1979 Chevrolet 3.3-Liter V-6 - But Wait There's More

Newsflash - people try to sell the craziest things on Facebook Marketplace. Take this 3.3-liter, Chevrolet V-6 for instance. While its $275 asking price is fair, what would someone do with it? Maybe I could swap it onto my 38-inch, Craftsman tractor. I would if I could. Some people do nuttier stuff than that. 

Chevrolet came out with these little engines in 1978 and stuffed them in their newly downsized, intermediate Malibu and El Camino; this came out of a 1979 El Camino. Making just 95-horsepower and 160-foot pounds of torque for 1978, 94 and 154 respectively for 1979, Chevrolet boasted it made more horsepower and torque per cubic inch or liter than the inline six it replaced. How's that for spinmeistering. What's more, they claimed it shared many "design efficiencies" with the seminal Chevrolet small block. 

Based on the seminal Chevrolet "small block" V-8, this 90-degree V-6 shared the SBC's stroke but had a teeny-tiny bore. To that extent it's a unique engine. With regards to "design efficiency", many SBC  parts bolt onto and into it. For 1979, Chevrolet added two-cylinders to the block creating the almost equally unknown or forgotten, Chevrolet 267-cubic inch V-8. 

Right into the teeth of the second gas crunch, Chevrolet pulled the plug on this for 1980; the 267 V-8 slogged on through 1982. They replaced this with a bored out version displacing 229-cubic inches (3.8-liter). Making all of ten more horsepower, its calling card was its significant increase in torque although anything with that mill would hardly be considered "powerful". Then again, my little tractor most certainly would be. 

But wait, there's more. Many believe the late, great Chevrolet 4.3-liter V-6 is a Chevy 350-cubic inch V-8 with less two cylinders. That might be mathematically correct, but in reality, the 4.3 is a larger bore 229 V-6. 

1976 Chevrolet Monte Carlo - Big Luxury

The AMC Pacer from the "Wayne's World" movies recently made headlines when it sold at the Mecum Auction for an incredible $71,500. I never "got" the joke of the two Wayne's World movies, although I find Mike Myers and Dana Carvey brilliants comedians, and I also fail to appreciate why an AMC Pacer was cast as the "Mirth Mobile". If the producers were looking for a vehicle that oozed the '70's in buckets, for us that were there, albeit I was but a wee-little-nipper, nothing said "Nixon-Watergate-Petrocks-Gerald Ford-Discotheques-Jimmy Carter, "Three's Company" and "The Love Boat" like a 1973-1977 Chevrolet Monte Carlo. What's more, this 1976 Monte Carlo should make headlines like the "Mirth Mobile" if it retails for anywhere near its absurd asking price of $19,500. 

I read recently that with the "chip shortage" inhibiting new car production, used car values have increased by some forty percent over the course of The Pandemic. For whatever reason that inflation has also trickled down to the "classic car market". Tell me why that is, please. Chop forty percent off the asking price of this car and you get a more reasonable $11,700. Still a lot of money for a rental-grade, bone stripper, 95,000-mile, 1976 Monte Carlo with a "305", but far easier on my stomach. Imagine what it would be worth if it was painted blue and had flame decals on the front fenders. Party on. 

Opinions differ as to what was officially the first "personal luxury car" but many say, me included, that Ford's 1958, four-passenger Thunderbird was the first. Followed by the Pontiac Grand Prix in 1962, Buick Riviera in 1963 and, subsequently, the Oldsmobile Toronado in 1966 and Cadillac Eldorado in 1967. However, it wasn't until a redesigned, mid-sized Pontiac Grand Prix debuted for 1969 that the market for these types of cars really took off. Chevrolet followed suit in 1970 with their first Monte Carlo. 

When General Motors rebooted their intermediate line for 1973 and rolled out their famous "Colonnade's", they were called that because of the pillar or column set behind the driver's door on the coupes and in the middle of the car on four-door models and wagons, the Monte Carlo was the most outlandish if not polarizing of them all. Allegedly an exaggeration of the "suitcase fender" design first seen on 1970-1972 Monte Carlo's, you either "got" these cars or thought they were as hideous perhaps as some think the AMC Pacer was. Many loved them, however, seeing how well they sold. Incidentally, the bulging, "suitcase fenders" were meant to evoke the spirt of classic cars from the 1930's. 

If that seems far-fetched to you, well, keep in mind at the time, the "1930's" were only some forty years prior to when these cars made their ostentatious debut. To put things in perspective, this being 2022, forty years "ago" would be 1982. Are you feeling old yet? 

In addition to the swoopy fenders, which I adore in case you're wondering, the Monte Carlo's triumphantly long hood is also a calling card of these beautiful monsters. Which, again, are supposed to be "mid-sized" cars. Note how big that radiator shroud is in front of that tiny, small-block Chevy. These cars were built on the 116-inch wheelbase that also underpinned the station wagon version of GM's new-for-'73 intermediates. However, rather than put all the extra space into the passenger cabin, designers put it in front of the firewall. Again, you either get this or you don't. To those of us of a certain vintage, "big-hood" means "big-luxury". 

In this seller's market there is something to be said for used cars appreciating. Our 1977 Corvette has finally seen some decent lift of late but not to the tune of what this overpriced Monte is going for. I wouldn't pay half the asking price for this, but I can't fault the seller for asking that much. 

I could, on the other hand, take exception to someone paying that much for this much in the same way I want to examine the head of the person who dropped more than $75,000, after taxes and fees, on the "Mirth Mobile". 

1972 Chevrolet Nova - Almost Criminal

Stumbled across this 1972 Chevrolet Nova recently and it brought me back. Way back. Not sure when exactly as some memories don't line up chronologically for me anymore. Funny how that happens as you get older. Details once so crystal clear to you suddenly begin to fade. 

Anyway, I was dating a girl named Regina through my senior year of high school and freshman and sophomore years of college and sometime during that time her older sister Sandy and her husband Wayne offered to sell me their Nova for, are you sitting down? $75. 

Even in 1982 or 1983 that was the deal of a lifetime. And, of course, I didn't take them up on it. It looked just like this '72 here save for that super-rare and strange optional "Sky Roof". Fun facts, the Skyroof was an odd, quasi-convertible top meets a massive sunroof and was only offered on 1972 and 1973 Chevy Nova's. Just over 10,000 or so were ever sold making this one here quite rare. Anyhoo, back to Sandy's Nova. 

They wanted to get rid of it because it was a hassle to park it where they lived. Parking then as now was a premium in the overcrowded commune like community of Long Beach, New York on Long Island. Many times they'd have to park one of their two vehicles upwards of a mile from their apartment. Better to have just one car to worry about. Only having one car would save on insurance, shoes and sneakers too.  

No surprise, it was far from perfect. Rear quarter panels were rusted through exposing the trunk, the finish was all but gone (like on this one) and the interior was torn up. Dash had cracks in it too. I don't remember how many miles were on it, but it had a lot of wear for a car that at the time was just ten or eleven years old. Then again, years ago cars didn't age nearly as well as they do today. Says the guy who uses a twenty-year old car with almost a quarter-million miles on it as a daily driver. 

What I really liked about it was how it rode and handled. Although it had Chevrolet's 307 cubic-inch V-8 like this car and not a "350", it had far more "go" than my Comet had. Way smoother too. Despite it having a funky, "when-is-this-thing-going-to-shift" two-speed Powerglide. The muffler was shot so it seemed as though it had a lot more power than it actually did. Sounded great too. Why didn't I pull the trigger?

Frankly, I've never been the biggest fan of these cars. Anything "Chevy Nova" to be honest. Too small while at the same time being too big, in my humblest of opinions, they have little of the design magic that many Bill Mitchell era designs have. And the safety-bumper era Nova's (1973-1979) look as clumsy as my Comet did. I also didn't think it that much of an upgrade from my shit-box Comet. Perhaps if it was in better shape but as it was, the move would have been lateral. 

In the end, Sandy and Wayne couldn't even give it away. After I rebuffed their offer, they said they'd let me have it for nothing. Save for the $1 they had to charge me for it to make the sale official. I politely declined. Again. They offered the same deal to others, and no one took them up on it either. The poor little Nova sat unloved. They eventually junked it. Seems almost criminal in retrospect. 

1976 Chevrolet Monza 2+2 - Things Get Worse Before They Get Better

Young and older me has mixed emotions about General Motors new-for-1975 "H-bodies" because I felt they all looked like the Camaro and Firebird's homely half-siblings. Those new "H's" being the Chevrolet Monza 2+2, Oldsmobile Starfire and Buick Skyhawk whom all shared the same chassis, wheelbase and much DNA with, of all things, the Chevrolet Vega.

I'm fairly alone with that sentiment given they were lauded for their styling by the press and even the late, great, John DeLorean whom was such a fan of the Monza 2+2 in particular that he called it an "Italian Vega"; he believed it resembled the lines of a Ferrari GTC\4. Err, if you say so, JD.

Chevrolet also peddled a Monza formal roofed Monza "Town Coupe" that was little more than it was - a portly Vega. Curiously, for 1975, Pontiac didn't get one of the new "H's" but got a Vega clone they called "Astre". More GM oddness, Chevrolet continued to sell the Vega along side the Monza through 1977. Come 1978 the Pontiac Astre was replaced by one of these fastbacks they called "Sunbird".

I can't for the life of me recall why it was I test drove a 1976 Chevrolet Monza "2+2" in the summer of 1983 but I did and I'm half-embarrassed to say that I loved it. Seriously. The handling, the braking, the maneuverability, the power of its factory V-8 engine. Crazy, I know. But understand that I was coming out of a shot-to-death 1974 Mercury Comet and my father's oafish '72 Cadillac so, by comparison, that little Monza was a world class athlete.

Despite everything it had to offer, even if I liked it's styling it was was just too damn small for the macho-man-boy I pretended to be who was dead set on getting a "man's car"; that meaning big. No sub-compact for me, please. Give me beef. And a big, fatty slab of it too. By the way, that big car I eventually got was the automobile love of my life, a...drumroll, please...1975 Chrysler Cordoba. Funny, the older I get, the more youthful my taste in cars has become. Call me Benjamin Button.

If I had to do it all over again, would I have gotten the Monza instead of the Cordoba? Oh, hell no. But I think I'd be far more discriminatory with regards to overall vehicle performance than I was.  Thing is, back in the early '80's, cars that could handle, stop and really go were few and far between. Throw in a car that had to be "cool" and that narrowed choices more so. Today it's a beautiful thing that performance is a commodity but back in the early '80's, the only things that a kid could afford that could do anything where small cars that were, for the most part, under powered and Ford Pinto dowdy. Say what you will, my Cordoba guzzled cool as much as it guzzled gas. If you found a Chevrolet Monza cool you'd have to explain why it was to someone. And once you start explaining you're losing.

To this day I've never warmed to these cars although I do recall fondly the seat-of-the-pants thrill of that little Monza stuffed with a V-8. Imagine if it had the Wankel. I'm a little dismayed to read contemporary road test reviews of the Monza V-8 and find it did zero to sixty in almost thirteen and half seconds. I guess I had an even more impoverished childhood than I thought possible.

GM ditched the Vega after 1977 and they built these through 1980. There was no 1981 model as GM cleared showroom space for a spring 1981 introduction of the 1982 front-wheel-drive "J-bodies" flag-shipped by the Chevrolet Cavalier and of course, the Cadillac Cimarron.

Whomever it was who first said that things get worse before they get better really knew what they were talking about.