350 bhp, 365 lbs of torque. MSRP around 32k. 5.7 liter V8, 19 CMPG, 28 HWMPG. Looks like a grand prix. Thoughts? Performance and looks?
http://auto.consumerguide.com/images/autoreview/lrg/04129171990004LRG.jpg

http://auto.consumerguide.com/images/autoreview/lrg/04129171990006LRG.jpg

looks pretty good for ponitac

I dont like their front nostril grill thing

That car is suppose to be da shit! Granted it will not handle as well as the RX-8, but it's got Corvette power and if not for a tame suspension setup, it would be a complete wolf in sheep's clothing.

My friend was trying to proposition for a demo from GM at the SEMA back in early November. He had NOS, the brakeman and a few others that were on the band wagon to hook up prototype parts if it would have went through. No luck though, GM has two of them to issue as demo's and it's unlikely Bottle Blown Racing will get one. Possibly a truck.

But for 32k dollars, those that want Corvette Power but don't want all of the attention, it's a good consideration.

Car and Driver - Decamber 2003

0-60 mph / 5.3 sec.
1/4 mi. / 14.0 sec @ 102 mph
Top Speed (governed) / 158 mph

Years ago I owned a 1969 and then a 1970 GTO, both were beasts.

I just picked up the December Car and Driver, The only thing the GTO gets the RX-8 on is straight line acceleration>

that last graph in the scan you posted there 6speed8 is really quite interesting:

note that C&D got the usual 18mpg in the RX-8, and got only 2mpg better in the Infiniti, and worse in the SVT and GTO... hmmm.... :) not so bad afterall??

looks mundane and extremely generic, imo the holden actually looks better. AWESOME performance, pulls and runs like a genuine musclecar, but supposedly handles real well, too. i'd drive it (and probably love it) :D but not buy it :p

sleeper of the year?

not very asthetically pleasing to the eye IMHO and to me thats one of the most important criteria when choosing a car with performance a close second.

Unaesthetic, straight line, beast . . . the archetypal definition of a GTO. If the Holden can really meet this description, then I think that Pontiac has its first real performace car in decades. If you'eve ever driven a '64 Tempest/LeMans/GTO then you know what I mean. It was just a very overpowered fairly lightweight, undersuspended, frighteningly under braked straight line family coupe rocket with no interior goodies at all. I love that car! I love driving '64 ponchoes. I hope that the new Goat is a gret success!

Ditto. I was never very big on domestic muscle, but I like the GTO. Granted it looks extremely mundane, regardless though, I have high hopes on it. Simply because it looks extremely humble by visual appeals, but it's waiting to tear open some assholes.

Ideal for go, not great for turning, awfull for stoping.

U know, I like my cars, especualy the quick ones, to stop.

But I'm British, so I dont realy get the 'America muscle car' thang.

It looked perfectly good when it left our shores.

We've also got it in 4wd with a lot more ponies if you're interested...

Originally posted by Kev
It looked perfectly good when it left our shores.

We've also got it in 4wd with a lot more ponies if you're interested...

You're cars are like the women that leave your shores and come to ours as celebrities...teases. :p

Originally posted by -=Zeqs=-
You're cars are like the women that leave your shores and come to ours as celebrities...teases. :p

Yeah, but you dont rip the face off the women and stick jason masks on like you do with their cars eh?

Originally posted by RX-GR8
not very asthetically pleasing to the eye IMHO and to me thats one of the most important criteria when choosing a car with performance a close second.


I agree... Looks, performance (0-60/breaking/handling) and relaibility are key factors in my choice. I think GM (as usual) missed the boat once more. Yep it will go fast, and it will need to because it just looks, well, let me quote Car and Driver:

on the new GTO: "Lusty performance disguised in a phone-company fleet car" and they also said this: Okay, the new GTO's styling is a snooze" and "styling that makes you say 'so what?'"

Talk about a sleeper... I like it, it's just to bad it doesn't have the rest of the equipment to go with the engine. Brakes, Suspension, and all that.

-JiM

a friend owns a pontiac dealership.. as soon as he gets a GTO in i will be able to TD one. ill see how it is then.

Aw..come on, guys. It doesn't look that bad/boring. Granted, the 8 is just damn stunning...But if I were to spot a GTO on the road, I'd still wet my pants. That car is nice! A car I definitely wouldn't mind owning...that's for sure. hmm...I just noticed that the wheels are similar for both cars.

But anyway, I still love my car. Everytime I close the garage door and look back at it, I still can't believe how beautiful she is. Just saying that the GTO's pretty sweet too. As far as handling, braking, etc...I wouldn't know. But, if used as a daily driver, I probably couldn't tell the difference.

Just what I wanted! Yet another iteration of the Grand prix! This is a perfect example of why I hate GM. They put a grand prix body on a corvette and now its "cool"? Nope sorry. Looks like Hertz rent-a-car to me. I can't believe they wouldn't hire a designer to at least conjure up a reminiscent form of the old goat. '05 Mustang is a perfect example of how you can spend your money when developing a car GM.

Grand Am on steroids

I can't wait to drive this car myself!!!!!
Unfortunetly it looks too much like the 2door cavalier. I used to own a grand am Gt ( before my RX-8) .

This car is what the Grand Am should of been!!! Even the pontiac rep at the auto show wasn't impressed with the sytling either.

Actually, I think the new GTO looks alot like the 1999-2000 Cadillac Catera. The new GTO is NOT available with sunroof, seat heaters or navigation system, there is no dead pedal, and the shifter is mushy and sloppy. The car is 189 inchess (15 longer than the RX-8) yet the trunk is only 7 cubic feet (the RX-8 has 8 cubic feet) beacuse GM relocated the fuel tank into the trunk for rear collision concerns (this RAISED the center of gravity).

During the C&D test drive, parts were falling off the car and it spent two hours at a dealership for repairs and a wheel alignment.

Also, the GTO has two exhaust pipes on the drivers side rear, not the balanced one-on-each-side dual exhaust.

Originally posted by RobDickinson
Ideal for go, not great for turning, awfull for stoping.

U know, I like my cars, especualy the quick ones, to stop.

But I'm British, so I dont realy get the 'America muscle car' thang.

We have alot of very loooong straaaaight roads here. :)

Originally posted by RobDickinson
Yeah, but you dont rip the face off the women and stick jason masks on like you do with their cars eh?

Maybe we should...IE: Nicole Kidman

Yeah, but if we did Nicole Kidman then we would have to do Naomi Watts too, and that would be a crime.

I like it. and I'm typically not a big GM fan. It must come from a different country or something! (yeah, I know)

427 cu versions of these just came in 1st and 2nd in the Bathurst 24 hour...

http://www.bathurst24hr.com/

...I don't know - there's something thats just not right here.


...I think I have the solution.

Repmobile looks notwithstanding, the arrival of the Monaro, erm, GTO, might cause me to make my first ever visit to a GM dealership.

http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com//pictures/VEHICLE/2004/Pontiac/100369148/028172-E.jpg

http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com//pictures/VEHICLE/2004/Pontiac/100369148/028171-E.jpg

first off the car looks alot better in person. Only thing I dont like the Pontiac Front Grill, but its their trademark what you gonna do?

I dont think it makes up on the interior what it lacks on the exterior

Originally posted by wakeech
that last graph in the scan you posted there 6speed8 is really quite interesting:

note that C&D got the usual 18mpg in the RX-8, and got only 2mpg better in the Infiniti, and worse in the SVT and GTO... hmmm.... :) not so bad afterall??

true!...thats for all those whiners that keep crying about their fuel efficiency...

that last graph in the scan you posted there 6speed8 is really quite interesting:

They use the quoted mileage of the manufacturer for each of the cars; as we all know, the 8 doesnt get what Mazda says it does.

I've always seen car and driver post "c/d observed" before the mileage which indicates they use their own tests.

Originally posted by Greg
I've always seen car and driver post "c/d observed" before the mileage which indicates they use their own tests.

well, then I wonder what city that was where they got 18mpg.

On the GTO.. I don't think I'd buy a Pontiac again.. my last car was a Firebird (2000 model, I got it new).. which got 200hp out of a 3.8l engine.

The GTO is their replacement for the Trans AM which they stopped producing 2002. The numbers (350 bhp from a 5.7 liter V8) sound like just the same concept. GM can just add displacement it seems.

The Firebird had the worst handling I've ever had in a car. When it started to rain, I seemed to be riding on a giant block of soap!!!
(no independent rear suspension, extremely bad weight distribution)

In the parking lot or at the stop light: Great looks (T-Tops to show off your babe better) , but not much when going.

Based on my Firebird experience, I expect the GTO to be the same piece of shit.

I'm so happy I got the 8. It's all about technology.

Well, it could have very well been savannah because thats about what mileage I get...

Well...how much power does the Vette put out? That's suppose to be the same engine...LS-1 is it?

I think it's a nice car to put a lot of kids with their coffee-can exhaust back into their place.

Plenty of minivans and suv's are already doing that. Another hertz rental car won't stop the insanity...

Originally posted by -=Zeqs=-
That car is suppose to be da shit!

glad to report that the RX-8 is not shit

Guys,

If you want to see the version of this car that you SHOULD be getting check out this link to the Holden Special Vehicles website.


www.hsv.com.au (http://www.hsv.com.au)

Personally I prefer to drive vehicles that are not powered by engines that should be in a farm tractor!!

i wonder how my poor family sedan would do against your exotic sports coupe's

somehow i don't think i'd be embarrased ...


http://www.micro-op.com.au/execls1/3a.jpg

Mate............................

As a fellow Aussie I have to say you might keep up whilst you are going in a straight line.........but when you have to go around corners ... See you later!

allright ... you have a point on the twisties, not that the holden can't be made to handle ...

but c'mon these guys are making out the GTO to be the biggest POS on earth , and you know its not the case !!! (especially compared to some other american cars going around)

do you think its ugly ?

I think the Holden is a great car if you want a car with some grunt that is reasonably sporty - But not a sports car like the 8.

Styling wise I think it is ok - just a little bland

IMHO I think it would be a great car if you want a car that has grunt that you can chuck the kids in and cruise down to the coast do the beach etc. If you really want a car that you enjoy driving evertime that you get in - buy an RX-8!

so what you are saying its in a different market / class of vehicle, and that i'm cool with.

what other coupes in north america provide the grunt, true seating for 4 , for low $30k that the GTO will provide ...

not many that i can think of ...

This car actually handles pretty well. I wont argue this point because I think its just pointless but here are some quotes from people who actually know their stuff.

"Handling isn't grip or mid-corner speed. Different things. Handling is the way the car behaves, the feedback it gives, the composure it imparts. It's got nothing to do with lap times or mid-corner speeds. "

Michael Taylor
Editor
MOTOR

Drive sent a holden to Germany to test against "Germany's four-door finery, a Benz AMG E55 and a BMW M5". Two drivers were used Mark Skaif who is the Australian touring car/bathurst champion and Anders Olofsson (swedish touring car ace) who is regarded by many as the king of the ring (Nordschleife).

Here is what Anders Olofsson's thoughts on the holden product.
"That's a real car, that GTS (closer to the GTO than the normal holden cv8 monaro), and that's a surprise to me. Honestly, I was a little bit disappointed by the Germans. There are many good things and many good parts to each of them but, driving-wise, the Holden's a better car for a pure driver. If you push the Commodore, you really get a good feel to it. When you drive it, all the technology doesn't take over."

Friday 7 July 2000
DRIVE

I tend to believe professional drivers not arm chair racers. FYI the holden did lap quicker than the M5 and the Mercedes-Benz's AMG E55 on the 20.8 km track.

Car and driver had the most daming comments on the GTO i.e. falling pieces etc, styling, and acceleration. People in many forums have tended to form their arguements solely on the figures published by C and D. While drives by other mags i.e. Edmunds, RT, and motortrend, which are more favourable have been left out or ignored.

I have no problem withing using CD figures, however the worst review and the worst 1/4 mile time for ???? car should also be used in the comparison (apples with apples people).

cheers

Originally posted by monaroCountry
Car and driver had the most daming comments on the GTO i.e. falling pieces etc, styling, and acceleration. People in many forums have tended to form their arguements solely on the figures published by C and D. While drives by other mags i.e. Edmunds, RT, and motortrend, which are more favourable have been left out or ignored.

I have no problem withing using CD figures, however the worst review and the worst 1/4 mile time for ???? car should also be used in the comparison (apples with apples people).

cheers

The Motor trend article was joke, they fell in love with the power and neglected to inform their readers of any other part of the car. Fom what I read in C&D, the trunk is very small, no moon roof, no nav system, access to the rear seats is difficult and the gas tank was relocated to the trunk. MT NEVER mentions this, why?

Edmunds never mentions the above issues as well, but both magazines do make comment on the "bland" styling. I think C&D was not as school girl giggly over the power (and nameplate) as the other magazines and gave a review on the entire car, rather than a pee-in-my-pants-cause-i'm-so-exited about hp review.

All things considered the C&D review has been the most COMPLETE review I have seen to date.

I am sure it's a nice car, and probably better as a Monaro than a GTO ( due to the gas tank relocation)

But it has power, and it needs it cause it is seriously overweight at almost 3800 lbs. It lacks a lot of features that cars in it's price range have, but we'll see how it sells and holds up.

Can anyone explain exactly why the tank was relocated from under the car to inside the trunk? One would have thought that if it was safe enough for the stringent Australian Design Rules, it would be OK for the US market. An internal tank is obviously not required - witness the fact that our RX-8 has its tank under the floor.

Originally posted by monaroCountry
Car and driver had the most daming comments on the GTO i.e. falling pieces etc, styling, and acceleration. People in many forums have tended to form their arguements solely on the figures published by C and D. While drives by other mags i.e. Edmunds, RT, and motortrend, which are more favourable have been left out or ignored.

I have no problem withing using CD figures, however the worst review and the worst 1/4 mile time for ???? car should also be used in the comparison (apples with apples people).

cheers

For me Motortrend, R&T and most other cars mags are a good newstand read to be taken with a grain of salt. As far as who I trust C&D far outweighs the other mags. They break news first, they don't try to candy coat problems with cars they love, and there is less misinformation than the other car mags. I hate to admit it... but I think SCC does a great job as well, and seems to value performance over rice far more than other mags in that segment of the car market.

Ike

Screw GM! HAHA
Sorry I just got rid of my 2000 T/A with Ram Air and I have JUST sold my 1987 GTA!

Once they quit making the Firebird and Camaro they lost my business.....Esp. when they are trying to replace the T/A with the Plain Jane GTO. Yah it has decent performance, but look at it!

Got my Mazda6 on trade for the 2000 T/A and 87 T/A is providing a healthy downpayment when my RX-8 arrives!

Look im not saying that CD should be ignored, far from it, however arguements against the GTO should not be based entirety on one review. It's misleading and might seriously damage the GTO's reputation (wrongly).

Also the GTO was and never will be a replacement for the firebird and camaro (totally different car).

Moon roof and sat nav is not a pre req for a great car... however its puzzling (lack of sat nav and climate control) because monaros normally have these features (harder to deleate than to include). I think that these deleations were done on purpose. Next year should see these features, therefore even though 2004 and 2005 are the same car people would still buy them because of upgrades.

Originally posted by monaroCountry
Look im not saying that CD should be ignored, far from it, however arguements against the GTO should not be based entirety on one review. It's misleading and might seriously damage the GTO's reputation (wrongly).

Also the GTO was and never will be a replacement for the firebird and camaro (totally different car).

True, even if it's your favorite magazine you should take the review for what it is, one man or one magazines opinion. I like what I've heard so far even though I read C&D, but it isn't a car for me. One of the higher HP AWD aussie versions, sign me up! :p

I was thinking it looked like a modified Cavalier from Chevy...acceleration numbers are strong but the car really has no sex appeal, I'd rather have another Cobra. My two cents are they are not doing the prestigeous history any favors. The whole project was just completed to hastily, should have done more of a true makeover and brought in next year with the same motor.

Originally posted by monaroCountry
Moon roof and sat nav is not a pre req for a great car...

True, but every other car in this price range OFFERS them. GM doesn't because that would add another 3k to 4k dollars to the price tag, rendering the GTO too expensive.

Also Aussies really dont need those things....sun is too hot and easily get cancer from (Q is moon roof = sun roof)

I think that the introduction of this car to the Pontiac lineup is great. Car enthusiasts from other manufacturers love this car i.e. the honda boys from honda-accord and the subaru wrx guys. It appeals to people because of its looks and performance. However from forums anyway this car has been blasted by the doy racers. Boy racers for me are not those people who dont like the car, but those who hate the car and like to exagerate and are active in trying to tarnish a great name.

Monaro country,

That's just it, the GTO nameplate in America is a reverred symbol not unlike Corvette and Shelby, but this car is no where close upto the standards of what is expected with that nameplate, the price tag is a bit high to weed out the wannabes but the appearence of the vehicle is not making people say "wow, that's a cool car", hell, you wouldn't know it from any other family sedan if you didn't catch the name on it as it passed your butt on the hiways. Believe me, the anticipation of it's re-interduction was highly awaited and the performance numbers are fine (what would you expect with CORVETTE'S motor?) but it's very very bland appearence is it's downfall. Don't really care what evo/wrx people think, they drive square box'es anyways.

Kevin

What made the old GTO a success was because of their bland looks and their performance, the majority wanted them. What the new one has is that same desirability and performance, again the majority wants these type of cars, including import buyers, luxury buyers, performance buyers, and mom and dads.

The monaro, no matter what happens with the GTO have been a success. They have surpassed their break even target years ago, and have helped spread holden products throughout the globe including Europe with the up coming vauxhil monaro, Arabia with their monaro, and America with the GTO.

The corporate look of the old GTO's were that of boxy cars, the corporate look of Pontiacts now and in coming cars are those of clean bodyline- some people call boring. Im not trying to bring down the image of the old GTO's but have a look at the lineup at that time.

I wouldnt discount evo/wrx drivers, they are still potential buyers. Its actually these people pontiacs should appeal to, since their number is one if not the fastest growing in America and the world.

I actually like quality cars including imports of any kind, these generation X'rs are spoilt for choice. They demand a car with good interiors, good experior, great performance, good handling, and great safty features (they have no brand loyalty).

There is only one reason Holden is doing well in Australia, because they are cheap and a local product. Built quality is terrible, but then again they are cheap. The only reason they handle well is because they use a very stiff suspension and big brakes.

Compare it to a BMW M5, which is it's closest competition, the M5 wins in every way. M5 is a lot more expensive because it is an import, it has a much much better chassis(so it doesn;t have to use a very stiff suspension), much better built quality, handling, performance and a lot more features.

Imagine if other performance cars like 330ci, RX8, Sti, Evolution Lancer, 350Z, 200SX, Integra Type-R and even MX5, come standard with suspension as stiff and as low, plus very wide Potenza S02 tyres. They are going to murder the HSV GTS in every corners.

Sorry to sounds that I hate the car so much, but the car really disappoints me. :( For the GTS price, I'd rather buy a 330ci, or Skyline GTR 34. I tested almost every series HSVs from VT series up to todays series, and I always feel dissapointed. That's why I always skim read any Ford or Holden reviews by Wheels and Motor magazine because I believe they tend to biased with Local products. Just like UK magazines with their Lotus, MGs, etc.

I personally think when you buy the HSV, you buy the corvette engine, the rest of the car is for free. Yup, I think it is that bad.

Then again maybe I am not Anders Olofsson.;)

Originally posted by Winning
There is only one reason Holden is doing well in Australia, because they are cheap and a local product. Built quality is terrible, but then again they are cheap.

Compare it to a BMW M5, which is it's closest competition, the M5 wins in every way. M5 is a lot more expensive because it is an import, .....much better built quality,

I've heard that Holden reliability is subpar but so is BMW but BMW's have a premium price.

Originally posted by babylou
I've heard that Holden reliability is subpar but so is BMW but BMW's have a premium price.

It does, have to agree with you. I heard about BMW maintenance cost when it has problems, especially electrical. Luckily, my 5 series costing me nothing until I sold it though.

Compare to Mercedes, BMW is the better of the germans in term of built quality.

Oh no, now I am confused does built quality and reliability come together?

I was talking about the materials they used in Holden and BMW M5. I still believe BMW use better metal, plastic, leather, engine parts, alloy wheels, etc.

If we are talking about reliability, then Japanese cars have my thumbs up. Lexus, Toyota and Honda has been very reliable. But the later Japanese cars also tend to be more fragile. Maybe the more gadgets they put in the car, the less reliable it becomes.

Current holdens are a drastic improvement to that of the early VT models. I do agree that compared to the M5, M3, and upper model BMW's and MB holdens quality is lacking. Compared with BM and MB of the same price however, holdens quality is better (you get what you pay). Trust me when I say that holdens are reliable and rugged, even with the punnishments they tend to endure (why do you think taxis and emergency vehicles use holdens and ford = because they are reliable, reasonable price, good performance (police); cheap 2nd hand, reliable, and roomy (taxis).

Winning I think that you have something against Holden and Australian products. Holdens spring rates are not as stiff as you think, they are actuall pretty compliant. Having big brakes are usually standard in larger cars, those cars i.e. sti, evo, RX8 are smaller cars. Again comparing holden products to M division BMW is a bit unfare (BMW costing nearly 2x the price of the top of the line holden). I do think that local mags tend to rave on about local products, however HSV handling and performance have been given a thumbs up from British mags, US mags, and overseas drivers. From your posts it also seems that you have a close mind. For me I love any cars, even toyota echos. You have to remember that not all cars are built for performqance, good cars for me are those that are good at what they are suppose to do (i.e. echo and low petrol consumption).

Monaro Country,

It's all become clear now, you ACTUALLY WORK at Holden don't you? Just kidding. I love many types of vehcles myself and I'm actually selling my heavily modified Mini Cooper S today, it was the down payment on my new 8. I must say that when it comes to build quality I would vote for BMW over any main stream manufacturer, I've had damn near every type of brand in some form or another and they just do not cut corners period. That said, as much as I wanted to love the new GTO, it simply does not "look the part" of the segment it caters to, ala the Chevy Impalla SS of a few years ago (another Vetter-motor leach). I also work with many young drivers (WRXs/Hondas) and there consensus is that even if they had the money for one that the car simply does not have the "look" to interest them - I concur.

Looks like crap, kinda like a civic, but american style. no civics look better, definately good performance though, i won't be racing any of those!

Probably but I also drive a ford car.

Originally posted by Winning
It does, have to agree with you. I heard about BMW maintenance cost when it has problems, especially electrical. Luckily, my 5 series costing me nothing until I sold it though.

Compare to Mercedes, BMW is the better of the germans in term of built quality.

Oh no, now I am confused does built quality and reliability come together?

It seems that most people consider "build "quality" to mean "reliability" though they are supposed to have different meanings.


Originally posted by Winning
If we are talking about reliability, then Japanese cars have my thumbs up. Lexus, Toyota and Honda has been very reliable. But the later Japanese cars also tend to be more fragile. Maybe the more gadgets they put in the car, the less reliable it becomes.

Many Japanese brands have poor reliability records. While Toyota and Honda, including their luxury brands, have stellar records, Nissan and Mazda are more middle of the road, and Mitsubishi, Isuzu and Suzuki are tail enders.