2007 Saturn Sky Redline: First Drive

Saturn introduced the Sky roadster in March, and ever since it's been moving off dealership lots faster than almost any model in the country. The stunner is an exercise in cost efficiency — it’s only $25,195, and offers a sporty feel — though it never delivers a true sports-car feel because of its anemic 177-hp engine. The Red Line version features a turbocharged version of the Sky’s four-cylinder engine, bumping power to 260 hp. Did it help?

Mike Hanley: I don't think small-roadster enthusiasts will be disappointed in the Red Line. The regular Sky is an eye-catching roadster, and putting a turbocharged 260-hp engine under its hood finally fulfills the promise of its looks. The Red Line's engine hits its stride at around 4,000 rpm and pulls strongly up to its redline. I just wish the redline were a little bit farther up the tach; it's all too easy to hit the rev limiter when pushing the smooth-spinning four-cylinder. There are some clanking sounds in the driveline at parking lot speeds, but they disappear once you're under way.

The suspension is firm, but it delivered a relatively compliant ride on the predominately rough roads I drove. There's not much extra room in the cockpit, but it's not overly snug for its class, either.

Comments

so wait, i've heard reports that the sky/solstice (upgraded ones) can run either as quick, or even quicker, than a Mustang GT, and yet everyone raves about that? hrm...

Totally different vehicles. The Mustang GT oversteers like a boat, while the Sky and Solstice are competent track cars. Think about comparing a Mustang to a Miata, and then you'll see why it doesn't work. But yes, the 'Stang goes faster in a straight line than either GM car.

Im saying why is it that everyone is raving towards the Mustang GT, that only has 300hp, when the Solstice/Sky is quicker, yet they say "it doesn't knock their socks off." And Kelsey, I know the difference between the 2 cars, but THANKS!

there is a huge difference between a Mustang GT and a Red Line. The Red Line may be "quicker" in all the slalom tests but who drives like that outside of a track?
Also we never mentioned the mustang. But Compare this to the Honda S2000 I just reviewed where everyone slammed me for not thinking it was the best car of all time.
The Sky red line does not hold a candle to that machine. I will say that. Of course it's still about $7K less. For the value its a good performer but that's about it.

As long as it's a GM product it will eventually show it's true colors - unreliable junk. How long until the rebates start kicking in? LOL.
Is Saturn still begging Honda for their V6's because they can't come up with a quality one on their own. As my neighbor recently said, "The ONLY reason I let my wife buy a VUE was because it had the Honda V6."

I was suckered into buying two GM products - both were total p.o.s. I didn't have much luck with the one Ford I bought neither. Luckily I ventured into an Acura dealer one day and WOW now that's how a car should be designed and built!
I love how Ford and GM have become so predictable with their rebates. Do you think when they design their junk they already know that it's going to be a '3k or 5k rebate car'.

Ford and GM should leave the car business to the Japanese and Koreans.

As I said in another post GM has vastly improved quality according to recent studies from JD Power. As the company actually scales back it should improve and as we're seeing with Toyota's expansion their quality is suffering. That seems to be a universal problem not reserved to just the Big 3.

Dave,
I think the point you are missing is that GM, Ford, and even Chrysler can win all the 30-60-90-120 day awards they want, but show me a GM-
Ford-Chrysler that is trouble free after 6 years and holds at least 40% of it's value and I'll show you a Unicorn. There is a reason that GM is losing billions and Ford's best selling car is still the Ford Taurus (thank you fleet sales). Don't even get me started on the rebates...

Show me any car that has ever held 40% of its value after 6 years of use Dave.

You guys are stuck on brand names like it matters. Companies help each other draft things and trade patents all the time. Ford and Mazda work hand in hand, Acura and Honda, Subaru and Suzuki, etc they all sell back and forth it's not about brand quality it's about how much money they can make even if it means putting a different logo on the same parts.

The Sky is an individual Model not just a "GM" the engine uses technologies from many patents for example the oil cooling jets for the pistons were used in miatas more than a decade ago, the forced injection is used in mitsobishi and the dual VVT is used in dodges yet no of that stuff is in any of the previous Saturns so can you still judge it by the tag?

Uh, Acura and Honda trade patents huh? Who'd have thunk it, amazing huh?

For the record, the Sky is supposed to do 5.5 seconds from zero to 60, and 13.9 in the quarter mile, and the Mustang GT about 5.2 seconds to sixy, and 13.8 in the quarter mile.

So yeah, it's quick, but it's not quicker than the GT by anyone's measurements.

Different cars anyways, as they've said. One is a small roadster, and the other is a genre-unto-itself, at least until the Camaro and Challenger return.

Actually, the Sky Redline nearly matches the Mustang GT in standing 1/4 mile times (13.9 vs 13.8 sec). Also, the Sky RL destroys the Mustang on the Skidpad, which should translate into much better handling. On a closed-course, I would bet that the Sky RL beats the Convertible Mustang V8 with a cheaper price to boot!

But one look at a Sky versus a Mustang, and there's no comparison--the Sky is fresh and unlike nothing on the road, whereas the Mustang is, well, like your father's mustang...

one other thing. there are many reports that the Auto transmission actually outperforms the manual tranny on the Sky Redline in straightline testing. I would be interested to hear if you were able to test any autos. According to my sources, the auto consistently gets sub-5.5sec 0-60 times and is much smoother to drive. Given that there are a significant number of buyers of the auto tranny, why is it that we seldom get to read reviews that compare autos against one another? as a non-journalist I would be very interested in the answer to this.

Thanks!

Actually i think Ford did a great job with the styling of the mustange!! Although I am not usually a fan of the unreliable domestic brands.. But notice I said domestic and NOT American made. There is no such thing as American made... not any more. The Honda Acord is build completely in Ohio. And they do often trade patents... Anyway, I would like to drive the redline, I would think that if it runs quarter mile times that close to the mustange it will completely out perform on the road. Personally I love small cars that take a nice tight turn. I used to have an eagle talon tsi turbo awd. not the fastest, but could turn on dime and a blast to drive. So besides the usual testoserone driven quarter mile numbers, what do you really want in a car? frankly i'm waiting for subaru to make a 2 door with the sti engine. screw the mustange.

Man i don't know wut some of u r saying bout the sky saying that it's basically the same thing as a bmw Z4 (base) and a Nissan 350Z if you think about it. The performance is basically the same in all the cars except the Z4 but i believe you're getting ripped off wit the 350Z because it's the same thing than the sky except wit 40 horsepower which the sky makes up for wit everything else.

hey umm you are right man. oh and the ford mustang sucks too it's sooooo overrated and plus saturn sky is the only american car i really like instead of like the corvette or dodge viper

What's wrong with all of you that are thinking that the Mustang is better than the sky. First of all the SKY has basically the same performance than the mustang but the sky costs less and it has better features. The value for money on the sky is better and, obviously the styling for the sky is better. THERE'S NO COMPARISON BETWEEN THE TWO BECAUSE ONE (THE MUSTANG) HAS PRETTY MUCH OVERSTAYED IT'S WELCOME AND UNTIL THEY REDESIGN IT, IT'S GONNA BE WORSE THAN THE SKY. The only reason you might think that the mustang is better is because of its four seats, but saying how small they are whats the point of having them. If you want to get ripped off buy the mustang but the sky is better in every aspect.

i hate when people that do reviews for cars "expertly" dont no anythin bout cars. all of them care only about cars people have bought a lot of but then say the other cars suck. im gonna laugh when everyone buys the sky and theyre gonna change their mind

We have a car club for enthusiasts of the Saturn Sky and Pontiac Solstice in Phoenix Arizona and we currently have two dozen members. We do rides and car shows every month, and I can attest to the fact that we are LOVING these cars -- a real automotive phenomenon. Check us out at www.sky-sol.com.

how did they get the idea of making a car that not only looks good but can handle anything and every thing on the road. but how much horse power does it put out.

Saturn Sky Redline.net is a website dedicated to the Saturn Sky and Saturn Sky Redline. This site is not forum based (but it does have one) so it makes it easy to find the information you are looking for. We have general info, pictures, videos, and a forum. Come check us out at www.saturnskyredline.net

I have been reading the blogs about the Redline and how it compares to the Mustang GT and I have to make a few comments. 1. Comparing these two cars is like comparing apples and oranges. Comparing it to a Corvette is closer to being correct that to a Mustang. The Redline really should be compared to a car like the Miata and only after a couple of years on the road to give it a chance to work out the bugs, which they are still doing. 2. I noticed that the performance numbers you were giving the Mustang GT were for the convertible model. The coupe gets to 1320 ft at 13.5 seconds not 13.8 as some of you wer saying. The Saturn is also probably pretty muched maxed out on the power and torque for the 4 cylinder motor. It would take less than $1k to put the Mustang into the 12sec category or $4k or so added to make it handle a lot better. Given the fact that you can get the Mustang GT out the door for less than the base price of the Saturn, I think I would rather go with the V8, and I did. Mine is a 2007 Mustang GT, 5-speed with the GT appearance package and the active anti theft alarm. Including tags, taxes and all the rest of the added costs mine was $28,495 out the door.

Sure, GM is using Honda engines, but GM has ignored Honda's warning against using Dexcool in their engines.... so they become as unreliable as every other GM product.

Hey rick I have the same mustang as you when it was stock, dont tell me its mineral grey. I put in a Rousch Stage 3 Kit, which gives my stang 415 horsepower and 385 ft./lbs. of torque, so dont tell me its overrated, sure it costs more with the kit and all, but hell there arent many 415 hp skys driving around anyway.

Rick, just one thing about the engine in the Sky... its no where near maxed out. If you are a car guy and havnt heard of the Ecotec engine....well.... your not a car guy. There are Ecotec engines out there running 800hp and more AND getting almost 40 drag runs out of the engine before having to be rebuilt. There is a reason GM openly states this is, pound for pound, the most powerfull engine they have on the road today.

Consider this: 800 hp is a lot. On a 122 cubic inch motor with 750 hp -- three-quarters of a thousand -- you're basically dealing with 6.14 hp per cubic inch. Pressures and stresses of all kinds -- thermal and mechanical loading across the board -- escalate to extreme levels. A Chevrolet 5.7-liter LS1 V8 with this much specific power (horsepower per cubic inch) would be making 2,137 hp.

You can do 1000hp with the SAAB engine (ecotec) and only replace 50% of the original parts on the motor!!!!! TRY THAT FORD/MAZDA!!!!!

All this controversy between Sky RL and Mustang GT. You can't compare. Yes the ford has back seats but its not a ROADSTER! If you want fuzzy dice and the rumble sound that your grand daddy had, pick up a mustang! If you want something that handles incredible in the mountains and on twisted roads, the SKY RL is UNBELIEVABLE! I have had BOTH CARS AND the REDLINE WILL WITHOUT A DOUBT BLOW THE MUSTANG AWAY IN EVERY WAY EXCEPT FOR THE STRAIGHT LINE WHICH WHEN DO YOU EVER DRIVE 130 MILES AN HOUR ANYHOW UNLESS YOU ARE AN IDIOT! GM needs to quite the tranny shifter when driving slower over bumps but other than that, it is awesome!

there is nothing, NOTHING, that can truly compare with the Red Line in terms of bang for the buck in its class. the Mustang GT IS NOT IN THE SAME CLASS. the closest thing is an S2000, but that is much pricier. same for the Z4, and the 350Z, but it has 46 more hp so it doesn't really count. This car is in a class of its own(at least until the mext Mazdaspeed MX-5 comes out). END OF DISCUSSION.

People can continue about how their Acura or Honda "might last longer". Build quality and rebates is the only thing they have to say against someone telling them they paid too much for there car. My Cobalt SS coupe was 20g's CAN and it can easily keep up with a new Civic Si that costs over 30g's...Buying a sport compact thats what you care about or you would have bought something else. And as for the Sky RL against the s2000...my cell phone hard drive has more torque then that overpriced piece of rice!

I have one question for the SKY Redline fanboys out there.

Why on earth would I spend the money for a new SKY RL when I could purchase a gently used Mistu EVO 9?

Yes I know they are different cars, one is rally inspired, the other a roadster. But if we're talking in terms of shere performance. The EVO has a better 1/4 mile, better skidpad, better slalom, etc. I can find an EVO for the cost of a SKY RL with less than 18K miles on it. Couple that witht the potential for a +800 hp car.

I just dont understand the fanboyism here. Hell one of the complaints about it is the GEARBOX! Ummm DUH only one of the most important parts of a narow powercurve boost engine.

Just a tastey tidbit to this debate of comparing the the Sky RL to your ricers and pusstangs. First off, take it easy, I mean the car's been out for a year and a half and you're judging it so harshly. Secondly you should consider that in an article I recently read (I don't remember the URL you'll have to look it up) that said GM was going to put an LS-9 motor in the sky. For those of you not familiar with this, that means 900 crank power and about 850 makes that to the tires, and this is out of the factory, so now we can start a new debate between the bugatti and the sky and I bet anyone who puts in 2 grand into their sky will destroy a bugatti for about 200 grand less. I rest my case. (and don't tell me the bugatti and the LS-9 Sky aren't in the same class, what other car on earth ((according to power) could you compare it to?))

Are you kidding??? How many things will break in that little car if you push it past 200rwhp? The mustangs parts are designed for high horsepower/torque and are good up to around 450rwhp. I just can't see how things will hold up in the Sky under that kind of stress. I think it would take a bit more than 2 grand...

aha. yeah, a LITTLE more than 2 grand ;-)

At this point, the team began to pump up the volume in a rigorous series of tests while a crew stood by with fire extinguishers. Testing at a given power level concluded when the engine could survive a series of 8-10 full-power dyno "Sprints" from peak torque through maximum power in 50 rpm steps, concluding with at least six seconds at full power, for a total of at least 20 very hard seconds. GM Racing successively verified the Ecotec survived happily at 200, 225 and 250 hp over numerous dyno pulls.

However, as the Ecotec pushed through 283 hp at 4400 rpm, all four connecting rods simultaneously failed catastrophically and smashed through the side of the block. Laboratory analysis subsequently revealed a mid-beam compression fracture on all four stock powder-metal rods. All other components checked out fine. GM Racing installed a package of components you'd certainly install if you were taking the trouble to open an engine to upgrade the connecting rods: Super-duty forged Crower X-beam rods -- plus 10:1 JE forged pistons with thicker top ring lands and Hastings moly ring packs. The GM Racing team installed larger fuel injectors, and continued lean on the engine. Power quickly advanced to 350 hp, at which point the engine ran out of breathing room on the exhaust side. The ratio of Reactants (exhaust) to Products (inlet charge) is very high on a nitrous motor. GM Racing found the stock Ecotec exhaust manifold became sufficiently restrictive above 350-hp that injudiciously adding more nitrous could actually make less horsepower -- due to dramatically decreased efficiencies in scavenging exhaust gases from the combustion chamber clearance volume. "We finally made 370-375 hp on nitrous," says Bothwell, "but the engine was really pissed off."

The Mustang GT is a lot faster. 0-60 in 4.9 and and the quarter mile in 13.5

I drive a 2008 Pontiac solstice gxp and I love it! I also like and have had Mustangs. I am 61 years old and still go drag racing, my stock sol with just a bsr tuner has 312hp and runs the 1/4 mile in 13.35 and 0-60 in 4.5. If I had listen to the reviews I would have missed having a great car that I just love to drive! Are you just looking to criticize it? The Sky Red line and Solstice gxp are great looking fun to drive and go fast, every thing I Look for in a car.See if you can say something nice about it even if its made in the U.S.A..

I have a 2007 Sky RL, 2002 Acura RSX Type S, and a 1995 Ford Explorer.

To the import junkies: Domestics can last a long time. Example the Explorer 286K miles less than $150 a year in maintenence for all the years it has been owned averaged. $1950 total is what I have spent in repairs, tires, brakes/AC/Parts for 13 years!

Next I bet all you gang bangin V8 lovers are singing a different tune now! LOL!

Mustang GT I was thinking of getting one way before gas went up. Even then though I was like V8=MUCHO GAS! Low and behold I am glad I said sky. 22 City 31 HWY. Wow I even get 20 MPG when I am romping on the gas kicking in that turbo. Got to love DI motors.

Also you can buy a canned tune at the moment to take you from 260 HP to 320 HP. All that in less than 30 seconds.

Now the person who said that foreign cars don't hold 40% or more value after 6 years.

I just sold my 2002 Acura RSX Type S for 13.5K that would be over 52% value retention from my 25K price that I paid.

Not to be unfair though that car was a show car and it in show room condition with 14K miles. So basically a new car, but still. I just went by KBB values.

The Sky is much better than the Mustang if you are like me and you liked the Fiat Spyders, MGB's and other two seater roadsters.

Mustang is a cruiser meant for a group or four people. Probably not much room for them anymore, but the quality is great and a lot of thought goes into the design.

Basically a car is as good as you take care of it. If you rag it out don't change the oil and care for the car you won't have a car for long.

I love my Sky though and like my Acura it needs a few modifications before it will be exactly what I want, but if was exactly what I wanted then it would be an Ferrari Enzo or Lamborgini Murcialago convert.