GTO is going bye bye...

[TGates]

Maybe so, but you ignored the low budget 4L65E that appears in automatic GTO. It should also be pointed out that on the newest Mustangs with the 4.0 come with a 5-speed automatic instead of ever-aging 4 speed units.

Yeah, it would have been nice if the GTO would have got the same 6 speed auto the 2006 C6 received, but let's face it, GM wasn't going to put any more money into the car than they had to.



I'm more of a manual transmission kind of guy myself.



We'll see if Ford's 5 speed auto holds up as well as the 4L60/65E did for GM.

 

[WSUcommuter]

0-60 mph in 6.0 seconds? What, starting in second gear? I've seen quarter mile times as low as 13.2 in person for the LS2 GTO's. Please don't break out the bench racer magazine articles.

I guess Pontiac is a provider of "bench racer magazine articles" then :LOLOL

 

[WSUcommuter]

You're proving the point myself and many other enthusiast GTO owners have been trying to prove for some time now. You rely on stats to draw you to/away from a car?

I don't mean to sound like a broken record here, but again:

Those stats didn't draw me to the GTO...but the looks of the Stang compelled me to go drive one of them.



Allow me to reword it- stats would not drive me to go drive a car. This is the exact point I am trying to make. If people allegedly drive their car based on stats, why is the Mustang out-selling the pants off the GTO? A muscle car/pony car must have something to get people's noses pressed against the showroom windows.



Good discussion, BTW.

 

[WSUcommuter]

let's face it, GM wasn't going to put any more money into the car than they had to.

I think you hit the nail on the head here. Had they spent some money and made the car look as well as it performs, we would not be having this discussion currently.

 

[WSUcommuter]

Chick cars. There was no such thing as a legendary V6 muscle car.

The 80's Buick Grand Nationals/Turbo Regals/GNX were legendary! The 1987 Buick GNX V6 had around 325 ponies and ran 13's right off the showroom floor. I still see these cars running strong at the track today, and they still look sexy to me.

 

[imported_Aurora40]

Huh? Then you'd have a slower, V6 powered car that looks like a slightly larger Cavalier.



I seriously don't get V6 pony cars.



The biggest problem the GTO had was its unfortunate reseambalance to the Cavalier's exterior. The inside is completely different, however I think a lot of people just expected a performance sedan to have more distinctive styling.

Oh, I didn't mean GM should do this. What I mean is that's how to get more sales. The "low sales" thing for the GTO comes from comparison to other cars. But I bet it compares well to Mustang GT sales, and I bet it sells more than V8 Firebirds did. The reason other pony cars have higher sales is because of the ~80% of V6's they sell to pump up the numbers.



I don't think ~15k sales a year of a V8, RWD coupe is too shabby, though I realize the target was more along the lines of 20k+.



I'm not sure I follow why the 4L65-E is "cheap", though? Just because it has 4 gears that makes it low-tech or cheap? Does shift speed or quality matter? Or torque capacity? What about the ratio spread or how well it controls the revs, shifting right at redline? Any of that a factor or is it just gear count?



I do expect the six-speed auto will start to show up in more cars than just the Corvette, though, which will be nice, provided it retains those qualities that make the 4L65-E nice.

 

[TGates]

I guess Pontiac is a provider of "bench racer magazine articles" then :LOLOL

Either you need to check your sources again or there was a typo, because the brochure I have for the 2005 GTO states 0-60 times of 4.6 (auto) and 4.7 (manual) seconds. That is with the 4L65E, mind you I believe the 1/4 miles times were either 13.2/13.3 or 13.3/13.4. Either way, it doesn't really matter. The GTO, IMO, is much more car than any Mustang GT money can buy.





And again, the reason the Mustang is outselling the GTO by such a wide margin has a lot to do with what was already discussed here... economical V6 models get more people into the showrooms than anything else nowadays. Yeah, the looks appeal to the vast majority of the buying public and that gets them in there, too. But that doesn't necessarily mean a sale is going to happen. People that come in and look at the GTO already know what the car is, and will probably be more likely to buy it.



They only imported I believe ~12,000 GTO's a year. Don't quote me on that as I may be way off, but I think that's ballpark.

 

[imported_Aurora40]

The 80's Buick Grand Nationals/Turbo Regals/GNX were legendary! The 1987 Buick GNX V6 had around 325 ponies and ran 13's right off the showroom floor. I still see these cars running strong at the track today, and they still look sexy to me.

Sort of OT, but where'd you get 325 ponies from? It was rated at 276hp. They are cool cars for sure, but I think a lot of their 1/4 mile time comes from the 4.10:1 gears.



Click here if you want to see a stock one head down the track

 

[WSUcommuter]

Directly from Pontiac's website:



"In early spring of 2005, Pontiac asked Pro Formance Driving Events (PFDE) to perform independent performance testing on the 2005 GTO against the 2005 Ford Mustang, BMW 330Ci, and 2005 Infiniti G35. Testing consisted of the quarter mile acceleration, 600' slalom, and a composite handling course (road course). Pro Formance brought in the Sports Car Club of America (SCCA) as another qualified third-party representative, to observe and validate all testing procedures."

 

[imported_SHICKS]

i say put the people in charge of the Corvette in charge of a few other things for a couple years. the Corvette is the one thing done consistantly right by Chevy/GM for 40 years

GM does not make any money on the Corvette. It's a legacy that has brand recognition.



GM has a lot of issues holding it back. I doubt it would take much to compete with Toyota or Honda in the family sedan market, but that reqiures cheaper labor and better materials. If you compare side by side a toyota and a chevy, it's easy to see why the toyota sells more. The technology is there, it's about cost and GM can't compete.



Steve

 

[TGates]

Directly from Pontiac's website:



"In early spring of 2005, Pontiac asked Pro Formance Driving Events (PFDE) to perform independent performance testing on the 2005 GTO against the 2005 Ford Mustang, BMW 330Ci, and 2005 Infiniti G35. Testing consisted of the quarter mile acceleration, 600' slalom, and a composite handling course (road course). Pro Formance brought in the Sports Car Club of America (SCCA) as another qualified third-party representative, to observe and validate all testing procedures."

And they listed launch technique, weather conditions, track conditions, track prep, etc. etc. in that same blurb, no?



I'm not really a numbers kind of guy myself. Anyone who gets behind the wheel of both an LS2 GTO and an 05/06 Mustang GT and can't tell the difference in acceleration needs to check for a pulse.



The ONLY area I would give the nod to the GT in is in the actual shifter. It's very nice, much nicer than the GTO shifter in fact. Other than that, I say YAWN to the GT.

 

[WSUcommuter]

The factory rating is 276 @4400 and 360 torque @2600. ASC did modify the last GNX's so these were popularly rumored to be under-rated (the old argument you can't top the Corvette if you are in GM, etc might also contribute to this as it did with the GMC Syclone/Typhoon ratings a few years later). I'm getting around 325 based on what I've read/heard/been told. I thought they had 3.42:1 rear ends?

 

[MongooseGA]

The 80's Buick Grand Nationals/Turbo Regals/GNX were legendary! The 1987 Buick GNX V6 had around 325 ponies and ran 13's right off the showroom floor. I still see these cars running strong at the track today, and they still look sexy to me.

OK, but I don't consider a GN a 'muscle car'. It's not something someone will look at and think "that thing looks mean."



It was also running a turbo.

 

[imported_Aurora40]

The factory rating is 276 @4400 and 360 torque @2600. ASC did modify the last GNX's so these were popularly rumored to be under-rated (the old argument you can't top the Corvette if you are in GM, etc might also contribute to this as it did with the GMC Syclone/Typhoon ratings a few years later). I'm getting around 325 based on what I've read/heard/been told. I thought they had 3.42:1 rear ends?

ASC/McLaren did all the GNX's. And in 1987 the Corvette was rated at 245hp so the GNX was already over that. I've heard the 300+ thing too. I dunno, maybe they made more, maybe they didn't. A lot of people claim a lot of cars were underrated. I thought they had optional 4.10's on the GN, though I'm not positive. I heard that from a guy with an '86 GN. Maybe he was mistaken? A 3.42:1 would still be a decent amount of gear, the 700-R4 had similar ratios but had a 2.73:1 axle in a Corvette.



I got to see several Typhoons and a Syclone run recently. They were mostly stock and ran in the high 13's low 14's. Those guys talked about the underrating and the "Corvette" factor too. I dunno, what do I know. But they ran times that seemed reasonable for the power rating. They were cool to see launch!

 

[lbls1]

Ashame. The GTO started on the wrong foot conceptually though. It was a bad idea to throw the badge on a monaro like that. It just did not jive. I agree with Mike that it would've been stronger just calling it Monaro. It was an excellent automotive combination of the potent gen III/IV electronically controlled 8-cyl. and a fully independent suspension. It seems like GM just can't get a good thing going like they used to. I am hoping that GM will not give up the RWD segment, and come back with a very good answer to the successful Daimler Chrysler RWD's.



Its now just the TB-SS as one of the last "good" GM cars south of the vette. GM has a wealth of engineering talent, but some of their car lines seem hopelessly out of touch with the buying public. I am keeping hope that they can see better numbers this year, or we just may hear of the Buick division as being the next axe victim.

 

[Arved]

The GTO is the 'poster boy' car that totally describes what is wrong with GM today. Cars like the GTO typify the GM slump.



GM has to build cars people want to buy!! 'WANT' to buy, with a 'gotta have it' factor. as someone pointed out, they should have had a home run here, but fell big time in the 'looks' department.

Looks and style sells, but build quality generates repeat business. I've owned GM, Ford, and Chrysler, along with Datsun (yes, pre Nissan) and Toyota. I'll neve buy from the big three again. Build quality has left a bad taste in my mouth from all three.



My 300M is the best of the big three that I've owned. But to tell you the truth, the build quality of my '71 Datsun 510 was superior. What a great car. I wish I had it today. If it weren't that it was totalled by a delivery truck backing into it, I might still have it today.



I have no problem supporting an American UAW employee. But if I buy his product, it's going to be a foreign brand. Seems they're all building here now. 'cept maybe Citroen.

 

[SilverLexus]

I think the GTO is a victim of bad styling in part. While fast, it just did not have a design that appealed to folks. The exterior was just boring and far too reminiscent of fleet rental cars....

 

[Joshua312]

I happen to love the look of GTO's....If I were walking past a Mustang or a GTO I would stop and walk around the GTO to look at it. To the Mustang, it's just another Mustang. They are becoming so common, where I live...everyone has a Mustang so it's just boring to see them. I like the looks of the GTO and even after all of this bashing. I would still love to buy one...except I think Im gonna go with the Solstice GXP - Now that sucker has power :grinno: lol neways..I like the looks of it, and I am partial to Pontiacs. Put on some subtle mods and it will easily be doing 300 hp. It's too bad the GTO's didnt make it...but it will be interesting to see what Pontiac replaces it with.

 

[imported_Aurora40]

This seems to be a big blow to two otherwise GREAT cars. I have driven both (hard) and I'd buy the V in a heartbeat! The lack of rubber seems to show more with the goat than the V IMO in stock form.

I wonder if this was due to the actual rubber? I think the GTO with 17" wheels has BFGoodrich gForce KDWs while the CTS-V has Goodyear Eagle F1 Supercars. The KDW's are an all-season tire and the Supercars are a pretty impressively grippy dry tire.

 

[Kanchou]

GM does not make any money on the Corvette. It's a legacy that has brand recognition.



GM has a lot of issues holding it back. I doubt it would take much to compete with Toyota or Honda in the family sedan market, but that reqiures cheaper labor and better materials. If you compare side by side a toyota and a chevy, it's easy to see why the toyota sells more. The technology is there, it's about cost and GM can't compete.



Steve

what is GM lacking in? brand recognition.



Could you site a reference that says they don't make, and therefore lose money on Corvette? It'd be interesting to see who would continue to support its development & sales if it was nothing but a weight to the company...



no, i think the primary reason holding GM back is brand recognition followed closely by bad corporate policy (banking sales on truck/suv division). So, why not put the people responsible for the best brand recognition in the company consistantly for so long in charge of some other things?



Cheaper labor may be a piece of the puzzle, but look to Unions for that. Toyota and Honda are cheifly American built these days except for luxury edition, put out typically a higher quality product for about the same and sometimes less consumer cost...