So is the going to be Pontiac twin of the Commodore SS then?

 

Well most coupes don't really seat five anymore despite what automakers may tell you, the days of body hiding trunks are pretty much over too.

I think there is a difference between making in the car in the same body style by modern standards and changing into a different car altogether.

You seem to be presenting an all or nothing arguement, since short of reproducing the original GTO any new car will be a changed version, that makes it ok to completely change its DNA, I don't think so.

And I generally feel that this whole retro design and naming thing is just a fad. If the charger and GTO teach us anything I would think it would be that the attention of the uninitiated isn't worth the disdain of the enthusiast when you re-hash old nameplates.

I know that this process isn't new but its a dangerous game. For example the whole "Hemi" thing is going over great, despite it not being a "real" hemi, however try to explain the difference to most people and you'll get. Whereas the GTO, Charger, Camaro, are relatively fresh in most peoples mind and aren't obscure engineering terms, so you have to work a lot harder to make that go over well. IMO too much harder if you are changing the main style of the car, ie coupe to sedan.

 

Not really all or nothing......

If I were simply looking to get a 2+2, I'd want it to be smaller, lighter and more nimble.

If I'm getting a 3,800 lbs midsized coupe, I just wish that I could occasionally get 5 people into it when I have to. I don't really need to hide any bodies in the trunk, but I'd like to put my dry cleaning back there, without wrinkling my shirts.

Every GTO ever built before 2004 however, would have met all my needs for a daily driver, ....the '04/'05, unfortunately does not. I'd accept the two extra doors if it would.

 

Putting GTO on a 4-door is just as ridiculous as what the new "Charger" is, and all Chrysler gets is critisizm. As mentioned before here, I think cars like these are gonna stop the whole bringing back names thing. People obviously thought that these days it was possible to bring the cars back and do them right, even some executives might have, but they were very wrong. It'll probably be the same for all out retro styling too. People just don't know how to do the cars right.

 

here's a bright idea! how about NOT calling it something that would obviously provoke loyalists. And you know its obvious when there is a warning at the top of such a thread of such a topic. Create a new name plate, or use one thats been bastardized already and call it a day. Not difficult.

 

Nope. Dog leg rear windows aren't Holden's style. Besides, word on the streets is that known future Pontiacs are going to be designed here.

But ya know, a Commodore could be the twin of another GM division.

 

Hell, if they wanted to raid the name bin so bad, they shoulda called it Coronet. That name has plenty of meaning to enthusiasts, but FITS THE CAR. I dont know what marketing dweeb came up with Charger, but they need to have a quick lesson in reality.

 

So then you and anyone else who wouldn't have a problem with a 4 door GTO, also wouldn't have a problem with a 4 door Mustang? Some name plates just don't fit with a 4 door. If you can't do them as a 2 door (or at least as a quad coupe), don't use the name.

 

I don't necessarilly relish a 4 door GTO, but everyone has to admit the new GTO really bends the classic GTO formula....for better or worse.
No problems with that?

How about if GTO became a 2 seater....is that no problem, as long as it retains two doors?

What if GTO shrinks to become a ponycar....is that no problem...as long as it has two doors?

The modern equivalent of what GTO was....would today, be a performance sedan.

Like it or don't like it....you can't deny it.

 

That wouldn't help sales or really save on cost much

As long as the back seat is as roomy as the current car I see no problem.

THat is true, GTO back in the day was really no more than the GTP package was on the 97-03 Grand Prix.

 

The 2004 GTO has everything it needs to "qualify" as a GTO, hoodscoops being the exception to some.

The 2005 has the hoodscoops, so all issued are addressed.

I have never heard anyone say the new GTO wasn't worthy because it does have a bench seat in the back.

GTO = larger sized (in relation to other offerings of the time period being looked at), 2 door, RWD, V8 muscle coupe. Throw in "with hood scoops" if you must.


If you want to run this logic, then, fine... you must also fight for four doors on a Camaro.... or at the very least a nice set of half doors like an RX-8. :blah:


Maybe it's be better if Camaro moved ot FWD to keep costs down and appeal to the younger market. You know.. Camaro was targeted at the younger buyer back in the day... that market today is the sport compact crowd... maybe we should slap "Z28" on the top of the line Cobalt?

 

I agree and feel the same way about the Camaro.

 

Whoa, whoa, whoa...........

I never said the current GTO is unworthy because it lacks a rear benchseat. I said that this changes the classic GTO formula....which it does. The point is, the GTO name was given to a car which doesn't really strictly follow what GTO was. That's all. Is that bad? I don't know. But it's different than what it was.....and yet no one can bring themselves to admit that.

Here's what people used to use their GTO's for, family cars, for guys that also wanted performance.

Also, three teenage boys cruising in a buddy's GTO convertible could pick-up three teenage girls. Try that in a new GTO.

 

And Corvettes used to have carbs... they don't now. Are they not what they were too?

Heck TPI 3rd Gen Camaro's didn't have carbs... the 67 Camaro sure did.



These things are probably MORE significant than the lack of a bench seat in the rear of the new GTO.

3rd and 4th Gen Camaro's didn't offer bench front seats... wouldn't THAT be the same problem too? Guess that opens the door for a full blown 4-door Camaro??

 

You would need a Tahoe or Escalade to roll with 6 people today