Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Leave it alone?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by Injuneer
    Having been the original owner of a 1966 GTO 389 Tri-Power (unfortunatley long gone), I'd have no problem at all jumping in a contemporary GTO and enjoy owning it. The whole argument is silly. What does the 1974 pictured above have to do with being a GTO? Nothing. Yet the modern GTO fulfills the performance image of the original much better. I'll take a mid-size car with a honking engine any day..... doesn't matter what year they decided to build it, or what label they put on it.

    Um......yeah. What Fred said.

    Comment


    • #17
      I'll try and be as unbiased as possible( ).

      The "new" GTO wasn't designed to be the "new" GTO like you see with the new mustang, charger, etc. GM loved the Monaro and simply rebadged it as a GTO. It doesn't reflect the look, but goddamn does it reflect the idea. A 400 HP rwd sports car. Simple as that.

      By far the best bang for your buck.
      28k gets you a beautiful interior with great color options and a decent sound system.
      ~25 mpg (It DOES matter!).
      The exterior isn't for every sports car enthusiast but I freaking love it! If you haven't seen one in real life don't even comment. Beautiful car.
      400 horses.
      I'm quicker/faster then any 30k vehicle (stock) on the road today. Bye Bye rustang.

      2005 GTO, Quicksilver, 6-Speed, DynaTech LT's and thats it. 366.6 hp/366.7 tq last time I checked.
      Sold-1995 Dark GreenTrans Am, Auto 63K. BBK Headers/off-road y-pipe/Hooker Exhaust/LPI CAI/Hypertech...need some money!!!

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by Steel2686
        The Charger? Well... Someone may think of today's machine as well as the 60's beast... But only because Dodge put a Hemi in the new version. Not everyone loves the new Charger, but not everyone loved the old one either.
        If everyone tried driving the new Charger, no one would like it lol
        Red 95 Trans Am: M6, Moroso CAI, Magnaflow, Spohn sway bars, back to life as of 2/15/10!!!
        SOLD- Kinda miss it
        94 Del Sol VTEC: 27 city/ 33 highway, knee deep in slowness
        SOLD- Good riddance!
        2006 Ford Fusion: 2.3, 5 speed, could run 15lbs of boost with a 150 shot and it'd still be slow

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Nightrage
          If everyone tried driving the new Charger, no one would like it lol
          It's actually not a terrible car... at least for my tastes. I'm not crazy about the looks. However, I wasn't crazy about the 60's Charger either. I'll take a 'Cuda or Challenger over the Charger any day.

          The new GTO? I'd be more than happy to own one. In fact, I was kind of hoping GM would badge the upcoming G8 as a LeMans. I'm going to take a long, serious look at one when they arrive. From everything I've read about them, it sounds like a rear wheel drive V8 version of my TL. I'm more than excited about that.
          SOLD: 2002 Trans Am WS.6 - Black on Black - 6 Speed
          SLP Loudmouth Exhaust
          17K Miles

          2005 Acura TL - Silver on Black
          Navigation - Surround Audio - Bluetooth

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Nightrage
            If everyone tried driving the new Charger, no one would like it lol

            The Goldens: Reno and Rocky

            2008 C6, M6, LS3, Corsa Extreme C/B, (it flys) & 2008 Yukon loaded (Titanic), 03 Ford Focus..everydaydriver.

            Wolfdog Rescue Resources, Inc.:http://www.wrr-inc.org
            Home Page: http://www.renokeo.com
            sold: 97 Firehawk, 97 Comp T/A, 2005 GTO, 2008 Solstice GXP turbo.

            Comment


            • #21
              Yeah, the name is un-important, as long as the car is good. You can fancy up Vega or a Pinto, but calling it an IROC- GTX- SS whatever won't make it any faster-

              It's nice to keep the name plates alive, if the car is worthy of it- I had a '67 Impala, a '77 Caprice and a '95 Caprice- the '95 had the same LT1 as the Impala SS- a nice performance car- my only gripe is that the SS should have had a big block- But yeah, the old names are kind 0f nostalgic
              2001 Z28 A4 - 160 deg t-stat, 3.42 gears, WS6 sway bars, rear springs and shocks, UMI SFC's, Torque Arm and STB, leather Firebird seats, Borla, SLP Y-pipe and lid, ZO6 cam and springs - 332 RWHP and 346 RWTQ, not bad for 'almost stock' - work in progress
              "Black, the fastest color"

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Wild Willy
                Yeah, the name is un-important, as long as the car is good. You can fancy up Vega or a Pinto, but calling it an IROC- GTX- SS whatever won't make it any faster-

                It's nice to keep the name plates alive, if the car is worthy of it- I had a '67 Impala, a '77 Caprice and a '95 Caprice- the '95 had the same LT1 as the Impala SS- a nice performance car- my only gripe is that the SS should have had a big block- But yeah, the old names are kind 0f nostalgic
                too bad the impala came back as a v6 fwd family car. so did the malibu. the new impala ss is a step in the right direction though.
                87 GTA: it's winter time, all tore apart

                ConElite: "Im 22, have had my TA since I was 21."

                "I wont lie, I have a heavy foot, but at the same time I know when its the safest to ring out a gear or 2."

                Comment

                Working...
                X