No new GTO or Camaro - Page 2 - PY Online Forums

red70goat · #21 03-31-2005, 04:21 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Rabon:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by red70goat:

I also said don't count on the 07 being on a Zeta platform but rather as a "GTO" option on the G6.

It just makes a lousy GTO

Therefor it's demise as a Pontiac GTO in 07. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Wrong: still continued on Zeta platform, just not in US.

Perhaps as a GM Monaro, but not as a GTO

Wrong: Excluding the original Ferrari GTO, this car makes the best GTO ever in every category

All around it is a better car however not the fastest Pontiac VIN #'d GTO built to date: 1964 : 0-60 4.6 seconds / 2004: 5.3 seconds / 2005 : 4.8 seconds. 1/4 mile : 1964: 13.1 @ 115 mph / 2004 13.8 @ 103.8 / 2005 : 13.3 @107. Comparisons done on a 1964 348 hp, manual, tripower, 3.90 ratio. 2004: 350 hp ,manual/ 2005: 400 hp , manual, 400 hp.

GTO 4MA · #22 03-31-2005, 05:36 PM

red70goat:

You must have gone to drag strips on the moon back in the '60's to have seen any factory stock 1964 GTO's turn 13.1 in the quarter mile. The factory stock '64 tripower 389's had trouble getting out of the 15's with stock tires and mufflers, and even with 7 inch slicks and headers they might squeeze a 14 flat on a good day at a good track. The few Royal 421 '64's I saw run back in those days might make mid - 13's with headers and slicks on a good day.

BTW, fastest means top speed, quickest means better quarter mile times. No way any vintage GTO is faster than the current offering.

Goat luver · #23 03-31-2005, 05:56 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by red70goat:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Rabon:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by red70goat:

I also said don't count on the 07 being on a Zeta platform but rather as a "GTO" option on the G6.

It just makes a lousy GTO

Therefor it's demise as a Pontiac GTO in 07. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Wrong: still continued on Zeta platform, just not in US.

Perhaps as a GM Monaro, but not as a GTO

Wrong: Excluding the original Ferrari GTO, this car makes the best GTO ever in every category

All around it is a better car however not the fastest Pontiac VIN #'d GTO built to date: 1964 : 0-60 4.6 seconds / 2004: 5.3 seconds / 2005 : 4.8 seconds. 1/4 mile : 1964: 13.1 @ 115 mph / 2004 13.8 @ 103.8 / 2005 : 13.3 @107. Comparisons done on a 1964 348 hp, manual, tripower, 3.90 ratio. 2004: 350 hp ,manual/ 2005: 400 hp , manual, 400 hp. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I see the fraud is still making a fool of himself!

Mr_GTO · #24 03-31-2005, 06:22 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by red70goat:
All around it is a better car however not the fastest Pontiac VIN #'d GTO built to date: 1964 : 0-60 4.6 seconds / 2004: 5.3 seconds / 2005 : 4.8 seconds. 1/4 mile : 1964: 13.1 @ 115 mph / 2004 13.8 @ 103.8 / 2005 : 13.3 @107. Comparisons done on a 1964 348 hp, manual, tripower, 3.90 ratio. 2004: 350 hp ,manual/ 2005: 400 hp , manual, 400 hp.[/b] </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The '64 had a 421 and they didn't use good timing devices. Read Wangers Book. It was a marketing tool. The 2005 GTO is the quickest most powerful GTO ever.

rabon008 · #25 03-31-2005, 09:33 PM

So far, the only slip of an actual 1/4 mile time for bone stock '05 GTO that I have seen is ~12.8 at Mo Kan Dragway a little over a week ago. The factory claimed time of 13.0 is presumably to keep sales up on the C6 coupe. The GTO's manual transmission is virtually identical to the Z51 (hence better accelerating than the C6 coupe). Therefore, even though it is heavier, it accelerates almost as well as the C6 coupe (with a skilled driver, of course).

baron_ · #26 03-31-2005, 11:47 PM

i've got a friend that has one of the new GTO's

i will say, it's a nice and comfortable car

and you're right, it seems to get a lot of people craning their neck to look at it

but in my experience, those people are just trying to squint and see if it's a GTO or just some other regular car....because it's so hard to tell...and i find myself doing that

i see one coming in the distance and if it doesn't have the hood, it takes me a while to make it out

after finding out that it is, they might come to look, but only to say, "so that's what everyone is complaining about..."

give me a mint'ish '66 or '67 convertible over the MSRP for a new one

red70goat · #27 04-01-2005, 12:00 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ozzy:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by red70goat:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Rabon:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by red70goat:

I also said don't count on the 07 being on a Zeta platform but rather as a "GTO" option on the G6.

It just makes a lousy GTO

Therefor it's demise as a Pontiac GTO in 07. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Wrong: still continued on Zeta platform, just not in US.

Perhaps as a GM Monaro, but not as a GTO

Wrong: Excluding the original Ferrari GTO, this car makes the best GTO ever in every category

All around it is a better car however not the fastest Pontiac VIN #'d GTO built to date: 1964 : 0-60 4.6 seconds / 2004: 5.3 seconds / 2005 : 4.8 seconds. 1/4 mile : 1964: 13.1 @ 115 mph / 2004 13.8 @ 103.8 / 2005 : 13.3 @107. Comparisons done on a 1964 348 hp, manual, tripower, 3.90 ratio. 2004: 350 hp ,manual/ 2005: 400 hp , manual, 400 hp. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I see the fraud is still making a fool of himself! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Prove me wrong. It's one thing to sling juvenile insults. Quite another to back it up.

red70goat · #28 04-01-2005, 05:27 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by GTO 4MA:
red70goat:

You must have gone to drag strips on the moon back in the '60's to have seen any factory stock 1964 GTO's turn 13.1 in the quarter mile. The factory stock '64 tripower 389's had trouble getting out of the 15's with stock tires and mufflers, and even with 7 inch slicks and headers they might squeeze a 14 flat on a good day at a good track. The few Royal 421 '64's I saw run back in those days might make mid - 13's with headers and slicks on a good day.

BTW, fastest means top speed, quickest means better quarter mile times. No way any vintage GTO is faster than the current offering. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Take it up with CD & RT. It's their data. People are saying the 04 / 05 was a better performer in every category. The numbers dispute otherwise. It could be argued the 64 was the quickest GTO with a Pontiac powerplant. What Pontiac motor is the 04 / 05 using again? A Monaro with a Vette motor... No wonder DeLorean had a stroke.

Bob Hall · #29 04-01-2005, 06:22 PM

Red70,

The 64 you mentioned was a ringer for the article. You couldn't buy it the way they tested it. As for the 04/05's, you can buy it the way they tested it.

On a side note, I read somewhere that a stock 74 GTO had the same performance numbers with a 350 that a stock 64 did with a 389. I don't remember where I read that at and I haven't found it yet online but I think that's interesting.

Regards,
Bob

Jeff R · #30 04-01-2005, 08:02 PM

What was the topic again?

GTO 4MA · #31 04-01-2005, 08:26 PM

Listen to red70goat make a fool of himself?

Or was it no new GTO or Camaro?

Mr_GTO · #32 04-02-2005, 07:01 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by red70goat:

Prove me wrong. It's one thing to sling juvenile insults. Quite another to back it up. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Page 105 from Glory Years By Jim Wangers and I quote

"When they(C&D) came up with zero to 60 in 4.6 seconds and 0-100 in 11.8 seconds, I knew it was time for me to "shut up and watch". Our red GTO wouldn't have run from Zero to 100 in 11.8 seconds even if it had been dropped off the top of the Empire State Building"

From page 106

"What they didn't know was the red car was a RINGER" The car was build with a 389 Tri Power engine. However, I had it converted almost immediately to a 421 and had royal Pontiac turn it into a Bobcat"

GO read the book.

red70goat · #33 04-02-2005, 11:21 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by GTO 4MA:
Listen to red70goat make a fool of himself?

Or was it no new GTO or Camaro? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You and Ozzy seem to be of the same infantile mindset. At least Mr G_T_O was able to back up his claims of the test on the 64 via credible material. But then again, you and Ozzy are probably limited to 1 syllable words anyways. The topic was no GTO / Camaro. It is my opinion for reasons previously stated that there will be no 07 GTO as a GTO, but rather as an option on another model.

red70goat · #34 04-02-2005, 11:24 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Mr_GTO:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by red70goat:

Prove me wrong. It's one thing to sling juvenile insults. Quite another to back it up. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Page 105 from Glory Years By Jim Wangers and I quote

"When they(C&D) came up with zero to 60 in 4.6 seconds and 0-100 in 11.8 seconds, I knew it was time for me to "shut up and watch". Our red GTO wouldn't have run from Zero to 100 in 11.8 seconds even if it had been dropped off the top of the Empire State Building"

From page 106

"What they didn't know was the red car was a RINGER" The car was build with a 389 Tri Power engine. However, I had it converted almost immediately to a 421 and had royal Pontiac turn it into a Bobcat"

GO read the book. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Given that Wangers is a more credible source than CD my assumption that the 64 mentioned was a production model was in error. Duly noted.

gold79TA · #35 04-02-2005, 12:05 PM

Wow,
I had a stock '66 GTO for a number of years.
Original 389 Tripower with manual trans. 360 Hp I believe was the factory spec. No options on the car so it was about as light as it gets without stripping stuff out.
16 second quarter mile was more like it.

skepecs · #36 04-04-2005, 05:04 AM

If gm does stop the GTO, I hope they don't use it as an option on a lesser model. This would be an insult equal to how they badged an Opel the Lemans(in mid 80's), or the mid 80's Toyota Corola a Chevy Nova. THATS JUST CRUEL.

red70goat · #37 04-04-2005, 08:15 AM

[QUOTE]Originally posted by steve kepecs:
If gm does stop the GTO, I hope they don't use it as an option on a lesser model....

The GTO was an option on the 1974 Ventura. They did it before and will probably do it again in 07 on the G6. GM needs to shed a lot of it's lesser products from Chevy such as the Monte Carlo, etc and scrap some product lines such as Buick and Holden THEN revive the cars that made GM great. Start from the ground up, not from an existing product line.

Mr_GTO · #38 04-04-2005, 09:44 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by red70goat:
The GTO was an option on the 1974 Ventura. They did it before and will probably do it again in 07 on the G6. GM needs to shed a lot of it's lesser products from Chevy such as the Monte Carlo, etc and scrap some product lines such as Buick and Holden THEN revive the cars that made GM great. Start from the ground up, not from an existing product line. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

GM waited 30 years to bring back the GTO on a proven RWD platform. THey aren't going to destroy the image by placing it on a FWD car as a gimmick package.

It will either be it's own car in 2007/8 or there won't be one at all.

nickvarnalis · #39 04-04-2005, 10:27 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by red70goat:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Rabon:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by red70goat:

I also said don't count on the 07 being on a Zeta platform but rather as a "GTO" option on the G6.

It just makes a lousy GTO

Therefor it's demise as a Pontiac GTO in 07. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Wrong: still continued on Zeta platform, just not in US.

Perhaps as a GM Monaro, but not as a GTO

Wrong: Excluding the original Ferrari GTO, this car makes the best GTO ever in every category

All around it is a better car however not the fastest Pontiac VIN #'d GTO built to date: 1964 : 0-60 4.6 seconds / 2004: 5.3 seconds / 2005 : 4.8 seconds. 1/4 mile : 1964: 13.1 @ 115 mph / 2004 13.8 @ 103.8 / 2005 : 13.3 @107. Comparisons done on a 1964 348 hp, manual, tripower, 3.90 ratio. 2004: 350 hp ,manual/ 2005: 400 hp , manual, 400 hp. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

LOL!!!!! I wouldn't count the 64 GTO with the ringer 421 a FACTORY STOCK GTO would you? LOL!!! Man you are clueless when it comes to GTO's.

You don't really believe a Factory Stock 64 GTO trapped at 115mph do you? LOL!
For that to happen that 64 GTO would have to be pumping out around.. Lets see. lets figure around 3600lbs around a 20% drivetrain loss and your still talking pushing 370HP to the rear wheels and around 464HP at the crank!!

red70goat · #40 04-04-2005, 02:01 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by nvarnalis:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by red70goat:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Rabon:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by red70goat:

I also said don't count on the 07 being on a Zeta platform but rather as a "GTO" option on the G6.

It just makes a lousy GTO

Therefor it's demise as a Pontiac GTO in 07. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Wrong: still continued on Zeta platform, just not in US.

Perhaps as a GM Monaro, but not as a GTO

Wrong: Excluding the original Ferrari GTO, this car makes the best GTO ever in every category

All around it is a better car however not the fastest Pontiac VIN #'d GTO built to date: 1964 : 0-60 4.6 seconds / 2004: 5.3 seconds / 2005 : 4.8 seconds. 1/4 mile : 1964: 13.1 @ 115 mph / 2004 13.8 @ 103.8 / 2005 : 13.3 @107. Comparisons done on a 1964 348 hp, manual, tripower, 3.90 ratio. 2004: 350 hp ,manual/ 2005: 400 hp , manual, 400 hp. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

LOL!!!!! I wouldn't count the 64 GTO with the ringer 421 a FACTORY STOCK GTO would you?

Neither would I. Where in there did I say anything about the 64 being outfitted with a 421? Read my post gain dipsh*t.

You don't really believe a Factory Stock 64 GTO trapped at 115mph do you? LOL!
(QUOTE]

CDs data, not mine. Take it up with them.