1994 Pontiac Firebird Trans Am on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Want to buy a worst-in-show-winning Faux Ferrari Fiero?

UPDATE: This heap sold for $5,001. But don't fret, there are more terrible cars out there for the taking if that's your thing. Today we bring you something truly terrible. It's not just a fake Ferrari built on the guts of an old Pontiac Fiero, it's actually the world's worst fake Ferrari built on the guts of an old Pontiac Fiero. And it's got the award from the Concours d'Lemons to prove it. It's so heinous, in fact, that it has somehow managed to become desirable, at least judging by the bidding history of this bright red affront to Maranello. Powered by a 140-horsepower 2.8-liter V6 engine (covered by an unconvincing and broken fake V12 cover) hooked to an automatic gearbox, this gloriously poor Prancing Horse won't be winning many stoplight drag races. There are bundles of stray wires hanging down from the dashboard, it has high mileage, most of its lights don't work, and it's ugly. Like, really ugly. And to top it off, this Fauxrarri can't currently be registered in its home state of California because it has failed its most recent smog test. Put simply, you're looking at a total piece of junk. But a piece of junk with internet notoriety, having been featured on an episode of Jay Leno's Garage after attending the 2019 Quail Motorsports Gathering — by mistake at first, and then earning a special place next to the porta potties — being the focus of a video series on YouTube and winning the aforementioned ribbon for Worst in Show at Lemons. Somehow, bidding has topped $4,000 at the time of this writing. This content is hosted by a third party. To view it, please update your privacy preferences. Manage Settings. If you want to earn the ire of your neighbors — and to be clear, we really wouldn't recommend it — click on over to Cars & Bids to view the auction. There are four days left to hit the "bid" button. Consider yourself warned. Related Video:

This or That: 2005 Chrysler Crossfire SRT6 vs. 1984 Pontiac Fiero

Welcome to another round of This or That, where two Autoblog editors pick a topic, pick a side and pull no punches. Last round pitted yours truly against Associate Editor Brandon Turkus, and my chosen VW Vanagon Syncro narrowly defeated Brandon's 1987 Land Rover. In fact, it was, by far, the closest round we've seen, with 1,907 voters seeing things my way (for 50.8 percent of the vote) versus 1,848 votes for Brandon's Rover (49.2 percent). Sweet, sweet victory! For this latest round of This or That, I've roped Editor Greg Migliore into what I think is a rather fun debate. We've each chosen our favorite terrible cars, setting a price limit of $10,000 to make sure neither of us went too crazy with our automotive atrocities. I think we've both chosen terribly... and I mean that in the best way possible. 2005 Chrysler Crossfire SRT6 Jeremy Korzeniewski: Why It's Terrible: Taken in isolation, the Chrysler Crossfire isn't necessarily a terrible car. In fact, it drives pretty darn well, and there's a lot of solid engineering under its slinky shape. Problem is, that engineering was already rather long in the tooth well before Chrysler ever got its hands on it, having come from Mercedes-Benz, which used the basic chassis and drivetrain in a previous version of its SLK coupe and roadster. Granted, the SLK was an okay car, too, but even when new, it hardly set the world on fire with sporty driving dynamics. Chrysler took these decent-but-no-more bits and pieces from the Mercedes parts bin – remember, this car was conceived in the disastrous Merger Of Equals days – and covered them with a rather attractive hard-candy shell. Unfortunately, the super sporty shape wrote checks in the minds of buyers that its well-worn mechanicals were simply unable to cash, though an injection of power courtesy of a supercharged V6 engine in the SRT6 model, as seen here, certainly helped ease some of those woes. In the end, Chrysler was left with a so-called halo car that looked the part but never quite performed the part. It was almost universally panned by critics as an overpriced parts-bin special, which, I must add, was damningly accurate. As a result, sales were very slow, and within the first few months, dealers were clearancing the car at cut-rate prices, just to keep them from taking up too much of the showroom floor. Why It's Not That Terrible, After All: I can speak from personal experience when discussing the Chrysler Crossfire. You see, I owned one. Well, sort of...

GM doing fine at retaining Pontiac owners

This isn't the first time we've reported positive news about General Motors retaining former Pontiac owners. Get a few more stories like this latest report from Edmund's Auto Observer, and it will mark an ongoing positive trend for GM. Edmunds.com crunched the numbers to see how well the General is hanging on to customers after shutting out the lights at Pontiac, and it found that nearly 40 percent of Pontiac owners stayed with a vehicle from a General Motors brand.
The numbers are a little lower than an earlier R.L. Polk & Company study, but Edmunds says General Motors is keeping more former Pontiac buyers than it has since 2007. Most are turning to vehicles from Chevrolet, especially during January and February of 2011, when GM incentivized Pontiac owners to stay under the umbrella. Those moves seem to have worked, and 28.1 percent of Pontiac owners trading up made the jump into a Bowtie.
Buyers that have gone elsewhere have largely stayed loyal to Domestic automakers, with Ford picking up the most conquests from Pontiac, with 9.4 percent switching. Toyota and Honda picked up 7.4 percent of the pool of former Pontiac drivers. The numbers are defying any predictions that Pontiac buyers would completely exit the General Motors fold, and have climbed up closer to parity with the retention figures of other GM brands from a 2009 low of only 16 percent retention.