This 1980 Chevrolet Monte Carlo has been stuck in our browser history for months now trying to get our attention and we've finally given in. The problem is coming up with something to write about it since we've already eviscerated these homely little bombs. Alright, 1980 Chevrolet Monte Carlo, entertain us.
On paper, we should like this car if not love it. A reasonably sized, V-8 powered, two-door sedan modeled after, even if pretentiously so, an American design icon. An icon in and of itself that was based on pretense even if buyers had no idea that it was.
We don't like these cars, in fact, we despise them much, in the same way, we dislike our high school yearbook photos and 4th-grade pictures with Santa. These are the cars mom would have bought us with all the best of intentions in the world because she thought them better to drive than the big brutes that came before them. She'd say, "at least it's got a V-8 like you want". Yes. Mom. Thanks. Again, she'd mean well but would have no idea that the Chevrolet 267 cubic inch V-8 was even less desirable than the 229 cubic inch Chevrolet V-6. Dad, of course, would have had our back saying that he wanted to get us a 1977 Monte Carlo with the 350 four barrel but "mom" overruled him. Thanks, pop.
On the block at $6,999, we'd love to know who would spend that kind of money on this. Seriously. While it could be an interesting first car for a teenager to beat up, seven grand is better spent on who knows what else. Ten-year-old Camry or Accord? How about a nice, gently used 2006 V-6 Mustang? Even the most sentimental of people we know would be allergic to parting with that much money to put their first car back in the garage. It has only 23,000 miles on the odometer so it would appear it's priced as an old car in very good condition more so than as a "vintage" car in great shape. Again, that money for this makes no sense on any number of levels.
The essential problem with these cars and all of General Motors half-baked 1978 intermediates is that, much like their overly heralded 1977 full-size cars, is that they didn't break any ground technologically. They really were nothing more than shrunken versions of what came before them. So, in essence, they were really were nothing more than rehashes of the same-old, same-old that GM had been pushing out since the late 1940's. Sad thing is that when GM did attempt to do something original they failed miserably. For more on this subject please read our blogs about GM's X-bodies . Check them out here and here.
We've discussed many times before how certain designs need an appropriately sized canvas in order for them to work aesthetically and, in the case of GM's 1978 vintage "A bodies", ergonomically. Look, we're not designers or engineers; we're consumers who are rabid fans of American automobiles. We can only express our feelings about what is rather than even recommend what should have been; these cars were painfully bad outside and inside. For instance, this is allegedly a six-passenger car but who in their right mind would ever sit in the middle of the front seat in one of these? All of GM's "A's" from 1978-1987 shared this most miserable of interior layouts.
Questionable styling, a cramped interior and this gutless, 267 cubic inch, 115 horsepower V-8; the hits just keep on coming. Well, at least it's not the Olds 350 diesel but the 267 always begged the question, why did Chevrolet bother with this engine? The only thing we can muster is that back then marketing a car with a V-8 was more appealing to many buyers than a V-6. Made no sense whatsoever given that the Chevrolet V-6 provided somewhat better performance and better fuel economy. Pontiac and Oldsmobile also made similar sized engines during this time period. Buick spared the ignominy of having to make a small V-8. That's why you find Olds and Pontiac V-8's under the hood of early '80's Buicks. Of all of these very small GM V-8's, all of which displaced between 260 and 267 cubic inches, allegedly, the 267 is the most upgradable of them all. If that means they're the easiest and least expensive to yank out and replace with a junkyard 350 from a late '80's Silverado then have it but that's not the case. There are a number of YouTube videos out there of built up 267's.
Have we sufficiently trashed this car so we can expunge it from our browser's history? Not sure but one thing is for sure, we feel confident in stating our case that a 1978-1980 Chevrolet Monte will never find a place in our Jay Leno-esqe, multi-floored fantasy garage. Love to chat with the person who plunks down seven large for this thing too. After all, as they say in the car business, there's an ass for every seat. Here's the listing.
No comments:
Post a Comment