CTS-V coupe?

chunkybs

chunkybs

Club Member
saw this today in lansing going down Saginaw. large multi-spoke black wheels, huge breaks, and duel center exhaust made me think it must be a CTS... maybe!?!
 

Attachments

  • 17162_293878821081_511271081_3961205_2799442_n.jpg
    17162_293878821081_511271081_3961205_2799442_n.jpg
    33.3 KB · Views: 323
Golden said:
How so? Powerful, comfortable, good fuel economy, and good looks.
Click to expand...
I know. My brother (Tin) has one and it is a sweet car. But they overall failed in sales. I think the true old school GTO guys were disappointed and the people that could truly appreciate the new car felt like something was missing. Like a solid rear axle for one :dontknow:
 
BigWheelinBubba said:
I know. My brother (Tin) has one and it is a sweet car. But they overall failed in sales. I think the true old school GTO guys were disappointed and the people that could truly appreciate the new car felt like something was missing. Like a solid rear axle for one :dontknow:
Click to expand...
yeah the IRs must have been why it flopped, and therfore they put it in the CTS, G8, and Camaro...
 
cjmatt said:
yeah the IRs must have been why it flopped, and therfore they put it in the CTS, G8, and Camaro...
Click to expand...

maybe if the gto was an origional car not some holden with a pontiac logo on it
and resembled something like the old gto's it might have worked out
\and with the cts-v coupe,,,, wouldnt it be a CTC-V?
 
Last edited:
CTS-V Coupe is a go and it would be an AWESOME car to drive/own. Big bucks but a bargain in the class. Auto is a tick quicker than the stick it's that good.:ohmy:
 
chunkybs said:
the GTO failed because it was a disgrace to the "GTO" name.
Click to expand...

Blah blah blah. Disgrace? :haha:

GTO was a 4 your car from the start...

Anyway -- not sure why they camo it, coupe is already known about. V series comes as no surprise - should be a badass ride :D
 
05-06 had the ls2... a very nice engine imo. they should have used a different name for it... like the pontiac "M3 killer" maybe that woulda worked or how about some advertising
 
F-crazy said:
since when is low 13's hi 12's slow for a factory car?...looks are personal, and yea it was heavy,,but it still ran its ass off and handled pretty damn good
Click to expand...

factory or not it's still not fast. it should have lived up to the name better.
 
chunkybs said:
factory or not it's still not fast. it should have lived up to the name better.
Click to expand...

How is that "not fast" --- it's faster than any of your cars have ever gone... it's faster than the original GTO...

1966: 0-60 in 6.5 sec, 1/4 mile in 14.65 sec @ 98mph.

1969:
400 RA III/360: 1/4 mile in 13.89 sec. @ 101.4 mph.
400/366 Ram Air: 1/4 mile in 13.70 sec. @ 103.6 mph.
400/370 Ram Air IV: 0-60 in 6.2 sec, 1/4 mile in 14.4 sec @ 98mph.


:) I'd say it lived up to it's name fairly well.... People just expected something more retro. And those who are bitching about it having an IRS and not a live axle are the same people who don't realize the new Camaro is essentially the next generation GTO in Australia... And it TOO has an IRS, but I don't hear THEM bitching. ;)
 
The Pontiac GTO should have been badged as 2-door Grand Prix. Then it would have been cool. The GTO should have been retro and it would have succeeded like the 2005 Mustang, new Camaro, Challenger.
 
SVT32VDOHC said:
The Pontiac GTO should have been badged as 2-door Grand Prix. Then it would have been cool. The GTO should have been retro and it would have succeeded like the 2005 Mustang, new Camaro, Challenger.
Click to expand...

Doesn't explain the success of the new Charger, does it? ;)



I don't like how everything has to be "retro" ... I don't understand some of these people who feel the new Corvette's non-flipup headlights destroy it's looks... I think it's badass myself, and part of the evolution of the car.


When you take a break from production for nearly 30 years, it's tough to show the evolution of the body... Look at the Camaro/Firebird from 1967 until 2002, you can see the body evolve.

That'd be like looking at the 1972 Camaro and the 2002 Camaro -- without anything in between to show it's evolution, people probably would have thought the 02 Camaro looked like shit as well :)
 
I wont say the GTO should have looked retro....i vote to keep evolving the looks of cars.


But the GTO looks like a cross between a cavalier and a 2door grand prix....i agree, it should have been labeled a 2door grand prix or something else. I love the drive line and the interior of it....but the exterior doesnt match its name nor its purpose.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top