2006 Pontiac Solstice Base Convertible 2-door 2.4l First 1000!!! on 2040-cars
Canfield, Ohio, United States
|
CAR IS FLAWLESS! The car is number 452 of the FIRST 1000. The car has only been driven on nice days that were sunny never driven in snow or rain! Car has 2190 original miles on it! We also have all the promotional items except the hat and also the original window sticker! Serious buyers only please and feel free to ask any questions. Car is a 10/10 for being a 2006!
|
Pontiac Solstice for Sale
2008 pontiac solstice base convertible 2-door 2.4l(US $16,500.00)
2006 pontiac solstice base convertible 2-door 2.4l(US $18,000.00)
2007 pontiac solstice base convertible 2-door 2.4l
2006 pontiac solstice convertible 2-door 2.4l ~clean carfax!(US $8,000.00)
2006 pontiac solstice base convertible 2-door 2.4l(US $9,000.00)
2007 pontiac solstice gxp 5 speed manual 2-door convertible
Auto Services in Ohio
Williams Norwalk Tire & Alignment ★★★★★
White-Allen European Auto Grp ★★★★★
Welch`s Golf Cart Inc ★★★★★
Vehicles Unlimited Inc ★★★★★
Tom`s Tire & Auto Service ★★★★★
Smith`s Automotive ★★★★★
Auto blog
What car brand should come back?
Fri, Apr 7 2017Congratulations, wishful thinker! You've been granted one wish by the automotive genie or wizard or leprechaun or whoever has been gifted with that magical ability. You get to pick one expired, retired or fired automotive brand and resurrect it from its heavenly peace! But which one? That's a tough decision and not one to be made lightly. As we know from car history, the landscape is littered with failed brands that just didn't have what it took to cut it in the dog-eat-dog world of vehicle design, engineering and marketing. So many to choose from! Because I am not a car historian, I'll leave it to a real expert to present a complete list of history's automotive misses from which you can choose, if you're a stickler about that sort of thing. And since I'm most familiar with post-World War II cars and brands, that's what I'm going to stick to (although Maxwell, Cord and some others could make strong arguments). So, with the parameters established, let's get started, shall we? Hudson: I admit, I really don't know a lot about Hudson, except that stock car drivers apparently did pretty well with them back in the day, and Paul Newman played one in the first Cars movie. But really, isn't that enough to warrant consideration? Frankly, I think the Paul Newman connection is reason enough. What other actor who drove race cars was cooler? James Dean? Steve McQueen? James Garner? Paul Walker? But, I digress. That's a story for another day. Plymouth: As the scion of a Dodge family (my grandfather had a Dodge truck, and my mom had not one, but two Dodge Darts – the rear-wheel-drive ones with slant sixes in them, not the other one they don't make any more), I tend to think of Plymouth as the "poor man's Dodge." But then you have to consider the many Hemi-powered muscle cars sold under the Plymouth brand, such as the Road Runner, the GTX, the Barracuda, and so on. Was there a more affordable muscle car than Plymouth? When you place it in the context of "affordable muscle," Plymouth makes a pretty strong argument for reanimation. Oldsmobile: When I was a teenager, all the cool kids had Oldsmobile Cutlasses, the downsized ones that came out in 1978. At one point, the Olds Cutlass was the hottest selling car in the land, if you can believe that. Then everybody started buying Honda Civics and Accords and Toyota Corollas and Camrys, and you know the rest. But going back farther, there's the 442 – perhaps Olds' finest hour when it came to muscle cars.
This or That: 2005 Chrysler Crossfire SRT6 vs. 1984 Pontiac Fiero
Tue, Feb 10 2015Welcome to another round of This or That, where two Autoblog editors pick a topic, pick a side and pull no punches. Last round pitted yours truly against Associate Editor Brandon Turkus, and my chosen VW Vanagon Syncro narrowly defeated Brandon's 1987 Land Rover. In fact, it was, by far, the closest round we've seen, with 1,907 voters seeing things my way (for 50.8 percent of the vote) versus 1,848 votes for Brandon's Rover (49.2 percent). Sweet, sweet victory! For this latest round of This or That, I've roped Editor Greg Migliore into what I think is a rather fun debate. We've each chosen our favorite terrible cars, setting a price limit of $10,000 to make sure neither of us went too crazy with our automotive atrocities. I think we've both chosen terribly... and I mean that in the best way possible. 2005 Chrysler Crossfire SRT6 Jeremy Korzeniewski: Why It's Terrible: Taken in isolation, the Chrysler Crossfire isn't necessarily a terrible car. In fact, it drives pretty darn well, and there's a lot of solid engineering under its slinky shape. Problem is, that engineering was already rather long in the tooth well before Chrysler ever got its hands on it, having come from Mercedes-Benz, which used the basic chassis and drivetrain in a previous version of its SLK coupe and roadster. Granted, the SLK was an okay car, too, but even when new, it hardly set the world on fire with sporty driving dynamics. Chrysler took these decent-but-no-more bits and pieces from the Mercedes parts bin – remember, this car was conceived in the disastrous Merger Of Equals days – and covered them with a rather attractive hard-candy shell. Unfortunately, the super sporty shape wrote checks in the minds of buyers that its well-worn mechanicals were simply unable to cash, though an injection of power courtesy of a supercharged V6 engine in the SRT6 model, as seen here, certainly helped ease some of those woes. In the end, Chrysler was left with a so-called halo car that looked the part but never quite performed the part. It was almost universally panned by critics as an overpriced parts-bin special, which, I must add, was damningly accurate. As a result, sales were very slow, and within the first few months, dealers were clearancing the car at cut-rate prices, just to keep them from taking up too much of the showroom floor. Why It's Not That Terrible, After All: I can speak from personal experience when discussing the Chrysler Crossfire. You see, I owned one. Well, sort of...
Another Burt Reynolds Trans Am is up for auction
Wed, Jan 18 2017Fans of Smokey and the Bandit, your car has arrived. This Saturday, January 21, Barrett-Jackson will auction a 1977 Pontiac Trans Am clone that, while not originally in the movie, was owned and signed by the Bandit himself, Burt Reynolds. Not only that, but it packs many modifications that should make this Pontiac drive the way we all imagined it did. This is a Trans Am clone, not an original. The car was built by Nebraska company Restore A Muscle Car, and started life as a lowly Firebird Formula. However, the company brought it up to Trans Am grade and beyond. Under the hood is a fuel-injected 8.2-liter V8 from Butler Performance that Restore A Muscle Car says produces 600 horsepower. Coupled to the big V8 is a Tremec five-speed manual transmission. There's even Hurst line-lock on-board, so this Trans Am should be perfect for on-demand burnouts. The car also comes with QA1 coil-over suspension, so it should corner better than the original, too. The outside looks roughly like a stock Trans Am, but it now has 18-inch wheels styled after those from the movie car, and the shaker scoop says "8.2" on each side. View 5 Photos In 2014, a 1977 Trans Am owned by Reynolds sold for a whopping $450,000. That car wasn't an actual movie car either, and lacked the modifications of this one. However, it was used as a promotional car and was given to Reynolds, so it did have some history with the film. This upgraded car is listed in the Barrett-Jackson catalog as "no reserve," so it's going home with a new owner on Saturday, regardless of price. Related Video:




