OK, put your spin on this one.... - PY Online Forums

Goathead · #1 12-18-2003, 01:48 PM

http://auto.consumerguide.com/auto/n...x.cfm/id/37948

54 out of a possible 100, not bad....

http://www.dannys65gto.com

http://kurtspontiac.homestead.com/dannys65gto.html

Goathead · #2 12-18-2003, 01:48 PM

http://auto.consumerguide.com/auto/n...x.cfm/id/37948

54 out of a possible 100, not bad....

http://www.dannys65gto.com

http://kurtspontiac.homestead.com/dannys65gto.html

Tails · #3 12-18-2003, 02:57 PM

I noticed that it was the only Pontiac that made the near luxury list.

Phantom Black/Red

The Champ · #4 12-18-2003, 03:21 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Goathead:
http://auto.consumerguide.com/auto/n...x.cfm/id/37948

54 out of a possible 100, not bad....

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well let's see where they downgraded it:

1. Fuel Economy

2. Ride Quality - "Performance-car firm, but mostly comfortable. Excellent body control over large pavement dips and swells. Little impact harshness or tire thump except on really sharp bumps."

3. Quietness - "V8 growls at full throttle, burbles at steady 65 mph, which suits this modern muscle machine."

4. Room/Comfort Rear

5. Cargo Room

Two of the items that caused it to be lower rated would actually be desireable by most GTO/Muscle Car buyers.

As for fuel economy, rear seat room, and trunk space... well, that's just not one of the reasons you buy this type of car.

Seeing as how the high score was 67, and the GTO got a 54 despite being downgraded for things that don't matter to most anticipated buyers, I'd say it's probably at or near the top.

My '64 GTO Convertible Webpage

The '49 Caddy Limo Page

The '72 Camaro Page

carbking · #5 12-18-2003, 04:07 PM

Interesting Goathead, but be fair in how you take numbers out of context.

Yes, 100 points were possible, but the high score in the group of 45 vehicles was 67 (average was 56); so at 54 this vehicle comes in at average to average minus. Not really that bad considering its competition.

The kicker is the ratings are not price relative. As only 11 of the 45 were higher priced, if the ratings were price relative, the rating would be lower in relation to the group.

Jon.

Good carburetion is fuelish hot air.

ChiefIronHorse · #6 12-18-2003, 06:00 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR> Main downsides are fuel thirst, subpar trunk space, and no available side airbags. The jury's still out on long-term reliability. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Anybody looking for these things, this vehicle is not for them. I think the GTO scored good where it counts (at least for me). In acceleration/steering/handling/braking. As for the noise score

. This is a true muscle car that should sound like a true muscle car.

225/50WR17 tires = WRONG INFORMATION!

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR> Fuel Economy 4 4
No chance to measure yet. Note that a $1000 federal Gas-Guzzler tax applies with automatic transmission. Pontiac recommends premium-grade fuel.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
No chance to measure yet but they're scoring it a 4?

I can kinda understand the automatic being a 4 but the standard should be a 6 IMO.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR> Ride Quality 5 5
Performance-car firm, but mostly comfortable. Excellent body control over large pavement dips and swells. Little impact harshness or tire thump except on really sharp bumps.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
They use words like, "excellent and mostly comfortable" but they still score it at a 5 (average).

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Room/Comfort (rear) 4 4
Seat shaped for two only, but roomy enough for adults. Front seats power fore/aft from outboard buttons on backrests, but are very slow. Entry/exit unusually tight; front backrests don't tip forward very far, leaving narrow passage, and no assist handles provided.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

So I take it the vette scored a 1 or 2 because they can only fit 2 adults in it. Anybody who's ever owned a coupe knows that getting in and out of the back seat is a pain in the ass.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR> Cargo Room 2 2
Disappointing. Trunk fairly deep and wide, but only some 18 inches front-to-rear, so a couple of golf bags fill it up--and rear seatback doesn't fold down. Cabin storage just adequate.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Agreed!

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR> Value within Class 6 6
The reborn GTO blends old-time American V8 go with modern Euro-style road manners in a suave, understated package. Main downsides are fuel thirst, subpar trunk space, and no available side airbags. The jury's still out on long-term reliability.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Not bad for a vehicle that hasn't hit the streets yet. I can live with an above average score, for now. Once the real GTO's are in the consumers hands, some of the scores will be higher and others will remain the same.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR> All Near-Luxury Cars
High Score 67
Low Score 42
Average Score 56
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Anybody know the other vehicles that were compaired?

Goathead · #7 12-18-2003, 06:04 PM

All Near-Luxury Cars
High Score 67
Low Score 42
Average Score 56

Exactly, middle of the road, how exciting...

http://www.dannys65gto.com

http://kurtspontiac.homestead.com/dannys65gto.html

GTO_2004 · #8 12-18-2003, 07:42 PM

I dunno Goathead , i appreciate your oppinion , and your negativities...

but your arguments will soon be null & void..

why ? because its no BS... there is no tricks or deception, the 2004 GTO really is just a kick-ass car !!!

and people will soon be finding out by themselves first hand.

http://www.ls1.com/forums/showthread...hreadid=444749

Australian RWD + American V8 - Now THAT'S what I call a "coalition".

The Champ · #9 12-18-2003, 08:37 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Goathead:
_All Near-Luxury Cars _
High Score 67
Low Score 42
Average Score 56

Exactly, middle of the road, how exciting...

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Danny

With all due respect, I'd be disappointed if the 2004 GTO ranked at the top of the "Near Luxury" class.

I don't want this car to be a Mercedes Benz, Cadillac or a BMW.

I like the fact they downgrade it for the V8 growl and the performance car-firm ride.

Would you prefer the new GTO was a quiet boulevard cruiser?

My '64 GTO Convertible Webpage

The '49 Caddy Limo Page

The '72 Camaro Page

Dave A · #10 12-20-2003, 09:13 AM

Carbking, 'value within class' was one of the items from which the total score was tallied, and it actually scored 'slightly higher than average' in that category.

carbking · #11 12-20-2003, 10:29 AM

Dave A - sorry, I missed that one.

Jon.

Good carburetion is fuelish hot air.

Goathead · #12 12-20-2003, 02:21 PM

Thought I said that....how exciting...

http://www.dannys65gto.com

http://kurtspontiac.homestead.com/dannys65gto.html