2004 GTO AND ORIGINAL - Page 3 - PY Online Forums

The Champ · #1 12-13-2004, 06:31 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by red70goat:
the last distinctly recongnizable GT0: 1970. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I can't believe the number of times you posted this same drivel...

Just because you own a '70, that makes it the last "distinctly recognizable GTO"???

Well here's a '70:

And a '71:

And a '72:

Now except for slight changes on the hood and front end, these cars bodies are virtually identical.

I would think that even a person who obviously knows very little about cars would even be able to see that.

Nickv · #2 12-13-2004, 03:56 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Strange Frogg:
Point 1 -- It's a different time, not 40 years ago. When I see the above pics, I do see a similarity; the 1964 car was a basic car (a Tempest) with a heart of gold and an Italian name (Gran Turismo Omologato), built it Canada, with what even at that time was a corporate GM motor.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Built in Canada? Where do you get your information? No 64 GTO was ever built in Canada.

The 64 GTO's were assembled in 4 different plants in the US.

Baltimore, MD
Freemont, CA
Kansas City, MO
or
Pontiac, Mi.

As a matter of fact the only year that any GTO was built in Canada that I'm aware of is the 1970 GTO.

FWIW: They're were not what we would call "corporate engines" back in 64, or for that matter throughout the 60's and early 70's from GM. Each division was unique, and each division built it's own unique engines, at least the V8's were. During the latter part of the 70's and into the early 80's is when the idea of "corporate engines" started to play a bigger role among the GM division. It seems that Chevy won out.

Your history is a little off.

ctgross · #3 12-14-2004, 08:16 AM

Champs right, no 1983 Vetts sold to the public. So, Danny you're gonna have eat those words.LOL

Tripower455 · #4 12-29-2004, 11:48 AM

LLorca, you're a troll

...... how dare you come on here and try to interject logic that's contrary to that of the vocal minority!

But seriously now.......

The back seat is actually pretty comfortable. Llorca's been in the back of mine, and he's a pretty big guy. We had 3 big guys (and one not so big guy) in it that day. The other guy is well over 6' and had plenty of room.

I'm also a pretty big guy, and I've been crawling in and out of the back while installing my aftermarket radio, and the hardest part for me is getting out of it! Getting in is OK.

The electric seats are a bit of a PIA, but once the kids are trained on it's use, it's not so bad. My 7 year old son used to always get in the back on the driver's side in my Formula, and it's taken a bit to train him to use the other side (where he or my daughter can move the seat back). Manual reversion for the seats would be a nice option, but they are not THAT slow, once you get used to them. I would not recommend this car for anyone using a car seat! It's really a pain to get stuff in and out of the back, and I can't imagine lifting a child in there on a regular basis.

Llorca, let's go check out your '67 in your '04... You did find one, right?

The Champ · #5 12-16-2004, 04:02 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Goathead:
In conclusion, the '64 GTO _could_ be found with the most poowerfull Pontiac motor availiable, thanks for the help guy's....

PS: Champ, you are correct sir. The #'s I posted were for the '65 GTO, not the '64, my oversite....but it could still be had with the 421...LOL <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Danny

With all due respect, if your talking about an engine installed after the fact, a '64 Tempest could have had a more powerful motor than what was put in a Royal Bobcat GTO...

Not saying it did happen, but it could have.

I think we should stay with factory installed equipment in this discussion...

charlzm · #6 12-23-2004, 03:14 PM

So let me get this straight. There are some people who are upset because the world has changed in the last 40 years? Evolutionary styling from FORTY years ago is the issue here?

Sheesh, I'll just get a 2005 Pontiac/Holden GTO/Monaro coupe. Whatever it's called and whether it came by boat, train or semi, it's a helluva car. Period.

You want drive a relic? Go ahead. I'll take a modern car that turns corners and stops just as well as it gets damn near 13 flat in the quarter mile.

If all you 04+ haters want some company, go find some Dodge message boards and recycle your comments. Just fill in "05 Charger" instead of "04 GTO" and make sure to add the very original complaint about it having two too many doors.

I'm sure that car in its hemi iteration will be a very credible, comfortable, fast car, able to run along side the likes of the "GTO" and "new" Mustang.

Hey, are all the Mustang board guys pissing and moaning because the 05 looks too retro and denigrates the beloved memories of their old rods?

The Champ · #7 12-16-2004, 10:39 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Goathead:
Come on Champ, what about the Pontiac GTO built to race the Ferrari GTO.....that was factory installed...

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

When did Milt start working at the factory???

My understanding is Milt put that engine in at Royal. I could be wrong, but I think I'm right...

Goathead · #8 12-15-2004, 07:26 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>A lot of people knock the car, I went for a ride and was very impressed.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

John, most people knock the way GM did the car. The name, rushing it into production with no fanfare, not the strongest motor possible, bland styling etc.

In all, producing a failure with a legends name on it, coping out.

I have driven an '04 twice, and they drive great, and handle well. It has a lot of little things that would discourage me from buying one, but all in all, it's a nice car.

My opinion since the begining is that the original GTO was not just a a nice car for it's time, it was also a trend setting car. This one is not.

Nickv · #9 12-13-2004, 12:56 PM

Isn't it funny that every freaking thread turns into a new GTO bash. How pathetic.

Nice cars btw.

Mr_GTO · #10 12-28-2004, 10:27 AM

I'm 187 and 5'11" and I sat in the back with no problem. The back has nice comfy buckets too.
The only issue is getting in. The seats have a power feature that takes a while to get the seat forward and then you have to be able to contour yourself into the car. But that is the same with any 2 door car.

The seat function is the real issue. Dumb feature if you ask me.

KVman389 · #11 12-13-2004, 07:25 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Mr_GTO:
No evolutionary process there uh?

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

At least your statement is correct

David Jones · #12 12-13-2004, 08:27 AM

Chevrolet did engineer the the small block a fact that is well known whether you choose to admit it or not. Front wheel drive GTO? You said that not me. Has Pontiac forgotten how to engineer a car from scratch or are they just waiting on a slow death like Oldsmobile?

RandyW · #13 12-15-2004, 08:52 PM

Not from the factory as an rpo. I feel sure you're smart enough to have understood that, but hey, I've been wrong before!

Trace · #14 12-12-2004, 11:28 PM

Sweet '64 for sure, John!! (And that's my '04 too - blue w/ the blue leather) It would be so nice if you'd just send me your '64 so my newborn '04 would have some company in my garage... to make her feel more secure, you know? Huh? Huh?

The Champ · #15 12-15-2004, 05:50 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by red70goat:
Danny: When Champ starts blathering on about "continuos production" ( again )go to Musclecarclub.com and look up the production figures for the vehicle he is referencing. Otherwise he'll make a big deal out of it with pics, etc. We all know what you meant. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

One of the things I like about Danny, is that when he's wrong, he will admit it.

Unlike you, who when proven wrong, changes the subject.

And talking about blathering, I make a completely accurate 4 word post and you call it blathering....

Danny's cool, Whatzit drools...

Mr_GTO · #16 12-13-2004, 05:21 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by red70goat:

" The Formula could be had for $25K. Did you buy one?"

>>>Nope. Drove my 70 until it got to 278,000 and then bought a 94 740i followed by a 98 convertible C5....still have the 70.

"You wouldn't buy one even if they satisfied all your wants."

>>> Actually I had been hoping to trade my high mileage 740i in on the GTO in 2004. It never showed.

"And they have improved their product. The GTO is MILES ahead of the last F-body,"

>>>Given that they've had 30 years to bring back the GTO I should hope so. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Uh, I was talking about the improvement from the 2002 Firebird to the 2004 GTO. Try to keep up.

RandyW · #17 12-15-2004, 10:33 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR> John, most people knock the way GM did the car. The name, rushing it into production with no fanfare, not the strongest motor possible, bland styling etc.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The GTO almost never had the strongest engine in Pontiac's stable. Standard or optional until about '69-'70 even some of that is debatable until '71.

Goathead · #18 12-13-2004, 07:58 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>does the 05 Corvette resemble the 65 at all? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

No. It truly did evole, and was not just a relabeled import...

Gee, it is even a Chevy with a Chevy motor too, what will they think of next?...

rabon008 · #19 12-24-2004, 01:48 PM

Well said, llorca.

Goathead · #20 12-14-2004, 07:47 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Danny, again, Chevy didn't make the LS1. How many times do I have to tell you that? Or are you too ignorant to actually believe it?

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Once again, anything to get off the subject....

Is the Vette a continuous production and evolution by Chevrolet?

Can the same thing be said about the '04 and Pontiac?

Oh great know it all, please enlighten us.....