2010 Pontiac G8 Ute

[Catman]

Well there was once a GMC Sprint, and here's a 454 powered one!

Those were cool.  I remember seeing a few when I was a kid!

[akuma_supreme]

It is compared to 6.3 metre, 2.8 tonne Dodge Rams...

That's metric, isn't it?  Is that a lot?

What would that be in hogsheads?   

[93JC]

Seppos...

[280Z Turbo]

Those were cool.  I remember seeing a few when I was a kid!

GMC Sprints are cool, but the 1980's Caballeros look so frumpy and cheap.

[dinkeldorf]

Latest from down under on this. Nothing new, just their perspective.  I hope this sells well to keep Holden viable but thing it'll have a hard go of it. A driver of this would get laughed at by clowns in those yellow coloarados dwarfing it.

http://www.drive.com.au/Editorial/ArticleDetail.aspx?ArticleID=50199&s_rid=theage:ClassiePuff

[Catman]

GMC Sprints are cool, but the 1980's Caballeros look so frumpy and cheap.

Yeah, they were sad as well as the Malibu's they were spawned from.

[traumadog]

Who knows how things go with CAFE rearing its head.  IF the mileage is much better than the Colorado/Canyon, I'd expect GM to push it more than the "smaller" pickups.

That being said, it's probably a better GMC (along with the ex-Torrent) than a Pontiac.

[ChrisV]

Yeah, they were sad as well as the Malibu's they were spawned from.

Hey! I, like a lot of people, like those Malibus:





I love that car, but the rear needs to come down a couple inches.

[omicron]

That's a sharp-looking Malibu, Mr. V. Assuming the bonnet-scoop is non-standard, I'd probably go for a flush bonnet, but overall that's very crisp. The colour and wheels suit it perfectly, too.

[Raza]

......We all know that this isn't a serious load-carrying ute/truck, yes? The VE series of utes is intended more as a two-door Commodore rather than a truck with any significant load-carrying or towing abilities, especially the V8 models. The highest payload rating is for the base Omega V6 automatic ute; the lowest the SS-V V8 manual.

To use an analogy, it's like the Dodge Magnum wagon - it's not as practical as other cars in its class, and a great deal of its existence is down to the fact that it looks good.

It looks good?

And as far as I can tell, the Magnum was plenty practical.

[omicron]

It looks good?

And as far as I can tell, the Magnum was plenty practical.

Australia is a country of dimwitted footballers wearing inappropriately small shorts, thongs and T-shirts. Such people like the look of utes. The Falcon ute can be had with a cab-chassis 1-tonne tray - that's the ute people buy when they actually want to put lots of things in it, whereas a V8 SS-V ute is more for the dimwitted footballer with money and nothing much more than their Versace sunglasses to sit in the back.

A Magnum (and its 300C Estate Australian equivalent) is by no means practical when compared to a Falcon or Commodore wagon.

[SVT666]

It looks good?

And as far as I can tell, the Magnum was plenty practical.

The Magnum's cargo area is actually fairly large.  The sloping roof is more optical illusion then reality.  The side windows slope much more then the actual roof line and it makes it look like the rear portion of the roof is pretty low.

[MX793]

Those were cool.  I remember seeing a few when I was a kid!

My grandfather has one.  Mid to late 70s, I want to say '76 or '77.  Whatever the last year of the full-size A body version was.  His only has the 350, though.

[Eye of the Tiger]

They should call this G8 sport truck  the "G8 SUV", or "G8 Sport Utility Vehicle". It deserves the title. All current SUV's will then change their designations to "Truck Wagons". Yeah, I bet that'll take a big chunk out of the sales of those abominable behemoths.  Nobody wants to drive around in a thing that's called a Truck Wagon. Ha! Idiots. 

[Schadenfreude]

A dismal failure. No doubt this thing will suffer the same fate.

Wasn't the point of the SSR to test GM's new hydroformed stamping technique more than anything?    I could've sworn I read that somewhere.

[TheIntrepid]

Wasn't the point of the SSR to test GM's new hydroformed stamping technique more than anything?    I could've sworn I read that somewhere.

I have no idea. I was like 14 when they came out.

[2o6]

Why do people call the SSR a failure, when it clearly was not trying to be a huge seller? It was a one-off car built by Chevrolet.

[Eye of the Tiger]

Why do people call the SSR a failure, when it clearly was not trying to be a huge seller? It was a one-off car built by Chevrolet.

One-off?

[ChrisV]

One-off?

What he measn it was supposed to be a halo car bringing people in to buy the full size trucks. At that it worked. Numerous dealers described selling Silverados simply on the strength of having SSRs in the showrooms. It wasn't supposed to sell in huge numbers to a wide market. They sold as many as they had anticipated selling and used it's existence as an advertising budget. In that regard, it was quite successful.

[akuma_supreme]

Wasn't the point of the SSR to test GM's new hydroformed stamping technique more than anything?    I could've sworn I read that somewhere.

That was part of the effort.  Like  GM's efforts with plastic body-panels though, the effort proved nigh as GM only half-supported the venture.  Hydroformed panels still proved too expensive to justify their use in full-scale production.

[dinkeldorf]

They thought about it but in production just the rails, same as the trailblazer/envoy/ranier/9x/whatever the oldie was called.

[Nebtek2002]

My concern is that these vehicles will be over-engined for an era of $3+ gas and too heavily optioned-out.

A bare-bones version with a 4-cylinder or smaller-than-currently-planned V-6 with "manual everything" would be an excellent choice for city delivery.

I don't need power windows, mirrors( the cable-operated adjustment system on my '77 an '78 LTDs worked just fine) and locks, 200+ horsepower, or automatic transmission, though the summers where I live are too humid for me to want to give up AC. As far as "audio systems" go, an AM-FM radio with a couple of good speakers and an external jack for an iPod is all I need.

What I need is a low liftover height, a full 6-foot cargo box and decent gas mileage.

A lot of the original '59-'60 full-size Caminos and the first and second generation Chevelle Caminos were stripped-down 6-cylinder models sold as a practical alternative to a big truck.

Somewhere around 1972, Chevy ( and Ford,too, with the Ranchero) made the emphasis on "sportiness" with ridiculously large and heavy engines and heavy electric motors in the doors and seats eating away at payload.
6s were still in the catalog, but the "hot" trim packages and a manual transmission with more than 3 gears required V-8s and power-options packages.

[Eye of the Tiger]

My concern is that these vehicles will be over-engined for an era of $3+ gas and too heavily optioned-out.

A bare-bones version with a 4-cylinder or smaller-than-currently-planned V-6 with "manual everything" would be an excellent choice for city delivery.

I don't need power windows, mirrors( the cable-operated adjustment system on my '77 an '78 LTDs worked just fine) and locks, 200+ horsepower, or automatic transmission, though the summers where I live are too humid for me to want to give up AC. As far as "audio systems" go, an AM-FM radio with a couple of good speakers and an external jack for an iPod is all I need.

What I need is a low liftover height, a full 6-foot cargo box and decent gas mileage.

A lot of the original '59-'60 full-size Caminos and the first and second generation Chevelle Caminos were stripped-down 6-cylinder models sold as a practical alternative to a big truck.

Somewhere around 1972, Chevy ( and Ford,too, with the Ranchero) made the emphasis on "sportiness" with ridiculously large and heavy engines and heavy electric motors in the doors and seats eating away at payload.
6s were still in the catalog, but the "hot" trim packages and a manual transmission with more than 3 gears required V-8s and power-options packages.

Sounds like you want a Camry.

[dinkeldorf]

The problem with basic cars as you describe is that there's not much margin in it, especially given this is in import and the USD is going to continue to tank for the foreseeable future. I don't think the target buyers would be that concerned with fuel economy.

[Nebtek2002]

Sounds like you want a Camry.

Perish the thought! Since when did that name attach itself to a practical city delivery truck?

[Nebtek2002]

The problem with basic cars as you describe is that there's not much margin in it, especially given this is in import and the USD is going to continue to tank for the foreseeable future. I don't think the target buyers would be that concerned with fuel economy.

The toolwork should come to the US and this vehicle, with its marketing re-targeted, should be made in an under-utilized domestic SUV plant.

[omicron]

The toolwork should come to the US and this vehicle, with its marketing re-targeted, should be made in an under-utilized domestic SUV plant.

No stealing our employment!

[dinkeldorf]

No stealing our employment!

I'm not sure at what production volume that would be economically viable. And an unfortunate reward to Holden for having the gumption & engineering nouse to keep at the large car RWD.

[Sprinterman]

The toolwork should come to the US and this vehicle, with its marketing re-targeted, should be made in an under-utilized domestic SUV plant.

This is GM's way of upping the production numbers for the OZ plants, and try and make them profitable. One interesting fact is the reason why they have car plants there is that Australia and New Zealand had closed markets (anything imported had ungodly tariffs applied to them) So GM, Ford, and Chrysler built cars in the land down under. These were ofter older models, that were upgraded through the years. Now it comes time that RWD is the in thing, and Aussie cars have been built that way forever.

Anyway, GM will not be producing these cars except for the weird and wacky world of OZ, and this is a way for them to squeeze more profit from a rather loss making division. They started doing this when the RWD Sedans went out of production in North America, and they exported "Caprice" and "Lumina" sedans from Australia to the Middle East.

[Tave]

My concern is that these vehicles will be over-engined for an era of $3+ gas and too heavily optioned-out.

A bare-bones version with a 4-cylinder or smaller-than-currently-planned V-6 with "manual everything" would be an excellent choice for city delivery.

I don't need power windows, mirrors( the cable-operated adjustment system on my '77 an '78 LTDs worked just fine) and locks, 200+ horsepower, or automatic transmission, though the summers where I live are too humid for me to want to give up AC. As far as "audio systems" go, an AM-FM radio with a couple of good speakers and an external jack for an iPod is all I need.

What I need is a low liftover height, a full 6-foot cargo box and decent gas mileage.

Hear Hear!



although I'd want a cd player in that head unit, but that shouldn't be a huge expense