And now you've all got me searching Fieros again.
And now you've all got me searching Fieros again.
"How do I feel about fiero's?"
I feel a certain warmth to them. Oftentimes, also from.
I like the MR2 better as a budget MR option, personally. But if the GM offering appeals to you, the one you posted looks like a decent starting point.
I had 2 friends that had them new. They just felt pieced together with GM leftover bits & suffered from GM build quality. Another friend had a new MR2. What a difference. I never had any desire to have a Fiero but did eventually have a 2nd gen MR2.
The Fiero could have been a great car but as usual GM execs got in the way. There was no way they would make a V6 car with the engine at the wrong end defeat their precious Corvette.
My sister bought the first model year. Despite their faults still one of my favorite cars.Didnt care much for the second gen looks
Don't believe the hype about fieros and fires. That was 1984 only, and only the 4-cylinder models. They developed leaks in the oil cooler, dumb-ass drivers didn't notice the lake of oil in their driveway for a month, they ran it low on oil, the rods would eject themselves through the block spraying oil on the exhaust manifold. To make things worse, the Saginaw foundry knew that 20-30% of the 2.5L rods that left the factory were faulty and were going to fail. A faulty design, no doubt, but to say it was all GM's fault that 1 in 500 cars caught fire when owners ran them without oil is a stretch. Just don't buy a 1984.
This is like saying that every explorer with firestone tires will suddenly flip over without warning. No, they flip over when owners don't check their tire pressure and expect an SUV to handle like a Camry.
The 4cyl in addition to not having any HP (92 HP out of 2.5L) or ability to rev past 4500 rpm, also have a fiber cam gear that likes to no longer have teeth.
All this Fiero talk is making me want to buy one and do it Right now that I have more money then I did when I was in High School and College when $50/ea for rims was unobtainable.
In reply to Curtis73 (Forum Supporter) :
I don't think they required no oil to spit a rod out the front of the block. The fire was made possible by the unfortunate location of the Catalytic converter immediately under the front side of the engine. Otherwise it would of just been unfortunate engine failures.
Additionally on the 1984 cars the center engine grill cover panel and solid side covers in the notch are magnesium castings. When the engine caught fire they would also. Water was innefective at putting them out so the fires just got worse. These where changed to side vents and a solid trunk in 1985. Do not put a 1985 solid trunk on a 1984 Fiero.
84s are also somewhat undesirable because the main engine harness connection is in the center of the firewall. This complicates wireing for swaps. 85+ the bay harness was re-routed to the side of the engine bay. For Engine swaps the 85+ are recommended.
These are things I remember from being into Fieros 18 years ago. It's possible some of it is being misremembered.
The 4cyl also held very little oil. One of my friends that had one, took it in for the recall. The recall involved making a new mark on the dipstick & adding a qt of oil. I saw the remarked dipstick.
Curtis73 (Forum Supporter) said:Don't believe the hype about fieros and fires. That was 1984 only, and only the 4-cylinder models. They developed leaks in the oil cooler, dumb-ass drivers didn't notice the lake of oil in their driveway for a month, they ran it low on oil, the rods would eject themselves through the block spraying oil on the exhaust manifold. To make things worse, the Saginaw foundry knew that 20-30% of the 2.5L rods that left the factory were faulty and were going to fail. A faulty design, no doubt, but to say it was all GM's fault that 1 in 500 cars caught fire when owners ran them without oil is a stretch. Just don't buy a 1984.
Also as I said to a friend when I was looking at them and he mentioned the fires, "It's been 30 years. All the Fieros that are going to catch on fire have already caught on fire, therefore, any that are left are safe."
This thread is timely and learning that the BDT has prior knowledge on the subject is both unsurprising and unsettling.
I have only driven one Fiero, one time, and have nothing to add in this conversation beyond admitting that I have been looking at them recently even though I am NOT SHOPPING FOR ANOTHER PROJECT.....
My x1/9 was fun but underpowered. I decided not to pursue building it up due to lack of parts availability. I have looked at the MR2 as a possible replacement but the AW11 has similar issues and it seems the SW20 fenderwells must be lined with 24k gold.
GM parts bin engineering is a big plus for the Fiero. I am only (not)shopping T-top cars, so that has helped prevent me from actually buying, so far.....
NickD said:Curtis73 (Forum Supporter) said:Don't believe the hype about fieros and fires. That was 1984 only, and only the 4-cylinder models. They developed leaks in the oil cooler, dumb-ass drivers didn't notice the lake of oil in their driveway for a month, they ran it low on oil, the rods would eject themselves through the block spraying oil on the exhaust manifold. To make things worse, the Saginaw foundry knew that 20-30% of the 2.5L rods that left the factory were faulty and were going to fail. A faulty design, no doubt, but to say it was all GM's fault that 1 in 500 cars caught fire when owners ran them without oil is a stretch. Just don't buy a 1984.
Also as I said to a friend when I was looking at them and he mentioned the fires, "It's been 30 years. All the Fieros that are going to catch on fire have already caught on fire, therefore, any that are left are safe."
As a student of logic, probability, philosophy and obtuse idioms, I'm not entirely sure that your argument holds water.
GM parts bin engineering is a big plus for the Fiero.
No, it was a compromise that led to the cars overall failure.
Underpowered, overweight FWD suspension in the back and overweight un-inspiring Chevette suspension in the front.
And the ever present "what if". What if the last design Fiero had actually been the first design and GM used those parts to improve other models they were building at the time spreading the cost of design to those models as well.
noddaz said:GM parts bin engineering is a big plus for the Fiero.
No, it was a compromise that led to the cars overall failure.
Underpowered, overweight FWD suspension in the back and overweight un-inspiring Chevette suspension in the front.
Taken in the context of the day, with the Fiero as a product hoping to attract buyers, your statement is very true. However, in the context of today and keeping a 30+ year old vehicle in serviceable condition, not so.
In reply to 1988RedT2 :
Yes, that is true.
Just found an 88 with an Archie's Fiero V8 conversion for $2500 on FB marketplace. I have too many damn projects right now. Dammit.
vwcorvette (Forum Supporter) said:Just found an 88 with an Archie's Fiero V8 conversion for $2500 on FB marketplace. I have too many damn projects right now. Dammit.
An LS swap into a Fiero sure sounds like a fun way to die.
There were some racing versions with a HD Iron duke.
I saw some a track days mid 2000's
That was a Super Duty block. It was VERY loosely based on the Iron Duke, but a much better design. It was used in IMSA and NASCAR Daytona Dash cars. When the Dash series ended, you could find those motors all over North Carolina for extremely cheap prices.
Saw this one today, made me want one. Its a set of wheels away from being the nicest Fiero I have seen.
There was an ls swapped one at car's and cantina today. It was glorious
Before they came out the car magazines hyped them up and I was young and excited about the car.
Then they came out and over its life they seemed to suck and after owning a crap ass '86 Pontiac Grand Am I wouldn't be caught dead in one.
Then I saw a really nice one with a clean V8 in the back and I was blown away. These are really nice.
I've always wanted one but it never lines up when I see one for sale
You'll need to log in to post.
