posted at the Cohort by William Rubano
Two key developmental trajectories during GM’s H Body (1971 – 1980) lifespan were inverse. In terms of durability, it started out rock bottom and managed to get to a semi-reasonably level as the years went on. But in terms of looks, things went mostly the opposite direction. It started out looking exceptionally good and clean, in the form original 1971 Vega. The 1975 Monza re-skin had its good aspects. But except for that little reprieve, things went mostly downhill, culminating in this 1980 Skyhawk. Its Monza-borrowed body started out as an homage to the Ferrari 365 GTC/4. And what is this an homage to?
I don’t think I want to know. But I am impressed that there’s on still out there, as by 1980, the production numbers of these were in the four-figure range.
By the late 1980s, the H-bodies had already become “the car you didn’t want to have to drive to school.”
1980 Skyhawk with the 5-speed- pegged at 132MPH on I-10 between Houston/San Antonio in 1988.
Solid, quiet, fast.
Guess you missed that part.
Only the 1980 Road Hawk is sadder – perhaps the epitome of malaise paint-on performance.
Stick-on tailfins like a 58 Stude. Yikes.
Just goes to show that the factories can compete in the “double-stick tape” school of customizing.
All that’s missing: the coffee-can exhaust tips.
Just . . . wow. I had forgotten that these had gotten so, uh, decorative.
This car takes me back to law school where my three roommates gave me regular exposure to some of the worst cars of the era: a 75 Mustang II, a 77 LTD II (swapped occasionally for an 81 Pontiac Phoenix) and what was probably the best of the bunch, a 1980 Monza.
If this Buick is anything like that Monza it is a rough, uncultured thing with pebble grained molded interior plastics that measured by the square yard. It was a sad commentary indeed when my teenaged 71 Plymouth Scamp was the class act among our motley crew of cars.
Amen to that. With a few exceptions, the 73-80 models were some of the sorriest vehicles ever offered.
Its Monza-borrowed body started out as an homage to the Ferrari 365 GTC/4. And what is this an homage to?
An homage to trying to update a body on the cheap? The Concord and Chevette suffered the same fate: a rounded 70s body “updated” with a rectangular face to try to keep up with the crisper styling then coming into vogue. The Escort went the other way a few years later when a more aero front clip was stuck on the original 81 body.
Interesting how, in the 60s and 70s every division at the big three felt the need to have a presence in every segment, resulting in brand blurring badge engineering. Now the trend is to entirely exit market segments and narrow a company’s market to the most profitable segments.
While Fields was trying to improve Focus margins by moving production to Mexico, he was criticized by some from selling the Focus and Fiesta in the US at all. Will be interesting to see if the move to Hermosillo happens, or if Hackett follows Marchionne’s lead and exits the B and C segments entirely.
I can see Ford replacing the Fiesta with a small crossover, but keeping the Focus. Producing it in Mexico will probably make the Focus more profitable for Ford.
I think Ford blew it with the Ecosport, in the grand Ford SUV tradition of arriving way too truckish for the meat of the market. It may sell, but it’s an expensive set of body dies that will be very dated very fast with very limited spinoff potential.
Europe gets a raised-and-cladded version of the next Fiesta; that’s the direction Ford should’ve gone. Base and ST hatchbacks and a high-volume/high-profit very carlike “CUV” off one set of body dies. Drop the sedan because it was mainly bought on price.
Getting back to the era, Ford also spent a fortune in new stampings squaring off the front of the Pinto for ’79-80 in a way that did nothing for the fundamental obsolescence of the concept. At least what Buick did here was cheap.
Getting back to the era, Ford also spent a fortune in new stampings squaring off the front of the Pinto for ’79-80 in a way that did nothing for the fundamental obsolescence of the concept.
Yoiks! I forgot about that one.
That’s actually the Pinto I’m most familiar with. I recall a few very well worn examples still bombing around in my early childhood. I became aware of the original design later from books
I actually liked this Pinto look and thought it was better than what came before. Ford also used aluminum bumpers for 1979-80 and pulled them in a bit tighter to the body for a more cohesive look.
The 1980 Plymouth Volare and Dodge Aspen also got a “square off the front end” facelift for its last year on the market, that like the others mentioned failed to change or update the overall look of the car when not viewed straight from the front.
I think for the Aspen / Volare it was meant to give a brand transition to the K cars. Chevy did similar busywork to the nova before the citation bowed. Then again Chryco did it again with airbags in the Omni.
The Pinto (and Bobcat) sold reasonably well in 1979 and 1980, considering the age of the platform and the state of the market. The tooling for the Pinto had been fully amortized by 1979, and the changes to the front weren’t that expensive.
The outer door skins, cowl and/or windshield would have been expensive to change, and those were left untouched for the car’s final two years.
The Pinto (and Bobcat) sold reasonably well in 1979 and 1980,
That was the time of the revolution in Iran, which disrupted production, which tightened supplies, which doubled the price of gas, repeating 74’s sudden demand for small cars.
Exactly – even Chrysler that everyone was afraid was about to go under sold every Omni and Horizon it could build in 1979-80. Had they been able to negotiate more 1.7 engines from VW above their contract for 300K engines per year, they could have sold even more.
“Ford spent a fortune in new stampings…”
This was not to far after era of “annual style changes”. Big 3 spent ‘fortunes’ doing this, until the 80s/90s.
A case of ‘old habits die hard.’
Producing it in Mexico will probably make the Focus more profitable for Ford.
When Fields first announced that the Focus was going to Mexico, it was supposed to be built in a new plant. Recently, Ford has said that the new plant would not be built, but the Focus was going into Hermosillo instead. Hermosillo has a capacity of about 300K/yr. The Fusion and MK-Z are presently built at Hermosillo, and their sales leave little capacity for the Focus, so something does not line up.
Remember when Marchionne announced the Dart and 200 would be dropped while he looked for a foreign “partner” to build them cheaper? Such a “partner” did exist: a Fiat plant in Changsha, China. Better yet, the Changsha plant was already building the Fiat Viaggio, which *is* a Dart, with a different grill and taillights. The Viaggio has been a failure in China, leaving plenty of the plant’s 160K capacity for production of Darts or 200s for the US, at lower cost than they could be made here. Instead of moving Dart/200 tooling to China, FCA announced last March that the Viaggio will be dropped and the plant probably retooled to build yet more Jeeps.
Bottom line is big cars are more profitable than small cars and SUVs, especially ones with a Jeep badge, are more profitable than passenger cars, so FCA is allocating more and more production capacity to SUVs and abandoning lower profit segments.
So, will Ford follow FCA and take the view that every Focus made takes a production slot away from a more profitable vehicle, and drop the Focus from the US market?
Demand has fallen for both the Fusion and the Focus. Part of downward sales curve for the Focus has been fueled by the troublesome automatic transmission, but the sales trend for sedans has been down – and not just at Ford. The Focus, however, is still very popular in Europe.
It most likely makes sense for Ford to consolidate production of these cars at one plant. Even the unveiling of new versions of these cars is likely to produce a permanent bounce in sales. For example, sales of the Honda Civic are down in its second year on the market, and no one is saying that it is a bad car or a half-hearted effort.
The current North American Fiesta has been sourced from Mexico, and even before the latest announcements Ford had indicated that the next-generation North American version would not be built there.
Ford has been cagey about whether we will even get the next-generation Fiesta. This is eerily the same as the company’s stance on whether we will ever get the next-generation Taurus, which has already been unveiled for the Chinese market.
Ford has been cagey about whether we will even get the next-generation Fiesta. This is eerily the same as the company’s stance on whether we will ever get the next-generation Taurus, which has already been unveiled for the Chinese market.
The Taurus shares the Chicago plant with the Explorer. They sold less than 35K Tauruses last year, vs over 200K Explorers. Ford probably sees the Taurus as nothing but a disruption of Explorer production.
Ford already compensated some for the drop in Fusion volume by dropping it from the Flat Rock plant, so Hermosillo is the only source. While Fusion and MK-Z sales are running below last year’s pace, they are far short of clearing enough capacity to add the Focus.
Marchionne has been very cagey about the future of Chrysler and Dodge. In a press conference at the Detroit auto show last January, he was going on and on about Jeep and Ram, and was asked, twice, about new model plans for Dodge and Chrysler. He ducked the question both times. The rumor mill has been going for a couple years about the future of the Dodge Journey. There wasspeculation it was moving to Italy and sharing the Alfa SUV platform. Thing is, the Journey shares Toluca with the Fiat 500 and the new Compass. The 500 is going to Poland with it’s next generation next year. Toluca has a capacity of about 260K. If the Compass sells as well as the old Compass and Patriot, it will move over 200K/yr, leaving little capacity for the Journey. With nothing official from FCA about the future of the Journey, I would not be surprised to see it dropped by fall if the Compass sells well. Interestingly, the latest Dodge ad I have been seeing on TV only shows the Charger, Challenger and Durango. No Journey and no Caravan, and we know the Caravan is being let run down.
@ Steve, I think your point about Chrysler and Dodge is spot on. Maybe Marchionne will prove to be a mad genius, but the odds of building the Alfa and Fiat brands in the U.S. as replacements for the Chrysler and Dodge brands will likely prove a fools errand.
The pace of destruction of Chrysler and Dodge seems to be well ahead of any ascendency of Alf-Romeo and Fiat.
I wouldn’t be surprised if Jeep and Ram are the only remaining “American” brands at FCA within five years. Fiat will probably go away, too, but Alfa is supposedly getting a crossover, which will help boost sales.
Alfa is supposedly getting a crossover, which will help boost sales.
The Stelvio, shown at the Detroit show last January. The Stelvio has been named as the supposed platform donor at various times for the Journey and Grand Cherokee.
In Re: Transmission? Lets not forget the POS Fiesta. Company car, a 2015 Fiesta with 33k and change miles, in the shop for the 3rd time for an F’d up transmission! Trim pieces falling off (Outside mirror housing, inside door pull) More plastic in the interior then I have ever seen in a car. Have to stomp on it to accelerate from a dead stop with the a/c on. Even the local Ford dealer said don’t buy them, they are crap! And I normally love Fords, but boy-howdy, they missed the mark on these.
Steve, I just saw a 2017 full-line Dodge commercial featuring the Journey. It is definitely the odd man out, but it is there.
I would seriously consider the Fusion IF it still offered a V6. IMO, a good portion of the market still desires a long lasting torque engine over a turbo four screamer. Darn CAFE regulations.
Personally, I think that broad full-line brands like Ford and Dodge need to stay in the game with a full line of cars. Some buyers for these brands will never buy high end luxury or sports vehicles either by choice or necessity, but many will buy progressively up the ladder of price and versatility. Today’s Sloan ladder is the Corolla, Camry, Sienna, Sequoia.
Ford has bigger issues with the Focus than where it is built. I recently went car shopping for my college student. A Focus came to the top of the list, but apparently the DCT semi-automatic transmission is a very significant problem in these cars. From there, a near useless rear seat, some obvious interior cost cutting (a single power door lock switch on the middle of the dash?), and Ford’s apparent tone-deaf handling of the transmission on even warranted Certified Used knocked the car off the list.
And, you can’t count out the importance to some buyers about where the money goes when you buy a car. My daughter has a typical college liberal streak, but really wanted to buy a car with American roots to the extent possible.
We ended up with a 2015 Dodge Dart SXT 2.4 automatic. While the Dart has its own issues, it is a surprisingly likable little car with the right equipment. And, it is the opposite of the failings I mentioned regarding the Focus, and came from FCA’s Belvidere (IL) Assembly Plant.
Dodge was moving 80,000 Darts a year (admittedly probably too many to rental fleets), but the car has quite a few positive qualities, and giving up on a bread-and-butter car like this to pursue the Alfa-Romeo pipe dream (currently under 1,000 cars a month), or the dying one-hit wonder that was Fiat, seems almost suicidal.
…giving up on a bread-and-butter car like this to pursue the Alfa-Romeo pipe dream (currently under 1,000 cars a month), or the dying one-hit wonder that was Fiat, seems almost suicidal.
I was noting the Alfa sales last month and wondering how much more profitable they are than a Fiat 500, 10 times? 20 times? Marchionne is all about profit margins. I have heard him gripe that the Dart/200 had the worst ROI of any program he has ever done.
With Maserati HQ moving from NJ to take over the former Chrysler museum building in Auburn Hills, and co-habiting that building with Alfa, but not Fiat, it occurs to me that, with nearly all Fiat showrooms established in separate buildings from the Chrysler stores, nearly all Fiat showrooms now selling Alfa, the only Fiat selling over 1,000/month is the 500 and the 500 scheduled to leave Toluca next year for Poland, which would increase the price, I would not be surprised to see Fiat pulled from the US, with Alfa and Maserati taking over all the dealerships.
And, ROI on small cars has long been about building brand equity for the hopes of selling some bigger cars. Marchionne seems to have a very narrow sense of vision.
I don’t understand why Fiat in North America isn’t like Fiat in Europe, with a full range of small cars that could potentially compete with Toyota, Honda, and Hyundai – or at least VW, Chevy, and Ford. Instead, we just get the cutesy ones.
I don’t understand why Fiat in North America isn’t like Fiat in Europe, with a full range of small cars that could potentially compete with Toyota, Honda, and Hyundai – or at least VW, Chevy, and Ford. Instead, we just get the cutesy ones.
The cutsey ones have a higher profit margin. As for the rest of Fiat’s European line, they range from small to much too small for US tastes. Sizewise, the Fiat that would compete with the Corolla or Civic is the Tipo. The Tipo looks really nice to me, and, being built in Turkey, it’s cheap, but every road test I read complains about the sloppy suspension, sloppy shifter, sloppy steering, road noise, wind noise, engine noise. Even if Fiat got the Tipo dialed in, it would be competing in a crowded field that is not the “in” thing right now, so it would not make the profits that yet another new Jeep would.
@ Steve, but are their really profit margins in any car below a certain volume? FCA is on record as losing money on Alfa-Romeo. This is all about a venture that is time consuming, expensive, and the outcome is of course, uncertain.
@ Steve, but are their really profit margins in any car below a certain volume?
That hasn’t prevented nearly everyone building halo models. Thinking on that point, FCA seems headed to being 100% halo models, with very high powered Chargers and Challengers, exotic Italians and Jeep has it’s own aura.
The Dart was dropped from line last Sept.
Regarding “… where the money goes when you buy a car…so ended up with 2015 Dart”
If buying used, all the profits go to the dealer. Or was it a leftover 2015 Dart? I’d believe that.
Don’t forget Fiat owns Chrysler now. So, new car profits go to Turin Italy. This is why Sergio is eager to sell trucks and utes, to pad Fiat/Alfa pipe dreams.
Good luck to you! Just traded in my Dart. Loaded Limited that I paid $26k for, and after 3 years and 50k miles it was worth just $6k. New shocks, struts, brakes, radiator, head gasket, cylinder head, battery, 3 sets of tires and 3 alignments, 3 sets of HID headlights, new spark plugs, two fuel system cleanings… a transmission constantly going into limp mode, resetting nav system, a broken hood latch, broken keyless remote buttons, and it still idled like a diesel and stalled coming down the parking ramp. Ironically my brother had the same Dart, same mileage, and almost the same problems. We both love our new Hyundais. I’d have gotten a challenger in a heartbeat and moved right up that ladder gladly but instead I was convinced by their own product never to buy another Fiat / CJDR product.
I owned a Vega and was interested enough in the Monza V8 to test drive one in the late ’70’s. By 1980 my Vega was replaced by a Fiesta and Scirocco (it took two German cars to replace the mighty Veg?) and I’ve either forgotten how low these cars had gone, or just ignored them at the time and never stuck them in my memory. This is pretty sad, though I’ll agree with Steve’s comment about the Concord … in some ways that was an even sadder styling decline.
Hello Paul, I hope you’re feeling better! Glad to see you writing, it was a pleasure meeting you!
I agree totally—what the original Vega lacked in quality, it possessed in looks (exterior). And GM did a nice job in 1974 with the revised 5-mph bumpers. And I thought the interiors were quite nice (as a kid, I rode in not one, but TWO friends’ parents Astre’s. A GT with a TACH (big deal for a 10yr old) and woodgrain IP, and a wagon).
The original Monza–I don’t like as much as the Vega/Astre, but it did look “cool and modern”.
But this Buick as deep malaise all over it.
1. The ‘new’ front clip. Cheaper to make, but looks it. Note the loss of Quad Headlamps(cost).
2. The faux “targa bar”. Yukkk!
3. The trailing edge of the rear window—the original Monza’s interesting shape has been squared off. Why? For a landau roof option?
But with a V6, this was probably a credible car–for 1977!
“The trailing edge of the rear window .. squared off”
Those rear quarter windows were covered with plastic in the rear. Same Monza windows, I remember looking at these trim pieces.
Buick was probably trying to ‘formalize’ the Hawk I guess.
Just doesn’t make sense. Did Buick offer a version of the Monza Towne Coupe? That would have been a better fit with their image. They could have gone all full-on formal on that body without it looking goofy.
Bafflingly they didn’t, which probably contributed to the Skyhawk and Starfire’s lower sales. A notchback seemed a logical fit, but then again GM also foisted the aeroback body on the ’78 Century and Cutlass..
Only Chevy and Pontiac ever offered the notchback version of the H-Body. I agree that a notchback for Buick would have made more sense, as sort of a mini-Regal. I remember a rendering in a ’75 car preview issue (I’ll try to dig it out) for a car called the Buick San Marino–the illustration anticipated the H-Body notchback roofline with small quarter windows and a padded roof, along with full-width Electra-style tail light bar across the rear. For whatever reason, the “San Marino” never saw the light of day, and only the most minimally differentiated Monza fastback imaginable (aka Skyhawk) appeared in Buick showrooms. I agree that the more formal style of the notchback would have been a better fit for the more “upscale” GM divisions, with the hatchback and wagon reserved for “sportier” Chevy and Pontiac.
Here it is: the Buick San Marino notchback concept–that never made it to market. From the August ’75 issue of Motor Trend. And on the topic of missing Buicks, the Tri-shield division also did not get a variant of the Seville as noted in the text–though of course that’s what the Apollo/Skylark already was…
Also mentioned but missing were the Opel-Isuzu two-door sedan and wagon. Isuzu only ever built T-body coupes and four-door sedans although the Aussies cobbled together a Gemini wagon using wagon-specific stampings sourced from Vauxhall in the UK.
Never heard of this one. Thanks for posting that article!
Huh. My wife’s first car was an ’80 Skyhawk. Bought in 1990 or thereabouts, for $1100 or so. Didn’t realize they were that rare.
I can’t even imagine driving one of these now. A crude, tiny RWD in the Wisconsin winter couldn’t have been much fun to own. Of course, it was long gone before I met her. I don’t think she had it for very long.
My first was an ’82 Century, which at the time was obviously a much better car.
My first car was a 80 Sunbird, in Wisconsin. I can tell you they were a real handful whenever it was slippery. It felt like it had 90/10 weight distribution, the skinny 165-13 tires didn’t help, either. Snow tires and 3, 50-lb bags of kitty litter helped. (And it was 3 because that’s all that fit under the hatch, with the full size spare in there as well.)
Not so bad compared to the usual average shape of that time all cars looking the same squared Ford Crown Victoria. Anyhow , the smaller and efficient Toyota Celica Liftback of the same era was the real trend setter among pseudo coupes . Celica liftback was hard to beat . Who could ask for anything more ? Years proven Toyota ” you’ ve got it ! “
Seeing as how I had not one, but TWO H-bodies, I have a soft spot for all of them. These, kind of make it hard to like, though… I remember these as new cars, and comparing this particular model to the earlier Monzas, really brought home the adage “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it”… I’d like to have a Road Hawk, just because of how weird and rare it is, when was the last time you saw one? I thought somebody at Buick saw a Monza Mirage with its crazy body kit, and demanded one for his division, too.
I have a soft spot for the H Bodies, having spent 5 consecutive years of my childhood in the passenger seats of first a Vega and then a Monza 2+2, but this one really is an abomination. During my late teens the H’s were the de facto high school and college cars of my generation, but in retrospect I don’t think I ever knew anyone who owned a Skyhawk or Starfire. This is one tarted up Vega for sure.
Ouch, that is painful. I sort of recall some Skyhawks actually being attractive cars. Apparently that stainless steel band was fairly common on these, and that final fascia is about as homely as things get.
I had a tough time finding a picture of a better looking version, this was the best I could get from the ’76 Buick brochure, but you can probably get the idea…………
Apparently that stainless steel band was fairly common on these,
A vestige of the great brougham epoch and the half vinyl roof.
At least with the Mustang II, the vinyl roof and other trim looked didn’t look as though it had been “slapped on” to a car that had never been designed with such trim in mind. That wasn’t the case with the silver trim band on this Skyhawk.
It would look much better with wire wheel covers and whitewalls, you know.
Hmmm. No. It wouldn’t.
What a difference a model year or two makes (or generation). I was employed by a French movie executive as her personal driver in L.A. She didn’t know much English but she did know that she wanted a “Buick” (French accent). Since she was on a budget, she leased an ’82 or an ’83 Buick Skyhawk, a dark blue four door, with what I recall was a blue velour interior–it probably was actually cloth. She was a tall lady, and the car seemed narrow and cramped, but hey, it was a Buick, which to her seemed to be a status symbol. I just remember being a little embarrassed to be seen in it amongst all the Hollywood and Beverly Hills Mercedes.
The 2004 Rendezous looks attractive by comparison.
There were demands that Detroit build more small cars in the ‘good old days’ of Oil Crisis. So, GM did, just not to level as they caould have.
Anyway, to me the ‘saddest’ H body* was the 78-80 base model Monza notchbacks [formerly Town Coupe], with the ‘cheaper’ front ends. Fixed with round old style headlights, looking like round pegs in square holes. Monza went from sporty car to ‘econobox’.
*Not counting any Vega or Monzas with leftover Vega bodyshells.
In regards to “Fields was mistaken… selling the Focus and Fiesta in the US at all…”
Short memories people have. Wasn’t too long ago buyers were screaming for small cars, with $5 gallon gas. Now, it’s “big, bigger, biggest!’ again.
With CAFE still in place, don’t expect all makers to simply sell all trucks. Sergio is/was looking for a partner to build B/C cars. Don’t see them without merging for very long, or lasting independent. And, don’t forget they still sell Fiat 500’s.
Don’t see Toyota, Nissan, Hyundai, or Honda dumping B and C cars, they’d love to have the customers.
Yes, dropping these cars would be as short-sighted as those buyers who buy an SUV/truck when gas prices fall and then trade it in on a compact/hybrid when they rise. Do people not realise prices fluctuate?
Short memories people have. Wasn’t too long ago buyers were screaming for small cars, with $5 gallon gas.
In June of 08, at the peak of the $5 gas and “peak oil” hysteria, my Aunt decided to sell her car, a 98 Civic LX sedan, well kept and low mileage for it’s age, equipped just as the vast majority of people want: 4 door sedan, air, auto, cruise, power windows/mirrors/locks. I listed it on Autotrader for her. My phone rang off the hook. The car was sold in a few hours. $7,400, slightly less than half what she paid for it new.
Yes, dropping these cars would be as short-sighted as those buyers who buy an SUV/truck when gas prices fall and then trade it in on a compact/hybrid when they rise. Do people not realise prices fluctuate?
Americans tend to have the memory of a gnat. Marchionne has said more than once that he thinks gas prices will be low permanently, but he’s retiring at the end of next year, so he doesn’t need to be right for long. With the stuff going on with Qatar and Venezuela, tightening oil supplies could be one riot away.
This looks so bad it looks almost homemade. I’ve never seen this model year Skyhawk before.
It might even be called a JC Whitney Homologation Special.
I wonder if this would be the saddest H-Body if it was turned into a hot rod with a custom chassis, performance wheels, Corvette Z06 motor and a custom interior. 🙂
In that case I’d throw away the targa bar, window louvers and front clip in the trash and make it look like an older, purer, 4 light Skyhawk.
RE: Marchionne. I have no idea what he’s trying to do with Alfa and Fiat. I suppose the idea of Fiat was to make it a Mini competitor, but how many people want a tiny somewhat sporty car? Kinda like every so often a Miata competitor appears, but the Miata pretty much fills that market space and there’s not any room left over.
With Chrysler, my bet is that he’s doing what every company which has been affiliated with Jeep eventually does: Throw away the car part of the company and sell the Jeep part.
Thinking about it, Jeep and Ram would make a perfect fit for Honda, or perhaps Hyundai. Honda has successful crossovers but nothing Jeep like and the Ridgeline isn’t a real truck. Honda has a great line of cars in the midrange but if the LX platform were rebadged as Acuras Acura sales would be hugely improved. The Jeep trucks would work great for Honda.
the truck and Jeep line would fit really well with Hyundai/Kia as well.
That’s only going to work if Hyundai or Honda are interested in buying those brands, and I myself haven’t heard of them expressing any interest in buying FCA as a whole, let alone parts of it.
For that matter, Fiat would be a perfect fit for Honda. Not so much for product but for market penetration – Fiat has traditionally been strongest in protected markets which Honda historically ignored (with the sole exception of VRA-era America that it was already in before the restrictions) in favor of markets open to buying Hondas from Japan.
Another reader with fond memories of the H-bodies. My ’73 Vega GT survived three seasons of SCCA autocross running B-sedan and actually beat an Alfa GTA at one time. The ’76 Monza 2+2 was a very nice “blue collar GT” in that it was cheap, a bit too heavy for the four cylinder it came with, but handled very nicely and did a good bit of rallying in the three years I had it.
The ’79 Monza Kammback . . . . . the less said about it the better.
Ugly, pointless, cheap-looking facelift, like the ’79 Starfire.
Is that a GM-10 Regal GS coupe next to it?
Its such an odd looking car…. I like it!
The ’80 Skyhawk (and Olds Starfire) were only offered during the first part of the 1980 model year. Production of these H-bodies ended in December, 1979 with Flint and Lansing trading these slow sellers for expanded production of the hot-selling X-body Skylark and Omega. The Chevy Monza and Pontiac Sunbird did continue through the end of the 1980 model year as both of those cars were still selling well thanks to the second energy crisis and deep recession and GM had no other small cars in its line other than the new X-cars and the Chevette.