Did you recently take on (or consider) a loan of 84 months or longer on a car purchase?
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/25 for details.
Options

Pontiac G6

1…1314161819…48

Comments

  • mcali17mcali17 Member Posts: 22
    If you want to add HID headlights it really is no big deal to add to just about any vehicle. I put a set on my '02 Envoy for about $500. By the way, there is no comparison between Halogen and HID. HID is far superior which is evident when I switch on my Standard Halogen High Beams vs. the HID low beams. At least the ones I have on my Envoy. Now that the pricing is out, I can't wait to see how the GTP turns out.
  • alpha01alpha01 Member Posts: 4,747
    Are you sure Pontiac is saying that the Vibe has "Stabilitrak"? It actually doesnt, it has Toyota's VSC, since the Vibe is Matrix (Corolla/Corolla XRS) based. As far as I know, the Vibe has GM badges and a GM stereo...

    ~alpha
  • hammen2hammen2 Member Posts: 1,284
    Actually, IIRC HID upgrades were made illegal by the federal government, due to issues with brightness and leveling, when the vehicle manufacturer doesn't do the engineering. Time to Google to see if my fuzzy memory is working this late at night...

    --Robert
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Not all HIDs are created equal. One test showed the Audi TT's HIDs were among the very worst lights tested, while one economy sedan had halogens that were among the best.

    Look at the theft problems Maxima owners are having. NJ is doing a class action lawsuit against Nissan.

    HIDs are not the no-brainer some people seem to think they are.

    -juice
  • logic1logic1 Member Posts: 2,433
    reviewed the Saab 9-3 convertibles. The '05s have rear wheel steering. The testers really liked the way the RWS worked with the suspension.

    I think it is possible this will find its way into the coupe/convertible G6.
  • rampedramped Member Posts: 358
    I can see its usefulness on a big pickup, which is hard to maneuver, but why on a coupe or convertible?

    Honda tried this a few years ago on the Prelude and it bombed. There is a point where these technological gimmicks seem like overkill to many people.
  • exalteddragon1exalteddragon1 Member Posts: 729
    OMG are they insane, can you paste the article if its available online...

        The problem with RWS is wheel alignment, just like FWS, after a while (many years, I know) you got to align them, its one less peace of mind for the driver. Imagine if all four wheels are out of allignment, the car might either not move, or burn the tires cuz of the way they are spinning. And what the hell are they doing putting RWS in Saab? Why don't they do something useful like take that money and improve the interior materials or add a bigger Nav screen. Or, just for thought, how about they do something really usefull and take the RWS costs, and attribute them to the development of GM's 2.4L VVT ecotec (170hp standard) in supercharged/turbocharged form. So that the 9-3 and 9-3 convertable would get about 250hp. They had this engine on displays but not put to production. This would also help the Ion red line... Im' just saying this B/C my firends old Mercury GM needed allignment several times (its a 94). I know these are new cars, but after driving a few times with the wheels like that I am a bit doutful about all wheels turning about.

        But enough about SAAB, lets just hope that GM does not put RWS onto the Pontiac G6. See, I think GM has been having a little gimmick war lately. They know they cannot, due to unions and healthcare/legacy costs match Japan and sometimes europe feature for feature, hp for hp, tq for tq, Xenon for Xenon, and Nav for Nav all in one car (except Cadillac), so they take away many features (like automatic reclining headrests as in Maxima) and 250hp engines, and instead put in stuff the other ppl don't have, like HUD and RWS. Has anyone else noticed this? What do you think of this phenominon?
  • pompiliuspompilius Member Posts: 54
    "What do you think of this phenominon?"

    I think you don't know how to spell it.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Typical GM, really. They're making a DVD player standard in all the new vans, which are really face-lifted (very) old vans. They have a unique selling point on a too-narrow van.

    Mazda also tried RWS and abandoned the idea.

    I guess GM has the technology and needs to spread the costs. Saab could use something to be unique.

    -juice
  • yurakmyurakm Member Posts: 1,345
    It is very hard to park in many European countries, especially in bigger cities. Saab is an European car.
  • logic1logic1 Member Posts: 2,433
    The article was in the September 04 issue. The buff rags always wait until about September (a month after the hard cover magazine has been out - go figure) before they index on line.

    Here is the link to the SaabUSA 9-3 Convertible Tech Specs:

    http://www.saabusa.com/main/US/en/tech_specs.xml?modelname=93c

    The system is called the ReAx Passive Rear Wheel Steering. ReAx is an exclusive Saab brand. It could be that GM does not plan to offer this on other Epsilon platform cars. However, I understand GM wants to better integrate Saab into the fold.

    I believe passive is different from the system Honda used on the Prelude, although I do not have information on it.

    In any event, when displacement on demand first came out, it did not work well. Now it appears technology has caught up with the concept. Could be the same with RWS.

    I would not expect to find RWS on the Sedans. But the hard top convertible coupe will be pricey anyway. Seems one way to further distinguish it.
  • logic1logic1 Member Posts: 2,433
    Shall we expect perfection from you this point forward then?
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    True, those Preludes were easy to park and could U-turn on a dime.

    But passive, oh, that's not really a big deal. My '91 Escort GT has passive rear wheel steering, so did the Mazda Protoge back then. Simple rear suspension engineering manages that. Forget the parking assistance.

    -juice
  • Kirstie_HKirstie_H Administrator Posts: 11,242
    Let's stick to the G6 instead of talking about other members' spelling. Remember, we have a lot of members who may not speak English as their first language, and some of us are just lousy typists :)

    MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR
    Find me at kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
    2015 Kia Soul, 2021 Subaru Forester (kirstie_h), 2024 GMC Sierra 1500 (mr. kirstie_h)
    Review your vehicle

  • z9z9z9z9z9z9z9z9 Member Posts: 101
    I hate to post an off-topic message on the HID forum, but has anyone noticed that Edmunds updated G6 info and pricing a few days ago?

    I think Pontiac did a really good job equiping and pricing the GT at just under $24K, with one exception: the only way to get a 6-way power seat and steering wheel audio controls is to order the expensive $1365 leather package.
  • pecclespeccles Member Posts: 52
    It might actually be Toyota's VSC but according
    to this site option JL4 is StabiliTrak at $495.
  • dan165dan165 Member Posts: 653
    Is there a list somewhere of the standard equipment on the $24000 GT model? Sounds like a GT2 and a G6 GT are priced pretty close?
  • minnguy34minnguy34 Member Posts: 11
    The Pontiac web site quotes gas mileage figures of 22/32 for the Base G6 and 21/28 for the GT version. The axle ratio for the base is 3.05 and for the GT it is 3.29. The GT has traction control standard and a manual shift mode for the automatic. Their curb weights are identical at 3,380 lbs. Is the mileage difference caused just by the axle ratio difference, or would the other two items have an effect? I want the leather / 6 way power seats, but don't know if they are worth a 4 mile per gallon highway mileage penalty. Those features are only available with the GT version.
  • eforemaneforeman Member Posts: 13
    Does anyone know when this car will really be available and likely to be found at dealerships? Is it even in production yet? Specs and pics are enticing, but I want to see it!
  • rayainswrayainsw Member Posts: 3,192
    "4 mile per gallon highway mileage penalty. "

    That seems like more of a difference than I'd expect for that final drive diff. (~8%)

    I am also surprised that the weights are quoted as the same - typically more equipment (power seat motors, etc, etc.) means more weight.

    Does it have larger tires? (= More rolling resistance and wind resistance.)

    Are the internal trans. top gear ratios the same?

    - Ray
    Curious as well . . .
    2022 X3 M40i
  • eforemaneforeman Member Posts: 13
    I believe the GT has 17" tires standard, base G6, 16".
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Gearing does affect the mileage but that highway figure is a big loss...must be other factors too.

    -juice
  • z9z9z9z9z9z9z9z9 Member Posts: 101
    Yeah, 32 to 28 is a HUGE drop which IMO can't be entirely accounted for by the change in axle ratio. I don't think the width of the tires affects it much either, since the base tire is 215/60-R16 vs. the GT's 225/50-VR17. The lower profile tires on the GT will have a tread that's wider in proportion to the width of the tire, but it still shouldn't make that much difference. 1 mpg or less I would think.

    My guess is that the base model probably got something like 31.5 on the highway which got rounded up to 32, and the GT 28.4 which got rounded down to 28. Still, best case that's still a spread of 3.1 mpg, which is large, especially considering that the Malibu Maxx with the same final drive ratio got 22/30.

    I think maybe Pontiac needs a re-test on the GT...
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    And I'd suspect the G6 is more aerodynamic.

    Of course these are just EPA estimates. Let's see what people report once they're on the roads. Malibus have been efficient from what I've read.

    -juice
  • z9z9z9z9z9z9z9z9 Member Posts: 101
    > Is there a list somewhere of the standard equipment on the $24000 GT model?

    Yep, everything is right here: http://www.pontiac.com/g6/specs_view_all.jsp

    I want the GT model for the firmer suspension, 17" wheels and tires, and Monsoon sound system. The base car with the "driver's package" would be OK though.
  • dan165dan165 Member Posts: 653
    Thanx!
  • dick60dick60 Member Posts: 12
    I am owner of a 1999 GT1 with the 3.29 rear axle ratio. I get consistantly 20 miles per gallon in Los Angeles city/freeway driving. When, however,I have the opportunity to do highway driving, the mileage increases to 24-25 mpg.

    A few years back I took a vacation in Canada and rented an Alero with the V6 and the standard axle ratio. I was shocked to achieve close to 30 mpg on the highway driving this car compared to my GT1. I attribute the lower mileage totally to the different axle ratio. While, the GT1 gives brisker acceleration and a nice growl from the dual output exhaust, there is definitely a mileage penalty.

    The only improvement I see on the G6 is an increase in EPA from 20 to 21 for city driving and an increase of 25 hp. Anyhow, I am looking forward to driving the G6 and comparing it to my GT1.
  • asiasi Member Posts: 1
    Hi,
    I had a 2002 GT
    I think you forgot about the ram air (or HO engine in the 1999) that gave you about 35 pounds of extra torque compared to any alero/grandam/malibu model...
    hence more fuel

    so why is there such a big diff. in gas milage on th g6
  • dan165dan165 Member Posts: 653
    I am very much looking forward to a comparison drive with my 2004 GT2. That said, I am extremely happy with my car so it's just for interest.

    Saw a G6 ad last night during the Olympics. Car should be here soon.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Saw the Olympics ads also, they're neat.

    This is the site they're plugging:

    http://www.first-everg6.com/

    And they show a neat perspective on the moonroof, when it folds.

    -juice
  • dan165dan165 Member Posts: 653
    Good link.

    I love the over all look of the car. Very sleek and clean. Pontiac is finally getting it's style right. My GP is clean of plastic also. I always hated the Grand Am ribs.
  • theo2709theo2709 Member Posts: 476
    That's one of the worst slogans for a car I've ever heard.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    I'm surprised they dropped the Grand Am name. They have a huge buyer base and the car was always a pretty good seller.

    I guess Lutz wanted a clean slate for its image.

    -juice
  • dan165dan165 Member Posts: 653
    Actually as much as I generally like the new Pontiacs, Grand Am has a plasticy image in my head. New name was a good idea though G6 is not what I would have picked.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Would it have been the 6th generation of the Grand Am? It still recalls the old name.

    Wonder how they'd have done is they brought back an older name plate like Tempest or something.

    -juice
  • rampedramped Member Posts: 358
    Right, Tempest or maybe LeMans. The problem with G6 is that it can easily be confused with the Mazda6.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    I'll admit I was confused when I heard someone compare the GP to the G6, I was like, Gee What?

    -juice
  • dan165dan165 Member Posts: 653
    I am confused when I see G6 and C6 articles also.

    Grand Am needed to go, but an old name from the past my have been a better option.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 0
    Should of stuck with the Grand Am name, unless they're gonna use that on a different vehicle in 3 or 4 years like some car companies do. I hope they post pics of the coupe version soon, should be sharp given the sedan's styling. Hopefully the GT will have more horses under the hood since 200hp isn't enough nowadays.
  • e2helpere2helper Member Posts: 1,002
    The GT does have just 200 HP engine (with different final drive ratio than the base model).

    However the G6 also has an upscale GTP version with 240 HP coming out next year - it is available with 4 speed auto or 6 speed manual transmission. That model has a couple other features not available on GT.
  • rampedramped Member Posts: 358
    "Hopefully the GT will have more horses under the hood since 200hp isn't enough nowadays."

    It's not? Well, that's as much HP as the Vettes had in the early '80s. Sure, everybody is bumping HP up to 250, 260, 270, but how often do you use it?

    I've got a '92 Maxima with a 190 hp VQ-6 that can still run with just about anything similar today, even with 250 hp. Why? Because it doesn't weigh as much, and the torque band is great.

    There is so much more to acceleration than simple HP figures. But, that is the only number that John Q. Public looks at.
  • pompiliuspompilius Member Posts: 54
    in case you haven't noticed, many modern cars have much higher torque numbers too.

    I use my 260HP every day when I merge onto highway. Plus at most traffic lights, to get away from the pack of inept morons.
  • alpha01alpha01 Member Posts: 4,747
    Feel free to correct me if Im wrong and you are a real Maxima enthusiast, but I dont think the 1992 Maxima used the VQ. Although the 1992 SEs and 1995 Maxmias both produced 190hp and displaced 3.0L, Im pretty sure there were major modifications made to the engine, and that it was officially the basis for the now VQ in 1995...

    ~alpha
  • rampedramped Member Posts: 358
    The '92 SE I drive is a VQ. Nissan put two engines in the Maxima that year, a 160 hp version for the GXE and luxury model, and the 190 hp version in the SE. The engine, of course, has been modified throughout its run.

    Pompelius: Yes, I'm aware that many new V-6s put out a broad torque band. My point was that the 200 hp engine in the G6 will produce more than enough power for everyday driving chores. Enthusiasts will seek more power, but mainstream America can commute just fine on 200 hp.
  • bporter1bporter1 Member Posts: 229
    I agree with you about the 200hp numbers. I drive a Regal GSE and 240hp is a bit too much for the front wheels to handle if I mash the throttle. The car ends up almost feeling like it is going sideways, too much torque steer. I know that can be handled properly like what Acura has done, but once you get over a certain number I would take rear drive.
  • dan165dan165 Member Posts: 653
    Unless you really want a performance sedan, for most people 200hp is plenty of power in a sedan. I have an 04 3800 Grand Prix and I never seems to have power issues. The G6 is smaller so I would think it will be just fine. Sure the 3900 will be better but most people just don't need it.
  • logic1logic1 Member Posts: 2,433
    Dan:

    C6 is the code name for the platform used by the Corvette and the XLR. While it is meant for internal use only, these cars are typically bought by gearheads who like to use manufacturer lingo. That is why you see C6 all over the place.

    G6, as we know, is the name of the new mid-sized Pontiac sedan and coupe.

    The 3.9 litre upgrade engine will more than meet the horse power issues raised here.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    AWD could solve the torque steer issue. Do they make a system for this platform, though?

    -juice
  • yurakmyurakm Member Posts: 1,345
    Interesting, because I never had the feeling of torque steer with my 2000 Regal GS. Even while I get the maximal torque (rpm in 3600-4000 range) rather often. Practically every time when merging on highway. Slipping wheels when starting from stop etc. - yes, it happens often, especially on wet pavement.

    240 hp was outstanding power in 1997, when GM started produce GTP and Regal. Still the best power in its class for year 2000 (and 2001, if I remember it right). However, now we are discussing what will in production in 2005. GM clearly is behind Nissan in this department. The 3.9 liter engine must have a very good torque, though. Especially low-end. It would be interesting to supercharge it...
  • rctennis3811rctennis3811 Member Posts: 1,031
    If you think 240HP is a lot for FWD cars, wait until the GP GXP - about 300HP through the front wheels!
Sign In or Register to comment.

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles