Monaro & GTO
- Thread starter Mistral1
- 27 comments
- 1,628 views
General Motors owns both brands and was looking for a quick fix to get a GTO on the North American market. They brilliantly selected the Monaro and debuted a wonderful car to absolute disgust in 2004.
The really funny thing about the GTO is that first-year models use a 350-horsepower 5.7-liter V8, while 2005+ models use a 400-horsepower 6-liter V8 with no price bump. I bet '04 owners are pretty pissed at Pontiac right about now - God knows I would be.
The really funny thing about the GTO is that first-year models use a 350-horsepower 5.7-liter V8, while 2005+ models use a 400-horsepower 6-liter V8 with no price bump. I bet '04 owners are pretty pissed at Pontiac right about now - God knows I would be.
- 24,344
- Midlantic Area
- GTP_Duke
Actually, smart-money GTO owners are buying leftover 2004s at deep discount, knowing they can kick 400hp ass for far less in engine work than the difference in sale price.
I agree with you, though, Doug, about what a great street car the GTO is. I never disliked it in any way, and I own a 1967 Pontiac.
I agree with you, though, Doug, about what a great street car the GTO is. I never disliked it in any way, and I own a 1967 Pontiac.
Duke
See, you understand it - it's not supposed to look outrageous, it's supposed to be outrageous and look understated. That thing is such a good car I was very close to naming it Car of the Year in 2004: it's got great features-per-dollar, great horsepower-per-dollar, good handling, and it's not ugly (I've heard bland but never ugly). It's worth every damn penny and then some.
BMW would probably charge $92000 for it.
- 794
M5PowerBMW would probably charge $92000 for it.
Seriously... I look at the 6 series and wonder why anyone would buy that when they could get a couple of GTOs instead
I like the GTO... I've heard people call it bland too, I think they've just gotten too used to seeing ugly cars. At the last autoshow I went to it's one of the few that doesn't stand out as being offensively ugly
Cap'n Jack
Premium
- 10,196
- South of the South
- GoldMineGutted
James2097
I don't mind the scoops, even though they are pointless.
retsmahI like the GTO... I've heard people call it bland too, I think they've just gotten too used to seeing ugly cars. At the last autoshow I went to it's one of the few that doesn't stand out as being offensively ugly
Exactly - a manufacturer finally comes out with something nice-looking and it's labeled 'bland.' You can't win with this bunch!
ShobThaBob
Premium
- 2,651
- rosooftw
Some say bland. I say stealthy and tasteful.
- 20,145
- Australia
- VIPERGTS01
Mistral1
They come out the same factory if that gives you any idea how similar they are, I see new GTO's going to shipping on trucks with export monaros to the middle east quite regularly (from the factory in Adelaide South Australia).
Monaro is still very popular in Australia even though we still get the 04 GTO LS1 engine (unless you buy a HSV then you get LS2), I dont know what the US market was expecting when the GTO was coming back? big scoops, sharp lines, big wings and decals bit like the Judge?
- 347
'05 GTOs are just sick. I don't really care how much people bash GTO, the '04s were pretty sweet and the '05s are just awesome!
- 1,128
The GTO is the best muscle car available right now. Unlike the Mustang and charger, which draw strongly on the (unaerodynamic) styling of their 60's counterparts, The GTO to me follows the classic muscle car formula to the T, but incorperates modern automotive design, both cosmetic and functional. I really like the way it looks, and the LS engine is one of the few overhead valve engines I like. The Mustang and Charger hark back too much. They do look good, but the barn door front ends just dont cut it anymore. I want sleek, and the GTO has an independent rear suspension to boot. (crosses fingers for LS7 GTO 
)
)
- 1,620
What do you mean the scoops aren't functiona LOLl? They cool the engine block! (in a hugely 'effecient' manner, by approximately 0.001% I'm guessing). Except the added drag easily outweighs any possible advantage hey!Duke
Bugger all GTO owners would actually fit a supercharger/turbo... the scoops are totally pointless!
I am a real rationalist when it comes to design. Form follows function. Any other way just gives you a gimmicky/featuristic product that will age really badly and lack integrity.
I believe maximum beauty is attained when the functional intent of a product is foremost in the designer's mind. Nature is the best at this - every living creature is designed (by evolution) to fullfill its function/s in the most efficient manner possible, given the initial building blocks of life. Just look at humans, eagles, albatrosses, cheetah's etc. They are all designed with strong intent as to function. Aesthetic beauty then comes naturally from the purity, or perfect efficiency of the design. Human designs that function at the peak of human engineering also tend to follow this trait. Things like an F-22 Raptor, a Porsche 911, a Maclaren F1 etc all exhibit this design philosophy, and look fantastic also!
That is why I am strongly against non-functional anything on cars. Non functional wings/spoilers? Ruined many a nice car. Spinners? The worst. Simpler is better. Less is more yada yada yada...
- 24,344
- Midlantic Area
- GTP_Duke
Which is precisely why Chris Bangle should be taken out behind the barn and shot, just like any mad dog.James2097
Agreed. For what it's worth, the hood scoops on 1965-68 GTOs were fake too; Ram Air wasn't introduced until 1969, I don't believe (Firebird will correct me if I'm wrong).
But dig this: Look at the fake scoop on a Neon SRT. Then pop the hood. There's a suspiciously large rib that runs from under the scoop area to the front left corner of the bay, over the air box. Lowering the hood reveals an almost perfect match between the rib and the flat top of the air box. Coincidence? I think not. Cut a 4" hole in the top of the airbox, a corresponding hole in the stiffening rib, and add a little Home Depot weatherstripping. Then remove the insert blocking the scoop. Voila: ram air for you, happy beancounters for Chrysler. The PVO guys are too cool.
- 895
Duke
'64-'66 GTOs had non-functional hoodscoops.
'67 saw Ram Air added as a dealer-installed option on the 400 V8, which replaced the 389 beginning that year. The 389 never had Ram Air (the highest performance 389 you could get was the "Tri-Power", with three two-barrel Rochester carburetors in place of the single four-barrel Carter).
Ram Air II debuted in '68.
Ram Air III and IV debuted in '69. Ram Air III was standard on The Judge, which was new that year. They (Ram Air III and IV) were dropped from the options list after 1970, replaced by the 455 V8.
'71-'74 hoodscoops were non-functional.
- 347
I dunno, the '04 GTO really needed a cool hood, and those '05 scoops + the appearance package really help out. Seriously though, many cars have non-functional scoops, and so what!? Like a scoop is that much different from pulling air out of a fender well or what have you.
- 1,620
No gimmickry, way better.
http://www.wallpaper.net.au/wallpaper/automotive/Holden Monaro Game Over - 1024x768.jpg
This is wierd... The the latest Monaro advert on telly doesn't show any pooper-scoopers on the bonnet, but in Holden dealerships the car definately has the scoops... maybe they'd rather use the 'better' looking older car in the advert?
http://www.holden.com.au//images/sc18_downloads/videos/monaro_tvc.mpg
http://www.wallpaper.net.au/wallpaper/automotive/Holden Monaro Game Over - 1024x768.jpg
This is wierd... The the latest Monaro advert on telly doesn't show any pooper-scoopers on the bonnet, but in Holden dealerships the car definately has the scoops... maybe they'd rather use the 'better' looking older car in the advert?
http://www.holden.com.au//images/sc18_downloads/videos/monaro_tvc.mpg
- 1,620
Its still a current advert if it still airs on telly (saw it a couple of days ago), and its up on the Holden website labelled as a current ad. If its out of date they should take it off air alltogether.
Hence (possibly) they know the old car looks better, or Holden are just slack at updating ads (more likely).
Hence (possibly) they know the old car looks better, or Holden are just slack at updating ads (more likely).
Similar threads
