Saturn puts out 1/4 mile estimate for Sky Redline
08-24-2006, 10:39 AM
#101
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Arlington Heights, IL
Posts: 3,668
Likes: 0
Received 19 Likes
on
11 Posts
One of the criticisms of the Solstice (not GXP) that I've read is that the tranny was lifted pretty much directly from another application (Colorado pickup, I think), and the ratios are wrong for the Ecotec's powerband. You would think that maybe GM would remedy that at least for their highly-anticipated performance version. If not, (warning, anti-GM fanboism here) that is the kind of attitude that would keep me from buying a Solstice or GM car. You can say a lot of things about the S2000, AP1 especially (outdated, slow), but one criticism that can't be levied is that it is compromised and hamstrung due to cost restraints and parts-bin sharing. You may not want what the S2000 is (high-strung low-torque N/A 4cyl), but you can't really say that the engineers didn't build the absolute best version of what they set out to do, as evidenced by the S2000's relative inability to be modded. The purity of the S2000's design is what appeals to me, the fact that it may be a few tenths slower than a less pure, more cobbled-together design doesn't really bother me at all.
I guess it's kinda like what Jeremy Clarkson said about the Cayman; there's nothing wrong with the Cayman itself, but he couldn't buy it knowing that Porsche intentionally held it back from being the best car it could be. If the GXP is hamstrung by something as stupid as not changing the gearing to suit the GXP's powerband, that shows a lack of passion, committment, drive, whatever, that I feel isn't present in the S2000, even if the GXP is slightly more capable overall.
I guess it's kinda like what Jeremy Clarkson said about the Cayman; there's nothing wrong with the Cayman itself, but he couldn't buy it knowing that Porsche intentionally held it back from being the best car it could be. If the GXP is hamstrung by something as stupid as not changing the gearing to suit the GXP's powerband, that shows a lack of passion, committment, drive, whatever, that I feel isn't present in the S2000, even if the GXP is slightly more capable overall.
08-24-2006, 10:42 AM
#102
Registered User
Originally Posted by Chris Stack,Aug 24 2006, 02:39 PM
The purity of the S2000's design is what appeals to me, the fact that it may be a few tenths slower than a less pure, more cobbled-together design doesn't really bother me at all.
08-24-2006, 11:34 AM
#104
Registered User
Originally Posted by PedalFaster,Aug 24 2006, 12:38 PM
Puzzling...
Curb weight is listed at 3,040 lb. You can expect real world test weight (w/o driver) to be more than that. I am guessing at least another 50 lb on the conservative side.
I guess my "wild overestimate" of 3,100 - 3,150 lb. is not so wild anymore, eh? They did surprise me with not having larger wheels and brakes.
I guess you are very surprised the GXP comes in over 3,000 lbs?
All in good fun
08-24-2006, 11:52 AM
#105
Originally Posted by Chris Stack,Aug 24 2006, 10:39 AM
and the ratios are wrong for the Ecotec's powerband.
08-24-2006, 12:12 PM
#106
Registered User
The Solstice GXP actually has shorter (numerically higher) gears than the base Solstice -- second gear tops out in the low- to mid-50s. Why Pontiac did this with such a torquey motor is beyond me.
[QUOTE=QUIKAG,Aug 24 2006, 10:35 AM]Remember, torque has nothing to do with acceleration once you're near the horsepower peak and shifting at redline.
[QUOTE=QUIKAG,Aug 24 2006, 10:35 AM]Remember, torque has nothing to do with acceleration once you're near the horsepower peak and shifting at redline.
08-24-2006, 12:42 PM
#107
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Arlington Heights, IL
Posts: 3,668
Likes: 0
Received 19 Likes
on
11 Posts
Originally Posted by QUIKAG,Aug 24 2006, 03:52 PM
You got any tech on this?
The biggest issue with the Solstice's gearbox is a yawning chasm between second and third gears. On the sort of roads the car was made for, these are going to be the two most-used gears. Yet at (as I remember) 35 mph, the choice is 2800 rpm in third, well below any serious power, or a thrashy-sounding 4200 in second. That difference makes quite a rev drop under acceleration, and also makes smooth, rev-matching downshifts tricky. If a six-speed gearbox is not in the future, revised ratios in the five-speed should be. Third through fifth are fine.
The first suggestion that it has more bark than bite is its low resting heartbeat: the thing idles at around 800 revs, meaning that it takes a whole lot of effort to get it up to any kind of attack speed. First gear seems to go on forever, and those driving in the city will find little use for anything higher than second, as the Solstice lacks the torque in third gear to keep up with the traffic flow. And the gearbox fails to redeem itself even when driven like a sports car; our senior car tech editor, Wayne Cunningham, found that his major complaint with the car was its inability to deliver a smooth transition when accelerating through the gears at speed. Running the Solstice up to 5,000 revs in second gear, then shifting to third causes the engine to plunge down to less than 3,000rpm with a dramatic loss of power.
Lows: Most interior plastics are the cheap stuff, convertible top can't be lowered from driver seat, five-speed transmission has wide gaps between gears.
That should get you started
08-24-2006, 12:50 PM
#108
That is a review of the base Solstice. Powerband of the turbo motor is much broader than the anemic 2.4L NA four banger. Also, they revised the gear ratios for the GXP.
08-24-2006, 01:15 PM
#109
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Question: At our altitude in Denver (5,280FT) do you think FI motors like the Solstice GXP and SKY Redline would be a tad quicker than the AP1 S2000? Considering NA motors at altitude lose power. Do FI motors tend to utilize more horsepower at altitude?