Re: Chevrolet should stick to what it does best....

Discussion in '2002 Pontiac Solstice Roadster Concept' started by kw_killer, Aug 10, 2002.

  1. <!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from CamaroEater</i>
    <b>Chevrolet does nothing good. wheres the camaro? Wheres the KODIAK? Where in the hell is the Firebird? Trans am? The Duramax's? all gone because they couldnt sell. Unfortuanetly chevy made bad moves on buying company's that couldnt benifit for them like hewlett packard and car companys like Vauxhall and Opel. and especially cars like SAAB. BLEH </b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->

    How was buying opel, vauxhall and saab bad? they are dominating the western european market. Besides, all three have been around GM since the 60's I have a 62 Vauxhall and it's original powerplant was the fireball 6.
     
  2. Chevrolet should stick to what it does best....

    the car is nice looking but the powerplant has got to go.. its not... well American.. hehe.. this car should be powered by a v8... no offence to the Chevy fans (My fav cars are CamaroSS and Corvette) but when it comes to small engines chevy is not at its game... My friend owns a 98 Chevy S-10 powered by a 2.2L 4 cyl engine and the power is not good.. not even the MPG is good... Chevy has always been great at V8 engines .. why change it?
     
  3. Yes... Most American companies stick to V8's simply because that's what American's prefer. I think this car is just to show the uninformed IDIOTS out there that think horsepower per liter and 4 cylinders are a concept that is lost on America. The truth is, the Big 2 (GM, Ford) CAN make good 4 cylinder cars, but that hasn't really been a "cool" thing to own until now. This is much different from the 2.2L found in their current cars... This engine will actually replace the it.

    btw- I have a 4 cylinder S-10, too. SLOW AS HELL, but I actually get some pretty good gas mileage. It's just a temporary thing until I finish my other car.
     
  4. man. . . some of the funnest cars gm has made were small engines. . .

    this car is great. . to get 240 horses out of a supercharged four is great. . . heck, the high-psi turbo in the wrx only generates 227 here in america. . .

    Also, they say they could produce this car for $20,000 !!!! <!-- Signature -->
     
  5. <!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from Ultimate</i>
    <b>the car is nice looking but the powerplant has got to go.. its not... well American.. hehe.. this car should be powered by a v8... no offence to the Chevy fans (My fav cars are CamaroSS and Corvette) but when it comes to small engines chevy is not at its game... My friend owns a 98 Chevy S-10 powered by a 2.2L 4 cyl engine and the power is not good.. not even the MPG is good... Chevy has always been great at V8 engines .. why change it?</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->


    dude..........you're an idiot. this whole american vs. import thing has gone way to far. THEY ARE ALL NICE CARS MAN. if american companies can make fast, decent handling cars with small engines, by all means go ahead.
     
  6. WTF.. did I insult u or something? or did I say imports suck?.. I think ur just the #$%#in idiot.. I like some small engined cars.. unfortunately none of them come from an American automaker.... I dont see why u would just insult someone like that when they havent insulted u.. We all know GM is not there (at least with the current line-up) when it comes to 4 cyls.


    Next time think before u talk KID
     
  7. hey. . .you were the one passing judgements on the car with just some pictures and simple statistics. . .you dont seem to understand. . this is not an american-made engine, this engine was developed for saabs!!

    But, you still shouldn't say that America can't build a rice rocket. . . i guess you can't call it a rice rocket, but just because an engine doesn't say v-tec on it or the car have a huge, tacky type-r logo on the side, doesn't mean that a small displacement engine can't be powerfull. . .

    sorry for any typos. . i had to hurry. . bye <!-- Signature -->
     
  8. 2002 WRX .. u make a good point..

    and yes I would like Americans to get into the Rice Rocket market and bring down prices.. but this roadster just doesnt seem it cuz.. think about it.. this a concept.. (which usually has mor Horsepower than if they go to production) .. the engine in this concept is bigger than that of the S2000 .. not only that but it has a supercharger attached to it.. yet it only generates just as much as the s2000.. this is why I dont think this is a good roadster to put into production.. if they are gonna release something they might as well do it right.. I mean think about it.. if u put a supercharger on the s2000 dont u expect at least 300 horses because it produces 240 naturally aspirated?

    Well just the way I look at things..


    BTW Its not that I think AMerican cant make a decent ricer.. I think the complete opposite.. they have the technology.. to do it.. and I hope they do bring out something really good.. but I personally dont think this roadster is it.
     
  9. i dont think anyone will dissagree with the statement that the s2000 has a much more advanced engine. . but you need to push that thing extremely hard to get that potential from it. . .and i dont think this thing is aimed at the s2000, its aimed at . . . something like a mitsubishi eclipse, or if there were a convertable acura rsx. . anyway, the reason i say this is that it is made to be bare basics. . the top is even a manual top, but this is all for a reason. . they say they can mass produce this thing (the convertable, not the coupe even!!)for 20k!!

    the s2000 costs 10k more initially, to add a supercharger your looking at at least 12k more than this thing. . .heck, i would not mind closing my own convertable top if i had 12k in my pocket :p<!-- Signature -->
     
  10. Chevrolet does nothing good. wheres the camaro? Wheres the KODIAK? Where in the hell is the Firebird? Trans am? The Duramax's? all gone because they couldnt sell. Unfortuanetly chevy made bad moves on buying company's that couldnt benifit for them like hewlett packard and car companys like Vauxhall and Opel. and especially cars like SAAB. BLEH <!-- Signature -->
     
  11. <!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from Ultimate</i>
    <b>2002 WRX .. u make a good point..

    and yes I would like Americans to get into the Rice Rocket market and bring down prices.. but this roadster just doesnt seem it cuz.. think about it.. this a concept.. (which usually has mor Horsepower than if they go to production) .. the engine in this concept is bigger than that of the S2000 .. not only that but it has a supercharger attached to it.. yet it only generates just as much as the s2000.. this is why I dont think this is a good roadster to put into production.. if they are gonna release something they might as well do it right.. I mean think about it.. if u put a supercharger on the s2000 dont u expect at least 300 horses because it produces 240 naturally aspirated?

    Well just the way I look at things..


    BTW Its not that I think AMerican cant make a decent ricer.. I think the complete opposite.. they have the technology.. to do it.. and I hope they do bring out something really good.. but I personally dont think this roadster is it.
    </b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->

    You forget that even though this has the same horsepower as an S2000, it actually has another feature - torque. That will help the acceleration a lot. I don't think a supercharger will help the little 2.0 Honda engine that much, the engine is stressed so much as it is.
     
  12. camaroeater: you wanna know why the firebird/camaro line is ending? the things were ancient. they were fossils surounded by much more technological cars. . . this little mini-vette will probbably out perform them in many areas, while using less gas, and costing less. . the solstice also has more to compete with than the f body did . . . and since most of the solstice's competition is over priced european/asian sports cars they already have a lead of about $10k <!-- Signature -->
     
  13. ROTF PONTIAC!!!
    Stick to what you guys do.....
    Making Sunfires (LMAO) Cavaliers (HAHH) and Azteks (Sorry I just threw up)
    Now you wanna rip off a jaguar and some ricer car? Nice try, ain't gonna fly.<!-- Signature -->
     
  14. they dont even make the cavalier dumbass <!-- Signature -->
     
  15. <!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from Saleen Stang</i>
    <b>ROTF PONTIAC!!!
    Stick to what you guys do.....
    Making Sunfires (LMAO) Cavaliers (HAHH) and Azteks (Sorry I just threw up)
    Now you wanna rip off a jaguar and some ricer car? Nice try, ain't gonna fly.</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->o yeah and stangs suck compared to trans ams so who care if ya just made yourself look like an idiot for saying pontiac makes cavaliers you look like an idiot next to any f body<!-- Signature -->
     
  16. <!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from CamaroEater</i>
    <b>Chevrolet does nothing good. wheres the camaro? Wheres the KODIAK? Where in the hell is the Firebird? Trans am? The Duramax's? all gone because they couldnt sell. Unfortuanetly chevy made bad moves on buying company's that couldnt benifit for them like hewlett packard and car companys like Vauxhall and Opel. and especially cars like SAAB. BLEH </b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->ever stop and ask yourself why the camaro and the firebird are going out of production its not becuz they didnt sell its becuz the cars dont meet 2003 side collision requirements and gm is making pontiac into there like family division kinda like cadddy is there lux division thats why the bird is going away and the camaro will be back in 3 years with a new design so maybe you better read up before you make yourself look like an idiot o and what exacualy do you drive i bet it couldn't take my Trans Am<!-- Signature -->
     
  17. I'm sorry but this is an almost direct rip off from a jaguar concept. And the jaguar concept looked nicer, prehaps pontaic thinks that because Rover can get away with it, they can, bollocks to it all.

    I am English btw, and I do love some American cars, but they could have fitted a nicer engine to it. how about the v12 from the aston martin v600 vantage, the nicest sounding, looking car in the world, and despite its 2.5 tonne weight, it still gets to 60 faster than my granny falls down the stairs, and all but breaks 200mph.

    Oh yeah, finally, wrx2002, if u hadnt said the bit about the comfort, then U should check out the chaterham style tiger, with twin 1.2 litre superbike engines in it. 0-60 in sub 3 seconds, fasted car in the world around the nurburg ring, and for under 24,000 dollars!

    Just dont try to drive it for more than 2 minutes, cuz your fillings will fall out<!-- Signature -->
     
  18. one problem with a v-12 superengine. . . actually two. . . well. . come to think of it. . . three. . .

    1: price - this car can be sold for under 20k. . a v12 in it wouldn't.

    2: fuel economy - c'mon. . . a 4 cylender is gonna get much better gas mileage, and one that makes 240 hp is gonna probably double the gas mileage of eqaul powered engines of larger dissplacement.

    3: wieght/suspension - there is no way in hell or on earth that this car could hold a v-12 without wieghing a whole hell of a lot more, and also keeping the low priced suspension components. if they put a premium engine in it, they need much more premium suspension components. . .with a v-12 your probablly looking at doubling the price. also. . . theres the issue of space. . . the v-12 will take up about twice as much room as the engine compartment most likely has.
    <!-- Signature -->
     
  19. Fenix where did u read that article about the f-bodies... I want to read it too.. I have read some articles from some other publishers but they just go around in circles.. So fenix if u can do me a favor and post the link to ur car news publisher.


    PS... Fenix I do agree with You TRANS-AM kicks #$%#ing ass.. and mustangs suck.. well at least the new ones do. <IMG SRC="http://www.supercars.net/servlets/cMsg/html/emoticons/smile.gif">
     
  20. Personaly id love this car, with the engined borrowed from the VX220 or Opel speedster, but with 100 more hp. Imagine that motor in a vx220 or speedster. Now personally i dont like mustangs or the f-bodies, they are over wieght and dont have the best handling. Now i hope that GM will see the way and make the next Camaro with independant rear suspension and a better suspension design. And hopefully shave off some wieght. Now dodge has the idea with the razor make a light as hell and cheap as hell rear wheel drive car. I love that razor, now if they put a v-8 in that all you muscle car lovers would flock to it. Dont get me wrong i can see why people like the mustangs and the f-bodies, but they just are not my bag. Yea and the Camaro and probably not the firebird will be back in 2004, 2005.
     
  21. <!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from Ultimate</i>
    <b>Fenix where did u read that article about the f-bodies... I want to read it too.. I have read some articles from some other publishers but they just go around in circles.. So fenix if u can do me a favor and post the link to ur car news publisher.


    PS... Fenix I do agree with You TRANS-AM kicks #$%#ing ass.. and mustangs suck.. well at least the new ones do. <IMG SRC="http://www.supercars.net/servlets/cMsg/html/emoticons/smile.gif"></b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->hey i will hook you up i just got to find the link to it i was accualy reading the mag in k mart a while ago but im sure its on the net sumwhere i think it was from car and driver but im not sure hey and should the topic not be pontiac should stick to what it does best not chevy or gm even though its wrong but ya know
    <!-- Signature -->
     
  22. <!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from EliseS2</i>
    <b>Personaly id love this car, with the engined borrowed from the VX220 or Opel speedster, but with 100 more hp. Imagine that motor in a vx220 or speedster. Now personally i dont like mustangs or the f-bodies, they are over wieght and dont have the best handling. Now i hope that GM will see the way and make the next Camaro with independant rear suspension and a better suspension design. And hopefully shave off some wieght. Now dodge has the idea with the razor make a light as hell and cheap as hell rear wheel drive car. I love that razor, now if they put a v-8 in that all you muscle car lovers would flock to it. Dont get me wrong i can see why people like the mustangs and the f-bodies, but they just are not my bag. Yea and the Camaro and probably not the firebird will be back in 2004, 2005.</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->the firebird series is out and i beg to differ a new ws6 pulls 91 g's on the skid pad thats quit impressive for a car that cant handle isnt it???? and for its sheer size i mean i love them i own one and its like driving the titanic its so long but its got a hole lot of power and that is all that matters to me and it has excelent handeling<!-- Signature -->
     
  23. lol ya I know.. I posted the topic at like 2:00 AM in the morning so I guess I was too sleepy to think right lol
     
  24. Kinda drifted away from the actual Subject Lol. Back on the Solstice, doesn't really seem fair to compare this to a Stang or Trans-Am, mostly because they will surely not be competing in the same performance OR price range. If they can keep this around $18K, it will be competitive. Especially with a V6 option.<!-- Signature -->
     
  25. i think it might only come with a v6 -,- if they make it it will be front wheel drive and wont use forced induction. . i can almost garuntee that. . . <!-- Signature -->
     

Share This Page