# The whole "Looks" issue...



## Gtrain (Jul 27, 2004)

There seems to be a great deal of talk about the look of the new GTO. I for one, enjoy its simple lines, and stance. Some cars try and break the mold and move styles forward ( 300M, Cadillac, BMW etc ) while others like the GTO will not. Granted, the style would have been just as comfortable in 1998 as it is today, but it wasn't meant to be complex, sorta like the original Tempest etc.

I am pretty sure GM stylist knew this. There was most likely a large push to change the style of the car and make it more cutting edge. I would surmise that the cars cost would have really skyrocketed with additional body work, style evolution, engineering etc beyond its already touchy $35K price point. 

If there was one wish, I would have hoped the car tied better to some of Pontiacs style history. A cue here or there would have helped it along in the eyes of some, but in a completitive market, where new, loud style sells, well the GTO may be in for a long ride.

I take it for what it is: A strong, rear wheel drive car coupe ( finally from Pontiac ) that can tour and cruise with the best in the world, hood scoop or not.


----------



## *89x2* (Jul 27, 2004)

I can't wait to see the Callaway AeroBody that has been designed for it - Every one of their designs so far has looked like pure sex on wheels :cheers


----------



## lkfjgarg257 (Aug 3, 2004)

You all realize that this "GTO" is an import from GM's Holden division of Australia dont you? The car basicly was imported and rebadged, there was no re-engineering at all. It was a weak attempt by GM to capitalize on a legendary name in the auto industry. Remeber how successful the 442 and Hurst/OLDS of the 80's were? LOL!!! As an older GTO owner I have to say this is an insult to me and to most muscle car enthusiasts. Its a big Chevy Cavalier, for crying out loud they are almost identical with respect to design. Is it a good car, maybe.....should it be called a GTO, certianly not. GM should not have rushed this import into the US market the way it did, they should have taken their time and made the car a bit more unique.


----------



## Troy Roberts (Jul 30, 2004)

I agree, Gtrain. I also think that we're going to see more and more style changes that differentiate it as a GTO.


----------



## rushhour (Aug 3, 2004)

Style is in the eye of the beholder - so if your insulted so be it - believe me a lot of people aren't, it ain't 1964 anymore.

This car is awesome. I have owned everything from a 60 vette, Chevelle SS, Camaros, Trans Am's on up (an old gezzer that has been there - done that). Yeah it could have a few more radical lines - but to bash it because it is an Australian import - is just wrong. Whiile our lame automotive industry has been sitting on it's arse the last 20 years - the aussies have been coming up with some good quality mean cars - just go to some of their sites and look at the Ford Falcons, Holden Utes, HSV's etc. I am glad that GM realized that "if" they wanted a new muscle car - Australia was the place to go. This car is better then any of the above cars I have owned - period. Most of the time I pull into a parking lot and I have someone coming over to ask me about it, about 75% are positve with the only negatives being it should have scoops. It deserves the GTO label - Cavalier you have to be kidding.

Before anyone posts an opion one way or the other - they should drive this car.

Just my 02. from a new member that actually owns one.


----------



## 2004 GTO (Aug 2, 2004)

Chevy Guy said:


> You all realize that this "GTO" is an import from GM's Holden division of Australia dont you? The car basicly was imported and rebadged, there was no re-engineering at all. It was a weak attempt by GM to capitalize on a legendary name in the auto industry. Remeber how successful the 442 and Hurst/OLDS of the 80's were? LOL!!! As an older GTO owner I have to say this is an insult to me and to most muscle car enthusiasts. Its a big Chevy Cavalier, for crying out loud they are almost identical with respect to design. Is it a good car, maybe.....should it be called a GTO, certianly not. GM should not have rushed this import into the US market the way it did, they should have taken their time and made the car a bit more unique.


 Yes I'm sure everyone that has one of these '04 GTO's knows all too well it is made in Australia. One big reason for that is because the US auto builders can't seem to build a car of this caliber for a reasonable price. All they seem to come up with is V6 FWD sidewinders with build quality like it was a 6 year old that put his first model car together. Being you are a "Chevy guy" I bet you would not have been so quick to bash the NEW GTO if it had a Chevy Bow-Tie on it. I've owned plenty of early GTO's and this car just can't compare in performance, handling and quality. I too love the early goats and will soon be adding one to my car collection but you have to realize that this is 2004 and not 1964.


----------



## porthos (Jul 30, 2004)

I own an 04 GTO M6 and love it - despite driving M-B and BMW for the last 25 years exclusively. I appreciate the understated looks and am very glad that it wasn't visually sculpted to match some of the other Pontiac's. The real strength of this car is strong drivetrain and the handling. And the seats are better than in any US car in memory! I have 8K miles on mine in a little over 6 months. I only wish the car weighed a couple hundred pounds less!


----------



## AmesGTO (Aug 3, 2004)

Now that ChevyGuy has shown me the light I'm selling my GTO. It's from Australia, no way.

I agree with ChevyGuy neither of us will stand for a GTO that is really another car re-badged. That goes against everything the GTO stood for since the first year it was sold in the 60’s.


----------



## lkfjgarg257 (Aug 3, 2004)

AmesGTO said:


> Now that ChevyGuy has shown me the light I'm selling my GTO. It's from Australia, no way.
> 
> I agree with ChevyGuy neither of us will stand for a GTO that is really another car re-badged. That goes against everything the GTO stood for since the first year it was sold in the 60’s.



Im certianly not saying the car isnt a good car, it just shouldnt have been called a GTO. 

Chevy Cavalier









GTO










Its just a big V8 cavalier.


----------



## AmesGTO (Aug 3, 2004)

Why shouldn't it be a GTO? Let's hear the great list of reasons you have, let me put it's a re-badged car at the top of your list; I noticed you left the re-badging out of your reply.

The design shares nothing with a Cavalier. Engine, suspension, interior. The only thing it is like the Cavalier is that it isn't meant to be a flashy car, the Aussie aren't into that design. Like you said it was designed in Australia, do you really think they were trying to copy a Cavalier or used any of it's design?

Have you been inside a GTO? It's like nothing else GM has done. The fit and finish is amazing. The interior is simply amazing. Nothing Cavalier about it. I've owned a lot of GM's and they need to learn from Holden on the interiors.


----------



## 1COOLPC (Jul 27, 2004)

Chevy Guy said:


> Its just a big V8 cavalier.


That's the dumbest thing I've ever heard. Anybody with a decent set of eyes can CLEARLY see that the GTO is really a 1/2 price Mercedes.


----------



## AmesGTO (Aug 3, 2004)

1COOLPC said:


> That's the dumbest thing I've ever heard. Anybody with a decent set of eyes can CLEARLY see that the GTO is really a 1/2 price Mercedes.


That's pretty good.

If we went with what some of these guys say Holden doesn't actually have a design team or a factory. They really have a chop shop and a big supply of V8's.


----------



## 1COOLPC (Jul 27, 2004)

Every 2 door coupe with a steeply angled rear window and low front ear overhang looks similar. There isn't a 2 door coupe on the market today I haven't heard compared to a GTO in looks. So that means, according to these people, that ALL 2 door coupes look alike, not just the GTO. Some people just don't have a clue.


----------

