Street/Strip Raced a guy from a light? Had that ride of yours on the timed track? Tell your story here.

GTO

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Dec 27, 2004 | 05:34 PM
  #21  
me alot fast than u's Avatar
me alot fast than u
I ♥ Acer
 
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 335
From:
Default RE: GTO

I agree...and they are way over priced....people buy the camaro..all the v6 ones they could make..but lets be real 30k for a ss when you can get a gt in the mid 20's...gm killed the car for greed..hell look at the price of the truck about 3-5k more...until they get wages under control there sales will still suffer look at honda had there first sales loss ever......the car is soo plain no strips or a nice hood nothing....the american buyer has wised up alil and won't just buy anything... now the aussie car looked good
Old Dec 27, 2004 | 05:58 PM
  #22  
Dan04COBRA's Avatar
Dan04COBRA
6th Gear Member
 
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 14,917
Default RE: GTO


ORIGINAL: 66chevyIISS

ya why was the Camaro losing money? no one wanted it lol.
GM wasn't losing money on the Camaro. It was contractual problems with the factories they were being built in, they decided it wasn't a financially smart idea to continue producing them until they did a full remodel of the car.
Old Dec 27, 2004 | 07:02 PM
  #23  
me alot fast than u's Avatar
me alot fast than u
I ♥ Acer
 
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 335
From:
Default RE: GTO

cannadians just didn't want to build them
Old Dec 27, 2004 | 07:13 PM
  #24  
66chevyIISS's Avatar
66chevyIISS
2nd Gear Member
 
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 454
From:
Default RE: GTO

Part of it was the plant the other part was the declining in sales was huge. If the Camaro was really hot and sold then they would find a way to keep making it. No company is going to kill off a car if it was a seller. Its been well documented the sales of the Camaro was declining every year.
Old Dec 27, 2004 | 07:24 PM
  #25  
TommyV8's Avatar
TommyV8
5th Gear Member
 
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 4,438
From: St. Louis
Default RE: GTO

If I'm not mistaken, I believe in 2002 sales of the fbody (Firebird and Camaro combined) were about 70,000 compared to 130,000 for the Mustang. I read that in the Hot Rod article about the new Stang.
Old Dec 27, 2004 | 11:57 PM
  #26  
Guest
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default RE: GTO


ORIGINAL: TommyV8

If I'm not mistaken, I believe in 2002 sales of the fbody (Firebird and Camaro combined) were about 70,000 compared to 130,000 for the Mustang. I read that in the Hot Rod article about the new Stang.
The plant could produce 250,000 units a year, they weren't selling them because GM wasn't advertising them like Ford was the Mustang.

Dollar per what you get is exactly the same as the Mustangs.

19k for a V6
24k for a Z28/GT
30k for an SS/na 4.6 SVT

I don't see where you guys are coming from with this "the GT was a better deal" when the Z28 ran mid 13s for the same base price as a 14 second GT?
Old Dec 28, 2004 | 12:02 AM
  #27  
jdaniel's Avatar
jdaniel
I ♥ Acer
 
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 9,172
From:
Default RE: GTO

Well not EVERYONE buys the car for what it will do in the 1/4. Some people like ride quality and comfort over performance.
Old Dec 28, 2004 | 12:06 AM
  #28  
Guest
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default RE: GTO

Wait... what?

If you want ride quality and comfort why the hell are you buying a car that is built for the sole purpose of 1/4 mile drag racing? Go buy a damn cadillac.
Old Dec 28, 2004 | 12:19 AM
  #29  
96SilverLT1's Avatar
96SilverLT1
3rd Gear Member
 
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 947
From:
Default RE: GTO

lol.. wait.. have you driven a mustang? they are not even close to an fbody in ride quality... very clicky stearing responce..
Old Dec 28, 2004 | 12:22 AM
  #30  
Sidewayz6.0's Avatar
Sidewayz6.0
6th Gear Member
 
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 10,639
From: IL
Default RE: GTO

Actually, you've got that backwards. Thats your opinion. Personally, having owned both the Mustang is 10X nicer to drive. But then thats my opinion. Not to mention the ****ty seats in the Camaro.




All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:40 PM.