Bob Cosby

What guionM said.

Darth Xed

So, what you are saying is... GM is making only FWD "crap" (ie Malibu) , yet, if they threw in the LS1 , it would be a "kick ***" car?

Ponykillr

Id drive the crap out of a LS1 Malibu.

Darth Xed

But.... it's still be "FWD crap" like you said, right?

stars1010

Yeah I am right and the "Modern" GM agrees with me.

And no this issue is a joke, it didn’t make me tired. The lack of sleep for the past 3 days, constant studying and school is making me tired.

Why does the Malibu need a V8 too when the Impy will get one in a year.

My god buddy if you would study the history of GM you would understand. Its about making money not just throwing LS1s in everything. Enthusiasts make up such a small amount of total buyers in America. This car is not made for enthusiast. GM has other cars on the way for us. It would make absolutely no sense to build that car your talking about.

But if you can figure out a way to do it and make it appealing, then $hit, go talk to the GM New Car Approval Board.

guionM

Ya know, I'd be rolling on the floor laughing my little bottom off if I didn't think you were serious.

You gotta be joking, right???

Quote:

As for the prices being comparable your wrong. The GTO was built so a working class father could buy one for his son. Lets travle back in time to the 60s. You could spend a lot of money on the big name cars just like now. You could also afford some real muscle cars for less than $3000 ie Dodge Dart Swinger 340. Kids with part time jobs back then could actually buy a fast cool car with a part time job in HS working full time in the summer. This is the days before finacing the **** out of stuff also.

In the early 60s it was not hard to find Vettes in HS parking lots also.

My answer to GM: Throw a LS1 in a malabu and call it a day at $25000. They would sell like crazy. Offer it in a manual and give it some really slick options. Gm lacks most on options. The 60s had options now we get A B or C.

Now you've done it. I have to go to my shed, and get my "Anti-nostalga truth chainsaw", and educate you about reality and the real world.

There are these things called the Consumer Price Index, Median wages, and a term called "adjusted for inflation". What these tools do is to give an accurate picture as to what things really cost to people and to prevent the really annoying tendancy of some people to talk about how cheap things used to be by using dollars, without taking into account wage & price increases due to inflation.

Lets say you are sitting in..... oh let's say Charlotte,
North Carolina for instance today in a job that makes you roughly $51,000 per year. A pretty good figure for North Carolina. If you were to step into a time machine and go back to 1968, and take the same good paying job making the same good money, you would only be getting paid $8,600. Both are the median incomes for it's time.
http://www.usc.edu/schools/sppd/rese...s_fainctyp.pdf

Now, let's take a look at GTO prices. A 1968 GTO started at $3100 base (that means 3 speed transmission). Add a Ram Air engine, a 4 speed tranny, and very little else, and you had a over $4,000 car.

Now, I don't know about you, but I don't see many "working class fathers" making 51 grand a year rushing out today and spending half their pay buying their sons a car. And it DEFINATELY didn't happen back then when new car terms rarely exceeded 18-24 months when we are talking $4,000 cars and a great paying job grossed just over $8,000....before taxes. As far as kids working part time jobs and buying themselves brand new muscle cars, anyone who tells you that give them this from me:

In the 1970s, the price of used 5-10 year old muscle cars dropped like a ton of bricks due to high fuel prices, the pending end of leaded gas production, and the fact that mantinence on them were much higher than the relatively cheaper newer cars, so perhaps then a "working class father" could by one for his son..... used (they were dirt cheap by the late 70s)!

But the idea for some kid working part time and getting a GTO is pure horsefeathers.

PS: With Corvettes costing 5 grand plus and the related astronomical insurence rates, the only high school parking lots that had many of them new must have been in Beverly Hills or the Hamptons.

Now.... don't get dumb, and make me break out a bigger chainsaw.

BTW: The 2004 GTO at $32,000 is dead accurate as to where a loaded GTO was in price historically (especially in the later 60s) taking into account average wages for then and now. When you also figure that you had 24 months to pay it off (instead of the 60 and more you have today) pretty much shows how ridiculous some of these "cheap muscle car" claims are.

Steve0

After reading the suggestion about putting a LS1 in a Malibu, religious or not, we should all thank God Ponykillr is not in charge of GM future products.

Heatmaker

Wow I love the attitudes you find on these internet boards. Newbie this Newbie that? WHo cares? Does it make your "opinions" anymore valid? All I'm saying is that GM basicly ended the modern muscle car when they cancelled the F-body. I'm predicting a Dodgish future for GM. A lot with no performance cars...and their only Performance model an unaffordable "Gem" in Dodges case the Viper...In GM's case the Corvette that they are bumping the tag up on. The muscle car started out as performance for the poor man...but what sense does it make when that "muscle cars" price tag resides where the marker for the corvette used to be? The GTO is has plenty big shoes to fill up...and if it's the last savoir for Muscle cars (Excluding Fords Pony cars.) But I for one don't think the GTO makes a big enough statement. THe original GTO looked like a Monster. A family car turned inside out. The new GTO is too bland doesn't say enough. Especially now with it's single sided exhaust. THe GTO isn't anything new or exciting. It's a Grand Am Concept with a RWD conversion and toss in LS-1. Someone at GM just got wise and decided they should slap a GTO badge on it. Even though the original plattform for the GTO was a family car...when they created the GTO they eliminated the family look of it They made it rebellious. I don't see that at all on the new "GTO" I just don't think it's worthy of the name. But my point about the GTO is that thats basiclly what GM's current standings on muscle cars are. Lets Market a name. For some reason Ford seems to be the only company reviving thier car. The new Mustangs will be getting bigger and more powerful engines and going back to thier roots with a Retro design...and if I'm correct the new thunderbird has a DOHC V8. But When ford remakes a classic they make it look like something. Why hasn't GM learned to do this? If you ask any average person about the Camaro's and firebirds they don't speak negatively about it's performance but rather the looks of the cars. To me the Camaro always looked half finished, and the Firebirds rear looked way over done. It's like GM wanted to end the F-body line. They do not even offer any Perofmrance support for the cars. Look in a Ford Racing Catalouge. There's TONS! of stuff for thier GT lineup. Look in the GM parts catalog and I think there's a F-1 package appearance page...An upgraded shock option (thanks to SLP only)...and some GM brake disc...and a driveshaft... everything that I wasn't looking for. The GM of old had something going for them they knew how to make cars fast and give people what they wanted...the GM of new knows how to create the engines....but they don't know what to do with them at all. For the most part I see GM trying to push the Corvette into the Viper range...when it comes to status. The GTO is baiscily a hit or miss car. I'm sure those eager to buy them and believe thier getting something "new and interesting" or rather the technology that should had been the 2004 F-body will meet GM's release Qouta. But after the hype is gone I'm sure the sales will go down....just like with the PT-cruiser. Then will come a redesign for the GTO...or rather a new Front Bumper cover . I'm sure that if the new GTO weren't called the "GTO" than people would be happy about it. A new powerful car from GM...but this car they created isn't living quite up to that stature even...especially not when thier riding on technology we already know what is capable of....LS1.

AnthonyHSV

Ahh there is no Grand AM concept conversion in the GTO.

1. It comes from another continent

2. The only "Grand Am" about it is the Pontiac front end which is corporate styling.

3. The only thing they created on the old GTO to eliminate the family look of it was some fake hood scoops. So your saying instead of performance you won't fake tacky add on's... umm isn't that the domain of rice?

4. Retro doesn't last...its all about moving forward not stagnating in the past.. i.e you mentiond the PT Cruiser which kind of contradicts what your trying to say!

krazzycowgirl

LET ME GET THIS STRIAGHT??? YOU THINK THE FIREBIRD & CAMARO WERE MUSCLE CARS???????

Oh you are a gem Because they were & will NEVER be muscle cars. They are PONY cars. The muscle cars were Full bench back seat & full framed. The Fbody can only fit 4 in the car if you are lucky & is unibodied. NOT Full Framed.

guionM

Opinions are valid & welcome. It's just that alot of what you brought up simply didn't make sense from an enthusiasts or practical standpoint.



In so far as the GTO began as a $250 option on a boring family car, though it was affordable, it wasn't a "poor mans" car. It was decidedly mid grade. The modern version would be a mid level Grand Am with a 3800 V6 and fake hood scoops for about a grand more.

You conviently forget, ignore, or are unaware that by 1969, loaded GTOs cost more..... that's right, I said more.... than base Corvettes.

Quote:

THe original GTO looked like a Monster. A family car turned inside out.

Looks like a monster in a way ALL Pontiacs look at that time. That's because all Pontiacs shared designs back then. GTO was nothing more than an engine in a typical Pontiac family car. You act as if the GTO was stylisticly something special....it wasn't.

Quote:

Someone at GM just got wise and decided they should slap a GTO badge on it. Even though the original plattform for the GTO was a family car...when they created the GTO they eliminated the family look of it They made it rebellious. I don't see that at all on the new "GTO" I just don't think it's worthy of the name.

I think I can count you among the people who are pretty dumb in the area of GTO history. You are not alone. There are plenty of GTO "enthusiast" who are far worse than you. They are the idiots.

Tell me exactly what "family" look Pontiac eliminated, and exactly what "rebellious" look beyond the hood scoop Pontiac actually did to the Tempest and LeMans to make the GTO. I am serious. I want to hear your answer.

I've owned far more Fords than GM cars, I appriciate Chrysler's styling leadership, and I give credit where credit is due. Thunderbird at nearly $40,000 better have a special engine. Ironically, it's the 3.9 engine that is dooming it. It's performance is not breathtaking. Ford's 4.6 cammer engines won't fit. Now that the styling has lost it's impact, there's nothing left to sell the car & sales have dropped. Thunderbird (as is) will be discontinued within 18 months. You picked a bad example.

As for Mustang, it's getting more powerful engines after a decade where Ford tied Team Mustang's hands keeping Mustang from being competitive with F-bodies in performance. This is an "It's about time" situation, not a "that's how it's done" example.

Quote:

To me the Camaro always looked half finished, and the Firebirds rear looked way over done. It's like GM wanted to end the F-body line. They do not even offer any Perofmrance support for the cars. Look in a Ford Racing Catalouge. There's TONS! of stuff for thier GT lineup. Look in the GM parts catalog and I think there's a F-1 package appearance page...An upgraded shock option (thanks to SLP only)...and some GM brake disc...and a driveshaft... everything that I wasn't looking for.

Design is in the eyes of the beholder and styling is subjective. I think Camaro should have a "tighter" design, and the fact it takes up more real estate than a CTS (Camaro is 3" longer & 4" wider), yet has passenger space almost as tight as a Tibron. Also, as a former multiple Fox Mustang owner, I can't argue at the difference between Ford & Chevy's motorsport catalogue & aftermarket items. You got me there.

Quote:

The GTO is baiscily a hit or miss car. I'm sure those eager to buy them and believe thier getting something "new and interesting" or rather the technology that should had been the 2004 F-body will meet GM's release Qouta. But after the hype is gone I'm sure the sales will go down....just like with the PT-cruiser. Then will come a redesign for the GTO...or rather a new Front Bumper cover . I'm sure that if the new GTO weren't called the "GTO" than people would be happy about it. A new powerful car from GM...but this car they created isn't living quite up to that stature even...especially not when thier riding on technology we already know what is capable of....LS1.

You obviously are new here to the 5th gen & future cars section, so you probally are unaware that the next GTO is all new, not just a "front bumper". You are probally also unaware that what I think you are advocating (a retro GTO) would see the same sales drop as the PT Cruiser you use as an example. You are probally also unaware that the GTO seems to be on track to sell it's whole year quota by spring. You are probally also unaware the GTO will probally outsell the Cobra and the LS1 Firebirds of any year.

There was no "name slapping" involved with GTO. Holden made the Monaro, a GM-N/A executive on loan assigned to Holden sent a memo to Bob Lutz mentioning that the Monaro would make a good candidate for a revived GTO, Lutz agreed, Lyn Myers agreed, CEO Wagoner, and the General Motors Product Planning Board agreed. GTO creators John DeLorean and Jim Wagners checked it out and they agree (big time!), responsible Pontiac enthusiasts who have actually spent time around them agree, and to date, every magazine article I've read also seems to agree as well. You're grossly outnumbered on this one.

In fairness it does look plain, but that was the idea of the initial GTOs. It was a "Sleeper".

morb|d

why are we still feeding this troll???

Heatmaker

And how is this? BEcause I dont think the GTO lives up to being a true muscle car?

Everything I said was true. Look in any GM parts catalog and you can see the reality. Look on their lot even.


"Opinions are valid & welcome. It's just that alot of what you brought up simply didn't make sense from an enthusiasts or practical standpoint.

What doesn't make sense? Big brakes to slow down a heavy car? A good suspension for take offs. A noiselss enterior? A lightweight aluminum engine? DOHC setup to take advantage of technology?

IS your car stock? Because aside from the DOHC thing most of the mentoined aboved were complaints about previous GM muscle cars.

"In so far as the GTO began as a $250 option on a boring family car, though it was affordable, it wasn't a "poor mans" car. It was decidedly mid grade. The modern version would be a mid level Grand Am with a 3800 V6 and fake hood scoops for about a grand more. "

Where do you get your info? The platform for the base model was a cheap piece of crap and the GTO was an even faster piece of crap.

You conviently forget, ignore, or are unaware that by 1969, loaded GTOs cost more..... that's right, I said more.... than base Corvettes.

And your also forgetting that the Muscle car only came into being for those peopel that couldn't afford the Corvette. Or do you now know why the Camaro is what it is? Even to this today it still has vette counterparts.

"Looks like a monster in a way ALL Pontiacs look at that time. That's because all Pontiacs shared designs back then. GTO was nothing more than an engine in a typical Pontiac family car. You act as if the GTO was stylisticly something special....it wasn't"

There were plenty of differences done to the GTO to make it stand out. From the Hood scoop to it's stance. It was a rebel. That was the entire point of it's creation.

"I think I can count you among the people who are pretty dumb in the area of GTO history. You are not alone. There are plenty of GTO "enthusiast" who are far worse than you. They are the idiots."

Dumb in the area of GTO history? Seems your "Dumb(in your own words)" in the area of Muscle cars period. You seem to forget what the muscle car is all about.

Tell me exactly what "family" look Pontiac eliminated, and exactly what "rebellious" look beyond the hood scoop Pontiac actually did to the Tempest and LeMans to make the GTO. I am serious. I want to hear your answer. "

Are you serious? Tell me your kidding?

TEMPEST

GTO

The GTO is like the anti-christ

"I've owned far more Fords than GM cars, I appriciate Chrysler's styling leadership, and I give credit where credit is due. Thunderbird at nearly $40,000 better have a special engine. Ironically, it's the 3.9 engine that is dooming it. It's performance is not breathtaking. Ford's 4.6 cammer engines won't fit. Now that the styling has lost it's impact, there's nothing left to sell the car & sales have dropped. Thunderbird (as is) will be discontinued within 18 months. You picked a bad example."

The Thunderbird came back with styling. That's the entire point if that argument. The DOHC V8 reference is to the fact that technology is available allthough the current THunderbird is not targeted to be a performer main reason why they launched it with a 6. The target audience for the Thunderbird is the same as with the CAdilliacs. Engine size isn't the reason for the thunder birds failings as you claim as I've never seen any Thunderbird at a strip event. The price of the Thunderbird is why it is failing.

"As for Mustang, it's getting more powerful engines after a decade where Ford tied Team Mustang's hands keeping Mustang from being competitive with F-bodies in performance. This is an "It's about time" situation, not a "that's how it's done" example."

And who told you this? Fords new GT's are Fords responses to giving the people what they want. That was the whole point of my statement. And for the F-body The Cobra was the anwser. And if not them Saleen and Roush were at the door.


"You obviously are new here to the 5th gen & future cars section, so you probally are unaware that the next GTO is all new, not just a "front bumper". You are probally also unaware that what I think you are advocating (a retro GTO) would see the same sales drop as the PT Cruiser you use as an example. You are probally also unaware that the GTO seems to be on track to sell it's whole year quota by spring. You are probally also unaware the GTO will probally outsell the Cobra and the LS1 Firebirds of any year."

I'm aware that the GTO is a new design running on old perfomrance. I'm aware that the first year sales will be follwed by a downwards fall after the market Hype is over. The GTO isn't bold enough to leave a footprint this time. It blends in to easily with everything else on Pontiacs lineup. 2005 Mustang will be the end of the GTO lineup..and if not the end will definantly put a deep dent in it.

"There was no "name slapping" involved with GTO. Holden made the Monaro, a GM-N/A executive on loan assigned to Holden sent a memo to Bob Lutz mentioning that the Monaro would make a good candidate for a revived GTO, Lutz agreed, Lyn Myers agreed, CEO Wagoner, and the General Motors Product Planning Board agreed. GTO creators John DeLorean and Jim Wagners checked it out and they agree (big time!), responsible Pontiac enthusiasts who have actually spent time around them agree, and to date, every magazine article I've read also seems to agree as well. You're grossly outnumbered on this one."

Why do early photos of the GTO announce it as the next Gran Prix concept? Doesn't matter what GM exucutives agree on it's the public that makes the final desicion. On almost every site people hated it. Car show reviews for the car where negative. GM's Board memebers are exactly why the company is the way it is now. They make very bad decissions.

"In fairness it does look plain, but that was the idea of the initial GTOs. It was a "Sleeper". "

No the initial idea of the GTO was a competitive muscle car designed off a platform they already had. The Donor vehicle the tempest. The Stance and agressive louvres of the vehicle where put there to distinguish it from the rest of the pack. Definantly not to be a sleeper but a force to be understood and respected.

AnthonyHSV

Where the hell are you getting this info from???

Its BASED ON A HOLDEN MONARO...

Z28x

This thread needs to get locked.

I wonder if the troll problem would be this bad if they called it the "Pontiac Monaro"