Pontiac GTO

jemiller · April 2003

...is that the GTO is not a new car. It's a Monaro, and that there was no time (even if anyone wanted to) to change the shape.

The old GTO was a perfectly decent-looking car for its day, but it was nothing special. Take one standard Tempest body, add some red paint and maybe a hood-mounted tach, and that's it.

Also remember that the new GTO program started about the time Lutz was wandering the halls reorganizing GM design in the US. Whether because GM had fundamentally hired a bunch of true incompetents, or because what decent designers they had were working for management who had no eye for design, the only decent-looking US-market product GM had shipped in the past ten years was the C5. Had US GM taken a whack at the GTO shape, the thing might well have come out looking like an Aztek coupe or a CTS, and *that* would have been a tragedy.

Yes, the new Mustang will outsell the 'Goat' by a big margin. On price. And they'll mostly be six-cylinder high-school-girl cars - that's where the Mustang's bread-and-butter has always been.

The problem is, Ford's busy throwing all the decent mechanicals in the garbage can to meet their lowball price targets. Stick axle in back? Good God, we've waited twenty years for a new Mustang and what they're coughing up is the same old junk?

The Monaro/GTO is a long way upmarket from any Mustang. It's a bigger, roomier car that will go out the door with all the good stuff already in it. I just hope there's an LS6 version...

funkcity · April 2003

Three Deuces and a Four Speed and a Three Eighty Nine da, da, da

The GTO is as American as Apple Pie.
Marinara or Linguine, GTO or Grand Am, Fiero or Accord.
or whatever the Ausies built,
I just have to say,
Its a nice car but it aint no Goat.

Lutz said: 
We wanted a modern interpretation, with a really slick chassis to go along with a big engine, Lutz wrote. We really would like to draw NEW customers, rather than traditionalists.

Well Bob. . .Mission Accomplished!

Well it seems that www.ultimateGTO.com also had some issues with the new GTO.

http://www.autoweek.com/cat_content.mv?port_code=autoweek&cat- _code=carnews&loc_code=index&content_code=06513698

obiwan · April 2003

Cry me a river.

Build a bridge.

Get over it.

So you don't like that the GTO doesn't meet your expectations. If you're so smart and so knowledgable about how it SHOULD be done, why not come up with your own design? Why not apply for a job at GM and become a designer?

Stop being couch quarterbacks. Either put up or shut up.

aviatorman · April 2003

Yes Andys120, I am sure the Mustang will out sale the GTO because GM is only importing 18,000 a year.

jemiller · April 2003

You hit the nail on the head.

regfootball · April 2003

I happen think its nice that all the old musclecar freaks probably don't like the new GTO.

Who gives a rats about em. Let up hang out in their pole sheds drinking 4 dollar a case beer, taking apart their late sixties musclecar for the 24th time, listening to steppenwolf and molly hatchet on a cassette or 8track, waiting for their old buddy to bring over the mary jane.

Considering all the complete crap Pontiac has thrust on the public for 20+ years now, its ok for them to produce something kinda unique to the brand. Maybe they can bring some new customers into the brand, and grow the brand some, and try and it will help repair its mullet / trailer park image at the same time.

Pontiac needs different right now. All those old GTO bangers who don't like the new car can go rot in their pole sheds.

jemiller · April 2003

You've got different groups out there.

First, you've got the guys who all they care about is a big engine and a cheap pricetag. These people had their shot. GM built the last Camarobird specifically for them - it was, for all of its cut corners and embarrassingly bad detail quality, a hell of a lot of high-end mechanicals (LS1 engine, T56 transmission, Torsen, the best stick-axle chassis Detroit's ever done) in a really cheap package.

But it didn't sell - or, more correctly, the cheap V6 high-school-girl version didn't sell well enough to keep the big-engine version around. And, since the Camarobird had no other RWD passenger cars to share parts with (okay, a few S-10 truck bits) it had to live or die on its own sales.

That's always been the truth behind the 'ponycar' myth - if it'd just been for the cars everyone remembered - the SS396, the Z28, the Boss 302 - the Camaro and Mustang etc. would never have existed. It was the six-cylinder and two-barrel-V8 cars (not to mention all the Novas and Falcons built with the same parts) that paid the rent.

The old GTO was a musclecar, but it was not a ponycar, and the new one continues that positioning - it's bigger and roomier than a Camarobird or Mustang (though not any heavier than an '03 Mustang Cobra and its iron-block 4.6.)

Then you have the bigger-is-better contingent, some of whom seem to think the Mercury Marauder is a 'musclecar'. No comment.

Finally, there's maybe a few people like me, who used to be big Detroit-iron fans - then we discovered BMWs and so forth and aren't prepared to go back to the junky chassis and flabby seats that marked Detroit's heyday. What we really want is a near-BMW with a big pushrod V8 (and no Chris Bangle aesthetics.)

The Monaro does have one thing in common with the early GTOs and other musclecars, that the Camarobird and Mustang do not - it shares a platform and running-gear bits with the rest of the Holden Commodore line. The Commodore SS, in fact, is the same basic mechanical package in a sedan. It is, of course, what a 2003 Impala SS should be, had GM not splattered the Impala name on the FWD rentacar that currently wears it.

regfootball · April 2003

your next to the last paragraph was dead on correct.

Chris Bangle, maybe he designed all his bimmers on a 'Manic Monday'.

b4z · April 2003

The styling is a little bland and somewhat plain.
Not sure they need to go so far as putting the twin hood soops on, but maybe a gill(sp?) in the lower front fender just behind the front wheel might help things a little.
I also think some work needs to be done on side back windoews between the b pillar and c pillar.
It doesn't blend well with flanks of the rear fenders.

regfootball · April 2003

lets leave all the childish hood scoops and junk for the aftermarket.

Its refreshing to see a domestic that isn't all garbaged up like Mustangs and Camaros. Who wants that junk?

andys120 · April 2003

"As one of the "renegade GM engineers" (Russ Gee was the other one) who put the Pontiac 399-cubic-inch V-8 in a Pontiac LeMans which John (DeLorean) called the GTO, I would like to comment on the 2004 GTO.
It is too bad the new one does not have hood scoops and dual exhausts. and why not red-line tires?
The car...has NO real identification. It is vanilla and does not make any visual statement.
We can only hope that it's overall performance will be more than outstanding."

Bill Collins in AUTOMOTIVE NEWS, April 21, 2003

regfootball · April 2003

The GTO look is fine. A little rounded, but 3 years ago that was vogue, and when the car was designed.

if you go to holden.co.au or hsv.com there are some charged up monaros that suggest what the car sould look like with some embellishment.

I don't recall the original Camaro having all sorts of scoops and ducts and stuff. Now granted that car was a classic. But the GTO is more along the lines of trying to emulatea clean restraint of a Euro car. Not trying to be boy racer like so many Pontiacs recently.

The original GTO came out, like 4 decades ago. Time to get over it. This is a new time, and performance cars must sometimes be appealing to eurocar intenders instead of just those who like the traditional muscle cars.

riez · April 2003

I'll take real performance over retro styling cues any day. If the car performs, it will sell. The styling, even lack thereof in the minds of many, will be forgiven. But God help this car if it doesn't perform.

Can anyone say "Mercury Marauder"? They want 18,000 annual sales and have trouble getting 3,000. And need deep, deep discounting in order to get what few sales they have.

Or study the original Corvette. Beautiful exterior. But a smallish, underpowered car that only had a 2-speed automatic. Took 'em a few years before they got the "formula" right, and even then Ford's T-bird outsold it handily.

Here's hoping GM is focused on getting the performance aspect right the first time. No repeats of cars like the Pontiac Fiero where it was only the last model year where everything came together.

andys120 · April 2003

If the performance is there most will learn to live with the styling, which will probably be improved as they go along. Some of those Monaro variants are quite nice (performance and styling).

It's also fair to say that the performance attributes of the original Goat were often exaggerated by bogus 'zine tests of modded cars.
Most'64-'74 Goats were equipped with options that
either robbed performance (AT/Air) or were just plain silly (Vinyl roofs).

-Owned original '70 GTO convertible. No air, no AT, no tri-power, no Ram-air.

obiwan · April 2003

Ford will soon be killing the T-bird again.

Why? It's stylish. It is replete with styling cues from the 50's birds. Everyone said it was a great retro look.

It's dying for one simple reason. Performance. A 3.x liter v8 in a car that big just isn't enough to satisfy the enthusiasts. When you factor in the near-'vette pricing, you can easily see why styling alone won't carry a car. For that much money, one could buy a 'vette or BMW M series that drives circles around the T-Bird.

Enter the GTO. So it doesn't have retro styling cues. So it looks like a bland Japanese/Euro sedan. But under that plain exterior lies a platform that, with some tweaking, can keep up with a BMW M5 for thousands of dollars less.

Will the GTO sell?

Most certainly.

People like me weren't really interested in the garish boy-racer-in-gold-chains / mullet-mobile look of the last F-body. It was a style who's time had come 10 years prior. Now that the GTO is coming, we can look forward to good American pushrod V8 power under the hood of a vehicle that we'd be willing to drive in public.

argent · April 2003

I don't think performance has anything to do with the Thunderbird's failure. I think the performance is in line with other cars in that class (non-M BMW Z3/Z4, Benz SLK, et al), and probably about as much as the DEW98 platform can manage without a roof -- it lost a lot of rigidity in its transformation.

The problem is that the styling seems half-hearted (despite its obvious retro cues, it's really very bland to look at), and the price is awfully high. The Thunderbird lists for a hair under $40K, and the awful dealer mark-up on early models pushed that up by another ten grand or so.

For that money or a little more, buyers looking for a posh roadster could buy a BMW, Mercedes, or even a base Porsche Boxster (especially if they got a late-model certified pre-owned model), all of which have much greater snob appeal.

I think even if the noveau T-bird had a stronger body, tauter suspension, and 400 hp, the result would be the same. In fact, it might even be selling LESS, because that would drive up the price even more into Deutsch-treat territory and make the ride harsher for boulevard cruisers.

funkcity · April 2003

The T-Bird is a 2 seater period.
That fact alone will limit sales.
The platform is good but it was always a boulevard cruiser.
The DEW-98 platform has serious potential
(Jaguar S-Type R comes to mind.)

Saleen is still planing a HiPo T-Bird.

But people want more.

Styling MUST get them in the door and then it must perform or all the car rags who are poised to crucify any brand that is not BMW or Honda will eat it for lunch.

The competition is fierce today.
A few styling cues from the past with today's styling edge and performance is a potential formula for success IMHO.

andys120 · April 2003

A Supercharged Bird in the works, it is supposed to be shown in NY.

argent · April 2003

The DEW98 platform works well enough in the Jag S-Type R and Lincoln LS, but it seems to have lost a LOT of strength in its transformation into a roadster, and that's a problem.

The Thunderbird has nostalgia appeal, but apparently for $35-$40K, nostalgia appeal doesn't overcome badge snobbery. We shall see if the GTO fares any better.

funkcity · April 2003

Where do you get this from??

""The DEW98 platform works well enough in the Jag S-Type R and Lincoln LS, but it seems to have lost a LOT of strength in its transformation into a roadster, and that's a problem.""

We all know that taking the roof away removes some of the structure's rigidity in any car, but why are you so specific about the T-Bird?
Is there some first-hand experience you'd like to impart?

If Saleen does do the 400hp SuperCharged T-Bird then they also will have to deal with it.

Shock Tower Braces, undercarriage cross braces etc. can all be used so this does not seem to be a big deal.

argent · April 2003

There's a sense of body flexibility in the Thunderbird -- not alarming, but noticeable -- that's absent in the Lincoln and Jag sedans built on that platform. It's not the spaghetti-noodle feeling you get in, say, an eighties Chrysler LeBaron, but it's not the kind of sensation that screams "add more power," either. I assume that limberness, which, again, isn't present in the LS or S-Type, is a function of the loss of the roof. It is a relatively large monocoque, after all, and the roof structure provides a lot of a unit body's rigidity, even more than a body-on-frame car.

Adding additional bracing would make the body stiffer, but they'd also make it heavier, and that, combined with performance-oriented suspension, would also erode the ride quality. It just doesn't seem like an appealing thought.

I think for that kind of money, if I wanted a more sporting open-topped car I'd be looking at something like a Corvette instead. The Thunderbird feels like a boulevard cruiser, and taking a belt-and-braces approach to try to turn it into a pseudo hot rod doesn't really seem worthwhile. With enough diligence and money, I don't doubt you could make it fast, but that doesn't necessarily make it any more appealing.

montanafan · May 2003

Once-hot retro cars chill

http://www.usatoday.com/money/autos/2003-04-30-retro_x.htm

ryboz301ss · May 2003

It's great that Bob Lutz was able to maintain the performance genre for Pontiac by bringing over the Holden Monaro CV8, but he still has a lot of work to do in trying to bring over some more from Aussie-land. Has anyone ever seen the HSV (Holden Specialty Vehicles www.hsv.com.au) lineup? Hopefully Mr. Lutz can bring over the HSV GTS Coupe or even the GTS 300 sedan. Those two cars alone can crush whatever is coming out of Germany. Mr. Lutz, if you ever get a chance to read this, please bring over the HSV lineup. This must be done before Ford brings over their FPV (Ford Performance Vehicles). It's time for the Lion to roar in America!

andys120 · May 2003

Any Holden can crush the German competition. AMG, BMW Msport and Quattro GMBh are rolling out 5 and 600 hp cars like they're going out of style.

Still it's likely that the stronger HSVs will come over eventually as Ram-Air or Judge variants, for a price (>$40k).

obiwan · May 2003

Since GM in North America has a relationship with SLP, I wouldn't be surprised if they get the contracts instead of HSV. Now, if I were working for SLP in this instance, I would certainly colaberate with HSV and maybe do some parts sharing.

Just my $0.02

jemiller · May 2003

The Bird is boring. It's boring to look at, it's boring to sit in, it's boring to drive.

It mostly botches the 'retro' clues (One '96 Taurus nose + one 39-cent piece of chrome flourescent-light diffuser grating = Thunderbird?) and it's just flat not quick enough for any sort of 'image' car by present-day standards. The butt-ugly-but-fun-and-full-of-toys Lexus SC430 is outselling it pretty considerably.

The GTO makes no effort to be retro. It's a serious, decently modern piece of hardware.

funkcity · May 2003

Does the GTO use an LS1 and a CTS V an LS6?

If so, whats the diff?

aviatorman · May 2003

It uses a LS1. Not a CTS-V LS6.

jemiller · May 2003

LS1 currently rated @ 350HP (Corvette), LS6 405HP.

LS6 block has 'windows' cut into bearing webs to reduce windage pumping losses at high RPM. LS6 heads have bigger ports and smaller combustion chambers, hollow-stem valves to reduce valvetrain inertia. Intake manifold, throttle, MAF different. Higher-lift cam, stiffer valvesprings.

A lot of different parts but nothing significantly different in design or material.

Interesting to note that in production quantities none of these changes should represent a significant cost increase (okay, the valves might cost a few bucks.) The LS6 is a cheap engine to build.

obiwan · May 2003

The dealer told me that GM has started to accept orders on the GTO. The order for mine has been submitted.

garnes · May 2003

What are the details of the order?

Price? Options? Or is it a general get in line/ you'll get a car thing?

riez · May 2003

Anyone stopped by a Pontiac dealer lately to see if GM has printed the brochures?

That is the one down side to a GTO. I dread going to a Pontiac dealer. Fearful some guy in a mismatched suit who knows nothing about cars will try to steer me into a Vibe or Grand Am!

obiwan · May 2003

Right now, the only options are color and transmission.

Standard features include all of what you would expect (power everything, etc.) A 6 disc Blaupunkt 200 watt stereo is also standard. Some places list a 340HP engine, others list a 350 horse mill.

I don't know the price yet. Mid 30's is all I'm told.

I know the dealer I'm working with and he's providing me as much as he knows. So far, no brochures are available except the press kit. He says pricing will be released sometime in the next month or two.

ron1010 · May 2003

I was in Adelaide - South Australia (Elizabeth is a nearby suburb) in Feb and saw a number of Monaros (GTO's) around. We stopped at a Holden dealer to check one out. Interior was very sharp, everything well appointed. Paint job was excellent, tires and wheels very impressive. The word on the street from the "aussies" was that this IS a great vehicle!
The Monaro/GTO has a huge reputation, and with the development through their Sedan racing over the years, Aussie GM/Holden have come up with a winner!
I'll be ordering mine very shortly!

obiwan · May 2003

I hope that a lot of the aftermarket parts follow the GTO over here. It would be great if HSV opened shop over on this side of the pond.

garnes · May 2003

obiwan - my opinion on the HP is that it's the same flipping output as the LS1 corvette. I highly doubt there is some difference in the intake or exhaust that keeps the peak torque in place but peak HP is down 10. It's just GM doing their goofy little game to "protect" another line or specific car. I'd bet it's 350.

They would always down-rate the Camaro and Firebird too. I think their output is closer to the Corvette too.

Then there is the 3.8 that does 200/225 in a Chevy and 205/230 in a Pontiac or Buick. Yeah right. It's all the same.

Aftermarket - oh yeah. I suspect a lot of the performance intakes for the Corvette may work or need slight modification. I'll bet Corsa makes an exhaust for it. They already have great stuff for the Corvette. They'll only have to work out the plumbing. It'll be great. Upper 300's will be easy with and intake and exhaust. Get ready to roast some tires.

theiceman · June 2003

You might be right but your reference to the hp output of the 3.8 is not quite accurate. The 3.8 in the W body sedans is identical across its applications regardless of division (i.e. the rating of the Grand Prix, Impala and Regal are all 200 ponies). The 205 rating is for the regularly aspirated series III in the G-body sedans (i.e. the Bonneville, LeSabre, and Park Avenue) - because the size and configuration of the engine bay permits a more direct exhaust outflow. The difference in output (at 2.5%) is marginal and, given that the G bodies are all heavier cars than the W bodies, the performance advantage is still with the latter.

Perhaps like me, you suspect that GM just made a little extra effort with the plumbing on the (more expensive) G-bodies to distinguish them from their W body stablemates. And, I wouldn't put it past them to program the PCMs to reinforce that distinction. Regardless, the distinction does exist - at least according to an enthusiast acquaintence who had ready access to a dyno.

ice

P.S. just making one of my infrequent forays into TownHall to see if there was any "news" about the GTO - alas, not much here...

obiwan · June 2003

You could try http://www.newagegto.com for information and a discussion forum.

garnes · June 2003

iceman - I still doubt there is a 5 HP/TQ difference. I'd bet that the exhaust plumbing on the G bodies is the same diameter, and the resonator and mufflers are the same too. A less severe bend or two may help a tad - but exactly 5 HP AND torque?? 5 is a bit much unless the exhaust plumbing is really bad on something like the Impala.

My experience/understanding is that improvements to the exhaust system usually help peak HP more than torque. And +5 (2.5%) seems like a lot for just a "more direct outflow" Again - maybe if there are radical differences.

I've been to a chassis dyno a bunch of times to test mods. Same day back to back is a must as results vary quite a bit depending on atmospheric conditions - even with the "corrections" by the computer. Unless you actually tested a G and a W back to back - same day, it's worthless. Also, how many non SC'd Bonnevilles, LeSabres or Park Avenues have been on a chassis dyno for WOT performance tests???

I will admit that I've heard the exhaust from manifold on the Impala is poorly designed for flow though.

Anyway, I still think GM plays games with their power ratings in some cars to protect certain lines.

montanafan · June 2003

On June 6th GM put out a press release on the new GTO's dual exhaust including a sound link. Check it out at http://media.gm.com

theiceman · June 2003

Agreed on the dyno test and I have no idea what or how this "acquaintence" tested these cars - or even if they were cars from the same year. He did tell me that he was puzzled by the non-SC 3.8 producing different power ratings in the Gs and Ws - and his tested determined that there was a gap. I don't recall if it was as much as 5 hp.

Now, he wasn't expert on the PCMs for the non-SC 3.8 (he owned a 2000 GTP) but suspected that at least part of the gap was programmed. If true, that much is most assuredly GM playing the exact sort of game that you (and I) suspect they are. Doesn't mean the numbers they are reporting are wrong though - nor does it suggest that they are the only car mfr doing this sort of thing to help distinguish lesser from more expensive models.

Which brings us back to your original point - GM has long been playing games to keep the Corvette at the top of their own performance heap. None of us really expect that to change now do we?

ice

garnes · June 2003

No, I don't expect it to change either. I wish there was some way to stop that insanity though. Most people looking to buy a Corvette in the past would not likely be persuaded to get the Firebird or Camaro if the power rating was much closer to the Corvette. Same for a Bonneville vs an Impala. GM is shooting themselves in the foot. They have to put their best to the market because there are so many imports people are considering vs. the car they might down-rate.

Hopefully, the next generation Corvette will produce an obscene amount of power thus opening up the window of possibilities for other divisions.

I still suspect the GTO will really be doing 350 HP though. The best part will be the ready to go aftermarket intakes, throttle body (perhaps) and exhaust improvements that will take the GTO from powerful to downright brutal. Those are simple improvements. Upper 300's HP should be enough for most people.

theiceman · June 2003

I suspect that the GTO would be one car that will be placed on several dynos PDQ once they hit the market. So we will certainly see the extent to which the games-playing goes on this car.

ice

andys120 · June 2003

The actual rated hp of the '64 Tripe GTO was a subject of great controversy.

theiceman · June 2003

That's one of the few things about the 60s goat that I do well recall. Of course, most GTO discussions I recall were held in the late 70s and the fond reminiscences often blurred the distinction between gross and net.

garnes · June 2003

theiceman - you're right. It'll be dyno'd quick. On "Two Guy's Garage" (Speed Channel - actually it was "Crank and Chrome" at the time) they dyno'd a stock 2000 Corvette. Stock it was 265 HP at the wheels (almost 76% of 350 HP). With the K&N FIPK intake kit, it went to 286 HP! That's what I'm looking forward to. A couple of easy modifications and it's brutal.

I've seen dyno's reported for other cars and sometimes I wonder about the "datum" or baseline or standard they are using. But anyway, 340 and 350 are pretty close. I'd expect about 75 or 76 % to the wheels and that should translate to mid 260's at the wheels. If it's 340 - upper 250's I guess. There is so much at play from day to day on a dyno though - mainly atmospheric conditions.

b4z · June 2003

Plus a cam for additional low end torque with 20 ft lbs more.
And a 3.46 axle ratio on both 6 speed and auto.

http://media.gm.com/

garnes · June 2003

Way cool. More than that, they are making this thing a torque monster - which is more important. Peak torque is up to 365 now, but it sounds like the torque curve is way fatter than originally planned.

It also sounds like this car might not need much modification for intake or exhaust. It seems this has been recently redesigned to achieve these better numbers. Maybe just toss in a K&N panel filter and you're done.

Thanks for the link b4z.

garnes · June 2003

Oh - and this car will be a true performer - quick acceleration times from any situation because it has lots of torque everywhere on the power curve - not just nice peak numbers.

None of this great 0 to 60 if launched just right from 0 and then the "street start" (5 to 60) is well over 1 whole second slower - like all the "pocket rocket" crap (that are starting to cost almost as much as the GTO).

montanafan · June 2003

I don't recall if it was posted here at Edmunds but if you check the list of releases on June 6th, there was a release about the GTO exhaust that actually included sound clips.

Pontiac GTO

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles