1982 Chevrolet Monte Carlo - The End is Near

These were never quite the apple of my eye although I wouldn't kick an '84-'87 (non-Aero coupe) Monte Carlo SS out of my garage. Still, you don't see these every day even at car shows so let's take a minute or to kick it's fourteen-inch wheels , dry-rotted tires and dorky AF wheel covers. 

Us "spotters" have a hard time with these because Chevrolet did little year-over-year to distinguish one model year from another. I tried to check the VIN but it's sun blasted away but based on what I know about these cars and no CHMSL this is for certain a 1981-1985.

 

I could call the number painted on the windshield to find out for sure but what's the point of that? If I was a betting girl I'd say it's an '82. 

From the looks of it you would never know there's just 79,000 miles on it's thirty-nine year old ticker; this is one tired looking automobile. I should have taken pictures of the front tires; they show signs of a front end seriously out of  alignment. The seats appear ok but the dash, carpet and headliner are shot to pieces and the exterior speaks for itself. 

I didn't see any rust on the body so it does have that going for it but I didn't peak underneath. "Pennsylvania cars" tend to be much cleaner than Ohio cars so they go for a bit of a premium over here but holy smokes, $6,000? That asking price has more to do with the current over-inflated used car market than about the car itself. 

Seriously, do people actually drop this kind of money on "non-classic" old cars in this kind of condition? NADA guidelines peg '82 Monte Carlo's low retail at $2,100, $4,375 for average retail and $6,975 for "high retail." Have they not updated their values in these odd, sort-of post-pandemic days? 

For $6,000 I'd want this car to have at least a mirror like finish and run better than the day it first left the factory.  If beaters like this have asking prices this high the end is truly near. This is a $1,500 car in my humblest of opinions.

Maybe it's a sleeper and there's a 383 or an LS1 lurking under it's patina-rich bonnet. Highly doubtful but for six-grand there should be something more interesting than, at best, the optional "Chevy 305". 

This could quickly become a money-pit and it's too damn expensive to buy as just an "old-car". Redoing the interior, good luck finding what you need, and a decent paint job will run you $4,000. 

Throw in whatever power train work it needs or you'd want to do and you're pushing ten-grand on top of the very high asking price. This thing worth the dark side of $20,000? 

High retail on a 1986 Monte Carlo SS is $9,750; that tells me everything about this car I need to know. 

General Motors got way fewer high-fives for their 1978 circa downsized intermediates than they got for their 1977 full-size models. More like up-sized compacts than intermediates, the worst-of-the-worst of them, in my humble-est of opinions, was the 7/8 scale, 1973-1977 Chevrolet Monte Carlo. 

Chevrolet did a pretty good job of cleaning it up for 1981 but whether it was that GM's class-of-'78 "personal luxury cars" were off-putting or not, by the early '80's, "influencers" and taste-makers began to make transportation-fashion statements elsewhere. 

The bloom was off the rose on personal luxury cars; or in this case the hood ornament. Chevrolet built these cars through 1987. 

Still, took the better part of thirty-years to finally deep-six these things if we bookmark the end of the personal-luxury-car era as the day Chevrolet pulled the plug on the Monte Carlo after model-year 2007. 

1979 Pontiac Grand Prix - Broke My Heart

There aren't any Pontiac Grand Prix models between 1969 and 1977 that I wouldn't want in my "Jay Leno Fantasy Garage". Sure, I prefer the lines of the pre-Colonnade 1969-1972 GP's but I have plenty-of-love for the over-sized 1973-1977's. I'm ambivalent about the first Grand Prix', those "full-sized sports cars" of  1962-1968. Not that I don't like them but the Grand Prix' of 1969-1977 are what I remember seeing in abundance when I was a kid and I loved them. Then the fall of 1977 came and my heart was broken by Pontiac's new-for-'78 Grand Prix. Our subject here is a 1979 but it's all but indistinguishable from a '78. 

I row against the flow since GM's "smaller" 1977 "B and C (and D)" bodies have a multitude of fans; I'm generally ambivalent towards them although given a choice between, for instance, taking a 1976 Pontiac Catalina on a road-trip and a 1977, the '77's the much better choice. However, in the grand scheme of things, give me the barge-like '76'er simply because I think it's a better looking car. So, if I wasn't doing jumping-jacks over the downsizing GM did to their big cars in '77, imagine my horror when GM shrunk their intermediates. The Pontiac Grand Prix might not be be bad as as the Chevrolet Monte Carlo but it's right there with it in terms of inducing a "what the hell is that?" gut reaction.  

 

The only thing vaguely similar between the 1978 Grand Prix and the model it replaced is it's front end and even that pales in comparison to what it supposedly emulates. 

It's not the downsizing, per se, that I find so off-putting and it's not that I like "big-cars" for the sake of liking them either. Doesn't matter to me if the car is a block long or has three-wheels; I like what I like it. Size-wize, while the Grand Prix was shorter overall by more than eleven inches, had an eight-inch shorter wheelbase and was eight-hundred pounds lighter, at two-hundred and one inches stem-to-stern, they were dimension-ally in line with General Motors seminal 1955 B-bodies. In fact, the 1978 Pontiac Grand Prix is approximately five-inches longer than a '55 Chevrolet and all of two-inches less long than a '55 Pontiac. 

Now, the '55 B-bodes did ride on a one-hundred and twenty-one inch long wheelbase and that went a long way towards helping designers create the "illusion" that their wares were larger than they actually were. That long wheelbase also helped give the '55's their remarkably airy interiors and tidy front and rear overhangs. The interiors of these "up-sized" compacts were not "cozy", they were cramped. 

It's the stubby-ness of these cars, due in large part to the short wheel base and absurdly long overhangs,  along with their questionable aesthetics that are the deal killers for me. Again, it's not that they're smaller that makes them off-putting; they're just simply ugly. 

If these cars had anything going for them it's their favorable power-to-weight ratios. Our '79 here stuffed with Pontiac's 301 cubic-inch V-8 and a four-barrel carburetor. It's "turbo 200" (transmission) and lazy rear axle won't help you win any drag races but at least compared to a '77 Grand Prix with the same engine, you'll have an easier time with highway on ramps and passing eighteen-wheelers when need be. Bonus, you'll get fourteen-miles per gallon compared to nine to ten. 

In a vacuum, I wonder what people think of this car. Ambivalence meeting necessity the essence of marketing, that might be the reason why the poster of the ad for this car on Facebook Marketplace is asking $10,500 for it. Wow. To the uninitiated, this might just be a "cool old car" but to me it's just an old car albeit one in pretty nice shape. There's only, allegedly, 33,000 on its ticker. But $10,500? 

That sky-high asking price just another prime example of just how nuts the used car market has gotten. And that's for all used cars apparently as the chip-shortage that's supposedly driving the shortage of new cars and driving up the price of used is affecting old and dare I say "non-classic" stuff like this. 

 

1977 Dodge Royal Monaco - Royal Treatment

Chrysler's full-size models were all-new for 1974 and their timing could not have been worse. Not only were they were "christened" weeks before the start of the OPEC Oil Embargo in October of 1973, their styling was derided for being derivative of two-to-three year General Motors designs. Our subject here is one of the last from that bumper crop of enormous '74's, a 1977 Dodge Royal Monaco. 

Makes you wonder how these cars would have fared if circumstances were different. Call me an old softie but I've always liked their lines, especially the 1974-1976 non-Royal Monaco's with fixed headlights and not this over-wrought, fussy front end. I liked them a whole lot more than the 1969-1973 fuselage models that did not sell well in those pre-gas crunch days too. 

Fun fact, the "Blues Mobile" from the 1980 movie, "The Blues Brothers" was a 1974 Dodge Monaco. Note, it was a "Monaco" and not a "Royal Monaco". 

What was the difference between a Monaco and a Royal one? Good question. A "Monaco", named for the region on the French Riviera on the Mediterranean, was denoted the top-of-the-line Dodge going back to 1965 when Chrysler "up-sized" after their abortive 1962 downsizing. Prior to adding the "Royal" pre-fix starting in 1975, there was a Brougham model that added the ritzy styling touches and doo-dads that were typical of 1970's luxury cars. Textured fabrics, opera lights, "landau" tops, wood-appliques, etc.

Then came the cake-toppers, the "Royal Monaco" and "Royal Monaco Brougham" for 1975 and 1976 complete with this (god-awful) hidden headlight, cheese-grater grill thing our '77 has. I think this front end treatment on these cars works as well as tennis-shoes with a tuxedo but that's just me; the front end the tuxedo, the rest of the car the tennis shoes. Or vice-versa. Take your pick. 

For 1977 Dodge rearranged their proverbial deck chairs. They moved "Monaco" to the old Coronet that was built on Chrysler's defacto intermediate "B-body" of 1962 downsizing fame (or infamy). Meanwhile, all the old full-size, "C-body" Monaco's became "Royal Monaco's: complete with the aforementioned cheese-grater front end. 

From what I can see from the interior photos of our '77 "Royal" here, doesn't look like the original buyer got much of a "royal treatment". Aside from the interior being much nicer than the shine-free, patina rich exterior, there's nary a power-window or seat adjuster, no power-door locks or tilting-steering column either. Oh, I can make out some plastic wood on the dash. Break out the Grey Poupon. 

At least our subject here has, get ready for a mic-drop, red-carpet. 

For 1978, Dodge got out of the full-size car market; after twelve-model years there was no Dodge sold built on Chrysler's 1965 circa "C-body". That left the "B-body" Monaco (nee: Coronet) all by itself as Dodge's largest model. Dodge ditching that and the Monaco nameplate altogether in 1979 when they sold a new car marketed as the "St. Regis" built on Chrysler's warmed over "B-body" they called the "R-body". 

Perhaps "R-body" was to denote Royalty. 

Dodge named a version of the Eagle Premier "Monaco" from 1990-1992. 

2004 Mercury Marauder - Some Assembly Required

I think the root-cause for my disdain of four-door sedans is that they all remind me of that piece of crap, dorky as hell Mercury Comet I had when I was in high school. That car was so bad that I usually tell people my Chrysler Cordoba was my first car; to me it just sounds cooler. Anyway, I can make exceptions to any self-imposed rule and this, coincidentally also a Mercury, big four-door is one sedan I might be able to live with. 

Well, perhaps not this one per se but a 2003-2004 Mercury Marauder might be found in my "Jay Leno" fantasy garage if for no other reason that they're just so unique. And what's not to like about a four-door hot-rod? Well, you'd be surprised; takers were few and far between for not only these cars but for any make or model in the "sporty full-size" genre. 

Not sure what's going on with this one for sale up in Detroit with an asking price of $2,000. Let's simply luxuirate in the car's badass-ness and the utter state of disary the poor thing appears to be in. 

Poster of the ad on Facebook Marketplace says, despite just 97,000 on the thing, the engine needs a timing chain and the rear axle needs to be replaced. That's interesiting. Oh, and it needs rear shocks. Aside from that, it's all there! Some assembly required.  

The Ford Motor Company's now long gone dazed-and-confused Mercury division had three interations of something they called "Marauder". They were all full-size automobiles with sporting pretensions; that oxymoronic enough for you? 

The first Marauder's were a trim package available on all full-size Merc's in either two or four-door guise. That would include 1963 1/2 - 1965 Mercury Montclair's, Park Lane's and Monterey's. All 1963 1/2 Marauder's, regardless of which model they were, were two-door's. 

Mercury eshwed the unique "Breezeway" rear window design found on mid-'60's Mercury Park Lane's and Monterey's on the Maruader for the rear window and roof design design from the Ford Galaxie; purportedly it was to make the car's more competitive on the race track. Marauder's came available with 390 or 427 cubic-inch V-8's and 4-speed manual transmissions; the 427 engine could be had with two-four-barrel carburetor's. Bucket seats and a floor-mounted shifter (on the two-door models) completed the "Let's Go" mission statement. Aside from that a Marauder was all standard-issue Mercury or Ford with nary a sway bar or poly urenthane bushing to be found. 

The second Marauder cropped up in 1969 and 1970 as a "sporty" two-door Mercury Marquis although marketed as a seperate model on a unique "snug" 121-inch long wheelbase. Again, the Marauder "package" was a trim option that, aside from an optional massive V-8, didn't actually provide buyers any real performance gains or improvements above and beyond what "lesser" Marquis' could do. 

The X-100 package was a luxury trim option on top of the Marauder option. You either "got" what these cars were supposed to be, and, frankly, that's rather murky at best, or you simply didn't. If you've never heard of a Marauder let alone a Maruder X-100 you're not alone; Ford, sorry, Mercury sold but a handful of them. General Motors tried multiple times throught the 1960's to market a full-size peformance/luxury car and didn't fair any better. 

That brings us to 2003 and Mercury's wonderfully inexplicable daliance with the "Marauder" name plate once again. This partially dissasmbled mess is a 2004. 

Who knows why they even bothered with these things - same could be said for Chevrolet and their 1994-1996 Impala SS - but I was sort-of kind-of glad they did. Although, frankly, I think the Impala SS just worked better aestheically overall. 

There was really no hiding the fact that these were Grand Dad's Marquis' with some black out, sinister baubles and bits. DOHC V-8 too! Requires premium, though. Boo. 

What actually made these cars special was their handling package that made the Marquis and it's sister-ship Ford Crown Victoria really the best they could be. 

Our Marauder here shares its frame with Ford's new for 2003 underpinnings with all "Panther's" and was quite the upgrade from the previous 1979-vintage jiggle wagon. The new stiffer frame along with Tokio nitrogen, monotube shocks, firmer anti-roll-bar bushings, less rubbery body-to-frame bushings, rear load-leveling air springs and front springs from the Crown Victoria police cruiser made for a very nice handling (big) car. 

If the Marauder fell down on itself anywhere it was with it's engine. Using the Ford Mustang Cobra's DOHC V-8, what with it being stuffed in such a heavy car, the transmission and rear axle ratio's were set to maximize fuel-economy; which was a shame. 0-60 in around 7.2-seconds even back then wasn't exactly sporty. "Snappy", pehaps but far from the numbers of a high performance machine. Cobra V-8 requires premium gas too. Boo. 

But what the devil is going on here with this thing? The ad doesn't say why it's in pieces  -  I could ask but it's funner to speculate.  All Maraders were black and the roof here is still black; doors, front fenders are white. Sum-zink tells me...she's been in...an accident?! The ad doesn't mention anything about such.

So much going on here. Not to mention it's splayed out over the sidewalk. Bet the neighbors love that. 

1975 Oldsmobile Ninety-Eight - Haves and Have Not's

This 1975 Oldsmobile Ninety-Eight brings me back to my pre-teen years when all was simultaneously wonderful and terrifying. Some people refer to those years as their "wonder years"; I prefer to call them my "woe-begotten years". 

My fondest memory of one of these was when I got a ride home in one after a den meeting during my stint in the Cub Scouts; my mother forcing me to do so at metaphorical gun point. Although it was short jaunt, a mile at most, I was enthralled by the car and also also by it implied. 

Compared to my father's hoary Ford Ranch Wagon, that big Oldsmobile was the very embodiment of  everything my life was not at that point.  The smooth, isolating ride, the plushness of the pillowy seats, air conditioning and music in stereo(!) wafting all around the cabin; the mom driving the car jocularly joking with us kids; it was like I was in another world. And in more ways than one, I most certainly was. 

It highlighted to impish and impressionable me that there were haves in this world and have not's. Clearly my family were members of the latter.

That family also had a late model, mid-'70's Buick Electra coupe that I found to be even more opulent in a Wayne Newton meets Englebert Humperdink performing at a resort in the Catskill's kind-of-way. Having one luxury land yacht was one thing but...two? 

It seemed to me that that family was drowning in money - their house was extravagantly decorated and their son complained to me about how long the flights where on their constant trips back and forth to "Vegas" and vacations in winter time to Caribbean Islands. I thought he was kidding at first and offered to change places with him. 

The Great Downsizing Epoch that GM began in earnest in 1977 shrunk dread-naughts like our "Ninety- Eight" here by more than a foot and melted some eight-hundred pounds on average off their curb weight. There's scuttle butt GM was planning to down-size before the first gas crunch; the events of October 1973 through March of 1974 only exacerbated matters. I wonder how far they would have gone if circumstances and government mandates hadn't forced them to go smaller. 

Our '75 here is a poster car of poor interior space utilization, I mean, look at this lack of rear leg room in a car more than two-hundred thirty inches long, and old school gas-guzzlerdom. A combination of a gigantic, carburetor fed V-8, just three forward gears, nearly two-and half tons of weight and the aerodynamics of a brick wall conspiring to deliver seven-to-nine miles per gallon. If you could afford to have one you can afford the single-digit gas mileage, right? 

It wasn't as if these cars had tire searing performance either. Contemporary road tests peg a 190-horsepower, 455 cubic-inch, 4,700+ pound "Ninety Eight" like this wheezing from zero-to-sixty in 12.3 seconds with a near 19 second quarter mile. So much for the virtues of the venerated Oldsmobile "Rocket". 

The downsized models were still huge automobiles but they could get like eleven-to-fourteen miles per gallon. Still terrible but everything's relative. But they lacked the stature and "look at us we're loaded" stance the larger models had. That glamorous Mounty Airy Lodge heart-shaped love-tub stance that cars like this '75 have; well, perhaps not in this awful shade of blue. 

Oldsmobile was General Motors middle division  on their vaunted pricing ladder and was flanked by Buick to the north, Pontiac to the south. Cadillac and Chevrolet at the top and "bottom" respectively.  Oldsmobile built a "98" a "Ninety-Eight" or "Ninety Eight" in some guise from 1940 through 1996. GM shuttered Oldsmobile after the 2004 model year.