Car and Driver Review- 05 Stang vs. 05 GTO

[fivepointNO]

And anyone who bought a GT over an LS1 is an idiot too by that logic.

I'll bite, an LS1 in what? Btw, it's not my logic, it's the GTO guys logic.

I am tired of people saying that GM did not do what the GTO used to be. It is EXACTLY what the old GTO used to be.

Well boo hoo. It's not even close to the original GTO, or any made through 1974. I doubt you were around to know the difference. Way back when, the GTO was considered a "mid-size" car, and it was an added nameplate to an existing Pontiac model(LeMans), not a Holden. I don't think Holden was even a GM car back then, but it hardly matters. The old "mid-size" GTO was the size of a full-size car today, and in some cases, bigger still. The old GTO had a FRAME! The old GTO could easily seat SIX! It wasn't really meant to, but it could. Try that in todays GTO and somebody's gonna get a cramp! The first Pontiac GTO was a convertible! "verts were offered for years(then). The old GTO had a big, rustable iron block and heads to match. The list of differences goes on and on. Performance wise, the new GTO is much better than any before it. The old GTO was ONLY about going straight, and it wasn't all that pricey. The original models weighed less, even as convertibles, than todays version, even with an iron block and heads, and a frame. It was offered in 15 colors, seven for the 'vert alone!

It doesn't have a big block like the 60's? EVERY car had a big block back then, it wasn't special because of that.

It took the Mustang until 1967 to get a big block. The original GTO had 389ci. engine. I don't consider it a big block, but it's a large engine, only used in full-size cars before the GTO, hence "muscle car." Hence, "special" because of that.

The GM vehicle that you guys want is the Camaro; just admit it. The Camaro SS of the 60's was the car that has fast, cheap [sort-of], and had a single purpose. The GTO was the Camaro, or in Pontaics place, the Firebird for the family guy.

The GTO wasn't at all like the F-body, and was still "cheap" in 1967, at under $2,900 for the sport coupe. The base Firebird sticker was $2,666 in 1967. With an automatic and a 326 V8 along with minor options, it could sticker at nearly $4,000. Even the base 'vert GTO cost less at the time. And in a striaght line, the GTO would SMOKE that one. To truly compete, you'd need a 400 Ram Air and that would be more money. It still wouldn't be as powerful as the Tri-Power GTO either. Bottom line? The GTO was no "pony car" and it didn't act like one in any way.

Someone asked about a comparo between the Cobra? Simple, Cobra is a better performace car by a slim margin stock for stock, GTO is a better car overall.

Better by what standard? The fact it's not worth nearly as much, or that it's not as powerful, or that it's not as quick? It's truly funny, we have ever angle covered to favor the GTO. It's a better performer than the GT(not realistically, but it's faster), so it's a better car. It's not as good a performer as the Cobra, but it's better anyway, because... What, it's a Pontiac and not a Ford? The very best drag race results from the 2004 GTO aren't even close to the best of the '03/04Cobra, btw. The best from the '05GTO won't be either... Hide and watch.

______________________________________________________________

Yeah, it is a RWD "family car" with a 400 HP engine that can do 0-60 in 4.5 seconds, turn and stop on a dime, and is available for $30K. If the price and performance don't do justice to the GTO name, what possibly could?

4.5? Heh... Enter, Corvette. Turn and stop on a dime. Please. It's good, yes. But it's not in that arena yet. Its base price(MSRP) will be over 32K.

People bitched endlessly about the 2004 GTO but consumers were buying them for $26K!!

Not "were," are. The reason, GM isn't selling enough and they're offering incentives. The base price is still over 30K.

It is like the car was so good that they forgot it was that cheap...

So cheap, GM had to lower the price to sell them.

Hell, the 2004s have been selling for $27-28K. 350-hp V8, 6-speed manual and IRS that runs 13.2s. That is a better deal than a Mustang.

All 1 of them? That's how many factory stock GTO's have been clocked at 13.2 according to EVERY posted time on the GTO boards I've been able to find. I've asked for them, and we've found 1. That's hardly indicative of the average 13.8 from a GTO. The average '05 MustangGT cost about the same, runs about the same, is less expensive to own and modify, etc. The '05 Mustang also has better grip and is generally considered a better looking car by the public. This will help it retain value the GTO has already lost due to drastic price reductions. Keep in mind, thousands of GTO owners spent well over 30K for theirs.

Btw, it's a GM stated fact, production of '05's(and prices were lowered) due to lower than expected sales, not the 2006 models. If anything, they should've HALTED 2005 production altogether, and called it a 2006 model, skipping the '05. Think about it. The plan is to produce a new GTO again in 2007. What difference would it be for them to have skipped the '05? Are the '06's also going to be a redesign? Doubtful, at best.

 

[Jon Do]

fivepointno, in that post, you basically admit that the 2004 GTO offers performance of a Mustang, for about the same price, but it is a near luxury vehicle vs. a muscle car. That is the whole point!! You buy the Mustang for performance. People buy the GTO because it is a fairly luxurious ride that offers performance.

Of course, in a year or 2, the Mustang will have a fat $2,500 rebate and remain ridiculously cheaper than the GTO... So yeah, it is a better performance value... But people who buy the GTO want luxury and performance. If they wanted just performance they would have bought a Mustang or a used Camaro. They are looking for more than that, and for that type of buyer the GTO isn't a bad value!!

 

[Jon Do]

"4.5? Heh... Enter, Corvette. Turn and stop on a dime. Please. It's good, yes. But it's not in that arena yet."

I am using that expression relative to the fact that it is a 3,700 lb near luxury car. For a car of that nature, the performance is sick!! The other cars in its price range are the G35 or CTS. Those cars would get their asses handed to them.

If Car and Driver got 4.8 out of a GTO that isn't broken in, mid 4s should be possible. A Corvette should be able to get aweful close for 4 flat.

"Not "were," are. The reason, GM isn't selling enough and they're offering incentives. The base price is still over 30K."

That is the whole point. Those rebates turn the GTO from a good value to an insane value. Right now the Mustang GT simply can't compete on value. But then again, people who buy cars in their first year right when they come out do so for emotional reasons, not value.

I am simply pointing out that since RIGHT NOW the GTO costs about as much as a Mustang GT, it is a pretty damn good value. You get an exclusive car with good performance and good luxury for the price of a pure performance-oriented car like the Mustang. The only reason people hate the GTO is because of A) cost and B) styling. But the GTO costs 10s of thousands less than comparable vehicles, and the styling is meant to appeal to the more conservative audience who want a 'stealth' car, not a showy type sports car.

I guess what I am saying is that all these reviews for the GTO are practically irrelevant. They all dog it because they evaluate it as something it is not (a camaro). Of course it is going to suck if you want a Camaro or Firebird. But it was never meant to appeal to that type of consumer. It's meant to appeal to the type of guy who wants to go to his accounting job every day and not stand out in the parking lot, but still have a car that is capable of providing a good amount of fun on the track on the weekends. The type of guy that wants to be able to carry four people around in comfort on occassion, and impress them to some degree WITHOUT mashing on the gas pedal.

Evaluate it like that, and no other car within $15K can compete. The next cheapest you are going to get is a CTS-V, but the GTO is about 85-90% of that car for 60% of the price.

 

[SuperchargedSix]

Since when did the GTO become Luxury Performance? Luxury? What are you ****ing smoking?

 

[Jon Do]

It is very much a near luxury car compared to a Mustang GT or Camaro. Plus it can carry four people.

 

[TxFrog1999]

Last time I checked the interior of the new Mustang isn't what I'd consider being on par with the previous models or that plastic bucket of years past known as the Camaro. The new interior is one of the main selling points to this new stang. Also the last time I looked the Mustang has a back seat.

You GTO guys want it both ways, so which is it? Are we going to continue to hash out some ridiculous comparison between the GT and the GTO or are you guys going to start this nonsense that the GTO is a Luxury car while trying to somehow maintain that in its current form it still resembles all that the original Goat offered?

If anything this thread has shown me how delusional GTO owners are. Seems to me these guys are just looking for a forum to justify their purchase... buyers remorse is a PITA.

 

[TRAMS_AM]

A very well thought, intelligent post. Thanks for that. Hope you stick around.

Thanks for the welcome!

A story about the first day I had my GTO:

I was driving around showing my friends the car. As we approached a red light, I noticed a silver car speeding closer in my rear view mirror. It became apparent that it was a ’05 ‘Stang, and a GT at that. I rolled my windows down to talk to the owner, but before I could get a word in he exclaimed “Is that the new GTO? That thing is sweet!” “Yeah,” I replied, that’s the first ’05 GT I’ve seen, it looks really good on the road.” He thanked me for the compliment, but commented several times after that how “sweet” the GTO was. I was flattered to say the least, this coming from someone in the ‘other camp’. One of my friends observed that this was the first time in 30 years that a new GTO and a new Mustang had sat next to each other at a stoplight. It was a good moment.

It’s unfortunate that sales have been so slow on the car. As someone mentioned, dealer price gouging was rampant at the vehicle’s introduction, and is one of the top reasons it’s selling so poorly. The worst case I witnessed was a markup to $57,000. Someone could have bought a ZO6, but I guess they “gotta have” a GTO.

I believe the GTO is a fair interpretation of what the car may have become over the course of 30 years. The gas crunch and smog regulations would have taken the same toll on the Goat as the Mustang, Camaro, and Firebird. After seeing several revered names slapped onto unworthy cars (Daytona and LeMans come to mind), the GTO is the first marque to return on a car that is easily worthy of the title. Some disagree as to what makes a GTO a GTO, and to me it’s in the spirit of the car and not in pinstripes, Ram Air, or hood tachs.

Route666 – If you were comparing the 6-year-old Monaro (and even older Commodore platform) to the all-new ’05 Mustang, then you’re spot on. This argument wasn’t valid last year, though, when the ‘Stang was still based on a 25 year old platform (albeit heavily revised, similar to the 4th Gen F-body’s 3rd Gen roots). I suppose this will be us GM cronies line in ’07 when the Zeta cars come out, so I can’t really argue it now.

TxFrog1999 – To me, the GTO is a V8 RWD coupe with really nice seats and superb road manners. I’m not going to pigeonhole it into a class other than that. I like it much more than my LT1 T/A, my LS1 T/A, or my sister’s ’95 Mustang. I think you will find that GTO owners truly love their cars, and that they don’t regret their purchase in the slightest. I guess we just want everyone else to know how sweet this thing is.

FivepointNO – the 13.2’s are more common than you may think. In one weekend, two members of LS1GTO ran that time, and several others have also run similar times. I think that due to the small number of GTO’s running around out there, and the even smaller number that see the track, there won’t be too many people posting times, let alone really good ones. The lowest time I’ve heard is a 12.9, which is close to the fastest stock LS1 F-body times (although a chicken may have been sacrificed or a soul may have been sold for this time. I also would love to see a slip for that run). At the same time, all the early ET’s for the ’05 GT that I was seeing were in the low 14’s, and weren’t breaking into the 13’s. It’s obvious that a 300hp car can do much better than this, and we’ll be seeing mid and low 13’s shortly, but the owners have to get a feel for the car first.

Superchargedsix – You’re completely right about the $3500 incentives causing a dramatic increase in sales. After the shameless price gouging during most of the year, it’s a bit like jumping out of the spa and right into the pool. The incentives are what made me get a ’04 instead of a ’05 (or even sinking my money into one of the T/A’s).

 

[TRAMS_AM]

And btw, I'd gladly drag race the quickest GTO on planet earth. I have no concern for "what if's."

The fastest Pontiac is BMR Fabrication's car. It's ran 10.98@125. The fastest Holden (to my knowledge) is a CV8 that runs 10.22@139.

 

[Jon Do]

"Also the last time I looked the Mustang has a back seat."

Yeah, but you're not going to carry four people around in comfort in a Mustang.

"You GTO guys want it both ways, so which is it? Are we going to continue to hash out some ridiculous comparison between the GT and the GTO or are you guys going to start this nonsense that the GTO is a Luxury car while trying to somehow maintain that in its current form it still resembles all that the original Goat offered?"

Did we compare the GTO to the GT? No, that was Car and Driver. The reason the GTO was compared to the GT is because it is the GT's closest rival, but it is in no way the all out performance-car that the Mustang is.

I can make stereotypes about you guys too. First someone here claimed that the GTO was a family car... Now it is being claimed that the GTO is a sports car like the Mustang? Which is it? Gee, I guess because two different guys said two different things, you Mustang owners can't make up your minds!

The truth is that the GTO can function adeptly at BOTH purposes (reasonable comfort and reasonable performance). It is probably as comfortable as those old big boats like the Crown Vic or 260 HP Chevy Caprice (once you get in anyway) but it can also hang on the track with out and out performance cars like the Mustang.

There was an article in Motor Trend comparing it to a $80,000 Mercedes. While that comparison is a little far fetched, a GTO can easily compare to a low optioned CTS or G35 for luxury.

Now No one is ever going to compare the Mustang to an $80,000 Mercedes Luxury coupe. That is because the Mustang in no way, shape or form is a luxury car. But to be fair, the GTO shouldn't be compared either because it isn't a *luxury* coupe but it is still a decent *near luxury* coupe that offers the performance of a Muscle Car.

Sure, it is getting raped in a Muscle car comparison against a Mustang but if any of you dudes were looking for a near luxury performance coupe in the near $30s, you have these choices--the GTO, the G35, the 325 CI, and maybe the Mazda RX-8. Or if we are going to include 4 door cars, maybe we could compare the GTO to the automatic only, $27K Mercury Marauder. (Probably the closest car to the GTO in purpose and ideology.) Out of these cars, which would you guys pick?

Probably most would say the 2004 or 2005 GTO. (Unless some of you would choose the Marauder if you had a hard on for Ford...) However, this is a Mustang forum, so guys are more concerned about out-and-out performance and flashy looks than discretion or comfort.

Even if you are going to contend that the GTO isn't a near luxury car, at the least it is as comfortable as a coupe version of a Chevy Caprice or Ford Crown Vic with greater performance. Comparing it to Ford cars, the GTO is in between the Mustang and Marauder. It ass rapes the Marauder in performance and it ass rapes the Mustang in comfort. However, it costs significantly more than the Mustang, so it should have an advantage to that car. The Marauder, however, has no excuses.

"If anything this thread has shown me how delusional GTO owners are."

I am not a GTO owner. But why am I delusional? Because I contend that it is more comfortable and luxurius than a Mustang or Camaro? You are the one that is delusional if you can't admit that.

The bottom line is that the GTO appeals to me because I can pull up to my 9 to 5er in it without being stereotyped or embarrassed. I can take 4 co-workers out in that car and have them feel comfortable and think, "Gee, this is a nice car" without mashing on the gas pedal. I'm not talking $50,000 BMW nice, but certainly $27K nice. And that is without taking the performance into consideration. The Mustang simply cannot do these things.

When taking the performance into consideration, I also have a car that can hang with the Mustang or Camaro too. That is the appeal of the GTO.

 

[Jon Do]

"Are we going to continue to hash out some ridiculous comparison between the GT and the GTO or are you guys going to start this nonsense that the GTO is a Luxury car while trying to somehow maintain that in its current form it still resembles all that the original Goat offered?"

I wanted to target this point specifically. What did the GTO originally offer? Performance and Luxury. At least luxury compared to a Mustang or Camaro.

People are so ridiculous about the GTO. Like someone else said, they want a Camaro, not a GTO. The new GTO fits old GTO ideology quite well. But that means **** all if you really want a Camaro or Mustang-type car!!

 

[Fast GTO]

I believe C&D or MT did a comparison of the GTO to Merc already. The point was that for 2 GTO's you could have the Merc, but the GTO was so amazingly close to the Merc's performance and comfort that they would have gotten the GTO.

 

[Jon Do]

Yeah, it is MT. And that is my entire point!!

MT thought it was fitting to compare the GTO to a high priced Merc because it offered a decent amount of luxury and performance. The comparison wasn't to pick a winner, because if you are talking about the better car obviously is it the Mercedes. The comparison was there just to show you how close you can get to $80K for $30K these days.

No one would ever compare the Mustang to that Mercedes because the Mustang is about out-and-out performance. Sure, it is more comfortable and civilized now, but it still doesn't have the performance-luxury mix of the GTO.

That is all I'm saying. Not that the GTO is way better or whatever. Just that it is a car that can hang with the Mustang in performance while offering more luxury. That is why it costs more.

Of course, if you were more concerned about flashy styling, then the Mustang would win, but the GTO isn't about that. It is about an understated comfort and performance mix.

 

[Bob Cosby]

It’s unfortunate that sales have been so slow on the car. As someone mentioned, dealer price gouging was rampant at the vehicle’s introduction, and is one of the top reasons it’s selling so poorly. The worst case I witnessed was a markup to $57,000. Someone could have bought a ZO6, but I guess they “gotta have” a GTO.

GTO's didn't sell because of style and price gouging. The price gouging has been discussed. Styling has been beat to death too - here's my take:

I think the problem that some folks have with the GTO is that by and large, it looks like any other Pontiac mid-size sedan from the past few years. For example....you see what is obviously a Pontiac something coming up/down the road. After a second or two (or a few seconds or whatever), you see that styling que that tells you that it is a GTO.

Contrast that to something like a Vette or a Firebird or a Camaro or the new Mustang. The very instant you see it - you know what it is. I'm not trying to say that is either good or bad, just my appraisal of the perception of some (most?) normal folk.

I believe the GTO is a fair interpretation of what the car may have become over the course of 30 years.

Anything is possible, and it certainly looks like the contemporary Pontiac that we all know. However, consider this:

40 years ago, times were different. I think the modern perception of the early GTOs is that they were rip-roaring, unique, muscular cars - which they were in some respects, but mostly, they were just a modestly-upgraded Tempest (at least in styling). However, when you go to a car show, you typically see GTOs, Chevelle SSs, etc - and gawk over the style, class, muscular look. You don't see nearly as many regular Tempests (or Chevelles, but more of those), thus our perception of the GTO is that it was, as stated, a very unique vehicle.

Doesn't mean the perception is right - but perception in the eyes of the perceiver is reality.

...The lowest time I’ve heard is a 12.9, which is close to the fastest stock LS1 F-body times (although a chicken may have been sacrificed or a soul may have been sold for this time. I also would love to see a slip for that run).

Ya, so would I. The very best I've heard of is 13.18. Please post your reference to one that has gone 12.9.

Superchargedsix – You’re completely right about the $3500 incentives causing a dramatic increase in sales.

"Dramatic" is relative - certainly the sales improved markedly when the price got down below ~$30k.

"....and it ass rapes the Mustang in comfort.

Have you driven both under similar conditions? I assume you have, and this is how you have come to your conclusion.

If not, what objective standard are you using to come to this conclusion?

The bottom line is that the GTO appeals to me because I can pull up to my 9 to 5er in it without being stereotyped or embarrassed.

One could argue that the "stereotype" might be "oh, that's a nice Grand Prix you got there".

The Mustang simply cannot do these things.

Nor was it designed to. However, you'll never be mistaken for any other car when you are in a Mustang (some might consider that good or bad, but that is personal preference.

Of course, if you were more concerned about flashy styling, then the Mustang would win, but the GTO isn't about that. It is about an understated comfort and performance mix.

It used to be different...back in the day.

Most of your other points I either agree with or have no real issues with.

 

[Jon Do]

"Have you driven both under similar conditions? I assume you have, and this is how you have come to your conclusion. If not, what objective standard are you using to come to this conclusion?"

You're right. I haven't driven both cars. I am stereotyping. I do not believe that I could drive four people around in comfort with as low noise levels and quite as smooth a ride in the Mustang as I could in the GTO.

As for the GTO's styling, it is fairly unique to me. It doesn't stand out like a Mustang does but it looks like a $30K Pontiac should.

Consider that the GTO, with discounts, costs as much as a highly optioned Grand Prix or Bonneville and then you will realize that the styling isn't bad for what you pay. The car still looks good in dark blue, just not Mustang or Camaro flashy.

Again, I do not plan to buy either car for a couple years: The prospects so far are the GTO, Mustang and RX-8... I will certainly consider a Mustang in a few years because it will be cheap and a good value. I am not dogging that car. I am just saying that the GTO offers an extreme amount of appeal and value for a certain niche buyers... These type of people don't want flashy cars with flashy styling. They want reasonably comfortable vehicles with good performance. These type of guys, when shopping for Ford products, would be just as likely if not more likely to consider the Marauder compared to the Mustang. But the GTO totally butt rapes the Marauder performance-wise, and is even available with a stick.

Compared to a similarly price, deep-discounted Ford product like the Marauder, the GTO's appeal suddenly becomes understandable. I am not dogging the Mustang; just saying that the GTO is a good car for what it is. It may not be what people _expect_ or _want_ so its sales are low. but that just enhances the niche factor and exclusivity that makes this car appealing for the right type of buyer anyway.

Basically, just because most people don't like it doesn't mean it is a bad car for what it is. Most people here would find the Honda Accord coupe even less exciting and more boring than the GTO, but some people are willing to pay mid-twenties for that car. Others would rather get a 350 HP GTO.

The Car and Driver comparison is kind of ridiculous because it ignores the type of car that GTO buyers want. They do this all the time when comparing cars. They say that one car wins decisively but they forget that the people who pay the money for the other car want something different.

For example, those guys could review trucks, and be more concerned about performance or NVH levels than utility. In doing so they forget the primary purpose of these cars... Just like they forgot the primary purpose of the GTO when they compared it to the out-and-out sports car Mustang.

But personally, I celebrate C&D's idiocy. Because of the ignorance of Car & Driver and reviewers like them, we are able to get great cars for cheap with huge rebates. Maybe if C&D was better able to consider a car's _purpose_ when reviewing, the demand and thus price of great cars like the GTO would be more extreme. So who cares what they think? I know what I like and you guys should too. If you want performance with flashy styling, go Mustang. Nobody is going to argue with you as to which is the better vehicle given that criteria.

 

[Bob Cosby]

You're right. I haven't driven both cars. I am stereotyping. I do not believe that I could drive four people around in comfort with as low noise levels and quite as smooth a ride in the Mustang as I could in the GTO.

The word is not stereotyping - it is assumption and/or presumption.

I would not subject two adults to the back seat of the Mustang either - there is likely not contest there (though I have no idea how comfortable - or not - the GTO rear seating is). However, my comment/question was to find out what you were basing your conclusion on - to wit: "it ass rapes the Mustang in comfort." If your metric was for back seat passengers, then you likely have a point. Otherwise, I believe you to be assuming/presuming, based on something you've read on the internet - which is why I asked.

As for the GTO's styling, it is fairly unique to me. It doesn't stand out like a Mustang does but it looks like a $30K Pontiac should.

We all have our preference, and mine are no better than yours.

Consider that the GTO, with discounts, costs as much as a highly optioned Grand Prix or Bonneville and then you will realize that the styling isn't bad for what you pay.

Forgive me, but this is my point - it is difficult to tell the difference, except for those of us that know what to look for. That is not necessarily a good thing or bad thing, depending upon your point of view.

The car still looks good in dark blue, just not Mustang or Camaro flashy.

Ok. I'm a bigger fan of black though.

the GTO totally butt rapes the Marauder performance-wise, and is even available with a stick.

Agreed - a very easily-defensible position. It should be noted that the Marauder sold very poorly.

Basically, just because most people don't like it doesn't mean it is a bad car for what it is.

Agreed - but it hurts sales, which in the end, is the name of the game for GM.

The Car and Driver comparison is kind of ridiculous because it ignores the type of car that GTO buyers want.

Assumptions and presumptions, my friend.

They do this all the time when comparing cars. They say that one car wins decisively but they forget that the people who pay the money for the other car want something different.

Meaning we're all different, with different preferences and biases. I have no issues with that, and truth be told, no issues at all with the GTO. It just doesn't suit me, and thus I never really considered buying one.

To each their own.

 

[TomServo92]

Superchargedsix – You’re completely right about the $3500 incentives causing a dramatic increase in sales. After the shameless price gouging during most of the year, it’s a bit like jumping out of the spa and right into the pool. The incentives are what made me get a ’04 instead of a ’05 (or even sinking my money into one of the T/A’s).

Don't think so scooter. They've only sold 53% of planned sales by 11/1/04. Yes, the incentives have increased sales but not dramatically. If they had increased as much as you seem to think, they wouldn't have 127 days worth of inventory stockpiled.

 

[Jon Do]

Me: They do this all the time when comparing cars. They say that one car wins decisively but they forget that the people who pay the money for the other car want something different.


Bob: Meaning we're all different, with different preferences and biases. I have no issues with that, and truth be told, no issues at all with the GTO. It just doesn't suit me, and thus I never really considered buying one.

To each their own.
-------------------------------

OK Bob, I understand your point, but my point is that the people who actually buy these cars are likely to evaluate them on a different criteria than C&D drivers. For example, C&D drivers will evaluate trucks but be more concerned about NVH than utility and practicality. But the people who actually buy those trucks (at least if it is for purpose, and not show) would probably use a different criteria.

Basically, C&D has their opinions but they want a certain type of car. The guys writing the reviews aren't alway the type of consumers that would actually be in the market _buy_ a certain type of car (say a truck or a performance-oriented boat like the Marauder or GTO) in the first place. They are the type of guys that would say the better truck is the one that drives more like a BMW while forgetting utility.

 

[zero3mach1dsg]

"oriented car like the Mustang. The only reason people hate the GTO is because of A) cost and B) styling. But the GTO costs 10s of thousands less than comparable vehicles, and the styling is meant to appeal to the more conservative audience who want a 'stealth' car, not a showy type sports car.

I guess what I am saying is that all these reviews for the GTO are practically irrelevant. They all dog it because they evaluate it as something it is not (a camaro). Of course it is going to suck if you want a Camaro or Firebird. But it was never meant to appeal to that type of consumer. It's meant to appeal to the type of guy who wants to go to his accounting job every day and not stand out in the parking lot, but still have a car that is capable of providing a good amount of fun on the track on the weekends. The type of guy that wants to be able to carry four people around in comfort on occassion, and impress them to some degree WITHOUT mashing on the gas pedal.

Evaluate it like that, and no other car within $15K can compete. The next cheapest you are going to get is a CTS-V, but the GTO is about 85-90% of that car for 60% of the price.

i think people hate the gto because of the style first, then because of what represent, i don't think the price have anything to do with the lack of sales.

you guys had said it, right now the price is really good for the performance it offers, but like i said, the lack of sales doesn't have anything to do with the price of that car...

too plain and too simple, what does it look like in the night when you're coming to one from behind??? is it a honda civic???,no, maybe a ford taurus???,no, it is a gto that car doesn't have personality, why???, pontiac wanted to bring a name that a lot of folks could recognized as a performer, and what happend, a grand prix on steroids was brought to states from another country. (i didn't came up with this name, blame the fbody guys since they were the first ones to use it ), who were the first group or niche that hated the car since the beginning??? pontiac guys!!!, fbody Guys!!!, GM people in the end... the car was brought after the killing of the camaro/bird, people were expecting at least more performance, (the same performance enthusiast that had a V8 camaro/bird) since the style wasn't there, they were expecting good numbers in stock trim, they were dissapointed,you could've got an SS camaro or WS6 trans am for that money and spank gto azzes left and right out of the door. lastly people buying an SS camaro or WS6 trans am were not looking to accomodate a family of 4 on their cars, why in the heck would they look that on a gto?????

remember, the camaro or bird were killed because of the lack of sales, not becuase of their prices, the performance was there, but it didn't appeal to a lot of people like the mustangs did, even with its 25 years old platform...

take a look again at the 05 GT, the car would sell like hot bread, it does have the style to sell to the same people that had a 67 stang back in those days (it was a revolution if you didn't know that) , to the people that wish they had one back in those days, and to today guys that doesn't know crap about mustangs or they didn't want to know, because it didn't have that good handling, the price is nothing but a good bonus for $25k.

what's going to happend to the 05 gto???, with 400hp's,the fbody guys looking for more performance would finally have SS camaro or WS6 trans am performance out of an ugly and plain style gto in 2005 for a little bit more money, of course they would have better seats now , but again, remember the guys buying ss camaro's or ws6 ta's couldn't saved their cars going out of production back in 2002, so you'd see the lack of sales one more time.... i hope GM bring the camaro back in 06/07, it was a huge mistake to kill it in first place, then let the aussies alone with their holden crap, we don't like that style, is GM to blind to realize that???....

and finally for the 05 GTO vs the 05 GT performance shootout, ford didn't create the GT model thinking it would be the top of the line of their performance models. it is the bottom end of their V8 models, it has 300hp's, it would out handle the 05gto on the twisties, (we can talk about twisties now days ), it looks better than a gto, (surveys and people reaction don't lie),for only 25k, what else can you ask for ????.....

an SE mustang is now been cooked in the oven, and the cobra would be there waiting for the new camaro/vette, thing's are only getting better with this hp war...

 

[Jon Do]

"you guys had said it, right now the price is really good for the performance it offers, but like i said, the lack of sales doesn't have anything to do with the price of that car..."

Well, actually, what I am saying it hat the GTO is a good value considering the performance AND comfort it offers. It is not striclty a performance vehicle like an EVO or STI.


"pontiac wanted to bring a name that a lot of folks could recognized as a performer, and what happend, a grand prix on steroids was brought to states from another country."

Well, I would have no problem buying a Grand Prix if it was RWD and 350 HP. I would vastly prefer such a car to the Camaro. But I am the type of guy whose dreamcar was a '96 Impala SS in highschool, not a Camaro guy. (Since then my preference has changed to accomodate smaller pocket rockets as well but that is besides the point...) The GTO is a great car when evaluated as a performance boat, not a great great car when evaluated as a cheap sports car.

"they were expecting good numbers in stock trim, they were dissapointed,you could've got an SS camaro or WS6 trans am for that money and spank gto azzes left and right out of the door. lastly people buying an SS camaro or WS6 trans am were not looking to accomodate a family of 4 on their cars, why in the heck would they look that on a gto?????"

Again, the GTO is not the firebird. They should hate GM for cancelling the firebird, not bringing back the GTO. The GTO is the closest thing we have on the market to a brand new '96 Impala SS. Only it is available with a stick too so it is even better.

The '96 Impala was a limited production car too, because the performance boat market isn't that big. But when the GTO is evaluated as a car made for that market (which is spiritually what the original GTO was), it is a great car!!

People who want a Camaro should get a Mustang. That is the only cheap torque-monster sports car left. These Camaro people don't want big boats like the Impala SS or GTO. You can blame GM for cancelling the Camaro, but not for bringing the performance boat back to the market, better than ever!!

"and finally for the 05 GTO vs the 05 GT performance shootout, ford didn't create the GT model thinking it would be the top of the line of their performance models. it is the bottom end of their V8 models, it has 300hp's, it would out handle the 05gto on the twisties, (we can talk about twisties now days ), it looks better than a gto, (surveys and people reaction don't lie),for only 25k, what else can you ask for ????....."

I can ask for a price of $21K, which is what it will probably cost in a year or two. Then it will have the type of performance value that will really spank the GTO!! But of course when evaluated as a boat, it will suck. You guys have to keep in mind that the GTO is made for the type of consumer that wants something between a pimp car like an old Caddy or Caprice and a sports car like a Camaro. The GTO is a great car for this market... It is not GM's fault that the Trans Am guys are more concerned with the sports car market and not this market!!

 

[Fast GTO]

Yeah, it is MT. And that is my entire point!!

MT thought it was fitting to compare the GTO to a high priced Merc because it offered a decent amount of luxury and performance. The comparison wasn't to pick a winner, because if you are talking about the better car obviously is it the Mercedes. The comparison was there just to show you how close you can get to $80K for $30K these days.

No one would ever compare the Mustang to that Mercedes because the Mustang is about out-and-out performance. Sure, it is more comfortable and civilized now, but it still doesn't have the performance-luxury mix of the GTO.

That is all I'm saying. Not that the GTO is way better or whatever. Just that it is a car that can hang with the Mustang in performance while offering more luxury. That is why it costs more.

Of course, if you were more concerned about flashy styling, then the Mustang would win, but the GTO isn't about that. It is about an understated comfort and performance mix.

And the only overstated Mercs exterior wise are the ones that cost 100K+.

And BMW's have nearly zero overstated cars.