Zeta Platform Not Cancelled

[GoatFink]

I need to set the record straight. The Zeta platform is NOT, I repeat NOT cancelled as suggested by a few posters. Zeta will continue as planned in Australia, however, not in NA. This potentially means the new GTO will still perhaps be made in Australia. Before the armchair enthusiasts cringe, or complain over that fact, GO TEST DRIVE A 2005 GTO!!!! It is one nice ride.

Also, most people are clueless as to the legacy and heritage of the Monaro. Australia's musclecar of the 1960s. The GTO is genetically linked to the Aussie Monaro in a few ways. It should be no surprise because Holden since the mid 1930s has been owned by GM. Australians love their V8 RWD Musclecars and Americans do not exclusively own the Musclecar market. That is the reality.

Here's another reality check. No such thing as a car 100% built or made in the USA. So it's time to get off this old tired hang-up that has ruined our economy because we failed to have world class presence and performance by trying to stigmatize cars that are not domestically made rather than make something the rest of the world sees as very worthy to purchase because its competitive in all the right categories. We simply suck at making quality and performance at the same time. Look at the 2005 GTO and its the closest thing we have from some company owned by GM. The '04/'05 GTO is simply world class with thunder.

Sure the style of the new GTO is understated. It was never been meant to be a retro car or in your face styling. The 1964 GTO was the same way in some aspect of its design with very modest exterior enhancements, but when it roared there was no mistaking this beast was full of hate and fury, and it didn't completely look the part. That is called a sleeper and that's the beauty of a sleeper, most people have no clue except for the initiated, or the educated; the true real gearheads.

I challenge those who are bashing the GTO to go visit Holden's website and see the capabilities of this car; especially the HSVz series cars. Not many people are aware the '04/'05 Monaro 427 Concept had the 7.0 underneath its hood before the new Z06 '06 Corvette was brought to the public's attention. Producing over 520 Horsepower and loads of torque. The capabilities of the Monaro based on a concept design in 1998 is still remarkable. The quality of the Monaro CV8 is just remarkable. We will never see this much quality in a GM product for under 33K.

I don't remember many people crying when the Camaro/Firebird was made in Canada and though it was a powerful car, it didn't look all that great. It sure as heck had no retro cues except some nostrils for the Firebirds. The Fox4 platform Mustangs had more retro cues and paid homage to the classic 60s than the old F bodies did and nobody complained about that. Then Ford comes out with the 05 Mustang GT and everybody is mad at Pontiac for not having a retro GTO. Really!!

Nobody bothered to think that the 2004 GTO was produced before the 2005 Ford Mustang ever came out. Honestly, how retarded can people be when they cry on the fact the GTO is not retro when retro wasn't even the in-thing when the GTO was re-introduced in 2002/2003? The Camaro and Firebird was gone, not to ever come back and the only thing to fill that void was a car based on the Monaro CV8.
Then again, the GTO wasn't to be a pony car, but an intermediate sports coupe.

Lutz did a good job bringing the GTO back. For one, at least the new GTO was not a re-badged FWD V6 car. Look at what Chevy did to the Malibu name, and the once proud SS moniker. Simply sacrilige! It's like making the Dodge Charger into a sedan. What were they thinking at DCX? Not that it won't perform but it no longer fits the category where it originated from. It no longer is a coupe but a sedan. Chargers and 300s were never sedans!!! They are built in Canada, and I don't hear many complaints. Matter of fact, the 300C gets accolades galore.

The new GTO both '04/'05 performs extremely well for the money and you get a lot of car for the money too. Very solid, very reliable, comfortable and powerful. The complaints are mainly from those who never got their lazy butts to a dealer and actually look at one, sit inside one and drive one. Yes, the car is understated even when compared to the Monaro CV8, but that doesn't mean it can't move and be a world class performer. Many Japanese cars are understated, but they last and people buy more Japanese imports than from any other country. Quality!

And for those who think the GTO is going to be heavily incentivized for 2005. You are so dead wrong. Not for '05 they are not, and the sales for Feb were at near the expectation rate to go up 35% more in Mar with NO incentives. Matter of fact you can't even find an '04 at the incentivized rate. There are less than 15,000 of 2005 GTOs in country and they are already being swallowed up by performance enthusiasts. So brag about the Mustang sales all you want, there are tons of 'em and everybody secretary, nurse, principal, maid, will own one. Dime a dozen! The GTO, unique, more rarified and still spanking the Mustang GT's retro'd out butt.

 

[Jay]

Awesome post, I completely agree with you.

Welcome to GTPlanet by the way.

 

[Sniffs]

I have a pic of a late sixties Monaro in my personal archives. now I know where the Chevelle came from or went to, because that's exactly what the old ones look like.
thing is, retro look is "in" right now, and it was started by the chrysler PT Cruiser...it's also why GM dug out the old designs. after all, there's a rumpr that camaro is to return, Impala goes back to RWD, and that GM is gonna dig out the Chevelle name as well. look at DC, they hauld out the old names and old forms too.

the only problem is that this is an EXACT repeat of what happened forty years ago to parents, granparents for some of you, and some of you directly...I have a feeling that everything's gonna crash when suddenly that Idiot Nader will do it again, and by '13, we'll be back down to 100 horse 4 pots, and, instead of buried in Japanese cars, we'll be buried in CHINESE ones instead.

 

[Jay]

I have a pic of a late sixties Monaro in my personal archives. now I know where the Chevelle came from or went to, because that's exactly what the old ones look like.
thing is, retro look is "in" right now, and it was started by the chrysler PT Cruiser...it's also why GM dug out the old designs. after all, there's a rumpr that camaro is to return, Impala goes back to RWD, and that GM is gonna dig out the Chevelle name as well. look at DC, they hauld out the old names and old forms too.

I would have though the retro started with the Viper (Shelby kinda look) and then the Prowler and the other concepts like Sidewinder etc, before the PT cruiser.


BTW I am currently restoring a 71 Holden Monaro (HG) this is the last of the first shape Monaros made 67-71.

 

[JNasty4G63]

I, for one, could care less about the GTO, 300C, Mustang, Charger, or other cars like that. I want this whole "retro" thing to go away. I don't want new cars with old names. I don't want new cars that look like old cars. I don't care about that. I think its real sad that the manufacturers can't come up with SOMETHING new. Yes, I know, they are just making what people want. But, would it be so hard to just make a new car and give it a new name???

I can live with the Vette and Mustang, because they never went away. But, the GTO had its chance back in the day. It didn't last, let it go. The Camaro/Firebird had their chance, didn't make it, let it go. The REAL Chrysler 300s had a chance over 30 years ago, it didn't last, let it go. Same with the Charger, the GT40, and Thunderbird. They all came and went. MAKE SOMETHING NEW!!!! Thats all I ask. If a car goes away, just let it go, and make something new. I like the performance and style of the new GTO, but just call it something else.

The manufacturers get away with selling mediocre cars just by leaning on their heritage. They aren't selling anything new, just getting the same people to buy the same cars. Its lame. Look what happened with the Thunderbird. It looked great, but that was about it. But Ford thought it was going to be this great thing, and people didn't bite. Which isn't shocking, because besides the looks, the new T-Bird was a boring, underwhelming car.

I just want new cars. Thats all. I'm glad Chevy ditched the Cavalier name and started fresh with a new car, name, and chassis with the new Cobalt. Fresh start, leave the old car in the past. More manufacturers need to do this.

Hilg

 

[Sniffs]

actually, J nasty, the guys that can afford to buy the cars nowadays are the ones that bought the originals back in the day. with cars starting at 20k for a super cheap nowadays...the only ones that can afford them are those making a couple Large a year. and then they buy cars that cost half a mil anyway. not only that...they're out of Ideas. ford, for example, is burned out. they can't find anything new that doesn't have the word "truck" attached to it. car guys have run out of new Ideas, and are bringing back the old ones.

not only that, the newest name in cars just happens to be Saturn...and even those designs are considered stale.
there's nothing new under the sun...everybody's allready thought of or used everything, and you have to be carefull what you DO use, or you will offend someone.
want proof? Ford Australia is using the Falcon and Galaxy names down there, yet...which we haven't since the sixties (psst, send one of those sweet falcons up here)

ViperGTSR01: yeah, but CC (now DC) was well overdue for a super to compete against Corvette™...
i heard of the Sidewinder...but you forgot the Copperhead

 

[Jay]

i heard of the Sidewinder...but you forgot the Copperhead

Yeah, could meantion lots of Chryslers concepts that didnt go anywhere.

 

[JNasty4G63]

See, thats my point. They are just making the same crap, and getting the same crappy people to buy it. But, it doesn't matter how much the cars cost. Hell, I can afford a GTO, 300C, and Thunderbird. Thats not the point. How much it costs isn't the problem. The problem is that they seem to know that they are making boring vehicles, so they slap a vintage name or look on it, and hope for the best. I mean, really, the 300C isn't that great of a car. I've driven a friends few times and was left feeling nothing. If it didn't say "300" and "Hemi" on the car, it would sell like A/C in the winter. Its just lame.

I want innovation. I'm talking about cars like the Audi TT, the Scion xB, and M-Benz CLS just to name a few. Those cars have style, innovation, and exude new-ness. They aren't anything dramatic, but with the way they shook up their individual segment is great.

The TT is great. Sure, its not the first or best sports coupe ever created. But its one of the best ones ever at blending style, character, and performance, all while not having to rely on old names or "retro" crap to sell.

The xB is the same thing. Again, its not a new type of car. It's just a small economy car, basically just a 5-door hatchback. But, regardless of what you think of the styling, it is unique. They made if fun to own an inexpensive, reliable, full-character little car.

And, the new CLS is great as well. Its just a sedan in essence. But like they call it, its more of a 4-door coupe. Put some emotion in the design. The way they made it look like very little out there, all while keeping it look like a true Benz is great.

Thats the type of thing I'm talking about. I don't care if the type of car is not new. Just don't make another "Me Too" kind of car. And, stop relying on past greatness to sell cars. Just make them good, and people will buy them. Thats all I ask.

Hilg

 

[1X83Z]

Yeah, could meantion lots of Chryslers concepts that didnt go anywhere.

Truer words have yet to be spoken. Chrysler took a lot of good car names in the 1990s and slapped them on really pathetic concept cars that amounted to very little.

 

[Sniffs]

Jnasty...I still don't know what you mean by "new" you surely don't mean body styles, they've finished up with all of those, as far as I'm concerned, and bringing back the Station Wagon body isn't gonna help. mabey if a US maker goes back to contemplating a mid engine again *shrugs*

unfortunately, you'd have to specify what your opinion of "new" is. you don't wanna see any old names dug up, no moscle car platform types, etc, etc...so what's left? i need a definition to get what your getting at. I'm an old fart that saw the death of the Wagon and the beginning of the minivan (at least, I FEEL like an old fart...I've had to deal with teenagers and 20 somethings for so long, that I think I'm old )

 

[JNasty4G63]

Jnasty...I still don't know what you mean by "new".....unfortunately, you'd have to specify what your opinion of "new" is.

Did you read all my post??? How hard is it to understand??? I gave 3 examples of cars that I'm talking about. I'm not talking about body styles, or genres of cars. I'm just talking fresh looks at current things. Like the examples I gave, you don't have to completely go against the norm to have a unique and fresh car.

.....you don't wanna see any old names dug up, no moscle car platform types, etc, etc...so what's left?

No, thats not what I said. I don't care if the car makers make muscle cars, or if they make sedans, or wagons, or cabrios. I just hate it when they make an average one of those cars, and then try to get all nostalgic with it in the hopes it will sell.

Like the GTO. Its an old car that GM just MILDLY touched up, and then tried to get everyone to think it was the second coming of the muscle car. Its just a mild, plain coupe with "GTO" badges on it. I like the car, its a nice car. But the way they try to get all nostalgic and crap just makes me mad. Its bad enough they just bring over an older model and try to get everyone pumped up about it. But, then they try to make us excited about a "NEW GTO" as well. Just make a NEW sports coupe and give it a new name. I don't care what they call it, just call it something new.

Hilg

 

[Sniffs]

JNasty...you gotta remember, theres guys in here that know more about carbs and obsucure manufacturers than about plain and subtle model types.
unfortunately, not everybody is into performance, etc. most people, Me included, simply drive the car...and gon't give a crap about how it looks, how it performs, etc. that's why they make and sell plain boring things like Freestar and FiveHundred.

but the one thing I think your not getting is that it probably costs too much to develop a scratch design. I agree that things are rather bland right now, but that's because of the consumer advocate movement that started in the 70's that bleached and blanded down automobiles. these are the guys that are currently running and designing todays cars. the GTO current design is a 90's "ultimate Jellybean" style...people are running out of Ideas on how to freshen things or create something new. that's why the cars are currently bland.

it will be probably 20 or 30 years before the current generation can get INTO running things, and de-bleach the car market.

 

[JNasty4G63]

.....most people, Me included, simply drive the car...and gon't give a crap about how it looks, how it performs, etc. that's why they make and sell plain boring things like Freestar and FiveHundred.

Thats fine. I'm not saying EVERY car has to be a flashy, fast, fun piece. Like I was saying in my first post, what Chevy did with the Cobalt is great. Its not a flashy car, or anything like that. But, they started fresh with a new platform and a new name. Get rid of the Cavailer. And, like you said, the Five Hundred is another good example. It doesn't have to be a brand new car with an exclusive chassis.

The Audi TT that I mentioned uses the same basic chassis as the Golf and Jetta, so its nothing new underneath. But, they were very bold with the look and feel of the car. Its great.

.....but the one thing I think your not getting is that it probably costs too much to develop a scratch design.....people are running out of Ideas on how to freshen things or create something new. that's why the cars are currently bland.

See, I don't agree with that. I don't see expensive, I see laziness. I mean, sure, there are some cars that you just shouldn't mess with. The Accord, the F-150, the Camry. Things like that, the big money makers, they are fine. You don't have to break the mold with those.

But, then you have cars like the new Mustang. They finally got a "new" chassis in the Mustang, and had a chance to do something fresh with it and move it forward. What did they do?? They make it look like a "retro 60s fastback" and all that crap. I agree that it looks fine, and it does work. But, its like they were too lazy to try and advance the design, so they just went backwards and played it safe. Lame.

Thats all I'm talking about. They don't have to break molds, or create all-new exclusive chassis' for cars. Just don't get all lame with the retro names and look. It works for a few cars, like the VW Bug and PT. Both of those cars are using an existing chassis, but made it into a fun, flashback style look. But, now it seems like all the domestic manufacturers are just relying on peoples fond memories to sell cars, and not just selling a good car.

Hilg

 

[1X83Z]

But, now it seems like all the domestic manufacturers are just relying on peoples fond memories to sell cars, and not just selling a good car.

Tone down the generalizations. Have a look at the domestic manufacturers' retro portfolios:

Ford
Retro:
- Mustang
- Thunderbird
Non-retro:
- Crown Victoria
- Escape
- Excursion
- Expedition
- Explorer
- Explorer Sport Trac
- F-150
- Five Hundred
- Focus
- Freestar
- Freestyle
- Ranger
- Taurus

Dodge/Chrysler
Retro:
- 300
- PT Cruiser
Non-retro:
- Caravan
- Crossfire
- Dakota
- Durango
- Magnum
- Neon
- Pacifica
- Ram
- Sebring
- Stratus
- Town & Country
- Viper

Chevrolet
Retro:
- SSR
Non-retro:
- Astro (design dates from 1983 so perhaps it should be in the above category)
- Avalanche
- Aveo
- Blazer
- Cavalier
- Cobalt
- Colorado
- Corvette
- Equinox
- Impala
- Malibu
- Monte Carlo
- Silverado
- Suburban
- Tahoe
- Trailblazer
- Uplander

As you can see the VAST MAJORITY of domestic cars have no retro components. A few GMs have a retro name and nothing else. That's it. You can't point the finger at American manufacturers for going "all retro" because it hasn't happened and it won't.

 

[JNasty4G63]

Why the hell doesn't anyone understand what I'm saying here???? I'm not saying that EVERY domestic car out there is "retro" or that every car has to be new and fresh. What I'm saying is, I just hate that all these "retro" cars come out, and people just think they are the greatest things around. Thats all. I know there are plenty of cars out there that aren't retro.

My point with the "domestic" thing was that there is very few other manufacturers doing it like that. Thats all. I don't mind the retro look, if its done right. The new Z is fine and works well. Its a modern interpretation of what the essence of "Z" is. Not, a modern chassis with an old 240Z style body on it, ala the Mustang. But lately, in my opinion, all the domestic "retro" cars are just lame attempts at new cars relying solely on the nostalgia factor to sell (GTO, Mustang, 300). Thats my point.

Hilg

 

[Layla's Keeper]

J-Nasty, you do realize that Chrysler brought back the 300 letter series a full model platform BEFORE the current 300C, right?

The 300M was based on the LH series of front wheel drive V6 sedans, and was hailed as the sporty stylish member of the set. By most accounts, it was actually a fine driving sedan when you got right down to it, just not a take-on-all-comers knockout BMW beater.

Chrysler decided that what it needed was something to set its sedans apart from those of GM, Ford, Honda, Toyota, Nissan, and Mazda. The "cab forward" LH series had done well, but the cars were only stylistically different from their competitors and certainly not memorable or striking after almost ten years.

So, Chrysler raided the Mercedes parts bin for some suspension gear and the Dodge truck bin for engines, then set about recalling not only classic Dodge and Chrysler design cues, but cues that were essentially American. Big chrome grilles with broad bumpers and squared off shoulders. Rumpy V8's and RWD. These sedans were going to ignore every Lancer, New Yorker, Intrepid, and Concorde ever built and put Chrysler back in the days of Monacos, Imperials, and Coronets.

The new cars took the essence of the swaggering masculine American sedan of the 60's and 70's and put it in a well-behaved, enviromentally and socially responsible European package. It's a package that works incredibly well, and Chrysler not only delivered it, but delivered it at a price that every Joe, Dick, and Tommy can afford.

The Ford Five Hundred offers a much more discreet (and some say modern) package than the 300C, but asking men to choose between the equally priced Ford Five Hundred and Chrysler 300C/Dodge Charger-Magnum is basically asking this question.....

Who would you rather be? Bono or Bon Scott?

 

[Sniffs]

right now, these are the tastes in the american car market: retro, trucks. like I said earlier, the guys that can afford to buy the new stuff are in their fifties and sixties. the "young" guys of Gen x are purchasing European and Japanese imports cause they make a couple hundred large, and can afford it. the middle aged guys wanna feel young again, the families are climbing into SUV's instead of minivans, now...the domestics aren't up to par anymore.

retro SELLS, Jnasty...that's the point. that's why they're making them in the first place.

and yI think the reason that they've dug up the old names BESIDES that is because they can't come up with anything NEW. the guys currently DESIGNING the cars are 30's and 40's...who grew us screwing around with said classics, and want to see what a MODERN version would do. mostly to get away from the bland 90's leftovers they drive to work, and chuck the 80's lemons they ended up being driven to school in.

btw, M5...crown vic and Astro/Safari are finally dead.
ford, you notice, is down to taurus, focus, and five Hundred...everything else is an SUV...like I said earlier, you wanna car, go see the japanese.

 

[JNasty4G63]

J-Nasty, you do realize that Chrysler brought back the 300 letter series a full model platform BEFORE the current 300C, right?

Yes, I do know this, it shared a platform with the LHS, Concorde, and Intrepid. Thats my point. I'm not talking about JUST the 300C. I know whats going on with the 300C, I don't need a lesson on this. But, if you get down to the heart of it, they already MADE a 300C back in '57.

retro SELLS, Jnasty...that's the point. that's why they're making them in the first place.

OK, I'm going to say this once more, and then I'm done. No one seems to be able to read or comprehend what I'm saying. So, I'll just speak my piece and be done with this thread......

I don't care about the retro look or names or whatever. Retro is fine, and yes, it does sell. My point is, many of the manufacturers seem to me, to be relying on anything retro just to help get away with selling bland cars. I mean, give me a break. Monte Carlo, Impala, Malibu, 300, Charger. Those to me, are all average, mediocre cars using throw-back names to spark interest. Then you have cars like the Prowler, SSR, and Thunderbird that were basically lame cars with the throwback look to try and sell.

My question is, WHY is it so hard for them to just use a new name and look. There are roughly 60,000 words in the english language alone. But, no, they feel they need to try and fluff up these so-so cars by dropping an old-school names and styling cues on them in the hopes that someone will have a childhood flashback and buy one. If Ford could have done with the new Mustang what Nissan did with the Z, they would have a winner. But, instead of just using some styling cues and feel of the older cars like the Z did. They just straight away copied the old 60's look. I like the look, when its on the old '60s car, not one in 2005. No one seems to want to advance things.

JUST MAKE GOOD CARS!!!

Hilg

 

[1X83Z]

Why the hell doesn't anyone understand what I'm saying here???? I'm not saying that EVERY domestic car out there is "retro" or that every car has to be new and fresh.

I know what you're saying - just, you said that domestic manufacturers are relying on peoples' fond memories to sell cars, and my point was to remind you that this is only true in the minority of cases.

btw, M5...crown vic and Astro/Safari are finally dead.
ford, you notice, is down to taurus, focus, and five Hundred...everything else is an SUV...like I said earlier, you wanna car, go see the japanese.

Astro and Safari are dead, but the Crown Victoria will outlive us all.

Ford is actually down to Focus, Freestar, Five Hundred, Mustang, and Crown Victoria, with Taurus going away. As many SUVs as cars - not bad for a full-market brand, especially given the popularity of the SUV market.

 

[somebody]

JNasty - don't worry, I think understand and agree with you. There is nothing wrong with using retro names and styling as long as the final product meets or beats the product it was based on. There are a few good cars on the market where this has happened. Yet some manufacturers are using the retro fad to slap together cars quick (and sometimes nasty) to try and turn a buck, when what they should be doing is improving their current crop or developing new platforms.

As an example, the new Mustang is a good car, but the retro styling has been applied for no apparent reason. They would have been better off with a modified version of the last Mustangs body or developing the new car further to make it some sort of anniversary/collectors edition where the retro styling may have some relevance.
Similar situation with the new GTO. While there is nothing wrong with the Monaro from which it is based, the GTO wasn't improved enough in the American conversion and therefore comes up short in comparison to the old Judge.

 

[Takumi Fujiwara]

I like the new Mustang. While it recalls the styling cues of the original, I don't think it's retro, rather, it looks like a modern evolution of the original. It's also, by many reports, the best driving Mustang of all time, and that's good enough for me. I don't care how a car looks, if it's the best driving, I'll drive a hot pink Vitz or whatever. (And probably enjoy it, too, cause nobody expects to be owned by a hot pink car...)

 

[Sniffs]

Someone: I believe ford swapped the design platform off for the mustang, so they "started fresh" with the retro design. according to what I've read. even the 94 and 99 body mustangs were still using the 79 foxplatform!

oh, you can officially gripe about the charger. I saw the first commercial for it last night. blowing the "doors" off a drag racer. corny DCX marking ploy!


M5Power: I meant CAR cars...no specialties, crossovers, etc. 500 replaces the Taurus, which is now too old to bother with. focus kiced the subcompact and Compact predecessors out (escort was too old for curent tastes, Contour was too small for american taste, and tempo/Topaz were craptacular)

Oh, and Jnasty...I do believe that american manufacturers have given up on the "conventional" car.

 

[skicrush]

I disagree with the take on the Charger. There is a giant void in American cardom for an American made performance sedan. A 425 hp car isn't exactly a poor offering. 4 doors didn't used to be a big deal--you just flopped over the seat, and you were good to go. No car seat to maneuver into the back seat, and the interiors were huge anyway. Times have changed. 2 door cars are not even impractical for anyone with even one child--they're near to impossible to live with. Look at how many 2 door cars that didn't even PRETEND to be sporty used to exist. Bel Aires, old Caddys, TBirds, etc. HUGE back seats, but only 2 doors. "Family car" and "2 doors" were not mutually exclusive ideas in the 60s and 70s. Today they are. I have griped left and right that there is no isn't a non-luxury, RWD sedan on the market. Finally the charger has come out. Who's only competition comes from the either the luxury segment, or the 2 door sport coupe (ie GTO or mustang, which I think is all inclusive) segment. With a "kick that FF sedan parked next door's ass" marketing campaign. So, here's how the logic goes in an enthusiast dad's head (that's all of you guys once you have kids!) Gee, there isn't a lot out there that has the 4 doors I need and is RWD. It looks like I'm limited to a used luxury car (which won't beat that stupid FF grand prix off the line), an AWD ricer, or I have to settle for a 2 door. Man, that sucks! WAIT!! What's that you say? 425 hp RWD sedan? That I can buy new for what the other things cost used?? SIGN ME UP!!

 

[1X83Z]

M5Power: I meant CAR cars...no specialties, crossovers, etc.

Crossovers and specialties? Which of Focus, Freestar, Five Hundred, Mustang, and Crown Victoria are crossovers and specialties? What the hell is a specialty?

 

[Sniffs]

M5: anything that isn't a plain old sedan/saloon or coupe. that means truck, crossovers (the new name for Wagons), SUV's, minivans. anything that's not a "notchback".

Skicrush: I don't need 4 doors. I don't have half a dozen kids, infant siblings, or neighbor kids to haul around. i ALSO don't need a pickup for hauling. what I need, basically, is the equivelant of an Impreza coup with a hatch, and AWD for winter backup in this state. I also don't need a great big old boat like this huge new stuff. i need something where I don't have to sit with my knees in the headliner just to reach the controlls

 

[1X83Z]

M5: anything that isn't a plain old sedan/saloon or coupe. that means truck, crossovers (the new name for Wagons), SUV's, minivans. anything that's not a "notchback".

That's your definition of a car? Are you the state of Texas?

 

[JCE]

Why is everyone so negative towards the GTO? My parents and older friends who lived and drove back in those days APPRECIATE GM's attention to an old classic NAME by putting it on ANY GM made car regardless of it's origin. I don't think the Monaro is lame and a "lazy" design...the car is aesthetically beautiful to look at not to mention it's RWD and has tons of BHP...what's not to love? One thing that would make GM's sedan/saloon market better is if they imported a Holden Commodore with the LS1/LS2 in it. The US needs more performance 4dr sedans/saloons to at least ATTEMPT to compete with the Euro market. Infact, more Japanese sedans should offer RWD like the G35 Sedan and the Lexus GS300.

That's your definition of a car? Are you the state of Texas?

I take that comment very personally. XD Please don't generalize us people who live in Texas. 👍

 

[1X83Z]

I take that comment very personally. XD Please don't generalize us people who live in Texas. 👍

You don't even understand the comment, nor did you read it properly. Then again, no one will understand it. The state of Texas's motor vehicle laws define a car very strictly. When registering a vehicle in the state of Texas, if it's not a true car, you will receive truck license plates. SUVs get truck plates, and minivans do too. It's sort of absurd - because of their idiotic system the vast majority of vehicles in Texas are in fact trucks.

 

[JCE]

You don't even understand the comment, nor did you read it properly. Then again, no one will understand it. The state of Texas's motor vehicle laws define a car very strictly. When registering a vehicle in the state of Texas, if it's not a true car, you will receive truck license plates. SUVs get truck plates, and minivans do too. It's sort of absurd - because of their idiotic system the vast majority of vehicles in Texas are in fact trucks.

Note the "XD" in the original comment. It was intended for sarcasm. Thanks. 👍

 

[1X83Z]

Note the "XD" in the original comment. It was intended for sarcasm. Thanks. 👍

I have absolutely no idea what XD means.