quote Originally posted by hyperv6: The numbers game is how it is played byt htose who have never driven or know how a good car should feel like or drive. They have nothing to compare it to and have to resort to numbers. I have never been a BMW fan. Their cars never pull big numbers but even in their standard series car even in the 70's they can tackle any road and it goes where it was pointed with little effort or drama. Many ther German cars do the same because of where they were tuned and set up on real non perfect roads. The American companies spent too much time on smooth test tracks and not enough time on the back roads of Michigan to tune any of their cars. Today they have learned other wise. A good example is the new Cobalt SS Turbo. While it has a very advance engine the suspesion is pretty much the same as the old Z24 or the 80's Rear Twist Beam and Struts and Shocks. The new car is amazing what they have done. There is no special electric shocks the is no exotic parts. It is the old Delta platform [Old J car] tuned as it could have been years ago if they had only tried. When you read some of these stories you have to remember they don't alway say it nice but some times the truth hurts. The Fiero was just a fully developed car or as well as it could have or should have been. It was just they way GM did things back then. That is also why GM has lost maket share and may even lose Pontiac soon. GM played the numbers game when they should have just made a better car no matter what the name. FYI I am a life long GM owner and fan. I too played the numbers game but I finally learned it is more than number to make a good car. With the Fiero you just have to take the bad with the good. IF you do that it all works out. In the past all you would get is a lot of negitive comments some fair some not but as time goes on fault become charm. Just ask an MG owner whose lights don't come on.

I agree with everything except one point... I don't believe the Fiero was anywhere near as fully developed as it could have been. They started with an idea and a parts bin, threw it out to the public to see if they would bite, and they did. Then they answered with Aero noses, V6's, and 120mph speedos, then major upgrades in '88. This is what I would call development. It was a new idea created on the cheap, and when sales unexpectedly took off, GM didn't take the opportunity to capitalize on the design and make it the fully developed Fiero.
On a brighter note, I love it when a guy at the gas station walks up and says "Is that a Fiero? My dad's uncle's sister's dog's cousin's brother had one of those, and it always broke down, blah blah..." That's when I tell him it's a 2.8L v6 that gets 30mpg, I get in, start it, rev it (flowmasters rumbling), and spin the tires just bit as I leave. The look on his face is priceless....

------------------
Journal of a concept: http://southeastfieros.com

Somebody should show this as@#$le the 1990 Fiero !!!

quote Originally posted by fieroboom: I agree with everything except one point... I don't believe the Fiero was anywhere near as fully developed as it could have been. They started with an idea and a parts bin, threw it out to the public to see if they would bite, and they did. Then they answered with Aero noses, V6's, and 120mph speedos, then major upgrades in '88. This is what I would call development. It was a new idea created on the cheap, and when sales unexpectedly took off, GM didn't take the opportunity to capitalize on the design and make it the fully developed Fiero. On a brighter note, I love it when a guy at the gas station walks up and says "Is that a Fiero? My dad's uncle's sister's dog's cousin's brother had one of those, and it always broke down, blah blah..." That's when I tell him it's a 2.8L v6 that gets 30mpg, I get in, start it, rev it (flowmasters rumbling), and spin the tires just bit as I leave. The look on his face is priceless....

Your correct!

Lack of development is what the whole problem was,

GM did not give Pontiac the parts, support and money needed to get the car right and Pontiac built the car anyway with hope to get it right in time. This was not just a Fiero problem but a GM problem all together.

Also you had Chevy fighting the car behind the sceans as they did not want a cheaper sports car for the Vette to lose sales too.

IF the Fiero hav been fully developed it would be praised by non Fiero lovers vs written about how wrong the car was.

That leaves us with guys like this writting about the glass half empty and us the fans explaining the Fiero is only a a glass half full.

The Fiero was just a car with a lot of things that could have been so right and GM not providing the support and Pontiac building the car anyway with put the correct support. The 88 was only where they almost wanted to start. Pontiac wanted a sports car and has to sell it as a econo car. they wanted a OHC 4 cylinder and only got the Iron duke. They wanted new suspension parts but got left over designs that were never fully sorted out.

The Fiero is kind of like a symbol of what was wrong and right with GM in the 70's and 80's. It is where a lot of the problems that got them to where they are today asking for 12 Billion diollars. GM did not just screw up this car but a lot of other cars too.

GM was so close to getting it right but dropped the ball just short of the goal. Toyota did not hurt GM it was GM and it's system that hurt GM. They fought themselves interally more than they fought the compitition.

[This message has been edited by hyperv6 (edited 12-03-2008).]

I agree, and it looks like Gm has manage to screw up GM now. Too many almost finished designs and half measures. Gm isn't slow and it isn't fast its Half fast.

[This message has been edited by Macs86GT (edited 12-03-2008).]

quote Originally posted by hyperv6: Your correct! Lack of development is what the whole problem was, GM did not give Pontiac the parts, support and money needed to get the car right and Pontiac built the car anyway with hope to get it right in time. This was not just a Fiero problem but a GM problem all together. Also you had Chevy fighting the car behind the sceans as they did not want a cheaper sports car for the Vette to lose sales too. IF the Fiero hav been fully developed it would be praised by non Fiero lovers vs written about how wrong the car was. That leaves us with guys like this writting about the glass half empty and us the fans explaining the Fiero is only a a glass half full. The Fiero was just a car with a lot of things that could have been so right and GM not providing the support and Pontiac building the car anyway with put the correct support. The 88 was only where they almost wanted to start. Pontiac wanted a sports car and has to sell it as a econo car. they wanted a OHC 4 cylinder and only got the Iron duke. They wanted new suspension parts but got left over designs that were never fully sorted out. The Fiero is kind of like a symbol of what was wrong and right with GM in the 70's and 80's. It is where a lot of the problems that got them to where they are today asking for 12 Billion diollars. GM did not just screw up this car but a lot of other cars too. GM was so close to getting it right but dropped the ball just short of the goal. Toyota did not hurt GM it was GM and it's system that hurt GM. They fought themselves interally more than they fought the compitition.

Exceptionally well said.
In keeping with looks on people's faces, I love it when I see a Fiero with a 3800 Series II SC dropped in a Fiero at the track. Because with no other modifications, just using an engine out of an "ok" car, the Fiero smokes many cars at the track. Speaking of cars GM effed over, I can't stand the Malibu-Impala (I call it the ImpalaBoo) they came out with in '06... That is NOT an Impala...

quote Originally posted by fieroboom: Exceptionally well said. In keeping with looks on people's faces, I love it when I see a Fiero with a 3800 Series II SC dropped in a Fiero at the track. Because with no other modifications, just using an engine out of an "ok" car, the Fiero smokes many cars at the track. Speaking of cars GM effed over, I can't stand the Malibu-Impala (I call it the ImpalaBoo) they came out with in '06... That is NOT an Impala...

I assume you are speaking about the W Impala. It is just an old design that was to have been replaced by the now cancled Zeta RWD. The Zeta was not going to make the new CAFE standards so it was killed before any more money was wasted.

I bought my mother a new 08 Malibu. I thought she would like the car but I never thugh I would. It is a dang good car.

I bought it cheap and it has a OHC V6 the same as the CTS. Also has the new 6 speed tranny that is smooth as glass.

This car is the measure of any Camry or Civic. The first 4 months it has been absolutly trouble free and a joy to drive.

For a car that is not considered a performance car it will give my GTP Comp G GP a run for its money in handling and perfromance. All that with a better ride and quieter.

Paid $20k for a fully loated one with only the sun roof missing. It even has the 18 inch wheels.

If I find the time I'll have to dig through my archive of old Fiero related magazines. I'm pretty sure that Popular Mechanics magazine sang the praises of the Fiero even before the car hit the showrooms. Maybe this guy needs to do a bit of research into his company’s own archives?

quote Originally posted by PePe-LePu_For_2: If I find the time I'll have to dig through my archive of old Fiero related magazines. I'm pretty sure that Popular Mechanics magazine sang the praises of the Fiero even before the car hit the showrooms. Maybe this guy needs to do a bit of research into his company’s own archives?

Everyone sang praise to the Fiero in the first year but each and every year after and as more compitition came out they started to point ou the areas that needed or should have been addressed.

I have all the articals from back then and you see a great decline form 84-87 only to get a little improvment with the 88 model.

quote Originally posted by GTMN: Somebody should show this as@#$le the 1990 Fiero !!!

Why? The style looks old and dated since GM essentially used it for the 4th gen Firebird. Back in 1990 it would have been stunning, but 18 years later it's "been there, done that".

quote Originally posted by hyperv6: ...snip... The things GM needed to do to make this car right were avaiable back then. Better tuned shocks, Better geometry on the suspension set up.and better bushings. The problem is the back and the front of the early cars never worked together as they should have just to make a average car not a Enzo. ...snip...

and

quote Originally posted by hyperv6: ...snip I have all the articals from back then and you see a great decline form 84-87 only to get a little improvment with the 88 model.

I realize this has been discussed before, but just how much better was the improved '88 suspension? One road test of the '88 car said:


"The Pontiac Fiero has at last made up it's mind. After $30 million of suspension and chassis development, the 'utility commuter' car that looked like a sports car is now aimed down a new road for 1988. Now it is a sports car..."

and

"The new suspension hardware transforms the Fiero...What changes the Fiero is new double A-arm front suspension and trailing arm rear end. The suspensions were not borrowed from other GM vehicles -- as '87 and earlier models had been...On the road you can drive a new Fiero without the clenched-fist grip on the wheel you needed on older Fieros. On glass-smooth roads, all you notice is a quiter ride. But on any other surface the difference is astonishing. Bumps get soaked up without upsetting the car, the steering is linear and accepts small corrections easily. That could never be said of the old car...In total, zipping over challenging roads is more rewarding. It's a new feeling as well, for any General Motors product, including even the Corvette."

[This message has been edited by FieroFanatic13 (edited 12-04-2008).]

quote Originally posted by FieroFanatic13: They posted my comments as well. In case you don't care to visit the site:

Wow, very well put. + for you!

Here is mine:

27. RE: 5 Classic Cars Detroit Shouldn't Rebuild for the 21st Century
I'm wondering why this article was written. Clearly it serves only to enflame proud owners of popular and innovative cars. And it if grossly fails to mention truly disasterous experiments in automotive design. In the Fiero article for example, the Chevette is mention in passing. Now, let's forget the author's mistaken statement that the Fiero pictured has any Chevette parts on it whatsoever, which it does not. But why mention one of GM's biggest catastrophes, the Chevette and FAIL to list it in the Top 5? What about the Ford Pinto? How about the Pontiac Aztec? What about ANYTHING built by AMC? I can rattle off a dozen cars just off the top of my head that cost GM a fortune in recalls and bad press that outweigh nearly every car on this list...well, except perhaps the Cordoba. Yep, that one deserves its infamy. What can I say, perhaps the folks at Popular Mechanics should task people who know something about cars to write articles on them next time. Just a suggestion.

quote Originally posted by FieroFanatic13: I realize this has been discussed before, but just how much better was the improved '88 suspension? One road test of the '88 car said: "The Pontiac Fiero has at last made up it's mind. After $30 million of suspension and chassis development, the 'utility commuter' car that looked like a sports car is now aimed down a new road for 1988. Now it is a sports car..." and "The new suspension hardware transforms the Fiero...What changes the Fiero is new double A-arm front suspension and trailing arm rear end. The suspensions were not borrowed from other GM vehicles -- as '87 and earlier models had been...On the road you can drive a new Fiero without the clenched-fist grip on the wheel you needed on older Fieros. On glass-smooth roads, all you notice is a quiter ride. But on any other surface the difference is astonishing. Bumps get soaked up without upsetting the car, the steering is linear and accepts small corrections easily. That could never be said of the old car...In total, zipping over challenging roads is more rewarding. It's a new feeling as well, for any General Motors product, including even the Corvette."

The 88 feels better controled and feels like the front is wokring with the rear as one car vs the early set up that was heavy feeling in the front with the rear bump steering around.

The early car is god on a smooth surface but on a road in the real world with bumps it is a mess.

The 88 is not perfect but it feel much better sorted vs the 84-87. It is a easier car to drive fast.

quote Originally posted by hyperv6: The 88 feels better controled and feels like the front is wokring with the rear as one car vs the early set up that was heavy feeling in the front with the rear bump steering around. The early car is god on a smooth surface but on a road in the real world with bumps it is a mess. The 88 is not perfect but it feel much better sorted vs the 84-87. It is a easier car to drive fast.

The part that I quoted that surprises me the most was the part about the '88 Fiero handling better than the Vette.

But I guess my overall curiosity is how did the '88 Fiero actaully compare to other sports cars of the time and today? The Motorweek show actually picked the '88 Formula as the winner when they tested it against the MR2 Superchaged back in 1988. But that was an "overall, best car to live with on a daily basis" pick. The MR2 was sited as having better race track handling, while the Fiero was said to have more forgiving handling for the average driver if I recall. The Fiero was picked for best brakes in the test as well. In the end, I think they said the Fiero was better balanced on the whole, and less twitchy than the MR2.

It's just interesting to me how much better the Fiero was in '88...

i believe they also said that the mr 2 was easy to drive past its limits, as the fiero would let you know.

Im gonna go ahead and step right out here and say I have 2 Fieros, both V6s and both needed moderate work when I got them. The reason the cars needed work to start with was lack of proper maintenance... go figure, yet again, someone didnt read the manual or didnt follow the proper schedule or even use the correct parts. These cars are just another one of a short list of cars that was and is misunderstood. The car, in its design is actually quite sturdy even in a front end impact. Its the height of the car that proves to be an issue. But just because something has a Chevette front suspension, Citation front suspension and drivetrain doesnt mean that it makes a bad car. To me, the front suspension remained easy to maintain with greasable ball joints and steering parts, cheap and easily replacable wheel bearings and seals. Brakes are to fit any budget WITH rotors! The Iron Duke is one of the best 4 cylinders to come through the lineups, always froviding reliability and maintainability to any car it was put into. Easily repairable and cheap to maintain. GREAT gas saver! I have had an 88 Grand Am base model with the 2.5 and that car is STILL running the roads after 3 more owners and untelling abuse! It has well over 200000 miles. I also have a 2001 Grand Am GT with the 3400 V6. This engine STOCK was running with the stock 4.6 GT mustang on top end! This car, with a few mods, is now pushing out 247 WHP and runs little SRT4s and a few others all over the track. My 3400n still gets 31MPG and has over 150,000 miles and doesnt use a DROP of oil, why?, because its been maintained as it should have been. I consider all 4 of my pontiac, mid and small cars, to be the top of any list out there. As with most cars, properly maintaned and serviced, they will continue to be as reliable as the day they were bought new. I also have a 2002 WS6 Trans Am and its mostly stock with just Headers and Full exhaust, 100,000 miles on block. I have been and always will be a Pontiac person and they can write all the untrue, misunderstood articles they want. You want driving excitment? Come hang out with just a few of the guys on here and lets see how excited they get when a Fiero passes 150MPH

quote Originally posted by Fformula88: Another curiosity is the appearance of the Grand Am on this list. Does he realize that when GM killed the Grand Am, it was the company's 2nd best selling car, moving over 300,000 units a year? They replaced it with the G6, which was better in virtually every way, yet sold less than half as well. Not everyone may have liked the cladded body, but GM would love to find someone to buy 300,000 Pontiacs a year today, all models combined. So the car may have it's haters, but it was hardly a failure. I agree, the Probe certainly isn't worthy of being in the top 5 either, but apparently resides there mainly because he dislikes the name. How does the Yugo not make this list at all?

quote Originally posted by PePe-LePu_For_2: If I find the time I'll have to dig through my archive of old Fiero related magazines. I'm pretty sure that Popular Mechanics magazine sang the praises of the Fiero even before the car hit the showrooms. Maybe this guy needs to do a bit of research into his company’s own archives?

Realizing that this post is off topic, I love that Avatar of yours.

Ron

quote Originally posted by FieroFanatic13: The part that I quoted that surprises me the most was the part about the '88 Fiero handling better than the Vette. But I guess my overall curiosity is how did the '88 Fiero actaully compare to other sports cars of the time and today? The Motorweek show actually picked the '88 Formula as the winner when they tested it against the MR2 Superchaged back in 1988. But that was an "overall, best car to live with on a daily basis" pick. The MR2 was sited as having better race track handling, while the Fiero was said to have more forgiving handling for the average driver if I recall. The Fiero was picked for best brakes in the test as well. In the end, I think they said the Fiero was better balanced on the whole, and less twitchy than the MR2. It's just interesting to me how much better the Fiero was in '88...

The 88 was on par with many sports cars of the day and better than many. Yes there were better cars out there but usally they cost much more.

The key to a good handling car is not the numbers but the ease it is to drive fast. If it feels slow but your going fast it is a sign the car is set up fairly well. Many cars can be driven fast but you have to work for it. A good car will not make you work.

The new Cobalt SS is not anything high tech in the suspension but it is very well sorted. It will run times at the Ring with M3 and M5. It is a eae to drive fast. The numbers onm the skid pad are not out of the range of many cars more is the 1/4 mile times. But it is just a well sorted package that make a good driver great.

Race track handling is great on the race track but in the real world it can make for an evil car.

Keep in mind GM designed the 88 suspension but the front was tuned and dialed in by Porsche According to John Sawruck of GM. Getting just the dampers right can make the world of differacne. The 84 Z51 Vette was a mess because they used the wrong shocks. The car was tuned on the test track away form the press. Once the car hit the real world roads for the first time with the press it jarred them to death. The car pulled some great numbers but the Z51 packages was a mess.

quote Originally posted by hyperv6: The 88 was on par with many sports cars of the day and better than many. Yes there were better cars out there but usally they cost much more. ...snip... Keep in mind GM designed the 88 suspension but the front was tuned and dialed in by Porsche According to John Sawruck of GM. Getting just the dampers right can make the world of differacne. The 84 Z51 Vette was a mess because they used the wrong shocks. The car was tuned on the test track away form the press. Once the car hit the real world roads for the first time with the press it jarred them to death. The car pulled some great numbers but the Z51 packages was a mess.

On that note, since any OEM shocks and struts are shot at this point, how do you deal with that "fine tuning" when replacing shocks and struts? My presumption would be that any replacement made nowadays should be better than the OEM's, but if they need to be "fine tuned," then what do we look for, etc., etc.?

quote Originally posted by FieroFanatic13: On that note, since any OEM shocks and struts are shot at this point, how do you deal with that "fine tuning" when replacing shocks and struts? My presumption would be that any replacement made nowadays should be better than the OEM's, but if they need to be "fine tuned," then what do we look for, etc., etc.?

We have had better strutts and shocks for a long time that will help. The problem is it is only one part of a complete package.

We also can imporve the bushings and bars too.

What we can't fix without majore worlk is the geometry of the suspension. The rear of the 84-87 is just what it is a FWD converted cheaply to a RWD. If GM had funded Pontiac better and Pontiac had started with a clean sheet we would have had a 88 or better rear suspension in the earlier years.

The sum total of part is not what that is improtant but the combination and how it all works together is what counts.

I get a lot of people at work who buy the biggest cams, highest compression, biggest exhaust, the largest carbs only to have a car that runs like a pig because many of the parts are not matched up wel with the others to work as a unit. Suspensions are not just put together they are designed and even if you have a lot of good parts they still need to get the scrub angles, arm travels, deflections and other factors designed in.

Now keep in mind I know as anyone here the Fiero is not an undrivable car and is still fun. But the 84-88 in stock form will make you work to get all you can get out of it. Most cars that are well set up work for you and make you look good not the driver with good skill working to make the car look good.

The shame of it all is the 88 is a very simple set up and really would not have cost much more to have made but at the time the Fiero was being designed money was tight and every dollar counted. The cost to designe the rear was enough that it could have killed the car and never getting built. So it is just something we need to live with as it is part of our history and will never change.

Not too I have the Herb Adams kit on my car. It improves my car but it is still not as good as if this car has the 88 suspesion.

It is corners cut like this over the years that put GM where they are now. In todays car world close is not good enough. They are correcting that today as they are building some very good and well thought out cars. But the hard part is earning the trust of the people they lost when they found out there were better cars to be had.

if you know what your doing with a suspension the issues with the stock set up can be remedied. It takes patience and dollars. How much are you willing to spend to correct what gm did on the cheap. Its all about the balance of parts seen as total whole not the parts themselves. Computers are the same way many people buy the biggest baddest processor then stick it on an anemic el-cheapo motherboard and then wonder why their computer runs like crap. Performance is about clearing or avoiding bottlenecks in a system which is why a smaller well balanced engine or well thought out suspension can out do someones hi dollar unbalanced brag wagon.

I just happened to run across this article this morning. Needless to say, I was quite surprised to see the Fiero on the list. However, after reading the rest of the article, it became obvious that PM needed an article to fill some space (they do need to have some content other than advertising... something... anything).

So you end up with some "contributor" (I think they are called stringers in the newspaper business) who is not on the staff, but nevertheless gets paid some token amount to put together something that will fill the pages. Well, there is an old saying... "You get what you paid for."

As far as the "list" is concerned... what a joke! At best, a lame attempt to equate a list of (not so) "classic" cars with current trend towards producing retro versions of three Big Three's best (at least between '65 and '74).selling performance cars.

When were any of the five on the list marketed as performance cars? Since when were any of the five considered classics? I do believe the Fiero is destined to become a classic, but not a classic performance car. As far as the rest are concerned... doubtful.

------------------
FierOmar

quote Originally posted by FieroFanatic13: They posted my comments as well. In case you don't care to visit the site:

Yeah... they liked it sooo much... they posted it twice