Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see May lease deals!
Options
Pontiac GTO v. Subaru STi
This discussion has been closed.
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
Back then the RS has the rear limited-slip diff and it was a lot lighter than today's WRX.
It wasn't a rocket but with 0-60 in the mid 7s and great traction plus light weight, it was a bit more than just a poseur.
-juice
The new GTO is a Holden Monaro with some changes like a different fuel tank.
HSV is Holden's performance division. An HSV coupe will handle better than a standard Monaro. So anything HSV uses on an HSV coupe will likely fit on a new GTO
check here
HSV
-juice
Catera got a relatively wimpy V6 IIRC.
This platform dates all the way back to a 1993 Opel.
-juice
The STi seems like a cool little car - nice place to visit but I wouldn't want to live there. I also wonder which is more likely to get dirt under it's tires - an STi or any one of the Navigator/Escalade/LX470/etcs that clog my local grocery store parking lot. I don't imagine either the rally-capabilities of an STi (debatable anyway) or the off-road capabilities of an Escalade are used much, if ever.
-juice
Pic for fun - this is Karl Schieble's Group N championship car, in a poster I have that he signed for the Subaru Crew here on Edmunds. )
-juice
-juice
-juice
Actually, Holden's V-chassis is older than that.
Or, were you referring to the (incorrect) assumption that the V-chassis is based on the Opel Omega? That's been rebutted by some Aussies on another forum. I think I reposted the message in the GTO discussion here.
--Robert
I was under the impression that it shared DNA with the Omega and the Catera.
-juice
"Just thought you and some others may like a brief history of the Holden Commodore which is not actually based on the Opel Omega/Cadillac Catera chassis. I live in Australia and I know the full history of the adaptation of the Opel Senator into the Holden Commodore.
Here’s the true story. Opel had a model called ‘Senator’ which Holden decided to base their new car on in the late 70’s to replace their ‘Kingswood’ (and eventually it’s LWB ‘Statesman’) large car range (above) in response to the oil crisis. It also had to replace the smaller Holden Torana. But they had to use Holden’s own designed old cast iron pushrod V8’s and sixes in the new car. But Opel’s Senator was too expensive with it's independent rear suspension. However Opel had a shorter lighter model called the ‘Rekord’ which shared most of the passenger cell with the Senator. So Opel and Holden decided to resurrect an old Opel name and created the 1978 'Commodore’ VB model by using the longer front from the Senator (which could take Holden’s 6-cylinder engine) and the rear doors, quarter panels and suspension of the Rekord which used a cheap live rear axle. And so the first large Holden to be based on an Opel used the Senator’s frame.
However, Holden did a lot of engineering changes for Australia’s harsh conditions but mainly to use as many parts from the old Kingswood to keeps costs down and limit reengineering for its local car parts suppliers here in Oz. Australia is a small market and low costs are critical. And this single fact dictates the entire rest of this story, because Holden and especially it’s suppliers could never afford to use a whole new Opel design. They took the basic new Opel design and crammed it as full as they could of carryover tough, rugged and proven components from previous Holden models. And they still do. Holden eventually upgraded it’s first Commodore by adding the rear doors, third rear window and rear quarters from the Senator making the 1984 Holden Commodore VK virtually an Opel Senator body fitted over a modified Holden Kingswood components and drivetrain.
Then in 1987 Opel brought out the new Senator B and Holden followed with the 1988 Commodore VN, except that while it looks like the Opel Senator B with different grill and rear lights, only the doors are shared with the Opel’s body. Because Holden couldn’t afford to wind tunnel test and develop a new body on it’s own, it used just the shape of the new Opel. But because it had lost sales to Ford’s much larger ‘Falcon’ for ten years it knew it couldn’t use a shape as narrow as the Opel body. Holden also couldn’t afford to use a new Opel frame and suspension, which it would have to reengineer to tougher standards and to suit local parts suppliers anyway. Therefore Holden simply welded sill extensions to it’s previous ten year old Commodore’s floorpan/frame and mounted over that a copy of the new Opel’s body, which had been widened by a few inches. Only the door skins were shared. Unfortunately people complained that the old track width of the wheels looked too skinny under the new wider body and so eventually Holden developed a new Holden designed wider tracked suspension which was fitted to later models of that body style. In 1990 Holden also reintroduced the Statesman model name with a stretched LWB (below bottom) version of the VN Commodore. And this LWB VQ Statesman was fitted with a wider and tougher version of Opel’s independent rear suspension, which Holden had developed. This IRS was later offered as an option on some Commodore models in this body style series from 1991 onwards.
Then in 1994 Opel brought out the brand new Omega B that replaced both the Record and Senator models and ended the inline 6 engines for Opel, using a new V6 and I4 engines (It was also sold in the US as the Cadillac Catera). Again Holden decided to save money by using the wind tunnel tested and developed ‘shape’ of the new Opel. But it again had to widen it. This resulted in the new 1997 VT Commodore using a stylized copy of the now 3 year old Opel Omega. But again locally designed suspension and other locally-sourced parts had to carry over into the new design. Again, only the doors were to be shared with the Opel, as well as a strengthened and modified copy of it’s independent rear suspension (which had been reengineered into a unique Holden version during the previous body) was used. However, as the body team worked on the style of the new VT Commodore (from which the Monaro/GTO was later engineered), even the rear door skins and glass were reshaped and so only the front doors were common with the Opel Omega B/Cadillac Catera. And of course the Holden Commodore now used the Buick 3.8 pushrod motor (with and without supercharger) and the Chevy Corvette LS1 engines matched to locally designed and sourced drivetrains and brakes etc. This also required a totally unique floorpan and framework than the narrower and lighter Opel/Catera.
To reaffirm that the Commodore and Omega are two different engineering products, you can visually see that the Commodore is a much wider and bigger vehicle than the Omega. And look at things like the roof of each. Note that the Omega’s roof is a single pressing while the Commodore has a three-piece pressing. Given that the passenger cell is a major frame component in a monocoque design - this is a significant difference on it’s own. But also follow the carriage line under the side windows forward to where they intersect the front. Note how this virtually straight line sweeps over the top of the Omega headlights yet intersects the side blinkers on the Commodore. And the bonnet shut lines on the Commodore are more inboard than the Omega’s. This is because the entire shape of the front and even the substructure in the Commodore are different And underneath is even more different. A car needing to carry a heavy cast iron 5.0 and 5.7 Holden V8 (and then the 5.7 LS1) has to have a different frame from a vehicle that uses 4 cylinder engines and whose heaviest engine is an alloy 3.0 V6.
And that is the story of how and why the Australian Commodore, from which the Monaro/GTO was derived, may have a similar ‘look’ to Opels, from whom the styling was sourced. However, underneath the skin, which they don’t even share, they are completely different animals."
Personally, I would not be caught dead is a "Subaru WRX" it looks like some childs toy blown up to face the real world. I like the looks of this new 2005 GTO much better.
The engine is also better, (no turbo) its pure power. No replacement for displacement baby!
Some say the STi's massive wing is childish, sure, but what about the GTO's flared nostrils (hood scoops)? And the color choices, too. It's not any different, really, these are extreme cars meant for a targeted audience.
The power is more than fine, it's just pulling a lot of weight.
hammen2: thanks for sharing the elaborate history of the Holden car on which the GTO is based, quite a journey!
-juice
Not really, read the long history above and you'll see that Holden basically recycled and combined platforms designed in other places. They wouldn't have the resources to design a clean-sheet car.
Besides, Subies were designed to withstand rallies, not Holdens.
-juice
PS pic for effect
I'll believe that the next time I see a GTO with Roo bars...... :P
-juice
I don't think either one can reasonably claim they are better in every way.
-juice
I believe the Ute (that's the open bed pickup) has a live axle with leaf springs for this reason precisely. That's probably the model they're talking about, not the GTO they send here, which surely has a differently tuned suspension anyway.
Australia is a huge market for Subaru, they even sell models with low-ranges there, so any tuning that applies to the Holden would apply to Aussie Subies as well. Not that any of those suspensions make it to the US.
-juice
I just reread the GTO/STi comparison which this forum stems from and the only thing I could find that the STi beats the GTO is in the slalom. So, there is one way that the Subaru can beat a GTO.
As for the flying WRX, when was the last time you did that? Or for that matter, when was the last time you even drove in the dirt?
I have seen that Australian guy hawking the Subaru wagon and I'm sure it's a good car especially over there. But I'll stand by my original statement that over here it is used for grocery shopping...
I don't own a WRX, so the answer is never. My Forester, which shares the Impreza's chassis, has been on the beach, farmlands, and dirt trails in the Pine Barrens, so basically I use the AWD all the time, since you're wondering. Places a RWD GTO couldn't dream of going.
here it is used for grocery shopping...
Let me ask you this, you don't think the GTO spends most of its time grocery shopping or at the mall?
Oh, right, it's used for heavy-duty off roading, rock hopping, of course!
Seriously, what's the difference that you are trying to highlight between these two cars? You're talking about capabilities that neither of these cars were tuned for. The suspensions are tuned for pavement of course.
WRX has a direct rally heritage. Group N cars add only safety equipment. Holdens drive on Australian dirt roads and so do Subarus, so what.
-juice
http://www.rivergate5speed.com/scca/rallycross/results20050430.html
http://www.sfrscca.org/RallyX/scoring/RXScores.2005.5.14.pdf
http://www.oregonrally.com/?page=results
Perhaps you haven't bothered to research SCCA RallyCross at all. It's nicknamed Spec Subaru.
-juice
PS my WRX can do 0-60 in mid/lower 6 so just cant understand the fact tht with almost 80hp more,how can the dif be in tenths of a second. Have seen spec in other websites where they have done 0-60 in upper 4's. :confuse:
FrEa|<
some pics of 2007 WRX prototype JDM SPEC tell me what u think http://www.japanesecarfans.com/news.cfm/newsid/2050616.001
-juice
If you like the aggressive look of ther STi that's fine with me.. I can understand that. But to call it functional. Ok, technically speaking it's functional. But, do you have ram air? No, then it doesn't add to hp. So, its for looks only. And a turbo. Bring hot waste gases back to the engine. Yow! That's gotta hurt enging life. And that wing? Do you really need that? If anything, the STi is great handling. All wheel drive and all that. So what's with the wing? Your top end isn't that high. Admit it, it wasn't built for top end. It's a 'rally' car. Unless of course it's that unaerodynamic boxy shape. So once again, looks only. And that price tag. If you are actually paying $33K for that car then you are paying thousands more than the GTO. I can't see paying more and getting less, but I don't understand the market for the car either. But in the end with all the performance, hp, and handling we will both meet down at the grocery store just like I said.
The air scoops feed a functional intercooler, it's a top mount. That hood scoop is very much necessary.
Those "hot waste gases" you mention are cooled by said intercooler.
-juice
http://www.howstuffworks.com/turbo.htm
Also, the internals of turbo engines are typically beefed up to handle the extra stress.
Semi-closed deck block
Sodium-filled exhaust valves
All upgrades that the non-turbo EJ255 does not get.
-juice
Ah, the hood scoop feeds an intercooler. So, your cooling your intercooler? Very clever.
And the waste gases are cooled. So the only damage is to the turbo bearings. Oh wait, I know, they are titanium so they last forever.
What a cool car. Too bad it doesn't sound more manly.