GTO

Sorry, to me they aren't a GTO, I've owned a 1965, 1966, 1967 & 1968. The new GTO has a Chevy motor, not a Pontiac V8, and it looks nothing like a GTO of any year. Nothing sounds like the old 389 with Tri-power opening up while speed shifting in to second gear.

my 2 cents

Brian

Reply to
el Diablo
Loading thread data ...

I pine for the 1967 model I once owned.

Reply to
James C. Reeves

Yes nothing will ever sound like that now from the factory, also nothing will burn oil like an ole GTO when it had 50,000 miles on it. The new ones are a whole new bread. Same goes for all the late 60's 70's cars that have made a come back. I suppose no one can answer that unless they own or have driven one. For sure they will handle better than the old ones to say the least. Its a good way to find your youth again go for it!

Reply to
Lanze

My 1967 GTO had 167,000 miles (hard miles) on it before I traded it. I don't remember it burning much oil at all.

Reply to
James C. Reeves

Thinking of getting a new GTO anyone have pros and cons on them.

Reply to
Tim

Pros: Powerful engine, smooth shifting 6-speed manual trans

4-wheel independent suspension and good handling Interior quality thats above anything GM USA makes Agressive exhaust note

Cons: Corporate LS2 engine instead of a REAL Pontiac engine ongoing electrical/computer problems with the gauge cluster axle shaft problems manual trans that pops out of gear(ongoing problem on T56 trans since its introduction in the early 90's) no trunk space jellybean styling replacement parts in short supply(don't get into an accident!)

Reply to
Dennis Smith

Plastic new car trying to be a decent car. Basically a fancy looking RWD GM car(what a novel concept!) with a big engine.

Reply to
Joseph Oberlander

No more plastic than any other current model.

Exactly what the original Pontiac GTO was, except it wasn't all that fancy looking. It was a Tempest LeMans with a few badges, a couple of fake hood scoops and Tiger Paw Redline tires. The '64 Tri-power coupe I owned could go like hell in a straight line, handled on a par with its contemporaries, couldn't stop worth a damn. How could it? It had the same size drums as the Corvair.

One poster commented on the sound of the Pontiac engine. Yep, at idle it had a bass burble similar to a Harley. At speed kicking in the two end carbs made you believe it was attempting to suck in the hood, fenders and all. That's what sold me the car. I was 24.

The only thing wrong with the Aussie GTO is the price and the gas guzzler tax slapped on the automatics. Otherwise it is superior to the original ...

4 wheel disc brakes, 6 speed manual transmission, good wheels and radial tires, and as strong an engine as can be found in any GM auto. Face it, Pontiac hasn't produced its own engines for almost 3 decades.
Reply to
Kent Finnell

I pine for the 1970 Trans Am, as well. But we both know it's not going to come back.

I also pine for a 1920 Ford Model T, where you could buy one for $200. But we both know it's not going to come back.

I'd go with a GTO, were it legal to own one in Canada. Nothing, and I repeat, NOTHING is as sweet as a RWD manual transmission car. That's why BMW rules.

Vuarra

Quid quid latine dictum sit altum videtur. (That which is said in Latin sounds profound.)

Reply to
Vuarra

Now that you mention it...why is it so expensive?

Reply to
James C. Reeves

Well, it is imported and well trimmed. My '64 cost about $3,300, no A/C or power anything except brakes. Taking inflation into consideration, I'd guess a domestic (US/Canadian) version should start at about $25,000. Remember that the original 6 cylinder Mustang started at $1,995. What does a 2005 V6 Mustang cost?

Oh, there is a third thing wrong with the current GTO ... I don't own one. But that's true of a lot of current makes and models.

Reply to
Kent Finnell

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.