I remember that last road test of the 88 against the CRX & MR2. It was a Formula if I'm not mistaken. The Formula was quicker and handled every bit as good as the others. Complaints- let's see...oh the instrument pod pointed at your belly and it was not as sexy as the others or some damn thing like that (it was a Formula which resembled the original 84 too closely?). Typical bias of the time. The fact that the car even existed to begin with was a miracle, pressure from GM (Chebby), the press...SOB's..
------------------ 65 Tempest 400 CID 2018 Chevy Colorado Z71 3.6 2015 BMW 535iX M Sport 2008 G6 GT "Street" Coupe 2005 Buick 3.6 Rendezvous
Not really comparing apples to oranges there because the MR had the supercharged engine. And a 300 lb weight advantage. I do agree that the MR was the better car in terms of technology and handling. But Car and Driver got an 86 GT 4 speed v6 to do 0-60 in 7.5seconds and the 1/4 in 15.9@85 mph. The R@T guys were never known for their drag strip prowess and the Formula had 50 lbs less weight than the GT so take those test #s with a grain of salt. I like the MR2, especially the most recent version. But it was only sold in the US. And most of the older ones that come up for sale around here are rusted out hulks. I havent looked for one lately though, maybe there is something worthwhile out there who knows?
------------------ 86 GT built 2.2 ecotec turbo rear SLA suspension QA1 coilovers on tube arms
I read the C&D article a few days ago, had to laugh at their reminiscing about the original article. Reinforces my decision to drop my subscription many decades ago.
First off- Car & Drivel did everything they could to kill the Fiero- every road test after the 84 was dripping with scorn- I have that C&D with the 3 way test- The Fiero is "MUCH improved" they wrote...The only problems now being that the steering is heavy and the instruments point at you navel.....And then they raved about the mr2 and the CRX!!!!!!! "Body of Daryl Hannah" and an engine from heaven(That only has Power above 6000 rpm)......Luckily, they didn't mind that with the CRXs seating position you could not get comfortable....(Instruments super important but comfort not so much)
I wonder just how much Toyota was paying C&D for those "Road Tests" (More massacres) Their hatred of anything American was really obvious.
How about a counterpoint; Road & Track's Peter Egan test of an 87 GT for the R&T Sports & GT special;
"There may still be a few of the small details to be refined, but Pontiac has done it's 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 mountain to the other quicker than all but a few cars on Earth- for $13,489."
Point of fact; They always compared the Fiero to the MR2, but the Fiero V6 was BETTER than the Non-Turbo RX7 and 300ZX of the 80s....Performed as good or better and cost substantially less.
[This message has been edited by cvxjet (edited 10-22-2019).]
How about a counterpoint; Road & Track's Peter Egan test of an 87 GT for the R&T Sports & GT special;
"There may still be a few of the small details to be refined, but Pontiac has done it's 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 mountain to the other quicker than all but a few cars on Earth- for $13,489."
Point of fact; They always compared the Fiero to the MR2, but the Fiero V6 was BETTER than the Non-Turbo RX7 and 300ZX of the 80s....Performed as good or better and cost substantially less.
Peter Egan was / is always a favorite of mine. He's the one guy that kept me reading R&T, great writing style. He is a first rate mechanic / restorer never afraid to get his hands dirty. His love of those damn British sports cars I could personally relate to owning a Triumph GT6 & working on other Triumphs & Lotuses.
My 85 GT 4 spd used to rip MR2's, CRX's & 300ZX's. First hand experience....their faces expressing.."but but Ceppos (or whoever) said this is a better car" as they had their a**es handed to them. Sorry, but this is a sore point with me as the owner of one of the first 85 GT's off the line. The guy in the 300ZX on I95 coming out of Philly won't forget it anytime soon as he threw up his hands in frustration. There was a shorter R&T article ~ winter 85 of the V6 that was pretty positive towards the Fiero. One of the reasons I went out & bought one.
------------------ 65 Tempest 400 CID 2018 Chevy Colorado Z71 3.6 2015 BMW 535iX M Sport 2008 G6 GT "Street" Coupe 2005 Buick 3.6 Rendezvous
[This message has been edited by MarkS (edited 10-22-2019).]
Peter Egan.....1) The article that got me hooked; I can't remember when or what car, but he wrote about the "head bashing under the car situation" (Lift up, bump bottom of car, jerk back, hit the cement, jerk back up, hit the car...cycle doesn't stop until A) Knock yourself out, or, b) pull yourself out from under the car....So funny and on-the-mark that it just killed me (I've done it a few times)
2) I had to go back to VA for a fuel testing class for the Coast Guard and drove back (Had my Dog with me) Stopped a couple of places mid-country, And saw an Older gray-haired guy riding a crotch-rocket bike- latest model.....Hmmmmm......So I asked him if he was Peter Egan and he said no....But I think it was him.....
All those guys raved about the 84. I've still got the magazines. Yes, they said it could use more power, but they also said it was quite peppy for what it was. As for handling, I believe the quote was it rides like its on rails.
When was the last time anyone attended an MR2 or CRX show? I think time has answered the question about which car was the better vehicle in the long run.
All those guys raved about the 84. I've still got the magazines. Yes, they said it could use more power, but they also said it was quite peppy for what it was. As for handling, I believe the quote was it rides like its on rails.
Yeah, they probably got their pee pee's wacked for that one so they spent the next 4 years trashing the car to make up for it. About the same time frame, C&D re-ran the GTO vs GTO test to prove I guess the Ferrari was indeed faster than a restored rust bucket Pontiac. After that DED Jr figured he would finally be able to pee while standing next to a Ferrari owner at the urinals (sorry again)
That was a biased comparison; The Fiero Formula at $13,000 vs the SUPERCHARGED MR2 at $17,500.....Also, remember, a number of magazines complained that the Fiero was overweight and "if the Japanese built a mid engine sports car it would be 500 lbs lighter" yet the N/A MR2 weighed 2300 which is 200-400 lbs lighter...but the Supercharged MR2 weighed 2620 which was only 155 lbs lighter than the Fiero in that test....
The 0-60 was 8 seconds in this comparo- but Peter Egan tested an 87 for the Sports & GT special and got a 0-60 of 7.7.......C&D actually got 7.5 second 0-60 in 1986(With a FOUR speed!)....And my lightweight (Basically optionless) 85 SE would probably get there in 7.2 ......Oh, and Hot Rod got there in 7.5 and a quarter of 15.25 seconds....That would beat the MR2 Super in that R&T test......
I will admit that the MR2 was the better little sports car with handling for the experienced enthusiast- but for the majority of people the Fiero had much safer handling....I like something that is easy to drive fast- not something that is on the edge and trying to kill me at every....turn!
I was always gravelly suspicious of the testing after 1985; In 1985 both MT and R&T raved about the car, then by 1987-88, they were stating "Hugely improved- but not a very good car" Seems kind of odd.
I'm actually surprised that this C&D retrospective wasn't stating at every turn that "ALL FIEROS HAVE AT THIS POINT CAUGHT FIRE AT LEAST ONCE!!!!"
That was a biased comparison; The Fiero Formula at $13,000 vs the SUPERCHARGED MR2 at $17,500.....Also, remember, a number of magazines complained that the Fiero was overweight and "if the Japanese built a mid engine sports car it would be 500 lbs lighter" yet the N/A MR2 weighed 2300 which is 200-400 lbs lighter...but the Supercharged MR2 weighed 2620 which was only 155 lbs lighter than the Fiero in that test....
The 0-60 was 8 seconds in this comparo- but Peter Egan tested an 87 for the Sports & GT special and got a 0-60 of 7.7.......C&D actually got 7.5 second 0-60 in 1986(With a FOUR speed!)....And my lightweight (Basically optionless) 85 SE would probably get there in 7.2 ......Oh, and Hot Rod got there in 7.5 and a quarter of 15.25 seconds....That would beat the MR2 Super in that R&T test......
I will admit that the MR2 was the better little sports car with handling for the experienced enthusiast- but for the majority of people the Fiero had much safer handling....I like something that is easy to drive fast- not something that is on the edge and trying to kill me at every....turn!
I was always gravelly suspicious of the testing after 1985; In 1985 both MT and R&T raved about the car, then by 1987-88, they were stating "Hugely improved- but not a very good car" Seems kind of odd.
I'm actually surprised that this C&D retrospective wasn't stating at every turn that "ALL FIEROS HAVE AT THIS POINT CAUGHT FIRE AT LEAST ONCE!!!!"
As an original Fiero owner, I read just about everything during that period. What I remember is that in just about every feature article about the Fiero, the authors were generally pretty complimentary of the Fiero. They did point out its weaknesses, but overall the car received fairly positive reviews. When they started comparing the Fiero and MR2, they always picked the MR2, despite the fact that the Fiero was better in just about every performance category. There decisions were made based on ergonomics. Even though I always suspected that the MR2 was a slightly better car, I wasn't thrilled with it visually. The Fiero was simply a better looking car, but for me the biggest benefit of the Fiero was its plastic body panels and space frame design. Far safer and more durable, and I think the test of time has shown that there are far more Fieros still kicking than original MR2s.
Did anyone read the Consumer Reports initial review of the V6 Fiero vs MR2? I happen to read it sitting waiting for my turn in my barber's chair so I didn't have the mag to re-read the article again. The jist of it was a pretty close match. Of course the MR2 came out on top but just barely. The article ended saying something like if the parking brake scored higher and maybe the chime?, they might have given the nod to the Fiero.
Well, Consumer Reports usually gives points for having the most ergonomic picnic table affixed to the trunk lid. You know, a place to spread out your lunch.
As a comparision, the Fiero's picnic table was much more accessible than the Dodge Charger Daytona.
I never read CR after my landlord showed me their quality graphic on the 84 fiero- which basically said the car would have electrical problems; I had no PW, PM,PDL or A/C so there wasn't much to go wrong electrically- as it was the heater blower motor was the only thing that went bad (Intermittent) in the first year.
I actually studied CR- they originally rated from average to full better or full bad at 30%...When their graphs were showing very little difference between the Japanese and US cars, they converted to 15%- that would have been fine, but they only Noted this change in the fine print- basically allowing most people who read their rag to believe that US products were still "Absolute crap"....
My stepsisters forced their Mother to buy a Accord to replace her 1994 Buick Century; "Don't want Mom being stuck on the side of the road in american JUNK!" Marge had recently replaced a bad battery in her 14 year old "American junk"....That was all she ever had problems with it!
If you guys want a very good book on Fiero road tests, get the Brookland books "Pontiac Fiero Performance Portfolio" $26 on Amazon; It has a bunch of old tests of different year Fieros....In mine I highlighted both the extreme positives (1985 MT and R&T tests + Peter Egan's 87 test) and the extreme negatives (Any C&D test plus a few others) and have let a few friends read them- most, after reading- basically go "WTF?! That actually sounds like someone was paying CD to kill the car!"...YEP!
The absolute low is a British/Aussy test where the >>>IDIOT<<< complains about how the "parking brake creates a barrier to entry/exit when set"
Guys we are all here because we like and (most of us anyway own at least one Fiero).
I am just trying to be realistic. In original stock form the supercharged MR2 was quicker then the Fiero in every comparison. Sure you can pick a slow day (like when R&T did both the Fiero and MR2 SC which I linked), and then find a fast result from a different magazine on a different day and say haha the other car is actually faster.
Its not apples to oranges, The OP I responded to said the Fieros are quicker then CRX and MR2. IMO you always compare top engine to top engine, to bring the best of each if you are comparing cars. Why handicap one manufacturer and bring the base MR2 to a V6 Fiero? Base engine vs Base engine, top engine vs top engine. The base MR2 would mop the floor with an iron duke, and the SC MR2 was quicker then a V6 Fiero (stock for stock back in the day).
I also put very little stock in anecdotal evidence from "street races". If any of you have ever raced at the drag strip, as little as .5s of reaction time can make a slower car look like a winner in a race. I always base my comparisons on hard imperical data, its the only way to determine a winner in performance.
Again I like my Fiero but I can easily admit that a stock MR2 SC was superior in acceleration to any stock Fiero its just a quicker car (albeit more expensive).
I think the press was extra harsh on the car as they had built it up to be "the next greatest thing" but GM let them down with the (un)finished product. Knowing that the car could have been so much more if Pontiac had had the budget to make it so, I can understand why they felt that they needed to punish GM in print by slagging the car.
Taken at face value though, the Fiero was a decent car and most buyers thought so.
Guys we are all here because we like and (most of us anyway own at least one Fiero). Its not apples to oranges, The OP I responded to said the Fieros are quicker then CRX and MR2. IMO you always compare top engine to top engine, to bring the best of each if you are comparing cars. Why handicap one manufacturer and bring the base MR2 to a V6 Fiero? Base engine vs Base engine, top engine vs top engine. The base MR2 would mop the floor with an iron duke, and the SC MR2 was quicker then a V6 Fiero (stock for stock back in the day).
Why bring up the iron duke if we are talking about top engine vs top engine? You're correct for 88 but prior to that, 85, 86 ,87; nope. Yes, the SC engine was available in Japan in 86 but not here.
I also put very little stock in anecdotal evidence from "street races". If any of you have ever raced at the drag strip, as little as .5s of reaction time can make a slower car look like a winner in a race. I always base my comparisons on hard imperical data, its the only way to determine a winner in performance.
Again I like my Fiero but I can easily admit that a stock MR2 SC was superior in acceleration to any stock Fiero its just a quicker car (albeit more expensive).
I've owned 3, but admit to being Fiero-less at the moment; that will change; I have a Buick 3.8 VIN 3 GN engine in my shed for a future swap.
Who said anything about a standing start? Realistically, on the street, at least for me, it was hardly EVER standing start. Could be just being a better driver is enough. On I95 we were well into three digits- both being young, fearless and pretty stupid (I'll admit that).
Question: What does an 85 mph Fiero speedometer do when its in that 3 digit territory?
I agree to some extent with you Kev...But It makes sense to compare cars based on basic price; With American cars you could upgrade to the bigger engine for $500-1000....But most imports make the "Big engine" part of a major upgrade all around. The RX7 and 300ZX cost approx' $15,000......But the Turbo versions cost around $19,000! That is A) a huge increase in price and WAY above what the Fiero GT (Loaded) cost.....The regular MR2 cost between $11,000 and $13,000....But the Supercharged version cost $18,000- Almost half again what the loaded Fiero GT cost.
But HP is not the only thing a car is judged on....And yes, the Fiero was not set up to be the "Great driver's car" that most mid-engined cars are.....But with GM selling over 100,000 the first year, I think we can safely say, if they had tuned the chassis for knife-edge handling, GM would have been sued for "Murdering 1000s of people with a dangerous-handling car"...Kind of like the situation with Ralphy NadIr and the Corvair; "The Corvair is dangerous!!!!" "Mr. Nadir...What about the VW beetle and 911? aren't they dangerous, too?" "No sir! They are imported so the major corporations are not evil like US companies all are!"
David E. Davis, who ran C&D back in the 80s, fought to say good things about some US cars- I remember specifically the Lincoln MK 7- but the people who ran the financial side were unhappy because C&D's mantra was "US Junk! Import Perfect!"
A list of what went wrong over the first 5 years with my Fiero; Heater fan at 10,000 (10 months), then WIndshield washer pump at 25,000 (2 years)...My Stepbrother, who stated that all US cars were JUNK!!!!! (But Never owned any) Bought(New) an 86 Accord- sold it 4 years later, having replaced the front rotors/calipers, the Rack & Pinion (Separate problem) and the AC compressor......"Best car I ever owned!! Never any problems!"
How can R&T and MT rave about the car in 1985, and from then on write about it like it is some kind of 3 legged dog with mange? (And believe it or not, the front suspension on the Fiero is almost exactly what the 1st gen Esprit had- same basic upright, same scrub radius- same upper A-arm, same basic geometry.....But since the esprit cost $40-50 thousand, they would NEVER say disparaging stuff about them....)
where i live in jacksonville fl. there has been an mr2 in a parking lot that looks new. i met the owner one day, verry nice lady. she bought it new and only drives it on days where it does not rain. she wanted to know if i wanted to buy it. i am a fan of toyota and pontiac as i do own a pontiac vibe. i told her good luck with her sale and not to give it away because it looks show room clean. she thought it was cool i owned a fiero. i do love all kind of cars, clean stock ones even more. i purchased an 1987gt in late 1986. i am a pontiac fan.
The series 1 MR2 was a horrible looking car, but the series 2 was very nice looking. i wouldn't mind having one, but one sports car is enuf. jon
------------------ Astronomy says we will find a coded signal from outer space. Then we'll KNOW that life exists there, for coded signals aren't by chance.
Biology says there are coded genetic signals in every cell, but we KNOW that no intelligence created life.
I'm the original owner of a white ' 84 2M4 purchased Dec 10, 1983 from Pontiac. Always garaged, no rust, 4-wheel drifts are fun!
This week there was a pretty decent looking red MR2 driving around somewhere that I was. A gen II of course, since it was decent looking. The first ones and the last ones sucked visually. Sucked with a capital D.
So was the Fiero built as a commuter car or a sports car? Because you can't call a suspension built from a parts bin a sportscar f the components weren't sports car components and weren't designed as a group.
Hulki and Pontiac management wanted a sports car- but they could not get it approved by GM management so they ran it up the flag pole as an economy commuter car...As for the Gen 1 suspension, most of the parts on the Chevette front suspension were all used on the Gen 1 Lotus Esprit...But the tuning of those components is the critical detail. Same with the rear Citation setup- The only difference is, the rear suspension had a (VERY) critical error in it's setup; The Tierod length should have been Shorter than the lower arm length- but the engineer instead made it extra long, thereby creating a lot of bump-steer. (" I'll make it long and it won't change length during suspension travel!")(Yes, but the lower arm does change length- varying the relationship)
Nowadays, we are used to having handling experts tune a car's suspension before production, but back in the 80s most car companies did not understand suspension tuning at all- The C4 Vette had a wonderful suspension DESIGN- But the tuning was (Basically) "Stiff springs and shocks!!!!!!!!!"
As for the acceleration side of the equation, remember that the Vette, Mustang and Camaro all were in the 6-7 second 0-60 range back in the mid-80s...So the Fiero V6 getting to 60 in 7.5-8 seconds was good (The non-Turbo versions of the RX7 and 300ZX were no faster than the Fiero)
[This message has been edited by cvxjet (edited 11-02-2019).]
Keep in mind that the supercharged MR2 cost 50% more than the Formula it was being tested against. The Formula was a second faster to 60 than the equivalent priced non supercharged MR2.
The other thing that many folks forget about is that when these cars were compared in the 80's on a race track the MR2 came stock with an excellent Yokohama summer performance tire while the Fiero came with the all season GT+4. Essentially a snow tire with delusions of grandeur. (fiero still stopped faster and had less brake fade) It would have been interesting to see the track results if the Fiero had those same Yokohama tires.
I also think the Hot Rod July 87 article was fair towards the Fiero GT, my biggest issue with the 1988 MR2 SC vs Fiero articles was the MR2 Supercharged model was a limited 300 run in the US along with it's price doesn't make it a fair comparison especially to a considerably more mass produced Fiero GT and Formula. In my opinion the 1st Gen MR2 SC edition was marketing ploy only in the US hence the limited run.
As for the acceleration side of the equation, remember that the Vette, Mustang and Camaro all were in the 6-7 second 0-60 range back in the mid-80s...So the Fiero V6 getting to 60 in 7.5-8 seconds was good (The non-Turbo versions of the RX7 and 300ZX were no faster than the Fiero)
Yeah, 85 was a real turning point in engine performance wasn't it? Port fuel injection etc. Add those black Grand National's to your list. 1st one I saw was the hot air 85 but it was still fast- I was like "what the h*ll is that??" come 86 and the intercoolers, watch out..
[This message has been edited by MarkS (edited 11-04-2019).]
If someone could do it, Post up the 1985 GT road tests from R&T and Motor Trend, and then the Peter Egan test of an 87 GT for the R&T Annual Sports & GT special (1987)...These three tests were VERY good- The first two were what made me go out and get a Fiero, while the *& test was basically the only kind words said of the Fiero after 1985(When the MR2 came out- and Toyada started paying R&T and Car & Drivel......)
For anyone who wants to see exactly what was going on, read the 87 GT test, then the 88 Formula/MR2S comparison.....Looks like they were talking about two completely different cars!
Keep in mind that the supercharged MR2 cost 50% more than the Formula it was being tested against. The Formula was a second faster to 60 than the equivalent priced non supercharged MR2.
The other thing that many folks forget about is that when these cars were compared in the 80's on a race track the MR2 came stock with an excellent Yokohama summer performance tire while the Fiero came with the all season GT+4. Essentially a snow tire with delusions of grandeur. (fiero still stopped faster and had less brake fade) It would have been interesting to see the track results if the Fiero had those same Yokohama tires.
Question: What does an 85 mph Fiero speedometer do when its in that 3 digit territory?
In my case, when I maxed out the revs at 6k RPMs in 4th gear at 140 mph+ racing a Lexus one night, it spins around and around in 360 degree revolutions.
In my case, when I maxed out the revs at 6k RPMs in 4th gear at 140 mph+ racing a Lexus one night, it spins around and around in 360 degree revolutions.
Nice....Thanks, I will consider my 85 GT as the prize...lol...These cars are far more awesome than anyone that doesn't know them could ever imagine....Cheers
