I requested a Saturn Sky from GM and picked up a Sky Redline after turning in my CTS after reviewing it, which is also available on the cardomain.com blog. I will have the car for a week and want very much to drive it side-by-side with a well-built and comparably powered Fiero, a 4.9-pushrod or a supercharged 3800. Is there anyone in the Southern California area with such a car that can meet me this weekend, possibly at the Cars and Coffee show at the Ford/PAG/Mazda HQ in Irvine Saturday morning? I'd love one weekend to bring a big turn out of Fieros to the show, which runs each Saturday from 7 AM to 9 AM and attracts upwards of 300+ cars each Saturday. I've brought both of my Fieros there as well as several of my AMCs.
Anyway, would love to meet up with ant Southern California Fiero owners, especially this week while I have the Sky Redline. I will request a Solstice for April so there will be another opportunity down the road.
On my initial impressions of the Sky, the top is a nightmare...a very poor design as far as the latching mechanism is concerned. On a 100-mile drive last night, with the wide rubber, it doesn't fel like any stock fiero I've ever driven. I think it would be interesting to drive a really low mileage and tight Fiero with a similar profile wheel/tire combination side-by-side with the Sky or a Solstice to see just how comparible they are.
Any takers? Live in Southern California? Contact me direct at richt at automotivetraveler dot com.
here should be no comperison. totally different approachs - and, of course the many years of suspension refinement - which dont show in the Fiero. these days you can buy a 2 ton truck that rides like a late 80's cadillac.
no matter how ya slice it - late 80's vs 2000+ is no contest. yes - a Fiero can handle & can have power - but "the ride/the feel" - nope. never.
they have 2 things in common: 2 seater & GM thats it.
but - I fully understand wanting to play with both side-by-side
I'm not so sure I agree with you. My '88 base coupe has only 69,000 miles is tight and rattle-free and handles as if it's on rails; it's just under-powered, and obviously on the stock wheel/tire combo, it lacks the grip of even a contemporary Hyundai. The idea I have is to find a well-built updated '88 Fiero with more motor, upgraded rubber, possibly poly bushings, and drive them side-by-side. The Sky/Solstice is front mid-engined (engine is positioned behind the front axle centerline) vs the Fiero which is a true mid-engine design, with a certain set of advantages that it brings to the table.
The exercise is to show how the Fiero might have evolved, even short-term.
The similarities are obvious, both are two-seaters, built 20 years apart, by GM and I think that the comparison will show that in those 20 years, in terms of measurable performance (as shown by the chart in my cardomain blog) the bar didn't get moved very far, testimony to just how advanced the Fiero was in its day.
With gas now going to $4/gallon and beyond, a 4-cylinder Fiero is a way to have your cake (driving a modern-enough old car) and eat it too (getting 30 MPG).
not saying either is capable or incapable - what I mean is the ride quality sacrafices made my the older to achive the same capability of the newer. you can make a '32 Ford Roadster do it too. you are looking at nearly a 30 year spread in suspension geometry evolution.
and, of course the powerplants - a lower RPM torquer vs a high RPM screamer.
you not seeing which Blonde you like better - you are finding if you want a Redhead or a Brunette
IP: Logged
10:20 AM
Old Lar Member
Posts: 13798 From: Palm Bay, Florida Registered: Nov 1999
I guess I never understood the "underpowered" comment about a Fiero. The car was in the power band of the mid 80s. My 87GT will hit 120+, but there is no place to drive that fast in the states, safely. It will do the 1/4 mile @ ~17 seconds @ ~80 mph, right where the performance was for a car of the 80s. Try to compare an 87 Corvette with a 2008 Corvette, the 87 is underpowered , different years and improved technology in 20 years.
If you need the testosterone injection just to say my car is faster than your car, that is your perogative. No matter what you get for a car, someone has one faster out there.
Old Lar, I think you're missing the point. I'm trying to show how the Fiero might have evolved.
And by any definition, even from its era, the 4-cylinder Fiero was underpowered, that's why the V6 was introduced. The looks of the '84 Fiero overshadowed its performance. Almost every magazine reviewer put it those words, or ones that were more critical.
Conversely, with gas now heading to $4.00/gallon or more (regular is now $3.50 here in Riverside County), there will be some advantages in driving a 4-cylinder Fiero. <SMILE>
In my experience, I though that the driving experience of a 2.4L Solstice felt very similar to that of my 88 Fiero. The car I drove had under 100 miles, so I did not overly beat on it. There were differences too, and not all age related (My Fiero had over 120K miles at the time). The Fiero steering is more communicative. That’s not to say the Solstice’s was bad by any stretch, but it’s hard to beat the feel out of the manual steering. The ride was a bit smoother, and ultimately the Sol has more grip. Part of that is tires of course, but the Sol on average all season tires pulls .90g.
I cannot say they felt the same, but not all that different. I do not think it has anything to do with the same manufacturer either, but that both cars have relatively short wheelbases, are similar in size, 2 seaters, etc.
Another good comparison might be a Solstice GXP/Sky Redline to a mid 80’s Corvette with similar, mid 200 HP figures. The kappa chassis takes a lot of inspiration from the C6 Corvette’s.
Where would the Fiero have really gone? Hard to say… but considering the popularity of the 1990 Miata, I think the Fiero could have carried on very well had GM brought one of their concept convertibles to market.
IP: Logged
12:46 PM
pswayne Member
Posts: 1282 From: Lawrenceville, GA USA Registered: Sep 2006
Depending on what kind of driving you do, power may not matter. I took my 88 4-cylinder coupe on last year's Run For the Hills. All of the other Fieros were either V6's or V8's. I had no trouble at all keeping up on the twisting mountain roads. We were taking some of those curves fast enough to squeal the tires. It would be interesting to drive a Solstice/Sky on a run like that to compare how it handles.
IP: Logged
01:35 PM
hyperv6 Member
Posts: 6132 From: Clinton, OH, USA Registered: Mar 2003
You just can't compare the two. It would be like comparing the new Camaro to the 1982 Camaro They are different cars from different era's.
The Solstice and Sky are just better cars as they have the benifit of time, technology and better investment from GM . It is unfair to compare the Fiero to this as it was a very good car but not a perfect car in it's time.
The Fiero was seldom showroom raced as it was not well suited without many modifications. Herb Adams and a few other tried but it was just not suited for the SCCA. The Kappa with a few minor changes can be race to a Championship [ two SCCA last year] The Kappas are proving to make a great club racer and autocross car. Once prices drop used ones will find their way to the track and wail on the Miatas as they already have.
There are a lot of if's with the Fiero . If it had the development support of GM like the Kappa, If it had better engines than the Iron Duke. If GM had let the 2nd gen go on. None of this would still be a 100% shot the car would have made it. Even the others like the RX7 died.
The Miata has made it as it is popular, affordable, can be race cheaply, and limited in sales to keep up demand. Marketing of the Miata has had more to due with it living a long life than anything else. GM noted this and it is why the Kappas are sold in low numbers and it was a priority to try to keep the price down,
Other than the Miata and the Vette few 2 seat cars live long lives 5-10 years is about as good as it gets with most. It is just such a limited market few people become repeat buyers and and the market share is so small to start.
If it was not for the new CAFE regs I would have been suprised if the Kappas lived more than 10 years. But with the 35 MPG set to take effect in 2020 it may have a new important roll in the future.
The bottom line is the Kappa and Fiero are good cars and we are damn lucly to have had both as GM fans. We could have had a FWD Capri or the new Demon FWD passed on us like the jokes they were but GM dug deeper and gave us two good sports cars. Heach had it's time and each will have it ledgend.
It does not matter where the engine is as a good sports car just needs 2 seats RWD and a 50/50 balance. ANd GM gave us that with the Fiero and Kappas.
IP: Logged
06:59 PM
PaulJK Member
Posts: 6638 From: Los Angeles Registered: Oct 2001
ive got a SKY Redline actually and you just can't compare it... the Kappa handles SOOO nicely in the corners... and my fiero suspension is modified and tightened up... But even in stock form the SKY redline will easily outperform the average Fiero in the corners. Or so in my experience anyway. Like others have said... The Kappas have benefited from time, advancements in technology and pure financial investment.
------------------
IP: Logged
08:46 PM
PFF
System Bot
KaijuSenso Member
Posts: 911 From: Westland, MI Registered: Jan 2007
I find the Fiero to be much more comfortable to drive. I'd rather drive my 86 GT 4spd over an Auto Redline any day, they just feel slow and heavy. (now a 5spd Redline is different...boy those are fun to drive wish i could afford one...)
IP: Logged
10:27 PM
hyperv6 Member
Posts: 6132 From: Clinton, OH, USA Registered: Mar 2003
don't forget about the toyota MR2, which probably beat out the fiero for a lot of customers.
The Fiero never lost too many customers to the MR2 as they never imported that many.
Even the Miata over it's life time has an average of only 17,000 sales a year. In a good year they could reach 25,000 but in some years only sell 9,000-10,000. Keep in mind the Miata is a better seller than the MR 2 ever was.
The Fiero issues were all self inflicted. GM did not support it in development and Pontiac pushed it ahead when at times it may have not been the wise thing to do. Either way the Kappas have been given the support they needed because of the Fiero mistakes. GM could not afford to repeat them. I expect a Second Gen Solstice will be even better as it will not be as limited on budget as the last one was. It will be figured in with the Alpha platform from the start.
IP: Logged
11:34 PM
hyperv6 Member
Posts: 6132 From: Clinton, OH, USA Registered: Mar 2003
ive got a SKY Redline actually and you just can't compare it... the Kappa handles SOOO nicely in the corners... and my fiero suspension is modified and tightened up... But even in stock form the SKY redline will easily outperform the average Fiero in the corners. Or so in my experience anyway. Like others have said... The Kappas have benefited from time, advancements in technology and pure financial investment.
Wise words form someone who knows and understands.
I agree too. I just bought an 07 N/A Solstice and the handling is pretty impressive, even compared to my highly modified 88GT.
Here are some pictures of my Sol and some of the local Colorado Fiero club. Some very nice examples in the club! It doesn't look like they have much in common besides 2 seats!
Glad to see that the thread has provoked some thought. Spent some time in the Sky Redline today and it's as the Brits might say, a splendid piece of kit. But I will say that the top latching mechanism is not well thought out (just read the manual to see what I mean) and luggage capacity with the top down is something of a joke. It's an automatic -- which I actually prefer in SoCal stop-and-go traffic -- and it handles with very high levels of grip. But, and this is a big but, subjectively it doesn't feel any faster than a 200-horsepower 4.9-liter pushrod I drove 18 months ago before I bought the IRM car. I'd love to drive a tight, low-mileage Fiero with 200+ horsepower and a proper 17-inch wheel/tire combo, side-by-side, back-to-back. Certain things factor in, power-to-weight ratio for starters, chassis stiffness, and upgrading the tires after that. Especially with regard to handling, weight distribution comes into play and in that regard, with a comparable power-to-weight ratio, an upgraded Fiero should turn in similar performance numbers; that's just the way things work.
I know that you're going to say I'm comparing apples (modified Fiero) to oranges (stock Sky/Solstice) but that wasn't the point I was trying to make, going back to the original post. It was about how might the Fiero have evolved over the last 20 years. Even comparing a 135-horsepower Fiero to a 177-horsepower Solstice, the numbers, according to magazine road tests of each, are very, very close (shown in the table on my original cardomain post).
I have to drive to a Subaru launch program tomorrow so I'll have some time to get some quality time behind the wheel of the Sky so I suspect that I will refine my initial observations but still, I'd love to find someone local with a well-sorted, upgraded Fiero (especially anyone with a 3800-powered Fiero in Orange, Riverside, or San Bernardino counties willing to meet up over the weekend before I have to give back the Sky on Monday?), please contact me at richt at automotivetraveler dot com.
All I'm saying is that the Fiero was quite advanced in its day, especially the 1988 models and it would be interesting to speculate how things might have turned out for a second generation Fiero in 1990 had GM continued developing the platform. It's also interesting to note that in its worst year, the Fiero sold almost as many units as the Solstice in its best. The question that the Solstice and Sky faithful might ask themselves, is this. Will GM follow through and continue to develop the Solstice and Sky, or will history repeat itself? Time will tell.
I too...bought a GXP 5-speed. Yes, it is far better in almost every area except one...The Fiero will kill the Solstice in Drag Coefficient. The Sol. is one of the worst in that area. I think only the Hummer and a few other vehicles are worse than a sol. Also, I think the mighty V6 gets better gas milage that the N/A sol. The N/A sol is a gas hog. Anyway, they are both great examples of engineering!
IP: Logged
01:08 AM
Steven Snyder Member
Posts: 3326 From: Los Angeles, CA Registered: Mar 2004
Man, if you had been around a couple weeks ago I could've let you borrow my 3.4 DOHC 5-speed Fiero. It's back up in Monterey now and I won't be back to it til June :-(.
I too...bought a GXP 5-speed. Yes, it is far better in almost every area except one...The Fiero will kill the Solstice in Drag Coefficient. The Sol. is one of the worst in that area. I think only the Hummer and a few other vehicles are worse than a sol. Also, I think the mighty V6 gets better gas milage that the N/A sol. The N/A sol is a gas hog. Anyway, they are both great examples of engineering!
How do you like the GXP so far? I wanted to get one for Jane for Valentines Day-an auto-but the best I could find was over $30,000 drive off==which I thought was too high. (She settled for a Silverado--which I will inherit when I get her something else)
(Watch the fabric top on the Solstice where the driver's door closes near the right top area--I talked to 2 different owners who said the door was rubbing the fabric when it closes and was fraying the edge of the fabric. Warranty covered it, but the fix apparently was just to resew it with heavier stichting)
[This message has been edited by maryjane (edited 03-05-2008).]
To be entirely fair and objective, years of production aside, the Sky/Solstice vs Fiero goes something like this;
Bulbous and fat looking vs. sleek and trim Tiny, stuffy interior vs. ample leg room and hip room Non-existant luggage capacity vs. limited luggage capacity Cost? hahahahahahaha Newer technology vs. older technology Hotrod ablility limited vs. hotrod ability unlimited Almost impossible to work on without a computer vs. possible to work on without a computer Parts cost exorbitant vs. parts cost reasonable.
I will point you to a site Arn to help you understand the following...
Hotrod ablility limited - Parts cost exorbitant...You need to go here for a better understanding...http://www.solstice.dejonpowerhouse.com/
Almost impossible to work on without a computer - I just put a K&N filter, larger Intercooler, Intercooler piping and opened the wastegate without a computer!
To be entirely fair and objective, years of production aside, the Sky/Solstice vs Fiero goes something like this;
Bulbous and fat looking vs. sleek and trim Tiny, stuffy interior vs. ample leg room and hip room Non-existant luggage capacity vs. limited luggage capacity Cost? hahahahahahaha Newer technology vs. older technology Hotrod ablility limited vs. hotrod ability unlimited Almost impossible to work on without a computer vs. possible to work on without a computer Parts cost exorbitant vs. parts cost reasonable.
I could go on
Arn
You are entitled to your opinion but please keep it informed and honest.
We are like the guys with the MG's with a affordable fun car to drive with faults that we are willing to accept. In time many of those faults add to the charm of the car as it reminds us of our past and what it used to be like back then, This is a claasic trademark for many older sports cars.
Love your Fiero but be fair and balanced that the new car is not a sin to like or at least respect it. Some people feel threatened by the Kappa's for some reason . Why I will never understand as there is no reason to be. It did not kill the Fiero or prevent a new one as there will never be a new one. Just be glad GM did this one well and it is very well respected by most non GM fans.
They could have just given us another boring FWD car and just left it at that.
IP: Logged
05:52 PM
Fformula88 Member
Posts: 7891 From: Buffalo, NY Registered: Mar 2000
To be entirely fair and objective, years of production aside, the Sky/Solstice vs Fiero goes something like this;
Bulbous and fat looking vs. sleek and trim Tiny, stuffy interior vs. ample leg room and hip room Non-existant luggage capacity vs. limited luggage capacity Cost? hahahahahahaha Newer technology vs. older technology Hotrod ablility limited vs. hotrod ability unlimited Almost impossible to work on without a computer vs. possible to work on without a computer Parts cost exorbitant vs. parts cost reasonable.
I could go on
Arn
Now Arns, lets be a little fair here. Fat and bulbous? Styling is certainly an opinion and everyone has one, but the Solstice has generated mostly positive reviews for styling, as has the Sky.
Interior is smaller and less roomy than a Fiero's. I was a little disappointed in that, but it is still acceptable for my frame.
Luggage capacity. Hard to argue. GM money pinching here. They didn't want to spend on a saddle gas tank, and thus the box tank eats up the trunk instead of straddling the drive tunnel.
Cost... relatively inexpensive compared to most new sports cars of similar performance and purpose.
Hotrod ability limited vs Fiero? How so. I bet there is more ability with the stock powertrains. The iron duke is certainly extremely limited in what you can do with it, and the 2.8L is limited in ultimate power due to intake restrictions. You have to drop a new engine in a Fiero to really turn it into a hot rod, and you can do that to a Solstice too (Archie, Mallett, and others already do).
Work needing a computer. I suppose. Do you mean when doing mods? Normal repairs? Regardless, no worse than any other new car. There are positives here too, a GM stage 2 kit is due to come out that will get the GXP 30+ more HP by doing essentially nothing more than reprogram the ECU. No ECU reprogram will find 30 HP on my Formula's stock engine.
Parts cost... yeah the Fiero is cheap thanks to the 20 year old technology in it. Again, no worse than other new cars for kappa.
To be objective and fair, the Fiero would be cheaper to own and operate, and if that is the main criteria than it wins the comparison. The Fiero also has some advantages. On the whole however, I think the Solstice is a heck of a value and a heck of a car for the money (and I am not taking anything away from the Fiero either).
IP: Logged
06:02 PM
Fformula88 Member
Posts: 7891 From: Buffalo, NY Registered: Mar 2000
Originally posted by hyperv6: Love your Fiero but be fair and balanced that the new car is not a sin to like or at least respect it. Some people feel threatened by the Kappa's for some reason . Why I will never understand as there is no reason to be. It did not kill the Fiero or prevent a new one as there will never be a new one. Just be glad GM did this one well and it is very well respected by most non GM fans.
I've noticed this attitude by some on this forum too (not saying it is anyone's attitude in this thread, but based on past threads it does exist).
Sure we all chose to own Fieros and love them. However, that doesn't mean all else is junk either.
I know some dislike the fact the kappa's are front engined and don't have the powerplant behind the seats like the Fiero. That's fine, but it doesn't make the kappa's bad. In fact, the kappa's are closer to a 50-50 split in weight distribution than a V6 Fiero!
There is certainly room for both cars, and lots of exciting things will be done with Solstice's and Sky's just as they are now with Fieros in years to come.
I love it when I can act as an agent provocateur. I just wanted to point out -- especially on the more mainstream cardomain.com forum -- just how advanced the Fiero was in its day, and that 20 years after the last car was built, that it has such a passionate following. (It will be interesting to look ahead 20 years and see if the Sky/Solstice engender a comparable following.)
With that being said, and thinking out of the box, how much fun it would be to drive a suitably updated, tight, low-mileage Fiero, say one with a 3.4-liter DOHC engine or a 3800, two very popular (and well sorted out) swaps? The bottom line is this, based on contemporary road tests of a 135-horsepower Fiero, and the 177-horsepower base Sky/Solstice, the numbers are almost the same. The more I thought about it, and based on something that was mentioned earlier, just how much aerodynamics comes into play especially in the comparative stock forms, the Fiero eeks out a tiny advantage in top speed. Even the EPA numbers are comparable.
The Sky/Solstice is front mid-engined, the Fiero is mid mid-engined, and that tips some handling advantages in the Fiero's favor but not enough to overcome the advantages of tire technology over the last 20 years. With that being said, in the past I've driven highly modified Fieros that pull close to 1G, which shows the potential inherent in the original design.
Hey guys, making fun of a nice new car is part of driving a classic. I have alot of fun making fun of Corvettes, Rustangs, Sky's, RX7's, Superchickens and the like. Not saying they aren't nice cars, and pulling the chain once in a while ok if we keep it all in good fun. Sorry if I offended anybody. BTW, you can see a really beautiful Sky convertible here https://www.fiero.nl/forum/F...1/HTML/069295-2.html
Okay...Just because I am a fan of both cars...I feel the need to mention something here. Some folks are comparing the V6 Fiero GT to the base N/A Solstice. Well, in an effort to make a fair comparison...One should compare the Base Fiero to the base N/A Solstice and the Fiero V6 GT to the GXP. Now knowing that...you cannot say the fiero can perform at the same level. It's not even close folks.
quote
Originally posted by autotronic:
I love it when I can act as an agent provocateur. I just wanted to point out -- especially on the more mainstream cardomain.com forum -- just how advanced the Fiero was in its day, and that 20 years after the last car was built, that it has such a passionate following. (It will be interesting to look ahead 20 years and see if the Sky/Solstice engender a comparable following.)
With that being said, and thinking out of the box, how much fun it would be to drive a suitably updated, tight, low-mileage Fiero, say one with a 3.4-liter DOHC engine or a 3800, two very popular (and well sorted out) swaps? The bottom line is this, based on contemporary road tests of a 135-horsepower Fiero, and the 177-horsepower base Sky/Solstice, the numbers are almost the same. The more I thought about it, and based on something that was mentioned earlier, just how much aerodynamics comes into play especially in the comparative stock forms, the Fiero eeks out a tiny advantage in top speed. Even the EPA numbers are comparable.
The Sky/Solstice is front mid-engined, the Fiero is mid mid-engined, and that tips some handling advantages in the Fiero's favor but not enough to overcome the advantages of tire technology over the last 20 years. With that being said, in the past I've driven highly modified Fieros that pull close to 1G, which shows the potential inherent in the original design.
"Okay...Just because I am a fan of both cars...I feel the need to mention something here. Some folks are comparing the V6 Fiero GT to the base N/A Solstice. Well, in an effort to make a fair comparison...One should compare the Base Fiero to the base N/A Solstice and the Fiero V6 GT to the GXP. Now knowing that...you cannot say the fiero can perform at the same level. It's not even close folks."
Absolutely not. How can you compare a 135-horsepower Fiero with a 240-horsepower Solstice? It's about power-to-weight ratio (which still leave the Fiero at something of a disadvantage), not base versus upgraded edition.
You can make any comparison you want but this is the one that is fairest, IMHO. Now comparing a Redilne or GXP, to a 3800 supercharged, that would be a fairer comparison, again in my opinion.
Originally posted by autotronic: Absolutely not. How can you compare a 135-horsepower Fiero with a 240-horsepower Solstice? ....
part of his point. base vs base & upgraded vs upgraded. you are more looking for how much you need to do to a Fiero to make it comparable. because on its own - it loses.
Who said anything about base-to-base or anything like that? When I started this thread (and evven before that over on cardomain.com where you can really look at the numbers) I tried to make the comparison between the 135-horsepower '88 Fiero and the current 177-horsepower Sky/Solstice, as they are the most directly comparable, at least in terms of power-to-weight ratio, which tends to even out, not skew, the playing field.
"Absolutely not. How can you compare a 135-horsepower Fiero with a 240-horsepower Solstice? It's about power-to-weight ratio (which still leave the Fiero at something of a disadvantage), not base versus upgraded edition."
Thats my point...You cannot compare the two.
Actually, the GXP is 260-horsepower.
IP: Logged
01:25 PM
Fformula88 Member
Posts: 7891 From: Buffalo, NY Registered: Mar 2000
Choosing to compare the two cars based on power to weight ration may be a valid comparison criteria. Comparison’s based on power to weight makes sense if you want to compare factors of cars with similar acceleration properties. In a way, it takes engine out of the equation of the car’s overall driving dynamics, since power is on an even level.
However, to be truthful, if you want to compare how far they have progressed from the Fiero to the Solstice, then comparing across trim levels makes more sense. The GT was the extra cost, uplevel performing Fiero of the day. To see how those criteria work now, you would have to compare it to a Solstice (260 HP BTW). Comparing it to the base Solstice, in an attempt to see how far things have gone, is a bit biased because it doesn’t truly show how far GM has come in marketing a high cost version of a 2 seater platform since it leaves the increased power of the engine’s out of the equation.
Doesn’t make the comparison of GT to base kappa invalid either. It just means those analyzing it needs to be aware of what is under comparison.
IP: Logged
02:19 PM
hyperv6 Member
Posts: 6132 From: Clinton, OH, USA Registered: Mar 2003
I think this proves the point that you can't compare the the cars as there is just too much time. money, technology and engineering differances between them. Now if you want to compare them to show how much things have advanced over 25 years you can do that.
It is just not these cars as even the new Vette today even in base form can not be compared even to the original ZR-1 as the base car today would smoke it in many points of measure.
I see no point to compare them anyway one is old one is new so what would the point be.
Just enjoy them both as this is not a compititsion we are all on the same team.
Apples to apples, oranges to oranges.
The Fiero was a good car that has a strong following today but it is still a old car. Even the best in the world sports cars of the past pail when compared to their present makers models. Example 308 Ferrari is nothing compared to the New F430 or 599. The 308 is still a cool car but time has moved on.
IP: Logged
08:59 PM
jscott1 Member
Posts: 21676 From: Houston, TX , USA Registered: Dec 2001
... and what did Consumer Reports think of the Fiero? ;-)
Well, I'm not completely sure but:
"Which Cars Protect You Best?" Consumer Reports Apr. 1984: 186-188. According to Consumer Reports, the only car rated safer than the Fiero in the year it came out was a Volvo.
IP: Logged
12:56 AM
hyperv6 Member
Posts: 6132 From: Clinton, OH, USA Registered: Mar 2003
"Which Cars Protect You Best?" Consumer Reports Apr. 1984: 186-188. According to Consumer Reports, the only car rated safer than the Fiero in the year it came out was a Volvo.
You can't compare a 1984 crash standard car to today as the air bags alone give it more passenger protection than any other car.
Have walked way from a hard crash. Well I drove away from a hard crash I can say the Fiero was one if not the best back in the day. But compared to some of todays tanks I will take todays car over the Fiero.
Keep in mind todays cars are built much like the Fiero and have many more safety features. That is why many sedans are near or over 4000 pounds.
TOdays standards are just so much higher todays cars are just better.
I blaime airbags alone as to why we have so many stupid people today. We used to thin the heard out of the hey watch this kind of people. Ha ha!
