I see many here are anticipating Holden's new cars for 2007 and later. The drift I am getting, is that many would like to see Holden build the new GTO. God what a nightmarish thought!!

Do I have to list the ways why Holden should not be selected? To refresh your memory about the current GTO please read and consider the following: (a) the car has a poor drive line and understrength differential; (b) the front wheels constantly rub the struts; (c) the wheel housings are small causing us to use under sized tires; (d) the car is too heavy; (e) the car experiences severe wheel hop;(f) the fuel delivery system is poor; and most importantly, replacement or after market parts are expensive and hard to find.

This is just a short list of major component problems or failures. I could continue and point out lesser annoyances such faulty instruments, particularly with the gas gauge, and related problems but I would need much more space.

The point I am making is the chassis and drivetrain are not suited for a 400 HP car, much less any configuration of greater HP. The marriage has not been a good one for GM. Holden provided a platform woefully inadequate for the high performance engine and tranmission provided them. The car was built to fill a niche left over after F body production ceased. For GM to turn to Holden again for the new Camaro would be misplaced since it is ludicrous to believe that Holden could produce a car capable of supporting the Ls2 motor with any current chassis or design.

No, the car must have a completely new platform if it is going to compete in the market. If GM turns to Holden again for the new GTO, that is a clear indication it is no longer a serious muscle car competitor. GM can ill afford to lose another car market. If the trend continues, in another twenty years GM will cease to exist.

For myself the choice is simple. If Holden is involved with the new GTO, then it will be good bye GTO and hello Mustang. Red.

Well you might as well head on over to the Rustang boards then, cause it's going to happen. It will save us your griping. :rolleyes:

Wow, that could possibly be the dumbest post i've seen in a while

Do you have a GTO?

I'm guessing that your an arm chair driver, and have no first hand knowledge of the GTO. Yes I could address all of your complaints, but don't feel it's worth it.

Go buy a Mustang, I dare you.

Okay let me first counter by saying did you ever drive an Fbody? You want underthought drivetrains, that is the epitimy of them. What about useless back seats, horrible interiors, horrible viewing position, etc etc.

All the things your pointing out are just as bad with the old fbody, the GTO is worlds better than those, AND its using a DATED chassis. The GTO wasn't made using a brand new Holden chasis, it was build off an older one dating back to the mid 90s. Why does the chassis feel like its not meant to hold that much power? Because it wasn't. Cars in the 90s didn't have NEAR the power they do now.

So don't judge holden badly based on what they did with the GTO, when you compare it with what GM did with the fbody, the next generation holden chasis is going to be much more well suited for a car like the GTO and Camaro. Holden has proven time and time again that they know how to build competant cars.

Well I am glad I woke you guys up. I will respond to Nocturn's post since he seems to have captured the premise of my post. But first let me point out that I owned a '98 Camaro and purchased a new GTO in 2004. Prior to these more recent purchases I owned an '85 Camaro, and used to race AA/Fuelers when they still raced the original rat motor, the 392 Hemi. Yeees, I have a few miles on me.

Your points about the old F-body are well taken in general. All of the problems you indicated such as sqeaks and rattles and soforth are true. But so what. The car was much lighter then the current GTO and that was due in part to the extensive use of plastic. Here's an example: the glove compartment door on a Camaro weighs about a pound while the door on the GTO weighs about 7-8 pounds. That sort of misengineering abounds throughout the car's construction whether we are discussing the heavy skid plate or the unnecessarily heavy front sway bar for instance.

Second, it is apparent from the posts above that my idea of a good muscle car is different from the others. For instance, I cannnot hear the radio over the headers and the exhaust in my car. I surely do not know if an interior body panel is vibrating. I used to race a '55 with a dropped front straight axle. I was called Shake, Rattle, and Roll, which is exactly what it did. That is a muscle car to me. If you want a quiet vibration free car I suggest you look at a ricer. You won't get that with an American V-8.

Third, the trouble with GM's muscle cars have always remained the same, to wit: a great engine and transmission and a weak drive train. The 7.5 inch rear axle, in the old Camaros as well as the current 9bolt in the GTO, with a diameter of 7.75 inches, are too small for 400 plus HP. An 8.5 or larger ring gear is necessary to hold the power. Hence, the popularity of the 9" Ford, and the current 8.8 found in the Mustang.

In short, GM's reliance on Holden is not Holden's fault. The Holden Commodore is a great vehicle for the Australian market and V-6 power levels. The Australian auto market, like the market in Britain, favors heavy coachwork and trim details to the sacrifice of weight savings and power.
The chassis was not designed to house a 400 HP V-8. Accordingly, GM was overreaching again and attempting to present a car on the cheap.

The drive train on a pony car should support 500 HP. This is especially true when starting with the excellent Ls2 motor since these power levels are easily obtainable with a few bolt ons. Do I expect the chassis to hold 600 or more HP? No. Will Holden present a chassis capable of handling the Ls2. Probably not.

Finally, it is sad to see GM spend so much time perfecting the Corvette and providing it with great drive trains while neglecting the pony cars. At least they should offer a car like Ford's " Mustang in the white " program where you purchase the body, chassis, and interior without engine and drive train and then build the car to suit your particular needs.

I hope this sheds some light on my idea of what a muscle car should be. The intention of the post was not to ruffle feathers but rather to point out a point of view. Red.

Well I am glad I woke you guys up. I will respond to Nocturn's post since he seems to have captured the premise of my post. But first let me point out that I owned a '98 Camaro and purchased a new GTO in 2004. Prior to these more recent purchases I owned an '85 Camaro, and used to race AA/Fuelers when they still raced the original rat motor, the 392 Hemi. Yeees, I have a few miles on me.

Your points about the old F-body are well taken in general. All of the problems you indicated such as sqeaks and rattles and soforth are true. But so what. The car was much lighter then the current GTO and that was due in part to the extensive use of plastic. Here's an example: the glove compartment door on a Camaro weighs about a pound while the door on the GTO weighs about 7-8 pounds. That sort of misengineering abounds throughout the car's construction whether we are discussing the heavy skid plate or the unnecessarily heavy front sway bar for instance.

Second, it is apparent from the posts above that my idea of a good muscle car is different from the others. For instance, I cannnot hear the radio over the headers and the exhaust in my car. I surely do not know if an interior body panel is vibrating. I used to race a '55 with a dropped front straight axle. I was called Shake, Rattle, and Roll, which is exactly what it did. That is a muscle car to me. If you want a quiet vibration free car I suggest you look at a ricer. You won't get that with an American V-8.

Third, the trouble with GM's muscle cars have always remained the same, to wit: a great engine and transmission and a weak drive train. The 7.5 inch rear axle, in the old Camaros as well as the current 9bolt in the GTO, with a diameter of 7.75 inches, are too small for 400 plus HP. An 8.5 or larger ring gear is necessary to hold the power. Hence, the popularity of the 9" Ford, and the current 8.8 found in the Mustang.

In short, GM's reliance on Holden is not Holden's fault. The Holden Commodore is a great vehicle for the Australian market and V-6 power levels. The Australian auto market, like the market in Britain, favors heavy coachwork and trim details to the sacrifice of weight savings and power.
The chassis was not designed to house a 400 HP V-8. Accordingly, GM was overreaching again and attempting to present a car on the cheap.

The drive train on a pony car should support 500 HP. This is especially true when starting with the excellent Ls2 motor since these power levels are easily obtainable with a few bolt ons. Do I expect the chassis to hold 600 or more HP? No. Will Holden present a chassis capable of handling the Ls2. Probably not.

Finally, it is sad to see GM spend so much time perfecting the Corvette and providing it with great drive trains while neglecting the pony cars. At least they should offer a car like Ford's " Mustang in the white " program where you purchase the body, chassis, and interior without engine and drive train and then build the car to suit your particular needs.

I hope this sheds some light on my idea of what a muscle car should be. The intention of the post was not to ruffle feathers but rather to point out a point of view. Red.

While many enthusiast share your point of view, it is what killed the fbody, for as passionate as you guys are, you don't buy cars in bulk. GM needs cars that will appeal to the general public, cars that people don't intend to modify, and that won't squek or rattle.

Gm can no longer afford (literally and figurativly) to build cars like the ones you want. They simply don't sell well enough in the NA market to justfiy the price of building them. Gm needs cars that will sell as evidence by last years 10B loss.

While this may dissapoint a few passionate enthusiast who may switch sides to Ford or DCX, they will gain hundreds of thousands of new owners because of the complete package of the car.

Troll. BAN.

I am sorry I do not like foreign cars. The skippy mobile will never become an American muscle car.

While many enthusiast share your point of view, it is what killed the fbody, for as passionate as you guys are, you don't buy cars in bulk. GM needs cars that will appeal to the general public, cars that people don't intend to modify, and that won't squek or rattle.

Gm can no longer afford (literally and figurativly) to build cars like the ones you want. They simply don't sell well enough in the NA market to justfiy the price of building them. Gm needs cars that will sell as evidence by last years 10B loss.

While this may dissapoint a few passionate enthusiast who may switch sides to Ford or DCX, they will gain hundreds of thousands of new owners because of the complete package of the car.

Excellent point Noc.

red I'm going to take one of your points above to back up Nocturn's post. A one pound, flimsy plastic glovebox door is exactly what got GM into trouble. It's cheap and it shows. GM has to build things with quality. They just aren't going to build a turnkey dragster for a VERY limited audience. It doesn't make ANY buisness sense.

I am sorry I do not like foreign cars. The skippy mobile will never become an American muscle car.

I'm with you there. I'll walk before I drive asian cars.

You own a 2004 so you know it is light years ahead of the old F-bodies in comfort and materials on the interior. All cars are gaining weight due to safety this and airbag that, weight is a problem that won't go away with a government forcing all types of "safety" devices into cars.

I don't want you going over to a Mustang so give the next GTO a chance but you just have to know that it's not going to be a 3300 pound, cheap plastic riddled, engine/drivetrain mobile like the old F-bodies.

This one is for Orbit. Nobody wants a cheaply made car. The point is, Gm has too often placed a powerful motor in a weaker chassis. The new GTO is yet another example.

In the 60's GM used to team the motor with the appropriate drive train. A '69 Chevelle for instance had several engine and drive train options. Gm developed a drive train suitable for the standard 6 or 8 of the day; developed a suitable drive train including 1310 spicer u-joints for the 396SS; and futher offered a 1350 drive train for the 427 450 Hp.
Makes sense.

Since the 80's, they foisted one under developed car after the other upon the car buying public, including the current GTO. Now I do not expect the drive train to support more than 500HP, but up to that point is mandatory. An Ls2 with a few bolt ons and/or cam is easily at 500.

Lets not forget also that we, meaning the new GTO owners, are a rare breed. I think the car's total production run is under 40,000. This version of the Goat failed in the market because of its poor drive train, styling perceived as bland, small tires, strut rubbing, and a myriad of other problems to lengthy to discuss here; and last but not least, the car cannot conform to US 2007 safety standards.

You are correct when you say GM needs to get the new GTO right. They must build a suitable platform here, add a drive train sufficent enough to handle the LS2, use the retro body they showcased, and include a well made interior. That's the key to Ford's success with the 2006 Mustang.

Besides who really likes or wants to buy a European/Asian style V-8 muscle car.

i cant agrue that the car has weak points however its still better the a mustang . I dont care how you slice it. The fact of the matter is the car itself is an old design and the crux of the thread initially started by red was that holden was not up to the job. Well i wouldnt hold the cars faults against them due to the design age of the car. The car was never designed to have a 400hp motor or wide tall tires in the first place . as far passing the 07 saftey standards its because of the airbag system . because there was never intended to be an 07 its a moot point. The car is not a failure its going to sell all of its limited production regardless of the lack of ADVERTISING.

Dont blame holden .they should be commended for developing a car 10 years ago that could still be compettive in the market place so far past its life expectancy. If this is what holden can do I say let them develop more cars. I dont understand how you can chastise holden for the gto. Its like they built a AAA baseball park and then where asked to house a major league ball club there .Is that the builders fault?

If your looking for how they did things in the 60s well those days are over (thank god) I own a olds 442 and it was one of the high end muscle cars that gm made back then. other than the drivetrain the car lacks any refinement. Its noisey ,gas hungry, piss poor brakes and the suspensions is far from great. Watch those old gm 68-72 A bodys go over a speed bump in a parking lot you can see the tire change angles greatly. Dont get me wrong I love my car and ill tell you what seperates those old muscle cars from anything in recent history or currently produced. The old cars have personality always have and always will. Until you talk about ultra expensive sports cars none of the cars today will really be sought after in 20 years . think into the 70,80,90 how many of those cars will be considered as great collectors cars? very few and that goes for all the big 3 had to offer us during those years and continuing today. Today a car is for the most part a conveyance and this is why honda and toyota has taken over the us market. they build great everyday cars (id rather die than drive). Thats what gm cant figure out. They dont really do any vehicle well these days .

i cant agrue that the car has weak points however its still better the a mustang . I dont care how you slice it. The fact of the matter is the car itself is an old design and the crux of the thread initially started by red was that holden was not up to the job. Well i wouldnt hold the cars faults against them due to the design age of the car. The car was never designed to have a 400hp motor or wide tall tires in the first place . as far passing the 07 saftey standards its because of the airbag system . because there was never intended to be an 07 its a moot point. The car is not a failure its going to sell all of its limited production regardless of the lack of ADVERTISING.

Dont blame holden .they should be commended for developing a car 10 years ago that could still be compettive in the market place so far past its life expectancy. If this is what holden can do I say let them develop more cars. I dont understand how you can chastise holden for the gto. Its like they built a AAA baseball park and then where asked to house a major league ball club there .Is that the builders fault?

If your looking for how they did things in the 60s well those days are over (thank god) I own a olds 442 and it was one of the high end muscle cars that gm made back then. other than the drivetrain the car lacks any refinement. Its noisey ,gas hungry, piss poor brakes and the suspensions is far from great. Watch those old gm 68-72 A bodys go over a speed bump in a parking lot you can see the tire change angles greatly. Dont get me wrong I love my car and ill tell you what seperates those old muscle cars from anything in recent history or currently produced. The old cars have personality always have and always will. Until you talk about ultra expensive sports cars none of the cars today will really be sought after in 20 years . think into the 70,80,90 how many of those cars will be considered as great collectors cars? very few and that goes for all the big 3 had to offer us during those years and continuing today. Today a car is for the most part a conveyance and this is why honda and toyota has taken over the us market. they build great everyday cars (id rather die than drive). Thats what gm cant figure out. They dont really do any vehicle well these days .

I wouldn't go quite that far, GM has come leaps and bounds since 2000, and their quality shows it. I wouldn't hesitate to buy a new GM car now like I would have in the 90s. The point is that no car company can afford to offer a car that has no audiance, and cheap plastic light weight cars with high power and strong drivetrains. Ford is offering a race car version of its Mustang for a mere 200 grand if that strikes your fancy.

The point I'm making is that with so few buyers who want less in cars these days (compared to the lazy americans who want heated seats, and automatic ass cleansing at every stop light) and more who want extra do dads and gizmos. That adds weight, TO compensate they add power, then to handle the power they need bigger wheels, bigger drivetrain, that adds MORE weight. Its the same with all new cars, Even the Miata ballooned up compared to its previous version. The new Cobra is a hefty 2 tons, near 300 LBS more than the GTO.

red I'll have to agree with you on a couple of points but disagree on the others. That's OK though we're not all alike. :)

Agree: Nobody wants a cheaply made car.
Agree: Yes I would like a stouter drivetrain.
Agree: Don't want a Euro/Asian looking car.

Disagree: Current GTO didn't fail due to it's poor drivetrain. You're other reasons are closer to the mark. Perceived (by baby boomers) "bland" styling to name one. Under marketed as number two.
Disagree: It should NOT go retro. We need a MODERN muscular American design for the new GTO. Sure it can have some heritage/retro cues, but we need to look forward not backward. I may be taking an incorrect guess but are you a "Baby Boomer" red? I can see if you are you probably think the GTO is bland and needs to look more retro. A lot of us Gen X'ers, don't like that look though. We want something more modern for US. I have a big bone to pick with many Baby Boomers whom I call the "ME ME ME" generation. If someone wants an older GTO, go buy one. The new one needs to look modern. I almost wish they would drop the GTO name for the next gen RWD Pontiac Coupe. That way it could shake this unfair stigma that has been placed on it by Boomers.

With all that said, I may be wrong about your age group. And I'm not trying to insult you, please don't think that. I'm enjoying this discussion actually. And remember I agree with you on several points. Keep up the conversation. Besides we are fellow GTO owners. :)

i cant agrue that the car has weak points however its still better the a mustang . I dont care how you slice it. The fact of the matter is the car itself is an old design and the crux of the thread initially started by red was that holden was not up to the job. Well i wouldnt hold the cars faults against them due to the design age of the car. The car was never designed to have a 400hp motor or wide tall tires in the first place . as far passing the 07 saftey standards its because of the airbag system . because there was never intended to be an 07 its a moot point. The car is not a failure its going to sell all of its limited production regardless of the lack of ADVERTISING.

Dont blame holden .they should be commended for developing a car 10 years ago that could still be compettive in the market place so far past its life expectancy. If this is what holden can do I say let them develop more cars. I dont understand how you can chastise holden for the gto. Its like they built a AAA baseball park and then where asked to house a major league ball club there .Is that the builders fault?

If your looking for how they did things in the 60s well those days are over (thank god) I own a olds 442 and it was one of the high end muscle cars that gm made back then. other than the drivetrain the car lacks any refinement. Its noisey ,gas hungry, piss poor brakes and the suspensions is far from great. Watch those old gm 68-72 A bodys go over a speed bump in a parking lot you can see the tire change angles greatly. Dont get me wrong I love my car and ill tell you what seperates those old muscle cars from anything in recent history or currently produced. The old cars have personality always have and always will. Until you talk about ultra expensive sports cars none of the cars today will really be sought after in 20 years . think into the 70,80,90 how many of those cars will be considered as great collectors cars? very few and that goes for all the big 3 had to offer us during those years and continuing today. Today a car is for the most part a conveyance and this is why honda and toyota has taken over the us market. they build great everyday cars (id rather die than drive). Thats what gm cant figure out. They dont really do any vehicle well these days .
__________________

EXCELLENT points!!! GM should print this up and hand it out as required reading to anyone that is involved in the automobile industry or interested in buying a performance car. :D

Although, I do think that there will be a growing market for 70's through 90's performance cars as Gen Xers and GenYers go looking for cars of their past much like Boomers go searching for 50's through early 70's muscle. So I'm with Noc there. :)

EXCELLENT points!!! GM should print this up and hand it out as required reading to anyone that is involved in the automobile industry or interested in buying a performance car. :D

Although, I do think that there will be a growing market for 70's through 90's performance cars as Gen Xers and GenYers go looking for cars of their past much like Boomers go searching for 50's through early 70's muscle. So I'm with Noc there. :)

thanks . I agree there will be some cars such as the impala ss, gran national, a few of the trans ams n camaros, montes (and thier sister cars 442s regals)some of the stangs , a few of the vettes(more recently ) however compare these few to the masses of collector cars from the mids 50s to 72 .impalas ,barracudas ,mustangs ,gtos,442,chargers,amxs,bel aires, caddys, t birds, vettes,chevelles, el caminos, camaros, firebirds, galaxies, gran torinos , challengers, ect ect ect it goes on and on. Have we changed as a people ? Its become a disposable tuner generation. the car gets worn out they get heaped in the scrap pile. They have no lasting appeal to save them. They are a flavor of the moment vehicle. Just like the music of the last couple of decades. Classic rock continues on and on never being off the airwaves since it was first played in the 60-70s. The music of the 80,90, and now is disposable . after the first year or so how much of this music ever gets any radio time ( rock variants tend to last longer ie. how much nirvana do you hear these days)?

My point here is that i dont see my generation as a whole being like the baby boomers I think were way to diverse as a group to become like the boomers. Our tastes vary far greater and our lifestyles are so far different then thiers were. the varieties of vehicles were and are so much greater look at the tv theres 100s of channels now we dont all watch andy griffith and gunsmoke.(.With this being said there will alway s be collector cars in every generation but its not gonna be like the 50and 60s were because were different .

Yes the american car companies have done alot better than they have in the past but they need to be the BEST in order to beat the myth that asian and european cars are so great. Im not happy that we have to have to go to foreign countries to get around our poor design concepts but if we can build them here at home ill be ok with that besides we have few true allies in this new world and austraillia is one of them.
p.s. has anyone noticed the warning on the driver side sunshade's safety notice says printed in austria not austrailla.

My point here is that i dont see my generation as a whole being like the baby boomers I think were way to diverse as a group to become like the boomers. Our tastes vary far greater and our lifestyles are so far different then thiers were. the varieties of vehicles were and are so much greater look at the tv theres 100s of channels now we dont all watch andy griffith and gunsmoke.(.With this being said there will alway s be collector cars in every generation but its not gonna be like the 50and 60s were because were different .


My sentiments exactly. I couldn't put it to words but it's like you plucked it out of my head and put it to print. (NO I'm not being a buttkisser either). That's the thing, we want something DIFFERENT, and boomers want more of same seemingly. Could be wrong but it doesn't seem that way. And I'm not trying to dump on any of our Boomer members either. Funny but Boomers were always supposed to be about "Open Your Mind". Many I talk to and read posts from are the exact opposite. Weird and sad.

im gald that someone else agrees with my opinion .We must be on the same wavelength OO. I wasnt trying to knock boomers either and they im sure would be the first to agree my generation(x) and subsequent generations are extremely diverse more so than they the boomers were. Not that they were all cut from the same mold because they werent but just that if we were to catagorize people there would be more now than then. As a matter of fact they in thier time were much more diverse than thier parents generation . So one might say they started the ball rolling in the open your mind era. I think mind closure comes with age and people in general begin to only identify with others of thier ilk.

All of these people factors contribute to consumer wants and needs. people diversity translates to vehicle diversity. I would agree with a previous post that people ideed want a quaility product. As far as looking asian or european well thats a matter of taste ( Id never buy an asian car i dont like the looks however a bmw is a beuatiful machine .i still wouldnt buy one on principle).

Dodge is gonna make a killing on the new challenger because itll be different than other cars with strong retro cues and modern underpinnings. the question is how much room will there be for more than 2 retro styled cars. Will the new cars create a demand for them? or more likely will they basically fight over the male twenty somethings and childless 30 somethings. This is the majority of the market for these cars . If gm wants a peice of this market they better do whats the fashionable thing and make a retro styled
car to appeal to the masses. make it quality, 2 door , with a strong drivetrain
and keep a lid on the overall cost because this market isnt the highest in disposeable income.

I have to agree with all said above, this generation differs from the past in what I call multitasking. This generation has at least 10x the choices in everything compared to the boomers. This has lead to a couple of trends, one being the idea of complete customability, there are so many choices and so many people, that others want to differentiate themselves from the masses by customizing their stuff. Another trend, is that since this generation has so much mass shoved down their throat, that they don't really care to preserve anything. Why bother restoring a car that there are 200,000 coppies of? There is so much corporate mass production, from walmart to ford, that this generation doesn't value little things like the boomers do.

This generation is probably both the hardest to please, and the hardest to sell to, as they were born with 100s of choices, and know that there are other alternatives to everything, and like all people they will find the path of least resistance (in this case, price) for what they want. Which leads to what I said before, that cars are having to become more and more dynamic while meeting harder and harder requirments. I for one wouldn't want to try and engineer a car for this generation for all the gold in the world....well I'd try, but wouldn't try to hard put it that way.

I The drift I am getting, is that many would like to see Holden build the new GTO. God what a nightmarish thought!!.
Someone mentioned somewhere that GM invests in cheaply made cars or some ****. If Holden's so crap, why didnt GM North America build their own GTO?

Holdens latest venture has a total bill of over $1 billion AUD, with a design period of 6 years. The newest Holden, the VE Commodore, has rigidity to rival BMW's. It's also been quoted as having just as good, if not better handling characteristics than some current European marques.

There's a solution to "the wheel housings are small causing us to use under sized tires" ..... its called GUARD ROLLING. There's Monaros over here that drive everyday on 20"s with no problems.

This is especially true when starting with the excellent Ls2 motor since these power levels are easily obtainable with a few bolt ons. Do I expect the chassis to hold 600 or more HP? No. Will Holden present a chassis capable of handling the Ls2. Probably not.
HSV already used the LS2 in the Z-series, which is basically the same chassis as the GTO.
I'm sure I could find you a Monaro with over 600HP...in fact there's one I've posted here somewhere.

Also, there's a HSV Senator with a 442ci engine (street driven): 503rwhp

Blown CV8 Monaro: 606HP (street driven)

G&D Twin Turbo Monaro (street): around 560 RWKW last time I heard

Guy on our forums:
Model: 1998 VT Commodore SS (same chassis all the way through to VZ Commodore (including GTO's))
Power: 583.3HP

Even IF Holden was building the next GTO (which I'm pretty sure they ARENT, the opposite in fact, our next Monaro could be US built) They'd be designing on the same chassis as the current "VE" Commodore, which is a far superior car compared to the outgoing generation of Commodores.

You should read up more about Holdens VE Commodore, you might be surprised......

Speaking of reading up, do you have any additional information on the VE Commodore?

Does it still have the 2 piece driveshaft? How about rear halfshafts, are they larger in diameter than the previous. What have they changed in the driveline over the GTO(Monaro) that is tougher now than what it was?

Someone mentioned somewhere that GM invests in cheaply made cars or some ****. If Holden's so crap, why didnt GM North America build their own GTO?

Holdens latest venture has a total bill of over $1 billion AUD, with a design period of 6 years. The newest Holden, the VE Commodore, has rigidity to rival BMW's. It's also been quoted as having just as good, if not better handling characteristics than some current European marques.

There's a solution to "the wheel housings are small causing us to use under sized tires" ..... its called GUARD ROLLING. There's Monaros over here that drive everyday on 20"s with no problems.


HSV already used the LS2 in the Z-series, which is basically the same chassis as the GTO.
I'm sure I could find you a Monaro with over 600HP...in fact there's one I've posted here somewhere.

Also, there's a HSV Senator with a 442ci engine (street driven): 503rwhp

Blown CV8 Monaro: 606HP (street driven)

G&D Twin Turbo Monaro (street): around 560 RWKW last time I heard

Guy on our forums:
Model: 1998 VT Commodore SS (same chassis all the way through to VZ Commodore (including GTO's))
Power: 583.3HP

Even IF Holden was building the next GTO (which I'm pretty sure they ARENT, the opposite in fact, our next Monaro could be US built) They'd be designing on the same chassis as the current "VE" Commodore, which is a far superior car compared to the outgoing generation of Commodores.

You should read up more about Holdens VE Commodore, you might be surprised......

Well there are 900+hp gtos over here but they have to be heavily modified in order to keep from destroying themselves.

The point was that these cars werent made to handle the ls2 power and even a mildly modified gto can tear itself up rather quickly. They should have been retooled to handle the power of the motor.I happen to love the car but i dont take life a 1/4 mile at a time. I love high speed runs so i generally dont cause alot of torque damage.

As i said before I dont hold this against holden it was gm that forced the issue. Also you should need to roll the fenders the car should have already been ready and equipped with fatter tires in the back. A 20" rim wheel assy is no bigger than an 18" rim wheel assy once equipped with the proper tires . Its the tire width thats the problem.

before you Gen X'ers go off on Baby Boomers - some of us have gotten wiser with age. As much as we like the 'look of our day' I clearly posted that doing a retro GTO isn't going to be the right direction to go. I stated the car needs to be new and progressive - a new car, not a reincarnation. The design lines of the old GTO simply can't be merged into a new design. I also agree that it might be best to drop the GTO badge - people would expect a throw-back. Much of what had drawn me to buy my '67 and '71 GTO's was what I was looking for when I bought my new Goat. I wasn't looking for retro design cues - but for a car that epitomized the origins of a muscle car. Take a smallish car and dump a huge engine in it. Is was the thrill of the kick in the butt that made those cars fun - and that's what our GTO's have now - plus the added advantage of a refined interior - real room for 4 - handling that's on-par with any german import - and all at a fraction of the cost. True the body style was dated by the time they brought it overseas - but it's still a beautiful car. I like that it doesn't have that massive look that the Chrysler 300 derivitives have.
What Holden brought was a car that met the desires of both Gen X'ers and Baby Boomers. You didn't see GM come up with it stateside. I look forward to what they have slated for GM in the future.
Personally I attribute the slow GTO sales to a piss-poor advertising job. Had they marketed it effectively, the outcome would have been different. I can remember only 2 ads televised and sporadically at best - oh yeah, and that awful excuse of a movie featuring the old and new GTO. Had they pushed the advertising to include clips of the GTO in races (I love the HD feature about the GTO's return to racing) it would have drawn much more attention. Think about it - Ford had one great commercial of the Mustang where the kid and father are in the car and he does a smoky burn-out and the father says lets do it again. Think of what that ad could have done for the GTO!
If I want to re-live my days of youth, I'll buy or rebuild a 60's era muscle car. What my '05 GTO purchase reflects is an appreciation for what the muscle car was meant to be - wicked fast.

I think Pontiac did a real good job advertising the new GTO, at least they did in 2004. You had the ad where the GTO comes spinning into the drive-way and then backing into the garage. You also had all the spinning tire and smoke ads, and the one where they assemble one right in front of your eyes. My favorite was the one where it waits through a green light so that it can take on another car who pulls up to the light after it. I think that ad was every bit as effective as the father-son Mustang ad.

In 2004, Pontiac also deluged the magazines with print ads for the GTO. Lot's of articles and reviews - lots of paid for ads - I even got a full size poster of a GTO out of Hot Rod one month.

And then there is the movie. You can't say that any other car manufacturer had a full length movie (good or bad) made with the sole purpose being to promote a car.

I don't believe for a second the GTOs slow sales were a result of limited marketing. I won't go into my thoughts on what did cause it ... you've all heard it many times before.

before you Gen X'ers go off on Baby Boomers - some of us have gotten wiser with age. As much as we like the 'look of our day' I clearly posted that doing a retro GTO isn't going to be the right direction to go. I stated the car needs to be new and progressive - a new car, not a reincarnation. The design lines of the old GTO simply can't be merged into a new design. I also agree that it might be best to drop the GTO badge - people would expect a throw-back. Much of what had drawn me to buy my '67 and '71 GTO's was what I was looking for when I bought my new Goat. I wasn't looking for retro design cues - but for a car that epitomized the origins of a muscle car. Take a smallish car and dump a huge engine in it. Is was the thrill of the kick in the butt that made those cars fun - and that's what our GTO's have now - plus the added advantage of a refined interior - real room for 4 - handling that's on-par with any german import - and all at a fraction of the cost. True the body style was dated by the time they brought it overseas - but it's still a beautiful car. I like that it doesn't have that massive look that the Chrysler 300 derivitives have.
What Holden brought was a car that met the desires of both Gen X'ers and Baby Boomers. You didn't see GM come up with it stateside. I look forward to what they have slated for GM in the future.
Personally I attribute the slow GTO sales to a piss-poor advertising job. Had they marketed it effectively, the outcome would have been different. I can remember only 2 ads televised and sporadically at best - oh yeah, and that awful excuse of a movie featuring the old and new GTO. Had they pushed the advertising to include clips of the GTO in races (I love the HD feature about the GTO's return to racing) it would have drawn much more attention. Think about it - Ford had one great commercial of the Mustang where the kid and father are in the car and he does a smoky burn-out and the father says lets do it again. Think of what that ad could have done for the GTO!
If I want to re-live my days of youth, I'll buy or rebuild a 60's era muscle car. What my '05 GTO purchase reflects is an appreciation for what the muscle car was meant to be - wicked fast.

Well said,(typed,whatever) nicely done.

before you Gen X'ers go off on Baby Boomers - some of us have gotten wiser with age. As much as we like the 'look of our day' I clearly posted that doing a retro GTO isn't going to be the right direction to go. I stated the car needs to be new and progressive - a new car, not a reincarnation. The design lines of the old GTO simply can't be merged into a new design. I also agree that it might be best to drop the GTO badge - people would expect a throw-back. Much of what had drawn me to buy my '67 and '71 GTO's was what I was looking for when I bought my new Goat. I wasn't looking for retro design cues - but for a car that epitomized the origins of a muscle car. Take a smallish car and dump a huge engine in it. Is was the thrill of the kick in the butt that made those cars fun - and that's what our GTO's have now - plus the added advantage of a refined interior - real room for 4 - handling that's on-par with any german import - and all at a fraction of the cost. True the body style was dated by the time they brought it overseas - but it's still a beautiful car. I like that it doesn't have that massive look that the Chrysler 300 derivitives have.
What Holden brought was a car that met the desires of both Gen X'ers and Baby Boomers. You didn't see GM come up with it stateside. I look forward to what they have slated for GM in the future.
Personally I attribute the slow GTO sales to a piss-poor advertising job. Had they marketed it effectively, the outcome would have been different. I can remember only 2 ads televised and sporadically at best - oh yeah, and that awful excuse of a movie featuring the old and new GTO. Had they pushed the advertising to include clips of the GTO in races (I love the HD feature about the GTO's return to racing) it would have drawn much more attention. Think about it - Ford had one great commercial of the Mustang where the kid and father are in the car and he does a smoky burn-out and the father says lets do it again. Think of what that ad could have done for the GTO!
If I want to re-live my days of youth, I'll buy or rebuild a 60's era muscle car. What my '05 GTO purchase reflects is an appreciation for what the muscle car was meant to be - wicked fast.

You have a great attitude. I commend you. I wish more Boomers would show the same attitude towards the new GTO that you have taken. I'm almost to the same point that I hope it's not even called a GTO at all. I think a lot of Boomers (excluding yourself who seems to be understanding) just don't get it anymore. They've lost the true meaning of what a musclecar was about. It's not to relive your past it's to live in the PRESENT. :)

before you Gen X'ers go off on Baby Boomers - some of us have gotten wiser with age. As much as we like the 'look of our day' I clearly posted that doing a retro GTO isn't going to be the right direction to go. I stated the car needs to be new and progressive - a new car, not a reincarnation. The design lines of the old GTO simply can't be merged into a new design. I also agree that it might be best to drop the GTO badge - people would expect a throw-back. Much of what had drawn me to buy my '67 and '71 GTO's was what I was looking for when I bought my new Goat. I wasn't looking for retro design cues - but for a car that epitomized the origins of a muscle car. Take a smallish car and dump a huge engine in it. Is was the thrill of the kick in the butt that made those cars fun - and that's what our GTO's have now - plus the added advantage of a refined interior - real room for 4 - handling that's on-par with any german import - and all at a fraction of the cost. True the body style was dated by the time they brought it overseas - but it's still a beautiful car. I like that it doesn't have that massive look that the Chrysler 300 derivitives have.
What Holden brought was a car that met the desires of both Gen X'ers and Baby Boomers. You didn't see GM come up with it stateside. I look forward to what they have slated for GM in the future.
Personally I attribute the slow GTO sales to a piss-poor advertising job. Had they marketed it effectively, the outcome would have been different. I can remember only 2 ads televised and sporadically at best - oh yeah, and that awful excuse of a movie featuring the old and new GTO. Had they pushed the advertising to include clips of the GTO in races (I love the HD feature about the GTO's return to racing) it would have drawn much more attention. Think about it - Ford had one great commercial of the Mustang where the kid and father are in the car and he does a smoky burn-out and the father says lets do it again. Think of what that ad could have done for the GTO!
If I want to re-live my days of youth, I'll buy or rebuild a 60's era muscle car. What my '05 GTO purchase reflects is an appreciation for what the muscle car was meant to be - wicked fast.

Ok first off I never went off on baby boomers . Never! I only stated the fact there are differences in the generations which no one who has eyes or ears could argue.
I dont agree. The gto badge can live on eventually people would stop expecting the car to be the old gto . People used the " it does look like an old gto" as an excuse for not buying a car that was bland in styling and not of the power they expected it to be. Gm tried to remedy this in 05 with the hood scoops and the ls2 . The ls2 of course caused the already under strength rear end to have even more problems but it helped sell cars. If they make a car that appeals to the market they are trying to sell to they wont have to hear its not the old gto anymore. Lets face it that market isnt baby boomers. Boomers have at this point more disposable income and if that urge for a nice sports car was to hit them thats why they build vettes. I havent met an owner of a gto over 50 yet. not that im saying there isnt any but just the percentages arent there but theres always exceptions to the rule and im happy to have anyone enjoy the car the way I do regardless of gereration.You can try to make vehicles for multiple gereration but most likely it will fail because it will be a compromise of design and ammenities which will satisfy no generation fully .

The advertising was terrible. some movie no one saw and a few commercials very few saw all in 04. What about the next year?

There likely wont be a gto at all any time soon so its all a moot point anyways.

Once again if you read actually read what I wrote there is no dogging on the boomers at all. I dont even see how it could be taken as offensive but if it was (and i dont see it at all) that wasnt my intent all all.

I dont agree. The gto badge can live on eventually people would stop expecting the car to be the old gto.

I completely agree. I do not think that GM should do away with the GTO badge. That is what drew me to the car. If GM would have marketed the new GTO's as something like G8, or similar, I would not have paid nearly as much attention to the car. Shoot! I was waiting for new GTO's back when I owned my '72 GTO. There were threats of bringing the GTO back as a FWD vehicle. This I could not tolerate. In any event, when I heard there was a new GTO in the making, I started paying attention to what was going on.

In terms of performance, my '05 would have run circles around my '72. Don't get me wrong, I loved my '72 as much as I do my '05. Relative to this thread, we are all aware of the GTO's weaknesses. However, anyone who has ever driven a new age GTO knows its strengths too. After having owned my '05 GTO for little more than a year, I am still ecstatic relative to my purchase.

I do not know where I fall with respect to the generations. I think that I might be one of the first Gen-Xers. What I do know is what I like. I do not find the current incarnation of the GTO to be of bland styling. Instead, I consider the styling to be subtle. Not meaning to offend anyone, but hood scoops (functional or not) and 18" wheels went a long way to rectify the appearance issues of the '04 model year (I could still go for some fat rubber out back and a nice rake to provide for a more aggressive stance).

All in all, I do not care to see retro version of the GTO, but do not mind the designers taking styling cues from the original. Also, I want the GTO badge to remain as a reminder of the car's heritage. To me, when I hear "GTO" performance comes to mind.

-K

P.S. If GM can't give me a lighter GTO, I will take one that puts out 500 Hp. :D

Is the moderator accepting posts for this thread?

Is the moderator accepting posts for this thread?

What do you mean?

-K

"...

The advertising was terrible. some movie no one saw and a few commercials very few saw all in 04. What about the next year?

..."



If you can caste your mind back to when the first shipments arrived in the US, there was a series of Pontiac Dealers who were flat out "gouging" RRP prices for the GTO. There were many a potential purchaser absolutely disgusted at the "rip off merchants" that were a significant reason for such poor beginnings for the 2004 GTO

On top of that there were rail shipping problems including a car train being derailed and a significant number being written off. All those people with Orders saw their cars being condemed to the crusher!

handling that's on-par with any german import - and all at a fraction of the cost.
If you like the GTO, you'd love the VE Commodore. It's worlds apart compared to the "Third Generation" Commodore on which the GTO is based.

As for driveline components, I'm not sure if the drive shaft is 1 or 2 piece and not sure about the halfshafts either. They pretty much replaced everything for the new car, so at this stage I'm not sure.

PS: The HSV E-series has 307kW across the range, with Senator and GTS getting the exclusive "Magnetic Ride Control" which is also featured on the Corvette and Ferrari 599 GTB :D

If you can caste your mind back to when the first shipments arrived in the US, there was a series of Pontiac Dealers who were flat out "gouging" RRP prices for the GTO. There were many a potential purchaser absolutely disgusted at the "rip off merchants" that were a significant reason for such poor beginnings for the 2004 GTO

On top of that there were rail shipping problems including a car train being derailed and a significant number being written off. All those people with Orders saw their cars being condemed to the crusher!

It is for this reason that I originally believed that I would never own a GTO. I also believed that the goats would, even at MSRP+ prices, I would not be able to get to the dealership quickly enough to secure one for myself. It appears that a little patience paid off well for at least one GTO owner. :D

-K

Ok first off I never went off on baby boomers . Never! I only stated the fact there are differences in the generations which no one who has eyes or ears could argue.
I dont agree. The gto badge can live on eventually people would stop expecting the car to be the old gto . People used the " it does look like an old gto" as an excuse for not buying a car that was bland in styling and not of the power they expected it to be. Gm tried to remedy this in 05 with the hood scoops and the ls2 . The ls2 of course caused the already under strength rear end to have even more problems but it helped sell cars. If they make a car that appeals to the market they are trying to sell to they wont have to hear its not the old gto anymore. Lets face it that market isnt baby boomers. Boomers have at this point more disposable income and if that urge for a nice sports car was to hit them thats why they build vettes. I havent met an owner of a gto over 50 yet. not that im saying there isnt any but just the percentages arent there but theres always exceptions to the rule and im happy to have anyone enjoy the car the way I do regardless of gereration.You can try to make vehicles for multiple gereration but most likely it will fail because it will be a compromise of design and ammenities which will satisfy no generation fully .

The advertising was terrible. some movie no one saw and a few commercials very few saw all in 04. What about the next year?

There likely wont be a gto at all any time soon so its all a moot point anyways.

Once again if you read actually read what I wrote there is no dogging on the boomers at all. I dont even see how it could be taken as offensive but if it was (and i dont see it at all) that wasnt my intent all all.



The rear end/drivetrain was upgraded for the ls2. do some research... Much ignorance abounds in this thread.


http://www.ls1gto.com/05GTO/

If you can caste your mind back to when the first shipments arrived in the US, there was a series of Pontiac Dealers who were flat out "gouging" RRP prices for the GTO. There were many a potential purchaser absolutely disgusted at the "rip off merchants" that were a significant reason for such poor beginnings for the 2004 GTO

On top of that there were rail shipping problems including a car train being derailed and a significant number being written off. All those people with Orders saw their cars being condemed to the crusher!

This is nothing new and not just a gto thing . the gt 500 is going for 10-15k over sticker. when the new stang came out they were get over sticker for it. It supply and demand . Thats just the way it is this didnt cause bad sales because the price came down fast once people werent willing to pay way over the sticker price. The rail shipment was blown way out of proportion it wasnt like 100s gtos were destroyed. If people really wanted the car they would have been back when the prices fell but they didnt. Just like everyone with the $1500 ps3s people are paying it but many (intelligent plp) will just wait a few months. They dont get all pissed off and decide not to buy one at all they wait.

The rear end/drivetrain was upgraded for the ls2. do some research... Much ignorance abounds in this thread.


http://www.ls1gto.com/05GTO/

I know the Auto trans was upgraded but what they did with the rear really didnt help at all .material changes! come on thats hardly an upgrade. that helps the pinion durability not the ability to get the power to the ground or to keep the tires there . How about a bigger ring gear and some retooling of the irs. So is it an upgrade? I dont think so. If this was an upgrade I wouldnt go around bragging about it. This so called "upgrade" didnt fix the problem the car had at all and the additional power of the ls2 makes wheel hop even worse.Its like giving a guy with a broken leg new shoes and expecting the problem to go away.
So please do me a favor and keep your ignorance comments to yourself in the future. If you think your the sole authority on gtos ive got news for you your not.What you deem as an upgrade because some article told you so doesnt make it an true upgrade.

I know the Auto trans was upgraded but what they did with the rear really didnt help at all .material changes! come on thats hardly an upgrade. that helps the pinion durability not the ability to get the power to the ground or to keep the tires there . How about a bigger ring gear and some retooling of the irs. So is it an upgrade? I dont think so. If this was an upgrade I wouldnt go around bragging about it. This so called "upgrade" didnt fix the problem the car had at all and the additional power of the ls2 makes wheel hop even worse.Its like giving a guy with a broken leg new shoes and expecting the problem to go away.
So please do me a favor and keep your ignorance comments to yourself in the future. If you think your the sole authority on gtos ive got news for you your not.What you deem as an upgrade because some article told you so doesnt make it an true upgrade.


The CV joints (from the HSV AWD VZ) and the pinion gear were upgraded. Your comments were illustrating that no upgrades were done to improve the STRENGTH in the rear end when they moved to the LS2. That's just not the case. Just trying to keep the facts straight here, and last time I checked I have a right to my own opinion.

The CV joints (from the HSV AWD VZ) and the pinion gear were upgraded. Your comments were illustrating that no upgrades were done to improve the STRENGTH in the rear end when they moved to the LS2. That's just not the case. Just trying to keep the facts straight here, and last time I checked I have a right to my own opinion.


my point was that the rear end (i am including the rear suspension as part of this rear end because its an irs system )was not suited for the car and the changes made did not do anything to remedy this. There basically was no change in the rear drive train worth mentioning. The pinion and cv joints did nothing to strengthen the rear . Next time you get wheel hop off the line so bad that you worry about breaking an axel you can thank gm for doing such a great job at upgrading that pinion for you that really did the trick ;) . Also just to keep the facts straight I never said nothing was done to the rear . I said was its understrength (and it was and still is). Its not a good setup for this cars power . I dont care if you make the ring and pinion and cv joints out of kyptonite because none of these will help the performance.

Ok first off I never went off on baby boomers . Never! I only stated the fact there are differences in the generations which no one who has eyes or ears could argue.


OK - maybe I was reading too much into your original comments - you get more sensitive as you get older! Yeah right!

What I object to is the "classification" of people. Not everyone fits in a box. I'm 45 - gonna be a grandpa in about 7 months (my 22 year old daughter), and my youngest kids are twin 2 1/2 year-old girls. I listen to everything from Linkin Park to NIN - and rebel against anything that puts me in that old guy column. Like I tell my 19 year old son (who lost his priveleges to drive the GTO after commenting how he couldn't believe he hit 100 mph before the bottom of the On Ramp) that as you get older, you still feel like your 18 - but just with more bills.

I simply ask that you be careful not to classify. Not everyone over 30 is completely out of touch.

The great thing about cars is that folks of any age can appreciate them - look at Paul Newman!

I love reading and chatting in this forum about one of my passions - the GTO.

OK - maybe I was reading too much into your original comments - you get more sensitive as you get older! Yeah right!

What I object to is the "classification" of people. Not everyone fits in a box. I'm 45 - gonna be a grandpa in about 7 months (my 22 year old daughter), and my youngest kids are twin 2 1/2 year-old girls. I listen to everything from Linkin Park to NIN - and rebel against anything that puts me in that old guy column. Like I tell my 19 year old son (who lost his priveleges to drive the GTO after commenting how he couldn't believe he hit 100 mph before the bottom of the On Ramp) that as you get older, you still feel like your 18 - but just with more bills.

I simply ask that you be careful not to classify. Not everyone over 30 is completely out of touch.

The great thing about cars is that folks of any age can appreciate them - look at Paul Newman!

I love reading and chatting in this forum about one of my passions - the GTO.

I was just making a point however as u say all people dont fit the generational mold.I hope everyone over 30 isnt out of touch because im over 30. Besides I wouldnt say boomers are out of touch they just have different needs and wants. Classifing plp is how all products are developed and marketed today . The fact is a large portion of the plp fit these molds . As a matter of fact i saw a commercial for a simplified cell phone called the jitterbug. guess who this product is aimed at . even the name tells you its for retirees who dont want all the fancy features just a phone but theyll charge them like they bought a motorolla razor. Im not sure that at 45 youd even be considered a boomer im thinking ur in the echo boomer era but im not sure . Im thinking the boomers were born in the late forties fifties after the war.

I tell you what, I'd put the 04-06 GTO up against anything made in the US, not counting the 'Vette, which gets special treatment by GM. Build quality, structural strength, interior design and comfort, performance/dollar quotient hand's-down are owned by the Goat. Styling is very subjective, but too many are hanging on to the "GTO heritage" mind set on that one. As a former F-body owner, if the new Camaro is anything like the out-going cars, that would be too bad, but I would be proud to own another Australian-built GTO/Camaro. Like was stated before, the Monaro was never supposed to be built beyond 06, that was not a decision made as a result of poor sales. And, of course, any new designs need to be better than out-going models, so I would EXPECT stronger running gear, more durable drive-trains. And modern cars are getting heavier due to safety equipment, emphasis on structural integrity and such. Just my .02 cents.