We’ve featured quite a few Pontiac Fieros on Barn Finds over the past several weeks, and it’s clear this orphan model of an orphan brand has some really dedicated followers. Finding this 1988 Pontiac Fiero for sale on here on craigslist in Benson, Arizona, I learned about a subset of Fieros I had never heard of before.
Photo Credit: Fiero Factory
Apparently, there is a company in Alabama called the Fiero Factory that has specialized in providing parts for Fieros (and has an amazingly large collection of parts cars and builders themselves).
Photo Credit: Fiero Factory
But, in addition to selling parts and cars, the Fiero Factory also offers 3.4 litre Camaro V-6 and 4.9 Cadillac V-8 engine transplants. And this particular Fiero happens to have one of those Cadillac V-8 engines done by the Fiero Factory!
In addition to the engine, it looks like the conversion included using the Cadillac 4 speed overdrive automatic transmission (maybe the Pontiac 5 speed can’t hold up to the added power of the V-8?). This car also features Michelin run flat p225/45 17 inch tires with Boret Alum Rims, which look really great on this car. It has air conditioning, power windows, power locks, doors and trunk with remote, tilt wheel, cruise control, a sun roof, rear window defroster and a AM FM CD radio. This car’s radiator was upgraded to a three core aluminum model.
According to the seller, the car and engine only have 54,700 original miles (wouldn’t that mean the transplant was done to a new car?) According to the ad, the interior and exterior are like new, and while there are only three pictures offered, the car does look quite good. The asking price of $8,500 seems quite reasonable, considering the cost of the conversion was something like $17,000 or more.
And from what other owners of Fiero Factory V-8 conversions say, this car will be fast and furious, handle well, and should be a blast to drive. America has a long tradition of stuffing big engines in small cars for go fast fun and this Fiero carries on the torch!
Caddy Conversion cost is more like 3K he has a lot more upgrades in his car or he paid a pretty penny for it…
Could the price include the initial price of acquiring the car?
I’ve always loved the unique style and design of the Fiero, especially as they become less and less common.
What frightens me about these, and other cars of the era (IROC’S, Z28’s), is what all that brittle plastic used in them is going to do to the cost of restoring/maintaining them.
The plastic used on Fiero’s was SMC and RRIM, definately not brittle. They are dent resistant and very durable. Where do you think the idea for the Saturn plastic panels came from?
Looks like fun
Anybody remember when first sneak peeks of a Fiero called it a GTO
With a V8 maybe
Van, first sneak peaks were either in Car and Driver or Motor trend in 1982. I was the one and only advanced engine engineer at Pontiac Engineering and in 1982 got the assignment to find an optional engine for the Fiero. Almost everything GM had fit in the rear engine compartment with the 90 degree V configurations packaging the best. At the time, there was tremendous competition between Pontiac and Chevrolet so I did not even propose as SMB. The Cadillac 4.9 iron head aluminum block V8 and the Buick iron even fire 3800 dropped right in. Our asst chief at the time didn’t want to tell me what to do but encouraged me to look at the 60 degree V6 “corporate” engine manufactured by Chevrolet. I heard GM’s engineering staff was working on an all aluminum version so I visited them. They had production tooled the aluminum sand cast head with Karl Schmidt and the die cast aluminum block at a GM Central Foundry. After a short discussion, we decided to increase the bore .014″ to just barely make it a 2.9L and turbo charge it. Usage would be a low volume optional engine for the STE and the 1986 Fiero. E staff supported it 100% supplying heads, aluminum rocker covers, blocks, head gaskets and I was responsible for the intake, throttle body, exhaust manifolds, turbocharger and related hardware design and engineering. The rest of the parts I got from Chevy. We built 2 LA9’s (that was the production RPO I picked which stood for aluminum 2.9L), and 4 STE’s both autos and manuals. The Fieros were crazy fast with 4 sec 0-60’s and ended up scarring the beezus out of our GM president when he spun out on a damp surface one morning. It was just the reason he needed to support Chevy’s protest (it was faster and cheaper than the Corvette) and kill the project. We still needed an optional engine, so that night we put the red turbo intake and Holley throttle body on an iron 2.8L, the sexy red aluminum rocker covers, and the SS turbo exhaust manifolds, dropped it in an engineering car and presented it as the optional engine for the 2M6 THE NEXT MORNING.. What sold it was the ease which we pulled this off and later when dynoed, we learned the 2.8 with the PONTIAC engineered intake and exhaust made more power than Chevy’s X11 H.O. package, causing them to loose the H.O. designation. As they say on Gas Monkey, ” have you some of that Chevy!!!!!” The top of engine parts from the LA9 turbo made it into production as originally designed and developed on the iron V6.
The LA9’s got photographed on the top of some mountain In Colorado on an engineering trip to the Desert Proving Grounds. We were calibrating A/F and spark on the fly and were making some changes. That’s how we did things at Pontiac. Best job I ever had. There ya go, long answer to a short question.
timbo,
Thanks for that really cool bit of insider history!
We’re you ever at the press previews? I was writing for a magazine in the 80’s and had a great experience at a Pontiac “short leads” event in Wisconsin. The last version of the Fiero was at the center of it.
I love it, the guys who build this stuff can be found here.
I was a big poncho fan, had a 69 and 70 GTO and 70 and 74 firebird.
Pontiac seamed like the fun guys. RA3, 4, HO, SD.
GREAT contribution! . Thanks for joining in with that!
Hay timbo
GM would have merged pontiac, olds, and saturn.
Couldn’t get past the POS division
Alan, no I was never invited to the press events at Pontiac. Guys like Carl Sheffer, Jill and Gary Witzenburg handled the press. I WAS ALWAYS WORKING. At the time, Pontiac “claimed to build excitement”. Here was the line up in that time period: Parisenne, 6000, T2000, J2000, Phoenix and Firebird. We didn’t even have exciting names. Lots of work to do. My first assignment when transferred to engineering from car assembly was to finish the design/release of the 301 turbo. This was supposed to be the 400 T/A performance replacement. This package went from approval to production in 14 months, which today is unheard of. The downside was Pontiac had never produced a turbo engine, and the LAYOUT WAS TOTALLY A BAD IDEA with a trubo designed for a truck. Sucking fuel through a carb with the fuel impinging on the compressor wheel creating resistance to it speeding up was STUPID. Being a farm boy from Iowa this was obvious, however, an influential (and very smart) manager would not agree to change it to a “blow through” due to concern of fuel squirting out the carb shaft seals and propensity for a “thermal event”, and we could not miss the 1980 launch and Indy Pace car opportunity. Some of the projects I had a big hand in were the creation of the STE, 1.8 J2000 turbo MPFI (first electronic MPFI speed density turbo ever at 91 HP/L, Pontiac/Brodix cyl heads for NASCAR sold through the Pontiac ad building mail room, SD4 super duty four cyl for 1984 Fiero pace car, midgets and baby grand national cars, Manhattan (integral block head), Power cube (integral inline 6 and 5 speed trans), truck inline 6/5/4 and too many more advanced engines that never were produced but many concepts and features were implemented over the years. When GM Powertrain was created, I was blessed with the engineering directorship of the Advanced Engine and Propulsion Systems for 8 years and then became the director if all gas engine development/calibration and validation for last 4 years before retiring. At our peak in advanced engines, we were designing and developing 3 all new engine concepts and many individual engine technologies a year. A very talented and skilled group that could do anything.
The group had a huge contribution to the LS engine, inline 6/5/4 including a turbo L5 for the Hummer 3 that should have gone into production, convincing the corporation of the value of step gear transmissions with more than 4 speeds, the value of inline 6 cylinder engines and all aluminum engines, finger follower OHC valve train, cylinder deactivation,cam phasing and all engine subsystem advancement for cost, quality, mass and efficiency. Today, all GM engines, pushrod and DOHC are conceptually identical in all the subsystems and merely sized for the application.
On a personal note back to the Chevy rivalry, before I even graduated from GMI, I had a 389 powered 54 Corvette. Talk about pissing the ” bowties” off. If you want to see my hot rod which was a Iowa barn find, go to the May 2014 Hot Rod issue, or google Tim Petersen 1937 Chevy 30CHVN.
Tim, thanks so much for sharing this terrific information! I love our readers!
Timbo is awesome
I’m guessing the 80s was a tough time
Very few cars in that time are still worth much. Quality, style, and performance weren’t important to the been counters. We always thought the idea of not allowing performance to rival the vet to be dumb in the extreme.
Timbo
What was the best engine that never happened
Alan, which rag were you writing for in the 80’s?
Van, to answer your question of which is the best engine, it depends on application (everyday use, pass car or truck, aircraft, marine, hot rod, etc) and criteria (cost, power density, durability, etc).
I favor and so do millions of others, the LS series which ranges from 4.8 – 7.0 L. We changed everything from the gen3 but the bore center spacing of 4.4″ (111.76 mm) and the rear crank seal . The chief obstructionist engineer was also changed which is a good story in itself. The cam was raised for more base circle, valve train layout is all in plane (no angle on pushrod), replicated ports and combustion chambers, deep skirt 6 bolt mains, inexpensive cylinder deactivation and cam phasing (dual equal and independent intake and exhaust) are available and easily implemented. What other engine can offer 500 reliable horsepower and get over 30 MPG in a Corvette? We had the data back in 1997 that the base engine could be warranted for a half a million miles if we wanted. Sounds crazy, but all heavy duty diesel engines are warranted in that range. In addition, you’d be amazed at what that engine cost is to produce. Note the aftermarket is buying LS crate engines with warranty for performance and hot rods rather than building an engine from scratch. That pretty much is a testament by real guys laying out their own money. Wait until you see what is coming after direct injection. We’re a long ways from the end of it’s life cycle. timbo
Timbo,
How about telling everyone about the aluminum chassis Fiero with the v8 that dusted the Corvette at the Milford Proving Grounds and then was ordered crushed, or the one with the Grand National engine?
gtjeff, sorry,I know nothing of the V8, Grand National or aluminum space frame Fieros. Where did you hear of these? Back in 1984, I had all of the experimental engine Fieros corralled, and even had to play musical chairs with them, shipping them between sites to keep them from the crushers. In 1985 I was reassigned when CPC was created to integrate the Chev and Pontiac L4 engine development groups and lost contact with the advanced vehicle development group. I think I would have heard of these vehicles if they really were created. If you are really interested I could dig around. The guy that might know is currently managing the Chevy COPO build center.
Like to hear about the hidden Fieros
You say multiple test cars with different engines where’s Ron Pratt and Barrett Jackson
How about a club
Fiero, Riatta, Allante, sky, solstice, crossfire, prowler,
You get the idea
Timbo,
Alcan built 2 alumunim chassis Fieros in 1986, the story of the one car that was ordered crushed has been posted on Pennocks Fiero Forum. If you take a look at the EV1 alum. space frame, it appears to have been derived from the Fiero program.
According to a Pennocks poster, the Fiero with the GN motor crashed into a garbage container. Ask your source about both cars.
timbo,
I was writing for “Auto-X” (correctly spoken as “Auto-Cross”) Magazine. The publication still exists; it was long ago renamed “Grassroots Motorsports”.
At the WI press preview, Pontiac had on display a complete Fiero front suspension. It was set up with electric power steering. Part of the spoken intro included the concept of GM selling the whole thing as a unit, with the market being hot-rodders and what we now call the resto-mod crowd. They were serious. It was explained to those listening that the geometry was so good, changes in spring and damping rates were all that would be needed to support a range of weights, as in lots of different engines sitting much closer than was the Fiero’s setup.
I took it upon myself to get in a really brisk drive down a country road in a V6 Formula with a 5-speed… I think making the ride-along engineer wish he was back at Design astride the chair in front of his desk.
And you are right about the dearth of real performers in those days. I took a LeMans (still can’t believe they used that great name on that crap import) for the shortest ride ever… it was horrid.
But maybe I impressed my ride-along a little, over and above the crease he left in the right seat. I was the ONLY guy who got to drive the prototype GP McLaren (with the 301 turbo???) out of everyone there, even those “name” guys from the high-zoot publications. We finished up by taking a different, higher-speed route with the latest TA. Relatively good power, but those cars… Well, I could see how so many met the reaper by going backwards into some fixed object at a silly rate of speed.
Van, I didn’t understand the Ron Pratte/BJ comment. I do know Ron, we were at his desert compound for his new years eve celebration. An unbelievable experience for car guys. I was also at his sand car repair shop today in Chandler chatting with his full time sand car mechanic that takes care of the fleet. BTW all of Pratte’s sand cars have LS engines. He told me there is sand in the oil every oil change and they just keep running. I was visibly shocked. I’m not surprised at the Alcan space frames, that project rings a bell. There was a lot of effort to make the Fiero great and the 1988’s were pretty good. Hadn’t heard the story about selling front end suspension modules in the aftermarket. I do have twin Fiero fuel tanks in my channeled hot rod, which was a perfect solution.
Alan, I hadn’t heard of that rag until now. Still writing? I assume you were talking about the Grand Prix McLaren turbo. No it was not a 301 turbo. Rich Oppman, who was in Pontiac planning at the time, commissioned that project out of frustration working with the “system”, less than 1000 were built. I gave them all my LA9 (aluminum 2.9L V6 turbo) drawings/models and I believe they used some of that design. I doubt that they addressed the week link which was the crankshaft and only advertised 205 HP out of the 3.1 which is pitiful for a turbo engine. My wife’s GXP Soltice is 260 HP out of a 2.0 L, much more respectful. One of the more exciting days was when we broke a LA9 turbo V6 crank at full load in a Pontiac dyno. The bottom end blew out, the flywheel and part of the crank hit the outside exit door and spun across the parking lot like a top. I then designed a forged crank but my pussy boss (x Chev ahole) would not let me order the tools for experimental parts. A few days later, I got a call from the Pontiac General Manager who had taken an experimental LA9 auto STE home and said he threw an accessory drive belt leaving a light on the way to work. Yup, broke another crank but not nearly as exciting. We sent our hook and another car. He pulled me into his office that afternoon and asked if we could fix it. I said it’s already done and ready to order experimental forged cranks (of course had no analysis to back that claim up). He then gave me the bad news that he wasn’t willing to burn a “chit” with the corporate guys downtown to force the engine program through. I was really disappointed but was impressed the big guy in the big office took the time to talk to me, a lowly design/development engineer. I remember him saying engine projects like these were important to keep guys like me from quitting. I said are you kidding, this is the best job in the world, and it was.
Timbo:
I’m curious why the Super Duty 4 in some form wasn’t the optional engine?? Even in mild form, it would out perform the 2.8 V6.
Do you know much about the SD4’s which were in the Indy Pace cars? I have been trying to figure out what configuration they were really running. I’ve ready that they may have had a CARB, other articles reference an over bored single injector, while others have said they have a dual TBI injection like the later 4.3L V6 trucks. I’m building my own SD4 for my Fiero and am wondering how close I can come to what they ran at Indy.
I would have thought Ron would buy any test mules that could be significant.
The Fiero had a resemblance to the BMW M-1 and looked to have great potential. Having driven both maybe not.
I had a tech school text book with a 68 firebird with a twin overhead cam v8. That was something we wanted to see. I remember John DeLorean had a Ram Air 5 in a GTO
It would be great to see these cars.
I’m sorry I ramble
Since you know Ron. It would be nice if someone could make car video’s that do more than show fluff.
I mean what technology made a Bugatti Type 35 and a Jaguar D-type special, engine, suspension etc.
As well as these Pontiacs.
The Stig / Mario, Michael Andretti driving these cars around laguna Seca.
Hay Ron, this knuckle head has a challenge for you. Instead of locking a collection of cars in you private collection, how about sponsoring something like this.
What would be the lap time of a 1953 Bently Contnental Type-R.
Anyway thanks for logging in.
Hi Timbo – I posted earlier, but not sure if you saw it.
I’m curious why the Super Duty 4 in some form wasn’t the optional engine?? Even in mild form, it would out perform the 2.8 V6.
Do you know much about the SD4’s which were in the Indy Pace cars? I have been trying to figure out what configuration they were really running. I’ve ready that they may have had a CARB, other articles reference an over bored single injector, while others have said they have a dual TBI injection like the later 4.3L V6 trucks. I’m building my own SD4 for my Fiero and am wondering how close I can come to what they ran at Indy.
Read more at http://barnfinds.com/v8-powered-pontiac-fiero/#lk6OZZPlI5OeVl2T.99
IowaJim. I did see and answer your post (I think). The SD4 parts were all low volume race parts and very expensive. Almost every part was unique except for a miscellaneous parts package that was available under a separate package. That would require considerable engineering expense (manpower and budget) that would be hard to recoup and make a business case, especially since a 60 degree “corporate V6” was available. You can engineer and tool a new car for about the same price as designing, developing, validating and certifying a new engine which takes 3-4 years. Engines are serious business and mistakes/warranty and recalls are very costly. The more conservative a company’s management is the less innovative and risk adverse they are regarding engines. A bad decision can sink a company like the International truck diesel after treatment and VW’s current diesel emissions cheating issue. It will be cheaper to buy back all the vehicles involved and scrap them than to fix them in the field.
The breakdown for an engine lineup in a car other than a mini van should go like this. 60-70% of the customers have no idea what engine is in the car, just like you probably have no idea what type or displacement of compressor is in your refrigerator. Therefore the base engine should be an adequate performer, lost cost and good value. 30-35% are “enthusiasts”, bench racers or just want more that will opt for an optional engine, and then there are the “enthusiast fringe”. Often early adopters, cost is less or no object, or want the fastest/badest and actually know a little. These packages also get in inordinate amount of press coverage which helps the brand and gets potential customers into the dealership, which is the first step in selling a vehicle. So, the ideal lineup for the Fiero was the path we were on (at the time), with the Iron Duke base (even though I thought that engine to be a POS, cheapened up and lightened up to the max), 2.8L 60 degree V6 iron block aluminum head MPFI optional engine, and the LA9 2.9L 60 degree aluminum V6 turbo as the performance option. Look at the current Cadillac engine lineups with the V series being the performance option, or Corvette lineup or the Dodge lineup with the Hellcat being the killer performance option.
Yes I know pretty much everything about the SD4’s that were in the actual Pace Cars and quite a lot about the Indy Pace car replica package that was sold to the public. I am originally from Iowa too near Fort Dodge. Where are you located? Leave me your phone number and we’ll talk as long as you want. timbo
Fiero Factory is a first class outfit. If anyone wants a V8 Fiero done right, this is the one to buy. Most are butcher jobs.
For some reason we have gotten into the bad habit of calling a discontinued car an orphan at car shows. This type of identification began when there were the Big Three automakers (GM Ford & Chrysler) and all the rest were Independents: Nash, Crosley, Studebaker, Hudson, etc. Some companies combined but eventually went out of business such as Studebaker-Packard. Those who went out of business had their remaining cars called Orphans. And that name has always stuck and rightly so, as the parent company was gone. DeSotos weren’t called orphans when they stopped production in the 60s; neither were Edsels. They were not Orphans as the parent companies were alive and well, still to this day in business. When Plymouth, Olds and Pontiac were pulled from production, some young ignorant journalist who knew nothing of this history called them orphans in an article. Then the copycats came along. Well boys, I’m here to tell you that any remnant of an auto company that is still in business is not an orphan. The parent company is still alive & kicking. Auto shows should not have an Orphan class so that your Trans Am is in a class with a Crosley and a Nash. Those classes should be referred to as Independents.
Jeff –
I think you are correct to draw a distinction between a company that went out of business and a marque discontinued by a company that continues to exist. But then Hudson is not an orphan either, because AMC still exists as part of Fiat Chrysler. Even the Kaiser nameplate lives on as Kaiser Industries.
But in the end this may be a distinction without meaning to the owners and fans of discontinued and out of business brands. Pontiacs are just as unavailable today as Studebaker, REO, and Hupmobiles. Doesn’t that put them all in the same category? Maybe the term “orphan” simply needs to be replaced with another label for “car brands no longer manufactured.”
Hudson, AMC, what’s in a name.
Most car company names belong to someone, BMW owns Triumph.
The idea that Bugatti is the same company that Ettore built would be silly
Car companies are built by a guy with drive, dedication, and passion, not a name
Do I understand it correctly that this is no longer a mid engined car but now a rear engined using the FWD engine and transaxle from the Caddy?
Fiero always had a front wheel drive setup in the back, no matter 4 or 6cyl from the factory.
Jimbo, a mid engine car has the engine located in from of the rear wheel centerline. A rear engine has the engine crankshaft rearward of the rear wheel centerline. timbo
There was a gent in Kansas City that developed a kit to drop a small block chevy in fieros back in the day. I remember reading it in hotrod magazine. I also recall him stating that there was enough room for a big block.
E.M. The issue is a compatible FWD trans. Engine length along the crank center line is almost never the packaging issue. Other issues with a mid engine vehicle are engine cooling and clean air for the intake.
Holy f@€*balls. This just seems insane. I want it….
I think the exterior design has aged incredibly well! I’d love to take for a spin especially one with a V8! A shame about the automatic though.
Was the V8 conversion ever executed with a manual?
why shoot them both?
The beauty of the 4.9L Caddy engine is that it bolts up to any Fiero transmission or to most other GM FWD transmission of that era. Most people stick with the auto because it’s easier to just just the caddy transmission versus having a custom flywheel drilled and adding a clutch. Popular now is the G6 six speed so it is very possible to have a V8 and a manual transmission. That’s what I have in my car and I converted it from auto to manual in the process.
Photos, or we think you’re making it up…
;-)
Here is my build thread on Pennock’s Fiero Forum, with lots of pictures.
http://www.fiero.nl/forum/Forum1/HTML/044137-3.html#p88
This will take you right to where the engine swap started. When I first had it done I had the caddy 4 speed auto because the car was an auto, but a couple of years later I had the engine dropped out and converted the car to 6 speed manual.
Cool pics want to hear more feed me
Do you have video or finished picks
Tell us about the performance. How does it compare with the last c4 vetts
I have finished pictures in my build thread if you read through all the pages. I “finished” it twice. Once in the “A” configuration as an auto, then it went back in the shop to be converted to a 6 speed and I added vertical doors, and mirrors from an an Oldsmobile Aurora, in what I call the “B” configuration.
The Caddy 4.9L was rated at 200hp, but in the Fiero with it’s shorter exhaust and lack of power steering might do a little better. At 2600 pounds that makes for a quick car comparable to an early C4. The 4.9L Fieros generally run about 14.5 in the quarter mile. Eventually I would like to drop in an LS3 and it would be comparable to a C5.
This thing sounds really cool
We should remind everyone tuning in
To maintain the cars balance
If it goes 200 mph it needs to stop from 200 mph
The tires need to go 200 the suspension needs to maintain control at 200
I love the smell of burning rubber in the morning, sounds like a trip to the tire store.
People in the Fiero world are well aware of it’s limitations, especially the 84-87 regarding the suspension. The 88s start out with better hardware, but the C4 12″ brakes are a common upgrade. Coilover suspension with stiffer springs are usually warranted as well. It’s very easy to get carried away and spend more than a C5 while upgrading a Fiero, and then you might as well get the C5. I almost wish I had done that.
I like it. I have a buddy who has a “monster miata” a 5.0 powered conversion he ordered somewhere that does them. Scary fast.I drove a few times. I am now a member off “hammer down anonymous”.. Lol
This one is an easy “YES” from me!
The trick is in the 4.9, Aluminum, Caddy, pre-Northstar, motor. (And you don’t have to stop with OEM on that motor)
And the transaxle that went with it! Just get a manual valve body for it and have so much fun!
Oh, the look of someone’s face when they realize, that’s not your grandpas Fierro!
Shame I can’t bend like I used to. Although, once your inside one, it’s a good fit.
That’s why I stick with drop tops! They’re only a problem in the rain, lol!
I too, also want! Not bad money either, IMO.
I am not a fan of the HT 4100 circa 1982. TBI, head gasket issues and only 135 hp.
Don’t get your hopes up on the Fiero Factory. The website hasn’t been updated in about 6 years. I’ve been by several times in the past few months and it looks to be closed now.
To answer a couple questions the V8 SBC,N*, 4.9, LS4 have been used have all been done with a Man. Some use the F23 or F40 transmissions and yes with the V8 it still is a mid-engine car, and only the 84-87 used the front suspension in the back, the 88 had it’s own much improved multilink design.
And…. The front suspension was significantly improved as well. The final year vehicles may have looked pretty much the same, but they certainly did not drive the same. Gone was the terminal understeer, which would formerly kick in well below the normally expected adhesion limit of the tires.
I was fortunate enough to attempt autocross in an earlier car, and have my negative opinion later erased by driving an ’88. Too late good, too soon gone.
3 more photos added to the listing, including 1 of the engine bay…. not much can be seen, it is kind of tight in there! :-) Plus, a shot of the front trunk. Appears to be a big radiator, not much space up there either. No spot for the groceries, or the golf clubs. =:^O
Guy still has the car. Won’t budge off $8000.
Interesting history. Yes, the 4.9 is alive and well, and living inside of many Fieros. I opted to swap the 4T60E transaxle for a New Venture T550 (essentially a late Getrag 282.) The gearing is not ideal, since the 4.9 is a torque monster. (Some people call them “tractor motors”. So be it.) It’s still a crapload of fun to drive. I embellished mine a bit by adding the intake setup from an 89 Allante 4.5. General consensus is that it’s probably worth ~220 HP and 300+ LBFT, although I’ve never dynoed it.
BTW, the Fiero Factory is still in business. They have shortened the name to TFF Auto, but they are still going strong.
Thanks to all the other posters, here. Especially Timbo. It’s always interesting to hear more Fiero history, from the mouth (and hands) of those who helped to create it.