I'll admit that i've never driven a G6, but the thought of it being "equal" to a TSX isn't registering with me. I've driven the TSX, and it has impressed me on all levels. Is the new G6 THAT good? Personally, given the same price, i'd opt for the TSX over the G6 without so much as a test-drive or a second thought.

I think decades of cheap low-quality pontiacs have messed with our perceptions to the point where EVEN if the G6 was twice the car the TSX is/was, we'd still expect a sticker 3-4k dollars cheaper.

Back to the topic on hand...To be perfectly honest, the only GM family car that has me impressed is the Cobalt coupe. That is one car that i would actually cross-shop with the import competition. The g6, while a definite improvement over the GA, does nothing for me and the Malibu, Imp, MC aren't even remotely attractive to me as a consumer. So the Cobalt definitly has my attention, but the others really don't.

Just found this under redzeds profile and found it ammusing.... "Interests: GM cars in general". Hehe. Sure shows.

 

I haven't driven a TSX....but I've driven it's big brother Accord. The G6 is a step in the right direction, but it doesn't drive as nice as an Accord....not even close.

Sorry, I wish I could tell you otherwise....but I just can't. Maybe the GXP version might approach an Accord...we'll see.

The G6 feels more like a Stratus sedan.

 

Thanks for the perspective, although I would argue that a new LS-1 F-body was too good to pass up at the time and the resale values were high enough to favor a new purchase as well. Maybe special (and I really mean "special") domestic products can escape the cycle of depreciation and mediocrity.

I'm not sure that they still build truly "bad" cars anymore. On a qualitative level, I'm sure the G6 is far better than the outgoing Grand Am, and it might even be better than the 2004 Grand Prix. On a absolute level, it isn't much of a car for $27,590. Similarly, the GTO was utterly appalling at $33K, and in many respects is a far worse car than a 2002 Trans Am that was similarly priced.

Of course, it would have been easy to have been "charitable" if the GM had shaved about $5K off the price of the G6. Even the crude 2004 GTO might have been credible at a price competitive to that of a Mustang GT.

 

OMG. This is perhaps the most ridiculous thing you have said yet. Like the GTO, or hate it... saying that it is "crude" compared to a 2002 Firebird or a 2004 Mustang is like saying Waterford Crystal is "crude" compared to a 6 pack of plastic mugs picked up at Wal*Mart.

I love the 4th Gen F-Bodies... my 99 Z28 was one of my favorite cars, but it is no where even close to being as refined as my 2004 GTO...

These statements are the pinnacle of showing your ignorance on the subject.

 

You have your head up your a*rse farther than I have ever imagined. There is a night and day difference in the refinement and quality between the GTO and the 2004 Mustang GT, and the Trans Am. Go drive a GTO and stop this keyboard test driving.

I have driven a GTO and must say it is one of the best interiors GM has come out with. Better than every Cadillac except the new XLR and STS. Everything looks and feels top notch. I like the seats better than what they put in BMWs Lexus, and Mercedes. And it is so stylish with the red gauges, red leather, red stitching, and silver accents.

And I thought 33k was a fair price for the GTO. It is faster and more practical than the 350z, G35, S2000, and RX-8, all which have a similar sticker price. And the GTO defiently has a nicer interior than these cars.(although the RX-8 is pretty cool) The reason it never caught on in my opinion was the style. The jellybean look was all played out about 6 years ago with the Grand Prix coupe

 

How's that? Could you speak into my good ear? Someone put this line of crap in his or her sig, please. "Crude 2004 GTO"?! Well, that puts you in agreement with just about - ah - no one. I for one get tired of people ripping on the F-cars as if they had no modern redeeming qualities (which is not true), but in terms of which is the better overall CAR, there is no contest between a GTO and a Firebird. Fit and finish, refinement, ride, interior quality, passenger space, and so on. Yeah, in outright performance numbers, an LS1 F-car will eek out a win over an LS1 GTO. But for real world use? I've said it before, and I'll say it again: The GTO is like an enlarged 3-series with a big V8 up front. Or a 5 series coupe. It drives like a European car with a big American engine.

This thread should be closed and enshrined now, as redzed has made possibly the most ignorant post of the year...

 

How is it every automotive rag so far has cited that the G6 provides an excellent value, and the only people I have seen knock it so far are, I don't know, a handful of people on this site??? I mean, I thought Car and Driver was hard to please...

Because you have yet to validly defend yourself against any facts I posted above, I sure as hell do not expect you to start now, redzed. But I ask you...how is the GTO a bad value? Does the GTO not come with more equipment than your fabled 325i? For less money? Is it not bigger? More comfortable? Faster? As high of quality inside? Again, BIGGER?????????? For christ sakes, a $33k car the size of a Civic BETTER be high quality...

But that's no matter guys...redzed is right. I wonder where that insightful post is he was bragging about beginning, about his wonderful new purchase and that "we wouldn't like" his post. Like that's a surprise...

Like I said, all bullsh!t and no substance...as I mentioned before you got truly asinine, public office is most certainly in your future.

 

http://www.caranddriver.com/article....&page_number=1

Car and Drive on the G6's handling:

Car and Driver on the 3.5 liter OHV V6:

I like the "never feels strong" part.

1. Interesting how they're reverting to hydraulic power steering for the GTP. Could it be that the electronic setup isn't appropriate for a "performance" car?

2. "Still, the 3.9-liter does not feel much more powerful than the 3.5." Enough said.


If the G6 is just as lacking in rear headroom as the Grand Am, where's the improvement?


I wonder what happened to the 6000STE. Between the rough ride, the huge price and the rotten MPG, it's no surprise that the STE "went away." The G6 is a far better car, but there again, what isn't these days?

 

Don't wanna talk about the "crude" GTO anymore, eh?

I love how you bounce back and forth from one thing to the other, simply ignoring the 98% of each post that totally rips everything you saw to shreads.

 

Whether one if a big fan of the GTO or not, its value is unquestionable. And comparing its refinment levels to that of an f-bod or 04 mustang makes zero sense.

 

Hehehehehe...oh redzed, you didn't do something stupid like quote that article now, did you? See, you've proved my point that you SHOULD run for office. No, I mean it. You wouldn't happen to be a Bush advisor during your time between work and slamming cars, would-ja??

I had a nice big fat response written out, then my stupid computer here at work crashed...grr. Anyways, looking back at the article...

1) The overall appearance had an "expensive aura" to it...justifying the price maybe? Oh wait...its more expensive than the competition, right? Nope...at the end, it says "Its not any cheaper than its competition." Now, that does not imply its MORE EXPENSIVE, right? But wait...your argument is that its too expensive...but its in line with its competition. Explain that one.

2) The backseat they said was ample for anyone UNDER SIX FEET TALL. Do you have any kids over 6 feet tall, red? Gee...I don't. No one I know does. Seems to me that in the family sedan market, not many people would...otherwise they'd buy a minivan or SUV for that big family. No, people who bought Grand Ams and Aleros from me were small families with small budgets with small kids...not people who needed to park Andre the Giant in the back. Otherwise, the article said buyers will be IMPRESSED with the back seat. Doesn't it say that? Explain to me then why you complain about the back seat. Also explain to me how the back seat of your beloved 3 series is so much better. Please. I beg of you.

3) The article says the car has a good, solid ride and a planted feel ON THE ROAD. They then complain it understeers on a race track. Redzed, how often do you drive on a race track? See, I drive back and forth to the office every day in my Grand Prix. I couldn't care less if a G6 plows in turns on a RACETRACK. Does that matter to me? No. Does it matter to 99.8% of target buyers? Highly doubtful. F body buyers, quite possible...but this is a G6 here. As a matter of fact, I bet if I surveyed every BMW owner I know (about 10-12), not one would even know what the term understeer even meant, let alone claim their Bimmer was superior due to its lack of it. I use the BMW analogy because hey, the 3 series is so much better, right? Explain this. Please.

4) The OHV engine is not as serene over 5k. To 99.8% of customers, does it matter? Not one bit. AS I SAID BEFORE (and you ignored), it gets "an impressive 29 MPG highway," per the article. Family sedan buyers care about that. Car and Driver, on a race track, complained the car did not feel as powerful. And yet, I can assure you a Mazda 6s with an AT (something I doubt they have ever tested) feels the same damn way due to lack of torque. Again, the AVERAGE OWNER WILL NEVER KNOW THE DIFFERENCE. Average people are going to buy a G6. Hell, I probably will too someday. And no, despite loving cars, I don't give a crap either if its a little thrashy over 5k. Why? My cars pass 5k what, once a month? Case closed. I'll enjoy the smooth torque and the MPG, thanks very much. So explain WHY GM needs to spend more $$ on a factor that to Joe Car Buyer really is not a factor.

5) I never said Car and Driver praised EVERY ASPECT of the car. But they didn't walk away and say "this is a pile of crap" either. These guys are about the most import biased mag out there. They loved the old Protege while it sat forlorn on car lots. Why? Well, it was great ON THE TRACK. Who the hell cared? I'll quote the Road and Track article later. You see no point to buying the G6. I do.

So does Car and Driver. So take your spin of the truth and cram it...and DON'T try to twist things that can be disproved. Do me a favor and ANSWER QUESTIONS FOR A CHANGE. Otherwise? Darth said it best. It seems like what you say is just **** floating in the wind...

 

this is what redzed is

http://www.winternet.com/~mikelr/flame60.html

 

or maybe

http://www.winternet.com/~mikelr/flame47.html