I cannot belive that you guys are even comparing these 2 vehicles. They have nothing in common. Its like comparing a Mustang with a Honda Prelude. I would not own a GTO if it was given to me for free. I would have it sold the next day and probably buy another stang. But hey that just my opinion.

 

I agree with David, I would not own a GTO. If I wanted one I could have bought one. The appeal of the 05 Mustang is in the numbers, no way to fudge that. It just proves that having a lot of H.P. doesn't cut it. The car needs to have that eye candy appeal. If you like looking at it and you also get ample horsepower and handling characteristics then you have a selling package. The 05 Mustang is a total package in my book. I just love this car............

 

I remember during the Detroit Auto Show, a representative was talking about the GTO as he stood next to it. In the tone of his voice, I could hear his frustration that it wasn't selling, he was speaking of how they dressed it up for '05, and the 400 hp for the low 30,000's and at the end he said "what more could anyone want?" IT was hilarious. I thought, what would a GTO fan want? maybe retro design, and a GTO that doesn't look like a 1990's era Grand Prix coupe, maybe affordability and no gas guzzler tax. Does anyone know by the way why the GTO has this tax? I noticed it on the stickers and I've seen other vehicles which get worse mileage and didn't notice this gas guzzler tax on them, at least, not written on the sticker.

 

C&D needs to get some ***** and just stand behind their decision. Why do they need us to massage their egos and tell them they made the right choice for once.

Sheesh..........

I mean.........and this is REALLY out "THERE"......but just MAYBE no one is writing in because most people agree with the choice? Or, Maybe I have this all wrong....

 

My favorite car growing up was the neighbors 67 Blue vert GTO with 4 on the floor and black interior with built in hood tach. I would have bought that car in a second. I was also aware of the GTO coming back a couple of years before and I was seriously saving money for it when it arrived. The mustang hadn't even been a thought in the back of my mind at the time. When I went to the car show last year and saw the GTO, well, I was more than a little dissapointed. I couldn't believe GM would even consider putting the GTO name on that Dogg butt ugly Lead Sled. GTO now stands for "GONE TO OVERWEIGHT" cuz it's heavy, slow and plain ugly. Also at the show was the new mustang. I had never even owned a ford or chrysler before but after I saw this, I knew that this was the one for me. Ordered it the first week I could and the rest is history. Totally pleased with this car and it's everything the "GOAT" isn't. GM really blew this one. I don't think the decision by the mag was really as tough as they stated. Even the Charger from Dodge looks like any other car. It's not JUST about HP. These companies need to weed out their design team and get some "young at heart" people in there.

 

Vehicles that have a top speed of greater than 145ish/150ish have a gas guzzler tax. That is the primary reason that Ford governed the mustang, or so I have been told.

 

That or 12 GTO owners writing 10 letters a piece

 

I think the gas guzzler tax is based purely on actual MPG rating of the vehicle not top speed. For instance, the auto GTO has the gas guzzler tax but the 6-speed doesn't. The auto gets 16/21 vs. 17/25 for the manual (per Pontiacs website).

 

I like both. Will own both when my SY GT gets here!

 

I think the gas guzzler tax is based purely on actual MPG rating of the vehicle not top speed. For instance, the auto GTO has the gas guzzler tax but the 6-speed doesn't. The auto gets 16/21 vs. 17/25 for the manual (per Pontiacs website).
[/b][/quote]

You're right. Here is an interesting link for anyone that wants read up more on the origins of the gas guzzler tax and its application.

http://www.electrifyingtimes.com/gas...rloophole.html

 

My letter

Greetings,

I just finished reading your article comparing the new Mustang GT versus the GTO. It was instrumental in helping me make the decision to order a new Mustang GT. I did seriously consider, the GTO, but they are even more scarce than Mustangs. The only one I could find in Northeast Wisconsin was a leftover 2004 in Waxed Banana Yellow. The dealer marked it up to cover the 2005 sheet metal they tacked on to it to get it out the door. Even with a GM supplier discount price, it was still 4grand more than the Mustang. Bottom line, even with the extras, it still looks like a bloated Sunbird or a stripper Grand Prix. :notnice: Pontiac has missed the mark. It's kind of like a plain homely girl with a nice personality, no one will take the time to find out if she's nice.

Mike Pajewski
Two Rivers, WI

The dealer was a butthead. he didn't even offer to open her up or let us test drive it. I am eleigible for the GM version of the X-plan, so a GTO was always a possibility (OK, so maybe it wasn't, but it was decent leverage to get the Ford dealer to deal) I promptly went to the Ford store and ordered my Stang. Now, if it would only come in soon.

 

So all 123 people who actually purchased that thing are writing in and complaining huh?


[/b][/quote]

 

John, I had a 68 Goat too, with a stock Hurst 3 speed, 400. No PS,PB,AC etc. Brutal car, and faster than greased lightning. I almost bought an 05 GTO, instead of my 05 Mustang GT. It drove like a dream, fast, handled great. I finally told the salesman though that every time I walked up to it in a parking lot, I'd have to kick it cause it's so friggin ugly.

 

So all 123 people who actually purchased that thing are writing in and complaining huh?


[/quote]


There may be 124 people that purchased that thing. That is, if my brother was telling the truth when I asked if he wrote a letter or not.

The question is, how many of the GTO owners regret their purchase? I drove little bro's GTO before I ever test drove the Mustang. I have to say I was impressed with the performance just couldn't get past the looks....... He drove my car after I got it and still won't admit he likes it better than his car even it if is "less horsepower" Every time he brings that up I just smile and say "Yeah, but my car's prettier" That always ends the conversation

 

although im a die hard mustang fan i am a big american muscle car fan. i always loved the uniqe and exciting looks of the old GTO'S, when i read one of the first articles with pictures to say i was dissapointed was an understatement. ive spent years listeing to my fathers stories from the late 60's and 70's about the muscle car era, and about how all his friends had camaros, chargers challengers, dusters, demons and any other factory hot rod you could imagine. he himself had a 70 mach1. i was looking forward to just another american muscle car, but GM really screwed up on the GTO, boring and uninspiring. With the firebirds being extinct, and the re-birth of the camaro still a lingering rumor, its just the mustang that is left to inspire. i myself love the new mustang, and if i werent 18 and stuggeling to make insurance payments on my 95GT id go to a dealership and buy one. but thanks to massive screw ups like the new pontiac GTO (or "very fast grand prix") and even worse screw ups like the 4 DOOR ugly (might as well be a magnum or chrysler 300) Dodoge charger, kids my age are blowing money away on fart can hondas, and even worse SRT4 neons and chevy cobalts. i hope domestic car dealers take notice and take a hint from ford, we want muscle cars, not big engines in european or ausralian styled sedans.
long live the mustang, true american muscle!

 

 

[/b][/quote]

Actually I own two GTO's. 65 ragtop and a 67 hardtop coupe.
I think the Austrailian Holden mutant (2004+) is ugly save for the cool retro badges.
Pontiac should keep the GTO but redesign it into something unique but
with features that remind you of the old ones.

Kinda like the 2005 Mustang! B)

 

I owned a 1985 special service Mustang that I got when it was just 1 year old. I proceeded to run that car till 1997 when I sold it at 225,000 miles. Still going strong. Except for the AC and faded paint, it was still looking and running in cherry condition. I sold it when I picked up a used Thunderbird SC.

While I owned that SC, I bought, drove, and sold over 8 CHP Mustangs over a 4 year period ending in 2000. I then sold my SC and bought a Camaro Z28.

I picked up another SC 2 years ago, and have restored it to mint condition. It floors people when they see 205,000 miles on the odometer.

The reason I am telling you this is because I want you to understand that I have a history with Ford. I'm a Mustang Cobra and Mach 1 fan, I have done phone interviews with John Coletti of SVT on at least 3 occasions, and occasionally write articles for a couple of magazines. I am an enthusiast for the best performance car at a reasonable price. Period.

That said, the Car and Driver test was the most flawed and the most tilted car test they have ever done in their 40 year history. That test made them lose alot of credibility.

Why?

They have a rating scale that they use when evaluating cars. It's designed to be fair, and over the years has done an outstanding job of giving an honest and balenced rating of vehicles they test.

The GTO outperformed the Mustang in the end, racking up the greater number of points over the Mustang GT they tested. The GTO won their test. No question about it.

The problem is that Car and Driver Magazine is having some type of (*edited*) contest with someone at GM, for whatever reason. Case in point: the original 2004 GTO article recieved relatively high praise from C&D. But their TV show (filmed later) slammed it. An accompanying article to the original story mentioned how they took their test GTO on an unauthorized car race in Neveda then fabricated a story about how they had to take the car to a frame shop because they twisted the chassis. Anyone with a passing knowledge of cars and manufacturer's policy on returning test & loaner cars to them for repairs saw through C&D's BS on this.

Bob Lutz soon after gave a veiled threat about holding up advertizing against car mags unfair reporting (directed mainly at C&D).

Furthermore, Car & Driver named the new Mustang among their 10 best, while essentially ignoring the GTO. When the GTO beat Mustang in overall points, they came up with another catagory. Taking a jab at a term Bob Lutz coined during interviews earlier in his position at GM, they called this invented catagory a "Gotta Have" catagory, then named the Mustang the winner.

There were alot of loyal readers rightfully outraged, and I'd say that most all of us in the auto journalist world shook our heads.

Anyone who has taken time to drive the GTO realizes it's a great car in search of a great wrapper. It's interior & fit & finish is perhaps the best you'll find at that price, the performance is fantastic, and the interior is not only very well detailed, it's very well made (unless you are going to be absolutly silly & compare it to $45,000++++ BMWs & Mercedes.

From a price standpoint, the common mistake is to compare the GTO to a base Mustang GT. Since GTOs come loaded, it's best to compare it to a loaded to the gills Mustang GT, which approaches 30 grand. Then it becomes a simple choice as to how fast are you willing to pay for.

The base Mustang at $25,000 is the best deal on the planet for a RWD V8 coupe. Period. Ford also managed to do what GM seemed incapable of doing: To value their own piece of automotive history enough to make it's continued profitable existence an important part of the company decision making process (even the very tiny GM-Holden subsiderary managed to get a RWD coupe together on a shoestring budget).

Car and Driver should have said that while admitting that GTO outscored Mustang. Car and Driver should also not let their personal disputes with GM management ruin their stelar reputation for fair and critical evaluations

No, those 123 readers aren't GTO owners.

 

I owned a 1985 special service Mustang that I got when it was just 1 year old. I proceeded to run that car till 1997 when I sold it at 225,000 miles. Still going strong. Except for the AC and faded paint, it was still looking and running in cherry condition. I sold it when I picked up a used Thunderbird SC............

The GTO outperformed the Mustang in the end, racking up the greater number of points over the Mustang GT they tested. The GTO won their test. No question about it.

The problem is that Car and Driver Magazine is having some type of (*edited*)

No, those 123 readers aren't GTO owners.
[/b][/quote]
all in all it might be the greatest car ever, its just the fact that they COMPLETELY ignored the heritage, and revived a name that had a very loyal following and tied NOTHING AT ALL into the name, you admit this yourself. it was a dissapointment simply because they called it a GTO, plain and simple.
if chevy decided to bring back the camaro, but instead of making it look like what we know or expect to be a camao, slapped a camaro emblem on a cobalt would anyone want it?

 

I just got my issue, what a bunch or crybabies. The people that wrote in, I could tear apart in a rebuttal, but it's not worth my time. I will spend my time driving around in my AMERICAN muscle car. I love how the one guy said "Ford took the easy(cheap?) way out and stole styling cues. Mr. Knabb YOU ARE DRIVING A REBADGED HOLDEN, WHO TOOK THE EASY WAY OUT? If these letters are indictive of GTO owners, I will say they are amatuers. The type of amateurs who pull up next will pull up next to me rev and then spin thru first and miss second