User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 7/27/2005 8:11:38 AM EDT
[#1]
They look kinda nice excoet for being small, but thats my opinion,
Also expect the typical bad things to happen to it withing 3 months of getting it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/29/2005 8:40:05 PM EDT
[#2]
It was a great idea for a replacement for the F-body (Camaro/Firebird) as far as power, but it's just way to ugly if you ask me.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/30/2005 3:39:19 AM EDT
[#3]
Get a Charger.
They are a lot prettier. They are also a VERY fun to drive car. The suspension and steering is nearly perfect. The weight of the car makes it very smooth riding, as well. It's like the best of both worlds. The current 5.7 liter engine is being upgraded to a 6.1 liter next year. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/30/2005 7:36:39 PM EDT
[#4]
Gas
Tires Oil  If you're thinking of a GTO, get the real thing, like a '65-'70. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/30/2005 7:47:25 PM EDT
[#5]
the new ones are great cars...400hp/tq and a sex-speed for about 30K with the discount...cant go wrong!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/30/2005 7:56:05 PM EDT
[#6]
I plan to get one in the next year or 2. At least a 2005, black, red seats, 6 spd.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/30/2005 8:40:21 PM EDT
[#7]
Ive seen a red and white one driving around town here in Orlando, i have mixed feelings on them. They look good except for the typical dodge hood, and the grill.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/1/2005 3:18:34 PM EDT
[#8]
The new GTO is a sweet car. A heavy, comfortable touring coupe capable of 12 second passes. The new Charger is an ugly POS and cant even keep up w/ the GT Mustang. No comparison. Oh and the Charger is more expensive than the Goat as well.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/1/2005 4:00:06 PM EDT
[#9]
That's not a good comparison though. The Charger and Mustang are totally different cars. The Charger wasn't built to be a serious performance car. It was built to be a nice family sedan, with enough muscle under the hood for dad to be able to have some fun. If you want to compare cars, go for it with the GTO and the Stang, but the Charger just doesn't fit in with them. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/1/2005 7:23:45 PM EDT
[#10]
It was just an example of the $35,000 + Charger not having the balls it's made out to have. Hell it's slower than the damned SRT-4. To bring back a car and call it a Charger it should be able to back it's namesake up a bit better than a low 14 second 1/4 mile. True the SRT-8 version will be quicker but hell for the money it will cost you could probably buy a CTS-V. The new Hemi is nothing but marketing hype. It cant touch the LS1 more or less the LS2 engine.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/1/2005 8:10:31 PM EDT
[#11]
Post some number of STOCK 60's-70's Chargers done by credible testers, with stock tires. I bet the numbers you get are not as low as you would expect. The "hold my beer, watch this" numbers may be lower. I also expect that the traction control system is a signifigant hindrance for the standing start times on the Charger, and way less of a problem for a turbo-fwd car. The 6.1 Hemi's are for the SRT versions, the 5.7 is supposed to stay as the base "hemi". |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/1/2005 8:16:42 PM EDT
[#12]
Most old muscle cars posted slow times back in the 60's and 70's due to crap tires. Take those same stock cars today and put a good set of modern rear tires on them and those times would drop considerably. A 68' 440 charger back in 68' would run high 14's. Slower than the new Charger. Yet put a set of wider modern tires on it and that time would be at least in the low 13's if not better. Are you saying it is easier to lauch a turbo FWD car than a RWD Charger? I dont think so. I am not familiar with the Dodges traction control system but I would imagine like most other modern American made muscle cars it has an off switch.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/1/2005 8:53:13 PM EDT
[#13]
Well in stock vs stock the new cars will perform better. The new cars are also easier to drive for most people. RWD Charger, 50% of weight on rear tires appx. When you whack open the throttle there is more than enough power to cause wheelspin. A little won't hur acceleration. BUT, most "traction control" systems will apply the brakes if the POSSIBILITY of wheel spin is predicted, and if that isn't enough, begin dropping out fuel to cylinders. On an SRT-4, something like 65-70% (Guess) of the vehicle's weight is on the front tires. More weight on the tires=more traction. The turbo won't be putting out power until it is spooled up. So the tires have to have enough traction to hook-up at launch, like the car has a normally aspirated engine. Then, after the car is moving and the turbo spools up, it will add power. That power, since the car is hooked up and already moving is less likely to break those tire loose than if it was applied to the tires at 0 mph. "Off" switches are not always installed. On some cars they move wahtever system from "full" to "partial", not truly "off". |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2005 7:49:42 AM EDT
[#14]
Have you ever driven a powerful front drive vehicle? Doesn't sound like it. The SRT-4 has tons of wheelspin and torquesteer problems. Not to mention a good driver will lauch in boost. A torquey rear drive V8 is worlds easier to launch. If you're going to test the old vs. new why not make it a level playing field? Why must the old Charger run on crappy bias ply tires? We both know on equal ground the old Charger would more than humiliate the new one.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2005 8:19:00 AM EDT
[#15]
I owned a Taurus SHO for several years. If we leveled the playing field, the old Charger would have a 318 or 360, since very few old Chargers had Hemi's, or even 383's. What is possible to buy, and what is bough are 2 different things. I'm sure more hemi Chargers are being built and sold now............... Until I launch a new CHarger, I guess I won't know. I suspect a lot of old cars were actually timed by "seat of the pants"............... newer cars often "feel" slower, but are in fact quicker, they are just more refined. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2005 11:36:06 AM EDT
[#16]
Sorry but I dont consider a Taurus SHO a powerful front drive vehicle. My little Nissan SER rapes SHO's like they are standing still and it's at best a mid 14 second car. I'm talking 250-300whp.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/3/2005 6:59:29 AM EDT
[#17]
Umm, the older SHO's had the 200 and some horse 24v 3.0 V6, and the later models had the 4.6 V8 I believe. I know they had some kind of V8 in them. Care to explain to me how that isn't a powerful fwd vehicle? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/3/2005 12:01:16 PM EDT
[#19]
A SHO weighs a hell of a lot more than an SRT-4. When I said powerful front wheel drive vehicle I should have been specific and said 4 cylinder turbo. I'm talking a 2500-2800lb vehicle with the power I stated earlier. Even the V8 SHO's were mid 15 second cars at best.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/4/2005 4:47:55 AM EDT
[#20]
Yes, that's an old GTO, this is a new GTO:  Times and cars change, you guys need to accept that, and stop whining that new cars are coming out with the old name. At least the new GTO has some serious power under the hood, and, in my opinion at least, lives up to it's heritage pretty well, even if it doesn't look a whole lot like the old one. |
|||
|
|
|
Posted: 8/4/2005 8:49:21 AM EDT
[#21]
Nobody's whining, but labeling a Holden Monaro 'GTO' is more marketing than the modern embodiment of the classic and its heritage. You opinion is just that. Why is it that because you have an apparently different opinion, anyone who doesn't agree is whining? good grief. p.s. that ugly turd looks like the bastard child of a grand prix and a monte carlo  |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/4/2005 10:05:13 AM EDT
[#22]
I have to disagree about the whining part, not necessarily you, but in general. There's been lots of it about both the Charger and the GTO. You're right though, it is a good a bit of marketing involved, but it's still a sweet car, hot looking in my opinion. If it makes any difference, I think 06 will be the last year of ths model, then they will be coming out with a new redesigned model of it for 08. Supposedly this one will look more like the old school goats. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 8/4/2005 10:42:55 AM EDT
[#23]
I was quite dissapointed w/ the 04 GTO. VERY plain looking and 350hp. Nothing special although still a pretty damn good car that mods real easy. W/ the 05 I think GM got it right. They made it more aggressive looking w/ the ram air hood and dual exhaust and they gave it some real balls. You do have to remember the original formula of the GTO. In 64' all GM did was take a plain old Le Mans and put a big engine in it. It wasn't any super exotic looking car. GM basically did the same thing with the new GTO although now it can stop and turn as well and it's very comfortable and pretty damned refined for a Pontiac.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/4/2005 10:55:51 AM EDT
[#24]
This is exactly what I meant by saying it kept to the heritage of the original. Well said 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/4/2005 12:51:31 PM EDT
[#25]
If I was going to buy a new / old Mopar..I'd wait for this to go into production.
 Concept drawing of a 2008 Challenger. Now that is a bad ass looking car from the grill back.I think the front is ugly. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/4/2005 1:40:27 PM EDT
[#26]
Holden (the Australian branch of GM that makes the bodies for the GTO) has already announced that they will stop selling the Aust version (the Monaro) here in Aust at the end of this year, but they will keep building it for export to the US and UK (where it's sold as the Vauxhall Monaro). There's been no announcement that they will have a replacement model available in Aust in 06, but it's likely that there will be an equivilent model in the pipeline to fill the 2 door large wheelbase coupe niche in countries where GM doesn't have something similar to the 'vette. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/4/2005 5:24:41 PM EDT
[#27]
I think that's a concept rendering, the real thing probably won't look much like that. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/4/2005 5:33:49 PM EDT
[#28]
If you want to save some money just get the V6 version grand prix
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/4/2005 5:46:58 PM EDT
[#29]
True, The Charger is proof of that! Dodge stepped on their dick again! A Charger with 2 doors too many! No manual transmission with a Hurst Pistol Grip! That concept looks like a 71 Cuda! Now if they made that like a 70 Challenger (2 door)with the Hemi option & manual transmission, Id give my left nutt for one! |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 8/4/2005 5:48:09 PM EDT
[#30]
I dunno. Chrysler has been doing great at keeping production cars very close to the concept vehicle. IE the Prowler, CrossFire. A guy can dream can't he? 
|
||
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2005 3:57:05 PM EDT
[#31]
 Looks like a 'Cuda! Sweet.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2005 7:02:04 PM EDT
[#32]
I work for a Pontiac dealership, and I'd get an '05 GTO in a heartbeat if I had the cash.
Cons: Rear visibility tiny trunk no factory sunroof / onstar / XM the key is flippin huge, and has the keyless entry remote built in. Pros: Everything else
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2005 10:21:50 PM EDT
[#33]
I drive a stratus coupe, and of the con's listed, mine already has low rear visibility, no factory sunroof, onstar, and xm. Key is ok, and trunk is huge. For 400 hp and 6 spd rwd car, I think I can make a sacrfice and deal with the big key and small trunk. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/6/2005 1:45:02 AM EDT
[#34]
People who need to say that need to realize, That the GTO of the 60's was thier era GTO, They one thats rolling off the Assembly line know is the GTO of my era. And I would bet today GTO would blow away the GTO of the 60's.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/6/2005 8:30:43 AM EDT
[#35]
That's for sure, same goes for the Charger. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/6/2005 9:29:15 AM EDT
[#36]
You do realize..if not the for the GTO of the 60's..you wouldn't have the GTO of today. As for todays GTO blowing away the original..in off the assembly line form, it probably would. Now if you applied todays suspension technology, fuel management,tires, brakes and cooling ability to the original...I wouldn't bet the farm on the new one winning. 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/6/2005 5:46:11 PM EDT
[#37]
Forget all of those things. Just tires and the the two GTO's would be pretty evenly matched. Now the new Charger vs. a 68' Hemi Charger or even a 440 on todays tires the new Charger would get ripped a new asshole so wide that it would'nt even be funny. The new goat is capable of 12 second 1/4 miles. Very impressive for a 3900 lb sport coupe. The New Charger is in the low 14's. Even on todays tires not much faster than the old Charger on crappy, skinny bias ply tires. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 8/6/2005 8:15:15 PM EDT
[#38]
You assessment of FWD turbo traction was hilarious. Thanks. As for the GTO, it is way too understated for me. If I spend that kind of money on a sports car I want a little more flair than the GP styling that it inherited, and it does not go fast enough for me to overlook it. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 8/6/2005 8:21:23 PM EDT
[#39]
FWD is the suck because the weight transfers to the back tires at launch anyway, and they torque steer if they have decent power.
Ever see a FWD drag car? There are a few of them, but they run slower than a similar vehicle set up for RWD. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/8/2005 7:55:12 AM EDT
[#40]
Exactly. FWD was invented to decrease productions costs, improve fuel economy, and offer safer handling for the average Joe (meaning understeer). Now, you can make a FWD car perform pretty well, in some cases VERY well, but that's like modifying a Ferarri to get better fuel economy. Purpose-built race cars are always either RWD or AWD.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/9/2005 1:23:23 AM EDT
[#41]
I have a '66 GTO that my parents bought new and was the family car until it was given to me on my 16th Birthday when they threw me the keys. I've entertained the idea of a 2006 GTO as a novelty 40th Anniversary model to mine but the price on new vehicles makes it just that...a novelty idea. I prefer the older cars as I can't imagine someone driving down the Interstate giving me a thumbs up in a new car that either looks like everything else being made or there are so many of them being made that they've become a "belly button" car...everyone has one.
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
