more 2004 GTO pics
#21
Senior Member
Certified GM nut
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 2,204
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The reason they designed it like that is so it sells to a wide variety. You gotta think though, if they design it all huge and muscle-carrish only car entusiasts are gonna buy it (and love it to death) . If they make it smaller and compact like that, they will get women buying them for looks, teens+adults for street racing, and GTO loyalists. I think it was a smart decision for the company for sales, but oh well. I was reading an article on last year and pontiac was - 5% in sales. Kinda suprised me considering you can't blink twice without seeing a Grand Prix GT driving around..and Grand Ams are everywhere! I don't understand..
#22
Senior Member
Posts like a Camaro
Originally Posted by BonneAlien
The reason they designed it like that is so it sells to a wide variety. You gotta think though, if they design it all huge and muscle-carrish only car entusiasts are gonna buy it (and love it to death) . If they make it smaller and compact like that, they will get women buying them for looks, teens+adults for street racing, and GTO loyalists. I think it was a smart decision for the company for sales, but oh well. I was reading an article on last year and pontiac was - 5% in sales. Kinda suprised me considering you can't blink twice without seeing a Grand Prix GT driving around..and Grand Ams are everywhere! I don't understand..
I think they are comparing to the previous years of when the stock market/economy was booming and everyone had money hanging out of their pockets (dont take me literally). So people bought alot more cars and they are comparing with their top peak sales numbers a few years ago. They do the same thing at retail stores complaining of "low sales" during the holiday season when they are comparing to a few years ago. Just gotta keep track of back history and see what they are comparing their new sales #'* to.
#23
Senior Member
Certified GM nut
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Kalamazoo, MI
Posts: 1,839
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by BonneAlien
The reason they designed it like that is so it sells to a wide variety. You gotta think though, if they design it all huge and muscle-carrish only car entusiasts are gonna buy it (and love it to death) . If they make it smaller and compact like that, they will get women buying them for looks, teens+adults for street racing, and GTO loyalists. I think it was a smart decision for the company for sales, but oh well...
The GTO will be Pontiac'* replacement for the Firebird/Trans Am--something a bit newer to give sales a boost and Pontiac more recognition. The TA has been around since 1967, most people have just taken it forgranted. The GTO brings back nostalgia for the Pontiac Motor Division brand.
BTW, what Holden and Pontiac are doing is the same thing they did in the late '60'* and early '70'*. Holden'* Monaro took many cues from the GTO--the Ralley II rims, the 1970-72 GTO fender treatment. Now they are reciprocating now, because Holden is already making a Holden GTO and a Holden GTS based on the Monoro platform. They are just re badging and putting a new facia on it for Pontiac. Since Holden is a GM division, they are doing the same thing that Pontiac did with Buick'* V-6, (ie. corporate sharing/standardization). Another example is the 5.7 liter (350 cu. in. engine) known as a GM corporate engine--which is really a Cheverolet engine used in all GM RWD applications (Caprise, RWD Impala SS, Trans Am, Corvette, RWD Buick Roadmaster, Camaro, GMC trucks, Cheverolet Trucks, Etc.). There are other engines now, and the 5.7 is being phased out over time--replaced by the 5.3, 6.0, etc. I was just using it as an example.
I still think that the GTO should have hood scoops--either functional or non-functional--as all previous GTO'* had.
Sorry for the novel.
#25
#26
Senior Member
Posts like a Turbo
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Crystal Lake, IL
Posts: 327
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think our problem is that we're holding this up against something from a drastically different era. The original was made at a time when there was 30-cent a gallon gas, and mostly boxy or angular bodywork, poor ergonomics, spartan interiors. Sure, it was a cool car and a crapload of fun to drive, unless you had to stop fast or take a hard corner. Then the things were kinda scary.
My hat'* off to PMD, for doing it at all. It might not be what we hoped, but neither were the 3rd gen F bodies at first. They'll probably take more styling chances in the next year or more of production. For now, they are playing it somewhat safe. I can understand that.
My hat'* off to PMD, for doing it at all. It might not be what we hoped, but neither were the 3rd gen F bodies at first. They'll probably take more styling chances in the next year or more of production. For now, they are playing it somewhat safe. I can understand that.
#27
I just went out and checked out the pictures of the GTO online at pontiacs site. I thought it looked pretty sweet, then I got to the back end. It looks almost (I stress almost but not quite) ricey. The tail lights look like something off an import (which I guess it is technically since it is designed by Holden) and I would expect dual exhaust out the back. I'm gonna be looking for a new car in the next year (in addition to my Bonneville) and I am considering the GTO, but I would need to do something with that back end, and maybe bolt on another 150 ponies while I'm at it.
Does anyone else see what I see in the back end of the GTO???
And as far as the era thing goes, I agree, you can't compare cars that are that far apart, BUT If you are gonna use a cars namesake, just be sure that is stands up for the same thing that it used to, not just a marketing ploy (EG: 67 Shelby mustang GT500 vs an 86 mustang LX, WTF were they thinking?). Still not sure where the new GTO stands on that one...
Does anyone else see what I see in the back end of the GTO???
And as far as the era thing goes, I agree, you can't compare cars that are that far apart, BUT If you are gonna use a cars namesake, just be sure that is stands up for the same thing that it used to, not just a marketing ploy (EG: 67 Shelby mustang GT500 vs an 86 mustang LX, WTF were they thinking?). Still not sure where the new GTO stands on that one...
#29
Senior Member
Posts like a Turbo
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Crystal Lake, IL
Posts: 327
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For what its worth, my opinion is that the car is nice, but nothing to get all excited about. Of course, thats not having driven it. One thing I do agree on is the trendy tail light treatment. That'* disappointing.
You know, one thing no one seems too upset about, is that the grand am was once a proud muscle car, as was the grand prix. GA'* now a days aren't much more than sporty commuters. The GP'* seem to have resurrected the performance image, but dropped the coupe .
Things change. I guess I prefer to revere the old Goat, but compartmentalize them (and the GA, & GP) so that I can appreciate the classics for what they were, and enjoy that they've crammed a lot of technology and pep into the newer cars. Speaking as someone who recently sold a 50th Anniversary GP with a 455, I can happily say I had fun with it, but drastically prefer the bonneville in my garage.
You know, one thing no one seems too upset about, is that the grand am was once a proud muscle car, as was the grand prix. GA'* now a days aren't much more than sporty commuters. The GP'* seem to have resurrected the performance image, but dropped the coupe .
Things change. I guess I prefer to revere the old Goat, but compartmentalize them (and the GA, & GP) so that I can appreciate the classics for what they were, and enjoy that they've crammed a lot of technology and pep into the newer cars. Speaking as someone who recently sold a 50th Anniversary GP with a 455, I can happily say I had fun with it, but drastically prefer the bonneville in my garage.