Pontiac Grand Prix GXP's Performance

The Pontiac website has posted 0 to 60 time of 6.0 sec. for the Grand Prix GXP. I estimate that 1/4 miles times should be very low 14s, maybe high 13s if you take out the torque management. The final ratings of the 5.3L LS4 is 290 hp and 325 ft. lbs. torque.

I am looking forward to seeing what the new '06 Impala SS will look like.

It sounds as if GM needs to get their a$$es in gear with the new 6-speed auto transmissions . The GTP's and SSEi's never got to show their true potential due to the transmission's inability , with the 04 GTP's having a worse case of good ol torque managment over the 97-03's with the 240 hp engines . Again , GM used to be the leader in the transmission business , and over the years they've slowly slumped to just adequte in their volume cars .

Didn't the one SEMA press release for the LS4 say 300HP?

Didn't the one SEMA press release for the LS4 say 300HP?
The probably hadn't decided how much they were going to limit the engine at that time.

Again, GM used to be the leader in the transmission business , and over the years they've slowly slumped to just adequte in their volume cars .

...and the Japanese were traditionally behind GM in transmission technology. I can think of plenty of Japanese cars - from only a couple of years ago - that had horrible, jerky automatic transmissions.

The Pontiac website has posted 0 to 60 time of 6.0 sec. for the Grand Prix GXP. I estimate that 1/4 miles times should be very low 14s, maybe high 13s if you take out the torque management. The final ratings of the 5.3L LS4 is 290 hp and 325 ft. lbs. torque.

I am looking forward to seeing what the new '06 Impala SS will look like.
I'd get a lot more excited about it if it drove the correct set of wheels.

Oh well. The LS4 is certainly a good thing. :)

Seems like the new 305's has some serious punch.

Seems like the new 305's has some serious punch.

They are actually ~327's (well 324ci i believe but 327 sounds cool)

They are actually ~327's (well 324ci i believe but 327 sounds cool)

They are 325 cubic inch actually.

Seems like the new 305's has some serious punch.

305ci = 5.0L

Man, if I could get RWD/AWD and a manual tranny, I'd be all over these cars...

-B

Good news. Toyota's new Avalon with a 260HP V6 with a 5 speed auto runs at around 6.5-6.8 seconds to 60. The tranny in the GXP is probably what is killing these cars and I can’t imagine why GM hasn’t upped the torque capacity at the minimum or just put in a new tranny altogether…

Good news. Toyota's new Avalon with a 260HP V6 with a 5 speed auto runs at around 6.5-6.8 seconds to 60. The tranny in the GXP is probably what is killing these cars and I can’t imagine why GM hasn’t upped the torque capacity at the minimum or just put in a new tranny altogether…

They did up the torque for 2006. A new 6 speed FWD auto is on the way (the one developed with Ford).

What these cars really need is an AWD option. Remember the Prontiac Grand Prix G8 show car with the 350HP LS1 and versatrek AWD

What these cars really need is an AWD option. Remember the Prontiac Grand Prix G8 show car with the 350HP LS1 and versatrek AWD

Blah, they'd just be porky pigs with axle problems then.

Pontiac brochures show 303hp, as does the Chevy site for the '06 Monte and Impala. I can't wait to drive one :D

The car should have equal width front and rear wheels.

They did up the torque for 2006. A new 6 speed FWD auto is on the way (the one developed with Ford).

What these cars really need is an AWD option. Remember the Prontiac Grand Prix G8 show car with the 350HP LS1 and versatrek AWD

Oh yes.. that is right.. I totally forgot about GM sleeping with the enemy ;) just kidding...

anyway what is the torque ratings on those trannies? any idea...

I'm all for the addition of AWD.

But these things will move with the 303hp 5.3L. Who knows, with AWD, they might have had enough traction to pull of consistant high 13's. With Fwd, they'll probably be low to mid 14 sec cars which is fairly quick for a family hauler. Remember when low 14sec 1/4 miles were considered fast just a decade ago? Now you've got fwd 5-passenger family cars putting up such #'s.

If you take out the torque management, you'll be going through transmissions like nothing

The car should have equal width front and rear wheels.

The Grand Prix GXP has front tires that are three sizes wider than the rears.:lol:

When an idea is so utterly unconventional, there probably is a good reason why nobody has done it before.

When an idea is so utterly unconventional, there probably is a good reason why nobody has done it before.

So, what reason do you post here still? :lol:

The Grand Prix GXP has front tires that are three sizes wider than the rears.:lol:

When an idea is so utterly unconventional, there probably is a good reason why nobody has done it before.

Someone has to be the first for everything. Have you ever seen FWD drag cars at a drag strip??

Form clubgp.com
- The GXP corners at about .87 Gs versus .83 Gs for the GTP comp G
- Using two cars with the same powertrain, one with 235s all-around, the other with 255s front/225s rear, the split-tire size car produced lap times 3-4 seconds per lap quicker, on average, at Grattan Raceway (where a good lap is in the 1 min, 30 second area)
- Projected tire life on the GXP is for all four tires to wear at about the same rate, versus most FWD cars, which normally use the fronts up sooner. This means the car is better balanced, getting "stick" from all four equally
- The GXP is styled so as not to call attention to the tire/wheel width difference

MT got .86g in the last 350z test.

That does not mean that the combo they are using is optimal. Just that it is superior to a vehicle with 235s all around. I'm sure they could have addressed balance with the suspension setup.

My thinking was that this is not an ultra performance vehicle and it would be better if you could actually rotate the tires. I suppose if the tires do wear evenly it doesn't matter (although they say at about the same rate... my tires wear at about the same rate but I still rotate them). If you can't see the size difference then it won't look idiotic. Maybe I am wrong and this will be the next big thing in OEM FWD design.

If I owned one though, I would end up putting the 255's and the larger wheels on the rear as well.

EDIT:
Have you ever seen FWD drag cars at a drag strip??
Actually I think this is the real reason they went with bigger front tires. There really is no good reason to put a motor that makes torque into a FWD vehicle. The handling stuff is maybe a pleasant side effect, but I think it is just spin.

They are 325 cubic inch actually.



305ci = 5.0L

I said 324 cause I thought that it was a 324.something but hey why can't Chevy just put 2 more cubic inches in it and call it a 327.

Saw a GXP at the autoshow. That 5.3L looks pretty cool under the hood.
The wider fronts are a bit odd but then I would just put the same ont he rears anyhow.

Looking forward to some road tests with numbers.

I'm split between being happy and thinking the GTP is going to be a kickass car and.............not wanting to get my ass handed to me at stop light by one.:shame:

I would really rather have my car...the new front is ugly as hell.

303 HP is nothing with the 3800 Supercharged....a pulley and intake away. Better yet, you can get a quick change pulley system and control the power by swaping the pulleys.

I really want to see what they did to the auto to make it take 40 more HP without grenading. 260HP was already pushing it.....and TQ managment was a PITA.

it not the hp its the tq.

I would really rather have my car...the new front is ugly as hell.

303 HP is nothing with the 3800 Supercharged....a pulley and intake away. Better yet, you can get a quick change pulley system and control the power by swaping the pulleys.

I really want to see what they did to the auto to make it take 40 more HP without grenading. 260HP was already pushing it.....and TQ managment was a PITA.

Remeber that the supercharged V6 will require premium fuel and the V8 will not. With regular gas prices hitting $2 a gallon here yesterday that WILL come into play.

Remeber that the supercharged V6 will require premium fuel and the V8 will not. With regular gas prices hitting $2 a gallon here yesterday that WILL come into play.

Isn't it amazing that every time gas prices make the headlines, all of the "premium fuel" whiners come out of the woodwork?

Remeber that the supercharged V6 will require premium fuel and the V8 will not. With regular gas prices hitting $2 a gallon here yesterday that WILL come into play.


Car runs fine on regular or midgrade. The computer pulls like 20 HP though.

Either way, I am perfectly fine with the blown V6 and its aftermarket. Thats not to say I would not love a 303HP V8 Grand Prix....the front is just so damn ugly...

Car runs fine on regular or midgrade. The computer pulls like 20 HP though.

Either way, I am perfectly fine with the blown V6 and its aftermarket. Thats not to say I would not love a 303HP V8 Grand Prix....the front is just so damn ugly...:think: Hmmm, beauty is indeed in the eye of the beholder. I think the GXP Grand Prix is WAY better looking than the GT/GTP. Part of it is the grille, though admittedly part of it is how the 18" wheels help offset the HUGE front overhang on these cars. I dig the looks of the new GP from most angles, but the side profile shot makes the front end look monstrous and too thick. The lowered stance and wide 18s on the GXP make it a little easier to swallow. The overall look is just more agressive, kinda hungry...

:think: Hmmm, beauty is indeed in the eye of the beholder. I think the GXP Grand Prix is WAY better looking than the GT/GTP. Part of it is the grille, though admittedly part of it is how the 18" wheels help offset the HUGE front overhang on these cars. I dig the looks of the new GP from most angles, but the side profile shot makes the front end look monstrous and too thick. The lowered stance and wide 18s on the GXP make it a little easier to swallow. The overall look is just more agressive, kinda hungry...


The front end has always struck me as the biggest detractor for the new GP. That being said, mine has aftermarket brushed aluminum upper and lower grills, and everyone says it helps alot. I hope to get pictures soon. I like the looks of my Comp G alot...but the GP definatly looks best in black. I think the GXP's squared off grill is hideous.

The front end has always struck me as the biggest detractor for the new GP. That being said, mine has aftermarket brushed aluminum upper and lower grills, and everyone says it helps alot. I hope to get pictures soon. I like the looks of my Comp G alot...but the GP definatly looks best in black. I think the GXP's squared off grill is hideous.I have seen a few GPs with the aluminum grilles, and they do look pretty sharp. One of my best friends has a black 2000 GP with the aluminum upper grill inserts, and they look pretty good on that car. The new car benefits even more, I think.

:thumb:

The Grand Prix GXP has front tires that are three sizes wider than the rears.:lol:

When an idea is so utterly unconventional, there probably is a good reason why nobody has done it before.

Actually, it was done before. It was done before on Volvo, and Citroen, to name just two.

Actually, it was done before. It was done before on Volvo, and Citroen, to name just two.

Prove it to me.

I can honestly state that no modern FWD Volvo has had wider tires in the front than the back. The same goes for Citroen. (Traditionally, Citroens have had a wider track in front than the back, but that's not what we're talking about.)


You've been called on this one. Back it up.:lol:

Prove it to me.

I can honestly state that no modern FWD Volvo has had wider tires in the front than the back. The same goes for Citroen. (Traditionally, Citroens have had a wider track in front than the back, but that's not what we're talking about.)


You've been called on this one. Back it up.:lol:


Go to any dragstrip and look at any of the front drive drag cars, they are set up this way. Also, when you think about the driving dynamics involved, front drivers tend to be heavier over the front wheels and have more of a tendency to push in the corners (due to both the weight balance and the front tires sharing cornering and acceleration duty). With the larger contact patch up front, this should be offset and help balance the chassis towards neutral.

Prove it to me.

You've been called on this one. Back it up.:lol:

Oh the irony!!!!! :lol: :rolleyes:

Go to any dragstrip and look at any of the front drive drag cars, they are set up this way.
This is true. However they are claiming it was done to get more neutral handling. I think this is the real reason they went with the wider tires up front.

Also, when you think about the driving dynamics involved, front drivers tend to be heavier over the front wheels and have more of a tendency to push in the corners (due to both the weight balance and the front tires sharing cornering and acceleration duty). With the larger contact patch up front, this should be offset and help balance the chassis towards neutral.
Here we go. In sports car racing leagues, do Integras or the like run wider wheels up front then in back?

Go to any dragstrip and look at any of the front drive drag cars, they are set up this way. Also, when you think about the driving dynamics involved, front drivers tend to be heavier over the front wheels and have more of a tendency to push in the corners (due to both the weight balance and the front tires sharing cornering and acceleration duty). With the larger contact patch up front, this should be offset and help balance the chassis towards neutral.

You see alot of things at a dragstrip that really aren't suitable for public highways.

Prove it to me...

You've been called on this one. Back it up.:lol:


Why should he? You never take the time to back anything up people ask you. :shrug:

You see alot of things at a dragstrip that really aren't suitable for public highways.


What's next...you gonna make fun of RWD cars for having bigger rear tires?

You see alot of things at a dragstrip that really aren't suitable for public highways.

Sure, but you see a lot of things you wish the automakers would include too.


What's next...you gonna make fun of RWD cars for having bigger rear tires?


Thank-you. My next point exactly.

My .02 is that the 5.3 is a way better choice than the blown 3.8. Its lighter, makes more HP (which WILL make a difference under part throttle, when tq management is not an issue), gets the same mileage and will probably be even more reliable. Also, it will probably SOUND better, too. Anyone heard a good sounding 3800? Quiet? Yes. Smooth? Sure. But it has all the aural appeal of a VW Beetle. Actually, I think the Beetle's hoarse grumble is more sporting.

A 3800 at 5,000 RPMs is smooth, but about as exciting as a cement mixer. Bring on the V8. Personally, when I get sick of the GP I've already decided I'm going for a slightly used '06+ Monte SS. V8....hehehehehe....

I love the 3800, but it needs to go away now...or become a Series IV with about 40-50 more HP.

Prove it to me.

I can honestly state that no modern FWD Volvo has had wider tires in the front than the back. The same goes for Citroen. (Traditionally, Citroens have had a wider track in front than the back, but that's not what we're talking about.)


You've been called on this one. Back it up.:lol:

You know, I totally forgot about this thread. I was looking for a post earlier and stumbled back on this one...

My question, Are you for real? Here's one link to give you a rough idea:

http://www.emhi.nl/cx.nl/cx-tires.html

Come on, be a sport now and take it like a man.