I’ve been sitting on this one (too busy catching up with life after our Road Trip Outtakes series), but after Paul’s screed thoughtful observations about the 1985 Camaro RS, I thought I’d pour more oil on a hot exhaust manifold and see what happens…
I shot this 1986 GT in Big Fork, MT, parked next to the parts store where I got a new battery for our road trip van – I haven’t seen a Fiero this nice in years. Surprisingly, I was unable to find a previous CC on the Fiero; this post will not be one, as Aaron Severson over at AUwM already has done a superb writeup on the development and history of America’s only mid-engine sports car (to date). Can’t beat that with a stick.
The Fiero was introduced in 1984, the same year I rebooted my college education by switching my Architecture major for one in Industrial Design. I clearly remember the hoopla (and lots of hype) that surrounded the Fiero. We ID students were particularly interested in Pontiac’s “mill and drill” process for mounting the plastic body panels, which influenced the proposed material and process of my Senior project in 1986: A three-wheeled sports car designed to be built on a steel space frame with molded body panels.
The early notchback styling on the first two-seat Pontiac since 1938 really didn’t do much for me, but when the fastback treatment was introduced I fell in love. Unfortunately, I had “Fiero Champagne” taste and a “Pre-owned Vega” budget, so I could only gaze wistfully on the few that graced our campus (rich Frat kids, probably).
Of course, by this time the Fiero’s propensity to catch fire was becoming common folklore—thankfully, the head of the ID Department at Tech (who had connections) was able to get personal attention paid to his daughter’s car before it went all Fuego on her.
Like many of you, seeing this car for sale made my heart skip a beat—first when I saw it, and again when I saw the low, low $3,500 price (with V6 and manual transmission, too!). However, cooler (and wiser) heads prevailed, and I settled for these photos instead.
Oh well, it’s all for the best, I’m sure. In typical GM fashion, a great idea was cost-reduced to death before being unleashed on the public (honestly, Chevette and X-body suspension components???); by the time they sorted out the Fiero into a really good product, there was no equity left in it and it was killed.
I found it very interesting that the prototype Fiero for 1989 (which can be seen here – scroll down a bit) not only looks a lot like the Firebird, but was speced out in a way that would have made it a really engaging vehicle to drive. For that matter, the final model year ’88s were getting mighty close to what the car should have been when it launched four years earlier.
So there you have it. Deadly Sin? Well, in my book, and from a certain perspective, yes. But when you look at it from a different angle, it’s really not a bad little car. No, not bad at all.
I never quite understood the love for the early Fiero. It comes across as a bit awkward in my eye. The refreshed nose in 86 and the GT “Fastback” in 87 and 88 were what really grabbed me.
That Prototype reminds me a lot of the Dodge/PPG M4C AKA “Wraith” car.
I’m the minority who prefers the “notchback” Fieros to the GTs. The “bumper pad” front & rear fascias came on all ’84-’85 base & SE models and the ’86 base models.
The “new” base model front fascia arrived in ’87.
The “aero” nose came on ’84 Indy Fieros, ’85-’88 GTs, and ’86-’87 SEs.
The GT was introduced in ’85 and was a notchback that year only. ’86-’88 GTs were the only Fieros to have the Fastback bodystyle like the featured car.
What’s neat is that the notchback & fastback rear clips can be interchanged. In addition, the roof panels can be interchanged which means one can transform a non-sunroof car to a sunroof car.
Thanks for the info. I’ve narrowed my next purchase down to four cars once I finish moving and the 87-88 GT is high on the list.
The aero nose versions also included new rounded side trim, but in typical GM fashion they did NOT modify the side marker light housings or the door handles. Because of this, some side trim used a rounded shape, while the carryover pieces had the old two-groove styling- You can see the difference in the rear three quarter view. Compare the front side of the red marker light to the trim running accross the back of the bumper.
I suppose most buyers never noticed the difference, but the trim differences always jump out at me when I saw an areo nose Fiero.
D/S
There were a bunch of us at work who were very interested in the Fiero before it came out. We all had good jobs and were about ready to get cars. (This was a plant at HP in Palo Alto. Not a huge division, but a lot of car enthusiasts in the bunch. A fair number with fat wallets.)
Then it came out.
I ended up with a Ranger, while the others went various other directions. I don’t recall anybody at that plant ending up with a Fiero.
Deadly sin, yep.
Not a car for the bulky. When these came out, I went with a co-worker to see them. I was (back then 6ft , 180 lbs, I’m heavier now), he was easily 6 ft 3 240+ lbs. I didn’t think there was any room in the thing. He fit worse than me but bought it. Traded a Audi 4000 in for it because he wanted to show off.
The glamour of a 2 seater in Connecticut 12 months of the year wore out after a year or so. He started calling it the clown car and traded it in for a 3 series BMW.
To his credit, he admitted his buying decision was for the flash.
It is a very nice looking car. Too bad GM decided to kill it just when they had the bugs worked out. But as you say, there was no equity left.
I was just getting ready to write up a Fiero CC, but you beat me to it. Except mine wouldn’t be so equivocal about its DS status. I’m pretty busy anyway….
I drive a friend’s Fiero once and couldn’t believe how heavy the steering was, and how blocky and thick everything seemed in side. The MR2 I had recently tried seemed like track shoes in comparison. A sports car is supposed to feel nimble and quick.
I remember the heavy steering effort too, surprising considering there was no heavy engine over the front wheels. The transformed V6 version got a very nice electric power steering system, one of the first in the industry.
By the standards of the time (and given its overall dimensions), the Fiero was still rather a porky thing, which probably had something to do with the steering.
Yes that and probably the wide tires. GM was going low profile/wide tires on everything back then, springing off of the new direction for the C4 Corvette. I remember driving a 1985 Grand Am and being amazed at the grip. The ride? Not so good.
Another thing that struck me odd about the Fiero was that it had a huge turning circle for such a small car.
The electric power steering was never produced, it was listed as an option for the 1988 MY but canceled. The V6 came out in the Fieros 2nd year of production.
There must have been a road test or something with a PS prototype because I “remember” it more than just being in a list of options that didn’t happen.
You’re correct, at least going by one of the resources I linked to. Apparently a very small number of cars at the end of the run did get power steering…
Picked off a thread in the Pennock forum.
Most Fieros were built in ’84 which also happens to be the worst year for these. My first Fiero DD was an ’84 SE; my second was an ’86 base model. I love every Fiero but the ’84s were exceptionally crappy cars.
The steering was much higher effort on the ’84 models & rough 2.5 engine coupled to the cable-shifted 4-speed transmission with 4.10 final drive ratio made everyday driving a miserable experience. Why GM picked the most inappropriate engine they had to put in this car I’ll never understand.
The iron duke with it’s 5,000RPM redline may be fine for a Ciera but not for a Fiero with a super-low geared final drive. My ’84 ran 3K RPM at 62mph and my ’86 automatic ran 3K at 60mph. First impressions are lasting impressions & it was too late by the time GM finally got these cars right. It’s such a shame because I find these cars absolutely beautiful, even the base coupes.
The V6 cars are a totally different story however. None of you guys would believe how much a difference there is between a stick-shift V6 Fiero and the lesser variants unless you drove one. I own(ed) much faster vehicles but none of them are more pleasant to drive than the ragged out 4-speed manual V6 Fiero I used to tool around in.
Well stated and as a former owner, I concur!
What’s that little vent thingy on the left quarter in front of the wheel, that isn’t on the right quarter?
It’s the air intake on running Fieros. On non-running Fieros it’s Wasp Nest Central.
It should have one on both sides, so a panel may have been replaced.
Nope. Only the driver’s side. It’s the engine’s air intake for both the 4-cylinder and the V6.
Ha, your right. I never noticed.
The transformation of the Fiero from POS “commuter car” to competitive mid-engine sports car shows what the boys at GM could do when they focused on something. They had too much going on in the 80s and not enough time, or bodies, to get it right the first time. Management’s mistake not the engineers’.
Think of how good the Gen 3 Camaro would have been if they could take a little more time with it.
In all fairness GM was uniquely handicapped in needing spend its precious resources on model variation for the diversions and not just keeping up with regs and the competition.
As for the Fiero I spent time in an 84 with the stick shift. Without a doubt the worst new car I have ever driven. Ugly noises right behind your head from the Iron Duke. The loudest transmission shifter I have ever encountered, loaded with friction. When you stepped on the gas car would actually slow down.
Surprisingly the body structure was solid and you could see the potential in the car, which came later with the V6 and 5-speed. All the faults were corrected and that V6 sounded great!
I seem to recall from my days in a Grand Prix car club that it was fairly common for Fiero aficionados to swap in a supercharged 3800 and actually make it into something like a sports car. They’re pretty much extinct around here, though. I saw a beat to hell one (unmodified, I’m sure) on the street a couple of months ago, but that’s the only one I’ve seen in years.
I had 2 fastback GT’s like this..fun car, except hard to work on the engine space wise.
It’s sad to see someone driving around with a misspelled licence plate.
Maybe Pegasus was already taken. The tag though is a sign of a real “Fieroseur”, Pegasus was one of the names considered for the Fiero, and is the namesake of its winged horse logo.
Well, maybe it’s a creative spelling of “Pegasus.” On the other hand, maybe the car belongs to Peggy Sue.
I spotted on this link some scans showing some pictures of a proposed 1989 Fiero from an old issue of Collectible Automobile http://www.oocities.org/fierolisa/89.html
I think the 88 Forumla Fieros are the best looking (saw them on the link) but I have NEVER seen a late build Formula model in the wild.
The thing about the Fiero was that it was supposed to be a “POS commuter car”, it was sold to management back when the embassys were being burned and $5.00 a gallon gas was for sure(ha). A 50MPG low cost personal commuter, think more CRX HF than 308GTB. It was to cost no more than X to make and list for no more than Y. Make it happen.
In its first year they sold something like 136,000 of the things, Yeah! High fives all around, then GM of course was miffed when they never sold that many again, as if there was a market for 100K plus a year 2 seat mid-engined small cars in the US? plus a year and since there was no ChevroOldsmoBuick version to absorb costs, though it was shopped around, Buick considered making the Reatta on the P-car chassis, but it was “too harsh and low” for Buicks inteded Reatta customers, so Buick went with an E-body, plus it was made in a plant that ONLY made the Fieros(stil vacant till this day). It was a star crossed idea all around.
I remember those early Car and Driver, Road and Track, Motor Trend articles on the Fiero’s introduction and how the original intent was as the commuter car….. Which explained GM’s use of sourcing parts from the Chevette and Citation. The V6 was the game changer and must have completely changed the personality of the car. John Cafaro’s design work on the 84 Indy Pace Car gave hints as to what the GT was become. I still think his work on the 86 fastback GT is stunning to look at. Cafaro went on to later fame with his design of the C5 Corvette. A great insiders look into GM, Cafaro, Chuck Jordan and the birth process of the C5 Corvette is documented in the book “All Corvettes Are Red” by James Schefter.
GM’s chief Deadly Sin for me was bringing interesting cars to market and not refining them. Examples include Fiero, Corvair. I’m sure dozens more can be listed! And it still ticks me off to consider they killed Pontiac…….
“Original intent” is kind of a tricky thing with the Fiero, given its convoluted development. The original original intent was for it to be a compact, two-seat, mid-engine sports car; when it looked like that was not going to happen, it was sold to corporate management as an inexpensive commuter. That was essentially a compromise to keep the project alive when it otherwise would probably have been shelved.
I owned 2 86 Fieros, one, the first, was the SE V6, 4 speed. Loved it. The Goodyear Eagle GT+4 14 inch tires had a way of wanting to track in the groove on worn out asphalt. Just loved the driving experience, the sound of the air intake at idle, the high shift console, the Corvette Stingray type flat rear glass window and the sound of the V6, which in the Fiero, sounded especially nice considering it was coming from a single catalytic convertor.
I traded her in after 2 years for the 86 GT, again with the 4 speed tranny. The fastback styling was a knockout and an additional benefit was the added rear visibilty from the tinted plexiglass windows. Overall, both Fieros gave me fantastic service for the 10 plus years total that I owned them. A Deadly Sin? Not in my book. That car gave Corvette like performance, exotic looks and sound with practical American engineering. I cannot speak for the early 2M4 years, but the V6 was dead reliable and gave me almost 30 mpg highway to boot.
GM played it’s usual tricks by finally fixing the Chevette derived front suspension in 1988, only to kill the car after the Fiero’s non-sporting X-Car and Chevette underpinnings were deepsixed. The era of the economic mid-engine sportscar was over. Later, when the Solstice came out, I marveled at what a step back Pontiac took with the release of that car; cramped interior with little room for luggage at a premium price. The rest is Pontiac history…
Amen on the Solstice thing. I was intrigued by the idea of the Solstice but was disgusted when I saw its styling. But the Saturn Sky was another story: it had much sharper lines & I had to check one out. It was incredibly cramped inside & I lost all love for it when I cranked the Ecotec engine. The redline models put out over 200hp but the car felt & sounded like a cheap Chinese toy. Such a shame.
Sometimes I feel like I’m in the minority in liking the Sky over Solstice. Solstice was a cartoon car.
The Ecotec that powered them?
I don’t know what they did to muck it up. The 01 Cav with the early 2.2 version was brilliant and I thought that it was an even better plant in the Cobalt SS with 2 liters and a blower.
Count me in in preferring the Sky to the Solstice. My parents’ neighbor has a medium metallic blue Sky, and it looks great. Reminds me of a 3/4-scale Corvette.
The owners are greatly to be complemented. One seldom sees a red car of that age where the paint still looks good.
It’s still hard to believe to this day that the Fiero died without ever getting a Quad4.
I’m sure it would have been a reliability nightmare, but the Quad4 was practically built for a car like the Fiero.
Amen! Some of the high output Quad4s in this era were putting out 180hp, literally twice the output of what was actually offered.
Only 94k miles…!.
Only ones here in the Uk were used as bases for Ferrari 328 kit cars. Just change the front and rear ends. some wast their time on converting the things to RHD!.
“some wast their time on converting the things to RHD!.”
Why is it a waste of time???
I own an ’88 GT with 5 speed and turbo. And it goes like stink. Hugs the corners with intoxicating confidence, (has Konis), and sounds beautifully. Okay the steering, when parking, needs a little muscle, but a sports car is not for softies. It is for passionate people who love driving. When the car is driving in traffic the steering feels wonderful tight and direct. This car is unlike most anything else on the road. You sit low to the ground and eventhough the car doesn’t look big on the outside, it feels roomy once you got in. The acceleration feels faster. You sit very comfortable and the driving feel and fun is unparalleled in this price class. The cheapest new car that generates this amount of driving fun is the Subaru BRZ. The Fiero GT really IS, the poor man’s Ferrari. Especially with added power. I got mine because life is too short not to live your little dreams.