1996 Pontiac Firebird Formula on 2040-cars

Auto blog

GM reintroduces Tripower name in the worst way possible

The story of General Motors' use of the Tripower moniker begins way back in 1957, when Semon E. "Bunkie" Knudsen, then General Manager of GM's Pontiac division, directed his engineers to inject more performance into his brand's line of V8-powered automobiles. Fuel injection was an option, but hot rodders flocked instead to Tri-Power (marketed way back when with a hyphen), which grafted a trio of two-barrel Rochester carburetors onto a single intake manifold. A legend was born. And that legend was born of performance. At idle and when full power wasn't required, Pontiac's Tri-Power system used just the middle carburetor, which helped make the setup easier to tune. Depending on the year and model, either a vacuum system or a mechanical linkage opened up the two outer carbs, thereby switching from two barrels to six, and allowing the engine to take in more fuel and air. And it was an easy marketing win – six barrels is better than four barrels, right? Because performance! So, when news filtered in that GM has resurrected the Tripower name, those of us who grew up attending classic car shows and wrenching on old Pontiacs did a double-take. And then we all collectively sighed. Turns out that today's Tripower refers to a trio of fuel-saving measures that include cylinder deactivation, active thermal management, and intake valve lift control, according to Automotive News. And, at least for now, it applies to GM's line of fullsize trucks powered by a 2.7-liter turbocharged four-cylinder engine. We're all for saving fuel whenever possible. And we have zero say in how any automaker chooses to market its products and technologies. But, we'll offer our two cents anyway: Relaunching a storied name from the past is fine. Relaunching a storied name from the past while completely overlooking the reasons the name got famous in the first place is only going to irritate the people who remember the name in the first place. Couldn't they just call this new technology package something else? Related Video: News Source: Automotive NewsImage Credit: Getty Green Marketing/Advertising Chevrolet GM Pontiac Automotive History Truck chevrolet silverado

MotorWeek's 80's GM muscle coupe roundup includes Regal GN and Monte Carlo SS

Even with just four brands in the family, General Motors still represents a performance powerhouse. Between the Chevrolet Corvette Z06, Camaro Z/28, Cadillac CTS-V and ATS-V, The General can still deliver plenty of thrills. The 1980s, though, saw the brand go even crazier with performance. While the Camaro and Corvette were still around back in the day, GM had a number of other interesting performance offerings. The Bowtie was complemented by the long-deceased Monte Carlo SS, while the now-defunct Pontiac and Oldsmobile offered the Grand Prix and thumping 442, respectively. And Buick, which isn't short on performance with its Regal GS and Verano Turbo, offered a much more serious vehicle, in the form of the Grand National (not to mention the Darth Vader-spec GNX). MotorWeek, in its hugely entertaining retro flashbacks, looks back on these three long-lost GM performance icons, and it's just as good as you might expect. News Source: MotorWeek via YouTube Buick Chevrolet GM Pontiac Coupe Performance Classics Videos buick grand national chevy monte carlo oldsmobile 442

2008-2009 Pontiac G8 recalled over airbag concern

General Motors is recalling around 38,000 Pontiac G8 sedans from its 2008 and 2009 model years. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration reports that the cars may have a passenger-side airbag flaw that might prevent proper deployment in certain scenarios.
According to NHTSA, the airbag might not adequately protect a fifth percentile woman - that is, a woman around four-foot, 11-inches weighing 108 pounds. The New York Times indicates that the anomaly was found during a crash test conducted by GM's Australian branch, Holden, which was testing the G8's twin (read: Commodore) for head injuries. According to that report, the test in question is specifically tailored to simulate injuries to females, so the results do not apply to men or children.
The issue has been blamed on a seat position sensor that governs airbag deployment rates. NHTSA indicates that when the front passenger seat is moved all the way forward, the faulty sensor may inappropriately trigger a 30-millisecond delay between airbag stages, potentially leading to greater injuries.