Pontiac: No Trans Am, no rear-wheel-drive

US gov't regulations suck, plain and simple. With India and China set to build over 850 coal power plants by 2012, I think we have a little more to worry about getting overseas countries to join in the environmental issue than making sure our cars can all get 35mpg. Bottom line is if you want a car that gets that you get a sedan or 4cyl vehicle made for it. People buy cars based on preference and if someone wants a Vette, then go get one, they should know the fuel costs associated with it.

Just because your car gets less mpg than mine does not mean it's any better. I may drive 3 times as much as someone with a Hummer H2 in my Matrix, so in a month period I may use just as much fuel as they do.

As for the dumping of the Trans Am, what a mistake given that Pontiacs new image has been doing fairly well.

— Whelan (View Profile)

Posted on 2/12/2008 10:12:27 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: 5   

Fully agree with Whelan. Moreover, the excuse that fuel economy standards are preventing this vehicle from adopting RWD is a crock. FWD cars with V6 engines generally have spark plugs that are so difficult to get at that some mechanics (often with the advice and consent of their dealer employers) simply don't change the plugs at recommended intervals even though the charge for this work shows up on your invoice. How good is that for fuel economy?

FWD cars exhibit torque steer and require fuel-sapping right-angle couplings to get the power to the rear wheels in AWD models. Another cost disadvantage to the consumer is the need to change CV joint boots when they get cracked. This is expensive work especially if the CV joints themselves have to be changed.

GM just announced a large quarterly loss and buy-outs to reduce employment - one need not look further than that to explain why Pontiac does not wish to change its driveline right now.

— EnnNorak (View Profile)

Posted on 2/12/2008 10:31:27 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: 0   

trim off the fat and keep the meat? What happened with this? Cuz, I still see wayee too many same models w/diff. name plate on them...w/close to 50 billion dollar loss for GM for 07...they are doing pretty my everything wrong, except for the exterior of some of the Cadillac models which, I predict is unreliable as heck, falling apart only after 3-4 years tops. Something must be done...but everything is that needs to be done is not being done. pretty sad.

— Homer008 (View Profile)

Posted on 2/12/2008 10:33:47 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: -2   

It may cost GM $200M to build the Trans-Am, but it will cost GM more money due to no business because no one wants FWD vehicles. IMO, Pontiac stands for the performance oriented brand of GM. If Pontiac wants any credibility of being this then RWD cars is a must.

— djrickp (View Profile)

Posted on 2/12/2008 11:03:00 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: 5   

Since today more and more vehicles are being built on similar platforms, then to justify RWD would be to spread development costs on to as many platforms as economically feasible. In the case of Buick, the dealers rejected a rwd platform for the Park Aveneue. I'm wondering if they had accepted the RWD platform that perhaps #'s wise GM might have taken a gamble on a Transam. The other thing I don't understand is what does fuel economy have to do with RWD?Yu can certainly put a turbo 4 cylinder or 6 cylinder engine in a RWD car. As was stated above the engine ancilleries are generally more accessable

— mini22 (View Profile)

Posted on 2/12/2008 11:46:14 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: 2   

Booooo. Thats too bad. I always thought the T/A was better styled than the Camaro.

— FerrarisR4me (View Profile)

Posted on 2/12/2008 12:49:44 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 3   

Not a smart. Gm may have lost another potential customer.

— keyzi747 (View Profile)

Posted on 2/12/2008 1:06:28 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 1   

Its too bad they are not bringing the T/A back, then we could lobby the New Knight Rider to drop the Mustang and keep it real with the T/A. ( Although the new KITT Mustang is sinister looking)

— MartyMoose (View Profile)

Posted on 2/12/2008 6:04:38 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 2   

Actually, there were never any plans to bring back the T/A anyway based on all the reading I've done, so I don't know why this is such a big surprise to many. In any event, blame the global warming tree huggers for this one (and the oil sheiks).

— ilmor (View Profile)

Posted on 2/12/2008 7:04:49 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 0   

its kinda like crown victoria, grand marquis, and lincoln towncar. there is no point of the grand marquis cause u can load the crown vic to levels of marquis.
there is no point of trans am because the camaro was always kinda the same... its not like its the towncar. for that you have a corvette. camaro is enough.

— iamdabest1 (View Profile)

Posted on 2/12/2008 8:13:15 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 1   

WTF is the point of the Pontiac brand, then? It will become the official recycled Chevy company.

— S4cabriofoxone (View Profile)

Posted on 2/12/2008 8:37:15 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 3   

If Pontiac can't have the Firebird or T/A back or even a GTO, then why the hell are they still allowed to have the upcoming G8!?
GM should just kill Pontiac off instead of wasting everyone's time. I don't want that to happen, but they are getting hosed big time.

— Bored (View Profile)

Posted on 2/13/2008 2:48:44 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: 2