Bingo!!! GM hs been slapping highly prized names from yesteryear on low style cars recently...exa. Monte Carlo SS, Malibu, GTO...... Its a crock. Build some cars worth wearing those names!
By the way A-bomb, is that your Blue GTO in the first video? If it is, here is a little tip for you. When you are running street tires you should not go in the burn out pit before you run
The 300 was not comparing it to the GTO. I posted it to show some of the styling Chrysler uses. You will not see their cars lookin alike. The 300 sure does not look like the Neon....lol Gm should follow that philosophy.
GM needs to wake up and realize the unhappy customers. Lets all face it though, GM will never make cars like they used to, example, even if they bring back the buick GS(if they did they would totally discrace the name and car), it won't be like the old ones. Same with any other muscle car, GTO, Chevelle, 442. When the muscle car era was around, cars were cars, not corporate weenie mobiles.(no offense intended to any one who owns a new GM car) Sorry for my rant being so long.ou: -Cody
You have to admit the Aztec is giving the AMC fugly days a run for their money. It's tough to get uglier than a Matador or Pacer but the Aztec is knocking on the door. The Aztec looks like a mini trash truck.
2005 gto FIRST IVE HEARD OF THE ls2.wonder what GM did to get an extra 50 horsepower? its a hell of a lot better looking than the chrysler 300. with 400 HP i bet itll really haul.
The arguement about how the GTO came from the tempest/lemans back in the '60s and comparing that to the GTO looking like a grand am is nice in theory, but I think everyone here can agree that any given car had more style back then. You could buy a run of the mill family car and get lots of chrome and styling for the money. now, everything has one big headlight on each side, a medium grill, flat hood, and two fog lamps. Pick a name, and put it on the generic car generator and that's how you get a new family sedan. When you pay extra to get a performance car, *most* people want to have something that has a little bit of style to it. I'll give it to the GTO for having a sleeper look, maybe putting a V8 in the grand am would have been a good idea. What get's more sleeper than that? But for 40k? You'd probably want something not everyone and their 15 year old daughter drives. The 2005 is a step in the right direction, but GM hasn't built anything I'd want (except the C5) in a long time. My $.02, I'm not saying the people who have new GTOs are dumb, but it certainly isn't my cup of tea. Maybe in a year when you can get them for 10-15, then they'll be a decent deal. :Comp:
Glad to see the upgrades. Most here on the other thread wanted it more like a muscle car with the familiar options: duals, scoops and more power. So, is most everyone happy? Looks great to me.
Pontiac has used the split grille for a very long time, some of the sharpest GTO's to me were the ones from 68-72 and theres no mistaking the split grille in them bad boys........its not that hard to give a chassie a different look it they would have even tried, look at the current Mustang and the style before it...97 vs 2002, the cars are completely different in looks but the same chassie/floor pans, it can be done the new SSR truck, what a body on that thing and its setting on a Trailblazer frame, I know that one is a ladder frame vs unibody but still...it CAN be done with if you get off your butt and try... and thats what has pissed off the GM muscle lovers is the lazy ass way GM did this, that car could be much more, but its so much LESS (in style...not grunt) then the legend that GTO is....how hard would it have been to give this current GTO some style?? Maybe the eye brows above the wheel openings like the 70-72 cars....is that not possible?......lazy, just plum lazy AND....a insult to classic GM cars and to the people that love them....I had never really thought about the Monte Carlo SS......LoL its worse then the GTO if you think about it. ou:
which muscle car enthusiast can tell me what car this is ? and who can tell me what american car of the time it mostly resmbles ? :grin:
now if a holden looked like that back then, and we aussies live and breath muscle cars and are proud of our cars as much as our american friends. so if a Monaro which was the sister car of pontic in the 60's and 70's looked similar, whats to say that the modern interpretation wouldn't share similar appearance, had pontiac not continued the GTO ? Im looking for answers that make logic rather than childish insults. alot of people critisize the GTO as looking like a Grand-Am / Grand Prix, but is it the Monaro's or Holdens fault Pontiac went soft FWD route whatcould have been a V8 RWD family coupe in the true sense of a Grand Tourer ? a lot of People have a bad taste of what GM in the recent past has done to its intermediate sized cars, Holden on the Other hand had been left to its own accord, heck we have V8 elcamino's cruising our streets today, just as mean and head turning as the old.
Ol theres no dout we got the short end of the stick over here.....I would RUN and buy a Elcamino/Ute (like the one sold over there but with the steering wheel were it belongs p ) if GM would sell it but nope, its not been here since 87.........no one over here hates the coupe that Holden has build, we just don't like when someone (GM) just throws a name on something and then trys to pass it off as the legend is re-born....BS :rant: Holden and its fans should be just as upset over it as the GTO fans :rant: Its not right to either one........please don't miss understand us or myself, the Holden coupe, sedan and ute are some killer cars.
If Pontiac had brought the Monaro over here and called it a Grand Am GTP or even the new Firebird, they'd have gotten less crap about it. The GTO name means too much to badge-engineer a car. Though that doesn't mean that I wouldn't want to have one! It would be nice to show up all of those WRX drivers. :TU:
So wer're all ok with the GS name on the late model Regal? It shares none of the styling ques with the older versions. Heck, the new GTO is closer to the original concept than many of the '60's versions and certainly anything else in GM's lineup currently. I think we still forget the position of the GS cars back in the day, dull styling from other muscle cars of the era, but great performance, handling interior trim, etc. The same could be said of the GN cars of the 80's. They were basically a blacked out Regal with great performance, etc. If your looking for chrome styling , etc of yesterday on a car of today, then your going to be dissapointed. That was then this is now. The GN didn't have any chrome on it either or even many of the '60's styling ques. It's the current culture that determines current style. I've said it before. If I wanted a car that looked like a '65 or '67 or '69 or '70 GTO, then I would have bought a '65 or '67 or '69 or '70 GTO. I think GM designers should be applauded for taking a concept and moving forward with it. Granted Diamler-Chrysler has come up with some unique styles in the past few years, but the large tank-like style doesn't do it for me, and the PT is a neon in desguise. I don't need a lot of people buying a car to tell me it's a great or cool car, only 678 bought a GSX in '70 - so it must not be a cool car? The same could be said for all GS cars, you weren't cool unless you had a Chevelle or Camaro because everyone was buying them.
Oh and couple of other things. I don't know why the uninformed keep indicating the GTO's price tag as $40k, its not even close to that, $30k is more like it. And as for comparring the Aztec to the GTO, I think you need to have your eyes checked.
The new GTO really does look like a big engine stuffed in a Grand Am,they could`ve done alot better on the styling i think,it really doesnt do anything for me when i see it in the street,sorry just my opinion.
