Choose Your Not A Miata: 2007 Pontiac Solstice vs 2001 Toyota MR2 Spyder

Menu Home » Choose Your Not A Miata: 2007 Pontiac Solstice vs 2001 Toyota MR2 Spyder Choose Your Not A Miata: 2007 Pontiac Solstice vs 2001 Toyota MR2 Spyder By Peter Vieira October 14, 2026 7:38 am 85 Comments We all know what car “is always the answer,” but it’s really just an answer, and others have done their best to attain at least some of the answer status the Miata has enjoyed so long. We have two such cars today via Pontiac and Toyota, each with their own faults and fandoms, but none of the staying power of Mazda’s seemingly eternal roadster. Which of these might you choose? We’ll get there.

First, let us consider the results of Monday’s Showdown (I’ll leave results coverage of David’s Showdown to him) betwixt an Opel GT and C3 Corvette, which was a study in contrasts between two visually similar cars. Steel body versus fiberglass. V8 versus inline-4. Green versus orange. All there versus no door skins and woodshop dashboard. You can see the long line down there, the Corvette got trounced.

I get it. While the Opel GT left unanswered questions of its own, the “somebody else’s project” factor (and the incompleteness / dubious repair solutions of said project) really did the poor C3 in. I thought perhaps the built engine might be a saving grace, all painted-red and all, but that too was as much a red flag as it was red Krylon.

Now let us turn our attention to today’s contestants.

Engine/drivetrain: 2.4-liter EcoTec VVT DOHC inline-four, 5-speed manual transmission, RWD

Operational status: “Great running, driving, and looking car.”

Looks pretty good, right? From this distance, sure, but if you check out the full ad (or look closely at the rear angle farther below), you can see Bob Lutz’ baby is marred by some clearcoat issues. That’s a bummer for parking lot inspection, but when you’re cruising down the road looking all cool in your convertible roadster, no one’s gonna notice. And I think I’d take the Solstice over its Kappa platform mate Saturn Sky in otherwise identical nick – that one never gelled with me.

The interior looks pretty good, especially for the mileage, and minus that dreadful steering wheel cover. Has it protected the wheel? Is it hiding damage? Has it caused any? Of course, when I say the interior looks pretty good, I mean condition-wise. Styling-wise, ehhhh, not so much. It’s aughts GM at its finest, sarcastically speaking.

This ain’t no GXP model, so you’re getting a naturally aspirated 177-horsepower Ecotec engine. It’s fine, especially when mated to a manual as this one is. A 0-60 time of about seven seconds flat makes the Solstice a match for the same-year Miata, if you care about that (I wouldn’t).

You can see the clearcoat there where the bumper cover meets the trunk lid, and that top is looking a bit scruffy, but it’s all there and appears undamaged, if a little stretched out.

Engine/drivetrain: 1.8-liter VVT-i DOHC inline-four, 5-speed manual transmission, RWD

Operational status: “Drive good.”

Where my fans of the bug-eyed Mister Two at? I know I’m supposed to gush over the baby-supercar W20 even if it does want to kill me, and yeah, they’re great, but I’ve always felt the W30 was closer to the original MR2 spirit. And hey, the top goes down. This one looks like the hood’s fitting a bit goofy, but maybe the owner just forgot to fully latch it before taking pics. Side note: I will never not be baffled by what sellers consider “good enough” for ad photos. Gee whiz.

This looks like a nicer place to be than the Solstice “IMO,” and I’m sure your eyes went straight to that stick. Then again, what else would be there? You could only get the car with a manual, after all (OK, fine, there was a sequential gearbox later, but there weren’t any torque-converted-equipped W30s). Everything looks to be in good shape for 160,000+ miles.

Here we are in the back of the MR2 – it’s mid-engine, remember? I’m sure 100% of you do. Things are looking pretty grimy back here, but the description says “drive good” (is that a description or an instruction?), and it’s a Toyota 1ZZ, so the VVT-i engine with its sixteen valves and variable timing should be pretty OK if maintained at all. And performance? You’ll be neck-and-neck with the Solstice.

I’d argue this MR2 looks even better from the rear than the front, even without the addition of nicely manicured nails. I don’t recall the W30s bulging light treatment being well received at the time, but I’ve always liked the car’s friendly, froggy looks.

For the money, I wouldn’t say no to either one. But I’ve heard about the quality issues the GM Kappa cars had.

So given the Toyota isn’t much more expensive, the MR2 is my pick.

I would pick the Solstace if it was 2-3 grand cheaper.

0 Member Max Headbolts 3 minutes ago Purely from a parts availability perspective I’m going MR DOS today, the Solstice parts are becoming hard to find, and I suspect that top will be unobtainable when it’s ready for replacement. They didn’t look great at 5 years old, I’d hate to deal with one today.

I don’t know that the Toyota will be any better, but I’m leaning on the reliability to make that less of an issue.

0 Benny Butler 4 minutes ago If it was the Sky I’d be more inclined to vote for it. i’m not a fan of the rounded off front end of the solstice. So I went MR2