Pontiac Grand Am: The Truth Hertz
Written: May 20 '04 (Updated Oct 02 '04)
|
Product Rating:
|
|
|
Pros: Styling gets more mature every year, big rebates mean low prices for a midsize.
Cons: Fake performance image, awful interior materials, crude four-cylinder, aging platform, generally unsophisticated feel.
The Bottom Line: Despite what Pontiac would like you to believe, the Grand Am is far more "rental car" than "sports car." The price is appealing, but it's all cheap, no thrills.
|
|
|
| drive571's Full Review: 2004 Pontiac Grand Am Sedan |
My Experience
I test-drove a Pontiac Grand Am SE1 sedan and a Pontiac Grand Am GT2 coupe at a local dealership. Each test drive lasted about half an hour and covered city streets, a winding frontage road, and the freeway.
Performance
Pontiac claims that the Grand Am's performance "is not for the faint of heart," and that its power "makes 'launch' a more appropriate word than 'start'." Well, it's true that the Grand Am has pretty decent accelerative capabilities for its class, but it would be a weak ticker indeed that found threat in the Grand Am's thrust levels.
The SE1 sedan that I tested was equipped with the base 2.2-liter four-cylinder, and while it stepped off the line promptly and responded well in the midrange, its power fell off at higher revs, leaving it about class-average in freeway merging situations. The sensitive folks Pontiac is concerned about will likely be more troubled by the four's unrefined noises than anything else. This engine is the same unit that I disliked so much in the Chevrolet Cavalier, and while it's much smoother and a bit quieter in this application, it's still a coarse and grumbly powerplant. It sounds gravelly and clattery when driven gently, and its noise escalates to a thrashy racket when revved hard. Decent motivation is all the base engine provides--smiles are not part of the bargain.
The 3.4-liter V6 that's standard on GT models is considerably better, if not class-leading. This engine provides quicker acceleration, for one thing. Performance still isn't earth-shattering, with 0-60 times around 8 seconds, but its good low-end grunt and authoritative midrange response make for confident passing and merging. And perhaps more importantly, it has a relatively smooth demeanor and a muted baritone engine note that make it a far more pleasant traveling companion. It still lacks the creamy-smooth feel of a Toyota V6, or the urgent potency of a Nissan V6. But it at least brings the Grand Am's overall character closer to Pontiac's claims.
Transmission/Clutch
Well, we can discount "clutch" right off the bat, as the Pontiac dealer had no manual-transmission Grand Ams on the lot--again, indicative of this car's true station in life. As far as the automatic transmission goes, the four-speed unit on both of my test cars was agreeable in the GT, a bit unhappy in the four-cylinder SE.
In the V6 version, it provided smooth, unobtrusive shifts and felt well-suited to the relaxed nature of the car. But when mated to the four-cylinder, it became a bit uncooperative and slow to respond. It still provided quick, firm shifts at lower speeds, but when I drove the SE on a winding road at speeds between 35 and 55mph, it took forever to downshift, lagging when I put my foot down and letting the engine bog for several seconds before changing gears. These mushy, slurred responses made the engine feel less powerful than it was, and became irritating after just a few minutes behind the wheel.
Steering/Handling
Pontiac says the Grand Am "delivers an exciting and balanced ride, even in the tightest corners," and that it is endowed with "a responsive, road-car feel." Well, I must admit, I can't argue with that--it certainly does feel like a road car, as does every passenger vehicle I've ever driven.
But what the Grand Am doesn't feel like is a precision sports sedan. Its handling and chassis tuning are middle-of-the-road GM midsize, whether it's the SE or GT version you're driving. And no, that's not entirely a cut--both Grand Ams felt solid, stable, and manageable in a wide variety of driving situations. But it wasn't much fun to hustle them around winding roads.
Steering feel is a weak link. Its moderate effort at low speeds gives way to slight over-lightness on the move, and while the system is generally accurate, it feels just artificial and disconnected enough to drain the fun out of twisty roads. It lacks self-centering motion in the first quarter-turn of the wheel, which lends a squirmy, uncertain feeling to initial turn-in. The near-total lack of road feel also means there's very little communication as to how much grip is left at the front wheels, despite the clunky kickback over bumps.
The chassis fares a little better, but it's still not the least bit sporty--"competent" is the best descriptor here. The chassis generally feels stable and predictable, but the body leans heavily in corners, accompanied by premature understeer, and the resulting feeling of inertia encouraged me to back off early on winding roads--most economy cars can cover sinous ground quicker than this. The wider tires on GT models gave it noticeably better grip than the SE, but no more eagerness for back-road enthusiasm.
Back on the relative comfort of the freeway, both Grand Ams displayed pretty good straight-line tracking, but were easily deflected by gusty crosswinds. The simple fact of the matter is that this is an aging chassis that was never designed for sporting purposes in the first place, and as a result, no Grand Am is going to feel like a sports car on the long way home.
Ride
The Grand Am's ride was a mixed bag. On one hand, I was genuinely impressed by the high level of structural integrity that this car displayed--both Grand Ams I drove felt surprisingly tight and solid over the road, with no quivering even on very rough pavement.
But on the other hand, a fair amount of road noise made its way into the cabin, and the suspension felt a bit firm and clumpy over the bumps, considering its softness in the corners. It also transmitted lots of gritty road textures up through the seats, which detracted from the feeling of isolation significantly. I certainly wouldn't call the Grand Am's ride uncomfortable--just a bit unrefined.
Interior
Ah yes, the interior. Let's just start by saying the Grand Am's interior has lots of flavor, most of it artificial. Step inside, and it's immediately clear that this is a product of Pontiac's old school of design, when "Hot Wheels" styling was more important than materials quality, and flash took precedence over function.
The dashboard is covered with gee-whiz bulges, strakes, and contours that serve more to distract the driver from the road ahead than anything else. This wouldn't be nearly as bad if the plastics were of a higher quality than those found on most children's toys, but they're not. Everything you touch feels cheap, flimsy, and hollow, with looks to match. From the brittle snap of the power-window switches to the mushy action of the climate control knobs, the materials quality in the Grand Am's cabin is nothing short of horrendous.
This is a shortcoming that seems especially egregious to me. If I'm going to spend several thousands of dollars on a new vehicle, isn't it reasonable to expect its knobs and switches to "click" with the same precision as those on my $30 Discman? It's such a simple thing, yet it goes such a long way in creating a satisfying impression of quality.
In terms of function, the Grand Am's interior rates slightly better, but still doesn't break into the top half of the midsize class. The front seats felt comfortable for the first few minutes of my test drives, but started to feel fatiguing quickly after that due to their flat, unsupportive cushions. And while it was easy to establish an ideal wheel-to-pedal relationship, the Grand Am's driving position felt somewhat confining because of the abundance of plastic bulging out at me, and the closeness of the A-pillar to my forehead. The rear seat provided decent space, with good legroom even with the seat moved back, but its cushion was even flatter and less supportive than those up front.
Pontiac seems to have spent most of their effort (and budget) giving the Grand Am's cabin a false sense of excitement, which is too bad--if they had spent it more wisely, they would have had a much more convincing product to sell.
Practicality
Although my dislike for the Grand Am's interior design is obvious, its practical aspects were somewhat better than its aesthetics. Its rear seat offered a decent amount of space--if not comfort--and the standard power height adjustment on the driver's seat is a nice touch to allow people of any stature to find an appropriate position behind the wheel. The Grand Am's trunk seemed a bit small for its midsize exterior dimensions--and indeed, its 14.6 cubic feet of space is slightly less what than the compact Saturn Ion's trunk provides--but at least it offers a standard split-folding rear seat to expand the cargo area when needed.
One other quirk I should mention about the Grand Am's cargo area, however, is the narrow, pinched trunk opening caused by the close-set taillights. While liftover height is low in the small space between the lights, bulkier items will have to be lugged all the way over the lip of the trunk, which could quite literally be a pain.
Reliability
The Grand Am scores surprisingly well on this point. You might not expect this car to hold up well judging by the cheapness of its interior, but according to Consumer Reports, the Grand Am has achieved a reliability rating of Average. The average number of defects in a brand-new car is quite low, so this rating is nothing to sneeze at.
Overall
I have a feeling I would have been kinder to the Grand Am if the salesperson hadn't handed me a brochure to read after driving it. My test drives had revealed the Grand Am to be an acceptable if somewhat crude midsize sedan, well-suited to rental-car companies and buyers looking for a commuter with substantial exterior dimensions at a rock-bottom price. But as I read each page of the booklet, scanning its pictures of misty mountain roads, I grew more and more disillusioned with the Grand Am. "Fuel for the soul?" "The same design characteristics found on German sports cars?" "Race-proven engineering?" This isn't a car, it's a marketing scam on wheels! And if the scheme has worked on you, and you're expecting a sporty car with racy reflexes, then boy, are you in for a disappointment.
Ignore the ludicrous claims, and the Grand Am can be recognized as a decent--if unsophisticated--set of wheels that delivers midsize dimensions at a compact price. Nothing special, but nothing to be ashamed of, either. But the effect of elevated expectations changes everything. No amount of misleading hyperbole can disguise the fact that this is an aging platform that's well past its prime, with interior materials that would make a Kia Rio wince.
If you're looking for comfort and a bit of fun on a budget, I suggest the Mazda 3s or Honda Civic EX. Or, if it must be a mid-size, try looking for a certified pre-owned Nissan Altima or Mazda 6. By all means, give the Grand Am a try if you're still unconvinced, but do so with a grain of salt.
I'll close with one last shining example of the Grand Am's skin-deep performance image, taken from the final pages of its brochure: The new Grand Am SC/T, a special performance edition that's accompanied by the tagline, "from production car to racecar," and a short blurb linking the SC/T to Pontiac's Pro Stock dragsters. The mechanical content unique to this limited-edition street machine? "A unique composite performance hood and rear aero wing spoiler." Yeah. That's what I thought. Then again, if that's enough to fuel your soul, who am I to argue?
Feel free to check out my reviews on some of the Grand Am's competitors:
Chevrolet Malibu Maxx
Chrysler Sebring
Recommended:
No
Amount Paid (US$): 15,900
|
|
|
|
Epinions.com ID:
drive571
|
 in Cars & Motorsports |
 - Top 200 |
|
Member: P.J. McCombs
Location: Berkeley, California
Reviews written: 138
Trusted by: 69 members
About Me:
New baby at home: a 1999 Mazda Miata in British Racing Green!
|
|
|
- Add to My Yahoo!: 
- Add to Google Homepage: 
© 1999-2009 Shopping.com, Inc.