it upscale and add some luxury when a platform moves from being a Saturn to a Buick.

You contradict yourself by saying "the only way to refine something anyway..by fixing it everyyear". I would argue that what killed GM was its bland style and substance year after year.

If a car is lame to start off with it will take 5 years before it gets refreshed and has another shot in the market - that system is broken IMHO.

The real problem is that the bean counters at GM don't understand how important good design is. Look at how well the Mini sells - yes it has a solid BMW engineering but guaranteed that a mass majority of sales are driven by its look and design.

Redesign the Solstice for 2008/9 or move it upmarket as a Buick Luxo roadster and GM will be back in the game making money off this same 3 year old platform.

↓↑report

well..i never said that each brand should have different platforms. The best is to have as less flexible platforms for the entire GM portfolio ass possible. But I stres ""flexible".
Thats where the engineering department needs to do some homework.
and killing a design every year or two and its not good idea for a couple of reasons..

1.first off..There is nothing wrong with the solstice
Its a nice looking car..give it more time and the public will like it more.
2.needs at least 4-5 years to develop a vehicle.
ifthey bring a buick version 1-2 years after the first launch of he platform..They better differentiate those cars insdie and out...and that takes more than 2 years my friend.
3.That design will never mature so pontiac wont have a brand identity ,,it will constantly change. (NOT a GOOD thing)

I think the SOLSTICE is a good start.
all it needs is some big brothers.
A sedan and a 2+2 coupe that emphasise perfromance.
the G6 its not doing it..and the G8 doesnt relate to pontiac's new design language (its a HOLDEN).

I personally think that they should have sold only the GPX in the begining.

The next thing they need to do is some minor changes..like
more wheel options ..different headlamps..HID and LED's
so it keeps up with the technology...
It doesnt need to be redesigned ,,Not yet at least, it just came out. Theres a lot o people that dont even know that it exists...

↓↑report

tons of discussion here. The bottom line is that a great car will sell, and doesn't need to be refreshed as often as every couple years. As a company (hell, as a consumer, too), I'd take a new Accord every 5 years over a new Malibu every year. Or, to be more appropriate to this thread, I'd take a new Miata every 8 years rather than a new Solstice every 2 years.

Constant redesigns don't solve the core problems that GM is having. I'd even argue that splitting their focus so much would distract them from making quality vehicles. It would simply perpetuate the assembly line of mostly bland cars that are coming out of the big 3 these days.

↓↑report

No I don't remember big changes in the fifties. Cosmetic but not total rebuilds. 1948-54 - 1955, 1956, 1957 and then the bigger cars in 1958.

Yearly changes are what is costing price increases. A new model every year to appeal to a new buyer is what causes inflated prices. The "old reliable" is being replaced by the newest gadget.

↓↑report

so true! it's not horid, but the Sky is sooooo much nicer

↓↑report

Funny!

A Solstice passed me the other day (opposite direction) and I thought it looked old...like the Taurus, which was once so daring, began to look old. I mean it is just a jelly bean with a twin kidney grill.

The Sky - even though Saturn has less brand equity than Pontiac, just looks fresher, cleaner and - um - edgier. I'd rather have a Sky.

↓↑report

Agreed, unless the Pontiac was a coupe-only version, there is no point of even having it.

Furthermore, everyone always says that Buick is the one who should join Olds for a long dirt nap... WRONG! I just don't get the point of Pontiac... where is the excitement? The General still has a ways to go and putting Pontiac on the chopping block should be one of them. Between Chevy and Saturn there is just no point of having Pontiac, the other two can be shifted to fill the gap. There are more performance oriented Chevys than there are Pontiacs anyway so just kill it already. They are by and large the ugliest of all GM vehicles to boot.

Buick has a purpose and is needed in the General's lineup. It should be given some more respect accordingly. Pontiac - not so much.

So there, kill Pontiac... and stop making Chevy trucks. Let GMC handle all the trucks or kill them too and let Chevy handle them all.

GM has been doing a fabulous job lately but there are still a few loose ends to tie up. I just bought a Cadillac two weeks ago and the last time I was in one was a 93 Deville. Cadillac has come a long long way and really is on par with the best the rest of the world has to offer. Anyone who still insists on bashing them is either completely ignorant or hasn't actually driven a newer one, which means they shouldn't be commenting in the first place!

Whew... it's been a while since I've been to AB so I figured I'd get it all out in one shot! :)

↓↑report

One more point along these same lines... if GM were to insist to have two of these on the same platform they should have made the Buick Velite. They could have made it upscale enough to justify having two different models and it would have given Buick's lineup a much need model/halo car.

A sexy little lux roadster with the bold and beautiful styling cues of the Enclave would finally make Buick a brand not to be ignored.

Doesn't look like that's gonna happen though... just keeping my fingers crossed for the Riviera now.

↓↑report