So they DON't want to sell them?? Interesting concept..... :rollseyes:

So you'd pay $35k+ for a car that nobody can tell from grandma's car....you want a "sleeper" that isn't a "pony car" (neither was the GTO...it was a muscle car) or a "sports car"?? Might want to check out a Catera......

It's painfully obvious that you have to check your artistic individuallity at the door...no thanks....but amatuers like Ted and Dutch seem to have a better sense of design.

Maybe the problem is that we are being force fed a diet of boring, non-descript cars because CEO's have a stockholder's gun to their heads......and SOME people would buy a anything if it's even 'just good enough'.

What's sad is we can't have an adult, mature debate without being called names and cussed at....learn how to make a point without resorting to childish antics and maybe we'd be more inclinded to listen to your points.

Fact is, most of us have held very true to the main point of fact......IF your going to rely on and use the name of a classic muscle car that EARNED it's place in history, then at the very least give us a design package (ain't nobody arguing against this car as being a possibly great car, performance wise) that has some tie to it's gloried past.

Some of us are not content to simply swallow whatever is thrown our way....obviously Pontiac could have called this car anything, THEY chose to invoke the GTO name, but wrapped it in a DATED 5 year old "corporate design" that is forgettable as it is tired and worn....Why not call it a Tempest, or ??

You gonna' be as happpy when the Camaro returns if it wears as boring of a design as this one? I'm sure GM would be tickled to not have to stretch the envelope...it's safer and cheaper.....heck, they know some people don't really care.

This debate has grown as tired as the Grand Am/Prix/GTO design....enough already.

BTW, I'm 45 years old, so YES I remember.



[This message has been edited by Doug Harden, Pres CICC (edited June 29, 2002).]

 

I always laugh when someone mentions "Sleeper Car" as a good thing.

In 95% of the cases, I think the term "Sleeper Car" is just a way to try and justify bad or uninspiring looks on an otherwise great car.

 

So you have no problem with this car being called a Tempest?you don't care about the Tempest name?

Keep in mind that a 2004+ GTO based of the 2004+ Tempest would look exatly like this car, with more power, hood tach and scoops maybe.They would look the same, which is your guys big arguement of it!!!

thats like saying a 2005 Trans Am must look like an old one, but a Firebird I could care less about, the name does,nt mean anything to me. even though they are sposed to look the same.the problem is obviously the GTO name, and you have some history to it. but you aren't in favor of following history. makes no sense.

 

Actually no, no I don't care about the Tempest...it was a role player NOT a car that is permanently etched in muscle car history.......

So YOU don't care about a car's name? Then WTH are you arguing w/ us?

BTW, where did I EVER say I wasn't in favor of "following history"?!? I've been arguing EXACTLY the opposite! Might want to re-read some of this thread and others.......:rollseyes:

I don't expect a full off re-do of a 1970 GTO, I simply want more of a resemblence than the weak, dated, GP copy design they showed in the sketch...they chose to use the GTO name..make it look like it at least came from the same tree.

 

How can you possibly judge (and form complete, strong opinions on) two cars where one is real and the other is a picture of a drawing of a nose clip, and call GTO a Grand Prix derivative?

Quote:

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">You can't be serious......it looks nearly identical to the GP....I know, I own one!

But you don't own GTO. You have not seen a GTO with the front clip as revealed in the picture, if ever you saw a Monaro.

I said before that people have different tastes. And to me, GTO doesn't look like Grand Prix, even the front nose. I said I see the similarities, but both speak of two different cars. As postings increased, I corrected my views to a certain extent, and I agreed that GM would be better off not using the name GTO on this car - all problems would be solved. So don't post saying "You can't be serious......it looks nearly identical to the GP" and later ask for more maturity in these conversations. This is all a matter of perception, this is what I concluded. Do you have the maturity to come to such conclusion?

Quote:

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">
You're not listening........IF they had done something even slightly similar to Dutch's design, I wouldn't say a word, but they chose to play it safe and use a dated, 5 year old "corporate" design.</font>

But are you listening? Are you hearing that MOST or the majority of people are satisfied with current upcoming GTO? How can you be so arrogant as to say that whatever design YOU would accept would be a perfectly valid move, whereas whatever you do not approve of is absolutely horrendous? OK, so GM would produce a design that would fit the appeal of enthusiasts such as yourself, but would it have greater appeal necessary for success of this car and any future derivatives of this car or of its platform?

Quote:

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">I've decided to simply keep repeating this until the "pros" understand my position..........</font>

Based on the posts I read so far, we know and we understand your position. There is absolutely no need to go repeating it.

 

QUOTE]Originally posted by muckz:
How can you possibly judge (and form complete, strong opinions on) two cars where one is real and the other is a picture of a drawing of a nose clip, and call GTO a Grand Prix derivative? [/QUOTE]

I use my eyes and the fact that it is nearly identical to my wife’s GTP (that I see every day)…..this isn’t a child’s finger painting, it’s a detailed sketch. How can you not see that? I have strong opinions, shoot me.

IF you had read my response to that post, I said “Obviously I am referring to owning a GTP”…what do you propose, wait until GM put’s this thing out or state your own opinion now in hopes someone listens?

Don’t preach to me about maturity……I haven’t use one derogatory term in any of my responses…..meanwhile the "cons" are referred to as "whiners" "bitchers", etc…. I respect everyone’s opinion, but I find it disingenuous for anyone to say they don’t see the similarity…..simply to attempt a response.


It isn’t arrogant to state one’s opinion…we have that right don’t we? You get to state yours, I expect to do the same….without being personally attacked. Must I walk in lock step because the "majority" likes it? Not me, I use my own brain. Do I expect GM to change anything? Heck no. They are too scared of trying something that isn’t “safe”. If it’s OK for GM to put out (what I feel like is a half-hearted attempt) this kind of design, then buy one….me, I already own a car that (to me….guess I oughta’ start clearing that up so people won’t get so bent out of shape) looks and performs (again, I KNOW it's not the same, just close) nearly identical……..I’ll save my money for something better.

Ditto……..


[This message has been edited by Doug Harden, Pres CICC (edited June 29, 2002).]

 

You did listen, you even quoted and replied to me... And where did I call anyone names? I guess "b¡tching" was a little too harsh, I'm sorry. But if you aren't in favor of the new GTO design, then you are complaining about it.

Sure. Why not. If it performs well, like the Monaros supposedly do. Not to mention the room and comfort inside. I don't care who thinks my cars look fast or not, I like driving them.

I don't think for a second anyone will confuse this car with Granny's Grand Prix... I'm sure it will be advertised and promoted, not to mention the fact that they will be rare, and will be easily spotted. Any car guy will be able to spot one of these a mile away, you know we pick up all the little details.

Like a car with a supercharger or cam, or the different tailight changes on a 1st gen Camaro, or even the difference between LT1 and LS1... some people don't notice those types of things, but we will. A GTO won't be shrugged off as a Grand Prix, but instead turn heads...

Well, they are using the current tree, not the old. Look at the other Pontiacs today... and thats what they are using for the GTO.

That is true to what the GTO was, it looked similar to other cars in the Pontiac lineup. This is a modern GTO, and not a retro one.

True, some cars are re-released today that are obviously retro, like the Thunderbird. But those cars aren't being imported here quickly in limited supply. Those cars are designed like that, and I'm sure a totally redesigned GTO would look nothing like a Monaro. But thats what our GTO is.

Dated design? Maybe. But this is a "stop-gap" car... what if in just 2 years they replace it with an American designed and built GTO? Probably with more sales in mind too, and not just 20K.

Lets pretend for a minute that the current Grand Prix is a Tempest, since it is missing from our current Pontiac lineup. Or that the Tempest replaced the Grand Prix name in 1997, whatever...

Would this new GTO satisfy you? Or not? Just an odd scenario, but if you look at that, then you will see where the problem lies. Would you be happier with a perfect looking GTO, if it was retro like the Thunderbird, but underpowered? Or front wheel drive?

I want one of these cars btw. I'm worried about how much this thing is going to cost. How much power it will have. That matters more to me, and I'm suprised that were debating something dumb like this.

From that pic, and everything else I know about the car, it looks great. I look at a car and take everything into account, and measure it up. Like my Formula, its red and a hardtop... I wanted a black Trans Am with t-tops, but I couldn't pass up this car with such low miles. Same with this. It looks a little bit like a Grand Prix, but I see no problem with that.

You want the GTO to be more retro, and thats fine. But you guys make it out to be a huge problem and disgrace that the GTO name is on this car, and I think thats crazy.

 

If you are willing to accept mediocrity, then be my guest.

Let's let this dead horse lie in peace...it's starting to smell from the beating.

Peace....

 

LOL!

Fine with me, although the Monaro/GTO itself is nothing close to mediocre... I can't wait to test drive one and see what all this Holden hoopla is about.

 

Doug Harden... I have more appreciation and admiration for you right now than you can possibly know. I was out of town for a few days, so I was unable to post for a while. (I actually wanted the break from this debacle after taking my lumps last week!) You have presented the "con" side of this issue admirably. JWD.

And for the twenty-some-odd people who have posted fervishly in support of this car... Great job! Way to beat-up on a few guys who are just trying to help make some change for the better in GM-ville - oops! I meant Truckville - OH-no wait, that's Dodge's turf, um, well, OK, how 'bout FWD-V6-land - hows that?

formula79 -&gt; you replied,"How many people asked for a Mustang Mach 1? How many asked for a new T-bird that looks like a 55 model???"
Well, as for the Mach 1 - the interest was generated back in '94/'95 with a concept car. There was also a BOSS package, which did hit the streets a while back(mostly stripe kit). But to answer your question directly, I think something like @150,000 people "requested" a properly packaged Mach 1 in the last few years through Mustang Club of America and other organized bodies (NMRA, local clubs, new car questionaires, etc).(I was one of 'em!) I know that demand was good for the T-bird through their clubs too, but I don't have any recollection of actual numbers.
Point is - these cars were asked for by the buying public.

stevil -&gt; Thanks for the lesson on "cues". Boy, no wonder nobody else here understood what us "cons" here were trying to say when we asked for "cues of the old GTO in this new one". Man, I bet GM would never mount two cue sticks or cue ***** on the hood like the old one had, huh? I'll put the "cue" lesson in my "queue" to print when I get the "que".

Spot -&gt; So you get this grand image of dual hood scoops cramming cold air down 4 to 8 barrels of gas-guzzling carbs creating tire-smoking power when you hear the name Tempest, eh? Showing both your age and your knowledge of car history in the same paragraph there my friend. Honestly, I would have no problem calling the Monaro a Tempest, even though it is still a Monaro.

muckz -&gt; you wrote,"Are you hearing that MOST or the majority of people are satisfied with current upcoming GTO?" Well yes, I am aware of that, and all I have to say is that the same could be said of the F4 introduction, the Monte Carlo reintroduction, the Lumina debut, and countless other car intro's. Did that make them unabashedly successful? It just tells me that "MOST or the majority of the people are satisfied"... in raping old names, settling for whatever is offered, or just have no appreciation for legends. No opinions, fact.

stevil -&gt; you replied,"But if you aren't in favor of the new GTO design, then you are complaining about it." What a shame!! After the wonderful literary proclamation about the definition of "cues", you falter on this concept of debate v. slander.
You see, when one offers criticism about a topic, they are compelled to point out what a deficiency is, then offer a potential solution to remedy said issue. Others may return like diction poising an alternative point. This process is called "debating".
However, when a person simply says bad things about a design, issue, or even another person - that is called slander. The point of this lecture is to inform those who believe we "cons" are just "complaining" that we are not - we are debating an issue. To the contrary, I think the posts show that we "cons" have taken an excessive amount of slander (name calling and fictitious directives) from many (but definitely not all - BTW, thanks to those who disagree, but write professionally. ) of the "pro" supporters. Says alot about the insight and level of maturity of those of us not approving of the GTO naming process, IMHO.

kizz -&gt; you said,"All these ridiculously long threads are based on a hand-drawn sketch from a bad angle. Get a grip people."
GM wouldn't make such a big deal about the press release of that "sketch" if it wasn't close to the finished product. BTW,you aren't seeing the rear of the car because nothing was done to it(ref the article Decromin posted). Also in that article, they talk about the directive to make it look like all the other Pontiacs, and say the design is done. Crimony, they even give you quotes from the guys that were charged to do the work! THERE WILL LIKELY BE NO MORE CHANGES!!!!

Flamesuit on guys... I had a great weekend and I'm ready!

[This message has been edited by ProudPony (edited June 30, 2002).]

 

SO.. I just read this article, about car models dying this year, posted in another thread.

QUOTE - Still, research has shown that Camaro "is the fifth most recognized nameplate in the industry," he said. But asked if the Camaro will return at a later time, all Baldic would say is "You can never say never, but we don't have any current plans to return with the car."

The fifth most recognized nameplate in the industry... doesn't say "pimp me out, I'll sell cars!" to me. You guys got nothin' to worry about with GM and future car names/designs/performance! Let's all go fight for a GTO at our nearest dealer!!!

Speaking of the demise of the Mercury Cougar, the following was quoted...
"Besides, he added, some Cougar club members have been recently contacted by Ford officials asking for opinions about a possible future Cougar. Indeed, "the Cougar will probably come back in about four or five years on the next Mustang platform," Cedergren said.
OMG!!! Now there's an interesting concept.
Who would actually care what buyers wanted?
Much less go after the feedback?

And 180,000 Mustangs a year sell why?
And we can't have a GTO with 1 visual link to it's past why?
And the buyer is where on GM's totum pole?

[This message has been edited by ProudPony (edited July 01, 2002).]

 

PP, once again you bring up thought provoking points.

As I've said previously...Ford does a good job of communicating with their enthusiast base. Ford has been much more thorough about communicating with me, just from one purchase of an SVT Contour, than Chevy has, even, with my life long affiliation with the Camaro.

I've driven future (at the time) Ford products with Ford developemental engineers riding shotgun....urging me to drive it even harder...and hanging on my every word of input.

With that said, and to be fair, I also know of fellow Camaro club members who got a ride in an LS1 Camaro before it was released.

I think the failure here is in what GM does with this info. Ford seems better able to convert this into products people want.

 

quote from Muckz: Thank you sir! It amazes me, reading this thread, seeing GTO-antagonists ignoring these key characteristics and issues. It's perfectly fitting to me to see the new GTO as it has been drawn, with its performance, capabilities and likely price point. Think of the Monaro as the modern-day Tempest. The GTO is essentially the same car but with a few visual tweaks to make it unique. Would I like to see a new GTO like Dutch Injun's rendition... sure, but it will take years for such a car to happen, IF a business case can be made for it and IF a plant can be found. Meanwhile - I live in the real world, where it's suddenly simpler now for me in the event my Formula gets trashed or stolen in the next year or two. GTO here I come!

I've recently detected a certain attitude from people discussing this car, among those opposing it (especially if they are also Ford fans)... they sound kind of... jealous! Jealous... that Ford has nothing like this to offer in 2003, 2004 or who knows when. To whit, a hot RWD IRS A4 V8 coupe with an American heritage and (relatively speaking) value pricing, with a real back seat to boot. Ford IMHO really should bring back a Torino GT-like vehicle. I hope the GTO is offered in some shade of green, so Ford fans can more easily turn green with envy!

Doug - Speaking of the GTP and similarities with the GTO... I guess styling is a subjective thing because I don't see the GTO being such a disgraceful carbon copy of the GTP. There are some things I don't like about my GTP's front end... the huge panel gaps around the headlights, the way the bumper bulges way wider than the headlights. There are some things I really like about it too, like the trademark twin notsrils, prominent fog lights, wide streamlined headlights. All the good things carry over in the new GTO design, but the things I don't like are not present (BTW I like the GTO front end better than the G-Force concept front end too). If I am a typical GTP owner, what do you suppose I will think upon seeing a GTO on a dealer's lot and reading about it's other features and price? A lot of GTP owners are dismayed about the upcoming discontinuation of the GTP coupe, and a lot also pine for RWD. They will LUNGE for this GTO. No, wait, they will have a long, gut-wrenching and emotional debate with themselves first about whether the new GTO "deserves" its name - then after that five-second pause, they will become happy GTO owners and a whole new chapter in GTO history will dawn.

------------------
NBM 99Formula, DF Lid, K&N, SLP WS6 Takeoff Muffler | DFGreen 98 GTP, Insulated SLP K&N, !U!Res, transcooler
| Dark Red Metallic 1990 IROC-Z Camaro, stock

 

At 38 I think I can say I was around when a good many of those muscle cars were still on the road. Quite a few people at my high school (these cars were 10-15 years old & very affordable in the fuel starved late 70's) and a cousin in Indiana had a 68 Torino GT 390, in North Carolina an uncle had a (gasp!) 69 GTO. My own father had as our family car from 1967 to 1972 a 1962 Impala SS.

The definition of muscle car is no longer bad brakes or straightline acceleration only. In a modern way GTO does relate to the past.

 

It's just a matter of taste Darth. Are you wrong for wanting a car that looks racy? No! Is someone else wrong for wanting a car that looks good but doesn't attract alot of attention? Of course not. It boils down to a matter of taste. What we do have in common, along with everyone else is that we like world class performance cars & we want GM to be in the game.

I loved the stealth nature of my Mustang coupes. I also loved the simple linebacker looks of my SC T-bird, & prefer the suttle yet sinister look of the recessed headlights of pre-98 Camaros to the latter versions. I know you are partial to Corvettes & racy designs. It's whatever one's taste is.

I wouldn't call a design bad (except Aztec) or uninspired (though the current Thunderbird comes dangerously close) for going the low keyed route. Jaguar has done it for years, and Pontiac is most certainly going that direction.

On a positive note, I Chevrolet is going to be the more daring design division within the new "Lutz" GM. The family design bar won't be on everything, but Chevrolets won't be "sleepers" in design anymore.