Isn't anyone even suspicious?

8496 Views 47 Replies 13 Participants Last post by swatthefly, Mar 7, 2005

DCaley

Discussion Starter · Feb 16, 2005

I've read a good deal on this and the Solstice site about the missing top for these cars. I've seen some interesting and amusing rumors. But people. Manual soft tops just aren't that hard to develop.

Take a look at the chassis pixs. Those from the rear show twin vertical members in the middle of the trunk over the diff. All those nice holes are attachment points for something. Engineering that did not come for free. That isn't at all like my old 73 MGB. Nor a Miata. Or any other soft top I know of.

The gas tank is clearly behind the seats. Look.
The exhaust system is underneath. Look. See for yourself.

Check out the mule pix and you will find four unpainted steel discs in the corners of the trunk lid. Look like some sort of attachment points to me.
How about prototype hinges that release?

Check out the trunk pix from recent car shows. Look for attachment points on the side of the trunk opening about half way back. I've never seen a car with those. Have you?

Check out the Opel Tigra. It has a dual acting trunk with side struts in about the right places. It opens at the front to swallow a power hard top, and from the back to swallow golf clubs. The G6 offers the same arrangement.

The Sky will be $5K more than the Solstice...

The Sky appears to be a twin of the new Opel GT. An artical on the net for that car showed a hard top... Have not been able to find it again. Sorry.

I may be wrong, but there is considerable evidence out there for a power hard top on the Kappa. So don't go ordering any hard top just yet.

A little mystery is a good thing.

Thanks Bob!

1 - 20 of 48 Posts

KappaMan

· #2 · Feb 16, 2005

DCaley said:
I've read a good deal on this and the Solstice site about the missing top for these cars. I've seen some interesting and amusing rumors. But people. Manual soft tops just aren't that hard to develop.

Take a look at the chassis pixs. Those from the rear show twin vertical members in the middle of the trunk over the diff. All those nice holes are attachment points for something. Engineering that did not come for free. That isn't at all like my old 73 MGB. Nor a Miata. Or any other soft top I know of.

The gas tank is clearly behind the seats. Look.
The exhaust system is underneath. Look. See for yourself.

Check out the mule pix and you will find four unpainted steel discs in the corners of the trunk lid. Look like some sort of attachment points to me.
How about prototype hinges that release?

Check out the trunk pix from recent car shows. Look for attachment points on the side of the trunk opening about half way back. I've never seen a car with those. Have you?

Check out the Opel Tigra. It has a dual acting trunk with side struts in about the right places. It opens at the front to swallow a power hard top, and from the back to swallow golf clubs. The G6 offers the same arrangement.

The Sky will be $5K more than the Solstice...

The Sky appears to be a twin of the new Opel GT. An artical on the net for that car showed a hard top... Have not been able to find it again. Sorry.

I may be wrong, but there is considerable evidence out there for a power hard top on the Kappa. So don't go ordering any hard top just yet.

A little mystery is a good thing.

Thanks Bob!

Well, you're a bit off on a lot of the stuff. In the end, we'll see, but here's some guidance.

First, don't use the mules as any guide, I heard there was no hinges and the rear decklid was "racing pinned" on. Having seen a few of them around SE MI up reasonably close, I'd say this is true.

The gas tank is not behind the seats on the production car. It is behind the seats on the chassis "skeleton" car, but it only holds enough fuel to move it around, few gallons or less. I'm assuming this was done because they wanted you to see the differential and a fuel tank sitting on top would have obscured it.

A 'vette-type fuel tank, I'm assuming, would have been too cost prohibitive (dual senders, saddle shape with two low points... etc...).

Manual tops with weird things like buttresses are hard to develop.

Yep, exhaust is underneath.

The solstice only has a rear-hinged trunk - no dual hinge, no dual opening. The Sky won't be much different - the attachments for the AFBTS's are still present on the Sky, which tells us the Sky will have the same roof. These add a significant amount of complexity and take a tremendous amount of volume (between the AFBTS accomodations and the rear-hinge).

All "photos" of the Kappa "Opel GT" were photochops. No real hard top Opel GT's exist. You can see where they 'chopped the photo.

So, no, I'm not suspicious. And if you're holding your breath for a an OEM hardtop, retractable hardtop, or a powered soft top, I hope you're an oyster diver, 'cause you'll be holding it a long long time.

See less See more

KappaMan

· #3 · Feb 16, 2005

BTW, DCaley, welcome to the skyroadster forum! :cheers:

Some of us have been around on the Solsticeforum for a while and have talked about a lot of this stuff (as I'm sure you've seen, if you're looking at the trunk photos of the "Mayan Pyramid" fuel tank location). There's also some folks who have been around or seen cars with tops, gotten sneak peaks at underneath, and have even sweet-talked some of the show people into operating the trunk, or cupholders, and stuff like that.

The Sky will be a re-skinned and new interior on the basic Solstice (or Kappa, if you like) underpinnings. The $5k more for a Sky is a bit high - if you piece together options, and allow for the Sky to be packaged with more standard equipment (think things like RKE and AC - which the base Solstice at $20,000 doesn't have), and you get more like a $1000-$1500 premium over the Solstice - the 2006 Solstice - comparably equipped, maybe a bit less.

AC by itself can run from several hundred to over $1000 just by itself - making that $20,000 Solstice but-I-really-gotta-have-AC closer to $21,000. You've still got a base single CD player, no subwoofers, crank windows... need I go on?

I emphasized the 2006 because I'm willing to bet that the next model year will see a significant increase in price for the Solstice - making the Sky premium even more in line.

See less See more

SkyCaptain

· #4 · Feb 16, 2005

Well, I'm at least a little suspicious. DCaley has one very good point.

DCaley said:
Take a look at the chassis pixs. Those from the rear show twin vertical members in the middle of the trunk over the diff. All those nice holes are attachment points for something. Engineering that did not come for free. That isn't at all like my old 73 MGB. Nor a Miata. Or any other soft top I know of.

His other points aside, those vertical members are there on purpose and might explain the horrible trunk. I don't think a power soft top or a stowable hardtop is completely out of the question - at least from a design point of view.

swatthefly

· #5 · Feb 16, 2005

ok, i just went through all those pictures... the verticle members that you guys are referring to are the little pieces that look to be triangle and about 6 inches tall, a few inches in from the wheelwell? those pieces with the holes on them? are those the ones that you guys are speculating?

KappaMan

· #6 · Feb 16, 2005

I believe they are the ones. Forgive me if they aren't.

I suspect these are for whatever structure is needed to support the rear tub (for lack of a better term), which covers the gas tank, the rails, creates the floor of the trunk, in basically the shape of the carpet shown in the famous (or infamous) trunk pictures.

We don't know if this "tub" is metal, plastic, fabric, or whatever, but there has to be something that creates a boundary between the elements and components and the "inside" of the trunk.

If it (the tub) is secured to the rails and sealed to the body at the trunk flange (where the seal goes), it may require support to keep it from collapsing or vibrating.

At least that's what I think.

swatthefly

· #7 · Feb 16, 2005

kappaman said:
I believe they are the ones. Forgive me if they aren't.

I suspect these are for whatever structure is needed to support the rear tub (for lack of a better term), which covers the gas tank, the rails, creates the floor of the trunk, in basically the shape of the carpet shown in the famous (or infamous) trunk pictures.

We don't know if this "tub" is metal, plastic, fabric, or whatever, but there has to be something that creates a boundary between the elements and components and the "inside" of the trunk.

If it (the tub) is secured to the rails and sealed to the body at the trunk flange (where the seal goes), it may require support to keep it from collapsing or vibrating.

At least that's what I think.

this makes sense, however, notice that they could have easily had those "supports" closer to the wheelwells. why would they have chosen that spot for those pieces? dont get me wrong, this isnt an argument for the hardtop either, because that doesnt really explain the location of those either. and i know its not for the location of the trunklid/seals, mainly because the trunklid doesnt have to follow the same lines as the base of the trunk. im just a little confused at their location, thats all.

KappaMan

· #8 · Feb 17, 2005

Again, I think the "side pockets" of the "Mayan Pyramid" are necessary because of the AFBTS's - for them to fold up and stow in the trunk.

When stowed, the top can't be like a normal top, collapsing into three folds - they chose (probably again because of the AFBTS's) to go with a two-fold roof. In other words, the "roof" folds against the "backglass" and hinges somewhere behind where the seatbelts attach - give or take. This is the only way they can do this (I've tried several different ways to do it in my head and on paper, and keep getting messed up when I think about these "buttresses").

In the end, you have to fold up the buttresses, then hinge the roof and when you collapse it into the trunk, the buttresses take up the room beside the gas tank hump.

Bottom line: having a roof that stows completely in the trunk with a reverse-clamshell decklid and two winglet-buttress-AFBTS-thingies drives the packaging in the rear to what you see today.

brentil

· #9 · Feb 17, 2005

But where will I keep my pink boots then?

What Solsticeman said is pretty much the conclusion we've come to about the roof/trunk/AFBTS system.

ho2go

· #10 · Feb 17, 2005

brentil said:
But where will I keep my pink boots then?

What Solsticeman said is pretty much the conclusion we've come to about the roof/trunk/AFBTS system.

In other words, what we know ain't amountin' to a pile of beans. =)

swatthefly

· #11 · Feb 17, 2005

kappaman said:
When stowed, the top can't be like a normal top, collapsing into three folds - they chose (probably again because of the AFBTS's) to go with a two-fold roof. In other words, the "roof" folds against the "backglass" and hinges somewhere behind where the seatbelts attach - give or take. This is the only way they can do this (I've tried several different ways to do it in my head and on paper, and keep getting messed up when I think about these "buttresses").

In the end, you have to fold up the buttresses, then hinge the roof and when you collapse it into the trunk, the buttresses take up the room beside the gas tank hump.

Bottom line: having a roof that stows completely in the trunk with a reverse-clamshell decklid and two winglet-buttress-AFBTS-thingies drives the packaging in the rear to what you see today.

so if i understand you correctly, the roof will only fold into TWO sections? of thats the case, how much more difficult would it be to have a hardtop convertable? that would be a two piece top as well. ???

brentil

· #12 · Feb 17, 2005

swatthefly said:
so if i understand you correctly, the roof will only fold into TWO sections? of thats the case, how much more difficult would it be to have a hardtop convertable? that would be a two piece top as well. ???

Yes, but a hard top doesn't compress down as much as a cloth/vynel top, so more initial trunk space would be requied. Also hard tops are vastly more expensive then cloth/vynel. You would also then HAVE to have it be an automatic top and not manual because of the sheer weight of it. So now your base Sky is a $30,000 car and not "below $25,000."

The G6 is a good representaiton of this. It's roof brings the trunk from about ~5.9 cu.ft. down to ~1.9 cu.ft. when stored.

swatthefly

· #13 · Feb 17, 2005

brentil said:
Yes, but a hard top doesn't compress down as much as a cloth/vynel top, so more initial trunk space would be requied. Also hard tops are vastly more expensive then cloth/vynel. You would also then HAVE to have it be an automatic top and not manual because of the sheer weight of it. So now your base Sky is a $30,000 car and not "below $25,000."

The G6 is a good representaiton of this. It's roof brings the trunk from about ~5.9 cu.ft. down to ~1.9 cu.ft. when stored.

ah, screw the trunk. if i wanted one, i'd buy a crown vic. and hadn't we only accounted for about $2000 worth of validation up from the solstice. do you think an upgrade from soft to hardtop could be had with about $3000?

SkyCaptain

· #14 · Feb 17, 2005

brentil said:
So now your base Sky is a $30,000 car and not "below $25,000."

I don't believe anyone is suggesting that the base Sky will have a power top. It can still be an option. A power hard top would be hard to fit, but a power soft top is feasible.

SkyCaptain

· #15 · Feb 17, 2005

swatthefly said:
do you think an upgrade from soft to hardtop could be had with about $3000?

One thing that you're gonna have to get used to around here is that everyone believes any option costs another $5000. I've seriously considered changing careers ever since I came here and saw how much people are willing to pay...

swatthefly

· #16 · Feb 17, 2005

SkyCaptain said:
One thing that you're gonna have to get used to around here is that everyone believes any option costs another $5000. I've seriously considered changing careers ever since I came here and saw how much people are willing to pay...

for another 2-3 grand, i would go with a hardtop convertable, however, for another 5-6 i would say nope. i cant see them doing a hardtop convertable for only $500 though. thats why i threw out 3 grand.

swatthefly

· #17 · Feb 17, 2005

honestly, it may be a while before we know for sure anyways, i just havent been able to rule out a hardtop convertable yet. and i really am hoping! :willy:

achieftain

· #18 · Feb 18, 2005

swatthefly said:
this makes sense, however, notice that they could have easily had those "supports" closer to the wheelwells. why would they have chosen that spot for those pieces? dont get me wrong, this isnt an argument for the hardtop either, because that doesnt really explain the location of those either. and i know its not for the location of the trunklid/seals, mainly because the trunklid doesnt have to follow the same lines as the base of the trunk. im just a little confused at their location, thats all.

Someone pointed out to me on the sol forum that those supports with holes actually get a crossmember bolted between them. I saw the photo of same with the brace but I don't recall where. I believe they also will be mtg points for inner and outer fenders. The location of this brace is under the mayan pyramid and may be some of the reason for it.

swatthefly

· #19 · Feb 18, 2005

achieftain said:
...those supports with holes actually get a crossmember bolted between them....

for what? i cant think of what they would need that for.

achieftain said:
...I believe they also will be mtg points for inner and outer fenders. The location of this brace is under the mayan pyramid and may be some of the reason for it.

again, my comment of why are they so many inches away from the fender? why cant the trunk go out to the wheelwells?

Also, everyone keeps talking about this "mayan pyramid" will someone please clarify?

brentil

· #20 · Feb 18, 2005

Head on over to the Solstice forums by clicking this link...
http://www.solsticeforum.com/forum/showpost.php?p=16325&postcount=11

This is the FAQ section about the trunk photos a member was able to get.

Here is an image of the trunk with the triangular braces.
http://www.solsticeforum.com/photopost/showphoto.php?photo=103&sort=2&cat=3014&page=2

If you look at both sets of images you'll see the Mayan Pyramid is what we're hypothesising is the fuel tank. If so there's a cross member across the top of those triangular supports that goes over the top of the fuel tank to cover the fuel pump and piping.

1 - 20 of 48 Posts

This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.