I have 3 cars in my garage and I was surprised to see my garage be one of the random galleries to pop up on the front page of M/A this morning. The car that showed is not the MINI but my Fiero. For those of you who don't know, the Fiero I bought is the first car I bought with my own money after graduating from university. It is unique in that it's mid-engined and affordable. Also for its day, it handle well and had reasonable power. Even by today's standard, the chassis is extremely stiff. My particular car was amongst the very first Fieros delivered with the V6 engine in it. Also, it has the SE body which is 120 pound lighter than the GT, as well, the 1985 engine has 15hp more than the 1986 due to emission control regulations changing for 1986. Of course overall fit n finish is pretty poor as GM cost cutting and compromises are evident. In anycase, last week, I went motoring. Not in my MINI, but in the Fiero. I drove 500 miles to Richland WA to attend Fiero Fest NW 2013. Fiero owners are much like MINI owners. There is a certain amount of comraderie and most of the owners are experts are keeping these 30 year old jalopies running. Here is a link to pictures I took to the event. Fiero Fest NW 2013 - a set on Flickr
I always liked the Fiero's. I remember those commercials where they took the baseball bat to them to show off the plastic body panels.
Great cars then...and today as well. I had an instructor last year at Mid Ohio who was driving a Fiero....
I still have it. Took it for a drive up the Fraser Canyon in BC. Not as engaging a drive as my MINI, but more relaxing for a long highway cruise. I don't remember if I mentioned a magazine article in Hagerty magazine earlier this year.
It's a shame that Fiero wasn't given a bit more time to become the car it should have been from the onset.
Yes it is a shame GM let the buying public do the durability testing for them. By the time the Fiero was sorted out it had a bad reputation that sealed its fate. RIP Fiero. Beken you are one of the keepers of the lost mark. Long may she run.
Both of my pre-teen boys went nuts every time they saw one back then. Too bad they're in that 'responsible' stage of life now and have to have 'practical' transportation.
GM finally figured out that a Chevette front suspension and a X-body front suspension and drive train in the rear didn't work so well. They got it right in the end then killed it. The iron duke and the 2.8 V6 were not the right engines for it. If I remember right it was the Indy pace car, the actual one, that had the Olds Quad 4. That would have been the right engine for the Fiero.
I owned one for a short while a few years ago. I forget what year but it was a GT with removable glass T-top. Someone offered me more money than I could pass up (considering I really didn't like the car).
I had an '84 GT, taught my wife to drive a manual with that car, replaced the clutch shortly after. I put Bilseins and poly bushings on and it handled much better.
I have a friend that had two of them. He told me he didn't learn what a piece of crap they were with the first one but he sure did with the second.
Reminds when I was in college and there was fiero in the parking lot every day during warm months. License plate said "Fiearri" which made me laugh every time I passed it. I also understand that is technically the correct ending to ferrari but I still enjoyed it.
The Indy Pace car (the real one...not the replicas they sold to the unsuspecting public) had a highly modified "super duty" iron duke. Special heads and internals. I read it put out 232 HP somewhere but can't confirm that. GM didn't have a transmission to mate with the Quad 4 that would fit in the Fiero. The aftermarket created an adapter to mate the quad 4 to the existing Fiero transmissions a few years later.
GM was so wrapped up in their own internal politics, the Fiero would never have become much more than a niche vehicle. As much as I like the design and enjoy driving a car that has a mid-engine balance and feel, you can see all the places where GM took short cuts to keep the costs down. Just a bit more refinement here and there and it could have been a great car rather than just a decent car. If they had engineered it right in the first place, it would never have gotten the bad rap (mostly hearsay) that it eventually got. By the time they got the suspension (1988 model year) right, the car was too heavy and expensive to build and be profitable for GM. They didn't bother to spend money to continue developing the rest of the car. Still, a good car (but not a great car) and a fine attempt by the "car people" in GM to do something different and possibly amazing under the noses of the GM bureaucracy. I'm keeping the car because it is a unique piece of American automotive history.