# Saturn Sky Red Line



## ExcelChampion (Oct 5, 2007)

Picked one up last week.  Now, let me say, before all of the "its a chick car" comments, let me just say 260 psychotic ponies, 260 lbs of pure adrenaline pulling torque, and 0 to 60 in 5.2 seconds.  Its a 2.0 turbo.  If you break the HP down by liters, that's 130 horses per liter.  

Oh yeah, and for the women (those that don't care about the above stuff), its Red with black leather interior...and its a CONVERTIBLE.

Really, I'm not bragging here, I'm just excited about it cuz it is a LOT of fun!  

Looks just like this:

http://stadium.weblogsinc.com/autoblog/hirezpics/PebbleConcepts - 6.jpg


----------



## starl (Oct 6, 2007)

There you go again, reminding us how old you are! mid-life crisis, huh >


----------



## ExcelChampion (Oct 6, 2007)

Uhhh...plew.  There you go, bursting my bubble.   

Well, November will be my 35th...is that mid-life?  Hmm, I guess a mid life crisis is better than the alternative...making up for...ahem...shortcomings.


----------



## starl (Oct 6, 2007)

35? is that all? I thought you were like 50 or something.
bah. you're still young.


----------



## ExcelChampion (Oct 6, 2007)

50?  Well, some say I am an 'old soul'...oh wait, I think it was ***hole...kinda sounds the same though.


----------



## NateO (Oct 6, 2007)

Hi Todd,



> Picked one up last week.  Now, let me say, before all of the "its a chick car" comments, let me just say 260 psychotic ponies, 260 lbs of pure adrenaline pulling torque, and 0 to 60 in 5.2 seconds.  Its a 2.0 turbo.  If you break the HP down by liters, that's 130 horses per liter.


Not bad at all, that's a lot pony-power/torque for such a light-weight application.

0 to 60 in 5.2 seconds, eh? Is it real wheel drive? How's the traction on launch?

When I search for Skyline, everything I'm finding is pulling up Nissan, not Saturn... 

F/I (turbo) will boost the output per litre. My naturally aspriated 6.1 litre Hemi cranks out 420 4WD bhp and 420 lb-ft of torque, dropping about ~360 to all four tires? If I apply F/I to it one of these days, 420 bhp jumps to over 500 bhp. Supposedly the drivetrain was designed to handle 600 bhp...

We'll see, I might get the next generation 6.4 litre Hemi which ships with a naturally aspriated 500+ bhp.

Carefull with these things off the light, they go 0-60 mph in 4.5 seconds, bone stock. Trying to run with a JGC SRT8, from a dig, has been confirmed as the leading cause for both weak stream and erectile dysfunction amongts grown male competitors. 

Here's a video of what this looks like:

http://www.wkjeeps.com/srt8_tv_ad.htm

I had a BMW 540 try me from a light one evening, I ran away from him like he was in reverse.  

In any event, congratulations on the new ride, sounds like you're stoked and that's what matters.


----------



## Smitty (Oct 7, 2007)

Sweet ride Todd!

I'll bet it's getting a bit chilly there in Michigan to be running top down about now...Sure you don't want to bring her out here to sunny Northern California?  We'll keep her warm running up and down the coast for you. 

Since we're talking rides, here's my newest addition to the stable: 2004 Triumph Daytona 955i - SE

Never been registered and only 812 miles on her!  

Might just have you in the hp category though: 147.00 HP (107.3 kW)) @ 10700 RPM.   It's the perfect commuter ride for up here.

Smitty


----------



## ExcelChampion (Oct 7, 2007)

> 0 to 60 in 5.2 seconds, eh? Is it real wheel drive? How's the traction on launch?


Yep, rear wheel.  Traction off the line is awsome.  Just a chirp  off the line.  Takes off like a sling shot once the turbo spools.  It has four traction control settings:

1. full traction and Elec. Stabiltity Control
2. competitve mode (loosens up the traction control and full ESC)
3. traction control off and full ESC
4. All off



> When I search for Skyline, everything I'm finding is pulling up Nissan, not Saturn...



That's because it is a _Sky *Red Line*_, not a _Skyline_.  



> F/I (turbo) will boost the output per litre. My naturally aspriated 6.1 litre Hemi cranks out 420 4WD bhp and 420 lb-ft of torque, dropping about ~360 to all four tires? If I apply F/I to it one of these days, 420 bhp jumps to over 500 bhp. Supposedly the drivetrain was designed to handle 600 bhp...


  Sheesh!    

There's a 10 year warranty on all Saturn's (drivetrain only).  But, I don't know if I can wait that long before I start making mods.  

There's a chip for the Sky that push that 260 hp to a wee more than 300.  Then, with a change of exhaust and intercooler, should get it up a few more.

Nice bike, Smitty.  Some day I want a hog with some big ol' ape hangers.  But I need to convince my girlfriend that its not a death trap (even though it probably is.)


----------



## NateO (Oct 8, 2007)

> > When I search for Skyline, everything I'm finding is pulling up Nissan, not Saturn...
> 
> 
> 
> That's because it is a _Sky *Red Line*_, not a _Skyline_.


D'oh! 

Ah, okay, I found a write-up:

http://www.caranddriver.com/shortroadtests/11891/2007-saturn-sky-red-line.html

14 seconds in the 1/4 mile, eh? That's pretty good! Looks to me as though you'd take a stock Trailblazer SS from a dig through the 1/4 mile:

http://www.roadandtrack.com/article.asp?section_id=3&article_id=4065&page_number=5

And that Trailblazer SS ships with 6.0 litre Corvette LS2 (and one lazy 4-speed tranny). Those easily modified though.  



> There's a chip for the Sky that push that 260 hp to a wee more than 300.


That doesn't sound like a trivial jump w/ just a chip to me. I'd be all over that like a cheap suit.

Is there a good aftermarket for these vehicles? GM vehicles tend to be mod friendly, GM gives out the codes for tuning them, etc...


----------



## ExcelChampion (Oct 8, 2007)

13.9 sec 1/4 mile with a manual trans...the Automatic is actually faster...(manual 0 to 60 is 5.5, automatic is 5.2)...but I can't remember the exact number but it shaves a point or two off the time for 1/4 mi.

A chip would void the warranty...and its a 10 year drivetrain warranty.  I'd be nuts to void that out.  Especially with this car.  I mean, let's face it, its a convertible roadster.  Its meant for touring.  Its meant for pleasure rides.  It just so happens to have enough juice to jump a few other cars off the line.  If I wanted a car built for speed then I'd buy a Vette.

Don't get me wrong, if the warranty was safe, I'd beef it up in a heart beat.  I could, probably, be abale to get the car to run in the 12s in the quarter...throw on new exhaust, intercooler, chip, bigger turbo, lighter rims, etc...

Or, I could do a Mallett conversion for $30000+.  But how dumb is that?  By the time someone buys the car and puts in a Vette motor, what you spent could have been spent on buying a Vette...and no hassles...???

http://www.mallettcars.com/sky-conversion.htm

Sheesh, 400 HP on a Sky?  I'd be worried the thing would get airborn...

Edit: Wow, there is a conversion package for $70,000!  540hp rw.  Sheesh, might as well just buy a Ferrari or something.  I'd like to meet the guy who thinks its a wise financial decision to spend $70K to convert his $30K car.


----------



## NateO (Oct 8, 2007)

> Sheesh, 400 HP on a Sky?  I'd be worried the thing would get airborn...
> 
> Edit: Wow, there is a conversion package for $70,000!  540hp rw.  Sheesh, might as well just buy a Ferrari or something.  I'd like to meet the guy who thinks its a wise financial decision to spend $70K to convert his $30K car.


How much torque?

People do this sort of thing all the time, though, check this out:

http://www.trucktrend.com/roadtests/suv/163_0704_2006_hennessey_srt600_jeep_srt8/specs_pricing.html

Look at these specs:



> The result is a 6.1-liter V-8 that delivers 600 horsepower (180 horses over stock) at 5200 rpm backed by 650 pound-feet of torque at 4000 revs.
> 
> 0-60 mph, sec 3.4
> Quarter mile, sec @ mph 11.9 @ 115.6
> 60-0 mph, ft 123


650 lb-ft of torque?!   

Here's what one Corvette owner says about 650 lb-ft of torque:

http://forums.corvetteforum.com/showthread.php?p=1559058108



> Newsflash for you...... 650 ft/lbs of torque would rip the driveline right out of that little Lexus toy, have you ever driven a car with that much torque??? I doubt it otherwise you would be a bit more enlightened. With 650 ft/lbs on tap you would be able to blaze all 4 tires across an entire intersection with that thing if you didnt leave the trans laying at the light.


One of the funnier threads I have read!  

But the Jeep SRT8 ships with a heavy duty AMG kraut tranny:

http://www.cherokeesrt8.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1231



> The tow capability is limited by the choice of the Mercedes A580 five speed automatic transmission. The A580 gave us our best performance... shift times and gear ratios.


3.4 seconds 0-60 mph? Even the stock 0-60 in 4.5 seconds is violent, it literally feels like the front wheels are coming off the ground!

Here's what my ex-girlfriend, Steph notes:



> it's definitely a nice ride for the ladies too! as long as you don't scare them in it.


She could care less about the bhp and lb-ft torque figures, she's all about the rims, dvd player, nav. system, seats, etc... Let's just say the violent launch really got her attention. :wink:


----------



## ExcelChampion (Oct 8, 2007)

I don't know all the stats for the Mallett, but the lowest package puts out 400hp.400 lb-ft.

650 lb-ft?!  My G**...wouldn't that make your heart stop or something...?

The SRT8 is a sexy vehicle with the balls to back it up.  What does one cost with options?


----------



## NateO (Oct 10, 2007)

> The SRT8 is a sexy vehicle with the balls to back it up.  What does one cost with options?


Thanks! I like it. 

Didn't mean to highjack, I like talking about vehicles of all kinds... 

Loaded, a Jeep GC SRT8's MSRP is ~$45k. I know a dealer in Chicago who will ship one to your door for $500 under invoice! Which is ~$43k.


----------



## ExcelChampion (Oct 10, 2007)

So, did you buy one or thinking about it?

What's the gas mileage on it.  Should have the displacement O/D...no?

The Sky R/L gets 300 miles out of a 13 gallon tank...and that's with the A/C always blowing (been hot here), and constantly testing out the acceleration (you know, to be sure I can pull out in to traffic quickly if I need to. )  I wouldn't be surprised if I could get 320 to 350 out of a tank of gas (I believe it is rated 27 highway.)

I have a Colorado with a 19 gallon tank.  I get about 300 miles out of it...BUT, it's only an inline 5!  ****** eats gas like its going out of style.


----------



## NateO (Oct 10, 2007)

I went to the auto show, saw one, thought about it for a nano-second and bought one, fully loaded.

Gas mileage isn't very good, I'm getting 14 mpg. It's got a 21 gallon and that's good for ~250 miles. It deserves a bigger tank.

I love driving this thing, though. Merging up to speed is not a problem, I get comments and the thumbs up, all the time. I took it on a road trip through Michigan up to northern Ontario and it was great, threw my sister, brother-in-law and everything except the kitchen sink in the back and we went up there, quickly.

Having that kind of power is really great when you're on two lane highways behind Sunday drivers, overtaking in the oncoming lane is not a problem.

This kind of power needs to be respected, though, as noted here:

http://www.roadandtrack.com/article.asp?section_id=3&article_id=4065&page_number=3



> And Marc reckoned the ride is “too firm for all but the most performance-oriented enthusiasts.”
> 
> Those are the ones this single-minded Jeep is aimed at; people who will go out and find its limits on a back road, and will find out that, yes, it can be provoked to oversteer on corner entry, and yes, again on corner exit as it spins all four tires. Maybe Marc summed up the GC SRT8 best when he said, “The Jeep is what the Cayenne should have been — focused 100 percent on performance; road performance, that is.”


Yes, indeed, I managed to get all 4 wheels spinning on a corner exit as I fish-tailed up a bridge one evening, on wet pavement by accident. It's pretty easy if you get your foot into it before you get fully lined up.  

1st gear needs to be treated with respect in snowy/icey conditions too if you're running on the stock run-flat, 12" wide performance tires, which I did last winter. It'll come unglued on you in a hurry if you get into it too much, which is easy to do.


----------



## ExcelChampion (Oct 11, 2007)

I would assume it has traction control...if so, do you leave it on?  Maybe you should when dring in snow/rain.


----------



## NateO (Oct 11, 2007)

That's with traction control on.   

You can only disable traction control by 80% by hitting the button to disengage, the only way to eliminate it by 100% is to pull a specific fuse under the hood.


----------



## ExcelChampion (Oct 11, 2007)

> That's with traction control on.



Man, it was really built for speed, huh?  Traction control that let's you burn all four tires?  

My prayers are with you... 

Too bad about the gas consumption.  Does it not have displacement-on-demand?  I thought all DC vehicles with the Hemi's had it...?


----------



## NateO (Oct 11, 2007)

> > That's with traction control on.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


On dry pavement, the only way I know how to do this is to go through a corner way too fast. In straight-line acceleration, on dry pavement, you get a chirp and you're [long] gone.

It's also hard to spin 'em in a straight-line on wet pavement unless it's really cold out, like 32-40F. But on a corner, when you're not line up, you can get fishy in a hurry if you get into it too much before you're lined up in a straight-line.

It's really not too bad, you just have keep in mind what's on tap and respect it. Every now and then I forget, like rushing to beat oncoming traffic from a parking lot and give it too much gas on a corner. It's a pretty serious wake-up call when the tires are barking and chirping and you're thrown back into your seat.  

But yeah, if you pull the TC fuse, which also will disable ABS, you can easily roast all 4 in a fairly straight-line.  


> Too bad about the gas consumption.  Does it not have displacement-on-demand?  I thought all DC vehicles with the Hemi's had it...?


Only the smaller V8s, the 5.7 litre varieties ship with this. The 6.1 litres SRT8 engines do not have this. I think the SRT10 Viper engines are lacking this, as well. Not sure why...


----------



## ExcelChampion (Oct 11, 2007)

> Only the smaller V8s, the 5.7 litre varieties ship with this. The 6.1 litres SRT8 engines do not have this. I think the SRT10 Viper engines are lacking this, as well. Not sure why...



That's too bad.  An engine that size is the one that would need DOD the most.  I'm becoming very concious about fuel consumption...not only for the $$$, but I guess the media has gotten to me about being more "green".  I gotta wonder why it would not have it though.

I don't think I've seen any of these on the road yet.  I've been keeping my eye open.  You'd think living in the Detroit area I'd see these one at least once in a while.  I want to antagonize one a t a light just to see it gooooooooooooo......


----------



## NateO (Oct 12, 2007)

> That's too bad.  An engine that size is the one that would need DOD the most.  I'm becoming very concious about fuel consumption...not only for the $$$, but I guess the media has gotten to me about being more "green".  I gotta wonder why it would not have it though.


I agree, I'm not proud of this aspect of the vehicle. The consolation I have is that I'm a very low mileage driver, I'd be lucky to put on 1,000 miles/annum.



> I don't think I've seen any of these on the road yet.  I've been keeping my eye open.  You'd think living in the Detroit area I'd see these one at least once in a while.  I want to antagonize one a t a light just to see it gooooooooooooo......


That's what BMW drivers do!

http://forums.bimmerforums.com/forum/showthread.php?p=9957854

BTW, the story that the NateO character in that thread told is completely fictional! 

The following might be my favourite thread, though:

http://forums.bimmerforums.com/forum/showthread.php?t=818804



> M3 < Jeep
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> We actually didn't race but these things are awesome. It was an SRT8 Grand Cherokee. He took off from the light and I was heavy into it right behind him, but there was no way I was keeping up with him. He walked on me pretty hard.


Aren't M3s the fast BMWs?     :wink:


----------



## ExcelChampion (Oct 14, 2007)

The M3s ARE fast...0-60 in 4.69 sec...nothing to sneeze at...and for an owner to say that...?  Wow, it is impressive.

One thing about the Jeep SRT8...can't put the top down.  :D

I'm going to have to wait a while before any decent mods come out for the Sky R/L.  There's stuff now: intercoolers, tunes, exhaust, but I'm not convinced of the claims in gains let alone what the long term affects can be (mostly talking about the tune here.)

Maybe I should get an SRT8 while I wait. :D


----------



## Domski (Oct 15, 2007)

I guess I'm a typical Brit that thinks Yank cars are just a little over the top when it somes to size of engines etc

Have been in love with my 1.8 225bhp Audi S3 for a number of years now and just can't get my head around big block American cars. Was on a dual track an A road with a tricked up Mustang the other day at the lights. Bless him he started giving the revs and I just couldn't help myself.

I so thought I would kick *** and then he just slipped passed. Joy upon joy when the first few corners came up and the 4 wheel drive and beauty revving engine just left him for dead as he, fortunately, just couldn;t handle a proper road.

Nice in a straight line but cr@p otherwise!!!!


----------



## ExcelChampion (Oct 16, 2007)

Well, if you like to drag, then bigger is better.  If you like to rally, then small and nimble is the way to go.  depends what you want to do.  I'd have to wonder how Nate's SRT8 would do around the twisties compared to my Sky, or an S2000, or Miata, etc.  (Well, actually, forget I mentioned Miata.)


----------



## NateO (Oct 16, 2007)

> The M3s ARE fast...0-60 in 4.69 sec...nothing to sneeze at...and for an owner to say that...?  Wow, it is impressive.


Note, the OP driving the M3 was driving a '95 M3, which is probably < 2007 M3.



> One thing about the Jeep SRT8...can't put the top down.  :D


True, but in Minneaplis, this is only 2.5 months of the year. But I do get my sunroof when weather permits...



> I'm going to have to wait a while before any decent mods come out for the Sky R/L.  There's stuff now: intercoolers, tunes, exhaust, but I'm not convinced of the claims in gains let alone what the long term affects can be (mostly talking about the tune here.)
> 
> Maybe I should get an SRT8 while I wait. :D


The SRT8 aftermarket is still pretty limited in terms of tunes or performance enhancing mods. Most people throw theirs on the bottle, which I won't do. Don't feel like melting down my head-gaskets. 



> I guess I'm a typical Brit that thinks Yank cars are just a little over the top when it somes to size of engines etc


There's more to it than this. Living in Minnesota, I'd be driving an SUV either way, just for my safety. RWD's just are not safe in my opinion with the weather we get here. It's not unusual to drive into work on 5 inches of hard-pack snow or a sheet of ice. And the advantage of sitting up a little higher buys you extra time when highway traffic is moving at irregular speeds, especially when the road conditions are extremely poor.

The beefed up engine, drivetrain, suspension, etc... That's a bonus for me. If you're going to have a 2.5 ton vehicle with the areodynamics of a Walmart, you need to generate a ton of torque and horsepower, or it's all for not.

There's other benefits for me driving an SUV, I'm not the smallest guy on Earth and am more comfortable in a mid-size SUV than I am in a compact car. You'd better understand if you saw my seat position, even in this Jeep, you would not want to be sitting behind me. And this a very flexible year-round car. It's no problem for me to throw my 210 skis in the back and head out to the mountain, or throw my bike in the back and go hit the lakes.

Either way, I'm a 1-car driver with diverse needs and interests and this vehicle allows me approach any such condition in a manner that I prefer and am comfortable with.  



> If you like to rally, then small and nimble is the way to go. depends what you want to do. I'd have to wonder how Nate's SRT8 would do around the twisties compared to my Sky, or an S2000, or Miata, etc. (Well, actually, forget I mentioned Miata.)


The Jeep SRT8 would absolutely annihilate a Miata under any speed competition.

It's not as big of slouch in the twisties as one might think, here's someone who's tried it:

http://forums.bimmerforums.com/forum/showthread.php?p=10029968



> It feels fairly well planted even in pretty aggressive transitions, esp. for a tall brick. You can see there's surprisingly little body roll.
> 
> With stability control disabled, coilovers to lower it and 18" wheels with rcomps it could be an interesting autocross car.


There's some good pictures posted there, too.

Road and Track weighs in, here:

http://www.roadandtrack.com/article.asp?section_id=3&article_id=4065&page_number=3



> But the biggest difference is felt when you throw the GC SRT8 into a curve. In a typical Jeep, you’d be met with varying degrees of squish; with the SRT8, rock-solid handling. A 1.0-in.-lower ride height, Bilstein dampers, stiffer springs, larger anti-roll bars and 255/45R-20 front tires and 285/40R-20 rears transform the GC SRT8 from ho-hum SUV into sports-car competitor.


The SRT8 has a seriously beefed up handling equipment from a standard JGC.

These guys took on up Pike's peak, which would normally be reserved for a Subaru STI:

http://www.trucktrend.com/roadtests...grand_cherokee_srt8/mountain_performance.html



> The first few corners probed the tires' grip, which turned out to be quite a lot--over 0.80 g on wet pavement. Only after crossing into the dirt did the Jeep really begin its dance with the mountain. The steering was accurate and quick, and the sideways drifts came naturally. I could feel the all-wheel drive shifting power around as the tires hunted for traction. This was unlike any Jeep I'd ever driven--it felt more like a V-8-powered Mitsubishi Evo IX.


And keep in mind that an Evo is well-known for its handling capabilities:

http://www.sportcompactcarweb.com/roadtests/0505scc_mitsubishi_evo_ix/index.html

Looks like they weren't babying it, either:







  

And of course, you don't have to take a Yank's word for it, how about a Brit?

http://www.channel4.com/4car/di/jeep/grand+cherokee/3534/3



> But as I turned into the first corner, instead of the lurch, wallow and squeal I'd expected, the SRT-8 simply locked onto its new co-ordinates like an unusually well aimed SAM missile. Moreover, as I nailed the throttle to the floor, the big Jeep not only made a lot of convincing noises - which I had been expecting - it also fled down the straight to the Craner Curves with an alacrity that, frankly, I had not.
> {snip}
> 
> And as we circulated Donington faster and faster, I was stunned by how well it coped. Unlike other Grand Cherokees, this one feeds 90% of its torque to the rear wheels unless loss of traction calls for redistribution, so most of the time it's effectively rear-wheel drive. Moreover there was grip aplenty from the 245/45 ZR20 tyres and even the brakes - massive Brembo discs - did not tire of this, the toughest track on brakes in all the land. The convincingly scooped sports seats did a fine job of keeping me from landing in my passenger's lap in the corners, and while the five speed auto box was not exactly the most responsive shifter I've tried, having 420lb-ft of torque to play with meant it did need to be.
> {snip}


So that sounds like a pretty experienced driver driving it hard on a non straightline course.






It's probably not an EVO, in terms of handling but it's pretty good in my opinion, I throw this things into curves I wouldn't dare attempt with a regular SUV and it fares pretty well.


----------



## Patience (Oct 17, 2007)

Well, a lot of this thread made little sense to me, but I will say - that is one sexy looking car you got there! *drool* That I do know and understand!


----------



## NateO (Oct 22, 2007)

Yeah, the Saturn Sky Red Line is a nice looking vehicle:






I like the rims.


----------



## ExcelChampion (Oct 22, 2007)

It certainly has its quirks, as most roadsters do.

One big one is that when first starting in the morning there's no vaccuum in the brake lines for about 30 seconds...which means no brakes for 30 seconds.

But get this, GM is saying that it is normal! :?

It was a big shock to me when I first realized it as I rolled out into the street from my driveway...unintentionally!

Plus, there's really no trunk space.  The Miata is a lot smaller yet has a much bigger trunk.  HUH?

The interior has that cheap plastic interior, but it is at least laid out well.

But, the handling is like a dream and it certainly has some oomf in terms of power.  Can't beat being able to put the top down.  Last but not least, its sexy looking.  I'll probably keep it for quite some time.


----------

