I have a Brooklands Books "Pontiac Fiero Performance Portfolio" that has a number of Road tests from the Fiero production years. I would recommend it to anyone who likes and/or owns a Fiero. Here I decided to do a review/comparison of the different tests out of this book. I will only list the highlights and...Low-lights....
I have owned my 1985 SE V6 since new- 35 years; Had only a few problems and enjoyed the car- taking it camping, commuting to work, driving it daily up till 1998- then a pause (Had 1999 F-bird Formula)...Started driving it again as a daily driver from 2006 on. Was it a perfect car? No- but it was a good car that was cancelled prematurely......Mainly because the Car magazine reviews bombed the car from 1986 on.....So let's take a look at these...."Reviews" (Mostly Hit pieces) (Positive reviews in Green, Negative in Red)
1) Car & Driver 1984 test; "Basically a good car- but born fat ("If this car was built in Japan, it would be 500 lbs lighter!" (Toyota MR2 =2300 lbs/Supercharged= 2600 lbs)>>>>Counterpoint; Larry Griffin Stated;"The Fiero is America's miniature BMW M1"
2) Motor Trend 1985 GT; "Impressive numbers can't begin to describe the feel of this engine on their own. It's turbine smooth, responsive and happy at it's work" - "Twisty roads are the Fiero's forte" - " The GT's handling Dynamics are nearly faultless by production road car standards. The steering effort is linear and proportional to front slip angles"
3) Road & Track 1985 GT; The V6 "Exhibits the sort of smooth, free-revving performance we have hoped for in the Fiero" - "The car almost seems to have an intuitive sense of what you want it to do" - "Very impressive (and safe)" - "Let's make it official. The debate is over. The Fiero isn't just a nice, 2-seat commuter car anymore, It's a world-class sports car"
4) Car & Driver 1986 GT; "Despite the new tires and suspension mods, the feel from the left seat is all too familiar. The steering is not only heavy, but as numb as a door knob. The steering is so artificially stiff that you actually have to help it unwind" - "When you hustle, the chassis gets loose in the knees and throws you off stride">>>>Counterpoint; Larry Griffin stated; "It's engine isn't ripe for the part. It's steering still gives no feel and no help whatever in centering the wheel" (Fastest 0-60; 7.5 sec)
5) R&T sports & GT Cars Special (1987 GT test); "Pass that last city limits sign on your way up the Angeles Crest Highway, shift up though 3rd an 4th gears and the Fiero GT really starts to come alive. The steering that was a little heavy suddenly becomes effortless and accurate, giving excellent feedback and feel for traction through the steering wheel" - "The Fiero GT feels more like a smaller, tighter Corvette than a direct competitor to any of the imported 2-seaters" - "There may still be a few of the small details to be refined, but Pontiac has done its job on the important things. What more can you ask of a real sports car than you get from the Fiero GT? It looks racy and exotic, sticks to the road like glue, sounds good and gets you from one side of the mountains to the other quicker than all but a few cars on earth" (2nd fastest 0-60; 7.7 sec)
6) R&T comparo Formula vs MR2 Supercharged; (On the 88 Fiero suspension and other improvements) "Does this all work better? Definitely yes. Its a noticeable improvement over the 1987 Fiero but still with a way to go, especially when compared with the nimble MR2. The Fiero remains a wide, heavy car with slow steering, not very subtle and not responsive to the light touch." - "Much of the older design's numb feel is gone, there is more road feel and the car turns in better" - "Talk about David & Goliath...The MR2 is so much faster that the Fiero just can't keep up" (In their rating system, they would state; Braking; Both good; Lighter stops shorter..Then rated the MR2 a 9 above the Fiero's 7! Also Gearbox; Neither terrific,MR2 easier...rating 7.8 above Fiero's 6.5...and Instrumentation; Fiero Handsome, MR2 complete (Only addition the boost gauge which the Fiero did not need) 8.5 above the Fiero's 7.2!)
When comparing the bad reviews (Both CD tests and 88 R&T tests) against the MT and R&T 1985 GT tests plus the 1987 Peter Egan GT review, it is really hard to believe they are talking about the same cars. I will state that the MR2 was the better handling car if you were knowledgeable about handling- but for the average driver the MR2 would be a Widow-maker!
Most of the Foreign car magazines (Autocar, Car, Motor and Modern Motor) that tested the Fiero actually liked the car- Most were positive reviews while not being a "Fan Club" (Lets face it, no doubt Toyota was paying the mags to burn the Fiero and push the MR2- but GM/Pontiac was possibly doing the same thing- especially in the beginning (1984)
I have also included a Road Test Specs chart of what the Fiero was able to do in the tests. (I re-did the graphics but now it constantly tells me I need to be "Logged on to post a picture" (Ain't computers just great?)
[This message has been edited by cvxjet (edited 04-06-2020).]
I too am a 35 year owner of a 85 2M6 SE. I have lived through all this and still retain the original version of these test as well many others.
Note to I hate the Miata and MR2. But I have driven both.
Yes the Fiero was not perfect and had some good areas. But the 84-87 cars while gun to drive left a lot on the table. The understeer was unforgivable and the bump steer was a mess even new. The Fiero was never an easy car to drive fast till 88 on anything but a smooth surface.
But with that said to me the Fiero is a more challaging car to drive and yo me that is the fun of it. Like many older sports cars you had to work around the faults each had. Anyone who has driven an old English roadster will understand.
The Miata and MR2 both are more dialed in for everyday driving. Both are easier to drive at their limits. They too have faults but they are less pronounced.
Today we are spoiled by cars today that are so well tuned and are not even a 2 seat sports car.
Case in point I needed a small hauler just to daily drive. I bought an HHR SS. I really do not like FWD nor Turbo 4 engines. But The GM Performance Division tuned it correctly and it was a full on blast to drive.
Even as a small wagon it would handle great with near neutral balance with FWD. iThey used softer springs with better tuned shocks to that rode exceptionally yet still made it to where you could drive stupid fast. The Engine had 300 HP with the GM tune on it. Torque was limited at 315 ft LB.
Yes it was still a crappy HHR but it was tuned to drive right and left little on the table. It would handle circles around my Fiero, deliver faster quarter times than my Chevelle SS stock. In the 13’s and top speed of 170 mph if you were dumb enough to to try.
The bottom line is we have an imperfect car and it is not some magazines fault it was the failure of GM for not supporting it. Also Pontiac knew going in that they were taking a risk and that the life of the car was likely to be cut short.
Politics at GM and lack of money really were the problem.
Note Pontiac was on the bubble for closure in the early 80’s. The Fiero was a Hail Mary to help inject life in the division with the Firebird. It worked as the a Grand Am sales saved the division and Olds tanked with their FWD line of Cutlass models.
When looking at the Fiero you have to consider many things that were in play as it was not just one or two things that doomed the car.
Finally as one of the Fiero team members told me on a visit to his hone in MI was Sports cars generally have short lives. He said even if the second gen had survived odds were it would not have survived very long. Most 2 seat sports car models outside the Corvette and Miata few last 10 year.
RX7, 300 z, MR2 twice and more all did not last very long and died. Sports cars generally sell in low volume as it is a limited market. They also make little money at low volumes and low prices.
One of the worst thing that happened was they sold over 300k Fiero’s in 5 years. Most people that had one were not going to replace it soon and even at the smaller volume Athens death of the GM 80 sealed the Fiero fate. The GM 80 was needed for volume at the Fiero plant and was one risk Pontiac took that did not pay off. Chevy used it as the reason to kill the plant and car as they worried about dropping sales of the Corvette. Yes they were worried as the C5 did get canceled but only survived as the ignored the cancellation and the C5 proved profitable.
So while the stories are not always complimentary there was a lot more that caused the agile to problems.
This is why we need a good book on the car yo really get all the factors out on what happened and why.
A) I am not saying the Fiero was perfect.....B) I also note that there were numerous reasons for the Fiero's cancelation; 1) Chevy's influence, 2) The collapse of the 2 seat market, 3) The over-saturation by the great first year sales of Fieros (Success killed the Fiero!) and also 4) The Fiero-Fire story that was blown out of proportion.
But the thing I have noticed when reading these tests together is that there are some very contradictory statements going on here. A couple of tests actually rave about the steering (I actually would not) but then Car & Drivel talks about it like it was using wooden pegs and rope to steer the car!
Comparing it to the MR2 is legit- but the Fiero actually compared more favorably to the RX7 and 300ZX- substantially cheaper than those two and same performance. I know it is different in other areas of the country- but in the Bay Area, CA I catch hell over my car- Basically, most car buffs (Here) think the Fiero was a three-legged dog with mange that usually caught fire before it pulled out of the dealer lot....I have taken numerous friends for a ride and they react with shock that the car can perform so well- especially on winding roads.
The bias that Car & Drivel showed the car was blatant...I read the MT and R&T 1985 GT tests and bought my car...It wasn't perfect but it was a blast and I like the Torque-biased engine that doesn't need to be "Buzzed" to move the car (Note; I was driving up in the Sierras back in 1987 and a MR2 was following me- we pulled into a gas station and were comparing the cars...When I got up close to a MR2 I thought the car was ugly, tiny and had little room. The Fiero is much roomier. When I saw the back trunk I felt it was much smaller than the Fiero trunk. The guy stated "You just have to keep it above 4000 or it won't go" I did not tell him that I never went above 4000 driving that road in front of him- and at times pulling away)
From the very beginning I caught hell from coworkers for buying the "American junk"...One guy (Who really gave me hell) was a former 1967 427 Vette owner- he went out and bought a CRX- but the "HF" version w/ automatic...What a miserable little car.....But he never failed to tell me how superior his car was.
I could understand one mag saying the steering was "OK" and then another saying that it wasn't that good, but in these reviews one mag says "Dead as a doorknob and doesn't return to center at all" while another (European) mag says the steering is a "Revelation"...How can they be talking about the same car?
That R&T comparo with the MR2 SC.....They state in their rating graph under brakes "Both good,; Lighter stops shorter (151 vs 160 feet) and then rate the MR2 at 9 vs 7 for the Fiero...That is utterly ridiculous!
If the MT and R&T 1985 GT tests and the R&T Peter Egan 1987 test were re-publicized I think a lot of people out there would have more respect for our little car......
A) I am not saying the Fiero was perfect.....B) I also note that there were numerous reasons for the Fiero's cancelation; 1) Chevy's influence, 2) The collapse of the 2 seat market, 3) The over-saturation by the great first year sales of Fieros (Success killed the Fiero!) and also 4) The Fiero-Fire story that was blown out of proportion.
But the thing I have noticed when reading these tests together is that there are some very contradictory statements going on here. A couple of tests actually rave about the steering (I actually would not) but then Car & Drivel talks about it like it was using wooden pegs and rope to steer the car!
Comparing it to the MR2 is legit- but the Fiero actually compared more favorably to the RX7 and 300ZX- substantially cheaper than those two and same performance. I know it is different in other areas of the country- but in the Bay Area, CA I catch hell over my car- Basically, most car buffs (Here) think the Fiero was a three-legged dog with mange that usually caught fire before it pulled out of the dealer lot....I have taken numerous friends for a ride and they react with shock that the car can perform so well- especially on winding roads.
The bias that Car & Drivel showed the car was blatant...I read the MT and R&T 1985 GT tests and bought my car...It wasn't perfect but it was a blast and I like the Torque-biased engine that doesn't need to be "Buzzed" to move the car (Note; I was driving up in the Sierras back in 1987 and a MR2 was following me- we pulled into a gas station and were comparing the cars...When I got up close to a MR2 I thought the car was ugly, tiny and had little room. The Fiero is much roomier. When I saw the back trunk I felt it was much smaller than the Fiero trunk. The guy stated "You just have to keep it above 4000 or it won't go" I did not tell him that I never went above 4000 driving that road in front of him- and at times pulling away)
From the very beginning I caught hell from coworkers for buying the "American junk"...One guy (Who really gave me hell) was a former 1967 427 Vette owner- he went out and bought a CRX- but the "HF" version w/ automatic...What a miserable little car.....But he never failed to tell me how superior his car was.
I could understand one mag saying the steering was "OK" and then another saying that it wasn't that good, but in these reviews one mag says "Dead as a doorknob and doesn't return to center at all" while another (European) mag says the steering is a "Revelation"...How can they be talking about the same car?
That R&T comparo with the MR2 SC.....They state in their rating graph under brakes "Both good,; Lighter stops shorter (151 vs 160 feet) and then rate the MR2 at 9 vs 7 for the Fiero...That is utterly ridiculous!
If the MT and R&T 1985 GT tests and the R&T Peter Egan 1987 test were re-publicized I think a lot of people out there would have more respect for our little car......
You just can’t take 35 year olds magazines with subjective articles get to you. Generally most people today really don’t have them let alone know about them.
As for co workers etc they are entitled to their opinion just as you. You also have to admit today the hate is no where what it was back in the day.
Time has moved on and you are not going to argue a change of these stories as many of the writers are retired or dead.
You just need to,let it go.
Again these stories played such a small part of what killed the Fiero that they don’t deserve any blame. GM itself killed the car with bot coperations, Chevy and Pontiac sharing Different parts the burden.
It’s not 1985 anymore. Soak up the positive vibe of today and stop reliving the past. That is all I am saying.
I guess we should all just agree with the main body of the car enthusiasts....The Fiero was and is a piece of crap.......We need to all take our cars down and have them crushed- but there must only be a few left because most caught fire and burned, Right?
I have shown friends the good reviews and they have reacted with "I never read this....why the hell did I only hear all those bad things about the car?"
Everyone "Knows" the Corvair is a horrible death trap, right? Because Ralph Nader said so- don't want to mention that Ralphy never had a drivers license and never drove a car....nor that the NHTSA tested a 1960 Corvair (With the early swing-arm suspension) in 1973 and found it to be better- and safer- handling car than the new 1973 cars.
Everytime I read any nostalgia piece on the Fiero, they bomb on it because "Everyone knows all the reviews and tests were bad- and they all caught fire anyway!"
So let me ask; Are you in total agreement with "The Fiero is a flaming pile of dog poo"?
I suppose you think that the 3 good reviews are the big lies......
If they would just show one of those good reviews it would change the public's perception. I catch hell all the time here.....But a few years ago I drove out to Modesto to a P&P for a part.....at a gas station a couple of guys complimented my car- then at the P&P parking lot, 2 other guys complimented it......It actually felt kind of good.
I water ski behind a jet boat and EVERYONE says "Can't ski behind a jet boat!" Finally convinced two different professional skiers to try it- both were impressed- but "Everyone KNOWS...."
Why is it wrong to have people read the good along with the bad?
I am pleased to say that 99% of the conversations I have or hear about my Fieros are positive and invoke pleasant memories among the participants. It's easy to identify the close-minded negative know-it-alls; I ignore 'em and don't strain a brain cell trying to educate 'em. Their loss.
I guess we should all just agree with the main body of the car enthusiasts....The Fiero was and is a piece of crap.......We need to all take our cars down and have them crushed- but there must only be a few left because most caught fire and burned, Right?
I have shown friends the good reviews and they have reacted with "I never read this....why the hell did I only hear all those bad things about the car?"
Everyone "Knows" the Corvair is a horrible death trap, right? Because Ralph Nader said so- don't want to mention that Ralphy never had a drivers license and never drove a car....nor that the NHTSA tested a 1960 Corvair (With the early swing-arm suspension) in 1973 and found it to be better- and safer- handling car than the new 1973 cars.
Everytime I read any nostalgia piece on the Fiero, they bomb on it because "Everyone knows all the reviews and tests were bad- and they all caught fire anyway!"
So let me ask; Are you in total agreement with "The Fiero is a flaming pile of dog poo"?
I suppose you think that the 3 good reviews are the big lies......
If they would just show one of those good reviews it would change the public's perception. I catch hell all the time here.....But a few years ago I drove out to Modesto to a P&P for a part.....at a gas station a couple of guys complimented my car- then at the P&P parking lot, 2 other guys complimented it......It actually felt kind of good.
I water ski behind a jet boat and EVERYONE says "Can't ski behind a jet boat!" Finally convinced two different professional skiers to try it- both were impressed- but "Everyone KNOWS...."
Why is it wrong to have people read the good along with the bad?
I will debate the topic here but if you want yo be a drama queen you are on your own.
I never said the Fiero was a horrid car. It was a good car that had room for improvement due to the lack of GM investment.
If you Really want to take 35 year old magazine stories personal that is up to you and a therapist at some point.
The Fiero is fun, different and interesting but it also left a lot on the table. It was a what if car as it never had a chance to be all it was going yo be.
My take here is you have never driven a properly sorted car to understand the full scope of what great handling is. Few cars reach that level and even fewer have experienced driving one. Yet even these cars have their quirks too if you really look for them. That is what makes each interesting and different.
Unbalanced fanatical fan ship often hurts a brand or model as the owners begine to be seen as nuts. The X1/9 people got hammered a while back as some of their owners went off the deep end with illogical defenses of their cars. They scared off more potential owners than drew interest to their models.
The long and short is don’t be that guy.
FYI Ralph did not kill the Corvair. The Mustang did as it led to the Camaro bthat was cheaper to build and faster. It is well documented. Ralph’s book was more a distraction than anything and got more credit than it deserved.
Having had 4 Corvairs in the family we are well versed in them and their history.
[This message has been edited by hyperv6 (edited 04-07-2020).]
I am pleased to say that 99% of the conversations I have or hear about my Fieros are positive and invoke pleasant memories among the participants. It's easy to identify the close-minded negative know-it-alls; I ignore 'em and don't strain a brain cell trying to educate 'em. Their loss.
The tone to the car went from being the it car to have in the 80’s to being negative by the early 90’s.
It slowly returned to a car seen as positive again today. Not quite yet what it was when I bought mine in 1985 but I hear few negative comments.
Also what helps is the condition of my car is better than new so it really helps. I can see some with a worn out weather beaten a Fiero might get some more negative comments but that happens often with any ratty car.
The worst comments I get today is I don’t like Fieros but I like yours. I always laugh at that one.
Most people are I had one or always wanted one are the most common comments. Younger kids today all love it, they know nothing of the past.
People ask about mine and I am honest with them. It is my go cart my father never bought me. It is fun to drive and not the second coming of the F40 but I enjoy it.
Be honest about the car for what is right and what is wrong and most people will respect that. As for negative folks you are not going to change them arguing.
Just don’t come across as some nut or it hurts us all. You represent all owners when you speak on the car. Most of us do a good job but some scare people off.
I went to one a Fiero event. My buddy coming off a divorce went just for a road trip. As soon as we got there some fanatic came up with 101 questions and not all were stable. He was nice but my buddy asked they all like that? I told him no but the first impression was not good.
First off....I am not a drama queen- I sold my dresses long ago! Second, I am not Un-Stable, either....I have never owned any horses so don't need a stable!
I suspect that in most areas of the country (And Canada) most people are relatively positive about the Fiero- But here in the Bay area it is really bad- I have pulled up to get gas numerous times and idiots at the gas station are snickering and pointing.....
Also, every time there is a retrospective article online on the Fiero(A lot recently), there is always a few know-nuthin's that comment saying stuff like "Biggest piece of junk ever made"....I generally don't care what others think- but it can wear on me after a while.
Like I said, the Fiero was not even close to perfect- but it was very comparable to the other 2 seaters back in the 80s....When I say that a lot of people will guffaw and say that I'm a damn fool and I should "Sell it before it burns to the ground" and then they jump in their buzz-bomb Tondas.......
First off....I am not a drama queen- I sold my dresses long ago! Second, I am not Un-Stable, either....I have never owned any horses so don't need a stable!
I suspect that in most areas of the country (And Canada) most people are relatively positive about the Fiero- But here in the Bay area it is really bad- I have pulled up to get gas numerous times and idiots at the gas station are snickering and pointing.....
Also, every time there is a retrospective article online on the Fiero(A lot recently), there is always a few know-nuthin's that comment saying stuff like "Biggest piece of junk ever made"....I generally don't care what others think- but it can wear on me after a while.
Like I said, the Fiero was not even close to perfect- but it was very comparable to the other 2 seaters back in the 80s....When I say that a lot of people will guffaw and say that I'm a damn fool and I should "Sell it before it burns to the ground" and then they jump in their buzz-bomb Tondas.......
Bay Area say no more.........
You need to learn to stop worrying what some others say and just live your life. No one ever said owning a Fiero was going yo always be easy.
I have a local genius who has a Miata with the wheels angled out at 25 degrees....Are they born dumb or do they have a lobotomy so they can be "cool"....? (That is the kind of people who give me crap) (I know- I should start a fertilizer company with all the crap I get for free!)
This car is so "Dope" Note; This is not the actual one near me- I refuse to risk my camera exploding in flames from taking a picture of something so "ztu-pud"!
[This message has been edited by cvxjet (edited 04-03-2024).]
I have a local genius who has a Miata with the wheels angled out at 25 degrees....Are they born dumb or do they have a lobotomy so they can be "cool"....? (That is the kind of people who give me crap) (I know- I should start a fertilizer company with all the crap I get for free!)
This car is so "Dope"
Note; This is not the actual one near me- I refuse to risk my camera exploding in flames from taking a picture of something so "ztu-pud"!
First off no one building cars is dumb. While they may have other taste it is ok to be different. You calling them dumb is just as bad as what you say you get.
The dumb is the unsafe or drunk dreams.
I not a big fan of the fast and furious mentality but more power too em. They are at least in the hobby and I make money off them working in the Performance parts industry. Hell I made money off the movies as they bough parts from us.
It takes all of us to make this work and if you have not noticed the car enthusiasts are not as common as we once were. We need others to come in and we need to work at unity.
It used to be that if you did not have a car older than 1957 the old guys would snub us. Even. With a 68 Chevelle SS it was not old enough to be cool in their eyes. Over time we respected them and they in turned respected us in time.
You are always going to have idiots on both sides. The key is don’t be that guy no matter the view.
.
