Stunning 3,400 Mile 1989 20th Anniversary Pontiac Turbo Trans Am Grand National on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Drive plays Smokey, Bandit with turbo Trans Am

The modern trend for powertrains can be summed up with the simple maxim: cut displacement and add forced induction. Whether you are looking at the just-introduced 2016 Chevrolet Cruze or a BMW M3, this adage holds true. However, Pontiac's attempt at the idea goes all the way back in 1980 with the Firebird Trans Am and its turbocharged 4.9-liter V8. Drive's Mike Musto takes out a 1981 example to explain what makes this largely forgotten muscle car so special, and it certainly isn't performance. While a 4.9-liter V8 might sound like a lot in the modern world, keep in mind that only few years before the second-generation Trans Am was available with up to a staggering 7.5-liters of displacement. Turbocharging of road cars in the early '80s was quite archaic by today's standards, and the Firebird only managed around 200 horsepower with this mill. Without much go, the turbo Trans Am made up for a lack of power with lots of show. As Musto points out, the famous flaming chicken adorns practically every surface you can see on the coupe, and boost lights on the hood illuminate when the turbo is spinning. Musto still finds a lot to like about the turbo Trans Am. He even calls it "Burt Reynolds as an automobile." Find out why the coupe is so special in this entertaining clip.

Junkyard Gem: 1988 Pontiac LeMans Sedan

During the 1960s, the Pontiac LeMans was a sporty, rear-wheel-drive midsize car, the GTO's cheaper sibling. Through the 1970s and into the middle 1980s, the LeMans became a bit less youthful-looking but remained a traditional rear-wheel-drive Detroit machine with a V8 engine option. Then, starting in the 1988 model year, the LeMans name went onto a South Korean-built version of the misery-inducing, front-wheel-drive Opel Kadett E. These were dark days for the Pontiac marque; here's the proof, photographed at a San Francisco Bay Area self-service wrecking yard last month. This one didn't quite make it to the 100,000-mile mark. These cars were very, very cheap and sold reasonably well, but nearly all of the 1988-1993 LeManses are hatchbacks. I have seen a total of two Daewoo LeMans sedans during the last decade, and this is one of them. Under the hood, 74 raging Opel/Daewoo horsepower. This content is hosted by a third party. To view it, please update your privacy preferences. Manage Settings. In this car's homeland, it benefited from extremely macho South Korean voiceovers in its television advertising. This content is hosted by a third party. To view it, please update your privacy preferences. Manage Settings. In the United States, the ads for the LeMans were all about the hatchback, and all about cheap excitement. Related Video: Featured Gallery Junked 1988 Pontiac LeMans Sedan View 12 Photos Auto News Pontiac

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...