I was thinking about this earlier this week. Had it not been for the GTP, would there be as large of a community of modders and performance options for the Grand Prix?
|
|
02-14-2008
I was thinking about this earlier this week. Had it not been for the GTP, would there be as large of a community of modders and performance options for the Grand Prix?
02-14-2008
My personal belief is probably not. However, that said, I think or would like to believe GM would have done something even if in a N/A form to set the GP apart. There are only a handful of supercharged/turbocharged vehicles out there that come that way from the factory so I think that help set the Grand Prix apart.
02-14-2008
i agree.
what i find interesting is the % of GTP's to GT/SE's anyway. i mean, in 97, i think less than 17% were GTP's havent looked at other years
02-14-2008
The GP has been our certain management level fleet vehicle since early 90's. I never really paid attention to them, until I was searching for stuff for my Impala and landed on an Impala site. Then a post there had a link that sent me to the large GP forum and it was all downhill from there.
02-14-2008
I think for 2001 GTP's accounted for only 10% of the Grand Prix's out there for that particular model year anyway.
02-14-2008
without a performance option there would not be much, the older gp's were fleet cars, and basic transportation for most people, so few people modded them (the gp has been around longer than the Camaro)
02-14-2008
I know since only the 04 and 05 Impalas came supercharged, I find myself 99.9% of the time looking at GP sites.
02-14-2008
Originally Posted by SyntheticShield
An easy way to check the percentages is through autozone. if you go on their site, and pick the car, when it asks what engine/vin code you have, it gives the percentage of each engine code that were produced that year.
02-14-2008
I think that may be where I actually got that information from now that I think about it.
02-14-2008
The Gen 1 gps started it all. If there were no gen 1 cars built then what would gm have based the gen 2 and gen 3 cars on??? Only if gm could have built a trans to handle the LQ1 3.4 DOHC when it was in the testing stages. The I think gm would have never made the L67. Cause the LQ1 in testing stages before it was released was well north of 400 horses... And for those non believers when I get a chance i'll find articles stating that..
02-14-2008
Ya think
02-14-2008
I wouldnt mind seeing that info myself. The only information I have seen to date (admittedly not a ton) was that the 3.4 started out around 280 horses but due to transmission reliability issues it was scaled back to around 200 - 210 range.
02-14-2008
The 3.4 when it was being tested and prep'd for market was over 400 horses. Gm couldn't keep trans under them and thats how the 4t60e was born and when the 3.4 was released gm's hydromatic department upgraded the 60e to the hd version.
02-14-2008
I would still like to see the link to that information or some form of documentation on that.
02-14-2008
I can't find anything to back that up.
02-14-2008
Like said iuse webtv at home when i get to a pc i'l find it again
02-14-2008
Ahh yeah, heres a link for you to read over (Trannyman gets credit for having posted this one before):
THE 3.4 DOHC 24 VALVE
02-14-2008
i cant find anything on this either-- everything ive seen says it was 281, but dialed back because of the trans, (4T60e) (perhaps HD in the aspect of it's essentially a beefed up 440T-4) but anywhoo, we're looking forward to the info you found. til then--
how did this debate show up in this thread??
02-14-2008
It was poorly segwayed unfortunately.how did this debate show up in this thread??
02-14-2008
I was about to suggest Autozone's site as well.
.09% in 2002 were GTP's according to them.
| « Previous Thread | Next Thread » |
| Tags for this Thread |
| Bookmarks |
Bookmarks |
