Why do 5.0s run like shit
!["MAC"'s Avatar](data:image/svg+xml;utf8,<svg xmlns='http://www.w3.org/2000/svg' viewBox='0 0 50 50'><circle class='avatar-circle-default' fill='%237f3b59' cx='25px' cy='25px' r='20px'></circle><text class='avatar-text-default' x='49%' y='53%' fill='white' text-anchor='middle' alignment-baseline='middle'>"</text></svg>)
09-13-2014, 10:23 AM
#163
It is a 100% serious post. I wanted a 5.0 until I went and checked one out for myself. Cheesy and cheap were my first thoughts. I actually thought the SN95 and new edge cars have a better interior. 05+ is HORRID, 11+ isn't much better. And the manual is god awful.
It is a great performance bargain no argument there.
But given the choice between a low mile SS/WS6 and a 5.0 with similar miles, I'm picking the F-body.
It is a great performance bargain no argument there.
But given the choice between a low mile SS/WS6 and a 5.0 with similar miles, I'm picking the F-body.
I don't post mine either! You cant figure it out?
09-13-2014, 11:18 AM
#165
TECH Regular
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Piqua,OH
Posts: 430
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's actually a double wide, get your facts straight suga.
I think it is more modern, just from the sake of better technology but not necessarily "nicer". Especially the base model cars. Yuck.
09-13-2014, 12:17 PM
#166
I know the F-body interior is garbage, never said it wasn't. lol. The new edge cars are about the same level of shitty-ness on the inside, but I would still take both over the 11+ interior. I hate it.
It's actually a double wide, get your facts straight suga.
I think it is more modern, just from the sake of better technology but not necessarily "nicer". Especially the base model cars. Yuck.
It's actually a double wide, get your facts straight suga.
I think it is more modern, just from the sake of better technology but not necessarily "nicer". Especially the base model cars. Yuck.
09-13-2014, 01:40 PM
#170
Launching!
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: lynchburg va
Posts: 279
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
09-13-2014, 01:55 PM
#172
Teching In
I will agree with you on the exterior design. They are alright looking but not the greatest. I just would have wished GM took the original GTO from say 67 and modeled it after that some what.
09-13-2014, 02:01 PM
#173
TECH Junkie
Ya that would of been better to retro the gto a bit cause I think the new design was horrible, nothing but a 2 door cavalier that's fast
09-13-2014, 03:01 PM
#178
***Repost Police***
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: DFW, TX
Posts: 2,480
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I loved the GTO. I thought it was a logical progression of what the GTO would have looked like had it continued production, but it wasn't so well-received because people got used to Pontiac (and American companies in general, in the 90s/00s) putting scoops and bulges on everything.
09-13-2014, 03:56 PM
#179
Even GM knew they were taking a big gamble with the same body as the G cars for the new ls1 GTO. Hence sales were terrible. Too bad. There would have been loads more ls1 & ls2 GTO's running around today if they had made a larger investment in the body design.
That said still a great car and future collectable.
That said still a great car and future collectable.
09-13-2014, 06:07 PM
#180
11 Second Club
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 804
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Or let me guess, you're down in Immocolee or up near Gainsville?
--Mark