MotorWeek - Retro Review: '87 GM Muscle Cars: SS

[Adam]

They could make a 4 door version and call it the Caprice, and G and B body fans could rejoice that there is a car to buy again that doesn't cost 50K.

They already have a Caprice that doesn't cost 50K.
http://www.gmfleet.com/police/chevy-cap ... e-car.html

[Adam]

The GTO is an updated F-Body/F-Body replacement, it isn't really like a car like the Monte was.

Negative. It has the passenger space (including rear seat), overall size, upright seating position and overall approach to handling which is identical to the mission of the G-body. It is sedan-based. There's nothing closer to a G-body that was made since 1988.

Helping?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holden_Monaro#HJ

A heavy facelift and some model rationalisation was applied to the HJ Monaro, which was released in October 1974.[6] Its front end bears a resemblance to the 1970–1972 American Chevrolet Monte Carlo.

Also, lol.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holden_Mo ... _program_2

The third generation Monaro was exported to several overseas markets. It was sold as a right hand drive in South Africa as the Chevrolet Lumina. It was also sold, in left hand drive, in the Middle East as the Chevrolet Lumina Coupe, and in the United States as the Pontiac GTO, reviving another classic muscle car icon.

[kevm14]

And now there are millions of those terrible things clogging the roads and filling the junkyards with fantastic power plants for us to put back into our B and G bodies. Everyone wins.

It seems obvious but it is worth pointing out that the VAST majority of these donor engines are specifically truck engines. And every one of them, the 4.8, 5.3 and 6.0, is ripe for turbocharging due to compression ratios being fairly compatible. Engines from cars are not commonly used for swaps, mainly due to the fact that they are aluminum and pricey.

[kevm14]

Yeah I stand by my G-body replacement argument. Maybe Bill was thinking more because the F-body went away in 2002 and then we got an LS1 GTO in 2004. But they are totally different kinds of (2 door) vehicles.

I think Bill would also agree that a Holden VZ Lumina would be sweet, as opposed to the W-body that we got. But that's interesting because our W-body Lumina coupe was the same thing as the Monte Carlo, so that just extends my VZ coupe = G-body replacement argument even further.

I also understand that the styling is very 90s, which Bill is not a fan of. But, I also think that with certain personalization touches (wheels, certain body panels, maybe a different hood, loud exhaust, etc), that there's nothing at all "uncool" about a GTO rolling up with a burbling idle.

[kevm14]

These aren't really as cheap as I thought they were.

http://charlottesville.craigslist.org/c ... 17642.html
http://raleigh.craigslist.org/cto/5333124110.html
http://knoxville.craigslist.org/cto/5326203855.html

I did not look for 2004s. They will be cheaper but not sure how much. They had the LS1 which I think wasn't quite enough engine for the GTO, even though it did have 350 hp.

I should check G8 GTs. I guess I'll put that in my thread.

[bill25]

I didn't realize these were more of a car platform than F-Body seating. I will look into this some more. I think what made me not really take a second look was the styling. I think that made most people not take a second look. Most people saw it and said: "That isn't a GTO" and that was the end of it. I did read some interesting article back when this came out that they actually tuned the exhaust sound (Mechanically, not audio enhanced) to sound like the old GTO.

[kevm14]

Yeah I remember that. There's nothing wrong with the way they sound. The 2004 had twin tips on the left, which was a little non-standard for a muscle car. So the 2005 got conventional dual exhaust with the LS2. And like I said, better brakes, a hood scoop (I think fake but can double check), and probably one or two other enhancements.

I drove a 2004 in December 2003 (still have the pics). I remember liking the car, and I can tell you nothing about the way it drives resembles an F-body. I can also tell you that the brakes weren't that great, and the LS1 with that weight didn't quite have the shove I would have liked. The 2005 directly solves several key complaints.

[kevm14]

I drove a 2004 in December 2003 (still have the pics).

Ok so it was Jan 2004.

http://www.kevinallenmoore.com/files/2004_GTO/GTO.html

Remove the "800" after loading an image to get all the res.

Other things I remember:
- Very comfortable overall. Good ride, etc.
- EXCELLENT seats
- Cheap feeling climate control knobs (why didn't they use auto climate control? this car was over $30k)
- Front view, rear view, and rear 3/4 view look good
- Front 3/4 view is the issue, I think
- Brake feel and brake performance both pretty lame, especially at this performance level. The 2005 addressed this directly.
- Drive by cable in 2004!
- Kind of had the spirit of the Challenger, just in a much less bulky package. More of a long distance cruiser. Drive coast to coast, easily. Can be made to handle though.

[Adam]

Yeah I stand by my G-body replacement argument. Maybe Bill was thinking more because the F-body went away in 2002 and then we got an LS1 GTO in 2004. But they are totally different kinds of (2 door) vehicles.

Makes more sense if you think about this: The G-body was a "mini" B-body. The chassis and suspension were very similar in design, just smaller. The GTO (Monaro) was based on the Commodore platform, just smaller (in length, most of the suspension was the same).

So in both cases, the coupe is based on the full size sedan.

[bill25]

Kind of trolling, but sad styling for a "muscle car":

This is why I think I didn't take them seriously. I know they are totally different cars but really... I guess this might be a positive for sleeper status I guess...
Are those the same rims in the first 2 pics? LOLOLOL

cavalierrear34.jpg

gtorear34.jpg

cavalierfront34.jpg

gtofront34.jpg