Why did so many people like the G-Body Monte Carlos?

[86 TR]

Ive owned 2 1986 Monte Carlo SS's and 2 Turbo Buicks. Ive always liked the monte carlos. Yes, it was really pathetic for performance though. But I enjoyed driving both of them. Then fast forward a few years I bought my first TR. Ive never looked back since. I just love the look of an all Black Buick rolling down the street. It looks very intimidating. There is one thing I have never understood. The 1984 Hurst/Olds Cutlass had the lightning rod shifters, bigger 8.5 rear, and a anemic 307!!!!??? Why put all the goodies in a G-body and then way underpower it.?? I do like the look of em though.

I know of somebody around my area that has a 1987 Monte Carlo SS with the LC2 drivetrain. Pretty cool car.

 

[SVORay]

There is one thing I have never understood. The 1984 Hurst/Olds Cutlass had the lightning rod shifters, bigger 8.5 rear, and a anemic 307!!!!??? Why put all the goodies in a G-body and then way underpower it.?? I do like the look of em though.

Yes sir, I agree.

It was a sharp car with tons of fun stuff but no balls.

I simply can't help but wonder if fuel economy had an effect on performance in the G-bodies. During the late 70's and early 80's they had an oil embargo and a fuel shortage. This may explain why all the Camaros, Gbodys, and GM trucks came with 305's? The GN was probaly able to fly low under the raidar simply because it used a V6 instead of a V8. It probaly got the same or better fuel economy than a 305 as long as you stayed out of the boost. So maybe they never went WOT in a TR during testing or used the numbers off the N/A 3.8L? It's just a thought? I also heard manufatures has to pay a gas gusler tax on cars like the Vette and why they don't produce a ton each year? So producing more hp in their other lines like the G bodies, would increase their tax? It's just a thought.

 

[dave82]

Just read my previous post. Didn't mean to bad mouth the monte carlo for those of you who do own one. But as someone said earlier its just that so many people mistake my car for one that I have almost started to not like the car.
Still, I would take one over an import any day. Its still a solid car and does have a muscle car look to it.

By the way, the low 11 sec. white one posted above would definately kill my car in a race.

 

[GNBRETT]

Personally I think the Monte SS is one of the ugliest cars ever built. Two each his own. If we all liked the same car we'd all be driving the same car. Whatever floats ones boat.....:tongue:

 

[Scott Long]

Monte SS isn't much to write home about in stock form, however they are more comfortable than an F-Body or Mustang. Especially if you have to ride in the back seat. Back in high school two of my friends had SS Monte's. Most guys had 3rd gen f-body's, lots of fox stangs, I had an SC T-Bird, and I really like the Monte SS because it was similar in size and comfort to my SC. Sure I could blow it's doors off, but when we'd all ride around I'd always ride in the SS if I wasn't driving my car because I just didn't fit in the F-body's well.

One friend took all the tape off his black SS and had it repainted, nice set of polished centerlines, and then put a 406 in it. That mother****er was bad news. No one could hang with that car. Nitrous wasn't popular back then, you had to do it all with cubic inches. The other friend kept the 305 in his maroon SS but he had some chrome American Racing wheels on it. I always liked them but we all wanted GN's just couldn't afford them. Hell they all thought I was loaded driving an SC because mine was the newest, most features, and had the highest top speed. I could clip most stangs and 3rd gen's but couldn't hang with the 406.

When I was a senior my buddy Tom traded his Fiero for an 86 SS with a 350 4-bolt in it with 4.10 gears. I had just bought my 2nd SC and this one was an auto (had a shift kit and a K&N filter at the time). From a roll he'd walk away from me, but from a dead stop I'd beat him in the 1/4 mile.

I would put an SS in my garage but I'd peel the vinyl decals and **** off it, all black, tinted windows, and pro-stars. Then the little 305 would come out and I'd like to put in an LS1/2 or if money was no object LS7.

I really liked the Hurst Olds and 442's. But like it was said the 307 is probably weaker than the 305 Monte's. One kid at school thought he was hot **** with his cutlass supreme 307 with cragar ss wheels on it and glass packs. It sounded good, but I showed him the tail lights quite a few times.

 

[rwrows]

the montes were/are definately nice cars. they lasted one more year than the buicks, no? i have both a monte ss and a TR. my monte is not slow. it runs high 10s. I think I like them equally. didn't a handful of montes come with 350s? the few that had the 350s had a little bit of balls. i bet they would run in the 14s with a few bolt-ons. i don't think the montes are ugly at all, and I know alot of us get asked if our cars are monte carlos, but in fact, i have never been asked that. everyone thinks my car is a grand national, even though it's a T. anyway, i love 'em both. here they are:

 

[TURBOPOWERED68]

I can't believe you guys missed it.

The ONLY REASON THE MONTE was the hotter car is.

The center console
You know when you are driving and want to rest your arm and you can't because the dam arm rest is so dam low on the Buicks.

 

[TURBOPOWERED68]

Rrwrows

the Monte never came with a 350

 

[rwrows]

Rrwrows

the Monte never came with a 350

apparently they may have in mexico. i just posted the question on the monte ss forum: quick question about ss engines - Monte Carlo SS Message Board

 

[TURBOPOWERED68]

Just some parts (at the parts stores) book had a listing for it.
Every single “350” I chased down had a “HO 305” and Boy did I do a lot of chasing.

I guess I didn’t chase enough.

 

[psycho6cyl]

Montes..

the montes were/are definately nice cars. they lasted one more year than the buicks, no? i have both a monte ss and a TR. my monte is not slow. it runs high 10s. I think I like them equally. didn't a handful of montes come with 350s? the few that had the 350s had a little bit of balls. i bet they would run in the 14s with a few bolt-ons. i don't think the montes are ugly at all, and I know alot of us get asked if our cars are monte carlos, but in fact, i have never been asked that. everyone thinks my car is a grand national, even though it's a T. anyway, i love 'em both. here they are:

hahhaha you cant fool me. Thats the same car you just put different rims on it... jk.lol... The body lines on a Monte dont do it for me. The front curves down back comes up... The only ones i like are the early 80s w the 3.8 Turbo motor (before black motors) oTher than that not my cup of tea. As long as its GM and or American. No one ever called mine a Monte yet....

 

[SVORay]

I can't believe you guys missed it.

The ONLY REASON THE MONTE was the hotter car is.

The center console
You know when you are driving and want to rest your arm and you can't because the dam arm rest is so dam low on the Buicks.

Thats no lie


You never really use them but the gears in the dash was cool. My girlfriend asked once, how do you know what gear you're in...I'm a profressional LOL

 

[2GNS4ME]

I remember when I was in highschool a older gentelmen and his son thought there stock SS was fast and gave me a ride needless to say I was not that impressed then I gave them a ride in my T-TYPE.....haha the look on their face and they were holding on like they were in a roller coaster. Ah the good old days.

 

[thepezking639]

remember 85?

as a proud monte carlo SS owner, no car has a special place in the darkest corner of my heart like the GN/t-type. its not that i think they are ugly, or slow, or even bad cars. the GN shows potential for the monte carlo. in its stock form the only thing the monte has over the GN is a better interior. (i think the monte is a better looking car, but thats my opinion) if GM would have put a real motor in the monte (say an aluminum headed TPI 350) and backed it up with a 4 or 5 spd manual we wouldnt be having this discussion. in short, i hate the car, but respect them to death.

the one thing i bring up that GN owners hate is a performance test that i found in popular mechanics in 1985: Monte Carlo SS 16.24@83.41 to the GN's 16.43@83.37, then Buick intercooled the GN.. and it was no contest. another thing to keep in mind was that the GN continually got R&D where the monte remained virtually unchanged.

rather than whine and complain about the GN, it has inspired me to build a 5l turbo motor, which is slowly coming together in my garage.

and just like you guys im tired of people thinking my car is something its not, which is why im ordering the plate " NO GN"

 

[87 355 TPI]

First post from a long time reader:

Being the owner of a 1987 SS, and wanting a Grand National....I don't understand how you can LOVE one car, and HATE the other. I have always wanted a T-type Regal...but in Oklahoma, those are the rarest of the G bodies. About the only thing you can come by is beater Cuttys. Personally, I like the style of all G-body cars, and I like the uniqueness of the SS. Non-SS, Cutlass, Grand Prix and Regals all look similar (i.e. you can tell they are built on the same platform.

And you have to remember who the Monte Carlo (well really most G-bodies) was built for. They weren't built for teenagers or drag racers. They were built for a more mature audience that wanted a touch of luxury and a somewhat sporty car. The reason Chevy didn't put a bigger motor in the Monte Carlo was because with it weighing close to the same a a f-body, would you sacrifice a back seat when you could get a much more comfortable car with similar performance? GM did it to keep innerbrand competition down.

And as far as a stock GN blowing the doors off of a stock SS...Here is an article titled "Modern Muscle" from the July 1985 Car and Driver comparing the GN, SS, and 442...

Base Price/Price as Tested:
GN: 13,565/16,289
SS: 11,608/14,430
442: 11,7445/14,366

HP/TQ
GN: 200/300
SS: 180/245
442: 180/245

0-60, 0-100, 1/4 mi (mph)
GN: 7.5, 22.9, 15.7 (87)
SS: 7.8, 25.6, 15.9 (86)
442: 9.1, 31.3, 16.6 (83)

Granted, .2 seconds is more distance than it sounds, I don't think it justifies "blowing the doors off". I think, when it came down to it...it was a matter of styling preference and cash at hand.

Oh, one more thing...I think that it is hilarious that you guys get comments about your "Monte Carlos" because I get comments on my "Grand National" all the time. I think that people are just stupid when it comes to knowing their cars!

 

[tntdiablo]

that is a nice silver monte,i had one exactly like it,but it had a 468 big block

 

[thepezking639]

and as an answer to why people were buying SS's instead of regals, i can tell you why my father bought an SS brand new in 85 rather than a GN, in his words " the interior of the GN blows" plus when he took a GN out for a test drive it would hardly break a tire, and that did not impress him. plus its a turbo motor and the reliability for turbo motors was crap in the 80's. then his friend who had a hot air GN with a performance chip, more boost, and exhaust and intake, offered to take him for a ride, needless to say my dad wasnt impressed, later after he purchased the Monte Carlo, he raced his friend with his GN and beat him by a half a car.

with this statement, im not saying monte carlos are faster than all GN's so dont take it that way, im saying in that specific circumstance the monte was faster than the GN.

but thats the reason why my dad bought an SS rather than a GN.

im glad my dad made the right choice.

(ive been in a hot air car, and got to drive a sub 30k mi intercooled 87. and i wasnt impressed either, i must admit the first time i beat a GN with my SS with a warmed over 350 i felt some satisfaction, then realized that stock GN's aren't exactly fast.)

but to each their own, the reason why monte carlo's are getting popular now is because they are good platforms for drag cars that arent overvalued like GN's are.

 

[kh440]

The SS has always been kinda "love it or hate it", and even then some colors looked better than others. You also have to remember the "win on Sunday sell on Monday" adage: As the SS came into nascar (back when they could sorta still be called "stock" cars) everybody who was kicking butts in the Regal had switched to the Monte by 83-84. Another thing in the Monte's favor was the fact that you could drop just about any bowtie engine you wanted into it and have some real fun, whereas very few people really understood the turbo 6 engines at that time.

 

[acoen]

I would have to say that the name Chevrolet had a lot to do with it. Chevrolet was running strong in Nascar in the mid to late 80's. Price was another, back then a Buick regal T or T-Type was more expesive and considered a grandmas car, TR performance or not. I like all G-Bodies....Best looking (aside from the GN)? Grey/Silver or Burgundy/Silver 84-87 Olds 442.

 

[DragulaGN]

My favorite Monte was the Aerocoupe.. I wonder what an Aerocoupe rear window would look like on a Regal? Pontiacs Grand Prix 2+2 looked awsome