Stunning Sky falls down on details
She's a stunner, no two ways about it. If you're going to spend any time in a Saturn Sky, you're going to have to get used to people doing double-takes, stopping mid-stride to stare and coming up to you in parking lots to ask you what it is.
With a more aggressive, angular stance than its brother, Pontiac's Solstice, the Sky actually has a more feminine feel to it. Less sports car, more boulevard cruiser (although it certainly has a sporty side).
My tester was mostly black, inside and out, with a good-sized chunk of red inserted in the leather seats, steering wheel and in leather panels in the door. Very sexy. Seating was plenty comfortable, too; a little more on the luxe side again, than the sporty. Downright cushy.
Piano black accents around the centre console were a nice touch of class, and although the dash was largely an expanse of pebbled plastic, it wasn't too cheap-looking.
Gauges and knobs weren't overly fussy and did their job well; my only minor complaint concerned the gas gauge, which was in the centre of the dash's gauge trio, and so small and deeply recessed as to be hard to read on a bright day. In another minor case of style over substance, the window controls are too far back on the armrest to be comfortable to use.
Head and legroom were sufficient even for the lankiest occupants.
For a Sunday drive along twisty roads with the wind at your back, your sweetie by your side, and no particular destination in mind, you'd be hard-pressed to do better.
The turbo version, dubbed Red Line, is fast and smooth. It tracks straight, turns well with minimal body lean (unless you're really pushing it, and that would only spoil the mood), and its capable five-speed automatic transmission shifts imperceptibly. The engine offers a sexy, rumbly voice just audible from within; a little louder with the top down, but never annoyingly so.
It has a retro feel to it that includes the ride quality — comfortable without being too remote, with just enough road feedback to feel like you're really driving.
In spite of the side mirrors' being rather pokey, visibility is decent even with the top up, which is often an issue with ragtops.
Braking is, although competent, less than razor-sharp, but never gave me cause for concern. The vehicle feels heavy, and is heavier than the MX-5 although lighter than the Crossfire and about the same weight as the S2000.
There is so much right with this car's handling and performance, it's a crying shame there is so much wrong in the details.
First, there's that roof. Oh, woe is me, that roof — a blight on what is otherwise a beautiful — and beautifully driveable — vehicle.
I am a huge fan of roadsters, and most of the ones out there do a capable enough job of getting the top down with a minimum of fuss. GM, apparently, has opted for originality over capability, and come up with an absolutely baffling roof design. First off, from an esthetics standpoint, the big grommets in the trunk into which the roof is anchored when up, only cheapen the look, because the reinforced panels around them look like they've been stuck on as an afterthought.
Secondly, the mechanics are, well, terrible. Here was my routine for getting the roof down (and I checked with bigger, brawnier colleagues to find out if it was just me — it wasn't): approach car with key fob in hand; click button to release reverse-opening trunk, which releases giant metal pegs from aforementioned grommets; get into car to access handle mounted above rearview mirror; release roof by pulling on handle; push roof enough to separate it from the windshield; get out of car; pull back roof on driver's side; push roof down into "trunk" (and I'll get to those ironic quotation marks in a moment); walk around to passenger side and push that side down too because the trunk lid wouldn't close if I only pushed it one side; push down on trunk lid; release trunk lid because I was never, ever able to push it hard enough on the first try; push it down again. (Colleague Joe Duarte says it works like a charm if throw yourself on top of it from the rear, but I never found a private enough spot to suffer the indignity.) To put the roof up: release trunk mechanism; pull up roof; get in and fight with roof because the pegs that are supposed to fit nicely into holes in the top of the windshield miss half the time and lodge themselves beneath their intended holes; try again to get wee pegs into wee holes; pull handle into closed position. Whew.
The obvious comparisons — to Mazda's MX-5, Chrysler's Crossfire — only stress the point.
The other travesty of the otherwise-charming Sky is storage, and not just the tiny trunk. Even with the roof up, storage back there is minimal thanks to the big ol' hump onto which the roof folds itself when down. It will hold a few bags or even a set of golf clubs (so I'm told) but you have to put them in, then put the top down, then put top up again to retrieve them — if you want to leave the top down, fuhgedaboutit. You're looking at maybe a purse. And I say maybe, because I had to molest and manipulate my purse pretty badly to get it stuffed into the gap between the roof and the rear wall of the trunk. But cabin storage is no great shakes either. There's a glovebox. There's a small leather pocket on the front of the seats between your legs. There's a cubby between the seats again cheapened by an opening mechanism that pops out and twists and seems far from sturdy.
And that's it.
The centre "armrest" is in fact a big plastic saddle-ish thing that straddles the driveshaft hump. It holds no cubbies, nor even a flat spot on which to rest an iPod. There isn't a place to so much as chuck a Kleenex — not even into the cupholders because, although there are three of them, none has a full bottom.
The two that pop out between the seats are inconveniently far back at an awkward angle for sipping while steering; the third pops out beside the passenger's left knee, a bad spot for the driver to use whether there's a second person aboard or not, and not the greatest spot for the passenger's use.
Incidentally, the Sky was my first taste of XM Satellite radio, and after a week's steady diet of comedy channels and Oprah, I give it a resounding "meh." I'll stick to my iPod, thanks. I enjoyed the comedy channels but after a week started to notice the same material in rotation — and Oprah, baby, what's with all the commercials? Not like you need the money!
The Saturn Sky reminded me of that old saw about the horse designed by committee — at first blush a ravishing thoroughbred, but once I'd gotten to know her, she turned out have a hearty helping of camel genes in her.
Still, they're selling well and deservedly so — for a second car, a weekend treat, it's hard to argue with a love not diminished by its impracticality (aren't those the best kind?).
The model is only in its first year and I have high hopes for its maturation. Would I buy one? No. But I am very keen to see the next generation.
MSRP Range: $33,125 - $38,380
Engines available: 2.4L I4 (177 hp; 166 lb.-ft.); 2.0L turbocharged I4 (260/260)
Transmissions available: 5-spd man.; 5-spd auto
Competitors: Mazda MX-5, Chrysler Crossfire roadster, Honda S2000
Strengths: Stunning looks; comfortable interior and ride; fast, smooth engine
Weaknesses: Roof mechanics; lack of storage
Find a dealer that sells the Saturn Sky
Other vehicle reviews for Saturn
Autonet Best Choice 2007 Convertibles (less than $50,000)
Latest News
-
1.
-
2.
-
3.
-
4.
-
5.
-
6.
-
7.
-
8.
-
9.
-
10.