Car Forum / Ford / Ford Mustang / August 2004
GTO a bust?
|
|
Thread rating:  |
Richard - 20 Aug 2004 21:32 GMT It's apparently selling at half the rate of the Aztec. What a joke. They apparently need to major re-work to get people to anti-up the money, Vette engine or not. I guess it doesn't help that all Pontiacs look the same...
Iggy - 21 Aug 2004 00:49 GMT > It's apparently selling at half the rate of the Aztec. What a joke. > They apparently need to major re-work to get people to anti-up the money, > Vette engine or not. I guess it doesn't help that all Pontiacs look > the same... Still trolling I see.....moron
John Del - 22 Aug 2004 13:52 GMT >Subject: Re: GTO a bust? >From: "Iggy" nuny@business.com >Date: 8/20/04 11:49 PM
>> I guess it doesn't help that all Pontiacs look >> the same...
>Still trolling I see.....moron Trolling or not, I have to agree. While the GTO seems to be a tremendous car and enormously capable, I'm not actually sure I've seen one on the road. From what I've seen in pictures, it doesn't stand out. A car with that sort of capability should turn heads of people who are other than just Pontiac fans.
John 66 2+2
ZombyWoof - 22 Aug 2004 14:13 GMT >>Subject: Re: GTO a bust? >>From: "Iggy" nuny@business.com [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] >John >66 2+2 Now that you mention it. I don't think I have ever seen one on the road either. The very first one my local Pontiac dealer got is still sitting on the showroom floor. --
ZombyWoof
The wages of sin are death, but after taxes are taken out, it's just a tired feeling.
Joe - 22 Aug 2004 16:27 GMT >>Subject: Re: GTO a bust? >>From: "Iggy" nuny@business.com [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > John > 66 2+2 Agreed. I've seen a few on the road, and they look just like any of the other Pontiacs but with less of the boy-racer thing. In the looks department, the GTO is the epitome of mundane.
Joe Calypso Green '93 5.0 LX AOD hatch with a few goodies Black '03 Dakota 5.9 R/T CC
doc - 23 Aug 2004 03:06 GMT > Trolling or not, I have to agree. While the GTO seems to be a tremendous > car and enormously capable, I'm not actually sure I've seen one on the > road. From what I've seen in pictures, it doesn't stand out. A car with > that sort of capability should turn heads of people who are other than > just Pontiac fans. I have to go along with your last statement: a car should turn heads. I loved the Mustangs of the '60s and early '70s but was turned off until the '94s came out. Those box-bodies of the '80s and early '90s just looked a lot too much like Japanese imports and Escorts to inspire any feeling in me. I know there're a lot of Fox-body devotees on this group, but that must be from a performance standpoint, not looks; they certainly weren't head-turners then or now.
Maybe the GTO will acquire a similar base of devoted fans, concerned with performance and not looks.
doc
Garth Almgren - 23 Aug 2004 03:18 GMT >>Trolling or not, I have to agree. While the GTO seems to be a tremendous >>car and enormously capable, I'm not actually sure I've seen one on the [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > me. I know there're a lot of Fox-body devotees on this group, but that must > be from a performance standpoint, not looks; Nope!
> they certainly weren't head-turners then or now. Sure they were. That's why there were so many copy-cats (The Japanese imports and Escorts you mentioned). The FOX Mustang was one of the best looking cars of the '80s; well proportioned, edgy yet smooth, to this day the FOXes are a masterpiece of design and style. Given equal performance and based only on looks, I'd choose a 79-93 over a 94-04 any day.
 Signature / Garth - '83 GL V6stang Hatch <Former MW #7> \
| My V6stang: http://www.v6stang.com/v6stang | | RAMFM Merchandise: http://www.cafeshops.com/ramfm | \ Mail pgp@v6stang.com for secure reply information /
doc - 23 Aug 2004 03:54 GMT > > they certainly weren't head-turners then or now. > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > performance and based only on looks, I'd choose a 79-93 over a 94-04 any > day. Wow.
From that testimonial, you either like nondescript cars or you own one. Those poor things didn't even have the classic Mustang symbol on the grille, just the blue oval Ford logo. Don't tell me the Escorts copied that!
It's okay to like those little econo-boxes though; there wasn't much innovation during those times and everything was very conservative. The Fox-bodies were just going along with those times. But the '94s were true head-turners; whether you liked them or not, you noticed them. That's the sign of a great body design, something the Fox-bodies never accomplished.
doc
JS - 23 Aug 2004 04:50 GMT > > > they certainly weren't head-turners then or now. > > [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > > doc I dunno, Doc... a mundane V6 '94-98 car really doesn't do it for me like a Fox does. It's all a matter of opinion I guess. The '87 redesign was a big crowd-pleaser, and put the Mustang back on the map. You think the Mustang was rounded back then... if people didn't like the '87-88 Mustang so much and badger to Ford to keep it, we'd all now be driving hi-po Probes. Now *that* was a bubble-car.
Some people dig the Foxes, and even my girlfriend can recognize them from the headlights alone.. though she doesn't really see the mass appeal. There is definately a big difference between a Fox GT and an Accord or Camry of *any* year though.
That said, I've owned a number of Foxes, and currently, my only 4-wheeled ride is a '97 Cobra. The couple of tweaks to the nose and hood make a big difference to me. Now the '99-up cars are nice... and the '05 promises to be a pretty nice car.
JS
doc - 23 Aug 2004 22:05 GMT > I dunno, Doc... a mundane V6 '94-98 car really doesn't do it for me like > a Fox does. It's all a matter of opinion I guess. The '87 redesign was > a big crowd-pleaser, and put the Mustang back on the map. You think the > Mustang was rounded back then... if people didn't like the '87-88 Mustang > so much and badger to Ford to keep it, we'd all now be driving hi-po > Probes. Now *that* was a bubble-car. LOL! I liked the Probes better than the later-model Tauruses, though. Talk about bubbles!
> Some people dig the Foxes, and even my girlfriend can recognize them from > the headlights alone.. though she doesn't really see the mass appeal. > There is definately a big difference between a Fox GT and an Accord or > Camry of *any* year though. The Fox GT certainly stood out more than the LX did, but it was all ground-effects, wasn't it? And the GT was slower than the LX because of the added weight.
But you're right: some people dig the Foxes. I just don't happen to be one of them, although I liked their power.
> That said, I've owned a number of Foxes, and currently, my only 4-wheeled > ride is a '97 Cobra. The couple of tweaks to the nose and hood make a > big difference to me. Now the '99-up cars are nice... and the '05 > promises to be a pretty nice car. I haven't seen an '05 up-close-and-personal, but I think I like them. They could have gotten rid of the fender flares, though.
doc
Howard Nelson - 23 Aug 2004 05:59 GMT > > > they certainly weren't head-turners then or now.
> Wow. > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > Fox-bodies were just going along with those times. But the '94s were true > head-turners; whether you liked them or not, you noticed them. Kind of like you notice the Firebirds with all the neat graphics. Yea, thats the ticket. :)
But you are right. I like nondescript performance cars and believe that any visible aftermarket mods are a crime. Probably why I think Taurus SHO's and BMW M cars are neat. You don't have to look fast to be fast.
Howard 1989 LX 5.0 OEM except handling and performance mods.
doc - 23 Aug 2004 22:08 GMT > Kind of like you notice the Firebirds with all the neat graphics. Yea, > thats the ticket. :) <big grin>
doc
BeverlyOmasta - 27 Aug 2004 19:29 GMT >day the FOXes are a masterpiece of design and style. Given equal >performance and based only on looks, I'd choose a 79-93 over a 94-04 any Agreed, i had a 99+ gt and i get more looks with my 88gt cobra clone... too many people are driving the new style GT'S today, its getting rediculous... I see alot less FOXES out there and they are rare to come around here.... Yesterday i went to our nearest mall, which is about 8 miles away and counted 4 gt's just on the way there...
BeverlyOmasta - 27 Aug 2004 19:27 GMT >'94s came out. Those box-bodies of the '80s and early '90s just looked a >lot too much like Japanese imports and Escorts to inspire any feeling in [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > >doc UGH, I htough the 94-98 mustangs look like girlmobiles...They look too damn tame, and look like a glorified older style cavalier...
Richard - 22 Aug 2004 19:15 GMT > > It's apparently selling at half the rate of the Aztec. What a joke. > > They apparently need to major re-work to get people to anti-up the money, > > Vette engine or not. I guess it doesn't help that all Pontiacs look > > the same... > > Still trolling I see.....moron Trolling? I read it in typically pro GM magazine, dickhead. But feel FREE to prove me wrong. -Rich
BeverlyOmasta - 27 Aug 2004 16:36 GMT >Trolling? I read it in typically pro GM magazine, dickhead. >But feel FREE to prove me wrong. >-Rich Rich, dont mind IGGY.. i mean, the dork names himself after a crack head 1920 rock and crack singer... What do you expect from him...
Just Me \ - 23 Aug 2004 03:08 GMT I see you are still on summer break Icky my love!
Richard is not a troll, he is a regular around here. So now that we know he is not a moron, what does that make you Icky?
 Signature _______________________________________ "The difference between 'involvement' and 'commitment' is like an eggs-and-ham breakfast: The chicken was 'involved' - the pig was 'committed'."
http://community.webshots.com/user/godwino
> > It's apparently selling at half the rate of the Aztec. What a joke. > > They apparently need to major re-work to get people to anti-up the money, > > Vette engine or not. I guess it doesn't help that all Pontiacs look > > the same... > > Still trolling I see.....moron BeverlyOmasta - 27 Aug 2004 16:38 GMT >I see you are still on summer break Icky my love! > >Richard is not a troll, he is a regular around here. So now that we know he >is not a moron, what does that make you Icky? A crack head old rock and crack singer with the last name of POP?
Just Me \ - 28 Aug 2004 21:37 GMT RFLMAO :-)
 Signature _______________________________________ "The difference between 'involvement' and 'commitment' is like an eggs-and-ham breakfast: The chicken was 'involved' - the pig was 'committed'."
http://community.webshots.com/user/godwino
> >I see you are still on summer break Icky my love! > > > >Richard is not a troll, he is a regular around here. So now that we know he > >is not a moron, what does that make you Icky? > > A crack head old rock and crack singer with the last name of POP? Iggy - 28 Aug 2004 23:21 GMT > RFLMAO :-) Awwww, isn't that cute? Koi found a new friend. Someone who knows just as much as he does about cars, beer, etc. LOL
Just Me \ - 29 Aug 2004 05:42 GMT Hey love, where have you been?
You never cease to amaze me, like a horror movie you pop up when least expected!
Are you not back in school yet?
Don't be jealous of BeverlyOmasta, it's not your fault that he has superior mind to yours.
Anyway, how are things going in Florida?
 Signature _______________________________________ "The difference between 'involvement' and 'commitment' is like an eggs-and-ham breakfast: The chicken was 'involved' - the pig was 'committed'."
http://community.webshots.com/user/godwino
> > RFLMAO :-) > > Awwww, isn't that cute? Koi found a new friend. Someone who knows just as > much as he does about cars, beer, etc. LOL BeverlyOmasta - 27 Aug 2004 16:33 GMT >Still trolling I see.....moron Still angry and bitter because you have a small penis ther IGGY? BTW, hows the crack going? are you getting treatment?
Iggy - 27 Aug 2004 23:15 GMT > >Still trolling I see.....moron > > Still angry and bitter because you have a small penis ther IGGY? BTW, hows > the > crack going? are you getting treatment? Still a dipshit I see?
Kick around your mom or girlfriend (or are they one and the same?) lately, you mysoginistic idiot?
By the way the decade and drug of choice you attribute to Iggy Pop is all wrong.....never mind your incorrect attribution of his name to my nickname. Sorry, binky.....but thanks for playing.
memset@recorddeal.com - 27 Aug 2004 23:17 GMT Now why the hell was that even posted, BeverlyOmasta? And wtf is with 94-98 mustangs being "girlmobiles"? And why are you interested in his penis size?
-Mike
-- A happy kid behind the wheel of a 98 Mustang GT Cold air intake FRPP 3.73 gears Steeda Tri-Ax Shifter Full Boar turbo mufflers Hi-speed fan switch 255/60R-15 rear tires
> >Still trolling I see.....moron > > Still angry and bitter because you have a small penis ther IGGY? BTW, hows the > crack going? are you getting treatment? Iggy - 28 Aug 2004 23:25 GMT > Now why the hell was that even posted, BeverlyOmasta? And wtf is with > 94-98 > mustangs being "girlmobiles"? And why are you interested in his penis > size? > > -Mike Thanks, Mike. His misogyny takes on a whole different slant when you put it that way. No wonder!! He's still in the closet, has anger issues associated with his homosexuality, and takes his anger out in the form of abusing women.....we won't even get into the penis envy thing. What a freak! He even has Mustang envy, being that he really doesn't own one.
memset@recorddeal.com - 28 Aug 2004 23:40 GMT LOL I see... still in the closet. It's ok... we all know your secret. We don't hate you because of that. As far as the penis envy issue, Bev... hmm.. penis pump?
-Mike
-- A happy kid behind the wheel of a 98 Mustang GT Cold air intake FRPP 3.73 gears Steeda Tri-Ax Shifter Full Boar turbo mufflers Hi-speed fan switch 255/60R-15 rear tires
> > Now why the hell was that even posted, BeverlyOmasta? And wtf is with > > 94-98 [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > abusing women.....we won't even get into the penis envy thing. What a > freak! He even has Mustang envy, being that he really doesn't own one. 66 6F HCS - 29 Aug 2004 03:21 GMT > As far as the penis envy issue, Bev... hmm.. > penis pump? The Austin Powers Special Swedish version.
 Signature Scott W. '66 Mustang HCS 289 '68 Ranchero 500 302 '69 Mustang Sportsroof 351W '97 Cougar 30th Anniv SE 4.6L ThunderSnake #57
memset@recorddeal.com - 29 Aug 2004 11:46 GMT LOL
-Mike
-- A happy kid behind the wheel of a 98 Mustang GT Cold air intake FRPP 3.73 gears Steeda Tri-Ax Shifter Full Boar turbo mufflers Hi-speed fan switch 255/60R-15 rear tires
> > As far as the penis envy issue, Bev... hmm.. > > penis pump? [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > '97 Cougar 30th Anniv SE 4.6L > ThunderSnake #57 Just Me \ - 29 Aug 2004 05:45 GMT Iggy, Did the penile pump work for you?
 Signature _______________________________________ "The difference between 'involvement' and 'commitment' is like an eggs-and-ham breakfast: The chicken was 'involved' - the pig was 'committed'."
http://community.webshots.com/user/godwino
> LOL I see... still in the closet. It's ok... we all know your secret. We > don't hate you because of that. As far as the penis envy issue, Bev... hmm.. [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > > abusing women.....we won't even get into the penis envy thing. What a > > freak! He even has Mustang envy, being that he really doesn't own one. Iggy - 29 Aug 2004 14:57 GMT > Iggy, > Did the penile pump work for you? What is with you, Bev, and your undying lust for my penis? We know Bev's problem...being a closeted homosexual, an admitted pedophile and woman abuser. What's your excuse?
Just Me \ - 29 Aug 2004 17:51 GMT Just trying to show interest in you that's all.
So did the penile pump work for you?
 Signature _______________________________________ "The difference between 'involvement' and 'commitment' is like an eggs-and-ham breakfast: The chicken was 'involved' - the pig was 'committed'."
http://community.webshots.com/user/godwino
"Iggy" <nuny@business.com> wrote in message What's your excuse?
BeverlyOmasta - 29 Aug 2004 15:04 GMT >From: "Just Me \"Koi\"" segun0@spamnothotmail.com >Date: 8/29/04 12:45 AM Eastern Daylight Time >Message-id: <kbdYc.2708$4m2.1156@trnddc01> > >Iggy, >Did the penile pump work for you? Nope, they dont make micro sized pumps... IGGY just uses a straw and his own breath...Mwhahahahahah!
BeverlyOmasta - 29 Aug 2004 15:02 GMT >LOL I see... still in the closet. It's ok... we all know your secret. We >don't hate you because of that. As far as the penis envy issue, Bev... hmm.. >penis pump? > >-Mike Nah sorry Mike... I tried a penis pump, buit your girlfriend pt it on me backwards an broke it... I may have to borrow yours next time..
66 6F HCS - 29 Aug 2004 17:29 GMT > >LOL I see... still in the closet. It's ok... we all know your secret. We > >don't hate you because of that. As far as the penis envy issue, Bev... hmm.. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Nah sorry Mike... I tried a penis pump, buit your girlfriend pt it on me > backwards an broke it... Backwards? What did she do? Shove it up your a.s?
 Signature Scott W. '66 Mustang HCS 289 '68 Ranchero 500 302 '69 Mustang Sportsroof 351W '97 Cougar 30th Anniv SE 4.6L ThunderSnake #57
TurboMike - 29 Aug 2004 21:50 GMT lmfao!!>
>> Nah sorry Mike... I tried a penis pump, buit your girlfriend pt it on me >> backwards an broke it... > >Backwards? What did she do? Shove it up your a.s? ///Mike 1993 BMW 525i http://community.webshots.com/user/mpompe2 Pics of all the old cars
Joe - 30 Aug 2004 01:56 GMT TMI. ;)
Joe Calypso Green '93 5.0 LX AOD hatch with a few goodies Black '03 Dakota 5.9 R/T CC
> lmfao!!> >>> Nah sorry Mike... I tried a penis pump, buit your girlfriend pt it [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > http://community.webshots.com/user/mpompe2 > Pics of all the old cars memset@recorddeal.com - 29 Aug 2004 22:34 GMT If my girlfriend put it on you backwards it's because she's never needed to use one on me... only you have the small pecker.
-Mike
-- A happy kid behind the wheel of a 98 Mustang GT Cold air intake FRPP 3.73 gears Steeda Tri-Ax Shifter Full Boar turbo mufflers Hi-speed fan switch 255/60R-15 rear tires
> >LOL I see... still in the closet. It's ok... we all know your secret. We > >don't hate you because of that. As far as the penis envy issue, Bev... hmm.. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Nah sorry Mike... I tried a penis pump, buit your girlfriend pt it on me > backwards an broke it... I may have to borrow yours next time.. BeverlyOmasta - 29 Aug 2004 15:00 GMT >Thanks, Mike. His misogyny takes on a whole different slant when you put it >that way. No wonder!! He's still in the closet, has anger issues >associated with his homosexuality, and takes his anger out in the form of >abusing women.....we won't even get into the penis envy thing. What a >freak! He even has Mustang envy, being that he really doesn't own one. BORING!
Iggy - 29 Aug 2004 15:05 GMT > >Thanks, Mike. His misogyny takes on a whole different slant when you put > >it [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > BORING! Then why bother to comment on it, if it bored you so much?
Truth hurt, Binky?
It's okay, Bev....Tom....or whatever you're calling yourself these days. Just come out....you woman abusing, homosexual, drug abusing pedophile. And seek help after you do.
BeverlyOmasta - 29 Aug 2004 15:06 GMT >you're calling yourself these days. >Just come out....you woman abusing, homosexual, drug abusing pedophile. And >seek help after you do. YAWN!
jriegle - 22 Aug 2004 15:25 GMT > It's apparently selling at half the rate of the Aztec. What a joke. > They apparently need to major re-work to get people to anti-up the money, > Vette engine or not. I guess it doesn't help that all Pontiacs look > the same... I don't keep up on Pontiac models much now, but they all look so similar to one another. I'd bet the design team is being restricted from above. The Grand am/prix is a hot selling model and the bean counters want to capitalize on it. The motor heads may go after it, but that's a lot to pay for a car that looks like a granprix.
Gas prices may be part to blame. Four months of this and no relief!
IMO, the SVT Cobra is much better way to go in this case, unless you're a die hard Ford hater.
John
winze - 22 Aug 2004 20:03 GMT A GTO? hey I remember those!
ZombyWoof - 22 Aug 2004 21:54 GMT >> It's apparently selling at half the rate of the Aztec. What a joke. >> They apparently need to major re-work to get people to anti-up the money, [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > >John I am actually a fairly diehard Goat guy going way back. I've owned numerous ones including a 64, 67, 71 Judge & 72 455 HO. I would have really loved to get one to add to the stable. However, it just didn't have a personality. The Pontiac dealers in my area all wanted premiums for the one they each had sitting in their showrooms. Most still have them.
Personally I find the 2004 Mach 1 to be a better looking & performing car all the way around. Haven't seen an `05 in the flesh yet, but from what I've seen & read it more then likely will be as well. Hell I even like my daughters `01 V6 drop top better then the current incarnation of the GTO. --
ZombyWoof
The wages of sin are death, but after taxes are taken out, it's just a tired feeling.
Rory P. Bellows - 22 Aug 2004 22:02 GMT Living in Metro Detroit, I'm surprised to see only see a few of these also. We love our muscle cars 'round here, and one would think they'd sell.
I have been fooled by some of them because it looks so much like a Grand Prix coming down the road, until you see the back end. Is that GM's problem? Why spend the $$$ on a cookie cutter Grand Prix, when you could gave the real thing and still have decent performance?
Rein - 23 Aug 2004 03:09 GMT >It's apparently selling at half the rate of the Aztec. What a joke. >They apparently need to major re-work to get people to anti-up the money, >Vette engine or not. I guess it doesn't help that all Pontiacs look >the same... 2 weeks ago I noticed an ad in our local newspaper. A dealer was offering them for 2500 UNDER INVOICE.
That's what you get for trying to sell an oversized Cavalier.
Remove NO-SPAM from email address when replying
Patrick - 23 Aug 2004 03:14 GMT I stopped to take a good look at a GTO the other day. I like it! I think it looks much better in person than in the magazine pics. The interior is very nice and the overall fit and finish seems first rate. The only thing that would keep me from buying one is the tiny two-suitcase trunk.
I think it's ironic that we all loved the plain-Jane five-liter LX Foxes, but the conservative GTO gets kicked around because its styling is too plain. Strange...
Patrick '93 Cobra '83 LTD
> It's apparently selling at half the rate of the Aztec. What a joke. > They apparently need to major re-work to get people to anti-up the money, > Vette engine or not. I guess it doesn't help that all Pontiacs look > the same... TurboMike - 23 Aug 2004 03:34 GMT >I stopped to take a good look at a GTO the other day. I like it! Me too. To me, it looks like what the GTP SHOULD have looked like, plus the coolness of RWD and a lot of HP. I don't think it'll be mistaken for a Cavelier. Saw the CTS-V the same day. Now that looks MEAN!
>I think it's ironic that we all loved the plain-Jane five-liter LX >Foxes, but the conservative GTO gets kicked around because its styling >is too plain. Strange... DItto.
///Mike 1993 BMW 525i http://community.webshots.com/user/mpompe2 Pics of all the old cars
Joe - 23 Aug 2004 12:05 GMT >>I stopped to take a good look at a GTO the other day. I like it! > > Me too. To me, it looks like what the GTP SHOULD have looked like, > plus the coolness of RWD and a lot of HP. I don't think it'll be > mistaken for a Cavelier. Saw the CTS-V the same day. Now that > looks MEAN! Ironically enough, I think Cadillac has the most performance going for it nowadays within GM. At least that's how they come across (remember the 'brand recognition' thread?).
>>I think it's ironic that we all loved the plain-Jane five-liter LX >>Foxes, but the conservative GTO gets kicked around because its >>styling is too plain. Strange... > > DItto. Sorry, guys, I have to disagree. Fox cars run all over the GTO as far as styling goes. Look at both cars from the side. Not to mention the fact that fox LXs had those beautiful twin stainless pipes...
Joe Calypso Green '93 5.0 LX AOD hatch with a few goodies Black '03 Dakota 5.9 R/T CC
MadDAWG - 23 Aug 2004 17:38 GMT > Sorry, guys, I have to disagree. Fox cars run all over the GTO as far > as styling goes. Look at both cars from the side. Not to mention the > fact that fox LXs had those beautiful twin stainless pipes... I'll give you the outside, but the inside of a Fox was terrible!
MadDAWG
Joe - 23 Aug 2004 18:16 GMT "MadDAWG" <onefastford@NOSPAMhotmail.com> wrote in news:412a1ebf$1 @news.mhogaming.com:
>> Sorry, guys, I have to disagree. Fox cars run all over the GTO as far >> as styling goes. Look at both cars from the side. Not to mention the [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > MadDAWG Ya got me there, Dawg.
Joe Calypso Green '93 5.0 LX AOD hatch with a few goodies Black '03 Dakota 5.9 R/T CC
JS - 23 Aug 2004 05:13 GMT > I think it's ironic that we all loved the plain-Jane five-liter LX > Foxes, but the conservative GTO gets kicked around because its styling > is too plain. Strange... Well...
The LX five-liter was a stripper version of a relatively hot car (for the era). It was both cheap and light. It was all about go fast, not about comfort, luxury, etc... plus, it wasn't the only option - the GT, the convertible, and the GT convertible were available. If you could get a GTO that looked like a Cavalier, or a GTO that is close to the same but has a more aggressive look to it... you'd only take the Cavalier if there was a benefit - like lower cost or lighter weight, etc.
I guess my idea is that it's too expensive and too plush to be considered an LX-style car, and not enough style to really look the part of an expensive performance machine. They're... eh... nice. That's about all I can say. I probably wouldn't trade it in if you gave me one... but I wouldn't spend my money on one.
JS
MadDAWG - 23 Aug 2004 17:51 GMT > I think it's ironic that we all loved the plain-Jane five-liter LX > Foxes, but the conservative GTO gets kicked around because its styling > is too plain. Strange... I think that is a sign of the times. When the LX hit the cars performance is what made it get noticed. Personally I preferred the four eyes over the 87-93 versions. Those headlights reminded me to much of a Caviler. (No wonder Chevy changed the name to Cobalt. It seems Caviler is the benchmark for bad. lol). The interior of the 87-93 was incredibly cheap. That dash was one of the worst I have ever seen. However the car kicked a$$ and took names so all those short comings were easily forgotten. Today I think the car has become nostalgia. Hell there was a thread last week about a retro Fox. The one thing I do like about all the 79-93s is that they didn't follow the typical Mustang trends. I like having hints to the original cars like the 94-04, but the 05 is like a bad copy job IMO.
Now fast forward 17 years and there are plenty of cars with similar performance to the GTO so it needs something to make it stick out. I don't mean fake wings and tacked on scoops, but the general body lines. In the current Hot Rod they have some ideas for paint jobs and body mods. Check out thee Judge redo. Now I might use my dad's GM discount for one of those. Its amazing what recessing the grill sections does for the front end. And the simple stripe down the side helps as well.
The GTO has a great interior and typically I'm not a fan of colored interiors.
MadDAWG
WraithCobra - 23 Aug 2004 21:20 GMT No matter how bad you think those interiors were, the seats in my '89 GT were the most comfortable of any of my other Mustangs; '98 GT, '00 GT, or '03 Cobra. The seatbelts in the '89 would also lock slightly loose from the body. I've been constantly tugging the shoulder belt away from my shoulder, over and over again as I drive since 1998 when I bought the '98 GT.
 Signature Mike Silver 10th Anniversary Cobra Coupe ---
>> I think it's ironic that we all loved the plain-Jane five-liter LX >> Foxes, but the conservative GTO gets kicked around because its [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > > MadDAWG .boB - 24 Aug 2004 15:54 GMT > It's apparently selling at half the rate of the Aztec. What a joke. > They apparently need to major re-work to get people to anti-up the money, > Vette engine or not. I guess it doesn't help that all Pontiacs look > the same... I read the magazine article about it's engineering and performance specs. Pretty impressive for a small (relativly) inexpensive sedan. But I happend to see one in the parking lot last week. I was not impressed. It looked like a honda/toyota/nissan/whatever. It just didn't do it for me.
 Signature .boB '01 Dakota Quad Cab, 5.9/Auto/4x4 '97 H-D FXDWG - Turbocharged! '84 GMC Jimmy - Mountain Beater '65 427SC Cobra FFR Replica - Project '66 Mustang Coup - Daily Driver
michaelanderson4@sympatico.ca - 24 Aug 2004 19:26 GMT >> It's apparently selling at half the rate of the Aztec. What a joke. >> They apparently need to major re-work to get people to anti-up the money, [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >impressed. It looked like a honda/toyota/nissan/whatever. It just >didn't do it for me. But what is so great about it at all? -It has a large engine that produces acceptable horsepower but nothing earth shaking. -It's small but heavy. -It's handling is nothing great. -It looks like a better version of a Cavalier or a lesser version of the Grand Prix.
There is nothing exceptional about it. -Rich
Patrick - 25 Aug 2004 02:59 GMT > But what is so great about it at all? It's a 2-door, RWD-coupe with a stout V8 and 6-speed transmission?
> -It has a large engine Yes, large displacement, but light and very compact...all good things.
> that produces acceptable horsepower but nothing earth shaking. Since when is 350 HP and 365 ft-lbs of torque just "acceptable?" Gosh, it was just a few years ago when our Cobra only put out 320/300. And the Mach 1 only has 305.
> -It's small but heavy. Small is good. And while it isn't a flyweight, it isn't a porker like the last T-bird.
Actually, I think it's weight is comparable to the Cobra's.
> -It's handling is nothing great. It's more the bad tires than a weak suspension.
> -It looks like a better version of a Cavalier or a lesser version of > the Grand Prix. All the better. I'd rather blend in than be cop bait.
> There is nothing exceptional about it. An automaker produces a car with 350 normally-aspirated horsepower, 6-speed, RWD, IRS, 4-wheel discs/ABS, sweet interior, clean stealthy exterior, and we complain. We sure have gotten picky, haven't we?
Patrick '93 Cobra '83 LTD
A Guy Named Steve - 25 Aug 2004 04:27 GMT > > But what is so great about it at all? > [quoted text clipped - 35 lines] > '93 Cobra > '83 LTD Well Patrick,
Maybe we can pick them up real cheap in a few years. I'd be cool having one as a daily driver if it were cheap!
Steve 72 Skylark
180 Out - 26 Aug 2004 02:06 GMT "A Guy Named Steve" <seeverist@455.earthlink.net> wrote
> "Patrick" <NoOption5L@aol.com> wrote
> > An automaker produces a car with 350 normally-aspirated horsepower, > > 6-speed, RWD, IRS, 4-wheel discs/ABS, sweet interior, clean stealthy [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Maybe we can pick them up real cheap in a few years. I'd be cool having one > as a daily driver if it were cheap! Autotrader.com has a couple dozen starting at $26,000 and going up to $34,000 for brand new. That's a lot of performance for the money for a one year old car.
Probably the biggest reason for the soft sales is consumer snobbery. In the majority of cases purchasing decisions on cars in this price range are not based on objective qualities. They're based on status.
By "status" I mean a guy's personal perception of how he will be perceived by others when he shows up at the health club or the singles bar in this car rather than that car. This explains why SUV's are so popular with young men and mini-vans so disdained. The mini-van will do everything the SUV, and for a lot less in buy-in and operating costs.
An Aussie-built Pontiac-branded pushrod-engined performance coupe just does not have the status of equivalently-priced BMW's and Lexuses -- or SUV's. And that's why sales are soft.
180 Out TS 28
TurboMike - 26 Aug 2004 02:22 GMT >An Aussie-built Pontiac-branded pushrod-engined performance coupe just >does not have the status of equivalently-priced BMW's Apples and oranges. There is NO COMPARISON to the build quality of a Pontiac anything and a BMW, and I actually really dig the GTO. You just have to spend some time in one to know what I mean. My car is tight hell EVERYWHERE...motor, trans shifting, suspension, cabin seal (read: no air leaks) etc and it has just shy of 200K. I LOVE the new GTO and would buy one, but it's gonna take a lot to get me to consider anything else but another BMW for a daily driver. Just makes the daily grind too enticing, especially for my late 30's azz :-)
///Mike 1993 BMW 525i http://community.webshots.com/user/mpompe2 Pics of all the old cars
Patrick - 26 Aug 2004 03:07 GMT > > > But what is so great about it at all? > > [quoted text clipped - 40 lines] > Maybe we can pick them up real cheap in a few years. I'd be cool having one > as a daily driver if it were cheap! Steve,
That's what I'm thinking. If dealer sales stay cool, these early GTOs will be a steal on the used car lots. Their only downside, again, is their lack of trunk space. But by then, and actually by next fall when both my kids will be out of the house, (my son left for college last week) I won't be packing much luggage.
Patrick '93 Cobra '83 LTD
A Guy Named Steve - 26 Aug 2004 03:11 GMT > > > > But what is so great about it at all? > > > [quoted text clipped - 52 lines] > '93 Cobra > '83 LTD I'm curious how the LS2 versions will sell. I saw that the LS2 is also slated for that SSR pickup thing.
Either way, I probably won't get anything any time soon.
Steve 72 Skylark
John Del - 25 Aug 2004 13:25 GMT >Subject: Re: GTO a bust? >From: NoOption5L@aol.com (Patrick) >Date: 8/25/04 1:59 AM >Message-id:
>An automaker produces a car with 350 normally-aspirated horsepower, >6-speed, RWD, IRS, 4-wheel discs/ABS, sweet interior, clean stealthy >exterior, and we complain. We sure have gotten picky, haven't we? I agree, with one caveat. As I posted earlier, it's a great car, but do we really want a "stealthy exterior"? To me, that's a nice way of saying the car is nondescript.
Give me the eyball baby!!!!
John 66 2+2
V'ger - 25 Aug 2004 15:59 GMT I kinda like non-descript.... A guy I once worked with put a V8 in a VW..... At stop lights he'd catch 'em off guard and blow their doors off.... embarassing for the other guy to get beat by a vanilla looking Bug. Needless to say you couldn't haul much in it, but it was a lot of fun seeing the looks on the other driver's faces. And in keeping with that, my fastback is pretty well stripped of anything which might look racey. Even the exhaust is toned down. Kinda like dealing with a mosquito in malaria country... it may be small but it's got a bite that can kill.
>>Subject: Re: GTO a bust? >>From: NoOption5L@aol.com (Patrick) [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] >John >66 2+2 V'ger jma(NOSPAM)@snowcrest.net 1965 Mustang Fastback 2+2 Vintage Burgundy w/ Black Std Interior 289 ci 4v V8 oem A Code Dual Exhaust C4 Auto converted to AODE 8" Trak Lok Vintage 40 wheels BF Goodrich gForce T/A 225/50ZR-16 KDWS tires Built in San Jose, CA on my birthday, May 10th ; ) Restoration by: Cool Mustang Restorations Cool, CA
Patrick - 26 Aug 2004 03:16 GMT > >An automaker produces a car with 350 normally-aspirated horsepower, > >6-speed, RWD, IRS, 4-wheel discs/ABS, sweet interior, clean stealthy > >exterior, and we complain. We sure have gotten picky, haven't we?
> I agree, with one caveat. As I posted earlier, it's a great car, but do we > really want a "stealthy exterior"? To me, that's a nice way of saying the > car is nondescript.
> Give me the eyball baby!!!! John,
Nothing beats surprising the unsuspecting. Nothing... it's a kick!
> 66 2+2 Sweet car!
My Dad used to have a '66 Star Chief. (I don't think I've ever saw another one.) The body and interior was in PRIMO condition when my father let the engine get low on oil and it blew up. He had it towed to the junkyard for scrap. I'm sure the guys at the junkyard probably fought over the car. I wanted the car so bad, unfortunately my paper-boy wages at the time weren't enough.
Patrick '93 Cobra '83 LTD
ZombyWoof - 26 Aug 2004 06:14 GMT >> >An automaker produces a car with 350 normally-aspirated horsepower, >> >6-speed, RWD, IRS, 4-wheel discs/ABS, sweet interior, clean stealthy [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] >fought over the car. I wanted the car so bad, unfortunately my >paper-boy wages at the time weren't enough. I faced that issue when my cousin wanted to sell his two year old `71 Z28. That $2300 dollar investment on a two year old muscle car would really be worth something today. Nice car too. Bronze with black stripes.
Sold my `72 455 HO GTO for $1600 when I went to Korea in `79. At the time it only had a little over 35k on the clock. In good shape that car would bring in the 20's nowadays. Oh well, hindsight is just that. I've sold way to many cars for way to little back in the day compared to what they would be worth today, but hell I've done it with houses as well. --
ZombyWoof
The wages of sin are death, but after taxes are taken out, it's just a tired feeling.
Richard - 25 Aug 2004 18:07 GMT > > But what is so great about it at all? > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > Gosh, it was just a few years ago when our Cobra only put out 320/300. > And the Mach 1 only has 305. 1hp per cubic inch is no brag nowadays. P.S. the Mach's engine is what, around 287 cu in, 63 less than the GTO. Also, claims regarding 'Vette gas mileage; Are there people who actually drive them in 6th gear much? -Rich
Rein - 25 Aug 2004 23:52 GMT >> > But what is so great about it at all? >> [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] >Also, claims regarding 'Vette gas mileage; Are there people who actually >drive them in 6th gear much? It's really only for cruising. That 6th gear is such a huge overdrive it isn't really usable for anything else. 75mph on a flat road is do-able in 6th, everything else needs lower gears. Remove NO-SPAM from email address when replying
TurboMike - 25 Aug 2004 23:54 GMT I remember on my 96 M6 SS I rarely used 6th except at higher speeds...i.e. 75 or over. 5th was usually fine.
>It's really only for cruising. That 6th gear is such a huge overdrive >it isn't really usable for anything else. 75mph on a flat road ///Mike 1993 BMW 525i http://community.webshots.com/user/mpompe2 Pics of all the old cars
WraithCobra - 26 Aug 2004 00:36 GMT >> It's really only for cruising. That 6th gear is such a huge overdrive >> it isn't really usable for anything else. 75mph on a flat road > > I remember on my 96 M6 SS I rarely used 6th except at higher > speeds...i.e. 75 or over. 5th was usually fine. I wish my Cobra was like that, I'm in 6th by 40 mph. I think Ford screwed up the gear ratios in the Cobra. I like the 3.55 rear, but wonder what difference a 3.27 would make with all that torque. The overall gearing in 6th is less than what it was in my '00 GT in 5th.
 Signature Mike Silver 10th Anniversary Cobra Coupe ---
Rein - 28 Aug 2004 17:40 GMT >>> It's really only for cruising. That 6th gear is such a huge overdrive >>> it isn't really usable for anything else. 75mph on a flat road [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >difference a 3.27 would make with all that torque. The overall gearing in >6th is less than what it was in my '00 GT in 5th. In 6th by 40 ? wow, that's way too low if you ask me. 60 is the low-end of using 6th, 70 or higher is best.
Remove NO-SPAM from email address when replying
WraithCobra - 30 Aug 2004 21:02 GMT >>>> It's really only for cruising. That 6th gear is such a huge >>>> overdrive it isn't really usable for anything else. 75mph on a [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > In 6th by 40 ? wow, that's way too low if you ask me. 60 is the > low-end of using 6th, 70 or higher is best. You've never driven a Cobra. The 6th gearing and the 3.55 rear totals to less than a GT's 5th gear. If I waited 'till 60-70 to shift to 6th I'd be driving around town starring at the damn up shift light in 5th all the time. Why do you think Cobra's only get 16 city / 22 highway? Trust me, when daily driving a Cobra shifting to 6th below 45 is the norm.
 Signature Mike Silver 10th Anniversary Cobra Coupe ---
Patrick - 26 Aug 2004 03:00 GMT > > > But what is so great about it at all?
> > It's a 2-door, RWD-coupe with a stout V8 and 6-speed transmission? > > > -It has a large engine
> > Yes, large displacement, but light and very compact...all good things. > > > that produces acceptable horsepower but nothing earth shaking.
> > Since when is 350 HP and 365 ft-lbs of torque just "acceptable?" > > Gosh, it was just a few years ago when our Cobra only put out 320/300. > > And the Mach 1 only has 305.
> 1hp per cubic inch is no brag nowadays. P.S. the Mach's engine is > what, around 287 cu in, 63 less than the GTO. Let me ask you this. How would it be comforting for a losing Mach 1 driver to know he lost because he wasn't packing enough cubes? Because I know I don't feel any better when I get smoked by an LS1 car knowing he has me outgunned by 45 cubes. All I realize is that I need more horsepower.
Rich, after a race, no one cares what the bores and strokes of the engines were; the only thing that matters is who won and who lost. Any talk afterwards about what the losing driver didn't bring to the race is an excuse.
> Also, claims regarding 'Vette gas mileage; Are there people who actually > drive them in 6th gear much? Not sure where this comment came from. I can't answer that. You'd have to ask a Vette or Cobra owner about their 6th gear usage.
Patrick '93 Cobra '83 LTD
JS - 26 Aug 2004 03:48 GMT > Not sure where this comment came from. I can't answer that. You'd > have to ask a Vette or Cobra owner about their 6th gear usage. Having driven an '02 SS 6-speed, I can say that they don't use it very often and still stay within posted speed limits, that's for sure. The thing was virtually useless under 70MPH in 6th gear, and even 75 was pushing it if there was even a slight hill. I'm not sure that the Cobra suffers from the same problems.
JS
Rein - 28 Aug 2004 17:42 GMT >> rander3127@rogers.com (Richard) wrote in message >news:<ec75e55a.0408250907.47d1bf73@posting.google.com>... [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >there was even a slight hill. I'm not sure that the Cobra suffers from the >same problems. It sure doesn't. Driving 70mph in 6th you still have quite a bit of oomph. It's not a lot but definetely useable.
Remove NO-SPAM from email address when replying
Richard - 27 Aug 2004 02:40 GMT >> > > But what is so great about it at all? > [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] >Any talk afterwards about what the losing driver didn't bring to the >race is an excuse. This kind of argument could go on for days, but my points are simple; The GTO has the muscle, but it's compromised (IMO) by the weight of the car and it's handling and the whole car is compromised by it's looks. It's unfortunate that GM saw fit to kill two muscle cars (Trans Am and Camaro) only to bring on board a car that is inferior to both of them except maybe in interior design. Just WHO are they building them for anyway??
V'ger - 27 Aug 2004 04:27 GMT Saw a writeup on the Goat, and when they tuned the suspension and tweaked the engine it was a screamer. And isn't it great that that actually brought back the rear wheel drive.. Yes, it could have been better, but, what else was left with the death of the Firebird and Camaro? Of course you could always drop a 302 into a Miata....
>>> > > But what is so great about it at all? >> [quoted text clipped - 32 lines] >design. Just WHO are they building them for anyway?? > V'ger jma(NOSPAM)@snowcrest.net 1965 Mustang Fastback 2+2 Vintage Burgundy w/ Black Std Interior 289 ci 4v V8 oem A Code Dual Exhaust C4 Auto converted to AODE 8" Trak Lok Vintage 40 wheels BF Goodrich gForce T/A 225/50ZR-16 KDWS tires Built in San Jose, CA on my birthday, May 10th ; ) Restoration by: Cool Mustang Restorations Cool, CA
Dave Combs - 27 Aug 2004 05:16 GMT Thought I would throw in my 2 cents worth. Several months ago GM had a "driver expo" at the closed down El Toro (CA) Marine base where you could drive their cars as well as some competitors'. I did drive a GTO and was pleased, but not excited. When I got in my '90 LX 5.0 Hatch it dawned on me that the only difference was a nicer interior and $30,000 cash. For that kind of money I would like a little more style (although not like the picnic basket handle on the Neon SRT-4) and having the dual exhausts exiting one on each side instead of together on the left side.
So if I were to replace the LX today, it would be a Dodge Magnum Hemi (would rather wait for the SRT-8 version with 426 Hemi and equal horsepower) because its got power and is practical (can haul a Christmas tree home just like the LX).
Dave
> Saw a writeup on the Goat, and when they tuned the suspension and > tweaked the engine it was a screamer. And isn't it great that that [quoted text clipped - 50 lines] > Built in San Jose, CA on my birthday, May 10th ; ) > Restoration by: Cool Mustang Restorations Cool, CA Patrick - 28 Aug 2004 04:06 GMT > Thought I would throw in my 2 cents worth. Several months ago GM had a > "driver expo" at the closed down El Toro (CA) Marine base where you could [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > basket handle on the Neon SRT-4) and having the dual exhausts exiting one on > each side instead of together on the left side. Dave,
The LXs weren't particulary "stylish." Purposeful is a much better description. And I think purposeful describes the GTO too. I see similarities between them. Only one is '80's the other 21st style.
> So if I were to replace the LX today, it would be a Dodge Magnum Hemi (would > rather wait for the SRT-8 version with 426 Hemi and equal horsepower) > because its got power and is practical (can haul a Christmas tree home just > like the LX). I've already test driven one. I liked it! I just wish they'd come with a stick shift. An SRT-8 version would really be sweet!!
IMO, the ONLY visual change from the regular Hemi magnum should be a very small 425 HP badge.
Patrick '93 Cobra '83 LTD
Dave Combs - 28 Aug 2004 17:20 GMT Patrick--I agree with you about the badging and a 6 speed in a Magnum.
Dave
90 LX 5.0 67 Dodge R/T
> > Thought I would throw in my 2 cents worth. Several months ago GM had a > > "driver expo" at the closed down El Toro (CA) Marine base where you could [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > '93 Cobra > '83 LTD Richard - 28 Aug 2004 00:32 GMT >Saw a writeup on the Goat, and when they tuned the suspension and >tweaked the engine it was a screamer. And isn't it great that that >actually brought back the rear wheel drive.. Yes, it could have been >better, but, what else was left with the death of the Firebird and >Camaro? Of course you could always drop a 302 into a Miata.... From the Chicago Tribune:
GTO's sales performance gets Pontiac's goat
Published June 2, 2004
There are a few red faces at General Motors.
In the first four months of this year, sales of the Pontiac Aztek sport-utility vehicle, considered by many the most gosh-awful-looking vehicle on the planet, totaled 7,416 units, down from 11,311 a year earlier.
But the countdown to Aztek obscurity is not what's causing the red faces.
In the same period, sales of the Pontiac GTO totaled 2,800 units, meaning Aztek outsold the highly touted performance coupe by more than 2 1/2-1.
GTO is derived from the rear-wheel-drive Monaro produced by GM's Holden operations in Australia.
Even before GTO went on sale in late December, critics complained that the styling was plain and not suited to a nameplate that kicked off the muscle-car era in the 1960s.
While Pontiac is considering styling tweaks on future models to soothe the critics, it insists that as many people like the look as object to it and that styling isn't what held back sales.
"While we'd always like to sell more, we haven't been disappointed with GTO sales so far," Pontiac spokesman Tom Beaman said.
Not disappointed though Pontiac forecast sales of 16,000 to 18,000 units a year and is on target to sell only about 7,400?
But then, GTO was meant less as a styling exercise than a performance statement with its 5.7-liter V-8 that produces a potent 350 horsepower.
Beaman cites a winter launch of a rear-wheel-drive performance car as one reason for slow early sales in the Northern states.
Of course, you have to ask, why in the name of all that's holy would anyone introduce a rear-wheel-drive performance car in the dead of winter in the North?
But then, if anyone knew the answer to that question, they'd know why 7,416 bought the most gosh-awful-looking vehicle on this planet in the first four months of this year.
Another problem, Beaman says, is that Pontiac held to its commitment to supply each of Pontiac's more than 2,700 dealers with a GTO to use as a "halo" vehicle to attract folks into showrooms.
Those halos helped Pontiac sell 16 percent more cars in the period, though few of them GTOs.
He also said that while the GTO didn't fare too well in the Snow Belt over the winter, it's done well in Southern California, where Pontiac is traditionally weak. There, more than 40 percent of GTO sales are conquests--captured from rival brands--so more GTOs will be shipped there.
Pontiac is also counting on "The Last Ride," a made-for-TV movie that airs Wednesday on the USA Network, to raise awareness of the GTO.
Pontiac struck a product-placement deal to feature the GTO in the film.
V'ger - 28 Aug 2004 03:13 GMT "Elinore" is is surely NOT. Sure hit the nail on the head about the Aztec! LOL Seems like it's all going down hill. Either they are excessively ugly, or bland because they look so much like everything else on the road.
There was a time when you saw a vehicle on the road and you knew exactly what it was. Today, you have to look for the emblems on a good share of them, and you can't even find that on some... or the company changed it.
I will be quite happy with my 65 FB. The 66 FB I sold last May was great. Kids were drawn to it like moths to a flame. Older people knew right away what it was and marvelled at it's condition... some joking that the car was in better shape than they were...
No, it's not a Cobra, Viper, etc, but it's special, and a bit uncommon, and when the suspension is tuned, it's surprisingly quick and agile.
>>Saw a writeup on the Goat, and when they tuned the suspension and >>tweaked the engine it was a screamer. And isn't it great that that [quoted text clipped - 71 lines] >Pontiac struck a product-placement deal to feature the GTO in the >film. V'ger jma(NOSPAM)@snowcrest.net 1965 Mustang Fastback 2+2 Vintage Burgundy w/ Black Std Interior 289 ci 4v V8 oem A Code Dual Exhaust C4 Auto converted to AODE 8" Trak Lok Vintage 40 wheels BF Goodrich gForce T/A 225/50ZR-16 KDWS tires Built in San Jose, CA on my birthday, May 10th ; ) Restoration by: Cool Mustang Restorations Cool, CA
Patrick - 28 Aug 2004 03:50 GMT > >> > > But what is so great about it at all?
> >> > It's a 2-door, RWD-coupe with a stout V8 and 6-speed transmission?
> >> > > -It has a large engine
> >> > Yes, large displacement, but light and very compact...all good things.
> >> > > that produces acceptable horsepower but nothing earth shaking.
> >> > Since when is 350 HP and 365 ft-lbs of torque just "acceptable?" > >> > Gosh, it was just a few years ago when our Cobra only put out 320/300. > >> > And the Mach 1 only has 305.
> >> 1hp per cubic inch is no brag nowadays. P.S. the Mach's engine is > >> what, around 287 cu in, 63 less than the GTO.
> >Let me ask you this. How would it be comforting for a losing Mach 1 > >driver to know he lost because he wasn't packing enough cubes? > >Because I know I don't feel any better when I get smoked by an LS1 car > >knowing he has me outgunned by 45 cubes. All I realize is that I need > >more horsepower.
> >Rich, after a race, no one cares what the bores and strokes of the > >engines were; the only thing that matters is who won and who lost. > >Any talk afterwards about what the losing driver didn't bring to the > >race is an excuse.
> This kind of argument could go on for days, but my points are > simple; The GTO has the muscle, but it's compromised (IMO) > by the weight of the car Rich,
It is heavy. But take note, there are only about 150 pounds separating the GTO and the '04 Cobra. And the '05 Mustang is supposed to be up another 1%-2% over the current car.
> and it's handling and the whole car is compromised by it's looks. Like I said before, I hear its factory tires are the reason for its "poor handling."
As for looks, the GTO's design is clean and tasteful. Just thank god there are no flaming chickens on the hood, no dorky Cobra R rear spoilers, no GT Mustang fake side scoops, and no Lightning pickup queer tail lights.
The new GTO looks like just a regular Pontiac, much the same way the original GTO looked like just a another 60's Pontiac.
> It's unfortunate that GM saw fit to kill two muscle cars (Trans Am and > Camaro) only to bring on board a car that is inferior to both of them except > maybe in interior design. Not "maybe". The new GTO's interior design IS about a hundred times better than the old Cambird's interior. And the overall packaging -- access under the hood, less front and rear overhang, no catalytic convertor hump, there's no horrible windshield rake -- of the GTO is world's better than those two.
> Just WHO are they building them for anyway?? I'm just glad there's another affordable, stick-shifted, V-8 powered, RWD coupe on the market.
Patrick '93 Cobra '83 LTD
ZombyWoof - 26 Aug 2004 06:07 GMT >> > But what is so great about it at all? >> [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] >drive them in 6th gear much? >-Rich In my `95 I do drive in 6th gear on interstate trips. I have averaged as high as 32 MPG on a trip. Usual combined driving is in the 24/26 mpg range. Now all it takes is a couple of really sprinted takeoffs to shoot those numbers all to hell. The gears that aren't used all that much are second & third unless one disables the first to fourth lockout device. --
ZombyWoof
The wages of sin are death, but after taxes are taken out, it's just a tired feeling.
|
|
|