Is Pontiac gone?

patgizz wrote: they can't kill saturn, the sky is way better looking than the solstice.

Nice guess contestant #3 but or judges say, WRONG!!!

Thanks for playing and please accept our complementary one year subscription for eyeglass world magazine.

"Helping the blind see for over fifteen years"

nicksta43 wrote:

patgizz wrote: they can't kill saturn, the sky is way better looking than the solstice.

Nice guess contestant #3 but or judges say, WRONG!!! Thanks for playing and please accept our complementary one year subscription for eyeglass world magazine. "Helping the blind see for over fifteen years"

I'm gonna call shenanigans on this one, Nick. I agree with patgizz, the Sky is the better lookin car.

I've read nearly every post in this thread, and I've just had an ephinany; there is more intelegent and logical thought on this forum than has been in the board room at GM in my life time. This thread needs to be forwarded to congress and when GM comes back with thier hands out again, congress should only agree to the bail out if GM fires all thier current board of directors and replaces them with the grm'ers who have posted in this thread

.....now on to chrysler.....

mtn wrote:

nicksta43 wrote:

patgizz wrote: they can't kill saturn, the sky is way better looking than the solstice.

Nice guess contestant #3 but or judges say, WRONG!!! Thanks for playing and please accept our complementary one year subscription for eyeglass world magazine. "Helping the blind see for over fifteen years"

I'm gonna call shenanigans on this one, Nick. I agree with patgizz, the Sky is the better lookin car.

Same here. The Solstice looks like two butts bookending a pair of doors. Ewww.

I don't see anything wrong with the Solstice's looks

To me, the Sky is a cleaner design. Unfortunately (turns on deflector shields) neither of them qualify for my personal 'must buy' criteria because they are just too wide and I don't care for the double bump behind the seats. I'd go with a S2000 Honda first.

Is it just me or is that some radical front tire geometry on the Solstice?

My vote goes to Sky as the prettier of the two. The Solstice seems to appeal to the more minimalist and "function over fashion" type look. Most important is that I want to see cars like this still made. I would take either one over having neither be available.

jrw1621 wrote: Most important is that I want to see cars like this still made. I would take either one over having neither be available.

+1. The Solstice is far from ugly; on the contrary it is one of the better looking cars on the road today. The Sky is just a little prettier; IMHO.

To me, the Solstice's split grille is just goofy looking, the nose is too rounded (I wonder what kind of high speed lift that would generate?) and doesn't balance with the proportions of the rest of the car.

When you plant that emblem in the middle of the grilles the whole front end winds up looking sorta like the cable guy's buttcrack. (holds up shield against rain of rocks and bottles) The Sky's lines are 'busier' but they work well together from front to rear. The funny thing about these two pictures: the Sky's wheels have more rounded elements and would look better on the Solstice and the Solstice's wheels are more sharp edged and would look better on the Sky.

I'm sure I have really smacked the Solstice owner hornets' nest hard.

You have to realize that the Turbo Solstice GXP has different bumpers, grills, etc.

I much prefer the GXP over the base car, though maybe just even with the Sky. Here's the thing though, both cars are very different looking, even though though they are the "same". That's why GM has so many different divisions and versions of a car. People that love the Sky's hard lines usually hate the Solstice's soft looks, whereas people like me that love the functional and clean design of the Solstice would not purchase a Sky because it is too "busy".

The Solstice grille looks like it's straight off a Norelco razor. I think the Solstice would look better than the Sky, if they took every Pontiac-inspired styling cue off of it.

I used to think these cars were a step in the right direction for GM, but my buddy had a terrible experience with his Solstice. He's from a staunch GM family, Dad was a GM lifer, buys only GM products with his GM discount.

He had to dump his wife's Solstice and get her a Saab because the Solstice went through three tops and a rear diff and numerous other build-quality issues in two years.

In reply to Jensenman:

Doesn't bother me. We bought the Solstice GXP and actually thought the lines were much cleaner than the Sky. Ours in navy blue with black interior. I have several cars and there is always someone who has something negative to say. Examples of some of the comments: /78 Trans AM gold special edition - I like the black SE better/ /85 Porsche 911 targa - Doesn't that leak....why wouldn't you get the coupe? Those look great in red (mine is silver)/ /71 Chevelle 454 SS - You really need to buff that. (I mean WTF.....car looks great BTW)/ I just listed a few for the heck of it. None of it really gets to me. Sometimes people have different tastes and other times they are just being shiny happy persons.

Tyler - My wife went from an Audi to the Solstice and the Sol has been much more reliable. We've had it in for one issue, which was a diff leak and there was a recall on it.

I'm not surprised that the Sol is more reliable than an Audi. There is a lot of GM-bashing going on right now, but I'll take a GM over a VWAG product any day. :D

I like that yellow GXP with the blacked out grille MUCH more than the standard version. Funny how a color change can make so much difference.

The Sky and Solstice definitely appeal to different folks. The same thing happened with the Thunderbird and Cougar in the early '80's, 'Bird people detested the Cougar and vice versa.

Trans_Maro wrote:

Osterkraut wrote: One of these things is not like the other... Chevy. Of the 41 models GM has, Chevy has 15. Most of them are redundent. Chevy must die so the others may live.

Chevrolet is the golden child and can do no wrong. They'll never go away.

Chevrolet has a larger dealer organization and also has dealers in smaller places where Pontiac and Saturn aren't.

Killing all the Chevy dealers and replacing Chevy Dealers in smaller towns with dealers handling multiple GM lines would cost more that getting rid of Saturn and Pontiac Dealers.

Snowdoggie wrote:

Trans_Maro wrote:

Osterkraut wrote: One of these things is not like the other... Chevy. Of the 41 models GM has, Chevy has 15. Most of them are redundent. Chevy must die so the others may live.

Chevrolet is the golden child and can do no wrong. They'll never go away.

Chevrolet has a larger dealer organization and also has dealers in smaller places where Pontiac and Saturn aren't. Killing all the Chevy dealers and replacing Chevy Dealers in smaller towns with dealers handling multiple GM lines would cost more that getting rid of Saturn and Pontiac Dealers.

Scions are sold out of Toyota dealerships, no big deal

It'd cost GM a little to get new signs, but das all.

Right?

Chevrolet, by itself, is a big "car company". It would be less painful to piss off the Pontiac and Saturn customers than the Chevy folks.

Osterkraut wrote: ...snip! Chevrolet: Cobalt, Aveo, Malibu, Impala, Corvette, HHR, Equinox, Traverse, Trailblazer, Tahoe, Suburban, Silverado, Colorado, Avalanche, and the Express (van). ....snip!

This has got to be the heaviest, most redundant vehicle lineup.......and I grew up in a GM family!! Seriously, axe all of the Chevrolet trucks/trucklets/things-that-look-like-they-might-grow-up-to-be-a-truck, kill the Cadillac trucks, kill Hummer, get rid of the redundant vehicles (do we really need a Sky AND a Solstice? Pontiac doesn't need their own Cobalt) then see how things shape up.

Phase 2 should be to examine Buick and Cadillac and come up with a single luxo-brand.

Phase 3 should include combining Saturn and Chevy offerings.

Okay, so assuming that GM were to follow the suggestions of the board.... what then? Would they sell any more cars? Would people that wouldn't buy a GM product now be more willing to buy a GM product after all the clutter is cleared?

I agree that it doesn't make much business sense to have 41 cars of which most are just rebadged versions of each other, and that of course they should axe some of their brands. However, I don't think this is really the core of the issue.

The issue that I see is that people aren't buying new cars in the first place, and when they are, they're not buying American. American manufacturers need to figure out why this is, and remedy it, or they deserve to go bankrupt.

Jensenman wrote: ...... Same here. The Solstice looks like two butts bookending a pair of doors. Ewww.

I guess I like a pair of butts....

That "laying on the ground" front 3/4 view is horrible for the Solstice. They aren't bad looking cars when viewed from sitting in another car or walking.

First, the Solstice is the most beautiful car made today which can be had for under $25,000.

Second, GM has too much internal competition. Does Chevy, Pontiac and Buick each need to have a mid-sized sedan, an SUV, etc? Of course not. They are just cannibalizing each others' sales, supporting unnecessary dealers, unnecessary parts (sharing a platform, but no body panels is VERY inefficient) and personnel. There is no need for Chevrolet trucks and GMC trucks. One or the other.

Cadillac should exist as a premiun brand and offer anything and everything its well-heeled clientele demand.

Chevrolet should build entry level cars, affordable family cars, affordable performance cars and the iconic Corvette.

Pontiac can offer more refined performance-oriented sedans.

Buick needs to become extinct.

Saturn, why?

As for the ideas of making one division an "import" division is that cars built outside of North America do not count towards CAFE numbers. This was to appease the UAW by discouraging more overseas manufacturing.

Ford should ditch Mercury, quite possibly the most irrelavent brand in Detroit.

Chrysler: Sadly there is no reason for Chrysler to exist. Jeep is the only valuable brand. Yes Dodge makes a good truck, but the sector is already well served. Dodge was once the domestic small car leader, but poor management (squandered the success of the "cab-forward" days) and the Daimler scourge left Chrysler a barren woman.

Chrysler (the marque) has no luxury identity and may be the second most irrelavent brand after Mercury (although Buick can fit in here as well).

Jensenman wrote: I like that yellow GXP with the blacked out grille MUCH more than the standard version. Funny how a color change can make so much difference. The Sky and Solstice definitely appeal to different folks. The same thing happened with the Thunderbird and Cougar in the early '80's, 'Bird people detested the Cougar and vice versa.

I never understood the affinity for a vertical backlight. It was the anti-fastback. GM went that direction as well with the Monte Carlo, Grand Prix, Cutlass and Regal (talk about too much badge engineering).

The Bird is much better looking than the Cougar.

Jensenman wrote: I like that yellow GXP with the blacked out grille MUCH more than the standard version. Funny how a color change can make so much difference. The Sky and Solstice definitely appeal to different folks. The same thing happened with the Thunderbird and Cougar in the early '80's, 'Bird people detested the Cougar and vice versa.

Jellybean all the way! I always hated that style Cougar. The saddest part of the badge engineering of those cars to me was the fact that the LTDII had the same damn dashboard.

Moparman wrote: The Bird is much better looking than the Cougar.

I agree... But the Cougar is still way cool. At least to me.