| | | quote | Originally posted by cvxjet:
Hyper, you are right on almost everything you have said....The main reason the Fiero was cancelled was corporate politics...But the Fire-myth and the C&D "All American cars are crap" rhetoric added to the inevitable....
As far as GM's numbers vs feel thing you are correct, but; One thing that GM did right but most enthusiasts would disagree with is handling- The MR2 had that wonderful knife-edge handling, which is great if you know what you are doing...Sadly, most Americans haven't a clue how to deal with a neutral-handling car. If GM had 'knife-edged" the Fiero handling and then sold 370,000 Fieros, there would be at least 50-60,000 people dead from crashes.
Some of the things I have done to my Fiero have greatly improved the handling FEEL; Much more neutral- Actually less DTO and far better turn-in....
Some of "Crappy-handling" cars I have driven include a Porsche Boxster, a number of Vettes (C3, 4, 5), a number of BMWs, a Miata, and a friend's racing Mustang.
In some ways, I think new cars have become to "Isolationist" because it is like you are driving a video game...
Is the Fiero perfect? Hell no- but it is a lot better than Car&Drivel's anti-American bashing would lead some to believe.....Just as proof of the BS out there; How many Fieros have YOU seen on fire?
|
|
Well you have softened up a bit but there is more to it. You need to let the magazine thing go. Most people never agree with them and they are only opinion. These are the same folks who pick the Car of the Year and if you look at that list we’ll time was not kind. Much in print is controlled by advertising. I know because the more where my work advertises in a magazine the more we get in print.
As for people not used to hood handling. That is pure BS. The early Fiero was not what they wanted to start with. The 88 suspension could have been there at the start but there was no money.
Some say the lack of a rear sway bar was due to the Corvair. But that makes no sense as that was not the early Corvairs issue. Also it did not account for the sway bars to the body in 84 that they fixed in 85.
The truth was they should have gone with solid bushings in the rear control arms and the bump steer would have vanished. The rear sway bar could tune out the massive under steer.
To be honest I have had many more problems with the under steer vs the over steer now with my Herb Adams VSE suspension tune.
The drop throttle over steer never hurt the 911. Why because the car is tuned well. In fact Porsche help tune elements of the 88 suspension that GM designed.
Some of the cars you list as crappy are actually not bad cars. A well tuned car will make driving fast on back uneven roads easy. A poorly tuned car will make it feel fast when you are even slow.
I am far from a 911 fan but I have tons of miles in one up and down the California coast and that is where I learned about tuning. That car can make 110 feel like 55 mph.
Most corvettes from the C5 up are similar with each one getting better.
The GM Performance group is where GM started to test at the ring and built a smaller version in MI to tune cars. It is not a flat smooth test track and exposes the car to real world elements.
GM has learned that you go softer on the springs. Moderate on the bars and spend extra money on shocks and struts.
My SS started with a crappy Cobalt suspension but GMPD group tuned it to where it was right. They may not have advertised it but they reworked all elements and put in Sachs struts and shocks that really got the job done with urethane bushings, softer springs and larger bars.
The GMPD group was integrated into suspension development right from the start of a platform now. That is why my wife’s Acadia family Truckster now will take the back roads much like my old SSEI Bonneville.
The truth is many have never driven a really well tuned car. And too often those who have never got yo push them enough to know the difference.
... here's the whole video!
