http://www.autoweek.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060221/FREE/60221009/1041

DETROIT -- General Motors has told Pontiac dealers that it will discontinue the GTO coupe at the end of this model year. GM will make the last deliveries of the vehicle to dealers by the end of September, sources close to Pontiac say.

GM will produce 10,000 to 12,000 more GTOs before dropping the nameplate, one source close to the situation says. Last year, Pontiac sold 11,590 GTOs compared to 2004 when it sold 13,569. That's a 14.6 percent drop.

When Pontiac launched the GTO in 2003, it projected 18,000 annual sales. The vehicle was criticized for bland styling, and some fans of the original GTO complained that it lacked nostalgic styling cues.

A Pontiac spokesman confirms the GTO will be discontinued after the 2006 model year.

“There are some changes in the federal regulatory standards. One is an airbag deployment standard that would require some very expensive re-engineering of the car,” says Jim Hopson, Pontiac spokesman. “Since the architecture of this car is being phased out around the world it’s not economically feasible to continue this car.”

Pontiac will continue to build the GTO through the end of May, Hopson says. The last “boatload will hit the ground in June”, he adds.

The GTO first came to dealerships in December 2003 as a 2004 model, Hopson says.

The GTO is built on a rear-wheel drive architecture from GM's Holden division in Australia. The present model is going out of production as GM constructs the new Zeta RWD architecture, says the source.

There is no replacement coupe planned at this time and because of the strong Australian and weak U.S. dollar, the GTO had to be priced thousands over where GM originally wanted it -- in the mid-twenties, the source says. "It never did as much volume as we had hoped," the source says.

Pontiac is considering a replacement in the lineup for a RWD performance vehicle, but does not have anything to announce yet, Hopson says.

The GTO suggested retail price starts at $31,990, including shipping. One GM source says, "the 2005 and 2006 were pretty well sold out, and sales were especially strong in areas of GM weakness, like Southern California. It's a shame it has to go -- for now."

The vehicle was criticized for bland styling, and some fans of the original GTO complained that it lacked nostalgic styling cues.


IMO thats what did it in, thats what ive said about it from the beginning.

Not too many people want to buy a 30k grand am. I wish it was getting restyled I really do, at least they aren't saying it will never be back

Not too many people want to buy a 30k grand am. I wish it was getting restyled I really do, at least they aren't saying it will never be back


what??!?!!?!

i loved the GTO, it was exactly what i wanted for my next car and probabily still will be my next car, just a used version. I know the styling is bland and doesnt fit with modern trends, but it was still a sexy beast IMO. The GTO they made was exactly what a modern day version of it should be, except they built it in a time when modern day car styling was ending for muscle cars and retro styling was begining.

What they really mean is that becuase they are bringin back the 'Maro and possibly Firebird, they don't want their name plate car being outsold by an oversized Cavalier.

The engine was really all it had going for it. I saw this coming as soon as the 05' Mustang came out.

The engine was really all it had going for it.

:1:

I liked it. RWD coupe with a 6 liter v-8 seems kind of hard to come by these days. Hope the new Camaro is a nice coupe design like all these concepts keep projecting.

thats one of the main reasons why i liked the GTO. it wasn't a gay copy of the original. who da hell wants to buy a new car that looked like it came from the late 60's? that is pure BS that the new mustang is doing so well. i hate that car with a passion. the designers are just so damn lazy, same with the new challenger concept. honestly everytime i see a new mustang, it makes me want to spit on it. ( not that i ever did )

the only car that i can't keep my eyes off is the new camaro concept, or how about the 350z with the 240z? if you look close enough you can see a resemblence but its not a carbon copy, thats how other companys should do things. only take cues but not be a complete bite off. i should work at ford or chrysler since it takes so little talent to design cars there.

I still like 'em lots.

I'd drive one for sure.. big comfy interiors with some pep. Good cruisers.

thats one of the main reasons why i liked the GTO. it wasn't a gay copy of the original. who da hell wants to buy a new car that looked like it came from the late 60's? that is pure BS that the new mustang is doing so well. i hate that car with a passion. the designers are just so damn lazy, same with the new challenger concept. honestly everytime i see a new mustang, it makes me want to spit on it. ( not that i ever did )

the only car that i can't keep my eyes off is the new camaro concept, or how about the 350z with the 240z? if you look close enough you can see a resemblence but its not a carbon copy, thats how other companys should do things. only take cues but not be a complete bite off. i should work at ford or chrysler since it takes so little talent to design cars there.



IMO the only reason that the new Mustang seems to be selling decently is female buyers who buy the v6 automatic, and if they have a bit more cash, they get the convertible model. However, I don't see this demographic going for the Camaro. Without female buyers, the same thing will happen to the new Camaro as the old one: it will NOT sell and will get the axe again. The hardcore Camaro fans will go out and buy one for $5k over MSRP in the first couple of months, then a few average guys will buy one just because they get a deal for $5k under MSRP, and then it will get cut 2-3 years later because it's not selling. That just my opinion however.

I saw the GTO as a GT car. I'd consider one if I did a lot of highway driving and I could afford the gas. But the handling is crap on them.

The engine was really all it had going for it. I saw this coming as soon as the 05' Mustang came out.

I would drive a GTO to 500,000 miles having to replace something new ever 1,000 miles after 200,000 before i would drive and ugly retro wanna be mustang.

Every mustang body had its own disticnt style and trait untill everyone thougt it was cool to live in the 70's agian...and im not just talking about cars...look at the "retro" clothing that is popular with the goody goody's now-a-days...makes me wanna vomit.

New GTO + Supercharger = one hell of a ride. :grinyes:

I saw the GTO as a GT car. I'd consider one if I did a lot of highway driving and I could afford the gas. But the handling is crap on them.


Based on what?

They can pull .85g's on the skidpad. For a 'GT' style car, that's not bad place to start with.

Get rid of the factory tires, and add some decent rubber. Maybe a few suspension tweaks and you could increase it to maybe .90g's.

It'll never be a AutoX beast with it's 3750lb curb weight, but that's not why you buy them. It handles better than any stock Fbody that's for sure. Never driven a GTO, but I can tell that it'll hand my Z28 its ass on any road with turns.

Not to mention the LS2's power. Yummy. Just a Cam and exhaust away from 400-425whp.

It'll be interesting to see what Danno posts. I think the GTO is extremely refined. Danno let me drive his GTO, and man, that engine pulls, and is exceedingly quiet.

The styling, I won't lie, i'm not sold on. The Charger SRT-8 is just alot meaner looking. Slapping on a ram air hood, that isn't functional, isn't grounds for making a pedestrian looking car look more aggressive.

Hope they don't remake the Trans Am. I want my car to go up in value :D

For a bit of trivia, the Australian Holden Monaro, on which the Pontiac GTO is based, is actually built on Holden's Commodore sedan chassis, which in turn is a stretched version of the German Opel Omega chassis. The rear-wheel-drive Opel Omega chassis dates back to the early 90s. And if you remember, the Cadillac Catera was a rebadged Omega with Cadiilac styling cues. If you look hard enough, you will see Catera design cues on the GTO. This is information Pontiac would like to keep quiet about.

Always found that interesting.

http://www.forbes.com/2002/07/01/0701vow_print.html

Cadillac Catera
http://images.autobytel.com/cyber/189556/i2523011_1.jpg

Pontiac GTO
http://forums.autoweek.com/servlet/JiveServlet/download/9-21784-486344-20309/2005%20Pontiac%20GTO%20Front.jpg





Despite all that rebadging... tweaking of 10 year old chassis and not so 'modern muscle car' styling. I still like it.

IMO the only reason that the new Mustang seems to be selling decently is female buyers who buy the v6 automatic

i hate to tell u this... but thats the reason that mustangs have been succesful since the mid 90s, starting with the 94 body style. lots of women buy ones like mine to except auto... think about it.

Every mustang body had its own disticnt style and trait untill everyone thougt it was cool to live in the 70's agian...and im not just talking about cars...look at the "retro" clothing that is popular with the goody goody's now-a-days...makes me wanna vomit.

not entirely true, all mustangs have been based on the idea of having a long hood and short back. even take a look at one like mine, long hood, and it kinda has a fast back thing goin on it. my body style has the hockey sticks to, unfortunatly it has fake scoops there though.... take any mustang and you can find traits of older styles in them, except the original of course. just now they have a lot more older traits...

also, whats with all the hating because its modeled after an old car... who cares as long as it looks good.

hahah alot of old traits. thats funny. don't you mean nothing but old traits?

lets go thru the check list

headlights: check
fog lights inbetween the headlights: check
grill: check
tailights: check
that little slit that sits on the side of hte door: check
general shape of the hatchback with the coupe: check

those are the most defining parts of any car yet ford managed to put every single one of those cues into the new model.

so alot of old traits is a understatement.

i actually like the vauxhall monaro vxr version much better then the gto.

http://images.newcarnet.co.uk/car_pic1/va_monarovxr_05_2_RT.jpg


http://www.rsportscars.com/foto/06/monarovxr05_02.jpg

so alot of old traits is a understatement.

thats true, thats basically what i meant though. but what i was pointing out was that its not like other generations dont have any of those traits. besides, i think it looks good. the new camaro tho... i think its only so so...

another thing, they arent EXACTLY the same, the new ones are more... how to put this... a little more smooth despite having the old looks. the dont have as many sharp corners as say a 68 mustang.

thats true, thats basically what i meant though. but what i was pointing out was that its not like other generations dont have any of those traits. besides, i think it looks good. the new camaro tho... i think its only so so...

haha i can't keep my eyes off the new camaro concept. that is how a car is suppose to be made. that car looking nothing like the classic camaro except for the front. and you know what? atleast they bothered to put modern projector headlights on them instead of those crappy yestur year non clear lens reflector headlights.

http://automobilemag.com/auto_shows/naias_2006/0602_camaro_ofsk_02_445.jpg

the tailights are also a work of art, they are square like the classic ones but they also have half halos in them to make them stand out.

http://www.autoblog.com/media/2006/01/Camaro-Roll-In-rear-450.jpg

not to mention hte car bodylines on that car flows so well esp the buldge by the rear 1/4 panel which gives it that very wide stance.

http://automobilemag.com/auto_shows/naias_2006/0602_camaro_ofsk_01_445.jpg

the profile also looks slippery smooth with a very wedge shape design with the tail sticking straight up while the front is almost kissing the ground.

http://gmhightechperformance.com/hotnews/0601ch_conceptcam_05_z.jpg

the front is alsovery pointy like an arrow head.

http://automobilemag.com/auto_shows/naias_2006/0602_camaro_ofsk_01_445.jpg

see those are all forward thinking features. not like the mustang. they just got really lazy with the car.

when i saw this car, my jaw dropped.

and yes i use to major in art so i guess i would pay attention to these little details that no one else does.

that car looking nothing like the classic camaro except for the front.

not true at all, look at the pictures, you even pointed out some things yourself. like the tail lights. you know that little bulge at the back by the wheels, thats straight off the old camaro. its kinda got the hockey stick thing goin to. plus... have you seen the interior? that thing makes me vomit. its quite possibly the worst interior ive ever seen. besides, i dont thinks its very likely that the actual production car will be just like this one. i know the mustang isnt. the concept mustang was definatly cooler than the one that actually came out. for one it had a much more modern chassis, including IRS.

check out the bulge at the back on this 67 camaro, i could probably find a better pic to show it too
http://www.1motormart.com/gallery/67chvy01.jpg

you know what, i think what makes me not like the new camaro as much is that they use a lot of the same queer ass styling that they using in all their cars right now.

the budge behind the rear glass is in the old yes, but if you over up just the front end of the car, you never not know that its a camaro. the shape of hte body is almost totally different. the old caramos was hardly sloopy at all, and it had a trunk, plus it has those lines running along the side of the car like the bmw pioneered Z4 and ends in slits in front of the back wheel. if you just look at the side pic not knowing its a camaro i would have had no idea its a camaro.

however you do have a valid point. the mustang concept did look better, but not much better, the main key elements was still there, the main difference was the hood and bumper.

i am alot more impressed with the camaro concept vs the mustang concept. also i don't think the interior is too bad for hte camaro. you make it sound like the new mustang has a nice interior or something ( it does not ) lol.

we will have to wait to see if they are even gonna make this car or not, and how much of it did they tone down.

mmm Vauxhall VXR... those are sexy.

Top Gear loved that car...

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1736672447988253834&q=Top+Gear


EDIT: just watched it again... Goes around just as fast as a Subaru WRX STi... not bad not bad.

while the mustangs interior may not be incredible, its certainly better than this. actually this is a clay model, i think it looks better than the real one
http://www.autoblog.com/media/2006/01/Interior-Buck-resized.jpg


i was actually surprised, top gear didnt criticize the mustang interior at all, unless i missed that part. i didnt see the very end of it.

1-im with red, id mob a gto!

2-holy shite! The Vauxhall VXR is sexy as hell! I WANT!...

3- I like using retro styling, in cases like the Mustang I am pleased! The Charger I am not. The proposed Chalanger I would die for.

THe Camaro is growing on me except for the interior.

Anyway...I need to find food...I havent eaten in a while...and im dehydrated...

The new comaro's just look mean, sure they follow similar lines to the retro comarro's, but GM did it right. Makes me wanna run in a corrner and cry, then masterbate to it...especially if it had some hot chick half naked bend over that beast of a front end. When i first saw it i was like "WTF" now that i look at it more and more i love it more and more, more than the past comaros.

Every time i see a new mustang i hate it more and more, just didnt ante up to the old mustang for me to even consider it as good, not even mentioning great.

the GTO took an old chassis, put a new twist on it, and didnt try to look like the old GTO. I see less edgy styled cadilac CT-S with a little less power.

Dodge, the new charger or SRT-8 or w/e it was, i saw a concept photo of it, it also followed the general lines of the old chargers but a whole new stance and a whole new style. and im less of a fan of dodge than i am of Ford.

if GM would get out of the hole and stop with the garbage cars like the HH-R or w/e it is i think it could be a great company....agian.

Oh and one thing i will give them...The Vette, Perfection. I dont think the body needs to be drastically changed for anotehr 15 years. sure the c6 is a c5 with new head lights and a little shorter. All the c5 needed was a little finesse.

i was actually surprised, top gear didnt criticize the mustang interior at all, unless i missed that part. i didnt see the very end of it.


Other than the fact that it's got a million different ways to light up the dashlights.

Who needs that?... honestly now. Talk about an Emo car... dash lights to suit your mood.

the mustang has that many lights???

On the dash? What, like lights telling you that your guages are light up? Or...oh god I cant think right now just tell me what lights it has, im currious!

the mustang has that many lights???

On the dash? What, like lights telling you that your guages are light up? Or...oh god I cant think right now just tell me what lights it has, im currious!

Yeah, the lights behind the dash... you can flip a switch and it changes colors. Top Gear said 120 different colors can be chosen.

Not sure if he was just making fun of it, or if it really is that many. But still... it's a useless option.

How about this... no interior lights at all... And the only light you get is the light that glows off of your cellphone. So it's like driving in a real '67 Mustang.

Talk about retro-styling..eh?! eh!?!

GTO = I liked. Subtle power. Just like the GTO was back in the 60's. Looked like the rest of the Pontiac line but with a bunch of grunt.

Mustang = Dislike. Boring to me.

Challenger = Like.

Camaro concept = Not sold yet. Waiting to see production model.

Charger = Failure.

also, whats with all the hating because its modeled after an old car... who cares as long as it looks good.
:1:

seriously, they're not so much retro designs as they are timeless. the early 70's mustang and challengers will always look good, and the majority of new cars coming out of american carmakers are not. why not use a retro look?
i love the new mustang. the retro styling with the modern edges and lines is perfect. a heck of a lot better than the 90's mustangs. i never liked those.
but i like the new camaro concet too. it's not bad at all. although, chevy will find a way to completely uglify it if it ever makes it to production. and that interior...are you kidding me?!? i had no idea it was that hideous. my little sister's '92 geo prizm has a better interior than that.

oh man, how many red lights did I run trying to see how fast I was going....

good ol' Ford!

also, briliant idea with the lights. Its marketing twords the womans folks! THEY can change coloors! Its like...shiny.

Yay.... shiny stuff...

Yeah, they can change the interior colors to match their shoes. Neat. The car is now a wardrobe accessorie.

Yeah, the lights behind the dash... you can flip a switch and it changes colors. Top Gear said 120 different colors can be chosen.

Not sure if he was just making fun of it, or if it really is that many. But still... it's a useless option.

How about this... no interior lights at all... And the only light you get is the light that glows off of your cellphone. So it's like driving in a real '67 Mustang.

Talk about retro-styling..eh?! eh!?!

i dont think the dash lights were a criticism though, although im not sure if he was joking about the lights either.

i dont think the dash lights were a criticism though, although im not sure if he was joking about the lights either.


It's my criticism of the car. I haven't had the chance to ride in a new Mustang, so I can't say much. But, when I saw that dashy light thingy. I wasn't impressed.

Top Gear said 120 different colors can be chosen.


if anyone remembers that "men's rules when it comes to women" thread in completely off topic awhile back....this is what i was reminded of...

"ALL men see in only 16 colors, like Windows default settings. Peach, for example, is a fruit, not a color. Pumpkin is also a fruit. We have no idea what mauve is."

i didn't even that there were 120 colors in existence

hahahah, thats soo true.

I mean, being able to chose a color from the factory would be cool...sorta. But having the whole color wheel...yah...naw...

Might as well be rainbow lit guages :rolleyes:

i didn't even that there were 120 colors in existence

:lol: thats what richard said too

Might as well be rainbow lit guages :rolleyes:

Would be popular where Tom lives.

:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

hahahah, thats soo true.

I mean, being able to chose a color from the factory would be cool...sorta. But having the whole color wheel...yah...naw...

Might as well be rainbow lit guages :rolleyes:

man this thread is moving to fast! holy crap.

im not sure about the interior lights myself, i mean it would be kind of neat to be able to change it after a couple of months so i doesnt get old. like when i got my car i really like the color of my guages, then recently i got in my bros car with orange guages, and i liked it. it might be kinda nice to have a change but idk if you need 120 colors... i think it would really help if we got a chance to actually have one for a while.

hjahahahaha...DMC12 gets raped by a guy because he said "wow...I like all your colors!"

:lol:

tom lives in the wrong hood

im not sure about the interior lights myself, i mean it would be kind of neat to be able to change it after a couple of months so i doesnt get old. like when i got my car i really like the color of my guages, then recently i got in my bros car with orange guages, and i liked it. it might be kinda nice to have a change but idk if you need 120 colors... i think it would really help if we got a chance to actually have one for a while.

good point...being able to change it up every once in a while wouldn't be so bad, superfluous, but i wouldn't complain. 120 colors though...that's definitely marketing towards females

Of all the neo-retro cars, I think the Camaro has the best styling. The did it exactly like they should have. It maintains alot of the same ideas of the origional, but incorporatesmodern styling as well. It does to the Camaros of old what the BMW Z8 does to the 507.

I like the Mustang alot, and it doesn't suprise me at all that it sells so well. Ford executed the 05' really well, and it will be obvious that the only reason this Camaro and Challenger will ever come out is because of the Mustang's success. It does look a little too much like the origional, but if I were at Ford, I wouldn't care. The car sells well, and offers more power then any sports car under $30,000.

The Challenger looks way too much like the origional. I don't care if it has 25hp more then the Camaro, it looks dumb. The Challenger was never as important to the auto market as the Mustang or the Camaro, and I predict it won't have as big an impact as the new ones either. I'm getting really tired of the 300/300c/Charger/Magnum platform.

I'm getting really tired of the 300/300c/Charger/Magnum platform.


Which is just a re-hash of an old Mercedes-Benz chassis. I forget which though...

Nobody is original anymore. :frown:

except for me...im origionally crazy...through impact and trauma to the head, crazy parents and lots of booze!

yes... yes you is.

i doubt that both the camaro and the challenger will make it to production. there just isn't room for 3, rear driver, v8, muscle-car coupes in the market today. i think that both dodge and chevy are looking hard at the failure of the GTO and they're a little worried about the same thing happening to the challenger and camaro, and with both having IRS, there's no way that either of them is going to be able to be a cheap as the mustang.

im not sure about the interior lights myself, i mean it would be kind of neat to be able to change it after a couple of months so i doesnt get old. like when i got my car i really like the color of my guages, then recently i got in my bros car with orange guages, and i liked it.

The Mustang could be used to bring forth Satan himself and you would still find a way to defend it.

Except for the proposed Challenger, all retro designs must die.

i doubt that both the camaro and the challenger will make it to production. there just isn't room for 3, rear driver, v8, muscle-car coupes in the market today. i think that both dodge and chevy are looking hard at the failure of the GTO and they're a little worried about the same thing happening to the challenger and camaro, and with both having IRS, there's no way that either of them is going to be able to be a cheap as the mustang.


With that kind of mentality, there shouldn't be...

83 different Minivans/SUVs to choose from.
34 different Trucks to choose from.
112 different Sedans to choose from.
57 different Coupes to choose from.
33 different Wagons to choose from.

That's just 2004 alone.


The Camaro and Challenger if are designed well, they'll sell. The IRS setup will be a big selling point I think. If they tune it to ride soft and still grip well. It'll help out sell the Mustang I think... or at least match it's sales figures.

With that kind of mentality, there shouldn't be...

83 different Minivans/SUVs to choose from.
34 different Trucks to choose from.
112 different Sedans to choose from.
57 different Coupes to choose from.
33 different Wagons to choose from.

That's just 2004 alone.


The Camaro and Challenger if are designed well, they'll sell. The IRS setup will be a big selling point I think. If they tune it to ride soft and still grip well. It'll help out sell the Mustang I think... or at least match it's sales figures.

yeah, but everyone buys minivans, suvs, trucks and sedan. worldwide. (well, not so much trucks...and i don't know about minivans)
the musclecar segment just isn't that big. the fact that the mustang is really the only one that's been able to stay in production is a big testament to that.

then again, i also think that american's are finally getting fed up with front drive cars and the success of the 300C shows that. so maybe we're finally ready for another musclecar era, with camaros and challengers and mustangs and chargers all running amok. i don't know...we'll see what happens.

one more thing, i don't know how big of a selling point IRS is going to be. for the enthusiasts, sure, they'll love it, and they'll be willing to spend a little extra for it, but the majority of people aren't enthusiasts and the price will be the selling point. plus, from what i've read, the mustang not having IRS isn't that big of a deal. it doesn't really hold the mustang back all that much.

The end of the GTO was coming since it came out. As I understood it was never going to be a long term thing because they were already cutting the chassis its built on when they started selling it over here in USA.

What's IRS?

And wow. This thread just exploded all of a sudden.

My opinion still stands. Care lines become extinct for a reason. They don't sell. What makes GM think that a car that they couldn't sell enough of in 2002 will "save" an entire company in 2007? What changed in 5 years that would be in their favor? Gas prices certainly didn't. Basically the only that changed is the styling which is hit or miss, and slightly more power. They did not make it appealing for a larger group, and with all the competition that Japanese car makers offer nowdays (S2000, 350z, RX8, Sti, Evo, etc) the number of sports car enthusiasts who would buy this is getting very small. People started realizing that a car was more than just horsepower. They can also take turns, look nice on the inside and be reliable. Just my two cents.

Here's what GM needs to do. Make a killer car in the family sedan market. Like a Malibu or Impala that will kill Accord/Camry sales. Not just a newly redesigned car that is still getting beat by a 4 year old Accord. They need something that nobody will have questions about that is better. Once they have that, they can focus once again on the sports car market. Adding more displacement for speed and stuffing more rubber under the 1/4 panels for "handling" is NOT selling cars.

but wider is better?

IRS stands for Internal Revenue Services

actually j/p it stands for Independant Rear Suspension.

such a big deal to american cars that they actually have to use acronime for it lol.

The Mustang could be used to bring forth Satan himself and you would still find a way to defend it.

:lol:

im not gonna lie... you are probably right

on the point of IRS- a lot of mustang enthusiats, not nearly all though, actually like having a live axle because they do mostly drag racing.

What changed in 5 years that would be in their favor? Gas prices certainly didn't.

they went up :dunno:

Here's what GM needs to do. Make a killer car in the family sedan market. Like a Malibu or Impala that will kill Accord/Camry sales.

you may be on to something here, that is how ford saved their asses back in the 80s with the taurus, however as you can see that only lasted so long...

i dont know if the camaro and challenger will sell quite as well as the mustang simply because of price difference. but you never know. i know one thing for sure and that is that there are a lot of loyal chevy guys out there who are going to buy a camaro...

I'm getting really tired of the 300/300c/Charger/Magnum platform.

:1: i think they really messed up on the charger. i think it would have had a better shot if it didnt have a truck front end, and was two door, and basically looked more like the challenger does.

such a big deal to american cars that they actually have to use acronime for it lol.

no, we're just all really lazy here


i think they really messed up on the charger. i think it would have had a better shot if it didnt have a truck front end, and was two door, and basically looked more like the challenger does.

and then you piss off all the anti-retro styling people, and with two doors you don't sell nearly as many because then it'd appeal to a smaller contingent of people and it'd be in more direct competition with the mustang...and there's just no way to please everyone.
it's a good car and i'll just leave it at that.

^^ still dont like the truck front end...

^^ still dont like the truck front end...


i just think it's a little too angry for me...it is growing on me the more i see it, but i just don't know about owning a car that's pissed off all the time. i mean...buck up!

the problem i have with the charger is that it looks like a dodge magnum but uglier.

the interior for the triplets ( 300c, magnum, and charger ) all look the same.

i just think it's a little too angry for me...it is growing on me the more i see it, but i just don't know about owning a car that's pissed off all the time. i mean...buck up!

The new Charger is Emo.

This is BS people bitched because the GTO didn't look like the GTO but people also bitch because the Mustangs and whatnot look to much like the older ones and have "no room for improvement". There's no way to fuckin win in this industry.

This is BS people bitched because the GTO didn't look like the GTO but people also bitch because the Mustangs and whatnot look to much like the older ones and have "no room for improvement". There's no way to fuckin win in this industry.

:iagree:

Always found that interesting.

http://www.forbes.com/2002/07/01/0701vow_print.html

Cadillac Catera
http://images.autobytel.com/cyber/189556/i2523011_1.jpg

Pontiac GTO
http://forums.autoweek.com/servlet/JiveServlet/download/9-21784-486344-20309/2005%20Pontiac%20GTO%20Front.jpg

tweaking of 10 year old chassis and not so 'modern muscle car' styling.


Not exactly...

In 1994 Opel brought out the brand new Omega B that replaced both the Record and Senator models and ended the inline 6 engines for Opel, using a new V6 and I4 engines (It was also sold in the US as the Cadillac Catera). Again Holden decided to save money by using the wind tunnel tested and developed ‘shape’ of the new Opel. But it again had to widen it. This resulted in the new 1997 VT Commodore using a stylized copy of the now 3 year old Opel Omega. But again locally designed suspension and other locally sourced parts had to carry over into the new design. Again, only the doors were to be shared with the Opel, as well as a strengthened and modified copy of it’s independent rear suspension (which had been reengineered into a unique Holden version during the previous body) was used. However, as the body team worked on the style of the new VT Commodore (from which the Monaro/GTO was later engineered), even the rear door skins and glass were reshaped and so only the front doors were common with the Opel Omega B/Cadillac Catera. And of course the Holden Commodore now used the Buick 3.8 pushrod motor (with and without supercharger) and the Chevy Corvette LS1 engines matched to locally designed and sourced drivetrains and brakes etc. This also required a totally unique floorpan and framework than the narrower and lighter Opel/Catera.

To reaffirm that the Commodore / GTO and Omega are two different engineering products, you can visually see that the Commodore is a much wider and bigger vehicle than the Omega. And look at things like the roof of each car. Note that the Omega’s roof is a single pressing while the Commodore has a three-piece pressing. Given that the passenger cell is a major frame component in a monocoque design - this is a significant difference on it’s own. But also follow the carriage line under the side windows forward to where they intersect the front. Note how this virtually straight line sweeps over the top of the Omega headlights yet intersects the side blinkers on the Commodore. And the bonnet shut lines on the Commodore are more inboard than the Omega’s. This is because the entire shape of the front and even the substructure in the Commodore are different And underneath is even more different. A car needing to carry a heavy cast iron 5.0 and 5.7 Holden V8 (and then the 5.7 LS1) has to have a different frame from a vehicle that uses 4 cylinder engines and whose heaviest engine is an alloy 3.0 V6.

Here's what GM needs to do. Make a killer car in the family sedan market. Like a Malibu or Impala that will kill Accord/Camry sales. Not just a newly redesigned car that is still getting beat by a 4 year old Accord. They need something that nobody will have questions about that is better. Once they have that, they can focus once again on the sports car market.

A new rwd Impala could share a chassis with a new Camaro.

A new rwd Impala could share a chassis with a new Camaro.


IMO it should be RWD, but probably a little bit shorter. A V6 engine should get about 40 mpg while offering a 4-cyl version that got 45 mpg. 4 cyl should come with 5 spd auto or 5spd manual, while 6 cyl version should come with 6 spd auto and 6 spd manual. Horsepower figures should be 180 hp for 4cyl, and 250 for 6 cyl while keeping weight down to 3300-3400 pounds. A lot of money should spent on the interior so it doesn't look plasticy and offer luxury items such as XM, heated leather seats, navigation, etc. Now place each of these $1-2000 under what a comparable Camry/Accord costs and spend their advertising dollars advertising comfort and reliability instead of horsepower. That would save them no doubt.

V6 engine should get about 40 mpg and 250hp for 6 cyl

thats asking an awful lot... especially from gm

thats asking an awful lot... especially from gm


even Honda and Toyota would be hard pressed to make a Non-Hybrid V6 to make 250hp... and get 40mpg.

I'm getting really tired of the 300/300c/Charger/Magnum platform.

Yeah, they should go back to fwd. :screwy:

New GTO coming

"Lutz confirmed that the GTO was “only ever off for two months, but that break has enabled us to get a more feasible program up.” The program he points to is General Motors’ Zeta rear-wheel-drive platform, which is being developed by Holden in Australia and set to underpin the new-generation Commodore due to be launched in August.

Besides Camaro and GTO, other models set to be based on the Zeta platform are upcoming replacements for the Chevrolet Impala and Monte Carlo, and a new car called the Buick Statesman, according to Lutz."

- http://autoweek.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060302/FREE/60302001/1039

I don't think Zeta will ever happen. GM will not be able to afford it.

I don't think Zeta will ever happen. GM will not be able to afford it.

they had better make it happen if they want to keep their heads above the water. it's no secret that america wants to go back to rear drive cars. just look at the success of the LX platform (300c/magnum/charger).
i was reading a column in motortrend not too long ago and the writer argued that the enormous popularity of trucks over the past 15 or 20 years shows that america never really lost it's love for rear drive, V8, automobiles.

it sounds like GM is pretty serious about the Zeta platform

I don't think that the average Joe cares as to whether he's driving fwd or rwd. I don't think that the 300C/Magnum/etc had success because of the simply fact that it's rwd. It probably had to do more with the styling than anything else.

I don't think that people really care that much about V8s anymore. Look at Honda and Toyota. Honda has never made a V8 that they put in a production car, and even though Toyota has V8s, they don't stick it in everything and anything, and yet they're selling cars like hot cakes.

I don't think that the average Joe cares as to whether he's driving fwd or rwd. I don't think that the 300C/Magnum/etc had success because of the simply fact that it's rwd. It probably had to do more with the styling than anything else.

I don't think that people really care that much about V8s anymore. Look at Honda and Toyota. Honda has never made a V8 that they put in a production car, and even though Toyota has V8s, they don't stick it in everything and anything, and yet they're selling cars like hot cakes.

I completely agree with this. One of the biggest mistakes that car guys make (myself included) when talking about the auto market is to think that everyone thinks like we do and has the same priorities that we do. If everyone thought like we do, we would see a lot more Evos, STIs, Camaros, Mustangs, S2000s, etc around, but as it is, the mainstay of the car market (in America) is the family sedan and pickup trucks.

The 300/300C is selling well, but it is far from being a front runner in its class. In February, DCX sold almost 13,700 300s, while Honda sold over 25,000 Accords, Nissan sold about 20,000 Altimas, Hyundai sold over 13,700 Sonatas, and Toyota sold 27,000 Camrys. As much as we love RWD platforms, they are hardly the future of the mainstream sedan.

they had better make it happen if they want to keep their heads above the water. it's no secret that america wants to go back to rear drive cars. just look at the success of the LX platform (300c/magnum/charger).
i was reading a column in motortrend not too long ago and the writer argued that the enormous popularity of trucks over the past 15 or 20 years shows that america never really lost it's love for rear drive, V8, automobiles.

it sounds like GM is pretty serious about the Zeta platform

man, this guy just got :owned:.....oh wait :uhoh:





that's my story and i'm sticking to it!

man, this guy just got :owned:.....oh wait :uhoh:





that's my story and i'm sticking to it!

honestly, i think theres some middle ground here, i think you make some good points, and clawhammer and dinan make goods points. i dont think a lot of people care if its rwd though, some people in the snowbelt region would probably rather have fwd. but at the same time i think a lot of people would prefer rwd...

The 300/300C is selling well, but it is far from being a front runner in its class. In February, DCX sold almost 13,700 300s, while Honda sold over 25,000 Accords, Nissan sold about 20,000 Altimas, Hyundai sold over 13,700 Sonatas, and Toyota sold 27,000 Camrys. As much as we love RWD platforms, they are hardly the future of the mainstream sedan.

The Accord and Sonata don't compete with sedans priced above $30,000 like the 300C and 300C SRT8.

The Accord and Sonata don't compete with sedans priced above $30,000 like the 300C and 300C SRT8.

That wasn't the point. That being said, what he was saying is that nowadays most people are looking for a good family sedan, or commuter car. Performance sedans aren't exactly going to be the at the top of the market in the years to come. Granted, no the Accord nor Sonata will never compete performance for performance witht the 300C, Charger, SRT8's or anything in that class. But, the performance sedans will never sell like the Commuter/Family sedans do.

The 300/300C is selling well, but it is far from being a front runner in its class. In February, DCX sold almost 13,700 300s, while Honda sold over 25,000 Accords, Nissan sold about 20,000 Altimas, Hyundai sold over 13,700 Sonatas, and Toyota sold 27,000 Camrys. As much as we love RWD platforms, they are hardly the future of the mainstream sedan.

but how well has the impala and monte carlo sold? i haven't researched it myself, but i'm guessing not as many as GM would like.
those cars can't compete with Accords and Altimas as is. there needs to be some major changes to jumpstart excitement in domestic family sedans. the LX platform cars started it and i think the zeta platform can continue it.

something interesting i read in R&T. the new corolla only gets 34 mpg, didnt they used to get like 42 or something? apparently they are going after hondas customers.

on the subject of domestics having problems. i think dodges current platform is getting old, they need something new. i personally have never seen why they are so appealing. all gm and dodge are doing is sticking a R/T or SS sticker on everything. ford on the other hand i think is heading in a different direction, in the future i think it will show.

Yeah, they should go back to fwd.
As much as I hate to say it I really think they should for the lower displacement engine versions. Honda, Toyota, and Nissan all control the family sedan market using less expensive FWD cars. Trust me, I like RWD, my M3 is RWD, but I really don't see the need for a 200hp or a 250hp family sedan to be RWD. Most of the buyers won't care for this market. As for the 300C and the SRT8, yes, they need to be RWD, its really tough to make a FWD car with 300+ hp drive properly.

The Accord and Sonata don't compete with sedans priced above $30,000 like the 300C and 300C SRT8.

By far the vast majority of 300s sold are the 2.7l and 3.5l models, not the 300C and the SRT8. The 2.7l and the 3.5l V6 300 models correspond directly to the Accord EX and the Accord EX V6 as well as a fully loaded Sonata LX V6. You know what? If you take out sales of the SRT8 and the 300C, then my arguement looks even better because 300 sales will drop even further. My point was simply to show that the RWD chassis isn't quite as big a deal as many of the auto magazines and DCX make it out to be. The 300/Magnum/Charger are interesting cars, but the market is dominated by FWD cars and probably will be for a while.

how well has the impala and monte carlo sold?

Chevy sold about 18,700 Impalas, 14,600 Malibus, and about 2,600 Monte Carlos last month. Not bad at all, not great, but not bad. The only problem I have with this specific set of numbers is that alot of Impalas and Malibus are sold as fleet cars to police departments, other government agencies, and rental car companies.

Sales of the 300 were 50/50 for V8/V6 models when it first came out. I'm not sure about now though.

Chrysler needs a smaller sedan than the 300.

Kind of off-topic. Where do you find out how many vehicles each manufacturer sold?

Kind of off-topic. Where do you find out how many vehicles each manufacturer sold?

http://www.theautochannel.com/

You have to do a little searching around, but early every month each manufacturer announces sales figures.