“Total production of the Pontiac Fiero over all 5 years was 370,168.[4] Regarding the number of cars which suffered an engine fire, we have the following two references, one from NHTSA and one from Pontiac Division.

“The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration…said it has received 148 complaints regarding [Pontiac Fieros catching fire] including reports of six injuries…Low levels of engine oil may cause a connecting rod to break; allowing oil to escape and come into contact with engine parts. The oil would catch on fire when it contacted the exhaust manifold or hot exhaust components…David Hudgens, a GM spokesman in Detroit… said, ‘If you ran out of oil, and then that coupled with some aggressive driving perhaps, and maybe not changing the oil very often, you end up with a broken rod, and that’s where the connecting rod came in, it is still the owners responsibility to check the oil.’ “[5]

“GM tests have shown that running these 1984 cars with low engine oil level can cause connecting rod failure which may lead to an engine compartment fire…Pontiac is aware of 260 fires attributable to the condition, along with ten reported minor injuries.”[6]

The larger of the two reported numbers of cars with fires (260), amounts to 0.07% of Fieros produced. The fires affected almost exclusively the 2.5 L engine, and mostly 1984 models. (Note that there may have been additional occurrences after the above reports were published.) The primary cause of engine fires was a batch of poorly cast connecting rods which failed when the oil level became too low. The faulty connecting rods were produced in GM’s Saginaw plant. The theory is that the sports car styling attracted buyers who would drive the car hard, most notedly over-revving the engine. Another factor was the misprinted three quart oil capacity, the actual oil capacity was 4 1/2 quarts but a misprint in the dipsticks and the owners manuals led to people running three quarts and perhaps a leaky valve cover gasket which would allow the oil level to decline over time to a dangerously low level. If the proper oil level was not maintained, the bearings could seize, snapping the porous castings of the connecting rods resulting in punched holes in the engine block, thus spraying oil onto hot exhaust components where it could ignite.

Most vehicles existing today have been serviced by GM during one of the safety recalls on the car. On the fire-related recall, shields and drip-trays were added to prevent leaking fluids from contacting hot surfaces. The presence of drip shields between the engine block and the exhaust manifold are a good clue that the car was retrofitted. The addition of the longer AC Delco PF51 oil filter and a re calibrated dipstick added extra oil capacity to the oiling system, and enabled running 4 quarts of oil in the crankcase instead of 3 quarts to help prevent oil starvation to the rods. Certain vehicles had their connecting rods or entire block replaced.

Another theory is that some fires may have been due to the engine wiring harness being located in the center of the engine bay above the exhaust manifold, where the heat could theoretically melt and ignite the wiring. Also, the 1984 model had a magnesium grille over this area. In later models, this was improved to some degree with much better heat shielding wrapped around the wiring harness.

A third cause of fires was due to the method used to cast the engine block and possibly overtorqued head bolts. Some engines developed cracks in the block that would leak coolant and/or oil, sometimes accompanied by broken head bolts directly above the crack. The leak would spray coolant or oil, the latter of which could result in a fire if sprayed onto the hot catalytic converter and exhaust manifold located at the front of the engine compartment. This was believed to be the cause in several cases.”

Oh, and I did forget the plastic panels. All Saturns, and the minivans I mentioned had that problem as well. A big let down, but there are now spray cans with a solvent to fix that.

I’ve never heard about G turns causing fires though, injunraiv. The problem was due to the connecting rods breaking and oil leaking out, and it doesn’t take TOO long to break a connecting rod, but not a few seconds of oil “fade away” from high G-forces. You might be on too something else though…

Gee, why are where we are again?

TomF, I would have to disagree with some of your list. For what the Cobalt does it does a great job at. The Pontiac Fiero was just too short lived, but was an amazing car at the time. If you want to talk about reliability, I remember nearly all problems being with breaking connecting rods in the 2.5. Reason for it? People didn’t change their oil. If you leave oil levels low, somethings gonna break. The older GM Minivans, the Trans Sport, Lumina and others, aside from having too many clones and underpowered engines were great. You don’t have to like the styling. The Reatta was another surprisingly nice car, but just sold too poorly (shouldn’t have been a Buick). And lastly the Aveo’s probably one of the best cars in it’s class, although it’s not meant to suit any tastes aside from a budget buyers. For that reason, I wouldn’t consider the G3 a crap car, just crap marketing.

Oh, and the Aztec. Horribly ugly vehicle, but otherwise it’s very nice. Huge amounts of space, nice interior and creative options. Oh, and had the highest customer satisfaction of pretty much any recently recorded vehicle. Only problem? Looks. You need to look deeper than the skin.

Otherwise, you can keep all the rest of the crap on there. Add pretty much every GM sedan from the early 80′s to 2005 aside from the first gen. Aurora, every SUV and pick-up aside from the Syclone and the Silverado, and… any further and it would be opinionated.

You got a good one. Not enough people did, or GM’s market share wouldn’t have plummeted as it has. It has collapsed owing to a preponderance of crap.

DrFill, our 23 year old 1-family owned Buick with 216,000 miles (never rebuilt) disagrees with you. So does my Uncle’s 1985 Silverado pickup (also original, never rebuilt 350 block & tranny) with almost 300,000 miles.

What is your definition of “crap”? Is it what you perceive through your own personal bias, or does it come from years of experience driving GM products? Please enlighten me.