Psyched about the NEW GTO [Archive]

n4cer

11-26-2002, 09:41 PM

Originally posted by Faylix
So what are the specs supposed to be? Is it the LS1 engine or somethin else?

It will have the Pontiac brand character including a dual-port grille and powered by a specially tuned version of the 5.7-liter LS1 V8 (shared with some models of the Chevrolet Corvette) mated to a choice of either a six-speed manual or four-speed automatic transmission. The rear-wheel drive coupe will feature 17-inch alloy wheels, 2+2 bucket seating and a premium sound system with an integrated six-disc CD changer. Additional performance and feature details are still being finalized and will be released closer to the public unveiling of the GTO at the North American International Auto Show.

Plus, add an available 6-speed manual transmission, and what do you have? A true driver's car, unleashing over 300 hp on command.

A fusion of heritage power and modern technology, the new GTO will combine legendary acceleration with precision handling and driver amenities not dreamed possible in decades past. The new GTO will truly be the modern incarnation of the classic.

Rba007

11-26-2002, 10:23 PM

Dont ya love it when jason copies and pastes so he can sound intelligent!:thumbs: Just messin dude...

n4cer

11-26-2002, 11:37 PM

I never claimed I was the author of this!! When questions are asked I simply answer what I can with the information available to me...... :boogie:

WOLF

11-27-2002, 04:48 PM

Because we have NASCAR here in the states and yet for some reason all of the cars are actually FWD. Eh, well if that stupid FWD crap never was a huge deal back in the 90's the cars still would be RWD anyway. (I'm not going to go into that)

We do have SCCA classes like American sedan and so on, just no big, fast V-8 four door cars and for one good reason. Insurance!! It killed the F-bodies pretty well by itself, one very large reason why I-4 tuners are so popular. Compare the cost of a V-tec Civic to that of a Z28 and you question is answered. Even the GTO will be watered down, somewhere around 320-345hp, compared to the sweet Aussie 405hp s/ced LS-1.

Doesn't matter because there is such a big aftermarket for the LS-1 that I'm willing to bet that we will see some person in a Pontaic mag with 700hp GTO with the LS-1 within 12 months of the cars date that it will be for sale.

MattBatt

11-28-2002, 07:19 PM

there are some saftey benifits to having a Front drive car like most of the weight on the driving and steering wheels.

GrafxWerks

11-28-2002, 10:27 PM

http://www.n-body.net/currie/Holden/Monaro_Colors.jpg

http://www.n-body.net/currie/Holden/Monaro_Front.jpg

http://www.n-body.net/currie/Holden/Monaro_Rear.jpg

http://www.n-body.net/currie/Holden/Monaro_Interior.jpg

- Ryan

WOLF

11-29-2002, 12:48 PM

Please don't change that interior, well make it left hand drive and thats about it.:thumbs:

And keep the exterior colored gauge cluster, I like that feature alot. Man, everthing is perfect and hopefully GM doesn't do anything stupid with a car that only needs a slightly different exterior to make it look like a Pontaic.

The FWD topic: new technology involving cars with RWD have closed any sort of advantage the FWD cars even had. Plus there are way to many draw backs with FWD cars anyway, torque steer, have yet to see a FWD car clock a 8 second or under 1/4mile.;) That and if the main issue was traction, why didn't people just get AWD cars or make AWD cars in the first place. Funny to think during the time FWD cars were popular that AWD drive cars didn't have the same sucess, seems more of a cheap thing you would see on a info-merical than anything else and we did a good job falling for it.

WOLF

12-03-2002, 11:05 PM

Bob Lutz slammed my ass on the ground, to heck with the "only" low-mid 300 range!

360+LS1 and a 405+LS6

http://www.newagegto.com/GTO%20News.htm

VTECSiGAH8R

12-04-2002, 01:39 AM

Originally posted by WOLF
Compare the cost of a V-tec Civic to that of a Z28 and you question is answered. Even the GTO will be watered down, somewhere around 320-345hp, compared to the sweet Aussie 405hp s/ced LS-1.

Acttually the 405 hp Monaro is not s/ced, its N/A tuned like the LS6 for the vette. The v6 Monaro is the engine w/ the s/c option. But yeah, the LS1 has a pretty nice aftermarket I'd say.

On the insurance thing, Civics and Integras and other little I-4's might be cheaper on insurance in one manner because they aren't performance cars, but Hondas/Acuras (and Camrys) are the most stolen cars on the road, and that somewhat makes up for the added insurance costs. Compared to say a J-Body or the plain jane W-Bodies, the Hondas are hella expensive on insurance. I think the most stolen car is an early 90s Camry, then a late model accord, a late model civic, a later model accord, a later model civic, a civic Si, and an Integra. Of course I am exaggerating, but that is not too far from the truth.

GreatGraySkwid

12-04-2002, 11:25 AM

Originally posted by VTECSiGAH8R
I think the most stolen car is an early 90s Camry, then a late model accord, a late model civic, a later model accord, a later model civic, a civic Si, and an Integra. Of course I am exaggerating, but that is not too far from the truth.
Actually, Integras top the list by a stupid margin.

http://www.cnn.com/2002/US/05/15/stolen.cars/index.html

Preludes are the next down in the sport compact category, and the reason for both should be pretty obvious...

WOLF

12-04-2002, 01:07 PM

Hate to say it but for some reason Hondas are incredibly easy to break into and strip them for cash, same goes for Toyotas. Don't ask me how I know either.;) It also helps when the car is popular and there is a high demand (plus good resale value)for them, thats another thing "people" look for.

Crap, screwed up again about it being s/ced, good thing you pointed that out VTEC, its Calloway tuned. Since it will be around the 360-405 that will keep the 0-60 in the mid 5's. Not bad for a car that weights over 3600lbs or 1200lbs more than your avg. Honda Civic. Heavy car, isn't it.

If I make another dumb mistake like that:rage:

MattBatt

12-07-2002, 03:14 PM

I have heard one of the most popular things to steal out of hondas and toyotas are their air bags. You can get a lot of cash on the black market for an airbag. Probably because those idiots who tear their hondas up making them **** rockets cant pass an insurance inspection.

DumbedDown

12-09-2002, 05:47 AM

Those pictures (interior and exterior) are from Monaro Series I. Series II is released here in Australia in January.

You'll be able to keep body colour coded leather interiors, but everything else about the interior is all new. Expect the interior of the GTO to look rather similar.

http://gm.wieck.com/forms/gm/PV__010140__.jpg

http://gm.wieck.com/forms/gm/PV__010141__.jpg

http://gm.wieck.com/forms/gm/PV__010142__.jpg

http://gm.wieck.com/forms/gm/PV__010139__.jpg

Mike3800

12-09-2002, 11:42 AM

:rage: :rage: I can't take it!!! Answer these questions truthfully and honestly.

Can GM design cars?

Can GM design cars with the LS1 and make it emissions legal? (ex. Corvette Z06, Camaro Z28)

Can GM design cars with 2 or 4 doors with rear wheel drive?

Can GM make a killer looking and functional interior like on the Monaro?

Brings the last question...

Why do we not have killer cars (as in not one car but CARS like that here?!!!

One GTO is nice if it really happens in 2004 and is not some downtuned overpriced excuse for a Camaro/Trans Am replacement. That will be cool.. What about all the other big bad to the bone Holden cars? Are we stuck with FWD slow asss opverpriced cars that can only make the new japaneese cometition wet themselves from laughter? COME ON... get the old GM guys on the team again!!! They wouldn't have some little cutsie toostsie little Maxima or Altima pounce on a Impala or Grand Prix of ANY trim level!!! And how dare they stick an SS badge on the Monte without at least having the L67 under the hood.

Sorry, I go over the edge when I see Holden cars. I'm kinda old scool when it comes down to it and I'd love to have a RWD V8 and a handfull of gears, room for passangers and suck down gas like mad and make fun of the new Z and Neon and Altima etc...

:rage:

VTECSiGAH8R

12-09-2002, 04:52 PM

Originally posted by WOLF
Hate to say it but for some reason Hondas are incredibly easy to break into and strip them for cash, same goes for Toyotas. Don't ask me how I know either.;) It also helps when the car is popular and there is a high demand (plus good resale value)for them, thats another thing "people" look for.

No seriously, you are right....Hondas are easy to break into. My friend was telling me that he knows a guy that steals cars and he likes to steal Hondas (Civics specifically) because it is so easy to pull back something on the door and get a hangar in there or something to pull the lock. And I don't know how good the anti-theft system is on those cars if they get stolen so much. I know it was a bitch getting past passlock II in Static's car for his remote start and I never want to mess with that resistance crap again. Makes ya think twice before ya sit there and say how great Japanese imports are over American cars.

BTW, with the GTO, Solstic, the SS series of cars, the Neon SRT-4 andd the SRT-10 Viper and Ram and the SVT cars, it seems like America is fighting back at the imports.

grandGTR

12-09-2002, 08:22 PM

Originally posted by Mike3800
:rage: :rage: I can't take it!!! Answer these questions truthfully and honestly.

Can GM design cars?

Can GM design cars with the LS1 and make it emissions legal? (ex. Corvette Z06, Camaro Z28)

Can GM design cars with 2 or 4 doors with rear wheel drive?

Can GM make a killer looking and functional interior like on the Monaro?

Brings the last question...

Why do we not have killer cars (as in not one car but CARS like that here?!!!

:rage:

Simple very few people want a car like that. Yes most of us would love a mean well designe car, but 90% of cr buyers do not want fancy colored interior, huge power and exotic styling since it would tripple the sticker price of the car and insurance rates. I mean you seen the interior of the Boxter? Driven one? Well it looks amazing. (steeo is amazing) and well it performanes top notch too, but not to many of us can afford one or the insurance on it. GM supplies a great cars to mee the meet the markets needs. And besides I thought the 99+ GA interior was a great step in the right direction. :)

Mike3800

12-10-2002, 10:42 AM

Originally posted by grandGTR

Simple very few people want a car like that.

My ASSS!!

Explain the following hot rodded new cars and why the trend is going this way and why they are SELLING...

255HP Nissan Maxima avalable with a 6-speed
240HP Nissan Altima in a manual or an automatic
170HP Nissan Sentra SER SpecV avalable with a 6-speed manual
227HP Subaru WRX
Mazda 6 avalable with a 6-speed manual
shall I contunue? Really, I can there are alot more.

No, my friend, the trend is going twards performance now, even with SUV's.

grandGTR

12-10-2002, 11:57 AM

Originally posted by Mike3800

My ASSS!!

Explain the following hot rodded new cars and why the trend is going this way and why they are SELLING...

255HP Nissan Maxima avalable with a 6-speed
240HP Nissan Altima in a manual or an automatic
170HP Nissan Sentra SER SpecV avalable with a 6-speed manual
227HP Subaru WRX
Mazda 6 avalable with a 6-speed manual
shall I contunue? Really, I can there are alot more.

No, my friend, the trend is going twards performance now, even with SUV's.

Now what question are you asking you can not just change it around. You said a car like that. Exotic multi tones leather interior, (not canvis like the sentra), and a car that is not just a package added to an exsisting body style (all you listed)...

The only car on that list that would be a nice car is the Maxima. The Subaru is also one of my favorites, but I would not call it as nice as what you were descirbing (the car in question here). I hope you are kidding about the Altima, that car looks nice, but has very little to excite you on the interior and to get the v6 you are adding a lot to the price for not so much. The new Mazda 6 I looked at just the other day, and man it is cool! So have not had the chance to take one out for a ride. If you moan for your question answered do not get mad when it is. :)

Mike3800

12-10-2002, 12:56 PM

Originally posted by grandGTR

Now what question are you asking you can not just change it around. You said a car like that. Exotic multi tones leather interior, (not canvis like the sentra), and a car that is not just a package added to an exsisting body style (all you listed)...

The only car on that list that would be a nice car is the Maxima. The Subaru is also one of my favorites, but I would not call it as nice as what you were descirbing (the car in question here). I hope you are kidding about the Altima, that car looks nice, but has very little to excite you on the interior and to get the v6 you are adding a lot to the price for not so much. The new Mazda 6 I looked at just the other day, and man it is cool! So have not had the chance to take one out for a ride. If you moan for your question answered do not get mad when it is. :)

My point was performance. GM is losing sight fast, and something like Holden for GM here (kinda like SVT for Ford) would be a good answer, RWD or not.

I can list more...

BTW I mentioned nothing about adding a package to an exsisting body style, That's a good thing, GM should get a clue and do that ya think? BTW Altima is a new body style in case you haven't noticed, so is the new Impreza, so get the facts straight buddy.

No one would buy a faster GP especially not with a manual tranny. Bad idea, instead make things like Azteck (flop anyone?) or Vibe (wait.... that's a Toyota Matrix on a Corrola platform) Impoviong exsisting platforms is dumb huh?

I am not moaning, I think you are because you realize I have a valid point that has been clearly made.

MattBatt

12-10-2002, 01:30 PM

we are talking about trends. It is real trendy right now to go japanese. Not just with cars but with everything you see people proudly wearing tatoos that have jap lettering on it. You can see it in cell phones in magazines (ever noticed that most of the covergirls for turbo and other import tuner mags are usually japanese).

As far as cars go when I bought my GA used I was looking at a maxima as well and even though it supposedly had 20 more horsepower I couldn't feel it. I like the way the GA snaps your neck back when you mash the throttle. What GM has to do is steal back some of those people who think that top end is better than torque. and I think they are on the right path to do just that.

Mike3800

12-10-2002, 02:01 PM

Originally posted by MattBatt
as cars go when I bought my GA used I was looking at a maxima as well and even though it supposedly had 20 more horsepower I couldn't feel it.

It's called refinement.

Ever drive a stock Lightning? I have twice. The stock lighning "feels" no faster than a GA with the exception of looking at the speedometer or noticing traffic suddenly dropping behind. No wheelspin (stock chip) and no lifting of the hood and no neck snapping. Yet it will still run 13's in the 1/4 stock.

Also... torque? Let's see....

Grand Am GT 3.4 liter V6, 175HP 205Ft.Lbs.

Nissan Maxima 3.5 liter V6 (notice the larger engine), 255HP 246 Ft. Lbs. (I don't know... is 246 ft. lbs more than 205 Ft.Lbs?)

Now.... tell me how there is more torque with the smaller engined Grand AM!!! LOL!!! At ANY rpm level!!!!

Not dissing the GA... just stating facts, and I can admit when a car I own or like is beaten. Grand Am and other GM cars WERE very compedative for performance... but not anymore (especially since the death of the F-body) and that is my point. Bring the performance back!!

No... the trend is not Japaneese, it's performance. Look at the new Neon turbo and PT Cruser turbo... last I checked that was not made in Japan!!

SVT Focus? Made in Japan right?

:wave:

Think "performance".

edit: I'm on your side, I still like GM but I don't like what they are doing right now. I can't tolerate not being in 1st place for bang for the buck like they always have been.

VTECSiGAH8R

12-10-2002, 05:12 PM

Mike, um I didn't want to say this, but after your constant posting....you need to calm the f*** down, seriously.

Oooh, GM's loosing ground in every field. One year of hot releases and suddenly GM is in big trouble or something??? I don't think so. GM is still the strongest selling car manufacturer on the road, and even with Ford's attempts at releasing more muscle (SVT Lightning and Cobra as well as the behemoth V10 and diesel SUVs and Pickups) and Diamler-Chrysler's 70,000 mile 7 year warranty and increase in power (Hemi, SRT-4 & SRT-10), GM is still the only profitable manufacturer.

And of course being the biggest manufactturer in the world, it isn't exactly a piece of cake trying to merge all of your cars into different platforms to save even more money, make better quality products, and produce more cars.

Yeah, Nissan released their new Altima, their Sentra is updated with nice packages, the Maxima is about to be updated, but they are still the company coming out of bankruptcy that was bought by Renault and is being revamped and because of the quick R & D that went into their new cars they have quality control issues and are still trying to recover from debt.

Then there is Honda, who released a 240 hp Accord, but car reviewers actually think the old Accord was better because it handled and braked better and didn't seem as bloated. Yes the extra power is a huge bonus, as is the extra room, but not for the markup. Then the new Civics are even more butt ugly than ever and that the Si is just a stupid idea. The only car from Honda I see as being worth its salt is the S2000 as a collector's item perhaps, and their SUVs are notriously crap and prone to roll over.

And I still have not seen more than maybe 4 WRXs in Miami in the same span of time that I have seen thousands of new GM cars. So that makes Subaru's count at 5 because I have a neighbor with an outback. Subarus are rare around here because they look kinda busted. BTW, Subaru also contributes somewhat to GM's profits anyway as they are partial owners I believe.

Yes the import cars may have some advantage performance-wise, but GM is doing something right if they can still sell cars like crazy (good values), so they really shouldn't have to do much, but they are doing a lot to change things up, and you need to recognize that because your attitude is getting old and annoying. It's the same stuff every post almost.

When my dad see's the new Accord, he thinks "nice," but then he realizes the markup and recognizes that Consumer Reports gave nice safety and overall remarks on the Impala, and decides he wants that, even if the engine is down from the Accord by 40 horsepower and doesn't handle as good. That doesn't matter much because it'll be stop and go most of the way for him and 200 hp is enough to manuver with anyway, not to mention that I believe the next Impala SS actually will have an L67 and should be worthy of the badge.

Mike3800

12-10-2002, 06:24 PM

Originally posted by VTECSiGAH8R
Mike, um I didn't want to say this, but after your constant posting....you need to calm the f*** down, seriously.

Or what? LOL!!!! Nobody is upset besides you tiger!!

I don't care if GM is successfull, really I don't. Perhaps to a point because they affect the overall economy, but past that... I don't personally know anyone that works there etc... All I care is if they make a performance car that is compedative again. Unless... you like rentals and Mary Kay cars only, as for me, I remain a performance enthusiast. You probbably hated the Camaro right? You like seeing GM take near last place for performance for probbably the first time in history, cause you hate them right? I don't, and it bothers me alot. I grew up with GM, I was working on GM cars when you were but a sperm swimming twards that egg.

If you don't like my opinon, don't read it!!!! and especially don't reply to my posts!!! STFU

Spoon

12-10-2002, 06:51 PM

Nice world we live in here wheree everyone can share their opinion, but it is not worht all of this. I live, eat, and sleep, the issues that the two of you are debating and I can say that I see both sides. I see the changes going on at GM and some of them are very good. The product continues to improve, but we can't satisfy everyone. :( :thumbs:

Mike3800

12-10-2002, 06:57 PM

Originally posted by Spoon
Nice world we live in here wheree everyone can share their opinion, but it is not worht all of this. I live, eat, and sleep, the issues that the two of you are debating and I can say that I see both sides. I see the changes going on at GM and some of them are very good. The product continues to improve, but we can't satisfy everyone. :( :thumbs:

I have nothing but respect for you Spoon. :thumbs:

Impossible to satisfy everyone, I just hope the changes being made are... performance oriented changes for the target price of 18-26k$. :D

VTECSiGAH8R

12-10-2002, 08:20 PM

If I didn't like GM I wouldn't have PATIENCE for them, which I obviously have because I don't down them every chance I get. Mike, look up the friggen word. Things don't get done instantly in this world.

The Camaro was a nice car, but of course everyone thought it was not good enough for the price or something, because nobody wanted an F-Body when it was out. But low and behold, as soon as GM takes it off the market, all the little whiners like YOU start complaining that they don't do YOU any favors, when it was only because of their persistance that the car stayed alive so long. Are they supposed to keep it on the market so that everyone can stare at them and drool about what a great value they are and then drive off the lot with a GA??? I think not!

Also, how are they supposed to fight people that claim the platform was aging and all it had was grunt for the buck with no choice for options that people would use everyday, like an interior someone can sit in for more than 10 minutes and can get in and out of without busting their head every time? The only way was to pull it off the market, save the beatings by car magazines and by consumers not buying the car, and see what the consumers want.

Of course when people get to the point where they whine about the car leaving and how much GM sucks before the last car even rolls off the production line, GM is not gonna feel like they have a responsibility to those people. Maybe they have or had the intention of pulling it off the line to make people drool and completely revise it for the better?? How would they feel about those intentions after hearing soooo many whiners like you?? I would be so ****ed that I would make sure to keep any future performance car outta your range, but that wouldn't be a great decision, thus why I am not a CEO of a car company.

Also, I don't seee what all you complaining is for anyway...sure they took it off the production line, but does that mean the car is gone??? Hell no! You can find later gen. F-Body V-8s used by the dozen in your area I bet. In fact, there are prolly a few last year F-bodies sitting at a local dealer waiting to be bought, so I don't see what your complaint is about. You can still get the car if you want it SOOOOOOOO BAD, so just get it and YOU STFU!

Not that I am against opinions, but I think that constant repetitive negative opinions are simply an annoyance. It's like when you are sitting in a car and someone says "Burger King sucks" or something every 5 minutes. Everyone knew your opinion from the beginning, but after the 10th time hearing it, someone will want to beat ur ass because it is unneccessarily repetitive, and you have reached that point on this site and on this thread.

MattBatt

12-11-2002, 07:02 AM

Maybe I didn't state my points correctly. The GA FELT faster when I test drove it. It FELT like there was more torque at lower RPMs.

Second point If you had read my post I used more examples than just the car market. Like tattoos that noone can read. Japanese shirts. Anime, Technology, Comercials.

And to rebuttle the point you made about the PT Cuiser and Neon (essintially the same car) they are trying to break into the inport tuner scene like Ford is with the Focus and GM is with the Caviler and the Sunfire.

Look dude I don't have time to sit here and argue with you I've got more important things to do.

Mike3800

12-11-2002, 10:24 AM

Originally posted by VTECSiGAH8R
Mike, look up the friggen word. Things don't get done instantly in this world.

OK tiger! You told me! You have been around the world, you would know. Things don't come instantly in this world. I'm getting the dictionary right now! :rolleyes: LOL!!! You kill me!!! Sorry, I didn't bother to read all of the other babble, just a little bit. I won't continue to argue with you, granted it is rather entertaining, but I will say... it does not take that much to put a larger engine or a different transmission on an exsisting platfom, what do you think Nissan did with the Maxima? Nothing special, just put the Pathfinder engine in and tweeked it a little....

OK I'm done with you.

Back to thread topic:

I hope they release the GTO sooner than later and it is priced under 30K, if so... I just might be seen in one!!

Also... why the limited production? I think they should have a... "Tempest" or something that is a downtuned GTO that sees higher production numbers and a lower price. That would be nice :D

Mike3800

12-11-2002, 10:30 AM

Originally posted by MattBatt
Maybe I didn't state my points correctly. The GA FELT faster when I test drove it. It FELT like there was more torque at lower RPMs.

Second point If you had read my post I used more examples than just the car market. Like tattoos that noone can read. Japanese shirts. Anime, Technology, Comercials.

And to rebuttle the point you made about the PT Cuiser and Neon (essintially the same car) they are trying to break into the inport tuner scene like Ford is with the Focus and GM is with the Caviler and the Sunfire.

Look dude I don't have time to sit here and argue with you I've got more important things to do.

Relax!

You stated your points correctly, and they were made. I didn't necessarily agree with all of them but that's OK. I am a little older, perhaps you are right about the Japanese trend or whatever, but I don't see it. Looks like a performance trend to me since we are talking about cars.... at least I was.

I agree with trying to break into the tuner market, but I think it is more than just the Japanese tuner market now, and I hope GM doesn't make the box Cavalier like on that other thread.... I'd like to see a supercharger on the 2.2 or a turbo on a rebuilt platform, it is pretty old now, THAT would be pretty nice!! :thumbs:

Jason E

12-11-2002, 11:56 AM

To all of Mike's dissenters...

I see EXACTLY where he is coming from, and I may be 1 of 3 people on this board who do get it :D The man is damn right...he can remember when GM performance per dollar ratio was second to none, and they've squandered it. A history lesson...

1985:
RWD -
-We have a Grand National that for the price of today's GTP, is faster than a Corvette 0-60, can handle .81g on the skidpad, comes with all the luxury goodies you could want, and can EASILY be tuned to run 13 flat, by doing nothing more than turning the psi up, and do it in a 5 passenger, luxury car with some STYLE. And these motors were SOLID...
-We have an IROC Camaro with the then-brand-new 305 TPI, capable of mid 6 second 0-60s, faster than any competition from the day, 300ZXs, Supras, GT 5.0s, etc, and could do .88g on the skidpad...same goes for the T/A
-We have the Monte Carlo SS, a TRUE SS...cheap. 305 V8 capable of the same 0-60 as our GAs, 3.73 gears, .81g on the skidpad, again, a COMFORTABLE car to drive that could keep up with sports cars in the twisities, even if it didn't look it. All for the price of today's GA GT, adjusted for inflation
-We had a world class, Corvette....well, we still do :thumbs:
-We had a cool little Fiero...sure, they got the handling wrong until '87, but it was a fun little pocket rocket.

FWD-
-Um, um, hmmmm...can we get back to you on that one? Unless you can say "Citation X11"....um, I can't.... :confused:

1990-
RWD-
-Camaro is still king for the buck...350 IROCs doing 0-60 in 5.8 seconds, and just LOOKED right...such a hot car.
-RWD G bodies dead... :(
-Corvette...still awesome

FWD-
-Here we go....180hp GA SE with a 5 speed...0-60 in low 7s, .86g on the skidpad, for LESS than today's GA GT, adjusting for inflation...not impressive?
-Same goes for Berretta GTZ...same mechanicals in a sportier body...Can you say a Spec V beater??
-195hp Calais W41. Sure, it was an odd looking duck, but it went 0-60 faster than a 305 5 speed IROC, and got 30 MPG on the highway, AND could be had for the price of today's GA SE.
-3.1 Turbo GP SE...not as great as the 3.4s to come, but a start...
-Z24...hey, what can I say?? I STILL see a ton of these old 2.8 Z's around...solid as the day is long, were as popular as white bread, and were the cheapest V6 around...quick too

1995-
RWD-
-World class 4th gen F bodies...period...
-Corvette? Long in tooth
-Impala SS....mmmm....Impala....even Car and Driver said "this car is awesome for the $$"

FWD-
-Whoops, sliding here a little....
-GA H.O. Q4 dead...left with a weakling 150hp "revised" Q4 with balance shafts... a pity :huh:
-Berretta now a wattered down, V6 only "Z26"
-3.4 DOHC GPs doing ok...
Um, uh, hmmmm...oh yeah, we get a new Z24. Looked like they did well...CLEAN, sporty styling, and it gets the 2.4 in '96...

2002-
RWD-
-F body better than ever, but so old, does anyone notice? Only enthusiasts did...others ask me, "they still make a Firebird??" When was the last time someone did a TV ad for these things?
-Corvette? Of course, world class.

FWD-
-Z24 looks no different than in '95. No longer a handling leader, no longer a price leader, no longer leading in anything. And again, looks hardly any different than '95. Did I mention in 7 years, like no change??? The '03 design? ICK....
-GA GT. Nice car...good styling, great handling....DOH...wait a minute...the '91 H.O. Quad 4 5 speed GA SE my dad used to own, well, it just ripped my precious GA to shreds, courtesy of my cousin who owns it now...with 170k miles on the clock. Our precious GA GTs can't even keep up with what was produced 12 years ago, as the same model. An absolute pity
-GP GTP-Our own guiding light for FWD performance. Getting kinda pricey though...over 28k now, and the styling is getting a little long in tooth. Same goes for Regal GS.
-Monte SS- Are you kidding me?? No supercharger, and almost the same price as a GTP? Thanks, I'll pass. Better yet, I'll take an '85 MC SS and run circles around you...and a nice one goes for 7k rather than 25k.
Yeah, thats it...

Notice how our best year for performance choices was right around 1990? And they were cheap too!!! This is what Mike is getting at, and so am I...where's the beef cheap????

Jason E

12-11-2002, 12:08 PM

Some other random comments...

1) I can see what someone said about "not wanting cars like these," the ones Mike supposedly proposed. If by that, you mean RWD V8, I'd like to ask this...WHY do they not like them?? Lemme see here...could it be because the average joe doesn't even know GM still MADE it??? Or could it be because dealers weren't forced to stock them? Oh wait, could it be because there hasn't been a TV ad for a Camaro since '98??? The fact we sold ANY is mind-boggling. GM put ZERO effort into this car since '98...if we had a freshened one, maybe people WOULD want this type of car. Mustang sales prove this.

2) There was NOTHING wrong with the performance to $ ratio of the car...car mags all raved about it, as did customers. What was wrong? A nine year old chassis with all of its inherent oldness in terms of space efficiency, and not as refined of a ride as needed to be more competitive. Thats it...and oh yeah, a new style couldn't hurt either!!!

3) If we don't whine, will anyone care??

4) If everyone else hadn't upped the ante, we wouldn't feel so slighted. If there was no 240hp Altima, no 215hp Neon, then maybe we'd be happier. But they are here. So GM needs to step up the ball. Give them time...

Mike is right...performance per dollar is at an all-time low with GM. For '03, we have a GTP, a Regal GS, and a Vette for true excitement. DOH...the cheapest is about $27k. Can you say OUCH????

Mike3800

12-11-2002, 12:51 PM

Thanks for that Jason! :thumbs:

Jason E

12-11-2002, 05:24 PM

Hey, no problem man :thumbs:

When someone's right, they're right. You have every right to be annoyed, and so do I. I'm a lifer when it comes to GM...but that doesn't mean I can't criticize them to hell and back when they're being asinine...

The cars they produced in the '80s and early '90s are what made me love GM. When I was in elementary school, to me the world revolved around IROCs, Trans Ams, Monte SSs, Grand Nationals, and a little later H.O. Quad 4 Berettas and GAs, and Z24s. These cars made me love GM at a young age...not to mention my mom owned a Camaro when all the other soccer moms had minivans :D

Performance per $ is at an all-time low...and its a shame. Should they come out with no new performance bargains I feel like I NEED, what will I do? Pay off my GA, keep it 'til the wheels fall off, and take the $$ I'd spend on a new car and invest it in either an IROC or TTA. Nothing produced since the F body makes my blood boil and say, "I NEED this car."

People ridiculed me to no end in the GA performance post I did, but its true...its a great car, but it doesn't make my blood boil. The only other car that comes close is a GTP, but its too big for what I need and want, hence the GA. I love my GA, but when I bought it I didn't say "I NEED it"...I bought it because it was a nice car and a great deal. What do I think I'd NEED?? Gimme something with a V8, even if its FWD...PLEASE....

Either than or an s/c Solstice :thumbs:

Mike3800

12-11-2002, 05:42 PM

Originally posted by Jason E
The only other car that comes close is a GTP, but its too big for what I need and want, hence the GA.

You think of GM nearly the same way I do, but I like their old musclecars too.

So here's your quiz :D :

What the most similar car to the 1987 Buick Regal GNX produced today in body class size engine size and even weight?

If you said Buick Regal GS or GTP... you are correct!!

That's why I NEED a GTP coupe (again). For 300$ worth of mods you are looking at running 13's in the 1/4. How could you not like that? And.. yes the GAGT out handles the GTP (not by as much as it "feels" however) but it does not take much to put it PAST the GAGT's handling either. That's the only thing left for me right now that's new that I can comfrotably afford... well they stoped making the COUPE!! :rage: Guess I gotta go used.

Jason E

12-11-2002, 08:07 PM

I hear that...

Oh, don't get me wrong...I love big old GM cars, especially '80s G bodies. If for some reason I end up on crack and never buy that third gen F body, either a MC SS, 442 or GN is gonna be in the garage. I almost bought an '87 MC SS Aero Coupe a year ago, with 13k miles, for $12,500. Problem is, what the hell do I DO with a car like that?? I can't drive it every day, nor can I drive the Z every day. So until I can afford to put away a car like that, I can't have it :(

I agree, GTPs and '80s G bodies do have a lot in common. The thing is not so much the size I guess, as it is the price tag. $27-29,000 is simply too much for me...I don't need that much car. Hell, I don't even need the GA! A year ago my daily driver was my '89 Camaro with 135hp. I think the reason I identify more with the GA than the GP is because its a smaller, better handling car (although I agree with the proper set up, a GP can blow the doors off a GA in the twisties) thats easier on the wallet. That, and I have a special place in my heart for GAs...I learned to drive on my dad's '91 H.O. Quad 4 SE Sedan...now THAT was a fun car. Unfortunately, as we speak its being donated to Big Brothers, Big Sisters, as the old H.O. has such a massive oil leak, it leaks a quart from between the head and the block every 3-4 days. Combine that with some rust and 170k miles, and the car isn't worth a damn...which is too bad. I sorta had dreams of buying it back for $500 and restoring it. But after years of old fixer uppers as daily drivers, I'm loving the GA...even though my 2 old F bodies, my old GA nor my '87 Skyhawk never left me stranded!!!

I just long for SOMETHING V8, RWD. Gimme a nice MC SS, which is slated for re-do for '06, and has a good chance to go RWD. Price it at $25,000 to start, give it 300hp, give it a sweet handling chasis, don't make it too big, and watch them roll off the lots. I'd be first in line, using the GA as a trade. I love my GA, but I'm too wrapped up in the traditional GM offerings not to go back, should they offer them again.

VTECSiGAH8R

12-11-2002, 11:48 PM

Originally posted by Jason E

Mike is right...performance per dollar is at an all-time low with GM. For '03, we have a GTP, a Regal GS, and a Vette for true excitement. DOH...the cheapest is about $27k. Can you say OUCH????

I can also say "ouch" when I bang my friggen head on the A pillar of a $26,000 grunt of a car that doesn't exactly have world class handling and has seats that feel like cardboard with cloth on them. Oh yeah, definately gimme that :rolleyes:.

Also, can anyone please state the price of the GN or GNX back in the day?? Wasn't it around $30,000?? Back then I wouldn't exactly call that affordible. And also, if you notice, most American cars from the 70's, 80's and early 90s were genuine ugly motherf***ing pices of $hit and if you deny that you must be insane because they were big monstrosities of cars that had no power except for a few exceptions (I would only consider the GN an exception because for a car to have a v8 and be made for performance and pull mid 6's in 0-60 is REDICULOUS!!).

I mean the GAGT may not be that fastest car on the road, but it has a lot more grunt than most 4 banger imports out there and outstyles almost all of them by a mile. As far as I'm concerned, I'll take the comfort and convenience of an 8 second 0-60 car with good mileage any day over a beast from the 70's or 80s that looked like someone beat it with an ugly stick from the factory and does maybe a second better 0-60 and gets worse mileage and probably costs the same as the GA now with inflation. I guess my problem is that I'm too young and I haven't walked the walk or talked the talk. Or maybe that is my advantage because I am not stuck in the old day ideas of "throw a v8 in it and slap a low sticker price on it and it will sell" era, of which only the GN escaped cleanly.

I would seriously consider the GN and GNX the ONLY performance car of the 80's. The Corvette then was OK, but not spectacular, as someone claimed. Gimme a break. The 427 60's Corvette with side exhaust and dynos that prove the engine puts out more like 500 hp is spectacular. A 2002 Z06 Vette that is rated one of the best handling cars in the world, has 405 hp, and pulls sub 4 second 0-60 times and 12 second 1/4 miles is simply amazing, along with 20 mpg in the city. A somewhat square (ugly IMO) looking 80's vette with a little over 200 hp, pathetic 0-60 and 1/4 mile times and way under 20 mpg in the city is a Sorry excuse for a performance car.

Lately, it seems to me that GM is trying to move toward performance, despite what you guys say. I mean anyone can say "increase the displacement like Nissan did and get more power." Well it's a little hard to pull and extra 60 hp out of the ass of a 200 hp 3.8L pushrod v6, even with supercharging they won't reach the mark this year. The problem is that the platform is old and it takes time for them to change over, thus why they are making new DOHC v6s with comparable horsepower to Nissans and Accords that are BRAND NEW THIS YEAR. Give it time and you'll see the engines. That's what I mean by patience.

cmoore

12-12-2002, 08:31 AM

I am reading this and I have to ask the question:

How many of you that are unhappy with the way that the GA responds to mods researched this very topic before purchasing your GA and\or started to modify it?

Most of the posters on this seem very well educated about the GA and especially performance cars in general, yet they seem to have not done a lot of homework as to what was available for the GA in the after market or the cost of adding performance to this great car.

I had wanted a 99+ model GA for a couple of years. Before I got my 2002 GAGT, I spent a lot of time researching the car on the net for performance, reliability, aftermarket parts availability etc. This gave me information to make an informed decision. I am in the fortunate position in my life that I am not greatly restricted from a financial perspective as to what I can by. I leased my GAGT because I loved the car, not because it was the best car I could afford.

The current generation GA probably hit the GM design boards sometime in 1997 for a 1999 model year. At that point the current horsepower wars in the mid size segment did not exist. So the current bashing of GM for not giving the current car 250 HP does not make any sense - kind of like beating a dead horse.

Fast forward to 2002 - mid size sedan horsepower ratings are now at 220 - 250. Nissan, Honda etc now have their redesigned products out on the market for 2002 -03. I did not see either Honda or Nissan make major design changes to their prior offerings that were on the market the same time as the 99 GA.

In 2004/05 timeframe, GM will be the manufacturer with the most current designs on the market . The year after it will be someone else. The point being that the automotive market is now changing a a pace faster that I have seen in my 30+ years being a part of it. Trying to predict a trend and what the public will want 3 years from now is a crap shoot.

Just my .02 worth.

Jason E

12-12-2002, 08:52 AM

Interesting responses...

1) VTEC, did I say I wanted world class handling in a $26k car? I think you're blowing things a little outta whack...seriously.

2) A GN loaded ran for around $15,000...I never made any referrence to the GNX, but even that didn't hit 20k...low 20s at best.

3) When I brought up '80s performance, look at it in the context of THE EIGHTIES, not today!!!!! How the hell can you do that? You say a V8 designed to pull mid 6's 0-60 was ridiculous...well you know what?? Those beloved Supra Turbos and 300 ZX turbos were in the 7s and 8s. So in the context of the time, they were VERY quick....:confused:

4) Hey, if you wanna think '80s cars are ugly, go for it...but here's a thought that may amaze you. NOT EVERYONE DOES. I'll take an IROC in style over my 30th any day.

5) I'm not stuck in old day thinking, but consider this. When you have an LS1 that gets the same gas mileage as a 3400, burns cleaner, and has twice the power in some variations, where's the downside to having a V8?? The fact it has size and not overhead cams means its done??? Don't implicate V8s as being a bad thing here. If you have a problem with '80s V8s, like I said, compare it to what else was out there. When Supras were pulling 7s 0-60, don't sit there and tell me GMs V8s were all that bad...:huh:

cmoore,
I agree wholeheartedly, the GA was designed much longer ago than the current crop. GM will pick it up. The problem is, couldn't they do a little more now? What happened to running changes? And in general, GM takes way too long to update their models anyways!! Have a look at a Malibu lately? What won Car of the Year in '97 is hideous now....things change too fast.

I also agree the car market is a crapshoot. Problem is, GM doesn't THINK....Aztek anyone? Did it not occur to them that 170-175hp wasn't segment leading in '99, and sure as hell would be worse off in '03??

To sum up though, I am VERY happy with my car. I don't need 250hp. I don't need the most modern chassis. My car looks great, handles great, runs great, and I wouldn't trade it for much of anything really. And no, I didn't bother to look into modding mine, because I have no major interest in modding it...its fast enough for me, and I don't feel like spending a ton of $$ on it. However, it would have been nice if GM brought a little more to the party...and its true. GM affordable performance is drying up. F body is gone, a car like the Beretta is gone, the Z24 is outclassed (now it isn't even a Z24), so I ask you, on the bottom end...

Where's the beef?

cmoore

12-12-2002, 09:32 AM

Jason you make some good points.

Running changes in a car's life cycle. Define running changes. For most manufacturers\model years running changes amount to little more than a new colour, trim or fascia change. Major changes to drivetrain etc generally do not occur except where a major redesign has occured. I can not think of any manufacturer that has made significant drive line changes in a top selling car line in the last few years other than perhaps to offer a V6 where only a V4 was available.

I agree GM has been to slow in the past reacting to market changes and trends. GM is still a huge ponderous company that is slow to react and slow to change. I live in Oshawa Ontario where the new Grand Prix is being built. A large number of my friends work there and they all say that even now changes are being made to the car even though production is only a couple of months away. GM is trying to change. I think that Bob Lutz returning has been the best thing GM has done to management in the last decade. Unfortunately it says a lot about GM when the best car guy they have is about 70. HOw successful they will be only time will tell. I think that GM has a difficult time in deciding where to market their cars in the Pontiac lineup. We have the new GA comming with reported 250 HP, the new GTP with a reported 260 HP, and the new GTO with I believe 360HP (apparently not available in Canada due to limited supply). Between the GAGT and Grand Prix will not be a lot of difference in power. I don't know how GM will try to differentiate these in the market.

Aztek .. go to agree with you. Butt ugly. Should be killed.

Killing the Fbody... with a few exceptions GM generally kills any car line when sales go lower than 50000 units, unless the vehicle is specifically designed for a smaller volume. I have to agree that the Fbody is the best performance bang for the buck GM produced. Unfortunately the market place did not agree. As a result production was halted. My comments about research on the GA also apply to the Fbody as well. When people complain about the small back seat, low seating etc. what did you think the cars were designed for. They were designed to go fast, not to get groceries at the local mall!

In many of the threads on this and other GA forums, the point has been raised over and over again about GA performance. If I want a 13 second GA I can get it. How much do I want to spend?
I can feel for a lot of the younger members out there that are frustrated when trying to increase performance on the GA. When it is a struggle to buy the car, plus pay insurance etc. there is not much extra left for modifications. On the other hand, you have been fortunate enough to be able to get a great looking, comfortable car with reasonable performance. MY oldest son is 16 and he is driving my car now. He hopes to buy it when the lease is up in a couple of years. He thinks it is the best looking car GM builds, including the new GP. He would like an Fbody, but my insurance company will not even insure him on one of these until he is at least 21.

For me, I am going to buy a car that already has 100% of the performance that I want. I am looking now at getting a 1998 to 2001 Trans AM with WS6 package. I know what I will be getting when I buy it. It will not be raced or modified since I think the performance is more than adequate for my needs.

Mike3800

12-12-2002, 10:32 AM

Originally posted by VTECSiGAH8R
Also, can anyone please state the price of the GN or GNX back in the day?? Wasn't it around $30,000??

I laughed for 15 minutes when I read that!! You could almost get a Ferrari for 30K "Back in the day" (before you were born).

I thought it was 17K but I do remember seeing it as low as 15K.

GNX was the only GM performance car of the 80's?... Kid.. study your interest in cars a little closer!

I'll just bring up 1 more. 20th anneversary 1989 Trans Am GTA with the 3.8 liter V6 and turbo with automatic only. Ran 13's stock.

Originally posted by VTECSiGAH8R
I mean anyone can say "increase the displacement like Nissan did and get more power."

That's normally a GM thing but Nissan is beating GM at their own game. Think for a minute roll back "all the way back" to 1999. Name a passange car with an engine larger than 3.4 liters that is a V6 that is not GM. Not many choices. Some SUV's and a Crown Victoria etc... but that's it. GM has always had the largest engines, not nessecsarily big HP with the big engines either, but the largest engines, and they always outperformed the cometition even if it wasn't by the greatest margin, even at fuel mileage.

Now everyone is starting to beat GM at that game paticullarly Nissan. While GM downsizes the J body engine, Nissan says "BS" to emission etc.. and up sizes the engine in the Sentra from 1.6 to 2.0 then to 2.5!!! GM used to do things like that.

Read up, listen to people like Jason and myself and THEN talk, cause you don't know what you are talking about, I know you have an opinon, but you do not have an informed one.

Class over.

:D

Mike3800

12-12-2002, 10:38 AM

Originally posted by Jason E
I I can't drive it every day, nor can I drive the Z every day. So until I can afford to put away a car like that, I can't have it :(

LOL... you see what I replaced the GTP with.... a ... Hyundai. But it is a great commuter and that's what I bought it for, I would have bought a Z24 but they were all gone and I didn't want to pay 18 grand for an "LS Sport" with the weak 2.2 since I only paid 13.5K for a car with nearly the same HP, less weight, more features and a better warranty.

That's what I mean... I really might have bought a Z24 instead... but they killed it, the performance continunes to vanish....

I think if Lutz has his way he will shut up the bean counters and get hings back top the way they SHOULD be... and I hope the cars are still affordable then too!!

Jason E

12-12-2002, 01:53 PM

Mike,

I think when I make my cross country road trip next summer, I oughta drive out near you, and toss back a few beers with you. Hard to argue with sound thinking, is it not???

Mike and I are not just jackasses here who don't know what in the world we're talking about. We REMEMBER when GM = best performance for the least money. Difference is, he was driving while I was still being shuttled around by my mom...but at least it was in a Camaro :thumbs:

I too would have bought a new Z24, if they still made it. I have an '01 5 speed on the lot, and I drive that, then hop back in the '03 Sunfire 5 speed I have, and I'll tell ya...that Ecotec in its present state does NOTHING for me. Before buying the GA, I put 100 miles on both an '02 Alero GL2 5 speed and an '02 Grand Am SE 5 speed, trying to figure out if I wanted the stick bad enough to live with subpar performance...the answer was, I just didn't...:( And I won't buy this used one because so many Z24 5 speeds have been run through the mill and back...

My apologies Mike for forgetting the one car that really fueled the F body fire for me back in the day...I can still remember when Motor Trends 6/89 (I think) High Performance Shootout mag came out...with the TTA clocking 162 on the radar. My dad was driving me to little league in our '85 Olds Calais, saying to me, "a Trans Am that can do 162!!!!" I remember it like yesterday...and it took me until August '02 to even see one in person.

cmoore,
I like your theories, and good luck in the WS6 hunt. Lemme tell ya, once you own one, you too will wonder how the hell they cancelled these cars! When I mention revising within the same model run, I mean things like better engines, revised interiors (slightly anyways), new wheels, etc. GA's have added no new engines, cheapened the interior cloth, FINALLY taken that hideous body cladding off the sides of the SE (just my opinion, no need to get flamed for that...), and thats about it...in 4 years. Now if this was an Accord, it would have been redone this year. But as a GM car, it has to be around for another 2 years...and rather than maybe revise something, lets just let it sit....

I just hope for the day affordable GM performance is realistic. I know they're trying, but I hope it isn't all too little too late. Ford gets it, Chrysler gets it, so what's GMs problem?? GM used to pound these two hands down...now? Well, we have nice trucks, and some nice cars, but the cars are for the most part a little long in tooth. I'm willing to wait for these new products, as I am a forever GM buyer...but how many are like me?? Every year, they're fading...

Gimli

12-12-2002, 03:49 PM

Originally posted by Jason E
GA's have added no new engines, cheapened the interior cloth, FINALLY taken that hideous body cladding off the sides of the SE (just my opinion, no need to get flamed for that...), and thats about it...in 4 years.

Well, they did change the 2.4 for the 2.2 Ecotech... I agree it's not the most successful move they made but it is a new engine for the GA and still the most popular...

Mike3800

12-12-2002, 04:08 PM

Originally posted by Jason E
I'm willing to wait for these new products, as I am a forever GM buyer...but how many are like me?? Every year, they're fading...

If I worked for GM or sold GM cars I'd probbably be on the same page, but I do not. Therefore I will always be a GM fan, but they have to do a little better to keep my business.... for buying new cars anyway.

VTECSiGAH8R

12-12-2002, 06:26 PM

Well I don't think you guys are completely informed either so I don't see why my opinion should count less. But anyway, I don't want this thing to continue as a heated discussion cuz some of the things I wrote were written when I was a little tired from spending about 12 hours at school. I still don't think the slowness of v8s in the 70s and 80s were acceptible, even if they were smoking Supras and 300zs or whatever. I would expect that, considering that the engines had twice the displacement (more than 4 times the displacement of rotaries) and the use of turbos in that manner wasn't something the Japanese had a lot of experience in at the time.

Maybe my problem is that the only 80's Camaros and Firebirds I have seen have mostly been beat to ****. I don't know a single one that is in good condition, so I associate the car with cheapness, especially with a v8 barely pushing over 200 hp (although they had quite a bit of torque). When I see a late model F-Body v8, however, I drool because of the awesome sound, performance, and look. IMO, the 90's F-Bodies (except the Turbo TA) don't compare one bit, especially to the LS1 F-Bodies.

However, as nice as the car is, I still don't get mad that they got rid of it because I know that they will most likely bring it back in a better form than ever or they will replace it with more nice stuff. Plus there are still sooo many on the road in great condition that I don't really miss it like crazy, so I don't blame GM for making a good business move so that they can keep making good cars in the future.

If I am able to say all that, in what way am I "misinformed?" The GN pricing was wrong sure, although with inflation $17,000 is about $24,000 now (still good price) and I'm sure the GNX is a bit more...but I was wrong, I just could swear that I saw someone say they drove it off the lot with all the options for like $32,000 seriously. Guess I was wrong. But where else have I been "misinformed?" To me there is no worse of an insult, even if I didn't experience it then like you guys did. I still read up on my history. How would you feel if you were saying something about a Roadrunner or a 60's vette or a 60's camaro and my dad called you "misinformed" just because you weren't born then?

Mike3800

12-13-2002, 10:12 AM

Originally posted by VTECSiGAH8R
How would you feel if you were saying something about a Roadrunner or a 60's vette or a 60's camaro and my dad called you "misinformed" just because you weren't born then?

I'd feel humbled if I had been stupid enough to argue with him since he lived it and I didn't, that is if he was a car enthusiast and knew at least common things that most enthusiasts know about cars.

Didn't mean to make you feel bad but you did attack personally.

You think the 70's were bad for low HP and high displacement? Yes it got better for GM in later years, but even though GM has the most bang for the buck in the 90's they still had the largest engines and the competition would make engines smaller and have near the same HP, but it was the fact that GM kept with the 60's and early 70's mentality of big engine small car, but now with computers and fuel injection. Most compact car tuners don't even think of that, they are more impressed with HP per cubic centemeter rather than HP and torque per LB of autombile.

But now it seems other car companies got a clue again, like Nissan and Chrysler and even Ford.... and "they" (competition) figuerd out that forced induction is not "cheating", it's caled simply... "ways of making an engine have more power".

Jason E

12-13-2002, 05:00 PM

Originally posted by Mike3800

I'd feel humbled if I had been stupid enough to argue with him since he lived it and I didn't, that is if he was a car enthusiast and knew at least common things that most enthusiasts know about cars.

Didn't mean to make you feel bad but you did attack personally.

You think the 70's were bad for low HP and high displacement? Yes it got better for GM in later years, but even though GM has the most bang for the buck in the 90's they still had the largest engines and the competition would make engines smaller and have near the same HP, but it was the fact that GM kept with the 60's and early 70's mentality of big engine small car, but now with computers and fuel injection. Most compact car tuners don't even think of that, they are more impressed with HP per cubic centemeter rather than HP and torque per LB of autombile.

But now it seems other car companies got a clue again, like Nissan and Chrysler and even Ford.... and "they" (competition) figuerd out that forced induction is not "cheating", it's caled simply... "ways of making an engine have more power".

Amen...

VTEC,

No one is here to bash you. Message boards are for discussing, and for learning. It seemed like people were getting real heated, I believed Mike had very key points, and they were getting bashed on, so I jumped into the fray. No harm, no foul...but please, don't come off like the gospel truth is that V8s from the '70s and '80s had to suck because they were so "slow." EVERYTHING was slower, so why point your finger at how bad V8s were? Lemme tell ya...you say V8s being so big should have made more power...well I can tell ya a Turbo 3 litre in a Supra should have made more than 200hp, and gone 0-60 faster than 8 flat, for almost $25,000. That same "unimpressive" '87 350 F body could go 0-60 in mid 6's for 10 grand less. Don't crucify one without considering the other...but thats what Mike and I mean by affordable performance.

As for the '82-'92 f bodies, if you wanted to see some nice ones, go to www.thirdgen.org Now THERE are some nice third gens. I remember how many nices ones used to be around, because I was a car nut when I was 5, during the Camaro's heyday of popularity (at least in my lifetime). Many argue they are the nicest looking overall cars made by GM, because the look was just RIGHT when they came out in '82. They were pulling .9g's on a skidpad when a Celica was still an economy car. Why do you see so many beat ones still? They were SOLID CARS. How many mid '80s Celicas and Preludes do you still see? Sure, these F bodies are beat, but they're one of the more bulletproof GM chassis....

And BTW, everything made in the 70s sucked :D

Mike3800

12-13-2002, 05:43 PM

Originally posted by Jason E

And BTW, everything made in the 70s sucked :D

HEY!! :mad:

Ya know 1980 was considered the last year of the 70's!!

Jason E

12-13-2002, 08:25 PM

LOL...and what did 1980 give us, besides my own life?? Heheh.... A turbocharged Trans Am that did 0-60 in 9.5 seconds....now THAT was a pitiful display... :(

I don't think 1980 was a great year for cars, unless I'm missing what you're getting at there lol....

VTECSiGAH8R

12-13-2002, 08:42 PM

Originally posted by Jason E

LOL...and what did 1980 give us, besides my own life?? Heheh.... A turbocharged Trans Am that did 0-60 in 9.5 seconds....now THAT was a pitiful display...

Kinda amazing that 9 years later they halfed that time.

Spoon

12-14-2002, 06:20 PM

Originally posted by Jason E

Amen...

VTEC,

No one is here to bash you. Message boards are for discussing, and for learning. It seemed like people were getting real heated, I believed Mike had very key points, and they were getting bashed on, so I jumped into the fray. No harm, no foul...but please, don't come off like the gospel truth is that V8s from the '70s and '80s had to suck because they were so "slow." EVERYTHING was slower, so why point your finger at how bad V8s were? Lemme tell ya...you say V8s being so big should have made more power...well I can tell ya a Turbo 3 litre in a Supra should have made more than 200hp, and gone 0-60 faster than 8 flat, for almost $25,000. That same "unimpressive" '87 350 F body could go 0-60 in mid 6's for 10 grand less. Don't crucify one without considering the other...but thats what Mike and I mean by affordable performance.

As for the '82-'92 f bodies, if you wanted to see some nice ones, go to www.thirdgen.org Now THERE are some nice third gens. I remember how many nices ones used to be around, because I was a car nut when I was 5, during the Camaro's heyday of popularity (at least in my lifetime). Many argue they are the nicest looking overall cars made by GM, because the look was just RIGHT when they came out in '82. They were pulling .9g's on a skidpad when a Celica was still an economy car. Why do you see so many beat ones still? They were SOLID CARS. How many mid '80s Celicas and Preludes do you still see? Sure, these F bodies are beat, but they're one of the more bulletproof GM chassis....

And BTW, everything made in the 70s sucked :D I could not resist putting my .02 in because it sounds like most of either were not born when the cars that you are bashing were around. Crude they may have been, but there was no shortage of raw torque and horspower. Most people here can not even fathom buying a car that you drove from the show room to the street with in excess of 500 lb-ft of torque. There were many! 0-60 was influenced more by the pour tires than by the lack of power. Most production tires today exceed the capability of the best racing tires of the day.

Jason E

12-14-2002, 10:11 PM

I'm not bashing any of them, by any stretch. Quite frankly, I prefer the old stuff by far...I'm an old-schooler, and thats what makes me mad...when the young-uns can't appreciate their elders :D

When I said 70s cars sucked, consider that almost everything made between 1973 and 1979 was a pure slug, especially compared to what was made in 1970-72...thats all.

I have complete respect otherwise for the elders :)

Gimli

12-15-2002, 01:42 AM

Hmmmm, can hardly beat a Mustang BOSS 429 '69... :thumbs:

Mike3800

12-16-2002, 10:10 AM

Originally posted by Spoon
I could not resist putting my .02 in because it sounds like most of either were not born when the cars that you are bashing were around. Crude they may have been, but there was no shortage of raw torque and horspower. Most people here can not even fathom buying a car that you drove from the show room to the street with in excess of 500 lb-ft of torque. There were many! 0-60 was influenced more by the pour tires than by the lack of power. Most production tires today exceed the capability of the best racing tires of the day.

I KNOW you were not including me on the "bashing cars" part. I was born in 1971 but I drove 70's cars up until about 1994 (from about 1986 :) ) and I have had the pleasure of driving some true musclecars as well!!! That's why you hear me biatch and moan the most about bringing back RWD V8 powered cars etc.... :D