http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/2006-...QQcmdZViewItem

 

I think a G6 GTP Coupe sounds good on paper and would be a nice alternative for someone shopping a V6 Mustang or Eclipse. I just hope it drives well and isn't compromised. A soft suspension, sloppy shifter, and overbearing torque steer would zap all of the fun out of it. Unfortunately, that's what I'm anticipating happening, so I haven't given the car a lot of thought. Stylistically, it could use some individuality. The front treatment on Pontiacs is growing very stale and uninspiring. The convertible could stand some testosterone, too.

 

Apples vs. oranges. That's why I posted what I did. I'm not interested in an overweight GTO/Holden, I would be interested in something a little lighter on it's feet with better styling.

 

We are supposed to get our first G6 coupe in fairly soon. Ours will be a G6 GTP 6 speed. Looking forward to driving this one with the stick. 3.9 V6 240hp with VVT, nice combo that should be torquey.

 

LS2, M6, RWD, coupe... sounded like it had all the bases covered.

 

Perhaps in your view it is. In mine, it is not. There are many enthusiasts out there who would prefer something lighter and with better styling. Imagine how well the product would be received if an LS2, rear drive variant that was a minimum of 400-500 lbs lighter than the Holden, had better styling and could also be had with lessor performance options as well were in place. Do you remember the older days? Perhaps not. There was a time that the run of the mill transportation versions fueled brand loyalty due to larger volumes, then the performance variant generated the excitement for the enthusiasts. Those performance versions upped the dealer's profit margin as well as fueling the overall strenght of the platform to enthusiasts. As it sits, you have a choice...... a GTO or a GTO of a different color. There is no other option for the line, GM is building them in limited quantities to squeeze as much profit out of the vehicle as possible, there is little brand loyalty generated. This gives the dealers even a bigger gun to shoot themselves in the foot. If you don't like the package as it sits, all that is left is to buy an entirely different car. Well, I take that back..... you could always add a ground effect package.

This is exactly why the Mustang is generating so many sales. The average Joe or Suzie can buy a basic sporty package with a V6 without breaking the bank. The knuckle scraping gearheads can opt for a performance version (GT) for more dough. The true gasoline in the veins motorheads can opt for the maximum performance version (Cobra or GT-500) at an even higher price point. When GM had this formula, sales were up. Now that they seem to have forgotten this, sales are trailing. It's not rocket science, it's economics 101.

 

Um.... G6 isn't a RWD car.

GTO is. And it has everything you mentioned in your first post. LS2, M6, RWD, and coupe. That's why I pointed it out... didn't mean to have you go off on an anti-GTO rampage...

As for the G6, it ***HAS*** all the varients you are talking about and more! Coupe, sedan, and convertible. Base, GT, and GTP.

Not every single car line is going to be RWD and V8 powered.

When Camaro comes back, it'll have a base model, and a V8 model, and probably a super V8 model... just like Mustang.

Not every single car model has to follow the same formula.

 

Also of note... GTO weighs 300 lbs more than a G6 GT sedan (only G6 varient I could find a curb weight on) [3725 for GTO vs 3425 for G6 GT)

G6

GTO

Granted, that is a decent amount more weight... but after you add the weight for a V8 vs a V6, a driveshaft, actual rear axles, etc.... I have a feeling that G6 would raise significantly in weight... might not surpase GTO, but it would probably get relatively close.

 

aaarrrrrrrrrrrrrrrghhhhhhhhhhhhhh

What ****ing maniac was allowed to put temperature and fuel guages that rotate backwards. That is beyond retarded.

maybe that's old news to some, but i never saw that until now. Otherwise a nice car.

 

I have news for you...there's a reason for that!!!!!!!! Count me in this group...my first 2 cars were RWD. Count my father in this group as well...who owned RWD cars until 1985, and will never drive a RWD car over the winter again. Count my grandfather in this group as well, who is 77 years old and has driven and owned more cars than anyone here, likely. His first car was a '32 Model A...his latest cars are a '95 LeSabre and my dad's old 4x4 '02 TrailBlazer. He never owned FWD before the LeSabre, and he'll never go back to RWD for the winter either.

As much as some people on here love to argue with the fact, the simple physics of FWD dictate it will work better in the snow. TC is an electronic band aid for RWD in snow. Put the same tires and same TC systems on a FWD and a RWD car making the same HP, and let them loose in the snow...then come back and tell me which is better

Unfortunately, where I live we get snow A LOT. I won't even consider a Mustang GT for a driver based on this fact alone.

 

You might just incite an arguement with this statement.

Put me in the rear wheel drive will do fine with good tires on it group.

 

Check the weight bias on your grand daddy's Model A. Now imaging a RWD car with close to 50/50 weight bias and traction control. Not so much trouble in the winter anymore. Chrysler brought a bunch of journalists up to Michigan before the release of the magnum and the 300. They were put on a snowy track and let go. They had trouble beaking the rearend loose with traction control.

 

I'm with Jason on this one.

Up here in Yooperland and Northern Wisconsin, you don't dare have a RWD or 4x2 pickup. If nothing else, for resale value alone. That should tell you something right there. Now, I won't say that a person couldn't get around with just a 4x2 or RWD (of course you can), but for 70%+ of the population, FWD gives the traction that most people expect for a real winter. And a FWD car with traction control gives 90% of the benefit of AWD (according to a GM guide). For here in my neck of the woods, it's not so much a matter of traction when you are rolling as it is to get moving (deep snow), and this is where FWD/4x4/AWD is king in terms of real world useage in winter.

 

FWD has had 2 main advantages that make it better to get going. Weight over the drive tires and realitively low horsepower with gearing that was not too tall. By fixing the weight bias you fix the weight problem. The traction control fixes the wheel spining caused by higher horsepower and gearing. With technology all things are possible.

 

Having driven both FWD and RWD in the snow... I basically summarize it liek this:

FWD is great to help you get going....

Once you are going, there's not a lot of difference.

RWD, however, is more "correctable/predictible" in a panic situation at speed than FWD.