I think Josh got it 99% right...style. The Solstice jumps out at you and has crazy street presence, while the GTO is very subdued. I happen to prefer the latter, and that is why I own a GTO.

With that said...I have never owned a car that so many people stared at and complimented

 

It cant do better if it doesen't exist. If it has four doors its not a GTO.

Does Pontiac need a four door performance sedan? Yes. But GTO does not need four doors.

 

I personally would not be interested in a 4-door GTO per-se, but the main reasons I have my Camaro vice a GTO today is:

NO useable trunk
4-seater, where 5 would be hugely more functional in a "personal coupe"

I drove a few GTOs and I must admit it was tempting but there was no real advantage. I posted the same question here a couple of years ago and the best compatison was it was not a trade up; more side-ways.


All of the speculation here (some based on excellent information and insight) give me hope that Pontiac will find it's way again and it will return to a performance division vice re-warmed re-badges. The potential for an imported LS2 powered VE is a good stop-gap and (I hope) an indicator of things to come!

Allen

 

I can see your point regarding utility, but I'd say the GTO would be a 'trade up' with regards to interior. Much more room is available in the backseat (once you are back there), and the quality is WORLDS ahead of an f-body interior...

 

Why not? People used to say that about a Grand Prix.

 

And Bonneville.

 

And now the Grand Prix is dying.

Things may not occur overnight, but eventually, it all falls into place.

 

Fair enough.

So im assuming you were indifferent when the Impala became the FWD boremobile it is?

Or would be ok with a quad door Camaro?

 

In 94 the first four door Impala SS was odd. But now its no big deal. I cant wait for my new 09 rwd Impala SS.

 

Actually, I was mildly pleased with the FWD Impala. It was better looking than the FWD Lumina it replaced. It also brought the Impala name back into the Chevrolet portfolio.

As far as a 4 door Camaro, why does everyone bring that up when trying to make a point? I guess the questions to ask would be, would such a car sell? Would it damage Camaro's brand equity? Would it's formula be inexorably altered with two extra doors? Just me, but IMO a Camaro's essence is so far away from requiring the utility of a four door that it would be utterly pointless.

Getting back to the GTO. I think the original spirit of the first GTO has more in common with a fast useable sedan, in the same vein as a Charger SRT-8 or CTS-V, than the sedan based 2+2 that the '04-'06 GTO was. No, I'll take that back. Those cars are FAR too expensive. The truer essence of a modern GTO would be like a base Charger SE with a Hemi. Let's call it $23,500 out the door.

 

Actually, a Camaro with RX8-style rear doors would be much easier to squeeze into and out of in the narrow space in my company's parking lot or in my garage, because the main doors would be much shorter. So I'd be fine with it!

I want a fast car with good handling. It should look good too. Four doors is not incompatible with any of those attributes. It may even make the car easier to use day to day. That is a good thing.

 

That and a $20-$25k pricetag, instead of a $30-$33k pricetag...

 

Ummm, guess you must not have looked at build quality, or the quality of the interior. The GTO is way more refined than any F-body... something that may not have come through in the test drive, but I can say this after 2 years of GTO ownership, no rattles, and very very few problems...

The market has changed from the 60's to today. In the 60's it was not uncommon for Dad to drive a 2-dr. The GTO being the sleeper 2dr coupe with a big motor, at least for the first few years of production.

Now, the coupe market is way smaller than it used to be, and the rest of the market split between sedans and pickups/SUV's. One of the only reasons why I bought a GTO was because I have a different car (a sedan) I can use when I need to (winter, road trip w/4 passengers, luggage space).

My next car will have to be a sedan (I don't do trucks, they're just not sporty enough, though the TBSS is tempting). I suspect I'm not alone. I just hope that the revitalized Pontiac of the future offers something RWD and V-8 (as well as 6 and 4 cylinder) powered for both coupe and sedan buyers...

 

I completely understand what you're saying. Its the same thing DCX said, "If we would have kept making the Charger this is what it would have looked like by now"

And I think thats largely true. Im just of the opinion that a car such as we're describing would sell on its own merit, as the Charger does. Charger doesen't create the warm fuzzy feelings in the market place Mustang or Camaro do, and Mopar guys where never ecstatic about it, so it must be selling because its a good car, not because its got a historic name shoehorned on it.

Unless its the styling...

 

100% agree that the spirit of the 60s era muscle cars today would be a fast sedan. The idea that only coupes can be muscle cars is something I don't agree with, but I do agree they should be rear drive.

But muscle cars weren't cheap compared to other models of their day. They tended to fall between the mid 90s Impala SS (a big premium... and profit... for an appearence package on an already quick car) and today's Charger SRT-8 (an expensive engine package that's relatively very rare).


In 1969, loaded GTOs cost at least as much as standard Corvettes. Ordering a Hemi engine for a new Roadrunner would nearly double the base price. Other engines were not only rare & expensive, but didn't even come with a warranty!

The Charger SRT-8 (about 10 grand over a base Charger) and the mid 90s Impala SS (nearly 8 grand over a just-as-quick LT1 Impala) are examples of muscle cars we dream of, while the Charger R/T would be an example of a modern Chevelle SS (high volume, relatively modest price, solid performance value).