Talk:Pontiac GTO
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Tri-Power/Tri Power
Is Tri-Power spelled with a dash or without one? Because both appear in the article, with and without a dash.
68.61.181.155 21:05, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Merge
No, don't merge it, get rid of the smaller. It's poorly written especially compared to the larger article and makes some incorrect assertions (such as rushing features into 04' production and future production possibilities).
Yes, merge the Pontiac gto into Pontiac GTO or just redirect because the gto is just rehashing everything that the main GTO article covers. Either get rid of it or merge it in. KLRMNKY 01:23, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
- I've turned it into a redirect. A quick glance showed content that wasn't as good as here. Anyone that wants to dig thru it and use whatever was there is able to do so. Friday (talk) 01:56, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
I think the whole 2004 section is full of weasel wording too. Best to cite some reviews for the critism of the vehicle if the detractions are to stay. --Decromin 16:24, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
The '04-'06 GTO was not cancelled because of poor sales, it was ended because GM/Holden wanted to shift the production lines to build Zeta type cars. Also, when it was initially decided to build the GTO, it was determined to only run it for a maximum of 3 years since this is the time allowed to build within to avoid having to run numerous crash and safety tests. Also, continuing on, the aged Cattera (late 90's Cadillac frame) that the GTO is build upon was replaced by the CTS and is deemed bulky and heavy as compared to modern automtove chassis. 65.166.103.203 05:32, 4 January 2007 (UTC)From a guy that actually owns and works on modern GTO's and knows what he is talking about.
[edit] 1974 power/weight ratio
- I removed an unsourced claim about a "record power to weight ratio" for the 1974 GTO. Since the weight was something like 80 percent of its predecessor's weight, and the horsepower was something like 50 percent of the actual (not advertised) power of its predecessor, this couldn't be true even among GTOs, before one even considers the AC Cobra or Lotus Super Seven. I'll check the edit history to see if this was just a hoax by an anon, as the poor spelling of the deleted sentence suggests. Barno 21:44, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
I say drop the other page.
[edit] Holden Monaro
Can you get Holden Monaro parts from Austraila and replace the current Pontiac GTO parts with them transforming it into a Holden Monaro? 209.137.173.69 20:00, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
- I think it might be possible; the only problem would be some interior parts, since the Monaro was only produced in right-hand drive while the GTO was, of course, produced in left-hand drive. --ApolloBoy 04:59, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
-
- And the GTO logo is stitched into the seats, which would recquire restitching. I have actually seen one, with new fascias front and rear. It can be done, there will still be places where the GTO logo will be visible. Bok269 23:40, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Reasons to not Merge
This car only holds the namesake GTO, it is a travesty to include this model with the likes of a car that was argueably the original American Muscle Car. Rather, if anything, the page should be merged with the Monaro as it holds no deserving merit except for holding the same name as the GTO, nothing else, no similar body lines or looks. John DeLorean is rolling in his grave knowing this car holds the name GTO. The concept car has a greater likeness. I take offense to the fact the car holds the name GTO, and I'm a Ford man! Cobrapete 19:32, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
I've gone over the articles it looks like the information could be merged into both the GTO and Monaro articles. Either way it looks like a good candidate for merger in my opinion. - Diceman 05:27, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Reasons for Merger
I suggested the Merger because the Pontiac GTO (2004) article contains info already mentioned here, and goes beyond the 2004 generation. Other 1 generation car articles only have that one generation. I apologize if I didn't go about this the right way; I am new to Wikipedia. Bok269 23:42, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
- Agreed, keep it all on one page. clever curmudgeon 03:00, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
On second thought, since many vehicles have articles for each generation, why not remove the platform for the new vehicle and move it to a new page? Bok269 01:16, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
I agree: merge. Or, more precisely, eliminate the GTO (2004) page and fold what is of value in it (not much) into the GTO page. I seem to pretty much agree with most other posters.
And somebody fix the internal links, too. I just fixed several but ran out of patience. --Deaconse 02:52, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Song
There was a popular song about the Pontiac GTO. It was called "GTO" or "Little GTO" or something.
I'm surprised nobody added it before me. It was called "Little GTO" and was done by Ronny and the Daytonas. They were a pretty good Beach Boys-esque surf/hot rod quartet. I'd suggest anyone reading this should have a listen. Now I have that "wah wah wah wah wah wah wah" part from Little GTO stuck in my head. 67.8.128.66 18:56, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
- I still don't believe his GTO was beating the gassers and the rail jobs. Gzuckier 19:15, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
i do not have the book in front but some of the informatio about the 66 and 67 gto is to the best of my knoledge incorrect. My source is a book written in the eighties ( the big little GTO book) and from archive information available for a fee from the pontiac archives which are now privately held i think. Send them your VIN, a fee, and they will send you all info on your exact car that is available. Anyway 1. the engine change from 66 to 67 was prompted by the first ever federal emmisions law that required a closed circuit Positive crankcase ventilation system for internal crankcase gases. The 389 usd and drop yube style breather dumping oil and combustion gases that passed the ring out the side of the block and onto the ground, in a closed system which all us automakers had to switch to which is what prompted the chang in block designs and in the engines that were offered. 2. the 67 was the only year that offered as its only model not an option, your posting says it was the 66. 3. the automatics withe dual gate shifter was commonly refered to as a "His and Hers", "D" for her and manual shifting for him. 4. the underrating of stated horsepower numbers was driven by to factors, i am not an trained expert but i do own a 67 four speed close ratio covertable generally considred the most desirable of all the second gen goats and have been very interested and "on the inside of the muscle car scene" for twenty years my understand is that as the horspower wars started to rage out of control in detroit; mostly between ford and chevy on the front page and chevy and pontiac internally at GM John Delorean was fastly making a name for himself. at at that time the major manufacurer beleived in the mantra win in sunday sell on monday.
[edit] actual homologation
I swear i remember some article in the magazines at the time that somebody at GM went through the steps to actually homologate the original GTO under FIA rules, and somebody ended up taking it to Le Mans (I think)... can't find any kind of reference on google, though. Grr. it would spice up the article. Gzuckier 18:41, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Different Track Times
Just commenting on the quarter mile times, they seem real slow. I know a guy thats had 6 GTOs and he took a few to the track and one of his bone stock 1967 GTOs with a 389 4 speed did low 13s on crappy tires and pump gas.
[edit] Name change to Firebird??
I realize that the entire section on the 2009 GTO is speculative, but the bit about it possibly changing its name to Firebird is beyond speculative and something I've only seen as a few bloggers' opinions on what they think the new vehicle should be. --Mary quite contrary (hai?) 22:33, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
