1967 Pontiac Bonneville Classic on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Pontiac should come back as a performance division for GM

For decades the Pontiac brand was known as GM's performance brand. From the 1964 Pontiac GTO, to the 1967 Firebird, to the 1984 Fiero, to the 2006 Solstice Turbo, and 2009 G8 GXP, Pontiac had a reputation for building exciting cars, with bold styling and performance to back it up. When the Camaro was killed off in 2002, the Pontiac Firebird died off with it, and the last Pontiacs were built in early 2010. But with names like G3, G4, and G6, Pontiac's performance image had long faded from it's earlier glory days. My idea for Pontiac's revival would be to bring it back as a dedicated performance marque similar to Chevy's Super Sport (SS) line up of years past. First, and most obvious would be to bring back the Pontiac Firebird. Offering the entry-level model with the Camaro's 275HP turbo 4 cylinder engine, then having the Camaro SS's 455HP V8, but also offering a halo model Trans Am that is a revamped Camaro ZL-1 along with it's tire-shredding 650HP, supercharged V8 and race tuned suspension. Secondly, I would bring back the GTO. Which I would base on the current Chevy SS, but I would use the full 455-horsepower LS4 V8 (rather than the 415-hp setup that it has now). Furthermore, I would add the impressive 650-hp supercharged V8 to provide real competition to the Charger Hellcat. Importantly, I would make sure that the new GTO had bold, distinctive styling that really set it apart. I understand that purists would want any Pontiac GTO to be a two-door coupe, but I think that they could forgive that if the new GTO was an outstanding American performance car. Next, I would take the Buick Cascada convertible, add much bolder styling, swap in the Camaro's 275-hp turbo engine, and tune up the suspension to provide more performance than luxury (without being harsh). And finally I would round out the line up by using the new 2018 Traverse , but use the new, bold Pontiac design language to spice up the model's looks, tweak the engines for more power, and again provide a performance suspension that matches the model's new sporty looks. Obviously, having a high performance Pontiac model line up would steal away some sales from Chevy, Buick, and Cadillac models. But I think that it would more than make up for this by also stealing away sales from competing brands. Related Video: Image Credit: Copyright 2012 Drew Phillips / AOL Pontiac Classics brands open road

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...

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