[WishfulThinking]

Consider the following estimates...

impala ~3400 lbs 3.4L/180HP ~30mpg
malibu ~3100 lbs 2.2L/145HP ~34mpg
sky ~2900 lbs 2.4L/170HP ~28mpg

Does this seem odd to anyone but me. I can tell you that fuel economy is not my top concern when looking at the sky, but when an impala can weigh more, have a bigger, more powerful engine, and have better (albeit estimated)highway milage, something seems wrong. I would think the whole point of having the complexity of VVT, would be to get that best-of-both-worlds performance (power when you need it, and economy the rest of the time).

Don't get me wrong. I'm not knocking the car as a whole. I thought the solstice was cool when I first saw pictures of it, and then I found this forum and got hooked on the Sky. (My first car was an Opel GT, so the mini-corvette-ness and distant Opel cousin-ness of this car gives it a special attraction for me.) I just get hesitant when I see things that don't add up, and this, to me, doesn't add up.

 

[marklynn70]

I bet the gas mileage will look a little better when it is released. But you are right when you look at it like you have the numbers definitely do not add up.

 

[sky_vue]

Consider the following estimates...
impala ~3400 lbs 3.4L/180HP ~30mpg
malibu ~3100 lbs 2.2L/145HP ~34mpg
sky ~2900 lbs 2.4L/170HP ~28mpg

The tuning makes the difference here.. you are getting 10 fewer horses with 1 liter less of displacement. You're fuel economy will take a hit because of that increase. They have to tune it to run on a higher compression ratio and what not. So I'm not all that surprised that this is the case.

 

[brentil]

There's several issues that make your comparison non-scientific. If you want to get a better idea look for the comparisons I did comparing the 2.4L G6, 2.4L HHR, 2.4L Cobalt SS, 2.4L Solstice.

Once a mass is in motion it doesn't take as much effort to keep it moving if it's aerodynamicly shaped as it does to accelerate it. The Malibu and Impala are Sedans with well designed air flows. The Solstice/Sky are blunt nosed Roadsters with open tops. Their coefficient of drag is humongous compared to that of the Sedans. This means it take far more effort to keep them moving against the friction caused by their shapes then the Sedans.

Also the values you quoted are for the Solstice, and not the Sky. I've mentioned a couple times that compared to the Solstice I believe the Sky will have slightly better values. The Solstice has 7HP more power then the Sky because it is tuned for better performance.

 

[marklynn70]

There's several issues that make your comparison non-scientific. If you want to get a better idea look for the comparisons I did comparing the 2.4L G6, 2.4L HHR, 2.4L Cobalt SS, 2.4L Solstice.

Once a mass is in motion it doesn't take as much effort to keep it moving if it's aerodynamicly shaped as it does to accelerate it. The Malibu and Impala are Sedans with well designed air flows. The Solstice/Sky are blunt nosed Roadsters with open tops. Their coefficient of drag is humongous compared to that of the Sedans. This means it take far more effort to keep them moving against the friction caused by their shapes then the Sedans.

Also the values you quoted are for the Solstice, and not the Sky. I've mentioned a couple times that compared to the Solstice I believe the Sky will have slightly better values. The Solstice has 7HP more power then the Sky because it is tuned for better performance.

Your certainly are a plethora of information. Do you work at GM, Pontiac, or Saturn? If do not then I applaud your ability to stay on top of current information. And finally my thanks for keeping those of us like me in the know.

 

[Delnari]

If you think those numbers are good. Look at what an C6 Corvette gets with it's 6-speed transmission on the highway, 28 mpg! This is a car with good 1-4 low gears that weights nearly 3200 lbs (full tank of gas).

Everytime I start making comparsions of the Sky to a Corvette the more I want one.

 

[WishfulThinking]

I understand that there are a lot of variables to consider, but every now and then, you have to step back and look at the big picture. After creating the original post, I thought to myself that gearing may play a major role. They could have traded economy for a better looking 0-60 or something. I'll even buy into the rag-top having some negative impact.

On the other hand, I feel like I've crossed into bizarro-world when someone calls the sky blunt-nosed, and the impala aerodynamic. (not that I'd say the opposite is true either.)

I think this whole comparison got stuck in my mind 2-3 years ago, when I noticed that the malibu used to be this way. At the time, the impala was bigger, had more horsepower, and got slightly better highway mileage. (and was only marginally more expensive.) Just looking at the numbers, you'd think the malibu guys missed a design meeting or something, and wonder why anybody would buy a malibu if it were sitting next to an impala.

Ultimately, I could tolerate the 28mpg number, if the performance justifies it. I could tolerate average performance, if the mileage justifies it. (Again, I thought the point of VVT was to get the best of both) If I get stuck with average performance and 28mpg, I'm afraid I'll have a serious case of buyer's regret. I'm anxious to start hearing real-world Solstice info coming in, even if it's not a direct comparison.

 

[brentil]

Your certainly are a plethora of information. Do you work at GM, Pontiac, or Saturn? If do not then I applaud your ability to stay on top of current information. And finally my thanks for keeping those of us like me in the know.

Nope, I'm not a GM employee. I wish I was, but I don't.

WishfulThinking: Gearing is also a very big determining factor of fuel economy too. The Solstice will supposedly hit 0-60 in 7~7.2s. The shape of a car greatly impacts its fuel economy. I was refering to the Solstice having a round blunt nose, the Sky fuel economy values have no been released yet so we don't know if it's nose helps it any or not comapred to the Solstice.

 

[SkyMan 08]

I understand that there are a lot of variables to consider, but every now and then, you have to step back and look at the big picture. After creating the original post, I thought to myself that gearing may play a major role. They could have traded economy for a better looking 0-60 or something. I'll even buy into the rag-top having some negative impact.

On the other hand, I feel like I've crossed into bizarro-world when someone calls the sky blunt-nosed, and the impala aerodynamic. (not that I'd say the opposite is true either.)

I think this whole comparison got stuck in my mind 2-3 years ago, when I noticed that the malibu used to be this way. At the time, the impala was bigger, had more horsepower, and got slightly better highway mileage. (and was only marginally more expensive.) Just looking at the numbers, you'd think the malibu guys missed a design meeting or something, and wonder why anybody would buy a malibu if it were sitting next to an impala.

Ultimately, I could tolerate the 28mpg number, if the performance justifies it. I could tolerate average performance, if the mileage justifies it. (Again, I thought the point of VVT was to get the best of both) If I get stuck with average performance and 28mpg, I'm afraid I'll have a serious case of buyer's regret. I'm anxious to start hearing real-world Solstice info coming in, even if it's not a direct comparison.

Another thing to consider, the smaller 4 cyl engines have to rev higher to maintain a good steady speed on cruise control on the highway, the larger engines can achieve this at a lower rpm therfore saving more fuel.. an example is my Monte Carlo with a 3.4 V6 runs around 1800RPM at 70 MPH, whie My son's Ion 5 speed will run at 3000 RPM at 70... there are two additional cylinders in my Monte, and on the highway I will average 33 MPG while my son's Ion gets 34 MPG... Much larger car, close to same gas mileage... once the car is up to speed it is how much power does it take to Maintain that speed... Overdrive gearing is set to provide a balance of power and gas mileage... If the Saturn could maintain speed at 1800 RPM it's mileage would be vastly superior...some manufaturers even recommend not running ih high gear till you reach a certian speed... because the engine does not have enough power and will lug down at a lower speed...