Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





Pontiac Grand Prix - 2000-2005

18081838586145

Comments

  • ab348ab348 Dartmouth, Nova Scotia, CanadaPosts: 2,251
    Thanks for the honest review. You seem to have hit many of the same points I noted about the car. It just could have been so much better with relatively little effort by GM if they had used some decent materials and got less gimmicky with the interior.

    2014 Cadillac ATS4 2.0T, 1968 Oldsmobile Cutlass S Holiday Coupe

  • gunitgunit Posts: 469
    <<But I've seen a lot of Silverados with only the right DRL on... Something fishy there...>>

    There is alot of them in my area with that one light on, is that GM Design feature? Hope not...

    <<About HID, I'm a little wary of replacement costs: $500 each! I've seen good headlights designs doing better than some HID-equipped cars around town...>>

    HID bulbs are NOT $500 to replace and they last longer then Halogen. Which non HID cars have better headlight designs then HID equipped cars? The '97-'03 GP has the most useless hi-beams I have ever used, the regular lamps aren't that great. By comparson the HID on my '01 I30t are the best headlights I have ever used. The '04 GTP should have had HID as an option just like the altima/max have had for years now.
  • gunitgunit Posts: 469
    Montanafan, All the new 2004 GP's my area have the foglights on during the day, so is somebody rewiring these cars? It against the law in NJ to drive with your foglights on UNLESS its inclement weather. Strange
  • gunitgunit Posts: 469
    Dindak, We can argue this over and over, I have seen studies that PRAISE DRLS and those that Shame it. So who do you believe then? 1/2 the studies are PRO DRLS and 1/2 are ANTI-DRLS, and when GM EPA rates it's cars the DRLS is shut down that is a fact. For every site that praises DRLS there is an anti DRLS site.

    A better feature is the automatic sensor on certain cars that turns the headlights on when it gets dark enough out. Driving without headlights is more of a safety problem. I have seen many people, especially in parking garages or at dusk driving with no lights on.
  • richm4richm4 Posts: 169
    Have had an 04 GTP since April and am happy but would have bought a CTS if I had to do it over again.

    Highs:
    Great engine and transmission
    Great radio
    Nice leather
    Roomy interior and trunk

    Lows:
    Expensive compared to what you get with some other cars
    Cheap cheap cheap plasticy interior
    Low back seat
    Harsh ride
    Wiper stalk gets turned on accidentally very easily
    Fit of moldings around carpeting was not installed very well
  • gunitgunit Posts: 469
    The GTP engine is very loud and unrefined sounding above 3500rpm when compared to the Accord or maxima. But can't beat that 280 ft lbs torque at 3600rpm.

    Notice Honda never mentions its torque rating of 212 at 5000rpm, but always mentions the 240 hp.
  • gunitgunit Posts: 469
    The only knock on the '04 is the regualr 3800, still rated at only 200 horse since the Series 2 came out in 1995? In 8 yrs everybody else has increased their power? What is up with that?

    Maxima, accord, altima have increased power 25-40% since 1997.

    GP is still stuck on 200hp!! In 1997 it was fine, not in 2004.

    Why did GM increase the GTP by 20 hp and not do anything with the regular one?

    The GT does NOT have enough highway acceleration.

    Do about 60 in the GT and put it to the floor, not much. The extra pwr of the GTP is much better.
  • vcjumpervcjumper Posts: 1,110
    What was the price differential between the GTP and CTS at the time? About the harsh ride, do you have a Comp-G?

    Interesting that more people who have driven the vehicle are saying how cheap the plastic interior is.
  • ruskiruski Posts: 1,566
    once you get hooked on HUD, it is hard to drive other cars that don't have it.
  • tek3tek3 Posts: 20
    To get a CTS with the same equipment as a loaded GTP one would have to pay mid $30's or better. Hard to say the CTS is a better choice at that price.
  • johnclineiijohnclineii Posts: 2,287
    I'll say it. The CTS at such a price is a much better deal than a loaded GTP. I bet it depreciates less as well, percentage-wise. Not to mention that Cadillac levels of service are much better than Pontiac ones.
  • carguy58carguy58 Posts: 2,303
    a black 04 GP yesterday(3rd one I have seen.) The overall shape of the car looks good. The front of it looks very nice. The back end is sort of a mystery. I appreciate the clean look of it w/o any cladding at all. I think it looks best in black. I do like it better than last generation in terms of looks.
  • dindakdindak Posts: 6,632
    gunit : Having LIVED with DRLs for 10+ years I totally believe the studies for them. I think my experience and the many studies I have provided links to are much better than the arguments you have put forth (saving $5 gas / year ect). Like I said, I was against them when they came out but after living with them I will tell you that not having them mandatory in the U.S. is shame. I hope the U.S. mandates soon. Auto head lights are a good feature also, they should be incorporated into the DRL systems.

    gunit : "The GT does NOT have enough highway acceleration". LOL, those poor people with only 200 HP, how do they live eh?

    johnclineii : Probably right on the CTS / GTP issue. Only down side is Cadillac service and insurance is likely to be higher.

    Just noticed in the paper this weekend that GM Canada added $1000 cash back to all 03s for the final clearance.
  • evandroevandro Posts: 1,108
    You're right, HID bulbs cost between $160 and $185 (see http://www.xenon-hid.com/hid-lights.htm). I was basing my comments on their cost in Europe. Yet, 10x more expensive than halogen ones...

    But I like the illumination quality of my Bonneville's headlights.

    And, boy, do some HID headlights cause glare!
  • evandroevandro Posts: 1,108
    As I said, what you think as the fog-lights on are just low-intensity lamps behind the same lenses as the actual fog-lights...
  • evandroevandro Posts: 1,108
    I wonder if what's been holding back the output of the 3.8 is the tranny... The GTP gets a soupped up version that, so goes the word, doesn't last as long as the stock one with the NA engine...
  • oldsman01oldsman01 Posts: 1,203
    Actually, 97 GPs with the n/a 3800 only made 195 hp so hp has increased by 5, but I get your point:) I like the 3800 V6 and for an OHV engine, it is pretty refined, economical, and performs well. But I think GM is nearing the end of the road on the engine's performance potential. The new 3.6 liter DOHC V6 looks very promising as it seems to have both the HP and torque numbers to provide a pretty good punch. Anyone want to imagine what one of those with a supercharger would be like.
  • I've been driving in NJ for the past 4 years with my fog lights on all the time.

    I like DRL's and I like automatic headlights.

    And I suspect that the GT2 will have enough highway acceleration to suit my needs. My Grand Am has plenty in that category, with a smaller enginer.
  • johnclineiijohnclineii Posts: 2,287
    Power is a relative thing. What is acceptable to some is too much for others and nowhere near enough for still others.

    Drive, then decide.
  • dindakdindak Posts: 6,632
    Absolutely. That said, the GT / GT2 200hp is plenty for me and 95%^ of people out there. I don't drag people (usually) at lights and have nothing to prove with my car.

    Even our second car (an Alero) has only a 140hp 2.2L Ecotec in it and I think it's plenty peppy even on the highway.
  • gunitgunit Posts: 469
    Oldsman01, you were right the GP made 195hp in 1997 at the last minute because of cooling issues, they couldn't safely rate it at 200hp until 1998. The bonny had a 205hp version of the 3800.
      
    Something doesn't sound right when GM bumped the SE 3100 engine from 160 hp in 1997 to 175hp, yet they couldn't do the same with the 3800? Come on !!

    Same thing, for '04 they bump the S/C 3800 to 260, up from 240, yet they keep the regular 3800 at 200 still? same as 1998 !!

    The competition has made such leap and bounds and GM is stuck on the same GT power ratings from 1998....
  • gunitgunit Posts: 469
    Dindak, Sepak for yourself, 200hp may be good for you, but not for me..... Based on sales, 95% of buyers were NOT happy with 200hp GT because nearly 30% of buyers opted for the GTP's 240 hp each year, that is the only reason I bought the GP was because of that engine, if it only had the 200hp engine, I would have gone with something else... 6.8 vs 8.0 0-60mph is a big difference, especially in safely pulling out onto a highway. The 200hp engine is great off the line and up to 40mph... after 40mph the 3800 runs out of steam. I have had many experiences in GT 200hp Grand Prix as renta cars, that is what I usually rent on business trips all the time. I could never find a GTP rentacar. Again, at 60mph, put the 3800 to the floor, not much, only so-so, where there was a huge dif with the 240 horse engine if you nailed it at 60mph.

    Every try pulling out from a dead stop with 4 people in the car directly on too a highway with no merge lane? You would then appreciate the extra 40 horse!!
  • gunitgunit Posts: 469
    When I traded my MODDED 1997 GTP Coupe with around 58k miles in 2002, never had a tranny problem, shifted like it was new. I used synthetic tranny fluid wit h an external cooler/shift kit and changed it at 30k miles. I like it better then the 4spd one in my '01 I30t. Shifts crisper before the kits.

     Like you said the GTP gets a more heavy duty version of the 4T65-E Transaxle to handle the extra power. It can take up to 280ft-lbs torque. It can probably take up to 280/300 hp mark, I don't know of the facts on what the rebuild rate of GTP vs GT trannies are. People are probably harder on the GTP. It's a good tranny regardless.
  • johnclineiijohnclineii Posts: 2,287
    And yet, I traded my 98 GTP for an 00 Impala LS with the 200 hp engine. Huge difference? No. As satisfying to drive as the GTP? Steering and handling? Yes, it is different but still satisfying. Power? No.
  • dan165dan165 Posts: 653
    I think you completely speak for your self when you say 200hp is not sufficient for a midsize sedan. For the vast majority of car buyers (myself included) the standard 3800 is more than enough power and certainly much more than the hundreds of thousands of 4 cylinder sedan buyers out there. Your power obsession is not shared by most people.

    RE: The DRLs issue you were arguing, your points are very weak to put it mildly. Saving gas? Give me a break!! DRLs have been shown to save lives and cut accident rates. Open you mind to other people's comments, your opinion is yours and not the holly grail.
  • montanafanmontanafan Posts: 945
    Gunit, I can't beleive that everyone in New Jersey is rewiring their cars.

    The anti-DRL sites all link to a "how does it work" article that says DRLs would cost the owners a couple of gallons of gas per year.

    I had a chance to drive the CTS during a recent GM Auto Show in Motion. The center stack in the CTS is the same material and "gain" pattern as the GP,to my eye. (Drove a GP a few minutes latter) The only difference is on the CTS it only forms the Top and Sides of the radio/HVAC box. There was a softer material on the front.
  • dan165dan165 Posts: 653
    Congrats on the new GPs. The 04 family is growing which is nice to see. I have a GT2 which I just love driving. No issues to report aside from a keyed door.

    :-(
  • "Based on sales, 95% of buyers were NOT happy with 200hp GT because nearly 30% of buyers opted for the GTP's 240 hp each year"

    Put me in the category that are happy with 200 HP. I would say that most people are most concerned about their acceleration at low to mid speed range. And I still don't understand how a car's accleration can just peter out once you hit 40 mph. Granted it doesn't have the supercharged push of the GTP, but still it has 230 ft lbs of torque! The 3.5 Altima has 45 more HP but only 16 ft lbs torque. The Accord has 40 more HP, but 18 LESS ft lbs torque. The Camry has 10 more HP, but 10 less ft lbs torque.

    And furthermore, I don't care that the 3800 engine has had 200 HP for the past 8 years or whatever. It gets the job done as far as I'm concerned. I drove a 240 HP Intrepid SXT and the thing couldn't get out of its own way. I test drove a 200 HP Monte Carlo and the car could spin the wheels at will.
  • I love this Edmunds customer review of the GT2 model. Is this person from this planet? Who orders a car without knowing what they're getting??

    "Review: I ordered not knowing the design...bad mistake...this is one ugly Grand Prix. As Vanilla looking as you can get...what were they thinking? Is there anyone home at Pontiac??? And we thought the Aztech was a joke?

    Favorite Features: Rear doors open wide...that about it.

    Suggested Improvements: Fire the design team...put them on the island with the Azteck team!!! Start over!!!"
  • evandroevandro Posts: 1,108
    I'm not unhappy with the 3.8's 205HP on my Bonneville SLE (5 extra HP from freer exhaust), but I'd take 240 or 260HP of the SC anytime. I just couldn't afford an SSEi.

    That been said, HP figures can be misleading, as midlifecrisis suggests. As someone has already said here, the torque figures and the shape of its curve is much more important.

    A good illustration of these statements was a mid-size test by C&D a few years ago, when a GP GT beat every contender under any performance aspect, even if the others had DOHC and valve timing, such as Accord, Maxima, etc. Yet, one wouldn't read more than one line about that in the article...
This discussion has been closed.