The Last Chevrolet Monte Carlo Rolls off The Line

[GMfan1111]

Originally Posted by fastball

The venomous fate the Monte Carlo encountered in it's last (2000-2007) iteration is due to the fact that, in 2000, it was nothing more than a Lumina coupe. In what was yet another brilliant PR move by GM at the time, they slap a revered nameplate on a low buck people mover. It would have sold exactly the same amount of units had they just continued to call it the Lumina and Lumina Z34.

The Monte died in 1988. The 2000-present model is just a joke, I don't care if it's supercharged or the 5.3 V8. The 1988 Monte Carlo SS with the 305 TPI can run circles arount it - litterally, thanks to the fact you don't get vociferous understeer with rear wheel drive. Thank you GM for puting it out of it's misery once and for all, and for making room for the PROPER return of the beloved Camaro. At least the new Camaro is a CAMARO! It looks like it and it should drive like it. It will be driven by the proper set of wheels, with the right engines and transmissions available. It will not share a single screw with a front wheel drive sedan of lesser stature.

Thats quite a rant there fastball granted the 2000 - current models are not perfect by any means but the monte was and still is a decent 2dr coupe that brought decent performance after 2004. Can it match or surpass the 88 Monte in performance? No of course not but a monte carlo with the 240 horsepower supercharged engine is still a decent car and if you bought the earnhardt editions it added a little personality to the monte. and you were half right on your claim of it being just a lumina coupe. Granted both the lumina and the carlo had the same dimensions in terms of wheelbase in the 90's but when the monte entered the 2000 model year it's wheel base became longer and it grew once more in 2006 when the monte was put on an updated version of the W body. Also the 2000 - 2006 montes with 06-07 in particular shared many components with the chevy impala four door

[fastball]

Originally Posted by GMfan1111

and if you bought the earnhardt editions it added a little personality to the monte.

The Earnhardt edition was just stickers and spoilers. You paid an extra three grand just to advertise DEI on your car.

No, that's not personality, that is marketing.

Personality would have been if they offered a stick shift on the car.

[ponchoman49]

Originally Posted by fastball

The venomous fate the Monte Carlo encountered in it's last (2000-2007) iteration is due to the fact that, in 2000, it was nothing more than a Lumina coupe. In what was yet another brilliant PR move by GM at the time, they slap a revered nameplate on a low buck people mover. It would have sold exactly the same amount of units had they just continued to call it the Lumina and Lumina Z34.

The Monte died in 1988. The 2000-present model is just a joke, I don't care if it's supercharged or the 5.3 V8. The 1988 Monte Carlo SS with the 305 TPI can run circles arount it - litterally, thanks to the fact you don't get vociferous understeer with rear wheel drive. Thank you GM for puting it out of it's misery once and for all, and for making room for the PROPER return of the beloved Camaro. At least the new Camaro is a CAMARO! It looks like it and it should drive like it. It will be driven by the proper set of wheels, with the right engines and transmissions available. It will not share a single screw with a front wheel drive sedan of lesser stature.

The 1983-1988 version of the Monte Carlo SS G-body did not come with a 305 TPI engine unless someone put it there and heavily modified everything from the gas tank to the wire harness on up. The factory engine was a 180 HP 305 4BBL V8 tied to a 200R4 automatic transmission and 3.73:1 rear gears. The front drive model actually pulled more latteral G's than the old rear drive model, usually in the .80 range and in supercharged form ran circles around the old G-body SS. The regular 3800 engine timed out slightly quicker to 60 and in the 1/4 mile compared to the old carbureted V8 and obtained 30 MPG all day long on a trip which was a pipe dream for the G-body gen. Don't get me wrong, those old G-bodies were the last true rear drive Monte Carlos but we can't paint them out to be something there not.

[ponchoman49]

Originally Posted by McG

No more Toyota

Thank god!

Can we get rid of all the ones that are currently on the road, too?

Fixed!

[member12]

Originally Posted by supraracer

I expect my personal luxury to handle well and to be pretty quick. This car did none of that well. A little too big and heavy.

exactly...people are not tired of front drive coupes. Toyota, Honda, and Nissan have sold many of them.

People are tired of bad cars.

Bland styling....4 speed auto only...V6 (most versions)...front wheel drive

My heart is racing now.

[HardSS99]

Too bad for the MC. My SS MC turns heads as a I drive by. Mainly when I pass other cars that are suppose to be fast. This car is the blacksheep of the family and not given its due. Charger R/Ts, Nissan 300's, G35's, all eat my dust. Remember MC SS weighs more the 300 and G35 even though they are 6 cyls.

No flame FASBALL, but the 80's MC SS can not hold the new MC SS hood when it comes to performance in the 1/4 mi. My MC SS runs 13.9s all day, bone stock. Others with the MC SS with mods are running mid to low 13's. not bad for grocery getter. The cool thing, no one suspects it!

I will hold on until the G8 is released or pick up a CTS-V. I don't like the new Impala SS Body style. Too bad the Malibu is not a V8, that would be killer for that class.

[HardSS99]

Too bad for the MC. My SS MC turns heads as a I drive by. Mainly when I pass other cars that are suppose to be fast. This car is the blacksheep of the family and not given its due. Charger R/Ts, Nissan 300's, G35's, all eat my dust. Remember MC SS weighs more than the 300 and G35 even though they are 6 cyls.

No flame FASBALL, but the 80's MC SS can not hold the new MC SS hood when it comes to performance in the 1/4 mi. My MC SS runs 13.9s all day, bone stock. Others with the MC SS with mods are running mid to low 13's. not bad for grocery getter. The cool thing, no one suspects it!

I will hold on until the G8 is released or pick up a CTS-V. I don't like the new Impala SS Body style. Too bad the Malibu is not a V8, that would be killer for that class.

[2005 Equinox LS]

People dont give the new cars the credit they deserve. Maybe some of us dont nitpick because they are FWD. I would never get a RWD car for a daily driver. Its fine in the Caprice and Bonneville but I like my Equinox and liked my 2000 Monte Carlo far better in the winter weather than the RWDs I had before. Not that I couldnt drive the RWDs in bad weather. Just that FWD or AWD is easier.

[ksr]

Originally Posted by 2005 Equinox LS

People dont give the new cars the credit they deserve. Maybe some of us dont nitpick because they are FWD. I would never get a RWD car for a daily driver. Its fine in the Caprice and Bonneville but I like my Equinox and liked my 2000 Monte Carlo far better in the winter weather than the RWDs I had before. Not that I couldnt drive the RWDs in bad weather. Just that FWD or AWD is easier.

People tend to rip on FWD too much. I only have RWD cars at the moment, but I've owned a bunch of FWD cars too. In the vast majority of situations, there's no real disadvantage. Why does Pontiac needs to be RWD only in the eyes of so many? Why not offer a mix of FWD and RWD performance-oriented cars? You haven't noticed the many FWD performance compacts on the market? They're rather popular. Pontiac should build one.

People look at the past through rose-colored glasses. A lot of the fondly remembered Monte Carlos of old were not fast at all. Those V8s were detuned and the cars were slow. My FWD '95 MC with the "twin dual cam" 3.4 V-6 was quick. Only 210 peak horsepower, but gun it on the highway when you were already doing 65 mph and it would pull strong and fast to well over 100. My '02 MC SS with the 3.8 V-6 (200 HP) would outrun most of the old V-8 MCs.

(That 3.4 was a great engine. Should have kept making it. Apparently the 3.8 was just cheaper to produce.)

[Ramair-WS6]

Originally Posted by ksr

People tend to rip on FWD too much. I only have RWD cars at the moment, but I've owned a bunch of FWD cars too. In the vast majority of situations, there's no real disadvantage. Why does Pontiac needs to be RWD only in the eyes of so many? Why not offer a mix of FWD and RWD performance-oriented cars? You haven't noticed the many FWD performance compacts on the market? They're rather popular. Pontiac should build one.

Exactly the point as to why Pontiac should have a RWD sport compact. It would be different, rebelious, and away from the mainstream. Exactly what Pontiac was back in the 60's under DeLorean.

[GMCSonoma]

Originally Posted by 2005 Equinox LS

People dont give the new cars the credit they deserve. Maybe some of us dont nitpick because they are FWD. I would never get a RWD car for a daily driver. Its fine in the Caprice and Bonneville but I like my Equinox and liked my 2000 Monte Carlo far better in the winter weather than the RWDs I had before. Not that I couldnt drive the RWDs in bad weather. Just that FWD or AWD is easier.

EXACTLY my feelings...

[MCGARRETT]

I am going to go out on a limb and make a bold statement here, but I believe that the 2006-2007 Monte Carlo SS that many here hate was the fastest Monte Carlo ever made from the factory.

0-60 5.6 seconds
150 plus mph top speed.
13.9 or so in the quarter mile.


Yeah, if this is a Lumina coupe, then the slugs from the 80's are just cross dressing Malibus.

[Ambalanche]

If GM had given the MC the new front clip two years earlier and done something with the horrible interior, it would have been a great car! I liked it much better than the new Accord Coupe,still I hate it wasn't advertised. I really wish GM would stop mass-advertising a car at launch and then leaving it with nothing. Although I don't think I ever saw an ad for the last Monte, only the Impala. While I can't wait for the Camaro's return, I'm sorry the Monte Carlo is gone.

[knightfan26917]

Originally Posted by ksr

Why not offer a mix of FWD and RWD performance-oriented cars?

This IS PERFECTLY acceptable to me ... as long as they don't slap old names on newer cars that aren't anything like the original..... THAT has always been my "beef" with the FWD Ch@#r%*ets of the last few years, beginning with the Toyota Nova/C#$*y Corolla....

Originally Posted by ksr

My FWD '95 MC with the "twin dual cam" 3.4 V-6 was quick. Only 210 peak horsepower, but gun it on the highway when you were already doing 65 mph and it would pull strong and fast to well over 100. My '02 MC SS with the 3.8 V-6 (200 HP) would outrun most of the old V-8 MCs.

So, if speed is what makes a Monte Carlo a Monte Carlo ... should we rename the Corvette to Monte Carlo, etc.?


And, apparently, I'm the only one that has never had difficulties with RWD in winter? Certainly, that can't be true. Can it?

Course, I always find it interesting when I see AWD/4WD/FWD vehicles off the road in the winter, since those are the vehicles that people claim NEVER have problems in winter.....

*shrugs*



Cort:34swm."Mr Monte Carlo.Mr Road Trip".pig valve.pacemaker
WRMNshowcase.lego.HO.model.MCs.RT.CHD = http://www.chevyasylum.com/cort
"Nothing can take the place of being there" ... Marvin Gaye ... 'Ain't Nothing Like The Real Thing'

[ksr]

Originally Posted by knightfan26917

So, if speed is what makes a Monte Carlo a Monte Carlo ... should we rename the Corvette to Monte Carlo, etc.?

And, apparently, I'm the only one that has never had difficulties with RWD in winter? Certainly, that can't be true. Can it?

Course, I always find it interesting when I see AWD/4WD/FWD vehicles off the road in the winter, since those are the vehicles that people claim NEVER have problems in winter.....

*shrugs*

I don't think speed is the only thing that made the car. But so many people rip on the FWD MCs as though they could in no way hold a candle to the RWD MCs. In some ways though, the FWD MCs were better performers.

I drive my CTS in the winter. I prefer it to any FWD car that I've had. With snow tires and it's traction control, it drives straight and true. None of the fishtailing that you get with FWD.