DJRobNM

I was still considering the solstice as a possible car this spring until today. I was getting lunch and saw a guy staring at a solstice in the parking lot. The lady that was in it jumped out and he asked her how she liked it. "Well it's a little aggravating" was what I heard as I continued walking by. Aggravating? This didn't make sense. I got lunch and went back outside to look at it. The lady appeared again and I asked how she liked it and she said it was a frustrating car. I saw the stick and immediately made the conclusion that she didn't like the manual. "Why?" I asked. "Let me show you." She opened up the trunk where the top was stowed and there was almost zero room. Maybe a square foot with the top down. "Where do you put the golf clubs?" I asked and she pointed to shotgun. She then said that on top of that, the charm wears off very quickly and that it wasn't as fun to drive as she had expected.

I had no idea the trunk would be impacted so severely by the top. That's stupid! How am I supposed to go on a weekend jaunt even without ANY room for luggage? I mean, not even enough room for a backpack!!! Wives/girlfriends need at least two pieces of luggage even for the weekend, I wouldn't even be able to take this thing to my summer home.

A boxter has two trunks, the solstice can't even muster one!

Yea you could put the top up, but its a fu@#ing convertible.

That made me so angry since I was seriously considering the turbo version.

I'm now back to a 2 horse list again (2006 S2000 or Mustang GT Vert)

Stupid!

marthafokker

Why not think about the new Miata as an option?

steven975

i kinda figured it had no trunk. the whole tonneu must be lifted (hinge at the rear) to put the top down. The trunk is the area behind the folded top...not much room.

thus, to carry any luggage, the top must be up...and that car is FUGLY with the top up.

notice the sky site has NO pics with the top up. the kappa looks delapidated with the top up.

rockville

Well it can fit clubs...
http://www.solsticeforum.com/forum/attachm...tachmentid=1637

austinpike

with the top up... I'm pretty sure that lump is the gas tank.

no_really

lemme ask - what kind of person can't figure those things out before leaving the lot?!? The Solstice/Sky are exactly what they appear to be - toy cars for playing around town. It was never designed to be a primary car or a grecery getter. Kind of silly to complain about luggage space in a two seat roadster for $20 grand, IMHO. At least they put the space where it can be appreciated - a Miata won't fit a normal sized person, only short people (jk, I'm 6' and won't fit )

aggie

In a perfect world we would all be able to own multiple cars. I can tell you many Miata (and S2000) owners drive those cars only. GM screwed up big time with this trunk design, although I must say I'm not surprised.

Anrosphynx

yup.. GM screwed up.. which is why they have already sold out the first year of production and will outsell the miata and S2000 combined... yup, GM screwed up...

MrClean

IMO, Rental agencies don't count.

Seriously...
GM blew its chance for a grand launch by announcing the car release on NBC's Apprentice this spring only to publish later that month the car would be delayed till September! DOH! So much for a perfect launch.

I highly doubt that car will set any records, but I could be wrong.

We'll see.

rockville

From what I read on the Solstice forum (not in the market but I would like to see the car do well) two sets of clubs will fit with the top up. One set with the top down. It sounds like the trunk actually has a decent amount of space but it's not well shaped. At least one person thought the reason the EPA trunk volume was so small was, as guessed by the poster, the EPA only counted the space above the top for top down volume. If this person is correct then the whole area where the clubs are located is not considered part of the trunk when the top is down. I'm sure the individual decisions leading up to the trunk design made sense but as a final product it does look like a bad idea.

Here is my guess why the gas tank is where it is. The Solstice uses two hydroformed frame rails as the backbone of the car's chassis. Like the CA5 and CA6 Vetoes this makes a very stiff and probably reasonably light backbone (we don't know if the car's weight is in the chassis or other parts). I suspect this chassis design was also chosen because it's lower tooling cost (conjecture on my part) make it well suited for lower volume chassis. Unfortunately this also means the car has two large frame rails that limit space for a gas thank behind the seats. Perhaps this wouldn't be a problem if the car were a hard top. In that case maybe a flat wide tank could be used. However, GM was rather ambitious (IMHO) with the top design on this car. The BAM 6XX Ci is the only other sub $100ka drop top I can think of with flying buttresses. Add to it they have a very racy body with an integrated boot cover. I suspect the combination of limited space inside the frame rails and an ambitious top with a well integrated hard boot (something the SA2000, MMatdon't not have) forced the designers to choose either a very small gas tank or a hump in the center of the trunk.

I certainly don't like the shape of the trunk and if I was in the market that would weigh on my decision (it wouldn't make it but it wouldn't help). I would have to examine the shape of the trunk carefully to decide if I could accept it. I know a lot of people think the trunk is a deal breaker relative to the Honda but to be honest, I expect a lot of the initial Solstice buyers (like many SA2000 and Mat buyers) will at least have easy access to a second car. Even though the Honda has a bigger trunk, I wouldn't consider it sufficient if I didn't have access to a second car.

Something else to keep in mind, probably 50% of the convertibles on the market loose trunk space when the top is down.