Carolinas A Better Place to Be

Solstice GXP article

Thread Tools
 
Old Apr 11, 2006 | 07:30 AM
  #11  
MULDER's Avatar
Thread Starter
Community Organizer
 
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 11,936
Likes: 12
From: Charleston
Default

I have test driven one... not the GXP though. You remember what i said about it then. I will withhold judgement on the GXP til I can drive it too, but if the handling is the same... booo gm.
Reply
Old Apr 11, 2006 | 07:44 AM
  #12  
Dolemike's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 2,867
Likes: 0
From: High Point
Default

I think the suspension will probably be modded for the extra power and whatnot. But like every other shot an american vendor makes at the sports car market... they usually fail to create a winner in all categories. I wouldnt want to wreck that car ill tell youthat much. I like the looks of it with the top down tho, top up makes me wanna uke:
Reply
Old Apr 11, 2006 | 07:51 AM
  #13  
MULDER's Avatar
Thread Starter
Community Organizer
 
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 11,936
Likes: 12
From: Charleston
Default

I'll put it this way, for the money, it isn't bad. But for the same cash, I could by the MX-5 which is built much better for the same price. And all of the details (i am a detail person) on the MX-5 make it , atleast to me more for your money. Same can go for the S2000 and GXP, sure the GXP may be faster, but will it look like it has been driven for ten years by the time it is 2. And will the usual things so common to GM break.. like cup holders, door latches, handles, ect... not to mention that overly complicated and oddly folding top.
Reply
Old Apr 11, 2006 | 07:55 AM
  #14  
RWD_HNDA's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 4,633
Likes: 0
From: homeless!!
Default

ain't skerrred
Reply
Old Apr 11, 2006 | 08:02 AM
  #15  
Dolemike's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 2,867
Likes: 0
From: High Point
Default

I doubt the GXP is faster probably = to the s2000 however. But as the same with all turbos... a little money will go a long ways for power.
Reply
Old Apr 11, 2006 | 08:09 AM
  #16  
RWD_HNDA's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 4,633
Likes: 0
From: homeless!!
Default

true, but 1 I don't care about straightline...and gears are a proven mod for our car
Reply
Old Apr 11, 2006 | 10:32 AM
  #17  
bmbjj's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 275
Likes: 0
Default

[QUOTE=MulderATO,Apr 10 2006, 05:06 PM] NOT MY ARTICLE! JUST FOUND THIS AND SHARED..........



It's a turbocharged 2.4-liter Ecotec four with an amazing 260 horsepower and 260 foot-pounds of torque. GM says that makes the Ecotec turbo its highest specific-output engine ever
Reply
Old Apr 11, 2006 | 11:43 AM
  #18  
DrDre1443's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 4,100
Likes: 0
From: Charlotte NC
Default

wow i totally missed that math too........so even with a turbo and a bigger engine, the hp per liter is only 108.3333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333 3333333333





Reply
Old Apr 11, 2006 | 01:04 PM
  #19  
whitemistress2k's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 2,928
Likes: 0
From: Asheboro, NC
Default

tell the customer what they wanna hear and hope they arent smart enuff 2 figure the truth... hp sells...
Reply
Old Apr 11, 2006 | 05:53 PM
  #20  
smccoy's Avatar
Gold Member (Premium)
20 Year Member
Liked
 
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 2,941
Likes: 3
From: Charlotte
Default

Originally Posted by Dolemike,Apr 11 2006, 09:39 AM
Im fairly certain everyone here can agree that our car does more like mid to low 5 second sprint to 60. I can tell thats an obvious biased letter to hype the car. Should be a decent performer, I wonder how well it well hold together before it breaks.
Actually, the 2000-2001 S2Ks did better than that; tested by Road and Track in under 5 seconds in 0-60. Here's one article:

Road & Track article from January 2001

Regardless, I simply do NOT like the heavy lines of the Solstice. It's just plain ugly IMO. Then again, I AM prejudiced!
Reply



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 01:30 AM.