what is the fate of the GTO... [Archive] (2024)

MRGTX

16th June 2004, 13:13

...and what does it mean for the future of the musclecar revival?

Word is getting around that even the Aztec is outselling the GTO!

Is it universally accepted that the GTO is not selling because of its mundane looks and slightly steep sticker price? How long will Pontiac allow it to flounder before they cut it loose to save the GTO name from shame?

Do you think its faliure (so far) spells disaster for future American muscle cars like the upcoming Charger?

Frank Discussion

16th June 2004, 13:28

I live in Delaware and have yet to see one on the roads, and only one at the dealer, and he was in Maryland.

I think the biggest problem with the GTO is the way the vehicle is marketed. Based solely on specs, the performance is pretty impressive. Pontiac always took alot of flak for its styling, with all of the tupperware, fake hood scoops, etc. I actually prefer the understated looks of the GTO.

I think a large segment of the marketing demographic who would be interested in the GTO wanted something with more "retro" muscle car styling, and they are dissapointed with the current incarnation. As for $$$, the vehicle is falling into a sort of "no mans land", I just don't see a arge number of buyers shelling out that type of money for a Pontiac.

Jerome81

16th June 2004, 13:36

Couple things.

First, the Aztec should outsell the GTO. It is a car that appeals (or maybe is supposed to appeal) to a larger audience. Tack on incentives of $5000 and it should be outselling the GTO.

As far as the somewhat slow selling GTO, I am not sure why it is. I like its looks. It is sleek and doesn't stick out like a "look at me" Mustang does. Just clean with the goods lurking underneath. If people can overlook cars like the WRX, I don't understand why they think the GTO is so bad looking. The interior is fantastic. Well made, very good materials. Everything is right inside IMHO.

I haven't driven one, but nearly every review I've read has heaped a lot of praise on the drive. Powerful, very good steering, and handling.

Price, again, I don't think it is too expensive. Maybe the problem is buyer perception more than anything. At $32K, "you can get a BMW or Mercedes" so why get a Pontiac? That's probably the biggest question. But if you look at performance for the dollar, the GTO is a cheap man's corvette, and it isn't as if the Corvette is overly expensive either.

My guess it is simply the fact that people don't think they should pay $32K for a Pontiac. People have the impression it is a car that competes with a Mustang, which is a lot cheaper (nevermind the GTO is a far far better driving car, and is light years ahead in quality/build). The rest of them think it should be a 1964 Tempest with a big engine, and that it should still cost $3500.

Maybe Pontiac needs to drop the price. I think they just need to make it clear that this is not an expensive mustang but more of an entry level luxury coupe, but one that has a hugely more powerful engine and more interior room than the competition.

I like the GTO. If I had $32K to spend, it would be on my shopping list for sure.

davisinla

16th June 2004, 14:02

I think I'm one of the few that actually like the styling of the new GTO - very subtle and sophisticated.

For years, everyone complained about all the plastic cr@p Pontiac stuck on cars - they finally delivered a clean design and get all this flack!

The first GTO was a simple Tempest with a big motor - "styling" consisted of fake hood scoops and fancy hubcaps. As far as I'm concerned, the new GTO is very true to its roots - I am glad Pontiac didn't make it a modern "Judge"!

I do find it weird that GM dropped the F body.

Brachinus

16th June 2004, 14:21

Originally posted by Jerome81:
If people can overlook cars like the WRX, I don't understand why they think the GTO is so bad looking.
The Beach Boys never wrote a song about a little WRX.

The GTO's problem is it's got a sleeper body with a name that's practically the opposite of sleeper.

If you're going to call a car a GTO, it better look tuff or boss or whatever the kids are saying these days. If you're looking to sell a great-driving car to people who don't care about packaging or labeling, then don't go calling it a GTO.

davisinla

16th June 2004, 14:31

Hey, I don't think there is anything wrong with a "sleeper" body. It sure sounds REAL nice!

BTW, The Beach Boys didn't do "Little GTO"...

It was the famous Ronnie (or maybe Ronny) and the Daytonas! They went on to do - well, nothing that I can remember.

http://www.webfitz.com/lyrics/Lyrics/1964/671964.html

Wa wa!

OKsubaru

16th June 2004, 14:51

mx5rush

16th June 2004, 14:56

Pontiac should have used the plain-jane wrapper on a 'LeMans' or something, and a slightly tougher version with fatter fenders and larger donuts, and maybe a slight hood buldge as the GTO. Give the LeMans 20hp or so less grunt. Make the LeMans the family car, to battle the sedate BMW's and the GTO the car to chase the M class bimmers.

Too bad they ruined the LeMans name a few years ago with that little FWD p.o.s.!

Ofcourse, offer the extra GTO grunt in the 'LeMans' boring body as a option!

Do not offer colors like yellow in this class. People drooling over going fast this in bright colored cars are 20. The people they are truly trying to get in the car are over 35 and don't really want a bright colored obnoxious hued car when they go smoking past a LEO. When is the last time you saw a fly yellow BMW 530i? My boss sure wouldn't drive one. His is a nice dark gunmetal color.

Billy

16th June 2004, 16:28

Drifting is its future :D

Current editions of both C/D and HotRod show GTOs being supplied to tuners for use in drift events.

Bondurant has started drift classes and is using them as the car.

Guess it's a way to 'reintroduce' something. It's been 40 years since the first one, meaning you really have to be late 40's or better for the name of the car to have real meaning to you.........

And I have to admit, since I owned #103, this one does not do much for me. Not that its not even a better car; I've no doubt it is.

It's just not revolutionary like it was the first time.

Formula_Ron

16th June 2004, 16:41

jcharm

16th June 2004, 17:11

NoOne

16th June 2004, 17:15

Whats sad is the reason why the GTO is even here.

The Monaro is an incredible car, its the car that is missing from the American line up and is badly needed.

Until the 300C/Magnum came out, and even those are in a different class there was nothing else that was RWD/V8 and even slightly sporty.

Lutz brought it over here because alot of us(including myself) asked him in letters to bring it over here. In my F-body LS1 days it was the daily driver option for those of us who's F cars were getting less daily driveable.

Its performance for the dollar is outstanding, unfortunetly the American public is amazingly deficient in their understand of cars and performance. No need to look farther than good Mustang sales and poor F car sales, the F car beats it at every point, in some cases annihilates it, but the public went to Ford in droves.

They should not have called it the GTO, they should have called it something else and sold it as what it is, but I don't think the public is smart enough to understand what it really is.

joecooool

16th June 2004, 17:18

A lot of the complaints voiced in this thread are already addressed in the next model year.

What’s new for 2005

LS2 6.0L engine replaces LS1
400 horsepower (295 kw)
395 lb.-ft. of torque (546 Nm)
Available hood with twin air scoops
Revised rear fascia incorporating outlets for new split dual exhaust system
Polished exhaust outlet tips
Larger brake rotors and calipers
Red-painted calipers with GTO logo on front caliper
Driver foot rest
Two new colors: blue and grey
Model Lineup
Engine Transmissions
6.0L V-8
6-spd man

nfeldt

16th June 2004, 17:24

I'm their target market and can tell you that there is no way I can buy one until it has four doors.

Yes I know it would be sacrilegious to the name, but with out that I won't/can't even look at it. It just isn't enough of a car IMHO for me to consider it as a second or third car it has to be more practical to make it into my garage.

Steeda360

16th June 2004, 17:30

Fletcher

16th June 2004, 17:37

Originally posted by nfeldt:
I'm their target market and can tell you that there is no way I can buy one until it has four doors.

Yes I know it would be sacrilegious to the name, but with out that I won't/can't even look at it. It just isn't enough of a car IMHO for me to consider it as a second or third car it has to be more practical to make it into my garage. You know whats funny about that.... The GTO is based on the Holden Monaro.... Its been around almost 5 years, as the two-door "coupe" version of a 4-door car, the Commodore.... which has been around in various guises for 25 years....

But they never thought they could sell it in the US until it was a 2-door!

Fletch.

davisinla

16th June 2004, 17:38

NoOne:

No disrespect, but who is this "public" that you keep referring to that is so deficient in their understanding of cars and performance?

Are you referring to the folks to whom manufacturers sell the majority of their cars? Like me - or the rest of us? Although the "public" may not have your awareness about things automotive, we get by ok.

(BTW, I loved some models of the F car, but considering which car is left standing, the F car could NOT beat the Mustang at every point.)

[ 16. June 2004, 17:53: Message edited by: davisinla ]

MidTNJasonF

16th June 2004, 17:56

ebygum

16th June 2004, 17:59

MX-5.0

16th June 2004, 18:07

davisinla

16th June 2004, 18:07

MX-5.0

16th June 2004, 18:08

You forgot to mention 'dealer-markup removal'!

Originally posted by joecooool:
A lot of the complaints voiced in this thread are already addressed in the next model year.

What’s new for 2005

LS2 6.0L engine replaces LS1
400 horsepower (295 kw)
395 lb.-ft. of torque (546 Nm)
Available hood with twin air scoops
Revised rear fascia incorporating outlets for new split dual exhaust system
Polished exhaust outlet tips
Larger brake rotors and calipers
Red-painted calipers with GTO logo on front caliper
Driver foot rest
Two new colors: blue and grey
Model Lineup
Engine Transmissions
6.0L V-8
6-spd man

Good2BPickle

16th June 2004, 18:13

Laguner

16th June 2004, 18:53

mbelanger

16th June 2004, 19:08

Originally posted by F1forever:
I think Pontiac really missed the mark with the new GTO as far as the styling goes. When you think GTO, you think muscle (after all it did start the muscle car era), but the exterior does not portray this image. That's cool if you want to remain low key, but you do not buy a GTO to be low key. I think Pontiac will get the hint, from low sales, and I predict that after it's new model face-lift in three or four years, it will have a more aggressive appearance. Except that in its beginnings, it was relatively understated in its appearance. IIRC, it was a 389 shoved into the Tempest for 1964 and given some different badging.

I can easily do without the aggressive looks, and have always opted for understated when I could. The lack of plastic add-ons was a big part of why I opted for the LX5.0 when I bought a Mustang in 1990 (well, that and I wanted the trunk and ran stealth since most of the LEO's were also running LX5.0 in black or B/W).

It is also the reason I will never buy a Miata with the tupperware packaging.

Unfortunately, it is probably difficult to know how sizable of a population you piss off if you market understated as opposed to garish. However, all the aggressive looks scream to me is "please, Mr. Officer...pull me over and write me the ticket."

The most compelling things that the new GTO has going for it IMO are that it has the manual tranny as an option, it was RWD and it had the understated look of stealthiness.

davisinla

16th June 2004, 19:25

mbelanger

I think you and I have the same taste in vehicles.

I actually own an 87 LX (http://www.paul-davis.com/mussy.html) and feel the same way about tupperware and clean designs in general.

I'm not sure how old you are, but you are correct re: the original GTO.

mx5rush

16th June 2004, 19:36

davisinla

16th June 2004, 19:44

avante

16th June 2004, 20:05

Matty

16th June 2004, 20:58

Fletcher

16th June 2004, 21:14

Originally posted by RI Laguna:
Hmmmmmm, gas is over $2.00, it's American, it's the first model year, it's ugly. I could go on but why bother? Its only a little-bit American, and I guess you could call it the first model year if you think the WRX and EVO are also in their first model year...

Fletch.

illinifan

16th June 2004, 21:46

While I wouldn't buy one, my dad (makes good money, 1 year away from retirement, used to drive a '70 buick GSX with the 455) drools over it.

I think he's their market. Older guys who can want a domestic, can afford a 'vette, but for whatever reason don't want one. While its not my style, I'd love for him to buy one!

Bill

davisinla

16th June 2004, 22:16

As I am smack in the middle of the baby boomer gen, I'd like to provide some of you younger folks (yikes, I never thought I’d say that) with a viewpoint.

You see, most of the current retro stuff is aimed at me – the GTO, new Mustang, Beetle, Mini, Thunderbird, and, of course, even the Miata is, at least partially, aimed at those of us who were teens when the originals were popular. Many of us missed out. Some of us got a taste, but now want more. And know what? The new versions are far better than the originals. (As neat as an original MGB would be, wouldn’t we all really rather have a Miata?)

We boomers now have some $$$ and are ready and willing to buy some memories – not necessarily the exact vehicle, but the “feeling”. I am very much drawn to the GTO, as I am the upcoming Mustang. Although I’ve been lucky enough to acquire several “toys” to satisfy some of those feelings, 30+K is a bit over my budget for a toy.

The point is that the GTO we’re discussing here is NOT meant for everyone or every “performance” need. GM knows that, as Ford knew the Thunderbird (and even the Ford GT) would be of limited production. There is a HUGE emotional factor at work here that goes beyond the performance specifications and styling.

Just some rambling perspective from an older guy. If you’re over 50, you probably understand.

Jerome81

16th June 2004, 22:38

All the talk about the 4 door, have you had a look inside the car? The back seat is actually pretty damn spacious. Far bigger than just about any other car (two door) in its price range.

[ 16. June 2004, 22:59: Message edited by: Jerome81 ]

illinifan

16th June 2004, 22:58

Originally posted by davisinla:
The point is that the GTO we’re discussing here is NOT meant for everyone or every “performance” need. GM knows that, as Ford knew the Thunderbird (and even the Ford GT) would be of limited production. There is a HUGE emotional factor at work here that goes beyond the performance specifications and styling.

I agree with your point, but I hope the Goat does better than the new Thunderbird.

Bill

davisinla

16th June 2004, 23:03

Brewster

16th June 2004, 23:08

jlb1001

17th June 2004, 02:27

There is a four door version... It's the Cadillac CTS Type-V. The latest version of the Catera, it is a Hot rodded version of a CTS. It has the LS6 engine (400 HP) and the same 6 speed.

They are all built on the same Opel platform.

____________________________

DILYSI (http://miata.cardomain.com/id/jlb1001)
-Joe

jcharm

17th June 2004, 04:24

Originally posted by joecooool:
A lot of the complaints voiced in this thread are already addressed in the next model year.

What’s new for 2005

LS2 6.0L engine replaces LS1
400 horsepower (295 kw)
395 lb.-ft. of torque (546 Nm)
Available hood with twin air scoops
Revised rear fascia incorporating outlets for new split dual exhaust system
Polished exhaust outlet tips
Larger brake rotors and calipers
Red-painted calipers with GTO logo on front caliper
Driver foot rest
Two new colors: blue and grey
Model Lineup
Engine Transmissions
6.0L V-8
6-spd man I was just going to post that they need to have split dual exhausts and hood scoops and there ya go, it's already done. I think this will make a huge difference and really attract the camaro/transam crowd.

Also, in the new Road and Track they put the Cobra up against the GTO and the GTO just blows it away in just about all categories except of course in straight line speed.

GI

17th June 2004, 09:31

Originally posted by Jerome81:
All the talk about the 4 door, have you had a look inside the car? The back seat is actually pretty damn spacious. Far bigger than just about any other car (two door) in its price range. I had a chance to sit in one yesterday, and while there is tons of room in the back, it seemed damn near impossible to get back there with out being a Chinese contortionist. I too would like to see a four-door version of it as well.

Chris

94-R

17th June 2004, 10:01

Kestrel

17th June 2004, 10:44

Originally posted by davisinla:

"As I am smack in the middle of the baby boomer gen, I'd like to provide some of you younger folks (yikes, I never thought I’d say that) with a viewpoint.

You see, most of the current retro stuff is aimed at me – the GTO, new Mustang, Beetle, Mini, Thunderbird...Yep, me too. But you know what I'd really like in my "retro car"? A car just like it was styled in the 1960/1970s with just updated mechanicals and a little "cleaning up" of the interior and exterior styling.

Look at the 2005 Mustang. Nice car, with some syling bits similar to a 1965 Mustang. But what I'd like is for Ford to pull out the old 1965 mould (OK, I know there isn't a real mould ;) ), and build a brand new 1965 Mustang convertible :cool: . Not some 2004 stylistic rendition with hints to the past. A real live 1965 Mustang convertible.

OK... I would like it to be updated in all the mechanicals (engine, suspension, brakes, etc), and current safety regulations would have to be considered. A slight "freshening" of the interior so that things like proper A/C vents and modern radios integrate nicely would also be OK. But does anyone who drives a 2004 Thunderbird (http://www.fordvehicles.com/Cars/thunderbird/gallery/index.asp?display=exterior&image=3&bhcp=1) really think it looks anything like a '57 Thunderbird (http://www.omniport.net/alinodot/mybird.html)? Now Ford seems to have "gotten it right" with the GT (was GT40). The new GT looks nearly exactly like the old GT40. Trouble is, it's $140k :eek: :( ;)

As for the GTO, I don't consider it a retro car at all. It's just another car from Pontiac. It's got some great specs, but the styling is pretty bland. And popping on some fake scoops and bling-bling body clading is not going to help. The car won't sell well because:
For people wanting a "GTO", this ain't the old muscle car they remember, and For people wanting a performance car, $32k for a Pontiac seems too much.
The new GTO is hands down a more advanced, better performing car than the old GTO. But it's not hands down better than other $32k+ performance cars out there, and it's nothing like the old GTO in terms of styling. So what market segment is it really trying to grab? Pontiac would have been much better served to simply bring this nice car out under it's own name... the Monaro comes to mind. :p

davisinla

17th June 2004, 11:07

Kestrel:

There does indeed seem to be a trend to take 50s / 60s cars and update them with modern mechanicals.

I was at an auction in Phoenix a few months back and there was a company selling '57 T-birds with new ford V-8s, disk brakes, upgraded suspension, etc. Very appealing - much more practical than a restored original. Maybe they don't have the value, but they would sure be fun to drive.

Silver Mazda

17th June 2004, 14:18

milo_x

17th June 2004, 19:37

The GTO is basically what's wrong w/ U.S. automakers -- no imagination and using old nameplates to generate buzz. Now if the GTO was continually manufactured, I wouldn't be so hard. However lets face it, the GTO is badge engineering. It's not a GTO Down Under, now is it and it's not really a GTO either.

Pulling out the GTO nameplate is just silly and another GM boner. Why not just intro the Monaro as Monaro. Relying on the past is a two edge sword -- some times it works and some times it doesn't. Looks like it didn't work this time.

My stance -- the Monaro/GTO really seems like a fun car and I'd be the first in line to rent one, but for $32k, I'd buy something else.

Natesully

18th June 2004, 00:38

T Squared

18th June 2004, 00:41

There was a fairly good discussion regarding the pros/cons of this car last month. (http://forum.miata.net/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=11;t=017131;p=1) . In it, I posted a link to the original Motor Trend review from 1964.

I'm curious: which model of Pontiac GTO are some of you referring to when you say it had such great styling? As mentioned by others, and in the link, the original was a Tempest with fake hood scoops, and a big motor. The Tempest was not known to be a styling breakthrough by any stretch of the imagination. Are you thinking of "The Judge" instead?

Lol, I can't help but notice that Pontiac is damned if they do, damned if they don't in this forum. There have been countless threads over the years, ripping Pontiac for using tupperware, scoops (usually fake), decals, gaudy interiors, etc., etc., etc.,...and now they introduce a car without any of that "all show & no go" crap, and they get ripped for creating a car that is too bland. Well, if you are a fan of the later GTO's with the plastic nose's and decals, I suppose I can see why you may consider it bland. I like the early, cleaner models myself; I guess that's why I like this car. Most cops/boy racers won't even know one if they saw one.

If I were inclined to buy an American, er, Australian, front-engine rear drive car, I would buy the new GTO before I'd buy a Mustang, or used Camaro/Firebird. This car is the automotive equivalent to walking quietly and carrying a big stick.

In the competitive 30-40k market, is it worth it? I'm not sure, but it is somewhat unique and I'd consider it. Thank God the rumors weren't true from just a few years ago: they were considering supercharging the FWD Grand Am, and calling it the GTO.

jesse_lee

18th June 2004, 01:47

The problem is this: If you want to build a muscle car- it must LOOK like a muscle car. If you want to build a sleeper- that's fine too, but a sleeper must share the body with a garden variety ho-hum car. (the Ford Lightning truck and some of the RWD Chevy Impalas are modern examples of sleepers).

The GTO is neither musclecar nor sleeper, and thus finds no audience.

milo_x

18th June 2004, 02:32

Originally posted by jesse_lee:
The problem is this: If you want to build a muscle car- it must LOOK like a muscle car. If you want to build a sleeper- that's fine too, but a sleeper must share the body with a garden variety ho-hum car. (the Ford Lightning truck and some of the RWD Chevy Impalas are modern examples of sleepers).

The GTO is neither musclecar nor sleeper, and thus finds no audience. I think you're right -- the GTO would make a great Nova SS but doesn't make a good GTO. Of course you would need a regular Nova to make it an SS a great sleeper.

sajack

18th June 2004, 07:49

[QUOTE]Originally posted by davisinla:

http://www.webfitz.com/lyrics/Lyrics/1964/671964.html

Wa wa!

DEFINITELY NOT RAP!

Kestrel

18th June 2004, 09:48

Originally posted by Silver Mazda:

OK... I would like it to be updated in all the mechanicals (engine, suspension, brakes, etc), and current safety regulations would have to be considered. And when all that is done, you have a 2005 Mustang. Regulations have changed a lot in the last 35 years.Bzzzzt! Wrong answer, but thanks for playing... ;) :D

Mechanically it would be closer to a 2005 Mustang*. Aesthetically it would have the visual impact of the 1965 Mustang*. :cool:

I'm not naïve enough to think that there would be no visual changes to the exterior and/or interior to accomodate modern mechanicals and guvment regulations, but I believe it is possible to update those originals without overstyling them like the current crop of "retro" cars are.

davisinla is close to the mark when he brings up the refurbished '57 T-Birds being offered by that group in Pheonix. Shelby is also doing pretty much the same thing with a group of "Elenors". These are low volume deals that cost a lot of money, but they prove that it can be done.

Alternatively, we can all go out and purchase the new GTO and pretend it has anything to do with the great GTO of the past... :rolleyes:

----------------------------------

* or GTO, or 1957 Thunderbird, or...

m477

18th June 2004, 11:07

Well, maybe it's because they're a lot more expensive than F-bodies, slower, and look like a Grand Am?

You can rant until you're blue in the face about how you think the handling or interior is better. But stuff like that doesn't matter to most muscle car buyers.

davisinla

18th June 2004, 11:40

Kind of weird to note that just the few of us who are here have presented a pretty wide range of opinions (oddly about a car none of us is likely to buy).

To paraphrase a few:

"Keep it the way it is"
"Add styling cues of past GTOs"
"It's ok, but don't call it a GTO"
“It’s ugly”
“I like it”
“It’s too low-key”
“It’s too expensive”
“It’s not too expensive”
and even "Make it a 4-door"

I don’t think it’s a matter of what’s right or wrong – whenever a manufacturer introduces a new car, decisions are made based on a lot of factors. It is obviously impossible to please everyone – especially in specialty cars like the GTO (and PT Cruiser, Beetle, Mini, etc.). That’s why there are so many choices out there.

It’s all about different stokes, eh?

Yet we all agree on the Miata! (Well, to a certain point I guess.)

And you can't blame Pontiac for using the GTO nameplate - many manufacturers are reaching back and grabbing any historical marketing hype they can find including BMW (Mini Monte Carlo), Porsche (Spyder 550), Ford (GT), and even Ferrari (Scaglietti). Hey, look at the marketing hype around the word "Hemi". Chrysler could have just used "V-8", but it wouldn't have the same impact:

"Hey, does that thing have a V-8?"

gary p

18th June 2004, 12:38

Originally posted by m477:
Well, maybe it's because they're a lot more expensive than F-bodies, slower, and look like a Grand Am? DING DING DING, we have a winner. You nailed it.

That and the fact that 30-large buys you a nice, low-milage C5 Corvette.

MRGTX

18th June 2004, 13:01

Originally posted by T Squared:

Lol, I can't help but notice that Pontiac is damned if they do, damned if they don't in this forum. There have been countless threads over the years, ripping Pontiac for using tupperware, scoops (usually fake), decals, gaudy interiors, etc., etc., etc.,...and now they introduce a car without any of that "all show & no go" crap, and they get ripped for creating a car that is too bland. Well, if you are a fan of the later GTO's with the plastic nose's and decals, I suppose I can see why you may consider it bland. I like the early, cleaner models myself; I guess that's why I like this car. Most cops/boy racers won't even know one if they saw one.
First of all, the Pontiac Solstice seems to have hit the balance well and people on these boards generally like the styling... I disagree with you when you say that Pontiac can't win on the boards...but even still, are you doubting that there are extremes in this category? Huge functionless expanses of ribbed plastic is ugly while extremely plain, non athletic, bland lines do nothing for a car. What is so hard to understand about that? The latter is what we got with the GTO which does indeed beat the hell out of the Grand Am look, but it still stinks.

The 1968 and up GTO's with the urethane bumpers look interesting and impressive without resorting to Sears type vinyl siding. It can/has been done. I will agree that the spoilers were ugly but you see many of them sans the towel rack.

MX-5.0

18th June 2004, 13:23

Dudefish

18th June 2004, 13:54

Silver Mazda

18th June 2004, 15:08

Bzzzzt! Wrong answer, but thanks for playing...

Mechanically it would be closer to a 2005 Mustang*. Aesthetically it would have the visual impact of the 1965 Mustang*.

Well thanks for the attitude anyway… :rolleyes:

It's not the wrong answer. It's my sound assessment. Your opinion just happens to differ from mine.

In 1965 the regulations were what? That a car have safety belts, a PVC valve, doors that stayed shut in an accident, sealed beam headlights, and safety glass. I can't think of much more.

Now there is a plethora of regulations, from a variety of agencies, that new cars must meet. A car that even looked similar to a real '65 Mustang would never meet safety requirements. Heck, even a '96 Vette can't pass current roll over and impact regulations.

I think that if Ford could have the new 2005 Mustang look more like a '65 Mustang, they would do it. After all, that's the whole point of the retro-style movement. Selling Boomers memories of the past.

LWW

18th June 2004, 16:12

Hmmmmmm, gas is over $2.00, it's American, it's the first model year, it's ugly.Actually gas is under $2/gal, it's Australian, it's been in production for awhile, and beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

PEACE

milo_x

18th June 2004, 18:02

Originally posted by MX-5.0:
Where is it listed that they are not selling well? I am just curious. The last time I read it, the dealers were asking well over sticker due to market "demand". For the answer look here: autoweek article (http://www.autoweek.com/cat_content.mv?port_code=autoweek&cat_code=carnews&loc_code=index&content_code=05812991)

and here: previous GTO thread on Miatanet (http://forum.miata.net/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=11;t=017131#000011)

They're not selling so well.

davisinla

18th June 2004, 18:09

Wow. I'm sure glad I'm not one of the folks who paid dealer markup to get one of the first ones. In fact, I think the same thing happened to the Thunderbird.

A great reason NOT to pay over list.

(Of course some of the first Miatas back in '89 were marked up 20% by the dealers - and they were getting it!)

miata2b

18th June 2004, 19:47

Originally posted by davisinla:
Wow. I'm sure glad I'm not one of the folks who paid dealer markup to get one of the first ones. In fact, I think the same thing happened to the Thunderbird.

A great reason NOT to pay over list. Same seems to happen very, very often these days. PT Cruiser, New Beetle, S2000, WRX, STi, Evo, 350Z, even Prius. Enthusiasts foam at the mouth on forums like this, whipping up a frenzy, and line up to be first on their block. Sometimes it stays high for a while (S2000). But in most cases, months down the line we see MSRP or even large discounts.

Why isn't it selling? In retrospect, I suspect it is mostly the staid styling. To me it is clearly light-years better than the F-car and Mustang, and a lot cheaper than the 'Vette. I though that good for 18K sales/yr easy. So I surely didn't predict this.

Jerome81

19th June 2004, 01:20

I too thought GM would have absolutely NO problem selling 18,000 a year. In fact, I predicted they would be fairly rare for at least a few years.

It is kinda a shame in my opinion.

PorscheConvert

20th June 2004, 04:02

I saw the GTO at the L.A.and N.Y. auto shows, and I wasn't impressed. Now, they couldn't run the engine to hear the exhaust note and they weren't showing the interior, but the exterior was bland. And I am so sick of the twin kidney grill. I'll take the new 300 front end.

The real spiritual successors for the '60 Muscle cars are the STI and the EVO: based on bland sedans/coupes with ridiculous power grafted on.

Bill_Rockoff

20th June 2004, 15:29

Originally posted by GI:
Originally posted by Jerome81:
All the talk about the 4 door, have you had a look inside the car? The back seat is actually pretty damn spacious. Far bigger than just about any other car (two door) in its price range. I had a chance to sit in one yesterday, and while there is tons of room in the back, it seemed damn near impossible to get back there with out being a Chinese contortionist. I too would like to see a four-door version of it as well.

Chris This was my take, exactly. I sat in one. Nice, and I could probably find a good driving position (although I hate the high sills; maybe my $32,000 could include a phone book to sit on, since I'm only 5'10".) However, there was no dead pedal (coming next year?) and the pedal position wasn't too great (bend it myself, for $32,000.) And the looks, well, there has GOT to be a middle ground between "tupperware" and "boring." Maybe something sleek and pretty, like a G35 coupe.

But the kicker is that rear egress. They expect you to to tilt the seatback all the way forward (which ain't real far) and then motor the seat forward, which it does slowly, slowly, s-l-o-w-l-y {looking at your watch...} Then the kids climb in back. Then you push the button that automatically returns the seat to the position and recline you had it set to before. No, just kidding, there's no such button. What you do is, you MANUALLY RETURN THE SEAT TO THE POSITION YOU PREFER FOR DRIVING. EVERY TIME SOMEONE GETS IN OR OUT OF THE BACK SEAT.

If it were a simple easy manual adjustment, like in a Miata, it would be easy. But I have to play press-the-button each time? "Oooops, too far. Wait, now it's too far forward. There, that's just right.. no, wait, still too far back. Just another tiny bit forward - ARGH! Kids, get in the minivan, we're taking THAT today."

The fate of the GTO will be the same as the fate for all other GM good ideas whose executions were fundamentally flawed - they'll fix some of the flaws, leave others for us to live with (or buy competing cars without them) and pull the plug after a couple of years. They'll get better and better, like the Fiero did, and then they'll be gone.

If you like the underlying car and can put up with the flaws, get one while you can.

Jerome81

20th June 2004, 22:54

JG

21st June 2004, 01:20

milo_x

21st June 2004, 03:16

Originally posted by JG:
Originally posted by Jerome81:
Well, here is a good question. Anyone here OWN a GTO? I would think that being this car should speak to people like us, I am curious if anyone has one. I'm more curious to know whether anyone here has actually driven one. Seems to me that all the people who complain that other people don't understand their Miatas are only too willing to be critical of the GTO without taking one for a good drive. As I've posted here, I really want to rent one. I waiting for them to get to the rental agencies, which might be never, unless they can't sell enough.

I could take a test drive at a dealer but you know that's not a real drive just a supervised one.

Perhaps Down Under the dealers are more relaxed but around here few stateside are going to let you drive a GTO either fast or by yourself so you can really see what it's like.

mdmbkr

13th March 2005, 06:11

Originally posted by Frank Discussion:

As for $$$, the vehicle is falling into a sort of "no mans land", I just don't see a arge number of buyers shelling out that type of money for a Pontiac. For what it's worth, you can spend up to at least $39,000 on a new Pontiac Bonneville.

milo_x

13th March 2005, 07:06

1) GM should have never named it the GTO: too many expectations that they could never fulfill. They should have just called it something else and not be held to the name.

2) As pointed out already, $32k will buy you plenty of car elsewhere, BMW, Audi, G35 or for $7k less a Mustang GT. That's stiff competition. Too narrow of a niche for that kind of money.

mdmbkr

13th March 2005, 07:45

Originally posted by milo_x:
2) As pointed out already, $32k will buy you plenty of car elsewhere, BMW, Audi, G35 or for $7k less a Mustang GT. That's stiff competition. Too narrow of a niche for that kind of money. What kind of BMW can you get for $32k?

And for $7k less you can get a miata too, so what? Mustang GT is a different category.

mdmbkr

13th March 2005, 07:48

davisinla

13th March 2005, 09:17

Originally posted by milo_x:
1) GM should have never named it the GTO: too many expectations that they could never fulfill. They should have just called it something else and not be held to the name.

[Wow, you sure revived an old thread - kind of like bringing back old car nameplates! ;) ]

IMHO, I think GM's use of the GTO name is more appropriate here than in the name revivals that Chrysler is so successfully pulling off: (i.e. "Charger" and "Hemi"). I mean the new Charger, a four-door sedan, standard six-cylinder, automatic) should have been called the Coronet! (Now THAT wouldn't have created much "buzz" in the industry, eh? And that's what it's all about anyway, right...BUZZ!)

The original GTO was a relatively plain two-door with a big motor. I, for one, am surprised at how many people think the new one is too boring and insist on spoilers and hood scoops. Personally I like it. I just Pontiac should have shot for a $28,000 price point when it was introduced.

miata2b

13th March 2005, 10:01

Davisinla: Great post!

I agree on all points. There's a sort of misty eye'd nostalgia with cars like the GTO and Charger that don't match reality. Yep, the GTO took a pretty plain car, put in a big motor, and eventually added some doodads to make it more showy. Very much like the modern GTO, only this one can brake and turn.

No doubt it was a flop out of the gate. GM had some crazy incentives Dec/Jan and now there are four(!) at work. Now with the 400 hp, it should be pretty attractive. But I'm afraid its fate may already be sealed.

We'll see what happens with the Charger.
Predictions?

davisinla

13th March 2005, 10:24

Originally posted by miata2b:

We'll see what happens with the Charger.
Predictions? From what I read, the reason for the Charger is to give Dodge its own version of the 300C 4-door (rather than only having the Magnum wagon). It is surely much safer using a classic name on a "mainstream" vehicle (4-doors, 6 or 8) vs. a specialty vehicle like the GTO. I'll bet the Charger does well.

A bit of a rant here: Chrysler's marketing department is unquestionably brilliant. Auto journalists seem to roll all over anything with the Chrysler name these days. I mean the Magnum is a RWD, 4-door station wagon with an available V-8 (and with worse outward visibility than a 1968 Oldsmobile Vista Cruiser) yet the magazines make it sound like they invented a new market segment. Sometimes I think Chrysler owns some of these publications.

Well, if nothing else, maybe the Charger will replace the Stratus in rental fleets!

Now if they'd only replace those Grand Ams with GTOs, I'd be REAL happy. (I'm a frequent traveler.)

MrHorspwer

13th March 2005, 13:06

The thing is, the GTO isn't costing GM a whole lot to bring over here.

The Holden plants are under-utilized for their domestic market. The Monaro is now sold in the US as the GTO and in the UK as a Vauxhaul Monaro. The extra production, regardless of how small it is, doesn't add alot of cost. The extra sales, even if they are less than expected, come at a very small dent in GM's pocketbook.

Should the production become excessive, GM can always reign in production at the Holden plant... something they can't do cheaply in the US with the UAW running the show.

The GTO is a value added car for GM. It was originally developed exclusivly for the Australian market. If they can add other markets and extra production at a low investment, it's damn near win-win.

MrHorspwer

13th March 2005, 13:24

As a side note... I have had the oppertunity to auto-x a GTO and spend a short bit of time with it. I wouldn't call it a nimble car, it's really too big for that. It handles well for what it is; a GT car. I could see this thing as being ideal for typical American highway travel... it's smooth, has bundles of torque, and is comfortable.

Another thing I noticed, it really is a drivers car. There are no "Save me!" electronics on the car. Unlike the BMW's and Infiniti's everybody compares them to, the GTO doesn't rely on stability control or any wunder-steering system to alter performance (some say electric controls are a godsend... others think they are the work of the devil). I suppose it really is personal preferance, but the GTO has no driver aids outside of ABS and a very simple (and easily defeatable) traction control system.

People say that the GTO isn't in the Mustang's class... really, it is. They feel very similar in terms of size and vehicle dynamics, but the overall performance of the GTO is turned up 2 notches compared ot the GT. It's not as high strung as the Cobra in terms of performance, but it's a bit more refined than either the GT or Cobra.

The car is everything the F-body should have been 10 years ago.

davisinla

13th March 2005, 14:41

I sure wouldn't mind a chance to drive a new GTO!

BTW, MrHorspwer, just curious: does your name relate at all to a certain cigar-smoking woodpecker that us old guys remember?

milo_x

13th March 2005, 15:24

Originally posted by davisinla:
Originally posted by milo_x:
1) GM should have never named it the GTO: too many expectations that they could never fulfill. They should have just called it something else and not be held to the name.

IMHO, I think GM's use of the GTO name is more appropriate here than in the name revivals that Chrysler is so successfully pulling off: (i.e. "Charger" and "Hemi"). I mean the new Charger, a four-door sedan, standard six-cylinder, automatic) should have been called the Coronet! (Now THAT wouldn't have created much "buzz" in the industry, eh? And that's what it's all about anyway, right...BUZZ!)

... I just Pontiac should have shot for a $28,000 price point when it was introduced.

GM's use of GTO is better then the Dodge's "Hemi" or "Charger" but it's still sort of a stretch. Both point the risk of using an old name plate since it carries baggage, good and bad. The biggest thing is it creates expectations which are hard to meet because you're matching up to another era and memories.

The thing with GM is since it's such a marketing based company, it strikes me as a cheap cash in.

I do agree about the price.

davisinla

13th March 2005, 15:54

The biggest thing is it creates expectations which are hard to meet because you're matching up to another era and memories. Why do you think the new GTO fails to meet expectations? It sure is about 1000 times better than the last one they sold back in 1974. In fact, the new one is closer to the original than the 1974 - now THAT was a cheap "cash in":

http://ultimategto.com/cgi-bin/showcar.cgi?type=show&pic=/1974/74_00008_1

I think the new GTO sure is closer (or as close) to the original concept than, say, the Beetle, Mini, Charger, Hemi...

[ 13. March 2005, 15:02: Message edited by: davisinla ]

XKR-4

13th March 2005, 16:05

Originally posted by davisinla:
The biggest thing is it creates expectations which are hard to meet because you're matching up to another era and memories. Why do you think the new GTO fails to meet expectations? It sure is about 1000 times better than the last one they sold back in 1974. In fact, the new one is closer to the original than the 1974 - now THAT was a cheap "cash in":

http://ultimategto.com/cgi-bin/showcar.cgi?type=show&pic=/1974/74_00008_1

The new GTO sure is closer (or as close) to the original concept than, say, the Beetle, Mini, Charger, Hemi... I really like the new GTO. I'd love to have one. The only problem for GM is that where the GTO fails to meet expectations is in sales.

And that is a serious problem for this car. ;)

mdmbkr

13th March 2005, 16:47

I've driven a 2005 GTO, and I like it a lot. I'm going to be ordering one soon (without the hood scoops). It'll be black and red, to match my 93LE =)

Anyways, with regard to the pricing of the car: I don't think it's realistic at this point to expect anyone to sell a 400hp car for $28k. Additionally, to even consider doing so would mean camaro'ing the GTO interior, which would be disatrous. A huge part of what makes the GTO appealing to me is the excellent interior.

MrHorspwer

13th March 2005, 17:00

does your name relate at all to a certain cigar-smoking woodpecker that us old guys remember? It sure does.

My dad is an old school rodder and introduced my at a young age. Clay Smith Cams was one of those iconic manufacturers along with Moon Eyes and Edelbrock that seemed to stick around my familys garage. I took the name as an AOL screen name (hence, the odd 10-character spelling) a while back and it's stuck with me since.

davisinla

13th March 2005, 17:02

Originally posted by mdm:
Anyways, with regard to the pricing of the car: I don't think it's realistic at this point to expect anyone to sell a 400hp car for $28k. Additionally, to even consider doing so would mean camaro'ing the GTO interior, which would be disatrous. A huge part of what makes the GTO appealing to me is the excellent interior. Yea, you're right. It's just that the most logical comparison to make with the GTO is the Mustang GT - which seems like such a bargain if you're after power (and torque!). As it closes in on $35K, it becomes a tougher sell.

I think if Pontiac had some of Chrysler's sharp marketing folks (and more friends in the automobile publishing business like they had in the early 60s) the GTO could have been presented as a BMW 3-series killer!

I sure hope they keep working on it.

m477

13th March 2005, 17:25

The age of muscle cars is over. These days people either want "sophisticated" cars like the Audi TT, or Gran Turismo type cars like the WRX or Evo.

Let me put it this way, if they couldn't sell the V-8 Camaro for low $20k's, why would anyone possibly think they could sell the GTO for $30k+? Sure, it might have some improvements, but as far as the general public is concerned, it's still a 2-seater (in reality) muscle car.

davisinla

13th March 2005, 17:43

Originally posted by m477:
The age of muscle cars is over. These days people either want "sophisticated" cars like the Audi TT, or Gran Turismo type cars like the WRX or Evo.
I don't agree. That's like saying the age of the sports car is over because these days people want cars that start every time and tops that are easy to put up and down.

Maybe muscle will never sell they way it did in the 60s, but it still sells. All that "Hemi" image they're pushin' is working on someone! And I'll bet the Mustang GT will be a huge success.

And GM may have pulled the plug on the F bodies, but sales needs are different for different companies. The cars you mention aren't exactly sales leaders.

[ 13. March 2005, 16:50: Message edited by: davisinla ]

Benior

13th March 2005, 18:03

Originally posted by mdm:
Anyways, with regard to the pricing of the car: I don't think it's realistic at this point to expect anyone to sell a 400hp car for $28k. Additionally, to even consider doing so would mean camaro'ing the GTO interior, which would be disatrous. A huge part of what makes the GTO appealing to me is the excellent interior. Well, the nosediving of the US dollar certainly didn't help the prices of the Australian built GTO stay down.

Without having driven it, I rather like the GTO. I sat in one at the Chicago auto show and was pleasantly suprised by the interior and smooth shifter. And it's hard to beat 400hp for under $35k.

m477

13th March 2005, 18:19

Maybe muscle will never sell they way it did in the 60s, but it still sells.
Right. Which is why I said the age of muscle cars is over -- they can only sell a tiny fraction of what they used to.

Originally posted by davisinla:
I don't agree. That's like saying the age of the sports car is over because these days people want cars that start every time and tops that are easy to put up and down.Huh? Many sports cars have been providing that for the last 20 years, so it's really not clear what you're trying to say.

There really was no "age of sportscars," they have consitently sold in relatively small numbers since they first appeared. On the contrary, there was a time when everyone and their mother had a muscle car, but their popluarity has plummeted since then.

mdmbkr

13th March 2005, 18:50

Originally posted by davisinla:
I think if Pontiac had some of Chrysler's sharp marketing folks (and more friends in the automobile publishing business like they had in the early 60s) the GTO could have been presented as a BMW 3-series killer!IMO it approaches M3 killer. It certainly bests the M3 in a straight line. What do you give up for the $15k you save over the BMW? M3 obviously is a better track car, but I definitely can't afford the expense of buying one, and, with the quality of German brands increasingly coming into question, owning one. But, that's my opinion.

As far as the GTO versus any "normal" 3 series BMW... for me that's a no-brainer.

mdmbkr

13th March 2005, 18:52

Originally posted by m477:
The age of muscle cars is over. These days people either want "sophisticated" cars like the Audi TT, or Gran Turismo type cars like the WRX or Evo.

Let me put it this way, if they couldn't sell the V-8 Camaro for low $20k's, why would anyone possibly think they could sell the GTO for $30k+? Sure, it might have some improvements, but as far as the general public is concerned, it's still a 2-seater (in reality) muscle car. Have you driven or at least sat in a GTO? The "sophisticated" factor is far beyond what any camaro ever had.

(PS, the rear seats are not vestigal in this car!)

Edit: just to try to back up my claim about the rear seat a little bit, here are the interior dimension numbers for both the 2005 Mustang, 2005 GTO, and 2005 M3 (Mustang and GTO from manufacturer websites, M3 from automotive.com). Of course the numbers aren't always the end of the discussion but they are good for a general idea:

Mustang head room: 34.7
GTO head room: 37.3
M3 head room: 36.5

Mustang shoulder room: 53.4
GTO shoulder room: 51.6
M3 shoulder room: 52.7

Mustang hip room: 46.8
GTO hip room: 50.2
M3 hip room: 55.2

Mustang leg room: 30.3
GTO leg room: 37.1
M3 leg room: 33.2

[ 13. March 2005, 18:05: Message edited by: mdm ]

crossbow

13th March 2005, 20:44

Nicest thing about the GTO is the 04's. Man the dealers are just giving those things away. People are passing them up cause the new ones have 400 hp, not realizing the 350 bhp motor has BOOKS OF MODS available for it. My friend just picked up a new 04 GTO for 24k! Supposedly some people have gotten them for as low as 22k.

Say what you will, but a 04 GTO for 22k is one hell of a car :) .

miata2b

13th March 2005, 21:30

milo_x

13th March 2005, 22:28

Originally posted by davisinla:
The biggest thing is it creates expectations which are hard to meet because you're matching up to another era and memories. Why do you think the new GTO fails to meet expectations? It sure is about 1000 times better than the last one they sold back in 1974. In fact, the new one is closer to the original than the 1974 - now THAT was a cheap "cash in":

http://ultimategto.com/cgi-bin/showcar.cgi?type=show&pic=/1974/74_00008_1

I think the new GTO sure is closer (or as close) to the original concept than, say, the Beetle, Mini, Charger, Hemi... My basic point: expectations based on memories are hard to meet, and it might be as much visual as anything else.

Certainly 400 horses is better then the original specs and the car overall is way better. But I don't think that's what a boomers remember of the GTO. They remember it was cool, they remember it looked bitchen and the stab-you-in-the-back aceleration which came from fewer horses and lighter weight and a rawness. Given there are no visual cues from the past, and it's still an Aussie Monaro I don't think the connection/illusion of the past is there.

I know this isn't a perfect comparo but I think the new Mustang did a good job bridging memory and the spec sheet. The first Charger concept shown a few years ago (that looked like a Charger) was another good example...but Daimler/Chrysler decided to barf on themselves.

davisinla

14th March 2005, 01:02

Certainly 400 horses is better then the original specs and the car overall is way better. But I don't think that's what a boomers remember of the GTO. They remember it was cool, they remember it looked bitchen and the stab-you-in-the-back aceleration which came from fewer horses and lighter weight and a rawness. Given there are no visual cues from the past, and it's still an Aussie Monaro I don't think the connection/illusion of the past is there.
Milo:

I'm not sure how old you are but I AM one of those boomers and remember the introduction of the GTO very well. When introduced, it didn't exactly look "bitchen". It was essentially a mid-size Pontiac LeMans - and not exactly a light-weight or "raw". The only styling difference was a pair of pretty bad-looking fake hood vents. There are really no styling cues to re-create - at least not from the original. During the later 60s, styling cues were indeed added (scoop, spoiler, stripes). If that's what you mean by "expectations" I'm glad they left them off. The late 60s were not great for "subtlety".

I think that anyone who remembers the '64 will agree that the original formula was used in this latest version - big motor, mainstream coupe, and yes, great acceleration. And I, for one, welcome the clean, simple looks.

TWBRITT

14th March 2005, 08:08

Wow, a gob of response to this one! Well, as an '04 GTO owner I have a particular insight on the car - & it *is* a fantastic car! Do yourself a favor & drive one. Then find out the *real* price of this car is considerably below sticker. There are still '04's out there now selling in some markets with a nearly $10k discount. If you don't need Joe Racer styling, appreciate a buttoned-down gorgeous interior, a rumbling Corvette engine & impeccable road manners then this just might be the car for you.

From a marketing standpoint the car finds itself strung somewhere between the somewhat pricier German & Japanese brands and the Mustang/Camaro/Firebird relm. It appeals to people who want muscle car performance combined with reasonable price & don't give a fiddler's d*mn about snob appeal. It hit me square on the mark, but obviously I was part of a smaller demographic than the Pontiac folks had hoped for. Adding scoops & bulges, etc. might add more buyers but it would leave people like myself uninterested.

BTW, it makes a perfect compliment to an MSM! ;)

TWBRITT

14th March 2005, 09:09

Originally posted by m477:
The age of muscle cars is over. These days people either want "sophisticated" cars like the Audi TT, or Gran Turismo type cars like the WRX or Evo.

Let me put it this way, if they couldn't sell the V-8 Camaro for low $20k's, why would anyone possibly think they could sell the GTO for $30k+? Sure, it might have some improvements, but as far as the general public is concerned, it's still a 2-seater (in reality) muscle car. Ha...I had to laugh at this one! No offense intended, but you obviously are not as familiar with the GTO as I am, I having owned and driven an '04 for 7k mi. & counting. I also believe that there are more "muscle cars" available today than almost any time in the past, they just are a more diverse group and often more subtly packaged than those of the 60's & early 70's. I believe cars like the WRX & Evo *are* modern muscle cars capable of outrunning most of hulks of old. Along with the resurgent Hemi's in the 300's/Magnums/Chargers, Mustangs, GTO's along with a number of choices from overseas, I'd say the performance car market is doing quite well.

As far as selling $20+k Camaros, seems to me they did just that for quite a number of years. It's falling sales numbers has more to do with an ageing platform & its product cycle having run its course. Huge amounts of the General's cash has gone to SUV's & other product development in resent years, but I wouldn't be surprised to be treated to the birth of a brand new Camaro in the near future.

Comparing current Camaros to the GTO is really comparing cars of different classes. Go drive a GTO & you'll immediately see the glaring difference in feel & refinement. These really aren't "comparable" cars, the GTO (Holden Monaro) being a more modern & sophisticated package.

Don't get me wrong - I'm not bad-mouthing F-bodies, I traded a '00 TA convert. for my GTO. They're just very different cars built to different price points. I had a good time with my TA - it was what it was, live axle & all. The GTO is a significant move upscale in engineering, fit & finish. 4WIS, some of the finest seats available in any car today (that goes for the back seats as well - no "2 seater in reality" here my friend - the rear seats are essentially the same as the incredible front seats).

With regards to the GTO, don't judge a car unless you've really had some experience with it. A whole lotta people would be a lot more interested in the GTO if they would just get behind the wheel & drive one. I drove a whole range of cars before deciding on the GTO - 2 G35's, an '05 Mustang GT, a turbo Volvo, & a Hemi Magnum amoung others. There's a lot to like out there nowadays, but for my money, with the discounts offered, I just couldn't pass on the Goat! I haven't been disappointed in my choice yet! :cool:

Analogeezer

14th March 2005, 11:31

Originally posted by milo_x:
The GTO is basically what's wrong w/ U.S. automakers -- no imagination and using old nameplates to generate buzz. Now if the GTO was continually manufactured, I wouldn't be so hard. However lets face it, the GTO is badge engineering. It's not a GTO Down Under, now is it and it's not really a GTO either.

Pulling out the GTO nameplate is just silly and another GM boner. Why not just intro the Monaro as Monaro. Relying on the past is a two edge sword -- some times it works and some times it doesn't. Looks like it didn't work this time.

My stance -- the Monaro/GTO really seems like a fun car and I'd be the first in line to rent one, but for $32k, I'd buy something else. Keep in mind that Pontiac stole the name "GTO" from Ferrari.

I thought it was kinda bland, but now I am liking it more. The thing is I only like sub 3,000 pound cars so I'm not in the target market for a GTO.

Seems like a really cool car for a relative to own...you get to drive it once and a while but not own it.

Oh yeah, I was reading an article (original C&D road test) the other day and they only plan to offer the car for four or five years...then it will be discontinued.

So I think it's a badge engineering excercise where they thought they'd sell a buttload based on old guys that want a GTO. But as many have pointed out it's nothing like the original GTO, which those guys really want.

Sure looks like fun in those drifting contests though... :)

Analogeezer

mdmbkr

14th March 2005, 12:23

Aratinga

14th March 2005, 13:52

Originally posted by TWBRITT:With regards to the GTO, don't judge a car unless you've really had some experience with it. A whole lotta people would be a lot more interested in the GTO if they would just get behind the wheel & drive one. I drove a whole range of cars before deciding on the GTO - 2 G35's, an '05 Mustang GT, a turbo Volvo, & a Hemi Magnum amoung others. There's a lot to like out there nowadays, but for my money, with the discounts offered, I just couldn't pass on the Goat! I haven't been disappointed in my choice yet! :cool: Exactly! I admit that I thought the GTO was a sorry mistake for GM when I first saw it -- too blah in the looks department for me. I was all hot for the new Mustang GT, and I'd driven it along with the Hemi Magnum RT when looking to trade in my wrecked-and-repaired RX-8.

But then I went to the GM Autoshow in Motion (just for kicks, mainly to ogle and drive the new C6 Vettes and Caddy CTS-V). As we were leaving, we saw the GTOs and decided to drive one more car. OH Yeaaaahhhh.... that was all it took.

"Sylvia", our new '04 Black six-speed GTO, was promptly located and purchased for about $8K under her $33K sticker price. She's an amazing car, especially for the price. Her looks have grown on me quite a bit, as well. Stealthy, classy, and absolutely not the "belly button" car the new Mustangs have already become.

nope_not_here

14th March 2005, 15:04

TWBRITT

14th March 2005, 16:03

Fletcher

14th March 2005, 16:08

Originally posted by milo_x:

Pulling out the GTO nameplate is just silly and another GM boner. Why not just intro the Monaro as Monaro. Relying on the past is a two edge sword -- some times it works and some times it doesn't. Looks like it didn't work this time.
I just thought I'd point out the irony thats only apparent to those of us from the southern hemoshpere...

The Monaro nameplate is also a retro-namecheck back from the dead.... Before the current one, Holden last made Monaro's back in the mid 70's. :)

Fletch.

95skids

14th March 2005, 23:00

Big Lan

15th March 2005, 04:04

Originally posted by davisinla:
I think if Pontiac had some of Chrysler's sharp marketing folks (and more friends in the automobile publishing business like they had in the early 60s) the GTO could have been presented as a BMW 3-series killer![/QB]Actually it was, kinda. There was a commercial, which I only saw 3 times, where a GTO sat idling at a light around dusk. The light cycles through, and The Great One doesn't move. A 3 series bimmer pulls up to the light. It turns green and you hear glorious tire squealing and that beautiful LS1 song.

Man how I wish I could afford one. I have driven one, at one of those GM autoshow in motion things, and my only complaint was a lack of a dead pedal.

They may not handle like a miata, but I don't expect a car that size to respond that way, either.

Lanny J.

mdmbkr

15th March 2005, 12:48

Silver Mazda

15th March 2005, 19:50

It's not that the styling is bland…
It's that it is virtually indistinguishable from the sea of do-da GM mid-size cars made over the last 15 years.

My theory is that in 2006 GM will have the car fully marketable. However, that same year they'll stop making it. Convinced people want SUVs, they'll push the ‘Yukon SS’. A Yukon with 25” wheels, hood scoop, and sticker package.

mdmbkr

15th March 2005, 20:40

Big Lan

15th March 2005, 22:55

Originally posted by mdm:
Do you know where I might get my hands on that commercial? Here ya go
http://www.ls1gto.com/media/

Scroll down about 3/4 of the way, under movies, Click GTO commercial 6.

You're welcome. :D

Lanny J.

rudyr

15th March 2005, 23:41

mdmbkr

15th March 2005, 23:45

7sins

16th March 2005, 00:26

Big Lan

16th March 2005, 01:48

Originally posted by 7sins:
The car cost too much for that market segment. Not saying its a slouch. Its a decent performance value. But its priced out of the market that would be interested in it. Exactly. The name Pontiac doesn't exactly exude status. The people shopping in that price range want a propeller or a three-pointed star on the hood. It probably would have been better off as a Buick (who also needs something exciting - the last Buford I would have purchased new they made in '87), since it's perceived as slightly more upscale than Pontiac.

The way the GTO should have been marketed should have been the same way the original was - as a car that kicks a$$, takes names, and anyone with a decent job can put in their driveway. I guarantee had they originally been put at their current selling price of ~$23k as an MSRP instead of 10 large higher, there wouldn't be a single one on the dealer lots.

Lanny J.

mdmbkr

16th March 2005, 02:28

mdmbkr

16th March 2005, 19:41

AussieMike

16th March 2005, 22:27

On the fuel tank issue. The Australian version was located under the trunk floor, in front of the rear bumper. Worried about "Pinto lawsuits" it was moved on the American version to behind the rear seats, taking up trunk space. Production has since changed so the Australian version is the same as the US version, to keep costs down.

Other changes (aside from the driving position) are to the exhaust. Australian noise restrictions are more strict, so we have to have a quieter exhaust.

Flighttester

16th March 2005, 23:30

Originally posted by m477:
The age of muscle cars is over. These days people either want "sophisticated" cars like the Audi TT, or Gran Turismo type cars like the WRX or Evo.

Let me put it this way, if they couldn't sell the V-8 Camaro for low $20k's, why would anyone possibly think they could sell the GTO for $30k+? Sure, it might have some improvements, but as far as the general public is concerned, it's still a 2-seater (in reality) muscle car. I disagree that the majority of sedan buyers are looking for a car like a Audi TT or a tiny rice rocket like the WRX or Evo.

You might be right if only persons under age 30 are considered.

However, I'll bet Audi sells far more A4's and A6's than TT's and I hardly see any WRX's or Evo's around here, but plenty of 3 and 5 series Beemers and Lexus sedans. Even new Jaguars outnumber WRX's and Evo's.

The problem with the GTO is that it is sophisticated in ways that the old (original LeMans based) GTO never was and it costs much more (even when 2005 dollars are considered) than those older, cruder cars.

But it's still a Pontiac.

If the original had stickered for $5,000 (instead of $3,000) in 1964 it would have sat on the showroom floors then too.

mdmbkr

17th March 2005, 19:41

davisinla

17th March 2005, 20:17

chickdr

17th March 2005, 20:38

mdmbkr

18th March 2005, 00:22

slotoy

18th March 2005, 04:56

Wide Open Tuning

21st March 2005, 01:40

TWBRITT

23rd March 2005, 05:29

Nizidramanii'yt'

23rd March 2005, 11:16

mdmbkr

4th April 2005, 19:33

I've been thinking about the "pricey" remark for a while.

You can spend over $26k on a new Miata. A new 05 GTO stickers at $33 and can be had most places for $32.

There are still new 04 GTO's on dealer lots that can be had for well under $30k. I've heard of people getting them for $26k. To me that seems like a steal!