That's a great question BD, and one I was even going to write my next Carmudgeon about. Basically, I'm of the opinion that fuel costs still don't matter very much to Americans, even at their current rates. People who study this stuff say that, when inflation is taken into account, gas still isn't as expensive as it was in both 1973 and 1981. That seems about right to me when I look at my fuel costs compared to my mortgage, electric bill, car insurance, and the cost of milk.
That said, I think the SUV will have a tougher time because I believe people will at least think about fuel mileage more than they use to. Will it actually change their buying behavior? Well, if they were going to buy an SUV before, but it was a relatively basic/mudane one, they might be thinking wagon or large sedan now. But if they see a really cool SUV, that strikes a chord with them, they might go ahead and buy it even with the higher fuel prices. So again, I think people who would have bought an SUV without really thinking about gas prices before will now be more hesitant. But if an automaker can produce an SUV that really appeals to them -- they'll still buy. Basically, mediocre SUVs that were just on the cusp of being considered before probably won't be bought now. Good ones/cool ones will probably continue to sell.
Now, of course, the question is -- Which ones are mediocre, and which OEs will be the first to recognize their mediocre offerings and either: a. discontinue them or b. improve them so they sell in a world of $3-a-gallon gasoline
I'm certain that SUV sales, overall, will drop. The market for those buying dollars just got a little more competitive.
Hey guys, here's the link to the Ford GT factory tour story. It has a pretty cool slideshow feature that we're trying out (with audio narration and larger pictures).
When I wrote my last post it was actually a two part question. The first one was regarding SUVs, to which you responded. The second part was this -
"Over the last few years the number of "performance" variants has grown immensely. Do you think this era will also come to an abrupt end? "
I was actually referring to passenger cars, not SUVs. Looking back, maybe that was not real clear.
It seems that we have been in a modern day horsepower war so to speak - Each OEM wants to offer better performance and more horsepower than the other. It has been great for those of us who desire the performance orientated ride. Even rather mundane vehicles like the Malibu offer performance editions (maybe not the best example). So, do you think when it comes to passenger cars, the concentration will shift away from performance and more towards fuel economy?
Your voice sounds similar to mine. Creepy. Your cadence and stress are also similar to how I speak. Does your voice sound higher pitched when you hear your recorded voice than it does when you are speaking?
At first I thought that having you speak the words that I can plainly read was superfluous, but it gives reader/viewer a chance to look at the pictures (what we are really interested in) and not the words.
Hey, it's pretty long, too. It's playing while I write this. It looks like it is about 10 minutes long.
I like it. The pictures are sweet and I like that it is actually your voice doing the voiceover.
You said that in buying a Solstice you give up some purity for a "nicer" experience compared to the Miata (sorry I'm paraphrasing so loosely, but you know what I mean). Why haven't we seen that in any Lexus reviews vs. BMWs, namely the IS. Bias in the media!
I'm kidding. But are the two cases that different? Was it a matter of expectations, since no one really believed that the Solstice would out-sport the Miata?
"Over the last few years the number of "performance" variants has grown immensely. Do you think this era will also come to an abrupt end? "
I don't think so. I think it came to an end the previous time (1971) because of several factors, and fuel costs were only one of them. Because gas is still relatively cheap, and because there still isn't a shortage problem (no long lines at gas stations -- except in some key areas right now from extenuating circumstances) I think the car companies will continue to produce performance models and the customers who they've always been designed for (higher income performance fans) will continue to buy them.
You said that in buying a Solstice you give up some purity for a "nicer" experience compared to the Miata (sorry I'm paraphrasing so loosely, but you know what I mean). Why haven't we seen that in any Lexus reviews vs. BMWs, namely the IS. Bias in the media!
Yes, bias. Because as we all know I'm biased for GM. :P
Actually, you make a good point. I would say the difference is this: In a BMW 3 Series, the "penalty" for driving such a sporty sports sedan is pretty small. If you buy a 3 Series and never once throw it into a corner -- just basically put around in it -- it's still a very nice car. So nice that the IS 300 being "nicer" at the cost of performance seems unnecessary. The IS is a bit quieter, a bit more refined, but the difference is so small that I can't believe someone would get out of the 3 Series and into an IS and say, "Wow, the Lexus is just so much easier to live with I must get it instead."
With the Miata--Solstice issue, the Miata is, in my opinion, pretty raw. Admittedly, I've never been a huge Miata guy, so its somewhat "buzz-bomb" nature has always been more of a penalty than its "purity of roadster spirit" is worth, at least to me. The Solstice dials back the "buzz-bomb" nature considerably while only giving up a fraction of the "purity of roadster spirit" thing (or whatever you want to call it). And at the same time, it's roomier, more comfortable, quieter (engine noise isn't nearly as intrusive), has better ride quality, looks better (purely subjective, I admit) and cheaper. Oh, and it pulls the exact same lap times and basically the same acceleration and braking numbers (BTW, I just looked at the newest Automobile and they pulled a 7.4 in the Miata and a 7.3 in the Solstice; our numbers were 7.5 Miata and 7.7 in Solstice -- I think that 6.5 Miata time in the new C&D is fishy...).
And while the cost differentiation isn't huge, I just priced out a Solstice with the only options I'd want (air conditioning and all the audio upgrades) versus a Miata with its audio upgrades. The cost difference is about $1,000, though admittedly you've got hand-crank windows and manual mirrors in the Solstice with power versions in the Miata -- though this also probably makes up a bit of the weight advantage of the Miata. Regardless, I can buy a Solstice I'd want to drive for $1,000 less than the equivalent Miata. Not a huge difference, but even at $3-a-gallon that's a lot of gas. Or at least a year's worth of insurance.
Just to be clear, neither car is a "bad" car (as is the case with most cars today). But I just think the Solstice better balances the fun of a roadster with the reality of an everyday driver. If you must have the "purity" thing the Miata is a blast to drive. I'd just rather have 10% less "purity" and 30% more comfort and daily live-ability -- while still having the exact same performance -- and better looks --- for less money.
To add to that - it may be also that the concepts of 'performance' may shift a bit. Afterall, Europeans have dealt with this level of fuel cost (if not higher) for years, and if anything, they have a larger number of 'performance' variants to chose from than we do in the US. But their idea of performance is more along the high rpm power with handling a huge factor whereas (it seems) the American idea of performance is big cubic inches and boatloads of torque.
So, at most, I would imagine that even at $5/gallon, manufacturers will still offer 'performance' variants. The only thing that may change is which performance aspects are stressed.
Thanks for the expanded Solstice vs. Miata (oops, MX-5) discussion.
As someone who is very interested in the Saturn Sky, I appreciate your comments ... I like the styling of the Sky vs. the Solstice, personally, though I'm not sure I'm quite as comfortable with the extra "standard features" the Sky will come with (the expected MSRP of the Sky is rumored to be $23-25K).
Like you, I'm not looking for a pure "sports car" - just something to have as a weekend toy for the Colorado summers.
Thanks for the very detailed response! It makes sense.
(Though you make the Solstice sound like the 2nd-gen Miata that you berated for being a poseur car =p.) *edit: that was supposed to be in a smaller font for the right effect*
Ahem. Sorry about that. I'm taking out my personal issues on the easiest target I can find. In fact, I like that we get commentary like "this car is better if you're not hardcore," I'm just not used to it. We don't see it often in cars that might possibly be worthy of it (like some of the milder sport compacts of recent times)... it's definitely a good thing to tell us though.
But I just think the Solstice better balances the fun of a roadster with the reality of an everyday driver.
That doesn't make sense as the Solstice has a trunk 1/4 the size of the Miata's. The trunk is unusable in the Solstice, thus the car is not a daily driver. I keep my cars devoid of anything in the trunk,glovebox, etc, but when I need to transport groceries, a total lack of any trunk space makes the Solstice pretty worthless.
The top mechanism also negates the car's usefulness as an everyday driver. If the top can't be operated from within the car, then it's just not a convertible built for daily use.
The top mechanism also negates the car's usefulness as an everyday driver. If the top can't be operated from within the car, then it's just not a convertible built for daily use.
Convertibles have been around for decades, and many of them have been used as daily drivers by many people, but the day of the "sit in the drivers seat and fully operate the top" (whether it is power, manual, or a combination thereof) is a pretty recent development. I think your statement is flawed. Besides, it takes about 30 seconds to do the Solstice's top, including getting out of the car, so it's not exactly a traumatic experience.
As for trunk space. Every once in awhile I might use my daily driver to get groceries, but every time I start it and drive it I'm going to hear the buzzy engine...or not, if it doesn't have a buzzy engine. I'll take putting the groceries in the passenger footwell (or passenger's lap) for those occasional grocery runs and enjoy the buzz-free, roomier, more comfortable cabin, and better ride quality, every time I drive my roadster.
The thing is...."what if"....fossil fuels continue to become more expensive, &/or harder to obtain. The energy situation "could" get more way more drastic than even the early '70's or 80's.....& right now, I wouldn't bet that it won't.....
*Because gas is still relatively cheap, and because there still isn't a shortage problem (no long lines at gas stations*
to having to get out of the car to work the top of a roadster. After all every single trip in a car starts with being outside of the car and ends with getting out of it. So what's the big deal?
getting out of a car in the breakdown lane of a highway is very dangerous. i always try to keep this in mind when i am pulled over for cops i try to pick the safest spot for the cop, and angle my car to the right so that the back of my car protects him, in addition to the way his vehicle is angled. this happens to me a bit too often, i must admit! as for working the soft-top fro outside the car, for the reason above, that's a big deal, when it starts to rain and you are miles between exits. personally i prefer a solid roof - and a sunroof/moonroof is ok with me too. cheers!
I'm spoiled from 15 years of living around miatas. I'm used to flip a lever (or two) and toss the top back at a light. If it's raining, at the next light or on the side of the road pull over, give the top a yank and then hit the latches. Just so stinking easy. The idea of getting out of the car pretty much ruins the notion of dropping the top at a light or in bumper-to-bumper on the freeway.
there is no reason to get out of the car to put the top up. it can still be inconvenient trying to put the top if it starts raining. i would rather put up with that occasional episode, that not have a convertible. own one convertible for a long time. i do like a sunroof too.
2024 Ford F-150 STX, 2023 Ford Explorer ST, 91 Mustang GT vert
This morning was a great example. It was cool when i got in it, so I waited to put the top down after about 2-3 miles of driving, when there was heat and the condenstation had run off the windows. Popped the top down in less than 10 seconds while sitting in traffic.
OK, I could have just been cold. Guess that would be tolerable with heated seats, but those aren't standard.
Another problem - if you fold the top in the AM with condensation, you end up with mildew. I let the top "blow dry" for a few minutes, then put the (now dry) top down. I don't want to pull over to do that every time.
Sudden rain is an even bigger problem. Try to find a brige or overpass to cover you when you need one...ain't happening!
That's true, and my biggest concern for the Solstice is that it may suffer the same fate due to its tiny trunk area (at least in terms of truly usable storage space back there).
I see cargo limitations as a much bigger potential issue than the Solstice's top operation. However, if they really do bring out a coupe version of the Solstice it could theorectically solve both problems in one fell swoop.
We're getting one of these today, swapping it for the R/T version we had last week.
I drove the R/T through the slalom during testing (same day we did Solstice/Miata) and I can tell you that it handles much better/rides stiffer than the Magnum. I know the Charger is supposed to have more aggressive suspension than both the Magnum and the 300C, so I'm really curious about the SRT-8. I drove the 300C SRT-8 last year and was blown away by the car's nimble handling -- despite it's massive size and curb weight. The Charger version should weigh a bit less, and if, like the regular R/T, the SRT-8 version is more aggressive than the equivalent 300C SRT-8, it could be a serious performance car -- four doors and all!
It was priced too high to compete with the Miata, trunk space was too small, and it's styling (highly important in this segment IMO) was more than a little off.
But I'd add that I drove both the Miata and MR2 back-to-back (both on public roads and at Willow Springs raceway) and I thoroughly preferred the MR2. Very easy to balance the car between under- and oversteer because of the mid-engine layout.
But, as you noted, it had too many problems for the majority of potential customers to overcome.
Way back in post #1675 and #1687 I gave you a huge list of comparison test ideas. You said you would take them to a meeting. Were any of them approved and will we be seeing any of them in the near future?
I read the Fusion review and I'm glad that you and several other seem to like it. When the next midsize sedan comparo comes up with the G6, Camry, Accord, Sonata and Fusion, I would expect the Fusion to finish high.
Actually, I'm a bit disappointed the Editors couldn't hold off with their VERY recent midsize comparo (between the Camry, Accord, and Sonata) to include the Fusion. However, given the fact that they just did this comparo, I wouldn't expect a return to this segment for a full comparison test until the Accord and Camry are updated again.
Maybe they could do a domestic midsize sedan comparo with the Fusion against the V6 equipped 300, G6, and Malibu with the winner going up against the Sonata?
:mad: All this whining about small trunks in roadsters tells me that lots of folks have no concept of what a roadster is about. The trunk in my TR-4 was typical of roadster trunks. It was my only car for six years and when I needed to carry something bigger than a six pack I'd:
1)use the passenger seat or the cubby behind the seats. 2)borrow another vehicle 3)Put the top down and transport articles that couldn't be accomodated in roofed vehicles.
Roadsters ought to be small, light and minimalist. :shades:
Yes, but back in the TR-4 days, one didn't have available nice tossable roadsters that ALSO had some trunk space and the ability to flop the top back (or back up) on a whim. But now we do.
About the smallest, lightest, most minimalist roadster available (outside of a Caterham) would be a Miata (I refuse to use it's numerical moniker). And this car DOES give the owner at least some trunk space and the ability to flop the top at will.
The Solstice gives up this ability for.........? Styling? Yes, I'll admit that the Solstice looks one heckova lot better, and is more suited to easy day-to-day driveability. But I didn't see 'styling' or 'day-to-day driveability' on your list of what a Roadster ought to be.
I dont think the 300 would belong in the test you suggested, but other than that it sounds good. I definitely want to see the Fusion vs. G6 vs. Sonata vs Accord.
"I dont think the 300 would belong in the test you suggested..."
Now that I think about it a bit more, I agree. I believe the 300 is rated as a full-size (and even with the least expensive V6 would be pricier than most of the others in the group). But I thought that there should be at least 1 competitor in the midsize group from DC and I just don't see the Stratus being able to compete in this group. But I do think the new Malibu should be included.
You're right about the capabilities of modern cars versus the days of the TR-4.
Muscle cars used to be fast in a straight line while being frightening whenever you had to turn or stop. Exotic cars use to be great on the open road, but almost undrivable in stop-and-go traffic (while also having terrible climate control systems and uncomfortable seats). True "luxury" cars used to start at $50,000 and go up from there.
The whole point is that today consumers expect cars to "do it all." They want their muscle cars to stop and handle as well as they accelerate (new Mustang and GTO), their exotic cars to have comfortable seats and easy drivability (Gallardo and GT), their luxury cars to have every possible amenity for less than $35,000 (TL, A4, G35, etc.) and their roadsters to be flully fling-able while still offering some functional trunk space and a (relatively) roomy, comfortable interior (Miata is good at first one, Solstice is good at the second).
It's the day of the "no compromise" car, which is why so many "good" or "nice" cars still don't sell well -- or get good write-ups from automotive journalists. There was nothing truly "wrong" with the Toyota MR2, but in a world where roadster buyers still want cargo space (and sleek styling), it just couldn't compete with the Miata.
karl(voice of the ford gt), the last mr2 was so ugly, that it had no chance against the miata, considering it was only somewhat more roadster'ish. to me, convetibles are about sights, sounds, and smells(cow country comes to mind, or maybe tire smoke ). i never listen to the radio. i'm willing to put up with the chance of getting caught in a downpour. i also find it useful for transporting my landscaping tools(string trimmer, leaf blower, spreader). my convertible is not my primary transportation.
2024 Ford F-150 STX, 2023 Ford Explorer ST, 91 Mustang GT vert
You brought up a very interesting point - sight and sounds indeed, and a low cowl and door are important for you to see well out of it and also feel the wind.
Compare a Miata to an MR2, and the doors were a lot lower. The MR2 had high door sills, I could barely rest my elbow there, plus you just sat very low in the interior so visibility wasn't as good. That takes away from the sights and sounds you mention.
Wonder how the MX-5 and Solistice compare in that regard. Lately manufacturers want to make passengers feel safe, but they often sacrifice the size of windows and therefore visibility and the open-ness that you want in a roadster.
My parent's 60's Pontiac Bonneville had a power soft top that did not need getting out of the car to retract (undo two latches, push button to let hydraulic system fold top behind seats). Only reason to get out would be to snap cover over the folded top (we did that sometimes).
A while back I suggested some good comparison ideas, in posts #1675 and #1687. You said you would take them to your meeting. Did any of them actually get approved?
One more question for you - What happens to a concept car after the auto show? Like what would happen to say, the Gladiator after the Detroit Auto Show?
With flanks blatantly ripped off the Hyundai Tiburon.
But more importantly, it looks good, overall. It looks like Saturns will not just look like Opels/Vauxhalls... they WILL be Opels/Vauxhalls. Makes sense to me. I don't see the point of keeping any car you've designed and built out of any market.
I want to see more on that 2.0T Hyundai Accent 3-door...
A while back I suggested some good comparison ideas, in posts #1675 and #1687. You said you would take them to your meeting. Did any of them actually get approved?
One more question for you - What happens to a concept car after the auto show? Like what would happen to say, the Gladiator after the Detroit Auto Show?
I am currently working on putting together the "500 Horsepower Yankee Club" comparo, that being the Z06, Viper and GT. Otherwise we're pretty bogged down in Frankfurt coverage and Tokyo show planning, new book publishing (yes, we still do a print book every year) and plenty of press trips. I'm sure we'll do some more comparisons in the next four weeks, but right now we're sort of playing it by ear based on what's available from the fleets and what we have time for.
Concept cars usually meet one of three fates: 1. Destroyed after being shown (sometimes immediately, sometimes years later) 2. Kept by the OEM indefinitely (one of the two Ford GT-40 concepts) 3. Sold/auctioned off to the highest bidder (the other Ford GT-40 concept, the Olds "Corvette" from last January at Barrett-Jackson, etc.)
I'm sure Chrysler is still using the Gladiator for various promotional purposes (I thought that was a VERY cool concept car). But it will end up in one of the three circumstances above, eventually.
Comments
Over the last few years the number of "performance" variants has grown immensely. Do you think this era will also come to an abrupt end?
The SUV craze never did much for me. But, I really hope manufacturers keep giving us reasonably priced, fun to drive cars.
That said, I think the SUV will have a tougher time because I believe people will at least think about fuel mileage more than they use to. Will it actually change their buying behavior? Well, if they were going to buy an SUV before, but it was a relatively basic/mudane one, they might be thinking wagon or large sedan now. But if they see a really cool SUV, that strikes a chord with them, they might go ahead and buy it even with the higher fuel prices. So again, I think people who would have bought an SUV without really thinking about gas prices before will now be more hesitant. But if an automaker can produce an SUV that really appeals to them -- they'll still buy. Basically, mediocre SUVs that were just on the cusp of being considered before probably won't be bought now. Good ones/cool ones will probably continue to sell.
Now, of course, the question is -- Which ones are mediocre, and which OEs will be the first to recognize their mediocre offerings and either:
a. discontinue them or
b. improve them so they sell in a world of $3-a-gallon gasoline
I'm certain that SUV sales, overall, will drop. The market for those buying dollars just got a little more competitive.
Be happy to hear any and all feedback.
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Features/articleId=107085
"Over the last few years the number of "performance" variants has grown immensely. Do you think this era will also come to an abrupt end? "
I was actually referring to passenger cars, not SUVs. Looking back, maybe that was not real clear.
It seems that we have been in a modern day horsepower war so to speak - Each OEM wants to offer better performance and more horsepower than the other. It has been great for those of us who desire the performance orientated ride. Even rather mundane vehicles like the Malibu offer performance editions (maybe not the best example). So, do you think when it comes to passenger cars, the concentration will shift away from performance and more towards fuel economy?
Your voice sounds similar to mine. Creepy. Your cadence and stress are also similar to how I speak. Does your voice sound higher pitched when you hear your recorded voice than it does when you are speaking?
At first I thought that having you speak the words that I can plainly read was superfluous, but it gives reader/viewer a chance to look at the pictures (what we are really interested in) and not the words.
Hey, it's pretty long, too. It's playing while I write this. It looks like it is about 10 minutes long.
I like it. The pictures are sweet and I like that it is actually your voice doing the voiceover.
Jason
You said that in buying a Solstice you give up some purity for a "nicer" experience compared to the Miata (sorry I'm paraphrasing so loosely, but you know what I mean). Why haven't we seen that in any Lexus reviews vs. BMWs, namely the IS. Bias in the media!
I'm kidding. But are the two cases that different? Was it a matter of expectations, since no one really believed that the Solstice would out-sport the Miata?
Because the Fusion is based on the Mazda 6 which has the benefits of being both an import and Japanese!
Only nit; A little of the narration did not exactly match the text (the narration was shorter). Darn those last minute changes!
I don't think so. I think it came to an end the previous time (1971) because of several factors, and fuel costs were only one of them. Because gas is still relatively cheap, and because there still isn't a shortage problem (no long lines at gas stations -- except in some key areas right now from extenuating circumstances) I think the car companies will continue to produce performance models and the customers who they've always been designed for (higher income performance fans) will continue to buy them.
Yes, bias. Because as we all know I'm biased for GM. :P
Actually, you make a good point. I would say the difference is this: In a BMW 3 Series, the "penalty" for driving such a sporty sports sedan is pretty small. If you buy a 3 Series and never once throw it into a corner -- just basically put around in it -- it's still a very nice car. So nice that the IS 300 being "nicer" at the cost of performance seems unnecessary. The IS is a bit quieter, a bit more refined, but the difference is so small that I can't believe someone would get out of the 3 Series and into an IS and say, "Wow, the Lexus is just so much easier to live with I must get it instead."
With the Miata--Solstice issue, the Miata is, in my opinion, pretty raw. Admittedly, I've never been a huge Miata guy, so its somewhat "buzz-bomb" nature has always been more of a penalty than its "purity of roadster spirit" is worth, at least to me. The Solstice dials back the "buzz-bomb" nature considerably while only giving up a fraction of the "purity of roadster spirit" thing (or whatever you want to call it). And at the same time, it's roomier, more comfortable, quieter (engine noise isn't nearly as intrusive), has better ride quality, looks better (purely subjective, I admit) and cheaper. Oh, and it pulls the exact same lap times and basically the same acceleration and braking numbers (BTW, I just looked at the newest Automobile and they pulled a 7.4 in the Miata and a 7.3 in the Solstice; our numbers were 7.5 Miata and 7.7 in Solstice -- I think that 6.5 Miata time in the new C&D is fishy...).
And while the cost differentiation isn't huge, I just priced out a Solstice with the only options I'd want (air conditioning and all the audio upgrades) versus a Miata with its audio upgrades. The cost difference is about $1,000, though admittedly you've got hand-crank windows and manual mirrors in the Solstice with power versions in the Miata -- though this also probably makes up a bit of the weight advantage of the Miata. Regardless, I can buy a Solstice I'd want to drive for $1,000 less than the equivalent Miata. Not a huge difference, but even at $3-a-gallon that's a lot of gas. Or at least a year's worth of insurance.
Just to be clear, neither car is a "bad" car (as is the case with most cars today). But I just think the Solstice better balances the fun of a roadster with the reality of an everyday driver. If you must have the "purity" thing the Miata is a blast to drive. I'd just rather have 10% less "purity" and 30% more comfort and daily live-ability -- while still having the exact same performance -- and better looks --- for less money.
Okay, okay, I'll stop now.
To add to that - it may be also that the concepts of 'performance' may shift a bit. Afterall, Europeans have dealt with this level of fuel cost (if not higher) for years, and if anything, they have a larger number of 'performance' variants to chose from than we do in the US. But their idea of performance is more along the high rpm power with handling a huge factor whereas (it seems) the American idea of performance is big cubic inches and boatloads of torque.
So, at most, I would imagine that even at $5/gallon, manufacturers will still offer 'performance' variants. The only thing that may change is which performance aspects are stressed.
As someone who is very interested in the Saturn Sky, I appreciate your comments ... I like the styling of the Sky vs. the Solstice, personally, though I'm not sure I'm quite as comfortable with the extra "standard features" the Sky will come with (the expected MSRP of the Sky is rumored to be $23-25K).
Like you, I'm not looking for a pure "sports car" - just something to have as a weekend toy for the Colorado summers.
Go, GM!
(Though you make the Solstice sound like the 2nd-gen Miata that you berated for being a poseur car =p.) *edit: that was supposed to be in a smaller font for the right effect*
Ahem. Sorry about that. I'm taking out my personal issues on the easiest target I can find. In fact, I like that we get commentary like "this car is better if you're not hardcore," I'm just not used to it. We don't see it often in cars that might possibly be worthy of it (like some of the milder sport compacts of recent times)... it's definitely a good thing to tell us though.
That doesn't make sense as the Solstice has a trunk 1/4 the size of the Miata's. The trunk is unusable in the Solstice, thus the car is not a daily driver. I keep my cars devoid of anything in the trunk,glovebox, etc, but when I need to transport groceries, a total lack of any trunk space makes the Solstice pretty worthless.
The top mechanism also negates the car's usefulness as an everyday driver. If the top can't be operated from within the car, then it's just not a convertible built for daily use.
Convertibles have been around for decades, and many of them have been used as daily drivers by many people, but the day of the "sit in the drivers seat and fully operate the top" (whether it is power, manual, or a combination thereof) is a pretty recent development. I think your statement is flawed. Besides, it takes about 30 seconds to do the Solstice's top, including getting out of the car, so it's not exactly a traumatic experience.
As for trunk space. Every once in awhile I might use my daily driver to get groceries, but every time I start it and drive it I'm going to hear the buzzy engine...or not, if it doesn't have a buzzy engine. I'll take putting the groceries in the passenger footwell (or passenger's lap) for those occasional grocery runs and enjoy the buzz-free, roomier, more comfortable cabin, and better ride quality, every time I drive my roadster.
*Because gas is still relatively cheap, and because there still isn't a shortage problem (no long lines at gas stations*
-Former owner of roadsters and convertibles.
2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93
as for working the soft-top fro outside the car, for the reason above, that's a big deal, when it starts to rain and you are miles between exits.
personally i prefer a solid roof - and a sunroof/moonroof is ok with me too. cheers!
This morning was a great example. It was cool when i got in it, so I waited to put the top down after about 2-3 miles of driving, when there was heat and the condenstation had run off the windows. Popped the top down in less than 10 seconds while sitting in traffic.
OK, I could have just been cold. Guess that would be tolerable with heated seats, but those aren't standard.
Another problem - if you fold the top in the AM with condensation, you end up with mildew. I let the top "blow dry" for a few minutes, then put the (now dry) top down. I don't want to pull over to do that every time.
Sudden rain is an even bigger problem. Try to find a brige or overpass to cover you when you need one...ain't happening!
-juice
Is Toyota the only major group that doesn't sell one now?
Oops.
-juice
I see cargo limitations as a much bigger potential issue than the Solstice's top operation. However, if they really do bring out a coupe version of the Solstice it could theorectically solve both problems in one fell swoop.
We'll see...
I drove the R/T through the slalom during testing (same day we did Solstice/Miata) and I can tell you that it handles much better/rides stiffer than the Magnum. I know the Charger is supposed to have more aggressive suspension than both the Magnum and the 300C, so I'm really curious about the SRT-8. I drove the 300C SRT-8 last year and was blown away by the car's nimble handling -- despite it's massive size and curb weight. The Charger version should weigh a bit less, and if, like the regular R/T, the SRT-8 version is more aggressive than the equivalent 300C SRT-8, it could be a serious performance car -- four doors and all!
Looking forward to finding out.
It was priced too high to compete with the Miata, trunk space was too small, and it's styling (highly important in this segment IMO) was more than a little off.
But I'd add that I drove both the Miata and MR2 back-to-back (both on public roads and at Willow Springs raceway) and I thoroughly preferred the MR2. Very easy to balance the car between under- and oversteer because of the mid-engine layout.
But, as you noted, it had too many problems for the majority of potential customers to overcome.
C'Est La Vie
I read the Fusion review and I'm glad that you and several other seem to like it. When the next midsize sedan comparo comes up with the G6, Camry, Accord, Sonata and Fusion, I would expect the Fusion to finish high.
Maybe they could do a domestic midsize sedan comparo with the Fusion against the V6 equipped 300, G6, and Malibu with the winner going up against the Sonata?
1)use the passenger seat or the cubby behind the seats.
2)borrow another vehicle
3)Put the top down and transport articles that couldn't be accomodated in roofed vehicles.
Roadsters ought to be small, light and minimalist. :shades:
2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93
About the smallest, lightest, most minimalist roadster available (outside of a Caterham) would be a Miata (I refuse to use it's numerical moniker). And this car DOES give the owner at least some trunk space and the ability to flop the top at will.
The Solstice gives up this ability for.........? Styling? Yes, I'll admit that the Solstice looks one heckova lot better, and is more suited to easy day-to-day driveability. But I didn't see 'styling' or 'day-to-day driveability' on your list of what a Roadster ought to be.
Now that I think about it a bit more, I agree. I believe the 300 is rated as a full-size (and even with the least expensive V6 would be pricier than most of the others in the group). But I thought that there should be at least 1 competitor in the midsize group from DC and I just don't see the Stratus being able to compete in this group. But I do think the new Malibu should be included.
Muscle cars used to be fast in a straight line while being frightening whenever you had to turn or stop. Exotic cars use to be great on the open road, but almost undrivable in stop-and-go traffic (while also having terrible climate control systems and uncomfortable seats). True "luxury" cars used to start at $50,000 and go up from there.
The whole point is that today consumers expect cars to "do it all." They want their muscle cars to stop and handle as well as they accelerate (new Mustang and GTO), their exotic cars to have comfortable seats and easy drivability (Gallardo and GT), their luxury cars to have every possible amenity for less than $35,000 (TL, A4, G35, etc.) and their roadsters to be flully fling-able while still offering some functional trunk space and a (relatively) roomy, comfortable interior (Miata is good at first one, Solstice is good at the second).
It's the day of the "no compromise" car, which is why so many "good" or "nice" cars still don't sell well -- or get good write-ups from automotive journalists. There was nothing truly "wrong" with the Toyota MR2, but in a world where roadster buyers still want cargo space (and sleek styling), it just couldn't compete with the Miata.
-juice
Must be hell talking your wife into the trunk..... :P
No, you didn't, nor will you. If I want to go shopping or golfing, I'll take a sedan or wagon, roadsters are about driving.
2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93
-juice
the last mr2 was so ugly, that it had no chance against the miata, considering it was only somewhat more roadster'ish.
to me, convetibles are about sights, sounds, and smells(cow country comes to mind, or maybe tire smoke
Now there's a man who understands what a convertible or roadster is about.
2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93
Compare a Miata to an MR2, and the doors were a lot lower. The MR2 had high door sills, I could barely rest my elbow there, plus you just sat very low in the interior so visibility wasn't as good. That takes away from the sights and sounds you mention.
Wonder how the MX-5 and Solistice compare in that regard. Lately manufacturers want to make passengers feel safe, but they often sacrifice the size of windows and therefore visibility and the open-ness that you want in a roadster.
-juice
shown here -
http://www.autoweek.com/news.cms?newsId=103166
Is this vehicle the same as what Lutz and his team showed you a few months back? Just curious.
-juice
Only reason to get out would be to snap cover over the folded top (we did that sometimes).
One more question for you - What happens to a concept car after the auto show? Like what would happen to say, the Gladiator after the Detroit Auto Show?
But more importantly, it looks good, overall. It looks like Saturns will not just look like Opels/Vauxhalls... they WILL be Opels/Vauxhalls. Makes sense to me. I don't see the point of keeping any car you've designed and built out of any market.
I want to see more on that 2.0T Hyundai Accent 3-door...
One more question for you - What happens to a concept car after the auto show? Like what would happen to say, the Gladiator after the Detroit Auto Show?
I am currently working on putting together the "500 Horsepower Yankee Club" comparo, that being the Z06, Viper and GT. Otherwise we're pretty bogged down in Frankfurt coverage and Tokyo show planning, new book publishing (yes, we still do a print book every year) and plenty of press trips. I'm sure we'll do some more comparisons in the next four weeks, but right now we're sort of playing it by ear based on what's available from the fleets and what we have time for.
Concept cars usually meet one of three fates:
1. Destroyed after being shown (sometimes immediately, sometimes years later)
2. Kept by the OEM indefinitely (one of the two Ford GT-40 concepts)
3. Sold/auctioned off to the highest bidder (the other Ford GT-40 concept, the Olds "Corvette" from last January at Barrett-Jackson, etc.)
I'm sure Chrysler is still using the Gladiator for various promotional purposes (I thought that was a VERY cool concept car). But it will end up in one of the three circumstances above, eventually.