Kerry Matthews
Well-Known Member
I drink to dat!
I'd LOVE to see $.43 a gallon for gas!!!
I'd LOVE to see $.43 a gallon for gas!!!
OT: What do you think of the "comeback" cars?
- Thread starter scott r
- Start date
Help Support Ford SportTrac Forum:
Travis Munday
Well-Known Member
dreman-
I live in Ga where 95-100 degree summers with 100%+ humidity is pretty much the norm. i still don't see a need for air conditioning in a drop top. In fact, I rarely use the a/c in my truck even. Windows down is fine for me.
I live in Ga where 95-100 degree summers with 100%+ humidity is pretty much the norm. i still don't see a need for air conditioning in a drop top. In fact, I rarely use the a/c in my truck even. Windows down is fine for me.
scott r
Well-Known Member
I suspect that "comeback" gas prices would be FAR more popular than comeback cars. hehe
I agree with DiveTrac, whenever you think of arkansas, and any vehicle, you think of it on blocks (with no tires/wheels) or jacked up.
I agree with DiveTrac, whenever you think of arkansas, and any vehicle, you think of it on blocks (with no tires/wheels) or jacked up.
I like the "Comeback" cars that resemble the early models that have been updated with modern automotive technology, but I hate the new GTO!
I owned a new 1965 GTO and loved it and I hoped they would revive the GTO again. But I was expecting something styled more like the current Grand Prix except with a bit tougher looking with hood scoops, etc. It appears that GM wanted something very different. The built a GTO that looks like it was styled by Kia or Daewoom and can't understand why it's been such a flop. No wonder GM is in such a financial crisis. GM claims that they were not trying to build a retro GTO, but something that would compete with BMW's, Lexus, and small Mercedes. Ha! Those cars have styling besides performance. The only thing the GTO has is power.
...Rich
I owned a new 1965 GTO and loved it and I hoped they would revive the GTO again. But I was expecting something styled more like the current Grand Prix except with a bit tougher looking with hood scoops, etc. It appears that GM wanted something very different. The built a GTO that looks like it was styled by Kia or Daewoom and can't understand why it's been such a flop. No wonder GM is in such a financial crisis. GM claims that they were not trying to build a retro GTO, but something that would compete with BMW's, Lexus, and small Mercedes. Ha! Those cars have styling besides performance. The only thing the GTO has is power.
...Rich
Travis Munday
Well-Known Member
Perhaps it's worth noting, and something no one seems to know, or remember, is the GTO (Holden Monaro) was designed for the Australian market, not the US one.
The Monaro/GTO is also sold in Europe as the Vauxhall Monaro, and gets rave reviews from nearly all European press (at least English-speaking ones).
The Monaro/GTO is also sold in Europe as the Vauxhall Monaro, and gets rave reviews from nearly all European press (at least English-speaking ones).
Last edited by a moderator:
scott r
Well-Known Member
One of my friends has a BMW 3-series and he likes the interior of my GTO a LOT better. It's comfortable, ergonomically friendly, and quite stylish. Everything is right where it needs to be, the gauges are large and easy to read, there are no extra bells and whistles to distract you from what's important...DRIVING THE CAR.
I suppose if I was a designer of the GTO, I wouldn't have the route they did either. It's not exactly the most beautiful thing. In my opinion, it stays true to the original essence of the GTO. Small car, big engine, big power, lots of straight-line fun. When you look back at the GTO of the time...do you think people thought it was pretty? Did they buy it because of the great lines? Probably not. They bought it because it would blow the doors off of almost every vehicle on the road. It was wicked fast and priced reasonably. I don't see what's changed...
I suppose if I was a designer of the GTO, I wouldn't have the route they did either. It's not exactly the most beautiful thing. In my opinion, it stays true to the original essence of the GTO. Small car, big engine, big power, lots of straight-line fun. When you look back at the GTO of the time...do you think people thought it was pretty? Did they buy it because of the great lines? Probably not. They bought it because it would blow the doors off of almost every vehicle on the road. It was wicked fast and priced reasonably. I don't see what's changed...
user 62785
Member
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2005
- Messages
- 66
- Reaction score
- 0
I think I express my opinion of the "comeback" cars every time I look at my driveway...
[Broken External Image]:
I love my mustang!!!! :wub:
[Broken External Image]:
I love my mustang!!!! :wub:
scott r
Well-Known Member
Martimus...wanna race?
I use the words "wanna race" WAY too much on these forums. hehe
I outran a 2001 Corvette last weekend, a Trans Am WS6 yesterday and various others that really aren't worth a mention. I haven't had my go at a Mustang GT yet, but I know what's going to happen if it's a stock Mustang GT. Even though the mustang is lighter, 100 horsepower is a bit difficult to overcome.
I do like the Mustang GT though, the looks. I almost bought one! Then I got to looking around and saw that EVERYONE had one. I counted 17 New-bodystyle Mustangs in a 10 mile stretch of St. Louis. Many of those were the 6-cylinder version, but still, that's WAY too many. Those things seem to be multiplying like rabbits!
I use the words "wanna race" WAY too much on these forums. hehe
I outran a 2001 Corvette last weekend, a Trans Am WS6 yesterday and various others that really aren't worth a mention. I haven't had my go at a Mustang GT yet, but I know what's going to happen if it's a stock Mustang GT. Even though the mustang is lighter, 100 horsepower is a bit difficult to overcome.
I do like the Mustang GT though, the looks. I almost bought one! Then I got to looking around and saw that EVERYONE had one. I counted 17 New-bodystyle Mustangs in a 10 mile stretch of St. Louis. Many of those were the 6-cylinder version, but still, that's WAY too many. Those things seem to be multiplying like rabbits!
Gypsy me
Well-Known Member
Yep! long live Mucsle cars!
user 62785
Member
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2005
- Messages
- 66
- Reaction score
- 0
:lol: Hmm... a race between a Mustang in Arid-zona and a Supercharged ST in Missouri. Kindof sounds like the plot for another one of those old Cannonball Run movies!! 
BTW Baron... mine isn't a GT... its one of those V-6's with a few, er, customizations. I figure your ST would have no problem leaving me in the dust!
BTW Baron... mine isn't a GT... its one of those V-6's with a few, er, customizations. I figure your ST would have no problem leaving me in the dust!
Last edited by a moderator:
Tiger,
I know that the GTO was derived from a Australian car, and it does have tremendous performance and can understand why the Europeans like it. The probloem is GM in the USA called it a GTO and those who remember the original GTO's don't feel the styling fits the name and image the early GTO's conveyed.
...Rich
I know that the GTO was derived from a Australian car, and it does have tremendous performance and can understand why the Europeans like it. The probloem is GM in the USA called it a GTO and those who remember the original GTO's don't feel the styling fits the name and image the early GTO's conveyed.
...Rich
scott r
Well-Known Member
Oops, sorry.
I don't have the supercharged trac anymore. As much fun as it was, in the state that I sold it, I doubt that it could have beaten a stock V6 mustang without blowing up the engine, burning a hole through a piston, blowing a head gasket, etc.! Lack of a good tune really killed that truck. I changed the plugs 5 days before I traded it in, and it ran fine for about 5 hours, but then it started running on 5 cylinders again...so I took it to my local pontiac/gmc/chevy dealer and bought a GTO. (seen below)
I don't have the supercharged trac anymore. As much fun as it was, in the state that I sold it, I doubt that it could have beaten a stock V6 mustang without blowing up the engine, burning a hole through a piston, blowing a head gasket, etc.! Lack of a good tune really killed that truck. I changed the plugs 5 days before I traded it in, and it ran fine for about 5 hours, but then it started running on 5 cylinders again...so I took it to my local pontiac/gmc/chevy dealer and bought a GTO. (seen below)
Autoweek has a picture of the new Dodge Challenger. Sweet as hell!!! It looks awesome.
Charger, Yawn
GTO, not only is it blasphemy, the looks are nothing but ZZZZZZZZZZZZZ
Mustang, very nice. Ford beat the GM F bodies hands down even with less power. The Mustang survives, the F Bodies didn't.
I hope Honda goes retro. I miss seeing those CVCC's. Those cars had "class".
Tom
Charger, Yawn
GTO, not only is it blasphemy, the looks are nothing but ZZZZZZZZZZZZZ
Mustang, very nice. Ford beat the GM F bodies hands down even with less power. The Mustang survives, the F Bodies didn't.
I hope Honda goes retro. I miss seeing those CVCC's. Those cars had "class".
Tom
Here is a link to the Challenger.
Like I said, I think it looks awesome.
Tom
Like I said, I think it looks awesome.
Tom
scott r
Well-Known Member
The Challenger was posted in my last thread "Update on the supercharged trac". It was like every other "comeback car", people either liked it or hated it; there wasn't much in between. Hopefully Dodge will be smart enough to put the 6.1L 425hp engine in it, instead of the anemic V6 and/or the base hemi that they put in the Charger.
There is an awful lot of GTO bashing here! Are y'all angry at me for trading off the supercharged trac or something? hehe
About all I have to say for the GTO is "DRIVE IT!". Once you do, you will be able to understand that pontiac DID capture the essence of the original. I was completely blown away by the performance and the sleek interior. After driving both the mustang GT and the GTO, the choice was very very clear. The Mustang GT would have been significantly cheaper...as well as slower, more common, less refined and not NEARLY as much fun to drive. One needs to do quite a few modifications on a Mustang GT to even come close to the stock performance of the goat. I know that there's no convincing some of the stubborn folks around here, but judging a book by its cover isn't exactly the best way to determine the merits of a car, or anything else for that matter. Cruise on down to your local Pontiac dealer and drive the GTO...then tell me if it deserves the nameplate on its front quarter panels.
There is an awful lot of GTO bashing here! Are y'all angry at me for trading off the supercharged trac or something? hehe
About all I have to say for the GTO is "DRIVE IT!". Once you do, you will be able to understand that pontiac DID capture the essence of the original. I was completely blown away by the performance and the sleek interior. After driving both the mustang GT and the GTO, the choice was very very clear. The Mustang GT would have been significantly cheaper...as well as slower, more common, less refined and not NEARLY as much fun to drive. One needs to do quite a few modifications on a Mustang GT to even come close to the stock performance of the goat. I know that there's no convincing some of the stubborn folks around here, but judging a book by its cover isn't exactly the best way to determine the merits of a car, or anything else for that matter. Cruise on down to your local Pontiac dealer and drive the GTO...then tell me if it deserves the nameplate on its front quarter panels.
Jim Johnson
Active Member
"Retro" cars . . .
Like, from most to least: MINI, Mustang, Thunderbird, Solstice, Camaro (if it makes it into production relatively unchanged). I think MINI and Mustang are just brilliant. The only reason I didn't buy a MINI is that the nearest dealership is almost 1-1/2 hours away. The Mustang almost makes me wish I'd waited 2 more years instead of buying the L (almost). Love the T-Bird's looks, but realized after a test drive that I couldn't put up with the "flexible flyer" chassis and the negative headroom (at 6'1", I found my head pressed against the soft top even with the seat all the way down). I'm no fan of G.M., but I think the Solstice and the Camaro concept are really good-looking cars. I'd consider owning a Solstice.
Lukewarm: PT Cruiser, HHR, SSR. Used to like the PT cruiser, but now that they're all over the place, my enthusiasm has cooled. HHR is a more angular PT knockoff, and the SSR is a poseur pickup.
Dislike, from most to least: 300, GTO, Magnum, Charger. I think the 300 looks like a pimp's car -- wouldn't be caught dead in one. Sleepers are OK, but the GTO's styling puts me in a coma (I don't really consider its styling to be retro, but someone brought it up). The Magnum bears too close a resemblance to the 300 (it's more of a wagon for a pimp with kids). The Charger isn't too bad, but it suffers from the same overwrought, caricature-like styling that Chrysler started with the catfish-faced Ram.
Your mileage may differ.
Oh, and a friend of mine who is a big G.M. fan <I>did</I> test drive a GTO, and he just didn't like it. He found the straight-line acceleration to be basically its only redeeming feature.
Like, from most to least: MINI, Mustang, Thunderbird, Solstice, Camaro (if it makes it into production relatively unchanged). I think MINI and Mustang are just brilliant. The only reason I didn't buy a MINI is that the nearest dealership is almost 1-1/2 hours away. The Mustang almost makes me wish I'd waited 2 more years instead of buying the L (almost). Love the T-Bird's looks, but realized after a test drive that I couldn't put up with the "flexible flyer" chassis and the negative headroom (at 6'1", I found my head pressed against the soft top even with the seat all the way down). I'm no fan of G.M., but I think the Solstice and the Camaro concept are really good-looking cars. I'd consider owning a Solstice.
Lukewarm: PT Cruiser, HHR, SSR. Used to like the PT cruiser, but now that they're all over the place, my enthusiasm has cooled. HHR is a more angular PT knockoff, and the SSR is a poseur pickup.
Dislike, from most to least: 300, GTO, Magnum, Charger. I think the 300 looks like a pimp's car -- wouldn't be caught dead in one. Sleepers are OK, but the GTO's styling puts me in a coma (I don't really consider its styling to be retro, but someone brought it up). The Magnum bears too close a resemblance to the 300 (it's more of a wagon for a pimp with kids). The Charger isn't too bad, but it suffers from the same overwrought, caricature-like styling that Chrysler started with the catfish-faced Ram.
Your mileage may differ.
Oh, and a friend of mine who is a big G.M. fan <I>did</I> test drive a GTO, and he just didn't like it. He found the straight-line acceleration to be basically its only redeeming feature.
buzz worth
Active Member
Why go retro? Drive the originals ! We all like to remember how we tooled around in these cars on a daily basis, but they are NOT as refined in the handling as even most base cars of today. The Z-28 is scary fast and with the power steering and bias ply tires of those days, it is quirky. On acceleration, it will want to jump around and point itself every which way.
It is amazing they all didn't end up in a ditch.
buzz[Broken External Image]:
It is amazing they all didn't end up in a ditch.
buzz[Broken External Image]:
baron_iv,
You are missing the point about a GTO. Yes, I understand it is fast. A Corvette is fast too.
Look at it this way.
You can take a turd (the body style of the GTO) and put BBQ sauce on it (400 HP) and eat it. It might taste good (the car is fast and fun to drive), but it is still a turd. (It still has the boring body style)
That is what most people are saying. We aren't saying the GTO is slow, lacks quality, handles bad, etc. We are saying that the GTO could have been so much better looks wise. It was another typical GM attempts to redeem themselves. They notice a screw-up, then they shove a giant engine under the hood and everyone is supposed to like it.
It did not work for the Camaro/Firebird. It was faster than a Mustang, but the Mustang outsold them. GM put BBQ sauce on a turd.
Just so you know, I like muscle cars. I don't care who makes them. I like muscle cars. I love the old Chevells, Novas, Chargers, Mustangs, Torinos, Monte Carlos, and even old GTOs. At one time, my brother and I were going to build a Chevy Malibu to race. We had the body and engine. We decided to sell it. What I am saying is that I am not "MR. Ford Only" when it comes to muscle cars, so it isn't a "GM thing" I have against the GTO.
Tom
You are missing the point about a GTO. Yes, I understand it is fast. A Corvette is fast too.
Look at it this way.
You can take a turd (the body style of the GTO) and put BBQ sauce on it (400 HP) and eat it. It might taste good (the car is fast and fun to drive), but it is still a turd. (It still has the boring body style)
That is what most people are saying. We aren't saying the GTO is slow, lacks quality, handles bad, etc. We are saying that the GTO could have been so much better looks wise. It was another typical GM attempts to redeem themselves. They notice a screw-up, then they shove a giant engine under the hood and everyone is supposed to like it.
It did not work for the Camaro/Firebird. It was faster than a Mustang, but the Mustang outsold them. GM put BBQ sauce on a turd.
Just so you know, I like muscle cars. I don't care who makes them. I like muscle cars. I love the old Chevells, Novas, Chargers, Mustangs, Torinos, Monte Carlos, and even old GTOs. At one time, my brother and I were going to build a Chevy Malibu to race. We had the body and engine. We decided to sell it. What I am saying is that I am not "MR. Ford Only" when it comes to muscle cars, so it isn't a "GM thing" I have against the GTO.
Tom
Johnny O
Well-Known Member
Basically two problems with the new GTO as I see it:
1. Looks too plain, although personally I like it. I don't care for a lot of scoops and baubles.
2. Costs too much.
Problems with the Camaro and Firebird:
1. Too big.
2. Too heavy.
3. Lousy visibility.
4. Cost too much.
A Mustang GT may be slightly slower but a lot of people vote with their wallets and the GTO and CamBird just aren't worth another $8-10 grand more.
1. Looks too plain, although personally I like it. I don't care for a lot of scoops and baubles.
2. Costs too much.
Problems with the Camaro and Firebird:
1. Too big.
2. Too heavy.
3. Lousy visibility.
4. Cost too much.
A Mustang GT may be slightly slower but a lot of people vote with their wallets and the GTO and CamBird just aren't worth another $8-10 grand more.
user 62785
Member
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2005
- Messages
- 66
- Reaction score
- 0
Baron_iv... Funny thing about performance-related mod's on a Mustang is that MUCH more HP and torque is available with just a few straight-forward mod's. Mod's like replacing the axleback exhaust, replacing the stock air box, dropping a custom tune. Essentially the same things many here do to their Trac.
Does it cost more? Yea but we can say the same about our Tracs. My Mustang cost me 18k through the buying service at my Credit Union. I've added likely 4k worth of "Go" and "Show" mod's and now the car performs MUCH better and is uniquely mine. I'd say that was well worth the price!!
Does it cost more? Yea but we can say the same about our Tracs. My Mustang cost me 18k through the buying service at my Credit Union. I've added likely 4k worth of "Go" and "Show" mod's and now the car performs MUCH better and is uniquely mine. I'd say that was well worth the price!!
