Road & Track compared the two and guess who came out on top? Scroll down for answer.
GTO.
Not sure how much credence you folks lend to R&T but I thought it was a pretty good magazine and still do, but...
They called the GTO a civilized, adult's car [I could nauseate you with R&T's gushing over the GTO but I'll spare you the trauma].
Of the Cobra, "...isn't trying to reinvent or redefine anything. It just is." Oh, and my favorite; it lacks refinement, has a notchy tranny and a shift knob that almost fell off in the driver's hand. LoL! They also said it's too cheaply made to cost north of $30K. But R&T also wrote the GTO lacked the finely honed road manners of the Cobra. Unrefined to finely honed. Hmm...
Yeah, yeah. So the GTO drives and handles great. But I saw one in person the other day and let me tell you it lacks character! It looks like an unformed fetus. Blah.
In that article you speak of ( I read it today ), they said a lot of good things about the Cobra and gave it higher marks in just about all the performance-type categories. Sure they felt the GTO was more refined in many ways. But the Cobra they said was much more what they thought a muscle car should be. I felt like the review was quite fair as far as how much praise they placed on each vehicle. Yeah they got a buggy shift knob but there wasn't much else they could rag on. The "notchy" shifter I found to be funny because when I hear that I think of how I *like* notchy compared to softie/wiggly shifters (ever try a Nissan Maxima or Subaru WRX?) that feel like or are cable-linked to the rest of the tranny. You are paraphrasing incorrectly when you say "it is too cheaply made to cost north of $30K". I don't remember the exact phrasing but it wasn't that harsh sounding to me. All in all yes they gave a higher score to the GTO. The question is, "for what?" For being a boring, floaty, slow, "refined", maybe even more comfortable car? Sure... if that is what we are judging on then maybe the GTO should win. If you are judging on pure handling, acceleration 5secCobra
5.6secGTO, road holding (.88cobra vs. .84gto in their test), and pure fun to drive, then the award should go hands down to the Cobra. I don't remember if they stated what "genre" they were competing for but they sure did admit all those positive things about the Mustang.
"Cindy" wrote in message news:2Zdwc.22251$My6.2982@fed1read05...
Yes, they did have positive stuff to say about the Cobra, I was just venting. :-) How could they choose the GTO over the Cobra? I don't get it. But then I am biased.
I think they wanted to like the GTO more from the start. The only area where I (personally) thought the GTO excelled was in the interior. The R&T test drivers are showing their age.
You gotta go test drive a GTO..... then you'll REALLY want a Cobra. :)
I never put much faith in Road & Tracks findings, I always felt they also take into considerations how much advertising a manufacturer is currently spending with them or maybe another publication they own. A long time ago, 1985, I purchased a new Mustang GT with a 5 speed and then read the R & T result when they put it up against an IROC Camaro. Their results claimed the IROC was faster at the track in 1/4 mile times and gave it better write up. The reality was I DESTROYED every Camaro and Trans Am that ever attempted to race me and I don't mean 1 or 2, I can still remember one guy punching his steering wheel as I pulled away. R & T is for good entertainment but that's about it.
Because it's new... different... not the S.O.S.D.D.
:¬D Kate
| >
| > >
| > >
| > >
| > >
| > >
| > >
| > >
| > >
| > >
| > >
| > >
| > >
| > >
| > >
| > >
| > >
| > >
| > >
| > >
| > >
| > >
| > >
| > >
| > >
| > >
| > >
| > >
| > >
| > >
| > >
| > >
| > >
| > >
| > >
| > >
| > >
| > >
| > >
| > >
| > >
| > >
| > >
| > >
| > >
| > >
| > >
| > > GTO. | > >
| > > Not sure how much credence you folks lend to R&T but I thought it was a | > > pretty good magazine and still do, but... | > >
| > > They called the GTO a civilized, adult's car [I could nauseate you with | > > R&T's gushing over the GTO but I'll spare you the trauma]. | > >
| > > Of the Cobra, "...isn't trying to reinvent or redefine anything. It just | > > is." Oh, and my favorite; it lacks refinement, has a notchy tranny and a | > > shift knob that almost fell off in the driver's hand. LoL! They also | said | > > it's too cheaply made to cost north of $30K. But R&T also wrote the GTO | > > lacked the finely honed road manners of the Cobra. Unrefined to finely | > > honed. Hmm... | > >
| > > Yeah, yeah. So the GTO drives and handles great. But I saw one in person | > the | > > other day and let me tell you it lacks character! It looks like an | > unformed | > > fetus. Blah. | > >
They chose the GTO over the Cobra??? Guess it's time to cancel my subscription to their magazine....oh wait i dont have a subscription to their magazine, i wonder why? LOL
I guess they like to have a more cushy ride than a more firm ride. In this case it results in the GTO having worse handling. I also think the GTO is ultra boring, looks like an oversized cavalier.
amazing the Cobra handles better, a platform that is so much older compared to the GTO yet it still beats it. GM sucks.
On Sat, 05 Jun 2004 17:08:09 -0400, "Fao, Sean" wrote something wonderfully witty:
I have to agree on the appearance of the interior, but the rest of the car falls way short from what it could have been. It has ZERO styling cues that give anyone any indication of it's heritage. The lack of handling that it had compared to almost anything else in its supposed class "What is it's class?" was sort of surprising as well. It reminded me nothing of my 3 other Goats.
GM is going to have to pull a rabbit out of its hat if they ever expect to get my pony car business back.
Wanted to like the GTO more? Personally I think Pontiac, seeing the GTO not even close to the sales they had projected, lobbied (ahem...paid off) the magazine to make the GTO look good in comparison with other muscle cars. The GTO may run well but it's not going to outrun the Cobra and it certainly doesn't look the part it's trying to play. IMO Pontiac damaged the legend of the GTO with this offering. Why didn't they just make that the new Grand Prix!!!
I disagree. The new GTO replicates it's heritage nearly perfectly: a simple package on a plain chassis with more motor than most commuters need. The Tempest/Le Mans was a basic sedan. Nothing special. The early GTO's were a few badges, a hood, a rear end, and motor. The only difference, as is the case with every late model muscle car, is you can't get a stripped coupe.
Now, I personally think they should have differentiated the exterior a little more from the Grand Prix, too. The A-bodies were pretty distinctive back in the day.
As for damaging the legend. Well, the LS2 motor will probably make this GTO faster than *any* of it's predecessors. Add the Mangnacharger blower that's coming up and this car will make it's own legend among the younger enthusiasts. And the die hard older folks like me, who like the modern ammenities *and* the power, will buy 'em too. It will probably turn out just like the barrier that I find between the classic Mustang folks and the late model enthusiasts.
I'll give you the fact that it replicates the heritage, plain chassis, lots of power. But thats the point!! It's ALREADY been done once and that became the GTO!!! If you want to follow that path again then thats fine with me, just start a new legend. Don't call this car a GTO when there is absolutely no link to it's predecessor. I agree that this automobile would dust any of the previous GTO's, and it should with 40 years of technological advancements under the hood. Thats not the point. Hell, My new Mustang GT with 260 HP will be equal to the task with my 335 HP 67' GTO in the quarter mile. SO WHAT! Where is the cosmetic heritage? Don't you think that Pontiac could have created a new body that stayed true to its heritage (like Ford did with the late model Mustangs)on a mid size chassis and slipped the LS2 in the engine compartment? Just yesterday my brother was looking at the nose of the Mustang and said "You know, as I look at this car I can see the early
64-66 Mustang. You can see the heritage of this car". You can't say that with the GTO. Maybe damaging the legend was too strong. Actually I don't even consider them related in any way. I agree with letting the new car make it's own legend, just call it something else!!! That's all. As far as sales go, the GTO is WAY behind on its number. Try this formula.
34K MSRP + lack of physical appeal = Pontiac will be Lucky to get rid of 16k cars.
I think they've sold around 4k so far.
I didn't realize there was a barrier between the classic and late model Mustang folks. This I really don't understand because like I said, at least you know where the new Mustang design came from when you look at the late models. I don't know maybe its me.
Maybe they slipped a 421 Royal Bobcat motor into the Aussie Goat, like Pontiac did to the infamous "Red Car" of the Car & Driver GTO vs. GTO test of 1964.
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.