GM Inside News Forum banner
1 - 5 of 5 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,056 Posts
I'm a Chevy guy and I do believe styling is what every person perceives it to be. So, on that note, I thought the article was well written.
I am not a fan of the body but cannot refute the performance figures. After all, it took only 17 months to get a rwd, performance vehicle to the dealerships. Wit hthe economy, GM needs something now to help sales.
Personally, I liked Brock Yates comments regarding the 64's.
Even parked, they look great. Take off the top and they are even better yet.
How they will be perceived in a decade, who knows.

No, I don't think a new Chevelle should look like the 69-70 models. With the new engineering tech tools, I expect them to be better on the road as well as easier to assemble. But style-wise, looking like a big Cavalier or a GTO with a different grill would turn me off.
Regarding the car mags, I have been suspicious of the writers' trend to knock American cars. But, in this month's Motor Trend (or is it C&D), they have a comparison article between Dodge's SRT-4, Ford's Focus and a Mazda. The Focus and Mazda are nowhere in the same class as shown by the 0-60 numbers. And the magazine does note that the Dodge is clearly more fun to drive. So, maybe the writers are not all that biased.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,056 Posts
I scanned through C and D yesterday. They also had an article on the Impala which was fair in my mind. They gave it good reviews but also said that it is no BMW. They also said that with the rebates, the car was a good buy.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,056 Posts
Boy, when you look at the articles and read the inuendos, I guess it does make a difference.
I know that many members on this site are more familiar with cars so they read past them. I know that I look for the really technical stuff (like gear trains, etc.) which one almost never sees. So, to somebody not very technically oriented in nature, those little phrases mean a lot. Especially when you consider that Mercedes' lower level cars have taken a quality beating yet people still think of them as the last word.

good point.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,056 Posts
In comparison to hum drum cars like any Toyotas or the Honda Accord, the GTO is not that bad style-wise.
I had to step back and re-think this subject.
The older GTO devotees are being too hard on the new vehicle. But, if asked to compare it to the other manufacturers, it is equal to most of them for the price range and category.
Also, the car mags are doing the same thing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,056 Posts
The getting with the times is measured on how much profit GM can turn. And this is reflected on money saved on the assembly line.
I, too, am a devotee of the 64 GTO but everybody must recognize that GM cannot put a car on the street without the pollution equipment, the users' safety fetures and better handling. Yeah, I look under the hood of any 60's vehicle and see only the bare necessities of getting the motor rumbling. A PCV and crank case tube into the air filter. Oxygen sensors? The only thing that was sensed was the water temp, oil pressure and amps. So, the engineers now have a more difficult time packaging the car just to meet the gov't specs.
So, how easily can it be assembled and how many parts go in it?
The radio in my 2004 Monte Carlo does 100 times the jobs as the old radios (the salesman took 1/2 hour explaining everything). while he was talking, I was wondering what polish to use and looking at the gauges.
BUT, aside from all the technological advantages (fuel injection, by the way, beats carburetion unless you like to tinker), the body of the 64 was good looking then and turns heads now.
 
1 - 5 of 5 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top