1960 Pontiac Catalina (american Model) Great Driver on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Burt Reynolds' personal 1977 Trans-Am from Smokey And The Bandit for sale

Smokey and the Bandit is one of those quintessential 1970s car movies with insane premises but tons of fun. After all, the basic plot of the film is about distracting the police to transport cases of Coors beer cross country. While Burt Reynolds receives top billing, the real star is definitely his black Pontiac Trans-Am. Now, there's a chance to posses one of these muscle machines actually owned by Reynolds, and it's already proving quite popular. The car is a '77 Trans-Am with the famous, gold screaming chicken proudly on the hood. However, while this is a piece of Reynolds memorabilia, it's not really part of cinematic history. According to the listing, this example was used as a promotional vehicle and then given to Reynolds with a title showing him as a previous owner for proof. Still, there's 400-cubic-inch (6.55-liter) V8 under the hood with a 4-barrel carburetor and an automatic transmission. A plaque inside the driver's door proclaims the car as a "1977 Pontiac Trans Am Owned By Burt Reynolds," and there's a Bandit logo on the door. This is just one lot of Julien Auction's sale of Reynolds memorabilia on December 11 and 12 at The Palms Casino Resort in Las Vegas, NV. Bidding is already running online, and the Trans-Am is up to $130,000, as of this writing. For the true Reynolds fanatic, the auction also lists the motorized stagecoach from his wedding to Loni Anderson. It rides built on an International Harvester Scout frame with an interior reportedly from Dolly Parton.

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...

Question of the Day: Most degraded car name?

When Ford came up with a not-so-sporty version of the Pinto and slapped Mustang badges on it in 1974, that was a low point for the Mustang name. When Chrysler applied the venerable Town & Country name on perfectly functional but unglamorous minivans, it saddened many of us. But perhaps the biggest demotion for a once-proud model came when, in 1988, General Motors imported a misery-enhancing Daewoo from Korea and called it the Pontiac LeMans. The original Pontiac LeMans was a great-looking midsize car with fairly advanced (for the time) suspension design and engine options including potent V8s and a screaming overhead-cam straight-six. The Daewoo-based Pontiac LeMans was a cramped, shoddy hooptie that served only to ruin the LeMans name forever, while stealing sales from the Suzuki-based Chevrolet Sprint. Sure, using the once-respected Monterey name on the Mercurized Ford Freestar was bad, but Mercury didn't have long to live at that point. I say the downward spiral of the LeMans name was the most agonizing in automotive history. What do you think? Related Video: This content is hosted by a third party. To view it, please update your privacy preferences. Manage Settings. Auto News Ford Mercury Pontiac Automotive History Classics questions ford pinto names