GM cans the GTO
02-23-2006, 07:30 AM
#41
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 483
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by My R2,Feb 23 2006, 06:45 AM
I actually like the GTO, the styling is bland but it is NOT ugly <cough> AZTEK <cough>.
Two questions:
1st Who thinks the GTO will see Supra like resale value or will it go the way of the SS and WS6?
2nd
To who ever typed that the GTO lost to 5 spd auto let us not forget the S2000 would also lose to that same four door/5 speed auto.
Two questions:
1st Who thinks the GTO will see Supra like resale value or will it go the way of the SS and WS6?
2nd
To who ever typed that the GTO lost to 5 spd auto let us not forget the S2000 would also lose to that same four door/5 speed auto.
02-23-2006, 09:03 AM
#43
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Orange County, California
Posts: 1,582
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I liked the GTO. I actually was looking at buying one.
Couple things I liked about it.
1) ROOM! tons of it. That car had room a plenty. It wasn't like the sardine can we drive. Lets face it, if you are over 6' and greater than 200lbs, the s2k is to damn small. The GTO had plenty of room, both front and back.
2) Interior- probably the best interior I have seen on a GM in a long time. Better, that's right, BETTER than the s2k.
3) Torque- It may not be the fastest thing on the road, but the feeling of torque is very addictive..
What I disliked-
1) Shifter- had to be one of the crappier shifters I have driven. The 6sp is sloppy and the throws are LLOOONNNGGGG.. You can't drive the car as fast as it should be driven.
2) Truck space. When the redid the car in 2005, they moved the position of the gas tank which ate up all the trunk space. A car that big, should have a full size trunk like it did for the 2004 model.
As far as styling is concerned, I liked it. It wasn't overdone and full of plastic/gimmics.
Couple things I liked about it.
1) ROOM! tons of it. That car had room a plenty. It wasn't like the sardine can we drive. Lets face it, if you are over 6' and greater than 200lbs, the s2k is to damn small. The GTO had plenty of room, both front and back.
2) Interior- probably the best interior I have seen on a GM in a long time. Better, that's right, BETTER than the s2k.
3) Torque- It may not be the fastest thing on the road, but the feeling of torque is very addictive..
What I disliked-
1) Shifter- had to be one of the crappier shifters I have driven. The 6sp is sloppy and the throws are LLOOONNNGGGG.. You can't drive the car as fast as it should be driven.
2) Truck space. When the redid the car in 2005, they moved the position of the gas tank which ate up all the trunk space. A car that big, should have a full size trunk like it did for the 2004 model.
As far as styling is concerned, I liked it. It wasn't overdone and full of plastic/gimmics.
02-23-2006, 09:12 AM
#44
Registered User
Originally Posted by Anrosphynx,Feb 23 2006, 01:03 PM
2) Truck space. When the redid the car in 2005, they moved the position of the gas tank which ate up all the trunk space. A car that big, should have a full size trunk like it did for the 2004 model.
02-23-2006, 09:51 AM
#45
Originally Posted by 05S2K,Feb 22 2006, 12:03 AM
Exactly!!! GM has killed the GTO to make way for the new Camaro. Which in my opinion is a much better looking car.
I'd buy the new Camaro but you couldn't give me a GTO for free.
I'd buy the new Camaro but you couldn't give me a GTO for free.
02-23-2006, 10:28 AM
#46
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Orange County, California
Posts: 1,582
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by S2kracka,Feb 23 2006, 10:12 AM
The 2004 has the tiny trunk too, the gastank had to be moved before it could be legalized in the USA. They really didn't "redo" the car for '05; they gave it a different engine, more plastic styling, and a different exhaust (it was always dual, not it just goes to both sides of the rear bumper not just one).
02-23-2006, 04:32 PM
#48
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Saratoga
Posts: 4,136
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by brockLT1,Feb 23 2006, 05:01 PM
magazine guys cant drive unless its gm hightech performance or muscle mustangs and fast fords. I refuse to look at the time of any other mag (sorry about my STI example). from what I have gathered.....only those two reputable magazines that I mentioned actually understand how to drive and do statistical analysis providing launch techniques, weather, and site locations....etc
theres a guy here in phx who has gone 12.8 only on drag radials in our horrible density altitude. any car that can trap 107-109 stock is a beast. you would be luck if a supercharged S2K could do that. the car is heavy, but the car has BALLS
theres a guy here in phx who has gone 12.8 only on drag radials in our horrible density altitude. any car that can trap 107-109 stock is a beast. you would be luck if a supercharged S2K could do that. the car is heavy, but the car has BALLS
I picked up my 2005 GTO up last week and the car is addicting to drive. Not the same addicted-feeling I had w/ my S2000 but this car holds it's own.
Drop it one gear on the freeway and you're flying.
I love this car.
02-23-2006, 05:54 PM
#49
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 483
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The problem with the GTO is really three fold:
1. The car was too heavy. It weighs 3600 - 3700 lbs which hinders it's performance. If the car was just 200 lbs lighter it would have been much faster and handled better. It would have put a world of hurt on the Mustang with it's 400 hp and IRS rear vs the Stangs 300 hp and straight axle.
2. The styling. The GTO looks too much like other cars in Pontiac's line up. IMO it's too bland and not exciting enough.
3. It was doomed from the start. GM never meant for this car to be any thing else but a temporary fill in for the Camaro and Firebird.
The last reason is the ultimate crime if you ask me. Could GM keep the GTO in their line up? Sure they could. They could let Pontiac keep the GTO as it is, just spice up the styling. The Camaro could be sold by Chevy but at a lower price point than the GTO. They could replace the IRS rear in the Camaro with a solid axle making it more of a drag car.
Overall the failure of the GTO is not because of the car but because of poor planning on GM's part.
1. The car was too heavy. It weighs 3600 - 3700 lbs which hinders it's performance. If the car was just 200 lbs lighter it would have been much faster and handled better. It would have put a world of hurt on the Mustang with it's 400 hp and IRS rear vs the Stangs 300 hp and straight axle.
2. The styling. The GTO looks too much like other cars in Pontiac's line up. IMO it's too bland and not exciting enough.
3. It was doomed from the start. GM never meant for this car to be any thing else but a temporary fill in for the Camaro and Firebird.
The last reason is the ultimate crime if you ask me. Could GM keep the GTO in their line up? Sure they could. They could let Pontiac keep the GTO as it is, just spice up the styling. The Camaro could be sold by Chevy but at a lower price point than the GTO. They could replace the IRS rear in the Camaro with a solid axle making it more of a drag car.
Overall the failure of the GTO is not because of the car but because of poor planning on GM's part.
02-23-2006, 06:37 PM
#50
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Brazoria
Posts: 1,351
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The last reason is the ultimate crime if you ask me. Could GM keep the GTO in their line up? Sure they could
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post