The Pontiac GTO is a four-seat Corvette.

Base Price: US$ 35K

Under the hood of the 2004 GTO is a specially tuned LS1 5.7-liter V-8 aluminum-block engine at 350 horsepower @ 5200 rpm, 365 lb-ft. of torque at 4000 rpm with an appropriately tuned Pontiac exhaust note. While sharing the same basic engine configuration with the base-level Chevrolet Corvette, the LS1 engine in the GTO has been modified with a high-lift camshaft and increased airflow induction to create greater horsepower and low-end torque than the Holden Monaro to address the needs of U.S. drivers.

All that power is mated to either an electronically controlled Hydra-Matic 4L60-E four-speed automatic transmission or the six-speed, close ratio manual transmission available on the Corvette ZO6. Both transmissions feature the same low-geared 3.46 final drive axle ratio in a rear-wheel-drive configuration to maximize off-the-line performance, a limited slip differential, and a three-channel traction control system designed to help enhance vehicle control.

Although performance testing on the vehicle has not been completed, the production model GTO is expected have a zero-to-60 acceleration time of less than 5.5 seconds and run the quarter-mile in approximately 14 seconds at a speed of 105 mph.

keyword "aluminum" engine block...

Not a bad looking car. I hear they're adding hood scoops though too. Now if only they can get rid of the cheap light gray plastic interior which all Pontiac's have.

Yeah, I hated the "Fisher Price" interior of my Grand Prix.

---jps

Too heavy.. 350hp and only 14's? Plus like others stated, the Pontiac interiors are horrific.

$35k for a car that has the exterior and interior style of a Grand Am, and weighs over 3700 lbs?

Very cool, thanks for reminding me what an awesome deal the RX-8 is at $27k. :D

Looks like every other American made sedan on the road....

Damn, only 14s in the 1/4? It's not supposed to be too much heavier (~200lbs IIRC) than the old F-bodies were but it runs a whole second slower in the 1/4? I wonder what type of times it actually will run once someone gets their hands on a production model...

The GTO is a re-badged Holden Monaro (I think I spelled that right). I read an Auzie article that compared the Monaro, Z350 and RX-8. They loved the monaro's straight-line acceleration and torque, but said the handling was mushy. The Monaro is aparently a good highway cruiser, but they picked the RX-8 out of the three for its all-around performance, fun factor and usefulness.

Surely you have the wrong picture, that's not a Monaro, it is an '01 Grand Am, and even then it needs its plastic mouldings put back on..........

S

GM has had terrible luck with its previous imports, rebadged Suzukis, Opels and Vauxhalls - the last one was, I believe, the Caddy Catera, widely renowned for its world-class shoddiness.

I remember one reviewer (Jean Jennings IIRC) complained that she was on the freeway when the headliner collapsed down on to her! They built the bodies at Ellesmeer Port plant in the U.K., and the motor was an Opel brought over from Germany (even GM wasn't daft enough to build it on Merseyside!) By now most of them have been recycled........

It will be very interesting to see the overall quality of the Monaro.
.
.
.
doc

they killed the gto

here's a review:
.....
http://www.drive.com.au/news/article.asp?article=http://drive.fairfax.com.au/content-new/news/general/2003/07/10/FFXB1MMNXHD.html

Forget the number of doors and the "revised cam" (with no change in HP and torque peak moves just 400rpm). The CV8 is basically a better looking GTO.

-pete

Yep, that's the article I was talking about.

Glad to see that GM has brought back the 1995 Ford Thunderbird SC:o

Just what's needed, another oversized, overweight and overpriced coupe with bland styling.

I think the problem with the GTO is the same one discussed in this thread (http://www.rx8forum.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=6182) I started.

Basically, the GM divisions try to play a balancing act where they each fill a particular niche and none competes directly with any other. So I bet when they decided to put the 'Vette LS1 into the GTO, some idiot made sure that the engine was detuned so no potential buyer for a $45,000 Corvette would settle for a $35,000 GTO. Never mind that the decision made the GTO a less attractive choice for people looking to spend $35,000.

It's probably the same reason that Ford's revival of the Thunderbird has a detuned version of the Lincoln LS's 3.9 liter V-8. It's a similar situation. If the Thunderbird was an attractive car, fewer Lincoln LS's would be sold. The new Thunderbird could have been a sweet car, but 280 horsepower in a two-seater convertible doesn't cut it for a 3800 pound car - especially one that costs more than $40,000.

well for as ugly as they are (bland is more of a proper word), i can still get that car for dealercost or less. Its nice having a cousin that owns a pontiac/caddilac/GMC dealership. But i doubt i will just like i still havn't bought a firebird from him, would much rather have a rotary :D

Originally posted by AIPEX
well for as ugly as they are (bland is more of a proper word), i can still get that car for dealercost or less. Its nice having a cousin that owns a pontiac/caddilac/GMC dealership. But i doubt i will just like i still havn't bought a firebird from him, would much rather have a rotary :D

I got my Chevy at dealer invoice because my grandfather was a retired GM employee. Most of my Dad's family drives GM vehicles for that reason.

My grandfather passed away a year ago, though... and now that we have to bargain against MSRP like everyone else, the family is moving on to other brands.

Motor Trend test data

_________________ 0-100mph _____ 0 – ¼ mile


2004 Pontiac GTO ____ 13.1 s ____ 13.6s @ 104.8mph


The GTO accelerates like an Audi S4.

The Motor Trend test car had four-season tires. The test numbers would be better with high performance tires.

Report: December issue Motor Trend (p.54)

Too heavy!


That 1/4 mile time seems to be a bit too fast based on the 0-60 time.

it looks like a stretched chevy cavalier. very boring design.

Pontiac needs a good kick in the pants....I doubt this is it, but at least I don't date that bit*h with the firebird any more!

Originally posted by revhappy
Too heavy!


That 1/4 mile time seems to be a bit too fast based on the 0-60 time.

That's not a 0-60mph time, it's a 0-100mph time. Seems to fit in rather well with the 1/4 mile time, actually. Since it came from a mag, I'm willing to bet that that time is what they actually got. Whether or not it's the actual limit of the car remains to be seen...

I wonder why they didn't at least make the body cladding look more like the original GTO.

The GTO has the same problem with trunk space as the RX-8....room for a couple golf bags.....because GM had to move the gas tank INTO the trunk to prevent it from becoming a fireball in rear-end collisions. Also, there's a good review of the GTO in this the current issue of Car and Driver.

Agghh!!! I am so sick of companies trying to make money off the good 'ole classics.

Chevy Impala
Chevy Monte Carlo
Chevy Malibu
Ford Thunderbird
Pontiac GTO
Etc,, Etc,, Etc.....

Next thing you know they will make a malibu longer and change the front and call it a Nova,,,Geez

Bring on the new cars, but don't try to resurrect the dead with something that doesn't even begin to do a classic justice.

Originally posted by IWANTMYRX8
Agghh!!! I am so sick of companies trying to make money off the good 'ole classics.

Chevy Impala


The resurrection of the Impala in the mid '90s was well received and the current iteration is generally blasted by critics.

On the other hand, the current version is selling well, while the other one had to be canned for lack of sales. It isn't exciting, but it is much more practical than its much beloved predecessor, and sometimes that's what is important.

The worst part was what were they thinking when they relocated the fuel tank to the inside of the trunk! It resides over the rear axle, directly behind the rear seat and takes up all the space under the rear window! WTF. :eek:

They claim that they did this to keep the car from turning into a fire ball ala Ford Pinto!

The December edition of AutomobileMagazine (automobilemag.com) had a review of the new GTO, and they were very impressed.

They think it's a huge improvement over the Camaro/Firebird (although of course that doesn't take much).

The resurrection of the Impala in the mid '90s was well received and the current iteration is generally blasted by critics.

On the other hand, the current version is selling well, while the other one had to be canned for lack of sales. It isn't exciting, but it is much more practical than its much beloved predecessor, and sometimes that's what is important.


We can't get a new-gen impala comment past you, can we? :P

Originally posted by blizz81
We can't get a new-gen impala comment past you, can we? :P

Nope :p

I get defensive easily, sorry.

Originally posted by RX8Lover
it looks like a stretched chevy cavalier. very boring design.

Ditto

Actually other than the bland exterior, I thought it was rather cool, I thought the interior was well done, especially the two tone interior. I am curious what the options are going to be, there isn't a lot of information out yet in regards to pricing and options.

My first choice is still the 2004 Ford Mustang Mach 1, and the 350z and the GTO as second and third choices.

350 hp, corvette engine, nice ehaust note, 4 seater, cool looking interior and guages - not a bad deal. A little heavy and a bland exterior but see what happens as its release date approaches.

From the Motor Trend review it seems more like a Euro 2+2 than an American muscle car. Very fast, but gets you there in comfort. Seems like well executed, although somewhat boring car that is very un-American.

Originally posted by cueball1029
From the Motor Trend review it seems more like a Euro 2+2 than an American muscle car. Very fast, but gets you there in comfort. Seems like well executed, although somewhat boring car that is very un-American.

Kinda the reason why the Mach 1 is my first choice. It's a modern muscle car. Nothing more, nothing less.

I am happy you noted MT and not C & D. I remember watching C&D TV about the Mach 1 and gape jawed cause of how much of what they said was completely wrong and stupid. "The Mach 1 is the first Mustang, maybe the second, to feature an independant rear suspension." Sorry it has a live axle and nowhere does it have IRS and no it doesn't use the engine from the 1995 Cobra - idiots.

Car&Driver test data

___________ 5-60mph __ 0-100mph ____ 0 – ¼ mile ____ EPA hwy

2004
Pontiac GTO __ 5.8 s _____ 13.4 s ____14.0s @ 102mph __ 28 mpg


Report: December issue Car&Driver (p.54)

Tire upgrade is a must for GTO owners.
The GTO is ideal for folks who spend a lot of time on the highway.

Road&Track test data

________________ 0-100mph _____ 0- ¼ mile


2004 Pontiac GTO ___ 12.9 s ____ 13.8s @ 103.8mph

Still an american car. Still a Pontiac. Still a dog.

Try searching for aticles and pictures of the GTO interior, its far from boring. Again this GTO should not be compared with sport cars. Nothing against RX8 (love the car) but ill use it as an example. RX8 is light, smaller engine = fast, GTO is heavy, bigger engine = fast. Australians love heavy cars, why, comfortable for long distance driving, tow a caravan or a boat, rough roads, and better stability. The wieght for the monaro therefore serves a purpose with stronger suspension, and stronger body.

For me I've never seen a mustange tow a boat but ive seen plenty of monaros towing them.

I am wondering how those gauges will look at night, very few photos out there of the GTO. I am very impressed with what I been reading so far, very positive reviews. So many impressive cars out, so hard to decide.

it looks like a neon...

Ive seen neons and monaro side by side, nothing like each other, try another comparison mate. If your comparing the interior of the GTO with a neon, again nothing, totally different.

I've also read the reviews of the GTO in one of those magazines and they all seem to love the performance and overall feel of the car (much like the 8) I remember they wrote in the WHATS HOT section "just freakin' everything!!" ... I can quote the whole thing for you guys when I get home if you want.

1. I totally agree with all the exterior haters... I think the grill is SICK!! (New version of the old Goat grill) But that's about it. It needs some lines, curves, character, anything!!!

2. K please don't yell at me... but my dad had a '03 GTP (supercharged grand prix) and I really didn't mind the interior at all. So, I'm a real big fan of the GTO interior without the 2 tone. So I like the one in the picture.

3. The engine is sick!! And if you all havent been to the Pontiac site and listen to the GTO exhaust revving up and watch the 0-60 clip shown by a view of the instruments (if that makes sense) then you all should... It's amazing.... I think.

Well, just thought I'd throw that in.

Brit

Originally posted by --Z--
Still an american car. Still a Pontiac. Still a dog.

Interesting. They are made in Adelaide, South Australia. They looked a lot nicer in original Monaro form, but butchered it with the GTO. The GTO Engine covers look nicer than the Holden ones. Sort of thought about the Monaro when I got the '8, but I was getting out of the 4 door version of the same thing anyway. Very easy and cheep to get 300+ kW out of them (about 400 HP) at the flywheel.

From experience: The "lesser" powered Monaro will lose out to an RX-8 on the strip in 60' time, and also to about 1/3 - 1/2 track distance - then they just drive straight by ya'. Low 14's dead stock. But they don't handle anywhere near as good as the RX-8, the brakes fade easily on the circuit, and the power-steering boils over with heavy track work, unless a cooler is fitted.

But a nice ballsey car all the same.

Cheers,
Hymee.

Hymee-

Were you talking about the GTO or the Manaro that had bad brakes and all of that stuff?

Just wondering... I was a little confused.

But, if you are talking about the Manaro... isn't the GTO a completely different car due to the motor and the performance parts even if it shares the same platform and/or body style?

Thanks,

Brit

You know, now that I look at the picture Supercharger posted at the beginning of this thread, the grill on the GTO (which I like) looks a whole lot like the grill on the Evo VII!

Actually, now that I think about it. I think I read something about Mitsubishi doing that on purpose. Or it just happened to look like that.

Just an observation!!

Brit

Whats the big deal...the Ram Air T/A looked a LOT better than this New GTO, had the LS1, ran 13.8 sec. 1/4 and 5.5 sec. 0-60.
These are real times from my 2000 T/A completely stock. And it cost LESS than the GTO! Hope they bring the Firebird/Camaro back!

Brit,

As far as I know, the GTO and the Monaro are exactly the same except for a few cosmetic things, and the uprated power. (And of course the repositioned fuel tank.) And the Monaro and the Commodore (the 4 door sedan on which the monaro is based) share exactly the same running gear. The Monaro handles a little better as it is a bit stiffer, and you sit slightly lower.

But I must be honest and say I have not looked at the brake specs on the GTO to compare. It is common here for the guys to upgrade their brakes with some slotted rotors, and some EBC Greenstuff pads along with a better brake fluid. That said, there isn't really anything wrong with the brakes for most driving situations, apart from the circuit.

Hope this can clarify the confusion.

Cheers,
Hymee.

Originally posted by Werth_lots
Whats the big deal...the Ram Air T/A looked a LOT better than this New GTO, had the LS1, ran 13.8 sec. 1/4 and 5.5 sec. 0-60.
These are real times from my 2000 T/A completely stock. And it cost LESS than the GTO! Hope they bring the Firebird/Camaro back!

The GTO is supposed to have more interior space, better visibility, better handling, a nicer interior, and superior reliability. If your 2000 Trans Am ran great, more power to you - but in general the model (and the Camaro) had serious reliability issues.

The GTO is a luxury coupe whereas the Transam was an out and out sports car. But performance wise the GTO can hold its own with sports cars; comfort wise it's also comparable to any other coupe in its price range. The Trans am may have performance but it wasn't a luxury car with a 350 HP motor for $30K.

Wow, I don't understand why it is so conservative looking. I guess I am not in thier target audience, I wonder what demographic that appeals too.

Funny, I still think that the new GTO design is more of what the Grand Prix should have looked like instead of what was done. My wife had a Grand Prix the year they changed to the previous body style. Back then the styling was nice but the interior...plastic city.

Sorry but after my experience with GM and Ford (even though they own Mazda), I will never have another car produced by either...no quality and blah interiors.

Originally posted by rjenk
Sorry but after my experience with GM and Ford (even though they own Mazda), I will never have another car produced by either...no quality and blah interiors.

According to Consumer Reports and JD Powers GM has almost caught up with Toyota (the industry leader) in reliability. So if a GM model strikes you fancy, bad reliability is not necessarily guaranteed.

On the other hand, most of the auto review magazines and websites agree with you that Ford and GM use cheap interior materials.

Originally posted by FamilyGuy
The GTO is supposed to have more interior space, better visibility, better handling, a nicer interior, and superior reliability. If your 2000 Trans Am ran great, more power to you - but in general the model (and the Camaro) had serious reliability issues.

The GTO most definitely does not have better handling than the F-bodies, but it's interior design and space blows them away. Anything powertrain oriented in the F-bodies (engine, clutch, tranny) were pretty much bullet proof, it was the little things that broke on them (power windows, squeaks and rattles galore). That's why they cost so little in comparison to the performance that you can get out of them, they were pretty much just cheap shells thrown around a good engine and suspension. The GTO costs more because it's nicer, roomier, and more comfortable as well as having all of the "little things" done right.

its horrid. It looks like a BEEFED up cavalier. haha im glad my 35k went to the 8

CM

Originally posted by CriticalMass
its horrid. It looks like a BEEFED up cavalier. haha im glad my 35k went to the 8

CM


Can't agree more. Just viewed yesterday at the SD Auto show and was really hopeing the "real" thing looked better in the flesh, to my dismay, it did not - very very plain looking and in my opinion a disgrace to the GTO badge (in appearence). The real star of the show (largest crowds) was around the new Ford GT, simply awesome looking.

While I agree that there are great things about the new GTO, I cannot get past the depressing look of the car. The real GTOs were mean looking and just plain awesome. I think Pontiac has missed the mark on the aesthetic looks that should go with this car's heritage. The guage cluster is nice, but it is the only thing in the interior I saw worth commenting on. This looks like a beefed up Sunfire to me and nothing more. But hey for my opinion, it makes my 8 look so much better...:D

You guys all still need to hear the clip of the GTO running that is up on the Pontiac site.

Everyone talks about how ugly and worthless the car looks which I completely agree with... but you all need to hear the clip anyways cause it sound so damb awesome!

So everyone go check it out... it even shows the car accelerating on the dials and the speedo!

In another forum we were discussing it. The original GTO was a special trim of the Pontiac Le Mans.

GM should have taken the GTO, ripped out the LS1, dropped in the supercharged V6 from the Bonneville (260 horsepower, 280 torque), named it the Le Mans, and sold it for less than $25K as a competitor to the Mustang GT. Then, when they had a decent appearance package to go with the V8, put it together and call it the GTO.

I've seen a lot of old POS cars that sound great, but look butt ugly and I'm just as impressed with them as I am the new goat. Either way it has to look the part and this style does not IMHO. They had an awesome looking Trans Am when they decided to kill it along with the Firebird, so how can they think that this body is the way to go?

The old gto were good cars, but were not exceptionally different from other cars of its day i.e. 1969 Pontiac LeMans= 1969 Pontiac GTO= 1969 Pontiac Bonneville. What made the old pontiac gto a legend was its power, not its bland looks.

The new GTO (monaro) have always been a muscle car, ppl ignore comments such as "the gto has no muscle car heritage". The monaro is a name synonymous with muscle in Australia, ever since the 70's. However Australian muscle were a blend of American power and European handling. The best muscle cars were in fact from Australia (monaro and gtho phase 3 and 4).

As for the value of the new gto, name another car (brand new) with interior and handling dynamics like those offered in bmw's and mb, with the power of a vette, and with usable and comfortable seating (for 31-33K). CAN’T THINK OF ANY?
:D :D :D :D :D :D

What's not to like about the GTO? LS1 soul, sexy Morona body (much preferred then classic Pontiac designs, they never looked wide enough), obvious euro interior influence, 4 seats, haul's ass. It does everything it was designed to do very well. Looks and sounds like a winner to me.

I see this a step down from the CTSv, in a good way.

Originally posted by monaroCountry
As for the value of the new gto, name another car (brand new) with interior and handling dynamics like those offered in bmw's and mb, with the power of a vette, and with usable and comfortable seating (for 31-33K). CAN’T THINK OF ANY?
:D :D :D :D :D :D

How good is the interior and the sound system? It will be that, and to a lesser extent the crash protection and reliability, that will determine this car.

I mean, you can get something just as fast with the Evo or the WRX STI. Those are also AWD. So the GTO will have to offer a significantly better interior in order to be worth the extra few $K over either of those.

(Granted, most fans of big V8 sports cars do not cross shop with turbocharged 4 cylinders and vice versa.)

why did you link a picture of a grand am?

I dont know why Pontiac would drop a car like the Firebird and make a car like the GTO. I mean, come on, atleast the Firebird looked like a real sports car! The GTO looks just like the Grand Prix/Grand Am. I dunno...good thing the GM family discount now applies towards Ford, which in turn gets me a discount on Mazda too... :D Cause the only NEW GM car that I would consider is the Corvette, but thats just a little too much.

I thought about a GTO. But my wife hated the way it looked, and both of us loved everything about the 8. I'm happy I got the 8, the better car.

PUSH RODS.........like Nascar....Yuuuuuuuuck

Originally posted by Baller
PUSH RODS.........like Nascar....Yuuuuuuuuck

what's wrong with push rod?

Originally posted by visitor
what's wrong with push rod?

I'm under the impression that OHC is considered more efficient and easier to engineer for performance applications. OHV is prevalent, but that's largely because it has momentum from being around for so long. They can re-use old parts, most existing mechanics know how to work with it, they don't have to change manufacturing setups, etc...

Originally posted by FamilyGuy
I'm under the impression that OHC is considered more efficient and easier to engineer for performance applications. OHV is prevalent, but that's largely because it has momentum from being around for so long. They can re-use old parts, most existing mechanics know how to work with it, they don't have to change manufacturing setups, etc...

Read..cheaper,
Only nascar uses push rod engines........

OHV=overhead valve= Nascar
SOHC= single overhead cam=better
DOHC=double overhead cam=better yet
Wankel rotary=no valves or cams=best

ya Baller, i used to be ignorant too.

actually the invention of the pushrod engine (the Chevy small block, which at the time replaced the old POS "Stovebolt" straight 6) was a real feat, and outclassed just about everything made in America, most notably the Ford Flathead V8.

the advantages of the under-head-cam, pushrod configuration: can have enormous displacement in a small & light engine and low centre of gravity (in comparison to overhead cam V8's).

the Chev 5.7L is a good couple of hundred pounds lighter than the Ford 4.6L (the DOHC motor), makes more power, and is a few inches overall shorter.

F1 rules the planet, but F1 isn't DOHC. F1 is also an unreality... hundreds of millions of dollars to go around in circles (hmmm... circles?? oh yeah, like Nascar, but with a few other bends in it... :p).
stop trying to pretend like you know better when you don't.

and just for the record, i'm not a muscle guy, my favourite engine configurations are the bi-rotor wankel, and the DOHC straight six (like the original Testa Rossa 3.0L, BMW's M3 motor, RB26DETT, etc).

for those who feel like whipping out that completely useless "hp/cc or hp/ci" metric, i'll say "shut it and show me hp/lb of engine, or hp/cubic foot of engine".
you can do a whole lot worse than a pushrod V8.


to bring this thread back on-topic, the GTO is a whale. it's not a sports car, it's just a big, boring, frumpy sedan with (ooooo!! :o) Corvette power under the hood. that's it. (note: the stick is a top-model OPTION)

Originally posted by wakeech
ya Baller, i used to be ignorant too.


... hundreds of millions of dollars to go around in circles (hmmm... circles?? oh yeah, like Nascar, but with a few other bends in it... :p).
OPTION)

F1 does not go around in circles my friend...and it does rule the planet.....check out

WWW.f1.com

Originally posted by Baller
F1 does not go around in circles my friend...and it does rule the planet.....check out

WWW.f1.com

uh, yeah... guy, i used to handicap on my friend's betting site for F1... i only got the final two races of '02 done for him before the site lost popularity, but i may pick that up again for this year (seems to have had a resurgance).

and all racing is just goin' around in circles... being that i seriously plan to have a career seated in racing or high performance tuning, don't take that to mean that i don't like racing.

F1 is my favourite, but i'm saying, just because it's the most expensive doesn't mean you have to be a snob about less expensive forms of racing... it's all legitimate.

Originally posted by wakeech
for those who feel like whipping out that completely useless "hp/cc or hp/ci" metric, i'll say "shut it and show me hp/lb of engine, or hp/cubic foot of engine".
you can do a whole lot worse than a pushrod V8.


to bring this thread back on-topic, the GTO is a whale. it's not a sports car, it's just a big, boring, frumpy sedan with (ooooo!! :o) Corvette power under the hood. that's it. (note: the stick is a top-model OPTION)

Hmmm... a few months back, I started a thread here asking why anyone uses Pushrod when DOHC is available. That section of your post is the best answer I've heard. I'm curious... why doesn't anyone use a pushrod V12 for the better balance?

The stick is technically an expensive option, but in the US if you get the 4 speed auto its poor gas mileage gets you a $2,000 gas guzzler tax. In reality, it's cheaper to get the manual.

We've been over this in the thread before. Supposedly this car will have better interior materials, more interior space, an almost useful back seat, handling as least as good as the Camaro, and at least average reliability. All of those add up to something at least worth consideration as a Mustang alternative. Me? I'd take one.... right after I got my RX8, my Elise, and my 2005 Mustang GT :D.

Originally posted by FamilyGuy
Hmmm... a few months back, I started a thread here asking why anyone uses Pushrod when DOHC is available. That section of your post is the best answer I've heard. I'm curious... why doesn't anyone use a pushrod V12 for the better balance?

i have no idea. they like eight cylinder motors. i guess dimentionally the motor would either be too big (in length) or too small (in displacement) to be what they're looking for...??

also, that lumpy, lopey idle which is characteristic of the impalance naturally found in a V8 is something that muscle people like anyways...

Originally posted by wakeech
also, that lumpy, lopey idle which is characteristic of the impalance naturally found in a V8 is something that muscle people like anyways...

Oh, I can sympathize with that. The sound is music to my ears. But while I would miss it, I personally would much rather have something that's smoother and more efficient.

wakeech I agree...........

Everyone keeps talking about how inefficient the GTO is - doesn't it get better gas mileage than the RX-8, despite weighing a whole lot more? I mean, I like the RX-8 more than the GTO, but the GTO gets 29 MPG on the highway. That's pretty impressive.

I just read a review of the GTO in some Pontiac magazine of the rack and I'm pretty sure I read that it gets 18 mpg city driving... so that shouldn't relate to 29 mpg highway.

Oh BTW... the reviewer loved the performance of the new goat... and also loved the fit and finish of the interior. The only negative thing he had to say about the car was once again the styling.

However, I've been lurking on newagegto.com and those guys are saying that they're gonna change the styling pretty dramatically in the next model year. So we've got that to look forward to!!

EPA Mileage Estimates: (City/Highway)
Manual: 17 mpg / 29 mpg
Automatic: : 16 mpg / 21 mpg


http://www.edmunds.com/new/2004/pontiac/gto/100369148/specs.html?tid=edmunds.n.prices.moreresearch.0.3.P ontiac*

The low 6th gear allows for very low RPM highway cruising. That's why the 4-speed auto doesn't have the same mileage. Who wants to drive an auto anyway?

Originally posted by Strom
Who wants to drive an auto anyway?

Someone who drives a high horsepower car and wants consecutive numbers on the 1/4 mile. BTW... the only difference between the manual and the auto is a .1 of a second and obviously the bad gas mileage. But, isn't that around the the gas mileage the RX-8 owners are seeing? I've read the auto runs the 1/4 in the high 13's, I'd only get the manual with the GTO if the gas mileage bothered me enough. Going with the manual GTO will get you that skip-shift feature that seems to be driving a lot of the manual owners nuts right now. I've noticed that the manual vs auto seems to bother import owners a lot more than high horsepower domestics.

Btw for those of you who are doubting the performance of the GTO, a bone stock GTO will kill a RX-8, 350Z, and a G35 coupe. The GTO uses a LS! engine which was used in the C5 corvette, there are tuners like Lingenfelter Performance who have pumped that engine to put out 650 - 800+ hp, I am just waiting until that technology is put into the GTO - according to Lingenfelter, that should coming out this year.

- Mike

Originally posted by FamilyGuy
How good is the interior and the sound system? It will be that, and to a lesser extent the crash protection and reliability, that will determine this car.

I mean, you can get something just as fast with the Evo or the WRX STI. Those are also AWD. So the GTO will have to offer a significantly better interior in order to be worth the extra few $K over either of those.

(Granted, most fans of big V8 sports cars do not cross shop with turbocharged 4 cylinders and vice versa.)

A V8 fan would never ever think of driving a tarded up 4 cylinder. Also I'd take a GTO over either a Evo or STi, the GTO has cleaner lines and a more mature look IMHO. The GTO will be more confortable, better looking, and down right better sounding. But then again, your getting these opinions here from a V8 fan - :D
Getting a V8 fan to go out and buy something like an Evo or STi, would be a harder sell than having a religious diehard changing religions.

- Mike

Originally posted by GodWhomIsMike
A V8 fan would never ever think of driving a tarded up 4 cylinder. Also I'd take a GTO over either a Evo or STi, the GTO has cleaner lines and a more mature look IMHO. The GTO will be more confortable, better looking, and down right better sounding. But then again, your getting these opinions here from a V8 fan - :D
Getting a V8 fan to go out and buy something like an Evo or STi, would be a harder sell than having a religious diehard changing religions.

- Mike

I'm not in the market for a performance car, because I don't have the cash. If I was, I would be one of the people that wouldn't care what the engine was, as long as the car was comfortable and delivered wicked performance. Doesn't matter if it's a turbo 4, an inline 6, a V8, or a Wankel, as long as it's quick. I guess there aren't that many buyers like that.

V8 engines do sound better than anything else though.

I think i would rather have a corvette than a $10k tuned up GTO. On the GTO the styling is just plain ugly, the interior is nice but not on par w/ bmw, does not have corvette power (it is tuned down), and yes it may b fast, but i think if i was given mayb $2k in aftermarket to even costs my 8 could beat it around a track and possibly in the 1/4 mile.

Originally posted by Rotarian_SC
I think i would rather have a corvette than a $10k tuned up GTO. On the GTO the styling is just plain ugly, the interior is nice but not on par w/ bmw, does not have corvette power (it is tuned down), and yes it may b fast, but i think if i was given mayb $2k in aftermarket to even costs my 8 could beat it around a track and possibly in the 1/4 mile.

The GTO does have Corvette power from the standard C5 Corvette: 350 peak horsepower, 365 ft*lbs peak torque. It lags behind the Corvette Z06, but the Z06 is a $52,000 car.

The interior is not on par with BMW, but if you want a BMW with equivalent performance you will have to get an M3 - which costs a hell of a lot more. A $35,000 BMW 318 or 325 couldn't possibly keep pace with the GTO.

In the quarter mile or on a track, if you want to beat the GTO you could probably do it with an Lancer Evolution or WRX STI, and spend less money too. The GTO is not the best bang for your buck performance car.

When you buy a Pontiac GTO, you're buying a luxury car that can hold its own with a Nissan 350Z on the track for about the same price. When you buy a Impreza or Lancer, you're buying an economy car that can beat a 350Z on the track for about the same price.

If you want luxury, go GTO.

IMO, here is how the GTO should have looked.

http://hp-car.com/2005.html

IMO, here is how the GTO should have looked.

This is the car that some college student produced as a concept for the "future" camaro. I agree that it does look awesome. Looks alot better than the 05 retro-Mustang. One car that does look great and has some serious power is the SS Concept by Chevrolet. Nice design, 430 hp, pricing was around 30-40k...we'll have to wait and see

This car stinks, even with its gas tank in the rear most position, the weight distribution is still 55/45. The US version has the gas tank raised and moved forward (bad for Cg, in both counts) The car has struts up front with trailing link steering and the rear has 1 semi-trailing arm and toe control link per side. Yuck. If this car had a modern (non obsolete) rear suspension, then the gas tank could be positioned under the rear seats and there would be room for decent sized mufflers in back flanking the full size spare wheel. And then the rear seats could fold too.
Try driving up Pike's Peak in this and an EVO (or anything else turbocharged)
If you live where the air pressure isn't 90% or better than sea level, then forced induction really helps out.

I sell this car everyday here in Australia while it is badged as a Monaro, fun to drive, but have the quality and ergonomics of a car originally designed over 7 years ago.

Okay for the average joe but not to the standards of Jap or Euro buyers of hi-po coupes.

Monaro is to us Aussies what the Mustang is to you Yanks... it's a trip down nostalgia lane to the glory days when muscle and cubic inches ruled the world.

Therefore I can understand it being badged a GTO. It's simply aimed at the heartstrings of baby boomers who want to relive a small part of their childhood.

Not the worse car on the planet, but nowhere near the best either.
I'll take my "Jap-Crap" cars any day. :)

If I wasn't in an RX-8 I would be in a Monaro, no questions. Or the 4-door version.

I said it pleny of times on the LS1 forum, so I may as well say it here - my 2 favourite engines are V8's and Rotary's.

Cheers,
Hymee.

i dont know about everyone else....but i am glad to see manufacturers looking into the future instead of living in the past...the new GTO looks, sounds, and performs amazingly....people need to stop criticizing such a great car:cool:

Well said, Doug!

Originally posted by Doug McGill Jr.
i dont know about everyone else....but i am glad to see manufacturers looking into the future instead of living in the past...the new GTO looks, sounds, and performs amazingly....people need to stop criticizing such a great car:cool:

Well, the thing is that GM resurrected the GTO nameplate for the car.

If GM called this thing something else, I don't know that anyone would complain about it. But they didn't do that, they brought back an old name plate and put it on a car that isn't connected to the legacy of the older car with that name in many ways at all.

Originally posted by Baller
Push-rods=GM=shit
LS1=Pushrod=one of the best engine out there.

Almost all LS1s put down 300+ WHP out of the factory. Just exhaust and headers will yield 35 HP. It is a compact, lightweight, and fuel efficent engine.

It's funny... car is built... and everyone says nagative shyt about the car.. think postive and screw the negative...

Originally posted by rx-7~rx-8
It's funny... car is built... and everyone says nagative shyt about the car.. think postive and screw the negative...

I would if the car was built with quality....but it is not, it is another GM product with a rubber-maid interior and inferior fit and finish, coupled with 60 year old engine designs and styling that looks like a over-grown Neon.

Originally posted by Baller
Push-rods=GM=shit

GM uses pushrod V6s in most of their sedans. They have the same reliability, performance, and gas mileage of engines of comparable power outputs from other automakers. What's the problem?

It's an old tech, but so is the wheel. It would be different if GM cars with pushrod engines had engine problems more ofen - but they don't. It would be a problem if they got bad gas mileage - but they don't. It would be a problem if they had poor performance - but they don't. Oh, a pushrod engine has to have larger cylinder displacement than a DOHC engine to get the same power output, but since the total engine weight is comparable because of the pushrod's smaller and lighter valvetrain the difference is meaningless.

My 3400 pound Impala with the 180 horsepower and 205 torque 3.4 liter pushrod V6 gets 24 mpg city, 30 mpg highway. That's pretty good.

Originally posted by FamilyGuy
GM uses pushrod V6s in most of their sedans. They have the same reliability, performance, and gas mileage of engines of comparable power outputs from other automakers. What's the problem?

It's an old tech, but so is the wheel. It would be different if GM cars with pushrod engines had engine problems more ofen - but they don't. My 3400 pound Impala with the 180 horsepower and 205 torque 3.4 liter pushrod V6 gets 24 mpg city, 30 mpg highway. That's pretty good.

actually, what i've found out watching tv shows about classic cars (and remmebering dates) is that DOHC motors were being built in europe (for race cars) well before the first Chevy small block V8.

and as for your claimed performance on that Impala, a girl i dated about uh.... a year and a half ago had one as a courtesy car while her other one was in the shop (oh, the fun that can be had in a canyonous back seat:)), and just drank gas like there was a hole in the tank...

Originally posted by Baller
I would if the car was built with quality....but it is not, it is another GM product with a rubber-maid interior and inferior fit and finish, coupled with 60 year old engine designs and styling that looks like a over-grown Neon.
The car actually has Monaro quality, which, according to the magazines is quite good. In fact, they say it is the best appointed car to come out of Chevy and most of GM. The seats are suposed to be amazing and the leather, very good. As for the styling, I'll agree with you that it is rather bland.

I cant wait to race a GTO at the drag strip, its really gonna FUNNY.

Originally posted by FamilyGuy
GM uses pushrod V6s in most of their sedans. They have the same reliability, performance, and gas mileage of engines of comparable power outputs from other automakers. What's the problem?

It's an old tech, but so is the wheel. It would be different if GM cars with pushrod engines had engine problems more ofen - but they don't. It would be a problem if they got bad gas mileage - but they don't. It would be a problem if they had poor performance - but they don't. Oh, a pushrod engine has to have larger cylinder displacement than a DOHC engine to get the same power output, but since the total engine weight is comparable because of the pushrod's smaller and lighter valvetrain the difference is meaningless.

My 3400 pound Impala with the 180 horsepower and 205 torque 3.4 liter pushrod V6 gets 24 mpg city, 30 mpg highway. That's pretty good.

21/32, and GM is still lying with those numbers. Seeing as the grand am (that uses the 4t45 instead of 4t65) get 20/29. but the gearing is taller, so maybe 20/30 is realistic with the 3400.

Originally posted by wakeech
and as for your claimed performance on that Impala, a girl i dated about uh.... a year and a half ago had one as a courtesy car while her other one was in the shop (oh, the fun that can be had in a canyonous back seat:)), and just drank gas like there was a hole in the tank...

Honest - I've never gotten under 24 mpg. I've only gotten above 30 once, but I can get 28 or 30 on the longer trips.

On the other hand, it won't be paid off for another two and a half years and it doesn't have a tachometer so I can only guess at the RPMs. I can afford to replace it if it falls apart, but I'd rather save my money for my midlife crisis car :D. I don't push the car very hard at all.

Maybe the loaner you got was poorly tuned. Maybe your girlfriend took advantage of the fact it was a loaner car and floored it at every stoplight :).

Originally posted by MikeW
21/32, and GM is still lying with those numbers. Seeing as the grand am (that uses the 4t45 instead of 4t65) get 20/29. but the gearing is taller, so maybe 20/30 is realistic with the 3400.

The gearing is taller. I test drove the 2001 Malibu before I bought the Impala. The Malibu felt faster, but the back seat was too small and the crash test rating was poor.

Originally posted by zerobanger
I cant wait to race a GTO at the drag strip, its really gonna FUNNY.

Mmm - it will be f@cken funny alright, and you will be on the receiving end.

You talking stock v's stock?

The stock LS1 powered Monaro's and Commodore's (the sedan) will just crack a 13 second quarter, if they are very lucky.

These are detuned compared to the LS1 they put in the GTO.

I have had plenty of races with my mates and their LS1's. In fact I was a ring in in my '8 at a private LS1 day.

The RX-8 will get a better 60', and might even win the race to 1/3 or 1/2 track distance, then the power of the V8 will just drive staight by you. I know. I have experienced it. And I have been an LS1 owner as well.

Push-rods=GM=shit

Why is pushrod = old technology? I have pictures of DOHC engines from WWII aircraft. Does that mean DOHC is old technology as well??

Get a grip. Exotic does not mean reliable. We have a 24 hour race here that the Monaro (albeit with a 427 CID version) has won the last couple of years. Most of the exotic competitive Ferraris and Lambo's etc. break and drop out - often early on.

The build quality of the GTO and the other Holdens is very good. They are very comfortable and enjoyable cars to drive. Speaking from experience, here.

Cheers,
Hymee.

pure shit

Now how can I argue with such a well-reasoned, descriptive, insightful criticism? I'm dazzled by your eloquence.

Baller,

I never said all the GM products are good. I never said the fit/finish/interior was world class, but I did say the build quality of the Australian built Holden products, such as the GTO, is very good.

Outback?? Try not to get personal, mate. I gave an objective view, based on actual experiences. I don't think ownership of a primarily military vehicle is representitive of GM products. You categorize all GM vehicles based on your bad experience with one vehicle that is totally unrelated to the vehicles in question. GM has lots of brands, built in many different factories in different parts of the world.

Are you going to say all cars that use metal chassis and body panels are crap just because F1 uses carbon fibre? I'll be immature for one moment, and suggest that F1 cars are not even street legal or roadworthy. Your comparison is flawed.

Cheers,
Hymee.

Originally posted by Baller
Formula 1 engines have not used push-rods forvever.....pushrods are cheap and so are GM products (junk).

edit: I went and looked at the the GTO and was very surprized on how well made the interior was (perhaps the best effort for GM thus far)....the rest of the car however was pure shit.

Why would you use F1 cars as an example of technology. Production autos are much more advanced than any race autos. If you don't know this then you don't know jack squat about autos.

If the GTO engine sucks so bad then I wonder why the new LS2 engine has a significant specific power to weight advantage over the Mazda Renesis? Or why are there so many peeps replacing their blown 50,000 mile FD RX-7 engines with LS-1 engines? Or why the 400 hp LS-2 engine is more fuel efficient than any other 400 hp engine in the world? I really hate to see how the new Z06 engine will compete in about 18 months.

First of all because of the compromises used to make the Renesis. Remember they scaled it down from what it could be to make the car more conservative. I wonder if a titanium and ceramic tri rotor turbo Renesis would stack up against an LS-1 or 2. That would make it a bit more expensive, because the Renisis has a low cost of labor, that is an advantage of the rotary engine. I don't know anybody w/ a FD RX7 that has replaced their rotary w/ a LS1. The tuneability and fun is what makes the RX7 better than a corvette, IMO. As of the LS engines they are some of the best engines ever made, I give the car props for that. But i don't care how good the engine is when the transmission goes on me 3 times as on a previous gm car. It only lasted 50k mi. The expensive repairs were more expensive than just buying a new reliable car. Oh yeah well the GTO is vintage muscle car, it only goes strait. I think that it has a solid rear axel even ;). Well lets just say that the suspension is extremely obsolete. Give me the price difference a coumparably equipped 8 and GTO and i will b able 2 make the 8 faster.

Originally posted by Hymee
Baller,

I never said all the GM products are good. I never said the fit/finish/interior was world class, but I did say the build quality of the Australian built Holden products, such as the GTO, is very good.

Outback?? Try not to get personal, mate. I gave an objective view, based on actual experiences. I don't think ownership of a primarily military vehicle is representitive of GM products. You categorize all GM vehicles based on your bad experience with one vehicle that is totally unrelated to the vehicles in question. GM has lots of brands, built in many different factories in different parts of the world.

Are you going to say all cars that use metal chassis and body panels are crap just because F1 uses carbon fibre? I'll be immature for one moment, and suggest that F1 cars are not even street legal or roadworthy. Your comparison is flawed.

Cheers,
Hymee.

Take it easy Hymee,
I'm just jacking ya.

Originally posted by babylou
Why would you use F1 cars as an example of technology. Production autos are much more advanced than any race autos. If you don't know this then you don't know jack squat about autos.

If the GTO engine sucks so bad then I wonder why the new LS2 engine has a significant specific power to weight advantage over the Mazda Renesis? Or why are there so many peeps replacing their blown 50,000 mile FD RX-7 engines with LS-1 engines? Or why the 400 hp LS-2 engine is more fuel efficient than any other 400 hp engine in the world? I really hate to see how the new Z06 engine will compete in about 18 months.

Hey Baby..........
WTF........production autos are more advanced than F1...I think not

Originally posted by Baller

WTF........production autos are more advanced than F1,,,,are you out of your Fuc*ing mind.....
I thought they had schools in Houston.

take it easy there Baller, you're losing here big. watch how you tread, stop being so hostile.

fwiw, it's true that production automobiles are far more advanced.

Originally posted by wakeech
take it easy there Baller, you're losing here big. watch how you tread, stop being so hostile.

fwiw, it's true that production automobiles are far more advanced.


F1 cars are the most advanced in the world period.......

Originally posted by Rotarian_SC
I think that it has a solid rear axel even ;). Well lets just say that the suspension is extremely obsolete. Give me the price difference a comparably equipped 8 and GTO and i will b able 2 make the 8 faster.

While I agree it is not state of the art, the Holden Commodore, Monaro and the Pontiac GTO all share the same independant rear end.

Some of my mates have 11s LS1 powered VX & VU Commodores, and I have not got under a 15.0s run in the '8. Admittedly I might not know how to drive :) Hehehe. Considering the base car costs between 35 - 50k, and the RX-8 costs 60k here, then they already have a start. Granted, these are cars spec'ed lower then the GTO. The closest GTO equivalent here (Which is a HSV GTO Coupe, BTW) is 80k.

Some pics:

Holden Commodore SS:
http://www.holden.com.au//images/uploads/vy_gallery/img_ss_05.jpg

Holden Monaro:
http://www.holden.com.au//images/uploads/gallery_images/monaro/Monaro_yellow.jpg

HSV GTO Coupe:
http://www.hsv.com.au/images/cars/vy2/coupe3le/images/image6.jpg

BTW - How much does a RX-8 and a GTO cost Stateside?

Cheers,
Hymee.

Originally posted by Hymee
Considering the base car costs between 35 - 50k, and the RX-8 costs 60k here, then they already have a start. Granted, these are cars spec'ed lower then the GTO. The closest GTO equivalent here (Which is a HSV GTO Coupe, BTW) is 80k.

Hymee.

Stateside, a base GTO costs a couple thousand more than my MT Grand Touring and 6CD Player. I believe that a comparibly equipped GTO would b about 35-37k.

Base price of RX8- 27k. Got mine for about 29k
Base price of GTO I think it is around 32k.

Originally posted by Baller
It must be the crack your smoking!!!!!
F1 cars are the most advanced in the world period.......
Baller, if you disagree about something that is fine, but the name calling and hostilty has to stop.

Patton also said if everyone is thinking alike the no one is thinking!

I have N0 hostilty against anyone.......Well maybe the Ex-wife

Sorry!!!!

Originally posted by Hymee
Some of my mates have 11s LS1 powered VX & VU Commodores, and I have not got under a 15.0s run in the '8. Admittedly I might not know how to drive :) Hehehe.No Hymee you can't drive. :)

Richard. Amazing. How are you old pal?

You must have had been listening when I said about the stock LS1 cracking the 13's! Yes - I was talking about you - how could I forget! And now you are famous around the world!!!

So - your first post, on the RX8 forum, and it is a wise crack, with no contributions to technical knowledge or anything otherwise useful. It has to be the real Richard!

Good to see you migrated your trademarks to this place. Just a few more posts and you will be able to put one of those great mug shots up for the world to see.

Cheers,
Hymee.

Originally posted by Hymee
Richard. Amazing. How are you old pal?

You must have had been listening when I said about the stock LS1 cracking the 13's! Yes - I was talking about you - how could I forget! And now you are famous around the world!!!

So - your first post, on the RX8 forum, and it is a wise crack, with no contributions to technical knowledge or anything otherwise useful. It has to be the real Richard!

Good to see you migrated your trademarks to this place. Just a few more posts and you will be able to put one of those great mug shots up for the world to see.

Cheers,
Hymee. Not bad. :D
Yup, famous. Who'd a thunk it 20 year ago?

OK. Tech knowledge:

1. Mags look better painted black.
2. A stock LS1 (with painted mags) will always beat a stock RX8 (with or without painted mags) over the 1/4 mile.
3. A loud exhaust is ALWAYS better than a quite one.
4. Dogs noses are wet and cold so they don't burn other dog's bums when they sniff them.

You forgot the reason why turds have tapered ends...

So your ass doesn't slam shut.

Word for word!

Originally posted by eccles
So your ass doesn't slam shut. That would be "ARSE" over here in God's Own. :D

When I left Melbourne back in 1999, it was still "ass." I guess you banana-benders had to differentiate between "arse" as in body part, and "ass" as in Joh Bjelke-Peterson or Pauline Hanson. :p

Correct :) We don't care if those ass's slam shut, just not the arse! Hehehe.

Notice the weak as hell cam in the car and those are old dyno numbers but to the wheels i'm a little over 400 hundred. That equates to about 440 horsepower. Waiting on your response. Lemme guess..."your car is old junk, gm garbarge,,...duhhh "

Originally posted by Hymee
Mmm - it will be f@cken funny alright, and you will be on the receiving end.

You talking stock v's stock?

The stock LS1 powered Monaro's and Commodore's (the sedan) will just crack a 13 second quarter, if they are very lucky.

These are detuned compared to the LS1 they put in the GTO.

I have had plenty of races with my mates and their LS1's. In fact I was a ring in in my '8 at a private LS1 day.

The RX-8 will get a better 60', and might even win the race to 1/3 or 1/2 track distance, then the power of the V8 will just drive staight by you. I know. I have experienced it. And I have been an LS1 owner as well.



Why is pushrod = old technology? I have pictures of DOHC engines from WWII aircraft. Does that mean DOHC is old technology as well??

Get a grip. Exotic does not mean reliable. We have a 24 hour race here that the Monaro (albeit with a 427 CID version) has won the last couple of years. Most of the exotic competitive Ferraris and Lambo's etc. break and drop out - often early on.

The build quality of the GTO and the other Holdens is very good. They are very comfortable and enjoyable cars to drive. Speaking from experience, here.

Cheers,
Hymee.

I'm refering to my 94 Rx-7. Stock vs stock with an FD would be close, but with FD's being able to run 13.5 bone stock and the GTO weighing near 4000 lbs I would guess the GTO will run high 13's.

My rx7 has 350 rwhp and weighs 2735 lbs. So yes I have no doubt my rx7 will rape a GTO. My Rx8 is my grocery getter and is not getting modded.

I respect the RX-7. I've seen them fly and put up great numbers. In fact there are Rx-7's with LS1's in them. It's one of the most widely used imports to put LS1's in as a matter of fact.

Fast in a straight line.....slow in the curves......most RX-8 people are about balance.

I really don't like being called names but if it makes you feel better....

Originally posted by 02LS1Z28
This is purely to Baller and some others in here who need to get there crap straight.



This is too Baller:

This link has been shared with now many f-body and gto sites. WE all think you are a fucking moron with your negativity towards a better car and ignorance towards ls1's. Your ignorance equates you to that of a ricer.

Baller, you must be the biggest moron i've ever heard on any sites. You think you know what you're speaking about but you really don't. Be silent little man and go pull your high 14's. You get worse gas mileage than me as my car sits now. You burn more oil, and would be outhandled pathetically too you idiot.

because you know nothing about cars.

Actually say hi Baller cause we're all watching your next dumb ass response. I'm an enthusiast and i dare you to bring it and back your shit up you little peice of ignorant trash.




I think the Baller is right, he is just to nice to tell you that you must be a white trash, trash mouth punk with a small dick.
GM products are getting better but they cancelled the F-bodies for a good reason.....because they have no quality....just junk..rattle traps....good bye to the F-body may they all rust to the ground.

fiberglass doesn't rust, but good try

Thanks RX_999!!!

The F-body cars are metal and heavy metal at that.....sorry Zerobanger........

Originally posted by Baller
Thanks RX_999!!!

The F-body cars are metal and heavy metal at that.....sorry Zerobanger........

When did they go from fiberglass to metal? Please elaborate.

The F-bodies (Camaro and Firebirds) have always been steel, only the hoods and front fenders on the newer ones is plastic.......so they will indeed rust to the ground.....or break.

The Baller
owner of many GM products (when they made good products before 1969) and a Hummer 2 that I traded in because it was the biggest pile I have ever owned.

Use this to clean your screen...use your mouse to move it around...
http://www.200dw.com/screencleaner

Knock off the flames guys.

Originally posted by 02LS1Z28
Try an LS1 with a drop of suspension work will out handle you badly.

I know you like F-bodies and thats cool, but its going to take more than a "DROP" of suspension work to outhandle an Rx-8. My friend weighted is LS1 T/A and it weighed in at 3550 lbs. Thats about a 600 lbs weight difference. That alone is a very severe deficite for the LS1 based car to make up. Believe it or not the heavier the car is the more it is going to whale going into to the turns. Next, consider that the Rx-8 has 50/50 weight distribution, that the engine is several inches (I think 6) behind the front axle and the gas tank is infront of the rear axle. Combine that with the limited slip differential and an exceptional IRS, the F-body is not going to outhandle an rx-8.

It would need an insane amount of work and money and the rx-8 can be upgraded too.

This is not to flame the LS1, handling is not what it was designed to do.

Good post, i do not intend to mock you and am sorry if i came across to U that way. My negativity is directed towards the above too(they know). You bring about all valid points. The chasis' of the LS1's are not very good at all from the factory. WIth Lower arm controls ($150), SFC (110), Adju Panhard Rod, reloc bracekts (220), Hal Shocks in the rear(350), and eibach's (240) we can achieve some sick handling in these cars. Torque arms are necessary in our cars in order to properly "hook up" and reduce wheel spin. With the above items though our cars hang nicely in the autocross events with cars like the Rx-8 and other well handling automobiles. It doesn't take that much money at all either. People are very surprised by this but the F-bodies (98-up) are actually very well handling cars stock for what they are with the weight and all.

You sound like someone i would hope represents the Rx-8!

LS-1 vs. Rotary

Ok let me start off that this post is not intended to flame, so don't take it that way. I don't really see comparing a renesis and LS-1 as quite fair. Try comparing your stock LS-1 to oh say a ferrari engine. The ferrari engine is better, but it is more expensive. Rotaries have a very low cost of production, so I believe that it would be more fair to compare a rotary engine comparable in price to an LS1. Stock at the drag track the LS1 win will, because the rotary's position in the car and lighter weight make it more favorable for handling. Saying that a modded LS1 car will outhandle a stock RX-8 is like saying that a modded renesis will put out more power than a stock LS1. You can't accept only one of those statements.

Pushrod V-8's are ancient technology. However, they are ancient technology that still works well. It is kinda like a cathode ray tube. Look at a CRT (old tv) tv. A comparable CRT vs. a flat screen is much heavier, larger and cheaper. I see the flat screen kinda like the DOHC if that analogy helps.

The above too............give me a break, learn to spell then get your license.

The Baller

Well, wakeech said it earlier but it bears repeating:

DOHC isn't flat out superior to pushrod across the board. DOHC engines tend to put out more power per cubic inch of cylinder displacement, but pushrods take up less space and put out more power per unit of total engine mass.

If I recall correctly, the 350 horsepower 5.7L pushrod V8 in the GTO weighs less than the 300 horsepower 4.6L DOHC NorthStar V8 in the XLR.

You're a funny guy baller, but looks are not everything. Your only defense it too presume i am a minor and that for some reason i can't spell. Hmm my spelling looks fine, i think your ghetto mind can't understand English. So you're not only an ignorant fool but a retard also. I see it clearly now. Well i now believe you are just a little ricer without a clue to how a car works. I would question you owning anything other than a kia wagon. Congratulations you are the joke of many sites right now loser. LOL.

By the way i've already shown what you can do too an f-body to maneuver it well. Sorry to say but my car like others of my kind with the same work will keep up through the twisties with you. Totally run and the misconception is really sad. Why would you compare a ferrari to an Rx-8?? The Rx-8 is the same price so why wouldn't you compare two cars which cost the same to each other? For the price of a ferrari i can buy a ZO6 which will outhandle it with a little work and blow it away on the straights with a little work and still save a good 100k. Bad analogy on the ferrari part. Stock for stock an rx-8 will outhandle an f-body.

The response though is too the fact that this moron baller is bashing a car which he knows nothing about. The two cars are in different categories. Stock for Stock it's not a race in the 1/4. Handeling is in the rx-8's corner. I can't understand calling an ohv f-body crap like this moron said. If the engine is so bad then why can't you keep up baller? Well i tell you, even if YOU had 500 horsepower in a 69 cheville you still wouldn't be able to keep up with a stock civic because you are an ignorant freak who uses the same moronic, simplisitic argument which proves nothing in your defense. Why don't you go ban me again because you can't understand what i'm talking about due to your limits of brain power in your narrow minded skull you dumb bitch. You've been OWNED!:D

Originally posted by 02Z28
You're a funny guy baller, but looks are not everything. Your only defense it too presume i am a minor and that for some reason i can't spell. Hmm my spelling looks fine, i think your ghetto mind can't understand English. So you're not only an ignorant fool but a retard also. I see it clearly now. Well i now believe you are just a little ricer without a clue to how a car works. I would question you owning anything other than a kia wagon. Congratulations you are the joke of many sites right now loser. LOL.

By the way i've already shown what you can do too an f-body to maneuver it well. Sorry to say but my car like others of my kind with the same work will keep up through the twisties with you. Totally run and the misconception is really sad. Why would you compare a ferrari to an Rx-8?? The Rx-8 is the same price so why wouldn't you compare two cars which cost the same to each other? For the price of a ferrari i can buy a ZO6 which will outhandle it with a little work and blow it away on the straights with a little work and still save a good 100k. Bad analogy on the ferrari part. Stock for stock an rx-8 will outhandle an f-body.

The response though is too the fact that this moron baller is bashing a car which he knows nothing about. The two cars are in different categories. Stock for Stock it's not a race in the 1/4. Handeling is in the rx-8's corner. I can't understand calling an ohv f-body crap like this moron said. If the engine is so bad then why can't you keep up baller? Well i tell you, even if YOU had 500 horsepower in a 69 cheville you still wouldn't be able to keep up with a stock civic because you are an ignorant freak who uses the same moronic, simplisitic argument which proves nothing in your defense. Why don't you go ban me again because you can't understand what i'm talking about due to your limits of brain power in your narrow minded skull you dumb bitch. You've been OWNED!:D

I've got all night- want to sit here remaking screennames while I keep banning you? Perhaps you didn't understand the TOS you agreed to when you signed up. State your opinions politely, and you're fine. Attack members for no reason, and you'll continue to be banned. There is no reason for this crap.

I love drama!

Hmm i have a page of comments on how much was said against Ls1's, Fbodies, Gto's, Etc.
Yup banned, but yet others on here can call names and bash cars way before i was here.--bashing others cars. Hmm calling white trash. But his post doesn't get deleted. Maybe because this is bias.

Hyprocritical. You can say stuff about other cars but when somebody debates you then you ban them. Good one.

Since you spew so much stuff against our cars, don't bother ever coming to any of our sites. You do not want to hear it and neither do we. This whole deal has been posted on our sites and will be documented of how hyprocritical this site is.

You can also delete certain posts but it's all been copied.

Fascism strikes again!!!

Originally posted by Z28
Hmm i have a page of comments on how much was said against Ls1's, Fbodies, Gto's, Etc.
Yup banned, but yet others on here can call names and bash cars way before i was here.--bashing others cars. Hmm calling white trash. But his post doesn't get deleted. Maybe because this is bias.

Hyprocritical. You can say stuff about other cars but when somebody debates you then you ban them. Good one.

Since you spew so much stuff against our cars, don't bother ever coming to any of our sites. You do not want to hear it and neither do we. This whole deal has been posted on our sites and will be documented of how hyprocritical this site is.

You can also delete certain posts but it's all been copied.

Can I have a link to your sites?

Originally posted by 02Z28
Your Why would you compare a ferrari to an Rx-8?? The Rx-8 is the same price so why wouldn't you compare two cars which cost the same to each other?

Well if you would actually read the post instead of look and flame you would see that nowhere did I compare an RX8 to a Ferrari, and that my name is not baller. First of all the cost of the cars is not to close together. I got my GT package for $4k less than the base price of a GTO. I think that comparably equipped RX8 and GTO is about $8k. With that I believe I could put in a turbo that would make it more powerful than a GTO stock is. What I really did do is make a point, which you happened to read right through. It is not fair to compare an RX8 or GTO engine to a Ferrari, because the Ferrari engine costs much more. For the same reason it is also unfair to comparea stock a Renesis stock and LS1 stock, a decently large price difference. As I said before the Renesis is very cheap to make, even though it cost a lot of money to develop. They have a very low cost of production, lower than the cost of a LS1. Also my rotary engine is more reliable than your LS1. Put them under the same normal driving condition stress and the rotary will live longer. This is probably irrelevant to you because you will just trade in your car in 5 years or so. Hopefully your repair bills for the car aren't that large by then. I plan to keep the RX8 for as many miles as it will go while still being cost effective.

I acutally wasn't referring to you as baller ^^^^^. I meant to write not right comparing a Ferrari engine to an LS1 and in that fact you can compare an LS6 to one and it's just as fast. You could when they were new get a Z-28, Formula, Transam for high 20's which is what i believe the Rx-8 goes for. Now the Rx-8 is not 8k cheaper than the GTO. If you were to put a turbo and reinforce your car to handle it, you would pay a good deal of money. It is by no where's cheap. For that price the Gto can do minor bolt on's and be in the mid 12's. To get the Rx-8 there you would need a turbo running a good amount of psi which would cause you to buy other parts and would end up costing you more money.

To say a rotary engine is more reliable is false. The rotary engine is documented to be a troubled engine which burns a great amount of oil and is having numerous maintanenece problems. I do not believe that the rotary will last longer under the same conditions because of this same oil problem. The rotary rev's forever which is putting more stress on it and will decrease it's life. Why would you think i'm trading my car in? I'm actually in the process of making the car a full race car and will own it forever as a track car. I will be buying a new LS2 C6 because it is a great engine, great all around car, and the best on the market for the price almost in every category. I'm sure you will debate that but it's the truth. I also think the new Cobra is great too. I'm sure my car will hold up, i just hope your engine doesn't have any problems or you don't burn it up. Good luck with it.

and i also posted a link but it was already deleted. Since i'm a thug like in your picture, talk to your moderator, he has it. Figure it's like your principal in the high school you attend.

I think i could put a complete turbo system in there that would give me the same LS1 performance for about 5k. Remember how turbos work better on rotaries. In terms of reliability issues, you are partially correct. Rotaries that are having problems are turbo rotaries and rotaries owned by people who don't know how to take care of them. Actually N/A rotaries are documented to be very reliable. About the revs, that is the point. They don't hurt the car like in a normal piston engine. The stress being put on the GTO at 4k rpms is much less than the stress being put on a Renesis. The same goes through all the rev range. Not much damage is being done even at the redline. The thing that limited the redline in this car was that you couldn't get any more power at 9k rpms because the engine was spinning to fast to get any more power without advanced ignition timing. Your V8 has an average of 97 major moving parts, while a rotary only has 3. That is 94 more major moving parts in that engine that can fail. The burning oil thing is not a problem as all the deposits it would leave get removed when you rev the car. If I were looking at a track car I would have gone with a RX7, Supra or 300ZX instead. I don't doubt that if you had the money to buy a GTO and are making it your track car while having a C6 as another car you could have gotten one of those instead, even a used one and put a new engine in.

I do however think that the C6 is looking promising. They have put an interior in it instead of using the one from their minivan, but I don't know if it has a parking brake now. I don't know about the new mustang though. Some of my friends have had GT's and one had a Cobra, and all of their stangs had problems. It depends on if Ford can fix that and if the new platform is as good as they say it is.

I like the Supra's and do have a good amount of money but i'm more of an american muscle myself. I just love the LS1. I put nothing but headers in the car with 373 gears and i ran mid 12's stock. It is said to be one of the best small block engines ever built. These engines can take a lot of abuse and they never have problems at all. NOW the big deal is the trannies. That's a whole new discussion. Trannies suck but that's just the way it is if you beat a car up. People have spent 4k on superchargers onthese cars and they pull 11's. It's a very capable engine and one which does not break at all. The problems documented are trannys in the auto's. The T-56 tranny in the 6 speeds are excellent though. I have a very good friend who has a supra with bolt ons but they have serious traction problems. Once he does the suspension he will be 12's.

Originally posted by Z28
and i also posted a link but it was already deleted. Since i'm a thug like in your picture, talk to your moderator, he has it. Figure it's like your principal in the high school you attend.

Thanks for the charming note. As soon as you can post something without making offensive remarks about people's sexual orientation, and can state your position politely without insulting other members, you can stay. Your banning has nothing to do with your opinions, it has everything to do with your behavior. I have no time to go through and edit your posts word by word, so I will continue to delete them until they are rational and polite. Until then, we have no room for anyone who personally attacks others for no reason. Everyone involved in this crap has been warned as well. If you had a problem, why didn't you report it instead of acting like an ass in front of everyone?

And that's "she" not "he."

And that goes for all of you. Re-read your TOS.

Elara..

You Go Girl!!!

Originally posted by Rotarian_SC
I think i could put a complete turbo system in there that would give me the same LS1 performance for about 5k. Remember how turbos work better on rotaries.


If I were looking at a track car I would have gone with a RX7, Supra or 300ZX instead.

You're not just slapping a turbo kit on and running with an LS1, it ain't happening, especially if they just get some basic inexpensive bolt-ons for the LS1. You're a bit off with that turbo's work better with rotaries statement considering the difficulties tuners are having adding a turbo to the renesis and the cooling nightmares of the previous turbo RX-7s.

Also, the Supra and the 300Z are not very good track cars, they're very moddable but make for better highway cruisers and dyno queens than anything else. They're heavy and lacking in the handling department unless you want to drop tons of money into suspension and weight reduction. The RX-7s can make very good track cars but the cooling issues become an even larger factor.

Originally posted by IkeWRX
You're not just slapping a turbo kit on and running with an LS1, it ain't happening, especially if they just get some basic inexpensive bolt-ons for the LS1. You're a bit off with that turbo's work better with rotaries statement considering the difficulties tuners are having adding a turbo to the renesis and the cooling nightmares of the previous turbo RX-7s.

Also, the Supra and the 300Z are not very good track cars, they're very moddable but make for better highway cruisers and dyno queens than anything else. They're heavy and lacking in the handling department unless you want to drop tons of money into suspension and weight reduction. The RX-7s can make very good track cars but the cooling issues become an even larger factor.


turbos work better with a rotary in respect to the fact that they require much less boost than other small displacement engines. Take an evo for example, what is it 17 PSI to get 278 HP?

the rx7 got 255 at only 10 psi and that was with a severely restricted exhaust.

Originally posted by zerobanger
turbos work better with a rotary in respect to the fact that they require much less boost than other small displacement engines. Take an evo for example, what is it 17 PSI to get 278 HP?

the rx7 got 255 at only 10 psi and that was with a severely restricted exhaust.

The EVO has more boost because it can have more boost and still be reliable, which IMO makes it better... You're also comparing a 2.0l engine that will pass today's federal emission standards to basicly a 2.6l that would not. Both impressive cars, but your post does nothing to support that turbps work better with rotaries than they do piston engines, and in fact supports otherwise.

Originally posted by IkeWRX
The EVO has more boost because it can have more boost and still be reliable, which IMO makes it better... You're also comparing a 2.0l engine that will pass today's federal emission standards to basicly a 2.6l that would not. Both impressive cars, but your post does nothing to support that turbps work better with rotaries than they do piston engines, and in fact supports otherwise.

first off, thats a 1.3, not a 2.6. Second, this has nothing to do with emissions. Im simply stating a fact. If you can get 275 HP @ 11 psi or get it at 18 or 19 PSI, what would you rather do?

Don't give me crap about the evo being reliable, its not been proven here yet.

Originally posted by zerobanger
first off, thats a 1.3, not a 2.6. Second, this has nothing to do with emissions. Im simply stating a fact. If you can get 275 HP @ 11 psi or get it at 18 or 19 PSI, what would you rather do?

Don't give me crap about the evo being reliable, its not been proven here yet.

When comparing a rotary to a piston engine it's only 1.3l in rotary fan's little dream worlds. If I can get 275 hp @ 19 psi on an engine that has been proven for the last 15 years to be reliable doing so (save for a few years when Mitsubishi used bad quality cranks) , I'll take that over an engine running 11 psi that has proven to need to be replaced regularly as a result of the heat created while running boost.

Originally posted by IkeWRX
When comparing a rotary to a piston engine it's only 1.3l in rotary fan's little dream worlds. If I can get 275 hp @ 19 psi on an engine that has been proven for the last 15 years to be reliable doing so (save for a few years when Mitsubishi used bad quality cranks) , I'll take that over an engine running 11 psi that has proven to need to be replaced regularly as a result of the heat created while running boost.

what ever, its 1.3 liters of displacement.

I'm getting laid in 20 minutes so im signing off. good luck in your little dream world.

Originally posted by zerobanger
what ever, its 1.3 liters of displacement.

I'm getting laid in 20 minutes so im signing off. good luck in your little dream world.

So your "date" arrives at 5:30 huh (depending on your timezone) , be sure to wear a condom and make the most of the time you paid for!

It just struck me that it would make more sense to use a 2 seater instead of a 4 seater for a track car of any type. I mean there are a few good two seaters, the S4, M3, RX8, GTO. But I think if you really wanted a track car you would have a two seater for the lower weight.

Oh yeah, the Evo's among other cars have had cooling problems as well due to their oil turbos. 3000GT, anymore good track cars I left out? I believe the C6 should be a pretty good track car anyway

Originally posted by Rotarian_SC
It just struck me that it would make more sense to use a 2 seater instead of a 4 seater for a track car of any type. I mean there are a few good two seaters, the S4, M3, RX8, GTO. But I think if you really wanted a track car you would have a two seater for the lower weight.

I think you mean a few good 4 seaters... It's not the number of seats nor doors for that matter, it's the dynamics of the car. The best track cars, for a street legal track car, come in all shapes and sizes. Once you start getting serious about a dedicated track car, you're only going to have one seat and a gutted interior.

What about 1 seat and no interior, open wheels, wings, 18,500RPM... :)

I must have been watching the F1 in Australia this weekend. ;)

Originally posted by Rotarian_SC
Oh yeah, the Evo's among other cars have had cooling problems as well due to their oil turbos. 3000GT, anymore good track cars I left out? I believe the C6 should be a pretty good track car anyway

The EVO doesn't have problems with their engine due to an oil cooled turbo though. It just means you have to let t idle for a bit after driving it hard, or get a turbotimer. This is to increase the life of the turbo and isn't related to engine durability. The 3000GT is an even worse track car than the Supra or 300Z, heavier and even worse handling.

Best somewhat affordable imported track cars of the last 10 years or so...

RX-7
EVOs
STi & WRX
MR2
Elise
Integra Type R
S2000
350Z
RX-8
Miata
DSMs
Celica
Minis

And some other's that I'm sure I'm forgetting.

MR2 turbos are nice :) . The Elise isn't street legal in america yet i believe, but they are sending over an american version soon. Of course I could be wrong. Skyline, the M3 is supposed to be on par with the RX8 and 350Z if not better. I heard the STi had a handling problem, but I could be wrong.

Originally posted by Rotarian_SC
MR2 turbos are nice :) . The Elise isn't street legal in america yet i believe, but they are sending over an american version soon. Of course I could be wrong. Skyline, the M3 is supposed to be on par with the RX8 and 350Z if not better. I heard the STi had a handling problem, but I could be wrong.

Skyline (in it's previous form) is not available in the US so I didn't include it, but included the Elise because it's about to be here and there are some people importing them and putting Typr R engines in them. The M3 is a very formidable track car and is better than the RX-8 and 350Z but kind of falls out of most people's price range and the Elise is certainly close to doing so as well. I figured under 40k would be a good place to stop. There is no problem with the STi, other than the fact that the EVO handles a little bit better. But it will still beat most of those cars listed around a non autox track. Both cars come close to having the fastest slalom speeds ever, including exotics, in any magazine that has tested them.

I saw that top gear got the same time on its track for the M3, Rx8, and 350Z

I haven't checked elsewhere though, but I wouldn't be surprised if the M3 was better.

Ah yes, the bane of General Motors' existence — and the reason, I'm convinced, for the company's continued market share slide. Seat time in a Z28 or Firebird Trans Am never fails to put a smile on my face, beckoning me to pick one up for myself. But as soon as I exit the cars' cockpit, the logical side of my brain takes over. I find myself thinking back to our experiences with the Oldsmobile Intrigue, Cadillac Seville and Hummer 2. Each of these vehicles offered a stunning drivetrain, acceptable — if not attractive — styling and reasonable value ... just like the F-bodies. And each of them proved an ordeal in terms of unscheduled and annoying dealer visits. At 20,000 miles on the odometer, they had all suffered mechanical malfunctions ranging from defective power steering to massive electrical gremlins to broken seat adjustments. By contrast, Mazda RX-8 has suffered fairly innocuous problems, and the Range Rover we have for almost a year has been nearly flawless in terms of mechanical problems. No matter how much fun I have behind the wheel of an F-body, I can't get over my fear of what the car will be like as the years, and miles, add up. I am sure and I hope that the American auto makers get it together before it's too late.

The Baller

I think the Baller has said it best.

If you wanted a reliable car, baller, you shouldn't have bought a first year model RX-8, which is built on a new platform, with a new engine, etc. It will have recalls and problems too.

Originally posted by tschangrx7
If you wanted a reliable car, baller, you shouldn't have bought a first year model RX-8, which is built on a new platform, with a new engine, etc. It will have recalls and problems too.

My RX-8 is very reliable.......but you can bet your butt that the new GTO is just like most GM products......JUNK.
I was going to buy the new Caddy V for my wife and after the first drive, the interior looked like it was made by RUBBERMAID....cheap, great engine bad tranny......I bought the wife a new Z......so we will see which is better....the RX-8 or Z.
Time will tell, but I can tell everyone right now I like the RX-8 better.

The Baller

Baller what car don't you have. I have seen RR, RX8, Motorcycle, Z...:)

We like our cars.......I sold the old Z, and bought the new one for my wife. The old one was 25 years old with 30,000 miles.
2 bikes, 3 Quads, the double R, the 8 and now the Z...

Here we go again stating that everything GM makes is junk. That is your opinion but then again it is not proven. In fact the Rx-8 has had thousands of recalls for burning oil and other engine attributes to this. Say what you want but check out the facts upon your car b4 you bash others. In my opinion the Rx-8's exterior looks like that of a cheap BMW. For a car too run extremely slow like it does it actually gets worse gas mileage than cars that are a lot faster and more appealing. I personally would never buy a car that gets this kind of gas mileage and can barely break into the 14's. Sorry but for 30k i'd prefer to get more for my money than just a car that can handle. My .02

Originally posted by Z28
Here we go again stating that everything GM makes is junk. That is your opinion but then again it is not proven. In fact the Rx-8 has had thousands of recalls for burning oil and other engine attributes to this. Say what you want but check out the facts upon your car b4 you bash others. In my opinion the Rx-8's exterior looks like that of a cheap BMW. For a car too run extremely slow like it does it actually gets worse gas mileage than cars that are a lot faster and more appealing. I personally would never buy a car that gets this kind of gas mileage and can barely break into the 14's. Sorry but for 30k i'd prefer to get more for my money than just a car that can handle. My .02

I'm sorry I wanted to say crap, not junk.
Z-28 were ok in 1969 now they are discontinued because they are crap......that's just the way it is as most people agree.....
BTW..."cheap BMW interior" give me a break and go troll in the BMW forum, I think they will really like you.

The Baller

Truth hurts, most people agree...LOL. Only you and your friends.

I agree Z-28's were great in 1969 and still are. Totally agree with you on that. Sounds like the oil burning in your car is getting too you. I hope everything is alright!

Nahh unlike yourself the BMW crowd give credit where it's due instead of just bashing on a brand of car. BMW, hmm now there's a car that's worth the money paid into it. I heard they get over 20 mpg too. Wow pretty good for low 14 second cars with great reliability, looks , and everything else also. LoL

What market is Mazda trying to direct attention to again? I mean 400 horsepower cars get better MPG than You? The chicks dig your car...don't they? Do they ask you too rev your lawnmower....i mean engine.

Originally posted by Z28
What market is Mazda trying to direct attention to again? I mean 400 horsepower cars get better MPG than You? The chicks dig your car...don't they? Do they ask you too rev your lawnmower....i mean engine.

As I said before, when you can be polite, you can post here. Until then, go troll somewhere else.

"My RX-8 is very reliable......."

No shit, you owned it for all of 3 months... Wait five or six years and then talk. But still, if you're concerned about reliability it's awful stupid to buy any new car in its first year of production. Even people who bought Acura RSX's and Honda Accords in their first two years were complaining about the transmissions... And those cars don't have brand new rotary engine designs in them... For the record, I bet some of the GM products you got were in their first years of production as well.

I hate to break it to you but Japanese engineers can't see into the future. Even though the RX-8 probably will be fairly reliable by 2007 or 2008, you're Mazda's Guinie pig (sp).

Regardless, even if the guy who buys the GTO has a less reliable car (doubtful), he will also absolutely DESTROY you on any track, has a more luxurious interior with better build quality, gets better gas mileage, has a PROVEN engine in his car, can seat four normal sized people comfortably in his car over long distances, etc. Of course you also spent 5-6K less on your car..

To clarify, it's not that I don't like the RX-8... If I didn't I wouldn't be here... However, I find it hilarious that people who drive around in a "niche" car like the 8 would bring up reliability. People don't exactly buy cars like that for reliability.

"As I said before, when you can be polite, you can post here. Until then, go troll somewhere else."

How is he trolling? Baller started this argument; Z28 just argued it from the other perspective. Every point he made however bothers prospective RX-8 buyers. Especially gas, rotary engine reliability, new model reliability, etc.

Most of this stuff I don't find factual. I think that if there were recalls for burning oil then every rotary engine did that because it is supposed to. Also bmw's aren't very reliable, especially the 7 series. Check out consumer reports reliability ratings, and mazda is right after Honda for overall models.

Originally posted by tschangrx7
"As I said before, when you can be polite, you can post here. Until then, go troll somewhere else."

How is he trolling? Baller started this argument; Z28 just argued it from the other perspective. Every point he made however bothers prospective RX-8 buyers. Especially gas, rotary engine reliability, new model reliability, etc.

No, he did not. He jumped on here calling people crap, and now he's posting just to get a response. That is trolling. If he had posted his position politely, there would have been no issue. You don't see those because I had to delete them. Everyone else was warned and backed off the insults. He did not. There is NO exuse for this confrontational crap on here. The thread is now closed.