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



  • 14871487 Posts: 2,407
    The pontiac website still doesnt have much info about the GXP. The literature I got at the autoshow said it will be available in april so perhaps it seems to me that the website should be updated soon. If the pricing has been released than I see no reason for the site to be lacking info and pics.

    While it is true that you could get a lightly equipped G35 for the same amount as a GXP, I think the GXP is aimed at the Maxima, Altima SE V6 and V6 Chargers/300s. I doubt it will get good reviews from the press so its going to be tought to launch this car with this pricing successfully.
  • cfazzaricfazzari Posts: 77
    It wouldn't surprise me to hear that GM is holding back the GP GXP in order to decrease the number of Bonneville GXPs and Grand Prix GTPs in inventory. GP GXP will cut into the sales of the cars it's already produced but not yet sold.
  • rayainswrayainsw Posts: 2,953
    "The pontiac website still doesn't have much info about the GXP."

    The Pontiac website was update today (or possibly last night) to include some additional info. on the GXP.

    Though the "Build Your Pontiac" still does not show / allow a GXP selection . .
    Nor the Locate function. That otherwise works better for me than GMBuypower . .
    So very very very odd . .
    - Ray
    Ready to drive one, but . .
    2016 BMW 340i
  • 14871487 Posts: 2,407
    I just saw it today. Obviously they have more work to do. The performance of the car looks promising.
  • yoda2yoda2 Posts: 1
    The specs for the GXP on the Pontiac website does not include a spare tire. Any idea why? The GXP comes with a tire inflation kit. Does anyone know what this is?

  • brood1213brood1213 Posts: 27
    They could not fit a spare that would fit in the hole already in the Grand Prix. Since it uses bigger tires and brakes it could not use the normal doughnut tire.
  • rayainswrayainsw Posts: 2,953
    First GXPs have been delivered to customers.
    - Ray
    With none shown in stock (according to GMBuypower) closer than 100+ miles from Atlanta yet (sigh) . .
    2016 BMW 340i
  • rayainswrayainsw Posts: 2,953
    Motor Trend sayeth:

    0 – 60: 6.0
    Quarter: 14.3 at 98.1

    No “Estimate” (theirs or GM’s)


    Now I must go read the article . . .

    - Ray
    Glad to see the 14.3 . .
    2016 BMW 340i
  • 14871487 Posts: 2,407
    I didnt see the GXP in the new MT issue. Is there a test in there? I may have missed it because I looked at it briefly. I saw the three page ad they had in there for the GTO and GXP. Pontiac is sponsoring a comparison test on Speedchannel involving the GTO and GXP vs their competition. It airs on June 12.
  • rayainswrayainsw Posts: 2,953
    “I didnt see the GXP in the new MT issue. Is there a test in there?”

    Article title is: “No Grip, No Glory / Front-, rear-, or four-wheel drive?” – page 90.

    Sad (to me) that there is no reference to the GXP either on the cover or in the table of contents. There, it shows article name, but does not list the selected combatants. So – if someone happens to be looking for info on the GXP, they will likely not notice that this is a source. . .

    Anyway. While I cannot type the whole article, here are a couple of quotes that might hold you over until your copy is available:

    “exhaust throbs”

    “. . beast finds focus when you crack the throttle”

    “ . .hang onto the steering wheel as it wriggles with spasms of torque.”

    Bondurant Instructor Mike Speck: “ . . impressed with how rudely the front-drive GXP can be manhandled.”

    Since this article was focused on the dynamic differences between RWD, AWD and FWD, there was little reference to ride (or other) comfort / convenience features on any of the cars. (Did mention that the 45-series 18” tires on the G resulted in some “jittery” feel.)

    Some numbers:
    . . . . . G35 6MT . . GXP . . WRX STi
    0 – 30: . 2.1 . . . . 2.4 . . . . 1.2
    0 – 60: . 5.8 . . . . 6.0 . . . . 4.7
    Quarter: 14.1 / 99.7 . 14.3 / 98.1 . 13.3 / 100.1
    braking: . 121ft . . . . 119 . . . 113 (from 60 – 0)
    slalom: . .65.4 . . . . 64.2 . . . 69.7
    Lat G: . . . 0.85 . . . 0.82 . . . 0.90
    (GXP number looks like a typo, as in another spot they show 0.86 g)
    Road Course: 23.3 . . . 23.8 . . . 21.9
    Base MSRP: $31.2 . . .$29.9 . . . $32.8
    Weight: . . 3510 . . . 3630 . . . 3290
    Wt dist . . 53 / 47 . 63 / 37 . 58 / 42

    My current and 2 prev. cars are / were RWD, AWD and RWD (then my ’97 GTP) – and each with an 8 cylinder motor rated between 250 and 280 HP.

    Oh, and there is an interesting typo that slipped through:

    “ . . we rounded up a trio of potent, 3000-horsepower (or so) sedans . .”

    Now I’d REALLY like to drive a 3,000 HP GXP – once . .

    - Ray
    Ready for MY test drive. .
    2016 BMW 340i
  • 14871487 Posts: 2,407
    I looked at the MT again and I saw it this time. I think the performance is impressive although I expected better grip on the skidpad. I was hoping C&D tested one but they didn't. That isnt too surprising though because I doubt they are interested in a high powered FWD car, unless its Japanese of course. The GXP ran right with the 298hp G35 and the G35 had a manual if I'm not mistaken.
  • rayainswrayainsw Posts: 2,953
    “Will the added power make this Grand Prix a hit?”

    Well – based on several indicators, I suspect that the answer to Kristie H’s initial question from Post #1 is: Nope.

    I personally think the GXP represents an attractive proposition, IF:

    You want 300+ HP / TQ V8 power and unique sound – and believe that GM has addressed the torque steer & related issues satisfactorily and created a car that is a lot of fun to drive (as early indications suggest) – and –

    You want or need 4 doors and ‘sedan’ –ish room in the rear seat area – and –

    You want something fun to drive that will also accommodate some family duties, has fold down rear seats, etc. as well – and -

    You find the styling acceptable – and –

    You seriously considered something like the Grand Prix GTP CompG, and might modify your car with such aftermarket items as a smaller S/C pulley for greater HP / TQ, wider wheels and tires, an exhaust that allows a bit of Internal Combustion ‘noise’ to escape, etc. . . . (All included in the GXP, and covered by the mfr.’s warrantee)

    And / Or -
    You believe that 90+ percent of a premium sport sedan’s performance is worth something like 60 percent (or so) of a typical premium sport sedan’s price . . .

    At an actual (I expect) transaction price (TMV, with discount to invoice + something like $100 / $500, and less current GM ‘incentives’) in the range of $24.5 (for a base GXP with MSRP = $30K) to $31K (if truly “loaded” with an MSRP in the $35+K region) the GXP represents an excellent value.

    But I doubt it will be a “hit”.

    Too many people will see that it is a V8, but remains FWD, and eliminate it from consideration.

    Others will see that it still has ‘only’ a 4 speed automatic, though strengthened to handle the additional HP / TQ loads of the V8.

    Others will not even notice that with 303 / 323 HP / TQ (and partly thanks to DoD) it still achieves a 28 MPG EPA highway rating.

    We’ll see. I could be wrong.

    - Ray
    Waiting to drive one before making a final decision . .
    2016 BMW 340i
  • pernaperna Posts: 533
    There is a Pontiac GXP forum on a famous GP site (don't think Edmunds allows links, sorry), that a GXP engineer posts on from time to time.

    He said the 4 speed tranny is there the same reason the Vette has one; they didn't have a 5-6 speed that could handle that much torque.

    Additionally, GM didn't see a problem with the FWD (he did say a lot of engineering time went into dealing with the torque steer on this car) due to the many sales up in the great white north. They wanted it to be a sports sedan that was driveable in all climates.

    One other thing I remembered that he said, is why they still didn't put a stick in these cars. It's the same reason you don't generally see them in a lot of domestic nameplate vehicles; nobody buys them. The reason the imports bring them over is because it costs them nothing, since they already have to do it for their home markets.

    Last item, trivial but I remember it for some reason. They didn't do anything cool with the hood (scoops, etc.), because it costs roughly $5M to run batteries of tests, tool a new hood, etc... and it just wasn't cost effective to do it for a relatively low-volume car.

    That said, this is the first US car to come out in awhile that makes me think about parting with my trusty Maxima. I didn't even know this car existed until I saw it (along with the other Pontiac junk) on the front page of a local dealer's ad yesterday. I actually made some sort of exclaimation that startled my wife and baby, something like, "They're putting V8s in Grand Prixs again!!".

    I'll look at them when they hit the lots (if they haven't already, have to check gmbuypower), but realistically I'll hold off for a year or two. Not long enough before they kill it, though, GM has a tendency to do that with "my next" cars (supercharged Olds Intrigue that never saw the light of day, mid-90s Monte SS, a Fiero with guts, etc...).
  • dieselonedieselone Posts: 5,727
    The 18" wheel package provides 255/45 series tires vs 225/50 on the rear. While this will help handling, I can't imagine not being able to rotate tires this soft on a FWD car. You'll be lucky to get a year out of the front tires.
  • rayainswrayainsw Posts: 2,953
    "He said the 4 speed tranny is there the same reason the Vette has one; they didn't have a 5-6 speed that could handle that much torque. "

    And yet (finally) the Corvette will receive a version of the 6-speed automatic being offered in the STS-v.

    - Ray
    Likely to be happy with 4 - but happier with 6 . . .
    2016 BMW 340i
  • rayainswrayainsw Posts: 2,953
    " I can't imagine not being able to rotate tires this soft on a FWD car. You'll be lucky to get a year out of the front tires. "

    But if that is the priority, this is not likely the car of choice.

    I find it very interesting that car manufacturers are often criticized for putting (relatively) cheap, low performance tires on otherwise sporting vehicles. (The Goodyear RS-As on my ’97 GTP, for example, were absolutely abysmal from a handling perspective. And I replaced them after only about 5,000 miles.)

    And then they are criticized for fitting really high performance rubber as OEM. Even on $50K plus Sport Sedans, like the M45 Sport w/19”-ers . . .

    - Ray
    Fascinated . . .
    2016 BMW 340i
  • danmandanman Posts: 16
    Vette is getting a 6spd automatic for 2006. That current 400hp 4 spd automatic Vette still gets EPA rated 26 mpg highway and 0-60 in under 5 seconds, pretty impressive for ONLY a 4 spd auto!! This same V8 Vette gets better gas mileage then a 4 cylinder WRX econo-sedan. 26 vs 25. Besides I don't care or buy my cars basaed on whether they have 4, 5 or 6 spd automatics, I buy them based on how they drive, performance.

    Case in point the new Ford 500 has a 6 speed automatic, yet is still SLOOOW. 8.5 to 9 second range to 60. Reason is that Ford Tauraus carry over 200 or 203hp V6. Car needs an extra 50hp. 500 weighs more Tauraus.

    Case in point, the 4 spd automatic GTO is same or FASTER 0-60 and 1/4 mile then the 6 spd manual version. Manual gives you 4 mpg better though! 25 vs 21.

    Case in point a 4 spd auto supercharged 260hp GTP, gets the same 28 mpg highway as a 5 spd manual 4 cylinder 170hp Subaru Outback wagon, both same 3500 lbs. Performance wise the GTP will blow the doors of the std 4 cylinder outback.

    Look at all of Honda/Acura's tranny problems with 4spd auto in the V6 Accord, TL etc. So Honda comes up with new improved 5 spd auto, same troubles... trannies not holding up. Recalls, extended warranty on tranny etc. 4 cylinder ACcord was fine. V6 models
  • pacinpelopacinpelo Posts: 142
    I can say I am impressed with the thought of the GXP but like the Bonneville GXP will it really sell at the pricing point and features.

    This will be a limited number run of models, dealers will hold for the highest value they can on the car, simply because they will have 1 or 2 at best on the lot.

    Cannot compare this GP model to the base junk at others (Ford 500, etc). You can say side by side to a 300 Hemi. But, the same will apply to the 300 Hemi, which will see dealers having limited inventory thus $$$. Base and mid level models will have you getting the GREAT DEALS, I am afraid that the GXP will have others questioning where the $$ is in realtion to competitors, not to mention a resale value that will drop like a ROCK.
  • 14871487 Posts: 2,407
    The pricing is a little high but it seems like their priority was performance hardware. It does come with the go-fast stuff standard and many people like that. Not everyone want to pay for leather and a sunroof (a la TL) when all they really want is the engine and looks of a car. That said, they should have made more equipment standard. This car will sell if they advertise it enough, but that is a big if because GM has a tendency to let new models get lost. The Bonneville GXP barely got any advertising. Anyone who thinks no one wants powerful FWD cars must not be paying attention to the MAxima. With 265hp and FWD it seems to be very successful. The pricing on the GXP is not out of line when compared to the Maxima or 300 Touring.
  • dieselonedieselone Posts: 5,727
    I wasn't criticizing GM for this tire package, I was merely pointing out if you go this route what you'll be up a against. I wouldn't be a bit surprised if the 18" wheel package is a rare find.
  • ocmike3ocmike3 Posts: 232
    A Hit? Maybe not on the sales scale, but likely with it's owners. Not only a good mileage V8 (if you can keep the lead foot reasonable) and improved suspension for better handling; it comes in a family sedan I could convince the wife to buy.
    I can't wait to test drive one and see how it compares to the GTP. So far the closest one I could find from here (PDX) is in San Francisco.
  • rayainswrayainsw Posts: 2,953
    "I can't wait to test drive one and see how it compares to the GTP. So far the closest one I could find from here (PDX) is in San Francisco. "

    As of this AM, the closest GXP shown on GMBuypower is well over 100 miles from where I live (north of Atlanta) and that is a fair hike. I definitely will contact this dealership today and see what I learn. I have heard other stories (here and elsewhere) of driving to a dealer that claims they have a particular car, only to find that the dealer representative was (um) mistaken. But I may take the trip on Saturday AM. We shall see. . .
    - Ray
    Frustrated that no dealer within the sound of my voice even has one on order . . .
    2016 BMW 340i
  • brood1213brood1213 Posts: 27
    Just got back from driving our first GXP. It is white with the ebony suede/leather interior. The MSRP was around $35,000 but was equipped with everything. Looks are very sharp. Something I noticed with the navigation system was that it had a DVD slot and a cd slot behind the screen. You definetly can tell the torque steer. It is very quick, exhaust gives a little rumble not like the GTO though. The torque steer will fight you from a dead stop launch but less noticeable when at highway speeds and you want to pass.
  • danmandanman Posts: 16
    Should have been Rear drive. Torque steer is annoying. For $2k cheaper I am getting a GTO, much nicer interior and seats then GXP and nearly 100 more horse, Corvette drivetrain. Backseats are much more comfortable on GTO, once you get to them. GTO ride is more comfortable then GXP and it handles better too. Rear drive vs Front. only advantage with GXP is 4 doors and bigger trunk. GTO has GM's best quality interior etc.
  • rayainswrayainsw Posts: 2,953
    “Should have been Rear drive. Torque steer is annoying. For $2k cheaper I am getting a GTO, much nicer interior and seats then GXP and nearly 100 more horse, Corvette drivetrain. Backseats are much more comfortable on GTO, once you get to them. GTO ride is more comfortable then GXP and it handles better too. Rear drive vs Front. only advantage with GXP is 4 doors and bigger trunk. GTO has GM's best quality interior etc.”

    Well, you are not the only one that would have preferred the Grand Prix be moved to a RWD platform. But.

    Other (potential) advantages that I can think of immediately to the GXP, over a GTO (for me) include:

    TAP Shift (manumatic mode for the automatic)
    Factory moonroof available.
    Factory NAV system available.
    HUD. (Including NAV instruction displays)
    Dual Zone HVAC available.
    Heated seats available.
    Fold down rear seats.
    EPA ratings: 17 / 28 (GTO w/4-speed automatic = 16 / 21)
    (and even with the 6 – speed manual trans. = 17 / 25)
    (Gas Guzzler Tax on the GTO Automatic: $1,300)

    Now I can certainly understand if some (or all) of these attributes are of no interest to you. I certainly support you right to an opinion and a preference for the GTO.

    But these attributes ARE of interest to me – and others.

    Also, concerning the actual performance numbers. I looked back at the Motor Trend GTO Automatic trans. test (since MT is the only magazine that I am aware of to publish GXP test numbers – see above post) in their May 2004 issue - for as fair a comparison as possible.

    The GTO is certainly quicker off the line. But even with a much more aggressive final drive ratio (3.46 vs GXP’s 2.93) the difference once rolling is not as great as I’d have expected: Calculating 30 – 60, GTO = (5.4 – 2.1) = 3.3 sec. GXP = (6.0 – 2.4) = 3.6 sec. Note that this is with the 350 HP 2004 version – I expect that the 2005 / 400 hp version would be quicker still, and if straight line acceleration is the overriding concern, GTO wins here.

    However, a few other relevant (to me) performance numbers, that I do NOT expect would be improved on a 2005 . .

    Braking from 60: GTO = 126’, GXP = 119’

    600’ Slalom: GTO = 62.5 mph, GXP = 64.2 mph

    Lateral Acceleration: GTO = 0.81G, GXP = 0.82G (or 0.85G in the sidebar)

    I think as an overall performance sedan, the GXP is respectable.

    Just my $.02.052171 worth – applying the Fed’s new interest rate . . .
    - Ray
    With (at least) as many opinions as anyone . .
    2016 BMW 340i
  • 14871487 Posts: 2,407
    also remember the GTO doesnt offer many features. I think the GTO is a value considering it has 400hp, but it doesnt have heated seats, side airbags, NAV or stabilitrak. It really doesnt come with much other that leather and a 6 disc changer. On top of that 18" wheels are standard on the GXP while they are a late model year addition to the GTO. Plus te GTO's mileage with auto is considerably worse than teh GXP.

    For '06 the GTP will be dropped and the GT will become the GTP essentially. 260hp and 17" rims will be standard on the GT. This is a smart move, I thought they were going to drop the 3.8L supercharged engine after '05. The option packages are also considerably different for '06. Side curtains will be standard on all models.
  • 442man442man Posts: 210
    Just bought a GTO with my GM employee discount 400hp 2005 GTO was rated at 4.8 seconds 0-60mph by car and driver. GXP is around 6.0 seconds. Also you have the choice of a manual trans in GTO, Rear drive is superior to Front drive, except in snow. Got to drive a GXP, nice car, but the interior on GTO is better in my experiences then GXP, C&D said it was one of GM's best interiors ever. Better then the C6 vette! I was shocked at it's interior, Esp 2 tone leather, suede inserts on doors/interior. Feels like Japanese or European car quality! Not usual cheap GM stuff.

    Also more exclusitivity with GTO, GP gets mistaken for a rental car too often, I see many GT1 and GT2 rental cars. though GXP has a few features on it like the side vents etc. GTO is limited 12,000 car production.

    They make a 4 door version of the GTO, but only in Austrailia, that woudl have been nice here.

    It did very well against $70k SLK in that Motor trend comparo. It held it's own. yeah the SLK is better.

    As for gas mileage, my GTO is 17 city and 25 highway, GXP is 18 city and 28 highway? Very close numbers. The GTO doesn't have Cylinder deactivation. I hope GM gets that right, remember early 1980's failure on the 4/6/8 caddies?

    That said, both GXP and GTO are good choices. I would consider a GXP in the future to replace my other 4 door.
  • rayainswrayainsw Posts: 2,953
    Well, if a manual trans. is a requirement (your EPA estimates mean yours is a 6-speed manual), or even a very strong desire, the comparison is really moot.

    And again, I was only trying to suggest that the (FWD) GXP generates (perhaps surprisingly) similar and even superior performance numbers, compared to the (RWD) GTO.

    If I wanted a 6-speed manual, I’d likely test drive a GTO.

    GXP looks like a very good choice for me, since I both want and need an automatic.

    If only a local dealer had one I could test drive. . .

    Enjoy the GTO!

    - Ray
    Considering a 200+ mile round trip for a test drive next weekend . . .
    2016 BMW 340i
  • 442man442man Posts: 210
    I ended up going with the 4 spd automatic on the GTO at the end. 16 and 21 mpg, I can afford it, fine for me. Still the same or better then SUV. No more annoying torque steer for me or the understeering of FWD on a road course. I had a 2004 Comp G GTP company car, nice car, but GTO blows it away in all aspects. Esp the quality/interior. It's almost no other GM product, Holden makes it. GXP is nice, but too much $$ for the current Grand Prix platform in my opinion. Hope they have a lot of incentives on it. Car and driver had a .88 Skidpad on GTO and 4.8 seconds. Governed to 158mph, top end is almost 180mph with governor disabled
    I personally prefer RWD.

    Good luck with GXP if you get one.
  • 442man442man Posts: 210
    The only concern I have with the new GXP is still using the same 4T65 tranny that came out in 1997 that was limited to 280 torque in the 3800 GTP application. When GM increased HP from 240 to 260hp, they had to keep the torque at 280 because of the tranny. I know GM says they are strengthening it, but I would like to see how this tranny holds up first. Lets hope they get it right.

    Why don't they use the 4spd 4T80 that handles the 4.6L V8 300hp and 300 torque? We know that would handle the 5.3L better then the 4T65. Time will tell.
Sign In or Register to comment.