steven@garfield.UUCP (Steven Brown) (01/25/85)
MUNCH MUNCH ..etc..etc TH YOUR MESSAGE *** Hello out there in netland from the keyboard on the rock I am seriously considering buying a 1985 Pontiac Fiero. Would greatly appriciate anyones opinions,criticisms, complaints etc. I know this car hasn't got the guts to support the looks but as a first car I am thinking of the fuel economy. So a humungus powerplant in of no interest. So what if it can't leave a long strip of rubber on the pavement. Any comments as to which options are worth considering or avoiding would help. Thanx Steve Brown "the Goofy Newfie"
stern@inmet.UUCP (01/30/85)
[]
Before even thinking about a Fiero, I'd advise you to read the
ConsumerReports article (I believe it was in the 1984 Auto Issue)
where they raked it over the coals. Having read that, knowing
two people who own them, and after hearing my roommate's horror
stories about the one he rented, I can offer these words:
(a) The thing turns very poorly. A Cadillac has a smaller turning radius.
Just *try* to avoid hitting something/someone with a turning radius
that huge (I don't remember the number, but I do remember it was
1.5 - 2 times the t-r for my Celica)
(b) If you are tall (over 5' 8") you are going to be uncomfortable in it.
It looks cool but cramps the slightly larger-sized passenger
(c) You can't see out the back too well.
(d) There is little or no storage/luggage space
(e) The glove box is a poor excuse for a storage area.
(f) The body construction is *a few* sections of fibreglass. Now 'glass
is great for fast, small sporty cars, but it does have one problem:
hit it and it shatters, splinters and cracks. Metal cars just dent;
fibre cars crack, the cracks fill up with water and freeze, and then
they crack more. When you bust a panel, you have to replace the whole
thing. That's a lot of bucks -- probably in the $600-$1000 range for
a single panel. Driving in Boston one tends to be concerned with
dent protection.
(g) The middie engine probably gives you a nice center of rotation. I
seem to remember somebody saying that it was an easy car to spin out.
No thanks.
As with all things, look before you leap. I first saw a Fiero up in
Connecticut around October 1983 -- and I tailed the lady driving it for
40 miles (along I-84) until I found out what it was and where/when you
could get them. After some closer inspection, I decided to get a Celica.
And again, as with all net-noise, these ideas are my own, and do not
necessarily represent those of my employer, friends, roommate, Consumer
Reports, Pontiac, Toyota, the lady in the new Fiero or anyone else
for that matter.
--Hal Stern
Intermetrics, Inc
{ihnp4, harpo, ima}!inmet!sternreview@drutx.UUCP (Millham) (02/04/85)
>(f) The body construction is *a few* sections of fibreglass. Now 'glass > is great for fast, small sporty cars, but it does have one problem: > hit it and it shatters, splinters and cracks. Metal cars just dent; > fibre cars crack, the cracks fill up with water and freeze, and then > they crack more. When you bust a panel, you have to replace the whole > thing. That's a lot of bucks -- probably in the $600-$1000 range for > a single panel. Driving in Boston one tends to be concerned with > dent protection. The Fiero is NOT fibreglass. It is made of a flexable plastic skin placed over a metal frame. I rented a Fiero and I will never rent one again! All that I can say about it is that is is cute. -------------------------------------------- Brian Millham AT & T Information Systems Denver, Co. ...!inhp4!drutx!review
thoth@tellab2.UUCP (Marcus Hall) (02/04/85)
In article <1929@inmet.UUCP> stern@inmet.UUCP writes: >(a) The thing turns very poorly. A Cadillac has a smaller turning radius. > Just *try* to avoid hitting something/someone with a turning radius > that huge (I don't remember the number, but I do remember it was > 1.5 - 2 times the t-r for my Celica) I don't have anything in front of me that states the turning radius, but my complaint with the steering is that it is SLOW. By that I mean that it takes a lot of turning the wheel to turn the car, at least compared to by old Fiat X1/9. Once you get the wheel all the way over, however, the car turns in a reasonable radius, nothing spectacular but nothing difficult to deal with either. >(b) If you are tall (over 5' 8") you are going to be uncomfortable in it. > It looks cool but cramps the slightly larger-sized passenger I'm 5' 10" and fit in it just fine. Actually it's substantially larger on the inside than by departed Fiat, which contributes to (d) below. >(c) You can't see out the back too well. I didn't have any problems. If you strap something large onto the (optional) luggage rack (as a solution for (d) below), it does block the rear view. >(d) There is little or no storage/luggage space True enough. For this reason, the Fiero cannot ever be a very *practical* car, but it all depends on what you're looking for. >(e) The glove box is a poor excuse for a storage area. True again, but this is true of many cars (i.e. Firebird, etc.) >(f) The body construction is *a few* sections of fibreglass. Now 'glass > is great for fast, small sporty cars, but it does have one problem: > hit it and it shatters, splinters and cracks. Metal cars just dent; > fibre cars crack, the cracks fill up with water and freeze, and then > they crack more. When you bust a panel, you have to replace the whole > thing. That's a lot of bucks -- probably in the $600-$1000 range for > a single panel. Driving in Boston one tends to be concerned with > dent protection. The Fiero is NOT fiberglass!! It is a plastic bodied car. There are actually several kinds of plastic used in the body, depending on what kinds of loads it is required to take. It is refered to as "friendly plastic" because it is flexible. Opening a car door into the Fiero does nothing to it. Kick it and your foot will bounce back. Very minor collisions will not hurt it, but if it's enough to bend the metal structure that the plastic skins bolt onto it won't bounce back so well. Replacing a plastic panel is a snap because they all just bolt on, thus repair costs may be kept down if you do your own labor (to say nothing of the aftermarket of body panels due to this feature). >(g) The middie engine probably gives you a nice center of rotation. I > seem to remember somebody saying that it was an easy car to spin out. > No thanks. Mid-engined cars tend to have a better weight distribution because the weight is spread more evenly on all four wheels. The Fiero has a low and long center of gravity which helps keep it pointing straight. The '84 Fieros did have a bad habit of going from understeer unexpectedly into oversteer when braking hard and turning, but this has been fixed on the '85s. > After some closer inspection, I decided to get a Celica. Fair enough. Everyone's surely entitled to their own choices without reproach. I have a V6 Fiero on order. Hopefully it'll get here soon, but Pontiac is having a hard time building Fieros fast enough, let alone stuffing the V6 in them. marcus hall ..!ihnp4!tellab1!tellab2!thoth
pugh@bmcg.UUCP (Mike Pugh) (02/07/85)
> [] > > Before even thinking about a Fiero, I'd advise you to read the > ConsumerReports article (I believe it was in the 1984 Auto Issue) > where they raked it over the coals. Having read that, knowing > two people who own them, and after hearing my roommate's horror > stories about the one he rented, I can offer these words: > (a) The thing turns very poorly. A Cadillac has a smaller turning radius. > Just *try* to avoid hitting something/someone with a turning radius > that huge (I don't remember the number, but I do remember it was > 1.5 - 2 times the t-r for my Celica) > (b) If you are tall (over 5' 8") you are going to be uncomfortable in it. > It looks cool but cramps the slightly larger-sized passenger > (c) You can't see out the back too well. > (d) There is little or no storage/luggage space > (e) The glove box is a poor excuse for a storage area. > (f) The body construction is *a few* sections of fibreglass. Now 'glass > is great for fast, small sporty cars, but it does have one problem: > hit it and it shatters, splinters and cracks. Metal cars just dent; > fibre cars crack, the cracks fill up with water and freeze, and then > they crack more. When you bust a panel, you have to replace the whole > thing. That's a lot of bucks -- probably in the $600-$1000 range for > a single panel. Driving in Boston one tends to be concerned with > dent protection. > (g) The middie engine probably gives you a nice center of rotation. I > seem to remember somebody saying that it was an easy car to spin out. > No thanks. > > As with all things, look before you leap. I first saw a Fiero up in > Connecticut around October 1983 -- and I tailed the lady driving it for > 40 miles (along I-84) until I found out what it was and where/when you > could get them. After some closer inspection, I decided to get a Celica. > > And again, as with all net-noise, these ideas are my own, and do not > necessarily represent those of my employer, friends, roommate, Consumer > Reports, Pontiac, Toyota, the lady in the new Fiero or anyone else > for that matter. > > --Hal Stern > Intermetrics, Inc > {ihnp4, harpo, ima}!inmet!stern I am a Fiero owner of 14,000 miles of experience. I have raced the Fiero in San Diego slalom events. Now for a point by point rebuttal. a. It does have a poor turning radius, but how often do you have to turn the wheel all the way to avoid hitting someone? I have won first place on courses with hundreds of pylons by avoiding them. b. I am 6' and find no problem. How wide are you? c. Backward vision is no problem, but to the side can be. d. The storage space is better than it looks, but it is a weakness. e. Yea. f. The body has *NO* fiber glass. It has three types of plastics. It is so soft in the front and rear that minor impacts (low speed parking) have no effect. The panels should cost less than you say, but I don't know how much. As far as the most commen type of dents, i.e. parking lot dings, it is immune. The cost of repairing a single door ding on a Mazda RX7 is $135.00. My fiero would have not been damaged at all. A great feeling when you have to park between two old rust buckets. g. The most commen cause of spinning a car is having too much difference in traction between the front and rear and losing the rear in a power off oversteer mode. one of the most notorious offenders is the porsche 911, with all that motor in the rear. By by the way, where did you take physics? In conclusion: The fiero handles very well once you learn to drive it. It is more difficult to learn than most front engine rear wheel drive cars and has a difficult clutch to boot. It does not feel as elegant as a BMW but will out do a 318i on the slalom by a lot. The shift is less than ideal especialy first. The motor has a low red line causing early shifts and needs more power. It has the best occupant survive-ability of ay car tested in the 6 year history of the government crash tests. The plastic body panels work well and require no special treatment, and never rust (even in the salt). For the price it is a bargain.
mary@bunkerb.UUCP (Mary Shurtleff) (02/07/85)
> In article <1929@inmet.UUCP> stern@inmet.UUCP writes: > > >(a) The thing turns very poorly. A Cadillac has a smaller turning radius. > > Just *try* to avoid hitting something/someone with a turning radius > > that huge (I don't remember the number, but I do remember it was > > 1.5 - 2 times the t-r for my Celica) > > I don't have anything in front of me that states the turning radius, but > my complaint with the steering is that it is SLOW. According to Consumer Reports, the turning circle for the Fiero is ~42 (no, that is not a typo of 24!) feet. By comparison, my Saab, with a longer wheel- base than the Fiero, has a turning circle of 36.5 feet. What you end up with with a large turning circle is a car that's not very maneuverable. The Fiero's relatively high weight for its size doesn't help. All in all, a nice looking car, but the beauty is only skin deep. M. Shurtleff
angel@edsel.UUCP (A Gomez) (02/09/85)
I have seen some rather negative comments about the Fiero on the net lately, so I thought I might add my 2 cents worth. I have owned an 84 Fiero since November 1983 and 22000 miles ago, and have the following options: 1) Its a very comfortable car. Im 5'11", and have no problems. 2) Handling is fantastic for a car thats this cheap. 3) Turning Radius is big, but who makes 180s anyway. 4) Engine is underpowered. It really does need a 6 or Turbo. 5) Luggage space is OK if you have floppy luggage, not so great if you have hard luggage. 6) Panels are plastic. Each panel set is made out of a different plastic. BTW. The panes are cheap. I got hit in the left rear; and the whole rear panel had to be replaced and painted. Total: $381 incl labor. In these cars, you don't fix it. You unbolt and replace. A lot less labor. Anyway, the car is a good car for fun and commuting. A bad car if you have a lot of anything to move around. It suits me fine and im really pleased with it. Hope this was some help. Angel
stern@inmet.UUCP (02/10/85)
[] Not to be accused of posting ideas to the net without substantiation (do people really do that? :-)) I can contribute the following information about the Pontiac Fiero. These quotes are taken from Consumer Reports, April 1984 Annual Auto Issue Volume 49 Number 4. They are reprinted without permission. Don't tattle on me. From: "Road Tests of the Pontiac Fiero: What's Under All That Flash?" Concerning handling: (p. 190): "Its rear end would swing out with too little provocation, and drivers found that the car didn't respond as cleanly as it should when they tried to control the read end by countersteering. Wet roads accentuated the problem - and snow or ice made normal handling a constant worry" (p. 191): "The Fiero has an unusually wide turning circle (42 feet) for so small a car. That made the car seem clumsy when maneuvering through city traffic or parking." About the super plastic body: (p. 192): "While parking, a careless driver backed into our parked Fiero. We had to replace the entire lower front panel and the energy-absorber assembly behind it." Generic comments: (p. 192): "The Pontiac Fiero is the automotive equivalent of junk food: Tempting to look at, maybe, but empty calories....It looks like a car that might accelerate powerfully, brake on a dime, and take hairpin turns in stride. It is none of those things." Flames may be addressed to: Hal Stern Intermetrics, Inc ihnp4!inmet!stern These opinions and comments are my own and do not represent those of anyone else, including my employer. I am also solely responsible for stealing the quotes from Consumer Reports.
mike@amdcad.UUCP (Mike Parker) (02/11/85)
> I have seen some rather negative comments about the Fiero on > the net lately, so I thought I might add my 2 cents worth. > > 3) Turning Radius is big, but who makes 180s anyway. Everyone in Silicon Valley, thats who! Most major streets have concrete dividers. To get to a business on the left you go to the next light and make a u-turn. You get three lanes to do this in. This is about 35 feet, not enough for a Fiero. Mike @ AMDCAD
cpr0@bunny.UUCP (C. Rosebrugh) (02/12/85)
I'm a very happy owner of an '84 Fiero SE. I think everyone is entitled to their opinion about cars, so I'm not in the mode of criticizing others choices of transportation. Anyway, I want to say and ask a few things about the Fiero. The car is not built for practicality, nor has this ever been claimed. For the first model year, with NEW ideas in body/chassis/frame engineering, Pontiac did a heck of a job in developing and opening up new markets for small cars. Not only is Ford scrambling to put out a mid-engine 2 seater, but the other GM divisions (Buick and Oldsmobile - I don't think this is one that Cadillac will touch -) are now designing the same style for 1988 release. I personally bought the car for fun in the sun, while living on the west coast - with the sun roof off, the windows down and the high-ended stereo blaring (with the speakers in the headrest), the money paid for the car tends to be quickly forgotten. Also, the engine is fairly simple to work on since all the cooling and air conditioning is in the front. I bought the car knowing that the ride, power, and handling all needed some help - but the idea was to work on just that. There's a company in California - California Coachworks (408-778-3583) in Morgan Hill - that specializes in customizing Fieros. They have all kinds of stuff - spoilers, wheels, progressive rate springs, anti-sway bars, gas shocks & struts, etc, (also a turbocharger) customized for the Fiero - the prices are good, too. Also, the car seems pretty tough - I moved from Portland, Oregon to Boston in August and drove the car after having bought it in June. I covered the distance in 4 days: 600, 1000, 1000, 620 miles @ an average trip speed of 67 mph, travelling at ~75 mph - (I have a Spectrum Whistler radar detector, also) - without any problems at all. Mileage was 29 mpg. The trip was like sitting on a living room couch listening to the stereo (I'm not into being a tourist). So now the problem - a couple of months ago I started to have a very squeaky belt problem. While under warranty, I took it to the dealer (twice) to have them checked and adjusted - but they still squealed: first for a few minutes after starting the car, then at about 1 minute intervals when highway driving. It was especially bad after it rained or snowed. Then, the alternator belt ripped off and chewed up so badly that I only recovered 3 pieces about 4" long. It was then that I noticed that the alternator was about 3/4" out of line with the other pulleys! I took it to an independent mechanic and he shimmed the alternator and put a new belt on. Three weeks later the belt got itself chewed. No warning - one squeal and Poof! I had a new belt put on and took the car to an alternator shop - they said there was absolutely nothing wrong with it - that it's a belt problem. They tightened the belts and sent me on the way. Two days later the squealing started again. Now I just keep moving the alternator back, tightening the belt up again - but it's happening every couple hundred miles! Can anyone offer a suggestion? The belts used so far have been different brands. I don't know alot about cars, but I'm learning fast. I'm also interested in other Fiero owner's problems. Please write if you have any info. Sorry for the verbosity. Chris Rosebrugh GTE Laboratories ..!harvard!bunny!cpr0
alien@gcc-bill.ARPA (Alien Wells) (02/13/85)
> ... talking about his Fiero ... >Also, the car seems pretty tough - I moved from Portland, Oregon >to Boston in August and drove the car after having bought it in >June. I covered the distance in 4 days: 600, 1000, 1000, 620 >miles @ an average trip speed of 67 mph, travelling at ~75 mph - >(I have a Spectrum Whistler radar detector, also) - without >any problems at all. Mileage was 29 mpg. You think this is *tough*? I have done the following: San Jose - Burlington, VT (3100 mi) in a 1972 Ford Pinto 2 days + 16 hours, Mileage was around 28 mpg. San Jose - New York City (3300 mi) in a 1980 Honda Civic (CA version) 3 days + 2 hours, Mileage was a bit over 42 mpg. I had no mechanical problems of any kind on either trip. The mileage on the trip to NYC is a little longer than you might expect since I was driving in early February and had miserable weather from the Sierras to Salt Lake City. I saw a really nasty storm in the mountains out of SLC, and decided to cut south into Colorado. If I was being snide, I would comment that the comparison between the Pinto and the Fiero was particularily appropriate, but the Pinto had more cargo space, a better turning radius, and probably more power :-). Alien
stern@inmet.UUCP (02/15/85)
[] I'll be the first to admit that 90% of the negative things said about the Pontiac Fiero have been said by me. I *do* believe that you are entitled to drive whatever car makes you happy; and as long as you drive it safely everyone will be quite content. bunny!cpr0 claims: >I personally bought the car for fun in the sun, while living on the >west coast - with the sun roof off, the windows down and the >high-ended stereo blaring (with the speakers in the headrest), >the money paid for the car tends to be quickly forgotten. Almost all of the hate mail I have received has been from west coast folks who have no problems with their Fieros!! Small wonder -- when was the last time someone had to drive in snow/ice/slush in California? It would be nice if people realized that their own part of the country does not necessarily represent driving conditions throughout the USA. And for criticizing my knowledge of physics, I was always taught the the the frictional force F = uN, where u is the coefficient of friction and N is the normal force. Now, having a middie engine means that N is less for the *FRONT WHEELS* than it would be for the same car, same engine mounted up front. Therefore, the front tires do not have as much grip -- making it a little tough to make left turns in a snowstorm. If someone would like to demonstrate the flaw in this argument, I will post a statement of my ignorance. --Hal Stern ihnp4!inmet!stern
ron@wjvax.UUCP (Ron Christian) (02/15/85)
Well then. What about the Fiero GT? We all know about
the fuel injected 6 it's supposed to have. What has the
increased horsepower and increased rear-biased weight done
to the roadability of the car? I'd also like to know if
they've tightened up the steering. (It *is* supposed to
be a GT....) Anyone drive one of these suckers?
--
Ron Christian (Watkins-Johnson Co. San Jose, Calif.)
{pesnta,twg,ios,qubix,turtlevax,tymix}!wjvax!ronbhs@siemens.UUCP (02/17/85)
Ladies and Gentlemen: Some minor clarification: the Fiero was pushed through the exceptionally rigid and reluctant GM burocracy by a few enterprising engineers and managers, who could only win project approval by targeting the car as a high- mileage commuter car. It's purported target market was going to be the person who carried no more than his/her attache case, and perhaps a co-worker, to the office and back. Thus, the project engineers were not allowed to develop too many parts, in fact, in an effort to keep development costs low, many of the mechanicals had to adopted from existant GM cars. In order to keep costs lower, the rather revolutionary bosy construction was chosen (it is light and parts are cheap to replace). In order to achieve the high mileage for the designated target market, the little four cylinder was ordered installed. Well. The car has outsold GMs expectations, and now the top management is slowly permitting the project engineers to do what they really wanted to do all along: beef the car up. Hence the six cylinder this year, which was originally to be joined by a better suspension. But then the bean counters got into the game again, and said that sales were still so strong that the better suspension (with associated costs) was not justified, just yet. But you should see the real Fiero take shape in the next (1986) model year, because that is when the true Fiero suspension is slated for introduction. From the marketing point of view, I guess GM played it's cards right. First, the market was the people who wanted to be the first on the block with it, then there were the people who just loved it's looks, and now slowly they are getting serious about the car. Of course, Toyota's MR2 contributed to the improvements planned. Bernard H. Schwab Siemens RTL, Princeton NJ siemens!bhs
review@drutx.UUCP (Millham) (02/18/85)
>And for criticizing my knowledge of physics, I was always taught the >the the frictional force F = uN, where u is the coefficient of friction >and N is the normal force. Now, having a middie engine means that N >is less for the *FRONT WHEELS* than it would be for the same car, same >engine mounted up front. Therefore, the front tires do not have as much >grip -- making it a little tough to make left turns in a snowstorm. If >someone would like to demonstrate the flaw in this argument, I will post >a statement of my ignorance. > >--Hal Stern > ihnp4!inmet!stern Doesn't the VW Beetle have the same problem where the front end looses traction? -------------------------------------------- Brian Millham AT & T Information Systems Denver, Co. ...!inhp4!drutx!review
haapanen@watdcsu.UUCP (Tom Haapanen [DCS]) (02/21/85)
>>And for criticizing my knowledge of physics, I was always taught the >>the the frictional force F = uN, where u is the coefficient of friction >>and N is the normal force. Now, having a middie engine means that N >>is less for the *FRONT WHEELS* than it would be for the same car, same >>engine mounted up front. Therefore, the front tires do not have as much >>grip -- making it a little tough to make left turns in a snowstorm. If >>someone would like to demonstrate the flaw in this argument, I will post >>a statement of my ignorance. >Doesn't the VW Beetle have the same problem where the front end looses >traction? Well, not really. The front end *is* a bit light in a corner, and you *might* be able to induce some understeer. However, the weight distribution is such that it's definitely a case of terminal oversteer. If you ever begin understeering (and it's a bit slippery), just pulll up the handbrake ever-so-slightly, and you'll have the rear end fishtailing out really nicely. Just don't pull the brake too hard or you'll end up doing multiple 360's (2*pi's :-) ). The Fiero is somewhat of a different case, though, as the weight is so evenly distributed, and in fact does tend to terminal understeer. \tom haapanen watmath!watdcsu!haapanen Don't cry, don't do anything No lies, back in the government No tears, party time is here again President Gas is up for president (c) Psychedelic Furs, 1982
doug@terak.UUCP (Doug Pardee) (02/21/85)
> Some minor clarification: the Fiero was pushed through the exceptionally rigid > and reluctant GM burocracy by a few enterprising engineers and managers, who > could only win project approval by targeting the car as a high- mileage > commuter car. Further substantiation: some years back I read in an automotive trade publication that the Pontiac Division was fighting tooth-and-nail to keep GM Corporate from stopping Pontiac's "P-car". Seems that GM felt that another GM Division (which shall remain nameless) already was selling a 2-seat high-performance sports car, and that if the P-car was built it would only steal customers from this other Division. This practice of "protecting your current products" is the reason that innovation tends to come from up-start companies (and countries). IBM sure did fine when they prevented the PC-jr from stealing customers away from the PC by having too little memory to run Lotus 1-2-3 and making the keyboard intolerable for word processing! -- Doug Pardee -- Terak Corp. -- !{hao,ihnp4,decvax}!noao!terak!doug