Saturn Sky Forum banner

This sucks

5K views 30 replies 10 participants last post by  Robotech 
#1 ·
Well that didn't take long, two months since purchasing our 37,000 mile Sky we have our first serious problem.

Wife says the A/C stopped working suddenly, blows hot air. It was 98F at the time. I check the car and find the following:
1. A/C inoperative because the compressor will not cycle.
2. The coolant temperature display is blank showing (---F)
3. After letting the engine cool overnight and starting cold in the morning I notice the engine cooling fan comes on as soon as the engine starts and conditions #1 & 2 remain.
4. While I was driving the Sky to the GM dealer (it's under a Zero deductible Plat warranty) the coolant temperature started displaying fluctuating readings from 147 to 175 F which of course is way below normal operating temperature. Since the coolant display started showing info (albeit inaccurate) the ECU came out of failsafe mode and the A/C began functioning normally.
5. The GM dealer kept the car 2 days ran it 7 miles and could not duplicate the problem. they also said they checked for codes and found none pending. CEL was never on.
6. While I was driving it home and looking at the fluctuating coolant display I ran the engine up to 6,500 RPM in the first 2 gears. That made the coolant display pop up to normal 195F temp and stabilize.

The Sky operated normally for 7 days...until the wife was driving home last night when the exact problem returned,
Yea, intermittent electrical problem that will probably never happen at the GM dealer.

I could not find a TSB regarding this condition.
 
See less See more
#2 · (Edited)
1GM, hate when these kind of intermittent problems occur. My best guess is you may have a coolant temperature sensor that is about to fail or has dirty connectors. Sounds like the ECM is throwing the AC into a safe mode when it can't determine how hot the engine is actually running. The ---F info on the DIC is telling me the ECM isn't receiving a signal from the sensor. The fluctuating temps tells me that when it does receive the signal, it's not at a constant voltage like it should be. When it starts reading correctly, whatever is going on inside the sensor or connector corrected itself for a short time before it failed again.

Here is a similar thread from 2010 describing your exact problem, that it is a sensor issue, where the sensor is located and how you change it.

http://www.skyroadster.com/forums/f5/engine-coolant-temp-sensor-34130/

Here is the jist of what they discussed back then...

@77 deg F according to the manual the sensor would have 2,796 ohms resistance @ 68 deg F it would have 3,520 ohms resistance. 9 degrees change would be 724 ohms which would be about 80.4 ohms per degree F.
although thr RTD probably isn't perfectly linear and there will be a small difference between any given sensor. that should get you in the ballpark

When a temperature display to reads ---F You generally have either an open RTD or an open wiring circuit . Essentially the display is an ohmmeter calibrated to display it's readings in deg F or deg C according to the resistance characteristics of the RTD it is calibrated to.
Therefore ---F would essentially be infinite resistance. So check your connections and wiring.
I am surprised you are not throwing a code. But I don't see a code in the manual for an erronious water temperature reading.You would think it would at least tell you the car is overheating.
I am not surprised that your fans run all of the time though because the temperature reading is so high that it would cause the controller to switch on all of the cooling fans. or in the case of the LNF run the fan at high speed.

There is only one coolant temperature sensor in the vehicle.
Yes, A dashhawk or similar device that can read live sensor data and error codes would be handy if you know someone that has one..
Doing my due diligence here. This is correct!

When looking for the sensor from the passenger side of the car, it is right of the thermostat housing, and left of the exhaust manifold.

You will need to take off the windshield cowl to access the sensor, but its not a big deal. A flathead screwdriver for the plastic rivets, a 7mm socket for the screws, and a 15mm socket for the wiper arm nuts.

Take the negative side off the battery.

I removed the pigtail from the sensor attached to the engine block and cleaned both using CRC MAF sensor cleaner. Cleaning both the pigtail side and the coolant temperature sensor side on the block helps clean any debris that gets in there, and trust me, it does!

After letting both sides dry for about 15 minutes, just reconnect, put the negative back on the battery and start the car. Let the engine get up to normal operating temperatures "factory thermostat is 200°F", to verify that cleaning it fixed the issue.

Finally, turn off the engine and put the windshield cowl and wiper arms back on the car.
Looks like Torquenstein just cleaned the connectors and this fixed the issue. If you don't mind taking off the windshield cowl twice if it doesn't, you may want to try cleaning out the connectors first and see if that doesn't resolve the issue since it is intermittent. If that doesn't solve the problem, then you would want to replace the sensor.

Good news is the part is just around $20 IF you need to replace it...

http://www.summitracing.com/search/...model/sky/engine-size/2-4l-145/engine-type/l4

...and you'll need some coolant...about $10 for DexCool, Peak Global, or whatever you are using in the coolant system.


Hope this helps.
 
#3 · (Edited)
Doubtful it's the Thermostat as the ---F shows an infinite resistance reading from the sensor. A bad t-stat should still produce some sort of temp reading from the sensor.

Key word...should.

The more I thought about this the more I feel the connectors are dirty.

Usually when a sensor goes, it just goes. Not always but usually. If you got gunk in the connectors though, sometimes that gunk my block the signal and sometimes it may conduct the signal but affect it's flow. We call this resistance. Since this sensor is a resistance based reading sensor (IE the ECM determines what the coolant temp is based on the resistance it sees in the signal wire) the gunk conducting the electricity would increase resistance in an unpredictable and inconsistent fashion. The increased resistance would account for the "drop" and the inconsistency would be responsible for the fluctuation in the reported coolant temps you experienced that were jumping around at temps lower than expected.

It is certainly worth trying the cleaning first before doing anything else.
 
#4 ·
Gentlemen thank you for the suggestions, I agree with you on the nature of the problem.
I drove it to the GM dealer this morning and about 3 miles into the trip the coolant indicator began displaying random fluctuating readings but always at least 20 deg F below normal never above 180. And of course the A/C worked after the display came back on.

Dealer stated they found malfunction code #P0128 pending this time. I am certain they did not check for codes the first visit, there is no way the ECM goes into failsafe mode and does not code.

Dealer tells the warranty company it's 2 separate problems:
1. Coolant temp sensor intermittent failure causing blank display.
2. Thermostat failure causing fluctuating low temperature.
They replaced both the sensor and the thermostat and cleared the code. Warranty paid $446

Just wanted to follow up for the record in case others here run into a similar issue. On the other hand if it craps out again I'll let y'all know.

Thanks.
 
#5 ·
Good to know but I'm willing to bet a good cleaning of the connectors would have done it. At least the dealership was wasting the warranty company's money and not yours.

Thermostat could cause the temperature fluctuations...assuming the fluctuations were steadily increasing and decreasing and not flopping quickly back and forth between numbers. Even so, I'd find it hard to believe a t-stat, even one stuck way open, would drop coolant temps 20-60 degrees below it's rating.
 
#6 ·
There is an older thread floating about here whereas the same symptoms were reported as far as the ---F temp reading, that one also ended up being the thermostat on his NA..
I expect that your issue IS probably resolved.. Hopefully you also did a system flush and reloaded with fresh dexcool..
 
#7 ·
Well the coolant temp / air conditioner issue seems sorted out...but there is a new problem. While driving the wife says the fuel gauge drops to (E) and low fuel warning comes on, after a few miles the gauge returns to correct reading and light goes off. This has happened twice in three days. Another intermittent problem the dealer is going to have to catch in the act to diagnose and repair.

And when it rains moderately or heavy rainwater leaks in from around the back window area...a lot. Enough to form a small stream of water that flows between the seats and collects behind the drivers seat soaking the carpet. The top looks like new since this car was garage kept most of its life. This issue would not be covered by ext warranty.

I know it's a used car (kind of hard to buy a new Saturn right now) but we have never...repeat never... had so many problems with such a clean low mileage (37k-now 40k miles) vehicle. I didn't mind the rattles and squeaks, the poor quality fit and finish and somewhat amusing ergonomic design flaws (like 3 cup holders in a 2 seat vehicle none of which are practical to use) but these electrical/mechanical failures are getting old.

All is not bad though, the initial appeal of the Sky remains it's outstanding handling and killer good looks that consistently get compliments from passing strangers.

The lack of power doesn't matter to my wife and it's her car but to me it's just nowhere near enough for a roadster that looks this cool and handles this good. To put it into perspective this Sky 2.4L runs 7.2 0-60 and 15.7 1/4 mile vs a standard Mustang V6 that can turn 5.4 0-60 and 14.0 1/4 mile which match Turbo Redline numbers. No arguments these are stock vs stock published tested facts. Insult to injury is the 600lb heavier bigger roomier and faster V6 Mustang gets a full 6-mpg better highway mileage rating than the 4-cylinder 2.4L Sky.

So she test drove a 2014 Mustang V6 premium convertible today and it looks like the Sky might have been our first and only GM vehicle. She'll decide tomorrow...
 
This post has been deleted
#14 ·
Frankly what we want is a reliable vehicle.

The Sky is fun...when it's working. In only 2 months and 3k miles its been down at the dealership twice and has to go back for 2 new problems. I'm an old gearhead and could fix this crap myself but honestly I've got better things to do with my time off at this point in my life. That's why I got a 3yr warranty on the Sky when I bought it figuring with so few miles and condition it wouldn't be this much trouble. We have other hobbies (boating and motorcycles) and the Sky was to be my wife's daily driver.
 
#8 ·
I understand your frustration. The gauge issue should be fixable and, as was mentioned, the window issue is known about but still sucks to deal with it.

As for the power issues, the Sky and Solstice were built in the vein of classic British style roadsters. You don't have a lot of power, but handling is top notch. I promise you the 2014 Mustang suspension isn't even close to what you have under that 2.4 Sky and the potential of the Sky's suspension is leaps and bounds above the Mustang. If your measuring stick of performance is quarter mile times, then yes, the V6 Mustang is going to give you a bit more.

However, I don't think it is too fair to compare fuel economy between two cars with a seven year model difference especially when there was a huge economic crash right after the older car was released. The fuel mileage improvement you're seeing with the Mustang is a direct result of those economic conditions.

I don't know what the Mustang is selling for, but I imagine for the difference in what you paid for the NA Sky and that Mustang a turbo kit can be added to the Sky surpassing the Mustang in power and your fuel economy hit for city driving.

Finally, the Mustang is a very common car. The Sky is not. Is it perfect? No. No car ever is. In the end, you have to decide which features are most important to you and go with the vehicle that checks off the most boxes for you.
 
#15 · (Edited)
The Sky isn't a "common car" because they were only in production for 4 years before GM went bankrupt. You call the Mustang "common" I call them American legends in production for 50 consecutive years.

Remember, this is my wife's daily driver. She wants a good looking convertible but it must be reliable. She isn't autocrossing on the weekend and the only "tune" she cares about downloading is the music on her phone.

Adding a turbo kit to the Sky does not interest me. The stock V6 Mustang is 1.5 seconds faster in the 1/4 mile. To put that into visual perspective the Mustang would be 14 car lengths ahead of the Sky (220 feet) through the traps. The Mustang does this on regular gas while the Sky owners manual recommends premium. Icing on the cake is the extra 6 MPG. The tone from Mustang's true dual exhaust and the effortless way it accelerates due to the low RPM torque. In the handling department .91g on the skidpad ain't bad for such a comfortable practical car.

The Sky turned out to be like a hot looking woman that you quickly realize is a psycho. Have fun then run before you regret it!

I realize it's not fair to compare the newer '14 Mustang 3.7L 6-speed to the older design Sky. Kind of apples-to-oranges comparison but she wouldn't be looking at oranges if the apple didn't have a worm in it.

Seriously though ours may have been the exception to the rule and had more problems than the average Sky. Unfortunately first impressions are important and OUR particular Sky did not earn our confidence. So she bought the 2014 Mustang convertible premium. Gray with black leather it's a damn nice car.
 
#9 ·
I also have the window top problem except mine is much worse because I didn't catch it right away. The top is a fairly easy and inexpensive fix as it uses a similar (or same) 3M adhesive as for a windshield. There is a TSB on it and how to fix it. I know of at least one owner who had his fixed under warranty and it's still fine 7 years later.

I'm almost certain I saw a thread on a similar fuel gauge issue a few months back. Seems like it was on this forum, but could have been another kappa forum. I can't for the life of me remember what the solution was. Try searching for that as well and see what you find. If you can't find it, I'll try to look for it and point you in the right direction.

You see mustangs all the time. How many kappas do you see on the road? Add a little tune and a few mods and the 2.4 will pep up a bit. I drove a GXP last week and the boost was fun on the straights, but to be honest, I found my little 2.4 handles the twisties just as well. So you play a little catch up on the straights...makes it a little more challenging trying to chase them down and I actually kinda like it!
 
#10 ·
You see mustangs all the time. How many kappas do you see on the road? Add a little tune and a few mods and the 2.4 will pep up a bit. I drove a GXP last week and the boost was fun on the straights, but to be honest, I found my little 2.4 handles the twisties just as well. So you play a little catch up on the straights...makes it a little more challenging trying to chase them down and I actually kinda like it!
The 2.4 actually has slightly better front to rear balance than the 2.0. Many feel the 2.4 is better in the twisties than the 2.0 all other things being equal.

...yet I still want a turbo...
 
#11 ·
2014 Mustang was rated the top Pony car. I can understand the deal for sure. Warranty most likely, no hassles with the dealer about something being 8-9 years old.

I am a Ford guy, have been up until the last few years. Had a 65,67,69 Mustang, love the new retro look of them. Way more things to do to them I would guess, but in the end you have a mass produced vehicle that looks just like everyone else's at the mall. Not unique, not as fun to drive.

Stick it out a little longer, a couple of bugs in an older car is to be expected. Take it to a Buick dealer, there will be a Kappa mechanic there I would bet. I have found two, and both were the lead/shop foreman at the GMC/Buick dealership.

Patience Grass Hopper. You can do this.
 
#16 · (Edited)
I'm a Ford (and Jeep) guy to, my daily driver is an F150. My first car was an $800 Mustang 302 coupe then I got a 1971 Mach-1 351 Ram Air. I sold the '71 and bought an '82 Mustang GT 5.0L back in 1983 because the Mach-1 had black vinyl interior, no A/C and was starting to get a little rust like all the old daily drivers used to. I dated my wife back in the '80s in the GT and kept it all these years, it's in my garage now. I maintain all of our vehicles but the old '82 GT is the hobby car. It takes me back to that simpler time when cars had carburetors not computers.

And now we have the 2014 Mustang convertible.
 
#18 ·
I can see both sides here, but the main thing that pops out at me is that this is his wife's daily driver car. So, if I were in his shoes with a choice of a potential phone call late at night/early morning informing him his UNhappy wife is stranded somewhere OR a car that makes his wife happy and gets her reliably from A to B... I know which one I'd choose.
 
#19 · (Edited)
I'm and old Mustanger. Had a '65 new, then a '71 Mach 1 (351 Cleveland) new. Bought an '87 for my daughter (what a disappointment).
Mustang to SKY is indeed apples to oranges. I've been disappointed with the common problems with the SKY, but it's sooooo unique, and not a daily driver.
SKY owner's manual recommends premium gas, even for the 2.4, but many 2.4 owners use regular. I find that my gas mileage on premium is sufficiently better that it offsets the cost and produces better performance. There's a fuel mileage thread either here on on Solsticeforum.com where I detailed a comparison of premium versus mid grade.
 

Attachments

This post has been deleted
#24 · (Edited)
--MPG ratings I listed are what the EPA states on their website at this time for both vehicles. The Mustang's 3.7L V6 sticker rating was the same from 2011 the year it was introduced to 2014. In 2011 it was advertized as the first 300 HP 30 MPG car IIRC.
--Speaking of window stickers our 2.4L Sky with the options it had was $27k the 6 year newer Mustang was $33k. But the apples-to-oranges thing is the Mustang has standard power top (no leaks yet) and modern electronics bluetooth voice to text adjustable interior lighting color LED and HID exterior lights and most importantly far superior fit and finish without the Sky's annoying rattles.
--Low miles = less wear and tear, the Sky has averaged 4,000 miles per year which should have not contributed to any problem and the car was in great condition not neglected. The issues we were having were not caused by abuse or neglect.
--The V6 Mustang is not what I'd consider a "muscle car" just a strong running convertible with the added convenience of a back seat (we took another couple out last night) and space in the trunk to pack for a vacation.
--Base car vs base car, meaningless?? That made no sense. Would you have preferred I compared the base Sky to a Mustang GT or Shelby GT500 or Boss 302?

GM should have made the base engine the 3.9L LZ4 V6 when they realized the Sky's curb weight was going to hit 3,000 lbs. It would have been a standard off the shelf low cost engine and that 224 HP 220 ftlb torque would have transformed the standard Sky especially with an automatic transmission.
 
This post has been deleted
#25 ·
Again, I think our car may have been an exception to the rule. It happens sometimes. I don't think the Sky has any serious design flaws but the devil is in the details.

Ours was the wrong car to use as a daily driver. Squeaks, rattles, quirky electrical failures and a heavily leaking top added up to diminish the enjoyment of the car. If GM had been able to keep Saturn I'm certain the following generation of Sky would have been even better.
 
#23 ·
Mine just rolled over 28K this morning, not a single problem with it in the last year, about 6 k I put on it. It had two visits to the dealership for warranty work before I got it. Once for an injector and the other for the fuel pump.

I expect to see the water pump develop problems, but nothing but a broken light, that I may have caused by trying to put the wrong LED in it. I am pretty sure I did it.

I do not depend on it, but normally only drive on 200 mile or so trips. It needs to work on those and has so far. I am sure it had the absolute best care possible before I got it, and I know it is now.

Hoping that it continues to be the fantastic car it has been so far.

I know robo drives his every single day. He has not had many problems with his that I am aware of.
 
#27 ·
If you read "The Solstice Book", the Solstice and Sky were designed to use only a 4 cylinder engine, along the lines of a traditional English roadster, lightweight and nimble.

Needless to say, both vehicles gained a bit of weight on the way to production. The fact that an LSx V-8 fits without too much trouble is more a tribute to the compact design of that engine than the space availble under the hood of our roadsters.

A modern dohc V-6 or V-8 would be too bulky to fit.

YMMV

.
 
#30 ·
IIRC the engine I suggested is an iron block 60 degree pushrod V6 a little heavy but certainly not too big, much smaller than the V8s people are dropping in. And 220 lbft torque would have been great with the automatic.

I realize the English roadster connection but they forgot about the light weight part.
 
This post has been deleted
#29 ·
Since you may have missed it I'll repeat myself: I'm not bashing the Sky this is an automobile discussion with fellow enthusiasts. So don't get butthurt about it.

Did we buy the wrong car? Yes, We had expected a clean low mileage General Motors vehicle that uses mostly carryover powertrain components from mass produced cars to be reliable. We were wrong.

We do not buy foreign cars so that limits the field of current (regular production) 2-seaters to Corvette. She didn't want one, besides I don't wear a toupee. Camaro convertible is out because I don't have a mullet either.

Seriously though we both work for multi-franchise new car dealerships (different companies) fixed operations management not sales. my wife can throw her D-tag on any car in inventory she's interested in. She liked the Sky enough to buy it. So we do not loose money on car deals, quite the contrary. Fell out of the Sky (pun) no loss at all but thanks for asking.

And now for a little roadster car humor and a good dig at Miata...
The 2016 Mazda Miata files for its man card
 
#31 ·
An iron block V6 would have solved the power issue, sure...at the cost of overall car balance.

For whatever reason, you had some rotten luck with you're Sky. For your preferences, the Sky isn't going to be your first choice. You're more a muscle/pony car guy. The Sky isn't that. For some of us, 1/4 mile times don't mean as much as ripping across an autocross course. For those folks, the Sky is going to be the superior car.

Perhaps you took my "common" comment as a dig. It wasn't. I love Mustangs and the history that goes with them. However, there are a lot of them out there and when compared to the number of Kappas, it is far, far greater. Nothing wrong with that.

To give you some idea of where I come from, before my Sky I had a 500 HP 3.8L pushrod, iron block V6 with a Supercharger. 12 flat in the 1/4. 28 mpg. From a 1960 era block design. I enjoy both the thrill of the 1/4 mile and the twisties of a technical track.

Glad your wife has a car to enjoy and understand your desire to get ride of a problematic car.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top