there should be another line to that pic that says

''and when you dont want an lt1'' :lol:

So my line of thinking wasn't too far off the mark. GM had a dead beat car on its hands, looked around and said "what can we call it????" So they slapped some GTO badges on it and pushed it. The could have called it anything, THEY chose to use the GTO name. They didn't call it the Astre or Ventura or TEMPEST or BONNEVILLE or LeMANS or CATALINA....they opted for GTO. The "general motoring public" would have bought it no matter what they called it, but they were looking to lure in the enthusiast and it failed on them. GM made the decision not to offer more than one major option on the car, again their own doing. Shame on GM for not doing its homework and using the GTO name on such a pedestrian looking vehicle.

Lessons learned may have brought us the G8.....that's a good thing.

Those same lessons may allow the Camaro to survive and thrive this time around. It will be interesting in 18 months to see if the current GM designers can come up with a fresh thought on how to carry the car forward or will the 6th gen be a retro styled 2nd gen?

Bring out the Z28 supercar......lets see that baby....$50K price tag and all...

Those numbers are alarming, but it also points to GM's (old GM, not new GM hopefully) inability to properly match production and resources with changing demand. Its not like in 1984 they sold 261,000 and then the following year they sold 40,000.....

You can't blame the consumer for that.

For all of the GTO haters, how would YOU have designed it? I have to agree with Justin, it actually paid respect to the old GTO's with it not being flashy, low key with power. Don't hate on it because it was leaps and bounds above our Fbodies in terms of quality.

it was a great car. wouldnt mind if they called it something like the g8 coupe, then the next gen couldve made a little bit more sense. like i said, great car...not a gto though. hell they couldve slapped the grand prix name on it and it wouldve sold probably more...or even a chevy badge and call it a monte

they killed the fbody after 2002, heard hell from the enthusiasts for all of 03, and managed to get us another sporty, classy, rear wheel drive v8 coupe in time for the 04 model year, and you complain that they didnt develop a whole new car?

as it has been mentioned a couple times, the original gto WAS A BLAND CAR it was a serious drive train in a run of the mill body. wtf would you expect to see as a current one? an enzo with kidney grills?

you are seriously kidding yourself if people bought or didnt buy due to the name, whatever they called it, it would have sold the same

But remember, GM was not advertising the Camaro or Firebird at that point in time because they knew they were shutting down the plant and the Canadian auto workers union that had exclusive rights to build the "Camaro". So those numbers have no meaning.

I agree, I was agreeing with him in the fact that the old GTO's were plain, not flashing but had the power.

For the people complaining about the name...does the Malibu and Monte Carlo pay respect to the old ones? :rofl::rofl: Really now...

or impalla?
or buicks new regal?

I disagree that they slapped the GTO name on for the enthusiasts... I think it's quite the opposite. If you asked people what car (from memory) was cooler, TEMPEST or BONNEVILLE or LeMANS or CATALINA or the GTO the non enthusiast would pick the GTO nearly every time. People know the name and I think GM did the right thing this time, going with the name recognition.

But even then....I'm a car enthusiast and the second car I think of when I hear Pontiac is GTO....certainly not Tempest or LeMans lol

4th gens just were not relevent for the market. It had nothing to do with marketing or anything. It had to do with the 4th gen stepping farther away from its base DNA.

So you're saying the 4th gen was too advanced for it's time! :lol: The 4th gen cars are great cars with comfort, power and decent gas mileage, how is that a bad thing? GM gave up on the 98-02 cars before they even built them knowing they were going to shut the plant down.

So using the GTO name was in no way an attempt to bring attention to the car and get people to at least come and look? I bet more than a few people who purchased, especially early over-priced dealer gouged models did in fact buy based on the GTO name plate...has it been called a T1000 or Sunbird there would have been no markup whatsoever.....

And if given the ability to properly allocate the resources to build the car efficiently, the F-body might have survived, but forces didn't allow GM that flexibility. But that's another discussion in its entirety.

You can have plain, unflashy styling and still be distinctive. The CTS is not flashy or ENZO-like with kidney gills, but is very distinctive. The G8 is also. And just because GM decided to rush it market is not an excuse they can use to defend its styling.

Nope the Malibu (assuming you are including chevelle here too) and the Monte Carlo are both shadows of their former selves, who suggested they were well appointed names?

I think the LT1 based Impala SS is one of the few times GM got it right in reaching back into history. "Lord Vader, Your Car is Ready"

http://stangbangers.com/94_ChevyImpalaSS_Ad.htm

That was a nice package.

Buick hasn't done anything of significance or success since the Grand National on the performance front. And supercharged v6's in family cars and old people cars don't count either, not they were success stories anyway.

I don't think you and I are far apart in our thinking....GM purposely used the GTO for the name recognition and easy marketing, but didn't envision the backlash. You say the commoner would most easily recognize the GTO as opposed to other names and I agree that name was chosen for the same reason, but for a different audience. And neither audience was all that impressed with the product....so GM failed on two fronts, not just one.

http://www.automotivetraveler.com/in...659&Itemid=194

Check out #5 and #3

Chris

What would you say the base DNA is?

I see the Camaro Z28 as a rear drive, V8, manual transmission, sports coupe with excellent handling and braking all wrapped in a clean distinctive body style at a price that is 30%+/- lower than the base Vette in pricing....

So that means I want my Z28 as described above for somewhere in the mid 30K's.

Chris

Reading #6 I have to say I like the looks of the GTO they picked better than the Monaro, and I think that's really interesting because the current look of the commodore is so much better than the G8 IMO.

So then every Pontiac would fit your description sans the Firebird right? The CTS is a bit flashy IMO with the rigid body lines and styling, certainly more flashy than a GTO.

Like or hate the styling, that's fine. But in the true name of the GTO and what it was back in the 60's, Pontiac/GM actually did right. A similar looking model as to what was in their lineup. If everyone was expecting some totally redesigned, stand out on it's own GTO then they don't know what the GTO was back in the day. In fact if the car was completely opposite of what other Pontiac's looked like then the GTO nameplate would be wrong.

I just don't understand what people wanted the car to be. They got a car that was better built than the Fbody, a bit more luxurious and had more than ample power...should GM have given a free blowjob and an 8-ball of coke with each purchase too? :rofl: A lot of dealers did screw up sales due to them being greedy and I would venture to say that a lot of people were hesitant to plop down a good chunk of change on a Pontiac when the Grand Prix, Grand Am and others were known to have stupid **** break all of the time. I know I wouldn't have purchased one new in their respective model years.

I think I've established through my time here that I'm a big critic of GM and don't ride their coattails because I like their cars however I just don't see where the major screw ups were on this car. You make the argument for the lack of trunk space but as far as the styling, quality, power, etc I don't think it's a bad car.

DNA is based on a personal coupe. What the 4th gen did was become a 4 seater Corvette.
The 5th gen splits somewhere in the middle, something a bit more upright then a 4th gen. You dont fall into it, its hood, while long, is not as obtrusive. The rake on the windshield is no where near as bad on the 4th gen.
4th gen is a great performance package, but outside of that it offers nothing. First, second, third and now 5th fit the DNA. 4th gen went way too far with performance.

4th gen design did something wrong. from what I read it killed off the female demographic, something the other 3 gens never did, nor did mustang (part of he who buys v6 cars discussion). You can't turn away 50% of the market and win too many times.

Ok. Good points. My firechicken is no fun to get into or out that's for sure.

No you can't.

Bahhh, 4th gens can tow boats better than 1st, 2nd or 3rd gen so it proved its utility. GM didn't build enough V6 4th gens and they put t-tops on too many of them. That runs the price up for stuff people really don't want. A V6 hardtop 4th gen should be a $20K car tops. Forcing people to buy a $30K car will help you lose buyers quickly.

I remember reading a bunch on the 4th gen after it's demise. both in & out of GM people said most women were turned off by how low it was, the long doors, the poor visibility regarding the nose and so forth. Cost was not something I read very often. Design was.

Of course this does not apply to the ladies here, they are not average. :)

It was....IIRC, Little G's '02 Camaro 3.8 / M5 hardtop car with normal power features and base radio was $19,2xx

- Justin