GTO Handling

AutoXR wrote: Weight doesn't play nearly the factor it used to.. The Nissan GTR should be proof enough of that.

It still does in terms of consumable items though.

93EXCivic wrote:

AutoXR wrote: Weight doesn't play nearly the factor it used to.. The Nissan GTR should be proof enough of that.

It still does in terms of consumable items though.

And often, in fun to drive quotient.

Otto Maddox wrote:

93EXCivic wrote:

AutoXR wrote: Weight doesn't play nearly the factor it used to.. The Nissan GTR should be proof enough of that.

It still does in terms of consumable items though.

And often, in fun to drive quotient.

The Nissan GTR is proof only that massive amounts of computing power and development play a huge role. The GTO doesn't have the AWD, the fancy transmission, or the same programming running stability and traction controls.

A GTO is a great car. I don't see a single person here saying that it isn't. The whole argument started because most of us say that if your primary use of the car is some sort of motorsport, it makes good sense to be looking at something that weighs less - that's common sense.

93EXCivic wrote:

AutoXR wrote: Weight doesn't play nearly the factor it used to.. The Nissan GTR should be proof enough of that.

It still does in terms of consumable items though.

The laws of physics are still the same. More mass takes more force to accelerate and decelerate, more friction, more fuel, more, more, more of everything to do the same work.

Strictly speaking, any car that is lighter given the same general balance and the same power to weight, proportional grip, torque curve etc will outperform it. You cannot run from that. It's the law.

Giant Purple Snorklewacker wrote: The laws of physics are still the same. More mass takes more force to accelerate and decelerate, more friction, more fuel, more, more, more of everything to do the same work. Strictly speaking, any car that is lighter given the same general balance and the same power to weight, proportional grip, torque curve etc will outperform it. You cannot run from that. It's the law.

The rate of consumption may be roughly the same, but on the smaller and lighter car, the parts consumed are usually smaller and cheaper. In terms of tires, usually a lot cheaper.

Giant Purple Snorklewacker wrote: You cannot run from that. It's the law.

You can run from the law, but it isn't advisable as they have radios and possibly a helicopter as well.

No, wait, you meant physics. Only tachyons can run from that law, and they are a BITCH to drive at all, much less fit into with a helmet on.

I like both the Miata and the GTO; both are great cars but both do need some work to become more effective as track cars...so to pick between the Miata or GTO....i'd go with the Miata for the fact that i already have a C6 Z06 I use on the track and a CTS-V for cililian use. CTS-V Feels like a boat when the corners start getting tight - i figure this is how the GTO would feel like. Will take it to an autocross just to see how well a CTS-V handles all that weight and power.

I had a E46 M3. It was a great car, I really enjoyed it. However, I'd stay FAR away from the SMG. It's a really crappy transmission, hard shifts, clunks, it just has issues.

Also have to watch out for the VANOS on the E46 M3, along with cracked rear subframes.

Both the M3 and the GTO need brakes for the track, the M3 has a better track suited suspension, both need bushings, both need oil coolers.

Much cheaper and easier to mod the GTO vs the M3 though.

MG Bryan wrote: The whole argument started because most of us say that if your primary use of the car is some sort of motorsport, it makes good sense to be looking at something that weighs less - that's common sense.

While true, there are many, many other factors. In general, Miatas and other convertibles are usually required to have a rollbar and/or hardtop for track usage, and maybe the OP has kids and can't use a 2-seater anyway, etc. He asked about a GTO, and that's what those of us who have actually driven and tracked them are trying to answer.

Yes, a Caterham is lighter than a GTo and will be cheaper on most parts and consumables, but he's not going to drive that scaffolding to dinner with his wife tonight or drop the kids off at school on Friday, etc, etc.

Yes, lighter IS better. Unfortunately, a GTO is about as light as it gets in the modern 2+2 RWD world, especially with a V8. It's damn near a featherweight compared to the Camaro, Challenger, Mustang, and CTS. The Beemers are going to be the only other thing realistically in the running here, if we're comparing apples-to-apples (until Mazda drops an LS1 into an RX-8 accidentally).

I can see how this argument can draw some discord.

Lets reiterate a lot of the key information that has already been stated: the few snippets of signal among all the noise.

GTO is a great car, no doubt about it. It makes for a great sledgehammer of a driver tool, seats four and is great bang for the buck. The best bang for the back for production cars in the used car market? Probably the C5 Z06. It is leagues faster and better balanced, but cannot seat 4, draws a bit more attention and might be a bit less ideal as a daily. If you want to compete against GT3s or have most of the T1 records in NA and on a budget; you get a C5 z06.

Going all yankee yeeha about your 4000lb track car is probably going to draw some ire. Especially if you talk efficiency. It wears parts faster, those parts can and usually will be more expensive because they are big. R888s for a miata and for GTO are in different price ranges, and guess which one will go through the tires faster.

A lightweight 1.8l engine is no more stressed being buzzed around at redline than your big v8. About having to use less gears, thats an apples to oranges comparison. Powerband, torque and such need to be considered. My 2nd tops out at about 56mph, but I enjoy rowing gears. Also, Ive had two miatas and have driven both the GTO and newer mustangs in anger. (Surprisingly, for autocross I enjoy the v6 stang over the GT, just because you dont need to trailbrake EVERYWHERE to get it to turn a little) I can assure you that you want to save yourself the trouble of shifting in those cars not only because you have the torque, but also because its such a nasty experience in comparison to the slick shifting miata.

Comparing any cars based on a trackday, is plain silly. Especially considering the immense disparity between skill and prep levels of cars. Some cars are also suited to specific tracks or disciplines than others. I have chased down cars that are lighter, with double the horsepower, more aero and stickier tires with my civic, moot point. Unless its the same driver, ideally Randy Pobst :) This is where the 13.0s 1/4 throws more fuel on the fire. By the same logic, the fact that I went faster in autox using a nearly stock civic sedan than a 997 turbo /= civic is faster than turbo. Apples to oranges comparison.

Some more ideas for thought:

If this is your daily, even with a couple trackdays, this car will spend 98% (do the rough math, go ahead) of its life on the street. Why do you think most race car drivers are content driving a stock sedan on the street? Because it makes sense. It needs to be comfortable, and the performance advantage of a gutted interior and backbreaking race seat (speaking from experience here) are not worth the 2% of its life that it will be used. By that regard, which do you think will be better to live day to day with? The e39 M5 or the GTO. Granted, the replacement parts are quite a bit more expensive.

As well, there is something to be said for driver engagement. Some people throw around the term "drivers car". What is that really? Well, some people like to play mechanics, some like to play race drivers and some like to do a bit of both. The mechanics like engine and chassis potential with ease to build on while the racers like driving engagement. Its about getting feedback through the wheel and driving at 9-10/10ths, whether its at 40mph or 120mph. BMW does this well (mostly), mazda does this well...etc. If you are dancing on the edge you are having a blast. If the car gets you home, doesnt eat too much gas and is comfortable you enjoy it even more. Those seemingly little track-irrelevant details start to add up. Fact is, the z06 has an edge that is hard to experience for the average mortal, and simply inaccessible on the street. But wait, isnt the car going to be 98% of its life on the street? Hmmm....

Javelin wrote: Yes, a Caterham is lighter than a GTo and will be cheaper on most parts and consumables, but he's not going to drive that scaffolding to dinner with his wife tonight or drop the kids off at school on Friday, etc, etc.

I would but then again my brain hurts.

rwdsport wrote: Going all yankee yeeha about your 4000lb track car is probably going to draw some ire.

All good points sir, but please do not add fuel to the speculation fire. The GTO's weigh between 3700-3800, wet, ready to go, without driver. Insinuating that they weigh 200-300Lbs more than that is unfair. Lightly lightened (wheels, skid plate, headers/exhaust, stereo/subwoofer, wing, useless NVH weights) they routinely drop into the 3500-3600 range, and occasionally under 3500. That's light by modern standards (for a 2+2 RWD car).

Honestly had no idea, my bad. Ballpark guess. Not bad considering my civic is 3000lb with the rollbar and no driver haha.

You would remove the stereo in a dual purpose car? Far braver man than myself, sir.

I thought we just got done shouting about the dominance of stock GTOs are now we're ripping out stereos?

Don't have much GTO experience myself, the one thing that really stuck out on my drive was that the brakes were so mushy I had to get out and check if there was still pad left (there was).

OP hasn't replied since 2:18am. Good jorb, guys, we scared him away.

I'm back. Sorry, wasn't able to get to a computer all day. I really appreciate everyone's input. Yes, the Miata would be a better track car than a GTO. Period. However, the car I'll be buying is going to be mostly a street car. I figured that having two extra (and usable) rear seats would be worth the performance sacrifice, otherwise, I'd just stick to getting the C5 Z06.

So far it sounds like no one has anything bad to say about the GTO, which is a really good thing. I know a car weighing around 3700lbs isn't going to be a canyon carver, but I think it should work well enough anyway.

TLDR past page 2..

but since i thought the gto vs miata thing was funny, i just wanted to point out..

Sure, GTOs are quick stock cars, but boosted miatas can be much faster with mild turbo setups IF they work right. And what i mean by that is if you find a turbo miata that isnt as fast as a stock gto, it's probably not working right.

I have a local friend who turbo'd a 250k mile miata with a $129 ebay special turbo and it ran 12.5@113 on 12psi several years ago. It's still running on that same turbo to this day, except now it's faster (11s? he plans to go to track this spring again). It's not HARD to make a turbo miata a lot faster than a stock gto. If anything, i would guess that the hardest thing about it is patently ignoring everything anyone in the miata crowd says. Im basing that statement off the fact that most boosted miatas seem to perform like crap (there are a lot of them under 200hp ), and i know it isn't the CARS that's causing that...

Damn... I own TWO Miata's, one for racing and one for the street, and even I'M getting tired of the Miata responses. Miata wasn't even MENTIONED by the op! I think I'll go trade the street Miata in on that '06 GTO down the street, just to distance myself from the Miata-Nazi's...

vincephan wrote: I'm back. Sorry, wasn't able to get to a computer all day. I really appreciate everyone's input. Yes, the Miata would be a better track car than a GTO. Period. However, the car I'll be buying is going to be mostly a street car. I figured that having two extra (and usable) rear seats would be worth the performance sacrifice, otherwise, I'd just stick to getting the C5 Z06. So far it sounds like no one has anything bad to say about the GTO, which is a really good thing. I know a car weighing around 3700lbs isn't going to be a canyon carver, but I think it should work well enough anyway.

As a fast DD that can hold 4 people.. you are going to have to spend a LOT more money to get a car that is the equal of the GTO

vincephan wrote: I'm back. Sorry, wasn't able to get to a computer all day. I really appreciate everyone's input. Yes, the Miata would be a better track car than a GTO. Period. However, the car I'll be buying is going to be mostly a street car. I figured that having two extra (and usable) rear seats would be worth the performance sacrifice, otherwise, I'd just stick to getting the C5 Z06. So far it sounds like no one has anything bad to say about the GTO, which is a really good thing. I know a car weighing around 3700lbs isn't going to be a canyon carver, but I think it should work well enough anyway.

Mostly street car, comfy fast cruiser, still fun on backroads, and getting entirely decent gas mileage? Go get yourself a GTO! I'll be jealous.

i'M jealous that he's getting to consider one.

93EXCivic wrote:

Javelin wrote: Yes, a Caterham is lighter than a GTo and will be cheaper on most parts and consumables, but he's not going to drive that scaffolding to dinner with his wife tonight or drop the kids off at school on Friday, etc, etc.

I would but then again my brain hurts.

Do you have a wife and kids?

To those who used to have a GTO and moved on... what did you buy to replace it and why?

I'm interested in a GTO in theory... I would buy a new one but right now I don't have time to deal with a search for a 6-8 year old used car.

My 04 GTO was totaled by a shiny happy person that decided not replace tires on his Exploder . . .

I recently picked up a 05 CTS-V as it's replacement.