Pontiac GTO Forum banner
1 - 19 of 19 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
20 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Thought you guys might be interested in the car magazine MPH this month. In it they compare the GTO, the Mustang GT, and the Charger.

Believe it or not when all was said and done, the GTO whooped dey ass! The mag was impressed with everything from the handling to the power of the LS2. The burnout was mentioned in detail as well. Go out and get this mag guys it is worth it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
937 Posts
Goat Herder said:
August issue, the one with the GTO, GT, and the Charger flying over both of them. Can't miss it.

What do you guys think? Worth reading for sure. They just might get a new subscriber with this issue.
I subscribed to them last month for 3 yrs, but havnt got my first issue yet :-(.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,100 Posts
Nice to have an objective car magazine out there. I'm letting my AutoWeek, C/D and R&T subscriptions run out. Sports Car International is good. Automobile's Jay Lamm actually wrote a very good short review on the '05 -- but David E. Davis, Jean Lindamood, and Robert Cumberford all trigger an unintentional puke reaction in me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
177 Posts
Great to hear someone in the magazines like the GTO. I just read a motor trend article about the charger and the moustang...and it was saying how the charger had GT mashing power. Of course the article for the GTO vs stang article never said that, and like MPH said...the GTO beats the other two. I hate biased people/companies.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
498 Posts
I found it yesterday at Borders, wassn't one I was familiar with but after reading it cover to cover I'm going to get a subscription! I got a good laugh from the writing styles. To quote: " The Mustang makes a decent cloud of tire smoke, the but GTO trumps them all, laying a skid mark bigger than the one in Bubba's Fruit of the Looms after the local chili cook-off!" You wont find verbage like that in Road & Track!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,100 Posts
ftlfirefighter said:
" The Mustang makes a decent cloud of tire smoke, the but GTO trumps them all, laying a skid mark bigger than the one in Bubba's Fruit of the Looms after the local chili cook-off!" You wont find verbage like that in Road & Track!!
The writers at Road & Track ARE skidmarks. In the latest Automobile, there's a similar article to the MPH one. Says, if you can believe this, that the Mustang represents the original muscle car era better than the Charger and GTO.

Let's see, I thought muscle cars were all about kicking somebody's chops in. The GTO certainly does that. Then again, maybe the Mustang's lousy interior and crappy suspension are more representative of 1960's technology.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
48 Posts
The Automobile mag or should I say RAG says, "maybe the GTO just isn't the right kind of American-bred package, as poor sales suggest". I have read sales are up 76% for 05 ,despite all the negative press the 04 recieved. Most of your auto writers drive BORING cars and don't know a real muscle car from what they drive. The article talks about WOODWARD AVE which I grew up with and let me tell you a 1965 GTO was the car to have, a 1965 mustang hipo was not considered a muscle car. Things have not changed in 2005 either.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
123 Posts
Great article

I hadn't heard of this magazine until I read this thread, but I went out and bought it. The article was awesome, basically because they loved the GTO. Can't say I have read many car magazine articles so pro-GTO. The photography was awesome too. I had always wondered what my GTO would look like in a field by an abandoned barn, surrounded by flowers. Now I know. :seeya:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
358 Posts
b_a_betterperson said:
The writers at Road & Track ARE skidmarks. In the latest Automobile, there's a similar article to the MPH one. Says, if you can believe this, that the Mustang represents the original muscle car era better than the Charger and GTO.

Let's see, I thought muscle cars were all about kicking somebody's chops in. The GTO certainly does that. Then again, maybe the Mustang's lousy interior and crappy suspension are more representative of 1960's technology.
:agree
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
565 Posts
x-stanger said:
The Automobile mag or should I say RAG says, "maybe the GTO just isn't the right kind of American-bred package, as poor sales suggest". I have read sales are up 76% for 05 ,despite all the negative press the 04 recieved. Most of your auto writers drive BORING cars and don't know a real muscle car from what they drive. The article talks about WOODWARD AVE which I grew up with and let me tell you a 1965 GTO was the car to have, a 1965 mustang hipo was not considered a muscle car. Things have not changed in 2005 either.
It's funny cause Mustangs have, for as long as I know, been called "pony" cars - not muscle cars. Gotta love how Ford's advertising department managed to change everything and make everyone htink the stang is a powerful muscle car...
 
1 - 19 of 19 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top