Original Red On Red 1 Owner Gto Matching #'s 400 Auto Clean on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Motorweek looks back at the Pontiac Aztek

The Pontiac Aztek has earned a position as this generation's ultimate, automotive punchline. Even other execrable models like the Yugo or Mustang II probably get more respect these days just out of their sheer quirkiness, but the Aztek remains a joke. Fortify your mind for what's coming, though, because the much-maligned Pontiac might not be quite so atrocious, at least according to MotorWeek's latest Retro Review video. MotorWeek calls the Aztek, "GM's first true crossover vehicle," and it's amazing to think of the hated model as a progenitor of one of the most popular segments today. While admitting that the looks are polarizing, John Davis and company actually come away pleased with the Aztek's utility. They praise that there's a ton of room in the back, and the interior is packed with useful features like a removable cooler in the center console and radio controls in a cargo area. The show is even impressed with how the Pontiac drives and throws around accolades like "nimble" and "pleasant." After seeing the Aztek leading the pack on lists of the worst vehicles of all time for years, listening to it get such effusive praise is actually quite jarring. Could we all be so wrong? No, there's absolutely no debate that this is still a hideous automobile. However, MotorWeek asserts a complete reversal of the generally perceived wisdom about the early CUV. While unexpected, thinking about such an abhorred model in a different way is a cool experience. Check out the video for a different take on the Aztek.

Remember when Pontiac made a Trans Am Kammback grocery getter?

Despite muscle cars having strong reputations as some of the most impractical cars one can buy, they've occasionally had one of the most useful and practical features a car can sport: a hatchback. In the 1980s, General Motors' Chevrolet Camaro and Pontiac Firebird had one, and it added respectable utility to the sports cars. But the people at GM thought they could make the F-Body cars even more useful. So, after a few clay-model experiments, Pontiac built three examples of an extended-roof 1985 Pontiac Trans Am Kammback concept. Spotted by GM Authority, one of these Trans Am Kammbacks (although "shooting brake" seems like the more apt descriptor) is going on the block at the Mecum Kissimmee auction in early January 2019. Reportedly only three of these prototypes/experiments/test mules were built to driveable specs, and this example, VIN No. EX4796, has additional history that might make it the ultimate example. According to Mecum, the show car, which has made appearances at numerous auto shows, also spent some time at the race track — just not as a participant. It was used as a pace car for PPG and IMSA racing and temporarily had a light bar and "two-way communications equipment." Following its pace duty, and after GM stopped the project from going any further, it was put into Pontiac Engineering's private collection for 13 years. Famous Michigan car collector and Pontiac dealership owner John McMullen then bought the car. He eventually sent it to Pontiac specialist Scott Tiemann for a full restoration to the gorgeous condition it is in today. As seen in the photos, the Trans Am features white paint over a gray leather interior. It houses a 5.0-liter V8 under the hood and has a five-speed manual transmission. The wild concept is rare enough to be super cool, but we can't help but think of an infinitely more practical, more modern, more powerful, and arguably more interesting car we'd rather have. Manual Cadillac CTS-V Sport Wagon in Black Diamond anybody? Or, if you don't care about the extra doors, perhaps the Callaway's Corvette AeroWagen is more applicable. Either way, we're in full support of any shooting brakes we can find. Related Video: This content is hosted by a third party. To view it, please update your privacy preferences. Manage Settings.

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.