[bballr4567]

That's the excuse we apologists made when the GTO came out. We thought, "Oh, it's an 11th-hour attempt to bring this to market for us! GM will be bringing something to market in due time that gives us GTO fans something to REALLY be proud of!"

Then they added the mock hood scoops and sales continued to be disappointed.

Sure, some can make excuses for a handsome jellybean, but they're still excuses.

The sales weren't a disappointment. Holden could only make 15k of them a year. No matter what, they would've been a "disappointment" numbers wise because there weren't that many of them made.

 

[Diego]

....yet GTO fans ended up not embracing the car with the love that was expected. And the Bimmer-minded folks were not swayed by a Pontiac.

 

[bballr4567]

....yet GTO fans ended up not embracing the car with the love that was expected. And the Bimmer-minded folks were not swayed by a Pontiac.

Nope, because GTO fans were 70 year olds trying to relive their past and not accept a car for what it is. Yet, the GTO introduced tons of new customers to Pontiac and GM (conquest rate was ridiculous but who knows, it could have been old GM customers coming back to the GM fold because they offered nothing affordable for RWD performance).

Despite all the terrible press the car got, it still sold almost all examples of it especially with the LS2 became involved. The capacity was not there to build some 100k/yr model. It wasn't.


You can either accept the fact that the car was a direct rehash of the 1st generation GTO or be angry that it didn't come back to look retro like the 2rd generation.

 

[Diego]

Boomers were 70 when the neo-GTO came out?

I don't recall the negative press of the GTO, but I do recall a lot of negativity from Pontiac folks. I am not sure what they wanted the GTO to look like (taking their opinions may result in a Homer), but they were not moved.

And then there was that pesky small-block . . . .

So you think the GTO was a "direct rehash?"

 

[bballr4567]

Pesky small block? You mean the motor that powered the car to dang good performance? Only special interest folks figured there would be a "Pontiac" engine under the hood.

Considering that the first GTO came out in 1966 and you had to be 16 to drive, added in 10 or so years until you could afford one and we arrive at 26. Add 40 years to that. 66. 70 is close enough don't you think?


If you look at the first GTO and the 2004 GTO, tell me the difference. They were both mundane. Both sedated and restraint. Both 2+2 with TRUE room for 4 adults. Both "sleepers". A great cruiser with good performance.

 

[vetterider19]

I don't think anyone here would argue that the modern GTO was an ugly car because it certainly wasn't. It had a sort of handsome and clean look for a big touring coupe. I think what people are trying to say is that it lacked any dramatic styling cues that people typically look for in that class of vehicle.

 

[vetterider19]

Pesky small block? You mean the motor that powered the car to dang good performance? Only special interest folks figured there would be a "Pontiac" engine under the hood.

Considering that the first GTO came out in 1966 and you had to be 16 to drive, added in 10 or so years until you could afford one and we arrive at 26. Add 40 years to that. 66. 70 is close enough don't you think?


If you look at the first GTO and the 2004 GTO, tell me the difference. They were both mundane. Both sedated and restraint. Both 2+2 with TRUE room for 4 adults. Both "sleepers". A great cruiser with good performance.

Memory is funny that way - overly fond perception of the original GTO styling had people expecting more for the 2004 re-launch.

 

[Diego]

There's an issue of perception that you and I have.

For a group of people first born in 1946, the Boomers were not that old when the Aussie GTO came out.

And look who's ruling the collector car market - the Boomers. How old are these folks? These were born in the 1950s, and thanks to the wonders of medicine, folks this age are much more robust than before. My point is that the Boomers still have plenty of steam and can't be characterized as old as you suggest.

So the small-block: Yes, GTO folks still lament the elimination of the Pontiac V-8. Visit Pontiac forums and read former Pontiac magazines and you'll find a constant debate whether small-block-equipped Pontiacs like the 5.0 Trans Am should be accepted within the respective pages.

The 1964 GTO (note the year) was hardly a sleeper but it was understated. For 1965, it was a more fully realized package, eventually having factory ram air induction as an option. Pontiacs of the era were distinctive but I hardly would call ANY GTO "a sleeper" unless it was something like a Ram Air '67 with poverty caps and blackwalls. But then you notice a hood scoop and gotta wonder, "What kind of sleeper has a hood scoop?" A sleeper is something like a Catalina two-door sedan with a 421.

 

[bballr4567]

Memory is funny that way - overly fond perception of the original GTO styling had people expecting more for the 2004 re-launch.

Shhhh!! You'll anger them.


Diego, I'll just agree to disagree. Sorry on the year, fun day at work already.

 

[Diego]

Fair 'nuff.:drive:

 

[vcs2600]

Memory is funny that way - overly fond perception of the original GTO styling had people expecting more for the 2004 re-launch.

I think what actually happened was every babyboomer head turned towards the 2005 Retro Mustang, and forgot all about the neoGTO.

I'm not going to say GTO styling was "boring" or "dull". But factually it is a design that dated to the mid 1990s, and the jellybean look was out, old-fashioned, by the time it was introduced.

 

[b4z]

2005 Mustang had the "gotta Have It Factor". Car and driver will never live that one down.

 

[b4z]

I don't know. You guys ever seen a low option '68 GTO with poverty caps? It doesn't get any plainer than that.

 

[BBDOS CV8]

Have any of you Aussies ever driven a Monaro Coupe 4? When I heard about those I thought it must've been a blast to drive!

No, seen a few around, there weren't many made. They aren't holding value particularly well, for a very limited $80K car.

6 sec 0-60mph on a dirt road, though. With the 'half foot rollout' that would be 5.5 secs. They aren't that quick in the dry, because they are limited to 360hp LS1s when the rest were LS2 by then because of the transfer case and front half-shafts and a fair bit heavier and they are 4 sp auto-only. In the wet, however, owners of hot Subies and other 4WD stuff basically don't even try...... They launch like no-one's business wet or dry.

On Holden's mini-NASCAR test track which is designed to induce understeer at 125mph, they apparently set the quickest-ever time.

 

[BBDOS CV8]

That's the excuse we apologists made when the GTO came out. We thought, "Oh, it's an 11th-hour attempt to bring this to market for us! GM will be bringing something to market in due time that gives us GTO fans something to REALLY be proud of!"

Then they added the mock hood scoops and sales continued to be disappointed.

Sure, some can make excuses for a handsome jellybean, but they're still excuses.

Only so much they could do with what Holden was doing. Remember, it was a cottage industry car. GTO bodies were essentially hand made in jigs, as the Omega line couldn't autoweld them. The body was returned to the line after painting for assembly. Holden never wanted to do Monaro, because it was a pain in the arse for a production line - they could build 3 sedans in the time it took to complete about 1.5 Monaros. Mitsubishi actually pressed the rear quarter panels, the rest of the cabin panels were made in low-volume dies that wore rapidly.

The fact it was greenlighted when the first Monaros were being made shows how seat-of-the-pants Lutz was and how ad-hoc the planning process then. If it had gone to a committee, you'd never do it. Think about it - here was a car that should never have made it off the designers easil. The model makers and stylists who made the 1/4 scale clay after hours and hid it, without authorisation, should have been sacked. The design manager who hadn't seen the clay until shortly before he took it to the board, was risking his job. The board who OK'd the concept had to know they were making a rod for their own back, as the clamour to build it lasted for years until it was confirmed. It was front page news for a week - that never happens with a mere car here.

Then Holden announced a limited, three year build of 10,000 cars because they needed the line in 2005 to build Zetas (postponed partly because of GTO). Then Lutz drives the car, and instanty quadrupled the build numbers and added three continents...... In 2000, they officially weren't building any, in 2001 10,000, then in 2002 55,000.
All basically, without recourse to focus groups, product planners, considerations by boards[ Holden's board apparently considered the concept for about 5 minutes when they saw the clay. They admonished the design chief and then committed several million dollars to the VT Coupe '97 showcar.


As it was, Holden built 13,000 Australian-delivery coupes as Monaros and HSV Coupes. So they easily made their money back. Holden can make money off short runs of niche product like Monaro, and Crewman, and Ute, and wagon, in a way GM just can't.

The 2nd gen modern car was to be the bespoke, styled for US and Australia car that ended up as the Coupe60 concept due for 2008 release. The plan was it would be built in America (or Canada), so the 'import' thing would no longer ring true.

That was the fibreglass (last step before production sheetmetal) prototype for the Zeta GTO/Monaro, and likely a Chevelle produced in about 2004. When Alex visited the GM Advanced Design studios they had studies for a bigger coupe chev 2+2 with a styling theme very similar to the Gen V Camaro, but more rounded. with a 2nd-gen induced grille v-shaped opening.

 

[Diego]

I don't know. You guys ever seen a low option '68 GTO with poverty caps? It doesn't get any plainer than that.

To me, it's not as plain as this, complete with rubber floorcover:

Even with few to no options, the 1968 was an upscale performance car - it had grown up. All the GTO's imitators were the same way till the Road Runner came about.

 

[Diego]

Only so much they could do with what Holden was doing.

110% in agreement, but the average guy in the street doesn't care about that - he just wants his hood scoops.

 

[Orbit Orange]

I'm not going to read the 7 plus pages and 100 or so odd posts but will just say I'm at 87,XXX miles and counting. Other than the original water pump crapping out I haven't had any of the issues some have had. Looking forward to keeping it forever.

 

[BBDOS CV8]

I'm not going to read the 7 plus pages and 100 or so odd posts but will just say I'm at 87,XXX miles and counting. Other than the original water pump crapping out I haven't had any of the issues some have had. Looking forward to keeping it forever.

And given the body is fully galvanised and the door hinges are special super-duty non-sag items, if you look after it even reasonably well. you should be able to keep putting bushes and consumables in it, and it will last just about that long. You can get any underbody wearing parts from Oz, they are the same as a zillion Commodores and HSV models underneath. Callipers - C4, C5 Corvette. BCM, engine, trans - all stock GM PT parts. Diffs - and other driveline bits, all available.

The only panels you can't get here are the rear quarters, as they were done on a high capacity press out of thicker stock than the rest of the A-panels.

 

[BBDOS CV8]

110% in agreement, but the average guy in the street doesn't care about that - he just wants his hood scoops.

True - but from any perspective, no 04-06 GTO, GM is out 36,000 sales of a high-value car. And unusually and far from typically, it was selling stronger at the end than the start of production. The only reason there is no 08-on GTO is because of GM's bankruptcy and the GFC.

For a first introduction, out of left field venture it did pretty well - GM did almost no promotion, but the contoversy of 'is it a true GTO' lit up the enthusiast internet. It sold a lot of GM cars to people who would not otherwise have bought a Pontiac. And a few of the guys are right about old school enthusiasts - a lot of them, wouldn't have bought it regardless of origin or styling - which old GTO should it look like? '64, '66, '68? Look at the arguments about which gen Camaro Gen VI should look like. Oscar Wilde said, the only thing worse than being talked about, is not being talked about. And for a miniscule number, import it got a lot of attention. Some negative, some grudglingly positive. Even a lot of detractors relented and bought one.

Holden had no, zero, nil experience of exporting to the US. One exec put it, it's like selling ice to eskimoes. And there's no two ways about it, the US is a tough nut to crack, it's so dollar-conscious and competitive, and an instant-gratfication market for discretionary purchases - 'what, I have to wait more than two days for this!??'

GTO cost nothing to create by modern car terms - I'd estimate, if wholesale price was $30K it generated over a $bill of business in the US, which wouldn't have happened otherwise. Yes, the '04 had issues of no scoops, single sided exhaust outlet, they made too many autos for starters, based on the take rate in Monaros and other GM cars (75%) whereas in '05/06 GTOs, it was 60% manuals. When they had ordering sorted out better the later cars were matched to market better. Once the 18" wheel package was certified they sold a lot more, a lot easily and not rebated or discounted. The LS2 was a good move.

I bet you the ATS coupe has cost GM ten times as much - and it's likely to sell inconsequential numbers, like the CTS coupe and wagon did. That's not a slam on it, but it shows coupes is a tricky market.

If you suggest to anyone working at Holden at that time the car was a flop, they'll laugh at you.