So GM finally realized the new "GTO" sucks...

[Rob WS6]

DETROIT -- General Motors has told Pontiac dealers that it will discontinue the GTO coupe at the end of this model year. GM will make the last deliveries of the vehicle to dealers by the end of September, sources close to Pontiac say.

GM will produce 10,000 to 12,000 more GTOs before dropping the nameplate, one source close to the situation says. Last year, Pontiac sold 11,590 GTOs compared to 2004 when it sold 13,569. That's a 14.6 percent drop.

When Pontiac launched the GTO in 2003, it projected 18,000 annual sales. The vehicle was criticized for bland styling, and some fans of the original GTO complained that it lacked nostalgic styling cues.

A Pontiac spokesman confirms the GTO will be discontinued after the 2006 model year.

“There are some changes in the federal regulatory standards. One is an airbag deployment standard that would require some very expensive re-engineering of the car,” says Jim Hopson, Pontiac spokesman. “Since the architecture of this car is being phased out around the world it’s not economically feasible to continue this car.”

Pontiac will continue to build the GTO through the end of May, Hopson says. The last “boatload will hit the ground in June”, he adds.

The GTO first came to dealerships in December 2003 as a 2004 model, Hopson says.

The GTO is built on a rear-wheel drive architecture from GM's Holden division in Australia. The present model is going out of production as GM constructs the new Zeta RWD architecture, says the source.

There is no replacement coupe planned at this time and because of the strong Australian and weak U.S. dollar, the GTO had to be priced thousands over where GM originally wanted it -- in the mid-twenties, the source says. "It never did as much volume as we had hoped," the source says.

Pontiac is considering a replacement in the lineup for a RWD performance vehicle, but does not have anything to announce yet, Hopson says.

The GTO suggested retail price starts at $31,990, including shipping. One GM source says, "the 2005 and 2006 were pretty well sold out, and sales were especially strong in areas of GM weakness, like Southern California. It's a shame it has to go -- for now."


Good to see GM finally realizing this. Now they need to just stop dicking around and bring back the Firebird.

[enRo]

:stupid:

[NJSPEEDER]

lol
let's see. the US was the last market in the world the platform was being used it, it doesn't meet upcoming safety standards, but some desk jockey critic knows that it is being dropped because of questionable styling. lol
you will also note the end of the article says "for now". a similar vehicle will reappear, and it WON'T be a firebird.

[Rob WS6]

Oh I know there wont be a Firebird... case that would make sense. :)

[NJSPEEDER]

don't confuse economic sense with your wants.
building 2 cars on the same platform to compete for the same market segment is foolish. that is how oldsmobile and plymouth both vanished, a lack of original products. don't think for a second that GM would risk the same mistake with the excitement division just for the sake of a name plate.

[WayFast84]

but it wont be the 5th gen fbody if it comes out, wouldnt it be 2nd gen zeta?

But dont get me wrong Ill take a black 5thgen trans am, with a ls7!!!!

[Firebird67dude]

HA. If its foolish to have two cars off the same platform them y did they do it from 1967 all the way to 2002. I thinks it was cool to have the two cars together. Having a lil GM rivalry goin on.

[Savage_Messiah]

They just accept anyone into college nowadays, don't they :roll:

Same platform AND SMALL MARKET SEGMENT.

Hm, if it's so foolish why did they do it for so long while they sold less and less cars, then give two of them (for the sake of this argument) the axe??? I don't know, selling less cars because your cars are competing with themselves is a good thing right??? Especially in the sports car market, I mean more people buy sports cars than SUVs and midsize sedans right?!?! And the firebird would piss all over the Camaro just like it has in the past, since it was selling less units it totally pissed all over the Camaro right?

[Firebird67dude]

I'm not talking about sales. I see ur point. Either way i still think chevy should just go all out with the vette, even more than they are, and give Pontiac the f-body.

[Savage_Messiah]

I'm not talking about sales. I see ur point. Either way i still think chevy should just go all out with the vette, even more than they are, and give Pontiac the f-body.

So do you enjoy bending over for David Hasselhoff?

[Firebird67dude]

Ok. so david hasselhoff has suttin to do with this? Explain how? Plz?! Hey kasey u kno a kid named John D'Eletto? he goes tyo willy P was going out with a girl named Laura.

[Savage_Messiah]

Denial and trying to word your way around the question, huh... we all know you wish you were a certain 3rd gen from a certain TV series...

and no i don't think so

[Rob WS6]

Of course sales were down, what was the last time you saw an f-body commercial more than once a year? Pretty hard to sell something when you dont advertise it.

And I think two cars on the same platform IS a good idea. Both cars appeal to different people. They have different options and look totally different. If anyone says the Firebird wasnt succesful, they are full of ****. The only reason for the demise of the f-body was GM's lack of advertising and buyers incentives. Period. Dont pull out the "noone wants sports cars" because look at the Mustang. Its not about competing with each other, its about choice... the buyers are out there, youve just gotta go get em.

Heres a scenario:
Someone wants a sports car. They dont like the Camaro, they think the Mustang is ok, but they love the Firebird. Well the Firebird no longer exists, so what do they buy? The Mustang, and GM loses a sale.

I mean christ, its not like they actually had a hard time selling the cars as it was, imagine if they actually tried.

[NJSPEEDER]

I'm not talking about sales. I see ur point. Either way i still think chevy should just go all out with the vette, even more than they are, and give Pontiac the f-body.

it comes down to the name game really.
Corvette is a segment unto itself anymore. as the best bang for the buck line of sports car in the world. that is a large gap from the twenty-something value performance group that the name Camaro appeals to both the mind and wallet of.
while the Firebird was always the styling leader, the Camaro was the side that maintained the competitive and performance image more strictly and gained a broader recognition base as a result.
pontiac also has the advantage of the best known muscle car name in history on it's side to consider, the GTO. with a chevy Camaro for someone to buy as a younger and not as well financed performance car, then a pontiac GTO for those who still want the performance but need a bit more luxary and can afford it, and the CTS-V and Corvette to top it off for those who can afford a pricey weekend fun-mobile and want every drop of performance that can come with it.
it is a food chain of performance that, unfortunately, doesn't leave room for two cars to compete with in the same company for the same segment.

[NJSPEEDER]

Heres a scenario:
Someone wants a sports car. They dont like the Camaro, they think the Mustang is ok, but they love the Firebird. Well the Firebird no longer exists, so what do they buy? The Mustang, and GM loses a sale.


if you can find some way to show that enough units could possibly be sold to justify all of the product development, tooling, assembly line development, and marketing of two cars in the same segment please let us know.
the system does not work based on getting every possible sale. it is based on moving the most units with at the lowest possible costs and maximum margain.
if you think jsut offering a firebird along with the camaro woudl do anything to hurt the mustang you are mistaken. even at the peak of f-body popularity the mustang moved nearly as many units as the camaro and firebird combined. subtract out the extra expense of all the double stamping and assembly facilities and you can see why the mustang is much more profitable for ford than the f-body ever was for GM.
it isn't a lack of love for the firebird that prevents it's return. it is freshman level economics.

[BigAls87Z28]

It comes down to this. The Firebird and Camaro split the budget for the Fbody, both had to share advertising money, etc etc. Having 2 cars off the same chassis in teh same market, especialy in one that is very small.

Actualy, you want to know what the #1 car Mustang owners also looked at durring the purchase of there Mustang? It was the Pontiac Grand Am coupe.

And more facts, the 2004 GTO sold more units the Trans Am's did in 2002, and sold more units then Mustang Cobra did in 2004.

[LS1Hawk]

First off, the GTO doesn't suck. The car takes the cake in performance over just about any f-body ever built...

GM didn't market the late 4th gens because they knew the f-body wasn't going to be around much longer. By 1997, GM knew the cars were living on borrowed time.

The best thing to have would be both cars back and selling well. But the more I look at it, it's not going to work. The Camaro really was the Firebird's worst enemy. Everyone says about the 4th gens that the Firebird/Trans Am was better looking and more stylish than the Camaro. So why didn't people buy more Firebirds? Because the Camaro was more affordable. I've met some Camaro owners and they said they wanted a firebird or T/A originally, but the Camaro was cheaper.

[coldkilla]

njspeeder hit the nail right on the head.

[Frosty]

The car takes the cake in performance over just about any f-body ever built...




Are you kidding me? I mean, seriously.

[NJSPEEDER]

First off, the GTO doesn't suck. The car takes the cake in performance over just about any f-body ever built...

$31k, 400hp, smooth lines, and better handling than any factory f-body ever built.

FTW!!!11

and before we get into the whole "it looks like a grand prix" thing, take a look at some old pictures. you will note that in 1964 the grand prix, GTO, tempest, le mans, and even teh bonneville had strikingly similar lines.

[enRo]

Id take a black on black LS2 GTO anyday of the week over a 4th gen camaro.

[LS1Hawk]

Are you kidding me? I mean, seriously.

Well, if you look at the last F-bodies and the current GTO, the numbers swing higher in GTO's favor. GTO does 0-60 in what, 4.7 seconds I believe. The 4th gens were somewhere in the low 5s. The solid rear vs. IRS may change some things in the quater mile, but overall I think you'd have to say GTO. And I'm just talking stock production cars here. I know there's the Yenko's, and all the other rare supercars of past years, but stock for stock...is there any you can think of? Maybe the SDs?

[BigAls87Z28]

GTO is a different type of sports coupe. It deffinatly rides a lot nicer, yet still gives you the performance and handling that you expect out of a 400hp car. Its engine is plenty powerful, its interior outclasses ANYTHING from GM, forget Fbody. Pound for pound, the GTO is a much better car then the Trans Am was.

I remember getting into a huge interweb fight with this guy on GMI. He bitched and moaned that the GTO was trash, it was a dog, it was total crap. I told him time and time again to test drive it and your mind will change. Over and over he would say the same ****, and I would just tell him to drive it. This went on for about a year, untill one day he made a thread about the 04 GTO he just bought. He test drove it, loved it, great power, great everything, and bought one for about 28k after everything said and done. I deffinatly think that I am gunna get a 04 or 05 GTO when the lease on the Maxx is done.

[Frosty]

It's definately more comfortable than the Fbody, that's what I like about the GTO. However a '04 GTO is NOT faster than a LS1 4thgen, sorry. I've also been in a LS2 GTO and while it's quick it's still a low 13 second car, just like the Fbody.

I'd buy a LS2 GTO for the comfort and performance but it still isn't leaps and bounds over a LS1 4th in performance...I really beg to differ.

[LS1Hawk]

I'm still waiting to drive a GTO, but my neighbor has an '05 and I've had the luxury of riding in it a few times. I can say between driving my Firehawk and being in the GTO, you feel a big difference in the goat. You feel the 400 horses through out the whole car. It constantly plants you in your seat. The car feels completely solid, not rickety like the 4th gens tend to. The car is drunk on torque, corners on a dime, and has great stopping performance. We were at a stop, and my neighbor showed me how the car "sits." I don't know how it does it, but just before the car comes off the line, it lowers its rear a few inches so the rear wheels get a better grip before it launches.

I just don't see GTO being completely dead. When Bob Lutz came to GM, his first order of business was GTO. He even went out to Australia himself and drove the Monaro to make sure it was a worthy car to carry the GTO badge. I'd really like to see them wait a year or two, get it up to standards and redesign it a little bit and give it a big unveiling in Detroit like they did with Camaro.

[camaroracer1992]

only took them 3 freaking years, i never liked that car since it came out, if they wouldve made it like the concept pics of the orange one back in early 2000 when i saw it, they wouldve been way ahead of ford with teh retro mustang, but give it to GM to be a follower and not a leader.......... someday

[BigAls87Z28]

Yeah, they could have spent millions to revamp a plant that only made about 30k Monaros for world wide consumption, and we told them to increase it 33% for the last 3 years, and we wanted this car to come to the US asap, and oh by the way, could you just tack on this sheetmetal real quick, so we can make a few enthusiats happy?? Thanks a bunch.

It would have taken an extra 3 years just to approve new shetmetal. By then, we would have had NO performance car.

[Rob WS6]

Exactly, why would GM want to make a car look nice to impress a few "enthusiasts" right? Cut me a break with the holier-than-thou GM **** already, its getting old.

[BigAls87Z28]

So, they should have forced Holden to retrofit there plant for a chassis that they werent gunna make in 3 years, just to please 60 year old die hards like you? Give ME a break.
Not everyone wants a retro mobile. That GTO concept looked as bloated as a 4th gen, if not more. Obviously more people found the GTO attractive then the Trans Am, since the last 2 years, the GTO continiously outsold the Trans Am in its last year.
400hp and 33k, 12 sec 1/4 mile, modern independant front and rear suspension, a upper class interior, automatic and manual transmission, seating for 4 ADULTS, and you are gunna bitch because it doesnt look like a 64?
Maybe some of you have a little ricer inside, just dying to get out? Maybe if they put on more scoops, made them bigger, and put them all around the body, and then threw on a big ol'wing, and put a decal on the side called "Judge", would that make it mad phat, dawg?

[Frosty]

Obviously more people found the GTO attractive then the Trans Am, since the last 2 years, the GTO continiously outsold the Trans Am in its last year.



It seats more than 2 people that's why lol. Seriously though, I consider the Fbody's a 2 seater vehicle. Unless you're really flexible or a circus midget(or both lol) you're not fitting in the back seat of those damn things.

[NJSPEEDER]

Exactly, why would GM want to make a car look nice to impress a few "enthusiasts" right? Cut me a break with the holier-than-thou GM **** already, its getting old.


the car that was sold actually market tested and was reviewe better than the concept car. it was a mass appeal car with solid performance, comfort, and value.
if GM ever had any thoughts of making it similar to the old GTO it would have been available stripped down and extremely plain jane othr than some badging. that is what the original muscle car was, a lightweight with excess power. the new GTO was intended to sell to the spirit of the original muscle cars, not be a throw back to one

[Savage_Messiah]

Maybe some of you have a little ricer inside, just dying to get out? Maybe if they put on more scoops, made them bigger, and put them all around the body, and then threw on a big ol'wing, and put a decal on the side called "Judge", would that make it mad phat, dawg?

Nah... it would need bigger wheels. Chrome. Spinnaz.

[Oddball]

I'm excited for the day when my Honda does. I'll have just three requirements:

- Large back seat for three kids in boosters
- Nice power
- No Grandpa car

Looks like some HP wars are going on, but with an adult twist. We have the Charger, hopefully a 4-door brother to the new (after 2 year break) GTO and new Camaro, and plenty of 4-door sedans from Acura and the Domestically-made "Imports".

I'm not a kid anymore. My IROC is fun but I need a practical daily driver. If I didn't have twins my Accord would ideal but I need the space and power of a Charger and don't want an SUV.

When the boys are grown I can get the coupe.

Until then, keep importing "domestic" cars GM cause we know no American car will have a nice interior.

[Rob WS6]

Yeah you got me Al, Im a ricer at heart. Youve figured me out! Guess its time I come out of the closet. Moron.

And ofcourse it outsold the Trans Am, it was the ONLY sports car offered by GM besides the 'Vette. I dont know ANYONE who thinks the GTO is better looking than ANY f-body.

And noone says it has to look like a 68, but who the hell wants a Grand Am on steroids?

[NJSPEEDER]

there are plenty of years of firebirds that i think don't look as good as the GTO.
i also want to know how GM not offering another V8 rear drive effects people picking the GTO over the offerings from every other company. the GTO had strong sales against BMW, M-B, Acura, and a host of other companies. all companies with a more established customer base in the market segment, and the GTO took share from them.
i don't see why you insist on putting the GTO and the firebird/trans am in the same group. they are very different cars targeted at very different markets. the GTO was teh right car for the gap GM was trying to fill.

[Oddball]

And noone says it has to look like a 68, but who the hell wants a Grand Am on steroids?

The same eople who wanted a Tempest on steroids :-)

[LS1Hawk]

So, they should have forced Holden to retrofit there plant for a chassis that they werent gunna make in 3 years, just to please 60 year old die hards like you? Give ME a break.
Not everyone wants a retro mobile. That GTO concept looked as bloated as a 4th gen, if not more. Obviously more people found the GTO attractive then the Trans Am, since the last 2 years, the GTO continiously outsold the Trans Am in its last year.
400hp and 33k, 12 sec 1/4 mile, modern independant front and rear suspension, a upper class interior, automatic and manual transmission, seating for 4 ADULTS, and you are gunna bitch because it doesnt look like a 64?
Maybe some of you have a little ricer inside, just dying to get out? Maybe if they put on more scoops, made them bigger, and put them all around the body, and then threw on a big ol'wing, and put a decal on the side called "Judge", would that make it mad phat, dawg?

The 1999 Concept was hideous. They tried putting elements of every year/generation into that and look how far it went. Didn't work at all. And what about the Autocross/Sports Appearance Package for 05-06? "Agressive" ground effects, higher spoiler, deeper grille, etc., yet every GTO I see on the road doesn't sport it. It's obvious the buyers liked the idea of a classy/sleeper looking car with a lot of power.

You have to remember, GMs intent was not to get people from Ford over to Pontiac with this car. It's a completely different vehicle from the Mustang. They were gunning for BMW owners and the like, and from what I've read it worked. A good majority of GTO buyers were first time GM buyers. And we all know how banal and plain those imports look, more so than the GTO.

[V]

I dont think the GTO was horrible, but it was definately lacking. I have mixed feelings about bringing back a former name of a car on a new design. It only works if there are obvious similarities or styling cues. The GTO didn't do it. Im in no way saying the GTO was bad or should not have been made. Im saying GM could have saved tons of money IF they just could have managed to keep the Monaro nameplate and only made a LHD version that met US regulations. Personally I would have considered buying Pontiac Monaro way before a "GTO", but thats just me. With the camaro concept, challenger concept, and the '05 mustang, i think they got all 3 right in the aspect of keeping the style fitting the name.

[jims69camaro]

i also want to know how GM not offering another V8 rear drive effects people picking the GTO over the offerings from every other company.

there are some people who are still loyal to GM.

the only thing the hiatus of the camaro and introduction of the GTO did for me was make me look at other GM brands. i didn't act on any of those impulses, thankfully, because i will be in perfect shape when the camaro comes out. provided that i don't find another 'project' car...

one more time for the cheap seats: car enthusiasts make up 1% (that's one percent) of the total car consumer market. you can suggest they do something to appease us, like bring back the firebird, but don't hold your breath. a car like the mustang appeals to more people than just enthusiasts and i certainly hope the camaro is the same way. it's the only way to ensure longevity in this fickle market where people are still hung up on the '80s where the imports had it all over the US auto makers.

maybe if people looked at it from my (slightly skewed) perspective: every import car sold means one less job for an american. with so many other things happening in the US economy, why can't we at least hang on to the factory jobs? do we have to ship every last dollar overseas to some other corporation? then sit back and lament that there are no jobs for our kids? 30% of americans graduate college, only to do what? work at mcdonalds? where is the future? why can't we (as a whole) see past our own greedy little noses?

[chevyt454]

It just needed to be more exciting

http://www.seriouswheels.com/pics-2004/2004-Pontiac-GTO-Ram-Air-6-Woodward-Dream-Cruise-1280x960.jpg

[Oddball]

maybe if people looked at it from my (slightly skewed) perspective: every import car sold means one less job for an american.

To put it in pespective, Hondas are made in Ohio, Nissans in Tennessee, and I forget where where Toyat's are. The "imports" are *moving* production to the US while the "domestics" are moving it out.

When I interviewed with Honda in 1995 for an engineering job they were doing everything they could to find American parts suppliers but had problems because of Quality concerns.

Sorry to sound like an *ss but the argument over american jobs is meaningless. Look at the VIN numbers for domestics versus imports and notice which ones start with "1".

[Savage_Messiah]

This argument has been here before and it's tricky... while they are employing americans, the coporation is still in Japan, Korea, wherever... most of the profit is going there, not to the payroll...

[Ian]

I dont think the GTO was horrible, but it was definately lacking. I have mixed feelings about bringing back a former name of a car on a new design. It only works if there are obvious similarities or styling cues. The GTO didn't do it. Im in no way saying the GTO was bad or should not have been made. Im saying GM could have saved tons of money IF they just could have managed to keep the Monaro nameplate and only made a LHD version that met US regulations. Personally I would have considered buying Pontiac Monaro way before a "GTO", but thats just me. With the camaro concept, challenger concept, and the '05 mustang, i think they got all 3 right in the aspect of keeping the style fitting the name.

think about what the GTO started out as...a full sized car with a big motor and a few other performance options. They made the modern day GTO perfectly in keeping with what the GTO stood for in the first place. Take a plain looking full sized two door car and jam a big, powerful motor into it. Maybe its just me but I thought they hit the nail on the head with the GTO. :shrug:

[V]

true, but the fact they took an already existing car, not really a "full sized car" IMO and just slapped badges on it and a few minor body mods.. deos that make it a GTO, ok so the tempest was an already existing car, but it was already in the marketplace, whereas here in th US, i believe the holden monaro could have brought egual profit that the GTOs did, if it was just introduced as is. BUT i do understand everyones side of this disscussion since we all have a valid point or two i think.

Lexus did the same thing in some aspects. ie the first lexsus is300, in japan it was the Toyota Altezza. Hmm lets bring it to the states, slap a lexus badge on it and make more money. its still a toyota.

[Ian]

yeah, I see where you're coming from too, neither of us are worng, its really just a matter of opinion and "what if's" :lol:

[jims69camaro]

To put it in pespective, Hondas are made in Ohio, Nissans in Tennessee, and I forget where where Toyat's are. The "imports" are *moving* production to the US while the "domestics" are moving it out.

When I interviewed with Honda in 1995 for an engineering job they were doing everything they could to find American parts suppliers but had problems because of Quality concerns.

Sorry to sound like an *ss but the argument over american jobs is meaningless. Look at the VIN numbers for domestics versus imports and notice which ones start with "1".

you have put nothing into perspective but your own bleating. yes, you are a sheep being led around to believe what they want you to believe. just because the car is assembled in the US doesn't mean squat. the money leaves the US and heads for korea or japan or where ever - that is eroding our economy and you can wear your rose colored glasses if you wish but it still comes out the same. fewer JOBS for AMERICANS. period. fewer of our dollars staying in this country and supporting our economy.

if more people start thinking like you, then you'll be driving afghani cars in 40 years.

what is meaningless today is the parts content. there is no way to stay competitive in the auto market without a certain percentage of your parts coming from outside the US - not for "quality" concerns, but bare cost. they can make anything cheaper outside the US and since people are dead set against buying american cars because they had their heads up their asses in the '80s and the japanese took over the market, the parts content has shifted to mostly outside the US.

if people came around so quickly to the fact that the US was turning out a **** product, why is it taking them so long to realize that the tables have turned? go check consumer reports then get back to me.

if we were living in a country that didn't produce automobiles, then we wouldn't have a choice and we would have to purchase an import if we wanted to drive. however, we do have a choice. and you can choose american. so why don't you?

p.s. nothing tricky to the argument at all. you can either see the truth or you can continue to be blinded by the out-dated propaganda.

[Ian]

I agree with Jim. I never understood that. people will spend all day bitching that our economy is going down the ****ter, then they hop into their honda or toyota and drive home. Kind of a case of "do as I say, not as I do" :roll:

[Savage_Messiah]

Jim that almost brought a tear to my eye... that's nothing but the truth.

[jims69camaro]

i apologize for calling him a sheep - it's just that i get carried away sometimes with this argument. it's not one that anyone that enters the ring with me can win. it comes down to the almighty dollar, and people need to reinvest their dollar in the US if we are going to continue to be the economic super power that we once were.

funny thing is, we created japan's economy for them after WWII. we are always going around doing things that come back to bite us in the ass afterwards. i am all for a world economy and semi-free trade (as long as the scales are balanced), but the japanese have it all over us in many fields.

it's a shame, really, that we are wasting our number one resource: our people. only a third of our young people go on to college, while their percentage is way higher (in the 80%, i think). instead of some of this liberal arts ******** that people are teaching, why don't they teach bare bones economics so that, at least, the people who go to college would know better than to buy a foreign car...

[LS1Hawk]

it's a shame, really, that we are wasting our number one resource: our people. only a third of our young people go on to college, while their percentage is way higher (in the 80%, i think). instead of some of this liberal arts ******** that people are teaching, why don't they teach bare bones economics so that, at least, the people who go to college would know better than to buy a foreign car...

Damn straight.

[Ian]

Amen brotha!