GTO is just too bland for me.

 

Copy of my post in the Future Holdens thread. I think it belongs here too.

As the owner of both a4th gen f-body and a GTO, I can tell you that redzed knows little,if anything about either car. I love my Firehawk, but the GTO has a better interior than most new cars on the market let alone a 4th gen . The build quality of the GTO is not only good, it is on a par with the best of the European cars on the market costing 10-20k more.

Along those lines the GTO should never have been compared to the Mustang,that's the Camaro's job. The GTO should be compared to the BMW 3 series (including the M3) . That's the comparison I made when I decided on the GTO. I found the GTO to be on a par with the 3 (or better in some respects) for 20k less. The GTO is brilliant on its own, especially when you consider how quickly GM adapted it to meet US standards. Anyone who says different doesn't know the car. Is the Mustang a better Ponycar? Of course, because the GTO isn't a Ponycar to begin with! It's an upscale sports-coupe (Musclecar) that is worth every penny of it's sticker. The answer is not too dumb-down the GTO to compete with Mustang, it is to promote it as the BMW-killer it truly is and to build a true GM Ponycar to tackle Mustang on its own turf: CAMARO

 

Well said.

 

haha exactly what i been saying , just a better description

 

I'd agree that the GTO might have been a BMW-competitor....

...if it had appeared at least 5 years earlier.

As it is, the GTO is a horribly compromised and very dated design.

The new 2005 Mustang GT, on the other hand, is fairly priced, well designed and very well built. More to the point, the Mustang looks and feels completely new.

Personally, I can appreciate why a GTO owner would resent direct comparisions with the new Mustang GT.

 

The GTO is a viable competitor now maybe even moreso than it would have been 5 years ago-since BMW has now lost its soul.

The GTO is not "horribly compromised" in any aspect, in fact it is a design GM rightfully looks to improve the DNA of its upcoming products. As to being "very dated" , I'd reserve that description for cars that really deserve it,like the Crown Victoria or the Dodge Caravan.

Don't presume to know how I feel about the Mustang. I certainly don't "resent" it, I actually like it quite a bit. It is exactly what a Mustang should be: an affordable,entry-level ponycar with fair performance and a low price. Additionaly, it looks like a Mustang should IMO. But, it simply doesn't qualify to be in the same league as the GTO. An '05 Mustang that can't even match the performance of an '02 f-body certainly doesn't qualify for any superlatives from me- it's a good Mustang,but not a great car.

 

If your idea of "soul" is mid-90's GM generic styling, then BMW didn't lose it, they never had it. Thankfully.


All of that inherited "DNA" is part of the reason that GM products that are still 2-3 years away from introduction are looking uncompetitive compared to today's Chrysler LX-platform products.

I'm sure you also can't see the uncanny resemblance between your GTO and a 1995 Chevy Cavalier coupe. If visual similarity to a 10-year old Cavalier isn't proof positive of a dated design, I don't know what it.



I don't think you get it. The 2005 Mustang - even the base car - is a visually stunning car. Ford finally got it right, and while I regret that the Mustang GT didn't get stability control....or an IRS....or and extra 50-100 horsepower....I can understand why this car is already a commercial success.

 

Continuing with the "Redzed said...." watch:

August or September's 2002 Car & Driver as well as multiple Australian car mags have compared various BMWs to Holdens. Even Car & Driver favored the Holden, though the bimmer won by 1 point if I remember.

Sure bub... if you say so.

1. The Mustang GT has less options. Of course it's cheaper.
2. Mustang GT has a live axle. Gee, that's a completely new idea, huh?
3. Mustang GT has cheaper interior materials. Though still light years better than what US makers traditionally have used, there really isn't any comparison between the 2 interiors. GTO has it hands down.
4. Mustang GT has a lighter duty body structure than the Holden based GTO. Like BMW & unlike US made cars, Holden didn't try to use the lightest & least amount of metal they could get away with. The only unibody car I've seen with Holden's structural rigidity is the GM F-body.
5. It's going to be intresting to see how fairly priced the Cobra Mustang will be, since it's the one that's going to be compared to the GTO.

 

Say what?

Are you serious?

 

The "Redzed said..." watch, part 2:

And, of course, YOU have seen these upcoming "uncompetitive looking" cars GM is bringing out in 2008 -2009 (2 to 3 years away), huh?

Actually, the GTO resembles a Volvo C70 or a Honda Accord coupe with a Pontiac front end, bigger tires, and 400 horsepower.

Mustang is a fantastic car, and it is selling very well. But the GTO is the better car. More people bought GTOs last year than Mustang Mach1s and Cobras combined.

GTOs also outsold Camaro SS and WS6 Trans Ams combined as well (last year GTO outsold typical Camaro SS sales by well over two to one.... and it's sales were below expectations!).

Not bad for such a high priced, poor selling, outdated, poor ergonomically designed, poor quality car that every owner seems to love and has won consistant praise on everything except it's sleeper styling.

 

I give credit where credit's due. GM overengineered the 4th gen's chassis, and it's a minor miracle thes cars aren't heavier than they are. Holden's version of GM's "V" chassis is the same way.

Go to any junkyard(s) with an assortment of cut up cars.

Find a 4th gen F-body that had a section cut out of it's side rails and it's "B" pillar.

Now, go and find something else that has not only that type of redundant construction (double box under the door seams, and a pretty massive thick stamping with an additional support on the "B" pillar), but also that guage of metal!

Check out headons in the Bimmer, Mustang, and then 4th gen F-bodies!

Whatever you do, don't compare it to a SN95 Mustang or BMW 3 series.

You'll be sorry.

 

... and check out the triple layered rockers if you find a clipped car. Or take a front fender off and see what's between the shock tower and fender...

We just cut up a '00 V6 car to make an Outlaw 10.5" car and PRO Edelbrock Super Street car. Its amazing how well the chassis are built! Anyone who has cut one up and cut the floor out knows why they weigh more than cars their size.

 

Is there anything left for me to say? Thanks to the sane folks posting in this thread. You might want to check-out my last post in the Future Holdens thread.

 

This is one of the man resons I love the new GTO, its got subtle styling and a mean engine to make people freak out. Its a car that is fun but doesnt attract unwanted attention from the boy racers and the Police even if you are just cruising at the speed limit enjoying a nice day out.

This is why Im drool over the car and want one. The mustang for me isnt even an afterthought. The GTO may cost more but it offers so much more for me.

 

My brother bought an '04 GTO several days ago. He drove an '05 mustang GT first, then the '04 GTO. In his opinion the '04 GTO was light years ahead of the mustang GT. After he brought it over and i drove it myself i couldn't agree more. The GTO is way more sophisticated. He paid $4k more for the GTO than he would have for the mustang - now i realize this is an '04 model and not an '05 but he got ripped off by going into the dealer having no idea what '04s go for (he should have called me i suppose first). At any rate, after driving his GTO (first time I had driven one actually) I don't see how it can be compared to the mustang at all. Especially now that i see a '05 mustang around every corner they have lost their mystique somewhat.