Straight Excellent Driver 69 Firebird T/a Tribute on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Woman Cleared In Fatal Car Wreck After GM Letter

A Texas judge cleared a woman Monday for a car accident that killed her fiance in 2004, after General Motors acknowledged that her car would have been among millions being recalled for a problem that may have contributed to the death. Candice Anderson was driving a 2004 Saturn Ion when it suddenly veered off a road about 60 miles east of Dallas and slammed into a tree. Anderson, then 21, was severely injured when the car's air bags failed to deploy. Her 25-year-old fiance, Gene Erikson, who was a passenger, was killed. She later pleaded guilty to charges stemming from the wreck. But during a hearing Monday, State District Judge Teresa Drum expunged the conviction from her record, according to officials in the Van Zandt County court andAnderson's attorney, Bob Hilliard. In a letter given to the court ahead of the hearing, an attorney for the automaker confirmed that Anderson's Saturn would have been among 2.6 million GM vehicles recalled in February to address ignition switches that can slip out of the "run" position, causing the engines to stall and disabling power steering, brakes and air bags. Anderson's crash "is one in which the recall condition may have caused or contributed to the frontal air bag non-deployment in the accident," attorney Richard C. Godfrey wrote. Hilliard provided a copy of the letter to The Associated Press, and Godfrey confirmed its contents Monday. Anderson was initially charged with criminally negligent homicide because there was no clear explanation at the time why the wreck occurred, according to court documents from the case. She pleaded guilty to a letter charge in 2006, and was sentenced to five years' probation. She also was ordered to perform 260 hours of community service, pay court costs and cover the costs of Erikson's funeral. "GM knew this defect caused this death, yet instead of telling the truth watched silently as Candice was found guilty of involuntary manslaughter," Hilliard said Monday. "It took 10 years for GM to find its voice." In a separate statement issued by the company, GM said it "cooperated fully by providing technical information that was requested to make a decision in this matter." The carmaker also said the issue in Anderson's case was for local law enforcement and courts to consider. "That's why we took a neutral position on Ms. Anderson's case," the company's statement said. "It was appropriate for the court to determine the legal status of Ms.

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:

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