G M Dropped The BALL Ford did this one 100% correct :beer . The only G M division that has anything that looks anything at all like it has Ba**s is Cadilac :3gears: . Chevy has that fiberglass thing :boring: , there will NEVER be a revised 442 :ball: , 'sup with Pontiac : o No: : ? Can't get a Sport Wagon from Buick anymore :jd: , but how many SUV's do they have now ? Yea, even the new Charger looks interesting :TU: with , can you say ? HEMI .Oh well, thank goodness for collectors like us.
Thank God for that!! The "revised" versions they were coming out with or hinting at were pretty sad. What gets me is this badge engineering....I know the technology has changed so much, etc but slapping a nameplate from a cool old car on a newer, generic platform seems to be GM's way of producing new "musclecars" (GTO, GS included). As mentioned before...at least Ford has the sense to come up with the whole package....looks and muscle. Patton
videos Those were excellent videos! Whoever was involved in that should be praised all the way to the bank! Can only help sales which would have been phenomenal without these additional marketing tools. GM better get in the game soon or they'll be slayed! Hats off to FoMoCo for an excellent package! Can't wait to see one in person.
I just saw one of those Mustangs parked at a garage that specializes in the late model Fords....I have to say this: it caught my eye as I drove by and it looks VERY mean... Kudos to Ford for doing this....SERIOUSLY!! Anyone know how much for one of these road rockets?
A 300 hp GT with a interior package, a wing, and something else cost 27k$ Base price was 25k$. Saw two on Friday, I bet they'll sell alot of these.
My cousin wanted to buy one. He asked to to test drive the GT this last Thursday. They told him No. uzzled: Company policy they said. He said, "I want to give you 30 thousand dollars and I can't drive the thing first?" They said No He says, you must be kidding. I'm 31 years old and fully insured with a clean driving record. I want to buy that car, but I want to drive it first. Only a fool puts a down payment on a Ford without driving it first, this thing ain't a Ford GT. Let's take the Mustang GT out for a test drive. They said No He said "Bye. I'm gonna go put a down payment on a 2005 GTO." And he is going to, Monday Ford better let folks try the car out or they might not sell many at all
What kind of bs is that, they won't let him test drive the car he's thinking of buying?! I would be writing a few letters to some higher ups at ford about that.
That seems pretty stupid to do;here a guy is going to buy a car, and says to them that he wants to road test it,and they tell him no.That's so sad. If it were me that owned the dealership,I'd be willing to give you the keys and let you borrow the car for a week. How would that sound? :3gears:
That car's look will be really tired when you see one on every street corner. GM did the right thing by not going retro, if I wanted a '67 mustank I would have bought one. The mudstain has trouble even running 14 flat in the 1/4 mile, I believe one might have finally made it into the 13s. I can't believe some of the ignorance here, with some calling an LS1 the "chevy motor" when all the LS1 shares with a SBC is bore spacing. How many realize a 5.7 LS1 isn't even a 350ci engine? The new GTO is still holding on to the concept of a corporate body with a lot of power under the hood. I appreciate older cars, but this isn't 1967. I would think automotive design would have come further in 35+ years. If all the newer cars look like older models, the older cars will lose some of the uniqueness that makes them all the more desireable. I, for one, like the fact that my Buicks are unique and not seen everywhere. How many people would notice old Rivs and Skylarks if GM made them again? The sixties and seventies are over, we should leave some parts of automotive history intact rather than desecrate them by producing look-alikes of their former glory. IMHO GM is preserving their older designs' place in history by not re-making them.
