Firebird or GTO?

[MattC]

Is everyone happy with the new GTO, or would you like the Firebird/Camaro F body back?

http://www.78ta.com/international.htm

Is nostalgia enough reason to revive the F body?

 

[skip0110]

The GTO does not fill the hole of F-body in GM's lineup. You could get a $ 21,000 (US) Camaro or Firebird that could drive of the showroom floor and pull easy 13's all day long. A $30 K GTO transplanted into the US linup from Australia will not fill that gap.

I think that GM need not "revive" the F-body, there is plenty of enthusiam out there (look at Mustang sales), but some boneheaded higher-up decided to suffocate it by lettign the platform go essentially unchanged for 20-plus years. IMO, if the F-body comes back, so will the buyers, en masse.

 

[Cap'n Jack]

I like the new GTO but it doesn't look as good as the Monaro, I reckon the should of kept it the same but put pontiac logo's where the holden ones were. Also have different rims and fix the back up a bit.

 

[1X83Z]

The new GTO is great, as was the Firebird.

Yes, the Mustang sells, but drawing comparisons between Mustang sales and Firebird sales is absurd. The Firebird's selling point was its high performance versions whereas 95% of all Mustang sales are either the 3.8L V6 or the non-supercharged 4.6L V8. The Mustang only sells because it's aimed at providing some fun cheaply and plus, a huge percentage of Mustang sales are to fleets.

 

[Fenrir51]

Which fleets?

 

[1X83Z]

Originally posted by Fenrir51
Which fleets?

Ask Hertz.

 

[toyomatt84]

Toyo and Ebert gives the Pontiac Motor Co. as a whole: 👎👎

 

[Josh]

The new "GTO" is a joke. The Firebird was a great car, but I'm glad they killed it before they had a chance to **** it up. I just wish Pontiac would have let the GTO die, and never brought it back. I also wish Ford would kill off the Mustang, and not produce an '05+ model. It's hideous.

Bah. New cars get worse every year.

 

[Fenrir51]

Firebirds ugh my ex friend has a 91 and its a big heavy pos. The GTO isnt a joke seeing as the first was just another model with performence. Mustang sells unlike the camaro and firebird so there is no reason to stop it because you dont like the looks.

 

[1X83Z]

Originally posted by Josh
The new "GTO" is a joke. The Firebird was a great car, but I'm glad they killed it before they had a chance to **** it up. I just wish Pontiac would have let the GTO die, and never brought it back. I also wish Ford would kill off the Mustang, and not produce an '05+ model. It's hideous.

Bah. New cars get worse every year.

On the GTO - why does everyone think it's so 'stupid'? Everybody says it's stupid because it's Australian-sourced, but what the hell does that matter? It's still got a 350bhp 5.7L American V8. The Australian argument is bogus because that's the argument used by people trying to sound smart. The fact that it's Australian means absolutely nothing. Or is it stupid because it looks boring? Everyone's forgetting the point of the original GTO - simply a Pontiac LeMans on the outside. Yes, the new GTO looks like a Grand Prix coupe, but that's the point of the thing, and it succeeds fairly masterfully at being a sleeper. The problem I tend to find with the GTO is that people can't help but compare it to the original, and, though this one is better than the original in every single measurable aspect, the original brings about better connotations, making it "better" particularly with fifteen-year-olds who think they know something by knowing about the 'original' GTO. The current GTO is better, and it's a great car.

On the Mustang - I hesitate to say it, but I believe the current Mustang SVT Cobra is the best new vehicle sold in my lifetime. The concept car may be hideous, but the Mustang is a brilliant package and I hope they never kill it.

 

[Joey D]

The old GTO's were based on the Tempest according to the car and driver TV I watched this morning, just a different engine.

I think its a pretty good car, but not for the price. 33g's could buy me something a little better.

I really want to drive one, but from what I heard the suspension is really stiff, which I guess isn't to bad.

I'll agree with M5 on the Mustang. I really like that car as well.

 

[Josh]

Originally posted by M5Power

On the Mustang - I hesitate to say it, but I believe the current Mustang SVT Cobra is the best new vehicle sold in my lifetime.

Agreed. That's why I bought one. And because I wanted something that would make my mother cry.

I don't dislike the "GTO" because it's Austrailian. I simply dislike it because it's a Cavalier/GP with an LS1 in it. They could've put a tad bit more time, and thought, into it and made one badass car.

 

[Joey D]

well it'll be gone or re-designed by 2007

 

[skip0110]

Originally posted by Josh
Agreed. That's why I bought one. And because I wanted something that would make my mother cry.

I don't dislike the "GTO" because it's Austrailian. I simply dislike it because it's a Cavalier/GP with an LS1 in it. They could've put a tad bit more time, and thought, into it and made one badass car.

I assume you mean that it looks like a Cavalier or Grand Prix with a LS1. Which is to say, it has to Pontaic corporate "look," which altogether isnt that bad. Back in the GTO's time, that is exactly what GM did--took generic-looking a family car (the Tempest) and put one helluva engine in it. By having the performace flagship be based off of a more plebain model, Pontiac can bring more buyers to the brand as a whole. And this is good for performace fans, because it means that they dont have to pull so much of a profit from the flagship model. Platform sharing means more hp for your dollar.

 

[1X83Z]

Originally posted by Josh

I don't dislike the "GTO" because it's Austrailian. I simply dislike it because it's a Cavalier/GP with an LS1 in it. They could've put a tad bit more time, and thought, into it and made one badass car.

Why do you think it doesn't have any thought in it? It clearly isn't just a Cavalier or Grand Prix with an LS1 in it; it's a completely different vehicle not even remotely related. Just because it might look slightly similar doesn't mean it's the same car! Come on, Josh!

The old GTO's were based on the Tempest according to the car and driver TV I watched this morning, just a different engine.

Yeah, well. I can tell you about four things about cars made before 1985. My point stands though - it doesn't need to look fast in order to be fast.

well it'll be gone or re-designed by 2007

It might get a minor redesign in calendar 2007 for 2008, but it's not going anywhere for a while. I'm praying it gets a few more features though - it can't quite stand up to the class without traction control (LSD, brake assist, antiskid - something - even if it was as an option!) and a power sunroof is necessary when you're competing against something like the Infiniti G35. Heated leather would be nice, but Mustang doesn't offer it and I just called the Mustang the best car in my lifetime. (then again, Mustang doesn't offer a sunroof either - maybe Pontiac's on to something)

 

[Motorer1]

The Solstice will be good for Pontiac. I think that with that, and the GTO, they have a good lineup. Plus, if Chevy brings in the Nomad, that should round it up. But hey, who can say no to a Camaro????

hmm....

 

[Fenrir51]

I can say no to a camaro.

 

[Cano]

Originally posted by skip0110
The GTO does not fill the hole of F-body in GM's lineup. You could get a $ 21,000 (US) Camaro or Firebird that could drive of the showroom floor and pull easy 13's all day long. A $30 K GTO transplanted into the US linup from Australia will not fill that gap.

I think that GM need not "revive" the F-body, there is plenty of enthusiam out there (look at Mustang sales), but some boneheaded higher-up decided to suffocate it by lettign the platform go essentially unchanged for 20-plus years. IMO, if the F-body comes back, so will the buyers, en masse.

I think this post is right on the money. The GTO is a great car, bt it cant fill the gap of the F-body, specially in the bang-for-the-buck department. and there are many MANY enthusiasts out there who would really support GM if they brought the F-body back.

 

[1X83Z]

Originally posted by Cano
and there are many MANY enthusiasts out there who would really support GM if they brought the F-body back.

Yet not enough to make it profitable.

 

[skip0110]

Originally posted by M5Power
Yet not enough to make it profitable.

Thats because GM mucked up the marketing. Ford did it right with the (93? to 2004) Mustang, you can get a V6 convertible for under $20 K to attract the younger (and mostly female) buyers, and by increasing the number of cars built this allows them to sell performance models to the enthusiats at what amounts to a great deal. Then some more expensive limited-run models, like the Mach 1, that make a good profit by using lots of parts-bin pieces to appeal to an older, more nostalgiac group of buyers with more money. (Spreading platform design costs over a 20-something year run helps a little too. The Fox platform dates back to, what, 1978?)

Now compare this to the Camaro/Firebird. Nobody wanted the V6 models, because there were so many packaging constraints in the design. (Example--a lump in the passenger floor for that catylytic converter. Unacceptable.) The halo models were not all that great, and stlying was overdone in most people's eyes. So everyone wanted a strippo LS1, and no profit was being made.

Now say that GM decides to take a RWD platorm that is shared with other vehicles (say the CTS), and redo the marketing so that it is all retro-friendly and other such BS so that V6 models sell like crazy. Drop in the LS1 and offer that as the affordable performance model (for the enthusiasts). And then use the LS6 to make some sort of equivalent to the Cobra R, and pull a huge profit off of it in limited production runs. So its all parts bin parts, most of the engineering is already done. I am surprized how GM will invest in Buick concepct cars that just bring a "meh" from the buying public, but when someone draws a Camaro concept, the response is wild. I dont see how they stand not to make a profit.

 

[liquidyellow]

GM are bringing it to Europe as well badged as an Opel/Vauxhall Monaro. I think the designs very 90s so bland bit at lest we've got a muscle car back over here.

 

[MattC]

Yes, the trouble with the new GTO is that it is one model, whereas the F body was a whole range of models from the base low powered ones to the coveted halo models.
With the 4th gen F body (1993-2002) GM over simplified the range so that the price competitive model that made up the bulk of sales (the hypothetical V6 Mustang that many buy) wasn't really there.
As the previous poster said you have to have balance in a range, competitive pricing and have a few and only a few halo models to add spice and image to the range. Ford seem much better at doing this than GM in the last decade, and that Fox platform started in the 1979 MY. 1978 was the last year for the Mustang II Pinto, Maverick based car.
GM over the last few years have been obsessed with their image cars and show cars. Like the CTS-V, new GTO. Maybe this is why they get on so well with the Vette because it is effectively a car sold in one version. The trouble is it's the butter and egg models that most people buy and if the public don't like them then sales drop to zero. The CTS-V is great, but many don't like the regular CTS itself, that's when you have problems.
A new F body can work, GM just have to improve their marketing and model positioning. GM have the platform and the engines, it's time they made it happen.

 

[skip0110]

Originally posted by MattC
GM over the last few years have been obsessed with their image cars and show cars. Like the CTS-V, new GTO. Maybe this is why they get on so well with the Vette because it is effectively a car sold in one version. The trouble is it's the butter and egg models that most people buy and if the public don't like them then sales drop to zero. The CTS-V is great, but many don't like the regular CTS itself, that's when you have problems.

Yep, exactly. To extend on this point, I think GM's problem is that they feel that they must seperate their luxury brands from the lesser models, sadddling cars like the Malibu and Regal with ancient 2-valve engines like the 3800. Clearly, GM can make a good engine--take a look at the LS1, Northstar, even the Ecotec 4 is pretty good--but they dont want to allow this to propagate through the model lines, they are afraid of model dilution or something like that. Frankly, I dont think that an engine like the Northstar needs to be "exclusive" to Cadillac. Nissan seems to get along just fine offering the same 3.5 L V6 in an Altima and a G35.

That, and I think GM is still suffering from the 80's, when they brought in marketing execs from the toilet paper industry that thought it wasn't the product that mattered, but how you sell it. In the world of cars, the product matters so much more than the marketing.

 

[1X83Z]

Originally posted by skip0110

That, and I think GM is still suffering from the 80's, when they brought in marketing execs from the toilet paper industry that thought it wasn't the product that mattered, but how you sell it. In the world of cars, the product matters so much more than the marketing.

I think GM's suffering from their own lack of creativity. One of the biggest mistakes of the decade was the cancellation of Oldsmobile. Do you see companies like Audi and BMW quitting the market just because they have competition? Why can't GM run each of their seperate divisions as if each was a competing entity in its own right? If they're not going to do this then I see no reason to continue Buick either, or GMC since they're trying to add a luxury image to GMC but refuse to back it up.

 

[skip0110]

Originally posted by M5Power
I think GM's suffering from their own lack of creativity. One of the biggest mistakes of the decade was the cancellation of Oldsmobile. Do you see companies like Audi and BMW quitting the market just because they have competition? Why can't GM run each of their seperate divisions as if each was a competing entity in its own right? If they're not going to do this then I see no reason to continue Buick either, or GMC since they're trying to add a luxury image to GMC but refuse to back it up.

GM is suffering from a lot of things. I dont know why cancelling Oldsmobile was a mistake, the brand wasnt offering anything special. It was supposed to be the "import fighter" brand--whatever that means. (Why can't chevy be the import fighter brand?) And what is Buick's role supposed to be? The 60-plus market? I though Cadillac had that covered with the DeVille . GM is a big lumbering giant that cant even keep track of itself. Way too many platforms, too many marketing strategies in too short a time. As I see it, GM would be fine as just Chevy (run-of-the mill, everyday Joe's brand), Cadillac (world-class luxury or whatever they want to call it), and Pontiac (performance brand). Saab, they should get rid of it before they mess it up buy putting thinly disguised Subarus in the model line and losing the brand loyalists.

 

[Mr.Kwik]

I race an 88 third generation firebird (see avatar) and also have had a 1968 firebird since the late 80's but have only driven the car a few times for I am saving it for my son whom is 13 yrs old now. The old car is very rare, it came out with factory A/C, Hurst shifter and a Ram Air inducted 400. She only has 62,000 actual miles on her. Firebirds are few and far between campared to the Camaro. The 68 Camaro was one of the most produced and sold cars in GM's history. So I guess you can say I am a loyal follower of GM . Oh I forgot I drive a chevrolet Z71 Blazer and my wife drives a 96 Sunfire GT which we bought new and havent had a single problem with.

 

[1X83Z]

Originally posted by skip0110
GM is suffering from a lot of things. I dont know why cancelling Oldsmobile was a mistake, the brand wasnt offering anything special.

Right now Cadillac's moving in the right direction - why couldn't Oldsmobile move in the exact same direction? Because GM doesn't want two of its brands competing for sales. But why not? I don't understand why GM can't make Cadillac, Buick, and Oldsmobile compete, each as best as they can rather than let Cadillac basically have the segment. They could have three companies rather than one - where's the focus?

Saab, they should get rid of it before they mess it up buy putting thinly disguised Subarus in the model line and losing the brand loyalists.

Have you seen the 9-7X yet? It's literally a Chevrolet Trailblazer. They've kept a few touches like the key in the center console, but it's got GM's optional 5.3L V8 - the same one in the Tahoe and Silverado. I'm in severe danger of calling it the worst sport-utility vehicle ever produced, and I haven't even seen one on the street. I'm fairly sure it's the Cadillac Cimarron of SUVs. Horrible.

 

[High-Test]

Originally posted by M5Power


Right now Cadillac's moving in the right direction - why couldn't Oldsmobile move in the exact same direction? Because GM doesn't want two of its brands competing for sales. But why not? I don't understand why GM can't make Cadillac, Buick, and Oldsmobile compete, each as best as they can rather than let Cadillac basically have the segment. They could have three companies rather than one - where's the focus?
[/B]

I don't really understand why they dropped oldsmobile. Practically every other car where I live is an olds alero, we passed at least 35 of them on the road today, I think it was a great car. Oh well, plymouth also got dropped. I can understand why they were dropped because of lack of sales, but I think GM pulled the plug on Olds way too soon.

To answer the question, yes. We do need the F- body back. It was worth way more than the new GTO ever will be, and It probably sold alot better. Who can't say a bright red Firebird isn't cool?

 

[F-Body]

As a devout F-Body fan I find the GTO insulting. You kill of the Camaro, the best car ever created in my mind, as a sever bang for the buck fan, and replace it with a larger, boxier car with the engine that SHOULD be in the 2004 Camaro and firebird? I was quite upset when GM stopped production on the Camaro and Firebird Legacy because I was not able to afford a brand new one at the time. But I will buy a 2002 Z-28 SS next month because there is nothing out there worth buying.

Certainly not gonna buy some rice car like a Honda or Toyota, those cars are such CRAP. SO I must go for the best car avaiable right now. A 2002 Z-28 Super Sport. Right now I drive a 1987 IROC Z-28 with 305 and standard transmission. Have almost 200k miles on the orignal motor and it still flies! Hit 120 the other day no problem, and I've driven it for 8 years throughout New ENgland winters. Best cars ever made, werd!

 

[XzifT]

You're lucky you didn't mention Mazda as crap, or I'd have to drive down to Massachusetts and prove it myself.