Howdy, Stranger!

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





Pontiac Grand Prix GXP 2006

1101113151634

Comments

  • rayainswrayainsw Posts: 2,529
    "Now that I have read the article more carefully, they really seemed to like the GP GXP. "

    Interesting quotes - thanks for posting them, as well as the Numbers.
    - Ray
    Awaiting Postal Service delivery of my copy . .
  • rayainswrayainsw Posts: 2,529
    "
    They also really liked the seats and the "grippy" steering wheel. "

    Did they specify if this was a 2006 model? Or a 2005?
    My understanding is (though I've not yet seen a 2006) that the steering wheel cover is one of the (few) changes . .
    - Ray
    Just Curious . .
  • bigdaddycoatsbigdaddycoats Posts: 1,058
    Since they mention the GM employee price for everyone, I am guessing this is a 2005 model. Not 100% positive though.
  • ocmike3ocmike3 Posts: 232
    It was a 2005 - the interior photos have the 2005 trim.
  • rmozolrmozol Posts: 124
    I finally got a 2006 brochure, and saw the new colors. The "Bronzestone Metallic" is actually a dark grey, but ISN'T offered on the GXP. I'm wondering how bright the "Sport Red Metallic" is now. Secondly, the brochure talks about the "standard keyless remote start" too. This shows up as a $150 option on most web sites, and not standard. I can't find any delaers close with a 2006, so I can't verify this. Do they mean a remote start, or the push-button start like on the upscale cars? Any ideas? Thanks.
  • ocmike3ocmike3 Posts: 232
    Per the GM Print Book the 2006 GT & GXP come standard with the remote start. Base model gets only keyless entry. I expect most websites are not updated to the full 2006 standard features and options yet.
    The remote start is a nice feature on cold and hot days. You can start the car from inside and let it run a bit before going out into the weather. It came on my 2005 GXP and after having it for a few months, it is a nice feature.
  • rayainswrayainsw Posts: 2,529
    I found this quite an interesting Test. I read it though twice. And I pulled the CompG test out of my files. Well, out of my disorganized stacks of back issues. . .

    I have driven multiple examples of both the 2004 GTP CompG and the GXP – and I can understand most of the comments and conclusions in each test. (The CompG was tested by C+D in the July 2003 issue.)

    The characters (as well as raw acceleration numbers) of these cars are very different.

    And given the limited editorial pages available, that’s likely why C+D chose to do a full 4 page test, rather than a single page of impressions.

    As I understand the substantial delays holding back a RWD platform to replace the FWD Grand Prix (and other FWD GM platforms) I see the GXP and the Impala SS as representative of what we will see for reasonably priced, mid-sized Sport Sedans from The General – at least for a while . .

    [[ Aside: In Post # 4040 on the GP Board here at Edmunds – now “Grand Prix 2005 and earlier” – in mid-February, I predicted a quarter mile time for the GXP of 14.3. MT reported 14.3 in their June issue, and now C+D reports: (drum roll, please) 14.3 . . ]]

    I consider this pretty quick, for a 4-door sedan geared as it is, with EPA ratings of 18 / 27, and available for substantially less than $30K. In fact, looking at the Sept. issue of Motor Trend, where they test 3 sport sedans (each with an automatic trans.) that I think one could argue have MSRPs and typical purchase prices that are in the “next tier up” - none of these 3 would beat the GXP in 0 – 60 or in the Quarter Mile. The quickest of these 3 (both the BMW 330i & Infiniti G35 – the Audi A4 3.2 was even further behind) posted 14.7 seconds. And 0 – 60 in 6.5 & 6.6. Compared to 5.7 (C+D), 6.0 (MT) for the GXP.

    A half second may not seem like a lot to many. My experience has been that the seat-of-the-pants difference in feel between two cars a half second apart in 0 – 60 and the Quarter is something that is easily discernable to those who view acceleration performance as: “of significant interest”.

    Now any car is more (or can be less) than a couple of numbers, but I find these numbers to be quite impressive (and I certainly find my GXP’s acceleration experience entertaining) given the actual transaction price and the other attributes this vehicle delivers.

    Clearly, in some respects, as C+D states: “This ain’t a BMW.”

    Yet, in every dynamic aspect that is important to me, the GXP is actually better than the last 3 BMWs I test drove – price considered. (2 330i-s and 1 540i, a couple of years ago.) And I find it quite comfortable and ‘driver friendly’ as well

    YMMV.

    - Ray
    Content with this iteration of GM’s FWD Sport Sedan . .
  • chats1chats1 Posts: 158
    I have a new 2006 GXP which I bought in August. It is in Dark Cherry and I like it very much. My only problem is with the tires. This car, as the 2005, comes with Bridgestone Potenza REO50A -- P255/45/R18 in front and P225/50/R18 in the rear. They are performance tires and low profile tires and I just found out but not from the dealer Summer Tires. Does anyone know if they can be driven in the snow. The car is front-wheel drive. Also, after calling two dealers, I was told they would be fine and GM told me that they would be fine, but two other dealers told me that I could either buy all-season tires or specialty snow tires. Any comments or suggestions. Thanks.
  • They are GM spec all weather tires. They are not the same as the the Potenza's available at the tire store. The sidewall should have a TPC spec number on them if they are from GM. They are supposed to have the M+S rating although it is not on the sidewall. I hope that is an oversight, I can't imagine Pontiac would let a front drive car out with summer only tires on it without all kinds of disclaimers and warnings about snow.. A lot of people are buying GXP's because they want a year round 303 hp performance car.
  • rmozolrmozol Posts: 124
    I was worried about the same thing living in WI. Here's my idea............. Rubber is rubber, and they won't crumble, right? Since the key to traction with a solid road underneath it, is digging down through it, the skinnier the tire, the better. Anyway, I think I'll just swap front to rear, and vice-versa, and have thinner ones on front. There MIGHT be an issue with the one inch wider rim on the rear, but I doubt it. I understand that I won't have maximum grip on a race track, but I can live with that for a few months. Any thoughts on THIS???????????
  • chats1chats1 Posts: 158
    The sidewall on the tire does have a TPC number above the P255 tire size and P225 tire size. The TPC number above the tire number contains numbers, but no letters, i.e. M+S for mud and snow. I was told that these are not all-season tires. All-season tires are H. The rating on the tires is W. I called GM about these tires on the GXP's and was asked if the dealer talked to me about these tires. I said no. She put me on hold and came back to me and told me that she called the Service Dept. where I bought my car and the Service Manager said that he is familiar with these tires and they would be fine in the winter; I don't need winter tires. But, two other dealers who I contacted over the Internet indicated that they are the same tires that are used on the Corvette and GTO and I could get specialty snow tires or all-season tires for driving in foul weather. I also read reviews that these tires get a 1.8 rating in the snow. I live in New Jersey and we do get snow. If I had known about this problem, I would have bought an Infinity G35 coupe which would have been just as worthless in the snow because it is instead of front wheel drive, rear wheel drive with low profile, performance tires -- 19 inch. I have had four GTP's and just wanted a change so that is why i bought the GXP.
  • rayainswrayainsw Posts: 2,529
    “these are not all-season tires”

    As far as I know, due largely to the timing of introduction, the only ones who have actually driven these cars with these tires in snow are GM employees.

    And the only one to have posted comments anywhere that I have seen regarding any such experience ** MAY ** be a bit biased. (GM’s product manager for the GXP program.)

    These tires, however, were developed specifically for the GXP, and snow traction was reported to be a priority. And they are not actually identical to those fitted to the other vehicles you mentioned. I think if I lived much further north, I’d at least wait for one or 2 snows before buying any different tires.

    Good luck!

    Clearly, we’ll know more once some customers start to encounter snow – and report here (hint) . .

    - Ray
    Happy to be living (Atlanta area) where snow it typically a non-issue . .
  • chats1chats1 Posts: 158
    thank you very much for your reply. I am going to wait until I encounter our first snow. Also, I know my other tires were different on the GTP's. I never had any problems with driving in the snow with the GTP's, actually those cars were very good. I think I should have kept my 40th Anniver. Edition. I did so much research on this car, but never even thought about the tires until I read an article saying that why did Pontiac put Summer Tires on this car. Thanks.
  • hammen2hammen2 Posts: 1,313
    ...the GTO only uses Bridgestone Potenza's on cars equipped with the 18" wheel option, and those are RE040's, not RE050's. The GTO tires are clearly labeled as "summer-only" and I've read of one bad winter experience (GM employee, prototype car).

    Having seen several posts on various sites, including some here, from the former product manager for the GXP (same employee as above, now no longer working for GM), I can tell you that snow performance was a very critical design parameter of this car (a FWD performance car alternative to RWD vehicles for folks in the snow belt). I'll email him and bring this question to his attention.

    --Robert
  • chats1chats1 Posts: 158
    the tires on the 2006 GXP are REO50A's. the tire does not say "summer only." The traction on the tire is A and the temperature is A. I have examined these tires very carefully. Nothing about summer is on the tire, but when I go to the Bridgestone Website, they are considered racing rain tires, not for snow. I called Customer Service at Bridgestone and the woman said the RE050A's are new. She did not know too much about them. She said they were for summer only and not for snow, but when I brought up the RE050A number, she checked and said that the traction is A and they should be okay. Who knows? If you find out any info about this, I would appreciate it.
  • hammen2hammen2 Posts: 1,313
    Here is his email response:

    "Though the Potenzas on GXP would appear to be the garden-variety type available at any Tire Rack, that is not the case. They were engineered specifically for the GXP application and had inclement weather performance as a high priority in their development. The way you can tell if its the "real" GXP tire set is to look for the TPC code on the tire sidewall, meaning it was devloped by GM. Any Bridgestone dealer will have the tires and I would strongly recommend replacing with the same tire, to take advantage of all the engineering work done.

    I drove a GXP last winter in southeastern Michigan for a couple of weeks (in snow) and found the car worked fine in those conditions. If I had to do it all over again, I'd make sure the tire had an all-season rating to clear up all this confusion."
  • ocmike3ocmike3 Posts: 232
    Per the GXP Owners Manual the tires are designed for excellent performance on wet and dry roads... I read in one of the Car rags that Bridgestone was/is the vendor of choice but they didn't work with GM on the RE050A's until they were embarrassed by GM trying out someone else's tire with good performance. The RE050A's were designed to provide better sidewall performance for the GXP and all that HP through the front wheels. The TPC codes are 1269 for the front and 1270 for the rear. Based on the design of these and having grown up in Montana, I would expect these are not that great in snow conditions. Most FWD cars will have advantage over RWD in snow similarly equipped, but I would want something with a bit more Bite for winter.
  • rmozolrmozol Posts: 124
    I see Pontiac FINALLY got the 2006 info on their website. I was beginning to wonder how long it would take. I guess the tire debate will go on forever. Either way, a 255 tire is one wide dude to cut through the snow! I'll just go to plan B.
  • ocmike3ocmike3 Posts: 232
    just took first real road trip, mostly freeway with some traffic jams through Seattle going and coming home. Running 65-75mph most of the time. I filled up on the way back; 362 miles 13.52g = 26.8mpg so the EPA estimates of 27mpg hwy seem pretty close. My mixed, mostly city streets, some back roads has been yielding 18-20mpg.
  • rmozolrmozol Posts: 124
    That's pretty impressive! Are you using premium then? How many miles on your engine? Thanks
  • rmozolrmozol Posts: 124
    I took one out for a test drive today and loved it! This was a new car, and it had the TC, ABS, and brake light on. The saleman said to drive it anyway because he thought that he turned them on by messing with the display controls, so I did. I hit the brakes hard near the delearship, the rear tires locked, and the back end started to come around on me. I barely kissed the curb, before it straightened out. He then said, "I guess those lights DID mean something."! Secondly, I looked closely at the tires too. There is NO way these will be any good in the snow. The edges are rounded, and the tread blocks have no sipes in them, and they are WIDE. These things will be like drag slicks on slush. I'm already looking at buying two, if not 4, Blizzaks then for the winter to put on the front. Now, I just have to find the best deal.
  • chats1chats1 Posts: 158
    After I purchased my 2006 GXP in August, I was told that they really don't know that much about them yet because "they haven't been schooled on them yet." When I drove the car home, as I was backing down the driveway I heard a shuffling noise coming from the rear. I took it back the next day. They asked me how I liked the car, I said ask me after you fix it. They fixed it. What they did they told me was lubricate it. Who knows, but I don't hear the noise anymore. I was there from around 10:20 to 1:30.

    Now, my car has the Satellite Radio in it, besides, of course, OnStar. I have one antennae on the roof behind the sunroof, which is a black mast with a little nub sticking up. I was told first that my Satellite antennae is in that antennae with the OnStar by the salesperson. On Star says no. The Service Manager told me that it is, he thinks, in with the radio antennae in the back window, another salesperson at the same dealership assured me that it is in with the the black mask OnStar antennae. According to my manual a Satellite Antennae should be near the front on the roof and the OnStar behind the Sunroof on the roof. Also in the back window where the defogger grid lines are, the top grid line is shortened by about five inches. I went back to the dealership, we looked at another 2006 Grand Prix and Bonneville GXP. They were exactly the same with the shortened line. I guess this is left if someone wants to add some equipment on the rear window. The Service Dept. told me that they would look on the computer. Any thoughts on any of these concerns. Also, when you took the 2006 for a test drive, did you notice the antennae on the roof.

    Also, my nephew has my 1999 GTP which he has had for four years, since I bought the 2002 Anniv. Edition, it went on fire last week five minutes after he turned off the ignition. the fire destroyed the entire front area up to and including the windshield. The fire dept. had to cut the engine out and the hood off. The fire started in the engine.
  • rayainswrayainsw Posts: 2,529
    "Any thoughts on any of these concerns."

    I see a number of observations concerning the antennas and defogger grid, and an issue that you took the dealer - and was apparently fixed.

    What exactly are your concerns here?

    My GXP has the 2 'roof' antennas. I have never tried OnStar – but 1 of them I believe is for XM and my XM certainly works, whatever antenna it uses.

    I looked at the rear defogger \ defroster ‘grid’ lines. Looking inside the car, it appears to me that the top (shorter) grid line is actually completely separate from the defogger section – and I expect that it is:

    “The AM-FM antenna is integrated with the rear window
    defogger, located in the rear window.” – owner’s manual p 3-134

    - Ray
    With a 2005 and the same 2 or 3 antennas and the same 'short' top grid line . .
  • chats1chats1 Posts: 158
    My concern is that I think I am supposed to have two antennaes. My Satellite works fine but sometimes listening to the music I get a hissing sound briefly and then it stops and the music resumes. I assume it is interference. My OnStar personal calling works just fine also. This is a 2006 model and is different than the 2005. also, where the antennae is in the rear window, there is a small black "glob looking" connector sticking out on the inside. I actually am the only person in this area of New Jersey that has this 2006 model. One morning driving in I got no signal on every channel I tried. I called Satellite, they said they could refresh it but didn't want to mess up my car. I said "no". I'll see how it is going home. It was fine. So, I assume there was interference. My brother actually developed the XM chip and said it's not worth the money. I guess I should just ask him my questions.
  • rmozolrmozol Posts: 124
    Cadillacs didn't have an OnStar antenna that showed. It was a receiver under the rear seat area hidden. Maybe these have that too.
  • Nav with the HUD and the new instrument trim, with the chrome on the interrior dress it up a bit. The rear still suck i bet, since they did not re-design the chassis or anything. But I can see this car for someone who does not have back seat passengers much. Its pretty long though, which in some places mean tough on parking.

    Still, this car with its V8 and all these features is compelling, as long as the final price is under 30K its probably worth it.
  • rayainswrayainsw Posts: 2,529
    “Nav with the HUD and the new instrument trim, with the chrome on the interrior dress it up a bit. The rear still suck i bet, since they did not re-design the chassis or anything. But I can see this car for someone who does not have back seat passengers much. Its pretty long though, which in some places mean tough on parking.

    Still, this car with its V8 and all these features is compelling, as long as the final price is under 30K its probably worth it.”

    While I have not seen a 2006, with the few interior changes, I am in basic agreement based on my 2005.

    With the V8 performance (and that lovely exhaust note!), the enhanced handling & ride & brakes, and an actual transaction price below $27K (no NAV, but most every other option – MSRP $33K) on mine, this represents a “Screamin’ Bargain”. For me. [[ Or perhaps a deep rumbling, barking, & burbling Bargain??? ]]

    I do carry rear seat passengers – but not often, and typically not for long. So the fact that the rear seat is configured more to accommodate the fold down seats & increased load capacity than long term comfort for human occupants does not concern me much.

    - Ray
    Find the GXP well “worth it” . .
  • I have 5100 miles on my Dk Cherry GXP and have some questions that the forum may be able to answer. The good news is that with the exception of a bad battery at three weeks, I have no isues with the build quality of the car.

    Question - Has there been any resolution regarding the remote start and the fact that the A/C doesn't turn on. Does anyone know if the heater will function with the remote start?

    Question - The one thing that bugs me is that the A/C resets to run when the ignition is activated even tho I turn it off. The only way to keep the A/C off on start is to have turned the entire system off before turning off the motor. There is no vent only setting. Does anyone know of a solution to this problem?

    Does anyone know when the aftermarket air filters ie. K and N will have a product available?

    I would like to replace the turn signals with the blue Silverstone lamps - yellow when on but blue when off. The manual doesn't list the bulb #.

    Love the car and am waiting to run a refrigerator (Dodge Charger) on a twisty road.
  • ocmike3ocmike3 Posts: 232
    yes, running premium and just turned over 2k miles.
  • rmozolrmozol Posts: 124
    So you're saying that the AC WON'T go on with the remote start, but it WILL go on with the key, even though it was turned off??????????? WOW! That's one thing I was looking forward to (car cooling with remote start), since they don't offer an "express down" window feature with the key fob. As far as performance, Chevy High Performance magazine has been doing a bolt-on of a Vortec 5.3 over the last few months. I don't know if there's a huge difference between this and the LS4 either. They added 21 HP, at the wheels, by just changing rocker arms. They got another 10 for K&N and a less-restrictive exhaust. Get this, they got an additional 8 HP using all synthetic fluids. This is almost 40 HP, AT THE WHEELS, which equals 55-60 at the engine? With all the cars and SUV's going to the LS4, it won't be long before there are kits out there!
Sign In or Register to comment.