1975 Pontiac Grand Lemans 350 V8 Coupe, Very Sharp And Sporty, Only 29k Miles on 2040-cars
Lakewood, Ohio, United States
Engine:350
Fuel Type:Gasoline
For Sale By:Dealer
Interior Color: Black
Make: Pontiac
Number of Cylinders: 8
Model: Le Mans
Warranty: Vehicle does NOT have an existing warranty
Trim: 2dr
Power Options: Air Conditioning
Drive Type: rwd
Mileage: 29,000
Exterior Color: Green
Pontiac Le Mans for Sale
Auto Services in Ohio
Zig`s Auto Service Inc ★★★★★
World Auto Network ★★★★★
Woda Automotive ★★★★★
Wholesale Tire Co ★★★★★
Westway Body Shop ★★★★★
Toth Buick GMC Trucks ★★★★★
Auto blog
This KITT replica sold at auction for $32,500
Thu, Apr 23 2020UPDATE: This 1987 Pontiac Firebird Trans Am KITT replica officially sold for $32,500. Here's hoping the new owner has a blast throwin' it into Pursuit Mode. Let's get one thing straight right off the bat: This isn't a perfect KITT replica. The original KITT used in the Knight Rider TV series was based on a 1982 Pontiac Firebird Trans Am. The one you see above, which is currently for sale at auction site Bring A Trailer, is a 1987 model, and since it's a GTA edition, it has some extra body cladding that the smooth-sided television car lacked. That aside, most casual observers would probably never notice the difference, and even those who did (like us) are still likely to be impressed by the car's transformation. This KITT replica is powered by a 5.0-liter V8 engine mated to a four-speed automatic transmission. It ought to be fairly quick, though quite a bit shy of the fictional car's very fictional 300-mph top speed. We're not exactly Knight Rider experts, but some quick Google sleuthing suggests that the Knight Industries Two Thousand supposedly cost more than $11,000,000 to build in Hollywoodland. This one will surely command a significantly lower sum — as of this writing, it's been bid up to $18,000 with four days remaining on the auction. This content is hosted by a third party. To view it, please update your privacy preferences. Manage Settings. For those truly fanatical about accuracy, here's a video of one of the originals visiting Jay Leno's Garage for reference. There are several videos of the car that detail its modifications inside and out, but suffice it to say it seems to be a well-sorted replica. Here's hoping its new owner keeps it well clear of other KARRs. Related Video: This content is hosted by a third party. To view it, please update your privacy preferences. Manage Settings.
This or That: 2005 Chrysler Crossfire SRT6 vs. 1984 Pontiac Fiero
Tue, Feb 10 2015Welcome 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...
What car brand should come back?
Fri, Apr 7 2017Congratulations, wishful thinker! You've been granted one wish by the automotive genie or wizard or leprechaun or whoever has been gifted with that magical ability. You get to pick one expired, retired or fired automotive brand and resurrect it from its heavenly peace! But which one? That's a tough decision and not one to be made lightly. As we know from car history, the landscape is littered with failed brands that just didn't have what it took to cut it in the dog-eat-dog world of vehicle design, engineering and marketing. So many to choose from! Because I am not a car historian, I'll leave it to a real expert to present a complete list of history's automotive misses from which you can choose, if you're a stickler about that sort of thing. And since I'm most familiar with post-World War II cars and brands, that's what I'm going to stick to (although Maxwell, Cord and some others could make strong arguments). So, with the parameters established, let's get started, shall we? Hudson: I admit, I really don't know a lot about Hudson, except that stock car drivers apparently did pretty well with them back in the day, and Paul Newman played one in the first Cars movie. But really, isn't that enough to warrant consideration? Frankly, I think the Paul Newman connection is reason enough. What other actor who drove race cars was cooler? James Dean? Steve McQueen? James Garner? Paul Walker? But, I digress. That's a story for another day. Plymouth: As the scion of a Dodge family (my grandfather had a Dodge truck, and my mom had not one, but two Dodge Darts – the rear-wheel-drive ones with slant sixes in them, not the other one they don't make any more), I tend to think of Plymouth as the "poor man's Dodge." But then you have to consider the many Hemi-powered muscle cars sold under the Plymouth brand, such as the Road Runner, the GTX, the Barracuda, and so on. Was there a more affordable muscle car than Plymouth? When you place it in the context of "affordable muscle," Plymouth makes a pretty strong argument for reanimation. Oldsmobile: When I was a teenager, all the cool kids had Oldsmobile Cutlasses, the downsized ones that came out in 1978. At one point, the Olds Cutlass was the hottest selling car in the land, if you can believe that. Then everybody started buying Honda Civics and Accords and Toyota Corollas and Camrys, and you know the rest. But going back farther, there's the 442 – perhaps Olds' finest hour when it came to muscle cars.