GTO or Stang
- Thread starter ponyboy66
- Start date
-
Sponsors (?)
..... GTO is in a different class, pure speed wise, a mustang shouldn't be too far behind but in terms of overall car quality (class, interior, ride quality) a mustang just doesn't measure up but of course it does cost like 8 gs less. If you cared about speed why spend the 35 k on a GTO when you can have an 03-04 Cobra for under 35 k?
Nobody will know for sure until it comes out, but the Mach 1 is pretty close to the 05 GT in power and weight(on paper anyways) and it has beaten the GTO stock for stock in 2 different Pontiac magazines. Here's the latest one if you care to see: http://highperformancepontiac.com/features/0407pon_gtotest/
peyotesands
New Member
2004 GTO 350HP is probably a tenth or two faster than the 2005 Mustang, but by the time the 2005 Mustang is out the 2005 GTO will be out and it will have a 400HP LS2 and should be damn close to the current Cobra.
Likke this article shows http://highperformancepontiac.com/features/0407pon_gtotest/ The Mach 1 and GTO are a dead heat, so the heavier less and powerful '05 GT should be slower than the '04 LS1 GTO
Likke this article shows http://highperformancepontiac.com/features/0407pon_gtotest/ The Mach 1 and GTO are a dead heat, so the heavier less and powerful '05 GT should be slower than the '04 LS1 GTO
I doubt that anyone shopping for a Mustang would even consider the GTO. That thing is so bland it puts me to sleep when I look at it. Since I'm not a track guy I could care less about the GTO being a couple of tenths faster in the 1/4. Besides, anybody who cares can mod their Mustang to make that up.
On my way to work Friday morning at a little before 6:00 AM I got passed by a 68 GTO convertible with the top down. That car was sweet. I think the folks at Pontiac should be ashamed of themselves for bringing back the GTO name on a car like this.
But then, they stole the name from Ferrari and badged it on a Tempest, so I guess they have no pride to begin with.
On my way to work Friday morning at a little before 6:00 AM I got passed by a 68 GTO convertible with the top down. That car was sweet. I think the folks at Pontiac should be ashamed of themselves for bringing back the GTO name on a car like this.
But then, they stole the name from Ferrari and badged it on a Tempest, so I guess they have no pride to begin with.
szer0
New Member
I considered a GTO, even took an extensive test drive. But they wanted a $3000 "market adjustment" price over the msrp. Even though i really liked the ride and the feel and look of the interior, the car is just boring. In fact its so boring that the yellow one i tested 2 months ago is still there, and they offered it to me for 1000 under msrp 
.
Well as much as i like that ls1 power the car will never get looked at or cared about. It may become what the tbird has become for ford
.
. Well as much as i like that ls1 power the car will never get looked at or cared about. It may become what the tbird has become for ford
.
The GTO is an old australian design. It's basically a Holden and a stop gap measure by GM until they reintroduce the camaro/firechicken. Its chassis has actually been around for awhile, and was tuned for more comfort then peformance, due to the Aussie's poor roads. I just saw Car and Driver TV the other day and they were really ripping on it from a handling standpoint, which surprised me. I would not be surprised if the new GT runs circles around it in the handling department.
Route666
Active Member
The Monaro is sporty, but being made out of a family car makes it cushy. The whole car was built in a year for a cost of less than 1 million AUD, to give you how much time and money was spent in the development of it. They basically took their current sedan, took the rear doors off and shortened it.
The handling is pretty good, good everyday driver, but certainly not all-out canyon-carver.
The handling is pretty good, good everyday driver, but certainly not all-out canyon-carver.
I'm more of a car guy than a Mustang guy, although I'll probably get rid of my 95 GT vert for a 2006 stang.
I was around when the first GTO's came out. My best friend had a 389 tri power with huge rear tires. It handled like a pig in corners but for its day (and even now) it was very fast in a straight line.
My first new car was a 1970 SS350 Camaro. I came SO close to buying a slightly new 1970 Boss 302 but it was from a private party and the financing would have been a little complex, so I traded in my 1967 425 cu in ex CHP car on the Camaro just before I was transferred form VA to OK (I was in the Marines then). Just after I did the union went on strike and I didn't get my car for 6 weeks--I had ordered one to my specs--but oh well.
I think you'll find that even Mustang owners can be objective when it comes to evaluating a car that desecrates its heritage. Read any major car magazine like Road & Track, Car and Driver, Motor Trend, or Automobile, and not that crap like MM&FF, and you'll the overwhelming majority of letter writers respect the performance of the GTO but the think the people who designed the styling were on sedatives.
Handling might be nice, but the car is boring. I think Pontiac should resurrect the Firehawk idea and put a great big turkey decal on the hood.
I was around when the first GTO's came out. My best friend had a 389 tri power with huge rear tires. It handled like a pig in corners but for its day (and even now) it was very fast in a straight line.
My first new car was a 1970 SS350 Camaro. I came SO close to buying a slightly new 1970 Boss 302 but it was from a private party and the financing would have been a little complex, so I traded in my 1967 425 cu in ex CHP car on the Camaro just before I was transferred form VA to OK (I was in the Marines then). Just after I did the union went on strike and I didn't get my car for 6 weeks--I had ordered one to my specs--but oh well.
I think you'll find that even Mustang owners can be objective when it comes to evaluating a car that desecrates its heritage. Read any major car magazine like Road & Track, Car and Driver, Motor Trend, or Automobile, and not that crap like MM&FF, and you'll the overwhelming majority of letter writers respect the performance of the GTO but the think the people who designed the styling were on sedatives.
Handling might be nice, but the car is boring. I think Pontiac should resurrect the Firehawk idea and put a great big turkey decal on the hood.
holler said:
Don't believe the Car and Driver TV show on the GTO. It conflicts with the article they did in the magazine. I have been a C&D reader for many years and found out that the TV show was a retaliation for what they did to the GTO they were given to test drive for the article. Seems they took it to Nevada (without GM's permission) and ran it in the Silver State challenge, which is an open road race a little over 100 miles in length. GM wasn't too happy about that. If you check all the other magazines (MT, R&T, Autoweek) they all loved the cars power and handling, great interior. Most of them did comment on a lack of styling, that it could have been more muscular. Speed TV just did a test drive on the GTO and had the same comments (great handling, power, interior) but could have had a little more style. That and the fact that its not a Beemer (everyone knows at this point that C&D is the number one Beemer fan in the world).
By the way, that old Australian car design has won the Australian V8 supercar series the last 3 out of 4 years and is leading in points this year. And there are only two manufacturers in the series, Ford and Holden.
I've been a Car and Driver subscriber for more years than you've been reading--that makes me 56 years old. Also to all the other major mags. There's a reason they all like BMW's--they handle incredibly well, some even go like bats out of hell, their build quality is excellent, and they look pretty, though I wonder where Chris Bangle is going to take them. On the downside, nobody likes idrive and repairs are expensve, not to mention the cars themselves.
As far as the general comments about the bland styling we've read in the majors about the GTO, that's called damning with faint praise. If you've read those publications for any length of time and can read between the lines, it means they hate it.
With good reason.
Mustang fanatics are going to scream when the 2005 Stang gets dissed for not having IRS, but folks, this is the 21st century and a great car should have a great suspension, at least as an option. Styling and 300 hp at a price point is great, but I think Ford should have gone a little farther to expand their market appeal.
Having said that, I think I'll climb into my bomb shelter to escape the frags from the younger fanatics here who will accuse me of being a commie for 1) reading, let alone liking liking, Car and Driver, and 2) suggesting that the Mustang is anything but perfect.
As far as the general comments about the bland styling we've read in the majors about the GTO, that's called damning with faint praise. If you've read those publications for any length of time and can read between the lines, it means they hate it.
With good reason.
Mustang fanatics are going to scream when the 2005 Stang gets dissed for not having IRS, but folks, this is the 21st century and a great car should have a great suspension, at least as an option. Styling and 300 hp at a price point is great, but I think Ford should have gone a little farther to expand their market appeal.
Having said that, I think I'll climb into my bomb shelter to escape the frags from the younger fanatics here who will accuse me of being a commie for 1) reading, let alone liking liking, Car and Driver, and 2) suggesting that the Mustang is anything but perfect.
scottie1113 said:
I agree with you. I think BMW's are good, but they are expensive and repairs are too. I'm on the mbworld.com and m3forum.com boards and I can't believe what these guys pay for repairs, but I'm sure they have the income to afford it. You're right on Bangles styling, I don't know what he's thinking. I didn't mean any disrespect to C&D, as I have been reading it since high school (I'm 42, not too far behind you). According to an interview I read with the chief engineer for the new Mustang, they went with the solid axle because "that's what the drag racers wanted for reliability". I will admit I see alot more Mustangs at the drags than doing things like autocross or road racing. They reserve the IRS for the Cobra because Cobra buyers are "more upscale and refined in their requirements". Don't know how much I believe that last one. I'm sure they could have done it, but they want to justify the price for the Cobra with something more than more horsepower.
Similar threads
